logo Sign In

A New Thought on George — Page 2

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Mielr
To me, TPM doesn't deserve to be called "best" anything. That's really lowering the bar. "Least terrible" perhaps, but IMO calling it "best" (and I'm not picking on you, Tiptup, many here have done this) is like being given a list of diseases, and choosing the "best" one to get.

It only seems better because of the two other films it's compared to. Again, just my opinion.

That's fair. I certainly don't claim anyone should like The Phantom Menace if they don't (it has huge flaws that some people can't ignore). I'm just saying that from a weird, sugared-up, attention-span-deficient, could-care-less-about-character-drama point of view, I actually enjoyed the film. Its not very enjoyable mind you, but I still found it fun on the whole. In other words, I don't think it was actually a bad film when I tried to simply let it be its own, weird thing.


Originally posted by: zombie84
Thank you so much for posting that. It is something I came to realise ever since AOTC, explaining the extremely different and entirely dissonant prequel identities. Its ironic that even though the OT is basically a patchwork of improvisations it still feels ten times more consistent and deliberate than the supposedly-planned PT.


Once you reach the idea of Vader being Luke's father the "deliberate" feeling starts to break down somewhat, but in light of the amazing character drama it accomplished, I really don't mind. Luke being Leia's sister is worse to me, but at least even that resulted in a very intense scene in RotJ. By comparison, telekinesis, which was a "new" idea in ESB, seemed an almost totally natural extension of what the first film presented to me. Unfortunately, I find the prequels are jam-packed with ideas that are not only incoherent with the original trilogies concepts (to varying degrees), but they also don't really accomplish anything emotional for me either (to make up for the illogic). At best I can see how each of the new ideas could have extraordinary merit on their own, just not in my Star Wars saga.


Edit: Oh and FanFiltration, your posts are intelligent and insightful to read. I'm pretty sure that nobody here wanted to say otherwise.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
On the original point of this thread, there's a part of me that wonders if Lucas WAS writing the PT for someone - his kids. I think his kids had a lot of behind-the-scenes input about what we eventually saw.

If I recall correctly, he stated that he made the Ewok movies to appeal to his kids. This makes sense since he was already divorced by that point. And don't forget that the only reason we got to see the conclusion of the Clone Wars cartoons was that his son wanted to know what happened. And consider all the cameos his kids had in the PT.

You know of the rebellion against the Empire?

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Erikstormtrooper
On the original point of this thread, there's a part of me that wonders if Lucas WAS writing the PT for someone - his kids. I think his kids had a lot of behind-the-scenes input about what we eventually saw.

If I recall correctly, he stated that he made the Ewok movies to appeal to his kids. This makes sense since he was already divorced by that point. And don't forget that the only reason we got to see the conclusion of the Clone Wars cartoons was that his son wanted to know what happened. And consider all the cameos his kids had in the PT.


I have always contended this played a huge role in the tone of the movies. Not necessarily his kids had an effect on what he was doing, but having kids changes anyone when they become a parent. Just think of it this way: Who would you want to make a cool scifi movie? A 50 year old guy with 3 kids who are all young and about to become teenagers, or a 25-30 year old single guy who just wants to make a movie to please himself? We got that 50 year old guy in the PT, and that 30 year old guy in the OT.




Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: corellian77


As for my original question, is the PT "technically" different from the OT? For example, is it just my imagination, or are there more medium and close-up shots in the OT? If so, would this have a subconscious effect on the viewer by making them feel more/less intimate with the on-screen characters?

I honestly think that the main difference between the PT and OT battles were that the PT battles were just poorly planned out and edited. Of course, the fact that I ended up not really giving a crap who died had something to do with it, but I also felt that the battle scenes were way too crowded with junk, and not properly executed - just plain messy. The OT battles were super-tight and created suspense and tension that the PT battles couldn't because they were sloppy. I'm sure the editing is mainly to blame for that. I didn't care for the saber battles, either.

Author
Time
Post link
I think maybe he just fluked the first 2, riding on the back of a highly talented team.


Author
Time
Post link
Speaking of battles, I rewatched Serenity tonight. The space battle in there is fantastic! Up there with the best of star wars in my opinion.
And you know what? It's all over in less than 60 seconds (IIRC), you get only momentary blurred flashes of the cool stuff happening at incredible speed, the heroes aren't even fighting in it, just trying to get past. and before you know it the ship is crashing to the earth out of control with bits of starships burning up in the atmosphere around them.
That battle alone is more entertaining than any scene in the PT...

Darth Lucas: I am altering the trilogy. Pray I don't alter it further.
Author
Time
Post link
^ Sad but too true. Serenity's battle was there with the point of showing what had to be shown to carry the story forward. It did its job well. The battles in the Star Wars trilogy were made to carry the stories forward, but in many cases were themselves the story. And they too did their job beautifully. The battles in the PT felt like they were battles for the heck of it. The battle at Hoth served the purpose to divide up and scatter our heros. The battles at the end of SW and ROTJ served to provide an entertaining climax for the film. The PT battles, such as the overly boring Jango/Obi-wan chase scene, and the battle at the beginning of ROTS, seem like they serve little purpose other than to extend the film and show off effects.

Battles are great moments for emotional situations. It is when you can really make your characters come out of their shells and show who they really are. The hotshot can prove to be a coward, and the reluctant hero can be forced to step up to the plate. In Serenity, the end battle served for the death of Wash, a very emotional moment. Anyone who had liked the series and had a fondness for that character was shouting in their head, "What? NO! Why did that have to happen!" This also pushed our minds out of the "Our heros can live through anything" line of thinking, to "Who is going to die next?" From that second and through the rest of the end of that film there is a feeling of lose and helplessness. Serenity did a great job of making the battle and the end fight an emotional moment. Star Wars, with Luke loosing his old childhood frind into a puff of flame, and all the rest of the squadron bitting the dust one after another, great emotional moment. Even ESB with Luke's gunner dying and several speeders crashing and the streangth of the empire's forced served to give us a real feel of how grave the situation really was, something that never give throughout the entirety of the film. FOr the most part, none of us gave a damn about the Ewoks dying in ROTJ or about the Gungans dying in TPM, or about the the Jedi dying in AOTC or ROTS. Heck, did any of us even really care when Padme died of her broken heart? I think most of us felt more cheated than saddened. If there is nothing at stake in a battle, why even bother fighting it? Or in the case of movies, why even bother filming it?

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

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: C3PX
The battles in the Star Wars trilogy were made to carry the stories forward, but in many cases were themselves the story. And they too did their job beautifully. The battles in the PT felt like they were battles for the heck of it. The battle at Hoth served the purpose to divide up and scatter our heros. The battles at the end of SW and ROTJ served to provide an entertaining climax for the film. The PT battles, such as the overly boring Jango/Obi-wan chase scene, and the battle at the beginning of ROTS, seem like they serve little purpose other than to extend the film and show off effects.

FOr the most part, none of us gave a damn about the Ewoks dying in ROTJ or about the Gungans dying in TPM, or about the the Jedi dying in AOTC or ROTS. Heck, did any of us even really care when Padme died of her broken heart?

I agree with most of what you said. However, I DID care about the Ewoks. I felt sympathy for them and I felt sad when that one Ewok died. But the Gungans- not really. The Ewoks reminded me of pets and the sadness one can feel when you lose a beloved cat or dog. But the Gungans never really went beyond CG-cartoon characters for me. Padme's death felt rushed and forced and I never really grew to care about her character anyhow.

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: MielrI agree with most of what you said. However, I DID care about the Ewoks. I felt sympathy for them and I felt sad when that one Ewok died. But the Gungans- not really. The Ewoks reminded me of pets and the sadness one can feel when you lose a beloved cat or dog.


Fair enough. To be honest, I cared about the Ewoks too, but I was quite young when that film came out. I can imagine a more mature viewer watching ROTJ for the first time in 83 and feeling much the way I felt about the Gungans in 99.

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

Author
Time
Post link
I'd say the dead Gungans were a pretty unemotional moment compared to the dead Ewoks. Not to say the Ewoks inspired a great amount of attachment, but you felt sorry for them in the sense that they were caught up in a war that was bigger than they were I guess. Little, noble, trustworthy creatures versus the treacherous empire. Made things interesting despite the unrealistic successes they had.

I liked the Gungan battle too, but mostly for the flow of the combat and not much else.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
Another thing that I think contribute to more sympathy for the Ewoks than the Gungans is that the Ewoks were real. You could imagine running into one while taking a stroll through the woods. They were real costumes with real people inside, this made them feel very tangible, like just about everything else in the OT. The Gugans were not real, I could imagine running into them in real life about as well as I could imagine running into Roger Rabbit or Daffy Duck in real life. They fact that they all looked pretty much the same didn't help much either.

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