Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[blonde_devil]

Originally Posted by KaineKinetic

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
Star Wars: Episode I: The Phantom Menace
Star Trek 4: The Voyage Home
The Living Daylights
The Amazing Spider-Man 2
The Terminator
Harry Potter and the Philospher's Stone
Highlander/Highlander 3
Alien/Aliens
Predator/Predators
2 Fast, 2 Furious/Furious 6
The Lost Boys
Despicable Me 2

Those are my favourites out of those Series.

Never figured out the love for Voyage Home. I mean, it is a decent enough film but has some weird writing - charges being dropped at the end for example. Plus it is a little on the nose with the story. Maybe people just like whales. Lucas had fish creatures, should have included whales in the prequels too and people would have loved them!

[Geoff D]

"He took a little too much...LDS"

I love Voyage Home.

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

"Well...a double dumbass on you!"

[Gold Ranger]

I think for me, it is because The Voyage Home shows them more as a family than the other movies and even the TOS.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Yojimbo68

I like ROTJ but it's not nearly as good as the first two installments and I actually think (and I'm going to loose some of you here) Revenge of the Sith is a better overall Star Wars movie.

No real argument here. Jedi is nowhere near as solid as the first two and yeah, Sith and Jedi are in the same overall ballpark.

[Astro Zombie]

Originally Posted by Batmon77

Sith > Jedi. No problem w/ that.

I prefer Sith to Jedi also.

But I guess I can say I like all 6.

[Nicolawicz]

Sith isn't even a movie. I don't know how anybody can take this crap seriously with those CGI clone troopers, for instance. The thing is an insult to filmmaking.

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

I'll admit to nostalgia being a factor here, but the later 3 (even though I do like them) can't touch the original 3 for me - RotJ included.

Having never lived in a world where the Star Wars Trilogy didn't exist (born in 1984), those films were touchstones for me from an early age and I love them so dearly that my more critical tendencies get left by the wayside when watching them.

edit: If I'm honest, I'll admit to TPM benefiting from childhood nostalgia too. I loved the movie when I saw it in 1999, and it still holds a very special place in my heart, even if it earns me some sneers.

[Elvis]

Originally Posted by Nicolawicz

Sith isn't even a movie. I don't know how anybody can take this crap seriously with those CGI clone troopers, for instance. The thing is an insult to filmmaking.

I'm not sure I would go that far, but it's not much better than Clones. TPM was the only film that even remotely felt like Star Wars from the PT.

[Nicolawicz]

I agree. It's because it has the least amount of CGI and was shot on film, but the script is also pretty idiotic.

[Falaskan]

Originally Posted by Elvis

I'm not sure I would go that far, but it's not much better than Clones. TPM was the only film that even remotely felt like Star Wars from the PT.

Jar jar is the only real downside and doesn't even bug me as much as most ppl. TPM feels a lot like rotj

[The Fallen Deity]

Originally Posted by Nicolawicz

Sith isn't even a movie. I don't know how anybody can take this crap seriously with those CGI clone troopers, for instance. The thing is an insult to filmmaking.

I personally think that ROTS feels the most like the OT out of the prequels.

I also think it's much better than the other two movies in the PT.

Granted there's still stuff in the movie that I don't like.

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

The digital look of AotC/RotS definitely turned me off from them a bit back in 2002/2005. I agree that TPM has much more of a OT feel than its successors.

Digital cinematography has matured quite a bit, but it was not flattering at all in these early years. I still don't care for the visual appearance of those films (though RotS looks better than AotC).

[The Fallen Deity]

Originally Posted by Aragorn the Elfstone

The digital look of AotC/RotS definitely turned me off from them a bit back in 2002/2005. I agree that TPM has much more of a OT feel than its successors.

Digital cinematography has matured quite a bit, but it was not flattering at all in these early years. I still don't care for the visual appearance of those films (though RotS looks better than AotC).

I don't like the look of AOTC.

It's far too smeary and digital looking imo.

ROTS looks miles better.

Speaking of TPM:

It's sucks that the BD transfer was DNR'ed to death.

It probably had a very filmic look to it when it first came out in the cinemas.

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

Originally Posted by The Fallen Deity

It's sucks that the BD transfer was DNR'ed to death.

It probably looked quite filmic when it first came out in the cinemas.

I was gutted when the first screencaps of the Blu-ray came out. Most people probably don't care (since the film is so reviled), but talk about a travesty of a transfer. So disappointing.

[Nicolawicz]

Originally Posted by Aragorn the Elfstone

The digital look of AotC/RotS definitely turned me off from them a bit back in 2002/2005. I agree that TPM has much more of a OT feel than its successors.

Digital cinematography has matured quite a bit, but it was not flattering at all in these early years. I still don't care for the visual appearance of those films (though RotS looks better than AotC).

Shooting Episodes II and III on video is probably the stupidest mistake Lucas made with those "prequels". Everything gets cheapened beyond belief. They almost look like fan films.

[The Fallen Deity]

Originally Posted by Aragorn the Elfstone

I was gutted when the first screencaps of the Blu-ray came out. Most people probably don't care (since the film is so reviled), but talk about a travesty of a transfer. So disappointing.

What's even more frustrating is that every other aspect of the transfer is pretty much perfect with the exception of some very obvious sharpening in places.

That sharpening was probably applied after it was filtered to death.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by The Fallen Deity

What's even more frustrating is that every other aspect of the transfer is pretty much perfect with the exception of some very obvious sharpening in places.

That sharpening was probably applied after it was filtered to death.

That's the usual procedure: filter the shit out of it and then sharpen it back up again to superficially compensate for the detail you've just wiped out. Makes no ****ing sense, but there you go.

Phantom Menace is easily the most OT-like of the prequels the way that it riffs on Star Wars and Jedi, plus the use of plenty of real sets/locations and some gorgeous miniatures. It's such a shame that they shafted it on Blu-ray, it could've looked incredible.

Sith looks great though IMO, they'd nailed the digital cameras by then (shooting with 12-bit colour, for example) and it's got the right combo of grain and sharpness, whereas Clones is fugly from start to finish. I'll always defend Lucas for taking those first steps with those cameras, but I can't defend the look of the end product in Clones' case.

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

Eh, Sith looks good from a digital standpoint, but I still don't like the aesthetic. It doesn't hold a candle to the wonderfully cinematic look of TPM.

Though I'll admit, I'm not exactly the biggest fan of digital cinematography. Game of Thrones was the first thing that really impressed me on that front.

[Geoff D]

What cinematic look? The one that's been wiped out by the DNR? As it stands, Sith looks more 'film like' than Phantom Menace to me, I shit you not. TPM on Blu-ray doesn't look like film but it doesn't look like sharp, glossy digital either, it's in some form of home video purgatory.