@FelixTheory Yeah, but the point I was making, is that they were ground breaking films on a technical level. Their bad films, but they have some quality. And objective perceptions, differ from person to person, because art is subjective. There is no unquestionably good or bad films. Somebody will find something to criticize in any film, no matter how good it is.
@Churchx77 hey man, i was not trying to offended you or anything, i was just saying, yeah it looks great but was no technical marvel. the technology already existed and they did not advance it any farther, they just used it as much as possible. things like Jurassic park changed movies forever technically, that's what makes it a technical marvel. and star wars did not do any such thing. ok the old trilogy did, but the new ones did not.
@MrCarkeys42 Actually the "Star Wars" prequels brought High Definition to the big screen, and they were the first films to really use digital sets in a good way.
@Transformers217 .............i thought that the digital "sets" looked like shit, no digital set was ever used in a good way because they should not exist. they look bad, it limits the actors, and it shows laziness, and high definition to the big screen? what the fuck does that mean? you cant have high def in a cinema, whatever........ look i see where this is going, i have no desire to get into some YouTube comment fight about the way films are made, so whatever, say what you like, i dont care.
@MrCarkeys42 That's your opinion, and I don't like the prequels either. But those films were a "first" of their kind. Jar Jar Binks was the first CGI character ever created, and the digital sets were ground breaking. So you can dislike the films, but they were still ground breaking. And the reason that High Definition is in theaters, is because of the "Star Wars" prequels.
@Transformers217 oh man i am sorry, i thought you were still Churchx77, sorry for sounding mean, i thought he was still arguing me, no offense implied. none taken?
@Churchx77 no, i would rather watch twilight then star wars 1-3. at least twilight wasn't some kind of big disappointment or something, everyone knew the books were bad, and everyone knows the movies are bad. star wars 1-3 on the other hand will be burned into our brains as one of the biggest disappointments ever. and i wouldn't call them technical marvels. they were no Jurassic park.
Number 1: His review on ROTS has been up for a while now on his website.
Number 2: You don't like the prequels but you like Twilight? The prequels may not be perfect, but Twilight is the worst thing to ever come to theatres. That really is a commercial franchise designed to appeal to as many 13 year old girls as possible.
Everything about Twilight sucks, and you suck for hating on the prequels while enjoying that story made for girls and sissies.
@Transformers217 how so? i'll admit that Kristen Stewart's "ACTING" is hiliarious for how shit it is. (making hayden christensen's anakin look like a sterling performance is a VERY difficult feat.
but there's no dramatic tension,
there's no relatable characters unless you're so unsatisfied with your life that slitting your wrist becomes a cheerful pastime.
@Lostprophetzzz But Hayden's performance as Anakin wasn't sterling at all. There is more dramatic tension in the last 20 minutes of "Twilight", then in all three "Star Wars" prequels. And none of these films are good, but at least "Twilight" is watchable.
@Lostprophetzzz I disagree. There is more chemistry and emotions between Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattison in "Twilight", then between anybody from the "Star Wars" prequels. Liam Neeson was awful, and Ewan Mcgregor wasn't anything special.
"Twilight" showed some fantastic chemistry between Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattison. And it's far more entertaining than the "Star Wars" prequels.
it's just Kristen staring blankly and emotionlessly while pattinson broods.
there is no chemistry whatsoever..... neither of them can act,
and the only emotional value comes from physical attraction, it's another case of bullshit love at first sight. with a plot line based on a manipulative bitch.....
it's dumbasses like you that probably vote for kristen in acting awards...
@Lostprophetzzz Stop trying to insult me, for having an opinion. This is purely subjective, but I think Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattison have great chemistry. Individually, their acting is mediocre. But together, their great. They know how to bounce off of each other, and their seem to be pretty convincing. I love their chemistry.
@Lostprophetzzz Actually I should, because I have great taste in films. I admit that the "Twilight" films are not that good, but I enjoy the franchise. It's a subjective opinion. I also love "2001: A Space Odyssey", "Blade Runner", "The Tree Of Life", "The New World", "Andrei Rublev", "Intolerance", "Vertigo", "Citizen Kane", "Neon Genesis Evangelion", and many other great films.
@Lostprophetzzz And you can't go around, trying to pretend that your opinion is based on objective facts. It's not. Opinions are purely subjective, and they differ from person to person. There is no objectively good, or bad film. There is just a consensus, that declares one film to be good or bad. And that consensus tends to change over time. "Blade Runner" was universally panned by the critics when it came out, now it's considered to be a masterpiece. It was a cult classic, now it's a classic.
@Transformers217 that's because Blade Runner had good ideas but was quite flawed in practice.
twilight doesn't even have good ideas, writing or execution look dude i understand that everything is subjective to a certain extent.but it is possible to judge things at least partially objectively,
twilight has none of the charm or creative spark that blade runner did.
it's made purely for the purpose of attracting dumbasses like yourself, for a quick profit.
@Lostprophetzzz "Blade Runner" had flaws, but it was a masterpiece. It had great performances, incredible themes and philosophy, great dialogue, with beautiful visuals and aesthetics. It's easily one of the top 3 best sci-fi masterpieces ever made. I give it a 10/10.
@Lostprophetzzz You can only judge things, from an objective perception. But your opinion is not based on objective facts. "Twilight" is a charming film, with great chemistry between the two leads, it has nice cinematography, and it's just a cute, fun, and entertaining film. I give the first "Twilight" film a 6/10. So please stop trying to insult me, for having an opinion. Art and entertainment is subjective. Even objective perceptions, are subjective.
@Lostprophetzzz I disagree. The plot-holes in the "Star Wars" prequels are laughably bad, the acting is terrible, the love story is atrocious, the cinematography and aesthetics are ugly in "Attack of the Clones", and the execution is consistently lame.
Intelligent people can enjoy all sorts of entertainment. I'm not insulting you for appreciating the "Star Wars" prequels, so please don't insult me for enjoying "Twilight."
@Lostprophetzzz It took three years to make each "Star Wars" film, and their terrible. The problem is that the scripts were written in one draft and had no rewrites, so nobody could fix any of the plot-holes, or inconsistent writing.
@Transformers217 whereas twilight changed dialogue from the already bad source material and somehow managed to make it worse. as well as screwing up on the delivery of characters....
it's one thing to screw up an entirely new plotline.
but twilight managed to screw up an already written plotline.
the books aren't exactly good.
but the production team behind the movies managed to misinterpret and tweak to the point of no return.
@Lostprophetzzz I thought "Twilight" was well written. Sure, the dialogue was cheesy, but the chemistry between the two leads was great enough, to make me ignore the bad dialogue. The books aren't good, and the films are probably on the same level.
every legitimate complaint of the SW prequels from a vaguely objective standpoint is true of twilight to a far greater extent.
SW prequels have bad acting. Twilight has Horrific acting. so on and so forth.
i know that a true objective standpoint is and inconceivable notion. but when most critics call the worst of the prequels (AOTC) better than the best of the twilight saga (eclipse) then it should be at least somewhat indicative.
@Lostprophetzzz But that's not an objective, that's just the critics opinions. There are plenty of people who disagree with me. Myself included. The "Twilight" films are a lot better than the "Star Wars" prequels. That is my opinion.
@Lostprophetzzz No, I have a good critical analysis. And I admit that the acting and dialogue in "Twilight" is weak, but the chemistry between the two leads is fantastic. My objective to reviewing, praising, or criticizing a film is purely subjective. The cinematography and aesthetics in "Twilight" is also beautiful. There are reviews that have praised the first "Twilight" film. Are they not going by an objective standard? Or do you just say that they lack something, because you disagree?
@Lostprophetzzz But those objective standards are subjective. You're just claiming that I lack a form of critical analysis on film, because you disagree with my opinion on "Twilight." That's just ridiculous. All opinions are valid, and I've backed up my opinion. Art and entertainment is subjective. I've shown you that I have great taste in cinema, and I admit that the "Twilight" films are flawed and mediocre, but their entertaining. And their vastly superior to the "Star Wars" prequels.
Man, screw these guys. I don't understand you liking twilights, but to defend the prequels is beyond absurd. How difficult a movie is to make doesn't fucking matter. The CG scenes in the prequels are crap. The color design is beyond bad. Most-everything about the prequels is bad/wrong. At least I could imagine laughing through a Twilight. Watching any of the 3 prequels is a task, at best.
@Transformers217 Yeah, I remember being dissapointed at the end of every one of them. In fact, the point where he says "...this is the part where you remembered you're a human being..." was eerily accurate to how I felt at that PRECISE moment in the movie. Boring movies about crap that had to happen for Lucas to make more money.
how can you like twilight and not the prequels? twilight is a fad, people will forget it very soon. star wars is universal and despite their flaws the prequels will be just as remembered as the originals
@pizzamanchris14 The "Star Wars" prequels are also a fad. They'll be remembered for being disappointing achievements. They make "Twilight", look like "The Dark Knight."
@pizzamanchris14 The prequels will never be remembered as well as the originals. They were horrible in every aspect that made the originals classic and memorable
@zzyzx0788 Actually the reviews for the prequels have gotten a lot better. I don't know what their ever gonna be as beloved as the originals, but the hate might actually die down within the next 10 years.
The writing in the originals wasn't that great either. They just had great spectacle.
@Transformers217 ...do you mean the REVIEWS for the prequels will be just as remembered as the original trilogy? Or the actual movies themselves? Because really, the prequels will never be as remembered as the originals. Seriously.
The originals may have not been A+ dialogue, but it was decent at least, and the story telling and atmosphere was top notch. The prequels are just a big video game with one-dimensional characters
@zzyzx0788 Technically, the originals had one-dimensional characters as well. While "Phantom Menace" tried to be more unconventional and original. And I could see the prequels being just as remembered, because they did digital sets in the right way, and were the first film to use a fully realized CGI character name Jar Jar Binks. Nobody liked him, but he was ground-breaking. And the prequels brought High Definition to the big screen, which is very important in my opinion.
@Churchx77 I thought "Twilight" had a nice story, nice aesthetics and cinematography. The technical aspects to the "Star Wars" prequels couldn't save them from being a complete travesty.
Man! Hell would be an endless loop of the prequels with the new ROTJ dance number as the cherry on top. I think there has to be a psychological disorder category created to explain such tragedy.
@plavins1 say what? a new hope does not hold up well at all. ROTS trumps it in every way - cinematography, acting, lightsaber choreography, music, space battles, set design, sound effects, you name it. TESB is still the best of the 6 films, but ROTS is second best.
@plavins1 then you should watch MY star wars reviews, because I explain the hypocrisy of RLM, and have every single point he makes about the prequels applies to the originals. that is, unless you think leia returning to the rebel alliance in a ship she KNOWS is being tracked isn't an enormous fucking plothole. thanks for playing.
@plavins1 are you saying making computer animations is easy???.........really you go ahead and make one fucking battle cruiser, or even a tiny blaster that looked remotely like what was in the prequels. the prequels sucked dont get me wrong but CGI takes talent and anyone who doesnt think so is a moron. RLM point was that the CGI in the films wasnt properly intergrated into the films, it didnt look like the actors were interacting with their environments. AKA: NOT GOOD FILM MAKING
@Transformers217 in terms of film making yes it is, in terms of actual skill and intelligence needed, no it isnt. a lot easier to learn how to work a camera and learn your film theory. making cgi, great cgi requires a great deal more talent.
@IGNsucks Not really. I think it's much easier to create CGI and use digital sets, then actually shooting on location. There's no real challenge with creating CGI. In terms of actual skill and intelligence, the process of creating CGI is much easier. At least in my opinion.
@Transformers217 well yeah cause its so cheap. why spend more money when you can get the samething with cgi. using the prequels is a bad example. I mean toy story is all cgi and that movie is amazing.
@IGNsucks "Toy Story 3" is an animated film, so I don't mind that. But using mostly CGI in a live action film can become very tedious. And it's just too convenient. There's no real challenge in making it. At least in my opinion.
There's a reason to why Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, and James Cameron are more focused on using CGI these days. Because it's convenient.
@pacificimporters "A New Hope" is a classic, and one of the most ground-breaking fantasy films ever made. "Revenge Of The Sith" had terrible acting, awful dialogue, boring CGI with no emotional weight to it, boring action, it's just a boring film.
@Transformers217 ROTS is a new classic, wait 30 years and see if kids lovingly remember it. they're both classics, ANH was just more groundbreaking. they both had awful dialogue and terrible acting. all of star wars does. and some people said the same thing about ANH in 1977 - it was just FX porn, no real story, terrible dialogue, and would be the death of cinema as we know it.
@pacificimporters People have already forgotten about "Revenge of the Sith." It's considered to be a major disappointment.
"A New Hope" had better acting, dialogue, special effects, direction, and consistent writing. Most people considered it to be a masterpiece. Not a lot of people ever said a bad thing about it. It was ground breaking, and it's one of the most influential sci-fi films of all time. "Revenge Of The Sith" isn't ground-breaking at all, and it is not influential.
@Transformers217 It's strange, nobody seems to compliment ROTJ but they don't criticize it either- its' my favourite! Why does everyone feel so neutral about it!
@Transformers217 You're right. The SWP do suck more. Both "romances" are pretty unbelievable but Mary Sue and Mr. Right Vampire aren't as contrived as Panda Bear and Bad Acting Anny.
@Transformers217 ehh while the prequels suck, revenge of the sith is tolerable, i wouldnt go as far to say that New Moon or Eclipse is better than Revenge of the Sith.
@jmiester25 I never said that "New Moon" is better than "Revenge of the Sith." I only consider "Twilight" and "Eclipse" to be better than "Revenge of the Sith."
"New Moon" is one of the worst films I have ever seen. And while "Revenge of the Sith" is okay, it's still not a good film.
@Transformers217 In my opinion the Twilight Movies are better then the prequels because anyone can go back and make another Vampire movie that doesn't suck(No pun intended) that gives Vampires back their credibility as scary, non-sparkly beings of death and chaos. But with the Star Wars prequels, nobody can make one or salvage that mess without first acquiring the legal rights.
@Iacensolu No, "Episode 2" is easily the worst "Star Wars" film to date. If you're gonna try to rank it above "Star Wars", or "Empire Strikes Back", then you need a real argument.
Thumbs up if you want Harry's next review to be Terminator Salvation.
chevypillow247 1 day ago
Go and read about the differs between subjective and objective views guys.
Hey! I like lightsaber duels from Revenge of the Sith, and I know the film suck.
FelixTheory 1 week ago
@FelixTheory Yeah, but the point I was making, is that they were ground breaking films on a technical level. Their bad films, but they have some quality. And objective perceptions, differ from person to person, because art is subjective. There is no unquestionably good or bad films. Somebody will find something to criticize in any film, no matter how good it is.
Transformers217 1 week ago
@Churchx77 and i am not bias towards anything, i just don't like 1-3, they are honestly not good.
MrCarkeys42 2 weeks ago
@Churchx77 hey man, i was not trying to offended you or anything, i was just saying, yeah it looks great but was no technical marvel. the technology already existed and they did not advance it any farther, they just used it as much as possible. things like Jurassic park changed movies forever technically, that's what makes it a technical marvel. and star wars did not do any such thing. ok the old trilogy did, but the new ones did not.
MrCarkeys42 2 weeks ago
@MrCarkeys42 Actually the "Star Wars" prequels brought High Definition to the big screen, and they were the first films to really use digital sets in a good way.
Transformers217 2 weeks ago
@Transformers217 .............i thought that the digital "sets" looked like shit, no digital set was ever used in a good way because they should not exist. they look bad, it limits the actors, and it shows laziness, and high definition to the big screen? what the fuck does that mean? you cant have high def in a cinema, whatever........ look i see where this is going, i have no desire to get into some YouTube comment fight about the way films are made, so whatever, say what you like, i dont care.
MrCarkeys42 2 weeks ago
@MrCarkeys42 That's your opinion, and I don't like the prequels either. But those films were a "first" of their kind. Jar Jar Binks was the first CGI character ever created, and the digital sets were ground breaking. So you can dislike the films, but they were still ground breaking. And the reason that High Definition is in theaters, is because of the "Star Wars" prequels.
Transformers217 2 weeks ago
@Transformers217 oh man i am sorry, i thought you were still Churchx77, sorry for sounding mean, i thought he was still arguing me, no offense implied. none taken?
MrCarkeys42 2 weeks ago
@Churchx77 Episode 3 looks kinda out-dated now.
Transformers217 2 weeks ago
@Churchx77 no, i would rather watch twilight then star wars 1-3. at least twilight wasn't some kind of big disappointment or something, everyone knew the books were bad, and everyone knows the movies are bad. star wars 1-3 on the other hand will be burned into our brains as one of the biggest disappointments ever. and i wouldn't call them technical marvels. they were no Jurassic park.
MrCarkeys42 2 weeks ago
Im sorry, but not everyone Agrees with Mr. Plinkett. Everyon is allowed to disagree, even Mike Stoklosa agrees.
zachzilla26 4 months ago
Number 1: His review on ROTS has been up for a while now on his website.
Number 2: You don't like the prequels but you like Twilight? The prequels may not be perfect, but Twilight is the worst thing to ever come to theatres. That really is a commercial franchise designed to appeal to as many 13 year old girls as possible.
Everything about Twilight sucks, and you suck for hating on the prequels while enjoying that story made for girls and sissies.
extremechampion00 4 months ago
@extremechampion00 I saw his review, it was awesome. And at least "Twilight" is fun to watch. I can't really say that about "Attack of the Clones."
Transformers217 4 months ago
@Transformers217 how so? i'll admit that Kristen Stewart's "ACTING" is hiliarious for how shit it is. (making hayden christensen's anakin look like a sterling performance is a VERY difficult feat.
but there's no dramatic tension,
there's no relatable characters unless you're so unsatisfied with your life that slitting your wrist becomes a cheerful pastime.
Lostprophetzzz 2 months ago
@Lostprophetzzz But Hayden's performance as Anakin wasn't sterling at all. There is more dramatic tension in the last 20 minutes of "Twilight", then in all three "Star Wars" prequels. And none of these films are good, but at least "Twilight" is watchable.
Transformers217 2 months ago
@Transformers217 anakin is horrifically overplayed but at least he is physically capable of showing emotion.....
Kristen Stewart cannot even comprehend emotion.
Robert Pattinson doesn't try because HE HATES the movie, despite the fact that is one of the sole reasons for his fame.
and taylor lautner is just there to take his top off.
at least the prequels had decent performances from Ewan Mcgregor and Liam Neeson.
twilight has nothing....
Lostprophetzzz 2 months ago
@Lostprophetzzz I disagree. There is more chemistry and emotions between Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattison in "Twilight", then between anybody from the "Star Wars" prequels. Liam Neeson was awful, and Ewan Mcgregor wasn't anything special.
"Twilight" showed some fantastic chemistry between Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattison. And it's far more entertaining than the "Star Wars" prequels.
Transformers217 2 months ago
@Transformers217 you really are stupid........
CHEMISTRY?
it's just brooding!
there is no chemistry....
it's just Kristen staring blankly and emotionlessly while pattinson broods.
there is no chemistry whatsoever..... neither of them can act,
and the only emotional value comes from physical attraction, it's another case of bullshit love at first sight. with a plot line based on a manipulative bitch.....
it's dumbasses like you that probably vote for kristen in acting awards...
Lostprophetzzz 2 months ago
@Lostprophetzzz Stop trying to insult me, for having an opinion. This is purely subjective, but I think Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattison have great chemistry. Individually, their acting is mediocre. But together, their great. They know how to bounce off of each other, and their seem to be pretty convincing. I love their chemistry.
Transformers217 2 months ago
@Transformers217 if that's the case. then you shouldn't be reviewing movies
Lostprophetzzz 2 months ago
@Lostprophetzzz Actually I should, because I have great taste in films. I admit that the "Twilight" films are not that good, but I enjoy the franchise. It's a subjective opinion. I also love "2001: A Space Odyssey", "Blade Runner", "The Tree Of Life", "The New World", "Andrei Rublev", "Intolerance", "Vertigo", "Citizen Kane", "Neon Genesis Evangelion", and many other great films.
Transformers217 2 months ago
@Lostprophetzzz And you can't go around, trying to pretend that your opinion is based on objective facts. It's not. Opinions are purely subjective, and they differ from person to person. There is no objectively good, or bad film. There is just a consensus, that declares one film to be good or bad. And that consensus tends to change over time. "Blade Runner" was universally panned by the critics when it came out, now it's considered to be a masterpiece. It was a cult classic, now it's a classic.
Transformers217 2 months ago
@Transformers217 that's because Blade Runner had good ideas but was quite flawed in practice.
twilight doesn't even have good ideas, writing or execution look dude i understand that everything is subjective to a certain extent.but it is possible to judge things at least partially objectively,
twilight has none of the charm or creative spark that blade runner did.
it's made purely for the purpose of attracting dumbasses like yourself, for a quick profit.
but unanimous
Lostprophetzzz 2 months ago
@Lostprophetzzz "Blade Runner" had flaws, but it was a masterpiece. It had great performances, incredible themes and philosophy, great dialogue, with beautiful visuals and aesthetics. It's easily one of the top 3 best sci-fi masterpieces ever made. I give it a 10/10.
Transformers217 2 months ago
@Lostprophetzzz You can only judge things, from an objective perception. But your opinion is not based on objective facts. "Twilight" is a charming film, with great chemistry between the two leads, it has nice cinematography, and it's just a cute, fun, and entertaining film. I give the first "Twilight" film a 6/10. So please stop trying to insult me, for having an opinion. Art and entertainment is subjective. Even objective perceptions, are subjective.
Transformers217 2 months ago
@Transformers217 (note that this is part 2 of my reply)
each star wars prequel even if flawed took 3 years of consolidated effort.
the writing was poor. but there was a decent attempt made at wrapping up plotline threads and they managed to make the universe cohesive.
the cinematography was good.
and there was some genuinely interesting drama.
two friends turned against each other is vastly more interesting then a poor fantasy knockoff of better romances.
/watch?v=TIEJsf_cg70&feature=related
Lostprophetzzz 2 months ago
@Lostprophetzzz I disagree. The plot-holes in the "Star Wars" prequels are laughably bad, the acting is terrible, the love story is atrocious, the cinematography and aesthetics are ugly in "Attack of the Clones", and the execution is consistently lame.
Intelligent people can enjoy all sorts of entertainment. I'm not insulting you for appreciating the "Star Wars" prequels, so please don't insult me for enjoying "Twilight."
Transformers217 2 months ago
@Lostprophetzzz It took three years to make each "Star Wars" film, and their terrible. The problem is that the scripts were written in one draft and had no rewrites, so nobody could fix any of the plot-holes, or inconsistent writing.
Transformers217 2 months ago
@Transformers217 whereas twilight changed dialogue from the already bad source material and somehow managed to make it worse. as well as screwing up on the delivery of characters....
it's one thing to screw up an entirely new plotline.
but twilight managed to screw up an already written plotline.
the books aren't exactly good.
but the production team behind the movies managed to misinterpret and tweak to the point of no return.
Lostprophetzzz 2 months ago
@Lostprophetzzz I thought "Twilight" was well written. Sure, the dialogue was cheesy, but the chemistry between the two leads was great enough, to make me ignore the bad dialogue. The books aren't good, and the films are probably on the same level.
Transformers217 2 months ago
@Transformers217 again note that this is part two of a reply.
every legitimate complaint of the SW prequels from a vaguely objective standpoint is true of twilight to a far greater extent.
SW prequels have bad acting. Twilight has Horrific acting. so on and so forth.
i know that a true objective standpoint is and inconceivable notion. but when most critics call the worst of the prequels (AOTC) better than the best of the twilight saga (eclipse) then it should be at least somewhat indicative.
Lostprophetzzz 2 months ago
@Lostprophetzzz But that's not an objective, that's just the critics opinions. There are plenty of people who disagree with me. Myself included. The "Twilight" films are a lot better than the "Star Wars" prequels. That is my opinion.
Transformers217 2 months ago
@Transformers217 it is the subjective opinion of DOZENS of critics who are paid for their high standard of critical analysis.
when a dozen people who's JOB it is to critically analyze films say it then it has some OBJECTIVE weight.
you can LIKE twilight. i'm not saying you can't.
you can call it entertaining or engrossing as these are pure subjective criteria.
but to call the acting, chemistry, cinematography or plot even decent, just shows a lack of any form of critical analysis.
Lostprophetzzz 2 months ago
@Lostprophetzzz No, I have a good critical analysis. And I admit that the acting and dialogue in "Twilight" is weak, but the chemistry between the two leads is fantastic. My objective to reviewing, praising, or criticizing a film is purely subjective. The cinematography and aesthetics in "Twilight" is also beautiful. There are reviews that have praised the first "Twilight" film. Are they not going by an objective standard? Or do you just say that they lack something, because you disagree?
Transformers217 2 months ago
@Transformers217 (part two)
a reviewer is supposed to review based on two things.
his own opinion.
and general objective standards.
for instance you can like the movie "matilda" for it's general likeability and charm.
but to call the dialogue, acting, or cinematography good is just pretty dumb. as the movies sucks in these more objective areas.
you shouldn't review movies if you can't look at things from even a VAGUELY objective standard
Lostprophetzzz 2 months ago
@Lostprophetzzz But those objective standards are subjective. You're just claiming that I lack a form of critical analysis on film, because you disagree with my opinion on "Twilight." That's just ridiculous. All opinions are valid, and I've backed up my opinion. Art and entertainment is subjective. I've shown you that I have great taste in cinema, and I admit that the "Twilight" films are flawed and mediocre, but their entertaining. And their vastly superior to the "Star Wars" prequels.
Transformers217 2 months ago
lol WOW this guy is a JOKE. Sorry /obvious
phoenix7289 4 months ago
@phoenix7289 How so?
Transformers217 4 months ago
I cannot believe how there are ppl defending the prequels! This is absurd!
Basty135 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Basty135 well tell that to me.
zachzilla26 5 months ago
You look like Lando.
Ryu12543 5 months ago
@Ryu12543 Cool.
Transformers217 5 months ago
Man, screw these guys. I don't understand you liking twilights, but to defend the prequels is beyond absurd. How difficult a movie is to make doesn't fucking matter. The CG scenes in the prequels are crap. The color design is beyond bad. Most-everything about the prequels is bad/wrong. At least I could imagine laughing through a Twilight. Watching any of the 3 prequels is a task, at best.
bebopbountyhead 5 months ago
@bebopbountyhead Exactly. At least "Twilight" is fun.
Transformers217 5 months ago
@Transformers217 Yeah, I remember being dissapointed at the end of every one of them. In fact, the point where he says "...this is the part where you remembered you're a human being..." was eerily accurate to how I felt at that PRECISE moment in the movie. Boring movies about crap that had to happen for Lucas to make more money.
bebopbountyhead 5 months ago
@bebopbountyhead LOL "twilights" lol
bebopbountyhead 5 months ago
how can you like twilight and not the prequels? twilight is a fad, people will forget it very soon. star wars is universal and despite their flaws the prequels will be just as remembered as the originals
pizzamanchris14 6 months ago 3
@pizzamanchris14 The "Star Wars" prequels are also a fad. They'll be remembered for being disappointing achievements. They make "Twilight", look like "The Dark Knight."
Transformers217 6 months ago
@pizzamanchris14 The prequels will never be remembered as well as the originals. They were horrible in every aspect that made the originals classic and memorable
zzyzx0788 4 months ago
@zzyzx0788 Actually the reviews for the prequels have gotten a lot better. I don't know what their ever gonna be as beloved as the originals, but the hate might actually die down within the next 10 years.
The writing in the originals wasn't that great either. They just had great spectacle.
Transformers217 4 months ago
@Transformers217 ...do you mean the REVIEWS for the prequels will be just as remembered as the original trilogy? Or the actual movies themselves? Because really, the prequels will never be as remembered as the originals. Seriously.
The originals may have not been A+ dialogue, but it was decent at least, and the story telling and atmosphere was top notch. The prequels are just a big video game with one-dimensional characters
zzyzx0788 4 months ago
@zzyzx0788 Technically, the originals had one-dimensional characters as well. While "Phantom Menace" tried to be more unconventional and original. And I could see the prequels being just as remembered, because they did digital sets in the right way, and were the first film to use a fully realized CGI character name Jar Jar Binks. Nobody liked him, but he was ground-breaking. And the prequels brought High Definition to the big screen, which is very important in my opinion.
Transformers217 4 months ago
@Transformers217 No
shadowmyfeet 4 months ago
@pizzamanchris14 remembered BECAUSE of there flaws. that's a lot worse then something that's just forgotten.
MrCarkeys42 2 weeks ago
@Churchx77 I thought "Twilight" had a nice story, nice aesthetics and cinematography. The technical aspects to the "Star Wars" prequels couldn't save them from being a complete travesty.
Transformers217 6 months ago
TWILIGHT???
meh23p 7 months ago
Man! Hell would be an endless loop of the prequels with the new ROTJ dance number as the cherry on top. I think there has to be a psychological disorder category created to explain such tragedy.
40gabe 7 months ago
The original trilogy may have it's flaws but here's the difference between the prequels and originals....one of them sucked
ChainSaWRapt0rJesus 8 months ago
you like twilight?
*counfused*
nilsen93 10 months ago
0:01- Jetson?
ExplorerDS6789 11 months ago
@ExplorerDS6789 I think I said "Jensen." lol!
Transformers217 11 months ago
his ROTS review sucked because it was a good movie, better than A New Hope. check out my Star Wars reviews for a more unbiased look at the Prequels.
pacificimporters 1 year ago
@pacificimporters That review was excellent. And it's not better than "A New Hope."
"ROTS" is not even a good movie.
Transformers217 1 year ago
@Transformers217 you're right it's a fantastic movie.
pacificimporters 1 year ago
@pacificimporters Nah, it's just above average.
Transformers217 1 year ago
@Transformers217
actually, not even that...
zipoites 1 year ago
@zipoites It is.
Transformers217 1 year ago
Comment removed
plavins1 11 months ago
@plavins1 say what? a new hope does not hold up well at all. ROTS trumps it in every way - cinematography, acting, lightsaber choreography, music, space battles, set design, sound effects, you name it. TESB is still the best of the 6 films, but ROTS is second best.
pacificimporters 11 months ago
Comment removed
plavins1 11 months ago
@plavins1 then you should watch MY star wars reviews, because I explain the hypocrisy of RLM, and have every single point he makes about the prequels applies to the originals. that is, unless you think leia returning to the rebel alliance in a ship she KNOWS is being tracked isn't an enormous fucking plothole. thanks for playing.
pacificimporters 11 months ago
@pacificimporters The originals have their problems, but no where near as bad as the prequels.
Transformers217 11 months ago
@plavins1 are you saying making computer animations is easy???.........really you go ahead and make one fucking battle cruiser, or even a tiny blaster that looked remotely like what was in the prequels. the prequels sucked dont get me wrong but CGI takes talent and anyone who doesnt think so is a moron. RLM point was that the CGI in the films wasnt properly intergrated into the films, it didnt look like the actors were interacting with their environments. AKA: NOT GOOD FILM MAKING
IGNsucks 8 months ago
@IGNsucks I think CGI is a much easier process, than actually shooting on location.
Transformers217 8 months ago
@Transformers217 in terms of film making yes it is, in terms of actual skill and intelligence needed, no it isnt. a lot easier to learn how to work a camera and learn your film theory. making cgi, great cgi requires a great deal more talent.
IGNsucks 8 months ago
@IGNsucks Not really. I think it's much easier to create CGI and use digital sets, then actually shooting on location. There's no real challenge with creating CGI. In terms of actual skill and intelligence, the process of creating CGI is much easier. At least in my opinion.
Transformers217 7 months ago
@Transformers217 do you even now what goes into creating CGI?............if you did then you would realize how ridiculous that statement is.
IGNsucks 7 months ago
@IGNsucks I've seen the process, and it's just too convenient.
Transformers217 7 months ago
@Transformers217 well yeah cause its so cheap. why spend more money when you can get the samething with cgi. using the prequels is a bad example. I mean toy story is all cgi and that movie is amazing.
IGNsucks 7 months ago
@IGNsucks "Toy Story 3" is an animated film, so I don't mind that. But using mostly CGI in a live action film can become very tedious. And it's just too convenient. There's no real challenge in making it. At least in my opinion.
There's a reason to why Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, and James Cameron are more focused on using CGI these days. Because it's convenient.
Transformers217 7 months ago
@IGNsucks Yup, CGI is cheap and easy.
Transformers217 7 months ago
@Transformers217 its cheap, but its not easy.
IGNsucks 7 months ago
@IGNsucks It's much easier then actually building a set or two. The process of creating CGI is long, but it's easy. At least in my opinion.
Transformers217 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Transformers217 It isnt, give it a try and youll see how "easy" it is
IGNsucks 7 months ago
@pacificimporters "A New Hope" is a classic, and one of the most ground-breaking fantasy films ever made. "Revenge Of The Sith" had terrible acting, awful dialogue, boring CGI with no emotional weight to it, boring action, it's just a boring film.
Transformers217 7 months ago
@Transformers217 ROTS is a new classic, wait 30 years and see if kids lovingly remember it. they're both classics, ANH was just more groundbreaking. they both had awful dialogue and terrible acting. all of star wars does. and some people said the same thing about ANH in 1977 - it was just FX porn, no real story, terrible dialogue, and would be the death of cinema as we know it.
pacificimporters 7 months ago
@pacificimporters People have already forgotten about "Revenge of the Sith." It's considered to be a major disappointment.
"A New Hope" had better acting, dialogue, special effects, direction, and consistent writing. Most people considered it to be a masterpiece. Not a lot of people ever said a bad thing about it. It was ground breaking, and it's one of the most influential sci-fi films of all time. "Revenge Of The Sith" isn't ground-breaking at all, and it is not influential.
Transformers217 7 months ago
@pacificimporters Actually, "A New Hope" and "Empire Strikes Back" have brilliant performances, and great dialogue.
The "Star Wars" prequels are garbage.
Transformers217 7 months ago
@Transformers217 It's strange, nobody seems to compliment ROTJ but they don't criticize it either- its' my favourite! Why does everyone feel so neutral about it!
TheSevenCamels 7 months ago
He likes Twilight over the star wars prequels, wow he needs to get his priorities straight.
NeoZource 1 year ago
@NeoZource "Twilight" is a lot better then the "Star Wars" prequels. At least in my opinion.
Transformers217 1 year ago
@Transformers217 You're right. The SWP do suck more. Both "romances" are pretty unbelievable but Mary Sue and Mr. Right Vampire aren't as contrived as Panda Bear and Bad Acting Anny.
NeverAloneForever 1 year ago
@Transformers217 ehh while the prequels suck, revenge of the sith is tolerable, i wouldnt go as far to say that New Moon or Eclipse is better than Revenge of the Sith.
jmiester25 1 year ago
@jmiester25 I never said that "New Moon" is better than "Revenge of the Sith." I only consider "Twilight" and "Eclipse" to be better than "Revenge of the Sith."
"New Moon" is one of the worst films I have ever seen. And while "Revenge of the Sith" is okay, it's still not a good film.
Transformers217 1 year ago
@Transformers217 oh. my bad. i dont consider the revenge of the sith a good film either. i consider it a creative idea with a very poor delivery
jmiester25 1 year ago
@Transformers217 In my opinion the Twilight Movies are better then the prequels because anyone can go back and make another Vampire movie that doesn't suck(No pun intended) that gives Vampires back their credibility as scary, non-sparkly beings of death and chaos. But with the Star Wars prequels, nobody can make one or salvage that mess without first acquiring the legal rights.
garamonde 1 year ago
@garamonde Hey why did you block me when I thought we were friends? Are you mad at me for disagreeing?
animatedimage92 1 year ago
@animatedimage92 I've blocked you, I think if you had any powers of deduction at all you'd understand I want you to no longer communicate with me.
garamonde 1 year ago
@garamonde I agree.
Transformers217 1 year ago
why are you begging him? it's obvious he's gonna review it eventually, why wouldn't he? they went over 1 million views no shit he's gonna review it
PFPrap2000 1 year ago
@PFPrap2000 Yeah, but I want to see it now! lol! :)
Transformers217 1 year ago
@PFPrap2000 But his review for "Star Trek" was excellent!
Transformers217 1 year ago 2
u suck
Iacensolu 1 year ago
@Iacensolu Why is that?
Transformers217 1 year ago
@Transformers217 Because Episode 2 is the best one
Iacensolu 1 year ago
@Iacensolu No, "Episode 2" is easily the worst "Star Wars" film to date. If you're gonna try to rank it above "Star Wars", or "Empire Strikes Back", then you need a real argument.
Transformers217 1 year ago
Yeah fuck dog cop. Fuck dog cop. fuck dog cop.
MyDormantSoul 1 year ago
@MyDormantSoul I agree! Lol!
Transformers217 1 year ago
@VenusVoicez Because I think he might either review "Star Trek", or "Twilight!"
Transformers217 1 year ago
@Transformers217
Thanks for this video! Somehow, I think Stoklasa really decided to review this film after seeing you begging for it 10 times, so my thanks to you!
twooffour 1 year ago