Review of Star Wars "Revenge of the Sith" Episode III

[wacki]

"It sucked less . . . barely." (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1815969,00.asp)

He goes on to say "What did impress me was the technology used to deliver the images to the silver screen."

[censored], I was so excited about the blood, carnage, and the pic Dynasty posted. [censored] [censored] fuckity [censored] George Lucas is a [censored] monkey.

[tdarko]

i am too stupid to know what [ QUOTE ]

"It sucked less . . . barely."


[/ QUOTE ] means.

if it barely sucked less than 4,5,6 then it was good but if it sucked barely less than 1,2 then it wasn't very good.

[stabn]

[ QUOTE ]
i am too stupid to know what [ QUOTE ]

"It sucked less . . . barely."


[/ QUOTE ] means.

if it barely sucked less than 4,5,6 then it was good but if it sucked barely less than 1,2 then it wasn't very good.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is quite obvious that it does not refer to 4,5,6.

[tdarko]

i didn't read the article.

[daryn]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
"It sucked less . . . barely." (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1815969,00.asp)

He goes on to say "What did impress me was the technology used to deliver the images to the silver screen."

[censored], I was so excited about the blood, carnage, and the pic Dynasty posted. [censored] [censored] fuckity [censored] George Lucas is a [censored] monkey.

[/ QUOTE ]

who cares what some clown said about the movie. go see it and make up your own mind. are you really getting pissed about a review? i hate critics and reviewers

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
who cares what some clown said about the movie. go see it and make up your own mind. are you really getting pissed about a review? i hate critics and reviewers

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too. Still this isn't your average "I love the Thin Red Line" movie reviewer. I agree most movie reviewers suck but this review is like Dynasty saying that a Harry Potter flick sucked. This guy has Star Wars screensavers on his computer for crying out loud.

Not good.

But your right, I will probably go and see it anyway. This might be enough for me to wait for the DVD though.

[tdarko]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree most movie reviewers suck but this review is like Dynasty saying that a Harry Potter flick sucked. This guy has Star Wars screensavers on his computer for crying out loud.



[/ QUOTE ]
then maybe a normal star wars fan (not so fanatical) would like the movie. sometimes when people know "too much" it ruins the movie for them.

[stabn]

[ QUOTE ]
i didn't read the article.

[/ QUOTE ]

Neither did i.

[tdarko]

[ QUOTE ]
Neither did i.

[/ QUOTE ]
proof that i am dumb /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Voltron87]

You might think that with the Vader avatar and all I was a huge Star Wars geek but I'm really not.

The first three (4-6) were amazing. They were extremely well done, and had a great feeling to them. So far 1 and 2 have been awful, just awful, so out of place in terms of the originals, they lack all the qualities which people liked about 4-6.

I had my hopes up for this one, sort of, since it has a potential premise to be awesome, but not really given how bad the production and direction has been on the new movies.

[hogua]

I saw it last week, and it was better then the last two, but not even in the same league as the first 3 (episodes 4,5,and 6).


The effects were good and not too overdone like the last one, but the acting, the script, and the direction (of non-action scences) was just above a college film project.

[DeezNuts]

[ QUOTE ]
who cares what some clown said about the movie. go see it and make up your own mind. are you really getting pissed about a review? i hate critics and reviewers

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't care if the review was in the bible, I'm going to see the movie before I make a post cryin' about it.

DN

[The once and future king]

I must add that I am deeply deeply shocked that the auter/genius that brought us TPM and AOTC has turned out another steaming pile of dung of a movie.

GASP!!!!!!!!!

Cmon, you know the best we can hope for in this movie is that the lightsaber fights etc are OK and we dont have to cringe to much in the scenes that link the fights together.

[woodguy]

[ QUOTE ]
The first three (4-6) were amazing

[/ QUOTE ]

That statement is incorrect.

Return of the Jedi was nearly ruined by Mark Hamill's atrocious acting and Lucas having cute furry freaking puppets everywhere.

Star Wars is in a class on its own.

Empire Strikes Back is the best movie ever.

Regards,
Woodguy

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]

Return of the Jedi was nearly ruined by Mark Hamill's atrocious acting and Lucas having cute furry freaking puppets everywhere.

[/ QUOTE ]

Those furry things were supposed to be wookies!!!! Lucas [censored] up his own story!!!

[ QUOTE ]
Star Wars is in a class on its own.

Empire Strikes Back is the best movie ever.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed on both counts. Except I would say "one of the best" its hard to make absolutes like that and all.

[A_C_Slater]

When Star Wars 4, 5, and 6 came out most of us were just kids. People tend to judge the new movies based on their mentality and memory of the first 3 films that they saw when they were children. I bet if you saw the first trilogy (456) for the first time when you were in your mid 20's it would all just seem like a bad sci-fi movie, like Stargate or something.

Likewise, I bet 8-12 year olds that watch the new Star Wars movies think of them as being the coolest movies ever.


Also, was Mark Hamill's acting any less atrocious in parts 4 and 5? Or are you claiming that it was specifically bad only in part 6?

[Voltron87]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The first three (4-6) were amazing

[/ QUOTE ]

That statement is incorrect.

Return of the Jedi was nearly ruined by Mark Hamill's atrocious acting and Lucas having cute furry freaking puppets everywhere.

Star Wars is in a class on its own.

Empire Strikes Back is the best movie ever.

Regards,
Woodguy

[/ QUOTE ]

Empire Strikes Back &gt;&gt;&gt; ROTJ, you're right. I still think ROTJ isn't as autrocious as you make it sound.


ESB &gt;&gt; ANH &gt;&gt; ROTJ &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Episode 2 &gt;&gt; Episode 1

The new ones just lack the style and feeling of the old 3, the effects are overdone, everything is off.

[Boris]

I'm not going to see this movie until it receives Dynasty's stamp of approval.

[woodguy]

[ QUOTE ]
Except I would say "one of the best" its hard to make absolutes like that and all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed.

Regards,
Woodguy

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
I bet if you saw the first trilogy (456) for the first time when you were in your mid 20's it would all just seem like a bad sci-fi movie, like Stargate or something.

[/ QUOTE ]

My dad loved The Empire Strikes Back.

As for Mark Hamill's acting, I didn't mean to quote that. I thought his acting was fine.

[woodguy]

[ QUOTE ]
The new ones just lack the style and feeling of the old 3, the effects are overdone, everything is off.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed.

If Lucas had his way, the whole thing would be computer generated and it would have no feel or soul.

Regards,
Woodguy

[woodguy]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, was Mark Hamill's acting any less atrocious in parts 4 and 5? Or are you claiming that it was specifically bad only in part 6?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think his acting was worse, but also the story depended more on him and his acting with all the scenes with Vadar and he gets exposed.

The first two don't make him carry many scenes with a lot of dialogue.

The scene where he tells Leia his history and that she is his sister is horrendous, but partly due to a bad script.

Regards,
Woodguy

[private joker]

"The general opinion of Revenge of the Sith seems to be that it marks a distinct improvement on the last two episodes, "The Phantom Menace" and "Attack of the Clones." True, but only in the same way that dying from natural causes is preferable to crucifixion."

-- Anthony Lane, The New Yorker

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The first three (4-6) were amazing

[/ QUOTE ]

That statement is incorrect.

Return of the Jedi was nearly ruined by Mark Hamill's atrocious acting and Lucas having cute furry freaking puppets everywhere.

Star Wars is in a class on its own.

Empire Strikes Back is the best movie ever.

Regards,
Woodguy

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that the Ewoks were a total disaster and showed the movie was crafted more to sell toys than be a good movie.

The lightspeeder or whatever those bikes were called was a sequence that was fun, but even by the standards of the time was excessively phoney looking.

Star Wars was a likeable movie.

Empire Strikes back was by far the best.

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
When Star Wars 4, 5, and 6 came out most of us were just kids. People tend to judge the new movies based on their mentality and memory of the first 3 films that they saw when they were children. I bet if you saw the first trilogy (456) for the first time when you were in your mid 20's it would all just seem like a bad sci-fi movie, like Stargate or something.

Likewise, I bet 8-12 year olds that watch the new Star Wars movies think of them as being the coolest movies ever.


Also, was Mark Hamill's acting any less atrocious in parts 4 and 5? Or are you claiming that it was specifically bad only in part 6?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is very true and I think hardly anybody credits this for its true impact. When I was a kid, I thought Gilligan's Island was pure genius. I loved and was even blown away by all kinds of stuff that's really anywhere from mediocre simple fun to outright crap.

Seeing these things when you're a kid makes them hit one hell of a lot harder, and gives you outsized fantastic, very fond memories of them later. Good opinions on things can get way out of proportion that way.

[Blarg]

LOL, now that's a review I would love to read.

[Yeti]

Joblo liked it. (http://www.joblo.com/reviews.php?mode=joblo_movies&amp;id=1217)