TheoOdo said:
You seem to be making an argument for a Coruscant-like city in the same breath that you argue against it. Blade Runner very successfully created a futuristic city with the effects of the time. The reason the Coruscant of the prequels reminds you of Blade Runner is probably because it deliberately rips off several shots and features of the futuristic L.A. The industrial plane with torches shooting flame, the passenger car landing on an apartment building shot from above, holographic advertisements etc.
Not at all--I was under the assumption that the author of the alternative script was refering to corruscant in the terms of how it was presented in the prequels---if he was not---then he could have called it anything!
A futuristic city in the OT would likely have quite a different tone than the noir inspired city of Blade Runner or the political hub of the prequels. The galaxy is under the control of a despot and this is the center of his activities. The tone would probably be like Nazi occupied Berlin. Some sections would house the sympathetic elite and would be resplendent with propaganda, banners and troops while others would be slums, housing the more aggressive of the Empire's enforcers, the poor and disenfranchised and pockets of resistance represented by graffiti and destroyed propaganda posters.
Yeah sounds like a good idea.
I think it would have been possible to create a city with a style recognised as distinct from that of Blade Runner. Yes, some would accuse them of ripping off Blade Runner, but that always happens in film criticism. The Return of the King was even accused of ripping off Pirates of the Caribbean in some reviews I read for including a shot of the ghost army charging from a ship. On these terms, a successful argument could be made that Blade Runner simply ripped off Metropolis. Doesn't mean they don't stand on their own or do something different with the same idea.
Interesting about the Pirates--Lord Of The Rings claim---I never knew that and never made the connection until you mentioned it!-definitely a more subtle connection!
This is all beside the point, anyways, because ripping off others is surelybetter than lazily attempting to recreate past successes - which is what they did with the Death Star II.
Maybe the idea of recreating the death star was lazy----but the attempt or execution was exhilarating----to date---the best crafted space battle put to film---not bad for a 28 year old movie.
And with all due respect ,at least on a technical level, it put the death star conflict in Ep 4(which I love BTW) in the shade.
I think you'd be hard pressed to conceive of something less tasteful than the Ewoks. I don't actually dislike them all that much, I just see that they're corny and cutesy. A Wookiee army could work if treated appropriately, the trouble is that they were treated badly in the prequels. Firstly, they did the Tarzan yell, which was bad in Jedi and was worse in Sith. Secondly, they were facing off against a not very intimidating enemy, the droids - who actually pass close to the screen and shout "charge" in a high-pitched voice. The whole scene is bad. The wookiees don't stand a chance of shining through.
"Crass" is a matter of execution. It could have been done well.
The costumes were certainly done well, even if we weren't given time to care about the characters behind them.
If Ewoks are corny or cutesy then Wookies(in numbers----as in ROTS) are annoyingly noisy!.
Chewbacca in isolation is fine because he interacts with other species.But the minute one wookie growls to another it just sounds like an amplified version of Planet Of The Apes or even 2001(and yes-the Holiday special)!
If I am not mistaken Lucas envisioned a climactic battle involving Wookies before he really had a final concept of what Wookies would look and behave like.
It was the signing of Mahew that enabled Chewbacca as a creature to evolve into the Wookie that we all came to know and love.
Once that evolution was complete,maybe Lucas dispensed with the idea of the wookies as a pivotal fighting force.