And thus is the joy of art - it always gets filtered through our own experiences and prejudices before we ever see it at all. There is no objectivity in art, only perspectives. When "critiquing" films, I always try to say how it made me feel, as opposed to absolutes about how "good" or "bad" it was. This doesn't especially hold true for quality of acting, special effects, or story, but it always holds true of how you view it and enjoy it.
When it comes to art appreciation, certainly I can embrace "Viva la difference!". In politics, however, you either agree with me or you're an infidel worthy only of death. :)Comment Posted By James Wright On 25.05.2005 @ 19:12
My favorite line from the movie:
"Only the Dark Side Deals in Absolutes"Comment Posted By James Wright On 25.05.2005 @ 17:04
- Obi-Wan Kenobi
I enjoyed Sith despite the movie, which I found to be pretty horrible. I enjoy Star Wars, so pretty much anything from that universe will entertain me. But the bad acting, too-smooth CGI action sequences, and lack of true evil on the part of Anakin left me wanting more. Wanting better.
How many Jedi did we actually see Anakin kill? Zero. He stopped Mace from killing Palpatine, which allowed Palpatine the opportunity to finish off Mace, but that kill isn't attributable to Anakin. He marched into the temple with all of those clones, and then we didn't see a single battle. He lit up his light saber in the room with all the younglings, but we never saw him hack and slash. His turn to the dark side was too fast and dramatic, especially considering the fact that 1) it happened because he was scared of his dreams, and 2) Palpatine's promises of saving Padme were unfounded as he didn't have the power to do it.
I wanted a movie where I learned to hate Darth Vader. I learned that the evil inside of him was too great for the good to overcome, and that he had done terrible things of his own accord because he was just evil. I feel that we could've formed a better emotional response to his turn to the dark side if we had seen him kill some Jedi, seen him kill the younglings, or seen him have a true emotional moment with Padme. Lucas can't write (or apparently direct) a romantic scene. I've seen more passion from cereal commercials.
One of the foundational problem areas, in my opinion, is the liberal-style thinking that went behind the movie that says no one is truly responsible for their actions. It is their circumstances and the people around them that cause them to do things out of character because they are deceived into thinking it's the right thing to do or the only option they have. I felt like the filmmakers were trying to get me to feel the same way about Darth Vader as they would want me to feel about drug dealers in the ghetto. It's not their fault - it's a societal and community failure to show another viable option.Comment Posted By James Wright On 25.05.2005 @ 17:02
There's nothing odd about a politician wanting to destroy American heroes and protect known terrorists. Call him "Howard Dean".Comment Posted By James Wright On 24.05.2005 @ 22:44
Swordfish wasn't at all about good men doing what it takes to protect this country. I do love the idea of Jack going "Rainbow Six" and putting together an international team of counter terrorists, possibly with the administrative team run by Tony and Michelle. They'd possibly have less in the way of resources, but they could have less restrictions on their actions and a whole lot less bickering with "Division". Palmer could be the liason for foreign relations. I'd appreciate it most if it was done as a capitalistic enterprise, but obviously that wouldn't go over too well on network TV. I just think that CTU's time has come and gone - "24" should be a story about Jack, not about Jack at CTU.
Intriguing question: What will Jack's name be next season?
Rick - I love the fact that you blogged this series. I got in a little late on the action, but this is good stuff. Definitely makes the show more involving and fun, and I've checked your blog for new comments on these posts a whole lot more than any other threads. Thanks for facilitating our enjoyment.Comment Posted By James Wright On 24.05.2005 @ 15:06
Now it's time for Jack to become a corporate mercinary for hire. But to make this a producable show, he'll only take on jobs working against companies that violate environmental laws.
If he had been able to go back to Washington, I was in favor of him becoming a politician and next season having 24 hours to stop the nuclear option.Comment Posted By James Wright On 23.05.2005 @ 21:01
No hard feelings. However, a "spoiler" is commonly defined as "information about the plot or ending of a film (or show) that may damage or impair the enjoyment of the film (or show) if known ahead of time". No matter the source of your information, a spoiler is a spoiler.
Not trying to cause problems for you here, but I'm new to this blog, and I don't want to have the ongoing reputation of being the spoiler type. Everyone here seems to have the highest esteem for you, so it wouldn't destroy your reputation if you took the responsibility and let me off the hook.
diamond - that's why I'm not a dem.Comment Posted By James Wright On 23.05.2005 @ 18:39
Rick - I'm interested to hear your answers to these questions... You started this. Seems like you should at least participate. :)Comment Posted By James Wright On 21.05.2005 @ 20:33
We haven't seen Wayne Palmer at all, so I guess I didn't consider him. If we're to consider the possibility that the mole (if there is a mole) could be someone we haven't seen yet, the possibilities would be endless. What's more, this entire line of activity hasn't helped Wayne at all. His brother, David, was called in to help, but that had to be a surprise even to him - and it's certainly understood that it's a temporary situation.
As far as hitting the Chinese Embassy with the bomb, it's too small a target for too large a bomb. Hitting the U.N. would possibly cause more problems, and likely take more dignitaries with it. But the point of these terrorists is to kill average Americans. I think the possibility of the U.S. going to war with China was a collateral bonus for Marwan.
Maybe Audrey set up her brother with that couple so that they could tap his phone, as even she didn't especially know when her dad would be visiting. I think he's more a clueless victim.
As far as Chloe and anyone, she's way too much of a head case.Comment Posted By James Wright On 21.05.2005 @ 17:19
Let me first state that I have no "insider information", so if my guesses here are accurate and ruin anything for anyone, I'm sorry. Just trying to start a dialogue.
I can't imagine a whole season of "24" without a mole. It just doesn't happen. The first and best mole was Nina - in large part because she was totally unexpected and because of her and Jacks previous romantic involvement.
In keeping with that tone, I'd have to say the most intriguing mole possibility would be Audrey. She's done nothing but distract Jack and try to keep him from doing what he needs to do, and despite her capture she suffered no harm and has stayed around at CTU to do...what, exactly?
The President will recover, if only because he's a relatively strong character to have for next season. Tony and Michelle is a tough call, because I don't see a season without them, but the only way they get together is if they leave this line of work. Would it be too much of a stretch for Jack to somehow bring them back next year if they've both quit?
For the sake of all that is good and decent, Chloe and Edgar will never get it on.
If I had a nuclear warhead on a missle and wanted to do as much damage as possible, New York would be my obvious target. I'd drop it right on Wall Street. That's my guess.
That's all I have to say for now...Comment Posted By James Wright On 21.05.2005 @ 09:09
Pages (2) :  2