Guest Posted 2 November 2012 Posted 2 November 2012 I'll take Portman over Carrie fisher And Ewan over Hamill and Liam Neeson over everyone. Loved the Darth Maul character and wished he'd been in 2 and 3. In the new movies Yoda probably disappointed me most. He should have stayed in the old movies.
Trav Le Bleu Posted 2 November 2012 Posted 2 November 2012 I'll take Portman over Carrie fisher And Ewan over Hamill and Liam Neeson over everyone. Loved the Darth Maul character and wished he'd been in 2 and 3. In the new movies Yoda probably disappointed me most. He should have stayed in the old movies. I also question the inclusion of R2D2, C3PO and Chewbacca. Lazy.
Captain... Posted 2 November 2012 Posted 2 November 2012 I'll take Portman over Carrie fisher And Ewan over Hamill and Liam Neeson over everyone. Loved the Darth Maul character and wished he'd been in 2 and 3. In the new movies Yoda probably disappointed me most. He should have stayed in the old movies. Snob
Guest Posted 2 November 2012 Posted 2 November 2012 Snob At least I didn't put "..........in the old movies stayed"
Captain... Posted 2 November 2012 Posted 2 November 2012 I'll take Portman over Carrie fisher And Ewan over Hamill and Liam Neeson over everyone. Loved the Darth Maul character and wished he'd been in 2 and 3. In the new movies Yoda probably disappointed me most. He should have stayed in the old movies. Sorry I'll respond properly, in terms of acting ability, maybe, but in these films they didn't work, I think in part because their characters were too complicated. In the originals, it was simple characters, innocent farm boy, cocky mercenary, headstrong princess, wise old sage, personification of evil, walking carpet, giant slug it didn't need thesbians to play them, and the dialogue was fairly simple and the character development simple but effective. As Harrison Ford, who you conveniently left off that list (along with Alec Guinness), said to Lucas. "George you can write this shit, but you can't say it." He was also very critical of his understanding of actors, he accused him of just expecting them to read the lines and that will be it, he also changed quite a bit of the dialogue and ad-libbed a lot. The originals didn't have Lucas solely in charge and other people were brought in to help, particularly with the dialogue, unlike the prequels which desperately needed someone to tell George what didn't work, you get the feeling he was surrounded by yes men. But I am getting away from my point, one of the problems with prequels was the characters, they were too complicated and didn't seem to develop organically, instead just changed to suit the mood of the shot. Take Padme, warrior, queen, politician, lover, what was her role in it? Or Binks, comedy bumbling fool to serious politician Obi Wan's character was fairly consistent, but I am struggling to sum him up easily, was he a mentor to Anakin, his saviour, or was he the big deal, the best, was he like an intergalactic policeman, or a guardian angel. Finally Christiansen, was he a petulant kid, a supremely talented Jedi, a flawed genius sort a bit of both (Christiano Ronaldo with a lightsabre) or was he a highly emotional loving caring dedicated person, tricked into being evil. At times respectful, at times cocky, at times headstrong and irrational, at times obedient and weak. The problem with having such complicated and over developed characters is it is very hard to act that way, when you don't really know how you should be acting. As much as McGregor and Portman are better actors, Fisher and Hamill had much simpler roles and it was much easier to find the character and maintain it.
Rocky Dennis Posted 2 November 2012 Posted 2 November 2012 Trav, u rate Keira knightlys acting skills above Natalie Portmans???? NP is an Oscar winner!
ADK Posted 2 November 2012 Posted 2 November 2012 You can't call it snobbism the older ones are just better films all round. Nothing to do with when you grew up. None of the sidekicks from the prequels are memorable with the exception of Jar Jar who is close to being overbearing. The originals have 3-CPO R2D2 and Chewbacca. The one central character to the whole story Annakin/Darth Vader is badly acted in the prequels. The suspension of disbelief is worse in the prequels too. Padme dies of "a broken heart"? Surely she should have commited suicide or something actually slighly grounded in realism. The love story was awful, just badly acted really, the character of padme is just so weak aswell. The first prequel is ok. Jar Jar, Obi Wan and Qui Gon + Darth Maul are interesting characters.
Carl the Llama Posted 2 November 2012 Posted 2 November 2012 You can't call it snobbism the older ones are just better films all round. Nothing to do with when you grew up. None of the sidekicks from the prequels are memorable with the exception of Jar Jar who is close to being overbearing. The originals have 3-CPO R2D2 and Chewbacca. The one central character to the whole story Annakin/Darth Vader is badly acted in the prequels. The suspension of disbelief is worse in the prequels too. Padme dies of "a broken heart"? Surely she should have commited suicide or something actually slighly grounded in realism. The love story was awful, just badly acted really, the character of padme is just so weak aswell. The first prequel is ok. Jar Jar, Obi Wan and Qui Gon + Darth Maul are interesting characters.
ADK Posted 2 November 2012 Posted 2 November 2012 Sorry i'm not a big star wars nerd, did i get his name wrong?
Captain... Posted 3 November 2012 Posted 3 November 2012 Funny pictures from a website I like: http://www.b3ta.com/challenge/disney-wars/popular/
Captain... Posted 3 November 2012 Posted 3 November 2012 You talking about Disney buying Lucas Arts or the Watford match?
Trav Le Bleu Posted 3 November 2012 Posted 3 November 2012 You talking about Disney buying Lucas Arts or the Watford match? You'll not believe me now, but I was tempted to post it in the match thread. I sense a large disturbance in the force. I actually think Disney will do ok.
Captain... Posted 3 November 2012 Posted 3 November 2012 You'll not believe me now, but I was tempted to post it in the match thread. I sense a large disturbance in the force. I actually think Disney will do ok. I think they will do a better job than Lucas, I would like him to be involved, but on an advisory capacity, but having people who know what they are doing in charge. Disney make cracking films, love Pirates of the Caribbean, and the Pixar films, will be interesting if they will incorporate some of the darker elements to intergalactic war, or whether it will be light and fluffy fun.
Trav Le Bleu Posted 3 November 2012 Posted 3 November 2012 I think they will do a better job than Lucas, I would like him to be involved, but on an advisory capacity, but having people who know what they are doing in charge. Disney make cracking films, love Pirates of the Caribbean, and the Pixar films, will be interesting if they will incorporate some of the darker elements to intergalactic war, or whether it will be light and fluffy fun. Actually, that would be my main worry. Truly appalling films.
Webbo Posted 3 November 2012 Posted 3 November 2012 Actually, that would be my main worry. Truly appalling films. Thankyou. I thought I was the only one.
Trav Le Bleu Posted 3 November 2012 Posted 3 November 2012 Thankyou. I thought I was the only one. I think that people of our age can remember proper pirate films with proper swashbuckling and decent acting. I even think Cutthroat Island, which was a major flop, is a better pirate film.
Carl the Llama Posted 3 November 2012 Posted 3 November 2012 I think that people of our age can remember proper pirate films with proper swashbuckling and decent acting. I even think Cutthroat Island, which was a major flop, is a better pirate film. I don't think Pirates is meant to be a series of 'proper' pirate films. I really enjoyed the 1st & 2nd films - can't remember 3 or 4 well enough to comment which may not be a glowing indication.
Captain... Posted 3 November 2012 Posted 3 November 2012 I think that people of our age can remember proper pirate films with proper swashbuckling and decent acting. I even think Cutthroat Island, which was a major flop, is a better pirate film. But they are not proper pirate films, they are family fun films, with good strong characters that are well and acted and directed and enjoyable, some good action set pieces, and well paced plot. Not perfect by any means, but thoroughly enjoyable family fare.
Trav Le Bleu Posted 3 November 2012 Posted 3 November 2012 But they are not proper pirate films, they are family fun films, with good strong characters that are well and acted and directed and enjoyable, some good action set pieces, and well paced plot. Not perfect by any means, but thoroughly enjoyable family fare. We are speaking about the same films?
Webbo Posted 3 November 2012 Posted 3 November 2012 We are speaking about the same films? This was the phrase that made me wonder. enjoyable,
Captain... Posted 3 November 2012 Posted 3 November 2012 We are speaking about the same films? Ok you didn't like them, but what was actually wrong with them, bearing in mind they were family films?
Webbo Posted 3 November 2012 Posted 3 November 2012 To be fair I've never been able to sit through a whole film although the wife and daughters like then a bit.I hate Jonny Depps crap Keith Richards impersonation and the stereotypical British characters also the stories are very boring.
Guest Posted 3 November 2012 Posted 3 November 2012 Surprisingly (not) I like the pirates films and Johnny Depp.
Phube Posted 3 November 2012 Posted 3 November 2012 Surprisingly (not) I like the pirates films and Johnny Depp. FIF, we seem to agree on a lot on this thread! The first Pirates is one of my favourite films!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.