Sign In

Shopping Maul

User Group
Members
Join date
12-Oct-2013
Last activity
17-Oct-2020
Posts
458

Post History

Post
#1381273
Topic
How do you feel about Star Wars being re-titled A New Hope in 1981?
Time

This will sound crazy but I just had the most bizarre flashback whilst watching TESB last night. I remembered (after 40 years!) that when I first saw TESB in the theatre and ‘Star Wars’ flashed up on the screen, I thought there had been a mistake and the cinema had accidentally loaded the first film into the projector. Of course the ‘Episode V’ thing followed and all was well.

It’s ironic given that we’ve been discussing the confusion of not having episode titles post-TESB but for me, however briefly, it was the episode title thing that threw me. Did anyone else have this experience?

Post
#1378053
Topic
How do you feel about Star Wars being re-titled A New Hope in 1981?
Time

StarkillerAG said:

Shopping Maul said:

Anakin Starkiller said:

Expecting or worse demanding the film not to get a subtitle to match the others is completely backwards. I just can’t wrap my head around the concept of people wanting to call it just “Star Wars”. That’s needlessly confusing and makes it stand out like a sore thumb.

As for the title itself I think it’s simple and elegant, and I like it.

It was called ‘Star Wars’ for 20 years and no-one got confused. Just saying’…

It was just called Star Wars for 4 years, actually. As soon as Empire started the whole subtitle thing, they changed the previous movie to make it match. And the “Star Wars” title may have worked in a time when it was the first Star Wars movie chronologically, but with the prequels I don’t think it makes sense. It just causes unnecessary confusion.

Yes, it was technically retitled in '81 but no-one bought into it. Even the video releases up until 1992 or thereabouts simply called it ‘Star Wars’. We bought ‘Star Wars’ action figures and ‘Star Wars’ lunchboxes and no-one said “hey, can’t wait to get ‘A New Hope’ on video” until the prequel era.

I’m not necessarily disputing the current logic of the subtitle but to say it’s backwards is actually backwards. Like all of Lucas’ retcons he should’ve crafted his future movies to be in line with what was established rather than roll with his usual ‘original intent’ crap. Star Wars was one of the most groundbreaking movies in cinema history and a) we can’t buy it on blu ray and b) we don’t know what to call the damn thing.

Post
#1377943
Topic
How do you feel about Star Wars being re-titled A New Hope in 1981?
Time

Anakin Starkiller said:

Expecting or worse demanding the film not to get a subtitle to match the others is completely backwards. I just can’t wrap my head around the concept of people wanting to call it just “Star Wars”. That’s needlessly confusing and makes it stand out like a sore thumb.

As for the title itself I think it’s simple and elegant, and I like it.

It was called ‘Star Wars’ for 20 years and no-one got confused. Just saying’…

Post
#1377260
Topic
Opinion: Return Of The Jedi is Very Underrated. Do You Agree?
Time

StarkillerAG said:

Shopping Maul said:

Quite the contrary, I think ROTJ is a terrible film that only gets a free pass because it’s in the OT (just my opinion - I’m in no way seeking to insult anyone here!).

Well, you think TROS is what ROTJ should have been like, so I don’t think you really have the right to criticize other people’s opinions. (I’m not being entirely serious here)

As always no offence taken - I always enjoy our chats!

But you’re absolutely correct. I think all of the ST films are just copies of their predecessors (TFA is ANH, TLJ is TESB with a dash of ROTJ, TROS is ROTJ on steroids etc), but TROS is the only one that feels like an improvement on the original to me. I could probably go into why, but that may be a rabbit hole no-one wants to venture down…

Post
#1374982
Topic
Reconstructing the Sequel Trilogy
Time

StarkillerAG said:

I understand that you don’t want to undermine the ROTJ ending (and that’s something I’ve struggled with as well), but I’m not sure that Mothma is the right character to make that happen. Ignoring her lack of screen time for a second, one of her defining traits is that she was part of the Rebellion from the beginning. She basically founded the beta version of the Rebellion in ROTS, and her biggest role was as the leader of the entire organization in Rogue One. I doubt that she would be an Imperial agent all along, given how long she’s been there.

The problem, then, is who should be the leader of the Rebellion? Maybe it could be some disgruntled Imperial leader, pissed that the Rebellion won so easily, and trying to rebuild the Empire to be stronger than before. Picture Moff Gideon from Mando, just with much more power and resources.

Well the formation of the rebellion in ROTS didn’t make the cut, so I’d place that in the canon alongside other such deleted scenes that don’t necessarily qualify canon-wise (ie Luke and Leia’s extremely romantic moments in the TESB medical centre or the conversations between Jedi in the prequels that were reshot in another locations). And I’m discounting Rogue One because obviously in my scenario RO would have been considered in the overall plan re Mothma. So my canon version is the 6 original movies as they appeared in the cinemas. In that canon she’s simply the nice lady in ROTJ who announces the Death Star stuff. But you might be right in stating there’s just too much overall lore surrounding Mothma (outside of the 6 films) to make it convincing.

Post
#1374945
Topic
Reconstructing the Sequel Trilogy
Time

StarkillerAG said:

Sorry about that, I edited the post. I was having a bit of a rough time last evening, so I guess I just wanted to vent my frustration. I just can’t see MON MOTHMA, of all people, being the real villain all along. I know she also had a bit role in two other movies, but I can’t imagine her being in cahoots with Palpatine the whole time.

Hey, caught your original reply (and no offence taken although I appreciate the support oojason!) - my reasoning is that any sequels really have to contend with the reality that ROTJ was a pretty definitive conclusion. The only possibilities are along the lines of the Empire simply reconstituting itself (like the ST) or there being an entirely new threat (like the SW comics did in the mid-80s) and neither idea is particularly compelling.

The Mothma idea (for me) serves the purpose of honouring the ROTJ conclusion entirely (unlike the Disney ST which is often accused of reverse-engineering both Luke’s and the rebels’ victory) whilst still planting a seed that could legitimately restart the whole fiasco. Mon Mothma (and bearing in mind I have no knowledge of Mothma/Bothan EU - I’m going by the OT alone and not including deleted prequel stuff or Rogue One) is enough of a beloved character to be a compelling figure in the New Republic of a sequel series. If she had been a double-agent in ROTJ (which I still maintain would make that “many Bothans died” scene really disturbing in a cool way) then she’d be in a prime position to logically orchestrate the other necessary elements of a sequel series - she’d have a legitimate beef with the rebels, she’d have the political clout to gather allies from within, she’d be close to Ben Solo and be a worthy corrupting mentor, and because she’s a beloved character it would be something of a shock to have her be the new Emperor (and a double-shock when ROTJ is revisited).

I never made it through the Thrawn trilogy, but it seems to me it was still a case of ‘Empire reconstitutes itself’ (I could be wrong obviously). Marvel in the 80s had space ninjas from outside the galaxy. The ST had Snoke who turned out to be a clone made by Palpatine or…something? I mean all of these stories - good and bad - simply exist because we want more Star Wars. I think the Mothma idea presents a legitimate reason for ROTJ to not be the final word whilst still preserving the integrity of its arcs.

Post
#1374770
Topic
Reconstructing the Sequel Trilogy
Time

I’d have the First Order being created on the sly by a female Sith Lord. In the end it would be revealed that she’s Mon Mothma, creating the First Order from within similar to Palpatine’s manipulation of things in the PT. The backstory would be that she’d been in cahoots with Palpatine all along, supplying the false information about Death Star II to the Rebellion in ROTJ (and killing the Bothan spies herself) in exchange for power at Sheev’s side. This trilogy would be her revenge for the Endor fiasco. As a trusted politician and friend of Leia, she’d be in a prime position to bend the ear of young Ben Solo, filling his head with tales of his grandfather and the glorious vision that was undermined by his bad uncle Luke. Her dual identity would echo Palpatine’s in the PT but in this instance the audience would be oblivious until the end.

The reason I’m sold on this idea is because it gives the ST legitimate ties to the OT that in no way undermines the ROTJ conclusion/victory but still gives valid reasons for the cycle to continue. It would also give that Mothma moment in ROTJ (“many Bothans died…to bring us this information”) a whole new dimension.

Post
#1374224
Topic
Episode IX: The Rise Of Skywalker - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

Anakin Starkiller said:

Luke and Leia being related is just as embarrassing as Rey Palpatine. Okay, well technically not as much since it didn’t contradict the last film, but the idea is just as cringey.

The Luke/Leia thing is infinitely worse than Rey Palpatine. Firstly Luke clearly had romantic feelings for Leia in eps 4 and 5. Secondly there was nothing whatsoever to indicate she was a Force-sensitive Skywalker all along. Thirdly it contradicts Yoda’s entire “too old to begin the training” thing since Leia hadn’t had a lick of training when he announced the ‘other’. And finally, the most overlooked one, Leia was a prisoner on Cloud City when Yoda said “there is another” - immediately after stating a) “now matters are worse” (meaning he couldn’t have known Luke or Leia would survive the Bespin fiasco) and b) he had just insisted Luke sacrifice Han and Leia for the greater good!

Rey’s being a Palpatine at least made some sense of the fact that she had godlike powers for no good reason.

Post
#1371722
Topic
What is the main Star Wars Saga about?
Time

Anakin Starkiller said:

You’re gonna to explain that one.

Sorry, was this directed at me? I probably didn’t explain myself very well.

I was responding to Omni and Sparky’s posts about where the saga fits thematically (and I would say tonally, logically etc etc) for some folks. Many people feel the PT doesn’t sit well with the OT, many think Star Wars should’ve stopped with the original movie, lots of people disregard the ST entirely, and some even see TLJ as a natural ‘ending’ and disregard TROS.

For me every SW film since (and including) ROTJ has been a bit of a mess in terms of fitting in naturally with ANH and TESB. TROS was the first truly immersive SW experience I’ve had since TESB in 1980 and, as a result, really feels like it exists in that universe. Since it’s basically a rip-off of ROTJ (but done better in my opinion) it fills that space in my head-canon that ROTJ once occupied in terms of wrapping things up.

Obviously this isn’t a ‘canon’ I could logically share. It’s not like I could play eps 4,5, and 9 to a stranger and have it make sense. It’s just a personal thing.

Post
#1371403
Topic
What is the main Star Wars Saga about?
Time

Omni said:

SW can be seen as completely detached from the other 8. It was the only one made without the ideas of the saga in place, and it shows. It really does stand alone and I can never watch it without getting the feeling that the story could well have been over at the end of it.

Lucas can say what he wants, I don’t see his 6 part saga as about “The Tragedy of Darth Vader”, but I get that, original film aside, it is a way one could see it. I’m not at all that bummed that the ST “trumped” that understanding, though. Thematically, however, I think the ST kind of falls short. It has one movie that left something to be desired (TFA) one movie that tried giving it all meaning through beautiful character studies and journeys (TLJ) and ??? (TROS), so depending on my mood, the Star Wars saga is either one movie long, three movies long, six movies long or seven movies long, with TLJ serving as an epilogue.

But then again, I think the question of the thread was already answered with great mastery by NFBisms and DominicCobb a couple pages back.

Back when I used to marathon the PT and OT, it always felt like Eps 4 and 5 just didn’t fit. ROTJ did, for me at least, seem to be in the same universe as the PT.
So when I saw TROS (with very little in the way of expectations) I was very surprised to note that it felt like a natural successor to TESB. It was as if I’d quit Star Wars in general after 1980, ignored the movies in between, and then caved and gone to see TROS. So my head-canon goes 4,5 and 9 - ridiculous as that may sound! I have to say though, if TESB wasn’t so damn brilliant I’d be a 'Star Wars ‘77 only’ guy for sure.

Post
#1354557
Topic
What is the main Star Wars Saga about?
Time

NFBisms said:

It’s pretty simple I’d think: Star Wars as a series is about storytelling, and the act of passing stories down. It’s rooted in a fun genre pastiche, with the original film(s) as a classic monomyth set in a storied world. The prequels then set out to deconstruct the ideals inherent in those stories from a more sociopolitical angle (The Empire rooted in capitalism, the classical masculine ideals are problematic, etc.) then the sequels tr(ied) to make sense of it all from a postmodernist perpsective: why are these stories important to us? How do you apply their lessons to real and imperfect people?

On every level, from Luke’s quest to fulfill his father’s legacy, to George’s borrowing of references, to even its cultural impact thereafter - Star Wars is about legends and how we interpret them. How the Jedi interpet their code, how Luke chooses to see his father, how Rey or Kylo see history, and their futures.

imo

I second the above - perfect post! Can’t believe I missed it.

Post
#1353914
Topic
<strong>Empire Strikes Back</strong> - 'Behind The Scenes / Making Of' <strong>images</strong> thread
Time

SilverWook said:

Shopping Maul said:

SilverWook said:

I sometimes forget how physically and mentally grueling ESB must have been for Mark. Buried in snow, repeatedly slapped by a Wampa hand on a pole, dunked in a giant aquarium, weeks if not months on a mudhole of a set with only Artoo, a rubber Muppet and various live reptiles to act opposite of. Not to mention the Vader duel!

On top of all that, he and his wife were expecting their first child during production. That’s stressful enough without being the lead in a Star Wars film to worry about.

Plus the weight training which apparently he hated! Mark was in killer shape on Empire. I saw an interview somewhere where he said he’d assumed he’d have to up the ante for Jedi - get even bigger and wear an eyepatch! I’d have been all for it (it’s a Conan thing)…

Call me Luke…

‘Escape from Anchorhead’- I like it!

Post
#1353552
Topic
<strong>Empire Strikes Back</strong> - 'Behind The Scenes / Making Of' <strong>images</strong> thread
Time

SilverWook said:

I sometimes forget how physically and mentally grueling ESB must have been for Mark. Buried in snow, repeatedly slapped by a Wampa hand on a pole, dunked in a giant aquarium, weeks if not months on a mudhole of a set with only Artoo, a rubber Muppet and various live reptiles to act opposite of. Not to mention the Vader duel!

On top of all that, he and his wife were expecting their first child during production. That’s stressful enough without being the lead in a Star Wars film to worry about.

Plus the weight training which apparently he hated! Mark was in killer shape on Empire. I saw an interview somewhere where he said he’d assumed he’d have to up the ante for Jedi - get even bigger and wear an eyepatch! I’d have been all for it (it’s a Conan thing)…

Post
#1352851
Topic
I love the OOT fan projects here - yet still want an official unaltered OT release. You too?
Time

In theory yes, because I hate that the films don’t exist anymore. It’s heartbreaking and infuriating that when I talk Star Wars at work with folks in their 20s, they have no concept whatsoever of an original theatrical version. I hate seeing Lucas celebrated at SW events and crapping on about his mythological motifs while the very movies that made him a household name have been suppressed by him. I hate that Gary Kurtz didn’t live to see and hold a pristine DVD/BluRay/4K copy of the groundbreaking films he produced. It’s just ridiculous.

For me personally I don’t care. I have versions for personal use that I’m more than happy with. I can’t help but think Disney would screw it up somehow anyway - mess with the sound mix or do something dumb with the colours or sleeve art. So yes, an official release on principal but I’m happy with what I have.

Post
#1349792
Topic
Small details that took you <em><strong>FOREVER</strong></em> to notice in the <em>Star Wars</em> films
Time

Broom Kid said:

Thing that only just now occurred to me:

Why would anyone on the Millennium Falcon be surprised that the Death Star wasn’t a moon? Moons orbit planets. There are no planets around. Alderaan never even had a moon to begin with.

If I remember rightly there was a line in the novelisation about it. When Luke says “heading for that small moon” Han says (something like) “strange, I wasn’t aware Alderaan had any moons”…

Post
#1349611
Topic
The Empire Strikes Back - at 40...
Time

Slavicuss said:

As with STAR WARS’ 40th anniversary celebrations, THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK is shamefully unavailable (officially) in its original release form.

I see nothing here to celebrate.

I here ya! It’s a strange world where my favourite movie of all time has come out in 4K with new artwork and I totally do not care. I guess Lucas has saved me a ton of money if nothing else…

Post
#1348020
Topic
<strong>Empire Strikes Back</strong> - 'Behind The Scenes / Making Of' <strong>images</strong> thread
Time

ZkinandBonez said:

BTW, does anyone know why they didn’t build the entire set for some of these shots, like in the photo above? Al the windows are clearly there in some BTS photos, and its really obvious (pre-SE anyway) that all but the central window has been added in post when you watch the actual movie.

I’m assuming that middle shot is from ROTJ? They built the entire bridge for Jedi but only the single window for Empire (as far as I know).

Post
#1344334
Topic
<strong>The Rise Of Skywalker</strong> — Official Review and Opinions Thread
Time

I guess I just don’t understand Jedi pacifism. It’s okay to go around fighting with swords or killing clones/stormtroopers - and taking out an entire Death Star full of people gets one a rousing cheer and a soothing Obi Wan voiceover. But if you’re stuck alone in a room with the two most evil guys in the galaxy who are on a killing spree, apparently retaliatory aggression is a path to eternal darkness.

I loved the showdown in TROS. Firstly Rey was actually tempted with an impossible choice rather than being simply goaded into anger. Secondly her actions had a direct bearing on the battle. Thirdly she made the ultimate sacrifice - she died! You don’t get more selfless than that.

Post
#1343353
Topic
<strong>The Rise Of Skywalker</strong> — Official Review and Opinions Thread
Time

Ryan-SWI said:

idir_hh said:

When I think of Rey’s character, what come to mind is an A-sexual Xbox avatar.

That’s an insult to Xbox avatars.

RogueLeader said:

You know, it is kind of surprising that they went into this trilogy knowing the main character would be female, but they didn’t seem to even consider hiring a female writer. I mean, clearly there were female cooks in the kitchen early on, like Kennedy and Hart. And I’m not saying men can’t write women characters, but I feel like Rey might’ve lacked something that a female writer really could’ve provided for her.

Rey is far from the biggest issue with Disney’s films. Even if she were expertly written the trilogy would still be hot trash from a story perspective.

I despise TFA and TLJ but can fully understand how someone may enjoy those films… I guess. I absolutely cannot fathom how anyone could defend TROS without being drunk out of their mind; it’s the cinematic equivalent of a computer generated algorithm shorting out while the Star Wars theme plays in the background and a 5 year old smashes 500 million dollar action figures against the computer terminal. It is probably the single most perfect example of a corporate-controlled dumpster fire we’ll ever see.

I’m completely sober but I love TROS. I won’t go into exhaustive detail, but I can break it down to this - TFA was a clone of ANH, TLJ was a clone of TESB (with a dash of ROTJ), and TROS was unsurprisingly ROTJ on steroids. So when I watch TFA I naturally just feel like swapping it out for ANH. Ditto TLJ and TESB. Can’t beat the originals right?

TROS is the exception for me. I think it’s better than ROTJ - indeed for me it’s what I wish ROTJ had been. I don’t know if you’ve seen my previous posts but I did not expect this at all. I was very pleasantly surprised. So yeah, I’m happy to defend it while sipping nothing stronger than tea!

Post
#1342686
Topic
I'll never understand the attitude of people who oppose the release of the unaltered original trilogy.
Time

imperialscum said:

Shopping Maul said:

I was thinking “no, you don’t get to celebrate 40 years of a movie you’ve deliberately tried to bury. You can celebrate 40 years in 2037”.

What do you mean 2037? He buried the 1997 version even more than the original.

So if it is not the original version, then it is all the same shit right? This kind of attitude is the symptom of the same problem I was describing in my earlier post.

I meant no offence, I was just making a generalisation based on when the SEs overtook the originals as a concept. I mean the originals were tinkered with too - different mixes, different opening crawls etc - but I was merely referring to 1997 as the particular line in the sand where the original theatrical films were written off and the new Star Wars (with its conga-line of versions/changes/additions to follow) became a thing.

Post
#1342252
Topic
I'll never understand the attitude of people who oppose the release of the unaltered original trilogy.
Time

I’ve tried to avoid being a ‘hater’ on this point, but the moment when I really knew just how pissed I am about this was when I saw a Youtube clip of Lucas on stage for the Star Wars 40th anniversary. People were cheering and waving lightsabers while Lucas crapped on about mythological motifs etc - I was thinking “no, you don’t get to celebrate 40 years of a movie you’ve deliberately tried to bury. You can celebrate 40 years in 2037”.