2005 was the battle of the bearded directors. Each releasing a popular movie competing for uhhh... money, fame, and stuff.

 

The combatants: George Lucas, Steven Spielberg, and Peter Jackson.

 

Their weapons:

George Lucas=Star Wars episode 3: revenge of the sith

Steven Spielberg= War of the Worlds

Peter Jackson=King Kong

 

So which one do you think was the best and/or did the best? And say why.

Guess no one wants to explain why

 

well any way I'll do this myself one aspect at a time.

 

Plot:

Plotwise ROTS had to have had the best plot. We all knew what was going to happen in episode 3 but the plot still suprised me. I expected an epic space battle at the end also with an epic duel aboard one of the ships at the same time. Course now that makes no sense but it did then. King Kong has an OK plotline but I could already guess what would happen and I hadn't seen any of the King Kong Movies ever before. War of the Worlds was full of plot holes. Like:

If they are so advanced why do they envy us?

How did they know we were going to be here if they buried the machine 1000s of years before us?

they didn't explain the red weeds to much.

Of course the movie was meant to leave a lot unsaid and other parts were to make it more origional.