ALMOST...But Just Not Good Enough...AND DONT GET MAD AT ME!

I love Islam.

 

I'd like to use this as a situation:

Say the Prequel haters got their wish. Lucas hires Peter Jackson (let's use him as an example) as the director of Episode III. Now, what happens is that Jackson's style does not mesh with Lucas' intentions of what Star Wars should be. On the set, you get constant arguements and disagreements on how Episode III should be filmed. In the end, Lucas does not get what he intended Star Wars to be.

So what does that mean? First off, I'm very pro-Lucas and I feel that Lucas should be left to finish Star Wars HIS way and not any other director's way. If he used another director who is not a "yes man," you might get a bad result. Also, the bashers DON'T KNOW if another director would make a better film than Lucas. The bashers take a look at the different directors of TESB and ROTJ and instantly assume that they were the reasons why those films were great. Forget how much say that Lucas had in the product, it's THOSE directors that MADE Star Wars! If you get a director to finish Episode III, you may get a terrible result.

 

I second that. But I actually love shoe laces istead of Islam. They are more rewarding.

 

And they forget that the reason the OT was so great was because of their minds spunge-like state at the time of viewing.

I have to shut off my brain now to watch ANH or I go bonkers with all of its problems.

RB

 

Peter Jackson would screw it up because its not his creation, vision, and I'm sure Lucas has little subtleties in mind when he writes the movies, like

"Why do I feel that you will be the death of me?"

Things like that. All Jackson could do would be to dress it up all pretty with dialogue for the Oscars.

And also, did anyone forget that maybe Peter Jackson didnt WRITE LOTR? No, actually. He did, but he had plenty of supervisors, editors, and other people writing on the script.

And I'll take Lucas' directing over Jackson's anyday.

And for all we know, Jackson may just be a one hit wonder. TTT and ROTK may be garbage for all we know.

Just because he makes one fantastic film doesn't mean he's the end all, be all director.

 

I love Lucas.

 

Not too seem that I disagree with you, Pooja. But, I really do like Peter Jackson as a director and I love his work. And I think he did a marvelous job on LOTR and should've won (alongside Luhrmann's Moulin Rouge) at the Oscars instead of ABM.

Yet, I will always have Star Wars as my number one favorite. Lucas is one of the reasons why I want to be a film director. Terry Gilliam also influenced me, but not as much as Lucas.

 

Jackson really is a great director in my book. He is very different from Lucas. I think both are full of genius. Lucas is a legend though. Jackson may well be some day.

RB

 

Oh, I think Peter is an outstanding addition to the world of cinema. No doubt. And I didn't mean to imply that he sucked...no no no. In fact, being a SW fan, I think it would be so wrong to not like LOTR because SW and LOTR share the same "void" if you will. They are both fantasy...thus I will not only say that just because we are SW fans doesn't mean we cannot love LOTR, but I'll go the extra mile and say since we are SW fans, we should appreciate and cherish LOTR as the type of film we'd like to see more of. I think LOTR is right up SW fans' alley as a production.

Now, which do I like better? Definetly SW. But if SW didn't...errr I'm not saying that.

(if SW didn't 'exist' I'd be a full-on LOTR fan)

Maybe I shouldn't have said that...its blasphemous.


But I just don't think that Jackson could do a SW film...its all in Lucas' head.

 

Personally I enjoyed LOTR but it didnt quite work how the climax of the film was half an hour before the end of the film. Personally the ideas and themes of star wars I find to be much more intresting.
And theres neon sticks.

 

Well... I love LOTR and Star Wars. No competition here. No matter which I consider a better movie I still find the Star Wars saga much more to my liking.

RB

 

I didn't really mean to imply that you didn't like Jackson. It's just that it feels so really great how one of my favorite directors actually gets noticed. If only Gilliam and Luhrmann had Best Director Oscar nods (if not wins)....

 

---And I'll take Lucas' directing over Jackson's anyday.---

And what directing did George do in AOTC? Natalie sleepwalks through some scenes, people laugh at Anakin's nightmare, there's sketchy editing, and some moments produce unintended laughter.

Give Jackson some credit, he directed Ian McKellan to an Oscar-nominated performance and earned a nomination himself. No one said the acting in LOTR was "flat" or "cheesy" because Jackson paid close attention to the performances, just as much as the effects. Lucas does it the other way around.

If someone said GL was nominated for a directing Oscar for AOTC, I would crack up. No WAY does it deserve an Oscar. That would be like giving the SuperBowl ring to an average team.

 

oy vey

It's almost as bad to see all you AotC gushers bash LOTR all to hell just because it was good, as it is to see the LOTR fan bash AotC.

Both worked. AotC left that tingly feeling of a Star Wars viewing, and was really fun.

Fellowship was a wonderful film, according to nearly everyone. Go check it's rank at IMDB.

You're allowed to like both. Shocking, I know.

 

I know I can like LotR but I just don't.

Why did Gandalf spin on his face again? I really was confused by that. If you spin a wizard is he not able to cast spells anymore?That is sillier than any ideas of masturbation someone may have got from the shot of Anakin dreaming.

 

AmadeusExMachina:

Like I've mentioned, I love LOTR and AOTC. But, I feel AOTC is a GREAT deal better than LOTR. Also, some posters here have the right to hate LOTR and love AOTC.

Also, I seriously doubt IMDB's Top 250 list. ANY list that has Amelie and Memento in their top ten films of all time should be shot with a dose of Terry Gilliam, Baz Luhrmann, and Stanley Kubrick.

 

---It's almost as bad to see all you AotC gushers bash LOTR all to hell just because it was good, as it is to see the LOTR fan bash AotC.---

I'm not an outright LOTR gusher who won't enjoy other films...I just use LOTR as the closest example, since it's fantasy and shares a lot of similarities to SW. If you want, I could come up with non-LOTR examples, but they aren't in the fantasy genre so it's very hard to compare.

Whatever the case, AOTC is like a guy who climbed Mount Everest two-thirds of the way. It almost got to the top, but didn't quite make it when it easily could've.

 

True... Memento is a good film though.

Of course you know that Moulin Rouge was an Academy nominated movie that had no director.

RB

 

I'm not sure why people think FOTR was the greatest movie in the world...

AOTC wasn't...that's for sure. But I liked it overall and at least it had a REAL ending.

I never read the LOTR books. And I found the movie lacking in explaining each character. So, you probably had to read the books to "get it." And it was way too long a movie for not doing much.

Ian McKellen was the one bright spot in FOTR. The guy who played Bilbo was pretty good too. Chris Lee had a very minor role in FOTR. And I thought his fight with Gandalf--the "throw you around the room" fight--was simply ludicrous and laughable.
Peter Jackson loves sweeping camera movements. While it sometimes shows the great landscapes in FOTR, I found some to be too much. How many different ways can we show Gandalf on the top of Saruman's tower?

And the final battle was good but I'm not as much into swords and shields as lightsabers.

I'd even say that I liked Spider-Man more than FOTR. And the last 45-minutes in AOTC for me made up for any shortcomings earlier in the film.

 

JohnWilliams... if only you could ONCE say "in my opinon" I could respect your opinion.

You make every remark as if it were a fact that was written in stone, by God.

I disagree with you completely.

RB

 

I understand that some honestly feel that AotC was better than Fellowship.

However, someone who really thinks that wouldn't need to post such vitriolic and petty arguments against Fellowship.

Oh, Gandalf spinning for 2 seconds looked funny?

Gee, what about Anakin riding the Shaak? Nitpicking works both ways, you see, and never really proves anything.

Then, the next guy argues that LotR is overrated because the IMDB ranks are suspect.

Ok, but even if that's true (which it isn't, considering that the fans vote, and the final rating represents their opinions), are the Oscars suspect, and is the box office suspect, and are all the rave reviews suspect as well?

Doubtful. The love for Fellowship was too vast and varied for it to be a coincidence or a falsity.

Again, you can love both. Or, you can dislike one and state fairly why, without including petty arguments and vitriolic nonsense.

 

That would be like giving the SuperBowl ring to an average team.

You know what? An average team DID win the Super Bowl....the New England Patriots!

 

Whatever the case, AOTC is like a guy who climbed Mount Everest two-thirds of the way. It almost got to the top, but didn't quite make it when it easily could've.

For me, FOTR was like a movie that could have easily had a REAL ending but didn't.

 

RB, I'll try to make sure I include it more next time. I post so much sometimes I forget to add it in, but I do use "IMO" often, but I let it slip sometimes.

True, I didn't mean to make it seem like whatever I said was undisputed fact, if that was the tone it created.

Yet, I thought I would have created enough of an online-persona where you could tell my posts are strictly my opinion. I don't want to have to add "IMO" or IMHO" in every post because it seems redundant when we know all of us are expressing personal opinions.

If a person said TPM was the greatest film of all time, I obviously know it's his opinion without him outright saying it.

***So a disclaimer: all of JW00's posts are strictly HIS opinion(s) and don't reflect the opinions of other members on this forum or the general public.

 

Actually... (and not that I am arguing your point) the Oscars ARE suspect.

How did Moulin Rogue not get a best director nomination?

How did Matt Damon and Ben Affleck win for best original screenplay (this is after all the ACADEMY Awards and not the highschool awards)?

Julia Roberts won an Oscar for playing a part no more complicated than Queen Amidala (ok... slightly more complicated).

How did Gladiator win for Best Picture (though I do love the movie)?

How does Denzel Washington win Best Actor for a mid-range performance?

I could go on for hours.

RB