Right you are, brash.
Sorry for derailing things, gents. Let's take this to a discrete "Annie" thread if more needs to be said about it.
DuracellEnergizer said:
The Merchant said:
I'm not so sure how to feel about the "power creep" when it came to Star Wars Jedi in the EU. Like Jedi are capable of planetary destruction with the Force and in the EU certain blasters can emit just light like the Remote droid that Luke used to train in A new Hope, meaning Jedi can think and have reflexes that are faster than Light. On one hand I think it's cool, on the other hand I also like them being just superhuman levels.
Generally, I like to go with the idea that the Jedi were almost superhumanly powerful prior to the Great Sith War, but became progressively weaker over the centuries and millennia that followed.
The very title of the forthcoming Episode 7 seems to be hinting at that, and at some kind of resurgence (or "awakening").
I like the idea, myself. I hope it's handled well.
Bingowings said:
Hayden again...?
Please, no... We shouldn't even joke about such things, lest we tempt cruel fate...
Han Solo IRL said:
I don't think fan reverence for Darth Vader should be projected on to characters in a film who don't even know of Anakin's future.
Well, George Lucas seemed to think that pretty much every other kind of wanky fanservice nod to Vader's popularity needed to be artificially projected backward onto the character of Anakin. He never seemed to miss an opportunity to ham-fistedly browbeat the audience with jarring, gratuitous, wink-wink-nudge-nudge reminders that Anakin's future as Vader was on the horizon:
- "We're going to be watching your career with great interest!"
- "Why do I get the feeling that you're going to be the death of me?"
- Vader breathing at the end of TPM.
- Anakin casting a Vader shadow in the TPM poster.
- Vader's face in Anakin's cloak in that wretched ROTS poster.
Hell, the whole Anakin-as-Chosen-One theme so central to the entire prequel trilogy is just such an artificial projection. It makes absolutely no sense in the greater scheme of the saga; it's simply a lazy, contrived imposition of gravitas and importance onto a character for no other reason than that he's a pop culture icon in the real world, utterly apart from the universe he inhabits.
What I mean about preserving the character's mystique is this: Leave some mystery to his origins. There's no reason to introduce him to us as a child. Han Solo retains so much of his mystique because we are introduced to him fully formed, yet still prime for a transformative character arc. That would be greatly compromised if we were subjected to a ten-year-old Han prancing and gamboling about the forests of Kashyyk or wherever (which very nearly happened, by the way). Did Han's grandmother call him "Hanny-poo?" I don't know and I don't want to. We don't need to. It would add nothing of value to the character and, in fact, would detract much.
And what I mean about preserving Vader's dignity is this: Give his younger self character traits consistent with his future self. An abiding intellectual interest in fascism (as opposed to ignorant indifference); a deep-seated hatred for the galactic republic in its current condition (apart from a single throwaway line); an innate tendency to violence and even cruelty (as opposed to an isolated indulgence in revenge) - all of these can conceivably lead to a character like Darth Vader whilst preserving the character's dignity. Presenting him as a churlish, whiny, lovesick and, frankly, not very intelligent man-child? Not so much (on either score). Respecting his dignity means showing him actually converting to the Dark Side, not being tricked into it. Respecting his dignity means not saddling him with a childish, effeminate nickname. Respecting his dignity means not going out of your way to craft an entire film introducing the character in his childhood (with all the various indignities concomitant with that) in which nothing at all of consequence to the saga happens that could not have occurred later anyway.
What I'm asking for is that the character be treated with the respect and consistency due to him in his own story, not the projection of an extraneous "fan reverence," which, with all his ham-fisted winks to the audience and his utterly false, tacked-on "chosen one" plot contrivance is precisely what Lucas actually did.
TV's Frink said:
Akton said:
generalfrevious said:
And now Disney comes in to make us pine for the glory days of Hayden Christensen.
Not humanly - or inhumanly - possible. I'm hard pressed to come up with a performance in all of film history that I hate as much as I despise that mushmouthed, testosterone-deficient, barely sentient canuck mannequin's rendition of that character ostensibly meant to be the selfsame Darth Vader we all know and love.
TFA might be good. It might be bad. But in the whole of the spectrum of possible outcomes, nothing exists that would ameliorate in the slightest the absolute nadir of cinematic dramaturgy that Hayden Christensen's performance as that male character inexplicably named "Annie" represents.
Perhaps I can explain it to you. He's named Anakin (not Annie). Many of us have cutesy nicknames when we are little thanks to our parents, and his mom gave him the nickname Ani (not Annie).
Well, yes, the in-universe explanation is pretty apparent. But it remains inexplicable to me from a creative standpoint. I cannot fathom the creator of Darth Vader sitting before his yellow legal pad, pencil in hand, writing the definitive backstory for the iconic villain, considering the use of an affectionate diminutive form of the name "Anakin," coming up with "Ani," but somehow not immediately dismissing that due to the glaring fact that this nickname will ring in the ears of the Anglophone world (the franchise's primary audience) as "Annie."
"Oh, no. Forget it," the reasonable internal reaction to that initial creative inkling would have gone. "I can't have the future Darth Vader being referred to as 'Annie.' I'll just scrap the nickname idea and have the mother call him 'Anakin'"
And yet, somehow, that internal objection was never raised. Or, if it was, it was never acted upon. Instead we were subjected to the future Darth Vader being called "Annie," or Ani" (not really any better, as the only real life public figure I'm aware of bearing the name "Ani" is a female folk singer that an ex girlfriend of mine annoyed me with all through college), even past the first film and into the character's adulthood.
Remember Luke Skywalker? Remember how great it was that everyone just called him "Luke?" Aren't you as grateful as I am that we never had to hear Beru (and Leia after her) refer to Luke as "Lulu?"
It's certainly not the worst crime committed by the prequels, but it is one of a seemingly endless list of creative decisions made by George Lucas, Hayden Christensen, and (to a much, much lesser degree, obviously) Jake Lloyd that served no other purpose in the final analysis than to strip Darth Vader of two of the traits that contributed most vitally to his having become the beloved, iconic villain that he is - his mystique and his dignity.
Leonardo said:
First DVD showcased is Star Wars Episope II.
Yes, Episope.
Even better... "Episo pe"!
Stuart Ashen is great. And that synopsis is incredible... I've seen a whole lot of Engrish in my time, but I've never seen it in such pure, highly concentrated, unadulterated form...
"anner the gold grow upped, and become a hero juedy warrior, but should be student of ao ratio king-kano the ratio have already promoted to be the teacher."
There aren't enough "sics" in the world to cover that...
Reasons 2 and 3 are pretty legitimate. Into Darkness was absolutely terrible (though most of the blame for that goes to those ubiquitous garbage mongering hacks Kurtzman and Orci). And Harrison Ford has been phoning in his performances for decades now. Since there is every indication that Han will have the largest role to play out of all the OT characters in this film, that could well be a problem.
As for reason 4 - That's really more a reason to rein in expectations than to expect objectivey bad quality from this film per se. Nobody should be blindly walking into this thing like we did back in 1999. Fool me thrice, shame on George Lucas; fool me four times, shame on me.
Reason 1 is no reason at all as far as I'm concerned. By the looks of the teaser trailer, JJ Abrams is not feeling himself overly obliged to slavishly reproduce the visual style of 1977-1983. And as for the rest of the film's elements, particularly plot, story structure, editing etc. I sincerely hope it doesn't work for modern audiences, inasmuch as utterly worthless brain-melting shit like the Transformers movies apparently do "work" for modern audiences. A film that takes its cues from great movies of yesterday, and paces itself with some intelligence and deliberateness rather than striving to meet a Michael Bay-like quota of explosions and mind-numbing action at the expense of story is one that is aces in my book. Gareth Edwards' delightfully restrained Godzilla, though it has its flaws, is proof that a less-is-more approach is every bit as viable today as it was three decades ago.
generalfrevious said:
And now Disney comes in to make us pine for the glory days of Hayden Christensen.
Not humanly - or inhumanly - possible. I'm hard pressed to come up with a performance in all of film history that I hate as much as I despise that mushmouthed, testosterone-deficient, barely sentient canuck mannequin's rendition of that character ostensibly meant to be the selfsame Darth Vader we all know and love.
TFA might be good. It might be bad. But in the whole of the spectrum of possible outcomes, nothing exists that would ameliorate in the slightest the absolute nadir of cinematic dramaturgy that Hayden Christensen's performance as that male character inexplicably named "Annie" represents.
SilverWook said:
I saw Caroline Munro at Monsterpalooza last year, and Starcrash was the furthest thing from my mind. (I must have been thinking about The Golden Voyage of Sinbad at the time.) She still looks pretty darn good too!
She does look great for her age.
Stella Star in her"slave outfit" (that's what it is... and there's an ice planet too; pre-TESB, pre-ROTJ... Hmm...) is one of the major reasons that 15 was the perfect age for me to discover Starcrash.
SilverWook said:
Akton said:
SilverWook said:
TV's Frink said:
Darth Id said:
Danfun128 said:
I've honestly never heard of Star Crash before today...
Akton said: ...Star Crash never subjects us to a towheaded 9 year old Count Zarth Arn constructing Intergalactic Police Robot "L" in his bedroom, so you know... there's that.
What are you talking about? Unless...are you referring to TPM?
I can never tell if this kind of density is a shtick.
Ooh, I see you're headed towards a ban. This should be fun.
Also, I've never heard of Star Crash either.
https://archive.org/details/MFT3K_Ep_F03
You're welcome. :)
I've seen every episode of MST3K (even all the extant KTMAs) and I've seen Starcrash almost as many times as Star Wars... and yet I've never managed to see this.
Bless you, SilverWook.
Of all the fan productions around, these guys come closest to the real thing.
I've never watched more than a few minutes of any of the others, but this is genuinely enjoyable! Feels like an early second season episode to me (circa "Sidehackers").
"You can put down the rifle-ray." "Sure but don't call me 'Ray.'"
I've been saying that riff in my head for over twenty years. Hearing it come from that silhouette is cathartic...
Extended European cut can be seen here:
SilverWook said:
TV's Frink said:
Darth Id said:
Danfun128 said:
I've honestly never heard of Star Crash before today...
Akton said: ...Star Crash never subjects us to a towheaded 9 year old Count Zarth Arn constructing Intergalactic Police Robot "L" in his bedroom, so you know... there's that.
What are you talking about? Unless...are you referring to TPM?
I can never tell if this kind of density is a shtick.
Ooh, I see you're headed towards a ban. This should be fun.
Also, I've never heard of Star Crash either.
https://archive.org/details/MFT3K_Ep_F03
You're welcome. :)
I've seen every episode of MST3K (even all the extant KTMAs) and I've seen Starcrash almost as many times as Star Wars... and yet I've never managed to see this.
Bless you, SilverWook.
ray_afraid said:
You really should check it out, Frink.
Don't read about it, just watch it.
The less you know about it before hand, the better.
Truer words were never spoken. It was the total absence of expectation on my part that made it such a fantastic experience. It is, I think, the perfect bad movie... especially for a Star Wars fan.
And any Star Wars fan who'd name himself TV's Frink is one I can't imagine not appreciating this gem of a film.
Push the button, Frink. You won't regret it.
yoda-sama said:
ImperialFighter said:
However, if the 4k version still includes the awful 'Han standing on CGI Jabba's tail' scene (which also ruins the later 'first reveal of the Falcon' scene), then restoring the original Han shooting Greedo editing will only mildly improve things overall.I don't know why it took till just now for me to realize that the added Jabba scene does indeed ruin the Millennium Falcon reveal. I guess I don't look at Star Wars with fresh eyes anymore, but that really would spoil things for a new viewer. It adds yet another layer of terrible to this entire Special Edition farce.
It ruins the Falcon reveal, it ruins the intro of Boba Fett in the next film, and it ruins the reveal of Jabba two films later.
As long as we continue to have to live with this scene as an integral part of the "official" versions, instead of as the mildly interesting deleted scene that it once was and still ought to be, then I suggest they go whole hog and insert even more future-reveal-ruining characters for Han to re-relay the same exact information that was already established in the Greedo scene...
"Look, Yoda, even I get boarded sometimes. You think I had a choice?"
"Look, Palpatine, even I get boarded sometimes. You think I had a choice?"
"Look, Rancor, even I get boarded sometimes. You think I had a choice?"
"Look, Kylo, even I get boarded sometimes. You think I had a choice?"
DominicCobb said:
So what, are you showing your kids Star Crash instead?
Star Wars is the very stuff of life, I'd no more deny a child the OT than I would food or water or air.
But Star Crash is a something different... a precious jewel; one that one must discover for himself at that right time...
For me that was as a bored 15 year old walking aimlessly around a video store back in the early 90's. For them, it'll no doubt be during a bored perusal of my DVD shelves. "What... is this?" they'll ask. And I'll smile warmly, fire up the DVD player and let the unbridled joy ensue.
Plus, Star Crash never subjects us to a towheaded 9 year old Count Zarth Arn constructing Intergalactic Police Robot "L" in his bedroom, so you know... there's that.
DominicCobb said:
I stand by my belief that a low key rendition of the force theme would do just fine as a fanfare.
Agreed. That would be roughly 10,000% better than what they've done. As it is now, it clashes horrendously with the bombast of the main theme which comes in just seconds later.
SilverWook said:
Apparently they have ditched the Fox logo and fanfare...
http://makingstarwars.net/2015/04/the-star-wars-saga-digital-release-has-a-new-fanfare-before-the-films/
https://twitter.com/MakingStarWars/status/586387893318369280/video/1
Star Wars still has it's Fox.
Amazing... when I first ruminated on what Disney would come up with to replace the Fox Fanfare, I concluded that it'd probably be some stock snippet of one of the more triumphant moments from John Williams' OT scores. I think I even thought of this exact snippet. But then I immediately dismissed the possibility out of hand as being "too lazy."
Let that be a lesson to me, I guess.
I guess I should point out that I admit there's a possibility that the ST will be good... But I had every reason to think the PT would be too.
A terrible Sequel Trilogy won't be such a tragedy for me, a grown man whose childhood memories of the the OT remain untouched and unharmed, but a crappy new Star Wars film featuring OT characters being shown to impressionable youngsters still basking in the golden rays of an OT only youth? Such a tragedy must be avoided at all costs...
I've done a fair job of keeping my kids away from the PT. Occasionally, I'll get questions about Clonetroopers or Darth Maul (when we inevitably run afoul of one or the other whilst watching the stop-motion action figure films that my son loves on Youtube), and I'll simply dismiss them as belonging to cartoons, video games and "other dumb things" that have nothing to do with the real Star Wars movies (true, from a certain point of view).
But what about the Sequel Trilogy? My kids haven't seen the teaser trailer yet but, as December approaches, it's going to be harder and harder to hide from them the fact that a new Star Wars movie is coming out, and featuring the real, honest-to-goodness characters of the OT whom they dearly love.
What do you gents plan on doing?
SilverWook said:
I think we're all forgetting that Ed Norton Saun Dann was the actual provider of said porno.
That was the most unkind cut of all... Beloved TV neighbor Ed Norton reduced to distracting Death Star Troopers (operating way outside of their jurisdiction) with Grace Slickless Jefferson Starship holograms, and aiding elderly Wookies in commission of the act of Onanism in full view of their minor grandchildren...
And then there's Harvey Korman and his headhole...
TV's Frink said:
Yellow plastic was cheaper back then.
Somehow I expected a less prosaic reason... but that makes perfect sense considering this was the company that would later turn the Gamorrean Guard into Friar Tuck.
SilverWook said:
It's just a pretty lady singing a seductive song inside a VR hairdryer.
"Oh! Oh! We are excited aren't we?"
"The Dark Side of the Force is a pathway to many abilities some consider to be... unnatural."
DuracellEnergizer said:
Akton said:
So... Han cops a feel on Leia once in each film of the OT...
I know he cops a feel in ROTJ, but SW and TESB, too?
I'm going to need photographical evidence in order to verify this. The bigger the images you provide, the better.
Yep. Sorry, I don't have any screengrabs (heh) handy (ha) at the moment, but it's there...
SW - Trash compactor scene, Han manhandles Leia to push her up on the pile, subtly making fingertip sideboob contact ("Get on top of it!")
TESB - When Leia falls back on Han on the Falcon cockpit, and when he subsequently pushes her back up ("Haven't got time for anything else!")
So... Han cops a feel on Leia once in each film of the OT...
...anybody think it'll happen again in TFA? Just for old times' sake?
Or, maybe this particular torch will be passed to Poe Dameron and Rey?
Does the Holiday Special count as EU? If so, I'd have to say that Wookiee Pornography might be the most loathsome thing ever foisted on us.
This is doubly so when one takes into account how much that blobby disco "opera" that Palpatine and Anakin are watching (together... ALONE...) in ROTS resembles the imagery that Chewbacca's father abused himself to in the family living room on Life Day. Was that intentional? That is commonly referred to as the scene where Palpatine "seduces" Anakin, right?
Eeeeeeeeeeewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww. Time for a good, cleansing shower.
