XERXES Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by whitedragon no one can compete with J.R.R. Tolkien. LOTR is the second most read book next to the bible read Frank Herberts Dune series and the other pre-dune novels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitedragon Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by XERXES read Frank Herberts Dune series and the other pre-dune novels. i liked those books but the problem that i found was that you had to read them twice to understand fully. tolkien is still #1. herbert is #2 in my opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JediNyt Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Well its great to know that Im not the only one here who agrees with JediMonk. Its seems that some people dont bother to read the good arguments supporting the PT. They keep on bashing it without even thinking about it. Then think others are wrong when they havent even acknowledged their points. Its arrogance and ignorance. Ive looked at everything. Ive seen people bash SW with their reasons and seen those defend it with theirs. I can conclude that SW is a masterpiece in almost every way. George isnt the best acting director and some scenes could have been done better in that way. Thats about it for the cons. Its quite trivial. The rest is unarguably outstanding. Im a visual film maker as apposed to a literary film maker. The film doesnt rest in the dialogue. - George Lucas. He does it HIS way the way HE likes it and if its not perfectly intuned with a viewers personal preferences BIG DEAL. Nothing ever is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrion Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Yet you call us ignorant and arrogant,for liking a different style than you.Hmmm.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JediNyt Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 You took that out of context. I said it was arrogant to not ackowledge the other sides points. I acknowledged your points. Lucas is not the best acting director. The rest is subjective really. If you dont like it you dont like it. Thats ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Simpson Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 I have no problem seeing others points, it's just that I don't agree with them. I have thought about it, and I still think Lucas could have done a much better job. It's not arrogance, it's my opinion. And it's not like I'm forcing it on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiRtY $oUtH™ Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 Well, here's my opinion: I used to like SW better. Now I like LoTR better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nova_wolf Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 I have to agree with various points at once... Yes, okay - it may be unfair to compare Prequels with LOTR due to their comparative ages as stories, but having said that, LOTR still needed to be made viable for movie usage - there is a lot o material there, ad not all of it CAN be covered in a single 2 1/2 or 3 hr movie. I am also in agreement with people such as Darth Yoda™. I was once of the opinion that SW was the ultimate film series. Then EpI happened, followed by the release of something that I canot fault, and cannot find anything other than superior to SW. Does not mean I am abandoning SW, I will still follow and watch, but it has been diminished AND beaten. Makes we think of the frequent thread The Future of SW... - GL has maybe cemented SW's future amongst the new egenration as a LOTR wannabe rather than the generational landmark. It was gonna be beaten to that acolade by LOTR - it had to be for it to be fair. Bond doesn't hold the same sway anymore - thats just life. But it's lesser quality form did not help this. To call LOTR better is not evil, or stupid - is a natural progression. Our parents had SW, we have LOTR. We still love SW, but things must change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiRtY $oUtH™ Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by nova_wolf I have to agree with various points at once... Yes, okay - it may be unfair to compare Prequels with LOTR due to their comparative ages as stories, but having said that, LOTR still needed to be made viable for movie usage - there is a lot o material there, ad not all of it CAN be covered in a single 2 1/2 or 3 hr movie. I am also in agreement with people such as Darth Yoda™. I was once of the opinion that SW was the ultimate film series. Then EpI happened, followed by the release of something that I canot fault, and cannot find anything other than superior to SW. Does not mean I am abandoning SW, I will still follow and watch, but it has been diminished AND beaten. Makes we think of the frequent thread The Future of SW... - GL has maybe cemented SW's future amongst the new egenration as a LOTR wannabe rather than the generational landmark. It was gonna be beaten to that acolade by LOTR - it had to be for it to be fair. Bond doesn't hold the same sway anymore - thats just life. But it's lesser quality form did not help this. To call LOTR better is not evil, or stupid - is a natural progression. Our parents had SW, we have LOTR. We still love SW, but things must change. Amen to that my brother...spoken like a true Swampie! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XERXES Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by nova_wolf To call LOTR better is not evil, or stupid - is a natural progression. Our parents had SW, we have LOTR. We still love SW, but things must change. i completely disagree with this its very untrue. J.R.R. Tolkein wrote the books waay before the Star Wars movies came out. My mom remembers being a Lord of the Rings fan before she ever liked Star Wars. Star Wars came shortly afterwards and served to entertain the next generation. Nowadays...yes we have Lord of the Rings in movie form, but the tale has been around for more than 50 years. I think that the movies were made because a lot of kids nowadays dont like to read, believe it or not its the inevatable(sp?) truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiRtY $oUtH™ Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by XERXES i completely disagree with this its very untrue. J.R.R. Tolkein wrote the books waay before the Star Wars movies came out. My mom remembers being a Lord of the Rings fan before she ever liked Star Wars. Star Wars came shortly afterwards and served to entertain the next generation. Nowadays...yes we have Lord of the Rings in movie form, but the tale has been around for more than 50 years. I think that the movies were made because a lot of kids nowadays dont like to read, believe it or not its the inevatable(sp?) truth. Sad but true, kids dont like to read. The majority at least. It's really quite sad. I am currently reading the FoTR. It's great! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XERXES Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by Darth Yoda™ Sad but true, kids dont like to read. The majority at least. It's really quite sad. I am currently reading the FoTR. It's great! word, i am reading The Return of the King and when i finish it, itl be about the 5th time ive read the trilogy. and the books completely blow the movies away, espically if you have a good imagination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiRtY $oUtH™ Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by XERXES word, i am reading The Return of the King and when i finish it, itl be about the 5th time ive read the trilogy. and the books completely blow the movies away, espically if you have a good imagination. I agree, the movies are almost never better than the book versions of them. Simply because you get to expand your imagination and you also get more info from the book. It's amazing how much you can learn and acquire, even from a fictional story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Talliusc Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 many of the people who dislike the prequels are people who saw the original trilogy in theatres. they remember the original trilogy being this powerful phenomenon that changed the way they thought about movies. since 82 they've grown up and as a result the movies dont have the same effect on them. i bet that if the prequels had been done first with the same low quality (by todays standards) special effects and we were just now doing the original trilogy people would hate the new ones, they would complain that it didnt have the same spirit as the prequels did. GL's only real fault was jar jar. thats all there was to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiRtY $oUtH™ Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by Darth Talliusc many of the people who dislike the prequels are people who saw the original trilogy in theatres. they remember the original trilogy being this powerful phenomenon that changed the way they thought about movies. since 82 they've grown up and as a result the movies dont have the same effect on them. i bet that if the prequels had been done first with the same low quality (by todays standards) special effects and we were just now doing the original trilogy people would hate the new ones, they would complain that it didnt have the same spirit as the prequels did. GL's only real fault was jar jar. thats all there was to it. **laughs**Jar Jar was the turning point in SW....totally ruined the movie...meesa thinks...lmfao!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nova_wolf Posted January 13, 2003 Share Posted January 13, 2003 Originally posted by Darth Yoda™ **laughs**Jar Jar was the turning point in SW....totally ruined the movie...meesa thinks...lmfao!!! Got a point there - all the effort that went into aking Jar-Jar such a class A, 24 carot, 24/7/365 bona-fide ******* made sense! It's HIS fault the Sidious succeeds. What I wanna know is - do people figure it, and if so, does Jar-Jar commit suicide due to the guilt, or is he shunned, or wil a mob find and slay him? Serious point, even with my distinct dislike for the slimy bugger! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jokemaster Posted January 13, 2003 Share Posted January 13, 2003 The reason the prequels aren's as good as the originals is because you know most of the plot elements are going to happen, you know Anakin is going to become Vader, you know that Obi-wan will survive, and you know that Anakin and Padme's relationship is going to fail. You know the Republic is going to end up as the Empire. Oh and BTW stop comparing the Star Wars prequels and LoTR, they're two diffrent genres, two diffrent series, two diffrent movies, sure I like TTT and FoTR better than AoTC, but it's just my opinion, that doesn't mean it's a better movie. The originals were both nominated for best movie and lost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Simpson Posted January 13, 2003 Share Posted January 13, 2003 No, that's not the reason for me not liking the prequels as much. The reason is that they are poorly written, especially in terms of dialogue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nova_wolf Posted January 13, 2003 Share Posted January 13, 2003 Agree with that. Yes - we know what events are likely to come, but as NOTHING has ever been set in stone, all we have are our own and others opinions and theories. It is nice as we have canon, settle arguements, and I was looking forward to seeing the evnts played out int full THX/ILM/LucaArts/Skywalker Sound glory.... Then EpI happened! It sucked not because it's storyline was predicatble (who can honestly say they predicted Jar-Jar Binks!) but because it sucked as a movie. Not as a SW movie, but as a SCI-FI movie. EpII - minor improvement - more storyline thats makes sense - more material we were looking forward to, and more action. But still verged on sucky even as a SCI-FI movie, let alone SW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiRtY $oUtH™ Posted January 13, 2003 Author Share Posted January 13, 2003 Originally posted by nova_wolf Agree with that. Yes - we know what events are likely to come, but as NOTHING has ever been set in stone, all we have are our own and others opinions and theories. It is nice as we have canon, settle arguements, and I was looking forward to seeing the evnts played out int full THX/ILM/LucaArts/Skywalker Sound glory.... Then EpI happened! It sucked not because it's storyline was predicatble (who can honestly say they predicted Jar-Jar Binks!) but because it sucked as a movie. Not as a SW movie, but as a SCI-FI movie. EpII - minor improvement - more storyline thats makes sense - more material we were looking forward to, and more action. But still verged on sucky even as a SCI-FI movie, let alone SW. Verged on sucky?? It was sucky. I don't like saying that about SW, but damn GL messed up. The whole love thing was pure BS. We didn't need too much love...just enough to know that Anakin and Padme end up together. Thats all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.