Post by: Nile Boogie on January 21, 2004, 06:34:53 AM
Post by: nolimit19 on January 21, 2004, 06:56:59 AM
Post by: Ms.Pikmin on January 21, 2004, 08:17:43 AM
Steven Spielberg should definitely NOT direct any of these films. He's too damn sappy. Look what happened when he directed the 2nd Indiana Jones film. Total piece of crap. He just had to throw a kid in and a stupid woman who screamed and cried through most of it.
As for the Olson twins, I'll just leave that one alone.
Post by: Bill Aurion on January 21, 2004, 08:39:09 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on January 21, 2004, 09:06:14 AM
Um, Spielberg directed the entire Indy trilogy. I think he was allowed to goof one of them up when Raiders and Last Crusade were so swank.
Unless they're adaptations of some of the Star Wars novels I have no desire to see another trilogy be made. Lucas has shown with prequels that he just doesn't have it anymore. Perhaps he never really had it and just fluked out with A New Hope, which is the only original trilogy film he actual directed and wrote himself. Lucas will be far too old to make a new trilogy anyway unless he starts them right after Episode III. I say just leave Star Wars alone.
Post by: Bill Aurion on January 21, 2004, 09:25:47 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Um, Spielberg directed the entire Indy trilogy. I think he was allowed to goof one of them up when Raiders and Last Crusade were so swank.
Agreed...But I hope that doesn't mean he'll be too overconfident with the new IJ movie...
Post by: Nile Boogie on January 21, 2004, 10:19:50 AM
Post by: Termin8Anakin on January 21, 2004, 12:06:50 PM
ANYONE other than Lucas directing the movies is better than Lucas himself.
There are heaps of stories/books the movies can be based on:
- The formation of the New Republic
- The formation of the New Jedi Order (see Jedi Knight games)
- The invasion of the Yu....somthing Vong; some freakish aliens that can repel the force
- The Jedi training of Anakin and Jaicen Solo
- The events in Timothy Zahn's excellent trilogy: Heir to the Empire, Dark something and The Last Command
and last of all:
- Chewbacca's death
Post by: mouse_clicker on January 21, 2004, 12:18:09 PM
Quote
Steven Spielberg should definitely NOT direct any of these films.
He's better than Lucas as of late. :/ I've heard that Spielberg begged Lucas to let him direct the prequels, but Lucas refused. Now I'm wishing he hadn't.
As for another trilogy (episode 7, 8, and 9), it's not happening- the rumor is left over from the days when Lucas was still developing the Star Wars universe and originally thought he'd need 9 movies to tell the whole story. It turned out 6 was enough and there have never been any actual plans for a sequel trilogy since. There wouldn't be any reason to, when you think about it, considering the many lines of Star Wars books have covered everything from thousands of years before A New Hope all the way to 30 years after, with some books either overlapping or taking place immediatley after the movies (The Courtship of Princess Leia, The Truce at Bakura). There's really no room for another significant story arc, and I really doubt they'd make movies out of any of the books.
Quote
The invasion of the Yu....somthing Vong; some freakish aliens that can repel the force
That would be the Yuzzhan Vong, and they can't repel the Force, they are merely devoid of it.
Also, the formation of the New Jedi Order took place in the aptly named New Jedi Order series.
I don't think any Star Wars game has gone as far yet- do you mean the Jedi Academy, which was formed in the also aptly named Jedi Academy trilogy (which was also Anakin Solo's first novel appearance)?
Post by: evil intentions on January 21, 2004, 02:46:32 PM
I think for episode 7, 8, and 9 they should bring back all of the old characters like Carrie Fisher, Mark Hamill, and George Harrison and show what happens after. (Unless some of them died, of course)
Post by: Bill Aurion on January 21, 2004, 02:59:19 PM
Post by: nolimit19 on January 21, 2004, 05:38:25 PM
Post by: Ms.Pikmin on January 21, 2004, 09:03:55 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Um, Spielberg directed the entire Indy trilogy.
You're right. But Lucas was heavily involved in the making on 1 and 3. My point was that Spielberg was left alone for number 2 and it stunk.
Post by: DrZoidberg on January 21, 2004, 09:55:46 PM
oh hey, no more starwars, the books should be left as books, and no more films should be made, even though i could possibly enjoy seven eight and nine, it's better if it's just left, bring out new and different movies, more pirate films need to be made, A MONKEY ISLAND MOVIE ^________^
Post by: ThePerm on January 22, 2004, 11:25:39 AM
Post by: mouse_clicker on January 22, 2004, 11:28:33 AM
Quote
You're right. But Lucas was heavily involved in the making on 1 and 3. My point was that Spielberg was left alone for number 2 and it stunk.
Then maybe if they did make a sequel trilogy, both Lucas and Spielberg should work on it, seeing as Indy 2 isn't very well liked (although I'm not sure why), and the prequel trilogy nobody has liked so far (making the only good SW movie directed by Lucas, in my opinion, A New Hope).
Post by: evil intentions on January 22, 2004, 11:50:51 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill
I'm sure you mean Harrison Ford, and not George Harrison...GH was a Beatle...
Oh, sorry. At that very moment I was talking to my friend George on the phone. Sorry.
Post by: Termin8Anakin on January 22, 2004, 12:18:15 PM
I really liked Temple of Doom - it's just that Raiders and Last Crusade both had Nazis, both the main treasures are mythical Christian artifacts, and both have a more 'grand, world-threat' feel to them, and they went to more places.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 22, 2004, 12:27:04 PM
Technically the Ark of the Covenant could also be considered a Jewish artifact. One thing that I find really weird is that in order for any of the supernatural stuff in the Indy movies to happen then both the Christian and Hindu religions are correct which seems like kind of a conflict since most religions believe that only their god exists. In the Indy world the Judeo/Christian God and the Hindu gods must both exist. Of course they're just movies so I should probably stop thinking so hard.
Temple of Doom was a great movie it just wasn't as good or believable as the other two. I still don't get how that guy pulls the other dude's heart out without him dying. It's never really explained.
Post by: Bill Aurion on January 22, 2004, 12:27:19 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on January 22, 2004, 12:33:06 PM
Quote
Temple of Doom was a great movie it just wasn't as good or believable as the other two. I still don't get how that guy pulls the other dude's heart out without him dying. It's never really explained.
Heh, and the other two movies ARE believable?
Personally, I don't watch an Indy movie to learn science or anything.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 22, 2004, 12:46:29 PM
Well sort of. I mean it's at least kind of explained why ghosts come out of the Ark and kill everyone. The assumption is that God is unhappy with Nazis trying to use his sacred stuff and thus smites them something fierce.
Post by: mouse_clicker on January 22, 2004, 12:48:49 PM
Jurassic Park was believable, none of the Indy movies are. That's partly the reason I like them so much, because they ride that very fine line between reality and fantasy, and pull it off perfectly.
Post by: Bill Aurion on January 22, 2004, 12:53:17 PM
Post by: nolimit19 on January 22, 2004, 12:55:48 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on January 22, 2004, 12:58:47 PM
Post by: Ian Sane on January 22, 2004, 01:01:02 PM
Sure it's more scientific but it still doesn't really make that much sense (the Raptors aren't even the right size). JP is more believable but I wouldn't say it is and Indy isn't. I guess the only thing everyone can agree on is that movies in general are pretty unrealistic.
And the explanation for the Ark stuff is pretty sound if God exists and the Indy movies assume he does.
Edit: Here's something else I just thought of in JP that is a HUGE assumption and that's that dinosaurs are warm-blooded. They have to be for the movie to be realistic because mosquitos don't suck the blood of cold-blooded animals. If dinos were like reptiles there's no amber entrapped skeeters with dino DNA.
I figure you have to base the believable factor of a movie on the reality presented. Otherwise you'll be all like "Hey toons don't really walk around. This Roger Rabbit stuff is all phooey!" The way I see it in the reality presented in the Indy films almost everything makes sense except the heart being torn out thing. I have to turn my brain off for Temple of Doom in order to get past that. I don't so much for the other Indy films.
Post by: mouse_clicker on January 22, 2004, 01:02:15 PM
True, they were some 3 feet too tall (a deinonychus is closer to the size of the movie velociraptors), but that hardly affected the story's credibility. Hell, if you REALLY want to get picky, you can say god, should he exist, as the movies assume, never acts directly, either, meaning you can't gloss over the story with the excuse "god did it". God would have put into motion the events that ocurred, but he would not have enacted them himself, which means there must be an actual explanation for what happened in the movies. Obviously that's not how the story work, making them far less believable in my book. No less enjoyable, though- the Indy movies are some of the best ever made, in my opinion.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 22, 2004, 01:16:31 PM
Why don't people use caps for God. It's a name. Anyway according to the Bible, which would be the ideal source for any God-related stuff in movies, God has directly interfered with the world of man. Parting the Red Sea for example. Is Ten Commandment an unbelievable film because of that?
Post by: Ms.Pikmin on January 22, 2004, 01:29:02 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill
Well there aren't going to be any Nazis in the next one...Does that mean it will suck?
Only if Kate Capshaw is in it.
Also, I want to say that although I think Temple of Doom stands out as the worst of this trilogy, I'm not saying that I think Stephen Spielberg is a bad director in general. He has an amazing body of work under his belt. There are many of his films that I like and respect. I was just trying to point out that I didn't think he'd be good as a director of a Star Wars film.
Post by: mouse_clicker on January 22, 2004, 01:29:08 PM
Anyway, the Old Testament also portrayed god as being a vengeful and wrathful one, yet the New Testament protrays a kind and loving god- obviously there are discrepancies. Still, you make a good point I can't refute. That doesn't mean I can just accept "god did it" as an explanation for anything- it's a big reason I'm an atheist. I don't like something like that being glossed over with a Because I said so attitude- I don't work that way. Seriously, though, how is Indy believable at all beyond "god did it", and how is it MORE believable than Jurassic Park, which gives a very detailed scientific explanation of exactly how the dinosaurs were cloned?
Post by: Bill Aurion on January 22, 2004, 01:36:03 PM
As for IJ, it's pretty picky to say that the whole movie isn't believable because strange religious things happen in incredibly small sections of the movies...(And if you recall from Last Crusade, the supposed "spiritual traps" are shown as being quite physical)
Third edit: The Bible was written by different people with different viewpoint/beliefs, in different time periods, so of course there are going to be discrepancies...
Post by: mouse_clicker on January 22, 2004, 01:43:44 PM
And all I'm really saying is I cannot see Indiana Jones ever happening- it makes for an extremely great movie, but I can't believe it's possible, while I can believe Jurassic Park is possible.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 22, 2004, 01:46:13 PM
Well you're letting your atheistic view get in the way of accepting the movie from the reality presented. If the film assumes God exists (oh and "God" is the name of the Judeo/Christian god and thus is in caps or if that's not good enough he's a character in a book called the Bible and thus is a proper noun) you can't say "well I don't buy it" and then think it's unbelievable. I mean I don't believe the Matrix or the Force really exist but I don't therefore decide that everything that happens in those movies doesn' t make any sense because of it.
And I never said that JP is less believable. I just said that if you want to get really technical neither film is. I think both films (aside from Temple of Doom) are believable enough for me to accept them as the films they are and not think "that doesn't make any f*cking sense".
Post by: Bill Aurion on January 22, 2004, 01:51:44 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on January 22, 2004, 01:52:25 PM
And on the subject of the Matrix and Star Wars, I love the stories of both movies, yet I in know way consider them possible. They don't NEED to be possible, they're simply meant to be enjoyed, and they excel at that. Physcially it is impossible to go faster than the speed of light, but that doesn't mean I don't like Star Wars, just that I recognize the fact that it's not possible. Same with Indiana Jones. Theoretically, if you do believe in god, you could say ANYTHING is possible, but that doesn't mean you're going to believe everything you see or hear is going to be possible. Bill: What basis do you have for that idea? Just musing? ALL life on Earth shares a large part of their DNA- this is a fact, you can read about it in any book covering biology. Why should 65 million years, a mere eyeblink in geological terms, bring about any complete change in that? There's huge support for birds being the modern descendants of dinosaurs- if you're interested, I suggest you read the book The Dinosaur Heresies by Robert Bakker (who was actually an adviser on the movie Jurassic Park). While amphibians -specifically- may not work in reconstructing the DNA, the idea is possible, although difficult, but mainly lends a further explanation to how the dinosaurs reproduce on the island despite the fact that they're all supposed to be female. I'm not saying it would be perfect but entirely possible. They planned on doing the same with the DNA found in the wooly mammoth preserved in Siberian tundra they found, implanting the DNA in a modern day elephant to complete the DNA, then contiually breeding until an animal as genetically close to an actual wooly mammoth was born. When they realized how expensive it would be, though, they decided not to.
Post by: nolimit19 on January 22, 2004, 01:58:45 PM
edit: i think the dna of humans and monkeys is only like 2 percent differnet or something really small. the only hting is if you get one thing wrong when cloning, you will completely mess up. life is so complicated. and i really dont think that they can ever bring dinosaurs back to life
Post by: mouse_clicker on January 22, 2004, 02:03:50 PM
Post by: Termin8Anakin on January 22, 2004, 02:19:30 PM
No one knows for sure.
And someone should re-name this the George Lucas thread
Post by: mouse_clicker on January 22, 2004, 02:23:47 PM
In any case, I myself just don't find Indiana Jones to be very believable (although it is extremely entertaining)- really it all started off as a joke. If you guys still want to debate the possibility of Jurassic Park's method of cloning dinosaurs, okay, but we're not going to get anywhere.
Post by: manunited4eva22 on January 22, 2004, 02:26:02 PM
Post by: Bill Aurion on January 22, 2004, 03:40:33 PM
Your Mammoth/Elephant argument isn't valid because the Mammoth first appeared some 3 millions years ago...Much less time of evolution than the more than 62 million years since the last dinosaur died out...
Modern-day elephants and Mammoths belong to the same family(scale goes kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, and then species if you haven't taken rudimentary Biology)...Descendants of dinosaurs aren't even close, some not even being in the same Class
Every time you branch off, you are splitting the genetic code while maintaining less and less of the original code that you started with...Because the Mammoth and modern-day elephant are still in the same family, the variation in their codes is nowhere near as significant as those of dinosaurs and their modern-day descendants...
(Don't try to take on a Bio major in a topic about Biology...
)
Post by: mouse_clicker on January 22, 2004, 03:53:17 PM
I realize it wouldn't work EXACTLY like it does in the book or movie, and I never said as much, but the basic idea is very possible.Besides all that, I really do suggest you read The Dinosaur Heresies- excellent book.
Post by: Bill Aurion on January 22, 2004, 04:05:00 PM
And I'm not arguing that what occurs in JP couldn't be done...I know it actually can(considering you have all important code lost in later evolution)...Just not by substituting such a large percentage of descendant DNA...
Post by: mouse_clicker on January 22, 2004, 04:11:37 PM
Still, though, read The Dinosaur Heresies- you will not be dissapointed.
Post by: manunited4eva22 on January 22, 2004, 04:16:19 PM
Post by: Hostile Creation on January 22, 2004, 04:25:08 PM
Post by: Ms.Pikmin on January 22, 2004, 04:29:41 PM
Post by: Bill Aurion on January 22, 2004, 04:53:06 PM
Ms.Pikmin: I'm willing to bet we see a cameo from Ms. Capshaw, or should I say, Mrs. Spielberg...
Post by: Nile Boogie on January 22, 2004, 06:41:37 PM
Post by: Ms.Pikmin on January 22, 2004, 08:14:22 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Nile Boogie
Boy you folks really know how to take a simple thought like more StarWars movie and F it all up. From Anikin Solo to the origins of life, DNA and cloned dinos. Word to ma, how did that happen I...ah to hell with it, Holla Back.
Don't feel bad, Nile Boogie, it's a common occurrence around here. It's part of the forum's..uh...er.....charm?
Post by: Bill Aurion on January 23, 2004, 01:18:39 AM
^_^''
Post by: nolimit19 on January 23, 2004, 02:38:38 AM
Post by: evil intentions on January 23, 2004, 08:06:32 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Nile Boogie
Boy you folks really know how to take a simple thought like more StarWars movie and F it all up. From Anikin Solo to the origins of life, DNA and cloned dinos. Word to ma, how did that happen I...ah to hell with it, Holla Back.
The way you said that, it makes me think of a hillbilly.
Post by: Nile Boogie on January 24, 2004, 04:33:22 AM
Post by: Nile Boogie Returns on November 11, 2014, 12:55:31 AM
Post by: Spak-Spang on November 11, 2014, 04:28:21 AM
Post by: Khushrenada on November 11, 2014, 01:10:08 PM
Post by: BranDonk Kong on November 11, 2014, 01:36:39 PM
Post by: Nile Boogie Returns on November 11, 2014, 03:58:41 PM
Yes, congratulations on making one of the most derailed threads of all time, 10 years ago.
T'was a thing of beauty my friend. Some of the greatest threads ever we're the derailed ones. Search the Twilight Princess thread after it got delayed. That's Gold!
Post by: Spak-Spang on November 13, 2014, 10:24:20 PM
It would be a fun game to see how many people debate the stupid bot or how many times it is banned.
Post by: marvel_moviefan_2012 on November 23, 2014, 01:14:44 AM
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on December 02, 2014, 12:36:35 PM
Post by: Khushrenada on December 02, 2014, 01:02:03 PM
Post by: ThePerm on December 29, 2014, 12:25:59 AM
Post by: Nile Boogie Returns on December 30, 2014, 10:21:42 PM
Post by: Khushrenada on December 30, 2014, 11:12:02 PM
Post by: Nile Boogie Returns on December 30, 2014, 11:58:17 PM
They probably could if they think there's money to it. There was a marathon of the Hobbit movies at one theatre just before the third opened and there was a marathon of the Nolan Batman movies on the night TDKR opened. Pretty sure there was a marathon of Star Wars movies before ROTS opened. A lot of theaters will often play classic movies once a month as well. Some theatres played It's a Wonderful Life on Dec. 24th so I don't think there is a huge rights issue about it but most likely there is probably some percentage of profits they have to pay for playing it.
But all those movies you named are by the same studio. I guess its still Lucas Arts w/ Disney Distribution. Fox put up money for the first 6 movies (or something like that) and right now, Fox and Disney ain't all cozy.
Post by: NWR_insanolord on December 31, 2014, 12:10:43 AM
Post by: marvel_moviefan_2012 on December 31, 2014, 02:38:56 PM
Post by: NWR_insanolord on December 31, 2014, 08:41:18 PM
Post by: Nile Boogie Returns on January 01, 2015, 01:34:16 PM
Post by: marvel_moviefan_2012 on January 01, 2015, 04:53:48 PM
Post by: Stratos on January 01, 2015, 08:19:32 PM
Post by: Nile Boogie Returns on January 01, 2015, 09:15:41 PM
