My Top 10 Reasons ROTJ sucks — Page 7

TV's Frink said:

Loosely related to this thread (which I'm really starting to enjoy, btw):

The dvdactive review of Jedi on Blu was just posted.

Although often seen as the ‘lame duck’ of the original trilogy, I'm actually quite fond of Return of the Jedi. It’s easily the most action-packed of the original films, with an exciting opening act and a multi-layered finale that delivers both action and drama. The special effects work is superior to anything seen in the previous films, we are (properly) introduced to a variety of new and interesting characters (including Jabba and the Emperor), and it serves as a satisfying resolution to the events of the preceding movies. So why does it have such a bad reputation?

There have been many theories put forward to explain Jedi’s supposed inferiority, raging from directorial interference to lack of interest by the actors. The story goes that George Lucas was not happy with director Richard Marquand’s performance, and that Lucas himself actually directed much of the film. There has also been a fair bit made of Harrison Ford’s reluctance to be involved with the project, and some feel that he all-but phoned in his performance. Others are against the inclusion of the second Death Star, citing it as nothing more than a rehash of the first movie’s plot (ex-producer Gary Kurtz is among the detractors). However, perhaps the biggest criticism is of the furry little Ewoks, the presence of which is seen by many as nothing more than a marketing gimmick to sell toys to kids, rather than a genuine plot device.

However, while I can see where people are coming from with these comments, I don’t necessarily agree with all of them. I do agree that there’s a bit of a slump in the middle of the film, but I think it  is made all the more obvious because of the tremendous amount of action that surrounds it. I also agree with the comments about Ford, at least to a certain extent, as he’s nowhere near his wise-cracking best. Still, much of this can be explained by the hardships he endures and his character arc - he’s gone from rogue smuggler to self-sacrificing hero. Other than that, I think the film hangs together rather well. There’s plenty of character progression, the performances are no less ‘hammy’ than the previous films, and our own history has taught us that it is possible for a technologically inferior people to overcome a technologically superior force.

This is basically my view of ROTJ. The performances of Ford and Fisher are what really hurt this film, not the Ewoks. Fortunately the script really pushed them into the background compared to Luke, so they don't hurt the film too much

What has become clear to me is that Han and Leia have nothing to do after the first film. The love story in Empire is in there in order to keep them interesting. By essentially resolving it at the end of Empire ("I love you"..."I Know") they are left with nothing in Jedi. Yeah, in Jedi there is the subtext that with having real friends for the first time ("Now I owe you one"), Han is ready to sacrifice for the greater good - but really he already had made this turn at the climax of Star Wars. The first film has a self-contained character arc for both Luke and Han.

Bingowings said:

I think what hurt ROTJ most was the, "knock it out quick, it'll do" attitude of Lucas which percolates through the whole piece.

The story is practically a cut an paste rehash of elements from the previous two stories.

The director was Medvedev to Lucas' Putin.

The sets were largely a collage of bits left over from the other films and photographed with very little sense of cinema (compare Jerjerrod's control room to Tarkin's in ANH, there are 1970's Doctor Who sets that look practically the same, no wonder most of the footage ended up on the cutting room floor).

In terms of characterisation ESB was a big step up from ANH because it had to be.

The audience had already entered the world and fallen in love with the core characters so the next film couldn't just coast along on the same level.

Lucas had the good sense to get a director in who could not only handle/control actors but also listened when they had good ideas which gave them a sense of personal investment in their roles.

Mark pretty much kept that going in ROTJ but almost everyone else seemed to be in it to close that paragraph of their resume/CV.

This is why to me Jedi hurts more than the PT.

I can choose to ignore it the PT but if I want closure from ESB's storylines I have to sit through ROTJ so it becomes as much of a contractual obligation to myself as it was to the people who made it.

At least the characters were still charming and likable, and the action sequences made sense, were well edited, and actually exciting. Compare that to the unlikable characters, boring and over the top action sequences, and crummy CGI of the prequels.

I can understand why a person might prefer Empire to the Original (a blasphemy to be sure, but understandable), but I cannot for the life of me put myself in the head space of people who prefer any of the prequels to Jedi. Jedi is vastly superior to those films in every way that a film can be evaluated; acting, dramatic effect, special effects, pacing, editing etc. etc.

theprequelsrule said:

Bingowings said:

I think what hurt ROTJ most was the, "knock it out quick, it'll do" attitude of Lucas which percolates through the whole piece.

The story is practically a cut an paste rehash of elements from the previous two stories.

The director was Medvedev to Lucas' Putin.

The sets were largely a collage of bits left over from the other films and photographed with very little sense of cinema (compare Jerjerrod's control room to Tarkin's in ANH, there are 1970's Doctor Who sets that look practically the same, no wonder most of the footage ended up on the cutting room floor).

In terms of characterisation ESB was a big step up from ANH because it had to be.

The audience had already entered the world and fallen in love with the core characters so the next film couldn't just coast along on the same level.

Lucas had the good sense to get a director in who could not only handle/control actors but also listened when they had good ideas which gave them a sense of personal investment in their roles.

Mark pretty much kept that going in ROTJ but almost everyone else seemed to be in it to close that paragraph of their resume/CV.

This is why to me Jedi hurts more than the PT.

I can choose to ignore it the PT but if I want closure from ESB's storylines I have to sit through ROTJ so it becomes as much of a contractual obligation to myself as it was to the people who made it.

At least the characters were still charming and likable, and the action sequences made sense, were well edited, and actually exciting. Compare that to the unlikable characters, boring and over the top action sequences, and crummy CGI of the prequels.

I can understand why a person might prefer Empire to the Original (a blasphemy to be sure, but understandable), but I cannot for the life of me put myself in the head space of people who prefer any of the prequels to Jedi. Jedi is vastly superior to those films in every way that a film can be evaluated; acting, dramatic effect, special effects, pacing, editing etc. etc.

I concur, theprequelsrule.

I do appreciate the Medvedev/Putin analogy, Bingowings.

As for my preferences, Jabba and the Ewoks were new and fun. Luke was now much more confident than before. I don't know that I would have wanted Star Wars to become increasingly more dramatic. A sequel does need to step it up and I think RoTJ did. To my eye, it was more exciting than ESB. I recognize ESB as the 'better' movie but it would not have taken much to bring Jedi to that same level. For the level of fun and dynanism, Jedi is my favorite. I don't think it's fair to turn a blind eye to ANH's "flaws" simply because it made ESB possible while treating Jedi like an aberration and failure.

http://www.listology.com/litgeek/story/vebber-and-goulds-fifty-reasons-why-jedi-sucks-rebuttal

I don't have the desire to do a thorough rebuttal to the "50 Reasons Jedi Sucks" link a couple pages back but fortunately someone else did. It's a multipart reply but that's the first page for anyone interested.

TheBoost said:

Mrebo said:

http://www.listology.com/litgeek/story/vebber-and-goulds-fifty-reasons-why-jedi-sucks-rebuttal

I don't have the desire to do a thorough rebuttal to the "50 Reasons Jedi Sucks" link a couple pages back but fortunately someone else did. It's a multipart reply but that's the first page for anyone interested.

 While that list is sure rebuttal worthy, this dude's work is a little weak. Lots of "George's vision" stuff, including faulting the first list for calling "Star Wars" "Star Wars" and not ANH.

Yeah, yeah, I agree...but I don't want to do my own rebuttal!

Some of the 50 Reasons are just so completely stupid, it's hard to rebut them beyond stating the obvious (eg #12 3PO is annoying and doesn't serve an integral purpose...what else is new?). Eh, maybe I'll be less lazy and respond to the first 10 or something.