Looks like a whole lotta "CGI" to me!!!

I know alot of us had a very long discussion about CGI this past fall. It was after Transformers was released on HD DVD. Some loyal fans of this site were making references to the OLD SCHOOL effects. Someone, and I cannot remember who, used the Indiana Jones movies as an example of how movies were supposed to be made.
Well here we are, a few day's away from #4, and some of the new trailers show a whole lotta CGI in this instalment. Now even though I feel that Mr. Lucas is a con artist, I am hoping that the movie alone is good. I use the term Con Artist, due to what he did with his own franchies in Star Wars. Looks like a TON of eye candy, and I am just hoping that the CGI does not over power the movie. To me, I am just hoping that this movie is not like Star Wars 3,4 and 5.... um I mean 1, 2 and 3. Let's just keep our fingers crossed.

What I don't get is why we go against effects when the writing is the rotten apple here.

Special effects are and will always be special effects. They can be CGI by ILM, Weta or whatever other workshop...or they can be miniatures or well built models...but in the end, if the story doesn't make sense, you can have effects that cost millions (I'm lookin at you [inster lame movie here])...

And we can see that as years go by...old movies have outdated effects, but still make for great movies. New movies that have great eye candy and not a good story, will become outdated and less enjoyable as time goes by (I'm looking at you Die Hard 4.0, McLane is NOT Superman...)...

MV I agree with you. The point I was making is that I was reminding certain people who were basically saying that movies that use tons of CGI, are crap most of the times (Transformers) At the time of the discussion, those making that statement used the Indiana Jones movies, as an example of great movie making without CGI. I then told those individuals that wait until #4 is released, I gurantee that Old Georgie Boy uses lot's of CGI in his new Indie release. Well like I said, it looks like a whole lotta CGI is being used, like I knew he would.I am hoping that the movie stands up to at least number 1 and 2 (3 was weird and pretty bad in my opinion)

My opinion about CGI is that sometimes dealing with the directors vision of the film, CGI is needed. LOTR for example, great trilogy and not saturated with CGI. and when used it tickled the imagination. Case in point, when Gandolf faught the fire demon and was falling into shadow. That was great CGI and could not have been convincingly done 20 yrs ago.

I don't think the CGI will be overdone(I hope). Spielberg won't let it. Speilberg and Lucas probably put their best CGI Guys on the project.

Hey I just got an e mail from a friend of mine who rights for the local entertainment section of our newspaper.(I am in the Pittsburgh area) He got to screen the movie last night, and he told me it was a C+ maybe a B- He said it was to much Lucas, and not enough Spielberg. I am sure that this movie will make a boat load $ (at least over the memorial day weekend) but will it have the legs to last beyond that, we will see.

I agree IB...everybody, just remember that IT IS FAKE... ...you can't make it 'faker'...you can make the story bad, the script bad, the characters bad...oh, well, the CG on the Indy trailer look faky, lol...Roger Ebert gave it a 3.5/4...so it's a good one...

my "star wars" ratings:
episode 1: 6
episode 2: 3
episode 3: 2
episode 4: 5
episode 5: 5
episode 6: 5

my "indiana jones" ratings:
"raiders": 7
"doom": 7
"crusade": 8
"crystal skull": 1 ( "you're a teacher?" "part time." ) (eddie leaves the theatre.)

[Post edited by posters5 on May 19, 2008]

I'm sorry. Ive never been to your site eddie. Are you saying that "The Phantom Menace" is the best SW movie? And "The Last Crusade", the best Indy movie?

CGI sucks. Looks fake. Hate it. Kills Storytelling. Ok in cartoons....

Empire was and still is the best Star Wars film hands down, so I'm not sure why you would give it just a 5...

bladerunner: i've written dvd/hd dvd/blu-ray reviews for dvdtown and dvdbeaver as well as my own site, http://hddvdreviews.blogspot.com .

hoodaguy: "empire" bores me to tears. "a new hope" has some really awful acting by the three leads. "jedi" is dumb because a bunch of teddy bears manage to defeat a powerful army.

Empire wasn't boring, and the prequels have worse acting than the original three films.

hoodaguy,

to each his own, okay? i don't like any of the "star wars" movies, period.

eddie

Wow, to say that The Empire Strikes Back gets a 5/10 is harsh...why the hate? Which sci-fi movies you like?

Yeah, well, don't let previews fool you. I thought Iron Man previews looked corny as all hell, but look what happened there!

The count down to Friday is on at RT and so far out of 50 reviews only 11 are rotten, leaving the Tomato Meter running at 78%. The RT Community is liking it a bit less running their meter at 70%, so far. I'm predicting by Friday the Tomato meter will be anywhere between 68% to 72%, which isn't all that bad considering it could turn out much worse. I never expect the Crystal Skull to be the best IJ movie made, I just expected to see the franchinse back in action and that's good enough for me.

Quote:
Wow, to say that The Empire Strikes Back gets a 5/10 is harsh...why the hate? Which sci-fi movies you like?

He likes Final Fantasy! Don't you read his reviews?

tim's right. among my sci-fi favorites are "final fantasy", "minority report", and "bubblegum crisis: tokyo 2040" (tv series).

OK THEN. Note to self..."Stay away from poser5 movie reviews."

OMG! can't believe what I'm reading here...

Final Fantasy and Minority Report(!) are better than the STAR WARS movies? I've never thought I actually live to see a fan of movies state this, but "to each his own"...

For any interested, here's my Star Wars ratings -

Episode #1 - 5 (or 6)
Episode #2 - 3 (or 4)
Episode #3 - 7
Episode #4 - 10
Episode #5 - 9
Episode #6 - 7

STAR WARS gets a perfect score, primarily because IT'S ONE OF THE GREATEST ADVENTURE FILMS EVER MADE!

No one knew it at the time what a 'classic' the film would turn out to be - fantastic production (on a smaller scale), amazing John Williams musical score, Peter Cushing, Alec Guinness, Harrison Ford (totally owns his 'space pirate' role!), best droid action of them all(!), most 'adult' of the series (almost all characters are indeed mature adults), best pacing and timing of the series (and best opening/closing scenes of the series), ETC.

I will concede on Chewbacca - as cool as he was in Episode 4, it could be argued that he was at his best in Empire (#5). As for Jedi, yes the 'teddy bears' helped defeat the Empire on the ground - HELPED - as some of the rebels were there too, and remember the main Empire forces were up in the air (space).

But I'm still laughing at Eddie thinking Episode #1 is the BEST of the entire series - amazingly shocking! ...but "to each his own".

_____________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

"a new hope" is nothing more than a piss-poor re-make of akira kurosawa's "the hidden fortress". if you watch the special features for "kagemusha", you'll see lucas talking about how he has no original ideas and that he took everything in the "star wars" series from...you guessed it, kurosawa.

where did all those lightsabers and jedis come from? why, samurai duels and jidai-geki! duh.

That's a good point Eddie, and I'm aware of how much Lucas admired Kurosawa's works (and he's admitted to using ideas from the legendary Japanese director's films), but still the final product of STAR WARS was not done by Kurosawa obviously ( ), but by a young Hollywood independent 'maverick'-type - GEORGE LUCAS.

Films, songs, etc inspire others to for their creativity. But the quality of work done by Lucas in STAR WARS (everything involved now) is absolutely comparable to that of Kurosawa's work (and I've seen a few of his films - very good, yet very slow-moving too).

And many of us know how Lucas has helped to publicize the works of Kurosawa over the last few decades to USA audiences (often being an executive producer behind the scenes in getting the films distributed here, along with his friend Francis Ford Coppola, who Lucas has acknowledged was his mentor in film directing).

_____________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

i'm not stating that the "star wars" movies are lame because they draw elements from other movies...they're lame because they're lame on their own merits, period. they take cool things from kurosawa's career and turn them into trash. (N)

Ok, daddy is having a senior moment, can someone please tell me what "CGI" means?

FYI...

> CGI - Computer-generated imagery

_____________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

Eddie said -

Quote:
"i'm not stating that the "star wars" movies are lame because they draw elements from other movies...they're lame because they're lame on their own merits, period. they take cool things from kurosawa's career and turn them into trash."

Well, that's your opinion...

But I doubt you'll find others who feel that the SW films are basically 'lame' or 'trash'. Some parts (or elements) are weak, granted, but overall are very popular, enjoyable, and have sold well on home video, as I'd bet that a majority of VHS/LaserDisc/DVD owners (WORLDWIDE) have at least one of the SW films in their library... but would they have any by Kurosawa? How often would a person sit thru a Kurosawa film, vs watching one of the 6 SW films again? Hmmm...

Adjusted for inflation, I believe STAR WARS is the 2nd highest grossing theatrical movie in history (behind Gone With the Wind). Another thing, what's the highest grossing Japanese film of all time (Gojira?), and do any Japanese films even appear among the Top 200 (in grosses) - ? Hmmm...

_____________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

Quote:
FYI...

> CGI - Computer-generated imagery

Bwaa ha ha!!!! LMAO!!!

SUCKER! I love it when someone falls for my shinanigans!

loverboy,

james cameron's "titanic" (1997) made more money (not adjusted for inflation) in the u.s. and canada than any other movie ever. does this make "titanic" the best movie of all time? no. (the same applies to "gone with the wind" if you want to adjust for inflation.)

popularity only means that something is easily understood by a majority of people. popularity isn't automatically indicate of quality, though popularity and quality are not mutually exclusive. (for example, "the godfather" was a blockbuster at the box office and is also a pretty good movie.) on the flip side, you have "citizen kane", which was a box-office bomb but is frequently cited as the best movie ever made.

that being said, the "star wars" movies are for people who just want to sit there and fantasize about the possible uses of "the force" (maybe yanking off a hot chick's clothes from three feet away?).

eddie

[Post edited by posters5 on May 19, 2008]

Well, I guess it was -my- "senior moment" - ?

tim,

and it was loverboy, who couldn't link to wikipedia fast enough!

Well Eddie, I'm not referring to "the best movie of all time" now, am I ...but the popularity of SW films in relation to your bringing up Kurosawa (read my post again). IMO, you would be in a very low minority of film fans, in your thinking that because Lucas 'borrowed' story plot elements from Kurosawa, that it then means his resulting films are 'lame' and 'trash'.

The sci-fi films that Lucas created owe their inspiration from Kurosawa, Kubrick (2001), and other previous earlier films. But what he gave the world in the STAR WARS films from -that- inspiration is some of the most enjoyable and fantastic scenes that moviegoers have ever seen (very memorable), and are part of home video collections the world over... Kurosawa, while a great director, well his films have NOT had the same worldwide popularity among filmgoers as that of Lucas, now have they? Among fellow directors/writers, yes - but what about those that matter more - the box office generating public.

_____________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

loverboy,

i'm not talking about popularity. the fact is, most people are just trying to get through life and never think about reaching higher than humanity's current trajectory. they can watch tripe all they want, and i won't stop them. that doesn't mean that tripe is nourishing.

eddie

Eddie said -

Quote:
"that being said, the "star wars" movies are for people who just want to sit there and fantasize about the possible uses of "the force" (maybe yanking off a hot chick's clothes from three feet away?)."

^That's stupid... surprised it was -you- who would say this!


-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

Hey Eddie, don't overlook the 'nourishing tripe' that -you- admit to enjoy watching (over SW films) - Final Fantasy and Minority Report...

[Post edited by Love Hendrix! on May 19, 2008]

those movies have so many ideas that i watch them at least once every year.

You should watch them more often, since they have 'nourishing tripe'. But hey, seriously I'm sure others here watch their SW films more than once a year, and/or Kubrick's 2001 (Chris' favorite!).

______________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

loverboy, i know you like this movie.

No, I'd rather see that other one... Indiana Jones and the Lost Corona... especially after drinking some Jack Daniels with Tim!

"...that doesn't mean that tripe is nourishing." --Eddie

Actually, tripe is quite nourishing--high in protein, low in fat.

I enjoyed "The Mummy" and "Dawn of the Dead" last week in high def. Very good tripe.

John

Hey now, don't get me mixed up in this. I've always known Eddie is picky in his tastes but he's always been a stand up guy and a good friend. Hell, one of my best friends I work with drives me nutts with his limited taste in music -- the guy is literally harder to please than music critics themselfs! And, ironically, he still has 80s hair to his waist and has the IQ of a rocket scientist. Go figure?

While I don't agree with Eddie's take on the Star Wars films, as I too am like most people and enjoy the films for the pure popcorn entertainment that they are. However, I will agree with him that many of the acting performances are dog vomit. You have to remember, Eddie has done a lot of film study and has probably opened his mind to several film noirs that many of us have no clue of. It doesn't mean his tastes are right or better than everyone elses, it just means he has a broader perspective of films and that can make it easy to weed out the trash, or easier to see the garbage American's manage to dish out as great works of art. If I remember correctly, Eddie's not a big fan of 2001, either -- another film with much critical claim. Eddie's just hard to please, and you know, there's no rule on the planet against that so there's nothing wrong with it.

Again, I don't want to get dragged into this because I agree and disagree with the both of you on the whole Star Wars thing. I'm afraid my input would just casue more chaos, so let's all agree to disagree, yes?



[Post edited by Tim Raynor on May 19, 2008]

http://www.moviewavs.com/php/sounds/?id=bst&media=MP3S&type=Movies&movie=Star_Wars&quote=toschi.txt&file=toschi.mp3

So? Still, why the hate??

Quote:
So? Still, why the hate??

Huh? What do you mean? Can you be more specific please?

For SW...

Oh, so then your question is really directed at Eddie?

Eddie is just picky, that's just the way he is. However, I don't think it's raw hatred because he would have rated the films with a 1 or 2 on all counts if that were the case. Eddie just doesn't find them as awe inspiring as most people and I can't say he's the first or only person I've met that feels the same. Just because everybody likes something doesn't mean EVERYBODY likes, or is supposed to like, the same thing.

[Post edited by Tim Raynor on May 19, 2008]

I can answer that one for ya. (why the hate)...eddie is probably an old man. He doesnt GET Star Wars. OR...he has droid envy. These 3 movies are classics. Who's eddie?

My Ratings:
STAR WARS-10
EMPIRE-10
JEDI-7
MENACE-7
CLONES-1
SITH-8
THE MECHANDISE FOR THESE FILMS?-INFINITY!

[Post edited by bladerunner1 on May 20, 2008]

"He won't like it, he hates everything!"

All this talk about Star Wars made me go rewatch Revenge Of The Sith! Pure fun. Star Wars is what it is an action series. People were looking for "Film or Cinema" with the prequels but there just fun popcorn action "Movies" Same with Indiana Jones. People go to see these movies with a "Nothing impresses me" attitude.
Remember when you were a kid and you loved the original movies! Thats because you loved the excitement and didn't care how "Fake" something looked.
Sorry for sounding Surly but it's May Two Four weekend here in Canada and I had some beers .Hic!

[Post edited by Ironbull on May 20, 2008]

Good grief, Revenge of the Sith is just appalling. I think people were so shell-shocked after the first two prequels, they were desperate to find something, anything redeeming about the last installment. I actually think it might be the worst of the three. After all the decades of buildup to get to the scene where Anakin turns to the Dark Side, and we get the most laughable scene in the entire series. Anakin: "No, Mace, don't hurt the Emperor, that would be a bad thing to do! We're Jedi! We're good!" Two minutes later. "Kill the Jedi children? Sure, no problem, I'm a bad guy now. Didn't you hear the musical cue on the soundtrack?" Pitiful. Truly, utterly pitiful. Jar Jar was better.

By contrast, I find it puzzling that Attack of the Clones is singled out from the other films. Yeah, it stinks too, but at least it has the only truly entertaining scene in the whole prequel trilogy - the fight on Fett's ship. That was great stuff.


I have low expectations for Indiana Jones, and I expect them to be met.

Quote:
where did all those lightsabers and jedis come from? why, samurai duels and jidai-geki! duh.

Eddie, I never thought I'd see the day when you defended the Japanese.

what does my age have to do with liking/dis-liking movies?

john actually saw "a new hope" during the movie's opening days, and i was born two years after "a new hope" hit theatres. if you mean "old" by having seen the movies as a child regardless of venue (movie theatre, tv, etc.), then i saw "a new hope", "empire", and "jedi" before i was ten. they've always been boring, even before i found out who kurosawa was.

chris: i'm not defending anyone. facts are facts. even lucas admits that he has no originality or artistry. remember his immortal words--"i've earned the right to fail."

Dude, EVERYBODY rips EVERYBODY, OK? And if you make it better, it doesn't matter where you got it from (except for copyright issues, of course )...

Revenge is dark, Renge is the turning point, and of course Anakin didn't want Mace to kill the Emperor, he already had a hold of him (I wish we could've seen more into how they got to have such a strong bond, Anakin and Palpatine), he wanted him alive because he told Anakin he could keep the ones he loved ALIVE...honestly, it was all Qui-Gon's fault, he died and Obi-Wan wasn't ready to take care of Anakin...

why are some people so bloody insistent that people in the whole world all have the same opinion about one thing or another? these aren't movie fans--they're movie boors.

[Post edited by posters5 on May 20, 2008]

The whole idea of this thread, was to basically remind those who made some strong arguments that all movies with heavy CGI, basically suck. I am sure that some of you remember that this was discussed in a thread about the CGI effects in Transformers. And again, someone said that movie like Indiana Jones, now thats movie making. Well Lucas could have went old school with his movie, but we all know that he is in it for the money. Sort of like he did with his Star Wars franchise, what a con artist.

And most of the reviews I am reading are C- for this new Indie movie. Yea he will make a TON of money, but it will never match up to the original IJ movies. Yep, no classic movie here.

I have to agree with Chris, Sith is appauling in more ways than imaginable. I have to admit I only enjoy these film for the eye-candy alone, and that's sad when you really think about it. A movie like that should be good based on every element involved, but since the acting of the lead roles sucks and the storyline is no better than a Disney fairytale, the entire movie bombs! After watching Episodes 1,2 & 3, I, too, think Sith is probably the worst out of the bunch. In fact, I never thought it was that great when everyone was up in arms about it when it was released. My favorite out of the three was Clones and manily because the elements where there for the making of a good film and it had a decent, climactic ending. However, the acting again ruined what could have been a pretty good sci-fi. Take away the two love leads and you would have had an almost perfect movie, but instead we got the Lucas wooden suck fest!

Quote:
but it will never match up to the original IJ movies. Yep, no classic movie here.

And it sounds more like it will be meeting my expectations. I never expected Skull to be better or as good as any of the other films as most people might have hopes for. I expect a film that revisits the character, has some fun moments, a few laughs, some popcorn adventure and nothing more. Plus, considering Fords age and the fact that they couldn't get Connery involved, I'm not expecting greatness, just something fun to pass the time. If it only rates a C for most critics and joes, then good enough for me. I mean, it can't be that bad since they don't have an annoying character like Chris Tucker to ruin the film.

Well, for starters, I am not crazy for the LOTR movies, however, we have to admit what they did for a new generation of movie making...still, most of you love LOTR, some of you love Juno, I don't. It's the best thing we all have different tastes, or else, it would be boring.

CGI, well, let's talk about Pixar, and don't tell me that is not the same, because IT IS. They got the visuals, they got the story, they got the characters, they get their movies right, with ALL CGI...so, with a well managed production, you can make excellent movies using CGI...

I think one (of the many) problems with the SW prequels, is that we actually need more information, more facts, more things happening...why did Anakin and Obi-Wan grow so distant? How did Anakin and Palpatine grow so close? Who trained the troopers to do the Jedi-killing order? Who was Syfo-Dyas? Was Anakin actually 'miracle conceived'? Why did Qui-Gon have to die? Why does Liam Neson keep doing those kind of characters?

There are many loose ends that should've never been like that, and many gaps in the story that needed to be fleshed out. Again, Revenge came to close the prequel chapter with a darker and mature theme, because it needed to be darker and mature, we needed to see evil in triumph, we needed to see the Empire rising...and so it happened...and whatever you may say, the opening scene on Revenge is one of the best in the entire series...and the Jedi-killing scenes are the saddest ..."You were the chosen one!"

Personally I thought Star Wars Ep 2 had a couple of good moments but it was ruined by WAY too much CGI also. It looked like a digital cartoon of the new Millenium.

From the trailer of Indiana Jones 4 I see they used some CGI but they didn't go overboard, which is a good thing. Hopefully George Lucas learned from the prequels, besides I bet Spielberg wouldn't let him do it anyway. Kills the realism unless it's what the director intends but that would only be good in comic book stuff...I.E. Sin City.

well, the upcoming "the clone wars" CGI movie is the movie that lucas has always wanted to make--no annoying actors to direct, and everything was created in a computer anyway.

The new Clone Wars movie thats comin actually looks good. I'm looking forward to it. Hopefully it won't have tacky dialogue and story.

Quote:
Hopefully it won't have tacky dialogue and story.

I don't mean to quash your hopes, but I think the odds of that are so low no Vegas book would even post them.

I actually didn't know about the movie until a few weeks ago the trailer looks very promising, actually, lets hope for the best...and prepare for what we always get...

There is an upside to the prequels that nobody ever mentions. Because they are so CGI driven...they can be changed and tinkered with in pretty dramatic ways. And we all know that ol' George LOVES to mess with his films. So, maybe someday, the CGI will have the "weight" that it needs to be comparable with the effects in the orginal films.

poster5,
we are pretty much the same age..."To each his own".

bladerunner: maybe you should bear that mind in the future when you discuss things (anything) with other people. other people don't have to agree with you--or even the majority.

as for "star wars: the clone wars", i think it's safe to say that we can expect little and still be disappointed.

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.05/lucas.html

"I've earned the right to fail, which means making what I think are really great movies that no one wants to see."

the joke is that he already has.

[Post edited by posters5 on May 20, 2008]

Well, I still admire George's output of films, those that he's directed, as well as executive-produced (Indiana Jones movies, Tucker-The Man and His Dream etc) and also those he's contributed story ideas (and screenplay help). If I could be George Lucas, I'd be proud of my work, even though it's not perfect, or will satisfy some who criticized him.

Also... I appreciate his many contributions elsewhere, the foundation of Pixar Animation (before selling it to Steve Jobs), the Industrial Light & Magic SpFx unit (one of the best!), the THX audio standards (which helped improved theater sound quality), and anything else I've overlooked that George Lucas has been a part of.... the man came from nowhere - Modesto CA (not brought up in the Hollywood studio system), went to the USC film school, and now has become the greatest 'force' (hehe) in the movie business.

Give us more cinema efforts comparable to those of GEORGE LUCAS, and I'll be ready to spend money on them! ...and let's hope for the STAR WARS series on Blu-ray by 2009.

_____________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

[Post edited by Love Hendrix! on May 20, 2008]

He has also created Lucasarts which is a very profitable gaming business and Lucas Animation which I believe is in Syngapore and made this new Clone Wars movie?

Anyway he has influenced a lot of successful ventures even if writing and directing is not his strength, he has contributed so much more. Creating THX alone is Phenominal.

From the link to Wikipedia (see my post above) - "George Lucas was also influential in the development of industry-standard post-production tools such as the Avid Film and Video nonlinear editor, first developed as the Edit Droid, and also the Sound Droid, which later became the Digidesign Pro Tools sound editing and mixing software."

_____________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

You gotta love a guy that sticks to his guns...one thing ol' george is not...SELLOUT. I admire this about the man the most. These are HIS films, and he is right, he can do whatever the fudge he wants with them. Going to watch THX tonight..."far out".

George Lucas and Uwe Boll - uncompromising men of vision!

well, considering that a person can't "sell out" if he is the establishment itself, lucas is the one doing the "buying out" when others "sell out".

When is he, LUCAS, going to do something original again?

The Indiana Jones (1,2,3) where awesome and so were Star Wars (what he called 4,5,6 and what I grew up to beleive was 1,2,3)
Those movies were original, not a rehash of what he is doing now. I personally think he is in it for the $, which he really does not need. Just my opinion though.

ugh, buddy? neither "star wars" nor "indiana jones" was original in any way.

"star wars" is just a samurai saga with some fantasy elements.

"indiana jones" is just feature-length versions of saturday-morning serials from the 1920s-1940s.

Um so I was wrong about him totally then. He did not come up with anything that was original at all.

Yea that's LUCAS for ya!!!

[Post edited by InvisibleBiker on May 21, 2008]

THX1138. Pretty original! The "effects" in SW.? The "sound" in SW?...dont think anybody saw anything like that either at the time. Which would also=Original. Lucas built his empire on,wait for it..............."ORIGINAL".

[Post edited by bladerunner1 on May 21, 2008]

bladerunner,

your grasp of film history is piss-poor. just because you haven't seen or heard about the movies that influenced lucas's movies doesn't mean that film history starts with "thx-1138" (which is basically just an expression of modernist and minimalist art theories).

besides, lucas himself always talks about how he draws from a variety of sources. he is the first to admit that he's not very original. by calling him "original", you are contradicting him.

eddie

I don't know, I'd have to say he's not that original. Many guys have gone from having a neck in their youth to having no neck in their elder years.

Eddie, do you have to rub on everyone your 'film history knowledge'?? Remember is knowledge, not wisdom...

i'm not rubbing anything in anyone's face.

george lucas--the man HIMSELF--says that he drew inspiration for "star wars", "indiana jones", "american graffitti", etc. from samurai movies, saturday-morning serials, hot-rod racing movies, etc. the man HIMSELF admits that he wasn't being original when he made his movies. yet, we've got bladerunner arguing otherwise.

from a cognitive point of view, bladerunner is utterly illogical for contradicting the very thing that he thinks he's defending.

everybody has ripped everbody off eddie. there are only so many ways you can tell the same story.

bladerunner,

if that's how you feel, then you agree with me. stop trying to pick a fight where there is none.

eddie

I still stand by what I said ed^^^^. Lucas just borrowed the things you and HE mentioned, and turned them into something different, which I consider to be pretty original. And so does ALOT of other people....OR is it MASS HYSTERIA?

it's mass stupidity.

LOL! "To each his own my friend"

Well, I certainly agree with bladerunner on this dispute.





You know Eddie... the classic 'western' cowboy theme has been around in films for a long, LONG time, but nobody had ever made an 'original' form of the western genre that was similar to what Sam Peckinpah did with THE WILD BUNCH - w/extreme realistic violence, and lots of blood (+ sex). Likewise, monster movies have been around a long time too, but nobody ever made something as 'original' as ALIEN until Ridley Scott and his team gave us that classic. There are many examples of what I'm referring to here. Filmmakers work is often inspired by others, but what they create from that inspiration can be wholly original (especially in the area of SpFx), and a major improvement over what came before.

Just because Lucas borrowed or copied story lines from other filmmakers (Kurosawa for an example) and various sci-fi inspirations, nobody had done anything that resembled STAR WARS until George Lucas gave us that type of 'original' filmmaking, taking stop-motion photography to the next level (years before CGI). Oh, we had Ray Harryhausen, Stanley Kubrick (2001), and others, and classic adventures like Flash Gordon, etc, but the world was amazed and in a state of "eye shock" (hehe) when we first sat down in a theater and saw that incredible opening scene after those early words - "A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away".

Think about what Lucas 'created' with the Star Wars films, and how his version of the good vs evil theme (set in a sci-fi "space" world) turned out to be more 'original' than many others that preceded his work - ironic, huh?

Yes, we've long seen comic book stories turned into TV shows and films going back many decades, but none of 'em ever were superior (or more popular) than the STAR WARS franchise, in my opinion. Superman is up there obviously (comic version, TV show, films), but the SW franchise is even more popular, I believe.

"The Force is strong with this one"... and definitely turned out to be strong in real life, with the huge $UCCESS that George Lucas has achieved and received with his SW saga.





~ rare photo of writer/director George Lucas with his close friend and mentor - director Francis Ford Coppola (The Godfather films, Apocalypse Now etc) on a Star Wars set...


~ funny 'spoof' film on Lucas (INFO)


_____________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

[Post edited by Love Hendrix! on May 22, 2008]

And yes I know about how popular Gene Roddenberry's STAR TREK was, and is. It too is 'original', but doesn't take away the 'originality' that Lucas created with his STAR WARS works (from 1977 onward).