Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[jala12]

Originally Posted by dookiex

He didn't make Devil but he did produce it or something and Devil was actually not too shabby. The Happening was also actually not too bad. Nice little old school paranoia b-movie horror/sci-fi there.

Yeah, it didn't say he directed it but when it said, "From the Mind of M. Night Shylamalan", everyone just groaned. And from what I've heard, it has happened elsewhere as well.

[dookiex]

Originally Posted by jala12

Yeah, it didn't say he directed it but when it said, "From the Mind of M. Night Shylamalan", everyone just groaned. And from what I've heard, it has happened elsewhere as well.

Missing the point there buddy. Shylamalan had a few stinkers after Unbreakable but to be perfectly honest, they weren't all bad. Like I mentioned, The Happening was actually somewhat good and him bringing out Devil was actually not bad as well since Devil turned out to be decent. I am sure most people are just going with the flow in regards to groaning when hearing his name. Kind of like a meme if you will.

Like you said "from what I've heard." People say he's horrible or that he hasn't had a good film since Unbreakable, every time I hear something like that, I feel that it's such complete nonsense. Most likely a good majority of those people probably didn't even see the Sixth Sense or Unbreakable. The bulk of them also probably never bothered to see the other films that came after such as The Happening. Honestly, Unbreakable was a bit of a stinker. There's really no reason why Unbreakable should be considered a good one that he's made when Signs gets panned even though Signs is a fair bit better of a movie than Unbreakable was. I think the reason people just say that Shymalan was no good after Unbreakable is because that's what the media started portraying him as after Unbreakable. Lady in the Water was a bit of a stinker. Signs was actually pretty good. The Village was ok. Truthfully, most of his films were ok and whilst not to the brilliance of the Sixth Sense, compared to most of the major studio releases, they were better. Shylamalan gets panned way too often and most of the time it's not really justified.

Honestly people, if you're going to take the time and try to validate your arguments on such topics such as how Lucas doesn't know what he's doing or that Lucas is lying about things such as the sad sad sad shape the original print of Star Wars is in, you should really start actually going out there and watch as many films and as many types of films that you can regardless of genre and age. A lot of the "points" being made around here is quite transparent in regards to how it's nothing much more than regurgitated stuff one finds on the internet and a lot of opinions that are really opinions one feels they need to have because everyone else seems to have the same one (kind of like an idea snowballing not because the idea is correct, but just because some things simply snow ball and gain momentum sometimes without much actual rhyme or reason).

[mrr1]

Originally Posted by MCT

yeah...but when even the DIRECTOR HIMSELF is disgusted with what he sees, even on a first cut, that speaks volumes.

my god, even when Lucas HIMSELF is disappointed with his work, you still swoop in to defend him. LMAO

The first cut of the original (Ep 4) was total crap as well, according to the 'Empire of Dreams' documentary. Only with a lot of editing work did it turn out as good as it did.

I think the prequels suffered from marginal editing more than anything else.

[mrr1]

Originally Posted by georgec

Red Letter Media has spoof reviews on all three prequels.

They are also full of biases and unfair points. (I agree they are entertaining and pretty hilarious at times, though).

This is a solid rebuttal of most of the criticisms:

http://www.examiner.com/star-wars-in-national/rebuttal-to-the-70-minute-phantom-menace-review-part-1

[dookiex]

Originally Posted by mrr1

They are also full of biases and unfair points. (I agree they are entertaining and pretty hilarious at times, though).

This is a solid rebuttal of most of the criticisms:

http://www.examiner.com/star-wars-in-national/rebuttal-to-the-70-minute-phantom-menace-review-part-1

It's sad how people no longer have the ability to think as individuals because they point at that (the video "review") with the implication of it being a de facto source on if the film was good or not. Let's just say that Phantom Menace wasn't great but it sure as heck isn't terrible. As a whole, the PT was actually ok and provides a substantial amount texture to the main Star Wars universe as a whole.

[Weirded Wonder]

Originally Posted by dookiex

It's sad how people no longer have the ability to think as individuals because they point at that (the video "review") with the implication of it being a de facto source on if the film was good or not. Let's just say that Phantom Menace was great but it sure as heck isn't terrible. As a whole, the PT was actually ok and provides a substantial amount texture to the main Star Wars universe as a whole.

I've hated the prequels long before anyone posted any videos on them. As I left ROTS I said out loud to my friends, "What the f#*& was that?" and somebody that I did not know responded "The death of Star Wars."

Where are the 9 part episodes on why the OT films suck?

[AlexSing]

Originally Posted by dookiex

It's sad how people no longer have the ability to think as individuals because they point at that (the video "review") with the implication of it being a de facto source on if the film was good or not. Let's just say that Phantom Menace was great but it sure as heck isn't terrible. As a whole, the PT was actually ok and provides a substantial amount texture to the main Star Wars universe as a whole.

or, let's just say we'll respect each other's opinions, some of which err on the side of it being awful. And regarding The Happening, I respect your opinion, mine just happens to be that it was an horrendous and at times laughably bad movie.

P.S. didn't you state earlier in this thread that you hadn't actually seen the Plinkett Reviews? (sincere apologies of that wasn't you - I know Beast hasn't but thought you said that as well)

[georgec]

Originally Posted by dookiex

It's sad how people no longer have the ability to think as individuals

You mean like people who say they like the PT b/c "it's SW"?

because they point at that (the video "review") with the implication of it being a de facto source on if the film was good or not.

Wrong. People point to that review as having well-thought, well-reasoned about the underlying shortcomings of the prequels in terms of story, characters, dialogue, plotting, etc.

Let's just say that Phantom Menace was great but it sure as heck isn't terrible.

What happened to thinking as individuals?

As a whole, the PT was actually ok and provides a substantial amount texture to the main Star Wars universe as a whole.

It really wasn't and it really doesn't. That's why so many people (mainly older fans of the OT) don't like the PT.

[Weirded Wonder]

Originally Posted by mrr1

The first cut of the original (Ep 4) was total crap as well, according to the 'Empire of Dreams' documentary. Only with a lot of editing work did it turn out as good as it did.

I think the prequels suffered from marginal editing more than anything else.

The original cut of Star Wars was edited in the style of what is called Classical Cutting; master shot or a wide shot 3 second hold, cut to Medium Shot, and intercut 2 shot reverse of character on action. It was the idea of the frantic cutting that really gave Star Wars it's energy.

I'm not going to jump on the band wagon and bash TPM because of that clip (that shows the test screening of TPM) because we do not see the cut that they do, I have no idea why they are obviously upset by it. Like Beast said, it was a work in progress, the scenes could have gone on far too long, we don't know. I only know that I do not like whatever came out at the theater. As far as George needing creative tension, I agree, that man has far too much control. There's no balance with what he is doing, there's no collaborative effort, it's only his vision.

[dookiex]

Originally Posted by AlexSing

or, let's just say we'll respect each other's opinions, some of which err on the side of it being awful. And regarding The Happening, I respect your opinion, mine just happens to be that it was an horrendous and at times laughably bad movie.

P.S. didn't you state earlier in this thread that you hadn't actually seen the Plinkett Reviews? (sincere apologies of that wasn't you - I know Beast hasn't but thought you said that as well)

First things first, I've noticed that I had a spelling mistake in my post, I meant to say "wasn't good" as opposed to "was good." As for the review thing, I did not post about the Plinkett reviews. I did watch a bit of the youtube video earlier and found it pretty skewed and more towards a complete nerdrage rant rather than a film review.

[The Doof]

Originally Posted by happydood

Um... 'disgusted?' Really? I'm not defending Lucas or anybody in this thread and it feels like your grasping to support your position and projecting something that might not really be there. I don't care if you hate the movie. You're entitled. Many other people do and have voiced it with reasonable conviction. I don't believe in the phrases 'Lucas-basher' or 'Lucas-apologist' or any of that nonsense, just in friendly and reasonable debate, but you have to back it up.

No offense, but I agree with the other poster that you may not know what a first cut's purpose really is.

They looked pretty disgusted to me. At least berry, berry scaward. A first cut's purpose is not to be disgusted or disappointed. Nobody wants to have to do a second cut. If everyone has done their jobs right, you should only have to worry about getting the cut down to time - not content/story and structure! That should be taken care of at the script stage. not always the way it goes, but clearly Georgie flies by the seat of his pants and calls it "painting" or "organic" or whatever. I'm an editor and i've been through this process about 1000 times. Believe me, they look a bit freaked.

I love that this is video we are talking about. And you still want someone to back up what is being shown in a video. How would you describe their reactions? Ecstatic? Excited? Proud? I mean, seriously, wtf? maybe disgusted is too strong, but not by much. i love that doc (the beginning) because i love filmmaking. I do admire Lucas for airing his dirty laundry.

[mrr1]

Originally Posted by georgec

People point to that review as having well-thought, well-reasoned about the underlying shortcomings of the prequels in terms of story, characters, dialogue, plotting, etc.

Those reviews are well-thought (i.e. a lot of thought went into making them), but I don't think they are well-reasoned. In fact, there is A LOT of content in those that are purely straight-up bashing without any rationale behind it

[mrr1]

Originally Posted by Beard Esquire

As far as George needing creative tension, I agree, that man has far too much control. There's no balance with what he is doing, there's no collaborative effort, it's only his vision.

Absolutely.

[The Doof]

Originally Posted by dookiex

It's sad how people no longer have the ability to think as individuals because they point at that (the video "review") with the implication of it being a de facto source on if the film was good or not. Let's just say that Phantom Menace wasn't great but it sure as heck isn't terrible. As a whole, the PT was actually ok and provides a substantial amount texture to the main Star Wars universe as a whole.

Hey, when something rings true you know it. that thing is seven parts man! and even though it comes across as a big joke, they expertly identify the real problems with the PT.

And i don't dislike something because a video tells me to. Are you for real? I could just as easily say the same thing about you - "i like it because it is SW" is not free thinking.

[Weirded Wonder]

Originally Posted by mrr1

Those reviews are well-thought (i.e. a lot of thought went into making them), but I don't think they are well-reasoned. In fact, there is A LOT of content in those that are purely straight-up bashing without any rationale behind it

There is some merit to what is being said, but it is ultimately entertainment. I agree with some of what is being said. But you can find a million faults with anything, how far is too far. I think it is obvious who the audience is intended to be, more than likely people that already hate the PT or people that like to laugh. They are funny videos.

[dookiex]

Originally Posted by georgec

You mean like people who say they like the PT b/c "it's SW"?

Wrong. People point to that review as having well-thought, well-reasoned about the underlying shortcomings of the prequels in terms of story, characters, dialogue, plotting, etc.

What happened to thinking as individuals?

It really wasn't and it really doesn't. That's why so many people (mainly older fans of the OT) don't like the PT.

Uhm, no. I said that the prequel was ok and in the grand scheme of things, adds a substantial amount to the Star Wars universe. If anything, what you are suggesting is ridiculous in regards to people liking the prequels just because it's Star Wars. Lets face it, the bulk of Star War fans do not like the prequels, due to that, BECAUSE it's Star Wars they would feel more obliged to DISLIKE the prequels.

That "review" is NOT a good review. It's nerdrage rant. You want reviews? Go check on Metacritic. The majority of the major reviewers actually found the film to be good.

What happened to thinking individuals? Again, if you actually look at what I wrote in the context of what I wrote, I clearly mistyped that and it was supposed to be "Let's just say that Phantom Menace WASN'T great but it sure as heck isn't terrible." What happened to using common sense and understanding context?

The older fans don't like the prequels because they just wanted more of the original trilogy. That's the problem. That's why these views on it is so skewed. They don't really want more Star Wars, they just love the idea of thinking up what if scenarios as well as filling in the many gaping holes of in the original trilogy. The fact that you said "It really wasn't and it really doesn't. That's why so many people (mainly older fans of the OT) don't like the PT" shows just how tainted the views on the prequels are. It's the snowball effect which I have mentioned in my earlier post. It's the same reason people just blindly say that Shymalan hasn't made a good film since Unbreakable when in actuality, Unbreakable was a pretty bad film and Signs was actually better. Sadly nobody really understands or acknowledges this because they basically just went with whatever other people say.

Originally Posted by The Doof

Hey, when something rings true you know it. that thing is seven parts man! and even though it comes across as a big joke, they expertly identify the real problems with the PT.

And i don't dislike something because a video tells me to. Are you for real? I could just as easily say the same thing about you - "i like it because it is SW" is not free thinking.

Again, when did I say I like it? All I said was that it wasn't terrible. I watch each and every film as a film, not as a fanatic that goes all goo goo ga ga over a bunch of what if scenarios. It's ridiculous. These are films, enjoy them as films. If you taint your viewing of films with a bunch of this ridiculous fanboism, you're just cheating yourself from enjoying the films. Simple as that. You folks are completely blind to just how deeply the nostalgia factor effects your judgement on these films. It's like Drive. That film is getting if not already dangerously overhyped. The hype may be greater than the film itself and one of two things will happen. People will go in to see Drive and then come out disappointed or they may go in to see it, not like it, but pretend they do because everybody else seems to think it's phenomenal. Honestly, a friggin 70 minute nerdrage "review" should not even exist. What the heck is the point? A film review should really tell you VERY LITTLE about the film and just enough about the film to give one the notion of them wanting to check it out or not. That's it.

If anything, all this discussion about what Star Wars should be or how wrong Lucas is and blah blah blah is really a DISSERVICE to people who have not seen the films or haven't seen the films in a long time. You're basically effecting their perception and expectations before they even see the thing. You're cheating them out of their enjoyment of the film. In all honesty, the prequel should indeed be recommended viewing for any viewer at minimum for getting the whole saga as Lucas intends it to be. There's gaping holes in the original trilogy, the prequel benefits Star Wars more than it hurts it. The prequels are not spectacular but they add substantial amount of background story for the original trilogy plus each episode actually gets better and with you get to Episode 3, it's actually not that bad.

[AltaDef]

Originally Posted by mrr1

They are also full of biases and unfair points. (I agree they are entertaining and pretty hilarious at times, though).

This is a solid rebuttal of most of the criticisms:

http://www.examiner.com/star-wars-in-national/rebuttal-to-the-70-minute-phantom-menace-review-part-1

The guy who wrote this "rebuttal" named his son Anakin. He makes some of the crazier rationalizations I've seen in this thread look like the writings of Socrates.

[AlexSing]

Originally Posted by dookiex

I did watch a bit of the youtube video earlier and found it pretty skewed and more towards a complete nerdrage rant rather than a film review.

Well, they are at least 90mins each so I suggest that if you ever have some down time that you check the full reviews out - as proper reviews done by someone that clearly understands film, is what they are. You really need to have actually seen them before selling them so short.

I hated TPM and AOTC in the cinema, years before these reviews came out. All they do for me is share some of the main points that I dislike about the PT (unlikeable characters, no lead protagonist to see through the eyes of, sterile and unengaging action scenes, overuse of lightsabres, awful stilted dialogue, etc etc) and actually articulate what is wrong with them in a very amusing way. Doesn't mean the content isn't accurate or informative and it doesn't delegitimise anything he says.

Watch them with an open mind and you may be surprised.

[The Doof]

Originally Posted by dookiex

It's sad how people no longer have the ability to think as individuals because they point at that (the video "review") with the implication of it being a de facto source on if the film was good or not. Let's just say that Phantom Menace wasn't great but it sure as heck isn't terrible. As a whole, the PT was actually ok and provides a substantial amount texture to the main Star Wars universe as a whole.

THAT'S a rebuttal? I swear to God i feel like i am losing my mind on here.

That was ridiculous. He criticizes the original review for daring to suggest there is no main protagonist. then he describes how tpm has no clear protagonist. even if it is QGJ, why the hell is the main protagonist dead at the end of the movie? we're talking about a trilogy here correct? ben wasn't the main protagonist of ANH, was he? So if QGJ is the main protagonist - and he DIES - that basically negates the purpose of the first movie. doesn't it? which is what the first review says in the first place!

oh my head...

[The Doof]

Originally Posted by dookiex

Uhm, no. I said that the prequel was ok and in the grand scheme of things, adds a substantial amount to the Star Wars universe. If anything, what you are suggesting is ridiculous in regards to people liking the prequels just because it's Star Wars. Lets face it, the bulk of Star War fans do not like the prequels, due to that, BECAUSE it's Star Wars they would feel more obliged to DISLIKE the prequels.

That "review" is NOT a good review. It's nerdrage rant. You want reviews? Go check on Metacritic. The majority of the major reviewers actually found the film to be good.

What happened to thinking individuals? Again, if you actually look at what I wrote in the context of what I wrote, I clearly mistyped that and it was supposed to be "Let's just say that Phantom Menace WASN'T great but it sure as heck isn't terrible." What happened to using common sense and understanding context?

The older fans don't like the prequels because they just wanted more of the original trilogy. That's the problem. That's why these views on it is so skewed. They don't really want more Star Wars, they just love the idea of thinking up what if scenarios as well as filling in the many gaping holes of in the original trilogy. The fact that you said "It really wasn't and it really doesn't. That's why so many people (mainly older fans of the OT) don't like the PT" shows just how tainted the views on the prequels are. It's the snowball effect which I have mentioned in my earlier post. It's the same reason people just blindly say that Shymalan hasn't made a good film since Unbreakable when in actuality, Unbreakable was a pretty bad film and Signs was actually better. Sadly nobody really understands or acknowledges this because they basically just went with whatever other people say.



Again, when did I say I like it? All I said was that it wasn't terrible. I watch each and every film as a film, not as a fanatic that goes all goo goo ga ga over a bunch of what if scenarios. It's ridiculous. These are films, enjoy them as films. If you taint your viewing of films with a bunch of this ridiculous fanboism, you're just cheating yourself from enjoying the films. Simple as that. You folks are completely blind to just how deeply the nostalgia factor effects your judgement on these films. It's like Drive. That film is getting if not already dangerously overhyped. The hype may be greater than the film itself and one of two things will happen. People will go in to see Drive and then come out disappointed or they may go in to see it, not like it, but pretend they do because everybody else seems to think it's phenomenal. Honestly, a friggin 70 minute nerdrage "review" should not even exist. What the heck is the point? A film review should really tell you VERY LITTLE about the film and just enough about the film to give one the notion of them wanting to check it out or not. That's it.

"Nerdrage rant." it is most certainly NOT nerdrage rant. that's what i was expecting, and why i never had gotten around to watching them before. you've let the style of the things prejudice you against the content. the guy basically gives a mini-master class on character and dramatic stakes when he describes the differences between the duels in each trilogy.