Registered: Jan 2001
Location: anywhere but here
Posts: 4420

Star Wars Vs LOTR

ok we all know that star wars is probably the biggest (finacially succesful) film saga ever and beside the Alien saga nothing else comes close to threatening it in its place as best saga (and even Suggesting Aliens as a challenger is pushing it), but there is a newcomer ariving to challenge this position that Star Wars has claimed. The LOTR is going to be big! humungus in fact and the fact that the story behingd the LOTR is a better one than that of George Lucas suggest that provided Peter Jackson and his team come thru with adequate directon etc it should eclipse star wars.

Many people concur upon the opinion that the last star wars movie (the phantom menace) was let down by its poor dialogue and lack of any distinguishable narrative, infact it was pretty much part IV A NEW HOPE remixed for the nineties.

There arent any other films that create universes of the kind created by Tolkien or Lucas, the queston is which is better and why? and which do you think is, or will be the better.

by the way i know im jumping the gun abit because LOTR hasnt been released yet and us limeys will get to see it before you yanks (haha) but its just food for thought.

------------------

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2001
Location: Boston
Posts: 6562

#1: Yanks is insulting, it makes reference to the New York Yankees.

I think the Star Wars TRILOGY will hold its own again LOTR. Especially if one factors in how much it would have made were it a modern movie (somewhere around $900 million just for Star Wars: A New Hope). LOTR will be successful I think, probably a $150 million flick, but it won't have the appeal Star Wars had because I don't think it's going to bring the same atmosphere to a wide audience. Sci-Fi is loved by the public, swords and magic is not nearly as widely embraced.

And don't forget about the Planet of the Apes... I can't wait for that....

------------------------
"You have just destroyed one model XQJ-37 nuclear powered pansexual
roto-plooker....and you're gonna have to pay for it."
-Frank Zappa

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Essex, England
Posts: 4523

Star Wars is classic....I don't even know what LOTR is about!

------------------------

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: my mother's bloody womb
Posts: 7128

you really can't compare the two, which was kind of touched on above. the time period that star wars came out was just ripe for a movie of that caliber. it's like when the matrix came out. if you released a movie that was on a similar level as the matrix now, even if the storyline was original and directed well, it still wouldn't be the same. because something can only be "new" once.

------------------------
Don't walk on the edge of the cliff, jump! Who knows, you just might fly. And if you don't fly, make lots of noise on the way down... MTC

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2001
Location: anywhere but here
Posts: 4420

quote:

---

Originally posted by morgana:
you really can't compare the two, which was kind of touched on above. the time period that star wars came out was just ripe for a movie of that caliber. it's like when the matrix came out. if you released a movie that was on a similar level as the matrix now, even if the storyline was original and directed well, it still wouldn't be the same. because something can only be "new" once.

---

one can always compare, starwars was re-released again for it 20th aniversary and it was amongst the biggest box office taking that year showing its timelessness, the new prequel trilogy is a current as the LOTR so on this point you talking out of ....lets jut say that this argument is inconsequential.

newness is not the thing that sells a film these days, and as far a fantasy trilogy is concerned the LOTR is the first of its kind. more interesting is the fact that it is going head-to-head with starwars so comparisons are inevitable.



------------------------

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: my mother's bloody womb
Posts: 7128

star wars re-release did so well because of the fact that all the fanboys (and girls) of that time period dragged their kids to the theater to see it. the reason it was so popular is because of the impact it had then.

lord of the rings has the advantage of having state of the art graphics to help the storyline evolve. people look at star wars with fondness, but with a good dash of cheesiness as well. the "special effects" of that time are downright laughable now.

i just hope that they treat the story with some justice. i fucking hate elijah woods. he's the worst actor whose ever graced the screen, and casting him in a lead role was, in my opinion, signing the death warrant on the film. no matter how good the script is, if he delivers his lines with the same "skill" he's shown in the past, we're doomed.

------------------------

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
Posts: 7236

I think LOTR will eclipse Star Wars. My reasons? Well basically LOTR is a more original narrative, whilst Star Wars is nothing more than plagiarism of a classic tale. Don't get me wrong, Star Wars is cool and all, but its narrative and basis is plagiarism to the highest degree.

------------------------
sp00ky

{avondale} THEY GOT TO SP00KY!
{wonderaz} he was expendable
{avondale} thank god
{czechreck} sp00ky went to the toilet 15 minutes ago, and he hasn't returned.....

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: zanzibar
Posts: 10413

i thought hobbits were trolls or something. i didn't get the preview.

looks like dungeons and dragons.

although I was surprised that anyone saw fast & furious, so I am not very reliable in estimating box office success.

The original star wars trilogy was great, but phantom menace was a downright shitty movie.

D

------------------------
at Rincon they're walking the nose

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2001
Location: anywhere but here
Posts: 4420

quote:

---

Originally posted by morgana:
star wars re-release did so well because of the fact that all the fanboys (and girls) of that time period dragged their kids to the theater to see it. the reason it was so popular is because of the impact it had then.

the "special effects" of that time are downright laughable now.

i just hope that they treat the story with some justice. i fucking hate elijah woods. he's the worst actor whose ever graced the screen, and casting him in a lead role was, in my opinion, signing the death warrant on the film. no matter how good the script is, if he delivers his lines with the same "skill" he's shown in the past, we're doomed.

---

ok no insult intended but to be honest it appears as if you no sweet F A about special effects. most of the practices used in the original star wars trilogy are still used today, to a lesser extent but they are still used, by the way which star wars special effects are you talking about in particular?) the only problem with the original special effects came from the matte screeen compositing, and that was only an issue when filming against lighter backgrounds. also the updated version of special editions were brought up to todays industry standards and most kids of today consider these to be the definitve versions of the films, as does George Lucas himself.

as far as us fanboys/girls dragging our kids (i personally have no kids) to the cinema to see it, well i have found that most of my 2nd cousins pestered their parents to go see it, because star wars has theis timelessness essence to it i believe it is fair to compare it to LOTR, and to that the prequel trilogy which is getting alot of kids into a tiswas and that just means backs up my argument.

on the acting department goes, it is extremely hard for one actor to bring down and ebtire trilogy, my example? Thec Matrix, Keanu Reeves can't act fro shit but The Matrix was still a good film as far as the box office was concerned. Addd to this the sheer amount of characters in the Lord of the Rings means that even though Frodo is the books main characters other such as Sam Gamgee, Gandalf, Aragorn, Merry , Pippin, Gimli, Legolas, Gollum etc etc....these being about a third of the characters within the book that Elijah Woods screen time is not going to be so great that he is able to detract from the story.

As far as which of these trilogys will be most successful i believe that the LOTR has the greater potential, and therefore the ability to supercede Star Wars. Sp00ky is right when he mentions plagiarism by George Lucas,the man did indeed borrow from kurosawa, the wizard of oz, Flash Gordon etc..

but the man was insightful by creating the first on screen universe, and is one of the film industries most succesful producers(he is better at producing than directing) and business men, he is the reason for all the merchandising that goes into todays blockbusters as he did it first.

so yeah.....




------------------------
....i've done the math enough to know the dangers of our second guessing.....

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
Posts: 7236

quote:

---

Originally posted by prozacjones:
Sp00ky is right when he mentions plagiarism by George Lucas,the man did indeed borrow from kurosawa, the wizard of oz, Flash Gordon etc..

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Bangor, ME
Posts: 10153

hmmmmmm

i love the LOTR books

that will make the movies excellent for me

but i grew up on star wars

the question isn't fair!

------------------------
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools."
-Ernest Hemingway

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2001
Location: 0.50
Posts: 9355

quote:

---

Originally posted by DevilMoon:
although I was surprised that anyone saw fast & furious, so I am not very reliable in estimating box office success.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2001
Location: anywhere but here
Posts: 4420

quote:

---

Originally posted by AlcoholSoopaFiend:
hmmmmmm

i love the LOTR books

that will make the movies excellent for me

but i grew up on star wars

the question isn't fair!

---

i am exactly the same, i was born in the year of star wars release, but i am reading the LOTR for a second time because i like it that much, nothings fair......just answer the question!



------------------------

....i've done the math enough to know the dangers of our second guessing.....

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: my mother's bloody womb
Posts: 7128

totally off the subject (sort of), but if you like the timelessness of the story form star wars, prozac, you should read a book called "hero with a thousand faces" by joseph campbell. the man is renowned as the TOP authority on myths from around the world, and in that book he talks about how star wars is built upon the world myth of "the hero". he talks about the stages that every mythical hero must go through, and how almost every culture in the world has the same myth told in a different way.

way cool.

------------------------

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2000
Location: Playa d'en London
Posts: 9788

quote:

---

Originally posted by morgana:
...and in that book he talks about how star wars is built upon the world myth of "the hero". he talks about the stages that every mythical hero must go through, and how almost every culture in the world has the same myth told in a different way.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2001
Location: anywhere but here
Posts: 4420

i think the best description of star wars is simple yet effective.

thanks morgana for the info i shall look that up.

------------------------

....i've done the math enough to know the dangers of our second guessing.....

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2000
Location: The Bottom of the Toyem Pole
Posts: 9453

I haven't seen Elijah Woods lately, but I thought he was a good actor as a child. Anyone ever see "The Good Son" with MacCauley married-at-17 McKulkien? McKulkien sucks and always has, which explains his incredible enduring popularity today. But Woods was killer in Good Son. Maybe it was just that MacCauley made him look goood, but I think he will be an excellent Frodo.

Speaking of casting, who is playing Gollum?

------------------------
The Law of Fives is never wrong. CzEch yerself b4 joo rEck yerself.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Erehwon
Posts: 7537

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vegas:
#1: Yanks is insulting, it makes reference to the New York Yankees.

---

You use the word 'limey' hence we can call you wehatever we like

as for the movies, i think LotR is something to look forward too - but i dotn think you can compare tehm directly

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26383

quote:

---

Originally posted by prozacjones:
but the man was insightful by creating the first on screen universe

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Erehwon
Posts: 7537

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paint CHiPs:
4. The Frighteners (1996)

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2001
Location: anywhere but here
Posts: 4420

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paint CHiPs:
Man.

You should be shot for such a generalization.

Ever see Metropolis (1927)?

---

see it, i wrote an essay about German Expressionism of which Fritz Lang was a major part of. but he didnt create a universe in the way Lucas did. How many species are their in Metropolis? how many planets are there in Metropolis? now ask those same questions of Star Wars, and you should see my point.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paint CHiPs:
But anybody who gives the guy who did Dead Alive and Meet the Feebles 150 million dollars to work with has some pretty big balls.

---

Where did you find that figure of 150 million? because by todays standards thats fuck all with which money to make three films, 50 million a movie???? that less than the cost of making Fight Club. Episode one by itself costed $105 and that came in under its $115 budget limit.



------------------------

....i've done the math enough to know the dangers of our second guessing.....

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged