is Threepio dim-witted or just programmed for logic? cos there are plenty of moments in the films where he simply doesn't fully understand human behaviour.
I've always considered the expanded radio plays of the original trilogy to be somewhat canon, in that they don't contradict events in the movies, but I'm pretty sure threepios's memory is erased of the princess and the Tantive's mission (?) although I'd have to dig them out and listen to them to be sure.
DuracellEnergizer said:
RicOlie_2 said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
The Empire Strikes Back
Hired a beautiful young actress to play the body of Palpatine (I would have kept Clive Revill to play the voice, though).
May I ask why you think a beautiful young girl is suitable to play Palpatine?
I've grown tired of antagonists who are ugly and misshapen on the outside. IMO, true evil is only ugly on the inside -- on the outside it is beautiful and attractive; if it weren't, if it were as ugly on the outside as on the inside, no one would ever give in to it.
On the flip side, I'd also like to see some protagonists who look like the Elephant Man; stereotypically beautiful heroes are just as tiresome as sterotypically hideous villains.
Beautiful on the inside ;)
Seriously though I agree that more heroes should be unattractive. As long as it stays away from Disney cheapquel fodder.
You probably don’t recognize me because of the red arm.
Episode 9 Rewrite, The Starlight Project (Released!) and ANH Technicolor Project (Released!)
Star Wars, being a fantasy, contained a lot of symbolism. Traditionally, evil is given a physically ugly appearance in such works, while good is portrayed as beautiful or good-looking (hence the "good" in the latter). Of course the idea that one shouldn't judge things by their appearance can be portrayed symbolically with good guys being ugly and bad guys being good-looking, but in Star Wars the first was employed, so we have ugly bad guys and handsome/pretty good guys/girls.
NeverarGreat said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
RicOlie_2 said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
The Empire Strikes Back
Hired a beautiful young actress to play the body of Palpatine (I would have kept Clive Revill to play the voice, though).
May I ask why you think a beautiful young girl is suitable to play Palpatine?
I've grown tired of antagonists who are ugly and misshapen on the outside. IMO, true evil is only ugly on the inside -- on the outside it is beautiful and attractive; if it weren't, if it were as ugly on the outside as on the inside, no one would ever give in to it.
On the flip side, I'd also like to see some protagonists who look like the Elephant Man; stereotypically beautiful heroes are just as tiresome as sterotypically hideous villains.
Beautiful on the inside ;)
Seriously though I agree that more heroes should be unattractive. As long as it stays away from Disney cheapquel fodder.
I think just having everyday looking heroes and heroines is enough. Nobody wants perfect looking chisel jawed specimens from mount olympus. Mark Hamill looked like anybody so we could identify with him better. I thought it was very crafty starting the Captain America film with Chris Pine looking all weedy, thin and small so we were well on his side long before he turns into muscle bound perfection later in the film. The opposite would be the actors that Verhoeven used in Starship Troopers to make a satirical point.
But a villain can be anything in Star Wars so I agree it would be a shame if they just went down the scars and black robes route for the new films. Palpatine was fantastic in ROTJ but all the pale immitations since in the EU and the PT have watered it down.
Oh and to underline your point, one of the Sith in Dark Forces2 was the Elephant Man lol
VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.
RicOlie_2 said:
Yeah, Leia even says "There's no time for sorrows Commander", which seems like a bit of an underreaction to the fact that she lost her parents, her friends, her planet, her dog, etc. forever in a quick second. It's not as if her house burned down, she lost just about everything for goodness sake!
Once something is done that cannot be undone then grief, crying and losing sleep is not only completely redundant but extremely counter-productive. Most of people cannot avoid that. But someone with an iron character and high intelligence should be able to skip that unnecessary stuff. And Liea seems like a person who could do that.
真実
DuracellEnergizer said:
RicOlie_2 said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
The Empire Strikes Back
Hired a beautiful young actress to play the body of Palpatine (I would have kept Clive Revill to play the voice, though).
May I ask why you think a beautiful young girl is suitable to play Palpatine?
I've grown tired of antagonists who are ugly and misshapen on the outside. IMO, true evil is only ugly on the inside -- on the outside it is beautiful and attractive; if it weren't, if it were as ugly on the outside as on the inside, no one would ever give in to it.
On the flip side, I'd also like to see some protagonists who look like the Elephant Man; stereotypically beautiful heroes are just as tiresome as sterotypically hideous villains.
More than that, I actually think it'd be more unsettling and creepy to see someone so beautiful with a deep, cold voice. It'd add another layer of creepiness.
You ever seen the Talosians? Same sort of aesthetic.
I’m just here because I’m driving tonight.
One Grevious concept drawing shown on the ROTS DVD was a creepy, malevolent looking kid in a floating chair, with IG-88's for bodyguards. I found it far more sinister than the character we actually got. ;)
Where were you in '77?
NeverarGreat said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
RicOlie_2 said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
The Empire Strikes Back
Hired a beautiful young actress to play the body of Palpatine (I would have kept Clive Revill to play the voice, though).
May I ask why you think a beautiful young girl is suitable to play Palpatine?
I've grown tired of antagonists who are ugly and misshapen on the outside. IMO, true evil is only ugly on the inside -- on the outside it is beautiful and attractive; if it weren't, if it were as ugly on the outside as on the inside, no one would ever give in to it.
On the flip side, I'd also like to see some protagonists who look like the Elephant Man; stereotypically beautiful heroes are just as tiresome as sterotypically hideous villains.
Beautiful on the inside ;)
Seriously though I agree that more heroes should be unattractive. As long as it stays away from Disney cheapquel fodder.
The irony is when Disney's Hunchback came out, some critics thought Quasimodo had been made to look too cute. Go figure.
Where were you in '77?
RicOlie_2 said:
Star Wars, being a fantasy, contained a lot of symbolism. Traditionally, evil is given a physically ugly appearance in such works, while good is portrayed as beautiful or good-looking (hence the "good" in the latter). Of course the idea that one shouldn't judge things by their appearance can be portrayed symbolically with good guys being ugly and bad guys being good-looking, but in Star Wars the first was employed, so we have ugly bad guys and handsome/pretty good guys/girls.
I fail to see why Star Wars has to be stuck in one mode, though. Why can't different storylines by different people have different styles with different themes?
SilverWook said:
One Grevious concept drawing shown on the ROTS DVD was a creepy, malevolent looking kid in a floating chair, with IG-88's for bodyguards. I found it far more sinister than the character we actually got. ;)
LOL That's pure George, condensed ^. Video starts with George having no f*cking idea what Grevious is gonna be like, then a young artist draws a sketch that is basically the complete character as seen in the movie and suddenly bam! cut to George saying I came up with that, it was my idea!.
VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.
I would have included more political scenes. The lack of them resulted in confusion and shallower, more boring movies.
Ryan McAvoy said:
SilverWook said:
One Grevious concept drawing shown on the ROTS DVD was a creepy, malevolent looking kid in a floating chair, with IG-88's for bodyguards. I found it far more sinister than the character we actually got. ;)
LOL That's pure George, condensed ^. Video starts with George having no f*cking idea what Grevious is gonna be like, then a young artist draws a sketch that is basically the complete character as seen in the movie and suddenly bam! cut to George saying I came up with that, it was my idea!.
It's funny when PT gushers apply the auteur theory to Lucas, yet fail to recognize that a lot of his "creative vision" consists of giving a picture he likes but never drew his stamp of approval.
I would have clarified what became of the Empire after the Battle of Endor. When a movie revolves around a war, the fate of both factions needs to be made clear.
There's a lot of fail going on in this thread . . .
None of the movies are perfect, but man, some people just don't seem to actually like them much at all, given the kinds of things they complain about. To me, this is sheer incomprehensibility.
Looking back, I would have gotten rid of the whole "a Jedi's body fades away after he dies" thing. After all, once you're dead, what's the point of taking your body along? You become a spirit regardless.
I'm not sure if a family audience was ready for a bisected Sir Alec yet?
He could have been stabbed I suppose.
They don't 'take their bodies with them'. They transcend the need for physical existence altogether.
It's meta, man. Deal with it.
It was also a way to communicate to the audience Ben isn't just a crazy old man on a damn fool idealistic crusade. There is something to this Force stuff.
Ben's death in the Marvel comic is kind of graphic though.
Where were you in '77?
hairy_hen said:
They don't 'take their bodies with them'. They transcend the need for physical existence altogether.
It's meta, man. Deal with it.
That doesn't explain why Ben and Yoda's bodies faded away after they died but not Anakin's.
SilverWook said:
It was also a way to communicate to the audience Ben isn't just a crazy old man on a damn fool idealistic crusade. There is something to this Force stuff.
Ben's death in the Marvel comic is kind of graphic though.
Graphic? Comically stupid is more like it. =P
They should have placed less emphasis on genetics with regards to Force sensitivity. In the original, more emphasis was placed on the Force being "with" somebody, and I assume this was because the Force is able to aid those willing to fight for peace and justice. Now the primary factor is who your parents are.
You probably don’t recognize me because of the red arm.
Episode 9 Rewrite, The Starlight Project (Released!) and ANH Technicolor Project (Released!)
I would have done a few things in the first film differently.
I would have had Luke's life on Tattooine fleshed out a bit more (in good ways, like the deleted scenes)
I would have had a scene somewhere in the film of the Emperor, hidden in the shadows entirely, but just enough of a presence.
I would have fleshed out a bit of an animosity between Tarkin and Vader, sort of like the original conceptions of Vader and Jejerrod from ROTJ.
I would have had Leia only guess that they were let go, and have those fears confirmed once they reached Yavin.
But, then again, this is all speculation.
I’m just here because I’m driving tonight.
Tack said:
I would have had a scene somewhere in the film of the Emperor, hidden in the shadows entirely, but just enough of a presence.
I would have fleshed out a bit of an animosity between Tarkin and Vader, sort of like the original conceptions of Vader and Jejerrod from ROTJ.
I second these.
Tack said:
I would have had a scene somewhere in the film of the Emperor, hidden in the shadows entirely, but just enough of a presence.
I like the absence of Emperor in ANH. I love how his character progression in OT. In the first film he is only mentioned in a way that it sparks your interest and get your imagination working. Then in the second film he makes short but interesting call to Vader, which further fuels expectations. And then he finally appears in last film and he is well acted and written.
真実
I found/find it rather disturbing in a Edvard Munchish sort of way. I used to get a bit nervous as I approached that page and turned it rather quickly too.
The Emperor went from being a politician who had a corrupted former Jedi as his blunt instrument to being a force user himself.
The average filmgoer would not have known Vader was a sith lord without having read the script or novelization.
“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.