Escape to the Movies: The Phantom Menace 13 Years Later

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT
 

Darkstrike_11:
Summary of this video: "God guys stop being such whingy fanboys, we shouldnt get our expectations up for a movie representative of our childhood"

*Then completely contradicts himself by including that bit about the avengers showing he's just doing the same*

Part of me really wants the avengers to suck just to see Bob's reaction after he has been (to use Yahtzee's words) "tossing himself off with glee in expectation" for about 2 years...

The thing is, he isn't really telling us not to get hyped for movies we want to see, only that going into a DECADE-long rage rant simply because the movie wasn't as good as you expected is anything but healthy. The movie was bad, but not nearly as horrendous as people make it out to be. You can rage about it for a while, but keeping it up for this long is just sad.

MovieBob:
The Phantom Menace 13 Years Later

The Phantom Menace isn't nearly as bad as you think it is.

Watch Video

I agree nearly 100%. (I do like the second one better.)

I've been arguing this point since the beginning. People who say this movie is one of the worst movies ever have obviously not seen a lot of movies. ... or they are lying because they think it makes them part of the cool crowd. People who think George Lucas is raping their childhood have a diagnosable mental illness and should be medicated. ... or they are lying because they think it makes them part of the cool crowd and / or think Trey Parker and Matt Stone should be worshiped as pop culture gurus.

Phantom Menace was and is my favorite Star Wars movie. I actually like the plot, I adore the Trade Federation and my favorite part of the Star Wars universe are the droid armies. My favorite piece of music, the Droid Invasion march, is also in this film =3.

---

I don't think Jarjar is annoying. Darth Maul is one of the coolest thing to happen to Star Wars next to Boba Fett, closely followed by Jango in my opinion. I also quite like General Grevious from the next two movies, though there begins and ends my problem with the Star Wars universe at large actually. Anakin Crywalker ruins my idea of who Darth Vader should be/is, and he wrecks movies that are otherwise entertaining to watch, or such is my personal opinion. Midichlorians didn't bother me enough to start flailing about it, but this angsty teenager ruining my SW experience did X3.

Right, well, I guess we can wait for this exact same point to be rehashed in The Big Picture next week, then, I'm guessing the backlash in this thread will be enough for Bob to have to try to clarify himself, again, in his other show.

Shame, because during this movie review I was hoping for an actual, y'know, review. Yes, we've all seen the movie but that just means you don't have to put up any spoiler warnings, shouldn't you kind of list what's good and bad about this movie as a stand-alone piece instead of glossing over those point briefly just to do what you could've done in The Big Picture. I'm not complaining, I get what you mean by this, but surely this review could've covered something else. Why waste it on something that you have more than ample room to say in your other show?

That's my two-cents on the matter, anyway, I'm just kind of confused as to what this is doing here and not in The Big Picture or in an article where it obviously belongs.

The movie is simply average. I don't think I'd watch it again.

sure not a fan of the saga, but i dint mind watching it. great movie....? hell no, but at least a good time waster. but i will not watch it in 3D. i just stick with the dvd.

Well, IMO prequels are cool. I really liked them, and still say that "Revenge..." is cool.

Oh, and never like Tartakovsky and his Clone Wars.

But, releasing anything in 3D should be banned for one, single reason. IT AIN'T FUCKING 3D!!
Just a depth effect. A gimmick. If something is 3D I can look at it from any side. Your 3D gimmick isn't viewable from other sides so go fuck yourselves Hollywood.

To be fair, I think you're overplaying the amount of hate for Episode 1. Pretty much everyone I know found Episode 1 underwhelming, but only really actively hated episode 2.

Basically, the consensus is that Episode 1 is more what IV - VI were initially intended to be, an action movie targeted more or less solely at pre-teen children to sell toys. On those grounds, it wasn't bad at all, it just didn't have IV-VI's accessibility to adults. Basically your analogy to Transformers seems to hold.

Episode II failed harder, not so much for reasons of pandering (Ep I pandered as hard to fans as is humanly possible) as because Lucas actually tried to make a movie that adults could get into, which is something that has _never_ worked for him, because Lucas went from upper-middle-class kid with no problems and enough money for film school almost directly into millionaire eccentric that can afford his own ranch, "adult" is not in his portfolio unless by accident.

Witness, III went back to the kiddie formula (straight black and white morality, the twist is straightforward betrayal, no attempt at fantastic politics, the last half-hour solid was a pair of friends having literally the shiniest light-flashing fight scene that it's physically possible to commit to film) and it worked again, arguably the best of the prequels (because friends getting into a fight and feeling betrayed and acting unreasonable is something that happens to adults, too, so you got your post-teen audience back).

"See it with fresh eyes," or, even better, never see it at all.

Did you get paid to plug it, Bob, or have you suffered some sort of cranial trauma?

I think I'll save the ticket price up until Osombie or Jane Austen's Fight Club comes out, then see one or both of them.

Moviebob I think you have to remember not everyone was a kid or teenage boy in 1977. Plenty of people born in the late 70's and in the 80's didn't see the original trilogy until the 90's or even the early 2000 century, thus creating a sort of aftershock when they later became older and one by one realized just how shallow, dumb and mediocre the prequels were.

Granted there are always those extreme fanboys who almost only exist for the one thing they enjoy in life, be it D&D, Startrek, LOTR or whatever. And people like that naturally have a much harder time to let go of something that disappointed them so much. But I don't think that's the case with most prequel "haters". I think it has more to do with when you finally figure out you been either fooling yourself to believe the prequels were ever any good or simply not thought about it up until a certain moment. This probably happens the next time you decided to watch the movies again when you become a little older and you are probably less naive, have higher standards and pay better attention things you otherwise wouldn't as a child.

Also it doesn't exactly help that George Lucas keeps fucking with the originals, seriously if I ever get my own children one day I want to know there is still a good version of the original movies I easly can get a hold of. And it also doesn't help how he constantly with almost no limitations keeps exploding the Starwars universe to death and keeps shoving all of this prequel crap and re-releases out to remind us of something we rather forget. And it certainty doesn't help how some people still try to argue that the prequels are actually really good, great or even fantastic movies. That if anything is probably the source for a lot of this massive silly prequel debate that still goes on to this day.

Anyway I was a teenager when The Phantom Menace was released and at that time I didn't think it was that bad, sure it wasn't exactly what I've expected but then again being so young and only have been a Starwars fan for maybe 5 years or so I didn't have time to build up any particular expectations either. But still I sure as hell didn't think the movie was great or fantastic by any means expect perhaps the soundtrack and some of the action, so for me still counted as a good film.

Then Clone Wars came out and I though well this was better, in fact I thought it was a great movie. Sure the love scenes were silly but weren't they always in movies? However there were lots of action and stuff for my dumb teenage mind to enjoy it, yet there were definitely something missing. By then I've started to speculate a little more on how Anakin really will became Darth Vader and like most others you sort of got this heroic figure in your head who for some heroic or at least awesome reason tragically turned evil. But there were no sign yet of this cool character, instead we only got to see this kind of annoying whining dumbass. Also we didn't really ever got to see a real Clone War, more of a single quite short battle that you kinda had trouble getting into for some reason, it wasn't exactly like Gladiator which was my favorite movie at that time.

But it build up expectation for The Revenge of the Sith and yeah I thought as most others that it was the best of the prequels and was a great almost fantastic movie, closest to the greatness of the original trilogy. However I still remember very well when I left the theater that day after watching it for the first time how kinda disappointing the ending were and especially how disappointing Anakins turn from good to evil were, something I never could shake and it created sort of an empty feeling in me. Now it wasn't just over, no more Starwars movies but the story I've sort of had expected would never become reality either.

Back then I still liked the movies but over the years and for every time I watched them again they became less and less enjoyable and when I really started to actually pay attention to the dialog, supposed love scenes and to the plot and story it all started to fall apart. My imdb score for movies now almost feel one point after each time Phantom Menace down from 7/10 to 3/10, Clone Wars down from 8/10 to 4/10 and Revenge of the Sith down from 9/10 to 6/10. But I didn't really know why, why did I dislike these movies so much I mean sure the disappointing story arc of Anakin surly had something to do with it but there were something more than that, thus entering Plinkett... :)

I'm still allowed to hate Titanic tho right?

I've never liked the phrase "not as bad as". Sure getting punched in the tender bits isn't as bad as getting kicked in the tender bits but it hurts enough to bring tears to your eyes either way.

If one or two things can make up for all the bad in a movie then I guess Pearl Harbor is an okay movie now because the attack on Pearl Harbor somehow makes up for the terrible love triangle.

WolfenD:
Stand back people I'm about to blow your mind: Star wars Episode 4,5 and 6 all suck. The characters are bad, effects bad, ending bad and most of all story bad. At least 1,2 and 3 it had a feel of something much more epic. It had back stabs and plot twists. Because in 1,2 and 3 it was the light side vs dark side. Two massive armies fighting to the death with the main villain slowly gaining control of the heroes army. It was man vs machine. It was a whole jedi order vs the sith. While in 4,5 and 6 it was a group of young adults taking down an entire government. Yeah fuck that. The characters are: a farm boy whose trained as a jedi for a month who is able to take down Lord Vader a man who has trained his entire life as a jedi and who for the last couple of years have being hunting jedis down. A princess who hasn't had any military training able to take on trained storm troopers. So how does that work.

Also how is it that people find Jar Jar Binks more annoying than Chewie. At least Jar Jar spoke English while Chewie just growls while everyone is agreeing with him. That's like trying to have a conversation with your dog. They can understand you but you can't understand them.

If episodes 4,5 and 6 were about Starkiller from the force unleashed then that would have being a good trio of films.

So you basically hate most of (video gaming) fiction where some young guy or girl gets thrust into a world of adventure and quickly becomes instrumental in destroying a great evil?

And you seem to entirely gloss over that bit about the heroes being part of a larger alliance of rebels.

The events of the original trilogy took place over roughly a four year period, so Luke had more than "a month" to get to where he was. But then, you seem to have taken only a very superficial glance at all six films, sorry to say.

I liked the Phantom Menace, I could care less about what anyone else has to say. What pisses me off though is when people younger than me (and the Phantom Menace came out when I was 8), jump on the bandwagon whenever they can and bash Episodes 1-3 saying 4-6 were the only "good" ones (half those people never even watched any of the movies). I understand it if you grew up with the original trilogy and were disappointed with the new ones, but for fucks sake, be disappoint with them because YOU didn't like them, not because you're a poser who can't think for themselves.

Pedro The Hutt:

WolfenD:
Stand back people I'm about to blow your mind: Star wars Episode 4,5 and 6 all suck. The characters are bad, effects bad, ending bad and most of all story bad. At least 1,2 and 3 it had a feel of something much more epic. It had back stabs and plot twists. Because in 1,2 and 3 it was the light side vs dark side. Two massive armies fighting to the death with the main villain slowly gaining control of the heroes army. It was man vs machine. It was a whole jedi order vs the sith. While in 4,5 and 6 it was a group of young adults taking down an entire government. Yeah fuck that. The characters are: a farm boy whose trained as a jedi for a month who is able to take down Lord Vader a man who has trained his entire life as a jedi and who for the last couple of years have being hunting jedis down. A princess who hasn't had any military training able to take on trained storm troopers. So how does that work.

Also how is it that people find Jar Jar Binks more annoying than Chewie. At least Jar Jar spoke English while Chewie just growls while everyone is agreeing with him. That's like trying to have a conversation with your dog. They can understand you but you can't understand them.

If episodes 4,5 and 6 were about Starkiller from the force unleashed then that would have being a good trio of films.

So you basically hate most of (video gaming) fiction where some young guy or girl gets thrust into a world of adventure and quickly becomes instrumental in destroying a great evil?

And you seem to entirely gloss over that bit about the heroes being part of a larger alliance of rebels.

The events of the original trilogy took place over roughly a four year period, so Luke had more than "a month" to get to where he was. But then, you seem to have taken only a very superficial glance at all six films, sorry to say.

Okay I'll agree that I didn't mention the rebellion but that wasn't my main argument. But I didn't mention it because the rebelion got nowhere without Luke and Han

"So you basically hate most of (video gaming) fiction where some young guy or girl gets thrust into a world of adventure and quickly becomes instrumental in destroying a great evil?" I don't mind that in video games because they're either (A) being training most of their life, (B) a chosen one, (C) a special power or weapon or (D) all of the above. But that still doesn't answer my question how did Luke beat Vader with only 4 years of training. It can't be because Vader wanted Luke alive to take down the emperor as Luke had already turned down his offer.

As for the time scale it didn't feel like 4 years when I watched it unlike 1,2 and 3 when it felt much longer.

Double post

Great trolling attempt, MovieBob. I bought that you actually believed all that shit right up until you compared it to the Star Trek reboot.

There's a reason the Plinkett reviews had even the possibility of existing. The writing of the movies was complete and utter garbage throughout. If you can appreciate the movies for CGI alone, good for you. Don't look down on people who expect anything in the writing department. This isn't coming from a fanboy, by the way. I don't really give a fuck about the Star Wars universe, but the prequels are bile.

I was 6 when it came out, so I didn't care, but I grew up, watched the movies in chronological order, and have just come to write off the prequels as not very good, but having spawned some great childhood memories, in the form of equally questionable games (Phantom Menace movie tie in; blessed be the ignorance of childhood), so I couldn't hate it and didn't feel anything for Jar Jar, but I like that he's fun to "hate". He's very easy to let become a fictional punching bag.

In short, I was too young to understand, and never felt that sting of disappointment because I simply couldn't, all the Star Wars films occurred at roughly the same time for me. As a debatable adult I do appreciate how awesome the original three are though.

Yeah, I'm kinda too young to say "Damn the prequels!" Since I only saw Phantom Menace like, two years after I watched the original trilogy... And I loved it.
Oh don't look at me like that I was like five years old, it had all the "pew pew, VWWUZZZZZHHH" that made me love the originals. Of course, even then the Anakin kid annoyed me...

Looking back on it though, I do enjoy the Originals tons more than phantom menace, even from a superficial "Pew Pew" perspective, (but also from a character and world lore perspective)
I also don't think the Phantom Menace is the worst part of the prequel trilogy. In fact, it was the point from which they could have turned it all around.

See, I think that the prequels biggest problems lie in making Anakin the main character. As many people have said before, it's not fun watching something play out when you know how it'll end and it takes FOREVER to happen. You just end up waiting for it and paying extra attention and scrutinizing the way it's done.
This MIGHT have been okay... If they did it well. But huge character arcs and development isn't the strength of star wars so much as just enjoyable, likable, relatable simple characters.

But yeah. They could have focused on someone else, I mean Obi-wan could have been focused on a lot more and made into a decent character.

Secondly, I think they should have worked up the mysticism of the Jedi.
No, I don't care about Midi-Chlorians. I actually like that added touch - I know there's no need to explain the Force, but they aren't really explaining it by saying there are these micro-biological life-forms that act as a conduit between people and the force. It leaves it fairly vague but I just like the explanation rooted in science... Roughly.

But the prequels establish the Jedi as a military force more than anything else. We don't see any of these "Peacekeeping" properties they claim. Everyone has a laser sword, everyone jumps around throws rocks with their mind, and their's thousands of Jedi soldiers living in a tower on the capital planet. They didn't take the place of sages, philosophers, seers and casters. Yoda and the Emperor displayed these kind of traits, old force sensitives who know of the ancient sciences of the force but don't necessarily leap around chopping things in half.
IMHO, The place of the Jedi should have been as advisers to leaders, ambassadors, philosophers, sooothsayers, only occasionally stepping into battle, rather than an independent military force that supports the Republic.

I get the whole ..stop the rage allready. Fine its done but what about the 3D in this movie , did i miss something since not once did i hear you say what was different with this version vs the one 13 years ago.Or was this not to compare the two ? Then again sorry if i missed that line , every time someone brings this movie up i tend to nod off.

I'm not entirely sure what this intends to accomplish.

Sure, there's still some vitriol over the movie, but it's hardly got the same level of focus that it did even, say, five years ago. It's hardly the only thought on any geek's mind, which means the disdain for the movie doesn't have to die for nerds to move on. People can hate this movie and still not care about it. Hell, without the preceding trilogy, this movie would've been Zardoz or Ishtar: a still-shitty movie that simply no one cares to remember beyond the notion that it's, well, shit. I honestly think you're a few years late on the "calm down everybody" moralizing; the few people who haven't let go now just plain aren't, and the rest HAVE moved on.

I, personally, didn't care for this movie because when I see a movie I generally care about three things, and in this order: good dialogue, good acting, good general story arc. This movie failed on all three counts and thus was just an awful experience for me. I like whiz-bang effects as much as the next guy, and I never really had much complaints about that until maybe the end of Episode 2. The world here, more or less, looks consistent. But the three things I cared about sucked a LOT here, and so the movie itself will never be good, or even kind of good, to me. That doesn't mean I engage in yearly practice wherein I routinely burn effigies of Lucas or anything. This movie is just a memorable catastrophe.

The only place where I do differ from a lot of people is here:

Jake Lloyd doesn't deserve the anger he's received.

I mean, look at this movie: it made Oscar Schindler, Renton, and Jules Winnfield tooth-grindingly dull and lifeless. Are we supposed to assume some child who had maybe one movie of note to his name prior have the chops to build on the direction given by the guy who sucked the life out of John Shaft? His performance was bad, but why do we blame him when Natalie Portman, Liam Neeson, and Ewan McGregor all turned out equally wooden performances?

What has it given us?

Allot of really funny reviews critique the prequel movies. I guess we walked away richer from that whole experience. In fact many internet critics started their careers by writing a review about the Phantom Menace.

Now I was to young to see Star Wars originally. So my first movie in the series Was Phantom Menace. I never had the experience of "OMG my childhood got raped". So to me the whole experience was doubly entertaining.

Seeing people get mad about a movie to an unprecedented extent and lots of funny reviews about it. I had a blast and I really hope something like this happens again so I can be a on the sideline laughing my ass in a coma.

So many 13 year olds on this website

and everyone here should read up on what a character arc is
there were no characters in this movie just zombies.

maybe I'm a "fanboy" but atleast I'm right

I was going to watch this video and then I saw the caption.

Not a movie I will be seeing in theatres that's for sure. Especially since George Lucas managed to shit all over this movie too by ruining the pod race.

Release the fricken unbutchered original movies George Lucas. My VHS tapes wont last forever

I'm...ambivalent about this review. While Bob does make many good points and I applaud him for not only standing up for the prequel but also giving excellent points as to why they're so hated despite their many good qualities (though I still hate them, but that's mostly thanks to reading the excellent novel adaptation of Revenge of the Sith which showed how the story might have turned out if put into the hands of the a competent writer), I couldn't help but shake one thought: aren't most of the arguments used by people to condemn the prequels at every turn also used by Bob to condemn the Bayformer movies at every turn?

glad to know I haven't been on the path to the dark side
tho I suppose I did sort of let the whole "time to grow up and live my life" thing get in the way of my childhood Star Wars fandom
OH WELL

but I liked AotC more then Episode 1 sooo if you enjoy it then you win I suppose. don't like, forget it and move on. (helps with relationships and bad hot dogs too)

Robot Overlord:
So many 13 year olds on this website

and everyone here should read up on what a character arc is
there were no characters in this movie just zombies.

maybe I'm a "fanboy" but atleast I'm right

The original trilogy wasn't even that amazing to begin with, in fact what made it so popular was the special effects(it's even amazing seeing other movies like Tron being a joke in terms of today's special effects while Star Wars only shows a little age), the Phantom Menace wasn't that great in terms of special effects but it was fine and it added alot more to it giving more interesting fight scenes than plot driven stuff, Episode 2 had more of it and Episode 3 had a huge amount of it. It's partly why the animated Clone Wars were so entertaining and well better than the actual movies, because when I was kid I didn't give a shit about Padme or Anakin's struggle, I just cared about the action and that was all the CN Clone Wars was, just hours of straight action. It's why Star Wars video games were so successful and good, it's why the toys were so successful etc

I've thought the Attack of the Clones was worse than the Phantom Menace since it first came out and I saw it in theatres. It still mystifies me that most people think TPM is the worst movie. TPM, while bad, at least had some good bits (Liam Neeson is good in anything even if Qui-Gon didn't really make any sense, Ewan MacGregor was pretty good as Obi-Wan even if he didn't do much, the three-way lightsaber fight was legitimately pretty cool, even if it didn't have any of the meaning of the OT fights because these two Jedi had no idea who this red horned guy WAS or have any baggage with him). Attack of the Clones, however, was built around one of the worst romance plots I've ever seen on screen, Anakin being a whiny useless asshole, much more focus on the tedious politics (which were a big point in the first film, but at least we were following people embroiled in the politics and them dealing with it rather than just the politics themselves), and a mystery plot with a pointless Boba Fett stand-in. And then, IIRC, Yoda hopping around like a gerbil on speed. The lightsaber fight at the end of TPM may have been pointless, but it at least looked nice, but Yoda fighting Dooku just looked ridiculous.

I do disagree with "the prequels' existence isn't hurting anybody", if only because the way it explained most of the things hinted at in the OT were incredibly stupid, but everything else written after that point has to treat the way the PT handled things as the highest form of canon.

Star Wars in general are pretty underwhelming films. They're really awesome when you're a kid because they're exactly like those saturday morning cartoons (unambiguously good or bad people, wooden acting, cool action, little complexity) drawn out to about an hour and a half/two hours. The third one and the fifth one are probably the best of them, and even those have pretty shitty acting.

It seems to be a strange phenomenon with sci-fi that so many movies or tv shows are placed on these pedestals as being so great, when they're really very poorly done from an outsider's perspective.

I'll put it out there, I have a love/hate relationship with The Phantom Menace. When it first came out, I was in the middle of reading some awesome trilogy in the books (the Black Fleet Trilogy, I think?) and it talked about this girl Luke met who supposedly knew where his mother was or had gone.

...and then we get "Episode 1", which basically shatters anything that may have ever been written about his mother previously, and by the next book the author has had change the direction so now the girl was simply baiting him the whole time. It's entirely possible that this was intended from the start, and I don't mind that. But the notion that books being written suddenly had to be changed cause Lucas arbitrarily comes up with this hokey plot for Episode 1 and how little Anakin fell in love with some child-queen on a world we've never heard of..

Essentially, when I WATCHED the movie in theaters, I thought it was awesome and a lot of fun. Then I thought more about what I've seen, and the more I thought about it, the more upset and disgusted I felt. Except the notion of Medichlorians or whatever, I called that as bullshit the moment they brought it up. Lucas essentially diluted the wonderful mysticism surrounding the Force with Science and turned Anakan's mother into the Virgin Mary.

I'll be frank, I actually liked the characters of Padme, Quai-Gon, and even Jar-Jar. Heck, I really enjoyed a lot of the movie, especially the fights and the "Duel of Fates" track or whatever during the climax of the film. But as has been said, there's so much that the movie did wrong, or the script did wrong, or when the actors seemed to be phoning it it.

Confused Matthew said it best with "they tried to convince us that Anakin was all these things, but he never came off as any one of them" or something to that effect. If I hated anyone in the first movie, it was probably the kid.. and Darth Maul, cause wtf was up with his design? Hell, I just watch CM's Prequel reviews and laugh my ass off when I'm feeling depressed over it all.

Was the Phantom Menace as bad as everyone thought it was? I think it was the strongest of the three prequels, but it set in motion a lot of the crap we'd have to swallow to enjoy the later films. It retconned the hell out of the original trilogy which many, including myself, grew up on and greatly enjoyed. It replaced all the awesome puppetry and animatronics from the previous films with crappy CGI, removing a lot of the life and presence various characters had. It was certainly the least convincing Yoda I'd ever seen, and while I certainly laughed at the Droids I never got the feeling they were actually there in the room with everyone.

That said, Phantom Menace also gave us a few good things. I hated the Pod-Racing sequence in the movie, but I really loved playing the N64 game for some reason. Also, thanks to it we'd eventually get those awesome Genndy Tartokovsky shorts. Still, I generally like to think that the prequel films didn't really happen. It also slowly killed off my desire to read the novels, too.

EDIT: Looking at some other responses, I should point out that I do, actually, think a lot of films and shows from the 70's and 80's were better than what we have today. Maybe that's cause I grew up with a lot of the stuff, or maybe it's due to my disliking of the hip-hop genre (and how it slowly permeated into a lot of 90's and 2000's films), or perhaps I don't care so much for CGI cause I feel it lacks the presence of someone in a suit, puppetry, and animatronics. Jurassic Park has, in my opinion, the best mixing of CGI with actual effects. If TPM had been closer to that insofar as how they handled their special effects, I think the prequel films might've had a better presence and believability to them.

But that's just me.

What? what if we where young enough to be the target audience and still hated the movie. look I didn't grow up with star wars or anything but I did watch them as a kid, in fact in preparation for the phantom menace coming out I watched the original trilogy for the first time and I really enjoyed them. But when I saw episode 1 I though there had been some mistake. The Dialogue was so awful and the story so frustrating in all three of the prequels that I couldn't bring myself to enjoy them and I was a stupid little kid. The special effects I felt fell really short compared to the originals, there was no believability in them. I don't hate them as Star wars movies but I feel like I have every right to hate them as movies.

Not sure what you mean that a new star wars movie couldn't come out that would bring me back the thrill of the original series. The knights of the old republic games (1, 2, and the mmo) were all amazing from a story perspective. Loved that they got me excited about star wars again. If a movie had been made about any of these games that would rock my socks off.

Episode 4-6 are just extremely meh, each more meh than the last. Yea on their own merits they aren't terrible just sort of so so si-fi stuff. The thing is they aren't on their own, they are star wars. That list of other so so movies Bob mentioned are also on my hate list. In particular star trek and Eragon. Again taken on their own merits they are ok movies, heck I even like the star trek movie when I can forget that it is supposed to be star trek.

Just think on that for a minute. I liked the space action movie when I could forget the theme, story, and major IP it is supposed to be representing... Why even tie it into the star trek franchise then, that's just fail in my book.

Yet for all my nerd rage phantom menace is still coming out in 3d. Oh well, I'll vote with my dollar and not go see it. At this point that's all I can really do. Well... that and give in to the dark side.

Meh, I even ended up with the Phantom Menance on VHS. I haven't re-watched any of them that much.

I did enjoy the original Clone Wars cartoon series so something good did come out of it.

Also I booked a ticket for this show (NSFW)
http://vimeo.com/25947106

Darth Vader makes me feel funny.

DiMono:

MovieBob:
The Phantom Menace 13 Years Later

The Phantom Menace isn't nearly as bad as you think it is.

Watch Video

I'm really glad you made this video, and I'll tell you why. The main point of your video seems to be that you should take this movie on its own merits, rather than holding it up to the other movies for comparison because it was never going to live up to our starry-eyed memories or our expectations, and trying to say it's a bad movie because of that is unfair. Exactly the same thing happened when Duke Nukem Forever finally came out: after over a decade of waiting, everyone looked at it expecting it to be the best game ever, and collectively said "...is that it?"

The problem is that the advice you give to us in this video is exactly the advice that you need to start taking yourself. You hold on far too strongly to source material.

It's not just that though: movies based on comic books tend to have a hard time staying loyal to canon because some things just don't translate well from a print media to an actively visual media. Same with books - especially The Road. And even when updating from one movie to another, what literally made audiences jump out of their seats and cheer 20 years ago usually doesn't have any effect on them any more at all, because society has changed, and movies have to keep up with it in order to stay relevant.

Just look at the original House on Haunted Hill - in its day, it was terrifying, but today it's comical. The 1999 Geoffrey Rush remake bore almost no resemblance to the original at all, but for the average movie-goer the year it came out, it was a much better movie (having Famke Janssen and Ali Larter didn't hurt things either). Another remake in today's society would have to be drastically different again in order to keep up with the times. Would that make it a bad "House on Haunted Hill" movie? Absolutely not. Because it doesn't matter whether it holds to the source material, all that matters is that it stands tall on its own two feet.

You are absolutely right that Phantom Menace has to be taken on its own merits. But you also need to start applying those same standards to other movies as you review them.

If I could give you an internet medal for that post, I would, you just managed to summarize every one of my reservations about Movie Bob's reviews and commentary perfectly. All I can say is I salute you sir, well said.

I stumbled upon my reply :D

image

Tim Chuma:

Also I booked a ticket for this show (NSFW)
http://vimeo.com/25947106

More than anything... I'm impressed with "Bobo Fetts" athletic prowess...

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here