Review the Movie You Viewed VII: We're Done, Professionally

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Star Trek - 8/10

Saw it last week, liked it a lot. I'd never seen an episode of ST at all, so I don't know how die hard fans felt, but it was a really good, entertaining summer blockbuster from where I'm sitting.

Earth - 8.5/10

If you've seen the Planet Earth DVDs, then this won't really be new to you, except that it's obviously edited differently to present a narrative of a year in the life of our planet. It's beautiful (wish it was in IMAX), it's touching, uplifting and sad at the same time. I really enjoyed it, and the credits were actually fantastic (stay for them if you go see this).
 
Helpful Tips From the Movie Taken, As We Embark On Another Jaunt of Following U2 Around on Tour:

1. Do not share a cab with a stranger, no matter how hot the stranger might be.

2. Watch out for those Albanians - they might kidnap you and sell you into sex slavery.

3. Do not, under any circumstances, piss off Liam Neeson. He will fuck you up (and remain broodingly sexy while doing so).

xx

Yeah, it was schlock, but man, it was some immensely entertaining schlock. :up:
 
The 27 Club. Know why it's not been released as a major motion picture. Dark, sullen, depressing. It's only 90 mins and emotional in places. Sometimes a bit slow. Not a bad performance for Eve Hewson's first professional acting debut. If you pay close attention there are some "U2" references throughout the film. I found it odd how Eve's Irish accent and Joe Anderson's British accent sort of fluctuated during the film also. That's always annoying in a films with a foreign actor. But I am glad I finally caught the film. I believe it deserved its awards and accolades on the Film Show circuit. It's available on many cable corp's On Demand through July I believe. I give it 3-1/2 thumbs up.
 
Role Models - 4 outta 10 - I always hated Sean doing comedies all the time, now I appreciate he is made for comedy (hot guy thou). Paul was so wrong for this movie, thou it was meant to be his character - he still sucked.

S** Drive - 8 outta 10 - had me laughing in many areas

Defiance - bored me - 3 outta 10

The Reader - very overrated movie thou I enjoyed Kate's role in it, too much nudity and not enough with the main plot of movie. could have added more in to make it visually interesting - 4 outta 10.

The Wrestler - 9 outta 10, Mickey totally rocked in this and usually I knock off at end of movie but I kept it on and listened to Bruce's song it all fitted quite well. sudden ending to movie but still had me feeling very very sad. Great performance Mickey! :up::up::up:

Bride Wars - boring. 2 outta 10.
 
was there anything derogatory in that post about the wrestler?

I was just commenting on the physical differences between the two actresses

as for the wrestler, like many, I said it was a good movie, not great, or best movie
 
It comes off as condescending, especially when you reach for that particular film. I know you liked it to a certain degree, but you do pop up just to mention how overrated it is and so forth. That's fine, not a big deal, but it is tiresome.
 
What's funny is that no one wants to man up and admit that Indy 4 is worse than The Phantom Menace. I think the nuked fridge (so bad it inspired its own catchphrase) and LaBoof swinging with the monkeys is on the awful level of Jar Jar, and the film doesn't even come close to matching Episode 1's high points (the pod race, the final duel). The whole thing, save for a note-perfect ending and a very good Harvard chase scene, is rather forgettable.

In this week, the 10th anniversary of TPM's release, can't we finally have some perspective?

0111_phantommenace.jpg
 
Indy 4 is worse than TPM. I'll own up. I don't like either very much, but there is some admirable filmmaking in the latter at least.
 
I don't think I could watch either of them fully without wanting to gag. Talk about wasted opportunity...

I've thrown around some ideas with The Lady Friend about how both Indy IV and the prequel series could've been greatly improved, but they're both flawed ideas from the start anyway. The prequels moreso than Indy.
 
How is it flawed from the start? Are you one of those "they should have began with him as a teenager" fanboys? It may have been cooler, but wouldn't have had the impact of showing the whole arc of his journey.

Whatever you want to say about the Anakin aspect, I think Palpatine's rise to power across the three films was plotted pretty brilliantly, even if many were bored by the trade federation stuff in TPM.
 
How is it flawed from the start? Are you one of those "they should have began with him as a teenager" fanboys? It may have been cooler, but wouldn't have had the impact of showing the whole arc of his journey.

Whatever you want to say about the Anakin aspect, I think Palpatine's rise to power across the three films was plotted pretty brilliantly, even if many were bored by the trade federation stuff in TPM.

Because we know the outcome anyway. There's no real dramatic tension for any character because we know everything that's going to happen. No moment in this series could match any of the major reveals at the end of Empire. It's hard to match, but still, that's the standard.

Granted, Palp's arc was incredible. Easily the best thing about the series. I think that even out of this idea, more could've been expanded about the Jedi, especially the idea of a schism between Qui-Gonn, Dooku and the more old school leaders... the actual rise of the Rebellion... the whole criminal underworld side of things... I just think it's a series of missed opportunities bogged down by exposition.

Yeah, seeing him as a teenager would make a little more sense, but as you said, would not have altered anything significantly. If anything, him being a child gives his relationship with Padme a little more significance.
 
Isn't that the novelty of the "prequel" form itself? That you know what comes afterwards? You can't really single out Star Wars as being particularly flawed because of this. I actually think it makes for a unique viewing experience--you know what he becomes so one feels rather helpless watching him make several major bad decisions. And the whole point of the SW prequels isn't WHAT happens but WHY it happens. Why does Anakin become seduced by the dark side? Why does a democracy give itself over to a dictatorship?

I'm sure there are better ways it could have been done, but had Lucas written digestible love scene dialogue, gotten rid of some of the digital clutter (like random droids/aliens in the background everywhere making stupid noises), and found someone else to do Jar Jar's voice I don't think there would be a lot of complaining about everything else.
 
The decision to cast an 18 year old Natalie Portman as the lead female character was the saving grace of the prequel trilogy. It's the biggest reason why those films are still watchable today.
 
Isn't that the novelty of the "prequel" form itself? That you know what comes afterwards? You can't really single out Star Wars as being particularly flawed because of this. I actually think it makes for a unique viewing experience--you know what he becomes so one feels rather helpless watching him make several major bad decisions. And the whole point of the SW prequels isn't WHAT happens but WHY it happens. Why does Anakin become seduced by the dark side? Why does a democracy give itself over to a dictatorship?

I'm sure there are better ways it could have been done, but had Lucas written digestible love scene dialogue, gotten rid of some of the digital clutter (like random droids/aliens in the background everywhere making stupid noises), and found someone else to do Jar Jar's voice I don't think there would be a lot of complaining about everything else.

Agreed, Laz. The thing I liked most about the prequels was the fact that I knew what was going to happen, but finding out WHY it happened.

The problem with the movies for me, will always be the acting. Natalie Portman and Ewan had to carry those last two movies and even though they did well, especially in Sith, it wasn't enough to make up for a lot of poor dialogue, and a very miscast lead.
 
Isn't that the novelty of the "prequel" form itself? That you know what comes afterwards? You can't really single out Star Wars as being particularly flawed because of this. I actually think it makes for a unique viewing experience--you know what he becomes so one feels rather helpless watching him make several major bad decisions. And the whole point of the SW prequels isn't WHAT happens but WHY it happens. Why does Anakin become seduced by the dark side? Why does a democracy give itself over to a dictatorship?

I'm sure there are better ways it could have been done, but had Lucas written digestible love scene dialogue, gotten rid of some of the digital clutter (like random droids/aliens in the background everywhere making stupid noises), and found someone else to do Jar Jar's voice I don't think there would be a lot of complaining about everything else.

That just boils down to personal taste then. I can dig reboots, because they're trying to jump-start a completely different series, but prequels rarely work for me.

Episode III works on the level that you're describing, but in the end, we have 2 movies worth of set-up with some great action setpieces for 1 film with nearly everything? It seemed like the story this series tried to tell had two points, the birth of Vader and the end of the Republic, and it succeeds to some degrees. Tonally, the first two films were way off, with an insane amount of childish humor peppered into some serious situations. None of which seemed organic to any situation or funny, for that matter. God, pretty much everything Han does on the Death Star in Star Wars is hilarious, but it's played completely straight... either that's a testament to Ford or Lucas, or whoever, but neither of those films had that sort of edge. Maybe some of Anakin and Obi-Wan's dialogue back and forth did, but not really. It never reached that dark territory until Shmi's death in Clones, then it went full force into Sith.

I can appreciate Lucas trying to expand the digital medium into something fresh and exciting, but I think it cost him that suspension of disbelief that is so prevalent in the original series. Take the sail barge sequence in Jedi (which is as muddled of a mess as Menace and Clones), it's a solid action setpiece, nothing too spectacular, but compare it to the green-screen fest of the droid factory in Clones and it's not even close... the amount of "fake" things in the sequence overwhelm everything around it.

The use of digital effects in the cityscapes and surroundings were mesmerizing, but there's only so much an actor can do when he or she is talking to a tennis ball on a string, or running on a treadmill in the middle of some soundstage.
 
And the whole point of the SW prequels isn't WHAT happens but WHY it happens. Why does Anakin become seduced by the dark side? Why does a democracy give itself over to a dictatorship? .

Maybe. But who really gives a shit? I actually don't particularly want to know why Anakin became seduced by the dark side. He was a mysterious character in the OT. There's absolutely nothing interesting or compelling about him in the prequels. Palpy's rise might have been the best plotted thread in the prequels, but does anyone else really care that much about council politics or to listen to irritating Jedi spout on about this and that. Yeah, prequels are good as telling WHY. Too bad it's rarely really worth listening.
 
I can appreciate Lucas trying to expand the digital medium into something fresh and exciting, but I think it cost him that suspension of disbelief that is so prevalent in the original series. Take the sail barge sequence in Jedi (which is as muddled of a mess as Menace and Clones), it's a solid action setpiece, nothing too spectacular, but compare it to the green-screen fest of the droid factory in Clones and it's not even close... the amount of "fake" things in the sequence overwhelm everything around it.

I won't argue about this. Of course, the droid factory scene is possibly the worst scene in the entire prequel trilogy. Completely pointless, like a fucking video game inserted into the film. And it was done during the reshoots, not even part of the original script!

In all fairness though, Salacious Crumb ruins every scene he is in (including the sail barge), and in my opinion is far worse than Jar Jar. Unfortunately the latter was given more screen time, so he affects much more of his respective film. Jar Jar at least was an interesting idea, especially if Lucas had followed through and actually had him mature instead of making him a dupe and slowly phasing him out of the trilogy. Crumb was just a fucking muppet that served no story purpose.

Maybe. But who really gives a shit? I actually don't particularly want to know why Anakin became seduced by the dark side. He was a mysterious character in the OT. There's absolutely nothing interesting or compelling about him in the prequels. Palpy's rise might have been the best plotted thread in the prequels, but does anyone else really care that much about council politics or to listen to irritating Jedi spout on about this and that. Yeah, prequels are good as telling WHY. Too bad it's rarely really worth listening.

Well, I'm not going to try and claim that he was written superlatively, but I do think there's something compelling about him being a slave who's also a wunderkind at electronics and racing. I think the idea of him being taken away from his mother by the Jedis at his age, and then reunited with her only upon her death is an interesting one, and I also think his later attempts to save Padme from a similar fate backfiring on him is good. But yeah, the execution could have been better.
 
I won't argue about this. Of course, the droid factory scene is possibly the worst scene in the entire prequel trilogy. Completely pointless, like a fucking video game inserted into the film. And it was done during the reshoots, not even part of the original script!

In all fairness though, Salacious Crumb ruins every scene he is in (including the sail barge), and in my opinion is far worse than Jar Jar. Unfortunately the latter was given more screen time, so he affects much more of his respective film. Jar Jar at least was an interesting idea, especially if Lucas had followed through and actually had him mature instead of making him a dupe and slowly phasing him out of the trilogy. Crumb was just a fucking muppet that served no story purpose.

Insane.

I totally agree. How ballsy would it have been to make him some kind of smart-ass instead of Stepin Fetchit? Hell, most of Jabba's Palace were a bunch of fucking muppets, except for the Orion chick that Kirk probably banged before she was on the wrong end of a Rancor meeting. CROSSING THE STREAMS.

Well, I'm not going to try and claim that he was written superlatively, but I do think there's something compelling about him being a slave who's also a wunderkind at electronics and racing. I think the idea of him being taken away from his mother by the Jedis at his age, and then reunited with her only upon her death is an interesting one, and I also think his later attempts to save Padme from a similar fate backfiring on him is good. But yeah, the execution could have been better.

Interesting ideas, yeah, but the development, or lack thereof, kills it. Every script reads like a first draft, or that no one stepped up to Georgie Boy and said, "Really? Trade disputes? Jar-Jar stepping in a pile of shit? Seriously?"

After hearing about the original plans for Jedi and possible sequel trilogy from Gary Kurtz, I have the feeling that this is the case.
 
Well, he did have a co-writer on Clones (which didn't seem to help much), and supposedly Tom Stoppard did uncredited work on Sith, which only has a couple clunkers (e.g., "Hold me like you did by the lake on Naboo"). They improved slightly as they went along.

James Cameron is guilty of the same thing on Titanic. That screenplay is a piece of shit, and only the actors saved it (except Billy Zane, who was as bad as he was written). It's telling that even though the film tied a record for Oscar noms and wins, it was the first BP winner in like 30 years without a screenplay nom. Everyone knew it sucked.
 
Well, he did have a co-writer on Clones (which didn't seem to help much), and supposedly Tom Stoppard did uncredited work on Sith, which only has a couple clunkers (e.g., "Hold me like you did by the lake on Naboo"). They improved slightly as they went along.

James Cameron is guilty of the same thing on Titanic. That screenplay is a piece of shit, and only the actors saved it (except Billy Zane, who was as bad as he was written). It's telling that even though the film tied a record for Oscar noms and wins, it was the first BP winner in like 30 years without a screenplay nom. Everyone knew it sucked.

And Spielberg helped figure out the Mustafar sequence. Heard about Stoppard, but it seemed more like a polish than a full-on re-write.

I always wonder what it would've been like if Lucas relented directing again to someone else, like Alfonso Cuaron or Bryan Singer or something.

Oh fuck Titanic, especially against stuff like L.A. Confidential, Jackie Brown, Boogie Nights, etc...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom