logo Sign In

CO

User Group
Members
Join date
25-Jul-2005
Last activity
22-Apr-2019
Posts
1,568

Post History

Post
#318897
Topic
Indiana Jones IV
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/318897/action/topic#318897
Time
I still think I am going to rent this movie, cause I it sounds like a typical sequel, which really doesn't get me juiced to goto the theater. Even people who have liked it from what I heard on the internet are doing what I call the PT excuses, "Well, what do you expect....it was never going to be like the originals.....you are expecting too much......"

To me a sequel should strive to be as great as the original, and that is all I ask for when goto the theater, as you look at a director like James Cameron, when the man does a sequel, he wants it to be better then the original. He did Aliens and T2, and we can debate which ones are better then the originals, but damnit, they are great sequels, and Cameron could have easily done a paint by numbers sequel of both films, and they would have been good enough for the time, and just be considered so-so 20 years later.

For me, the Indiana Jones sequels are entertaining, but forgettable years later, as they just don't come close to Raiders, so anyone who has seen this 4th Indy, is it on par with a T2 movie where it is a great sequel, or is it just a Lethal Weapon 4, where it is a sequel that is living off its name.

Thanks.
Post
#318492
Topic
Indiana Jones IV
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/318492/action/topic#318492
Time
zombie84 said:

Romancing the Stone may have been inspired by Raiders but its much more than just a knock-off, its a terrific adventure film itself. Some people used to consider it the real sequel to Raiders rather than Temple of Doom. I wish they still made movies like Romancing the Stone. The closest we get is The Mummy and Tomb Raider, which are fun in their own, superficial way. But I don't recall any other explorer/jungle adventure film like Romancing the Stone that was made with adults in mind and had serious acting and writing. Everything sort of winks at the camera or is deliberately cheesy. Romancing the Stone was great because it had realistic characters written from an adult perspective--just like Raiders. Too bad its sequel sucked though, it could have been a very neat sort of alternative to Indiana Jones.


I agree Zombie, Romancing the Stone is a great 80's flick, and that is because Michael Douglas and Kathleen Turner are such great characters, and that is the difference today in these action movies, they rely too much on action/CGI instead of focusing on the characters to tell the story. Brendan Fraser in the Mummy and Angelina Jolie in Tomb Raiders are typical of movies today, one dimensional characters that take a backseat to the explosions and constant action.
Post
#318325
Topic
Crystall Skull has GL's fingerprints all over it
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/318325/action/topic#318325
Time
Actually, most reviews are positive in a sense of putting the expectations game before you walk in. This is why I have a big problem with these sequels, and this has nothing to do with Lucas. It is almost like they are yelling to the fan, "DONT EXPECT A GREAT MOVIEEEEEE!!!!!"

Usually by the 4th movie in a series, the movies start to get a bit stale, Lethal Weapon 4 anyone? But the characters still sell the movie, so you atleast have some affection for them walking into the theater. Same goes with Indy, we all love Ford, he is one of the coolest action characters put on screen, so Lucas/Spielberg can really put anything up there to Joe Public.

I think Indy IV will be a good sequel, but was it really needed? I mean will we be really talking about this movie 5 years from now, or will it have that replay value of movies of the past? Probably not, but this is Hollywood these days: Sequels, Sequels, Sequels... and as long as people keep coming, and think that 'good' reviews equates to a great movie, I'm sure we'll see Indy V along with Rambo V next summer.
Post
#318073
Topic
Oh yeah!!! Lucas...clueless as ever.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/318073/action/topic#318073
Time
thecolorsblend2 said:

And I think some of you have some really screwy ideas about CGI. It's a tool to achieve a certain illusion, same as any other from the filmmaking trade. If it's a choice between something looking exactly the way the director wants via CGI or else a hackjob, bastardized shadow of how he originally envisioned, I'll take CGI everytime.


I don't think anyone thinks CGI is bad, but there is a point where it overwhelms the movie. Look at a movie like T2, that is a perfect example where CGI makes the movie better, where the Robert Patrick T-1000 can do all these things on screen that wouldn't be possible in the 70's, especially when he reforms after being shot or something. Jurassic Park is another example where many dinosaurs were CGI'd to really give the movie that epic look that models may have not have achieved, as it would have been too expensive to build that many dinosaurs.

Where CGI goes wrong for me, is when it overwhelms the story & characters, and it becomes a big 'look how cool I can make this movie look' fest. You look at a movie like TPM, you have real locations like Tatooine, then you goto CGI environments like Kamino, Geonosis, Utapau, Mustafar, and just don't hold up as well compared to OT enviroments like Hoth and Endor.

I remember back in 1996, the huge summer movie to see was Independence Day, as the CGI wowed the crowd especially the White House Blowing up. That movie has not held up, essentially because the story & characters took a backseat to the CGI/Action fest that made movie-goers love it 12 summers ago. Now it is called one of those 'guilty pleasure' movies. Now those pre-CGI movies like Jaws, Star Wars, Raiders, and ET hold up much better simply because the characters and story were ALWAYS the #1 reason the movies were great.
Post
#318035
Topic
Oh yeah!!! Lucas...clueless as ever.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/318035/action/topic#318035
Time
sunday256 said:

Well that cluless filmmaker just so happend to make some of the most popular movies ever. Some of you guys need to get a grip. Stop taking all this crap you read and hear about so seriously.


Sunday, I think people who call Lucas a hack now are being too extreme, but in the same respect he is the not the same filmmaker that made our favorite movies from the late 70's/early 80's.

It happens to anyone, athletes, actors, musicians, they have a prime where their work is second to none, then once they reach stardom and have kids as Mickey said to Rocky in Rocky III, "You become civilized." You lose that eye of the tiger to put it metaphorically.

I look at Lucas like a great rock band like The Who or Led Zeppelin, has Pete Townshend written anything as great as Tommy or Quadrophenia in the past 20 years? Has Jimmy Page/Roger Plant recorded anything close to Stairway to Heaven in the past 20 years? The same goes for Lucas, he churned out Graffiti, Star Wars, then produced films like Empire & Raiders, and then he got divorced raised 3 daughters, and played it safe for the rest of his career.

George Lucas career is just like most directors,(with exception of a handful guys like Spielberg) who is just past his prime, and the difference is that Coppola and Depalma, other great directors from the 70's aren't making anymore movies that are extensions of their trilogies for people to compare them to, they are doing new work and most of it isn't as great as what they were doing 20-30 years ago. Oh yeah, Coppola did Godfather III! See what I mean?
Post
#317998
Topic
Oh yeah!!! Lucas...clueless as ever.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317998/action/topic#317998
Time
See, what Lucas doesn't understand about Indy & SW, is Indy(Harrison Ford) is what sells Indy, and the story of SW is what sells SW. By having Shia as a continuation of the Indy adventures will kill the series, because people are plopping down their 10 bucks to see Harrison Ford, plain & simple.

With the PT, Lucas was able to get away with a new cast, because the story tied to the OT, and how Darth Vader came to be was the hook that kept us waiting for 3 movies.

It would be like having Back to the Future IV, and not having Michael J Fox in it, and some new guy flying the Delorean all around with new adventures, nobody would care!
Post
#317760
Topic
Indiana Jones IV
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317760/action/topic#317760
Time
I have to say any 4th movie in a movie series that comes out you have to take with a grain of salt, and can't expect too much from it. Remember Leathal Weapon IV? Superman IV? The Phantom Menace?

I think this will be on par with TOD & LC, as good sequels that are entertaining, and essentially not really needed, but a diehard will still enjoy it. The one thing I don't like is having Marion come back, as the great thing about each Indy movie is that he essentially had a different love interest each movie, a different sidekick, and that is what makes each one original in that respect. As much as I love her character from Raiders, and love Connery as Indy's dad, I don't want to see them in sequels after the fact, cause they give each movie their own identity.
Post
#317688
Topic
Originals: A New Preference
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317688/action/topic#317688
Time
The irony of all these changes, is I actually didn't mind the '97 changes, and for a long time had a bootleg of those versions when I first got a DVD player back in 1998.

Then Lucas put out the '04 DVD, and Hayden was in there in ROTJ! I remember saying, "WHOA! He is changing actors now? What the hell is he doing to these movies?" So I bought a bootleg of the OOT, which I hadn't seen since I was a kid on HBO, and realized how much better these versions were, and how stupid and unnessecary alot of the changes were.

I guess the irony is that Lucas couldn't stop changing the OT, and he was able to fool me with the '97 SE, but after he made more changes in '04, I had enough and explored the OOT versions again.

Fool me once, shame one me, fool me twice......
Post
#317683
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317683/action/topic#317683
Time
I still would like the find out the specifics on when Lucas got the rights to the OOT in the 90's from Fox, specifically SW'77, as he owned the rights to ESB & ROTJ. I remember he negotiated to get the rights to the OT films, and by having the 'SE', which wasn't the same cut as the Originals, he wouldn't have to give a dime to Marcia Lucas. And he was able to release them in '06 as bonus versions, and someway not have to pay Fox or Marcia for that set too.

I don't know the whole story, but I remember reading about this in the summer of '06, and wonder how much this contributes to Lucas 'sticking by vision' mostly so he doesn't have to pay his ex-wife a dime. If this is true, I can understand the man doesn't want to give anymore money to a women who left him, in that respect, I don't blame him.
Post
#317639
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317639/action/topic#317639
Time
zombie84 said:

I would even disagee with "95% of fans prefer the OOT", I don't think thats even close to being accurate, I would say only about 50% of the fans prefer the OOT because 95% of younger fans like the SE and prequels, and this is LFL's primary demographic right now, that under-20 years old crowd, the one that loves Spiderman 3 and Iron Man and The Matrix. .


My bad Zombie, I meant 95% of the fans who have seen the OOT, as most younger kids honestly never saw it, so in that respect, they really dont have a favorite version, since the SE is the only one they have seen.

My nephews are a perfect example of never seeing the OOT, my sister in law bought them the '04 DVD's and they have grown up (all of them under 10) with the SE, and really don't know about the OOT vs SE debate.
Post
#317623
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317623/action/topic#317623
Time
I agree with Zombie. You guys have to understand there are two types of markets that buy home video, the masess and the diehards, and the masses are only going to buy one set for each new generation (ie VHS, Laserdisk, DVD, BluRay, etc.)

Whatever version of SW/OT came out in 2004, whether it was the OOT, '97, or the '04 version, they would have sold pretty much the same numbers. Sure if the OOT were released that year, the numbers would have been alittle better, but the masses will not nitpick when it comes to which version they want.

For example, I like ET, but it is not one of my favorite movies of all-time. When it was first announced in 2002 for DVD, it was only going to be the SE, and I was sorta mad, but I still would have bought it. In the end, the Original Version was added last minute, mostly cause it didn't well in the theater, and they added that version when the DVD came out in October, but the bottom line was I was buying it cause it wasnt life or death to me, although I preferred the Original ET version.

Same goes with the OT, 95% of the fans prefer the OOT, but most fans aren't going to go crazy if Lucas puts out the SE, and like myself with ET, they will settle for whatever comes out. Lucas has one shot to get the masses for BluRay, just like he had for DVD, and just like he had on Laserdisk. After that, he then has to tweak each edition to get the diehards to buy it again: Deleted Scenes? OOT remastered? PT with added scenes? New documentaries?

So OOT could be on the horizon when SW BluRay hits the shelves, but if it is the SE, then it will do just fine sales-wise. And that makes me sad, but there isn't much we can do about it.
Post
#317492
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317492/action/topic#317492
Time
Zombie, have you ever seen the Empire of Dreams Documentary? There are shots in there of the OOT that anamorphic, such as the death star exploding without the ring, Han encountering 5 stormtroopers inside the deathstar instead of a room full of them, and of course the original crawl without Episode IV: A New Hope added. When I watch that documentary, those scenes definitely come up anamorphic, so how is that possible? Where are they taking those scenes from?

Thanks
Post
#317454
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317454/action/topic#317454
Time
Exactly Zombie.

Let's look at it from Lucas's perspective. He prefers the SE, he doesn't feel like putting out 2 different editions of the movies in every boxset, he wants everyone to look at the saga as 6 movies, as long as the SE sell well in every release, why would he change? If the '04 DVD's were the #1 selling boxset that year, why should he think the majority of SW fans would want the OOT? Lets just say the SE + PT movies are released on BluRay in 2009 and it is the #1 selling boxset that year, why should Lucas not think the majority of fans want that?

Now if the SE + PT BluRay set does not sell well, then there Lucas & Co. will realize that the market may not want the SE movies, or care to rebuy the PT movies too. THEN he goes back to old faithful: OOT.

People have to speak with their wallet, and if this CloneWar movie does great boxoffice numbers, and the TV show gets great ratings, Lucas will move on and like he has always done: Go with the market that is lining his pockets in the PRESENT DAY.

Just think of all those SW'77 fans who don't recognize Vader as Lukes dad, or Luke & Leia as siblings, have they ever gotten a single release of Star Wars on VHS in that context? No, Lucas catered to the OT fans all through the 80's and 90's with Star Wars Trilogy Boxsets.
Post
#317439
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317439/action/topic#317439
Time
Actually, I don't ever like rooting for anything to fail, but I think if the Clone War movie in August doesn't do well at the box office, and the series on TV doesn't get great ratings, then this will actually help the OOT being released on BluRay.

Everything in business is about supply/demand, and when the SE in '04 were the #1 seller on DVD that year, why should Lucas think there is a huge demand for the OOT? It is just like the money the PT made in the theater, sure there are vocal people that didn't like it, but the movies made ALOT of money, so why should Lucas think that there aren't saga fans who enjoy the 6 movies?

The only way that Lucas will go back to the older fanbase is if the new fanbase dries up. If the toys stop selling, the videogames don't sell as well, the Clone War movie underperforms, the TV show gets low ratings, etc. Lucas will then realize that the real cash cow for the future is the movies, and he may realize the OOT fanbase will always be there, and the 'Saga' fans may be the wishy washy ones.

Only time will tell, cause SW is a train that has never derailed no matter what quality has been put out, and as long it is keeps making money with Lucas's new endeavors, the farther away Lucas will distance himself from the old fanbase and focus on the new.

Edit: To sorta sum up my post, if the '04 DVD's didn't sell well, can we all agree that the OOT would have been remastered for a nice boxset a year or two after that, cause Lucas would have gotten the memo that nobody wants the SE, they want the originals. But the OT is so powerful, the majority of people will 'put up' with the SE just to have them on DVD. I can't tell ya how many of my friends bough the 04 Boxset and said, "Yeah, the SE changes annoy me, but its SW!"
Post
#317276
Topic
The Empire Strikes Barack
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317276/action/topic#317276
Time
Lord Phillock said:

hah! That was really funny!

hmm last time I checked... Abraham Lincoln was republican.


A co-worker and myself were rolling when we were watching it in work, and I think it would have been better if JFK was inserted as ObiWan ghost in ESB, and have him talk in that Boston accent, "You must see Yoda on Dagobah....."

They should have showed Bill Clinton(Emperor) zapping Obama, and then Hillary looks at the delegate count and realizing she can't get the nomination, and then flashes back to Monica Lewinsky, and then throws Bill Clinton down the shaft.
Post
#317248
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317248/action/topic#317248
Time
Baronlando said:

I had this notion that LFL might do the OOT right this year, if only to broadly promote the clone wars and the videogame, and make this "new wave Star Wars" more all-inclusive to everybody, the focus seems very narrow now, mainly kids. And kids have a LOT competing for the attention. (Plus, Indiana Jones is such an exercise in stroking the nostalgia of 30 somethings, a restored 77-80-83 trilogy with a bunch of old school packaging would fit right in with that)


It is really weird why Lucas won't just put out a great edition of the OOT, and create another fanbase to milk every few years. Think about it, he has the Saga fans that he can keep putting out SE/new changes to the OT/PT movies, and they will keep buying them. He can put out EU books/cartoons that another segment of fanbase will always keep up with. He then has the toys/videogames for kids/teenagers for every new system. Why not remaster the OOT on DVD, and then remaster it on BluRay 3 years down the road and double dip us!
Post
#317208
Topic
What order would you show the Star Wars movies to your kids?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317208/action/topic#317208
Time
Cable-X1 said:



CO....you are right...the best will win out in the end....but I'm keeping the faith nonetheless and making sure the kiddies experience SW exactly the way I did...by seeing the best first.


I agree, but times are different now with DVD and essentially all the movies being out at once.

I am pretty sure we are roughly the same age, but we saw the movies 3 years apart, and waited....waited for the next installment. They are going to see the movies probably all in a couple of days? weeks?

I saw SW in '77 and just enjoyed the movie for 3 years before ESB, and the ironic thing was I only saw the movie once in the first 6 years of its existence! If you remember we had to wait til '83 to see the movie on HBO! So even though SW was my favorite movie, and ESB & ROTJ were #2 & #3, I only really saw them once in the first few years of existence. I didn't see ESB again til 1985 when we finally got a VCR, and ROTJ again til 1986 when it came to home video.

I guess what I am saying is that I respect and agree you should show your kids the OT in that order first, but because of DVD, kids can watch the PT after that, and then tell you, "You know what pop in Episode IV, that was a really cool movie!" For us, I saw it SW in 1977 at 5 years old and then waited til I was 11 to see it again! So, we just grew up in a different time, and in someways, the waiting may have been the best part.
Post
#317192
Topic
What order would you show the Star Wars movies to your kids?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317192/action/topic#317192
Time
Guys, you have to let your kids watch the PT movies, and don't be afraid of whether they like it or not. When I was growing up in the late 70's/early 80's as a kid, the days before VHS, I watched so many movie series out of order, cause you were married to whatever came on HBO or cable, you couldn't just pop in a DVD when you wanted to watch it.

I saw Rocky II before Rocky I, I saw Temple of Doom before Raiders, I saw Jaws 2 before Jaws 1, and I saw Superman II before Superman I, and considered the sequels all better then the originals as a kid, cause I saw them more times on TV. As I got older, I started to smarten up as to what is a great movie, and what is average, and after I got to see them all on VHS, I realized the originals of all those movies series are classics.

Kids are going to see the PT, just like they are going to see Batman & Robin(1997) sometime on TV, you just have to let them enjoy what they want, and trust me, in the end quality will ALWAYS win over.

Although I do agree if you can show your kids the OOT first, that is fair because they did come out first.