logo Sign In

Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (official) — Page 3

Author
Time
Post link
I'm sure I'm in the minority, but I happen to find TPM to be far better than AOTC (not that either of them are that great). With some editing help, it could have been pretty good, and it succeeded on some fundamental levels. It also, for me, resembled a SW 'film'. AOTC was flawed on so many levels that I don't think anything less than a total overhaul could have saved it. Again, this is just my opinion though.
40,000 million notches away
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Luke Skywalker
sorry jimbo gotta just totally disagree with everything you said...
especially about T3....

id hate to see your movie collection if you honestly think its better than T2...


The first Terminator movie was a masterpiece. It is my favorite movie of the 80s. One of my favorite movies of all time. In my opinion Terminator 2 is vastly inferior. While it is much bigger bigger doesn't always mean better. The movie makes no sense. T-1000 is scientifically impossible, John was a whinny brat, its way to politically correct, and it fucks with the first movies theroys on time travel. Its a movie thats fun but its better the less you think about it. Terminator 3 is also inferior to the original and repeats some of Terminator 2s many flaws. Still it has such a great ending, nonstop action, Kristanna Loken, and returns to the first movies theroys on time travel make it overall better then Terminator 2.
Author
Time
Post link
Well I do agree with Jimbo insofar as the original Terminator is the best. T2 is a piece of garbage as far as I'm concerned. I have yet to see T3. It's on my Netflix queue but is not a priority of mine at the moment. If I see it, I see it. If I don't, I'm not gonna cry over it.

But, yeah, you gotta respect the fact that other people have opinions, Jimbo. Some people might like Alice in Wonderland better than Lion King (I don't, but I respect that opinion) and others might like Family Guy more than Futurama (I'm on the fence about that one, I like 'em both pretty equally - damn if I'm not looking very forward to the upcoming Stewie action figure!). Everyone's entitled to an opinion. That's what makes the freedom of thought so wonderful. If you want everyone to share your opinion, then you pretty much have to live in a place where emotion is repressed. Try the movies THX-1138 and Equilibrium, or just move to Iraq circa the Saddam days of yore.
"You fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is 'Never get involved in a land war in Asia'."
--Vizzini (Wallace Shawn), The Princess Bride
-------------------------
Kevin A
Webmaster/Primary Cynic
kapgar.typepad.com
kapgar.com
Author
Time
Post link
True everyones entitled to there opinions. I just don't understand them. I don't understand how or why people like Return of the Jedi more. So it bothers me. Can I get a good explanation of why. I apoligize if I sounded disrespectful but come on have some people hear not been repectful towards mine.
Author
Time
Post link
Not disrespectful man.
Listen, if you like AOTC best fair enough. I love ESb the best, but I don't tell you you're a twat for liking one film more than the other.
I'm glad you're so passionate about the film, shit I am about Empire. Just stop saying you're right and everyone else can go fuck themselves.

Jesus man, it's a discussion forum, not 'JIMBOS PLACE...SO MY OPION IS ALL YOU NEED TO HEAR'

http://www.facebook.com/DirtyWookie

Author
Time
Post link
Sometimes it's truly difficult to explain why you like one thing more than another. Sometimes, something just strikes a chord in you and you like it. I can't tell you why I like the music of Concrete Blonde, but I do. I can't tell you why my brother and I love sitting around watching Hudson Hawk. Terrible movie by all respects, but we love it.

I think if you just accept that some people like something and move on, then you won't get as much violent backlash against your opinions. That's all I do. Someone says they like something, I leave it at that. No point in getting all bent out of shape about it. Does it affect your life at all? No. So why worry about it? See what I mean?

Oh, and all things considered, I do like AOTC just a touch more than ROTJ. It's pretty close. But this is only because of the damn Ewoks. However, if I saw another damn Gungan battle in AOTC, I would not be so amenable. I do find the Ewoks to be much more acceptable than a bunch of floppy-eared Jar Jar speaking freaks.
"You fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is 'Never get involved in a land war in Asia'."
--Vizzini (Wallace Shawn), The Princess Bride
-------------------------
Kevin A
Webmaster/Primary Cynic
kapgar.typepad.com
kapgar.com
Author
Time
Post link
and now back to...............

Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (official)

- I wonder if GL came up with this title or if he found it on the internet

EITHER way this is a COOL title but I still think the new 'Jedi' ships look weak - progression or not, it looka liksa bigga peeza Bantha Poodoo

And remember....

A Jedi shall not know anger nor hatred

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

Author
Time
Post link
Well, rik, alot of fans already had Revenge of the Sith in their minds for a while, it just hadn't been confirmed. So Lucas very well could have went online to find a title that his fans would like. Wait, that seems uncharacteristic of Lucas. Do something to please his fans? Nevermind then.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: miochza
Well, rik, alot of fans already had Revenge of the Sith in their minds for a while, it just hadn't been confirmed. So Lucas very well could have went online to find a title that his fans would like. Wait, that seems uncharacteristic of Lucas. Do something to please his fans? Nevermind then.


Lucas doesn't do things just because fans want it. Its called Revenge of the Sith because that is the best title for the movie. So was Attack of the Clones. Also Bossk I suggest seeing Terminator 3 its definutly better then the second part.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: jimbo


Lucas doesn't do things just because fans want it. Its called Revenge of the Sith because that is the best title for the movie. So was Attack of the Clones. Also Bossk I suggest seeing Terminator 3 its definutly better then the second part.


I thought T3 was terrible compared to T2. The plot just seemed generic and done before. You like recent movies alot better than older ones don't you, jimbo?
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: miochza
Quote
Originally posted by:

I thought T3 was terrible compared to T2. The plot just seemed generic and done before. You like recent movies alot better than older ones don't you, jimbo?


No Terminator 1 is by far my favorite of the series. I could have liked Terminator 2 had it made any sense at all. Terminator 3s only problem is it carrys over some of Terminator 2s flaws. For example Arnold kills no one. He is the friggin Terminator he needs to kill. One of the biggest flaws of Terminator 2 was the fact Arnold was too human, too emotional, and had to take orders from some punk. In the third he is still the good guy but it less emotional and doesn't take orders. He acts alot more like a machine like he should have acted in Terminator 2. Still he was best as the villian. Though the worst thing about Terminator 2 was how it fucked with the first movies view on time travel. In Terminator 1 time travel is a circle of inevidibility. In Terminator 2 its a branching butterfly effect where things can be altered (either that or Kyle and the Terminator were lying). Terminator 3 appears to return to the first movies views on time travel which was a welcome plus. Also the T-1000 is scientifically possible. It mentions the T-1000 can't form complex machines. Yet he can see, hear, and talk. All of these require complex moving parts. I enjoyed the T-X more since its endoskeleton makes her far far more possible. Though it still makes no sense how either of them got through time. Also Terminator 3s got Kristanna Loken. Possibly the sexiest women alive. Who can forget her entrance from the time displacement equitment.
Author
Time
Post link
Well, he does to a degree. However, he has great taste in his preference on Terminator and Planet of the Apes flicks.

I'm sure I'll see T3 sometime soon. If for no other reason than Kristanna Loken. Yum.
"You fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is 'Never get involved in a land war in Asia'."
--Vizzini (Wallace Shawn), The Princess Bride
-------------------------
Kevin A
Webmaster/Primary Cynic
kapgar.typepad.com
kapgar.com
Author
Time
Post link
I haven't seen T3. For me, I just can't fathom how they could carry the story on after T2. On the DVD, I only watch the Extended Special Edition. You know, the one ends where we see Sarrah 30 years in the future. Anyway, it doesn't matter which version you see, the end is the same. They prevented the future events from happening when they killed Miles, blew up Skynet and destroyed all remaining parts of the Terminator. Logically, how can the story go on from there? There are no more machines that can come from the future because the future has been changed. It just doesn't make sense to me. And I watch a lot of Star Trek and have a rudimentary grasp of temporal mechanics. It just seems like I'd have to suspend too much disbelief to accept the events of T3.

This may be opening a can of worms, but which Planet of the Apes movie do you prefer Jimbo? The original or the remake?
Keeping The Star Wars Hoiliday Special alive. Once person at a time. Stir, stir, whip, whip, stir, beat, beat.
Author
Time
Post link
The original Planet of the Apes. I enjoy the remake for dumb action and Thade is a great villian but the polictal dialog of the original is very thought provoking. My favorite Apes movie is Conquest of the Planet of the Apes. Also no they didn't prevent Judgement Day. That ending was deleted. Frankly if that ending had been kept Terminator 2 would have been a total suck fest. That was the worst ending to any movie. I am so glad it was deleted. In the first Terminator movie we see that the future is completly unchangable. Everything in Terminator 1 shows that the Terminator was always there in 1984 and that nothing was changed

John Connors conceivement
Sarahs picture
The chip in the lab

It all shows that nothing can be changed. The worst thing about Terminator 2 was how it fucked with the first movies views to try to create a happy lame ass ending. Terminator 3 returns to the first movies views. Judgement Day is enevible. Humanity will fall. The machines will rise.
Author
Time
Post link
Whoshew! For a second there I thought you were gonna say the new Apes movie was the best. I hated the new one. Total mind rot. The apes looked great but the whole thing just stunk. In my opinion. For me, there was really no good reason to remake that movie. The original was and will always be the best. I will say that neither film folows the book that closely. However, at least the original had characters that were in the book. Not one character in the new film was ever mentioned in the book. Burton really messed that movie up.

As for T2. It doesn't matter which version you see, they still kill Miles, blow up Skynet and destroy all of the Terminator chips. Therefore, logically, how can the machines rise? All traces of them have been destroyed. The only logical way for this to happen is if someone went back in time to before Miles was killed and stole the chip that Skynet had from the original Terminator. Now if that happened, then maybe, I could buy the story of T3. However, by traveling back in time to steal the original Terminator chip then that pretty much negates the events of T2. Sarrah's whole quest to stop Skynet in T2 becomes a mute point.

Also by your logic, if the future is unchangable, then why did they send the Terminator back in time to kill Sarah in the first place? If the future is unchangable then with or without Kyle's involvement or the Terminator's, John was going to be born and therefore become the leader of the human resistance. It didn't matter how many Terminator's went back in time to kill Sarrah or John, they were going to live to fulfill their destiny.

The future is the past. The past is the future. The whole thing gives me a headache.
Keeping The Star Wars Hoiliday Special alive. Once person at a time. Stir, stir, whip, whip, stir, beat, beat.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: R2
Whoshew! For a second there I thought you were gonna say the new Apes movie was the best. I hated the new one. Total mind rot. The apes looked great but the whole thing just stunk. In my opinion. For me, there was really no good reason to remake that movie. The original was and will always be the best. I will say that neither film folows the book that closely. However, at least the original had characters that were in the book. Not one character in the new film was ever mentioned in the book. Burton really messed that movie up.


The only reasons they remade it are: 1. $$$$$$$ 2. $$$$$$$
Author
Time
Post link
Yep. $$$$$$$$$$ is the only reason that I can see for remaking that movie. The original is a classic. I'm always of the opinion that just because we can do something doesn't always mean that we should do something.
Keeping The Star Wars Hoiliday Special alive. Once person at a time. Stir, stir, whip, whip, stir, beat, beat.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: R2
Yep. $$$$$$$$$$ is the only reason that I can see for remaking that movie. The original is a classic. I'm always of the opinion that just because we can do something doesn't always mean that we should do something.


How many original Planet of the Apes were made? I remember a bunch....
Author
Time
Post link
There were 5. Planet of the Apes, Beneath the Planet of the Apes, Escape From the Planet of the Apes, Conquest of the Planet of the Apes, and Battle For the Planet of the Apes.

There was also a very short lived TV show called Planet of the Apes and the cartoon series Return To the Planet of the Apes.
Keeping The Star Wars Hoiliday Special alive. Once person at a time. Stir, stir, whip, whip, stir, beat, beat.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: R2
Whoshew! For a second there I thought you were gonna say the new Apes movie was the best. I hated the new one. Total mind rot. The apes looked great but the whole thing just stunk. In my opinion. For me, there was really no good reason to remake that movie. The original was and will always be the best. I will say that neither film folows the book that closely. However, at least the original had characters that were in the book. Not one character in the new film was ever mentioned in the book. Burton really messed that movie up.

As for T2. It doesn't matter which version you see, they still kill Miles, blow up Skynet and destroy all of the Terminator chips. Therefore, logically, how can the machines rise? All traces of them have been destroyed. The only logical way for this to happen is if someone went back in time to before Miles was killed and stole the chip that Skynet had from the original Terminator. Now if that happened, then maybe, I could buy the story of T3. However, by traveling back in time to steal the original Terminator chip then that pretty much negates the events of T2. Sarrah's whole quest to stop Skynet in T2 becomes a mute point.

Also by your logic, if the future is unchangable, then why did they send the Terminator back in time to kill Sarah in the first place? If the future is unchangable then with or without Kyle's involvement or the Terminator's, John was going to be born and therefore become the leader of the human resistance. It didn't matter how many Terminator's went back in time to kill Sarrah or John, they were going to live to fulfill their destiny.

The future is the past. The past is the future. The whole thing gives me a headache.


Skynet thought like you. They believed it could be changed so did John which is why he sent Kyle back. He knew Kyle was his father when he sent him back. Also if Judgement Day had been stoped then John and both Terminators would have vanished the second Skynet was destroyed. No skynet means no Kyle, no Kyle means no John. The fact that John didn't vanish means that Judgement Day still is going to happen. John and Skynet are connected to each other. Neither can live without the other and both destroy each other at the same time. If John never sent Kyle back then John would have never excisted. Its called fate. No fate is a lie. Or at least in the first and third movie it is.
Author
Time
Post link
I see where you're coming from with that. And it does make perfect temporal sense. So, logically, how was the story carried on after the second film? Besides John, what piece of future technology survived in order for the machines to rise? Something tells me that it's not going to be very plausible.

The whole Terminator series is one big paradox after another. That's why I gave up on it after the second one. For me, they changed the future. Judgement Day never happend. End of story. But that's just the way I see it.

That and I just couldn't bear to see the series go down the tubes the way that Alien did. Two Terminators were enough for me. Same with Alien. Should have stopped with the second one.

Also, this has gotten way off topic. LOL!
Keeping The Star Wars Hoiliday Special alive. Once person at a time. Stir, stir, whip, whip, stir, beat, beat.
Author
Time
Post link
oops..
i thought i was in the T2 vs T3 thread...
hehe

i still find that the ending to T2 through the dialogue and black road or the ending with sara at the park is the ending...
thats how i thought of it.... so giving us a sequel after you think its the end is always going to create conflict....
thats why im dreading Indy 4...
they should just leave it alone...
"Never. I'll never turn to the darkside. You've failed your highness. I am a jedi, like my father before me."
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Luke Skywalker
oops..
i thought i was in the T2 vs T3 thread...
hehe

i still find that the ending to T2 through the dialogue and black road or the ending with sara at the park is the ending...
thats how i thought of it.... so giving us a sequel after you think its the end is always going to create conflict....
thats why im dreading Indy 4...
they should just leave it alone...


I know Indy 3 had all of them riding into the sunset! Riding into the sunset! It's THE END for any story. If that is not closure, I don't know what is
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
I know Indy 3 had all of them riding into the sunset! Riding into the sunset! It's THE END for any story. If that is not closure, I don't know what is


EXACTLY!!!
someones finally gets what im saying...
haha

a movie doesnt have to say THE END to show that it is the end of the movie...
George and Steven both knew they were done with Indy.... but now all of a sudden they want to revisit it...
okay with Steven on board i have some confidence... but then Lucas hopes on and brings his CG with him....
no no no... there should be no Lucas allowed on this ride...
"Never. I'll never turn to the darkside. You've failed your highness. I am a jedi, like my father before me."
Author
Time
Post link
I'm totally not thrilled about a 4th Indy film. The story ended just fine with the 3rd one. I'm with Luke on this. Just leave it alone.
Keeping The Star Wars Hoiliday Special alive. Once person at a time. Stir, stir, whip, whip, stir, beat, beat.