|
Post by Ack on Jan 9, 2012 8:15:57 GMT -5
I want to be excited about this as I love WWII aviation and think the Tuskegee Airmen deserve to have their story told. But I have a feeling this is going to suck on a Pearl Harbor level.
The Tuskegee Airmen deserve better. And so do we, lol!
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Jan 9, 2012 10:20:59 GMT -5
Just what LED said. Very Pearl Harbor to the eye, both in the good and not-so-good ways.
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Jan 9, 2012 12:02:41 GMT -5
George Lucas is behind the the film. Red Tails is a Lucasfilm production.
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Jan 9, 2012 13:09:36 GMT -5
Be fair, he didn't direct it. I don't too often blame the producer for a bad film. Usually it's the script and the direction and the acting.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2012 13:10:19 GMT -5
George Lucas is behind the the film. Red Tails is a Lucasfilm production. Yep, he's been working on it for what seems like forever too.
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Jan 9, 2012 15:01:07 GMT -5
I would call Jedi awful. It's the worst Star Wars film, but it's still enjoyable.
So does this mean when a Spielberg film sucks -- say, like 1941 or the sequel to Jurassic Park -- we should look to the producer? I see Spielberg get the blame for those and rightly so, in my book.
Or vice versa...when a heavy hand like Spielberg is producing, we often defer to the director instead of the project head himself...even though this might've been Steven's pet deal and, like Lucas, Spielberg doesn't throw his money around lightly.
I guess what I'm saying is that there seems to be the "oh, Lucas edited the film? Fuck, that's the problem" mentality/knee-jerk that we don't do with other filmmakers. Lucas could be a co-producer and people throw it out for that reason alone. We don't do this with most filmmakers.
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Jan 9, 2012 15:04:30 GMT -5
Be fair, he didn't direct it. I don't too often blame the producer for a bad film. Usually it's the script and the direction and the acting. I think if he directed it, Red Tails would be far worse. I know you love the prequels, but Ridley Scott or James Cameron or someone other than Lucas should have directed those films.
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Jan 9, 2012 15:05:27 GMT -5
Be fair, he didn't direct it. I don't too often blame the producer for a bad film. Usually it's the script and the direction and the acting. I think if he directed it, Red Tails would be far worse. I know you love the prequels, but Ridley Scott or James Cameron or someone other than Lucas should have directed those films. Of course no one here has actually seen the film either.
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Jan 9, 2012 15:07:17 GMT -5
I think if he directed it, Red Tails would be far worse. I know you love the prequels, but Ridley Scott or James Cameron or someone other than Lucas should have directed those films. Of course no one here has actually seen the film either. Let us know how it is Lucasfilm fan.
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Jan 9, 2012 15:10:11 GMT -5
Another example and a more direct one involving both big hitters: Spielberg gets all the credit for the good Indy films and Lucas gets the blame for the bad one (or two, depending on what you think of Doom). Everyone knows George Lucas created the character but didn't make the films and therefore they're considered Spielberg movies. I totally agree. But that includes Crystal Skull.
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Jan 9, 2012 15:12:08 GMT -5
Of course no one here has actually seen the film either. Let us know how it is Lucasfilm fan. ;D I really don't follow Lucas's other films, quite honestly....or his productions. Indy's great. Star Wars is great. I've never seen THX 1138 (and I actually own it!) or the sequel to American Graffiti...or The Young Indiana Jones or Radioland Murders, etc. I'm just trying to be fair in how blame is parsed out. Like it or not, there's an anti-Lucas sentiment. Again, Indy IV isn't a bad Spielberg film, it's a bad Lucas project. But 1941 was a terrible Spielberg film. You can't deny that's how we think of things....
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Jan 9, 2012 15:22:01 GMT -5
Another example and a more direct one involving both big hitters: Spielberg gets all the credit for the good Indy films and Lucas gets the blame for the bad one (or two, depending on what you think of Doom). Everyone knows George Lucas created the character but didn't make the films and therefore they're considered Spielberg movies. I totally agree. But that includes Crystal Skull. I read an interview with Spielberg where he essentially said that Crystal Skull was all George. He basically listened to George and did what Lucas wanted as opposed to maybe going with his own idea or vision. More or less, he himself pracitically blamed it on Lucas. Don't forget ROVER that it's the producer who is truly boss. Maybe not in the case with Spielberg, but once a film is finished, it's the producer that can control the editor - not the director unless you are someone like Spielberg. Just making the point that it's the producer who truly holds the cards in most cases - not the director, even though it may be their vision.
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Jan 9, 2012 15:36:51 GMT -5
Another example and a more direct one involving both big hitters: Spielberg gets all the credit for the good Indy films and Lucas gets the blame for the bad one (or two, depending on what you think of Doom). Everyone knows George Lucas created the character but didn't make the films and therefore they're considered Spielberg movies. I totally agree. But that includes Crystal Skull. I read an interview with Spielberg where he essentially said that Crystal Skull was all George. He basically listened to George and did what Lucas wanted as opposed to maybe going with his own idea or vision. More or less, he himself pracitically blamed it on Lucas. Don't forget ROVER that it's the producer who is truly boss. Maybe not in the case with Spielberg, but once a film is finished, it's the producer that can control the editor - not the director unless you are someone like Spielberg. Just making the point that it's the producer who truly holds the cards in most cases - not the director, even though it may be their vision. Then it's Lucas's doing that the early Indy films are incredible. Yay!! ;D FUCK STEVEN SPIELBERG....HACK!! Brown and Zanuck on Jaws as well. WOOT!!
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Jan 9, 2012 15:38:48 GMT -5
We can stop the Empire!
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Jan 9, 2012 15:41:51 GMT -5
You didn't like the message that live critters triumph over machinery? You're taking the moral too literally. Shit doesn't make sound in space either. There is no such thing as a containable beam of light in the form of a sword. There is no fire in space, etc, etc. The lists of "yeah right!!" type observations are endless. I've also never seen a wolf that could blow a house down with a single breath either. Or many breaths, for that matter. I guess that's just relegated to the "highly unlikely" bin.
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Jan 9, 2012 15:47:56 GMT -5
You didn't like the message that live critters triumph over machinery? You're taking the moral too literally. Shit doesn't make sound in space either. There is no such thing as a containable beam of light in the form of a sword. There is no fire in space, etc, etc. The lists of "yeah right!!" type observations are endless. I've also never seen a wolf that could blow a house down with a single breath either. Or many breaths, for that matter. I guess that's just relegated to the "highly unlikely" bin. No, Return was just bad and lazy storytelling.
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Jan 9, 2012 15:52:55 GMT -5
I agree.
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Jan 9, 2012 15:55:23 GMT -5
While you may enjoy them, don't you also agree that the prequels should have blown our fucking minds at how awesome they are. They don't. At all. People were more blown away by The Matrix.
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Jan 9, 2012 16:04:13 GMT -5
While you may enjoy them, don't you also agree that the prequels should have blown our fucking minds at how awesome they are. They don't. At all. People were more blown away by The Matrix. I wasn't. I can't speak for how someone else should have or could have enjoyed the prequels when I loved them. I'm entirely the wrong person to ask. It's like telling you how disappointed I am with Forevermore and don't you think Coverdale could have done so much more to bowl me over with it. According to you and the people who like it, no, not so much more. But like me with the prequels, you'd be the wrong person to ask. I'm not directly comparing these two things...just asking what can you do when someone doesn't like something and you do? Not much. Does it have flaws? Sure. It's hardly perfect. But they're not the fatal flaws to me that they are to some. I have much bigger issues with a film like Indy 4 than the WORST prequel.
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Jan 9, 2012 16:07:04 GMT -5
While you may enjoy them, don't you also agree that the prequels should have blown our fucking minds at how awesome they are. They don't. At all. People were more blown away by The Matrix. I wasn't. I can't speak for how someone else should have or could have enjoyed the prequels when I loved them. I'm entirely the wrong person to ask. It's like telling you how disappointed I am with Forevermore and don't you think Coverdale could have done so much more to bowl me over with it. According to you and the people who like it, no, not so much more. But like me with the prequels, you'd be the wrong person to ask. I'm not directly comparing these two things...just asking what can you do when someone doesn't like something and you do? Not much. Does it have flaws? Sure. It's hardly perfect. But they're not the fatal flaws to me that they are to some. I have much bigger issues with a film like Indy 4 than the WORST prequel. But I know you really dig Forevermore. Seriously though, I can love something and realize it's shitty to most people.
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Jan 9, 2012 16:11:25 GMT -5
We all have them. I also wouldn't say most. Had they scored 20% on the tomatometer, for instance, I'd say "most" for sure. The worst of them scored over 60%, which by its definition suggests more than not enjoyed it. And those are critics. The public tends to be softer still. Sith scored an 85%. Hardly disapproving. But we've had this discussion before.
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Jan 9, 2012 16:16:05 GMT -5
If anything, Lucas's input is likely the reason why Red Tails is watchable at all. He didn't write the script. He didn't direct the actors. The stuff that looks enjoyable is the stuff I know he had a lot to do with, namely the dogfighting scenes. Those are the only aspects of Pearl Harbor worth tuning into for as well (also ILM). It sure wasn't the great direction by Michael Bay and awesome performance by Ben Affleck. Maybe it was the producer's fault and not Michael Bay's...
|
|
|
Post by Ack on Jan 12, 2012 14:00:20 GMT -5
I'm not even excited for the dogfighting scenes. They look really overdone. Even Top Gun with the modern jets (at the time) wasn't as played up as Red Tails looks to be.
|
|