logo Sign In

Obi Jeewhyen

User Group
Members
Join date
1-Aug-2006
Last activity
1-Feb-2007
Posts
440

Post History

Post
#247274
Topic
The Merits of the Prequel Trilogy and the "Saga"
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247274/action/topic#247274
Time
Originally posted by: Jumpman
Obi,

That argument still doesn't hold much water. How can you go see a film, you know you loathe, that many times, even if it is labeled Star Wars? I mean, that's wasting money.

Dead Man's Chest made ridiculous amounts of money this summer. I loathed that damn film after one viewing and will never see it again. I don't go back and see something if I don't like it.


Ah, the perfect example. I, too, loathed Dead Man's Chest, after loving the first movie. Even as a Disneyland addict, I am not addicted to that franchise ... so, I didn't like the second movie, and I never paid to see it again. Better still, I'm not sure I'll even bother seeing the third one next year.

Star Wars has a hold on me, as it does on many others. I paid to see films I hated in the 6-pak many, many times. In hopes of liking them better, anxious to find things to appreciate. (And really, $10 a pop doesn't set me back anything drastic.)



The difference? STAR WARS. People will pay to see bad movies. Again and again.

I should know. I'm one of them.


.

Post
#247256
Topic
The Merits of the Prequel Trilogy and the "Saga"
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247256/action/topic#247256
Time
Originally posted by: Jumpman
People don't go back if they didn't like what they saw....

Really? My friends and I (oh, say 50 or so die-hard Star Wars fans who camped out over a month for the premier) went back and saw Episode One a dozen or so times, hating it every single time, desperate to like it, never achieving that.

I loathed Revenge of the Sith with a passion unbridled, and I still paid to see it three times.


So, I'm not buying that repeat business was exclusive to satisfied filmgoers. I'm not even convinced those astronomical revenue numbers represent any significant return business ... these were films that every single person on the planet had to see for themselves, despite dismal word of mouth and bad reviews (though, for some reason unfathomable to me, Sith was the best-reviewed of the bunch).

These films were critic-proof, and quality-proof. Every Earthling was going to buy a ticket, no matter what. And many that hated the films still saw them time and again.



.

Post
#247227
Topic
The Merits of the Prequel Trilogy and the "Saga"
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247227/action/topic#247227
Time
Go-Mer, your partial lobotomy experiment is interesting, but I completely disagree with the theory that knowing the outcome causes disinterest.

Recall that when the words "DEATH STAR" appeared on the screen within the first 60 seconds of the original Star Wars, audiences knew how the film would end. There was suspense in the Death Star Battle and the trench runs, there was universal audience ebulation when Luke made the perfect shot and the Death Star exploded. Yet everyone knew it was coming. Sure, the details may have been surprising (e.g., Han Solo coming to the rescue at the last moment), but the outcome was assured from the start.

With the prequels, the outcome was also known from the start ... it's the details that were disappointing (e.g., Anakin turning to the dark side easier than most of us might choose to cheat on a diet).


And foreknowlege of character fates or not ... I don't think the publics 'meh' with Hayden's Anakin, Natalie's Padme and (aside from the hearthrob factor) Ewan's Obi-Wan had anything to do with foreknowledge of their fates ... rather it was from poor writing, the poorest acting of any of their careers, nearly zero chemistry, and hardly any fun.

The public's delight with Mark's Luke, Carrie's Leah and Harrison's Han was because of their characters, their chemistry, their fun together and their seemingly great friendship. It had little to do with them being heroes or knowing they would come out on top. Audiences loved the the original trilogy's trio, and enjoyed their high-spirited adventures.

Audiences loathed the prequel trilogy's trio and deplored their decidedly low-spirit escapades.




The trilogies were yin and yang alright ... just maybe not in the way you posited earlier.




.
Post
#247183
Topic
The Merits of the Prequel Trilogy and the "Saga"
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247183/action/topic#247183
Time
Hmmm, I'm trying to get it about Episode I. I just can't see why anyone found it entertaining. Even when people eloquently give their reasons, I simply cannot seem to connect those dots.

I confess I found the movie better after I'd seen Sith. The ploddingness, the pointlessness, the roundabout story, the wooden performances, the needless set pieces that advanced nothing ... all seemed more artful than anything in the final film of the 28-year saga.


But Phantom Menace simply did not pass the sleep test.

That's where you live on Hollywood Boulevard for a week, or more, waiting for the premier of the movie. You stay awake for 36 hours before the film opens at midnight, but you take a healthy dose of hallucenogenic, recreational drugs for the event. The lights go down, "Star Wars" blasts across the screen, there's tons of excitement ... but, before long, you are sitting in a comfortable chair in a darkened theater.

If you fall asleep ... it's a bad Star Wars movie.


Phantom Menace failed my test.



(The test is not foolproof: while only two have failed the sleep test, I consider three of the movies to be lame ... oh, and it's not the threequels.)


* * * * * * *

Still, I don't think I'd like the 6 films as a single saga even if the prequels were good. The Anakin story, even if well told, just does nothing for me.



.

Post
#247166
Topic
The Merits of the Prequel Trilogy and the "Saga"
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247166/action/topic#247166
Time
That's the thing about backstory in general. It's almost always meant to be enjoyed in the context of already knowing what came "after" in time.

Stories are not necessarily told chronologically. Oftentimes, as with Star Wars and ... oh, Lord of the Rings is another good example ... the main story happens at a certain point in time, and the back story that is told later, but "happens" before, illuminates the main story ... having a completely different - and purposefully different effect than had the events simply been told in the order that they (fictitiously) happened.


* * * * * ** *

I, too, appreciate the yins and yangs of the prequel story points as they relate to the O.T. story points. But it doesn't change the fact that I find the prequels to be terrible films. Interesting story comparisons are simply not enough to make them good entertainment, imo. And were it not for their relation, storywise, to the Star Wars triliogy, they would hold no interest whatsoever.


I laugh to think of anyone watching these films for the first time in Chron Order. Hahaha, who would make it past the second one? How many hours of film can you watch before saying, "Hey, when's the good stuff? Why is this Star Wars crap so famous anyway?"

I know that not only would I not fall in love with the first trilogy ... if I managed to sit through it at all, you'd have to Clockwork Orange me to make me sit thru another three films!


.
Post
#247139
Topic
The Merits of the Prequel Trilogy and the "Saga"
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247139/action/topic#247139
Time
Although I cringe at the thought of anyone new to Star Wars watching the films 1 thru 6 their first time out, I actually revel that good old Episode 4 (ahem, aka Star Wars) will stand out as not part of the bunch.

Heheh, good.

It's not part of the bunch.


It's a stand-alone film (and in a class by itself, imho). I'm actually gratified it might seem out of place among the saga of six episodes. And it certainly might seem puzzling as having nothing whatever to do with the Anakin story.

But Darth Vader was a lot better before his back-story was dragged into it. And Star Wars does deserve to be considered separate and apart from that hokey story.



Because it is.


If it stands out like a sore thumb, I say ... (in my best Mr. Burns voice) Exxxxcellllent.




As for it not being as likeable as the others when considered in the context of a six-pak saga, I love the irony in that. Neither Empire nor Jedi nor Clones nor Sith nor Phantom Menace would have triggered a world-wide phenomena of adoration had any of them been the first Star Wars movie unleashed on the world.


Not as likeable!!. Feh!


.
Post
#247120
Topic
The Merits of the Prequel Trilogy and the "Saga"
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247120/action/topic#247120
Time
Originally posted by: COThen jump to ROTJ, and it is alien-fest. Now if you do an alien or creature right like Yoda or Jabba, it can come as cool as hell, and gives that richness to the movies. But ROTJ is littered with so many aliens in jabbas palace, and then you have the Ewoks, and then you even have aliens on the rebellion now!

Sorry for the tangent, but I thought the RotJ alienfest was a nifty way to add something new to the mix ... i.e, aliens everywhere. It was the color palette (very lush) and the wall-to-wall aliens that gave Return of the Jedi its own style, separate from the other two films. I think the alien-fest was one of its greatest assets ... and, because of that, I'm one of the few who didn't even hate the Ewoks!

But I'll wholeheartedly agree that non-humans have a hard-time delivering a credible performance. It's the reason I hate Darth Vader as the villain in The Empire Strikes Back. You can have all the James Earl fantasic voice in the world, but the character has absolutely NO facial expression. I found him laughable and utterly unable to carry an entire movie as the heavy. (Back in his rightful position as supporting villain in RotJ - - as he was in Star Wars - - I found Vader much easier to swallow.)



Ok, um end of tangent ... Now back to your regularly scheduled thread ripping the P.T. a new, ahem old one.


.

Post
#246922
Topic
What's Original '77 and What's Not?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246922/action/topic#246922
Time
I'm gonna compare EoD and new DVD myself. I have no idea if the EoD crawl is authentic, but I'm going to go with my gut reaction of "Thank the Maker" when I first saw it, and give it authentic status in my mind. It will be the grail, and if the new DVD pretty much matches it, thumbs up from me.

(boris' visual evidence posted above with the dark star crossing an "a" and a film scratch on a frame of an "e" was very convincing in its own right.)


.
Post
#246848
Topic
What's Original '77 and What's Not?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246848/action/topic#246848
Time
No, that's not exactly what I meant about my synch memory. I am thrilled to have the Tatooine reveal crash restored.

But I seem to remember other crescendos of the score being perfectly timed with the paragraph ends (much easier to achieve with those great one-word, hanging paragraph ends!).


Um, I freely admit I may have imagined this effect from simply listening to the score a zillion times, and picturing the crawl in my skull - - naturally synching up the various crescendos of the theme with the paragraphs as I imaginatively read them (loving the sensation of actually having to turn my head from side-to-side to read the text as it issues from the bottom of the giant screen, wider than my peripheral field of vision).


But speaking of comparisons to the EoD crawl ... whatever became of the controvery that the words "STAR WARS" disappear far earlier in relation to the crawl on the EoD version than on the new DVD? Completely subjectively, it seems to me that "STAR WARS" does indeed remain on the screen far too long into the crawl's appearance.



Don't get me wrong ... I'm eager and willing to be shown that the crawl is the real deal. And I incline in that direction right now.



And I'm glad I'm not insane about the subsequently added sound effects. (I hate being wrong about everything.)



.
Post
#246815
Topic
LFL {GAG ORDER MODE]
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246815/action/topic#246815
Time
Originally posted by: Bootfit
...only thing i want to know if members of this site and sites like Home Theatre Forum and Original Trilogy purists will be finally happy, if you know what i mean???


Please tell me what is wrong with being a purist.

(And whether I'm wrong in getting the distinct impression you write the word with a sneer?)


No, I will not be happy about a Star Wars DVD release until it is as pure as the driven snow. That is, 100% 1977 in ALL aspects - - including the soundtrack. They have 3 to choose from, so it shouldn't be that difficult to include only sounds that appeared on one of those three tracks.

But until they stop lying with 'Original Theatrical Release' on a version that has sounds added in the 80's, I will not be happy.


About a DVD release.


I remain plenty happy in life. Completely gay in fact. And with, well, a fairly giant penis to boot.


But there's nothing wrong with wanting the original theatrical versions of Star Wars or Fantasia or King Kong or Close Encounters. They are pieces of cinematic history ... and they only qualify as such in their ORIGINAL forms.



.
Post
#246775
Topic
LFL {GAG ORDER MODE]
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246775/action/topic#246775
Time
Raul, I, too, am sorry for the way you've been treated around here ... both by members and mods.

I think you were a tad too loose with hints about your LFL "whistleblower," but I don't recall reading anything that threatened to blow their cover.

As for your claims, I found them harmless - whether they are true or not.


I look forward to the 2007 box set. I'll be tempted to buy it if the packaging looks as cool as you predict ... but if it doesn't contain a beautifully restored and completely correct 1977 Theatrical Version of Star Wars, my interest plummets to zero.



Regardless of my personal preferences or beliefs about the 2007 release, I regret the shoddy treatment you have received around here. Please don't take it too much to heart; people on the internet have a right to be cynical (but not rude), and mods must tread very carefully about leaks from inside Lucasfilm.


.
Post
#246764
Topic
The Merits of the Prequel Trilogy and the "Saga"
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246764/action/topic#246764
Time
Wow, I actually agree with this comment about Revenge of the Sith ... though, um, not at all with the same sentiment ShiftyEyes posted with:
Originally posted by: ShiftyEyes

While watching it, there's a mood of constant doom that you can't shake off. It's like a nightmare. You know things are going to go down a slippery slope full of unimaginable horrors, and the worst thing about it is you can't wake up. You have no choice but to be subjected to it. That's the feeling I get out of the movie.

Yep, one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Like a descent into hell and a nightmare from which I could not escape.

The only Star Wars movie I never bothered to own, or to watch again past my initial theatrical experiences of horror (I gave it three chances, but it failed to emerge from complete suckitude).

I'll grant Sith one boon - - - it made Phantom Menace look like frelling Citizen Kane to me in comparison.



The only way the PT works as part of a saga is as a backstory only hazily remembered, thus perhaps accounting for the many ways it fails to relate to the real Star Wars saga, both logically, and thematically. But I prefer not to consider it as part of the "saga" at all. Greater lameness cannot be iimagined by me.



.
Post
#246459
Topic
OOT Anamorphic Widescreen 2007
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246459/action/topic#246459
Time
Whoa. So what if the dude's lying? Why go into a frenzy about it? That's what spoiled that other thread, so please let's not go down that road again (although at least it wouldn't be a total derail here).

It's the frenzy that should be the cause of locking a thread, not some information that may or not be leaky Lucasfilm gunk.


And I understand about skepticism on the internet. But it cracks me up that RichardPX3 quotes someone from Lucasfilm to debunk Raul. That company's PR deparment is a proven source of lies, whereas Raul's veracity is at least unknown.

In any event, if you can't give Raul the benefit of the doubt, fine. Just lay off the tirades, please.
Post
#246413
Topic
OOT Anamorphic Widescreen 2007
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246413/action/topic#246413
Time
Really, Raul - -you're gonna have to develop a thicker skin ... or it's going to start looking like you are about exactly what the naysayers say you are about, namely, being an internet attention seeker.

Otherwise, get real ... this is the internet - and when you make outlandish claims, they are going to be met with a great deal of skepticism on the part of many internet-saavy people.

So, if you're on the level ... I respectfully suggest you cool it with the outrage for not being believed on the face of your completely anonymous internet presence. Just take the doubt in stride, and continue with your LFL leaking regardless. If your purpose is to leak juicy information, please continue and stop fretting publicly about the doubters. That kind of thing just plays right into the hands of those who are calling you a liar.
Post
#246407
Topic
What's Original '77 and What's Not?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246407/action/topic#246407
Time
Yeah, I'm getting pretty darn convinced that it's the real opening crawl. boris' evidence really sold that for me (thanks, boris). Something about the music synch seems off to me, but I may just have romanticized the synch over the ensuing years of the missing crawl.


Alas, the sight of the crawl - while nice - didn't make me flip like I hoped it would. I've seen it too many times in the past couple of years (though only once actually attached to the movie). Heheh, when it took me totally by surprise in Empire of Dreams, I nearly sh!t myself ... but I guess the thrill is gone.



And I will still look forward to maybe a custom soundtrack bootleg someday ... because I won't be completely happy till I seventysevenize the entire frelling movie!
Post
#246069
Topic
What's Original '77 and What's Not?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246069/action/topic#246069
Time
Yeah, was Beru's original Aussie voice ever heard in any version?

Thanks for the responses so far, folks. They are in line with what I've surmised from my long experience, but I haven't done any actual research.

Of the "sweetening" sounds added post-'77, the surveillance camera explosions and the asteroid swooshes really stand out, bug me no end, and pull me right out of the 1977 euphoria granted me by the opening crawl - which, if it is a fake, is a darn good one. My gut tells me it's a fake, btw.


Of course, my gut also told me that 3PO's tractorbeam rant and a stormtrooper's "Close the blast doors" were in the 70mm, stereo mix that I saw many times June thru September in '77. After that, thru the end of the year, I saw the film in a second-run house that must have had the mono mix, and that's where I must have picked up those lines of dialogue. Hence, I will forgive their absense from the newly released DVD.


I wish those later-added sound effects didn't bug me so much. Other folks are bugged by the ghosting, the grain, the non-anamorphicality ... but I am only bothered by the non-seventysevenness in a product labled "original theatrical release." Bah.


(oh well, to each his own quibble.)


Post
#245992
Topic
You've Failed, Your Highness.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/245992/action/topic#245992
Time
I love the analysis (and, bizarrely enough, was looking for the proper way to address an Emperor on a completely unrelated matter) .... but, alas, I don't think any of it entered into the thoughts behind the screenplay. I simply think the much simpler "Your Highness" was easier on the tongue, easier on the minds of the audience, and a merely expedient way to convey what the script wanted to convey - without doing somersalts of language.
Post
#245973
Topic
What's Original '77 and What's Not?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/245973/action/topic#245973
Time
Quibbles about best visual quality aside, I found it so pleasant to watch the (by and large) unaltered, original version of Star Wars on DVD.

But I'm left with the nagging suspicion that, since all but the crawl is from the same source as the 1993 laserdiscs, a few things (mostly in the audio mix) are not '77 original. Of course, since there were different "authentic" audio mixes for the 1977 release, it's possible that sounds I am personally unfamiliar with from the many 70mm screenings I was fortunate enough to view were, in truth, featured on the 77 mono mix.

So, let's test our arcane Star Wars knowledge .... ready? Here we go ...


1) Coming out of hyperspace in the Falcon cockpit. Those swooshie sounds made by passing Alderaan asteroid debris. I first heard them in the second or perhaps third VHS release (the first in "HiFi" sound, heheh, remember that?). I thought they were new sound effects, but someone here in some thread recently alleged those asteroid sound effects were part of the 1977 mono mix? Anyone know the truth on this???

2) C-3POs tractor-beam location speech, and "Close the blast doors." Does anyone know difinitively which 1977 audio mix featured these lines? I remember hearing them from the get-go, and the first dozen or so times I saw Star Wars was in 70mm (the stereo mix). Yet many have claimed these bits of dialogue were only on the mono mix. Can anyone shed some light on this?

3) Prisoner transfer from Cell Block 1138. When Luke, Han and Chewbacca shoot it out with the Imperials in the cell block, I heard some sound effects, new to me, on that same "HiFi" VHS release and in every subsequent release ... specifically, the really loud sound of glass breaking (more like kicking in a tube-TV screen) every time a laser blast hit a surveillance camera. Anyone know whether these were on the '77 mono track, or if they were added later?

3) Ok, on the visual realm. Same cellblock scene (and perhaps others). Has anyone yet determined if the blaster hits are the "toned-down" versions of revisionism, or whether they are the slightly more violent '77 originals?

4) Lastly, the long-debated matter of the opening crawl. So much pre-release talk about it. Well, the DVD's been out for a week! Anyone care to venture a final answer? Original or a well-intentioned copy?


Any answers or insights will be greatly appreciated.


Thanks.
Post
#245578
Topic
"BUT ANAMORPHIC ENHANCEMENT ALTERS THE MOVIES!!!"
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/245578/action/topic#245578
Time
ooooh, a $20 gamble that there might not be a future release, or it might be a long, long time till one. Sheesh, I spend more than that on lunch.

In the meantime, as poorly as the DVD looks in comparison to how it could, it nonetheless IS the currently best picture quality legally available.

You can whine all day about non-anamorphic and a shoddy restoration of a questionable master print. It doesn't change the fact that a film released a bunch of times over the decades has tended to get better-looking with each release. This release is no exception to that pattern.

The future may, and likely will, hold even better-looking releases of Star Wars and its sequels. But my $20 was well-spent ... even if that better-looking release comes as early as the 30th-anniversary next May.