Random Nonsense

Spiderman 3 review
harkovast at 2:56PM, Nov. 21, 2010
(online)
posts: 5,198
joined: 10-12-2008
They ought to make a law against trilogies.
Sequels can (occasionally) work, but trilogies always blow.
The only exception I can think of is the Toy Story Trilogy, where the quality stays constant throughout.
In every other case trilogies always end up sucking goat balls.
Star Wars- Return of the Jedi had the bad guys use the same evil plan from the first film again (a plan that completely failed and proceeds to completely fail again…is making death stars all these guys know how to do?) and features large numbers of Ewoks.
Lord of the Rings- The final film was the cheesiest of the three and has an ending that goes on for about 3 hours too long.
Matrix- The second and third films need to crawl away and die.
Aliens- The third film makes me want to throw rocks at my tv when it comes on.

You get the idea.

So that brings us to the sorry story of Spiderman 3.
Super heroes come with a lot of baggage. They have vast, over written back stories and literally dozens of enemies that fans will be crying out for.
This can provide a rich source of ideas, but can become a poisoned chalice as film makers get greedy and feel the need to shoe horn too much of this stuff into a single movie.
This is what spoiled a lot of the pre-Christian Bale Batman movies.
And in keeping with the proud tradition of DC and Marvel copying each other, Spiderman attempts to one up Batman in terms of creating the most overly cluttered super hero movie imaginable.
At the end of Spiderman 2, it is established the Peter Parkers best friend is about to become the new Green Goblin and seek revenge on him.
Now that sounds like a pretty clear set up, right?
That's why the movie is all about Spiderman fighting the Sandman (who is a monser made of sand) who it turns out was the REAL killer of Peter Parkers Uncle Ben.
An interesting point with this revelation (other than the fact it is a massive ret con) is that entirely undermines the original moral that motivated Spiderman to fight evil.
Spiderman letting a criminal escape did not actually lead to his uncle's death…
Wow, we have not only learned who the real killer of Uncle Ben was but we've also watched as his entire legacy is lined up an executed.
So what happened to the New Goblin? The one who we were expecting to fight the hero?
Well he gets hit on the head and loses his memory at the start of the film.
No really.
That's what happens.
The films creator were so desperate to avoid doing the movie we were expecting in favour of their ridiculous Sandman contrivance, that they need to use further contrivance avoid all the things that might have made their movie any good!
Another major plot point that showed up in the hype to the movie was the Black Spiderman suit, which Spiderman fans will know leads to the creation of Venom (big evil black demon Spiderman made of slime).
Unfortunately Sam Raimi doesn't like Venom very much, so gives him the smallest possible role in the movie.
No really, Sam Raimi made a movie about a character he didn't like and so tried to side line that character as far as possible.
Venom is barely in this film, appearing for perhaps five on ten minutes on screen. I wish that was an exaggeration. He basically shows up for a final battle and gets destroyed.
We do get a long time of Peter Parker wearing the black suit (which is made of the slime that will eventually become Venom.) The suits makes him increasingly aggressive and out of control until he almost becomes a heartless killer and discards the suit before its too late and he loses everything that he stands for.
Oh sorry, that is what was supposed to happen!
Instead Peter starts doing silly walking, over the top dancing and being kinda smug.
No really.
Peter's girl friend starts becomes a really jealous self absorbed bitch during the movie, becoming angry that Peter as Spiderman is more popular than her singing career.
But this is presented that we are supposed to sympathise with her.
Honestly, I am not making any of this up!
This is one of those movies that you cant exaggerate. It is so badly structured and ill conceived that almost everything that it includes sounds like a deliberate joke when said out loud.
After watching the movie, I was left wondering if what I had just seen had really happened.
Its a jumble of bungled ideas and half finished plot lines. There are THREE main villains who are all fighting for screen time and the two most interesting and relevant ones (that were in all the trailers) get entirely side lined.
Peter Parker turning to the dark side and losing himself ends up seeming like half assed comedy.
There is even is a scene with Raimi regular Bruce Campbell showing up as a French
waiter, because….ummm….who knows? It wasn't funny, it wasn't really anything. But I suppose it didn't work any worse then any of the other stupid things that got into this pile of shit.
This movie ruined the franchise, to the extent that they are now planning a reboot of the whole thing.
It is becoming almost funny how rapidly super hero films reboot these days. The Hulk had a movie that sucked, then a reboot that also sucked and now Hulk will be back played by a third actor in The Avengers movie (which will also suck…there, I called it!)
This is a movie Spiderman would never see, because his spider sense would tingle, warning him that it was complete shit and he would then use his super spider skills to go and beat the living fuck out of the assholes who were ruining his legacy.
That thought kinda makes me wish I lived in the Marvel Universe.

For more Harkovast related goings on, go to the Harkovast Forum
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
Genejoke at 11:55AM, Nov. 23, 2010
(online)
posts: 3,098
joined: 4-9-2010
No Hark spiderman 3 is pure genius, it throws these curveballs at us to stop it being the predictable tripe that most hollywood threequels are. It also shows us that bad guys (Sandman) can be sympathetic and complex characters and that heroes can be utter dicks. Mary Jane IS sypathetic, it is clear that Peter is being a dick therefore her attitude is justified. She is also excellently by the hideously talented Kirsten dunst, she was robbed of an oscar for that one.
The Goblin story line was the most tragic tale in a super hero movie ever, who couldn't be touched by two friends reuniting after a petty argument. The choice of redeeming harry was also a stroke of genius, thus proving that forgiveness IS the way forward.

The dance scene is possibly the best thing in a movie outside of Mama mia(love that film) and is very unfairly derided.

You are right though, Topher Grace wasn't given enough time to make Eddie Brock and therefore Venom a convincing character. Which is a shame as I really wanted to see more of his smarmy and slimey nature followed by his whining and bitching before he is blown up. Another big mistake as he could have been an excellent villain for spiderman 4.


Aaaaaand that is quite enough bullshit.

Spiderman 3 has the great pleasure of being better than x-men 3 and batman and robin but little else. which still makes it better than mama mia in my opinion.
which I have not and never will see. I know it is shit for two reasons ABBA and MUSICAL.
simples.
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
metabad at 1:07PM, Nov. 23, 2010
(online)
posts: 33
joined: 1-6-2006
As soon as I saw this topic title I said to myself “YES!”

I REALLY wanted to like this movie back when it came out, I really did and I probably even tried to pretend while watching it that it was good, but it's just inexcusably awful…they just really took a whole bunch of subplots they thought up at the top of their heads, crammed three villains in it, put in loads of filler, put it all in a blender with the top off and turned it on. That's exactly what Spiderman 3 is.

The worst villain in it by far was Venom, his human counterpart being such a douchebag, not having the classic Venom voice or at least something similar sounding, constantly switching to his human face for when he talks, dying so easily…LAME! The Venom and Sandman team up didn't really make a whole lot of sense to me, I mean just because they both hate Spiderman? Weak…it only served as an excuse to have a tag-team match between Sandman, Venom, Harry and Spiderman. The only thing I kind of liked about him is the roars he made, and the fact that he killed Harry in a pretty cool way. Other than that, they should have made him resemble the classic Venom more so and/or save him for the sequel and/or not have taken and butchered him in the first place, seriously I was so excited to see Venom in the movie ever since the first movie and to see him butchered like that made me die a little on the inside.

I remember my friend warned me about the “Mary Jane and New Goblin dancing scene” and he was right to do so, blech, the less said about that painful filler the better.

I don't really have anything else to say other than what you said Hark, but with that said at least it's better than that God-awful Shrek 3, but then again I suppose that's like comparing a turd to an even bigger log of shit, either way they still stink.

Yeah Return of the Jedi was definitely the weakest of the original trilogy aside from Darth's death which was really well done, but with that said at least it's not half as bad as the prequel trilogy.

Totally agree with you on The Matrix, it should have just stayed at one, it didn't really leave an open ending, so what's the point?

Even the director of Alien 3 hates his own creation, so much in fact that he disowned it and doesn't include it on his resume, I think he likes to pretend it doesn't exist as do the fans, same with Alien: Resurrection. Though to be fair I haven't seen Alien 3 in a while so I can't really say anything about it other than James Cameron hates it for killing the survivors of his movie, though I remember Resurrection sucked. Though both 3 and Resurrection are better than that awful AVP movie franchise which just murdered the Predator and Alien's origins though it did have a pretty cool mobile Queen Alien. But the sequel sucks so much shit for having a mary sue predator and fight scenes that are basically unseeable with the Predator apparently kicking all the Alien's asses to impossible levels, I mean he crushes one of their heads under his foot, WOULDN'T IT BURN FROM ACID THEN? HELLO, HELLO? ANYBODY HOME? HUH? THINK DIRECTOR, THINK! also if TVtropes is right, then the directors weren't even fans of the alien series and complained about all the alien fans whining about their movie and how they butchered the aliens. THEN WHY EVEN MAKE AN AVP MOVIE IF YOU DON'T EVEN LIKE ALIENS YOU STUPID FUCKS? WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU STUPID ASS DIRECTORS YOU FUCKING PRICK PIECES OF MELTING SHIT, I'LL KILL ALL OF YOU, I'M GONNA RIAIWOROWTKTRKGKGDFMMBVMFKHHKFGV

…Sorry, got carried away there, that movie just makes me rage so much. Still…way to respect your source material, assholes. I'll be sending a chestburster to the Brothers Strauss' house, rest assured.

But yeah if I ever watch 3 and Resurrection again then it'll probably just be for the Xenomorphs. I love those little guys. Alien and Aliens were awesome movies though, no doubt about that.

I did sort of like the last Lord of the Rings film, the fight scenes were still good, still had the same general feel to it as the other movies had. Saruman wasn't in it though which sucked but he got included in the Extended Edition so that was cool. (Apparently Christopher Lee didn't even watch the original RoTK cause his scene was cut.) I don't really have a lot to complain about other than Sauron died, I wanted to see him win damn it! I even heard that Aragorn and Sauron were going to battle, only to learn later that they scrapped it, YOU LIED TO ME INTERNET! I mean I know it wouldn't have been accurate to the books at all, but it would have been cool to see. I think so, anyways. I just want to see his physical form again outside of the first movie, kicking ass again and blowing away armies and all sorts of things with that badass mace of his. I would have also preferred it if he destroyed the heroes and plunged the world into darkness, enslaving every race on Middle Earth like the first movie implied. That would have been a much better ending.

Okay again, I admit that would not be accurate, but I just wanted to see his awesome physical form again and wanted to see him win, damn it!

But yeah I think Lord of the Rings is the most solid trilogy of the bunch. Even if the third film was a little weaker than the others. I still enjoy it…except for Sauron's death. =( R.I.P

Anyways, good review Hark, I couldn't have put it better myself, I probably could have put it insaner though. Perhaps. Is insaner a word? Firefox isn't correcting me on it so maybe it is. I don't know.

Also Rise of the Silver Surfer sucked, if you ever saw it do you think you'll do a review of it, Hark?
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
Genejoke at 2:37PM, Nov. 23, 2010
(online)
posts: 3,098
joined: 4-9-2010
Yeah return of the king didn't suck, but it did have flaws, the legolas/olyphant scene was silly in fact when the whole army of the dead stuff didn't seem to work, well it worked too well and the result was the victory had no feeling of satisfaction.

And the ending…endings… too many and not enough, I appreciate what he went for in giving the film a nice slow close rather than an abrupt “we won, woo hoo. THE END”
but damn they seemed to go on forever and it left a lot of characters out.


Shrek 3 was mentioned. Fuck me that film is awful. Spiderman 3 does have redeeming features, the action scenes are mostly well done and elements of it could have worked really well if not crammed and the aforementioned ret-con thing. Shrek 3 manages to bungle every joke it has making them go from weak to just plain lame. Also it has justin timberlake. BAD BAD FILM.

last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
Canuovea at 1:31AM, Nov. 24, 2010
(online)
posts: 287
joined: 6-25-2010
Overall I liked The Return of the King… but… some bits of it didn't work too well. Like the endings.

Shrek 3… was awful.

I liked Mamma Mia… I don't even know why… I just did. It was fun… eh. Then again, I kinda like ABBA too.

Yeah, yeah, laugh it up.

But… Spiderman 3. Oh dear gods. I didn't even watch it. Why? I heard about it. Essentially, everything in this review. No way. So, I wasn't a great fan of the other two films (except the villains, I liked the villains for some reason, just not Mary Jane or Peter Parker or Harry for that matter). Now, if the only good thing about the other two films was the villains, and this one doesn't really have any villains worth mentioning, then I'm not going to bother watching it. QED.

Here's a link that also complains about it: http://chaospet.com/2007/06/21/6-spiderman-3/
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
harkovast at 3:03AM, Nov. 24, 2010
(online)
posts: 5,198
joined: 10-12-2008
No time to read all the responses just yet.
But its nice to know all of you check my forum so regularly, as this has got loads of response in a really short time!

For more Harkovast related goings on, go to the Harkovast Forum
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
Genejoke at 5:15AM, Nov. 24, 2010
(online)
posts: 3,098
joined: 4-9-2010
Yeah, I like your reviews even when I disagree.
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
harkovast at 5:21AM, Nov. 24, 2010
(online)
posts: 5,198
joined: 10-12-2008
Genejoke you had me going right up until you said you liked the dance scene.
No one…anywhere….ever….has ever said they liked that scene.
I like to imagine Sam Raime was crying when he was making it.

Return of the King was not a disaster, but it was clearly the most bull shit of the movies.
Eowyn was incredibly rubbish at sword fighting. She was meant to seem tought bu the actress looked terrified and awkward. I didn't believe she could kick ass at all (and she looked silly in that helment.)
The ghiost army felt like a complete cop out. They might as well have had Spock beam down and phaser the orc army away, it would have felt as satisfying.
And the final battle Sauron unleashed….a load more orcs.
Like he had been unleashing in all three movies up to that point.
And the heroes proceeded to wipe the floor with the orcs like they always did.
I didn't get any sense that the heroes were doomed or overwhlemed. Until the troll stepped on aragorn, I thought things seemed to be going pretty well for them!

I still need to see Shrek 3….if only to give myself something to talk about on here!

For more Harkovast related goings on, go to the Harkovast Forum
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
metabad at 12:26PM, Nov. 24, 2010
(online)
posts: 33
joined: 1-6-2006
harkovast
Genejoke you had me going right up until you said you liked the dance scene.
No one…anywhere….ever….has ever said they liked that scene.
I like to imagine Sam Raime was crying when he was making it.

Return of the King was not a disaster, but it was clearly the most bull shit of the movies.
Eowyn was incredibly rubbish at sword fighting. She was meant to seem tought bu the actress looked terrified and awkward. I didn't believe she could kick ass at all (and she looked silly in that helment.)
The ghiost army felt like a complete cop out. They might as well have had Spock beam down and phaser the orc army away, it would have felt as satisfying.
And the final battle Sauron unleashed….a load more orcs.
Like he had been unleashing in all three movies up to that point.
And the heroes proceeded to wipe the floor with the orcs like they always did.
I didn't get any sense that the heroes were doomed or overwhlemed. Until the troll stepped on aragorn, I thought things seemed to be going pretty well for them!

I still need to see Shrek 3….if only to give myself something to talk about on here!

If you want to watch absolute shit to make fun of in a review, I'd suggest Rise of the Silver Surfer, that piece of shit has loads of things you could make fun of. Though Shrek 3 is a good candidate for these kinds of reviews.

Yeah, Return of the King was probably the best out of the trilogies you listed, but yeah definitely the weakest of the LoTR series IMO. I actually first watched it in theaters on the opening day on a School field trip back in Grade 7 when we were watching all the LoTR parts, so I felt like I was the first one to see it even though I wasn't which was cool. The ghost army did look pretty awesome though, even if they were a deus ex machina. The Witch King and the Mouth of Sauron sure looked badass as well.

I also saw The Hobbit animated movie in that same class way back when as well, but let's not get into that.

I'm pretty much with Genejoke on your reviews, even if I disagree with a review of yours it can still get a laugh out of me.
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
harkovast at 1:33PM, Nov. 24, 2010
(online)
posts: 5,198
joined: 10-12-2008
I saw rise of the silver surfer….and it must PAY!!!

For more Harkovast related goings on, go to the Harkovast Forum
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
metabad at 6:55PM, Nov. 24, 2010
(online)
posts: 33
joined: 1-6-2006
harkovast
I saw rise of the silver surfer….and it must PAY!!!

YES!

I even have a Galactus rant all prepared for when you do make that review. Perhaps not as long as my Venom rant, but I did really hate his portrayal in that movie as well.
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
zaymac at 8:02AM, Nov. 25, 2010
(online)
posts: 396
joined: 12-29-2008
I actually started watching Spider-Man 3 again the other day on HBO and was thinking the first 15mins or so weren't that bad. But it sure went to hell in a hand basket pretty quick.

Too many villains is the main issue. If they absolutely needed a new villain, I would've chose Sandman because I really hate Venom (except for the Venom that I'm about to spew at this film). Venom is such a bad reminder of early 90's comics that I just hate him in every way. And why would they choose the skinniest person on the planet (Topher Grace) to portray Venom, when he's always been a hulking beast in the comics.

Second point about too many villians. If you are going to have multiple villains, why do they always have to find a reason to team up? Why can't you wrap up one villians arc in the first half of the movie, then focus on the second one in the second half? Instead, lets shoehorn everybody into one giant massive battle at the end. Oh, and lets make Sandman shed a single solitary tear… WHEN HE'S MAKE OF FRICKING SAND! You can't get water from a desert, yet you can get a single tear from a man made of sand?!

I'm also going to point out a character that you completely glossed over, who served no real purpose other than to weigh down the plot even more with a jealousy angle. Her name, GWEN STACY. Why? In the comics Gwen Stacy was Peter's love interest before Mary Jane, and then she died. So why are we choosing the third film to introduce her?

There is so much more I could say, but why bother. It just plain sucked. The best part of the movie when I saw it in the theaters was when Harry kissed Mary Jane on the bridge and someone in the theater yelled out “SLUT!” :)

It was pretty apparent that Raimi had no real control and was basically phoning it in.

It's the second greatest tragedy to befall Spider-Man. The first was when Marvel decided to wipe away 30 years of his history with Mary Jane, and had her make a deal with Mephisto, so his Aunt May would live. That's when I stopped reading Spider-Man.

One more thing on trilogies. I think that the third Jurassic Park was slightly better than the second one. Actually it was much better. The second Jurassic Park sucked. That is all. :)

It's a Grizzly Bear battling Zombies. Do you need to know more?
DOLLAR STORE HAIRCUTA daily webcomic of unfunny.
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
harkovast at 8:24AM, Nov. 25, 2010
(online)
posts: 5,198
joined: 10-12-2008
There are trilogies where the third installment is not the weakest, but my rule still holds that overall trilogies always end up.

I was quite fired up to see venom, big drooly evil spider man, sounded like fun. Peter fighting his own dark side etc.
Or some guy who shows up at the end, has very poor motivation and then gets murdered by spider. Interesting that Spiderman only murders another human being AFTER he rejects the evil suit. What moral are we meant to take away from this again?
I wonder if I could make a deal with mephisto to erase this movie from existance?
Or perhaps I can hit my head like Harry did and erase the memor?

PS- The slut thing about Mary Jane cracked me up!

For more Harkovast related goings on, go to the Harkovast Forum
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
Genejoke at 4:48AM, Nov. 27, 2010
(online)
posts: 3,098
joined: 4-9-2010
Speaking of trilogies… the starwars prequels buck the trend.

Revenge of the sith is clearly the best of those.
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
harkovast at 8:42AM, Nov. 27, 2010
(online)
posts: 5,198
joined: 10-12-2008
Genejoke that is only because the other two set the standard so low that revenge of the sith could only be an improvement.
The third one was still pants, and as a whole the trilogy is terrible. Its just that it looks okay when compared to the horrific disaster of ass that the first two represent.

For more Harkovast related goings on, go to the Harkovast Forum
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
Canuovea at 6:25PM, Nov. 27, 2010
(online)
posts: 287
joined: 6-25-2010
I have no objective evidence for this but… I liked The Phantom Menace more than Revenge of the Sith. I also think it has the best lightsabre fight out of all the Star Wars movies (I think that is because they actually had someone who knew what he was doing, AND it wasn't CGI'ed to death).

Then again, I was reasonably young when it happened. I tend to like things I've seen when young (Last of the You-Know-What's included).

And the Star Wars prequels… well. Can't bash some of the acting. Ian McDurmant (yeah, can't spell his name) is good and Ewen McGregor is decent too… and… Maybe Christopher Lee… yeah. That's about it. Personally, I blame terrible script writing and a overall story that needed revision.

I think they sucked the soul outta the third prequel. Those little 2D (not that lame, CGI, crap that came later) animation shorts had more soul than the entire thing (plus General Grevious actually kicked ass in it instead of just spinning the little lightsabres around like a helicopter fairy). The Phantom Menace had more soul, despite Jar Jar Binks. The main improvements the sequels made was that Jar Jar Binks was faded out. (I don't say that because he may have been a racist caricature, I just hate that bastard!).

Attack of the Clones? Only had one good thing going for it. The clones and Jango Fett looked cool. That was it. And what happened in the Revenge of the Sith? The clones look like crap in comparison, and Jango Fett doesn't make an appearance (hard to do that when decapitated, ya know?).

So,,, I personally think the rule still stands for Star Wars.
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
harkovast at 6:07AM, Nov. 28, 2010
(online)
posts: 5,198
joined: 10-12-2008
The phantom menace had a plot that made absolutely no sense on any level what so ever.
Wiser men than me have already explained at great length why the Phantom menace is so stupid, so here is a link to one of them-
http://redlettermedia.com/phantom_menace.html

Watch that and then tell me the Phantom Menace had heart!

And last of the you know what's was a big steaming pile of you know what.

For more Harkovast related goings on, go to the Harkovast Forum
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
Canuovea at 1:54PM, Nov. 28, 2010
(online)
posts: 287
joined: 6-25-2010
Did you get the impression I thought the first one was good?

Dear gods no.

Thing is, I found more to like about it than all the other prequels. And that's probably because I was, about, 10, when I saw it. Again, Last of the you know whats is a pile of… well yeah… but I saw it when I was younger and I got attached to it…

And at least whoever was playing young Anakin was doing a better job at it then that fellow who played him in the prequels.

The plot was bad. The space battle was boring, the land battle was… a bunch of dead gungans… which could have been neat if they hadn't screwed it up with Mr. Binks trying to be humourous… it could have been the anti-avatar, you know, where the fellows with the comparatively primitive weapons all die. Instead they tried to make it funny.

More soul does not = an actual soul. Saying that the Phantom Menace had more soul than the rest of the prequels is like saying Stalin was a better person than Hitler (which is about as controversial too).

All the prequels had some good points, just surrounded by so much terrible terribleness that it gets hard to distinguish them. The latest Star Trek Movie was better than them. That's right, Star Wars got beaten out by Star Trek. Order overturned! So I try to find the points which were bearable.

To that end… the lgihtsabre fight at the end of Phantom Menace was the most innovative one ever and it was well choreographed… it also wasn't CGI'ed. Sure, the ending was a little anti-climactic, but overall well done. Attack of the Clones tried to do that with Yoda, but failed miserably. And the Grevious “lightsabre fight” was a let down… “and all of them, just spinning about!” Please. Boring.

Oh and, were we supposed to care about the Jedi? Was it just me, or was Mace Windu a jerk?

You're gonna hate this comparison but I'm gonna do it anyway, but keep in mind it is a comparison of stereotypes… Jedi bear an uncanny resemblance to the Victorian England's ideal. Prim, proper, self controlled at all times, gentlemanly. Yeah, sure, it worked (for the English at the time, world superpower, hello), but tended to be boring when not portrayed correctly (When portrayed correctly you get something like “Zulu,” discipline under stress, intelligence, emotion bubbling to the surface regardless, etc, all good things). Jedi weren't handled properly. “Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering…” *Yawn* may be true… but boring. Emotionless robot boring, not endearing, they've got all the emotional appeal of Warhammer 40k Space Marines. Oh and they're all Mary Sues too, and so they must die! Sith bear an uncanny resemblance to the angry Scotsman stereotype. RAAAARGH! Lets get the bastards! Use your anger! Death! Look how well that worked out… but it's far more interesting than that tool who Alice was supposed to marry in the most recent Alice in Wonderland (of course, that was playing up the stereotype for laughs).

And yet… the prequels managed to screw the Sith up too. They had an interesting dichotomy they could have used well (providing both were done well), but they failed miserably. When video games do a better job than the movies you know that there are problems.

See. I've gone off on a tangent again. Oh, and when it comes to stereotypes, I am more than aware that they don't usually exist in reality, as collective imagination they do. Maybe that's what bugged me about some of the prequels… moral complexity of 0, or it seemed that way, which, for a movie, is the same thing. Anyway, all Scotsmen don't work themselves into a rage at the slightest thing, with mouth frothing etc. This was never the case… all Englishmen weren't prim and proper. Ever. And Canadians don't all live in igloos and say “eh” at the end of every sentence… eh?
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
harkovast at 2:30PM, Nov. 29, 2010
(online)
posts: 5,198
joined: 10-12-2008
It is interesting that you consider the sith to be angry and berserk.
Considering how much they are meant to “give in to their rage” all the sith seem really calm and stoic.
Count Dooku and Darth Sidious were really calm- hardly the mad maniacs you would expect from their philosophy. If they had been it might have made the ideological conflict more interesting.
The light sabre battle in episode 1 was technically impressive, but what were they fighting for? There was nothing at stake, the characters didn't really know each other or have any history so it was shallow and meaningless.

Its not just how you fight, but what you are fighting about that matters.

Also, I dont think you can really compare Jedi to Victorian England. The idea off Victorians as uptight is a modern invention (like silly myths like they put socks on piano legs because they were considered too shocking etc)
In Victorian times people in England considered Americans to be very uptight and scared of sex etc.
Victorian England was probably uptight in some ways by modern standards, but no more than other periods of history.
The Jedi were less like Victorian England and more like the portrayal of English people in the movie The Avengers (not the new super hero one either.)
I wont say too much more about this right now….that is a review for another time….

For more Harkovast related goings on, go to the Harkovast Forum
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
Canuovea at 5:43PM, Nov. 29, 2010
(online)
posts: 287
joined: 6-25-2010
Nah, the Sith are supposed to be angry and berserk. See Sidious in Return of the Jedi. He ends up going batshit crazy. He was all fine and dandy when things were going his way, but then Luke tells him to piss off and BAM, crazy lightning zappy zappy!

That's why I said they screwed the Sith up too. You only get the crazy Sith thing at the end of Return of the Sith, for a split second or two. Not exactly an ideological conflict. See, it could have been good! But… just kinda failed.

Many things about the prequels were technically impressive. There wasn't much of anything else, so when pointing good things out, all you're gonna get is the technically impressive.

Really? Victorian England was like that? Maybe. You would know better than me, in theory anyway. Still, I do recall reading something about repression of self during the 1800s as being part of the civilizing process, something that Victorian England has become a symbol of. That's the Jedi all over. Self denying Mary Sue human robots. Except Anakin, who could have been interesting, but turned into a stupid whining fool instead.

Though you have a point about the USA at the time. Maybe it can be a general “upper class” ideal. Who knows?

The Avengers? I don't know about that movie, haven't seen it. Bad I suppose?
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
metabad at 1:33PM, Nov. 30, 2010
(online)
posts: 33
joined: 1-6-2006
Man, Grievous was BADASS in that Clone Wars cartoon, fuck that CGI shit. I heard George Lucas didn't even like the 2D cartoon since it wasn't made by him or something stupid like that (might've been a lie though, but I wouldn't be surprised if it were true) Grievous was just…okay in Episode 3, though the coughing was weird and it was a HUGE letdown that he was only taken down by one jedi when he killed like, six or nine jedi in the cartoon. His best scene in the movie was when he was spinning the lightsabers around, while at the same time revealing that he had four arms…but even then, meh, it was done much better in the cartoon.

To be fair though, he probably was the best villain in the prequel trilogy.

…yeah, that's not saying much at all.

I love Red Letter Media's reviews of it, though. It's by far the best thing to come out of the prequels.
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
harkovast at 1:46PM, Nov. 30, 2010
(online)
posts: 5,198
joined: 10-12-2008
After the 2D Clone Wars cartoon I was also incredibly psyched up for Grevious…only to be confronted with a wheezing invalid who was practically carrying his IV drip around with him.
You could hand George Lucas gold bricks these days and he would turn it into logs of shit.

For more Harkovast related goings on, go to the Harkovast Forum
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
metabad at 1:59PM, Nov. 30, 2010
(online)
posts: 33
joined: 1-6-2006
harkovast
After the 2D Clone Wars cartoon I was also incredibly psyched up for Grevious…only to be confronted with a wheezing invalid who was practically carrying his IV drip around with him.
You could hand George Lucas gold bricks these days and he would turn it into logs of shit.

Yeah, I actually heard that George Lucas recorded the coughing himself while he had laryngitis or something. There's a perfectly good reason for that though and that reason issssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss…sssssss…ssss…
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
Canuovea at 2:59PM, Nov. 30, 2010
(online)
posts: 287
joined: 6-25-2010
… Mace Windu crushed Grevious's innards with the force. Which really perfectly symbolizes Lucas's career and reputation, and what the prequels did to it.

Seriously. It actually happened in the 2D cartoon, at the end when Grevious is leaving with Palpatine.

Though I bet that was just to make sense of the coughing.

Honestly, that's okay. But… It isn't okay that they screwed the character up that much…

And, really, the 2D animation collection was better than the entire prequilogy.
No, I don't think that's a word.

Oh, and guess what? Grevious isn't a droid… he's a cyborg like Vader! Who knew?
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
metabad at 3:14PM, Nov. 30, 2010
(online)
posts: 33
joined: 1-6-2006
Canuovea
… Mace Windu crushed Grevious's innards with the force. Which really perfectly symbolizes Lucas's career and reputation, and what the prequels did to it.

Seriously. It actually happened in the 2D cartoon, at the end when Grevious is leaving with Palpatine.

Though I bet that was just to make sense of the coughing.

Honestly, that's okay. But… It isn't okay that they screwed the character up that much…

And, really, the 2D animation collection was better than the entire prequilogy.
No, I don't think that's a word.

Oh, and guess what? Grevious isn't a droid… he's a cyborg like Vader! Who knew?


Well, I already knew he wasn't a droid given his organic-looking eyes.

Yeah that chest crush was pretty much thrown in at the last second since they were like “Oh shit, George Lucas established him as an asthmatic cyborg, quick! We need to throw in a reason as to why he would go from a badass to a weakling!” Still doesn't justify how much he sucked in Episode 3 though.

Love the symbolic comparison there, Canuovea, it's so true now that I think about it.

Oh yeah and I was referring to why the hell George Lucas would record his own coughing when it was Matthew Wood voicing the character, I still don't get it.

Oh well, either way John DiMaggio and Richard McGonagle made for much better voice actors for Grievous in the animated series, though I do wonder how Gary Oldman would have portrayed him since I did hear that he said he would send in a voice sample, but never really did.
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
harkovast at 4:29PM, Nov. 30, 2010
(online)
posts: 5,198
joined: 10-12-2008
I can confirm the crushing from Mace was added in order to justify how pathetic and weak he seemed in the films. Yeah, they had to make him less cool and awesome as he was too bad ass to fit with the shit Lucas was producing.
What the hell was up with that four light sabre thing in the film anyway?
He comes forward with four arms then IMMEDIATELY gets two of them cut off.
So the promised four light sabre bad guy never happens and instead we get one guy with two sabres….just like in the last film.
Maybe doing a fight with a four armed death beast would be too difficult to film…so why even put it in if you cant fucking do it?

The same holds true of Palpatine's fight with the jedi and mace. (wasn't it cooler when he was just the Emperor? Palpatine is such a fucking shitty name. Expanded universe can go suck balls.)
IT promises a 4 on one fight, something we have never seen before.
But then three of them instantly die and its just another one on one battle…something that by that point had been done to death and I was completely sick of.

I am not going to do a review of star wars on here, because they have been covered by so many others in such depth, but yeah….George Lucas can go suck a donkey dick.

For more Harkovast related goings on, go to the Harkovast Forum
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
dwrean at 10:19PM, Dec. 11, 2010
(online)
posts: 56
joined: 6-15-2010
grevious is my favorite of the star wars crew
design is cool and when he gets his quad sabre on i go ‘hellz ya’, as i can imagine a cool fight scene with him.
but more impressive than that is he isnt a jedi, but he is killing them at their own game. seriously, how much do you have to suck at being a jedi and not being able to beat a non jedi in close quarters combat. force push anyone, hello? seriously, do his spinning blades daze you or something. still, at least he gets to star in cartoon series, sorry maul, the early bird gets sliced and diced.
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
harkovast at 6:47AM, Dec. 12, 2010
(online)
posts: 5,198
joined: 10-12-2008
The thing is with Grevious is he COULD have been cool.
And he was cool in the animation.
But in the movie he was a wheezey old man who ran away all the time and wasn't very good at fighting.
Yeah, real scary!

For more Harkovast related goings on, go to the Harkovast Forum
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
metabad at 9:58PM, Dec. 12, 2010
(online)
posts: 33
joined: 1-6-2006
The thing is with Harkovast is he COULD have been cool.
And he was cool in the comics.
But in the forums he was a wheezey old man who posted away all the time and wasn't very good at reviewing.
Yeah, real scary!
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM
harkovast at 4:34PM, Dec. 14, 2010
(online)
posts: 5,198
joined: 10-12-2008
*implodes due to epic pwnaged*

For more Harkovast related goings on, go to the Harkovast Forum
last edited on July 18, 2011 10:17AM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved