Does anybody here not like Star Wars?

[Cicero]

I like all of the Star Wars movies, but to varying degrees. I love The Phantom Menace (excepting one performance), and really enjoy Attack of the Clones, The Empire Strikes Back, and (when I skip past the Ewoks on DVD*) Return of the Jedi. I enjoyed Revenge of the Sith, but it was my least favorite of the six movies.

*In concept the Ewoks were fine, but they weren't carried off well. Maybe in the next edition, they'll be CGIed to look more like little bears than like teddy bears?

 

[Captain Craig]

I like all of the Star Wars movies, but to varying degrees. I love The Phantom Menace (excepting one performance)...

LOVE Phantom Menace? Minus ONE performance?
Well the saying is "There is always at least one".

I get that TPM was made for kids more than it was for OT fans. I get that TPM wasn't trying to be Shakespeare. Considering that it is still a fairly flawed film.

What is in all the remaining performances that you find suitable? How are those deemed 'good' in your opinion? The acting is considered flat and emotionless by a large % of people so what is it you see? Just curious.

 

[3D Master]

I voted I didn't like them, although I don't exactly dislike them either. Like you said, they're just "meh".

They're rather empty. A bit of fantasy, some fights, a few laser blasters and that's it. There isn't anything deep about them, and they don't have anything else that truly stands out either.

They're okay to watch, if you're in the mood for a bit of mindless entertainment - which I rarely am - but other than that there isn't anything there.

 

[Cicero]

I like all of the Star Wars movies, but to varying degrees. I love The Phantom Menace (excepting one performance)...

LOVE Phantom Menace? Minus ONE performance?
Well the saying is "There is always at least one".

I get that TPM was made for kids more than it was for OT fans. I get that TPM wasn't trying to be Shakespeare. Considering that it is still a fairly flawed film.

What is in all the remaining performances that you find suitable? How are those deemed 'good' in your opinion? The acting is considered flat and emotionless by a large % of people so what is it you see? Just curious.

Aside from massed starfighters and Imperial battleships, it had everything I liked about the original trilogy, but was a modern movie made with the best practical and digital effects of the time. I loved it. Theed was amazing, the threats and incidents seemed real and interesting, and aside from Anakin's performance on Tatooine and Naboo, I really enjoyed the various characters (even Jar Jar, and especially Amidala). I grew up with the original Star Wars movies on VHS (and in brief theatrical release in some of my earliest memories of the mid-1980s), and was simply thrilled by the movie. I think I went to see it about four or five times.

One thing I particularly appreciate about The Phantom Menace today is the skill with which it was filmed and constructed. Like in the earlier films, squences and progressions are well thought-out and clearly delimited. It's also one of the last great movies filmed in the classical style, wherin CGI was used to add additional elements to live action (and used only where physical solutions were impractical) and not to construct scenes from several live action elements.

Also, Amidala's accent was very cool.


Edit: The tone and style of the Kamino scenes of Attack of the Clones was very consistent with what I liked about The Phantom Menace.

 

[USS Kongo]

I was a Trek fan far longer than I was a fan of Star Wars. But when Star Wars first came out when I was a kid, I was captivated by it. My favorite film is The Empire Strikes Back.

As much as I love Wars, if I absolutely had to chose, it would be Trek, for the simple fact that there's so much more of it to watch.

Sean

 

[clint g]

I enjoy them for what they are. I do find it to be over rated though

 

[Blip]

Edit: The tone and style of the Kamino scenes of Attack of the Clones was very consistent with what I liked about The Phantom Menace.

I agree. I felt that there was almost a mysterious quality to those scenes, similar to the very opening of The Phantom Menace where the Radiant VII arrives, the presence of the Jedi Temple and Qui Gon's funeral at the end. Maybe it was the visual aesthetics, or perhaps it was John Williams' score; but they evoked (IMO, at least) a sense of that lost era, with an element of foreboding.

Unless of course, you're thinking of the brief fight between Jango (does anyone else think of the mouse from The Green Mile?) and Obi-Wan... The only thing I particularly liked about that scene was the heavy rain!



Overall I'd say I tend to dislike the Prequels - for the aforementioned bad dialogue and worse characters, not to mention one whiny individual in particular and Palpatine's shoddy transformation (not to mention Yoda jumping around like "Captain Smollet" when fighting Dooku).

Wait, there's another: Dooku?!! WTF kind of name is that?! Jar-Jar... Quattro Dinero... General Grievous... Jesus I know some of the background characters had slightly odd names in the original trilogy, but comparing them to this lot, the prequels are full of childish junk names that 3yr olds would invent! Is Lucas just getting senile, or have his own kids been at the word processor?! For pity's sake...

Otherwise, I tend to ignore the prequels simply because of how often they overruled some of the excellent groundwork laid by Timothy Zahn and others. Both he and the creators of the KOTOR (and TOR) games seem to have had a much better handle on what "makes" the Star Wars universe special than Lucas himself!

 

[Cky]

I'm much for of a Star Trek fan, and as it goes for Star Wars, there was a time when I really enjoyed them. I think Empire Strikes Back is still a really good film and is still the best Star Wars film that's been released.

However, I hate (which is a strong word, but can definately be used here) the mess that is the prequel trilogy. Honest to God, George Lucas seemed to have no clue what he was actually writing and then submitted three of the worst, pointless, and boring films that have ever been released. In the whole prequel trilogy there was only a few scenes I actually liked - the fight between Gui-Gon (who by the way, was the only character to have any development in the first film), Obi-Wan and Darth Maul, and the opening 20 minutes of Episode III when we actually get to have a coherient storyline (which turns out to be pointless anyway).

I could honestly rant for hours on how bad, and a complete mess these films are, but I'll restrain myself for now. But honestly, they even managed to ruin the ending to Return of the Jedi in these prequel films. Anakin should have NEVER been welcomed back by Obi-Wan and Yoda because he was nothing more than a 1 dimentional winey bitch. (Oh, and a mass-murderer).

 

[ProwlAlpha]

From what I gather from the various online forums, blogs, and other criticisms of the PT, I can get a general idea of the their reasons:

There reason that I hate the Prequel Trilogy is because George, you did not personally consult with me about my vision of the Star Wars Universe. I have a personal vested interest in Star Wars that overtakes yours, George. Why George did not pick me as the writer, director, producer, star, co-star, and key grip for Episodes I to III. I have a lot of background in viewing and critiquing movies from my couch to my ipod. Why George did you not choose me, when I personally acted out every scene from Star Wars, including playing both Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker at the same time. I know those characters better than my little brother. I know how to use a camera George, because I used my parents old camera, which my friends and I have mapped out Episodes VII to XX. Why George did you rape my childhood?

This statement can be modified to for the Trek fans against Nemesis and Trek XI.

 

[Too Much Fun]

Nah, I think that's way too harsh a generalization. I believe fans are not so narcissistic that they can't acknowledge that something is objectively good just because it differs from what they would have liked to see. I remember when I first saw "Spider-Man 2". I didn't think it was simply bad, but I was very disappointed with it and confused by why so many people liked it because it wasn't what I specifically wanted out of a superhero movie.

"X2: X-Men United" has been the ideal for me since it came out, because I think it had the perfect blend of action, story, and drama, whereas I found "Spider-Man 2" had way too much drama (specifically about how crappy Peter Parker's life is when he's not Spider-Man and how doomed his relationship with Mary Jane is) and "The Dark Knight" had too much story (specifically all the bickering between Dent and Gordon, the corruption in their departments, and all the fuss about Lau and the Mob's money). But this doesn't mean I can't find "The Dark Knight" to be an excellent film overall.

And after watching it again, I've realized that "Spider-Man 2" is actually much better than I originally gave it credit for and I can even understand why so many seem to think it's superior to and more mature than "X2", but "X2" is still my favourite and that doesn't mean I'm going to criticize Sam Raimi for not making his movie more like it.

The drama, story, and acting in those prequel trilogy movies (as much as I can recall of them, which isn't much) was just shamefully limp, amateurish, and stale. As I said in my original post, that's why what's most disappointing about what Lucas did with them is not that he didn't do them the way fans would have wanted them, but the fact that he did them so sloppily, which is surprising given his 30 plus years of experience as a writer/director at the time of "The Phantom Menace" being released.

 

[The_Emperor]

From what I gather from the various online forums, blogs, and other criticisms of the PT, I can get a general idea of the their reasons:

There reason that I hate the Prequel Trilogy is because George, you did not personally consult with me about my vision of the Star Wars Universe. I have a personal vested interest in Star Wars that overtakes yours, George. Why George did not pick me as the writer, director, producer, star, co-star, and key grip for Episodes I to III. I have a lot of background in viewing and critiquing movies from my couch to my ipod. Why George did you not choose me, when I personally acted out every scene from Star Wars, including playing both Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker at the same time. I know those characters better than my little brother. I know how to use a camera George, because I used my parents old camera, which my friends and I have mapped out Episodes VII to XX. Why George did you rape my childhood?

This statement can be modified to for the Trek fans against Nemesis and Trek XI.

That's not the sense I get, at all. I had no preconceived notions going in of what the movies should've been. The only thing I expected going in was a good movie. And The Phantom Menace absolutely did not deliver in that regard, whereas Attack of the Clones did a better job, but was still dragged down by those horrendous Padme/Anikin scenes.

The same goes for Nemesis, which was just a terrible film. All in all, that's a pretty weak defense, as it certainly can't apply to any reasonable percentage of the people who criticize the new trilogy. And the number of people who have criticisms of it seems to be pretty big. The more likely reason that people criticize those movies is that they wanted good movies... and they just weren't good. Certainly not Phantom Menace.

By the by, I loved the new Star Trek movie.

which is surprising given his 30 plus years of experience as a writer/director at the time of "The Phantom Menace" being released.

Eh, could one really say he has that much experience? After all, he spent more then a few years sitting around resting on his laurels. If I remember right, aside from Star Wars and producing Indiana Jones, he doesn't have many other films to his name.

 

[Rackon]

From what I gather from the various online forums, blogs, and other criticisms of the PT, I can get a general idea of the their reasons:

There reason that I hate the Prequel Trilogy is because George, you did not personally consult with me about my vision of the Star Wars Universe. I have a personal vested interest in Star Wars that overtakes yours, George. Why George did not pick me as the writer, director, producer, star, co-star, and key grip for Episodes I to III. I have a lot of background in viewing and critiquing movies from my couch to my ipod. Why George did you not choose me, when I personally acted out every scene from Star Wars, including playing both Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker at the same time. I know those characters better than my little brother. I know how to use a camera George, because I used my parents old camera, which my friends and I have mapped out Episodes VII to XX. Why George did you rape my childhood?

This statement can be modified to for the Trek fans against Nemesis and Trek XI.

LOL , no, I dislike the PT cuz by almost all objective standards of cinema artistry they are lacking.

They're not very good movies...as movies.

See...I didn't do all that stuff about acting out. Cuz I was like...an adult...in 1977.

 

[Harvey]

There reason that I hate the Prequel Trilogy is because George, you did not personally consult with me about my vision of the Star Wars Universe. I have a personal vested interest in Star Wars that overtakes yours, George. Why George did not pick me as the writer, director, producer, star, co-star, and key grip for Episodes I to III. I have a lot of background in viewing and critiquing movies from my couch to my ipod. Why George did you not choose me, when I personally acted out every scene from Star Wars, including playing both Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker at the same time. I know those characters better than my little brother. I know how to use a camera George, because I used my parents old camera, which my friends and I have mapped out Episodes VII to XX. Why George did you rape my childhood?

Gross hyperbole if I've heard it. My only interest in Star Wars is that it achieves a bare minimum of cinematic worth. With flat (at best) performances from actors who have proven they are capable of far better (this means bad direction), empty characterization and boring plotting (this means bad writing), an overuse of often fake looking computer generated effects, and even butchered edits of the most redeeming aspect of the series (John Williams' score), it doesn't achieve that minimum.

But don't take my word for it. Listen to the critics here, here, and here. The critics, to their credit, are far more positive about the third film than I am. But, then again, when "the only one at all worth watching [of the prequels]" is positive praise, what gives?

 

[paudemge]

A new hope is probably one of my favorite movies, and empire is also right up there. ROTJ is right up there and I really like it, except for the ewoks. Now the prequels they are ok,but I'm not a big fan, they have a lot of problems and while i'll watch the OT from time to time, I don't make an effort to watch the PT
My biggest problem with the PT is that it was dissapointing.

 

[DBR]

I love all Star Wars; I can even find joy and entertainment in the shitty stuff that's put out.

 

[The_Emperor]

There reason that I hate the Prequel Trilogy is because George, you did not personally consult with me about my vision of the Star Wars Universe. I have a personal vested interest in Star Wars that overtakes yours, George. Why George did not pick me as the writer, director, producer, star, co-star, and key grip for Episodes I to III. I have a lot of background in viewing and critiquing movies from my couch to my ipod. Why George did you not choose me, when I personally acted out every scene from Star Wars, including playing both Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker at the same time. I know those characters better than my little brother. I know how to use a camera George, because I used my parents old camera, which my friends and I have mapped out Episodes VII to XX. Why George did you rape my childhood?

Gross hyperbole if I've heard it. My only interest in Star Wars is that it achieves a bare minimum of cinematic worth. With flat (at best) performances from actors who have proven they are capable of far better (this means bad direction), empty characterization and boring plotting (this means bad writing), an overuse of often fake looking computer generated effects, and even butchered edits of the most redeeming aspect of the series (John Williams' score), it doesn't achieve that minimum.

But don't take my word for it. Listen to the critics here, here, and here. The critics, to their credit, are far more positive about the third film than I am. But, then again, when "the only one at all worth watching [of the prequels]" is positive praise, what gives?

Yep. Why is it when someone criticizes a bad movie as a bad movie, nobody says a peep. But when you criticize a bad Star Wars or Star Trek movie, there's always someone coming out with various rationalizations explaining that the movie isn't bad, it's just that all the viewers who think it's bad carried a ton of baggage preventing them from enjoying it? What's the greater likelihood? That millions of people who saw the movie and didn't like it all had some weird personal baggage or "ownership" issues keeping them from enjoying what's actually a good movie... or that the movie was just plain bad?

Seems to me that the latter is the likelier option.

I love all Star Wars; I can even find joy and entertainment in the shitty stuff that's put out.

The skip button, friend. Attack of the Clones is an absolutely wonderful movie... as long as you make heavy use of the skip button. I've watched it so many times like that, that I nearly got myself convinced that Anakin and Padme only made cameo appearances in the movie.

 

[Deckerd]

You watch one movie over and over again and skip bits? Why not watch movies you haven't seen before?

 

[The_Emperor]

You watch one movie over and over again and skip bits? Why not watch movies you haven't seen before?

Who says I don't do both? There's a difference between watching an old movie, though, and watching a new movie. And the difference, there, is that I gotta go out and buy the new movie, Netflix it, or rent it, if I want to watch it. The old movie, though, I can just grab off my shelf and watch. Besides, who doesn't rewatch movies? You say that as if it's an unusual thing. How many people really only watch a movie they like once? God knows that most of the people, here, have probably seen most episodes of Star Trek multiple times.

 

[Captain Craig]

You watch one movie over and over again and skip bits? Why not watch movies you haven't seen before?

I gotta say I find this an odd comment as well.
I have Netflix and watch at least 3-5 movies a month that I've not seen.
In addition and in between Netflix deliveries I'm either watching something I bought(Dollhouse recently) or rewatching favorites.

When he says he is rewatching a movie and skipping some parts its just an odd leap to assume he isn't also watching new or new to him material. We all do what he does. Are you going to say you don't rewatch movies?

 

[3D Master]

You watch one movie over and over again and skip bits? Why not watch movies you haven't seen before?

I gotta say I find this an odd comment as well.
I have Netflix and watch at least 3-5 movies a month that I've not seen.
In addition and in between Netflix deliveries I'm either watching something I bought(Dollhouse recently) or rewatching favorites.

When he says he is rewatching a movie and skipping some parts its just an odd leap to assume he isn't also watching new or new to him material. We all do what he does. Are you going to say you don't rewatch movies?

I think what he meant was: why rewatch what you think are BAD movies, when you could be watching new GOOD movies?