Revenge of the Sith

RS, thanks for the explanation of General Grievous. I saw a few episodes of The Clone Wars or whatever it was called. I'm mixed on Gendy's (did I spell that right?) style of animation, but I admit I really liked the pilot episode of Samurai Jack. That said, it's still annoying to look at Grievous cough all over the screen. I found it almost as irritating as Jar Jar Binks. About as painful as the trachiotomy-box-voice of the bad guy in Ong-Bak (loved the action and stunts, wish the story wasn't so unbearable though--was expecing a bad story, but not one that would assault intelligence). The backstory shouldn't be enough to justify the irritating experiences of Grievous' hacking...

Liquid Max, curious what your current review would look like now since your initial review had so much buzz from just watching the movie.

This is not an attack on you, but it is my expression of what is so lifeless and dull in the visuals of Episode II and III. I personally found Lucas' world very mechanical in Episode II and III. If you grabbed a still from them, maybe I would say they look nice--in a sense, they literally look like they come out of a conceptual artists' render. But film is a motion narrative... And it's in the animation (motion) that the visuals are very weak imo. In Palpatine's office, we generally have 5 o'clock traffic in the background for the sake of having flying cars in the background. If you ask me, it's as boring to watch and more distracting than actually having 5 o'clock traffic in the background of another movie. And in such a case, at least it should have a reason and acknowledgement somewhere... But no, as far as I can tell, the traffic of flying cars move so uniformly in the background and without real purpose except to underline the "flatlining" of the scene. One might think that a person of such power would prefer to not have traffic obstructing his corner office view...

You look at the modified scenes from Return of the Jedi where there were a couple tie-fighters flying outside the deathstar and that looked fine, but Lucas wanted to give a sense of an armada of them so he just added a bunch of them to the scene, and if you ask me, it ruined the scene because more does not make better and he might as well have just created a whole 'nother scene if he truly wanted to capture the size of the fleet. Episode III's visuals were an improvement over II in the sense that Episode II had very flat interiors, without any wear and tear--and while some may value that, it only drives home the message that you're watching something artificial, a cartoon--and to be honest, most cartoons capture more realistic elements than Episode II did. Maybe Episode III improved by having a larger portion of exterior shots.

In Lucas' Star Wars universe as evident in how he's "modified" 4-6 and especially as he has displayed in CG glory in 2 and 3, he adds more and more to scenes not for composition reasons so much as he thinks it'll be cool if certain things existed in the scene, but as far as I can tell they are mostly just sitting dead on the screen. Not only did it make the world less believable, I felt it made the world that much more boring--the star wars world that is. Again, the world of II and III just look like they come straight out of very forward conceptual artist renders, and probably nothing more. Probably not even storyboards. Which to me results in very boring composition of long and medium shots that are about as forward and dry as one can imagine.

But that's just a part of my take on the visuals/atmosphere/look of Episode II and III.

P.S. I'm not a Lord of the Rings nut, but my short-take on the visuals of the motion picture trilogy is that they succeeded in looking like they came out of illustrated fantasy books, but carrying the mythic qualities and over-illustrated look in both composition and motion. And everything had some sort of life or purpose for being there, nothing felt tossed in for the sake of being tossed in.

 

[ QUOTE ]
Liquid_MAX said:

[ QUOTE ]
RandomHajile said:

did u think it was good or bad?

as i was watching it i was thinking it could be the best of the prequles but the rushed shitness that was the ending made me realise that star wars was a killed with the force a long long time ago (whenin 1999 qui gon said the force was mediclorents not "spirit")

it did look and sound good tho....

[/ QUOTE ]

He didn't say that the Force was midichlorians, just that these midichlorians were present in all living things as a conduit to the Force, which is a spirit-type entity. That's why some are more "strong with the Force" than others. It's why "my father has it, I have it...and my sister has it".

[/ QUOTE ]

if you cant see that this is a blatent atempt to lucas trying to 2nd guess that in real life we will find similer "medicloriants"

and didnt qui gon say you can talk to them.they can to u???

my point was that after YEARS of interviews saying he came up with "the force" as a spritual concept/to make people think about such things, he then destroys the concept in episode 1

i forgave jarjar but killing of the force and saying you need a "high count" of them in your blood/body cheepens my intelegence!

then surely that as vader has had all his limbs choped then his "count" would be lower/hence hes less powerful/capable?>????

more GL bullshit!

i for one am GLAD it leaked online!

someone internal must of done it for a reason!

 

Re: Huh...

[ QUOTE ]
SgtRamrod said:

The maturity of Episode III and II... I am still scratching my head over that one. The central love stroy was so corny, so after-school-special-y that it made me embarrassed for all involved.

[/ QUOTE ]

I said "comparative maturity", meaning that it was thematically more mature than the original trilogy.

And yes, the love story was corny, but this was all in the style of Star Wars. Unlike Han and Leia, the love of Anakin and Padmé isn't so playful. I can buy that. The melodramatic style of the movies lends itself well to this kind of romance, and hey, it worked for me.

[ QUOTE ]
Now episode III was a fun movie to watch, but it was pure Campy Space Cartoon. The visuals, while technically amazing, are not as arresting as those in say The Last Emperor or The Thin Red Line simply because, well, I think Lucas doesn't have the best taste and instead puts $millions in CGI to mask this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I personally found the artistic design of every planet, creature and landscape frame to be utterly beautiful, with all those big bucks used to amazing effect. And yes, it was camp, but again, this was the style of the movie.

[ QUOTE ]
I can see how a Kubrick fan would also love George Lucas. A lot of pepole dpn't know this, but Kubrick actually wrote the screenplay for "Howard the Duck" at the same time that he was making "Barry Lyndon."

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I happened to be aware of that /versus/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

 

[ QUOTE ]
Madin said:

This is one of those 'needless spam' replies, but congratulations on doing 6 of the last 9 posts!
also... did U luv da matrix?!?1 i think its da bestest sci-fi evar!!!
i meen, its got romanse, kung-fu, guns and robots!!!
OH MY GOSH!

[/ QUOTE ]

Um..thanks, I guess /versus/images/graemlins/smile.gif

And yes, I'm a huge lover of The Matrix Trilogy. Perhaps the most amazing big-budget cyberpunk production in history. But I loved it for a bit more than just the aforementioned reasons /versus/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[ QUOTE ]
Chanchai said:

RS, thanks for the explanation of General Grievous. I saw a few episodes of The Clone Wars or whatever it was called. I'm mixed on Gendy's (did I spell that right?) style of animation, but I admit I really liked the pilot episode of Samurai Jack. That said, it's still annoying to look at Grievous cough all over the screen. I found it almost as irritating as Jar Jar Binks. About as painful as the trachiotomy-box-voice of the bad guy in Ong-Bak (loved the action and stunts, wish the story wasn't so unbearable though--was expecing a bad story, but not one that would assault intelligence). The backstory shouldn't be enough to justify the irritating experiences of Grievous' hacking...

[/ QUOTE ]

Oddly, I didn't find it annoying. Sure, it made him look less tough than he could have, but it was hardly an irritance.

[ QUOTE ]
Liquid Max, curious what your current review would look like now since your initial review had so much buzz from just watching the movie.

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually saw the movie a second time about a fortnight later, and it still retained its amazing quality. Funnily enough, the fact that the images were so overwhelming the first time round meant that I could now make a little more sense of the more grandiose shots...and to my amazement, picking up on the details just puts you into another level of awe. It really was quite amazing. Oh, and the spine-tingling sensation I got when watching the execution of Order 66 was actually replicated in my second viewing! Damn, it's not like I wasn't expecting it, but somehow it happened! So yeah, the movie still held up on subsequent viewings for me /versus/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
This is not an attack on you, but it is my expression of what is so lifeless and dull in the visuals of Episode II and III. I personally found Lucas' world very mechanical in Episode II and III. If you grabbed a still from them, maybe I would say they look nice--in a sense, they literally look like they come out of a conceptual artists' render. But film is a motion narrative... And it's in the animation (motion) that the visuals are very weak imo. In Palpatine's office, we generally have 5 o'clock traffic in the background for the sake of having flying cars in the background. If you ask me, it's as boring to watch and more distracting than actually having 5 o'clock traffic in the background of another movie. And in such a case, at least it should have a reason and acknowledgement somewhere... But no, as far as I can tell, the traffic of flying cars move so uniformly in the background and without real purpose except to underline the "flatlining" of the scene. One might think that a person of such power would prefer to not have traffic obstructing his corner office view...

[/ QUOTE ]

Nothing personal, but I sort of view the whole Chancellor's office view thing as a bit of a nitpick, and it's not one I could relate to at that. If that's how you feel, fair play to you - but I personally thought it added an extra dynamic to the world Lucas created. The ever-moving planet of Coruscant was beautifully conceived, and I really can't fault its design or final application...it was totally mesmerising.

[ QUOTE ]
You look at the modified scenes from Return of the Jedi where there were a couple tie-fighters flying outside the deathstar and that looked fine, but Lucas wanted to give a sense of an armada of them so he just added a bunch of them to the scene, and if you ask me, it ruined the scene because more does not make better and he might as well have just created a whole 'nother scene if he truly wanted to capture the size of the fleet. Episode III's visuals were an improvement over II in the sense that Episode II had very flat interiors, without any wear and tear--and while some may value that, it only drives home the message that you're watching something artificial, a cartoon--and to be honest, most cartoons capture more realistic elements than Episode II did. Maybe Episode III improved by having a larger portion of exterior shots.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that the spotless, super-sleek designs are a part of the design. Sure, it looks artificial, but then it doesn't bother me as much as it does some people. I can't understand why that is. People have a problem with being able to tell when something is CGI. Having seen CG become more and more frequently used since 1991, I've kind of grown used to it as a visual device, like say matte paintings or other, more traditional visual tricks. Mind you, when you're on the desert planet of Tatooine or on the insectoid-like catacombs of Geonosis, this argument doesn't seem to apply quite as much, pobably since the whole point of it is that we're on a dirt-ridden planet as opposed to the droid-maintained cleanliness of Coruscant or Kamino.

I haven't actually seen the 2004 reworks of the original trilogy, so I can't really comment on that.

[ QUOTE ]
In Lucas' Star Wars universe as evident in how he's "modified" 4-6 and especially as he has displayed in CG glory in 2 and 3, he adds more and more to scenes not for composition reasons so much as he thinks it'll be cool if certain things existed in the scene, but as far as I can tell they are mostly just sitting dead on the screen. Not only did it make the world less believable, I felt it made the world that much more boring--the star wars world that is. Again, the world of II and III just look like they come straight out of very forward conceptual artist renders, and probably nothing more. Probably not even storyboards. Which to me results in very boring composition of long and medium shots that are about as forward and dry as one can imagine.

But that's just a part of my take on the visuals/atmosphere/look of Episode II and III.

P.S. I'm not a Lord of the Rings nut, but my short-take on the visuals of the motion picture trilogy is that they succeeded in looking like they came out of illustrated fantasy books, but carrying the mythic qualities and over-illustrated look in both composition and motion. And everything had some sort of life or purpose for being there, nothing felt tossed in for the sake of being tossed in.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I see your point in your visual comparison to The Lord Of The Rings. Mind you, I think that they are two separate visual experiences - super-modern Vs. super-ancient (yes, I know Star Wars happens "a long time ago", but you know what I mean /versus/images/graemlins/tongue.gif ) - and whilst I sort of understand your idea that the fantasy-scapes of LOTR seem more 'applied to reality' as it were, I don't think that this was so much the goal of Star Wars. If anything, what you describe as being a very concept-rendering look is what I find to be so wonderfully unique to the visual aesthetic of the films.

But hey, everyone to their own, eh? /versus/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

 

[ QUOTE ]
RandomHajile said:

[ QUOTE ]
Liquid_MAX said:

[ QUOTE ]
RandomHajile said:

did u think it was good or bad?

as i was watching it i was thinking it could be the best of the prequles but the rushed shitness that was the ending made me realise that star wars was a killed with the force a long long time ago (whenin 1999 qui gon said the force was mediclorents not "spirit")

it did look and sound good tho....

[/ QUOTE ]

He didn't say that the Force was midichlorians, just that these midichlorians were present in all living things as a conduit to the Force, which is a spirit-type entity. That's why some are more "strong with the Force" than others. It's why "my father has it, I have it...and my sister has it".

[/ QUOTE ]

if you cant see that this is a blatent atempt to lucas trying to 2nd guess that in real life we will find similer "medicloriants"

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't quite understand how you got to that conclusion, but I trust you know what you mean.

[ QUOTE ]
and didnt qui gon say you can talk to them.they can to u???

[/ QUOTE ]

As I said, they are a conduit between the living organism and the Force. The 'talk' was lamens terms for 'communication' for the kiddies to understand.

[ QUOTE ]
my point was that after YEARS of interviews saying he came up with "the force" as a spritual concept/to make people think about such things, he then destroys the concept in episode 1

i forgave jarjar but killing of the force and saying you need a "high count" of them in your blood/body cheepens my intelegence!

then surely that as vader has had all his limbs choped then his "count" would be lower/hence hes less powerful/capable?>????

more GL bullshit!

i for one am GLAD it leaked online!

someone internal must of done it for a reason!

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, I think you might be overlooking the fact that Lucas did not "destroy the Force". He merely gave a way in which someone's affinity to the Force can be measured. Of course, this affinity is merely potential - without formal training, it would be untapped potential. Nevertheless, Luke calling out to Leia, establishing that his family "has it" is something that was done long before the prequels, implying that while all living things are surrounded by the Force, an organisms' ability to tap into it is determined by the midichlorian count that is mostly standard, but in a rare few, it is exceedingly high.

I think it works. You may feel differently.

 

[ QUOTE ]
Liquid_MAX said:
Again, I think you might be overlooking the fact that Lucas did not "destroy the Force". He merely gave a way in which someone's affinity to the Force can be measured. Of course, this affinity is merely potential - without formal training, it would be untapped potential. Nevertheless, Luke calling out to Leia, establishing that his family "has it" is something that was done long before the prequels, implying that while all living things are surrounded by the Force, an organisms' ability to tap into it is determined by the midichlorian count that is mostly standard, but in a rare few, it is exceedingly high.

I think it works. You may feel differently.

[/ QUOTE ]

i can just picture it now, thosands of little DrMario germs all talking to each other and moving stuff!

fan fucking tastic

next thing you'll be saying is that ewoks wasnt a toy/marketing move

 

you know what, its great to see people that dont give a shit what other people say and just plainly say how much they like a movie. people who try to get "cool awareness points" (wtf? lol) judge how much to praise something based on other peoples opinions, clouding their own judgement (holy shit that was deep! read it again lol). saying something like "best thing i have ever seen" is a really big deal nowadays (actually it was always like this...), you WILL be ridiculed or laffed at just cause not everyone shares your views, ESPECIALLY since its something other people have labeled as "not cool". for example: wanna be a "cool" kid and not look like a retard, just say star wars / matrix sucks! hey everyone is doing it, its the IN thing to say (hmm i swear i said this line a looong time ago here at vfdc heh). you see, people are very concious to not look like an unintellingent individual, that they cloud their own judgement and are convinced that their new thinking is the right one, instead of going wih the stuff that really makes them enjoy the movie, not the stuff that makes them happy with themselves cause thas what the majority (not always the case) goes for. (fuck its hard to get my point accroos i dont think i made it clear, oh well i hate typing too much lol)

so basically dont be afraid to shout it out loud that you think BMX DANDITS is the best 80's movie EVER (second to RAD the movie ) so fuck what everyone says and enjoy your GUILTY PLEASURES.

disclaimer: this post was not directed at ANYONE, just saying "good shit" to liquid max to having the balls to liking something and calloing it the best thing ever. and to all future posters, dont over analize too much and post your thoughs, its boring /versus/images/graemlins/smile.gif oh and yes i dont care about grmmar online.

PS, buy battlefield 2, join #vfhome and join us in the fun.

 

fair dues, fair dues...

just one thing tho,

this is a discussion board. As in to discuss. its not a statement board, cuz if it was, then goddammit this place would be a more boring place.

 

[ QUOTE ]
Sudden_Death said:

you know what, its great to see people that dont give a shit what other people say and just plainly say how much they like a movie. people who try to get "cool awareness points" (wtf? lol) judge how much to praise something based on other peoples opinions, clouding their own judgement (holy shit that was deep! read it again lol). saying something like "best thing i have ever seen" is a really big deal nowadays (actually it was always like this...), you WILL be ridiculed or laffed at just cause not everyone shares your views, ESPECIALLY since its something other people have labeled as "not cool". for example: wanna be a "cool" kid and not look like a retard, just say star wars / matrix sucks! hey everyone is doing it, its the IN thing to say (hmm i swear i said this line a looong time ago here at vfdc heh). you see, people are very concious to not look like an unintellingent individual, that they cloud their own judgement and are convinced that their new thinking is the right one, instead of going wih the stuff that really makes them enjoy the movie, not the stuff that makes them happy with themselves cause thas what the majority (not always the case) goes for. (fuck its hard to get my point accroos i dont think i made it clear, oh well i hate typing too much lol)

so basically dont be afraid to shout it out loud that you think BMX DANDITS is the best 80's movie EVER (second to RAD the movie ) so fuck what everyone says and enjoy your GUILTY PLEASURES.

disclaimer: this post was not directed at ANYONE, just saying "good shit" to liquid max to having the balls to liking something and calloing it the best thing ever. and to all future posters, dont over analize too much and post your thoughs, its boring /versus/images/graemlins/smile.gif oh and yes i dont care about grmmar online.

PS, buy battlefield 2, join #vfhome and join us in the fun.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey there, SD - thanks for the hoot of encouragement /versus/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Over at Rotten Tomatoes, I have a statement in my sig that says "Fuck The Critics". Bottom line, peoples' idea that certain views are in some way 'more valid' than others simply because it's the more popular 'critically accepted' view is utter bullshit.

The thing is that art is a 100% subjective experience. When you get these know-it-all critic-types who seem to have a very real distinction on what makes 'good' and 'bad' cinema, and if you get down to the nuts and bolts of it, you realise: "these mofos seriously have forgotten how to go to the movies and just enjoy themselves!!".

Hey man, I've only like Star Wars for the better part of six months (hehe...no, I'm not a die-hard fan of the franchise, I only got into it because I dug Ep. II when they were showing it on Sky Movies at the end of last year /versus/images/graemlins/laugh.gif ), despite having seen the OT and not being especially moved by it, it was actually the prequels that sparked my imagination. In my view, none of the Star Wars films are exemplary pieces of filmmaking, but what they show is experimentation, guts, emotion, and bucket-loads of entertainment value!

My love of The Matrix also didn't actually become a real love until Reloaded - being a fan of animé, graphic novels and 'alternative' entertainment (i.e. cyberpunk, Hong Kong movies), I felt as though The Matrix was a cool movie, but didn't inspire anything that I hadn't already felt. It wasn't until Reloaded (more specifically, the episode Matriculated of The Animatrix) that I felt the Brothers Wachowskis had truly begun pushing the boundaries of what we expected and what we took for granted. The superficial illusion of the Matrix that dominated the pre-title sequence that was the 1999 original was but a pre-cursor, a way in to a much deeper conspiracy that was as much psychological as it was an actual physical manifestation.

This, to me, is why the sequels are immensely superior to the original in almost every conceiveable way.

The first Matrix was a bullet-ridden cliché with a Giger-inspired backdrop.

Reloaded and Revolutions were artistic and intellectual expression of the highest order.

But you see, the bottom line is, that's just my view. And my point (as was yours) is that no-one's view is any less valid.

Oh, and I bloody hate the term "guilty pleasure"...no pleasure in life should ever be ridden with guilt. There just ain't enough time for that /versus/images/graemlins/wink.gif


Re: PS

#VFHome? What's this? What's Battlefield 2, also? I'm sorry, it's just that my degree has dominated my life so much as of late that I've had next to no time for gaming! I've actually been playing VF since the days of the Saturn (yes, the most underrated console in history!!! Sega gave the gaming world the first analogue controller...and no smart-ass comments about the PC mouse, please /versus/images/graemlins/laugh.gif ) and I spent many happy days without internet access just bashing away, trying to figure out how to make Jacky do that little dance after the axe kick! I was only about 15 or so at the time, I think.

But yes, I'd be delighted to join if I knew what these were - a little help for the blissfully ignorant? /versus/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

 

[ QUOTE ]
RandomHajile said:

[ QUOTE ]
Liquid_MAX said:
Again, I think you might be overlooking the fact that Lucas did not "destroy the Force". He merely gave a way in which someone's affinity to the Force can be measured. Of course, this affinity is merely potential - without formal training, it would be untapped potential. Nevertheless, Luke calling out to Leia, establishing that his family "has it" is something that was done long before the prequels, implying that while all living things are surrounded by the Force, an organisms' ability to tap into it is determined by the midichlorian count that is mostly standard, but in a rare few, it is exceedingly high.

I think it works. You may feel differently.

[/ QUOTE ]

i can just picture it now, thosands of little DrMario germs all talking to each other and moving stuff!

fan fucking tastic

next thing you'll be saying is that ewoks wasnt a toy/marketing move

[/ QUOTE ]

Your cynically-based assumptions about Lucas' money-making motives (yes, people do try and make money - it's crazy, I know) are not really any of my business. However, this will be the third time I've stated that the midichlorians were small blood-based organisms that act as a conduit (they don't literally 'talk') between the organism and the Force.

That is all.

 

Re: Huh...

GREAT LIES IN HISTORY

1."if you masturbate, you will go blind and hair will sprout from your palms."

2. "If you went back in time you could bang your mom and concieve yourself."

3. "Mission accomplished."

4. "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky."

5. "Kubrick actually wrote the screenplay for "Howard the Duck".

 

Re: Huh...

[ QUOTE ]
sanjuro said:

1."if you masturbate, you will go blind and hair will sprout from your palms."



[/ QUOTE ]

And here I've been thinking the Yeti actually were confused blind wankers. I had the book done and everything /versus/images/graemlins/tear.gif

/KiwE

 

nonononnoonononnnonooononononoooooonooooooooOOOoooo

ignore #vfhome, ignore bf2. get that degree and get a nice job.

move along now...

 

Click on the "chat" link at the very top of the page for the answers to your questions. -_^

 

[ QUOTE ]
Mr. Bungle said:

nonononnoonononnnonooononononoooooonooooooooOOOoooo

ignore #vfhome, ignore bf2. get that degree and get a nice job.

move along now...

[/ QUOTE ]

Hehe...duly noted, sir /versus/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[ QUOTE ]
Shag said:

Click on the "chat" link at the very top of the page for the answers to your questions. -_^

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks very much /versus/images/graemlins/laugh.gif