imperialscum

CO said:

imperialscum said:

Let me put it like this. How many people watches Star Wars, let's say annually, and how many does that with Matrix?

 I think its tough to compare The Matrix to Star Wars simply because one movie is Rated R and the other movie is Rated PG, and just by that The Matrix will never have as big an audience.

If Star Wars was rated R in 1977, then it wouldn't have reached all young kids like myself, and would have been just as popular as a huge blockbuster like Jaws, you are losing a whole demographic. 

Heck, I remember when I went to see Matrix Reloaded in 2003, the Theaters were really cracking down on kids under 17.  I had a bunch of highschool kids come up to me and asked me if I could buy them tickets for the movie the same way I used to stand outside liquor stores before I was 21 years old.

I will say that The Matrix totally owned The Phantom Menace in 1999 as the 'must see' movie, and that is when I started to notice a chink in the armor of the Star Wars brand.  (Then Spiderman beat Attack of the Clones at the 2002 Boxoffice was the final blow to Star Wars being the #1 Franchise it was before.)  The Matrix dazzled people with its special effects that year, along with a really intersting story (it wasn't some dumb Michael Bay summer movie).

Well I can certainly agree with Matrix having a good story. But the "whole demographic" you speak about (i.e. the teenagers) were (speaking from experience) almost exclusively attracted by its fancy action, violence, slow-motion fighting and shooting scenes. You take that away and you get PG rating but then you lose the interest of most of the kids as well. In Star Wars that wasn't the case.

TV's Frink said:

Liar?

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/A-New-Hope-was-released-at-just-the-right-time/post/677343/#TopicPost677343

As for the rest, you can call it slight exaggeration, but the essential point stands.  I forget if English is your first language but you need a refresher either way.

This proves exactly what I said. I did not even mention Matrix until you highlighted it. In that post I was replying in general to the films Anchorhead mentioned AND all similar that he did not specifically mention. Then you highlighted Matrix and made it "the key one". Not me.

TV's Frink said:

Dude tried to claim that The Matrix (among others, but it's the key one) was forgotten one year later

"Dude" did not make any specific mentions of Matrix until YOU somehow dragged it out of Anchorhead's (note - NOT my) post. So it wasn't "the key one" until you made it.

TV's Frink said:

then tried to claim people don't watch it anymore

I have never said that. That's your second lie in one sentence.

TV's Frink said:

or at least nowhere near as often as Star Wars.

Now that's something completely different, ehh... BUT to be precise, I did not even say that. I asked a question how many people watches each of them and how often. And that's the third lie in the same sentence.

Now that we went through this analysis, I can confirm your last accusation. I do think that it is the case (despite not specifically saying so). We don't have the data to prove it but I am pretty confident I am right about that.

TV's Frink said:

hairy_hen said:

This is a foolish comparison.

 Repeated 'cause is so true.

 It actually wasn't a comparison. It was a question.

SilverWook said:

G.E. thinks there's still enough recognition factor for The Matrix, they hired Agent Smith as a pitchman. ;)

TV's Frink said:

 Yeah, you never hear anything about The Matrix fifteen years later...

That's not what I was trying to point out. Human memory is amazing. Obviously we will still recognise stuff and maybe say something about it once in a while. But that is true for good films and bad films.

Let me put it like this. How many people watches Star Wars, let's say annually, and how many does that with Matrix?

darklordoftech said:

I would definitely prefer an Imperial villain over a Sith villain.

Well most of us don't want to see Sith after ROTJ. But there is no reason for me to hate a perfectly good concept implemented before ROTJ.

Mielr said:

That's interesting. In the interviews I've seen w/ Kirshner, he says that the line was changed to take advantage of Han's character more than the line that was originally intended. I took that to mean that they wanted to take advantage of the self-centered aspect of Han's personality, and honestly the line never struck me as anything other than humorous.

Maybe it's more of a regional/cultural interpretation. :-?

Nothing personal, but why are there so many people misspelling Kershner's name.

Well Kershner used to give half-truths in his interviews and was taking credit for things that he shouldn't (listening to him it was always "I this", "I that"... a decent person say "we" when talking about collaborative wrok). He actually didn't have anything to do with the change, other than agreeing to what was proposed by Ford. According to The Making of book, Ford came up to him before shooting of the scene and suggested the change because he felt that was what Han would say. I guess Ford was primarily concerned with the character that was established in Star Wars and "I love you too" was not really a match with it.

darklordoftech said:

imperialscum said:

darklordoftech said:

imperialscum said:

darklordoftech said:

I vote for Palpatine having an apprentice who's not called a "Sith".

 Oh please, no more secret apprentices.

 Oh please, no more fallen Jedi.

Well at least fallen Jedi are fresh in the sense that they do not parasite on and pollute the OT characters like The Force Unleashed did.

I think fallen Jedi undermine Vader's redemption, no matter how unrealistic that may be.

I am certainly against anyone turning back from the dark side. I insist Vader being unique in that sense. But I don't mind Jedi falling to the dark side.

If the thing was set right after the ROTJ, the potential would be huge. There would be Empire collapsing and we would get a strong imperial remnant. No matter how unoriginal that may be it is by far the best enemy. Then there would be criminals who would have way more power in this chaotic transitional era than they would 30 years after when a stable republic is established.

darklordoftech said:

imperialscum said:

darklordoftech said:

I vote for Palpatine having an apprentice who's not called a "Sith".

 Oh please, no more secret apprentices.

 Oh please, no more fallen Jedi.

Well at least fallen Jedi are fresh in the sense that they do not parasite on and pollute the OT characters like The Force Unleashed did.

darklordoftech said:

I vote for Palpatine having an apprentice who's not called a "Sith".

 Oh please, no more secret apprentices.

Well don't get me wrong. I think ROTJ is fine as it is (same goes for ESB).

Just curious about the "reunion" stuff. What kind of reunion do you have in mind. I hope not the kind they did in LOTR:ROTK that made me want to leave the theatre. :D

As much as I love ESB, it is actually refreshing to see some deviation from the usual "ESB is perfect" attitude.

DominicCobb said:

The triangle practically disappears from ESB because Luke spends most of his time away from the other two. Yeah, Leia professes her love for Han in ESB, which would seem to put a fork in it, but if she wasn't made Luke's sister, Luke still could've had interest in her which would have made for some interesting material in ROTJ.

They could have done that but it would make things very weird after what we see in ESB. I mean if Luke attempted to make a move on Leia and if she responded to it, then it would establish her as kind of unreliable "whore" character. If she rejected his moves (as one would expect) then it would make Luke look completely lame. I think overall, the "sister" solution was decent in the given circumstance.

TV's Frink said:

I so love when you say that your opinion is true.

 I am glad you do.

DominicCobb said:

2. ANH and ESB set up a love triangle with Han, Leia, and Luke. ROTJ could have finally faced the triangle head.

I think I discussed this sometime already. But there is only some evidence of love triangle in ANH. In ESB it pretty much disappears. There is this kiss scene but the context was different (ie Liea just did to shut up Han... she could kiss Chewie with the same affect). The triangle from ANH was broken in ESB with obvious indications that Liea prefers Han and was then completely shattered by Leia proclaiming her love to Han in the very scene that is a subject of discussion now.

DominicCobb said:

So, really, the romance potential in ROTJ was nixed not by ESB, but by Lucas (I think).

Well either way (in ESB or ROTJ) it is Lucas who is to blame.

Mavericks said:

Well, I have to say that ROTJ Han/Leia arc worked pretty well for me,

To be honest I like the way it is done in ROTJ too. It is not bad after all. But it should be noted that the romance doubts were over with the Liea proclaiming love to Han at the end of ESB.

luckydube56 said:

Not only do they not need the Carbon Freezing scene.

I am not sure whether this is directed at me. The carbon freezing scene itself is necessary. Its main purpose is to show Han being frozen and sent to Jabba. What I was saying is that the (secondary) romance part was not essential. In fact, it greatly diminished Han and Liea character potential for ROTJ while adding very little to ESB. I know some of you adore the "I love you", "I know" moment brought up by Ford... but what I said is true.

LexX said:

Did they really need to make the films?

 Yes.

Reegar said:

imperialscum said:

Mielr said:

It's arguably the best scene in the movie. So...yes. ;-)

 The film has many far better scenes.

 Don't list them and explain why they're better. Just say it. :P

Seriously, though, which scenes do you consider superior?

"I am your father" scene. Pretty much most of the stuff on Dagobah. Imperial March introduction scene (just the amazing combination of music and visuals makes for a far better scene - one of my favourite scenes in entire trilogy btw). "Apology accepted" scene (brilliant). Most of the scenes involving imperial officers subplots (especially this element is usually completely overlooked - one of the most complex/adult element in the film imo). Asteroid chase scenes are also great (SFX stuff) and I get more satisfaction from them.

And of course the kiss scene on the Falcon which is far more necessary (and better imo) than the "I know" scene.

Mielr said:

It's arguably the best scene in the movie. So...yes. ;-)

 The film has many far better scenes.

Making Leia proclaim her love to Han in ESB was a mistake imo. The conclusion should be left for ROTJ. That way it would make Han and Leia subplot and characters much more interesting in ROTJ, while ESB wouldn't lose on anything.

The prequels.

RicOlie_2 said:

Rip-offs of other characters (ex. the immortal emperor in the Old Republic who is a rip-off of Palpatine).

 It is not the obvious similarity to Palpatine that bothers me. It is the fact that he is immortal and can go into other people's bodies. The whole JK storyline is pointless because of the later.

RicOlie_2 said:

Along with the above is cloning of characters.

Oh yes. I obviously hate Dark Empire.

Force Unleashed

bkev said:

I'm not denying the lasting appeal of Star Wars -- hell, I wouldn't be here if I did -- but at least part of that was manufactured.  

And I am not denying that part. But that part was small and lasted (had an affect) only a few years around the release. It is not a factor in lasting appeal of SW. I don't know about your case (I am curious) but it certainly had no influence on me. Nor on anyone of my age that I know and who was also introduced to SW 20 years after the initial release. The only influencing factor on me was the film itself. I did not know any of the details about the hype and historical context of the initial released and at that time I did not see nor own any of Star Wars merchandise.

luckydube56 said:

It could not have been released in the 90s or 00s and had the same affect. Technology of today would actually dim the fantastic world of Star Wars.  We're walking around with iphones and tablets and we're going to be presented with a movie that doesnt really blow our minds.  So Star Wars released today would be a completely different film and then who knows what you got or how good it is.  Maybe what we would have ended up with was something very much like....the Phantom Menace.

Look, I told you. I first watched Star Wars in late 90's. So as far as I am concerned, for me it was as if it was released in late 90's because that's when I was first introduced to it. Yet I found it superior to any film made at that time. So it did not "dim" nor was  "completely different film". It simply was the same great film as it it was in 1977. Certainly far better than any crap released at the time I watched it.