Star Wars vs Star Trek

[OB1]

Well, you CAN just stop anytime you want!

Hey you started it.

Yes, I keep seeing that line from you, but it is meaningless to me, because regardless of whether YOU know any hidden motives, I sure as hell don't, because they don't appear in any of the movies. And revenge? It's a very, very broad and impersonal revenge, nowhere near as compelling as the very personal hatred Khan feels for Kirk, and it's silly to suggest otherwise.

How could you not see the decay and problems with the Old Republic in the prequels and the aftermath in the OT and not get this extremely obvious point? But don't worry beause it will be spelled out for people like you in Episode III, as well as an explanation of the whole revenge thing (hence the title).

That he rose to power in a creative way does not make him a deep villain. It's more interesting than the average "he conquered with brute force" idea, but it doesn't in any way add depth to Palpatine's character. We know his methods, what we don't know is his reasons. So far, he has none.

I've already explained them to you. If you're not willing to understand a thing either of us has to say then you should just stop trying to discuss this.

No, I said that Hitler was a more complex VILLAIN. There are many fake villains who are nowhere near as interesting, and yet there are some that have motivations far deeper and more stringent than Hitler did. Great figures in history like Ghengis Khan and Atilla the Hun were voracious conquerers, inspiring countless villains of fiction, and were terrible foes, but they had very base motives: Greed. They are interesting in their methods and in their successes, but they only conquered for the sake of conquering. What makes those men interesting is that we know details of their lives, their quirks, their mannerisms and such. With Palpatine, we know nothing of these.

Statements like that are why it doesn't surprise me you'd drown in the shallow pool here.

I expected more from you, Ryan. Now you're actually saying that there are fictional characters with "far deeper" motivations than real people like Hitler and Genghis Khan?? By all means, name some! Your pointing out the fact that these historical figures had what you consider to be simple motives for doing evil things shows just how bizarre your entire argument is. To say that Palpatine is a shallow villain and then to follow that up by saying the same thing about Hitler and Attila the Hun is almost as ridiculous as some of the things I've heard ABF say in the past. You find Hitler interesting because of what he liked to eat for breakfast and the kinds of suits he liked to wear, while I find him interesting because he was an actual living, breathing villain, the type that's hard to believe ever existed. The same thing goes for serial killers. I don't give a damn about their life story but the fact that they could actually commit such horrors is almost beyond my comprehension. If the only way you're going to be able to appreciate a villain is by knowing the details of their childhood, well then I find you strange but more power to you. I think I completely understand your opinion now and don't feel the need to continue this.