LexX

Was it already proven or just an urban legend that ROTJ 70 mm had TESB opening theme? This could prove that, if still needed.

The four hours were only more Jar Jar.

Skyfall really left me baffled with its Aston Martin. Bond seems to "remember" it and we are meant to think that he's driven it but he can't be the same guy who drove it in the 60s. Or should we just think that it was Bond's first time to drive some 50-year-old car and it happens to be exactly like the one in the other Bond universe? I think Craig's Bond films as a different timeline than the older ones as it was the first reboot, but this just doesn't make sense. It probably shouldn't either, but still.

SilverWook said:

There are times I think perhaps the iguana was really in charge, and Sanchez was merely his minion. ;)

LOL. Loved the iguana too!

Warbler said:

the 80's Miami/drug scene doesn't seem very Bondish to me.  Bond is a spy, not a narc.

It isn't. But this time... it's personal.

TLD is okay but it's missing something. It's not bad but it's lacking. Similar to the recent ones, like QOS. Okay to watch but meh. LTK is one of my personal favorites, it probably is in my top5. I'm a fan of 80's Miami/drug scene kind of things.

Warbler said:

LexX said:

I'd like to see a more adventuristic Bond next. Enough with the gloomy stuff, I'd like to see another Licence to Kill type of film.

you just contradicted yourself.  License to Kill was just about the darkest Bond movie to that point.

LexX said:

Now how about making a Bond similar to the old ones, not this kind of tribute movie.

License to Kill is not similar to the old ones.

I didn't. Licence to Kill isn't gloomy. It's dark, and ahead of it's time in that way, but it's not "terrorism is everywhere, everything is colorless except exotic new places, Bond has a darker side" etc.

To me, Licence to Kill is the last one of the old ones. It's also more similar to the very first movies than newer films.

EyeShotFirst said:

What kills modern Bond films starting with The World Is Not Enough, is how M based they are. Not saying it should stay with one mold, but come on, I start to nod off when ever Bond is in MI6.

That's just my opinion.

Agreed. I didn't need the whole story how M got replaced in Skyfall. It may seem okay for first viewing but I don't need to see it, say, after 20 years when the cast is probably replaced again. Too much "oh, you're *long pause* Q", "nice to meet you, *long pause* Moneypenny", "that's cool... *long pause* ...M".

Just watched Skyfall the second time. Copying The Dark Knight still shines through the whole movie, even more so than for the first time. Even the music. It's a very similar movie to watch, too. It's good to watch it but it's not something you pick up off the shelf to see it many times again, I think. Kinda like Nolan's Batman movies. They're not fun, the feel is almost documantary-like. For the future I hope some fun would come back to Bonds, not Moonraker fun, but Connery fun. Craig said that Austin Powers killed the fun from Bond films, I really hope not.

I'd like to see a more adventuristic Bond next. Enough with the gloomy stuff, I'd like to see another Licence to Kill type of film. A badass yet colorful and entertaining film. Also the film should be more Bond-centric, Skyfall took probably over 30 minutes to set up the whole "what happens to M and MI6" thing. Less extras, more Bond. And more Bond girls, Skyfall didn't really have any (Moneypenny and some nobody who soon gets killed, blah). Another 30 minutes probably went to telling how old stuff is better in different ways throughout the movie. We got it! Now how about making a Bond similar to the old ones, not this kind of tribute movie.

ray_afraid said:

Ronster said:

I have not been and I think I am going to give it a miss... Could anyone who has seen it imagine it being superior with John Williams music?

Or is it just that bad and even music won't save it?

I love music more than anything in life, but great music never turned a bad movie into a good one. Ever.

Well, at least the soundtrack of Broken Arrow made the film a little better than it actually was.

Ronster said:

I have not been and I think I am going to give it a miss... Could anyone who has seen it imagine it being superior with John Williams music?

Or is it just that bad and even music won't save it?

The image is just too dark and the overall feeling is IMO even more gloomy than in the Dark Knight trilogy which doesn't fit for Superman at all. Williams' music wouldn't fit into it at all. MoS just isn't fun. Well, I laughed to myself a couple of times during never-ending fights because I couldn't care less even if the whole Earth would be destroyed.

Just saw it too. I have to say, one of the worst films I've seen. I didn't imagine they would make a worse Superman film than Superman Returns but it seems like a masterpiece compared to this. Ugh. Very disappointed.

Ryan McAvoy said:

^ Working for Lando has weighed heavily on poor old Lobot

John Hollis has passed away years ago.

Avi: avvy

.DOC: DOCK

FAQ: FAK (pronounced like FUCK as that's how A is prononunced here, although I don't remember saying it out loud, just thinking it like that)

JPEG/MPEG/etc.: J-P-G, M-P-G, ... (still not used to the extra E)

.PDF: P-D-F

Of course, my pronounciation with these is not as you'd think it in English. If there is a vowel in it I usually think it as one word, like avi, mov, exe etc. Although I hate it when some people say AT-AT as atat, you don't say AT-ST  atst. Probably because of the vintage commercials, Kenner got it wrong.

Well, I saw this thread when you first posted it without any replies, and I knew that you were just trying to poke some fun with it. I just didn't think it was funny, as it's pretty much true and kind of sad that it is that way. Us, fans, can't get as easily excited as we maybe should. And again, that roots to those subjects mentioned in the replies.

Also my earlier reply was based on this whole thread which became more argumentative and not the original post, just saying. No offence meant.

Edit: And this is your third mocking thread? I have to ask, why? If you don't care about the subject ("people trashing everything"), then why the mocking? I think these replies are no surprise to you or anybody else, otherwise you wouldn't have made this if you didn't stir up some conversation. Again, I know it was meant to be as a joke, but I don't think you just expected to get LOLs out of this.

imperialscum said:

darth_ender said:

But Adywan started a thread on the new series Rebels.  And immediately many folks say it will suck.

It is not like people say it just like that... they have been experiencing disappointment after disappointment for more than 10 years. Any kind of statistical algorithm would make the same kind of prediction based on that kind of previous experience/data.

Exactly.

And since there are only news and/or rumors about upcoming releases, any opinions concerning them is really a moot point if you think about it. It hasn't been made yet, no-one has seen them, so saying "it will be great" is as valid or as ridicilous comment as "it will suck". But then we wouldn't have any discussion at all. I have to say that I'm more surprised about the optimism regarding the series. Hell, I didn't like TCW at all, and even I said I was somewhat interested. And I have to add, I like to be surprised positively, so I will always keep my excitement down. Nothing sucks more than being overly-excited and then let down. And if any fandom should know that, it's Star Wars fans.

I think someone needs to grow a thicker skin.

Btw, did I send you the McQ pdf as well msycamore? That's what I've used cataloging them but they don't include the toy stuff or that card for example.

70%?? Wow, I almost feel embarassed now, lol.

Now that you mentioned it, I went through my McQ files. It seems that there's about 100 production paintings then about 70 new ones.

none said:

timdiggerm wrote: I didn't think the paintings in that book were made for that book?

From The Art of Ralph McQuarrie: pg.297

Quote:"In 1995, I was asked to work on a book titled The Illustrated Star Wars Universe.  I really wasn't sure if I could do it, because I was sort of through with Star Wars.  I looked at some of the things I didn't gt a chance to do during the films that I thought I could finally complete, and I signed up for it.  It was really quite a pleasure.  These are a few of my favorite paintings from that book.

The "Jawa swap-meet on Tatooine" is the second of the images shown.

You always learn something. What other paintings did he paint in the 90s? I thought he only did some art for toys.

Rebels, huh... Sounds interesting!

Baronlando said:

Ryan McAvoy said:

 

and HOLY SH*T I now know what GL was talking about in '97 when he said SW didn't finish up looking how he imagined it:

 

^ That's going in my workprint fanedit for sure!

 

That painting was done for a book in the mid 90s.

Really? I did not know that, I've always thought it was original art. What book would that be?

Ryan McAvoy said:

^HELL YES!!!!!!!!!!!!

This photo has got me more excited about Ep.VII,than anything else.

That photo is almost 10 years old now, much has happened since.

Hey, it's me.

Mielr said:

I think the timing of this is also interesting, with all the rumors of his being cast in the next Star Wars sequels.

I'm almost certain this wouldn't be happening without the upcoming sequels.

Wow that's bad. So they decided this 13 years too late and got some beeping noise from the 50s? LOL

Waiting for this

SilverWook said:

By way of comparison, how has Disney been treating their live action films on Blu Ray? I haven't read anything negative about Who Framed Roger Rabbit?

There's a thread about Roger Rabbit in the other preservations forum here. It has been censored, but that's mostly for the animated parts. Don't know about other live action films.