Stardust1138

Anchorhead said:

I’m not familiar with the prequels, so I guess it’s lost on me as to why that’s not subtle. Neither here nor there. I’ll never see them, so it doesn’t matter.

No need to watch them if you don’t want to as that’s your personal choice. I mention it though because it’s a subtle set up that has a final payoff later when this very thing is his undoing in a different context. It’s just like when Anakin tells Palpatine on the Invisible Hand that Obi-Wan’s fate will be the same as ours. Not only does it have meaning in the context of that sequence but all three ended up dying on a Death Star. It’s double meaning in retrospect as much as it is laying ground work for payoffs later in the story when viewed as a collective whole.

Anchorhead said:

SparkySywer said:

What is that picture? A prequel scene, but what is happening?

It’s from Yoda’s fight with Palpatine in the Senate Building in Revenge of the Sith. Yoda slips off of a senator’s pod when trying to gain the high ground again. He ends up escaping through tunnels but his cloak gets caught. As it so happens Palpatine thinks he’s dead until a clone tells him otherwise. This is really planting a seed to display overconfidence and this key weakness of his that Luke picks up on in Return of the Jedi.

Fan_edit_fan said:

“You just don’t understand George Lucas”

Boy you ain’t kidding. Ever since he thought we would all find it funny to have fart and poop jokes from a bumbling fool in SW there was HUGE misunderstanding.

Oh yes because these things weren’t in Return of the Jedi. Oh wait…

It’s all a matter of personal tastes and our own perception in one way of viewing these films. I mean I’m not the biggest fan of this type of humour now that I’m older but I admit to still giggling a little bit. It’s also good fun for kids I find. I’ve never seen a kid complain about it. That’s who these movies were always for after all. He’s said this from the very beginning to namely Time Magazine.

SparkySywer said:

Stardust1138 said:

It’s nothing personal towards anyone at all what I am saying.

I don’t feel insulted by what you say in any way. I just think it’s silly that the only reasons you seem to ever give why someone would disagree with you is that they just don’t understand the prequels. The prequels are not difficult to understand. The very, very last thing they are is subtle, and the amount of “visual literacy” you need to comprehend them isn’t that much.

It isn’t really that hard to figure out what something like this is trying to say.

Nor is George Lucas’s visual storytelling particularly unique or complex.

None of this is a dig at the prequels, by the way, and “hard to understand” is not a good goal to have when writing a Star Wars movie.

My point is,

This all merely means I think it could be examined more closely instead of just assuming there’s no deeper meanings behind certain things
People absolutely do think there’s deeper meanings to the prequels, examine them, comprehend them correctly, and still come away with the conclusion that the prequels are bad. The debate over the prequels is not between people who know what they were trying to say and people who don’t know what they were trying to say, it’s between people who liked what they were saying and people who don’t like what they were saying.

Visual literacy is more than strictly visuals alone. I understand different people get something different from the Prequels and it’s not per say that I think people don’t understand them but that I think they don’t understand them in contexts to how George Lucas saw them. It’s more in line of how they contextualise and equally add new meaning to what something meant in the Original Trilogy. I see it as some still view them as a seperate trilogy but not as a collective whole about The Tragedy of Darth Vader and what would’ve been his legacy in George’s Sequels. It’s when you watch them as a collective whole of I-VI I find is when you’re able to draw connections with juxtapositions and poetry between the films. You also see the plot holes aren’t really plot holes but what you perceived something as with the information you had at the time. It’s equally about what is done visually. You’re right it’s not that complex but still it’s misread sometimes. I would though say it is very unique. Especially on say Mustafar. That’s not to say I think people misunderstand the Prequels when they see them as separate in every sense as I’m like this too as I get something different when I watch them as individual films but that’s different from the collective whole that I’m getting at with what I’m saying. I don’t mean that as a personal insult to anyone as I know it’s a hard leap to make for some as it’s hard to break the cycle of your perception of something in the order you viewed them first or how you feel the story is supposed to be. That’s perfectly okay but there’s another side to the story and that George wanted them viewed.

I don’t think they’re really meant to be hard to understand.

Here’s a great video that shows how unique it truly gets in Revenge of the Sith and where visual literacy can take you. It’s as much personal as it is a tool for understanding author’s intent:

https://youtu.be/Ibkmh72_1pw

RogueLeader said:

rocknroll41 said:

I grew up with the PT, so I have a soft spot for it. That said, I think my entire generation lost IQ points because of these three movies…

I also think TFA wouldn’t have played it so safe had the PT not been so asinine, which therefore would’ve led to a less-confused TLJ and TRoS.

This is an interesting thought. I’m definitely in the camp that thinks JJ Abrams was the primary reason the Sequel Trilogy went retro. I think JJ was definitely a part of that first generation of fans who grew up with the OT and was disillusioned by the PT. If the PT had been received more positively by that generation, I definitely think the overcorrection Abrams tried to do with the ST wouldn’t have happened.

What’s more ironic is how I think the decision to go “retro” with the ST was made just before the PT/Clone Wars generation was old enough to start having a major voice online. It’s possible the release and reception of TFA contributed to a lot of people looking back at the PT more fondly, but it does seem the shift began in-between the ST’s announcement and after TFA’s release (2013-2016). So I wonder if the ST had began production just a few years later, if things would have been different. Honestly I think even a different director would’ve led to things being different, but it sort of feels like a chicken and egg situation to me.

That’s mostly exactly how I see it. The shift was happening in the time before the first trailer for The Force Awakens came out as I remember talking on another forum about how the Prequels would tie into the new trilogy and about The Clone Wars series. We would also discuss the Prequels in general but it was still being trampled on in some circles. This seems to be in part what Disney saw as the majority of opinion and it didn’t help having someone like J.J. as head of kickstarting their trilogy with friends who equally shared the same opinion at the time of not liking the Prequels to put it mildly. J.J. was mostly diplomatic about it during the lead up to The Force Awakens (except for two times where he showed what he really felt) but you could tell he was playing towards pleasing Original Trilogy fans only. J.J. is definitely the major factor with regards to the Sequels but it was equally Disney in general I think too as they did cancel The Clone Wars in favour of Rebels. It was certainly cost but Rebels is definitely more Original Trilogy in style on the surface in certain ways since it’s inspired by Ralph McQuarrie heavily. That’s not to say The Clone Wars wasn’t inspired by him though as it was. Rebels though was more so and is one of the best parts of Disney Star Wars I’d argue because of its more direct influence from Ralph but it never felt beholden to it like the Sequels do with the Original Trilogy. This is not what you want to continue into the trilogy set after the Battle of Endor. Even George talked about it in regards to the Sequels to Charlie Rose (in the infamous interview where he called Disney what he did) subtly by saying J.J. had a different approach for vision from him in how Episode VII should go. You can truly see it in how concept art during the development of Episode VII got progressively more retro and like the Original Trilogy as it went along when George left and J.J. took control of the project. Nobody stepped up to challenge Disney or J.J. as it was agreed by all of them to go in a different direction to what George left them. Bob Iger discussed this in his book.

George never liked doing the same things with his world building and even the stories themselves. His whole Sequel Trilogy was meant to be about gangsters trying to overtake the New Republic. It’s a natural conclusion I think that builds off the power vacuum created by the Hutts and Empire falling instead of Rebel Alliance and Empire 2.0. It has nothing to do with the fans of the Prequels themselves but what J.J. feels is Star Wars. He doesn’t like the look of the Prequels. He’s openly admitted it. His whole mantra was giving fans what he wanted. He spoke on our behalf. It was personal wish fulfillment at its finest. He also loved his practical effects. Ironic considering The Phantom Menace has more practical effects than The Force Awakens. That and the Prequels in general have more practical effects than the entire Original Trilogy combined. It’s even more ironic in how it worked for so many initially and is contributing to the lack of anything truly new in Star Wars since. It also explains why they’re trying to win over the Prequels generation now but not committing to it fully as they don’t want to lose Original fans. Yet they also want to appeal to a general audience member. Yikes! Alienating and inconsistent much? This is why you should never try pleasing anyone but make stories for yourself.

Anchorhead said:

Stardust1138 said:
…in the case of an auteur like George…

That’s being very generous. To me, Lucas is nearly the opposite. Star Wars is largely derivative. At times, some of the scenes are nothing more than direct recreations of other films, novels, and comic books. Here is one of the many examples. Plenty of other articles, sites, and video comparisons out there. https://youtu.be/WtGAQLxYZJ0

When I think of auteurs, the first ones who come to mind are Hitchcock, Kubrick, Spielberg, Coppola, Fellini, Orson Wells, Penny Marshall, Jordon Peele, Nora Ephron, and a few others.

Now that I’m guilty of further derailing the discussion, perhaps we can get back to it.

I’ll just add that it isn’t uncommon for auteurs or filmmakers to borrow from other works of art. It’s all about the context in how they use it to tell their story. Some equally use paintings like Stanley Kubrick did with Barry Lyndon when he based entire scenes on art from the 18th Century. It’s also like Quentin Tarantino did with using Lady Snowblood as the template for his Kill Bill series. He also used other films. I mean the title of Once Upon A Time in Hollywood is a direct homage to Sergio Leone’s Once Upon A Time in the West. Just like The Phantom Menace is a homage title to Republic Serials that always had some kind of Phantom Something. It’s the most Star Wars-y a title you can get. There’s equally plenty of examples where Ingmar Bergman and Andrei Tarkovsky played off of each other. It’s all about adding different contexts and meaning to how the current artist interprets it within their own work. This only adds if anything to George Lucas being an auteur. Why is he singled out? The others you mentioned and that I mention do the same thing. If you want to go further Bob Dylan does the same thing with music.

Sources:

https://youtu.be/EykTXlhVmTg

https://youtu.be/Wfbkn21yvr4

https://youtu.be/Y4le3EDDAIQ

And Steven Spielberg used a factory in Minority Report just as George did in Attack of the Clones. Both in 2002. So it seems to me like they both drew from each other’s work. Just as George did originally with THX 1138 being based in part on Alphaville by Jean-Luc Godard (who taught George as a guest lecturer at USC) and Metropolis by Fritz Lang. As much as it is in a literature sense based off of George Orwell’s 1984. Just as Attack of the Clones is a play off of The Searchers by John Ford when Anakin searches for his mother. George Lucas also used THX 1138 and equally American Graffiti in Attack of the Clones as a template in more than just the Droid Factory. In Revenge of the Sith even Commander Cody is based off of Republic Serials too as there was a Commando Cody. I could go on and on. Star Wars is as much a direct homage to itself as it is other works. After all the Prequels are the other side to the story told in the Originals. They juxtaposition off of each other as visual and thematic poetry. Characters say the same things and go through similar situations but they must differ to create poetry and symmetry.

It doesn’t make any of these individuals I or you cite are less of an auteur. If anything it magnifies their knowledge of what can successfully convey emotions subconsciously as the same stories have been told for thousands of years. It’s about creating your own unique stamp and on a personal level to me it is really fun to discover the roots of what we love.

ken-obi said:

Stardust1138 said:

ken-obi said:

Stardust1138 said:

None of what I’m saying is attacking anyone personally. So I’d greatly appreciate if you didn’t put words in my mouth. Please and thank you.

I agree. I never said you were attacking anyone personally, and have not put words in your mouth. I did say “What you are saying is insulting and a little narrow minded.” and “it seems obvious you have no respect for people with the view that the Prequels were not enjoyable movies.”

I am sorry if that is harsh, but it my reading of what you have wrote about people who do not like the Prequel films, in here, and in the Prequel Trilogy thread.

A newbie doesn’t have that opinion. It’s like a newborn baby. A baby is pure. Just like a newbie to Star Wars or whatever it might be they’re learning about for the first time. I’m simply giving information and tools to make it so what is misunderstood becomes accessible instead of wanting someone else’s viewpoint that reinforces what my opinion is already or becomes other than from George Lucas for example, which is always definitive but evolving as all stories do.

We were all newbies again going into the Prequels. We were all looking forward to them. We all wanted them to be great movies. Unfortunately for many fans this wasn’t the case. Yet we all made our opinions after watching them, whether these were good, mixed or bad. No baggage. No projections. No need to later understand the author’s intentions either.

We haven’t misunderstood them - or simply “do not understand” them. Tools, intentions, a bio on George, visual literacy, additional content and so on are obviously very important to you with these films, and that is great, as you have repeatedly stated many times. But for many fans they are simply not required to like or dislike a film. It feels like I and others are repeating ourselves over and over, but what happens on screen is the most important for many fans. Please stop. Or at least try to respect the OP and stay on the topic of their thread.

Absolutely but a newbie with a point of view more than likely that already knew Anakin became Darth Vader and that Palpatine was Emperor. This in some way, albeit subconsciously, may have informed and influenced your view on how you felt for example Anakin was supposed to behave and be. It’s why you get so many Original fans complain he’s too whiny and isn’t how they pictured him. This is different from everything I talk about in being important to understanding not just the Prequels but the Originals as well as part of a collective whole. However some fans also grew up with the Prequels ended up not liking them. They and fans of the Original Trilogy first have their reasons for not liking them. It’s perfectly reasonable and okay but that’s subjective reasoning versus everything I describe as tools to understand Star Wars how the author intended. No matter how much we may want to love something sometimes we can’t. It’s perfectly okay. It truly is. However this is completely different from everything I’ve been talking about over and over. Everything I feel you need to know though is within the films themselves. It’s fine some can’t get there but it’s not Prequels fans imagining things more often than not as some want to claim.

However yes, it’s best to keep the topic to what JadedSkywalker intended it to be. There’s no need to continue saying the same things if words are going to be misinterpreted and given contexts that create further impasses.

Omni said:

Dude, lots of people see the parallels that are intended, the story beats, character beats, all that. People aren’t as dumb as you think. It’s just that for a lot of people those parallels fail on many levels, or even if said people like the parallels they’re not enough to salvage their low opinion on other aspects of the film that end up dragging it down. I’ve talked to people about AOTC talking about how it’s an interesting mystery story with inspiration from 40s noir and romance pictures, the classical love story, all that jazz, and how I love that.

These people turned to me and said “Yeah, I know. Still awfully written dialogue, poorly directed scenes and the acting is atrocious. The movie looks like a tech demo also. So I think it sucks.” Which is valid. People see the parallels, Palpatine in the throne in ROTS and ROTJ, they see what George was trying to say, they just either think he’s saying something stupid or that he’s saying something nice, but in a very poor way.

Get off your high horse, man. You’re not the only one that gets these movies. And, again, I say this as a major fan of them.

That’s exactly what I am saying as it is valid to have these criticisms. I obviously don’t agree but I do find it fair to have this opinion as long as it’s aware quite frankly the Original Trilogy isn’t perfect either and has a lot of similar problems. Yet I understand why some don’t see the flaws as that was their viewpoint into the series. No film is without flaws though as yes I’m well aware the Prequels have flaws. I think it’s fair and perfectly okay for people to not like certain things about the things they love. However what I find unsettling is when people see the parallels and everything else within Star Wars without understanding the contexts as to why they’re there to begin with like you see with the Disney Sequel Trilogy. It was merely picking and choosing what was personal to the filmmaker and not what it is to George Lucas. That’s not to say I don’t respect them on a personal level for not wanting to go there. I might be annoyed but I also recognise that’s not what some fans get from these movies as that’s who is making these stories now but I do admit I find it absurd some want to take the author out of the picture and that’s what Disney has done. So they’ve got their wish for better or worse. This all merely means I think it could be examined more closely instead of just assuming there’s no deeper meanings behind certain things and that George had no idea what he was doing without certain people. They were part of it but George had final say. I’m happy we can’t all like the same things and that Star Wars means different things to everyone in how they view it. I’m all for personal viewpoint. This is different from author’s intentions.

I’m obviously not an expect in everything Star Wars as I have things to learn too. Both on a fan’s prospective and George Lucas prospective. I just lean more heavily on George’s side than most fans tend to. So it’s not about being on a high horse but merely full respect for the original creator and collaborators on a creative and personal level. It’s the same thing I try having in similar relationships with fellow fans who view things on a level that is personal to them. I may not always agree but I do respect them as people while respectfully disagreeing on certain views on storybeats that I feel contradict George and what is in the films themselves. They are an extension of him and his collaborators. This is natural and part of discussing anything you love. We all get something different. A book read by a thousand different people is a thousand different books but there is one author in the case of an auteur like George that everything was filtered. It’s our choice if we choose to follow along with them on their story or not. This isn’t disrespectful to anyone.

ken-obi said:

Stardust1138 said:

None of what I’m saying is attacking anyone personally. So I’d greatly appreciate if you didn’t put words in my mouth. Please and thank you.

I agree. I never said you were attacking anyone personally, and have not put words in your mouth. I did say “What you are saying is insulting and a little narrow minded.” and “it seems obvious you have no respect for people with the view that the Prequels were not enjoyable movies.”

I am sorry if that is harsh, but it my reading of what you have wrote about people who do not like the Prequel films, in here, and in the Prequel Trilogy thread.

Well, that’s not how I feel. I respect everyone for having a different point of view on how they see Star Wars. I’m simply giving another way of seeing it that aligns with my own personal view and equally viewing it how George himself has talked about seeing it and aligns with what is in the films themselves. This is different in a way from others who I find tend to strictly watch it from a personal viewpoint and wonder why something doesn’t make sense to them. I may wish some people tried to immerse themselves in understanding George and his way of seeing the story but I’m also aware that isn’t how some want to view it. So yes what I am saying can be read as snobby probably to some who don’t get the concepts I’m putting out there but the actual reality is more complicated than that. The reality is that as fans we are very emotionally attached to Star Wars and can sometimes miss details because we’re so invested in the parts of the story we enjoy most. A newbie doesn’t have that opinion. It’s like a newborn baby. A baby is pure. Just like a newbie to Star Wars or whatever it might be they’re learning about for the first time. I’m simply giving information and tools to make it so what is misunderstood becomes accessible instead of wanting someone else’s viewpoint that reinforces what my opinion is already or becomes other than from George Lucas for example, which is always definitive but evolving as all stories do.

I’m sorry if that’s harsh too.

Anchorhead said:

They weren’t related when he wrote the movie. No mythology, no influences, no anything else. It was a farm boy and a princess in the only thing Lucas had written. There was no Original Vision or multi-film Saga

I meant earlier drafts with Annikin Starkiller and Deak Starkiller. The story evolved away from siblings to arbitrary come together in Return of the Jedi with Luke and Leia becoming twins. I got my information crossed on the twins part.

There’s a lot of mythology that has Luke and Leia like relationships at the same time. So I do think there’s some merit as to why he’d merge the two than simply wrapping up the loose end of “Another”. Although arguably that was part of it because he was burnt out by Star Wars and wasn’t going to do Sequels at the time.

SparkySywer said:

Stardust1138 said:

ken-obi said:

Stardust1138 said:

SparkySywer said:

BedeHistory731 said:

Sure, but sometimes you have to step back and say, “Wow, I’m spending countless hours looking for deeper meaning in family space fantasy movies. Maybe I’m no better than the nerds who memorize wikis.”

I think you absolutely can ascribe deeper meaning to Star Wars movies, even the prequels and sequels. The Star Wars fandom wouldn’t be so passionate if this weren’t the case. Star Wars isn’t indie arthouse kino and George Lucas isn’t Francis Ford Coppola, but he was a friend and close colleague of his. Star Wars isn’t Marvel either and Lucas isn’t Michael Bay.

That said, and I truly do mean no disrespect to Stardust1138 (because this is all an internet argument over above average space movies after all)…

Emre1601 said:

Mental gymnastics and insane stretches have always been required by Prequel fans when in discussion with others who did not enjoy these films or point out the discrepancies between the two trilogies. I am surprised many Prequel fans themselves rarely seem to question why Lucas’ poor writing for the later Trilogy created so many needless plot-holes and contradictions, and still look to use such gymnastics and stretches instead.

This is spot on. I almost feel like it’s a culture within the prequel fandom, because prequel fans talking about the basic plot of the prequels is full of more headcanon than what’s actually shown on screen.

All I’ll say is there’s always another side to every story. Everyone gets something different from what they see as we each have different experiences that shape us. We can choose to view something from a more personal perspective or we can view it from a more artistic perspective. I tend to view it from both but I recognise not everyone cares to go down that rabbit hole. That’s there choice but in my humble opinion especially with something as profoundly moving as Star Wars can be I question why you wouldn’t want to understand George Lucas and his point of view but in life you can’t always understand why people think as they do. I don’t know anymore in life if we truly ever understand each other but it’s human sympathy that is more valuable than ideologies, beliefs, and thought processes.

As others have said on here you assume too much. You assume that others have not also viewed the films from different perspective. You also do not factor in it is possible to view the films from such differing perspectives and still not like or enjoy them.

That is quite a narrow and limited view to take.

I would also counter that by saying I think it’s more to do with the perception of how you view the films.

and

It didn’t bother her in the slightest. She’s not been influenced by me or the years of baggage we as a fandom have with it. She’s taking the story as it’s given to her in the order George wanted her and everyone to see it. Perhaps in general that’s a lesson we can all learn from on both sides that we shouldn’t project but share as the author intended versus what is personal to us until after we give the newbie a chance to form their own thoughts.

As above you assume far too much. People have watched these films in various orders, and some will have watched the Prequels before watching the Original films.

“Baggage as a fandom?”

“A lesson to be learnt?”

“we shouldn’t project but share as the author intended”

But these are only taken into account if we didn’t like the films, right? You seem to be of the opinion Star Wars fans turned up to watch the Prequels with a closed mind, already deciding they didn’t like them before seeing them, and knew nothing of George prior to them. Or if they didn’t like these movies they didn’t simply didn’t understand them.

I would suggest you open your mind to what others are saying to you when they are of the opinion they didn’t enjoy the Prequels very much.

What you are saying is insulting and a little narrow minded. Even when overlooking some brief lip service about “all views being respected” in your posts, it seems obvious you have no respect for people with the view that the Prequels were not enjoyable movies.

I do think a lot of the problems some have lay with they don’t understand it how George Lucas views it. There’s a lot of fans that are simply satisfied with the spaceships and spectacle of it or don’t try understanding things like why the Yoda in Attack of the Clones is different from where we see him in The Empire Strikes Back.

“Everyone who doesn’t like the prequels just doesn’t get them and they don’t think any more deeply about these movies than a caveman.”

I need something more than that and like being able to draw lines between the two trilogies.

“I, the annointed one, however, need a little more than what you Australopithecines seem to sustain yourselves on.”

However that doesn’t mean I think it’s wrong to have your own personal point of view on things with this very thing being what is enjoyed most or not being interested in finding the juxtapositions.

Of course

Again. Don’t misconstrue my words either. It’s nothing personal towards anyone at all what I am saying. It’s simply pointing out that people misunderstand Star Wars sometimes how George Lucas sees it. Like when Balance of the Force is discussed for example. This in a way is no different from Prequel fans who get accused of being worshippers of him and can pick and choose what fits what they want to see. I recognise this is generalised and not a personal insult. It’s merely an opinion some have. It’s all a matter of perception. You can have your personal viewpoint but what George wants and says is Star Wars is different from what is personal except obviously to him who created it and lived it. I try though to get there with his viewpoint as I feel it creates a more rewarding experience. Some don’t feel the need to understand him or the story his way as they want to keep it as a strictly personal experience. This isn’t wrong as we all get something different from it. However at the same time everything you need to know is within the films themselves and yet equally more that isn’t necessarily essential can be discovered when you know him as a person or even watch the The Clone Wars movie and series. His last and final connection to Star Wars that made it to screen. Sometimes as fans we forget what it always meant to him because we are deeply attached and close to it compared to a newbie who doesn’t have preconceived beliefs or because we are getting stories now from somebody else who has a different spin on what something meant like some fans would view it. See the Sequel Trilogy.

I’m simply put relying the same things Sam Witwer says about Star Wars as I feel the same way as he does generally speaking.

ken-obi said:

Stardust1138 said:

SparkySywer said:

BedeHistory731 said:

Sure, but sometimes you have to step back and say, “Wow, I’m spending countless hours looking for deeper meaning in family space fantasy movies. Maybe I’m no better than the nerds who memorize wikis.”

I think you absolutely can ascribe deeper meaning to Star Wars movies, even the prequels and sequels. The Star Wars fandom wouldn’t be so passionate if this weren’t the case. Star Wars isn’t indie arthouse kino and George Lucas isn’t Francis Ford Coppola, but he was a friend and close colleague of his. Star Wars isn’t Marvel either and Lucas isn’t Michael Bay.

That said, and I truly do mean no disrespect to Stardust1138 (because this is all an internet argument over above average space movies after all)…

Emre1601 said:

Mental gymnastics and insane stretches have always been required by Prequel fans when in discussion with others who did not enjoy these films or point out the discrepancies between the two trilogies. I am surprised many Prequel fans themselves rarely seem to question why Lucas’ poor writing for the later Trilogy created so many needless plot-holes and contradictions, and still look to use such gymnastics and stretches instead.

This is spot on. I almost feel like it’s a culture within the prequel fandom, because prequel fans talking about the basic plot of the prequels is full of more headcanon than what’s actually shown on screen.

All I’ll say is there’s always another side to every story. Everyone gets something different from what they see as we each have different experiences that shape us. We can choose to view something from a more personal perspective or we can view it from a more artistic perspective. I tend to view it from both but I recognise not everyone cares to go down that rabbit hole. That’s there choice but in my humble opinion especially with something as profoundly moving as Star Wars can be I question why you wouldn’t want to understand George Lucas and his point of view but in life you can’t always understand why people think as they do. I don’t know anymore in life if we truly ever understand each other but it’s human sympathy that is more valuable than ideologies, beliefs, and thought processes.

As others have said on here you assume too much. You assume that others have not also viewed the films from different perspective. You also do not factor in it is possible to view the films from such differing perspectives and still not like or enjoy them.

That is quite a narrow and limited view to take.

I would also counter that by saying I think it’s more to do with the perception of how you view the films.

and

It didn’t bother her in the slightest. She’s not been influenced by me or the years of baggage we as a fandom have with it. She’s taking the story as it’s given to her in the order George wanted her and everyone to see it. Perhaps in general that’s a lesson we can all learn from on both sides that we shouldn’t project but share as the author intended versus what is personal to us until after we give the newbie a chance to form their own thoughts.

As above you assume far too much. People have watched these films in various orders, and some will have watched the Prequels before watching the Original films.

“Baggage as a fandom?”

“A lesson to be learnt?”

“we shouldn’t project but share as the author intended”

But these are only taken into account if we didn’t like the films, right? You seem to be of the opinion Star Wars fans turned up to watch the Prequels with a closed mind, already deciding they didn’t like them before seeing them, and knew nothing of George prior to them. Or if they didn’t like these movies they didn’t simply didn’t understand them.

I would suggest you open your mind to what others are saying to you when they are of the opinion they didn’t enjoy the Prequels very much.

What you are saying is insulting and a little narrow minded. Even when overlooking some brief lip service about “all views being respected” in your posts, it seems obvious you have no respect for people with the view that the Prequels were not enjoyable movies.

That’s not what I’m saying. Don’t misconstrue my words by picking and choosing what I say. I do think a lot of the problems some have lay with they don’t understand it how George Lucas views it. There’s a lot of fans that are simply satisfied with the spaceships and spectacle of it or don’t try understanding things like why the Yoda in Attack of the Clones is different from where we see him in The Empire Strikes Back. I need something more than that and like being able to draw lines between the two trilogies. However that doesn’t mean I think it’s wrong to have your own personal point of view on things with this very thing being what is enjoyed most or not being interested in finding the juxtapositions. I have no problem at all with anyone having their own take on the Prequels or even the Sequels for that matter but there’s a difference between personal viewpoint and watching something how George intends it. I try watching it from his prospective lenses and yet I equally have my own personal viewpoint. I have things to learn about his way of seeing the story. This doesn’t make me right or wrong but is in my humble opinion how you should try to view any creative work. It’s not always about us as a fan when trying to understand a creative’s body of work. It’s just as much a personal experience and how we first experience something that influences how we see a different part of the same thing. It always factors in as with life we become more narrow focused. That’s a fact. It doesn’t mean we can’t still be open minded. None of what I’m saying is attacking anyone personally. So I’d greatly appreciate if you didn’t put words in my mouth. Please and thank you.

thebluefrog said:

TFA was a fine movie. Of all 3 films, it had the least flaws. That isn’t to say it was perfect (Rey winning the final fight was a huge mistake) but it still did its job well:set up the rest of the movies.

Then Rian decided to ignore almost everything it set up for his own interpretation of his own Star Wars universe, and, well, the balance was lost. ROS was just the crash that started with TLJ.

I actually think it started with The Force Awakens as it actively ignores the full contexts of the previous six films in favour of playing to what fans expect to see instead of exploring new ideas and letting characters we know grow in a meaningful way that respects them as people. It went for what was familiar on the surface with the Original Trilogy without doing the neccessary work of understanding the contexts of the trilogy and even the Prequels. The whole movie is retro and staying in the past. The Last Jedi equally has its share of problems but I don’t pin them all on Rian. There are some things but he was really put in a bad spot of either continuing the trend of nostalgia or trying something bolder than what was given in the previous film. The problem is it tries new things without actually understanding context even slightly in key ways but a lot of that is from the poor setup. It’s equally on him not understanding the contexts on things such as the important issue of Luke seeing Anakin as Anakin and not as Darth Vader or why Luke wouldn’t contemplate killing Ben even on instincts. It regresses his growth from Return of the Jedi from a very similar moment that was key to his character development. The Rise of Skywalker on the other just feels like everyone gave up and didn’t care anymore. They just needed an Episode IX to exist and that’s what they made.

It’s sad to see this is what Star Wars has come to. I can definitely see why some fans and newbies alike would love The Force Awakens though. Like George said it’s very much the film certain fans were looking for after the Prequels and equally from a newbies standpoint it has very likeable characters that mask the clear retread of A New Hope. They may never have seen it anyways. So they wouldn’t know until they went back and watched the previous six. In the long run though running away from your story causes more issues than solutions. That’s what ended up happening as they all had a different version of Star Wars than what it meant to George.

Now we’re stuck with a Palpatine being the last one standing and taking the Skywalker name to add to the thought as if it wasn’t enough that a Skywalker last says “Ow!” In the Skywalker Saga. This is very much the anti message of what Star Wars always meant in the first six films.

theprequelsrule said:

I really don’t like, and this has only bothered me recently, how important it is for Luke to be a Jedi. The whole “we have a new enemy who could destroy us” thing is weird. I mean…why can’t Yoda help The Rebels? Why did he bother going into hiding? The PT doesn’t help at all in resolving this stuff either; if anything it makes it worse. Yoda can’t defeat The Empero, so what chance would Luke have? Yoda remarks that only a fully trained Jedi can defeat Yoda and The Emperor. Did he forgot how he couldn’t defeat Palpatine after being a Jedi for who knows how long?

The only explanation that makes sense to me is that, as conceived during the production of ESB, a Jedi Master is more like a coach/trainer, but did not have the advanced combat skills that a Jedi Knight did. So a Master is a different position rather than a superior rank in the Jedi Order.

I suppose having Jedi on The Rebellions side could be a huge PR cure for The Rebellion…Luke would be a great status symbol and give legitimacy to the cause. But it needs to be flushed out how important Jedi are to the legitimacy of the galactic government…but I think I am straying a little from the Topic.

I also dislike how overpowered The Force becomes in ESB and the later films. To use an analogy from Dune; I prefer it as something that gives people the abilities of a Mentat/bene geserit (at most). Which I think was the initial conception.

Why can’t he help the Rebels? He’s older now for one. He’s also come to the belief that wars don’t make one great and arguably I think the biggest reason he decides to stay hidden is in the event Luke fails he can train Leia. I mean he could see it as Luke would only have a chance at defeating Palpatine and Vader as a fully trained Jedi. It doesn’t contradict really. If anything it’s him knowing from experience that a said Jedi would stand a chance. It just wasn’t Yoda’s particular destiny to defeat Palpatine.

So there’s really nothing there I see as contradicting but merely a wisdom of knowing when to get involved and when to stay patient with the past experiences he had during the Old Republic era.

The importance of the Jedi is shown throughout the Prequels. They’re peacekeepers and negotiators. Albeit they’ve lost their way in certain ways but they’re still doing their best. It makes sense as Bail Organa originally sent out for Obi-Wan as it is said in Revenge of the Sith when they’re all together the Jedi will disappear until the time is right. The connection is established between the early seeds of the Rebel Alliance and Jedi working together in that scene. So naturally when Obi-Wan and Bail for that matter end up passing on Luke becomes the Jedi within their ranks while Leia takes Bail’s role. However one could just as well see Luke is serving the Rebel Alliance like everyone else as his whole time with Yoda is learning to be a Jedi. It’s different from being a hero in the Rebel Alliance which includes adventure but like Yoda said a Jedi doesn’t crave having one. Being a Jedi requires more discipline as then in Return of the Jedi you see Luke go into the heart of the Empire with Death Star II versus A New Hope when he’s more externally connected to the conflict with the first Death Star.

The natural question after Return of the Jedi though I think is asking how the Jedi Order and New Republic will coexist but that loose end wasn’t picked up on per say.

To answer the original question, the only thing I can think of that I dislike about the Original Trilogy is Luke and Leia kissing but in a way there’s a lot of mythology that does the same thing. So while it is weird that they do kiss it’s not completely unheard of within myth and we know it influenced George. The story did evolve away it seems from having twins but there were earlier drafts of A New Hope with twins. So it ended up finding its way back into the story and from a mythological perspective it works.

SparkySywer said:

BedeHistory731 said:

Sure, but sometimes you have to step back and say, “Wow, I’m spending countless hours looking for deeper meaning in family space fantasy movies. Maybe I’m no better than the nerds who memorize wikis.”

I think you absolutely can ascribe deeper meaning to Star Wars movies, even the prequels and sequels. The Star Wars fandom wouldn’t be so passionate if this weren’t the case. Star Wars isn’t indie arthouse kino and George Lucas isn’t Francis Ford Coppola, but he was a friend and close colleague of his. Star Wars isn’t Marvel either and Lucas isn’t Michael Bay.

That said, and I truly do mean no disrespect to Stardust1138 (because this is all an internet argument over above average space movies after all)…

Emre1601 said:

Mental gymnastics and insane stretches have always been required by Prequel fans when in discussion with others who did not enjoy these films or point out the discrepancies between the two trilogies. I am surprised many Prequel fans themselves rarely seem to question why Lucas’ poor writing for the later Trilogy created so many needless plot-holes and contradictions, and still look to use such gymnastics and stretches instead.

This is spot on. I almost feel like it’s a culture within the prequel fandom, because prequel fans talking about the basic plot of the prequels is full of more headcanon than what’s actually shown on screen.

All I’ll say is there’s always another side to every story. Everyone gets something different from what they see as we each have different experiences that shape us. We can choose to view something from a more personal perspective or we can view it from a more artistic perspective. I tend to view it from both but I recognise not everyone cares to go down that rabbit hole. That’s there choice but in my humble opinion especially with something as profoundly moving as Star Wars can be I question why you wouldn’t want to understand George Lucas and his point of view but in life you can’t always understand why people think as they do. I don’t know anymore in life if we truly ever understand each other but it’s human sympathy that is more valuable than ideologies, beliefs, and thought processes.

I also do think Star Wars under George shares many aspects of arthouse cinema but they’re also designed to be entertainment films for kids. They’re the mixture of when you get both as he’s an auteur and they’re independently made. They also deal with themes and issues often found in art films. The really key difference with typical art house cinema and what George did with Star Wars is he made the movies for kids to introduce to them something more than purely a means to entertain. Art films also tend to be for adults. His biggest pure cinema project of this kind was THX 1138 but both Star Wars and American Graffiti were for young people yet do have roots in arthouse cinema.

I would also counter that by saying I think it’s more to do with the perception of how you view the films. Some view them as I-VI but others as IV-VI, I-III. How we experience something first does inform our outlook and way of making connections. Take my friend. She’s watching the Prequels first right now. She loves the series so far and is very excited for Episode III. She loves Jar Jar and was sad when Qui-Gon died. Her favourite scene was him making Obi-Wan promise to train Anakin. She especially loves Anakin and Padme falling in love as she saw they had a connection in The Phantom Menace but didn’t recognise they were so close in age. It didn’t bother her in the slightest. She’s not been influenced by me or the years of baggage we as a fandom have with it. She’s taking the story as it’s given to her in the order George wanted her and everyone to see it. Perhaps in general that’s a lesson we can all learn from on both sides that we shouldn’t project but share as the author intended versus what is personal to us until after we give the newbie a chance to form their own thoughts.

Omni said:

Stardust1138 said:

StarkillerAG said:

Stardust1138 said:

BedeHistory731 said:

I’m in the Bionicle fandom, so I’ve learned to be reticent to demand all the answers from the creators about things they probably never even considered too deeply. Too many people pestered Greg Farshtey (Bionicle’s head writer) for answers about characters’ appearances during the canon contests.

Creators don’t owe you all the answers to minutia.

Exactly. They don’t owe you anything in general. This is where we are alike in slightly differing ways.

George said it best:

“I make my movies for myself. People will say, “When you release it, it belongs to the public.” No, it’s mine. I’m leasing it to you. $10 at a time. It still belongs to me.”

Sorry if this sounds a bit too interrogative, Stardust, but I’ve been wondering: What are your opinions on the original theatrical versions? Because with both your love of George Lucas, and with your recent talk about creators not owing audiences anything, it sounds like you’d be fine with the Special Editions being the only versions available. It’s fine if you are, I’m not trying to shame you, but it feels a bit weird on a site devoted to releasing the original versions. Maybe I’m completely wrong, though.

I’ve really avoided giving my opinion on this for a long, long time but I’ll take the bait.

My opinion is simply that if George approves then I’d be more than happy to have them like when he gives his blessing towards the Academy to show A New Hope at their museum’s cinema. I’d love seeing the Original Trilogy unaltered again as I grew up with it that way too as they were the versions that my dad’s friend burnt me copies of on tape if I recall correctly. I genuinely appreciate the dedication of everyone who works to capture the feeling of what they feel Star Wars was when they first saw it with their various versions but at the end of the day I think only George himself can decide what it truly means.

It’s not ours to tamper with and it’s the artist who gets to choose what they wish us to view. They have a reason for alterations. I think trying to understand why is a more interesting question than asking what were they thinking. I also don’t see the level of distain towards George to be all that productive or fair. I mean other artists have changed their work but I rarely see the level of vicious hate George gets thrown at them. I mean he made changes and a trilogy you may not enjoy as much as the original unaltered or otherwise three films but maybe it’s better to understand him and his intentions if you’re still going to devote time to Star Wars.

However I suppose that’s not neccessary anymore since Disney owns it now and it has run off into a different direction than what it means to him but it may help with viewing his films as Episodes I-VI. Star Wars was always very personal to him. He was what he wrote and he was very concerned about being responsible with what he said in his films. It’s why he made certain changes like cutting back frames with the Imperial Bridge Officers getting shot or having Greedo shoot first or even limiting blood shown in the later films. It may not be something fans as they’re older think about in this way as we really or hopefully know the difference between right and wrong but he was thinking about the current generation children viewing them but also the children that will be here after we’re gone. He’s a futurist and forward thinker. These films are for children but can be enjoyed by all ages.

[…]

Ulimately trying to alter it to how we wish to see it might be personal to us but we should also try thinking about it from the other side too. It’s not always about us the fans as much as I think we’d like it to be. I’ll never discourage anyone from watching the films how they intend or desire to but truly remember at the same time I think that George Lucas Is Star Wars.

[…]

I’m sorry Stardust, but this is all crazy to me. I’m a huge fan of George’s the biggest amongst my group of friends by far. I love all of his movies to varying degrees and in particular his writing. But as his fan - and I know you are one, too - you have to respect George more. Not current age George, but 1977 George. And 1980 George. And 1983 George too. They were just as amazing, if not more, than 1997, 2004 or 2011 George.

He called all the shots in the original movie and he did everything he could at the time, but he saw it as completely fit for release and proudly put it out. The movie was always meant to be for children, and none of them got upset at seeing 10 extra frames of imperial officers getting hit or Han shooting Greedo. That scene was straight out of old westerns Lucas saw as a child and you and I will both agree he turned out alright, even seeing that. Which is why he made something similar for the children of that time and it’s still just as effective.

I don’t think the SE is a travesty of any sorts at all. The absurdity is the fact that current age George does not respect his past self, a guy who made one of the best trilogies ever made. And honestly that’s very normal. Most Lennon interviews from the 1970s have him trashing on his Beatles work, or dismissing all or most of it as shit, even songs he was proud of like Strawberry Fields. It’s how artists are. But where most of them respect where their minds were at when they made the movie/album or whatever, George doesn’t.

When you dive into his psyche a little more with stuff like Skywalking or even more surface-level stuff like Rinzler’s books, you get a good sense of why he’s more like that than others. But it’s no excuse to supress his past self’s work and obviously many others as well. The SE should always, on every occasion, be presented as an extra next to the movies that 70s and 80s George made. Those are the hit movies, those are the acclaimed movies.

You make some valid points. I really want to read Jonathan Rinzler’s books. I actually bought both books for A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back last year but unfortunately they came damaged. I had to send them back. I’m definitely going to try again buying them but first I want to get The Ingmar Bergman Archives book from Taschen since it’s out of print.

I think where we differ is that I truly don’t think George changed all that much. I think the difference between where we see him at with making the Original Trilogy and the Prequel Trilogy comes down to the technology. He had to reel himself in more so with the Original Trilogy as he couldn’t possibly make everything he dreamed of achieving.

https://youtu.be/aOknduJ6Rmk

This video with Jonathan Rinzler and Pablo Hidalgo really shows how much the initial idea of THX 1138 and ulimately Star Wars has lots of seeds to what came about in the Prequels. However like all stories they evolve and grow but I think George’s stories in particular always dealt with the same core issues. You can see a lot of parallels between THX 1138 and American Graffiti with Attack of the Clones for example. He’s also always loved history and anthropology. You can see these things in all of his films.

I also would say I think George is more of a forward thinker. He’s not really one to bath himself in self praise. He doesn’t believe his own hype or at least let it get to his head. I’m sure he’s very proud of the work he did on the Original Trilogy but it was also a turbulent time in his life as he also had to set up Lucasfilm and contend with both The Empire Strikes Back going over budget when he was self financing himself and Richard Marquand’s limited experience in special effects forcing him to be on set more for Return of the Jedi than he wanted. Add all of this with the fact that his first marriage started to fall apart when Return of the Jedi was being made. He said in one interview he considers it to be the greatest failure of his life that things fell apart and in another Biography Channel special it was said that it caused him a seven year tail spin of deep depression. It’s also related in Howard Kazanjian’s book that Marcia always wanted to go to the Academy Awards but George didn’t want to. So she went with Howard and his wife. He also refused to take a writing credit on Return of the Jedi until Howard convinced him to as he doesn’t like taking too many credits. So I’m sure George is very proud of the achievements he had with the Original Trilogy but at the same time I don’t think he likes to sit around and think about achievements or I assume that time in his life too much. He’s always about what he can do next to push the medium of storytelling forward. That’s where his interests lie. I’ve started to read The Star Wars Archives: Episodes I-III and it really shows that. He really lights up when he’s talking about the Whills, Midi-Chlorians, and pushing storytelling forward. The heart of telling stories is always the most important thing to him. He never lost sight of that but he knew even before the Prequels came out that he was making films some fans wouldn’t like. He’s very self aware I think of why some fans don’t like the Prequels but that’s not important to him as he makes the films for himself as any truly great artist does. He wants to tell stories but expand the canvas that can tell them. He’s always tried pushing boundaries of what was possible for the time but the technology is a tool to him. He actually doesn’t even like technology that much.

It’s what I feel is missing in Disney Star Wars. The abilities of the creators to understand core contexts of George’s work but to not feel beholden to it at the same time. Yet also push the medium forward at the same time. Unfortunately I don’t see that as a lesson they’ll be learning anytime soon. They seem to on the technology side with The Mandalorian but story needs to come next in my opinion.

I’ll vouch for the Special Editions being the definitive way George wanted Star Wars to be viewed. This doesn’t mean I personally agree or like every change but I respect the artist. It’s like if I wrote a story I worked on with my own personal time for over thirty years. I made a successful first book but I didn’t feel I could deliver what my fans expect of me so I sold it with story treatments for the second and third story. The company decided they didn’t want to use my story. I’d take that personally as I devoted myself and nearly all my life to it. I think that’s how George must feel to some degree. He feels personally slighted that some don’t like what he did. The Special Editions like everything he did were personal to him and weaved together a tale that was as much personal as it was a way to tell entertaining stories. He was what he made and even changed. It’s interesting Ben Burtt said that George told him he would want to go back and change things right after A New Hope came out. So he was always wanting to go back. It may not be what we would do in his shoes but I do think we’d feel personally attacked if a company or someone else tried to take away authorship of our work we evolved over the course of years.

I would also add that kids may not have a problem with the Imperial Bridge Officers or even Han shooting first but that’s because they’re not conditioned to think this way. Kids are less ridged in their thinking than adults. They take things at face value more than we do. We become more narrow minded as we get older but for George it was a matter of what a kid could draw upon and the psychological effects it could have on them growing up as they tend to act out everything they love. I know my buddies and I would play chop each other’s heads off like Anakin does Dooku when we’d lightsaber fight. We weren’t thinking of the context and awfulness of it. I can see where George countered this now though by showing Anakin being burnt by lava to show the consequences of what doing terrible things leads to in the long run. Subconsciously I think we know but we’re still developing that mind as a kid. The changes though were to trim things to not glorify violence. That’s how he saw it and may seem contradictory. He was looking out for making sure kids were protected from becoming as to him anyone can do evil things. His stories are about the choices we have. I can see why he’d feel the way he does about Han shooting first as I admit I never liked Han much before The Force Awakens but I do wonder how my perception would’ve been if I saw things the way George envisions now with Greedo shooting first and saying “Maclunkey”. I can absolutely also see why these changes are problematical to some. There’s a couple of changes I like for example but think could be better executed. It’s all a matter of prospective.

In the end though he took things to heart by giving fans what he thought they’d want with a new chapter in the Disney era and because he assumed his legacy would be protected. He’s not a big fan of the Sequels but he does seem to be more or less at peace with everything else. He also does seem to have taken the high road when he’s around Kathleen Kennedy and everyone else with Disney. He knows the story has to grow beyond him but I’m sure it doesn’t make it any easier. It’s a lesson though I try to take to heart with the Sequels and the other Disney era content I don’t like. It’s not my Star Wars anymore but it is for someone. I suppose as well what Star Wars was always trying to teach us the whole time is we have to let go and act on instinct at some point. I’m taking that lesson step by step. Maybe one day I will fully.

I truly do understand why it can be personal to so many to have the unaltered Original Trilogy. I hope they get an official release but there’s always another side to the story that doesn’t get looked at nearly enough I feel when these things and Star Wars in general are discussed.

George Lucas and Kathleen Kennedy were both presented PGA Milestone Awards by Steven Spielberg.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/pga-awards-george-lucas-kathleen-kennedy-steven-spielberg-1235115251/

I’d argue though having R2-D2 and C-3PO within the Prequels adds a further connection between the films as they serve as the Greek chorus through all six of George’s films. They know galactic history but also have a direct connection between Luke and Leia’s history through Anakin and Padme. I’d also say there’s a deeper connection between Anakin and C-3PO. C-3PO is an extension of Anakin’s personality and experiences both symbolic and not. R2-D2 on the other hand ulimately is whose telling the story to the Keeper of the Whills. We can see little instances of where this is being foreshadowed when events are told through R2’s prospective. It’s really unfortunate how we’ll probably never see that plotline picked up on now.

StarkillerAG said:

Stardust1138 said:

BedeHistory731 said:

I’m in the Bionicle fandom, so I’ve learned to be reticent to demand all the answers from the creators about things they probably never even considered too deeply. Too many people pestered Greg Farshtey (Bionicle’s head writer) for answers about characters’ appearances during the canon contests.

Creators don’t owe you all the answers to minutia.

Exactly. They don’t owe you anything in general. This is where we are alike in slightly differing ways.

George said it best:

“I make my movies for myself. People will say, “When you release it, it belongs to the public.” No, it’s mine. I’m leasing it to you. $10 at a time. It still belongs to me.”

Sorry if this sounds a bit too interrogative, Stardust, but I’ve been wondering: What are your opinions on the original theatrical versions? Because with both your love of George Lucas, and with your recent talk about creators not owing audiences anything, it sounds like you’d be fine with the Special Editions being the only versions available. It’s fine if you are, I’m not trying to shame you, but it feels a bit weird on a site devoted to releasing the original versions. Maybe I’m completely wrong, though.

I’ve really avoided giving my opinion on this for a long, long time but I’ll take the bait.

My opinion is simply that if George approves then I’d be more than happy to have them like when he gives his blessing towards the Academy to show A New Hope at their museum’s cinema. I’d love seeing the Original Trilogy unaltered again as I grew up with it that way too as they were the versions that my dad’s friend burnt me copies of on tape if I recall correctly. I genuinely appreciate the dedication of everyone who works to capture the feeling of what they feel Star Wars was when they first saw it with their various versions but at the end of the day I think only George himself can decide what it truly means.

It’s not ours to tamper with and it’s the artist who gets to choose what they wish us to view. They have a reason for alterations. I think trying to understand why is a more interesting question than asking what were they thinking. I also don’t see the level of distain towards George to be all that productive or fair. I mean other artists have changed their work but I rarely see the level of vicious hate George gets thrown at them. I mean he made changes and a trilogy you may not enjoy as much as the original unaltered or otherwise three films but maybe it’s better to understand him and his intentions if you’re still going to devote time to Star Wars.

However I suppose that’s not neccessary anymore since Disney owns it now and it has run off into a different direction than what it means to him but it may help with viewing his films as Episodes I-VI. Star Wars was always very personal to him. He was what he wrote and he was very concerned about being responsible with what he said in his films. It’s why he made certain changes like cutting back frames with the Imperial Bridge Officers getting shot or having Greedo shoot first or even limiting blood shown in the later films. It may not be something fans as they’re older think about in this way as we really or hopefully know the difference between right and wrong but he was thinking about the current generation children viewing them but also the children that will be here after we’re gone. He’s a futurist and forward thinker. These films are for children but can be enjoyed by all ages.

People often compare him naturally to Luke but I don’t think they realise just how much Anakin and Padme’s relationship really mirrors his life with Marcia. That’s at least the feeling I get the more I know about him and her too. There’s many things like this you discover the more you peel the stories and George back on a more personal level.

Ulimately trying to alter it to how we wish to see it might be personal to us but we should also try thinking about it from the other side too. It’s not always about us the fans as much as I think we’d like it to be. I’ll never discourage anyone from watching the films how they intend or desire to but truly remember at the same time I think that George Lucas Is Star Wars.

I’m also on here compared to other forums because despite my many differences with most but not all on here it can be very tolerant of those with differing views of it. It’s hard to find that level of open Star Wars talk lately. This can be both a good or bad thing but it usually evens out in finding some middle ground. I also do admire film preservation and see its importance. We do need to preserve films and media in general for generations to come.

I’ve never been the biggest Star Trek fan but I occasionally would watch the original series when it came on TV and watched J.J.'s 2009 film when it came out. I really enjoyed the film as a casual viewer and found the TV series to be fine but nothing earth shattering. I never really truly got into it but recently I decided to watch clips for the original series and I found I like it a lot more now. I do find I like Next Generation the best of what I’ve seen with the shows but we’ll see as I watch the original series properly if it overtakes it. I definitely want to watch the movie for Star Trek: V at some point as the premise intrigues me more than it seems to most Trekkies.

What would Trekkies say are essential things about it that I need to know?

Rush - The Foundation of Lamneth

https://youtu.be/MrqwZD7jMqI

fmalover said:

Basically any movie directed by Paul Thomas Anderson.

Everywhere I look they’re praised by critics and movie fans alike as masterpieces, but I find them to be the very definition of boring. The only movie directed by him I did like was The Master and it had nothing to do with the acting, the characters or the plot, but purely because of the 70mm cinematography which is pure eye candy.

One thing I do respect about PTA is the fact that he’s one of the last directors who’s still committed to shooting on film.

It’s funny you should mention him. I was thinking about giving him a chance as I found Licorice Pizza to look pretty fun by the trailer. It goes to show really just how subjective film can be.

BedeHistory731 said:

I’m in the Bionicle fandom, so I’ve learned to be reticent to demand all the answers from the creators about things they probably never even considered too deeply. Too many people pestered Greg Farshtey (Bionicle’s head writer) for answers about characters’ appearances during the canon contests.

Creators don’t owe you all the answers to minutia.

Exactly. They don’t owe you anything in general. This is where we are alike in slightly differing ways.

George said it best:

“I make my movies for myself. People will say, “When you release it, it belongs to the public.” No, it’s mine. I’m leasing it to you. $10 at a time. It still belongs to me.”

PS: I miss Bionicle. Haha

Emre1601 said:

Stardust1138 said:

Emre1601 said:

It is disappointing to see you think so low of peoples’ opinions when they do align with yours. And that you insult others and dismiss the opinions of those who are critical of George and Prequels in this manner. But at least your opinion on people who think differently is clear.

It’s not the people themselves that I take an issue with as they have every right to their opinion. Sometimes I even find myself agreeing on a personal level. Everyone has an opinion and in life we’re not meant to always agree on everything but that’s where human sympathy is more valuable. It’s inevitable that we can’t all see eye to eye on every little thing. However an opinion is different from being able to view things from an artistic standpoint of visual literacy and everything else I’m hammering on and on about. I’m stopping though as I see now nobody wants to ask the questions of why or how but merely what reinforces their opinions on what something is supposed to be. It’s a sad thing to me how some can’t see the difference between having a personal opinion on something and reading things for what the artist intended or did in fact include in their works.

I was serious when I suggested you start a “visual literacy” thread - separate to other threads focusing about what happens on screen. Some people may not agree with or be too engaged in it, and that it doesn’t affects their view of what occurs in the films onscreen, but it is still an interesting and alternative way of viewing films (and films outside of Star Wars too).

Many people did not like or agree with the Star Wars ring theory. That may be because it brought little to what the they had see and experienced onscreen, and it could have done without the subtitle “the hidden artistry of the Prequels” as much of it was already known, but not in a central hub as Mike Klimo had taken the time and effort to compile. But it was still interesting feature to read about and learn.

I too will not mention this again as it is not what the focus of the thread is about.

My apologies. I missed where you suggested I do so. I was very zoned out this morning. I feel unfortunately I’ve said mostly everything I need to with regards to these things. It’s a great way to view films in general and not just Star Wars. I understand though why some wouldn’t want to go there. Star Wars is a very personal thing to each of us. We all have a different reason for why we love it. Some just watch it purely to be entertained while others like to peel back the layers to counter the fun we’re having. Neither set of fans is wrong. I’m happy we can’t all see it the same way but I do wish sometimes we could try understanding one another more so than watching reviewers who use false claims as evidence why one set of films is worse than another or is the definitive reason they’re not any good when they’re merely just giving their opinions. Enjoy what you enjoy but try being open minded. Star Wars belongs to all of us yet at the same time the first six films are George’s and we should respect that. It might not be our way but that doesn’t matter.

I really enjoy Mike Klimo’s work as I think he’s completely spot on. It probably could’ve done indeed without the “the hidden artistry of the Prequels” but to be fair to him the Prequels were getting slandered pretty heavily at the time by everyone and Prequel fans like me were in the minority and/or still coming to our own as a voice within the fandom.

Emre1601 said:

It is disappointing to see you think so low of peoples’ opinions when they do align with yours. And that you insult others and dismiss the opinions of those who are critical of George and Prequels in this manner. But at least your opinion on people who think differently is clear.

It’s not the people themselves that I take an issue with as they have every right to their opinion. Sometimes I even find myself agreeing on a personal level. Everyone has an opinion and in life we’re not meant to always agree on everything but that’s where human sympathy is more valuable. It’s inevitable that we can’t all see eye to eye on every little thing. However an opinion is different from being able to view things from an artistic standpoint of visual literacy and everything else I’m hammering on and on about. I’m stopping though as I see now nobody wants to ask the questions of why or how but merely what reinforces their opinions on what something is supposed to be. It’s a sad thing to me how some can’t see the difference between having a personal opinion on something and reading things for what the artist intended or did in fact include in their works.