| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Ali |
Posted - 02/08/2008 : 14:03:38
Here is my defense of The Phantom Menace. And why not?
|
| 9 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Downtown |
Posted - 02/10/2008 : 20:38:11
quote:
Originally posted by Conan The Westy
the opening sequence when two fully-fledged Jedi Knights show what can be done against the droids on the Trade Federation ship
Yeah that was cool. I'll watch that on TV, up until the part where they're running through the forest and Qui-Gon meets Jar Jar and tackles him. That's the exact moment when the movie turns crappy.
The showdown between the two Jedi and Maul is okay, but a little bland...it lacks the incredible choreography of the Obi-Wan/Vader showdown in Episode III, and the sheer drama of a battle between father and son from Episode VI. It does, however, have an incredible accompaniment from John Williams, and a very cool death. |
| Conan The Westy |
Posted - 02/10/2008 : 19:48:47
Great article Ali. Despite the obvious shortcomings with dialogue and acting, I'm prepared to forgive a lot, primarily for two scenes:
the opening sequence when two fully-fledged Jedi Knights show what can be done against the droids on the Trade Federation ship and the magnificent battle at the end with Darth Maul. |
| Downtown |
Posted - 02/10/2008 : 04:33:44
Ali made a spirited defense, though. |
| GHcool |
Posted - 02/09/2008 : 07:14:52
I don't agree with everything Ali wrote, but I agree with most of it. I've always loved The Phantom Menace. I was just talking to some co-workers about this. We all agreed that we liked Transformers and the Spider-Man films, but I was the only one in the room to say that they liked the Star Wars prequels. Why? The reason is that there is a double standard at work here: the Star Wars brand name is judged by a different standard than other summer CGI blockbusters made during the first decade of the 21st century. There is nothing wrong with comparing Phantom Menace to A New Hope, but that is not the only or even the most important yardstick to measure the quality of Phantom Menace by. |
| damalc |
Posted - 02/09/2008 : 01:32:49
quote:
Originally posted by Downtown
THE ACTORS CAN'T PROPERLY INTERACT WITH A CHARACTER THAT'S NOT THERE AND A SET THAT DOESN'T EXIST.
i agree, DT. that was one of my biggest problems with eps. 1-3. "Sin City" had the same feeling. i know green screen is cheaper, but there's a lot of value in actually going places and building stuff. |
| damalc |
Posted - 02/08/2008 : 23:47:31
schadenfreude? |
| Downtown |
Posted - 02/08/2008 : 23:14:57
And here's my biggest complaint of all about the PT:
I was really looking forward to learning all about the fall of the Republic, the rise of the Empire, and most importantly, the birth of the Rebellion. I was really excited to learn that Mon Mothma had been cast for Ep. III. But all her scenes were cut, because Lucas decided he was going to make the whole story about Anakin, as part of his six episode saga of a man's fall and eventual redemption (never mind that he's lying when he says that's what the story always was from the very beginning, because anyone can tell that the OT is about Luke, not Vader).
Okay, so if Lucas has decided he's going to tell us as little as possible about the galactic conflict so he can devote all the screentime to one character, WHY IS HE SO OBSESSED WITH TELLING US THE BACKGROUND OF EVERY LITTLE CHARACTER FROM THE OT? He decided we DIDN'T need to know about the beginnings of the Rebellion, but we DID need to know who built 3PO and what Chewbacca did before he met Solo and how Fett became a bounty hunter? WHO CARES?
These are terrible film making decisions! This is why the producer and director should NEVER be the same person. Lucas needed someone to tell him, "yeah, George, I like your artistic vision...but I don't think the audience is going to buy it." But who's job was it to tell George Lucas that? George Lucas! |
| Downtown |
Posted - 02/08/2008 : 23:03:16
The Phantom Menace was nothing about a showcase for all the great new special effects Lucas developed. He didn't care that he ignored one of the features that made the original trilogy visuals so great: his concept of a "used future." So instead we got shiny, beautiful locations and backgrounds...that looked completely fake. And since he's a lousy director - God forbid he should learn something from how great Episode V came out - he didn't even notice the most fundamental problem with CGI characters and sets: no matter how much more "real" they look than Muppets and soundstages, THE ACTORS CAN'T PROPERLY INTERACT WITH A CHARACTER THAT'S NOT THERE AND A SET THAT DOESN'T EXIST. Muppet or not, Luke was actually talking TO someone in all those scenes on Dagoba, and he really looked like he was in the middle of a slimy, stinky swamp. But Jar Jar ISN'T THERE, and all those scenes on Coruscant might as well have been done in front of matte paintings.
Episode III has the same shortcomings, but at least it had lots of action and a moderately interesting story. I really like it. But Episode I is just "little boy goes to space" and Episode II is like a bad John Hughes movie...it's just some annoying teenager moping all the time. |
| turrell |
Posted - 02/08/2008 : 21:25:58
A valiant defense, well written and reasoned, but you give Jar Jar too little criticism, and the dialogue is so labored. Finally I think the whole of the three prequels could have been summed up in Episode III's main story of how Anakin became Vader and mostly the pre-trilogy deals with establishing every minute detail.
For my money you coiuld have done Episode 7 with a flashback showing the few important details from the pre-trilogy.
You ague that it is popcorn action fun, but for me the writing and acting were so stilted that I couldn't really enjoy it.
That said - well done!! I disagree, but you certainly make your points more eloquently than I could in refutation. |
|
|
