logo Sign In

Who Felt Return Of The Jedi Was A Letdown At The Time? — Page 4

Author
Time
 (Edited)

It's too big an ethical discussion to be had on a thread of this kind but I too believe in evil acts not evil people.

Those acts can become habitual and infectious but I think all people are capable of falling into the trap of doing evil things and experimenting with evil ideas.

There are some things universally accepted as evil but much of it is subjective too.

Hitler was a war hero before becoming the most notorious national leader in modern history and refused to gas cities (because of his experiences in the trenches of WWI) that didn't stop him from bombing cities to rubble but that was happening on both sides.

He also encouraged his underlings to gas millions of people (largely Jews as in his warped view they were responsible for WWI). He started a war which killed millions a large number of which were non-combatants out of a sense of outrage at how Germany was treated after WWI. He wasn't a demon but a human doing what he thought was right, that's the problem with evil.

Imagining him as different from anyone else underplays the infectious danger of evil.

That's why the PT is such a letdown as Star Wars could have been the ultimate modern parable for how even the most noble of people can be corrupted by taking the dark path.

Author
Time

Zombie wrote:

Its in 1983's Skywalking and I think Kershner reported this as well. Its appeared in other sources too.

Did a quick read and i'm not finding mention in the ESB parts of this scenerio.

the word 'psychiatrist' does not appear in the Skywalking on google.books.

http://books.google.com/books?id=ZC2c40Bw-L4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=skywalking+life+films+george+lucas&hl=en&ei=F0Z-TOqKLcL58Ab0i9XSAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=psychiatrist&f=false

here's the 4 mentions of 'psychology'

http://books.google.com/books?id=ZC2c40Bw-L4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=skywalking+life+films+george+lucas&hl=en&ei=F0Z-TOqKLcL58Ab0i9XSAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=psychology&f=false

 Maybe people are thinking about this: 'psychological' reference

http://books.google.com/books?id=ZC2c40Bw-L4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=skywalking+life+films+george+lucas&hl=en&ei=F0Z-TOqKLcL58Ab0i9XSAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAA#v=snippet&q=psychological&f=false

Quote: "While the amputation of Luke's hand in Empire has a psychological justification (a clear expression of boys' castration fears), justifing the random violence in Raiders is more difficult.  Lucas uses terms like 'therapeutic' and 'nondestructive'

page 211 discusses the Revelation:

Quote:"Lucas's biggest problem was the revelation that Darth Vader is Luke's father.  After Star Wars, audiences knew Luke was the hero and couldn't be killed.  "The way you can get an audience going is to make them belive that you as a filmmaker are going to do some really rotten thing," Lucas told his collaborators.

 

Following the rotten creator idea.  The creation of ESB was close to the creation of Raiders, and at that time Lucas pushed for the implication that in Raiders, Indy had had relations with an underaged Marion. 

http://mysterymanonfilm.blogspot.com/2009/03/raiders-story-conference.html

G — I was thinking that this old guy could have been his mentor. He could have known this little girl when she was just a kid. Had an affair with her when she was eleven.

L — And he was forty-two.

G — He hasn't seen her in twelve years. Now she's twenty-two. It's a real strange relationship.

S — She had better be older than twenty-two.

G — He's thirty-five, and he knew her ten years ago when he was twenty-five and she was only twelve. It would be amusing to make her slightly young at the time.

S — And promiscuous. She came onto him.

G — Fifteen is right on the edge. I know it's an outrageous idea, but it is interesting. Once she's sixteen or seventeen it's not interesting anymore. But if she was fifteen and he was twenty-five and they actually had an affair the last time they met. And she was madly in love with him and he...

S — She has pictures of him.

 

Lucas had a cavallier attitude to plot devices in the creation of entertainment, this psychiatrist story seems out of character with early 80s Lucas.

Author
Time

none said:

Following the rotten creator idea.  The creation of ESB was close to the creation of Raiders, and at that time Lucas pushed for the implication that in Raiders, Indy had had relations with an underaged Marion. 

http://mysterymanonfilm.blogspot.com/2009/03/raiders-story-conference.html

G — I was thinking that this old guy could have been his mentor. He could have known this little girl when she was just a kid. Had an affair with her when she was eleven.

L — And he was forty-two.

G — He hasn't seen her in twelve years. Now she's twenty-two. It's a real strange relationship.

S — She had better be older than twenty-two.

G — He's thirty-five, and he knew her ten years ago when he was twenty-five and she was only twelve. It would be amusing to make her slightly young at the time.

S — And promiscuous. She came onto him.

G — Fifteen is right on the edge. I know it's an outrageous idea, but it is interesting. Once she's sixteen or seventeen it's not interesting anymore. But if she was fifteen and he was twenty-five and they actually had an affair the last time they met. And she was madly in love with him and he...

S — She has pictures of him.

 

Lucas had a cavallier attitude to plot devices in the creation of entertainment, this psychiatrist story seems out of character with early 80s Lucas.

Wow, that's REALLY disturbing.  First Marion is eleven during the affair, then ten (22 minus 12), then twelve, then finally fifteen...but only because Spielberg made an objection to George's initial suggestions.  Good thing he was there to do so--a good example of why George really needs someone who can actually say no to some of his stupider ideas!  I realize this was only a story conference, but jeeze...to even suggest some of this stuff is unthinkable for a character you want to have any kind of moral compass.

--SKot

Projects:
Return Of The Ewok and Other Short Films (with OCPmovie) [COMPLETED]
Preserving the…cringe…Star Wars Holiday Special [COMPLETED]
The Star Wars TV Commercials Project [DORMANT]
Felix the Cat 1919-1930 early film shorts preservation [ONGOING]
Lights Out! (lost TV anthology shows) [ONGOING]
Iznogoud (1995 animated series) English audio preservation [ONGOING]

Author
Time

It makes the whole Padme/Anakin dynamic in TPM and the Luke/Leia snog in ESB (after the revelation in ROTJ) pale into near insignificance doesn't it?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Easterhay said:

zombie84 said:

Easterhay said:

Well the fact is I was misquoted.  How's that for starters?

 You were, and that was unfair to you, but don't side-step my point. "Negativity" in regards to the subject that was in discussion is pretty understandable considering the history of the person in question with regards to these sorts of claims (i.e. that Lucas is known for stretching the truth or just plain making stuff up) and also when considering the specifics of the alleged event in question (i.e. that it seems a little fishy the way it is often reported). Saying that you're tired of people speaking about Lucas in a negative light seems a bit unmotivated and unnecessary since peoples issues here are fairly understandable. It really just seems like you didn't like people picking on Lucas, regardless of the reasons.

 

Well, I don't think Lucas is untouchable at all.  Ergo, he once said Star Wars was a nine part saga and he has recently went back on that and acted as though he never said it.

 

However, saying and doing things that some find disagreeable does not make that person essentially bad.  There is no such thing as a bad person; all people are essentiallly good.  This is my belief. 

 That's great, but no one said Lucas was not essentially good. CO said he's had enough of Lucas' bullshit with regards to spin-doctoring things, which he justified with a list of precedents. Furthermore, as I argued, the circumstances of the alleged psychologist incident does not seem realistic given the context reported. And that was what you objected to. Which is stupid, because he's got a pretty good case to be negative here. Its becoming further evident that, as I said before, you really just don't like seeing Lucas picked on.

It is neither unecessary or unmotivated (how do you work that one out, fella?  How does carping and negativity motivate anyone other than to continue to it all the more, especially when the braying gallery is urging them on?) to complain about negativity?  Some people here are so consumed by their feelings that they will deny Lucas everything, even when it is clear as day that he is not always dishonest or economical with the truth.  After all, w  hat has Anchorhead just done if not lied about what I said just to fuel his own argument?  This is what I mean about being consumed by feelings: someone says something thay find objectionable, so from that point on they object to everything that person says.  It's witless.

 

If someone does something that is perceived to be bad and then does something that is good, is the good deed then ignored in favour of the bad?  Tell me, where's the motivation in that?

 Okay, I don't know what the hell you are even talking about anymore. CO said he had enough of the Lucas bullshit, because he felt this particular example was another instance of it. He was right about the precedents he listed, and he is probably correct about this one too. Thats it. And you objected to this? Why? Some invented stuff about "some people here...will deny Lucas everything". Where the hell does that come from? The objection CO raised was valid and specific and justified by a long list of precedents and reasons why this example fits the M.O. 

You do a good job of side-stepping the point and then re-directing it in your favour with an irrelevant point. Are you Arawn Fenn's brother?

Author
Time

Easterhay said:

 

It is neither unecessary or unmotivated (how do you work that one out, fella?  How does carping and negativity motivate anyone other than to continue to it all the more, especially when the braying gallery is urging them on?) to complain about negativity? 

If someone does something that is perceived to be bad and then does something that is good, is the good deed then ignored in favour of the bad? 

Author
Time
 (Edited)


ChainsawAsh said:
I see your "Luke & Leia" and raise you "The Dark Side Beckons" (begins when Luke is hiding from Vader toward the end).  Phenomenal.

I'd say ROTJ is a veeery close second to ESB for the best score of the originals.  That's one area in which it certainly isn't lacking.

Definitely! "The Dark Side Beckons" still gives me chills. I was sooo disappointed when I purchased the LP back in the day, and it wasn't included. I think it was Ben Burtt who said that people kept coming up to him around that time and asking where they could purchase that piece of music.

For some reason- the ESB score is the one I listen to least. :-?

Author
Time

zombie84 said:

You do a good job of side-stepping the point and then re-directing it in your favour with an irrelevant point. Are you Arawn Fenn's brother?

 

  LOL!

  It is I,  Tosche_Station from the other forums...

The poster also known as, "Tosche-Station"

"This is spurious business!" -  'Anonymous'

"Don't freakin' dissemble!" - Jack Nicholson as the Joker if he were in the movie 'Anger Management'

Author
Time

I watched the films endlessly as a kid, but ROTJ always gets meandering and uneventful-it really is too safe. Every loose end is tied up and no one major dies. Anyone could have written this end of the trilogy and it was done simply to please everyone.

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader

Author
Time
 (Edited)

captainsolo said:

Every loose end is tied up

 You mean subplots are actually RESOLVED?!  The NERVE!

captainsolo said:

no one major dies.

Yeah, really. I mean, it's not like Yoda, Darth Vader or the Emperor were all that crucial to any of the movies or anything. Geeze, Lucas, what a hack! Everybody knows a movie is always better when a bunch of people die.

captainsolo said:

it was done simply to please everyone.

 I know what you mean, it's so lame when filmmakers try to make their expensive films appeal to broad audiences. I mean, wtf do these guys want anyway, a PROFIT?!

All I really want is each film as it was originally seen and heard in theaters; no fixes, corrections, "improvements" or modifications necessary.

Author
Time

To put it bluntly: the freedom and energy of the first film and the darkness and development of the second are simply not present in Jedi. It is not a bad film by any means, but it is flawed and does pale in comparison overall to the two previous entries.

The story really does go nowhere.

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader

Author
Time

Fett accidentally swatted by a blind Solo.

Yoda dies in the middle of a conversation after waiting months or years for Luke to return to complete his training.

Jabba fair doos Vader's daughter chokes him in the panic created during a pirate ship raid in her undies.

The Emperor (thrown down a well by a one armed man with two fake legs).

Vader, fair doos the Emperor manages to zap him on his way to the improbable death pit in the middle of the throne room allowing for a moment of true poignancy which would be better served in the next episode after the characters had been allowed to develop a little more and the Empire had really been on the run.

The Empire itself, from all we see on screen (especially in the SE) all folded after the boss went all fally downy and puffy bye-byes.

All across the galaxy everyone celebrates because Lucas thinks the story is over now.

ROTJ is the end it all fast and don't leave any hanging threads segment of the OT just as ROTS is the end it all fast and don't confuse the viewers by leaving anything to their imagination segment of the PT.

In ANH Ben dies and most of the Rebel Pilots are wiped out, the Rebel Base is seconds away from destruction everything hinging on one moment of Luke trusting his instincts.

In ESB Luke loses his hand, finds out his father is his father's murderer, his mentors have lied to him, Han is frozen and lost to an uncertain fate, the remaining heroes barely escape with their lives.

In ROTJ a legion of the Emperor's best troops are largely defeated by Ewoks alone, The Executor is taken out by two fighters, none of the major Rebel characters are killed, all Leia gets is a flesh wound to the arm and no tension is made from it, the only real peril comes from the Emperor zapping Luke and that's a few minutes if that and Lando being chased by an explosion which he miraculously escapes even after foreshadowing otherwise. The Imperial fleet vanishes after the Death Star explosion.

Author
Time

captainsolo said:

To put it bluntly: the freedom and energy of the first film and the darkness and development of the second are simply not present in Jedi. It is not a bad film by any means, but it is flawed and does pale in comparison overall to the two previous entries.

The story really does go nowhere.

Wait a minute, I'm getting mixed messages here. More main characters die in ROTJ than either of the previous ones combined. By your standard, I'm assuming, that would give the point to ROTJ, both in terms of number of people dying as well as "darkness and development" (whatever that means).

The story that you say goes nowhere resolves the conflict between Luke and Vader, restores freedom to the galaxy and all but guarantees that Han and Leia will live happily ever after. All that, and Anakin Skywalker is redeemed and dies as a Jedi Knight, reconciled to the good side of the Force and to Yoda and Obi-Wan.

I prefer ANH and ESB over ROTJ myself but how can you argue the story of ROTJ goes nowhere when it covers all that ground?

All I really want is each film as it was originally seen and heard in theaters; no fixes, corrections, "improvements" or modifications necessary.

Author
Time

thecolorsblend said:

The story that you say goes nowhere resolves the conflict between Luke and Vader, restores freedom to the galaxy and all but guarantees that Han and Leia will live happily ever after. All that, and Anakin Skywalker is redeemed and dies as a Jedi Knight, reconciled to the good side of the Force and to Yoda and Obi-Wan.

I prefer ANH and ESB over ROTJ myself but how can you argue the story of ROTJ goes nowhere when it covers all that ground?

 

   I would agree that the Leia-As-Sister sub-plot goes 'nowhere'.

The poster also known as, "Tosche-Station"

"This is spurious business!" -  'Anonymous'

"Don't freakin' dissemble!" - Jack Nicholson as the Joker if he were in the movie 'Anger Management'

Author
Time

It serves as a motivation for getting Mark to go ape...but imagine how much fun it would have been if Leia had gone to the dark side (the signs are there) she had already notched up one death by choking and nearly choked Lando by proxy,

Episodes 7-9 could have been a whole lot of fun.

Author
Time

To me Jedi has never been a letdown.  I loved everything about it, the novel, the comics, years later i got to play video games that recreate my favorite scenes whether in super return of the jedi or lego star wars.  The Soundtrack is also one of my favorites and i love the Radio Drama.

The Luke kenner figure in black was also my favorite toy as a kid, no i don't have it anymore, but i do have the memories.

 

Me and my older brother used to reenact the duels from empire and jedi.  He always was Vader, and i played Luke.LOL.  Man we got into so much trouble using sticks or making swords out of old broom handled its a wonder we never killed somebody.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time

The only reason they made Luke and Leia sister was to tie up the story into this one trilogy. Originally the "other" Yoda spoke about was supposed to be the star of episodes 7-9 but after ESB Lucas decided to just end it after ROTJ.

Forum Moderator
Author
Time

Bingowings said:

It serves as a motivation for getting Mark to go ape...

But other than that,  Leia's character arc ends in ROTJ exactly or near where it would have had she remained the Leia of ANH and TESB who was NOT Luke's sister/The Other.

The poster also known as, "Tosche-Station"

"This is spurious business!" -  'Anonymous'

"Don't freakin' dissemble!" - Jack Nicholson as the Joker if he were in the movie 'Anger Management'

Author
Time
 (Edited)

It was also the only way Lucas found to get himself out of a hole he had written himself into.  He needed that as Luke's motivation to go apeshit on Vader.

Luke's under the gantry hiding, won't fight Vader and would rather die first, there is no motivation for him to tap into his anger and go over to the darkside.

I mean he is fighting his father, not his father's killer.  Total change in motivation.  If Vader really killed Luke's father and also Obi Wan all you would have is a Revenge tale.

 

Luke finally in the end throws his saber away realizing he is becoming his father.  Looks at his own mechanical hand and vader's severed stump with wires coming out of it.

He proves to be of stronger character than either of his parents from those prequel films.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time

zombie84 said:

Easterhay said:

zombie84 said:

Easterhay said:

Well the fact is I was misquoted.  How's that for starters?

 You were, and that was unfair to you, but don't side-step my point. "Negativity" in regards to the subject that was in discussion is pretty understandable considering the history of the person in question with regards to these sorts of claims (i.e. that Lucas is known for stretching the truth or just plain making stuff up) and also when considering the specifics of the alleged event in question (i.e. that it seems a little fishy the way it is often reported). Saying that you're tired of people speaking about Lucas in a negative light seems a bit unmotivated and unnecessary since peoples issues here are fairly understandable. It really just seems like you didn't like people picking on Lucas, regardless of the reasons.

 

Well, I don't think Lucas is untouchable at all.  Ergo, he once said Star Wars was a nine part saga and he has recently went back on that and acted as though he never said it.

 

However, saying and doing things that some find disagreeable does not make that person essentially bad.  There is no such thing as a bad person; all people are essentiallly good.  This is my belief. 

 That's great, but no one said Lucas was not essentially good. CO said he's had enough of Lucas' bullshit with regards to spin-doctoring things, which he justified with a list of precedents. Furthermore, as I argued, the circumstances of the alleged psychologist incident does not seem realistic given the context reported. And that was what you objected to. Which is stupid, because he's got a pretty good case to be negative here. Its becoming further evident that, as I said before, you really just don't like seeing Lucas picked on.

It is neither unecessary or unmotivated (how do you work that one out, fella?  How does carping and negativity motivate anyone other than to continue to it all the more, especially when the braying gallery is urging them on?) to complain about negativity?  Some people here are so consumed by their feelings that they will deny Lucas everything, even when it is clear as day that he is not always dishonest or economical with the truth.  After all, w  hat has Anchorhead just done if not lied about what I said just to fuel his own argument?  This is what I mean about being consumed by feelings: someone says something thay find objectionable, so from that point on they object to everything that person says.  It's witless.

 

If someone does something that is perceived to be bad and then does something that is good, is the good deed then ignored in favour of the bad?  Tell me, where's the motivation in that?

 Okay, I don't know what the hell you are even talking about anymore. CO said he had enough of the Lucas bullshit, because he felt this particular example was another instance of it. He was right about the precedents he listed, and he is probably correct about this one too. Thats it. And you objected to this? Why? Some invented stuff about "some people here...will deny Lucas everything". Where the hell does that come from? The objection CO raised was valid and specific and justified by a long list of precedents and reasons why this example fits the M.O. 

You do a good job of side-stepping the point and then re-directing it in your favour with an irrelevant point. Are you Arawn Fenn's brother?

 

Here's an idea: let the person to whom I was speaking answer for themselves.  I'm not answerable to you for anything other than what I direct to you.  You'll know when I'm speaking to you - it will be clear from the post.  I believe I've already said more to you than I'm obliged to on this issue.

That's some bad hat, Harry
Author
Time

Tobar said:

The only reason they made Luke and Leia sister was to tie up the story into this one trilogy. Originally the "other" Yoda spoke about was supposed to be the star of episodes 7-9 but after ESB Lucas decided to just end it after ROTJ.

 

Not entirely true.  At the time of ESB, Lucas did not have a clear idea on who "the other" was; originally - as we all should know - the twins were in the story right from the start and that idea went through various rewrites before he settled on the notion of them being apart from the start.  That said, if he hadn't decided on Leia being "the other" in ESB, how do we explain her use of The Force towards the end of the film where she suddenly sense Luke is still alive and they should go back to him?

 

One of the ideas considered was that Han Solo was the other.  I know you all like your little links on this forum - unfortunately I don't have one so, in the time honoured fashion that some of you have chosen, you can argue away 'til your heart's content :)

That's some bad hat, Harry
Author
Time

Easterhay said:

Here's an idea: let the person to whom I was speaking answer for themselves.  I'm not answerable to you for anything other than what I direct to you.  You'll know when I'm speaking to you - it will be clear from the post.  I believe I've already said more to you than I'm obliged to on this issue.

If you don't want others to respond to you on a public forum, well, you're barking up the wrong tree.  You're speaking to everyone here.

Author
Time

There's something familiar...I've got a strange feeling...nope it's gone!

Author
Time

Easterhay wrote:

I know you all like your little links on this forum

It's the difference between having an opinion, and having an opinion backed up by someone else with a similar thought.  Knowledge building.

I can say Admiral Akbar was the other, duh you all should know that.  Now go debate you stupid sillies.

What Tobar wrote is predominantly correct:

The only reason they made Luke and Leia sister was to tie up the story into this one trilogy. Originally the "other" Yoda spoke about was supposed to be the star of episodes 7-9 but after ESB Lucas decided to just end it after ROTJ.

Now sure you can say it wasn't the 'only reason' and maybe the decision didn't happen after ESB and back that up with other statements.

Here's Gary Kurtz backing up the overall sentiment:

http://www.filmthreat.com/interviews/8/

So the story was quite a bit more poignant and the ending was the coronation of Leia as the queen of what was left of her people, to take over the royal symbol. That meant she was then isolated from all of the rest and Luke went off then by himself. It was basically a kind of bittersweet ending. She’s not his sister that dropped in to wrap up everything neatly. His sister was someone else way over on the other side of the galaxy and she wasn’t going to show up until the next episode.