STAR WARS and other George Lucas Productions

ok so since every one here pretty much loves Star Wars i decided to create a page that discusses star wars and any other George Lucas Productions

1.) Indiana jones 4 will it be as good as the others judging by the title and sounds slightly corny

2.) Should they make another Star Wars I found ROTS Quite enjoyable and i thought it was 1 of the best Star Wars

3.) I watched Something on the history channel that compared Star Wars to many other things like King Arthur and i want to kno if any1 else watched it so i can discuss it wit them

1. what's the indiana jones title? (if it says something about aliens, russians, or native americans we're screwed (i read a potential plot summary a year back))

2. what daoes your statement have to do with the release of a new star wars movie?

3. everyone i talked to that saw it said it wasn't that good.

First off Rohan, if you liked the history channel show, you'll have to take my social studies seminar course. I've been teaching everything that was in that show for 10 years in that class. I still can't figure out how I teach a class on Star Wars (and other popular culture) and only a hand full of students take it each year. But anyway, if you like star wars, you should take my class .
The title of Indy IV is Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.
Whatever the plot, let's just hold off until it comes out and than start judging it.

Also, Check out the preview for the new Star Wars video game coming out, it looks good. Star Wars Force Unleashed

I figure i'll be commenting here a lot!!!

question, what exactly is the name of that course mr white? ill take it, i just need to know what its called

Footie wrote:

question, what exactly is the name of that course mr white? ill take it, i just need to know what its called

Ummm... Social Studies Seminar? Mr. White says it in the first line...

alcojedimaster wrote:

you'll have to take my social studies seminar course

See?

well i think we will be ok in terms of indy plot in that case. however, i think shila labuff (i don't know his name) doesn't really fit the indy's son picture, so i guess we'll just have to see about that. they really should have put sir sean back in though. i mean he drank from the holy grail so he should live forever. and let's face it: a movie with two of The Men (ford/connery) would HAVE to be at least halfway decent. and also, if they screw this one up, we will have large-scale rioting across the globe.

Sir Sean thought long and hard about it, but decided he retired for a reason, to play golf. George said yesterday in an interview that it actually works out better for the film, because Sean Connery was only going to be in the first quarter of the film and he thought it would have been cheating the audience for Sean to be the beginning and than disappear for the rest of the film. What gets me is that Karen Allen (Marion Ravenwood) has not aged in the past 26 years. I mean yeah, you can tell she is older, but not by much.

Sir Sean!!!!! Best Bond Ever!!!!! Daniel Craig is a close second; he's really cool too- but, Sean Connery! Too bad he's not going to reprise his Indy role... but still, I can't wait for Indy IV. Though, if it's anything like The Phantom Menace, I think I shall be sorely disappointed. Lord knows I only sat through THAT for Ewan and Liam.

ya phantom menance wasnt enjoyable at all and Mr. White i mite think of doin ur class i enjoyed how they related the star wars saga into modern day history and such like during the scene where vader come off the ship and the stormtroopers and red guard all stood there it was the colors of the Nazi flag.

on indy jones note ya i dont like shia bein his son i dont think he mite b up 2 it but then again i thought daniel craig wuldnt b a good james bond but it turned out he was really good guess we gotta wait and see

Daniel Craig!!!!!!!

tracyfaery wrote:

Daniel Craig!!!!!!!

Daniel Craig (along with casino royal in general) ruined 40 years of James Bond! He should be tied up and beaten with rolled up copies of Casino Royal's script, then executed.
The bond greatness goes this way:
1. Sean Connery
2. Roger Moor
3. Pierce Brosnan
4. Timothy Dalton
5. George Laserby
6. Daniel Craig

Die in a hole, NOW! Roger Moore? Worst Bond EVER!!!!! (Except for David Niven, but THAT Casino Royale was a comedy, and it was weird, and it frightened me). Daniel Craig=Sir Sean but not as cool. But still frickin' AWESOME!!!!!

Plus, Eva Green is really attractive...

What are you talking about? Daniel Craig is, by far, the most beautiful Bond in decades--really. And that's what counts.

Eva Green has weird ears.

Yeah, well, YOU have weird ears. And who do you think is better, Tracy? Daniel or Sir Sean?

Well, maybe it wasn't compleatly Daniel Criags fualt that his lines sucked. It was more likely Casino Royals mediocre plot. They spend the majority of the movie playing poker! Bond should be parachuting and shooting everything, not playing cards. Not to mention the whole screw over the stock market evil plot was very hard to take seriosly. The only scheme worse was On Her Majesty's Secret Service (George Laserbys 1st and last bond film), which was to brainwash a bunch of blonds to use as terrorists.

woah this is made 4 star wars stuff but on the James bond note Daniel craig is a dominant bond I had sum doubts at first but he totally kicked butt in casino royale brosnan wasn't bad either and sean Connery needs no explanation

Matthew, I like them both very much. I cannot choose.

no tracy no! sir sean ALWAYS takes the cake.

like we've said in other threads, people dont stay to one topic threads end up getting used for other purposes

zach, the point of a forum is a steadily progressing conversation that molds as it goes to suit those who post them. of course the topic is going to change!

ethan is right....the moving trombones to politics is pretty impressive though.