- Time
- Post link
"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape
A New Thought on George
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
When was the last time Brian Depalma made a great movie? Did anyone see Eyes Wide Shut by Kubrick before he died in 1999? Has Coppola done anything near the quality of his 1970's work with Godfather I & II, The Conversation, Apocalypse Now? These guys did their best work when they were hungry, and their careers were on the line: Spielberg with Jaws, Coppola with Godfather, Lucas with Star Wars.
I think a director gets soft through the years, and loses that edge, and in this genre of fantasy, is out of touch with what is cool to the public. You have to remember Lucas was in his late 20's when he made the OT, and invented the lightsaber, the millenium falcon, Darth Vader, Han Solo, Carbonite, AT-AT's, The Emperor, these are all cool things that appeal to the geeks in this genre. What is cool in the PT other then maybe Darth Maul?
I do agree that if Lucas would have hired writer A, and had more collaboration, etc, the PT would have been better, but the heart of soul of the OT came from Lucas, and I just think a 50 year old guy writing about a teenage kid who turns the darkside is a recipe for disaster, compared to a 25 year old guy writing about this huge war going on in space between good vs evil.
- Time
- Post link
Then he divorced her.
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: CO
I think we way overanalyze the faults of the PT sometimes, and it is real simple: Lucas was past his prime when he filmed the PT, and like many directors, his best work was done in his 20's/30's as a struggling director before he had kids and becomes financial successful. Now sure there exceptions like Spielberg, but there are exceptions to every rule.
When was the last time Brian Depalma made a great movie? Did anyone see Eyes Wide Shut by Kubrick before he died in 1999? Has Coppola done anything near the quality of his 1970's work with Godfather I & II, The Conversation, Apocalypse Now? These guys did their best work when they were hungry, and their careers were on the line: Spielberg with Jaws, Coppola with Godfather, Lucas with Star Wars.
I think a director gets soft through the years, and loses that edge, and in this genre of fantasy, is out of touch with what is cool to the public. You have to remember Lucas was in his late 20's when he made the OT, and invented the lightsaber, the millenium falcon, Darth Vader, Han Solo, Carbonite, AT-AT's, The Emperor, these are all cool things that appeal to the geeks in this genre. What is cool in the PT other then maybe Darth Maul?
I do agree that if Lucas would have hired writer A, and had more collaboration, etc, the PT would have been better, but the heart of soul of the OT came from Lucas, and I just think a 50 year old guy writing about a teenage kid who turns the darkside is a recipe for disaster, compared to a 25 year old guy writing about this huge war going on in space between good vs evil.
I think we way overanalyze the faults of the PT sometimes, and it is real simple: Lucas was past his prime when he filmed the PT, and like many directors, his best work was done in his 20's/30's as a struggling director before he had kids and becomes financial successful. Now sure there exceptions like Spielberg, but there are exceptions to every rule.
When was the last time Brian Depalma made a great movie? Did anyone see Eyes Wide Shut by Kubrick before he died in 1999? Has Coppola done anything near the quality of his 1970's work with Godfather I & II, The Conversation, Apocalypse Now? These guys did their best work when they were hungry, and their careers were on the line: Spielberg with Jaws, Coppola with Godfather, Lucas with Star Wars.
I think a director gets soft through the years, and loses that edge, and in this genre of fantasy, is out of touch with what is cool to the public. You have to remember Lucas was in his late 20's when he made the OT, and invented the lightsaber, the millenium falcon, Darth Vader, Han Solo, Carbonite, AT-AT's, The Emperor, these are all cool things that appeal to the geeks in this genre. What is cool in the PT other then maybe Darth Maul?
I do agree that if Lucas would have hired writer A, and had more collaboration, etc, the PT would have been better, but the heart of soul of the OT came from Lucas, and I just think a 50 year old guy writing about a teenage kid who turns the darkside is a recipe for disaster, compared to a 25 year old guy writing about this huge war going on in space between good vs evil.
Bah, anyone who becomes lazy in their old age has no excuse. Someone who lives their life to attain comfort should not be considered normal in my mind. It's a socially acceptable kind of gluttony but it's disgusting. People should always try their best to create the best, no matter what their age. To the degree I compromise things which should not be compromised (like art) I can understand Lucas, but I will not excuse him and I would not want others to excuse me.
That said, we all have blind spots where, even when trying to do our best, we will still make big mistakes. In such situations we should never be afraid of criticism. Receiving input from people who have a different approach to life is invaluable. (At the very least, if someone is convinced of their viewpoint then they shouldn't be afraid to test it.) Thankfully the original Star Wars had a whole team of people creating it. While George Lucas was the primary impetus behind the final result, he had enormously talented people working in conjunction with him. (When he made crap they told him and it was fixed.) In the end we have a great film that can still be enjoyed years later.
"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself. It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Bah, anyone who becomes lazy in their old age has no excuse. Someone who lives their life to attain comfort should not be considered normal in my mind. It's a socially acceptable kind of gluttony but it's disgusting. People should always try their best to create the best, no matter what their age. To the degree I compromise things which should not be compromised (like art) I can understand Lucas, but I will not excuse him and I would not want others to excuse me.
.
Bah, anyone who becomes lazy in their old age has no excuse. Someone who lives their life to attain comfort should not be considered normal in my mind. It's a socially acceptable kind of gluttony but it's disgusting. People should always try their best to create the best, no matter what their age. To the degree I compromise things which should not be compromised (like art) I can understand Lucas, but I will not excuse him and I would not want others to excuse me.
.
Tiptup, the difference between us and people like George Lucas, Spielberg is they have a huge amount of talent for their craft, and that is a double edge sword. When they use that talent, and work their hardest, they come up with movies like Jaws and Star Wars. The problem for many people in their field (sports, entertainment, music, etc) when they hit the jackpot, they lose alot of the drive that got them there in the first place.
Is it a coincidence that most directors greatest work is in their first 10 years? It is just like many actors when they finally win that Oscar, their careers are usually never the same. Look at Robert Deniro, he won for Raging Bull and Godfather II in 74 and 80, and he hasn't even been nominated for an oscar since Awakenings. He just doesn't take those demanding roles anymore that forces him to gain 60 lbs like he did with Raging Bull, and that is because he hit the mountain top and now he is just taking lightweight roles that are fun to continue his career now in his 50's/60's. Is Deniro still the great actor of our generation? Of course he is, but he lost that edge and you just won't see him in that hugely dramatic role anymore.
The same happened to Lucas, he just skated by for 3 movies saying, "good enough is good enough." but you can't honestly say he had the same passion for the PT that he did with SW in 1977, and that goes a long way to making a great movie.
Just look at Tarantino and all his movies, the guy LOVES making movies, and has never lost that edge, that is why he doesn't put out any crap movies.
- Time
- Post link
There is no lingerie in space…
C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.
- Time
- Post link
FF
“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison
- Time
- Post link
First up--its no secret that Marcia Lucas was, as Steven Spielberg put it, George's "secret weapon." The only Oscar the Lucases ever earned was the one that she won for editing Star Wars. Mark Hamill says "she was the warmth and heart of those films [the OT], someone he could bounce ideas off, who would tell him when he was wrong." IMO she is one of the unsung heroes of the American New Wave, editing American Graffiti, Taxi Driver, Star Wars and Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore.
But what Gaffer Tape pointed out is absolutely valid--Lucas has always been stubborn and that was one of his greatest strengths. He was a genius who could see things that none of his contemporaries did, and when they told him was making a bomb he basically said "fuck it, what do you guys know," and he was right. His uncompromising vision is both the success of Star Wars and the failure of the PT.
But the truth is that its not one or the other--all of the above are true. Here's what I mean: Star Wars was designed to be a traditional drama, that is the audience is supposed to subjectively identify and become emotionally involved with the characters and the story, and thus be moved, be thrilled, be entertained. Unlike THX 1138--that was a film that is very much like 2001, you're not supposed to identify with characters or become engaged in a dramatic plot, the film exists for its form and its intellectualism.
But, the problem was that people didn't get the very concept of Star Wars--they didn't understand robots and spaceships and how you could make this be serious and emotional they way a normal drama is, the way, say, American Graffiti was, with humor, thrills, and identified characterisation. Everyone thought of "space opera"--the whole Flash Gordon/serial style that Lucas advertised it as--as being silly, unrealistic, with cardboard characters, convoluted plotting and implausibility. And if you read the first drafts that Lucas wrote thats what they are like--the characters are thin, and for people that couldn't see it the way Lucas pictured it in his head it must have easily seemed silly. Spielberg grew up on the same sci-fantasy diet that Lucas did and could see how you could take the vernacular of the old adventure films and update them with realistic characters and effects--and thats the sole reason why Lucas "got" Star Wars and supported it; and so did Alan Ladd Jr.--his father was the producer of The Sea Hawk and all the films Lucas said it would recall, which is why he also "got" Star Wars.
But Lucas wasn't good at writing, and thats why the film succeeded only through the input of others. I know the film says "Written by George Lucas" but its decieving because the film was co-written in a sense by a half dozen other people. Lucas wanted the film to have realistic characters that people could identify with, that would be interesting and funny and seem like real people, and so over the course of four drafts he listened to input from Hal Barwood, Gloria and Willard Huyck, Francis Coppola, Walter Murch, Matthew Robbins, Steven Spielberg, Michael Ritchie, and more, plus his wife Marcia--whom specialised in down-too-earth, realistic character-driven pieces--was there to point out "this is dumb" and "I don't get this". Then to top it off the Huyck's wrote a polish of the final draft to change the dialog to make it more realistic, and with the spot-on casting the actors brought it to life and made it their own.
Lucas said in 1973 he "gave up" on hiring writers because the results never satisfied him--he shelved entire drafts of THX, Graffiti, and yes, Star Wars II, because the writers didn't get what he was going for, both because his vision was so particular and because he's a bad communicator. But he didn't really give up at all. Instead of having someone literally write it for him, he would be the one to put down the words on paper in a manner that suited his tastes, but the script would be shaped, edited and influenced by a whole circle of friends whom all were successful writers themselves. They pointed out what worked, what didn't, what should be kept and added and where to improve, and even in some cases did actual writing themselves. The writing was totally a group effort. And then the edit had a team of people, including Marcia, who got rid of all the crap--Deleted Magic has the film edited as it is in the script and its very weak, but the changes they made brought it to a whole new emotional level. There's a reason it won the editing Oscar.
And thats how Star Wars ended up as a film that was uniquely George Lucas, that had all of his vision and defied those who said he was wrong, yet simultaneously was emotionally engaging by being the product of letting others shape and influence the work to make up for his shortcomings.
Why did the prequels suck? Because he abandoned this formula--the same forumula he basically used in American Graffiti, Empire Strikes Back, Raiders of the Lost Ark and Return of the Jedi. At the time of Graffiti and Star Wars he would confess he was "a terrible writer", he had little confidence in himself and could face the facts that he was bad at writing characters, dialog and plot, as he admitted at that time. But when he got nominated--twice--for a "best screenplay" Oscar, had four of the highest grossing films of all time under his 5-film resume and was the most successful filmmaker whom ever lived: I think he began to think "maybe I'm a good writer after all." So when it came time to write the prequels--he just did it all himself. He didn't have a wife anymore, didn't collaborate with his friends anymore or even show them the script, and because he was treated as if a deity no one dared say anything. So thats why we ended up with Episode I, a film which shows how an unchequed Lucas goes off the deep end, getting obsessed with aliens and special effects and kooky weirdness and totally forgetting about characters and completely ignorant to constructing drama or a finely crafted plot.
So to sum up: yes, he was writing for Marcia and his friends. The reason he made Graffiti was because his wife and friends said he could never do a realistic and funny character piece and so he said "I'll show you I can"--and Star Wars was an extension of this. So he was writing for them from the perspective of characters and emotion--and in fact they themselves were the ones writing it in some sense--but at the same time the concept of the film, of spaceships and sword duels and such, was a uniquely George Lucas thing that was his uncompromising vision, and its the fusion of these two elements that created such a rich, imaginative, unqiue, but also warm and recognizeably human, film.
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
But on the flip side of that coin, hardly anybody had anything good to say about Star Wars when Lucas was first coming up with it (other than Spielberg, supposedly). None of his friends understood, the studio criticized it, the cast and crew didn't believe in it. But Lucas pretty much said, "Screw all of you guys, I'm doing what I want," and we ended up with a great movie. So he did the same thing on the prequels... and it didn't quite work out. The question is: when do you accept other people's opinions and when do you simply charge ahead? It can be pretty difficult to figure out that line. At least, I think it is.
But on the flip side of that coin, hardly anybody had anything good to say about Star Wars when Lucas was first coming up with it (other than Spielberg, supposedly). None of his friends understood, the studio criticized it, the cast and crew didn't believe in it. But Lucas pretty much said, "Screw all of you guys, I'm doing what I want," and we ended up with a great movie. So he did the same thing on the prequels... and it didn't quite work out. The question is: when do you accept other people's opinions and when do you simply charge ahead? It can be pretty difficult to figure out that line. At least, I think it is.
I will agree with you guys that Lucas does not listen to people anymore, or he has become more autonomous since the success of SW.
I guess I am going to defend Ol'Georgie for a second, and TPM IS what he wanted, and that movie is pretty much crap to me. He wanted Jar Jar to be this clumsy sidekick cause he thought kids would gravitate to him. He wanted Anakin to be 10 years old, cause he wanted a character arc of Darth Vader to be from a good kid to a guy who is burned up, broken and dies in front of his son. He wanted a huge amount of CG that he couldn't use in the OT.
Then look at AOTC, he uses Boba Fett/Jango Fett to appease the crowd that has loved him since 1980. He toned down Jar Jar to next to nothing in that movie because he heard the cries that this guy is ANNNNOYYYYING!!!! Remember the first reviews of AOTC, "It not a great movie, but it is sure as hell better then TPM!"
Then look at ROTS, he heard cries from the fans that the romance is nauseating, so there are only a few scenes with Padme/Anakin that make you want to vomit. He throws Chewbacca in there to appease the OT crowd who wanted the Wookie planet in ROTJ. He makes it more adult and PG-13 for the first time by having Anakin slaughter children and burning up in front of ObiWan.
Lucas did listen to people and the fans during the PT, and it still went all wrong, as I think you can't expect him to listen to EVERY criticism, because he is an artist. The PT is average or bad simply because it is an exhausted movie series that doesn't have the great characters from the first trilogy, so right you dont' have that magic of Luke, Leia, and Han to grab the viewer in the movie. You then have a 50 year old guy with 3 kids from the age range of 5-14 who Lucas definitely wants to appeal to, compared to a renegade guy in the 70's who just wanted to make a cool frickin movie for himself.
Lucas changed and that is just a fact of life, as the PT was never going to be what fans like us wanted it to be, and I am guilty of thinking it could have been great too. Sure it could have been better, but the magic was slowly dying in ROTJ in 1983, and once a movie series loses that magic, all it becomes it just a retread of living off what made it great. You can say what you want about Lucas, but I think he did what he did, tried to appease this fanbase and that fanbase, and in the end, it was impossible and should have never been attempted. But hindsight is 20/20.
- Time
- Post link
After that, I think he allowed a concern for money to motivate his artistic choices too much. But, that's not too uncommon. :\
Originally posted by: zombie84
So thats why we ended up with Episode I, a film which shows how an unchequed Lucas goes off the deep end, getting obsessed with aliens and special effects and kooky weirdness and totally forgetting about characters and completely ignorant to constructing drama or a finely crafted plot.
So thats why we ended up with Episode I, a film which shows how an unchequed Lucas goes off the deep end, getting obsessed with aliens and special effects and kooky weirdness and totally forgetting about characters and completely ignorant to constructing drama or a finely crafted plot.
Since I could ignore Jar Jar to a degree (and even found his antics humorous at a few points) I still say that Episode I is the best of the prequels for exactly everything you just described right there. It's certainly not a great film (it's even way below RotJ in my mind), but if we simply expect it to be nothing more than it is (and forget the other Star Wars movies, for instance) it totally works as a fun, fast film. Essentially, Phantom Menace had a ton of amusing crap squeezed into it. While I would never recommend it to anyone looking for a serious, adult-movie experience, it's still a movie you can vegetate in front of (for a while).
If you go to watch the other two prequels for what they are, however, they're absolutely terrible and almost completely rely on their connection to the OT to even seem good. They're both just big, long jokes assembled and dressed up in ways to make you think you're watching something well crafted (while it's actually falling apart at the seams).
"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself. It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005
- Time
- Post link
It's funny how so many of the same key things that you people say went wrong (and why) with the PT, also went wrong with the Pierce Brosnan JAMES BOND films as well. Once the original Bond Film makers and stars that made the series a hit in the 60's and 70's became old and started to depart, the magic was gone. The way to carry on became the mantra "Just make the old fans (and younger fans of the old films) happy", and that was translated by the second generation of producers (The Broccoli kids) as let's Re-do everything that worked in the hit films of the past, but now use high tech CGI, and young hip popular actors even if they are not up to the parts standards. The Broccoli kids seem to have gone with "Let's not break the mold and just give the fans what they expect to see, and keep it trendy and flashy so the movie shows like Entertainment Tonight will take notice of our production, and we can make lots of money to keep our production company & way of life going".
I think the last film Casino Royal worked a bit better for them because the makers did break away from the mold a great deal more then they had done with the "Brosnan Bonds", but are still not even close to that magic that was there from Dr. No - Moonraker...
Just seems like Lucas and The Broccoli kids have a lot in common here.
If Indy 4 sucks and fails to be a huge hit at the box office, I wonder if it will be Lucas or Spielberg who will be the fans "Sacrificial Cow" in the blame game. If it does suck, I'll have only myself to blame for expecting something even a bit close to the thrills I got from seeing Raiders of the Lost Ark for the first time.
FF
“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison
- Time
- Post link
It only seems better because of the two other films it's compared to. Again, just my opinion.
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Tiptup
I've said it before and I still believe that George Lucas is a man obsessed with ideas. A certain concept will grab his attention for a moment, he'll love it, try to use it, and then, once he's bored with it, move onto another idea. These fascinating ideas are what made Star Wars so great (and they easily comprise the most promising aspects of the prequels as well). While I'd say that this is his greatest artistic strength, it also causes him to ignore a lot of other things like continuity, plausibility, and finesse, as well as a whole ton of various emotional concerns (such as energetic dialogue). For instance, George knows what character drama looks like from the outside, and can have everything sitting in the right place, but he doesn't know how to connect all of that to the emotions sitting inside. Or, in the reverse case, when George starts with an emotional motivation (like the fear of loss), he doesn't know how to truly connect that to logical events nor on-screen performances. To do so would require too much work and he wants to move onto his next, fascinating idea.
I've said it before and I still believe that George Lucas is a man obsessed with ideas. A certain concept will grab his attention for a moment, he'll love it, try to use it, and then, once he's bored with it, move onto another idea. These fascinating ideas are what made Star Wars so great (and they easily comprise the most promising aspects of the prequels as well). While I'd say that this is his greatest artistic strength, it also causes him to ignore a lot of other things like continuity, plausibility, and finesse, as well as a whole ton of various emotional concerns (such as energetic dialogue). For instance, George knows what character drama looks like from the outside, and can have everything sitting in the right place, but he doesn't know how to connect all of that to the emotions sitting inside. Or, in the reverse case, when George starts with an emotional motivation (like the fear of loss), he doesn't know how to truly connect that to logical events nor on-screen performances. To do so would require too much work and he wants to move onto his next, fascinating idea.
Thank you so much for posting that. It is something I came to realise ever since AOTC, explaining the extremely different and entirely dissonant prequel identities. Its ironic that even though the OT is basically a patchwork of improvisations it still feels ten times more consistent and deliberate than the supposedly-planned PT.
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: zombie84
Thank you so much for posting that. It is something I came to realise ever since AOTC, explaining the extremely different and entirely dissonant prequel identities. Its ironic that even though the OT is basically a patchwork of improvisations it still feels ten times more consistent and deliberate than the supposedly-planned PT.
Thank you so much for posting that. It is something I came to realise ever since AOTC, explaining the extremely different and entirely dissonant prequel identities. Its ironic that even though the OT is basically a patchwork of improvisations it still feels ten times more consistent and deliberate than the supposedly-planned PT.
I can see this...
It's like in Empire, George was able to "Play" with his new idea of the world of Dagoba and his new guy "Yoda" and how to make him work, or a new Ice Planet with Huge Walker Tanks, or a Cloud City... while Lawrence Kasdan and Ivan Kirshner had the Job of making Luke and friends, as well as all the required "Star Wars" story arc things work together within Georg's new "play" environments... Once Empire was done Lucas never did go back add anything new to the Dagoba world in Jedi, he just moved on to "Play" in Jabba's Court, and also with his new Ewok guys and there planet. He only went back to Dagoba in that film because he HAD TO for the story the fans expected and paid to see.
In Empire this system worked well because Kasdan and Ivan Kirshner made the story SW fans had to follow work in these kewl new "LUCAS MADE" places, and the two of them got what "Star Wars" was all about to us fans of the original movie. It did not work as well in Jedi because Richard Marquand did not understand the pop-cultural impact "Star Wars" was as strongly as Kirshner had. When Lucas does it all himself like in the PT, it just falls apart under it's own weight. There are some great new environments in the PT, it's just too bad Lucas did not have some strong collaborators on those projects like Lawrence Kasdan and Ivan Kirshner, as well as good casting...
FF
“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison
- Time
- Post link
It's IRVIN Kershner, not ivan...
oh & it's Gary KurtZ
Now back to your regularly scheduled beating of a dead horse...
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: canofhumdingers
i know everyone hates a grammar nazi
i know everyone hates a grammar nazi
Quoted for truth. Though I do have to gripe about the "i" being lower case. One pathetic grammar nazi you are!
"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape
- Time
- Post link
So I now come to these forums to relive my stress just to deal with this kind of crap?
Some people can't be as letter perfect as you nerd a$$ wipes can be. Sorry for trying to participate.
And if you want to ban me, go on! I don't need that kind of picky a$$ S#!T from anyone! Sorry for being a bit testy, but being up all night puking my toxic medications just makes me a tad on edge sometimes.
FF
“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: FanFiltration
Just for the record, I suffer from a God Damn Brain Abscess, as well as other unwanted and undesevered disabling medical problems!
So I now come to these forums to relive my stress just to deal with this kind of crap?
Some people can't be as letter perfect as you nerd a$$ wipes can be. Sorry for trying to participate.
And if you want to ban me, go on! I don't need that kind of picky a$$ S#!T from anyone! Sorry for being a bit testy, but being up all night puking my toxic medications just makes me a tad on edge sometimes.
FF
Holy fuck buddy...
Originally posted by: zombie84
Everyone thought of "space opera"--the whole Flash Gordon/serial style that Lucas advertised it as--as being silly, unrealistic, with cardboard characters, convoluted plotting and implausibility.
Just for the record, I suffer from a God Damn Brain Abscess, as well as other unwanted and undesevered disabling medical problems!
So I now come to these forums to relive my stress just to deal with this kind of crap?
Some people can't be as letter perfect as you nerd a$$ wipes can be. Sorry for trying to participate.
And if you want to ban me, go on! I don't need that kind of picky a$$ S#!T from anyone! Sorry for being a bit testy, but being up all night puking my toxic medications just makes me a tad on edge sometimes.
FF
Holy fuck buddy...
Originally posted by: zombie84
Everyone thought of "space opera"--the whole Flash Gordon/serial style that Lucas advertised it as--as being silly, unrealistic, with cardboard characters, convoluted plotting and implausibility.
Gee, that pretty much summarizes the PT, doesn't it?
I must say this is a great thread; I've enjoyed reading these posts and find that many of them mirror my own thoughts. From a more technical standpoint, does anyone think that the PT was less effective due to such things as cinematography, editing, etc? For example, I find that I'm not emotionally involved in many of the battle sequences in the PT, and I sometimes think it's partly due to the fact that the camera is more concerned with capturing all the chaos going on instead of focusing on particular individuals in the action (such as in the Death Star battle in the OT).
“It’s a lot of fun… it’s a lot of fun to watch Star Wars.” – Bill Moyers
- Time
- Post link
Back on topic, as someone pointed out, Lucas didn't exactly say "screw you" to everyone & do his own thing on both STAR WARS & the prequels. Back in '77, even though he did basically say "screw you" to the studios in an effort to do his on thing, he still had mentors & trusted friends who challenged him & pushed him to do great things. Even though he was "doing his own thing" with the prequels, at that point he was surronded by "yes men" & would brush off anyone who questioned/challenged him.
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: corellian77
From a more technical standpoint, does anyone think that the PT was less effective due to such things as cinematography, editing, etc? For example, I find that I'm not emotionally involved in many of the battle sequences in the PT, and I sometimes think it's partly due to the fact that the camera is more concerned with capturing all the chaos going on instead of focusing on particular individuals in the action (such as in the Death Star battle in the OT).
From a more technical standpoint, does anyone think that the PT was less effective due to such things as cinematography, editing, etc? For example, I find that I'm not emotionally involved in many of the battle sequences in the PT, and I sometimes think it's partly due to the fact that the camera is more concerned with capturing all the chaos going on instead of focusing on particular individuals in the action (such as in the Death Star battle in the OT).
I feel the same way. None of the space battles/races in the PT drew me in the way the OT battles/chases did. I knew it was over when I saw the race scene in TPM- it was totally flat to me. I had no idea about where they were going, who was winning, etc. It was just a confusing blur of CGI and sound effects and there was absolutely no suspense in the editing. The same goes for the end battle in TPM, and the opening scene in AOTC (or was that ROTS?
).But the battle scenes in the OT totally sucked me in. I felt like I was IN the movies. I'll never forget when I saw ROTJ for the first time on opening day, how everyone in the audience ducked when the speederbikes had that near-miss with the fallen tree trunk.
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Mielr
I feel the same way. None of the space battles/races in the PT drew me in the way the OT battles/chases did. I knew it was over when I saw the race scene in TPM- it was totally flat to me. I had no idea about where they were going, who was winning, etc. It was just a confusing blur of CGI and sound effects and there was absolutely no suspense in the editing. The same goes for the end battle in TPM, and the opening scene in AOTC (or was that ROTS? ).
But the battle scenes in the OT totally sucked me in. I felt like I was IN the movies. I'll never forget when I saw ROTJ for the first time on opening day, how everyone in the audience ducked when the speederbikes had that near-miss with the fallen tree trunk.
I feel the same way. None of the space battles/races in the PT drew me in the way the OT battles/chases did. I knew it was over when I saw the race scene in TPM- it was totally flat to me. I had no idea about where they were going, who was winning, etc. It was just a confusing blur of CGI and sound effects and there was absolutely no suspense in the editing. The same goes for the end battle in TPM, and the opening scene in AOTC (or was that ROTS?
).But the battle scenes in the OT totally sucked me in. I felt like I was IN the movies. I'll never forget when I saw ROTJ for the first time on opening day, how everyone in the audience ducked when the speederbikes had that near-miss with the fallen tree trunk.
I agree that the OT space battles were light years better then the PT space battles, but in the end doesn't it come down to the characters, and that has always been my contention as to the PT's biggest flaw.
Think of the podrace and little Anakin, does anyone really care if he wins or not? Did anyone of us really gravitate to that character? And this has nothing to do with whether we wanted Anakin to be 10 or 20 in TPM, the character, or the characters in general in the PT really don't lend the audience any chance of caring about them.
Does anyone of us really care what happened to Padme/Anakin when they are in the Geonosis arena in AOTC? Think of the OT when Han & Leia are flying through the asteroid field, or Luke going down the trench to blow up the death star, or even Luke/Leia on the speeder bikes in ROTJ on Endor. Sure those scenes were well done, but when you watch a movie, you can't just watch it cause of the plot and cause it is 3 more SW movies of how everyone got to Episode IV, there has to be some connection with the characters.
Characters, Characters, Characters, that is the biggest flaw of the PT.
- Time
- Post link
In the PT, by contrast, the focus is on the battle... in TPM, aside from watching the lightsaber fight (which was great because it focussed on individual characters), we're watching droids *yawn* fight no-name gungans, who aren't even sympathetic as a species. Same is true with the battle in AOTC -- do I really care which no-name Jedi dies or which robot gets blown up? No, because these characters mean nothing to me. At least things kind of got on track in ROTS, in my opinion, because once again most of the fighting focussed on individual characters that we have some emotional attachment to (or at least, should have an attachment to).
Overall, I'd agree that one of the great failings of the PT is the characters. Not only were they not focussed upon sufficiently, but most of the performances were too rigid and two-dimensional. I wonder if this is due in part to Lucas discouraging any deviation from the script. If so, it's too bad, as the actors could likely have delivered better performances if only they could have changed some of the dialogue. I would hope that they had as much leeway as Scorcsese gave his actors in The Departed, where he was happy with any alterations the actors wanted to make to their characters or dialogue, as long as it didn't change the overall story or character arc.
As for my original question, is the PT "technically" different from the OT? For example, is it just my imagination, or are there more medium and close-up shots in the OT? If so, would this have a subconscious effect on the viewer by making them feel more/less intimate with the on-screen characters?
“It’s a lot of fun… it’s a lot of fun to watch Star Wars.” – Bill Moyers
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: corellian77
As for my original question, is the PT "technically" different from the OT? For example, is it just my imagination, or are there more medium and close-up shots in the OT? If so, would this have a subconscious effect on the viewer by making them feel more/less intimate with the on-screen characters?
As for my original question, is the PT "technically" different from the OT? For example, is it just my imagination, or are there more medium and close-up shots in the OT? If so, would this have a subconscious effect on the viewer by making them feel more/less intimate with the on-screen characters?
There are definitely more landing platform shots in the PT, and I not saying this in a joking way. Just watch the PT movies again, Lucas puts a ship on a landing platform in almost every scene, compared with the OT where the viewer kinda gets that they land on the planet, and doesn't need to be shown EVERY time! The only time Lucas uses landing platforms in the OT, minus the SE additions, is when there is something that will affect the plot. Luke crashing his x-wing into dagobah, which then results in Yoda lifting it out to show Luke the power of the force. The millenium falcon landing on the deathstar and every Stormtrooper plus Darth Vader surround it and you wonder, "How are they going to get out of this one?" Then fastforward to ROTJ and when they land on Endor, you never actually see it except them flying into Endor to show the viewer they have arrived, mainly because it doesn't nothing to drive the plot, so there is no need to show them landing. Now think of the PT, Anakin/Padme in AOTC land on a platform on Tatooine, The crew land on a platform on Coruscant in TPM, ObiWans lands on a platform on the planet he fought Grevious in ROTS. Why does Lucas show us this? Cause it looks cool!!!