logo Sign In

The Beginning: Making 'Episode I': A comedy masterpiece

Author
Time
Up there with the best of them: Arsenic and old lace, Ladykillers, The big lebowski, Some like it hot, Bowfinger, SPACEBALLS etc!

Whoever hasn't seen it yet, it's on the 2nd disc of the Phantom Menace dvd. It should have been te 1st ( Nah, I kind of enjoy and like the film so it's all for laughs)! Not even five minutes in, the docu lives up to its comic potential, and trust me there's whole lot more funny in there than just this line from George Lucas.

'JAR JAR IS THE KEY TO ALL THIS. IF WE GET JAR JAR WORKING. CAUSHE HE'S A FUNNIER CHARACTER THAN WE'VE HAD IN THE OTHER MOVIES BEFORE.'


I was laughing my ass off when they were shooting tests for jar jar and some guy was holding a very ugly jar jar puppet moving him about whilst driving in a jeep around the range. I don't know, it just gets to me.

I'll you guys talk about it while I have a loooong day of college ahead of me! =(
Author
Time
IIRC there's a shot of Ben Burtt editing with Lucas over his shoulder telling us how they can "punch out" captain Panaka from one take and insert him in another take where other actors gave better performances. I'm sure Burtt is suffering in silence and looks totally pissed off at all the pointless meddling. What would Marcia have have said if she'd been editing?!
Author
Time
The ironic thing about that whole documentary is that Lucas had such high hopes for the PT at that point, and I really think his heart was in it originally, as he just totally miscalculated his audience with Jar Jar, Jake Lloyd, etc. I mean the man had a camera follow him around from 1994 all the way up to shooting the movie and the first rough cut, and finally the premiere, so he really thought lightning would strike twice as it did in 1977. If you notice AOTC/ROTS don't have anything near the behind the scenes footage the TPM documentary does.

The screentests with all 3 10 year old Anakins reading with Portman is cringeworthy, as NONE of them are good! Jar Jar is the key sums up the whole problem with the PT, as it was the visuals and CG that would wow the audience, not the characters and story! The first rough cut is sad to watch as McCallum and everyone there sits there stonefaced as they are thinking, "This is it?" I honestly believe they knew it was a dud there, and at that point it was too late.

I believe the backlash to TPM really changed Lucas to this day, as to his opinion on the OOT, the OOT fans, the way he kept changing the story of AOTC/ROTS as it seems like he didn't follow his original ideas that TPM set out to say. TPM is my least favorite of the PT movies, as I find it utterly childish in most parts of the movie, but I am coming around to what Lucas was doing as compared to the other 2 PT movies, as that one is atleast tries to be like the OT movies trying to be fun, using real landscapes and having that sense of adventure. And yes I think Lucas had the right idea with Jar Jar because humor was always a part of the OT movies, the problem: HE WASN'T FUNNY! So AOTC/ROTS are devoid of ANY humor and just stick out as this 'trying to be serious cheesy B-movie."
Author
Time
Originally posted by: CO
The ironic thing about that whole documentary is that Lucas had such high hopes for the PT at that point, and I really think his heart was in it originally, as he just totally miscalculated his audience with Jar Jar, Jake Lloyd, etc. I mean the man had a camera follow him around from 1994 all the way up to shooting the movie and the first rough cut, and finally the premiere, so he really thought lightning would strike twice as it did in 1977. If you notice AOTC/ROTS don't have anything near the behind the scenes footage the TPM documentary does.





^^ Co....You've just summed up my points on TPM 100%. That's how I describe the film to my friends when they go on about how bad TPM is.
I too felt that Lucas gave his heart and soul into that film, trying to make it the best he possibly could (there's no denying the shear amount of detail and hard work put into that film) that he must have been truly heartbroken to have it slammed the way it was.
Then to make 2 & 3 for the 'fans'. The same fans that slated him in the first place. I dunno, I feel sorry for the guy. I actually prefer TPM to that pile of crap AOTC. Out of all 3 prequels I find myself watching Sith more than the other two these days.

http://www.facebook.com/DirtyWookie

Author
Time
I was actually very disappointed with the amount of [or lack of] documantary footage for Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Yea, I re-watched this a couple months ago mainly because I hadn't seen it in a while and "I've learned so much" in just the past year of posting on these forums. Yes, I would also have to say it's quite amusing, especially watching it now ten whole years after it began.

One thing I remember noticing this time, now that I was watching with a more discerning eye, is that George actually seems to get genuinely annoyed at one point during that conversation he, McCallum and (I think) Burtt are having after getting out of the screening room for that first roughcut. One of the two other guys says something in that slow, trying to say it the nicest he can way and George sort of snaps and goes "yea, yea, yea, I know, this and that" just as the camera cuts away.

Another thing I caught the fuller implication of this time around was how Titanic had not been released when Episode I started shooting, so when they're doing the pickups in Spring of '98 that's why George says "we're never going to beat Titanic" when Frank Oz asks him how well he thinks Episode I is going to do. Also, I didn't notice until this time that George was saying "More American Graffiti" and how it only made 2 cents (or something to that effect).

And, of course, seeing that ending with the Rick McCallum premiere and all the fans screaming upon the cut to the title shot conjured up all kinds of feelings, especially after reading someone's account (I think it was magnoliafan's) of pretty much that same thing happening and the very steep downward decline the rest of the movie after the opening crawl was.

CO, I was thinking the same thing about how Lucas probably went in a different direction than he was going to for eps II and III after all of the TPM backlash, and I echo HotRod's sentiments when I say that AOTC is the true disappointment of the PT. It was nothing but filler to get to Episode III, and even parts of that ended up being filler. The reason I look at TPM differently is that it was only the beginning of the story. Lucas could've gone in any direction he wanted to get from there to Episode IV, and it's the direction he took that disappointed me.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Fang Zei


Another thing I caught the fuller implication of this time around was how Titanic had not been released when Episode I started shooting, so when they're doing the pickups in Spring of '98 that's why George says "we're never going to beat Titanic" when Frank Oz asks him how well he thinks Episode I is going to do. Also, I didn't notice until this time that George was saying "More American Graffiti" and how it only made 2 cents (or something to that effect).

.



Lucas also says to Oz, "You know you can ruin these things." in reference that a sequel or a prequel can totally ruin what has been done by its previous movies, and I think that is what we have been saying for years.

I think deep down Lucas knows the PT is pretty bad compared to the OT, but the movies made so much money, he is able to justify what he has done, cause most movie series that have bad sequels usually don't make ANY money, and it is the audience that dictates when the creator should stop. In the end, most SW fans were going to see the PT movies no matter how bad they were, cause we all wanted them to be great, and we all wanted them to fit nicely into a 6 movie saga, so in that respect the money the PT made is irrelevant, compared to what people think of them after it is all said in done.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Johnny Ringo

I was actually very disappointed with the amount of [or lack of] Jar-Jar footage for Revenge of the Sith.


Fixed.
Author
Time
Very interesting thoughts. Lucas messed up bad with the PT, I wish he would have stuck to The Phantom Menace style, but with some added maturity. Perhaps by the time he realized the Phantom Menace wasn't what he wanted it to be he felt like he was already commited to doing the next two and kind of gave up on them and just followed through with them without the care he put into TPM. Anytime you try to please everyone you end up in some trouble, that is kind of what he was trying to do I think.

If George does feel like he kind of ruined things with the PT, I wish he would just give up on Star Wars and go makes some films. I would like to see him redeem himself as a serious director, perhaps become a real life version of his Darth Vader, pull off the mask that is the SW franchise and come back to the lightside of the director's chair. Proving to us once again, like he did back in 83, that it is never really too late to turn back from any chosen path.

Regardless of criticism, he should have put out the movies he wanted to put out. I think that is the true mark of any good story teller, to tell the story THEY want to read or watch. It is obvious this was the case with Star Wars (1977), Lucas make a film with elements from all the television serials and movie he watched while growing up. He wanted to make his own vision of the kind of fantasy stories he liked.

There is an essay by C.S. Lewis titled "On Three Ways of Writing for Children" in which he explains that when he writes children stories he does not write down to his intended audience or try to find out what kind of books are popular, rather he writes a story he would like to read. I think that is why so many adults love Lewis' Narnia books and his Ransom Trilogy. In both cases Lewis wrote the kind of story that he himself would be interested in reading, rather than trying to come up with something children might like. In fact, let's look at J. K. Rowling, a relatively new author who poped up out of nowhere to have her name know all over the world. I think it is quite obvious that with the Harry Potter books she is writing the kind of story that interests her very much and was very close to her, not nessicarily the kind of book she thinks would be popular or that she felt would sell a lot of copies. I really felt that all throughout the PT that Lucas was trying to change things to make people like them more. What? You don't like Jar Jar? Fine I'll give you less Jar Jar. What? You didn't think there was a good enough villian in the second film to live up to the standard of Vader and Maul? Alright, I will make a really great half man half robot who uses light sabers! What? Not enough violence? Not mature enough? Okay, I will make it more mature. How does decapitation, lots of amputations, the slaughtering of children, and someone being burned alive sound?

This is why we have such a disjointed trilogy, one film you have filled with cartoony characters and fart jokes, then by the last film you have the murder of kids and Anakin being burned alive on screen.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time

I realize that so much of this sort of discussion comes down to taste, but I don't understand how AOTC takes as much flak as it does.

TPM was an utter failure in most respects, but it did at least succeed at getting the PT story underway. A lot of AOTC was significantly flawed, but we did get to see Anakin struggling with his mentor, with his attraction to Padme, and with his Dark Side temptations (I disagree with the execution, as I will address later). ROTS doesn't fulfill its primary purpose - a plausible turn to the Dark Side by Anakin Skywalker.

First of all, Anakin's character development was out of its logical order. In AOTC, Anakin openly clashes with his master but is all buddy-buddy with Obi-Wan in ROTS. If someone is moving gradually toward the Dark Side of the Force, does it not logically follow that Anakin would be more friendly to, and less critical of, Obi-Wan the second movie rather than the third? Ditto his attitude toward the Jedi Order. He doesn't particularly praise or criticize the Order until they placed him onto the Council without granting him the rank of Master. I actually liked that plot point in ROTS, but there was absolutely no build up to it. Anakin, starting in AOTC, should have been wary of the Order and that suspicion should have festered and grown all throughout AOTC and ROTS up to the Council's decision, where Anakin's distrust of the Order reached a boiling point. Anakin at least revealed a mistrust of Republic politics in AOTC, but that one aspect of Anakin's character wasn't enough to convince. I know lots of people who don't trust the government and don't slaughter children.

Second of all, Anakin's treatment of Padme in ROTS was baffling. "I love you, I love our child, I'll save you, but right after I turn to the Dark Side, I'll try to kill you after we have a little spat just because you're hanging out with Obi-Wan." Huh?

Third of all, Anakin's loyalty to Palpatine should grow steadily (again, starting in AOTC). No one kills children ten seconds after swearing loyalty to another - hell, I'll bet even Charles Manson gave his followers simple tests at first: "Prove your loyalty to me...and hand me that pencil!"

ROTS was supposed to be the payoff of the PT - but it didn't work for me.

Want to book yourself or a guest on THE VFP Show? PM me!

Author
Time
"A lot of AOTC was significantly flawed, but we did get to see Anakin struggling with his mentor, with his attraction to Padme, and with his Dark Side temptations"

But what does any of that matter? Who cares if Anakin struggled with his mentor, was that really ever suppose to be the point? Instead of the hero Anakin Skywalker was suppose to be, we only see him as a rebellious teenager. He isn't doing anything but clashing with his mentor. I don't see any of those things you listed as a defense for AOTC against all the flak it gets. It deserves that flak because it is a bad, bad, terrible movie. I wouldn't call TPM a failure in most respects though. None of the PT were failures, they all did great in Box Office and DVD sales, thanks to their name. TPM is the only one of the trilogy that strikes me as real. It is the only one with an organic feel to it. It still used pupets and it still used locations. All the others just feel like extended toy commercials. Phantom had some very childish elements, but if you go beyond that then it by far has the greatest OTish moments of the whole PT in it. That saber battle at the end set the standard for saber battles so high, and unfortunately neither of the other two even tried. The first time I saw Ep. II I was expecting a nifty little saber battle at the end, instead I get a CG Yoda going beserk. Episode III, again doesn't even try to out due any of the sagas saber fights. Even the Anakin Obi-Wan fight is pretty boring and disjointed thanks to the lame Yoda Palps battle.


"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
But what does any of that matter? Who cares if Anakin struggled with his mentor, was that really ever suppose to be the point?

Look - my argument isn't based upon how I would have written the prequels. As Episode II was written, Anakin clashing with Obi-Wan was a relevant plot point and I think Episode II fulfilled its basic objectives adequately.

Instead of the hero Anakin Skywalker was suppose to be, we only see him as a rebellious teenager.

Not true. The opening dialogue between he and Obi-Wan establishes that Anakin has saved Obi-Wan at least once before. Later, Anakin foils the second assassination attempt, rescues Obi-Wan in the skies or Coruscant, then dives out of his speeder onto the assassin's.

I don't see any of those things you listed as a defense for AOTC against all the flak it gets. It deserves that flak because it is a bad, bad, terrible movie.

This sounds suspiciously like circular reasoning.

I wouldn't call TPM a failure in most respects though. None of the PT were failures, they all did great in Box Office and DVD sales, thanks to their name.


When I said failure, I didn't mean commercially. I don't even care about that sort of thing. Lots of shitty movies, many worse than TPM, have made big money.

TPM is the only one of the trilogy that strikes me as real. It is the only one with an organic feel to it. It still used pupets and it still used locations. All the others just feel like extended toy commercials.


Well, to pose a question you posed earlier, So what? Sets and puppets do not a movie make - just as CGI does not a movie make.

Phantom had some very childish elements, but if you go beyond that then it by far has the greatest OTish moments of the whole PT in it. That saber battle at the end set the standard for saber battles so high, and unfortunately neither of the other two even tried.


Well, as far as sheer artistry goes, there is no surpassing the Darth Maul vs. Qui-Gon & Obi-Wan battle. That was a beautifully coreographed scene. However, it is incorrect to connect this saber battle to any in the OT. The saber battles in the OT weren't nearly that artistic, especially the very first one.


Want to book yourself or a guest on THE VFP Show? PM me!

Author
Time
Originally posted by: vote_for_palpatine


Well, as far as sheer artistry goes, there is no surpassing the Darth Maul vs. Qui-Gon & Obi-Wan battle. That was a beautifully coreographed scene. However, it is incorrect to connect this saber battle to any in the OT. The saber battles in the OT weren't nearly that artistic, especially the very first one.


That scene felt too choreographed to me. It lacked the kinetic feel of the duels in ESB and ROTJ. I agree that the SW duel wasn't much, but considering Ben's age and the fact that he had decided beforehand to let Vader "win", it's understandable why it ended up being what it was.

The ESB duel to me was the best. Maybe it wasn't quite as fancy as the TPM duel, but it felt more like a real duel. You could feel Luke's utter exhaustion by the end. The duel in TPM felt more to me like a dance.

Author
Time
Originally posted by: crazyrabbits
Originally posted by: Johnny Ringo

I was actually very disappointed with the amount of [or lack of] Jar-Jar footage for Revenge of the Sith.


Fixed.


Hey! c'mon now. Play nice.

Author
Time
Originally posted by: vote_for_palpatine


Look - my argument isn't based upon how I would have written the prequels. As Episode II was written, Anakin clashing with Obi-Wan was a relevant plot point and I think Episode II fulfilled its basic objectives adequately.

Man, if the criteria for a movie being decent were that it fullfills it objectives that it set out to make, then we would have a lot less crappy movies. I am sure the makers of Mano the Hands of Fate felt that their film went out to achieve they wanted it to from a story telling standpoint. Anakin's clashing with Obi-Wan could have been done a million other ways, but the way that it was done is a joke and painful to watch. Hence, it deserve flak.


Not true. The opening dialogue between he and Obi-Wan establishes that Anakin has saved Obi-Wan at least once before. Later, Anakin foils the second assassination attempt, rescues Obi-Wan in the skies or Coruscant, then dives out of his speeder onto the assassin's.

So just because he saves Obi-Wan's life, doesn't mean he wasn't rebellious, whiney teenager. I have known teens who have claimed to hate their parents and wish they were dead, only for their parents to end up actually dying some accident, and guess what? The kid usually has a pretty hard time coping with this. So you are saying that if Anakin were truely a rebellious teenager, he would simply not have bothered to save Obi-Wan's life?


This sounds suspiciously like circular reasoning.


Okay... good comeback... uh... never mind.


Well, to pose a question you posed earlier, So what? Sets and puppets do not a movie make - just as CGI does not a movie make.


Okay, you English is really falling apart on his in the last sentence, just thought I'd mention it. No, that does not make a movie, never said it did. But it undeniably sets the feel of a movie. I feel like I could visit Theed. I feel like I could walk through the jungles of Naboo, just like it has always felt that I could walk though the forests of Endor, or the snows of Hoth. There are really no locations in either of the other two films that feel tangible. Oddball and the clone pilots were so painfully CG, as were many of the other CG characters. This is why I said that TPM felt more real and organic than the others. Never said it was a good movie because it used puppets and real locations. I simply said those contributed to it feeling more real than the others. If you ask me what Kashyyk looks like, I would say blurry and green. Because that is all I ever got out. Feels like a scene out of a 100% CG film, not even any of the characters are real in those scenes. If it had been real, the whole wookie battle probably would have been pretty cool. Imagine the ewok battle, but with wookies.


Well, as far as sheer artistry goes, there is no surpassing the Darth Maul vs. Qui-Gon & Obi-Wan battle. That was a beautifully coreographed scene. However, it is incorrect to connect this saber battle to any in the OT. The saber battles in the OT weren't nearly that artistic, especially the very first one.


Oh, sorry, I didn't realize it was incorrect to connect it to the OT. I should have asked you first if it was correct or not.

What I meant by that had nothign to do with sheer artistry, what I mean by that was that it was the only lightsaber battle in the PT, that was fun to watch like the OT. It was the only lightsaber battle in the PT, that had you on the edge of your seat, like the lightsaber battles of the OT. But this too is probably incorrect, or circular, or spherical or something.

Anyway, you asked why does it deserve so much flak, I gave you plenty of answers by now. I thought you seriously wanted to have someone point out to you why it gets so much flak, not to get into an endless debate on why it is treated unfairly, and who is and isn't giving suspiciously circular reasoning. In all honesty I don't think you can say the PT is treated unfairly by any means at all, it is a series of crappy movies that are successful simply because they bear the same name as a series of really good movies that were made a long time ago. They really didn't deserve the success they got. If it hadn't been for the name Star Wars, it is not likely it would have done too well. You can say they may have done well on their own, and they may have, but you simply can't ignore the 20 years worth of Star Wars fans who rushed to theaters with their kids to see each one of these that would not have done so had it been something completely different.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Johnny Ringo
Originally posted by: crazyrabbits
Originally posted by: Johnny Ringo

I was actually very disappointed with the amount of [or lack of] Jar-Jar footage for Revenge of the Sith.


Fixed.


Hey! c'mon now. Play nice.


Heh, I couldn't resist.

I think that, with any franchise built on the back of one person's vision (James Cameron and the Terminator series, Francis Ford Coppola and the Godfather series), making a sequel much farther than the road is not always a good idea. You get this sort of "mystique" built up in the minds of the fanbase, and the end product, even if it's good, is sure to be a letdown. Most people were set out to hate Terminator 3 when it was announced Cameron wasn't directing, and the movie was actually quite watchable, but it will always be the black sheep of that series. With this film, I think that once the euphoria of the premiere wore off, people were quick to slight the film for it's kid-like elements (the comic relief, the questionable acting by the child actor), but they forget about the great lightsaber duel, the scenes on Coruscant (which I thought were quite good)...what I mean to say is that, while I don't think the film is great by any means (it could have used more finesse like the original script), it will always be maligned, and I personally don't think it could have ever lived up to the standards Star Wars fans had set in their minds. Just my opinion, of course.
Author
Time
I was ready to love Terminator 3--I went to that theater excited as hell. I didn't expect it to live up to either two originals because I know that those are so above-average that its an unrealistic expectation. But when the credits rolled and i left the theater I realised that the film fucking sucked just because it fucking sucked. Okay, some nice action scenes, and a pretty neat last 10 minutes. But you know what--Wing Commander has redeemable qualities like this. Battlefield Earth has some interesting effects and a cool action scene. Scary Movie 4 has a few jokes I laughed at. Every movie has something good in it, something worth watching. When you get a pool of talent--Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor, designer Doug Chiang and Gavin Boucquet, the best special effects wizards in existance, John Williams and hell, even George Lucas--of course there will be elements, scenes and moments that are watchable, good or even excellent. But the reason that people think Wing Commander sucked, Terminator 3 was poor and Phantom Menace was poor was because, for whatever good elements in there, they were swallowed up by ten times as many bad elements. Thats what matters.

And this excuse of "fans were waiting to hate" is total bullshit to excuse poor filmmaking. Lord of the Rings got more successful with each film, and this had almost as much expectation--and more, IMO, challenges to overcome. But LOTR, while not perfect, was done pretty well, and people also embraced Harry Potter and Chronicles of Narnia--films that are light and whimsical like TPM, appealing to young kids. But people and critics praised them because they were done well. Theres this myth that people wanted to hate TPM--but that makes absolutely no sense. Why the hell would Star Wars fans seek out to dislike what was such a good story?? Yes, the expectations were high, but if the movie was at least done half-way well people would have liked it. Look at ROTS--its not exactly great, its probably worse than ROTJ, but fans are willing to give a little, and this film was embraced by most people as worthwhile and had almost no backlash except by select fans. Phantom Menace was slagged because it wasn't just "not great" but because it was outright bad. It had terrible writing, terrible directing, and even the acting was kind of dull. Sure, the music and effects and costumes and designs were good, but thats just because Lucas had a bunch of talented people around him that he paid to make the film for him. The emotional core of the film--the writing, conveyed by directing and made material by the acting--was a hollow failure for the most part, even if there are some moments that succeed.
Author
Time

That scene felt too choreographed to me. It lacked the kinetic feel of the duels in ESB and ROTJ. I agree that the SW duel wasn't much, but considering Ben's age and the fact that he had decided beforehand to let Vader "win", it's understandable why it ended up being what it was.

The ESB duel to me was the best. Maybe it wasn't quite as fancy as the TPM duel, but it felt more like a real duel. You could feel Luke's utter exhaustion by the end. The duel in TPM felt more to me like a dance.

I wasn't judging the saber battle in an overall sense - I was judging them by an artistic standard. I do agree with you that the TPM battle lacks realism at times, particularly when Obi-Wan and Darth Maul spin away from each other and strike a pose. Also, the end of that duel was extremely stupid. Darth Maul, who can evidently react with incredible quickness to anything, basically stands there while Obi-Wan vaults over him, calls a saber into has hand, and cuts him in half.


Originally posted by: C3PX
Originally posted by: vote_for_palpatine


Look - my argument isn't based upon how I would have written the prequels. As Episode II was written, Anakin clashing with Obi-Wan was a relevant plot point and I think Episode II fulfilled its basic objectives adequately.

Man, if the criteria for a movie being decent were that it fullfills it objectives that it set out to make, then we would have a lot less crappy movies. I am sure the makers of Mano the Hands of Fate felt that their film went out to achieve they wanted it to from a story telling standpoint. Anakin's clashing with Obi-Wan could have been done a million other ways, but the way that it was done is a joke and painful to watch. Hence, it deserve flak.

But what is TPM trying to accomplish? It tries to establish Anakin as the chosen one. And sure, he runs a good podrace, but in the end he's just randomly pressing buttons in space and not only doesn't get blown to bits, he destroys the Death Star - er, Droid Control Ship.

Not true. The opening dialogue between he and Obi-Wan establishes that Anakin has saved Obi-Wan at least once before. Later, Anakin foils the second assassination attempt, rescues Obi-Wan in the skies or Coruscant, then dives out of his speeder onto the assassin's.

So just because he saves Obi-Wan's life, doesn't mean he wasn't rebellious, whiney teenager.

Reading is fundamental, my son. You said all he did was whine and rebel, that he wasn't shown as a hero. In the first 30 minutes of the movie, Anakin pulls off three heroic acts. I didn't deny that Anakin was whiny and rebellious - you said he was nothing but that. Let the record reflect that you were wrong.

I have known teens who have claimed to hate their parents and wish they were dead, only for their parents to end up actually dying some accident, and guess what? The kid usually has a pretty hard time coping with this. So you are saying that if Anakin were truely a rebellious teenager, he would simply not have bothered to save Obi-Wan's life?

That's not what I'm saying at all. I don't know where you're getting this from. Correct me if I'm wrong, but to me it seems that you think that Anakin is a flat character in AOTC. He's not. He obviously respects Obi-Wan, yet bristles under his tutelage at the same time. If your point is that Hayden Christiansen didn't properly convey that dichotomy, I have no problem with that. HC was terrible in AOTC, and not much better in ROTS.

This sounds suspiciously like circular reasoning.

Okay... good comeback... uh... never mind.

Wow. QED, I guess.

Well, to pose a question you posed earlier, So what? Sets and puppets do not a movie make - just as CGI does not a movie make.


Okay, you English is really falling apart on his in the last sentence, just thought I'd mention it.


Those were sentence fragments used deliberately to make a point. I know how to write, thanks. And BTW, you meant to say " your English", not " you English".

No, that does not make a movie, never said it did. But it undeniably sets the feel of a movie. I feel like I could visit Theed. I feel like I could walk through the jungles of Naboo, just like it has always felt that I could walk though the forests of Endor, or the snows of Hoth. There are really no locations in either of the other two films that feel tangible. Oddball and the clone pilots were so painfully CG, as were many of the other CG characters. This is why I said that TPM felt more real and organic than the others. Never said it was a good movie because it used puppets and real locations. I simply said those contributed to it feeling more real than the others. If you ask me what Kashyyk looks like, I would say blurry and green. Because that is all I ever got out. Feels like a scene out of a 100% CG film, not even any of the characters are real in those scenes. If it had been real, the whole wookie battle probably would have been pretty cool. Imagine the ewok battle, but with wookies.


That's good and fair. However, if AOTC and especially ROTS had been better movies, I don't think people would object to the CG as much.

Well, as far as sheer artistry goes, there is no surpassing the Darth Maul vs. Qui-Gon & Obi-Wan battle. That was a beautifully coreographed scene. However, it is incorrect to connect this saber battle to any in the OT. The saber battles in the OT weren't nearly that artistic, especially the very first one.


Oh, sorry, I didn't realize it was incorrect to connect it to the OT. I should have asked you first if it was correct or not.


Zing!

What I meant by that had nothign to do with sheer artistry, what I mean by that was that it was the only lightsaber battle in the PT, that was fun to watch like the OT. It was the only lightsaber battle in the PT, that had you on the edge of your seat, like the lightsaber battles of the OT. But this too is probably incorrect, or circular, or spherical or something.


Your previous post was vaguely worded to the point where I had to guess at your meaning. You explained yourself much better this time.

Anyway, you asked why does it deserve so much flak, I gave you plenty of answers by now.


"It deserves that flak because it is a bad, bad, terrible movie" = plenty of answers? Forgive me if I'm still not convinced.

I thought you seriously wanted to have someone point out to you why it gets so much flak, not to get into an endless debate on why it is treated unfairly, and who is and isn't giving suspiciously circular reasoning.


This is your second jab at my circular reasoning post. I'm wondering if you even know what that means.

In all honesty I don't think you can say the PT is treated unfairly by any means at all, it is a series of crappy movies that are successful simply because they bear the same name as a series of really good movies that were made a long time ago. They really didn't deserve the success they got. If it hadn't been for the name Star Wars, it is not likely it would have done too well. You can say they may have done well on their own, and they may have, but you simply can't ignore the 20 years worth of Star Wars fans who rushed to theaters with their kids to see each one of these that would not have done so had it been something completely different.


This answers an argument I didn't make.

Want to book yourself or a guest on THE VFP Show? PM me!

Author
Time
Originally posted by: crazyrabbitsbr> Most people were set out to hate Terminator 3 when it was announced Cameron wasn't directing, and the movie was actually quite watchable, but it will always be the black sheep of that series. .


I never bought into the theory the fans were ready to hate the film. Everyone I know saw T3 opening weekend, as it did have an initial great first weekend, but the movie pretty much sucked. The reason it sucked is that Mostow payed no attention to character development the same way Cameron does on his Terminator movies , and it didn't have anything interest until the last 10 minutes when the movie teases you with a supposed sequel in the ending that fans are still waiting for! The T3 ending is like ESB and then finding out Lucas was not going to make any more SW movies in 1980!

T3 is a typical summer blockbuster movie, as it is entertaining for a rental one night, with good action scenes, but not much substance, and in many ways contradicts the last 2 Terminator films, because the whole moral of the first 2 Terminator films is that you can make your fate and the future isn't set yet, but after T3, World War III was happening whether you like it or not. I saw T3 once in the theater, I rented it again that fall, and never have cared to watch it again.

Author
Time
Originally posted by: zombie84
I was ready to love Terminator 3--I went to that theater excited as hell. I didn't expect it to live up to either two originals because I know that those are so above-average that its an unrealistic expectation. But when the credits rolled and i left the theater I realised that the film fucking sucked just because it fucking sucked. Okay, some nice action scenes, and a pretty neat last 10 minutes. But you know what--Wing Commander has redeemable qualities like this. Battlefield Earth has some interesting effects and a cool action scene. Scary Movie 4 has a few jokes I laughed at. Every movie has something good in it, something worth watching. When you get a pool of talent--Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor, designer Doug Chiang and Gavin Boucquet, the best special effects wizards in existance, John Williams and hell, even George Lucas--of course there will be elements, scenes and moments that are watchable, good or even excellent. But the reason that people think Wing Commander sucked, Terminator 3 was poor and Phantom Menace was poor was because, for whatever good elements in there, they were swallowed up by ten times as many bad elements. Thats what matters.


I totally agree. I didn't mean that people outright assumed the movie would be spectacular, but with any sequel to a franchise that is made many years later, the memory of the previous entries will cause everyone to build up images of what they think the film is going to be like in their head, and I don't mean necessarily good or bad, but everyone has a different perception, and when you get all those people into a theatre, after so long, there will undoubtedly (in my opinion, at least) be mixed reactions to what the audience is seeing.

Author
Time
So anyway, guys, Ahmed Best 'Jar Jar Binks' is one smooth motherfucker (check ep I docu). Might as well have played Master Windu instead of Sam Jackson.

Ahmed Best 'Mace Windu': Hey yo, boyo, yousa on da council, but wesa do not grant you da rank of master, yousa big doo-doo head.

Author
Time
vote_for_palpatine, do you really like getting into these kinds of pointless debates? Because I don't. It is a waste of time and I don't have that much time to waste. They especially get pointless when they become biting and everyone starts talking down to each other. Since you already bothered to put me down in a few areas and make me sound stupid, I'll give a few quick defenses and clairifications,


Reading is fundamental, my son. You said all he did was whine and rebel" I never used the word "all", what I said was, "Instead of the hero Anakin Skywalker was suppose to be, we only see him as a..."

Maybe "only" was true strong of a word, but I still stand by what I said. We should have seen him as a hero, not a rebellious teen. Also what's with the "my son" what makes you so convinced you are so much older than me?


"That's not what I'm saying at all. I don't know where you're getting this from. Correct me if I'm wrong, but to me it seems that you think that Anakin is a flat character in AOTC. He's not."

Okay, I didn't realize your attack was against my use of the world "only" I thought you were saying it was not true that he was a rebellious teen, with the fact that he saved Obi-Wan as proof that he wasn't.


"Those were sentence fragments used deliberately to make a point. I know how to write, thanks. And BTW, you meant to say " your English", not " you English"."

Hmm, don't see how talking like Yoda makes any points, but alright. Yeah, I have a tendacy to leave the "r"s off of my "your"s when I am typing in a hurry and not proof reading. Very clever on turning that around to prove I can't write and you can. I can see you are very experienced in arguing over the internet.


"That's good and fair. However, if AOTC and especially ROTS had been better movies, I don't think people would object to the CG as much."

Of course! No doubt about it. It could have been a full out CG film without a spec of live footage to be found anywhere, and I would have had nothing but praise for it had it been a good movie.


"Zing!"

Yeah, I figured you would answer with something like that.


"Your previous post was vaguely worded to the point where I had to guess at your meaning. You explained yourself much better this time."

I never even mentioned the artistry of it, odd you would assume that. You told me it was incorrect to compare it to the OT battles because of they were not as artistic. Not even sure how something like that has the ability to be incorrect. I said, "it by far has the greatest OTish moments of the whole PT in it. That saber battle at the end set the standard for saber battles so high, and unfortunately neither of the other two even tried." Not sure how that is vague, I simply meant that it set the standard for saber battles pretty high and the other two didn't even come close. I consider it an OTish moment because it was a moment in the film where I felt like I was watching a new Star Wars movie.


"It deserves that flak because it is a bad, bad, terrible movie" = plenty of answers? Forgive me if I'm still not convinced."

I never said that that one sentence was the plenty of good answers. I wrote more than just that.


"This is your second jab at my circular reasoning post. I'm wondering if you even know what that means."

Yes, I made it this far in life without knowing what circular reasoning was, you caught me. You are by far my intellectual superior.


"This answers an argument I didn't make."

I didn't intend to answer an arguement made by you with that last section of my last post. It was in response to your feeling that AOTC gets too much undeserved flak. I was just offering that I didn't feel they got undeserved flak, but rather quite the opposite.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
Originally posted by: vote_for_palpatine


This sounds suspiciously like circular reasoning.


You're sounding suspiciously like a separatist!


Somebody had to say it...

IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!

"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005

"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM

"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.

Rewrite the Prequels!

 

Author
Time
Originally posted by: C3PX
vote_for_palpatine, do you really like getting into these kinds of pointless debates? Because I don't. It is a waste of time and I don't have that much time to waste. They especially get pointless when they become biting and everyone starts talking down to each other. Since you already bothered to put me down in a few areas and make me sound stupid, I'll give a few quick defenses and clairifications,

Yeah, I'm going to end this exchange in this post. Bear in mind that I was not the one who began the putdown fest, so don't go playing the poor tortured victim here. I don't get preemptively snarky with anyone, and in fact my first post on this topic had nothing to do with you. To be fair, maybe that's what you thought because my first post came right after a post of yours.

Reading is fundamental, my son. You said all he did was whine and rebel" I never used the word "all", what I said was, "Instead of the hero Anakin Skywalker was suppose to be, we only see him as a..."

Maybe "only" was true strong of a word, but I still stand by what I said. We should have seen him as a hero, not a rebellious teen. Also what's with the "my son" what makes you so convinced you are so much older than me?

As I mentioned before, I only get snarky when attacked, hence the talking down. (I can't believe I'm actually explaining this!)

"That's not what I'm saying at all. I don't know where you're getting this from. Correct me if I'm wrong, but to me it seems that you think that Anakin is a flat character in AOTC. He's not."

Okay, I didn't realize your attack was against my use of the world "only" I thought you were saying it was not true that he was a rebellious teen, with the fact that he saved Obi-Wan as proof that he wasn't.

I wasn't attacking - I can't be expected to accurately read into things all the time, so when you used the word "only" I assumed that's what you meant.

"Those were sentence fragments used deliberately to make a point. I know how to write, thanks. And BTW, you meant to say " your English", not " you English"."

Hmm, don't see how talking like Yoda makes any points, but alright. Yeah, I have a tendacy to leave the "r"s off of my "your"s when I am typing in a hurry and not proof reading. Very clever on turning that around to prove I can't write and you can. I can see you are very experienced in arguing over the internet.

Oh come on! You've never heard the expression "One _________ does not a _________ make?" I didn't pull that out of thin air. Chances are rather good that most posters here have heard that phrase at one time or another.

"That's good and fair. However, if AOTC and especially ROTS had been better movies, I don't think people would object to the CG as much."

Of course! No doubt about it. It could have been a full out CG film without a spec of live footage to be found anywhere, and I would have had nothing but praise for it had it been a good movie.


"Zing!"

Yeah, I figured you would answer with something like that.

Ba-zing!

"Your previous post was vaguely worded to the point where I had to guess at your meaning. You explained yourself much better this time."

I never even mentioned the artistry of it, odd you would assume that.


I'll explain below why it's actually far from odd to make that assumption.

You told me it was incorrect to compare it to the OT battles because of they were not as artistic. Not even sure how something like that has the ability to be incorrect.


No, I'm sure you're right - the artistry of the OT saber battles is right up on par with the TPM saber battle. Oh, wait...

I said, "it by far has the greatest OTish moments of the whole PT in it. That saber battle at the end set the standard for saber battles so high, and unfortunately neither of the other two even tried." Not sure how that is vague, I simply meant that it set the standard for saber battles pretty high and the other two didn't even come close. I consider it an OTish moment because it was a moment in the film where I felt like I was watching a new Star Wars movie.


So your claim is that you're not sure how it's vague? All right - allow me to elaborate:

I said, "it by far has the greatest OTish moments of the whole PT in it. That saber battle at the end set the standard for saber battles so high, and unfortunately neither of the other two even tried."


There's nothing vague about a general standard? What is the standard?? You see, I can compare things by specific standards - scores on standardized tests, batting averages of baseball players, sales figures of new release DVDs, and so on. However, I didn't have anything specific from you in regard to which standard to judge the saber battle with - did you mean an artistic standard? Were you referring to the tension the scene created, was that the standard? Was the battle technically accurate, was that the standard? I had no idea what you meant before, so I assumed it was the artistry of the scene, which was in my opinion was practically all the merit that scene had going for it. However, you clarified yourself in the response, which was to say that it was the tension of the scene. OK, fine. Be clear from the beginning, and we don't waste all of this precious time.

"It deserves that flak because it is a bad, bad, terrible movie" = plenty of answers? Forgive me if I'm still not convinced."

I never said that that one sentence was the plenty of good answers. I wrote more than just that.


You wrote plenty, most of which had nothing to do with AOTC.

"This is your second jab at my circular reasoning post. I'm wondering if you even know what that means."

Yes, I made it this far in life without knowing what circular reasoning was, you caught me. You are by far my intellectual superior.


See, that didn't hurt, did it?

"This answers an argument I didn't make."

I didn't intend to answer an arguement made by you with that last section of my last post. It was in response to your feeling that AOTC gets too much undeserved flak. I was just offering that I didn't feel they got undeserved flak, but rather quite the opposite.


"I didn't intend to answer you, it was in response to you". Huh?

If you learn nothing else from this exchange, learn that words mean things. That, and also if you're going to start cracking on people, don't get all drama queeny when they crack back. Keep it civil, and so will I.

See you round the cosmos. (sentence fragment)

Want to book yourself or a guest on THE VFP Show? PM me!