logo Sign In

Stupidest Prequal complaints — Page 2

Author
Time
Jimbo...I looked at some of your past posts and I agree with most of them, but the acting...was terrible! The story was average and to much CGI. Look back at the past trilogy, the acting was great. The stories were even better (especially the dialoge). There is way to many one liners and I think GL went for humor way to much instead of making a serious action film (like the originals). Also the style of shooting could have matched the style of the old films a little better(He CGI's everything). Overall I like the new films but the don't even compare to the originals, but all can be forgiven with a killer episode 3.
Author
Time
No Attack of the Clones was the best Star Wars movie and The Phantom Menace is better then Return of the Jedi. The acting was good all of it. Every preformance works so well. Especially Natalie Portmans. In my opinion story, style, and acting of Attack of the Clones was all just as good as The Empire Strikes Back. But Attack of the Clones beets it with possibly the most exciting action sequence ever and far far better effects. Van Helsing is a dumb action movie. It is basically an effects show. Its dumb, its weird, but it is also very very fun. I enjoyed Van Helsing. The Hulks digital effects were excellent. Thats good since the rest of the movie absolutly sucked the great effects work is the only thing that makes The Hulk watchable. The Core is a good action movie. It has some cliches but has a good plot and I don't see how those effects could have been done without digital animation.
Author
Time
Quote

But Attack of the Clones beets it with possibly the most exciting action sequence ever and far far better effects. Van Helsing is a dumb action movie. It is basically an effects show. Its dumb, its weird, but it is also very very fun. I enjoyed Van Helsing.


?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

most exciting action sequence ever and far better effects yet Van Helsing is a dumb action movie and is basically an effects show... reminds me of another movie you just mentioned no?

its dumb, its weird but you liked it? hrm... shows how your evaluation of movies works....


i couldnt resist this post...
"Never. I'll never turn to the darkside. You've failed your highness. I am a jedi, like my father before me."
Author
Time
Van Helsing is a good movie because its fun and entairtains. Attack of the Clones is a great movie because its fun it entairtains and has a great story.
Author
Time
But some would argue that it doesn't have a great story.

Or that it isn't verywell told.

But that isn't me. I just think some of the dialogue--especially the one-liners--in Attack of the Clones is incredibly annoying, and the fireplace scene was horrible. And some of the shots of Coruscant look fake, especcially durning the chase scene.

4

Author
Time
Hi Lazysean.
I agree with you,
He was too young for the adult audience that waited many years for the phantom menace.
I was like at the cinemas and watching the end when i heard this young kid say"UH OH" when destroying a starship.
I thought i had walked into the wrong movie?????

Why didnt Lucas play more on the actual"phantom" in Phantom menace.
When you think about it there was no menace.

Sceens in the mos eisley space bar could have been played,Where the sith is battling it out in the bar and displaying his full combat skills.

More enphasis could have been played on the use of the force itself,The film starts ass if it is half way through the trilogy?
Also more hand to hand combat,We have already been witness to incredable effects in the other films so why not have tried to come up with a new concept and more solid storyline.

Author
Time
jimbo, you are definitly a unique individual. I never thought I would ever come across a person who called themselves a "Star Wars" fan that thought any of the prequals was superior to the originals. Or that I'd come across a person that thought the acting in the PTs was good.

Natalie Portman can act?
(After falling out of a transport and rolling down a sand dune)
Clone Trooper: "Are you alright?"
Padme (perfectly fine): "Yes."

The above scene was so bad that they edited it out for the DVD release and replaced it with a better acted scene. So, a) Natalie Portman is a crappy actress and b) ATOC had crappy editors.

No such thing as too much CGI? How about when you feel like you're watching a cartoon because everything in the shot looks fake and cheesy? Digital ships better than model ships? Every single ship in the OT looked infinitely better than every ship in PT, in my opinion. Maybe REALLY shiney fake looking cartoon ships look better to you than model ships that are actually real. I guess that's just you...

GL really does use CGI in order to be lazy. They could make models and have ships that look real, or they could take a short cut and use CGI. CGI was used. They could have actually shot a battle scene instead of making a battle scene completely out of CGI, again having the feel of a cartoon and looking and feeling really cheesy and obviously fake. CGI was used. So, is there really no such thing as too much CGI? When models looks better and more realistic and there is no real reason to use CGI except for laziness and ego, should CGI be used instead? Or go for something that looks better? If there is no such thing as too much CGI how come every movie isn't all CGI?

Your words:
"Van Helsing is a dumb action movie. It is basically an effects show." Does that mean it had too much CGI...?
Author
Time
and the beat goes on...

“My skill are no longer as Mad as the once were” RiK

Author
Time
This is such a pointless argument. It's obvious from the title that Jimbo put this post is here purely to bait the rest of us. I was hoping it would just be ignored and drift into obscurity...
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion-
Author
Time
Watching The Empire Strikes Back and A New Hope I can see why someone would like them best but it honestly seems childish to prefer Return of the Jedi to Attack of the Clones. I am definutly a Star Wars fan. I have loved Star Wars since the momment I can remember. I wore out my VHS pan scan tapes of the originals. Natalie Portman can act as well as she looks in my opinion. Thats good considering she looks fucking gorgous. She has talent beyond her years. I would not want any other women to play the role. Natalie if your reading this look me up. I can dream can't I? The arguement that George uses it because of lazyness is stupid because it is more expensive and harder to do it digital. He does it digital because he believes it is more realistic, and in my opinion hes right.
Author
Time
I agree that Portman is a great actor, but her talent may be hindered a bit in the star wars movies because of all the blue screen sets she has to work on. Hayden Christenen is another story. I mean Anakins borderline creepy in AOTC.
You like popsicles? Then you need to come on down to the cellar. I got a whole freezer FULL of popsicles. Mmmmm...
Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: HotRod
In Jimbos defence..........

If he likes AOTC as much as I like ESB, fair play to the bloke!!


hey i am in the same boat ok. i like the prequels. and luke there is no way with a strait face you can tell met hat the ship in the OT looked better then the ships in the PT cus it is simplally not true. that would mean that we have gone backward in the 1970s and if that iw waht you are saying then... i am speechless and have lost some respect for you today.
Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Duke Groundrunner
I agree that Portman is a great actor, but her talent may be hindered a bit in the star wars movies because of all the blue screen sets she has to work on. Hayden Christenen is another story. I mean Anakins borderline creepy in AOTC.


Anakin was too creepy for my tastes. I think Hayden Christensen was trying to hard to foreshadow evil with his character. I mean, all the publicity photos and posters for Ep. II show him holding his lightsaber in front of him with eyes narrowed to slits. What happened to 'the good man who was your father'?
My Blog
Currently Reading: Shatterpoint, by Matthew Stover
Unrepentent Nader Voter
Author
Time
that goood man was anakin in TMP but people didnt like that anakin.
Author
Time
Quote

luke there is no way with a strait face you can tell met hat the ship in the OT looked better then the ships in the PT cus it is simplally not true. that would mean that we have gone backward in the 1970s and if that iw waht you are saying then... i am speechless and have lost some respect for you today.


Shimraa, I definitely think the OT ships look better than the new ones. It doesn't mean we've gone back to the 70's, were real life models in some way inferior to real life models today? Do we have some super space-age paint and decals to decorate them with now or something? The new trilogy ones I'm thinking of truley look worse to me than ships from the OT because the new ones are CGI and look fake. not to mention have less detail, and also their design is far less appealing in my eyes. You shouldn't condescend people by saying you have lost respect for them for what they think. I could say the same about you right now, and with better reason than just because you like a different appeal, but I won't coz we all make mistakes
Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Duke Groundrunner
I agree that Portman is a great actor, but her talent may be hindered a bit in the star wars movies because of all the blue screen sets she has to work on. Hayden Christenen is another story. I mean Anakins borderline creepy in AOTC.


He was suppose to be creepy. Thats what I like about his preformance and I thought he has talent. He better considering what he was able to do. His Anakin was one who acted childish and horny. While I can blame him for being horny many people have critized the childish behavior as bad acting. I disagree he purposefully acted childish to show how such behavior can lead to disaster. Attack of the Clones has such a deep story. It baros elements from shackspeare, the fall of Rome, and a bit of Tolkien to create a truely mastered work of story. That combined with extremely exciting action and state of the art effects equal a truely great cinematic experiance.
Author
Time
You guys honestly think that an X-wing from any of the OT movies looks crappy next to a Naboo fighter? Seriously?

Or a Lamba shuttle next to the Naboo queen's shuttle?

And speaking of going back in time for effects, has anyone here seen "Flight Of The Navigator"? From 1986!! Because they have the EXACT same shiny effect for a ship...

jimbo, I'd argue with you, but I honestly think you are on your own little planet deep in the galaxy somewhere...
Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Delicieuxz
Quote

luke there is no way with a strait face you can tell met hat the ship in the OT looked better then the ships in the PT cus it is simplally not true. that would mean that we have gone backward in the 1970s and if that iw waht you are saying then... i am speechless and have lost some respect for you today.


Shimraa, I definitely think the OT ships look better than the new ones. It doesn't mean we've gone back to the 70's, were real life models in some way inferior to real life models today? Do we have some super space-age paint and decals to decorate them with now or something? The new trilogy ones I'm thinking of truley look worse to me than ships from the OT because the new ones are CGI and look fake. not to mention have less detail, and also their design is far less appealing in my eyes. You shouldn't condescend people by saying you have lost respect for them for what they think. I could say the same about you right now, and with better reason than just because you like a different appeal, but I won't coz we all make mistakes


i did not say that i had lost repect for him i said if he thought that we had gone backwards since the 70s then i had there is a difference.and you can think what every you like about i really dont care.
Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Joker_Smilez
You guys honestly think that an X-wing from any of the OT movies looks crappy next to a Naboo fighter? Seriously?

Or a Lamba shuttle next to the Naboo queen's shuttle?

And speaking of going back in time for effects, has anyone here seen "Flight Of The Navigator"? From 1986!! Because they have the EXACT same shiny effect for a ship...

jimbo, I'd argue with you, but I honestly think you are on your own little planet deep in the galaxy somewhere...


they dont look better in terms of artistic design but they look realier. the design is cool but they are different ships. also i am talking about the ships in the originals the ones that were done in the OT not the digitally remastered CG Ships in the SE.

and yes i can argue that the naboo ships look better then some of the OT ships. they really do look better then some of the ships in ROTJ. the mini-SDs in AOTC look better then the SDs in the OT. the insecct people in AOTCs looked better then the ewokes. you may also say that the ship looks stupid cus its shiny and it looks fake, you have to understand the naboo ships you see are Royal transport ships so obviously they are going to look fancy. you think they look cartoony cus there hulls are very shiny. but think of it this way, in the SW universe ships are like Cars, in really life really rich people have very shiny cars. so why wouldnt the poeple in SW have very shiny ships is it so hard to believe, also we are talking a time when the galaxy is in the golden age in the PT where as in the OT there is an imperial power in place there is fear across the galaxy. and you arnt seeing the coolest looking ships in th galaxy your seeing the best ships in terms of ability. cus on one side you have an under-buget rebellion that can t go on looks they need what is good and cheap and on the other side a millitary power, that wouldn't will not use shiny ships.
the clone drop ships and the ships with the 2 big wheels that fire hundreds of missles look alot better then the ATATs and those troopers on bikes.
Author
Time
psst.. Shimmy that wasnt me who said the thing about the OT ships looking better... he just has the same avatar...


but in some respects i do think the OT ships looked more "realistic"...
but thats like telling a mac user that a pc is far superior... (which they are) hehe

im staying out of these... there will never be a solution.. lol
"Never. I'll never turn to the darkside. You've failed your highness. I am a jedi, like my father before me."
Author
Time
oops. my bad i knew there was something strange there you couldnt possibly say things like that. i am sorry luke my respect for you is back to normal.
Author
Time
The Naboo starfighters are just as shiny as the queen's transport...maybe the pilots are really rich and like fancy looking starfighters...I don't know...

And yes, the ships in the ORIGINAL original trilogy looks way better than anything in the PTs. The PTs are obviously fake and digital. The REAL models look like REAL ships because they are just that...REAL.

In my opinion, almost nothing in the PTs look real. Probably because almost nothing in the PTs is real...they set records for most use of CGI. I can't stand watching them because to me, everything looks so cheesy and fake and obviously computer generated.

Maybe to you and guys like jimbo, everything about the PTs is "so cool" and "awesome", but I can't stand any of it. The battle scenes were cheesy and lame, the ships looked cartoonish, and the feel was COMPLETELY differant than the originals, which makes it seem like the PTs were made by someone other than GL. Everything about the PTs rubs me the wrong way. They try and mix in way too much humor with unfunny actors so it sounds cheesy and forced, they're always seemingly shooting for kiddy appeal and lowest common denominator stuff. I mean, it seems like GL made Star Wars for preteens and no one older. To me, the PTs are kids movies. I'm in my 20s which may not be very old, but for myself, all my friends, and all of our parents, we can't stand the PTs. We grew up with the OTs and we know them well. So, when the PTs came along and were SO differant, and really cheesy and kiddy in comparison, it turned us right off. I can see why a kid who's like, 14 might love the PTs, but I hate them.

This forum was created so jimbo can rant and rave about how awesome ATOC was and how he thinks it's better than any of the OTs, and I can't resist arguing, because I feel so strongly against the PTs. I've seen each only twice and can't stand watching them any more than that. Everything about them makes me cringe. If you feel differantly, good for you. Personally, I hate the stupid things.
Author
Time
The Prequels are not any more kids movies then the originals. You oviously forgot the ewoks. They seem very adult don't they. There no more mature then Jar Jar. The Naboo Starfighters looked way way better the the originals X-wings. Also like Shimarra said the shinny digital look of the prequals is meant to show the happy age of Star Wars. Attack of the Clones feel was much more close to the originals then The Phantom Menace was and in Episode 3 Lucas is giving it an even more 70s dirty look. Its a progressive and evolutionary process. Attack of the Clones is a masterpiece. It has a beautiful story, beautiful effects, and a beautiful girl. Attack of the Clones is what movies are about. It combines story with action in such a seemless way. Very few movies meet this feet. Other examples are The Terminator, The Matrix, Dragonheart. Attack of the Clones is number one in my book for just doing everything right.
Author
Time
Another thing in my belief if you hate a Star Wars movie you are not a Star Wars fan.