Draken Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 I'd add the neck joke, just to play it safe. Seriously, only like, three people can touch my body Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metadigital Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 I don't think there is actually an OT versus PT deliniation, and I think that is disingenuous you make that observation. More, I think that GL's films have been on the slide for a long time, so any further films need to reverse a siginficant entropic trend. OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
213374U Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 I don't think there is actually an OT versus PT deliniation, and I think that is disingenuous you make that observation. More, I think that GL's films have been on the slide for a long time, so any further films need to reverse a siginficant entropic trend. Yet it's the PT that gets all the criticism. A very unspecific, vague and generic criticism, that could fit the OT just fine for all intents and purposes, too. If you say that SW is [insert epithet] when compared to some renowned piece of literature or cinema, you'll probably be right (though you'll have to support your claims much better than what I've read here), and I'll most likely agree. If you say that the PT is [insert epithet] when compared to the OT, then chances are you are unaware of the effects that nostalgia has in your judgement. - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyric Suite Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 If you say that the PT is [insert epithet] when compared to the OT, then chances are you are unaware of the effects that nostalgia has in your judgement. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Being an hater of both, i'd like to contest that argument. I can say that in all fairness, i 'enjoyed' the originals a whole lot more then the prequels. Whatever went wrong with the first three films, it went even worst with the new ones... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plano Skywalker Posted March 9, 2006 Author Share Posted March 9, 2006 my point is simply that GL came up with a great "big picture" idea with the Star Wars setting but, for whatever reason, this particular idea is not extremely well implemented by him. The ESB is the only film that we have to point to that was not micromanaged by him and it is head and shoulders above the rest. The gulf between the ESB and other other films is wider than the gulf between OT and PT. Of course, this may all be an academic discussion because it doesn't look like he is going to hand the creative reigns of the SW franchise over to another producer or director any time soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moreKOTORplz Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 I love critics. people just love to crap on things. give someone a million dollars and they will cry about how its not a million and one. I would much rather have a world full of SW, even the PT, then crap like broke back humping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucius Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 NO KOTOR 4 U! COME BACK ONE YEAR! DENMARK! It appears that I have not yet found a sig to replace the one about me not being banned... interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metadigital Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 I don't think there is actually an OT versus PT deliniation, and I think that is disingenuous you make that observation. More, I think that GL's films have been on the slide for a long time, so any further films need to reverse a siginficant entropic trend. Yet it's the PT that gets all the criticism. A very unspecific, vague and generic criticism, that could fit the OT just fine for all intents and purposes, too. If you say that SW is [insert epithet] when compared to some renowned piece of literature or cinema, you'll probably be right (though you'll have to support your claims much better than what I've read here), and I'll most likely agree. If you say that the PT is [insert epithet] when compared to the OT, then chances are you are unaware of the effects that nostalgia has in your judgement. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> O come on! Are you saying that The Empire Strikes Back wasn't a better film than ANY of the prequel films? And you are also ignoring the fact that the early films had no / a lot less CGI. Blue screen was still being perfected: it was an immature effect in 1977 (only one moving object in the frame at once); it was still expensive and difficult in 1979 (more than one object moving in the frame), and when CGI turned up it was well and truly overdone with the farcical RotJ. Yes, this did coincide with everyone aging; but MORE IMPORTANTLY it corresponds to the film industry aging. When Spielberg made Jaws, the fact that the shark spent more time being repaired than filmed, meant that the trialoque interplay between Brody, Hooper and Quint had to take centre stage. For the film and our general betterment. GL just kept making films trapped in the 1970s, just with more CGI (I believe he is on record with wishing he could replace ALL actors with CGI). I certainly agree that the OT was not perfect. (In fact, it was a high degree of cheese, wrapped up in spectacular new Special FX delivery mechanism.) It was FIRST, though, and provided a platform for every other film, director and producer to learn from. OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
213374U Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 O come on! Are you saying that The Empire Strikes Back wasn't a better film than ANY of the prequel films? And you are also ignoring the fact that the early films had no / a lot less CGI. Blue screen was still being perfected: it was an immature effect in 1977 (only one moving object in the frame at once); it was still expensive and difficult in 1979 (more than one object moving in the frame), and when CGI turned up it was well and truly overdone with the farcical RotJ. Yes, this did coincide with everyone aging; but MORE IMPORTANTLY it corresponds to the film industry aging. When Spielberg made Jaws, the fact that the shark spent more time being repaired than filmed, meant that the trialoque interplay between Brody, Hooper and Quint had to take centre stage. For the film and our general betterment. GL just kept making films trapped in the 1970s, just with more CGI (I believe he is on record with wishing he could replace ALL actors with CGI). I certainly agree that the OT was not perfect. (In fact, it was a high degree of cheese, wrapped up in spectacular new Special FX delivery mechanism.) It was FIRST, though, and provided a platform for every other film, director and producer to learn from. ESB was probably the best of the lot. That still does not prove that the infamous quality gap that nobody can quite put their finger on actually exists, at all, between the OT and the PT. Basically what you're saying is that the OT's main cinematographic merit was to innovate. That I agree with. Note that I haven't been saying that the OT is great or anything. All I say is that the PT is not significantly worse. And now that SW is no longer new, logic dictates that the merit of the franchise is... nil. That is not a problem for me as fortunately I'm not a professional critic. Also, I have a feeling you don't look for the same things in SW films I do. I'm happy with a healthy amount of action, loads of eye candy, and enough character depth and interaction to fill the gaps in between. That's what I watch SW for. If I wanted to do mental gymnastics, delight in the creativity of experimental or alternative cinema, or experience the ecstasy of a narrative masterpiece, there are many other flicks that are much better suited for that. But perhaps I don't hold the same expectations from SW as most people seem to do. For me, it's just mindless entertainment. And it's pretty good at that. - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucius Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 I <3 your new avatar numbs. DENMARK! It appears that I have not yet found a sig to replace the one about me not being banned... interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
213374U Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 :"> - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metadigital Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Yep, I think we ended up agreeing (violently or not). I think I am one of those who is guilty of trying to get too much out of a film like SW. But I blame human's innate tendency to pareidolia. Not me. :D OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moreKOTORplz Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 pareidolia (w00t) carl sagen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Provided John Williams composes for it, it doesn't really matter what crap LucasFilm makes - at least we'll have a kick arse soundtrack to buy afterwards. There are none that are right, only strong of opinion. There are none that are wrong, only ignorant of facts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyric Suite Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Provided John Williams composes for it, it doesn't really matter what crap LucasFilm makes - at least we'll have a kick arse soundtrack to buy afterwards. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I rather listen to the originals Williams steals from... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 Oh? Do tell. There are none that are right, only strong of opinion. There are none that are wrong, only ignorant of facts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
213374U Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 Gustav Holst's The Planets, for instance. - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metadigital Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 Thanks for the link, Numbers! PS Glad you're back (it was rude of me not to say so earlier, I know). OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts