Post a New Comment
RE: Posted by Blake Fought Simply put, once Anakin goes to Mace to say something's up, the whole movie from there on is totally awesome. It won't win an Oscar likely because Hollywood hates sci-fi (although the fan base and media forced them to declare Lord of the Rings awesome), but this one was the best sci-fi movie to come out in years (ignoring LOTR though...that's a fantasy movie and I don't group them together). Personally I think it's the best of them all. Lucas delievered a gem. No Subject Posted by Some Anonymous Whim Reader I think there were many good parts in this film, however, Anakin's turning to the Dark Side was absolute crap. I know we've discussed this before Adam, so sorry for the repeat, but I have watched these films with the same perspective I watched the originals, mostly because I didn't want the original trilogy as a child, I watched it as a teenager who enjoys science fiction.
I have no complaints with the CGI, but I have complaints about the acting . . . or more so . . . the dialogue. Lucas can't write specific details for crap. His overarching plot lines are great, but his specifics are horrific. He can't direct much either. He took on way too much in these films.
No Subject Posted by Adam Frazier While I would agree that perhaps Lucas wasn't always the best director - he is the sole creator of the material, unlike Peter Jackson who can apparently only turn other people's masterpieces into films (LOTR, now KONG) I would say that's why "Empire" in my opinion is the best, because Lucas stepped back from it and allowed Irvin Kirshner to direct. In the end, you don't really remember the specific dialogue - except for the famous lines. What you remember is the rhyming of each episode - because they play like long poems off each other. I mean, the scene in III of Anakin staring at Mace while he is deflecting Palpatine's lightning is so powerful when you look at the scene in VI of Vader watching his son getting struck by the same lightning. In III Anakin made the wrong choice, in VI - he redeemed that choice. That's the beauty of Star Wars. RE: Posted by Blake Fought "I mean, the scene in III of Anakin staring at Mace while he is deflecting Palpatine's lightning is so powerful when you look at the scene in VI of Vader watching his son getting struck by the same lightning. In III Anakin made the wrong choice, in VI - he redeemed that choice." Never thought of that until you just said it. I do have to disagree with the guy who posted above you - as much as Empire was good, I didn't think it was the best. Hoth was good but dragged a bit and there was a bit too much of Dagobah. Once you got to Cloud City though, it was good. However, I loved the acting in III this time, I thought it stepped up alot from I and II. 95% of the movie was well-acted (the other 5% was the cheesy lines that you knew were coming). However I guess what I enjoyed the most was the premise that Anakin turned on - good choice. I mean you had to figure his relationship with Padme would have something to do with it but the logic of it all was well-concieved. No Subject Posted by Adam Frazier I could probably teach a philosophy class on the hidden rhymes and meanings in Star Wars, hah - actually that would be my profession of choice. No Subject Posted by Andrew Lent Sorry, I was the anonymous poster from the previous time. Didn't realize my name didn't make it. I thought idea of why Anakin turned to the Dark Side was fine, but how they carried out the scene was crap. However, Adam, you did hint on why I think III was the best of the prequels, Lucas actually tied in III with the other movies. There were subtle actions, like the one you described, that blended so well if you thought about them.
I also agree that Empire was the best of the entire series. No Subject Posted by Adam Frazier Basically, what episode III does is gives a whole new dimension to "the man in the mask." After watching III, IV looks so incredibly different - I mean, when you see Vader on the rebel blockade runner at the beginning, you instantly see Anakin's face behind the mask. Also, did anyone notice that now in IV when Obi-Wan approaches an unconscious Luke (after the Tusken Raider attack) that he makes a noise very similar to Boga's? (The lizard he rides in III). It's a nice touch too I think. It also gives so much to R2-D2, because he has been at the center of the story. He remembers Obi-Wan, and Obi-Wan remembers him - there's an unspoken understanding that R2-D2 is "in on the secret" and the droids didn't end up so close to Owen Lars by accident. lotr No Subject Posted by Adam Yeah, I believe he said it was more fantasy... which, to me anyway, is more what Star Wars is anyway. No Subject Posted by Some Anonymous Whim Reader Well, it won't win an Oscar, not because of a Hollywood bias, but because it simply really wasn't an "Oscar" movie. You know what Posted by Ray Gunter You know why the movie didnt win an oscar? because it sucked. the first scene, the shield generators were on the outside of the ship? yea, because a race that can develop the death star can think to put that sort of stuff on the inside. Lord Grievous, who is supposed to be the most badass villan in star wars ran the entire movie. How about you stay and fight, pussy. Dont even get me started on the fact 100 and 10 fucking percent of the movie was shot green screen. why even have real actors? they could all be cgi'd. Know why the first movie was good? Yes it was cutting edge technology, but it wasnt overly done like the last 3 pieces of shit lucas put out. Im surprised he released them at all, with all the violence. Maybe in a couple of years he can go in and replace all the weapons with giant dildo's like in et. Fuck that shit. Shoot on location once in a while douchebag. God, star wars sucked. Get the hell out of here. LOTR is infinitely better because it actually had something i like to call plot consistancy between the movies. Funny how Petere Jackson didnt jeopardize the story to make a profit. True, there were subtle changes from the book, but in the whole all three movies were consistant. Even that matrix had this. Sure you had to watch the animatrix to understand a lot of the backstory, but even that was tastefully done and consistant with the rest of the overall story. You guys are idiots Hmm. Posted by Adam Frazier Hmm. Well, first off - Every villain, with the exception of Vader has ran, and has usually met a cowardly death. Boba Fett, who was supposedly a legendary bounty hunter, was hit by a blind Han Solo and was eaten by the Sarlacc, who then burped. Jabba was strangled by a half-nude Leia, Dooku ran from Yoda in II, Sidious tried to run out on Yoda in III, and Darth Maul was cut in half by a padawan learner. It's lucas' ironic intentions to make the villains act the way they do, since his main inspiration were 1930s Sci-Fi serials like Flash Gordon. Grievous even used corny b-movie lines like "Time to abandon ship." Also, while the film was prodominantly shot on green screen. III used more models and sets than all three of the original films combined. When you have a film of such vast scale - that incompasses so many different settings, you basically have to use green screen to achieve the look you want. Peter Jackson used his fair share of green screening for LOTR. Do you think Jackson would have used CGI for Golum if they didn't see what Lucas did with Jar Jar in I? Granted Jackson didn't use as much, but don't think for a second that he's not taking advantage of the technology for King Kong. I mean, he's running a $270,000 budget afterall. LOTR has plot consistency because it was written YEARS ago. Of course it's going to be good when the blueprint was laid out for Jackson to follow step-by-step. Also, where do you suggest George Lucas shoots on location? When the imagination carries you away from earthly settings, how do you find a Lava planet? How do you create the fungal forests of Felucia? In closing, there will always be haters. People who can't handle the direction that film is going. Don't get me wrong, I think III could have been made better by using less green screen - but Lucas doesn't see that way. And unless you can write a better story, fund and produce it on your own, and also direct it - then I suggest you just deal with it. Also Posted by Adam Frazier Also, not to sound like a nerd but you can't very well have a shield covering the entire outside of a ship if it's generated from the inside can you? I mean... I believe that's Lucas' logic. The shield generators are on the outside of every ship in Star Wars if I'm not mistaken. R2-D2 climbs outside in space and fixes the deflector shield of the Naboo Skiff in I, and the shield generator for all Star Destroyers are on outside, above the bridge. What about that big satellite dish contraption on the Millenium Falcon - guess what that controls? Not to mention the shield generator for the Death Star has to be located outside of it - stationed on Endor. It's really just...common sense isn't it? I mean, Lucas creates principles like that so everyone in the crowd can grasp what's going on. RE: Posted by Blake Fought "if they didn't see what Lucas did with Jar Jar in I?" Mesa glad I forgotten Jar Jar but now mesa rember him again and mesa not being happy nomores. On a separate note, remember that the shield generator (if I remember right) on Executor (the Super Star Destroyer in Empire and Jedi) was on the top and when they blew that the ship was a sitting duck. No Subject Posted by Adam Frazier Yeah, exactly. I was hoping I didn't come off too nerdy, ha. |
Inside Whim
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
