Tonight on GeekNights, we consider the merchandise around cartoons, anime, comics, and manga. In the news, the fireworks are back in Queens, Glamdring the Foe-Hammer is back, a ton of cels are up for auction, the Sweet Tooth TV adaptation is pretty good so far, the El Hazard OAVs are getting a re-release, and Yoko Kanno is scoring the live action Cowboy Bebop. Also, we'll be live at PAX East online 2021 with Atari Game Design!
Things of the Day
Episode Links
Patreon:
Live Stream:
What I find interesting at 50 years old is I really don’t collect things anymore. With very rare exceptions, the most I will get is a t-shirt of my two favorite fandoms: S.H.I.E.L.D. and Dr. Who. I do have a S.H.I.E.L.D. coffee mug and 3rd Doctor sonic screwdriver, but that is it.
I was never a collector in the show things off way, I was more of a competitionist when it comes to things. Like wanting and eventually getting a complete animal cross card collection. Now I want things I can show in my office that is very subtly nerdy, like 80% of people will look at it and see it as cool but the 20% would go nuts.
I think Star Wars is the worst example of the originals not being tainted by remakes or additions to the franchise. You say “the original still exists” but in the case of the original trilogy, the only widely available versions have been changed from the original. That’s not because of the prequels, of course, but literally any other example would serve you better than Star Wars, as that is the most textbook case of the opposite.
Anyone who cares, knows, and has despecialized editions or laserdiscs or whatnot.
Well done for demonstrating the opposite of “widely available”.
One could argue the despecialized editions are more widely available than any other edition. They are free to download and play on any device. No money or subscription required.
This is also all besides the original point. Availability has nothing to do with it. In the show the point we were making is that new works of art existing does not in any way affect the quality or nature of any other work.
Imagine I bake you a cookie. You say it is delicious. It is now completely gone in your stomach, never to be tasted again. Then I bake a second cookie. You say it is awful. That has no impact whatsoever on the first cookie. Even though the cookie is gone. Even though I may never bake a good cookie ever again in my life. Even though the cookie will eventually be forgotten by all humans. The goodness of that first cookie is a permanent truth.
Too many nerds out there we see eating the first cookie, loving it. Eating the second cookie, hating it. And then they say the equivalent of “The first cookie I loved before actually sucks now because the second one sucked.” You can’t point at qualities of object B as part of judgement of object A. “The couch is ugly because I don’t like the color of the carpet.” That is the completely illogical idea I often witness and reject.
Yes, I get your original point. It is a good original point. I agree with your original point.
My post was that the single example you brought up in the episode was a particularly BAD example to use as an illustration of that point. Seriously, there is no other movie that has MORE outcry about how the original ISN’T widely available to watch. That people go to all the effort to make despecialized editions, because the original works of art aren’t widely available, is making MY POINT, and refuting YOUR choice of example. Almost NO OTHER movie has this issue, and what makes Star Wars unique from so many other movies is how its legacy is being tarnished by how the original movie isn’t widely available.
Really, Scott, it’s okay to let this one go. You know you picked a bad example, and you’re only making yourself look like an idiot trying to make it into a good example. Nobody else on this forum is thinking “wow, I really think more of Scott’s character because he’s sticking to his guns on this one”.