Checked out Star Wars: The Phantom Menace in 3D?

[TransatlanticFoe]

I wish 3D would just go away already so people can focus on creating new films rather than enhancing old ones (or adding extra 3D post-production guff to new ones).

I have no idea why George Lucas doesn't let someone go off and do a load of films based on the expanded universe novels. He'd be rolling in more cash than he's getting from constant bastardising re-releases of the existing films. I keep thinking how incredible the Hand of Thrawn trilogy would be if it were converted to cinema

[greg]

TPM had some enjoyable moments, and some good ideas. It can be "enjoyed" on that level, but it's still a terrible disappointment. Dunpeal, I enjoy watching Plan 9 From Outer Space. That movie is so terrible it's absurd. It's okay to enjoy dumb stuff, so don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

However, I am so sick of 3D and how it's being shoved down our throats. Isn't Promethius going to be released only in 3D? I hate this crap. It makes my eyes feel weird, it looks dark, and the detail is lost. I cannot see 3D movies as clearly as I can a 3D movie. Moreover, I already see in 3D. I don't need my movies or my video games to be in 3D. What I want is to appreciate art.

Whether or not TPM is a terrible movie, any movie redone in 3D is such a stupid idea. If a movie wasn't originally filmed in 3D, making it look 3D is stupid, like a bunch of freaking paperdolls moving around. I heard they're going to make the LOTR movies 3D too. Why don't they remake Da Vinci's artwork in 3D? Or Van Gogh? "Hmm.. The Mona Lisa is so boring because it's 2D. But if it was 3D and dark and blurry, then I'd appreciate it more!" Why not? Because it's insulting. I want to see movies that have good photography and frame the scenes right with the rule of thirds, stuff like Citizen Kane, The Matrix, or The Ring (USA ver). Movies should be 2D artwork and filmed as such. Hollywood must think that forcing 3D on us is going to help put an end to piracy or something, and it makes me want to puke.

[Friendly]

I have no idea why George Lucas

Because he's a moron. That's the answer to any question regarding anything Lucas personally did or didn't do after 1989.

The funny thing is, if Lucas had died in 1989, he'd now be considered one of the greatest directors ever instead of being a joke, and someone else would have created the Star Wars prequels/sequels. And no matter how bad they would have been, they wouldn't have sucked as much as the movies we actually got. Of course in that alternate reality we'd then complain about them too and would wish Lucas had made them

EDIT
I really like this. Especially the description of the of the video. Star Wars fans are special.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzDIClx-_pY

[greg]

What do you guys think of the Red Tails trailer? It looks promising. But then again, so did Epsiode I's trailer. Just in time for Black History Month, too. I'm not sure how historically accurate the movie is (I saw some Messserschmit Me262's in the trailer, and those were used at the end of the war), and it may be aimed at a younger audience, but 1. I love WWII movies (even sat through that terrible Thin Red Line movie that tried to make WWII look more like Vietnam), and 2. I still think Lucas is capable of something good, as long as he has the guts enough to let other people make appropriate changes and he lets them do it and not bitch about how everyone is out to ruin his works because he doesn't realize what a spastic retard he can be. (Wow, I think that was all one sentence.)

[Skykid]

George Lucas' Basic Principles of Filmmaking

YT comments do make me laugh:

i hate you george lucas you brain dead fuck

[Udderdude]

What do you guys think of the Red Tails trailer? It looks promising. But then again, so did Epsiode I's trailer. Just in time for Black History Month, too. I'm not sure how historically accurate the movie is (I saw some Messserschmit Me262's in the trailer, and those were used at the end of the war), and it may be aimed at a younger audience, but 1. I love WWII movies (even sat through that terrible Thin Red Line movie that tried to make WWII look more like Vietnam), and 2. I still think Lucas is capable of something good, as long as he has the guts enough to let other people make appropriate changes and he lets them do it and not bitch about how everyone is out to ruin his works because he doesn't realize what a spastic retard he can be. (Wow, I think that was all one sentence.)

It got 36% on Rotten Tomatoes, and Red Letter Media gave it a pretty scathing review.

http://redlettermedia.com/half-in-the-bag-red-tails/

[BulletMagnet]

Some of you might have already seen this, but if not allow me to stir the pot a little.

*Previous link does not represent the opinions of BulletMagnet, Inc. Void in Wisconsin.*

[TransatlanticFoe]

That is quite funny. The prequels are better because they're more relevant to today's politics? Ha. Thinly veiled critiques of current politics does not a great story make (in fact, it's hilarious placed in the "a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away" context)! Also, Star Wars is popular globally, it's high time a great number of Americans got over themselves (see also: the Mega Drive wikipedia article being headed up as "Sega Genesis" ).

[Estebang]

Watching the "Stars Wars" prequel trilogy

Lol.

[greg]

Oh wow. Thank you for that Red Letter review link. I haven't been keeping up with them since early December because life has been in fast forward since then. I am definitely not going to see Red Tails now. I don't always agree with Red Letter Media's reviews (I kinda liked Captain America), but I think they touched on some real valid points. I love WWII movies, but I really do not like those old movies that were made during WWII because they were just ridiculous propaganda movies with no basis on reality.

Case in point, John Wayne's Flying Tigers movie. The Tuskegee Airmen and the Flying Tigers, in my opinion, were the two most compelling fighter pilot stories from the WWII era. I went through a WWII otaku phase in junior high and did a whole lot of studying and reading, so when I saw that John Wayne movie, I thought it was horrible because none of it had much to do with the real story of Chennault's bad-ass mercenary fighter pilot group hired by Chiang Kai Shek to defend China from Japan (who, according to right-wing extremists in Japan, were just there to help China out and didn't really do anything bad). They flew scores of missions before any of them were actually shot down.

If Lucas really wanted to honor the Tuskegee Airmen, he would have made a movie with some bearing on reality and show how they really were. Not by playing the race card and painting every German soldier as some comic book villain. Man, the fanboy in me was really hoping that this would be a decent WWII fighter pilot movie. Once again, Lucas had a good idea, but it looks like he needed Gary Kurtz to keep him in line. And I bet Lucas was micromanaging the director of Red Tails as well. It's best if he does retire.

[Ed Oscuro]

The last "film" I saw in 3D was a segment of Honey, I Shrunk The Audience, at Disney World, probably within a year of its original release there (to give an idea how long ago this was, at least PC-Engine FX! should be able to guess the year ). I wouldn't go out of my way to see a film in 3D because of a very slight astigmatism giving me enough problem with depth perception as is.

[BrianC]

Is the 3D effect in Phantom Menace anything like this?

[PC Engine Fan X!]

The 3D conversion just adds some depth (and not in your face bone-jarring type of cheap 3D effects like those 1950s type of 3D films of old). You'll be wearing a pair of passive "Real D" 3D glasses, of course. I certainly got my $12.50's worth viewing it yesterday.

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

[EinhanderZwei]

Fuck yeah, I had to rush in the theater yesterday, and the whole thing was breathtaking. When the opening fanfare started playing, and the Star Wars logo flew into the screen, I had such a powerful nostalgia surge, it's like the time has never passed. Holy hell, I'm watching STAR WARS in theater. When the Phantom Menace came out in 1999, I watched it 5 times in a row. I don't care that it's considered the worst of the bunch, to me it's still an all around satisfying film, not to mention that I still was a child when I first saw it, and for a second I felt being 11 yrs old again. It's unbelievable. I remember it so perfectly, I think I've spotted all the new and enhanced scenes. Of course, 95% of them were totally pointless and added nothing to the story, and the 3D itself was kinda shallow, but that's not the point. It still looked as breathtaking today as it was back then!!!

[Skykid]

The 3D conversion just adds some depth (and not in your face bone-jarring type of cheap 3D effects like those 1950s type of 3D films of old). You'll be wearing a pair of passive "Real D" 3D glasses, of course. I certainly got my $12.50's worth viewing it yesterday.

$12.50? In the UK it's £12.50 for a 3D movie, we're always getting ripped off.

[Estebang]

The final appearance of puppet Yoda was retconned in favor of his CG model. I guess it was easier to convert to 3D.

[PC Engine Fan X!]

The 3D conversion just adds some depth (and not in your face bone-jarring type of cheap 3D effects like those 1950s type of 3D films of old). You'll be wearing a pair of passive "Real D" 3D glasses, of course. I certainly got my $12.50's worth viewing it yesterday.

$12.50? In the UK it's £12.50 for a 3D movie, we're always getting ripped off.

Part of the reasoning for U.S. movie theater chains to "jack up" the overall movie ticket price is the 3D projection system used to show it, hence the "higher than usual" fees. Sure adds up rather quickly if more than one movie goer attends to see a "bargin matinee" 3D flick nowdays with a group of friends/family.

I recall forking over $18.50 (was considered bargin matinee pricing, otherwise, it'd be even higher) to watch Tron Legacy in 3D with D-Box motion seating upgrade back in December of 2010. Totally worth it IMO.

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

[BrianC]

The final appearance of puppet Yoda was retconned in favor of his CG model. I guess it was easier to convert to 3D.

The video I linked to in my last post makes much better use of 3D and uses real puppets.

[MJR]

For every star wars thread you get bunch of bitter old gurmudgeons.
Prequel trilogy has some awkward moments (so does LOTR) but as general I am truly happy that it exists, otherwise we would be left with michael bay. I still rate it higher than most of the other brainless popcorn blockbusters, as that is the genre lucas has created and I think its better off as what it is.

I will definitely be seeing this soon, and if the conversion is done well enough, I may even consider 3Dbluray.

[NTSC-J]

Yea, who needs a good story, memorable characters, convincing special effects, emotional depth, originality, solid acting, smooth dialogue, or competent directing? Yoda has a lightsaber!

This sorry piece of shit made $23 million this weekend. I'm gonna go crawl back into my hole with my early 90s anime VHS' and Playstation games and cry some more.

[Skykid]

For every star wars thread you get bunch of bitter old gurmudgeons.
Prequel trilogy has some awkward moments (so does LOTR) but as general I am truly happy that it exists, otherwise we would be left with michael bay.

Um, Michael Bay makes tripe, but he's still probably a better film-maker than modern-day Lucas. He doesn't make so many elementary errors and has a better grasp on the process (even if it's paper-thin, throwaway guff: he's good at it.)

It's a bad comparison imo. Make Lucas look even worse.

[CMoon]

The above posts sum up my feelings. Prequels weren't bad because ep 4 & 5 are good; they are bad because they are bad.

[PC Engine Fan X!]

If Lucas had filmed Episodes 7, 8 & 9 out of an originally envisioned nine part SW series, episode 7 would've debut in 1986, episode 8 in 1989 & episode 9 in 1992 (assuming if ILM were to make a new SW film every three years after RoTJ). Makes me wonder how those would've turned out if they were made. I agree, The Hand of Thrawn trilogy would allow the SW franchise to return back to it's former glory if it was greenlit for film production.

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

[Skykid]

I just watched Plinkett's Episode III review for the second time. These are without a doubt the best SW reviews ever. They destroy everything about the prequels in an intelligent, thorough and deserved fashion. Lucas should be forced, if nothing else, to at least watch the last ten minute wrap-up of this review to be aware of his crimes against humanity.
Hell, they should screen the Plinkett reviews in theatres. I'd pay for that.

[Estebang]

Yeah, I pretty much feel ashamed now for previously claiming that Episode III was good.

Lucas isn't an awful human being, and I believe he was still capable of making great movies before the prequels, but letting him have free reign over everything was a terrible, terrible decision. If they had gotten someone else to direct--hell, even J.J. Abrams--and ran every one of Lucas' ideas and scripts through a gauntlet of exacting editors (Jar Jar would have been shot down right away, among countless other embarrassments) I believe that the prequels could have been classics, or at least Trek-reboot-level competent films.

But hey, they got their money anyway, and are still getting it, so I guess there was no incentive.

[MJR]

There are many films that can be enjoyed on merits other than just acting and plot, though those are arguably the most important qualities. Dark crystal and legend come to mind. Star wars films also count as them.

I watch prequels to enjoy rich and detailed imaginary world. This contributes the feelings of escapism, and balances the shortcomings in dialogue and plot. No other movie series in history, ever, has as much imagination and work put in their worlds as star wars films. Avatar by James Cameron is the lone example, and that got grilled to a crisp in the nerd forums because of the clicheed plot. And yes, I love that film too.

Anyway, rich imagination justifies many less than great movies for me, enough to watch them more than once. I would not imagine watching them countless of times, like I can watch the old Hitcher with Rutger Hauer, or Near Dark by Kathryn Bigelow, which are two of my favourite movies, and Ive seen those more than 20 times each already. But to shun them out completely would feel exaggerating.

I never took star wars seriously enough to be offended by the fact that prequel trilogy actually is NOT that good as everyone was hoping for. Its not Ed Wood level bad either, it has too much good work put into it.

If I want some good drama, I dont even imagine going for star wars. That idea alone feels incredibly silly. I would go for tv series, like Firefly or new Galactica, which have good characters and good plot, that more than makes up for cheap production values. For good scifi, I for some classic star trek or Tarkovsky's Solaris.

But to whine at George Lucas and quote that redlettermedia.. how about having some ideas and perceptions of your own, rather than just parroting what someone else had said?

[Skykid]

What the - hold on a minute.

I watch prequels to enjoy rich and detailed imaginary world. This contributes the feelings of escapism, and balances the shortcomings in dialogue and plot.

No it doesn't. Its world is bland and tasteless because everyone in it is made of cardboard and they utter such unmentionably embarrassing dialogue that it undermines any semblance of realism, drama or emotional attachement. It's so crushingly boring I had to check my pulse during Episode III to make sure I was still alive.
You may as well watch a CG turd going down a plughole for two hours, it basically amounts to the same thing.

No other movie series in history, ever, has as much imagination and work put in their worlds as star wars films.

Blade Runner?
Labyrinth?
THX 1138?
2001?
Aliens?
And, should we grace old Tolkien with a little credit, Lord of the Rings perhaps.

And Avatar is a load of pap too, Titanic actually anal rapes that movie and eats its prolapsed rectum for breakfast.

Hitcher with Rutger Hauer, or Near Dark by Kathryn Bigelow

Both solid flicks, no shame there.

I never took star wars seriously enough to be offended by the fact that prequel trilogy actually is NOT that good as everyone was hoping for. Its not Ed Wood level bad either, it has too much good work put into it.

Assuming you mean the director Ed Wood and not the Tim Burton film, in actuality - and since you brought the comparison under scrutiny - they are almost that bad.

But to whine at George Lucas and quote that redlettermedia.. how about having some ideas and perceptions of your own, rather than just parroting what someone else had said?

You come across as having a rather shallow appreciation of film so it wouldn't be right to lay into you too hard. On that same note, if you enjoy these films you go on and enjoy them. Don't let anyone spoil the movies you love by detailing how much they suck ass. I always have my own perceptions (surely you know that by now), Plinkett just happens to echo and vindicate those perceptions with destructive but brilliant analyses. I'd suggest watching them, but only if you're ready to give up the Hollywood trash you hold so dear.

[MJR]

Plinkett just happens to echo and vindicate those perceptions with destructive but brilliant analyses. I'd suggest watching them, but only if you're ready to give up the Hollywood trash you hold so dear.

I have watched them, and I appreciate them, they detail all the shortcomings quite well.

I disagree on quite a few things you posted, but I have also been reading these forums quite well enough to know better than start to waste time on arguing with people here. You can keep your opinions, I will keep mine!

[evil_ash_xero]

I'm gonna watch this, right after I see Birdemic 3D. Similar quality, and all.

[Illyrian]

I also didn't mind episode 3 but only because it shows you a lot of important plot stuff that leads to eps. 4-5-6.

As a move it's hardly amazing, but it is the best of the prequel trilogy at least.

I was mostly annoyed that in the cartoon series before episode 3 came out General Grievous was a total badass who destroyed 5 jedi at once, and I was looking forward to having a proper badass midmovie villian. Instead he just gets beat 1 on 1 in a plothole ridden mess against Obiwan Kenobi. Like seriously,

I'll link it after work, but watch the scene from the clone wars cartoon where Grievous fights like 5 Jedi at once or the episode where he captures Palpatine, he's a total badass! I seriously don't understand why they nerfed him so hard in the movie