CO

Nanner Split said:

Since when has it been the trend to shit on the Back to the Future sequels? I always liked all three.

 

 I agree.  BTTF II & III are good sequels, as they don't fall in the 'shit' sequels category for me.   They both lack that magic of the original, but BTTF II is very innovative and had a cool story, because what would anyone do if they had a time machine?  Go back and bet on sports and become a millionaire!

Superman III & IV are shit sequels, movies that I saw once, and never ever want to see again.  I think it was Superman IV where Superman addresses the United Nations?  Even as a teenager I was like, WTF???

Anchorhead said:

I'm all for continuing the petitions, letter writing, and published articles calling for a proper release and pointing out his lies.  I just can't behind the hate threads.  Lucas is someone who really digs his heels in when pushed and strikes me as the kind of fellow that would hold off a proper release just out of spite.

For all his flaws - and where Star Wars is concerned, he has more than can be counted - I just can't get behind the hate.  Through the years, Lucas has given me much more than he's taken from me.

 

I see what you are saying.  I honestly never understood the hate for Lucas for the PT.  Hey, I will be the first person to rag on the Prequels, but I never hated Lucas for those 3 movies.   They are what they are, just like that piece of crap Rocky V, I can choose to enjoy them or ignore them in my viewing universe.

I will say after the GOUT was the first time I really thought differently towards Lucas.  I would never hate the guy, because they are just movies in the end, but I will say that I have become frustrated with his disrespect for the original movies, and those morons at TFN take that and run and really disrespect the movies.

If someone enjoys the SE, PT, OOT, EU, when it comes to SW, I could really care less, what bothers me is that Lucas has helped perpetuate this stereotype that the OOT movies are inferior.  He has people on TFN actually saying the real ending in ROTJ is the 2004 version!!  So now we have a bunch of idiots who aren't proclaiming their love for different versions, which I am cool with, they are saying now that THIS or THAT is THE definitive version.  All because Lucas keeps saying, "The Originals dont exist anymore!!" 

I have multiple versions on DVD of T2, Lord of the Rings, ET, The Abyss, Aliens, Superman II, etc, and not once have I even thought what the definitive version was.  I just enjoy the one I like!!!!

Anchorhead said:

All the anger, discussions, alterations, sequels, board discussions, versions, formats, etc, etc - they are nothing but noise that fades away as soon as I press play.

I don't have the angst or hatred because it's a complete waste of time.  It's like Tom Hanks (Jim Lovell) says to Haise & Swigert in Apollo 13 when they start arguing with each other over something they can't change;

"We're not going to start bouncing off the walls for ten minutes, because we're just going to end up right back here with the same problem"

Anchor, you know you are one of my favs here because you are an Original SW fan only, but I have to respectfully disagree with you on this one.

Sure many people go on and on bitching about the PT and SE, which wont change those movies one bit.  But I think the fact that OT.com exists showed Lucas that there is a fanbase for the OOT, and eventually getting the GOUT released in 2006.  Now of course it was a crappy version, but the fact that Lucas relented on 'the version he deemed dead' was a small victory in itself.

Just look at Superman II: Donnor Cut, that release was soley driven by the internet as they sort of did the same thing we did, kept pressing Warner Brothers to go back and re-edit the old scenes, and they practically made a new movie, which costs alot more then Lucas would have to do with the OOT.  Same goes for Bladerunner, as the internet drove that BluRay release for the Original Cut last year.

In the end if Lucas released the OOT the same way Spielberg released E.T. in 2002 (same exact quality transfers, both versions included on the DVD), I would walk away and Lucas would never hear from me again. 

And the new generation of fans can enjoy all the shitty quality SW stuff that is released these days!  :)

ChainsawAsh said:

Naboo has been added to the end celebration, and you can hear a Gungan shout "Weesa free!" - but you never see Jar Jar, nor is it even really implied that the Gungan you hear is Jar Jar.

If you play the DVD backwards on an old turntable the Gungan really says, "Fuck You OT fans, love George!"

:)

ferris209 said:

I'm sorry guys, I cannot equate him with Elvis at all. I also disagree that any of his stuff was "timeless" it all sounds terribly 70's and 80's to me. But that is just my opinion. He was a good artist and a talent and certainly a standout of his era, but I just pull myself to go any further than that.

 

I love Elvis's music, but 'Hound Dog' and 'Dont Be Cruel' sound a bit 50's to me.   Elvis also didn't write his own songs, and Michael Jackson did, so I don't think you're giving MJ enough credit.

Elvis was a great entertainer, a great personality, but he didn't write much of his own music.  MJ's 'Thriller' I still believe is one of the highest selling albums in the history of music.  Now in saying that, MJ is still a pop star, so his music won't compare on the scale of The Beatles.

I'm not saying everyone should love MJ's music, because music is all about opinions, so no one is right or wrong.  But for anyone who lived through the 80's, especially through 'Thriller', the guy was the King for that time period. 

Oh, and I agree about the excessive coverage on MJ's death, it's enough already with the tributes!!! 

I think it is fair to critique Michael Jackson's legacy as 'The King of Pop' and a man accused of child molesting several times.

I think post-1993 Michael Jackson is the Wacko Jacko, who changed his appearance almost to being a white guy, slept with little boys, and dangled his child outside a hotel.

Pre-1993 is one of the most influential people to music ever.  I equate his impact to Frank Sinatra, The Beatles, and Elvis, they all have stood the test of time, and didn't cater to one market of fans. 

I was in elementary school when Thriller came out, and that was all that was talked about from 1983-84.  The girls loved Michael Jackson in my class, and I think he won 8 Grammy's that year?  For anyone who wasn't alive when MTV started in 1981, Thriller was the first long video as I believe it was 14 minutes long?  And in the first few months of 1984, the video was on EVERY hour.  Now think of MTV and that they don't even play music anymore!

I always thought Michael Bay is everything that is wrong with the Summer Blockbuster, and doesn't suprise me that this movie sucks.  His movies are souless, have zero character development, and the plots are always ridiculous.  His movies rely on NON STOP action,  explosions, and CGI, nothing more, nothing less.

Bad Boys, The Rock, Armageddon, Pearl Harbor, Bad Boys II, Transformers, and Transformers 2 are the reason why I rarely go to the movies in the summer anymore. 

TheBoost said:

 

Isn't that the nature of sequals; not to be as good as the original?

 I would have no problem if any of the movies above didn't have any sequels.  99% of the time, sequels are not as good, and they usually lead to more sequels where the series usually get stale to the point of the movie is a joke.  Batman & Robin anyone?

Even I dare say that the sequels for SW has put a damper on the series?  Stay with me on this one:

If Star Wars never had any sequels, I guarantee we would all have a copy of the Original Original Star Wars in Pristine DVD quality, and awaiting a BluRay release in the next year or two.  There may have been a SE, but the demand would not be there for it on DVD, so THAT would be the alternative version.

Now we have the SE'97, SE'04, OOT, PT, EU, and none of us as fans are happy! None of us can really enjoy the movies anymore on DVD because Lucas is headstrong on the SE 2.0 as his present day SW version.

I know we are giving up ESB, and for many who love ROTJ, you are giving that up too, but if Lucas stopped in 1977, Star Wars would essentially be like ET. 

What do you think?

Overrated films for me:

Forrest Gump - I just don't get it.  I am definitely in the minority because the movie was beloved that summer of 1994, but I just never thought it was a great movie.

The Departed -  I liked it, but this doesn't even rank in the top 5 for Scorcese for me.  Goodfellas is light years better then The Departed, yet The Departed won the damn Best Picture Oscar!

Independence Day - To this day, I will never understand how this movie was such a hit.  It is such a piece of crap, it isn't even a good 'guilty pleasure' movie, but again I am in the minority because it made a boat load of money.

Bingowings said:

Moth3r said:

CO said:

Terminator/ T2

While the series is much improved if T3 and T4 never happened, it's not perfect unless T2 also never happened.

Hallelujah!

While all the sequels can be improved by tinkering the series is greatly improved by removing all of them.

T2 is possibly the most over-rated film in history.

 

 I agree as I never understood how people could say T2 was better then T1, but it is an opinion.

I would have been fine if Cameron never did a sequel to The Terminator, but I did think it was still a very good sequel.

ChainsawAsh said:

CO said:

Fellowship of the Ring/The Two Towers/Return of the King

Wait ... what'd you take out?

 My list was all the movies that should be in each series. 

Star Wars/The Empire Strikes Back/Return of the Jedi

Back to the Future

Terminator/ T2

Jurassic Park

Godfather I/Godfather II

Superman: The Movie/Superman II

Raiders of the Lost Ark

The Matrix

Alien/Aliens

Fellowship of the Ring/The Two Towers/Return of the King

Jaws

Dirty Harry

Batman Begins/The Dark Knight

Rocky

Gaffer Tape said:

Well, whether it was real or not, you can't deny that it wasn't a marketing wet dream to not only be able to unveil these new-fangled Special Editions, but to claim they existed because of some messianistic effort to save the film stock from death.

 Yeah, I remember the interview with McCallum on how if they did not restore the Star Wars Trilogy back in '97, the movies would have been lost forever....

I am still trying to find any hit movie ever made that the original negatives were lost forever by a studio company!

Anchorhead said:

 I know for a fact he's lied about all things Star Wars77, so there's no believing him ever again.

 

No Anchorhead, it is Obiwan who is the liar in the Original Star Wars, not George Lucas:)

Anchorhead said:

However, it was sort of a double-edged sword.  Now I see what all the hype was about and I want to upgrade several of the films I already have.

This is why I haven't bought a BluRay player yet, because once I see a movie in 'Bluray' quality, I wont want to go back to watching 'DVD' quality.

It is the same as the GOUT, I have seen the '04 DVD's and how great a SW movie can look on DVD, with some flaws, and then I pop in the GOUT and I can't watch some crappy, grainy version of my favorite movies.

Ignorance is bliss, and I am staying away from BluRay until I can buy SW, Back to the Future, Jaws, Raiders, etc.

DarkFather said:

The guy rambling on and on and on about the various sounds was the thing that made me turn it off.

You're talking about Ben Burtt.  It drives me crazy how much time he gets on the commentary, and sometimes he gets crucial scenes I want to hear Lucas talk about.

It would be like Darth Vader is about the say to Luke I am your father, and Ben Fucking Burtt comes on, "On the soundstage we used big fans to simulate the wind in the backround and we turned up to the maximum to get the best wind resistance so you could see Darth Vaders cape swoosh all around."

Sky, here is my take on Jedi.

As a kid, I loved the movie, as I saw it in '83 as a 10 year old.  But in the same respect, I did not like ESB when I saw it in '80, much too dark for me.  I remember arguing with my brother, "The damn Yoda parts are so BORING!!!!"  "And whats with the ending, and the bad guys losing!"

Fast Foward years later, the tide starts turning.  I finally get the Trilogy in HighSchool and get to rewatch the movies whenever I want for the first time in my life.

StarWars - Still love it like I did in 1977, same magic, favorite movie of alltime.

Empire- Damn, this movie is fucking great, what was I thinking?  The Yoda parts kick ass, and I understand the cave!  The last 40 minutes could be some of the greatest ever put on screen for a film.

Jedi - Ok, I still enjoy it, but it is lacking that 'it', it is lacking that magic that pervades Star Wars and Empire.  Han Solo seems a bit off, the jabba scenes go on way too long, the Ewoks really hurt the tone of the movie, can anyone imagine the ewoks in Empire?  The ending is great, but the movie falls to #3, while Empire gets pushed to #2.

My point?  In one respect, I noticed the flaws in Jedi that I didn't see as a kid, but Empire also gets elevated as I get older too, as what I thought was dull or boring as a kid, is fucking awesome when I got older.  Jedi and Empire went different ways for alot of SW fans, nothing more nothing less.

www.thedigitalbits.com has posted that Indiana Jones Trilogy BluRay has been pushed back to the 2010 now.  It is in the rumor section, but Bill Hunt has a pretty good track record most of the time for DVD news.

Going by Lucas's track record on DVD, he released Indy Trilogy in 2003, and Star Wars Trilogy in 2004.  Are we now looking at the Star Wars BluRay movies in 2011????

I just don't understand two of the biggest selling movie series take their jolly old time coming to digital formats!!!

ATown8814 said:

Francis Ford Coppola and George Lucas both suffer from the same problem.

In fairness to Coppola, he actually admits he did Godfather 3 for the money.  He was very candid and very honest in an interview a few years back about the Godfather Trilogy (something Lucas could never humble himself to do).  Coppola said he was having financial problems in the late 80's, and Godfather III was old reliable to get him some $$$.  He even said that it didn't turn out as he hoped, and understood the public sentiment towards the movie compared to the first two classics. 

The one thing Coppola doesn't do is revisionist history about the Godfather movies, as he doesn't say that Godfather III was always planned, and doesn't tell audience to watch the movies in chronological order meaning flashbacks first.  He put out the VHS version of the movies with the flashbacks first as more of an experiment for the fans, but never protested, "The movies should be watched this way or that way." 

I always liked that Coppola was a bit more humble then Lucas.

OK, this is just my theory, so I welcome any disagreements or agreements:) 

Many here (not all, I am generalizing), wonder why SW & ESB stick out as such classics and wonder why ROTJ & the PT couldn't harken back to the quality of those two movies.  Here is my theory:

Star Wars '77 is just a simple good vs evil story that is essentially told through the hero. It is a self contained movie, and  it is film 101 at its best.

ESB is a brand new start to the series, and really tells a whole NEW story, essentially with the same characters we fell in love with.  Now the movie isn't just about good vs evil, but about father vs son, and by doing this Lucas can take the movie WHEREVER he wants to go.  He doesn't have to tie up any loose ends, isn't held down to saying what happened to this guy and that guy, the movie just moves for 2 hours and this is the NEW story, as Episode IV was just a prologue.

ROTJ and the PT are essentially tied down now by all the plot points that have to be settled because of ESB.  In ROTJ, we have to have closure if this is the last movie, we have to see what happened to Yoda, we have to see what happens to Vader, we have to have Luke find out who this 'other' is.  Great plot points, but the plot points essentially dictate the story, rather then in ESB, the story dictates the plot points.

Lucas is even more tied down in the PT as he has to tell the WHOLE backstory.  He has to follow a plotline and address many of the plot points in the OT to keep the story linear.  He can't go from point A to point C like he did in ESB, he has to go from point A to point B and finally to point C, and that is why the last hour of ROTS is essentially a paint by numbers greatest hits. 

Just my theory, discuss!

Gaffer Tape said:

I don't know.  I just don't see Godfather Part III as at all comparable to ROTJ.  Jedi is something of a rehash, something of a phone-in, where the characters fill their parts, and the only really good stuff is at the end.  It felt like an obligation:  to tie everything up.  Godfather Part III was something completely different from the first two films.  It felt fresh, while ROTJ felt a bit tired.

 I do agree that Jedi is a rehash of Star Wars, but it still has a purpose of closure because of the open ending of Empire.  Godfather III is sorta like the PT, it didn't need to be made, and Godfather II could still work as an ending to the series.

I love the ending of Godfather II with Michael just sitting there in Vegas all by himself, how ironic is that?  It is the greatest irony to every human being, your biggest enemy could be:  Yourself! 

I think the difference for me is that Jedi has great parts, and if you weigh them with the OK/Bad parts, the movie still works as part 3 of the OT.  I can't think of any memorable parts of Godfather III, other then the great line, "Every time.......they bring me back!"   

Gaffer Tape said:

What's so bad about The Godfather Part III?  I think it's great!

 Godfather III suffers the same fate as Return of the Jedi, it just doesn't compare to the two previous movies.  Godfather III isn't a bad movie, but when compared to Godfather I & II, it pales.  I always go by replay value as to how much I love a film and I have seen Godfather I & II a zillion times, and I can count on my fingers how many times I have watched Godfather III. 

Same with Return of the Jedi, as a sequel it isn't a bad movie, but when you compare it to Star Wars and Empire, it pales.  I always say that I would rather have 2 classics and 1 OK sequel like the OT and the Godfather Trilogy, rather then 3 crappers like the Prequels;)

Batman and Robin (1997)  It literally killed the Batman Franchise, until Nolan rebooted it.   There are alot of bad sequels that were named here, but I think we all have to look at the context of some of them as just throw away movies.  Batman was a staple of ruling the summer ever few years from 89-95, and then this turd was god awful.

skyjedi2005 said:

I would not have done the prequels period.  i would have moved the story forward and show Luke After Return of the Jedi.  I would have done a sequel trilogy with at least Mark Hamill if not Ford and Fisher. 

Looking back now, I am glad Lucas didn't do 7,8,9.  Atleast with the PT, if we don't like it, we can erase it from the story, cause essentially it is about the rise of Anakin and the Empire in a nutshell.  You can enjoy 4,5,6 even today without the PT.

If Lucas made 7,8,9 and those movies sucked with Hammil, and possibly Ford and Fisher, that would have REALLY tarnished the OT.  Atleast now we can say that 4,5,6 are classics to us, and the PT is just a different story, whereas 7,8,9 would have been like Rocky V, where OUR heroes are in a crappy movie.

Plus bashing is funner when it comes to Hayden, Jake Lloyd, Jar Jar, and Padme, whereas it wouldn't be the same burying Mark Hammill because the Sequel Trilogy sucks.

Publish them as books only, that way they are considered EU, and we would be waiting for the Star Wars Trilogy to come out on BluRay sometime in the future. 

No movies =  No Hayden = No change in the ending of Return of the Jedi;)