logo Sign In

I'm sorry, but I must say this... screw this forum, and screw the entertainment industry

Author
Date
Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link

…Screw this forum.

Okay, let me make this clear: I’m tired of being jacked around by the entertainment industry. It’s not just George Lucas anymore. It’s Peter Jackson raping Lord of the Rings while at the same time glorifying how “close” he was to “Tolkien’s spirit.” It’s some new company making a crappy-ass version of He-Man and the Masters of the Universe for Cartoon Network (a version which thankfully bombed). It’s Nintendo putting out more and more Legend of Zelda games that get increasingly worse.

The worst part of all is that every time this happens, there’s always people who will turn around and try to pretend that raping our cultural heritage and our childhood is somehow a GOOD thing.

The new show “Loonatics”–a superhero version of Looney Tunes–is yet another way the entertainment industry is dicking with us. Right now there are a lot of people who are talking about how much it will suck. What do you want to bet that those exact same people will turn around and praise it on release, even going so far as to try and claim it’s somehow better than what it’s based on? JUST LIKE how some people on this very forum knew the Star Wars DVDs were going to suck but went ahead and bought them anyway.

Screw this, and screw the entertainment industry. Thankfully most of the stuff I love is available on DVD in unbutchered form, and I can live without the stuff that isn’t–including Star Wars.

I think I’m going to go watch Transformers: The Movie and remember what “Entertainment” used to mean…

Author
Time
Post link
If you are referring to the new Bugs.....oops, "Buzz" Bunny, I have to agree. What a terrible decision. Space Jam showed that he is still very much a viable product as is.

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: Sadly, I believe the prequels are beyond repair.
<span class=“Bold”>JediRandy: They’re certainly beyond any repair you’re capable of making.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: You aren’t one of us.
<span class=“Bold”>Go-Mer-Tonic: I can’t say I find that very disappointing.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>JediRandy: I won’t suck as much as a fan edit.</span>

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: JamesEightBitStar
...Screw this forum.


What does this forum have to do with the entertainment industry as a whole?

Quote
Okay, let me make this clear: I'm tired of being jacked around by the entertainment industry. It's not just George Lucas anymore. It's Peter Jackson raping Lord of the Rings while at the same time glorifying how "close" he was to "Tolkien's spirit." It's some new company making a crappy-ass version of He-Man and the Masters of the Universe for Cartoon Network (a version which thankfully bombed). It's Nintendo putting out more and more Legend of Zelda games that get increasingly worse.


1.What changes has Jackson "raped" into the LotR Movies. I was unaware that there were any different versions, just extended editions on DVD...

2.He-man has allways sucked. Nobody wants to watch a blonde guy in fetish garb fight evil

3.You say "increasing worse" as if Zelda sucked to begin with. So what if not every game is as good a ALttP or OoT? The Oracles were nearly flawless, Wind Waker was better than Majora's Mask, and this new GC Zelda looks to be amazing!


Quote
The worst part of all is that every time this happens, there's always people who will turn around and try to pretend that raping our cultural heritage and our childhood is somehow a GOOD thing.


Actually all I hear is people complaining. I've not heard one word of praise for the new He-man show, and was completely unaware the LotR films had been messed with.

Quote
The new show "Loonatics"--a superhero version of Looney Tunes--is yet another way the entertainment industry is dicking with us. Right now there are a lot of people who are talking about how much it will suck. What do you want to bet that those exact same people will turn around and praise it on release, even going so far as to try and claim it's somehow better than what it's based on? JUST LIKE how some people on this very forum knew the Star Wars DVDs were going to suck but went ahead and bought them anyway.


The Starwars DVDs aren't perfect, but they hardly suck. The transfer is excellent... Ok.. so, otherwise they were a bit lackluster. As for Lunatics.. I'd not heard of it, but I guess I'd agree. Taking characters out of their element sort of destroys why the were popular to begine with.

Quote
Screw this, and screw the entertainment industry. Thankfully most of the stuff I love is available on DVD in unbutchered form, and I can live without the stuff that isn't--including Star Wars.

I think I'm going to go watch Transformers: The Movie and remember what "Entertainment" used to mean...


Maybe you need to get out more...

4

Author
Time
Post link
Somebody didn't get their wookiee-cookie in their lunch today.
"I don't mind if you don't like my manners. I don't like them myself. They're pretty bad. I grieve over them during the long winter evenings."
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
The Starwars DVDs aren't perfect, but they hardly suck.

No, the boy is quite astute, they really do suck. Candy colored images, terrible sound mixing and more detrimental changes, the discs are a nightmare.

Neil

Well at least the reversed surround channels have been addressed.

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Neil S. Bulk
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
The Starwars DVDs aren't perfect, but they hardly suck.

No, the boy is quite astute, they really do suck. Candy colored images, terrible sound mixing and more detrimental changes, the discs are a nightmare.

Neil


Neil has a good point, the image "quality" might be "good" as you would say, but they are horrible looking in regards to color levels and added special effects.
"I don't mind if you don't like my manners. I don't like them myself. They're pretty bad. I grieve over them during the long winter evenings."
Author
Time
Post link
OMG i really cannot believe some people i swear. Change is a good thing, you want to know the real reason why the PTs movies and of the new reamkes are not good in your eyes, it one reason only: you hav changed that is why you dont like it, your personalities are different and so when you see things you interpet them differently. that is why, go find a kid the same age as you when the first SW movies came out and ask him what he thought of the PTs. same goes with many of the other remakes that are coming out.




and MAN i am a lotr king, i worship those book and i find it offensive when you say that they were butchered. sure they weren't as good as the books but you cant make those books directly into movies its impossible, you'd get a 30 hour movie. What PJ made was an incredible adaption of the books, one that far surpassed my expectations, and ill tell you my expectations were very high.

you really need to get out more too, the entertainment industry is not butchering your childhood, they are remaking in way so that it is liked by the kids today. remember to shot beasties, i am sure your going to say that butchered transforms actually it did the opposite.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: TheSessler
Quote
Originally posted by: Neil S. Bulk
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
The Starwars DVDs aren't perfect, but they hardly suck.

No, the boy is quite astute, they really do suck. Candy colored images, terrible sound mixing and more detrimental changes, the discs are a nightmare.

Neil


Neil has a good point, the image "quality" might be "good" as you would say, but they are horrible looking in regards to color levels and added special effects.


The color saturation is different, right? I noticed in RotJ the Jabba's palace sequence is really heavy on earth tones... Which makes sense on a dessert planet, but it will take some getting used to. ANH and ESB looked just like my VHS tapes color wise, though, so I don't see the problem.

4

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Shimraa
OMG i really cannot believe some people i swear. Change is a good thing, you want to know the real reason why the PTs movies and of the new reamkes are not good in your eyes, it one reason only: you hav changed that is why you dont like it, your personalities are different and so when you see things you interpet them differently. that is why, go find a kid the same age as you when the first SW movies came out and ask him what he thought of the PTs. same goes with many of the other remakes that are coming out.


I will bet you a million dollars that you will never find a kid that feels and talks as passionately about the PT as some of the people here(including me) feel and talk about the O OT. Change is not always a good thing.




Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Quote
Originally posted by: TheSessler
Quote
Originally posted by: Neil S. Bulk
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
The Starwars DVDs aren't perfect, but they hardly suck.

No, the boy is quite astute, they really do suck. Candy colored images, terrible sound mixing and more detrimental changes, the discs are a nightmare.

Neil


Neil has a good point, the image "quality" might be "good" as you would say, but they are horrible looking in regards to color levels and added special effects.


The color saturation is different, right? I noticed in RotJ the Jabba's palace sequence is really heavy on earth tones... Which makes sense on a dessert planet, but it will take some getting used to. ANH and ESB looked just like my VHS tapes color wise, though, so I don't see the problem.



You haven't seen the lobster man in ANH have you? And look how screwed up Luke's saber on the Falcon (easily corrected by changing the color levels).
"I don't mind if you don't like my manners. I don't like them myself. They're pretty bad. I grieve over them during the long winter evenings."
Author
Time
Post link
I was unaware there even was a lobster man in ANH... Anyway, Yeah, that did suck what they did with the light saber. I think whoever did quality control for the DVDs had either

1)never seen starwars before

2)was somewhere between 1/2 and 100% asleep

3)was stoned, drunk, or otherwise intoxicated

4)was distracted and/or paying little-to-no attention.

4

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Warbler
Quote
Originally posted by: Shimraa
OMG i really cannot believe some people i swear. Change is a good thing, you want to know the real reason why the PTs movies and of the new reamkes are not good in your eyes, it one reason only: you hav changed that is why you dont like it, your personalities are different and so when you see things you interpet them differently. that is why, go find a kid the same age as you when the first SW movies came out and ask him what he thought of the PTs. same goes with many of the other remakes that are coming out.


I will bet you a million dollars that you will never find a kid that feels and talks as passionately about the PT as some of the people here(including me) feel and talk about the O OT. Change is not always a good thing.


of course you wouldnt because kids today arint like that. you dotn get kids that love things the same way you loved them when you were the same age. i do know that you would find many many kids that really liked the movies. that thought they were good.
Author
Time
Post link
"ANH and ESB looked just like my VHS tapes color wise, though, so I don't see the problem. ".

Look at the opening sequence of ANH. The thing is soooo badly desaturated. The ISDs lasers have NO glow anymore, neither do the T4s engines. The matte painging is dull and lifeless. And then, a few shots later, the red levels are boosted off the map. This is a poor, poor preparation of the video material.

And the other thing to keep in mind about kids today versus those of us who saw the OT theatrically, is that the market SINCE SW is completly oversaturated with action/adventure/sci-fi blockbusters, whereas the world of the '70s was a little different. SW was UNIQUE when it arrived, and the timing of those movies has a LOT to do with their success and indelibility.
Author
Time
Post link
"Change is a good thing"

Prove how this is an absolute by creating a new account, and discarding your current one for good. While you are at it, change your entire warddrobe, get a new car, find a new place to live, hang out with new friends...

...or find a new website to visit. That would be a good change too, right?

"you hav changed that is why you dont like it"

Excuse me? Didn't you just say "Change is a good thing". Are you now saying your comment was incorrect?

"of course you wouldnt because kids today arint like that."

So, are you saying they've changed? Is this another change that is NOT good? You are 0 for 2 now.

"you really need to get out more too"

You could change by not visiting this or other SW websites as well, since you obviously seem annoyed by the general consensus regarding these discs. When you stop visiting here, maybe we will too.

Until you are ready to take your own advice, kindly keep it to yourself.

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: Sadly, I believe the prequels are beyond repair.
<span class=“Bold”>JediRandy: They’re certainly beyond any repair you’re capable of making.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: You aren’t one of us.
<span class=“Bold”>Go-Mer-Tonic: I can’t say I find that very disappointing.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>JediRandy: I won’t suck as much as a fan edit.</span>

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Shimraa
OMG i really cannot believe some people i swear. Change is a good thing, you want to know the real reason why the PTs movies and of the new reamkes are not good in your eyes, it one reason only: you hav changed that is why you dont like it, your personalities are different and so when you see things you interpet them differently. that is why, go find a kid the same age as you when the first SW movies came out and ask him what he thought of the PTs. same goes with many of the other remakes that are coming out.


Hey, find a newborn baby and ask him to eat crap, and see if he agrees that it's crap. If the newborn baby decides he likes eating crap, that must mean the baby is right and that my perception of food has changed, right?

No offense man, but the "your perception has changed" is the biggest hunk of complete bull I've ever heard. I watch the old and new Star Wars movies back to back--there is a huge and definite difference in terms of storytelling style. I play the old Zeldas and the new Zeldas back to back. There are HUGE differences in the gameplay. The games didn't just re-write themselves magically to fit my "perceptions."

Quote
and MAN i am a lotr king, i worship those book and i find it offensive when you say that they were butchered. sure they weren't as good as the books but you cant make those books directly into movies its impossible, you'd get a 30 hour movie.


And what, exactly, do you base this on? Ralph Bakshi did an LOTR movie that was more-or-less an accurate adaptation. Granted, his only covers up to the Battle of Helm's Deep (he ran out of money before he could finish it) but it told the story (and told it well, in my opinion) in about the same length of time it takes to watch Peter Jackson's first LOTR movie.

Secondly, most of the reason the books are so long is because of Tolkien's detailed descriptions, and because of dialogue. In a visual medium, the length of both would be drastically reduced--after all, it's much quicker to SHOW people a vivid landscape than it is to tell them about it, and generally when you hear people actually talking, it's much faster than reading them on a page.

There is, simply put, no basis for the "it would've been a 30 hour movie" claim.

Quote
you really need to get out more too, the entertainment industry is not butchering your childhood, they are remaking in way so that it is liked by the kids today.


That's why many of these revivals are abysmal failures, right?

Besides that, "butchering my childhood" and "making the shows I like so they appeal to kids of today" are pretty much the same thing, just one is saying it in a sugar-coated way.
Author
Time
Post link
I agree about lord of the rings it could have been better, (too much altering of the plot just to get Tylers face into as many scenes as possible for my liking). I went to the cinema to see FOTR and didn't bother with the rest I just watched them on dvd (copies) and thought they got steadily worse. (hmm reminds me of another franchise). Ah well in about another 30 years someone else might attempt to make a faithful movie or tv series of these great books, we can only hope.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab

What does this forum have to do with the entertainment industry as a whole?


What pissed me off here is how many people don't like what Lucas does to his movies yet still feel compelled to buy the DVDs, books, and see episode three. Many of them outright admitted this in other threads.

Quote
1.What changes has Jackson "raped" into the LotR Movies. I was unaware that there were any different versions, just extended editions on DVD...


Dude, what I meant was there's so many mindless sheep who go around pretending that these are somehow faithful adaptations of the books, when really they are not. In all honesty I don't see how you didn't understand that.

Quote
2.He-man has allways sucked. Nobody wants to watch a blonde guy in fetish garb fight evil


That's why the character has been popular for over two decades, right?

Quote
3.You say "increasing worse" as if Zelda sucked to begin with.


Oh, my mistake--the first two were amazing. Personally I never agreed with the consensus that LttP was such a Godly game, I mean it pussified a lot of aspects that made the original fun (stuff that is supposed to be secret is now clearly pointed out via gimmicks such as cracks in the wall. there is no longer any reason to keep yourself at full health because the sword beam is pathetically weak, etc). Don't even get me started on OOT... the lather-rinse-repeat battles did that one in for me.

And yes, I played both back when they were new. I didn't like them then, and my perception hadn't changed when I played them both again quite recently.

Quote
Actually all I hear is people complaining. I've not heard one word of praise for the new He-man show,


Dude, the show may not have been a complete success but it does have a cult popularity. In fact the He-Man.org forums added a section dedicated wholly to the new show. Just go there and say "The old show was better" and you'll see some praise for the new show flyin'.

Quote
Maybe you need to get out more...


I've heard this one, but I don't get it--what, would hanging around in the outside world more than I already do somehow make me magically realize that Lord of the Rings were actually good movies? If I hung around in the outside world more often, would I magically realize that the new Zelda games don't suck? There is no logic there! No matter what else I do, I'm still going to come home and play good games and bad games side by side, and be able to tell the difference between the cream and the crap.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: JamesEightBitStar

Quote
What pissed me off here is how many people don't like what Lucas does to his movies yet still feel compelled to buy the DVDs, books, and see episode three. Many of them outright admitted this in other threads.


Is there a problem with wanting to read the books or see episode three? I admit that my decision to buy the DVDs was probably a mistake, but I had read some favorable and supposedly unbiased reviews, so what can I say?

Quote
Dude, what I meant was there's so many mindless sheep who go around pretending that these are somehow faithful adaptations of the books, when really they are not. In all honesty I don't see how you didn't understand that.


*Shrugs* I never really got into the books that much because of how descryptive they are. Besides, just because it isn't exactly faithful to the books doesn't make them bad movies. This is why "purists" are infuriating.

Quote
That's why the character has been popular for over two decades, right?


I was unaware of this... I figured it was revived for nostalgia's sake. My claim still stands. He-man couldn't succede today even with a good show in that sort of fetish garb.


Quote
Oh, my mistake--the first two were amazing. Personally I never agreed with the consensus that LttP was such a Godly game, I mean it pussified a lot of aspects that made the original fun (stuff that is supposed to be secret is now clearly pointed out via gimmicks such as cracks in the wall. there is no longer any reason to keep yourself at full health because the sword beam is pathetically weak, etc). Don't even get me started on OOT... the lather-rinse-repeat battles did that one in for me.


Did we play the same AlttP? Even with the cracks in the walls, the game is harder than most games released today. I'll agree that the sword beam is weak, but it is much easier to hit your target than it was in LoZ. I think that's a fair trade. Besides, Even if you weren't a fan of Ocarina of Time's excellent battle system, the Oracle games Were great, and as I said, superiour to OoT IMHO.

Quote
Dude, the show may not have been a complete success but it does have a cult popularity. In fact the He-Man.org forums added a section dedicated wholly to the new show. Just go there and say "The old show was better" and you'll see some praise for the new show flyin'.


That doesn't change the fact that all I hear is complaining about the "rape" of our childhood. I'm quite sick of it, too. And there is no way in Kessel I'm going to 'He-man.org" *shudders*

Quote
I've heard this one, but I don't get it--what, would hanging around in the outside world more than I already do somehow make me magically realize that Lord of the Rings were actually good movies? If I hung around in the outside world more often, would I magically realize that the new Zelda games don't suck? There is no logic there! No matter what else I do, I'm still going to come home and play good games and bad games side by side, and be able to tell the difference between the cream and the crap.


It's a figure of speach dude; and I meant get out of the house and mellow out. But yeah, I'm sure mellowing out would make you realize that the Lord of the Rings movies, especially the first one, are great movies, that the new Zelda games have very little sucking (Except Minish Cap and it's awesome Gust Jar. Gotta love the Gust Jar.)

4

Author
Time
Post link
"That doesn't change the fact that all I hear is complaining about the "rape" of our childhood."

Ironically, the only time that excuse comes up anymore is when people like you rehash it as a slap against anyone who says they don't like the changes. I've yet to see anyone in the past couple of years complain about Lucas raping their own childhood. You really need to update your arguments, much like Lucas did his films.

"But yeah, I'm sure mellowing out would make you realize that the Lord of the Rings movies, especially the first one, are great movies, that the new Zelda games have very little sucking (Except Minish Cap and it's awesome Gust Jar. Gotta love the Gust Jar.)"

LOL. I hope that statement makes sense in your own mind. Apparently, anyone who disagrees with your opinion is too blinded by digust and anger to see things your way? Maybe if you got out more, you'd see how ridiculous that assertion is.

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: Sadly, I believe the prequels are beyond repair.
<span class=“Bold”>JediRandy: They’re certainly beyond any repair you’re capable of making.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: You aren’t one of us.
<span class=“Bold”>Go-Mer-Tonic: I can’t say I find that very disappointing.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>JediRandy: I won’t suck as much as a fan edit.</span>

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: MeBeJedi
"That doesn't change the fact that all I hear is complaining about the "rape" of our childhood."

Ironically, the only time that excuse comes up anymore is when people like you rehash it as a slap against anyone who says they don't like the changes. I've yet to see anyone in the past couple of years complain about Lucas raping their own childhood. You really need to update your arguments, much like Lucas did his films.


What are you talking about?

From Jame's orginal Post:

Quote
The worst part of all is that every time this happens, there's always people who will turn around and try to pretend that raping our cultural heritage and our childhood is somehow a GOOD thing.


He's the one who used that euphenism, as archaic as it may be.

Quote
"But yeah, I'm sure mellowing out would make you realize that the Lord of the Rings movies, especially the first one, are great movies, that the new Zelda games have very little sucking (Except Minish Cap and it's awesome Gust Jar. Gotta love the Gust Jar.)"

LOL. I hope that statement makes sense in your own mind. Apparently, anyone who disagrees with your opinion is too blinded by digust and anger to see things your way? Maybe if you got out more, you'd see how ridiculous that assertion is.


He stated a strangely unshared opinion as fact. I just made the point that because from his post James is obvioulsy disgusted by the unfaithful ness of Lord of the Rings and the mysterious lack of fun he found in all but the two of the worst Zelda games. (I enjoy LoZ and AoL, but the fact remains they are archaicly outdated by today's standards)... I figured that mellowing out would make some of his hate for the direction these franchises took go away.

4

Author
Time
Post link
Quote

And what, exactly, do you base this on? Ralph Bakshi did an LOTR movie that was more-or-less an accurate adaptation. Granted, his only covers up to the Battle of Helm's Deep (he ran out of money before he could finish it) but it told the story (and told it well, in my opinion) in about the same length of time it takes to watch Peter Jackson's first LOTR movie.

Secondly, most of the reason the books are so long is because of Tolkien's detailed descriptions, and because of dialogue. In a visual medium, the length of both would be drastically reduced--after all, it's much quicker to SHOW people a vivid landscape than it is to tell them about it, and generally when you hear people actually talking, it's much faster than reading them on a page.

There is, simply put, no basis for the "it would've been a 30 hour movie" claim.


LOTR would have been a lot longer than 30 hours I'm sure. It was estimated that Gone With the Wind, which is about the same length as LOTR (though granted written differently) would have taken 168 hours or so. There is so much in the books that it would have taken a similar amount of time to put it all to film.

Oh, and Bakshi's cartoon was terrible. It was much less accurate than Jackson's version, even if Jackson did change things for his films.

Gentlemen, you can’t fight in here, this is the war room!

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
He stated a strangely unshared opinion as fact. I just made the point that because from his post James is obvioulsy disgusted by the unfaithful ness of Lord of the Rings and the mysterious lack of fun he found in all but the two of the worst Zelda games. (I enjoy LoZ and AoL, but the fact remains they are archaicly outdated by today's standards)... I figured that mellowing out would make some of his hate for the direction these franchises took go away.


1. "Today's Standards" is little more than a cruel joke when applied to games. There are good games and bad games. There are not "Games that were good then, but suck now."

Would you say that The Three Stooges are "outdated by today's standards?" Would you use that phrase to describe Gone With the Wind? Citizen Kane? Star Wars? Would you use it to describe Sherlock Holmes novels?

No? So why would you use it to describe video games?

Besides that, often "Today's standards" are worse. "Today's Standards" are where RPGs are more about their storyline than their gameplay (just compare Might & Magic to Final Fantasy X and you'll see what I mean) and people will think you know nothing about the genre for trying to advocate that it should be otherwise (even though I've played more RPGs than the people I argue with have). "Today's Standards" are where the GTA games are considered great because they allow you "absolute freedom".... even though they really don't, and in fact are horribly limited in terms of what you can do.

2. As for unfaithfulness, it wasn't just that... I could mind them being unfaithful if they had created a good product as well--after all, I'm a fan of "Hook," and that movie contradicts James Barrie's original Peter Pan novel in several very major respects. The problem with LOTR was not only that it was unfaithful, but many of the changes were stupid, pointless, and overall detracted from the film. The romance scenes between Aragorn and Arwen, for example. Yes, I know they're supposed to be in love, but did the romance have to be so cliched and stock-hollywood? This isn't Tolkien or Middle-earth, this is just stock. And why do so many of the battle scenes seem like they came right out of an episode of Hercules: The Legendary Journeys? Why are so many parts of the first movie so tongue-in-cheek in a story that's supposed to be of an overall more serious tone?

The scene at Weathertop is one such example--this is a scene that should've been very suspenseful. Instead we have the "terrifying" ringwraiths screaming like little girls, getting burned, and falling off cliffs all so Aragorn can look bad-ass. But... the Ringwraiths are supposed to be the most powerful servants Sauron controls. If all nine of his most powerful servants are beaten easily by ONE GUY, and Sauron himself looks like a reject from Power Rangers, how am I supposed to take the entire conflict seriously? Especially when Legolas is also portrayed as a superhero, and Gimli is always making every situation so lighthearted? Mind you, I don't mind lightheartedness, but it just doesn't fit in these films, at least not in the manner it was handled.

The worst offender was that Peter Jackson didn't know anything about "subtlety." Seriously, he's worse than Lucas in this regard--we can't figure out for ourselves that Frodo's becoming a slave of the ring, he has to actually turn into Gollum for a brief moment! And he can't show the deepening conflict between loyal Sam and a Frodo who is slowly being corrupted just by their actions and emotions--Sam has to get the point across by saying "Screw you Frodo, I'm going home."

Seriously, if I hadn't have read the books and seen Bakshi's film first, I probably wouldn't have been interested after seeing these movies. And unfortunately the LOTR movies are probably going to become the defining image of LOTR now, just like how the Conan movies became the defining image of Conan.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
I was unaware of this... I figured it was revived for nostalgia's sake.


He-Man is considered one of the classics of the 80s, along with Transformers and G.I. Joe and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Granted there are those who argue that the 1980s in general sucked, but to me that's as rediculous as claiming all classic literature sucks.

Quote
My claim still stands. He-man couldn't succede today even with a good show in that sort of fetish garb.


Who wants He-Man to succeed today? He-Man is a product of the eighties. While bringing back old heroes can give good results (Fox's Peter Pan and the Pirates), this over-dependancy on bringing back characters from the 1980s is disturbing. The entertainment industry should make new heroes, not try to breath new life into old ones.

Seriously, hasn't anyone but me read "Frankenstein"?

Quote
Did we play the same AlttP?


Mine was for the Super Nintendo. Yours?

Quote
Even with the cracks in the walls, the game is harder than most games released today.
I'll agree that the sword beam is weak, but it is much easier to hit your target than it was in LoZ.


Can't say I ever had a problem hitting people with the original beam, so I wouldn't know.

Quote
I think that's a fair trade. Besides, Even if you weren't a fan of Ocarina of Time's excellent battle system, the Oracle games Were great, and as I said, superiour to OoT IMHO.


Personally, I don't consider "Hit, block, wait for an opening, hit again, and then use this same general strategy on 98% of all enemies in the game" to be fun. And just to say this now... I personally consider the Gameboy installments of the Zelda series to be the worst ones (not counting the CD-i ones, which I've never played).

Most of the reason I liked the first Zelda was because of how many ways you could approach enemies--with your sword, with your bow, with your bomb, etc. I've honestly had situations where I was surrounded and used all sorts of desperate measures. In LttP, it seems like only the sword is good as a practical weapon. Everything else tended to be used more for solving puzzles than fighting, and some items (such as the bomb) were modified to the point that they were now USELESS as weapons--by the time that stupid bomb went off, whoever you were trying to blow up is all the way across the screen. In general the side-weapons are only useful if they're an enemy's specific weakness. Don't get me started on how the boss battles became hopelessly pattern-centric...

Quote
That doesn't change the fact that all I hear is complaining about the "rape" of our childhood. I'm quite sick of it, too.


I'm sick of hearing people complain about rotten tomatoes. Should they stop complaining, or should the farmer growing said tomatoes start selling them fresh?

Quote
It's a figure of speach dude; and I meant get out of the house and mellow out. But yeah, I'm sure mellowing out would make you realize that the Lord of the Rings movies, especially the first one, are great movies, that the new Zelda games have very little sucking (Except Minish Cap and it's awesome Gust Jar. Gotta love the Gust Jar.)


Heh. I recently got Minish Cap from a friend of mine. He outright gave it to me simply because he couldn't stand it anymore, and told me as much himself. That sure gives me a boost of confidence -__- (I haven't played it yet, by the way).

It also doesn't help knowing what "Minish" would spell if you put a "De" in front of it and an "Ed" behind it.
Author
Time
Post link
Warning explicit language is used dont read this if your a kid

Ok buddy you wanted to pick a fight you just did.


Quote
Originally posted by: JamesEightBitStar

Hey, find a newborn baby and ask him to eat crap, and see if he agrees that it's crap. If the newborn baby decides he likes eating crap, that must mean the baby is right and that my perception of food has changed, right?


WTF that is the kinda short sight idoit comment that i would expect from an individual like you. why the f*ck would you give a baby crap, and secondly what the f*ck does that have to do with a TV show. seriously man if you are try to compare the too think of something a lil more accurate. I understand that you frustrated with media nowadays but if you want to be takin seriously use a better comparison.


Quote
No offense man, but the "your perception has changed" is the biggest hunk of complete bull I've ever heard. I watch the old and new Star Wars movies back to back--there is a huge and definite difference in terms of storytelling style. I play the old Zeldas and the new Zeldas back to back. There are HUGE differences in the gameplay. The games didn't just re-write themselves magically to fit my "perceptions."


Wow so your telling me that you havent grown up since you were ten, man that really explain alot about your character. "WHY CAN IT BE MY WAY, I WANT IT LIKE THIS NOT LIKE THAT WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA" f*ckin grow up, and let your balls drop. you preception changes as you grow older, its just a fact, you are a different person now then you were when you were ten, why cus people change. wow you played all the zelda back to back man you need to get out more, thats alot of game play. and as for Starwars, you'll you will never beable to watch the PT movies from the POV that you watched the originals, the reason why you still like the originals is cus they captured your attention when you were little. the PT will never do that cus you watched the for the first time after you had matured.

Quote
And what, exactly, do you base this on? Ralph Bakshi did an LOTR movie that was more-or-less an accurate adaptation. Granted, his only covers up to the Battle of Helm's Deep (he ran out of money before he could finish it) but it told the story (and told it well, in my opinion) in about the same length of time it takes to watch Peter Jackson's first LOTR movie.


well lets see i have read the book once a year since i was hmm 10. i have done projects on the book, for school i have done biographies on tolkien, i know the boks inside out. that what i base my assertion on. as for ralph Bakshi's version, yes i personally liked it, however all the stuff he did with the orcs the half cartoon half constume shit was stupid, also not finishing is a big indicator on how good some people thought the movie was. and dont tell me that it did a good job of portraying the books, because he never finished the hard part of it. the fellowship and the first half of TTT are the easiest parts to adopt from the book cus there is lots of imagery. but ROTK had alot of events that happen quickly and close together, that dont take much time in the book but take alot of time in the movies. But man you can't compare his version to PJs version why cus they were made in different times, by different people, in different mediums, and with different bugets.

Quote
Secondly, most of the reason the books are so long is because of Tolkien's detailed descriptions, and because of dialogue. In a visual medium, the length of both would be drastically reduced--after all, it's much quicker to SHOW people a vivid landscape than it is to tell them about it, and generally when you hear people actually talking, it's much faster then reading them on a page.

There is, simply put, no basis for the "it would've been a 30 hour movie" claim.
i was accounting for that man but your right it wouldnt be 30 hrs long a direct tranlation of the books into a movie would be at least 15hrs. rent the bbc versions of books the total air times adds up to 13 hours, that is with larger portions of dialog cut out. the lotr movies add up to 10 hrs. hmm.. thats 3 full hours. on top of that 20-30% of the films were scene without dialog showing middle earth. you cannot expect people to go and see a 15 hr movie, the current versions were really pushing the lengths as it was. also i am sure you can read that you can read a peice of dialog faster then a person can say it. espeically when they have to act it out.

Quote
That's why many of these revivals are abysmal failures, right?

Besides that, "butchering my childhood" and "making the shows I like so they appeal to kids of today" are pretty much the same thing, just one is saying it in a sugar-coated way.


i need to get out, buddy trust me i get out and i do alot of shit that doesnt include watching the Starwars movies back to back, or playing all the zelda game in a row. I can have a good time without playing a video game or watching a movie.

hmm. abysmal revivals yeah so thats why lotr gross over a billion dollars, and made history but winning so many awards, that is why spiderman is a good movie right, or why shows like beasties were good, yeah man that is why these revivals are failures.

you are a very shortsight and selfish individual, if entertaining the youth of today is the raping of your childhood, then so be it. man i feel like beating the shit out of you for being so selfish.