Originally posted by Aries
it's simple. people don't go for old fashioned, kick ass, your army and my army on the field at 2 pm and we duke it out combat anymore. there always has to be one of the 'good guys' working for the enemy, playing the spy thing, stabbing someone in the back.

Originally posted by Aries
it's simple. people don't go for old fashioned, kick ass, your army and my army on the field at 2 pm and we duke it out combat anymore. there always has to be one of the 'good guys' working for the enemy, playing the spy thing, stabbing someone in the back.
Originally posted by Delance
As much as the "traitor" plot is over-used, that isn't the point here. The test audiences found it too complicated. If it's over-used, how can that be so?
Originally posted by Aries
too many stupid people in the world.
, maybe we're wierd since we argue over the smallest things... but if this is wierd i dont care to see normal 
Originally posted by Maniac II
So True, so true.... and too many non-wingcommander junkies., maybe we're wierd since we argue over the smallest things... but if this is wierd i dont care to see normal
![]()

Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
The issue wasn't that it was too complicated -- it was that it wasn't established properly. You see Admiral Wilson on Pegasus for about ten seconds at the beginning of the movie... and then are supposed to remember who he is two hours later when the identity of the traitor is revealed. The only 'reminder' that he existed was when Wilson glanced at a photo of him mid-way through the movie. Audiences didn't understand who the traitor was or why he was important.
We may know what the scenes are like very soon, though.
)Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
The issue wasn't that it was too complicated -- it was that it wasn't established properly.

Originally posted by Ghost
Pfftt...polls, that will change in the next poll.
art II, and see how it goes.... that's if the maker of the last one dosent wanna do it first 