Tiptup

Originally posted by: Obi Jeewhyen
And I agree that it was a poor bit of editing, done in service of great pacing, that shows Vader one moment on Cloud City and the next on a StarDestroyer.

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic

Maybe it isn't so much "how dare Lucas contradict what I had assumed" but more of, "I really prefer the way I was looking at it before".

Originally posted by: Han Solo VS Indiana Jones

I didn't think Batman looked all that silly in the fights from the other films, but that's just me.

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic

Every time [Lucas] nails something down that contradicts something we assumed, there will be one of two reactions. 1) So I was wrong about that. Interesting. or 2) How dare Lucas not remain consistent to what I had imagined.

Neither reaction is "wrong" or anythying.

Originally posted by: Han Solo VS Indiana Jones

One of the few things I disliked about Batman Begins - I couldn't tell who was hitting who and where in some of those fights.

Originally posted by: Han Solo VS Indiana Jones

Enya is ALWAYS good.

Yeah, I agree there. I own some of her albums and like listening to them. Some of the songs might be a bit dull at times but never anything bad as far as I know.


Originally posted by: Han Solo VS Indiana Jones

Don't virtually all films today have this problem?

Originally posted by: Knightmessenger
I never read the books but what bothered me tremendously about the movies was the mucked up colors and digital grading. It looked so unnatural that it took me out of the movie. It was like having a different one of the component RGB cables not connected every 10 minutes.

Some of the digital re-coloring was a bit overdone and sloppy, but I'm pretty sure that, in general, I'd rather have the movie with it than without it. Though I agree with your later statement that Legend is a beautiful film to watch from a visual standpoint (as well as others).


Originally posted by: Knightmessenger
Some scenes (usually overbrightened and having that painful Enya singing) were way overdramaticized.
The camera work during the fight scenes was atrocious. Don't give me this crap about trying to convey chaos, watch the battle scenes in slow motion. Notice how rarely the camera shows anything in frame much less in focus.

Originally posted by: Obi Jeewhyen
Interesting, though, that people seem willing to give J.R.R. a pass on revising The Hobbit to fit with the later-composed The Lord of the Rings .... yet Lucas gets no such pass for sticking Hayden in Return of the Jedi, or deleting Yub Nub.

Originally posted by: Wesyeed
Personally, I remember the real obi-wan's words about him being amazed by how strongly the force was with Anakin, not by how many mutant cells he had in his system. This implies a natural gift to me that is also a hereditary trait more in the sense of a spiritual bonding families have (My spirit is of my parent's spirit etc.) but not limited to being just that.

Originally posted by: Nanner Split

Man, and I was thinking about buying that game one of these days too, but you have to go and ruin the ending. Thanks a lot, spanky.

Originally posted by: lord3vil
The art of capturing emotions and impressions like these in the finished product in a way the audience can easily relate to has to be the most difficult art of cinema, and there just isn't a single director out there who's ever been able to do it consistently and at will. So even though I don't think the movies quite fulfill their true potential, I don't blame Jackson for it. I think his attempt was honest and commendable and even though it fell a little short of the mark, it's still quite good.

I agree. In fact I thought the movies were fantastic. My problem, is that as a fan of Tolkien, I cannot accept a number of certain, absolutely needless changes to his story for Jackson's films. It cannot be argued that the nature of cinema required them in any way. But, that's not a debate for this thread.


Originally posted by: Scruffy

Jackson's movies, Bakshi's movie, the Rankin/Bass movies ... if we accept the conceit of LotR, that it's a translation of one historical document about ancient events, then all of these coexist with Tolkien's translation. Tolkien's translation of the Red Book may be the most interesting and artistically valuable of the lot, but that should not stop other artists from using telling historical fiction about the Third Age. In fact, it seems the main obstacle to that is the Tolkien Estate.

Originally posted by: starkiller
Back on topic:
Haven't they already "announced" a SE Phantom Menace with CGI Yoga replacing the puppet??

Originally posted by: Darth_Evil
Excuse me, but one of the definitions of trolling is constanstly steering threads off topic.

Originally posted by: Scruffy
In this fictional universe, there can even be action-adventure movies based on the Red Book, and no one complains about "canon" or authorial intent because historical fiction frequently deviates from historical records, which themselves frequently deviate from historical truth.

Originally posted by: Darth_Evil
I think trolling is a perfectly reasonable ground for banning, and if it isn't, there is something seriously wrong here.

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic

I agree that the "I am your father" is ruined for the audience, but I think it still works on a dramatic level to have the surprise be just for Luke. We see that Anakin is Vader in the prequels, then we see Ben flat out lying to Luke about Vader killing Anakin, so after Yoda and Obi-Wan beg Luke not to leave before he is trained because he's not ready and he leaves anyway, we get to that part where Vader tells him the truth and the audience then wonders... Crap, how is Luke going to take being lied to by Obi-Wan? Is he going to be able to still trust his teachings? Is he going to say screw Obi-Wan, he's no better than Vader as Anakin said about Palpatine vs the Jedi?

We don't find out until the next movie, which starts out with Luke dressed up like Evil Anakin in black robes, force choking gammorean guards and telling Jabba not to underestimate his power.

To me this whole dynamic ratchets up the tension quite a bit with the way it all flows now.

First, those questions are absolutely needless in those scenes and only serve to distract from the story’s emotions. (What good are they to ask at those points?) The OT is not enhanced by those thoughts in any way as far as I can tell. At best, what happens in the OT only serves to enhance the PT.

Second, you don’t need the PT to have the concern that Luke might go to the dark side. The OT sets that up sufficiently and beautifully. And besides, let’s be realistic here, there’s only so far that kind of suspense can go. Seriously, he’s the freakin’ hero of the story! Anyone who cannot invest faith in his goodness probably isn’t enjoying the movies in the first place.




Heh, if you can argue for that assessment without the slightest reservation, then I truly feel sorry for you. The Darth Vader revelation is awesome every single time for me. It has NEVER been “fleeting.” You just have to watch movies with a fresh mind and forget the context of scenes that are out of order. It makes for very enjoyable viewing. I never knew you were so feeble, Go-Mer.


Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic

Now, to keep that surprise, you have to show a first time viewer the classic trilogy first. The problem with that is you lose most of the surprises in the prequels. You know going in that Palpatine is Sidious, you know going in that the Jedi are going to be made all but extinct, you know going in that only Yoda and Ben survive, you know going in that Anakin does not do the right thing in the end, you know going in that Padme won't survive. You know going in that the Republic will become the Emprie. The list goes on and on.

All for one surprise that only works the first time you see it.

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic

Well I don't think personal values are evil or less important than universal values, it's a balancing act between the two.

Hear you nothing that I say?

If your motivations and actions are pure, then there is no conflict between universal and personal values. The two can work together perfectly and in that situation you would have no need to balance anything. It’s very simple and you should be able to follow what I’m saying here.




Heh, so you agree with me that the line was logically stupid, but you enjoy it because it then shows that Obi-Wan is evil too?

LOL


Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic

We have a situation where Anakin has been told since 9 that he is "the chosen one". That the Force created him for the purpose of "bringing balance" to the force. He has the Jedi in one ear talking about what they see as what's good. He has the Emperor in the other ear talking about what he thinks is "right". He knows that all the chaos and war are the direct result of these two Force based religions, and as you pointed out, the Jedi aren't exactly saints in the whole matter either.

He knows Sidious is evil. He sees all the ways the Jedi have been acting selfishly, against the Jedi Code itself. To me it isn't such a huge leap to see why he would see fit to judge them all. After all, he was bringing balance back to the Force. If he was the chosen one, then why shouldn't he be the one to make them agree?

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
I may not know all that for sure, but it does fit with what the movies show, and that does support the idea that Lucas has been consistent about the Force all along.

Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape

I agree. But it would have worked a lot better if it had just been kept that way. The Hobbit told the lie, and the lie was revealed in LOTR. It makes less sense when he went back to The Hobbit and changed it so that Gollum doesn't openly bargain the ring. Now we have Bilbo's story telling the truth, yet he admits the non-existant lie in LOTR.

Originally posted by: Wesyeed

It's like a class system where once there was only level of experience and skill. Jedi are to be classed as a mutants, than a mysteriously cool supernatural warriors. Yoda could train every day for 400 years but never achieve enough force power as someone with more 'size' than him? I can not accept this.

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Wait a minute, Qui-Gon talks about how they speak to you, and tell you the will of the Force, but that's just the way he's looking at it.
It would be the same thing as if he said your ears speak to you, and tell you what sounds are happening around you.

You don't know that. For all you know, Qui-Gon's way of looking at things is the official word of truth in the Star Wars universe.




First, when I said "vaguely" hereditary, I meant that the stories were vague in terms of how it was hereditary. We didn't know how it worked in a hereditary fashion or to what degree it was hereditary.

Second, you cannot say for sure that the "extinction" of Jedi was not mostly due to destruction of their order. Without proper training, how can there be Jedi? There are many possibilities to explain the use of that term.


Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic

The Force is still everywhere, it's just living beings have Midichlorians that allow them to commune with "the Force".

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
No, Midichlorians are what allows life to exist in the first place. The Jedi communicate with the force through them in the same way they hear sounds with their ears.

No, Qui-Gon specifically said that midichlorians speak to Jedi and "tell" them the will of the force. They aren't just organs or appendages. They're supposed to be intelligent.



Why can't they be both? It's not like the Force wasn't hereditary in the classic trilogy. I figure with the Midichlorians, we have a solid basis to say it's about all life, not just the Skywalkers.

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Midichlorians are loosely based on Mitochondria, which are a real organism that lives inside every cell of every being here on Earth.

When scientists first discovered them, some of them theorized that they could hold the secret to the origin of life itself. They speculated that it was these mitochondria that came along to co-exist with single celled organisms which allowed them to grow into multi-celled organisms.

A lot of religious groups felt that we shouldn't even be studying about mitochondria, because they could serve to "explain" God. Just as a lot of us accused the Midichlorian concept of "explaining" the Force.

The truth is they do no such thing. As a lot of you pointed out, they only add more questions to the ones we already had.