SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic

Posted: Jun 07 2008 03:59 pm

Blackout Boy wrote:

The new Testament.

No, that one had lasers and robots. Dinosaurs too, if I recall correctly.

Posted: Jun 07 2008 04:02 pm

Tyop wrote:

Blackout Boy wrote:

The new Testament.

No, that one had lasers and robots. Dinosaurs too, if I recall correctly.

*Pictures Jesus riding a T-Rex shooting Lasers at the Anitchirst's Evil Robot Minions* Ahh yeah that's the stuff. Smile

Posted: Jun 07 2008 09:36 pm

ross_rifle113 wrote:

I find that I have troubles with the direct sequels, but I usually enjoy the third installment of franchises. I really wasn't huge on X-Men 2, Spider-Man 2, Attack of the Clones, or The Two Towers, but X-Men: The Last Stand, Spider-Man 3, Revenge of the Sith, and The Return of the King made up for them.

The only franchise sequels that aren't like that for me are The Empire Strikes Back and Evil Dead 2.

Keeping on topic, Evil Dead 2 gets shit on because it's a rewrite of the first. Granted, that pissed me off at first too, but only because I had just finished the first one and wasn't expecting to watch the same movie again. If anything, the scenes with Ash's chainsaw hand are worth watching alone.

i actually thought xmen 2 was better than 1. didnt care for spiderman 2 and i definitely hated spiderman 3. dont get me started on the star wars prequels. only good one was revenge of the sith. and you cant forget about godfather 2 in terms of good sequels. and if you havent watched it, then get off the fucking computer and go rent it

Posted: Jun 08 2008 12:50 am

HOLY FUCK I FORGOT GODFATHER!!!!

Yeah, Godfather 2 definitely goes in there with Empire and Dead By Dawn.

K, this is definitely on topic then: The Godfather 3!! Ok, it's the worst of the Godfathers, fair enough, and Sofia Coppola is the worst actress on the planet, and there's the occasional cheesy line I suppose. But could you make that movie? By average movie standards, it's excellent. And the scene when !!!SPOILERS!!! Mary dies and Micheal stands there screaming END SPOILERS is just incredible.

Posted: Jun 08 2008 01:34 am

I agree with whoever said the The Matrix Reloaded/Revolutions.

Posted: Jun 08 2008 02:09 am

username wrote:

ross_rifle113 wrote:

I find that I have troubles with the direct sequels, but I usually enjoy the third installment of franchises. I really wasn't huge on X-Men 2, Spider-Man 2, Attack of the Clones, or The Two Towers, but X-Men: The Last Stand, Spider-Man 3, Revenge of the Sith, and The Return of the King made up for them.

The only franchise sequels that aren't like that for me are The Empire Strikes Back and Evil Dead 2.

Keeping on topic, Evil Dead 2 gets shit on because it's a rewrite of the first. Granted, that pissed me off at first too, but only because I had just finished the first one and wasn't expecting to watch the same movie again. If anything, the scenes with Ash's chainsaw hand are worth watching alone.

i actually thought xmen 2 was better than 1. didnt care for spiderman 2 and i definitely hated spiderman 3. dont get me started on the star wars prequels. only good one was revenge of the sith. and you cant forget about godfather 2 in terms of good sequels. and if you havent watched it, then get off the fucking computer and go rent it

Really? I thought Revenge of the Sith was absolute garbage. Seemed rushed, the acting was poor(Fuck Hayden Christensen as Vader, he should go die). And some of it felt extremely rushed.

Posted: Jun 08 2008 02:58 am

Seemed like your response was rushed Razz

Fuck Hayden Christensen indeed, but nothing will be as bad as his "I hate the sand" line in Attack of the Clones.

Posted: Jun 08 2008 03:53 am

i think hayden christensen really really sucks ass. but out of the three prequels, the third one was the most decent one. it wasnt as full of bullshit as the other ones were and had a lot of action, which kept me interested in the movie.

Posted: Jun 08 2008 09:52 am

username wrote:

i think hayden christensen really really sucks ass. but out of the three prequels, the third one was the most decent one. it wasnt as full of bullshit as the other ones were and had a lot of action, which kept me interested in the movie.

I never liked the cry baby my girlfriend is going to die angle in that movie, what a weak ass darth vader. Rolling Eyes

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

Hayden Christensen's worst offense was being placed into Return of the Jedi.

That very well may become the definition of Film Blasphemy.

Personally I think the prequels would have been great movies if the following were true:

Jar Jar didn't exist
Meticlorians were not discussed
Jake Lloyd and Daniel Logan used gestures more often than words (Lets just say that young actors shouldn't need to talk as often as they were forced to).
Anakin Skywalker were angry, discussed, frustrated, vengeful, hurt, sad, confused... just not fucking emo. He didn't need to be all 'woe is me'.
Obi-won was less clumsy.
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
maybe could have been turned into just Noooooo!

I am sure a few other changes could come to mind if I thought more about it, but for now those are the ones that really stick out as "breaking" the movies' vibe.

Posted: Jun 08 2008 12:22 pm

GPFontaine wrote:

Hayden Christensen's worst offense was being placed into Return of the Jedi.

That very well may become the definition of Film Blasphemy.

Personally I think the prequels would have been great movies if the following were true:

Jar Jar didn't exist
Meticlorians were not discussed
Jake Lloyd and Daniel Logan used gestures more often than words (Lets just say that young actors shouldn't need to talk as often as they were forced to).
Anakin Skywalker were angry, discussed, frustrated, vengeful, hurt, sad, confused... just not fucking emo. He didn't need to be all 'woe is me'.
Obi-won was less clumsy.
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
maybe could have been turned into just Noooooo!

I am sure a few other changes could come to mind if I thought more about it, but for now those are the ones that really stick out as "breaking" the movies' vibe.

agreed. I also did not care for the HEAVY reliance on CGI, watch the making of its all freakin blue screen, even stuff that could have been done IRL easily and probably cheaper.

Posted: Jun 08 2008 12:45 pm

Blackout Boy wrote:

I also did not care for the HEAVY reliance on CGI, watch the making of its all freakin blue screen, even stuff that could have been done IRL easily and probably cheaper.

If you had to watch the Making Of to know that those scenes were done in front of a green screen, then they did everything right. CGI is only annoying if it's painfully obvious, like in Indy 4. Making use of CGI isn't inherently bad.

I'd say the quality of the effects was one of the best things about the prequels. Off the top of my head, there was only one scene were I was really thrown off because of an obvious green screen in the back (Anakin riding the speeder bike in Attack of the Clones). Considering the amount of CGI in the three movies, that's pretty good.

Posted: Jun 08 2008 02:09 pm

Tyop wrote:

Blackout Boy wrote:

I also did not care for the HEAVY reliance on CGI, watch the making of its all freakin blue screen, even stuff that could have been done IRL easily and probably cheaper.

If you had watch the Making Of to know that those scenes were done in front of a green screen, then they did everything right. CGI is only annoying if it's painfully obvious, like in Indy 4. Making use of CGI isn't inherently bad.

I'd say the quality of the effects was one of the best things about the prequels. Off the top of my head, there was only one scene were I was really thrown off because of an obvious green screen in the back (Anakin riding the speeder bike in Attack of the Clones). Considering the amount of CGI in the three movies, that's pretty good.

green blue whatever, I could have swore the final fight scene between Obi Wan and Ani was blue. Confused

In fact it's blue in my mind so I'm gonna have to watch it again to see if I've gone crazy. Shocked

Posted: Jun 08 2008 02:10 pm

They used blue in Episode I, especially during the lightsaber battle...I don't think color matters lol.

Posted: Jun 08 2008 02:13 pm

ross_rifle113 wrote:

They used blue in Episode I, especially during the lightsaber battle...I don't think color matters lol.

Yeah but if I remember blue and go back and watch it again and it's green I'm gonna have to get my head checked, I can see blue right now. Confused

Posted: Jun 08 2008 02:29 pm

I used "green screen" as a general moniker for the color keying technique. I didn't watch the making of, so I have no idea whether they used blue or green. Maybe both. Green screens are better for darker foregrounds, whereas blue screens are better for lighter foregrounds. Although I think I read somewhere that green screens generally work better if you're shooting digital. No idea why.

Joined: Aug 26 2007 Posts: 2752

GPFontaine wrote:

Hayden Christensen's worst offense was being placed into Return of the Jedi.

That very well may become the definition of Film Blasphemy.

Personally I think the prequels would have been great movies if the following were true:

Jar Jar didn't exist
Meticlorians were not discussed
Jake Lloyd and Daniel Logan used gestures more often than words (Lets just say that young actors shouldn't need to talk as often as they were forced to).
Anakin Skywalker were angry, discussed, frustrated, vengeful, hurt, sad, confused... just not fucking emo. He didn't need to be all 'woe is me'.
Obi-won was less clumsy.
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
maybe could have been turned into just Noooooo!

I am sure a few other changes could come to mind if I thought more about it, but for now those are the ones that really stick out as "breaking" the movies' vibe.

But the
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
was the best part of the movie. To be honest, the prequels get shit on because they ruin the original three movies in that, it's hard to believe how advance the technology was in the past (prequels) compared to the future (originals). And NO HAN SOLO! WTF! also, i agree that Jar Jar should not exist, that is what happens when Lucas takes advice from his daughter.

And Meticlorians? what are these Meticlorians you speak of? Twisted Evil

Posted: Jun 08 2008 04:19 pm

Whoops I misread

Tyop wrote:

If you had to watch the Making Of to know that those scenes were done in front of a green screen

as

Tyop wrote:

If you had watched the Making Of you'd know that those scenes were done in front of a green screen

My bad.

Posted: Jun 12 2008 05:17 pm

I could go on for days about sequels being better than the original film. Instead, two things make me go "huh?" in this thread. First is the strange green vs. blue screen tangent...

The other is that people say BTTF III gets a bad wrap. All my life I've heard nothing but II was the weakest. The DVD even has the cast and crew saying the same thing. Now, I prefer II to III because I love alternate universes, paradoxes, and the future more than westerns, but I think people who don't post on message boards prefer III over II. And II and III are both better than I. Wink

One sequel that gets overlooked is "Jewel of the Nile". Sure it isn't as good as "Romancing the Stone", but that series could've been a great reoccurring franchise IMO. Alas.

Posted: Jun 12 2008 05:29 pm

Tebor wrote:

One sequel that gets overlooked is "Jewel of the Nile". Sure it isn't as good as "Romancing the Stone", but that series could've been a great reoccurring franchise IMO. Alas.

totally agree w/you on that one

Posted: Jun 12 2008 11:52 pm

If we're all done bashing Revenge of the Sith now...

I actually think it's the best Star Wars movie. No, not the best prequel, the best of all. I'm not even going to bother posting my views on it because I'll immediately be shouted down and called an idiot, but it's true. So, you know. Eat it.

Posted: Jun 13 2008 02:40 am

Black Zarak wrote:

If we're all done bashing Revenge of the Sith now...

I actually think it's the best Star Wars movie. No, not the best prequel, the best of all. I'm not even going to bother posting my views on it because I'll immediately be shouted down and called an idiot, but it's true. So, you know. Eat it.

I hold III, V, and VI in a league of their own.

Posted: Jun 13 2008 11:35 am

episode V is the best one ever.