BiggsFan44

ChainsawAsh said:

BiggsFan44 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

BiggsFan44 said:

I don’t think that’s what you’re actually getting out of the thread

I don’t think you get to tell me how I think, but…

because it isn’t what I’m saying.

…okay, fine.

The OT was first, the PT came next and was made by the same guy, who attempted to graft on an expansion of the original story by making Luke’s father’s journey an inverse of Luke’s.

I disagree in that he contradicted what came before in every subsequent film. Besides, you’re ignoring the contributions of Gary Kurtz, Lawrence Kasdan, Irvin Kershner, Howard Kazanjian, and Richard Marquand to the OT (though I’d argue that Kazanjian and Marquand had markedly less influence on ROTJ than Kurtz did on ANH and ESB or Kershner and Kasdan did on ESB), and ignoring the fact that Kasdan co-wrote ESB and ROTJ while also co-writing TFA and Solo.

The ST is being made by people who can be assumed to strongly disagree with elements of the PT, and make movies that reflect that.

I don’t understand why this is a problem, since they take place after the OT, and as such should be sequels to the OT. Besides, there’s a ton of prequel influence in TLJ and even a little in TFA, so I’d also argue you’re blatantly wrong about this and letting your feelings about the ST get in the way, since you’re stating this as objective fact when it quite clearly isn’t.

For example, Infinity War feels like a modern blockbuster- using all the tech at its disposal to craft a HUGE story.

What? Why does that matter?

Or even look at Solo and Rogue One- they’re shot with digital cameras.

So?

But everything TFA does (cloning a resource limited movie from 1977 being a big one)

Oh, you don’t like that TFA was shot on film? Really? Why does that make a difference?

is a condemnation of the last movies in the saga before it, real life-time wise.

It…what? How? You’re stating this as objective fact without citing any examples.

Now, this isn’t even about whether TFA is better or worse than the PT, really. I’m simply asking- How are we supposed to believe that Episode 7 is the continuation of a collection movies that it is telling off half of?

Because it’s set decades later with similar characters and is clearly part of the same universe?

If this isn’t just a “waaaah I don’t like the ST and I’m angry about it” thing, then I honestly don’t understand what you’re saying.

If you can’t see how TFA is “people who were burned by the PT please come back, you liked ANH right?: The Movie”, then I don’t see how we can converse.

If you can’t give examples for why you think this is the case, or if it is, how that “completely destroy[s] the illusion that ALL of these events from ALL of these movies and shows take place in the same universe” (the entire thesis from your original post, copy/pasted exactly), then I don’t see how we can converse, either.

But I did.

RogueLeader said:

Man, you think it is but it isn’t.

The Neo-Empire, one of Han and Leia’s kids turning to the darkside, a young scavenger girl, a big superweapon, a new big bad, Luke in self-imposed exile, Han dying, these are all elements from George’s treatments for Episode 7. The broad strokes you are complaining about are from George Lucas.

Some sources:

1. https://boards.theforce.net/threads/the-development-of-the-sequel-trilogy.50046418/
2. https://www.resetera.com/threads/medium-pablo-hidalgo-and-young-many-of-the-ideas-for-tfa-and-tlf-were-from-lucas.15410/

The only thing I think you could complain about is how a lot of the designs are not that different from the OT, the X-Wings and TIE-fighters look pretty similar. Maybe George’s designs would’ve been a little weird, but with fans you can never win and people probably would have complained that it “didn’t feel like Star Wars” just like they did when the prequels came out.

The Sequel Trilogy continues the themes of family and love that the other films had. And actually, I think the Sequel trilogy is resolving issues that the Prequels had through the stories of Luke, Kylo Ren and Rey.

Luke recognized the flaws of the Jedi that the prequels introduced. And yes, we were meant to see the Jedi as flawed. By the end of the film, instead of thinking the Jedi need to disappear forever, he recognizes that the new generation has to learn from the mistakes of the old in order to grow into something better.

Rey and Kylo Ren’s relationship is the poetic inverse of the relationship between Anakin and Padme. It was romantic love that tore the galaxy apart, and I think it will be love between Rey and Ben that bring the galaxy back together. Just like how Anakin’s love for Padme damned him, his love for his son saved him.

I think these new films are truly building off what came before it.

They are implementing the Hero’s Journey made famous by Joseph Campbell, and they are using elements of Jungian philosophy to continue these stories. Things that Lucas used when developing the other films.

If you look at the Hero’s Journey, even though it is used heavily in film/literature today, most heroes don’t complete the entire cycle as Joseph Campbell has it listed in his work.
Luke ended his journey inROTJ around the Ultimate Boon, which is only the end of the second part of the cycle. Luke’s story in the Sequel films continue that off. Read this if you want to know more about it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/StarWars/comments/8azql2/how_the_last_jedi_explored_the_last_stages_of_the/

Looking at it this way, Luke’s story is really the perfect continuation of his journey. He’s now on the level of great heroes like Gilgamesh and King Arthur.

Luke, Rey, Kylo, all of their journeys reflect the archetypes created by Carl Jung in his life’s work, the ego, the Shadow, the anima/animus. Things that were heavy elements of the OT and the PT, now being continued in the ST. We also see the idea of the assimilation with the Shadow and Rey/Kylo Ren’s story. These archetypes can even be reflected with the political conflict in the new trilogy as well.

I just think you are looking at this new trilogy in a very surface level way, or have been watching to many of the toxic YouTubers who are stuck in a cyclical pattern that have to create videos for that community’s echo chamber. I’m not saying these movies are perfect, but these movies are thematically cohesive with the rest of the saga.

Empire vs Rebels 2.0 was not in Lucas’ story. Sorry.
And I don’t have sources on hand, but I’ve seen convincing arguments on TFN for Luke in TLJ not really jiving with Campbell.

The rest I just disagree with. Also Rey has less reason to fall for Kylo than Padme did Anakin, AKA basically none.

ChainsawAsh said:

BiggsFan44 said:

I don’t think that’s what you’re actually getting out of the thread

I don’t think you get to tell me how I think, but…

because it isn’t what I’m saying.

…okay, fine.

The OT was first, the PT came next and was made by the same guy, who attempted to graft on an expansion of the original story by making Luke’s father’s journey an inverse of Luke’s.

I disagree in that he contradicted what came before in every subsequent film. Besides, you’re ignoring the contributions of Gary Kurtz, Lawrence Kasdan, Irvin Kershner, Howard Kazanjian, and Richard Marquand to the OT (though I’d argue that Kazanjian and Marquand had markedly less influence on ROTJ than Kurtz did on ANH and ESB or Kershner and Kasdan did on ESB), and ignoring the fact that Kasdan co-wrote ESB and ROTJ while also co-writing TFA and Solo.

The ST is being made by people who can be assumed to strongly disagree with elements of the PT, and make movies that reflect that.

I don’t understand why this is a problem, since they take place after the OT, and as such should be sequels to the OT. Besides, there’s a ton of prequel influence in TLJ and even a little in TFA, so I’d also argue you’re blatantly wrong about this and letting your feelings about the ST get in the way, since you’re stating this as objective fact when it quite clearly isn’t.

For example, Infinity War feels like a modern blockbuster- using all the tech at its disposal to craft a HUGE story.

What? Why does that matter?

Or even look at Solo and Rogue One- they’re shot with digital cameras.

So?

But everything TFA does (cloning a resource limited movie from 1977 being a big one)

Oh, you don’t like that TFA was shot on film? Really? Why does that make a difference?

is a condemnation of the last movies in the saga before it, real life-time wise.

It…what? How? You’re stating this as objective fact without citing any examples.

Now, this isn’t even about whether TFA is better or worse than the PT, really. I’m simply asking- How are we supposed to believe that Episode 7 is the continuation of a collection movies that it is telling off half of?

Because it’s set decades later with similar characters and is clearly part of the same universe?

If this isn’t just a “waaaah I don’t like the ST and I’m angry about it” thing, then I honestly don’t understand what you’re saying.

If you can’t see how TFA is “people who were burned by the PT please come back, you liked ANH right?: The Movie”, then I don’t see how we can converse.

ChainsawAsh said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:
Good perspective. Just to clarify, I’m also talking about the idea of certain pieces of the canon not respecting other pieces even though they are supposed to be 9 parts of one story, which is slightly different from recasting etc.
On the topic of Trek, it’s funny that you mention scale, since now that I know that the saucer set in First Contact was not full size it bugs me, even though you can’t tell in the film that it is only 70 percent of the full size.

But Star Wars has been disrespecting its own canon from day one. In the first film Luke, who had an obvious crush on Princess Leia, was the son of a war hero who’d been killed by Darth Vader. In the next film Lucas suddenly decided Vader was actually Luke’s father. Then he decided that Leia was Luke’s sister, the Emperor was a different bloke to the one we’d seen in Empire, and Luke had supposedly been ‘hidden’ at the family homestead and with Dad’s old surname intact no less! I haven’t even started on the prequels yet!

“Do you remember your mother? Your real mother?”

“Uh, well, ‘remember’ is such a strong word…”

I’m really not being clear, apparently.
That’s not the kind of disrespect I’m talking about. Lucas retconning his work doesn’t mean that he disagrees with those works, it just means he thought up a new story element.
For example, George does not feel about ANH the way JJ feels about the PT, I’m sure.

What I’m getting out of this thread is that you don’t like Abrams/Johnson/the ST and want an echo chamber to complain about them under the guise of a discussion about coherent canon in a franchise that spans decades, and you jump down anyone’s throat who says even a slightly nice thing about the ST or a slightly critical thing about the OT/PT/Lucas.

Shame, because the topic of cohesiveness in a long-spanning canon is an interesting one. Wish I could actually discuss it here.

I don’t think that’s what you’re actually getting out of the thread, because it isn’t what I’m saying.
The OT was first, the PT came next and was made by the same guy, who attempted to graft on an expansion of the original story by making Luke’s father’s journey an inverse of Luke’s.
The ST is being made by people who can be assumed to strongly disagree with elements of the PT, and make movies that reflect that.
For example, Infinity War feels like a modern blockbuster- using all the tech at its disposal to craft a HUGE story.
Or even look at Solo and Rogue One- they’re shot with digital cameras.

But everything TFA does (cloning a resource limited movie from 1977 being a big one), is a condemnation of the last movies in the saga before it, real life-time wise.

Now, this isn’t even about whether TFA is better or worse than the PT, really. I’m simply asking- How are we supposed to believe that Episode 7 is the continuation of a collection movies that it is telling off half of?

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:
Good perspective. Just to clarify, I’m also talking about the idea of certain pieces of the canon not respecting other pieces even though they are supposed to be 9 parts of one story, which is slightly different from recasting etc.
On the topic of Trek, it’s funny that you mention scale, since now that I know that the saucer set in First Contact was not full size it bugs me, even though you can’t tell in the film that it is only 70 percent of the full size.

But Star Wars has been disrespecting its own canon from day one. In the first film Luke, who had an obvious crush on Princess Leia, was the son of a war hero who’d been killed by Darth Vader. In the next film Lucas suddenly decided Vader was actually Luke’s father. Then he decided that Leia was Luke’s sister, the Emperor was a different bloke to the one we’d seen in Empire, and Luke had supposedly been ‘hidden’ at the family homestead and with Dad’s old surname intact no less! I haven’t even started on the prequels yet!

“Do you remember your mother? Your real mother?”

“Uh, well, ‘remember’ is such a strong word…”

I’m really not being clear, apparently.
That’s not the kind of disrespect I’m talking about. Lucas retconning his work doesn’t mean that he disagrees with those works, it just means he thought up a new story element.
For example, George does not feel about ANH the way JJ feels about the PT, I’m sure.

Lucas absolutely retconned his work because he disagreed with earlier works. If you don’t believe me, go purchase an official Blu Ray release of the unaltered OT and tell me who shot first.

Closer, but still not what I’m talking about since he didn’t change Han’s character in the sequels, just superseded it in the movie it happened in.
The CANON isn’t at war with itself in that instance because only the SE is currently canon.

The point I’m making is that Star Wars has never truly had a cohesive canon. Only ANH and TESB make total canon sense (obviously TESB not having to answer its own questions is an advantage!) but from there on its the proverbial dog’s breakfast. We all have our own canon boundaries as a result. For me things start getting ridiculous as early as RoTJ. For you it’s clearly anything that negates the PT. Some just relax into the overall story (like Yotsuya’s wonderful post) and disregard cgi/puppet disparities and/or niggling details. Abrams himself has publicly claimed that ‘Han shot first’, so he clearly doesn’t care that the SE is ‘official’ canon. Rian on the other hand happily calls Palpatine ‘Sidious’ and drops some clear PT homages in TLJ. To each their own. Star Wars ‘canon’ is like a buffet. Choose the bits you like.

I agree with you in practice, it’s more of a logical problem for me. It’s like, Episode 7 kind of implies an embrace of the previous 6 movies.
It’s like if Harry Potter 7 was clearly a response to the percieved failings of the first 3 Potter movies.

DuracellEnergizer said:

yotsuya said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Besides, half the SE changes are cool. That giant half buried ship that’s at a 70 degree angle in Mos Eisley is cool.
Also, the restoration of that one Biggs scene towards the end (gotta love Biggs).

If only Lucas had thought to reincorporate the earlier Biggs scenes along with it. Then its inclusion might work instead of feeling tacked on and incongruous.

How does it feel tacked on? If anything it makes the Trench run part flow more smoothly by fixing up the Biggs/Wedge nonsense.
It’s also just a nice little moment in itself, since Luke talks about Biggs on Tatooine, even in the final cut.

His introduction so late into the proceedings without any lead-up feels nothing short of abrupt. Plus it’s just more unnecessary universe-shrinkage.

And Luke flying with Biggs without any conversation doesn’t feel abrupt? He was going on and on about Biggs earlier in the film and then we meet him and there is nothing. Incidently, Biggs talking to Luke is implied in the original cut because Biggs leaves Luke at the base of the X-wing ladder in every single version. That was the best edit to ANH for the SE.

There are, what, two throwaway mentions of Biggs in the theatrical version? That’s hardly “going on and on about Biggs”. And I never even realized Red Three was supposed to be the same character as Biggs until I started getting into the reference material.

Nevertheless, he is, so adding in the hangar scene does not do what you claim.

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:
Good perspective. Just to clarify, I’m also talking about the idea of certain pieces of the canon not respecting other pieces even though they are supposed to be 9 parts of one story, which is slightly different from recasting etc.
On the topic of Trek, it’s funny that you mention scale, since now that I know that the saucer set in First Contact was not full size it bugs me, even though you can’t tell in the film that it is only 70 percent of the full size.

But Star Wars has been disrespecting its own canon from day one. In the first film Luke, who had an obvious crush on Princess Leia, was the son of a war hero who’d been killed by Darth Vader. In the next film Lucas suddenly decided Vader was actually Luke’s father. Then he decided that Leia was Luke’s sister, the Emperor was a different bloke to the one we’d seen in Empire, and Luke had supposedly been ‘hidden’ at the family homestead and with Dad’s old surname intact no less! I haven’t even started on the prequels yet!

“Do you remember your mother? Your real mother?”

“Uh, well, ‘remember’ is such a strong word…”

I’m really not being clear, apparently.
That’s not the kind of disrespect I’m talking about. Lucas retconning his work doesn’t mean that he disagrees with those works, it just means he thought up a new story element.
For example, George does not feel about ANH the way JJ feels about the PT, I’m sure.

Lucas absolutely retconned his work because he disagreed with earlier works. If you don’t believe me, go purchase an official Blu Ray release of the unaltered OT and tell me who shot first.

Closer, but still not what I’m talking about since he didn’t change Han’s character in the sequels, just superseded it in the movie it happened in.
The CANON isn’t at war with itself in that instance because only the SE is currently canon.

yotsuya said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Besides, half the SE changes are cool. That giant half buried ship that’s at a 70 degree angle in Mos Eisley is cool.
Also, the restoration of that one Biggs scene towards the end (gotta love Biggs).

If only Lucas had thought to reincorporate the earlier Biggs scenes along with it. Then its inclusion might work instead of feeling tacked on and incongruous.

How does it feel tacked on? If anything it makes the Trench run part flow more smoothly by fixing up the Biggs/Wedge nonsense.
It’s also just a nice little moment in itself, since Luke talks about Biggs on Tatooine, even in the final cut.

But even though I don’t see any "tacked on"ness, I do agree that he should have went all out and added back in the Tosche station bits.
And I’m not sure why he cut out the older Rebel pilot talking about Anakin, because it fits if that guy was around when Anakin was a General.

Incorporating the cut Tatooine scenes would do more to rewrite canon than anything else that has ever happened. Have you listened to the dialog lately? There are some major issued with that and where the saga went (even just in the OT). The only reasons those scenes even got shot was because they didn’t take a lot of setup and were the first things they shot in Tunesia. They were cut before the rought B&W cut was ever done. Lucas had been talked into writing those scenes because of his friends and what he wanted was the droids to lead us to Luke, then Ben, then Han, then back to the Princess and those scenes didn’t fit. They were filler and were dropped. And Red Leader’s missing lines about knowing Anakin would not make sense with how the PT did things.

I’m not sure, but I thought he cut those scenes after getting spooked because Spielberg or somebody called them “American Graffiti in space”.
And the Rebel pilot dialogue would fit, since

1. The timeline roughly matches to where he could have been a teen in the Clone War and have seen General Skywalker in action
2. He wouldn’t know that he became Vader

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Besides, half the SE changes are cool. That giant half buried ship that’s at a 70 degree angle in Mos Eisley is cool.
Also, the restoration of that one Biggs scene towards the end (gotta love Biggs).

If only Lucas had thought to reincorporate the earlier Biggs scenes along with it. Then its inclusion might work instead of feeling tacked on and incongruous.

How does it feel tacked on? If anything it makes the Trench run part flow more smoothly by fixing up the Biggs/Wedge nonsense.
It’s also just a nice little moment in itself, since Luke talks about Biggs on Tatooine, even in the final cut.

His introduction so late into the proceedings without any lead-up feels nothing short of abrupt. Plus it’s just more unnecessary universe-shrinkage.

What? Biggs is still in the Rebellion in the pre SE version.

dahmage said:

NeverarGreat said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:
Good perspective. Just to clarify, I’m also talking about the idea of certain pieces of the canon not respecting other pieces even though they are supposed to be 9 parts of one story, which is slightly different from recasting etc.
On the topic of Trek, it’s funny that you mention scale, since now that I know that the saucer set in First Contact was not full size it bugs me, even though you can’t tell in the film that it is only 70 percent of the full size.

But Star Wars has been disrespecting its own canon from day one. In the first film Luke, who had an obvious crush on Princess Leia, was the son of a war hero who’d been killed by Darth Vader. In the next film Lucas suddenly decided Vader was actually Luke’s father. Then he decided that Leia was Luke’s sister, the Emperor was a different bloke to the one we’d seen in Empire, and Luke had supposedly been ‘hidden’ at the family homestead and with Dad’s old surname intact no less! I haven’t even started on the prequels yet!

“Do you remember your mother? Your real mother?”

“Uh, well, ‘remember’ is such a strong word…”

I’m really not being clear, apparently.
That’s not the kind of disrespect I’m talking about. Lucas retconning his work doesn’t mean that he disagrees with those works, it just means he thought up a new story element.
For example, George does not feel about ANH the way JJ feels about the PT, I’m sure.

I recall that George really disliked Star Wars (1977) and embarked on a forty-year quest to ‘fix’ them to his liking.

/thread

Incorrect.

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Besides, half the SE changes are cool. That giant half buried ship that’s at a 70 degree angle in Mos Eisley is cool.
Also, the restoration of that one Biggs scene towards the end (gotta love Biggs).

If only Lucas had thought to reincorporate the earlier Biggs scenes along with it. Then its inclusion might work instead of feeling tacked on and incongruous.

How does it feel tacked on? If anything it makes the Trench run part flow more smoothly by fixing up the Biggs/Wedge nonsense.
It’s also just a nice little moment in itself, since Luke talks about Biggs on Tatooine, even in the final cut.

But even though I don’t see any "tacked on"ness, I do agree that he should have went all out and added back in the Tosche station bits.
And I’m not sure why he cut out the older Rebel pilot talking about Anakin, because it fits if that guy was around when Anakin was a General.

NeverarGreat said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:
Good perspective. Just to clarify, I’m also talking about the idea of certain pieces of the canon not respecting other pieces even though they are supposed to be 9 parts of one story, which is slightly different from recasting etc.
On the topic of Trek, it’s funny that you mention scale, since now that I know that the saucer set in First Contact was not full size it bugs me, even though you can’t tell in the film that it is only 70 percent of the full size.

But Star Wars has been disrespecting its own canon from day one. In the first film Luke, who had an obvious crush on Princess Leia, was the son of a war hero who’d been killed by Darth Vader. In the next film Lucas suddenly decided Vader was actually Luke’s father. Then he decided that Leia was Luke’s sister, the Emperor was a different bloke to the one we’d seen in Empire, and Luke had supposedly been ‘hidden’ at the family homestead and with Dad’s old surname intact no less! I haven’t even started on the prequels yet!

“Do you remember your mother? Your real mother?”

“Uh, well, ‘remember’ is such a strong word…”

I’m really not being clear, apparently.
That’s not the kind of disrespect I’m talking about. Lucas retconning his work doesn’t mean that he disagrees with those works, it just means he thought up a new story element.
For example, George does not feel about ANH the way JJ feels about the PT, I’m sure.

I recall that George really disliked Star Wars (1977) and embarked on a forty-year quest to ‘fix’ them to his liking.

That’s disingenuous as hell.
He likes it, it’s just that it’s far from what his imagination could dream up, as any sci fi movie from that era is.
Hell, the finished product doesn’t even match McQuarrie’s paintings.
Besides, half the SE changes are cool. That giant half buried ship that’s at a 70 degree angle in Mos Eisley is cool.
Also, the restoration of that one Biggs scene towards the end (gotta love Biggs).

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:
Good perspective. Just to clarify, I’m also talking about the idea of certain pieces of the canon not respecting other pieces even though they are supposed to be 9 parts of one story, which is slightly different from recasting etc.
On the topic of Trek, it’s funny that you mention scale, since now that I know that the saucer set in First Contact was not full size it bugs me, even though you can’t tell in the film that it is only 70 percent of the full size.

But Star Wars has been disrespecting its own canon from day one. In the first film Luke, who had an obvious crush on Princess Leia, was the son of a war hero who’d been killed by Darth Vader. In the next film Lucas suddenly decided Vader was actually Luke’s father. Then he decided that Leia was Luke’s sister, the Emperor was a different bloke to the one we’d seen in Empire, and Luke had supposedly been ‘hidden’ at the family homestead and with Dad’s old surname intact no less! I haven’t even started on the prequels yet!

“Do you remember your mother? Your real mother?”

“Uh, well, ‘remember’ is such a strong word…”

I’m really not being clear, apparently.
That’s not the kind of disrespect I’m talking about. Lucas retconning his work doesn’t mean that he disagrees with those works, it just means he thought up a new story element.
For example, George does not feel about ANH the way JJ feels about the PT, I’m sure.

yotsuya said:

Busy for a thread just started today.

But to tackle the question of the original post… things don’t have to be perfect. Yoda is voiced by Frank Oz in all the films so it is the same character. Puppet or CG doesn’t matter. Just like it doesn’t matter that there were multiple R2-D2’s used in each film, not to mention the vast number used over the course of the Saga. Do you really watch for the hoses that hid Kenny Baker’s legs or the supports that hold him in the correct position when the 3rd leg is out? Those are movie shortcuts that you are supposed to ignore. If you want perfection, you will not find it. It doesn’t exist. Rogue One did an awesome job of replicating aspects of A New Hope, but there are flaws even in that. Who cares that Hayden’s character is especailly whiny and in Clone Wars he is more sure of himself. It was his golden age and he was elevated to Jedi Knight and assigned a Padawan. Clone Wars did a good job of hinting at the growing Darkness in Anakin.

And if you watch the Saga in order on Blu-ray, you get 3 films of CG Yoda, 1 film without Yoda, 2 films with old Puppet Yoda, another film without Yoda, and 1 film with Puppet Yoda 3.0 (my opinion is that 2.0 is best forgotten and was fortunately replaced by CG Yoda). Why complain? It is a series of movies made over more than 40 years. Technology has changed and they have managed to keep the vision pretty consistent. A lot of people can’t wrap their heads around sets, props, and models not always being built to scale. Spend some time appreciating the classics and the development of special effects and movie magic and you can ignore all of it and appreciate the grander story being told. Don’t sweat the little things. The character of Anakin/Vader was played by 7 people over the course of 6 films and Clone Wars.

But then, I am also a Star Trek fan and as a Trekkie I have to deal with recasting Saavik, changing Klingons, Romulans, ship models that aren’t in scale and seem to appear in many scales, and a whole host of issues that make what you are talking about seem pretty pathetic and ignorable. I’m also a Doctor Who fan where we’ve had 3 actors play the first Doctor, 3 versions of the Destruction of Atlantis, two origins for the Daleks and Cybermen, and so many glitches, gaffs, and outright contradictions that two different versions of Anakin between the movies and Clone Wars is nothing.

Almost every movie has its issues and you just accept them and let the illusion wash over you and don’t sweat the details. It is cool to notice them and find all the mistakes the movie makers made, but letting it ruin a movie makes about as much sense as cutting off your leg because you stubbed your toe.

Going back to Star Trek, when I finished watching 7 seasons of TNG and then was presented with Generations, it sucked. 7 seasons of intelligent stories followed by such a dud… And it only got worse when Abrams and Orci made their films. Talk about not knowing your characters and no knowing the property. Those films make the worst of the Prequels look like an Oscar winner. Trek canon was literally thrown out the window. You can argue that Luke in the ST (Rian just followed JJ’s lead and piked up where he left off) is very much like the Luke of ANH and TESB where the ROTJ Luke was quite different. But there is a 200 page topic about TLJ that frequently discusses Luke. But as a fan of many franchises I find that Star Wars has been the most faithful and consistent over the course of years where others often involve overlooking a lot more heinous mis-steps.

So I find it quite easy to ignore all of it and focus on the story. That is what is important after all.

Good perspective. Just to clarify, I’m also talking about the idea of certain pieces of the canon not respecting other pieces even though they are supposed to be 9 parts of one story, which is slightly different from recasting etc.
On the topic of Trek, it’s funny that you mention scale, since now that I know that the saucer set in First Contact was not full size it bugs me, even though you can’t tell in the film that it is only 70 percent of the full size.

dahmage said:

if anything is just trolling, i am tempted to believe it is this topic.

Why?

dahmage said:

BiggsFan44 said:

NeverarGreat said:

BiggsFan44 said:

NeverarGreat said:
-Every character in these movies is more compelling than any character in the prequels.

Do you really believe that?

Well maybe not Ric Olié. 😉

More seriously, it’s not that the Ewok movie characters are more realistically portrayed or well acted (they aren’t), but rather that there is some ineffable sense of energy and earnestness in their writing and direction that has been wrung out of the prequel characters. Just look at the behind the scenes materials for Episode 2 for the sort of energy that all but disappeared when George was done editing.

I think that feeling of earnestness is the essential component in a Star Wars movie, which is why the sequel trilogy has worked so much better than the prequel trilogy in my opinion.

Wow, I can’t believe that you hold that opinion. Earnestness is all well and good, but it can’t save bad characters. By the end of TFA, I felt like JJ had not done the work to get me to like Rey, but rather took shortcuts like having Leia and Han be too eager to help/like her. For example, when Leia walks past to Chewie to hug Rey, and THEN sends Rey out of all the Rebels to be the one to find Luke, their only hope.
I don’t feel that GL took those same shortcuts with PT characters. I think he knew that aging up Anakin in TPM would have pleased more of the audience, but he didn’t do it for reasons he saw as logical (Leaving his mother at 9 instead of 13 is going to do more damage, 9 year olds are more innocent than filthy teenagers, etc.)
Also, TPM Anakin is plenty “earnest”.

So yeah, i’d say that earnestness is way down on the list of what makes a good character, since the main character of the ST sucks, despite being more earnest than PT characters (according to you).
I’m also not above speculating that JJ counted on her gender making it easier for him to take investment shortcuts and still get good audience and critic reviews.
Take Rey vs Ahsoka. It takes Anakin 3 whole seasons to stop trying to hold Ahsoka back. Filoni did not count on Ahsoka’s gender/is not a lazy enough filmmaker to essentially try to “force the meme”.

And don’t even get me started on how Kylo Ren is about ten years older than AotC/RotS Anakin and is STILL more of a whiny petulant baby than Anakin ever was, despite coming from a loving household (barring TLJ Luke style OT3 character assassinations.)

And finally, I think what people don’t like about the PT is that it’s actually TOO earnest. It doesn’t get more earnest than Anakin’s fireside monologue, or the Tusken confession.

suggestion, leave the TLJ and TFA bashing in the review threads for those movies.

I’ll take “intruding in a discussion only when you disagree with the opinions presented” for 2 dollars and fifty cents, Alex.

In my excitement, I may have jumped the gun. The video editing software I was planning on using is giving me problems. Also the source I was planning to use for the Biggs scenes is no longer online, so I may have to rip the scene from youtube, making this project less of a watchable movie and more of a proof of concept.
Will report back, thank you to the responses so far, I have taken them all under consideration.

Frank your Majesty said:

It’s a point you brought up, so I don’t see how it’s off-topic.

It really isn’t. The topic of my post is how parts of the saga passing judgement on others breaks the feeling that it’s all one saga.
Yoda being CG in the PT isn’t passing judgement on puppet Yoda for the same reason that Maz Kanata being CG isn’t.

NeverarGreat said:

BiggsFan44 said:

NeverarGreat said:
-Every character in these movies is more compelling than any character in the prequels.

Do you really believe that?

Well maybe not Ric Olié. 😉

More seriously, it’s not that the Ewok movie characters are more realistically portrayed or well acted (they aren’t), but rather that there is some ineffable sense of energy and earnestness in their writing and direction that has been wrung out of the prequel characters. Just look at the behind the scenes materials for Episode 2 for the sort of energy that all but disappeared when George was done editing.

I think that feeling of earnestness is the essential component in a Star Wars movie, which is why the sequel trilogy has worked so much better than the prequel trilogy in my opinion.

Wow, I can’t believe that you hold that opinion. Earnestness is all well and good, but it can’t save bad characters. By the end of TFA, I felt like JJ had not done the work to get me to like Rey, but rather took shortcuts like having Leia and Han be too eager to help/like her. For example, when Leia walks past to Chewie to hug Rey, and THEN sends Rey out of all the Rebels to be the one to find Luke, their only hope.
I don’t feel that GL took those same shortcuts with PT characters. I think he knew that aging up Anakin in TPM would have pleased more of the audience, but he didn’t do it for reasons he saw as logical (Leaving his mother at 9 instead of 13 is going to do more damage, 9 year olds are more innocent than filthy teenagers, etc.)
Also, TPM Anakin is plenty “earnest”.

So yeah, i’d say that earnestness is way down on the list of what makes a good character, since the main character of the ST sucks, despite being more earnest than PT characters (according to you).
I’m also not above speculating that JJ counted on her gender making it easier for him to take investment shortcuts and still get good audience and critic reviews.
Take Rey vs Ahsoka. It takes Anakin 3 whole seasons to stop trying to hold Ahsoka back. Filoni did not count on Ahsoka’s gender/is not a lazy enough filmmaker to essentially try to “force the meme”.

And don’t even get me started on how Kylo Ren is about ten years older than AotC/RotS Anakin and is STILL more of a whiny petulant baby than Anakin ever was, despite coming from a loving household (barring TLJ Luke style OT3 character assassinations.)

And finally, I think what people don’t like about the PT is that it’s actually TOO earnest. It doesn’t get more earnest than Anakin’s fireside monologue, or the Tusken confession.

Frank your Majesty said:
I’m talking about Yoda being a puppet again. I don’t care if you want to call that a continuity error or something else.

If you’re intentionally avoiding the actual topic, then you’re just trolling.

Frank your Majesty said:

BiggsFan44 said:

2. massive double standard between the PT and ST

You mean like having no problem with the PT introducing continuity errors, but hating the ST for reverting them? Yes, I think that’s a massive double standard.

I don’t know what you’re misunderstanding here. My original post is not about continuity errors.

DuracellEnergizer said:
If you really knew anything about me, you’d know I consider TFA pablum, that I’ve refused to see TLJ, and that I utterly detest the capitalist abomination that is the Walt Disney Company.

I’m not miffed you dislike the ST. I merely find it infantile that you get “very angered” over someone coming away from the ST with a different POV than yours.

Because some things aren’t really as easy as POV.
TFA is more than just a little poorly made.

DuracellEnergizer said:
Damn. I was striving for “snide”.

I mean, people like you are why the ST is a stale rehash, so I don’t think my strong opinions are rooted in what you claim.

DuracellEnergizer said:
I remember when I used to get triggered over stupid, irrelevant crap. For instance, I absolutely hated Stargate SG-1 and couldn’t stand the thought of anyone liking it more than the original movie. Then I grew up.

You seem upset.

DuracellEnergizer said:

I’m suddenly very angered by this conversation

Jeez. Triggered much?

Yeah.

OutboundFlight said:
Both succeeded

I’ve made my opinion on TFA very clear, but TLJ did not do what you claim, since Rey did not join Kylo. The movie chickens out and even trots out a super laser for good measure.
Also as far as Anakin goes, like I said, I think there is a double standard there too, since Anakin by the end of the show is identical to RotS Anakin, besides the deeper voice. Anakin is just as “unlikable” in the second Clovis arc as he is in the movies.
It’s early TCW Anakin that is the odd man out.