Robin R Probyn Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 Yeah I guess everyone is a bit worried about film rushes.. although.. wow he has alot of experience to fall back on.. ! .. but he also does shoot film too I believe.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted December 13, 2015 Premium Member Share Posted December 13, 2015 That was always the problem for me. Not that I often had the choice, but the answer to the question "did we get that?" was "I have no idea, ask me in a week." P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manu Delpech Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 (edited) Are we still going on this? Satsuki's comment didn't settle it? Back to Star Wars please. If we could also respect what Lucas did, and his contributions to the saga, no matter how much he may have messed up on the prequels, it'd be real nice. The original trilogy is just, you know, composed of three of the greatest works of science fiction of all time, but I guess it's easy to forget. Edited December 13, 2015 by Manu Delpech Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin R Probyn Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 "The original trilogy is just, you know, composed of three of the greatest works of science fiction of all time, but I guess it's easy to forget." Not Metropolis,Blade Runner,Alien,2001,Solaris... Manu,the force,it is strong with you.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted December 13, 2015 Premium Member Share Posted December 13, 2015 I'm with Robin. That's just mad. They're popcorn movies at best. Many of the people involved have done much good work since, and I mean no disrespect. Nevertheless, neither the whole nor any single aspect of Star Wars (writing, acting, etc) is better than average, with the possible exception of the visual effects which are now trivial in any case. P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin R Probyn Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 (edited) I would say #2 was a decent flick.. but all time greats is pushing it a bit.. when you look at the competition .. Nothing that has Ewoks and Jar Jar Binks is a classic .. the whole thing was killed by merchandising .. very expensive 2hr toy commercials .. and Lucas losing the plot IMHO.. Edited December 13, 2015 by Robin R Probyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted December 13, 2015 Premium Member Share Posted December 13, 2015 Well, if we're allowed to factor in the prequels, the average quality is terribly low. I didn't see the second and third prequel, but let's be clear - Phantom Menace is an absolutely terrible film, a complete embarrassment, a movie of no redeeming features whatsoever which would taint any series of which it were part. If we're including that stuff, then good grief, Star Wars is awful. P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin R Probyn Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 I mean the second film.. Empire Strikes Back.. all went to crap after that.. damn those Ewoks.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manu Delpech Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 I assure you that all of you are in the absolute minority, but hey, do as you wish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny N Suleimanagich Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 (edited) Well... I mean, yea. But that's for a different thread. ;) Roger said himself in a recent interview on his upcoming project with the Coen Brothers (Hail Caesar), his reason for not shooting film was simply being a worry wart. He's been that way his entire life and the solution was to shoot in a format that gave him instant results, so he could sleep at night on shoots. He didn't joke, the interviewer even said "really" and Deakins smiled and nodded yes. I also feel Arri media was heavily instrumental in Deakin's decision process, since he's only shot with Arri cameras, but that's just a guess. Just to avoid confusion, "Hail Caesar" was shot on 35mm, maybe he was referencing other projects besides this one. Edited December 13, 2015 by Kenny N Suleimanagich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted December 13, 2015 Premium Member Share Posted December 13, 2015 I don't even really consider star wars Sci-Fi; but then again I'm a trekkie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Drysdale Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 IMDb has Star Wars listed as Action, Adventure, Fantasy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Bill DiPietra Posted December 13, 2015 Premium Member Share Posted December 13, 2015 I don't even really consider star wars Sci-Fi; but then again I'm a trekkie. As a kid, I was a huge Star Wars fan. I had all the toys, belonged to the fan club, etc. But as a young adult, I really got into Star Trek and I still watch it today. I just watched Balance of Terror last night. So I know what you mean by "sci-fi" & "not sci-fi." Star Trek has always been more cerebral with many of its foundations based in actual culture & science. Star Wars falls more into the realm of fantasy and, in my opinion, that's why its always appealed to generations of movie-goers. It epitomizes the Hero's Journey probably more successfully than any other trilogy (Episodes IV, V & VI, that is) in recent history. And the stories are told in such a way that they have much more of a visceral response. The films that Robin mentioned - especially Blade Runner (1981,) Solaris (1972) & 2001 (1968) - require much more of an intellectual response on the part of the spectator. So most people can only truly appreciate them once they reach young-adulthood. This does not make any one of the Star Wars films or any of the other aforementioned sci-fi films "good" or "bad." They are just directed at very different audiences. In reality, the first Star Wars Trilogy was a kids trilogy because that's who it was aimed at. How much merchandising do you remember being done for Blade Runner, Solaris or 2001? Say what you will, but George Lucas knew exactly what he was doing back in 1977. And for that, he deserves his due. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Dom Jaeger Posted December 13, 2015 Premium Member Share Posted December 13, 2015 I don't even really consider star wars Sci-Fi; but then again I'm a trekkie. Aw come on, Star Wars opens with the greatest spaceship sequence in film history! OK I was 11 and hadn't seen 2001 yet, but it still looks pretty cool today, especially on a big screen. I never really got the either/or thing between Star Trek and Star Wars, I liked them both. Maybe like Bill says they appeal to different ages, and so it depends on when you were first exposed. Certainly Star Trek is more sci-fi in the sense of being speculative about our own future, rather than a fantasy set far far away, but I'm not sure I'd really classify it as "cerebral" in the way say Solaris or 2001 or more recent entries like Gattaca or Moon are. Depending on the iteration (original series, next gen, movies, spin-offs) the various Star Trek shows could be as much soap as conceptual, and the attempts to embrace multi-culturalism always seemed rather forced within the homogenised fantasy of their environments. Sometimes they played with scientific ideas, alternate realities or the paradox of time travel, but then so did Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure. Not that I didn't enjoy that particular gem either. But I guess if I had to choose which universe to live in, it wouldn't be the one with onesie uniforms.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Holland Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 Dom I was 25 when I watched it on a huge 70mm Screen and as you say that space ship opening was amazing the sound the picture was something never seen before ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tyler Purcell Posted December 13, 2015 Premium Member Share Posted December 13, 2015 Just to avoid confusion, "Hail Caesar" was shot on 35mm, maybe he was referencing other projects besides this one. Why yes... that's why it was so interesting to hear him interviewed for the making of Hail Caesar. I believe his problem is more about being on location somewhere out in the middle of nowhere and waiting a day or two. Most of the Coen Brothers films take place in remote areas, so you can understand his frustration. Today with the mobile lab, it makes me wonder if he'd change his mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tyler Purcell Posted December 13, 2015 Premium Member Share Posted December 13, 2015 I agree with Adrian, I don't think Star Wars is quite Sci-Fi. Since it takes place in a different universe, right away it's Fantasy. Sci-Fi content is generally grounded in some realism, usually the characters are from earth and there is a heavy technical/scientific element. Star Trek, Blade Runner, Alien, Forbidden Planet, 2001, Interstellar, etc... they're heavy on the science and come from earth, so they're Sci-Fi. Mind you, that's not putting down the original three Star Wars films. I grew up with them and of course like those first three films quite a bit. However, they're nothing more then western's set in space. The first film was a risk for everyone involved, no-name leads, piss poor script and a concept that could have completely backfired. However, with a heavy marketing campaign and people's desire to see space-based films at the time, it was a win win. Once the first people saw it and told their friends, everything was down hill from there. Honestly, I like the first Star Wars film (Episode 4) the most. It's the only one that stands on it's own in the franchise. It's also sloppy and more fun then the more serious Empire Strikes Back (Episode 5). I do think they went kinda backwards with Return of the Jedi (Episode 6), it went back to the campiness of the first film in a lot of ways. Still, the original three films are pretty solid, especially for the time period. People who bitch about them are the same people who will bitch about the Nolan Batman films 20 years from now. The funny part is, some of the story elements of the prequel's weren't that bad. However, there just wasn't enough meat to each script, so Lucas and co, filled in with horrible subplots and characters that do nothing to advance the story. Plus, the horrid green screen world Lucas uses, looks very dated when you see those movies today. Most of Episode 2 and 3 look like a poorly made Disney or Pixar film, rather then live action. Yet, most Star Wars fan's (myself included) lined up at the box office in droves to see all three of them. It's funny because if I were to pick my favorite movie from that trilogy it would be the first one, minus the pod race, minus Jar Jar, minus the end battle that was so horribly done. Most of that is again, due to it being an origin story and having decent character development. I also liked Palpatine's connection not being so obvious. Clearly, the new film (episode 7) is going to be lightyears better then Lucas's prequel's. I mean JJ isn't going to ruin a space western... like he ruined Star Trek. Ohh yep, I said it! LOL :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KH Martin Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 How much merchandising do you remember being done for Blade Runner, Solaris or 2001? Say what you will, but George Lucas knew exactly what he was doing back in 1977. About merchandising, that's for sure. There actually was a fair amount of merch for 2001 planned, though not all of it got to market. I had a huge jigsaw puzzle, like 5000 pieces, showing several scenes from the movie, but about 4900 of those pieces were black! I worked on it for about 3 years before giving up, around the time I got into filmmaking as a teen. Then there was a game manufactured called pentominoes, but the scene showing them play it in the film got cut, so I think distribution was cancelled. And there were model kits of the space clipper and the moon bus, though not many of the latter. How many movies got THICK making-of books back in the pre-motioncontrol days? 2001 did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted December 14, 2015 Premium Member Share Posted December 14, 2015 Merchandising goes back to Charlie Chaplin and Mickey Mouse, but it was nothing on the level of success as "Star Wars" -- one reason Lucas got the merchandising concession for "Star Wars" was that 20th Century Fox lost a lot of money on the merchandising of "Doctor Dolittle" so didn't see the point. "2001" had the novel and soundtrack album of course, and a comic book, plus the model kits -- I had the PanAm shuttle model growing up. AMT got the rights to the models for "Star Trek" partly because they agreed to pay for the costs of building the Galileo shuttle mock-up for the TV series. Fox had "Planet of the Apes" before "Star Wars" and I recall a fair amount of merchandising on that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin R Probyn Posted December 14, 2015 Share Posted December 14, 2015 I think merchandising its self is fine.. of things/character that were in a film.. but to actually preemptively put in "characters" based totally on possible toy sales,and making up huge scenes in the film..(Ewok forest dance)..to push them.. is not really a good sign for the integrity of the film makers.. esp if they are on the so called creative side.. and not just a bean counter.. or bode well for the quality of the film.. in my humble opinion anyway.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Black Posted December 14, 2015 Share Posted December 14, 2015 I agree with Adrian, I don't think Star Wars is quite Sci-Fi. Since it takes place in a different universe, right away it's Fantasy. How do we know it's set in a different universe? It's an interesting idea but I thought it was supposed to be just long ago and very far away. Freya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Black Posted December 14, 2015 Share Posted December 14, 2015 The funny part is, some of the story elements of the prequel's weren't that bad. However, there just wasn't enough meat to each script, so Lucas and co, filled in with horrible subplots and characters that do nothing to advance the story. Plus, the horrid green screen world Lucas uses, looks very dated when you see those movies today. Most of Episode 2 and 3 look like a poorly made Disney or Pixar film, rather then live action. Yet, most Star Wars fan's (myself included) lined up at the box office in droves to see all three of them. It's funny because if I were to pick my favorite movie from that trilogy it would be the first one, minus the pod race, minus Jar Jar, minus the end battle that was so horribly done. Most of that is again, due to it being an origin story and having decent character development. I also liked Palpatine's connection not being so obvious. I saw the first of the prequels and also some of the outtakes and we agreed that the movie would have been a lot better with the stuff that was cut out and far less (well none really) of jar jar. Freya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Jason Debus Posted December 14, 2015 Premium Member Share Posted December 14, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tyler Purcell Posted December 14, 2015 Premium Member Share Posted December 14, 2015 How do we know it's set in a different universe? It's an interesting idea but I thought it was supposed to be just long ago and very far away. Freya LOL! Well... a long time ago and galaxy far far away, kinda means you don't come from earth. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KH Martin Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 (edited) Actually all it means is that they might be from the same time and space as the BATTLESTAR GALACTICA remake ... another newer reason for Fox to get up in arms over a Galactica! Edited December 15, 2015 by KH Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now