The Unofficial Complete REVISITED SAGA Ideas and Random Discussion Thread — Page 5

I'm not kidding, there's nothing iconic in the prequels and without a magnifying glass I don't think 'The Stellar Envoy' counts

J

Yeah podracers win the most iconic....um....iconic flying chariots.....throw away

J

Nothing memorable about the Prequels?

That's....c'mon, that's slightly ridiculous. 

It isn't hard to read the posts before mine, if you read it you will see the topic of conversation was about how ships should look shiny & new in the prequels compared to worn out & used in the originals, I added that there was nothing iconic in the prequels, bar RBR......now people are sayin light sabres & pod racers??

And I didn't say nothing memorable,.....'iconic' is what I said, and that was only 4 posts above

J

Once again I think the problem is not with the designs but with the context.

The Falcon is iconic because it's associated with a great character and memorable situations.

The Star Destroyer is iconic because it's the star in the most jaw dropping opening scene in cinema history.

The Trade Federation Ships could have been as iconic (they are memorable shapes and look rather good) but they are associated with stupid characters doing stupid things in boring situations.

Solve that and the designs might stand for something other than disappointment.

nightstalkerpoet said:

Now that I think of it, considering the fact that that ship would mirror the things around it, why doesn't it appear black in space?

 Hollywood is lies man...nothing but LIES!!!

If you were to light the ships of star wars realistically most of the time all the ships would be black and sometimes they would look like bleached out glowing shapes.

The film ships that got closest to proper space lighting were the Enterprise in TMP

and the Leonov in 2010

and even then they cheated by having the non-native stars visible in a stellar system (usually all you can see is blackness and nearby objects the local star/ stars would bleach them out).

The dust on the moon is charcoal grey and yet from Earth with the sun's light bouncing off it the moon appears to be a source of light rather than a reflector.

Star Wars space shots are composed to look more like pulp magazines than real space.

The lighting of the Queen's ship like the lighting of most of the ships in Star Wars is more like a plane in the sky than a object in space.

It would be nice if the prequels had been exceptional.

Honestly, all this talk about ship designs is for me a background issue. The screenplay is broken. If the story had been amazing and the characters had been as engaging as they were in OT, then honestly we may have been more forgiving of these ship designs, because holy crap that was a great story.

If the story had sucked in ESB, I would have complained about how stupid of a design the ATAT's were. I mean who creates tanks on legs that can easily be tripped? Not to mention that when they are in this "tripped" state their armor is no longer too strong for blasters and can be blown to bits.

Fix the story, then a lot is forgivable.

^ THIS sort of... I maintain that one reason (if not the main reason) we aren't as dewy eyed about the Trade Federation doughnut ships as we are about the Imperial pizza slices is because they were populated by idiotic characters doing boring things. 

Because a blank normal looking forehead, while technically consistant, doesn't do much for ADDING continuity. It just removes a very very minor difference.

Adding moles to Alec Guiness however does the opposit. There is something particular to notice that automatically calls back to the other one.

I understand that the attitude around here is very OT Now OT Forever! I don't think a blanket rule of change the PT to fit the OT is necessarily smart. Regardless of what you'd like, you only have so much to work with.

It can be your guiding principle in general, but you really need to be making whatever changes you feel you need, on either side to make the best possible version.

I'm not sold on the whole preserving surprises. I get why you want it, but I think 1, its impossible and 2 you are shortchanging the reverse viewings of those surprises. I am your father is still in the movie. Its just different. Now its, the audience knows, but Luke does not. And that isn't nothing. Its a very powerful scene when view from that *ahem* point of view. Im not saying its AS good, but its got its own merits.

Ask yourself. Has knowing Vader is Luke's father diminished the scene all these years since you first saw it? Don't you still watch Luke closely for his reaction to the truth?

Assuming that a new viewer has no idea about Darth Vader and Luke. I think its interesting to be in on the lie that Obi-Wan tells. And then to hear Vader say Obi-Wan never told you etc. He told me enough, he told me you killed him.

All of that is fascinating Id say to a first timer. I can imagine being on the edge of my seat waiting to see if Vader is going to drop the bomb on Luke and how Luke will react.

You trade in some twist shock (which I think is a bit overrated) and gain a little suspense.

Not saying its better or AS good, but it doesn't suck.

princethomas said:

Because a blank normal looking forehead, while technically consistant, doesn't do much for ADDING continuity. It just removes a very very minor difference.

 

Adding moles to Alec Guiness however does the opposit. There is something particular to notice that automatically calls back to the other one.

 

I understand that the attitude around here is very OT Now OT Forever! I don't think a blanket rule of change the PT to fit the OT is necessarily smart. Regardless of what you'd like, you only have so much to work with.

It can be your guiding principle in general, but you really need to be making whatever changes you feel you need, on either side to make the best possible version.

 

I'm not sold on the whole preserving surprises. I get why you want it, but I think 1, its impossible and 2 you are shortchanging the reverse viewings of those surprises. I am your father is still in the movie. Its just different. Now its, the audience knows, but Luke does not. And that isn't nothing. Its a very powerful scene when view from that *ahem* point of view. Im not saying its AS good, but its got its own merits.

Ask yourself. Has knowing Vader is Luke's father diminished the scene all these years since you first saw it? Don't you still watch Luke closely for his reaction to the truth?

 

Assuming that a new viewer has no idea about Darth Vader and Luke. I think its interesting to be in on the lie that Obi-Wan tells. And then to hear Vader say Obi-Wan never told you etc. He told me enough, he told me you killed him.

All of that is fascinating Id say to a first timer. I can imagine being on the edge of my seat waiting to see if Vader is going to drop the bomb on Luke and how Luke will react.

 

You trade in some twist shock (which I think is a bit overrated) and gain a little suspense.

 

Not saying its better or AS good, but it doesn't suck.

All of my yes to this. 

princethomas said:

Because a blank normal looking forehead, while technically consistant, doesn't do much for ADDING continuity. It just removes a very very minor difference.

 

Adding moles to Alec Guiness however does the opposit. There is something particular to notice that automatically calls back to the other one.

 

I understand that the attitude around here is very OT Now OT Forever! I don't think a blanket rule of change the PT to fit the OT is necessarily smart. Regardless of what you'd like, you only have so much to work with.

It can be your guiding principle in general, but you really need to be making whatever changes you feel you need, on either side to make the best possible version.

 

I'm not sold on the whole preserving surprises. I get why you want it, but I think 1, its impossible and 2 you are shortchanging the reverse viewings of those surprises. I am your father is still in the movie. Its just different. Now its, the audience knows, but Luke does not. And that isn't nothing. Its a very powerful scene when view from that *ahem* point of view. Im not saying its AS good, but its got its own merits.

Ask yourself. Has knowing Vader is Luke's father diminished the scene all these years since you first saw it? Don't you still watch Luke closely for his reaction to the truth?

 

Assuming that a new viewer has no idea about Darth Vader and Luke. I think its interesting to be in on the lie that Obi-Wan tells. And then to hear Vader say Obi-Wan never told you etc. He told me enough, he told me you killed him.

All of that is fascinating Id say to a first timer. I can imagine being on the edge of my seat waiting to see if Vader is going to drop the bomb on Luke and how Luke will react.

 

You trade in some twist shock (which I think is a bit overrated) and gain a little suspense.

 

Not saying its better or AS good, but it doesn't suck.

This is a valid argument, and I've even seen that it's true for SW newbies. However, as you said it's probably not a better situation (even if isn't bad) and if we can preserve the surprise (and I think it can be done) why not do it? If you have the opportunity to make it stronger, then make it stronger.

mrbenja0618 said:

princethomas said:

Because a blank normal looking forehead, while technically consistant, doesn't do much for ADDING continuity. It just removes a very very minor difference.

 

Adding moles to Alec Guiness however does the opposit. There is something particular to notice that automatically calls back to the other one.

 

I understand that the attitude around here is very OT Now OT Forever! I don't think a blanket rule of change the PT to fit the OT is necessarily smart. Regardless of what you'd like, you only have so much to work with.

It can be your guiding principle in general, but you really need to be making whatever changes you feel you need, on either side to make the best possible version.

 

I'm not sold on the whole preserving surprises. I get why you want it, but I think 1, its impossible and 2 you are shortchanging the reverse viewings of those surprises. I am your father is still in the movie. Its just different. Now its, the audience knows, but Luke does not. And that isn't nothing. Its a very powerful scene when view from that *ahem* point of view. Im not saying its AS good, but its got its own merits.

Ask yourself. Has knowing Vader is Luke's father diminished the scene all these years since you first saw it? Don't you still watch Luke closely for his reaction to the truth?

 

Assuming that a new viewer has no idea about Darth Vader and Luke. I think its interesting to be in on the lie that Obi-Wan tells. And then to hear Vader say Obi-Wan never told you etc. He told me enough, he told me you killed him.

All of that is fascinating Id say to a first timer. I can imagine being on the edge of my seat waiting to see if Vader is going to drop the bomb on Luke and how Luke will react.

 

You trade in some twist shock (which I think is a bit overrated) and gain a little suspense.

 

Not saying its better or AS good, but it doesn't suck.

This is a valid argument, and I've even seen that it's true for SW newbies. However, as you said it's probably not a better situation (even if isn't bad) and if we can preserve the surprise (and I think it can be done) why not do it? If you have the opportunity to make it stronger, then make it stronger.

Because we can't without removing a bunch of really cool stuff.

Seriously, we can't. Anyone who thinks so is fooling themselves. 

^This

Serioudly, I've talked about this before. I don't think preserving the secret makes the films stronger at all. Quite the opposite.

nightstalkerpoet said:

... Leave Anakin to die on Mustafar.

Padme's funeral.

Yoda goes to Dagobah.

Emperor/Vader/Tarkin looking at the death star (change that to be Coruscant or something else)

Roll credits.

We lose... NOOOOOOO! and the scenes with the twins. Secret, for the most part, preserved. Where's the cool stuff?

Not showing that Anakin lives, and showing Vader at the end even adds to the deception. 

ABSOLUTELY THIS.

I too would like to know what "cool" stuff we would miss. However, if I lose cool in favor of substance, I'm going to choose substance every time.

I don't think its doable at all. I think the best you can do is create a sort of muddled story where you don't really know whats going on. If we know the names Skywalker for Anakin and Luke and if we know that Padme is pregnant, then I think most people wont buy what Obi-Wan is selling to Luke for a minute. But I am in favor of someone trying it. Its enough of a debate to make it worth trying to see what its like. I just don't think theres enough material for it.

I'll tell you guys something else that isn't going to be popular. I think Lucas skated pretty on some pretty thin ice when he pulled the I am your father bit to begin with. I know a few people who were adults when Empire came out and several have said that I am your father was met with a fair bit of criticism. "Its like a soap opera"  was the "its a bunch of muppets" complaint.

I'd be willing to bet that whatever you put together toward preserving that surprise will only worsen that possibility. Id guess thats probably part of why Lucas didn't worry about it.

From a cinema history perspective, "I am your father" is great. As an actual cinematic device. Its a little gimmicky.

DominicCobb said:

^This

Serioudly, I've talked about this before. I don't think preserving the secret makes the films stronger at all. Quite the opposite.

A) Name one cool story point from the PT worth fretting over losing. If you are saying Palpatine being behind both armies I'm with you, other than that it's an unassembled bucket of bolts (and we know how good a well assembled bucket of bolts can be).

B) How many versions of the PT have you seen that do maintain the secrets of the OT? How many versions that don't actually work?

There's nothing to lose and everything to gain with the PT.

Make them Episodes One to Three and not the Prequels and they may just be salvaged.