Plinkett reviews Page 2

  • Page

    of 4 First / Last

  • Deleted user 2 January 2011 17:21:08
    Finished now - that was great!

    Didn't realise exactly how much sitting and walking went on - loved the Citizen Kane comparison bit as well

    Nice find
  • oceanmotion 2 Jan 2011 19:34:50 15,651 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Wow, I thought they were bad but this makes them horrendous. The footage of Lucas is quite embarrassing, he seems so clueless and uninterested in pushing anything but effects. The people working with him couldn't be any more up his arse too. Spot on by Mr Plinkett
  • Deleted user 2 January 2011 19:37:06
    You should watch the making of docs on the DVDs, it'll make you wanna punch your telly.
  • Jmek 2 Jan 2011 20:47:15 1,309 posts
    Seen 9 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I hate Lucas bashing. It's so sad to see the kids of the 70's turning on Lucas for producing prequels that did not live up to their expectations. Star Wars was never high art, they were exciting fun films which had a huge impact back in the day. It's ironic that the complaints made when Star Wars was first released became part of of the complaint's regarding CGI as an FX tool in later years. With a lot of the kids who were held enraptured by Star Wars assuming an almost luddite like mentality towards the prequels.
    You may not like the movies or the man, however for better or worse Lucas has a had a huge impact on modern film making. It really is sad to see some of the comments on this page are so disingenuous.
  • ecureuil 2 Jan 2011 21:13:43 76,496 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Star Wars was genre defining and forever affected the way movies were made. I've seen a lot of people recently say stuff like "well Star Wars was never anything special blah blah" because it's totally incorrect.

    The prequels were absolute garbage and just went to show Lucas as a greedy hack. He made the prequels to make money, not to make good movies, and they also highlight irrefutably that he doesn't understand why people liked Star Wars in the first place.
  • Dirtbox 2 Jan 2011 21:43:34 77,468 posts
    Seen 25 minutes ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    More like he didn't know how to make movies in the first place.

    The first movie was pretty much saved from being shit by Gary Kurtz who held Lucas's hand throughout, not to mention the studio demanding script re-writes until they were happy. then Empire was directed by Irvin Kershner, and then Jedi was back to Lucas with considerably less hand holding. He's credited with far more than he ever deserved.

    The prequels are the direct result of giving someone with no talent too much control.

    +1 / Like / Tweet this post

  • RedSparrows 2 Jan 2011 21:48:00 22,030 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Star Wars was never high art, no, but they were great films.
  • Deleted user 2 January 2011 21:48:13
    He's very creative, but has too much power with nothing stopping him from doing what he wants. The bloke knows how to make a film, but is only interested in the "Ride" now, as db said, Kurtz was a 'no' man, the complete opposite of McCallums 'yes' man.

    It's also the nature of sequels, law of diminishing returns and all that. Did we need more Star Wars films? No.
  • Orange 2 Jan 2011 22:13:15 4,656 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    not quite up to the previous reviews, but part 3 was great. Still can't believe how some people were claiming them to be really good films on release, all 3 were shit.
  • Metalfish 2 Jan 2011 22:14:41 8,786 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Jmek wrote:
    It really is sad to see some of the comments on this page are so disingenuous.
    You don't know what 'disingenuous' means, do you?
  • VandelayIndustries 2 Jan 2011 22:16:41 1,521 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    ecureuil wrote:
    Star Wars was genre defining and forever affected the way movies were made. I've seen a lot of people recently say stuff like "well Star Wars was never anything special blah blah" because it's totally incorrect.

    The prequels were absolute garbage and just went to show Lucas as a greedy hack. He made the prequels to make money, not to make good movies, and they also highlight irrefutably that he doesn't understand why people liked Star Wars in the first place.
    Indeed, but he also made them to push ILM and also to push digital filmmaking. He's become a pioneer in cinema rather than a particularly good practitioner of it. (Shame really as I like his first two films).

    He promoted the notion of electronic (digital) cinema back in the 80's.
    Electronic (digital) editing/3D editing. Which is commonplace now.
    Sound design as an art.
    Digital image capture as a viable alternative to 35mm film.
    And no doubt a bunch of other innovations along the way too.
  • RedSparrows 2 Jan 2011 22:19:01 22,030 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Teamed up with a decent director, he'd make good films!

    Oh wait, Empire says hello!
  • Deleted user 2 January 2011 22:21:03
    I wouldn't call Kirshner a good director, unless you're a fan of Robocop 2.
  • RedSparrows 2 Jan 2011 22:22:04 22,030 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Empire was good!
  • ecureuil 2 Jan 2011 22:22:18 76,496 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    CrispyXUK64 wrote:
    It's also the nature of sequels, law of diminishing returns and all that. Did we need more Star Wars films? No.

    Do we ever "need" more of anything? It's not like it was a saturated genre, in fact, there's not a whole lot like it, and there still isn't.

    Star Wars has a vast universe with almost limitless potential, you only need look at how some of the games have exploited it. There's no reason why the prequels couldn't have been great.
  • Deleted user 2 January 2011 22:23:33
    RedSparrows wrote:
    Empire was good!
    Obviously, but Kirshner's made more shit than Lucas :D
  • Deleted user 2 January 2011 23:18:33
    Jmek wrote:
    I hate Lucas bashing. It's so sad to see the kids of the 70's turning on Lucas for producing prequels that did not live up to their expectations. Star Wars was never high art, they were exciting fun films which had a huge impact back in the day. It's ironic that the complaints made when Star Wars was first released became part of of the complaint's regarding CGI as an FX tool in later years. With a lot of the kids who were held enraptured by Star Wars assuming an almost luddite like mentality towards the prequels.
    You may not like the movies or the man, however for better or worse Lucas has a had a huge impact on modern film making. It really is sad to see some of the comments on this page are so disingenuous.

    Did you watch the review?
  • Deleted user 2 January 2011 23:21:30
    Also: I really resent him for pushing digital video. It looks SHIT compared to 35mm. I'm not a big picture quality guy, but even I can tell the difference.
  • Deleted user 2 January 2011 23:23:45
    You only have to watch Episode 1 and II to see the difference between digital and film, that said, digital has come a long way since then.

    Shame everyone fucks everything up now with their horrible DIs
  • Deleted user 2 January 2011 23:58:59
    Christ, I can't believe I've watched all 3 of his prequel reviews in one day :D

    Attack of the Clones was the best of the 3 reviews imo, the love-story bits were superb as was highlighting the (now obvious) similarities between AotC and Empire Strikes Back

    I seem to have developed a hunger for pizza rolls too
  • Deleted user 2 January 2011 23:59:51
    And fucking cats.
  • Deleted user 3 January 2011 00:02:39
    These vids would be better if they weren't as long as the films being critiqued.
  • funkyd 3 Jan 2011 00:05:01 7,522 posts
    Seen 10 months ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Rage_Quit_Rob wrote:
    These vids would be better if they weren't as long as the films being critiqued.

    Patience, my young padawan.

    sorry
  • ecureuil 3 Jan 2011 00:05:26 76,496 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    They're perfectly lengthed. YouTube has made everyone think any video longer than 5 minutes is too long.
  • Khanivor 3 Jan 2011 00:05:31 40,388 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    CrispyXUK64 wrote:
    RedSparrows wrote:
    Empire was good! Obviously, but Kirshner's made more shit than Lucas :D

    It's incredible how many folk gloss over this bothersome fact.
  • Deleted user 3 January 2011 00:07:04
    No they aren't. 2 hours is not the perfect length for some funny piss take video. And I am not saying it needs to be 4 minutes because I have drooling ADD either. I watched the whole of the first one thinking it was gonna be twenty/thirty minutes then I saw the other two. No ta.
  • Genji 3 Jan 2011 00:09:41 19,691 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    They are a bit long, imo. There is quite a bit of padding that doesn't really need to be there.
  • ecureuil 3 Jan 2011 00:10:18 76,496 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Tbh they're too short. It takes more than two hours to break down these shitty movies, but he fit the important things in. Personally I'd have been happy with a scene by scene breakdown covering the entire movie, THEN a more thorough overarching analysis. He could have spent 5 hours on Phantom Menace alone.
  • ecureuil 3 Jan 2011 00:12:01 76,496 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    The only issue I have is that I'm not a fan of the character, the reviews are at their best when he's just analysing the movie.
  • Deleted user 3 January 2011 00:15:46
    ecureuil wrote:
    The only issue I have is that I'm not a fan of the character, the reviews are at their best when he's just analysing the movie.

    Well thats what I am getting at, I was more interested in what he had to say about the films, rather than the obviously very Family Guy influenced humour where he gets sidetracked about something or makes some reference. If he stuck to the informed and funny deconstruction of the films and included some of the best gags then the overall quality would be better, and the runtime would be shorter making it more viable for people to watch. Surely a win win all round.
  • Page

    of 4 First / Last

Log in or register to reply