I'm going to dissent on most of this. Not just on the value of the Star Wars prequels (I loved them) but on the whole 'state of movies' in general.
First, with Star Wars. I admit that when I first saw Phantom Menace I was disappointed, but after watching it after seeing the next 2 it was vastly better, seeing it in context. The trilogy was, true, loaded with awesome effects (which I don't have a problem with) but it's the whole Annakin/Padmé relationship, and a number of other, more subtle themes that make the trilogy as much as anything.
As for movies today being all bad, I totally disagree. There have certainly been ones I didn't enjoy, but nobody's ever going to be pleased by everything coming out. A lot of the big-budget, visually-oriented stuff (King Kong, Batman Begins, etc.) has been outstanding. The only thing I agree with on the budget issues is some of the less obvious choices. Star Wars, Lord Of The Rings, that kind of thing, you can see why it would cost so much; but I really don't understand why some of the comedies, dramas, police stories, etc. are costing 65 and 70 million nowadays, even when they are really good.
I'm a fan of the big epics, but I don't understand why people think that's all that comes out nowadays. Fifteen years ago, would March Of The Penguins or Whale Rider have been getting wide releases? I think the main reason the 2000s have been a tremendous time for movies (although other periods have put out lots of great stuff too) is that all the different 'genres' or 'styles' are being well represented (well most of them - Westerns and Musicals, for example, are still rare, but there's more of them than they were for a long time) instead of just focusing on 2 or 3 subgenres for a couple of years, then switching to 2 or 3 different ones for a while, and so on. Let's look at just a small cross-section of what's come out in the 2000s:
the Star Wars prequels;
Lord Of The Rings trilogy;
Rabbitproof Fence;
Gothika;
Spirited Away;
Superman Returns;
Millennium Actress;
An Inconvenient Truth;
House Of Sand And Fog;
Phantom Of The Opera (2004);
4 Inyong Shiktak (aka The Uninvited);
Freddy Vs. Jason;
Identity;
Underworld and Underworld Evolution;
Lilo & Stitch;
Spirit - Stallion Of The Cimarron;
The Eye;
Showtime;
13 Going On 30;
The Notebook;
Winged Migration;
X-Men trilogy;
Amélie;
King Kong;
Solaris (2002);
The Exorcism Of Emily Rose;
The Lake House;
Whale Rider;
Unspeakable;
Dinosaur;
The Village;
and I could go on for a long time. The point is, there's a ton of stuff for every taste out there, from all over the world. Not everybody's going to like everything on the list above, but the point is there's so much to choose from coming out now. If you don't like some of the stuff you've been seeing, take a chance on some different titles; you might be pleasantly surprised.
And I, for one, hope Lucas eventually changes his mind and does a couple more movies. I think he's still got some great stuff left in him.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm going to dissent on most of this. Not just on the value of the Star Wars prequels (I loved them) but on the whole 'state of movies' in general. First, with Star Wars. I admit that when I first saw Phantom Menace I was disappointed, but after watching it after seeing the next 2 it was vastly better, seeing it in context. The trilogy was, true, loaded with awesome effects (which I don't have a problem with) but it's the whole Annakin/Padmé relationship, and a number of other, more subtle themes that make the trilogy as much as anything. As for movies today being all bad, I totally disagree. There have certainly been ones I didn't enjoy, but nobody's ever going to be pleased by everything coming out. A lot of the big-budget, visually-oriented stuff (King Kong, Batman Begins, etc.) has been outstanding. The only thing I agree with on the budget issues is some of the less obvious choices. Star Wars, Lord Of The Rings, that kind of thing, you can see why it would cost so much; but I really don't understand why some of the comedies, dramas, police stories, etc. are costing 65 and 70 million nowadays, even when they are really good. I'm a fan of the big epics, but I don't understand why people think that's all that comes out nowadays. Fifteen years ago, would March Of The Penguins or Whale Rider have been getting wide releases? I think the main reason the 2000s have been a tremendous time for movies (although other periods have put out lots of great stuff too) is that all the different 'genres' or 'styles' are being well represented (well most of them - Westerns and Musicals, for example, are still rare, but there's more of them than they were for a long time) instead of just focusing on 2 or 3 subgenres for a couple of years, then switching to 2 or 3 different ones for a while, and so on. Let's look at just a small cross-section of what's come out in the 2000s: the Star Wars prequels; Lord Of The Rings trilogy; Rabbitproof Fence; Gothika; Spirited Away; Superman Returns; Millennium Actress; An Inconvenient Truth; House Of Sand And Fog; Phantom Of The Opera (2004); 4 Inyong Shiktak (aka The Uninvited); Freddy Vs. Jason; Identity; Underworld and Underworld Evolution; Lilo & Stitch; Spirit - Stallion Of The Cimarron; The Eye; Showtime; 13 Going On 30; The Notebook; Winged Migration; X-Men trilogy; Amélie; King Kong; Solaris (2002); The Exorcism Of Emily Rose; The Lake House; Whale Rider; Unspeakable; Dinosaur; The Village; and I could go on for a long time. The point is, there's a ton of stuff for every taste out there, from all over the world. Not everybody's going to like everything on the list above, but the point is there's so much to choose from coming out now. If you don't like some of the stuff you've been seeing, take a chance on some different titles; you might be pleasantly surprised. And I, for one, hope Lucas eventually changes his mind and does a couple more movies. I think he's still got some great stuff left in him.