It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
tinyE: Hold on a sec, slight change of subject, while I agree there are some very mediocre and overrated Spielberg and Tarantino movies, are you saying neither of them has made anything good?
avatar
F4LL0UT: I haven't seen all films by either director but all the ones I've seen were friggin' stupid. Some of them are enjoyable to watch but still friggin' ass stupid. There's a chance I'd like them more, though, if they weren't so incredibly overrated and if it were obvious that Spielberg and Tarantino know how stupid their films are (and I'm not talking about the deliberately stupid elements). But hey, I have weird requirements to films anyway. To me any Verhoeven or Stallone film is better than anything Spielberg or Tarantino have made or will ever be able to make.
Seriously?
I am, the law.
My favorite thing about the original SW trilogy has always been the music. I love the movies, of course, but the music is probably the single element that stands out most to me.
avatar
Tarm: Seriously?
I am, the law.
I meant films directed/written by him.
avatar
Tarm: Seriously?
I am, the law.
avatar
F4LL0UT: I meant films directed/written by him.
Ah. Then I can somewhat understand you. I don't agree but I sort of understand. The latest Rambo wasn't bad at all for example and Verhoeven is a genius.
avatar
tinyE: The most amazing thing about Tie Fighter is that it holds it's own with modern day shooters and space sims and not just because of nostalgia. I still play it and it remains as good looking and fun as anything being released today.
avatar
Tarm: Tried Tie Fighter when it had been out a couple years but I couldn't get anywhere. Too much like a simulation for me. Everyone tells me I missed out because I didn't have patience enough to learn it. :(
As good as the game is, it has a very high difficulty curve. The only reason the lower-end ships have a chance is selective enemy AI targeting. You need your dodging, target selection, and power management at full potential to beat many missions.
avatar
aymerict: I was a big fan of the original trilogy growing up, and in my opinion the prequels don't really work because Lucas relied to much on CGI. He obviously spent some time on the script, and there are plenty of stuff to enjoy from theese movies, but there is no spontaneity in the actors play, it seems all artificial like a Pixar movie.

The first trilogy was always presented as groundbreaking in terms of special effects, and it seems that for the prequels, they had to show that they were at the forefront of the industry again, and the movies eventually suffered from it.
avatar
itchy01ca01: See I really don't care about CGI at all. CGI has brought us massive space battles, huge space stations, space ships with parts that moved (Not just: "X-foils in locked position". Oh how fucking cute), etc. etc. If you can't move past the fact that creating a spaceship model and filming it takes a ton of time, a ton of manpower and doesn't look as real as CGI.. I can't help you.

It's a movie. And it was years ago.
Well, I suppose it's just a matter of opinion. The visual effects in the prequels didn't seem always convincing to me. For the most part they are good, but many times, you can feel these are just computer images. Creating scenes that are difficult to make without computers is one thing, but if I can't help seeing the artifiact, it kind of defeats the purpose. And they didn't use CGI for space battles only, they used them for too many things, like costumes for clones, which looked terrible.
avatar
Tarm: Tried Tie Fighter when it had been out a couple years but I couldn't get anywhere. Too much like a simulation for me. Everyone tells me I missed out because I didn't have patience enough to learn it. :(
avatar
wvpr: As good as the game is, it has a very high difficulty curve. The only reason the lower-end ships have a chance is selective enemy AI targeting. You need your dodging, target selection, and power management at full potential to beat many missions.
That's the thing. Everyone plays in from X-Wing, where you have shields, then you're in a TIE Fighter and you're suddenly incredibly exposed. First death I encountered in it was by destroying a ship, and being killed by the debris.

It's not selective targetting, it's just that you need to be a constantly unpredictable target while targetting them. It's why it's so great.

It's epitomised by the mission in which you're in a TIE Interceptor, and asked to clear a minefield. That's a seriously tough mission, but after that you're pretty much in line with the way the game wants you to think.
avatar
itchy01ca01: Trying to say that both trilogies aren't full of terrible plot holes, horrible voice actors and crappy dialogue is deluding yourself. Some people ARE seeing the original movies through rose-tinted glasses. The rest is all subjective opinion.

Some people just don't like the fact that the prequels were not aimed at adults. Well too bad. It's not your decision.
And they were just as terrible as the first ones.

http://whatculture.com/film/star-wars-10-giant-plot-holes-you-probably-missed.php/7
Who then were the prequels aimed at? Because they sure as hell aren't appropriate for children. The original trilogy was at least moderately child friendly at most points.
avatar
aymerict: I was a big fan of the original trilogy growing up, and in my opinion the prequels don't really work because Lucas relied to much on CGI. He obviously spent some time on the script, and there are plenty of stuff to enjoy from theese movies, but there is no spontaneity in the actors play, it seems all artificial like a Pixar movie.

The first trilogy was always presented as groundbreaking in terms of special effects, and it seems that for the prequels, they had to show that they were at the forefront of the industry again, and the movies eventually suffered from it.
avatar
itchy01ca01: See I really don't care about CGI at all. CGI has brought us massive space battles, huge space stations, space ships with parts that moved (Not just: "X-foils in locked position". Oh how fucking cute), etc. etc. If you can't move past the fact that creating a spaceship model and filming it takes a ton of time, a ton of manpower and doesn't look as real as CGI.. I can't help you.

It's a movie. And it was years ago.
I take it you haven't seen the Langoliers....
Post edited December 15, 2013 by hedwards
avatar
wvpr: As good as the game is, it has a very high difficulty curve. The only reason the lower-end ships have a chance is selective enemy AI targeting. You need your dodging, target selection, and power management at full potential to beat many missions.
avatar
wpegg: That's the thing. Everyone plays in from X-Wing, where you have shields, then you're in a TIE Fighter and you're suddenly incredibly exposed. First death I encountered in it was by destroying a ship, and being killed by the debris.

It's not selective targetting, it's just that you need to be a constantly unpredictable target while targetting them. It's why it's so great.

It's epitomised by the mission in which you're in a TIE Interceptor, and asked to clear a minefield. That's a seriously tough mission, but after that you're pretty much in line with the way the game wants you to think.
I literally snapped a joystick handle off on that mission. Winning it is mostly a matter of evading nonstop, but getting all the bonus objectives is close to impossible.

Target selection has more to do with how quickly you can lose when you aren't dying from collisions. TIE Fighter has the same demanding victory conditions as X-Wing on top of the added challenge of keeping yourself alive. You have to shoot down enemy attackers or destroy the right enemy objectives to win. If you don't, the mission critical ship dies too fast or you run out of time.

Great game, but tough. Very tough.
avatar
Tarm: Ah. Then I can somewhat understand you. I don't agree but I sort of understand. The latest Rambo wasn't bad at all for example and Verhoeven is a genius.
I loved the last Rambo. A movie about a guy who spends half an hour at a heavy machine gun tearing people into pieces - that's pure genius. :D
avatar
Tarm: Ah. Then I can somewhat understand you. I don't agree but I sort of understand. The latest Rambo wasn't bad at all for example and Verhoeven is a genius.
avatar
F4LL0UT: I loved the last Rambo. A movie about a guy who spends half an hour at a heavy machine gun tearing people into pieces - that's pure genius. :D
That scene was brilliant. :)
The prequel trilogy are absolutely dire. Unintentionally funny, sometimes poorly acted, have laughable dialogue, a tedious and sometimes incoherent plot, and the worst, most embarrassing 'romance' in cinematic history.
Post edited December 16, 2013 by psadler
avatar
aymerict: And they didn't use CGI for space battles only, they used them for too many things, like costumes for clones, which looked terrible.
Oh yeah, remember one scene where you see that black officer dude of Princess Amidalla "walk" wearing some armor which was clearly fully rendered in 3D with his head pasted onto it. After the CGI walk animation he actually raises his head in the most unnatural manner that should break his neck. I just couldn't believe my eyes when I saw that. How am I supposed to take a movie seriously when friggin' everything except for people's faces is coming from CGI?
Post edited December 16, 2013 by F4LL0UT
avatar
aymerict: And they didn't use CGI for space battles only, they used them for too many things, like costumes for clones, which looked terrible.
avatar
F4LL0UT: Oh yeah, remember one scene where you see that black officer dude of Princess Amidalla "walk" wearing some armor which was clearly fully rendered in 3D with his head pasted onto it. After the CGI walk animation he actually raises his head in the most unnatural manner that should break his neck. I just couldn't believe my eyes when I saw that. How am I supposed to take a movie seriously when friggin' everything except for people's faces is coming from CGI?
A scene I have in mind is during the battle in the second episode: the soldier has a helmet but it's a closeup and, contrary to the panoramic scenes when you can only guess that all the soldiers are computer generated, you can see instantly that it's not a guy in a costume. I was shocked that they didn't bother hiring an actor and make a proper costume.
avatar
F4LL0UT: Oh yeah, remember one scene where you see that black officer dude of Princess Amidalla "walk" wearing some armor which was clearly fully rendered in 3D with his head pasted onto it. After the CGI walk animation he actually raises his head in the most unnatural manner that should break his neck. I just couldn't believe my eyes when I saw that. How am I supposed to take a movie seriously when friggin' everything except for people's faces is coming from CGI?
to be fair, episode IV also had something goofy and downright hilarious. I am talking of course about the stormtrooper banging his head against an overhanging door (or the top part of an entrance). I've only seen clips of it so I'm not sure whether it was in die theatrical release though. I never noticed it - its one of those blink and you miss it things. You have to decide whether you want these things to bother you or not, like the stormtroopers on the deathstar who seriously need extra firerange blaster training. I also found the stormtrooper costumes in the original trilogy to be very silly, but again, I do not let it bother me too much. And don't get me started on the teddy bears in die forest ;)