zombie84 said:
Eh, could say the same thing about Boba Fett. Doesn't really do anything. Only in like four scenes. Has a stupid death. A few minutes of posing goes a long way.
Absolutely.
With all the idiotic deaths, I'm surprised nobody fell into an open elevator shaft.
Since they're like poetry, what with the rhyming and all, I find that I only need to watch three out of the six films.
Monolithium said:
zombie84 said:
Eh, could say the same thing about Boba Fett. Doesn't really do anything. Only in like four scenes. Has a stupid death. A few minutes of posing goes a long way.
Absolutely.
With all the idiotic deaths, I'm surprised nobody fell into an open elevator shaft.
Obi/Ani/Palps did in the beginning of ROTS...
Well, not so much fell into, but fell down, and ran along, and fell down some more, and...
Wait, what was I talking about?
WhatsMyName said:
Quackula said:
Grevious didn't look cool and acted and sounded like a complete buffoon. He didn't do a single thing in his only movie to make him seem threatening or impressive.
Shit, at least Darth Maul offed a Jedi.
First of all, Darth Maul was the greatest Sith out of all the movies.
This is kind of like saying Sebulba was the greatest out of all the podracers.
Sluggo said:
General Analogy sounds more threatening than General Grevious.
Oh, I so wish there was a way I could rename him this in my edit.
I just looked up Grievous on You Tube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XqKvKUTElA
I can't put into words how fucking stupid I think that is. No emotion, no depth. Just cartoon CGI, over-saturated colors, Transformeresque robots, and constant movement everywhere. Oh, and the requisite spinning light sabers.
Empty calories.
I love that you have to Google "Star Wars" characters.Anchorhead said:
I just looked up Grievous on You Tube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XqKvKUTElA
I can't put into words how fucking stupid I think that is. No emotion, no depth. Just cartoon CGI, over-saturated colors, Transformeresque robots, and constant movement everywhere. Oh, and the requisite spinning light sabers.
Empty calories.
Star Wars Revisited Wordpress
Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress
Grievous was one of the best things about the prequels.
The fact that no one remembers something from a movie doesn't mean SHIT.
More people have heard of Justin Bieber than Andrea Bocelli. Does that matter?
twooffour said:
Grievous could have one of the best things about the prequels if they hadn't given him that lame-ass cough and made him into a chicken-shit coward.
Fixed.
Ziggy Stardust said:
Let us not forget, Darth was in the prequels.
True.
It would be interesting to somehow find a way to measure if the recognition of Vader by those 14-year-olds was from the OT or the PT. My guess would be that it's a combination of both. For 34 years Vader has been a cultural icon of bad. That's fame the prequel characters can't buy.
doubleofive said:
I love that you have to Google "Star Wars" characters.Anchorhead said:
I just looked up Grievous on You Tube.
You guys drive me to it. ;-)
Because he was mercifully short lived? ;-)twooffour said:
Grievous was one of the best things about the prequels.
Star Wars Revisited Wordpress
Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress
doubleofive said:
Because he was mercifully short lived? ;-)twooffour said:
Grievous was one of the best things about the prequels.
Delicious ham and cheese to cheer at, that's why. Kinda like the Green Goblin from Spiderman (the one in the mask, at least - Grievous got nothing on Dafoe's incredible face expressions :D).
TV's Frink said:
twooffour said:
Grievous could have one of the best things about the prequels if they hadn't given him that lame-ass cough and made him into a chicken-shit coward.
Fixed.
"Sleazy villains" are often "cowardly" to some extent - the Joker from TDK fights like a pussy (heck, even Nicholson's in the old film), Raul Julia in Street Fighter, and I could probably name others (but these two have already gained "iconic" status in pop culture, so hey).
Using dirty tricks, being weak and attempting to run away all the time makes them less "badass", but all the more "sleazy" and "despicable", and all in all in no way weaker villains cinematically.
The cheesy, stupid cough is part of why I find watching him so enjoyable. Basically, if you compare him to Vader or even the Emperor, he's pretty much a cackling, mustache-twirling Disney villain, but as far as I'm concerned, a damn entertaining one.
To each his own, I suppose. I still think comparing a (weak) character like Grievous to a cultural icon like Darth Vader means nothing. Many people who don't know Star Wars, can recognize Darth Vader.
Anchorhead said:
I just looked up Grievous on You Tube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XqKvKUTElA
I can't put into words how fucking stupid I think that is. No emotion, no depth. Just cartoon CGI, over-saturated colors, Transformeresque robots, and constant movement everywhere. Oh, and the requisite spinning light sabers.
Empty calories.
Not sure about the colors, I think the Star Wars clips on Youtube most have over-saturated colors - you can regulate that shit, and it looks better on my DVD at home. Still quite "colorful", though...
CGI is pretty convincing and photorealistic in itself, as far as I can judge.
I agree that the fight itself is lame-ass and sucks, but the dialog parts in that particular scene, to me, is pretty much on par with the Ben-Darth scenes from ANH.
Both exchanges are cheesy, wooden "cliché storm" material, and while this one is so in a more "comical" way (feels like it was from some sort of parody/comedy film) and the other one's more "epic" and "mythical" and basically takes itself as seriously as this kind of dialog allows, I still do enjoy it.
Grievous' like "you are looooost", and then this stupid-ass clichéd "western eye shot"... and then Obi-Wan's like "ohh... I don't think so!! aahhhhhh"...
Delicious. I do find the majority of the dialogue in the prequels dull and boring, whenever not downright painful, but this bit is damn cool :D
Alexrd said:
To each his own, I suppose. I still think comparing a (weak) character like Grievous to a cultural icon like Darth Vader means nothing. Many people who don't know Star Wars, can recognize Darth Vader.
Not arguing with you there, but I'd be careful when using osmosis as a judge.
A bunch of furryballs known of "Tribbles" have made it from one silly (but fun as hell) comedy episode to being one of the most (or more) prominent Star Trek images.
Of course, "Klingons" are still better known... but.. you know...
In my opinion, it's not about the dialogue (The OT never had good dialogue, either). It's about charisma.
twooffour said:
TV's Frink said:
twooffour said:
Grievous could have one of the best things about the prequels if they hadn't given him that lame-ass cough and made him into a chicken-shit coward.
Fixed.
"Sleazy villains" are often "cowardly" to some extent - the Joker from TDK fights like a pussy (heck, even Nicholson's in the old film), Raul Julia in Street Fighter, and I could probably name others (but these two have already gained "iconic" status in pop culture, so hey).
Using dirty tricks, being weak and attempting to run away all the time makes them less "badass", but all the more "sleazy" and "despicable", and all in all in no way weaker villains cinematically.
The cheesy, stupid cough is part of why I find watching him so enjoyable. Basically, if you compare him to Vader or even the Emperor, he's pretty much a cackling, mustache-twirling Disney villain, but as far as I'm concerned, a damn entertaining one.
I can see your point. I still think he could have been a much better character, but as Alexrd said, to each his own.
Alexrd said:
In my opinion, it's not about the dialogue (The OT never had good dialogue, either). It's about charisma.
Almost everything Han Solo says... heck, every SCENE where he is in, at least from the first two movies, still looks pretty damn fun on paper.
Take the exchange on board of the Falcon, for example, when Han taunts Luke about Leia - or when Solo is about to leave and Leia tries to prevent him. The dialogue feels alive and fresh, and there is unspoken thought and implication almost behind every line.
The "I was but a learner, but now I am a master" "only a master of evil, Darth", is cheesy cliché stuff - obviously, still delivered with lots of charisma ;)
TV's Frink said:
twooffour said:
TV's Frink said:
twooffour said:
Grievous could have one of the best things about the prequels if they hadn't given him that lame-ass cough and made him into a chicken-shit coward.
Fixed.
"Sleazy villains" are often "cowardly" to some extent - the Joker from TDK fights like a pussy (heck, even Nicholson's in the old film), Raul Julia in Street Fighter, and I could probably name others (but these two have already gained "iconic" status in pop culture, so hey).
Using dirty tricks, being weak and attempting to run away all the time makes them less "badass", but all the more "sleazy" and "despicable", and all in all in no way weaker villains cinematically.
The cheesy, stupid cough is part of why I find watching him so enjoyable. Basically, if you compare him to Vader or even the Emperor, he's pretty much a cackling, mustache-twirling Disney villain, but as far as I'm concerned, a damn entertaining one.
I can see your point. I still think he could have been a much better character, but as Alexrd said, to each his own.
At this point, one has to make the distinction: he could be better character, or a better CARTOON?
As a character, undoubtedy - he was established and characterized waaaaay too poorly.
As far as personality and mannerisms, again, could he be more threatening and serious? While Grievous, imo, still manages to come off as threatening instead of completely disappearing in the camp territory, heck sure.
As for could he be more memorable and entertaining than he was, if we STAY with the "cheesy Disney villain" concept? Sure, maybe, not saying he's the epitome of cheese villainy on film, but he's already pretty damn fun to watch (ymmv on that), and it's obvious that quite a bit of work has been put into giving his movements character.
For what it's worth, I've seen some snippets of CW, and I do find Grievous pretty boring there, as compared to the movie - he doesn't cough, and acts less silly overall :D
Grievous was a stupid, worthless piece of shist in all ways.
His 'voice-acting', if you can call it that, was done by Matthew Wood.
The same Matthew Wood who is responsible for the absolute garbage that is the 2004 dvd sound mix for ANH.
Need I say more?
hairy_hen said:
Grievous was a stupid, worthless piece of shist in all ways.
Come on now, I was disappointed in him too, but need you stoop so low as to call him shist?
Grievous seemed more menacing and interesting when I was just reading him in the RotS novelisation.
Then I went to the actual movie, and could have died of embarrassment at what I was seeing. It took a lot of rationalising to make me think that any of that was okay, and that didn't last more than a few months before how rubbishy it was completely sunk in.
The Matthew Wood thing is just the icing on the cake.
When I went to see episode 3 opening night people in the audience were laughing at grivious. I think half the audience just was there to see how bad of a film it would be compared to the other two turds.
Typo joke fail :-(
...
Incidentally, I kind of liked Grievous in the older CW series.
I knew you were joking, but the spelling 'shist' was quite deliberate. Could have also used 'shast'. :p
I've never really understood all the cracks about the dialogue in the OT. Not the greatest sometimes, sure, but much better than the PT. Plus, as has been said, it's delivered with such style.