|
|
|
#21
03-27-2017, 03:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
What do you expect.? Disney refuses to release the ORIGINAL 1977 version of Star Wars an any decent condition.
|
|
#22
03-27-2017, 09:52 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
It might be different if the remake was actually BETTER than the original. In most cases they ABSOLUTELY SUCK! My daughter and I saw Star Wars VII once in the theater in Indiana while we were visiting family... We BOTH left with a bad taste in our mouths and didn't like the film... (she's 12, but has seen all the Star Wars films and just didn't care for it at all; I was at best ambivalent). I couldn't quite put my finger on the reason WHY I didn't like it, other than it seemed confused, convoluted, didn't make much sense, and just poorly conceived... I bought the Blu-Ray but didn't get around to watching it until Rogue One came out... Now, usually, if I enjoy a movie, I will go see it at least TWICE in the theater, sometimes 3-4 times. I find that I ALWAYS enjoy it MORE the second time around... I pick up on things I missed in the first viewing, nuances that I missed, I'm not distracted trying to keep track of the characters or their names or relationships to other characters, etc. If I DON'T enjoy a film, I don't waste my money seeing it again. SW7 was SO forgettable that I didn't even bother watching the Blu-ray for MONTHS after I bought it... but I had seen "Rogue One" and was SO thoroughly impressed I wanted Keira and Betty (my wife) to see it, and figured I'd show them "SW7" first so they could see the difference between them. It struck me while I was watching it WHY I was left SO unimpressed with SW7... the stupid thing was a CRAPPY remake of the original 1977 Star Wars Episode I- A New Hope. "JJAbram's spin" on the original as it were, and just like his shoddy attempt at Star Trek, FAR, FAR inferior to the original in every way-- a shoddy attempt at storytelling that jumps from one scene to another with no rhyme or reason, shallow characters that just act dumb, with no real motivations or anything that resembles sense, dumb dialog, and the whole thing just comes off as a melange of disjointed scenes slapped together like someone made a movie out of 'wouldn't it be cool if' ideas thrown out in storyboard meetings with NO real story or script behind it... and of course the CGI effects are supposed to substitute for good storytelling... Lots of schmucks thought that too after the success of the original Star Wars in 1977... the "PTB's" in Hollywood had said that the sci-fi genre was death at the box office-- expensive to make and with narrow appeal that limited ticket sales. Lucas proved them wrong with Star Wars-- but he did it in an entirely different way than how the studios were doing sci-fi movies... instead of campy, dumb storylines with usually moronic or weird characters doing nonsensical stuff inside a fake plastic universe, and then expecting special effects to "make up the difference" (since that's why studios thought that was the only reason people went to see sci-fi movies anyway), he basically brought the classic themes of knights saving princesses and battling powerful warlords with magic warlocks into a sci-fi setting, and not just a fake, plastic universe, but a REAL place, REAL locations and sets and props that looked like they'd seen heavy use, rode hard, and put up wet. A setting that looked LIVED IN. That made it seem real. Look at the original "Mos Eisley Cantina" scene-- most of his "creatures" in there are from legends, stories, and fables, religions, etc... There's mouse like creatures, a "devil", "gray aliens", Chewbacca is basically a Bigfoot or Yeti type creature, etc. Not all are from fables or stories, but many are... Nobody had to tell you Darth Vader was a real bad guy you didn't want to cross... he SHOWED YOU... Compare and contrast with JJAbrams abysmal attempt at Star Wars... You've got a wimpy, whiny "bad guy" worshipping his dead Grandfather's mask, who they've already shown to have comic-book level powers far beyond Darth Vaders... then to top it off, he's an idiot... can't even get a piece to some nonsensical map back, cannot interrogate a prisoner successfully, and of course she, after having not known ANYTHING about the Force manages to gain near comic-book level powers in it and fights Darth Wimpy Boy to a standstill at the end... Instead of the Death Star, you get some stupid-looking sun-gobbling planet-killer with a trench dug in it for a superweapon, manned by a bunch of pale gaunt skinhead-looking rejects that looked like they couldn't get cast in "Iron Sky" or "Indiana Jones and the last Crusade" as Nazis... The whole thing was patently ridiculous... the "trench" on the planet would have required removing the soil and rock the size of several continents literally HUNDREDS of miles deep to look even remotely like the crappy CGI-- there's LOTS easier ways to build megaweapons than that, and don't even get me started on the abject stupidity of the sun-gobbling crap... It was just like a seventh grader decided to remake "Star Wars" and the studio gave them a bazillion dollars to do it... AGAIN (after his equally moronic and lousy retake on Star Trek-- how that HACK Abrams is allowed to do anything other than sell hot dogs and popcorn at movies I'll never know!) But, hey, like I said, it's all happened before. The studios cranked out a LOT of poorly-done sci-fi films in the wake of Star Wars... even the original "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" was basically capitalizing on the success that Star Wars had paved the way for... and it too fell victim to the "let's take a "movie of the week" B-grade script, stretch it to nearly 3 hours with eye-popping special effects that linger for MINUTES on the screen, and everybody will love it... WRONG! ST:TMP was a success (of sorts) mainly because people were CLAMORING for anything Star Trek and had been, to some extent, for over 15 years. But ask any fan, and they'll tell you that TMP was basically an extended remake of "The Changeling" story from the Original Series Star Trek, with "V'ger" in place of the "Nomad" probe... and that the special effects scenes of a miniscule Enterprise flying over a bazillion acres of weird "space probe" surface were just plain boring after the first or second viewing, as were the scenes of the characters all standing on the bridge set "slack jawed" at what they were "seeing outside"... The producers and directors made the SAME OLD MISTAKE of thinking that spending $1.98 on the script and $60 million dollars on the special effects is what makes a good sci-fi movie... WRONG! Just like since, with the advent of super-realistic CGI and motion capture technology, that nowdays the studios believe that regardless of how shallow, nonsensical, or ridiculous the story and characters are, if they spend a bazillion bucks on increasingly unbelievable CGI (because the effects are now SO busy you can't see it all, or simply defy the simple physics we all intrinsically understand about how things move and SHOULD look, regardless of "impossible technology" or "super powers"... that's why I don't like any of the comic book films). They think so long as the thing is overflowing with tons of CGI, it's gonna be great... WRONG!!! Had Star Trek II taken the same path as ST:TMP, it would likely have been the last film... (which is what a lot of people at the time thought-- including Nimoy who consented to Spock being killed off because he thought it was the last film). THANKFULLY they got a GOOD screen writer that realized what people wanted was a good CHARACTER DRIVEN STORY that just happened to be set in space 300 years in the future, and coupled that with the effects necessary to tell a good rollicking adventure story with a battle between ships like a submarine movie... IT WORKED because HE UNDERSTOOD THE PREMISE... JJAbrams and the studios DON'T understand the premise... Lots of folks criticized James Cameron's "Avatar" as basically being a retelling of "Dances with Wolves" in space on a planet populated by 10 foot tall blue half cat-half people... BUT, he "got it" that it needed to be a story with a point, with strong characters, and have a "moral to the story"... If "Avatar" had had a JJAbrams-type script, with a lot of hokey nonsense, shallow characters doing stupid stuff for no reason, and no flow or purpose to the story whatsoever, it would have been a COMPLETE FLOP, despite the tons of cutting-edge motion capture CGI done in that film... Later! OL J R 
__________________
The X-87B Cruise Basselope-- THE ultimate weapon in the arsenal of Homeland Defence and only $52 million per round! Last edited by elliott; 03-28-2017 at 09:02 AM. Reason: Keeping it family friendly
|
|
#23
03-27-2017, 09:53 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Yup, JJAbrams in a nutshell... Later! OL J R
__________________
The X-87B Cruise Basselope-- THE ultimate weapon in the arsenal of Homeland Defence and only $52 million per round! Last edited by elliott; 03-28-2017 at 09:05 AM.
|
|
#24
03-27-2017, 10:17 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hear! Hear!
[QUOTE=l
The producers and directors made the SAME OLD MISTAKE of thinking that spending $1.98 on the script and $60 million dollars on the special effects is what makes a good sci-fi movie... WRONG! [/QUOTE] Well said. Ever since the series of writer's strikes, the entertainment industry has tried to create without creative people. Abrams version of Trek was soul-less and without a point, save to make a buck and go for cheap laughs. Characters took the place of characters. We need writers writing...literate writers with some philosophical knowledge, some scientific acumen, and some skill in shaping events that draw the viewer in because the story is compelling and challenging; not just noisy and filled with movement. Too many films lookalike they are attempting to be antidotes for ADHD, or compensation for social media malaise. The endless string of remakes, reboots, and recasting efforts to satisfy some political point, makes for not only poor entertainment, but as well soul-less and mind-numbing drivel. See ya in the funny papers...
__________________
"One does not plow a field by turning it over in his mind..."
|
|
#25
03-28-2017, 05:36 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
It seems like the movies that are not already based on video games are mostly feature length advertisements for action figures and video games that will be based on the movie. You can even pick out respawn points and sequences where you will loose a bunch of health points. Available on PC, Mac, and your favorite console (unless PC, Mac, or your favorite console manufacturer buys the exclusive rights so you get cut out if you don't have a PC or a Mac or a console).
Then there is the inevitable set up for a franchise featuring endless sequels, prequels, sequels to prequels, and prequels to sequels that will follow. Oh yeah, have an interesting Anime that was very popular many many years ago? Let's make a live action movie of it and really screw up the premise and story. Why try to come up with something original we can call in. 
__________________
~Doug~ AC010505 EAMUS CATULI! Audere est Facere THFC 19**-20** R.I.P. it up, Tear it up, Have a Ball
|
| Google Adsense |
|
#26
03-28-2017, 08:34 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Live action 'Ghost in the shell' - no thanx, watch the original anime, better still, read Shirow's original manga (some pages for adults only !). Disney, again, seem set on live action releases of their animated films - they better not do a live action 'Little Mermaid' !!
SWvii was just a greatest hits from the original 3 SW films jammed together ! And how would a stormtrooper 'grunt' know that there was one vital area on the planet killer planet that would destroy it ? He was just a dude in white armour - and better taking on aliens in 'Attack the Block', which was made for probably 1000% less money and is so much a better film for that.
__________________
"It's all in the reflexes."
|
|
#27
03-28-2017, 01:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
First and foremost it is all business. They want to minimize risk of money loss so they copy the same "prooved" templates or made remakes, because original movie has funbase that, with high probability they calculate with, will spend some money and come to see it.
|
|
#28
03-28-2017, 05:49 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
But I still enjoy science fiction and do keep track of what is going on. Now, to the quote. There is that most likely circular question - are movies going there because people/society has gone there? Or are people/society going there because media is leading them there? Full disclosure: I have the mixed cynical and somewhat historically accurate attitude that societies are just like those pesky fractions in math class - they resolve to the lowest common denominator.
__________________
Screw the rivets, I'm building for atmosphere, not detail. later, F Scott W
|
|
#29
03-29-2017, 05:42 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I suppose as film companies are, first and foremost, businesses and are therefore only in existance to make profit that they want to make as much profit at the least effort, and remakes, reboots, reimagings are the easiest way to do it. The product - the film - is a means to an end. What annoys me, hence this thread, is how we, the consumer, is treated by (some)film companies -like sheep who will follow whatever they give us. This also happens with comic books - I now no longer buy DC graphic novels because DC have made further alterations to their multiverse, and I refuse to buy into the hype. This is why I never went to see Star Wars vii when it came out, nor do I own is on DVD. Having been stung with episodes 1-3 (Star Wars:The 'Ani' Years), I wasvery unwilling to take a bite of this new 'hook'.
__________________
"It's all in the reflexes."
|
|
#30
03-30-2017, 10:54 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
The X-87B Cruise Basselope-- THE ultimate weapon in the arsenal of Homeland Defence and only $52 million per round!
|
| Google Adsense |
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
