View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Hawkwing74 Camera Operator
Joined: 29 Mar 2004 Posts: 51 Location: Schaumburg, IL
|
Posted: 03.30.2004 5:47 pm Post subject: Why is the new Star Wars Trilogy so bad? |
|
|
People here seem to be movie experts, so I'd like your take on why The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones are so much worse in overall quality than the original trilogy.
I've heard it said that Lucas went from making movies he'd like to see to making movies he would want his kids to see.
I think the CGI is always beautiful in these newest movies, but without a strong script the overall result is rather soulless.
Is it simply because I am now an adult that I am so critical of these last 2 movies? I don't think so, because I can still watch the original trilogy, and except for minor flaws (the campiness of Episode IV and the Ewoks in Episode VI) I enjoy them as much as when I was a child.
Also, Hayden Christiansen: I saw him in "Life as a House" and I thought he did a great job. How can he be so bad in Ep. 2??? Is it the script again?! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
the night watchman Studio Exec
Joined: 27 Jun 2003 Posts: 1373 Location: Dark, run-down shack by the graveyard.
|
Posted: 03.30.2004 6:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I like Episode I and II more than many others seem to, but yes, I think you hit the nail on the head when you said, "I think the CGI is always beautiful in these newest movies, but without a strong script the overall result is rather soulless." The original trilogy had a tale to tell. This trilogy, or at least the first two instalments so far, seem be Lucas playing with a new toy. In other words, there is much less of any significance in these two movies than in Stars Wars - Jedi. Frankly, Lucas left himself with a whole lotta ground to cover in Episode III. _________________ "If you're talking about censorship, and what things should be shown and what things shouldn't be shown, I've said that as an artist you have no social responsibility whatsoever."
-David Cronenberg |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Danny Baldwin Studio Exec
Joined: 26 Jun 2003 Posts: 1354 Location: San Diego, CA
|
Posted: 03.30.2004 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I take the recent two for what they are, and cherish them because of that. I felt the same with Terminator 3. Why should skyrocketing expectations that aren't met result in failure to enjoy a new product? _________________ Danny Baldwin
View My Reviews |
|
Back to top |
|
|
matt header Studio Exec
Joined: 26 Jun 2003 Posts: 623 Location: Milwaukee, WI
|
Posted: 03.30.2004 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I somewhat enjoyed Episode II (can't say the same about Episode I), but both of them have the feel of laziness to me, despite the overcrowding of elaborate special effects. In a way, the story seems already written - very generally, we already know what will happen thanks to the original trilogy. Therefore, the new episodes have the feel of Lucas simply connecting the dots with rote technological process - there is no newness to the new films because so little we see is new. And, of course, the simplistic scripts hurt too: the original screenplays had a rollicking fun to them that contributed to amiable matinee-style entertainment, but the new screenplays leave out the originality and the fun. I think even now Lucas' concoctions can be exciting - visually, anyway - but they're not anywhere near as magical as they once were.
The Empire Strikes Back is the only addition to the series you can truly call masterful, in my opinion. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
The Third M?n Studio Exec
Joined: 09 Sep 2003 Posts: 575 Location: Chasing Stef around post-war Vienna
|
Posted: 03.31.2004 3:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The original series never was that good, if you ask me.
The Empire Strikes Back is, as matt said, the only masterful one. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
filmhobbit Grip
Joined: 08 Aug 2003 Posts: 3
|
Posted: 04.01.2004 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The original series IS that good and if there is any real tragedy in the making of the new ones it is that it has created a group of people who run around justifying their badness by unjustly maligning the fantastic originals.
Why are the new ones so bad?
1. Lucas is overly reliant on technology. Technology first, story and actor second.
2. Lucas is more interested in telling a story for kids... when even more than the original the prequels are a very adult tale. _________________ CinemaBlend.com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Fred C. Dobbs Director
Joined: 11 Mar 2004 Posts: 201 Location: New York
|
Posted: 04.01.2004 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Third M?n wrote: | The original series never was that good, if you ask me.
The Empire Strikes Back is, as matt said, the only masterful one. |
100%. _________________ "Pino, fuck you, fuck your fuckin' pizza, and fuck Frank Sinatra." |
|
Back to top |
|
|
The Third M?n Studio Exec
Joined: 09 Sep 2003 Posts: 575 Location: Chasing Stef around post-war Vienna
|
Posted: 04.01.2004 8:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fred C. Dobbs wrote: | 100%. |
Don't get me wrong, they can be enjoyed as what they are -- pure escapism, after all -- but judging the film cinema-wise they, really, they're not that good at all. They are entertainment and sure, visually, they're fascinating -- but that doesn't stop them from being B-movies at heart. However, when it's really done right [see Raiders of the Lost Ark], the can be both enjoyed and appreciated as fine pieces of cinema.
It's just that seeing them at no. 1 in Channel 4's "The 100 Greatest Films of all Time" made me sick. They're overrated. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Fred C. Dobbs Director
Joined: 11 Mar 2004 Posts: 201 Location: New York
|
Posted: 04.01.2004 11:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Third M?n wrote: | Fred C. Dobbs wrote: | 100%. |
Don't get me wrong, they can be enjoyed as what they are -- pure escapism, after all -- but judging the film cinema-wise they, really, they're not that good at all. They are entertainment and sure, visually, they're fascinating -- but that doesn't stop them from being B-movies at heart. However, when it's really done right [see Raiders of the Lost Ark], the can be both enjoyed and appreciated as fine pieces of cinema.
It's just that seeing them at no. 1 in Channel 4's "The 100 Greatest Films of all Time" made me sick. They're overrated. |
Technically, they are innovative and have several aspects that make a film great. But is Star Wars really better than Sunrise? Night of the Hunter? Treasure of the Sierra Madre? One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest? Sunset Blvd? Grapes of Wrath? Throne of Blood? Citizen Kane?...etc...It's disgusting, man.
I wouldn't even consider my favorite of the trilogy, The Empire Strikes Back, in the top five best science fiction films ever.
This is how i'd rate the entire Star Wars series:
A New Hope - 3.5 out of 5
The Empire Strikes Back - 4.5 out of 5
Return of the Jedi - 3 out of 5
The Phantom Menace - 2 out of 5
Attack of the Clones - 2.5 out of 5
Average rating: 3 out of 5... _________________ "Pino, fuck you, fuck your fuckin' pizza, and fuck Frank Sinatra." |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Hawkwing74 Camera Operator
Joined: 29 Mar 2004 Posts: 51 Location: Schaumburg, IL
|
Posted: 04.02.2004 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
What would be your top 5 best Sci Fi?
As for me, I'm a SW fanboy, so
Empire Strikes Back
Star Wars
The Matrix
(from here it gets hard because I don't think there are many good SciFi movies)
Star Wars ratings:
A New Hope 4 out of 5
The Empire Strikes Back 5 out of 5
Return of the Jedi 3.5 out of 5
Phantom Menace 1.5 out of 5
Attack of the Clones 2 out of 5
avg = 3.2 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tooky Cat Cinematographer
Joined: 15 Mar 2004 Posts: 106 Location: Madison, WI
|
Posted: 04.02.2004 3:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think the huge drawback of episodes I and II is just how new they are. The original trilogy is what, from the '70s? I love all the little models, and some of the cheesiness of the effects actually adds to the appeal of the whole thing. Now in Episodes I and II, 90% of it is in the form of 0's and 1's. All that's left is the poorly casted cast.
And I forget who said it, and I don't feel like looking up and quoting the person, but they were basically talking about how Lucas is just filling in the plot holes that everybody already knows about. Well, that doesn't allow for much in the element of surprise/twists/etc. _________________ Let's See It In - T H X - The Audience is Listening. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
The Third M?n Studio Exec
Joined: 09 Sep 2003 Posts: 575 Location: Chasing Stef around post-war Vienna
|
Posted: 04.02.2004 5:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My favourite science fiction films?
01. Stalker
02. 2001: A Space Odyssey
03. E.T.
04. Blade Runner
05. The Matrix
06. Alien
07. Minority Report
08. The Empire Strikes Back
09. Donnie Darko
Something like that, I guess... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Fred C. Dobbs Director
Joined: 11 Mar 2004 Posts: 201 Location: New York
|
Posted: 04.02.2004 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hawkwing74 wrote: | What would be your top 5 best Sci Fi? |
1. Metropolis
2. The Day The Earth Stood Still
3. Alien
4. King Kong
5. Alphaville
6. The Empire Strikes Back
7. Planet of the Apes
8. The Thing From Another World
9. The Creature from the Black Lagoon
10. The Thing _________________ "Pino, fuck you, fuck your fuckin' pizza, and fuck Frank Sinatra."
Last edited by Fred C. Dobbs on 04.03.2004 4:20 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rob Vaux Grip
Joined: 23 Jan 2004 Posts: 20 Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
Posted: 04.02.2004 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm convinced that the difficulty with the later Star Wars films lies solely in the script. Lawrence Kasdan (and the late Leigh Brackett) simply have a better sense of plotting, character interaction, and most importantly DIALOGUE than Lucas. A New Hope got a pass on some of that because it was such a new and original concept that nobody cared if the characters were a little thin. Kasdan and Brackett did wonders in shoring those weak spots for Empire which further obsured the original's shortcomings. The new trilogy sort of pulls away the curtain, exacerbating all of the flaws that were really there from the beginning.
I'm still fonder of the new films than most, though I don't think they match up to the first trilogy. And oddly enough, I like The Phantom Menace much more than Attack of the Clones.
My hastily-assembled sci-fi list:
1) The Terminator
2) Planet of the Apes (the original)
3) The Thing (the remake)
4) Alien
5) Blade Runner
6) The Empire Strikes Back
7) 2001
8) A Boy and his Dog
9) The Road Warrior
10) The Iron Giant
I could probably revise it heavily if I had more time to ponder it. And I find myself growing increasingly fond of Minority Report as time goes on. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
matt header Studio Exec
Joined: 26 Jun 2003 Posts: 623 Location: Milwaukee, WI
|
Posted: 04.02.2004 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Man, I love lists:
- A.I. Artificial Intelligence
- Brazil
- The City of Lost Children
- Close Encounters of the Third Kind
- The Day the Earth Stood Still
- The Empire Strikes Back
- Gattaca
- The Man Who Fell to Earth
- Metropolis (1927)
- Metropolis (2001)
- Sleeper
- Solaris (1972)
- Twelve Monkeys
- 2001: A Space Odyssey
I must admit a slight aversion to sci-fi movies. The two genres I tend to be less wowed by are sci-fi and war (although 2001 is still my favorite movie ever). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|