|Star Wars anyone?||mr_spin|
Jun 10, 2002 7:06 AM
|No spoilers here.
I went to see the latest Star Wars the other day and boy was I disappointed. Luckily someone else paid, so all I lost was some time.
A lot of things bothered me (the acting, the script, etc.) but I read a comment the other day that I think really summed up my displeasure. The problem with the recent pictures is that there is no Han Solo!
Han was the cynic of the group. He was the cowboy. The sarcastic one. The guy who made it up as he went along. The guy who got into trouble. The guy who hung out with low-lifes, not royalty. He was the one who stood up and said out loud you guys are idiots! Even if he was wrong. Most important, he was the one who didn't buy into The Force (I'll take a blaster over hokey religions and light sabers any day).
There's no cynicism in the new movies. There's no sarcasm. Beyond the predictable plots and marketing-oriented characters, they characters are far too serious about what they are doing. And what they are doing isn't much. Talking, mostly. No one seems to be having any fun. Nobody ever stumbles into trouble like Han always did. Instead, they walk into every situation knowing what is coming. The picture is left to survive on effects alone. Frankly, it's not worth it.
Jun 10, 2002 7:32 AM
|I saw the last one, and was very disappointed. I thought the casting was awful. There was no pizzaz, no interesting characters. They were boring and weak, like a bad British detective movie. With the same actors, I'll wait and see this one on HBO.
I loved the first 3 movies, though.
|This one's so much better than the last that...||cory|
Jun 10, 2002 7:41 AM
|...I had to like it just for that. I was a huge fan of the first couple, but either I got too old or they got too stupid. I'm still sorry I saw Phantom Menace.
BTW, is anybody else getting tired of movies that are just vehicles for the special effects? Now that they can do anything they want with a computer, so there's no novelty in explosions, could we be ready for a return to plot and story?
|agreed. nm||JS Haiku Shop|
Jun 11, 2002 9:40 AM
|I'm waiting for it to come out on DVD||ColnagoFE|
Jun 10, 2002 7:54 AM
|then again I never saw Lord of the Rings yet either. Movies today mostly seem like a big yawn............can't remember the last one I really thought was spectacular.|
|Keep waiting...||The Walrus|
Jun 10, 2002 10:12 AM
|You'd be missing nothing at all if you never saw "LotR". The best thing I could say about that picture is that I'll be saved the expense of seeing the other two installments. Perhaps as a True Believer in the Trilogy (I've read it probably about 3 dozen times since '66) I was doomed to be disappointed, but the woefully inept casting, generally lethargic acting and the liberties taken with the story were the kiss of death.
"Clones" was definitely better than "Phantom", but not by much. It's best enjoyed as eye candy that won't make much lasting impression.
|Disagree on LOTR||Me Dot Org|
Jun 12, 2002 1:52 PM
|Peter Jackson's adaptation is not perfect, but I think he did an incredible job, all things considered. LOTR generally did very well with the critics ( http://www.sfgate.com/eguide/movies/criticalconsensus/index2001.shtml ).
But then again, I've only read the Trilogy a couple of times. Perhaps others who have read it 3 dozen times feel the same as you.
|re: Star Wars anyone?||Starliner|
Jun 10, 2002 8:43 PM
|I've seen it twice, thanks mainly to my 15 year old fanatic son. The first time, my opinion was tepid. I think Lucas misses his first wife, whom he met at USC film school and who helped him out with the first three films. Then they split, and there was a long hiatus between the Return of the Jedi and the Phantom Menace.
After the first viewing of the latest, I left confused as to what some of the characters were in the movie for. What were their relationships to each other. Why the clone army and why the robotic army, etc. Lucas didn't give enough background on some of the important characters such as Dooku and Jango Fett, and what their stuff was together. Too many vague references and not enough clarity.
Then my son and I went to see it at a theater with a digital projector and THX digital sound system and what a difference (AMC Van Ness). The sound system was worth the price of admission. Plus, some of the questions I had after the first viewing were answered.
I think Lucas did a magnificent job in crafting the settings and creatures for the film, but unfortunately at a cost - all the visual stimulation distracts from the rather weak storyline.
|re: Star Wars anyone?||firstrax|
Jun 11, 2002 6:12 AM
|Jar Jar Binks needs to be killed off.|
|Memo to Lucas: More Swashbuckling. Less Joseph Campbell.||Me Dot Org|
Jun 12, 2002 1:38 PM
|You pretty well nailed it.
Although I think this movie is superior to The Phantom Menace, I see two problems:
1. The movie takes itself far too seriously.
2. Mr. Lucas is much better at creating robots and computer effects than directing human beings.
Let's face it: The guy has an emotional tin ear. If The Phantom Menace were not preceded by the original Star Wars Trilogy, we'd be talking about it as the Heaven's Gate of SciFi.
I agree that Clones is better than TPM. But the only reason we're having this discussion is because of the first 3 movies. Somewhere between then and now Lucas got loaded up with Hubris, just like one of Mr. Campbell's fallen heros.