PDA

View Full Version : CHUD.com reviews ROTS: Four Views


jake_$teed
05-10-2005, 08:11 PM
Four very interesting reviews from CHUD, all from guys who not only love Star Wars, but film as well.

http://chud.com/news/2860

SheepFactory
05-10-2005, 09:39 PM
heh great reviews , i know i'll agree with them upon seeing it. Nice to see some unbiased reviews pop up.

this line especially sums up my feelings about the acting quality of the prequels:

"What does come before the fall here is one of the single worst fight scenes in recent memory, as Samuel L Jackson’s Mace Windu (still played as though Sam L is doing cut scenes for a Wing Commander game) takes on Chancellor Palpatine, revealed as Darth Sidious."

jake_$teed
05-10-2005, 09:56 PM
heh great reviews , i know i'll agree with them upon seeing it. Nice to see some unbiased reviews pop up.

this line especially sums up my feelings about the acting quality of the prequels:

"What does come before the fall here is one of the single worst fight scenes in recent memory, as Samuel L Jackson’s Mace Windu (still played as though Sam L is doing cut scenes for a Wing Commander game) takes on Chancellor Palpatine, revealed as Darth Sidious."

Yeah, I thought they were really good, since they were written by people I can relate to, those for whom Star Wars helped create thier love for film, and yet, can still review the films without blinders on, focusing on the filmaking, storytelling and artistry rather than the title "Star Wars" and all that accomapanies it.

Overall,that's why I enjoy CHUD.com so much, they deliver the news and reviews and stuff without being too fanboy-ish, as well as often being scathingly funny.

Ezekiel19
05-10-2005, 10:21 PM
What did he expect..........."The Impossible" ??? as Luke would say.

Ezekiel19
05-10-2005, 10:31 PM
Anyabody who thought and actually believed "a HitchHikers Guide to the Galaxy" was going to be good. Makes me question and wonder. Out of all the sperm in between there fathers legs, they were the fastest? I question anything else from them after reading that admission* LOL

Books dont make good movies folks. Directors make good movies.

lovisx
05-11-2005, 03:50 AM
it seems like these reviews were written to appeal to the people who used to like star wars but think its total crap now. ANd that by appealing to these people their review would be more valid. I didn't read all the reviews because of the spoilers but the summations were fairly mediocor. "it should have been better to save the franchise," was what they all commented.

Too bad they think that all their readers hated the first two, and that they have to take the extra time to make it clear that though it is better it won't save the franchise. Though it is good, it's not great because it can't save. That's a load of crap, just say the movie's good and don't be so pretencious.

Kimotion
05-11-2005, 04:01 AM
Too bad they think that all their readers hated the first two, and that they have to take the extra time to make it clear that though it is better it won't save the franchise. Though it is good, it's not great because it can't save. That's a load of crap, just say the movie's good and don't be so pretencious.

Agreed. It's like they're trying so hard to sound like an intelligent-artsly film connoseiur by trying really hard not to like the flick.

SheepFactory
05-11-2005, 04:06 AM
yet if you guys bothered to read the reviews you would have seen that *gasp they liked the movie. and gace it 7/8 out of ten.

lovisx
05-11-2005, 04:23 AM
yet if you guys bothered to read the reviews you would have seen that *gasp they liked the movie. and gace it 7/8 out of ten.

and if you would have read my post sheep factory, you would have realized that I realize that they liked the movie, and thought that overall it was better. I just thought the excuse that it didn't save the franchise, and that because of that it isn't great, was a little dubious.

That was their own summation of the article anyway, so if that doesn't describe the rest of what they wrote, then I'm at a lost for believing them.

leigh
05-11-2005, 04:27 AM
Anyabody who thought and actually believed "a HitchHikers Guide to the Galaxy" was going to be good. Makes me question and wonder. Out of all the sperm in between there fathers legs, they were the fastest? I question anything else from them after reading that admission* LOL

Books dont make good movies folks. Directors make good movies.

:surprised

leigh
05-11-2005, 04:34 AM
I love how people desperately try to dredge up any other recent films of similar genres whenever the films they're obssessed about get bad reviews.

Why the hell Hitchhikers Guide is being brought into the mix here in this thread is truly beyond me. But I recognise an insult when I see one, and that was pretty lame. Perhaps the humour went right over your head and you didn't even realise that Hitchhikers Guide is a comedy, not a sci-fi film.

titaniumdave
05-11-2005, 04:34 AM
Anyabody who thought and actually believed "a HitchHikers Guide to the Galaxy" was going to be good. Makes me question and wonder. Out of all the sperm in between there fathers legs, they were the fastest? I question anything else from them after reading that admission* LOL

Books dont make good movies folks. Directors make good movies.

http://www.pix8.net/pro/pic/537CpJ1f/461354.jpg
:surprised

Kimotion
05-11-2005, 04:42 AM
and if you would have read my post sheep factory, you would have realized that I realize that they liked the movie, and thought that overall it was better. I just thought the excuse that it didn't save the franchise, and that because of that it isn't great, was a little dubious.

That was their own summation of the article anyway, so if that doesn't describe the rest of what they wrote, then I'm at a lost for believing them.

Yes, they did admit they liked the movie but it seemed like they were holding their noses when admitting it. Granted, movie reviews are best when they both present what's good and bad about a film, it's just annoying when they begrudgingly admit it's good while writing an obituary of the franchise a paragraph later.

Terrell
05-11-2005, 08:06 AM
Jesus! Out of all the reviews you pick to post, you go to that dreck call CHUD? Any review on that site should be ignored, because the people doing the reviewing are a complete waste of time, and pathetic to boot. I know, I used to post there before I realized it was not a place for useful, mature discussion. Devin Faraci in the resident anti-Star Wars and anti-Lucas brigade. He's spent the last 3 years assaulting Lucas and Episode III with a ridiculous level of hyperbole. Not only that, his review is as transparent as he is. He slams the film, big surprise, but gives it a 7 out of 10. Why? Because he's trying to play both sides of the coin, hedging his bets so to speak. That way, when the reviews come out and they're positive, he can claim he gave them film a 7 out of 10. If the reviews are negative, he can say he slammed the film. That way, he can claim his opinion mirrors that of the critical consensus. That's is exactly the kind of person he is.

Ignore CHUD and grab some reasonable, honest reviews posted on RT or metacritic.

jake_$teed
05-11-2005, 08:20 PM
because the people doing the reviewing are a complete waste of time, and pathetic to boot.

Yeah, Nick Nunziata is pathetic. He's producing a $75 million movie for New Line. What are you up to these days? Even working in the industry? Mmmmm, probably not.

And besides, what is wrong with you people? I just don't understand why people's opinions are immediatley judged and dismissed if they don't jibe with your own. What is this, some sort of nerd thought police? And you pathetic losers haven't even seen the movie yet, so how can you even debate someone's critique? What the hell would someone have to gain by "playing both sides of the fence"? It's a f---ing movie review. They express thier opinion, and then it's over. There's no movie review acadamy awards. What benefit is there for not honestley reviewing a film? And oh yes, and all the reviews from Rotten Tomatoes are "credible media outlets" , ummm, let's see....about.com, groucho reviews, hero realm, splicedwire, filmjerk, juicy cerebellum, moviehole, freakin' emanuellelevy.com, who the hell is emanuel levy?

In the end, it dosen't even matter, you losers, are gonna see the movie and love it. (I hope I do too) You'll keep telling yourself that no single aspect of it could have been any better and the film cannot be judged in any manner because it is perfect. You will ooze with joy as you check Box Office Mojo daily to see how much money it has grossed worldwide, and how good it makes you feel, even though you had absolutely zero part in the making of the film. And guess what? You will not get any of that money. In fact, you will be giving it all gladly to George Lucas (minus Fox's meager distribution fee), again and again. In the theater, on DVD (then HD-DVD), and on the toys, with little thanks from George. Ten years from now, you will still look at the movie as the vision of perfection that it is. (oh , and you still won't be working in CG). Get a life.

BillSpradlin
05-11-2005, 08:53 PM
I oozed with joy over that post Jake -)

lovisx
05-11-2005, 08:58 PM
I have phantom menace on VHS and I never even baught Attack of the Clones, didn't even get a chance to see it in theaters. I do recognize that Star Wars is a little corny at times. I don't buy star wars toys and I've played about 2 star wars video games. I love CG and am working in CG.

Obviously if you make a review you want it to be valid to your readers, and I felt that they were speaking more to the cynical instead of the unbiased. So I voiced my opinion. Again I'm just talking about the summation. You don't need to see the movie to know if someone is being cynical or not.

I guess you have to be cynical to make a good review? I guess you can't criticise the critics?

Sorry if you took it personally, I do realize you posted that you love these guys. I have nothing against them or against you, I just didn't like their summations.

Nemoid
05-11-2005, 09:15 PM
well critics are critics and so they're personal opinions. to be honest, i have to say that the main thing i found in the new prequels is a lack of timing in editing, and maybe some not clever choices in making up a conspiracy athmosphere in the movie. resut : boring sequences. i feel the need for more rithm, but also for more streamlined characters like they were in the original saga. in the old trilogy all the elements are well mixed together. ok the first nmovie is a bit more boring than others.

however : new Sw episodes show alot of good sequences as well. podracer sequence in EP I for example. and i loved the round droids attacking Jedis in the 2nd movie the sequences in coruscant were good, and also the ones in the clones factory planet, and the battle between Obi 1 and Jango fett. SFX are good as well and certainly better than the first trilogy BTW.

now, i have to see Ep III of course. i think it will be dark, but maybe a bit boring as well, in the part in wich anakin has yet to betray and pass to the dark side of the force.hopefully there will be good scenes with familiar characters like wookies , c3po and r2d2 in their full glory and what about making us see a bit of millenium falcon?

jake_$teed
05-11-2005, 10:05 PM
I have phantom menace on VHS and I never even baught Attack of the Clones, didn't even get a chance to see it in theaters. I do recognize that Star Wars is a little corny at times. I don't buy star wars toys and I've played about 2 star wars video games. I love CG and am working in CG.

Obviously if you make a review you want it to be valid to your readers, and I felt that they were speaking more to the cynical instead of the unbiased. So I voiced my opinion. Again I'm just talking about the summation. You don't need to see the movie to know if someone is being cynical or not.

I guess you have to be cynical to make a good review? I guess you can't criticise the critics?

Sorry if you took it personally, I do realize you posted that you love these guys. I have nothing against them or against you, I just didn't like their summations.

I didn't take it personally. I don't care. But I am constantly amazed by the things I read posted. I want you to look at what you're saying. If you have any complaints about the new star wars, you are "Cynical". If you love every aspect of it, you are "unbiased". Oh, that makes a lot of sense.

lovisx
05-11-2005, 10:44 PM
sorry, I see the folly in my argument.

fez
05-12-2005, 12:09 AM
Like many folks I know, my expectations are so ridiculously low after the first two that I might actually enjoy "Revenge"...

Longwinded OT:

In 7th grade I moved to a new town and filled a friendship void with Star Wars fandom. That was, what 1988? Who knows.

Around 9th grade or so I realized being a Star Wars fan was social suicide and that if I ever wanted a girlfriend I was gonna have to give it up. So basically, I sacrificed Star Wars for sex. Never looked back!

In college I came out of the closet again, as it seemed everyone was at least a casual fan. But I only admitted to my closest friends that I had a basement full of Star Wars toys.

There was this one really hot Star Wars geek though. Since I was still a bit self-conscious about being a reformed Star Wars fanatic, the joke whenever she walked by in her Star Wars T-Shirt, was to say "I was looking at her tits, I swear!"

Kimotion
05-12-2005, 12:39 AM
Very similar situation!

Late 80's--Grade school/Junior High: Star Wars was lame and outdated. Made myself forget about it.

Early - Mid 90's--High School: Star Wars was dead. Forgotten. Yes, never admitted I was ever into Star Wars or I wouldn't get laid. I went to an all boys Catholic HS so it was difficult to get laid anyway, unless you joined the school plays where they had productions with sister schools, but that's OT.

Mid - Late 90's--College: After the announcement that the prequels were in the works, Star Wars was cool again. Everyone seemed to just "happen" to be all into Star Wars. Got laid.

1999--The Phantom Menace: Star Wars was lame again

2002--Attack of the Clones: Star Wars was still lame but there was hope for redemption.

2005--Revenge of the Sith: TBD

NanoGator
05-12-2005, 03:26 AM
Are there any reviews conducted by people who liked the original trilogy but thought I & II were a crushing bore?

CGTalk Moderation
05-12-2005, 03:26 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.