logo Sign In

Why don't people hate the Palpatine re-casting in ESB yet despise Force ghost Anakin's re-casting in RotJ? — Page 3

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I hate both. But I hate Hayden in ROTJ more. TBH any prequel invasion into the OT pisses me off the most.

I’ll take Han shooting first long before the Jango Fett Kiwi accent in TESB for Boba Fett. I’ll take all the CGI in ANH long before the lone CGI Dugg in Jabba’s palace.

I grew up with the OUT on VHS and saw the SEs in the cinemas as a teenager. I felt most of the additions were meh. It wasn’t until the 2004 versions were released that my venom for the SEs came about and it was mainly due to the prequel invasions in the films.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

The emperor in the originals looked like a guy in a cheap mask. So when i was a kid and watched the new editions of ESB it just looked like it was a remastered version of the emperor.

In comparison to Anakins ghost, there was nothing wrong with the original version… In fact Haydens creeper face felt like a downgrade.

Author
Time

The annoying thing about the Anakin change (to me) is that once again Lucas was changing the OT to suit his prequels when the prequels should have been made to suit the OT. Anakin died as an old man in the original canon - Lucas described him as being ‘in his 60s’ and I believe the novelisation described him as old and looking ‘not unlike Ben’. When I first saw ROTJ in '83 I felt Anakin looked like Owen Lars, which was a touching moment and conjured all kinds of speculation of what had occurred back in the day between these brothers. I can’t for the life of me understand why Lucas didn’t simply stick to the timeline and have Anakin/Hayden be around 35-40 (with Obi Wan being 45-50 or so) when Luke was born.

Author
Time

Wanderer_ said:

The emperor in the originals looked like a guy in a cheap mask. So when i was a kid and watched the new editions of ESB it just looked like it was a remastered version of the emperor.

Sorry what

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Marjorie Eaton with chimp eyes looks like “a guy in a cheap mask”, whilst Ian McDiarmid in cheap ROTS makeup looks “remastered”.

I don’t share that opinion, either.

Author
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:

Marjorie Eaton with chimp eyes looks like “a guy in a cheap mask”, whilst Ian McDiarmid in cheap ROTS makeup looks “remastered”.

I don’t share that opinion, either.

I may even go as far to say it’s the other way around.

Author
Time

ray_afraid said:

theMaestro said:

By that logic, the Hayden ghost is also a plot hole, since a long-haired Anakin with an intact right arm and those specific robes also never existed.

lol This.
Also, I guess Obi-Wan’s ghost should still be chopped in half.
Ridiculous.

You must admit that the scene after Yoda’s death would be infinitely better if Obi-wan sat on the log by placing his hands on his hips and pushing his upper body off of his lower body and setting it on the log, with his legs walking offscreen on their own.

You probably don’t recognize me because of the red arm.
Episode 9 Rewrite, The Starlight Project (Released!) and ANH Technicolor Project (Released!)

Author
Time

Even he could chose any form to show himself as, the Shaw form doesn’t make any sense.

Author
Time

Of all the forms he could take, the Shaw form makes the most sense. Visually, it’s consistent with how the other ghosts don’t magically de-age from when they died. And thematically, it represents growth with how the character has truly become a better person after all his life experiences. Any pre-Vader Anakin form just symbolizes regression because PT Anakin still acts on greedily possessive “love”, whereas post-Vader Anakin has finally grown beyond that flaw.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Anakin Starkiller said:

Even he could chose any form to show himself as, the Shaw form doesn’t make any sense to me.

FTFY

And frankly yes it does make sense. Hayden Anakin represents a character that Luke never knew, a character that became evil, and frankly makes the redemption less meaningful because it implies he’s reverting to his pre-evil self, not a redeemed man. And if you wanna frankly argue that unscarred Shaw never existed, neither did Anakin in those Jedi robes in both scenarios.

Author
Time

It primarily has to make sense to the people that watch the movie. If it doesn’t look like the burnt guy we saw earlier on, if we can’t recognize him, the movie makers have failed at story telling.

Star Wars is not an historical documentary about the GFFA, it’s a fairy tale that is maybe somewhat based on true facts. Like all fairy tales, entertainment is more important than the truth!

Han: Hey Lando! You kept your promise, right? Not a scratch?
Lando: Well, what’s left of her isn’t scratched. All the scratched parts got knocked off along the way.
Han (exasperated): Knocked off?!

Author
Time

Z6PO said:

It primarily has to make sense to the people that watch the movie. If it doesn’t look like the burnt guy we saw earlier on, if we can’t recognize him, the movie makers have failed at story telling.

*sarcasm mode ON*

But that’s why you should watch the movies in chronological order!

*sarcasm mode OFF*

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DuracellEnergizer said:

Marjorie Eaton with chimp eyes looks like “a guy in a cheap mask”, whilst Ian McDiarmid in cheap ROTS makeup looks “remastered”.

I don’t share that opinion, either.

Both have make up effects applied, the original holds up poorly whereas Ians make up looks a lot more organic and believable. In fact while watching the original version i always felt the emperors face was about to melt off at any stage of the movie.
https://images.app.goo.gl/kVczqCH7ggaiEoDM9

Author
Time

I’ve been thinking it about Anakin’s force ghost and I think what I’ve settled on (if I ever get around to doing the SE fan edit I want to do) is start out with Shaw and have it morph to Hayden. Not sure if that would work, but it is worth an experiment. The Emperor’s dialog should not have been changed and they shouldn’t have used the same makeup as Ep III. But the makeup is one of those things that the saga is now filled with as it was done out of order and is rife with changes.

Author
Time

Wanderer_ said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

Marjorie Eaton with chimp eyes looks like “a guy in a cheap mask”, whilst Ian McDiarmid in cheap ROTS makeup looks “remastered”.

I don’t share that opinion, either.

Both have make up effects applied, the original holds up poorly whereas Ians make up looks a lot more organic and believable. In fact while watching the original version i always felt the emperors face was about to melt off at any stage of the movie.
https://images.app.goo.gl/kVczqCH7ggaiEoDM9

Well, if you compare Revisited Palpatine to OUT Palpatine, of course the former’s gonna look superior to the latter.

Author
Time

After all that work to disguise the terrible ROTS latex makeup it does look… marginally better.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I can’t stand the original Emperor, and to be honest don’t care about Shaw or Hayden.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

ray_afraid said:

Z6PO said:

It primarily has to make sense to the people that watch the movie. If it doesn’t look like the burnt guy we saw earlier on, if we can’t recognize him, the movie makers have failed at story telling.

But, since it’s easy to recognize him as the man we just met, this is no problem.
…right?

Is it? I think especially once you remove the eyebrows he’s just about completely unrecognizable.

Author
Time

I despise both changes - along with all the others inflicted on the original trilogy.

The new Emperor footage (EMPIRE) looks bad. The actor’s face has become fuller with age, and the make-up covering it makes it look even fatter. The new dialogue and its delivery are also sh*t.

Young Anakin looks like he has impure thoughts, concerning his beautiful daughter. Unintentionally creepy scene.

All these changes would be a lot easier to live with if the unaltered versions existed alongside these travesties.

Author
Time

Z6PO said:

It primarily has to make sense to the people that watch the movie. If it doesn’t look like the burnt guy we saw earlier on, if we can’t recognize him, the movie makers have failed at story telling.

Star Wars is not an historical documentary about the GFFA, it’s a fairy tale that is maybe somewhat based on true facts. Like all fairy tales, entertainment is more important than the truth!

If you’re gonna argue that, I found it extremely jarring as a child the first time I saw the pre-SE version of RotJ with some weird old guy in the place of Anakin.