I think you're reading into this a little. It's kinda funny, it's cool to make an impact...who cares what he does with his life.

Idk, man. It's his life, it's kinda funny, and it's cool to make an impact. The people getting "hurt" are overeager fans.

Different stroke for different folks. I find it kinda funny. Plus it's cool to make an impact.

It looked like it would be good for an amusement park, maybe. A movie? No way. Jar Jar Binks at least had a face that could move. And we're not holding this movie to the standards of what I could do. If that were the case, it'd be a pretty bad movie.

There was zero implication in your one anti-CGI sentence. There are,…

Muppet T-shirt. But, yes, that would be oddly specific.

Necropuppetry, oh my gosh I'm done...

Sorry. This is difficult for us all.

And this is why people need to stop going on about how digital creations are not art.

No, puppets are fine. It's Muppets that are wrong.

My dad and little bro play D&D all the time. That being said, there's a guy in our assembly who thinks that Muppet T's are evil. So...it's a balancing act.

Puppets are a lot older than CG. 9 times out of 10 good CG is better than good puppet work. There's just less good CG.

But yeah, Lucas kinda had a paint by numbers and every number was filled with CG.

OH. OH SNAP.

Except that puppet looked like trash. How about a good mix of practical and CGI where they're needed. Alright? Alright.

It's just bad. Good for maybe an amusement park. Not a movie character. That being said, no one will care because it's a puppet and practical effects are perfect and yaddya.

And not at all that CGI that old was extremely limited and relatively new.

I find that's a matter of opinion. There are plenty of convincing animated characters and elements, they just require a different kind of work and understanding.

That's really silly. You know the point he's trying to make. Don't dismiss it.

This made me so hungry. Is that...wrong? I want to, just once, converse with my food as I eat it.