The Gusher's Supplemental to the Basher's Sanctuary.

I think his problem was he'd never cast a kid before.

Uh wait, Corey Carrier played a itty-bitty Indiana Jones in Young Indy. That kid was actually pretty good.

Overall, I don't mind Lloyd through the first 2/3 of the movie. However, some of his moments with Padme' and Qui-Gon were "Ugh" inducing. The main problem I have is with his character's motivation(or lack of)during the space battle.

That's primarily the writers and directors responsibility however, not the actors.

 

Exactly. I don't mean to imply that he should have held out for a miniature Laurence Olivier, but there's no shortage of competent child actors in Hollywood.

 

>>BTW, Star Wars wasn't made just in the U.S. It was in the U.K. and a few other places as well.<<

Yes but it was still a holleywood backed movie and Mad Max was not. That is the difference I was trying to make. Sorry for not being clear.

But now that I think about it, Warner Bros. has it's name on the lable so I could be wrong. But it was still a cheaply made movie that didn't get much advertising for it and has since become a cult classic.

 

I like The Road Warrior more than Mad Max and more than Thunderdome.

Still, they're all more like road movies than the space fantasy of Star Wars.

They're also dystopian while Star Wars is more in the tradition of space opera and fantasy romance.

Speaking of Road Warrior, I dug that little pint-sized Ewokian boomerang thrower. Reminds me of Chaka. Ruuuuaaarrr!

Maybe he could've played Anakin?

 

Waterworld is an obvious take-off on Mad Max. (or is it Road Warrior? The 2nd one) Are there any other movies that really follow a similar style? I can't think of any. Oh yeah, and Thunderdome was very much a horrible film.

 

>>I like The Road Warrior more than Mad Max and more than Thunderdome.<<

I do too. I like the series in that order as well.

And just for the record it is "The Road Warror" that I am talking about above. I called it Mad Max because it was called Mad Max II everwhere else in the world except the US.

>>Still, they're all more like road movies than the space fantasy of Star Wars. <<

I'm not sure I understand your point here.
Are you saying that a movie would half to be a space fantasy to equal Star Wars?

I don't like Thunderdome either. It's the Phantom Menace of that saga. I liked it until he actually wen't "Beyond Thunderdome".

>>Are there any other movies that really follow a similar style?<<

Yeah there were a several horible movies that took place in a radiation filled post-apocalyptic time. I can't remember the names of any of them as they are all very forgetable movies. I do remember that one of them had Rowdie Roddie Piper in it though and he was fighting frog people. Another one had it where there only women left of the human race excpet for a couple of males--lucky guys

Oh, and then were was a "skate or die" series that I think was supposed to take place after the nukes went off. I remember they used to play these back when Gilbert Gotfried hosted "USA Up All Night" Any one ever watch that?

 

"I'm not sure I understand your point here.
Are you saying that a movie would half to be a space fantasy to equal Star Wars?"

No not at all. I'm just saying they're really drawn from different sources of inspiration. It'd be difficult to do a side by side comparison of the mythos of the two.

The Road Warrior is more like the "Adventures of Han Solo".

 

"Mad Max"'s scope is more "smal-scale" while SW has a grander (meaning bigger, not "better") scope. SW encopmases a lot of "environment" while "Mad Max" focuses more on the individual and his present environment and situations.

I dunno, my two cents.

 

>>It'd be difficult to do a side by side comparison of the mythos of the two.<<

>>SW encopmases a lot of "environment" while "Mad Max" focuses more on the individual and his present environment and situations.<<

You both are right of course. The spirit of the two stories are practically bi-polar. SW deals with making choices, right and wrong, good and evil--it deals with the big picture and glosses over the complexities of life; while Mad Max deals with grief, hoplessness and finding a prupose after all that you loved, counted on and believed in was taken away. Maybe the biggest argument against my claims that TRW could have done as well as ANH is that Star Wars is warm and comforting, while Mad Max is harsh and gritty--not very kid friendly beyond the action. But then again Titanic wasn't very kid friendly either it still holds the record of top grossing film, so I don't know.

But like I mentioned before a lot of the same mythic qualities of Star Wars can be found in Mad Max as well and that is why even without the outside push that Star Wars has, Mad Max has still be very successful.

Oh, and I just wan't to correct myself here. I stated that Beyond Thunderdome was the TPM of the series...WRONG. That dishonor I am afraid will go to Mad Max 4 when it comes out. I have not heard one positive piece of information on that that gives me any hope that it will be a good movie. I hope I'm wrong though.

 

AdmiralOzzal: "Sheeeesssshh . . . can't GL say just once, admit just once, that Jar Jar may have been a mistake . . . "He went well?!!" . . . with what . . . the "retard" of the year award . . ."

Go-Mer: When will any of you admit Jar-Jar -may- have turned out the way Lucas intended him to?

 

When will any of you admit that Lucas can make a mistake?

 

"Go-Mer: When will any of you admit Jar-Jar -may- have turned out the way Lucas intended him to?"

"When will any of you admit that Lucas can make a mistake?"

LOL! Wow, three years and so much progress.

 

Lucas has made plenty of mistakes, one of which was letting just anyone in to see TPM.

 

Yes, you must be required to pass the "Star Wars Ultimate Gusher Test" before you are allowed to see any more SW movies.

Dumb.

 

"Lucas has made plenty of mistakes, one of which was letting just anyone in to see TPM."



Oh, Gomer,gomer,gomer. LOL!

 

I don't think that would be needed.

Lucas should have taken a sample of text from the last half of some novel, and a sample of text from the very beginning, so that the "audience hopefuls" are reading just the very beginning, and the last half of the book.

If they completely melt down because they can't concieve the possiblity that any kind of clarification could happen in the missing portion of the story, then they would be marked as part of the population who will have to wait until all the films are complete.

 

Sorry Gomer, but TPM is BOOK ONE.

BTW, what would you do have a blood test to check for a gusher count? If so, not even Master Homer has a count as high as you.

You are The Chosen One!

 

TPM is chapter I.

Another test that might have helped is the Ewok test. Simply ask them what they thought of the Ewoks.

If they suddenly start to involuntarily snarl at the prospect that someone could even pose that as a question, they have to wait too.

 

So, basically anyone who doesn't unquestioningly accept anything Lucas says or does is not entitled to bask in his glow?

Your right. That does let me out.

 

Well look at it this way, if you aren't allowed to see the films, you have nothing to complain about.

These films aren't for people who get hung up on everything, they are for people who can roll with them and enjoy them for what they are.

 

If you apply that logic, then there is no such thing as a bad film.

 

Every film is good to somebody. You just have to decide wether you want to enjoy the films or not. As always, your focus determines your reality. Some films need to be taken with a grain of salt.

The cool thing about TPM is if you allow yourself to enjoy it, you realize no salt is required.

 

This again?

Let me tell you a little bit about my taste in film. See, I LOVE a challenging film. There's nothing that blows my mind like sitting down to watch a film that really requires something of me. Case in point: My favorite film of last year, "Mulholland Drive". One of the best films I've ever seen. I don't know if you've seen it, but let me tell you that very few films have ever asked the audience to dig as deeply as this one did. I've watched the DVD about half a dozen times since I got it last week and I'm STILL getting new things out of it.

The point is, you're not talking to some couch potato who needs his art spoon-fed to him. I know a challenging film when I see one. TPM isn't it.

 

Were you expecting it to be?

And if so, in what way?

 

You know what Gome, that is a stupid way to look at things. Before TPM, if you had tested everyone, I'm sure 95% of people would have passed this "test" about being a devoted SW fan. The remaining 5% would probably have had a problem with Ewoks or thought that ANH should have updated graphics and music blaring through every damn scene. That puts you back to square one. There is no way beforehand to tell who's going to like/dislike a movie. The only test is to let them watch it. Only in retrospect can you tell who likes, and doesn't like the movie.

Every film is good to somebody. You just have to decide wether you want to enjoy the films or not.

If someone would have told me before May 1999 that I wouldn't have liked TPM, I would have laughed them straight out of the room. There's no deciding whether you like a movie or not, there's just the knee-jerk reaction that unconsciously hits you after you've seen it that determines your feelings. I think everyone went in to the theaters wanting to enjoy it. Unfortunately, for many of us (yes, many) it just wasn't that good. Same way that Armageddon or ID4 just aren't that good for a lot of people.

And seriously, if you are telling people that they have to force themselves to want to like it, that's the same as admitting it isn't very good.