The two biggest neo-fags in Hollywood

The two biggest neo-fags in Hollywood [+ favourites]

Why are these two directors fags? Because they had it and lost it, and that's a lot worse than never having it at all. These veterans of film are sellout bastards who star Orlando Bloom and Hayden Christensen in their movies, thereby destroying them. But that's not bad enough... because they have so much pull they get wicked actors to act in their disasters to attract the people who are repulsed by bad acting, in the hope that maybe, just maybe these canned shitheads learned how to act.

In other words, they should know way, way better... and they don't. Which makes them fags.

When they "had" it:

George Lucas -
Star Wars
Empire Strikes Back
Return of the Jedi
Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
Willow
Howard the Duck
Labyrinth

Ridley Scott -
Blade Runner
Alien
Legend
Thelma and Louise
Black Rain
1492: Conquest of Paradise

Now that they are fags:

Lucas:
Episode 1
Episode 2
Episode 3

Scott:
Black Hawk Down
Hannibal
Gladiator
Kingdom of Heaven
GI Jane

(Notice how they both have that vacant "did I do that?" stare? And why is the bottom of their beards a different color than their heads? Could it be that they both share a mutant gene that decomposes logical reasoning as time progresses?)

"Hating everyone protects me from elitism."

but episodes 1-3 were good, and how did making those films make lucas a"fag" in your eyes. Most people i think did want a backsotry for episodes 4-6, and considering they were named that, implies that he was most liklly going to go back and do 1-3. On the other hand ive seen only two movies on Ridlys list, they were pretty good also, espically gladitor, don't rember any really famous actors at the time that stared in either gladiiator or BHD.

"Fear nothing for fear is the mind killer."

exactly what was bad about gladiator. that is one of the most bad-ass movies i have ever seen. and the only things that really bothered me about 1-3 were the old style yideo trnsitions they used after every fricken scene. with that he was just trying to pay hommage to the older ones. and in episode three i didnt like darth vader. but the first and second felt epic. good acting (natilie portman). and episode three aniken skywalker, is one of the bigest bad-asses there are in film today.

"Wht cry for those that often cry? Instead, help them smile, and smile for those that smile."

It you don't see what was bad about the neo-fag movies then you definitely won't see what was spectacular about the "when they had it" movies.

"Hating everyone protects me from elitism."

I think it to do everything becoming a bit too commercialized

"I'll heal ur woundz I'll set u free, I m jesus christ on xtacy"

Decius: Yes. Worse than the movies that Hollywood used to churn out once a week in the old days when the studios owned the actors? well thats the typical mediiocre films that derive from Hollywood. Hollywood cannot control its marketing costs or star salaries. Back in the days, actors were artists. Today they are business men and women. While there are a few fabulous actors, most only have jobs because of their looks, not their talent. The variety of movies is what is causing the decline of quality. The market is saturated. Gladiator was good though and so was star wars (except its pathetic script). But then again this is about the directors isn't it.

"The summit is just a halfway point"

i think the only thing they may have lost is originality. Scott more than Lucas. the scope and creativity has diminished somewhat as well. i wouldnt write Lucas off yet, all of his time has been on Star Wars. he may have some greatness left in him yet. as for Scott, hes had quite a few misses. maybe he will bounce back, maybe hes just out of ideas.

they are both getting rather old. which does tend to cause people to become a bit out of touch. if this makes them "fags" then so be it.

"I am Akba-Atatdia"

I dont think it is about being old (unless that makes you a sellout)

They are basically sellouts... they sacrfice quality for monetary certainty. Making money isn't a bad thing as long as it coincides with the art. Both of these guys don't take risks anymore, and in doing so their art suffers.

They both are horrible at writing/choosing scripts. The actors under them act attrociously.

"Hating everyone protects me from elitism."

yea, i think you hit it there. they dont take risks like they use to.

"I am Akba-Atatdia"

did you know that when lucas made star wars. he said he would give them his salary. and the only thing he wanted was ten percent of the sales on all the toys. well at the time no one bought that stuff and they laughed at him, but it got the job done. and now he is a rich bastard. what im trying to say is that they dont have to take risk. and just to let you know, as of right now, lucas is fighting to take the panosoninc cameras off the market. make them obsolete. the thing is panosonic has basically monopolizied the studio camrea by not makeing them campatable with anything else. as such the theatres must use panosonic projectores. but lucas is risking his own neck and money to put some new technology out their. he is also greatly responsible for hi-def t.v.

thought you guys might want to know some of the risks he still takes before you assume. because as you know, assuming makes an ass out of you, and me...

"Wht cry for those that often cry? Instead, help them smile, and smile for those that smile."

?

How is your post related to the art of moviemaking?

Lucas battling for competition in the camera industry or his past movies are not up for debate. We know his past movies were good because he took risks.

"Hating everyone protects me from elitism."

Yeah they really have lost their way. But that's what's apparently is in style. The same old predictable crap movies with the predictable crap actors. I think people are more into the tabloids of actors than the actual acting. People would rather hear about whom they are dating, marrying or having kids. I blame housewives and anybody that reads that crap.

You should see the south park episode on it. Same sort of thing except on re- releases.

"I love to see people struggling for their purpose in life..."

thats the point Tre and Matt were trying to make. a lot of movie producers/directors would rather rehash out something they know will make money as opposed to coming up with something new and original which might fail.

i still say Lucas has some left in him. whether he did ep 1-3 for the fans or for himself is questionable, but i wouldnt discredit him altogether just because of it. i suppose he could have made each movie differently, that would have been more risky and interesting. but perhaps he kept them all similar for continuity purposes.

his crusade against Panasonic has nothing to do with his movie making ability, altho i could see how it may suffer because of it, but thats no excuse anyway.

"I am Akba-Atatdia"

Good lord people. 1-3 is so horrendous. There is like no re-playability unless you are high. The relationships are shallow and unbelievable. Is it just me? Am I the only one who sees them for what they are?

"Hating everyone protects me from elitism."

the movies failed miserably in their effort to have a good story. i never found myself caring about any of the characters. but they really are visual masterpieces. i think Lucas may have gotten a bit lost in his own vision. maybe his ego is at fault.

"I am Akba-Atatdia"