S_Matt said:
doubleKO said:
S_Matt, I can identify if not agree with everything you've said except this:
Woah there buddy! To say that Star Wars was on terms with the prequels or even Jedi in terms of pacing and story delivery is utter rubbish. George might have directed but his friends he showed it to hated it. Whoever was the editor for Star Wars (and I'm ashamed that I don't know...) was largely responsible for the movie's success. The fact that the now-replaced and horribly out-of-place Biggs hangar scene was cut is a testament to the editor's gift. In at least some of the PT I believe George used Ben Burtt, his SOUND editor to edit the video. To his exact specifications no doubt, leaving all that boring exposition-y crap intact.S_Matt said:
Jedi and Star Wars only really differ from the prequels in that the actors and the characters are like-able and believable.
Well the version of Star Wars Lucas had screened for friends and colleagues was barely more than a rough assembly. Its not unusual for these to be very poorly received. ALL films are made in the editing bay. One cannot overstate this simple truth. The film was re-edited by a crack shot team of editors that included Lucas's wife of the time (who edited Taxi Driver for Martin Scorsese). Just FYI.
And Ben Burtt was *the* editor on the Prequels. There's nothing wrong with the pacing in those films, even the story doesn't bug me much. Its all down to the wooden delivery and poor dialogue (but its a deliberate stylistic choice!) that Lucas insisted on that sank the Prequels.
The story of the first film is so minimalist anyway - its all down to the cast that it worked so well.
Again all of this is a worthy rationalisation of your opinion and I respect your argument. Maybe we can just agree to disagree on the story and pacing of the PT. Out of interest have you seen the Phantom's edits? With Star Wars it's not all down to the cast, it is also down to another word within your same sentence: minimalist.