 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Also missing is the underrated MY SCIENCE PROJECT (score by Peter Bernstein) from 1985.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I get that it's in vogue to dump on all things Lucasfilm in general, but why are the Star Wars prequels given more respect here than the originals? I'd have thought that if anything, it'd be the other way around...
If you mean by more respect including "Star Wars" in the titles, I tend to go by the Oscars as what the official movie title is, and if you check the Oscars database (see link below) it's only the prequels that have that whole "episode 1" crap in their official titles. (but you'll have to pay me to put "Tyler Perry's" at the front of a movie title)
http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/BasicSearchInput.jsp
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Great Expectations that opened this week is not the Mike Newell version but a one-night-only screening of a stage version. The Newell version is being held up by legal issues with the film's distributor over another film (Odd Thomas).
Are you sure? It seems to be playing once a day at several Laemmle theaters (as it did for the last week). I'll take it off anyway, just in case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Mar 22, 2013 - 8:26 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Joe E.
(Member)
|
If you mean by more respect including "Star Wars" in the titles, I tend to go by the Oscars as what the official movie title is, and if you check the Oscars database (see link below) it's only the prequels that have that whole "episode 1" crap in their official titles. (but you'll have to pay me to put "Tyler Perry's" at the front of a movie title)
http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/BasicSearchInput.jsp
I tend to go by what the actual title is onscreen, and all of them have the words "Star Wars," followed by an episode number and a subtitle, and always have (excepting the original movie for the first few years of its existence, of course, but still). Moreover, even the prequel titles are slightly wrong here, since they should have Roman numerals rather than Arabic ones.
Anyway, didn't you make a point several years ago in one of your columns of refusing to refer to Star Wars - Episode III: Revenge of the Sith by its full title, and continuing with that for a while? What made you change your mind on that?
I don't think I'd rely on that database as a guide for "official" titles to begin with, since aside from disagreeing with the filmmakers, rightsholders and/or movies themselves on what some of those titles actually are, it's just not comprehensive anyway - doesn't it contain only movies nominated for Oscars (which I'd think would make it particularly inadequate a source for info on this genre, given its history with the Academy)?
"The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai" should be The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension, as well, BTW.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Mar 22, 2013 - 10:03 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
SchiffyM
(Member)
|
I tend to go by what the actual title is onscreen, and all of them have the words "Star Wars," followed by an episode number and a subtitle, and always have (excepting the original movie for the first few years of its existence, of course, but still). Moreover, even the prequel titles are slightly wrong here, since they should have Roman numerals rather than Arabic ones.
When I saw "Star Wars," it was called "Star Wars." There was no episode number, there was no "A New Hope." So I'm not sure how calling it "Star Wars" could possibly be the wrong thing to call it.
The episode numbers were there, of course, for "The Empire Strikes Back" and "Return of the Jedi." But nobody would have dreamed of calling them "Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back" (etc.) until 1999, when "Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace" came out. It wasn't even considered. Nobody -- not even George Lucas -- referred to them that way. The behind-the-scenes specials were called things like "Classic Creatures: Return of the Jedi," not "Classic Creatures: Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi." (And what about that one called "From Star Wars to Jedi: The Making of a Saga." Where's that "New Hope" thing? Isn't "Jedi" also "Star Wars"?)
This whole cumbersome naming thing began when the new trilogy came out. It felt like a marketing choice more than anything else -- lead with "Star Wars" (a long-dormant franchise), then tease with "Episode I" so we'd know we were back at the beginning.
That's fine. But I don't know how you can be too purist about it. And I hardly think calling the films by what they were called when they were released is somehow a lack of "respect."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I added MY SCIENCE PROJECT (and GOOD BOY), and replaced the Arabic numerals on the Star Wars prequels with Roman ones.
If anyone can think of any actual rejected scores (as opposed to composers who were attached to a film but probably didn't get around to recording a score -- I believe Mychael Danna on HULK and Mark Isham on WATERWORLD fall into this category) to add to the list, please let me know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the period of film from 1968 to 1978 is, as you call it, the "Golden Age of Science Fiction (Film)," then what is the 1950's? I would say that the decade that saw the release of THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL, THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD, THEM!, THIS ISLAND EARTH, FORBIDDEN PLANET, THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING MAN and many others was the "Golden Age." THE PLANET OF THE APES/2001 to STARWAR/CLOSE ENCOUNTERS period was the "Silver Age" era. Beyond that I don't know what you'd call it. Maybe a mixed bag era?
I tend to think of that 60s/70s period as the Golden Age because the success of 2001 and Planet of the Apes showed that science-fiction films could be serious and even dark, leading to such first-rate (and often underrated) films as Colossus, Andromeda Strain, THX-1138, Silent Running and Soylent Green. Then the success of Star Wars (basically, like E.T., a fantasy film with sci-fi trappings like aliens and spaceships) suggested that people wanted to see science-fiction with space battles and laser beams. Not to knock those beloved 50s films, but overall they were a bit pulpier than the best of the 70s films.
Fortunately, a few 70s-style films have come out in the last few decades, particularly Gattaca, and A.I.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Mar 22, 2013 - 12:51 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Michael24
(Member)
|
When I saw "Star Wars," it was called "Star Wars." There was no episode number, there was no "A New Hope." So I'm not sure how calling it "Star Wars" could possibly be the wrong thing to call it.
Agreed. To this day, I still refer to the first film as simply Star Wars. A friend once tried to correct me and said, "It's actually A New Hope," and I was like, "No, it's Star Wars. It's always Star Wars." 
On the flip side, whenever I do refer to the prequels I call them Episode I, Episode II, and Episode III, but that's probably because I don't really care for them enough to call them by their actual titles.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Mar 22, 2013 - 12:58 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
SchiffyM
(Member)
|
A friend once tried to correct me and said, "It's actually A New Hope," and I was like, "No, it's Star Wars. It's always Star Wars."
The funny thing is, "A New Hope" is a wimpy, generic title. It would never be the title of a movie that we didn't know anything about. The other five titles, or subtitles, or whatever you want to call them are all pulpy and promise action. Empires strike back, Siths have their revenge, clones attack, Jedis return, phantom menaces… um… exist! "A New Hope" is a decent title for a chapter of a book, but as a title for an action/fantasy film? Please!
|
|
|
|
|
|
A friend once tried to correct me and said, "It's actually A New Hope," and I was like, "No, it's Star Wars. It's always Star Wars."
The funny thing is, "A New Hope" is a wimpy, generic title. It would never be the title of a movie that we didn't know anything about. The other five titles, or subtitles, or whatever you want to call them are all pulpy and promise action. Empires strike back, Siths have their revenge, clones attack, Jedis return, phantom menaces… um… exist! "A New Hope" is a decent title for a chapter of a book, but as a title for an action/fantasy film? Please!
I've always thought of them as episode titles for a serial. I think The Phantom Menace is the best of those titles despite the pervasive lousiness of the movie, and I've developed a fondness for the pulpiness of the title Attack of the Clones (it's also my favorite of the prequel trilogy - not as consistent as Sith but with higher highs, particularly Obi-Wan's visit to the clone planet, some of my favorite scenes in the series, and the final shot of young Boba Fett).
Continuing the discussion of modern sci-fi, I'd put Moon as worthy of great 70s sci-fi, while In Time is hugely underrated and Looper is my favorite film of the last few years in any genre.
And though it's too ascientific to be truly sci-fi, the just-released Upside Down is visually amazing and dramatically disastrous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please refer to the movie by its full appropriate title, as it was originally intended by George Lucas in 1977: "Star Wars: Episode IV: A New Hope: Special Edition: Revised 2004 DVD Edition: Revised 2011 Blu-Ray Edition (2011)"
As the kids say, LOL.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I get that it's in vogue to dump on all things Lucasfilm in general, but why are the Star Wars prequels given more respect here than the originals? I'd have thought that if anything, it'd be the other way around...
Even the Special Edition posters from 1997 say "Star Wars", "The Empire Strikes Back", and "Return of the Jedi".
When I was younger I called Star Wars "A New Hope" but then I felt like that was just the beginning of Lucas' revisionist nonsense. All of my toys said "Star Wars".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Great Expectations that opened this week is not the Mike Newell version but a one-night-only screening of a stage version. The Newell version is being held up by legal issues with the film's distributor over another film (Odd Thomas).
Are you sure? It seems to be playing once a day at several Laemmle theaters (as it did for the last week). I'll take it off anyway, just in case.
Positive. ; )
Also Scott, Mark Isham supposedly had a score for Upside Down rejected (he was hired after the first score was finished but it's not known if he recorded anything).
There was actually a "Themes by Mark Isham" credit in the opening but no mention of his name elsewhere.
Thanks for the info on Great Expectations; I hadn't clicked on the link on the Laemmele page til' now, and it makes it clear that it's the stage version.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
