Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 54
  1. #1
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025

    Some thoughts on the Star Wars DVD's

    Picked it up on Sunday. A lady friend of mine who works at a store was nice enough to loan it to me on the condition I pay for it later today.

    First I'll say that Lucas and crew did a fabulous job with the visuals in these movies. You'd never believe these were 20-25 years old. They are incredible. I thought the Godfather Trilogy was done well, but this is a whole 'nuther level.

    The DD EX 6.1 track is fairly competent, with some nice surprises. There are more than a few scenes that really benefit from the rear surround field. (FYI I have a "7.1" setup) Even in 5.1 (which I played with for a bit out of curiousity) the sound track is excellent. John Williams' score never sounded so good.

    There are more than a few scenes that suffer from dialogue drop though (similar to Alien 3, but not nearly as bad). Especially in Star Wars (or Ep IV: A New Hope). These are relatively minor, and you don't notice them until the tonality changes when a person's voice returns to how it's suppose to sound like. I'm glad they didn't try re-recording though.

    The "new scenes". I really don't know what everyone complains about. With the exception of Greedo apparently shooting first and missing Han Solo in the bar, these are all harmless scenes that had they been included in the originals, wouldn't have taken anything away from the films at all. People just love to complain I guess. There's a few subtle changes that tie the original trilogy in with the prequel trilogy (Anakin's "Force Ghost", no eyebrows on the dude under Darth Vader's mask, etc.) Given that none of these changed the plot much at all and probably would have gone un-noticed if included in the originals, I let them slide without a 2nd though. Some of them are actually kind of cool.

    Seeing these again really made me think about my take on the Ep's I and II. I'll be honest, I enjoyed them, thought they were "above average" in terms of today's movies, though I've never felt they quite lived up to the Star Wars franchise, and in that they were kind of a disappointment. But I never understood all the complaining about them...I guess if something sits for 20 years, while anticipation builds, it's pretty much doomed from the start.
    After watching the Original Trilogy again, and constantly thinking about Ep I and II, I've come to realize that everyone (myself included) have been way too hard on Lucas for The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones.

    The pace, cheesy dialogue, bad Lucas humor, and even "Shakesperean" plot evolution is actually quite consistent in all 5 movies. I had to honestly ask myself, if all 5 of these were released in 1977 at the same time, would the Ep I and II be any worse? In hindsigh, I doubt it. As much as the stupid pod-race bored me (too long, my least favorite part of all the movies so far) and the under water stuff in Ep I, it wasn't much worse than the first 50 minutes or so of A New Hope. Action wise, there's alot more interesting stuff in the new films. I really noticed, however, just how valuable Han Solo's character was. This kind of lowest-common-denominator humor isn't quite so prevalent in Ep's I and II.

    There's a lot grander story being told in the new trilogies, and maybe it suffers because the whole world all pretty much knows what it is? Or maybe it's just that it's "more of the same" and not really "revolutionary" as the originals were? Who knows.
    My own thought is that the originals can stand as 3 stand-alone movies, whereas the the newer films almost need to be approached as small parts of a larger story, and because of this, can drag on a bit at certain points.

    At any rate, I think I'm going to blow the dust of Ep I and II and spin those later this week too, with an open mind and no criticism...Darth Maul was a pretty cool bad guy.

  2. #2
    Resident DVD Reviewer
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    1,202
    There are in-depth articles on both hometheaterforum.com AND thedigitalbits.com regarding audio problems on the EX track on Episode IV: New Hope; I do not own these yet, as I am more of a Trek nut than Wars, so I cannot say from experience, but the articles go into detail regarding John Williams' score somehow being "reversed" in the surround channels at certain points, and these dialogue dropouts you speak of; as if whole pieces of dialogue are lost somewhere in the mix itself. Check it out when you get a chance; The Digital Bits even goes as far to say that these problems may warrant exchanges for those who bought it, or for Fox to re-press the discs themselves.

  3. #3
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025
    Quote Originally Posted by Lexmark3200
    There are in-depth articles on both hometheaterforum.com AND thedigitalbits.com regarding audio problems on the EX track on Episode IV: New Hope; I do not own these yet, as I am more of a Trek nut than Wars, so I cannot say from experience, but the articles go into detail regarding John Williams' score somehow being "reversed" in the surround channels at certain points, and these dialogue dropouts you speak of; as if whole pieces of dialogue are lost somewhere in the mix itself. Check it out when you get a chance; The Digital Bits even goes as far to say that these problems may warrant exchanges for those who bought it, or for Fox to re-press the discs themselves.
    Hmm, curious...I'll have to look into it. I hadn't noticed anything reversed in the music, but wasn't listening for it. And if they can repair these dialogue nuances, even better.
    I've heard many re-mastered DVD's with similar problems though, I just attributed it to age and the limits of modern studios...It's not nearly as bad as some movies, and you I only noticed it when the voices would all of a sudden return to normal.

    I don't consider myself a Star Wars nut per se, I like just about any sci-fi movie (except maybe Battlefield Earth, Wing Commander, and anything Tim Burton touches).

    Anyhoo, thanks for the tip Lex!!!

  4. #4
    Resident DVD Reviewer
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    1,202
    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    Hmm, curious...I'll have to look into it. I hadn't noticed anything reversed in the music, but wasn't listening for it. And if they can repair these dialogue nuances, even better.
    I've heard many re-mastered DVD's with similar problems though, I just attributed it to age and the limits of modern studios...It's not nearly as bad as some movies, and you I only noticed it when the voices would all of a sudden return to normal.

    I don't consider myself a Star Wars nut per se, I like just about any sci-fi movie (except maybe Battlefield Earth, Wing Commander, and anything Tim Burton touches).

    Anyhoo, thanks for the tip Lex!!!
    No problemo....figured I would point out that there were concerns about the audio on this Episode IV (which I think sounds silly --- just call it STAR WARS like they used to!) disc.

    I know what you mean about remastered material; my "Predator Collector's Edition" is like this, where the audio, while loud and fresh sounding in DTS mode, just sounds uneven in quality and has continuous dialogue and effects dropouts; like machine gun fire would fill the front soundstage and then get lost somwhere in the two front channels and get very odd-sounding; its weird, but its there.

  5. #5
    Crackhead Extraordinaire Dusty Chalk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    below the noise floor
    Posts
    3,636

    The difference between Ep.'s 1 & 2 vs. IV, V & VI

    The thing that bugged me about Episodes 1 and 2 was that the "action" sequences -- the pod race, the underwater creatures, the war with those fighter thingies and the bubbles, the part where they're rescuing the Natalie Portman character in the arena -- is that they felt like a video game. And when I played the video game (yes, I did), they (the movie scenes) felt like a setup for the video game. Whereas in the older movies, they felt like action sequences conducive to a storyline within a movie -- "oh, dear, they're in trouble, I hope they get away", "they're at war, look at all those X-wing fighters!", etc. It just felt smoother, like it was a natural extension of the plot in an action movie. In the newer films, they just felt gratuitous.

    And WRT Greedo shooting and missing -- how can you miss at such close range? That's ridiculous.
    Eschew fascism.
    Truth Will Out.
    Quote Originally Posted by stevef22
    you guys are crackheads.
    I remain,
    Peter aka Dusty Chalk

  6. #6
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025
    Quote Originally Posted by Dusty Chalk
    The thing that bugged me about Episodes 1 and 2 was that the "action" sequences -- the pod race, the underwater creatures, the war with those fighter thingies and the bubbles, the part where they're rescuing the Natalie Portman character in the arena -- is that they felt like a video game. And when I played the video game (yes, I did), they (the movie scenes) felt like a setup for the video game. Whereas in the older movies, they felt like action sequences conducive to a storyline within a movie -- "oh, dear, they're in trouble, I hope they get away", "they're at war, look at all those X-wing fighters!", etc. It just felt smoother, like it was a natural extension of the plot in an action movie. In the newer films, they just felt gratuitous.

    And WRT Greedo shooting and missing -- how can you miss at such close range? That's ridiculous.
    That's interesting Dusty...there were a few scenes in Ep. 2 with Yoda that didn't quite look real enough for me, but for the most part I really think the goofy costumes and archaic special effects of the originals were improved.(though I do love a good muppet from time to time). I try not to judge movies by the effects, but it is hard. I have a feeling the Matrix would have been brutal in 1986.

    I think in all, what I've come to realize it that the new Star Wars movies aren't so bad, but rather, the old ones weren't as good as I always remembered. As such, they were on an impossible pedestal that no movie could ever reach for many fans and critics. If the originals they were released today, they would be the new ones. Back in the 70's though, if it wasn't Disney, it wasn't made for kids (which is who Lucas said all along the story was mostly geared for). As such, they were revolutionary.
    By 4, 5, and 6 movies, only a devoted fan will still appreciate a genre. Don't think I could sit through Tolkein's Silmarillion without drawing unfair comparisons either.

  7. #7
    Resident DVD Reviewer
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    1,202
    Quote Originally Posted by Dusty Chalk
    The thing that bugged me about Episodes 1 and 2 was that the "action" sequences -- the pod race, the underwater creatures, the war with those fighter thingies and the bubbles, the part where they're rescuing the Natalie Portman character in the arena -- is that they felt like a video game. And when I played the video game (yes, I did), they (the movie scenes) felt like a setup for the video game. Whereas in the older movies, they felt like action sequences conducive to a storyline within a movie -- "oh, dear, they're in trouble, I hope they get away", "they're at war, look at all those X-wing fighters!", etc. It just felt smoother, like it was a natural extension of the plot in an action movie. In the newer films, they just felt gratuitous.

    And WRT Greedo shooting and missing -- how can you miss at such close range? That's ridiculous.
    Natalie Portman was simply eye candy for these prequels, as is every half-naked chick that is being cast in films to satisfy the cravings of the male section of this new generation; I mean, she is a great looking piece of ass, dont get me wrong, but shots of her in Episode II with her shirt half-ripped to show her perfect flat stomach, I mean come on.....is that REALLY what Star Wars is all about? It was simply eye candy, no more, no less. I dont even consider the prequels --- Episodes I and II --- Science Fiction; they are more like direct-digital transfers for pure eye candy for our home theater displays --- they are showpieces for the digital age, not really ultimate sci fi storytelling at its finest or most classic.

    Now, dont get me wrong --- I use Attack Of The Clones as much as the next guy to show off my theater; the Dolby EX track is amazing (especially in the bass department) and the soundstage is rich if a bit soft in the score....I just think Portman's role in all of it was simple window dressing; since when does the Star Wars world involve real hot chicks with sexy bodies and belly shirts, as we horny males are subjected to each day at our local shopping malls?

  8. #8
    Resident DVD Reviewer
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    1,202
    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    That's interesting Dusty...there were a few scenes in Ep. 2 with Yoda that didn't quite look real enough for me, but for the most part I really think the goofy costumes and archaic special effects of the originals were improved.(though I do love a good muppet from time to time). I try not to judge movies by the effects, but it is hard. I have a feeling the Matrix would have been brutal in 1986.

    I think in all, what I've come to realize it that the new Star Wars movies aren't so bad, but rather, the old ones weren't as good as I always remembered. As such, they were on an impossible pedestal that no movie could ever reach for many fans and critics. If the originals they were released today, they would be the new ones. Back in the 70's though, if it wasn't Disney, it wasn't made for kids (which is who Lucas said all along the story was mostly geared for). As such, they were revolutionary.
    By 4, 5, and 6 movies, only a devoted fan will still appreciate a genre. Don't think I could sit through Tolkein's Silmarillion without drawing unfair comparisons either.
    I think the best that can be said here is that as we get older (I am at the ripe ole number of 31), most every single film we remember from our youth just doesnt have the same impact at all; this seems to be happening with every single older film I sit down with, some of which I paid a lot of money to have on DVD. I used to be a big fan, as a kid, of the "Airport" disaster films, as cheesy as they were, and watching them on DVD in the collection Universal put together of all of them, they just didnt "do it" for me like they used to; in fact, they seemed rather silly. Seems like a waste of money for the DVD box set now in hindsight.

    I recently purchased "Police Academy 2" on DVD, after pondering whether or not to buy the entire Police Academy Collection set of all the films, because I was a fan of this series as a kid, too...watching part 2 the other night, all the gags and comedy just didnt seem to grab me or make me laugh anymore....it was downright stupid. This is happening with many films and collections I am buying on DVD; they just dont have the impact they used to have. Boy am I glad I didnt spend 60 bucks on that Police Academy collection...

    And thats probably what is going to stop me, ultimately, from getting this Star Wars box set....sure, I own Episode II by itself, but I can watch that simply for the impact it gives me on my home theater....I think the original film trilogy just wont play back for me with the same magic it had when I was a kid. I dont even own Episode I (not anything really to do with whats being discussed here), but Im looking forward to III, where Anakin finally has to become Vader. Should be interesting.

    Ultimately, it seems like certain films have a feel to them almost as if they ONLY belong being watched in the time they were created in; like, for me, Police Academy films only seemed to be funny when I was younger and me and my cousin used to watch the infamous shower scene with Mauzer when his hands get stuck to his head over and over and over on my VHS copy of part 2; now, that stuff doesnt seem entertaining or funny anymore.

    But then, there are older films that just stand the test of time and you can pretty much enjoy them at any age, at any point in your life. I find this with the original "Exorcist", "Jurassic Park", "JFK", "GoodFellas", "Scarface" and films like that.You never really sit down with films like The Exorcist and GoodFellas and say "I just dont get this....this is so not entertaining...." because you are entertained by these films almost each time they are taken off the shelf. Although, I have to admit to watching Scarface just one too many times and thinking, when I first bought this new Anniversary DVD, "yeah, this film was cool the first 100 times I watched it....and now...well...."

  9. #9
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025
    I think you really hit the nail there, Lex...
    There are some movies that just lose their impact, and then there are those that I've grown into...The Godfathers weren't something I really appreciated until I was 20 or so. ET comes to mind as being a huge, huge letdown now when I watch it...hard to remember what all the fuss was about.
    Same with Batman...I remember Batman as being the first huge corporate movie that sold goofy cups and toys at McDonald's etc...now I just hate it.

    Scarface suffers from Star Wars likey symptoms too...it was a bit groundbreaking at the time, but there've been so many similar and arguably better movies along those lines that it's lost a little something...Thank god for all those legendary one-liners though...

  10. #10
    Resident DVD Reviewer
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    1,202
    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    I think you really hit the nail there, Lex...
    There are some movies that just lose their impact, and then there are those that I've grown into...The Godfathers weren't something I really appreciated until I was 20 or so. ET comes to mind as being a huge, huge letdown now when I watch it...hard to remember what all the fuss was about.
    Same with Batman...I remember Batman as being the first huge corporate movie that sold goofy cups and toys at McDonald's etc...now I just hate it.

    Scarface suffers from Star Wars likey symptoms too...it was a bit groundbreaking at the time, but there've been so many similar and arguably better movies along those lines that it's lost a little something...Thank god for all those legendary one-liners though...
    Agreed, totally. Scarface has some classic one liners..."Who you callin' a spic, you white piece of bread?"

  11. #11
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    I just picked up my copy of the trilogy on my way to work (Fry's Electronics was selling it for $36 today only), so I'll see how it all fits.

    I think the main thing that people are complaining about is that Lucas decided to release the trilogy without making available any version of the original movies. He keeps insisting that as far as he's concerned, the original films don't exist anymore. For people who grew up with the original trilogy, the original trilogy is what counts and what matters, warts and all. It would be as if a band decided to keep rerecording their best albums, and keep the original versions that fans first enjoyed locked up and unavailable.

    With ET, the original plan was to release only the 20th anniversary edition, but after fans raised a stink, the DVD got released with both versions available. Lucas seems oblivious and almost antagonistic to his fan base. But, the thing is that as a cultural icon, Star Wars is bigger than just Lucas. He just happens to own the rights, so he sees fit to keep tinkering with it. For one thing, I'll never refer to the first movie as "A New Hope" since that tagline didn't even get inserted into the opening crawl until later rereleases. When a movie gets out there, how the fans perceive its value goes beyond the control of one guy. Lucas can try and convince us that new digital effects and tinkering with the plot lines and dialog are a good thing, but IMO that doesn't necessarily improve upon what a lot of people already regarded as their all-time favorite.

    Also, gotta disagree with you about Episodes I and II. Both of those movies have been big time letdowns because Lucas lost track of what endeared the original trilogy to its fans -- the simple fact that we cared about the main characters and the fate of their quests. Young Obi Wan, Anakin, Padme -- if any one of those characters got killed, I would not have cared. If the trade federation in Episode I had prevailed, I would not have cared.

    And the plotlines have gotten so convoluted that they have no clear purpose other than to advance all the plot strings up to Episode IV. In his effort to make the entire six-episode serial fit together cohesively, Lucas forgot that he still needs to make a decent standalone movie. I mean, try summarizing the plots for Phantom Menace versus Star Wars. Star Wars is about a ragtag group of adventurers who rescue a princess and defeat an evil empire. Phantom Menace is about a trade dispute, some young kid with a lot of karma, and a big battle to break a blockade that ends with the kid accidentally saving the day.

    The original movie was far from perfect, but taken in the context of its time, it was groundbreaking. And the movie was simply fun.

    Like everyone, I'm buying the trilogy because I just love these films. I appreciate that they did the necessary restoration work on it, and it's finally available on DVD. But, I can't help but think that the thing got rushed out due to piracy fears. I'm reading accounts about how the soundtrack in Star Wars got reversed in the surrounds with the music, and some of the remixing made some not so well advised changes. I guess I'll see when I fire up the system tonight.

    Also, one thing about the Godfather trilogy, the picture quality on that DVD set has been a pretty controversial topic. I read that the recently released single-disc version of the first movie was done by a different mastering house and the look is different from the boxed set, which was done by Coppola's mastering facility.

  12. #12
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    I think you really hit the nail there, Lex...
    There are some movies that just lose their impact, and then there are those that I've grown into...The Godfathers weren't something I really appreciated until I was 20 or so. ET comes to mind as being a huge, huge letdown now when I watch it...hard to remember what all the fuss was about.
    Same with Batman...I remember Batman as being the first huge corporate movie that sold goofy cups and toys at McDonald's etc...now I just hate it.

    Scarface suffers from Star Wars likey symptoms too...it was a bit groundbreaking at the time, but there've been so many similar and arguably better movies along those lines that it's lost a little something...Thank god for all those legendary one-liners though...
    Well, I think that's how a lot of it works out. "Singin' In The Rain" was a flop when it initially came out, and "American In Paris" got the big box office and won Best Picture. In the contemporary revisionist thinking, "Singin' In The Rain" is now typically regarded among the greatest musicals ever, while "American In Paris" has slipped in stature.

    It's funny how revisionist thinking goes. I think Star Wars will always be regarded as a fun movie, though more people are now apt to pick on its flaws. Nowadays, a lot of people say that "Empire Strikes Back" is better than the original "Star Wars". But, within the trilogy, I think that "Empire Strikes Back" is the weakest as a standalone movie simply because it has no backstory and no resolution. Within the context of the completed trilogy, an argument can be made that it's the strongest movie in the series in regard to character and thematic development. I remember when Empire came out, a lot of people did not like it at all because it left so many unresolved plot threads at the conclusion. Now, I see a lot of reviewers taking shots at "Return of the Jedi", but that film was needed in order to put Empire in the correct context.

    I haven't seen Batman in years, but I have a different recollection of the whole groundswell of hype that led up to its release. Sure, the merchandising tie-ins were a bit much, but more so than just about any other movie up to that point, that movie had a lot of buzz and people targeting the release date on their calendar. In a way though, that movie had to have that entire campaign tied to it because beforehand most the public's perception of Batman was shaped by the 1960s TV series. (The movie was molded by Frank Miller's Dark Knight graphic novel from 1986, which was the darker vision of Batman) If Warner did not market it the way that they did, nobody would have known how different the Tim Burton film was from the BIFF POW WHAM Adam West version. Personally, I liked the movie, but it has not held up well through repeated viewing.

    Scarface is another strange little phenomenon. The one-liners in that movie are so memorable that they overwhelm the rest of the movie. I enjoy the movie in bits and pieces, but not sitting through the whole thing. Scarface also didn't do too well at the box office when it first came out, and it was lambasted by reviewers initially. But, it was very influential and eventually championed by people who saw it on TV and video.

  13. #13
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025
    Quote Originally Posted by Woochifer
    But, the thing is that as a cultural icon, Star Wars is bigger than just Lucas. He just happens to own the rights, so he sees fit to keep tinkering with it. For one thing, I'll never refer to the first movie as "A New Hope" since that tagline didn't even get inserted into the opening crawl until later rereleases. When a movie gets out there, how the fans perceive its value goes beyond the control of one guy. Lucas can try and convince us that new digital effects and tinkering with the plot lines and dialog are a good thing, but IMO that doesn't necessarily improve upon what a lot of people already regarded as their all-time favorite.
    Hmmm, I agree with this assessment. I would add that if the I was to grade the original movies out of 100, the laterations might have the effect of 1 point or 2 for me...They're nice eye candy, but don't change the story, or do damage at all in my opinion. Just like Wing Commander's eye candy didn't win it any Oscars though (to my knowledge), the new eye candy stuff isn't what the movie's about though.

    Quote Originally Posted by Woochifer
    Also, gotta disagree with you about Episodes I and II. Both of those movies have been big time letdowns because Lucas lost track of what endeared the original trilogy to its fans -- the simple fact that we cared about the main characters and the fate of their quests. Young Obi Wan, Anakin, Padme -- if any one of those characters got killed, I would not have cared. If the trade federation in Episode I had prevailed, I would not have cared.
    I think you've approached it the wrong way. Lucas didn't lose track of anything. He held the course, stuck to what he claims was THE STORY, and told it as it is. If it isn't as interesting, doesn't have the same character appeal, then it just doesn't. I would mention that they never came with any suggestion or implication that they would be "better" than the original. Just more of the genre he created. What's worse, everyone knows the ending, and much of the plot and characters to begin with. I always approached the new films as "There's the old Star Wars trilogy and for those who asked for more, here's the back story of the rise and fall of one of the characters, the main villian, from the classic series". I've always presumed that if it was the better story, it would have been told first. It wasn't. Given what it was intended to accomplish, in hindsight, I think it's done that quite well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Woochifer
    And the plotlines have gotten so convoluted that they have no clear purpose other than to advance all the plot strings up to Episode IV.
    What more could it have ever possibly have been intended for...it's a "Prequel"?
    In my opinion that grandness and complexity of the story offer more of Lucas' imagination. As I've aged, the Original Trilogy's plot is rather primitive, it's a bit refreshing to see some of the universe expanded. The characters aren't quite as intersting, but, oh well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Woochifer
    In his effort to make the entire six-episode serial fit together cohesively, Lucas forgot that he still needs to make a decent standalone movie. I mean, try summarizing the plots for Phantom Menace versus Star Wars. Star Wars is about a ragtag group of adventurers who rescue a princess and defeat an evil empire. Phantom Menace is about a trade dispute, some young kid with a lot of karma, and a big battle to break a blockade that ends with the kid accidentally saving the day.
    Yes, you are right here. However, artistically, the prequels are a single story told in three parts without compromise. "Star Wars" was a stand alone movie, the other two would work incredibly poor as stand alones. Every bit as bad as Ep I and II. In fact, Star Wars and ROTJ have basically the exact same plot if I was to break it down like you have.
    Quote Originally Posted by Woochifer
    The original movie was far from perfect, but taken in the context of its time, it was groundbreaking. And the movie was simply fun.
    Yes, but I can't help but think if it wasn't released until 1999, it would be just another Sci-Fi movie, and not the cultural icon it has become.
    [/QUOTE]

    There are a few characters I'm interested in in the Prequel Trilogy, oddly enough, Obi, and Padme aren't them...I'm more curious about the Jedi's and the Sith...the rise of the emprie, where the Jedi went, etc...

    You are right though, Wooch. The Prequel Trilogy does demand a longer attention span, has a far more intricate plot and needs to be viewed much like Lord of the Rings, 3 parts of 1 story. To me, they aren't anywhere near as great as the originals, but all in all, they aren't nearly as bad as I'd previously written them off as.

    As with anything that enjoys success, after so much of it, it sort of loses mass appeal and attracts only those most loyal to it. I think everyone approached the Prequels from the point of view "this has to be as good as the original, or it sucks", not "this is the history behind the classic tale for those who've been begging for the last 20 years to have more."
    It's almost like Star Trek, in that the genre became bigger than the original story. I'm glad Lucas is stopping with 6 films before it becomes too saturated. I'm also happy for the fanatics that can continue to get more of what they like.

    As a musician (and dare I say artist) I really respect Lucas for not just compromising the story to whatever everyone wanted to see. He has a story and he's sticking with it. In the music world, if he did compromise the story lines just to sell better, he'd have been reamed big time.

    Any artist will tell you that many of their works are constantly evolving. As much as I love the original trilogy, I have no problem conceding these incredibly minor changes to Lucas. If the suck, they suck. If Jar-Jar becomes Luke's father in ROTJ, then I won't buy the HD-DVD version or whatever. I can still enjoy the original (though only on VHS, grr).

  14. #14
    Oldest join date recoveryone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,435

    Talking Star Wars DVD

    WOW, you guys went way down the road on your reviews and comments. I was just going to say that I enjoyed the DVD and the sound mix was a big improvement, it made me feel like I was watching the movie for the first time again. For me, hearing the little small things pulls you into the movie..IE: C3PO feet walking in the sand and the chess game, you hear them click the buttoms to make each piece move. little things like that is what I listen for. The Transfer was real nice especially when you see Luke looking off into the sky with the Moon and setting sun. I'm gogin to watch the other ones later and I'll come back and add my 2cents.
    HT
    Pioneer Elite SC lx502
    Pioneer Elite N50
    Pioneer Cassette CTM66R
    Pioneer Elite BDP 85FD

    Vizio P series 2160p
    Panamax 5300 EX

  15. #15
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025
    The "commentary tracks" have tons of interesting tidbits of info...normally I wouldn't watch 6 hours plus of directors/crew commentary, but I might make an exception in this case...
    Finished Empire tonight...there is a slight improvement all the way in this film...3 years is a long time in Hollywood I guess...bigger budget, newer technologies. This DVD was top notch.
    And the newly revised scenes took care of my biggest personal beef with the original trilogy...I won't spoil it here.

    It really is like watching it all over again for the first time. My VHS tapers were all but worn out and were only so-so anyway...I'm noticing quite a few new things in the scenery.

    I must admit, 25 years later these still don't look "dated".

  16. #16
    Crackhead Extraordinaire Dusty Chalk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    below the noise floor
    Posts
    3,636
    Quote Originally Posted by Lexmark3200
    I just think Portman's role in all of it was simple window dressing; since when does the Star Wars world involve real hot chicks with sexy bodies and belly shirts, as we horny males are subjected to each day at our local shopping malls?
    Actually, since the first episode, in which Princess Leia (Carry Fischer/Fisher/?sp) went braless.

    And in regards to the rest of the discussion as to how the movies aged -- I am going to sound like a hipocrite, but I'm just defending a concept, not the movies -- it's not really a fair comparison. To see a movie for the first time is nothing like seeing it for the second. "Luke...I am your father." can only punch you in the gut and shock you once, after that, it's just echos of the original sympathy that you felt for Luke.

    Also, WRT f/x -- it was cutting edge at the time -- sort of like the Matrix was when it came out. And yes, the story is kind of simple, but again, what's wrong with a simple story line if it's a classic -- good vs. evil, hot young stud falls for princess, risks life, wins. The ones where there are lots of twists and turns have their own problems -- they only work a few times, themselves. I mean, how many times can you watch Blood Simple...alright, bad example, I can watch that one repeatedly, too. But how about Body Double...alright, another bad example...okay, here's one: how many times can you watch Dead Man's Curve? Heh-heh.

    I do agree that movies aren't as good as we remember them being. I used to cite Kentucky Fried Movie as the funniest movie ever, and list them in lists, based solely on my memory of it. Then I rewatched it. OMG, it was so juvenile, gutter humour, the works. I immediately scratched it off my "favourites" list. It's still funny, mind you, just not as funny as I remember it being. Yup, geezin' sucks.

    WARNING: SCARFACE SPOILER FOLLOWS

    Scarface is still an intense movie, I haven't seen any movie where a character went out with a bang the way Stallone's did. So I have to completely disagree that it's not as good a movie as it used to be.
    Eschew fascism.
    Truth Will Out.
    Quote Originally Posted by stevef22
    you guys are crackheads.
    I remain,
    Peter aka Dusty Chalk

  17. #17
    Resident DVD Reviewer
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    1,202
    Quote Originally Posted by Dusty Chalk
    Actually, since the first episode, in which Princess Leia (Carry Fischer/Fisher/?sp) went braless.

    And in regards to the rest of the discussion as to how the movies aged -- I am going to sound like a hipocrite, but I'm just defending a concept, not the movies -- it's not really a fair comparison. To see a movie for the first time is nothing like seeing it for the second. "Luke...I am your father." can only punch you in the gut and shock you once, after that, it's just echos of the original sympathy that you felt for Luke.

    Also, WRT f/x -- it was cutting edge at the time -- sort of like the Matrix was when it came out. And yes, the story is kind of simple, but again, what's wrong with a simple story line if it's a classic -- good vs. evil, hot young stud falls for princess, risks life, wins. The ones where there are lots of twists and turns have their own problems -- they only work a few times, themselves. I mean, how many times can you watch Blood Simple...alright, bad example, I can watch that one repeatedly, too. But how about Body Double...alright, another bad example...okay, here's one: how many times can you watch Dead Man's Curve? Heh-heh.

    I do agree that movies aren't as good as we remember them being. I used to cite Kentucky Fried Movie as the funniest movie ever, and list them in lists, based solely on my memory of it. Then I rewatched it. OMG, it was so juvenile, gutter humour, the works. I immediately scratched it off my "favourites" list. It's still funny, mind you, just not as funny as I remember it being. Yup, geezin' sucks.

    WARNING: SCARFACE SPOILER FOLLOWS

    Scarface is still an intense movie, I haven't seen any movie where a character went out with a bang the way Stallone's did. So I have to completely disagree that it's not as good a movie as it used to be.
    Sure, Carrie Fisher may have gone braless, but I still contend this shouldnt be the essence of sci fi (although those ultra short skirts of the female officers in the original Star Trek would have you thinking otherwise, too); my point is that by the time Episodes I and II came around, it became pure teenage horny-satisfying skin shows on the part of Portman; this chick just SEEMS too sexy for a Star Wars plot, understand? I mean, its just ridiculous....she just HAD to have her top ripped in half so we see her perfect stomach at the end of Attack of the Clones? That just HAPPENED to rip just in that spot so we can see her abs? This was nothing but for WINDOW DRESSING and eye candy. Like every other film released today featuring, and relating to, really hot chicks.

    What are you talking about with regard to Scarface and Stallone? Do you mean Pacino? Stallone wasnt even in Scarface....and ask any self respecting fan, like I have been since the film was released in 83/84.....AFTER 200 times watching it, it loses the magic....NOT COMPLETELY, but that loss is there. The film STILL belongs in the list of the best films of all time, without question.

    Yeah, getting old does suck.....seems so many films now are just stupid that used to entertain the **** out of me as a kid....Porkys, Police Academy, Stewardess School....there are even horror and thriller films that just dont excite me anymore since Im older; I bought them for my collection but often wonder, after watching them under a scruitinizing eye, what the hell was so appealing about them after all. Its kinda depressing.

  18. #18
    Feel the Tempo eisforelectronic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    640
    I tend to agree with the thought that in reality nothing has changed but our perceptions. Ep I and II were not better or worse than the original trilogy, they were the same. The prequels seem to affect young children the same way the originals affected us at that age, therefore my assumption must be that these movies simply have not evolved. I think if there were a way to forget 20+ years of expectation and and other life experience, we could all simply enjoy a 6 part sci-fi epic. Don't you wonder what it would be like to be a kid again and actually watch the whole thing in order without any preconceived notions?

  19. #19
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025

    Wtf????

    Quote Originally Posted by eisforelectronic
    I tend to agree with the thought that in reality nothing has changed but our perceptions. Ep I and II were not better or worse than the original trilogy, they were the same. The prequels seem to affect young children the same way the originals affected us at that age, therefore my assumption must be that these movies simply have not evolved. I think if there were a way to forget 20+ years of expectation and and other life experience, we could all simply enjoy a 6 part sci-fi epic. Don't you wonder what it would be like to be a kid again and actually watch the whole thing in order without any preconceived notions?
    Well said, esforelectronic...That's what I'm coming to realize. There a few boring scenes in all 5 movies and there's a really long one in EP I, but all in all find them all pretty close to each other. The only thing that's changed is me, and my tastes over time.

    As for Natalie Portman being eye candy...WTF??? She's not bad looking, but I'd hardly consider Amidala the T n' A appeal of Star Wars...
    To be honest, I don't think there is any window dressing, eye candy, sex appeal, etc...

    Geez, the Harry Potter movies have more T n' A than Star Wars...except ROTJ, Carrie Fisher was something else!

  20. #20
    Sgt. At Arms Worf101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Troy, New York
    Posts
    4,288

    Angry I'm sorry folks, but NO amount of "revisionist" theory...

    is gonna convince me that Episode I wasn't one of the worst movies made in the history of mankind. Jar Jar Binks will go down in history as one of the most infamous caricatures (sp) in film history. I won't belabor it, I won't analyse it. The film stunk to its core and everyone involved should be ashamed of themselves. If I'd been in a room with Lucas after first viewing that chite I'da punched him.

    Da Worfster

  21. #21
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025
    Quote Originally Posted by Worf101
    is gonna convince me that Episode I wasn't one of the worst movies made in the history of mankind. Jar Jar Binks will go down in history as one of the most infamous caricatures (sp) in film history. I won't belabor it, I won't analyse it. The film stunk to its core and everyone involved should be ashamed of themselves. If I'd been in a room with Lucas after first viewing that chite I'da punched him.

    Da Worfster

    You never saw "Wing Commander", eh worfster?

  22. #22
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Worf101
    is gonna convince me that Episode I wasn't one of the worst movies made in the history of mankind. Jar Jar Binks will go down in history as one of the most infamous caricatures (sp) in film history. I won't belabor it, I won't analyse it. The film stunk to its core and everyone involved should be ashamed of themselves. If I'd been in a room with Lucas after first viewing that chite I'da punched him.

    Da Worfster
    Worf the angry meister, perhaps I should give you back the fine upstate beer I filched from ya. I rather liked the movie(and don't punch me!). Okay, so jar jar was jar jaring my senses, overall I was thoroughly entertained.(now you can punch me..as I run from the room!)
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  23. #23
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    Worf the angry meister, perhaps I should give you back the fine upstate beer I filched from ya. I rather liked the movie(and don't punch me!). Okay, so jar jar was jar jaring my senses, overall I was thoroughly entertained.(now you can punch me..as I run from the room!)
    Wow, so I'm not the only one...yeah, it wasn't necessarily better than the originals...but it sure beat alot of late 90's movies.
    Why doesn't anybody gripe about Star Trek: Insurrection?
    Now THAT was a let down (and I still kinda liked it).

  24. #24
    Crackhead Extraordinaire Dusty Chalk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    below the noise floor
    Posts
    3,636
    Quote Originally Posted by Lexmark3200
    Sure, Carrie Fisher may have gone braless, but I still contend this shouldnt be the essence of sci fi
    And I agree with the criticism that I think you're overstating the importance of her bare midriff. I don't think that was the essence of the movie, neither. Perhaps you're just a dirty old man, easily distracted by visible flesh? Not that there's anything wrong with that. I'm a dirtier, older man.
    What are you talking about with regard to Scarface and Stallone? Do you mean Pacino?
    Um...yeah...they all look the same to me.

    Don't flame me for the statement -- I say it with tongue firmly in cheek -- I can't believe I said Stallone -- one of them can act, the other can't.
    Eschew fascism.
    Truth Will Out.
    Quote Originally Posted by stevef22
    you guys are crackheads.
    I remain,
    Peter aka Dusty Chalk

  25. #25
    Resident DVD Reviewer
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    1,202
    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    Well said, esforelectronic...That's what I'm coming to realize. There a few boring scenes in all 5 movies and there's a really long one in EP I, but all in all find them all pretty close to each other. The only thing that's changed is me, and my tastes over time.

    As for Natalie Portman being eye candy...WTF??? She's not bad looking, but I'd hardly consider Amidala the T n' A appeal of Star Wars...
    To be honest, I don't think there is any window dressing, eye candy, sex appeal, etc...

    Geez, the Harry Potter movies have more T n' A than Star Wars...except ROTJ, Carrie Fisher was something else!

    NATALIE PORTMAN ISNT HOT? Man, I need to re-think this one....or perhaps YOU do...you dont think her character was unnecessary tits and ass in this film? You're kidding, right?

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. I will not buy Star Wars DVDs
    By ske in forum Favorite Films
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 09-22-2004, 12:27 PM
  2. Star Wars Trilogy
    By htfan14 in forum Favorite Films
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-16-2004, 06:18 AM
  3. STAR WARS Special Edition films on DVD
    By Sealed in forum Favorite Films
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-26-2004, 11:46 AM
  4. Star Wars Trilogy announced....
    By Express in forum Favorite Films
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-10-2004, 12:33 PM
  5. Star Trek Lovers Rejoice?
    By jamison in forum Favorite Films
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-08-2003, 08:22 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •