It should have been Bib Fortuna that was added instead of Boba Fett.
I didn't like that article's Hamill-bashing. I always felt he's been wrongly maligned. But I suppose that's for another thread.
Not only did the 3D release under perform, but none of TPM3D-related merchandise seemed to sell, either. All the store shelves near me are still clogged with TPM action figures that don't move.
I was talking to an acquaintance the other day and he started telling me about Lucas leaving Lucasfilm, which I already knew thanks to you fine folk.
But in his version of the story, George was humbled by the failure of TPM3D and decided he'd had enough of Star Wars. Has anyone heard this, or is this just conjecture?
McCallum is smart enough to know there's $$$$ to be made with the UOT. That's all he cares about, after all.
Religious references don't ruin movies for me. They're not a plus or a minus to me, just a "zero".
Comedies that rely almost entirely on pop culture are fairly rare. I don't watch Seth MacFarlane cartoons or Friedberg/Selzer movies. I hear I'm not missing much.
timdiggerm said:
What if the allusions had been to ancient myths or some other religion?
I don't really like that either. That engineer sacrificing himself at the beginning is probably supposed to be a reference to Prometheus; again, that doesn't really do anything for me.
I also hate TV shows that rely on pop culture references for humor. (Family Guy) I wonder if there's a connection.
I'm not a religious person, so religious allegories and symbolism mean nothing to me.
In film class, a teacher would point out during a movie, "Note the Christ-like imagery," and I would just shrug while teacher oohed and ahhed.
It just seems lazy to me; a crutch. A director's story isn't strong enough on its own, so let's invoke Jesus. That makes it deep.
If I wanted to watch a movie about Jesus, I'd watch Passion of the Christ or something.
I hope this post doesn't offend anyone; it's not intended as such.
Well---no film is perfect----but if there had been no Star Trek The Motion Picture-----then there would have been no ST movie franchise ------ Period.
And if I am not mistaken----after it is adjusted for inflation---ST:TMP had been the highest grossing ST movie(yes---even more than the beloved Wrath Of Khan!)----until the 2009 release of Abrams's new ST film.
I do agree with your points that you made above------- having said that there is a certain amount of subjectivity when it comes to this kind of analysis.
I personally felt that the CGI version of the Vger spaceship looked exactly that----CGI!
I also think that the CGI depiction of the Vulcan planetscape also looked out of place for a movie made in 1979.
I thought TMP (Director's Cut) was OK. It had the best soundtrack of the six, IMHO. I also liked that "Kirk's shuttle ride to the Enterprise" scene that everyone seems to hate.
I think we can tell those scenes were CGI, but I doubt the average person can. Some of those vintage effects like the warping and the transporter beams kind of look like CGI even though they weren't.
Bingowings said:
That majority you are talking about probably like Star Wars anyway George gives it to them (most of them possibly aren't even aware it's any different from 1997).I on the other hand find TMP to be the best of all Star Trek movies, it's not my favourite one though.
Agree about them liking it, but I think the public does know it a modified product. When they see gawdy CGI Rontos jumping around, they know that effect couldn't have been done in 1977.
The ST:TMP DC was done in a such a classy way that I've seen many people after they've watch it post, "Well, what did they change?" It looks like the kind of thing that could have been done back then had they the time and money.
This X-Files/Lost/Prometheus garbage isn't even proper storytelling. It's more like bad beat poetry or something, where imagery is invoked but is ultimately meaningless.
What did David do
With that black goo?
That hip albino cat
Just made old man Weyland splat
danny_boy said:
It is relevant because in the period that it was not available Wise(and Paramount) were never castigated in the same manner that Lucas has been.
1) People WERE pissed about only having the DCs on DVD. But at least all the scenes that were changed WERE on the DVD as deleted scenes bonus features. A fan editor could have used those and reassembled the original cut if they wanted to. (I don't think anyone did, though.)
2) People ARE pissed about the current inverse situation, where we can't get the DCs on Blu-ray
3) But the majority of people don't give a damn about Star Trek: The Motion Picture. It was a lousy to mediocre movie depending what cut you watch. Many, many more people love Star Wars, thus a disproportionate outcry.
But you know this already.
doubleofive said:
And that TMP:DE, which was the director's "final cut" (which he didn't have for the original release) isn't available on Blu-ray because Paramount is too cheap to re-render the new effects. To be fair, why aren't we up in arms about NOT having this "special edition"?
Well, I am! I preferred that version! That's what a special edition should be. Fixing what didn't work and leaving the rest alone. They should have fixed Star Trek V while they were at it. I've refused to buy those Trek Movie Blu-rays because they all contain the theatrical cuts only.
LOL! I loved that movie as a kid, too. I saw it recently and still found the villains (Ustinov and Pat Buttram) pretty hilarious.
greenpenguino said:
FYI the script isn't about King John as the goodie, but rather the script centres around the Sheriff of Nottingham, investigating a string of murders that may or may not have been done by the Terrorist 'Robin Hood'
My mother will be disappointed to hear that. Our ancestor is once again relegated to Disney villain status. ;)
I guess there's worse guys to be related to. I'm so thankful she hasn't found any slavetraders or Nazis in our background.
Oh back to Prometheus, here's a choice quote from an AICN talkbacker:
you're an idiot. you're pointing out "plot holes" that a child could have picked up on answers to. i don't have the time to start explaining it all to you.
I'm seeing that excuse a lot. "You're too dumb to understand it, but I'm smart, so I do. But I'm not going to tell you for some reason."
asterisk8 said:
Anyone who want a GOOD critique of the film that explains what's wrong with it from someone who knows what he's talking about, check out Gavin Rothery's blog (VFX supervisor of MOON): http://www.gavinrothery.com/my-blog/2012/6/11/so-what-was-wrong-with-prometheus.html
That is a really good critique. I hadn't noticed the "almost everybody is speaking in another voice/accent than their own" thing. I personally believe that actors do their best acting in their own accents; some actors seem to be concentrating more on getting the accent right than getting across the best performance.
Them being humans in a costume is a minor disappointment for me. If they had done something mindblowing with the concept I wouldn't mind the retcon, but they didn't.
Ultimately, making the Space Jockey into man's creator makes the Alien universe smaller.
I'm not even completely sure if Engineers = Space Jockey. The Space Jockey looked like it was 20 feet tall and the Engineer looked half that, at most.
Bingowings said:
As I've posted before it seems as if it started out as a pretty solid Alien prequel script (face huggers, eggs, chestbursters etc) and then the suits wobbled.
Does anyone have that script? That sounds like the movie I would have rather seen. Apparently that was before they brought in that Lost hack.
Just look at Ridley's own Robin Hood, the script was thought of a masterpiece (the good King John holding back the vile terrorist Robin) then the suits twitched and it became a vehicle for Russell Crowe's global accent.
SERIOUSLY!? That would have rocked!! I recently discovered I am a descendant of King John and it's been something of an embarrassment to me. This would have changed all that.
I also think it was constructed with PG13 in mind but they didn't count on the classification board getting the jitters over the medpod scene.
I totally agree. They even "bleeped" the geologist's F-bomb.
CP3S said:
Bib Fortuna and Jabba the Hutt scoff at the idea of Luke being a Jedi. I guess that could be taken as, "Wow, a Jedi. Haha, what a kook" or a, "Him? A Jedi? Yeah right!", I've always taken it as the first.
Their reaction makes sense because
A) All the Jedi are supposed to be dead.
B) If a Jedi did somehow survive, he would be middle-aged to elderly.
Also, Jabba and Bib are technically correct because Yoda explicitly said Luke would only be a Jedi after defeating Vader. So, if you'll forgive my use of PT jargon, Luke at that point was a Padawan and not a Jedi.
Are people calling this movie "LOST in Space" yet? Because that should totally be a thing.
Another why: Why does a little English girl grow up to be a Swedish Woman?
georgec said:
Ugh when I read interviews of Lindelof I cringe. His "vague is good" argument is a laughably transparent attempt to divert criticism from his extremely flawed, amateur writing. ...................
It feels like TPM all over again, but the evolution of my feelings on the movie is more accelerated (days vs. months or even years).
Same here.
This "raising questions is what good sci-fi does" talking point needs to get shot down. It's a half-truth used to cover plotholes. Good sci-fi can raise questions, but these are questions like "Who am I? Why am I here?" "Does mankind have a future?" "Can a machine be alive?" "What is reality?"
The questions raised by Prometheus are nothing of the sort. "What was that black goo?" is not a deep question. It's just shitty storytelling.
Tobar said:
So true! I hope they post the 30 min one someday.
I'm really disappointed by this movie's rabid defenders. All their arguments boil down to "You're too much of a [A) Retard B) Mouthbreather C)Troglodyte D) dumb fanboy that lives in his mother's basemet] to understand the genius of this film."
They usually don't go any further than that to enlighten us. If they do, it's something that completely contradicts what the previous know-it-all said.
Somebody should do a "Prometheus" edit of Star Wars. Remove any scenes of exposition and other random scenes so that the narrative makes no sense. Cut out Obi-Wan explaining what the Force is and what lightsabers and Jedi are. Remove all of Vader's lines so he's always silent and killing people for no reason. And end the film right when we see the X-Wings take off from Yavin.
The last time I had to go on the internet to try and figure out what the hell I just watched was Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes. And like in that instance, I'm finding no answers (except "lousy screenwriting").
I don't even understand what the black oil (that they ripped off from X-Files) was. Some people are saying it was a mutagen; others are saying it was a weaponized liquid form of Alien eggs.
I wish I had known some LOST flunkie had written the screenplay. It would have saved me $19. I hate that Lost/X-Files crap with a passion.
I'm really baffled as to the incoherence of scripts and movies these days. Are test screenings no longer being done?
And in a literal sense-----the supression(of the 35mm prints) of the "original film" of Star Wars can go right back to 1981 when "Episode IV" was tacked onto the begginning-----because the theatrical re-releases in 1981.82' 83'and 85'(in 83' and 85'---Star Wars was part of a triple bill with ESB and ROTJ) all featured these new "altered" prints------ but no-one complained back then!Why didn't VHS and laserdisc fans complain in 1982 when the "altered" version of star wars was released for the first time on home video?----- why did'nt they complain that they could not hear the mono mix on that 82' video tape/laserdisc?
The majority of the people probably never noticed the change. And most of those that did didn't care. It was a minor, minor thing.
George made MAJOR changes in the 1997 Special Editions, many of them minor ones nobody noticed or cared about, but many of them mere major detriments that changed the films drastically for the worse. You know what those changes are, and you know all this already. You're just being pedantic.
And I expect a "gotcha" response from you, likely with some weird fixation on The Godfather.
What we're looking for is a pipe-dream, there's a better chance of Richard Dawkins converting to Christianity than of the OOT ever getting properly restored.
It will happen, eventually. It may be 25, 50, 70 years from now, but it will happen. Look at how Metropolis was recently put back together after existing for 83 years in a hacked-up form.
The current fan-restorations might even be used as a guide for these future restorationists on how to put the film back together.
I like how Rick is several years behind the times. These days he should be invoking "Game of Thrones in space".