New topic
Printable
|
1. Purple Rain and Star Wars: Not "cult" classics. Cult classics are less known niche albums/films. Star Wars and Purple Rain are both the epitome of "popular" and well known.
2. The first bolded point. You never get another 1st time. Star Wars sequels/prequels were never going be as "original" or fresh as the first movie. Read Roger Ebert's review on this, it spells out this point better than I can: "New Power slide...." |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
no ... star wars and purple rain are just both very successful cult classics
nobody seriously ranks them among the greatest movies of all time, except for their cult followings
as in good movies not as in best money makers
otherwise they are considered drivel by people who love great movies
but the fact is that there is much more to these movies than meets the eye
there is enough wrong with them that its hard to take seriously
but there is so much right with them that it did not matter
none the less they are both in fact .. cult classics for this reason
as for reviews summing up perspective ..
i already posted this but i'm pretty sure no one watched it ..
its the red letter media review of phantom .. they do all the prequels but this will get you started in understanding why star wars fans HATE the prequels and wish they were never made
http://redlettermedia.com...om-menace/
2 parts and they are long so as to truly educate you .. i hope to see you on the on the other side of sanity | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
Purple Rain (the movie) may be a cult classic (an academy award winning cult classic?) However, the album is definitely not simply a "cult classic".
You are wrong on the original Star Wars not being considered one of the greatest films of all time. Surely it is. It was nominated for best picture and won a slew of Academy Awards. Now, I am not suggesting that it is routinely in discussion with The Godfather, or Citizen Kane, but it is viewed by most as being a watershed moment in cinema.
Again, to call it a cult classic is laughable. Surely, there is a massive cult of Star Wars fans, but the films themselves are too massively popular to be considered a "cult film" like, Rocky Horror Picture Show, or Donnie Darko. The original Star Wars film is constantly ranked on many such (serious) all time great lists. Here are just a few well respected "greatest film" lists. These lists (especially the American Film Institute) are about as serious as you can get.
http://www.afi.com/100years/movies.aspx
http://rogerebert.suntime...s_first100
http://entertainment.time...-wars-1977
wikipedia: In 1989, the U.S. National Film Registry of the Library of Congress selected (Star Wars) as a "culturally, historically, or aesthetically important" film.
I have watched this review years ago. They are so long because they are a review created by a Star Wars fanboy. Not that there are not valid opinions in this, but only someone obsessed with Star Wars (for better or worse) would even bother to create such a review.
Do you think this (longwinded) fan review is any more legit than a positive review from an actual movie critic? [Edited 5/22/12 9:25am] [Edited 5/22/12 9:55am] "New Power slide...." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
You know, you may be right. I was using the info at this link:
http://boxofficemojo.com/...justed.htm
I guess my original statement was based on the the fact that most of the 5 movies from the last 20 years are ranking on the lower side of the top 20 with the exception of Titanic (#5). The other spots taken are numbers 14, 16, 18, and 20. Perhaps a more math minded person can further analyze the statistic. A weak claim by me, I apologize for not looking into it more.
Again, a "massive dissappointment to almost everyone who saw them." How can that ever be proven or disproven? Who are we asking? People that we know? People that you know? The internet majority? Mass media?
I mean, if you look at the reviews, the prequels films shared similar mixed reviews that the Star Wars sequels (Empire and Jedi) received. Many of these negative reviews (for Empire and Jedi) also poked at the clunky dialog, limited acting, "the special effects over plot" problems. For every negative review you can find on any Star Wars film, I can show you a positive one. Besides the very first Star Wars movie, the sequels/prequels have all received mixed reviews.
Again, all Star Wars films are a bit notorious for the clunking dialog. Even the originals. Harrison Ford's famous quote to Geroge Lucas is that "You can type this shit, but you cannot say it." I don't disagree with you, but it is a weakness of all Star Wars films.
[Edited 5/22/12 9:28am] "New Power slide...." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
The Orignal Trilogy didn't have ANY clunking Dialoug, it had some great lines:
Leia: I Love You.... Han: I Know
Leia: I like NICE men Han: I am nice men Leia: No you're not Kiss
And in the first movie, when ObiWan says to Luke: "Your father fought in the Clone Wars" at that time the prequels weren't even an idea, and 'Clone Wars' is actually just a throw away line, but it brings up SO many awesome images in your head. What were the clone wars? Were there cloned Jedi's? Obi Wans name has yet to be spelled out, is his name OB-1 because he's a clone? The strong script and straight forward narrative story telling are what made the original trilogy so great.
Unlike the prequels, that brought us:
ANAKIN PADME ANAKIN PADME
What did she die of? Oh yeah, the medical robot says she died of a broken heart! ha ha ha ha ha [Edited 5/22/12 10:11am] "Prince doesn't have verbal diarrhea, he has studio diarrhea...." Allen Leeds | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
I agree that these are great lines. Harrison Ford went above George Lucas's with the director to get these said.
Wait a minute? Are you quoting lines and plot points from a movie you've never seen? You said you never saw Revenge of the Sith. How do you know so much? "New Power slide...." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
i was refering to purple rain the movie not the record
and yes i do think a fan review after many years of thought and disappointment after the media blitz and decades of huge anticipation have worn off is far more credible than some dip who writes for a magazine that makes tons of ad money from the industry they are supposedly reviewing
and most importantly ..
i agree with the fan boy .. so therefore his review is more credible
just like i agree that prequels made a lot of money .. they did
but to say they are equal to the original star wars in any other way is simply absurd
for a dude with such a great avatar on a prince site i hate to be at odds
lets just leave it at .. "there is good in him still"
lucas and prince turned into darth for a couple decades .. so be it .. destroying everything good in their worlds .. still waiting for their respective redemption scene .. i've sat thru the ewoks jar jar tony m and purple yodas .. lets take off the mask i wanna see the real prince lucas live again .. even if its a dying gasp of an apology ..
wildboys post summed it up well .. the clone wars were a passing diolog filler .. completely unneccesary to star wars saga yet they turned it into 3 completely useless movies ..
just as prince post wb output is completely unneccessary and only proves to diminish the value of his legend and the importance of his classic work
in both cases neither added ANYTHING to their legacy or contributed ANYTHING even worth the time it took to listen or watch ..
job one for any artist movie maker or musician is to bring something worthwhile to the senses and neither did .. in fact .. they offended most of the populations senses with what they brought ..
could have been just mediocre like say an indy 4 or a diamonds and pearls .. but no .. they had to jump the shark completely and repeatedly .. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
TrevorAyer said:
Well, I appreciate the honesty. This fan boy prefers the original trilogy, but also really dig the prequels too.
I don't think the prequels are equal to the original Star Wars. I don't think that they are as strong on their own, and that they benefit greatly from viewing/knowing the original trilogy. They also have the burden of not being "the first" Star Wars films. However, I don't agree with the sentiment that they are complete garbage or that no one likes them.
I think there are many things in the prequels that are better than the original trilogy. However, the sum of it's parts isn't as great. I think the prequels add depth to the originals and make the entire thing more of an actual saga.
Different strokes for different folks I guess.
I don't think an artist creating new work can ever tarnish previous work. I just don't buy into that line of thinking. Prince could have recorded 9 hours of farting after Purple Rain, and the legacy of Prince's Purple Rain would still remain intact with all of it's greatness. Darling Nikki would still be in the hotel lobby and Lisa would still be asking Wendy if the water is warm enough. Sequels always have a rough go at topping the original. Follow ups to great albums are always judged extra harshly.
If you don't enjoy something like Revenge of the Sith or Musicology, etc. that is your cross to bear. You stopped being a fan of an artist at a current point. That's all there is to it. You can point fingers at George Lucas, or Prince for not "having it" anymore. You can accuse the people who are still fans of the current output as having no taste, but the truth is..you aren't into it. Plenty of people enjoy it. Quickly these kind of conversations devolve into a "back in my day music was good music" type of stances.
Some people fell off the Star Wars bandwagon with the green muppet and the teddy bears. Some were done with Prince when he did his black and white french film. So what?
Ultimately, what resonates and moves you is really up to you. Be a fan of what you want. I applaud people for being passionate about the shit they love and the shit they don't. However, it becomes a slippery slope when people start judging others for liking what they like, or when folks start making giant sweeping generalizations that are actually just personal viewpoint.
Lastly, thanks for the kind words about my avatar. Vader's silhouette is awesome.
[Edited 5/22/12 13:49pm] "New Power slide...." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
You may not think that the prequels tarnish the star wars legacy, or that 'Everybody Loves Me' doesn't tarnish Princes legacy, but there are a LOT of people who do, and that isn't there "cross to bear" that's the opinion of a LARGE group of people.
I think the fact that there is such a HUGE proportion of people who love the original trilogy and think the prequels are crap (maybe even a bigger percentage then people who actually like the prequels) sort of speaks for itself.
There are very few people who like the prequels better then the originals, and I've never heard of anyone who thinks the prequels are great and the originals are crap. However, the FACT remains SOOOO many people who say the prequels were disappointed. "Prince doesn't have verbal diarrhea, he has studio diarrhea...." Allen Leeds | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
Listen, I am not saying that there are not people that don't like the prequels (or Prince's new stuff). I fully admitted that I prefer the original trilogy a bit more. However, you are completely overstating your position (hating the prequels and loving the originals) as everyone else's position.
1. First of all, you have no real idea/facts/or numbers to support any of your sweeping generalizations of "huge proportions" etc. There are likely plenty of people that don't like Star Wars at all, and think they are all crap. There are likely plenty of people that love all of 'em. You have shown no evidence either way. I never made the claim that people love the prequels, but hate the originals. I am just making the case that most Star Wars fans don't draw the huge dividing line that you do.
All you have provided is secondhand word of people (kids) you know. Also you have provided box office numbers that are so astronomically high it actually hurts your argument.
2. The vast majority of the population didn't buy Around The World in a Day. The masses that dug Purple Rain, stayed away from the very next album. However, you still think it's great/important/etc. Whether the rest of the world liked it doesn't mean it's shit. You then make claims like people just didn't get it . This is a hypocritical stance.
[Edited 5/22/12 16:58pm] "New Power slide...." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I didn't say I liked ATWIAD. And those are two different situations. ATWIAD was meant to be artistic and inaccessible. The Prequels were meant to make 5 Billion dollars (which they didn't). That's the difference between a success and a failure.
It's not just me who hates the prequels. Those low ratings on rotten tomatoes and all the golden raspberries it won aren't up for debate. Not to mention the anecdotal word of mouth on them is terrible. "Prince doesn't have verbal diarrhea, he has studio diarrhea...." Allen Leeds | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
You are still trying to portray the Prequels as commercial failures? You don't even have to like them, but to call them commercial failures is just lying.
Fun stuff: It's not just me who loves the prequels. The box office records they broke, and the dollars they earned aren't up for debate either. We haven't even talked about the home video/dvd sales of the prequels. For movies that "everyone hated" each prequel was a top selling DVD in the year it was released. You weren't far off when you were jokingly counting in the billions. There just isn't great divide between the prequels/originals in terms of commercial money earned.
You think George Lucas counts Prequel vs Original dollars? You think Darth Maul action figures didn't make up for the low selling Jar Jar figures?
You can speculate on how much money The prequels "should have" earned, but that speculative reasoning is ridiculous. Check it out:
By this (your) reasoning, Empire Strikes Back "should have" made more money that Star Wars. Even following the one of the biggest successes ever, and having a massive marketing campaign behind it, Empire didn't make as much as the original. Nor was Empire as well received critically. Nor did it receive as many awards/nominations. Now, by your reasoning, was Empire a shit movie and a "commercial and artistic failure"? Of course not, because you loved the hell out of it...even if many didn't like it as well as the original.
Btw....Anecdotal word of mouth is the unprovable bulk of your entire argument. [Edited 5/22/12 20:05pm] "New Power slide...." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
What about Sign O' The Times then? Or Parade? Prince was trying to keep his sales modest, was he?
Also, are you still claiming that The Phantom Menace is the only prequel that you've seen? [Edited 5/22/12 20:19pm] "New Power slide...." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
By MY reasoning? Are you crazy? Is that your problem? We've already talked about how the movies sold far LESS then they were supposed to. That is IRREFUTABLE at this point. And there is a clear difference in sales between the two groups of movies, as the first set of movies made twice as much.
Furthermore, I looked up these DVD sales figures you speak of, and it seems that if you factor in VHS sales as well (the medium that the original trilogy was sold on) The Original Trilogy outsold the prequel trilogy about 15:1. OUCH! THAT MUST HURT REAL BAD
Now, obviously they have had a much longer time to sell the Original Trilogy, but it's not like the Prequels came out yesterday. PhanMen is a decade old, and it's current sales are extremely low. You know what's funny. They majority of it's sales come from the complete box set that people get because they want the original trilogy. Meanwhile the Original Trilogy box set outsold the Prequel trilogy the last three years in a row. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it
What I don't get, is the second I read about you quoting DVD sales figures, my mind immediately went to the fact that the DVDs for the original would sell more (even 35 years later). The fact that you didn't realise this was an obvious train of thought and a bad argument that would backfire on you baffles me.
Stick to teaching first grade, the debate team isn't your strong suit "Prince doesn't have verbal diarrhea, he has studio diarrhea...." Allen Leeds | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
And yes, PhanMen is the only one I've seen in intirety. If you google "Revenge of the Sith bad Dialogue" you are rewarded with this http://www.youtube.com/wa...ddaZhaAxBY
Which tells me all i need to know about the films. I was also flipping around the TV and watch 3 min of AotC. It was long enough to hear Yoda say "Around the Survivors, a perimeter create" that was when I realised it was as bad as everyone else was saying.
"Prince doesn't have verbal diarrhea, he has studio diarrhea...." Allen Leeds | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
Yes I am crazy. That's why I have been claiming that you were several different users at this website. That's why my comments were snipped several times by the mods. And that is why I am debating endlessly about movies I have never actually ever seen. Oh wait...
You've talked about how the movies sold less than they "were supposed to". Please go back to my comments about how much Empire Strikes Back was "supposed" to make. You avoided it. You left it alone because it hurts your argument.
Just curious. Where did you look up these sales figures? Source?
Listen, I am not comparing the sales of the Prequels to the Originals. Maybe this is what is causing confusion? I am comparing the sales of the Prequels to all the other movies of it's era/year/time frame.
Again, my point has never been that the prequels are better/more well respected/more loved than the originals.
My point is that the prequels are loved and popular in their own right. That a shit ton of people went to see them. That they were bix office monsters. That they helped usher in a new era of digital film making. You keep trying to push this original vs prequel thing...I love them all. So what are you trying to prove? That you can watch a youtube clip and 3minutes of a movie on cable and make a sound, well thought out, judgment? [Edited 5/22/12 21:16pm] "New Power slide...." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Yes, the 3 minute clip is enough. If I watch them, then you'll say, "well, YOU saw them, so people DID go to see them" quit trying to box me into a corner with this 7th grade stuff. You're not smart enough for it
and I think the 5 different people on this thread who all think you're out of your mind might start to convince you that these movies weren't quite as popular as you thought. And were box office disapointments that didn't make as much as they were supposed too. And were lampooned by critics.
And if you want to go down the road of who ignores things that hurt their arguments, you have yet to speak about the Golden Raspberries the films recieved, or the lack of Oscars (despite half the people in the academy worked on these films), or the low sales of action figures during the Prequel trilogy.
As for the Empire stikes back, it made about as much as AotC and RotS COMBINED while being made for only a fraction of the cost. So I would say yes, that was a success.
"Prince doesn't have verbal diarrhea, he has studio diarrhea...." Allen Leeds | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Who said that they were meant to make 5 billion?
Not that it matters, they've made 2.5 billion at the box office and cost far less than that to make, so that must make them successful?
From this site: http://www.the-numbers.com
The prequels each had a production budget od $115,000,000, so $345,000,000 to make them all. To date the box office is $2,500,000,000. That's an excess of over $2 billion dollars. Whether they're shit or not is personal opinion, but I can't for the life of me see how you argue them a failure. It's nonsense. RIP  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Here is where I think you're being disingenuous. I've lost count of the amount of disparaging comments I've heard about those prequels. I've already cited several examples and I could easily bore you with many more. You've admitted yourself that they are less respected than the original trilogy so clearly there's a part of you that knows the truth, but the fan-boy in you is trying desperately to deny it.
This is very similar to the denial you've shown about Prince's declining reputation. The overwhelming majority think that his golden period was in the 80s. Incredibly, you've gone to great lengths to try and prove that this is not true. In your mind his recent output is just as loved and respected as his older stuff. Such a disconnection to reality tells me that you are far too emotionally invested in these idols of yours. It's leading you to play all kinds of tricks on yourself.
There are many wonderful things in this life besides Prince and Star Wars. If you spent more time on them then you might not need to work so hard on maintaining your denial. The truth will set you free. Give it a try, you might like it. “The man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them, inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.”
- Thomas Jefferson | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
wildboy? response? "New Power slide...." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
I know that there is a huge portion of the population (maybe a larger portion on the internet) that thinks the prequels severely pale in comparison to the originals. My argument is (and has been) that there is also a large portion of the population that loves the prequels as well. It is too easy just to say the movies were shit and that no one liked them. The box office numbers clearly indicate otherwise. Movies don't have the box office numbers that the prequels did, if someone wasn't into them. In my experience, many people don't draw a huge line of distinction between the two trilogies.
As I have said, it has also been my experience that many younger people prefer the prequels....a fact that is much to my chagrin. I am a teacher, and I find myself constantly on the opposite end of this discussion with them. When it comes to my students and the Star Wars movies they grew up with, I am often having to defend the original trilogy.
You mistake me. I am not trying to show/prove what the masses think. I know what popular opinion is on Prince and Star Wars. I am just saying that popular opinion doesn't equate to actual quality.
Do you think Prince's most popular album is his best? You think the movie that won best picture, or made the most at the box office is, in fact, the one of best quality?
Thanks for being patronizing. I really appreciate the kind words. [Edited 5/23/12 7:22am] "New Power slide...." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
^^^Exactly
Skywalker. I already responded to these in previous posts talking about how despite coming in with the strongest brand name in history and a level of marketing that didn't exist in the late 70s and early 80s, and having more advanced special effects technology, the Prequels managed not to capture the imaginations of audiences like the original and that's why despite costing twice as much to produce (adjusted for inflation) the Prequels only raked in half the dough.
I also responded to this with the Mariah Carey gold record comment a few posts ago. If a brand new band coming up gets a gold record, they throw a huge party and freak out! Now, if Mariah Carey brings out a new album, and that album goes gold (as opposed to Multi Platinum), it's going to be a HUGE failure. People will lose their jobs and Mariah Carey will love star power.
You see, a REAL hit is a movie like Big Fat Greek Wedding. Costing only 5 million to produce, the movie pulled in 370 million dollars. This is a movie with little or no marketing. There were no Big Fat Taco bell tie ins (though that would be ironic). Now, AotC brought in more money then Big Fat Greek Wedding, but success needs to be considered relative. Greek wedding had a lot of no name and B actors and was made for the cost of a few upper scale houses. The flip side is ANY movie produced by George Lucas with the Star Wars name on it should be a top ten movie AUTOMATICALLY. Like Mariah Carey, if that bitch don't go mulit platinum, it's a failure and a disappointment. And just like Mariah Carey, George Lucas gave up art in favor of soulless crap that is made purely for commercial success. The only difference is the MC's last album DID go multi platinum and The Prequels did the equivalent of going Platinum 2 or 3 times. That's a mere knock on the door to true financial greatness.
While these sums of money might sound like a lot to people who make $100K a year, in the world of hollywood big wigs, these movies undersold, and were a FINANCIAL AND ARTISTIC DISAPPOINTMENT
Skywalker, you said you were at a school, are you SURE you're one of the teachers and not one of the students? Cause the not overly sharp 5th grader I help tutor could come up with better arguments then that one.
If you're gonna make a point of trying to call me out, at least make sure it's a question I haven't already answered in depth. You seem to have memory problems. "Prince doesn't have verbal diarrhea, he has studio diarrhea...." Allen Leeds | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
1. You take the Golden Raspberry Awards seriously? 2. Still waiting on where you got your home video/dvd sales stats from. (Also, can you show me where you are getting your action figure/toy sales stats from?)
3. You avoided my question about Empire Strikes Back:
Despite being massively marketed. Empire made approx half of what the original Star Wars did. It won less awards, was nominated for less awards, and was less critically acclaimed...unlike A New Hope it received mixed reviews.
Now, would you label/consider Empire Strikes Back a commercial and artistic failure?
I ask you this, because this is the same reasoning/evidence you are judging the prequels on.
[Edited 5/23/12 7:42am] "New Power slide...." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I already responded to the Emipre Stikes back, read my posts BRO
Also, being nominated for a Golden Raspberry (especially best picture) is a sign that a movie is complete crap. While obviously not the oscars, it does reflect on the lack of quality of a picture.
Dvd and action figure sales can be found on google, and at the time of PhanMen release there were numerous news stories about that lack of action figure sales and what Lucas was going to do with them.
"Prince doesn't have verbal diarrhea, he has studio diarrhea...." Allen Leeds | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
I did read your post about Empire.
You (again) compared it to the prequels. I am asking you to compare it's numbers/acclaim to the success of the previous Star Wars film. You have not done that.
You didn't answer why it made less money than Star Wars, you didn't answer why it was less critically acclaimed, and you didn't address why is was not up for as many awards.
All of these are things that you use as evidence against the prequels, but most of these claims could be leveled at the Star Wars sequels as well. Does this mean the sequels are shit movies?
The Razzies are a spoof. Do you not get that? They are voted on in the same manner as the People's Choice awards (which the prequels won plenty of btw). They are not a legitimate counterpoint to the Oscars. Razzie's are like MAD magazine.
Can't provide a source on your number/claims? Google it? You are just making things up? Google just told me that Darth Maul was the best selling Star Wars toy this year. Great. The reason you are telling me to "google" it is because you don't actually have any of these stats. Be honest.
I dare you to give me a site/source on your DVD and action figure stats. You don't have any.
[Edited 5/23/12 9:46am] "New Power slide...." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Really, cause I showed that it made as much money as 2 of your precious prequels. And as for this whole "opened to Mixed reviews thing" you found on wikipedia, I've been looking around at their sources and this seems sketchy at best. From what I looked up off that wiki page (I followed the sources at the bottom of the page). I'm going to go look to see if you changes that wiki page recently. It was probably you who made those changes. Meanwhile sites like IMDB and rotten tomatoes rate it in the top percentage. An artistic and financial breakthrough, that helped usher in a new age of special effects, unlike your prequels.
DUDE, GOOGLE IT
And the Darth Maul action figure is selling this year like hot cakes because he is a character in Clone Wars, which as I have stated many times is WAY better then the prequels. Also, I find it funny that you insist that everyone else put up links showing every source, when you yourself never list a single source, and use the word FACT all in caps when it comes to your opinions.
The Razzies are totally legit, and I find it funny that you say they are voted on just like the peoples choice awards, cause that means LOTS OF PEOPLE AGREE the prequels suck, something you have denied, saying it's just me and a couple of old people off the org. Also, the Razzies are done in a deliberate low class way as a satire. Every year the Golden Raspberry award nails it to big budget failure crap that Hollywood is trying to pat itself on the back for the very next day. That's the whole point. To say that being nominated for a golden raspberry doesn't mean anything is like me saying winning an oscar doesn't mean anything. "Prince doesn't have verbal diarrhea, he has studio diarrhea...." Allen Leeds | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Wildboy with some straight-up entry level trolling.
Wow, dude, you suck at this. No hard feelings. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
Again, this is not a prequels vs originals debate for me*. I have already admitted that, as a whole, I like the originals better.
You still have not answered the questions I have asked:
Why did Empire, with the enormous marketing behind it, only make approx half of the original Star Wars? Why did it not receive similar critical acclaim, or awards/nominations? You use these as criteria for your harsh judgment of the prequels, yet you give Empire Strikes Back a free pass? Why?
I love The Empire Strikes Back, but if you need examples/sources of the mixed reviews it received, here are the two most famous:
http://www.washingtonpost...martin.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/li...mpire.html
You watch the Clone Wars? You realize Darth Maul is also character from the prequels, right? That's from The Phantom Menace aka the only one you claim to have seen.
Well, what does winning an Oscar mean? Is Forrest Gump Better than Pulp Fiction? Was Titanic truly the "best" movie of 1997? Do you like Annie Hall better than Star Wars?
*Remember, how this debate between you and I began:
Notice, that I am not even debating your opinion that the prequels are horrible. Notice I am not tilting the conversation of originals vs prequels.
I was and am stating that the prequels
A. Are some of the biggest box office hits ever. Which they are. It's a fact. Even if you want to dismiss all of the box office records they broke and go with the more honest route adjusted for inflation they are on the list. Neck in neck with other blockbusters of their era.
You can claim that they "should have" made 5 billion instead of 2.5 billion. You could also claim that Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi "should have" made more. But you don't. Why is that?
B. The Phantom Menace took special effects that ILM pioneered in early 90's films like Jurassic Park, and T2 to a new level. The movie feature the first photorealistic compeltely cgi character. That's an undeniable fact. So what if Jar Jar is loathed? The effect was a breakthrough/watershed moment.
Also, Lucas pioneered digital film making with Episodes II and III.
Now, I know that you HATE cgi and digital effects. In all this venom you spew, you even slagged off on Avatar and Titanic also. Which is hilarious. However, Star Wars prequels (like their predecessors) pushed the state of the art in terms of special effects and the business of "making movies". You don't have to like the films (perhaps you should see them 1st?), you have a right to be horribly disappointed with them, but they moved the medium forward.
For the love of God, please DO it. Your results will be just as rewarding as when you found out that I am not, in fact, posting as several people on this website.
[Edited 5/23/12 12:09pm] "New Power slide...." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
Careful now. He may think you and I are dating, and/or the same person. "New Power slide...." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Seriously, anyone whining about The Phantom Menace in 2012 should be perma-banned from the internet.
George Lucas made some children's films, fat-fucks around the world couldn't deal with them, and are still blubbering into their Mountain Dew. I need to see Episode 2 and 3 just so I can hit up some nerd sites and play devil's advocate.
And it's been years since I've seen it, but Return of the Jedi was as big a piece of shit as the Phantom Menance. No hard feelings. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |