LORD IMPERATOR
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2020
Each individual part had to be extraordinary. The characterization had to be good. The atmosphere and music had to be good. The special effects had to be good by their time's standards. Part of the reason why Star Wars worked so well is because everything, from the character dynamics, to the mysticism, to the action, atmosphere, and music, were all done superbly. It's not the sum being greater than its parts, it's more akin to every part being great and once put together, became an even greater thing.hence me saying sum greater than it's parts. the individual parts are nothing extraordinary, it's the combination (and a good dose of luck). even the special effects are debatable because at some point some else would've come up with it, you can only be stagnant for so long (boy this is gonna bring in the ratings).
it's also easy to go backwards with "unpopular = shit" - that's not how it works.
And it's not even about popularity or being unpopular, since the OT's charm was enduring over time, meaning that it withstood the test of time and the moodswings of people deciding what is popular and what isn't.
But here's the thing; both TFA AND TROS are mocked and derided by fans because they're shit. You can't just slap Star Wars onto something and call it a day, or else your work will be derided by fans. They bought the ticket based on the brand name, but their judgement of the work's quality came after they experienced and bought it. Hence why despite selling well, TFA, TROS, and TLJ are still mocked by the fans. Whereas GOOD Star Wars works like the Jedi Knight games, the Thrawn Trilogy, the KOTOR games, the Tartakovsky Clone Wars cartoon, among others, can stand tall as good examples of SW media that the fans come back to, because they are good works of fiction set within the SW universe.average means between good and bad. there's a scale, not absolutes. also "good" in terms of personal enjoyment is highly subjective (obviously).
and even shit stuff that gets elevated by the brand, which means people will buy (and sometimes enjoy it) because it's the brand. that's how it works. remember, TFA made 2 billion, and TROS made 1 billion. one man's trash is another man's treasure. and again, since it's a scale even 7/10 stuff can be "good", especially when you can't constantly output 10/10 stuff.
Of course, of course. But if your story is shit, it doesn't matter if you took care to properly set it in its new framework or if you cite other parts of SW lore, because it's still shit. The Traviss books cited other EU works like the KOTOR comics, but that doesn't make them good, nor does that absolve them from the fact that they were badly-written Mary Sue books that had really one-sided characterizations which the fans mocked.transplanting a story and make it fit the new universe also has nothing to do with the quality of the story itself, but your adaption. you can have the best story in the world, but if you don't care to properly set it in it's new framework it doesn't matter when the rules don't make sense and the story you want to tell completely absurd.
No, because once people do dig up that good "forgotten" stuff and bring them back into the public consciousness, people begin to like those old things again. Like how people got tired of 80s movies and forgot about them by the time of the 90s and the early 2000s, but now, people are revisiting such classics and they like them again, hence why a lot of modern media is based on 80s nostalgia, because people are re-awakening their love of 80s stuff. Shakespeare is still critically acclaimed after hundreds of years, and the same goes for the Greek Tragedies.again, that's why I said "the better the latter the less distractions you need."
but following that logic, there was plenty of great stuff 100, 500, 1000 years ago you don't even remember - does that mean they're shit? because after all they can't have been this great if people forgot about them. and what about people that like trash? ed wood movies are by and large considered pretty crappy, won't stand the test of time and are objectively not good at all, yet there are plenty of people that enjoyed them, time and time again for decades. why is that?
Ed Wood movies are enjoyed by people who love the fact that they're bad. It's basically a case of "it's so bad, it's good" kind of thing, like how The Room was unintentionally hilarious and it became a cult classic, not because of quality, but because of how funny its cringe moments were.