Posted 2:50 AM by Steve
Getting ready to see the new "Star Wars" movie.


I recently watched the DVD of "Star Wars: Attack of the Clones" in preparation for seeing the new "Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith" movie sometime soon.

What struck me is how bad the two prequel films have been compared to the original series (yes, even "Jedi") The over use of CGI has ruined any sense of tangible realism that was so cool about the original "Star Wars" movies had. Who cares about some world that is so advanced and technologically superior if it's not believable. Give me goofy droids and cardboard cut-outs of a dewback in the dusty streets of the original Mos Eisley compared to the smooth CGI blah of the new films any day.

The only actors worth watching are Ewan McGregor and Ian McDiarmid and they are wasted on bad dialogue and watching them try to react to artificial surroundings is just wrong. Give me a giant soundstage with a real set compared to these phony CGI worlds that seem to be about as original as a video game sequel. Or how about combining great CGI with great location shooting a la Peter Jackson with his astounding "Lord of the Rings" trilogy?

Lucas makes far too many lame references to classic films. When Anakin searches for his mother, the shot of him dropping into the Tuskan raider camp is straight out of "The Searchers". George, we know you grew up on Ray Harryhausen, we just don't want to pay $8.00 of 2005 money for effects and shots from the 50's and 60's. Ray's effects were state of the art for the time. Be so good as to give us the same and truly honor the man.

Why does a levitating cart need a beast of burden to pull it!?! Don't just do something because it's "different" or because you saw it in some other film. Don't give license to CG animators to ruin your film.

Anyone else think about how lame the Jedi became in the first two film. We have a constipated Mace Windu and Yoda sitting on their duffs while the Empire falls apart and all they can do is make cryptic announcements. The Jedi council maybe a model of Republic diversity but it also appears to be somewhat of a freakshow. "Young paduan learner, Master Bearded Lady and Master Dog-faced boy wish to teach you the ways of the force." Jedi are neither infallible nor all that powerful getting surrounded and beat up by a bunch of droids with blasters. They are sort of like samurai in a town full of gunslingers, now if they had some of them "Sith" powers....

It all makes Han Solo's pronouncement that, "Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid." seem just about right on.

Posted 2:04 AM by Steve
The much maligned Crusades (or "Hollywood blows it again.")


Reading the real history of Europe and the Middle East circa 1000 A.D. it becomes clear that the religious nature of the Crusades has been rather distorted. In place of a religious motivation, many historians have used religion merely as an excuse for materialistic motivations. Through modern eyes...it's the only thing that makes sense. Why else would these people literally risk everything if not for material gain. What is blatantly ignored by these historians is the rapid expansion of Islam between the 600 A.D. and 1000 A.D. To fully understand why this was a serious threat to the West one must first understand the nature of Islam or "Submission to the will of God". Mohammed, unlike Jesus, was a prosperous merchant and became a political and religious leader. By contrast, Jesus was a poor carpenter's son and considered a extremist rebel by his contemporaries. Islam expanded by the sword. Christianity was spread by peaceful proselytization. The concept of jihad was first used by Mohammed to justify his aggression against pagans. It's worth noting, in light of current events, that jihads against Jews and Christians were forbidden because Jews and Christians were not considered unbelievers. Only if they actively persecuted or hindered Islam were Jews or Christians to be considered legitimate targets. Mohammed completed his conquest of Arabia and after his death in 632 A.D. the swift expansion of Islam continued as Arab Muslims swiftly conquered Persia, Egypt and Syria. The Byzantine Christians had little choice but to maintain a tenuous peace with their Muslim neighbors.

The Crusaders, especially the earliest of the bunch, had little material to gain by leaving hearth and home and marching off to battle starvation, the elements and an openly hostile enemy in a holy pilgrimage to the lands where Christ lived and died. In fact, the only thing they could gain was something our increasingly secular society can't comprehend: Salvation.

To call the Crusades a united military effort is to misunderstand it's very nature. Each individual who went on his pilgrimage to the Holy Land was fulfilling a sacred oath. In medieval times, if a Lord or noble decided to go somewhere, his people accompanied him. This meant his servants, his workers, his soldiers and bodyguards were to travel in his entourage. Many times, these Lords and nobles would travel together to combine their resources and for protection. These fortified and supplied caravans would naturally pick up stragglers, the pious poor and common citizens who had devoted themselves to the holy pilgrimage.

It was no easy task to march a large number of people anywhere in those days. The early crusaders traveled from the middle of Europe south to the Byzantine empire of Constantinople and into hostile Turkish Muslim controlled lands. They battled not only the inhabitants of the regions they passed through, but also the elements and dwindling supplies.

In hindsight, the Crusades were really skirmishes in a brewing "Cold War" between Christianity and Islam. The crusades were a military response to a militaristic expansion of Islam. The success of the First Crusade must be considered a sort of "miracle" by anyone who is familiar with the disorganized nature of the forces making the pilgrimage and the vast number of mistakes the Muslim forces made and the amazing fortune of the Christian forces.

The Crusades were an expansion by Christians who lived by a much different code than modern man. They valued salvation more than comfort and convenience. They put their physical well-being lower on their list of priorities than the state of their soul. It's fascinating history.