This is the problem with many Star Wars "fans"

"Fans", is crude, but "JJ Wars", isn't?
Come on.

I didn’t use parentheses.

Jesus Christ.

You might have a laugh, be entertained, but whatever. You clearly aren't going to watch it and I'm not going to pay you to watch it. I personally enjoy their content and no Dicky, they don't give me my opinions. I can think for myself, thank you very much. That doesn't mean I can't watch a review video and enjoy it and maybe walk away with something I hadn't thought of before. I don't think that just because three middle age men criticize a Star Wars film that makes them (or me) any less a "fan" than anyone else or that there's something wrong with that as implied in the OP. Anyway, it seems this particular discussion has run it's course. I will grant that the personal interactions here are more valuable to me than interactions on YouTube and I'll leave it there.

My Roku's got nearly 700 channels on it, finding something to make me laugh on it is easy. If you want me to watch something you like, you've got to find a compelling reason for me to do so. You ain't got tits, so...

You know the saying, "Ass, gas, or grass."

Here's the thing: There are certain posters here, and we all know who they are, who've got opinions which are set in stone at one end of the extremes or the other. They absolutely love something, or they absolutely hate it. They will not concede that a particular element of something is the opposite of what they feel about the whole product. You know, they love a movie, so even though there's an objective plothole in the film (like, in the Peter Jackson King Kong movie where there's a scene about how they won't allow a specific character to carry a gun, because he's never handled one before, and then a couple of scenes later, he's using a tommy gun to shoot giant grasshoppers off of people without killing them), they can't admit this and insist that every scene in the movie is absolutely perfect.

Now, again, it's objective that this scene is a plot hole. There's no way someone who's never handled a gun could safely accomplish what happens in that scene (and truthfully, I doubt that a skilled marksman could do it either, but that's another matter). It's subjective if that particular scene ruins the movie for you or not. Personally, the movie was ruined for me well before that, but that's another story.

There are people who are on the opposite end of the spectrum who cannot admit that a movie they don't like has any decent scenes at all. I'm not a fan of TFA, but there's no way I'm going to try to argue that from a visual standpoint the scene this shot comes from isn't visually gorgeous.



Where you seem to be coming from is that you're saying, "I don't like this movie, and these guys hate it too, so I'm right!" Maybe that's not your intention, but that's how you come across. And if your defense of why you don't like a movie is for us to watch a video of guys who independently happen to agree with you, well, that's not much of an argument. It's far, far better if you articulate your reasons, and then, maybe drop the video in your post with a comment along the lines of "these guys go into greater detail about the specifics." That tells us that what your expressing is authentic, and not merely something you regurgitated.

I'm not going to dig around and find examples of this, but there have been a number of threads on this board which have overlapped with various podcasts I listen to. Some times, I will drop a link to the podcast in a comment, in case folks might be interested in the subject. I won't chastise them for not listening to it, and if asked, I will happily provide a link to a news article which backs up what the podcast says. Other times, I will reference that a podcast I listen to makes a particular point, without dropping a link to the podcast, or even mentioning it by name, because while that particular podcast may agree with what a poster said in this instance, other things that the podcast talks about go against opinions that the poster might have. So, if I mention the specific podcast, it derails the thread and takes it down a wrong direction. No point in doing that. Unless, of course, I get to drag the ass of a few particular posters through the thread so that the majority of us here can laugh at them. Do you see where I'm coming from?

Yes I see your point. For the record, I don’t hate TLJ. There are moments to like in it, but it’s the weakest of the Star Wars movies, IMO. The only movie I can think of that I hate in recent memory would be Ghostbusters 2016. It on was tv a few months ago and I tried giving it another shot and I couldn’t stomach it. Other than that, I can’t think of a movie I hate other than maybe the Schumacher Batman movies. TLJ Justus gives me very little to like. Yes, I’m including the prequels. I also hate Halloween 3 : Season of the Witch, I can never finish it. Now you got me thinking of movies I hate.

I found a video @Diacanu will love because it’s nothing but love for everything Star Wars and it’s probably how he watches trailers.

I’m sorry a less than 2 minute is too long for you.

Trek had a lot of Universe and tech building. I remember when I was getting into it you could read tech manuals and they had thought about great explanations for the technology and terminology for how it worked. They had worked out languages and lore for different races. It may not have all started out that way, but the universe building of trek really went as deep as things like LOTR, and provided a real base for nerdy pursuits and arguing.

I always got the feeling with SW that the tech was less defined, and the universe not as thought through. Sure they had a wide variety of different looking aliens, but how much history of those races were there? Even the main races were not as fleshed out as the vulcans, romulans, and klingons ended up. Their tech manuals were just diagrams of ships. If ypou read things like the guides to the enterprise there was thought into the systems and how they worked together. They already had a plan for how TNG enterprise would be evacuated long before Diana crashed it into a planet. I knew the escape protocols and how the pod launches were supposed to look and was having a fangasm when I actually saw it on the big screen.

It always seemed like the star wars vehicles were held together by spit and duct tape to me, and you kicked them to get them going like an old ford pickup. Of course, JJ did show us that you could kick the warp drive into alignment which did go against most of the nerdy knowledge that was geordi's and scotty's engines. Who knew you could align the dilithium crystals with a good swift kick or three? I also thought that a star ship crashing into a very populated city would be self destructed and had an attempt to evacuate rather than crash land into occupied buildings, but it was an exciting scene.

I think this was in part due to most of the early Trek writers (including Roddenberry of course) had worked in actual jobs in the real world prior to working in television. Plus, they had read classical literature and science fiction from the classical science fiction era. In contrast most of the modern Star Trek writers have basically "watched television and movies".

The point being that the people working on the original series took seriously the idea of there being "science" in science fiction. It didn't all make sense either scientifically or dramatically but the effort to make it at least "feel" based on science was there.

In contrast, I don't think George Lucas and company had the least interest in thinking about whether anything in Star Wars was based on either real science or even fictional science. As far as Lucas was concerned he was making something akin to the early black and white Buck Rogers serials based in part on a Japanese story and the climatic part of the first movie lifted almost entirely from the movie "Dam Busters".

In other words, Lucas wanted simply to make something that was fun. And he obviously succeeded. But that doesn't mean the Star Wars universe would ever stand up to serious scrutiny.

Neither did Diacanu.