Contrary to Popular Belief
- Thread starter Professor James
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I have no interest in revisiting an argument from a week ago. Also, contrary to popular belief, the world doesn't revolve around America. I honestly pity you.Andre Rapp said:
*reply with argument, get insulted, rebuttal, "I HAVE NO INTEREST IN THIS, I PITY YOU"*manic_depressive13 said:
you speak of America in your own post, yet when i reply i get "lol America"
what a shame, was hoping for a good debate.
You quoted me saying the exact same thing which another poster has already said to me. I replied to that person. I'm not going to continuously repeat myself just because you can't be bothered reading through the whole thread.Andre Rapp said:
You then insulted me by saying that you corrected my spelling even though there were no spelling mistakes in my post. Despite your juvenile pedantry you failed to use capital letters where necessary.
Finally, you seem to lack any awareness that the -ise and the -ize suffixes are interchangeable. The former is British English and the latter is American English. You "corrected" my spelling even though it wasn't wrong, implying the version you use is somehow superior and making yourself appear both smug and ignorant.
So no, I have no interest in engaging in an argument with you.
Sigmund Freud was not the first psychologist. The first psychologist was Alexander Bain. The first experimental psychologist was Wilhelm Wundt. Freud was the first psychotherapist, and a bad one at that. He basically stole his idea of the id, ego, and super ego from Aristotle's concept of the four souls. In addition, pretty much all of Freud's ideas have zero relevance to modern psychology.
Source: my brain went to university and all I got was this lousy hatred for people who don't know how unimportant Freud is to my field.
Source: my brain went to university and all I got was this lousy hatred for people who don't know how unimportant Freud is to my field.
so i didn't get to the rest of the thread, you already said something along those lines then you can just not respond. instead you decided to be a jackass, and become incredibly angry over a post on the internet.manic_depressive13 said:
well I'm here to have a good time and engage in conversation, you can just stay mad then.
have a good day, it looks like you need one.
I'm not angry. I'm having a fantastic time shooting you down.Andre Rapp said:
You have a nice day too.
Apparently Napoleon wasn't short and of average height for a frenchman. The cause for this myth would seem to come from multiple sources, including:
-French measurements being longer then uk ones so 5.2 foot high in french meant around 6 in british measurements
-Napoleon was affectionaltly dubbed "little corporal" by the french soldiers as he tended to be accompanied by grenadiers and bodyguards who had height requirements so were quite tall and so napoleon was small in comparison
-Brit propaganda to make fun of napoleon,
-French measurements being longer then uk ones so 5.2 foot high in french meant around 6 in british measurements
-Napoleon was affectionaltly dubbed "little corporal" by the french soldiers as he tended to be accompanied by grenadiers and bodyguards who had height requirements so were quite tall and so napoleon was small in comparison
-Brit propaganda to make fun of napoleon,
.
No, they were about "the hero's journey". Luke's family was killed by the Empire and has the direct connection to his father as a jedi thus additionally fueling his desires to train to become one. The movie follows from his point of view until the very end cementing the fact that the whole movie is his story. He also doesn't only come into the plot half-way through the movie like Anakin (which you forgot to mention) nor is his participation in the climax rendered to a side story like Anakin was when compared to the climactic battle between the Sith and the Jedi at the Theede palace core.Buretsu said:
Young Anakin has no bearing, understanding or even reason for his presence in the political conflict between the Trade Federation and the Naboo, which, let's be honest, is the whole movie.
Anakin is introduced into the plot of Phantom Menace and does at least start his "hero's journey", yes, but he's not the protagonist that we are meant to follow and empathize with. It doesn't make sense from a narrative standpoint. He becomes the protagonist in the next two films but does not meet the requirements for this one, you see. Thus we go back to "who was the real protagonist of the first prequel?" which, in itself, is a hard question to answer since it seems none of the cast meet the requirements in the way that a film protagonists should.
I would say that Obi-wan was meant to be the real protagonist due to his involvement in the plot, relationship with Qui-gon, and character arc, but again we're met with the problem where he is also out of the film for an extended period of time and never has any real interest in the conflict beyond the fact that his master does. It's a hard question to answer, you see.
Please have more respect and use a different term in the future.Buretsu said:
True, it was an exaggeration on my part, but I meant to identify Anakin as more of a "tag-along" character by the summation of the climax since he really has no reason to be subjected to a war-zone.
An entire trilogy ruined and incomplete due to the lack of one sentence, huh? (An incorrect analysis of a sentence's context within the story, by the way. I think he was quite evil when he started killing children before she actually died, just sayin'.) I wouldn't put it in such blunt terms, but you're acting like Vader's story never had any exposition in the first place.Buretsu said:
Okay, let's break this down like we would in a writing class.
You're saying that the original trilogy is incomplete and cannot function as a story without the addition of the prequels for that specific reason.
The story being the hero's journey and thus revolves around Luke's journey, an integral factor being Darth Vader as his father. Thus we conclude that Vader's primary roles are being the villain and his relationship with Luke as father and son. Anything beyond this is superfluous.
I'm going to say this now: Padme is superfluous to the original trilogy's function as a story. The prequels add nothing to the relationship between Luke and his father because he doesn't come into existence until the last five minutes, and even then he's an infant. It's just additive backstory--unnecessary to Vader's function and role within the story at hand and doesn't add anything to his relationship with Luke.
Even so, a superfluous addition can be nice to have, but it is not necessary and thus does not take anything away without its presence in the story. Do you at least see where I'm coming from with this? You wouldn't hear anyone suggest that the scientist guy from Captain America (whose presence was vital to the story) needed his own movie to explain his backstory and how he made the super-soldier serum since saying "He made the serum because science" doesn't hold to the same standard. This is writing 101. It really can't be argued.
Alright look, I get the feeling like this is more about the prequels getting so much hate rather than having a legitimately ruining plothole within the originals, not that it's impossible for them to have a writing or plot problem. To be honest, I do like the prequels as a sort of nice, fun little action-packed extension of the Star Wars universe (well, I like Clones and Revenge at least. Really can't stand Phantom though). What I'm saying is that I do not curse the very existence of the prequels like many fans do. I like them in the same way I like Dragon Age 2 despite the fact that it was filled with flaws and was overall an ungraceful sequel to Dragon Age: Origins. Even so, it's fun for a lark and I don't condemn anyone who would like or dislike the game since both positions are understandable.
In the same way, Phantom Menace was a bit of a mess. The prequels themselves had a lot more glaring flaws despite being made over 30 years after the originals. However, I do not take umbrage with you if you like them more, but understand I do not agree with your assessment of the lack of any vital backstory for Vader in the originals. There's no reason we can't come to a simple "agreement to disagree" as it were.
Captcha: tea with jam
That would be lovely, thank you.