Phantom Menace review (very funny, must see)

Posted:
in AppleOutsider edited January 2014
It?s a 70 minute review of a 130 minute movie. I know it?s long, but watch the first 3 minutes and then decide. I think you?ll be hooked.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 5
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Really? No one has watched this? I think you are missing out.
  • Reply 2 of 5
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 18,016member
    Good stuff. I watched it. "Hey...what's that in your face?"
  • Reply 3 of 5
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,323moderator
    Great review, episode 1 is one of the worst films I've ever had the misfortune to see. It's so bad that I start the series at episode 2. There are so many points in the review that so clearly explain why the film is bad. The most important point that I like to emphasize is the following:



    "We need a deeper meaning to things, without it none of it really matters"



    During the contrast between the original films and episode 1, you can see a worrying shift in how they make movies now vs how they made movies back then. It's all about meaning and without it, the films are just empty. 3D projection won't put it back in, CGI won't put it back in and celebrities won't either.



    I really feel Lucas needs to be made to do episode 1 all over again because as the review says, this franchise is huge and this tragic waste of space will be around forever.



    This trend creeps into so many films and there's this tendency to try too hard to create epic movies. You can see it all the way through the Avatar trailer:



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRdxXPV9GNQ



    Genuinely epic material doesn't need overly patriotic undertones, sweeping camera pans, slow motion shots at an action scene and worst of all, over-emphasized weak dialog:



    "We will send them a message that this... this is our land"



    Give me a break. I can't judge the film yet as I haven't seen it but the trailer is weak. So many franchises are being ruined - Terminator, Transformers, Indiana Jones, Superman, X-men, Spiderman, GI Joe, The Watchmen - by trying too hard to stick to a formula. It's as if they have a team of people who think they know how to shoot action scenes and you end up with shots like the one of General Grievous and the 4 light sabers where there's lots going on and you care about none of it. In the older films, they couldn't put all that junk on screen so they had to make you care about what was there.



    I don't think it has to be one or the other - CGI can add so much to great stories but filmmakers need to put more care into the content first and make sure the CGI people are aware of what they are trying to convey so it doesn't end up as another mishmash of fake dialog and totally unrelated stunt sequences.
  • Reply 4 of 5
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    During the contrast between the original films and episode 1, you can see a worrying shift in how they make movies now vs how they made movies back then. It's all about meaning and without it, the films are just empty. 3D projection won't put it back in, CGI won't put it back in and celebrities won't either.



    When I heard that Samual L. Jackson was cast as a Jedi I knew it would suck. And as the narrator mentions the redoing of the original movies with more cluttering CGI was pointless.



    The narrator does make many excellent points. I never watched it more than once or twice to get a feel for how much foolishness was in it yet I?ll watch the original movies every time they?re on TV.





    PS: I?ve heard some say that the story if Avatar was weak, but the story of Avatar was very clear and simple. I was relating to 10 foot blue CGI aliens and knew how they?d react to given situations. It was a great movie experience, not something that was so confusing that I was thinking it must be good because I didn?t understand it. I can?t wait to see it in IMAX.
  • Reply 5 of 5
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 18,016member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    When I heard that Samual L. Jackson was cast as a Jedi I knew it would suck. And as the narrator mentions the redoing of the original movies with more cluttering CGI was pointless.



    The narrator does make many excellent points. I never watched it more than once or twice to get a feel for how much foolishness was in it yet I?ll watch the original movies every time they?re on TV.





    PS: I?ve heard some say that the story if Avatar was weak, but the story of Avatar was very clear and simple. I was relating to 10 foot blue CGI aliens and knew how they?d react to given situations. It was a great movie experience, not something that was so confusing that I was thinking it must be good because I didn?t understand it. I can?t wait to see it in IMAX.





    I was one of those people that left the theatre thinking I liked it. Of course, that was just my brain telling me that it was Star Wars, so it had to be good. "It told the back story well," I thought..."that was its job." Yeah. Pretty horrible.



    The whole thing would have been better if they started at Episode II. There could have been so much done with that. The young, arrogant and talented Anakin could have been the true protagonist, running around the galaxy with other Jedis, killing bad guys. None of this mopey, I miss my mom crap, boo-hoo cry baby I'm angry at the universe crap.
Sign In or Register to comment.