<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_21_1637235</id>
	<title>The Definitive Evisceration of <em>The Phantom Menace</em> *NSFW*</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1261419900000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:mmarch@nOsPAM.gmail.com">cowmix</a> writes <i>"When <em>TPM</em> came out ten years ago, its utter crappiness shocked me to the core and wounded a entire generation of geeks.  My inner child had been abused and betrayed. I moped around, talking to no one, for almost two weeks.  I couldn't bring myself to see #2 or #3, whatever they were called.  Now, a decade later, comes  <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI"> <em>Star Wars: The Phantom Menace Review</em></a>, the ultimate, seven-part, seventy minute analysis of this mother of all train wrecks. Not only does it nail how the film blows, but tells us why. Time, apparently, does not heal all wounds."</i>  Or, if you prefer all 7 parts embedded in one page, you can check out <a href="http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/12/17/watch-this-70-minute-video-review-of-star-wars-the-phantom-menace/">slashfilm's aggregation</a>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>cowmix writes " When TPM came out ten years ago , its utter crappiness shocked me to the core and wounded a entire generation of geeks .
My inner child had been abused and betrayed .
I moped around , talking to no one , for almost two weeks .
I could n't bring myself to see # 2 or # 3 , whatever they were called .
Now , a decade later , comes Star Wars : The Phantom Menace Review , the ultimate , seven-part , seventy minute analysis of this mother of all train wrecks .
Not only does it nail how the film blows , but tells us why .
Time , apparently , does not heal all wounds .
" Or , if you prefer all 7 parts embedded in one page , you can check out slashfilm 's aggregation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cowmix writes "When TPM came out ten years ago, its utter crappiness shocked me to the core and wounded a entire generation of geeks.
My inner child had been abused and betrayed.
I moped around, talking to no one, for almost two weeks.
I couldn't bring myself to see #2 or #3, whatever they were called.
Now, a decade later, comes   Star Wars: The Phantom Menace Review, the ultimate, seven-part, seventy minute analysis of this mother of all train wrecks.
Not only does it nail how the film blows, but tells us why.
Time, apparently, does not heal all wounds.
"  Or, if you prefer all 7 parts embedded in one page, you can check out slashfilm's aggregation.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515244</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>fiannaFailMan</author>
	<datestamp>1261425420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Now that said, I wish the voice acting for this review had been better.  Or at least normal.  The guy intentionally mispronounces everything.  It was funny the first time but after a bit he just comes off as a one trick pony looking for a half million views on YouTube (well done, by the way).  The pitch inflections actually recall me to a sort of idiot valley girl a la Alicia Silverstone.  I think if the effort had been more serious he might have gotten a message out to Lucas and maybe even Hollywood but he needs to put his own humor on it so that's his choice.</p>  </div><p>Sense of humour failure, methinks.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now that said , I wish the voice acting for this review had been better .
Or at least normal .
The guy intentionally mispronounces everything .
It was funny the first time but after a bit he just comes off as a one trick pony looking for a half million views on YouTube ( well done , by the way ) .
The pitch inflections actually recall me to a sort of idiot valley girl a la Alicia Silverstone .
I think if the effort had been more serious he might have gotten a message out to Lucas and maybe even Hollywood but he needs to put his own humor on it so that 's his choice .
Sense of humour failure , methinks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now that said, I wish the voice acting for this review had been better.
Or at least normal.
The guy intentionally mispronounces everything.
It was funny the first time but after a bit he just comes off as a one trick pony looking for a half million views on YouTube (well done, by the way).
The pitch inflections actually recall me to a sort of idiot valley girl a la Alicia Silverstone.
I think if the effort had been more serious he might have gotten a message out to Lucas and maybe even Hollywood but he needs to put his own humor on it so that's his choice.
Sense of humour failure, methinks.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562</id>
	<title>midichlorians</title>
	<author>DoofusOfDeath</author>
	<datestamp>1261426980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A big problem for my enjoyment was the midichlorians, the microbes that supposedly give a person control over the Force.</p><p>By making the Force scientifically explicable rather than mystical/magical, it changed the feeling of the story for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A big problem for my enjoyment was the midichlorians , the microbes that supposedly give a person control over the Force.By making the Force scientifically explicable rather than mystical/magical , it changed the feeling of the story for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A big problem for my enjoyment was the midichlorians, the microbes that supposedly give a person control over the Force.By making the Force scientifically explicable rather than mystical/magical, it changed the feeling of the story for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518030</id>
	<title>What has George Lucas actually made?</title>
	<author>HockeyPuck</author>
	<datestamp>1261396800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I headed over to <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000184/" title="imdb.com">IMDB</a> [imdb.com] to see what George Lucas has actually made and it sadly boils down to two franchises and one great movie.</p><p>He made Star Wars, and should have stopped at ROTJ.<br>He made Indiana Jones, and should have stopped with Last Crusade (1989)</p><p>Oddly his best work might have been American Graffiti (1973).</p><p>He had other crap like Howard the Duck and Captain EO.  He should just retire and stop making toys.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I headed over to IMDB [ imdb.com ] to see what George Lucas has actually made and it sadly boils down to two franchises and one great movie.He made Star Wars , and should have stopped at ROTJ.He made Indiana Jones , and should have stopped with Last Crusade ( 1989 ) Oddly his best work might have been American Graffiti ( 1973 ) .He had other crap like Howard the Duck and Captain EO .
He should just retire and stop making toys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I headed over to IMDB [imdb.com] to see what George Lucas has actually made and it sadly boils down to two franchises and one great movie.He made Star Wars, and should have stopped at ROTJ.He made Indiana Jones, and should have stopped with Last Crusade (1989)Oddly his best work might have been American Graffiti (1973).He had other crap like Howard the Duck and Captain EO.
He should just retire and stop making toys.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516026</id>
	<title>Re:If that's what it means to be a geek...</title>
	<author>Doctor\_Jest</author>
	<datestamp>1261386120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>WELL put!  Although I wasn't as put off as you on the 3rd movie (I enjoyed it a bit better than ATOC), I echo the sentiment.  I think the pacing problem was Lucas' inability to show sufficient time passing in the movie... don't know why.
<br> <br>
The prequels were for kids, no doubt about it.  And all these whiners who are talking about how Lucas raped their childhood (and so on) are forgetting one important thing...  they were KIDS when they saw the first trilogy.  The only problem with the 2nd set of movies is that after the first Trilogy, everyone and his sister tried to re-capture the model Lucas used to achieve blockbuster status.   There have been DECADES of also-rans, improvements, and the entire hollywood system has morphed into the "blockbuster channel" (with some Oscar stuff thrown in like sprinkles on a sundae).  Before A New Hope there wasn't much in the way of epic Space Opera storytelling (the storyline was pretty standard and had been done to death in books before and in movies/games/books since),  now with the likes of Terminator, Alien, etc.  we have been accustomed to the epic blockbuster sci-fi movie.  The new Trilogy from Lucas did not open in the same atmosphere as ANH did.
<br> <br>
I for one enjoyed the movies for what they were... another trip into the Star Wars universe.  I didn't expect Shakespeare, nor did I expect Oscar quality acting (let's face it, Mark Hamill was a whiny bitch in the first movies...)  I just wanted a fun ride with awesome effects that let us know how it all started.  Was it perfect?  Far from it.  But then again, if we are honest with ourselves, neither was the first Trilogy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>WELL put !
Although I was n't as put off as you on the 3rd movie ( I enjoyed it a bit better than ATOC ) , I echo the sentiment .
I think the pacing problem was Lucas ' inability to show sufficient time passing in the movie... do n't know why .
The prequels were for kids , no doubt about it .
And all these whiners who are talking about how Lucas raped their childhood ( and so on ) are forgetting one important thing... they were KIDS when they saw the first trilogy .
The only problem with the 2nd set of movies is that after the first Trilogy , everyone and his sister tried to re-capture the model Lucas used to achieve blockbuster status .
There have been DECADES of also-rans , improvements , and the entire hollywood system has morphed into the " blockbuster channel " ( with some Oscar stuff thrown in like sprinkles on a sundae ) .
Before A New Hope there was n't much in the way of epic Space Opera storytelling ( the storyline was pretty standard and had been done to death in books before and in movies/games/books since ) , now with the likes of Terminator , Alien , etc .
we have been accustomed to the epic blockbuster sci-fi movie .
The new Trilogy from Lucas did not open in the same atmosphere as ANH did .
I for one enjoyed the movies for what they were... another trip into the Star Wars universe .
I did n't expect Shakespeare , nor did I expect Oscar quality acting ( let 's face it , Mark Hamill was a whiny bitch in the first movies... ) I just wanted a fun ride with awesome effects that let us know how it all started .
Was it perfect ?
Far from it .
But then again , if we are honest with ourselves , neither was the first Trilogy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WELL put!
Although I wasn't as put off as you on the 3rd movie (I enjoyed it a bit better than ATOC), I echo the sentiment.
I think the pacing problem was Lucas' inability to show sufficient time passing in the movie... don't know why.
The prequels were for kids, no doubt about it.
And all these whiners who are talking about how Lucas raped their childhood (and so on) are forgetting one important thing...  they were KIDS when they saw the first trilogy.
The only problem with the 2nd set of movies is that after the first Trilogy, everyone and his sister tried to re-capture the model Lucas used to achieve blockbuster status.
There have been DECADES of also-rans, improvements, and the entire hollywood system has morphed into the "blockbuster channel" (with some Oscar stuff thrown in like sprinkles on a sundae).
Before A New Hope there wasn't much in the way of epic Space Opera storytelling (the storyline was pretty standard and had been done to death in books before and in movies/games/books since),  now with the likes of Terminator, Alien, etc.
we have been accustomed to the epic blockbuster sci-fi movie.
The new Trilogy from Lucas did not open in the same atmosphere as ANH did.
I for one enjoyed the movies for what they were... another trip into the Star Wars universe.
I didn't expect Shakespeare, nor did I expect Oscar quality acting (let's face it, Mark Hamill was a whiny bitch in the first movies...)  I just wanted a fun ride with awesome effects that let us know how it all started.
Was it perfect?
Far from it.
But then again, if we are honest with ourselves, neither was the first Trilogy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30532698</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261504800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree with the parent's sentiment, but in defense of the horrible portrayal of kids in most movies, I have to call out the "Sandlot" as having characters I could identify with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with the parent 's sentiment , but in defense of the horrible portrayal of kids in most movies , I have to call out the " Sandlot " as having characters I could identify with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with the parent's sentiment, but in defense of the horrible portrayal of kids in most movies, I have to call out the "Sandlot" as having characters I could identify with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515824</id>
	<title>TPM was best of the three.</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1261428240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone rips TPM because of Jar Jar, but I'd rather have an annoying but plausible character over a ridiculous concept of a guy being a Jedi knight for a bunch of years suddenly selling out the galactic republic because he had a bad dream.  Revenge of the Sith was the most ridiculous thing ever made.  There was no adequate reason or foreshadowing of Anakin's downfall, just a bunch of fanboys cheering when it happened.  And frankly, if it was down to the Emperor vs Yoda + Obi Wan, why not take the Emperor down?  They had the battle almost -won-.</p><p>In fact, really, the Phantom Menace was the only prequel that was actually any good at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone rips TPM because of Jar Jar , but I 'd rather have an annoying but plausible character over a ridiculous concept of a guy being a Jedi knight for a bunch of years suddenly selling out the galactic republic because he had a bad dream .
Revenge of the Sith was the most ridiculous thing ever made .
There was no adequate reason or foreshadowing of Anakin 's downfall , just a bunch of fanboys cheering when it happened .
And frankly , if it was down to the Emperor vs Yoda + Obi Wan , why not take the Emperor down ?
They had the battle almost -won-.In fact , really , the Phantom Menace was the only prequel that was actually any good at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone rips TPM because of Jar Jar, but I'd rather have an annoying but plausible character over a ridiculous concept of a guy being a Jedi knight for a bunch of years suddenly selling out the galactic republic because he had a bad dream.
Revenge of the Sith was the most ridiculous thing ever made.
There was no adequate reason or foreshadowing of Anakin's downfall, just a bunch of fanboys cheering when it happened.
And frankly, if it was down to the Emperor vs Yoda + Obi Wan, why not take the Emperor down?
They had the battle almost -won-.In fact, really, the Phantom Menace was the only prequel that was actually any good at all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514930</id>
	<title>Character</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261424160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the first couple installments, he attacks the lack of real characters in the prequels.  However, while the people in the video stare blankly when asked about Amidala, my wife was able to give some legitimate answers (devoted to her people, proactive, not willing to sit around, wants to be in the action).  So some of it is strawman.  But for the most part, dead on.  And hilarious.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the first couple installments , he attacks the lack of real characters in the prequels .
However , while the people in the video stare blankly when asked about Amidala , my wife was able to give some legitimate answers ( devoted to her people , proactive , not willing to sit around , wants to be in the action ) .
So some of it is strawman .
But for the most part , dead on .
And hilarious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the first couple installments, he attacks the lack of real characters in the prequels.
However, while the people in the video stare blankly when asked about Amidala, my wife was able to give some legitimate answers (devoted to her people, proactive, not willing to sit around, wants to be in the action).
So some of it is strawman.
But for the most part, dead on.
And hilarious.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30530512</id>
	<title>Re:midichlorians</title>
	<author>Random BedHead Ed</author>
	<datestamp>1261483020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree, I've never figured out why people get so hung up about midichlorians. Such a minor detail, and the mention of it in the third film was a nice callback. The big issues with TPM were the cardboard central characters, the annoying add-on character Jar-Jar, the complex plot and the over reliance on CGI. A film that had genuine characters and a classic Star Wars plot could have been called The Midichlorian Menace for all I care.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree , I 've never figured out why people get so hung up about midichlorians .
Such a minor detail , and the mention of it in the third film was a nice callback .
The big issues with TPM were the cardboard central characters , the annoying add-on character Jar-Jar , the complex plot and the over reliance on CGI .
A film that had genuine characters and a classic Star Wars plot could have been called The Midichlorian Menace for all I care .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree, I've never figured out why people get so hung up about midichlorians.
Such a minor detail, and the mention of it in the third film was a nice callback.
The big issues with TPM were the cardboard central characters, the annoying add-on character Jar-Jar, the complex plot and the over reliance on CGI.
A film that had genuine characters and a classic Star Wars plot could have been called The Midichlorian Menace for all I care.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516034</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516406</id>
	<title>Summary in one paragraph:</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1261387860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It was written by a 12 year old George Lucas, putting his childhood dream to paper. Those inner feelings were his, and his alone. They can&rsquo;t be transported to a 50 year old Lucas, by helper writers, by a production studio, and certainly don&rsquo;t fit the minds of 30 year old geeks with expectations as high as the sky. What did you expect??</p><p>It should have been a children&rsquo;s movie, from a child, to children. It would have been nice and funny and fittingly childish. But tell that to a guy sitting in his basement for a decade (no offense, as I can sympathize), waiting for it to come out.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It was written by a 12 year old George Lucas , putting his childhood dream to paper .
Those inner feelings were his , and his alone .
They can    t be transported to a 50 year old Lucas , by helper writers , by a production studio , and certainly don    t fit the minds of 30 year old geeks with expectations as high as the sky .
What did you expect ?
? It should have been a children    s movie , from a child , to children .
It would have been nice and funny and fittingly childish .
But tell that to a guy sitting in his basement for a decade ( no offense , as I can sympathize ) , waiting for it to come out .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It was written by a 12 year old George Lucas, putting his childhood dream to paper.
Those inner feelings were his, and his alone.
They can’t be transported to a 50 year old Lucas, by helper writers, by a production studio, and certainly don’t fit the minds of 30 year old geeks with expectations as high as the sky.
What did you expect?
?It should have been a children’s movie, from a child, to children.
It would have been nice and funny and fittingly childish.
But tell that to a guy sitting in his basement for a decade (no offense, as I can sympathize), waiting for it to come out.
;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515470</id>
	<title>Re:Don't look now</title>
	<author>Virak</author>
	<datestamp>1261426500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've seen all the films as an adult, never had any of the toys, and I still like them and you are still a trolling asshat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've seen all the films as an adult , never had any of the toys , and I still like them and you are still a trolling asshat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've seen all the films as an adult, never had any of the toys, and I still like them and you are still a trolling asshat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518560</id>
	<title>Re:Lucas made the best film Lucas could make</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1261400520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Watch the videos - they make some very good points.  A couple of the more important ones:
</p><p>
In TPM, there is no character for the audience to identify with.  Who is the film about?  Who are we supposed to care about?  Who is the main character?  With ANH, the beginning introduced Luke.  You got to know him.  You saw his life, his hopes and aspirations, the challenges, and then felt sympathy with him when his family died.  In TPM, there is no equivalent character or group of characters.  There is no one for the audience to identify with, no one for them to relate to, no one for them to care about.  He demonstrates this very well by getting a group of people to describe the characters in both films, without relation to their appearance, their job, or their role in the movie.  When asked about Han Solo, for example, people could give a description of his character.  When asked about Queen Amidala, no one could think of anything.</p><p>
Another great point he makes is the lightsabre duels.  They're beautifully choreographed in TPM, but there is no emotional content.  In the original series, your first duel is between Darth Vader and Obi Wan.  There is more talking than fighting, and it's clear that Obi Wan is sacrificing himself for the others to escape.  Then you have Juke against Vader.  Vader is barely moving.  It's obvious he could kill Luke, but he's playing with him.  The point of the fight is to tempt Luke to the dark side and to let Luke know about his father.  Then you have the final fight between Luke and Vader.  He contrasts the point in this where Luke becomes angry and where Obi Wan becomes angry in TPM because his mentor was just killed in front of him.  Luke loses all finesse and just hacks at Vader, drawing strength from the dark side and eventually hacks his hand off.  Then he has an introspective moment, seeing that he has become like Vader, calms himself, and refuses to kill his father.  In contrast, Obi Wan continues fighting in exactly the same unemotional way he did previously.  Maybe he's a better trained Jedi, and controls his feelings better, but it just makes him seem less human.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Watch the videos - they make some very good points .
A couple of the more important ones : In TPM , there is no character for the audience to identify with .
Who is the film about ?
Who are we supposed to care about ?
Who is the main character ?
With ANH , the beginning introduced Luke .
You got to know him .
You saw his life , his hopes and aspirations , the challenges , and then felt sympathy with him when his family died .
In TPM , there is no equivalent character or group of characters .
There is no one for the audience to identify with , no one for them to relate to , no one for them to care about .
He demonstrates this very well by getting a group of people to describe the characters in both films , without relation to their appearance , their job , or their role in the movie .
When asked about Han Solo , for example , people could give a description of his character .
When asked about Queen Amidala , no one could think of anything .
Another great point he makes is the lightsabre duels .
They 're beautifully choreographed in TPM , but there is no emotional content .
In the original series , your first duel is between Darth Vader and Obi Wan .
There is more talking than fighting , and it 's clear that Obi Wan is sacrificing himself for the others to escape .
Then you have Juke against Vader .
Vader is barely moving .
It 's obvious he could kill Luke , but he 's playing with him .
The point of the fight is to tempt Luke to the dark side and to let Luke know about his father .
Then you have the final fight between Luke and Vader .
He contrasts the point in this where Luke becomes angry and where Obi Wan becomes angry in TPM because his mentor was just killed in front of him .
Luke loses all finesse and just hacks at Vader , drawing strength from the dark side and eventually hacks his hand off .
Then he has an introspective moment , seeing that he has become like Vader , calms himself , and refuses to kill his father .
In contrast , Obi Wan continues fighting in exactly the same unemotional way he did previously .
Maybe he 's a better trained Jedi , and controls his feelings better , but it just makes him seem less human .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Watch the videos - they make some very good points.
A couple of the more important ones:

In TPM, there is no character for the audience to identify with.
Who is the film about?
Who are we supposed to care about?
Who is the main character?
With ANH, the beginning introduced Luke.
You got to know him.
You saw his life, his hopes and aspirations, the challenges, and then felt sympathy with him when his family died.
In TPM, there is no equivalent character or group of characters.
There is no one for the audience to identify with, no one for them to relate to, no one for them to care about.
He demonstrates this very well by getting a group of people to describe the characters in both films, without relation to their appearance, their job, or their role in the movie.
When asked about Han Solo, for example, people could give a description of his character.
When asked about Queen Amidala, no one could think of anything.
Another great point he makes is the lightsabre duels.
They're beautifully choreographed in TPM, but there is no emotional content.
In the original series, your first duel is between Darth Vader and Obi Wan.
There is more talking than fighting, and it's clear that Obi Wan is sacrificing himself for the others to escape.
Then you have Juke against Vader.
Vader is barely moving.
It's obvious he could kill Luke, but he's playing with him.
The point of the fight is to tempt Luke to the dark side and to let Luke know about his father.
Then you have the final fight between Luke and Vader.
He contrasts the point in this where Luke becomes angry and where Obi Wan becomes angry in TPM because his mentor was just killed in front of him.
Luke loses all finesse and just hacks at Vader, drawing strength from the dark side and eventually hacks his hand off.
Then he has an introspective moment, seeing that he has become like Vader, calms himself, and refuses to kill his father.
In contrast, Obi Wan continues fighting in exactly the same unemotional way he did previously.
Maybe he's a better trained Jedi, and controls his feelings better, but it just makes him seem less human.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514862</id>
	<title>If that's what it means to be a geek...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261423860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, if a Movie wounded your inner child and destroyed your hopes and dreams, you had a very sad life.  Most normal Star Wars fan just didn't watch the movie again and that's it.  Personally, it was the 3rd movie that turned me off completely.  Anakin's turn to the darkside felt so rushed and didn't seem to work with the character at all (one minute he's a goodie 2 shoes that's going to turn Sidius in, 30 seconds later he's bowing to his new master... wtf ?).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , if a Movie wounded your inner child and destroyed your hopes and dreams , you had a very sad life .
Most normal Star Wars fan just did n't watch the movie again and that 's it .
Personally , it was the 3rd movie that turned me off completely .
Anakin 's turn to the darkside felt so rushed and did n't seem to work with the character at all ( one minute he 's a goodie 2 shoes that 's going to turn Sidius in , 30 seconds later he 's bowing to his new master... wtf ?
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, if a Movie wounded your inner child and destroyed your hopes and dreams, you had a very sad life.
Most normal Star Wars fan just didn't watch the movie again and that's it.
Personally, it was the 3rd movie that turned me off completely.
Anakin's turn to the darkside felt so rushed and didn't seem to work with the character at all (one minute he's a goodie 2 shoes that's going to turn Sidius in, 30 seconds later he's bowing to his new master... wtf ?
).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521558</id>
	<title>Re:Different Audience</title>
	<author>deek</author>
	<datestamp>1261474320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe Lucas wanted to throw in some sophistication for the more mature members of the audience.  Unfortunately, he then created a character like Jar-Jar, a complete offence to most people beyond the age of 8.  Alas, it was a movie that tried to please too many, and thus pleased too little.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe Lucas wanted to throw in some sophistication for the more mature members of the audience .
Unfortunately , he then created a character like Jar-Jar , a complete offence to most people beyond the age of 8 .
Alas , it was a movie that tried to please too many , and thus pleased too little .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe Lucas wanted to throw in some sophistication for the more mature members of the audience.
Unfortunately, he then created a character like Jar-Jar, a complete offence to most people beyond the age of 8.
Alas, it was a movie that tried to please too many, and thus pleased too little.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30520714</id>
	<title>Re:midichlorians</title>
	<author>darthvader100</author>
	<datestamp>1261419960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Midiclorians = Jedi Herpes</htmltext>
<tokenext>Midiclorians = Jedi Herpes</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Midiclorians = Jedi Herpes</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514978</id>
	<title>Box Office</title>
	<author>Dan East</author>
	<datestamp>1261424340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course this doesn't directly correlate to the "crappiness" of the movie, but Phantom Menace did just shy of $1 billion in worldwide sales, and it is currently the #10 top grossing movie of all time (placing just below LOTR-TTT).  It was the #2 top grossing film of all time until the first Harry Potter movie came out in 2001.</p><p>Regardless of the hype, or the previous success of a franchise, a movie cannot be so popular without being liked or enjoyable to at least a very significant portion of the population. That seems to go against TFA's opening line of "Chances are you probably didn&rsquo;t like Star Wars: Episode I The Phantom Menace."</p><p>Could Episode 1 have been better? Absolutely, in so many ways. But it was an incontrovertible success on many levels too.  For me personally, various aspects of the movie was too childish (for starters).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course this does n't directly correlate to the " crappiness " of the movie , but Phantom Menace did just shy of $ 1 billion in worldwide sales , and it is currently the # 10 top grossing movie of all time ( placing just below LOTR-TTT ) .
It was the # 2 top grossing film of all time until the first Harry Potter movie came out in 2001.Regardless of the hype , or the previous success of a franchise , a movie can not be so popular without being liked or enjoyable to at least a very significant portion of the population .
That seems to go against TFA 's opening line of " Chances are you probably didn    t like Star Wars : Episode I The Phantom Menace .
" Could Episode 1 have been better ?
Absolutely , in so many ways .
But it was an incontrovertible success on many levels too .
For me personally , various aspects of the movie was too childish ( for starters ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course this doesn't directly correlate to the "crappiness" of the movie, but Phantom Menace did just shy of $1 billion in worldwide sales, and it is currently the #10 top grossing movie of all time (placing just below LOTR-TTT).
It was the #2 top grossing film of all time until the first Harry Potter movie came out in 2001.Regardless of the hype, or the previous success of a franchise, a movie cannot be so popular without being liked or enjoyable to at least a very significant portion of the population.
That seems to go against TFA's opening line of "Chances are you probably didn’t like Star Wars: Episode I The Phantom Menace.
"Could Episode 1 have been better?
Absolutely, in so many ways.
But it was an incontrovertible success on many levels too.
For me personally, various aspects of the movie was too childish (for starters).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515438</id>
	<title>I barely remember the movie...</title>
	<author>wandazulu</author>
	<datestamp>1261426380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...but I remember the hype and feelings of expectation my friends and I had about it. We paid full price for "Meet Joe Black" just to see the TPM trailer, then left immediately afterward. There were a lot of other people doing the same thing, to the point everyone was laughing and the ushers were promising the trailer would run again after the movie if everyone stayed.</p><p>After we left, we went to have dinner and talked endlessly, dissecting every second of the trailer at length, imagining what the plot would be, how they would eventually get to "New Hope", and then after dinner we went to an arcade and played video games.</p><p>I don't care a whit about the actual movie, but for me it'll always be about that evening with friends in New York and how much fun we had in total geek mode. Sadly, I can't say I've had a repeat of that experience since. So for that evening alone, I'll still say thanks to Lucas for making the movie in the first place. But, yeah, the movie itself sucked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...but I remember the hype and feelings of expectation my friends and I had about it .
We paid full price for " Meet Joe Black " just to see the TPM trailer , then left immediately afterward .
There were a lot of other people doing the same thing , to the point everyone was laughing and the ushers were promising the trailer would run again after the movie if everyone stayed.After we left , we went to have dinner and talked endlessly , dissecting every second of the trailer at length , imagining what the plot would be , how they would eventually get to " New Hope " , and then after dinner we went to an arcade and played video games.I do n't care a whit about the actual movie , but for me it 'll always be about that evening with friends in New York and how much fun we had in total geek mode .
Sadly , I ca n't say I 've had a repeat of that experience since .
So for that evening alone , I 'll still say thanks to Lucas for making the movie in the first place .
But , yeah , the movie itself sucked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...but I remember the hype and feelings of expectation my friends and I had about it.
We paid full price for "Meet Joe Black" just to see the TPM trailer, then left immediately afterward.
There were a lot of other people doing the same thing, to the point everyone was laughing and the ushers were promising the trailer would run again after the movie if everyone stayed.After we left, we went to have dinner and talked endlessly, dissecting every second of the trailer at length, imagining what the plot would be, how they would eventually get to "New Hope", and then after dinner we went to an arcade and played video games.I don't care a whit about the actual movie, but for me it'll always be about that evening with friends in New York and how much fun we had in total geek mode.
Sadly, I can't say I've had a repeat of that experience since.
So for that evening alone, I'll still say thanks to Lucas for making the movie in the first place.
But, yeah, the movie itself sucked.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518686</id>
	<title>His voice...</title>
	<author>loshwomp</author>
	<datestamp>1261401660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>sounds like the voice of the serial killer in <i>Silence of the Lambs</i>.  "Put the fucking lotion in the basket!"  You know, that guy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>sounds like the voice of the serial killer in Silence of the Lambs .
" Put the fucking lotion in the basket !
" You know , that guy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sounds like the voice of the serial killer in Silence of the Lambs.
"Put the fucking lotion in the basket!
"  You know, that guy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516360</id>
	<title>Re:If that's what it means to be a geek...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261387620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Seriously, if a Movie wounded your inner child and destroyed your hopes and dreams, you had a very sad life.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Without naming names or anything, I went to USC film school in the late 90s, and many, many of my friends, roommates and classmates had chosen their future profession primarily on how much they had been affected by watching Lucas's original <em>Star Wars</em> films.  Those films were very inspiring, they made you want to make movies yourself.  They proved that you could make a great film that was entertaining, thematically rich, use a big budget to your advantage, and make a lot of money doing it.</p><p>I'm not going to say that TPM was some sort of shattering experience or anything, but I seem to recall the whole tone of the critical dialogue over big budget action movies began to shift, starting with this film, <em>Titanic</em>, <em>Starship Troopers</em>, <em>Men in Black</em> etc.  In short, I think what started to happen was people like Lucas, Spielberg and Cameron around this time began to internalize their contempt for the audience.  With Lucas in particular you can see this working itself out in TPM-- he has no desire to make a remotely good movie on its own merit, one wonders if he even considers it a possibility.  It's clear that even <strong>he</strong> thinks <em>Star Wars</em> is kinda dumb at this point, and he doesn't seem to be as concerened with high-quality entertainment as much as he is with creating the functional component of a marketing platform.  Now, I'm not talking about the mythology of Star Wars here, or the Force, or if Greedo shot first or any of that shit; I'm talking about what <em>Star Wars</em> (or <em>Raiders</em>, or <em>Gremlins</em>, or all those other shows the review mentions) said about the potential for film as a medium to entertain and inspire.</p><p>For people who grew up with his original movies, and thought they showed how someone with creative vision could make a kick-ass movie that pleased basically everyone and made a lot of money, this is pretty demoralizing, because even Lucas, someone who's extremely independent, vastly wealthy and doesn't have to please anyone, seems to be admitting defeat.  Now Hollywood doesn't really do good fantasy films anymore; we get obvious, dumb, soulless CGI fests like "Avatar," which is more of a carnival ride, or arch, cynical Wes Anderson movies.  The only pleasures in watching a film nowadays are guilty ones, and the budgets spent on these movies that people admit from the outset are mediocre are stupendous, while really good stories remain unproduced.</p><p>Oh well, it's not really anyone's fault, it's natural that Lucas would have begun to hate his creation.  Why he'd make three movies illustrating how and why he hated his creation is of course more curious.  And now that people see that you can make a lot of money giving your audience the finger, I imagine the trend will continue until its natural culmination.</p><p>d46345aa360c9e250bba02b4bf1601fae0437d75</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , if a Movie wounded your inner child and destroyed your hopes and dreams , you had a very sad life .
Without naming names or anything , I went to USC film school in the late 90s , and many , many of my friends , roommates and classmates had chosen their future profession primarily on how much they had been affected by watching Lucas 's original Star Wars films .
Those films were very inspiring , they made you want to make movies yourself .
They proved that you could make a great film that was entertaining , thematically rich , use a big budget to your advantage , and make a lot of money doing it.I 'm not going to say that TPM was some sort of shattering experience or anything , but I seem to recall the whole tone of the critical dialogue over big budget action movies began to shift , starting with this film , Titanic , Starship Troopers , Men in Black etc .
In short , I think what started to happen was people like Lucas , Spielberg and Cameron around this time began to internalize their contempt for the audience .
With Lucas in particular you can see this working itself out in TPM-- he has no desire to make a remotely good movie on its own merit , one wonders if he even considers it a possibility .
It 's clear that even he thinks Star Wars is kinda dumb at this point , and he does n't seem to be as concerened with high-quality entertainment as much as he is with creating the functional component of a marketing platform .
Now , I 'm not talking about the mythology of Star Wars here , or the Force , or if Greedo shot first or any of that shit ; I 'm talking about what Star Wars ( or Raiders , or Gremlins , or all those other shows the review mentions ) said about the potential for film as a medium to entertain and inspire.For people who grew up with his original movies , and thought they showed how someone with creative vision could make a kick-ass movie that pleased basically everyone and made a lot of money , this is pretty demoralizing , because even Lucas , someone who 's extremely independent , vastly wealthy and does n't have to please anyone , seems to be admitting defeat .
Now Hollywood does n't really do good fantasy films anymore ; we get obvious , dumb , soulless CGI fests like " Avatar , " which is more of a carnival ride , or arch , cynical Wes Anderson movies .
The only pleasures in watching a film nowadays are guilty ones , and the budgets spent on these movies that people admit from the outset are mediocre are stupendous , while really good stories remain unproduced.Oh well , it 's not really anyone 's fault , it 's natural that Lucas would have begun to hate his creation .
Why he 'd make three movies illustrating how and why he hated his creation is of course more curious .
And now that people see that you can make a lot of money giving your audience the finger , I imagine the trend will continue until its natural culmination.d46345aa360c9e250bba02b4bf1601fae0437d75</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, if a Movie wounded your inner child and destroyed your hopes and dreams, you had a very sad life.
Without naming names or anything, I went to USC film school in the late 90s, and many, many of my friends, roommates and classmates had chosen their future profession primarily on how much they had been affected by watching Lucas's original Star Wars films.
Those films were very inspiring, they made you want to make movies yourself.
They proved that you could make a great film that was entertaining, thematically rich, use a big budget to your advantage, and make a lot of money doing it.I'm not going to say that TPM was some sort of shattering experience or anything, but I seem to recall the whole tone of the critical dialogue over big budget action movies began to shift, starting with this film, Titanic, Starship Troopers, Men in Black etc.
In short, I think what started to happen was people like Lucas, Spielberg and Cameron around this time began to internalize their contempt for the audience.
With Lucas in particular you can see this working itself out in TPM-- he has no desire to make a remotely good movie on its own merit, one wonders if he even considers it a possibility.
It's clear that even he thinks Star Wars is kinda dumb at this point, and he doesn't seem to be as concerened with high-quality entertainment as much as he is with creating the functional component of a marketing platform.
Now, I'm not talking about the mythology of Star Wars here, or the Force, or if Greedo shot first or any of that shit; I'm talking about what Star Wars (or Raiders, or Gremlins, or all those other shows the review mentions) said about the potential for film as a medium to entertain and inspire.For people who grew up with his original movies, and thought they showed how someone with creative vision could make a kick-ass movie that pleased basically everyone and made a lot of money, this is pretty demoralizing, because even Lucas, someone who's extremely independent, vastly wealthy and doesn't have to please anyone, seems to be admitting defeat.
Now Hollywood doesn't really do good fantasy films anymore; we get obvious, dumb, soulless CGI fests like "Avatar," which is more of a carnival ride, or arch, cynical Wes Anderson movies.
The only pleasures in watching a film nowadays are guilty ones, and the budgets spent on these movies that people admit from the outset are mediocre are stupendous, while really good stories remain unproduced.Oh well, it's not really anyone's fault, it's natural that Lucas would have begun to hate his creation.
Why he'd make three movies illustrating how and why he hated his creation is of course more curious.
And now that people see that you can make a lot of money giving your audience the finger, I imagine the trend will continue until its natural culmination.d46345aa360c9e250bba02b4bf1601fae0437d75
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517228</id>
	<title>The final light saber duel in Revenge of the Sith</title>
	<author>NotSoHeavyD3</author>
	<datestamp>1261392060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>told me how much of a hack Lucas is at times. I mean you basically have Obi-Wan tricking Amidala into taking him to where Anakin. Then letting her come out first and then obviously coming out of the same ship so that Anakin can see how he got there.(And winning the duel since Vader would go into a blinding rage since he thought Amidala had completely screwed him over.) At first I thought Lucas wanted to show the moral dilema with the light side of the force being so rational and emotion less. (Since from a rational point of view using Amidala to get you there in the first place and then using her again to convince Vader that he can trust absolutely no one would be a very effective tactic. It'd be an utterly dick move but if you're emotionless about it then it makes loads of sense. If the evaulation is use some stupid love sick tart to take out some master of potential evil and you're some emotionless dick like Ben well there's a kind of sense in that tactic.) Instead of doing that it's just another fight and it ends up with Ben winning because he's 2 feet higher. (Really, he could have done a reference to Vader losing before the fight began then realize after the fact how peverted he'd become by blindly following the light side since it was totally ok with all of his tactics since they may have been brutal but they were definitely cold.)

Anyway that's the most blatant example of Lucas being a complete hack but I know, way too many to mention.</htmltext>
<tokenext>told me how much of a hack Lucas is at times .
I mean you basically have Obi-Wan tricking Amidala into taking him to where Anakin .
Then letting her come out first and then obviously coming out of the same ship so that Anakin can see how he got there .
( And winning the duel since Vader would go into a blinding rage since he thought Amidala had completely screwed him over .
) At first I thought Lucas wanted to show the moral dilema with the light side of the force being so rational and emotion less .
( Since from a rational point of view using Amidala to get you there in the first place and then using her again to convince Vader that he can trust absolutely no one would be a very effective tactic .
It 'd be an utterly dick move but if you 're emotionless about it then it makes loads of sense .
If the evaulation is use some stupid love sick tart to take out some master of potential evil and you 're some emotionless dick like Ben well there 's a kind of sense in that tactic .
) Instead of doing that it 's just another fight and it ends up with Ben winning because he 's 2 feet higher .
( Really , he could have done a reference to Vader losing before the fight began then realize after the fact how peverted he 'd become by blindly following the light side since it was totally ok with all of his tactics since they may have been brutal but they were definitely cold .
) Anyway that 's the most blatant example of Lucas being a complete hack but I know , way too many to mention .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>told me how much of a hack Lucas is at times.
I mean you basically have Obi-Wan tricking Amidala into taking him to where Anakin.
Then letting her come out first and then obviously coming out of the same ship so that Anakin can see how he got there.
(And winning the duel since Vader would go into a blinding rage since he thought Amidala had completely screwed him over.
) At first I thought Lucas wanted to show the moral dilema with the light side of the force being so rational and emotion less.
(Since from a rational point of view using Amidala to get you there in the first place and then using her again to convince Vader that he can trust absolutely no one would be a very effective tactic.
It'd be an utterly dick move but if you're emotionless about it then it makes loads of sense.
If the evaulation is use some stupid love sick tart to take out some master of potential evil and you're some emotionless dick like Ben well there's a kind of sense in that tactic.
) Instead of doing that it's just another fight and it ends up with Ben winning because he's 2 feet higher.
(Really, he could have done a reference to Vader losing before the fight began then realize after the fact how peverted he'd become by blindly following the light side since it was totally ok with all of his tactics since they may have been brutal but they were definitely cold.
)

Anyway that's the most blatant example of Lucas being a complete hack but I know, way too many to mention.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516058</id>
	<title>You don't like them because they aren't for you</title>
	<author>rgviza</author>
	<datestamp>1261386300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My kid loved all three prequels. Given the target audience, that makes them a success. Maybe people don't like the prequels because they are grownups now.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/shrug</p><p>All I know is my dad thought the first 3 were crap. Probably because he was a grownup. Us kids loved them.</p><p>I think everyone is pissed at Lucas because they feel abandoned. You don't like them because they were never meant to be liked by you. You like the old ones because you were a kid when you first saw them. I have no problem turning on my sense of wonder and suspension of disbelief. I loved all 6 star wars movies and the animated series'.</p><p>Get over it, they are tween movies, a space soap opera meant for kids, like Buck Rogers. You need to look at them from that perspective. Then again I'm totally into Sponge-bob and iCarly too. I step down to my son's level and watch the stuff with him. When I'm there, I love it. I don't like serious movies or tv shows. I'd rather watch Toy Story than Seven.</p><p>I'm not sure how you can take a set of movies called "Star Wars" seriously to begin with. Adults expecting something more is like expecting High School Musical or Hannah Montana to be as satisfying as Gone With the Wind.</p><p>Analyzing every detail and character takes all the fun out of it. It's like critiquing the latest McDonalds happy meal and talking about how it doesn't measure up to what a meal at a 5 star French restaurant should be.</p><p>The whole subject of Lucas "ruining" Star Wars is decidedly stupid. Move on, grow up, and let it go, or enjoy the movies for what they are: movies for kids.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My kid loved all three prequels .
Given the target audience , that makes them a success .
Maybe people do n't like the prequels because they are grownups now .
/shrugAll I know is my dad thought the first 3 were crap .
Probably because he was a grownup .
Us kids loved them.I think everyone is pissed at Lucas because they feel abandoned .
You do n't like them because they were never meant to be liked by you .
You like the old ones because you were a kid when you first saw them .
I have no problem turning on my sense of wonder and suspension of disbelief .
I loved all 6 star wars movies and the animated series'.Get over it , they are tween movies , a space soap opera meant for kids , like Buck Rogers .
You need to look at them from that perspective .
Then again I 'm totally into Sponge-bob and iCarly too .
I step down to my son 's level and watch the stuff with him .
When I 'm there , I love it .
I do n't like serious movies or tv shows .
I 'd rather watch Toy Story than Seven.I 'm not sure how you can take a set of movies called " Star Wars " seriously to begin with .
Adults expecting something more is like expecting High School Musical or Hannah Montana to be as satisfying as Gone With the Wind.Analyzing every detail and character takes all the fun out of it .
It 's like critiquing the latest McDonalds happy meal and talking about how it does n't measure up to what a meal at a 5 star French restaurant should be.The whole subject of Lucas " ruining " Star Wars is decidedly stupid .
Move on , grow up , and let it go , or enjoy the movies for what they are : movies for kids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My kid loved all three prequels.
Given the target audience, that makes them a success.
Maybe people don't like the prequels because they are grownups now.
/shrugAll I know is my dad thought the first 3 were crap.
Probably because he was a grownup.
Us kids loved them.I think everyone is pissed at Lucas because they feel abandoned.
You don't like them because they were never meant to be liked by you.
You like the old ones because you were a kid when you first saw them.
I have no problem turning on my sense of wonder and suspension of disbelief.
I loved all 6 star wars movies and the animated series'.Get over it, they are tween movies, a space soap opera meant for kids, like Buck Rogers.
You need to look at them from that perspective.
Then again I'm totally into Sponge-bob and iCarly too.
I step down to my son's level and watch the stuff with him.
When I'm there, I love it.
I don't like serious movies or tv shows.
I'd rather watch Toy Story than Seven.I'm not sure how you can take a set of movies called "Star Wars" seriously to begin with.
Adults expecting something more is like expecting High School Musical or Hannah Montana to be as satisfying as Gone With the Wind.Analyzing every detail and character takes all the fun out of it.
It's like critiquing the latest McDonalds happy meal and talking about how it doesn't measure up to what a meal at a 5 star French restaurant should be.The whole subject of Lucas "ruining" Star Wars is decidedly stupid.
Move on, grow up, and let it go, or enjoy the movies for what they are: movies for kids.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515182</id>
	<title>Re:SWHS?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261425240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a fan of star wars you should nevertheless try to get a hand on it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... the kitchen scene reminds me of a futurama episode (which seems to cite that part of swhs imho) where bender watches a cooking show and tries to cook a dinner for his friends<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....</p><p>on the other side, hearing the wookie "language" for nearly 90 minutes with only a few interruptions when luke talks<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... *shudder* i don't want to remember that</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a fan of star wars you should nevertheless try to get a hand on it .... the kitchen scene reminds me of a futurama episode ( which seems to cite that part of swhs imho ) where bender watches a cooking show and tries to cook a dinner for his friends ....on the other side , hearing the wookie " language " for nearly 90 minutes with only a few interruptions when luke talks .... * shudder * i do n't want to remember that</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a fan of star wars you should nevertheless try to get a hand on it .... the kitchen scene reminds me of a futurama episode (which seems to cite that part of swhs imho) where bender watches a cooking show and tries to cook a dinner for his friends ....on the other side, hearing the wookie "language" for nearly 90 minutes with only a few interruptions when luke talks .... *shudder* i don't want to remember that</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515524</id>
	<title>I am still waiting</title>
	<author>MemoryDragon</author>
	<datestamp>1261426800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For the Jar Jar Binks christmas special.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For the Jar Jar Binks christmas special .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the Jar Jar Binks christmas special.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518106</id>
	<title>Re:Different Audience</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1261397280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Its primary target was the little kids... progeny of the original audience.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Both of them?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Its primary target was the little kids... progeny of the original audience .
Both of them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its primary target was the little kids... progeny of the original audience.
Both of them?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516992</id>
	<title>Re:Merchandising doesn't require bad child actors</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261390800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The N64/PC podracing game was a highlight of my childhood, actually. And it's still an awesome game- zero friction, 400mph racing through teeny tunnels.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The N64/PC podracing game was a highlight of my childhood , actually .
And it 's still an awesome game- zero friction , 400mph racing through teeny tunnels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The N64/PC podracing game was a highlight of my childhood, actually.
And it's still an awesome game- zero friction, 400mph racing through teeny tunnels.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515728</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514916</id>
	<title>I actually liked TPM</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261424100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) The Pod Race is really cool over a six pack.<br>2) The Gungan fight is awesome.</p><p>Who cares about the rest?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) The Pod Race is really cool over a six pack.2 ) The Gungan fight is awesome.Who cares about the rest ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) The Pod Race is really cool over a six pack.2) The Gungan fight is awesome.Who cares about the rest?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30527662</id>
	<title>I liked the Phantom Menace actually</title>
	<author>axl917</author>
	<datestamp>1261514580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is that there was a 16-year gap between the originals and the new movie.  The vast majority of us were in the 5-10 yr old age range when the original came out, and spent that time playing with toys, reading other Star Wars novels, playing the video games, etc...  Filling in the gap with either the derivative/side works or our imaginations, or both.</p><p>We grew up over that period of time, but by the time Lucas got around to making the prequels, there was simply no way what he did would ever match what our childhood-borne anticipation and imagination had already created.  We also forgot that these films...and film in general...is rarely specifically targeted at a single audience.  Lucas didn't make the prequels solely for the 30-somethings; he made them for everyone, which includes the 5-10 year audience of 1999.  Kids find Jar Jar antics funny, just as we found R2 and C3P0's antics funny 30 years ago.</p><p>I am sick to death of the nerd rage over how "bad" they feel The Phantom Menace is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that there was a 16-year gap between the originals and the new movie .
The vast majority of us were in the 5-10 yr old age range when the original came out , and spent that time playing with toys , reading other Star Wars novels , playing the video games , etc... Filling in the gap with either the derivative/side works or our imaginations , or both.We grew up over that period of time , but by the time Lucas got around to making the prequels , there was simply no way what he did would ever match what our childhood-borne anticipation and imagination had already created .
We also forgot that these films...and film in general...is rarely specifically targeted at a single audience .
Lucas did n't make the prequels solely for the 30-somethings ; he made them for everyone , which includes the 5-10 year audience of 1999 .
Kids find Jar Jar antics funny , just as we found R2 and C3P0 's antics funny 30 years ago.I am sick to death of the nerd rage over how " bad " they feel The Phantom Menace is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that there was a 16-year gap between the originals and the new movie.
The vast majority of us were in the 5-10 yr old age range when the original came out, and spent that time playing with toys, reading other Star Wars novels, playing the video games, etc...  Filling in the gap with either the derivative/side works or our imaginations, or both.We grew up over that period of time, but by the time Lucas got around to making the prequels, there was simply no way what he did would ever match what our childhood-borne anticipation and imagination had already created.
We also forgot that these films...and film in general...is rarely specifically targeted at a single audience.
Lucas didn't make the prequels solely for the 30-somethings; he made them for everyone, which includes the 5-10 year audience of 1999.
Kids find Jar Jar antics funny, just as we found R2 and C3P0's antics funny 30 years ago.I am sick to death of the nerd rage over how "bad" they feel The Phantom Menace is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518174</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>Chaos Incarnate</author>
	<datestamp>1261397640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Star Wars: Episode I&mdash;Racer</i>, as qnick said. Also <i>Lego Star Wars</i>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Star Wars : Episode I    Racer , as qnick said .
Also Lego Star Wars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Star Wars: Episode I—Racer, as qnick said.
Also Lego Star Wars.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517178</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515682</id>
	<title>Dr. Zoidberg</title>
	<author>hansamurai</author>
	<datestamp>1261427580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just watched the whole thing, entertaining, but I couldn't get over the fact that the narrator sounded like Dr. Zoidberg.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just watched the whole thing , entertaining , but I could n't get over the fact that the narrator sounded like Dr. Zoidberg .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just watched the whole thing, entertaining, but I couldn't get over the fact that the narrator sounded like Dr. Zoidberg.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521062</id>
	<title>Midichlorines turn magic into biology.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261424400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I find it interesting that in a Star Trek film, Midichlorines (sp?) would have been not only accepted, but <i>expected.</i>  Magic isn't allowed to exist in Star Trek.</p><p>In Star Wars, however, Magic is the rule.  It's not allowed to be understood or reduced into a discrete and measurable phenomenon.  It has to remain romantic and awe-inspiring.</p><p>Cross the line, (in either the Trek or Wars story universe), and it is taken as a grave offense.  I was annoyed by it as much as anybody.  But I do have to stop and ask, "Why?"  In fact, I find this little feature of our culture enormously tremendously interesting.  -Technology geeks are perfectly happy with magic; they <i>want</i> it, are enraptured by it, but only when it is safely contained and labeled within the fiction box.  Outside that box, it is immediately despised and attacked even at the mere suggestion that it might have some bearing on our real world.  Yes, this is a bit of an axe grinding, but nonetheless, it remains a point of un-answered curiosity for me.</p><p>Real magic makes many people severely uncomfortable to consider in our day to day lives.  The concept of midichlorines, given the general despising of all things unscientific among the tech-geek crowd, should have been applauded by all those who hate the notion of religion or spirituality, etc.  And yet, this is obviously not the case.</p><p>It is particularly interesting to me that 'real' magic is by no means actual magic, (as I understand it), but rather a collection of rule-driven forces we simply haven't managed to categorize yet.  Wanting the concept of the Force to remain in the realm of the purely mysterious makes me think that something else is at play in the collective psyche of the engineer/Sci-Fi geek.</p><p>-Just an observation I have kicking around in my head with no formal answer yet.</p><p>-FL</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I find it interesting that in a Star Trek film , Midichlorines ( sp ?
) would have been not only accepted , but expected .
Magic is n't allowed to exist in Star Trek.In Star Wars , however , Magic is the rule .
It 's not allowed to be understood or reduced into a discrete and measurable phenomenon .
It has to remain romantic and awe-inspiring.Cross the line , ( in either the Trek or Wars story universe ) , and it is taken as a grave offense .
I was annoyed by it as much as anybody .
But I do have to stop and ask , " Why ?
" In fact , I find this little feature of our culture enormously tremendously interesting .
-Technology geeks are perfectly happy with magic ; they want it , are enraptured by it , but only when it is safely contained and labeled within the fiction box .
Outside that box , it is immediately despised and attacked even at the mere suggestion that it might have some bearing on our real world .
Yes , this is a bit of an axe grinding , but nonetheless , it remains a point of un-answered curiosity for me.Real magic makes many people severely uncomfortable to consider in our day to day lives .
The concept of midichlorines , given the general despising of all things unscientific among the tech-geek crowd , should have been applauded by all those who hate the notion of religion or spirituality , etc .
And yet , this is obviously not the case.It is particularly interesting to me that 'real ' magic is by no means actual magic , ( as I understand it ) , but rather a collection of rule-driven forces we simply have n't managed to categorize yet .
Wanting the concept of the Force to remain in the realm of the purely mysterious makes me think that something else is at play in the collective psyche of the engineer/Sci-Fi geek.-Just an observation I have kicking around in my head with no formal answer yet.-FL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find it interesting that in a Star Trek film, Midichlorines (sp?
) would have been not only accepted, but expected.
Magic isn't allowed to exist in Star Trek.In Star Wars, however, Magic is the rule.
It's not allowed to be understood or reduced into a discrete and measurable phenomenon.
It has to remain romantic and awe-inspiring.Cross the line, (in either the Trek or Wars story universe), and it is taken as a grave offense.
I was annoyed by it as much as anybody.
But I do have to stop and ask, "Why?
"  In fact, I find this little feature of our culture enormously tremendously interesting.
-Technology geeks are perfectly happy with magic; they want it, are enraptured by it, but only when it is safely contained and labeled within the fiction box.
Outside that box, it is immediately despised and attacked even at the mere suggestion that it might have some bearing on our real world.
Yes, this is a bit of an axe grinding, but nonetheless, it remains a point of un-answered curiosity for me.Real magic makes many people severely uncomfortable to consider in our day to day lives.
The concept of midichlorines, given the general despising of all things unscientific among the tech-geek crowd, should have been applauded by all those who hate the notion of religion or spirituality, etc.
And yet, this is obviously not the case.It is particularly interesting to me that 'real' magic is by no means actual magic, (as I understand it), but rather a collection of rule-driven forces we simply haven't managed to categorize yet.
Wanting the concept of the Force to remain in the realm of the purely mysterious makes me think that something else is at play in the collective psyche of the engineer/Sci-Fi geek.-Just an observation I have kicking around in my head with no formal answer yet.-FL</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519256</id>
	<title>Re:Jar Jar redeemed himself</title>
	<author>roc97007</author>
	<datestamp>1261406700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
It wasn't lost on me that one could argue Jar Jar was the ultimate villain of the entire story arc.  But that bit of irony wasn't enough to make up for three terrible movies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It was n't lost on me that one could argue Jar Jar was the ultimate villain of the entire story arc .
But that bit of irony was n't enough to make up for three terrible movies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
It wasn't lost on me that one could argue Jar Jar was the ultimate villain of the entire story arc.
But that bit of irony wasn't enough to make up for three terrible movies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516628</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>Dan667</author>
	<datestamp>1261389060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>sad part is a great movie would still be earning a lot more than they are now on all of those.  They are still out selling episode 1 with all the original star wars films merchandising so I don't see your logic.</htmltext>
<tokenext>sad part is a great movie would still be earning a lot more than they are now on all of those .
They are still out selling episode 1 with all the original star wars films merchandising so I do n't see your logic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sad part is a great movie would still be earning a lot more than they are now on all of those.
They are still out selling episode 1 with all the original star wars films merchandising so I don't see your logic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515282</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261425600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>This and more.

This guy's voice makes me want to blow my brains out and i don't give a fuck how spot on his points are, this is 10 years too late. Who the fuck doesn't know all this stuff already if you actually care about TPM in any sense at all? Phantom has been torn to shreds over the last decade and this guy isn't bringing anything original to the table except his shitty jokes. If you need 70 minutes to dissect why TPM "is a bad movie", you're doing it wrong. It isnt that complicated.

TPM isnt the worst movie ever made. I've paid money to see worse. I'm not even sure that its the worst star wars movie ever made. I think there are failures in ATOC and RotS that are much bigger, simply because more of the film hangs on those moments (like the anakin/padme 'romance').

Regardless, I cant understand why this is lighting the internet on fire. Some guy spends 70 minutes talking like a retard and repeating film 101 bullet points and he's a fucking comedy genius?</htmltext>
<tokenext>This and more .
This guy 's voice makes me want to blow my brains out and i do n't give a fuck how spot on his points are , this is 10 years too late .
Who the fuck does n't know all this stuff already if you actually care about TPM in any sense at all ?
Phantom has been torn to shreds over the last decade and this guy is n't bringing anything original to the table except his shitty jokes .
If you need 70 minutes to dissect why TPM " is a bad movie " , you 're doing it wrong .
It isnt that complicated .
TPM isnt the worst movie ever made .
I 've paid money to see worse .
I 'm not even sure that its the worst star wars movie ever made .
I think there are failures in ATOC and RotS that are much bigger , simply because more of the film hangs on those moments ( like the anakin/padme 'romance ' ) .
Regardless , I cant understand why this is lighting the internet on fire .
Some guy spends 70 minutes talking like a retard and repeating film 101 bullet points and he 's a fucking comedy genius ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This and more.
This guy's voice makes me want to blow my brains out and i don't give a fuck how spot on his points are, this is 10 years too late.
Who the fuck doesn't know all this stuff already if you actually care about TPM in any sense at all?
Phantom has been torn to shreds over the last decade and this guy isn't bringing anything original to the table except his shitty jokes.
If you need 70 minutes to dissect why TPM "is a bad movie", you're doing it wrong.
It isnt that complicated.
TPM isnt the worst movie ever made.
I've paid money to see worse.
I'm not even sure that its the worst star wars movie ever made.
I think there are failures in ATOC and RotS that are much bigger, simply because more of the film hangs on those moments (like the anakin/padme 'romance').
Regardless, I cant understand why this is lighting the internet on fire.
Some guy spends 70 minutes talking like a retard and repeating film 101 bullet points and he's a fucking comedy genius?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516008</id>
	<title>Thank the Force for Good Friends</title>
	<author>hyades1</author>
	<datestamp>1261386000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> I have so far managed to avoid seeing all three of these abortions.  I was lucky to have a couple of friends who went to the first one.  When their eyes stopped bleeding, they swore to me on a case of single malt Scotch that if I was foolish enough to waste my money watching such drek, I would henceforth be known to them as, "That Dumb Asshole". </p><p> Their firm response to having their wallets heartlessly drained by a movie that apparently would have given Plan 9 From Outer Space some competition as Worst SF Film Ever saved me from attending until enough reviews were out to thoroughly support their opinion. </p><p> Besides, my mom would have been upset if she happened to drop by and overhear my new nickname. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have so far managed to avoid seeing all three of these abortions .
I was lucky to have a couple of friends who went to the first one .
When their eyes stopped bleeding , they swore to me on a case of single malt Scotch that if I was foolish enough to waste my money watching such drek , I would henceforth be known to them as , " That Dumb Asshole " .
Their firm response to having their wallets heartlessly drained by a movie that apparently would have given Plan 9 From Outer Space some competition as Worst SF Film Ever saved me from attending until enough reviews were out to thoroughly support their opinion .
Besides , my mom would have been upset if she happened to drop by and overhear my new nickname .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I have so far managed to avoid seeing all three of these abortions.
I was lucky to have a couple of friends who went to the first one.
When their eyes stopped bleeding, they swore to me on a case of single malt Scotch that if I was foolish enough to waste my money watching such drek, I would henceforth be known to them as, "That Dumb Asshole".
Their firm response to having their wallets heartlessly drained by a movie that apparently would have given Plan 9 From Outer Space some competition as Worst SF Film Ever saved me from attending until enough reviews were out to thoroughly support their opinion.
Besides, my mom would have been upset if she happened to drop by and overhear my new nickname. </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515700</id>
	<title>Not the worst</title>
	<author>rhadamanthus</author>
	<datestamp>1261427640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Attack of the Clones was far worse.  Sillier story, even more breathtakingly unnecessary market-driven hoopla and the dialogue goes from "it's a small child and consequently this is bad, but tolerable" to "omg, who wrote this utter drivel and why did these actors defile themelves by partaking in it?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Attack of the Clones was far worse .
Sillier story , even more breathtakingly unnecessary market-driven hoopla and the dialogue goes from " it 's a small child and consequently this is bad , but tolerable " to " omg , who wrote this utter drivel and why did these actors defile themelves by partaking in it ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Attack of the Clones was far worse.
Sillier story, even more breathtakingly unnecessary market-driven hoopla and the dialogue goes from "it's a small child and consequently this is bad, but tolerable" to "omg, who wrote this utter drivel and why did these actors defile themelves by partaking in it?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517578</id>
	<title>Re:midichlorians</title>
	<author>bckrispi</author>
	<datestamp>1261393860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That was actually a theory I came up with shortly after AotC came out.  Palpatine conspired against the republic by breeding dissent with the separatists. Then, conveniently, the republic has a ready-made army waiting for them when hostilities break out.  Why not destroy the Jedi from within as well?  A Jedi "born of the force" would be considered to be the one to fulfill the Jedi prophecy.  The Midi-chlorians seemed to exist for a single reason in the plot: to give the Sith something tangible that they could manipulate to their own ends.  Needless to say, I felt quite vindicated once RotS came out.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>That was actually a theory I came up with shortly after AotC came out .
Palpatine conspired against the republic by breeding dissent with the separatists .
Then , conveniently , the republic has a ready-made army waiting for them when hostilities break out .
Why not destroy the Jedi from within as well ?
A Jedi " born of the force " would be considered to be the one to fulfill the Jedi prophecy .
The Midi-chlorians seemed to exist for a single reason in the plot : to give the Sith something tangible that they could manipulate to their own ends .
Needless to say , I felt quite vindicated once RotS came out .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was actually a theory I came up with shortly after AotC came out.
Palpatine conspired against the republic by breeding dissent with the separatists.
Then, conveniently, the republic has a ready-made army waiting for them when hostilities break out.
Why not destroy the Jedi from within as well?
A Jedi "born of the force" would be considered to be the one to fulfill the Jedi prophecy.
The Midi-chlorians seemed to exist for a single reason in the plot: to give the Sith something tangible that they could manipulate to their own ends.
Needless to say, I felt quite vindicated once RotS came out.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516100</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515792</id>
	<title>What should have happened</title>
	<author>lymond01</author>
	<datestamp>1261428060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the prequels had been a separate story of a person or persons, amongst the backdrop of the rise of the empire and Darth Vader, they could have been great.  What we have instead is a 9 hour Wikipedia article on the history of Darth Vader, and about as fun to watch on the big screen (with the exception of the sabre fight at the end of Episode 1 which was awesome).</p><p>Just pick a new character -- someone we've never heard of before.  Heck, even make the person a wannabe Sith apprentice who finds himself (like all the video games) and who dies at the end in some heroic fashion.  Memorable, but nothing to interfere with the next 3 movies.  But at least someone that the audience might say, "Damn...I wish that character was still alive..." rather than wishing they were all dead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the prequels had been a separate story of a person or persons , amongst the backdrop of the rise of the empire and Darth Vader , they could have been great .
What we have instead is a 9 hour Wikipedia article on the history of Darth Vader , and about as fun to watch on the big screen ( with the exception of the sabre fight at the end of Episode 1 which was awesome ) .Just pick a new character -- someone we 've never heard of before .
Heck , even make the person a wannabe Sith apprentice who finds himself ( like all the video games ) and who dies at the end in some heroic fashion .
Memorable , but nothing to interfere with the next 3 movies .
But at least someone that the audience might say , " Damn...I wish that character was still alive... " rather than wishing they were all dead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the prequels had been a separate story of a person or persons, amongst the backdrop of the rise of the empire and Darth Vader, they could have been great.
What we have instead is a 9 hour Wikipedia article on the history of Darth Vader, and about as fun to watch on the big screen (with the exception of the sabre fight at the end of Episode 1 which was awesome).Just pick a new character -- someone we've never heard of before.
Heck, even make the person a wannabe Sith apprentice who finds himself (like all the video games) and who dies at the end in some heroic fashion.
Memorable, but nothing to interfere with the next 3 movies.
But at least someone that the audience might say, "Damn...I wish that character was still alive..." rather than wishing they were all dead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516164</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261386780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Stop fucking saying 'frak'. Unless you're fighting cylons, you don't get to fucking say 'frak'. Stop it, asshole. We know you mean 'fuck'. So say it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stop fucking saying 'frak' .
Unless you 're fighting cylons , you do n't get to fucking say 'frak' .
Stop it , asshole .
We know you mean 'fuck' .
So say it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stop fucking saying 'frak'.
Unless you're fighting cylons, you don't get to fucking say 'frak'.
Stop it, asshole.
We know you mean 'fuck'.
So say it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517178</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261391760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Three things which were not in the original trilogy. A trilogy which, as I recall, has had a bit of success marketing toys and other goods. Can you name *one* video game featuring young Anakin or Jar Jar that was a success? I can't, but I can think of several original games that were both commercial successes *and* generally regarded as good games.
<br> <br>
Marketing may have been an excuse, but it is a misguided one at best.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Three things which were not in the original trilogy .
A trilogy which , as I recall , has had a bit of success marketing toys and other goods .
Can you name * one * video game featuring young Anakin or Jar Jar that was a success ?
I ca n't , but I can think of several original games that were both commercial successes * and * generally regarded as good games .
Marketing may have been an excuse , but it is a misguided one at best .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Three things which were not in the original trilogy.
A trilogy which, as I recall, has had a bit of success marketing toys and other goods.
Can you name *one* video game featuring young Anakin or Jar Jar that was a success?
I can't, but I can think of several original games that were both commercial successes *and* generally regarded as good games.
Marketing may have been an excuse, but it is a misguided one at best.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514992</id>
	<title>I was more disappointed by Return of the Jedi</title>
	<author>bunuel</author>
	<datestamp>1261424400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think Return of the Jedi was a more disappointing movie.  The change in tone in this from Empire was more drastic than the change between this and the prequels.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think Return of the Jedi was a more disappointing movie .
The change in tone in this from Empire was more drastic than the change between this and the prequels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think Return of the Jedi was a more disappointing movie.
The change in tone in this from Empire was more drastic than the change between this and the prequels.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30522432</id>
	<title>Stop your whining...</title>
	<author>w2ed</author>
	<datestamp>1261487460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm probably alone in the thought that "The Phantom Menace" did not suck.

Granted, it was not the greatest movie everyone, myself included, was expecting, but it's far from the bitch-all-you-want-buffet that people make it out to be.  Jar Jar Binks?  Annoying, yet necessary - from a comedic standpoint (as R2-D2 and C-3PO had a very small pairing at this point) and from a historical standpoint (as he would prove in the second film as being the nail in the coffin for the war to begin in the next film.)  Young Anakin?  Again, annoying but necessary - It's hard to understand how someone could become a monster without seeing them at their best.  (Note the growing arrogance and carelessness in the latter two films to see how he'd become the monster.)  There are many other plot points and story things to complain about, yet these two are consistently the biggest.

I get so sick of hearing everyone whine because the film did not live up to their expectations - which is what I really feel is the basis for all of TPM's backlash.  Instead of Darth Vadar being a bad-ass and raping and pillaging things like the monster we were expecting, we got a young boy who happened to have excellent skills being noticed by someone who believed him to be the one for their prophecy.  We didn't get Obi-Wan and Anakin fighting side-by-side until the latter two films, we didn't get the Darth Sideous we were expecting, etc.  It was never going to live up to everyone's preconceived expectations, but the number of people whining about it far exceeds the number it should be.

Yes, there are things I will concede to - TPM was, by and far, the worst Star Wars film ever made, and it's stiffness in dialogue and characters leaves a lot to be desired.  It's far from the worst movie ever made (I've seen far worse than that!), and it did what it was supposed to do:  set the elements up and show the staring points for the events to come.  It's time to stop the complaining.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm probably alone in the thought that " The Phantom Menace " did not suck .
Granted , it was not the greatest movie everyone , myself included , was expecting , but it 's far from the bitch-all-you-want-buffet that people make it out to be .
Jar Jar Binks ?
Annoying , yet necessary - from a comedic standpoint ( as R2-D2 and C-3PO had a very small pairing at this point ) and from a historical standpoint ( as he would prove in the second film as being the nail in the coffin for the war to begin in the next film .
) Young Anakin ?
Again , annoying but necessary - It 's hard to understand how someone could become a monster without seeing them at their best .
( Note the growing arrogance and carelessness in the latter two films to see how he 'd become the monster .
) There are many other plot points and story things to complain about , yet these two are consistently the biggest .
I get so sick of hearing everyone whine because the film did not live up to their expectations - which is what I really feel is the basis for all of TPM 's backlash .
Instead of Darth Vadar being a bad-ass and raping and pillaging things like the monster we were expecting , we got a young boy who happened to have excellent skills being noticed by someone who believed him to be the one for their prophecy .
We did n't get Obi-Wan and Anakin fighting side-by-side until the latter two films , we did n't get the Darth Sideous we were expecting , etc .
It was never going to live up to everyone 's preconceived expectations , but the number of people whining about it far exceeds the number it should be .
Yes , there are things I will concede to - TPM was , by and far , the worst Star Wars film ever made , and it 's stiffness in dialogue and characters leaves a lot to be desired .
It 's far from the worst movie ever made ( I 've seen far worse than that !
) , and it did what it was supposed to do : set the elements up and show the staring points for the events to come .
It 's time to stop the complaining .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm probably alone in the thought that "The Phantom Menace" did not suck.
Granted, it was not the greatest movie everyone, myself included, was expecting, but it's far from the bitch-all-you-want-buffet that people make it out to be.
Jar Jar Binks?
Annoying, yet necessary - from a comedic standpoint (as R2-D2 and C-3PO had a very small pairing at this point) and from a historical standpoint (as he would prove in the second film as being the nail in the coffin for the war to begin in the next film.
)  Young Anakin?
Again, annoying but necessary - It's hard to understand how someone could become a monster without seeing them at their best.
(Note the growing arrogance and carelessness in the latter two films to see how he'd become the monster.
)  There are many other plot points and story things to complain about, yet these two are consistently the biggest.
I get so sick of hearing everyone whine because the film did not live up to their expectations - which is what I really feel is the basis for all of TPM's backlash.
Instead of Darth Vadar being a bad-ass and raping and pillaging things like the monster we were expecting, we got a young boy who happened to have excellent skills being noticed by someone who believed him to be the one for their prophecy.
We didn't get Obi-Wan and Anakin fighting side-by-side until the latter two films, we didn't get the Darth Sideous we were expecting, etc.
It was never going to live up to everyone's preconceived expectations, but the number of people whining about it far exceeds the number it should be.
Yes, there are things I will concede to - TPM was, by and far, the worst Star Wars film ever made, and it's stiffness in dialogue and characters leaves a lot to be desired.
It's far from the worst movie ever made (I've seen far worse than that!
), and it did what it was supposed to do:  set the elements up and show the staring points for the events to come.
It's time to stop the complaining.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516942</id>
	<title>Shortened version</title>
	<author>jwriney</author>
	<datestamp>1261390620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The movie is terrible. There, I just saved you 69 minutes and 55 seconds.</p><p>--riney</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The movie is terrible .
There , I just saved you 69 minutes and 55 seconds.--riney</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The movie is terrible.
There, I just saved you 69 minutes and 55 seconds.--riney</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519538</id>
	<title>Re:Don't look now</title>
	<author>roc97007</author>
	<datestamp>1261408740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Um, no.  I was 21 when I saw Star Wars in 1977.  I saw it six times.  I don't even remember if there were Star Wars toys in 1977.  I remember my roommate made his own lightsaber with an old flashlight, a colored lens, and a lucite curtain rod.
</p><p>
What amazed me about the film was that the pulp science fiction I had grown up with could finally be realized on the big screen.  Turns out that largely didn't happen, but that's another story.  There finally existed a film that could show what I had to imagine up to then.
</p><p>
That's where my fond memories lie.  Not some seven-year-old childlike wonder.  I saw Star Wars as an adult, liked it as an adult, and then saw The Phantom Menace as an adult, and hated it as an adult.  I think this "childlike wonder" argument is hogwash.
</p><p>
There's another thing we have to understand here -- 1977 turned around a decade-long downer trend in science fiction films.  It seemed like there was an ironclad industry rule that scifi films had to have a black or at least frustrating ending.  Star Wars, for all it's flaws, turned that around, and allowed you to leave the theater feeling good instead of wretched.  Now, perhaps we've gone too far the other way, but at the time, it was what the audience needed.
</p><p>
Star Wars worked in spite of it's flaws.  The Phantom Menace was merely an exercise in "more is not better".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , no .
I was 21 when I saw Star Wars in 1977 .
I saw it six times .
I do n't even remember if there were Star Wars toys in 1977 .
I remember my roommate made his own lightsaber with an old flashlight , a colored lens , and a lucite curtain rod .
What amazed me about the film was that the pulp science fiction I had grown up with could finally be realized on the big screen .
Turns out that largely did n't happen , but that 's another story .
There finally existed a film that could show what I had to imagine up to then .
That 's where my fond memories lie .
Not some seven-year-old childlike wonder .
I saw Star Wars as an adult , liked it as an adult , and then saw The Phantom Menace as an adult , and hated it as an adult .
I think this " childlike wonder " argument is hogwash .
There 's another thing we have to understand here -- 1977 turned around a decade-long downer trend in science fiction films .
It seemed like there was an ironclad industry rule that scifi films had to have a black or at least frustrating ending .
Star Wars , for all it 's flaws , turned that around , and allowed you to leave the theater feeling good instead of wretched .
Now , perhaps we 've gone too far the other way , but at the time , it was what the audience needed .
Star Wars worked in spite of it 's flaws .
The Phantom Menace was merely an exercise in " more is not better " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Um, no.
I was 21 when I saw Star Wars in 1977.
I saw it six times.
I don't even remember if there were Star Wars toys in 1977.
I remember my roommate made his own lightsaber with an old flashlight, a colored lens, and a lucite curtain rod.
What amazed me about the film was that the pulp science fiction I had grown up with could finally be realized on the big screen.
Turns out that largely didn't happen, but that's another story.
There finally existed a film that could show what I had to imagine up to then.
That's where my fond memories lie.
Not some seven-year-old childlike wonder.
I saw Star Wars as an adult, liked it as an adult, and then saw The Phantom Menace as an adult, and hated it as an adult.
I think this "childlike wonder" argument is hogwash.
There's another thing we have to understand here -- 1977 turned around a decade-long downer trend in science fiction films.
It seemed like there was an ironclad industry rule that scifi films had to have a black or at least frustrating ending.
Star Wars, for all it's flaws, turned that around, and allowed you to leave the theater feeling good instead of wretched.
Now, perhaps we've gone too far the other way, but at the time, it was what the audience needed.
Star Wars worked in spite of it's flaws.
The Phantom Menace was merely an exercise in "more is not better".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515006</id>
	<title>Don't look now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261424460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All of the films sucked.</p><p>Just, as a child, you saw the film *once*, then bought the toys, and had a ton of fun playing with the toys in the schoolyard, making up your own adventures.</p><p>That is where your fond memories lie.  You are disappointed because you are no longer a child, and can no longer revel in your imagination, and are upset that Lucas can't replace your lost youth.  Tough shit.</p><p>Detach yourself, and watch any of the films with a critical eye.  They are all awful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All of the films sucked.Just , as a child , you saw the film * once * , then bought the toys , and had a ton of fun playing with the toys in the schoolyard , making up your own adventures.That is where your fond memories lie .
You are disappointed because you are no longer a child , and can no longer revel in your imagination , and are upset that Lucas ca n't replace your lost youth .
Tough shit.Detach yourself , and watch any of the films with a critical eye .
They are all awful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All of the films sucked.Just, as a child, you saw the film *once*, then bought the toys, and had a ton of fun playing with the toys in the schoolyard, making up your own adventures.That is where your fond memories lie.
You are disappointed because you are no longer a child, and can no longer revel in your imagination, and are upset that Lucas can't replace your lost youth.
Tough shit.Detach yourself, and watch any of the films with a critical eye.
They are all awful.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518816</id>
	<title>None of this changes the fact...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261403100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>That faggots like to eat shit out of the asses of other faggots. Prove me wrong. I dare you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That faggots like to eat shit out of the asses of other faggots .
Prove me wrong .
I dare you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That faggots like to eat shit out of the asses of other faggots.
Prove me wrong.
I dare you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516828</id>
	<title>+ 5 Insightful</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261390140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mods are fanboys...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mods are fanboys.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mods are fanboys...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517674</id>
	<title>Let me tell you</title>
	<author>Iceykitsune</author>
	<datestamp>1261394460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'l say what I said on the gizmodo page, Do you hate the prequel troliogy because of the fact that it is not a new hope remake? or is it something else?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I'l say what I said on the gizmodo page , Do you hate the prequel troliogy because of the fact that it is not a new hope remake ?
or is it something else ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'l say what I said on the gizmodo page, Do you hate the prequel troliogy because of the fact that it is not a new hope remake?
or is it something else?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521830</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>VShael</author>
	<datestamp>1261477920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Younger kids identify more and are responsible (indirectly) for many more toy sales.</i></p><p>Because young kids didn't identify with Luke? And didn't buy tons of toys?</p><p><i>Action figures.</i></p><p>Because they haven't sold ENOUGH C3P0 and R2D2 toys in the last 30 years?</p><p><i>Video games.</i></p><p>Because it's simply not possible to have a video game based on sensible stuff in the movie?<br>We've got to have StarWars meets Mario Kart in there somewhere?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Younger kids identify more and are responsible ( indirectly ) for many more toy sales.Because young kids did n't identify with Luke ?
And did n't buy tons of toys ? Action figures.Because they have n't sold ENOUGH C3P0 and R2D2 toys in the last 30 years ? Video games.Because it 's simply not possible to have a video game based on sensible stuff in the movie ? We 've got to have StarWars meets Mario Kart in there somewhere ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Younger kids identify more and are responsible (indirectly) for many more toy sales.Because young kids didn't identify with Luke?
And didn't buy tons of toys?Action figures.Because they haven't sold ENOUGH C3P0 and R2D2 toys in the last 30 years?Video games.Because it's simply not possible to have a video game based on sensible stuff in the movie?We've got to have StarWars meets Mario Kart in there somewhere?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515650</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>NimbleSquirrel</author>
	<datestamp>1261427400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I thought I made it pretty clear that if you want me to watch an hour and ten minute critique of a two hour and thirteen minute movie, you had better do a better job than what I saw in the first ten minutes</p></div><p>Really? You made it clear? Can you please point out the part in your original comment where you said that? You never made that claim in any form.
<br> <br>
That aside, you never watched the whole thing, so you feel qualified to critique it? It is like reveiwing the plot of a movie by watching just the trailer (that may be possible with a lot of Hollywood movies, but not true for every movie).
<br> <br>
What you're saying now is that your three paragraph diatribe was just a big TL;DR.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought I made it pretty clear that if you want me to watch an hour and ten minute critique of a two hour and thirteen minute movie , you had better do a better job than what I saw in the first ten minutesReally ?
You made it clear ?
Can you please point out the part in your original comment where you said that ?
You never made that claim in any form .
That aside , you never watched the whole thing , so you feel qualified to critique it ?
It is like reveiwing the plot of a movie by watching just the trailer ( that may be possible with a lot of Hollywood movies , but not true for every movie ) .
What you 're saying now is that your three paragraph diatribe was just a big TL ; DR .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought I made it pretty clear that if you want me to watch an hour and ten minute critique of a two hour and thirteen minute movie, you had better do a better job than what I saw in the first ten minutesReally?
You made it clear?
Can you please point out the part in your original comment where you said that?
You never made that claim in any form.
That aside, you never watched the whole thing, so you feel qualified to critique it?
It is like reveiwing the plot of a movie by watching just the trailer (that may be possible with a lot of Hollywood movies, but not true for every movie).
What you're saying now is that your three paragraph diatribe was just a big TL;DR.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515296</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30561714</id>
	<title>Re:SWHS?</title>
	<author>Svartormr</author>
	<datestamp>1261906620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, at least now with TSA on the job, you can bet they'll never board that plane and someone will make them talk!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , at least now with TSA on the job , you can bet they 'll never board that plane and someone will make them talk !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, at least now with TSA on the job, you can bet they'll never board that plane and someone will make them talk!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30522350</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>vegiVamp</author>
	<datestamp>1261486200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>True, but then in all the examples you mention, the kid character is a sidekick. In TPM, Anakin is pretty much the central character, as he's the major link to the later movies.</htmltext>
<tokenext>True , but then in all the examples you mention , the kid character is a sidekick .
In TPM , Anakin is pretty much the central character , as he 's the major link to the later movies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True, but then in all the examples you mention, the kid character is a sidekick.
In TPM, Anakin is pretty much the central character, as he's the major link to the later movies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515504</id>
	<title>Re:Different Audience</title>
	<author>operagost</author>
	<datestamp>1261426680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Of a caliber" is a statement of comparison.  Neither Ladas nor Yugos are good cars, but you can still say that Yugos were not of the same caliber as a Lada, because a Lada is crappy but better.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Of a caliber " is a statement of comparison .
Neither Ladas nor Yugos are good cars , but you can still say that Yugos were not of the same caliber as a Lada , because a Lada is crappy but better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Of a caliber" is a statement of comparison.
Neither Ladas nor Yugos are good cars, but you can still say that Yugos were not of the same caliber as a Lada, because a Lada is crappy but better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516182</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261386840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><blockquote><div><p>No Pod-Racing... 20 minutes about 1/3 of the movie about nothing.</p></div></blockquote><p>Video games.</p></div></blockquote><p>Ahhh...that's why there are no video games based on any of the other star wars movies...lack of pod racing!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No Pod-Racing... 20 minutes about 1/3 of the movie about nothing.Video games.Ahhh...that 's why there are no video games based on any of the other star wars movies...lack of pod racing !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No Pod-Racing... 20 minutes about 1/3 of the movie about nothing.Video games.Ahhh...that's why there are no video games based on any of the other star wars movies...lack of pod racing!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515102</id>
	<title>Pathetic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261424820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>My inner child had been abused and betrayed. I moped around, talking to no one, for almost two weeks.</i> <br> <br>Why don't you seek professional help. This is one of those sad testimonies that makes geeks look like raving idiots. It's another reason to dismiss geek culture as a whole.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My inner child had been abused and betrayed .
I moped around , talking to no one , for almost two weeks .
Why do n't you seek professional help .
This is one of those sad testimonies that makes geeks look like raving idiots .
It 's another reason to dismiss geek culture as a whole .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My inner child had been abused and betrayed.
I moped around, talking to no one, for almost two weeks.
Why don't you seek professional help.
This is one of those sad testimonies that makes geeks look like raving idiots.
It's another reason to dismiss geek culture as a whole.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30543092</id>
	<title>Reveiw of a reveiw</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261659900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First off, I think the original Trilogy is superior to the prequel trilogy, and if I meet someone who says I've never seen star wars, I always recommend they watch one all the way through and take it from there.  I recommend the first Star Wars (that some might call Episode 4 A New Hope, ANH).</p><p>While the review was humorous at parts, I think that in utterly wrong at its core.  None of the Star wars movies are bad.  The real question is how do you rate a movie?  I ask this how entertained were you by the Phantom Menace when you saw it?  For me I would say I was enthralled, you might not have been.  Most movies I get bored during parts of them.  Some times I even start laughing at them or even making fun of them.  I was totally immersed in this one.  Generally, I call that a good movie.  Was this movie a master piece that is just totally awesome.  No not at all.   However, it is a part of a well done series.  Does it leverage on the original IP.  Yep, it would not have been made with out it, but Lucas is expanding his Space Opera.</p><p>I find it interesting that the author of the 70 minute review compared the way the story was told in the first trilogy to solely the first movie of the second trilogy.  If the story would have been told exactly the same way the author would have attacked Lucas for not being original and sticking to recipe.</p><p>Actually, honestly, I don't think Lucas could possibly live up to what all fans could want.  Here probably the best time to make this point.  When the Empire strikes back was released people came out of the theater saying this is not Star Wars.   It seems that if you create a fictional world and then change it there is always resistance or someone saying I wish they had not done that.</p><p>Another point the Author attempted to compare characters of the trilogies, but asked only to compare their personalities particularly he asks Qway Gon Gin.  Alright fine, using only the terms you set out describe there counter parts in the original Star Wars film.  Master Jedi to master Jedi.  Obi - Won is mysteriously boring, seriously.</p><p>We could go on about the points made, but here is the conclusions I would make.  Point out that the original Trilogy was not perfect by any means either.  Take these movies for what they are worth a piece of entertainment.  And I can tell you were entertained if read this post, otherwise you would not have even bothered.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First off , I think the original Trilogy is superior to the prequel trilogy , and if I meet someone who says I 've never seen star wars , I always recommend they watch one all the way through and take it from there .
I recommend the first Star Wars ( that some might call Episode 4 A New Hope , ANH ) .While the review was humorous at parts , I think that in utterly wrong at its core .
None of the Star wars movies are bad .
The real question is how do you rate a movie ?
I ask this how entertained were you by the Phantom Menace when you saw it ?
For me I would say I was enthralled , you might not have been .
Most movies I get bored during parts of them .
Some times I even start laughing at them or even making fun of them .
I was totally immersed in this one .
Generally , I call that a good movie .
Was this movie a master piece that is just totally awesome .
No not at all .
However , it is a part of a well done series .
Does it leverage on the original IP .
Yep , it would not have been made with out it , but Lucas is expanding his Space Opera.I find it interesting that the author of the 70 minute review compared the way the story was told in the first trilogy to solely the first movie of the second trilogy .
If the story would have been told exactly the same way the author would have attacked Lucas for not being original and sticking to recipe.Actually , honestly , I do n't think Lucas could possibly live up to what all fans could want .
Here probably the best time to make this point .
When the Empire strikes back was released people came out of the theater saying this is not Star Wars .
It seems that if you create a fictional world and then change it there is always resistance or someone saying I wish they had not done that.Another point the Author attempted to compare characters of the trilogies , but asked only to compare their personalities particularly he asks Qway Gon Gin .
Alright fine , using only the terms you set out describe there counter parts in the original Star Wars film .
Master Jedi to master Jedi .
Obi - Won is mysteriously boring , seriously.We could go on about the points made , but here is the conclusions I would make .
Point out that the original Trilogy was not perfect by any means either .
Take these movies for what they are worth a piece of entertainment .
And I can tell you were entertained if read this post , otherwise you would not have even bothered .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First off, I think the original Trilogy is superior to the prequel trilogy, and if I meet someone who says I've never seen star wars, I always recommend they watch one all the way through and take it from there.
I recommend the first Star Wars (that some might call Episode 4 A New Hope, ANH).While the review was humorous at parts, I think that in utterly wrong at its core.
None of the Star wars movies are bad.
The real question is how do you rate a movie?
I ask this how entertained were you by the Phantom Menace when you saw it?
For me I would say I was enthralled, you might not have been.
Most movies I get bored during parts of them.
Some times I even start laughing at them or even making fun of them.
I was totally immersed in this one.
Generally, I call that a good movie.
Was this movie a master piece that is just totally awesome.
No not at all.
However, it is a part of a well done series.
Does it leverage on the original IP.
Yep, it would not have been made with out it, but Lucas is expanding his Space Opera.I find it interesting that the author of the 70 minute review compared the way the story was told in the first trilogy to solely the first movie of the second trilogy.
If the story would have been told exactly the same way the author would have attacked Lucas for not being original and sticking to recipe.Actually, honestly, I don't think Lucas could possibly live up to what all fans could want.
Here probably the best time to make this point.
When the Empire strikes back was released people came out of the theater saying this is not Star Wars.
It seems that if you create a fictional world and then change it there is always resistance or someone saying I wish they had not done that.Another point the Author attempted to compare characters of the trilogies, but asked only to compare their personalities particularly he asks Qway Gon Gin.
Alright fine, using only the terms you set out describe there counter parts in the original Star Wars film.
Master Jedi to master Jedi.
Obi - Won is mysteriously boring, seriously.We could go on about the points made, but here is the conclusions I would make.
Point out that the original Trilogy was not perfect by any means either.
Take these movies for what they are worth a piece of entertainment.
And I can tell you were entertained if read this post, otherwise you would not have even bothered.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514940</id>
	<title>SWHS?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261424220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I still haven't seen the Holiday Special, but I've heard from a very reliable source that it is so terrible that there are no words in any language on Earth that sufficiently describe it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I still have n't seen the Holiday Special , but I 've heard from a very reliable source that it is so terrible that there are no words in any language on Earth that sufficiently describe it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still haven't seen the Holiday Special, but I've heard from a very reliable source that it is so terrible that there are no words in any language on Earth that sufficiently describe it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515958</id>
	<title>Re:midichlorians</title>
	<author>Sechr Nibw</author>
	<datestamp>1261428960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually I believe the midichlorians were explained as life forms that were attracted to Force sensitive people. So the more midichlorians that were attracted to an individual, and residing within their body, the greater their Force sensitivity.<br>
<br>
This tidbit of knowledge made the movie a little bit more enjoyable, though the pod-race was definitely too long, and Jar Jar was definitely still in the movie.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually I believe the midichlorians were explained as life forms that were attracted to Force sensitive people .
So the more midichlorians that were attracted to an individual , and residing within their body , the greater their Force sensitivity .
This tidbit of knowledge made the movie a little bit more enjoyable , though the pod-race was definitely too long , and Jar Jar was definitely still in the movie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually I believe the midichlorians were explained as life forms that were attracted to Force sensitive people.
So the more midichlorians that were attracted to an individual, and residing within their body, the greater their Force sensitivity.
This tidbit of knowledge made the movie a little bit more enjoyable, though the pod-race was definitely too long, and Jar Jar was definitely still in the movie.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517882</id>
	<title>Patton Oswalt</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261395780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>does a stand-up bit about exactly this topic.</p><p>http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?title=patton-oswalt-star-wars&amp;videoId=103167</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>does a stand-up bit about exactly this topic.http : //www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml ? title = patton-oswalt-star-wars&amp;videoId = 103167</tokentext>
<sentencetext>does a stand-up bit about exactly this topic.http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?title=patton-oswalt-star-wars&amp;videoId=103167</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515082</id>
	<title>Re:It's actually a pity ...</title>
	<author>jlmale0</author>
	<datestamp>1261424760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Funny, but you really needed the link:

<a href="http://xkcd.com/566/" title="xkcd.com" rel="nofollow">http://xkcd.com/566/</a> [xkcd.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny , but you really needed the link : http : //xkcd.com/566/ [ xkcd.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny, but you really needed the link:

http://xkcd.com/566/ [xkcd.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519068</id>
	<title>Re:You don't like them because they aren't for you</title>
	<author>sl3xd</author>
	<datestamp>1261405260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My view:  Far too many people had what <i>their</i> Star Wars universe was.  Then when Lucas didn't give them exactly what they wanted (all 300 million versions of 'exactly what I wanted'), the results are predictable.</p><p>Here's a news flash:  Episodes 4-6 were every bit as bad as Episodes 1-3.</p><p>Now go back and read it again.</p><p>It's just nostalgia that keeps many fans from admitting that episodes 4-6 were a long way from the best movies ever made.  They had fantastic special effects, sound effects, and an even better musical score.</p><p>Yet movie reviews at the time blasted episodes 4-6 as being effects-coated bad movies.  Just like Transformers 2 or Battlefield Earth...</p><p>The critics need to take their rose-colored glasses off, and realize that the original Star Wars trilogy is not, and never was the deep universe critics imagined in their heads.  Most of the "depth" was written in the decades that followed the release of the movies, and most of that was also "non-canon."</p><p>Lucas discarded much of the well-liked but non-canon lore that was written between the two trilogies.  This upset many a fanboy.</p><p>Now I liked the entire Star Wars saga.  But I also liked it for what it was - a family dinner at McDonalds; not fine dining at a five-star restaurant.  You can have a good time at both.  But nobody should ever mistake Episodes 4-6 as being in the same league as the greatest movies ever made.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My view : Far too many people had what their Star Wars universe was .
Then when Lucas did n't give them exactly what they wanted ( all 300 million versions of 'exactly what I wanted ' ) , the results are predictable.Here 's a news flash : Episodes 4-6 were every bit as bad as Episodes 1-3.Now go back and read it again.It 's just nostalgia that keeps many fans from admitting that episodes 4-6 were a long way from the best movies ever made .
They had fantastic special effects , sound effects , and an even better musical score.Yet movie reviews at the time blasted episodes 4-6 as being effects-coated bad movies .
Just like Transformers 2 or Battlefield Earth...The critics need to take their rose-colored glasses off , and realize that the original Star Wars trilogy is not , and never was the deep universe critics imagined in their heads .
Most of the " depth " was written in the decades that followed the release of the movies , and most of that was also " non-canon .
" Lucas discarded much of the well-liked but non-canon lore that was written between the two trilogies .
This upset many a fanboy.Now I liked the entire Star Wars saga .
But I also liked it for what it was - a family dinner at McDonalds ; not fine dining at a five-star restaurant .
You can have a good time at both .
But nobody should ever mistake Episodes 4-6 as being in the same league as the greatest movies ever made .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My view:  Far too many people had what their Star Wars universe was.
Then when Lucas didn't give them exactly what they wanted (all 300 million versions of 'exactly what I wanted'), the results are predictable.Here's a news flash:  Episodes 4-6 were every bit as bad as Episodes 1-3.Now go back and read it again.It's just nostalgia that keeps many fans from admitting that episodes 4-6 were a long way from the best movies ever made.
They had fantastic special effects, sound effects, and an even better musical score.Yet movie reviews at the time blasted episodes 4-6 as being effects-coated bad movies.
Just like Transformers 2 or Battlefield Earth...The critics need to take their rose-colored glasses off, and realize that the original Star Wars trilogy is not, and never was the deep universe critics imagined in their heads.
Most of the "depth" was written in the decades that followed the release of the movies, and most of that was also "non-canon.
"Lucas discarded much of the well-liked but non-canon lore that was written between the two trilogies.
This upset many a fanboy.Now I liked the entire Star Wars saga.
But I also liked it for what it was - a family dinner at McDonalds; not fine dining at a five-star restaurant.
You can have a good time at both.
But nobody should ever mistake Episodes 4-6 as being in the same league as the greatest movies ever made.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516058</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515778</id>
	<title>Good news, everyone!</title>
	<author>everynerd</author>
	<datestamp>1261428000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Good news, everyone! Dr. Zoidberg is now reviewing 20th century cinema.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good news , everyone !
Dr. Zoidberg is now reviewing 20th century cinema .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good news, everyone!
Dr. Zoidberg is now reviewing 20th century cinema.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518594</id>
	<title>Re:Box Office</title>
	<author>KGBear</author>
	<datestamp>1261400700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have no idea how old you are, of course. I was 13 when I saw Episode IV on the big screen. I didn't know what to expect, I didn't particularly want to go to the movies with my dad and mom that day. It's safe to say however that that movie changed my life and has a great deal of responsibility in making me who I am. I saw the movie again 12 more times during its first theater run. I borrowed money, I worked, I sold raffles, all to afford spending every minute I could watching that movie. 12 x a movie ticket is a lot of money to the average 13 yo. Then I waited 20 years. It is extremely unlikely that anyone who has gone through the original trilogy in their teens would have skipped the latest 3 based on reviews. That is why it was such a blockbuster. I, and millions like me, just *had* to see it, even if we knew it was going to suck. Others have spoken here about why the original trilogy was amazing and why the latter one sucks so I'm not going there. Except to say that IMHO Lucas tried to keep the franchise's appeal to kids while trying to give the 1978 kids some grown-up material that would appeal to the middle-aged geeks they had become. To do that requires a sort of genius that Lucas does not possess. It's possible - just look at the Phineas and Ferb show on Disney Channel. But Lucas seems incapable of dealing with adult issues, let alone bridging the required age gap. His adult themes are not grave, they are boring - trade taxes indeed! So Star Wars fails to grow up with its audience.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have no idea how old you are , of course .
I was 13 when I saw Episode IV on the big screen .
I did n't know what to expect , I did n't particularly want to go to the movies with my dad and mom that day .
It 's safe to say however that that movie changed my life and has a great deal of responsibility in making me who I am .
I saw the movie again 12 more times during its first theater run .
I borrowed money , I worked , I sold raffles , all to afford spending every minute I could watching that movie .
12 x a movie ticket is a lot of money to the average 13 yo .
Then I waited 20 years .
It is extremely unlikely that anyone who has gone through the original trilogy in their teens would have skipped the latest 3 based on reviews .
That is why it was such a blockbuster .
I , and millions like me , just * had * to see it , even if we knew it was going to suck .
Others have spoken here about why the original trilogy was amazing and why the latter one sucks so I 'm not going there .
Except to say that IMHO Lucas tried to keep the franchise 's appeal to kids while trying to give the 1978 kids some grown-up material that would appeal to the middle-aged geeks they had become .
To do that requires a sort of genius that Lucas does not possess .
It 's possible - just look at the Phineas and Ferb show on Disney Channel .
But Lucas seems incapable of dealing with adult issues , let alone bridging the required age gap .
His adult themes are not grave , they are boring - trade taxes indeed !
So Star Wars fails to grow up with its audience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have no idea how old you are, of course.
I was 13 when I saw Episode IV on the big screen.
I didn't know what to expect, I didn't particularly want to go to the movies with my dad and mom that day.
It's safe to say however that that movie changed my life and has a great deal of responsibility in making me who I am.
I saw the movie again 12 more times during its first theater run.
I borrowed money, I worked, I sold raffles, all to afford spending every minute I could watching that movie.
12 x a movie ticket is a lot of money to the average 13 yo.
Then I waited 20 years.
It is extremely unlikely that anyone who has gone through the original trilogy in their teens would have skipped the latest 3 based on reviews.
That is why it was such a blockbuster.
I, and millions like me, just *had* to see it, even if we knew it was going to suck.
Others have spoken here about why the original trilogy was amazing and why the latter one sucks so I'm not going there.
Except to say that IMHO Lucas tried to keep the franchise's appeal to kids while trying to give the 1978 kids some grown-up material that would appeal to the middle-aged geeks they had become.
To do that requires a sort of genius that Lucas does not possess.
It's possible - just look at the Phineas and Ferb show on Disney Channel.
But Lucas seems incapable of dealing with adult issues, let alone bridging the required age gap.
His adult themes are not grave, they are boring - trade taxes indeed!
So Star Wars fails to grow up with its audience.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30526970</id>
	<title>Re:midichlorians</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261512300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember wondering at the time if Force ability was contagious, microbes frequently being communicable and all. When the hallmark of your childhood fantasy ends up getting chalked up to an infectious disease, it kinda sucks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember wondering at the time if Force ability was contagious , microbes frequently being communicable and all .
When the hallmark of your childhood fantasy ends up getting chalked up to an infectious disease , it kinda sucks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember wondering at the time if Force ability was contagious, microbes frequently being communicable and all.
When the hallmark of your childhood fantasy ends up getting chalked up to an infectious disease, it kinda sucks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519452</id>
	<title>Re:Every film is flawed</title>
	<author>tuxedobob</author>
	<datestamp>1261407960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know if you sat through the whole seven of them, but he mentions the lightsaber duels. Yes, the lightsaber duels in #1 are very choreographed, but they're not any good. If you want choreography, go see the ballet. Or a flag routine, if you want choreography with sticks.</p><p>Unfortunately, I have to agree with pretty much everything this guy says. : \</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know if you sat through the whole seven of them , but he mentions the lightsaber duels .
Yes , the lightsaber duels in # 1 are very choreographed , but they 're not any good .
If you want choreography , go see the ballet .
Or a flag routine , if you want choreography with sticks.Unfortunately , I have to agree with pretty much everything this guy says .
: \</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know if you sat through the whole seven of them, but he mentions the lightsaber duels.
Yes, the lightsaber duels in #1 are very choreographed, but they're not any good.
If you want choreography, go see the ballet.
Or a flag routine, if you want choreography with sticks.Unfortunately, I have to agree with pretty much everything this guy says.
: \</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515752</id>
	<title>Oh for $#\%&amp; SAKE!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261427820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get over it!!!!<br>The New Trilogy were made in the same Saturday morning matinee style as the originals;i.e. they're kids movies! Sure, they have some heavy scenes, a bit of Kurosawa, and some Tao, but they're still meant to be fun.<br>I bet if the complainers had first watched the Original Trilogy as adults rather than as children you'd probably think the same way of the originals.<br>But yeah... Jar Jar did suck!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get over it ! ! !
! The New Trilogy were made in the same Saturday morning matinee style as the originals ; i.e .
they 're kids movies !
Sure , they have some heavy scenes , a bit of Kurosawa , and some Tao , but they 're still meant to be fun.I bet if the complainers had first watched the Original Trilogy as adults rather than as children you 'd probably think the same way of the originals.But yeah... Jar Jar did suck !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get over it!!!
!The New Trilogy were made in the same Saturday morning matinee style as the originals;i.e.
they're kids movies!
Sure, they have some heavy scenes, a bit of Kurosawa, and some Tao, but they're still meant to be fun.I bet if the complainers had first watched the Original Trilogy as adults rather than as children you'd probably think the same way of the originals.But yeah... Jar Jar did suck!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518346</id>
	<title>Re:Jar^2</title>
	<author>bckrispi</author>
	<datestamp>1261398840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Agreed.  I had TPM on DVD for about a year before I got my first big-screen TV, and it made all the difference.  The Battle of Naboo is actually <i>really freaking intense</i>... so long as you keep your focus off Jar-Jar who appears at the center of every frame.  I mean, in RotJ, you had comic relief teddy-bears, but there was at least a moment where the comedy was broken to see an Ewok getting blown to bits.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed .
I had TPM on DVD for about a year before I got my first big-screen TV , and it made all the difference .
The Battle of Naboo is actually really freaking intense... so long as you keep your focus off Jar-Jar who appears at the center of every frame .
I mean , in RotJ , you had comic relief teddy-bears , but there was at least a moment where the comedy was broken to see an Ewok getting blown to bits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.
I had TPM on DVD for about a year before I got my first big-screen TV, and it made all the difference.
The Battle of Naboo is actually really freaking intense... so long as you keep your focus off Jar-Jar who appears at the center of every frame.
I mean, in RotJ, you had comic relief teddy-bears, but there was at least a moment where the comedy was broken to see an Ewok getting blown to bits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516426</id>
	<title>Re:midichlorians</title>
	<author>farble1670</author>
	<datestamp>1261387980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>yes, it is always troubling when something is explained with science. you wouldn't be religious would you?</htmltext>
<tokenext>yes , it is always troubling when something is explained with science .
you would n't be religious would you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yes, it is always troubling when something is explained with science.
you wouldn't be religious would you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515350</id>
	<title>Re:Different Audience</title>
	<author>Captain Fallout</author>
	<datestamp>1261425900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sure, TPM was lame when compared to the original Star Wars trilogy, but it was never meant to please the audience of the original films.  Its primary target was the little kids... progeny of the original audience. </p></div><p>That point is addressed in one of the later clips. If this movie is made for little kids, then why make it so complicated in regards to trade disputes, political arguments in the galactic senate and the machinations of someone trying to take power.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , TPM was lame when compared to the original Star Wars trilogy , but it was never meant to please the audience of the original films .
Its primary target was the little kids... progeny of the original audience .
That point is addressed in one of the later clips .
If this movie is made for little kids , then why make it so complicated in regards to trade disputes , political arguments in the galactic senate and the machinations of someone trying to take power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, TPM was lame when compared to the original Star Wars trilogy, but it was never meant to please the audience of the original films.
Its primary target was the little kids... progeny of the original audience.
That point is addressed in one of the later clips.
If this movie is made for little kids, then why make it so complicated in regards to trade disputes, political arguments in the galactic senate and the machinations of someone trying to take power.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30526924</id>
	<title>Re:If that's what it means to be a geek...</title>
	<author>hitmark</author>
	<datestamp>1261512180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>or maybe lucas had a hard time getting people to pick up of the mental issues anakin was having?</p><p>basically, he started training as a jedi late (yoda and the rest of the council worried).</p><p>he showed raw power that some gossiped could outdo yoda.</p><p>while the jedi code forbade family or other ties (to avoid negative emotions), he was in love with padme, and his mother got killed by sandpeople (one thing that never showed up in the movies).</p><p>all this time his ego is going thru the roof, but is snubbed the title of jedi knight.</p><p>then palpatine starts his mind games on the kid (as i suspect he was very much a kid mentally), playing on his fear of loosing padme and his ego (planting the idea that the council was holding him back from fear of his potential).</p><p>in essence, its a expanded version of "the road to hell is paved with good intentions". And also a case of teens/20-something people thinking they cant do wrong, are invincible or cant die.</p><p>this is all a whole lot of stuff to cram into 2 hours, without having some kind of continual inner voice spelling out each thought anakin is having about a situation. And is not unlike the problem faced when dune was turning into a movie back in 1984.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>or maybe lucas had a hard time getting people to pick up of the mental issues anakin was having ? basically , he started training as a jedi late ( yoda and the rest of the council worried ) .he showed raw power that some gossiped could outdo yoda.while the jedi code forbade family or other ties ( to avoid negative emotions ) , he was in love with padme , and his mother got killed by sandpeople ( one thing that never showed up in the movies ) .all this time his ego is going thru the roof , but is snubbed the title of jedi knight.then palpatine starts his mind games on the kid ( as i suspect he was very much a kid mentally ) , playing on his fear of loosing padme and his ego ( planting the idea that the council was holding him back from fear of his potential ) .in essence , its a expanded version of " the road to hell is paved with good intentions " .
And also a case of teens/20-something people thinking they cant do wrong , are invincible or cant die.this is all a whole lot of stuff to cram into 2 hours , without having some kind of continual inner voice spelling out each thought anakin is having about a situation .
And is not unlike the problem faced when dune was turning into a movie back in 1984 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or maybe lucas had a hard time getting people to pick up of the mental issues anakin was having?basically, he started training as a jedi late (yoda and the rest of the council worried).he showed raw power that some gossiped could outdo yoda.while the jedi code forbade family or other ties (to avoid negative emotions), he was in love with padme, and his mother got killed by sandpeople (one thing that never showed up in the movies).all this time his ego is going thru the roof, but is snubbed the title of jedi knight.then palpatine starts his mind games on the kid (as i suspect he was very much a kid mentally), playing on his fear of loosing padme and his ego (planting the idea that the council was holding him back from fear of his potential).in essence, its a expanded version of "the road to hell is paved with good intentions".
And also a case of teens/20-something people thinking they cant do wrong, are invincible or cant die.this is all a whole lot of stuff to cram into 2 hours, without having some kind of continual inner voice spelling out each thought anakin is having about a situation.
And is not unlike the problem faced when dune was turning into a movie back in 1984.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515092</id>
	<title>Phantom storytelling</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261424820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I remember after seeing <i>Episode One: The Phantom Menace</i> thinking "I know it was bad but I don't feel like expending too many cycles analyzing why"? The myriad answers here.  And in the process of deconstructing dismanting the film, conveyed as well is a good basic lesson in storytelling/scriptwriting. My own <i>Star Wars</i> orbit began to decay with <i>Return of the Jedi</i>. Besides the accursed Ewoks, I came away with the distinct impression that Lucas didn't actually rescreen or review his previous films for the-story-up-to-now before scribbling the script for the next one. At the End of "Empires" Yoda states: "There is another." Leia, I'd guessed. Made sense. But I never found out who for sure...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember after seeing Episode One : The Phantom Menace thinking " I know it was bad but I do n't feel like expending too many cycles analyzing why " ?
The myriad answers here .
And in the process of deconstructing dismanting the film , conveyed as well is a good basic lesson in storytelling/scriptwriting .
My own Star Wars orbit began to decay with Return of the Jedi .
Besides the accursed Ewoks , I came away with the distinct impression that Lucas did n't actually rescreen or review his previous films for the-story-up-to-now before scribbling the script for the next one .
At the End of " Empires " Yoda states : " There is another .
" Leia , I 'd guessed .
Made sense .
But I never found out who for sure.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember after seeing Episode One: The Phantom Menace thinking "I know it was bad but I don't feel like expending too many cycles analyzing why"?
The myriad answers here.
And in the process of deconstructing dismanting the film, conveyed as well is a good basic lesson in storytelling/scriptwriting.
My own Star Wars orbit began to decay with Return of the Jedi.
Besides the accursed Ewoks, I came away with the distinct impression that Lucas didn't actually rescreen or review his previous films for the-story-up-to-now before scribbling the script for the next one.
At the End of "Empires" Yoda states: "There is another.
" Leia, I'd guessed.
Made sense.
But I never found out who for sure...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30528038</id>
	<title>Re:Different Audience</title>
	<author>axl917</author>
	<datestamp>1261472580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just because it was too complicated fro you doesn't mean it would be for a kid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just because it was too complicated fro you does n't mean it would be for a kid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just because it was too complicated fro you doesn't mean it would be for a kid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30526500</id>
	<title>Re:Different Audience</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261510620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>L. M. F. A. O. !!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>L. M. F. A. O .
! ! !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>L. M. F. A. O.
!!!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517200</id>
	<title>The best the Internet gave us in 2009</title>
	<author>Xipe66</author>
	<datestamp>1261391880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>10/10 for content and delivery. Thank you!</htmltext>
<tokenext>10/10 for content and delivery .
Thank you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>10/10 for content and delivery.
Thank you!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515940</id>
	<title>Re:midichlorians</title>
	<author>JDHannan</author>
	<datestamp>1261428900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>I've always wondered why more people can't subscribe to the notion that midichlorians don't cause the Force, they're drawn to the force.&nbsp; Like if someone had control over magnetism, you'd expect to find lots of iron on him... that doesn't mean that that iron caused the magnetism</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've always wondered why more people ca n't subscribe to the notion that midichlorians do n't cause the Force , they 're drawn to the force.   Like if someone had control over magnetism , you 'd expect to find lots of iron on him... that does n't mean that that iron caused the magnetism</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've always wondered why more people can't subscribe to the notion that midichlorians don't cause the Force, they're drawn to the force.  Like if someone had control over magnetism, you'd expect to find lots of iron on him... that doesn't mean that that iron caused the magnetism</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518070</id>
	<title>Hehe</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1261397040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is so bad, that NEW star wars games were set in another universe, just to get away from it all.
</p><p>Amazing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is so bad , that NEW star wars games were set in another universe , just to get away from it all .
Amazing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is so bad, that NEW star wars games were set in another universe, just to get away from it all.
Amazing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515444</id>
	<title>Re:Different Audience</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261426380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Star Wars was for children because it was about a teenage hero who teamed up with a mysterious old wizard and a swarthy space pirate to rescue a princess, battle an evil knight dressed in black armor, and destroy the Death Star.</p><p>TPM was for children because it was about galactic teamsters strike negotiations, interspersed with with CSPAN footage of a senate sub-committee debate on interplanetary tariffs.  If the Jedi don't foil Senator Palpatine's evil plan in time, he will be elected to a Senate sub-committee chair!  The video game probably expands on this theme by including lots of exciting amendments and cloture votes, because kids love that stuff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Star Wars was for children because it was about a teenage hero who teamed up with a mysterious old wizard and a swarthy space pirate to rescue a princess , battle an evil knight dressed in black armor , and destroy the Death Star.TPM was for children because it was about galactic teamsters strike negotiations , interspersed with with CSPAN footage of a senate sub-committee debate on interplanetary tariffs .
If the Jedi do n't foil Senator Palpatine 's evil plan in time , he will be elected to a Senate sub-committee chair !
The video game probably expands on this theme by including lots of exciting amendments and cloture votes , because kids love that stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Star Wars was for children because it was about a teenage hero who teamed up with a mysterious old wizard and a swarthy space pirate to rescue a princess, battle an evil knight dressed in black armor, and destroy the Death Star.TPM was for children because it was about galactic teamsters strike negotiations, interspersed with with CSPAN footage of a senate sub-committee debate on interplanetary tariffs.
If the Jedi don't foil Senator Palpatine's evil plan in time, he will be elected to a Senate sub-committee chair!
The video game probably expands on this theme by including lots of exciting amendments and cloture votes, because kids love that stuff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517912</id>
	<title>To those who enjoy, well enjoy</title>
	<author>DannyO152</author>
	<datestamp>1261396020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As for me - I watched most of part 1 and a snippet of part 2 -  I found the inclusion of personal "details" disturbing, especially if they are true. I understand that with the internet, ratcheting up the rude is <em>de riguer</em> but, I was hoping that perhaps film criticism could withstand the tenor of the times.</p><p>As for his specific critique of Episode I regarding character arc, I think his argument that Annakin Skywalker could not be the protagonist due to late arrival point in the film is not particularly compelling. Episodes I-III are the rise and fall of Annakin Skywalker. Episode I, being an origins story, necessarily has to introduce the major characters for the trilogy and establish relationships. Even though we think we understood the Republic, in fact, there had to be tedious exposition regarding the politics so as to explain the crisis and motivate the major characters.</p><p>On balance, I like Episode I, but I acknowledge the flaws, which are plain to see. In its defense, I liked the restaging of the "Ben Hur" chariot race. The production design of Nabu alluded to some of my favorite artists and for my money, nobody tops Lucas and team for art, sound design, conceptualization and creation of a universe, even if particulars are derivative. I also think that it could be argued that some of the flaws in the first Episodes come from the revisiting of the "universe" at a point 30 years prior with film technology that was advanced 20 years. With "Star Wars" and "American Graffiti, Lucas had already shown a predilection for parallel action sequences, fast editing, and dense visuals. Well, Episodes I-III were even more so because the CGI enabled it. It's a fair criticism that there was too much visual density and to little point and I wonder if that made the exposition even more dreary. Still, when the drone army deployed from the carrier, I thought that looked cool, and especially because the numbers made an interesting visual pattern.</p><p>There's no denying that Lucas had lost some of his story telling bravado in his late middle ages, as evident from re-editing Han to shoot later. Han shooting first came out of Howard Hawks' manual - you may read in Bogdanovich's book exactly why Hawks had his heroes shoot first - and maybe the ultimate point is that Lucas should have either stuck with his masters or thought harder about how to replace them. In "Phantom Menace" we had a John Ford door framing, we had a tableau which echoed Kurosawa's "Throne of Blood," but, we didn't have the cutting-edge bravery, as in Episode IV and taken from Kurosawa's "The Hidden Fortress," to tell the story from the point of view of minor, reactive, characters.</p><p>Good points nonetheless, Episode I is only marginally better than Episode VI and I fully understand those who hate both.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As for me - I watched most of part 1 and a snippet of part 2 - I found the inclusion of personal " details " disturbing , especially if they are true .
I understand that with the internet , ratcheting up the rude is de riguer but , I was hoping that perhaps film criticism could withstand the tenor of the times.As for his specific critique of Episode I regarding character arc , I think his argument that Annakin Skywalker could not be the protagonist due to late arrival point in the film is not particularly compelling .
Episodes I-III are the rise and fall of Annakin Skywalker .
Episode I , being an origins story , necessarily has to introduce the major characters for the trilogy and establish relationships .
Even though we think we understood the Republic , in fact , there had to be tedious exposition regarding the politics so as to explain the crisis and motivate the major characters.On balance , I like Episode I , but I acknowledge the flaws , which are plain to see .
In its defense , I liked the restaging of the " Ben Hur " chariot race .
The production design of Nabu alluded to some of my favorite artists and for my money , nobody tops Lucas and team for art , sound design , conceptualization and creation of a universe , even if particulars are derivative .
I also think that it could be argued that some of the flaws in the first Episodes come from the revisiting of the " universe " at a point 30 years prior with film technology that was advanced 20 years .
With " Star Wars " and " American Graffiti , Lucas had already shown a predilection for parallel action sequences , fast editing , and dense visuals .
Well , Episodes I-III were even more so because the CGI enabled it .
It 's a fair criticism that there was too much visual density and to little point and I wonder if that made the exposition even more dreary .
Still , when the drone army deployed from the carrier , I thought that looked cool , and especially because the numbers made an interesting visual pattern.There 's no denying that Lucas had lost some of his story telling bravado in his late middle ages , as evident from re-editing Han to shoot later .
Han shooting first came out of Howard Hawks ' manual - you may read in Bogdanovich 's book exactly why Hawks had his heroes shoot first - and maybe the ultimate point is that Lucas should have either stuck with his masters or thought harder about how to replace them .
In " Phantom Menace " we had a John Ford door framing , we had a tableau which echoed Kurosawa 's " Throne of Blood , " but , we did n't have the cutting-edge bravery , as in Episode IV and taken from Kurosawa 's " The Hidden Fortress , " to tell the story from the point of view of minor , reactive , characters.Good points nonetheless , Episode I is only marginally better than Episode VI and I fully understand those who hate both .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As for me - I watched most of part 1 and a snippet of part 2 -  I found the inclusion of personal "details" disturbing, especially if they are true.
I understand that with the internet, ratcheting up the rude is de riguer but, I was hoping that perhaps film criticism could withstand the tenor of the times.As for his specific critique of Episode I regarding character arc, I think his argument that Annakin Skywalker could not be the protagonist due to late arrival point in the film is not particularly compelling.
Episodes I-III are the rise and fall of Annakin Skywalker.
Episode I, being an origins story, necessarily has to introduce the major characters for the trilogy and establish relationships.
Even though we think we understood the Republic, in fact, there had to be tedious exposition regarding the politics so as to explain the crisis and motivate the major characters.On balance, I like Episode I, but I acknowledge the flaws, which are plain to see.
In its defense, I liked the restaging of the "Ben Hur" chariot race.
The production design of Nabu alluded to some of my favorite artists and for my money, nobody tops Lucas and team for art, sound design, conceptualization and creation of a universe, even if particulars are derivative.
I also think that it could be argued that some of the flaws in the first Episodes come from the revisiting of the "universe" at a point 30 years prior with film technology that was advanced 20 years.
With "Star Wars" and "American Graffiti, Lucas had already shown a predilection for parallel action sequences, fast editing, and dense visuals.
Well, Episodes I-III were even more so because the CGI enabled it.
It's a fair criticism that there was too much visual density and to little point and I wonder if that made the exposition even more dreary.
Still, when the drone army deployed from the carrier, I thought that looked cool, and especially because the numbers made an interesting visual pattern.There's no denying that Lucas had lost some of his story telling bravado in his late middle ages, as evident from re-editing Han to shoot later.
Han shooting first came out of Howard Hawks' manual - you may read in Bogdanovich's book exactly why Hawks had his heroes shoot first - and maybe the ultimate point is that Lucas should have either stuck with his masters or thought harder about how to replace them.
In "Phantom Menace" we had a John Ford door framing, we had a tableau which echoed Kurosawa's "Throne of Blood," but, we didn't have the cutting-edge bravery, as in Episode IV and taken from Kurosawa's "The Hidden Fortress," to tell the story from the point of view of minor, reactive, characters.Good points nonetheless, Episode I is only marginally better than Episode VI and I fully understand those who hate both.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515020</id>
	<title>Grow Up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261424520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The prequel to the movies you saw as a child didn't live up to your expectations? Perhaps you should take a closer look at those first three movies, and maybe you will realize they are all crappy movies meant to be enjoyed by kids.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The prequel to the movies you saw as a child did n't live up to your expectations ?
Perhaps you should take a closer look at those first three movies , and maybe you will realize they are all crappy movies meant to be enjoyed by kids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The prequel to the movies you saw as a child didn't live up to your expectations?
Perhaps you should take a closer look at those first three movies, and maybe you will realize they are all crappy movies meant to be enjoyed by kids.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515430</id>
	<title>They are all just as bad as any others</title>
	<author>unum15</author>
	<datestamp>1261426320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I did not grow up watch Star Wars.  I have absolutely no nostalgia attached to them.  I watched the original trilogy for the first time in college, in 1998.  I watched the remastered versions.  They are ok movies not bad, but not great.  Same with the newer trilogy.  They all have annoying character and plot holes.  Get over it.  If you had watched the original three for the first time as adult, you would have thought they were over hyped(which they are).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did not grow up watch Star Wars .
I have absolutely no nostalgia attached to them .
I watched the original trilogy for the first time in college , in 1998 .
I watched the remastered versions .
They are ok movies not bad , but not great .
Same with the newer trilogy .
They all have annoying character and plot holes .
Get over it .
If you had watched the original three for the first time as adult , you would have thought they were over hyped ( which they are ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I did not grow up watch Star Wars.
I have absolutely no nostalgia attached to them.
I watched the original trilogy for the first time in college, in 1998.
I watched the remastered versions.
They are ok movies not bad, but not great.
Same with the newer trilogy.
They all have annoying character and plot holes.
Get over it.
If you had watched the original three for the first time as adult, you would have thought they were over hyped(which they are).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515534</id>
	<title>Re:Don't look now</title>
	<author>operagost</author>
	<datestamp>1261426860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're entitled to your opinion, but you are greatly outnumbered by both experts and lay people.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're entitled to your opinion , but you are greatly outnumbered by both experts and lay people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're entitled to your opinion, but you are greatly outnumbered by both experts and lay people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515384</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>rhyder128k</author>
	<datestamp>1261426080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"So from watching the first part, the guy raises some good points."</p><p>This is Slashdot and it's unreasonable of people to criticise you for not watching the TFV. They're obviously still on web 1.0 and obsessed with not reading TFA without extending standard<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. protocols to FVs.</p><p>I'm on part 3 and it seems to be going the same way as TPM. It started well with a good pace and a plot that expounds some interesting details. Shame as he was onto something pretty good at the beginning but by the middle of part 3 I kept saying, "Well, I can't really agree with that". For example, it doesn't seem implausible, in story terms, that a corrupt trade regulation body would be carrying out an embargo for self serving reasons.</p><p>It's a shame that he couldn't have taken his own advice and edited out some of his crappier ideas.</p><p>Yeah, I was disappointed that Ep1 was a kids movie too. Most adults who grew up with the original trilogy were. But it could have been much worse and it does expand the SW universe with some interesting new details.</p><p>Anyway. Onwards...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" So from watching the first part , the guy raises some good points .
" This is Slashdot and it 's unreasonable of people to criticise you for not watching the TFV .
They 're obviously still on web 1.0 and obsessed with not reading TFA without extending standard / .
protocols to FVs.I 'm on part 3 and it seems to be going the same way as TPM .
It started well with a good pace and a plot that expounds some interesting details .
Shame as he was onto something pretty good at the beginning but by the middle of part 3 I kept saying , " Well , I ca n't really agree with that " .
For example , it does n't seem implausible , in story terms , that a corrupt trade regulation body would be carrying out an embargo for self serving reasons.It 's a shame that he could n't have taken his own advice and edited out some of his crappier ideas.Yeah , I was disappointed that Ep1 was a kids movie too .
Most adults who grew up with the original trilogy were .
But it could have been much worse and it does expand the SW universe with some interesting new details.Anyway .
Onwards.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"So from watching the first part, the guy raises some good points.
"This is Slashdot and it's unreasonable of people to criticise you for not watching the TFV.
They're obviously still on web 1.0 and obsessed with not reading TFA without extending standard /.
protocols to FVs.I'm on part 3 and it seems to be going the same way as TPM.
It started well with a good pace and a plot that expounds some interesting details.
Shame as he was onto something pretty good at the beginning but by the middle of part 3 I kept saying, "Well, I can't really agree with that".
For example, it doesn't seem implausible, in story terms, that a corrupt trade regulation body would be carrying out an embargo for self serving reasons.It's a shame that he couldn't have taken his own advice and edited out some of his crappier ideas.Yeah, I was disappointed that Ep1 was a kids movie too.
Most adults who grew up with the original trilogy were.
But it could have been much worse and it does expand the SW universe with some interesting new details.Anyway.
Onwards...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517310</id>
	<title>Re:midichlorians</title>
	<author>Tanman</author>
	<datestamp>1261392480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You mean the mitochondria ?  waaaait a minute!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean the mitochondria ?
waaaait a minute !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean the mitochondria ?
waaaait a minute!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518620</id>
	<title>"My my this here Anakin guy..."</title>
	<author>spaceyhackerlady</author>
	<datestamp>1261401060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I loved the first batch of Star Wars movies, but have never watched any of the second batch in their entirety. From the excerpts I've seen on TV, they really do blow, and I find it impossible to pay attention to them.
Lousy dialogue (just plain lousy, not the original hokiness), no plot, no characters. The whole question, "who are these people and why should I care?", goes unanswered.

</p><p>I do like Weird Al's take on it, though.

</p><p>...laura</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I loved the first batch of Star Wars movies , but have never watched any of the second batch in their entirety .
From the excerpts I 've seen on TV , they really do blow , and I find it impossible to pay attention to them .
Lousy dialogue ( just plain lousy , not the original hokiness ) , no plot , no characters .
The whole question , " who are these people and why should I care ?
" , goes unanswered .
I do like Weird Al 's take on it , though .
...laura</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I loved the first batch of Star Wars movies, but have never watched any of the second batch in their entirety.
From the excerpts I've seen on TV, they really do blow, and I find it impossible to pay attention to them.
Lousy dialogue (just plain lousy, not the original hokiness), no plot, no characters.
The whole question, "who are these people and why should I care?
", goes unanswered.
I do like Weird Al's take on it, though.
...laura</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516004</id>
	<title>Re:Box Office</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261386000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Regardless of the hype, or the previous success of a franchise, a movie cannot be so popular without being liked or enjoyable to at least a very significant portion of the population.</i> </p><p>Standard practice in the movie industry nowadays is to hype-hype-hype a movie and then hope that the opening week will bring in most of the profit.  That ensures that if the movie sucks, they still make lots of money before word gets out.  Another trick is to use a franchise that's so popular that people will go to see it even if they hear bad things from their friends.  In these cases the revenue rarely correlates to the actual quality of the movie (example: Transformers ROTF).</p><p>Or to put it another way, Lucas could have released 90 minutes of people ramming their heads into walls and still made that money, provided he had some good trailers.  Basically he capitalized on the fact that everyone who'd ever seen his earlier movies would want to see this one.</p><p>Granted, there are some people who really genuinely liked the movie.  A lot of them being young kids, which seems to have been the real target audience of the movie;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Regardless of the hype , or the previous success of a franchise , a movie can not be so popular without being liked or enjoyable to at least a very significant portion of the population .
Standard practice in the movie industry nowadays is to hype-hype-hype a movie and then hope that the opening week will bring in most of the profit .
That ensures that if the movie sucks , they still make lots of money before word gets out .
Another trick is to use a franchise that 's so popular that people will go to see it even if they hear bad things from their friends .
In these cases the revenue rarely correlates to the actual quality of the movie ( example : Transformers ROTF ) .Or to put it another way , Lucas could have released 90 minutes of people ramming their heads into walls and still made that money , provided he had some good trailers .
Basically he capitalized on the fact that everyone who 'd ever seen his earlier movies would want to see this one.Granted , there are some people who really genuinely liked the movie .
A lot of them being young kids , which seems to have been the real target audience of the movie ;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Regardless of the hype, or the previous success of a franchise, a movie cannot be so popular without being liked or enjoyable to at least a very significant portion of the population.
Standard practice in the movie industry nowadays is to hype-hype-hype a movie and then hope that the opening week will bring in most of the profit.
That ensures that if the movie sucks, they still make lots of money before word gets out.
Another trick is to use a franchise that's so popular that people will go to see it even if they hear bad things from their friends.
In these cases the revenue rarely correlates to the actual quality of the movie (example: Transformers ROTF).Or to put it another way, Lucas could have released 90 minutes of people ramming their heads into walls and still made that money, provided he had some good trailers.
Basically he capitalized on the fact that everyone who'd ever seen his earlier movies would want to see this one.Granted, there are some people who really genuinely liked the movie.
A lot of them being young kids, which seems to have been the real target audience of the movie;</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516840</id>
	<title>Re:Jar^2</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261390200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who Framed Roger Rabbit had a more believable cartoon animal than Jar-Jar.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who Framed Roger Rabbit had a more believable cartoon animal than Jar-Jar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who Framed Roger Rabbit had a more believable cartoon animal than Jar-Jar.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519276</id>
	<title>Could someone do a youtube criticizing this review</title>
	<author>TheRealRainFall</author>
	<datestamp>1261406820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's slow, boring, drags on, and generally promotes more of an Americanization of the movies which i felt were the downfall.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's slow , boring , drags on , and generally promotes more of an Americanization of the movies which i felt were the downfall .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's slow, boring, drags on, and generally promotes more of an Americanization of the movies which i felt were the downfall.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30556010</id>
	<title>Maybe we are looking at this all wrong..</title>
	<author>Veretax</author>
	<datestamp>1261845360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>See I always think back to Ep VI where C3PO Is talking to the Ewoks about their adventures, and thought the prequels could be a highly dramatized fiction embellished by C3PO trying to retell events that have been scrambled in his circuits for some time.  If that were true it would explain why certain traits got so accentuated<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</htmltext>
<tokenext>See I always think back to Ep VI where C3PO Is talking to the Ewoks about their adventures , and thought the prequels could be a highly dramatized fiction embellished by C3PO trying to retell events that have been scrambled in his circuits for some time .
If that were true it would explain why certain traits got so accentuated : D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See I always think back to Ep VI where C3PO Is talking to the Ewoks about their adventures, and thought the prequels could be a highly dramatized fiction embellished by C3PO trying to retell events that have been scrambled in his circuits for some time.
If that were true it would explain why certain traits got so accentuated :D</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518360</id>
	<title>Very very funny. Thank you.</title>
	<author>Torodung</author>
	<datestamp>1261398900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.darthsanddroids.net/episodes/0122.html" title="darthsanddroids.net">Jar Jar, you're a genius!</a> [darthsanddroids.net]</p><p>(Just giving back some funny if you haven't seen Darths and Droids yet)</p><p>--<br>Toro</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jar Jar , you 're a genius !
[ darthsanddroids.net ] ( Just giving back some funny if you have n't seen Darths and Droids yet ) --Toro</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jar Jar, you're a genius!
[darthsanddroids.net](Just giving back some funny if you haven't seen Darths and Droids yet)--Toro</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516104</id>
	<title>The review is good without worrying about Jar Jar.</title>
	<author>Zaphod-AVA</author>
	<datestamp>1261386540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the best things about this review is that it doesn't get stuck on how awful Jar Jar is, or the poor acting, it attacks the fundamental building blocks of the film.</p><p>For those that don't want to slog through all 7, I recommend just watching # 6, it has some of the best content.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the best things about this review is that it does n't get stuck on how awful Jar Jar is , or the poor acting , it attacks the fundamental building blocks of the film.For those that do n't want to slog through all 7 , I recommend just watching # 6 , it has some of the best content .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the best things about this review is that it doesn't get stuck on how awful Jar Jar is, or the poor acting, it attacks the fundamental building blocks of the film.For those that don't want to slog through all 7, I recommend just watching # 6, it has some of the best content.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514864</id>
	<title>Different Audience</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261423860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sure, TPM was lame when compared to the original Star Wars trilogy, but it was never meant to please the audience of the original films.  Its primary target was the little kids... progeny of the original audience.    Agreed, Lucas could have achieved this with a film of the caliber of the originals, but I suspect that at that point he didn't really care to go to the effort.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , TPM was lame when compared to the original Star Wars trilogy , but it was never meant to please the audience of the original films .
Its primary target was the little kids... progeny of the original audience .
Agreed , Lucas could have achieved this with a film of the caliber of the originals , but I suspect that at that point he did n't really care to go to the effort .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, TPM was lame when compared to the original Star Wars trilogy, but it was never meant to please the audience of the original films.
Its primary target was the little kids... progeny of the original audience.
Agreed, Lucas could have achieved this with a film of the caliber of the originals, but I suspect that at that point he didn't really care to go to the effort.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517584</id>
	<title>Re:midichlorians</title>
	<author>Dun Malg</author>
	<datestamp>1261393860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's hard for me to stomach Vitalism injected into sci-fi, since I find the idea incredibly unimaginative.</p></div><p>Thing is, Star Wars <b>isn't</b> hard sci-fi. It's just another iteration of [Mystic|Samurai|Kung-fu] Heroes vs. Evil Warlord, set in space.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's hard for me to stomach Vitalism injected into sci-fi , since I find the idea incredibly unimaginative.Thing is , Star Wars is n't hard sci-fi .
It 's just another iteration of [ Mystic | Samurai | Kung-fu ] Heroes vs. Evil Warlord , set in space .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's hard for me to stomach Vitalism injected into sci-fi, since I find the idea incredibly unimaginative.Thing is, Star Wars isn't hard sci-fi.
It's just another iteration of [Mystic|Samurai|Kung-fu] Heroes vs. Evil Warlord, set in space.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516034</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516198</id>
	<title>Dead horse.</title>
	<author>Buzzsaw5</author>
	<datestamp>1261386960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ten years later and people are still whining about the movie not being what they wanted it to be. I honestly don't think it's that bad anymore. Jar Jar and "young Anakin" served their purposes- to attract a new generation of children to the franchise, and to show Anakin's initial innocence.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ten years later and people are still whining about the movie not being what they wanted it to be .
I honestly do n't think it 's that bad anymore .
Jar Jar and " young Anakin " served their purposes- to attract a new generation of children to the franchise , and to show Anakin 's initial innocence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ten years later and people are still whining about the movie not being what they wanted it to be.
I honestly don't think it's that bad anymore.
Jar Jar and "young Anakin" served their purposes- to attract a new generation of children to the franchise, and to show Anakin's initial innocence.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516128</id>
	<title>Re:SWHS?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261386660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh, what a sob story.  [tiny violin]</p><p>You are forgetting those of us who were kids then.  It was a time when "special effects" in science fiction consisted of cheap plastic models with fireworks and sparklers stuffed in them, and laser shots were hand-drawn onto the film.   Good science fiction was a rarity, and if the story was good the effects that went with it were often very, very poor indeed.  There was none of this fancy CGI stuff that today gives you some eye candy to admire even if the story sucks.  And, oh, you should have seen some of the awful, forgotten spin-off movies that Hollywood spewed out once they realized, thanks to Star Wars, that there might be some money in this science fiction stuff after all.</p><p>I'm talking about people who were old enough to have gone to Star Wars Ep IV when it was first released in the theatres.  Then, after weeks of anticipation built up by the advertising, and after weeks of begging our parents to "stay up late" to 10pm, we also watched the holiday special on TV.  It seemed like a duty after going to the theatre so many times in a row.  The special was viewed with none of this mamby-pamby "torrent" or "youtube" nonsense where you can pause at will in between the gasps of horror, laughter, and gagging on your food.  I'm talking actual cathode-ray-tube, over-the-air TV signals where you *had* to sit through the commercials -- an ancient time when the whole family would be huddled around the glow of that tiny, solitary TV in the house.  When it was all over, you could collectively say together: "That was it?" and feel embarrassed to be so duped by the hype.</p><p>Talking to people of that era is kind of like the science fiction equivalent of talking to battle-scarred veterans.  They've seen so much glory and horror.</p><p>When The Phantom Menace sucked so badly that, I swear, the air pressure in the theatre caused my ears to pop, I almost felt nostalgic about it.  Oh, it was all gussied up with newfangled CGI, but *this* was the cheesy, cringe-worthy science fiction I remember!</p><p>So, grow some guts and watch <i>all</i> of it, ya yellow-bellied maggot!  And on Nov. 17th every year, please remember the many sacrifices made by science fiction fans before you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , what a sob story .
[ tiny violin ] You are forgetting those of us who were kids then .
It was a time when " special effects " in science fiction consisted of cheap plastic models with fireworks and sparklers stuffed in them , and laser shots were hand-drawn onto the film .
Good science fiction was a rarity , and if the story was good the effects that went with it were often very , very poor indeed .
There was none of this fancy CGI stuff that today gives you some eye candy to admire even if the story sucks .
And , oh , you should have seen some of the awful , forgotten spin-off movies that Hollywood spewed out once they realized , thanks to Star Wars , that there might be some money in this science fiction stuff after all.I 'm talking about people who were old enough to have gone to Star Wars Ep IV when it was first released in the theatres .
Then , after weeks of anticipation built up by the advertising , and after weeks of begging our parents to " stay up late " to 10pm , we also watched the holiday special on TV .
It seemed like a duty after going to the theatre so many times in a row .
The special was viewed with none of this mamby-pamby " torrent " or " youtube " nonsense where you can pause at will in between the gasps of horror , laughter , and gagging on your food .
I 'm talking actual cathode-ray-tube , over-the-air TV signals where you * had * to sit through the commercials -- an ancient time when the whole family would be huddled around the glow of that tiny , solitary TV in the house .
When it was all over , you could collectively say together : " That was it ?
" and feel embarrassed to be so duped by the hype.Talking to people of that era is kind of like the science fiction equivalent of talking to battle-scarred veterans .
They 've seen so much glory and horror.When The Phantom Menace sucked so badly that , I swear , the air pressure in the theatre caused my ears to pop , I almost felt nostalgic about it .
Oh , it was all gussied up with newfangled CGI , but * this * was the cheesy , cringe-worthy science fiction I remember ! So , grow some guts and watch all of it , ya yellow-bellied maggot !
And on Nov. 17th every year , please remember the many sacrifices made by science fiction fans before you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, what a sob story.
[tiny violin]You are forgetting those of us who were kids then.
It was a time when "special effects" in science fiction consisted of cheap plastic models with fireworks and sparklers stuffed in them, and laser shots were hand-drawn onto the film.
Good science fiction was a rarity, and if the story was good the effects that went with it were often very, very poor indeed.
There was none of this fancy CGI stuff that today gives you some eye candy to admire even if the story sucks.
And, oh, you should have seen some of the awful, forgotten spin-off movies that Hollywood spewed out once they realized, thanks to Star Wars, that there might be some money in this science fiction stuff after all.I'm talking about people who were old enough to have gone to Star Wars Ep IV when it was first released in the theatres.
Then, after weeks of anticipation built up by the advertising, and after weeks of begging our parents to "stay up late" to 10pm, we also watched the holiday special on TV.
It seemed like a duty after going to the theatre so many times in a row.
The special was viewed with none of this mamby-pamby "torrent" or "youtube" nonsense where you can pause at will in between the gasps of horror, laughter, and gagging on your food.
I'm talking actual cathode-ray-tube, over-the-air TV signals where you *had* to sit through the commercials -- an ancient time when the whole family would be huddled around the glow of that tiny, solitary TV in the house.
When it was all over, you could collectively say together: "That was it?
" and feel embarrassed to be so duped by the hype.Talking to people of that era is kind of like the science fiction equivalent of talking to battle-scarred veterans.
They've seen so much glory and horror.When The Phantom Menace sucked so badly that, I swear, the air pressure in the theatre caused my ears to pop, I almost felt nostalgic about it.
Oh, it was all gussied up with newfangled CGI, but *this* was the cheesy, cringe-worthy science fiction I remember!So, grow some guts and watch all of it, ya yellow-bellied maggot!
And on Nov. 17th every year, please remember the many sacrifices made by science fiction fans before you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30533314</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>Narcogen</author>
	<datestamp>1259785320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I didn't mind the funny voice, but the whole thing had an overly misogynistic tone.  Killing and raping women is kind of not funny.</p></div><p>That there are common traits between someone so obsessive they'd make a 70 minute video review of a film years after its release and people who murder their wives, kidnap and batter women, and has human bones in his basement was sort of the second layer of parody in the piece that I think most of the audience passed over.</p><p>The video (and all the other Star Trek reviews done by the same guy) are just as much critiques of the critics as they are of the films.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't mind the funny voice , but the whole thing had an overly misogynistic tone .
Killing and raping women is kind of not funny.That there are common traits between someone so obsessive they 'd make a 70 minute video review of a film years after its release and people who murder their wives , kidnap and batter women , and has human bones in his basement was sort of the second layer of parody in the piece that I think most of the audience passed over.The video ( and all the other Star Trek reviews done by the same guy ) are just as much critiques of the critics as they are of the films .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't mind the funny voice, but the whole thing had an overly misogynistic tone.
Killing and raping women is kind of not funny.That there are common traits between someone so obsessive they'd make a 70 minute video review of a film years after its release and people who murder their wives, kidnap and batter women, and has human bones in his basement was sort of the second layer of parody in the piece that I think most of the audience passed over.The video (and all the other Star Trek reviews done by the same guy) are just as much critiques of the critics as they are of the films.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516462</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515922</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>zenjah</author>
	<datestamp>1261428840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>We didn't need a cute kid, an annoying clown, and an extended fictional sporting event to convince us to buy a gazillion toys based on the original movies.

When Lucas made movies as a young man he made them to suit his own tastes.  And as a kid, I liked them far more than any show that was written specifically for children.

How did the original trilogy capture the attention of so many kids, and sell so much merchandise, without Jar Jar?</htmltext>
<tokenext>We did n't need a cute kid , an annoying clown , and an extended fictional sporting event to convince us to buy a gazillion toys based on the original movies .
When Lucas made movies as a young man he made them to suit his own tastes .
And as a kid , I liked them far more than any show that was written specifically for children .
How did the original trilogy capture the attention of so many kids , and sell so much merchandise , without Jar Jar ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We didn't need a cute kid, an annoying clown, and an extended fictional sporting event to convince us to buy a gazillion toys based on the original movies.
When Lucas made movies as a young man he made them to suit his own tastes.
And as a kid, I liked them far more than any show that was written specifically for children.
How did the original trilogy capture the attention of so many kids, and sell so much merchandise, without Jar Jar?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521614</id>
	<title>Re:Merchandising doesn't require bad child actors</title>
	<author>memco</author>
	<datestamp>1261475280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You mean F-zero?  Yeah that game was pretty rad!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean F-zero ?
Yeah that game was pretty rad !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean F-zero?
Yeah that game was pretty rad!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516992</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516906</id>
	<title>Re:Box Office</title>
	<author>oogoliegoogolie</author>
	<datestamp>1261390440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PPL saw the prequels because of two words that were in the movie title:"Star" and "Wars".  Anything containing those two words will make tons of cash.  Remove those two words and TFM would have grossed 10\% of what it did, as most movies of that quality typically do.  Lucas could do a "Star Wars-Happy Days" crossover and it would wind up being one of the top grossing movies of the year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PPL saw the prequels because of two words that were in the movie title : " Star " and " Wars " .
Anything containing those two words will make tons of cash .
Remove those two words and TFM would have grossed 10 \ % of what it did , as most movies of that quality typically do .
Lucas could do a " Star Wars-Happy Days " crossover and it would wind up being one of the top grossing movies of the year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PPL saw the prequels because of two words that were in the movie title:"Star" and "Wars".
Anything containing those two words will make tons of cash.
Remove those two words and TFM would have grossed 10\% of what it did, as most movies of that quality typically do.
Lucas could do a "Star Wars-Happy Days" crossover and it would wind up being one of the top grossing movies of the year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517950</id>
	<title>Re:Every film is flawed</title>
	<author>aquabat</author>
	<datestamp>1261396200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The same person who wrote this probably sat through Transformers 2 without having an aneurysm. Really, which film was worse?</p></div><p>If TPM had a scene of Natalie Portman, smudged with grease, working on her hoverbike, then I'd be willing to swap the two films' relative positions in a list.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The same person who wrote this probably sat through Transformers 2 without having an aneurysm .
Really , which film was worse ? If TPM had a scene of Natalie Portman , smudged with grease , working on her hoverbike , then I 'd be willing to swap the two films ' relative positions in a list .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The same person who wrote this probably sat through Transformers 2 without having an aneurysm.
Really, which film was worse?If TPM had a scene of Natalie Portman, smudged with grease, working on her hoverbike, then I'd be willing to swap the two films' relative positions in a list.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516962</id>
	<title>Re:If that's what it means to be a geek...</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1261390680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe it is a bad moment to mention all the fan-fiction I wrote while in denial ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe it is a bad moment to mention all the fan-fiction I wrote while in denial ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe it is a bad moment to mention all the fan-fiction I wrote while in denial ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519870</id>
	<title>Re:Demo Reel</title>
	<author>imroy</author>
	<datestamp>1261411380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Then they made several attempts to change platforms to various Intel chips, and released <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SGI\_Visual\_Workstation" title="wikipedia.org"> <b>Windows  NT</b> workstations</a> [wikipedia.org]. People didn't take them seriously after that.</p></div><p>There, I fixed it for you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Then they made several attempts to change platforms to various Intel chips , and released Windows NT workstations [ wikipedia.org ] .
People did n't take them seriously after that.There , I fixed it for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then they made several attempts to change platforms to various Intel chips, and released  Windows  NT workstations [wikipedia.org].
People didn't take them seriously after that.There, I fixed it for you.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519224</id>
	<title>Star Trek Generations movie review too!</title>
	<author>antdude</author>
	<datestamp>1261406400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>See here: <a href="http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&amp;videoid=48519614" title="myspace.com">http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&amp;videoid=48519614</a> [myspace.com] (29 minutes video) or <a href="http://www.videosift.com/video/Why-Star-Trek-Generations-is-the-Stupidest-Movie-Ever-Made" title="videosift.com">http://www.videosift.com/video/Why-Star-Trek-Generations-is-the-Stupidest-Movie-Ever-Made</a> [videosift.com] (three parts embedded YouTube video). I wonder if he has any more movie reviews.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>See here : http : //vids.myspace.com/index.cfm ? fuseaction = vids.individual&amp;videoid = 48519614 [ myspace.com ] ( 29 minutes video ) or http : //www.videosift.com/video/Why-Star-Trek-Generations-is-the-Stupidest-Movie-Ever-Made [ videosift.com ] ( three parts embedded YouTube video ) .
I wonder if he has any more movie reviews .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See here: http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&amp;videoid=48519614 [myspace.com] (29 minutes video) or http://www.videosift.com/video/Why-Star-Trek-Generations-is-the-Stupidest-Movie-Ever-Made [videosift.com] (three parts embedded YouTube video).
I wonder if he has any more movie reviews.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515208</id>
	<title>Re:SWHS?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261425300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I honestly couldn't bring myself to watch the whole thing. I've yet to speak to a die hard Star Wars fan who has watched the whole thing. It really is that bad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I honestly could n't bring myself to watch the whole thing .
I 've yet to speak to a die hard Star Wars fan who has watched the whole thing .
It really is that bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I honestly couldn't bring myself to watch the whole thing.
I've yet to speak to a die hard Star Wars fan who has watched the whole thing.
It really is that bad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515688</id>
	<title>Re:SWHS?</title>
	<author>Rary</author>
	<datestamp>1261427640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I honestly couldn't bring myself to watch the whole thing. I've yet to speak to a die hard Star Wars fan who has watched the whole thing. It really is that bad.</p></div><p>I sat through it, in its entirety, with a couple other people.</p><p>What I have not been able to do is sit through it a second time, even though I have managed to sit through all of the prequels a second time. That's how bad it is.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I honestly could n't bring myself to watch the whole thing .
I 've yet to speak to a die hard Star Wars fan who has watched the whole thing .
It really is that bad.I sat through it , in its entirety , with a couple other people.What I have not been able to do is sit through it a second time , even though I have managed to sit through all of the prequels a second time .
That 's how bad it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I honestly couldn't bring myself to watch the whole thing.
I've yet to speak to a die hard Star Wars fan who has watched the whole thing.
It really is that bad.I sat through it, in its entirety, with a couple other people.What I have not been able to do is sit through it a second time, even though I have managed to sit through all of the prequels a second time.
That's how bad it is.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519792</id>
	<title>Should be the MMO report guy</title>
	<author>Bryan Ischo</author>
	<datestamp>1261410660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK, so I *almost* gave up after about 5 minutes, because the dude's voice was so terrible to listen to.  And the interjections of the creepy "the narrator is a psycho killer" stuff turned me off; they were funny in a few spots but overall, I would definitely have cut them.  However, the content was *incredible*.  I am glad I continued to watch because in the end it was really excellent, and so spot on.</p><p>I think it would have been better though if it was voiced by someone who spoke more intelligently and understandably, with a much wittier delivery.  I just started watching the MMO report recently, I can't remember the name of that guy, but he would be the perfect guy to do that video.</p><p>My conclusion: excellent video, would have been over the top with a better narrator and without the mostly stupid psycho killer interludes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , so I * almost * gave up after about 5 minutes , because the dude 's voice was so terrible to listen to .
And the interjections of the creepy " the narrator is a psycho killer " stuff turned me off ; they were funny in a few spots but overall , I would definitely have cut them .
However , the content was * incredible * .
I am glad I continued to watch because in the end it was really excellent , and so spot on.I think it would have been better though if it was voiced by someone who spoke more intelligently and understandably , with a much wittier delivery .
I just started watching the MMO report recently , I ca n't remember the name of that guy , but he would be the perfect guy to do that video.My conclusion : excellent video , would have been over the top with a better narrator and without the mostly stupid psycho killer interludes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, so I *almost* gave up after about 5 minutes, because the dude's voice was so terrible to listen to.
And the interjections of the creepy "the narrator is a psycho killer" stuff turned me off; they were funny in a few spots but overall, I would definitely have cut them.
However, the content was *incredible*.
I am glad I continued to watch because in the end it was really excellent, and so spot on.I think it would have been better though if it was voiced by someone who spoke more intelligently and understandably, with a much wittier delivery.
I just started watching the MMO report recently, I can't remember the name of that guy, but he would be the perfect guy to do that video.My conclusion: excellent video, would have been over the top with a better narrator and without the mostly stupid psycho killer interludes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516606</id>
	<title>Re:It's actually a pity ...</title>
	<author>BobNET</author>
	<datestamp>1261389000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It's actually a pity that after Return of the Jedi, no more Star Wars movies were ever made.</p></div></blockquote><p>You mean there was more than one Star Wars movie?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's actually a pity that after Return of the Jedi , no more Star Wars movies were ever made.You mean there was more than one Star Wars movie ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's actually a pity that after Return of the Jedi, no more Star Wars movies were ever made.You mean there was more than one Star Wars movie?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517980</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>Caesar Tjalbo</author>
	<datestamp>1261396440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It could tell you something about Lucas' current tastes and mental age.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It could tell you something about Lucas ' current tastes and mental age .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It could tell you something about Lucas' current tastes and mental age.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515922</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515136</id>
	<title>JarJar narrating?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261425060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is it just me or does it sound a bit like JarJar underwater is narrating this ?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it just me or does it sound a bit like JarJar underwater is narrating this ?
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it just me or does it sound a bit like JarJar underwater is narrating this ?
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30549704</id>
	<title>Star Trek: Nemesis</title>
	<author>antdude</author>
	<datestamp>1261773600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.videosift.com/video/Star-Trek-Nemesis-is-the-Final-Nail-in-the-Space-Coffin" title="videosift.com">http://www.videosift.com/video/Star-Trek-Nemesis-is-the-Final-Nail-in-the-Space-Coffin</a> [videosift.com]</p><p>Hilarious reviews by this guy!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.videosift.com/video/Star-Trek-Nemesis-is-the-Final-Nail-in-the-Space-Coffin [ videosift.com ] Hilarious reviews by this guy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.videosift.com/video/Star-Trek-Nemesis-is-the-Final-Nail-in-the-Space-Coffin [videosift.com]Hilarious reviews by this guy!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515978</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261429080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The first movies didn't suck like the last three, and Luke was in his late teens/very early 20's, yet *they* were incredibly successful from a marketing/toy/etc. perspective.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The first movies did n't suck like the last three , and Luke was in his late teens/very early 20 's , yet * they * were incredibly successful from a marketing/toy/etc .
perspective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first movies didn't suck like the last three, and Luke was in his late teens/very early 20's, yet *they* were incredibly successful from a marketing/toy/etc.
perspective.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30545910</id>
	<title>Re:If that's what it means to be a geek...</title>
	<author>Doctor\_Jest</author>
	<datestamp>1261683180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You obviously don't remember a child's capacity to tune out boring and tune in when there are explosions....</htmltext>
<tokenext>You obviously do n't remember a child 's capacity to tune out boring and tune in when there are explosions... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You obviously don't remember a child's capacity to tune out boring and tune in when there are explosions....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518776</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30520308</id>
	<title>Re:It's actually a pity ...</title>
	<author>ckimyt</author>
	<datestamp>1261415280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>... that after <b>The Empire Strikes Back</b>, no more Star Wars movies were ever made.</p></div><p>There, FTFY.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... that after The Empire Strikes Back , no more Star Wars movies were ever made.There , FTFY .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... that after The Empire Strikes Back, no more Star Wars movies were ever made.There, FTFY.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514984</id>
	<title>oh zing mr. lucas</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261424400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Welcome to Last Week, Slashdot.</p><p>Also much nerd rage and neckbeardery going on for a ten year old film. Where is the pundit who will excoriate and denigrate Citizen Kane on the YouTubes?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Welcome to Last Week , Slashdot.Also much nerd rage and neckbeardery going on for a ten year old film .
Where is the pundit who will excoriate and denigrate Citizen Kane on the YouTubes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Welcome to Last Week, Slashdot.Also much nerd rage and neckbeardery going on for a ten year old film.
Where is the pundit who will excoriate and denigrate Citizen Kane on the YouTubes?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517724</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>jitterman</author>
	<datestamp>1261394820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Because TPM is for kids" does not suffice.</p></div><p>Okay. One reason you didn't like this that I infer from what you wrote: you don't get the insinuations the guy is making. He points out that Lucas SAYS the film is for kids, while demonstrating for you that clearly there are parts that children don't get and never will give a rat's ass about. He doesn't say it - he shows you. Several times. The point is pretty clear that this film tries to be a number of things at once, and because it does it fails at all of them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Because TPM is for kids " does not suffice.Okay .
One reason you did n't like this that I infer from what you wrote : you do n't get the insinuations the guy is making .
He points out that Lucas SAYS the film is for kids , while demonstrating for you that clearly there are parts that children do n't get and never will give a rat 's ass about .
He does n't say it - he shows you .
Several times .
The point is pretty clear that this film tries to be a number of things at once , and because it does it fails at all of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Because TPM is for kids" does not suffice.Okay.
One reason you didn't like this that I infer from what you wrote: you don't get the insinuations the guy is making.
He points out that Lucas SAYS the film is for kids, while demonstrating for you that clearly there are parts that children don't get and never will give a rat's ass about.
He doesn't say it - he shows you.
Several times.
The point is pretty clear that this film tries to be a number of things at once, and because it does it fails at all of them.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515296</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846</id>
	<title>Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261423740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>So from watching the first part, the guy raises some good points.  And we've all ripped apart Episode One because it's so easy.  Some of the points he raises are the fact that we can't identify with anyone and therefore any character that's supposed to be the protagonist fails at being a protagonist.  He also points out that George Lucas doesn't have big enough genitals and intelligence as a director to be straying from this standard model.  On top of that, it's George Lucas which we can all safely assume there was no second guessing King Midas on set or off set.  These are problems.  The other thing addressed in part one of this series is that the characters are by and large featureless in the prequel while anyone can talk for two hours about Han Solo's character.  Good luck describing Qui Gon.  <br> <br>

Now that said, I wish the voice acting for this review had been better.  Or at least normal.  The guy intentionally mispronounces everything.  It was funny the first time but after a bit he just comes off as a one trick pony looking for a half million views on YouTube (well done, by the way).  The pitch inflections actually recall me to a sort of idiot valley girl a la Alicia Silverstone.  I think if the effort had been more serious he might have gotten a message out to Lucas and maybe even Hollywood but he needs to put his own humor on it so that's his choice.  Now, this isn't the MST3K style of ripping apart a movie, it's deeper than that and I just wish it had been presented in a serious manner.  Yes, you can still be funny when you're being serious, that's what makes great teachers, speakers and orators.  <br> <br>

One important caveat that this review overlooks is that many of his criticisms center on complexities and different approaches that Lucas took (before that he wanted to take <a href="http://www.cinemablend.com/new/David-Lynch-On-Refusing-To-Direct-Return-Of-The-Jedi-16071.html" title="cinemablend.com" rel="nofollow">different approaches when he asked Lynch to direct RotJ</a> [cinemablend.com]).  Just because Lucas screwed it up doesn't make these things bad.  Lucas gambled and he lost.  He lost everything.  He made something different but he wasn't good enough at what he did to ensure that it was still great.  In software development, you generally start with the basics and master them before you begin an epic endeavor into parts unknown.  <br> <br>

Lucas made bad choices and failed.  If you need to relinquish another seventy minutes of your life to this failure.  Watch this series.  The odds are you already know all of this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So from watching the first part , the guy raises some good points .
And we 've all ripped apart Episode One because it 's so easy .
Some of the points he raises are the fact that we ca n't identify with anyone and therefore any character that 's supposed to be the protagonist fails at being a protagonist .
He also points out that George Lucas does n't have big enough genitals and intelligence as a director to be straying from this standard model .
On top of that , it 's George Lucas which we can all safely assume there was no second guessing King Midas on set or off set .
These are problems .
The other thing addressed in part one of this series is that the characters are by and large featureless in the prequel while anyone can talk for two hours about Han Solo 's character .
Good luck describing Qui Gon .
Now that said , I wish the voice acting for this review had been better .
Or at least normal .
The guy intentionally mispronounces everything .
It was funny the first time but after a bit he just comes off as a one trick pony looking for a half million views on YouTube ( well done , by the way ) .
The pitch inflections actually recall me to a sort of idiot valley girl a la Alicia Silverstone .
I think if the effort had been more serious he might have gotten a message out to Lucas and maybe even Hollywood but he needs to put his own humor on it so that 's his choice .
Now , this is n't the MST3K style of ripping apart a movie , it 's deeper than that and I just wish it had been presented in a serious manner .
Yes , you can still be funny when you 're being serious , that 's what makes great teachers , speakers and orators .
One important caveat that this review overlooks is that many of his criticisms center on complexities and different approaches that Lucas took ( before that he wanted to take different approaches when he asked Lynch to direct RotJ [ cinemablend.com ] ) .
Just because Lucas screwed it up does n't make these things bad .
Lucas gambled and he lost .
He lost everything .
He made something different but he was n't good enough at what he did to ensure that it was still great .
In software development , you generally start with the basics and master them before you begin an epic endeavor into parts unknown .
Lucas made bad choices and failed .
If you need to relinquish another seventy minutes of your life to this failure .
Watch this series .
The odds are you already know all of this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So from watching the first part, the guy raises some good points.
And we've all ripped apart Episode One because it's so easy.
Some of the points he raises are the fact that we can't identify with anyone and therefore any character that's supposed to be the protagonist fails at being a protagonist.
He also points out that George Lucas doesn't have big enough genitals and intelligence as a director to be straying from this standard model.
On top of that, it's George Lucas which we can all safely assume there was no second guessing King Midas on set or off set.
These are problems.
The other thing addressed in part one of this series is that the characters are by and large featureless in the prequel while anyone can talk for two hours about Han Solo's character.
Good luck describing Qui Gon.
Now that said, I wish the voice acting for this review had been better.
Or at least normal.
The guy intentionally mispronounces everything.
It was funny the first time but after a bit he just comes off as a one trick pony looking for a half million views on YouTube (well done, by the way).
The pitch inflections actually recall me to a sort of idiot valley girl a la Alicia Silverstone.
I think if the effort had been more serious he might have gotten a message out to Lucas and maybe even Hollywood but he needs to put his own humor on it so that's his choice.
Now, this isn't the MST3K style of ripping apart a movie, it's deeper than that and I just wish it had been presented in a serious manner.
Yes, you can still be funny when you're being serious, that's what makes great teachers, speakers and orators.
One important caveat that this review overlooks is that many of his criticisms center on complexities and different approaches that Lucas took (before that he wanted to take different approaches when he asked Lynch to direct RotJ [cinemablend.com]).
Just because Lucas screwed it up doesn't make these things bad.
Lucas gambled and he lost.
He lost everything.
He made something different but he wasn't good enough at what he did to ensure that it was still great.
In software development, you generally start with the basics and master them before you begin an epic endeavor into parts unknown.
Lucas made bad choices and failed.
If you need to relinquish another seventy minutes of your life to this failure.
Watch this series.
The odds are you already know all of this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30533420</id>
	<title>Re:Midichlorines turn magic into biology.</title>
	<author>Narcogen</author>
	<datestamp>1259787360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I find it interesting that in a Star Trek film, Midichlorines (sp?) would have been not only accepted, but <i>expected.</i>  Magic isn't allowed to exist in Star Trek.</p><p>In Star Wars, however, Magic is the rule.  It's not allowed to be understood or reduced into a discrete and measurable phenomenon.  It has to remain romantic and awe-inspiring.</p><p>Cross the line, (in either the Trek or Wars story universe), and it is taken as a grave offense.  I was annoyed by it as much as anybody.  But I do have to stop and ask, "Why?"  In fact, I find this little feature of our culture enormously tremendously interesting.  -Technology geeks are perfectly happy with magic; they <i>want</i> it, are enraptured by it, but only when it is safely contained and labeled within the fiction box.  Outside that box, it is immediately despised and attacked even at the mere suggestion that it might have some bearing on our real world.  Yes, this is a bit of an axe grinding, but nonetheless, it remains a point of un-answered curiosity for me.</p></div><p>I think a lot of viewers point out the magic vs science angle with regard to the inclusion of midichlorians in the prequels, but I think the real motivation for the objection comes from elsewhere, and it's another area of stark contrast between Star Wars and Star Trek.</p><p>The arc of the first trilogy can be seen partially as a repudiation of the idea that the sins of the father are the sins of the son. Luke is horrified at the revelation that his evil nemesis is his father, but he ultimately comes to terms with that (with Kenobi's help), rejects the choice his father made, and ultimately offers his father forgiveness. Luke successfully escapes his father's fate. So while we are certainly led to believe that heredity is a factor in one's ability to use the Force, it is not impossible to escape destiny.</p><p>Enter the midichlorians. Anakin is the prophesied one, supposedly the product of a union between some random slave woman on Tatooine and the Force itself, with the highest count of midiwhatevers ever seen. He is *destined* to bring balance to the Force. Yoda and the Jedi Council, however, see bad things on the horizon. I guess they don't see that before things can get better, they have to get worse-- that Vader ultimately *does* bring balance by betraying Palpatine in order to save Luke at the conclusion of the final film.</p><p>In a sense it's a rehabilitation of Oedipus. Vader had to do what he did back then, just as he has to save Luke at the end. Without the first, the latter would not have been necessary.</p><p>Midichlorians is the magical grey goo in the hypodermic that Lucas uses to extract heroism from the franchise and replace it with destiny.</p><p>This couldn't possibly be more different from Star Trek, which is ultimately the world's most perfect meritocracy, where family connections get you nothing and everybody has to stand on their own two feet and make a name for themselves. None of the TNG crewmembers are blood relations of the original series crewmembers. Family members of the crew, if they want active roles, have to prove their worth. Nobody is destined for anything (for the most part, there are exceptions-- it's hard to do as many episodes of as many series, plus feature films, from 1966 to date without being inconsistent).</p><p>If the Star Trek universe behaved the way the Star Wars universe did, captaincy of the Enterprise would be hereditary. Picard would be the great-great-grandson of Kirk (or whatever) who was originally drummed out of the service for insubordination, and later on they would meet and Picard would find out that Kirk only disobeyed orders in order to save his family (and HIS ship and HIS crew) and really wasn't that bad a guy after all, just hotheaded, impatient, and... well, a little egomaniacal.</p><p>The Skywalkers are a kind of space royalty in a universe where it's who you are, not what you know or do, that counts. Star Trek has no place for such people-- everybody gets an equal opportunity, no more, no less, and it is not a recognized fact that some people are just born innately superior by virtue of having more microorganisms.</p><p>Even if it WERE true, Dr. Crusher would prescribe regular midichlorian injections for every crewmember found to have Heredtitary Midichlorian Deficiency Syndrome and everybody would just get on with their lives normally. It's not that the inclusion of midichlorians replaces magic with science within the context of Star Wars; it's that it is presented as a scientific problem with no scientific solution. If the Star Wars universe treated gravity the same way it treated midichlorians, there would be no space travel.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I find it interesting that in a Star Trek film , Midichlorines ( sp ?
) would have been not only accepted , but expected .
Magic is n't allowed to exist in Star Trek.In Star Wars , however , Magic is the rule .
It 's not allowed to be understood or reduced into a discrete and measurable phenomenon .
It has to remain romantic and awe-inspiring.Cross the line , ( in either the Trek or Wars story universe ) , and it is taken as a grave offense .
I was annoyed by it as much as anybody .
But I do have to stop and ask , " Why ?
" In fact , I find this little feature of our culture enormously tremendously interesting .
-Technology geeks are perfectly happy with magic ; they want it , are enraptured by it , but only when it is safely contained and labeled within the fiction box .
Outside that box , it is immediately despised and attacked even at the mere suggestion that it might have some bearing on our real world .
Yes , this is a bit of an axe grinding , but nonetheless , it remains a point of un-answered curiosity for me.I think a lot of viewers point out the magic vs science angle with regard to the inclusion of midichlorians in the prequels , but I think the real motivation for the objection comes from elsewhere , and it 's another area of stark contrast between Star Wars and Star Trek.The arc of the first trilogy can be seen partially as a repudiation of the idea that the sins of the father are the sins of the son .
Luke is horrified at the revelation that his evil nemesis is his father , but he ultimately comes to terms with that ( with Kenobi 's help ) , rejects the choice his father made , and ultimately offers his father forgiveness .
Luke successfully escapes his father 's fate .
So while we are certainly led to believe that heredity is a factor in one 's ability to use the Force , it is not impossible to escape destiny.Enter the midichlorians .
Anakin is the prophesied one , supposedly the product of a union between some random slave woman on Tatooine and the Force itself , with the highest count of midiwhatevers ever seen .
He is * destined * to bring balance to the Force .
Yoda and the Jedi Council , however , see bad things on the horizon .
I guess they do n't see that before things can get better , they have to get worse-- that Vader ultimately * does * bring balance by betraying Palpatine in order to save Luke at the conclusion of the final film.In a sense it 's a rehabilitation of Oedipus .
Vader had to do what he did back then , just as he has to save Luke at the end .
Without the first , the latter would not have been necessary.Midichlorians is the magical grey goo in the hypodermic that Lucas uses to extract heroism from the franchise and replace it with destiny.This could n't possibly be more different from Star Trek , which is ultimately the world 's most perfect meritocracy , where family connections get you nothing and everybody has to stand on their own two feet and make a name for themselves .
None of the TNG crewmembers are blood relations of the original series crewmembers .
Family members of the crew , if they want active roles , have to prove their worth .
Nobody is destined for anything ( for the most part , there are exceptions-- it 's hard to do as many episodes of as many series , plus feature films , from 1966 to date without being inconsistent ) .If the Star Trek universe behaved the way the Star Wars universe did , captaincy of the Enterprise would be hereditary .
Picard would be the great-great-grandson of Kirk ( or whatever ) who was originally drummed out of the service for insubordination , and later on they would meet and Picard would find out that Kirk only disobeyed orders in order to save his family ( and HIS ship and HIS crew ) and really was n't that bad a guy after all , just hotheaded , impatient , and... well , a little egomaniacal.The Skywalkers are a kind of space royalty in a universe where it 's who you are , not what you know or do , that counts .
Star Trek has no place for such people-- everybody gets an equal opportunity , no more , no less , and it is not a recognized fact that some people are just born innately superior by virtue of having more microorganisms.Even if it WERE true , Dr. Crusher would prescribe regular midichlorian injections for every crewmember found to have Heredtitary Midichlorian Deficiency Syndrome and everybody would just get on with their lives normally .
It 's not that the inclusion of midichlorians replaces magic with science within the context of Star Wars ; it 's that it is presented as a scientific problem with no scientific solution .
If the Star Wars universe treated gravity the same way it treated midichlorians , there would be no space travel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find it interesting that in a Star Trek film, Midichlorines (sp?
) would have been not only accepted, but expected.
Magic isn't allowed to exist in Star Trek.In Star Wars, however, Magic is the rule.
It's not allowed to be understood or reduced into a discrete and measurable phenomenon.
It has to remain romantic and awe-inspiring.Cross the line, (in either the Trek or Wars story universe), and it is taken as a grave offense.
I was annoyed by it as much as anybody.
But I do have to stop and ask, "Why?
"  In fact, I find this little feature of our culture enormously tremendously interesting.
-Technology geeks are perfectly happy with magic; they want it, are enraptured by it, but only when it is safely contained and labeled within the fiction box.
Outside that box, it is immediately despised and attacked even at the mere suggestion that it might have some bearing on our real world.
Yes, this is a bit of an axe grinding, but nonetheless, it remains a point of un-answered curiosity for me.I think a lot of viewers point out the magic vs science angle with regard to the inclusion of midichlorians in the prequels, but I think the real motivation for the objection comes from elsewhere, and it's another area of stark contrast between Star Wars and Star Trek.The arc of the first trilogy can be seen partially as a repudiation of the idea that the sins of the father are the sins of the son.
Luke is horrified at the revelation that his evil nemesis is his father, but he ultimately comes to terms with that (with Kenobi's help), rejects the choice his father made, and ultimately offers his father forgiveness.
Luke successfully escapes his father's fate.
So while we are certainly led to believe that heredity is a factor in one's ability to use the Force, it is not impossible to escape destiny.Enter the midichlorians.
Anakin is the prophesied one, supposedly the product of a union between some random slave woman on Tatooine and the Force itself, with the highest count of midiwhatevers ever seen.
He is *destined* to bring balance to the Force.
Yoda and the Jedi Council, however, see bad things on the horizon.
I guess they don't see that before things can get better, they have to get worse-- that Vader ultimately *does* bring balance by betraying Palpatine in order to save Luke at the conclusion of the final film.In a sense it's a rehabilitation of Oedipus.
Vader had to do what he did back then, just as he has to save Luke at the end.
Without the first, the latter would not have been necessary.Midichlorians is the magical grey goo in the hypodermic that Lucas uses to extract heroism from the franchise and replace it with destiny.This couldn't possibly be more different from Star Trek, which is ultimately the world's most perfect meritocracy, where family connections get you nothing and everybody has to stand on their own two feet and make a name for themselves.
None of the TNG crewmembers are blood relations of the original series crewmembers.
Family members of the crew, if they want active roles, have to prove their worth.
Nobody is destined for anything (for the most part, there are exceptions-- it's hard to do as many episodes of as many series, plus feature films, from 1966 to date without being inconsistent).If the Star Trek universe behaved the way the Star Wars universe did, captaincy of the Enterprise would be hereditary.
Picard would be the great-great-grandson of Kirk (or whatever) who was originally drummed out of the service for insubordination, and later on they would meet and Picard would find out that Kirk only disobeyed orders in order to save his family (and HIS ship and HIS crew) and really wasn't that bad a guy after all, just hotheaded, impatient, and... well, a little egomaniacal.The Skywalkers are a kind of space royalty in a universe where it's who you are, not what you know or do, that counts.
Star Trek has no place for such people-- everybody gets an equal opportunity, no more, no less, and it is not a recognized fact that some people are just born innately superior by virtue of having more microorganisms.Even if it WERE true, Dr. Crusher would prescribe regular midichlorian injections for every crewmember found to have Heredtitary Midichlorian Deficiency Syndrome and everybody would just get on with their lives normally.
It's not that the inclusion of midichlorians replaces magic with science within the context of Star Wars; it's that it is presented as a scientific problem with no scientific solution.
If the Star Wars universe treated gravity the same way it treated midichlorians, there would be no space travel.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518952</id>
	<title>Re:Every film is flawed</title>
	<author>roc97007</author>
	<datestamp>1261404240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&gt; Read Mr. Cranky and he will make the greatest film on the planet sound terrible. Every film is flawed.
</p><p>
That's true.
</p><p>
&gt; The prequels on the whole failed to live up to lofty expectations. But they aren't terrible on a Batman and Robin scale either.
</p><p>
Um, yeah, I'd say they were, for a lot of the same reasons.  A too-complicated plot, too many characters who were just empty suits, bad acting, bad scriptwriting, and not one likable character with the possible exception of Alfred.  Um, I'm sorry, I mean... Yoda.  No I don't, he started to piss me off about half way through the film...  Sorry, I can't think of one.
</p><p>
&gt; I don't understand the massive vitrol aimed at films that ultimately aren't half as terrible as people would like us to believe.
</p><p>
I'm not certain what people you're talking about.  I personally went through the classic five stages of grief starting with the final spittle-flying cheek-wobble of whoever-the-hell-that-was, when I realized there weren't any scenes left that might redeem what I had just witnessed.  I certainly didn't need anyone to tell me that I had just seen shite dripping down the screen for 133 minutes.
</p><p>
&gt; The same person who wrote this probably sat through Transformers 2 without having an aneurysm. Really, which film was worse?
</p><p>
That's a good question.  I think the trivial answer is that Transformers 2 had Megan Fox.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Read Mr. Cranky and he will make the greatest film on the planet sound terrible .
Every film is flawed .
That 's true .
&gt; The prequels on the whole failed to live up to lofty expectations .
But they are n't terrible on a Batman and Robin scale either .
Um , yeah , I 'd say they were , for a lot of the same reasons .
A too-complicated plot , too many characters who were just empty suits , bad acting , bad scriptwriting , and not one likable character with the possible exception of Alfred .
Um , I 'm sorry , I mean... Yoda. No I do n't , he started to piss me off about half way through the film... Sorry , I ca n't think of one .
&gt; I do n't understand the massive vitrol aimed at films that ultimately are n't half as terrible as people would like us to believe .
I 'm not certain what people you 're talking about .
I personally went through the classic five stages of grief starting with the final spittle-flying cheek-wobble of whoever-the-hell-that-was , when I realized there were n't any scenes left that might redeem what I had just witnessed .
I certainly did n't need anyone to tell me that I had just seen shite dripping down the screen for 133 minutes .
&gt; The same person who wrote this probably sat through Transformers 2 without having an aneurysm .
Really , which film was worse ?
That 's a good question .
I think the trivial answer is that Transformers 2 had Megan Fox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
&gt; Read Mr. Cranky and he will make the greatest film on the planet sound terrible.
Every film is flawed.
That's true.
&gt; The prequels on the whole failed to live up to lofty expectations.
But they aren't terrible on a Batman and Robin scale either.
Um, yeah, I'd say they were, for a lot of the same reasons.
A too-complicated plot, too many characters who were just empty suits, bad acting, bad scriptwriting, and not one likable character with the possible exception of Alfred.
Um, I'm sorry, I mean... Yoda.  No I don't, he started to piss me off about half way through the film...  Sorry, I can't think of one.
&gt; I don't understand the massive vitrol aimed at films that ultimately aren't half as terrible as people would like us to believe.
I'm not certain what people you're talking about.
I personally went through the classic five stages of grief starting with the final spittle-flying cheek-wobble of whoever-the-hell-that-was, when I realized there weren't any scenes left that might redeem what I had just witnessed.
I certainly didn't need anyone to tell me that I had just seen shite dripping down the screen for 133 minutes.
&gt; The same person who wrote this probably sat through Transformers 2 without having an aneurysm.
Really, which film was worse?
That's a good question.
I think the trivial answer is that Transformers 2 had Megan Fox.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516244</id>
	<title>Re:Don't look now</title>
	<author>Temujin\_12</author>
	<datestamp>1261387140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Just, as a child, you saw the film *once*, then bought the toys, and had a ton of fun playing with the toys in the schoolyard, making up your own adventures. That is where your fond memories lie.</p></div><p>True, true. Growing up, I didn't have Star-Wars action-toys. But if by "toys" you include X-Wing and Tie Fighter computer games then, yes, I had Star Wars toys.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>You are disappointed because you are no longer a child, and can no longer revel in your imagination, and are upset that Lucas can't replace your lost youth.</p></div><p>My playing with my son seems to prove you wrong on this point. Having kids is a great excuse to become a kid again.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just , as a child , you saw the film * once * , then bought the toys , and had a ton of fun playing with the toys in the schoolyard , making up your own adventures .
That is where your fond memories lie.True , true .
Growing up , I did n't have Star-Wars action-toys .
But if by " toys " you include X-Wing and Tie Fighter computer games then , yes , I had Star Wars toys.You are disappointed because you are no longer a child , and can no longer revel in your imagination , and are upset that Lucas ca n't replace your lost youth.My playing with my son seems to prove you wrong on this point .
Having kids is a great excuse to become a kid again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just, as a child, you saw the film *once*, then bought the toys, and had a ton of fun playing with the toys in the schoolyard, making up your own adventures.
That is where your fond memories lie.True, true.
Growing up, I didn't have Star-Wars action-toys.
But if by "toys" you include X-Wing and Tie Fighter computer games then, yes, I had Star Wars toys.You are disappointed because you are no longer a child, and can no longer revel in your imagination, and are upset that Lucas can't replace your lost youth.My playing with my son seems to prove you wrong on this point.
Having kids is a great excuse to become a kid again.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518554</id>
	<title>Sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261400460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>30 years after the originals, people still quote the movie and parody it. Nobody does it with the prequels. Popular is NOT the same as iconic. The original three movies are part of culture. If it was music it would like The Beatles and Elvis. It is not just about the movies themselves, but that they changed the industry. George Lucas and all the people who made it happen added a whole new segment to the industry. Some products go beyond just the money they earned. And some, no matter how much they earned, never make an impression beyond their economic lifespan.
</p><p>Quick example. Michael Jackson vs Mc Hammer. Mc who? Exactly. At the time the guy claimed that he was even bigger then MJ. Eheh.
</p><p>If you studie movies, then you must study A New Hope and its effects. TPM you can forget about other then its earning figures. It is just another blockbuster, but there are dozens of them each year and I bet you can't even remember the ones from 10 years ago. Be honest, if it wasn't for the originals, would you even remember TPM?
</p><p>And you can already see how unsuccesful TPM is. Lucasarts swore up and down that AFTER the prequels all future game products would be based on the prequels. That changed quickly enough with "The force unleashed" and even an entire new era being created for Kotor and the upcoming MMO. 10 years after the originals people still wanted more. 10 years after TPM and people want less. Go ask a 18 year old what their favorite movie was. Bet you it ain't TPM.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>30 years after the originals , people still quote the movie and parody it .
Nobody does it with the prequels .
Popular is NOT the same as iconic .
The original three movies are part of culture .
If it was music it would like The Beatles and Elvis .
It is not just about the movies themselves , but that they changed the industry .
George Lucas and all the people who made it happen added a whole new segment to the industry .
Some products go beyond just the money they earned .
And some , no matter how much they earned , never make an impression beyond their economic lifespan .
Quick example .
Michael Jackson vs Mc Hammer .
Mc who ?
Exactly. At the time the guy claimed that he was even bigger then MJ .
Eheh . If you studie movies , then you must study A New Hope and its effects .
TPM you can forget about other then its earning figures .
It is just another blockbuster , but there are dozens of them each year and I bet you ca n't even remember the ones from 10 years ago .
Be honest , if it was n't for the originals , would you even remember TPM ?
And you can already see how unsuccesful TPM is .
Lucasarts swore up and down that AFTER the prequels all future game products would be based on the prequels .
That changed quickly enough with " The force unleashed " and even an entire new era being created for Kotor and the upcoming MMO .
10 years after the originals people still wanted more .
10 years after TPM and people want less .
Go ask a 18 year old what their favorite movie was .
Bet you it ai n't TPM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>30 years after the originals, people still quote the movie and parody it.
Nobody does it with the prequels.
Popular is NOT the same as iconic.
The original three movies are part of culture.
If it was music it would like The Beatles and Elvis.
It is not just about the movies themselves, but that they changed the industry.
George Lucas and all the people who made it happen added a whole new segment to the industry.
Some products go beyond just the money they earned.
And some, no matter how much they earned, never make an impression beyond their economic lifespan.
Quick example.
Michael Jackson vs Mc Hammer.
Mc who?
Exactly. At the time the guy claimed that he was even bigger then MJ.
Eheh.
If you studie movies, then you must study A New Hope and its effects.
TPM you can forget about other then its earning figures.
It is just another blockbuster, but there are dozens of them each year and I bet you can't even remember the ones from 10 years ago.
Be honest, if it wasn't for the originals, would you even remember TPM?
And you can already see how unsuccesful TPM is.
Lucasarts swore up and down that AFTER the prequels all future game products would be based on the prequels.
That changed quickly enough with "The force unleashed" and even an entire new era being created for Kotor and the upcoming MMO.
10 years after the originals people still wanted more.
10 years after TPM and people want less.
Go ask a 18 year old what their favorite movie was.
Bet you it ain't TPM.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516546</id>
	<title>Re:Every film is flawed</title>
	<author>pete\_norm</author>
	<datestamp>1261388580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Transformer 2...Is that the movies with the hot babe running in the desert??? I liked that movie!   Not sure why they decided to include robots in it though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Transformer 2...Is that the movies with the hot babe running in the desert ? ? ?
I liked that movie !
Not sure why they decided to include robots in it though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Transformer 2...Is that the movies with the hot babe running in the desert???
I liked that movie!
Not sure why they decided to include robots in it though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516358</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261387620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Younger kids identify more and are responsible (indirectly) for many more toy sales.</i> <br> <br>
I'm not sure who said it first, but I think there's a lot of truth in the statement that no kid wants to be robin, they all want to be batman. As a kid, I recall always hating the "kid character". I never identified with him. Or, if I did, that was a bad thing. I didn't watch transformers, for example, to understanding of the young male viewpoint in a world with giant robots. I just wanted to be a giant robot who could shoot lazers. Or be a part of gi joe, not the dumbass kids they saved.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Younger kids identify more and are responsible ( indirectly ) for many more toy sales .
I 'm not sure who said it first , but I think there 's a lot of truth in the statement that no kid wants to be robin , they all want to be batman .
As a kid , I recall always hating the " kid character " .
I never identified with him .
Or , if I did , that was a bad thing .
I did n't watch transformers , for example , to understanding of the young male viewpoint in a world with giant robots .
I just wanted to be a giant robot who could shoot lazers .
Or be a part of gi joe , not the dumbass kids they saved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Younger kids identify more and are responsible (indirectly) for many more toy sales.
I'm not sure who said it first, but I think there's a lot of truth in the statement that no kid wants to be robin, they all want to be batman.
As a kid, I recall always hating the "kid character".
I never identified with him.
Or, if I did, that was a bad thing.
I didn't watch transformers, for example, to understanding of the young male viewpoint in a world with giant robots.
I just wanted to be a giant robot who could shoot lazers.
Or be a part of gi joe, not the dumbass kids they saved.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515380</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>foo fighter</author>
	<datestamp>1261426080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>One important caveat that this review overlooks is that many of his criticisms center on complexities and different approaches that Lucas took (before that he wanted to take different approaches when he asked Lynch to direct RotJ).</i></p><p>I don't know what this sentence is supposed to mean, exactly.</p><p><i>Just because Lucas screwed it up doesn't make these things bad.</i></p><p>Well, yes it does. <i>The Phantom Menace</i> is bad because Lucas screwed up. And the critic does explicitly address the fact that it is not just Lucas's fault, but the fault of the editors, producers, screenwriters, and everyone else who were sycophants instead of creative partners willing to say no and challenge Lucas when he screwed up.</p><p><i>Lucas gambled and he lost. He lost everything.</i></p><p>Lucas didn't gamble anything. And he sure as frak hasn't "lost everything". He's still in the top 25 of Forbes Celebrity 100. He pulled in $170 million last year and has an estimated net worth of around $3 billion (that's three-fraking-BILLION-with-a-"B").</p><p><i>In software development, you generally start with the basics and master them before you begin an epic endeavor into parts unknown.</i></p><p>How did this vacuous comment make it to +5?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One important caveat that this review overlooks is that many of his criticisms center on complexities and different approaches that Lucas took ( before that he wanted to take different approaches when he asked Lynch to direct RotJ ) .I do n't know what this sentence is supposed to mean , exactly.Just because Lucas screwed it up does n't make these things bad.Well , yes it does .
The Phantom Menace is bad because Lucas screwed up .
And the critic does explicitly address the fact that it is not just Lucas 's fault , but the fault of the editors , producers , screenwriters , and everyone else who were sycophants instead of creative partners willing to say no and challenge Lucas when he screwed up.Lucas gambled and he lost .
He lost everything.Lucas did n't gamble anything .
And he sure as frak has n't " lost everything " .
He 's still in the top 25 of Forbes Celebrity 100 .
He pulled in $ 170 million last year and has an estimated net worth of around $ 3 billion ( that 's three-fraking-BILLION-with-a- " B " ) .In software development , you generally start with the basics and master them before you begin an epic endeavor into parts unknown.How did this vacuous comment make it to + 5 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One important caveat that this review overlooks is that many of his criticisms center on complexities and different approaches that Lucas took (before that he wanted to take different approaches when he asked Lynch to direct RotJ).I don't know what this sentence is supposed to mean, exactly.Just because Lucas screwed it up doesn't make these things bad.Well, yes it does.
The Phantom Menace is bad because Lucas screwed up.
And the critic does explicitly address the fact that it is not just Lucas's fault, but the fault of the editors, producers, screenwriters, and everyone else who were sycophants instead of creative partners willing to say no and challenge Lucas when he screwed up.Lucas gambled and he lost.
He lost everything.Lucas didn't gamble anything.
And he sure as frak hasn't "lost everything".
He's still in the top 25 of Forbes Celebrity 100.
He pulled in $170 million last year and has an estimated net worth of around $3 billion (that's three-fraking-BILLION-with-a-"B").In software development, you generally start with the basics and master them before you begin an epic endeavor into parts unknown.How did this vacuous comment make it to +5?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515310</id>
	<title>Lucas made the best film Lucas could make</title>
	<author>TiggertheMad</author>
	<datestamp>1261425720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>TPM was lame when compared to the original Star Wars trilogy</i>
<br> <br>
While I would agree with most people that TPM wasn't as strong as the first three films, I often wonder what sort of movie Lucas would have to have made to appease the fanboi masses. After all, the 'holy trinity' was a cornerstone of growing up for many and its awful hard to compete with deeply ingrained nostalgia and twenty years of anticipation.
<br> <br>
Could TPM been better? Sure. Could TPM been what everyone imagined? I don't know, its awful hard to compete with childhood memories...</htmltext>
<tokenext>TPM was lame when compared to the original Star Wars trilogy While I would agree with most people that TPM was n't as strong as the first three films , I often wonder what sort of movie Lucas would have to have made to appease the fanboi masses .
After all , the 'holy trinity ' was a cornerstone of growing up for many and its awful hard to compete with deeply ingrained nostalgia and twenty years of anticipation .
Could TPM been better ?
Sure. Could TPM been what everyone imagined ?
I do n't know , its awful hard to compete with childhood memories.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TPM was lame when compared to the original Star Wars trilogy
 
While I would agree with most people that TPM wasn't as strong as the first three films, I often wonder what sort of movie Lucas would have to have made to appease the fanboi masses.
After all, the 'holy trinity' was a cornerstone of growing up for many and its awful hard to compete with deeply ingrained nostalgia and twenty years of anticipation.
Could TPM been better?
Sure. Could TPM been what everyone imagined?
I don't know, its awful hard to compete with childhood memories...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519688</id>
	<title>Re:midichlorians</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261409940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><b> <i>And I've always wondered why people think that it is cool to use single width fonts in their posts.  If people wanted to read text like that they would configure their browsers to display text that way.  I suspect that it is just another form of karma-whoring, formatting posts so as to grab attention.</i></b></p><p><b><i>Pretty annoying if you ask me.</i> </b></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And I 've always wondered why people think that it is cool to use single width fonts in their posts .
If people wanted to read text like that they would configure their browsers to display text that way .
I suspect that it is just another form of karma-whoring , formatting posts so as to grab attention.Pretty annoying if you ask me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> And I've always wondered why people think that it is cool to use single width fonts in their posts.
If people wanted to read text like that they would configure their browsers to display text that way.
I suspect that it is just another form of karma-whoring, formatting posts so as to grab attention.Pretty annoying if you ask me. </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517956</id>
	<title>Resisting the temptations of Lucas</title>
	<author>mnmlst</author>
	<datestamp>1261396260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I find it a bit weird, but I have known some people who heard TPM was so bad they just refused to see Episodes I, II, II perhaps as a way to avoid spoiling their image of Star Wars.</p><p>Personally, I saw Star Wars as an 11 year old and was pretty much knocked to the floor.  Episode V was great, but Episode VI disappointed.  TPM was so abysmal it took about 4 years before I could muster the stomach to see it again.  I still can't believe they cast Jake Lloyd over Haley Joel Osmont who was spectacular in "The Sixth Sense" and "AI".  Things were looking up a bit with Episode II, but I kept my expectations at immediate post-TPM levels before seeing Episode III.  Honestly, I think Episode III is my favorite now.  The FX are incredible and to finally close the loop to Annakin's descent was very very satisfying.  Ian McDiarimid's performance was mesmerizing.</p><p>If you've never seen it, find the short video clip "Lucas in Love" for some good laughs.  Like "Shakespeare in Love", it is intended to show where the Big Ideas came from.  When do we get Episodes VII, VIII, and IX, Mr. Lucas?  Can you please let someone else direct them?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I find it a bit weird , but I have known some people who heard TPM was so bad they just refused to see Episodes I , II , II perhaps as a way to avoid spoiling their image of Star Wars.Personally , I saw Star Wars as an 11 year old and was pretty much knocked to the floor .
Episode V was great , but Episode VI disappointed .
TPM was so abysmal it took about 4 years before I could muster the stomach to see it again .
I still ca n't believe they cast Jake Lloyd over Haley Joel Osmont who was spectacular in " The Sixth Sense " and " AI " .
Things were looking up a bit with Episode II , but I kept my expectations at immediate post-TPM levels before seeing Episode III .
Honestly , I think Episode III is my favorite now .
The FX are incredible and to finally close the loop to Annakin 's descent was very very satisfying .
Ian McDiarimid 's performance was mesmerizing.If you 've never seen it , find the short video clip " Lucas in Love " for some good laughs .
Like " Shakespeare in Love " , it is intended to show where the Big Ideas came from .
When do we get Episodes VII , VIII , and IX , Mr. Lucas ? Can you please let someone else direct them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find it a bit weird, but I have known some people who heard TPM was so bad they just refused to see Episodes I, II, II perhaps as a way to avoid spoiling their image of Star Wars.Personally, I saw Star Wars as an 11 year old and was pretty much knocked to the floor.
Episode V was great, but Episode VI disappointed.
TPM was so abysmal it took about 4 years before I could muster the stomach to see it again.
I still can't believe they cast Jake Lloyd over Haley Joel Osmont who was spectacular in "The Sixth Sense" and "AI".
Things were looking up a bit with Episode II, but I kept my expectations at immediate post-TPM levels before seeing Episode III.
Honestly, I think Episode III is my favorite now.
The FX are incredible and to finally close the loop to Annakin's descent was very very satisfying.
Ian McDiarimid's performance was mesmerizing.If you've never seen it, find the short video clip "Lucas in Love" for some good laughs.
Like "Shakespeare in Love", it is intended to show where the Big Ideas came from.
When do we get Episodes VII, VIII, and IX, Mr. Lucas?  Can you please let someone else direct them?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516690</id>
	<title>Absolutely spot on</title>
	<author>filekutter</author>
	<datestamp>1261389360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have to admit I was disappointed with the second Star Wars, and then a disdain took over as the story lines, dialogue, and elements of the movies were more and more
dumbed down "for" children. For that reason I never even bothered to pirate/download the phantom menace. I'd been insulted enough times. Well done and more entertaining
than the movie you reviewed! Thank you!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to admit I was disappointed with the second Star Wars , and then a disdain took over as the story lines , dialogue , and elements of the movies were more and more dumbed down " for " children .
For that reason I never even bothered to pirate/download the phantom menace .
I 'd been insulted enough times .
Well done and more entertaining than the movie you reviewed !
Thank you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to admit I was disappointed with the second Star Wars, and then a disdain took over as the story lines, dialogue, and elements of the movies were more and more
dumbed down "for" children.
For that reason I never even bothered to pirate/download the phantom menace.
I'd been insulted enough times.
Well done and more entertaining
than the movie you reviewed!
Thank you!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518804</id>
	<title>What's interesting about all this...</title>
	<author>roc97007</author>
	<datestamp>1261402980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Let's go back to 1977.  My dad and step-mom go to Star Wars with me.  They hate it.  They think it's trite, the acting is wooden, the plot is predictable, that if it weren't for the special effects it would have disappeared without a trace.  And to a certain extent they were right.
</p><p>
Flash forward to 1999.  Us original fans have grown up, but we're still fans and we're lining up to see the first Star Wars film in a decade and a half.  And... it sucks.  It's trite, predictable, wooden, and leans heavily on special effects.
</p><p>
So, I have to ask myself, is it because I'm seeing Episode I as an adult, with an adult's expectations, and have lost the childlike innocence with which I watched the first film?
</p><p>
That's a fair question.  The answer is no.  I was in my twenties in 1977.  I wasn't exactly brimming with childlike innocence.  Besides, Menace didn't have only the flaws of the first film, it was also overly complicated, had incomprehensible plot holes, and didn't have one likable character, flaws that the original Star Wars demonstrably did not have.
</p><p>
But, you know, it's a grey area.  I think that to say Star Wars was a character driven film that succeeded despite the absence of digital effects, is misremembering what we were all saying when we came out of the theater that Spring in 1977.  "I never thought I'd see anything like that on the screen", not "I really thought Hamill portrayed Luke's spiritual growth in a believable fashion".

Star Wars was an effects-driven film that succeeded despite it's flaws.  The Phantom Menace was all the bad things in Star Wars, hugely exaggerated.  The flaws of the original film and the dependency on effects magnified ten-fold, plus a bunch of new flaws.  What was amazing to me was that Lucas did not figure it out from the backlash, and bulled on to make two more unwatchable films.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's go back to 1977 .
My dad and step-mom go to Star Wars with me .
They hate it .
They think it 's trite , the acting is wooden , the plot is predictable , that if it were n't for the special effects it would have disappeared without a trace .
And to a certain extent they were right .
Flash forward to 1999 .
Us original fans have grown up , but we 're still fans and we 're lining up to see the first Star Wars film in a decade and a half .
And... it sucks .
It 's trite , predictable , wooden , and leans heavily on special effects .
So , I have to ask myself , is it because I 'm seeing Episode I as an adult , with an adult 's expectations , and have lost the childlike innocence with which I watched the first film ?
That 's a fair question .
The answer is no .
I was in my twenties in 1977 .
I was n't exactly brimming with childlike innocence .
Besides , Menace did n't have only the flaws of the first film , it was also overly complicated , had incomprehensible plot holes , and did n't have one likable character , flaws that the original Star Wars demonstrably did not have .
But , you know , it 's a grey area .
I think that to say Star Wars was a character driven film that succeeded despite the absence of digital effects , is misremembering what we were all saying when we came out of the theater that Spring in 1977 .
" I never thought I 'd see anything like that on the screen " , not " I really thought Hamill portrayed Luke 's spiritual growth in a believable fashion " .
Star Wars was an effects-driven film that succeeded despite it 's flaws .
The Phantom Menace was all the bad things in Star Wars , hugely exaggerated .
The flaws of the original film and the dependency on effects magnified ten-fold , plus a bunch of new flaws .
What was amazing to me was that Lucas did not figure it out from the backlash , and bulled on to make two more unwatchable films .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Let's go back to 1977.
My dad and step-mom go to Star Wars with me.
They hate it.
They think it's trite, the acting is wooden, the plot is predictable, that if it weren't for the special effects it would have disappeared without a trace.
And to a certain extent they were right.
Flash forward to 1999.
Us original fans have grown up, but we're still fans and we're lining up to see the first Star Wars film in a decade and a half.
And... it sucks.
It's trite, predictable, wooden, and leans heavily on special effects.
So, I have to ask myself, is it because I'm seeing Episode I as an adult, with an adult's expectations, and have lost the childlike innocence with which I watched the first film?
That's a fair question.
The answer is no.
I was in my twenties in 1977.
I wasn't exactly brimming with childlike innocence.
Besides, Menace didn't have only the flaws of the first film, it was also overly complicated, had incomprehensible plot holes, and didn't have one likable character, flaws that the original Star Wars demonstrably did not have.
But, you know, it's a grey area.
I think that to say Star Wars was a character driven film that succeeded despite the absence of digital effects, is misremembering what we were all saying when we came out of the theater that Spring in 1977.
"I never thought I'd see anything like that on the screen", not "I really thought Hamill portrayed Luke's spiritual growth in a believable fashion".
Star Wars was an effects-driven film that succeeded despite it's flaws.
The Phantom Menace was all the bad things in Star Wars, hugely exaggerated.
The flaws of the original film and the dependency on effects magnified ten-fold, plus a bunch of new flaws.
What was amazing to me was that Lucas did not figure it out from the backlash, and bulled on to make two more unwatchable films.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516954</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>mujadaddy</author>
	<datestamp>1261390680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So I take it you're not in the "grandkids left their toys in my basement" demographic?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So I take it you 're not in the " grandkids left their toys in my basement " demographic ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I take it you're not in the "grandkids left their toys in my basement" demographic?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519614</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>CensorshipDonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1261409280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just because it's true doesn't mean the film directors realized that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just because it 's true does n't mean the film directors realized that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just because it's true doesn't mean the film directors realized that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515150</id>
	<title>Re:SWHS?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261425120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> It was terrible, but it wasn't even the worst Christmas special that year! That distinction goes to Shields and Yarnell at Disneyworld. Mimes, for God's sake!</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Brett</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It was terrible , but it was n't even the worst Christmas special that year !
That distinction goes to Shields and Yarnell at Disneyworld .
Mimes , for God 's sake !
      Brett</tokentext>
<sentencetext> It was terrible, but it wasn't even the worst Christmas special that year!
That distinction goes to Shields and Yarnell at Disneyworld.
Mimes, for God's sake!
      Brett</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516576</id>
	<title>Re:SWHS?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261388760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I still haven't seen the Holiday Special, but I've heard from a very reliable source that it is so terrible that there are no words in any language on Earth that sufficiently describe it.</p></div></blockquote><p>
"Echuta!!"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I still have n't seen the Holiday Special , but I 've heard from a very reliable source that it is so terrible that there are no words in any language on Earth that sufficiently describe it .
" Echuta ! ! "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still haven't seen the Holiday Special, but I've heard from a very reliable source that it is so terrible that there are no words in any language on Earth that sufficiently describe it.
"Echuta!!"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518506</id>
	<title>Why George Lucas made a pig's ear of the film</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261400040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"You can write this stuff," Harrison Ford famously complained about the Star Wars script to Lucas during filming back then, "but you can't make me say it."<br>What saved the first (fourth) film was that George Lucas had not got the special effects that he wanted for the movie he wanted to make so he had to scale back to something credible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" You can write this stuff , " Harrison Ford famously complained about the Star Wars script to Lucas during filming back then , " but you ca n't make me say it .
" What saved the first ( fourth ) film was that George Lucas had not got the special effects that he wanted for the movie he wanted to make so he had to scale back to something credible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"You can write this stuff," Harrison Ford famously complained about the Star Wars script to Lucas during filming back then, "but you can't make me say it.
"What saved the first (fourth) film was that George Lucas had not got the special effects that he wanted for the movie he wanted to make so he had to scale back to something credible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516658</id>
	<title>Do or do not, there is no try</title>
	<author>lessthanpi</author>
	<datestamp>1261389240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm disappointed in all you Star Wars Nerds. Look how you've let George Lucas tear us apart. We used to band together and mock treckies, now we sit behind screens and badmouth our own universe.<br><br>Still, out of principle I have not seen the new Star Trek, and I'm ashamed at any of you whom identify with Star Wars that would waste any credits on that bantha fodder.<br><br>Be faithful to the Star Wars Universe, for as George Lucas is still a capitalist, another trilogy in 10 years, come to us, will.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm disappointed in all you Star Wars Nerds .
Look how you 've let George Lucas tear us apart .
We used to band together and mock treckies , now we sit behind screens and badmouth our own universe.Still , out of principle I have not seen the new Star Trek , and I 'm ashamed at any of you whom identify with Star Wars that would waste any credits on that bantha fodder.Be faithful to the Star Wars Universe , for as George Lucas is still a capitalist , another trilogy in 10 years , come to us , will .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm disappointed in all you Star Wars Nerds.
Look how you've let George Lucas tear us apart.
We used to band together and mock treckies, now we sit behind screens and badmouth our own universe.Still, out of principle I have not seen the new Star Trek, and I'm ashamed at any of you whom identify with Star Wars that would waste any credits on that bantha fodder.Be faithful to the Star Wars Universe, for as George Lucas is still a capitalist, another trilogy in 10 years, come to us, will.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517038</id>
	<title>Seriously....</title>
	<author>NerveGas</author>
	<datestamp>1261391100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"So you might like the characters.... you know, if you're stupid."</p><p>Funny and smart.  This guy is good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" So you might like the characters.... you know , if you 're stupid .
" Funny and smart .
This guy is good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"So you might like the characters.... you know, if you're stupid.
"Funny and smart.
This guy is good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30523528</id>
	<title>Re:Box Office</title>
	<author>Andtalath</author>
	<datestamp>1261496760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't see why a movie that seemed to be fun, that a whole lot of people already had a huge emotional investment (for a movie in) which contains elements to make kids want to see it several times (it's mostly kids who want to go several times to the cinema to see the same movie) couldn't be successful without being a decent move.</p><p>The movie is horribly poorly written, directed, it has no real characterization, it makes little sense if you do try to make sense of it and it has a bunch of other problems as well.</p><p>So, no, a movie isn't redeemed since it made a lot of money, however, the reason it's so universally reviled is JUST BECAUSE you know that that piece of crap made more money than so many jewels.<br>If it had failed abysmally, no-one would've cared, now, it's the highest grossing SW movie and is also easily the worst of them.</p><p>That's what's wrong with todays movie industry, the hype is what makes the movie successful in the only thing which is important to the managers, their income.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't see why a movie that seemed to be fun , that a whole lot of people already had a huge emotional investment ( for a movie in ) which contains elements to make kids want to see it several times ( it 's mostly kids who want to go several times to the cinema to see the same movie ) could n't be successful without being a decent move.The movie is horribly poorly written , directed , it has no real characterization , it makes little sense if you do try to make sense of it and it has a bunch of other problems as well.So , no , a movie is n't redeemed since it made a lot of money , however , the reason it 's so universally reviled is JUST BECAUSE you know that that piece of crap made more money than so many jewels.If it had failed abysmally , no-one would 've cared , now , it 's the highest grossing SW movie and is also easily the worst of them.That 's what 's wrong with todays movie industry , the hype is what makes the movie successful in the only thing which is important to the managers , their income .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't see why a movie that seemed to be fun, that a whole lot of people already had a huge emotional investment (for a movie in) which contains elements to make kids want to see it several times (it's mostly kids who want to go several times to the cinema to see the same movie) couldn't be successful without being a decent move.The movie is horribly poorly written, directed, it has no real characterization, it makes little sense if you do try to make sense of it and it has a bunch of other problems as well.So, no, a movie isn't redeemed since it made a lot of money, however, the reason it's so universally reviled is JUST BECAUSE you know that that piece of crap made more money than so many jewels.If it had failed abysmally, no-one would've cared, now, it's the highest grossing SW movie and is also easily the worst of them.That's what's wrong with todays movie industry, the hype is what makes the movie successful in the only thing which is important to the managers, their income.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516100</id>
	<title>Re:midichlorians</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261386480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am not so sure that the Old Republic Jedi had this right. Maybe they *thought* that midichlorians imparted Force powers, but it was actually more of a correlative effect than causative. Maybe it was even a way to insure that Anakin (who was most likely created by Sidious' former master) was chosen by the Jedi Council for training. Interesting fictional conspiracy theory...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not so sure that the Old Republic Jedi had this right .
Maybe they * thought * that midichlorians imparted Force powers , but it was actually more of a correlative effect than causative .
Maybe it was even a way to insure that Anakin ( who was most likely created by Sidious ' former master ) was chosen by the Jedi Council for training .
Interesting fictional conspiracy theory.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not so sure that the Old Republic Jedi had this right.
Maybe they *thought* that midichlorians imparted Force powers, but it was actually more of a correlative effect than causative.
Maybe it was even a way to insure that Anakin (who was most likely created by Sidious' former master) was chosen by the Jedi Council for training.
Interesting fictional conspiracy theory...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515584</id>
	<title>So am I normal or something?</title>
	<author>Quiet\_Desperation</author>
	<datestamp>1261427040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I moped around, talking to no one, for almost two weeks.</p></div><p>Really? I mean... really?</p><p>I left the theater, commented to my friends that Lucas had lost the formula somewhere along the way, and got on with life. I rented the next two. End of story.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I moped around , talking to no one , for almost two weeks.Really ?
I mean... really ? I left the theater , commented to my friends that Lucas had lost the formula somewhere along the way , and got on with life .
I rented the next two .
End of story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I moped around, talking to no one, for almost two weeks.Really?
I mean... really?I left the theater, commented to my friends that Lucas had lost the formula somewhere along the way, and got on with life.
I rented the next two.
End of story.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515252</id>
	<title>Jar Jar redeemed himself</title>
	<author>benchbri</author>
	<datestamp>1261425420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd just like to point out that Jar Jar -alone- allowed the creation of the Galactic Empire.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd just like to point out that Jar Jar -alone- allowed the creation of the Galactic Empire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd just like to point out that Jar Jar -alone- allowed the creation of the Galactic Empire.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517580</id>
	<title>Re:Different Audience</title>
	<author>supersloshy</author>
	<datestamp>1261393860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because the kids would only be there for Jarjar and lightsaber fights; everything else just goes in one ear and out the other (believe me, I'm a victim of this too).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the kids would only be there for Jarjar and lightsaber fights ; everything else just goes in one ear and out the other ( believe me , I 'm a victim of this too ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the kids would only be there for Jarjar and lightsaber fights; everything else just goes in one ear and out the other (believe me, I'm a victim of this too).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515128</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>NimbleSquirrel</author>
	<datestamp>1261425000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So from watching the first part,</p></div><p>So you didn't watch the whole thing?? Your three paragraph diatraibe is rather wothless if you didn't watch the whole thing. The guy does know a thing or two about making film, and what makes this review funny isn't just ripping apart The Phantom Menace (which in itself isn't hard to do), but the way he does it and the way it is revealed there is something else about the reviewer. While this review makes some serious points pulling apart TPM, it is not a serious review itself.
<br>
How about you watch the whole thing and then start your diatribe?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So from watching the first part,So you did n't watch the whole thing ? ?
Your three paragraph diatraibe is rather wothless if you did n't watch the whole thing .
The guy does know a thing or two about making film , and what makes this review funny is n't just ripping apart The Phantom Menace ( which in itself is n't hard to do ) , but the way he does it and the way it is revealed there is something else about the reviewer .
While this review makes some serious points pulling apart TPM , it is not a serious review itself .
How about you watch the whole thing and then start your diatribe ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So from watching the first part,So you didn't watch the whole thing??
Your three paragraph diatraibe is rather wothless if you didn't watch the whole thing.
The guy does know a thing or two about making film, and what makes this review funny isn't just ripping apart The Phantom Menace (which in itself isn't hard to do), but the way he does it and the way it is revealed there is something else about the reviewer.
While this review makes some serious points pulling apart TPM, it is not a serious review itself.
How about you watch the whole thing and then start your diatribe?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514828</id>
	<title>Demo Reel</title>
	<author>bsDaemon</author>
	<datestamp>1261423680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought it was awesome at first, because it seemed to just be a demo reel for SGI and Alias|WaveFront.  Then I realized that it was a "real" movie, and that it was supposed to be Star Wars... then I realized how bad it was.  Apparently so did the rest of the world, and they seem to have taken it out on SGI.  Poor SGI... it wasn't their fault!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought it was awesome at first , because it seemed to just be a demo reel for SGI and Alias | WaveFront .
Then I realized that it was a " real " movie , and that it was supposed to be Star Wars... then I realized how bad it was .
Apparently so did the rest of the world , and they seem to have taken it out on SGI .
Poor SGI... it was n't their fault !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought it was awesome at first, because it seemed to just be a demo reel for SGI and Alias|WaveFront.
Then I realized that it was a "real" movie, and that it was supposed to be Star Wars... then I realized how bad it was.
Apparently so did the rest of the world, and they seem to have taken it out on SGI.
Poor SGI... it wasn't their fault!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517706</id>
	<title>Re:It's actually a pity ...</title>
	<author>secretcurse</author>
	<datestamp>1261394700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And you'd think The Matrix could've gotten a sequel or two.  Too bad that never happened...</htmltext>
<tokenext>And you 'd think The Matrix could 've gotten a sequel or two .
Too bad that never happened.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And you'd think The Matrix could've gotten a sequel or two.
Too bad that never happened...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515412</id>
	<title>Re:It's actually a pity ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261426200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>... that after <b>the Emire Stirkes Back</b>, no more Star Wars movies were ever made.</p></div><p>Fixed that for you. I can't believe you're actually putting the awful Rancor monster, Sarlac pit, and the Ewoks over JarJar and a whiny little brat. Imho, Ep1 was better than Ep6 (and I'm not saying Ep6 was a bad movie).</p><p>Granted all of the new movies each had at least three gratuitous video game scenes, but overall the prequels were still some of the best scifi+action+adventure movies of the last decade. They're certainly better than the Harry Potter series. And granted, there were much better scifi movies (e.g. Donnie Darko and Serenity), and much better adventure movies (e.g. Gladiator, LotR), and I don't think the prequels are even in the top 50 of the decade, but they're still good movies. I suspect people only rate Ep6 higher because of our nostalgia for the original cast, because after having watched them all on DVD I promise you the prequels are better than Ep6.</p><p>The real problem is: we all grew up over the past 2-3 decades and forgot how to appreciate the genre. That and we had such high expectations for what the movies <em>could have been</em> that we felt personal injury when they weren't top 20 of all time movies.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... that after the Emire Stirkes Back , no more Star Wars movies were ever made.Fixed that for you .
I ca n't believe you 're actually putting the awful Rancor monster , Sarlac pit , and the Ewoks over JarJar and a whiny little brat .
Imho , Ep1 was better than Ep6 ( and I 'm not saying Ep6 was a bad movie ) .Granted all of the new movies each had at least three gratuitous video game scenes , but overall the prequels were still some of the best scifi + action + adventure movies of the last decade .
They 're certainly better than the Harry Potter series .
And granted , there were much better scifi movies ( e.g .
Donnie Darko and Serenity ) , and much better adventure movies ( e.g .
Gladiator , LotR ) , and I do n't think the prequels are even in the top 50 of the decade , but they 're still good movies .
I suspect people only rate Ep6 higher because of our nostalgia for the original cast , because after having watched them all on DVD I promise you the prequels are better than Ep6.The real problem is : we all grew up over the past 2-3 decades and forgot how to appreciate the genre .
That and we had such high expectations for what the movies could have been that we felt personal injury when they were n't top 20 of all time movies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... that after the Emire Stirkes Back, no more Star Wars movies were ever made.Fixed that for you.
I can't believe you're actually putting the awful Rancor monster, Sarlac pit, and the Ewoks over JarJar and a whiny little brat.
Imho, Ep1 was better than Ep6 (and I'm not saying Ep6 was a bad movie).Granted all of the new movies each had at least three gratuitous video game scenes, but overall the prequels were still some of the best scifi+action+adventure movies of the last decade.
They're certainly better than the Harry Potter series.
And granted, there were much better scifi movies (e.g.
Donnie Darko and Serenity), and much better adventure movies (e.g.
Gladiator, LotR), and I don't think the prequels are even in the top 50 of the decade, but they're still good movies.
I suspect people only rate Ep6 higher because of our nostalgia for the original cast, because after having watched them all on DVD I promise you the prequels are better than Ep6.The real problem is: we all grew up over the past 2-3 decades and forgot how to appreciate the genre.
That and we had such high expectations for what the movies could have been that we felt personal injury when they weren't top 20 of all time movies.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515276</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>zwede</author>
	<datestamp>1261425600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Good luck describing Qui Gon.</p> </div><p>Who? Oh, wait... good point.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good luck describing Qui Gon .
Who ? Oh , wait... good point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good luck describing Qui Gon.
Who? Oh, wait... good point.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519828</id>
	<title>Great Example of memory Abuse</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261411080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"That is what George Lucas became to his own films. After a great piece of artwork has become culturally accepted, it should be cast in stone, and be preserved as it is."</p><p>It is. They're called "memories". The only reason all copies of the original trilogy have been burned is so those memories can go on to have a "rose colored" look.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" That is what George Lucas became to his own films .
After a great piece of artwork has become culturally accepted , it should be cast in stone , and be preserved as it is .
" It is .
They 're called " memories " .
The only reason all copies of the original trilogy have been burned is so those memories can go on to have a " rose colored " look .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"That is what George Lucas became to his own films.
After a great piece of artwork has become culturally accepted, it should be cast in stone, and be preserved as it is.
"It is.
They're called "memories".
The only reason all copies of the original trilogy have been burned is so those memories can go on to have a "rose colored" look.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515352</id>
	<title>Re:Demo Reel</title>
	<author>girlintraining</author>
	<datestamp>1261425960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Apparently so did the rest of the world, and they seem to have taken it out on SGI. Poor SGI... it wasn't their fault!</p></div><p>SGI didn't fall from glory because of a three-coiled Lucas-branded turd. It failed because it made repeated strategic mistakes in the market. When 3D hit the desktop, they sat there watching people build clusters out of gaming consoles and making boards out of commodity components -- management was convinced it wasn't a threat. Then they made several attempts to change platforms to various Intel chips, and released Linux workstations. People didn't take them seriously after that (Yes, I am saying on slashdot that using Linux was a <i>strategic mistake</i>). They were nearly dead, delisted from the NYC, shareholders demanding they fold -- when they finally reversed course, hired a crisis team, and assessed the damage. But it was too late -- the economy didn't allow for a recovery, and the vulnerable shell of SGI was bought out, and its brand identity assumed by a company specializing in rackmount servers.</p><p>SGI died because management lost focus, got complacent, and fried like an egg in a frying pan in the recession. Besides, Hollywood was never SGI's main market -- it was the government and scientific institutions. For every CG animation you see, there's ten weather modeling simulations, and other massively-parallel graphic-intensive processes.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apparently so did the rest of the world , and they seem to have taken it out on SGI .
Poor SGI... it was n't their fault ! SGI did n't fall from glory because of a three-coiled Lucas-branded turd .
It failed because it made repeated strategic mistakes in the market .
When 3D hit the desktop , they sat there watching people build clusters out of gaming consoles and making boards out of commodity components -- management was convinced it was n't a threat .
Then they made several attempts to change platforms to various Intel chips , and released Linux workstations .
People did n't take them seriously after that ( Yes , I am saying on slashdot that using Linux was a strategic mistake ) .
They were nearly dead , delisted from the NYC , shareholders demanding they fold -- when they finally reversed course , hired a crisis team , and assessed the damage .
But it was too late -- the economy did n't allow for a recovery , and the vulnerable shell of SGI was bought out , and its brand identity assumed by a company specializing in rackmount servers.SGI died because management lost focus , got complacent , and fried like an egg in a frying pan in the recession .
Besides , Hollywood was never SGI 's main market -- it was the government and scientific institutions .
For every CG animation you see , there 's ten weather modeling simulations , and other massively-parallel graphic-intensive processes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apparently so did the rest of the world, and they seem to have taken it out on SGI.
Poor SGI... it wasn't their fault!SGI didn't fall from glory because of a three-coiled Lucas-branded turd.
It failed because it made repeated strategic mistakes in the market.
When 3D hit the desktop, they sat there watching people build clusters out of gaming consoles and making boards out of commodity components -- management was convinced it wasn't a threat.
Then they made several attempts to change platforms to various Intel chips, and released Linux workstations.
People didn't take them seriously after that (Yes, I am saying on slashdot that using Linux was a strategic mistake).
They were nearly dead, delisted from the NYC, shareholders demanding they fold -- when they finally reversed course, hired a crisis team, and assessed the damage.
But it was too late -- the economy didn't allow for a recovery, and the vulnerable shell of SGI was bought out, and its brand identity assumed by a company specializing in rackmount servers.SGI died because management lost focus, got complacent, and fried like an egg in a frying pan in the recession.
Besides, Hollywood was never SGI's main market -- it was the government and scientific institutions.
For every CG animation you see, there's ten weather modeling simulations, and other massively-parallel graphic-intensive processes.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516148</id>
	<title>Re:Grow Up</title>
	<author>domatic</author>
	<datestamp>1261386720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The first three at least work as summer action/adventure movies.  Sure the Ewoks were a bit hard to take in the third but these movies weren't any worse than say RoboCop or Terminator.    And I'm speaking of the original un-"enhanced" versions.  The "enhancements" to the first three manage to shovel in a good bit of the suckness the prequels had.   And I was there in the seventies and more than kids liked them.  I knew many adults who watched them in the theatre multiple times.  But take the fast moving lightly explained at most premises of the first movie and add:</p><p>Annoying little kid characters.<br>Annoying mockery of Jamaicans character.<br>Nasty explicatory things like "midichlorians" and trade disputes<br>cgi that doesn't exceed the original effects in many respects (hint here: if I get the feeling I'm watching someone play Wing Commander IV...)<br>excruciatingly bad dialog (or at least WAY MORE of it)<br>A drawn out love story<br>thin political debate</p><p>and take away:</p><p>Anything remotely resembling a character you want to care about.</p><p>Ah hell, I could go on for a long time.  Trash up the summer movie aspect with buckets of that sort of vomit and all you have left is something that is for VERY easily pleased little kids.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first three at least work as summer action/adventure movies .
Sure the Ewoks were a bit hard to take in the third but these movies were n't any worse than say RoboCop or Terminator .
And I 'm speaking of the original un- " enhanced " versions .
The " enhancements " to the first three manage to shovel in a good bit of the suckness the prequels had .
And I was there in the seventies and more than kids liked them .
I knew many adults who watched them in the theatre multiple times .
But take the fast moving lightly explained at most premises of the first movie and add : Annoying little kid characters.Annoying mockery of Jamaicans character.Nasty explicatory things like " midichlorians " and trade disputescgi that does n't exceed the original effects in many respects ( hint here : if I get the feeling I 'm watching someone play Wing Commander IV... ) excruciatingly bad dialog ( or at least WAY MORE of it ) A drawn out love storythin political debateand take away : Anything remotely resembling a character you want to care about.Ah hell , I could go on for a long time .
Trash up the summer movie aspect with buckets of that sort of vomit and all you have left is something that is for VERY easily pleased little kids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first three at least work as summer action/adventure movies.
Sure the Ewoks were a bit hard to take in the third but these movies weren't any worse than say RoboCop or Terminator.
And I'm speaking of the original un-"enhanced" versions.
The "enhancements" to the first three manage to shovel in a good bit of the suckness the prequels had.
And I was there in the seventies and more than kids liked them.
I knew many adults who watched them in the theatre multiple times.
But take the fast moving lightly explained at most premises of the first movie and add:Annoying little kid characters.Annoying mockery of Jamaicans character.Nasty explicatory things like "midichlorians" and trade disputescgi that doesn't exceed the original effects in many respects (hint here: if I get the feeling I'm watching someone play Wing Commander IV...)excruciatingly bad dialog (or at least WAY MORE of it)A drawn out love storythin political debateand take away:Anything remotely resembling a character you want to care about.Ah hell, I could go on for a long time.
Trash up the summer movie aspect with buckets of that sort of vomit and all you have left is something that is for VERY easily pleased little kids.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516984</id>
	<title>Re:It's actually a pity ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261390800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>... that after Return of the Jedi, no more Star Wars movies were ever made.</p></div><p>Probably for the best though...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... that after Return of the Jedi , no more Star Wars movies were ever made.Probably for the best though.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... that after Return of the Jedi, no more Star Wars movies were ever made.Probably for the best though...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515170</id>
	<title>Every film is flawed</title>
	<author>Enderandrew</author>
	<datestamp>1261425180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Read Mr. Cranky and he will make the greatest film on the planet sound terrible. Every film is flawed.</p><p>The prequels on the whole failed to live up to lofty expectations. But they aren't terrible on a Batman and Robin scale either.</p><p>Episode 1 ultimately fails due to a poorly written script. Not just in dialogue, but also in structure. A tentpole blockbuster film comes down to a series of meetings followed by a series of meetings. Lucas forget screenwriting 101 - show, don't tell. That being said, the saber duels in Episode 1 are the best of the series. The pod race sequence is pretty decent. The movie also invented 8.1 channel sound, didn't it?</p><p>I don't understand the massive vitrol aimed at films that ultimately aren't half as terrible as people would like us to believe. The same person who wrote this probably sat through Transformers 2 without having an aneurysm. Really, which film was worse?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Read Mr. Cranky and he will make the greatest film on the planet sound terrible .
Every film is flawed.The prequels on the whole failed to live up to lofty expectations .
But they are n't terrible on a Batman and Robin scale either.Episode 1 ultimately fails due to a poorly written script .
Not just in dialogue , but also in structure .
A tentpole blockbuster film comes down to a series of meetings followed by a series of meetings .
Lucas forget screenwriting 101 - show , do n't tell .
That being said , the saber duels in Episode 1 are the best of the series .
The pod race sequence is pretty decent .
The movie also invented 8.1 channel sound , did n't it ? I do n't understand the massive vitrol aimed at films that ultimately are n't half as terrible as people would like us to believe .
The same person who wrote this probably sat through Transformers 2 without having an aneurysm .
Really , which film was worse ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Read Mr. Cranky and he will make the greatest film on the planet sound terrible.
Every film is flawed.The prequels on the whole failed to live up to lofty expectations.
But they aren't terrible on a Batman and Robin scale either.Episode 1 ultimately fails due to a poorly written script.
Not just in dialogue, but also in structure.
A tentpole blockbuster film comes down to a series of meetings followed by a series of meetings.
Lucas forget screenwriting 101 - show, don't tell.
That being said, the saber duels in Episode 1 are the best of the series.
The pod race sequence is pretty decent.
The movie also invented 8.1 channel sound, didn't it?I don't understand the massive vitrol aimed at films that ultimately aren't half as terrible as people would like us to believe.
The same person who wrote this probably sat through Transformers 2 without having an aneurysm.
Really, which film was worse?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516296</id>
	<title>Re:Don't look now</title>
	<author>schon</author>
	<datestamp>1261387320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>All of the films sucked.</p></div><p>Sorry, but no.</p><p>My wife was 27 when I met her in the 1990s.   Although she was a huge movie fan, she hated science-fiction, and hadn't seen the Star Wars movies at all.   It took some convincing, but she finally agreed to watch them with me.  We rented "Star Wars", and watched it together.   She liked it so much that she insisted we go rent the other two the same day.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Detach yourself, and watch any of the films with a critical eye. They are all awful.</p></div><p>Done, and it turns out you're completely wrong.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>All of the films sucked.Sorry , but no.My wife was 27 when I met her in the 1990s .
Although she was a huge movie fan , she hated science-fiction , and had n't seen the Star Wars movies at all .
It took some convincing , but she finally agreed to watch them with me .
We rented " Star Wars " , and watched it together .
She liked it so much that she insisted we go rent the other two the same day.Detach yourself , and watch any of the films with a critical eye .
They are all awful.Done , and it turns out you 're completely wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All of the films sucked.Sorry, but no.My wife was 27 when I met her in the 1990s.
Although she was a huge movie fan, she hated science-fiction, and hadn't seen the Star Wars movies at all.
It took some convincing, but she finally agreed to watch them with me.
We rented "Star Wars", and watched it together.
She liked it so much that she insisted we go rent the other two the same day.Detach yourself, and watch any of the films with a critical eye.
They are all awful.Done, and it turns out you're completely wrong.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515376</id>
	<title>It sucked</title>
	<author>Mashhaster</author>
	<datestamp>1261426080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>How many words, how much time do you need to waste saying something anyone who saw it already knew?

It's like being trolled, in allowing yourself to be you have validated the troll.  Seeing the movie was time that I'll never get back.  Now they've made a pointless documentary about how bad it was, throwing good time after bad.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many words , how much time do you need to waste saying something anyone who saw it already knew ?
It 's like being trolled , in allowing yourself to be you have validated the troll .
Seeing the movie was time that I 'll never get back .
Now they 've made a pointless documentary about how bad it was , throwing good time after bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many words, how much time do you need to waste saying something anyone who saw it already knew?
It's like being trolled, in allowing yourself to be you have validated the troll.
Seeing the movie was time that I'll never get back.
Now they've made a pointless documentary about how bad it was, throwing good time after bad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515194</id>
	<title>Re:Different Audience</title>
	<author>BatGnat</author>
	<datestamp>1261425240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Blasphemer! Kill the Heretic!! Stone Him!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Blasphemer !
Kill the Heretic ! !
Stone Him ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blasphemer!
Kill the Heretic!!
Stone Him!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515204</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261425300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The pitch inflections actually recall me to a sort of idiot valley girl a la Alicia Silverstone.</p></div></blockquote><p> 
Actually, I think he's going for Buffalo Bill from <i>Silence of the Lambs</i>, with a bit of Ed Gein thrown in.  It's a bit that did not work for you,
apparently, but that keeps it from being too Comic Book Guy.  If that's what you want I'm sure there are hundreds such out there.  Once I spun up with it I liked this review.  <i>Chacun &agrave; son go&ucirc;t</i>.
<br>
He also has multi-part reviews of all of the TNG-cast Star Trek films (yes, in the same character), even more brutal than the Ep I takedown.  Good stuff.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The pitch inflections actually recall me to a sort of idiot valley girl a la Alicia Silverstone .
Actually , I think he 's going for Buffalo Bill from Silence of the Lambs , with a bit of Ed Gein thrown in .
It 's a bit that did not work for you , apparently , but that keeps it from being too Comic Book Guy .
If that 's what you want I 'm sure there are hundreds such out there .
Once I spun up with it I liked this review .
Chacun   son go   t .
He also has multi-part reviews of all of the TNG-cast Star Trek films ( yes , in the same character ) , even more brutal than the Ep I takedown .
Good stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The pitch inflections actually recall me to a sort of idiot valley girl a la Alicia Silverstone.
Actually, I think he's going for Buffalo Bill from Silence of the Lambs, with a bit of Ed Gein thrown in.
It's a bit that did not work for you,
apparently, but that keeps it from being too Comic Book Guy.
If that's what you want I'm sure there are hundreds such out there.
Once I spun up with it I liked this review.
Chacun à son goût.
He also has multi-part reviews of all of the TNG-cast Star Trek films (yes, in the same character), even more brutal than the Ep I takedown.
Good stuff.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30523648</id>
	<title>Re:Midichlorines turn magic into biology.</title>
	<author>Andtalath</author>
	<datestamp>1261497360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The reason is simple.
Star Wars is not, has never been and will never be science fiction.
It's an epic space saga.

Science fiction is all about understanding the implications of new technology and situations are supposed to make sense and everything is supposed to be able to be understood or have an easily obtainable explanation.

An epic space saga is meant to tell an epic story, anything not being a part of the story is irrelevant, you aren't supposed to look behind the curtain, you are supposed to see the wizard.

I like both genres, but I loathe it when they intermix since it's like my little pony coming and resurrecting Brad Pitts wife in the end of Seven.
It breaks the mood.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The reason is simple .
Star Wars is not , has never been and will never be science fiction .
It 's an epic space saga .
Science fiction is all about understanding the implications of new technology and situations are supposed to make sense and everything is supposed to be able to be understood or have an easily obtainable explanation .
An epic space saga is meant to tell an epic story , anything not being a part of the story is irrelevant , you are n't supposed to look behind the curtain , you are supposed to see the wizard .
I like both genres , but I loathe it when they intermix since it 's like my little pony coming and resurrecting Brad Pitts wife in the end of Seven .
It breaks the mood .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reason is simple.
Star Wars is not, has never been and will never be science fiction.
It's an epic space saga.
Science fiction is all about understanding the implications of new technology and situations are supposed to make sense and everything is supposed to be able to be understood or have an easily obtainable explanation.
An epic space saga is meant to tell an epic story, anything not being a part of the story is irrelevant, you aren't supposed to look behind the curtain, you are supposed to see the wizard.
I like both genres, but I loathe it when they intermix since it's like my little pony coming and resurrecting Brad Pitts wife in the end of Seven.
It breaks the mood.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516382</id>
	<title>compared to episode 4,5,6 ...</title>
	<author>farble1670</author>
	<datestamp>1261387740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the original star wars movies are pretty equivalent taking into account the time difference. painful acting, nice special effects. they both have the same story line, so i don't see how anyone can complain there. if anything, episodes 1,2,3 gave me more details, enough for me to really get into the star wars universe.</p><p>i think the real problem is that so today's critics are the ones that says episodes 4, 5, 6 when they were kids, and when they had a less critical mind to all of the same problems that exist in 1, 2, 3.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the original star wars movies are pretty equivalent taking into account the time difference .
painful acting , nice special effects .
they both have the same story line , so i do n't see how anyone can complain there .
if anything , episodes 1,2,3 gave me more details , enough for me to really get into the star wars universe.i think the real problem is that so today 's critics are the ones that says episodes 4 , 5 , 6 when they were kids , and when they had a less critical mind to all of the same problems that exist in 1 , 2 , 3 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the original star wars movies are pretty equivalent taking into account the time difference.
painful acting, nice special effects.
they both have the same story line, so i don't see how anyone can complain there.
if anything, episodes 1,2,3 gave me more details, enough for me to really get into the star wars universe.i think the real problem is that so today's critics are the ones that says episodes 4, 5, 6 when they were kids, and when they had a less critical mind to all of the same problems that exist in 1, 2, 3.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518278</id>
	<title>Re:Jar^2</title>
	<author>ucblockhead</author>
	<datestamp>1261398420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>See, this is why I love slashdot.  Someone points to an hour long evisceration of a movie, and someone immediately pops up with a comment that says that something that wasn't particularly complained about "isn't so bad" and gets rated 5 for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>See , this is why I love slashdot .
Someone points to an hour long evisceration of a movie , and someone immediately pops up with a comment that says that something that was n't particularly complained about " is n't so bad " and gets rated 5 for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See, this is why I love slashdot.
Someone points to an hour long evisceration of a movie, and someone immediately pops up with a comment that says that something that wasn't particularly complained about "isn't so bad" and gets rated 5 for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30520880</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1261421820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Those three points violate rule #1 of sci-fi action for kids - Marketability outweighs quality.</p></div><p>My son is 6. He saw the original Star Wars, Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi shortly before he saw Phantom Menace. He prefers any of the three over Phantom Menace. (RotJ is actually his favorite, but he also likes Empire.) Maybe he's just a discerning kid, but...</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Younger kids identify more and are responsible (indirectly) for many more toy sales.</p></div><p><div class="quote"><p>Action figures.</p></div><p>And yet, boys like to fight. That's just the way it is. Anakin does very little of that, and kids my son plays with have battle droids, Darth Maul, Obi Wan, etc. - no Anakin. Most of the kids don't even really realize the movie was "about" Anakin, from what I can tell.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Video games.</p></div><p> Those sucked unless they involved fighting. And yes, a 6 year old can tell the difference between "fun" and "un-fun". Racing games were -never- the preferred games for kids.</p><p>Sure, those were probably the motivations used in making the damn film, but they were flawed reasoning: they evidently didn't see the original films as kids, and don't have children of their own.</p><p>I had a crush on Princess Leah in the metal bikini when I was 7. How about you? My daughter wants to be a "princess"; she doesn't relate to Jar Jar, she relates to Princess Leah/Amadilia all dressed up pretty.</p><p>Leave the cartoon animation to the cartoons, please.</p><p>I'm just glad Lucas is done making more Star Wars movies.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Those three points violate rule # 1 of sci-fi action for kids - Marketability outweighs quality.My son is 6 .
He saw the original Star Wars , Empire Strikes Back , and Return of the Jedi shortly before he saw Phantom Menace .
He prefers any of the three over Phantom Menace .
( RotJ is actually his favorite , but he also likes Empire .
) Maybe he 's just a discerning kid , but...Younger kids identify more and are responsible ( indirectly ) for many more toy sales.Action figures.And yet , boys like to fight .
That 's just the way it is .
Anakin does very little of that , and kids my son plays with have battle droids , Darth Maul , Obi Wan , etc .
- no Anakin .
Most of the kids do n't even really realize the movie was " about " Anakin , from what I can tell.Video games .
Those sucked unless they involved fighting .
And yes , a 6 year old can tell the difference between " fun " and " un-fun " .
Racing games were -never- the preferred games for kids.Sure , those were probably the motivations used in making the damn film , but they were flawed reasoning : they evidently did n't see the original films as kids , and do n't have children of their own.I had a crush on Princess Leah in the metal bikini when I was 7 .
How about you ?
My daughter wants to be a " princess " ; she does n't relate to Jar Jar , she relates to Princess Leah/Amadilia all dressed up pretty.Leave the cartoon animation to the cartoons , please.I 'm just glad Lucas is done making more Star Wars movies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those three points violate rule #1 of sci-fi action for kids - Marketability outweighs quality.My son is 6.
He saw the original Star Wars, Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi shortly before he saw Phantom Menace.
He prefers any of the three over Phantom Menace.
(RotJ is actually his favorite, but he also likes Empire.
) Maybe he's just a discerning kid, but...Younger kids identify more and are responsible (indirectly) for many more toy sales.Action figures.And yet, boys like to fight.
That's just the way it is.
Anakin does very little of that, and kids my son plays with have battle droids, Darth Maul, Obi Wan, etc.
- no Anakin.
Most of the kids don't even really realize the movie was "about" Anakin, from what I can tell.Video games.
Those sucked unless they involved fighting.
And yes, a 6 year old can tell the difference between "fun" and "un-fun".
Racing games were -never- the preferred games for kids.Sure, those were probably the motivations used in making the damn film, but they were flawed reasoning: they evidently didn't see the original films as kids, and don't have children of their own.I had a crush on Princess Leah in the metal bikini when I was 7.
How about you?
My daughter wants to be a "princess"; she doesn't relate to Jar Jar, she relates to Princess Leah/Amadilia all dressed up pretty.Leave the cartoon animation to the cartoons, please.I'm just glad Lucas is done making more Star Wars movies.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515296</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261425660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How about you watch the whole thing and then start your diatribe?</p></div><p>I thought I made it pretty clear that if you want me to watch an hour and ten minute critique of a two hour and thirteen minute movie, you had better do a better job than what I saw in the first ten minutes.  Nothing groundbreaking was presented to me in the first ten minutes and on top of that I was getting pretty annoyed with the guy's intonation.  All I'm saying is that it's not my cup of tea.  If you found something worthy of note in part whatever that you think is brilliant, let's hear it.  <br> <br>

But who is he and what has he done to contribute to modern cinema?  He sure speaks like everyone's a fucking moron for not seeing all the problems with The Phantom Menace.  Yet I could have presented films where the <i>exact</i> techniques he criticizes actually work.  He himself shows some of these movies, why did it work in the Usual Suspects but not The Phantom Menace to leave the enemy confusingly hidden the whole time?  "Because TPM is for kids" does not suffice.  If I give you seventy minutes of my life, I expect a comprehensive analysis.  I stand by my statements and will not devote any more time to this review.  <br> <br>

We all know Lucas is no stranger to screwing with his old work.  Maybe now, a decade later, he'll hack apart something that <i>should</i> be hacked apart and rework TPM to have a five minute pod racing scene, no Jar Jar Binks and a whole lot more interesting development?  I think there are some good things in TPM but the bad things just overshadow anything worth watching.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about you watch the whole thing and then start your diatribe ? I thought I made it pretty clear that if you want me to watch an hour and ten minute critique of a two hour and thirteen minute movie , you had better do a better job than what I saw in the first ten minutes .
Nothing groundbreaking was presented to me in the first ten minutes and on top of that I was getting pretty annoyed with the guy 's intonation .
All I 'm saying is that it 's not my cup of tea .
If you found something worthy of note in part whatever that you think is brilliant , let 's hear it .
But who is he and what has he done to contribute to modern cinema ?
He sure speaks like everyone 's a fucking moron for not seeing all the problems with The Phantom Menace .
Yet I could have presented films where the exact techniques he criticizes actually work .
He himself shows some of these movies , why did it work in the Usual Suspects but not The Phantom Menace to leave the enemy confusingly hidden the whole time ?
" Because TPM is for kids " does not suffice .
If I give you seventy minutes of my life , I expect a comprehensive analysis .
I stand by my statements and will not devote any more time to this review .
We all know Lucas is no stranger to screwing with his old work .
Maybe now , a decade later , he 'll hack apart something that should be hacked apart and rework TPM to have a five minute pod racing scene , no Jar Jar Binks and a whole lot more interesting development ?
I think there are some good things in TPM but the bad things just overshadow anything worth watching .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about you watch the whole thing and then start your diatribe?I thought I made it pretty clear that if you want me to watch an hour and ten minute critique of a two hour and thirteen minute movie, you had better do a better job than what I saw in the first ten minutes.
Nothing groundbreaking was presented to me in the first ten minutes and on top of that I was getting pretty annoyed with the guy's intonation.
All I'm saying is that it's not my cup of tea.
If you found something worthy of note in part whatever that you think is brilliant, let's hear it.
But who is he and what has he done to contribute to modern cinema?
He sure speaks like everyone's a fucking moron for not seeing all the problems with The Phantom Menace.
Yet I could have presented films where the exact techniques he criticizes actually work.
He himself shows some of these movies, why did it work in the Usual Suspects but not The Phantom Menace to leave the enemy confusingly hidden the whole time?
"Because TPM is for kids" does not suffice.
If I give you seventy minutes of my life, I expect a comprehensive analysis.
I stand by my statements and will not devote any more time to this review.
We all know Lucas is no stranger to screwing with his old work.
Maybe now, a decade later, he'll hack apart something that should be hacked apart and rework TPM to have a five minute pod racing scene, no Jar Jar Binks and a whole lot more interesting development?
I think there are some good things in TPM but the bad things just overshadow anything worth watching.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518770</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261402680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But don't you often watch a scene in a movie and think that they have only put that in there because it transfers perfectly into a video game?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But do n't you often watch a scene in a movie and think that they have only put that in there because it transfers perfectly into a video game ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But don't you often watch a scene in a movie and think that they have only put that in there because it transfers perfectly into a video game?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516182</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515680</id>
	<title>Anonymous Cowards</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261427580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I couldn't get past the first 30 seconds of this bozo speaking with marbles in his mouth and using the f-bomb to ingratiate himself with the kiddies. Then I started to read the comments...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I could n't get past the first 30 seconds of this bozo speaking with marbles in his mouth and using the f-bomb to ingratiate himself with the kiddies .
Then I started to read the comments.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I couldn't get past the first 30 seconds of this bozo speaking with marbles in his mouth and using the f-bomb to ingratiate himself with the kiddies.
Then I started to read the comments...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518128</id>
	<title>Re:compared to episode 4,5,6 ...</title>
	<author>16K Ram Pack</author>
	<datestamp>1261397400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"i think the real problem is that so today's critics are the ones that says episodes 4, 5, 6 when they were kids, and when they had a less critical mind to all of the same problems that exist in 1, 2, 3."</i>
<p>That's a poor excuse for some poor films.</p><p>I can critically dismantle films as an adult, and while there's a couple of glaring plot holes in Star Wars, it works as a heroic myth. The Phantom Menace just doesn't have that. It has no main protagonist. It has poorly written characters. It has a convoluted, inexplicably complex plot. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" i think the real problem is that so today 's critics are the ones that says episodes 4 , 5 , 6 when they were kids , and when they had a less critical mind to all of the same problems that exist in 1 , 2 , 3 .
" That 's a poor excuse for some poor films.I can critically dismantle films as an adult , and while there 's a couple of glaring plot holes in Star Wars , it works as a heroic myth .
The Phantom Menace just does n't have that .
It has no main protagonist .
It has poorly written characters .
It has a convoluted , inexplicably complex plot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"i think the real problem is that so today's critics are the ones that says episodes 4, 5, 6 when they were kids, and when they had a less critical mind to all of the same problems that exist in 1, 2, 3.
"
That's a poor excuse for some poor films.I can critically dismantle films as an adult, and while there's a couple of glaring plot holes in Star Wars, it works as a heroic myth.
The Phantom Menace just doesn't have that.
It has no main protagonist.
It has poorly written characters.
It has a convoluted, inexplicably complex plot. </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514832</id>
	<title>cool story, bro</title>
	<author>Luke727</author>
	<datestamp>1261423680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BURIED!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BURIED !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BURIED!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515210</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>CeramicNuts</author>
	<datestamp>1261425300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think his review is brilliant, both delivery and content. Even the editing is funny. Haven't laughed so hard in a long time... His Star Trek movie reviews are great too.</p><p>What's wrong with your face?!?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think his review is brilliant , both delivery and content .
Even the editing is funny .
Have n't laughed so hard in a long time... His Star Trek movie reviews are great too.What 's wrong with your face ? !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think his review is brilliant, both delivery and content.
Even the editing is funny.
Haven't laughed so hard in a long time... His Star Trek movie reviews are great too.What's wrong with your face?!
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515690</id>
	<title>The Fight Scene w/ Darth Maul was awesome</title>
	<author>masmullin</author>
	<datestamp>1261427640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The fight scene didn't quite make up for the crappiness.  But it was damn fine action at the end.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The fight scene did n't quite make up for the crappiness .
But it was damn fine action at the end .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fight scene didn't quite make up for the crappiness.
But it was damn fine action at the end.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515960</id>
	<title>Re:Don't look now</title>
	<author>dzfoo</author>
	<datestamp>1261428960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interesting idea.  Except that it is not necessarily true.</p><p>As a child, I remember watching the first Star Wars movie over and over and over and over again.  I think at one time during my teens I counted 40 times, between multiple visits to the theater (since it kept being re-released every other year or so) and later owning it in VHS.  I remember liking a bit the other two but nothing like the first one, yet I also saw them many times over.</p><p>Now, over 30 years later, I still watch Star Wars once in a while, and I enjoy it very much.  To me it is an action-packed, fast-paced movie with a good story, like so many others I also enjoy.  During the years, my taste in films and appreciation of the art has expanded greatly, yet I still enjoy action movies, both old and new, once in a while--including, but not limited exclusively, to those from my childhood.</p><p>To me, the original Star Wars may not be a great and perfect film, but it is entertaining.  Plus the special and visual effects have stood rather well against the test of time (not to mention the sound effects!).  In contrast, there are many movies which I remember fondly from my childhood, in diverse genres, which I have tried to watch as an adult only to regret with utter agony.</p><p>Although I do admit that nostalgia takes a part in my appreciation of some things, it is mosts definitely <i>not</i> the only criteria that colors my view.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; -dZ.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting idea .
Except that it is not necessarily true.As a child , I remember watching the first Star Wars movie over and over and over and over again .
I think at one time during my teens I counted 40 times , between multiple visits to the theater ( since it kept being re-released every other year or so ) and later owning it in VHS .
I remember liking a bit the other two but nothing like the first one , yet I also saw them many times over.Now , over 30 years later , I still watch Star Wars once in a while , and I enjoy it very much .
To me it is an action-packed , fast-paced movie with a good story , like so many others I also enjoy .
During the years , my taste in films and appreciation of the art has expanded greatly , yet I still enjoy action movies , both old and new , once in a while--including , but not limited exclusively , to those from my childhood.To me , the original Star Wars may not be a great and perfect film , but it is entertaining .
Plus the special and visual effects have stood rather well against the test of time ( not to mention the sound effects ! ) .
In contrast , there are many movies which I remember fondly from my childhood , in diverse genres , which I have tried to watch as an adult only to regret with utter agony.Although I do admit that nostalgia takes a part in my appreciation of some things , it is mosts definitely not the only criteria that colors my view .
              -dZ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting idea.
Except that it is not necessarily true.As a child, I remember watching the first Star Wars movie over and over and over and over again.
I think at one time during my teens I counted 40 times, between multiple visits to the theater (since it kept being re-released every other year or so) and later owning it in VHS.
I remember liking a bit the other two but nothing like the first one, yet I also saw them many times over.Now, over 30 years later, I still watch Star Wars once in a while, and I enjoy it very much.
To me it is an action-packed, fast-paced movie with a good story, like so many others I also enjoy.
During the years, my taste in films and appreciation of the art has expanded greatly, yet I still enjoy action movies, both old and new, once in a while--including, but not limited exclusively, to those from my childhood.To me, the original Star Wars may not be a great and perfect film, but it is entertaining.
Plus the special and visual effects have stood rather well against the test of time (not to mention the sound effects!).
In contrast, there are many movies which I remember fondly from my childhood, in diverse genres, which I have tried to watch as an adult only to regret with utter agony.Although I do admit that nostalgia takes a part in my appreciation of some things, it is mosts definitely not the only criteria that colors my view.
              -dZ.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30522660</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>jonadab</author>
	<datestamp>1261489800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt; The first movies didn't suck like the last three<br><br>You didn't *notice* their suckiness, because back then you were accustomed to the assumption that if it was sci-fi or took place in space, ipso facto it must Hoover like a Shop Vac.  Up to that point most sci-fi featured cosmic rays as a major plot element, used actors straight out of drama school if you were lucky, and had robots and/or spaceships that were obviously made out of cardboard.  So sci-fi audiences were prepared to cut Star Wars a little slack.  When it had a real character-driven plot and real costumes and used real state-of-the-art (for the day) special effects and even featured a real professionally-composed sound track consisting of music written just for the film, we were sold.  The acting was pretty lousy (especially Luke), but we'd expected that, so it didn't really stand out.<br><br>But by the time Episode I came out, sci-fi was a major established film genre, so you expected it to stack up and compare well against, well, anything.<br><br>&gt; Luke was in his late teens/very early 20<br><br>Yes, Luke was in his late teens and at least twice as wangsty and annoying as little Anakin and teen Anakin combined.  "Aw, come on, uncle Owen, I don't want to help around the farm for a whole nother year, I want to go off and have adventures now.  Now, now, now!"  Sheesh.<br><br>Then there's Han.  Stop and think?  Solve a problem?  Nah, let's just argue loudly and incoherently all the time and then when we lose the argument we'll just blast everything.<br><br>Speaking of flat stereotype characters, two words:  Princess Leia.  At least the acting was okay there (not that it was a difficult role).<br><br>I'm not saying the prequel movies didn't have some problems.  But I don't think they were objectively much worse than the first three.  They seemed worse mostly because audience expectations had shifted.</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; The first movies did n't suck like the last threeYou did n't * notice * their suckiness , because back then you were accustomed to the assumption that if it was sci-fi or took place in space , ipso facto it must Hoover like a Shop Vac .
Up to that point most sci-fi featured cosmic rays as a major plot element , used actors straight out of drama school if you were lucky , and had robots and/or spaceships that were obviously made out of cardboard .
So sci-fi audiences were prepared to cut Star Wars a little slack .
When it had a real character-driven plot and real costumes and used real state-of-the-art ( for the day ) special effects and even featured a real professionally-composed sound track consisting of music written just for the film , we were sold .
The acting was pretty lousy ( especially Luke ) , but we 'd expected that , so it did n't really stand out.But by the time Episode I came out , sci-fi was a major established film genre , so you expected it to stack up and compare well against , well , anything. &gt; Luke was in his late teens/very early 20Yes , Luke was in his late teens and at least twice as wangsty and annoying as little Anakin and teen Anakin combined .
" Aw , come on , uncle Owen , I do n't want to help around the farm for a whole nother year , I want to go off and have adventures now .
Now , now , now !
" Sheesh.Then there 's Han .
Stop and think ?
Solve a problem ?
Nah , let 's just argue loudly and incoherently all the time and then when we lose the argument we 'll just blast everything.Speaking of flat stereotype characters , two words : Princess Leia .
At least the acting was okay there ( not that it was a difficult role ) .I 'm not saying the prequel movies did n't have some problems .
But I do n't think they were objectively much worse than the first three .
They seemed worse mostly because audience expectations had shifted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; The first movies didn't suck like the last threeYou didn't *notice* their suckiness, because back then you were accustomed to the assumption that if it was sci-fi or took place in space, ipso facto it must Hoover like a Shop Vac.
Up to that point most sci-fi featured cosmic rays as a major plot element, used actors straight out of drama school if you were lucky, and had robots and/or spaceships that were obviously made out of cardboard.
So sci-fi audiences were prepared to cut Star Wars a little slack.
When it had a real character-driven plot and real costumes and used real state-of-the-art (for the day) special effects and even featured a real professionally-composed sound track consisting of music written just for the film, we were sold.
The acting was pretty lousy (especially Luke), but we'd expected that, so it didn't really stand out.But by the time Episode I came out, sci-fi was a major established film genre, so you expected it to stack up and compare well against, well, anything.&gt; Luke was in his late teens/very early 20Yes, Luke was in his late teens and at least twice as wangsty and annoying as little Anakin and teen Anakin combined.
"Aw, come on, uncle Owen, I don't want to help around the farm for a whole nother year, I want to go off and have adventures now.
Now, now, now!
"  Sheesh.Then there's Han.
Stop and think?
Solve a problem?
Nah, let's just argue loudly and incoherently all the time and then when we lose the argument we'll just blast everything.Speaking of flat stereotype characters, two words:  Princess Leia.
At least the acting was okay there (not that it was a difficult role).I'm not saying the prequel movies didn't have some problems.
But I don't think they were objectively much worse than the first three.
They seemed worse mostly because audience expectations had shifted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515234</id>
	<title>Your childhood...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261425420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...shouldn't have been walking alone there at night dressed like that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...should n't have been walking alone there at night dressed like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...shouldn't have been walking alone there at night dressed like that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514948</id>
	<title>It's actually a pity ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261424220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... that after Return of the Jedi, no more Star Wars movies were ever made.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... that after Return of the Jedi , no more Star Wars movies were ever made .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... that after Return of the Jedi, no more Star Wars movies were ever made.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515828</id>
	<title>Oh my god, what a fucking NERD</title>
	<author>BrowncoatJedi</author>
	<datestamp>1261428300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Really, how can you stand that twit's voice?  He sounds like a complete retard.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Really , how can you stand that twit 's voice ?
He sounds like a complete retard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really, how can you stand that twit's voice?
He sounds like a complete retard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516712</id>
	<title>Re:If that's what it means to be a geek...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261389540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>THANK YOU!  In one scene, sure, he's got some anger issues, but he's not pissy all the time.</p><p>The next scene, he's slaughtering children at the Jedi school.</p><p>RLY?</p><p>I think a big part of the problem isn't that "I saw the first three when I was a child", the problem is "I wrote the back story in my head from all the clues in the first three, AND MY STORY WAS BETTER!"  There were bits and pieces of I, II, and III that were ok, but for the most part I couldn't believe what was done to the story.  It had such promise.</p><p>My son enjoyed I and II (we haven't watched III together yet...he was too young, imo, to deal with the fight scene at the end).  I wish I could, but they were horribly botched.</p><p>I've actually considered writing a story the way I thought it should've been, but I have more important things to do (like read these posts).<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>THANK YOU !
In one scene , sure , he 's got some anger issues , but he 's not pissy all the time.The next scene , he 's slaughtering children at the Jedi school.RLY ? I think a big part of the problem is n't that " I saw the first three when I was a child " , the problem is " I wrote the back story in my head from all the clues in the first three , AND MY STORY WAS BETTER !
" There were bits and pieces of I , II , and III that were ok , but for the most part I could n't believe what was done to the story .
It had such promise.My son enjoyed I and II ( we have n't watched III together yet...he was too young , imo , to deal with the fight scene at the end ) .
I wish I could , but they were horribly botched.I 've actually considered writing a story the way I thought it should 've been , but I have more important things to do ( like read these posts ) .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>THANK YOU!
In one scene, sure, he's got some anger issues, but he's not pissy all the time.The next scene, he's slaughtering children at the Jedi school.RLY?I think a big part of the problem isn't that "I saw the first three when I was a child", the problem is "I wrote the back story in my head from all the clues in the first three, AND MY STORY WAS BETTER!
"  There were bits and pieces of I, II, and III that were ok, but for the most part I couldn't believe what was done to the story.
It had such promise.My son enjoyed I and II (we haven't watched III together yet...he was too young, imo, to deal with the fight scene at the end).
I wish I could, but they were horribly botched.I've actually considered writing a story the way I thought it should've been, but I have more important things to do (like read these posts).
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518656</id>
	<title>Did you like them?</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1261401420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because my mother sure liked the originals herself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because my mother sure liked the originals herself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because my mother sure liked the originals herself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516058</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514990</id>
	<title>Re:Different Audience</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261424400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The original films aren't all that good. They are enjoyable and have some outstanding moments, but they aren't 'of a caliber'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The original films are n't all that good .
They are enjoyable and have some outstanding moments , but they are n't 'of a caliber' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The original films aren't all that good.
They are enjoyable and have some outstanding moments, but they aren't 'of a caliber'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515076</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261424700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like you're stuck up. I'm sure the doctor can help you get out what ever it is that is stuck up your anal cavity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like you 're stuck up .
I 'm sure the doctor can help you get out what ever it is that is stuck up your anal cavity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like you're stuck up.
I'm sure the doctor can help you get out what ever it is that is stuck up your anal cavity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517504</id>
	<title>Re:SWHS?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261393500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Oh, what a sob story.  [tiny violin]</p><p>You are forgetting those of us who were kids then.  It was a time when "special effects" in science fiction consisted of cheap plastic models with fireworks and sparklers stuffed in them</p></div><p>Cheap?  <em>Plastic</em>?  Huff-huff and guffaw, good sir!  You speak as if you know nothing of the special effects models of that era.</p><p>Most of them would have been wooden, most likely...  "Cheap" certainly varied depending on the production...  But I wouldn't say the original Starship Enterprise models were "cheap" by any means.  The main one was huge - 11 feet long.  And while it's true there was a lot of crap and even the good stuff wasn't always <em>that</em> great, they did some impressive work...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , what a sob story .
[ tiny violin ] You are forgetting those of us who were kids then .
It was a time when " special effects " in science fiction consisted of cheap plastic models with fireworks and sparklers stuffed in themCheap ?
Plastic ? Huff-huff and guffaw , good sir !
You speak as if you know nothing of the special effects models of that era.Most of them would have been wooden , most likely... " Cheap " certainly varied depending on the production... But I would n't say the original Starship Enterprise models were " cheap " by any means .
The main one was huge - 11 feet long .
And while it 's true there was a lot of crap and even the good stuff was n't always that great , they did some impressive work.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, what a sob story.
[tiny violin]You are forgetting those of us who were kids then.
It was a time when "special effects" in science fiction consisted of cheap plastic models with fireworks and sparklers stuffed in themCheap?
Plastic?  Huff-huff and guffaw, good sir!
You speak as if you know nothing of the special effects models of that era.Most of them would have been wooden, most likely...  "Cheap" certainly varied depending on the production...  But I wouldn't say the original Starship Enterprise models were "cheap" by any means.
The main one was huge - 11 feet long.
And while it's true there was a lot of crap and even the good stuff wasn't always that great, they did some impressive work...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515418</id>
	<title>Re:Jar^2</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1261426260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mod me to heck, but Jar Jar made me chuckle. The forced worked through (channeled) his clumsiness, which is a rarely-used plot device, making it refreshing. Sure, Shaggy and Scooby "solved" crimes by clumsiness, but it was just lucky accidents (as far as the audience knows), not supernatural assistance.</p><p>It kind of reminds me of speculation that the future is saving itself from the LHC by making a <a href="http://perdurabo10.tripod.com/galleryi/id47.html" title="tripod.com">bird poop on just the right spot.</a> [tripod.com] And the fact that those around Binks seem to mostly ignore his clumsiness makes it even more funny. They may waver an eyebrow or two, but otherwise go about their business with a serious face.<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod me to heck , but Jar Jar made me chuckle .
The forced worked through ( channeled ) his clumsiness , which is a rarely-used plot device , making it refreshing .
Sure , Shaggy and Scooby " solved " crimes by clumsiness , but it was just lucky accidents ( as far as the audience knows ) , not supernatural assistance.It kind of reminds me of speculation that the future is saving itself from the LHC by making a bird poop on just the right spot .
[ tripod.com ] And the fact that those around Binks seem to mostly ignore his clumsiness makes it even more funny .
They may waver an eyebrow or two , but otherwise go about their business with a serious face .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod me to heck, but Jar Jar made me chuckle.
The forced worked through (channeled) his clumsiness, which is a rarely-used plot device, making it refreshing.
Sure, Shaggy and Scooby "solved" crimes by clumsiness, but it was just lucky accidents (as far as the audience knows), not supernatural assistance.It kind of reminds me of speculation that the future is saving itself from the LHC by making a bird poop on just the right spot.
[tripod.com] And the fact that those around Binks seem to mostly ignore his clumsiness makes it even more funny.
They may waver an eyebrow or two, but otherwise go about their business with a serious face.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515880</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>Senjutsu</author>
	<datestamp>1261428600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>  I think if the effort had been more serious he might have gotten a message out to Lucas and maybe even Hollywood<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div><p> Apparently Damon Lindelof (Lost co-creator, Star Trek Producer) has been pimping links to the review and is quite taken with it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think if the effort had been more serious he might have gotten a message out to Lucas and maybe even Hollywood ... Apparently Damon Lindelof ( Lost co-creator , Star Trek Producer ) has been pimping links to the review and is quite taken with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>  I think if the effort had been more serious he might have gotten a message out to Lucas and maybe even Hollywood ... Apparently Damon Lindelof (Lost co-creator, Star Trek Producer) has been pimping links to the review and is quite taken with it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515838</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>DinDaddy</author>
	<datestamp>1261428360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Struck me as TPM review by Buffalo Bill (Silence of the Lambs), for obvious reasons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Struck me as TPM review by Buffalo Bill ( Silence of the Lambs ) , for obvious reasons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Struck me as TPM review by Buffalo Bill (Silence of the Lambs), for obvious reasons.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521670</id>
	<title>Re:You don't like them because they aren't for you</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261476060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this is incredibly insightful. nobody here at all had already figured this out 10 years go.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;o)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this is incredibly insightful .
nobody here at all had already figured this out 10 years go .
; o )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this is incredibly insightful.
nobody here at all had already figured this out 10 years go.
;o)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516058</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516462</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>Xtravar</author>
	<datestamp>1261388160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I didn't mind the funny voice, but the whole thing had an overly misogynistic tone.  Killing and raping women is kind of not funny.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't mind the funny voice , but the whole thing had an overly misogynistic tone .
Killing and raping women is kind of not funny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't mind the funny voice, but the whole thing had an overly misogynistic tone.
Killing and raping women is kind of not funny.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515004</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>Jethro</author>
	<datestamp>1261424460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, that's what I came here to say. Guy makes some good points (that, face it, aren't new) but tries way too hard to be funny. That 'voice' was way too annoying.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , that 's what I came here to say .
Guy makes some good points ( that , face it , are n't new ) but tries way too hard to be funny .
That 'voice ' was way too annoying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, that's what I came here to say.
Guy makes some good points (that, face it, aren't new) but tries way too hard to be funny.
That 'voice' was way too annoying.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517186</id>
	<title>Re:Demo Reel</title>
	<author>clintp</author>
	<datestamp>1261391820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a week late, but I'd like to chime in on this.  You're absolutely right.  I spent the late 90's putting SGI workstations on the desktops of engineers for drafting and fluid analysis.  Hot shit, really.  But SGI relied way too heavily on their outstanding graphics hardware and completely missed the fact that... hardware vendors always lose eventually.</p><p>In the early 90's I worked for one of many minicomputer companies that were trying to sell terribly expensive hardware and give away the software for practically nothing.  Eventually they all learned that the hardware really was just a commodity and it was the software that was the valuable bits.  You can't turn the marketing around once the customer figures that out.  1989 hardware = $100k, software = free.  1992  Hardware = $10k, software = $100k.  Doesn't work.</p><p>In the late 1980's I got to watch the PC market go through the same death throes.  Any fool can build slightly outdated hardware for pennies on the dollar.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a week late , but I 'd like to chime in on this .
You 're absolutely right .
I spent the late 90 's putting SGI workstations on the desktops of engineers for drafting and fluid analysis .
Hot shit , really .
But SGI relied way too heavily on their outstanding graphics hardware and completely missed the fact that... hardware vendors always lose eventually.In the early 90 's I worked for one of many minicomputer companies that were trying to sell terribly expensive hardware and give away the software for practically nothing .
Eventually they all learned that the hardware really was just a commodity and it was the software that was the valuable bits .
You ca n't turn the marketing around once the customer figures that out .
1989 hardware = $ 100k , software = free .
1992 Hardware = $ 10k , software = $ 100k .
Does n't work.In the late 1980 's I got to watch the PC market go through the same death throes .
Any fool can build slightly outdated hardware for pennies on the dollar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a week late, but I'd like to chime in on this.
You're absolutely right.
I spent the late 90's putting SGI workstations on the desktops of engineers for drafting and fluid analysis.
Hot shit, really.
But SGI relied way too heavily on their outstanding graphics hardware and completely missed the fact that... hardware vendors always lose eventually.In the early 90's I worked for one of many minicomputer companies that were trying to sell terribly expensive hardware and give away the software for practically nothing.
Eventually they all learned that the hardware really was just a commodity and it was the software that was the valuable bits.
You can't turn the marketing around once the customer figures that out.
1989 hardware = $100k, software = free.
1992  Hardware = $10k, software = $100k.
Doesn't work.In the late 1980's I got to watch the PC market go through the same death throes.
Any fool can build slightly outdated hardware for pennies on the dollar.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521900</id>
	<title>Re:midichlorians</title>
	<author>Vastad</author>
	<datestamp>1261478820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This.</p><p>I got my wonderful childhood memories of kung-fu qi-gong martial arts mysticism reduced to a satire of itself as "LOL! u hav magikal powers AIDS!"</p><p>What made it so ironic was this suspicion that it was an attempt by Lucas to make the Force less like new-agey ESP and more like Rupert Sheldrake's morphogenetic field science-y. Lets not even begin discussing how ridiculous this is in space opera fairy tale in the first place. It made it even more ridiculous and un-science-y.</p><p>While it was a mystical energy or qi or whatever, you only needed to loosely establish that it was some sort of universal constant like gravity and was not subject to time or space. Great. That's why Jedi can be any species. That's why anywhere in the universe can have it. That's why it can cheat physics a little bit. And it remains <i>mysterious to reason</i>.</p><p>But if it's some sort of mitochondria with magical powers...how do you explain it being present in every species known to possess force-sensitive individuals? <i> <b>Even between species with totally incomparable metabolic processes.</b></i>  How did it get across a huge universe in time to infect every sentient species available? How does mere mitochondria manage to send information outside of time-space contraints or <i>c</i> in order to allow things like precognition or telepathy? What factors govern whether or not you can be force-sensitive or not? If it's just to do with a population count, does this mean injecting more midi-chlorians into a subject can grant magical powers to a formerly non-sensitive individual? Would getting malignant midi-chlorian cancer turn you into an organic nuclear power plant? Where did they come from? If they are biological, are there different species of midi-chlorian? If they "talk" when you listen, what do they say? If telepathy is based on all midi-chlorian clusters somehow being able to sense one another and exchange information without any exchange of energy between population clusters i.e. bodies, then we are talking about some sort of weird quantum entanglement field that spans the universe.....aaaaaaaand ergo we're right back to the universal qi or new-agey ESP precedent set earlier. Only now, it's a fucking mess.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This.I got my wonderful childhood memories of kung-fu qi-gong martial arts mysticism reduced to a satire of itself as " LOL !
u hav magikal powers AIDS !
" What made it so ironic was this suspicion that it was an attempt by Lucas to make the Force less like new-agey ESP and more like Rupert Sheldrake 's morphogenetic field science-y .
Lets not even begin discussing how ridiculous this is in space opera fairy tale in the first place .
It made it even more ridiculous and un-science-y.While it was a mystical energy or qi or whatever , you only needed to loosely establish that it was some sort of universal constant like gravity and was not subject to time or space .
Great. That 's why Jedi can be any species .
That 's why anywhere in the universe can have it .
That 's why it can cheat physics a little bit .
And it remains mysterious to reason.But if it 's some sort of mitochondria with magical powers...how do you explain it being present in every species known to possess force-sensitive individuals ?
Even between species with totally incomparable metabolic processes .
How did it get across a huge universe in time to infect every sentient species available ?
How does mere mitochondria manage to send information outside of time-space contraints or c in order to allow things like precognition or telepathy ?
What factors govern whether or not you can be force-sensitive or not ?
If it 's just to do with a population count , does this mean injecting more midi-chlorians into a subject can grant magical powers to a formerly non-sensitive individual ?
Would getting malignant midi-chlorian cancer turn you into an organic nuclear power plant ?
Where did they come from ?
If they are biological , are there different species of midi-chlorian ?
If they " talk " when you listen , what do they say ?
If telepathy is based on all midi-chlorian clusters somehow being able to sense one another and exchange information without any exchange of energy between population clusters i.e .
bodies , then we are talking about some sort of weird quantum entanglement field that spans the universe.....aaaaaaaand ergo we 're right back to the universal qi or new-agey ESP precedent set earlier .
Only now , it 's a fucking mess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This.I got my wonderful childhood memories of kung-fu qi-gong martial arts mysticism reduced to a satire of itself as "LOL!
u hav magikal powers AIDS!
"What made it so ironic was this suspicion that it was an attempt by Lucas to make the Force less like new-agey ESP and more like Rupert Sheldrake's morphogenetic field science-y.
Lets not even begin discussing how ridiculous this is in space opera fairy tale in the first place.
It made it even more ridiculous and un-science-y.While it was a mystical energy or qi or whatever, you only needed to loosely establish that it was some sort of universal constant like gravity and was not subject to time or space.
Great. That's why Jedi can be any species.
That's why anywhere in the universe can have it.
That's why it can cheat physics a little bit.
And it remains mysterious to reason.But if it's some sort of mitochondria with magical powers...how do you explain it being present in every species known to possess force-sensitive individuals?
Even between species with totally incomparable metabolic processes.
How did it get across a huge universe in time to infect every sentient species available?
How does mere mitochondria manage to send information outside of time-space contraints or c in order to allow things like precognition or telepathy?
What factors govern whether or not you can be force-sensitive or not?
If it's just to do with a population count, does this mean injecting more midi-chlorians into a subject can grant magical powers to a formerly non-sensitive individual?
Would getting malignant midi-chlorian cancer turn you into an organic nuclear power plant?
Where did they come from?
If they are biological, are there different species of midi-chlorian?
If they "talk" when you listen, what do they say?
If telepathy is based on all midi-chlorian clusters somehow being able to sense one another and exchange information without any exchange of energy between population clusters i.e.
bodies, then we are talking about some sort of weird quantum entanglement field that spans the universe.....aaaaaaaand ergo we're right back to the universal qi or new-agey ESP precedent set earlier.
Only now, it's a fucking mess.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515518</id>
	<title>Who was the target audience?</title>
	<author>beetle496</author>
	<datestamp>1261426800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><em> &gt; Its primary target was the little kids </em> <p>

As the review points out rather humorously, films targeted to children give dialogs on tariffs less screen time!

Lucas' target audience was fanbois.  From a financial perspective, he was successful.  Money and feeding his ego are his only motivation.  Lucas gives lip service to artistic vision, but he is not credible when making such claims.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Its primary target was the little kids As the review points out rather humorously , films targeted to children give dialogs on tariffs less screen time !
Lucas ' target audience was fanbois .
From a financial perspective , he was successful .
Money and feeding his ego are his only motivation .
Lucas gives lip service to artistic vision , but he is not credible when making such claims .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> &gt; Its primary target was the little kids  

As the review points out rather humorously, films targeted to children give dialogs on tariffs less screen time!
Lucas' target audience was fanbois.
From a financial perspective, he was successful.
Money and feeding his ego are his only motivation.
Lucas gives lip service to artistic vision, but he is not credible when making such claims.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517480</id>
	<title>Re:Box Office</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261393380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You pay for a movie before you have a chance to see if you like it or not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You pay for a movie before you have a chance to see if you like it or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You pay for a movie before you have a chance to see if you like it or not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516094</id>
	<title>Good reviews of Star Trek too.</title>
	<author>biglig2</author>
	<datestamp>1261386480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>His reviews of Generations and Insurrection are good too: besides the obvious flaws in the plots of both, he knows the TV series well enough to find the non-obvious continuity flaws. Intercutting the plot of Insurrection with footage of Picard chewing Wesley a new one for doing exactly (and I mean EXACTLY) the things that Picard does in the film is exquisite.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>His reviews of Generations and Insurrection are good too : besides the obvious flaws in the plots of both , he knows the TV series well enough to find the non-obvious continuity flaws .
Intercutting the plot of Insurrection with footage of Picard chewing Wesley a new one for doing exactly ( and I mean EXACTLY ) the things that Picard does in the film is exquisite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>His reviews of Generations and Insurrection are good too: besides the obvious flaws in the plots of both, he knows the TV series well enough to find the non-obvious continuity flaws.
Intercutting the plot of Insurrection with footage of Picard chewing Wesley a new one for doing exactly (and I mean EXACTLY) the things that Picard does in the film is exquisite.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517524</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261393560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because God knows what a bust the Star Wars action figure, toy and game market was after the first movie in the 70s.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because God knows what a bust the Star Wars action figure , toy and game market was after the first movie in the 70s .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because God knows what a bust the Star Wars action figure, toy and game market was after the first movie in the 70s.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30522968</id>
	<title>...but they fucked up.</title>
	<author>DrYak</author>
	<datestamp>1261493040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Older Skywalker (Lets get him in his late teens)</p></div><p>Younger kids identify more and are responsible (indirectly) for many more toy sales.</p></div><p>I just can't understand how could movie producer get this thing that much wrong.<br>No, sorry. Younger viewers *are NOT*, definitely *NOT* attracted to tag-along kids. And even more so due to the way kids are depicted in movie : They are not just younger as the the other members of the cast, they are often deliberately stupid, clumsy and/or constantly get into trouble in a way which should have Darwin selection eliminated them long before.<br>How could a *real* kid feel attracted and identify him-/her-self with what is basically a mini-idiot over-the-top carricature of children ? When I was a kid, I certainly was never interested by any of the tag-alon-kids that producers kept insisting on adding to anything which was market to kids.</p><p>Young kids want to see role-models, characters that will inspire them. Something that they will want to become themselves one day. And you can't get anymore less inspiring than the "stupid idiotic midget" way with which children are commonly depicted into movies.</p><p>I mean, all the makers of Star Wars, Georges Lucas as well as the rest of the crew, should have known better : The older trilogy had enormous success despite having no tag-along children. Han Solo is a much beloved character, who probably left a good impression in lots of the younger viewers even if he wasn't 6 years old. (I certainly liked the character when I was a kid). Some of the people on the crew probably saw the original trilogy as children and should pretty much know that they enjoyed its characters even if no 6-year-old-idiots were involved in the story.</p><p>The whole concept of tag along kid is stupid and show that the executive often don't have any idea of how their public actually enjoys movie : By the same twisted logic, every Sci-Fi movie should include one mandatory male overweighted, mid-aged, either balding or with long dirty hair, sucking at sport, with a dubious concept of hygiene, useless character which basiclly just stand in the way of adventurer. So the main geek audience would have someone the can identify more with.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Older Skywalker ( Lets get him in his late teens ) Younger kids identify more and are responsible ( indirectly ) for many more toy sales.I just ca n't understand how could movie producer get this thing that much wrong.No , sorry .
Younger viewers * are NOT * , definitely * NOT * attracted to tag-along kids .
And even more so due to the way kids are depicted in movie : They are not just younger as the the other members of the cast , they are often deliberately stupid , clumsy and/or constantly get into trouble in a way which should have Darwin selection eliminated them long before.How could a * real * kid feel attracted and identify him-/her-self with what is basically a mini-idiot over-the-top carricature of children ?
When I was a kid , I certainly was never interested by any of the tag-alon-kids that producers kept insisting on adding to anything which was market to kids.Young kids want to see role-models , characters that will inspire them .
Something that they will want to become themselves one day .
And you ca n't get anymore less inspiring than the " stupid idiotic midget " way with which children are commonly depicted into movies.I mean , all the makers of Star Wars , Georges Lucas as well as the rest of the crew , should have known better : The older trilogy had enormous success despite having no tag-along children .
Han Solo is a much beloved character , who probably left a good impression in lots of the younger viewers even if he was n't 6 years old .
( I certainly liked the character when I was a kid ) .
Some of the people on the crew probably saw the original trilogy as children and should pretty much know that they enjoyed its characters even if no 6-year-old-idiots were involved in the story.The whole concept of tag along kid is stupid and show that the executive often do n't have any idea of how their public actually enjoys movie : By the same twisted logic , every Sci-Fi movie should include one mandatory male overweighted , mid-aged , either balding or with long dirty hair , sucking at sport , with a dubious concept of hygiene , useless character which basiclly just stand in the way of adventurer .
So the main geek audience would have someone the can identify more with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Older Skywalker (Lets get him in his late teens)Younger kids identify more and are responsible (indirectly) for many more toy sales.I just can't understand how could movie producer get this thing that much wrong.No, sorry.
Younger viewers *are NOT*, definitely *NOT* attracted to tag-along kids.
And even more so due to the way kids are depicted in movie : They are not just younger as the the other members of the cast, they are often deliberately stupid, clumsy and/or constantly get into trouble in a way which should have Darwin selection eliminated them long before.How could a *real* kid feel attracted and identify him-/her-self with what is basically a mini-idiot over-the-top carricature of children ?
When I was a kid, I certainly was never interested by any of the tag-alon-kids that producers kept insisting on adding to anything which was market to kids.Young kids want to see role-models, characters that will inspire them.
Something that they will want to become themselves one day.
And you can't get anymore less inspiring than the "stupid idiotic midget" way with which children are commonly depicted into movies.I mean, all the makers of Star Wars, Georges Lucas as well as the rest of the crew, should have known better : The older trilogy had enormous success despite having no tag-along children.
Han Solo is a much beloved character, who probably left a good impression in lots of the younger viewers even if he wasn't 6 years old.
(I certainly liked the character when I was a kid).
Some of the people on the crew probably saw the original trilogy as children and should pretty much know that they enjoyed its characters even if no 6-year-old-idiots were involved in the story.The whole concept of tag along kid is stupid and show that the executive often don't have any idea of how their public actually enjoys movie : By the same twisted logic, every Sci-Fi movie should include one mandatory male overweighted, mid-aged, either balding or with long dirty hair, sucking at sport, with a dubious concept of hygiene, useless character which basiclly just stand in the way of adventurer.
So the main geek audience would have someone the can identify more with.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518608</id>
	<title>Re:Great Example of IP Abuse</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1261400820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>That is what George Lucas became to his own films. After a great piece of artwork has become culturally accepted, it should be cast in stone, and be preserved as it is.</i></p><p>Seriously? You honestly believe that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is what George Lucas became to his own films .
After a great piece of artwork has become culturally accepted , it should be cast in stone , and be preserved as it is.Seriously ?
You honestly believe that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is what George Lucas became to his own films.
After a great piece of artwork has become culturally accepted, it should be cast in stone, and be preserved as it is.Seriously?
You honestly believe that?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515608</id>
	<title>Calling all Slashdoters/Wannabe Jedis</title>
	<author>beberly37</author>
	<datestamp>1261427220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It has long been my stance that while all 6 movies are fanstically enteraining movies, Mr. Lucas couldn't make a quality film to save his life.  I just want to put it out there and start a movement.  Start to finish, episodes 1-6 maybe even thrawn years (7,8,9) reimagined star wars movie with no Lucas influence.  Who's with me!!!

ps TPM will long hold a place in my memory.  In the first ten minutes of the movie, when Obi won and Qui Gon are fighting the driods.  The usage of bass to vibrate in my chest when a force push happened.  That was the single coolest movie moment ever. If you didn't see it in the theater..I feel sorry for you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It has long been my stance that while all 6 movies are fanstically enteraining movies , Mr. Lucas could n't make a quality film to save his life .
I just want to put it out there and start a movement .
Start to finish , episodes 1-6 maybe even thrawn years ( 7,8,9 ) reimagined star wars movie with no Lucas influence .
Who 's with me ! ! !
ps TPM will long hold a place in my memory .
In the first ten minutes of the movie , when Obi won and Qui Gon are fighting the driods .
The usage of bass to vibrate in my chest when a force push happened .
That was the single coolest movie moment ever .
If you did n't see it in the theater..I feel sorry for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It has long been my stance that while all 6 movies are fanstically enteraining movies, Mr. Lucas couldn't make a quality film to save his life.
I just want to put it out there and start a movement.
Start to finish, episodes 1-6 maybe even thrawn years (7,8,9) reimagined star wars movie with no Lucas influence.
Who's with me!!!
ps TPM will long hold a place in my memory.
In the first ten minutes of the movie, when Obi won and Qui Gon are fighting the driods.
The usage of bass to vibrate in my chest when a force push happened.
That was the single coolest movie moment ever.
If you didn't see it in the theater..I feel sorry for you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516034</id>
	<title>Re:midichlorians</title>
	<author>sohare</author>
	<datestamp>1261386180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>A big problem for my enjoyment was the midichlorians, the microbes that supposedly give a person control over the Force.</p><p>By making the Force scientifically explicable rather than mystical/magical, it changed the feeling of the story for me.</p></div><p>I can respect your point of view, but I rather liked the concept itself.  Now, the fact they were only introduced after the three original films is another matter.  That was certainly a botch job.

Perhaps I like the midichlorians since I'm a rather skeptical person and like my sci-fi to essentially take on a materialistic perspective.  It's hard for me to stomach Vitalism injected into sci-fi, since I find the idea incredibly unimaginative.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A big problem for my enjoyment was the midichlorians , the microbes that supposedly give a person control over the Force.By making the Force scientifically explicable rather than mystical/magical , it changed the feeling of the story for me.I can respect your point of view , but I rather liked the concept itself .
Now , the fact they were only introduced after the three original films is another matter .
That was certainly a botch job .
Perhaps I like the midichlorians since I 'm a rather skeptical person and like my sci-fi to essentially take on a materialistic perspective .
It 's hard for me to stomach Vitalism injected into sci-fi , since I find the idea incredibly unimaginative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A big problem for my enjoyment was the midichlorians, the microbes that supposedly give a person control over the Force.By making the Force scientifically explicable rather than mystical/magical, it changed the feeling of the story for me.I can respect your point of view, but I rather liked the concept itself.
Now, the fact they were only introduced after the three original films is another matter.
That was certainly a botch job.
Perhaps I like the midichlorians since I'm a rather skeptical person and like my sci-fi to essentially take on a materialistic perspective.
It's hard for me to stomach Vitalism injected into sci-fi, since I find the idea incredibly unimaginative.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517350</id>
	<title>Re:midichlorians</title>
	<author>skine</author>
	<datestamp>1261392720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's still faith, but George Lucas switched from Christianity to Scientology.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's still faith , but George Lucas switched from Christianity to Scientology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's still faith, but George Lucas switched from Christianity to Scientology.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30522126</id>
	<title>Re:Phantom storytelling</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261482120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Besides the accursed Ewoks, I came away with the distinct impression that Lucas didn't actually rescreen or review his previous films for the-story-up-to-now before scribbling the script for the next one. At the End of "Empires" Yoda states: "There is another." Leia, I'd guessed. Made sense. But I never found out who for sure...</p></div><p>Uh... but they did follow that plot line in Return of the Jedi. You know, when Vader fights Luke, and tells him he'll turn Leia to the Dark Side if he refuses to.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Besides the accursed Ewoks , I came away with the distinct impression that Lucas did n't actually rescreen or review his previous films for the-story-up-to-now before scribbling the script for the next one .
At the End of " Empires " Yoda states : " There is another .
" Leia , I 'd guessed .
Made sense .
But I never found out who for sure...Uh... but they did follow that plot line in Return of the Jedi .
You know , when Vader fights Luke , and tells him he 'll turn Leia to the Dark Side if he refuses to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Besides the accursed Ewoks, I came away with the distinct impression that Lucas didn't actually rescreen or review his previous films for the-story-up-to-now before scribbling the script for the next one.
At the End of "Empires" Yoda states: "There is another.
" Leia, I'd guessed.
Made sense.
But I never found out who for sure...Uh... but they did follow that plot line in Return of the Jedi.
You know, when Vader fights Luke, and tells him he'll turn Leia to the Dark Side if he refuses to.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518776</id>
	<title>Re:If that's what it means to be a geek...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261402740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The prequels were for kids, no doubt about it."</p><p>Turmoil has engulfed the Galactic Republic. The taxation of trade routes to outlaying star systems is in dispute. Hoping to resolve the matter with a blockade of deadly battleships, the greedy Trade Federation has stopped all shipping to the small planet of Naboo.</p><p>PALPATINE : Supreme Chancellor, delegates of the Senate. A tragedy has occured on our peaceful system of Naboo. We have become caugt in a dispute you're all well aware of, which began right here with the taxation of traderoutes, and has now engulfed our entire planet in the oppresion of the Trade Federation.</p><p>PALPATINE : Enter the bureaucrats, the true rulers of the Republic, and on the payroll of the Trade Federation, I might add. This is where Chancellor<br>Valorum's strength will dissapear.</p><p>VALORUM : The point is conceded...Section 523A take precedence here. Queen Amidala of the Naboo, will you defer your motion to allow a commission to explore the validity of your accusations?</p><p>AMIDALA : (angrily) I will not defer...I have come before you to resolve this attack on our sovereignty now. I was not elected to watch my people suffer and die while you discuss this invasion in a committee. If this body is not capable of action, I suggest new leadership is needed. I move for a vote of no confidence...in Chancellor Valorum's leadership.</p><p>VALORUM : What?...No!</p><p>MAS AMEDDA : Order! We shall have order...</p><p>BAIL ORGANA : Alderaan seconds the motion for a vote of no confidence in Chancellor Valorum.</p><p>MAD AMEDDA : The motion has been seconded by Bail Organa of Alderaan.</p><p>BAIL ORGANA : There must be no delays. The motion is on the floor and must be voted upon in this session.</p><p>LOTT DOD : The Trade Federation moves the motion be sent to the procedures committee for study.</p><p>And on and on...</p><p>Oh yeah, the kids gotta love this stuff!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The prequels were for kids , no doubt about it .
" Turmoil has engulfed the Galactic Republic .
The taxation of trade routes to outlaying star systems is in dispute .
Hoping to resolve the matter with a blockade of deadly battleships , the greedy Trade Federation has stopped all shipping to the small planet of Naboo.PALPATINE : Supreme Chancellor , delegates of the Senate .
A tragedy has occured on our peaceful system of Naboo .
We have become caugt in a dispute you 're all well aware of , which began right here with the taxation of traderoutes , and has now engulfed our entire planet in the oppresion of the Trade Federation.PALPATINE : Enter the bureaucrats , the true rulers of the Republic , and on the payroll of the Trade Federation , I might add .
This is where ChancellorValorum 's strength will dissapear.VALORUM : The point is conceded...Section 523A take precedence here .
Queen Amidala of the Naboo , will you defer your motion to allow a commission to explore the validity of your accusations ? AMIDALA : ( angrily ) I will not defer...I have come before you to resolve this attack on our sovereignty now .
I was not elected to watch my people suffer and die while you discuss this invasion in a committee .
If this body is not capable of action , I suggest new leadership is needed .
I move for a vote of no confidence...in Chancellor Valorum 's leadership.VALORUM : What ? ...No ! MAS AMEDDA : Order !
We shall have order...BAIL ORGANA : Alderaan seconds the motion for a vote of no confidence in Chancellor Valorum.MAD AMEDDA : The motion has been seconded by Bail Organa of Alderaan.BAIL ORGANA : There must be no delays .
The motion is on the floor and must be voted upon in this session.LOTT DOD : The Trade Federation moves the motion be sent to the procedures committee for study.And on and on...Oh yeah , the kids got ta love this stuff !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The prequels were for kids, no doubt about it.
"Turmoil has engulfed the Galactic Republic.
The taxation of trade routes to outlaying star systems is in dispute.
Hoping to resolve the matter with a blockade of deadly battleships, the greedy Trade Federation has stopped all shipping to the small planet of Naboo.PALPATINE : Supreme Chancellor, delegates of the Senate.
A tragedy has occured on our peaceful system of Naboo.
We have become caugt in a dispute you're all well aware of, which began right here with the taxation of traderoutes, and has now engulfed our entire planet in the oppresion of the Trade Federation.PALPATINE : Enter the bureaucrats, the true rulers of the Republic, and on the payroll of the Trade Federation, I might add.
This is where ChancellorValorum's strength will dissapear.VALORUM : The point is conceded...Section 523A take precedence here.
Queen Amidala of the Naboo, will you defer your motion to allow a commission to explore the validity of your accusations?AMIDALA : (angrily) I will not defer...I have come before you to resolve this attack on our sovereignty now.
I was not elected to watch my people suffer and die while you discuss this invasion in a committee.
If this body is not capable of action, I suggest new leadership is needed.
I move for a vote of no confidence...in Chancellor Valorum's leadership.VALORUM : What?...No!MAS AMEDDA : Order!
We shall have order...BAIL ORGANA : Alderaan seconds the motion for a vote of no confidence in Chancellor Valorum.MAD AMEDDA : The motion has been seconded by Bail Organa of Alderaan.BAIL ORGANA : There must be no delays.
The motion is on the floor and must be voted upon in this session.LOTT DOD : The Trade Federation moves the motion be sent to the procedures committee for study.And on and on...Oh yeah, the kids gotta love this stuff!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518258</id>
	<title>Re:most fundamental flaw of prequels ---</title>
	<author>Tetsujin</author>
	<datestamp>1261398240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You can already guess how it turns out. I like flashbacks. I've seen many enjoyable stories where the past of certain characters and events is kept a mystery to slowly tease out over the course of the story. But it's never the primary focus of the story. When you go and make a prequel, dedicating an entire movie to going backwards, it feels like retreading old ground, even if we haven't explicitly seen it. Vader starts off as good guy, falls to evil. We caught the gist from Obi-Wan's exposition. Nothing we saw in the prequels added anything to it whatsoever.</p></div><p>It might have worked if they'd really sold it.  If they'd somehow made me believe that the same Anakin from "Phantom Menace" and "Attack of the Clones" someday would turn into Big Bad Vader...  (Damn!  I shoulda used spoiler tags...)</p><p>I think the more natural point for a prequel would have been a straight lead-in to "Episode 4" - the formation of the rebellion, early battles, the theft of the plans, and so on.  With the right treatment I think that could have made a fine set of prequels.  Phantom Menace went back too far, IMO - it went back to a point where not much interesting was happening.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can already guess how it turns out .
I like flashbacks .
I 've seen many enjoyable stories where the past of certain characters and events is kept a mystery to slowly tease out over the course of the story .
But it 's never the primary focus of the story .
When you go and make a prequel , dedicating an entire movie to going backwards , it feels like retreading old ground , even if we have n't explicitly seen it .
Vader starts off as good guy , falls to evil .
We caught the gist from Obi-Wan 's exposition .
Nothing we saw in the prequels added anything to it whatsoever.It might have worked if they 'd really sold it .
If they 'd somehow made me believe that the same Anakin from " Phantom Menace " and " Attack of the Clones " someday would turn into Big Bad Vader... ( Damn ! I shoulda used spoiler tags... ) I think the more natural point for a prequel would have been a straight lead-in to " Episode 4 " - the formation of the rebellion , early battles , the theft of the plans , and so on .
With the right treatment I think that could have made a fine set of prequels .
Phantom Menace went back too far , IMO - it went back to a point where not much interesting was happening .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can already guess how it turns out.
I like flashbacks.
I've seen many enjoyable stories where the past of certain characters and events is kept a mystery to slowly tease out over the course of the story.
But it's never the primary focus of the story.
When you go and make a prequel, dedicating an entire movie to going backwards, it feels like retreading old ground, even if we haven't explicitly seen it.
Vader starts off as good guy, falls to evil.
We caught the gist from Obi-Wan's exposition.
Nothing we saw in the prequels added anything to it whatsoever.It might have worked if they'd really sold it.
If they'd somehow made me believe that the same Anakin from "Phantom Menace" and "Attack of the Clones" someday would turn into Big Bad Vader...  (Damn!  I shoulda used spoiler tags...)I think the more natural point for a prequel would have been a straight lead-in to "Episode 4" - the formation of the rebellion, early battles, the theft of the plans, and so on.
With the right treatment I think that could have made a fine set of prequels.
Phantom Menace went back too far, IMO - it went back to a point where not much interesting was happening.
:)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515532</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515100</id>
	<title>TL;DW</title>
	<author>TangoMargarine</author>
	<datestamp>1261424820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I actually *liked* The Phantom Menace...minus the Anakin crap.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I actually * liked * The Phantom Menace...minus the Anakin crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I actually *liked* The Phantom Menace...minus the Anakin crap.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800</id>
	<title>Why a decade later</title>
	<author>sopssa</author>
	<datestamp>1261423500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It probably took 10 years to do all of this.</p><p>I didn't think The Phantom Menace was all that bad then, but now he's pointed out all the flaws in humorous manner.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It probably took 10 years to do all of this.I did n't think The Phantom Menace was all that bad then , but now he 's pointed out all the flaws in humorous manner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It probably took 10 years to do all of this.I didn't think The Phantom Menace was all that bad then, but now he's pointed out all the flaws in humorous manner.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517982</id>
	<title>Re:So am I normal or something?</title>
	<author>dsanfte</author>
	<datestamp>1261396440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole" title="wikipedia.org">Hyperbole</a> [wikipedia.org], from ancient Greek "", meaning excess or exaggeration) is a figure of speech in which statements are exaggerated. It may be used to evoke strong feelings or to create a strong impression, but is not meant to be taken literally.</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>Get your Assburgers diagnosed. I could shine a CO2 laser in your face, and it wouldn't be as blindingly obvious as that sarcasm was.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hyperbole [ wikipedia.org ] , from ancient Greek " " , meaning excess or exaggeration ) is a figure of speech in which statements are exaggerated .
It may be used to evoke strong feelings or to create a strong impression , but is not meant to be taken literally .
Get your Assburgers diagnosed .
I could shine a CO2 laser in your face , and it would n't be as blindingly obvious as that sarcasm was .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>  Hyperbole [wikipedia.org], from ancient Greek "", meaning excess or exaggeration) is a figure of speech in which statements are exaggerated.
It may be used to evoke strong feelings or to create a strong impression, but is not meant to be taken literally.
Get your Assburgers diagnosed.
I could shine a CO2 laser in your face, and it wouldn't be as blindingly obvious as that sarcasm was.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515138</id>
	<title>Great Example of IP Abuse</title>
	<author>grumpygrodyguy</author>
	<datestamp>1261425060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I haven't seen it, but I'm glad someone devoted the time to do this.</p><p>The prequels, and especially the <i>replacement</i> of the original trilogy with the "re-mastered" Lucas-edited crap are great examples of how destructive exclusive IP can be to creative works.</p><p>"The ultimate single-minded, self-centered creature is a cancer cell."</p><p>That is what George Lucas became to his own films.  After a great piece of artwork has become culturally accepted, it should be cast in stone, and be preserved as it is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have n't seen it , but I 'm glad someone devoted the time to do this.The prequels , and especially the replacement of the original trilogy with the " re-mastered " Lucas-edited crap are great examples of how destructive exclusive IP can be to creative works .
" The ultimate single-minded , self-centered creature is a cancer cell .
" That is what George Lucas became to his own films .
After a great piece of artwork has become culturally accepted , it should be cast in stone , and be preserved as it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I haven't seen it, but I'm glad someone devoted the time to do this.The prequels, and especially the replacement of the original trilogy with the "re-mastered" Lucas-edited crap are great examples of how destructive exclusive IP can be to creative works.
"The ultimate single-minded, self-centered creature is a cancer cell.
"That is what George Lucas became to his own films.
After a great piece of artwork has become culturally accepted, it should be cast in stone, and be preserved as it is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516398</id>
	<title>Re:Every film is flawed</title>
	<author>eulernet</author>
	<datestamp>1261387800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Really, which film was worse?</p></div><p>Both of them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Really , which film was worse ? Both of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really, which film was worse?Both of them.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516410</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261387920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You got whooshed. Watch the second part and once you're in his basement, you get the point.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You got whooshed .
Watch the second part and once you 're in his basement , you get the point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You got whooshed.
Watch the second part and once you're in his basement, you get the point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516848</id>
	<title>Ewan McDonald?</title>
	<author>Trogre</author>
	<datestamp>1261390200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I stopped watching at this point.  I'm amazed I made it that far, actually.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I stopped watching at this point .
I 'm amazed I made it that far , actually .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I stopped watching at this point.
I'm amazed I made it that far, actually.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514918</id>
	<title>Jar^2</title>
	<author>TBoon</author>
	<datestamp>1261424100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Jar Jar wouldn't have been so bad, if he had gotten way less screen time. Sure he's a "breakthrough in technology"...hmmm... actually that seems to summarize everything wrong with that movie... It's there because it's possible (and/or have never been done before), not because the story needs it to be there...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Jar Jar would n't have been so bad , if he had gotten way less screen time .
Sure he 's a " breakthrough in technology " ...hmmm... actually that seems to summarize everything wrong with that movie... It 's there because it 's possible ( and/or have never been done before ) , not because the story needs it to be there.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jar Jar wouldn't have been so bad, if he had gotten way less screen time.
Sure he's a "breakthrough in technology"...hmmm... actually that seems to summarize everything wrong with that movie... It's there because it's possible (and/or have never been done before), not because the story needs it to be there...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515696</id>
	<title>Han Solo is so sexy.</title>
	<author>Jessified</author>
	<datestamp>1261427640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like how all the men describe Han Solo as sexist and chauvinist and so on, and the girl thinks he's "sexy." I bet she's a feminist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like how all the men describe Han Solo as sexist and chauvinist and so on , and the girl thinks he 's " sexy .
" I bet she 's a feminist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like how all the men describe Han Solo as sexist and chauvinist and so on, and the girl thinks he's "sexy.
" I bet she's a feminist.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515034</id>
	<title>The Definitive Evisceration of The Phantom Menace</title>
	<author>Entropy98</author>
	<datestamp>1261424520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been waiting almost 10 years for  The Definitive Evisceration of The Phantom Menace and I must say that now that it's here I'm very disappointed.</p><p>My inner child has been abused and betrayed. Im going to mope around, talking to no one, for the next two weeks. I don't think I'll be able to bring myself to see #2 or #3, whatever they will be called.</p><p>There were so many good points to be made, but it seems the director just went for the easy, mass appeal, fluff.  Maybe if the director wasn't surrounded with mindless 'yes men' with no vision this could have been better. Maybe if they had cast a narrator with a better voice. Unfortunately this 70 minute train wreck cannot be undone.</p><p>I hope I don't have to wait 10 years for the The Definitive Evisceration of The Definitive Evisceration of The Phantom Menace.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been waiting almost 10 years for The Definitive Evisceration of The Phantom Menace and I must say that now that it 's here I 'm very disappointed.My inner child has been abused and betrayed .
Im going to mope around , talking to no one , for the next two weeks .
I do n't think I 'll be able to bring myself to see # 2 or # 3 , whatever they will be called.There were so many good points to be made , but it seems the director just went for the easy , mass appeal , fluff .
Maybe if the director was n't surrounded with mindless 'yes men ' with no vision this could have been better .
Maybe if they had cast a narrator with a better voice .
Unfortunately this 70 minute train wreck can not be undone.I hope I do n't have to wait 10 years for the The Definitive Evisceration of The Definitive Evisceration of The Phantom Menace .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been waiting almost 10 years for  The Definitive Evisceration of The Phantom Menace and I must say that now that it's here I'm very disappointed.My inner child has been abused and betrayed.
Im going to mope around, talking to no one, for the next two weeks.
I don't think I'll be able to bring myself to see #2 or #3, whatever they will be called.There were so many good points to be made, but it seems the director just went for the easy, mass appeal, fluff.
Maybe if the director wasn't surrounded with mindless 'yes men' with no vision this could have been better.
Maybe if they had cast a narrator with a better voice.
Unfortunately this 70 minute train wreck cannot be undone.I hope I don't have to wait 10 years for the The Definitive Evisceration of The Definitive Evisceration of The Phantom Menace.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517810</id>
	<title>Re:Jar^2</title>
	<author>Cro Magnon</author>
	<datestamp>1261395360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For the most part, I thought JarJar sucked, but I did get a half-chuckle/half-incredulous stare out of the fight between the Gungans and the droid army.  To this day, I can't believe that that Gungan tossed that explosive device to the idiot who got banished for his clumsiness.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For the most part , I thought JarJar sucked , but I did get a half-chuckle/half-incredulous stare out of the fight between the Gungans and the droid army .
To this day , I ca n't believe that that Gungan tossed that explosive device to the idiot who got banished for his clumsiness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the most part, I thought JarJar sucked, but I did get a half-chuckle/half-incredulous stare out of the fight between the Gungans and the droid army.
To this day, I can't believe that that Gungan tossed that explosive device to the idiot who got banished for his clumsiness.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30530818</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1261484880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The sad thing is, I think I got more enjoyment from the Pod Racer game than from the three prequel movies put together.  If they just wanted to make a game out of it, they could have had a thirty second clip of pod racing in the background of one of the shots.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The sad thing is , I think I got more enjoyment from the Pod Racer game than from the three prequel movies put together .
If they just wanted to make a game out of it , they could have had a thirty second clip of pod racing in the background of one of the shots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The sad thing is, I think I got more enjoyment from the Pod Racer game than from the three prequel movies put together.
If they just wanted to make a game out of it, they could have had a thirty second clip of pod racing in the background of one of the shots.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30527258</id>
	<title>The alternate script?</title>
	<author>whitroth</author>
	<datestamp>1261513380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>About the time that came out, a buddy of mine found a 17-page treatment someone had done. I read all of it, and it *was* the movie we'd been waiting for. The author said he'd tried, numerous times, to contact Lucas, and got brushed off.</p><p>Anakin's mom was a *much* stronger character, etc, etc. On and off, the last couple of years, I've tried to find that treatment again, and haven't been able to - anyone here remember it?</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; mark, also looking for the story of the sysadmin who gets 2 lbs of chocolate-<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; covered espresso beans for the holidays, and the department self-<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; destructs....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>About the time that came out , a buddy of mine found a 17-page treatment someone had done .
I read all of it , and it * was * the movie we 'd been waiting for .
The author said he 'd tried , numerous times , to contact Lucas , and got brushed off.Anakin 's mom was a * much * stronger character , etc , etc .
On and off , the last couple of years , I 've tried to find that treatment again , and have n't been able to - anyone here remember it ?
              mark , also looking for the story of the sysadmin who gets 2 lbs of chocolate-                             covered espresso beans for the holidays , and the department self-                             destructs... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>About the time that came out, a buddy of mine found a 17-page treatment someone had done.
I read all of it, and it *was* the movie we'd been waiting for.
The author said he'd tried, numerous times, to contact Lucas, and got brushed off.Anakin's mom was a *much* stronger character, etc, etc.
On and off, the last couple of years, I've tried to find that treatment again, and haven't been able to - anyone here remember it?
              mark, also looking for the story of the sysadmin who gets 2 lbs of chocolate-
                            covered espresso beans for the holidays, and the department self-
                            destructs....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515442</id>
	<title>Needed fans to consult</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261426380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I mean<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. how is it that Obi-Wan needs Yoda to remind him that "there is another" when<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. OBI-WAN WAS THERE FOR THE BIRTH?!?!</p><p>It is the stupid ignorance of HIS OWN MOVIES that makes the prequels so bad. Not the poor acting, dialogue, pod race, emo kid, midchlorideans, etc.</p><p>I would forgive everything else and give Lucas a pass on the prequels - had they fit and worked within the Star Wars Universe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean .. how is it that Obi-Wan needs Yoda to remind him that " there is another " when .. OBI-WAN WAS THERE FOR THE BIRTH ? ! ?
! It is the stupid ignorance of HIS OWN MOVIES that makes the prequels so bad .
Not the poor acting , dialogue , pod race , emo kid , midchlorideans , etc.I would forgive everything else and give Lucas a pass on the prequels - had they fit and worked within the Star Wars Universe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean .. how is it that Obi-Wan needs Yoda to remind him that "there is another" when .. OBI-WAN WAS THERE FOR THE BIRTH?!?
!It is the stupid ignorance of HIS OWN MOVIES that makes the prequels so bad.
Not the poor acting, dialogue, pod race, emo kid, midchlorideans, etc.I would forgive everything else and give Lucas a pass on the prequels - had they fit and worked within the Star Wars Universe.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516760</id>
	<title>Re:Demo Reel</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261389780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Whooosh!<br>
<br>
The OP knew that SGI was already in trouble by the time TPM came out. He was just making a joke, which you just ruined.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whooosh !
The OP knew that SGI was already in trouble by the time TPM came out .
He was just making a joke , which you just ruined .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whooosh!
The OP knew that SGI was already in trouble by the time TPM came out.
He was just making a joke, which you just ruined.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516706</id>
	<title>Re:Grow Up</title>
	<author>thisnamestoolong</author>
	<datestamp>1261389480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As someone who knows a great deal about the art of film making, I can tell you that on every possible metric by which one could judge a film the original trilogy utterly decimates the prequel trilogy. The original trilogy is an entertaining and wildly creative sci-fi/adventure/fantasy epic. These films are absolutely flawed, but are still extremely well made and effective for what they are. The prequel trilogy, on the other hand, is an utter mess. The story is incoherent, none of the characters have any depth or behave in anything even approaching a believable manner, and all the CG eye-poop only serves to make the whole thing even less believable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who knows a great deal about the art of film making , I can tell you that on every possible metric by which one could judge a film the original trilogy utterly decimates the prequel trilogy .
The original trilogy is an entertaining and wildly creative sci-fi/adventure/fantasy epic .
These films are absolutely flawed , but are still extremely well made and effective for what they are .
The prequel trilogy , on the other hand , is an utter mess .
The story is incoherent , none of the characters have any depth or behave in anything even approaching a believable manner , and all the CG eye-poop only serves to make the whole thing even less believable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who knows a great deal about the art of film making, I can tell you that on every possible metric by which one could judge a film the original trilogy utterly decimates the prequel trilogy.
The original trilogy is an entertaining and wildly creative sci-fi/adventure/fantasy epic.
These films are absolutely flawed, but are still extremely well made and effective for what they are.
The prequel trilogy, on the other hand, is an utter mess.
The story is incoherent, none of the characters have any depth or behave in anything even approaching a believable manner, and all the CG eye-poop only serves to make the whole thing even less believable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30539536</id>
	<title>You lost me at 'surgical incision into the skull'</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259753160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gah!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gah !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gah!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515728</id>
	<title>Merchandising doesn't require bad child actors</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261427760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Those three points violate rule #1 of sci-fi action for kids - Marketability outweighs quality.</p></div><p>Marketability is made much easier by having a good product.</p><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Older Skywalker (Lets get him in his late teens)</p></div><p>Younger kids identify more and are responsible (indirectly) for many more toy sales.</p></div><p>I've got a box full of the original Star Wars action figures that says the age of the kid has little to do with marketability.  Furthermore, none of the other Star Wars movies featured a child so prominently and somehow they still managed to sell a galactic ass-load of merchandise.</p><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>No JarJar and/or no C3PO and R2D2 (way to many comedy characters)</p></div><p>Action figures.</p></div><p>See previous response.</p><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>No Pod-Racing... 20 minutes about 1/3 of the movie about nothing.</p></div><p>Video games.</p></div><p>You don't need pod racing to do a video game.  Even if you do want to make it a video game you don't need 25 minutes of it where the plot advances nowhere and we have bad dialog and worse acting by the kid playing Anakin.  They could have shown pod racing in about 2-5 minutes and you'd have your video game AND a better movie.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Those three points violate rule # 1 of sci-fi action for kids - Marketability outweighs quality.Marketability is made much easier by having a good product.Older Skywalker ( Lets get him in his late teens ) Younger kids identify more and are responsible ( indirectly ) for many more toy sales.I 've got a box full of the original Star Wars action figures that says the age of the kid has little to do with marketability .
Furthermore , none of the other Star Wars movies featured a child so prominently and somehow they still managed to sell a galactic ass-load of merchandise.No JarJar and/or no C3PO and R2D2 ( way to many comedy characters ) Action figures.See previous response.No Pod-Racing... 20 minutes about 1/3 of the movie about nothing.Video games.You do n't need pod racing to do a video game .
Even if you do want to make it a video game you do n't need 25 minutes of it where the plot advances nowhere and we have bad dialog and worse acting by the kid playing Anakin .
They could have shown pod racing in about 2-5 minutes and you 'd have your video game AND a better movie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those three points violate rule #1 of sci-fi action for kids - Marketability outweighs quality.Marketability is made much easier by having a good product.Older Skywalker (Lets get him in his late teens)Younger kids identify more and are responsible (indirectly) for many more toy sales.I've got a box full of the original Star Wars action figures that says the age of the kid has little to do with marketability.
Furthermore, none of the other Star Wars movies featured a child so prominently and somehow they still managed to sell a galactic ass-load of merchandise.No JarJar and/or no C3PO and R2D2 (way to many comedy characters)Action figures.See previous response.No Pod-Racing... 20 minutes about 1/3 of the movie about nothing.Video games.You don't need pod racing to do a video game.
Even if you do want to make it a video game you don't need 25 minutes of it where the plot advances nowhere and we have bad dialog and worse acting by the kid playing Anakin.
They could have shown pod racing in about 2-5 minutes and you'd have your video game AND a better movie.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516168</id>
	<title>Re:Every film is flawed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261386780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The same person who wrote this probably sat through Transformers 2 without having an aneurysm.</p></div><p>How, exactly, did you come to this conclusion?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The same person who wrote this probably sat through Transformers 2 without having an aneurysm.How , exactly , did you come to this conclusion ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The same person who wrote this probably sat through Transformers 2 without having an aneurysm.How, exactly, did you come to this conclusion?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>jellomizer</author>
	<datestamp>1261424460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Phantom Menace could have been fixed by 3 things...</p><p>Older Skywalker (Lets get him in his late teens)<br>No JarJar and/or no C3PO and R2D2 (way to many comedy characters)<br>No Pod-Racing... 20 minutes about 1/3 of the movie about nothing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Phantom Menace could have been fixed by 3 things...Older Skywalker ( Lets get him in his late teens ) No JarJar and/or no C3PO and R2D2 ( way to many comedy characters ) No Pod-Racing... 20 minutes about 1/3 of the movie about nothing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Phantom Menace could have been fixed by 3 things...Older Skywalker (Lets get him in his late teens)No JarJar and/or no C3PO and R2D2 (way to many comedy characters)No Pod-Racing... 20 minutes about 1/3 of the movie about nothing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517222</id>
	<title>Re:Every film is flawed</title>
	<author>ErikZ</author>
	<datestamp>1261392000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Transformers 2 was boring. But I didn't expect much after Transformers 1.</p><p>What I expected from Episode I was a plot, interesting characters, and all the stuff that made the previous 3 movies so good. It had *none* of that.</p><p>Why wouldn't you be pissed? He demonstrated that he could make a good movie in the past, and now has a lifetime of experience and an incredible budget.</p><p>The result, Episode I. So either he's been secretly incompetent all these years. Or that he purposefully made a crappy movie. I'm sure it's the latter. And to prove it I have to say one word. Midiclorians.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Transformers 2 was boring .
But I did n't expect much after Transformers 1.What I expected from Episode I was a plot , interesting characters , and all the stuff that made the previous 3 movies so good .
It had * none * of that.Why would n't you be pissed ?
He demonstrated that he could make a good movie in the past , and now has a lifetime of experience and an incredible budget.The result , Episode I. So either he 's been secretly incompetent all these years .
Or that he purposefully made a crappy movie .
I 'm sure it 's the latter .
And to prove it I have to say one word .
Midiclorians .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Transformers 2 was boring.
But I didn't expect much after Transformers 1.What I expected from Episode I was a plot, interesting characters, and all the stuff that made the previous 3 movies so good.
It had *none* of that.Why wouldn't you be pissed?
He demonstrated that he could make a good movie in the past, and now has a lifetime of experience and an incredible budget.The result, Episode I. So either he's been secretly incompetent all these years.
Or that he purposefully made a crappy movie.
I'm sure it's the latter.
And to prove it I have to say one word.
Midiclorians.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516052</id>
	<title>Geez!</title>
	<author>Berkyjay</author>
	<datestamp>1261386300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow, the movie wasn't that bad.  Get over it already.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , the movie was n't that bad .
Get over it already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, the movie wasn't that bad.
Get over it already.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518648</id>
	<title>Fuck it, I loved all the prequils</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261401300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>None were awful movies, all were entertaining, all had everything I wanted in a Star Wars movie:
<br>
Lightsabre fights, space battles, cool special effects, and not all boring'ed up by wasting time with fancy dialogue or plot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>None were awful movies , all were entertaining , all had everything I wanted in a Star Wars movie : Lightsabre fights , space battles , cool special effects , and not all boring'ed up by wasting time with fancy dialogue or plot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>None were awful movies, all were entertaining, all had everything I wanted in a Star Wars movie:

Lightsabre fights, space battles, cool special effects, and not all boring'ed up by wasting time with fancy dialogue or plot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515532</id>
	<title>most fundamental flaw of prequels ---</title>
	<author>jollyreaper</author>
	<datestamp>1261426860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can already guess how it turns out. I like flashbacks. I've seen many enjoyable stories where the past of certain characters and events is kept a mystery to slowly tease out over the course of the story. But it's never the primary focus of the story. When you go and make a prequel, dedicating an entire movie to going backwards, it feels like retreading old ground, even if we haven't explicitly seen it. Vader starts off as good guy, falls to evil. We caught the gist from Obi-Wan's exposition. Nothing we saw in the prequels added anything to it whatsoever.</p><p>Personally, I would have preferred to see the future adventures of Luke. Pretty much all of the expanded universe stuff was crap. But there could have been some great stories to tell as the Rebellion tries to become a Republic and not fall into the very tyrannies they fought against. Luke reforming the Jedi Order would have been awesome. The Jedi Academy stories weren't fit to line the bottom of birdcages. I would fear causing damage to any fireplace I tossed those books into for burning.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can already guess how it turns out .
I like flashbacks .
I 've seen many enjoyable stories where the past of certain characters and events is kept a mystery to slowly tease out over the course of the story .
But it 's never the primary focus of the story .
When you go and make a prequel , dedicating an entire movie to going backwards , it feels like retreading old ground , even if we have n't explicitly seen it .
Vader starts off as good guy , falls to evil .
We caught the gist from Obi-Wan 's exposition .
Nothing we saw in the prequels added anything to it whatsoever.Personally , I would have preferred to see the future adventures of Luke .
Pretty much all of the expanded universe stuff was crap .
But there could have been some great stories to tell as the Rebellion tries to become a Republic and not fall into the very tyrannies they fought against .
Luke reforming the Jedi Order would have been awesome .
The Jedi Academy stories were n't fit to line the bottom of birdcages .
I would fear causing damage to any fireplace I tossed those books into for burning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can already guess how it turns out.
I like flashbacks.
I've seen many enjoyable stories where the past of certain characters and events is kept a mystery to slowly tease out over the course of the story.
But it's never the primary focus of the story.
When you go and make a prequel, dedicating an entire movie to going backwards, it feels like retreading old ground, even if we haven't explicitly seen it.
Vader starts off as good guy, falls to evil.
We caught the gist from Obi-Wan's exposition.
Nothing we saw in the prequels added anything to it whatsoever.Personally, I would have preferred to see the future adventures of Luke.
Pretty much all of the expanded universe stuff was crap.
But there could have been some great stories to tell as the Rebellion tries to become a Republic and not fall into the very tyrannies they fought against.
Luke reforming the Jedi Order would have been awesome.
The Jedi Academy stories weren't fit to line the bottom of birdcages.
I would fear causing damage to any fireplace I tossed those books into for burning.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515466</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261426440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know it's old, old news by now, but if you haven't already check out <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_Phantom\_Edit" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">The Phantom Edit</a> [wikipedia.org]. It made some great headway in making TPM watchable, boosting it from unwatchably atrocious to plain old Vanilla Bad. It doesn't address all of your issues, but did a great job in rectifying the biggies.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know it 's old , old news by now , but if you have n't already check out The Phantom Edit [ wikipedia.org ] .
It made some great headway in making TPM watchable , boosting it from unwatchably atrocious to plain old Vanilla Bad .
It does n't address all of your issues , but did a great job in rectifying the biggies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know it's old, old news by now, but if you haven't already check out The Phantom Edit [wikipedia.org].
It made some great headway in making TPM watchable, boosting it from unwatchably atrocious to plain old Vanilla Bad.
It doesn't address all of your issues, but did a great job in rectifying the biggies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515302</id>
	<title>Re:SWHS?</title>
	<author>Pop69</author>
	<datestamp>1261425720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Belgium man, Belgium !</htmltext>
<tokenext>Belgium man , Belgium !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Belgium man, Belgium !</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516946</id>
	<title>Re:Jar^2</title>
	<author>cryptoluddite</author>
	<datestamp>1261390620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Jar Jar wouldn't have been so bad, if he had gotten way less screen time.</p></div><p>The biggest problem with Jar Jar is that he <i>talked English</i>.  His equivalent in the original movies, Chewie, talked but only in another language so we didn't have to actually hear his dialog.  Instead we get to use our imagination to fill that in (not relevant to the story) with whatever stupid or smart dialog we can imagine.  It brings some of the imagination element of books to the movies.</p><p>And no, C3PO is not really comic relief or the equivalent of Jar-jar, he's a <i>prophet / a fate</i>.  Just about everything he says comes true later on in the movie.  He prepares us for what's coming so we can focus on what's important.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Jar Jar would n't have been so bad , if he had gotten way less screen time.The biggest problem with Jar Jar is that he talked English .
His equivalent in the original movies , Chewie , talked but only in another language so we did n't have to actually hear his dialog .
Instead we get to use our imagination to fill that in ( not relevant to the story ) with whatever stupid or smart dialog we can imagine .
It brings some of the imagination element of books to the movies.And no , C3PO is not really comic relief or the equivalent of Jar-jar , he 's a prophet / a fate .
Just about everything he says comes true later on in the movie .
He prepares us for what 's coming so we can focus on what 's important .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jar Jar wouldn't have been so bad, if he had gotten way less screen time.The biggest problem with Jar Jar is that he talked English.
His equivalent in the original movies, Chewie, talked but only in another language so we didn't have to actually hear his dialog.
Instead we get to use our imagination to fill that in (not relevant to the story) with whatever stupid or smart dialog we can imagine.
It brings some of the imagination element of books to the movies.And no, C3PO is not really comic relief or the equivalent of Jar-jar, he's a prophet / a fate.
Just about everything he says comes true later on in the movie.
He prepares us for what's coming so we can focus on what's important.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519528</id>
	<title>phantom menace worse than this reviewer?</title>
	<author>blueworm</author>
	<datestamp>1261408620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm going to have to say that the phantom menace is better than this review video. The reviewer's tone is so boring, so monotonic, that I can't watch more than 10 seconds of the video. George Lucas at least let me get to the end of \_his\_ film!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm going to have to say that the phantom menace is better than this review video .
The reviewer 's tone is so boring , so monotonic , that I ca n't watch more than 10 seconds of the video .
George Lucas at least let me get to the end of \ _his \ _ film !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm going to have to say that the phantom menace is better than this review video.
The reviewer's tone is so boring, so monotonic, that I can't watch more than 10 seconds of the video.
George Lucas at least let me get to the end of \_his\_ film!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326</id>
	<title>Re:Why a decade later</title>
	<author>gnick</author>
	<datestamp>1261425840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those three points violate rule #1 of sci-fi action for kids - Marketability outweighs quality.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Older Skywalker (Lets get him in his late teens)</p></div><p>Younger kids identify more and are responsible (indirectly) for many more toy sales.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>No JarJar and/or no C3PO and R2D2 (way to many comedy characters)</p></div><p>Action figures.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>No Pod-Racing... 20 minutes about 1/3 of the movie about nothing.</p></div><p>Video games.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Those three points violate rule # 1 of sci-fi action for kids - Marketability outweighs quality.Older Skywalker ( Lets get him in his late teens ) Younger kids identify more and are responsible ( indirectly ) for many more toy sales.No JarJar and/or no C3PO and R2D2 ( way to many comedy characters ) Action figures.No Pod-Racing... 20 minutes about 1/3 of the movie about nothing.Video games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those three points violate rule #1 of sci-fi action for kids - Marketability outweighs quality.Older Skywalker (Lets get him in his late teens)Younger kids identify more and are responsible (indirectly) for many more toy sales.No JarJar and/or no C3PO and R2D2 (way to many comedy characters)Action figures.No Pod-Racing... 20 minutes about 1/3 of the movie about nothing.Video games.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521972</id>
	<title>Re: Kill Bill</title>
	<author>cyclomedia</author>
	<datestamp>1261479780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Personally I'd like to edit all 6 films into two in the style of kill bill, even keep some of the music from that and have volume 1 end with the I am your father revelation... Most of eps 1/2 would be contained in a few flashback chapters, heck they've both got the same 4/4 character pattern in the titles...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally I 'd like to edit all 6 films into two in the style of kill bill , even keep some of the music from that and have volume 1 end with the I am your father revelation... Most of eps 1/2 would be contained in a few flashback chapters , heck they 've both got the same 4/4 character pattern in the titles.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally I'd like to edit all 6 films into two in the style of kill bill, even keep some of the music from that and have volume 1 end with the I am your father revelation... Most of eps 1/2 would be contained in a few flashback chapters, heck they've both got the same 4/4 character pattern in the titles...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515220</id>
	<title>Re:Good Material But Lengthy and Bad Delivery</title>
	<author>furby076</author>
	<datestamp>1261425360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Lucas gambled and he lost. <b>He lost everything.</b></p> </div><p>This is where I have to disagree.  He went on to make 2 more movies, and their associated toys, video games, books, etc.  He went on to make a stupid amount of money.  While the person who created this entire thread said he didn't see the last two movies (and I doubt this very much) most people, even the ones who complained about TPM, did.  We went to the theatres, we saw the movies, and cheered during the movie.  After the movie we became the typical fanboys who tried to equate the last three movies to something from our childhood.  <br> <br>

Right there that is the equivelant of what I did to myself by watching Transformers cartoon (the original cartoon) when I was 30 years old.  I f'd up my memory.  Back when I was 8 y/o Transformers was top notch graphics...now it is like reading a comic book - except not drawn as well.  Same thing with these movies; we are trying to compare what our childhood memories (fantasies) represent and compare it to this -- it ain't going to fly.<br> <br>

Anyhow - many of us have gone to see movies for their graphics and not their stories (avatar anyone)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lucas gambled and he lost .
He lost everything .
This is where I have to disagree .
He went on to make 2 more movies , and their associated toys , video games , books , etc .
He went on to make a stupid amount of money .
While the person who created this entire thread said he did n't see the last two movies ( and I doubt this very much ) most people , even the ones who complained about TPM , did .
We went to the theatres , we saw the movies , and cheered during the movie .
After the movie we became the typical fanboys who tried to equate the last three movies to something from our childhood .
Right there that is the equivelant of what I did to myself by watching Transformers cartoon ( the original cartoon ) when I was 30 years old .
I f 'd up my memory .
Back when I was 8 y/o Transformers was top notch graphics...now it is like reading a comic book - except not drawn as well .
Same thing with these movies ; we are trying to compare what our childhood memories ( fantasies ) represent and compare it to this -- it ai n't going to fly .
Anyhow - many of us have gone to see movies for their graphics and not their stories ( avatar anyone )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lucas gambled and he lost.
He lost everything.
This is where I have to disagree.
He went on to make 2 more movies, and their associated toys, video games, books, etc.
He went on to make a stupid amount of money.
While the person who created this entire thread said he didn't see the last two movies (and I doubt this very much) most people, even the ones who complained about TPM, did.
We went to the theatres, we saw the movies, and cheered during the movie.
After the movie we became the typical fanboys who tried to equate the last three movies to something from our childhood.
Right there that is the equivelant of what I did to myself by watching Transformers cartoon (the original cartoon) when I was 30 years old.
I f'd up my memory.
Back when I was 8 y/o Transformers was top notch graphics...now it is like reading a comic book - except not drawn as well.
Same thing with these movies; we are trying to compare what our childhood memories (fantasies) represent and compare it to this -- it ain't going to fly.
Anyhow - many of us have gone to see movies for their graphics and not their stories (avatar anyone)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516852</id>
	<title>Made it through 3 minutes...</title>
	<author>EmagGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1261390260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know if he was trying to be funny by sounding like he was trying to talk with his mouth full, but it was utterly intolerable...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know if he was trying to be funny by sounding like he was trying to talk with his mouth full , but it was utterly intolerable.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know if he was trying to be funny by sounding like he was trying to talk with his mouth full, but it was utterly intolerable...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516622</id>
	<title>Call me a f-ing idiot if you want but</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261389060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I liked the movie. I thought it was bad ass. And yes, it is the only Stars Wars movie I have ever seen. I watched it in the theater with a buddy. Loved it!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I liked the movie .
I thought it was bad ass .
And yes , it is the only Stars Wars movie I have ever seen .
I watched it in the theater with a buddy .
Loved it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I liked the movie.
I thought it was bad ass.
And yes, it is the only Stars Wars movie I have ever seen.
I watched it in the theater with a buddy.
Loved it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30526924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515082
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519870
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516426
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30523528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30533420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_103</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516946
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517178
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518174
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30522968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30520308
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_110</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519688
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519256
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516244
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517810
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_100</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515466
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516628
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30526500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30526970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515182
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517980
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516058
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516462
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30533314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_106</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515534
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518346
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515194
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519452
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30523648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515960
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515220
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515728
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515302
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_104</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516576
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515958
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517950
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30520714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516962
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30528038
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30522350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516058
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517524
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30530512
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_101</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30522660
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516410
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30520880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516168
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30561714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518106
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517222
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_109</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515244
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30549704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_108</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516546
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515838
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_113</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518278
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521558
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515276
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516058
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_105</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517186
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30530818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_107</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30532698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_112</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516296
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515076
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30522126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_111</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30545910
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_102</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_21_1637235_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515688
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517982
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516058
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518656
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519068
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521670
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515608
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515100
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514916
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515524
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519224
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30549704
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30523648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30533420
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516848
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515244
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516954
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515276
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516410
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515210
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515282
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515076
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515204
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515128
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515296
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517724
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515650
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515384
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515004
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515838
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516462
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30533314
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515380
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516164
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515252
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519256
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518258
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518816
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514992
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514996
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515562
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516100
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517578
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521900
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515958
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517310
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517350
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515940
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519688
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516426
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30520714
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516034
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517584
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30530512
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30526970
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515466
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515326
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516182
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518070
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518770
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516628
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515978
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30522660
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517178
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518174
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521830
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30530818
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515922
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517980
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517524
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30520880
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515728
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516992
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521614
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30522968
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516358
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30532698
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30522350
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519614
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515034
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515006
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515534
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515960
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516244
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519538
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30522126
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515690
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515824
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515170
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516546
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517222
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517950
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519452
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516168
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518952
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515442
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515752
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516052
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514978
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516906
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518594
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30523528
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515020
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516148
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516706
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30520308
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516606
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516984
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515412
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516828
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515082
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514828
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515352
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517186
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519870
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516760
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515418
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516840
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518128
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515438
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30519828
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521972
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30527662
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518686
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518648
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516026
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30526924
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518776
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30545910
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516962
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516360
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514940
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515150
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30561714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515302
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516576
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515208
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515688
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30516128
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517504
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515778
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514930
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_21_1637235.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514864
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30514990
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515194
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515504
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515350
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30517580
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30528038
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30521558
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515444
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30526500
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515518
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30515310
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_21_1637235.30518560
</commentlist>
</conversation>
