Moron

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



OB1-adobe
Amazon.com is the best place to find reviews by people who don't know jack shit.


**************************************************
*******
1 of 7 people found the following review helpful:

Not good, May 30, 2005
Reviewer: C. Nielsen (Orange Park, FL) - See all my reviews


Revenge of the Sith was a mixed bag. The fact that it was able to tie into the original Star Wars was satisfying, but that was about the only thing I found satisfying in the movie. Most of it was boring. The script was atrocious. Lucas continued to make the same kinds of mistakes that I thought he made in the last two movies.

Yoda played too big of a role.
Dooku is a stupid name. So is Grievous.
Jar Jar Binks appeared in a couple of scenes.
Lucas showed altogether too many creatures and people and flying ships. The sparseness of the original Star Wars is what captured my imagination about the movie. Lucas failed again to realize this and destroyed the most interesting thing about the original Star Wars.
The "Force" was demystified by "mitochlorians" or whatever they were called.
There were far too many BORING light saber battles. All they are is glorified sword fighting using light sabers which are not novel anymore. You've seen one of these fight scenes, you've seen them all, and there were far too many of them in this movie.
The attempts to weave modern day politics into the script and the philosophical statements coming out of Yoda's mouth were stupid.
Too many new inventions. So in the original Star Wars, technology actually decreased?
Uncomfortable, melodramatic "giving birth" scene, along with awkward dialog.
Ewen McGregor and Sam Jackson and Natalie Portman were all miscast. They should have gone with unknown actors. The fact that these actors are so well recognized detracts from the appeal and the immersiveness of the Star Wars universe.
Why were there so many "Clones" in the first three movies, but none in the original three movies?
I don't think George Lucas is a good director. Anyone else could have made a better prequel trilogy for Star Wars. Everything that was good about the original trilogy has been stripped away and replaced with heartless, visionless filler. **************************************************
************

Yeah, in 1998 everyone knew who Natalie Portman and Ewan Mcgregor were.

ALL HAIL DIPSHITS!!!!!!!

mandalorian_war
quote"Why were there so many "Clones" in the first three movies, but none in the original three movies? "quote

there were clones in the original 3

ShadowKing
"There were too many *boring* lightsaber fights...."

Doofus, there were few light saber fights in the original because all the Jedi were f*cking dead! Obi-Wan and Yoda were the last of the Jedi. Luke and Vader (and I suppose Sidious) were the final students of the ancient use of the lightsaber as a weapon.

Uncomfortable birth scene? Duuuh! She was dying asswipe...feel a little uncomfortable now?

Fishy
Have to agree with that birth scene it sucked

JKozzy
yes

peluffo
I've liked if Lucas directed Ep1, Cameron Ep2 and Burton Ep3 smile

astrofan428
Originally posted by Fishy
Have to agree with that birth scene it sucked

oooba,oooba

Delta 62
The guy is whining about NAMES? Too much action in EpIII and he can't take it.

I don't think I've ever said this about anything before..but Luke and Leia were adorable little babies. whistle

Robin Darkside
That is all bullsh*t, People do too much crack

SixOfTwelve

astrofan428
Ewan wasnt too big in America then, not sure about Natalie.

Lazerlike42
I don't remember knowing anything about either of them, and furthermore on the matters of Mace Windu for example being well known, Lucas did cast some well knowns in OT for various roles

Billy Dee Williams, Sir Alec Guiness, Harrison Ford was not well known but neither was unknown, Peter Cushing...

keYa
I wanna kick his ****ing face !!!!!!

Delta 62
Casting unknowns isn't always a good decision. Take the new Superman for example..he doesn't look like a Superman. He can't be played by some lame little pretty boy actor..the job should've went to someone who resembled Alex Ross's Superman. He is the REAL Superman.

astrofan428
Originally posted by Delta 62
Casting unknowns isn't always a good decision. Take the new Superman for example..he doesn't look like a Superman. He can't be played by some lame little pretty boy actor..the job should've went to someone who resembled Alex Ross's Superman. He is the REAL Superman.

Oh god yes, I hate the way the new so called Superman looks.

ShadowKing
Spielberg - Episode I ( works great with movies about kids and sci-fantasy)

Cameron - Episode II ( really dynamic battle scenes, begins to get dark,
knows how to get decent performances from "B" actors (Lance Henriksen, Arnold, Sigourney Weaver).

Bryan Singer - Episode III (can work with multiple characters, handles emotional scenes well, has worked with effects, dynamic fight scenes)

aaaahhhh, what could have been!

Did any of you know that Lucas approached Spielberg and Ron Howard (Coccoon, Apollo 13) before TPM and asked them if they wanted to direct the PT? They both told him he should get back in the directors chair and make his movies). faintthud

bILLYgOAT
^^^^good choice of directors^^^^

((The_Anomaly))
lol...im not even going to comment on this guys review...

his points are not even legitimate points, just him whining about things like names....wtf..

meh whatever...

El_NINO
HEY IM DRUNK EVERYBODY!!!

eek!

dumbass review too

The Unknown
I agree with the technology part.

Cipher
Lots of people knew who Ewan McGregor was in 1998.
I knew who he was when he got cast for the part.......

He was the guy from Trainspotting.

DeVi| D0do
Originally posted by C. Nielsen @ Amazon.com

Yoda played too big of a role.

I agree. He should've been killed off.

Delta 62
I hope Yoda gets killed off in about-oh say..Episode VI.

Cipher
That quote was from the other person's review, actually.

The quoted reviewer is a jack-ass. Too many ships? It was different from the old ones?
No s**t!! If it were exactly the same, then I'd be wondering what the old Obi-Wan was so nostalgic for in Ep. 4.......

DeVi| D0do
indeed...

post changed.

Ou Be Low hoo
Originally posted by OB1-adobe
Amazon.com is the best place to find reviews by people who don't know jack shit.


**************************************************
*******
1 of 7 people found the following review helpful:

Not good, May 30, 2005
Reviewer: C. Nielsen (Orange Park, FL) - See all my reviews


Revenge of the Sith was a mixed bag. The fact that it was able to tie into the original Star Wars was satisfying, but that was about the only thing I found satisfying in the movie. Most of it was boring. The script was atrocious. Lucas continued to make the same kinds of mistakes that I thought he made in the last two movies.

Yoda played too big of a role.
Dooku is a stupid name. So is Grievous.
Jar Jar Binks appeared in a couple of scenes.
Lucas showed altogether too many creatures and people and flying ships. The sparseness of the original Star Wars is what captured my imagination about the movie. Lucas failed again to realize this and destroyed the most interesting thing about the original Star Wars.
The "Force" was demystified by "mitochlorians" or whatever they were called.
There were far too many BORING light saber battles. All they are is glorified sword fighting using light sabers which are not novel anymore. You've seen one of these fight scenes, you've seen them all, and there were far too many of them in this movie.
The attempts to weave modern day politics into the script and the philosophical statements coming out of Yoda's mouth were stupid.
Too many new inventions. So in the original Star Wars, technology actually decreased?
Uncomfortable, melodramatic "giving birth" scene, along with awkward dialog.
Ewen McGregor and Sam Jackson and Natalie Portman were all miscast. They should have gone with unknown actors. The fact that these actors are so well recognized detracts from the appeal and the immersiveness of the Star Wars universe.
Why were there so many "Clones" in the first three movies, but none in the original three movies?
I don't think George Lucas is a good director. Anyone else could have made a better prequel trilogy for Star Wars. Everything that was good about the original trilogy has been stripped away and replaced with heartless, visionless filler. **************************************************
************

Yeah, in 1998 everyone knew who Natalie Portman and Ewan Mcgregor were.

ALL HAIL DIPSHITS!!!!!!!

I agree with every facet of this review. It strikes me as pertinent that out of all the faults the reviewer mentions, the only one you can comment on is the choice of actors - who were already well known by most people over the age of 12!

Cipher
Almost all of the points of this reviewer display an unfortunate level of ignorance.
He has a point about the midi-chlorians (although it does still fit the old explanation of the Force).
How anyone could call the saber fights in these movies boring is beyond me.
As for the technology being different, remember, this isn't Star Trek with its "exact" timeline- its supposed to be a fantasy.......

The real politics that were woven into it were based on things from the past, actually. Any connection to modern times is in your head.

According to Lucas, there are some clones in the old movies. Keep in mind that was no new genetic material from Jango to make more....

Lazerlike42
Originally posted by Cipher

As for the technology being different, remember, this isn't Star Trek with its "exact" timeline- its supposed to be a fantasy.......


Additionally, it's pretty widely held that the opression of the empire stifled technological development, and made it economically difficult for anyone to posess anything other than very old junk. Furthermore, what do we see in the OT? We see the rebels and a few shots of tatooine lol.... tatooine is a very low level economy anyways, and all the technology the rebel alliance is using are things stolen from Imperial junkyards.

(and also, Star Trek Enterprise had much better technology than Star Trek lol.... offtopic)

Cipher
What you say is the generally-held assumption of many fans.
Citing Star Trek as an example really wasn't off-topic.......

This is supposed to be a fable, not a pseudo future thing.

astrofan428
My view on the technology differences is this...

In the OT most of the places and people you see are rebels. These are not the royalty of Coruscant and Naboo, they are the farmers and scoundrels from all over the galaxy. They dont have the resources for the advanced technology we see in the amazing worlds of the PT. The only place we see(not counting ROTJ celebration) related to the Empire(who holds the technology) is the Death Star which is a nice piece of hardware itself. Other than you get an ice planet, a desert planet, a care bear infest moon forest. Of course Bespin was nice but it had great technology.

Lazerlike42
Originally posted by Cipher
What you say is the generally-held assumption of many fans.
Citing Star Trek as an example really wasn't off-topic.......

This is supposed to be a fable, not a pseudo future thing.

I was referring to MY gratuitous Star Trek reference, not yours smile

Bicnarok
Everyone has thier opinion. otherwise the world would be boring with no wars

Darth_Sidious01
is it just me or did that droid that delivered the babies sound like a teletubby
"Oooba....ohhhba."
"Tinky Winky...uh-ohhhhh...poe....lalaaaaa."
Coincidence?

neo313
okay, i respect that this guy has his own opinion, and that's wonderful, but 90% of the stuff he complained about was stupid and not really important.

"Yoda played too big of a role."
Who the hell cares? What would be an ideal length of time for Yoda to appear in the movie? imo, yoda=kickass, so more yoda=more kickass confused

"Dooku is a stupid name. So is Grievous. "
Wow. who cares what the characters are named? someone might think "chewbacca" or "jabba" is a stupid name, but why would that affect how good the movie is? oh, and "dooku" is japanese for poison, it's not just some random, "stupid" name.
Imagine if i said "Frodo Baggins is a stupid name, therefore lord of the rings must be pretty bad"

"Jar Jar Binks appeared in a couple of scenes."
yes, jar-jar is a motherf***er, but he is in the movie for, like, 10 seconds? get over it.

"Lucas showed altogether too many creatures and people and flying ships. The sparseness of the original Star Wars is what captured my imagination about the movie. "
Too many flying ships? Can someone explain this one to me? Ships and creatures add life to the star wars universe! imagine if the skies of couruscant were empty all of the time! if i wanted to see an empty sky, i would look out the window. star wars is about imagination.

"The "Force" was demystified by "mitochlorians" or whatever they were called. "
okay, this is mostly true, however... palptine's story about midichlorians shows that he had a hand in anakin's conception! still, he has a point here. the force is not as intriguing when explained by science.

"There were far too many BORING light saber battles."
W T F
blink blink wacko wacko What the f**k?
the saber fights were spectacular! ok, this is his opinion, so whatever... i just don't understand where he's coming from here

"Too many new inventions. So in the original Star Wars, technology actually decreased?"
several people have explained this already. i can see how he would get confused, though

"Uncomfortable, melodramatic "giving birth" scene, along with awkward dialog. "
alrite, the birth scene was unrealistic. the babies just pop right out. and the robot was effed up. "oooooooba". but there are 100's of unrealistic elements in star wars. lightsabers? light doesnt stop in midair. but any true star wars fan knows that star wars has next to nothing to do with science.

"The attempts to weave modern day politics into the script and the philosophical statements coming out of Yoda's mouth were stupid. "
someone already explained this, it's actually elements of history, specifically pertaining to hitler and cesar. any modern day political statments that you got out of the movie were all in your head. and he doesn't say WHY yoda's staements are stupid, they simply ARE stupid to him... ok, so thats his opinion, but he doesnt even give a reason

"Ewen McGregor and Sam Jackson and Natalie Portman were all miscast. They should have gone with unknown actors. The fact that these actors are so well recognized detracts from the appeal and the immersiveness of the Star Wars universe."
arguable. althought Ewan and Natalie were in a few movies before star wars, TPM is the first movie in which I really noticed them. to me, they have always been obi-wan and padme.
yes, samuel L jackson is extremely well known, but this goes along with the billy dee and alec guiness thing, well known actors. besides, you already know Mace Windu is a BMF before he even speaks. that's just how i think of sam jackosn, because of pulp fiction.

"Why were there so many "Clones" in the first three movies, but none in the original three movies?"
............uhhh, like, the stormtroopers ARE clones? messed

"I don't think George Lucas is a good director. Anyone else could have made a better prequel trilogy for Star Wars. Everything that was good about the original trilogy has been stripped away and replaced with heartless, visionless filler."
alrite, another opinon. WHY is GL a bad director? i'm sure he could've given a few examples, but he didn't, so whatever. RotS was ANYTHING but heartless. I really felt for the characters.



maybe if this guy would've talked about bad acting, poorly written scenes or diolgue, he would've had a valid point. but the reasons he gave for disliking the movie are just nonsensical.

neo313
sorry my post is so long

Greedo is a stupid name, so ANH must be a stupid movie
Ringo is a stupid name, so the Beatles must suck
Franklin is a stupid name, so FDR was a bad president

matreid
Originally posted by ShadowKing
"There were too many *boring* lightsaber fights...."

Doofus, there were few light saber fights in the original because all the Jedi were f*cking dead! Obi-Wan and Yoda were the last of the Jedi. Luke and Vader (and I suppose Sidious) were the final students of the ancient use of the lightsaber as a weapon.

Uncomfortable birth scene? Duuuh! She was dying asswipe...feel a little uncomfortable now?
I agree.

This guy does know jackshit. What a bad review!

Creechuur
Honestly, the more I think about it, the more I have to say that Lucas dropped the ball HARD with Ep 3.

Awesome saber fights, Yoda looked excellent, but the rest was crap. The movie was like a beautiful yet dumb woman. You see pictures of her, you get all excited to meet her, she looks stunning...then her mouth opens and theres nothing. No substance, no intelligence, nothing but an empty, beautiful shell.

Just one fans opinion.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.