Monday, May 16, 2005

A Surprising Review

Considering how terrible the last (first?) two Star Wars movies were I was surprised to see that A. O. Scott's review in the New York Times didn't pan the movie. Even more surprising was that he said "This is by far the best film in the more recent trilogy, and also the best of the four episodes Mr. Lucas has directed. That's right (and my inner 11-year-old shudders as I type this): it's better than "Star Wars.""

4 Comments:

Blogger Ger said...

I don't believe this will be a good movie.

4:46 PM  
Blogger Vergasy said...

The last two, visuals aside, were terrible. Really, really, really bad. At the time I swore I would never pay money to see this one. I don't know if I will see it, but I won't expect much if I do.

10:01 PM  
Blogger Tally Ho said...

Granted, part of the review does trash the acting and writing again (the two features I felt runied Eps. I and II), but I mean really, guys, haven't you ever heard of having a "new hope?"

10:44 PM  
Blogger Tally Ho said...

It warent bad

2:46 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home