skywalker said:

JoeTyler said:

the CGI of Revenge of the Sith was/is spectacular, just as good as Avatar's effects...

Agreed. Also, a lot of people are attributing cgi to things that actually are old school, practical effects like models, matte paintings, and such.

[Edited 5/9/12 16:50pm]

I agree, the CGI in RotS is on par with Avatar, which also has SHITTTY special effects.

Avatar looked like fucking Shreik. The only people who actually think Avatar looked good are the morons who worked on the movie and the computer special effects industry that strokes them off.

When you watch the old school Return of the Jedi, when Luke and Han are over the Sarlacc, you aren't thinking "holy fuck, check out all this CGI" you are thinking "Oh man, Han and Luke are screwed, how are they going to get out of this one". In the new movies, like when the Clone Troopers and the Droids go at it at the end of AotC, you're eyes aren't fooled into believing what you're seeing is real, you just think to yourself "this is the part of the movie that looks like a really expensive video game"

The special effects in those movies are crap.

[Edited 5/9/12 20:53pm]

Wildboy said:

skywalker said:

Agreed. Also, a lot of people are attributing cgi to things that actually are old school, practical effects like models, matte paintings, and such.

[Edited 5/9/12 16:50pm]

I agree, the CGI in RotS is on par with Avatar, which also has SHITTTY special effects.

Avatar looked like fucking Shreik. The only people who actually think Avatar looked good are the morons who worked on the movie and the computer special effects industry that strokes them off.

When you watch the old school Return of the Jedi, when look and Han are over the Sarlacc, you aren't thinking "holy fuck, check out all this CGI" you are thinking "Oh man, Han and Luke are screwed, how are they going to get out of this one". In the new movies, like when the Clone Troopers and the Droids go at it at the end of AotC, you're eyes aren't fooled into believing what you're seeing is real, you just think to yourself "this is the part of the movie that looks like a really expensive video game"

The special effects in those movies are crap.

dude, you're old fashioned

I bet you prefer Pacman or Pitfall than a state-of-the-art 2007-2012 game, lol

I like GOOD special effects, It doesn't matter to me whether they are CGI or real effects. That's why I don't like Avatar, it looks shitty.

The CGI in the film Starship Troopers is a perfect example of how to utilise CGI properly. The special effects in that movie are spot on, and it looks like there really is a horde of alien bugs bum rushing the humans. However in Phantom Menace, the battle of the Gungans and the Droids looks like a cheap Playstation game. The Droids animations are too similar and the "grass" the battle takes place on is a fucking joke.

CGI done right is a beautiful thing, for instance the shots from Prometheus look fantastic, but most of what I'm seeing now is CGI with the shadows falling incorrectly and the light reflecting off it in ways that show it's obviously fake. The elephant in the room is that CGI doesn't work half as good as hollywood is telling itself it does, and no one wants to say it.

my god you're right! 1999 The New Master!

all we need now is a Red Letter Media review of Graffiti Bridge and the World will be as one

Prince has far more in common with Woody Allen than he does with George Lucas.

Both of them are extremely self-reliant: Prince writes, produces and plays all the instruments on his albums while Woody writes, directs and (up until recently) starred in all his films.

Both are extremely prolific: Woody (incredibly) is still making a film a year. Prince has slowed down recently but for years he was so prolific that he was actually criticized for it.

Both of them have a very individual style and are often compelled by their vision to shun commercial concerns. Their work has depth.

None of this can be said about George Lucas. He has much more in common with Michael Jackson - all big budgets and cheap thrills. Also like MJ, he's not very prolific and nowhere near as self reliant.

So all in all, the Prince - Lucas comparison is poor. Hell, Spike Lee in the '80s would be a better comparison for Prince than George Lucas.

[Edited 5/10/12 6:35am]

None of this can be said about George Lucas. He has much more in common with Michael Jackson - all big budgets and cheap thrills. Also like MJ, he's not very prolific and nowhere near as self reliant.

I agree with the analogy. Just not the cheap thrills part. Lucas and MJ both represent the best in turning pop perfection into bona fide art.

skywalker said:

None of this can be said about George Lucas. He has much more in common with Michael Jackson - all big budgets and cheap thrills. Also like MJ, he's not very prolific and nowhere near as self reliant.

I agree with the analogy. Just not the cheap thrills part. Lucas and MJ both represent the best in turning pop perfection into bona fide art.

I suspect your definition of "bona fide art" may differ from mine. Most bona fide art doesn't appeal to 8-year-olds.

[Edited 5/11/12 6:16am]

Midnightmover, if you can, try and get your hands on the original cut of THX-1138. It's a fascinating glimpse at the George Lucas that might have been!

Prince is good

Star Wars is shite

thank you good night

midnightmover said:

skywalker said:

I agree with the analogy. Just not the cheap thrills part. Lucas and MJ both represent the best in turning pop perfection into bona fide art.

I suspect your definition of "bona fide art" may differ from mine. Most bona fide art doesn't appeal to 8-year-olds.

[Edited 5/11/12 6:16am]

EXACTLY

I like both. Never compared the two before. Don't really see that much in common. As of late, Prince is becoming more Georgish, I would suppose. Lucas has always done interviews, never been afraid to let you step behind the scenes, and dresses like the average used car salesman.

Lucas seems to love kids very much. Prince, not so safe for kids through most of his career.

I think there is only one major common property they shared in their history,

They were SO original that no one who let them work beneath, Warners or 20th century, felt like they were a couple of odd balls who could decent work and that was about it. I don't think either corporation really considered them to be major talents or ignite in the way they did.

Lucas was able to obtain all of the rights to merchandising on his 'little space movie.'

And who the hell really knew 1999, not Purple Rain, because at that point I think Warner's knew they had something, was going to be the party album to usher in the 80's during all of that British invasion influx going on?

So that's what they had in common: SURPRISE!

I am sure Lucas was shocked at the success of Star Wars, because he has said so very humbly, and that it was a phenomenon which happened for whatever reason phenoms do.

Prince on the other hand, has been anything but humble. There is still an ass load of arrogance dripping off of him even in this more tamed version of Prince.

But I think over all, Prince and Lucas have more at odds than in common.

Look at Lucas' business leading ability. I have never seen or heard of the fruit basket turnovers or jaded ex-associates coming from his camp as I have Prince's. Lucas is there to offer a service to all of the movie industy, and has been therefore, a revolutionary force.

Prince has ran indy and done well, but I don't think he has been a revoltuionary force on how music is produced or it's business and technical ends. (Artistically yes, business - nope.) If anything, a lot of Prince's actions has caused the music industry to tighen their reins and enforce boundaries in contracts.

To sum it up, Lucas seems to know how to play well with others. Prince never has.

midnightmover said:

skywalker said:

I agree with the analogy. Just not the cheap thrills part. Lucas and MJ both represent the best in turning pop perfection into bona fide art.

I suspect your definition of "bona fide art" may differ from mine. Most bona fide art doesn't appeal to 8-year-olds.

[Edited 5/11/12 6:16am]

Snob. What are you talking about? Art appeals to a variety of people. Both Star Wars and Michael Jackson appeal to more than just 8 year olds. You know this.

You don't have to like either, but both MJ and George Lucas are some of the most influencial artists of all time. Both revolutionized their artforms. So again, what are you talking about?

[Edited 5/11/12 9:56am]

Skywalker, quit the name calling. Saying that episodes 1-3 were made to appeal to the under 10 crowd is a god damned fact.

The original trilogy attracted people of all ages. The new ones were a cash cow to make money off an existing brand name by putting a bunch of shit on the side of Taco Bell cups and selling crappy hong kong plastic action figures at a 2,000% markup. The Old trilogy is timeless and inspiring. Episodes 1-3 are a poorly written, poorly acted mess who's target audience were people not yet in high school.

To be honest Skywalker, I teach kids between the ages of 3-12, and THEY don't like episodes 1-3.

How old are you exactly?

Wildboy said:

Skywalker, quit the name calling. Saying that episodes 1-3 were made to appeal to the under 10 crowd is a god damned fact.

The original trilogy attracted people of all ages. The new ones were a cash cow to make money off an existing brand name by putting a bunch of shit on the side of Taco Bell cups and selling crappy hong kong plastic action figures at a 2,000% markup. The Old trilogy is timeless and inspiring. Episodes 1-3 are a poorly written, poorly acted mess who's target audience were people not yet in high school.

To be honest Skywalker, I teach kids between the ages of 3-12, and THEY don't like episodes 1-3.

How old are you exactly?

You are speaking as if the original trilogy was some type of "pure" art that was void of any HUGE commerical/pop push. That is dead wrong.

The original trilogy was marketed just as heavily as the prequels with fast food cups and crappy hong kong action figures. In fact, the original Star Wars is the movie that basically invented present day movie marketing/tie ins.

Example A:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXHzQlJbnXI

Example B:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMvynvc3UPA

Also, nothing about the prequels is as embarassing as the Holiday Special Not even Jar Jar Binks. Talk about crass commercial sell out shit.

If you don't like the new trilogy, that's fine. However, all of the Star Wars movies are geared towards a younger crowd. You can argue that Return of The Jedi was designed for an " audience of all ages" , but it was for kids. Puppets and Ewoks brother.

Coversely, Revenge of the Sith was hardly designed for the 10 and under crowd. Check the rating. The darkest moments of any Star Wars movie happen in Episode III.

As for me, I am 32. Yep, I like the original Trilogy better. Mostly because it's the one I grew up with. I am also a teacher (high school). Most of my kids like the new Trilogy better and refer to the Original as "the old ones". You say Skywalker and my students think Anakin before Luke. You think I like that? Not really.

The point I was making is that Lucas is an artist that continues to push the state of the art. He is much more comparable to Michael Jackson. You can dislike both of them, and their output. However, to dismiss what they have done as "kid stuff" is ignorant.

Lastly, if someone makes a comment like this: "Most bona fide art doesn't appeal to 8-year-olds." They are a snob. Some of the best art appeals to children. You said it yourself with your love for the Original Trilogy.

[Edited 5/11/12 13:24pm]

[Edited 5/11/12 13:26pm]

Wildboy said:

hollywooddove said:

Wildboy said:

Skywalker, quit the name calling. Saying that episodes 1-3 were made to appeal to the under 10 crowd is a god damned fact.

The original trilogy attracted people of all ages. The new ones were a cash cow to make money off an existing brand name by putting a bunch of shit on the side of Taco Bell cups and selling crappy hong kong plastic action figures at a 2,000% markup. The Old trilogy is timeless and inspiring. Episodes 1-3 are a poorly written, poorly acted mess who's target audience were people not yet in high school.

To be honest Skywalker, I teach kids between the ages of 3-12, and THEY don't like episodes 1-3.

How old are you exactly?

Lucas simply lost himself more in the how of his work instead of just having fun. The man used to be an artist, now he is a business. That always equal rape.

I disagree. He's always been about business. Look into how he financed and secure the rights for the Original Star Wars, and his companies. He has ALWAYS been a ferocious business man.

Furthermore, Lucas has been quoted as saying that making the first Star Wars film was, arguably, the least fun experience of his life.

[Edited 5/11/12 13:28pm]

skywalker said:

hollywooddove said:

skywalker said:

I disagree he's always been about business. Look into how he financed and secure the rights for the Original Star Wars, and his companies. He has ALWAYS been a ferocious business man. Furthermore, Lucas has been quoted as saying that making the first Star Wars film was, arguably, the least fun experience of his life.

[Edited 5/11/12 13:27pm]

As I recall, from interviews, George was more concerned with having no one else tamper with his vision of his work after havingTHX and American graffiti chopped and edited by someone else. The business thing was a side effect. Lucas even once told his father he NEVER wanted to be a business man.

Sure, but again...look at how he innovated by marketing the first film. The very fact that he retained liscensing rights for toys/merchandise/etc. shows you how shrewd he was. No one saw a real value in merchandising based on a movie because, outside of Disney, no one really made money off movie tie ins until Star Wars (aka Lucas' business sense) changed everything.

That's why it really astounds me when people accuse him of being "too commercial" now by selling Star Wars stuff. That has been there before teh first film was even released.

When the Original trilogy came out you had grown people stand in line for an hour to see Star Wars, see the movie, then get back in fucking line to see the movie again cause it was one of the most amazing sights ever put to film.

Nobody went to see episode 1 twice in a row.

Or at least no one who doesn't suffer from boarder line retardation.

Episode 3 dark? The stuff on the walls in Jabba's palace is darker then anything in Ep3. Yeah, it was really dark when Vader said "NNOOOOOOOO!!" ha ha ah ha That was what was SOOO wrong with the movie, it was supposed to be all dark and bad ass but Vader came off as a whining Pansy. That movie is such a piece of shit.

Haiden Christianson really is a terrible, terrible actor. I just don't get why Natalie Portman looked so bland in those movies (which she has stated were the low point in her career).

Skywalker, you can go on saying this and that about Episodes 1-3, about how they sold X amount of tickets and action figures, but you are in a minority of 1 if you think these things are anything but shit.

BTW, the original star wars had NOTHING in the way of marketing and tie-ins like movies do today because promotional machinery like that did not exist yet. Star Wars was such a sleeper hit that they DIDN'T make toys in time for Christmas and you could actually buy an IOU screen with pics of the toys on it and you would get the toys in the mail between Feb and June: http://www.youtube.com/wa...5cK5srUNn4

Yeah, that commercial really looks like the top of the line promotional stuff from today. Give me a fucking break. Skywalker, I hope you work at ILM, otherwise there is zero reason to be as retardedly in love as you are with Episodes 1-3. There is such a thing as opinion, but when one person says that rat piss tastes better then a fresh vanilla milkshake, they lose their right to have an opinion.

the way I see it, Prince is the one who controlls ALL the elements to create a product

Lucas is the one who gives ideas/freedom to other people (professionals) who work together to create the product.

The main problem is that his ideas for the prequels were lame or underdeveloped, lol. Even Revenge of the Sith (by far the best prequel) is flawed...and he should have known that he's a tedious director...and a pompous writer...

and Prince (probably after 96) should have realized that he "might" have needed someone behind to help him (new band, new collaborators a la Wendy&Lisa, a new deal with a big label, or a manager/A&R guy)

so basically both Lucas and Prince lost their natural strengths, hence the "decadence"...

Wildboy said:

When the Original trilogy came out you had grown people stand in line for an hour to see Star Wars, see the movie, then get back in fucking line to see the movie again cause it was one of the most amazing sights ever put to film.

Nobody went to see episode 1 twice in a row.

Or at least no one who doesn't suffer from boarder line retardation.

Episode 3 dark? The stuff on the walls in Jabba's palace is darker then anything in Ep3. Yeah, it was really dark when Vader said "NNOOOOOOOO!!" ha ha ah ha That was what was SOOO wrong with the movie, it was supposed to be all dark and bad ass but Vader came off as a whining Pansy. That movie is such a piece of shit.

Haiden Christianson really is a terrible, terrible actor. I just don't get why Natalie Portman looked so bland in those movies (which she has stated were the low point in her career).

Skywalker, you can go on saying this and that about Episodes 1-3, about how they sold X amount of tickets and action figures, but you are in a minority of 1 if you think these things are anything but shit.

BTW, the original star wars had NOTHING in the way of marketing and tie-ins like movies do today because promotional machinery like that did not exist yet. Star Wars was such a sleeper hit that they DIDN'T make toys in time for Christmas and you could actually buy an IOU screen with pics of the toys on it and you would get the toys in the mail between Feb and June: http://www.youtube.com/wa...5cK5srUNn4

Yeah, that commercial really looks like the top of the line promotional stuff from today. Give me a fucking break. Skywalker, I hope you work at ILM, otherwise there is zero reason to be as retardedly in love as you are with Episodes 1-3. There is such a thing as opinion, but when one person says that rat piss tastes better then a fresh vanilla milkshake, they lose their right to have an opinion.

you're way too radical dude. Not exactly a troll, but you write like someone who isn't even looking for feedback, someone who just wants to post a rant/immovable opinion

Wildboy said:

When the Original trilogy came out you had grown people stand in line for an hour to see Star Wars, see the movie, then get back in fucking line to see the movie again cause it was one of the most amazing sights ever put to film.

Nobody went to see episode 1 twice in a row.

A movie doesn't become one of the top grossing films ever with out repeat business. Guess there are a lot of "boarder" line retarded people out there. The movie grossed more than any Star Wars film besides the original. Not that it's "better". But it did.

Episode 3 dark? The stuff on the walls in Jabba's palace is darker then anything in Ep3. Yeah, it was really dark when Vader said "NNOOOOOOOO!!" ha ha ah ha That was what was SOOO wrong with the movie, it was supposed to be all dark and bad ass but Vader came off as a whining Pansy. That movie is such a piece of shit.

But you still saw it. So, only boarder line retarded people go see Episode I twice, but you went to both of it's sequels? Come on.

Haiden Christianson really is a terrible, terrible actor. I just don't get why Natalie Portman looked so bland in those movies (which she has stated were the low point in her career).

Skywalker, you can go on saying this and that about Episodes 1-3, about how they sold X amount of tickets and action figures, but you are in a minority of 1 if you think these things are anything but shit.

Fine if I am in the minority. Each movie was a huge success. You cannot dismiss that...regardless of how you feel about the films. Opinions are like assholes. If mine is different than yours that's fine. Millions of people love the Transformer films, I didn't. I am not going to call them names for loving the movies.

BTW, the original star wars had NOTHING in the way of marketing and tie-ins like movies do today because promotional machinery like that did not exist yet. Star Wars was such a sleeper hit that they DIDN'T make toys in time for Christmas and you could actually buy an IOU screen with pics of the toys on it and you would get the toys in the mail between Feb and June: http://www.youtube.com/wa...5cK5srUNn4

It didn't exist because George Lucas invented the machinery. I am well aware of the toys not being made in time, but that fact is they were made. It was the birth of modern movie merchandising. It was hype. The movie sold the toys/etc. and the toys sold the movie. Keep in mind that Star Wars was still in the theaters when the toys came out, and was re-released in the years between.

Yeah, that commercial really looks like the top of the line promotional stuff from today. Give me a fucking break. Skywalker, I hope you work at ILM, otherwise there is zero reason to be as retardedly in love as you are with Episodes 1-3. There is such a thing as opinion, but when one person says that rat piss tastes better then a fresh vanilla milkshake, they lose their right to have an opinion.

You are too kind. I gladly drink the rat piss with a smile. I love all of the Star Wars films...like millions of others. I sure the hell didn't make those movies box office smashes by myself so I imagine that I am not alone. Don't care if I am.

Lastly, I like how you completely avoided the Holiday Special issue. Still the low point of all things Star Wars.

[Edited 5/11/12 14:35pm]

[Edited 5/11/12 19:00pm]

JoeTyler said:

the way I see it, Prince is the one who controlls ALL the elements to create a product

Lucas is the one who gives ideas/freedom to other people (professionals) who work together to create the product.

The main problem is that his ideas for the prequels were lame or underdeveloped, lol. Even Revenge of the Sith (by far the best prequel) is flawed...and he should have known that he's a tedious director...and a pompous writer...

and Prince (probably after 96) should have realized that he "might" have needed someone behind to help him (new band, new collaborators a la Wendy&Lisa, a new deal with a big label, or a manager/A&R guy)

so basically both Lucas and Prince lost their natural strengths, hence the "decadence"...

See this is where Prince and Lucas are very different. The creative process.

I think Prince works best by himself with a chip on his shoulder and something to prove.

I think Lucas should have not directed the prequels and kind of "ghost directed" or used whatever process he used for Empire and Jedi.

JoeTyler said:

Wildboy said:

When the Original trilogy came out you had grown people stand in line for an hour to see Star Wars, see the movie, then get back in fucking line to see the movie again cause it was one of the most amazing sights ever put to film.

Nobody went to see episode 1 twice in a row.

Or at least no one who doesn't suffer from boarder line retardation.

Episode 3 dark? The stuff on the walls in Jabba's palace is darker then anything in Ep3. Yeah, it was really dark when Vader said "NNOOOOOOOO!!" ha ha ah ha That was what was SOOO wrong with the movie, it was supposed to be all dark and bad ass but Vader came off as a whining Pansy. That movie is such a piece of shit.

Haiden Christianson really is a terrible, terrible actor. I just don't get why Natalie Portman looked so bland in those movies (which she has stated were the low point in her career).

Skywalker, you can go on saying this and that about Episodes 1-3, about how they sold X amount of tickets and action figures, but you are in a minority of 1 if you think these things are anything but shit.

BTW, the original star wars had NOTHING in the way of marketing and tie-ins like movies do today because promotional machinery like that did not exist yet. Star Wars was such a sleeper hit that they DIDN'T make toys in time for Christmas and you could actually buy an IOU screen with pics of the toys on it and you would get the toys in the mail between Feb and June: http://www.youtube.com/wa...5cK5srUNn4

Yeah, that commercial really looks like the top of the line promotional stuff from today. Give me a fucking break. Skywalker, I hope you work at ILM, otherwise there is zero reason to be as retardedly in love as you are with Episodes 1-3. There is such a thing as opinion, but when one person says that rat piss tastes better then a fresh vanilla milkshake, they lose their right to have an opinion.

you're way too radical dude. Not exactly a troll, but you write like someone who isn't even looking for feedback, someone who just wants to post a rant/immovable opinion

Agreed.

skywalker said:

JoeTyler said:

the way I see it, Prince is the one who controlls ALL the elements to create a product

Lucas is the one who gives ideas/freedom to other people (professionals) who work together to create the product.

The main problem is that his ideas for the prequels were lame or underdeveloped, lol. Even Revenge of the Sith (by far the best prequel) is flawed...and he should have known that he's a tedious director...and a pompous writer...

and Prince (probably after 96) should have realized that he "might" have needed someone behind to help him (new band, new collaborators a la Wendy&Lisa, a new deal with a big label, or a manager/A&R guy)

so basically both Lucas and Prince lost their natural strengths, hence the "decadence"...

See this is where Prince and Lucas are very different. The creative process.

I think Prince works best by himself with a chip on his shoulder and something to prove.

I think Lucas should have not directed the prequels and kind of "ghost directed" or used whatever process he used for Empire and Jedi.

hmm, if we think about it, Lucas kinda directed 5 of the 6 SW movies, because it's public domain that he "ghost directed" Jedi

if I'm not mistaken, he didn't direct Empire because he was "artistically" exhausted and focused on the production/merchandise/promotion of the whole thing instead...

BTW, I'm pretty sure that JoeTyler and Skywalker are the same person.

And btw, I didn't watch RotS all the way through nor did I watch AotC all the way through, I caught glimpses of them flipping around the TV, and saw more then enough (Yoda saying "Around the survivors, a perimeter create" ha ha ha ha Lucas lost his mind)

And the reason that Episodes 1-3 made more then previous star wars films has to do with the fact that the price of a movie ticket in 1977 was about $2.35, not to mention international movie sales weren't even close to what they are now. Adjusted for inflation Episodes 1-3 don't even BEGIN to scratch the surface of the original trilogy, and you either A) already know this and are trying to pad your argument with misleading statistics, or B) actually can't figure something like this out and are genuinely reatarded (which would not be surprising given your praise of Episode1-3)

The way I figure it, on the strength of the original star wars movie, Lucas got to make 2 huge sequels. Had Lucas first produced episode one, there would NOT have been a sequel and anyone with a set of eyes knows it. You know you're in trouble when The Knights of the Old Republic video game has a better plot then Ep 1-3.

And btw, I DIDN'T

Wildboy said:

BTW, I'm pretty sure that JoeTyler and Skywalker are the same person.

And btw, I DIDN'T

we're homies

Wildboy said:

You know you're in trouble when The Knights of the Old Republic video game has a better plot then Ep 1-3.

OHHHHHHHH we can finally agree on something. 00s videogames were, by far, like 1000000 times better than any 00s sci-fi/action movie

I knew i smelled a rat

they've both got dodgy beards

American Graffiti - Graffiti Bridge