Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: RE:

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News >> RE: RE: Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 6 [7]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: RE: - 2/11/2012 10:29:51 AM   
Dannybohy


Posts: 1374
Joined: 7/1/2009
quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy


quote:

ORIGINAL: NeoBrowser

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy
Now i'm pretty sure your just baiting me but I don't care, Nolan is the single worst thing to happen the Superhero movie genre ever. He should stick to boring pretentious twatty mind fuck movies which granted he does quite well. An example of this horrible infection is the fact that judging by the clips of MoS, we are essentially going to get SUPERMAN BEGINS. Same plot same visuals. Just hope there is enough Zack injected to at least pull of a decent action scene, thats all it will need to be better than Superman Returns. Nolan should be put in Arkham and I hope your eye lashes fall out.
p.s. Burtons Batman movies are still the greatest.


Or, to rephrase:

Nolan is the single BEST thing to happen the Superhero movie genre ever. He should be given as many DC comic heroes to make into films which he does quite well. An example of this wonderful new thing is the fact that judging by the clips of MoS, we are essentially going to get SUPERMAN BEGINS, which will be epic. Nolan should be given an BAFTA and YOU should be locked up in Arkham and prevented from airing your horrible film tastes on the internet.
p.s. Burtons Batman movies are some of the worst.

(And judging by everything you've said in this thread, you are living so far in the past that you can't accept new advancements in film or technology. Someone call the orderlies, another one got out!)


The double bait! always a winner. Judging by your post, your about 17 years old.



Come on dude, given how widely rated Nolan's films are, surely the burden of proof is on you to offer an argument for why you hate him so? Personally, I don't want anyone's eyelashes to fall out...

I liked Burton's Batmovies - indeed, I've suggested that he might be the obvious choice if Disney decide to go with a great visual stylist for episode VII - but Nolan's Batfilms have a serious Batman *and* proper themes, ideas, charactisation, subtext, striking visuals (the burning fire track in post-9/11 DK is still a more striking image than even Burton ever managed in his Batfilms). Snyder, in contrast, is famous for crap versions of good graphic novels! There's more to Superman than action.

Would you be up for a Burton-directed Episode VII? My point was that, if you can't get away from a plot that is, on some level , a rehash of the PT/OT ( Sith wiping out Jedi, Jedi coming back and restoring peace to the galaxy) maybe accepting that and going with a fresh, new distinctive visual look might be the way to go, instead of needlessly monkeying with the classic Star Wars formula. I'm surprised people haven't been suggesting some of the Pixar dudes - but then I suppose the live action John Carter was a big flop!



Apart from one friend (best friend if you will) I don't know of a single other friend or work colleague who rates the Nolan movies, so good company. My best friend however rates them much the same way people around here, we argue/banter constantly about it and have done since Batman Begins. What is strange is that we both agree that the recent Batman games are the best Batman entertainment to date. I argue that the games are closer to Burton/Schumacher..it goes on and on ..still best of friends with different opinions
I am not a Burton fanatic, his Batman movies are superb they are visually unbeaten in regards to Batman/Gotham. Burton took a character and he crafted a world, he created a Gotham and a fantastic one. Watch again, his movies are more brutal and dark than any of the Nolan movies. There is serious *and* proper themes, and then there is boring and convoluted!. Nolan has taken this great comic character and story and plonked into the most bland uninspired normal cityscape with the cheesiest dialogue and tried to wrap it as edgy,real world!!, serious!!. A Batman that goes to all the trouble and great technological expense to protect his identity, but does a growly voice! just doesn't work for me and Ive watched Nolans a few times and literally laugh at some parts as it takes itself so serious at the same time as a large tank flys over a dozen buildings with ease, why so serious?! give me a break. Superhero movies should be entertaining, they should have great action in, saying its not about the action is plain fuckin ridiculous. i will never agree that Nolan is some Supersaviour or anything other than a bland director, but Like you said, this is a Starwars thread so....

I find Burton movies are 50/50 for me, some great, some utter shite. I would not scream movie rape if he was involved in Starwars! his visual style would obviously be something to behold when it comes to the Sith. Perhaps they should have two directors, light and dark. Then again, with Tim there is always the horrendous possibility that Depp might be involved!!. My dream team, Boyle to direct, Vince Gilligan to write with Hamill returning only as the pivot into a new Trilogy, all new characters.

< Message edited by Dannybohy -- 2/11/2012 10:33:16 AM >


_____________________________

'Man of Steel!,Man of Shit!' -fairyprincess

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 181
Plea from a longtime subscriber - 2/11/2012 10:38:32 AM   
philshepp

 

Posts: 58
Joined: 25/11/2005
Come 2014/15, please don't dedicate a full issue to the new movie like you did with Phatom Menace and, just now, The Hobbit. If you do, please don't send me it and extend my subscription by 1 issue ahead! Cheers.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 182
RE: RE: - 2/11/2012 10:40:01 AM   
chewbacasnapsak


Posts: 740
Joined: 6/7/2006
From: westbound on olympic

quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: chewbacasnapsak

I always thought both the Star Wars and the Indiana Jones movies were intended to be a hark back to the serial movies of the 30s and 40s, a fact that both Lucas and Speilberg banged on about constantly, but then instead of doing just that and release a movie every 2 or 3 years


Well, in fairness, how many big directors would be up for doing a classic sci-fi serial style movie? If Ridley Scott or James Cameron (say) were up for doing a Star Wars movie, surely they'd want to take as long as they want and do whatever they want to? That's the price you pay for visionary directors! I realise I'm in the minority in liking Crystal Skull, but I'd imagine there's a lot of people who'd much rather have the three original films directed by Spielberg, rather than a whole lot of films by inferior directors.

Its more the fact that Speilberg clearly didnt want to do anymore Indiana Jones movies after Temple of Doom, but between him and Lucas (more Lucas) they kept hold of the franchise rather than letting it go with someone else. Its a franchise at the end of the day with a fan base that wants new movies, I obviously want them to be great movies, but with the money Disney have to throw at them, getting decent talent shouldn't be too difficult, and fuck it take a few risks.

_____________________________

"who'd pay a million dollars to have me killed"
"jealous husbands, outraged chefs, humiliated tailors...the list is endless"

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 183
RE: RE: - 2/11/2012 10:53:03 AM   
Dannybohy


Posts: 1374
Joined: 7/1/2009
get back on topic, you bastards

_____________________________

'Man of Steel!,Man of Shit!' -fairyprincess

(in reply to chewbacasnapsak)
Post #: 184
RE: RE: - 2/11/2012 12:13:08 PM   
chewbacasnapsak


Posts: 740
Joined: 6/7/2006
From: westbound on olympic
never left the topic.

Both franchises should have Directors for hire is what i'm saying, getting a Director who will become too precious about it will lead them down the same previous path.

_____________________________

"who'd pay a million dollars to have me killed"
"jealous husbands, outraged chefs, humiliated tailors...the list is endless"

(in reply to Dannybohy)
Post #: 185
RE: RE: - 2/11/2012 1:38:58 PM   
Russ Whitfield

 

Posts: 425
Joined: 10/4/2012
I think that Paul WS Anderson should write and direct Episode VII.


_____________________________

www.soldiergirlsmovie.com/
www.i-spimovie.com/

(in reply to chewbacasnapsak)
Post #: 186
RE: RE: - 2/11/2012 1:48:02 PM   
OPEN YOUR EYES

 

Posts: 4380
Joined: 5/2/2012
Would love to see Del Toro be given a chance to Direct the next Star Wars film.
Spielberg maybe a good shout,though abit unimaginative considering his links with Lucas or maybe even Joss Whedon.

Theres been slight murmurs that Catherine Hardwicke maybe on the hit-list but I pray she isn't given the opportunity because her films are frankly just over-long pop videos.

(in reply to Russ Whitfield)
Post #: 187
RE: RE: - 2/11/2012 3:31:12 PM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: OPEN YOUR EYES

Would love to see Del Toro be given a chance to Direct the next Star Wars film.
Spielberg maybe a good shout,though abit unimaginative considering his links with Lucas or maybe even Joss Whedon.

Theres been slight murmurs that Catherine Hardwicke maybe on the hit-list but I pray she isn't given the opportunity because her films are frankly just over-long pop videos.


I remember Empire reporting that Spielberg's favourite Star Wars movie is Attack of the Clones - I like the prequels, but you could argue that doesn't bode well for a Spielberg-directed Star Wars.

(in reply to OPEN YOUR EYES)
Post #: 188
RE: RE: - 2/11/2012 6:38:53 PM   
Litshttam

 

Posts: 130
Joined: 10/6/2012
You can bet your bottom dollar Lucas ring-fenced the six existing movies from Disney-tinkering as part of the deal.

_____________________________

"Now dig on this!"

- Peter Parker

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 189
Did anyone else find Kathleen's sycophancy unsettling? - 2/11/2012 10:26:44 PM   
launcelot

 

Posts: 60
Joined: 5/8/2009
Just watched the interview video. Kathleen spent the whole time talking to George Lucas rather than the interviewer. She simply came out with a few trite suck-up phrases like 'the main thing is that we protect your characters" and "you'll be my Yoda". This is not a woman with reassuring vision. This is a woman who will be George's puppet. Sadly, while be at physically out of the building, his Force will still be strongly felt.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 190
Well........... - 3/11/2012 11:04:14 AM   
Wedge_Antilles

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 3/11/2012
Truth is they already have story lines they can use which can incorporate the original actors into for example Darth Caedus as a new sith lord.

but in my opinion they should do prequels long live REVAN!!!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 191
RE: Did anyone else find Kathleen's sycophancy unsettling? - 3/11/2012 12:38:49 PM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1893
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere

quote:

ORIGINAL: launcelot

Just watched the interview video. Kathleen spent the whole time talking to George Lucas rather than the interviewer. She simply came out with a few trite suck-up phrases like 'the main thing is that we protect your characters" and "you'll be my Yoda". This is not a woman with reassuring vision. This is a woman who will be George's puppet. Sadly, while be at physically out of the building, his Force will still be strongly felt.



Even if the reality is, in some people's view 'fuck off you tired, washed up, old bearded shitbag' nothing even remotely along those lines is going to be said to his face, on camera, during the handover of the keys to his kingdom, Showbusiness is PR is saying nice things publicly and keeping rancor (see wot I did there) under wraps. The proof of intent or vision or lack thereof will be in the results.

Hell how do we even know Lucas isn't divesting himself of his interests because pricks who have said online things like the exemplar used above? The dude owes us nothing. Even though I've been pretty vociferous about the execution of some of his ideas, the focus of his scripts and perfunctory dialogue, it was never personally targeted hatred of the kind that would have made me, were I him, announce a gungan trilogy, made up clones of Jar Jar, tripping over their own feet and the only dialogue being 'mesa so clumsy', being said constantly

_____________________________

Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.

(in reply to launcelot)
Post #: 192
RE: Did anyone else find Kathleen's sycophancy unsettling? - 3/11/2012 4:57:31 PM   
Darth Marenghi

 

Posts: 3210
Joined: 10/10/2010
From: Manchester

quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

The proof of intent or vision or lack thereof will be in the results.



Indeed. It's completely pointless to try and extrapolate anything from an interview for PR purposes.

_____________________________

Invisible Text for SPOILERS: "color=#F1F1F1" Spoiler text "/color" , then change the quotation marks to square brackets.


(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 193
thank god - 8/11/2012 5:57:24 PM   
mclane1


Posts: 367
Joined: 7/2/2009
brilliant news, with george lucas out of the way we might actually get a good new instalment! yay!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 194
RE: lucas films - 10/11/2012 1:47:45 AM   
Mightyman

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 10/11/2012
Well I have the perfect person to play Indiana Jones: Thomas Jane
He fits the role perfectly, is about the right ag,e and is young enough to make at least 3-4 sequels.

My Bet Thomas Jane.

(in reply to manwihtheplan)
Post #: 195
RE: RE: - 10/11/2012 8:30:56 AM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1893
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: grucl



There is is in fact no evidence (other than George Lucas' word *cough*) that Jabba in ANH was gonna be anything else than a human actor in a costume. Quite to the contrary:



Right. George wanted a Jabba scene. Financially, they could only afford a guy in a suit (remember that the Cantina scene has dudes in wolf masks due to budgetary constraints). The guy in the suit looked rubbish. Years later, when George has oodles of cash and creative control, he puts Jabba back in with the best available technology. Surely that's a case of technology catching up with the original vision? I know people think George is not exactly honest when it comes to claiming what was in his original vision but surely the fact that they tried to film Jabba in ANH at the time shows that it definitely is part of the original vision?



Sorry, but that's being willing to swallow whatever Lucas says to a ludicrous degree. The dialogue in the Jabba/Han scene, in terms of the information it conveys adds NOTHING that wasn't already conveyed by the scene between Han and Greedo, including reuse of the lines about even I get boarded sometimes, do you think I had a choice? It was, applying a little logic to the situation, an alternative scene to convey story information that became unnecessary, and if it was in any way necessary to the film it would have been in the film in it's original form. Stuff is tried, what works is kept, what doesn't work is jettisoned. That's a natural part of the creative process, and if things are necessary to the whole, they don't get jettisoned in the first place. That's a comment on creativity itself, not limited to Lucas.

Not only does the scene being added to the film add nothing to the film, it kills the big reveal of who Jabba is and what he looks like in ROTJ stone dead (as well as looking worse than the puppet by a very long way), it has a fucking useless attempt to get round the fact Jabba has a tail (which in itself would be the equivalent of Michael Corleone being cuffed round the chops in Godfather Part two by someone he wanted to intimidate and doing nothing about it, just carrying on a conversation as if it didn't happen, even if it looked any good, which it doesn't).

And if I recall correctly, it also has a Boba Fett cameo added that is so 'Ladies and Gentleman...Mr Boba Fett!!' stupid that it is clearly just there for the sake of it.

Lucas and his protestations of his 'original vision' are suspect, at best. He seems to simply have used the special editions of the OT to test out the feasibility of the CGI led approach (as well as re-releasing the films to raise the cash to make the sequels_, without any real sense of why he was doing what he was doing in terms of the effect on the storytelling, for example, by adding 'hilarious background slapstick' to ANH in Mos Eisely that distracts attention from what is happening in the foreground and because of the relative disparity between the CGI and real elements stands out like a dog's arse on a duck.

Rather than make a whole new film to test out the technology, he used the love of work he had already done to make it possible to try things out and be able to estimate a certain level of income from the results. That's not such an evil thing to do, it;s good business sense.

You can still love a film, despite the excesses of it's creator, without swallowing whole every single word he says.

What you don't seem to realise about Lucas's 'original vision' comments is this: every 'creative person' has a process via which there are things they intend to do in their work, and there is what the work ends up being. WHATEVER the original kick off point and intent was, however things are rationalised by the writer, there is a degree of more luck than judgement to how something ends up. And they end up how they end up.

The 'original vision' stage is where all options are open and every idea you have seems equally valid. But every idea is NOT equally valid, and once you have the finalised form of the result of this vision with a beginning, a middle and an end, and you try to go back to it and add things that you wanted to put in but couldn't, you (with varying degrees of potential fatality) kill some of what you originally achieved because it if worked anyway, what you attempt to add is simply not necessary and because the relevance of the 'original vision' to how that vision ended up being expressed is simply not there, it is almost impossible to add something and make it look like it was always meant to be there.

You don't attempt to improve the seasoning of a meal you've already eaten. you just add it next time you cook. And in the case of storytelling, you explore the idea next time out, if it is something you are so desperate to say that it simply has to be said.

Cards on the table, I've had ideas for long stories, but once time and opportunity (ie lack thereof) boiled them down to short stories that got across the main points of what I had intended to say anyway, attempts to take them back to a longer form, 'as originally envisaged' just killed them.

I suppose the pitfall of being a billionaire with only your paid employees to tell you where you might be going off the road into horesehit territory is that employees do not tell you such things, Every artist needs someone who will argue with them over whether what they are doing is necessary or indulgence, because sometimes, maybe more than half the time, ideas just aren''t as great as the person who has the idea thinks they are. If you are never made to fight for your ideas right to be part of what you are doing, you will never get any kind of objectivity over what are your better, and your stupider ideas. If nothing else was highlighted by Lucas finding himself in the position, absolutely as a result of his own work of course, to fund his films entirely out of his own pocket, it's the extent to which people will not argue with the boss.

Even if the ego of the boss means he has to have the final say, he would do very well to employ someone to tell him things he might not want to hear, with a contract stipulating the words 'you're fired' in response to creative headbanging away from the rest of the team are meaningless unless after a cooling off period of reflection comments made are stood by.

Shit, even when directing little silent comedy shorts with some mates, I can can safely say I've had the hump when my 'vision' has been challenged, said, okay let's try it your way and then subsequently said you were right, I was wrong, the same point was made, it;s stronger than it would have been if I'd had my way. What applies to a situation with no money still applies to situations where hundreds of millions of dollars are involved. Creativity is ego led, it has to be, because otherwise you'd create nothing. But when, having reached a certain level of success, you have only the people you pay offering you opinon, and you AREN'T allowing yourself to be open to question (it doesn;t always have to be negative criticism, it can equally be a process of clarification of the reason for an idea that actually clarifies it's actual worth) you don't get the best out of yourself, you just get whatever occurs to you at any given moment, without resistance. And that leads to a lack of self critique that is ultimately damaging to what you seek to achieve. Russell T Davies and to an extent Steven Moffat in their Doctor Who tenures have both fallen into 'The Lucas Trap' of being feted for their good ideas and then not always having the perspective to critique themselves anymore, once the critique they might have previously received stops. I mention the other simultaneously loved and hated Sci-fi behemoth simply to reaffirm the point my comments are not Lucascentric, but comments on creativity in general.

Everybody who is creatively minded knows this about themselves: Looking back I was a dick about situation x, but in the moment my ego felt threatened and I reacted as if under attack (and it's a part of being a human being not necessarily limited to 'a creative process'). Nobody wants to feel that feeling, but its very important to know it's natural, unavoidable and beneficial in the end. Lucas had the level of success to effectively insulate himself from criticism during his creative process and that is the sole seed of the criticism of the results of his creative process of late, coming after the fact because it didn't come before the fact. And were he to search his feelings, I'm sure he'd know it;s true.

No single creative mind is infallible.


< Message edited by jobloffski -- 10/11/2012 8:43:51 AM >


_____________________________

Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 196
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 5 6 [7]
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News >> RE: RE: Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 6 [7]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.078