ajzepp Posted December 22, 2009 Posted December 22, 2009 I am wildly skeptical about Avatar mostly because I'm so anti-CGI jerkfests. But I keep hearing...from all the right people...what a wonderful film it is. I will NOT see it for the first time sober. I think it has watch-me-after-eating-brownies written all over it. Yep, especially given the running time. I have a hard time sitting in theater seats much more than two hours.
The Big Cat Posted December 22, 2009 Posted December 22, 2009 I couldn't disagree more. The choice of Naboo for the invasion....the role of the Trade Federation...the establishment of Anakin as a tragic figure...it all makes perfect sense. Dude, as someone who supported Jauron up until just days before he was fired (I have the post to prove it), let me say it's best you accept that you're on an island when it comes to this one!
ajzepp Posted December 22, 2009 Posted December 22, 2009 Dude, as someone who supported Jauron up until just days before he was fired (I have the post to prove it), let me say it's best you accept that you're on an island when it comes to this one! lol, I fully realize that man....but I stand by what I said. If people can't explain the basic elements of the film, then they were too focused on bashing it and not giving it enough of a chance.
billsfan89 Posted December 22, 2009 Posted December 22, 2009 lol, I fully realize that man....but I stand by what I said. If people can't explain the basic elements of the film, then they were too focused on bashing it and not giving it enough of a chance. I was 10 years old and loved everything Star Wars and I saw that film in theaters and was disappointed in that movie big time. I had no reason to go into that movie and hate it in fact I had every reason to go in and love it. So I disagree with your reasoning of that no one ever gave it a chance. Take yourself back to 1999 the expectations were really high BUT Star Wars fans were just soooo ready to eat it up. But even my love of Star Wars has limits. They focused too much on special effects and didn't develop a simple coherent story. Then they further bastardized the movie by appealing to kids way too much. Lucas tried to do too much and it turned out to be an incoherent story that was filled with a lot of C-Span political jargon and nonsensical plot choices. Lucas needed a few people to disagree with him once in a while and center him without that he went all over the place and simply lost sight of why people like Star Wars. So yeah why would I at 10 years old hate on the movie just to hate when I absolutely loved the franchise and paid no attention to the temped reviews that were out?
ajzepp Posted December 22, 2009 Posted December 22, 2009 I was 10 years old and loved everything Star Wars and I saw that film in theaters and was disappointed in that movie big time. I had no reason to go into that movie and hate it in fact I had every reason to go in and love it. So I disagree with your reasoning of that no one ever gave it a chance. Take yourself back to 1999 the expectations were really high BUT Star Wars fans were just soooo ready to eat it up. But even my love of Star Wars has limits. They focused too much on special effects and didn't develop a simple coherent story. Then they further bastardized the movie by appealing to kids way too much. Lucas tried to do too much and it turned out to be an incoherent story that was filled with a lot of C-Span political jargon and nonsensical plot choices. Lucas needed a few people to disagree with him once in a while and center him without that he went all over the place and simply lost sight of why people like Star Wars. So yeah why would I at 10 years old hate on the movie just to hate when I absolutely loved the franchise and paid no attention to the temped reviews that were out? I'm not trying to speak to your situation specifically...but in general. There are movies I love that others hate, and vice versa. That's why I love talking about movies cause everyone sees things differently and it makes for interesting conversation. I just think that 1) there's absolutely no way that the prequels could have met the expectations most of us had, 2) the back story of Vader and the Empire just wasn't as interesting as the good v. bad, david v. goliath story you have with the OT, and 3) most people can't have an intelligent conversation with me about certain elements of the film....namely, the ones I mentioned above in the thread. I'm not trying to convince you to like it if you didn't, bro....a lot of people I know didn't like it. I just have found that in general, a lot of people have jumped on the anti-prequel bandwagon without thinking through the plot/characters/elements that Lucas DID provide us. I'll be the first to say that SW II is a film I haven't re-watched but once since it's theatrical release. For me to say that about a star wars film is huge, cause I'm a total Lucas geek and always will be. But I absolutely LOVED most of III, and with the exception of JarJar, I really enjoyed TPM. In fact, I think the second half of III is up there with the best of the SW saga. I loved Darth Maul and I loved the way Palpatine manipulated various pieces of the puzzle to lay the foundation for what would become "the first Galactic Empire". All of those moves started in TPM, and I thought that part of the story was really well done.
DaGimp Posted December 22, 2009 Posted December 22, 2009 Lucas made it a kid friendly muppet fest and it started with the F'ing Ewoks. Just like the "other" Matrix movies, three movies should just have been edited into one. There is not enough good content to stand alone.
DaGimp Posted December 22, 2009 Posted December 22, 2009 I watching those videos now and that is some funny sh*t! And he is dead nuts right.
EasternOHBillsFan Posted December 22, 2009 Posted December 22, 2009 Phantom menace = the suck. When compared to the storylines of ep. IV and V, it just IS non-existent. That and George Lucas should be skinned alive for the abomination that is Jar Jar Binks. YES!!!! YES!!!! I'll never own the movie... II-VI only in my collection!
Booster4324 Posted December 22, 2009 Posted December 22, 2009 I'm not trying to speak to your situation specifically...but in general. There are movies I love that others hate, and vice versa. That's why I love talking about movies cause everyone sees things differently and it makes for interesting conversation. I just think that 1) there's absolutely no way that the prequels could have met the expectations most of us had, 2) the back story of Vader and the Empire just wasn't as interesting as the good v. bad, david v. goliath story you have with the OT, and 3) most people can't have an intelligent conversation with me about certain elements of the film....namely, the ones I mentioned above in the thread. I'm not trying to convince you to like it if you didn't, bro....a lot of people I know didn't like it. I just have found that in general, a lot of people have jumped on the anti-prequel bandwagon without thinking through the plot/characters/elements that Lucas DID provide us. I'll be the first to say that SW II is a film I haven't re-watched but once since it's theatrical release. For me to say that about a star wars film is huge, cause I'm a total Lucas geek and always will be. But I absolutely LOVED most of III, and with the exception of JarJar, I really enjoyed TPM. In fact, I think the second half of III is up there with the best of the SW saga. I loved Darth Maul and I loved the way Palpatine manipulated various pieces of the puzzle to lay the foundation for what would become "the first Galactic Empire". All of those moves started in TPM, and I thought that part of the story was really well done. Well, I think Lucas is the issue, not the prequels. He almost succeeded in ruining Return of the Jedi. I really think a couple of writers helped Lucas a ton with Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back. After substituting Ewoks for Wookies I think his biggest co-writers have been Hasbro® and Mattel®.
DC Tom Posted December 22, 2009 Posted December 22, 2009 Well, I think Lucas is the issue, not the prequels. He almost succeeded in ruining Return of the Jedi. I really think a couple of writers helped Lucas a ton with Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back. After substituting Ewoks for Wookies I think his biggest co-writers have been Hasbro® and Mattel®. Don't forget how he wrecked Episode 4 with the DVD release. Greedo does NOT shoot first, George!
Booster4324 Posted December 22, 2009 Posted December 22, 2009 Don't forget how he wrecked Episode 4 with the DVD release. Greedo does NOT shoot first, George! Good point. At least he sorta backed off that with the last release of the DVD set. How many releases did we really need anyway?
Chef Jim Posted December 22, 2009 Posted December 22, 2009 Well, I think Lucas is the issue, not the prequels. He almost succeeded in ruining Return of the Jedi. I really think a couple of writers helped Lucas a ton with Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back. After substituting Ewoks for Wookies I think his biggest co-writers have been Hasbro® and Mattel®. I give credit to Lucas' success to Gary Kurtz. I only say that because I was good friends with his parents (now both deceased) and his daughter . But everything he did with Gary was great, Star Wars, Empire, American Graffiti everything without Gary sucked.
ajzepp Posted December 22, 2009 Posted December 22, 2009 Lucas made it a kid friendly muppet fest and it started with the F'ing Ewoks. Just like the "other" Matrix movies, three movies should just have been edited into one. There is not enough good content to stand alone. Aw, man, I was so disappointed with those Matrix sequels...after Reloaded, I was like "mmmmkay...guess we'll see where this goes", only to see the third one and end up absolutely hating it. The original Matrix was near-perfect sci-fi...loved it. The sequels don't exist to me.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 22, 2009 Posted December 22, 2009 Aw, man, I was so disappointed with those Matrix sequels...after Reloaded, I was like "mmmmkay...guess we'll see where this goes", only to see the third one and end up absolutely hating it. The original Matrix was near-perfect sci-fi...loved it. The sequels don't exist to me. +1000000000000000000000000000000000000000
Astrojanitor Posted December 22, 2009 Posted December 22, 2009 I am wildly skeptical about Avatar mostly because I'm so anti-CGI jerkfests. But I keep hearing...from all the right people...what a wonderful film it is. I will NOT see it for the first time sober. I think it has watch-me-after-eating-brownies written all over it. Good call man. Sober plus Avatar is a terrible idea. Brownies plus 3-d imax? brilliant idea. I found Avatar to be goofy and dumb, but with awesome landscape shots. not sure why everything on the planet needed to be candy colored, but I guess that's why they don't call me Hollywood.
Alaska Darin Posted December 22, 2009 Posted December 22, 2009 The original Matrix was near-perfect sci-fi...loved it. The sequels don't exist to me. Truer words have never been spoken. I can't believe they dicked that up so much.
billsfan89 Posted December 23, 2009 Posted December 23, 2009 I'm not trying to speak to your situation specifically...but in general. There are movies I love that others hate, and vice versa. That's why I love talking about movies cause everyone sees things differently and it makes for interesting conversation. I just think that 1) there's absolutely no way that the prequels could have met the expectations most of us had, 2) the back story of Vader and the Empire just wasn't as interesting as the good v. bad, david v. goliath story you have with the OT, and 3) most people can't have an intelligent conversation with me about certain elements of the film....namely, the ones I mentioned above in the thread. I'm not trying to convince you to like it if you didn't, bro....a lot of people I know didn't like it. I just have found that in general, a lot of people have jumped on the anti-prequel bandwagon without thinking through the plot/characters/elements that Lucas DID provide us. I'll be the first to say that SW II is a film I haven't re-watched but once since it's theatrical release. For me to say that about a star wars film is huge, cause I'm a total Lucas geek and always will be. But I absolutely LOVED most of III, and with the exception of JarJar, I really enjoyed TPM. In fact, I think the second half of III is up there with the best of the SW saga. I loved Darth Maul and I loved the way Palpatine manipulated various pieces of the puzzle to lay the foundation for what would become "the first Galactic Empire". All of those moves started in TPM, and I thought that part of the story was really well done. I guess my issue is the fact that you say that the only reason people didn't like the film was because they were predisposed to not liking it. There were serious flaws with The Phantom Menance. I think that for some there was no way the Prequels could have lived up to the hype ever. BUT had they been done well I think a bunch of fans like myself (Children who liked star wars and not as serious older fans) would have accepted the movie as being on par or close to what was expected. I watched the rest of the youtube critique and it seemed that Lucas was all over the place in doing the ending (There were four situations going on) and the film didn't really have a main character. As well as the fact that the jedi's were really stupid and most of the characters were really boring as well. In the end I think that while some were just predisposed to not liking the movie no matter what to say that everyone or most people who didn't like the film just didn't get it or were just never going to like it no matter what is just not true. I feel that the story of how Anakin Skywalker turned into Darth Vader and how the Republic turned into the Empire is pretty interesting to Star Wars fans (yeah maybe not as interesting as rebels vs empire but there is still plenty to work with). I feel that with episodes 3 and 2 Lucas did a bad job (Episode 3 is the best out of 1,2, and 3) developing Darth Vader. I think that the turn to evil happening over the course of the second half of Episode 3 was not enough time to properly develop the movie. I think that Episode 2 should have been where the turn to evil started and in the first half of Episode 3 he should have already been Darth Vader while the movie ends with the jedi being killed off and the rebellion forming in the second half of the film. The turn that Anakin made was way to sudden and really motivated by nothing more then some half ass promise. Also should have foreshadowed Anakin being kind of a badass in Episode 1 at least a little.
billsfan89 Posted December 23, 2009 Posted December 23, 2009 I give credit to Lucas' success to Gary Kurtz. I only say that because I was good friends with his parents (now both deceased) and his daughter . But everything he did with Gary was great, Star Wars, Empire, American Graffiti everything without Gary sucked. I think that Kurtz (My dad always use to tell me that Kurtz leaving Lucas was the reason Return of the Jedi was different from Empire and A New Hope) was a guy who drove the idea of a story into the main point of a the Star Wars movies. Lucas (Once again from what I am told) wanted Star Wars to be much more of a action oriented movie aimed at kids. Now aside from Ewoks I like Return of the Jedi (Not as much as A New Hope or Empire) and thought it was about on par with the first two although the worst of the three. And I think Lucas should have realized that kids did like the first two Star Wars because they were cool. Lucas should have stuck to what made Star Wars work it wasn't broke why did he feel the need to fix it? Gary was the guy that clashed with Lucas and without Kurtz there wasn't any opposition to Lucas and Lucas pretty much just did what ever he liked and it went wrong from there.
ajzepp Posted December 23, 2009 Posted December 23, 2009 Truer words have never been spoken. I can't believe they dicked that up so much. It may be the most disappointed I've ever been with any film...seriously. I remember seeing the Matrix with my brother and a couple friends, and afterwards we were shocked how good it was. Thankfully it works great just as a stand alone film, cause it really does make me sick to my stomach to think about what they did with 2 and 3
Booster4324 Posted December 23, 2009 Posted December 23, 2009 I give credit to Lucas' success to Gary Kurtz. I only say that because I was good friends with his parents (now both deceased) and his daughter . But everything he did with Gary was great, Star Wars, Empire, American Graffiti everything without Gary sucked. Read up on that and you may have a solid case actually. For those who didn't watch all of it, I recommend 7. I am going to have to go check out that behind the scenes stuff with Lucas. The reviewer picked some really candid moments to make Lucas look really bad.
Recommended Posts