|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 150 responses total. |
brighn
|
|
response 75 of 150:
| 
Apr 24 21:17 UTC 2002 |
The Batman movie was superior to the Superman movie. Do you disagree?
I generally find movies based on comic books to not be to my liking, even if
I like the comics involved. Exceptions include The Crow, and XMen was ok
despite periods of camp.
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 76 of 150:
|
Apr 25 08:32 UTC 2002 |
resp:66 My understanding is that as a Senate Representative, we'll
see a lot less of Jar-Jar.
People don't seem to understand Jar-Jar, the Gungans, and the Ewoks
were created for the kids. As far as Episode I, I keep telling people
Lucas had to draw in an entirely new generation of Star Wars fans--
kids young enough that couldn't remember the original trilogy, or are
as yet still too young.
I read a review of the DVD release, and I learned there was a bootleg
version where Jar-Jar had been significantly edited out. It was
mentioned by the reviewer, because, much to his chargrin, it was not
included.
I am a Star Wars fan, and I work at Toys R Us. The toys for cross-
marketing (indeed, it could be said Lucas brought the trend to its
current heights) arrived today. I've viewed the toys, I've viewed all
three trailers at http://www.starwars.com, and I see little evidence
there will be much of *any* kiddie stuff at all. You are unfairly
writing the movie off, Russ, since three trailers honestly leave
little surprises. The story plotline appears that it will focus
largely upon Anakin and Amidala's love affair, the Jedi battles and
the creation of the clone troopers, and Boba Fett's origins. Most
fans are primarily stoked about Boba Fett, and seeing Yoda wield a
lightsaber.
This is an entirely different movie, and I expect to be much more
satisfied with it than I was Episode I.
|
scott
|
|
response 77 of 150:
|
Apr 25 13:08 UTC 2002 |
I don't recall if somebody else has mentioned it here, but Lucas has said (in
interviews) that the merchandising was *way* overboard for Ep. 1, and that
he's not going to make that mistake again.
|
gull
|
|
response 78 of 150:
|
Apr 25 14:10 UTC 2002 |
Re #76: Why is there such a fascination with Boba Fett?
|
aruba
|
|
response 79 of 150:
|
Apr 25 14:19 UTC 2002 |
I'm wondering the same thing.
|
edina
|
|
response 80 of 150:
|
Apr 25 14:25 UTC 2002 |
Because he's Boba Fett!! He's a bad ass. Dude - you don't mess with the
Fett.
|
brighn
|
|
response 81 of 150:
|
Apr 25 14:29 UTC 2002 |
I've got a fascination for Twi'lek females. I think that's much healthier.
;} (Twi'leks are blue, green, or white -- solid colors -- and have long
tail-like things protruding from their heads; Jabba the Hutt's right-hand man
was a Twi'lek, as were the bimboes cuddling Sebulba.)
Time magazine's review of Episode II was raving, and suggests that this is
MUCH better than Episode I.
I want to know why the fourth biggest money-making movie of all time (third
before ET's re-release) is so soundly panned. Episode I seems to get as much
razzing as, say, Waterworld, Battlefield Earth, and that Beatty/Hoffman flick
whose name I've forgotten.
|
other
|
|
response 82 of 150:
|
Apr 25 14:34 UTC 2002 |
Ishtar
|
brighn
|
|
response 83 of 150:
|
Apr 25 15:02 UTC 2002 |
What does Boba Fett do that makes him a bad ass? He stands around a lot and
fires a gun from time to time. (I'm told that Boba Fett is much more fleshed
out in the books, and that's what I'm missing... based on the movies, he's
some guy who stands around and fires a gun from time to time.)
(Ishtar's what I was thinking of, yes, thanks.)
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 84 of 150:
|
Apr 25 15:12 UTC 2002 |
Re #81: Because it *sucked*. I enjoyed Waterworld and Ishtar more than I
liked Episode 1. (I haven't seen Battlefield: Earth.)
|
brighn
|
|
response 85 of 150:
|
Apr 25 17:09 UTC 2002 |
#84> It sucked so much it made over $400M, fourth only to Titanic, Star Wars
IV, and ET. Granted, I've never seen Titanic and ET, but I assume that the
movies must have had audiences that enjoyed them a great deal.
If it's not your cuppa, that's one thing. But it clearly didn't *suck.*
(The money rule doesn't seem to work for music nearly as well as for movies.
;} )
But then, I'm arguing with someone who enjoyed Waterworld.
|
jp2
|
|
response 86 of 150:
|
Apr 25 17:12 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
brighn
|
|
response 87 of 150:
|
Apr 25 17:14 UTC 2002 |
I only use public taste to bolster my arguments. When public taste disagrees
with me, I'll still say the movie sucked. ;} I'm such a hypocrite.
The Matrix was all right. I'd watch it again if it happened to be on in the
background. I don't know what got people off about it, though, it didn't blow
my mind. It's a Boba Fett of movies... it's not worthless, but damn I can
figure out the appeal.
|
edina
|
|
response 88 of 150:
|
Apr 25 17:16 UTC 2002 |
Jamie, this definitely goes into the "why Jamie is gay" evidentiary book.
|
jp2
|
|
response 89 of 150:
|
Apr 25 17:18 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
edina
|
|
response 90 of 150:
|
Apr 25 17:19 UTC 2002 |
Don't talk about Amit like that.
|
brighn
|
|
response 91 of 150:
|
Apr 25 17:19 UTC 2002 |
Seth Green turned his GF into a Lesbian on Buffy.
|
jp2
|
|
response 92 of 150:
|
Apr 25 17:20 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
senna
|
|
response 93 of 150:
|
Apr 25 17:32 UTC 2002 |
People bash ep 1 because it's convenient. It had all kinds of hype and didn't
bring people to their knees with joy. I like it, and it's a nice enough
movie without being either a masterpiece or a particularly complimentary part
of the series... but it can easily wind up being an excellent introduction
to the rest of the movies, if done correctly.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 94 of 150:
|
Apr 25 17:54 UTC 2002 |
Re #85: I never said I liked Waterworld. I said I liked it more than the
piece of puerile (literally) crap that was Episode 1.
My problem with Episode 1 is that it was aimed at 4-year-olds.
The kid blowing up the Death Star (oops, this one wasn't called the
Death Star, that's later), the aliens speaking English in funny
ethnic accents instead of speaking alien languages with subtitles
like all the other movies, etc., etc.
|
brighn
|
|
response 95 of 150:
|
Apr 25 18:35 UTC 2002 |
Ok, language lesson. "Puerile" literally means "of or pertaining to children."
"Puerile" figuratively means "immature, silly, insipid." Calling something
"literally puerile" is much less of an insult than calling it "figuratively
puerile."
#93> Episode 1 "sucked" because no movie could hope to live up to fans'
expectations after that long a haitus. I used to think that The Matrix sucked
until I realized that, for what it was and taken out of the hype, it's a
pretty good movie (compare Reeves' other cyberpunk foray, "Johnny Mnemonic").
It's just not as good as the hype would suggest, and that's mostly because
the hype seemed obsessed that its plot was so damned original. Ooo... our
reality is being manipulated by aliens feeding us thoughts... how novel...
Episode 1 is the worst of the Star Wars movies, but it's still one of the best
movies that was out that year, and one of the better movies of the last
decade.
|
flem
|
|
response 96 of 150:
|
Apr 25 18:36 UTC 2002 |
If I understand correctly, a lot of the appeal of Boba Fett to hardcore Star
Wars fans comes from various novels, comic book series and so forth that
aren't part of the "official canon". I believe there was a particularly good
comic book series covering the time between when the heroes escape in the
garbage, with Boba Fett trailing them, and when they get to the gas planet.
|
flem
|
|
response 97 of 150:
|
Apr 25 18:37 UTC 2002 |
And Episode 1 sucked in an absolute, not relative, sense.
|
brighn
|
|
response 98 of 150:
|
Apr 25 18:40 UTC 2002 |
*snort* Sez you.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 99 of 150:
|
Apr 25 20:10 UTC 2002 |
For those who are coming in late, a summary of the discussion so far:
"It sucked!"
"Did not!"
"Did too!"
"Sez you!"
|