As a kid I was terrified of the flying monkeys. (Love your icon)
This is one of the biggest problems I have with fan fiction.
I don't have an issue with fan fiction per se, It's a nice pursuit of ones imagination. It's only when the writers/readers try to hold ff out as canon that I want...to get a cannon.
But... there are many parts of the Star Wars films that are impossible to defend/understand/appreciate without creating some uniformly agreed on conjecture.
Because, otherwise, we have to assume that George Lucas ruined much of our childhood by making shit up out of his ass.
There are only three movies. The rest is bad drugs.
As I was reading this, one thing kept coming to mind: the prequels. Not critiques of a movie, but definitely not supported by the original movies. ;-)
Yes, and if one was to discuss those nonexistent products of our collective bad nightmare, one would have to criticize them on the faults they actually display, including timeline boning, and not make shit up.
Even if one is George Lucas.
Then how am I supposed to explain Matrix:Revolutions?
LOL. If we'd stuck to these rules on SFMEDTWO we'd never have had any conversations.
No, we speculated, but it was recognized as speculation, NOT critiquing the original. People need to understand that there is a difference. Or face abuse by me. And the flying monkeys. ;-)
The *OBVIOUS* exception to this rule is when watching the movie makes you remember that you are actually a fictionkin of something represented in the movie, in which case, you can explain the movie however the hell you want, because you know what REALLY happened.
No. You can go off and have your own version of what really happened. But if you are engaging in critique, talking about your alternate life and history is still Right Out.
2010-01-18 08:10 am (UTC)
Yes, your version may be better. You don't get to use it, or your speculations about what was happening "offscreen" and never mentioned, as proof that the story was much better than it really was.
That's what fan fiction is for. I hated the way in Star Wars they explained Leia remembering her mother ... why couldn't they have said she remembered her 'adopted' mother -- or anything else but how it was explained?
However, that's not what I think critiquing is about. The fact that George Lucas probably should never write dialogue? that's pretty black and white with little gray area ... and substantiated by what's on the screen.
Then again some people would disagree with that comment .....
The original version of the story had Leia's mother hiding out with Bail Organa. That got chucked out the window in favor of death.
You know, they could have fixed it by Bail insisting on having holograms of Amidala to show baby Leia. (Which, notice, is not me saying, "well, they probably had...." It wasn't in the movie, so I'm not defending it as a story feature.)
What would your stand be on bringing in deleted scenes and alternate endings? I've seen quite a few movies that had bits make more sense after seeing these features. There are times when the existing film will retain an artifact of a deleted scene, such as Sigourney Weaver's unzipped uniform in Galaxy Quest (she'd unzipped to distract the alien grunts with cleavage).
Speaking of Siguurney Weaver, one series no one has mentioned yet was Aliens. I remember picking up a lot of the background books and was fascinated by the alien life-cycle presented in the "carving" painted by Giger. The symbiotic nature of the creature had been a nice touch. It reminds me of much of our developing knowledge of viral life-cycles bacteriophages and the like. It made a lot of sense too. By actually making use of the host DNA, it caused each generation to be better suited to living in the host's environment.
This wonderful bit was thrown out of the window with the second movie, good as it was. The introduction of a Queen made it so very mundane (literally).
The one good thing about Aliens III was that it seemed to go back to that idea of the adult being based upon the structure of the host.
They are enlightening as to what the intent was, but not really valid for critique purposes - except maybe to increase the irritation with how bad the movie is.
The exception to that is extended or alternate versions, released in their entirety, such as Lord of the Ring or Blade Runner. Then the new version can be judged on its own merit.