cortan

I just watched this series of videos recently and the review he did on phantom menace. I am in the camp that thinks this is pretty brilliant. He concisely puts into words better than I ever could exactly why the new trilogy was a fail.
He knows his stuff about film structure and character development.

I think the most telling clip he has out of both videos is where he shows a piece an old interview of George Lucas around the time the episode IV or V came out.

That quote is my new sig.
I guess as George got older he really lost his ways and forgot what makes a movie great.

andy434343

It's amazing when someone grows and turns into something that they were so against when they were younger. Regardless of George changing, at least he was smart enough to change from a talented director/producer who was rich, into a talented marketing and business man who became SUPER rich.

Maybe he just came to realize that he had the opportunity to practically become a billionaire, if he played his cards a certain way, like he did with the new trilogy. Judging by what we see in the original trilogy, it looks like he started this back then, and what we see in the new trilogy is nothing new. The older movies just were better, but as we see in the video reviews, he was already starting to cater to wider audiences back then. Lando for the Americans, whose ancestors a couple hundred years ago lived in Africa, Ewoks for the younger kids, so on and so fourth.

I think that we are all capable of changing what we do, even if it goes against what we once were, if we had the opportunity to make as much money as he did.

Count Dooku

That the prequel trilogy was going to make billions of dollars in box office, DVD sales, and licensed-product marketing was a foregone conclusion.
There is no "Lucas wanted to make money" justification for the poor quality of the story-telling; it was ineptitude.

andy434343

So maybe Lucas was a man of his time, and he lost touch with what he once was in terms of movie making......but he still has the opportunity to make movies today, and make MUCH more money with them compared to the original, because of his marketing and business decisions that he makes along with his bad quality movies that come out.

Count Dooku

What you say makes me think of boxers who, in their prime, were champions --great athletes, rich and famous, and idolized by millions. But they insist on stepping back into the ring for more fights after time has passed them by and their skills are diminished. They can still draw a crowd and command a hefty paycheck because they "are a name". But they end up getting beaten up --mumbling and stumbling due to brain damage, the objects of pity and derision.

With his friendships and professional relationships --and because of his stature in the film industry, George Lucas had every resource available to him as he embarked on production of the prequels. He is close friends with two of America's greatest living filmmakers. A host of great screenwriters would come running if he beckoned them for assistance. There is an entire generation of talented and creative individuals who worship the Star Wars movies.

Lucas failed artistically with the prequels because he fell victim to his own ego.
"What benefits a man to gain the world if he loses his soul?"

islandclaws

I rarely care to listen to anyone's film reviews, aside from friends and a few respected critics, but this guy constantly has me in stitches. I love his deadpan delivery and dark humor, and he makes so many valid points it almost makes you never want to watch these movies again. They had some good scenes, but they're largely expensive pieces of shit. I'm looking forward to Ep. III.

andy434343

I don't think we are in disagreement at all, I just think that we are talking about two separate things. I am talking about how he was smart enough to make the most money possible for the prequel movies that he made, and you are talking about how he was stupid enough to not make good movies when he obviously had the resources to, all because he was a victim of his own ego.

I totally agree with you, some people don't enjoy dark humor, I have always loved it, and this guy is a genius in terms of dark humor delivery, along with giving excellent points.

dhmac

I think the section of the review (in parts 4 & 5) that used either a check-mark box or a crossed-out box (with "Family Feud"-like sound effects) on aspects of the love story within the movie was brilliant comedy.

.

Graftenberg

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Noz7BjhiUpM&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Noz7BjhiUpM&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

Dr. DVD

Just got through watching the review of Clones. While some of it seemed overblown, I found most of it spot-on and quite thoughtful. I didn't care much for the abducted women angle, but that was quite minor.

I still think Sith is quite good, but the other two are just fluff with some good action sequences.

lamphorn

They're on the verge of jumping the shark. The reviews are still great, but all the side shit, Plinkett character stuff and now they're ebaying the prop DVD box autographed by the guy that plays Plinket... getting some douche chills.