Here's an interesting cultural disconnect: major US critics were generally gaga over SITH but major UK critics generally thought it blew chunks. VERY VERY tough reviews from virtually all of the major daily newspaper critics in the UK. What do I think? The U.K. critics were too kind. At least Anthony Lane in the US figured it out and spoke truth to Lucasian power: poor writing, meaningless wall-to-wall CGI, leaden acting, predictable, ham-handed, charmless. And the biggest opening day boxoffice in history.

Excuse me, there's something competent on Turner Classic Movies I need to see....

I haven't seen it yet but I doubt it is nearly as bad as you claim it is. We can all agree that the new movies are not even comparable to the former ones, but Lucas has to finish the series and fromt the reviews that I have read, including Mark F.'s "Mini-Mini review," and when he gives something a strong rating I can trust that he is being honest. You are a little bit too broad with your dislikes on it. Is there anything specifically or do you want to continue saying things like "poor writing" and "predictable" as if they actually mean something without evidence to back up your opinion.

Don't take my word for it, but here's a link to one of the best critics in the UK, who writes for one of the most respected dailies. This was the common in the UK:

http://enjoyment.independent.co.uk/film/reviews/story.jsp?story=639664

Enjoy!

First off, I’m very thankful to George Lucas for giving us Star Wars. Now that that’s out of the way…

I wasn’t impressed with the new prequels at all. I thought they were really bad movies with cool computer graphics… but the thing that irks me about his latest endeavor is that the movie fails to entertain on the most basic of levels. How can you give high praise to a movie where a majority of scenes are shot from a distant side view as if watching a school play? How can you appreciate a movie where the dialog is so piss poor you can’t help but be annoyed if you pay too much attention to it? Every scene is so cluttered with CG that the actors look like they’re the ones who are out of place. How the hell did all the CG characters out perform the real actors? Since when did inconsequential space battles and light-saber fights demand almost the entire movie’s running time while interesting and pivotal moments, like Anakin’s turning to the Dark Side, warrant only a few minutes?

Ignoring the fact that the first two movies (I & II) were a complete waste of time story wise, how the heck did Lucas manage to reduce the most adored sci-fi villain to a snot-nosed, pouty brat? If Revenge of the Sith wasn’t based on Star Wars, everybody would think it was mediocre at best.

Personally, I’m not mad at Lucas… I’m pissed off at the undeserved praise he is receiving. George Lucas is not a genius. He’s just an average guy with a very vivid imagination. Unfortunately, he thought he could do it all by himself. I don’t think he realized how much of his success was due to the talented people associated with the original trilogy.

Of course, a lot of people think that I’m unjustified in my claims. How could a rating of 7.9 on IMDB be wrong? I must be wrong, right? Yeah… I mean, people vote. Majority rules… so the majority is always right. Yeah… and that’s why George Bush is still the president of the United States.

Sometimes, the majority just doesn’t get it.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike:
I haven't seen it yet but I doubt it is nearly as bad as you claim it is. We can all agree that the new movies are not even comparable to the former ones, but Lucas has to finish the series and fromt the reviews that I have read, including Mark F.'s "Mini-Mini review," and when he gives something a strong rating I can trust that he is being honest. You are a little bit too broad with your dislikes on it. Is there anything specifically or do you want to continue saying things like "poor writing" and "predictable" as if they actually mean something without evidence to back up your opinion.

Mike stop being a Busta. We've all seen at least one of the prequels and we know full well that describing it as "boring", "predictable", and "poorly written" would not exactly be untrue. I've read Mark's review and I that dude is CrrrazyYYEEE!!! "Sith" was a tolerable movie. And for summer entertainment it ranked high on my list until I saw "Batman Begins" and "War of the Worlds" which are unfathomably better than anything Lucas has ever made (well "BB" was; not "WotW"). This comes from someone who just doesnt get what's so great about "STar Wars". I understand it's a very creative universe that is being embraced by geeks everywhere. But, why is it so much bigger than all the other cliques out there. Why don't Everquest fans get into ridiculous debates on Metacritic?!? That's easy. It's cuz the sequels weren't shit.


Period.

I really can't say. I'd like to say adaptablity is waht makes it so popular. The fact that the story has everything. Action, love, drama...lots of subjects are covered by the movies.

quote:

Originally posted by EccentricSam:
"Sith" was a tolerable movie. And for summer entertainment it ranked high on my list until I saw "Batman Begins" which [is] unfathomably better than anything Lucas has ever made... This comes from someone who just doesnt get what's so great about "STar Wars".

I guess you haven't seen American Graffiti then.

quote:

Originally posted by mark f:
I guess you haven't seen American Graffiti then.

American Graffiti is a great movie… which proves my point that Lucas needs help from talented people in order to produce quality films. I would argue that Gloria Katz and Willard Huyck contributed to that movie’s success… even if they haven’t written any other noteworthy scripts.

To George’s defense, he is credited as the only writer for Episode IV. It was a fun movie that combined many of his ideas for later episodes (like the Death Star) into one action packed movie. If I remember correctly, he had to alter his script to make the movie more complete in itself to ensure its success and get the financing to complete the trilogy. Regardless, we can’t forget the stellar cast that made some of his awkward dialog digestible.

I think that’s why I didn’t like the new prequels… there wasn’t a memorable performance (amidst the directing and script related flaws), even though the cast had the credentials. Many of the actors were stone-faced throughout the entire movie.

I’d like to see more Star Wars stuff in the future, but next time I want George to take a step back and let the pros do what they do best; making quality movies as a team, instead of one man’s bloated ego driving every crucial element.


PS – I remember hearing from some of the actors in the original trilogy commenting on Lucas’ directing style boiling down to shouting, “Faster!” and “More emotion!” I think he forgot to shout “More emotion!” when he made the new prequels.

He actually shouted 'more intensity'.

Emotion didn't come into it.

quote:

Originally posted by Echolocating:
I think that’s why I didn’t like the new prequels… there wasn’t a memorable performance (amidst the directing and script related flaws), even though the cast had the credentials. Many of the actors were stone-faced throughout the entire movie.

I'd have to agree with you on most performances. Still, I enjoyed the prequels.