logo Sign In

Who Felt Return Of The Jedi Was A Letdown At The Time? — Page 5

Author
Time

Easterhay said:

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.

 In other words, I'll ignore your point again.

If you want a private conversation go to a private message, otherwise if you post in a public discussion everyone that reads it has the right to chime in when you say something stupid.

Author
Time

Easterhay said: 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?

Luke specifically attempted to contact Leia with the Force.  She did not suddenly sense Luke:  he called to her, after first trying Ben.  That is why she knew. To whom else could he call out for rescue with the Force?  Han was in carbonite, Lando's allegiance was suspect at best and Luke did not really know him, presumably the droids could not be spoken to with the Force as they were not living beings, and growling Chewie was hardly the best choice to pass on any message. Chewie! Hear me, Chewie! just doesn't work.

Lucas had no choice but to have Luke contact Leia as a deus ex machina, as she was the only one on the Falcon whom he could plausibly contact.  (There is also the fact that the love triangle had yet to be resolved, so the scene could also have served as a sign of Luke's connection with Leia, if Lucas had decided to resolve the triangle the other way.)  I think a significance can be read into this scene -- with Leia as "the other" -- just as a significance could be read into Ben's pause after Luke's question in ANH, but it was not written with that in mind originally.

Author
Time

Chewtobacca said:


Chewie! Hear me, Chewie! just doesn't work.
Speak for yourself! I LOLed. Especially after realizing it was you who said it!

Star Wars Revisited Wordpress

Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Retroactively though it helps the case for turning Leia into 'the Other' that she could receive the message with ease.

One of the other lost opportunities is not having Lando die so that the cynical Han actually possesses latent use of The Force he claims to have seen no evidence of in ANH by correctly predicting the destruction of The Falcon.

A clever writer could have turned blind Solo's dispatching of Fett into a reversal of the training scene in the first film.

Instead (like little Annie in TPM) it was just a silly accident.

Author
Time

Unfortunately, I have very little recollection of ROTJ as a very young teen at all. I can base my comments on facts though. I did not go out and buy Ewok action figures I'll tell ya that much. And I know I was thinking how much cooler it would be if those ewoks were wookies instead.

Author
Time

Bingowings said:


One of the other lost opportunities is not having Lando die so that the cynical Han actual possesses latent use of The Force he claims to have seen no evidence of in ANH by correctly predicting the destruction of The Falcon.
I'm not sure what that scene is trying to get across except for that maybe Han's bad feelings are nothing to worry about, but its not really ever brought up again. I do feel like its a lost opportunity, always have.

Star Wars Revisited Wordpress

Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress

Author
Time

^Thanks for quoting me it's often the only way I notice my terrible typos.

Author
Time

doubleofive said:

 

Bingowings said:


One of the other lost opportunities is not having Lando die so that the cynical Han actual possesses latent use of The Force he claims to have seen no evidence of in ANH by correctly predicting the destruction of The Falcon.
I'm not sure what that scene is trying to get across except for that maybe Han's bad feelings are nothing to worry about, but its not really ever brought up again. I do feel like its a lost opportunity, always have.

 

Not only that, in the SE Lucas made sure that there is no doubt that Han is not force sensitive by adding ropes to the shot where Han miraculously hangs by only the tips of his toes from the skiff (the ropes disappear in the next shot) and replacing his "It's ok, trust me!" line with "It's ok, I can see a lot better."

Author
Time

I like the added ropes.  I don't like the "I can see a lot better" line.

Author
Time

Yeah, Han hanging by his toes was definitely a blooper rather than a deliberate way of showing his use of the force but they could have at least made it consistent and have the ropes still be there in the next shot...

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I don't like the added ropes. The other half of the blooper is really the edit between the wide shot of the skiff being hit and Han hanging from his feet. The stunt double in the wide falls and hangs from his arms, then Han is seen swinging from his feet with his hands below:

I think it's supposed to look like Chewie grabs Han's feet before he falls, but the extra few frames showing his boot tips touching the skiff edge removes that intention.

But these sorts of continuity mistakes happen all the time, so it's not a bother.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I don't like the ropes, either. They're even less plausible than Han hanging by his toes (they had time to tie ROPES around his feet?)

Author
Time
 (Edited)

avoidz said: But these sorts of continuity mistakes happen all the time, so it's not a bother.

Mielr said:

I don't like the ropes, either. They're even less plausible than Han hanging by his toes (they had time to tie ROPES around his feet?)

That's how I see it too.  This fix has always seemed misguided to me.

 

Author
Time

I've seen it in 1983 in the best - giant - screen of Paris at that time (the Rex) wich had even stars shining in the dark on the ceiling + a damn great sound, and I had a good place facing the screen on the balcony (or circle).

I didn't retain the negative side of the film. I must have been somehow temporarilly "fooled", like a lot of people.

Anyway, I wanted to become a Jedi (not like my father before me) what is the essential.