Well the would-be life coaches are here to give an elementary lesson on developmentally appropriate enthusiasms. Great.
I struggle to understand those who can't get over the fact that the game they have invested themselves in is both shit and tanking and keep going on about the "haters" as if it is their fault.
Well the would-be life coaches are here to give an elementary lesson on developmentally appropriate enthusiasms. Great.
I struggle to understand those who can't get over the fact that the game they have invested themselves in is both shit and tanking and keep going on about the "haters" as if it is their fault.
More opinion not based in fact from you it seems. It's kinda pathetic that some haters, yourself included, have such time to invest in a forum in a game they are not interested in. Oh and I will laugh at you if you list x-fire as proof.
Well the would-be life coaches are here to give an elementary lesson on developmentally appropriate enthusiasms. Great.
I struggle to understand those who can't get over the fact that the game they have invested themselves in is both shit and tanking and keep going on about the "haters" as if it is their fault.
More opinion not based in fact from you it seems. It's kinda pathetic that some haters, yourself included, have such time to invest in a forum in a game they are not interested in. Oh and I will laugh at you if you list x-fire as proof.
Nope, that's pure opinion on my part. Feel free to laugh, the water will drown out the sound when the prow gets submerged.
The original trilogy changed the way we think about futuristic sci-fi. Prior to those movies, everything in the genre was clean and perfect to a point. You didn't see broken down space ships or ones that wouldn't start. It's this specific atmosphere that gave those movies their soul and exactly what's lacked ever since. As much as Lucas laments the technical limitations of that time, it gave the pictures more realism.
I honestly never looked at the originals as kids movies where as the new ones were obviously designed for his own kids. You don't make movies like this written for kids, it never works. If you look at films from back then with kids in it, they were written for adults but kids understood and loved them. I'm not sure what's happened in the last 35 years, but it's rare for a kids movie these days to be written well and written for adults. For all the technology we have, maybe we've gotten stupider?
What we've learned from both the new films and TOR is that an unlimited budget cannot make up for terrible writing and poor decisions from nothing but yes men.
The original trilogy changed the way we think about futuristic sci-fi. Prior to those movies, everything in the genre was clean and perfect to a point. You didn't see broken down space ships or ones that wouldn't start. It's this specific atmosphere that gave those movies their soul and exactly what's lacked ever since. As much as Lucas laments the technical limitations of that time, it gave the pictures more realism.
I honestly never looked at the originals as kids movies where as the new ones were obviously designed for his own kids. You don't make movies like this written for kids, it never works. If you look at films from back then with kids in it, they were written for adults but kids understood and loved them. I'm not sure what's happened in the last 35 years, but it's rare for a kids movie these days to be written well and written for adults. For all the technology we have, maybe we've gotten stupider?
What we've learned from both the new films and TOR is that an unlimited budget cannot make up for terrible writing and poor decisions from nothing but yes men.
At the end of the day times change; not sure when but invariably marketing is such a dominant force these days that they know during the initial planning stage whether or not something can be viable...
From my perspective the initial Star Wars was a "B" movie with cookie cutter archetypes at best; but because it felt tangible/real and showed the flaws any society displays, so it captured our attention. Add in the fact that only 5-10 movies came out per year that's all you got. So copying an idea took too much time and other studios coudln't compete like today.
Look at movies like:
Avatar - Dances with Wolves or Disney's Atlantis with 3D tricks.
Hunger Games: Battle Royale (A complete copy) or Running Man.
Studios can do more even TV can be better too but why? You'll still go see crap because what's the alternative. Look at Madden, it remained unchanged from the 90' until 2K changed the way it should look. Then EA removed the competition in 2006 and what's changed since then? Not much, but it still sells well. Personally I don't know why EA even puts out a new game, just update the rosters and bypass the retailers.
As a side opinion, if I were Prowse I'd be upset that Lucas removed him the final scene and put in Hayden Christiansan. I mean comeon, He wears the suit for 5 seconds and gets the scene? Just another string of bad decisions...
Movies came out slower back then, yes, but they were original and had story depth. Today we see nothing but CGI replace writers for movie content.
I was a teen when Star wars came out, watched star trek on prime time growing up. At the time these were concept shattering ideas that challenged convential thinking. Do you know how shocked my parents were when Ohura kissed Kirk that very first time? It took them weeks to get over it. What do we see coming out today, retreads. John Carter anyone? Avengers? seriously? The problem is corporation, they are incompetent play it safe entities, that only want established ideas to invest in. If these same companies like EA were around during the Ford Motor days, they would have bought him out and put horses back in front of the Model A.
Great post, the amount of Star Wars fans living in a freaking childhood dream world is amazing the original films are not even that good comapared to a lot of film that were produced in the 70's and 80's. I never will understand the fanaticism people have for shoddy entertainment and I watched Star Wars in the cinema in 1977 but find it really not a good film compared to 100's of others, George Lucas is not a great director. The Indian Jones films blow the Star Wars films into the weeds for quality and thats just for starters.
I've got to step in here.. While you're right that some of these fan reactions can get a bit over the top. Star Wars was great to many for one reason, characters. While some performances were campy, (luke, Leia) some were very memorable. Much like Firefly IMO.
There was a level of serious talent portrayed in the original trilogy that was missing in the prequels. Namely actors the caliber of Peter Cushing, Alec Guiness, Harrison Ford, David Prowse/J.E. Jones, Henson/OZ. Even with medicore directing, these actors and their performance demanded your attention when they were on screen. Couple that with the exotic nature of the OG's you have the makings for a lasting franchise sure to gain the attention of many fans.
OH! you mean like Liam Neeson, Terence Stamp, Samual L Jackson, Natalie Portman, Ewan McGregor, Keira Knightly, Christopher Lee, Ian McDiarmid.... Nah! there wasn't any actor of calibre in the prequels.
Star Wars was a phenomenom because it was original for its time and as a kid of only 7 it was the mutts nuts to me and my friends, but I/we have grown up and see it for what it is a fun but simplistic kids action film. The great legacy (see what I did there ) that George Lucas has given us is the universe it is set in and thats something to be thankful for for sure, but we should never think that it is any more than that, this is not a David Lean, Alfred Hitchcock, David Lynch level of film making here. Though my favorite thing in these debates is the irony is that Star wars is only a cash cow to George Lucas now, people seemingly forget (or were never there) it was the film that started it all back in 1977 with the mass producing and marketing of merchandise on a scale never seen before.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Movies came out slower back then, yes, but they were original and had story depth. Today we see nothing but CGI replace writers for movie content.
I was a teen when Star wars came out, watched star trek on prime time growing up. At the time these were concept shattering ideas that challenged convential thinking. Do you know how shocked my parents were when Ohura kissed Kirk that very first time? It took them weeks to get over it. What do we see coming out today, retreads. John Carter anyone? Avengers? seriously? The problem is corporation, they are incompetent play it safe entities, that only want established ideas to invest in. If these same companies like EA were around during the Ford Motor days, they would have bought him out and put horses back in front of the Model A.
I think that stuff is all so diluted now because access is instant and it's everywhere. I remember getting to see pictures from Empire Strikes back in a book at the library and I was excited to see it again because I hadn't seen it since I saw the movie in the theatre. Today it's different.
Great post, the amount of Star Wars fans living in a freaking childhood dream world is amazing the original films are not even that good comapared to a lot of film that were produced in the 70's and 80's. I never will understand the fanaticism people have for shoddy entertainment and I watched Star Wars in the cinema in 1977 but find it really not a good film compared to 100's of others, George Lucas is not a great director. The Indian Jones films blow the Star Wars films into the weeds for quality and thats just for starters.
I've got to step in here.. While you're right that some of these fan reactions can get a bit over the top. Star Wars was great to many for one reason, characters. While some performances were campy, (luke, Leia) some were very memorable. Much like Firefly IMO.
There was a level of serious talent portrayed in the original trilogy that was missing in the prequels. Namely actors the caliber of Peter Cushing, Alec Guiness, Harrison Ford, David Prowse/J.E. Jones, Henson/OZ. Even with medicore directing, these actors and their performance demanded your attention when they were on screen. Couple that with the exotic nature of the OG's you have the makings for a lasting franchise sure to gain the attention of many fans.
OH! you mean like Liam Neeson, Terence Stamp, Samual L Jackson, Natalie Portman, Ewan McGregor, Keira Knightly, Christopher Lee, Ian McDiarmid.... Nah! there wasn't any actor of calibre in the prequels.
Star Wars was a phenomenom because it was original for its time and as a kid of only 7 it was the mutts nuts to me and my friends, but I/we have grown up and see it for what it is a fun but simplistic kids action film. The great legacy (see what I did there ) that George Lucas has given us is the universe it is set in and thats something to be thankful for for sure, but we should never think that it is any more than that, this is not a David Lean, Alfred Hitchcock, David Lynch level of film making here. Though my favorite thing in these debates is the irony is that Star wars is only a cash cow to George Lucas now, people seemingly forget (or were never there) it was the film that started it all back in 1977 with the mass producing and marketing of merchandise on a scale never seen before.
This. I was a kid when the original trilogy came out. I thought it was the best thing ever until I grew up and saw fillms that didn't need music and special effects to tell a good story. Now when I go back to watch those old films, they seem bland and so predictable. George Lucas was NEVER a good writer and in my opinion an average director. I liken him to Gene Rodenberry, someone who had a great idea and got way too much credit for the work that others brought to it. In my view his contemporaries(Coppola,Dipalma,Speilberg,Scorceses) were far better.
Movies came out slower back then, yes, but they were original and had story depth. Today we see nothing but CGI replace writers for movie content.
I was a teen when Star wars came out, watched star trek on prime time growing up. At the time these were concept shattering ideas that challenged convential thinking. Do you know how shocked my parents were when Ohura kissed Kirk that very first time? It took them weeks to get over it. What do we see coming out today, retreads. John Carter anyone? Avengers? seriously? The problem is corporation, they are incompetent play it safe entities, that only want established ideas to invest in. If these same companies like EA were around during the Ford Motor days, they would have bought him out and put horses back in front of the Model A.
I think that stuff is all so diluted now because access is instant and it's everywhere. I remember getting to see pictures from Empire Strikes back in a book at the library and I was excited to see it again because I hadn't seen it since I saw the movie in the theatre. Today it's different.
It's funny you mention Empire Strikes back.Star Wars A new Hope was only a roll out success. I saw it the first night and there werent any lines, sure it was packed, but it wasn't until a few weeks later that the lines to the theater began. But when Empire came out, I remember having to stand in line to get the tickets the day before, and still waited hours on a movie line. The best part was that the movie was better than expected. The third was not so much. But it was the wait between movies that built up anticipation. Instant gratification is a let down. It also forces creative thinking to be rushed and artificial.
Everything now is based on making bucks for the company that funds it. Damn the content. To be honest, it's how we reward vernture capital now versus pre-1980. I make twice the money I earn investing than I do with my two companies that actually make things. A resort RV park and a small tanning and cosmetic export company. Our tax code and monetary system rewards short term investment and punishes long term creative thinking.
Movies came out slower back then, yes, but they were original and had story depth. Today we see nothing but CGI replace writers for movie content.
I was a teen when Star wars came out, watched star trek on prime time growing up. At the time these were concept shattering ideas that challenged convential thinking. Do you know how shocked my parents were when Ohura kissed Kirk that very first time? It took them weeks to get over it. What do we see coming out today, retreads. John Carter anyone? Avengers? seriously? The problem is corporation, they are incompetent play it safe entities, that only want established ideas to invest in. If these same companies like EA were around during the Ford Motor days, they would have bought him out and put horses back in front of the Model A.
I think that stuff is all so diluted now because access is instant and it's everywhere. I remember getting to see pictures from Empire Strikes back in a book at the library and I was excited to see it again because I hadn't seen it since I saw the movie in the theatre. Today it's different.
It's funny you mention Empire Strikes back.Star Wars A new Hope was only a roll out success. I saw it the first night and there werent any lines, sure it was packed, but it wasn't until a few weeks later that the lines to the theater began. But when Empire came out, I remember having to stand in line to get the tickets the day before, and still waited hours on a movie line. The best part was that the movie was better than expected. The third was not so much. But it was the wait between movies that built up anticipation. Instant gratification is a let down. It also forces creative thinking to be rushed and artificial.
Everything now is based on making bucks for the company that funds it. Damn the content. To be honest, it's how we reward vernture capital now versus pre-1980. I make twice the money I earn investing than I do with my two companies that actually make things. A resort RV park and a small tanning and cosmetic export company. Our tax code and monetary system rewards short term investment and punishes long term creative thinking.
I find this attitude hilarious and slightly sad really as its seems to be quite common amongst us 30/40 somethings. Remember when your Dad said the same things about the things you found interesting in your teens? I sure do and I'm never turning into my cynical old man I can assure the world. The best way to some this is up is with a very famous and great bands name.... spoken in your Dads voice... The Who?
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
I've got to step in here.. While you're right that some of these fan reactions can get a bit over the top. Star Wars was great to many for one reason, characters. While some performances were campy, (luke, Leia) some were very memorable. Much like Firefly IMO.
There was a level of serious talent portrayed in the original trilogy that was missing in the prequels. Namely actors the caliber of Peter Cushing, Alec Guiness, Harrison Ford, David Prowse/J.E. Jones, Henson/OZ. Even with medicore directing, these actors and their performance demanded your attention when they were on screen. Couple that with the exotic nature of the OG's you have the makings for a lasting franchise sure to gain the attention of many fans.
OH! you mean like Liam Neeson, Terence Stamp, Samual L Jackson, Natalie Portman, Ewan McGregor, Keira Knightly, Christopher Lee, Ian McDiarmid.... Nah! there wasn't any actor of calibre in the prequels.
Aside from Lee (who wasn't given nearly enough screen time), I don't count the actors you've mentioned to be of the calibre of the likes of Cushing and Guiness in the least bit. Even if they may be good actors/actresses.
The only one who may come close is Jackson, but that is more based on the persona of the bad ass.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The original trilogy changed the way we think about futuristic sci-fi. Prior to those movies, everything in the genre was clean and perfect to a point. You didn't see broken down space ships or ones that wouldn't start. It's this specific atmosphere that gave those movies their soul and exactly what's lacked ever since. As much as Lucas laments the technical limitations of that time, it gave the pictures more realism.
I honestly never looked at the originals as kids movies where as the new ones were obviously designed for his own kids. You don't make movies like this written for kids, it never works. If you look at films from back then with kids in it, they were written for adults but kids understood and loved them. I'm not sure what's happened in the last 35 years, but it's rare for a kids movie these days to be written well and written for adults. For all the technology we have, maybe we've gotten stupider?
What we've learned from both the new films and TOR is that an unlimited budget cannot make up for terrible writing and poor decisions from nothing but yes men.
I have to disagree, futuristic SF was certainly not clean and perfect before Star Wars. There was plenty of science fiction realism around long before Star Wars, even from the 70s themselves I can think of gritty SF like A Clockwork Orange, Escape from the Planet of the Apes, Omega Man, Silent Running in 1973 (a very realistic and dirty ship that was), Death Race 2000, Rollerball... etc...
Probably the dirtiest ship of all run by a bunch of hippies... Dark Star.
Ok so 2001 had nice clean ships that worked, but also a bonkers computer.
It did maintain realism but if anything Star Wars also moved away from the usual dystopian SF of the 70s. It was newish because it was high adventure and space opera as opposed to gloomy near future disaster movie set on Earth. That's what caught the public imagination, pure escapism from depressing films about annihilation and a grim future world. The biggest draw was that it was set in 'A long time ago in a galaxy far far away' and not 'in your country in a few years time'.
I've got to step in here.. While you're right that some of these fan reactions can get a bit over the top. Star Wars was great to many for one reason, characters. While some performances were campy, (luke, Leia) some were very memorable. Much like Firefly IMO.
There was a level of serious talent portrayed in the original trilogy that was missing in the prequels. Namely actors the caliber of Peter Cushing, Alec Guiness, Harrison Ford, David Prowse/J.E. Jones, Henson/OZ. Even with medicore directing, these actors and their performance demanded your attention when they were on screen. Couple that with the exotic nature of the OG's you have the makings for a lasting franchise sure to gain the attention of many fans.
OH! you mean like Liam Neeson, Terence Stamp, Samual L Jackson, Natalie Portman, Ewan McGregor, Keira Knightly, Christopher Lee, Ian McDiarmid.... Nah! there wasn't any actor of calibre in the prequels.
Aside from Lee (who wasn't given nearly enough screen time), I don't count the actors you've mentioned to be of the calibre of the likes of Cushing and Guiness in the least bit. Even if they may be good actors/actresses.
The only one who may come close is Jackson, but that is more based on the persona of the bad ass.
Peter Cushing was a B movie actor for most of his career and never really made it in mainstream films and Alec Guiness hated playing Obi-Wan-Kenobi and it shows in the films hes on automatic pilot through the 20 minutes he's in one film. Watch Guiness in Kind Hearts and Coronets, Bridge Over The River Kwai, The Lady Killers to see him enjoying and putting his soul into roles of depth and quality.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Pic on the left shows a creative guy working on a project for the love of it and not knowing whether it had a market or not.
Pic on the right shows a guy who thinks fancy digital effects are a substitute for soul, and the green-screen also links to the colour of money...
How it pertains to SW:TOR....well if the pic on the right was from 2002 we could all refer to 'Attack of the clones' and pat ourselfves on the back for encapsulating the anti-TOR argument so succinctly.
But as others have said, Lucas is essentially tuned out (apart from endless, needless retweaks of his films for each release on a new medium), and IMO the fans care more about the 'integrity' of the Star Wars universe than he does. Fans are the ones who are stricter lore police than Lucas Arts, and hold every product bearing the name to impossibly high standards.
I listened to a friend rant for a solid hour about the legacy abilities in SW:TOR and how they are 'lore-breaking' and I just shrugged and said: "1. Midichlorians 2. I bet Lucas Arts signed off on it. If they don't care, why should you?"
I've got to step in here.. While you're right that some of these fan reactions can get a bit over the top. Star Wars was great to many for one reason, characters. While some performances were campy, (luke, Leia) some were very memorable. Much like Firefly IMO.
There was a level of serious talent portrayed in the original trilogy that was missing in the prequels. Namely actors the caliber of Peter Cushing, Alec Guiness, Harrison Ford, David Prowse/J.E. Jones, Henson/OZ. Even with medicore directing, these actors and their performance demanded your attention when they were on screen. Couple that with the exotic nature of the OG's you have the makings for a lasting franchise sure to gain the attention of many fans.
Actors the calibre of Dave Prowse? I'm guessing you aren't from the UK Distopia otherwise you would know that the biggest thing Dave Prowse did before SW was the Green Cross Code Man adverts on TV. I'm sorry but as soon as you placed his name alongside Guiness et al. your argument made no sense to me.
In fact A New Hope is packed full of British TV acting talent, and to be honest they were the best thing in the film, actors like Don Henderson, Jeremy Sindon and Denis Lawson. All of those people had been performing on stage and screen for a long time and brought their gravitas to the film.
I've got to step in here.. While you're right that some of these fan reactions can get a bit over the top. Star Wars was great to many for one reason, characters. While some performances were campy, (luke, Leia) some were very memorable. Much like Firefly IMO.
There was a level of serious talent portrayed in the original trilogy that was missing in the prequels. Namely actors the caliber of Peter Cushing, Alec Guiness, Harrison Ford, David Prowse/J.E. Jones, Henson/OZ. Even with medicore directing, these actors and their performance demanded your attention when they were on screen. Couple that with the exotic nature of the OG's you have the makings for a lasting franchise sure to gain the attention of many fans.
Actors the calibre of Dave Prowse? I'm guessing you aren't from the UK Distopia otherwise you would know that the biggest thing Dave Prowse did before SW was the Green Cross Code Man adverts on TV. I'm sorry but as soon as you placed his name alongside Guiness et al. your argument made no sense to me.
HE was just a body in Star Wars, but the presense of Vader was something that awed a lot of people.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I've got to step in here.. While you're right that some of these fan reactions can get a bit over the top. Star Wars was great to many for one reason, characters. While some performances were campy, (luke, Leia) some were very memorable. Much like Firefly IMO.
There was a level of serious talent portrayed in the original trilogy that was missing in the prequels. Namely actors the caliber of Peter Cushing, Alec Guiness, Harrison Ford, David Prowse/J.E. Jones, Henson/OZ. Even with medicore directing, these actors and their performance demanded your attention when they were on screen. Couple that with the exotic nature of the OG's you have the makings for a lasting franchise sure to gain the attention of many fans.
Actors the calibre of Dave Prowse? I'm guessing you aren't from the UK Distopia otherwise you would know that the biggest thing Dave Prowse did before SW was the Green Cross Code Man adverts on TV. I'm sorry but as soon as you placed his name alongside Guiness et al. your argument made no sense to me.
David Prowse was an excellent Frankenstein's Monster in that one movie. And a good...well..whatever he was in "A Clockwork Orange"..lol
2: Guys, Star Wars was a kids film in 1977 and was still a kids film in 2005 but you are no longer a kid so see it with adult eyes and in the case of most Star Wars fans cynical eyes. All I can say is when the generation that was first exposed to the modern prequels grow up they'll be bemoaning the same thing as youylot of grumpy old men. Just get over it, things chance thats a fact of life.
Yep, and in 25 generations people will be drooling on their lazyboys while "bating" during commercial breaks of "Ow My Balls".
I've got to step in here.. While you're right that some of these fan reactions can get a bit over the top. Star Wars was great to many for one reason, characters. While some performances were campy, (luke, Leia) some were very memorable. Much like Firefly IMO.
There was a level of serious talent portrayed in the original trilogy that was missing in the prequels. Namely actors the caliber of Peter Cushing, Alec Guiness, Harrison Ford, David Prowse/J.E. Jones, Henson/OZ. Even with medicore directing, these actors and their performance demanded your attention when they were on screen. Couple that with the exotic nature of the OG's you have the makings for a lasting franchise sure to gain the attention of many fans.
Actors the calibre of Dave Prowse? I'm guessing you aren't from the UK Distopia otherwise you would know that the biggest thing Dave Prowse did before SW was the Green Cross Code Man adverts on TV. I'm sorry but as soon as you placed his name alongside Guiness et al. your argument made no sense to me.
David Prowse was an excellent Frankenstein's Monster in that one movie. And a good...well..whatever he was in "A Clockwork Orange"..lol
I'd forgotten his Clockwork Orange role. He was the bodyguard of that guy the Droogs beat up I think.
Aside from Lee (who wasn't given nearly enough screen time), I don't count the actors you've mentioned to be of the calibre of the likes of Cushing and Guiness in the least bit. Even if they may be good actors/actresses.
The only one who may come close is Jackson, but that is more based on the persona of the bad ass.
Peter Cushing was a B movie actor for most of his career and never really made it in mainstream films and Alec Guiness hated playing Obi-Wan-Kenobi and it shows in the films hes on automatic pilot through the 20 minutes he's in one film. Watch Guiness in Kind Hearts and Coronets, Bridge Over The River Kwai, The Lady Killers to see him enjoying and putting his soul into roles of depth and quality.
Yeah anyone that tries to put Peter Cushing on the same plane as universally acclaimed actors such as Liam Neisan, Natalie Portman, Ewan McGregor and Samual L Jackson lose all credibility with me as far as opinion on actors go. Far as Christopher Lee goes, I like him as a n actor, but I HATED his character on Star Wars. I wish Lucas hadn't killed Darth Maul off so early. He was clearly the better villian.
And did someone mention David Prowse? Did you actually HEAR his dialogue in the first Star Wars movie? It was horrible. There's a reason the guy made his living playing monsters and why lucas overdubbed his voice with James Earl Jones. To put him in the same company as Alec Guiness is just laughable.
I've got to step in here.. While you're right that some of these fan reactions can get a bit over the top. Star Wars was great to many for one reason, characters. While some performances were campy, (luke, Leia) some were very memorable. Much like Firefly IMO.
There was a level of serious talent portrayed in the original trilogy that was missing in the prequels. Namely actors the caliber of Peter Cushing, Alec Guiness, Harrison Ford, David Prowse/J.E. Jones, Henson/OZ. Even with medicore directing, these actors and their performance demanded your attention when they were on screen. Couple that with the exotic nature of the OG's you have the makings for a lasting franchise sure to gain the attention of many fans.
Actors the calibre of Dave Prowse? I'm guessing you aren't from the UK Distopia otherwise you would know that the biggest thing Dave Prowse did before SW was the Green Cross Code Man adverts on TV. I'm sorry but as soon as you placed his name alongside Guiness et al. your argument made no sense to me.
David Prowse was an excellent Frankenstein's Monster in that one movie. And a good...well..whatever he was in "A Clockwork Orange"..lol
I'd forgotten his Clockwork Orange role. He was the bodyguard of that guy the Droogs beat up I think.
Yes. He was dressed like an extra in a Village People video. I thought he was in Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger too but that was Peter Mayhew in the golden Minoton suit.
Aside from Lee (who wasn't given nearly enough screen time), I don't count the actors you've mentioned to be of the calibre of the likes of Cushing and Guiness in the least bit. Even if they may be good actors/actresses.
The only one who may come close is Jackson, but that is more based on the persona of the bad ass.
Peter Cushing was a B movie actor for most of his career and never really made it in mainstream films and Alec Guiness hated playing Obi-Wan-Kenobi and it shows in the films hes on automatic pilot through the 20 minutes he's in one film. Watch Guiness in Kind Hearts and Coronets, Bridge Over The River Kwai, The Lady Killers to see him enjoying and putting his soul into roles of depth and quality.
Yeah anyone that tries to put Peter Cushing on the same plane as universally acclaimed actors such as Liam Neisan, Natalie Portman, Ewan McGregor and Samual L Jackson lose all credibility with me as far as opinion on actors go. Far as Christopher Lee goes, I like him as a n actor, but I HATED his character on Star Wars. I wish Lucas hadn't killed Darth Maul off so early. He was clearly the better villian.
And did someone mention David Prowse? Did you actually HEAR his dialogue in the first Star Wars movie? It was horrible. There's a reason the guy made his living playing monsters and why lucas overdubbed his voice with James Earl Jones. To put him in the same company as Alec Guiness is just laughable.
You can have your opinion, I'll keep mine, and I won't even bring your credibility into question.. Cheers.
The only reason I mentioned Prowse was because he supplied the body for the role, I have no idea what else he has even done, I was talking about the characters in the movie, not the actors themselves.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
They are different mediums. I don't think the green screen is any less representative of hard work. CGI modeling has to be just as meticulous as the original modeling. And I don't think any less work went into designing these models.
The difference is that with the original story, Lucas was hungry with a dream and a story to tell. now he's fat and happy with a story to sell.
I never bought into the "Many truthes we cling to" crap excuse Lucas wrote Guinnes's script. It was garbage. Lucas turned that ship in mid course and set a new direction and it was obvious. He thought he's get a bigger impact with the "I am your father" bomb than "I killed your father". He changed his original story and forever changed the course of StarWars and While I liked ESB, it totally set the stage for the future of the dranchise and it blew. RotJ was crap as was the entire prequel trilogy.
Comments
I struggle to understand those who can't get over the fact that the game they have invested themselves in is both shit and tanking and keep going on about the "haters" as if it is their fault.More opinion not based in fact from you it seems. It's kinda pathetic that some haters, yourself included, have such time to invest in a forum in a game they are not interested in. Oh and I will laugh at you if you list x-fire as proof.
I struggle to understand those who can't get over the fact that the game they have invested themselves in is both shit and tanking and keep going on about the "haters" as if it is their fault.More opinion not based in fact from you it seems. It's kinda pathetic that some haters, yourself included, have such time to invest in a forum in a game they are not interested in. Oh and I will laugh at you if you list x-fire as proof.
Nope, that's pure opinion on my part. Feel free to laugh, the water will drown out the sound when the prow gets submerged.The original trilogy changed the way we think about futuristic sci-fi. Prior to those movies, everything in the genre was clean and perfect to a point. You didn't see broken down space ships or ones that wouldn't start. It's this specific atmosphere that gave those movies their soul and exactly what's lacked ever since. As much as Lucas laments the technical limitations of that time, it gave the pictures more realism.
I honestly never looked at the originals as kids movies where as the new ones were obviously designed for his own kids. You don't make movies like this written for kids, it never works. If you look at films from back then with kids in it, they were written for adults but kids understood and loved them. I'm not sure what's happened in the last 35 years, but it's rare for a kids movie these days to be written well and written for adults. For all the technology we have, maybe we've gotten stupider?
What we've learned from both the new films and TOR is that an unlimited budget cannot make up for terrible writing and poor decisions from nothing but yes men.
+1 This man gets it.
At the end of the day times change; not sure when but invariably marketing is such a dominant force these days that they know during the initial planning stage whether or not something can be viable...
From my perspective the initial Star Wars was a "B" movie with cookie cutter archetypes at best; but because it felt tangible/real and showed the flaws any society displays, so it captured our attention. Add in the fact that only 5-10 movies came out per year that's all you got. So copying an idea took too much time and other studios coudln't compete like today.
Look at movies like:
Avatar - Dances with Wolves or Disney's Atlantis with 3D tricks.
Hunger Games: Battle Royale (A complete copy) or Running Man.
Studios can do more even TV can be better too but why? You'll still go see crap because what's the alternative. Look at Madden, it remained unchanged from the 90' until 2K changed the way it should look. Then EA removed the competition in 2006 and what's changed since then? Not much, but it still sells well. Personally I don't know why EA even puts out a new game, just update the rosters and bypass the retailers.
As a side opinion, if I were Prowse I'd be upset that Lucas removed him the final scene and put in Hayden Christiansan. I mean comeon, He wears the suit for 5 seconds and gets the scene? Just another string of bad decisions...
Movies came out slower back then, yes, but they were original and had story depth. Today we see nothing but CGI replace writers for movie content.
I was a teen when Star wars came out, watched star trek on prime time growing up. At the time these were concept shattering ideas that challenged convential thinking. Do you know how shocked my parents were when Ohura kissed Kirk that very first time? It took them weeks to get over it. What do we see coming out today, retreads. John Carter anyone? Avengers? seriously? The problem is corporation, they are incompetent play it safe entities, that only want established ideas to invest in. If these same companies like EA were around during the Ford Motor days, they would have bought him out and put horses back in front of the Model A.
OH! you mean like Liam Neeson, Terence Stamp, Samual L Jackson, Natalie Portman, Ewan McGregor, Keira Knightly, Christopher Lee, Ian McDiarmid.... Nah! there wasn't any actor of calibre in the prequels.
Star Wars was a phenomenom because it was original for its time and as a kid of only 7 it was the mutts nuts to me and my friends, but I/we have grown up and see it for what it is a fun but simplistic kids action film. The great legacy (see what I did there
) that George Lucas has given us is the universe it is set in and thats something to be thankful for for sure, but we should never think that it is any more than that, this is not a David Lean, Alfred Hitchcock, David Lynch level of film making here. Though my favorite thing in these debates is the irony is that Star wars is only a cash cow to George Lucas now, people seemingly forget (or were never there) it was the film that started it all back in 1977 with the mass producing and marketing of merchandise on a scale never seen before.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
I think that stuff is all so diluted now because access is instant and it's everywhere. I remember getting to see pictures from Empire Strikes back in a book at the library and I was excited to see it again because I hadn't seen it since I saw the movie in the theatre. Today it's different.
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
This. I was a kid when the original trilogy came out. I thought it was the best thing ever until I grew up and saw fillms that didn't need music and special effects to tell a good story. Now when I go back to watch those old films, they seem bland and so predictable. George Lucas was NEVER a good writer and in my opinion an average director. I liken him to Gene Rodenberry, someone who had a great idea and got way too much credit for the work that others brought to it. In my view his contemporaries(Coppola,Dipalma,Speilberg,Scorceses) were far better.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
It's funny you mention Empire Strikes back.Star Wars A new Hope was only a roll out success. I saw it the first night and there werent any lines, sure it was packed, but it wasn't until a few weeks later that the lines to the theater began. But when Empire came out, I remember having to stand in line to get the tickets the day before, and still waited hours on a movie line. The best part was that the movie was better than expected. The third was not so much. But it was the wait between movies that built up anticipation. Instant gratification is a let down. It also forces creative thinking to be rushed and artificial.
Everything now is based on making bucks for the company that funds it. Damn the content. To be honest, it's how we reward vernture capital now versus pre-1980. I make twice the money I earn investing than I do with my two companies that actually make things. A resort RV park and a small tanning and cosmetic export company. Our tax code and monetary system rewards short term investment and punishes long term creative thinking.
I find this attitude hilarious and slightly sad really as its seems to be quite common amongst us 30/40 somethings. Remember when your Dad said the same things about the things you found interesting in your teens? I sure do and I'm never turning into my cynical old man I can assure the world. The best way to some this is up is with a very famous and great bands name.... spoken in your Dads voice... The Who?
Have a song as well...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hje28F-IhLo&feature=related
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Aside from Lee (who wasn't given nearly enough screen time), I don't count the actors you've mentioned to be of the calibre of the likes of Cushing and Guiness in the least bit. Even if they may be good actors/actresses.
The only one who may come close is Jackson, but that is more based on the persona of the bad ass.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I have to disagree, futuristic SF was certainly not clean and perfect before Star Wars. There was plenty of science fiction realism around long before Star Wars, even from the 70s themselves I can think of gritty SF like A Clockwork Orange, Escape from the Planet of the Apes, Omega Man, Silent Running in 1973 (a very realistic and dirty ship that was), Death Race 2000, Rollerball... etc...
Probably the dirtiest ship of all run by a bunch of hippies... Dark Star.
Ok so 2001 had nice clean ships that worked, but also a bonkers computer.
It did maintain realism but if anything Star Wars also moved away from the usual dystopian SF of the 70s. It was newish because it was high adventure and space opera as opposed to gloomy near future disaster movie set on Earth. That's what caught the public imagination, pure escapism from depressing films about annihilation and a grim future world. The biggest draw was that it was set in 'A long time ago in a galaxy far far away' and not 'in your country in a few years time'.
I haven't played SWTOR yet. Is it any good?
Peter Cushing was a B movie actor for most of his career and never really made it in mainstream films and Alec Guiness hated playing Obi-Wan-Kenobi and it shows in the films hes on automatic pilot through the 20 minutes he's in one film. Watch Guiness in Kind Hearts and Coronets, Bridge Over The River Kwai, The Lady Killers to see him enjoying and putting his soul into roles of depth and quality.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Pic on the left shows a creative guy working on a project for the love of it and not knowing whether it had a market or not.
Pic on the right shows a guy who thinks fancy digital effects are a substitute for soul, and the green-screen also links to the colour of money...
How it pertains to SW:TOR....well if the pic on the right was from 2002 we could all refer to 'Attack of the clones' and pat ourselfves on the back for encapsulating the anti-TOR argument so succinctly.
But as others have said, Lucas is essentially tuned out (apart from endless, needless retweaks of his films for each release on a new medium), and IMO the fans care more about the 'integrity' of the Star Wars universe than he does. Fans are the ones who are stricter lore police than Lucas Arts, and hold every product bearing the name to impossibly high standards.
I listened to a friend rant for a solid hour about the legacy abilities in SW:TOR and how they are 'lore-breaking' and I just shrugged and said: "1. Midichlorians 2. I bet Lucas Arts signed off on it. If they don't care, why should you?"
He didn't have an answer for that.
Actors the calibre of Dave Prowse? I'm guessing you aren't from the UK Distopia otherwise you would know that the biggest thing Dave Prowse did before SW was the Green Cross Code Man adverts on TV. I'm sorry but as soon as you placed his name alongside Guiness et al. your argument made no sense to me.
In fact A New Hope is packed full of British TV acting talent, and to be honest they were the best thing in the film, actors like Don Henderson, Jeremy Sindon and Denis Lawson. All of those people had been performing on stage and screen for a long time and brought their gravitas to the film.
HE was just a body in Star Wars, but the presense of Vader was something that awed a lot of people.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
David Prowse was an excellent Frankenstein's Monster in that one movie. And a good...well..whatever he was in "A Clockwork Orange"..lol
Yep, and in 25 generations people will be drooling on their lazyboys while "bating" during commercial breaks of "Ow My Balls".
I'd forgotten his Clockwork Orange role. He was the bodyguard of that guy the Droogs beat up I think.
Yeah anyone that tries to put Peter Cushing on the same plane as universally acclaimed actors such as Liam Neisan, Natalie Portman, Ewan McGregor and Samual L Jackson lose all credibility with me as far as opinion on actors go. Far as Christopher Lee goes, I like him as a n actor, but I HATED his character on Star Wars. I wish Lucas hadn't killed Darth Maul off so early. He was clearly the better villian.
And did someone mention David Prowse? Did you actually HEAR his dialogue in the first Star Wars movie? It was horrible. There's a reason the guy made his living playing monsters and why lucas overdubbed his voice with James Earl Jones. To put him in the same company as Alec Guiness is just laughable.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
Yes. He was dressed like an extra in a Village People video. I thought he was in Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger too but that was Peter Mayhew in the golden Minoton suit.
You can have your opinion, I'll keep mine, and I won't even bring your credibility into question.. Cheers.
The only reason I mentioned Prowse was because he supplied the body for the role, I have no idea what else he has even done, I was talking about the characters in the movie, not the actors themselves.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
They are different mediums. I don't think the green screen is any less representative of hard work. CGI modeling has to be just as meticulous as the original modeling. And I don't think any less work went into designing these models.
The difference is that with the original story, Lucas was hungry with a dream and a story to tell. now he's fat and happy with a story to sell.
I never bought into the "Many truthes we cling to" crap excuse Lucas wrote Guinnes's script. It was garbage. Lucas turned that ship in mid course and set a new direction and it was obvious. He thought he's get a bigger impact with the "I am your father" bomb than "I killed your father". He changed his original story and forever changed the course of StarWars and While I liked ESB, it totally set the stage for the future of the dranchise and it blew. RotJ was crap as was the entire prequel trilogy.