ladyofleithian (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
ladyofleithian) wrote2011-08-30 09:26 pm
ladyofleithian) wrote2011-08-30 09:26 pm
Entry tags:
Did you see this shit?
Me no like.
(OH NOOEEEEEEESSSSS, we are complaining about the great god Lucas!!!!)
Me no like.
(OH NOOEEEEEEESSSSS, we are complaining about the great god Lucas!!!!)
Hum... They should stay as they were, that's the point :/
ESPECIALLY OT
Extra material, outtakes, more special, those are cool, but changing the movie isn't (unless is Highlander II, because it sucks less in the 2003 director's cut, lol)
ESPECIALLY OT
Extra material, outtakes, more special, those are cool, but changing the movie isn't (unless is Highlander II, because it sucks less in the 2003 director's cut, lol)
I'll be honest, I like the changes I've seen so far.
Sigh. I wish he'd stop messing with the movies. That said they're his babies he can do what he wants. But I can also still watch my original VHS tapes that still work! ;-)
AGAIN? Wasn't the special edition bad enough? o0; (Star Wars)
Unfortunately, my VHS tapes, my daughter borrowed, and lost, and... *sob*
What the fuck????
Are those changes he added to the blu-ray release?
When they talk about minor changes that fix glitches as one might release a patch for a game, that I understand and am A OK with.
However, that shit ain't patching, that's a fucking retcon mod coming on the canon rape train. Greaaaaat...
Are those changes he added to the blu-ray release?
When they talk about minor changes that fix glitches as one might release a patch for a game, that I understand and am A OK with.
However, that shit ain't patching, that's a fucking retcon mod coming on the canon rape train. Greaaaaat...
First thoughts on the Blu-ray release? I don't care. At all. TOTAL apathy. I'm totally apathetic about Blu-ray period, actually. AFAIK the only difference between Blu-ray and DVD is OMG BETTER SOUND AND PICTURE OMFG! And, well...I've got no real problem with DVD. I've got no real problem with my non-special-edition, letterbox collector's OT on laserdisc. I can see that DVD (in general, not SW...) has an advantage over LD. They're smaller, take up less space, you can have bilingual tracks if the language of the movie and the language of your country isn't the same, you can see special features like the trailer, and you don't have to change disks mid-movie. They don't wear out like VHS and you don't have the risk of the VCR eating them... But I fail to see any difference between DVD and Blu-ray that matters to someone like me, who watches movies for the story, and doesn't really care how big your explosion is. So I won't be buying SW on Blu-ray and as long as there are still more DVDs than Blu-ray discs at the video store, I won't be buying a player either. So really, it doesn't affect me AT ALL.
I don't really remember the way Yoda originally looked in TPM. I haven't seen any of the PT since they left theaters. But I did watch that clip with the two side-by-side...and I fail to see how the CG Yoda is an improvement. I'm not even going to watch that ROTJ clip after reading the description.
It makes me sad that a whole generation (at least, those whose parents don't care enough to bring them up on the ORIGINAL OT despite the inconvenience) will never see the beautiful films that ANH, ESB, and ROTJ once were. But as far as me and my family...*shrug* I've got the laserdiscs and a couple of DVD backup copies, I'm good to go (and willing to copy for anyone else who wants them and doesn't mind unremovable Japanese subtitles...)
I don't really remember the way Yoda originally looked in TPM. I haven't seen any of the PT since they left theaters. But I did watch that clip with the two side-by-side...and I fail to see how the CG Yoda is an improvement. I'm not even going to watch that ROTJ clip after reading the description.
It makes me sad that a whole generation (at least, those whose parents don't care enough to bring them up on the ORIGINAL OT despite the inconvenience) will never see the beautiful films that ANH, ESB, and ROTJ once were. But as far as me and my family...*shrug* I've got the laserdiscs and a couple of DVD backup copies, I'm good to go (and willing to copy for anyone else who wants them and doesn't mind unremovable Japanese subtitles...)
IKR?
I always thought the Krayt dragon call was cool, they should leave that alone. And that part about Vader saying nooo, is it really necessary?
I always thought the Krayt dragon call was cool, they should leave that alone. And that part about Vader saying nooo, is it really necessary?
I guess it's a nice mirror to both instances in ROTS (Anakin saying it when Mace is about to kill Sidious in cold blood, and Vader screaming it after Sidious breaks the news about him "killing" Padme), but otherwise...no. Sometimes actions speak louder than words could ever do.
I figured as much, but to me it's overdoing it.
Did you read the comments?
They're bad, but I was cracking up. I guess people realy are tired of all the fiddling around with the movies.
Did you read the comments?
They're bad, but I was cracking up. I guess people realy are tired of all the fiddling around with the movies.
It makes me sad that a whole generation (at least, those whose parents don't care enough to bring them up on the ORIGINAL OT despite the inconvenience) will never see the beautiful films that ANH, ESB, and ROTJ once were.
And the films are *still* beautiful. Honestly, no Executive Meddling will change that. At all.
And while we're at it...*sighs* This isn't your fault; let's say I'm slightly exhausted, sleep-deprived, and I've just seen this mentality around the Internet a lot, not just STAR WARS, but other instances: not everything new is bad. CGI did not murder your family in their beds, CGI is not responsible for why most films suck nowadays, the new films do not suck (just look at BLACK SWAN, THE SOCIAL NETWORK, TRUE GRIT, TOY STORY 3, TRON LEGACY, and so on and so forth), and honestly, most of the films back then were So Bad It's Good at the very least. While we're at it, George Lucas does not deserve to die, Jake Lloyd does not deserve to become a heroin addict for playing Anakin Skywalker (especially since a lot of aspects of Anakin were *completely beyond his control*), and the prequels did *not* rape your childhood. Honestly, the only reason the prequels were hated in the first place is because "everything new sucks". Because that's the way of the Internet. If it's good, and it's new, they're guaranteed to bash it. After all, narrowminded idiocy is the way of the Internet. /end rant. I'm very sorry; I'm just not in a good mood today.
They can't stand anything that's new. That's why. That's why some people hated the LOTR movies, after all. (Other than the "They Changed X and Y and Z" people, who are...slightly more reasonable) #Sorry, grumpy.
Mostly due to lack of sleep.
That sucks. I'm sorry. *Hugs*
I don't think CGI is evil. I just think it's overused and misused. It's not the ONLY way to do EVERY special effect, and a lot of directors seem to see it that way. I love everything Pixar's ever done (that I've seen anyway). CGI just doesn't usually look real, and it doesn't usually look like animation cels either. Pixar didn't try to make it REPLACE either, they let CGI be what it is and built a new genre around it, and that's great.
I have no problem with the CGI in Lord of the Rings either...there were obviously decisions made to do some things with CGI and to do other things with more physical camera tricks, special props, etc. The CGI was chosen from among several options to do specific things, and it did them very well. The things it couldn't do so well (re-sizing hobbits for example) were done by other means.
The CGI in the PT and SE, for the most part, does not look real. And it was obviously SUPPOSED to. Toy Story is never supposed to look real. Woody never needs to interact with a human actor and appear to be an actual toy in his actual hand. A lot of the CGI in Star Wars WAS supposed to look real and was supposed to appear to be a part of the same physical universe as the actors, and I personally feel that a lot of it (ANH Jabba, anyone?) doesn't.
I didn't even see SW until I was 12, no one raped my childhood. And I feel bad for Jake Lloyd AND Hayden Christensen. Neither of them "destroyed" Star Wars, and they seem like nice enough people who did what they could with the material and the direction they were given.
I don't watch many sci-fi or action movies these days...and I probably am missing some good ones. The trailers mainly try to make them look bigger! faster! louder! and there may be some good storytelling there, but it's just hard to tell from the trailers where it might be found. There have definitely been some very good human dramas, historical films, etc put out in the last few years.
I have no problem with the CGI in Lord of the Rings either...there were obviously decisions made to do some things with CGI and to do other things with more physical camera tricks, special props, etc. The CGI was chosen from among several options to do specific things, and it did them very well. The things it couldn't do so well (re-sizing hobbits for example) were done by other means.
The CGI in the PT and SE, for the most part, does not look real. And it was obviously SUPPOSED to. Toy Story is never supposed to look real. Woody never needs to interact with a human actor and appear to be an actual toy in his actual hand. A lot of the CGI in Star Wars WAS supposed to look real and was supposed to appear to be a part of the same physical universe as the actors, and I personally feel that a lot of it (ANH Jabba, anyone?) doesn't.
I didn't even see SW until I was 12, no one raped my childhood. And I feel bad for Jake Lloyd AND Hayden Christensen. Neither of them "destroyed" Star Wars, and they seem like nice enough people who did what they could with the material and the direction they were given.
I don't watch many sci-fi or action movies these days...and I probably am missing some good ones. The trailers mainly try to make them look bigger! faster! louder! and there may be some good storytelling there, but it's just hard to tell from the trailers where it might be found. There have definitely been some very good human dramas, historical films, etc put out in the last few years.
I believe you. *Watery grin* And you make a good point about the CGI in STAR WARS, I guess it's just...*sighs* I'm not having a very good morning, if you get what I mean. That and...well, the PT-detractors off LJ...I just hate them. (Except Mr. Plinkett and Confused Matthew, but that's only because they actually *explain* what's bothering them, instead of just being...you know)
Thanks. Some of the things he did were okay, but others...boggled the mind. And that was on the first reboot. I'm dreading the second.
But why mess with something that works just fine as it is?
They are changing the Star Wars they loved as a kid.
To me Han always shoots first. Because that is the Star Wars that I watched.
The LOTR movies are fantastic, I love them. And Peter Jackson is better than Lucas (go complain about that, bashers of disappointed Star Wars fans).
But I totally understand why some fans never why they never wanted the movies, because nothing replaces the theater of one's own imagination.
Just because something is new doesn' mean it's good or needs to be done.
They are changing the Star Wars they loved as a kid.
To me Han always shoots first. Because that is the Star Wars that I watched.
The LOTR movies are fantastic, I love them. And Peter Jackson is better than Lucas (go complain about that, bashers of disappointed Star Wars fans).
But I totally understand why some fans never why they never wanted the movies, because nothing replaces the theater of one's own imagination.
Just because something is new doesn' mean it's good or needs to be done.
Srsly.
W.
T.
F.
...
Why.
Am.
I.
Still.
Doing.
This.
...
Gaaaahhh
W.
T.
F.
...
Why.
Am.
I.
Still.
Doing.
This.
...
Gaaaahhh
Warning: Rant. Not directed at you in particular -- just some general rage I want to get out.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com
2011-08-31 06:30 pm (UTC)(link)
Maybe Lucas just wasn't happy with it. It happens. Honestly, the only reasons one would hate the Special Editions is because "George Lucas Raped My Childhood" (i.e. I can't accept change in any way, shape or form because I'm an entitled brat who has to resort to rape metaphors because my vocabulary's as limited as Biff Tannen's *). And I frankly don't give a shit about "who shot first". It's just a scene. There are things far more worth your time than "who shot first".
On a lighter note, I definitely agree regarding Peter Jackson. But regarding the fans -- some of them have good reasons they don't like the movies (elizabeth_hoot, for example), but I think the other more hardcore fans mostly wanted Peter and co. kissing their asses instead of a good balance of adaptation-to-workable-on-screen ratio. (And that sounded better in my head)
Just because something is new doesn' mean it's good or needs to be done.
And just because it's old doesn't mean it's good either. A lot of the "cult classics" back then were So Bad It's Good at best. If you're going to criticize something new (looking at you, IMDB) at least criticize it for a reason outside, say, "Leonardo DiCaprio is a queer who can't act" (I'm Not Making This Up). Or -- looking at you, bloodrunsclear -- "Sam Worthington is a worthless pretty boy who can't act." Neither of these are true.
(I'm sorry, eldritch; I'm just slightly irritable today)
* I'm not referring to you, BTW -- I'm mostly referring to the idiots off LJ.
On a lighter note, I definitely agree regarding Peter Jackson. But regarding the fans -- some of them have good reasons they don't like the movies (elizabeth_hoot, for example), but I think the other more hardcore fans mostly wanted Peter and co. kissing their asses instead of a good balance of adaptation-to-workable-on-screen ratio. (And that sounded better in my head)
Just because something is new doesn' mean it's good or needs to be done.
And just because it's old doesn't mean it's good either. A lot of the "cult classics" back then were So Bad It's Good at best. If you're going to criticize something new (looking at you, IMDB) at least criticize it for a reason outside, say, "Leonardo DiCaprio is a queer who can't act" (I'm Not Making This Up). Or -- looking at you, bloodrunsclear -- "Sam Worthington is a worthless pretty boy who can't act." Neither of these are true.
(I'm sorry, eldritch; I'm just slightly irritable today)
* I'm not referring to you, BTW -- I'm mostly referring to the idiots off LJ.
You're welcome. :)
And very good points, BTW.
And very good points, BTW.
Page 1 of 3