PT vs OT Scientific Study :: 1 < 3 > 7

  • Reply
  • Print
Alexrd's avatar
RE: PT vs OT Scientific Study

hairy_hen said:

I've never really understood all the cracks about the dialogue in the OT.  Not the greatest sometimes, sure, but much better than the PT.

In my opinion, the difference is only in the character's charisma. I like Star Wars, but it's certainly not because of the dialogue.

WhatsMyName's avatar
RE: PT vs OT Scientific Study

The only "style" i found in the OT is Han Solo and Lando Calrissian busting out there dumb jokes. They always made me laugh.

And don't diss Darth Maul. You tell me one amazing force flip or a Jedi he offed, not as Anaking Skywalker, and prove it makes him better.

zombie84's avatar
RE: PT vs OT Scientific Study

I thought Grievous was pretty fun for what he was, and he had a lot of character for someone with so little screentime, the problem was that there wasn't much room to develop him because he only was in 1/3 of a single film. Now, that's okay, but the damn trilogy is so crowded that every single villain is like that. On his own, Grievous is a cool character IMO, I think it's more the context that makes people dislike him. There were too many useless, undeveloped, CG characters with spinny acrobatics and funny voices and no room for a more developed, realistic, adult characterization. Dooku had so much potential but he ended up on a development arc that went right into a brick wall, even if his death scene was really cool.

Last edited on March 2, 2011 at 1:07 AM by zombie84

The Secret History of Star Wars -- now available on Amazon.com!

"When George went back and put new creatures into the original Star Wars, I find that disturbing. It’s a revision of history. That bothers me."

--James Cameron, Entertainment Weekly, April 2010

hairy_hen's avatar
RE: PT vs OT Scientific Study

It doesn't have anything to do with it--directly.  But it sure as heck doesn't surprise me that bad taste in one area would also carry over to another.

The 2004 mix being a pile of crap is a pretty commonly held opinion on this forum.  I have, in fact, analysed it in detail, and it's worse even than most people realise.  The sound quality is often very bad, and aesthetically it stomps all over the original sound design and replaces it with a misguided mess that bears only superficial resemblance to what the movie is supposed to sound like.

Anchorhead's avatar
RE: PT vs OT Scientific Study

TV's Frink said:

...need you stoop so low as to call him shist?

 

*note to self*

Don't have half-chewed Cheetos in your mouth when reading any Frink post.  He'll get you when you least expect it.

;-)

Crimson. Eleven. Delight. Petrichor.

Diego's avatar
RE: PT vs OT Scientific Study

Meh... in a universe that has Jar-Jar, Boss Nass, the two headed pod race announcer and, if you count the Clone Wars, a german evil mad scientist, Grievous is almost cool.

Like pretty much everything else in the prequels, he doesn't make any sense. There's no way anyone could beat him in a fight when he's spinning four lightsabers super fast like some blender. Also he looks more advanced than Vader and much more agile.

And like a lot of other things in the prequels, he's only there so we can have yet another lightsaber fight, cause you know, having three fights in a movie is not enough, you need four or it gets boring.

DuracellEnergizer's avatar
RE: PT vs OT Scientific Study

Anchorhead said:

Maul & Grievous - that's just lazy.

If it's any consolation, their "pre-evil" names were Khameir Sarin and Qymaen jai Sheelal, respectively.

I know it isn't for me =D 

God doesn't think in terms of black or white - or even shades of gray - but in big, bright, bold hues of blue and orange.

haljordan28's avatar
RE: PT vs OT Scientific Study

WhatsMyName said:

The only "style" i found in the OT is Han Solo and Lando Calrissian busting out there dumb jokes. They always made me laugh.

And don't diss Darth Maul. You tell me one amazing force flip or a Jedi he offed, not as Anaking Skywalker, and prove it makes him better.

Darth Maul was indeed a very cool character. He didn't talk much, his costume was cool and kick ass, he looked evil as hell, and he fought well.

Episode 1 in my opinion was the only one of the PT films that felt "SOME WHAT" like the OT films. qui-gon and maul  were the only two good things to come out of all 3 of the PT films. Lucas in some  brilliant move   decided to kill them off though. Dooku and grivious were NOT needed. Maul and palpatine could have and would have  filled the space for villians in the 3 films.

I still am  amazed at how poorly these three films  were written. It is almost unbelivable. How someone could put so little thought and so little care  into the most awaited and looked forward too  films of all time. It really makes you  scratch your head.

Ziggy Stardust's avatar
RE: PT vs OT Scientific Study

At least TPM used real locations.

quadrennia.tumblr.com

CP3S said:


pittrek said:
I seriously hope I will live enough to see the original Star Wars trilogy in this quality
You will not. None of us will, except for a very old and dying Ziggy Stardust who will watch it through teary eyes as he remembers us all.  
bkev's avatar
RE: PT vs OT Scientific Study

AOTC did more than you think. They did film some of the Tatooine scenes in Tunisia as well as the Naboo scenes - the first part after they've landed, under the arches, is in Sevilla (Spain).

DuracellEnergizer's avatar
RE: PT vs OT Scientific Study

haljordan28 said:

Darth Maul was indeed a very cool character. He didn't talk much, his costume was cool and kick ass, he looked evil as hell, and he fought well.

His costume was really kind of "meh" to me. Rather drab and generic.

It'd be a different story altogether, though, if the costume had looked like this ...

God doesn't think in terms of black or white - or even shades of gray - but in big, bright, bold hues of blue and orange.

haljordan28's avatar
RE: PT vs OT Scientific Study

actually  durcell  that is pretty bad ass  too.  I could take that one as well.  Darth Maul was suich a good character  I have a hard time believing lucas came up with him.

zombie84's avatar
RE: PT vs OT Scientific Study

He didn't, the art department did.

The Secret History of Star Wars -- now available on Amazon.com!

"When George went back and put new creatures into the original Star Wars, I find that disturbing. It’s a revision of history. That bothers me."

--James Cameron, Entertainment Weekly, April 2010

WhatsMyName's avatar
RE: PT vs OT Scientific Study

Maul was a true, in my opinion, representation of what a sith should be. Merciless, powerful and amazing force powers. I know the OT is the OT and Luke wasn't a full fledged Jedi Knight, but no other Light Saber battle can beat Dual of the Fates in TPM

Last edited on March 2, 2011 at 5:57 AM by WhatsMyName
haljordan28's avatar
RE: PT vs OT Scientific Study

WhatsMyName said:

Maul was a true, in my opinion, representation of what a sith should be. Merciless, powerful and amazing force powers. I know the OT is the OT and Luke wasn't a full fledged Jedi Knight, but no other Light Saber battle can beat Dual of the Fates in TPM

duel pf the fates was exciting  and flashy  but it lacked the pure emotion  intensity  of the empire strikes back duel.  The episode 5 duel was realistic    and it  was breath taking.  when luke is walking down the hall   nad  vader jumps out of  no where just taking it to luke  it made you  grasp the seat at the theater. It was as if the viewer could read vaders mind and he knew this kid was not to be taken lightly anymore  and  he has to be disabled or  taken out or vader himself might  be taken out  by this yound jedi apprentice.

 

empire strikes back is just a perfect film in my opinion. the duel of the fates  was good  but it  was just more of the prequel circus performance stuff.   too many cheroographed  spins and  leaps. especially at the end  after  qui-gon  is struck down and obi-wan rushes  maul. It was  just too  staged and flashy for it's own good. to me the PT duels were just power ranger  type scenes. Where  with the OT the duels  looked just like sword fighting scenes in gladiator or braveheart or troy or lord of the rings.

TML's avatar
RE: PT vs OT Scientific Study

WhatsMyName said:

Maul was a true, in my opinion, representation of what a sith should be. Merciless, powerful and amazing force powers.

How was he merciless and powerful? All he did was look cool and did some gymnastics?

Anchorhead's avatar
RE: PT vs OT Scientific Study

TML said:

How was he merciless and powerful? All he did was look cool and did some gymnastics?

It's been a long time since I saw the film, but from what I can remember, I agree with TML.  The character seemed largely a creation for toy merchandising & Halloween costume sales.  He was little more than a posed figure.  Other than his twirling, he did very little.

Which gets back to Zombie's point earlier in the week of how Boba Fett was also just a posed figure, yet Lucas squeezed uber-mileage out of him. 

As has been the case with Lucas since the early 80s;  he doesn't need writers or actors.  He just needs a design group and a marketing department.

 

Crimson. Eleven. Delight. Petrichor.

Scruffy's avatar
RE: PT vs OT Scientific Study

Diego said:

And like a lot of other things in the prequels, he's only there so we can have yet another lightsaber fight, cause you know, having three fights in a movie is not enough, you need four or it gets boring.

I fell asleep during Obi-Wan's fight with Grievous.

I used to stay up all night watching the trilogy or playing the games. Then I fell asleep in the middle of the day watching a brand new Star Wars movie. That's when I knew all the fire had gone out of the relationship and we were never getting it back.

Fortunately, my brief nap left me refreshed for lightsaber fights #3 and 4.

None of this is really scientific of course. We could set up cameras to watch people's eyes while viewing the movies to track their attentiveness, or draw blood for stress hormones and endorphins after key scenes. We could also use EKGs, EEGs, plethysmographs, etc. to monitor physical arousal. Familiarity or recall can be measured by simple surveys, distributed at random to a large enough population. Advertisers and anti-advertising advocacy groups frequently use such surveys to measure mascot familiarity among children.

"It's the stoned movie you don't have to be stoned for." -- Tom Shales on Star Wars
Scruffy's gonna die the way he lived.
Members reading this topic: None