Negative Sun Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 The SW TV series are far more tantalising IMO. Yes but GL and Co haven't "ruined" that one with a trailer yet have they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 Yes but GL and Co haven't "ruined" that one with a trailer yet have they? There was trailer released for the CG series ages ago >> it was indeed tantalising and be tantalised mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 To me it seems that CGI and animation has really cursed directors to make cheesy movies. Have you watched any of the Indy movies? They're all cheesy and filled with the cutting edge effects work. I'm sorry if you're offended by the use of CG, maybe you shouldn't watch Crusade anymore since that also used early model CG work. Remember the pixar machine? Anyway. I came, I saw, I came twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nedak Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 ^ Of course I have. I was addicted to the damn movies when I was smaller, and they are still one of my favorite series of all time. Also no, the Indiana Jones movies weren't really cheesy. Of course they all had a very fiction/fantasy to them but there is a point where something is "cheesy" to where something is just like... "come on".... I mean, a lot of the Indiana Jones movies based the plots on myths or historical facts/ideas. For example, the Nazis in the 40s were very interested in ancient myths (such as The Lost Arc/Holy Grail). The movies kind of shined light on what if it was real. The new movie just kind of looks like something they made up. On a side note, I do not hate CG animation. It's just that some directors these days have focused so much on the CG that they forget about the story line completely, which just gets the audience confused. Also, like what happened in the Star Wars prequels, and in the the Pirates of the Caribbean sequels... They became very child based, in order to make more money. They appealed more to children, which makes the movies very cheesy. Unfortunately based on the trailer, I think that's what this new Indiana Jones movie was geared towards children as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taak Farst Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 Ruined...completely over the top. Come on...I h8 nowaday films, if they are making a sequel to something they completely forget the actual icing on the cake. I like Indy for the old Nazi, ancient myth stuff. Now it looks like they are trying to make as less money as they can, because I can't really imagine who would see it and recommend it, from looking at the trailer. Guess we will have to face that even the film world is changing, for the worst...you just don't get good films anymore like Indy, star wars, Rocky. Rocky is gr8, but the Rocky Balboa film killed it all. I hardly ever go cinema now because there is nothing worth watchin. The makers are too obsessed with special effects and good animation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marius Fett Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 Bah come on Wolv it's Indy! You should go and watch it even if just for old times sake! I know i'm gonna go see it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
90SK Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 Looking good! Can't wait! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Negative Sun Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 There was trailer released for the CG series ages ago >> it was indeed tantalising and be tantalised mtfbwya I thought you were talking about the live actions series I've seen the new CW series' trailer and it does look good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 Also no, the Indiana Jones movies weren't really cheesy. Of course they all had a very fiction/fantasy to them but there is a point where something is "cheesy" to where something is just like... "come on".... Yes, they were cheesy. That's what made them fun. I mean, a lot of the Indiana Jones movies based the plots on myths or historical facts/ideas. For example, the Nazis in the 40s were very interested in ancient myths (such as The Lost Arc/Holy Grail). The movies kind of shined light on what if it was real. The new movie just kind of looks like something they made up. Crystal Skull On a side note, I do not hate CG animation. It's just that some directors these days have focused so much on the CG that they forget about the story line completely, which just gets the audience confused. People bash on CG just because it's the prime special effects method right now. It has little to do with plot depth or anything. People remember the great movies of the past, but they forget the amount of crap that was made back then. I don't think that if the numbers were compared, the amount of forgettable movies is anything more now then it was before. Also, like what happened in the Star Wars prequels, and in the the Pirates of the Caribbean sequels... They became very child based, in order to make more money. They appealed more to children, which makes the movies very cheesy. Unfortunately based on the trailer, I think that's what this new Indiana Jones movie was geared towards children as well. You do realize that Star Wars, when it first came out, seemed like it was for kids? Hey, might as well say the truth, it was for kids. The original Indiana Jones didn't seem like essays on existentialist philosophy either. This trailer doesn't seem geared towards any age group in particular. Indiana Jones was always suitable for everyone and George Lucas sure as hell isn't stupid. This is supposed to be Indy's last adventure, he learned from Phantom Menace that you must please the old fans as well as get new ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabretooth Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 Also, like what happened in the Star Wars prequels, and in the the Pirates of the Caribbean sequels... They became very child based, in order to make more money. They appealed more to children, which makes the movies very cheesy. Unfortunately based on the trailer, I think that's what this new Indiana Jones movie was geared towards children as well. IMO, the first PotC was a lot more kids-oriented than the sequels, which had some slight mature themes. Not to mention the complex and multi-faceted story which left me befuddled and sorting out after the movies finished. The first one was fun and simple in comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 On a side note, I do not hate CG animation. The world has passed you by... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nedak Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 People bash on CG just because it's the prime special effects method right now. It has little to do with plot depth or anything. People remember the great movies of the past, but they forget the amount of crap that was made back then. I don't think that if the numbers were compared, the amount of forgettable movies is anything more now then it was before. That's not what I mean. What I mean is sometimes a director will get so into trying to make a movie look good that they will stray from the storyline. I'm not saying this is the for-sure case, but I'm just weary of it all. You do realize that Star Wars, when it first came out, seemed like it was for kids It was geared towards both children and adults. You have to admit that the prequels weren't as good as the originals.The prequels were geared to mostly just children which created the more unbelievable factor around them. The cheesy lines, the unbelievable death of Padme... It all seemed very child-based. This is what mainly scares me about the new Indiana Jones movie. George Lucas is a part of it so I'm afraid he'll stick with the same method he used to create the SW prequels. IMO, the first PotC was a lot more kids-oriented than the sequels, which had some slight mature themes. Not to mention the complex and multi-faceted story which left me befuddled and sorting out after the movies finished. The first one was fun and simple in comparison. I guess we differ in opinions then. The first Pirates of the Caribbean had a lot more violent, or older themes. The second and third one kept getting stupider; the whole Davy Jones and Davy Jones Locker thing seemed a little stupid IMO. Not to mention the very end of the third one after the credits. The world has passed you by... Not quite sure what that means. Since I'm not old, and the quote you used stated I had nothing against CG Animation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 the whole Davy Jones and Davy Jones Locker thing seemed a little stupid IMO. Then Pirate lore is not your thing, stay away from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nedak Posted February 22, 2008 Share Posted February 22, 2008 Then Pirate lore is not your thing, stay away from it. Maybe. I liked the first one a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Dando Posted February 22, 2008 Share Posted February 22, 2008 I seriously cannot wait for this movie now Although, "This ain't going to be easy" "Not as easy as it used to be" Yeah, you're old, we know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted February 22, 2008 Share Posted February 22, 2008 Then Pirate lore is not your thing, stay away from it. Now there's a sentence you dont read/hear every day Arrrgh! *squawk* !! mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted February 22, 2008 Share Posted February 22, 2008 That's not what I mean. What I mean is sometimes a director will get so into trying to make a movie look good that they will stray from the storyline. I'm not saying this is the for-sure case, but I'm just weary of it all. But it has nothing to do with CG. Any director, in any age, any time, with any technique that concentrates solely on how good his special effects will look like will have a sucky movie. CG is only the prime method now, thus somehow gets a lot of bashing. Had it been stop-motion animation or lord knows what, it would get the same amount of poop thrown at it. It was geared towards both children and adults. You have to admit that the prequels weren't as good as the originals.The prequels were geared to mostly just children which created the more unbelievable factor around them. The cheesy lines, the unbelievable death of Padme... It all seemed very child-based. This is what mainly scares me about the new Indiana Jones movie. George Lucas is a part of it so I'm afraid he'll stick with the same method he used to create the SW prequels. I don't see how all the prequels were geared towards children. Phantom Menace? Perhaps, but neither Attack of the Clones nor Revenge of the Sith were childish. IMO, too violent for little children. By the way, the lines were always cheesy. If you look at the dialogs in the OT Trilogy, it was pretty bad sometimes. Bad lines has little to do with childish or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nedak Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 But it has nothing to do with CG. Any director, in any age, any time, with any technique that concentrates solely on how good his special effects will look like will have a sucky movie. CG is only the prime method now, thus somehow gets a lot of bashing. Had it been stop-motion animation or lord knows what, it would get the same amount of poop thrown at it. I am just weary that is all. I don't see how all the prequels were geared towards children. Phantom Menace? Perhaps, but neither Attack of the Clones nor Revenge of the Sith were childish. IMO, too violent for little children. By the way, the lines were always cheesy. If you look at the dialogs in the OT Trilogy, it was pretty bad sometimes. Bad lines has little to do with childish or not. The prequels were very child based. Jar-Jar was a character made for children. The Attack of the Clones wasn't very violent at all. Awful, awful, storyline and love scenes. Right idea, but was just ruined with "gag me" cliche scenes. Revenge of the Sith wasn't as child based, but again had wasteful lines ("Can't you see that you're breaking my heart?") and things that didn't make any sense (Pademe's death). Then again, there were some child based elements. Grevious was made for a younger audience. You have to keep in mind that movies these days, even if violent, a lot of them are based towards children, because violence is accepted for younger children in movie making. Hell, most of the kids I grew up with could not see a movie with nudity in it, but could see a rated R horror movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 The prequels were very child based. Jar-Jar was a character made for children. The Attack of the Clones wasn't very violent at all. Awful, awful, storyline and love scenes. Right idea, but was just ruined with "gag me" cliche scenes. Revenge of the Sith wasn't as child based, but again had wasteful lines ("Can't you see that you're breaking my heart?") and things that didn't make any sense (Pademe's death). Then again, there were some child based elements. Grevious was made for a younger audience. Like I said, Phantom Menace is as close as it gets. Attack of the Clones can hardly be called for children. Sure, the Padmé/Anakin relationship was full of bad clichés and awful lines, but the Han/Leia one wasn't better and if it wasn't for Harrison Ford's incredible charisma, we'd both be complaining about how bad it is. I still fail to see how bad lines makes a movie more geared towards children. I thought bad lines just meant...bad lines. I don't see how Grievous is made for children... You have to keep in mind that movies these days, even if violent, a lot of them are based towards children, because violence is accepted for younger children in movie making. Hell, most of the kids I grew up with could not see a movie with nudity in it, but could see a rated R horror movie. Children? No. Teenagers? Yes. Children can't pay for their tickets but teenagers can. That market is quite large and many movie makers have been accused of caving in, reducing levels of violence in order to get a PG13 instead of an R. I've not heard of anyone going from R to simple PG. I still fail to see how you can accuse Indy IV to be geared towards children and other Indy movies to not be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nedak Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 but the Han/Leia one wasn't better and if it wasn't for Harrison Ford's incredible charisma, we'd both be complaining about how bad it is. The Han/Leia was not as bad as the Anakin/Padme lines at all. Han and Leia had a kind of love/hate relationship in the beginning and they used the relationship for comedic purposes. In no way were the lines as terrible as the Anakin/Padme lines. I still fail to see how bad lines makes a movie more geared towards children That aspect of my point wasn't meant to support it was geared towards children, but just a point of how much worse the prequels were to the originals. I don't see how Grievous is made for children... He was, and he wasn't. It was a great marketing idea by Lucas for children. Of course children would love Grievous as their favorite bad guy because of the four lightsabers he wielded and how he looked. It also really helped in the Star Wars Cartoon Series that aired on CartoonNetwork. Without Grevious not as many children would have been engaged in the prequels. Children? No. Teenagers? Yes. Children can't pay for their tickets but teenagers can. That market is quite large and many movie makers have been accused of caving in, reducing levels of violence in order to get a PG13 instead of an R. I've not heard of anyone going from R to simple PG. Yes, of course Teenagers go to movies, but you do realize that the little Star Wars fans (5-13) will of course get brought to the movies by their parents. Not to mention once the movie comes out on DVD, and when they little kid starts screaming his head off because he wants action figures. Movies make more money on merchandise and DVDs then they do while the movie is in theater. I still fail to see how you can accuse Indy IV to be geared towards children and other Indy movies to not be. I don't know if Indy IV will be geared towards children or not. That's what I'm worried about. Many people will agree with me that the prequels were geared more towards children. Most of all the old Star Wars Fans dislike the prequels due to this. The Indiana Jones movies were geared towards both audiences. This is proven by the amount of violence (adults), by using historical facts/myths in the movies (adults), and the cheesy humor (children/adults). On a side note, I have been around a lot of smaller children, and they all prefer the prequels to the sequels. For them it's easy to follow and they like the fight scenes and cheesy lines... Because their children who are attracted to such things, and will buy into pretty much anything. For example when I was little I use to think that Gushers Fruit-Snacks would actually turn your head into a fruit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tk102 Posted April 15, 2008 Share Posted April 15, 2008 Film is in the can, being distributed today, so says John Williams. Thanks Mojo news. Source Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted April 16, 2008 Share Posted April 16, 2008 Film is in the can, being distributed today, so says John Williams. Thanks Mojo news. Source you'd hope so! Its freakin April Try as I might, I cant seem to get hyped about this at all...sure, will go watch it...but Clone Wars CGI looks much more appealing(to me anwyay) mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Posted April 16, 2008 Share Posted April 16, 2008 I'm psyched! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q Posted April 16, 2008 Share Posted April 16, 2008 You do realize that Star Wars, when it first came out, seemed like it was for kids? Hey, might as well say the truth, it was for kids. I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with you here. ANH and especially ESB were aimed at an adult audience, but the material was also suitable for kids. This is one of the main reasons why I believe that they're the two best films of the saga. The focus on the cutesy-cutesy, cartoony kid crap didn't come along until RotJ, and it undermined the seriousness of that film in the process. Lucas obviously hadn't learned this lesson by the time he made TPM. He toned it down for AotC, but that film had other, gaping flaws that I needn't go into here, as did RotS. OT: If this film's got one thing going for it, it would have to be the fact that Spielberg, and not Lucas, directed it. I Can't wait! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.