53 replies to this topic

[Copaman]

 

I hear it comes with a free limited edition Pokemon card. Sounds like a world of fun waiting in that box.

And I suppose you think that Star Wars was extremely shitty, meant only for little kids, and should probably never have been made? 

[Vortigern]

And I suppose you think that Star Wars was extremely shitty, meant only for little kids, and should probably never have been made?

Yes. Apart from the little kids thing. It's shit however old you are.

[mike_]

If it isn't canceled, give Primeval a look, Vort. Pretty good show (one of the few British shows I can stand ).

[Rafv Nin IV]

I'll have to disagree with you, Vort. The original three Star Wars movies were classic. Plus, Ewoks are some of the coolest creatures I've ever seen.

[Taralom]

I can't stand commercials, so I mainly watch at the evening, when I'm too tired to think.
Most of the time Scrubs is on, and Family Guy. Man, I hate that show. It's not my humor at all!
I was a fan of Stargate Atlantis, due to the mysterious aura around the show and the city itself, but they never went further than season 2, and they didn't even reach the end of that season

[Duke]

Spooks, Torchwood and NCIS. That's about it really.

Edited by Duke, 03 July 2009 - 05:03 AM.

[Vortigern]

You get Torchwood in New Zealand? Sweet.

Star Wars = pile of wank. I care not who is offended by this. Poor acting, dialogue of a lower quality than most pornos, preposterous assumptions about the nature of the universe, "science" that makes no sense whatsoever even with willing suspension of disbelief, and worst of all, George Lucas. Star Wars was his childhood fantasy. Clearly he was a child with very few friends, and even fewer non-imaginary friends. And it should tell you something that Harrison Ford was the only one of the stars to still have a career afterwards.

[Allathar]

Sorry Vort, but you just lost a point on my respect-o-meter.

And Taralom, you should download the rest of the show. The beginning of the second season was pretty meh except for the Ford stuff, but after that it gets a whole lot better with the introduction of Michael, the Asura-Replicator arc and Todd the Wraith.

Edited by Allathar, 03 July 2009 - 12:31 PM.

[Rafv Nin IV]

Vort, Star Wars is not classic because it was of Dances With Wolves caliber. Star Wars is classic because it was the single most influential science fiction movie series ever filmed. Every sci-fi movie made today includes elements pioneered in the Star Wars Trilogy.

[mike_]

Most books of that genre (and in the 'New for Teens' section in ANY bookstore do as well ) do as well.

[Jeth Calark]

Star Wars = pile of wank. I care not who is offended by this. Poor acting, dialogue of a lower quality than most pornos, preposterous assumptions about the nature of the universe, "science" that makes no sense whatsoever even with willing suspension of disbelief, and worst of all, George Lucas. Star Wars was his childhood fantasy. Clearly he was a child with very few friends, and even fewer non-imaginary friends. And it should tell you something that Harrison Ford was the only one of the stars to still have a career afterwards.

Vort, you refuse to look at the facts.

1. "Star Wars" was not his childhood fantasy. He first discussed the idea of a "space opera" during post-production of American Graffiti. He didn't start typing on it till January of 1973. He was born in 1944.

2. As for his social life, we have nothing solid. However, the four guys in American Graffiti were all based on Lucas himself at different years of his teen years. In general, he has also said that American Graffiti is based on his general teen years. The people in American Graffiti are definitely what you would call friends and social.

3. So if none or most of the actors in a film don't go on to become superstars, then the film wasn't any good? Lord of the Rings had plenty of actors who didn't become big stars afterwards. Are you saying LOTR wasn't any good? Your logic is a little flawed.


Look, if you don't like it because you think the acting and the dialogue wasn't the greatest, cool. That's a matter of taste so I'm not going to argue that with you. If you didn't like some of the story elements, fine. Again, that is somewhat taste, so I'm not going to argue that.

[Vortigern]

I understand that a lot of people love Star Wars and will happily watch it time and time again, but that also does not make it a good film. Watch Star Wars with an objective eye. Look critically at the dialogue and the acting, as if you were a film critic. Just once, you can go back to enjoying it afterwards.

And no, Lord of the Rings is not the same, as that had plenty of already-successful actors and was a genuinely good trilogy. Also, it was based on a series of books rather than some dickwad's imagination. I don't care if you respect me less for this, I just want to know how you can respect someone who lives at the Skywalker Ranch. Naming your home after somewhere from someone else's book is fine. For example, I am aware of several houses called Rivendell. However, naming it after your own work is just obscenely pretentious.

I am also annoyed that Star Wars is so successful when there are so many much better films that have failed just because they don't have lasers, as far as I can tell. Lasers which, scientifically, make no sense. Furthermore, can you honestly tell me Episode 1 was good? If you can, then you have no standards and need to seriously re-evaluate your existence. The only halfway-decent scene was the racing scene, when it didn't have little lines from child-Anakin, who was more annoying than those starving little Rohan kids in The Two Towers.

[Allathar]

Episode 1 was crap indeed. When I mean 'Star Wars' I'm talking about the original trilogy. Episode 2 was decent and 3 was good, but they weren't as good as the originals.

What I like about Star Wars isn't the dialogue, nor the acting. It's the story, the mythology. There's this evil emperor who rules the galaxy. There's the young farm boy destined to be a great hero. There's the princess who needs to be rescued. There's the brave rebellion, the mythological force, the old wise mentor. There's the loose canon anti-hero. The bar scene, the two robot companions, the lost legacy of the Jedi knights... Come on, GL took elements from the classic stories and the old mythologies, and made it into a great sci-fi movie. Every story element is so familiar, yet excersized in a totally new way... And that's what makes Star Wars great. Imo.

[Jeth Calark]

And I'll have to agree with Allathar....it's not the acting, the dialogue, or anything like that....it was the mythology (high-pitched space battles and some of the lightsaber duels are the other thing for me).

Personally, Episode 1 is rather "meh" (except for Darth Maul. I will gladly watch that movie only for Darth Maul. ). Episode 2 slightly better because it had some more fun action moments, but I am totally bored whenever Anakin and Padme come on (quick, get more popcorn!). Episode 3 was pretty sweet due to its epic battles.


So people can't name stuff after characters they created? CRAP, now I have to change all my usernames to something other than "Jeth Calark"! (Well, a house and a username are too wildly different things, but it is the principle you seem to be arguing against)
Why not? It is an expression of individuality. Same as some people name their houses "Rivendell" because they like LOTR a lot; that is part of who they are.

And LOTR was not full of "already-successful actors" It had some, but it also had no-names, some of whom haven't gone on to a big career. Most of them did two or three other movies, then dropped off the scene.

Edited by Jeth Calark, 06 July 2009 - 05:29 PM.

[Mathijs]

I just wanted to congratulate all of you douchebags for relentlessly debating something so utterly subjective as taste.

Good job.

[Vortigern]

Thanks, Matias. This isn't a discussion of taste, this is a discussion of what I don't like about Star Wars and what they do like. A discussion of taste would simply be "I don't like it, therefore it's shit." "But I do like it, therefore it's good." That would be pointless. This isn't.

And now to business. LotR had people like Elijah Wood, Sean Astin, Sirs Ian McKellen and Holm, Christopher Lee, John Rhys-Davies, Bernard Hill and more, all of whom have achieved cinematic or theatrical success, or indeed both. Added to which, significant numbers of the cast have since gained further roles, most notably Orlando Bloom, whose career took off like Concorde. And he wasn't even a particularly main character. Sure, he was there a lot, but there wasn't all that much acting involved in being Legolas. Whereas Mark Hamill, who did star in Star Wars, promptly disappeared forever. That point can be taken either way, really.

I have no problem with the Star Wars universe. I appreciate that the world George Lucas created has vast, perhaps limitless potential. I just strongly disagree with the way he went about it. I have no doubt that I would enjoy some of the Star Wars novels, because they were written by far more talented people.

The part of naming his house Skywalker Ranch with which I take issue is that it is his own creation. Naming yourself after somebody else's creation is fine, but after your own? That seems vain and arrogant in the most depressingly open fashion imaginable.

I would also disagree with your labelling of Star Wars as 'science-fiction'. It isn't. There is no science present. There is magic, there is Empire, there is destiny. That is standard fantasy, just with spaceships and lasers, none of which are ever explained to any degree whatsoever, at least in the main series.

I must admit, however, that I was quite impressed that they managed to tie in all the loose ends by the close of Episode 3, but I think they could have come up with something much better than falling into lava for Anakin. Much, much better.

[Allathar]

I would also disagree with your labelling of Star Wars as 'science-fiction'.

.........

.........

Clearly you don't realize what science-fiction is about.

Edited by Allathar, 06 July 2009 - 08:44 PM.

[Jeth Calark]

Technically, Vort is right. "Star Wars" is not science fiction, just a fantasy set in a futuristic world. However, most people just lump it in science fiction because of its futuristic setting, which is fine with me. (As long as I know where to find the books inside the bookstore, I don't care where they put it! )


Two things on the actors. First, for a movie to be "good", must its actors go on to have big, long careers? Or is it actually possible for a good movie to not produce new superstars? That's point one.

Second, Mark Hamill has actually done plenty, just not big "superstar" things. He has become a very good and prolific voice actor, especially in his role as the voice of the Joker in the TV series Batman: The Animated Series (which went on to win an Emmy, if you count those things). I've noticed his name pop up as a voice actor for many animated movies and such.

As for something better than lava, what would you have done then?

[Rafv Nin IV]

Obviously, it would have been way cooler if Anikan had been severely burned in a bizarre sexual fetish gone wrong. That would have been worth watching.

[Beowulf]

And it should tell you something that Harrison Ford was the only one of the stars to still have a career afterwards.

Mark Hamill still sorta has one...