My Top 10 Reasons ROTJ sucks — Page 3

Mrebo said:

I don't see Lando as "kill the black guy" as much as "kill a lead character", to the point originally made - to establish some level of sacrifice for the good guys, for the sake of creating an element of danger for the characters, and risk for the audience that someone we have grown to care about, regardless of skin pigmentation, might die on screen.

Nonetheless, the only prominent black person in the OT would have been quickly killed, as has happened in so many other sci fi works. And ultimately it simply isn't any kind of flaw to not kill the main characters. I think conveying the sense of risk is always done before a character does or does not die.

 I think it was in an interview with author Matthew Stover that he said, (and I paraphrase) if you can't make dramatic tension without killing the main characters, you're a crummy writer.

TheBoost said:

 I think it was in an interview with author Matthew Stover that he said, (and I paraphrase) if you can't make dramatic tension without killing the main characters, you're a crummy writer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlruR2zQxpE :D ;)

I don't see Lando as "kill the black guy" as much as "kill a lead character", to the point originally made.

Well, yes, but you also can't say they cast Dee without any intention of having a "cool black hero" in their movie, now can you? :)

As a side note, Lando is the first (and, I think, only) traitor in the plot... if you count out the elephant from Tattoine. And he redeems himself by helping out the white people... OMG!!!

sonnyboo said:

Let's be real, Jar Jar Binks with his Gungans and  Ewoks are duking it out for 'worst element in Star Wars movies".

 

Harrison Ford, ON SCREEN, in this movie gives the single worst and most uninspired performance of his career.

 

No effing way. What does an Ewok do in ROTJ that even compares to "Icky poo!" or "Weesa FREE!" You think about that one.

The worst element in the Star Wars movies (as they stand now) belongs to "Jedi Rocks" in the piece of shit ROTJ Special Edition. Only reason I think that's worse than the two-headed announcer from TPM is that it's a grotesque CG replacement of a puppet band that worked just fine before being fucked with and thus ruining the scene.  

As for Harrison Ford, worse than the Holiday Special? Six Days Seven Nights? How about Hollywood Homicide? 

Personally? I'd have acquiesced to Ford's demands; yes, kill Han off -- but let it be a major part of the plot. One of his major complaints was "he's got no mama, he's got no papa"; why didn't they just do something like they were planning with the Brackett version of Empire? Give him a papa, or a step-papa; a rich and influential man, someone the Rebel Alliance wants to get to before the final fight -- thus giving them a slightly darker motive for helping Luke and the gang rescue Han at the start of the film. In the course of this, at the beginning of the third act, Han would die -- sacrificing his life for this man.

See? Something for him to do besides mushy love dialogue; Ford certainly would've put in more of an effort with even that.

For me ROTJ is more of a problem than any of the PT because all the PT films are, in their current form, so badly made I can barely watch them but the OT has two really good films and a poor film with some really nice moments.

Mark's performance is really good for example.

I can't dismiss the whole film like a can with the PT but it doesn't maintain the trajectory of quality that the first two films had .

It will always feel like the contractual obligation film (both for the film makers and this member of the audience).

I need to watch it to complete the story but I feel let down by the drop of quality which prefigures much of what is wrong in the PT.

If I let ROTJ off the hook for it's hideous and avoidable flaws I might as well watch the PT as well.

I want the original version released because it's less of a mess than any of George's SEs but if any SE can fix it (and I doubt if George is the guy for the job) I would at least have one trilogy I can watch all the way through without being weighed down by what the final act isn't.

xhonzi said:

However, I have to also remind myself that the reviewer is basing this wacky opinion on RotJ2011, which I guess I can maybe start to understand.  Last time I tried to watch RotJ2004, I had to turn it off because it was making me angry instead of happy. 

RIP RotJ1983.

I stand by my opinion that ANY version of RETURN OF THE JEDI is the worst of the 6 movies to me.

None of the "changes" made in 1997, 2004, or 2011 fixed or addressed any of my top 10 reasons why the movie sucks.

Mr. Bungle said:

The worst element in the Star Wars movies (as they stand now) belongs to "Jedi Rocks" in the piece of shit ROTJ Special Edition. Only reason I think that's worse than the two-headed announcer from TPM is that it's a grotesque CG replacement of a puppet band that worked just fine before being fucked with and thus ruining the scene.

Mr. Bungle said:

No effing way. What does an Ewok do in ROTJ that even compares to "Icky poo!" or "Weesa FREE!" You think about that one.

As for Harrison Ford, worse than the Holiday Special? Six Days Seven Nights? How about Hollywood Homicide? 

 

I'll see your icky icky poo and raise you a Yub nub  and Ee chee wa maa! !

;)

Yes, Harrison Ford in the cockpit of the Millenium Falcon of the Holiday Special is WAY more convincing than "Take her, she's the fastest ship in the galaxy..." and the completely inconsistent (within a few freakin seconds no less), "I have your word, not a scratch!"

sonnyboo said:

xhonzi said:

However, I have to also remind myself that the reviewer is basing this wacky opinion on RotJ2011, which I guess I can maybe start to understand.  Last time I tried to watch RotJ2004, I had to turn it off because it was making me angry instead of happy. 

RIP RotJ1983.

I stand by my opinion that ANY version of RETURN OF THE JEDI is the worst of the 6 movies to me.

None of the "changes" made in 1997, 2004, or 2011 fixed or addressed any of my top 10 reasons why the movie sucks.

Well stand by your opinion then, I doubt you can make any solid case for it.

Jaskoen said:

sonnyboo said:

It's just from the Blu Ray and over 6 years since I last saw Return of the Jedi

I just want to add - I'm talking about the OT only. Lucas ruined so much of Jedi with his changes (IMO), from Jedi Rocks to Little Sarlacc of Horrors to Noooooo!! to no Yub-Yub to Hayden Christensen's ghost - I just can't watch it. It'd be like trying to eat my favorite meal with a big ol' turd on top of it. I'll stick to DJ's GOUT preservation, which I consider to be exponentially superior to any of the prequels, even with the dated FX work.

 The Nooo!!!! i can do without. Anakins ghost needs to follow some continuity. He's either and old geezer or young looking. I liked the Jedi Rocks scene as well as the added beak in the Sarlaac pit. Both parts made the movie fun to watch. And the ending GL redid with all the worlds, i thought that was better then the yub nub song. Still waiting for him to put Kassyke in there....

twooffour said:

Well stand by your opinion then, I doubt you can make any solid case for it.

I was never trying to convince you or anyone else to change their minds. That was never my intention. I merely expressed my opinions, as they are.

Is that what you do? Try to make people 'prove' beyond all doubt that their subjective opinion is right or wrong? Why not debate which is better, chocolate or vanilla ice cream?

_____________________________

As for someone referencing Gary Kurtz quitting/getting fired after Empire Strikes Back and reading George's draft of JEDI...

“I took a master class with Billy Wilder once and he said that in the first act of a story you put your character up in a tree and the second act you set the tree on fire and then in the third you get him down”

- Gary Kurtz, producer

sonnyboo said:

I'll see your icky icky poo and raise you a Yub nub

Why not debate which is better, chocolate or vanilla ice cream?

That's not a valid analogy - the preference of food depends entirely on taste, the evaluation of movies also includes a great portion of thought, argument and attention.

I.e., I may watch through a movie while eating pizza and get high on happiness hormones, but miss a lot of bad stuff that might have downgraded my opinion of the movie overall had I noticed them.
Hence, me saying "wow, this movie is awesome" is worth less than a thought-out review focusing on its various aspects. I'm only good enough to say "this movie is good to have fun for two hours with a pizza and lots of green tea".


Having that all said, don't you think you're acting a bit too defensive for a dude who started his own thread about 10 reasons why chocolate is better than vanilla ice cream? :D

Mrebo said:

sonnyboo said:

twooffour said:

Well stand by your opinion then, I doubt you can make any solid case for it.

I was never trying to convince you or anyone else to change their minds. That was never my intention. I merely expressed my opinions, as they are.

Is that what you do? Try to make people 'prove' beyond all doubt that their subjective opinion is right or wrong? Why not debate which is better, chocolate or vanilla ice cream?

Okay, well he does do that. But I happen to agree with him here.

There is a legitimate criticism that you claim RoTJ is worse than 5 other movies...without contrasting them with those 5 movies. Instead you express your opinion about how RoTJ could have been better. You're entitled to think whatever you want (of course), but there is a big gap between what you assert and the reasons for it. To say vanilla ice cream is the worst flavor because it doesn't have chocolate chips in it signifies that you like chocolate chips, not that vanilla is so terrible.

Conceptually and in execution, the PT was a mess. I also pointed out how similar "flaws" you identify exist in other SW movies. RoTJ was fun, made sense, had a lot of great effects, had great emotional scenes (Yoda's death, duel with Vader), and decent to good acting.

Just to clarify, I really don't care if someone watches a movie I consider shitty and enjoys it overall (i.e. happiness hormones), it's just when one starts making arguments attempting to quantify something, that fallacies can be made, and misjudgement becomes possible.

And I really don't think anyone should have a problem with people objecting to their opinions if they put their opinions out there in the first place.
I mean, I recently watched Pirates 4 and enjoyed it (I hardly even followed the plot, but I enjoyed the witty lines and entertaining acting, along with atmosphere and action... you know, the stuff that doesn't require too much thought), I regularly watch NC reviews just for fun, without knowing the movie or digging into the points presented, and I may even express my opinions on a forum, but I'll also realize my fallibility and won't mind getting corrected or bashed.

__

And yea, I agree with the above post, too.
Sometimes, you just start thinking about a movie, articulate some ideas you've had in the back of your head, and write them down in a post.
It's still very possible to overlook flaws within these arguments, or forget to compare them to the other objects you're referring to in the post title, and then someone points out and BAM.

Having that said, nah, I don't demand that he writes an essay before he dares to post a thread or anything, I'm just saying that I've read through the list and think that the leap from this to "worst SW movie" is giant and makes no sense.

Thx.

Darth Bizarro said:

twooffour said:

Having that all said, don't you think you're acting a bit too defensive for a dude who started his own thread about 10 reasons why chocolate is better than vanilla ice cream? :D

Don't you think you're behaving a bit to offensively for a thread about a FREAKING MOVIE.

I don't see how I'm being particularly "offensive", except in the regular way of joining in and saying something makes no sense, which is a fairly regular thing to do when talking about a freaking movie ;)

Darth Bizarro said:

twooffour said:

Well stand by your opinion then, I doubt you can make any solid case for it.

The great thing about opinions is that you don't have to.  

Well that's what you think, but wait till my Nazi sqads knock at your house. You really think you have freedom of speech? In this place?

Ok, unscientific as I am, here's my brief response to the 10 points without having read the previous rebuttals / responses - have fun with the unorganized mess!

10. and the dramatic tension lasts almost 3 whole seconds before Han Solo, a well known scoundrel, gives up and apologizes right away. No waiting until they're in the battle and she gets shot to make up, thus creating some much needed drama.

First, it's the character development the lack whereof (??) you proceed to complain about - he isn't the amoral scoundel in ESB that he was in the first half of ANH, he makes yet another step shortly before being frozen, and is obviously a better person after being unfrozen.

His apology after being a jealous ass is yet another piece of character development, or maybe an example of it showing the "nice guy" who genuinely cares for Leia taking over the douchebag.

Could his character and development have been made more interesting than it was? Sure, but making him fall out with Leia over some minor issue until some crisis of life and death could've easily, EASILY devolved into artificial dramatic tension.

And that was my second point :)



9&8
Ok, please let's talk about the fake-looking CGI in the prequels now.
°_°

7 If you consider the prequels, Vader was shown to be a good guy (sort of) before he murdered children.
If you watch the backstory in ANH, he was a good guy before. Now that he's Luke's father, the appeal of that may even be higher for Luke (who may well operate under a delusion, considering that Yoda and Ben disagree), plus there was some hint of fatherly "affection" after the battle was over.

This thread continues on in this movie, and at the end, Luke TURNS OUT to be right.
At the end of the day, Luke SENSED the good in Vader with Magic Force Thingy, and yes, it could've been built up better.

But let's talk about Anakin's sudden conversion in Sith and how his capability to murder children as well as his total lack of critical faculties was built up in the previous movies (and his wangsty arrogance before that), and it all makes ROTS a better movie ;)


6. Lando didn't die, so the movie is the worst of all 6. Okay, not even going to.
ESB was just as bad, because Solo survived and Luke got his hand back.

5. Meh. The "in defense of DSII" thread had good points.
Have the prequels attacked the same kind of starship in two long action sequences? I guess not, so they're better movies.

4. Because the prequels handled romance and love triangles so much better.
Look how Anakin's jealousy for Obi-Wan was built up throughout the plot. And the dramatic tension in Clones? OMG! He's a Jedi, she's a SENATOR!

3. Ford wasn't at the top of his game, so let's prefer the prequels with Jake Lloyd, Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman who's acting just a little bit less inspired than in her other movies.

2. Okay, so TPM focused just as much on the Gungans, who were at least as good as the Ewoks, right??

1. Yea, that alternate scene would've been better, but then again, Luke should've said "so why didn't you tell me that they would make it without me? And if you didn't know, how was my move wrong?"

At any rate, the prequels are rather good at resolving conflicts in a credible way, and having characters immune to absurd relativism.
So when Palps tells Anakin that "good is a point of view", he just nods, so it's a better movie.



..

Yea, right. It's a decent list of "10 things that bug me about ROTJ", but if you wanna claim it's worse than the prequels, you need more than that.

And yes, you NEED it, because I'm an international dictator, and got my minions everywhere.

twooffour said:

Having that all said, don't you think you're acting a bit too defensive for a dude who started his own thread about 10 reasons why chocolate is better than vanilla ice cream? :D

No. I think you are projecting your opinion of what I'm writing as being defensive.

I do not think you or anyone else is 'wrong' for liking JEDI or disagreeing with my opinions. I simply have my opinions that are entirely subjective, as you do yours. Your opinion is in no way objective or absolute for anyone other than yourself and those who share your point of view.