PLUS Your club board comp is now up!
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Opening Round
The Golden Ticket - Official AFL on-seller of MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Originally posted by Dan26
Didn't mind Blair Witch Mantis. The end was good, when they reached the old cabin. Not that you'd know, of course.
And if you think you can judge a movie when you havn't actually SEEN sixty f*cking minutes of it, you are on drugs, girl.
Originally posted by mantis
Dan come to the understanding that not everything you like is what the whole world should too.
D'oh!
In your black and white world where things are either good or bad with no in between it is not surprising you feel this way. I've seen plenty of great films, which I love. Rear Window, Sleepers, Chinatown, the Empire Strikes Back, Jaws, The Wizard of Oz are all films I love among others. I must bow to you, because you're an expert, who has analysed every scene after your one viewing.
Originally posted by Dan26
Well, you're wrong. I have. Deal with it.
If you bothered to even read my posts - and it's clear you didn't - you will notice I said The Phantom Menace has flaws and I gave it a 6.5 out of 10. Of course the film has some merit. Like ANY film, there are good points and bad points. Your absolute insistence that 100% of the film was bad is incredibly short-sighted and ignorant. How many times have you seen it again? There are dozens and dozens of scenes in any 2-hour flick and if you think every one of those scenes is poor then you are not being honest.
Stupid comment which I take offence to. I would have liked The Phantom Menace to be of Episode 4 and 5 standard, but it wasn't. But for you to say it was as bad as you claim is ignorant. How hypocritical is it for you to claim I have no taste or critical faculties just because I though The Phantom Menace was better than you thought it was. Gee, sorry I don't agree with you.
It's not poor. It was average. It didn't live up to impossibly high expectations. There was arguably too much Jar Jar, not great acting from Jake Lloyd and not enough meaningful dialgogue from Ewan McGregor, who really didn't serve a purpose until the end.
There were also some good points like in any average film. Liam Neeson owns the film and is a great actor, the battle scenes are intense, and the music (for God's sake a acknowledge the music BSA) is typical John Williams. The movie is also paced quite well. There are some choice lines, but a film such is this is told through the visuals and the music. The music tells the story. If you actually bothered to watch it you might see this. Oh wait, I can't say that, because after all, it is a poor peice of film making with no redeeming features at all. Silly me, what would I know?
What the f*ck is that supposed to mean, especially given that I rated Retuen of the Jedi a 4 out of 10, and Menace a 6.5. Hardly glowing endorsements, which you shoudl have picked up on, if you had read my posts.
The Phantom Menace is not a great film - It is an average film. I never said it was a "great" film. Please cut-and-paste for me where I said it was. It has it's good moments and it's poor moments and for someone who is reasonably intelligent I am gob-smakced that you would fail to acknowledge the good points. Don't give me rubbish like, "There are no good points" Of course there are, yet you don't seem to know a lot about the film in question so I don't know if I trust your judegment.
Lets go through them shall we:
Interesting plots: The Phantom Menace may have some below par dialogue but the plot is complicated and interesting. When you watch the second film, you will realise that the whole "situation" in Episode 1 was engineered by an influential senator, to weasel himself into a position of power. If you ignore the screenplay and look at the basic story of the movie then it is an interesting plot. One man is basically creating a war and playign both sides against each other. That's an interesting story. It's not just "god guys versus bad guys" as you seem to imply. It's the beginning of an epic story. Now if the screenplay and acting didn't suit you, then fair enough. I accept that, and agree with you in some parts. But the story of the film is certainly interesting. Perhaps you didn't realise the whole "story" behind the story of the plot? You seem to think it is "good guys vs bad guys with no other story, which is rubbish.
snappy scripting The script was not great. I agree wth you.
believable acting: Jake Lloyd wasn't good, Portman was average. Ewan McGregor was okay given what he had to work with. Liam Neeson was fantastic. Ian McDiarmid (Palpatine) was once again the underrated standout. Let me guess, you're going to make a board sweeping statement that the acting was bad from every one of the actors, with not one good acting scene at all.
Intelligent and beautiful design: Whatever Menace lacks in scrpiting and acting, it makes up for with beautiful design. The designers are making an entire culture from scratch and there are beautiful costumes on the Queen's planet and on the city plant (Coruscant.) The movie was nominated for an Academy award for costume design, BSA. There are middle Eastern themes in the costumes on the Queens planet.
artistic cinematography: There is very artsitic cinematography on Coruscant. The lighting in the Jedi Temple is desinged to shine the light and develop a contrast between scenes.
Now, you are fully entitled to question and criticize the scirpting and acting, screeplay etc. But for you to criticise the set design is beyond comprehension. I am simply staggered that you could not ackowledge the visual and design aspect of the film.
The Original Star Wars in 1977 had virtually NO design. Remember Leia's white gown? Lucas got around the desing issue by keeping everything simple 25 years ago. In Episode 1, he walked right into a movie where design is paramount. Did you even see the Queen's 10 or-so different costumes? Did you even notice how the Naboo army was dresed in various military outfits all designed from scratch, and all different depending on the rank of the officer?
Fair dinkum, mate I agree that the acting and some of the lines might be questionable, but if you criticise the visual aspect, then you simply have no idea what you are talking about. We are talking about a film that took 1.5 years to add in the visuals after the filming was completed. Visually it was outstanding.
If you read my posts, you will realise I said it was average. I never said it was GREAT. For you to claim it has no credibiltiy and had no redeeming features at all (not even one) is one of the most ludicrous things I have ever seen written. If you watch the film again you will see the beautiful set desgin for yourself. Just because I have studied film doesn't mean I'm not allowed to enjoy a popcorn flick. It's not just about studying good flims either. I wrote an essay on a bad film (not Phantom Menace by the way), and got a good mark, because it was a good analysis of the film and it's faults. Studying film is not just about anlaysing good films. Its certainly not about making big sweeping statements like yours. How about a rational analysis of the good points and the bad points from you? Some sort of objectivity from you would be appreciated given that we havn't seen any yet - instead we have been treated with your broad exaggerated sweeping statements and stupid claims that the set design was shabby. What set design mate? Which one?
These are bad movies.
Originally posted by mantis
Jod
I liked the first hour of Dusk til Dawn, was just amazed at the incredible change in the story line.
Originally posted by jod23
any Hulk Hogan movie
