Somebody went through all that trouble to make a review that long?
Incredible how a movie made for entertainment purposes only manages to eat away at someone.
I was disappointed with Spider-Man 3. To me, it was a mega letdown and finale to the first 2 films, which were magnificant. But, at the end of the day, it is what it is, entertainment. The fact that I didn't like Spider-Man 3 means one thing only....I didn't bother to spend my money on it, and moved on with my life. lol
__________________
I like George.
Last edited by Sith Master X on Dec 11th, 2010 at 01:30 AM
No... actually, it's called not having a life when you have to make a 9 part series bitching because someone is looking into things a little too much.
One of his basic arguments for the movie being runied is because there's kids in it with lightsabers....uh..yeah. I guess every movie ever made with kids in it completely sucks. And what were those kids in Attack of the Clones supposed to be doing, cartwheels?
Oh well. I guess I don't have a life either if I bothered to watch the review. I'll admit, it was funny, but he looks into things way too much.
He even ripped apart Avatar...so yeah, you can basically make any film look stupid when you rant about it sounding drunk at the same time.
__________________
I like George.
Last edited by Sith Master X on Jan 1st, 2011 at 01:15 AM
Seriously....Lucas has been so stereotyped as a fat lazy slob that cares about nothing but himself. There's no way he could just be be a filmmaker who enjoys visual story telling and makes movies as a hobby.
Honestly, you know this much is true. Take for example, Toy Story 3. That very same movie could have been directed by George Lucas and turned out exactly that way you saw it in the theaters, but because of the stereotype associated with Lucas, that film would be loathed instead of loved. I could see the comments now...
"A Spanish dancing Buzz???? A fat pink bear as the Villian??? A Barbie and Ken love story!!???? A weird clown dude and a character named Pricklepants?????? Dear goodness, Lucas sure knows how to ruin my childhood."
Oh but no...those things were all o.k because the credits said "Directed by Lee Unkrich."
Just look at Indiana Jones for crying out loud. 1-3 were great...and who gets praised and credited for that? Oh, Steven Speilberg! The 4th one wasn't quite up to par....so who get's blamed for that....oh, not Steven...it was....it was....Geroge Lucas!!! Shame on you.
I'll just pretend that it wasn't Steven's choice to shoot the Mayan crap in front of a green screen rather than on location because he wanted to be closer to his family. I'll blame it on George instead. Aliens. Ha! Who makes a movie about Aliens anyway? No film has ever been made about Ailens before! Crazy Lucas!
__________________
I like George.
Last edited by Sith Master X on Jan 1st, 2011 at 01:48 AM
Well, yeah you're right. Spielberg is as much to blame as Lucas on Indy 4...
However, Indy 4 is much more along the lines of the SW prequels than it is to movies like Munich, Catch me if You Can, The Terminal. (Okay, there was War of th Worlds as well... ;-). But surely, Spielberg has shown himself to be more versatile in his last 4 flicks than Lucas. And Indy movies were always very much Lucas' films as well...
So I do blame Lucas mostly, and Spielberg for going along so (apparantly) easy.
Not to mention him "not having a life" and making these reviews, is making him MONEY. The crew from Red Letter Media now have a weekly review show with MTV, all thanks to the popularity of their Star Wars reviews.
I've stated several times I thought it was funny, yes...but overally necessary? No. He might be making money now...but he sure as hell isn't making money for taking copyrighted material from LucasFilm.
I get that these movies generate discussion both positive and negative...but my god, the extent people go to to second guess everything down to the smallest of details makes me wonder what happened to people being able to suspend their belief a little bit when watching a "movie." Something that's not real.
A fair amount of those reviews is comedy, yes. I was smart enough to pick up on that. Also, an equal amount of that review was pointless b***tching.
But I just don't really know what to say anymore. It's not worth it and I really don't have the energy for it.
__________________
I like George.
Last edited by Sith Master X on Mar 18th, 2011 at 01:58 AM
And again, he is a critic as well as a comedian. He makes money from this, entertains thousands of people and has fun doing it. The hell is wrong with that? And how is it more pathetic then say, bitching about it on an internet forum?
As he mentioned in his review, it takes away from the majesty and impressivness of a lightsaber if you have 5 year old kids wielding them. A lightsaber was supposed to be a weapon, not a kids toy (though that didn't stop Lucas from sellig them as such).
Except he's protected by parody laws as well as whatever anyone else is every time they make a review on anything ever.
Not really. There is some pointless bitching, but mostly he brings up intelligent points and questions imo.
__________________
Last edited by Nephthys on Mar 18th, 2011 at 02:43 PM
Yes, I agree. He uses the b!tching to hammer his points home. And for comedic purposes of course. But the main drift of his analysis demonstrate a good insight in storytelling and the storytelling flaws of the PT.
Dec 9th, 2010 07:56 PM
