The bulk of Star Wars exposition is done symbolically.
You don't have to even read the crawl to know the smaller ship represents a small plucky band and the really, really big ship are Galactic bullies.
You could easierly know Luke wants to get off Tatooine without hearing a word of dialogue just by the look on his face as he looks up at the twin sunset.
Until Lucas decided we needed to know Darth Vader was Luke's father, who built c-3p0 a robot more human than vader to make a kind of irony.
Lucas likes to echo the stories in the prequels, but did we really need to know boba was a clone who was sad cause his dad died,lol.
That Luke and Anakin come both from the same world.
The retcons really started with empire depends on if you except vader as the father in V, and leia as the sister in VI or say its horseshit because that was not there when he wrote star wars 77.
When i see star wars when Obi Wan says Vader killed Luke's father that sounds literal and not like obi wan is lying. Lucas started by making him a horrible liar in V and then look at how much of a deceiving asshole he is by the prequels which are supposed to have been written before the other movies but were written in the late 90's to 2000's.
Sometimes i wonder how different it would be if the brackett script with Vader as the slayer of Lukes father and not his dad had been made. And if we really had a revenge of the jedi where the purpose is for luke to avenge his teacher and his father. But that would also have been at the time less mythic .
“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.
Lucas should have prepared for a silent movie and got the actors to read the caption cards with conviction.
Less isn't always more but less exposition would have made even the wonky world of the PT seem less tedious.
skyjedi2005 said:
Until Lucas decided we needed to know Darth Vader was Luke's father, who built c-3p0 a robot more human than vader to make a kind of irony.
Lucas likes to echo the stories in the prequels, but did we really need to know boba was a clone who was sad cause his dad died,lol.
That Luke and Anakin come both from the same world.
The retcons really started with empire depends on if you except vader as the father in V, and leia as the sister in VI or say its horshit because that was not there when he wrote star wars 77.
When i see star wars when Obi Wan says Vader killed Luke's father that sounds literal and not like obi wan is lying. Lucas started by making him a horrible liar in V and then look at how much of a deceiving asshole he is by the prequels which are supposed to have been written before the other movies but were written in the late 90's to 2000's.
Sometimes i wonder how different it would be if the brackett script with Vader as the slayer of Lukes father and not his dad had been made. And if we really had a revenge of the jedi where the purpose is for luke to avenge his teacher and his father. But that would also have been at the time less mythic .
This is about EXPOSITION in movies, not how the prequels ruined the originals. Please, get rid of your obsession and get a sense.
I meant changing exposition or shifting canon as i'm making this all up as i go, like indiana jones quips in raiders.
Might as well have been George Lucas describing his storytelling on the star wars films. With the backwards way of starting in the middle and then not even writing the backstory until later when you had already pretty much said you would never direct again and were determined to never do any more star wars films, even though publicly the statement was maybe someday if not for Howard the duck or to further the technology revolution of computers and cgi would the prequels have been made, probably not.
“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.
Take for example the 'on paper' stupid notion that Anakin built Threepio.
Qui-Gon and the gang take shelter in Anakin's home.
We see a crappy looking droid helping his mother with the soldering.
Anakin says he assembled it out of discarded junk to help his mother.
There's no need to make a big thing out of it, we don't have to know it's a protocol droid (though observant viewers may notice the round shape on it's chest and that the eyes match those of the silver droid at the beginning of the film).
We learn that Anakin is good at building stuff and that his mother largely works from home.
The question of ownership of the droid is side stepped (for all we know Watto knows about the thing and considers it his property just like Anakin and his mum).
We needn't learn it's name until the next episode or the one after that it doesn't even have to speak.
It's still a stupid idea but at least it's palatably stupid.
twooffour said:
skyjedi2005 said:
Until Lucas decided we needed to know Darth Vader was Luke's father, who built c-3p0 a robot more human than vader to make a kind of irony.
Lucas likes to echo the stories in the prequels, but did we really need to know boba was a clone who was sad cause his dad died,lol.
That Luke and Anakin come both from the same world.
The retcons really started with empire depends on if you except vader as the father in V, and leia as the sister in VI or say its horshit because that was not there when he wrote star wars 77.
When i see star wars when Obi Wan says Vader killed Luke's father that sounds literal and not like obi wan is lying. Lucas started by making him a horrible liar in V and then look at how much of a deceiving asshole he is by the prequels which are supposed to have been written before the other movies but were written in the late 90's to 2000's.
Sometimes i wonder how different it would be if the brackett script with Vader as the slayer of Lukes father and not his dad had been made. And if we really had a revenge of the jedi where the purpose is for luke to avenge his teacher and his father. But that would also have been at the time less mythic .
This is about EXPOSITION in movies, not how the prequels ruined the originals. Please, get rid of your obsession and get a sense.
Oh no, sky is back and I find myself suddenly siding with 2/4.
*sigh*
DuracellEnergizer said:
I forgot about Dune. Now there's a Lynch film I hate, and I haven't even read the book.
It's always funny to go back and read one's own posts just to wonder what the hell said one was thinking when he posted said posts.
Oh, and apparently Frink hates Lynch's entire oeuvre after seeing only one of his movies. Assuming this is still the case, that makes Frink unpalatably obtuse.
Lynch's Dune was a good movie. Perhaps not great, and it doesn't do Dune justice, but I'm glad that it exists.
To put this necro'd thread on topic, I'd rather have too little exposition than too much. I'd say 2001, A Space Odyssey comes dangerously close to having too little exposition, whereas Interstellar has far too much.
You probably don’t recognize me because of the red arm.
Episode 9 Rewrite, The Starlight Project (Released!) and ANH Technicolor Project (Released!)
NeverarGreat said:
Lynch's Dune was a good movie. Perhaps not great, and it doesn't do Dune justice, but I'm glad that it exists.
That's pretty much my opinion on the movie, now, too. Frankly, I'm astonished at how coherent the film is considering how much material from the novel had to be cut out.
DuracellEnergizer said:
This sums up the reason why I like him pretty much. Incomprehensible artistic weirdness appeals to me very much.
By now we are well aware you are into weird stuff.
真実
Pfft. If you're going to comment on my tastes, link to a post of mine which isn't being facetious.
This one, for example:
NeverarGreat said:
Lynch's Dune was a good movie. Perhaps not great, and it doesn't do Dune justice, but I'm glad that it exists.
To put this necro'd thread on topic, I'd rather have too little exposition than too much. I'd say 2001, A Space Odyssey comes dangerously close to having too little exposition, whereas Interstellar has far too much.
I'm gonna go with...uproariously terrible on the whole Dune issue. And certainly not light on the exposition, to forgive an on-topic connection. IIRC, the "film" opened with about 6 1/2 minutes of uninterrupted spoken-word doggerel re "THE SPICE," etc., while the screen just alternated back and forth between shots of two static planets.
Darth Id said:
NeverarGreat said:
Lynch's Dune was a good movie. Perhaps not great, and it doesn't do Dune justice, but I'm glad that it exists.
To put this necro'd thread on topic, I'd rather have too little exposition than too much. I'd say 2001, A Space Odyssey comes dangerously close to having too little exposition, whereas Interstellar has far too much.
I'm gonna go with...uproariously terrible on the whole Dune issue. And certainly not light on the exposition, to forgive an on-topic connection. IIRC, the "film" opened with about 6 1/2 minutes of uninterrupted spoken-word doggerel re "THE SPICE," etc., while the screen just alternated back and forth between shots of two static planets.
I'm not sure how to feel about that exposition dump. Star Wars had one in text form, so if Dune went the same way, would it be viewed as harshly? Dune in book form prefaced most chapters with quotes by the Princess Irulian, so having her preface the movie doesn't seem out of place. However I don't think that it needed to go on for so long. Just a little about Arrakis and the spice, then cut to Caladan.
You probably don’t recognize me because of the red arm.
Episode 9 Rewrite, The Starlight Project (Released!) and ANH Technicolor Project (Released!)
DuracellEnergizer said:
Oh, and apparently Frink hates Lynch's entire oeuvre after seeing only one of his movies. Assuming this is still the case, that makes Frink unpalatably obtuse.
Says the guy who thinks all sorts of movies are terrible without ever having seen them.
Suspect =/= think.