logo Sign In

Best movies of 05 — Page 4

Author
Time
Post link
Actually, it's hardly mentioned in Empire of Dreams and only in passing. The only time it comes up is during the start of production of Empire Strikes Back, where the narrator says, "The first movie, now dubbed Episode IV: A New Hope..." That's all that's said about it. It says absolutely nothing about what it was originally supposed to be called or why it was cut in the first place. Not saying your reasoning is necessarily wrong, but your reference is.

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
Post link
No, if I remember correctly, they specifically explain during the section on ANH that the studios felt that calling it Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope would confuse audiences, so they changed it. Correct me if I am wrong about the source. I thought it was Empire of Dreams. If not, I know I heard it elsewhere.
Author
Time
Post link
Yeah, I've heard it elsewhere too, but it's definitely not on Empire of Dreams, at least not the version on the DVD.

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
Post link
Sorry, the original title is STAR WARS. If you were to go back in time to 1977 and watch the debut of STAR WARS, you would have seen that the title opening simply used STAR WARS. No bloody Ep IV or ANH. The people my always refered to it as STAR WARS. I will continue to do so. I don't give a damn what Lucas, Lucasfilm, and/or 20th Century Fox want. I will call it what I have always called it.
Author
Time
Post link
Right there with you, Warbler. It's a completely different situation than The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe is the given title of the book, and Star Wars was the given title of the movie. The front of Lucas's scripts even said Star Wars or The Starwars.

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
Post link
Alright guys! lets get back to the topic and move this over to the general discussion thread. I don't know about this year being better than 2004. It's sorta so-so. The movies this year were not much of an improvement from last year. It'd be nice if we could get good movies like we had during the 80's and 90's though.
"Who's scruffy-lookin'?" - Han Solo
"I wish my lawn was emo so it would cut itself." -sybeman
"You know, putting animals in the microwave is not a good idea. I had to learn that one the hard way." -seanwookie
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Warbler
Sorry, the original title is STAR WARS. If you were to go back in time to 1977 and watch the debut of STAR WARS, you would have seen that the title opening simply used STAR WARS. No bloody Ep IV or ANH. The people my always refered to it as STAR WARS. I will continue to do so. I don't give a damn what Lucas, Lucasfilm, and/or 20th Century Fox want. I will call it what I have always called it.

Right On!

War does not make one great.

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
Right there with you, Warbler. It's a completely different situation than The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe is the given title of the book, and Star Wars was the given title of the movie. The front of Lucas's scripts even said Star Wars or The Starwars.


"The Star Wars" referred to the entire six-part movie. OK, now we shall move this to the general thread.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Adamwankenobi
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
Right there with you, Warbler. It's a completely different situation than The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe is the given title of the book, and Star Wars was the given title of the movie. The front of Lucas's scripts even said Star Wars or The Starwars.


"The Star Wars" referred to the entire six-part movie. OK, now we shall move this to the general thread.

Look, I am going to give this debate a big fat 'Whatever'. Adam, what you are saying is correct - as part of a saga, the original movie is subtitled A New Hope, and Lucas made this change very early on and probably intended it all along but wasn't allowed because the distributer thought it would confuse viewers. This is one piece of Lucas history telling that I actually believe. However, I have a number of VHS releases at home that clearly say 'Star Wars' on the front cover, with absolutely no mention of Episode 4 or A New Hope, including, Adam, the '97 special editions that introduced you to the original trilogy. The film was released in theatres in '77 under the name 'Star Wars'. It was rereleased a number of times throughout the late 70s and 80s under the name 'Star Wars'. It was released on home video and leaserdisc countless times throughout the 80s and 90s under the name 'Star Wars'. It was released cinematically with new special effects in 1997 under the name 'Star War'. This special edition was then released on VHS and laserdisc under the name 'Star Wars' in 1998. It wasn't until 1999, the year TPM came out, that lucasfilm really started to tout this' new hope' thing, and the 2004 DVD is the first official release that has carried the 'ANH' moniker on the packaging. Lucas may be able to alter his movies and deny the originals. but unless he plans on coming into my home and burning my store bought Star Wars VHS, there is no denying that the film was, in fact, called 'Star Wars'.



War does not make one great.

Author
Time
Post link
BUT, the film itself has said "Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope" on the opening crawl since the theatrical 1981 re-release. Calling it simply Star Wars (on the packaging or as everyday usage) was just pretending that it was called that.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Adamwankenobi
BUT, the film itself has said "Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope" on the opening crawl since the theatrical 1981 re-release. Calling it simply Star Wars (on the packaging or as everyday usage) was just pretending that it was called that.

^???

OK, so, let's say that next year, the Watchowskis, jealous that Lucas managed to go 20 years before destroying his legacy while they done it in 4, decide that in order to sell more Matrix boxsets, they will change the title of the first matrix film to The Matrix Episode 1: A Neo Hope. However, they also decide that in order to not piss the fans off too much, this title will only appear in the movie intro itself, and not on the actual packaging. Are you seriously telling me that you would adopt that title, or would you still refer to the film as 'The Matrix'? Be honest now.

War does not make one great.

Author
Time
Post link
Yes I honestly would. If, as the film makers, that is their intentions with their films, then I would have no problems with it.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Adamwankenobi
Yes I honestly would. If, as the film makers, that is their intentions with their films, then I would have no problems with it.
I don't have a problem with it either. I think it's sad and ridiculous, but I don't have a problem with it. I just find it hard to call it 'A New Hope' when it was fed to me, by Lucas himself, as 'Star Wars' for 2 decades, and as a result I will probably always think of it as 'Star Wars'. As for 'A Neo Hope', well, I would just laugh at the Watchowskis and say 'ah, bless 'em. Dang fools', which is pretty much my take of Georgie Lucas.

War does not make one great.

Author
Time
Post link
It's just that I believe that a film should be called what the creator of it intends. For instance, Lucas intends for the first released Indiana Jones film to be called Raiders of the Lost Ark. I refuse to call it "Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark," because first off he himself never intended it to be called that, and the film itself is not titled that. And he could have easily changed it if he wanted, but he didn't. If he actually changed the title to fit the overall Young Indy series, I would accept that. But simply changing thepackaging is not changing the name of the film.
Author
Time
Post link
Hey, hey...this is to be left for SW Gen Discussion...not best movies of the year.

Sooooooooooooo....

Anyone seen Kong yet? Is it truly best movie evar?
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Adamwankenobi
It's just that I believe that a film should be called what the creator of it intends. For instance, Lucas intends for the first released Indiana Jones film to be called Raiders of the Lost Ark. I refuse to call it "Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark," because first off he himself never intended it to be called that, and the film itself is not titled that. And he could have easily changed it if he wanted, but he didn't. If he actually changed the title to fit the overall Young Indy series, I would accept that. But simply changing thepackaging is not changing the name of the film.
But he has, in fact, now changed the title to 'Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark', episode 26 in the complate Indiana Jones Saga, if you take into account the most recent release of that movie. Seriously, he has changed it. Anyway, everyone's getting pissed at us for discussing this (even though this is how the thread has developed and sometimes you gota just accept that a thread has taken a new direction), so I'm gonna end this debate - it's called Star Wars. I think all this debate has really achieved is highlighting the stupidity and ridiculousness of retitling and reediting your fuilms to fit you current (or 'original') vision. It's bullshit and it detracts from the films by fueling stupid debates like this one. It is just so, so gay.

War does not make one great.

Author
Time
Post link
I'm going to see kong today!!! can't wait. Gotta go do some stuff first though. And I hope WE ARE DONE WITH THE STAR WARS ARGUMENT!! Seriously guy grow up. take a moment and look at what your arguing over. The name of the first SW movie. Call it whatever strikes your fancy, but please quit arguing about it.
"Who's scruffy-lookin'?" - Han Solo
"I wish my lawn was emo so it would cut itself." -sybeman
"You know, putting animals in the microwave is not a good idea. I had to learn that one the hard way." -seanwookie
Author
Time
Post link
I saw King Kong last night. It has replaced Sin City as the best movie of the year. It is easy to get a great performance out of Naomi Watts or Adrian Brody and it is easy to make visual effects look good. However, to get a great dramatic performance out of Jack Black and to get a great dramatic performance out of computer generated 25-foot ape with no dialogue in English is an accomplishment. An even bigger accomplishment is making me care about the love triangle between a man, a woman, and an ape.
Author
Time
Post link
King Kong was very sad kong did not deserve to die!
Author
Time
Post link
This is true. It is the people that made this remake that deserve to die(just kidding). I'm sorry but the 1931 version is a classic. This version will not beat it. Kong was already remade once, it flopped. A third remake is unnecessary. Can't Hollywood think of anything new?

Originally posted by: Switch Radic
And I hope WE ARE DONE WITH THE STAR WARS ARGUMENT!! Seriously guy grow up. take a moment and look at what your arguing over. The name of the first SW movie. Call it whatever strikes your fancy, but please quit arguing about it.


-um you're on a Star Wars forum. This forum has a lot of big time Star Wars fans. What might matter very little to average people, matters alot to big time Star Wars fans.

(see the things that we hate thread)
Author
Time
Post link
The original King Kong is a great movie, but so is the new movie. Jackson has crafted something that is different enough in tone and look that they are two seperate movies, unlike a lot of remakes.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Warbler
This is true. It is the people that made this remake that deserve to die(just kidding). I'm sorry but the 1931 version is a classic. This version will not beat it. Kong was already remade once, if flopped. A third remake is unnecessary. Can't Hollywood think of anything new?

Originally posted by: Switch Radic
And I hope WE ARE DONE WITH THE STAR WARS ARGUMENT!! Seriously guy grow up. take a moment and look at what your arguing over. The name of the first SW movie. Call it whatever strikes your fancy, but please quit arguing about it.


-um you're on a Star Wars forum. This forum has a lot of big time Star Wars fans. What might matter very little to average people, matters alot to big time Star Wars fans.

(see the things that we hate thread)


Exactly.
Author
Time
Post link
This is true. It is the people that made this remake that deserve to die(just kidding). I'm sorry but the 1931 version is a classic. This version will not beat it. Kong was already remade once, if flopped. A third remake is unnecessary. Can't Hollywood think of anything new?


i agree that the first one was a classic and theres no doubt the remake (1976) was a flop...
but regardless PJ version is definatley the last remake...

i mean the first one was a classic but theres not much too it..
i mean it didnt look very nice (but what does at that time) and there was no emotional attachment between Kong and Ann which really did nothing for the climax of the movie...

agree with me or not but this was definatly in need of an overhaul and you can't seriously say that it wasnt a good adaption of the story...

definatly best of 2005!
"Never. I'll never turn to the darkside. You've failed your highness. I am a jedi, like my father before me."