Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pinky and the Brain

fantheories.fandom.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 83 posts

Re: Pinky and the Brain

#71

Post by missblit »

mLuby wrote: post #50
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It takes away from the other films as well by cheapening the force and the ability to wield it. Luke barely manages to lift some rocks after a lot of training montage, Rei lifts heaps of rocks without formal training. I don't think there's many people that liked the sequels. I can't believe they went in with those gung-ho, without the story fleshed out already. I mean the stakes were incredibly high, billions in reve…

> I mean the stakes were incredibly high, billions in revenue for the foreseeable future. That's exactly why the first sequel movie (EpVII: TFA) was so timid; I'm sure it was the most de-risked thing the writers and execs could think of—just a re-skin of the original. > cheapening the force and the ability to wield it… It's telling that the secondary things - Rogue One, Mandalorian - are fan favorites instead. Star W…

There are tons of ways to write a story involving the force that doesn't boil down to destiny or power creep. Jedi are essentially swordsmen / samurai / ronin characters; and not every swordsman needs to be in a hero villain pair.

And there's plenty of fun stuff in the EU (Luke's Jedi academy, the force blocking Ysalamari lizards, Sith Holocrons, etc.) that could have been used to write a solid force-centric plot.

Though as you say the writers were too timid to do anything really interesting with it.

Re: Pinky and the Brain

#72

Post by Qi_ »

psbp wrote: post #51
SuoDuanDao wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my headcanon, the light speed weapon explains why even though we're obviously descended from one of the races in the setting, we don't have spaceships or force powers - once one person got the idea they could use a ship as a suicide nuke, everyone did it, until the only survivors literally had to flee the galaxy and stop using advanced technology. If one views the entire nine-series arc as the story of the fall of…

My headcanon is that the maneuver was just a lot harder to accomplish than it's depicted. Distance from other ships, residual shield levels, etc. allow it to be possible but unlikely. They threw in a line in episode 9 that it was 1/million (kind of like the Death Star kill shot). I think it makes the Holdo character more interesting if she has some sort of force intuition or just advanced analytical/risk-taking skill…

I was under the impression the Holdo maneuver was just basic projectile physics: huge projectile with huge velocity. I guess the in-universe explanation isn't that simple.

Re: Pinky and the Brain

#73

Post by SketchySeaBeast »

darkerside wrote: post #66
SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can't believe they let someone like that I assume you're referring to Rian Johnson - I wouldn't lay the blame all on him - he's clearly capable of making great fun movies. I think the fact that the new trilogy is an incohesive mess is entirely the fault of Disney as a whole not knowing what they wanted to do with it. I'd also lay a ton of the blame at JJ Abraham's feet - the man loves to set up a mystery but seemin…

He asked JJ to make changes to TFA to set up his vision for TLJ. JJ certainly shares blame (TROS was garbage and everybody knows it, including JJ), and the flaws you describe are accurate. But this was RJ's movie, given to him by the executives at Disney, with no interference to speak of. How can you not blame the man with the smoking gun?

> He asked JJ to make changes to TFA to set up his vision for TLJ.

Do you have articles about that? I hadn't heard about it. It's also surprising considering that JJ didn't do the same back to him, especially with the whole "no, her lineage IS special" thing. Weird power dynamics.

> How can you not blame the man with the smoking gun?

Because it was all garbage? Honestly, if they'd continued on TLJ's path, I think it would have been a better ending than what actually happened. Maybe they would have changed Star Wars instead of just rehashing the exact same thing again.

Re: Pinky and the Brain

#74

Post by WorldMaker »

missblit wrote: post #71
mLuby wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I mean the stakes were incredibly high, billions in revenue for the foreseeable future. That's exactly why the first sequel movie (EpVII: TFA) was so timid; I'm sure it was the most de-risked thing the writers and execs could think of—just a re-skin of the original. > cheapening the force and the ability to wield it… It's telling that the secondary things - Rogue One, Mandalorian - are fan favorites instead. Star W…

There are tons of ways to write a story involving the force that doesn't boil down to destiny or power creep. Jedi are essentially swordsmen / samurai / ronin characters; and not every swordsman needs to be in a hero villain pair. And there's plenty of fun stuff in the EU (Luke's Jedi academy, the force blocking Ysalamari lizards, Sith Holocrons, etc.) that could have been used to write a solid force-centric plot. Th…

I think all the EU things you just mentioned are their own versions of Force scope/power creep. The Sith Holocrons are very deeply implicated in some of the power creep in the EU. The lizards were added to fight a power creep in one book and then became their own obstacle that in turn caused new power creep in a later book. Luke's Jedi Academy turned out some OP members no better/worse than what the Disney era sequels did with Kylo Ren.

The EU definitely isn't a great example for avoiding Force power creep, either. I'm not sure Star Wars has a good example.

(In general I'm not sure much of fandom anywhere has a good long term cure for power creep: the stakes inflation race is a huge problem in almost every similar franchise, too. Avatar: TLA saw its own stakes inflation over the seasons and between the shows. DBZ is a classic case where stakes inflation just gets baked into the manga/anime's formats and assumed as a given for every storyline that follows. Comics both DC and Marvel have long struggled with it and their properties in other media such as films have done nothing but inherit it. And so forth…)

Re: Pinky and the Brain

#75

Post by AtlasBarfed »

toast0 wrote: post #64
darkerside wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ridiculous that the entire movie was basically a setup for one scene that admittedly looked cool, but also made no sense in the context of the universe. Can't believe they let someone like that steer an American cultural icon into the ground.

Unfortunately, by the third movie, Lucas didn't have to listen when other people said no (or nobody told him no anyway), and the quality plumetted. It doesn't take a lot to ignore the junk in Return. But the prequels are crap between a lack of interesting story, lack of interesting characters, lack of interesting sets. Somehow character are in the desert of wherever, but aren't hot and there's no sand movement at all…

The Ewoks were supposed to be wookies originally I heard somewhere. IMO would have fundamentally fixed the movie. Cutification was simply a money grab.

Re: Pinky and the Brain

#76

Post by JediWing »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #27
fractallyte wrote: post #15

I thought this was made pretty clear in the theme song's lyrics? "They're Pinky and The Brain - Yes Pinky and The Brain - One is a genius - The other's insane" Brain is clearly made out to be insane (in the cartoon sense), which leaves Pinky as the genius. QED, right?

also in general English style if you say there is X and Y and one is an A and other a B, it is common that the property A refers to X and the property B to Y as they occupy the same positions in the statement. However one can also be structuring things in this ambiguous manner for artistic reasons.

Or because brain rhymes with insane...

Re: Pinky and the Brain

#78

Post by bryanrasmussen »

JediWing wrote: post #76
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

also in general English style if you say there is X and Y and one is an A and other a B, it is common that the property A refers to X and the property B to Y as they occupy the same positions in the statement. However one can also be structuring things in this ambiguous manner for artistic reasons.

Or because brain rhymes with insane...

Of course that's what they want you to think!

Re: Pinky and the Brain

#79

Post by [deleted] »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #68
thih9 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We instead got the first movie redone, and two pretty poor follow ups with grrrrrr fake teeth What do you mean? What fake teeth? Could you elaborate?

https://i.redd.it/5n4plnaub6641.jpg It was their ham fisted way to show she would turn bad. Sharp teeth and a hisssss. Because we all know being evil changes your teeth so you can consist on your new diet of tearing the raw flesh directly from your enemies. They wanted this https://i.redd.it/sftg7bb41eu01.jpg but dirty wouldn’t cut it, needed more, sharp and pointy, because everything in the new movies was made blunt…

[deleted]

Re: Pinky and the Brain

#80

Post by xtracto »

imbnwa wrote: post #58

Warner Bros hit animation out of the park in the 90s. Animaniacs is a classic with writing that I still get in my 30s, and we got Pinky and The Brain spun-off from there, but Freakazoid for me was the underrated pinnacle, the writing team's habits given steroids and methamphetamine.

I think most of it was due to Steven Spielberg´s influence. I remember Tiny Toons blowing my mind during that time as well. Most of those amazing cartoons (Animaniacs, Pinky & The Brain, Tiny Toons and Freakazoid) had Spielberg's influence.
Post reply on HN