Search
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated New Jack City (1991) in Movies
Mar 21, 2018
Good Movie
Released in 1991, New Jack City takes place in the late 80's with the perfect vibe to boot. A time during which Kangol hats and "gold ropes" were in and rap needed a hard bass beat to be considered car system-worthy. New Jack is a solid groove of a film that remains timeless even to this day.
While a handful of spots were farfetched, I appreciate the grit and realness of the film as a whole. It's an open awareness into the crack epidemic and how badly it damaged black communities. It's hard watching people destroy the lives of those in their community knowing full well their lives gave them little choice to do much else. In one of my favorite scenes, antagonist Nino Brown (Wesley Snipes) is having a meaningful conversation with an older man. At the heart of the conversation, they talk about how black people haven't gotten far from a societal progression standpoint since Martin Luther King Jr. died. No matter which side of the argument you're on, both had strong points that made you think.
The lead roles were consistently strong throughout. Chris Rock excelled in his role as Pookie, a crackhead trying to get his life together. You come to sympathize with his character hoping for a happy ending, but knowing the fate he is destined for. And you can't mention lead roles without giving Wesley Snipes his proper due as Nino Brown. Nino is smooth, a speaker for the people. His presence oozes with power in the criminal circuit yet the law sees him as just another delinquent. I give Rock the nod, but Snipes is a very close second.
Ice-T plays the role of Appleton, a cop hired to take a bite out of the crack epidemic by taking out one of its largest suppliers: Nino. The film as a whole is not without its faults as it lacks cohesiveness in certain spots. While the main actors are outstanding, the supporting roles are ghastly at best. I could definitely have done without Keisha (Vanessa Williams). If I heard "Rockabye baby" one more time, I'm pretty sure I would have lost it.
Not a classic for me, but still a consistent watch. I give New Jack City a 75.
While a handful of spots were farfetched, I appreciate the grit and realness of the film as a whole. It's an open awareness into the crack epidemic and how badly it damaged black communities. It's hard watching people destroy the lives of those in their community knowing full well their lives gave them little choice to do much else. In one of my favorite scenes, antagonist Nino Brown (Wesley Snipes) is having a meaningful conversation with an older man. At the heart of the conversation, they talk about how black people haven't gotten far from a societal progression standpoint since Martin Luther King Jr. died. No matter which side of the argument you're on, both had strong points that made you think.
The lead roles were consistently strong throughout. Chris Rock excelled in his role as Pookie, a crackhead trying to get his life together. You come to sympathize with his character hoping for a happy ending, but knowing the fate he is destined for. And you can't mention lead roles without giving Wesley Snipes his proper due as Nino Brown. Nino is smooth, a speaker for the people. His presence oozes with power in the criminal circuit yet the law sees him as just another delinquent. I give Rock the nod, but Snipes is a very close second.
Ice-T plays the role of Appleton, a cop hired to take a bite out of the crack epidemic by taking out one of its largest suppliers: Nino. The film as a whole is not without its faults as it lacks cohesiveness in certain spots. While the main actors are outstanding, the supporting roles are ghastly at best. I could definitely have done without Keisha (Vanessa Williams). If I heard "Rockabye baby" one more time, I'm pretty sure I would have lost it.
Not a classic for me, but still a consistent watch. I give New Jack City a 75.
Bokosuka Wars II
Video Game
"Defeat the tyrant King Ogereth!" Free your allies and lead your armies to invade the Basamu...
simulation role-playing
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Deep Red (Profondo rosso) (1975) in Movies
Jul 19, 2021
Contains spoilers, click to show
Deep Red (aka Profondo rosso) is a thriller/slasher from Italian writer/director Dario Argento.
When Marcus Daly (David Hemmings) witnesses the murder of the women living in the flat below him he finds himself in a race to find the murderer before he becomes their next victim. The films killer follows a lot of what would become familiar tropes in slasher films, the killer is rarely seen and when they are seen they are covered u, they use a number of different ways to kill their victims and they have a habit of sneaking around. There isn't necessarily a a lot of blood from the kills, that is to say blood is sprayed around but when there is blood it is filmed in such a way that you can't miss it, in fact they eye is drawn to it.
Speaking of eyes there are a lot of them, Dario Argento has his own style of filming, he uses filters and strange camera angles and, in Deep Red a lot of closeups on eyes, sometimes just for scene transitions.
As well as being a Slasher, Deep Red is a mystery, as the film progresses Marcus the protagonist find clues as to the identity of the killer giving the viewer the chance to work out who it is as well. But there are red herrings and a lot of things that don't necessarily make sense. There is a clockwork boy, used only one by the killer, there is a creepy girl with a possibly mad farther, two facts that really don't affect the story.
As I said, Deep Red contains a lot of the Slasher tropes but it predates most of them, even beating Halloween by three years and so you can see that it has a big influence on the modern (well 80's so not so modern now) slashers.
The down side is that Deep Red is slow, there is a lot of talking, although contained in this are some clues as to the killers identity and the level of violence isn't quite as much as some of the more modern films, it does however beat some of it's slasher predecessors such as Psycho.
Over all Deep Red is a good film, slightly more mystery than slasher but with enough kills to keep a slasher fan happy. The story does plod along at is own pace but over all an enjoyable film.
When Marcus Daly (David Hemmings) witnesses the murder of the women living in the flat below him he finds himself in a race to find the murderer before he becomes their next victim. The films killer follows a lot of what would become familiar tropes in slasher films, the killer is rarely seen and when they are seen they are covered u, they use a number of different ways to kill their victims and they have a habit of sneaking around. There isn't necessarily a a lot of blood from the kills, that is to say blood is sprayed around but when there is blood it is filmed in such a way that you can't miss it, in fact they eye is drawn to it.
Speaking of eyes there are a lot of them, Dario Argento has his own style of filming, he uses filters and strange camera angles and, in Deep Red a lot of closeups on eyes, sometimes just for scene transitions.
As well as being a Slasher, Deep Red is a mystery, as the film progresses Marcus the protagonist find clues as to the identity of the killer giving the viewer the chance to work out who it is as well. But there are red herrings and a lot of things that don't necessarily make sense. There is a clockwork boy, used only one by the killer, there is a creepy girl with a possibly mad farther, two facts that really don't affect the story.
As I said, Deep Red contains a lot of the Slasher tropes but it predates most of them, even beating Halloween by three years and so you can see that it has a big influence on the modern (well 80's so not so modern now) slashers.
The down side is that Deep Red is slow, there is a lot of talking, although contained in this are some clues as to the killers identity and the level of violence isn't quite as much as some of the more modern films, it does however beat some of it's slasher predecessors such as Psycho.
Over all Deep Red is a good film, slightly more mystery than slasher but with enough kills to keep a slasher fan happy. The story does plod along at is own pace but over all an enjoyable film.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated The Fly (1986) in Movies
Sep 10, 2020
Buzz Buzz
The Fly is a excellent remake of the 1958 version. Cronenberg does it again. All of his 80's films are excellent. I mean the gore, the violence, the horror, the suspense, the thrills, the sci-fi, the visuals, the terror and the acting.
The Plot: When scientist Seth Brundle (Jeff Goldblum) completes his teleportation device, he decides to test its abilities on himself. Unbeknownst to him, a housefly slips in during the process, leading to a merger of man and insect. Initially, Brundle appears to have undergone a successful teleportation, but the fly's cells begin to take over his body. As he becomes increasingly fly-like, Brundle's girlfriend (Geena Davis) is horrified as the person she once loved deteriorates into a monster.
The Fly was critically acclaimed, with most praise going to Goldblum's performance and the special effects. Despite being a gory remake of a classic made by a controversial, non-mainstream director, the film was a commercial success, the biggest of Cronenberg's career, and was the top-grossing film in the United States for two weeks, earning a total domestic gross of $40,456,565.
Film critic Gene Siskel named The Fly as the tenth best film of 1986. In 1989, Premiere and American Film magazines both conducted independent polls of American film critics, directors and other such groups to determine the best films of the 1980s, and The Fly appeared on both lists.
In 2008, the American Film Institute distributed ballots to 1,500 directors, critics and other people associated with the film industry in order to determine the top ten American films in ten different genre categories. Cronenberg's version of The Fly was nominated under the science fiction category, although it did not make the top ten. It was also nominated for AFI's 100 Years... 100 Thrills and AFI's 100 Years...100 Passions and Veronica's warning to Tawny in the film—"Be afraid. Be very afraid."—was nominated for AFI's 100 Years... 100 Movie Quotes.
The quote "Be afraid. Be very afraid." was also used as the film's marketing tagline, and became so ingrained in popular culture (as it—and variants—have appeared in countless films and TV series) that a large number of people who are familiar with the phrase are unaware that it originated in The Fly.
Its a excellent movie.
The Plot: When scientist Seth Brundle (Jeff Goldblum) completes his teleportation device, he decides to test its abilities on himself. Unbeknownst to him, a housefly slips in during the process, leading to a merger of man and insect. Initially, Brundle appears to have undergone a successful teleportation, but the fly's cells begin to take over his body. As he becomes increasingly fly-like, Brundle's girlfriend (Geena Davis) is horrified as the person she once loved deteriorates into a monster.
The Fly was critically acclaimed, with most praise going to Goldblum's performance and the special effects. Despite being a gory remake of a classic made by a controversial, non-mainstream director, the film was a commercial success, the biggest of Cronenberg's career, and was the top-grossing film in the United States for two weeks, earning a total domestic gross of $40,456,565.
Film critic Gene Siskel named The Fly as the tenth best film of 1986. In 1989, Premiere and American Film magazines both conducted independent polls of American film critics, directors and other such groups to determine the best films of the 1980s, and The Fly appeared on both lists.
In 2008, the American Film Institute distributed ballots to 1,500 directors, critics and other people associated with the film industry in order to determine the top ten American films in ten different genre categories. Cronenberg's version of The Fly was nominated under the science fiction category, although it did not make the top ten. It was also nominated for AFI's 100 Years... 100 Thrills and AFI's 100 Years...100 Passions and Veronica's warning to Tawny in the film—"Be afraid. Be very afraid."—was nominated for AFI's 100 Years... 100 Movie Quotes.
The quote "Be afraid. Be very afraid." was also used as the film's marketing tagline, and became so ingrained in popular culture (as it—and variants—have appeared in countless films and TV series) that a large number of people who are familiar with the phrase are unaware that it originated in The Fly.
Its a excellent movie.
CollectNet
Business and Utilities
App
EST See on uudne lahendus pakkide kättesaamiseks. Kas teadsid, et kui Cleveron 2009. aastal...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Groot Expectations.
James Gunn is back writing and directing the sequel to his surprise 2014 summer hit. And it might be a fresh mix tape slammed into the Walkman, but it’s much of the same again. Not that that’s necessarily a bad thing.
In terms of the story, it’s almost a remake of the worst Star Trek film ever made! However, this time its all done for ‘laffs’ and so works much, much better. We join Quill (Chris Pratt, “Jurassic World“), Gamora (Zoe Saldana, “Star Trek Beyond“), Drax (Dave Bautista, “Spectre“) and Rocket (the voice of Bradley Cooper) ‘ever ready’ (LOL) to save the priceless Anulax batteries of their current employees, the Sovereigns, from the ravages of some multi-dimensional being. ‘Helping’ them is Baby Groot, a twig off the old branch from the first film, again voiced (in what must be the easiest money in Hollywood) by Vin Diesel (“Fast and Furious 8“).
The Sovereign’s High Priestess (Elizabeth Debicki, “The Man From U.N.C.L.E.“) provides payment to Gamora in the form of her chained-up evil sister Nebula (a deliciously sulky Karen Gillen, “Dr Who”, “Oculus”) but is then less than impressed when the mercenary Rocket pockets a knapsack full of the batteries. So starts a chase across the galaxy leading Quill to meet Ego (Kurt Russell, “The Hateful 8“) on the planet Ego (LOL) at the very base of his family tree.
The great thing about these films is that they don’t even TRY to be realistic. Characters get towed behind crashing spaceships and – literally- dragged through a wood backwards; others fall hundreds of feet to certain death… no, sorry, a “superhero landing”; and planets and characters are painted with a garishness never ever to be found in nature. You’ll even believe Kurt Russell is 18 again – oh that these effects were available on the NHS!
But the other saving grace for this film is the soundtrack, put together by Tyler Bates as an ode to the 80’s, with wonderful tracks by ELO, Fleetwood Mac, Cat Stevens and a host of others. The film matches the music with the action superbly.
I won’t bother commenting on the acting… who cares with this sort of film! But everyone seems to have fun with Michael Rooker (“Cliffhanger”) being particularly good in reprising his role of Yondu. There are also a wealth of memorable cameos, some of them being laugh out loud moments. While some of the pop culture references might go over a younger audience’s heads, there are still enough great one-liners and comic moments to provide general appeal. Bad guys silhouetted against the moon, ET style, was particularly memorable.
One criticism I would have though is that it’s just too darn long for an “action comedy”. The original film just about scraped into my good books by coming in under the two hour curfew. The sequel however adds another 15 minutes, which should have found its way either onto the cutting room floor or onto the “Blu Ray collector’s edition”. In particular, the final never-ending showdown of CGI manicness went on too long for my liking.
Looking back at the original 2014 review, I gave it a rather stingy FFF rating, which in retrospect I think was a bit mean given its novelty. This time the novelty has worn off, but if anything this is an even more enjoyable romp that the first outing.
James Gunn be warned though: I am unlikely to be so generous with “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 3” (as threatened) which in my view might be a trip too far for this franchise. My advice would be to take a leaf out of Peter Kay’s “Car Share” book and quit while you’re ahead.
By the way, for those who are interested, the film had a reported budget of $200 million (an impressive “BvS quotient” of 80%!) and the end titles have four “monkeys“, with a humorous reprise of Stan Lee’s astronaut.
In terms of the story, it’s almost a remake of the worst Star Trek film ever made! However, this time its all done for ‘laffs’ and so works much, much better. We join Quill (Chris Pratt, “Jurassic World“), Gamora (Zoe Saldana, “Star Trek Beyond“), Drax (Dave Bautista, “Spectre“) and Rocket (the voice of Bradley Cooper) ‘ever ready’ (LOL) to save the priceless Anulax batteries of their current employees, the Sovereigns, from the ravages of some multi-dimensional being. ‘Helping’ them is Baby Groot, a twig off the old branch from the first film, again voiced (in what must be the easiest money in Hollywood) by Vin Diesel (“Fast and Furious 8“).
The Sovereign’s High Priestess (Elizabeth Debicki, “The Man From U.N.C.L.E.“) provides payment to Gamora in the form of her chained-up evil sister Nebula (a deliciously sulky Karen Gillen, “Dr Who”, “Oculus”) but is then less than impressed when the mercenary Rocket pockets a knapsack full of the batteries. So starts a chase across the galaxy leading Quill to meet Ego (Kurt Russell, “The Hateful 8“) on the planet Ego (LOL) at the very base of his family tree.
The great thing about these films is that they don’t even TRY to be realistic. Characters get towed behind crashing spaceships and – literally- dragged through a wood backwards; others fall hundreds of feet to certain death… no, sorry, a “superhero landing”; and planets and characters are painted with a garishness never ever to be found in nature. You’ll even believe Kurt Russell is 18 again – oh that these effects were available on the NHS!
But the other saving grace for this film is the soundtrack, put together by Tyler Bates as an ode to the 80’s, with wonderful tracks by ELO, Fleetwood Mac, Cat Stevens and a host of others. The film matches the music with the action superbly.
I won’t bother commenting on the acting… who cares with this sort of film! But everyone seems to have fun with Michael Rooker (“Cliffhanger”) being particularly good in reprising his role of Yondu. There are also a wealth of memorable cameos, some of them being laugh out loud moments. While some of the pop culture references might go over a younger audience’s heads, there are still enough great one-liners and comic moments to provide general appeal. Bad guys silhouetted against the moon, ET style, was particularly memorable.
One criticism I would have though is that it’s just too darn long for an “action comedy”. The original film just about scraped into my good books by coming in under the two hour curfew. The sequel however adds another 15 minutes, which should have found its way either onto the cutting room floor or onto the “Blu Ray collector’s edition”. In particular, the final never-ending showdown of CGI manicness went on too long for my liking.
Looking back at the original 2014 review, I gave it a rather stingy FFF rating, which in retrospect I think was a bit mean given its novelty. This time the novelty has worn off, but if anything this is an even more enjoyable romp that the first outing.
James Gunn be warned though: I am unlikely to be so generous with “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 3” (as threatened) which in my view might be a trip too far for this franchise. My advice would be to take a leaf out of Peter Kay’s “Car Share” book and quit while you’re ahead.
By the way, for those who are interested, the film had a reported budget of $200 million (an impressive “BvS quotient” of 80%!) and the end titles have four “monkeys“, with a humorous reprise of Stan Lee’s astronaut.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
Back in the 80’s, razor-fingered Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) became an iconic figure of horror and mainstream pop culture with the film “A Nightmare on Elm Street”. Thanks to great special effects, macabre humor, and the charismatic Freddy, audience flocked to theaters and launched a highly successful series that spanned several films. Eventually the series ran its course, but the title character remained a mainstay of horror fans everywhere. Last seen in “Freddy Vs. Jason”, the terror of teenagers’ dreams has returned in a new take on the film from the Platinum Dunes production team, the same team behind the successful relaunch of the “Friday the 13th Series”.
The new film stars Jackie Earl Haley as the title character, and once again he is dispatching the teens of Elm Street in all manner of bizzare and grisly fashions in their dreams. Soon the town is full of dead teens and their insomniac peers anxious for an answer to the madman. Their parents are no help as they are quick to downplay any questions about Freddy and quickly disregard any concerns raised by their kids, even when the body count continues to rise. As their numbers dwindle, a group of friends starts to uncover the reason behind the unresloved deaths and band together to solve the mystery of Freddy Krueger and survive.
Freddy is only able to menace the teens in their sleep, so they take all manner of precautions in an attempt to stay awake and plot a defense, but sleep is something one can only postpone, never fully avoid, which means Freddy is always lurking, just waiting for his chance to strike.
What follows is a fairly by-the-numbers horror film that is sadly is lacking much suspense and horror. I was a big fan of the series and I found myself wanting to watch the original Wes Craven classic rather than what was unfolding on the screen. Haley does a great job as Krueger, blending menace with gallows humor, but Englund left a very large Fedora and razor gloves to fill and Haley comes up lacking. I also missed the elaborate effects that defined the series, greatly underwhelmed by this film’s attempts. The gore, suspense, and thrills were restrained compared to the previous films.
This is not to say this is a bad film, but the generic cast headed by Thomas Dekker gives us very little to root for and left me wanting more. Here is hoping that the next offering gives fans more of what made the series so popular and less of the formulaic predictability that has become so common in horror.
The new film stars Jackie Earl Haley as the title character, and once again he is dispatching the teens of Elm Street in all manner of bizzare and grisly fashions in their dreams. Soon the town is full of dead teens and their insomniac peers anxious for an answer to the madman. Their parents are no help as they are quick to downplay any questions about Freddy and quickly disregard any concerns raised by their kids, even when the body count continues to rise. As their numbers dwindle, a group of friends starts to uncover the reason behind the unresloved deaths and band together to solve the mystery of Freddy Krueger and survive.
Freddy is only able to menace the teens in their sleep, so they take all manner of precautions in an attempt to stay awake and plot a defense, but sleep is something one can only postpone, never fully avoid, which means Freddy is always lurking, just waiting for his chance to strike.
What follows is a fairly by-the-numbers horror film that is sadly is lacking much suspense and horror. I was a big fan of the series and I found myself wanting to watch the original Wes Craven classic rather than what was unfolding on the screen. Haley does a great job as Krueger, blending menace with gallows humor, but Englund left a very large Fedora and razor gloves to fill and Haley comes up lacking. I also missed the elaborate effects that defined the series, greatly underwhelmed by this film’s attempts. The gore, suspense, and thrills were restrained compared to the previous films.
This is not to say this is a bad film, but the generic cast headed by Thomas Dekker gives us very little to root for and left me wanting more. Here is hoping that the next offering gives fans more of what made the series so popular and less of the formulaic predictability that has become so common in horror.
CO
Counterexamples on Uniform Convergence: Sequences, Series, Functions, and Integrals
Andrei Bourchtein and Ludmila Bourchtein
8.0
Rate It
Book
A comprehensive and thorough analysis of concepts and results on uniform convergence Counterexamples...
Koder Code Editor
Productivity and Utilities
App
HOLIDAY SALE - 30% OFF "Koder for iPad: Nerds Rejoice! You Can Code on Your iPad" -- GIZMODO / App...
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Star Wars: Episode VI – Return of the Jedi (1983) in Movies
Mar 7, 2019
The weakest...
Contains spoilers, click to show
This is often thought of as the weakest of the original trilogy, and whilst I would agree with that, that's not to say that it is bad. The phenomenon which had begun with"Star Wars", six years earlier was about to conclude, or so we thought, with Jedi.
The first film had pioneered the technology and concepts of which to present and achieve such a franchise in the 1970′s and '80′s, and "The Empire Strikes Back" is still the benchmark for part twos, but where this film falls down is that it has sacrificed narrative quality for Lucas' realisation that he could finally do what he wanted, without any hindrance from studios or production limitations.
He had the best of best in visual effects with his Industrial Light and Magic, and he had a vision which had remained unrealised in the previous two films, such as the so called failed Cantina scene in "Star Wars", which is presented here, only this time in the walls of Jabba's palace.
The first half I believe, is George Lucas' real film. Monsters and Muppets, pure fantasy as our heroes wrap up the events of the previous film, and make their daring escape from Jabba the Hutt. The second part is almost a separate film, focusing quite rightly on the Empire and the destruction of the second Death Star. But this plot is very matter of fact, and has no real charm or heart, just epic visuals and a theatrical sense.
Meanwhile, Han Solo and Princess Leia are leading a rebel assault on the forest moon of Endor, populated by the most annoying Muppets of all the dreaded Ewoks! The Ewoks must be one of cinema's greatest misjudgments, the first real misstep in Lucas' handling of the "Star Wars Saga"; but with the prequels and the constant tinkering with the originals, this was to be the thin end of the wedge.
Don't get me wrong, there are plot elements revolving around the Muppets which I liked, such as the nature vs. technology metaphor, but that doesn't excuse the Ewoks and nothing ever will! But elements such as the Speedbike chase and the final battle, all of it, the final Vader/Luke dual, the assault of the Death Star itself, and even the ludicrous Ewok assault, are excellent, visually stunning and exiting and it is enough to save this film from being bogged down by the bad.
And like I said, the money grabbing, almost narratively illiterate George Lucas has damaged and defamed his franchise with his constant tinkering, firstly with the Special Edition in 1997, and then with his Enhanced Special Edition in 2004 for the DVD release.
Lucas is a visionary and has done so much for the film industry and we should be grateful but in the end, he needs to stop milking this franchise, stop pretending that it is never finished, when he has finished it THREE times now and realise that the best of the original trilogy was directed and written by other people, all of which display more talent. Lucas is not a good director but he is a good producer and he has brought this franchise to the screen and the movie industry is better for it. But the Special Editions bring nothing important to the mix, with the exception of the finale, which does carry more scope that 1983 original.
Overall, the weakest of the "Star Wars Trilogy" is a fair assessment and at its worst, it's still leagues above any entry in the prequels, even the Episode III, which is the closest to this high standards of this series.
The first film had pioneered the technology and concepts of which to present and achieve such a franchise in the 1970′s and '80′s, and "The Empire Strikes Back" is still the benchmark for part twos, but where this film falls down is that it has sacrificed narrative quality for Lucas' realisation that he could finally do what he wanted, without any hindrance from studios or production limitations.
He had the best of best in visual effects with his Industrial Light and Magic, and he had a vision which had remained unrealised in the previous two films, such as the so called failed Cantina scene in "Star Wars", which is presented here, only this time in the walls of Jabba's palace.
The first half I believe, is George Lucas' real film. Monsters and Muppets, pure fantasy as our heroes wrap up the events of the previous film, and make their daring escape from Jabba the Hutt. The second part is almost a separate film, focusing quite rightly on the Empire and the destruction of the second Death Star. But this plot is very matter of fact, and has no real charm or heart, just epic visuals and a theatrical sense.
Meanwhile, Han Solo and Princess Leia are leading a rebel assault on the forest moon of Endor, populated by the most annoying Muppets of all the dreaded Ewoks! The Ewoks must be one of cinema's greatest misjudgments, the first real misstep in Lucas' handling of the "Star Wars Saga"; but with the prequels and the constant tinkering with the originals, this was to be the thin end of the wedge.
Don't get me wrong, there are plot elements revolving around the Muppets which I liked, such as the nature vs. technology metaphor, but that doesn't excuse the Ewoks and nothing ever will! But elements such as the Speedbike chase and the final battle, all of it, the final Vader/Luke dual, the assault of the Death Star itself, and even the ludicrous Ewok assault, are excellent, visually stunning and exiting and it is enough to save this film from being bogged down by the bad.
And like I said, the money grabbing, almost narratively illiterate George Lucas has damaged and defamed his franchise with his constant tinkering, firstly with the Special Edition in 1997, and then with his Enhanced Special Edition in 2004 for the DVD release.
Lucas is a visionary and has done so much for the film industry and we should be grateful but in the end, he needs to stop milking this franchise, stop pretending that it is never finished, when he has finished it THREE times now and realise that the best of the original trilogy was directed and written by other people, all of which display more talent. Lucas is not a good director but he is a good producer and he has brought this franchise to the screen and the movie industry is better for it. But the Special Editions bring nothing important to the mix, with the exception of the finale, which does carry more scope that 1983 original.
Overall, the weakest of the "Star Wars Trilogy" is a fair assessment and at its worst, it's still leagues above any entry in the prequels, even the Episode III, which is the closest to this high standards of this series.