Re: Who would do better?

Yeah, actually, I think you have a point.  The fact that GL is a special FX whore, must have had something to do with it.  I mean, come on.  Every clone trooper in the new trilogy was digital. Every one.  They had zero armor made for the films.  Someone needs to punch that man in the throat.

If ya love me . . .And ya know me . . . And ya've seen me . . .
I'm Old Gregggggggg!

Re: Who would do better?

lol.

Re: Who would do better?

You know, I just watched Queen of the Damned a few night ago, and I was thiking "Lestat looks a lot like Anakin!" XD
But anyways, I could see Stuart in the role as Anakin, but just because he looks like Hayden. Quite honestly, I wasn't that impressed with his acting either (or the movie, Queen of the Damned).

-BFFC Manji aka Jess

Re: Who would do better?

Lestat probably would have been better. Hayden's anger was forced. and he just seemed so...bitchy. He just didnt look or act or talk like the person who would eventually become Darth Vader.

Est Sularus Oth Mithas
I am a Role Playing Gamer, like my father before me.

Re: Who would do better?

any body but haden PLEASE just not Nicolas Cage please (i hate him)

Re: Who would do better?

The Yautja wrote:

Yeah, actually, I think you have a point.  The fact that GL is a special FX whore, must have had something to do with it.  I mean, come on.  Every clone trooper in the new trilogy was digital. Every one.  They had zero armor made for the films.  Someone needs to punch that man in the throat.

From the way you say it,I can assume that you don't like that Lucas is a special FX "whore".But let me say something.Why not be?I mean,SW is a science fiction series that surely needs to hold its reputation,and that reputation is only achieved through S.FX.Compared to other movies that use special FX,from Chronicles of Riddick to LOTR,I understand that Lucas MUST use special FX in order to continue selling SW.If he didn't,I'm sure we would say that he is outdated and must use the new technology....

Fear! Fear attracts the fearful...fear is my ally.

Re: Who would do better?

what he means by Lucas being a SFX whore is that, if you watch Episodes II and III, 75-90% of the entire film is CGI.

Re: Who would do better?

Hayden did a good job. Man it would have been cool if the clones were of Mr.T.

calvinanglin@gmail.com

Re: Who would do better?

Exactly.  Lucas started off great.  The entire trilogy was first made with about 15-20% CGI.  They used minitures alot, which is a much better way to do it.  Lord of the rings used mostly prosthetics and minitures, and it looked great.  Then he redid them again and again, with more and more SFX, and made them worse.  See where I'm going with this?

If ya love me . . .And ya know me . . . And ya've seen me . . .
I'm Old Gregggggggg!

Re: Who would do better?

I do not mind the amount of CGI that George Lucas uses or the stuff that has been re-edited into episodes 4-6 (well apart from the scene with Han and Greedo)

The Yautja wrote:

Yeah, actually, I think you have a point.  The fact that GL is a special FX whore, must have had something to do with it.  I mean, come on.  Every clone trooper in the new trilogy was digital. Every one.  They had zero armor made for the films.  Someone needs to punch that man in the throat.

I think that is a bit harsh though. Sometimes I think it is a little wasteful to make so much armour to get so little use out of it.

I also think that Lord of the rings was able to get away without using a lot of CGI because there was not much technology used in the books.

Jedi photographer - May the focus be with me.
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/devil_girl/]Photographs[/url]

Re: Who would do better?

yea, LOTR had a lot of stuff that really couldn't happen well without CGI.

37 (edited by cujo Monday, June 4, 2007 2:32 pm)

Re: Who would do better?

Devil Girl wrote:

I do not mind the amount of CGI that George Lucas uses or the stuff that has been re-edited into episodes 4-6 (well apart from the scene with Han and Greedo)

The Yautja wrote:

Yeah, actually, I think you have a point.  The fact that GL is a special FX whore, must have had something to do with it.  I mean, come on.  Every clone trooper in the new trilogy was digital. Every one.  They had zero armor made for the films.  Someone needs to punch that man in the throat.

I think that is a bit harsh though. Sometimes I think it is a little wasteful to make so much armour to get so little use out of it.

the effects in LotR r entirely different. and if you recall they filmed in new zealand, not a sound studio lined with green plastic. in space battles i say the more effects the better...but when shooting a scene with people and places, i think you have to be real...or mostly real.

i was watching the old trilogy this weekend and, yeah alot of the effects r dated but it did not distract me from the story. what did distract me was a beak on the sarlacc. (btw still annoyed with fetts rediculous demise)

special effects enhance a movie but should never be asked to carry it. LotR had a strong cast and a visionary director...sadly the same cannot be said for the new trilogy. in an odd sidenote, ive heard lucas wanted others to direct- ron howard and speilberg but they would not.

"mmmm, pistol whip." -Homer Simpson
[url=http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=42831046]Cujos' MySpace[/url]

Re: Who would do better?

ps- you can't hear an explosion in space.

Re: Who would do better?

The Yautja wrote:

Exactly.  Lucas started off great.  The entire trilogy was first made with about 15-20% CGI.  They used minitures alot, which is a much better way to do it.  Lord of the rings used mostly prosthetics and minitures, and it looked great.  Then he redid them again and again, with more and more SFX, and made them worse.  See where I'm going with this?

Oh I see your point now.But in my opinion,I can't find the new trilogy worse.I like them both the same.

Fear! Fear attracts the fearful...fear is my ally.

Re: Who would do better?

cujo wrote:
Devil Girl wrote:

I do not mind the amount of CGI that George Lucas uses or the stuff that has been re-edited into episodes 4-6 (well apart from the scene with Han and Greedo)

The Yautja wrote:

Yeah, actually, I think you have a point.  The fact that GL is a special FX whore, must have had something to do with it.  I mean, come on.  Every clone trooper in the new trilogy was digital. Every one.  They had zero armor made for the films.  Someone needs to punch that man in the throat.

I think that is a bit harsh though. Sometimes I think it is a little wasteful to make so much armour to get so little use out of it.

the effects in LotR r entirely different. and if you recall they filmed in new zealand, not a sound studio lined with green plastic. in space battles i say the more effects the better...but when shooting a scene with people and places, i think you have to be real...or mostly real.

i was watching the old trilogy this weekend and, yeah alot of the effects r dated but it did not distract me from the story. what did distract me was a beak on the sarlacc. (btw still annoyed with fetts rediculous demise)

special effects enhance a movie but should never be asked to carry it. LotR had a strong cast and a visionary director...sadly the same cannot be said for the new trilogy. in an odd sidenote, ive heard lucas wanted others to direct- ron howard and speilberg but they would not.

I understand what you mean. It would have been funkier for him to have filmed on location and then added affects in. But I suppose he did what was easier to do, and it is a lot easier to work from a studio from his point of view.

I also think though that if he would have had more special effects in the original trilogy if he could have.

Fett II, you also would not see huge explosions in space due to the lack of oxygen.

I agree with Darth Maul Clone. I like episodes 1-3 just as much as episodes 4-6. They are different but just as enjoyable.

I am actually going off LOTR. It looks funky and there is a great cast but after reading the books to my eldest son I have started to realise how much he has got wrong with the film. It is not so much the things he has missed out (which is understandable) but it is the fact he has changed how events happen in the book and even changed the ending that really annoyed. I do not want to go too much into the portrayal of the Ents but it is really, really annoying and when I have seen the film I really want to forward past those parts.

Jedi photographer - May the focus be with me.
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/devil_girl/]Photographs[/url]

Re: Who would do better?

I think it was so load it was not able to.

calvinanglin@gmail.com

Re: Who would do better?

poor Tom Bombadil... and Saruman's death was incorrect. yeah, i was a bit ticked too with the ending, but the movies were still really good (sorry I saw before I read, but I've noticed the major differences as well)

Re: Who would do better?

Okay I l absolutely love LotR.  Trying to get my hands on that new one Christopher published.  I have to say LotR was one of the most accurate books turned movies I have ever seen.  And it was still lacking but they did the best they could.  The timeline was a bit off in terms of where things happened in the movies eg Death of Boromir in Fellowship when it should have been in Two Towers and Shelob in Return when it should have been in Two Towers.

[i]Like I told your captain, the orphange attacked me.  It was self-defense.[/i]  -Richard the Warlock  [url]http://archive.lfgcomic.com/lfg0002.gif[/url]

Re: Who would do better?

eh, there were a lot of changes Sev.

Re: Who would do better?

But it was still one of the most accurate movie to book translation I have seen.  Comparing to the most recent one I've seen (Eragon) it was amazing.

[i]Like I told your captain, the orphange attacked me.  It was self-defense.[/i]  -Richard the Warlock  [url]http://archive.lfgcomic.com/lfg0002.gif[/url]

Re: Who would do better?

There were changes to LotR.  I really was annoyed when they skipped certain parts, especially some I was looking forward to seeing.  BUT, in my humble opinion, it is still the best book turned movie I have EVER seen.  Eragon is an okay action flick, despite its fast pace, but it is NOTHING compared to LotR's book-movie conversion.  Heck, it wasnt even close to the book it was based off of, save for the characters' names.  And, besides, imagine what the actors, and directors, and other cast members had to go through for LotR.  It was one of the most well-known, and most well-loved fantasy books ever.  The pressure to turn it into a respectable movie would be astronomical.  Considering all this, the movie trilogy exceeded themselves.  I say hats off to them.

Due to maintenance problems, the light at the end of the tunnel will not be in operation today.  Sorry for any inconvenience this may cause.

Re: Who would do better?

agreed. After all, Return of the King did win everything it was nominated for.

Re: Who would do better?

I think that Return of the king won the awards as they were all saved up for that, as the other films did not do so well.

I am afraid I seem to dislike the films more and more every time I see it. I just seem to find new things with it that are not done right and it is really beginning to annoy now sadly.

Also another thing that really gets me is that while I understand why things get missed out I do not like seeing things added in that were not in the book. In my opinion if the scenes that were not in the book were not in the films then there would be more space for things that were missed out that were in the book.

I do not think it is the best film adaptation for the reasons that I have stated. I do still enjoy it but not as much as I did before I re-read the lord of the rings.

Jedi photographer - May the focus be with me.
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/devil_girl/]Photographs[/url]

Re: Who would do better?

I dident Like haden in episode II,but i think he did a exallent job in episode III, he realley chaught the dark side of anikin

Re: Who would do better?

Yeah I agree!

calvinanglin@gmail.com