Anyone hate Return of the Jedi? — Page 2

Jedi is not so much a step down quality wise from the highs of Empire as it is the unfortunate film that had to follow a masterpiece. But I'd say its at least on a par with the first film. Star Wars and Jedi do have a juvenile slant and feature "cute" side characters that lend themselves to merchandising, particularly the type aimed at kids. The plots of both also feature some pretty hard to swallow and difficult to believe elements - its just in Jedi these are much more obvious. But then these films are fairy tales so I don't really hold the lack of believability of some parts against them. And its pretty clear that this results purely from them being the kind of films Lucas makes - he obviously had much more active role in the production of Jedi than Empire, with Richard Marquand being pretty much a proxy for Lucas. The Lucas-directed films plus Jedi have a lot in common, much more than most around here would be prepared to admit. Jedi and Star Wars only really differ from the prequels in that the actors and the characters are like-able and believable.

Of the six films, Empire is really the odd one out - the grown-up, cynical, realistic, entirely believable one. Neither the heroes or the villains actually wins in Empire - that to me is so much like real life.

I guess the only real problem I have with Jedi is that it doesn't seem that fitting an end to an entire saga as you'd think it ought to be. Empire moved the game along massively from Star Wars. Jedi didn't really move any further.

S_Matt said:

Jedi is not so much a step down quality wise from the highs of Empire as it is the unfortunate film that had to follow a masterpiece. But I'd say its at least on a par with the first film.

Sorry, I couldn't take you seriously after you said that so I stopped reading.

S_Matt, I can identify if not agree with everything you've said except this:

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.

Woah there buddy! To say that Star Wars was on par with the prequels or even Jedi in terms of pacing and story delivery is utter rubbish. George might have directed but the friends that 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, and Lucas' folly. 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.

doubleKO said:

S_Matt, I can identify if not agree with everything you've said except this:

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.

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.

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.

One of Jedi's crucial problems for me is its complete lack of momentum. The first two films are exhilarating largely because they continually move from location to location, never looking back. Jedi takes place in three locations we've been to before (Tatooine, Dagobah, Death Star) plus... some woods. The universe suddenly seems a lot less huge and thrilling than it did in the earlier instalments.

(Of course, this got far worse in the prequels. When I realised that the finale of TPM was going to be set back on Naboo, my heart sank.)

Having said that, the Star Destroyer / Imperial shuttle / Death Star opening is probably my favourite in the saga. I don't think there's a more impressive example of callous Imperial might in any of the other films...

S_Matt said:

doubleKO said:

S_Matt, I can identify if not agree with everything you've said except this:

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.

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.

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.

Bingowings said:

I don't hate it.

It has some nice moments and Mark is perfect.

Some of the special effects are amazing even now (others are really awful).

It did play out as the contractual obligation episode of the OT and now it points to the direction that PT would later follow.

The plot frequently makes no sense (Luke's Han rescue plan makes as much sense as the Clone mystery in AOTC and succeeds largely because it had to succeed because it's in the beginning of the film rather than any part of the plan itself).

The problem with the Ewoks isn't the Ewoks themselves but the way they are portrayed.

They never come across as small, furry alien people and always seem like small humans in costume.

The Galactic Empire shrinks from a large hierarchically structured junta ruling thousands of star systems backed with thousands of heavily armed starships and trillions of troops to two old men and a few dozen ships hiding behind one superweapon idea. All it takes is one of them to throw the other down a convenient placed hole in the floor and the whole thing falls apart.

If with a bit of modification Return Of The Jedi was Episode IX and it showed the desperate last gasp of an already collapsing Empire it would make more sense.

Lucas just fell out of love with Star Wars and wanted it over and done with and it shows in the rather cheap looking recycled feel of ROTJ.

I don't think he fell back in love with it with the PT but he missed the money and technological advances meant he could make three more films to sell and keep on selling on a lower than the Hollywood norm budget.

That said, it is fascinating that there is much in ROTJ and the PT that is still enjoyable and visually interesting.

If there had been more love and attention paid to the core of those films (the story and the characters) they could have been as good as the first two and have cost just the same amount.

The only way that they can be made to work is to take them to pieces and reassemble them into largely brand new films.

I still want the theatrical presentations of all six Star Wars films officially restored and available because of their place in cinema history but in terms of enjoyment ROTJ:SE fails as much because of the changes it doesn't make (to make the story and performances make more sense and fix the broken tone) as much as the changes that bugger up the few things that did originally work.

Nice post. A bit depressing but hey, nearly everyone has to admit it has major problems even if they love it to death. The part of your post that I made bold made me remember something really embarrassing. Yes you are absolutely right: when they are on film/video at least. As a naive 8 year old I saw my first picture of an ewok:

You can't say this always looked like a small human to everyone because I was convinced it was a dog trained to stand, with some kind of godawful fur and latex enhancements! I was a bit freaked out to be honest. Chewie, naturally - big guy in a suit. But even though I had seen Wizard of Oz the thought of little humans never occurred to me until I saw them move :P

S_Matt said:

 Star Wars and Jedi do have a juvenile slant and feature "cute" side characters that lend themselves to merchandising, particularly the type aimed at kids.

 Oh god, here goes the revisionism of the Old movies again.......  Star Wars wasn't made for kids (Hence it was targeted at Comic Con in 1976, as they were all teenagers/early 20's SciFi nerds.  If Lucas thought that the merchandising would be a cash cow, they actually would have figures ready to me demand of all of us kiddies for Christmas 1977.  I remember having to wait for Christmas '78 to get most of my SW action figures :)

Star Wars is a real gritty movie (Original Version), and alot darker then many of the revisionists give it today.  Just to see two dead skeletons at a young age was very shocking to me!   Sure it is not as dark as Empire, but its not suppose to be, and it actually pulls off the perfect combination of action, drama and comedy without one dominating the other.

Just watch the final Battle of Yavin, there is one little hint of kiddie himor in there as C3PO stands next to Leia and doesn't say a word!  Just watch where Obiwan tells Luke about his father, and C3PO actually tells Luke he is gong to shutdown.  That is Lucas telling us it is time for a serious part of the movie, and it is a key part.  The movie builds and builds the drama and gets more serious as it goes on.  Just because a movie isn't dark for 2 hours doesnt mean it is a kiddy-fest like Jedi comes off as.

CO, I edited my last reply to you with an apology and a couple of questions about Empire/Jedi. Here is just the edit:

edit: Sorry I shouldn't be flippant with you CO as you are one of the fans that I was looking for. I just didn't really want the PT brought into it. Do you watch Jedi at all? Are you satisfied with Empire as a conclusion to a two-part saga? Or do you just get to the end of Empire and go "Meh I remember...Rancor, Jabba, skimpy Leia, Death Star, Ewoks, Lightsabers, explosion. Been there, done that."?

I watched Jedi stoned the other night and it was the first time I have enjoyed the film that much. All it's bad qualities become virtues!

doubleKO said:

CO, I edited my last reply to you with an apology and a couple of questions about Empire/Jedi. Here is just the edit:

edit: Sorry I shouldn't be flippant with you CO as you are one of the fans that I was looking for. I just didn't really want the PT brought into it. Do you watch Jedi at all? Are you satisfied with Empire as a conclusion to a two-part saga? Or do you just get to the end of Empire and go "Meh I remember...Rancor, Jabba, skimpy Leia, Death Star, Ewoks, Lightsabers, explosion. Been there, done that."?

 I honestly watch the OT movies as standalone movies, because whenever I try to watch them as a 'Saga/6 movies' or 'Trilogy/3 movies' it has never worked.

The reason I am like this is I grew up watching the movies on HBO way before I had a VCR to watch them together.   SW came to HBO in '83, so I watched that a zillion times on its own.  ESB came to HBO in '86, and I watched that a zillion times on it own.  Same with Jedi in '88, as I had a VCR by then, but didn't buy the trilogy til 'one last time in 1994.'  

I never really thought of them as 'one big story' even in the trilogy days. Sorry, but this is the biggest failing of Lucas because I saw Star Wars in the context of how it was told in 1977, and Lucas keep changing and changing the story, there are just too many inconsistencies.   If I watch each movie on its own and in the context of how that movies was made, then they work alot better.

When Jedi is on Spike, I will usually tune in and out for certain parts:  Sail Barge, Throne Room Scenes, Dagobah, Vaders entrance at the beginning.  But I can't remember the last time I sat down and watched it on DVD, probably a few years ago. (I think 2007 or 2008)  Whereas I will watch Star Wars and Empire whenever I get time to watch a DVD.

What I meant by the PT affecting Jedi was more on the level that it opened my eyes that Lucas was loosing it in '83. (I also love Raiders but think Temple of Doom and Crusade are OK and Crystal Skulls is unwatchable).  The PT story doesn't affect anything about Jedi to me, but after seeing the quality of PT movies, it made more sense why Jedi is sub-par to Star Wars and Empire.

CO, whenever you post I feel like me and you had a very similar childhood experience growing up. I was too young to see them in theatres and grew up in the 1980s watching them on video. My dad taped SW off television for me and then later ESB and I watched those over and over. At one point I taped over Star Wars, but then someone gave me a recording of ROTJ from HBO, but I didn't watch it much and even taped over parts of it with Super Dave Osbourne (ouch for ROTJ). Later I re-taped Star Wars but then lost ESB. I finally bought ESB on video when I was ten, my first video purchase ever. Then when the 1995 Faces tapes came out, I only bought SW and ROTJ because I already owned ESB. So 1997 was the first time I bought a boxset and it wasn't even the original versions. I never really thought of them as one big story, even though there is a logical progression that you get a sense of, but I mainly just enjoyed each film on its own merits.

zombie84 said:

CO, whenever you post I feel like me and you had a very similar childhood experience growing up. I was too young to see them in theatres and grew up in the 1980s watching them on video. My dad taped SW off television for me and then later ESB and I watched those over and over. At one point I taped over Star Wars, but then someone gave me a recording of ROTJ from HBO. Later I re-taped Star Wars but then lost ESB. I finally bought ESB on video when I was ten, my first video purchase ever. Then when the 1995 Faces tapes came out, I only bought SW and ROTJ because I already owned ESB. So 1997 was the first time I bought a boxset. I never really thought of them as one big story, even though there is a logical progression that you get a sense of, but I mainly just enjoyed each film on its own merits.

 It may be just a generational thing as every kid today has ALL the movies to watch back to back.  But I was from a generation where you had to wait YEARS for the release of the movie to either home video or HBO.  Heck, I waited 6 damn years to Star Wars again in 1983!!!!

I was like that with all the movies I grew up with.  I never thought of 'the Rocky Story', I watched Rocky II a zillion times in either 1980 or 1981 when it came to HBO, (I actually saw Rocky II before seeing Rocky because I was too young to see it in theaters). 

I often wonder if Lucas made SW movies much like Indiana Jones movies as each movie would have its own story and that would have given him more freedom to write the story without being indebted to the previous ones.  Well...thats another topic!

Lucas definitely started to miss the forest for the technology right around this time. My favorite example is how he kept saying how much better the palace creatures were than the ones in the cantina, which I've never heard anyone agree with. But the step up in hardware, from pullover masks to the more complex muppety nerf creatures with all the hoses and shit in them, was something that just had to be better. Because you know, technology. It was like the first version of the cgi-vs. models debate. (All the prequel-era debates could be found in some form during the Jedi vs. SW/Empire days. The big difference is the pro-Jedi guys were never as touchy about it.)

CO said:

 Oh god, here goes the revisionism of the Old movies again.......  Star Wars wasn't made for kids

I never said it was made for kids. I can't help it if it appealed to kids though, now can I? And there had to be some reason that it did. Maybe because its basically a fairy-tale? Or did I miss something? Maybe I missed some other movie called Star Wars that was an existential drama of Shakespearean magnitude?

Yes, Jedi definitely had things that appeal to kids in higher doses than the first film did. Yes, it is lacking a certain emotional gravitas of the first two films, Empire in particular. But in my opinion is nowhere near as bad as a lot of its detractors think. Too many people went "Oh, look how Phantom Menace turned out - quick, blame it on Jedi! We'll look smart because we saw this coming." - now there is some revisionism!

TV's Frink said:

How are you stuck with the 97 SE?

Assuming this is one of your few serious questions, I'll just answer by saying that the SE VHS version of ROTJ is the only copy of the movie I own; I'm poorer than dirt, so buying a new GOUT copy is out of the question, and I haven't as of yet stumbled upon a second hand DVD or VHS copy of the OOT version.

S_Matt said:

 

I never said it was made for kids. I can't help it if it appealed to kids though, now can I? And there had to be some reason that it did. Maybe because its basically a fairy-tale? Or did I miss something? Maybe I missed some other movie called Star Wars that was an existential drama of Shakespearean magnitude?

Yes, Jedi definitely had things that appeal to kids in higher doses than the first film did. Yes, it is lacking a certain emotional gravitas of the first two films, Empire in particular. But in my opinion is nowhere near as bad as a lot of its detractors think. Too many people went "Oh, look how Phantom Menace turned out - quick, blame it on Jedi! We'll look smart because we saw this coming." - now there is some revisionism!

 

 

 

 

 There is a difference between appealing to kids and gearing the movie towards kids.  Star Wars appealed to kids like me, but the movie was not made in that tone.  Whereas Jedi was made to appeal more to kids my age, and it is evident in the movie.

There are alot of movies that appeal to kids, but that doesn't mean they are 'kiddy' movies.  Back to the Future was beloved by 12 year old kids like myself in 1985 making it one of the biggest grossing movies of all time, but the movie really wasn't made in that vein.  Heck, a big part of the story is the 'incestual' angle of Marty and his mom!   I'm sure they didn't think of kids when they were putting that storyline in!

There is a reason that alot of people from my generations (30 and older) thought that Jedi was the best back in 1983, and now think it is the worst of the trilogy in 2011.  We all grew up and that was the only SW Trilogy movie that doesn't hold up as well.

Baronlando said:

Lucas definitely started to miss the forest for the technology right around this time. My favorite example is how he kept saying how much better the palace creatures were than the ones in the cantina, which I've never heard anyone agree with. But the step up in hardware, from pullover masks to the more complex muppety nerf creatures with all the hoses and shit in them, was something that just had to be better. Because you know, technology. It was like the first version of the cgi-vs. models debate. (All the prequel-era debates could be found in some form during the Jedi vs. SW/Empire days. The big difference is the pro-Jedi guys were never as touchy about it.)

Don't want to be the touchy pro-Jedi guy here but I agree that the palace creatures were better, especially if you are including Jabba here. I don't think the scenes were shot or edited as well as the cantina; being a bit too focused on the creations for their own sake, rather than allowing them to provide more atmosphere from the background. Some of them obviously didn't work, but with the Jabba puppet & animatronic Gamorrean masks alone I think he pretty much surpassed the quality of the cantina creatures.

CO said:

doubleKO said:

CO, I edited my last reply to you with an apology and a couple of questions about Empire/Jedi. Here is just the edit:

edit: Sorry I shouldn't be flippant with you CO as you are one of the fans that I was looking for. I just didn't really want the PT brought into it. Do you watch Jedi at all? Are you satisfied with Empire as a conclusion to a two-part saga? Or do you just get to the end of Empire and go "Meh I remember...Rancor, Jabba, skimpy Leia, Death Star, Ewoks, Lightsabers, explosion. Been there, done that."?

 I honestly watch the OT movies as standalone movies, because whenever I try to watch them as a 'Saga/6 movies' or 'Trilogy/3 movies' it has never worked.

The reason I am like this is I grew up watching the movies on HBO way before I had a VCR to watch them together.   SW came to HBO in '83, so I watched that a zillion times on its own.  ESB came to HBO in '86, and I watched that a zillion times on it own.  Same with Jedi in '88, as I had a VCR by then, but didn't buy the trilogy til 'one last time in 1994.'  

I never really thought of them as 'one big story' even in the trilogy days. Sorry, but this is the biggest failing of Lucas because I saw Star Wars in the context of how it was told in 1977, and Lucas keep changing and changing the story, there are just too many inconsistencies.   If I watch each movie on its own and in the context of how that movies was made, then they work alot better.

When Jedi is on Spike, I will usually tune in and out for certain parts:  Sail Barge, Throne Room Scenes, Dagobah, Vaders entrance at the beginning.  But I can't remember the last time I sat down and watched it on DVD, probably a few years ago. (I think 2007 or 2008)  Whereas I will watch Star Wars and Empire whenever I get time to watch a DVD.

What I meant by the PT affecting Jedi was more on the level that it opened my eyes that Lucas was loosing it in '83. (I also love Raiders but think Temple of Doom and Crusade are OK and Crystal Skulls is unwatchable).  The PT story doesn't affect anything about Jedi to me, but after seeing the quality of PT movies, it made more sense why Jedi is sub-par to Star Wars and Empire.

Thanks for the reply. I guess that was one approach/attitude I hadn't considered. I can accept Star Wars as its own movie, but I can't separate Empire from Star Wars or Jedi. It is Star Wars only or whole OT for me. And my memory was a bit off - Jedi wasn't released on VHS til '86 when I was twelve, so it was my favourite until I was at least 13, beacause I watched it at least twice a week for the next year :) (My aunt owned a video store and we got brand-new rental copies of the OT as soon as they were released).

The level of hate for Jedi from some quarters really is quite surprising though. It was a tough act to follow the first two films but Jedi still counts, to me, as an exceptional fantasy film and an incredible technical achievement. Its just that comparing it to two masterpieces makes it seem perhaps a lot worse than it is.

S_Matt said:

The level of hate for Jedi from some quarters really is quite surprising though. It was a tough act to follow the first two films but Jedi still counts, to me, as an exceptional fantasy film and an incredible technical achievement. Its just that comparing it to two masterpieces makes it seem perhaps a lot worse than it is.

Where or how have you experienced surprising levels of hate for Jedi?

Online it became pretty fashionable to hate Jedi in the wake of The Phantom Menace because certain sections of fandom felt they needed to appear nonchalant about the negative reception of that film, as a way to say "we saw this coming" sort of thing.

Makes sense.

S_Matt said:

Online it became pretty fashionable to hate Jedi in the wake of The Phantom Menace because certain sections of fandom felt they needed to appear nonchalant about the negative reception of that film, as a way to say "we saw this coming" sort of thing.

 SMatt, there has always been a level of hatred towards Jedi from people that were older then me.

I was 10 years old when I saw Jedi, and all of my friends and myself loved it at the time (We were all born from 1971-73).  Most of my older brothers friends (Born around 1965-66) thought it was a joke then, the same way many fans who grew up with the OT thought Episode I was a joke.

And you would be suprised that many people older then me think ESB isn't that great either.  My brothers friends who are in their mid 40's just love The Original Star Wars (as they saw it when they were around 13 years old in 1977.   They LOVE the original and think the sequels are a bit much, as many of them joke with me, "Darth Vader is Lukes father??? That's a bit too much" 

It is all at what age did you see the movies?  Star Wars '77 is universally loved by everyone I know, and then the ESB and Jedi vary among what age you are.  And as I said, I have yet to meet a person who loves the PT, but I do have friends who accept it and enjoy with a grain of salt simply because its more SW.

Don't go by what is said on the internet, because they are the extreme fans on both sides who think WAY too much about the movies.

Including myself :)

CO said:

S_Matt said:

Online it became pretty fashionable to hate Jedi in the wake of The Phantom Menace because certain sections of fandom felt they needed to appear nonchalant about the negative reception of that film, as a way to say "we saw this coming" sort of thing.

 SMatt, there has always been a level of hatred towards Jedi from people that were older then me.

I was 10 years old when I saw Jedi, and all of my friends and myself loved it at the time (We were all born from 1971-73).  Most of my older brothers friends (Born around 1965-66) thought it was a joke then, the same way many fans who grew up with the OT thought Episode I was a joke.

And you would be suprised that many people older then me think ESB isn't that great either.  My brothers friends who are in their mid 40's just love The Original Star Wars (as they saw it when they were around 13 years old in 1977.   They LOVE the original and think the sequels are a bit much, as many of them joke with me, "Darth Vader is Lukes father??? That's a bit too much" 

It is all at what age did you see the movies?  Star Wars '77 is universally loved by everyone I know, and then the ESB and Jedi vary among what age you are.  And as I said, I have yet to meet a person who loves the PT, but I do have friends who accept it and enjoy with a grain of salt simply because its more SW.

Don't go by what is said on the internet, because they are the extreme fans on both sides who think WAY too much about the movies.

Including myself :)

 

This is the kind of post I was after. What would be even better would be if some of those people you describe posted and described their experience as well.

*edit* Also, I can't believe that nobody has commented on the fact that I thought Wicket was a dog.