Sunday, January 16, 2005

Layman movie review: EPISODE III RETURN OF THE SITH


Ug. I just knew it. I attended an exclusive preview screening of the upcoming Star Warts prequel and it was every bit as half-assed and idoticallly knuckle-headed as I thought it would be.

In honor of this movie, I'm going to start a new feature in this blog, titled:
Layman expose: REASONS WHY GEORGE LUC-ASS IS A BIG FAT IDIOT, Part One (of Infinity)

Ok, so... at the end of the Return of the Sith, Natalie Portman's character, Paddle-Me Armadillo, dies in childbirth, while giving birth to Luke and Leiar. Hello? Your frickin' galaxy has swords made of lasers, machines that resist gravity, and giant ships big enough to destroy planets. And yet, you can't master childbirth. How idiotically convinient for Episode III's lamebrained story purposes.

Plus, it's not like the character's death-during-childbirth comes as a surprise. Manakin has dreams about it the entire damn movie, and yet nobody takes any precautions. Ug. Double Ug. Anyway, another stupid Star Warts movie down the tubes. At least the misery is over.

And I'm not even gonna get started on the Threepio stuff.

11 comments:

Christian said...

I hope you're joking, because...not to be a continuity maven, but Leia specifically recalls, for luke's benefit, what their mother was like in Return of the Jedi. So, to have her die in childbirth can only mean one thing: Return of the Jedi: Specialer Edition, coming soon to a DVD rack near you.

.rich

Jaymo said...

*SIGH*Well, let me preface this by saying it's just a bit of respectful dissent - I love a good debate, after all.

I suppose it would be too much to ask that, before spending too much time ripping it apart, we actually learn the correct name of the film. "Revenge" not "Return." Are you sure you attended an exclusive preview screening? Because, I would have thought you would notice the title as it scrolled up the screen. But then, I don't doubt you actually went to a screening, you just attended with a closed mind so you already knew you were going to hate it... oh yeah, and your mind was closed enough that the correct title couldn't seep in.

As for childbirth, you know, childbirth is childbirth, man, whether you're living in an advanced society or not - unless you're somehow trying to say that childbirth could be made safer by things like... anti-gravity, planet destroying ships, and laser-swords? Before you jump on that - your attempt at logic wasn't lost on me, it just doesn't fit. Do you think that in a futuristic society there will some button that pregnant moms can push, emitting a little *ding*, followed by an overly cheery voice that says, "You've got babies!" thereby avoiding the pain and danger of childbirth?

Whatever happened to going to a movie, suspending disbelief, and just watching a story play out on screen? Sure, you can dislike things about the story, but when did we, as a society, start ripping films to shreds simply because they didn't match up with what we expect?? The filmmaker tells the story, if you don't like the story, fine, but to attack from every angle and rip it to shreds is just senseless. It speaks a lot to the character and intellect of the "ripper" I think. "Hey, I didn't like this, therefore the movie sucks and no one should see it!"

Hey, if you don't like a painting, you say so and get over it, you don't take a claw-hammer and rip holes in it. A movie is just as much a work of art, a story told in such a way as to be the visual for the audience, rather than leaving it to the audience to create their own visual. Opinions differ wildly on art, as is the case with film. There are still people today that find some of Van Gogh's work pedantic, or some of DaVinci's work to be unforgivably sacrilegious, while others feel completely the opposite about their works. But I can't remember the last time I saw someone in front of an art museum with a bullhorn or publishing a newspaper column trying to convince fellow art-lovers that they shouldn't waste time looking at a particular painting. Shouldn't we have enough respect for our fellow movie-goers to let them form their own opinions about a film, rather than trying to taint their opinions or displace them with our own? Maybe make your opinion known, sure, but overtly trying to influence other people's view isn't cool. And I find the insulting comments toward George Lucas to be especially objectionable. Criticizing the film is one thing, attacking the person is another entirely.

That's the difference between a filmmaker and a film critic, though - the filmmaker makes the film and leaves it to the audience to decide whether it's good or not, opening themselves up to criticism. The critic tries to rip apart something that the filmmaker has created and to tries to influence as many people as possible before they even have a chance to view the film and come up with an unbiased opinion of their own. Too bad, really.

TomB said...

Hey, Jaymo, you are a douche bag. Take your head out of lucas's ass and stop tongue-polishing his turds long of enough to know he doesn't make films. He makes shitty movies designed to take every dollar your mama gives you for mowing the lawn. I'm sure your medical background makes you an expert on death in child birth, but you can't suspend disbelief when someone directly contradicts oneself. You are not a douche bag. See how that works, douche bag? And if you want to call your lord and master an artist, that's your opinion. I bet your gonna have your mint condition Darth-Tater framed, huh, numb-nuts?

Jaymo said...

Wow, ignorant, classless, and low on vocabulary. Congratulations, you're a triple-threat!

I made a perfectly civil post to express a difference of opinion. It's a shame you can't achieve such civility.

Or, since vocabulary seems to be a problem for you, maybe I should go back and use smaller words in my original post. I shouldn't use anything greater than two syllables or anything hard to spell.

TomB said...

Hey, hey, self-righteous, sanctimonious, and pretentious. There's three words you can't pronounce, excuse me, say. Let me save you a bus trip to the "library," all three words add up to "douche-bag."

As your first post was clearly confrontational, sound it out, con-fron-tational, means your were looking to start some shit and elevate yourself as well as take up the banner of Grand Lucas-Lover, you instigated a rebuke. Or in your parlance, "asked fur a beatin'."

But, hey, thanks for taking time out of your busy schedule of jerking off to episode 3 trailers to reply to my lowly post. I noticed your post was considerably shorter this time, typing with one hand must be difficult.

Darth_Tanyan said...

If I can jump between the cannon-shots here for a second, I'd just like to say that Mr. Lucas is an A-1 Class media whore on a scale surpassed only by Mr. Barnum during the turn of the other century. Lucas lost the 'eye of the tiger.' After Empire Strikes Back, every movie has sucked harder than a black hole in Cygnus. You may now carry on with your exercises...

Jaymo said...

I'm impressed, TomB. You used bigger words this time.

As to my being confrontational, well, you seem to be the only person whose delicate sensibilities were offended by my original post, since you're the only one who tried to take up the charge to "confront" me.

A couple of thoughts before I sign off from this thread. As for your last comment, TomB, really, grow up - I think I already used the whole "avoiding big words" sentiment, so you going back to it amounts to the old elementary school comeback of, "I know you are but what am I?" You should really try attending a debate school, or at least, an English class, if you'd like to do better. Sorry if that seems sanctimonious or pretentious of me to say so, but it seems your lack of eloquence is easily inferred from your tacky posts.

Given your frequent reference to feminine hygiene products and masturbation, it seems obvious you have nothing of greater substance to offer to this discussion. It's a sure sign that someone doesn't have a sensible or well-reasoned argument when they result to vulgarity. Having said that, do try to clean it up a bit - you're really brining down the class-level, or at least, the IQ level of this Blog.

Having said that, I'm leaving this particular thread behind, as your posts alone have really made this all quite beneath me.

Anonymous said...

It's favorite thing in the world when people loudly declare that they're leaving some online discussion behind. I mean, did you expect farewells? Fanfare? Sobbing? Oh, or how about the rending of our garments?

John, your weblog rocks, if for no other reason than you've already managed to attract more blog drama queens than mine, and I seethe with jealousy.

SEEEEEEETHE!!!!

.rich

TomB said...

Oh, boo hoo! The lucas-ite is taking his poorly conceived justifications and going back to his nana's basement. Now we won't have his ivy league education to enlighten us poor, classless, common folk. How much does anyone want to bet the walking rectal wart sits poised at his keyboard, anxious to type a searing retort to this, my latest post, only restrained by the knowledge that doing so will further expose him as the hypocrite he so vociferously ( see W, that's how you use the word in context ) would deny being. Damn, that's a good sentence, huh? Oh that's right, can't comment, huh, Jaymo? Douche-bag.

Rich, I think the idea jaymo had in declaring his departure is just a feeble attempt at slamming the door as he exits the room. Pathetic, i know, but what can you expect from a douche bag?

Sything said...

Tomb, you pretentious little prick...

Anonymous said...

Man, you guys have way to much time on your hands. Get a job or something. or maybe try to make your own movie and see what people say about it before you go draging others efferts through the mud.