Grievous was one of the best things about the prequels.

The fact that no one remembers something from a movie doesn't mean SHIT. 

More people have heard of Justin Bieber than Andrea Bocelli. Does that matter?

doubleofive said:

 

twooffour said:

Grievous was one of the best things about the prequels.

Because he was mercifully short lived? ;-)

 

Delicious ham and cheese to cheer at, that's why. Kinda like the Green Goblin from Spiderman (the one in the mask, at least - Grievous got nothing on Dafoe's incredible face expressions :D).

TV's Frink said:

twooffour said:

Grievous could have one of the best things about the prequels if they hadn't given him that lame-ass cough and made him into a chicken-shit coward.

Fixed.

"Sleazy villains" are often "cowardly" to some extent - the Joker from TDK fights like a pussy (heck, even Nicholson's in the old film), Raul Julia in Street Fighter, and I could probably name others (but these two have already gained "iconic" status in pop culture, so hey).

Using dirty tricks, being weak and attempting to run away all the time makes them less "badass", but all the more "sleazy" and "despicable", and all in all in no way weaker villains cinematically.

The cheesy, stupid cough is part of why I find watching him so enjoyable. Basically, if you compare him to Vader or even the Emperor, he's pretty much a cackling, mustache-twirling Disney villain, but as far as I'm concerned, a damn entertaining one.

Anchorhead said:

I just looked up Grievous on You Tube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XqKvKUTElA

I can't put into words how fucking stupid I think that is.  No emotion, no depth.  Just cartoon CGI, over-saturated colors, Transformeresque  robots, and constant movement everywhere.  Oh, and the requisite spinning light sabers.

Empty calories.

Not sure about the colors, I think the Star Wars clips on Youtube most have over-saturated colors - you can regulate that shit, and it looks better on my DVD at home. Still quite "colorful", though...

CGI is pretty convincing and photorealistic in itself, as far as I can judge.

I agree that the fight itself is lame-ass and sucks, but the dialog parts in that particular scene, to me, is pretty much on par with the Ben-Darth scenes from ANH.

Both exchanges are cheesy, wooden "cliché storm" material, and while this one is so in a more "comical" way (feels like it was from some sort of parody/comedy film) and the other one's more "epic" and "mythical" and basically takes itself as seriously as this kind of dialog allows, I still do enjoy it.

Grievous' like "you are looooost", and then this stupid-ass clichéd "western eye shot"... and then Obi-Wan's like "ohh... I don't think so!! aahhhhhh"...

Delicious. I do find the majority of the dialogue in the prequels dull and boring, whenever not downright painful, but this bit is damn cool :D

Alexrd said:

To each his own, I suppose. I still think comparing a (weak) character like Grievous to a cultural icon like Darth Vader means nothing. Many people who don't know Star Wars, can recognize Darth Vader.

Not arguing with you there, but I'd be careful when using osmosis as a judge.

A bunch of furryballs known of "Tribbles" have made it from one silly (but fun as hell) comedy episode to being one of the most (or more) prominent Star Trek images.

Of course, "Klingons" are still better known... but.. you know...

Alexrd said:

In my opinion, it's not about the dialogue (The OT never had good dialogue, either). It's about charisma.

Almost everything Han Solo says... heck, every SCENE where he is in, at least from the first two movies, still looks pretty damn fun on paper.

Take the exchange on board of the Falcon, for example, when Han taunts Luke about Leia - or when Solo is about to leave and Leia tries to prevent him. The dialogue feels alive and fresh, and there is unspoken thought and implication almost behind every line.

The "I was but a learner, but now I am a master" "only a master of evil, Darth", is cheesy cliché stuff - obviously, still delivered with lots of charisma ;)

TV's Frink said:

twooffour said:

TV's Frink said:

twooffour said:

Grievous could have one of the best things about the prequels if they hadn't given him that lame-ass cough and made him into a chicken-shit coward.

Fixed.

 

"Sleazy villains" are often "cowardly" to some extent - the Joker from TDK fights like a pussy (heck, even Nicholson's in the old film), Raul Julia in Street Fighter, and I could probably name others (but these two have already gained "iconic" status in pop culture, so hey).

Using dirty tricks, being weak and attempting to run away all the time makes them less "badass", but all the more "sleazy" and "despicable", and all in all in no way weaker villains cinematically.

The cheesy, stupid cough is part of why I find watching him so enjoyable. Basically, if you compare him to Vader or even the Emperor, he's pretty much a cackling, mustache-twirling Disney villain, but as far as I'm concerned, a damn entertaining one.

I can see your point.  I still think he could have been a much better character, but as Alexrd said, to each his own.

At this point, one has to make the distinction: he could be better character, or a better CARTOON?

As a character, undoubtedy - he was established and characterized waaaaay too poorly.

As far as personality and mannerisms, again, could he be more threatening and serious? While Grievous, imo, still manages to come off as threatening instead of completely disappearing in the camp territory, heck sure.

As for could he be more memorable and entertaining than he was, if we STAY with the "cheesy Disney villain" concept? Sure, maybe, not saying he's the epitome of cheese villainy on film, but he's already pretty damn fun to watch (ymmv on that), and it's obvious that quite a bit of work has been put into giving his movements character.

For what it's worth, I've seen some snippets of CW, and I do find Grievous pretty boring there, as compared to the movie - he doesn't cough, and acts less silly overall :D