Are the latest Star Wars movies worth watching?

[TheSpokenWheel]

btw, LOTR > Star Wars. Any day of the week.

 

[Ace Bandage]

btw, LOTR > Star Wars. Any day of the week.

Find a tall bridge, pal. That's blasphemy.

 

[TheSpokenWheel]

Find a tall bridge, pal. That's blasphemy.

How so? the films are so much better made than Star Wars and it has yet to be ruined by a series of shitty prequels. It could be this December, but I highly doubt it.

 

[Sam Fisher]

How so? the films are so much better made than Star Wars and it has yet to be ruined by a series of shitty prequels. It could be this December, but I highly doubt it.

My daughter has read every book and probably seen all the movies. I've yet to read the books, and I've not seen one second of any of the movies. She said I should. I don't doubt they are good. I've just never been much into wizard type movies.

I dunno, maybe if I watched 'em, I'd change my mind.

 

[Ace Bandage]

How so? the films are so much better made than Star Wars and it has yet to be ruined by a series of shitty prequels. It could be this December, but I highly doubt it.

Okay, the prequels I'll give you. But by making a blanket statement like LOTR>Star Wars are you saying that one of the LOTR movies is better than The Empire Strikes Back? Because if that's the case, we may have to throw down in fisticuffs...

 

[DR. B]

This message is hidden because Sam Fisher is on your ignore list.

LOL!!!

 

[TheSpokenWheel]

Okay, the prequels I'll give you. But by making a blanket statement like LOTR>Star Wars are you saying that one of the LOTR movies is better than The Empire Strikes Back? Because if that's the case, we may have to throw down in fisticuffs...

How is that a blanket statement? its LOTR (3 films) vs Star Wars (6 movies). And yes, LOTR is better than TESB... Sam, you should definitely check 'em out. Its not all about wizards (there's only 2 in the whole trilogy) and they don't really even use magic that much (it's definitely not like that Harry Potter shit).

 

[DR. B]

How so? the films are so much better made than Star Wars and it has yet to be ruined by a series of shitty prequels. It could be this December, but I highly doubt it.

LOTR fucking sucked dirty ass. Why didnt those giant eagles at the end of the third movie just fly frodo to the volocano??? why fucking walk??? When I saw that part I nearly slapped the fuck out of the usher. It totally ruined the whole trilogy. LOTR sucks

 

[TheSpokenWheel]

LOTR fucking sucked dirty ass. Why didnt those giant eagles at the end of the third movie just fly frodo to the volocano??? why fucking walk??? When I saw that part I nearly slapped the fuck out of the usher. It totally ruined the whole trilogy. LOTR sucks

That's foolish. I'm not going to get into a nerdy argument about the eagles with you, but if your going to let that one thing ruin a trilogy of brilliant films for you than maybe you should just go watch "National Lampoon's Plotless Movie With the Occasional Bare Breast".

 

[Mayhem]

LOTR was a huge disappointment for those of us that read and re-read the books (and The Hobbit....and the appendices.....and The Silmarillion). Aragorn was much cooler in the books, and had some great moments that were left out of the movies. Theoden and Faramir got royally screwed over. And there is no fuckin' way in a million years that Elrond is going to let his cherished daughter, Evenstar of his people and direct descendent of Luthien the Fair; hop on a horse and go out by herself.....with or without Nazgul in the neighborhood. The role of Arwen should have been kept small and handed to Adriana Lima, or someone of comparable hotness.

And don't get me wrong, I love Cate Blanchett. I mean, I really love her. But Galadriel....she ain't. Period. Especially in a world where Jane Seymour is still really beautiful.

Sauron being a huge flaming eye, suspended between two electrodes kind of left me unimpressed too.

Oh and BTW, Saruman didn't direct the shitty weather on Caradhras. It was the power and malevolence of the mountain itself that caused it. So....in your face, Saruman!

 

[L3ggy]

I can't believe that he left out the mighty Glorfindel.

 

[Shifty]

I can't believe that he left out the mighty Glorfindel.

Or Tom Bombadil! :dunno:

 

[L3ggy]

I understand why Tom was left out, but Glorfindel?

 

[Mayhem]

I tend to skip over the Tom Bombadil part in the book. :shy:

 

[Rane1071]

LOTR was a huge disappointment for those of us that read and re-read the books (and The Hobbit....and the appendices.....and The Silmarillion). Aragorn was much cooler in the books, and had some great moments that were left out of the movies. Theoden and Faramir got royally screwed over. And there is no fuckin' way in a million years that Elrond is going to let his cherished daughter, Evenstar of his people and direct descendent of Luthien the Fair; hop on a horse and go out by herself.....with or without Nazgul in the neighborhood. The role of Arwen should have been kept small and handed to Adriana Lima, or someone of comparable hotness.

And don't get me wrong, I love Cate Blanchett. I mean, I really love her. But Galadriel....she ain't. Period. Especially in a world where Jane Seymour is still really beautiful.

Sauron being a huge flaming eye, suspended between two electrodes kind of left me unimpressed too.

Oh and BTW, Saruman didn't direct the shitty weather on Caradhras. It was the power and malevolence of the mountain itself that caused it. So....in your face, Saruman!

Couldn't agree more. I thought the movies were very ordinary, probably because I'm such a big lover of the books (all of them) and having read them from a young age I had my own "picture" of them in my head.

 

[TheSpokenWheel]

yeah, I can definitely see why Bombadil isn't in the movies, because he's in the books somewhat briefly and you'd have to spend 30 minutes of the movie on him just to have the slightest idea what the fuck is up with him (they did put one of his rhymes in the extended cut of the two towers though). I must admit, I saw the movies first, primarily because they came out when I was at an age when there was no way I would have been able to comprehend the tolkien language if I'd tried to read them.

 

[L3ggy]

Same here, TSW.

 

[Patrick_S]

There sure is a whole lot of nerd talk in this thread. I like it.

 

[darthtexan]

I like both trilogies, but I slightly prefer the new one. Obviously the old one is more popular, but that is because the old one is more commercial in nature and people are more nastalgic for it. Its just that other than the music, sound effects, and b movie acting, they are completely different types of movies.

The OT is Buck Rogers. The PT is Greek Tragedy
The OT has mideval style sword fighting, the PT has samurai sword fighting
The OT is more realism, the PT is more romanticism
The OT has a more used look, the PT has a more pristine, new look
The OT is morally absolute, the PT is morally ambiguous
The OT plot is more linear, the PT plot is more clustered
The OT is character driven, the PT is plot driven
The OT is more simple, the PT is more complex
The OT is full of smugglers, pirates, and farmboys, and the PT is full of monks and politicians.
THe OT has way more adventure, the PT has way more political intrigue and plotting.

Dont expect Darth Vader to be the badass that you thought he was in the OT. He was afterall a flawed man and had to fall from grace some how.
Dont expect the Jedi Order to be the all -knowing, all powerfull, all wise organization that you thought they were from watching the OT. After all, they did have to get themselves extinguished somehow.

 

[Sam Fisher]

I like both trilogies, but I slightly prefer the new one. Obviously the old one is more popular, but that is because the old one is more commercial in nature and people are more nastalgic for it. Its just that other than the music, sound effects, and b movie acting, they are completely different types of movies.

The OT is Buck Rogers. The PT is Greek Tragedy
The OT has mideval style sword fighting, the PT has samurai sword fighting
The OT is more realism, the PT is more romanticism
The OT has a more used look, the PT has a more pristine, new look
The OT is morally absolute, the PT is morally ambiguous
The OT plot is more linear, the PT plot is more clustered
The OT is character driven, the PT is plot driven
The OT is more simple, the PT is more complex
The OT is full of smugglers, pirates, and farmboys, and the PT is full of monks and politicians.
THe OT has way more adventure, the PT has way more political intrigue and plotting.

Dont expect Darth Vader to be the badass that you thought he was in the OT. He was afterall a flawed man and had to fall from grace some how.
Dont expect the Jedi Order to be the all -knowing, all powerfull, all wise organization that you thought they were from watching the OT. After all, they did have to get themselves extinguished somehow.

Thank you. That is by far the best response in this thread. :goodpost: