Red Mosquito

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

washing machine wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

washing machine wrote:Got it. Thanks for clearing that up. How about this General Grevious guy? What's he all about?

He's one of the best things about the prequels

I haven't read enough of your posts in these threads to decide if your love for Grevious is genuine or schtick. Either way,

I promise you it is genuine. There is only one other SW character I adore more than Grievous. I even have a thread about Grievous:

http://forums.theskyiscrape.com/viewtop ... 84#p661184

I just listened to a podcast that talked about how much stronger the film would be without Grievous and that whole storyline.
And I yelled at the podcast, "You shut your mouth! He's Ruddo's favorite!"

durdencommatyler wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

washing machine wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

washing machine wrote:Got it. Thanks for clearing that up. How about this General Grevious guy? What's he all about?

He's one of the best things about the prequels

I haven't read enough of your posts in these threads to decide if your love for Grevious is genuine or schtick. Either way,

I promise you it is genuine. There is only one other SW character I adore more than Grievous. I even have a thread about Grievous:

http://forums.theskyiscrape.com/viewtop ... 84#p661184

I just listened to a podcast that talked about how much stronger the film would be without Grievous and that whole storyline.
And I yelled at the podcast, "You shut your mouth! He's Ruddo's favorite!"

Thanks joey. While the movie may have benefited from the exclusion of him, the character of Grievous is one of the most interesting (to me). And he was certainly more interesting than half of the characters in those prequels.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

washing machine wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

washing machine wrote:Got it. Thanks for clearing that up. How about this General Grevious guy? What's he all about?

He's one of the best things about the prequels

I haven't read enough of your posts in these threads to decide if your love for Grevious is genuine or schtick. Either way,

I promise you it is genuine. There is only one other SW character I adore more than Grievous. I even have a thread about Grievous:

http://forums.theskyiscrape.com/viewtop ... 84#p661184

I just listened to a podcast that talked about how much stronger the film would be without Grievous and that whole storyline.
And I yelled at the podcast, "You shut your mouth! He's Ruddo's favorite!"

Thanks joey. While the movie may have benefited from the exclusion of him, the character of Grievous is one of the most interesting (to me). And he was certainly more interesting than half of the characters in those prequels.

I totally agree. He's a fascinating character and I'd love to see him get some love and an expanded story in the future.

i would fuck him

Im about to watch ROTS

Ugh. Lifeless.

Funny though - it seamlessly melds with Clone Wars cartoons. Thats not a good thing.

Strat wrote:Ugh. Lifeless.

Funny though - it seamlessly melds with Clone Wars cartoons. Thats not a good thing.

How the hell does it seemlessly meld? The Clone Wars spend the entire time with Anakin having a Padawan who isn't mentioned or even hinted at?

Lot of the clone wars episodes are better than any of the prequel films.

dimejinky99 wrote:Lot of the clone wars episodes are better than any of the prequel films.

Right. But they meld for shit for the most part.

Star Wars: Retcon

@SkitchP wrote:

Strat wrote:Ugh. Lifeless.

Funny though - it seamlessly melds with Clone Wars cartoons. Thats not a good thing.

How the hell does it seemlessly meld? The Clone Wars spend the entire time with Anakin having a Padawan who isn't mentioned or even hinted at?

I talking about style and animation It looks the fucking same. Thats embarrassing. The CGI is awful and it looks like a cartoon

Strat wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:

Strat wrote:Ugh. Lifeless.

Funny though - it seamlessly melds with Clone Wars cartoons. Thats not a good thing.

How the hell does it seemlessly meld? The Clone Wars spend the entire time with Anakin having a Padawan who isn't mentioned or even hinted at?

I talking about style and animation It looks the fucking same. Thats embarrassing. The CGI is awful and it looks like a cartoon

Oh. Good. Agreed.

@SkitchP wrote:

Strat wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:

Strat wrote:Ugh. Lifeless.

Funny though - it seamlessly melds with Clone Wars cartoons. Thats not a good thing.

How the hell does it seemlessly meld? The Clone Wars spend the entire time with Anakin having a Padawan who isn't mentioned or even hinted at?

I talking about style and animation It looks the fucking same. Thats embarrassing. The CGI is awful and it looks like a cartoon

Oh. Good. Agreed.

See guys, im not an idiot!

Strat wrote:See guys, im not an idiot!

I love you.

The opening of ROTS feels like a cartoon and not a film, I never had that feeling in R1. I know it was a ton of CGI, but it felt real. The really bad thing about the prequels for me is that they got the feel all wrong. It doesn't feel like the same movies at all, like strat said "lifeless". I know it was before the dark times in a more civilized age but still, it feels like a completely different sci-fi franchise. TFA and R1 both have the "feel" right.

there's something very tactile about star wars that they are completing missing (the Prequels). Both new films get that exactly right.

darth_vedder wrote:The opening of ROTS feels like a cartoon and not a film, I never had that feeling in R1. I know it was a ton of CGI, but it felt real. The really bad thing about the prequels for me is that they got the feel all wrong. It doesn't feel like the same movies at all, like strat said "lifeless". I know it was before the dark times in a more civilized age but still, it feels like a completely different sci-fi franchise. TFA and R1 both have the "feel" right.

Absolutely.

That tactile tangeble fee in force awakens is what informs a lot of people's complaints about it. Always find that funny. It was too Star Wars. Can't please anyone. I loved he design and design language. It so sad Lucas embraced tech so much in the prequels. Who knew it was going to date so badly.

stip wrote:there's something very tactile about star wars that they are completing missing (the Prequels). Both new films get that exactly right.

Yes. Exactly.

I like that Lucas tried to do something totally different in the Prequels, but this is exactly what's missing. There was a way to do both: to make it new and different and still tactile.