That was hilarious, Max. It’s a gag, right? It doesn’t really appear in the DVD, right?
It does appear in the DVD, jab1. Select the “deleted scenes” chapter, and just keep watching after the last scene for the credits, where they will intersperse the credits with outtakes. One of the outtakes is this Jawa Sandcrawler scene.
TheeGrumpy yes, I’m sure most of them are aware of it. The people I know who feel this way basically feel resentful because they know that he can put out whatever slop (Phantom Menace was definitely slop) he wants and so long as it is part of those series they will plunk down their money just in the off chance that it might live up to the past magic. And it never does.
Plus the whole DVD thing with Indy.
Well no wonder they left it out of the original. That was one funny gag. So funny, if it had been in the movie, you’d stop taking it seriously and start doing MST3K on it. (Well, I would have.) I mean, we’re supposed to believe that a big, lumbering sandcrawler can move that fast? It would be like seeing a bulldozer run a drag race.
My bad. I’ve never seen the movie, but I’ve heard second-hand about the vast differences in the versions and what they mean as for the tone, style, and meaning of the film, including most importantly the nature of who or waht Deckard is. I guess I’ve heard more people say that they didn’t like the DC as opposed to those who did. A brief look at “alternate versions” on the IMDb would also seem to indicate that there are several different versions of the film. I’ll just throw in the proverbial YMMV.
*Originally posted by ElwoodCuse *
My bad. I’ve never seen the movie, but I’ve heard second-hand about the vast differences in the versions and what they mean as for the tone, style, and meaning of the film, including most importantly the nature of who or waht Deckard is.
Yes, this is true. The ambiguous nature of the ending is more in line with PKD’s book. And since the film is essentially Sci-Fi film noir, the darker tone of the film without the voiceover, just works better IMHO.
*Originally posted by Neurotik *
Gotta go with Lego here. In my experience, Star Wars fans HATE Lucas more than the average American. Indian Jones fans hate him even more than Star Wars fans, due to his decision to not release the Indy trilogy on DVD until the next installment comes along. Indy fans that are also big Star Wars fans hate him more than anyone could possibly hate anything else in the universe.
Geez…
So … who does like George Lucas? What keeps him going?
And does this mean there are millions of Star-Wars-fans-who-hate-George-Lucas out there who are in deep need of therapy to resolve their feelings?
*Originally posted by rjung *
And does this mean there are millions of Star-Wars-fans-who-hate-George-Lucas out there who are in deep need of therapy to resolve their feelings?
I know you’re just kidding here, but this has never struck me as inconsistent. Why does liking a tv show or movie necessitate worhipping its creator? I saw that all the time with the X-Files and see it a lot now with Buffy the Vampire Slayer. You like the product, ergo, you must love the producer (and unconditionally at that).
I like the Star Wars universe (within the movies…the few books I read cured me of the desire to read more). I like Star Wars, Empire Strikes Back, and bits of the other two. But I think George Lucas is a pompous ass. Similar to music - I like the music of both Elvis Costello and REM, but I sure as hell don’t want to hear them talk about it and I’ve no desire to meet either of them.
I think it’s perfectly reasonable to like a movie and not think the guy who made it is fantastic.
I think part of the antipathy toward Lucas comes from a general decline in the series, with few improvements.
Generally, the first film is revered for what it is. The second offered a more darker, richer tone. I’m not sure what the general consensus is regarding the third film, but I found it extremely tedious.
“Phantom Menace” trends the series downward into the silliness that Lucas avoided successfully in “A New Hope.”
And then are the Ewoks (ack!), and the, the, the (I’m trying to spit it out) “Star Wars Christmas Special” which is as vile (with Bea Arthur!) as you can imagine.
I also remember a different pro-environment special, featuring Carrie Fisher and the Ewoks, with her pleading those little furballs to help her. “Do it for the trees.” No wonder she turned to being a script doctor.
Now, why do you suppose Lucas gets shafted for his various Star Wars mishaps in a way that has not happened to Gene Roddenberry and company for Star Trek? It seems to me that the rancor falls much heavier on Lucas.
Legomancer wrote:
Why does liking a tv show or movie necessitate worhipping its creator? I saw that all the time with the X-Files and see it a lot now with Buffy the Vampire Slayer. You like the product, ergo, you must love the producer (and unconditionally at that).
I saw that, too, with Babylon 5 creator/producer J. Michael Straczynski. I swear, it seemed as though some of the people on the Babylon 5 newsgroup(s) had “JMS IS GOD!” bumper stickers.
I like the Star Wars universe (within the movies…the few books I read cured me of the desire to read more).
Didja try Timothy Zahn’s Thrawn trilogy? It’s considered by many Star Wars fans to be the best of the novels. It’s even available in convenient abridged books-on-tape form.
*Originally posted by pesch *
It seems to me that the rancor falls much heavier on Lucas.
I’d pay to see that.