scissors wrote:


And that's why it's important that back then Lucas wasn't the demigod he became by the beginning of the filming of the prequels, so Harrison Ford could tell him that his dialogs suck.

Yeah, but Magnum P.I. wouldn'ta told him that even way back when (had they gone with him with Raiders of the Lost Ark as Lucas wanted).

Can you imagine how succesful a franchise that would have been if...

It was Lawrence Kasdan who wrote the screenplay for Raiders, the same guy who wrote those of Empire and Jedi, so I think the dialogs weren't that bad to begin with.

Skelly, Newt is a great side-character in Aliens and I think it was smart to make a survivor. It made from some great exchanges with Hudson too, "why don't you put here in charge?!"

But I agree she is REALLY weak character-wise so when the movie totally focuses on her instead of the marines (when Newt gets separated from Ripley/Hicks) that's when the movie becomes MUCH less interesting because now instead of survival, it's about rescuing Newt which is LAME.

I agree that Newt being dead in Alien 3 makes for some great scenes (autopsy) but I'm saying that her being dead really kills the momentum in Aliens upon rewatches (because what's the point). I think an alternate storyline on EARTH would have been great. Newt doesn't necessarily have the be in the movie just like Jonesy in not really in Aliens, "this time you little shit, you're staying here". i can totally see Ripley saying that to her "daughter" and it would be cool.

I'm so disappointed that Ridley Scott isn't really doing the Alien prequels anymore from the sounds of it, that could have been great.

I just hope COLONIAL MARINES will add something for the fans in the same way that the CLONE WARS mini-cartoon gave something cool to hardcore SW fans

One thing I found really interesting about the prequels that I didn't think about until I watched the Red Letter Media reviews is the limitation that using purely digital backgrounds puts on cinematography and actor direction. I'm not even talking about the actors having to act against a floating styrofoam ball that they have to imagine is an alien character (although that's definitely a problem). I mean the restrictions on camera angles and visual creativity that comes with the fact that none of the environments actually exist and are only created in the computer later.

This affects simple things like the actors always walking on flat ground and not being able to interact in any way with their environment. It not only looks bad, but it severely limits what an actor or director can do with a scene. Actors basically have to walk and say their lines, and the director is reduced to shot/counter shot over the shoulder. Compare that to the scene in Empire where the rebellion is evacuating Hoth during the Imperial invasion. One has urgency and excitement, the other is boring.

OBI-WAN: "It's over, Anakin! I have the high ground!"

ANAKIN VADER: "...uh, is this the same high ground that Darth Maul had over you, master?"

OBI-WAN: "......"

...and since physical sets require some forethought and planning, they will tend to prevent the writer-director from filming the first draft of a scene he wrote just that morning.

clockwirk wrote:

I remember when TPM first came out, how vocal Ewan MacGregor was about how awful an experience working on the film was, specifically mentioning how miserable it was to try to act in front of a green screen. That itself was unusual; most actors never let out negative comments about films in current release unless they really hate it.

OK, I'm throwing down the gauntlet now, beyotches.

What other film, in the HISTORY OF FILM, has spawned a legion of amateur filmmakers to send in millions of single scenes to create a fan-made remake of Star Wars as totally awesome as this:

vimeo.com/34948855

SuperflyTNT's link, embedded: