Qui-Gon is an independent minded risk taker, who is also wise

10 years later good job fagœt

>>82307740
>>>/co/92032080

>>82313459
The contrarian award

File: shiggy.jpg (10KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 250x250px

>>82313538
>being a stalker

>>82313459
a blowjob by Rich Evans

That sounds incredibly bland and proves his point.

>risk taker
>measured

That description could be referring to at least 10 other characters in the prequels alone.

>>82313610
>That sounds incredibly bland and proves his point.
????
His point was that you can't do it.
Nice goalposts.

>>82313684
That's irrelevant since it describes Qui-Gon.

>>82313647
Yes. Should I have said "measured demeanor" to appease your autism?

>>82313756
>His point was that you can't do it.
No

His point was the more descriptive you can get the better the character. He literally says that.

File: MIKE .png (167KB, 300x347px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 300x347px

>>82313792
But I got nicely descriptive.

Han is literally
>rogue with a heart of gold
He's as cliche as the come.

>mike thinks that a film has to have a single protagonist and a conventional plot structure

More like Mr.Plebbit

>>82313792
Ben in 4 is a pretty shit character then. Not only is he exactly as bland as Qui-Gon, he also dies like a dirty dog bitch

>>82314010
That's a good point.
Also his death was completely pointless since he could have done everything he does in the next two movies while still alive.

>>82314010
He's the archetypal mentor, all of the Phantom Menace characters are just sort of there

>>82314010
Yeah he is.

The Original trilogy has good characters to make up for it though. The prequels really have nothing except maybe the Emperor.
He was great.

>>82314106
>He's the archetypal mentor
So is Qui-Gon. That's literally what his role in the film is.

>not drinking from an evian bottle

You missed your pottery touch here, lucas

>>82313973
A film needs to have a main character, at all, usually...yes. TPM has none.

>>82314166
Okay now we have established that both movies have a generic mentor figure.
How does that make the prequels better or gives the movie a good protagonist?

>>82314144
>The Original trilogy has good characters
No it doesn't. Luke is only really good in 6, before that he's just a bland nobody. Leia is just kind of there, doesn't really have a personality. Harrison Ford is great, but that's not really a chracter, that's just Harrison Ford doing a great Harrison Ford. Yoda is retarded in 5, I'm sorry, but only prequels made him an actual non-retarded character. Surely you won't argue that C3PO was good, he's the original Jar Jar

>>82314202
>A film needs to have a main character

Except it doesn't, ever hear of an ensemble cast?

>>82314202
>usually.
At least you admit that it's not actually a rule.

>>82314106
>are just sort of there
What does this even mean?

>>82314144
>has good characters
What is your criteria for this?

>>82313973
>I can't remember what Mike actually said
ok then

>>82313869
Correct, but he is the only character in the OT who is like that, the only who is near that is Lando and that's the point of their love/hate relationship in TESB.

>>82314246
It doesn't work for the prequels
They are terrible.

A decent director could make an ensemble cast work with star wars. Lucas couldn't.

>>82314223
>gives the movie a good protagonist
Obi-Wan in 1 is a better protagonist than Luke in 4. There, I said it. Obi-Wan was fun, Luke was just bland in his first film.

>>82314260
>>are just sort of there
>What does this even mean?

Phantom Menace has a cast of non-characters, we've gone over this a few times

Why do you guys even argue with the trolls?

>>82314295
>Obi-Wan in 1 is a better protagonist than Luke in 4.
But Obi-Wan wasn't the protagonist in 1.
If he had been you would probably be right
But he was stuck on the ship for most of the time.

Saying Ewan McGregor should played a bigger role in the movie and should've done all the shit Qui-Gon has done and saying he should've been the protagonist is LITERALLY what plinkett said in his review

>>82314295
The problem is Obi-Wan isn't the main character of Phantom Menace, he sits in a ship doing nothing for the entire second act

>>82314359
Why post on 4chan at all if you are just going to assume everyone is a troll?

>>82314265
>but he is the only character in the OT who is like that
So? We are getting away from the issue because you can't refute my description of Qui-Gon.

>>82314264
And that's the problem isn't it?
Mike makes wishy washy ("a film does't need a protagonist, but it's good in this type of movie") statements that can be defended forever because the fallback is "he didn't say you have to have one, just that it's a good idea".
This means that people take his opinions ("it's good idea") and act like they are evidence that the film is objectively flawed.

The real answer is that Mike just has bad opinions that people like to eat up and parrot because he's funny.

>>82314327
>non-characters
What does this mean?

>>82314430
>>non-characters
>What does this mean?

Characters that lack definable traits or personality, it's something Lucas excels at

>>82314286
>Lucas couldn't.
Source?

>>82314362
>Saying Ewan McGregor should played a bigger role in the movie and should've done all the shit Qui-Gon has done and saying he should've been the protagonist is LITERALLY what plinkett said in his review
But since Qui-Gon absorbed Obi-Wan's original personlity when Lucas created him, that means that Obi-Wan in TPM would have had Qui-Gon's characteristics- the ones Mike says are nonexistent.

So he's trying himself in knots.

File: 1449861503611.jpg (11KB, 356x297px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 356x297px

>>82313571
>being a stalkee

>>82314246
I said usually, and even ensembles have to have some form of depth to work.

>>82314478
But that's incorrect.
Look at the OP.
No one has refuted this yet, they have merely tried to claim that it ALSO fits other characters.

>>82314520
Now we're getting somewhere.
All you really have if your opinion that the ensemble isn't interesting.

>>82313459
>risk taker
>wise and measured

Literally a contradiction

>>82314595
see
>>82313756
>Should I have said "measured demeanor" to appease your autism?

>wise people don't take risks
The only way to get anywhere in life is to take risks.

>>82314498
>Source?
The prequels.
>But since Qui-Gon absorbed Obi-Wan's original personlity when Lucas created him, that means that Obi-Wan in TPM would have had Qui-Gon's characteristics- the ones Mike says are nonexistent.
Okay what the fuck are you talking about.
Obi-wan and Qui-gon are equally boring
Therefore if Obi-Wan would've gotten all the screentime Qui-Gon had gotten he would become boring again?

Are you retarded? Literally retarded? Obi-Wan was an okay character in prequels who never did anything. He was criminally underused

Imagine if Obi-Wan wouldn't have died in Star Wars and he would've done Luke had done from his death on.
Then you have the fucking Phantom Menace.

>>82313459
What does Georges shirt say?

>>82314566
>All you really have if your opinion that the ensemble isn't interesting.
No.
Lucas just couldn't write a decent ensemble

You seem to think an Ensemble doesn't need any good characters in it.

>>82314620
No, a wise person wouldn't take a risk

>>82314626
>>Source?
>The prequels.
Opinions are not a source.

>who never did anything
yikes

>>82314654
>doesn't need any good characters in it.
See, this is your opinion.

>>82314671
So you are disputing this claim-
>taking risks is how you go places in life
?

>>82314724
You couldn't name a single good character in the prequels and so far only got to the point of people admitting that qui-gon is as boring as Obi-wan is in the originals

Which is incredibly bad considering Obi-Wan is a side character in a story and qui-gon is the most active character in an ensemble cast.

>>82314724
>taking risks is how you go places in life

Do you have this in wooden letters above your bed?

>>82314763
>You couldn't name a single good character in the prequels
I think Anakin, Obi-Wan, Qui-Gon, Palpatine, Yoda, and Bail are great.

BUT we both know that you will call them bad characters, so why should I bother?

>>82314799
The little kid? Really? Might as well defend Jar-Jar while you are baiting
Who is Bail?

>>82314566
1. You are talking to multiple anons, bud.
2. Just having characters exist and calling them an ensemble, doesn't hand wave the fact that for ensembles to WORK, they need to have character depth enough to function as parts of a whole.

TPM fails at doing this.

>>82314799
Anakin, Obi-Wan, Palpatine and Yoda are all from the OT

>>82314799
Because they are bad characters.

>>82314856
>TPM fails at doing this.
In your opinion. Do you see how this works?

>>82314886
Source?

>>82314865
?
The question was good characters in the prequels.

>>82314925
So do you just want to hear that it is okay to have the opinion to like the prequels

It is your opinion that the prequels are good

Are you okay now? Can we end this?

>>82314100
Wrong. Ben and Yoda had to die because Luke had to face Vader alone.

>>82314998
>So do you just want to hear that it is okay
I know it's ok. I'm trying to make him understand that his opinion is not a fact.

>>82315016
????
He would have faced him alone anyway.

>>82314925
Literally filmmaking 101, when applied to TPM in any layman capacity, shows that they are poorly written. Sure you have your opinion but that doesn't make you 100 percent correct that they are well-rounded characters. We are talking about function and structure, not aesthetics you dumbfuck.

>>82315034
You just have bad taste. Did you start this thread to target anyone who thinks their opinions are facts? Why?

>>82314954
>Source?
The films.

>>82315016
>Luke had to face Vader alone
Is that why he ends up fighting Vader with Palpatine?

>>82315101
What special edition did that happen in?

>>82314763
Not OP, but I could, I found Jango Fett interesting, too bad he was killed at the end in the worst movie of the franchise, but the whole background of his character kept me interested.

>>82315039
No, see. That's still an opinion.
It is your opinion that since they don't follow your criteria or criteria you adhere to, that they've done something wrong.

For example, Terrence Malick's newer films don't adhere to character criteria of any kind, yet are absolutely amazing in terms of humanity on display.

>>82315071
No.
Listen. If someone asked me me source for the PT being good, I could say
>the films
but that's my OPINION.
Get it?

>>82315034
>He would have faced him alone anyway

Wrong.

If Ben and Yoda were both live and kicking, they would have lent their assistance in taking down Vader/Emperor.

>>82315147
Source?
Yoda sat in a swamp for 20 years and didn't ever try to kill Vader.

>>82315145
Anon, aesthetics is an opinion...technical quality, function and structure are not.

You can have aesthetically pleasing characters you like, that speak grammatically stunted dialogue.

>>82315199
>technical quality, function and structure are not.
Yes they are.
Are you saying that Knight of Cups is lacking in character richness for Bale because it has no coherent narrative?

>>82315145
And your opinion just serves to show me that you have a poor understanding of film in general.

>>82315233
see
>>82315230
Refute this.

>>82315230
>technical aspests to a film are opinion based
No, they aren't. This is retarded. If you can't light a scene or frame a scene well, you notice that. We aren't talking about aesthetics when we are talking about those things.
>Knight of Cups
I never saw it.

>>82315293
>No, they aren't.
Yes they are.
Watch Knight of Cups.

>>82315265
Again, I never saw that,

>>82315321
Even if you disagree with me, watch Knight of Cups any way.
It's amazing.

>>82315309
So all technical aspects to a film are opinion-based, in your mind? So if I accidently just up and turn a camera off by accident, that's not a technical error?

>>82315101
That literally didn't happen retard

Luke beat Vader and refused to kill him

>>82315367
>So all technical aspects
>all
No. But character stuff, most definitely. Absolutely.

>>82315410
There are ways to fuck up characters technically, anon. Watch TPM.

Don't even try arguing with Reddit Leddit Media or his drones, the guy who wrote an amazing essay got laughed off because "heh autist why would you counter my points, discarded"

>>82315441
>Watch TPM.
I have. Which is why I hold the opinion I hold.

>>82315462
>amazing essay
Oh man, bait is out in force today.

File: 1464931093440.jpg (13KB, 360x240px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 360x240px

>>82315462
>amazing essay
You wrote it didn't you?

>>82315487
...and your opinion is that characters in TPM are well-written?

>>82315495
>>82315498
It was good, but since those guys are le internet stars and they are above everyone they just dismissed it, they deserve to die.

Also Space Cop was fucking garbage and it was pathetic

>>82315528
Yes he is retarded
How many times do we need to go through this?

>>82315528
How hard is it to just scroll up?
Yes.
I find them to be as well written as the OT characters (whether that means that they are good or not is up you).
MUCH more importantly I find them to feel human.

To use an example from TFA vs. R1,
Rey MIGHT have been written better, but Jyn felt much more... human to me.
Maybe it was her performance, maybe it was direction, maybe it was her reacting to other characters, who knows.

I like Qui-Gon for the same reasons. He feels real in a way that, say, Finn doesn't.
Abrams movie characters feel like spastic cartoons.
Qui-Gon actually has a consistent demeanor.

>>82314678
What a tard. You asked for a source on a subjective opinion.