Because of George Lucas: Can you still enjoy Star Wars?

  • 54 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -

Personally, I have been more-or-less uneffected by his most recent ventures. In fact, I have the controversial opinion that enjoys the prequel trilogy. That said, the writing has its abysmal lows and the highs are scarce enough to become negligible. Yet, still I find myself fascinated with Star Wars. However, all the while I have this sinking feeling of this enjoyment being a guilty pleasure. And that's the biggest disturbance in the Force of all.

#2 Posted by JoelTGM (5596 posts) -

Star Wars is great.  There's a lot of crap but that's something else, it doesn't bother me.

#3 Posted by HandsomeDead (11863 posts) -

After seeing the prequels, I can safely say I have no interest in seeing them again and I can live with the original IV, V and VI. Well, IV and V. Return of the Jedi was a bit shit anyway.

#4 Posted by WilliamRLBaker (4777 posts) -

I didn't like starwars to begin with, but george lucas literally ruined the movies by making 1-3, why the hell he made 3-6 in the first place ill never tell nothing about 1-3 makes me think they couldn't have done it back then.

#5 Posted by tekmojo (2302 posts) -

I don't care what anyone says I love all of em.

#6 Posted by MattyFTM (14368 posts) -

Personally, I quite like the prequel trilogy (especially 2 and 3). Sure, they're not as good as the original trilogy, but I never expected it to be. They're entertaining and they tie up some loose story ends

Moderator
#7 Posted by Arkthemaniac (6535 posts) -

V and VI are pretty much it for me. IV is kinda boring (and you can tell that the actors are new to the screen, in a big way), and the first trilogy didn't quite cut it. I thought III was alright, but II was godawful, and I was made passable by Liam Neeson, who was almost completely counterbalanced by the little shit that played Anakin.

#8 Posted by Captain_Fookup (1519 posts) -

I saw "Episode One" and after that I refuse to watch "Episode Two" and "Episode Three"

#9 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
Arkthemaniac said:
"V and VI are pretty much it for me. IV is kinda boring (and you can tell that the actors are new to the screen, in a big way), and the first trilogy didn't quite cut it. I thought III was alright, but II was godawful, and I was made passable by Liam Neeson, who was almost completely counterbalanced by the little shit that played Anakin."

B-bu-but...Darth Maul!
#10 Posted by Lunarbunny (1025 posts) -

At least we got this.

#11 Posted by HandsomeDead (11863 posts) -
BiggerBomb said:
"Arkthemaniac said:
"V and VI are pretty much it for me. IV is kinda boring (and you can tell that the actors are new to the screen, in a big way), and the first trilogy didn't quite cut it. I thought III was alright, but II was godawful, and I was made passable by Liam Neeson, who was almost completely counterbalanced by the little shit that played Anakin."

B-bu-but...Darth Maul!"
That's your counter arguement? A bad guy who says nothing and does a bit of dodge kung fu? Vader would crush that sucker in a second.
#12 Posted by Maxszy (2064 posts) -

The original Star Wars trilogy is amazing. Always will be and I will always enjoy it. I love Star Wars too much not to.

Episode 3 Revenge of the Sith is the only one I can actually watch time and time again. Its decent, though the dialogue hits new lows in movie history from time to time. Its no where near as bad as the first two. And Obi-Wan actually has a few good lines toward the end when they are on Mustafar during the fight with Anakin. So yeah, I know the prequels weren't GREAT but to directly answer your question... no, they didn't ruin "Star Wars" for me.

The Clone Wars: The Movie though... that may be the worst out of all of them.

#13 Posted by Arkthemaniac (6535 posts) -

They didn't give Darth Maul a good enough hook, other than the fact that he has a double-sided lightsaber, which they should have kept secret in the commercials. It would have made that moment a lot sweeter.

Darth Maul was only in episode I for all of 20 minutes on screen. He should have had more airtime.
#14 Edited by Food (383 posts) -

Man I loved Star Wars as a kid, but I can't watch any of the movies anymore.  I know them so well that I can't tell whether I enjoy them or not.  It's like how it's hard to tell if your mom or sister is hot.  They've been there as long as you can remember so you just kind of accept them as a natural fact of the universe, like the ground or the sky.  And that's how I feel when I'm watching Star Wars.  Like I'm staring at the ground for a couple hours.

#15 Posted by Arkthemaniac (6535 posts) -
Maxszy said:
The Clone Wars: The Movie though... that may be the worst out of all of them."
Didn't happen.
#16 Posted by HandsomeDead (11863 posts) -
Arkthemaniac said:
"They didn't give Darth Maul a good enough hook, other than the fact that he has a double-sided lightsaber, which they should have kept secret in the commercials. It would have made that moment a lot sweeter.
Darth Maul was only in episode I for all of 20 minutes on screen. He should have had more airtime.
"
Precisely. He was basically a glorified goon.
#17 Edited by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
HandsomeDead said:
"BiggerBomb said:
"Arkthemaniac said:
"V and VI are pretty much it for me. IV is kinda boring (and you can tell that the actors are new to the screen, in a big way), and the first trilogy didn't quite cut it. I thought III was alright, but II was godawful, and I was made passable by Liam Neeson, who was almost completely counterbalanced by the little shit that played Anakin."

B-bu-but...Darth Maul!"
That's your counter arguement? A bad guy who says nothing and does a bit of dodge kung fu? Vader would crush that sucker in a second."

Yes, actually that is my argument. He is immensly badass. Perhaps Terminator 2 would have been a better movie if no one said a word, the dialogue was equally shitty and the voice acting was worse than Episode I's Anakin might ever witness, even in his wildest dreams. That's the saddest part.
#18 Posted by LiquidPrince (15909 posts) -

I like them all to some degree.

#19 Posted by SoothsayerGB (1468 posts) -

I hate Star Wars because of Lucas.  More then I hate him.  He should die from stomach cancer or get shot in the face.

#20 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
SoothsayerGB said:
"I hate Star Wars because of Lucas.  More then I hate him.  He should die from stomach cancer or get shot in the face."

And you should probably see a shrink.
#21 Posted by Jayge_ (10221 posts) -

Star Wars is still great, but Lucas keeps trying to intentionally sabotage it. He needs to be shot or something.

#22 Edited by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
Jayge said:
"Star Wars is still great, but Lucas keeps trying to intentionally sabotage it. He needs to be shot or something."

He's not trying to sabotage it. He must have a pang of jealousy that the success of his original creation is largely attributable to the directing and contributions of others. He probably did what he did so he could feel like he did something other than create it, which a crazy line of thought considering that the creation of Star Wars is an amazing feat unto itself. It's the most expansive fiction universe I have ever encountered.
#23 Posted by Jayge_ (10221 posts) -
BiggerBomb said:
"Jayge said:
"Star Wars is still great, but Lucas keeps trying to intentionally sabotage it. He needs to be shot or something."

He's not trying to sabotage it. He must have a pang of jealousy that the success of his original creation is largely attributable to the directing and contributions of others. He probably did what he did so he could feel like he did something other than create it, which a crazy line of thought considering that the creation of Star Wars is an amazing feat unto itself. It's the most expansive fiction universe I have ever encountered."
He's trying to sabotage it. Don't let those doughy eyes (and doughy everything else) fool you. Nobody could be that stupid.
#24 Posted by HandsomeDead (11863 posts) -
BiggerBomb said:
"HandsomeDead said:
"BiggerBomb said:
"Arkthemaniac said:
"V and VI are pretty much it for me. IV is kinda boring (and you can tell that the actors are new to the screen, in a big way), and the first trilogy didn't quite cut it. I thought III was alright, but II was godawful, and I was made passable by Liam Neeson, who was almost completely counterbalanced by the little shit that played Anakin."

B-bu-but...Darth Maul!"
That's your counter arguement? A bad guy who says nothing and does a bit of dodge kung fu? Vader would crush that sucker in a second."

Yes, actually that is my argument. He is immensly badass. Perhaps Terminator 2 would have been a better movie if no one said a word, the dialogue was equally shitty and the voice acting was worse than Episode I's Anakin might ever witness, even in his wildest dreams. That's the saddest part."
That's a terrible arguement. How am I meant to think of a villain as badass, or at least as comparably badass as Darth Vader when they don't say a word, aren't on screen much and when they are, they're getting bossed around by Palpatine? At least Vader felt like his apprentice rather than lackey.

You're saying Terminator 2 is worse that Star Wars Episode I? Why even bring it up? No one else mentioned Terminator 2. And  So, for the millionth time, can you tell me what exactly the problem was with the acting or are you going to start ignoring me again then moan to the mods for harrassment?
#25 Posted by Karmum (11519 posts) -

I never liked Star Wars to begin with.

#26 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
Jayge said:
"BiggerBomb said:
"Jayge said:
"Star Wars is still great, but Lucas keeps trying to intentionally sabotage it. He needs to be shot or something."

He's not trying to sabotage it. He must have a pang of jealousy that the success of his original creation is largely attributable to the directing and contributions of others. He probably did what he did so he could feel like he did something other than create it, which a crazy line of thought considering that the creation of Star Wars is an amazing feat unto itself. It's the most expansive fiction universe I have ever encountered."
He's trying to sabotage it. Don't let those doughy eyes (and doughy everything else) fool you. Nobody could be that stupid."

He's not stupid. His choice to sign off the rights for the original trilogy and take a larger portion of the merchandising rights was absolutely brilliant. Not to mention risky, there is no way he could know how succesful the franchise would become. For a guy to pour millions upon umpteen millions into the franchise, and construct the epic Skywalker Ranch, and then work to burn it down takes a real masochistic conscience.
#27 Posted by Red (5994 posts) -

The original movies are great. The new movies blow. I'd be able to perfectly enjoy the original movies if they weren't edited with bad CG and Anakin. It makes me want to kill a baby. I also enjoy me some Star Wars Video Games.

#28 Posted by Food (383 posts) -

I thought it was common knowledge that George Lucas was captured by aliens in the early 90's and replaced by an evil clone.  He created the Star Wars prequels to undermine our faith in the capitalist system.  (Did I mention the aliens were communists?)  Look at what's happened to our economy just 4 years after Episode 3 was released.  Now that we have elected Barack Obama, their overlord, as our president it is only a matter of time before the aliens emerge from their cocoons deep below the earth's crust and complete their takeover of our planet. 

Why are we even arguing about this?

#29 Posted by WilliamRLBaker (4777 posts) -

I love my troll, people have said worse in the thread then me but i get -1? lol

#30 Posted by Jayge_ (10221 posts) -
BiggerBomb said:
"He's not stupid. His choice to sign off the rights for the original trilogy and take a larger portion of the merchandising rights was absolutely brilliant. Not to mention risky, there is no way he could know how succesful the franchise would become. For a guy to pour millions upon umpteen millions into the franchise, and construct the epic Skywalker Ranch, and then work to burn it down takes a real masochistic conscience."
George Lucas is an idiot. There is no other explanation. He is evil, he is dumb, and he is satanic. He will not stop until he rules the world. He needs to be put down.
#31 Posted by HandsomeDead (11863 posts) -
BiggerBomb said:
"Jayge said:
"BiggerBomb said:
"Jayge said:
"Star Wars is still great, but Lucas keeps trying to intentionally sabotage it. He needs to be shot or something."

He's not trying to sabotage it. He must have a pang of jealousy that the success of his original creation is largely attributable to the directing and contributions of others. He probably did what he did so he could feel like he did something other than create it, which a crazy line of thought considering that the creation of Star Wars is an amazing feat unto itself. It's the most expansive fiction universe I have ever encountered."
He's trying to sabotage it. Don't let those doughy eyes (and doughy everything else) fool you. Nobody could be that stupid."

He's not stupid. His choice to sign off the rights for the original trilogy and take a larger portion of the merchandising rights was absolutely brilliant. Not to mention risky, there is no way he could know how succesful the franchise would become. For a guy to pour millions upon umpteen millions into the franchise, and construct the epic Skywalker Ranch, and then work to burn it down takes a real masochistic conscience."
He might not be stupid, but he's not talented. Like you said, the best parts of the franchise are the things he had nothing to do with and so if he's not sabotaging it, he's definitely trying to craft everything into his own vision with some severe retcons (Midichlorians, anyone?) so he's not as good as you're trying to make him out as.
#32 Posted by Arkthemaniac (6535 posts) -
Karmum said:
"I never liked Star Wars to begin with."
Get out of my site.
#33 Posted by Karmum (11519 posts) -
Arkthemaniac said:
"Karmum said:
"I never liked Star Wars to begin with."
Get out of my site."
What is the point of the third poll option, then?
#34 Posted by HandsomeDead (11863 posts) -
Karmum said:
"Arkthemaniac said:
"Karmum said:
"I never liked Star Wars to begin with."
Get out of my site."
What is the point of the third poll option, then?"
Too worm out all the posters who deserve to get banned.
#35 Posted by RHCPfan24 (8609 posts) -

I will never NOT like Star Wars, even if Lucas still acts like the cash cow he is. And, you know what? I don't care. The guy was brilliant for signing on for the profits of the merchandise way back when, and now he is getting millions for resting on his laurels. That guy is one of the smartest business minds in the movie business, because he has extended a franchise for over 30 years, keeping it alive for the new generation, making new movies (yeah, they weren't that good, but they made mucho $!!) and re-releasing his movies a thousand times. He deserves it. The guy started out small and now is among the leading entertainment figures in history. I will always love the Star Wars movies because they were just so damn good, and I will stand by and watch the franchise be expanded (and sometimes exploited, yes) because I think Lucas is one of the smartest guys in the biz.

#36 Edited by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
HandsomeDead said:
"BiggerBomb said:
"HandsomeDead said:
"BiggerBomb said:
"Arkthemaniac said:
"V and VI are pretty much it for me. IV is kinda boring (and you can tell that the actors are new to the screen, in a big way), and the first trilogy didn't quite cut it. I thought III was alright, but II was godawful, and I was made passable by Liam Neeson, who was almost completely counterbalanced by the little shit that played Anakin."

B-bu-but...Darth Maul!"
That's your counter arguement? A bad guy who says nothing and does a bit of dodge kung fu? Vader would crush that sucker in a second."

Yes, actually that is my argument. He is immensly badass. Perhaps Terminator 2 would have been a better movie if no one said a word, the dialogue was equally shitty and the voice acting was worse than Episode I's Anakin might ever witness, even in his wildest dreams. That's the saddest part."
That's a terrible arguement. How am I meant to think of a villain as badass, or at least as comparably badass as Darth Vader when they don't say a word, aren't on screen much and when they are, they're getting bossed around by Palpatine? At least Vader felt like his apprentice rather than lackey.

You're saying Terminator 2 is worse that Star Wars Episode I? Why even bring it up? No one else mentioned Terminator 2. And  So, for the millionth time, can you tell me what exactly the problem was with the acting or are you going to start ignoring me again then moan to the mods for harrassment?"

Silent anti/protagonist =/= a shitty character. You think Vader wasn't bossed around by Palpatine? Are you kidding me? He bended over faster than a wimp in a prison shower.

I bring up Terminator 2 because you are commenting on the quality of a movie, when you seem incapable of recognizing the atrocities Terminator 2 enacted on the professions of acting and screenwriting. For the millionth time, I will tell you what the problem is with the acting as I always do and you ignore me.

The argument of, "well the boy in T2 is supposed to be a whiney snob who says each sentence in the same tone and conveys no real emotion" and "well Ahnohld is playing a robot, so it's ok that he acts like the mannequin he always plays in every other movie" and "well this is the 90's, it's ok that no one actually talks like that," is not a real argument. It's an evasive argument to dodge the fact that the entire movie is delivered through characters who can't break from monotonous sentence structure and line delivery.

As for me PMing the mods for your incessent obsession of harassing me, that should be left for PM's and not broadcasted on the forums as you so often do.

Grow up.
#37 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
Arkthemaniac said:
"Karmum said:
"I never liked Star Wars to begin with."
Get out of my site."

+1 & a cookie
#38 Posted by Arkthemaniac (6535 posts) -
HandsomeDead said:
"Karmum said:
"Arkthemaniac said:
"Karmum said:
"I never liked Star Wars to begin with."
Get out of my site."
What is the point of the third poll option, then?"
Too worm out all the posters who deserve to get banned."
He called it. I am now getting my gun. I don't want to see you around here until I have passed you in posts.
#39 Posted by HandsomeDead (11863 posts) -
BiggerBomb said:
"Silent ant/protagonist =/= a shitty character. You think Vader wasn't bossed around by Palpatine? Are you kidding me? He bended over faster than a wimp in a prison shower."
He had no character. All he was was some chop socky fighter. If there was even a good backstory for him, i'd be fine, but he was a blank slate. OK, so Vader was bossed around a bit, but like I saw, it was more apprentice and less bitch like. Plus, he actually had a character and some fantastic moments: Choking that guy for lack of faith in the control room, chasing Luke down the Death Star canyon, the surprise arrival on Bespin, I could go on forever. What did Darth Maul do?

BiggerBomb said:
" bring up Terminator 2 because you are commenting on the quality of a movie, when you seem incapable of recognizing the atrocities Terminator 2 enacted on the profession of acting and screenwriting. For the millionth time, I will tell you what the problem is with the acting as I always do and you ignore.

The argument of, "well the boy in T2 is supposed to be a whiney snob who says each sentence in the same tone and conveys no real emotion" and "well Ahnohld is playing a robot, so it's ok that he acts like the mannequin he always plays in every other movie" and "well this is the 90's, it's ok that no one actually talks like that," is not a real argument. It's an evasive argument to dodge the fact that the entire movie is delivered through characters who can't break a monotonous sentence structure and line delivery."
Wrong. Arnold Schwarzenegger is playing an emotionless robot, why would he show emotion, it goes against the character. Do you think the character of the T-800 would be more menaxing if he were played by an overacting Daniel Day Leiws? Similarly, Edward Furlong was meant to be a dick who only realised his potential right at the end, anything else would completely invalidate his character. Also, no real emotion? The final scene in T2 is one of the most iconic heartbreaking moments in cinema. I have a huge feeling it all went over your head as it wasn't spelled out constantly like in more recent movies. I also like how you mention it goes against screenwriting when it was written by James Cameron, well known for his fantastic screenplays. And, you're doing all this while defending Star Wars Episode I. This is elaborate trolling at its finest.

BiggerBomb said:
"As for my PMing the mods for your continued harassment, that should be left for PM's and not broadcasted on the forums as you so often do.

Grow up."
No, this is the internet. Lighten up, cheeky chops.
#40 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
HandsomeDead said:
"BiggerBomb said:
"Silent ant/protagonist =/= a shitty character. You think Vader wasn't bossed around by Palpatine? Are you kidding me? He bended over faster than a wimp in a prison shower."
He had no character. All he was was some chop socky fighter. If there was even a good backstory for him, i'd be fine, but he was a blank slate. OK, so Vader was bossed around a bit, but like I saw, it was more apprentice and less bitch like. Plus, he actually had a character and some fantastic moments: Choking that guy for lack of faith in the control room, chasing Luke down the Death Star canyon, the surprise arrival on Bespin, I could go on forever. What did Darth Maul do?

BiggerBomb said:
" bring up Terminator 2 because you are commenting on the quality of a movie, when you seem incapable of recognizing the atrocities Terminator 2 enacted on the profession of acting and screenwriting. For the millionth time, I will tell you what the problem is with the acting as I always do and you ignore.

The argument of, "well the boy in T2 is supposed to be a whiney snob who says each sentence in the same tone and conveys no real emotion" and "well Ahnohld is playing a robot, so it's ok that he acts like the mannequin he always plays in every other movie" and "well this is the 90's, it's ok that no one actually talks like that," is not a real argument. It's an evasive argument to dodge the fact that the entire movie is delivered through characters who can't break a monotonous sentence structure and line delivery."
Wrong. Arnold Schwarzenegger is playing an emotionless robot, why would he show emotion, it goes against the character. Do you think the character of the T-800 would be more menaxing if he were played by an overacting Daniel Day Leiws? Similarly, Edward Furlong was meant to be a dick who only realised his potential right at the end, anything else would completely invalidate his character. Also, no real emotion? The final scene in T2 is one of the most iconic heartbreaking moments in cinema. I have a huge feeling it all went over your head as it wasn't spelled out constantly like in more recent movies. I also like how you mention it goes against screenwriting when it was written by James Cameron, well known for his fantastic screenplays. And, you're doing all this while defending Star Wars Episode I. This is elaborate trolling at its finest.."

You just attempted to refute my argument with the refutal of your own argument. This is elaborate trolling at its finest.
#41 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -

And if you think the ending of Terminator 2 is the most iconic heartbreaking moment in cinema, you need to watch another movie. By another, I literally mean ANY other.

#42 Posted by auspiciousqueue (1298 posts) -

Hayden Christensen made Episodes II and III unbearable among other things.

#43 Posted by HandsomeDead (11863 posts) -
BiggerBomb said:
"You just attempted to refute my argument with the refutal of your own argument. This is elaborate trolling at its finest."
No I never. Everything I said is what James Cameron, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Edward Furlong intended to do with the characters. Unless they are telling lies, I am not refuting anything. Apart form the screenwriting comment but even then, can you argue against James Cameron's talent?

BiggerBomb
said:
"And if you think the ending of Terminator 2 is the most iconic heartbreaking moment in cinema, you need to watch another movie. By another, I literally mean ANY other."
Learn to read: '...one of the...'

Again, this is just opinion vs. opinion so no one wins, but seriously, I can't fathom how you dislike T2. I honestly do not get it. In all my years, I haven't met a single person who has had a bad word for it until now and I can't get past it unless you're a film snob. But that in itself is countered by the fact you like and enjoy Star Wars Episode I. Say, what is your opinion of Paul Verhoeven? Particularly RoboCop, Total Recall and Starship Troopers.
#44 Posted by zitosilva (1840 posts) -

The prequels did ruin the original trilogy a bit, but not enough for me not o enjoy them. But habving said that, it's been some years since I last saw any of the original movies, and honestly I have no will whatsoever to whatch them again.

#45 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
HandsomeDead said:
"BiggerBomb said:
"You just attempted to refute my argument with the refutal of your own argument. This is elaborate trolling at its finest."
No I never. Everything I said is what James Cameron, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Edward Furlong intended to do with the characters. Unless they are telling lies, I am not refuting anything. Apart form the screenwriting comment but even then, can you argue against James Cameron's talent?

BiggerBomb
said:
"And if you think the ending of Terminator 2 is the most iconic heartbreaking moment in cinema, you need to watch another movie. By another, I literally mean ANY other."
Learn to read: '...one of the...'

Again, this is just opinion vs. opinion so no one wins, but seriously, I can't fathom how you dislike T2. I honestly do not get it. In all my years, I haven't met a single person who has had a bad word for it until now and I can't get past it unless you're a film snob. But that in itself is countered by the fact you like and enjoy Star Wars Episode I. Say, what is your opinion of Paul Verhoeven? Particularly RoboCop, Total Recall and Starship Troopers."

I think RoboCop is RoboCop, it was made thirty years ago. What else am I supposed to expect? Starship Troopers is a parody of itself and is the one movie where the acting is worse than Terminator 2.

Also, you preface your response with "this is just opinion vs. opinion" and then proceed to pontificate to kingdom-come and label me as a film snob. You are calling my argument rubbish, all the while your argument is, "they are supposed to be like that." What the hell does that even mean? That's like questioning the CEO of the recently contaminated peanut distributer and asking him how the company managed to ignore shipments which lead to six deaths, only to have him reply "they are supposed to be like that."

Seriously, what the hell kind of assbackwards argument is that? And you call me a troll, that's a real class act.
#46 Posted by HandsomeDead (11863 posts) -
BiggerBomb said:
"I think RoboCop is RoboCop, it was made thirty years ago. What else am I supposed to expect? Starship Troopers is a parody of itself and is the one movie where the acting is worse than Terminator 2."
Thanks. My suspicions have been confirmed. You are completely unable to follow subtext.

BiggerBomb said:
"Also, you preface your response with "this is just opinion vs. opinion" and then proceed to pontificate to kingdom-come and label me as a film snob. You are calling my argument rubbish, all the while your argument is, "they are supposed to be like that." What the hell does that even mean? That's like questioning the CEO of the recently contaminated peanut distributer and asking him how the company managed to ignore shipments which lead to six deaths, only to have him reply "they are supposed to be like that."

Seriously, what the hell kind of assbackwards argument is that? And you call me a troll, that's a real class act."
It means that those are the characters were put forward by James Cameron to make one of the most intelligent sci-fi movies ever made. And yet you seem to dismiss it as if it's a mindless action movie. That comparison really is a lame attempt at being funny and clever. A CEO would never say a product that inadvertantly killed his consumers was supposed to be like that because it would probably lead to his sacking and his company being closed down. Nice try though.
#47 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
HandsomeDead said:
"BiggerBomb said:
"I think RoboCop is RoboCop, it was made thirty years ago. What else am I supposed to expect? Starship Troopers is a parody of itself and is the one movie where the acting is worse than Terminator 2."
Thanks. My suspicions have been confirmed. You are completely unable to follow subtext.

BiggerBomb said:
"Also, you preface your response with "this is just opinion vs. opinion" and then proceed to pontificate to kingdom-come and label me as a film snob. You are calling my argument rubbish, all the while your argument is, "they are supposed to be like that." What the hell does that even mean? That's like questioning the CEO of the recently contaminated peanut distributer and asking him how the company managed to ignore shipments which lead to six deaths, only to have him reply "they are supposed to be like that."

Seriously, what the hell kind of assbackwards argument is that? And you call me a troll, that's a real class act."
It means that those are the characters were put forward by James Cameron to make one of the most intelligent sci-fi movies ever made. And yet you seem to dismiss it as if it's a mindless action movie. That comparison really is a lame attempt at being funny and clever. A CEO would never say a product that inadvertantly killed his consumers was supposed to be like that because it would probably lead to his sacking and his company being closed down. Nice try though."

Thanks. My suspicions have been confirmed. You are a troll.
#48 Posted by HistoryInRust (6293 posts) -

I dunno.  I think I partly grew away from the series, and partly grew tired of it being an enormous cash-cow.  I hated the prequels and hated the CG Clone War business (I think the earlier cartoon was good, though).  Anymore, I can only stomach watching A New Hope and Empire.  Return of the Jedi is sort of the beginning of the downfall of the series, in terms of quality.

At the end of the day, I think even the originals would be nigh-unwatchable were it not for the presence of Harrison Ford.  The writing is still bad in the original trilogy, but the first two have solid direction. 

#49 Posted by MrCynical (66 posts) -

I loved the prequel trilogy. I can see why people who grew up with the original trilogy hate the new films - they are primarily about characters (dare I say it a 'love story') rather than the scifi action of the original films. They also take the most popular film villain of all time, and turn him into a tragic hero. Having been born after the original films were made, and indeed only actually become interested in Star Wars a couple of years ago (I still paid no attention to it at the time of the PT's release for example), perhaps that has made me more receptive to the new films.

#50 Posted by HandsomeDead (11863 posts) -
MrCynical said:
I loved the prequel trilogy. I can see why people who grew up with the original trilogy hate the new ... [more]
You have watched Empire Strikes Back, right?

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.