User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.6854 seconds
50 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
And then they killed him and ruined everything.
I'm not sure Locke was ever going to be able to be the hero of that story. The way it turned out kind of seems like a lame compromise ot keep Terry O'Quinn involved in the show, but I think Locke was always going to be a tragic figure, and I think his insecurities and self-doubt quite organically led to his downfall.
I didn't dislike the ending of Lost. The actual final episode I thought was fine, the last season overall was disappointing. But not unexpectedly so. The resolution is never as exciting as the process of figuring out what's going on, and by the start of the final season it was pretty clear what the general direction of the show was going to be. It was sort of like just marking the days until it was over.
I am assuming though that your point was more about the general consensus of the ending, which does seem fairly negative.
I always thought TNG had a fairly solid final episode. That was...geez...almost 20 years ago now?
Futurama?
He didn't need to be the hero, but it would've been nice if they let him be Locke.
"I was only a nipper when the Beatles was on the go, but I was ####### glad when they broke up!" - Steve Jones
"But..but..I thought it was a chip in his head!!"
Me: "They told you it was God. From ep 1. Deal with it."
...but then I adored the Quantum Leap finale too.
Extras and The Office were unwatchable for me. Made me way too uncomfortable.
I thought the actual last scene was a little lame, though. Usually the alternative timeline exists as a way of putting the events of the main timeline into perspective, but the last scene played more like a cast party or an opportunity for a last bow.
I guess my take on the ending was that it wasn't great, but it was good enough not to spoil the parts of the series that truly were great. That may not sound like much, but it's more than the Star Wars prequels can say.
Okay. As I mentioned, only Revenge of the Sith was really "worth it" as a prequel, and few prequels to anything are ever really "worth it", especially in movies.
However, I've noticed that most prequels that ARE good (ROTS notwithstanding) are usually not prequels in the usual sense. And they usually are GOOD ENTERTAINMENT FIRST and PREQUELS SECOND.
Take AbramsTrek for example. One of the best Star Trek movies in years, and while it was a prequel, it was just as much a reboot (the events of the movie set up a alternate timeline) and a sequel (from Nimoy-Spock's perspective). But the thing was, it was made with it being entertaining as the big goal. Yeah, it had the Kobayashi Maru test, Captain Pike and the like, but that was not the focus of it, the focus was on the story.
Or look at the Genndy Tartakovsky "Clone Wars" miniseries (as opposed to the 3D-animated series, which I haven't watched much): It was lots of stories that, while taking place in the Star Wars universe, only a few of them had anything to do with the Skywalker story, what was there was good foreshadowing. The fact that the long-talked-about Star Wars live-action series apparently will be about the underworld of the Star Wars universe, with few references to Vader, Skywalker, etc, makes it promising.
Then there was the recent Captain America movie. Good film, throwback to derring-do action films. But it also serves as a prequel to basically every other Marvel/Avengers movie. But all those prequely touches were done as extras to the actual story.
So, yeah, if you do a prequel, focus on making it good first and put the prequel stuff in after that.
I always thought that the writers were a bit hamstrung by the format they had established. I think the alternate universe thing was an ok concept to build into the ending, but the need for prominent flash backs throughout the season kind of made us invest more in it than it was worth.
I suppose you have to lay some kind of groundwork to get to that ending without it coming out of nowhere, but there sure was a lot of time spent with Jack and his kid that in retrospect didn't appear totally useful. I guess Desmond's ambiguous existence across all universes played into the story and built a little suspense. But for the most part the alternate flashbacks just seem like an exercise in reminding us "hey, there this other weird universe that's eventually going to pay off!"
EDIT: I'm signing on to your assessment of the ending in the final paragraph Zach
Probably in my top 5 episodes.
King of the Hill? Or was that not popular?
SPOILERS: From the brilliantly terrifying highway scene, to the loss of Sophia, to Shane's descent into madness, Andrea's rediscovery of the will to live and herself as a gun-totin' badass (that scene in the housing development did nothing for you? Seriously?), and the humor of her "romance" with Shane, to Daryl becoming more and more human, and thereby a part of the group, Glen and Maggie's romance, the secret of the barn, and Barnaggedon--just to name some highlights and themes--were horrendous?
Pshaw.
I don't know how popular it was, and the show had lost a lot of steam in its later seasons, but the finale of Six Feet Under was damn good.
If you think the Sophia storyline was a highlight then I don't know what to say.
Anyway, while I doubt it would have been my central story line, as a narrative thread Sophia going missing accomplished a lot of good things. It rooted the group in one place, an interesting place, while creating tension between those wanting to stay and those wanting to leave. It put them in close proximity to another group of survivors (underexplored, granted, but we're talking all of four hours of screen time in the first half of season two once they reached the farm) for multiple episodes. It brought out the character of Daryl. It heightened the tension between Rick and Shane, which has been the most interesting of the serie's many themes. And, of course, it gave us that incredible ending with episode 7.
It's hard to believe that Trek movies never got better than The Wrath of Khan and The Voyage Home...with all the technology we have now.
Second season? Then yes.
I would put the blame on the comic book for a lot of this but then again the writers of the show haven't had a problem changing the storyline in the past. The comic has had and still has some pretty bad writing and character development.
@328: well, like I said, when you already have a group of ten then add characters, and have had all of six hours in order to handle multiple plotlines, I can forgive that we only got to know three of the farm dwellers. The business with Beth (zombie scratched girl) will probably be notable for Hershel and Maggie's reaction to what becomes of her, rather than her fate as a distinct character (which she's never been--most viewers probably couldn't even name her before episode 8).
Look, Andrea /kidding!
Wait--you're telling me Lori, who was on the edge of aborting her baby, doesn't realize that? I like that Shane and Rick have two very different attitudes towards this new world, and that Shane is an extremely complex character--he could so easily have been a caricature. The writers often make mistakes (if I hear "keep you safe" one more time I'm going to throw something through my tv screen), but keeping Shane in the picture versus the comic's killing him off was a brilliant stroke.
Oh, I never read the comic. But still, using shitty source material is just going to make your product shitty.
I loved King of the Hill but my recollection was that it didn't really have a "finale" pe se, just a "last episode". A finale implies some sort of resolution or implied finality, like the last episodes of M*A*S*H, Cheers, or Seinfeld, doesn't it? IIRC the last episode of King of the Hill was sort of a throwaway episode where Bobby finds an old Ray J Johnson album.
I wouldn't call it brilliant but simply what happens for TV. It's a lot easier to add and cast off characters in a comic book than adding or removing actors for a TV show.
Sure, and other times she sending Glen on pharmacy runs every 20 minutes or running away to pee on a stick in the middle of the night or worried her son might grow up cold because he wanted to shoot a zombie.
Ok, yes Andrea is on the Shane side of things.
I'd still like to know where people got the idea that Shane killed Otis.
I'd argue the season lost momentum creating new loose ends. You're staring 10 more episodes left in the entire series with all these questions, and we're still in the ####### temple? And for what purpose? Not to mention all the time spent in the alternate timeline, which you get invested in, only to find out that none of it really meant anything?
ETA: And they never killed off Hurley.
Fast-forward and everyone thinks Kirk is a hot-headed lothario and that Shatner is the biggest ham on the planet. Ugh. This is a planet that also includes BRIAN BLESSED, by the way.
*Not including the amazing self-deprecating "Has-Been" album of course.
The comic was solid, but I don't agree with those who think it's far superior to the TV show. Some characters were better in the comic (Lori, Andrea, etc), some are better in the show (Shane, Glen, Hershel). I enjoy them both, somewhat equally.
I do think the show could use a little dose of Michonne and/or Tyreese soon. I don't know if I want them to go the Governor route, though.
I can't get past the silliness of a Zombie Apocolypse in the first place*. I haven't watched admittedly. But from what I've seen, they're the typical shambling zombies right?
He told a whole story when he first came back. I don't remember (I could be wrong) anyone having a problem with it until Dale was pissed at him.
I can't get past the silliness of a Zombie Apocolypse in the first place*.
One odd thing about the show is that they apparently live in an alternate universe where zombies don't exist. By which I mean, no one calls them zombies.
Return of the Living Dead is a little more problematical, 28 Days is a BIG problem.
The Walking Dead had a really good pilot, but the rest of the first season was pretty mediocre up until the abysmal season finale. Just really weak characters and a tendency to leave dangling plot threads (did Michael Rooker ever come back?). I haven't watched since.
One of the things I like about the OS Star Trek - Spock has the reputation as the smart one and Kirk as the fighter, but I think most would take Spock in a fight and Kirk in a mental contest (he always seems to win when they play that space chess, for example)
I do like the reboot. The plot is a weak-ish retread of Star Wars, but the actors do a great job. It definitely doesn't feel like Trek, too action-y, which is probably why a lot of hardcore Trek fans seem to hate it.
Only as a hallucination in one episode.
Good call.
As for the end of Deadwood, I thought it was appropriate, but I didn't love it. I thought the entire last season of The Wire was awful.
The "finale" of Firefly was great, but it wasn't supposed to be the last episode or anything, so that doesn't count.
Edit: I'm also glad to see a lot of complaints about the Star Trek re-boot. I wasn't impressed either.
I understand the criticisms of the last season, but the final two episodes were excellent.
Edit: I'm also glad to see a lot of complaints about the Star Trek re-boot. I wasn't impressed either.
It had its absolute faults in a vacuum, but compared to every other reboot/remake we've been subjected to? It was ####### platinum.
I guess, I don't think I've watched many recent reboots so I probably can't compare it to the group (although I've heard the Planet of the Apes reboot was pretty good). But it was a pretty thin movie that was just glossed over by loud and pervasive special effects. It was also loaded with attractive people. Other then that, I don't think it offered much of anything.
You tell adults today that it is still funny, and they have missed a couple of good seasons and they wont believe you.
Especially if they've watched any of the episodes from the last couple seasons.
I musta missed the good stuff and gotten stuck with Moe marrying a midget, Moe's talking bar towel, and Moe opening a gay bar. Oh yeah, and Principle Skinner going on your with Tommy Chong and Marge becoming a professional fighter. If I wanted 30 minutes of wacky I could sit through Family Guy, if I could sit through Family Guy.
Fox, once the home of the Simpsons and King of the Hill, now relying on Bob's Burgers for animated comedy salvation. Anyone else think the mom on that series has the most annoying voice in television history?
Nope. She's awesome.
By far the best recurring villain in the Trek universe, and it's not even close, even if you are one of the people who like Q, Dukat blows him away.
Yes, the worst part of the movie was the travesty they made of Kirk. It's like they remembered every SNL parody (and Shatner parodying himself) and forgot all about the original character.
Kirk was a military prodigy, the youngest captain in Star Fleet history, a genius on a par with Nelson or Nimitz. He regularly overcame his foes by out-thinking them, always one step ahead. Heck, he even was good enough to beat Spock at chess. In the movie all he does is shout at people, fly by the seat of his pants and leer at women. At no point does the character show any particular aptitude for leadership let alone come across as a natural commander.
I'm the same way, Community is continuing the cycle of comedies that I do not get at all, like The Office, Frasier, Always Funny in Philadelphia, (someone said Louie was a comedy? Really? guess I'll add that to the list, for some reason I thought comedy implied humor) etc that is the sitcom equivalent of Andy Kaufmann. For some reason every time I hear people liking those shows, I think it's a big ironic joke that people are playing on those who don't watch it.
I will agree with this. The most annoying part of the film.
i'm gonna guess you're not a fan of karl pilkington, either, are you?
I remember reading somewhere that this was somewhat the point: that without his father as a influence, without having the dream of Starfleet drilled into him from a early age, he didn't become that person, and that he has to grow to become that person*. Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if that's entirely a case of "Kurtzman and Orci trying to cover their asses". That said, if that turns out to be a major part of AbramsTrek II (with Benedict Cumberbatch!), awesome.
*You see hints of SHAT!Kirk at times in the movie, most notably the offer to save Nero- a totally Kirk thing to do.
I've often thought about what must happen to the creative people and actors in fictional universes. I know that in Marvel Comics they say that Marvel exists making pseudo-accurate biographical comics about the heroes. And a bunch of old novels would just say that they are writing about real events told to them by somebody. In one of the Ocean movies they make a bad joke about how Julia Roberts' character looks just like... Julia Roberts. But, like, what would the Federation Databases say about Gene Rodenberry and William Shatner? Does anybody remember Fay Wray in the King Kong universe? It's... the Celebrity Paradox.
Conquest of the Planet of the Apes disagrees with this. Arguably the second best Planet of the Apes film ever made. (Haven't seen the most recent ones, and the previews don't make me want to go see it. I can't get over the concept of thousands of apes in one metropolitan city in the very near future, just too hard for me to suspend my belief)
There was a Star Trek reboot and I missed it? I did see a movie with Star Trek in the title, and none of the soul of Star Trek a year or two back, it was a good action movie, with by far the dumbest villain motivations in the history of movies, but it sure as heck wasn't Star Trek.
The Shield had a good ending.
Back in the day it was
1.
3.
4.
2.
5.
These days I can't get through the third one. I greatly enjoy Beneath and Conquest....and at least the fifth one has "Now! Fight like apes!!", and John Huston's bittersweet ending.
1) Just to reiterate from pages ago, the Simpsons has recovered a fair bit. It's not episode after episode of quality - the bar towel ep was a misfire - but I still think the christmas/holiday episode from this season was a gem and the 500th was quite good. It's not season 6 anymore... Deal with it. It's aging -- at 2 1/2 times the age -- much better than Family Guy, which doesn't even seem to be trying anymore.
2) The BSG finale was perfectly fine. It was appropriate. It wrapped up what needed to be wrapped up. Sure - you probably saw it coming... but so what. Overlong? It needed a long goodbye. It was 4 seasons of great television. It needed a good 45 minutes to say goodbye to the characters. The final season was a season of despair and weariness. The ship is falling apart. Key characters are dying. Everything's falling apart... walking around under the sun was a perfect ending.
3) I'm not a big comics/graphic novel fan - so I can't speak to the print version of the Walking Dead... but I've found the 2nd season to be just fine... and Shane is a #########. Zombie apocalypse doesn't give one leave to be a #########.
I probably flip flop Escape(3) and Battle(5). I just can't watch Escape at all. I honestly don't think I've ever seen it all the way through, and I love the Planet of the Ape Movies(have the box set with all five, and even the Mark Wahlberg abortion).
I sometimes prefer Conquest over the Original even.
Agreed, earlier in the thread people were talking about how American Dad is better, which I thought would have been impossible, but over the past season and a half, I find myself watching American Dad before Family Guy(I record them then watch later) I didn't think that would be the case, but I haven't even watched last weeks episode of Family Guy yet and I'm probably about 4 weeks behind on the Cleveland Show.
The "finale" of KOTH was the episode where Bobby enters meat cut identification contests. It was a standard episode. but it had a coda where all the characters of the neighborhood were drawn to a cookout by the smell of meat (not the heat, natch). There was a reveal of Boomhauer's occupation.
There were four unaired episodes that later aired in syndication, including that Ray J Johnson ep. Two years previously KOTH was supposed to end and Luanne's wedding was the finale. All the characters were brought together and it ended with the gang drinking in front of the fence, with Hank surprised that he was feeling "emotions". Fox ended up picking up the show for more seasons.
In both cases the finales was understated, sweet and entirely in character.
Shane did look very uncomfortable in the aftermath, answered questions obliquely, then to top it off--in a strong scene--shaved his head. It's one of the things people do when they're trying to put something behind them. Not remotely conclusive, but didn't Dale all but accuse Shane to his face, and he didn't deny it? Dale saw Shane hold Rick in his gunsights, so he was more than ready to believe Shane killed Otis. Shane's done enough stuff that's off that others are ready to believe it of him--that's a nice touch, btw. The story Shane told when he returned was thin, and lacked the detail real stories often include. One of the things that made it compelling is that when he told this it was to Otis's widow, so a certain simplification or glossing was to be expected. He took cover in what's often already a cover story. Damned clever fellow is Shane, I really appreciate that kind of subtlety, and it's not rare in the series.
SPOILERSPOILERSPOILER
Agreed--I've been reading them on occasion at a friend's place and I'm up to v15 of the softcover collection. The issues that take place in the prison are solid, creepy entertainment with some thoughtful philosophizing interwoven, while especially v15 in the fenced housing development was awfully tame. Which is to say, like the tv version, it has its ups and downs
Yup. Another strong character is going to be important, particularly if--as I think they have to--Shane departs during the next couple of episodes. I also don't think the Governor will work that well in the tv series. He's so far gone he's not much more than a cartoon character (and didn't work that well even in a comic), and those are tough to do on-screen without descending into farce. The biggest mistake they could make would be to bring the Governor in AND give the role to a ham like Tom Savini, as I've heard rumored. That would wreck the tone of the series.
I have a weakness for postapocalyptic zombie horror so I'm very probably overrating the series. Still, I'm enjoying it enormously, and was delighted that AMC contracted for 16 more episodes.
For anyone who can't get enough, there's a realistic radio zombie apocalypse drama over at http://www.zombiepodcast.com/The_Zombie_Podcast/Main.html
I've only listened to the first four episodes, but it's pretty good.
In some ways I hope that when the Simpsons does finally end, it's like this. I mean, apparently one of the reasons the Simpsons was saved from cancellation again was so that they'll be able to have enough notice to do a grand finale. I don't like the idea of a grand finale Simpsons episode. If they want to do a grand finale, just make another movie, and make sure Kelsey Grammar is in this one.
Yes and no. In terms of main story line I think they are basically headed in the same direction as the comics but in the little thing they have changed and added things.
As for your comic stuff I too have thought that the storyline behind the new location has been pretty lame and uninteresting.
The thing is that the direction that the comics were headed after the farm is a direction I don't see that they can head in basic cable TV show. Especially not after they created a feel and mood to the show through two seasons. They'll be added but they'll be minor characters with the violence keyed way down and consequently the mood and such will be dampened as well.
@374: I don't remember where they went after the farm--it was often a month between times at my friend's so I've lost track of the chronology. Where did they go--was that to the prison?
I dunno--they've done the hand on the crotch thing, and a man's face eaten off in gorgeous, drooling closeup... surely they can do an amputation, and an execution without feeling like they've gone too far?
For example The Walking Dead
As of the current episode of the show (as not to give away any possible spoilers) you become a zombie by being bitten by an already infected zombie. The virus then spreads and eventually you turn into a zombie. Okay, that is fine but there are 7 billion people on this planet and zero zombies at this time. So even if the cause of the outbreak is some sort of weaponized virus the zombies are still going to be an extremely tiny segment of the entire population. And they are mindless bags with teeth going up against advanced civilizations. How in the world does the US military lose to zombies? It is an impossibility. It can't happen. Zombies are not going to over run a column tanks and armored vehicles. The human population can simply not get wiped out as depicted in the Walking Dead.
I'm not saying they can't show violent things or grotesque things. I'm saying the mood and tenor of the show would have to change to the new conditions as well and I don't know if they can or want to do that. Plus it could become a HBO Rome type thing where they simply have no budget to do the sprawling spectacle.
In the comic anyone who dies of any cause gets reanimated as long as they're appropriately intact.
Archer - every time I watch it, I thoroughly enjoy it. My problem is I haven't watched a season thru, I always seem to forget it's on, forget to DVR it, etc.
Community - great show, love it. I'm glad there is at least a date for it coming back.
Family Guy - stopped being funny after the 1st season it was back on FOX. American Dad has far surpassed it in terms of current quality and is pretty damn close to overall catalog quality.
Parks and Rec - For me, this season of Parks and Rec is slowing becoming one of my all time favorite of any tv comedy. It's continuing to be fresh while also being familiar, the characters are starting to break out of their predefined roles, it's been touching and human at appropriate times, and all while being very funny.
Venture Brothers - for some reason I had never watched an episode until a few weeks ago. Now I'm trying to watch all I can. Such a great show.
Big Bang - mildly entertaining at first, now it's just pathetic.
HIMYM - Well, I'm still watching, sometimes begrudgingly. Over the last 1.5 seasons it's recovered some, but not to the point it once was.
I caught the 2 hour premier of The River, but haven't got to check out the next 2 episodes. Seems like it might be entertaining enough.
SPOILERSPOILERSPOILER
Ah, okay. Unless they got a deal on a used prison, budget would definitely be an issue, but I think they could do half a season of truly dark stuff without losing their audience.
They might also be able to scale down a prison to a more affordable setting while keeping the metaphor of the prison alive and well. A gated community of some kind...?
It would make for lousy tv, but the first thing I'd do in an emergency camping out situation would be to jack a few hundred feet of roll fencing and string a few hundred cans from the fencing that I surrounded my tents with. (Not that there's any way in hell I'd be sleeping in anything other than my car if solid housing wasn't available.) Second thing I'd do is aim for a small island close to shore meaning I could clear the island of zombies while keeping access to the mainland for regular food runs. Set up a broadcasting and receiving arrangment and see how things evolved.
I think the original question here had to do with how the group, or Dale in particular figured out that Shane directly caused Otis's death. Speaking of which, why does Shane get a pass on the whole fiasco at the campground in season one? He was at least nominally in charge when the walkers attacked without warning. Where was the night watch? Why were tents scattered here and there instead of within a circle of vehicles and other obstacles?
What happened with Rome?
I think it depends on the initial etiology of the infection. Bubonic plague wiped out half of Europe's population twice, the 1918 flu pandemic infected something like 25% of global population, if you get a virulent lethal bug to give you that initial horde of several million to the millions added every day through other mortality and you'll need to call out the Avengers.
I'm not really concerned about a prison set so much as the constant need for a large amount of actors, extras, and special effects that the next area would require in almost every single episode. But yeah, the next chapter would require a lot more sets than they currently have.
I've thought about what I would do as well in a zombie outbreak that got as bad as The Walking Dead. I've restrained my fantasy to me having to deal with the situation where I currently live. So stuff like remote mountain retreats and islands are out of the equation for me. I would basically wall off my block with cars and any dividers I could haul around. Ring everything with barbwire and sandbags. Go door to door on my block clearing them all out. Going around the neighborhood stockpiling goods and weapons. Making sure every house on my block had easy access to the roofs and start some gardens on the roofs. Granted it would all go to hell when the nuclear reactors go through a meltdown but there isn't much I could do about that.
Something like 155,000 people in the world die each day. That is the entire world. Even if there is an initial outbreak that causes a large number of people to turn those zombies have to survive a very long time in an extremely hostile environment to overwhelm the world's societies.
It would've been nice had Rome tossed in a few large-scale battles from time to time. I fear that Game of Thrones will suffer similarly due to budget constraints.
I only watched the first 5 episodes of Rome but I thought what it needed more was a single likeable character.
Did Rescue Me end? I think I lost it somewhere around the end of Season 6, when it was just getting far too ridiculous. Damn, was that a good show in the beginning though.
You could make some great movies with these characters.
Episode I begins with Anakin as an old teenager/young adult (mirroring Luke in Episode IV). The pod race, Anakin building C-3PO, and the ship battle at the end become much more reasonable because of Anakin's age. You've still got Darth Maul killing Qui-Gon, but the ending is different. Darth Maul toys with Obi-Wan, clearly the better fighter, but Anakin lashes out at Maul with the Force and Obi-Wan kills Maul). This demonstrates that Anakin is remarkably powerful in the Force; with no training, he was able to shatter the concentration of a highly competent Sith Lord. Obi-Wan trains Anakin against the council's wishes.
Episode II has Anakin and Obi-Wan running around the galaxy righting wrongs (both rogue Jedi, not supported by the council). They meet Padme for the first time, Anakin rescues her, and they gradually fall in love. That really has to happen, and it has to be a really great love affair, because of where it's going to go. Anakin becomes increasingly resistant to limits on his experimentation with the Force, reckless, ambitious, etc. He's already much stronger with the Force than Obi-Wan, but he's not disciplined. He's clearly becoming unstable... we see heavy-handed use of power, collateral damage that he shrugs off as insignificant, etc. Anakin throws his lot in with Palpatine because Palpatine offers him training without restriction; this causes a very pregnant Padme to recognize that he's a lost cause and to leave with Obi-Wan. Padme gives birth to the twins and Anakin shows up soon after. Obi-Wan has taken the twins away in order to keep them from Anakin. Anakin demands to see his son (he doesn't know that there were twins), and when Padme refuses, Anakin kills her in a fit of rage. He blames Obi-Wan rather than himself and we have the battle that practically ends Episode III, where Anakin is crippled and terribly burned.
Episode III has Darth Vader hunting down all of the other Jedi and executing them, while Palpatine seizes more and more power. The Empire starts treating non-humans as second-class citizens. We see Yoda escape, Obi-Wan go into hiding, and the twins placed with their foster-parents. Perhaps we have brief shoutouts to other characters: Chewbacca escaping from the Empire's attack on Kashyyyk on the Millenium Falcon -- perhaps having to dump his cargo to hide Chewbacca is the job gone wrong that causes the trouble with Jabba the Hutt; C-3PO gets memory-wiped and sold to the Jawas; etc.
There's your great prequels.
Bingo! This was the fatal problem with the prequel trilogy from the beginning; the structure is all wrong. As is Episode 1 is completely irrelevant and everything interesting that is hinted at in the original films happens after Episode 3. Your structure is a million time better.
Also there should be no clone pawns and no robots. There are no stakes when they die. I'd always imagined the "clone wars" as Timothy Zahn's books suggested, with people fighting copies of themselves.
You don't like Pullo? And Mark Antony is one of the all time best characters on television...though it takes him until season two to really shine.
I thought the major strength of Rome was that they kept the characters true to their time. Sure, Vorenus owns slaves and appears willing to kill his wife, and Pullo murders a slave in a fit of jealousy (it's interesting that here Vorenus is more upset that he destroyed some of his property than killed a human being). The most annoying thing for me about hisorical drama is when the main character is obviously a 21st century person stuck in a socially backwards world full of people who "don't get it". It's annoying on two levels - 1) it takes away from the me getting immersed in the environment and 2) it's insulting to the audience, thinking we need a modern character to point out all the cultural differences through contrast (or explicit complaining), rather than simply observation.
In that sense I think Rome is a great template for how to do historical drama.
If I recall properly when I stopped watching his most notable recent activities were stabbing someone through the throat for cheating at dice then attempting to slaughter everyone the man was with followed by helping torture and kill a man for sleeping with his friend's wife... but yeah, he was indeed the most likeable character. Mark Antony didn't figure into the first five episodes much so I can't say much about him. It was clearly a well made show but even a dark, violent political drama needs to have characters you can care about(see Game of Thrones.)
Burned, duh.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main