*OFFICIAL THREAD* Media articles, interviews and reviews for Revenge of the Sith. V.2.

Discussion in 'Prequel Trilogy' started by G-FETT, May 14, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Moderators: SithStarSlayer
  1. G-FETT Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 10, 2001
    star 7
    God I HATE that man. And I don't don't mean I just moderatly dislike him, but I actually HATE him with a passion. If somebody gave me his picture I could quite easily throw darts at it all day and all night too! [face_laugh]

    And, the cheek of him questioning some of George Lucas's motives, when you look at some of the complete and total tripe that guy has done! Amazing! :eek:

    Out of interest, who were his guests and what did they say? Did anyone have the guts to stick up for ROTS? :)
  2. Get_in_Gear Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Nov 29, 2004
    star 5
    Missed the show myself - downloading at the moment from UKnova...

    "Jonathan Ross and guests discuss the movie year that was, and reveal the result of the viewers' poll to name the nation's favourite film of 2005. Chipping in with their choices are stars including Johnny Depp, Cameron Diaz, Jodie Foster and Daniel Radcliffe." - so says the blurb
  3. Gobi-1 Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Dec 22, 2002
    star 5
    Boy I'm I surprise. I'd never thought I'd see a Star Wars prequel film praised by EW.
  4. Ed-A_1978 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jul 10, 2004
    star 2
    Well, I used to think Jonathan Ross was okay, but after reading that I have now changed my opinion of him. What a complete moron. Idiotic comments like "Lucas only did it for the money" is the sort of crap I expect a typical PT basher to say. It's a great shame this turd of a TV presenter is a respected critic for the BBC and regarded as quite popular.
    Boy, am I glad I wasn't watching that when it was on. I would've probably put my fist through the TV screen in a fit of rage.
  5. G-FETT Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 10, 2001
    star 7
    Did you download it? :)
  6. qui_gonbear Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Mar 16, 2005
    star 1
    ...now that the saga is complete, it's the constant bashing, both in the mainstream media and on many fan-sites. I loved this movie...I loved ALL of the prequels. It's amazing that if one wants to be concerned with such things as making money, all 3 prequels have done that just fine and as time passes, the Star Wars movies are still good sellers on DVD and are still enjoyed by audiences everywhere. The toy line was the biggest seller of the year, we saw a huge convention just for Star Wars this year that was attended by many more people than expected.
    It just seems to be another in the long line of "build 'em up to tear 'em down". Remember back in '99 when The Matrix was the flavor of the season? It even pushed TPM out of the way at the Oscars for the FX award that year. Cut to years later and two very heavily hyped sequels...one that was fairly successful at the box office, the other almost rejected outright and the tide turned...critics and fans alike now loathed the efforts put out by the W brothers. They put out 2 sequels that were radically different in tone from the original and audiences, fans & critics panned them.
    A case in point for today is Peter Jackson. He puts together a successful trilogy of movies based on some classic books and is in a postition to fulfill his own moviemaking dream...to remake one of the most cherished and successful adventure movies of all time, King Kong. The result, an entertaining if somewhat overdone 3-plus hour effort that borders on the self-indulgent (sorry, I felt like we were being forced to watch the extended DVD version in the theater without the remote to zip though the excess)and while it's proving to be moderately successful (compared to expectations), this movie was canonized by mainstream critics as the 2nd coming. To paraphrase RS's Peter Travesty er Travers comment on ROTS, the critics "drank the KoolAid" when it came to Jackson's effort and it will be sad to see the resulting backlash/hangover that is sure to come his way next. He's done the competant adaptation and the spruced-up remake...now he'll have to come up with something original. Heaven help him...
    Lucas came up with something original and different when he made the SW prequels...instead of just doing a rehash of the original trilogy, he took a different tact...creating a dense complicated story set amidst many complex settings....gone was the intimate feeling of the original trilogy's classic characters, replaced instead with a much bigger canvas both of characters and situations that warranted much more attention from the audience. What was he rewarded with? Financial success to be sure, adoration from fans and attentive audiences and of course, becoming the hip critics number-one punching bag.
    I won't miss that one bit...they can go back to their art-house snobbery of elevating "important" films that will be forgotten much sooner than the ever-enduring "Star Wars" movies...and those of us can just continue to enjoy our trips to that galaxy far, far, away...thankful in the knowledge that the critical slime has slithered to the next Big Thing they'll build up so they can tear it down....

    Thanks for the opportunity to rant a bit...
  7. stormcloud8 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 24, 2002
    star 4
    Nice rant. I agree with much of the sentiment.
  8. jasperjones Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 24, 2001
    star 4
    Yeah, I agree that there is an element of that. The critical love fest being heaped on Kong is OTT. Kong is guilty of the same flaws GL is accused of in that the CG sometimes gets out of hand - the brontosaurus stampede and the bug sequence are examples of this - totally overblown. Had Lucas turned in the same film I reckon it would have been torn down again. That said, Kong is a good film. My point is not to bash that film. I'd give it four stars. The main thing it has in its favour is that it has a competent script (apart from any scenes with Mr Hayes and Jimmy in) whereas ROTS is OK and then everynow and again you have an enormous howler.

    Anyway, Ross had the guy from League of Gentlemen and Neil Marshall on. All said they were pleased to see the end of SW although they were led that way by the prosecution (Ross). Still, it is fair to say that many in the media who are mid thirties don't enjoy the prequels and are just disappointed. That doesn't mean they are necessarily biased, they just happen to be the people writing the negative pieces. From their point of view they're right. On the plus side, sky movies news voted ROTS in at no 6 of the year I think.
  9. stormcloud8 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 24, 2002
    star 4
    Utter garbage. CNN's best movies of the year. King Bomb is on it, no surprise there. Not a mention of Sith.

    http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Movies/01/02/best.2005/index.html
  10. G-FETT Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 10, 2001
    star 7
    Hopefully that will remedy itself in 20 years when todays kids all get jobs in the media. :)
  11. Get_in_Gear Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Nov 29, 2004
    star 5
    It seems we were far kinder to ROTS in the UK at least:

    Empire Magazine
    1) Sideways
    2) Batman Begins
    3) Crash
    4) ROTS
    5) Sin City

    Total Film
    1) Sideways
    2) Batman Begins
    3) Murderball
    4) Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang
    5) The Descent
    ...9) ROTS

    Film 2005 (voted by the public)
    1) Serenity
    2) Batman Begins
    3) Sin City
    4) ROTS
    5) Crash

    (Did anyone in the UK pick up Hotdog Magazine this month? Did they do a best of 2005 list?)

    MSNBC is pretty reprasentative of the US reviews of the year I've seen
    They actually use the fact that ROTS was the box office success of the year to express what a bad year it has been, explaining how ROTS may have been the biggest film of 2005, but sold far fewer tickets that all of the other SW films except AOTC. It does not feature in their top 20 films of the year.
    Neither does ROTS feature in Roger Ebert, Leonard Maltin, Time or, geting back to the UK, Channel 4's lists...
  12. stormcloud8 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 24, 2002
    star 4
    Sideways? You've got to be kidding.

    Serentity? Who ever saw that? Must have been someone voting 24 hours a day to bump that to the top.

    Batman was good, but rather forgettable.

    Those lists are silly...
  13. Whitey Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 26, 2003
    star 6
    The reviews for King Kong were only marginally better than ROTS' (83% on rottentomatoes compared to ROTS' 82%), and it isn't even on the the Top 250 on imdb while ROTS is sitting at #243. King Kong won't earn much more than $200 million domestically while ROTS earned a hefty $380 million. The facts are simple, yet I'm still amazed how the media can so grossly skew everything towards King Kong being the "blockbuster of the year."
  14. stormcloud8 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 24, 2002
    star 4
    Because they will never ever admit that George Lucas made a better film this year than Peter Jackson or Steven Spielberg. That would make them wrong, and they couldn't ever be wrong, could they?
  15. jasperjones Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 24, 2001
    star 4
    In the Times(UK) business section there was a report on the box office successes of the year. When it comes down to numbers, as they put it, ROTS was the most popular film of the year.
  16. Get_in_Gear Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Nov 29, 2004
    star 5
    Personally, I thought Sideways was great. I think it deserves to be up there.

    I didn't. That film didn't appeal to me one jot. Looked like an episode of Farscape or something from what I saw of it...

    I wasn't impressed by Batman Begins, well, not enough to say it was the second best film of 2005.

    Personally, I'd go maybe:

    1) ROTS
    2) Sideways
    3) Crash
    4) The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou
    5) The Aviator

    Or something like that...
  17. jasperjones Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 24, 2001
    star 4
    Mine would be

    1)Kiss Kiss Bang Bang
    2)Serenity
    3)Constant Gardener
    4)ROTS
    5)Life Aquatic - good call!

    I dunno, for me there is an element of loving SW so while it may be one of my favourites, I can see what some critics are talking about. I ignore, or let slide some of the more obvious flaws that I wouldn't in other films, but I also believe that if you hate the prequels you call it to task on things you would let slide in other films. I can see why intellectually, and especially if you're a real cinephile you wouldn't rate ROTS as one of the best of the year. Why it's my favourite is because the SW universe gives me a thrill no other films give me. I get caught up in it and just enjoy the hell out of them. I don't see what's so bad about that.

    BTW, GIG, I think you should check Serenity out on DVD. It really has an old school SW vibe to it plus it's own stuff going on. Considering Firefly was essentially Wheedon's take on Solo before the rebellion that's not really surprising.
  18. Tyranus_the_Hutt Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 14, 2004
    star 4
    ...now that the saga is complete, it's the constant bashing, both in the mainstream media and on many fan-sites. I loved this movie...I loved ALL of the prequels.

    How dare you?!?!?:p I liked all three films as well.

    It just seems to be another in the long line of "build 'em up to tear 'em down". Remember back in '99 when The Matrix was the flavor of the season? It even pushed TPM out of the way at the Oscars for the FX award that year.

    I don?t feel that the SFX in "The Matrix," while impressive, were not as good as or better than the various effects in "The Phantom Menace." This doesn?t have anything to do with which film is (artistically) superior, but the quality of the visuals; both pictures displayed exemplary effects work, yet I can?t help but think that the Oscar was awarded to "The Matrix" as an indirect slam toward TPM, and its failure to "live up to expectations," etc. (as ludicrous as this conspiracy may appear, I think that it is more than plausible, given the Academy?s storied history).

    Cut to years later and two very heavily hyped sequels...one that was fairly successful at the box office, the other almost rejected outright and the tide turned...critics and fans alike now loathed the efforts put out by the W brothers. They put out 2 sequels that were radically different in tone from the original and audiences, fans & critics panned them.

    I don?t know that the movies were radically different in tone, but on complaint that is frequently directed towards the "Matrix" sequels is how they were overly reliant on extravagant (and gimmicky) action set pieces, rather than the cool mysticism and iconic punch (pun not intended) of the original picture. I?m not sure that I agree with this criticism in its entirety, given that the mythological and spiritual premises of the initial movie were somewhat tenuous to begin with, but no matter; it would seem that portions of the fan base (to what degree, I cannot say) were turned off by the second and third installments in "The Matrix" trilogy for whatever reason, and there was less hostility and ire directed towards the Wachowski brothers, than disappointment. This became evident in the massive box-office plunge of the saga?s concluding chapter, "The Matrix Revolutions." The latter installment was the only one that I seem to recall getting poor critical notices; while "Reloaded" was considered by some to be a misfire, it did garner mostly positive reviews, if I am not mistaken.

    A case in point for today is Peter Jackson. He puts together a successful trilogy of movies based on some classic books and is in a postition to fulfill his own moviemaking dream...to remake one of the most cherished and successful adventure movies of all time, King Kong. The result, an entertaining if somewhat overdone 3-plus hour effort that borders on the self-indulgent (sorry, I felt like we were being forced to watch the extended DVD version in the theater without the remote to zip though the excess)and while it's proving to be moderately successful (compared to expectations), this movie was canonized by mainstream critics as the 2nd coming.

    It seems as though I am virtually alone in my admiration for Jackson?s "Kong" (I?m being hyperbolic), and yet I understand and agree with some of what you are saying; the film?s excessive bits are showing, and indeed it is far from being a great feat of cinematic deliverance.

    To paraphrase RS's Peter Travesty er Travers comment on ROTS, the critics "drank the KoolAid"

    It is a matter of some irony that: a) Travers did somewhat of an about-face regarding his opinion of "Revenge of the Sith," now giving the film a marginal pass due to its final half-hour; and b) he chose to list all three PT films in his book, "Rolling Stone?s 1000 Best Movies on DVD."

    when it came to Jackson's effort and it will be sad to see the resulting backlash/hangover that is sure to come his way next.

    I am not convinced that such a backlash is likely to head in Jackson?s direction.

    He's done
  19. marathonjedi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 5, 2005
    star 2
    here's one that gave sith #1 on there list
    http://www.twitchfilm.net/archives/004634.html
  20. Gobi-1 Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Dec 22, 2002
    star 5
    To paraphrase Yoda "Seeing those good reviews brings warm feelings to my heart."

    I received my issue of Entertainment Weakly today and seeing those potshots at Star Wars just really got my blood boiling. I decided to write a letter to EW calling them on their SW hate.

    Enough is enough! When will the Star Wars bashing end? For six years EW has done nothing but go out of it's way to trash Star Wars and George Lucas. You hit a new low with your pot shots in the Best of 2005 issue. Calling Ian McDiarmid, one of your Summer's Most Valuable Players (Issue # 836) and Must List entry (Issue # 824) "some old dude" in your "The Year That Was" feature is not only disrespectful of a fine actor but reeks of hypocrisy. Do you even bother to read what you previously printed?

    You might also want to recheck your "Critical Mass" list as Revenge of the Sith was ranked higher then the critically acclaimed Crash. Sith was also far and away the years biggest blockbuster, not King Kong as the cover of issue # 855 would have us believe. And speaking of covers why devote six collectable Star Wars covers (Issue # 813) to a film series you now hate with a passion? Maybe you wanted to cash in on the Star Wars moneymaking machine? Nahhhh! EW is above that.

    It's time to end this. Your endless bashing got old by Christmas of 1999 and now it's just making you look pathetic. One more lame, misguided swipe at Star Wars and I'll have to execute my own "Order 66" and cancel my subscription.

    P.S. I guess I really shouldn't be surprise at EW's behavior considering you gave The Dukes of Hazzard movie a B+.


    I encourage everybody to send their EW hate mail to ew_letters@ew.com
  21. JamesBatista Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jul 13, 2005
    star 1
    ROTS is in the Honorable Mentions of James Berardinelli's Top 10 list, as well.
  22. stormcloud8 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 24, 2002
    star 4
    Here's a tidbit from the latest PC Gamer magazine, talking about a new Star Wars video game called Empire at War:

    "After my brief time with Empire at War, I'm convinced that I'm going to enjoy this game more than all of the prequel films combined."

    I love it when geeks (i.e. the writers at PC Gamer) try to appear cool by putting down Star Wars.
  23. DarthHomer Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 29, 2000
    star 5
    Jonathan Ross bashing ROTS doesn't surprise me. After all, this is the critic who said Batman Forever was "one of the greatest movies of all time"! [face_laugh]

    The media and public turning against Star Wars again is depresseing, but not surprising. TPM and AOTC both had people jumping on the bashing bandwagon months after they were released, and even ROTS, with its better reviews, doesn't seem to be able to avoid that. I know people who loved the film back in May who are now agreeing that it was one of the worst movies of 2005. This zombie-like attitude is downright scary.
    As I said in the box office topic, ROTS put Star Wars back on top again, after AOTC lost to Spidey and The Two Towers. But there's still no respect. Nearly all the end of year reviews I've read have had ROTS as just a footnote (that Star Wars film that made tons of money even though it sucked just like the last two).
    Every other film that achieves the same level of success as the prequels at least gets credit for being popular. But ROTS' critical and commercial success is dismissed by the media and the "in-crowd" still refuse to admit any regular moviegoers actually enjoyed the film. It just made over $800 million worldwide on the back of obsessed fans seeing it multiple times even though it sucked, apparently.
    I think this constant turnaround of opinions is pathetic, and in a way I'm actually glad that Lucas won't make any more films, so the people taking potshots at him and the saga can finally move on to something else.
  24. CJedi72 Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Sep 29, 2005
    star 4
  25. Darth_Zoo Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 15, 2002
    star 4
    A local radio station gave a top 10 movie list and RotS was #1 (voted by listeners). Of course the DJs announcing mocked and bashed the movie after saying it was #1 :rolleyes:. The DJs tried to sound smug and trendy. It is like bashers like to bash it so they feel "cool" and "anti-geek", it's a real shame.

    There is some KK backlash though. I was watching CNN and before the movie came out everyone was tripping over themselves to give a glowing remarks yet yesterday the film critics were slipping in snarky comments and saying it was "too long".

    Matrix backlash was limited because people just stopped watching or talking about it. Revolutions came and went with a whimper and the media and audience just moved on to AotC and RotS.
Moderators: SithStarSlayer
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.