I'm sure many Star Wars fans have heard about this, but if you haven't here's the news of a pretty funny (and morbidly depressing) change to the new blu-ray editions of the Star Wars saga:
Here's the video in case you feel like getting it over with:
In spite of all of the negative response Lucas looks like he's going to stick with the change. At this point I just suspect that he doesn't get internet at Skywalker Ranch.
Edit: To those not reading the article/aren't Star Wars fans, the change is an overdubbed "nooo!" much like the infamous cry of "noooo!" from Vader in Episode 3.
I thought everyone already knew he hated his fans? Haha.
Have you seen any of the fanmade media for Star Wars? Any amateur movie makers doing Star Wars? He always pulls that crap and disallows it forever. Does anyone remember the Star Wars Christmas thing from TV ages ago? He's forever banned that from seeing the light of day as well, despite people loving it.
On September 03 2011 00:45 Torenhire wrote: Does anyone remember the Star Wars Christmas thing from TV ages ago? He's forever banned that from seeing the light of day as well, despite people loving it.
...did people love that? I saw a bit of it and it's quite possibly the worst thing I've ever seen in my life.
This wouldn't be that bad if it didn't remind me of the greatly more embarrasing NOOOOO at the end of Episode 3.
It's the same as Luke's scream in Ep. 5. When did Lucas start hating solemn gestures? Both Luke's silent fall and Vader's return were dignified in the original vision. Lucas would have everyone act like Jar Jar Binks if he had his way. :-(
Makes me want to go watch the south park episode where george lucas and steven speileberg rape their movies lolololol. Why the hell NOW does this have to be put in, if it was so "awesome and needed" why wasn't it done the first time around? This just makes me lose respect for lucas even more after I heard him call a lightsaber a "laser sword" in the commentary of my anniversary dvds.
I seriously don't understand why you need to change old movies. Also, Starwars is the only thing where this happens. At least i have never heard of any other movie series that does something similar.
On September 03 2011 00:59 Simberto wrote: I seriously don't understand why you need to change old movies. Also, Starwars is the only thing where this happens. At least i have never heard of any other movie series that does something similar.
On September 03 2011 00:59 divito wrote: Can someone explain the significance of the video to someone who has never watched Star Wars?
In the original, Darth Vader is silent while sacrificing himself, killing the Emperor and thus saving his son.
In this new edit, his iconic "Nooooooo" from the new movies reappears for no apparent reason.
Personally, I think this change is pointless and yet another example of how corrupted Lucas has become over the years. As previously mentioned, the South Park episode about Lucas' desire to screw over his fans really nailed it.
He added a scream to Luke falling in some special edition, but then removed the scream in a subsequent special-special edition.
And Greedo is made to shoot first instead of Han, so that Han isn't the badass he was in the original film, since kids might interpret that as "violence is good" or some such nonsense. It made so much sense to have Han start off as cut-throat and greedy and grow into something better as the story unfolds.
On September 03 2011 00:46 MadPretty wrote: George Lucas has turned into that kid at the playground who keeps changing his superpowers while you play "X-Men".
LOL
or the kid who keeps arguing that you missed when you shot his ass
I was a lot younger when the episode 3 came out and even I thought him screaming "noooooo" at the end was the goofiest most out of place dialogue ever. so so bad.
On September 03 2011 00:46 MadPretty wrote: George Lucas has turned into that kid at the playground who keeps changing his superpowers while you play "X-Men".
haha that reminded me of myself. I was that friend who wanted your base when we played "guys". Then when you finally gave up and let me have your base, i wanted your new one because it was better than mine still.
Someone needs to limit Lucas' budget on movies and then he might make something good. When he is limitless he just goes too far. The main reason the original trilogy was good was that his lack of funds made him have to imply stuff rather than just pouring money into the screen to make it look interesting. Too bad that people actually buy these new versions, thus funding more hideous fuckups.
On September 03 2011 00:59 LayZRR wrote: So what? can anybody explain why this is so bad? it doesnt change anything right?
It's indicative of Lucas' complete disregard for a classic of cinema, his fans, film as an artwork. I'm not a big Star Wars fan but imagine if, for example, at the end of Godfather II when Michael stands silently at the window while Fredo is shot on the lake, if he heard the gunshot and then fell to his knees and went 'NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!'. Imagine if they released a blu ray version where that happened.
The change itself is shit and retarded, but it's not as bad as what is says about Lucas. He just doesn't get it. With his constant revisions he is taking a fucking chainsaw to the original trilogy. The man doesn't understand why it's a fucking awful idea to composite in CGI creatures to existing scenes in original trilogy, he doesn't understand why jamming the screen full of effects doesn't make a film better, he basically doesn't know what the fuck he's doing and shouldn't be allowed anywhere near his own work.
The fact that he thinks the original films need revising to be more like the universally reviled and objectively fucking terrible new trilogy is what makes people angry.
On September 03 2011 01:28 Carnac wrote: it's dumb, but it's his movie, so he can do whatever the fuck he wants
how many versions are there by now lol
there's got to be at least four or so of the originals...
the orignal releases post movie then there was digital remastering in the 90s then there was the OMG NEW FOOTAGE ones late 90s/early 00s to promote the new trilogy then this
it's quite depressing as a fan of the franchise, but fuck that's good business
I hate george lucas. First he makes han shoot second, then the "prequel" garbage and now this? ugh. In the future im going to have to actively find versions of star wars which are old and he hasnt molested in order to watch. How bloody annoying. Hopefully when he dies or retires whoever takes over undoes his changes.
On September 03 2011 00:59 LayZRR wrote: So what? can anybody explain why this is so bad? it doesnt change anything right?
It's indicative of Lucas' complete disregard for a classic of cinema, his fans, film as an artwork. I'm not a big Star Wars fan but imagine if, for example, at the end of Godfather II when Michael stands silently at the window while Fredo is shot on the lake, if he heard the gunshot and then fell to his knees and went 'NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!'. Imagine if they released a blu ray version where that happened.
The change itself is shit and retarded, but it's not as bad as what is says about Lucas. He just doesn't get it. With his constant revisions he is taking a fucking chainsaw to the original trilogy. The man doesn't understand why it's a fucking awful idea to composite in CGI creatures to existing scenes in original trilogy, he doesn't understand why jamming the screen full of effects doesn't make a film better, he basically doesn't know what the fuck he's doing and shouldn't be allowed anywhere near his own work.
The fact that he thinks the original films need revising to be more like the universally reviled and objectively fucking terrible new trilogy is what makes people angry.
I was about to post how no director should ever go back and redo his film, but then I remembered the first special edition 1997.
You have to admit the 'original' special addition was a significant improvement from the original releases (Jabba the Hutt is a man, there's still the vaseline blur under the airspeeder, many scenes are very claustrophobic. The difference between 1977 and 1997 versions are substantial. The difference of course is most of the changes were pretty non-intrusive special effects changes and not storytelling ones (who shot first in the Cantina for instance.)
And then again, a master storyteller like JRR Tolkien went back and completely revised the character of Gollum in The Hobbit and changed the chapter Riddles in the Dark substantially to jive with the Lord of the Rings (and then included the original story as canon/ Bilbo's first telling of the story, genius.)
So while I can't rule out that substantial revisions are possible after the fact, and Lucas did it once quite well, the Star Wars franchise is turning into a bit of a monster. The first revision is kinda like plastic surgery, it made some substantial improvements to the looks. But Lucas got addicted to plastic surgery modifications and is turning into Michael Jackson or Pamela Anderson.
That's what happens when you get tons of money and your ego overtakes you. At least before he had a studio keeping him in check, without putting all kinds of goofy shit in, like jar jar, "deathsticks", and NOOOOOOOOOOO!
once upon a time there was a man ... This man made gold ... then he diamond encrusted this gold in platinum settings with an array of rubys and sapphires. Quite a few years go past he polishes off his gold looks at it and says somethings missing. Followed shortly by him dropping his pants squatting and with a merry "UNNGH" changing the whole colour scheme.
Thats what the star wars franchise feels like to me.
On September 03 2011 02:03 JMSLEX wrote: I have altered the films. Pray I do not alter them further. :D
haha, nice.
small changes like these just seem like ego stroking. the original directors and producers of the first trilogy no longer have control, and lucas gradually remakes every small detail to his own satisfaction
I'm just gonna put this out here, I'm not trying to encourage anyone or "test the waters" or make threats or anything, I'm just asking a question, in the casualest possible way one might ask a question:
If George Lucas was to die horribly in, say, a fire, would anyone be terribly upset?
On September 03 2011 02:17 Osmoses wrote: I'm just gonna put this out here, I'm not trying to encourage anyone or "test the waters" or make threats or anything, I'm just asking a question, in the casualest possible way one might ask a question:
If George Lucas was to die horribly in, say, a fire, would anyone be terribly upset?
People who make money off him, I guess. Although it's quite possible that they would juice his death to the last penny selling junk like Lucas with a lightsaber.
Its not really that bad... that being said, while I don't really mind if he wants to change crap on his movies I just wish I could get the freaking option to get the original cut on Blu Ray
Okay, George Lucas needs to listen to Barber's Adagio, commune with the composer "from the beyond," which is popular both in SW and SC, ask Barber to put in music during the great silence in that piece of music, and listen very carefully as he's told how not to screw up a masterpiece.
What an idiot, that's an iconic scene and he is going back to tamper with it? People can just look at Vader and know he's struggling with himself, the whole scene leads up to it; they don't need some lame "thinking out loud to alert the viewer of the plot" bullshit. He is, and for most of his career has always been, a hack.
Can't really understand why he would fiddle around with that. It was perfectly fine as it was. I get the feeling that he thinks he can do whatever the hell he wants with the franchise since he owns it. I guess it's too much to ask of Mr Lucas to see the films as works of art, and treat them as such. Good thing he doesn't own the Mona Lisa, because you know he'll be drawing in some eyebrows with a permanent maker.
Luckily I have digitized my old vhs box set (the original not the one with storm troopers on cg lizards lol) for future rewatchings.
I can only imagine in 10 years from now people will have versions of the movie with george lucas staring as luke skywalker, digitally "remastered" in of course.
thats a pretty bad change but i like that yoda will be computer-generated in episode one now but i dont like the old movies (4-6) anyway so i dont really care
George Lucas has been trolling the Star Wars fan base for over 20 years. That people are still getting upset over this stuff must bring a giant, toothy grin to his face.
On September 03 2011 02:50 aDd3z wrote: thats a pretty bad change but i like that yoda will be computer-generated in episode one now but i dont like the old movies (4-6) anyway so i dont really care
On September 03 2011 00:45 Torenhire wrote: I thought everyone already knew he hated his fans? Haha.
Have you seen any of the fanmade media for Star Wars? Any amateur movie makers doing Star Wars? He always pulls that crap and disallows it forever. Does anyone remember the Star Wars Christmas thing from TV ages ago? He's forever banned that from seeing the light of day as well, despite people loving it.
This doesn't surprise me in the least, lol. :p
Star Wars Christmas? That thing was an abomination, I wouldn't let it see the light of day either.
On September 03 2011 02:50 aDd3z wrote: thats a pretty bad change but i like that yoda will be computer-generated in episode one now but i dont like the old movies (4-6) anyway so i dont really care
watched the first five minutes: funny because I like the star wars movies so much because there is not really boring sterotype protagonist like in all those other movies he mentioned and that i dont liked.....why cant it be different? okay i understand if you are a fan of the first ones you feel betrayed! And rigthfully so! But I personally kinda like it
An important distinction: George Lucas doesn't hate his fans, he just doesn't care about them. He cares more about his personal integrity, his own vision, as every artist should. It just so happens that George Lucas is an idiot, and so his integrity drives him to take charge of parts of his movies where he has no actual talent.
I don't understand what world he lives in, every change and 'update' he has made to the original movies has resulted in them being worse off and even making them look more dated than they are!
I was hoping that they would relise a collection of the original movies un-'updated' instead looks like I'll have to keep hold of my VHS copy's...
My dear god does he hope that by making the old episode worse the recent one won't look as bad or something ? Can he touch Empire Strike Back as he's not the director ? (no wonder it's the best one...) Pretty happy my parents kept their old pre-1997 VHS =)
The title is miss-leading IMO, i thought he said in a interview or something thast he hates his fan... its a minor change that shouldnt be like , "omg he hatesus" its his movie, i think its better IMO, but w/e go starwars!
On September 03 2011 02:54 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On September 03 2011 02:50 aDd3z wrote: thats a pretty bad change but i like that yoda will be computer-generated in episode one now but i dont like the old movies (4-6) anyway so i dont really care
watched the first five minutes: funny because I like the star wars movies so much because there is not really boring sterotype protagonist like in all those other movies he mentioned and that i dont liked.....why cant it be different? okay i understand if you are a fan of the first ones you feel betrayed! And rigthfully so! But I personally kinda like it
Well, I'm not going to tell you that your opinion was wrong, and while I enjoyed the newer StarWars films... they are just shallow. You can't watch the Phantom Menace and discover/enforce something about the human condition.
The original StarWars movies were so good because you had a bunch of characters changing and growing with each different task; watching these characters overcome life lessons creates a bond much stronger than watching two guys in a perfectly choreographed fight scene.
To put it bluntly, there isn't a single character that develops or changes all through Episode 1 and 2. Anakin as a character changes, but it is in a form that is backwards from how people want themselves to change, and it is all overshadowed by the 45 minute lightsaber battle that is filled to the brim with as much shit that can possibly be packed onto the screen at once.
Not to say that special effects are bad, just that in most modern films they are used to draw in box office numbers in a way that detracts from what makes a story a good story. Storytelling has been around for a long long time, and it never needed explosions before.
And at the very heart of it, that is why people are upset with these changes that are being made to the story. You see Lucas adding in as much special effects in as possible, you see him changing major story aspects (like Han no longer shooting first) that ruins character development, and you see him changing an internal emotional struggle that makes sense to something that is just so... contrived and fake.
On September 03 2011 03:19 OscarN wrote: The title is miss-leading IMO, i thought he said in a interview or something thast he hates his fan... its a minor change that shouldnt be like , "omg he hatesus" its his movie, i think its better IMO, but w/e go starwars!
Exactly my thoughts. Yes, some people are going to be pissed off at this, but it's not like he's deliberately trying to piss of his fans. He probably just did what he thought was best for the movie itself.
On September 03 2011 02:54 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On September 03 2011 02:50 aDd3z wrote: thats a pretty bad change but i like that yoda will be computer-generated in episode one now but i dont like the old movies (4-6) anyway so i dont really care
watched the first five minutes: funny because I like the star wars movies so much because there is not really boring sterotype protagonist like in all those other movies he mentioned and that i dont liked.....why cant it be different? okay i understand if you are a fan of the first ones you feel betrayed! And rigthfully so! But I personally kinda like it
Boring stereotype, hilarious stuff, man. But you are right, in a way, because they are not boring stereotypes, they have no personalities, at all.
In response to the title of the thread: Lucas has fans? I sure as hell know Star Wars has fans, but Lucas? Every SW fan is like: "Dude, just retire, relax on your big pile of money, you did enough unrepairable damage already".
"My name is George Lucas. I am a writer, director, and producer of motion pictures and Chairman of the Board of Lucasfilm Ltd., a multi-faceted entertainment corporation.
I am not here today as a writer-director, or as a producer, or as the chairman of a corporation. I've come as a citizen of what I believe to be a great society that is in need of a moral anchor to help define and protect its intellectual and cultural heritage. It is not being protected.
The destruction of our film heritage, which is the focus of concern today, is only the tip of the iceberg. American law does not protect our painters, sculptors, recording artists, authors, or filmmakers from having their lifework distorted, and their reputation ruined. If something is not done now to clearly state the moral rights of artists, current and future technologies will alter, mutilate, and destroy for future generations the subtle human truths and highest human feeling that talented individuals within our society have created.
A copyright is held in trust by its owner until it ultimately reverts to public domain. American works of art belong to the American public; they are part of our cultural history.
People who alter or destroy works of art and our cultural heritage for profit or as an exercise of power are barbarians, and if the laws of the United States continue to condone this behavior, history will surely classify us as a barbaric society. The preservation of our cultural heritage may not seem to be as politically sensitive an issue as "when life begins" or "when it should be appropriately terminated," but it is important because it goes to the heart of what sets mankind apart. Creative expression is at the core of our humanness. Art is a distinctly human endeavor. We must have respect for it if we are to have any respect for the human race.
These current defacements are just the beginning. Today, engineers with their computers can add color to black-and-white movies, change the soundtrack, speed up the pace, and add or subtract material to the philosophical tastes of the copyright holder. Tommorrow, more advanced technology will be able to replace actors with "fresher faces," or alter dialogue and change the movement of the actor's lips to match. It will soon be possible to create a new "original" negative with whatever changes or alterations the copyright holder of the moment desires. The copyright holders, so far, have not been completely diligent in preserving the original negatives of films they control. In order to reconstruct old negatives, many archivists have had to go to Eastern bloc countries where American films have been better preserved.
In the future it will become even easier for old negatives to become lost and be "replaced" by new altered negatives. This would be a great loss to our society. Our cultural history must not be allowed to be rewritten.
There is nothing to stop American films, records, books, and paintings from being sold to a foreign entity or egotistical gangsters and having them change our cultural heritage to suit their personal taste.
I accuse the companies and groups, who say that American law is sufficient, of misleading the Congress and the People for their own economic self-interest.
I accuse the corporations, who oppose the moral rights of the artist, of being dishonest and insensitive to American cultural heritage and of being interested only in their quarterly bottom line, and not in the long-term interest of the Nation.
The public's interest is ultimately dominant over all other interests. And the proof of that is that even a copyright law only permits the creators and their estate a limited amount of time to enjoy the economic fruits of that work.
There are those who say American law is sufficient. That's an outrage! It's not sufficient! If it were sufficient, why would I be here? Why would John Houston have been so studiously ignored when he protested the colorization of "The Maltese Falcon?" Why are films cut up and butchered?
Attention should be paid to this question of our soul, and not simply to accounting procedures. Attention should be paid to the interest of those who are yet unborn, who should be able to see this generation as it saw itself, and the past generation as it saw itself.
I hope you have the courage to lead America in acknowledging the importance of American art to the human race, and accord the proper protection for the creators of that art--as it is accorded them in much of the rest of the world communities."
George Lucas 2011:
HUEHUEHUEHUEHUEHUEHUEHUEHUEHUEHUE
(hat-tip toplessrobot.com for the speech, not the hues)
Lucas actually just has some business sense and is milking star wars as much as humanly possible. You can't really blame him when the "upset" fans are lining up to buy every new version he shits out.
When it is all said and done and he actually runs out of ideas for new versions he will just top it all off with a "new" uncut/unedited theatrical release for the final milking of the cow and they will line up to buy that too.
edit: it's official! September 5th this post will be re-released on BLUE RAY FORMAT! Some changes have been made of course, 67% of words will from now on be spelled BACKWARDS! GET PUMPED
edit: something just came to mind. The power glove. It compares well to these changes. Because it's so bad.
Aha, this is kind of funny and stupid at the same time. I'll stay far, FAAR away from those blue ray ones. CGI yoda? REALLY? I think that's the biggest change. I just recently watched the special features for the 2nd prequel (where CGI yoda was introduced) and It's clear (at the risk of sounding like a rabid fan who thinks he knows better than Lucas himself) that Lucas doesn't understand what Yoda was all about, and he has waaay too many Yes-men around him. Nobody challenges him, and when he's in the room there seems to be a nervous feeling in the air, and everybody looks scared. That's not really what you want, having one person essentially decide what the entire movie will look like.
Yoda, in my view, was supposed to represent the Force, not weapons or wars (wars not make one great!) and the wisdom of the force (i'm such a fucking nerd), and him flailing around like an idiot in the prequels successfully ruined the character.
I think I'm just really bitter that all I have atm of the original three masterpieces are the revised editions from the late 90's (v_v)
They don't ruin the movies, but it's so vulgar, occasionally theres some very out of place retarded CGI bantha creature. It doesn't fit the movies at all.
And that's my biggest gripe (one of them) in the prequels too, SO MUCH is done in pure CGI as opposed to actual real sets and real stunts.
For comparison, think of the luke & leia scene in Hope where they have to swing across the chasm. That was a real stunt, and in fact Mark's strap was broken atm (he didn't know that though ) so it was pretty dangerous. I'm not saying scenes need to be dangerous to be good in terms of action, but it just looks and feels much better when it's somewhat real.
Also, if you notice, every single dialogue scene in the prequels they're either walking slowly, stopping by the end, then one of the characters take off (slight variations occasionally) or they're sitting on a couch and one of them stands up by the end. Every single one, I swear.
/Rabid star wars fanboy rant OFF
edit: oh wait, it was a new CGI yoda in Phantom Menace, not Empire? Well that's fine, that puppet looked like ass anyway.
I also didn't hate Jar Jar as much as everyone else. People who say he ruined the feel of Star Wars are obviously remembering C3PO wrong - he was a doofus too.
Strange... not even James Earl Jones can manage to make that 'nooooooooooooooo' sound good.
It's a bad change, but thankfully I don't need to constantly rewatch the old Star Wars films to remember how good they were before the edits. Just sucks that newer generations of people have to see this version of things.
I guess it depends on which Star Wars you grew up with. I'm old enough to have watched the original trilogy in the theaters when the graphics were still 'good'. So that colors my feelings, I was also young enough to not think the Ewoks were selling out (something people already hated when Jedi came out).
But you got to admit that Lucas is a little delusional about the movies. After all, he thinks Empire Strikes Back is the worst one (probably because Harrison Ford rewrote the lines for 'I love you' - 'I know' scene).
I'm a HUGE Star Wars fan, but I'm not the typical OT purist. Episode 1 was whatever, Episode 2 kinda sucked, and Episode 3 was the best of the prequels in my opinion. As for the changes for the Blu-Ray editions, I can live with it, but would have preferred if they left it alone.
On September 03 2011 00:43 SlimeBagly wrote: Haha, that's really goofy.
Still a minor offense compared to making Greedo shoot first.
No kidding. That was a travesty.
I don't understand why he has to keep tinkering around with the old films, they were obviously good how they were. The changes mess around with the feeling nostalgia I attatch to each scene.
Despite my purist fanboy rants, I don't *really* mind the changes as much as other people. I don't think it "ruins" star wars or anything, and people acting like Lucas raped their childhood or something just because he made one scene a little silly (greedo shot first) are being silly imo.
On September 03 2011 02:54 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On September 03 2011 02:50 aDd3z wrote: thats a pretty bad change but i like that yoda will be computer-generated in episode one now but i dont like the old movies (4-6) anyway so i dont really care
watched the first five minutes: funny because I like the star wars movies so much because there is not really boring sterotype protagonist like in all those other movies he mentioned and that i dont liked.....why cant it be different? okay i understand if you are a fan of the first ones you feel betrayed! And rigthfully so! But I personally kinda like it
No dood I think you missed the point. Having a protagonist that has appealing qualities (or any qualities at all ...I'm looking at you Liam Neelson's character) is not a stereotype. Its part of the definition of a protagonist. He needs qualities that make him relate-able. You want to be able to identity the protagonists motivations for his actions and feel for him as a fellow man. Wanting a protagonist to have those qualities is not stereotypical. That's like saying you don't want a stereotypical car with 4 wheels... its simply not a car otherwise.
Luke Skywalker, princess leia, and han solo are some of the most relate-able protagonists in cinema history. Do you really find those characters boring? Who can't relate to at least one of those 3 leads?
My biggest problem with this is that Lucas seems to be messing with them just for fun. He probably would have been able to make more money off of them my just rereleasing the movies every time a new format started up the way they were originally released. I just wish that he would release the original cut on some HD medium so we don't have to convert VHS tapes.
He just lost hundreds of thousands of blu ray sales. Why don't people understand why fans are pissed off about this? What if Casablanca or The Godfather added in new dialogue, computer generated characters, and additional scenes that werent needed?
I'm actually surprised Lucas hasn't decided to replace the ewok actors with cgi ones, since anyone over 4 years old takes one look at them and thinks "oh, its a midget in a bear suit."
On September 03 2011 00:46 MadPretty wrote: George Lucas has turned into that kid at the playground who keeps changing his superpowers while you play "X-Men".
Cartman? He was actually playing ninjas with the guys.
STOP THE PRESSES THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING ... jk :D
As a pretty big (old episode) stars wars fan, I don't really mind it. I think had it been in the original version nobody would have looked at Vader differently than they do now.
obviiously noone should buy the product. its a shame, but you have to destroy something thats been tainted, and the only way to do that with film is complete abstinence from buying said product.
I was 8 when I saw VI, and I understood the concept without him saying "no".
OR maybe the scene is now a juxtaposition of darth vader being fans, GL being palpatine, and Luke being his films.
Oh, and the whole "han shot first" thing. I saw the digital remake and could tell something was wrong with that scene from the jitter imposed by the editing to make him shift to the side, I just never knew the scene was altered so he would be "self defense" instead of "outright murder".
Thats the point of the scene, its like the whole "wild west" theme in outer space. Thank god GL doesn't have rights to edit Good, the bad, and the ugly, or A fistful of dollars.
Tasteless would call you all hipsters. The only reason the "noo" seems out of place is because you are used to seeing the scene without it. Had you have never seen Starwars before, I highly doubt any of you would even think twice about it.
On September 03 2011 00:46 MadPretty wrote: George Lucas has turned into that kid at the playground who keeps changing his superpowers while you play "X-Men".
Cartman? He was actually playing ninjas with the guys.
I don't think he was specifically mentioning anything except a person we could most likely relate to in our childhood ;p
....its his movie, his franchise, his way of seeing that moment and how he felt Vader was "feeling" at that time. He probably felt in the original movies Vader didnt express his real emotions thoroughly in episode 3. He still came across as a cold person and Lucas probably never meant to show him in that way.
The real killer for me in the prequel movies was casting Hayden Christenson as Anakin Skywalker. He is so BAD. I think if they wanted someone who looked just as good but acted better, James Franco would have been a better choice.
100% of all movies considered great, have a deeper meaning to them than what is presented.
George Lucas hates his fans? pretty strong oppinion coming from someone who knows nothing about the man.
On September 03 2011 06:03 elmizzt wrote: It's like poetry, it rhymes! You guys just don't understand!
Aahahahaha . Those reviews are so awesome, and that quote is one of the best parts.
On September 03 2011 06:02 Okiesmokie wrote: Tasteless would call you all hipsters. The only reason the "noo" seems out of place is because you are used to seeing the scene without it. Had you have never seen Starwars before, I highly doubt any of you would even think twice about it.
Well that's the point. There is a previous version, and it's better. Vader killing Emperor while thinking in silence = audience can follow his train of thought, sympathize with him, a whole story is told with uttering a single word. Vader screaming "Nooooo" - stereotypical rage response, audience doesn't have to think for themselves, edited scene takes away from total experience.
We have seen SW before, and we've come to respect / like / love it the way it was (depending on level of fan-dom). Some things just don't need editing or "improvement".
On September 03 2011 06:18 Shockk wrote: Well that's the point. There is a previous version, and it's better. Vader killing Emperor while thinking in silence = audience can follow his train of thought, sympathize with him, a whole story is told with uttering a single word. Vader screaming "Nooooo" - stereotypical rage response, audience doesn't have to think for themselves, edited scene takes away from total experience.
We have seen SW before, and we've come to respect / like / love it the way it was (depending on level of fan-dom). Some things just don't need editing or "improvement".
The only difference is that now people who would not have been able to understand his train of thought before he threw the emperor over the bridge (ie: the younger generation, new viewers of Star Wars), are now able to see the anguish he was suffering. The end result is the same, except more people can enjoy it. I don't see why people complain about it.
I know in the past I have watched the movie with younger kids and have been asked why Vader did what he did.
On September 03 2011 06:17 wingweaver415 wrote: ....its his movie, his franchise, his way of seeing that moment and how he felt Vader was "feeling" at that time. He probably felt in the original movies Vader didnt express his real emotions thoroughly in episode 3. He still came across as a cold person and Lucas probably never meant to show him in that way.
The real killer for me in the prequel movies was casting Hayden Christenson as Anakin Skywalker. He is so BAD. I think if they wanted someone who looked just as good but acted better, James Franco would have been a better choice.
100% of all movies considered great, have a deeper meaning to them than what is presented.
George Lucas hates his fans? pretty strong oppinion coming from someone who knows nothing about the man.
Hayden Christensen is a good actor, he just got given a shitty script. It's hard to make lines like "You've grown... More beautiful I mean" sound good. Shattered Glass is a much better demonstration of his ability since it has a good script and good direction. If you've seen that then you know that cringe-worthy Anakin Skywalker moments are direction/scripting issues rather than Hayden's inability to act.
On September 03 2011 06:03 elmizzt wrote: It's like poetry, it rhymes! You guys just don't understand!
Here is my favorite dialog from the prequel. It deserves an Oscar.
"You are so... beautiful -No you are soooo beautiful -That's because I'm so in love -No, that's because I am so in love with you -So... love has blinded you? -No, that's not exactly what I meant"
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
EDIT: OH MY GOOOOOD WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOUR FAAAACE?
Star Wars already has stupid changes, for example Han Solo kills Greedo off the bat in the original, in the extended edition Greedo fires first and Han retaliates..... Jurrassic Park will be without raptors and the trex next >.<
I get the idea about someone making something worse after you got used to something, but you don't have to watch the blue-ray version. Watch the old versions only. Big deal...
Things like this really reinforce how little of star wars greatness is actually due to George Lucas' vision and how much of it was simply a one-off confluence of coincidence and happenstance.
i'd consider myself a pretty big star wars fan, and i couldn't care less about this
i actually like some of the changes made in new versions, like in the dvd of return of the jedi where hayden christensen portrays anakin skywalker at the end, I thought that was really cool and made perfect sense
On September 03 2011 06:17 wingweaver415 wrote: ....its his movie, his franchise, his way of seeing that moment and how he felt Vader was "feeling" at that time. He probably felt in the original movies Vader didnt express his real emotions thoroughly in episode 3. He still came across as a cold person and Lucas probably never meant to show him in that way.
The real killer for me in the prequel movies was casting Hayden Christenson as Anakin Skywalker. He is so BAD. I think if they wanted someone who looked just as good but acted better, James Franco would have been a better choice.
100% of all movies considered great, have a deeper meaning to them than what is presented.
George Lucas hates his fans? pretty strong oppinion coming from someone who knows nothing about the man.
Hayden Christensen is a good actor, he just got given a shitty script. It's hard to make lines like "You've grown... More beautiful I mean" sound good. Shattered Glass is a much better demonstration of his ability since it has a good script and good direction. If you've seen that then you know that cringe-worthy Anakin Skywalker moments are direction/scripting issues rather than Hayden's inability to act.
That's what I think anyway.
Go check out Shattered Glass. Same well below average acting In my oppinion. He was hired for his looks not his abilities.
On September 03 2011 06:47 Fleebenworth wrote: Things like this really reinforce how little of star wars greatness is actually due to George Lucas' vision and how much of it was simply a one-off confluence of coincidence and happenstance.
No, it's mostly due to the hard work and brilliance of the people who were working with Lucas and told him no repeatedly when Lucas had a terrible idea. Unfortunately, after his success with the first few films, people grew afraid to tell him no, and then you get the prequels and this shit.
On September 03 2011 02:50 aDd3z wrote: thats a pretty bad change but i like that yoda will be computer-generated in episode one now but i dont like the old movies (4-6) anyway so i dont really care
On September 03 2011 00:45 Torenhire wrote: I thought everyone already knew he hated his fans? Haha.
Have you seen any of the fanmade media for Star Wars? Any amateur movie makers doing Star Wars? He always pulls that crap and disallows it forever. Does anyone remember the Star Wars Christmas thing from TV ages ago? He's forever banned that from seeing the light of day as well, despite people loving it.
This doesn't surprise me in the least, lol. :p
I wouldn't say hatred as much as I would say greed and selfishness. A long time ago he actually did something smart, he made a deal with Fox that all merchandising and logos would be owned by him and he would have complete control over any future movies and basically anything to do with starwars. A VERY smart decision by lucas, not getting as much money up front but more money long term and no one actually knew at Fox studios whether the original movie would be a hit.
I honestly think lucas is playing the smart business man in that he doesn't allow profit to be made without his consent and if he straight up doesn't like his "starwars" being used then he removes it. I'd do the same thing if I was him. HOWEVER, that doesn't excuse him for the horrible choices he has made such as Jar Jar in Episode 1 and doing stunts like this by changing the original movies. I think he is a good businessman but I honestly think his creativity has gone down hill ever since Episode 4.
I think some people say the "NO" is only a rumor which may be true, but think back to the "special" editions of the original 3 episodes of Star wars. Did he really have to have an entire scene at the end of Ep. 6 with ewoks singing? Did we need to see the snow monsters face in Ep. 5? Most of the things he added were things the audience loved because they WEREN'T there in the original. Like I said, his creativity has only gotten worse and I don't need to mention Ep. 1 - 3 to prove that.
On September 03 2011 06:18 Shockk wrote: Well that's the point. There is a previous version, and it's better. Vader killing Emperor while thinking in silence = audience can follow his train of thought, sympathize with him, a whole story is told with uttering a single word. Vader screaming "Nooooo" - stereotypical rage response, audience doesn't have to think for themselves, edited scene takes away from total experience.
We have seen SW before, and we've come to respect / like / love it the way it was (depending on level of fan-dom). Some things just don't need editing or "improvement".
The only difference is that now people who would not have been able to understand his train of thought before he threw the emperor over the bridge (ie: the younger generation, new viewers of Star Wars), are now able to see the anguish he was suffering. The end result is the same, except more people can enjoy it. I don't see why people complain about it.
I know in the past I have watched the movie with younger kids and have been asked why Vader did what he did.
Well, I watched them when I was 8 or 9 and I understood fully why Vader did what he did. It just irks me so much. The "noooo" is unnecessary and takes away part of what made that scene so good in the beginning.
On September 03 2011 02:54 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On September 03 2011 02:50 aDd3z wrote: thats a pretty bad change but i like that yoda will be computer-generated in episode one now but i dont like the old movies (4-6) anyway so i dont really care
One of the worst reviews I've ever seen in my life. You would actually use this as your basis for proving a point?
Thanks for sharing.
You should watch it completely (all the parts). The first minutes are, especially for an introduction, quite bad. However, in the end you'll see he makes excellent points about the disaster that is called the New Trilogy. Basically how most things in the movie (story writing, CGI, dialog, decisions by movie characters) are all extremely flawed. And yes, his voice is irritating.
On September 03 2011 06:02 Okiesmokie wrote: Tasteless would call you all hipsters. The only reason the "noo" seems out of place is because you are used to seeing the scene without it. Had you have never seen Starwars before, I highly doubt any of you would even think twice about it.
lol who seriously gives a shit. People just find a reason to bitch over anything. It wasn't like the scene was life altering. Although that noooooooooooo was funny. It turned the scene from a scifi thriller to comedy though
On September 03 2011 00:43 SlimeBagly wrote: Haha, that's really goofy.
Still a minor offense compared to making Greedo shoot first.
So true.
Of all the things he's done to Star Wars, that was the one change that made me say, "Wow, this guy has lost all perspective on his characters, the story as a whole, and what makes for interesting cinema."
This is just one more slap in the face, and one more clue to the burning question:
'Has George Lucas forgot how to make a good movie, or were his earlier successes nothing but a fluke?'
On September 03 2011 00:43 SlimeBagly wrote: Haha, that's really goofy.
Still a minor offense compared to making Greedo shoot first.
So true.
Of all the things he's done to Star Wars, that was the one change that made me say, "Wow, this guy has lost all perspective on his characters, the story as a whole, and what makes for interesting cinema."
This is just one more slap in the face, and one more clue to the burning question:
'Has George Lucas forgot how to make a good movie, or were his earlier successes nothing but a fluke?'
The former, imo. American Graffiti was a great film, so Lucas must have known how to make good movies in the years past.
On September 03 2011 06:02 Okiesmokie wrote: Tasteless would call you all hipsters. The only reason the "noo" seems out of place is because you are used to seeing the scene without it. Had you have never seen Starwars before, I highly doubt any of you would even think twice about it.
You mean the same Tasteless who hates the prequels and mentioned during some GSL that according to him there are only 3 star wars movies? Yeah, I'm pretty sure he'll love the "nooo"
On September 03 2011 02:54 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On September 03 2011 02:50 aDd3z wrote: thats a pretty bad change but i like that yoda will be computer-generated in episode one now but i dont like the old movies (4-6) anyway so i dont really care
On September 03 2011 02:54 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On September 03 2011 02:50 aDd3z wrote: thats a pretty bad change but i like that yoda will be computer-generated in episode one now but i dont like the old movies (4-6) anyway so i dont really care
On September 03 2011 00:43 SlimeBagly wrote: Haha, that's really goofy.
Still a minor offense compared to making Greedo shoot first.
So true.
Of all the things he's done to Star Wars, that was the one change that made me say, "Wow, this guy has lost all perspective on his characters, the story as a whole, and what makes for interesting cinema."
This is just one more slap in the face, and one more clue to the burning question:
'Has George Lucas forgot how to make a good movie, or were his earlier successes nothing but a fluke?'
The former, imo. American Psycho was a great film, so Lucas must have known how to make good movies in the years past.
On September 03 2011 00:43 SlimeBagly wrote: Haha, that's really goofy.
Still a minor offense compared to making Greedo shoot first.
So true.
Of all the things he's done to Star Wars, that was the one change that made me say, "Wow, this guy has lost all perspective on his characters, the story as a whole, and what makes for interesting cinema."
This is just one more slap in the face, and one more clue to the burning question:
'Has George Lucas forgot how to make a good movie, or were his earlier successes nothing but a fluke?'
The former, imo. American Psycho was a great film, so Lucas must have known how to make good movies in the years past.
This is probably my favorite scene in the original trilogy, the one that really made me love Star Wars.
Subtlety is an important tool in filmmaking, and Lucas lost it ages ago and no longer has any comprehension of the concept. A good filmmaker knows when to use words and when not to.
On September 03 2011 07:51 CptCutter wrote: i dont understand the point of the title. your not serious with it right? because if you go with that logic then parents hate their children.
From a lot of interviews with him it definitely feels like theres a bit of antipathy from Lucas towards the fans, cause of the way the prequels got trashed.
What's the big deal? Any true Star Wars fanatic already has the original edition anyway. I for one don't care about blu ray quality.
Anyway this is how I see it: George Lucas is an artist. As an artist, you tend to envision such great things that when you try to make them become real, to substantiate them, then the actual results are oftentimes below your expectations. I believe that to him, his works are not perfect (and may very well never be); he's always looking to reach perfection, he's always striving to stay faithful to what he envisioned in the first place.
Now please tell me if I'm totally wrong or if this does not make sense but, in my opinion, it's clear that this guy is struggling to make his work live up to his expectations. So it's perfectly understandable that he wants to change details here & there, even if it turns out to be an endless endeavor. You know what they say about genius and madness...
Anyway in some cases the guy definitely needs someone close to him, a friend or a business partner to step up and say "You got to stop, it's good as it is".
PS; the indiana jones hate was totally exaggerated. You guys need to stop with this whole hate band wagoning bullshit.
I've long suspected Lucas keeps making ridiculous changes to these just so he can eventually sell "original" versions to the same fans who buy the film when it's released on a new format.
On September 03 2011 06:17 wingweaver415 wrote: ....its his movie, his franchise, his way of seeing that moment and how he felt Vader was "feeling" at that time. He probably felt in the original movies Vader didnt express his real emotions thoroughly in episode 3. He still came across as a cold person and Lucas probably never meant to show him in that way.
The real killer for me in the prequel movies was casting Hayden Christenson as Anakin Skywalker. He is so BAD. I think if they wanted someone who looked just as good but acted better, James Franco would have been a better choice.
100% of all movies considered great, have a deeper meaning to them than what is presented.
George Lucas hates his fans? pretty strong oppinion coming from someone who knows nothing about the man.
Hayden Christensen is a good actor, he just got given a shitty script. It's hard to make lines like "You've grown... More beautiful I mean" sound good. Shattered Glass is a much better demonstration of his ability since it has a good script and good direction. If you've seen that then you know that cringe-worthy Anakin Skywalker moments are direction/scripting issues rather than Hayden's inability to act.
That's what I think anyway.
Go check out Shattered Glass. Same well below average acting In my oppinion. He was hired for his looks not his abilities.
I've seen it, hence why I referred to it in my post, which I'm guessing you didn't really read. Hayden Christensen received a reasonable amount of critical acclaim for his role in that movie, although he was slightly overshadowed by Peter Saarsgard, who was amazing.
I stand by my point that it was poor scripting and direction (esp. scripting) which lead to Christensen looking like a shit actor. No actor could make the cheese that Lucas injected into Anakin's script sound good.
On topic, I don't think the actual change that Lucas made is bad at all. In fact, had I seen it this way originally I would be perfectly happy with it. I think the real issue that fans have with it is that he is essentially changing the events that occurred in the movies retroactively, however minor the changes may be. No respectable writer would go back and change certain lines or events post-publication because it ruins the illusion that the story is something that actually happened. Basically, it's difficult to connect with a story whose events are constantly changing.
On September 03 2011 00:43 SlimeBagly wrote: Haha, that's really goofy.
Still a minor offense compared to making Greedo shoot first.
So true.
Of all the things he's done to Star Wars, that was the one change that made me say, "Wow, this guy has lost all perspective on his characters, the story as a whole, and what makes for interesting cinema."
This is just one more slap in the face, and one more clue to the burning question:
'Has George Lucas forgot how to make a good movie, or were his earlier successes nothing but a fluke?'
The former, imo. American Graffiti was a great film, so Lucas must have known how to make good movies in the years past.
Agreed. The Indiana Jones films were also really good and he's worked on a few other films which were box-office hits, critical successes or both. I definitely think it's just that he's forgotten how to make a good movie, whether it's a temporary or permanent thing.
On September 03 2011 02:54 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On September 03 2011 02:50 aDd3z wrote: thats a pretty bad change but i like that yoda will be computer-generated in episode one now but i dont like the old movies (4-6) anyway so i dont really care
One of the worst reviews I've ever seen in my life. You would actually use this as your basis for proving a point?
Thanks for sharing.
That review makes numerous good points about the film.
Any potential it had at being a decent review in the first place is completely squandered by the fact that it's created to try to make everybody hate the movies. The part where he had the descriptive word test was the most obviously edited shit ever hahahahaha. Like really? Qui-gon, little Anakin, and Padme are not memorable characters? I don't know, it just tries TOO hard to make the film look bad. I agree with a few points within it but to say it's a fair portrayal of the film is absolutely wrong. It should just never be referenced in the old vs new argument, sorry
I don't know about anybody else, but when Qui-gon got impaled my heart broke. I had fallen in love with that character throughout the movie. Maybe you can credit that to Liam Neeson though
On September 03 2011 09:04 Ballack wrote: The joke is on you people for buying all these releases, just stick to the DVD/VHS or smth. Star Wars in HD doesn't make it better.
I know I didn't purchase any late releases of anything he's made. I also believe that the only people that purchased them are those defending what he did here.
The review really does make some good points -- I've seen it in its entirety, and while the reviewer does get a bit over-indulgent in his "creepy" persona, he's really insightful at some parts.
Watch this part of the review from 6:00 to the end. It perfectly sums up everything that's changed for the worse about Star Wars since the originals were finished.
On September 03 2011 09:06 Romance_us wrote: I don't know about anybody else, but when Qui-gon got impaled my heart broke. I had fallen in love with that character throughout the movie. Maybe you can credit that to Liam Neeson though
For me Qui-gon was the only worthwhile character in all of the prequels, and it was down to Liam Neeson, who can pull off decent performances even in terrible movies like TPM and the Clash of the Titans remake.
The thing is this time, I just don't understand the reasoning behind it. Maybe he secretely hates Star Wars and the effect it had on his life and he wants to destroy it.
Lucas is such a freaking moron why can't he do what the fans want and release the original trilogy UNEDITED with none of his CGI crap in there.I remember going to the movies in 1997 to watch the 'remastered' versions and the CGI models stuck out like a sore thumb.Hence why the original non CGI VHS releases still go for high money.
These changes are almost as bad as Han not shooting first or the changes in JEDI where when Vader took off his helmet he was no longer the old guy but that pretty boy Hayden Christianson.It's so wrong.
I really DO hope all of this is a ploy to release the original versions in HD. I won't feel comfortable telling my future kids that these are my favorite movies. EDIT: Talking about edited original trilogy of course.
As a DIE - HARD starwars fan i see absolutely nothing wrong with this. Lucas attempts to bring new life into his films AGAIN and people just complain. Sure, it was dumb as SHIT when vader yelled 'NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO' at the end of Revenge of the Sith but what the hell man?? you have already experienced return of the jedi a thousand times in its perfect form why complain? This is just Lucas trying to squeeze a little more cash out of his films and, if people are going to buy it (WHICH THEY WILL) then more power to him. Anyone and everyone bitching about this A) has waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(to the 10th power)y too much time on their hands. and B) can just stfu to be quite frank.
i see so many worthless complaints on this thread that i dont even know where to begin ^ ^ trust me -- i tried!
"These changes are almost as bad as Han not shooting first or the changes in JEDI where when Vader took off his helmet he was no longer the old guy but that pretty boy Hayden Christianson.It's so wrong."
Wait -- when vader took off his helmet and he WAS HAYDEN CHRISTIANSEN?! Did that even HAPPEN?! at ANY point?! link to it or it did not happen first off. i recall his (obviously meant to be portrayed as his younger self) holographic figure to be Hayden in the special edition, but don't come in here and pretend that they fucked up the "Luke, you were right about me" scene when they DID NOT. because right there you shat on a scene that, to my knowledge, has still remained untouched. And its SO wrong.
On September 03 2011 10:18 Moldwood wrote: As a DIE - HARD starwars fan i see absolutely nothing wrong with this. Lucas attempts to bring new life into his films AGAIN and people just complain. Sure, it was dumb as SHIT when vader yelled 'NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO' at the end of Revenge of the Sith but what the hell man?? you have already experienced return of the jedi a thousand times in its perfect form why complain? This is just Lucas trying to squeeze a little more cash out of his films and, if people are going to buy it (WHICH THEY WILL) then more power to him. Anyone and everyone bitching about this A) has waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(to the 10th power)y too much time on their hands. and B) can just stfu to be quite frank.
Your comment took just as much time as the comments complaining, so that's dumb.
He's not bringing new life anyway, he's rewriting events which had already occurred in the Star Wars universe. If you consider the films to be 'factual' timelines of the Star Wars story then changing something post-release is like rewriting history. There are two scenes, one with Darth Vader saying nothing and one with Darth Vader saying 'No!", but which scene actually occurred in this story? It might seem minor to you, but to an actual fan it completely breaks the illusion of Star Wars being a timeline of actual events. Yes, it's fictional, but a good fiction becomes 'real' in the viewer/reader's mind. Retroactively modifying events ruins that 'realness'.
If George Lucas is unhappy with his movies he should attempt to create another movie rather than mucking round with ones he has already done.
Wtf? You can't edit The Return of the Jedi. It's a classic.I'm not buying that version. I never want to watch that version. George Lucas, you're a fucking movie director and you think that Vader saying, "Noooooo!" in the cheesiest way possible, was so important it absolutely had be added to RTOJ? Fucking mental.
On September 03 2011 10:18 Moldwood wrote: As a DIE - HARD starwars fan i see absolutely nothing wrong with this. Lucas attempts to bring new life into his films AGAIN and people just complain. Sure, it was dumb as SHIT when vader yelled 'NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO' at the end of Revenge of the Sith but what the hell man?? you have already experienced return of the jedi a thousand times in its perfect form why complain? This is just Lucas trying to squeeze a little more cash out of his films and, if people are going to buy it (WHICH THEY WILL) then more power to him. Anyone and everyone bitching about this A) has waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(to the 10th power)y too much time on their hands. and B) can just stfu to be quite frank.
Your comment took just as much time as the comments complaining, so that's dumb.
He's not bringing new life anyway, he's rewriting events which had already occurred in the Star Wars universe. If you consider the films to be 'factual' timelines of the Star Wars story then changing something post-release is like rewriting history. There are two scenes, one with Darth Vader saying nothing and one with Darth Vader saying 'No!", but which scene actually occurred in this story? It might seem minor to you, but to an actual fan it completely breaks the illusion of Star Wars being a timeline of actual events. Yes, it's fictional, but a good fiction becomes 'real' in the viewer/reader's mind. Retroactively modifying events ruins that 'realness'.
If George Lucas is unhappy with his movies he should attempt to create another movie rather than mucking round with ones he has already done.
Well honestly i agree with everything you have to say here besides one notion. This minor change makes the story seem less 'Real' to the true fiction fans? Well first off, its fiction............................................. but second off, if I was completely immersed in and satisfied with the original versions i would continue to enjoy them -- and NEVER buy or view these new blu rays. Because you have the OPTION of doing so. Meanwhile, George Lucas has the option of making more money. have.... have you guys read anything about Lucas? Not only is he going to select this option for the rest of his life, i am quite certain that star wars will still be MILKED of every penny for decades to come, after he dies.
Look, The Phantom Menace, at its core, absolutely sucked. And after reading the reviews any reasonable-minded fan could say "HEY -- WHOA -- looks like this series has spun way off track. I DONT THINK I WILL SUPPORT THE CONTINUATION OF THE SERIES by buying tickets, DVDs, blu rays, what have you". it is that simple. no reason to make a thread entitled "George Lucas HATES his fans" which frankly i think is silly. i clicked this thread expecting something MORE atrocious than Jar-Jar Binks.
On September 03 2011 09:04 Ballack wrote: The joke is on you people for buying all these releases, just stick to the DVD/VHS or smth. Star Wars in HD doesn't make it better.
I just wanted to add that this thread is pure gold. Ive already said I digitized my original vhs trilogy but rarely to I get the enjoyment from them that I have from the responses here. He is changing a classic that did well and doing it to make more money because he frankly cant create anything new. As the review from redlettermedia said perfectly "he is a business man first and a film-maker second and I wont say he is a bad business man." Where I feel he lost his soul is purely conjecture. Will I personally buy the new version? Oh hell naw. Will I let it effect my life beyond the minor anecdote with a co-worker? Nope. Personally I would say find a copy of the original and enjoy it, thats just personal preference though. I never felt star wars had anything to do with lucas, he was a (very) minor idea man with business acumen that hit the timing jackpot.
George Lucas has been a money-hungry failure of a director/writer for many many years now. In fact, considering there was strong input on all three Star Wars films by actors/others, and both Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi were done by other directors, one could even claim that his only real home brewed success was Star Wars: A New Hope.
Sickening, really. But then again, Star Wars has been being ruined for many years now. What else is new?
On September 03 2011 09:36 Node wrote: The review really does make some good points -- I've seen it in its entirety, and while the reviewer does get a bit over-indulgent in his "creepy" persona, he's really insightful at some parts.
Watch this part of the review from 6:00 to the end. It perfectly sums up everything that's changed for the worse about Star Wars since the originals were finished.
That's what bothered me so much about the reviews (I spoilered the youtube part to save space). He could have said everything in 10-20 minutes covering all three movies, and is milking Star Wars' fame in his own way by spending so much time with sarcasm, beating points to death, and the "creepy persona." To a certain extent, I agreed with most of his sincere points. Also there is truth to the thought that he brought to light a lot of the murky feelings many many people may have had about the prequels but couldn't put into words. But there is a certain extent to which you can fault find with anything and make it look worse than it actually was.
Regarding the "noooooo," I shall reiterate that Lucas needs to listen to Barber's Adagio, and learn the power of silence. The "noooooo" itself isn't really that bad, but what I remember about that scene is looking at that mask, that "face," and seeing, even if only imagining the change, the decision going on in that mind. And then I actually shed tears when he does it. I don't need the distraction of an inferior version, and it's the last thing I'd ever want to share with my kids or friends when I simply have something better, the original.
On September 03 2011 09:36 Node wrote: The review really does make some good points -- I've seen it in its entirety, and while the reviewer does get a bit over-indulgent in his "creepy" persona, he's really insightful at some parts.
Watch this part of the review from 6:00 to the end. It perfectly sums up everything that's changed for the worse about Star Wars since the originals were finished.
That's what bothered me so much about the reviews (I spoilered the youtube part to save space). He could have said everything in 10-20 minutes covering all three movies, and is milking Star Wars' fame in his own way by spending so much time with sarcasm, beating points to death, and the "creepy persona." To a certain extent, I agreed with most of his sincere points. Also there is truth to the thought that he brought to light a lot of the murky feelings many many people may have had about the prequels but couldn't put into words. But there is a certain extent to which you can fault find with anything and make it look worse than it actually was.
Regarding the "noooooo," I shall reiterate that Lucas needs to listen to Barber's Adagio, and learn the power of silence. The "noooooo" itself isn't really that bad, but what I remember about that scene is looking at that mask, that "face," and seeing, even if only imagining the change, the decision going on in that mind. And then I actually shed tears when he does it. I don't need the distraction of an inferior version, and it's the last thing I'd ever want to share with my kids or friends when I simply have something better, the original.
Guess you didnt watch much beyond the first few youtubes. Alot more is changed than just nooo I wont spoiler it for you but lets just say it gets pretty bad. I agree the weird disassociative scenes threw me at first until I realized he was making a point with the little mini vids. Points that directly related to what he had just been talking about. He was stripping away the "lucas" and the money to show how shallow and silly it all was. Maybe you got that and Im just being critical or maybe you didnt and thought they were weird segways into nothing. Either way I suggest watching the entirety of the reviews of the first 3 films. Only entertainment will ensue.
On September 03 2011 10:21 Moldwood wrote: i see so many worthless complaints on this thread that i dont even know where to begin ^ ^ trust me -- i tried!
"These changes are almost as bad as Han not shooting first or the changes in JEDI where when Vader took off his helmet he was no longer the old guy but that pretty boy Hayden Christianson.It's so wrong."
Wait -- when vader took off his helmet and he WAS HAYDEN CHRISTIANSEN?! Did that even HAPPEN?! at ANY point?! link to it or it did not happen first off. i recall his (obviously meant to be portrayed as his younger self) holographic figure to be Hayden in the special edition, but don't come in here and pretend that they fucked up the "Luke, you were right about me" scene when they DID NOT. because right there you shat on a scene that, to my knowledge, has still remained untouched. And its SO wrong.
yes because that change was sooooo popular amongst star wars fans you are in a tiny minority i assure you
Ugggggggghhhhh. So much more epic when Vader just silently flipped a table the Emperor into oblivion. Spoke much more to me than anything he could possibly have said.
On September 03 2011 10:18 Moldwood wrote: As a DIE - HARD starwars fan i see absolutely nothing wrong with this. Lucas attempts to bring new life into his films AGAIN and people just complain. Sure, it was dumb as SHIT when vader yelled 'NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO' at the end of Revenge of the Sith but what the hell man?? you have already experienced return of the jedi a thousand times in its perfect form why complain? This is just Lucas trying to squeeze a little more cash out of his films and, if people are going to buy it (WHICH THEY WILL) then more power to him. Anyone and everyone bitching about this A) has waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(to the 10th power)y too much time on their hands. and B) can just stfu to be quite frank.
Your comment took just as much time as the comments complaining, so that's dumb.
He's not bringing new life anyway, he's rewriting events which had already occurred in the Star Wars universe. If you consider the films to be 'factual' timelines of the Star Wars story then changing something post-release is like rewriting history. There are two scenes, one with Darth Vader saying nothing and one with Darth Vader saying 'No!", but which scene actually occurred in this story? It might seem minor to you, but to an actual fan it completely breaks the illusion of Star Wars being a timeline of actual events. Yes, it's fictional, but a good fiction becomes 'real' in the viewer/reader's mind. Retroactively modifying events ruins that 'realness'.
If George Lucas is unhappy with his movies he should attempt to create another movie rather than mucking round with ones he has already done.
Well honestly i agree with everything you have to say here besides one notion. This minor change makes the story seem less 'Real' to the true fiction fans? Well first off, its fiction............................................. but second off, if I was completely immersed in and satisfied with the original versions i would continue to enjoy them -- and NEVER buy or view these new blu rays. Because you have the OPTION of doing so. Meanwhile, George Lucas has the option of making more money. have.... have you guys read anything about Lucas? Not only is he going to select this option for the rest of his life, i am quite certain that star wars will still be MILKED of every penny for decades to come, after he dies.
Look, The Phantom Menace, at its core, absolutely sucked. And after reading the reviews any reasonable-minded fan could say "HEY -- WHOA -- looks like this series has spun way off track. I DONT THINK I WILL SUPPORT THE CONTINUATION OF THE SERIES by buying tickets, DVDs, blu rays, what have you". it is that simple. no reason to make a thread entitled "George Lucas HATES his fans" which frankly i think is silly. i clicked this thread expecting something MORE atrocious than Jar-Jar Binks.
You missed the point. Yes, it's fiction, but like I said in my first post, a good fictional story will feel 'real' to the audience - as if it hasn't just been made up by some guy. It's not about whether or not you buy the bluray version - the fact that Lucas has made a change (whether or not you experience it in viewing) is what ruins the illusion. It sets a precedent that anything in the movies is open to change if it could be 'better'.
Imagine somebody told you an amazing story about whatever-the-fuck, and right as they finish telling it they say "On second thought, that isn't how the story went. It was more like this...". At that point you're thinking "Well if it didn't happen that way then why did you say it?". That's what George Lucas is doing. Not in the biggest way, and in fact I hardly care at all (I'm only posting to explain why some people think it's a big deal), but like I said, it's the precedent that it sets ("I'm George Lucas and I can do what I want") that's insulting to the fans.
Lucas is not a real human, hes an evil alien. The fact that money corrups is no news, but this is just too much. Star Wars is classic, a part of my chilhood, and something i love. This maniac is a money machine, more than he is a real person - a human would never to this kind of crap... again....
On September 03 2011 02:54 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On September 03 2011 02:50 aDd3z wrote: thats a pretty bad change but i like that yoda will be computer-generated in episode one now but i dont like the old movies (4-6) anyway so i dont really care
One of the worst reviews I've ever seen in my life. You would actually use this as your basis for proving a point?
Thanks for sharing.
Seriously?
Man, 'Plinkett's' reviews of all three Star Wars prequels are probably some of the best film reviews I've ever seen. Sure, sometimes the humour seems a bit contrived but holy christ, the people behind those reviews know film inside and out. Anyone who has little knowledge of film and what makes film good can learn a tonne from those reviews.
Never mind the fact that they take what is a boring subject to many and put it in a far more entertaining format than what we'd usually get to see in a review.
Red Letter Media have their shit down with those reviews, and yes, I'd use a lot of the things mentioned in those reviews to prove a point. They actually know what they're talking about.
im sure that if George Lucas always listened to his fans, star wars wouldn't be nearly as great as it is today. The man created the damn thing he should do with it what he pleases.
On September 03 2011 06:18 Shockk wrote: Well that's the point. There is a previous version, and it's better. Vader killing Emperor while thinking in silence = audience can follow his train of thought, sympathize with him, a whole story is told with uttering a single word. Vader screaming "Nooooo" - stereotypical rage response, audience doesn't have to think for themselves, edited scene takes away from total experience.
We have seen SW before, and we've come to respect / like / love it the way it was (depending on level of fan-dom). Some things just don't need editing or "improvement".
The only difference is that now people who would not have been able to understand his train of thought before he threw the emperor over the bridge (ie: the younger generation, new viewers of Star Wars), are now able to see the anguish he was suffering. The end result is the same, except more people can enjoy it. I don't see why people complain about it.
I know in the past I have watched the movie with younger kids and have been asked why Vader did what he did.
In Luke's training scene in ESB where he goes inside the cave and fights a fake Vader, chops off his head and it is revealed that Luke actually cut his own head! This is one of the most symbolic scenes in the Star Wars franchise and as a kid I was perplexed at what I had just seen because at that age I took scenes literally and this scene just made no sense at the time.
Thank God Lucas hasn't destroyed the greatness of this scene by having someone explain what had just happened. I think back on it and it seems as though, like the Harry Potter movies, the series was going to get more mature and more serious as it went on (unfortunately it didn't).
On September 03 2011 14:24 Hokay wrote: The original scene lacked emotions. This one is better.
No it didn't, you could feel the emotions like they were tangible. Now it's just dumbed down so they just tell you what he's feeling, rather than setting the scene so you feel it yourself.
You could feel how conflicted he was, watching his son being slowly and painfully killed in front of him, but at the same time feeling loyalty to the master he has served for so long, and to the dark side. It just kills his character to scream it though.
On September 03 2011 14:24 Hokay wrote: The original scene lacked emotions. This one is better.
No it didn't, you could feel the emotions like they were tangible. Now it's just dumbed down so they just tell you what he's feeling, rather than setting the scene so you feel it yourself.
You could feel how conflicted he was, watching his son being slowly and painfully killed in front of him, but at the same time feeling loyalty to the master he has served for so long, and to the dark side. It just kills his character to scream it though.
It was also a scene in which the guy was trying to convince the younger one to kill his own father... and then ends up torturing his own son in front of him... of course he was going betray his own master...
On September 03 2011 14:24 Hokay wrote: The original scene lacked emotions. This one is better.
One of the hallmarks of good writing is that you don't spell out what's going on for the audience so they can a) put it together themselves and ideally b) they feel it more.
This change is a lame attempt to:
- make up for the debacle of episode 3s "Nooooo!" scene by, - giving some continuity to the character's actions, exclamation, voice - showing the internal conflict we already knew was there
It was more powerful when he suffered in silence and then acted. Now it's emo/pathetic as all fuck.
I hope he has a heart attack, and it ends up being the most painful event ever experienced by a human being, because he fucking deserves it. This fat, triple chinned, useless, pathetic, piece of shit hack is hell bent on ruining my, and many other people's, childhood. I swear to any deity you might of might not believe in he is fucking possessed. It isn't natural for a human being to cause this much suffering. Even Adolf had his limits, what with him loving dogs. George Lucas is worse than Hitler.
Now if you'll all excuse me I'm going to go into the corner in a drunken stupor, curl up into the fetal position, and cry. Cry at the image of George Lucas fucking raping Darth Vader. Hold me. Please.
This is just...terrible. Part of what made the scene great was Vader's silence. It's like when he throws the emperor off the ledge without saying a word it's almost surprising. I mean it's obvious Vader is going to find some redemption at some point in the movie, but he still has that very coldhearted demeanor. The action says enough.
Adding this in was unnecessary, isn't consistent with the character, and frankly he sounds retarded.
Lol didn't this happen before? The ending scene of episode 6, we see the ghosts of anakin, obi wan, and yoda saying hello to Luke. And apparently Lucas had Hayden Christensen photoshopped into the trio, instead of the darth vader anakin. LOL
edit: here is the original and re-made ending scene in one clip.
On September 03 2011 02:54 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On September 03 2011 02:50 aDd3z wrote: thats a pretty bad change but i like that yoda will be computer-generated in episode one now but i dont like the old movies (4-6) anyway so i dont really care
One of the worst reviews I've ever seen in my life. You would actually use this as your basis for proving a point?
Thanks for sharing.
Well, I'll leave it with two options:
1- You didn't watch the whole review. You watched like, one minute. It's 70 minutes long. So, watch the whole thing, and if you still think it's a bad basis for proving my point, cross this first option and jump to second possibility.
2- You didn't understand the review.
Because it's the best, the most flawlessly devastating critic I have seen or read in my life. You just can't defend the prequels after watching it, because it proves in a very simple way that it's a movie with a story that makes no sense at all, with awful character design, and with no cinematographic creativity whatsoever, with no suspense, with no tension, and without any redeeming quality.
On September 03 2011 02:54 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On September 03 2011 02:50 aDd3z wrote: thats a pretty bad change but i like that yoda will be computer-generated in episode one now but i dont like the old movies (4-6) anyway so i dont really care
One of the worst reviews I've ever seen in my life. You would actually use this as your basis for proving a point?
Thanks for sharing.
Well, I'll leave it with two options:
1- You didn't watch the whole review. You watched like, one minute. It's 70 minutes long. So, watch the whole thing, and if you still think it's a bad basis for proving my point, cross this first option and jump to second possibility.
2- You didn't understand the review.
Because it's the best, the most flawlessly devastating critic I have seen or read in my life. You just can't defend the prequels after watching it, because it proves in a very simple way that it's a movie with a story that makes no sense at all, with awful character design, and with no cinematographic creativity whatsoever, with no suspense, with no tension, and without any redeeming quality.
Yes, RLM's reviews of 1 & 2 are spot on.
And on the thread topic, if and when I have children, I expect to not expose them to Star Wars unless I can attain versions of this stuff without all the stuff added over a decade after release. :/
On September 03 2011 17:07 Sceptor87 wrote: I hope he has a heart attack, and it ends up being the most painful event ever experienced by a human being, because he fucking deserves it. This fat, triple chinned, useless, pathetic, piece of shit hack is hell bent on ruining my, and many other people's, childhood. I swear to any deity you might of might not believe in he is fucking possessed. It isn't natural for a human being to cause this much suffering. Even Adolf had his limits, what with him loving dogs. George Lucas is worse than Hitler.
Now if you'll all excuse me I'm going to go into the corner in a drunken stupor, curl up into the fetal position, and cry. Cry at the image of George Lucas fucking raping Darth Vader. Hold me. Please.
This wasn't even slightly amusing, comedy is definitely not your strong point. In fact, its pretty saddening and pathetic =/
On September 03 2011 00:43 SlimeBagly wrote: Haha, that's really goofy.
Still a minor offense compared to making Greedo shoot first.
Ugh, I'm still getting pissed every time I think about that. Luckily I have my old VHS versions that I can still watch.
It's like
"Oooh, everybody's favourite character has to be a good guy from the beginning to the end... He wouldn't shoot without it being self-defense".
Lucas is such a fucking idiot. That's mind-blowing the capacity he has to misunderstand so radically what is good about the movie he made, a long time ago. Every time he does something nowadays, it's ruining a part of what made Star Wars so good.
I don't understand why people care so much about this, I still have the originals at home, they are still as good as ever and unless Lucas sends ninjas to my house there is absolutely nothing he can do about it.
On September 03 2011 19:26 KlaCkoN wrote: I don't understand why people care so much about this, I still have the originals at home, they are still as good as ever and unless Lucas sends ninjas to my house there is absolutely nothing he can do about it.
I don't have a copy of the original.
They were not even released on DVD without the ten billion shit he added.
On September 03 2011 19:26 KlaCkoN wrote: I don't understand why people care so much about this, I still have the originals at home, they are still as good as ever and unless Lucas sends ninjas to my house there is absolutely nothing he can do about it.
I don't have a copy of the original.
They were not even released on DVD without the ten billion shit he added.
Time to digitalize my THX enhanced VHS tapes, before Special Edition and all that other jazz. Those were the times. You could also look for the 1080p upscaled HDTV version made by "ATOM". No "Nooooo's" in there, except for where they belong.
He is changing a classic that did well and doing it to make more money because he frankly cant create anything new. As the review from redlettermedia said perfectly "he is a business man first and a film-maker second and I wont say he is a bad business man." Where I feel he lost his soul is purely conjecture.
Is he a good businessman or did he just make one good business decision in his life that made him a billionaire? (attaining the merchandising rights for Star Wars)
Releasing both the originals and edited versions on DVD and Blu-ray would be good business. It would be milking the franchise to its fullest extent, but it'd work, as more copies would be bought. Yet he doesn't do it.
I think its always been more about ego for Lucas then business sense. He lost interest in filmmaking as an art and became obsessed with the technology side of it, hence the prequels. He resented the reaction the prequels got from the majority of fans and that's affected his attitude towards them. I feel like his refusal to release the unedited originals on DVD or Blu-ray has a lot to do with that.
Spielberg was able to throw up his hands and step back. Fans reacted quite badly to the changes he made to ET, but he acknowledged their viewpoint rather then just dismissing them as angry 30-something basement dwellers. Certainly hasnt made him any less rich.
Reminds me of the episode of south park where George Lucas and Steven Spielberg are raping indiana jones and they finally get arrested when they're found raping a stormtrooper
I dont get why this is such a big deal, it's one line in the movie, sure it might be silly, but people are overreacting.
Also, i dont get the hate about Phantom of Menace, i liked it. I thought it had some cool stuff even though the characters were a bit boring. People always think they know better, but they probably dont. Nostalgia is a powerful thing.
Oh, and to that review that constantly complained about plot holes and such in phantom - watch IV V and VI - FULL of plot holes and things that dont make sense, talk about bias O.o People are overrating the early movies soooo much.
You can easily get the original versions on DVD anyways, so there really is no reason to care that much.
On September 04 2011 01:37 Deadlyfish wrote: I dont get why this is such a big deal, it's one line in the movie, sure it might be silly, but people are overreacting.
Also, i dont get the hate about Phantom of Menace, i liked it. I thought it had some cool stuff even though the characters were a bit boring. People always think they know better, but they probably dont. Nostalgia is a powerful thing.
Oh, and to that review that constantly complained about plot holes and such in phantom - watch IV V and VI - FULL of plot holes and things that dont make sense, talk about bias O.o People are overrating the early movies soooo much.
You can easily get the original versions on DVD anyways, so there really is no reason to care that much.
I have 1 thing to say to you - medichlorians. But apperantly you know better.
I guess Lucas is just getting older and older and he freaks out :/ still, I have the original version "in my heart" so no "improvements" will change my mind about the best saga in the whole galaxy :D
On September 04 2011 01:37 Deadlyfish wrote: I dont get why this is such a big deal, it's one line in the movie, sure it might be silly, but people are overreacting.
Also, i dont get the hate about Phantom of Menace, i liked it. I thought it had some cool stuff even though the characters were a bit boring. People always think they know better, but they probably dont. Nostalgia is a powerful thing.
Oh, and to that review that constantly complained about plot holes and such in phantom - watch IV V and VI - FULL of plot holes and things that dont make sense, talk about bias O.o People are overrating the early movies soooo much.
You can easily get the original versions on DVD anyways, so there really is no reason to care that much.
i don't get the hate about Phantom of Menace, i liked it
i liked it
liked
-_- definitely won't ask you about movie recommendations.
Wouldn't say I'm a hardcore star wars fan but even I can understand why people hate that movie
- Jar Jar
- A kid piloting a starship
- The mystical force being reduced to a microorganisms
- The kid who played Anakin
- Stale characters. There is not one person who's even 1/4 as cool as Han solo or Darth Vader
- Generally just a very dull plot.
Nostalgia plays no part either, considering this is from my generation. It's just a shit movie.
That sucks man. Why mess with the original in the first place? I've heard the whole "I would have done it in the original if I'd had the technology" in regards to things like replacing real-Yoda but I agree with Simon Pegg when he says he always loved Vader's voiceless self sacrifice. I guess that this subtlety doesn't work in today's world.
On September 04 2011 01:37 Deadlyfish wrote: I dont get why this is such a big deal, it's one line in the movie, sure it might be silly, but people are overreacting.
Also, i dont get the hate about Phantom of Menace, i liked it. I thought it had some cool stuff even though the characters were a bit boring. People always think they know better, but they probably dont. Nostalgia is a powerful thing.
Oh, and to that review that constantly complained about plot holes and such in phantom - watch IV V and VI - FULL of plot holes and things that dont make sense, talk about bias O.o People are overrating the early movies soooo much.
You can easily get the original versions on DVD anyways, so there really is no reason to care that much.
i don't get the hate about Phantom of Menace, i liked it
i liked it
liked
-_- definitely won't ask you about movie recommendations.
Wouldn't say I'm a hardcore star wars fan but even I can understand why people hate that movie
- Jar Jar
- A kid piloting a starship
- The mystical force being reduced to a microorganisms
- The kid who played Anakin
- Stale characters. There is not one person who's even 1/4 as cool as Han solo or Darth Vader
- Generally just a very dull plot.
Nostalgia plays no part either, considering this is from my generation. It's just a shit movie.
-My mom's favorite character is Jar Jar lol dunno why. C-3PO has always pissed me off way more than Jar Jar.
-¯\_(ツ)_/¯
-Ignored it lol. Didn't happen.
-All kid actors are terrible, and I don't know how the movie could have been possibly made without a kid playing Anakin, lol
-I really liked Gui Gon, and Darth Maul was cool too
-Kind of agree with you there. The final battle was cool imo, and I found the scene with Gui Gon's death to be more emotionally moving than the iconic "I am your father scene", probably because of spoilers, but I'm not sure.
I watched that movie at least 10 times before I was 8, so I was kind of perplexed when I found out everyone seemed to hate it.
Why would anyone care about some single change in some re-release of a movie? Do you not still have your original? Do not have that memory of the original? I just can't figure out how anyone could care about this.
George Lucas made the original Star Wars films right? So he made what you guys seem to worship so much? So this is another part of this Star Wars world that baffles me, how can you be mad at the guy who created it? Why is he not allowed to change whatever he wants for re-releases? Is there no loyalty or appreciation for his original creation? By creating that which you are obsessed over, has he not earned any sort of right to make "mistakes" or do "stupid" things?
And finally, the craziness that is this anger over the prequels. Why does the creation of these prequels have to diminish whatever you watched in the final 3 episodes? Why does it bother you at all? Can you not just simply ignore them?
I never really found Star Wars to be that compelling of a movie series so maybe I'll just never understand the Star Wars fans.
On September 03 2011 02:54 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On September 03 2011 02:50 aDd3z wrote: thats a pretty bad change but i like that yoda will be computer-generated in episode one now but i dont like the old movies (4-6) anyway so i dont really care
Personally, I kind of feel sorry for George Lucas. He hasn't directed a good film since 1977. He hasn't produced a good film since 1989. He has lost most if not all of his credibility as a Hollywood great. I guess he still has a lot of money.
On September 04 2011 02:46 Befree wrote: Why would anyone care about some single change in some re-release of a movie? Do you not still have your original? Do not have that memory of the original? I just can't figure out how anyone could care about this.
This change happens to be to a pivotal scene from the original trilogy. For me its my favorite scene.
But yeah, I do have the originals on VHS, and I do have the memory, thankfully he cant take that. But a lot of fans would like DVD or Blu-ray quality versions of them, since VHS is quite archaic, but every version released since the 1997 VHS has been altered versions of the film.
Improving sound and picture quality is fine. Altering scenes is just dumb. You dont go into an art gallery and change a painting, and its even worse cause none of the changes Lucas makes are good.
George Lucas made the original Star Wars films right? So he made what you guys seem to worship so much? So this is another part of this Star Wars world that baffles me, how can you be mad at the guy who created it? Why is he not allowed to change whatever he wants for re-releases? Is there no loyalty or appreciation for his original creation? By creating that which you are obsessed over, has he not earned any sort of right to make "mistakes" or do "stupid" things?
Lucas 30 years ago is a completely different person from Lucas now. Just have to watch interviews with him then, or watch some of his earlier films, to see why.
Its just sad to see a talented filmmaker become so corporate and out of touch with his fans, is all.
And finally, the craziness that is this anger over the prequels. Why does the creation of these prequels have to diminish whatever you watched in the final 3 episodes? Why does it bother you at all? Can you not just simply ignore them?
On September 04 2011 01:37 Deadlyfish wrote: I dont get why this is such a big deal, it's one line in the movie, sure it might be silly, but people are overreacting.
Also, i dont get the hate about Phantom of Menace, i liked it. I thought it had some cool stuff even though the characters were a bit boring. People always think they know better, but they probably dont. Nostalgia is a powerful thing.
Oh, and to that review that constantly complained about plot holes and such in phantom - watch IV V and VI - FULL of plot holes and things that dont make sense, talk about bias O.o People are overrating the early movies soooo much.
You can easily get the original versions on DVD anyways, so there really is no reason to care that much.
The problem with the Phantom (of?) Menace isn't plot holes. It's that there is no story. There is nothing for the viewer to engage with. The viewer doesn't even know what is SUPPOSED to engage them. They aren't told what is happening or why it matters. The most exciting part of the film is a heavily choreographed sword fight between 3 people we don't care about who are fighting for a reason we do not understand and don't give a fuck about. The rest of the film is head beatingly dull bullshit about the politics and trade of space organisations that also are not explained.
Watch the bit in the Plinkett review (that's presumably the review you meant) where he asks who the main character of the Phantom Menace is. You'll see what I mean when I say there's nothing for the viewer to care about.
Man I don't even like Star Wars that much. But the Phantom Menace is fucking bad.
On September 04 2011 02:13 FrostedMiniWheats wrote:
On September 04 2011 01:37 Deadlyfish wrote: I dont get why this is such a big deal, it's one line in the movie, sure it might be silly, but people are overreacting.
Also, i dont get the hate about Phantom of Menace, i liked it. I thought it had some cool stuff even though the characters were a bit boring. People always think they know better, but they probably dont. Nostalgia is a powerful thing.
Oh, and to that review that constantly complained about plot holes and such in phantom - watch IV V and VI - FULL of plot holes and things that dont make sense, talk about bias O.o People are overrating the early movies soooo much.
You can easily get the original versions on DVD anyways, so there really is no reason to care that much.
i don't get the hate about Phantom of Menace, i liked it
i liked it
liked
-_- definitely won't ask you about movie recommendations.
Wouldn't say I'm a hardcore star wars fan but even I can understand why people hate that movie
- Jar Jar
- A kid piloting a starship
- The mystical force being reduced to a microorganisms
- The kid who played Anakin
- Stale characters. There is not one person who's even 1/4 as cool as Han solo or Darth Vader
- Generally just a very dull plot.
Nostalgia plays no part either, considering this is from my generation. It's just a shit movie.
-My mom's favorite character is Jar Jar lol dunno why. C-3PO has always pissed me off way more than Jar Jar.
-¯\_(ツ)_/¯
-Ignored it lol. Didn't happen.
-All kid actors are terrible, and I don't know how the movie could have been possibly made without a kid playing Anakin, lol
-I really liked Gui Gon, and Darth Maul was cool too
-Kind of agree with you there. The final battle was cool imo, and I found the scene with Gui Gon's death to be more emotionally moving than the iconic "I am your father scene", probably because of spoilers, but I'm not sure.
I watched that movie at least 10 times before I was 8, so I was kind of perplexed when I found out everyone seemed to hate it.
What was cool about Darth Maul. He is essentially the main villain apart from a hologram, he was on all the posters. So, who was he? What were his motivations? Why is he helping the Sith? If you could describe his character in 3 words what would they be? And you can't use the words 'double sided lightsaber' 'red and black' 'spikes' or 'black cloak'. Oh and no referencing additional fiction like comics or novels.
On September 04 2011 05:27 Spitfire wrote:What prequels?
George Lucas was planning to make some prequels but tragically died in 1995 so they were never made. It's a shame because they would have been fantastic.
Well, Darth Maul is not so bad, he had no senseless dialogues because he had no dialogue at all and he did kill boring Qui-Gon Gin, that's a good thing !
Regarding the Plinkett review; That review (and his review of the two other prequels) are SO good, they put words to everybody's criticism of the prequels in such an amazing way, and they still manage to be funny and uphold Plinkett's persona. I always knew I really hated the prequels, but I wasn't able to properly explain why except for "bad acting, corny and weird" before watching those reviews. Defo worth checking out, unless you're going into them with a defensive mindset towards the prequels.
All I want is the films released on Blu-ray in the ORIGINAL form -- no Greedo shooting first, no added in Jabba scene in Episdode 4, no young anakin ghost at the end and no 'NOOOO!!' in the Return of the Jedi.
Seriously. Lucas should put his effort into making new films instead of tinkering with films fans have grown attached to as they are in their original form.
On September 04 2011 03:09 TurtlePerson2 wrote: Personally, I kind of feel sorry for George Lucas. He hasn't directed a good film since 1977. He hasn't produced a good film since 1989. He has lost most if not all of his credibility as a Hollywood great. I guess he still has a lot of money.
The man is quite wealthy, don't feel bad for him.
His company has accomplished amazing things even discounting his movies (Industrial Light and Magic).
I think the "no" is kinda of unnecessary, but it's not that bad. The new noise Obi-Wan makes to scare the sandpeople away........well that's a different story.
On September 04 2011 02:13 FrostedMiniWheats wrote:
On September 04 2011 01:37 Deadlyfish wrote: I dont get why this is such a big deal, it's one line in the movie, sure it might be silly, but people are overreacting.
Also, i dont get the hate about Phantom of Menace, i liked it. I thought it had some cool stuff even though the characters were a bit boring. People always think they know better, but they probably dont. Nostalgia is a powerful thing.
Oh, and to that review that constantly complained about plot holes and such in phantom - watch IV V and VI - FULL of plot holes and things that dont make sense, talk about bias O.o People are overrating the early movies soooo much.
You can easily get the original versions on DVD anyways, so there really is no reason to care that much.
i don't get the hate about Phantom of Menace, i liked it
i liked it
liked
-_- definitely won't ask you about movie recommendations.
Wouldn't say I'm a hardcore star wars fan but even I can understand why people hate that movie
- Jar Jar
- A kid piloting a starship
- The mystical force being reduced to a microorganisms
- The kid who played Anakin
- Stale characters. There is not one person who's even 1/4 as cool as Han solo or Darth Vader
- Generally just a very dull plot.
Nostalgia plays no part either, considering this is from my generation. It's just a shit movie.
-My mom's favorite character is Jar Jar lol dunno why. C-3PO has always pissed me off way more than Jar Jar.
-¯\_(ツ)_/¯
-Ignored it lol. Didn't happen.
-All kid actors are terrible, and I don't know how the movie could have been possibly made without a kid playing Anakin, lol
-I really liked Gui Gon, and Darth Maul was cool too
-Kind of agree with you there. The final battle was cool imo, and I found the scene with Gui Gon's death to be more emotionally moving than the iconic "I am your father scene", probably because of spoilers, but I'm not sure.
I watched that movie at least 10 times before I was 8, so I was kind of perplexed when I found out everyone seemed to hate it.
What was cool about Darth Maul. He is essentially the main villain apart from a hologram, he was on all the posters. So, who was he? What were his motivations? Why is he helping the Sith? If you could describe his character in 3 words what would they be? And you can't use the words 'double sided lightsaber' 'red and black' 'spikes' or 'black cloak'. Oh and no referencing additional fiction like comics or novels.
Likewise, how would you describe Darth Sidious in the original trilogy? Probably something like 'Really really evil' or 'Dark evil evil', 'lol psionic storm' etc.
Even Darth Vader, before the audience learns about him being Luke's Father etc. he is basically portrayed as a mindless drone fulfilling Sidious' deeds. It took the whole of 3 entire movies for him to develop as a character as well.
On the other hand, Darth Maul unfortunately simply didn't really get enough screen time (What, maybe 10 minutes? Haven't watched Star Wars recently, planning on doing a full marathon tho lol) for his character to develop at all. Instead of him actually becoming a more developed character over the whole trilogy he kind of just got killed off in one movie (Same story with Gui Gon). Imagine if in the duel between Obi-Wan and Darth Vader in Ep.IV if Darth Vader died. You'd basically have the same thing as you have with Darth Maul.
So on some levels I agree with you, it was kind of a shitty storytelling idea by Lucas. He was still IMO on par with Ep. IV's portrayal of Darth Vader, however.
On September 04 2011 17:07 Fourn wrote: I like all 6 films.
I think it is hilarious how butthurt Star Wars nerds get when someone says they like Phantom Menace.
Starwars hipsters are the hipsters of hipsters. I didn't like jarjar binks, but I did enjoy all 6 films. I won't say 1-3 are better than 4-6, but they were still good.
On September 03 2011 02:54 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On September 03 2011 02:50 aDd3z wrote: thats a pretty bad change but i like that yoda will be computer-generated in episode one now but i dont like the old movies (4-6) anyway so i dont really care
One of the worst reviews I've ever seen in my life. You would actually use this as your basis for proving a point?
Thanks for sharing.
That review makes numerous good points about the film.
Any potential it had at being a decent review in the first place is completely squandered by the fact that it's created to try to make everybody hate the movies. The part where he had the descriptive word test was the most obviously edited shit ever hahahahaha. Like really? Qui-gon, little Anakin, and Padme are not memorable characters? I don't know, it just tries TOO hard to make the film look bad. I agree with a few points within it but to say it's a fair portrayal of the film is absolutely wrong. It should just never be referenced in the old vs new argument, sorry
I don't know about anybody else, but when Qui-gon got impaled my heart broke. I had fallen in love with that character throughout the movie. Maybe you can credit that to Liam Neeson though
I dont really see a problem with that. If he hates the movies, his review is going to reflect his hate. If people read his review and agree with him, of course theyll hate the movies too. Thats how movie reviews work. I didnt agree with all of his points, but the review was pretty damn accurate in my opinion
Secondly, the point about unmemorable characters was one of the more valid arguments of the whole review. In the original 3 movies, each character had specific personality traits that distinguished them from each other. Luke was a hot-headed, naive fish out of water. Han was a cavalier rogue with a good heart. Leia was a stern leader with a strong sense of justice. You remember them by who they were rather than what they did. Of course what they did in the plot was also very important.
In the Phantom Menace, no one really had any memorable personalities. Padme was only memorable because Natalie Portman is sexy as hell. Anakin was only memorable because his actor was god awful. Jar Jar was memorable because he was annoying as fuck. Other than that, everyone just acted really formal/stern. No one was interesting whatsoever. Yea they were integral in the plot and what they did made them easy to remember, but just as characters they were completely forgettable and boring.
On September 04 2011 01:37 Deadlyfish wrote: I dont get why this is such a big deal, it's one line in the movie, sure it might be silly, but people are overreacting.
Also, i dont get the hate about Phantom of Menace, i liked it. I thought it had some cool stuff even though the characters were a bit boring. People always think they know better, but they probably dont. Nostalgia is a powerful thing.
Oh, and to that review that constantly complained about plot holes and such in phantom - watch IV V and VI - FULL of plot holes and things that dont make sense, talk about bias O.o People are overrating the early movies soooo much.
You can easily get the original versions on DVD anyways, so there really is no reason to care that much.
The problem with the Phantom (of?) Menace isn't plot holes. It's that there is no story. There is nothing for the viewer to engage with. The viewer doesn't even know what is SUPPOSED to engage them. They aren't told what is happening or why it matters. The most exciting part of the film is a heavily choreographed sword fight between 3 people we don't care about who are fighting for a reason we do not understand and don't give a fuck about. The rest of the film is head beatingly dull bullshit about the politics and trade of space organisations that also are not explained.
Watch the bit in the Plinkett review (that's presumably the review you meant) where he asks who the main character of the Phantom Menace is. You'll see what I mean when I say there's nothing for the viewer to care about.
Man I don't even like Star Wars that much. But the Phantom Menace is fucking bad.
I get that there is almost no story. I also like Die Hard, not for the story, but for the visuals and the amazing action. There are so many movies where you dont really care about the story, you just want to enjoy the action. You dont NEED a main character always.
And although the story is flimsy and not very well done, i did understand it. It was pretty simple... Not sure how people dont get it.
- The underwater city was awesome. - Podrace was cool - Jedi's kicking robot ass was enjoyable.
Yes, the movie isnt deep and might not have the same atmosphere and feeling as the other star wars movies, but i bet if it wasnt called "star wars" and it was just a seperate sci fi movie then people wouldnt be calling it bad. Oh well : /
On September 04 2011 01:37 Deadlyfish wrote: I dont get why this is such a big deal, it's one line in the movie, sure it might be silly, but people are overreacting.
Also, i dont get the hate about Phantom of Menace, i liked it. I thought it had some cool stuff even though the characters were a bit boring. People always think they know better, but they probably dont. Nostalgia is a powerful thing.
Oh, and to that review that constantly complained about plot holes and such in phantom - watch IV V and VI - FULL of plot holes and things that dont make sense, talk about bias O.o People are overrating the early movies soooo much.
You can easily get the original versions on DVD anyways, so there really is no reason to care that much.
The problem with the Phantom (of?) Menace isn't plot holes. It's that there is no story. There is nothing for the viewer to engage with. The viewer doesn't even know what is SUPPOSED to engage them. They aren't told what is happening or why it matters. The most exciting part of the film is a heavily choreographed sword fight between 3 people we don't care about who are fighting for a reason we do not understand and don't give a fuck about. The rest of the film is head beatingly dull bullshit about the politics and trade of space organisations that also are not explained.
Watch the bit in the Plinkett review (that's presumably the review you meant) where he asks who the main character of the Phantom Menace is. You'll see what I mean when I say there's nothing for the viewer to care about.
Man I don't even like Star Wars that much. But the Phantom Menace is fucking bad.
I get that there is almost no story. I also like Die Hard, not for the story, but for the visuals and the amazing action. There are so many movies where you dont really care about the story, you just want to enjoy the action. You dont NEED a main character always.
And although the story is flimsy and not very well done, i did understand it. It was pretty simple... Not sure how people dont get it.
- The underwater city was awesome. - Podrace was cool - Jedi's kicking robot ass was enjoyable.
Yes, the movie isnt deep and might not have the same atmosphere and feeling as the other star wars movies, but i bet if it wasnt called "star wars" and it was just a seperate sci fi movie then people wouldnt be calling it bad. Oh well : /
If a compilation of hysterical animated visual effects showed into a horrible nonexistent story that makes no sense at all, nonexistent characters who have 0 personality, bad humor and filmed in such horrible way and with such a lack of creativity that a computer could have done it as well, is a good follow up to the original Star Wars, well... What should I say?
Lets be honest, Phantom Menace was purely a kids film. There is nothing wrong with that exactly but George Lucas went way out of his way to make sure little kids would like and understand it. It wasn't insanely horrible, at least not like Attack of the Clones, but it was still pretty bad. That said, and I know I will get a lot of shit for saying it, Revenge of the Sith was the 2nd best Star Wars movie ever made :D.
On September 04 2011 02:13 FrostedMiniWheats wrote:
On September 04 2011 01:37 Deadlyfish wrote: I dont get why this is such a big deal, it's one line in the movie, sure it might be silly, but people are overreacting.
Also, i dont get the hate about Phantom of Menace, i liked it. I thought it had some cool stuff even though the characters were a bit boring. People always think they know better, but they probably dont. Nostalgia is a powerful thing.
Oh, and to that review that constantly complained about plot holes and such in phantom - watch IV V and VI - FULL of plot holes and things that dont make sense, talk about bias O.o People are overrating the early movies soooo much.
You can easily get the original versions on DVD anyways, so there really is no reason to care that much.
i don't get the hate about Phantom of Menace, i liked it
i liked it
liked
-_- definitely won't ask you about movie recommendations.
Wouldn't say I'm a hardcore star wars fan but even I can understand why people hate that movie
- Jar Jar
- A kid piloting a starship
- The mystical force being reduced to a microorganisms
- The kid who played Anakin
- Stale characters. There is not one person who's even 1/4 as cool as Han solo or Darth Vader
- Generally just a very dull plot.
Nostalgia plays no part either, considering this is from my generation. It's just a shit movie.
-My mom's favorite character is Jar Jar lol dunno why. C-3PO has always pissed me off way more than Jar Jar.
-¯\_(ツ)_/¯
-Ignored it lol. Didn't happen.
-All kid actors are terrible, and I don't know how the movie could have been possibly made without a kid playing Anakin, lol
-I really liked Gui Gon, and Darth Maul was cool too
-Kind of agree with you there. The final battle was cool imo, and I found the scene with Gui Gon's death to be more emotionally moving than the iconic "I am your father scene", probably because of spoilers, but I'm not sure.
I watched that movie at least 10 times before I was 8, so I was kind of perplexed when I found out everyone seemed to hate it.
What was cool about Darth Maul. He is essentially the main villain apart from a hologram, he was on all the posters. So, who was he? What were his motivations? Why is he helping the Sith? If you could describe his character in 3 words what would they be? And you can't use the words 'double sided lightsaber' 'red and black' 'spikes' or 'black cloak'. Oh and no referencing additional fiction like comics or novels.
Likewise, how would you describe Darth Sidious in the original trilogy? Probably something like 'Really really evil' or 'Dark evil evil', 'lol psionic storm' etc.
Even Darth Vader, before the audience learns about him being Luke's Father etc. he is basically portrayed as a mindless drone fulfilling Sidious' deeds. It took the whole of 3 entire movies for him to develop as a character as well.
Vader in the first 5 minutes of A New Hope has way more personality than anyone in episode 1...
Oh, it takes some effort to get used to the reviewer, but he's awesome and makes some great points which show that he has a good understanding on how movies work.
Damn it just seriously offends me the ways he is trying to forcefully tie the prequels together with the original trilogy. Fine he made the prequels and they were bad, so be it, I can live with that, but damn you Lucas for shoving in all the crap from the new ones into the original ones (if you can even call them that anymore..) Why can’t he just make a Blu-ray version of the originals with enhanced coloring, sharpness and such? That’s what I think most star wars fans would want, that’s what would like to see anyway.
I get that there is almost no story. I also like Die Hard, not for the story, but for the visuals and the amazing action. There are so many movies where you dont really care about the story, you just want to enjoy the action. You dont NEED a main character always.
And although the story is flimsy and not very well done, i did understand it. It was pretty simple... Not sure how people dont get it.
- The underwater city was awesome. - Podrace was cool - Jedi's kicking robot ass was enjoyable.
Yes, the movie isnt deep and might not have the same atmosphere and feeling as the other star wars movies, but i bet if it wasnt called "star wars" and it was just a seperate sci fi movie then people wouldnt be calling it bad. Oh well : /
That's probably the reason why Star Wars fans are so butthurt about episode 1 (-3). Die Hard is an action movie (btw from the 80ies) and people didn't expect some masterful story behind a movie like that. They wanted action and boy did they get served. But for Star Wars people expected some more bang for their buck. Especially after 30 years of waiting the audience didn't want to see some boring stuff about trade politics and blockades, with boring characters nobody can identify with. Furthermore these characters are the most generic I have seen in a such a big blockbuster movie in a long time. None of those phantom manace characters are likeable at all. The "cool" things you mentioned are indeed well done from a purely CGI standpoint but things like that should really be just the topping on an awesome-cake made of a interesting and well-executed storyline and great characters with good (or even sometimes cheesy) dialogue like in the old movies.
Somebody mentioned that phantom menace was a movie made for kids only. Honestly I can't imagine that. Imagining kids to sit through all those senate scenes only to have their moms wake them up telling them: " Look! There's this jarjar guy in the underwater city."
I didn't like the earlier changes in ROTJ when they changed the last scene to show the Anakin from the new movies but changing Vader's line is kind of not necessary. To sum it up in one sentence: Changing Vader's dialogue in the BluRay's makes as much sense as changing the APM in patch 1.40.
I get that there is almost no story. I also like Die Hard, not for the story, but for the visuals and the amazing action. There are so many movies where you dont really care about the story, you just want to enjoy the action. You dont NEED a main character always.
And although the story is flimsy and not very well done, i did understand it. It was pretty simple... Not sure how people dont get it.
- The underwater city was awesome. - Podrace was cool - Jedi's kicking robot ass was enjoyable.
Yes, the movie isnt deep and might not have the same atmosphere and feeling as the other star wars movies, but i bet if it wasnt called "star wars" and it was just a seperate sci fi movie then people wouldnt be calling it bad. Oh well : /
That's probably the reason why Star Wars fans are so butthurt about episode 1 (-3). Die Hard is an action movie (btw from the 80ies) and people didn't expect some masterful story behind a movie like that. They wanted action and boy did they get served. But for Star Wars people expected some more bang for their buck. Especially after 30 years of waiting the audience didn't want to see some boring stuff about trade politics and blockades, with boring characters nobody can identify with. Furthermore these characters are the most generic I have seen in a such a big blockbuster movie in a long time. None of those phantom manace characters are likeable at all. The "cool" things you mentioned are indeed well done from a purely CGI standpoint but things like that should really be just the topping on an awesome-cake made of a interesting and well-executed storyline and great characters with good (or even sometimes cheesy) dialogue like in the old movies.
Somebody mentioned that phantom menace was a movie made for kids only. Honestly I can't imagine that. Imagining kids to sit through all those senate scenes only to have their moms wake them up telling them: " Look! There's this jarjar guy in the underwater city."
I didn't like the earlier changes in ROTJ when they changed the last scene to show the Anakin from the new movies but changing Vader's line is kind of not necessary. To sum it up in one sentence: Changing Vader's dialogue in the BluRay's makes as much sense as changing the APM in patch 1.40.
The redlettermedia explains for whom these movies are made: for everybody. There is a marketing thought targeting every single category of the population, in order to attract the biggest audience: there are little kids and cartoonish creatures for little kids (which rlm explains why it's such stupid reasoning), super fast nerdy pod race for early teenagers, nice dresses all over the place for girls, boring political dialogues and laser fights for nerds, Samuel L Jackson (horribly miscasted) for the "urban market", means black people, etc etc etc.
That's part of the reason why these movies are so fucking horrible: nothing is done with any integrity, nothing is done for the movie, but to please a category of fans.
On September 03 2011 01:22 Hawk wrote: This wasn't realized after the last batch of new starwars movies???
This is really stupid though
also, how many times is that bastard going to add new content and digitally remaster the same goddamn movies??
As many times as he wants, it's his movie. If you don't like it don't buy it.
As many times as he feels he will sell few more copies because some nerds are excited to see the movie getting destroyed a little more with some gimmick crap.
It's his movie, but as an artist, you have a responsibility towards your audience and you work.
But wait, he is not an artist, he is a businessman.
I get that there is almost no story. I also like Die Hard, not for the story, but for the visuals and the amazing action. There are so many movies where you dont really care about the story, you just want to enjoy the action. You dont NEED a main character always.
And although the story is flimsy and not very well done, i did understand it. It was pretty simple... Not sure how people dont get it.
- The underwater city was awesome. - Podrace was cool - Jedi's kicking robot ass was enjoyable.
Yes, the movie isnt deep and might not have the same atmosphere and feeling as the other star wars movies, but i bet if it wasnt called "star wars" and it was just a seperate sci fi movie then people wouldnt be calling it bad. Oh well : /
That's probably the reason why Star Wars fans are so butthurt about episode 1 (-3). Die Hard is an action movie (btw from the 80ies) and people didn't expect some masterful story behind a movie like that. They wanted action and boy did they get served. But for Star Wars people expected some more bang for their buck. Especially after 30 years of waiting the audience didn't want to see some boring stuff about trade politics and blockades, with boring characters nobody can identify with. Furthermore these characters are the most generic I have seen in a such a big blockbuster movie in a long time. None of those phantom manace characters are likeable at all. The "cool" things you mentioned are indeed well done from a purely CGI standpoint but things like that should really be just the topping on an awesome-cake made of a interesting and well-executed storyline and great characters with good (or even sometimes cheesy) dialogue like in the old movies.
Somebody mentioned that phantom menace was a movie made for kids only. Honestly I can't imagine that. Imagining kids to sit through all those senate scenes only to have their moms wake them up telling them: " Look! There's this jarjar guy in the underwater city."
I didn't like the earlier changes in ROTJ when they changed the last scene to show the Anakin from the new movies but changing Vader's line is kind of not necessary. To sum it up in one sentence: Changing Vader's dialogue in the BluRay's makes as much sense as changing the APM in patch 1.40.
Weird choice of words, saying fans are butthurt but then going on to support their views.
Anyway though, George Lucas did say that the movie was made for kids but it seems like a BS excuse for making such a bad movie. Ive always liked Star Wars but Im not one of the super fans. Still, given the quality of the first 3 films I expected a lot more from the prequels. Instead, we got shitty acting, boring plot, boring characters, and super flashy CGI. I saw it as a teenager and I was pretty disappointed. I imagine the disappointment for the true fans must have been exponentially worse
On September 03 2011 01:22 Hawk wrote: This wasn't realized after the last batch of new starwars movies???
This is really stupid though
also, how many times is that bastard going to add new content and digitally remaster the same goddamn movies??
As many times as he wants, it's his movie. If you don't like it don't buy it.
that doesnt mean its not stupid lol
I hate it when people say stupid shit like this. Its as if you think that ownership of something means no one but the owner can voice their opinion on it.
On September 04 2011 02:13 FrostedMiniWheats wrote:
On September 04 2011 01:37 Deadlyfish wrote: I dont get why this is such a big deal, it's one line in the movie, sure it might be silly, but people are overreacting.
Also, i dont get the hate about Phantom of Menace, i liked it. I thought it had some cool stuff even though the characters were a bit boring. People always think they know better, but they probably dont. Nostalgia is a powerful thing.
Oh, and to that review that constantly complained about plot holes and such in phantom - watch IV V and VI - FULL of plot holes and things that dont make sense, talk about bias O.o People are overrating the early movies soooo much.
You can easily get the original versions on DVD anyways, so there really is no reason to care that much.
i don't get the hate about Phantom of Menace, i liked it
i liked it
liked
-_- definitely won't ask you about movie recommendations.
Wouldn't say I'm a hardcore star wars fan but even I can understand why people hate that movie
- Jar Jar
- A kid piloting a starship
- The mystical force being reduced to a microorganisms
- The kid who played Anakin
- Stale characters. There is not one person who's even 1/4 as cool as Han solo or Darth Vader
- Generally just a very dull plot.
Nostalgia plays no part either, considering this is from my generation. It's just a shit movie.
-My mom's favorite character is Jar Jar lol dunno why. C-3PO has always pissed me off way more than Jar Jar.
-¯\_(ツ)_/¯
-Ignored it lol. Didn't happen.
-All kid actors are terrible, and I don't know how the movie could have been possibly made without a kid playing Anakin, lol
-I really liked Gui Gon, and Darth Maul was cool too
-Kind of agree with you there. The final battle was cool imo, and I found the scene with Gui Gon's death to be more emotionally moving than the iconic "I am your father scene", probably because of spoilers, but I'm not sure.
I watched that movie at least 10 times before I was 8, so I was kind of perplexed when I found out everyone seemed to hate it.
What was cool about Darth Maul. He is essentially the main villain apart from a hologram, he was on all the posters. So, who was he? What were his motivations? Why is he helping the Sith? If you could describe his character in 3 words what would they be? And you can't use the words 'double sided lightsaber' 'red and black' 'spikes' or 'black cloak'. Oh and no referencing additional fiction like comics or novels.
Likewise, how would you describe Darth Sidious in the original trilogy? Probably something like 'Really really evil' or 'Dark evil evil', 'lol psionic storm' etc.
Even Darth Vader, before the audience learns about him being Luke's Father etc. he is basically portrayed as a mindless drone fulfilling Sidious' deeds. It took the whole of 3 entire movies for him to develop as a character as well.
On the other hand, Darth Maul unfortunately simply didn't really get enough screen time (What, maybe 10 minutes? Haven't watched Star Wars recently, planning on doing a full marathon tho lol) for his character to develop at all. Instead of him actually becoming a more developed character over the whole trilogy he kind of just got killed off in one movie (Same story with Gui Gon). Imagine if in the duel between Obi-Wan and Darth Vader in Ep.IV if Darth Vader died. You'd basically have the same thing as you have with Darth Maul.
So on some levels I agree with you, it was kind of a shitty storytelling idea by Lucas. He was still IMO on par with Ep. IV's portrayal of Darth Vader, however.
Darth Vader in Episode IV may not have a multi layered character but he was a strong, functional villain. From the moment he is introduced it is made clear that he is the bad guy of the movie. Our reasons for disliking him are made clear and plentiful. He imprisons and tortures Princess Leia. He blows up a planet. He does evil shit. We are told that he killed the heroes father. His background is explained not in depth but enough to establish a character; he is the right arm of the empire, feared but also a relic of an older time and the last practiser of an ancient magical art.
All this time we also have the hero characters which for various reasons we relate to and like SO much more than the ones in Episode 1. Since we like the hero and the hero is set against our functional villain, we share in the victory when the hero overcomes the villain.
These are the 8 points of a classic story arc. Episode IV has many of them. Episode IV is a very simple story, based on dozens of classic tales before it. It's part of the reason it works. However none of these apply to Episode I. Even the dumbest action movie has a basic plot arc but Episode 1 doesn't. We aren't introduced to a hero. We don't understand what they are fighting for. We don't understand what the basic motivation of the villain is other than 'kill dudes' and we don't understand why we should root for the 'heroes' over him. So when is comes to the final scenes it's just 3 guys hitting eachother with laser swords. Fine if all you want is mindless overchorerographed fighting.
On September 04 2011 01:37 Deadlyfish wrote: I dont get why this is such a big deal, it's one line in the movie, sure it might be silly, but people are overreacting.
Also, i dont get the hate about Phantom of Menace, i liked it. I thought it had some cool stuff even though the characters were a bit boring. People always think they know better, but they probably dont. Nostalgia is a powerful thing.
Oh, and to that review that constantly complained about plot holes and such in phantom - watch IV V and VI - FULL of plot holes and things that dont make sense, talk about bias O.o People are overrating the early movies soooo much.
You can easily get the original versions on DVD anyways, so there really is no reason to care that much.
The problem with the Phantom (of?) Menace isn't plot holes. It's that there is no story. There is nothing for the viewer to engage with. The viewer doesn't even know what is SUPPOSED to engage them. They aren't told what is happening or why it matters. The most exciting part of the film is a heavily choreographed sword fight between 3 people we don't care about who are fighting for a reason we do not understand and don't give a fuck about. The rest of the film is head beatingly dull bullshit about the politics and trade of space organisations that also are not explained.
Watch the bit in the Plinkett review (that's presumably the review you meant) where he asks who the main character of the Phantom Menace is. You'll see what I mean when I say there's nothing for the viewer to care about.
Man I don't even like Star Wars that much. But the Phantom Menace is fucking bad.
I get that there is almost no story. I also like Die Hard, not for the story, but for the visuals and the amazing action. There are so many movies where you dont really care about the story, you just want to enjoy the action. You dont NEED a main character always.
And although the story is flimsy and not very well done, i did understand it. It was pretty simple... Not sure how people dont get it.
- The underwater city was awesome. - Podrace was cool - Jedi's kicking robot ass was enjoyable.
Yes, the movie isnt deep and might not have the same atmosphere and feeling as the other star wars movies, but i bet if it wasnt called "star wars" and it was just a seperate sci fi movie then people wouldnt be calling it bad. Oh well : /
Die Hard is an action movie but not a mindless action movie. For action to have intensity there has to be something at stake, i.e. you have to care about the characters. There's no set up for that in Episode I. I absolutely can't agree that it's possible to have an enjoyable action movie with nothing at stake. You're telling me you'd like to go to the cinema and just watch literally 2 hours of fighting and explosions? With no characters? I find that hard to believe.
Films like Die Hard, action movies that have remained popular, have done so because they are based in strong, simple, functional story arcs.
And although the story is flimsy and not very well done, i did understand it. It was pretty simple... Not sure how people dont get it.
Really. Tell me, what was the purpose of the blockade over Naboo that the whole film focused on? What supplies were the Naboo not getting that they needed? Why were the Trade Federation following a holograms orders? What was the holograms motivation and more crucially how was his eventual victory achieved?
- The underwater city was awesome. - Podrace was cool - Jedi's kicking robot ass was enjoyable.
I'm afraid I cannot agree. This is purely opinion now, but to me the underwater city was a pointless excursion to some city full of annoying assholes, the podrace was a stupendously overlong and purposeless sequence, and Jedi kicking robot ass holds nothing but boredom for me. As Plinkett said in his review, when the main adversaries of your heroes fall apart like butter and pose absolutely no threat then the action is unenjoyable. I found nothing to enjoy in watching a couple of actors swing out well practised moves on machines that literally crumbled without resistance.
Anyway I've clearly gone on for way too long about something I don't really care about, but I'll just say that if Episode I was just some sci fi film and not a Star Wars film, we definitely would have called it fucking awful. But we wouldn't still be talking about it.
The first starwars films were not great in story telling either. The characters were very simple and stiff. You only got to know the main characters a bit after 3 full films.
You dont even know who leads the rebellion, you know nothing about the imperator he is just the evil guy. Starwars was about the special effects and adventure all along not about the stroy telling. What really hurts is this children crap they put in. I want to see dirt blood and rape in war and action movies and not these steril shit. I want to see strugle and not this bullshit. This vader buring scene should be all over every battle scene and should be nothing special.
The childish approach is lame and the story telling is lame.
They should have set it darker more realistically with more storytelling and not this shit, episode 1 was an enormerous failure.
On September 04 2011 21:26 Holy_AT wrote: The first starwars films were not great in story telling either. The characters were very simple and stiff. You only got to know the main characters a bit after 3 full films.
You dont even know who leads the rebellion, you know nothing about the imperator he is just the evil guy. Starwars was about the special effects and adventure all along not about the stroy telling. What really hurts is this children crap they put in. I want to see dirt blood and rape in war and action movies and not these steril shit. I want to see strugle and not this bullshit. This vader buring scene should be all over every battle scene and should be nothing special.
The childish approach is lame and the story telling is lame.
They should have set it darker more realistically with more storytelling and not this shit, episode 1 was an enormerous failure.
On September 04 2011 21:26 Holy_AT wrote: The first starwars films were not great in story telling either. The characters were very simple and stiff. You only got to know the main characters a bit after 3 full films.
You dont even know who leads the rebellion, you know nothing about the imperator he is just the evil guy. Starwars was about the special effects and adventure all along not about the stroy telling. What really hurts is this children crap they put in. I want to see dirt blood and rape in war and action movies and not these steril shit. I want to see strugle and not this bullshit. This vader buring scene should be all over every battle scene and should be nothing special.
The childish approach is lame and the story telling is lame.
They should have set it darker more realistically with more storytelling and not this shit, episode 1 was an enormerous failure.
... Jesus fuck. That's like saying: "I didn't like Raiders of the Lost Ark because it didn't show scenes where Jews were gassed down despite the fact that there were nazis in the movie. It's unrealistic and bullshit. Nazis don't work this way."
I'm sorry, you want to see dirt blood and rape in a star wars movie? You're saying you can't make a war-scifi movie without having it be completely 100% realistic?
Yeah, I think "imperator" speaks for itself, you were probably born LONG after the original trilogy was released.
Also, by episode 1 you mean A new hope i'm assuming because of the context of the rest of the post? Well, the late 70's don't agree with you that it was an enormous failure (or an "enormerous" one for that matter).
In fact, if I recall it became the highest grossing film of all time? Yup, Star Wars broke away from what the norm was at the time (which was more dark and depressing, reflecting the war at the time) and it was HUGELY successful. Now I feel bad for responding to your post. Was it a troll?
On September 04 2011 21:26 Holy_AT wrote: The first starwars films were not great in story telling either. The characters were very simple and stiff. You only got to know the main characters a bit after 3 full films.
You dont even know who leads the rebellion, you know nothing about the imperator he is just the evil guy. Starwars was about the special effects and adventure all along not about the stroy telling. What really hurts is this children crap they put in. I want to see dirt blood and rape in war and action movies and not these steril shit. I want to see strugle and not this bullshit. This vader buring scene should be all over every battle scene and should be nothing special.
The childish approach is lame and the story telling is lame.
They should have set it darker more realistically with more storytelling and not this shit, episode 1 was an enormerous failure.
As has been repeated quite a few times here, episode IV was not about the overarching war, because that came later. It was about Luke Skywalker's quest. He was happily living on Tatooine, when disaster happened. He was sent on a quest and chased around the galaxy by an evil force. I agree that Darth Vader had about as much character as Darth Maul, however there is one important difference: we are properly introduced to our hero and because the villain is set on killing our hero (in fact, heroes), we hate him by proxy. The only reason anybody even knows Darth Maul is the villain is because he is black and red and has spikes on his head. Neither Qui Gon, nor Obi Wan are interesting characters, nor is the film focused on their quest. This leads to Darth Maul being an uninspired bad guy, rather than a Force of Evil, like Darth Vader. As for the childish crap: episode IV had it too. C3PO was comic relief and a bumbling idiot kids could relate to. Chewy was endearing. However, it did not detract from the story for adults, because there were interesting empathetic characters to drive the story on. Jar Jar Binks is not only far more annoying than C3PO because of his speech, but also because he is probably the most prominent character of the movie. He stands out in his awfulness because of the blandness of everybody else.
Back ontopic: George Lucas should keep his money grubbing hands off the originals. There is no reason to remaster classics (although he legally has the right to, it is pathetic): you will not make them better, because they are loved despite, and possibly because of their flaws. Digitally removing artifacts is fine (such as making the strings invisible at the higher resolutions available on bluray), but changing the movie in any significant manner is just retarded.
I get that there is almost no story. I also like Die Hard, not for the story, but for the visuals and the amazing action. There are so many movies where you dont really care about the story, you just want to enjoy the action. You dont NEED a main character always.
And although the story is flimsy and not very well done, i did understand it. It was pretty simple... Not sure how people dont get it.
- The underwater city was awesome. - Podrace was cool - Jedi's kicking robot ass was enjoyable.
Yes, the movie isnt deep and might not have the same atmosphere and feeling as the other star wars movies, but i bet if it wasnt called "star wars" and it was just a seperate sci fi movie then people wouldnt be calling it bad. Oh well : /
That's probably the reason why Star Wars fans are so butthurt about episode 1 (-3). Die Hard is an action movie (btw from the 80ies) and people didn't expect some masterful story behind a movie like that. They wanted action and boy did they get served. But for Star Wars people expected some more bang for their buck. Especially after 30 years of waiting the audience didn't want to see some boring stuff about trade politics and blockades, with boring characters nobody can identify with. Furthermore these characters are the most generic I have seen in a such a big blockbuster movie in a long time. None of those phantom manace characters are likeable at all. The "cool" things you mentioned are indeed well done from a purely CGI standpoint but things like that should really be just the topping on an awesome-cake made of a interesting and well-executed storyline and great characters with good (or even sometimes cheesy) dialogue like in the old movies.
Somebody mentioned that phantom menace was a movie made for kids only. Honestly I can't imagine that. Imagining kids to sit through all those senate scenes only to have their moms wake them up telling them: " Look! There's this jarjar guy in the underwater city."
I didn't like the earlier changes in ROTJ when they changed the last scene to show the Anakin from the new movies but changing Vader's line is kind of not necessary. To sum it up in one sentence: Changing Vader's dialogue in the BluRay's makes as much sense as changing the APM in patch 1.40.
Weird choice of words, saying fans are butthurt but then going on to support their views.
Anyway though, George Lucas did say that the movie was made for kids but it seems like a BS excuse for making such a bad movie. Ive always liked Star Wars but Im not one of the super fans. Still, given the quality of the first 3 films I expected a lot more from the prequels. Instead, we got shitty acting, boring plot, boring characters, and super flashy CGI. I saw it as a teenager and I was pretty disappointed. I imagine the disappointment for the true fans must have been exponentially worse
On September 03 2011 01:22 Hawk wrote: This wasn't realized after the last batch of new starwars movies???
This is really stupid though
also, how many times is that bastard going to add new content and digitally remaster the same goddamn movies??
As many times as he wants, it's his movie. If you don't like it don't buy it.
that doesnt mean its not stupid lol
I hate it when people say stupid shit like this. Its as if you think that ownership of something means no one but the owner can voice their opinion on it.
You can voice your opinion but Lucas knows your opinion on it, has known for many years now, and he doesn't care. It's annoying to see people drone on and on about it when it's not going to do any good, you're not going to change his mind.
On September 04 2011 01:37 Deadlyfish wrote: I dont get why this is such a big deal, it's one line in the movie, sure it might be silly, but people are overreacting.
Do you know what would happen if Obama during a meeting with other country's official said something like "Eat shit and die!" instead of what he intended?
On September 05 2011 01:29 redviper wrote: I just realized that I have never seen the original star wars, only the special edition. Is that the reason I never liked Star wars in general?
On September 04 2011 01:37 Deadlyfish wrote: I dont get why this is such a big deal, it's one line in the movie, sure it might be silly, but people are overreacting.
Do you know what would happen if Obama during a meeting with other country's official said something like "Eat shit and die!" instead of what he intended?
One line can change everything.
If darth vader said "eat shit and die" it might be a big deal too :D Actually that would be pretty awesome if just before killing the emperor he went "EAT SHIT AND DIEE!"
On September 04 2011 21:26 Holy_AT wrote: The first starwars films were not great in story telling either. The characters were very simple and stiff. You only got to know the main characters a bit after 3 full films.
You dont even know who leads the rebellion, you know nothing about the imperator he is just the evil guy. Starwars was about the special effects and adventure all along not about the stroy telling. What really hurts is this children crap they put in. I want to see dirt blood and rape in war and action movies and not these steril shit. I want to see strugle and not this bullshit. This vader buring scene should be all over every battle scene and should be nothing special.
The childish approach is lame and the story telling is lame.
They should have set it darker more realistically with more storytelling and not this shit, episode 1 was an enormerous failure.
As has been repeated quite a few times here, episode IV was not about the overarching war, because that came later. It was about Luke Skywalker's quest. He was happily living on Tatooine, when disaster happened. He was sent on a quest and chased around the galaxy by an evil force. I agree that Darth Vader had about as much character as Darth Maul, however there is one important difference: we are properly introduced to our hero and because the villain is set on killing our hero (in fact, heroes), we hate him by proxy. The only reason anybody even knows Darth Maul is the villain is because he is black and red and has spikes on his head. Neither Qui Gon, nor Obi Wan are interesting characters, nor is the film focused on their quest. This leads to Darth Maul being an uninspired bad guy, rather than a Force of Evil, like Darth Vader. As for the childish crap: episode IV had it too. C3PO was comic relief and a bumbling idiot kids could relate to. Chewy was endearing. However, it did not detract from the story for adults, because there were interesting empathetic characters to drive the story on. Jar Jar Binks is not only far more annoying than C3PO because of his speech, but also because he is probably the most prominent character of the movie. He stands out in his awfulness because of the blandness of everybody else.
Back ontopic: George Lucas should keep his money grubbing hands off the originals. There is no reason to remaster classics (although he legally has the right to, it is pathetic): you will not make them better, because they are loved despite, and possibly because of their flaws. Digitally removing artifacts is fine (such as making the strings invisible at the higher resolutions available on bluray), but changing the movie in any significant manner is just retarded.
To add to your points we also know Darth Vader is a bad guy because he FUCKING CHOKE HOLDS A DOOD 10 minutes into the film. And then does it again to his own subordinate. Darth Maul has like 2 shitty lines. Also the music when we first see vader is FUCKING EPIC, whereas we meet maul chatting w/ palpitine in some quiet area outside the senate.
And to the original complaint about storytelling, are you serious? New Hope is like THE coming of age story, and you're telling me its characters are simple? We see Han transform from a heartless space pirate to a genuinely good dood who puts the rebellion above himself (for the first time ever, look at that character development) to allow Luke to save the day. We see Luke go from a lame ass farm boy loser who day dreams about leading a meaningful life, TO A FUCKING JEDI MASTER! You think Luke had the Scarlac scene in him at the beginning of new hope. Hell no, he developed over the course of 3 films into a giant badass. Leia went from the lame princess in distress character to leading the rebel alliance.
You want to compare those arcs to the arcs in 1,2,3? Or any trilogy for that matter? Idn how you can possibly call them simple characters.
On September 04 2011 21:26 Holy_AT wrote: The first starwars films were not great in story telling either. The characters were very simple and stiff. You only got to know the main characters a bit after 3 full films.
You dont even know who leads the rebellion, you know nothing about the imperator he is just the evil guy. Starwars was about the special effects and adventure all along not about the stroy telling. What really hurts is this children crap they put in. I want to see dirt blood and rape in war and action movies and not these steril shit. I want to see strugle and not this bullshit. This vader buring scene should be all over every battle scene and should be nothing special.
The childish approach is lame and the story telling is lame.
They should have set it darker more realistically with more storytelling and not this shit, episode 1 was an enormerous failure.
... Jesus fuck. That's like saying: "I didn't like Raiders of the Lost Ark because it didn't show scenes where Jews were gassed down despite the fact that there were nazis in the movie. It's unrealistic and bullshit. Nazis don't work this way."
I'm sorry, you want to see dirt blood and rape in a star wars movie? You're saying you can't make a war-scifi movie without having it be completely 100% realistic?
Yeah, I think "imperator" speaks for itself, you were probably born LONG after the original trilogy was released.
Also, by episode 1 you mean A new hope i'm assuming because of the context of the rest of the post? Well, the late 70's don't agree with you that it was an enormous failure (or an "enormerous" one for that matter).
In fact, if I recall it became the highest grossing film of all time? Yup, Star Wars broke away from what the norm was at the time (which was more dark and depressing, reflecting the war at the time) and it was HUGELY successful. Now I feel bad for responding to your post. Was it a troll?
The guy makes some fair points though. In the original movies, you're basically told that the Empire is evil, and you're expected to nod your head. They don't really elaborate on why they are evil, or what the Rebels goals are. Maybe the Rebels want to instill their own evil empire. Maybe they want to rebel because they are bored. *shrug*
As for the "imperator" comment, the guy is from Austria, he probably speaks English as a second language, cut him some slack.
On September 04 2011 01:37 Deadlyfish wrote: I dont get why this is such a big deal, it's one line in the movie, sure it might be silly, but people are overreacting.
Do you know what would happen if Obama during a meeting with other country's official said something like "Eat shit and die!" instead of what he intended?
One line can change everything.
If he said that, then he get +1 awesome point?!?!? So what if some guy hate his fans? Maybe he just want to live a normal day life w/o being disturb? Have you guys ever thought of that?
I'm pretty sure he just does this kind of stuff to upset nerds that think that franchise belongs to them. It also keeps the movies sort of in the spot light.
He knows he has borderline religious fans, he knows people are already pissed about getting Hayden Christensen as vader after death in Return of the Jedi and a lot of other stuff, so I really have to wonder if he is just doing it for the cash. I so want to belive he actually wants to improve his work, but it's getting harder and harder to the point where I am concidering that he is just sitting at home and thinking up subtle ways to piss of more fans.
This is like if at the end of Shawshank Redemtion a prison guard was standing outside the prison and shot Andy as he tried to escape on a new blu-ray version.
On September 05 2011 03:39 Xiphos wrote:If he said that, then he get +1 awesome point?!?!? So what if some guy hate his fans? Maybe he just want to live a normal day life w/o being disturb? Have you guys ever thought of that?
If he wants to be left alone to live his life with the shitload of cash he's made then why does he insist on shitting all over his previous work? Why can't he just let it be and stop pissing people off if he doesn't want to get disturbed?
On September 05 2011 03:31 Ferrose wrote: As for the "imperator" comment, the guy is from Austria, he probably speaks English as a second language, cut him some slack.
The emperor's called "Imperator" in the German versions.
On September 05 2011 03:47 Zalitara wrote: He knows he has borderline religious fans, he knows people are already pissed about getting Hayden Christensen as vader after death in Return of the Jedi and a lot of other stuff, so I really have to wonder if he is just doing it for the cash. I so want to belive he actually wants to improve his work, but it's getting harder and harder to the point where I am concidering that he is just sitting at home and thinking up subtle ways to piss of more fans.
This is like if at the end of Shawshank Redemtion a prison guard was standing outside the prison and shot Andy as he tried to escape on a new blu-ray version.
On September 05 2011 03:39 Xiphos wrote:If he said that, then he get +1 awesome point?!?!? So what if some guy hate his fans? Maybe he just want to live a normal day life w/o being disturb? Have you guys ever thought of that?
If he wants to be left alone to live his life with the shitload of cash he's made then why does he insist on shitting all over his previous work? Why can't he just let it be and stop pissing people off if he doesn't want to get disturbed?
Because he is an asshole? If that was his intentions to do that. Then let him be. Its just StarWars lol
On September 03 2011 05:47 Babaganoush wrote: I think the only good thing to come out of the Blu-Ray edits is the Yoda CG replacement for the puppet.
I saw someone photoshopping Hayder's face when Luke takes Vader's mask off. Hopefully, that wasn't true.
I actually just watched star wars for the first this week. Some puppets looked goofy, but I didn't mind. And the yoda puppet was fucking awesome. I think it will look weird when everything else looks out of date to have amazing CGI.
On September 03 2011 05:47 Babaganoush wrote: I think the only good thing to come out of the Blu-Ray edits is the Yoda CG replacement for the puppet.
I saw someone photoshopping Hayder's face when Luke takes Vader's mask off. Hopefully, that wasn't true.
I actually just watched star wars for the first this week. Some puppets looked goofy, but I didn't mind. And the yoda puppet was fucking awesome. I think it will look weird when everything else looks out of date to have amazing CGI.
Well done puppets are better than CGI. Good thing i have them all on VHS :D
And yea, it must look wierd to have yoda be done with CGI but everything else to still be super dated.
On September 03 2011 05:47 Babaganoush wrote: I think the only good thing to come out of the Blu-Ray edits is the Yoda CG replacement for the puppet.
I saw someone photoshopping Hayder's face when Luke takes Vader's mask off. Hopefully, that wasn't true.
I actually just watched star wars for the first this week. Some puppets looked goofy, but I didn't mind. And the yoda puppet was fucking awesome. I think it will look weird when everything else looks out of date to have amazing CGI.
Well done puppets are better than CGI. Good thing i have them all on VHS :D
And yea, it must look wierd to have yoda be done with CGI but everything else to still be super dated.
I disagree with that, there's a lot more you can do with CGI than with a puppet.
As for the dated thing, I don't understand your point on that. The CGI is supposed to make him look believable.
On September 03 2011 05:47 Babaganoush wrote: I think the only good thing to come out of the Blu-Ray edits is the Yoda CG replacement for the puppet.
I saw someone photoshopping Hayder's face when Luke takes Vader's mask off. Hopefully, that wasn't true.
I actually just watched star wars for the first this week. Some puppets looked goofy, but I didn't mind. And the yoda puppet was fucking awesome. I think it will look weird when everything else looks out of date to have amazing CGI.
Well done puppets are better than CGI. Good thing i have them all on VHS :D
And yea, it must look wierd to have yoda be done with CGI but everything else to still be super dated.
I disagree with that, there's a lot more you can do with CGI than with a puppet.
As for the dated thing, I don't understand your point on that. The CGI is supposed to make him look believable.
Oh, it takes some effort to get used to the reviewer, but he's awesome and makes some great points which show that he has a good understanding on how movies work.
He's got great points, and a good clear way of showing his points. Pity his voice is so droll.
Oh, it takes some effort to get used to the reviewer, but he's awesome and makes some great points which show that he has a good understanding on how movies work.
He's got great points, and a good clear way of showing his points. Pity his voice is so droll.
I think he does that voice on purpose, because in the episode 2 review on his site he suddenly starts talking normal for a few sentences, then seems to remember right away and go back to the "funny" droll voice.
On September 04 2011 21:26 Holy_AT wrote: The first starwars films were not great in story telling either. The characters were very simple and stiff. You only got to know the main characters a bit after 3 full films.
You dont even know who leads the rebellion, you know nothing about the imperator he is just the evil guy. Starwars was about the special effects and adventure all along not about the stroy telling. What really hurts is this children crap they put in. I want to see dirt blood and rape in war and action movies and not these steril shit. I want to see strugle and not this bullshit. This vader buring scene should be all over every battle scene and should be nothing special.
The childish approach is lame and the story telling is lame.
They should have set it darker more realistically with more storytelling and not this shit, episode 1 was an enormerous failure.
And shakespeare was just an illiterate imbecile who made up his own words....
On September 04 2011 21:26 Holy_AT wrote: The first starwars films were not great in story telling either. The characters were very simple and stiff. You only got to know the main characters a bit after 3 full films.
You dont even know who leads the rebellion, you know nothing about the imperator he is just the evil guy. Starwars was about the special effects and adventure all along not about the stroy telling. What really hurts is this children crap they put in. I want to see dirt blood and rape in war and action movies and not these steril shit. I want to see strugle and not this bullshit. This vader buring scene should be all over every battle scene and should be nothing special.
The childish approach is lame and the story telling is lame.
They should have set it darker more realistically with more storytelling and not this shit, episode 1 was an enormerous failure.
The changes to Star Wars made since the originals make me sick.
The end of ROTJ being the biggest. Putting an evil looking young Anakin in place of that kind smiling old man? Some gungan shouting "WEESA FREE" at the end sequence?
Oh, it takes some effort to get used to the reviewer, but he's awesome and makes some great points which show that he has a good understanding on how movies work.
On September 03 2011 00:53 ch33psh33p wrote: Anyone give some background on this?
Whats the big deal?!
...
OK, I'll explain, I don't have the time to sift through all these pages in case someone beat me to it.
Have you ever seen a movie where there's a silent scream? All you see is the actor's anguished face, the harrowing background music...and other than that, there's no sound at all.
The effect on the viewer is incredible and delivers an enormous emotional punch, where hearing the actual scream itself, could never do. If done correctly, it's amazing. But it's been done so many times over the years, and in many horrible movies too. But anyways...
In the original, Darth Vader wordlessly picks up the Emperor, and tosses him down the shaft. I'm a little disappointed that I actually have to EXPLAIN to you, what thousands of people "get" about the significance of the silent actions, and somehow it's completely lost on you.
It is completely unnecessary and also entirely changes the scene. It's the little things that kill you.
This is so depressing... this scene was soooo good because you really felt Vaders inner conflict.... now he just sounds like a dumbass saying NOO NOOOO..... crap....
In all honesty I'm not sure why it matters that much - the official version of the OT has been garbage for years now, further changes won't impact this.
I hate reviving this topic, but I just finished watching Epsiodes 1, 2 and 3. I thought they were decent back then and now I've watched them for a second time.
The above spoilered image is pretty much everything I thought of and finally made me stop at this point in the movie. If you haven't seen the first episodes, don't. They're absolutely horrendous from the terrible acting, to the horrid scriptwriting to the need to fit every single big-name in the movie who don't entirely fit the role (I am hugely in love with Natalie Portman, especially in this movie).
There's a movie recently out about George Lucas:
I simply adored this documentary, but don't go in thinking you're going to learn something immense or life-changing.
Oh look it's this time of the year again : when nerdy hipsters go on rampage because Georges Lucas has modify something in their beloved films.
Let me enlighten you guys : It doesn't matter what you think.
Furthermore, I'd like you to think about the following topics before saying stupid things on topics you don't understand : The sacralization of nerd culture over the years. The fanaticism related to the nerd culture. The impact it has on other people. The impact the Star Wars movies had on you and how a rejuvenation is helping it. The difference between art and entertainment. The rights of artist to modify their own work without any outside pressure.
PS : I find you really outright pathetic, borderline creepy. For me you are the reason mainstream medias still consider us as retarded 12 years old who can't let go their shiny toys.
I can't think of any decent reason to make that sort of a change. I mean come on, let the movies stand on their own as classics without changing various things in later format editions
Oh, it takes some effort to get used to the reviewer, but he's awesome and makes some great points which show that he has a good understanding on how movies work.
He's got great points, and a good clear way of showing his points. Pity his voice is so droll.
Oh, it takes some effort to get used to the reviewer, but he's awesome and makes some great points which show that he has a good understanding on how movies work.
He's got great points, and a good clear way of showing his points. Pity his voice is so droll.
That's the point. It's funny... :|
Personally I like Episode 1. Yeah I understand what he was saying and all, but Episode 1 was my first SW movie. Like others before me who are so attached to the Original Trilogy I am to Episode 1. And who says you need to follow the Shakespearean Model of the Hero Cycle.
Could it have been better? Of course, but so could have alot of movies that we know and love. But, If i were to make 1 change that would be to make Obi-wan the protagonist. Really the role of the protagonist in this movie is shared between Obi and Ani, and as a result did not accomplish what most people expect.
All in all I love the movie, and hope the Lucas makes a Prequel of the Prequel Trilogy.
The following write-up "The Secret History of Star Wars" and the video "The Mythology of Star Wars" explain the real essence and influences of Star Wars. Whether Darth Vader says NOOOOO or not , has nothing to do with what Star Wars is all about.
On September 09 2011 06:59 Otolia wrote: Oh look it's this time of the year again : when nerdy hipsters go on rampage because Georges Lucas has modify something in their beloved films.
Let me enlighten you guys : It doesn't matter what you think.
Furthermore, I'd like you to think about the following topics before saying stupid things on topics you don't understand : The sacralization of nerd culture over the years. The fanaticism related to the nerd culture. The impact it has on other people. The impact the Star Wars movies had on you and how a rejuvenation is helping it. The difference between art and entertainment. The rights of artist to modify their own work without any outside pressure.
PS : I find you really outright pathetic, borderline creepy. For me you are the reason mainstream medias still consider us as retarded 12 years old who can't let go their shiny toys.
Were you under the mistaken impression you actually had anything of value to contribute, or have you just been waiting for an excuse to use the phrase "nerdy hipsters"
Let me enlighten you: it doesn't matter what you think.
Just be grateful we have Star Wars to being with. Lucas is entitled to as many (widely perceived) blunders as he wants for giving us Star Wars in the first place. So what he thought Vader needed to express his new found good side a little more vocally - it really doesn't change anything and if it bothers you watch an old version.
Ep.1-3 are really different. I like the original trilogy better for various reasons, but I still never really minded the new trilogy. What I don't really understand is why they found it necessary to go back to the old trilogy and change things in it. A bit senseless, really.
I never really minded Greedo shooting first, yea i can see why the fans complained, but in the overall picture Han Solo was still a bad ass and the "anti hero" to Luke's more traditional hero.
What bothered me the most was seeing Hayden at the end of ROTJ, as that brings up new problems that werent there. Didnt Anakin REDEEM himself at the end of ROTJ by saving his son? Isent that his entire story arc? That its never too late to do the right thing? That Anakin really was the chosen one and fulfilled his destiny, tough in a unexpected way?
Thus older, redeemed Anakin should appear with Yoda and Ben as the ghostly..whatever they are at the end.
This new change is bad, we can all agree, and the Flanneled One should stop fucking with these movies. He took the worst line out all 6 movies (yes worst than anything Jar Jar or Jake Lloyd ever said) and implented it in ROTJ, in the most important scene in all 6 films.
Putting in a CGI Yoda in Phantom Menace i actually support, that thing was hideous in PT,, awful.
Non-intrusive CGI that fixes problems that were unsolvable back then because the technology wasn't up to par? Sure I'm all for that. Even stuff like blinking ewoks, sure, why not. What I never understood, instead of raping the Moss Eisly entrance scene with a butt load of VERY intrusive CGI, why didn't they ever clean up the scene where Han Solo finds Luke on Hoth, and his Taun Taun dies. That was one of the worst puppet stop motion scenes in the whole of the original trilogy. Putting CGI Yoda in ep1 isn't that bad, since the whole movie was CGI, just don't touch him in ep5 and 6, please please please. Even though CGI can fix a few things, I still yearn for the theatrical releases in proper 5.1 and HD, hey, a man can dream, right?
On September 09 2011 18:24 Parcelleus wrote: The following write-up "The Secret History of Star Wars" and the video "The Mythology of Star Wars" explain the real essence and influences of Star Wars. Whether Darth Vader says NOOOOO or not , has nothing to do with what Star Wars is all about.
There is an interesting quote in this around 46:45:
I see my audience, and my audience is me... You know, I make these films for myself more than I make them for anyone else.
Its not quite true to say that George Lucas "hates his fans," but it is true to say that George Lucas is ultimately interested only in how he receives his movies, not anyone else. Thus, if this new "noo!" really makes him have an emotional connection in a way that the previous silence does not, he will add it in, even if the majority of fans thinks otherwise.
I think it also relates to Red Letter Media's criticism that in his earlier works, there were people to tell him "no" when he made a bad decision, whereas now, he is too powerful to criticize outright: he now has more ability to "make these films for [him]self" without people interfering. He also seems to have grown more confident in his ability to appeal to others, though he is ultimately seeking only to appeal to himself.
This may seem obvious, but it is nice to have a quote that neatly summarizes the way he thinks about these movies.
On September 09 2011 06:59 Otolia wrote: Oh look it's this time of the year again : when nerdy hipsters go on rampage because Georges Lucas has modify something in their beloved films.
Let me enlighten you guys : It doesn't matter what you think.
Furthermore, I'd like you to think about the following topics before saying stupid things on topics you don't understand : The sacralization of nerd culture over the years. The fanaticism related to the nerd culture. The impact it has on other people. The impact the Star Wars movies had on you and how a rejuvenation is helping it. The difference between art and entertainment. The rights of artist to modify their own work without any outside pressure.
PS : I find you really outright pathetic, borderline creepy. For me you are the reason mainstream medias still consider us as retarded 12 years old who can't let go their shiny toys.
I somewhat agree, but I can see why people who were alive for the original trilogy would be offended because it was a huge thing during that time that sort of defined an era
but for kids who werent alive for the original trilogy I don't see why they're so upset
EPT
) so it was pretty dangerous. I'm not saying scenes need to be dangerous to be good in terms of action, but it just looks and feels much better when it's somewhat real.![[image loading]](http://www.winterson.com.nyud.net:8090/pics/swb251lt.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://h8.abload.de/img/vader_comic_noooooooo_gwva.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/images/ep3_tot1.gif)
![[image loading]](http://chzmemebase.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/memes-heres-the-sitch.jpg)
