# Disney to Acquire Lucasfilm for $4 Billion - Star Wars Episode 7 for 2015.



## EpicBroFist (Oct 30, 2012)

> *The Walt Disney Company (NYSE: DIS) announced today that it has agreed to acquire Lucasfilm Ltd. in a stock and cash transaction valued at $4.05 billion.*  Lucasfilm is 100 percent owned by Lucasfilm chairman and founder, George Lucas.
> 
> Under the agreement and based on the closing price of Disney stock on Oct. 26, 2012, the transaction value is $4.05 billion, with Disney paying  half of the consideration  in cash and issuing  40 million shares at closing.
> 
> ...





Lock if old.


----------



## MinatoRider (Oct 30, 2012)

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWaLxFIVX1s[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Sygurgh (Oct 30, 2012)

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWaLxFIVX1s[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Zaru (Oct 30, 2012)

"Star Wars 7 in 2015"


----------



## Burke (Oct 30, 2012)

Why the no?
If its expanded universe then i say go right ahead.
If its a new story that lucas is making up himself then i say 

But really it shouldnt be a problem.


----------



## ExoSkel (Oct 30, 2012)

There is going to be Star Wars movie every 2 or 3 years.


----------



## Burke (Oct 30, 2012)

What if theyre good.


----------



## Megaharrison (Oct 30, 2012)

Disney has done a great job with Marvel (which many decried at the time, they've actually turned Marvel around financially, helped with their booming film industry, and haven't interfered with the Intellectual Propety/universe at all) and Lucas Films can't get much worse.


----------



## Ceria (Oct 30, 2012)

That is shocking, the quality level of Avengers, Lucas not completely behind the wheel, he'll be a consultant not the puppetmaster. 

OHMYGOD. 

/endfreakout


----------



## Mintaka (Oct 30, 2012)

WHY!?

I hope this is a joke.


----------



## Frostman (Oct 30, 2012)

I sense a disturbance in the force.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 30, 2012)

Why would anybody NOT want more Star Wars?  I don't get it.


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Oct 30, 2012)

Mider T said:


> Why would anybody NOT want more Star Wars?  I don't get it.



because for some reason people are convinced that the only "episodes" that should have existed were the "first" three that were made.

and to them I say "fuck you"


----------



## Bender (Oct 30, 2012)

Franchise zombying


----------



## Petes12 (Oct 30, 2012)

Mider T said:


> Why would anybody NOT want more Star Wars?  I don't get it.



episode 1 mainly


----------



## Shock Therapy (Oct 30, 2012)

if they do expanded universe i'm all for it. luke being badass on the screen? the vong invasion? YES


----------



## Hatifnatten (Oct 30, 2012)

This is the worst thing... well, since last 3 movies. And a TV series.
Actually there's nothing even to ruin now, just go ahead George. Rape the corpse in any hole to your heart's content.


----------



## baconbits (Oct 30, 2012)

Mider T said:


> Why would anybody NOT want more Star Wars?  I don't get it.



I feel the same way.  Disney is very good at what it does.  It also does a great job recognizing greatness and not ruining it.


----------



## the_notorious_Z.É. (Oct 30, 2012)

I have a bad feeling about this.


----------



## Arishem (Oct 30, 2012)

An Old Republic movie set during the peak of the Jedi/Sith Wars would be the tits.


----------



## Sunrider (Oct 30, 2012)

The only Star Wars movie I want to see is a giant fight scene, Jedi and Sith popping up out of nowhere and for no reason, hacking and choking and shocking the shit out of each other for two hours. No dialogue, no plot, just force and lightsabers. 

And throw in a few bounty hunters boss enough to keep up, with jet packs and blasters, just to shake it up a bit. 

That's pretty much the only thing they could do with it that I have any confidence in.


----------



## corsair (Oct 30, 2012)

I hope they keep Lucas as far away as possible from this


----------



## Mintaka (Oct 30, 2012)

Shock Therapy said:


> if they do expanded universe i'm all for it. luke being badass on the screen? the vong invasion? YES


I wouldn't mind that.

However the vong invasion would have to be censored or made R.  The mutilation rituals and the way they brutally go about things wouldn't exactly be kid friendly.


----------



## Hatifnatten (Oct 30, 2012)

Le Petit Mort said:


> The only Star Wars movie I want to see is a giant fight scene, Jedi and Sith popping up out of nowhere and for no reason, hacking and choking and shocking the shit out of each other for two hours. No dialogue, no plot, just force and lightsabers.
> And throw in a few bounty hunters boss enough to keep up, with jet packs and blasters, just to shake it up a bit.


So you just want to re-watch the prequels again?


----------



## Arishem (Oct 30, 2012)

Jedi/Sith Wars is guaranteed big bucks, and I doubt Dinsey would screw up with how well they handled Avengers.


----------



## Mintaka (Oct 30, 2012)

> So you just want to re-watch the prequels again?



I think he's a masochist.

As long as they keep lucas away from it, then I might give it a shot.  However after the disaster that were the prequels I'm uncertain of this.


----------



## Final Giku Tenshou (Oct 30, 2012)

I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced. I feel something terrible has happened.


----------



## FitzChivalry (Oct 30, 2012)

I'm not a Star Wars guy, so I'll be much more open-minded and patient about it. Disney did a good job with Marvel and their IP, so I'm willing to wait and see what they can do with Star Wars.


----------



## kazuri (Oct 30, 2012)

I think most people are fearing it will be more childish like episode 1, but worse.

They should make a movie from the sith perspective, thatd be cool.


----------



## Megaharrison (Oct 30, 2012)

Arishem said:


> Jedi/Sith Wars is guaranteed big bucks, and I doubt Dinsey would screw up with how well they handled Avengers.



This, Disney dragged Marvel out of its slump and put together the Cinematic Universe which is far and above most of their previous movies in quality.


----------



## Bender (Oct 30, 2012)

Mider T said:
			
		

> Why would anybody NOT want more Star Wars? I don't get it.



This



Petes12 said:


> episode 1 mainly



Clearly dun know what you're talking about MT. 

There's also the bad dialogue of ep II and III.


----------



## Arishem (Oct 30, 2012)

THE PREQUELSA living corpse and his degenerate apprentices vs hilariously incompetent Jedi =/= Jedi/Sith Wars


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Oct 30, 2012)

I love you Disney.


----------



## Gunners (Oct 30, 2012)

Mintaka said:


> WHY!?
> 
> I hope this is a joke.



Money talks and at first I was concerned but Megaharrison's post makes me reasonably optimistic.


----------



## Ceria (Oct 30, 2012)

ADMIRAL THRAWN

and that's all i got to say.


----------



## dummy plug (Oct 30, 2012)

if that is the case, they should start a new story not revolving around Luke...of course in the same universe...perhaps a movie starring the clones based on the Clone Wars arc?


----------



## Linkdarkside (Oct 30, 2012)

Yami Munesanzun said:


> because for some reason people are convinced that the only "episodes" that should have existed were the "first" three that were made.
> 
> and to them I say "fuck you"



yeah ,my favorite was episode 3.


----------



## dream (Oct 30, 2012)

I have some optimism for the new movie.  Disney has been good for Marvel and I can see them being good for Lucasfilms.  As long as Lucas doesn't have considerable input on the script it should be fine.


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Oct 30, 2012)

ITT: People passing their opinions on a movie as if they were absolute.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 30, 2012)

Petes12 said:


> episode 1 mainly



What was wrong with Episode I?  If you say the common "Jar-Jar Binks" I'm going to talk down to you.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 30, 2012)

Bender said:


> This
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Um, wat               .


----------



## Gunners (Oct 30, 2012)

I didn't actually mind the prequels I just think it is one of those things where no one would be happy. The end of the day people had different theories on what turned Darth Vader, how the world was before yada yada it would have been impossible to produce a film that satisfied everyone's  desires. 

Don't get me wrong the films had their faults but I feel as though they're greatly exaggerated.


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Oct 30, 2012)

Mider T said:


> What was wrong with Episode I?  If you say the common "Jar-Jar Binks" I'm going to talk down to you.



the one thing i noticed about those three is as it went on, the droids did i type "drones"? my fingers must be dyslexic. became more talkative and less competent.

i guess that's what happens when you're fodder, you stop caring


----------



## Coteaz (Oct 30, 2012)

I want Vong.

Parents will take their children to see the funny robots and furry people

RAPE RAPE RAPE


----------



## Distance (Oct 30, 2012)




----------



## Blitzomaru (Oct 30, 2012)

I think people are forgetting the most awesome prospect of this... Jedi's in Kingdom Hearts!!!


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 30, 2012)

They did a good job with Marvel.


----------



## neko-sennin (Oct 30, 2012)

There's just something about the idea of Disney buying out another chunk of my childhood that just leaves a hollow feeling. 



Megaharrison said:


> Disney has done a great job with Marvel (which many decried at the time, they've actually turned Marvel around financially, helped with their booming film industry, and haven't interfered with the Intellectual Propety/universe at all) and Lucas Films can't get much worse.



The Marvel movies are the only ray of hope in all of this.

After all, anymore, I don't see how Lucas could do any worse.



ExoSkel said:


> There is going to be Star Wars movie every 2 or 3 years.



(Unless they're "Avengers" level quality, and start exploring the few chapters of the Expanded Universe that _don't_ read like bad fanfiction...) That's what I'm afraid of.


----------



## Linkdarkside (Oct 30, 2012)




----------



## Mintaka (Oct 30, 2012)

Blitzomaru said:


> I think people are forgetting the most awesome prospect of this... Jedi's in Kingdom Hearts!!!


Excuse me, I think I hear my inner child committing suicide.


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Oct 30, 2012)

Mintaka said:


> Excuse me, I think I hear my inner child committing suicide.



an inner child would imply the possibility of a soul.

i thought you didn't have a soul, Minty.


----------



## Saufsoldat (Oct 30, 2012)

I was looking for a proper reaction video to this and the top comment is "My reaction to Disney buying Lucasfilm"


----------



## Mintaka (Oct 30, 2012)

Yami Munesanzun said:


> an inner child would imply the possibility of a soul.
> 
> i thought you didn't have a soul, Minty.


 It was a way of putting my disdain into a sarcastic response that most people would understand.

In otherwords It's a figure of speech Yami.


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Oct 30, 2012)

Mintaka said:


> It's a figure of speech yami.



I had no idea.

/sarcasm.


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Oct 30, 2012)

Blitzomaru said:


> I think people are forgetting the most awesome prospect of this... Jedi's in Kingdom Hearts!!!



Never thought about that.


----------



## Bender (Oct 30, 2012)

> I think people are forgetting the most awesome prospect of this... Jedi's in Kingdom Hearts!!!



Like Keyblade wielders aren't already jedi-like


----------



## Mintaka (Oct 30, 2012)

Yami Munesanzun said:


> I had no idea.
> 
> /sarcasm.


*pats on the head*

It's okay Yami, I don't think any less of you.


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Oct 30, 2012)

Bender said:


> Like Keyblade wielders aren't already jedi-like



Sora


----------



## CandleGuy (Oct 30, 2012)

Leia a Disney Princess yall

Celebrate that knowledge


----------



## A Tool (Oct 30, 2012)

New Jedi Order series! PLEASE! I need to see the Vong in theaters!!!!


----------



## MCTDread (Oct 30, 2012)

Yuuzhan Vong Invasion and Old Republic films would be epic. 

This could be good for the franchise. I look forward to it "Episode 7"


----------



## vampiredude (Oct 30, 2012)

They just need to re-retcon general grevious to his former clone wars glory. A flashback story, revival or past story ark. I don't care anymore, the general is my favourite and i need to have him back.

DO ET DISNEY! NAO!


----------



## Bungee Gum (Oct 30, 2012)

They need to retcon ANakin skywalker into not being such a bitch, and instead more like Akainu.

This is an awesome move, I am fucking excited, finally more Star wars. I fucking love star wars, and its disney.


----------



## Ultimania (Oct 30, 2012)

This is either going to be really good or really bad. We'll find out soon enough.


----------



## Pliskin (Oct 30, 2012)

Mider T said:


> What was wrong with Episode I?  If you say the common "Jar-Jar Binks" I'm going to talk down to you.



[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI&list=PL5919C8DE6F720A2D&index=1&feature=plpp_video[/YOUTUBE]

Oldie but goldie. Explains in full detail why the movie fails not only as a prequel, but as a movie in general.
Though Jar Jar sure as hell doesn't help.


----------



## Phenom (Oct 30, 2012)

I trust Disney with Star Wars ... they did a great job with Tron


----------



## A Tool (Oct 30, 2012)

Pliskin said:


> [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI&list=PL5919C8DE6F720A2D&index=1&feature=plpp_video[/YOUTUBE]
> 
> Oldie but goldie. Explains in full detail why the movie fails not only as a prequel, but as a movie in general.
> Though Jar Jar sure as hell doesn't help.



A lot of criticism of the prequels can also apply to the Originals.

C-3P0 = Jar Jar

Darth Maul's Silence = Boba Fett's Silence

Politics doesn't play as big of a role as he makes it out to be.
The real downfall is the acting is horrid.... 

Except: Obi-Wan and Palpatine.


----------



## Rescuebear (Oct 30, 2012)

It would be cool to see an old republic movie.

And I liked episode 3.


----------



## Skywalker (Oct 30, 2012)

This will be really good or really bad.

Either way, that's about 30 years of EU down the drain.


----------



## A Tool (Oct 30, 2012)

Skywalker said:


> This will be really good or really bad.
> 
> Either way, that's about 30 years of EU down the drain.



Unless they do a Thrawn/NJO series.... 

If not I'll have wasted the last three years of my life power reading to catch up on the EU, haha. xD


----------



## Skywalker (Oct 30, 2012)

A Tool said:


> Unless they do a Thrawn/NJO series....
> 
> If not I'll have wasted the last three years of my life power reading to catch up on the EU, haha. xD


It all depends on who they bring in to work on them, if they're smart it'll be writers that've already worked on the EU, or a bunch of new guys that'll screw it all up.


----------



## Vynjira (Oct 30, 2012)

Has narc posted yet?


----------



## Roman (Oct 30, 2012)

Not sure yet if this will be a good or a bad move. I, for one, will miss the Lucasfilm logo before the introductory sequence of the new movie. As for the movie itself, who knows. Disney has made a lot of good movies as well as some terrible ones. I have serious doubts it'll ever compare to the original three movies so I'll be going into the theaters expecting something only slightly better than what we've had in the prequels (take it any way you want).


----------



## Pliskin (Oct 30, 2012)

A Tool said:


> A lot of criticism of the prequels can also apply to the Originals.
> 
> C-3P0 = Jar Jar
> 
> ...



I'll grant you C-3PO, but prior to fanculture, Boba Fett was just another background character. Not more imortant than any other of Jabbas crooks.

/rant
And yes the acting is horrible, but even that isn't the worst part. The worst part is the clusterfuck of stuff happening at once. You're supposed to feel sad at Qui go go girls death/ cut to anakin screaming like dogfights are a rollercoaster (that part is insanely stupid, why did they even bring him there?)/cut to the battle  droids vs. Gungans which cannot decide if it is threatening or funny/ cut to Padme and crew getting cornered and youre supposed to feel anxious for them.

It just cannot pick a tone and it shows. The original finale to the trilogy had similiar problems, but this one takes the cake.

And don't get me startet on the stupiditys that is Qui Gon. He does not only take the effin child of the prophecy to a battlefield, he also does not even think of selling his ship for a taxi ride? I mean seriously, Lucas? It's not like you had Obi Wan do exactly that in episode IV. And after that they never came back to free his mother? Not even Yoda thought that having the Jesus child of the force live through his mothers continued plight might just tempt him to the dark side?

/endofrant


----------



## Hellion01 (Oct 30, 2012)

I really dunno how I feel about this but I guess I have to see where it goes. I actually like how the movies connected and there's a nice "closure" feel to it. All of this seems odd.


----------



## Mist Puppet (Oct 30, 2012)

> Disney to Acquire Lucasfilm for $4 Billion



Cool, I guess. 



> Star Wars Episode 7 for 2015.



Not as cool.


----------



## Edward Nygma (Oct 30, 2012)

Megaharrison said:


> Disney has done a great job with Marvel (which many decried at the time, they've actually turned Marvel around financially, helped with their booming film industry, and haven't interfered with the Intellectual Propety/universe at all) and Lucas Films can't get much worse.



This is not entirely true. They have, imo, destroyed the animated portion of Marvel. Marvel used to have badass shows and movies. They haven't even released an animated movie since the buyout and all the shows are on the Disney channel, so they are all geared to the super-young. That is a pretty big deal to me. However aside from that, they have done a pretty good job.

I'm not totally against more SW movies. They good really expand on the story. I've never read any of the books or anything, but I have heard from other people that there is plenty of things that could be done with these movies.


----------



## MCTDread (Oct 30, 2012)

To start off I wouldn't do a continuation with the old characters. If I were them I would start fresh with an era of Star Wars we haven't seen with new characters and such.


----------



## Linkdarkside (Oct 30, 2012)

Mider T said:


> What was wrong with Episode I?  If you say the common "Jar-Jar Binks" I'm going to talk down to you.


for me is that the race part took to long.


----------



## Stunna (Oct 30, 2012)

Repost from other thread


> Anyway, this will most likely suck. But I'm not going to lie, the prospect of getting to experience the beginning of a new chapter of the Star Wars saga on the big screen is very exciting to me. Thus so, I will remain cautiously optimistic until further news.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Oct 30, 2012)

I would see an Old Republic movie. The Skywalker saga is boring and too played out, won't be spending a dime if they go for that again.


----------



## All The Good Names Are Taken (Oct 30, 2012)

Shinigami Perv said:


> I would see an Old Republic movie. The Skywalker saga is boring and too played out, won't be spending a dime if they go for that again.



yeah they should adapt the Darth Bane trilogy , that shit would be live


----------



## Enclave (Oct 30, 2012)

I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.


----------



## Stalin (Oct 30, 2012)

Eh., why
 Thee franschise has been continuing the story forever.


----------



## Stunna (Oct 30, 2012)

Evil doesn't get much more real than Sidious. 

Furthermore, both of the sequels were 80's movies.

0/5 terrible post, try again.


----------



## Sōsuke Aizen (Oct 30, 2012)

Stunna said:


> Evil doesn't get much more real than Sidious.
> 
> Furthermore, both of the sequels were 80's movies.
> 
> 0/5 terrible post, try again.



Sequels suck ass. Hows that for a better post?

Anything about Luke and the Skywalker family should be destroyed... lightsaber is not worth using. Use a massive hammer!!!!!

And real evil as in Sidious, instead of a retarded boy who was forced into the darkside.


----------



## AfterGlow (Oct 30, 2012)

I'm staying cautiously optimistic.

1; It can't be worse than with Lucas at the helm, and 2; it worked out well enough for Marvel.


----------



## Wilykat (Oct 30, 2012)

This can't be good.  With Disney involved we'd end up with something like Ewok movie spinoffs.


----------



## Stunna (Oct 30, 2012)

Apparently _Pirates of the Caribbean_ never happened.


----------



## Sōsuke Aizen (Oct 30, 2012)

Darth Sidious was more believable as a Dark Lord, Mastermind, Evil Prick... only in the prequels. He played both sides... it was brilliant! The old skank Palpy who was defeated by a droid should not be allowed to exist...


----------



## Mexican God Lvl 3 (Oct 30, 2012)

Pliskin said:


> [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI&list=PL5919C8DE6F720A2D&index=1&feature=plpp_video[/YOUTUBE]
> 
> Oldie but goldie. Explains in full detail why the movie fails not only as a prequel, but as a movie in general.
> Though Jar Jar sure as hell doesn't help.



The reviewer and everyone who was featured in that video is a total ^ (not the meaning of the word "respect".).

People outcast by society as losers. Who are blind by fanboyism. Much like the itachi and minato fans on NF.


----------



## Stunna (Oct 30, 2012)

Ad hominem.


----------



## neodragzero (Oct 30, 2012)

Datenshi Uchiha said:


> This is not entirely true. They have, imo, destroyed the animated portion of Marvel. Marvel used to have badass shows



Such as what that wasn't over long before Disney got involved? Anything that was over before 2009 isn't so much gone because of Disney but of entirely separate reasons.


> and movies. They haven't even released an animated movie since the buyout and all the shows are on the Disney channel, so they are all geared to the super-young. That is a pretty big deal to me. However aside from that, they have done a pretty good job.


You're saying that an animated movie hasn't been released since the buyout, that occurred around August 2009, even though Planet Hulk and Thor: Tales of Asgard were released in 2011?

I really don't see the age group difference between say Clone Wars and the Avengers series. I don't see Madhouse produced anime being made for the super young either but I guess it would help if you explained what you mean by super young.

Anyway, Disney buying out LucasFilms is what we need to get the same treatment that's done for the production quality that the Avengers and upcoming live TV pilots are getting, I'm all for it. I sincerely doubt Disney has any interest in treating the Star Wars brand the same way it treats its main animation division that's so blatantly different in how it's supposed to be handled.


Stunna said:


> Evil doesn't get much more real than Sidious.


Easily thinking of 5 villains who make that statement sad hilarious.


----------



## AfterGlow (Oct 30, 2012)

Avengers: Earths Mightiest Heroes was the first animated Marvel show that came even close to the animated DC shows. Marvel had a lot of good things; animated series was never one.

Add in the Marvel superhero movies, and there's zero case against Disney.


----------



## Sōsuke Aizen (Oct 30, 2012)

We all agree that Jar Jar was annoying and Anakin was childish (WHAT A FUCKING SURPRISE) but to say the prequels were shit because of that is a manifestation of insecurity and simple ignorance of what the movies were. The prequels were so much darker, actually required some knowledge of politics to comprehend the trajectory of the plot and the nature of the emotions fueling Sith and Jedi choices. There was a lot going on, though it seems the retards only saw Jar Jar and were scared away by him because they don't wanna feel like a little kiddy.


----------



## Stunna (Oct 30, 2012)

Please watch Plinkett's reviews of the prequels so you can stop spewing your ignorant drivel in this thread.


----------



## Sōsuke Aizen (Oct 30, 2012)

Stunna said:


> Please watch Plinkett's reviews of the prequels so you can stop spewing your ignorant drivel in this thread.



Dude, I have already destroyed that piece of shit review in past posts. Don't make me laugh with comments made by mountain trolls who are only waiting for the next cheap Han Solo joke and worlds being saved by teddy bears.


----------



## neodragzero (Oct 30, 2012)

AfterGlow said:


> Avengers: Earths Mightiest Heroes was the first animated Marvel show that came even close to the animated DC shows. Marvel had a lot of good things; animated series was never one.
> 
> Add in the Marvel superhero movies, and there's zero case against Disney.



Yeah, I can't see how any of the negative fuss about Disney buying Marvel was anymore than just exclusive minded belly aching.


----------



## Stunna (Oct 30, 2012)

♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> Dude, I already have destroyed that piece of shit review in past posts. Don't make me laugh with comments made by mountain trolls who are only waiting for the next cheap Han Solo joke and worlds being saved by teddy bears.


Oh really now? I want to see these posts.


----------



## Chelydra (Oct 30, 2012)

Im torn... maybe if they make a movie with Tyber Zann.... and a good movie


----------



## DemonDragonJ (Oct 30, 2012)

This is a most interesting development, indeed. I initially was wary of the idea of Disney Corporation acquiring LucasFilm, but I remembered that I also had been worried about their acquisition of Marvel Comics, and that they have not at all interfered with the creative processes of Marvel's franchises, so I am fairly confident that the Disney Corporation shall not interfere with the creature process of LucasFilm, either.

The news about _Star Was: Episode VII_ does slightly bother me, however, as I worry that such a film may not be as well-made as were the original three films, but I shall still remain hopeful, especially since George Lucas has passed the mantle of directing the franchise to another person, as I have been very displeased with many of the changes that he made to his films in their various home video releases. What story may such a film have? Will it be an adaptation of an expanded universe novel or a completely new and original story?


----------



## AfterGlow (Oct 30, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> Yeah, I can't see how any of the negative fuss about Disney buying Marvel was anymore than just exclusive minded belly aching.



Exactly.

Really, what's there to complain about? They are letting Marvel do their thing, while giving them a bigger budget to do so. Win/Win.


----------



## Dark Knight Spike (Oct 30, 2012)

I find it curious as to how Warner Bros. didn't attempt to try and gain rights for Star Wars.

Imagine if Steven Spielburg had the rights?


----------



## Mider T (Oct 30, 2012)

♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> We all agree that Jar Jar was annoying and Anakin was childish (WHAT A FUCKING SURPRISE) but to say the prequels were shit because of that is a manifestation of insecurity and simple ignorance of what the movies were. The prequels were so much darker, actually required some knowledge of politics to comprehend the trajectory of the plot and the nature of the emotions fueling Sith and Jedi choices. There was a lot going on, though it seems the retards only saw Jar Jar and were scared away by him because they don't wanna feel like a little kiddy.



Jar Jar was a kid's character, as Star Wars is a FAMILY MOVIE.  There's always a humorous character in Star Wars movies, he served a purpose in the first film as well so the complaints about his character (other than being a stereotypical you-know-what) aren't valid.  Don't bellyache over comedy.

Anakin was childish as a child yes.

Other than that I agree with you about the prequels.


----------



## Suzuku (Oct 30, 2012)

-2013-2014: Clone Wars goes from CN to Disney XD, one or two other new cartoons are produced
-2015: Episode VII is released, grosses $1.3b, media spins it as SW franchise is reborn
-2016: Live-action SW TV show finally airs a pilot on ABC, pulls in 20 million viewers
-2017: Episode VIII released, grossed another $1.5b

What lies in the future. Disney is definitely going to make this another Marvel and Pixar.


----------



## Stunna (Oct 30, 2012)

You can be a comedic character and not be obnoxious/annoying.


----------



## AfterGlow (Oct 30, 2012)

The prequels were nothing but garbage scripts centered around overusing CGI to cover up the most glaring holes.

Episode 1 is mostly an example of terrible writing and racist caricatures.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 30, 2012)

^Overusing CGI?  You mean using CGI to it's fullest ability like any live action space movie?  Why would you use robots when you have technology to surpass that?  There were no glaring holes, that sounds like the logic Library fanboys use for things they don't understand.

It helps to make the characters more animated (in movements and actions) for the kids, though it backfired because of the


----------



## kluang (Oct 30, 2012)

revan deserve to be in the big screen.

along with my jailbait twilek mission and bastila


----------



## Skywalker (Oct 30, 2012)

Suzuku said:


> -2013-2014: Clone Wars goes from CN to Disney XD, one or two other new cartoons are produced
> -2015: Episode VII is released, grosses $1.3b, media spins it as SW franchise is reborn
> -2016: Live-action SW TV show finally airs a pilot on ABC, pulls in 20 million viewers
> -2017: Episode VIII released, grossed another $1.5b
> ...


I am curious if they'll dig up the live action show idea now, that could be interesting.


----------



## AfterGlow (Oct 30, 2012)

Mider T said:


> ^Overusing CGI?  You mean using CGI to it's fullest ability like any live action space movie?  Why would you use robots when you have technology to surpass that?  There were no glaring holes, that sounds like the logic Library fanboys use for things they don't understand.
> 
> It helps to make the characters more animated (in movements and actions) for the kids, though it backfired because of the



The script was thin to say the least, and not a single person in their right mind prefers the sequels to the originals. Thus overexposure to flashy effects and gimmicks to hide that the movies weren't good, at all. The CGI is supposed to complete the movie; not be the movie.

Deal with it.


----------



## Edward Nygma (Oct 30, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> Such as what that wasn't over long before Disney got involved? Anything that was over before 2009 isn't so much gone because of Disney but of entirely separate reasons.


This may be so, but there have been no new projects geared towards the young adult demographic.[/quote]



> You're saying that an animated movie hasn't been released since the buyout, that occurred around August 2009, even though Planet Hulk and Thor: Tales of Asgard were released in 2011?


I apologize, I had my dates mixed up. Though I am pretty sure both of those where well into their production at the time of the buyout, so it is likely that Disney had little to do with either of them.

Also, there are no plans, that I can find, to make anymore. I doubt we will be getting any movies like Hulk VS or The Avengers (Animated) that are geared towards teens and young adults.  



> I really don't see the age group difference between say Clone Wars and the Avengers series. I don't see Madhouse produced anime being made for the super young either but I guess it would help if you explained what you mean by super young.


I find the comparison between Clone Wars and the Avengers to be a pretty large stretch. Though admittedly, I have only watched a handful of Clone War episodes.  

When I say super-young what I really mean is like 13 -. I want shows comparable to say what Justice League: Unlimited was back in the day. That is what a comic  book show should be, or at least as close as we can get on regular TV. 


> Anyway, Disney buying out LucasFilms is what we need to get the same treatment that's done for the production quality that the Avengers and upcoming live TV pilots are getting, I'm all for it. I sincerely doubt Disney has any interest in treating the Star Wars brand the same way it treats its main animation division that's so blatantly different in how it's supposed to be handled.


I agree completely. I just have a tendency to go on little tangents when it comes to how Disney has handled Marvel Animation over the bast couple of years. I love how Disney has had the live action side of Marvel and I am sure Star Wars will get the same star treatment.



> Easily thinking of 5 villains who make that statement sad hilarious.


Yeah, like The Grinch 

Sidious is little more than a glorified Pedobear. He's the Star Wars equivalent of Orochimaru, while being far less interesting.


----------



## T7 Bateman (Oct 30, 2012)

This could be great for Disney. They have done great with Marvel and if they can do the same Star Wars then that would be a great win for them.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 30, 2012)

AfterGlow said:


> The script was thin to say the least, and not a single person in their right mind prefers the sequels to the originals. Thus overexposure to flashy effects and gimmicks to hide that the movies weren't good, at all. The CGI is supposed to complete the movie; not be the movie.
> 
> Deal with it.



There's nothing to "deal" with.  The script was for the most part better for reasons I already stated.  There was no overexposure to flashy effects, you act as if we were watching Avatar.  The CGI made up most of the landscape (obviously because they're on different planets) and fighting aliens and that's about it.  The Battle of Geonosis was beautiful because it was in CGI, that'd have been stupid if they'd done it like the Death Star.

Also Episode II was one of the first movies to be shot in HDD 24-frame.  So the real people moved so prettily (including Jango Fett) that you probably thought that they were CGI, so you lose.


----------



## neodragzero (Oct 30, 2012)

Datenshi Uchiha said:


> This may be so, but there have been no new projects geared towards the young adult demographic.


And the last Marvel animation geared towards to young adult was what exactly? How exactly does Disney have anything to do with something that predates their buy out?


> I apologize, I had my dates mixed up. Though I am pretty sure both of those where well into their production at the time of the buyout, so it is likely that Disney had little to do with either of them.


Besides how it still makes your original statement somewhat odd, you would have to prove that Disney would at all cancel out these productions.


> Also, there are no plans, that I can find, to make anymore.









> I doubt we will be getting any movies like Hulk VS or The Avengers (Animated) that are geared towards teens and young adults.


Because the Avengers animated series is geared to the super young because how exactly?



> I find the comparison between Clone Wars and the Avengers to be a pretty large stretch.\



I don't see much weight in your findings.


> When I say super-young what I really mean is like 13 -. I want shows comparable to say what *Justice League: Unlimited* was back in the day.


The Avengers series is pretty close to being just that for Marvel.


> I agree completely. I just have a tendency to go on little tangents when it comes to how Disney has handled Marvel Animation over the bast couple of years. I love how Disney has had the live action side of Marvel and I am sure Star Wars will get the same star treatment.


Hopefully things turn out as well as they have with Marvel.


Mider T said:


> ^Overusing CGI?  You mean using CGI to it's fullest ability like any live action space movie?



Actually, no. The most recent Star Trek movie was nowhere near filled to the brim with as much CG in one frame. Ditto on Prometheus, Fifth Element, etc.


> It helps to make the characters more animated (in movements and actions) for the kids



That makes absolutely no sense. Filling a frame with a shit load of ships and other crap to the point of mind numbing filler isn't adding to character movements and action beyond the simple matter of making the characters do stuff that's interesting to the eye. What doesn't help is having a crap load of scenes with people talking about stuff that most kids couldn't care less about while these characters do so walking slowly, sitting in a couch, or sitting around. A single conversation scene between two important characters in Looper has more action in a conversation than the numerous stilted conversations between bland prequel characters.

The script for Episode 3 wasn't even written before production started.  That should make it obvious what's going on rather than the silly idea that the script was crafted in the first place to demand certain production choices.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Oct 30, 2012)

Dark Knight Spike said:


> I find it curious as to how Warner Bros. didn't attempt to try and gain rights for Star Wars.
> 
> Imagine if Steven Spielburg had the rights?



No kidding. 

Please god keep the traditional big directors out of this movie. No Lucas, Jackson, Spielberg or Cameron please. 

Someone like Neill Blomkamp or Christopher Nolan would be nice.


----------



## Disquiet (Oct 30, 2012)

Well they can't possibly do anything worse than the Anakin/Padm? romance, so it's got to be a step up.

I'm more of a Trekkie anyway though. 


Stunna said:


> You can be a comedic character and not be obnoxious/annoying.


This. All of this. "It's comedy" and "it's for kids" are not catch-all excuses; characters aimed at kids or intended as comic relief can still be terrible, and in any case need to mesh with the rest of the movie.


----------



## Sōsuke Aizen (Oct 30, 2012)

Stunna said:


> Oh really now? I want to see these posts.



Search for it in the forums... it should be some where on here, probably in the last SW thread.

I can't really think of anything that mind glowingly brilliant about the sequels, other than the fact I recall they had awesome special effects when I first watched them. If we're talking special effects, the prequels trumps the sequels.

If we're talking sophistication, I'd definitely give it to prequels. It had so much more politics and economics as opposed to pure military engagements of the sequels and its simple space travel.

We always knew who the bad guys were in the sequels, whereas Darth Sidious wasn't operating in the open in the prequels. For people watching first time, you'd never really know that such an old kind man would turn out to be so fucking evil. He worked perfectly... it was just like real life... Palps was much more like a dictator, like Hitler and other evil men in the prequels. He had more of a role. In the sequels, he did absolutely nothing until the very end, even then as an old man completely fucked by the darkside that he turns his back on his Sith Apprentice who he knows wants him dead, while he's trying to incinerate the guys son with force lightning.

As for the battles... a silly little explosion of a planet that looked ridiculous as a smashed brick is NOTHING compared to the Jedi vs droid battles in SW2 or the SITH vs Jedi battle of SW1, 2, 3. What's funny is that kid Anakin was better than Luke. And the pod racing was actually pretty cool... I love the sounds they make... as a F1 fan, racing is never bad.

The romance in both trilogies were boring.

The jokes in both trilogies were passable; nothing got me rolling on the floor.

The best character of the prequels was Sidious/Palps. I prefer Padme to Leia, since she was not just a fighter, she was so much more, and had to make some very difficult choices of her own. Yoda was so much better in the prequels than the sequels... what was it Yoda did in the sequels? I completely forget.  There were many more Jedis at the height of the Republic; Windu was pretty cool too, though I wish he had more of a part to play in the prequels. Anakin and Luke are ANNOYING, but fuck Luke, his fighting style sucks. I've seen more replays of Darth Vader at Mustafa or other fights than the first and only time I watched Luke?s boring fights with Troider. And LOL... who recalls watching Vader and Oldkinobi fight in the death star? Who returned to watch that fight and who watched him fight Vader at Mustafa, Maul, Grievous, Dooku twice? And I'm pretty sure I prefer Jango Fett to dumbo Fett... since well... the guy actually had more of a role in the movie... he didn't just stand there trying to be cool.

R2 and C3PO are in all trilogies.

There were so many epic and beautiful worlds in the prequels. Naboo, CORUSCANT, Mustafa, Genosis, Kashyyyk, Kamino, Tatooine.

There were so many types of aliens, bounty hunters, jedi, Sith, droids, 

The prequels had everything the sequels had, AND MORE!!!!!!!!


----------



## Ennoea (Oct 30, 2012)

The prequels are a great watch if you're braindead.


----------



## AfterGlow (Oct 30, 2012)

Mider T said:


> There's nothing to "deal" with.  The script was for the most part better for reasons I already stated.  There was no overexposure to flashy effects, you act as if we were watching Avatar.  The CGI made up most of the landscape (obviously because they're on different planets) and fighting aliens and that's about it.  The Battle of Geonosis was beautiful because it was in CGI, that'd have been stupid if they'd done it like the Death Star.
> 
> Also Episode II was one of the first movies to be shot in HDD 24-frame.  So the real people moved so prettily (including Jango Fett) that you probably thought that they were CGI, so you lose.



Yeah, the droids acting like a bunch of retards as if the entire army was there for comical relief, their stereotypical evil asian overlords, the evil, greedy jew character holding the white hope captive, the worlds most boring race from any movie in the history of mankind, politics, politics, politics, 5 minutes of lightsaber action (which I admit had great choreography), anakin accidently winning the space battle by himself and of course the steaming pile of shit which was jar jar, all framed by the eloquent brits solving disputes and lecturing/mastering the lesser, more ignorant tribes folk.

"There's always a bigger fish, HURRR!"

GREAT movie. Really.


----------



## Suzuku (Oct 30, 2012)

Datenshi Uchiha said:


> I apologize, I had my dates mixed up. Though I am pretty sure both of those where well into their production at the time of the buyout, so it is likely that Disney had little to do with either of them.
> 
> Also, there are no plans, that I can find, to make anymore. I doubt we will be getting any movies like Hulk VS or The Avengers (Animated) that are geared towards teens and young adults.


----------



## AfterGlow (Oct 30, 2012)

Suzuku said:


>



Yeah. Earths Mightiest Heroes was cancelled in favor of a more "kid friendly" adaption, which is completely fucking retarded.


----------



## Stunna (Oct 30, 2012)

You think the prequels are good movies.

You're not in the position to insult another's intellect.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 30, 2012)

How far can they take this...?


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Oct 30, 2012)

I sense much retro-tarding in this thread.

And to those retro-tards you'll appreciate the intended irony of this post:


----------



## Sōsuke Aizen (Oct 30, 2012)

Ennoea said:


> The prequels are a great watch if you're braindead.



Whether they're bad or good is irrelevant to the fact that they are still BETTER than the sequels.


----------



## Detective (Oct 30, 2012)

I find the lack of faith in this thread disturbing. And hopefully you all have failed me for the last time.


----------



## Sōsuke Aizen (Oct 30, 2012)

Stunna said:


> You think the prequels are good movies.
> 
> You're not in the position to insult another's intellect.



 Says the retard who only watched hours of Jar Jar.


----------



## jetwaterluffy1 (Oct 30, 2012)

Does no-one else think they should set the new episodes just _after_ the current book series?


----------



## TSC (Oct 30, 2012)




----------



## drache (Oct 30, 2012)

given the last 5 years I'll give disney a chance


----------



## neodragzero (Oct 30, 2012)

♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> Whether they're bad or good is irrelevant to the fact that they are still BETTER than the sequels.



Nope, they're not better than the original trilogy.


----------



## Suzuku (Oct 30, 2012)

AfterGlow said:


> Yeah. Earths Mightiest Heroes was cancelled in favor of a more "kid friendly" adaption, which is completely fucking retarded.


They never said the new Avengers show would be any more kid friendly than EMH only that it would be closer to the movie i.e. probably not draw from classic stories as much and have more of a focus on action.


----------



## Suzuku (Oct 30, 2012)

Seto Kaiba said:


> How far can they take this...?


Pretty far. It's a big universe and the only stories they've told have been the Skywalkers.


----------



## Sōsuke Aizen (Oct 30, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> Nope, they're not better than the original trilogy.



Keep watching the lameology then.

I personally hope the new movies will be like the prequels only more like SW3... I can't stand the faggotry that Han was.


----------



## AfterGlow (Oct 30, 2012)

Suzuku said:


> They never said the new Avengers show would be any more kid friendly than EMH only that it would be closer to the movie i.e. probably not draw from classic stories as much and have more of a focus on action.



TR is down, so I can't get the article where I first read it.



All The Good Names Are Taken said:


> I see you had me for a second you're trolling



All he ever does is troll, bait and flame.
He's only on this forum because he was banned from his regular.

I don't know why he hasn't been kicked out.


----------



## Lord Glacial (Oct 30, 2012)

They will make Star Wars into a musical.


----------



## drache (Oct 30, 2012)

^

star wars in concrete rocked so I am not inherently opposed to that


----------



## Chibason (Oct 30, 2012)

It will be set 30 years after RotJ and will star Mark Hamill as the elder Grand Master of the Jedi order...:rofl


----------



## Skywalker (Oct 30, 2012)

♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> Don't ever say the n word again, you imbecile. I don't care if you're black and that I'm not black... it's just dumb.
> 
> I hated the ending of ROTJ. I had my hands on face when the so called Dark Lord, a man who can predict futures, a so called mastermind, was defeated by a man in a gimp suit. I really can't imagine teddy bears defeat the U.S. military let alone any militaries 10,000 years in the future. And what's so great about Empire?


Awful, just awful.


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Oct 30, 2012)

the only thing that irks me in the "first" episodes is how useless the clone's armor is/was


----------



## Suzuku (Oct 30, 2012)

AfterGlow said:


> TR is down, so I can't get the article where I first read it.


Well I've never read that. I've never even read an article where they say it'll be similar to Ultimate Spider-Man. All they ever say about it is that it will be viewed as continuation to EMH but focus more on the core characters from the movies than the other Avengers.


----------



## Sōsuke Aizen (Oct 30, 2012)

Skywalker said:


> Awful, just awful.



Vader as a gimp droid was awful.


----------



## drache (Oct 30, 2012)

Chibason said:


> It will be set 30 years after RotJ and will star Mark Hamill as the elder Grand Master of the Jedi order...:rofl



having read some of the unoffical books (or are they actually cannon?) I am not sure that would be so bad but that said there's still a lot of stories in the original trilogy I wouldn't mind having be answered then again I think any such attempt would fall into the same trap that epis 1-3 did


----------



## AfterGlow (Oct 30, 2012)

Yami Munesanzun said:


> the only thing that irks me in the "first" episodes is how useless the clone's armor is/was



Then you have bigger problems than anybody here can help you with.


----------



## Gunners (Oct 30, 2012)

♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> Keep watching the lameology then.
> 
> I personally hope the new movies will be like the prequels only more like SW3... I can't stand *the faggotry that Han was*.


----------



## jetwaterluffy1 (Oct 30, 2012)

drache said:


> having read some of the unoffical books (or are they actually canon?) I am not sure that would be so bad but that said there's still a lot of stories in the original trilogy I wouldn't mind having be answered then again I think any such attempt would fall into the same trap that epis 1-3 did



Almost all of the books are canon (for now at least).


----------



## drache (Oct 30, 2012)

jetwaterluffy1 said:


> Almost all of the books are canon (for now at least).



ah ty I stopped about 10 years ago or so, so my reading is not that current but even those were really good and what little I've gleamed about the new jedi series it sounds interesting

here's hoping that disney can establish a 'jedi universe' like they are with marvel


----------



## AfterGlow (Oct 30, 2012)

♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> Vader as a gimp droid was awful.


----------



## All The Good Names Are Taken (Oct 30, 2012)

♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> Don't ever say the n word again, you imbecile. I don't care if you're black and that I'm not black... it's just dumb.


It was satirical


♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> I hated the ending of ROTJ. I had my hands on face when the so called Dark Lord, a man who can predict futures, a so called mastermind, was defeated by a man in a gimp suit. I really can't imagine teddy bears defeat the U.S. military let alone any militaries 10,000 years in the future. And what's so great about Empire?



the ewoks were inexcusable I agree, but Darth Vader killings Palps was pretty epic ,it gives me chills in every viewing.it seems you missed the theme of redemption though


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Oct 31, 2012)

AfterGlow said:


> Then you have bigger problems than anybody here can help you with.


oh, so the problem with how the clone's armor was essentially useless in the _first episodes that came out_ - i.e. "first" - means I have "bigger problems than anybody here can help me with"?

well look at you Mr. Superior, is it lonely on your pedestal?

yea, i liked episodes 1, 2, and 3. man the fuck up and deal with it.


----------



## Blitzomaru (Oct 31, 2012)

Datenshi Uchiha said:


> This is not entirely true. They have, imo, destroyed the animated portion of Marvel. Marvel used to have badass shows and movies. They haven't even released an animated movie since the buyout and all the shows are on the Disney channel, so they are all geared to the super-young. That is a pretty big deal to me. However aside from that, they have done a pretty good job.
> 
> I'm not totally against more SW movies. They good really expand on the story. I've never read any of the books or anything, but I have heard from other people that there is plenty of things that could be done with these movies.



I would have to disagree with this. If you want someone to blame for Marvels animated problems, it is Jeph Loeb. He is the one who cancelled Avengers: EMH. Yes, Disney hired him to be the head of their animated department, but he worked for Marvel and knows the characters (supposedly) better than Disney, so he was an obvious choice. He is also behind making Ultimate Spider-man so shitty. Now, I loved Spectacular Spider-man, but Sony no longer had the license, so it was either let Disney make their animated show, or Sony pays Disney a shitton of money to keep doing it.


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Oct 31, 2012)

Fuck the Clones. Storm Troopers all day.


----------



## AfterGlow (Oct 31, 2012)

Yami Munesanzun said:


> oh, so the problem with how the clone's armor was essentially useless in the _first episodes that came out_ - i.e. "first" - means I have "bigger problems than anybody here can help me with"?
> 
> well look at you Mr. Superior, is it lonely on your pedestal?
> 
> yea, i liked episodes 1, 2, and 3. man the fuck up and deal with it.



Yes, the fact that all of THIS soared by way, way over your head:



> the droids acting like a bunch of retards as if the entire army was there for comical relief, their stereotypical evil asian overlords, the evil, greedy jew character holding the white hope captive, the worlds most boring race from any movie in the history of mankind, politics, politics, politics, 5 minutes of lightsaber action (which I admit had great choreography), anakin accidently winning the space battle by himself and of course the steaming pile of shit which was jar jar, all framed by the eloquent brits solving disputes and lecturing/mastering the lesser, more ignorant tribes folk.



and the only thing that "irks" you with the steaming load of shitstew the prequels were, is some armor crap? Speaks volumes.

Forget that they were bad Star Wars movies, they were bad movies period.


----------



## Golden Circle (Oct 31, 2012)

Corran Horn and Mara Jade movies here we come! :WOW

/me has read almost all the books


----------



## Dark Knight Spike (Oct 31, 2012)

I'd like to see a Jar Jar Binks show 


Only on Disney XD


----------



## jetwaterluffy1 (Oct 31, 2012)

drache said:


> ah ty I stopped about 10 years ago or so, so my reading is not that current but even those were really good and what little I've gleamed about the new jedi series it sounds interesting
> 
> here's hoping that disney can establish a 'jedi universe' like they are with marvel



The thing is, with star wars, it is likely to be part of the canon instead of an adaption (although that might be interesting), so they'll need to attack it differently.


----------



## drache (Oct 31, 2012)

Blitzomaru said:


> I would have to disagree with this. If you want someone to blame for Marvels animated problems, it is Jeph Loeb. He is the one who cancelled Avengers: EMH. Yes, Disney hired him to be the head of their animated department, but he worked for Marvel and knows the characters (supposedly) better than Disney, so he was an obvious choice. He is also behind making Ultimate Spider-man so shitty. Now, I loved Spectacular Spider-man, but Sony no longer had the license, so it was either let Disney make their animated show, or Sony pays Disney a shitton of money to keep doing it.



this is very true though I do miss EMH as it was really good, I have to say sometimes the new spider man series is halfway decent


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Oct 31, 2012)

AfterGlow said:


> Yes, the fact that all of THIS soared by way, way over your head:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



do you even know the first ones that came out?

episodes 4, 5, and 6. 

VHS format.

_first episodes that came out_. mid-late 1970's. and i have all 3 in the original VHS.

also, it's cute how you and the rest of you retro-tards think your opinion is absolute fact and that somehow gives you a higher intelligence than the rest of us who like episodes 1, 2, and 3. 

you don't like it? fine. but you're not better because I like it and you don't. 

in short, you're being quite the egotistical asshat, and frankly you should shut the fuck up.


----------



## Blitzomaru (Oct 31, 2012)

drache said:


> this is very true though I do miss EMH as it was really good, I have to say sometimes the new spider man series is halfway decent



I still dont like it. I feel its what a kids deadpool show would be like(ugh). Its like an animated Scrubs...


----------



## drache (Oct 31, 2012)

Blitzomaru said:


> I still dont like it. I feel its what a kids deadpool show would be like(ugh). Its like an animated Scrubs...



true it's not my favorite but it has it's moments and well I'm willing to give disney a chance they've earned it


----------



## Mexican God Lvl 3 (Oct 31, 2012)

Light sabre fights in 1 2 3 > 4 5 6  The light sabre fights are so slow and dull in the retro films come on people.


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Oct 31, 2012)

Mexican God Lvl 3 said:


> Light sabre fights in 1 2 3 > 4 5 6  The light sabre fights are so slow and dull in the retro films come on people.



you may or may not be trolling, but we're dealing with some Class A, Foaming-at-the-Mouth-Rabid, Retro-Tards.


----------



## Petes12 (Oct 31, 2012)

prequel fight scenes make a lot more sense for a weapon that weighs absolutely nothing and fighters with something like precognition. I generally liked the lightsaber fights in ep 1 and 3.

Tbh I wish the originals didn't look so shit in comparison, makes vader look bad :/


----------



## Mexican God Lvl 3 (Oct 31, 2012)

Yami Munesanzun said:


> you may or may not be trolling, but we're dealing with some Class A, Foaming-at-the-Mouth-Rabid, Retro-Tards.



Im sick of those ^ (not the meaning of the word "respect".). 

I always gotta hear how great the first 3 movies were.

Luke was suppose to be a young dude. He looked fucking 30 in the film. Han solo was a total douche and looked like my friends uncle. And the princess, well not hot enough.

1 - Darth Maul epic fight 2 -the last fight 3 - Anakin vs Obi

I want my light sabre fights fast and dangerous. So I look forward to 6, 7 , 8


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Oct 31, 2012)

Petes12 said:


> Tbh I wish the originals didn't look so shit in comparison, makes vader look bad :/



different eras of CGI


----------



## Blitzomaru (Oct 31, 2012)

You kids and your MTV and your Facebook and your youporn. In my day, all we had was Leia in a gold bikini and the pause button on the upskirt scene from Basic Instinct.

Saying Leia wasn't hot...


----------



## Mexican God Lvl 3 (Oct 31, 2012)

She isnt Princess tier hot


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Oct 31, 2012)

Blitzomaru said:


> You kids and your MTV and your Facebook and your youporn. *In my day*, all we had was Leia in a gold bikini and the pause button on the upskirt scene from Basic Instinct.
> 
> Saying Leia wasn't hot...



so two hours ago, then?


----------



## Golden Circle (Oct 31, 2012)

^ 





Blitzomaru said:


> You kids and your MTV and your Facebook and your youporn. In my day, all we had was Leia in a gold bikini and the pause button on the upskirt scene from Basic Instinct.


What about Usenet? 



> Saying Leia wasn't hot...


She isn't hot.


----------



## Platinum (Oct 31, 2012)

I can't believe people are actually complaining about this .

Are you all blind or something?

Lucas finally stepping away from star wars is fantastic.


----------



## drache (Oct 31, 2012)

Yami Munesanzun said:


> different eras of CGI



different eras of stunt fighting too


----------



## Dark Knight Spike (Oct 31, 2012)

I wonder if Disney will continue with the ongoing i*c*st joke from the first three movies


----------



## lucky (Oct 31, 2012)

It'd be fucking great!  If they make the movies 14A + in ratings.  Rated PG just doesn't grasp the spirit of star wars very well. (considering how dark the EU could be.)


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Oct 31, 2012)

drache said:


> different eras of stunt fighting too



yes, i'm aware of that.


----------



## drache (Oct 31, 2012)

Dark Knight Spike said:


> I wonder if Disney will continue with the ongoing i*c*st joke from the first three movies



was less a joke and more a right cross to the face


----------



## Shock Therapy (Oct 31, 2012)

Honestly they should not make it PG. at least 14A. Then they could actually implement the goodies. Honestly they can't fuck up with all the quality material that EU has. They could do something with Bane and the rule of 2, or some Exar Kun, or Vong, or Jacen.


----------



## Petes12 (Oct 31, 2012)

Yami Munesanzun said:


> different eras of CGI



I know. Even so.


----------



## cnorwood (Oct 31, 2012)

why do people think it will be pg because disney is behind it? Was avengers and prince of persia pg?


----------



## Petes12 (Oct 31, 2012)

I would kinda assume it'll be pg since every star wars movie other than the last one was pg?


----------



## Edward Nygma (Oct 31, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> And the last Marvel animation geared towards to young adult was what exactly? How exactly does Disney have anything to do with something that predates their buy out?


Wolverine and the X-men was a really good show that was canceled right about the same time as the buyout, as was Iron Man armored adventures.


>


I sit stand corrected. 

Though on a personal note, the first one is the only one that seems note worthy.



> Because the Avengers animated series is geared to the super young because how exactly?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


First off comparing Avengers to JL: U is like comparing spongebob to Samurai Jack.

There is a huge difference in language, story, and violence levels. Not to mention all the not-so subtle grown up jokes that shows like JL: U like to throw in. In the magical world of the Disney channel there is no blood, sex, or naughty words. Three things that are rampant in comic books.
[/QUOTE]



> Hopefully things turn out as well as they have with Marvel.


Agreed. 



Blitzomaru said:


> I would have to disagree with this. If you want someone to blame for Marvels animated problems, it is Jeph Loeb. He is the one who cancelled Avengers: EMH. Yes, Disney hired him to be the head of their animated department, but he worked for Marvel and knows the characters (supposedly) better than Disney, so he was an obvious choice. He is also behind making Ultimate Spider-man so shitty. Now, I loved Spectacular Spider-man, but Sony no longer had the license, so it was either let Disney make their animated show, or Sony pays Disney a shitton of money to keep doing it.


Canceling EMH is not the problem. IMO it's the beginning of the solution. IMHO, EMH and Ultimate SpiderMan are both in the same league of crap.
Neither of them can hold a candle to any of the original marvel shows from the 90's, and they are light years from JL: U which I personally hold as the gold standard of comic book shows.

The only half-way decent comic book show on now is Young Justice.


----------



## Patchouli (Oct 31, 2012)

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16gYsXBOhyI[/YOUTUBE]

I can only hope it's pulled off like this.


----------



## Palpatine (Oct 31, 2012)

I heard about this this morning. Not sure what I should feel to be honest...


----------



## lucky (Oct 31, 2012)

Lol it's been a few hours?  10 pages already!  Shows what kinda geeks we are. :rofl :rofl :rofl


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Oct 31, 2012)

♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> Dude, I have already destroyed that piece of shit review in past posts. Don't make me laugh with comments made by mountain trolls who are only waiting for the next cheap Han Solo joke and worlds being saved by teddy bears.



I really doubt that.


♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> Whether they're bad or good is irrelevant to the fact that they are still BETTER than the sequels.



I don't hate 1-3 with the passion of 1000 suns, but I can tell you right there that isn't true.
I can put number one up against a movie like  and it only gets a bit ahead with all of it's special effects and thrown in elements. 
Complicated don't mean better nor does more.
Though if you want see that kind of thing done right the lord of the rings films are the best example.


Mexican God Lvl 3 said:


> Light sabre fights in 1 2 3 > 4 5 6  The light sabre fights are so slow and dull in the retro films come on people.




*Spoiler*: __ 



[YOUTUBE]zkrGSv2cv3s[/YOUTUBE]



Dull and slow, I would call it dramatic.


Petes12 said:


> I know. Even so.



Next thing I'll be told is that the original super mario brothers is a terrible looking game. 


Mexican God Lvl 3 said:


> Im sick of those ^ (not the meaning of the word "respect".).
> 
> I always gotta hear how great the first 3 movies were.
> 
> ...



The actor didn't age that well 
That and you really shouldn't look like the damn prom queen after going though all of that.
So you want all fights to last only a few seconds? 


Petes12 said:


> prequel fight scenes make a lot more sense for a weapon that weighs absolutely nothing and fighters with something like precognition.


There is still weight. The hilt is weight, the air they have to cut through adds weight, and when do sabers connect the one with the greater force behind it prevails in fending the other off.
Precognition also means you don't have to go fast all the time.
[YOUTUBE]WIj7gIDFDe4[/YOUTUBE]
One of the best fights done.


Platinum said:


> I can't believe people are actually complaining about this .
> 
> Are you all blind or something?
> 
> Lucas finally stepping away from star wars is fantastic.



Thank god.


----------



## Palpatine (Oct 31, 2012)

lucky said:


> Lol it's been a few hours?  10 pages already!  Shows what kinda geeks we are. :rofl :rofl :rofl



I already knew it'd be a long-ass thread before I even came on today.


----------



## Suzuku (Oct 31, 2012)

Datenshi Uchiha said:


> Wolverine and the X-men was a really good show that was canceled right about the same time as the buyout, as was Iron Man armored adventures.


That had nothing to do with the buyout those shows were out of production a good deal of time before hand.



> First off comparing Avengers to JL: U is like comparing spongebob to Samurai Jack.


It absolutely is not.



> There is a huge difference in language, story, and violence levels. Not to mention all the not-so subtle grown up jokes that shows like JL: U like to throw in. In the magical world of the Disney channel there is no blood, sex, or naughty words. Three things that are rampant in comic books.


The JL animated series had no blood, sex, or "naughty words" so what's your point? The maturity level of EMH was pretty on par with JL. Only difference is that JL was less sensitive with the words "death", "kill", and such otherwise they're exactly the same in terms of maturity. If you're trying to say the tone of JL is more serious than EMH, then that has nothing to do with "Disney pixy dust" but rather the fundamental difference between DC and Marvel properties.



> Canceling EMH is not the problem. IMO it's the beginning of the solution. IMHO, EMH and Ultimate SpiderMan are both in the same league of crap.


Wow. I'm starting to wonder if you've even watched more than a couple eps of EMH.



> Neither of them can hold a candle to any of the original marvel shows from the 90's, and they are light years from JL: U which I personally hold as the gold standard of comic book shows.
> 
> The only half-way decent comic book show on now is Young Justice.


EMH > every Marvel show from the 90's and had it continued running probably would have ended up being just as good as JL. You're just stuck in the past.


----------



## Petes12 (Oct 31, 2012)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> There is still weight. The hilt is weight, the air they have to cut through adds weight, and when do sabers connect the one with the greater force behind it prevails in fending the other off.



They often did pause and didn't try to strike when they could have, I kinda rationalized that as the precog. But really they're very lightweight weapons, the claymore style of the old movies didn't make much sense.


----------



## neodragzero (Oct 31, 2012)

Datenshi Uchiha said:


> Wolverine and the X-men was a really good show that was canceled right about the same time as the buyout, as was Iron Man armored adventures.



On the first, you would have to prove that the series ended just because of and within the time frame needed for Disney to be the cause. On the second, it ended supposedly in 2011. There's not enough to suggest that Disney's buyout extends nor shortens the life of said series. Especially when we're talking about televised material that' still influenced by ratings and budget.


> First off comparing Avengers to JL: U is like comparing spongebob to Samurai Jack.
> 
> There is a huge difference in language, story, and violence levels. Not to mention all the not-so subtle grown up jokes that shows like JL: U like to throw in. In the magical world of the Disney channel there is no blood, sex, or naughty words. Three things that are rampant in comic books.



I'll just leave it to the first person who responded to this.


> IMHO, EMH and Ultimate SpiderMan are both in the same league of crap.
> Neither of them can hold a candle to any of the original marvel shows from the 90's, and they are light years from JL: U which I personally hold as the gold standard of comic book shows.



Are you suggesting that Wolverine and the X-Men and Ironman Armored Adventures hold a candle to original marvel shows from the 90s? Seriously, I don't see how exactly there's any real proof nor suggestion that Marvel's quality somehow just got worse in terms of animation just because they're owned by Disney. It still sounds like the earlier on somewhat amusing complaints about Disneyfied Marvel comics.


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Oct 31, 2012)

Petes12 said:


> They often did pause and didn't try to strike when they could have, I kinda rationalized that as the precog. But really they're very lightweight weapons, the claymore style of the old movies didn't make much sense.



Can't break the props and to be fair it was all real meaning there isn't that much room to move.
It was like that because it was more real.


----------



## Narcissus (Oct 31, 2012)

Vynjira said:


> Has narc posted yet?


I have now, dearie.

And personally, I don't think Disney can do any worse than what Lucas has recently. If anything, I think Disney has proven themselves. We'll see.

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJlbPXZEpRE[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## drache (Oct 31, 2012)

lucky said:


> Lol it's been a few hours?  10 pages already!  Shows what kinda geeks we are. :rofl :rofl :rofl



anime forum, is it really a surprise?


----------



## Edward Nygma (Oct 31, 2012)

Suzuku said:


> The JL animated series had no blood, sex, or "naughty words" so what's your point? The maturity level of EMH was pretty on par with JL. Only difference is that JL was less sensitive with the words "death", "kill", and such otherwise they're exactly the same in terms of maturity. If you're trying to say the tone of JL is more serious than EMH, then that has nothing to do with "Disney pixy dust" but rather the fundamental difference between DC and Marvel properties.


There was blood, and naught*ier* words, and while there was no actual sex there was a lot of innuendo and suggestive jokes. For instance when Hawkgirl suggests that Walley being the fastest man alive might be why he can't get a date. You would never hear anything even close to that on EMH.

Also, I strongly disagree with your notion that DC is fundamentally more serious than Marvel. 



> Wow. I'm starting to wonder if you've even watched more than a couple eps of EMH.


Watched every single episode.



> EMH > every Marvel show from the 90's and had it continued running probably would have ended up being just as good as JL. You're just stuck in the past.


You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I'm pretty sure you are in a minority.



neodragzero said:


> On the first, you would have to prove that the series ended just because of and within the time frame needed for Disney to be the cause. On the second, it ended supposedly in 2011. There's not enough to suggest that Disney's buyout extends nor shortens the life of said series. Especially when we're talking about televised material that' still influenced by ratings and budget.


I'll admit I may have been wrong about this. You're right, the dates don't add up. My bad.



> Are you suggesting that Wolverine and the X-Men and Ironman Armored Adventures hold a candle to original marvel shows from the 90s? Seriously, I don't see how exactly there's any real proof nor suggestion that Marvel's quality somehow just got worse in terms of animation just because they're owned by Disney. It still sounds like the earlier on somewhat amusing complaints about Disneyfied Marvel comics.


Wolverine? Yes. Iron Man? No.

I really liked Wolverine and the X-men. It had a way higher maturity to it then EMH. 

I don't think any marvel show will be able to reach the level of maturity I want while airing on Disney. It needs to either be on Nick or preferable Toonami.


----------



## trollface (Oct 31, 2012)

Well they cant fuck it up any more than ol Georgey boy has


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 31, 2012)

Leia Organa Now Officially a Disney Princess


----------



## Mexican God Lvl 3 (Oct 31, 2012)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nah, that shit is gay and boring.


Unlosing Ranger said:


> The actor didn't age that well
> That and you really shouldn't look like the damn prom queen after going though all of that.
> So you want all fights to last only a few seconds?
> 
> .



Da hell are you on?

Obi wan ,qui-gon vs darth maul wasnt a few seconds lol

Anakin + Yoda vs dooku wasnt a few seconds lol

Obi wan vs Anakin wasnt a few seconds lol

lol lol lol

Get out of here with ur retro shit.


----------



## Bungee Gum (Oct 31, 2012)

makeoutparadise said:


> Leia Organa Now Officially a Disney Princess



Thats one thing i was sure would never happen. I even put money in vegas on it when i was 6. Damnit


----------



## Suzuku (Oct 31, 2012)

Datenshi Uchiha said:


> There was blood, and naught*ier* words, and while there was no actual sex there was a lot of innuendo and suggestive jokes. For instance when Hawkgirl suggests that Walley being the fastest man alive might be why he can't get a date. You would never hear anything even close to that on EMH.


Well it's great that that makes you feel better about JL but that doesn't help your argument at all. Just because JL made one-off sexual jokes and had more of a focus on some of the romantic side of the characters relationships does not inherently make it a more mature show.



> Also, I strongly disagree with your notion that DC is fundamentally more serious than Marvel.


It is in most media.



> Watched every single episode.


And I find that hard to believe with your stance that JL is so much more mature than EMH it's like comparing a grade school comedy to a TVPG action show. I guess it's your opinion but it borders on being factually incorrect.



> You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I'm pretty sure you are in a minority.


I'm not. Many fans loved EMH and consider it the best show Marvel has ever produced. You must not have watched the 90s Marvel shows in a while..the only good ones were seasons 1-4 of Spider-Man and X-Men. The IM and F4 cartoons were pretty basic action shows and did nothing to push the envelope at the time..and don't even get me started on that 90s Avengers show...


----------



## Blitzomaru (Oct 31, 2012)

Datenshi Uchiha said:


> Wolverine and the X-men was a really good show that was canceled right about the same time as the buyout, as was Iron Man armored adventures.
> 
> I sit stand corrected.
> 
> ...



No offense, but I feel people are looking at the 90's cartoons thru nostalgia glasses.

1) Spider-man was heavily censored. Even more so than Superfriends. Spider-man wasn't allowed to throw a punch. Do you know how shitty of a concept that is? 5 seasons. He threw 2 punches. Only one I can recall off the top of my head is when he fought the Spot.

2) Guns weren't allowed, so everyone had bullshit laser guns. Everyone. regular street thugs. supervillains.

3) Almost none of the voice actors recoreded their lines together or all their lines at once, which resulted in weird inflections in their lines. Especially Spidey's when he was thinking in his head. 

4) People complain that the fighting in Avengers: EMH is a bit static. The same can be said for Spider-man. most spider-man fights ended with him swinging into someone or webbing them up.

5)Spider-Man TAS's sequel was Spider-man Unlimited. Not gonna even go into that...

6) X-Men introduced Jubilee, who I hate more than Jar Jar Binks and 3PO combined. She was a true creation of the 90's. Horrible fashion sense, shitty powers and annoying voice who infused herself into everyone's storyline.

7) Wolverine was the first to pop his claws but usually did nothing. In fact, unless you were an inanimate object, he was the best person to fight cause his claws did nothing.

8) X-Men's final seasons made little to no sense. Jean Sacrifices herself as the Phoenix, comes back, becomes dark Phoenix, leaves, but is back somehow.

9) Story wise, Spider-man's is strong, but some of the liberties they took with characters is just wrong. Making carnage a non serial killer. (I know its a kids show, but why use his character if you are gonna completely change him?) Electro. Mary Jane's 'death' Morbius' 'vampirism' (He wasn't able to suck blood. Couldn't even say blood. He drained plasma)

I loved the 80's TMNT. But everyone has to admit, it was corny and doesn't stand the test of time. Neither does Thundercats, or Spider-man TAS, or X-Men. its hard to compare older movies or shows to current ones. Animation, respect of the source material, and target audience.


----------



## Suzuku (Oct 31, 2012)

Blitzomaru said:


> No offense, but I feel people are looking at the 90's cartoons thru nostalgia glasses.


Exactly.



> 1) Spider-man was heavily censored. Even more so than Superfriends. Spider-man wasn't allowed to throw a punch. Do you know how shitty of a concept that is? 5 seasons. He threw 2 punches. Only one I can recall off the top of my head is when he fought the Spot.


Wow I never noticed this 



> 9) Story wise, Spider-man's is strong, but some of the liberties they took with characters is just wrong. Making carnage a non serial killer. (I know its a kids show, but why use his character if you are gonna completely change him?) Electro. Mary Jane's 'death' Morbius' 'vampirism' (He wasn't able to suck blood. Couldn't even say blood. He drained plasma)


What made me mad at the show was that after season 3 pretty much the entire premise of the show is shit. Those last 4 episodes of season 5 completely ruined the whole series for me. They had a really good run, minor gripes aside, until they hit those last 4 episodes and completely turned the prior 2 seasons to shit single-handed. The unresolved plot thread with Felicia and MJ was also a big fucking disappoint. It's like good Spider-Man cartoons are cursed to be cancelled early (here's looking at SSM).



> I loved the 80's TMNT. But everyone has to admit, it was corny and doesn't stand the test of time. Neither does Thundercats, or Spider-man TAS, or X-Men. its hard to compare older movies or shows to current ones. Animation, respect of the source material, and target audience.


Yeah the only cartoon that comes to mind that still stands up well from back then (as far as action cartoons go I mean) is Batman TAS. When you look at it today it's still as fresh as it was back then. Bruce Timm and those guys really did a good job at giving it a timeless look. One could argue Superman TAS holds up as well but that was a lot closer to the 2000s than the original Batman was.


----------



## Edward Nygma (Oct 31, 2012)

Suzuku said:


> Well it's great that that makes you feel better about JL but that doesn't help your argument at all. Just because JL made one-off sexual jokes and had more of a focus on some of the romantic side of the characters relationships does not inherently make it a more mature show.


Having more mature concepts doesn't make a show more mature? I'm confused.



> It is in most media.


If that's so, then most media portrays Marvel poorly.



> And I find that hard to believe with your stance that JL is so much more mature than EMH it's like comparing a grade school comedy to a TVPG action show. I guess it's your opinion but it borders on being factually incorrect.


There is a pretty big difference between a grade school comedy and TVPG action show. 

For the record I think JL was actually tv14 or something like that. 



> I'm not. Many fans* loved EMH and consider it the best show Marvel has ever produced.* You must not have watched the 90s Marvel shows in a while..the only good ones were seasons 1-4 of Spider-Man and X-Men. The IM and F4 cartoons were pretty basic action shows and did nothing to push the envelope at the time..and don't even get me started on that 90s Avengers show...


I find the bolded mind blowing tbh. It wasn't a terrible show, but from what I saw it was a children's show through and through. There was almost nothing in it that for the adults in it. Even shows like spongebob throw in the occasional one-off joke for the sake of the parents. This had virtually nothing. 





Blitzomaru said:


> No offense, but I feel people are looking at the 90's cartoons thru nostalgia glasses.


Probably to some extent.



> 1) Spider-man was heavily censored. Even more so than Superfriends. Spider-man wasn't allowed to throw a punch. Do you know how shitty of a concept that is? 5 seasons. He threw 2 punches. Only one I can recall off the top of my head is when he fought the Spot.
> 
> 
> 2) Guns weren't allowed, so everyone had bullshit laser guns. Everyone. regular street thugs. supervillains.
> ...




I didn't know this, and yet the show was still awesome. Also, I'm not nearly as nostalgic as some, seeing as how I didn't start watching it till it was over. I was only 4 when it came out. 



> X-Men introduced Jubilee, who I hate more than Jar Jar Binks and 3PO combined. She was a true creation of the 90's. Horrible fashion sense, shitty powers and annoying voice who infused herself into everyone's storyline.


Love Jubilee, GTFO.


> 7) Wolverine was the first to pop his claws but usually did nothing. In fact, unless you were an inanimate object, he was the best person to fight cause his claws did nothing.


And Thor's hammer in EMH does what exactly? Leave people in a bloody heap? I don't think so. Lethal weapons being useless is still here. In fact it's probably worse


> 8) X-Men's final seasons made little to no sense. Jean Sacrifices herself as the Phoenix, comes back, becomes dark Phoenix, leaves, but is back somehow.
> 
> 9) Story wise, Spider-man's is strong, but some of the liberties they took with characters is just wrong. Making carnage a non serial killer. (I know its a kids show, but why use his character if you are gonna completely change him?) Electro. Mary Jane's 'death' Morbius' 'vampirism' (He wasn't able to suck blood. Couldn't even say blood. He drained plasma)


Admittedly I have never watched either show from start to finish. The shows had already run their course when I really started watching, so I was catching reruns.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Oct 31, 2012)

Blitzomaru said:


> No offense, but I feel people are looking at the 90's cartoons thru nostalgia glasses.
> 
> 1) Spider-man was heavily censored. Even more so than Superfriends. Spider-man wasn't allowed to throw a punch. Do you know how shitty of a concept that is? 5 seasons. He threw 2 punches. Only one I can recall off the top of my head is when he fought the Spot.
> 
> ...


I don't think you  remember spiderman right in some areas.

And jubilee wasn't introduced in the cartoon.


----------



## Pilaf (Oct 31, 2012)

George Lucas was such a genius..

Oh wait.

No.


----------



## Roman (Oct 31, 2012)

Pilaf said:


> George Lucas was such a genius..
> 
> Oh wait.
> 
> No.



He was a genius before the turn of the century. Until CG technology made leaps and bounds.


----------



## Blitzomaru (Oct 31, 2012)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> I don't think you  remember spiderman right in some areas.
> 
> And jubilee wasn't introduced in the cartoon.



Care to tell me where I'm wrong? Cause all of that is true. Spider-man was the most censored comic book cartoon of its time.

And I meant it introduced us to Jubilee as a mainstream character. Majority of casual fans wouldn't be able to name her if it wasn't for this cartoon. And she was a poster hold of everything that was the 90's...

And Datenshi, I'm not saying they were bad shows. They were great for their time, and still good by today's standards.  But Spectacular Spider-man did everything right(except Kraven. Interesting concept but i didn' lie it. That pissed me off)There wasn't a major character on that show tha didn't have character development. Hell, almost every villain had character development, and there were oly 25 episodes in the series. 

Especially

Sandman
Black cat
Flash


----------



## Stunna (Oct 31, 2012)

Stop replying to Aizen. I've never seen someone so completely ignorant pertaining to Star Wars. Has to be a troll.


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Oct 31, 2012)

[YOUTUBE]fU7v_Ju3djI[/YOUTUBE]


Blitzomaru said:


> Care to tell me where I'm wrong? Cause all of that is true. Spider-man was the most censored comic book cartoon of its time.


Because if it was truly censored it wouldn't work at all.
Really laser guns instead of bullets that's your argument?
A world full of super heros and that's what would bother you?
That spiderman isn't punching people to death when it already apart of his character that he doesn't kill?
It's just you being nitpicky for no reason there is plenty of violence in the x-men and spiderman cartoons you bloodthirsty buffoon
[YOUTUBE]JlVaRcPJRtQ[/YOUTUBE]
Wolverine melted into a puddle isn't violent enough?
Spiderman gets beat up all the time as well, huge explosions happen.
[YOUTUBE]H_Y__4yK1ro[/YOUTUBE]
Mary jane jumps off a building(is then saved)
I mean there are so many instances, I think you didn't watch either of them at all.


----------



## kluang (Oct 31, 2012)

ghost rider comes

use penance

3 seconds later

galactus is down

leave 

like a boss

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bumuAmQ92mY[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Chibason (Oct 31, 2012)

^Lol Dat GR


----------



## oprisco (Oct 31, 2012)

I read somewhere that Lucas went back to doing courtm?trage movies. That's actually sick. Which well known movie maker would go back to his basics? He has unlimited budget and I saw some trailer of his shortfilms. They look really artistic and good. Star wars didn't show what he is really capable of.


----------



## Sōsuke Aizen (Oct 31, 2012)

Stunna said:


> Stop replying to Aizen. I've never seen someone so completely ignorant pertaining to Star Wars. Has to be a troll.



I don't think you know what ignorant means, so go back to school, retard. And sorry for having a different opinion of the trilogies, if that makes me a troll, then by definiton, you're a troll. 



Freedan said:


> I will deal with him



Bring it on! 



> Sorry, but that's not actually the reason why the majority of our generation (mid-20's, therefore born after the sequels were made) likes the movies. Conforming with the older folk is not at all why younger people like the old movies. It's a lot more to do with how the characters work for the story in all three movies, the dynamic of the relationships with said characters and the significance of events. Judging by your later posts, the main reason you don't like the old movies is because the action and effects were better, but they lack the same level of significance as they did in the old ones. I'll explain more below.



I get it, you just don't understand the relationships in the prequels. 



> That's not the point of the fight at all. If you wanted a sword-fighting movie, I suggest you pick up Seven Samurai. Wait, on second thought I realize you would hate that movie so much you'd destroy the computer/TV set from which you watched it because of how slow the pace of the movie is. Maybe The Last Samurai would be more to your liking. The point of the fight scenes in the older sequels was hardly how flashy and skillful the combatants were, but the significance of the battle to the characters involved.



It's not about being flashy, dude, it's about being realistic. The old movies did not adequately show that these guys were powerful Jedi. They looked so weak that I imagine I could've killed them even in my early teens. Moreover, some of them lacked any real intelligence, especially the so called Dark Lord of the Sith. 



> You mention Vader vs Obi Wan. That fight was the first confrontation that an aged Master and his former student, corrupted by evil, have had in 20 years. The point was to emphasize how Vader had descended from being a great Jedi Knight who fought for justice and peace in the galaxy to an evil war-mongerer, and how Obi Wan, his old master, fought with his life to protect the new generation: Luke and his friends. Obi Wan's sacrifice had more significance than any sword swing Darth Maul could ever have done.



Lolderp. That's what I got from your post. The duel was supposed to accomplish two things. One, what you are pointing out and two, what I've pointed out, i.e. to make it believable that Vader was a Dark Lord of the Sith in the star wars universe, which the sequels failed to convince. Having a black mans voice doesn't convince anybody. Sure, I suppose you might be unsure of your strength and fear him due to his reputation, but once the fight started you'd laugh at the weakling.

The Mustafa fight had everything you apparently seek, only much much more. There's betrayal. There's huge misunderstandings. There's confusion. There's huge moral and emotional conflict. There's two friends fighting. There's Sith fear and Jedi clarity. I didn't get anything out of Vader's gimp suit, he always had the same old boring black man's voice, whether he was angry or whether he was joking.

And what relationship did Obiwan and Vader even have in the sequels? Much of their character was developed in the prequels.   



> As for Yoda, he did far more than nothing. He taught Luke the ways of the Force, and it was through his teachings that Luke matured from a reckless and headstrong boy to a thoughtful and wise Jedi Knight. Yoda demonstrated Luke just how immense the Force was and its influence. And if we're going to mention feats, Yoda force gripping a starfighter is more than anything anyone's shown even in the prequels.



That is nothing for such an iconic character. Yoda encountered everyone he taught, whether it was Anakin, Qui Gon, Windu, Kenobi, or Dooku. He shared with them his wisdom in his councils just as he did with Luke, though much of it was Qui Gon and Kenobi's responsibility and rightly so. Furthermore the relationship between him and Sidious was established in prequels. They consulted one another on all kinds of issues. We saw a serious fight between the leading Sith and Jedi.  And of course, Yoda levitated a few things too.  



> I already explained how the fight between Obi Wan and Vader in the sequel was far more significant and had a greater impact on the characters than any sword skill Maul displayed.



No, the sequels were only showing off established characters that had developed as much as they could, whereas the prequels gave us insight into how they became the men they were. You aren't looking at the movies objectively, so I imagine you didn't really understand them... it might have helped if people weren't so drawn to Jar Jar.  Maybe they distracted you?



> The only thing that could be considered influential about the fight with Maul was Qui Gon's death. The problem with that is Qui Gon died because he was stupid and didn't wait for Obi Wan to recover. It wasn't the same was Obi Wan being beaten by Vader. Also, Palpatine was already old in the prequels. He was roughly 24 years older in RotJ, not to mention unarmed, so even from a superficial pov you can't expect him to do much more than that.



Why don't you just watch regular theatre plays instead of these action movies if all you really care about are so called character development and character focus? Gui Gon wasn't stupid, he was fighting a Sith and his death had a huge impact on Obi wan's character.

So you consider it to be a smart idea to turn your back on your Sith Apprentice, while you electrocute his son?  



> You're also completely ignoring the fact that the sfx in the 70's and 80's were subpar compared to what was there in the 21st century. Try again.



You are ignoring the fact that the sequels suck.


----------



## Sirius B (Oct 31, 2012)

I just learn that Disney acquired Marvel from this thread 

Anyway, considering the success to Tron: Legacy and Avengers, I won't be to quick to judge on the next Star Wars movie until I see it. However, I still hold some distaste for Disney for what they did to other franchise.


----------



## Roman (Oct 31, 2012)

♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> I get it, you just don't understand the relationships in the prequels.



I think I understand them just fine, but it's better if I explain below.



♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> It's not about being flashy, dude, it's about being realistic. The old movies did not adequately show that these guys were powerful Jedi. They looked so weak that I imagine I could've killed them even in my early teens. Moreover, some of them lacked any real intelligence, especially the so called Dark Lord of the Sith.



Realistic? Do tell what's realistic about The Force?  In the sequels, Lucas wanted to give the impression lightsabers were quite heavy, hence the claymore style of fighting which I'll admit makes little sense given that they're supposed to be laser swords. However, there's a technical reason for it and that's because the props used for the lightsabers at the time were delicate, therefore sword fights couldn't be as complex, advanced or, as you want it, realistic.

But the realism of the battles weren't the focal point, but the confrontation between the characters and what the fight meant for them. And what proof do you have that Palpatine was stupid? He trapped the entire rebel fleet by trolling the Rebellion's intelligence angets. He outwitted Bothan spies and if you take what's in the EU as canon, Bothans are supposed to be among the most able spies in the galaxy. If you're talking about Vader, he turned a huge mistake from one of his commanders around into a success. Remember Hoth? He choked a guy because he came out of hyperspace too close to the planet, giving away their element of surprise. Despite that, Vader's tactics won them the battle and forced the rebels to retreat.



♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> Lolderp. That's what I got from your post. The duel was supposed to accomplish two things. One, what you are pointing out and two, what I've pointed out, i.e. to make it believable that Vader was a Dark Lord of the Sith in the star wars universe, which the sequels failed to convince. Having a black mans voice doesn't convince anybody. Sure, I suppose you might be unsure of your strength and fear him due to his reputation, but once the fight started you'd laugh at the weakling.



As I said, with the props being used for the saber fights, not much could really be done. That being said, if force chocking someone and blocking laser blasts with your bare hands doesn't count as a show of power (the latter which certainly wasn't done by any Jedi in the prequels), do tell me what does. Starkiller taking down a Star Destroyer? But wait, that's in a game. No one in the movie does that.



♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> The Mustafa fight had everything you apparently seek, only much much more. There's betrayal. There's huge misunderstandings. There's confusion. There's huge moral and emotional conflict. There's two friends fighting. There's Sith fear and Jedi clarity. I didn't get anything out of Vader's gimp suit, he always had the same old boring black man's voice, whether he was angry or whether he was joking.



The Mustafar fight was horribly scripted:

Obi Wan: I have failed you Anakin! I have failed you...

Anakin: I should've known the Jedi were plotting to take over!

Obi Wan: Anakin! Chancellor Palpatine is evil!

Anakin: From my point of view the Jedi are evil!

Obi Wan: Well then you are lost!

You wanna know what that sounds like? Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. No. Even a child could come up with that level of scripting. Sequels had much more to offer in that regard. Sure, I can understand that the fight was meant to show the betrayal, lost friendship and brotherhood, but when you think about just how sudden it all went down (and the horrible writing), I can't help but feel a little awkward. Consider this: the last time Anakin and Obi Wan spoke to each other before Mustafar, Anakin was apologizing for being headstrong and impatient, and Obi Wan compliments him for being wiser than he is. Not 30 minutes later, Anakin is Darth Vader. Too soon. That's what I had thought.



♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> And what relationship did Obiwan and Vader even have in the sequels? Much of their character was developed in the prequels.



And it was done poorly. Besides, the sequels didn't even want to focus on Obi Wan and Anakin. It wanted to focus on Luke and Vader. One is the last of the Jedi, the other is the Sith Lord that exterminated the Jedi. And they're father and son. I'd say their relationship has a greater amount of importance and effect on the story compared to Vader and old Ben.



♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> That is nothing for such an iconic character. Yoda encountered everyone he taught, whether it was Anakin, Qui Gon, Windu, Kenobi, or Dooku. He shared with them his wisdom in his councils just as he did with Luke, though much of it was Qui Gon and Kenobi's responsibility and rightly so. Furthermore the relationship between him and Sidious was established in prequels. They consulted one another on all kinds of issues. We saw a serious fight between the leading Sith and Jedi.  And of course, Yoda levitated a few things too.



And never something as big as a starfighter. And honestly, how many times did we see Yoda confer with Sidious throughout the prequels? They haven't spoken to each other once in TPM and only a handful of times in the two following prequels. They didn't have much development between each other aside from their final battle. A battle which was more to do with the two grand masters of their respective orders than with a Jedi and a former friend. You seem to be getting your cards mixed up here.



♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> No, the sequels were only showing off established characters that had developed as much as they could, whereas the prequels gave us insight into how they became the men they were. You aren't looking at the movies objectively, so I imagine you didn't really understand them... it might have helped if people weren't so drawn to Jar Jar.  Maybe they distracted you?



After you said this and with everything else you already said, I have to ask: did you watch the prequels before the sequels? Because you're talking as tho in the sequels, we should treat characters as already established, characters which by all means should be treated as secondary. Yoda and Obi Wan are secondary characters to Luke and his friends. Vader is a primary character in relation to Luke because he's the main villain up until the end, and Palpatine is deliberately made to be a mysterious figure to give the audience an impression that he is far more powerful than anyone can imagine (which he was considering he displayed a power no other Jedi in the movies up to that point displayed). And I never even mentioned Jar Jar. You can stop picking at straws.



♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> Why don't you just watch regular theatre plays instead of these action movies if all you really care about are so called character development and character focus? Gui Gon wasn't stupid, he was fighting a Sith and his death had a huge impact on Obi wan's character.



I actually do like regular plays and acted in a few myself 

That aside, Qui Gon was stupid. As Pliskin said, why didn't he just sell the ship for a hired one to Coruscant? It would've been a lot less conspicuous on top of everything else. Instead, he had to put everyone in danger, himself and a 9 year old boy included, for the sake of a hyperdrive engine that no one but a douchebag owned in his junkyard.

Yes, he was fighting a Sith. And instead of waiting for his apprentice to recover, he took him on by himself. That's what led to his death. You'd have thought he knew after fighting him on Tatooine that he couldn't take him on aline, and even if he could, he risked himself to a solo battle against an enemy at a time where much more than a duel was at stake. Yeah, very smart.



♚Sōsuke Aizen♚ said:


> So you consider it to be a smart idea to turn your back on your Sith Apprentice, while you electrocute his son?



uhm, what? You were talking about how Sidious's lighting looked a lot stronger in the prequels, and I said considering the CG tech of those days, it's not as tho they could make Palps's lightining look impressive. Where are you getting this from?


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 31, 2012)

Goova said:


> Thats one thing i was sure would never happen. I even put money in vegas on it when i was 6. Damnit



The times they are a changing


----------



## KidTony (Oct 31, 2012)

have you guys not see what Disney has done for the marvel brand? i mean, seriously was lucasfilm doing such a good job now that you don't fancy an avengers level star wars movie comming out in the next few years? because im am soooooo down


----------



## neodragzero (Oct 31, 2012)

Datenshi Uchiha said:


> Wolverine? Yes. Iron Man? No.
> 
> I really liked Wolverine and the X-men. It had a way higher maturity to it then EMH.
> 
> I don't think any marvel show will be able to reach the level of maturity I want while airing on Disney. It needs to either be on Nick or preferable Toonami.



I'm gonna say this now. Disney has Gargoyles. The level of content and background for it is well beyond just being for the super young. I don't see that level of quality in young adult material in Nick while bringing up Toonami is odd when the matter of Marvel animation being on a network owned by Time Warner (DC) is moot a long time before the buyout. I still don't see enough to suggest that Disney carries any responsibility on how Marvel's animation is developing.


----------



## Roman (Oct 31, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> I'm gonna say this now. Disney has Gargoyles. The level of content and background for it is well beyond just being for the super young. *I don't see that level of quality in young adult material in Nick* while bringing up Toonami is odd when the matter of Marvel animation being on a network owned by Time Warner (DC) is moot a long time before the buyout. I still don't see enough to suggest that Disney carries any responsibility on how Marvel's animation is developing.


----------



## ninjaneko (Oct 31, 2012)

I *really* don't like Disney acquiring everything under the sun... 

Also, I don't want an Episode VII. Do an Old Republic thing or something, but leave the "Episode" thing alone. Honestly, I don't really want a new Star Wars movie every other year plus MOAR franchising. Maybe I'll like it, but... 

And lol, I must not be enough of a fan to hate the prequels. xD


----------



## neodragzero (Oct 31, 2012)

You're suggesting that Avatar is comparable to a show that references numerous William Shakespeare stories and conventions, numerous myths throughout the world spectrum, a substantially higher amount of death, and so on? The word you must keep in mind is level. I didn't say there was absolutely no young adult to begin with.


ninjaneko said:


> I *really* don't like Disney acquiring everything under the sun...



It's a good thing Marvel and Lucasfilm don't represent everything under the sun.


----------



## Vynjira (Oct 31, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> I'm gonna say this now. Disney has Gargoyles. The level of content and background for it is well beyond just being for the super young. I don't see that level of quality in young adult material in Nick while bringing up Toonami is odd when the matter of Marvel animation being on a network owned by Time Warner (DC) is moot a long time before the buyout. I still don't see enough to suggest that Disney carries any responsibility on how Marvel's animation is developing.


In the interest of honesty, Disney only did the last season of Gargoyles which was utter shit. Similarily the 90s X-Men was finished by Disney... which also sucked hard...

That being said, Lucas was causing more harm to Star Wars than Disney could ever hope to do. I'm also quite hopeful Disney will restore the classics.. and take out the "edits" that Lucas made.

Also ignoring the nostalgia of Gargoyles, objectively Avatar was at least as good as Gargoyles.


----------



## neodragzero (Oct 31, 2012)

Vynjira said:


> In the interest of honesty, Disney only did the last season of Gargoyles which was utter shit.



No, Disney did all of it. It was produced by Disney Television Animation. The issue with the last season past the first episode seems to be because of Greg Weisman not doing the bulk of that season.

Which company do you think was producing the first two seasons of Gargoyles?


> Similarily the 90s X-Men was finished by Disney... which also sucked hard...


The original whole run was completely aired on Fox. How exactly is Disney responsible for the quality of something it was simply rerunning rather than being the company that produced it?



> Also ignoring the nostalgia of Gargoyles, objectively Avatar was at least as good as Gargoyles.



It's a good thing I mentioned numerous differences rather than simply talking about how good it is simply because it's older.


----------



## Roman (Oct 31, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> You're suggesting that Avatar is comparable to a show that references numerous William Shakespeare stories and conventions, numerous myths throughout the world spectrum, a substantially higher amount of death, and so on? The word you must keep in mind is level. I didn't say there was absolutely no young adult to begin with.



Yes, I'm suggesting exactly that and then some. If you haven't seen Avatar, I will tell you right now that the amount of depth within the characters, their interactions, backstories, what they do and how they grow throughout the series is easily even better than anything I've seen in the vast majority of other shows, anime and live action alike. And the amount of death in any story doesn't make for a better story anyways.


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 31, 2012)

Not that serious.


----------



## Shock Therapy (Oct 31, 2012)

JL: U was the best of all time but EMH was pretty enjoyable.


----------



## Petes12 (Oct 31, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> You're suggesting that Avatar is comparable to a show that references numerous William Shakespeare stories and conventions, numerous myths throughout the world spectrum, a substantially higher amount of death, and so on? The word you must keep in mind is level. I didn't say there was absolutely no young adult to begin with.



avatar was better


----------



## Ben Tennyson (Oct 31, 2012)

this can either turn very good or very bad.


----------



## Cocoa (Oct 31, 2012)

Just putting this out there...George Lucas would have made the original trilogy into crap if he didn't have people improving things. 

I can tell you now based on the crap I saw George make before people changed them (for the original trilogy) no one would care about Star Wars if those people didn't say no to George. By himself George Lucas sucks.

Ontopic: Stop buying everything disney! 




Vynjira said:


> *In the interest of honesty, Disney only did the last season of Gargoyles which was utter shit. Similarily the 90s X-Men was finished by Disney... which also sucked hard...*
> 
> That being said, Lucas was causing more harm to Star Wars than Disney could ever hope to do. I'm also quite hopeful Disney will restore the classics.. and take out the "edits" that Lucas made.
> 
> Also ignoring the nostalgia of Gargoyles, objectively Avatar was at least as good as Gargoyles.


The bolded is so true. The last season had crappy plot and really crap art. I was so upset when I saw that last season of X-men.

Also, Disney would be better for Star wars than George Lucas. Which is funny.


----------



## Tyrannos (Oct 31, 2012)

I got a bad feeling about this.......


----------



## kluang (Oct 31, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> You're suggesting that Avatar is comparable to a show that references numerous William Shakespeare stories and conventions, numerous myths throughout the world spectrum, a substantially higher amount of death, and so on? The word you must keep in mind is level. I didn't say there was absolutely no young adult to begin with.



Gargoyles is often refer as Disney's answer against Batman TAS.

I enjoy Gargoyles but The Goliath Chronicles sucks.


----------



## Orochibuto (Oct 31, 2012)

St. Burke said:


> Why the no?
> If its expanded universe then i say go right ahead.
> If its a new story that lucas is making up himself then i say
> 
> But really it shouldnt be a problem.



Becuase dude, if episode 2 and 1 were shit under George Lucas, how do you expect episode 7 to come out made by FUCKING DISNEY?!


----------



## fantzipants (Oct 31, 2012)

What disney?

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfoR8SbFhy8[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## neodragzero (Oct 31, 2012)

Freedan said:


> Yes, I'm suggesting exactly that and then some. If you haven't seen Avatar, I will tell you right now that the amount of depth within the characters, their interactions, backstories, what they do and how they grow throughout the series is easily even better than anything I've seen in the vast majority of other shows, anime and live action alike. And the amount of death in any story doesn't make for a better story anyways.





Petes12 said:


> avatar was better



Freedan, look back on the conversation you're attempting to comment on. I said nothing about which one was better. I simply made a statement about the difference in content and background as far as mythology, Shakespeare references, and so on that the other series lacks. I simply was making a point that Disney animated television isn't absolutely only super young material in opposition to another poster's claim that Disney is automatically responsible for the maturity level of all Marvel shows from the buyout. Once again, pay attention guys, I said nothing about one being better than the other. Just the obvious fact that Shakespeare references and numerous world mythologies are more likely to be lost on anyone below the age of 14.


Cocoa said:


> The bolded is so true. The last season had crappy plot and really crap art. I was so upset when I saw that last season of X-men.



I'm still waiting for an explanation as to how Disney is responsible for something they never produced but only rerun after its original air was over on Fox.


Orochibuto said:


> Becuase dude, if episode 2 and 1 were shit under George Lucas, how do you expect episode 7 to come out made by FUCKING DISNEY?!



Because Avengers was as awful as the Daredevil film.

Oh yeah, guys, give this a read:


----------



## Blitzomaru (Oct 31, 2012)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> [YOUTUBE]fU7v_Ju3djI[/YOUTUBE]
> 
> Because if it was truly censored it wouldn't work at all.
> Really laser guns instead of bullets that's your argument?
> ...



Obviously you didn't read my post, R-Tard. I never said anything about punching to death. I said spider-man wasn't allowed to throw a punch EVER in the show. Except for 2 times. And the only one I can remember is against the Spot. That's documented. For someone like Spider-man, actually hitting people is one of the main ways he fights. Most fights end with spider-man webbing someone, catching them in some elaborate trap or that person crashing and him simply capturing them. And yes, regular crooks robbing convenience stores with laser guns is pretty damn retarded. Regular cops using laser guns is retarded. When the mob gets into a shootout with the cops in the 2nd part of the daredevil episode it's like the first scene in Star Wars....But since you don't think I've watched the show (and I don't think you have), here is the list of the things the creators of the show had to deal with.


> By 1994 heavy censorship was being enforced by Fox because certain shows like Power Rangers were being banned for excessive violence in some countries. So in a bid to make Spider-Man: The Animated Series as politically correct as possible, the producers of the show were instructed to abide by their extensive list of requirements [1]. Among the notable restrictions were:
> 
> Not mentioning "Death", "Die", "Kill" or other words with a strong negative meaning. Death was to be avoided, leading Semper to skirt around the issue, killing characters off-panel or in unrealistic ways, and "destroy" and "destruction" were frequently employed as synonyms. For example:
> Mary Jane and the Green Goblin fall through an interdimensional portal instead of falling to their deaths.
> ...




On another note, I didn't even go into all the shitty reused animation. For example, almost any episode that involved spider-man climbing about in the sewer uses old footage from the first Lizard episode. Any episode showing anything leaving or taking off from crime central (Kingpins lair) is from the Spider-Slayer and Hobgoblin episodes.


The audio is atrocious. The lines were corny. The animation degraded each season.  The same can be said for X-Men to an extent. While there was more violence (usually only directed AT wolverine) The lines were corny(storm), the animation was more and more static as the seasons went on (Just look at any flying character try to move in the air. Storm, Gladiator and Magneto Especially) And the Animation in the final season was completely different and craptacular. And as I said. Wolverine, since he could heal, was really the only person who got hurt (Barring morph and Magneto). 

There's a reason why I said that Spectacular Spider-Man surpassed JL as the best animated comic show with only 2 seasons. It did everything right. The humor was perfect. The characters were all fleshed out, get development, and aren't just background characters. Everyone actually changes, even if its just a little bit, in the span of 25 episodes. Spider-man actually uses his brawn and his brain in most of his fights. His enemies get smarter, and don't fall for the same trick (most of them) when he fights them again. His villains go to prison. They stay there unless broken out. They don't just pop up randomly in the weirdest of place with no notice.

My love for Spectacular is my opinion. But the reason's it is superior objectively are fact.

Oh, and AngryJoe lost my respect when he praised Guild Wars 2 for being innovative when it borrows almost everything it does to make in innovating from City of Heroes, a game that's 8 years old and was cancelled by the same publisher of GW2.


----------



## lazer (Oct 31, 2012)

The prequals were garbage compared to 4,5 and 6 so he should pass it on but not for money... lucas is a sell out and is doing this out of spite because he got shitted on by fans due to his lackluster prequals.


----------



## Blue_Panter_Ninja (Oct 31, 2012)

Tyrannos said:


> I got a bad feeling about this.......


Who doesn't,we al know how Di$ney works


----------



## Petes12 (Nov 1, 2012)

lazer said:


> The prequals were garbage compared to 4,5 and 6 so he should pass it on but not for money... lucas is a sell out and is doing this out of spite because he got shitted on by fans due to his lackluster prequals.



Funny you mention this, I just came to this thread because 



Lucas is donating nearly all of the $4 billion to charity.


----------



## drache (Nov 1, 2012)

lazer said:


> The prequals were garbage compared to 4,5 and 6 so he should pass it on but not for money... lucas is a sell out and is doing this out of spite because he got shitted on by fans due to his lackluster prequals.


 
actually epi 1-3 are not bad the real problem is that 4-6 exist on a glorified pedestal that frankly I don't think anyone can reach.


----------



## neodragzero (Nov 1, 2012)

drache said:


> *actually epi 1-3 are not bad* the real problem is that 4-6 exist on a glorified pedestal that frankly I don't think anyone can reach.



As film goes, as attempting to tell good story goes, as having good characters go, as not overfilling the frame with mind numbing CG crap goes, as dialgoue goes, etc., Episodes 1 to 3 pretty much failed. In all seriousness, Episodes 1 to 3 were the problem in so many ways.


----------



## drache (Nov 1, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> As film goes, as attempting to tell good story goes, as having good characters go, as not overfilling the frame with mind numbing CG crap goes, as dialgoue goes, etc., Episodes 1 to 3 pretty much failed. In all seriousness, Episodes 1 to 3 were the problem in so many ways.


 
honestly no both 'sets' had their ups and downs (though Lucas saved the annoying extras for last in the orginal set) and frankly the punchline of 1-3 was ruined by the intervening years

Frankly the dialogue of episode 4 is horrible, 5 is a bit better and 6 well 6 is downright schizo with at times being good and at times being aweful.

As to CG, that's entirely subjective in many ways. I have a friend that probably like you swears he can tell the difference (he did this too for the Matrix trilogy) to me overall the newer ones have better CGI.

If Lucas had waited frankly I think overall people would like epi 1-3 about as much as 4-6. The probelm was he didn't wait and well taht's on him


----------



## neodragzero (Nov 1, 2012)

drache said:


> honestly no both 'sets' had their ups and downs (though Lucas saved the annoying extras for last in the orginal set) and frankly the punchline of 1-3 was ruined by the intervening years


Didn't say anything about only one having have downs. Simply specified the numerous downs that go well beyond just being compared to the original films. 


> As to CG, that's entirely subjective in many ways. I have a friend that probably like you swears he can tell the difference (he did this too for the Matrix trilogy) to me overall the newer ones have better CGI.


I'm not talking about the matter of how the CG compares between the two sets. I'm talking about how the prequels had frames overloaded with CG bits to the point that it all just blurs together rather than being much of a set design. There's attempting to present a futuristic scene that will draw in the audience while, hopefully, helping to move along the story but instead you have a lot of frame cramming with stuff that just takes the audience out of it. Especially when something like a fleet battle scene has a bunch of stilted dialogue in completely forgetting the fact its in the middle of a bloody fleet battle. It's too much of a disconnect that makes it all the more obvious what the problem is when George Lucas suggested at all that for Episode 3 production was already started before a script was even finished.


----------



## Mexican God Lvl 3 (Nov 1, 2012)

neodrag, face it.

When u think about what a movie with spaceshifts that fire lasers and lightsabre can be, u start to notice how shitty 4,5 and 6 were.


----------



## Sōsuke Aizen (Nov 1, 2012)

Incredibly funny how Lucas and Kathy i.e. people who actually make films and have done do so for decades making fun of retarded reviewers with ZERO experience:

[YOUTUBE]YyqlTi7lkhY[/YOUTUBE]

I imagine they'd crush the living shit out of any of the 'great directors and producers' posting shit about GL on here.


----------



## Overwatch (Nov 1, 2012)

This could go either way, but locking up Lucas in the broom closet kinda tips the scales in their favor. I'll be keeping this shit under the microscope.


----------



## drache (Nov 1, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> Didn't say anything about only one having have downs. Simply specified the numerous downs that go well beyond just being compared to the original films.
> 
> I'm not talking about the matter of how the CG compares between the two sets. I'm talking about how the prequels had frames overloaded with CG bits to the point that it all just blurs together rather than being much of a set design. There's attempting to present a futuristic scene that will draw in the audience while, hopefully, helping to move along the story but instead you have a lot of frame cramming with stuff that just takes the audience out of it. Especially when something like a fleet battle scene has a bunch of stilted dialogue in completely forgetting the fact its in the middle of a bloody fleet battle. It's too much of a disconnect that makes it all the more obvious what the problem is when George Lucas suggested at all that for Episode 3 production was already started before a script was even finished.


 
well frankly but with no offense mean I think you're blinded by rosey glass there

And are you really going to blame lucas for using the tools he wished he had in the 70s and 80s? The entire reason why he originally skipped 1-3 was because it was too effect heavy for the time

As to dialog, the battle of the second death star, the battle of the first death star, most of empire strikes back. All examples of how if you really wanted to you could take issue with the dialogue.


----------



## neodragzero (Nov 1, 2012)

drache said:


> well frankly but with no offense mean I think you're blinded by rosey glass there
> 
> And are you really going to blame lucas for using the tools he wished he had in the 70s and 80s? The entire reason why he originally skipped 1-3 was because it was too effect heavy for the time


Once again, you don't seem to get the critique where I'm not talking about the usage of CG but the overfilling of the frame to the point it's just pretty much not drawing in the audience while doing so in numerous occasions that make no sense as story telling go.



> As to dialog, the battle of the second death star, the battle of the first death star, most of empire strikes back. All examples of how if you really wanted to you could take issue with the dialogue.


Notice how you just simply put down what sounds you're just saying the name of movies rather than any real details as to what bad dialogue you're talking about.

Please do share when exactly in those movies we have a multiple minute conversation... that completely ignores a huge space battle occurring at the same time. Please do share when exactly in those movies are people forced through numerous dialogues sitting in a couch or the weird case of someone telling another person dire news that you'd think needs to be acted upon... only to just walk rather than run.

But, in all more seriousness, I don't need to think about 4-6 to figure out how idiotic the lines for Anakin in Episode 3 sound as far making turning to dark side equate to sounding like even more of idiot.


----------



## drache (Nov 1, 2012)

^

I tell you what Neo when you do as you demand for your criticsims I will as well but since you seemed to be so familar with the movies I used short hand and frankly 'too much CGI' is more a personal preference then a critique.


----------



## Zhariel (Nov 1, 2012)




----------



## Karasu (Nov 1, 2012)

Never thought this would happen, but so damn glad it did.


----------



## Cocoa (Nov 1, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> Freedan, look back on the conversation you're attempting to comment on. I said nothing about which one was better. I simply made a statement about the difference in content and background as far as mythology, Shakespeare references, and so on that the other series lacks. I simply was making a point that Disney animated television isn't absolutely only super young material in opposition to another poster's claim that Disney is automatically responsible for the maturity level of all Marvel shows from the buyout. Once again, pay attention guys, I said nothing about one being better than the other. Just the obvious fact that Shakespeare references and numerous world mythologies are more likely to be lost on anyone below the age of 14.
> 
> 
> I'm still waiting for an explanation as to how Disney is responsible for something they never produced but only rerun after its original air was over on Fox.
> ...


I don't know whether or not disney did it. I'm just saying that the last season of x-men animated series sucked.

Disney will be good for star wars. Lucas is just that bad.


----------



## neodragzero (Nov 1, 2012)

drache said:


> ^
> 
> I tell you what Neo when you do as you demand for your criticsims I will as well


Are you really suggesting that the numerous areas I bring up, including specifying an exact issue with the Episode 3 battle, set up for actors to do dialogue, and such compare to you simply saying that three movies had dialogue issues? Because that's basically what you're doing. Also, once again, I'm bringing up issues with the prequels themselves rather than only critique based upon comparing them to the original trilogy.


> but since you seemed to be so familar with the movies I used short hand


No, you just made vague commentary with no explanation as what exactly was the issue with any dialogue while I specified how it's a problem to have characters sitting on couches so much, characters walking slowly even though one of the characters informed them of dire news that needs to be acted upon immediately, etc.

Seriously, I talk of certain issues that there are while your response was basically "these other movies were just awful."


> and frankly 'too much CGI' is more a personal preference then a critique.



Too bad I've actually explained the matter of overfilling the frame to the point that it loses the audience and even is done in a fashion that can make little sense from time to time as far as minutes of strangely calm dialogue even though a ship is in the middle of a hectic space fleet battle. I also added the explanation of how Lucas pretty much suggested that the script wasn't even done before the start of production for Episode 3. When the writing isn't there first, it's clear proper planning of the image to convey a story isn't being well practiced. It's not a person preference but a requirement of doing a decent fictional film.


Cocoa said:


> I don't know whether or not disney did it. I'm just saying that the last season of x-men animated series sucked.



How about specifying that instead of simply saying you agree to an entire chunk of a quote to puts blame upon Disney for something it didn't produce?


----------



## drache (Nov 1, 2012)

^

I responded exactly as you did if yuo want verbatim quotes and analysis then you should go first because I'm not going to put in the time to do that unless I know you are going to


And you realize the 'strangely calm dialogue during a space battle' thing was exactly what I was pointing out in epi 4-6 among many other things?


----------



## Cocoa (Nov 1, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> Are you really suggesting that the numerous areas I bring up, including specifying an exact issue with the Episode 3 battle, set up for actors to do dialogue, and such compare to you simply saying that three movies had dialogue issues? Because that's basically what you're doing. Also, once again, I'm bringing up issues with the prequels themselves rather than only critique based upon comparing them to the original trilogy.
> 
> No, you just made vague commentary with no explanation as what exactly was the issue with any dialogue while I specified how it's a problem to have characters sitting on couches so much, characters walking slowly even though one of the characters informed them of dire news that needs to be acted upon immediately, etc.
> 
> ...


Because something funny usually comes of it.  Didn't happen this time though.


----------



## neodragzero (Nov 1, 2012)

drache said:


> ^
> 
> I responded exactly as you did



I specified what dialogue issues that come to mind. You didn't. I have an issue with more than just the matter of dialogue while I never brought up CG in terms of detail quality but the matter of overfilling the frame. I named a character after talking about a specific scene where two characters strangely take a stroll even though they are aware of news that should have them running. I don't see where exactly you suggested anything that specific at all.


> And you realize the 'strangely calm dialogue during a space battle' thing was exactly what I was pointing out in epi 4-6 among many other things?



Such as what? 4 through 6 don't allow any scenes with characters practically talking as if there isn't a hectic space fleet battle. What scene are you referring to that's comparable to the beginning of Episode 3?

Among what other things are you talking about?


----------



## drache (Nov 1, 2012)

Neo for the love of gods go watch the two death star battles most of the dialogue sounds as if they're all having crumpets and tea and that is as specific as you were frankly


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Nov 1, 2012)

drache, he's retro-tarding to the extent where he thinks his preference is suddenly the only thing that matters.

so in that sense, you're going to lose this because he's convinced himself that his opinion makes him right.


----------



## neodragzero (Nov 1, 2012)

drache said:


> Neo for the love of gods go watch the two death star battles most of the dialogue sounds as if they're all having crumpets and tea and that is as specific as you were frankly



Who exactly? Tie-fighter pilots? Nope. Rogue Squadron? Nope. Rebel Alliance major ships? Nope. Star Destroyers? Nope. Not even the main bridge crew of the two Death Stars act if they don't happen to be fighting a Rebel Allicance fleet at the time. If you're talking about the Death Star in terms of Jedi-Sith fighting, you do realize that the Death Star is worlds beyond the ship shown at the beginning of Episode 3 where the former is ridiculously shielded from attack while the latter is not? When exactly did you mention something about Anakin for which of the original trilogy films? Heck, have you even named a single character like I have?

But, anyway, time to move on. I specified an issue on the matter of the prequels alone. Whether or not the original trilogy has issues is meaningless to the fact that the prequels have their issues on their own rather than caring whether or not the original trilogy is as great as it's overrated to be. 



Yami Munesanzun said:


> drache, he's retro-tarding to the extent where he thinks his preference is suddenly the only thing that matters.


It's a good thing I make a reference to an audience in terms of how much they're likely to get from overfilling the frame and George Lucas not having a script done before the start of production.

I didn't know that the common sense of moving in a rush rather than just walking when someone delivered news that affects an entire galactic republic was just a solitary preference. I guess people in fiction and real life that hustle a move for things of lower grand scale are just weird.


----------



## drache (Nov 2, 2012)

^

wow yeah you're right it is time to move on and I'm just going to end this discussion becuase it is pointless


----------



## Petes12 (Nov 2, 2012)

never mind he's giving almost all of it to charity


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Nov 2, 2012)

Petes12 said:


> never mind he's giving almost all of it to charity



oh well that doesn't matter because he's apparently a sell out.

derp.


----------



## Blitzomaru (Nov 2, 2012)

He's a sell out because he was able to get 4 bil, which most will go to charity? And that he wanted to make sure someone who respected his product would take care of it.


----------



## Golden Circle (Nov 2, 2012)

Well since everyone's leaving, you may want to continue the discussion here:


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Nov 2, 2012)

[YOUTUBE]I7x4oIgAkF0[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## CandleGuy (Nov 4, 2012)

Luke Skywalker to be primary focus of new star wars trilogy


----------



## Megaharrison (Nov 4, 2012)

Loool, episodes 10, 11, 12 now too.


----------



## CandleGuy (Nov 4, 2012)

> From my understanding the movies that follow will be far more in line with the original trilogy in regards to tone and method, and from the few names I have heard being banded around I am very excited, as they are all choices that I think people will get behind.
> 
> *- Steven Spielberg, who may actually get to direct his episode of STARWARS after all.
> 
> ...



*Spoiler*: __


----------



## Bungee Gum (Nov 4, 2012)

Yes, yes. Now I cannot commit suicide until the next two trilogy's are over.


----------



## All The Good Names Are Taken (Nov 4, 2012)

CandleGuy said:


> Luke Skywalker to be primary focus of new star wars trilogy



I was hoping for a non Skywalker centric trilogy


----------



## Bungee Gum (Nov 4, 2012)

heard a rumor from 4 chan that Luke is the main focus of the first movie, but then the other 2 focus on the 2 teenagers and the bad guys


----------



## Luna (Nov 4, 2012)

As long as it's serious, not animated, not a musical, has no Disney characters whatsoever, the conflict isn't overcome by the power of friendship, or love or anything like that, and is written, directed, produced, and edited by professionals, then I'll be okay with it.


----------



## dream (Nov 4, 2012)

CandleGuy said:


> Luke Skywalker to be primary focus of new star wars trilogy





> From my understanding the movies that follow will be far more in line with the original trilogy in regards to tone and method, and from the few names I have heard being banded around I am very excited, as they are all choices that I think people will get behind.
> 
> - Neil Blomkamp, District 9, Elysium.



Blomkamp possibly directing this?  That would be fantastic if they give him enough creative freedom but I don't see that happening.

Alfonso Cuar?n?  Intriguing possibility. 



Megaharrison said:


> Loool, episodes 10, 11, 12 now too.



Star Wars will be milked dry.


----------



## Bungee Gum (Nov 4, 2012)

As long as it's good, that's not a bad thing


----------



## CandleGuy (Jan 24, 2013)

Star Trek’ director J.J. Abrams will call the shots on the new ‘Star Wars’ movie




> Can someone do both "Star Trek" and "Star Wars"? Apparently so.
> 
> It looks like J.J. Abrams will be the director of "Star Wars: Episode VII," the first "Star Wars" film under the Disney banner and the first installment of a planned new trilogy, according to reports published Thursday. Neither Lucasfilm nor Abrams has officially confirmed yet, but an official announcement is said to be forthcoming.
> 
> ...


----------



## Stunna (Jan 24, 2013)

Abrams is a fine choice. They could have done much worse.


----------



## Tyrannos (Jan 24, 2013)

Thought J.J. Turned down the offer because he was working on Star Trek?  

Well, here comes the lense flares.  




> However, according to Moviefone, this new film will be an original story that won't draw from any currently existing work, such as Timothy Zahn's "Heir to the Empire" books that take place soon after the events of "Return of the Jedi."



Really?  

That sucks, Zahn's Trilogy was the best thing from the Novels.   That series really had to be the one thing that helped relaunch Star Wars, because Admiral Thrawn is the best!

Well on the bright side, hopefully it overwrites the stupid Vong invasion.


----------



## Ceria (Jan 24, 2013)

Tyrannos said:


> Thought J.J. Turned down the offer because he was working on Star Trek?
> 
> Well, here comes the lense flares.
> 
> ...



Thrawn is the only thing we want to see right now, sure it'll sell billions regardless but after all these years, continue the story with the greatest villain in the series after Palpatine.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Jan 24, 2013)

Good news. Abrams will achieve what Disney wants, to make a lot of money and not embarrass the franchise. It will probably be solid if not great, like his Trek.  

Too bad Affleck turned it down. Shit actor but brilliant director. Would have loved to see such a realistic Star Wars.


----------



## Stunna (Jan 24, 2013)

A realistic Star Wars would be awful tbh.


----------



## Ultra Instinct Vegito (Jan 24, 2013)

Let's hope the movie will be good.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Jan 24, 2013)

Did you ever play KOTOR? It doesn't have the playfulness of the original 3 and yet was great.


----------



## Stunna (Jan 24, 2013)

Admittedly, no, but those are the games. The movie don't need to be dark and realistic. It's Science-_Fantasy._ Why take away the magic by grounding it?


----------



## Mintaka (Jan 24, 2013)

CandleGuy said:


> Star Trek? director J.J. Abrams will call the shots on the new ?Star Wars? movie


Well I may as well kill myself now and spare myself the misery.


----------



## Əyin (Jan 24, 2013)




----------



## Elim Rawne (Jan 24, 2013)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Did you ever play KOTOR? It doesn't have the playfulness of the original 3 and yet was great.



Playfulness of the original 3 ?

Have you seen Empire ?


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Jan 24, 2013)

Should have said Episodes 4, 5, and 1 instead.


----------



## Enclave (Jan 24, 2013)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Should have said Episodes 4, 5, and 1 instead.



Why 4, 5 and 1?  1 sucked.  6 while not as good as 4 and 5 was still infinitely better than 1,2 and 3.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Jan 24, 2013)

4,5 and 1 are more playful, less serious. I was saying that if Affleck had gotten SW, he might have taken a more serious tone like KOTOR. Would have been interesting to see Affleck do SW.


----------



## Foxy (Jan 24, 2013)

Meh, I enjoyed all the Star Wars movies.

With a universe that big there are endless opportunities, so I'll gladly put my faith in the upcoming films.


----------



## dr_shadow (Jan 24, 2013)

No matter what they do I'm sure people will complain, with the astronomic amount of hype there will be to live up to.

Since the post-RotJ timeline is already explored in books and novels, there will be nitpickers to point out everything they "got wrong". We're already seeing this with the "no Thrawn? WTF raaaaage!!!". But if there _was_ a Thrawn movie, there would instead be complaints that it wasn't faithful to the material.

Probably the best way to avoid the minefield is -as they are doing- to set it in a time that's not all that explored yet. Whenever that might be...

And already in 2015? I always figured Star Trek would be trilogy. Is he gonna power-shoot a third part for 2014 and then rush on to Star Wars? Considering it took him four years to get from Star Trek 1 to Star Trek 2...


----------



## dummy plug (Jan 24, 2013)

those Disney Stormtroopers' eyes better not be cute and cuddly


----------



## dr_shadow (Jan 24, 2013)

dummy plug said:


> those Disney Stormtroopers' eyes better not be cute and cuddly





Problem?


----------



## dummy plug (Jan 24, 2013)

mr_shadow said:


> Problem?



i clearly stated Stormtroopers, sir


----------



## dr_shadow (Jan 24, 2013)

dummy plug said:


> i clearly stated Stormtroopers, sir



Alright then.

The point I was making was that if one complains about pointless cuteness in _Disney's Star Wars_ (imagine that on the poster. The horror...), one should be aware that pointless cuteness has been in the series since 1983.

And yes, I think the Ewoks were pointless. I don't think their segment of Return of the Jedi did much to further the plot, except for at the very end when they defeat "an entire legion of [the Empire's] best troops" with stone-age weapons. But most of the time spent in the Ewok village seems to just be there to drag the movie out to feature-lenght since the _important_ scenes with Luke, Vader and the Emperor were not long enough on their own.

Yoda however was warranted cuteness since he manages to be both cute, funny and _contribute something to the plot_.


----------



## dummy plug (Jan 24, 2013)

eh, mr shadow my post is more on the joke side rather than a complaint...but take it as you will


----------



## TetraVaal (Jan 24, 2013)

It's such a boring and by-the-numbers choice.

I really would've liked to have seen someone like Duncan Jones get a crack at it.

And in light of the news that Matthew Vaughn pitched the idea of Chloe Moretz starring in the lead role had he got the gig--even that would've been more appealing than Abrams getting the gig.


----------



## Mider T (Jan 25, 2013)

mr_shadow said:


> Yoda however was warranted cuteness since he manages to be both cute, funny and _contribute something to the plot_.



Yoda was cute?  The hell you smoking?


----------



## TheCupOfBrew (Jan 25, 2013)

Y'know who was cute? Vader Anakin


----------



## Golden Circle (Jan 25, 2013)

I watched that new Star Trek movie. The man is good and perfectly skilled to take a task like this up.

Rumor has it that he knows to go for the dirty look of Star Wars rather than the shiny look of Star Trek.

One proviso though: I want it to be in 3D and I want it to be glorious.


----------



## Palpatine (Jan 25, 2013)

Abrams huh? 

Not bad


----------



## Roman (Jan 25, 2013)

Rainbow Dash said:


> I watched that new Star Trek movie. The man is good and perfectly skilled to take a task like this up.
> 
> Rumor has it that he knows to go for the dirty look of Star Wars rather than the shiny look of Star Trek.
> 
> One proviso though: I want it to be in 3D and I want it to be glorious.



Hearing that, I'm going to do something that is completely out of character of me and watch the Star Trek movie to see what he's capable of. I'm not at all excited about the fact Luke is going to be the main character again.


----------



## The Space Cowboy (Jan 25, 2013)

A non lucas directing?

PEOPLE, THE FRANCHISE HAS A NEW HOPE!


----------



## dr_shadow (Jan 25, 2013)

Rainbow Dash;46054128[B said:
			
		

> ]I watched that new Star Trek movie. The man is good and perfectly skilled to take a task like this up.
> [/B]
> Rumor has it that he knows to go for the dirty look of Star Wars rather than the shiny look of Star Trek.
> 
> One proviso though: I want it to be in 3D and I want it to be glorious.



That movie, while a fun watch, was more an action movie set in the Star Trek universe than a "Star Trek movie" though. Because it lacked a message.

The Star Trek tv show was originally concieved of as "Gulliver's Travels in space". Each episode was supposed to be an allegory of some contemporary political/social issue, but it would be hidden enough networks would not censor it (started in the 60's...) and viewers would not find it boring. Depending on political interest and educational level the viewer may or may not be aware of which issue a show is actually about.

The philosophical-political aspects of Star Trek are toned down in all the movies (except maybe the first one), but they're usually present in some way or form. However in the Abrams reboot, I found it to be _completely absent_.

Except if you try to posit some meta-question of "what would Star Trek be like if we killed off one of the most popular alien races?". Which is something only someone who loves the tv show would ask...


----------



## Han Solo (Jan 25, 2013)

So the uninteresting and safe pick was chosen. I'm not exactly surprised.


----------



## Sunrider (Jan 25, 2013)

mr_shadow said:


> That movie, while a fun watch, was more an action movie set in the Star Trek universe than a "Star Trek movie" though. Because it lacked a message.
> 
> The Star Trek tv show was originally concieved of as "Gulliver's Travels in space". Each episode was supposed to be an allegory of some contemporary political/social issue, but it would be hidden enough networks would not censor it (started in the 60's...) and viewers would not find it boring. Depending on political interest and educational level the viewer may or may not be aware of which issue a show is actually about.
> 
> ...


While I agree with you, this just means Abrams's style is perfect for Star Wars, which is, at it's best, mostly a rollicking adventure. 

Sure, 1-6 were about Anakin'd rise/fall/redemption, and there were themes of civic responsibility, and the consequences of trading liberty for security, or the perils of complacency, but at the very least, that adventurous, roller coaster vibe of episodes 4-6 is right up Abrams's field.


----------



## Saishin (Jan 25, 2013)




----------



## Hatifnatten (Jan 25, 2013)

Rainbow Dash said:


> I watched that new Star Trek movie. The man is good and perfectly skilled to take a task like this up.


----------



## rac585 (Jan 25, 2013)

yes. this man has definitely survived the fall.


----------



## CandleGuy (Feb 19, 2013)

> There might be a new hope (see what we did there?) for those yearning to see the offspring of the Skywalkers and Solos on the big screen.
> 
> According to veteran Hollywood columnist Roger Friedman at Showbiz 411, Star Wars: Episode VII will be set "some time in the future [after Return of the Jedi]. Han, Princess Leia (with a presumably better hairstyle), and Luke Skywalker will be a lot older. Their children will be the new main characters. RsD2 [sic] and C-3PO will be unchanged, I would guess. since they are not human. But suffice to say, the three main actors are definitely coming back. The bigger question is, which young actors will play their kids?"
> 
> If this report is true then does this mean we'll get movie versions of established expanded universe characters such as Ben Skywalker, Jacen Solo, Jaina Solo and Anakin Solo? Or will Lucasfilm, director J.J. Abrams, and screenwriter Michael Arndt invent all new descendants for viewers to follow?


----------



## Rabbit and Rose (Feb 19, 2013)

They should make an alternate universe movie and call it Star Peace.


----------



## Stunna (Feb 19, 2013)

That's actually a bit disappointing. It's not a deal breaker by any means, though.


----------



## Wilykat (Feb 19, 2013)

If they do bring back Harrison Ford, Mark Hamill, and Carrie Fisher the new movie may dethrone Tron Legacy as the longest pause between sequel with original actor 

Tron Legacy: 1982 to 2011, 29 years
Star Wars: 1983 to 2015, 32 years


----------



## Snowfairy (Feb 20, 2013)

All I could think was:

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRMFH71fDIE[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## kazuri (Feb 20, 2013)

Having the old cast back could be really good or really bad. A lot of times when you have 'legendary' characters come back after a long time they try to hard to be/do what they thought was so good and it comes out like regular tv. A good example of this is the seinfeld reunion on curb your enthusiasm. More specific examples would be kramer in that episode, or jerry trying to say 'hello... newman' like he use to, and not quite being able to do it.


----------



## Tyrannos (Feb 20, 2013)

Well we won't know until we see it.   But I think they could nicely pull it off.


----------



## Sanity Check (Feb 20, 2013)

In before 20 bladed lightsabers, lightsaber nunchucks and lightsaber ninja throwing stars & kunais.

:WOW


----------



## kazuri (Feb 20, 2013)

> lightsaber nunchucks



That would be pretty fucking awesome..


----------

