ROS Thoughts and Reviews Spoiler Thread

Utinniii

Moderator
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
5,117
Reaction score
560
Location
Canada
While I understand the broad point, I think expectations DO need to be tempered going into anything. We all create expectations of something in our minds so most of the time, these things won't happen in the story. Many fan expectations are not realistic. I think they also need to be broad.
For me, new aliens, ships, droids and creatures are enough. I don't need Jawas in every film though (but it wouldn't lessen the film had they been in it. Hoth Jawas!!!!)

I wanted to leave TPM with the same marvel and excitement as I did watching the original SW. That wasn't a realistic expectation. Just by virtue of my age that would have been improbable.
John Williams had some amazing scores but not all of them were as moving as I expected.

SW wasn't an original story with great actors and dialogue (although some/most of it was). Virtually all of the original cast made fun of the dialogue at some point (and Ford's abysmal acting in ROTJ made me actively angry for the longest time).

But is was an old story told well, with sublime moments and characters that inspired people.
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
1,741
Reaction score
88
Location
Sarlacc Pit of Carkoon
While I understand the broad point, I think expectations DO need to be tempered going into anything. We all create expectations of something in our minds so most of the time, these things won't happen in the story. Many fan expectations are not realistic. I think they also need to be broad.
For me, new aliens, ships, droids and creatures are enough. I don't need Jawas in every film though (but it wouldn't lessen the film had they been in it. Hoth Jawas!!!!)

I wanted to leave TPM with the same marvel and excitement as I did watching the original SW. That wasn't a realistic expectation. Just by virtue of my age that would have been improbable.
John Williams had some amazing scores but not all of them were as moving as I expected.

SW wasn't an original story with great actors and dialogue (although some/most of it was). Virtually all of the original cast made fun of the dialogue at some point (and Ford's abysmal acting in ROTJ made me actively angry for the longest time).

But is was an old story told well, with sublime moments and characters that inspired people.
I think we're on the same page. There is a pretty big difference between, I want to relive my childhood and I want to see a solid SW movie. I wanted the latter. If that is what you consider tempering my expectations, then I guess I'm guilty.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 31, 2011
Messages
1,048
Reaction score
18
TPM is on the top 3 of my fav SW films… (No, I’m not trolling/high/mentally-challenged… at least not when I’m posting here LOL And I’m aware of its very glaring flaws and failures as a film. But it’s an extremely ambitious undertaking brimming with untapped potential— and arguably one of the most multiculturally-rich in design and realworld historical references of any SW films. Whether you dig that sort of thing, is absolutely up to your personal preference and taste. Fortunately for me, I do and still find its design vocabulary unmatched and freshly visionary to this day.)

I went into TPM without any expectations/nostalgia/comparison to any previous SW since I never cared for SW before TPM. I went in with an open mind for George to tell whatever story he wanted. My only expectation was that George told a good solid story. Needless to say, it wasn’t. And it failed as a film not because it didn’t “live up to the expectations of what I wanted in a SW movie”… It failed as a movie due to sloppy, lazy first-darft writing and weak, lifeless directing.

And this is why the insipidly stupid ROS fails— along with the rest of the Sequel: Lazy, sloppy and first-draft writing along with weak and lifeless directing. Add to that it’s a blatant, unabashed rip-off of the OT, clumsily cobbled together like an ugly Frankenstein’s Monster with no distinction of its own. And even more insultingly so, it’s completely and desperately reliant on OT-nostalgia. Seeing as I have no nostalgic connection to the OT, all I see is pure corporate ugliness that fails on every single department: Storytelling, characterization, and the most important element in SW— design.
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
7,750
Reaction score
78
Location
BC Canada
The thing is, a new SW movie doesn’t have to be as good as or better than the OT for me to enjoy it. Let me give you a few examples to illustrate my point:
  • ESB is my favorite SW movie, maybe even my favorite movie period.
  • My favorite album is probably Revolver, although as a musician, that’s a tough question to answer.
  • I’m not big into sports, but game seven of the 2016 NBA finals was probably the best game I've ever watched. Congrats to your 2019 Raptures BTW.
Does that mean I can’t enjoy any movie, album, or game ever again if it’s not as good as my favs? Of course not. That’s why “it’ll never be as good as the OT” logic never made sense to me.

What I want and expect from a SW movie are the following:
  • Cool lightsaber fights
  • Awesome space battles
  • An original story that makes sense
  • A fantastic soundtrack
What I don’t expect, but would be a bonus:
  • Good dialog
  • Good acting
I hope this clarifies for you that Di$ney did not have an impossible task to satisfy me, but a rather simple one. For all the faults of the PT movies, I enjoyed them all because they meet my expectations.



As for your remarks, my reaction isn’t an indication of your intention. I didn’t get “much more upset” because I’m an adult on a public forum interacting with a complete stranger. If such things got me upset, I would remove myself from the situation. Now being snide (maybe cheeky is what you were going for?) might not have been your intent. If that was the case then I would politely suggest you take more care in your phrasing because snide is how it was perceived. Living under a rock never had a positive connotation. “Sounds like you’re happy avoiding the cinema and should probably continue to avoid it” expresses the same point without the spice.

Lastly, if having rather simple expectations is considered having a monkey on my back, well then call me Indy.
You and I are actually a lot alike. As for the 'living under a rock'... that's fact of the matter when you choose not to expose yourself to something. You've chosen to not watch the movie, which is fine... your choice... but then you are going to be largely ignorant of the subject matter - that's the consequence of not wanting to expose yourself to it. You're still welcome to comment of course, I would never suggest otherwise. Put in other words, I simply meant - if you choose to take a course that means staying ignorant of something, but leaves you happier for it, then that's what you should probably do.

Before anyone takes exception to my use of the word ignorance... it's not a 'bad word'. We are all ignorant of some things.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 28, 2013
Messages
529
Reaction score
214
Location
UK - Leeds
I'm not adverse to an extended cut, I'd quite like to see it.... but releasing a longer version now, and then another version later with the bits they haven't finished yet.... I get it gives them an opportunity to make more money from the cinema release (and maybe people will want to watch it on the big screen) but I'd rather they just release two versions on DVD/Disney Plus release.
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2013
Messages
529
Reaction score
214
Location
UK - Leeds
Thinking about Luke searching for the Wayfinder, I'm struggling to accept the fact he wouldn't know the connection between Vader and Mustafar (and if he doesn't Anakin needs to up his force ghost game) to think to look there or wouldn't consider searching the massive Death Star ruins (or are we supposed to accept that the rebels were completely oblivious to a masisve part of the station surving and landing nearby?).
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
1,741
Reaction score
88
Location
Sarlacc Pit of Carkoon
You and I are actually a lot alike. As for the 'living under a rock'... that's fact of the matter when you choose not to expose yourself to something. You've chosen to not watch the movie, which is fine... your choice... but then you are going to be largely ignorant of the subject matter - that's the consequence of not wanting to expose yourself to it. You're still welcome to comment of course, I would never suggest otherwise. Put in other words, I simply meant - if you choose to take a course that means staying ignorant of something, but leaves you happier for it, then that's what you should probably do.

Before anyone takes exception to my use of the word ignorance... it's not a 'bad word'. We are all ignorant of some things.
It's true that I don't have first hand reference, but I don't think that makes me 100% ignorant. I have what I've read and hear from those that have watched it which allows me to comment on the facts. I may not be able to say, that scene where Rey matches up the blade with the DS2 remains was terrible, but I can say that the idea sure sounds terrible.

You are right though, I am much happier now that I don't waste my money or time watching those film. But who knows. Maybe one day I'll hear universal praise for one of their SW movies and I'll venture out once again.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
5,898
Reaction score
266
...the idea sure sounds terrible.

it's not as terrible as it sounds. when 3PO has the red eyes, he says "from the south shore" the dagger-map would reveal the location; Rey stands on the south shore and holds up the dagger/map.

terrible? probably. but you kinda have to see it for yourself, otherwise, it "sounds" more terrible than it actually is.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
1,741
Reaction score
88
Location
Sarlacc Pit of Carkoon
it's not as terrible as it sounds. when 3PO has the red eyes, he says "from the south shore" the dagger-map would reveal the location; Rey stands on the south shore and holds up the dagger/map.

terrible? probably. but you kinda have to see it for yourself, otherwise, it "sounds" more terrible than it actually is.
It's not the fact that she happens to gets to the right spot with a vague location such as "the south shore", although the ease of it is off putting. It's more so that someone made that dagger in the first place, but maybe there is an interesting story to be made up about it and revealed in a future book.
 
Joined
Sep 5, 2015
Messages
3,849
Reaction score
958
Location
Viborg, Denmark
it's not as terrible as it sounds. when 3PO has the red eyes, he says "from the south shore" the dagger-map would reveal the location; Rey stands on the south shore and holds up the dagger/map.
See, I didn't catch that in the cinema, most likely due to the pace and bombardment of various details both visually and auditory. But still, it was awfully accurate. So unless the south shore was formed into a tip/point, which it wasn't (as I remember it) it was very convenient for the plot.
 

Utinniii

Moderator
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
5,117
Reaction score
560
Location
Canada
See, I didn't catch that in the cinema, most likely due to the pace and bombardment of various details both visually and auditory. But still, it was awfully accurate. So unless the south shore was formed into a tip/point, which it wasn't (as I remember it) it was very convenient for the plot.
Except we see these conviences in film all the time. EX: People rarely need to find a parking spot (especially in the city) and many other things. Would it have added to the story to see Rey go to different spots before lining up the dagger? Or her standing on an obvious stone/marker?
 
Joined
Sep 5, 2015
Messages
3,849
Reaction score
958
Location
Viborg, Denmark
Except we see these conviences in film all the time. EX: People rarely need to find a parking spot (especially in the city) and many other things. Would it have added to the story to see Rey go to different spots before lining up the dagger? Or her standing on an obvious stone/marker?
I got the impression that the dagger was some kind of ancient Sith dagger, but it can't be more than 30+ years old, as it was made to fit the DSII wreck, which in itself in a roaring sea didn't change, either by nature or looters/scrappers.
 

Utinniii

Moderator
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
5,117
Reaction score
560
Location
Canada
I got the impression that the dagger was some kind of ancient Sith dagger, but it can't be more than 30+ years old, as it was made to fit the DSII wreck, which in itself in a roaring sea didn't change, either by nature or looters/scrappers.
Ah, I thought you meant where she stood. The roaring sea should have budged it (although, I think if a force user got close enough, they would sense where it exactly was (like Luke sensed the cave).
As for the dagger, the pull out part might be the only new bit. Even if Sids made it, it would still be a sith object.
 
Joined
Sep 16, 2011
Messages
2,934
Reaction score
735
Location
Pennsylvania
I mean...end of the day, you can only suspend so much disbelief. Every adventure-action-fantasy-action-science fiction film has plot convenience. Heck really just any genre movie. Heck, really any movie. I am one of the more outspoken fans of TROS. I like it, I'm not embarrassed to say I did. But yeah, of course I noticed some things. Oh Poe just so happens to run into his former flame who happens to have exactly what they'd need to board a destroyer. There's the whole dagger subplot. But honestly, I'm like, whatever. It's a movie. Of course I RECOGNIZED it, but it wasn't anything I couldn't roll with. It's nothing really story breaking IMO. See this is why I HATE the Holdo Maneuver. I can't suspend that because it breaks the universe, it severely wounds things like the Battle of Yavin and Endor. Rey conveniently figuring out where the dagger is and how it works? It's not world breaking. Who cares? The Death Star II having wreckage? Alright, fine, whatever. It doesn't ruin that it was destroyed. It's all in what the convenience undermines, is it important or not? And I found the convenience here to mostly just undermine pacing of the story rather than the story in and of itself. So most I just found trivial.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
7,750
Reaction score
78
Location
BC Canada
It's true that I don't have first hand reference, but I don't think that makes me 100% ignorant. I have what I've read and hear from those that have watched it which allows me to comment on the facts. I may not be able to say, that scene where Rey matches up the blade with the DS2 remains was terrible, but I can say that the idea sure sounds terrible.

You are right though, I am much happier now that I don't waste my money or time watching those film. But who knows. Maybe one day I'll hear universal praise for one of their SW movies and I'll venture out once again.
Again, I said 'largely ignorant', not '100% ignorant'.

I find many people, even when they watch the movie, tend to miss things that would have explained away their gripe. Or they miss a fairly obvious explanation. Back in the day people scoffed that the original DS had a serious design flaw that made it vulnerable. Of course, there was nothing in Star Wars that explained that, but once Rogue One came out it took all of 2 seconds to explain reasonably. People are often short sighted, so in general it's very difficult to be truly critical of a point without standing on unstable ground. Like people who think Luke & Leia kissing has to = Lucas didn't plan for them to be siblings. In fact, its the perfect cover. Flawed logic is everywhere in movie reviews, and that's from people who saw the movie.
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
7,750
Reaction score
78
Location
BC Canada
I mean...end of the day, you can only suspend so much disbelief. Every adventure-action-fantasy-action-science fiction film has plot convenience. Heck really just any genre movie. Heck, really any movie. I am one of the more outspoken fans of TROS. I like it, I'm not embarrassed to say I did. But yeah, of course I noticed some things. Oh Poe just so happens to run into his former flame who happens to have exactly what they'd need to board a destroyer.
I agree. I remember when TLJ released and people ran to the forums to complain about 'dropping bombs in space'. First of all, there's actually some scientific logic to support what was depicted in the movie. But aside from that, I found it difficult to listen to people complain about 'suspension of disbelief being ruined' by the scene, when laser weapons shoot bolts moving slow enough you can watch them leaving the guns, or sound waves are travelling in a vacuum.

About Poe and his 'luck'. Though the movie doesn't try to explain the situation, I personally compare it to Han Solo's 'luck'. The unspoken workings of The Force - often disguised as 'luck' for the benefit of the unbelievers, bringing people together that need to come together for a particular outcome.
 
Joined
Sep 16, 2011
Messages
2,934
Reaction score
735
Location
Pennsylvania
I don't expect real-world science from Star Wars, that's absurd considering all that's going on that people unanimously love, but I do expect a level of basic layman respect for it. I can roll with the theatrical and bombastic breaking of science for the sake of drama, it's fantasy after all, but just adhere to the laws established in the OT. That's all I ask. If they do that much, I have no complaint as far as that aspect goes, hence why I hate the Holdo maneuver, but can roll with other aspects.
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
7,750
Reaction score
78
Location
BC Canada
How about this one...

Palpatine is alive and the end of return of the Jedi just flat out doesn’t matter anymore? Like literally the end of Jedi gets repeated here except this time it’s different because he dies? Except we already saw him die in return of the Jedi.
Did you notice ROTJ featured a second Death Star? Star Wars was intended to be that way. Lucas fashioned it as a space opera after serial movies he watched on TV as a kid. He studied anthropology and was introduced to an author by name of Joseph Campbell who wrote a book called 'The Hero with a Thousand Faces'. Essentially the idea is that you can recycle key story elements that resonate with people and it will keep their interest. Star Wars was as much an experiment in story telling for Lucas as it was a movie. He experimented with action sequences to see just how fast paced action can be with the audience still keeping up. He was experimenting when he hired Frank Oz and stuck a 'muppet' in ESB and hoped he could still suspend disbelief. He experimented with recycling story elements to see just see how much the audience would still buy into.

Palpatine returning was actually a no-brainer, IMO. Thanks to the significance of 'cloning' in the prequels, and EU stories like 'Dark Empire', or Zahn's novels, I was expecting Palpatine to return for the last saga.
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
7,750
Reaction score
78
Location
BC Canada
I thought it was interesting that in TLJ we're shown a glimpse of Luke's X-Wing underwater. At the time, you think... okay maybe they are explaining how Luke got to the planet. But that's also kind of a no-brainer. Dialogue earlier in the movie already suggests he took a ship and went off. Then you remember "Chekov's Gun", the principle that you don't show something in a movie unless it plays a significant role later on in the movie. But alas... no further use of the X-Wing is made in TLJ. Then along comes JJ's 'Rise of Skywalker' and we have one of JJ's 'remember this' toss back to ESB moments where Luke is once again trying to get his X-Wing out of the water - this time successfully.

So was Rian Johnson following "Chekhov's Gun" in setting up for something in the last film, or was it just his way to say "Luke got here in a ship" (DUH).

It makes me wonder how much of an overall trilogy story existed pre-production of TFA.
 
Joined
May 1, 2011
Messages
751
Reaction score
241
Did you notice ROTJ featured a second Death Star? Star Wars was intended to be that way. Lucas fashioned it as a space opera after serial movies he watched on TV as a kid. He studied anthropology and was introduced to an author by name of Joseph Campbell who wrote a book called 'The Hero with a Thousand Faces'. Essentially the idea is that you can recycle key story elements that resonate with people and it will keep their interest.
The Hero with a Thousand Faces is about mythological patterns, though, not about the concrete repetition of the exact same thing. So, you would have the abstract plot point "Death of the Master" which we have in all trilogies (Qui-Gon in TPM, Obi-Wan in ANH, Luke in TLJ) but always under different circumstances and with different figure constellations. If you want to abstract the Death Star, it would probably be "Defeating overwhelming evil", but not the exact "we have a moon-sized Death Star battlestation that has been constructed in secret and must now be destroyed by Rebel forces against all odds because otherwise all hope is lost".

I was sort of okay with the DS II in ROTJ because it varied the theme a little by actually firing at rebel ships, and the weak point was different, and we had multiple battles going on at once. However, I was not impressed by it. And I hated the endless repetitions that the Old EU made of it - the "Tarkin" from the original Marvel comics; the "Darksaber" project by the Hutts; the Death Star Prototype from the Maw installation. That was not very inventive. (Starkiller Base was the low point of that - a DS lookalike that took a million times more material than the original DS constructed by a faction that was not even able to draw on the resources of the whole galaxy, unexplained, underdefended, destroyed too easily and with too many parallels to ANH.)

Parallels, mirroring, Campbellian motives, ring theory, or heroic patterns like the classic, Faustian, Byronic, or Quixotic hero are not an invitation for plain repetition but a challenge to balance genre- and franchise-immanent necessities with novel approaches and variations. Otherwise you end up with Save the Cat.

(Same goes for recurring villains like the Emperor, but I'll grant Abrams puppy protection because Johnson killed off Snoke. I disliked the return of the cloned Emperor in Dark Empire, and I would not have used him in the ST at all.)
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
5,898
Reaction score
266
Campbell's book was NOT concerned with modern literature. it was about ancient mythology. it compared ancient myths from around the world (from regions which had NO contact with each other in the ancient world) and it correlated similarities between the myths from these disparate cultures. it reached the conclusion that ALL ancient mythologies shared common archetypes, which could ONLY come from 'the Human Condition'.



quote by George Lucas, from the authorized biography of Joseph Campbell, "A Fire in the Mind":

"I [Lucas] came to the conclusion after "American Graffiti" that what's valuable for me is to set standards, not to show people the world the way it is...it came to me that there really was no modern use of mythology...The Western was possibly the last generically American fairy tale, telling us about our values. And once the Western disappeared, nothing has ever taken its place. In literature we were going off into science fiction...so that's when I started doing more strenuous research on fairy tales, folklore, and mythology, and I started reading Joe's books. Before that I hadn't read any of Joe's books...It was very eerie because in reading "The Hero with a Thousand Faces" I began to realize that my first draft of "Star Wars" was following classic motifs..."


--> by his own admission: GL did not start with 'hero with a thousand faces' and use it as a "template" for creating SW :rolleyes: this is revisionist history.
by his own admission: GL had never read any of Joe's books when he sat down to write SW. he only realized the "eerie" connection, after the fact.

cheers.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
7,750
Reaction score
78
Location
BC Canada
Campbell's book was NOT concerned with modern literature. it was about ancient mythology. it compared ancient myths from around the world (from regions which had NO contact with each other in the ancient world) and it correlated similarities between the myths from these disparate cultures. it reached the conclusion that ALL ancient mythologies shared common archetypes, which could ONLY come from 'the Human Condition'.



quote by George Lucas, from the authorized biography of Joseph Campbell, "A Fire in the Mind":

"I [Lucas] came to the conclusion after "American Graffiti" that what's valuable for me is to set standards, not to show people the world the way it is...it came to me that there really was no modern use of mythology...The Western was possibly the last generically American fairy tale, telling us about our values. And once the Western disappeared, nothing has ever taken its place. In literature we were going off into science fiction...so that's when I started doing more strenuous research on fairy tales, folklore, and mythology, and I started reading Joe's books. Before that I hadn't read any of Joe's books...It was very eerie because in reading "The Hero with a Thousand Faces" I began to realize that my first draft of "Star Wars" was following classic motifs..."

--> by his own admission: GL did not start with 'hero with a thousand faces' and use it as a "template" for creating SW :rolleyes: this is revisionist history.
by his own admission: GL had never read any of Joe's books when he sat down to write SW. he only realized the "eerie" connection, after the fact.

cheers.
You assume too much.

I didn't say Lucas STARTED with Campbell's book and devised Star Wars. I said that after reading the book he experimented with the idea of recycling story elements in Star Wars. Which he did. Among other 'experiments' he makes reference to throughout the many interviews and documentaries he's done since.

Even American Graffiti contains numerous references and ideas rehashed from his previous sci-fi film, and echoed again in Star Wars. For instance, Harrison's character 'Bob Falfa' represented a story element later reflected in 'Boba Fett'. As you mentioned, he was already doing it to some degree (following classic motifs).

Neither did I say that Campbell's book was concerned with modern literature. I refer only to what Lucas drew from the book with regard to his story telling, when I say "the idea is that you can recycle key story elements that resonate with people and it will keep their interest ". Not the book itself.

Quoting Lucas...

"About the time I was doing the third draft I read The Hero with a Thousand Faces, and I started to realize I was following those rules unconsciously. So I said, I'll make it fit more into that classic mold."

-The Making of Star Wars, J.W. Rinzler, pgs 46-47

You don't get much clearer than Lucas himself stating that he made Star Wars 'fit more into the mold' he saw laid out in Campbell's book.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
7,750
Reaction score
78
Location
BC Canada
How does Checkov's Gun relate to part of the wing being the door to Lukes hut, then suddenly back on the x-wing again?
It doesn't.

Based on the content of RJ's movie it wasn't necessary to show us the submerged X-Wing. But they did. Chekov's Gun simply suggests that if you show something in the film, it should pertain to the greater story. Now, it does.
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
7,750
Reaction score
78
Location
BC Canada
Parallels, mirroring, Campbellian motives, ring theory, or heroic patterns like the classic, Faustian, Byronic, or Quixotic hero are not an invitation for plain repetition but a challenge to balance genre- and franchise-immanent necessities with novel approaches and variations. Otherwise you end up with Save the Cat.
And now you know why Lucas's films are as often bombs as successes. He hates writing. He hates directing. He's a story teller who doesn't care what the audience thinks, as long as he's told his story his way.

Having said that, I'm not suggesting that specific characters or devises had to be re-used. But character 'types' and 'plot devices' certain were. Starkiller Base is just another Death Star. Put it on a Star Destroyer... same plot device. It's serving the same purpose.

Emperor Palpatine was first introduced back in 1976 with the Star Wars novelization. It was fitting that he be in the end, IMO.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
7,750
Reaction score
78
Location
BC Canada
GL had never read any of Joe's books when he sat down to write SW. he only realized the "eerie" connection, after the fact.
Btw... 'no'. Do you really believe Lucas sat down one day and banged out Star Wars? The concept of SW predates his work on THX 1138, and the actual 'writing' extended over a couple of years. The story was altered many times between 1975-76, with many changes coming during and after production of the film.

So your comment, 'after the fact' is very wrong. As Lucas stated, he hadn't yet even written the fourth draft when he read Campbell's book.
 
Joined
Feb 11, 2010
Messages
4,318
Reaction score
259
Location
Chicago, IL
SW wasn't an original story with great actors and dialogue (although some/most of it was). Virtually all of the original cast made fun of the dialogue at some point (and Ford's abysmal acting in ROTJ made me actively angry for the longest time).
This has always stuck in my craw. It almost feels spiteful at times.
 
Top