Sign In

yotsuya

User Group
Members
Join date
2-Dec-2008
Last activity
10-Aug-2022
Posts
1,910

Post History

Post
#1486276
Topic
The Kenobi <s>Movie</s> Show (Spoilers)
Time

Well, I think the inquisitors are supposed to be over the top and annoying. But deadly.

Anyway, my favorite part of this is Leia. That young actress not only looks like Carrie Fisher, but she is acting like Carrie Fisher. Perhaps more than she is acting like Leia. But we also see that Bail and Breha are trying to mold this young firecracker into the Leia she will be. I think they are trying to honor Carrie by how wild young Leia is. And if you think she is too short for the character, you haven’t been among kids lately. In any grade they very greatly in height. Up to about a foot. And since Carrie’s Leia was very short, her being short is in line. Vivien Lyra Blair is presently 10.

Post
#1485997
Topic
The Kenobi <s>Movie</s> Show (Spoilers)
Time

I have to say I loved everything about this. Young Leia most of all.

The story picks up where I expected it to, with Obi-wan making his way on Tatooine and keeping an eye on Luke. How he spends his time is fittingly dull one for a Jedi-in-hiding. From there the story was engaging. The Cinematography was outstanding. The acting perfect. In many scenes I was drawn in by the amazing colors. Some of the city vistas were jaw dropping. Some were quite muted, but the Tatooine scenes felt right and felt like they fit with the original. Owen felt older and closer to the original.

I have a couple of minor nitpicks, but they didn’t impact my enjoyment in the slightest.

I am so enjoying all these new shows. I can’t wait to see what Andor and Ahsoka are like. And outside the Star Wars universe, there is Picard and Strange New Worlds which are also both excellent. These short format series (very British) are really great. It is fun to see how different teams handle the material.

Post
#1485758
Topic
What do you think of The Prequel Trilogy? A general discussion.
Time

CarboniteSolo said:

yotsuya said:

Servii said:

JadedSkywalker said:

The celibate monk thing goes back to the 1974 screenplay but was dropped in the actual movies and the EU. Only to be recanonized contexualized in the prequel. Like midi clorians being too similar to the Kaiburr Crystal as a way to describe the force. its something that should have not been revisited.

My opinion.

The weird thing is, I recall an interview from the early 2000’s where George stated that Jedi actually aren’t technically celibate. They’re just not allowed to have emotional relationships, but it’s technically okay for them to have sex. Which is weirder to me. I need to find where he said that.

The thing is that I feel the PT movies make it clear that this harsh Jedi way with no attachments is directly responsible for Anakin’s fall. That and they are blind to Palpatine and his influence. I think that is the real point of Qui-gon. While he is as aloof as any Jedi in the PT, he is not as harsh as Mace. He’s not as bound by tradition as Yoda. He was a student of Dooku who fell to the dark side. Obi-wan comments that he would be on the council if he just conformed. It is that non-conformity that I think Anakin needed to be successful. He needed the tools to deal with his issues where the main Jedi order was telling him to not have issues. It is like telling a drug adict to quit vs. sharing with them the tools to do it. I think Qui-gon is the only Jedi who had the tools Anakin needed. I thought that even before I heard that this was how George was thinking (Duel of the Fates - so it dates to TPM).

Agreed, and I think Palpatine sensed and foreseen that, so he made sure Darth Maul killed the master Jedi Qui-Gon.

I think Palpatine is behind more in the PT than it appears.

Post
#1485724
Topic
What do you think of The Prequel Trilogy? A general discussion.
Time

Servii said:

JadedSkywalker said:

The celibate monk thing goes back to the 1974 screenplay but was dropped in the actual movies and the EU. Only to be recanonized contexualized in the prequel. Like midi clorians being too similar to the Kaiburr Crystal as a way to describe the force. its something that should have not been revisited.

My opinion.

The weird thing is, I recall an interview from the early 2000’s where George stated that Jedi actually aren’t technically celibate. They’re just not allowed to have emotional relationships, but it’s technically okay for them to have sex. Which is weirder to me. I need to find where he said that.

The thing is that I feel the PT movies make it clear that this harsh Jedi way with no attachments is directly responsible for Anakin’s fall. That and they are blind to Palpatine and his influence. I think that is the real point of Qui-gon. While he is as aloof as any Jedi in the PT, he is not as harsh as Mace. He’s not as bound by tradition as Yoda. He was a student of Dooku who fell to the dark side. Obi-wan comments that he would be on the council if he just conformed. It is that non-conformity that I think Anakin needed to be successful. He needed the tools to deal with his issues where the main Jedi order was telling him to not have issues. It is like telling a drug adict to quit vs. sharing with them the tools to do it. I think Qui-gon is the only Jedi who had the tools Anakin needed. I thought that even before I heard that this was how George was thinking (Duel of the Fates - so it dates to TPM).

Post
#1485480
Topic
What do you think of The Prequel Trilogy? A general discussion.
Time

Servii said:

Had Qui-gon Jinn lived to train Anakin, he would have had a chance.

We never hear Qui-gon say or show that he’s against the no-attachment rule. That’s just fan conjecture. I’m still not convinced that Lucas viewed the Jedi’s rules on attachment as an unhealthy thing.

We know that Qui-gon often went against the council. So he was a bit of a rebel. He may have been able to teach Anakin to handle his attachment issues. I agree that Lucas included a subtle feeling that the Jedi rules on attachment were wrong, but there is nothing specific. But he did tell Dave Filoni that had Qui-gon lived, Anakin wouldn’t have turned to the dark side. The light saber battle in TPM is about Anakin’s fate. Qui-gon died and with him the chance for Anakin to stay on the light side.

Post
#1485176
Topic
What do you think of The Prequel Trilogy? A general discussion.
Time

JadedSkywalker said:

It is poorly executed. But the idea is the Jedi lost by fighting the war in the first place it corrupted them. And Anakin sees them breaking their oaths and codes just like Palpatine warned him they would. Was he wrong that the Jedi feared to lose power, not in the way the Jedi are portrayed in those films. Everything they do is because they are manipulated by fear, pawns on the chessboard of Sidious.

Anakin is manipulated by the fear of loss. Because he lost his mother. Because he didn’t want to lose Padme. And the Jedi tell him to let go of his fear and let her die. Or at least that is the gist of what Yoda said. Its greedy to love someone so possessively says Lucas. That is Anakin’s fault. Its all so humdrum and laughably inarticulate.

I don’t think that is what Lucas is saying. I see everything in the PT as pointing to the Jedi being corrupted by their opposition to the Sith. They have shunned everything that might lead down that path. That includes teaching young students like Anakin how to deal with the temptation. Their answer is don’t. No instructions on how, just don’t do it. Those are stupid instructions. Had Qui-gon Jinn lived to train Anakin, he would have had a chance. But Obi-wan was not as wise and did not see how to teach that lesson. Yoda said fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering and suffering leads to the dark side. He did not say how to deal with fear so that it does not become anger. Or any of the other steps. So we watch Anakin as his fear in Ep I becomes anger in Ep II, which becomes hate in Ep III and finally suffering at the end of Ep III. And the fact the Palpatine has been his mentor all those years doesn’t help matters.

Post
#1482815
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

AspiringCreator said:

yotsuya said:

JadedSkywalker said:

I liked the aspect of the force being more democratic and mysterious and its choosing a neophyte no one to restore the balance. I liked that Last Jedi basically made the whole mutant inherited bloodline thing, irrelevant. Only for Rise to make Rey a Palpatine and undo the idea of Star Wars going back to the style of the original where Luke was a no one, who had the courage to leave Tatooine and confront the Empire. Originally Luke was a brave kid who went on an adventure he wasn’t the son of a super-villain/mutant with the most mitochondrial DNA or midichlorians whatsits in existence to some prophecy. Its undermines the force and free will. Its junk.

Luke was always the son of a Jedi. Jedi didn’t start out being monks. That is a prequel thing. I think it is important to see both that any old nobody can be a Jedi, and that the force can run strong in a particular family. Anakin was a nobody. Luke was his son. Rey is Palpatine’s granddaughter (or daughter of his clone). Nothing can negate that Anakin and broom boy are nobodies. Most Jedi came from nobodies because the prequels made them monks - no attachments means no kids so no Jedi bloodlines. So there is a lot more to the saga that says a no-one can become the chosen one than that you have to be part of a bloodline.

I would believe this… if it wasn’t for the PT and several pieces of Star Wars media conflicting with this. Anakin for instance is not a nobody. Sure when we first see him in terms of the chronology he’s just a little slave boy on a desert planet and if we’re counting when we first see him in the franchise he’s just some big scary guy in armor… but TPM reveals he was born via virgin birth and the PT makes it clear he’s supposed to be the Chosen One, not the guy that a prophecy assumes is going to be the Chosen One but the actual Chosen One and while we can totally split hairs and mention how many Jedi are nobody? No one who’s actually important in the movies is a nobody and even if you want to try and argue that? There’s still the problem of Anakin being so important and so integral via this story that it makes it clear that if your name ain’t Skywalker? You are not someone who has a place in this story. And that’s not even getting into the EU which is loaded with characters that are just related to people we know for no reason other than making connections or the story just focusing on the same people. That’s why it was so important and meaningful when TLJ bucked the trend by having Rey revealed to be no one. We did this story before where the main character was secretly related to someone else and we did the story before that about that guy’s father and how he’s the most super awesome important dude in the Star Wars galaxy so it was genuinely refreshing to get a Star Wars story that showed that our main character was nobody. Then TROS came along, gave her the Palpatine heritage and even noted that “Oh you don’t just have power, you have his power.” which is just so forced and hackneyed. The Force is interesting to me because the OT made it about believing in yourself, it’s a mystical that surrounds and binds every living being together and with ESB, it gives the impression that anyone can use the Force if they clear their mind and set their heart to it. Hell it’s what makes the idea of “Force-sensitives” make sense because that tells me anyone can use the Force, it’s just some are more sensitive to it. But when you have the concept of midichlorians, say Anakin is the Chosen One and just keep making main characters who are connected in some way to those we know? People can say then all they want that Jedi can still be no one but there’s an asterisk there because all the important main characters have to be connected and somebody.

I totally don’t see it that way.

Post
#1482811
Topic
What do you think of The Prequel Trilogy? A general discussion.
Time

screams in the void said:

yotsuya said:

And face it, Threepio was pretty comic in the OT.

Face it , Threepio’s comedy in the OT was actually funny and played off the other characters in service of the story .The prequels had him resorting to bad puns and quips …" I’m beside myself ." " This is such a drag . " , " What do you mean naked ? My parts are showing ? Oh my !" etc I did like some of the early episodes of Clone Wars where Threepio was teamed up with Jar Jar though , as he was annoying ,even to Threepio . I felt that show handled Jar Jar better than the films overall .

I felt Jar Jar’s humor fit with the story. And yes, Threepio in AOTC was really bad. Several of those things you quoted are from the head switch sequence. Take that out and the rest of his lines fit with the OT, but those are as way off as the sequence they are in.

Post
#1482677
Topic
What do you think of The Prequel Trilogy? A general discussion.
Time

I don’t think my opinion of Ep I has changed much over the years. I loved it in 99 and I still do. I am not a fan of the longer pod race. I think that wrecks the flow of the film so I like the original cut, but I do like CG Yoda to match the other two films. I never did object to Jar Jar or the Gungans. I thought it was a brilliant piece of world building by Lucas. And face it, Threepio was pretty comic in the OT.

AOTC has issues. I think this one could have been done so much better. I think Lucas took his time on Ep I and on Ep II he brought on a co-writer and it bombed. And Lucas’s attempt at comic relief with Threepio and the battle droid switching heads is the most horrible sequence in all the films. It is on part with Harvey Corman’s alien chief in the Holiday Special. This should have been a film where you see the friend relationship between Anakin and Obi-wan. Anakin’s fall would have been that much more bittersweet if Obi-wan was too much of a friend and that is why he failed to teach Anakin. That argument in Padme’s apartment just derails their whole relationship. The story outside that is fine. But that is enough that I rate AOTC 8 out of 9 in the Saga.

I think the flaw in ROTS is subtlety. Too much of it. After a lot of views and a lot of contemplation I can see the depths of the story, but it is just so … unexplained on the surface that it draws it down. But the subtlety here started in Ep I. So he was at least consistent. But there were things he did that could have been more obvious that would have gotten a better audience reaction. I feel that Palaptine used the dark side to unwillingly turn Anakin once he was vulnerable. I think Palaptine sucked the life force from Padme so she would die to cement Vader’s turn. And I think that Palpatine used the force to keep Vader alive. Possibly all along, but definitely from Mustafar to Coruscant.

I think the biggest flaw of the prequels stems from the success of the OT. No one wanted to direct a Star Wars film and no one wanted to give Lucas any constructive feedback on his scripts. I think those things are where the negative comes from and disguises the same genius who gave us the OT.

Post
#1482657
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

JadedSkywalker said:

Was he trolling when he had Vader yell NOOOOOOOOO! in Return of the Jedi, because Lucas knew fans hated it in Revenge of the Sith? Like when he said Empire Strikes Back was the worst film because he knew fans would read that and flip.

Replacing Shaw with Hayden his whole explanation for it didn’t make sense but i don’t think at the time he did that to anger OT fans. But the 2011 Blu Ray change might be trolling. Still not gaslighting like the things he says about the Greedo scene or having this one big script thing in 74 when there was barely one movie. Or the Oxymoron thing about not being able to give us the originals.

I think most of us around here are aware that Lucas plays it loose with the truth and accuracy.

Many fans in 1980 and even later in the 80’s felt TESB was the worst film. I did for many years. My opinion changed. And I don’t for a moment think that Lucas gave a single thought what fans wanted when he worked on the SE changes. I think he did what he wanted.

And Lucas did have a larger script. It basically went from ANH and leaving Tatooine, to Bespin, to Endor. Except Bespin was Imperial so it was kind of like the Death Star part of ANH, but on a city in the clouds. That was his big story. The script exists. I’ve read it. It is a huge story that would have made 2 movies, but with him taking the climactic space battle for ANH, he had to rework the rest of it which expanded it out to 3 films. But what he had was definitely more than 1 film in that script.

As for the originals. We are all aware around here of what can be done in restoring film. We know that the original version is easily within reach. It is not lost. But doing from the original negatives might not be possible. Like that has stopped anyone from restoring any classic film. They just can’t do it by running the original reels through a machine so it isn’t worth the effort as far as he is concerned.

Post
#1482655
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

JadedSkywalker said:

I liked the aspect of the force being more democratic and mysterious and its choosing a neophyte no one to restore the balance. I liked that Last Jedi basically made the whole mutant inherited bloodline thing, irrelevant. Only for Rise to make Rey a Palpatine and undo the idea of Star Wars going back to the style of the original where Luke was a no one, who had the courage to leave Tatooine and confront the Empire. Originally Luke was a brave kid who went on an adventure he wasn’t the son of a super-villain/mutant with the most mitochondrial DNA or midichlorians whatsits in existence to some prophecy. Its undermines the force and free will. Its junk.

Luke was always the son of a Jedi. Jedi didn’t start out being monks. That is a prequel thing. I think it is important to see both that any old nobody can be a Jedi, and that the force can run strong in a particular family. Anakin was a nobody. Luke was his son. Rey is Palpatine’s granddaughter (or daughter of his clone). Nothing can negate that Anakin and broom boy are nobodies. Most Jedi came from nobodies because the prequels made them monks - no attachments means no kids so no Jedi bloodlines. So there is a lot more to the saga that says a no-one can become the chosen one than that you have to be part of a bloodline.

Post
#1479994
Topic
George Lucas's Sequel Trilogy
Time

As far as I’m concerned, Lucas started messing up from the beginning. The leaked script drafts from the OT show that he is correct, he did have a story and he cut it up for ANH. He abandoned some concepts he came back to later. He like some things he was cutting and changed the story. And then once he had his story for the first film roughed out, he spent a lot of time editing it and refining it. He killed off Ben for dramatic effect.

So when it came time to make a sequel, he had to go back to the drawing board. The entire Hoth sequence was added. Ben training Luke in ANH was expanded and Ben was replaced with Yoda. In some ways Hoth is the planet side battle that was cut from the original Death Star Battle. He brought back the city in the clouds but had to change what it was. That had become the section on the Death Star in the ANH. So it went from Imperial facility to a mining facility. He created the entire Vader’s hunt as a post Death Star reaction. And of course Vader being Luke’s father. So most of TESB is created to bridge to the finale with little pieces from the original story.

Then in the development of ROTJ, Lucas brought back his original concept for the final battle. The combined battle was mostly restored. But because he’d pulled Chewie out and made him tech savy, Wookies became Ewoks and shrunk, with no less ferocity in action, though a lot less in appearance. But that didn’t make a full movie. So the rest is the continuation of Han’s capture and Jabba the Hutt and then Luke facing Vader and the Emperor.

From the drafts of the scripts, the concept art, and more, We can see that Lucas likes to change things. Consistency in story is not as important to him as dramatic impact and story. That really becomes clear with the Prequels. Sure he said he created the back story while he was working on the OT, but all he had was a few details. In order to make the PT, he had to flesh it out and see what worked with the story. Sure some things don’t line up perfectly with the OT, but things don’t line up in the OT much better.

So when it comes to the ST, Lucas was in a bad place after ROTS. All the bad fan reaction led him to call the saga closed. Plus, my understanding of his early ideas for the ST were basically, wouldn’t it be neat to have these stars come back to reprise their roles and pass on the torch to a new generation. And I don’t think there is a diehard fan out there who isn’t aware that Harrison wanted Solo to die in ROTJ. What else Lucas was thinking post ROTJ is a mystery.

So when we get to the point where he actually started fleshing out the ideas, there are some things that should have been expected. Han and/or Luke dying should have been expected. R2 and Threepio surviving to the end should have been expected. Some return to conflict and a return of the Dark Side should have been expected. Pulling from the same type of sources that he did the first time around should have been expected. What I’ve seen in negative fan reaction has largely been based on these things that are pretty obvious to expect based on what we knew being disliked. It is called Star Wars so any ST was going to have a war. That in itself means that the glorious new Republic would have an enemy it would have to fight off. That we have planet destroying weapons leads to having a better version of that to imperil the galaxy and the Republic. Luke being in self exile comes from myths.

Now the quality of the writing is very much in the eye of the viewer. My gripes with TFA are all about the writing and how it fails to craft a strong story. I feel it is more about scenes than a complete story. So I can’t say that everyone should like every writing choice made, but I feel very sure that the ST we got is based on Lucas’s treatments. They definitely dumped a lot of what Lucas had, but from our PT experience, I don’t think that part would have gone over well. I think if Lucas would have done it himself that we would be having a very similar discussion. But we would be talking about how HE screwed up the PT. We’d be complaining about who he cast, the wooden dialog and acting, how no one wanted to help him write or direct the stories, etc. I think the only way they could have gotten made with any quality was for him to sell the franchise and turn the reins over.

We would be having the same discussion about what his original intentions were, his original treatments, but then about how HE screwed them up.

I don’t think dreaming that Lucas’s own versions would be any better. And I think it is very fitting for the saga that when you look at credit for each film in chronological order, it goes from Lucas doing this solo (technically he wrote and directed the first 4 movies) to him letting go for the OT and then completely stepping back for the ST.

I am very confident that I like what we got more than I would have liked what Lucas would have done.

Post
#1479094
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

Servii said:

And I think the most brilliant thing about the ST is bringing Palpatine back. People think this was a last minute change, but I think JJ had this in mind from the beginning. It was pointed out before TLJ came out that musically Rey’s Theme was a variation on Palpatine’s theme.

I strongly recommend watching this video by a channel that analyzes musical scores:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FstNC8T4LjA

He goes in depth into the details of Rey’s theme, and calling it just a variation of Palpatine’s theme is misleading. When analyzed, Rey’s theme contains traces of the Force theme, the Imperial march, and Palpatine’s theme, and can be harmonized with Yoda’s theme as well as others. The conclusion he reaches in the video is that Rey’s theme was deliberately designed by Williams to be as vague and versatile as possible, because he knew that the writers hadn’t decided on an origin for Rey yet.

Also, Daisy Ridley said in an interview that Rey being a Palpatine was not at all part of the original plan. She actually said there was talk of making Rey a Kenobi.

And keep in mind, the EU already did the whole thing of bringing back Palpatine. And arguably, the EU did it better because it actually accounted for how the heroes were going to prevent Palpatine from returning again in the future. And even then, it was an extremely divisive move at the time. And if the ST writers were really planning early on to bring him back, they would have at least foreshadowed it in some way, however subtly. But they didn’t do that. And on top of that, they didn’t ask Ian McDiarmid to come back as Palpatine until a point in 2018 when the production of TRoS was already well underway. All signs point to Palpatine’s inclusion being a last-minute choice.

JJ is famous for his mystery box ideas. What I was saying is that it is likely he had in mind bringing Palaptine back as part of that, but he originally didn’t intend to be involved in IX. When he got involved that the idea was there. And considering the schedule, 2018 is not a surprise. That is when we found out Williams was coming back as well. So that timing fits with the general casting of the movie. You write the movie and then cast the actors. I think it is only foreshadowed by Rey’s theme being based (partially as you say) on Palpatine’s theme, but Abrams isn’t big and pre-planning the solultions to his mystery box ideas. Too much time in TV so he leave them open in case someone else is charged with crafting the solution. I’d claim this is another flaw in TFA, not TROS.

Post
#1478998
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

The thing I really don’t get and totally disagree with is that TLJ undoes TFA and TROS undoes TLJ. I don’t see that and I don’t agree with it. What I do see is that TLJ is the middle act and like TESB, nothing seems to go right. We have Kylor Ren and his philosophy dominating the dialog, but in the end, what he had to say was not the message of the film. Countless people around here have claimed that “kill the past” was what Rian Johnson was trying to do when that was Kylo Ren and the Dark Side. What the Dark Side character has to say is never the point of a Star Wars film. Luke in Exile was decided before Rian was hired, or even JJ. Rey had to find a way to bring him back to the galaxy and in the end it took Yoda to do it. What Luke sarcastically said at the start becomes what he does at the end. Instead of killing the past, the movie embraces it to move forward. And I think the most brilliant thing about the ST is bringing Palpatine back. People think this was a last minute change, but I think JJ had this in mind from the beginning. It was pointed out before TLJ came out that musically Rey’s Theme was a variation on Palpatine’s theme. And Snoke’s rise to power was full of questions, until you find out Palpatine was behind him. Another puppet like Count Dooku, but this time a more mailable clone. I think that TLJ’s “anyone can be a Jedi” was not aimed at Rey, but at Finn and countless other. Rey was not a Skywalker and that fits in very well with the message. Her being a Palpatine makes that transition to central hero even more significant. Rather than being at odds, I see the three ST films and building on one another. I was disappointed in TFA, not because it was similar to ANH (something else I disagree with), but because it is a series of beautiful scenes that really didn’t form a full story. The film is charming in its own way, but it fails to have the impact that many other Star Wars films do. JJ was too concerned about his mystery box setups to craft a cohesive story.

I think the parallels to the OT and PT are to be appreciated and enjoyed. Lucas wanted the saga to have poetry and I feel that the ST we got gives it. Some fans complain about Han, Luke, and Leia dying, but that is what happens to the previous generation. That is what the OT does to the PT characters. They all die (except R2-D2, C-3PO, and Chewbacca). And I think many forget the inspirations behind Star Wars. Flash Gordon in 1980 ends with a closeup of Ming’s ring and Ming’s laugh ringing out indicating he isn’t really dead. That is exactly what we get in the ST, just without the foreshadowing. Palpatine is back like so many great villains (such as the Master in Doctor Who). So rather than any part of the ST ruining Star Wars, I feel that JJ and Rian really understood the saga and its roots and honored that with what they created. It has elements of the classic serials, the nearly unkillable villain, classic films, with a bit of comic relief in a glitzy package that pushes the movie making envelope of the time. It really is a better successor to the OT than the PT were.

Not that I expect everyone to agree. Just ponder the ideas I put forward and think about what George created and how it was born and where he expected it to go. Luke and Han were always going to die if Harrison and Mark came back. That was a given. Luke was supposed to die in Ep VII, but they couldn’t work him into the story so his death was moved to the climax of episode VIII and Han dies in VII, like Ben in IV and Qui-gon in I. Poetry, symmetry, myth and legend, part of the hero’s journey.

Post
#1476459
Topic
What do you think of The Prequel Trilogy? A general discussion.
Time

Channel72 said:

theprequelsrule said:

I really thought the whole plot where Palpatine is basically running both the Separatists and The Republic really strained credibility. At least have the reveal that Dooku was a Sith take place in ROTS - make the audience think he is truly a rogue Jedi fighting against a hopelessly corrupt Republic and that The Separatists were actually the good guys.

Yeah - and as a morality tale it’s a bit hollow because it’s so far removed from how these things play out in real life. Real life dictators aren’t far-seeing puppet masters that expertly pull off elaborate conspiracies to seize power. They just take advantage of existing weaknesses in the political system. Caesar marched his army into Rome because he gambled that after years of war, his legion would be more loyal to him than the Senate. Hitler took advantage of a politically divided and economically depressed Germany.

A more realistic scenario would have Palpatine taking advantage of never-ending war to slowly implement more and more “emergency powers” (similar to the Enabling Act that gave Hitler power), until he became de-facto dictator for life. This is sort of what happened, except in the actual movies Palpatine also artificially caused the war in the first place, and expertly directed it towards an intended outcome. (We’re also never told why General Grievous et al takes orders from a mysterious hologram, or why all the thousands of Separatist planets suddenly just stop fighting just because Anakin killed their first tier leadership.) Plus, the movie implies that it was more the botched assassination attempt led by Mace Windu that ultimately cemented Palpatine as dictator than the years of war or the recent attack on Coruscant.

I would disagree. What I see in history is that successful dictators are fairly cunning when they rise to power. It is once they are in power and what they do to try to hold on to it that leads to paranoia and mistakes. Usually it leads to their undoing. So I see Eps I to VI as being a fairly accurate depiction of a dictator who has ruled for 23 years. He has a cunning plan for gaining power. He is wicked in his use of power. Then he becomes paranoid and/or overconfident (or both) and makes mistakes that lead to his downfall. Palpatine is overconfident that his cunning plan to trick the Rebels will go according to his plan. It does not. He is overconfident that Luke is putty in his hands. He is not. He is paranoid enough that he doesn’t have anyone around him. He is isolated. In many ways he has been isolated since his rise to power because he is leading a double life - the kindly Emperor vs. the evil Sith Lord. But after 23 years, it doesn’t look like he has very many people around. There are something like 3 or 4 odd looking people in his party. They’ve always been called diplomats, but what if they are his Sith followers. Could be both. But that isn’t the entourage he used to travel with. I think it very much matches what we see happen to many of these dictators who trust fewer and fewer people until they are practically alone.

Post
#1476329
Topic
What do you think of The Prequel Trilogy? A general discussion.
Time

theprequelsrule said:

Channel72 said:

In retrospect, the biggest problem with the Prequels is they’re told in a way that often ignores their own premise. In theory, the most interesting thing about the Prequel story template should be Anakin and the circumstances behind Alec Guinness’ wistful recollections to Luke in ANH. This is a classic “good guy turns bad” story. The problem is that this type of story is very difficult to write convincingly. This type of story was done in the Godfather Part I and also Breaking Bad - but the latter had 6 seasons of television to pull it off, and the Godfather involved a much less extreme transition from good to bad than is required for Anakin, who has to go from Obi-Wan’s good friend to a mass murdering tyrant in only 3 movies.

This is just a REALLY hard story to write convincingly in only 3 movies. It requires a lot of upfront planning of story structure. Yet bizarrely, it seems that Lucas wasn’t even primarily interested in Anakin’s story and the obvious drama that could be mined from it. Instead he wrote Episode 1, which was a meandering side-story that introduced us to the world of the Prequels, but barely connected with the other movies. It seems clear that Lucas didn’t see the “Tragedy of Anakin Skywalker” as the primary reason for writing the Prequels. Rather, Lucas saw the Prequels as more like a general backstory to the OT that showed how the Republic turned into a dictatorship and the Jedi order was destroyed. That could certainly be interesting as a political/military drama if done correctly, but Star Wars movies are generally simple character driven stories. It seems by the time Revenge of the Sith came around, Lucas suddenly realized this saga was supposed to be more about Anakin and less about Palpatine’s crazy schemes to get elected or mysterious clone conspiracies. But by that time, it was virtually impossible to make up for lost time and write a compelling arc for Anakin in only one movie.

Most of all, it’s eternally baffling to me that so much of the Prequels are framed around MYSTERY plots. Episode 1 is about a mysterious hooded figure who operates in the shadows. Episode 2 is a detective story about a conspiracy involving a mysterious clone army created decades ago for unknown reasons. But none of these mysteries are ever really explicitly resolved because ultimately they’re superfluous to the story. More importantly, why would anyone frame a PREQUEL around mystery plots, when we all know how everything turns out? We know the mysterious hooded guy is the Emperor and that all the Jedi die, so why pretend the story is some kind of deep, compelling mystery or political conspiracy thriller? The only reason the Prequels really should exist is because the story of Anakin and his mentor/friend Obi-Wan had the potential to be an amazing character-driven drama and fantasy/sci-fi adventure story.

Very good points, ones I never thought of specifically before. A much better script for all 3 prequels is needed to tell both the fall on The Republic and the fall of Anakin Skywalker simultaneously.

I really thought the whole plot where Palpatine is basically running both the Separatists and The Republic really strained credibility. At least have the reveal that Dooku was a Sith take place in ROTS - make the audience think he is truly a rogue Jedi fighting against a hopelessly corrupt Republic and that The Separatists were actually the good guys.

Also; remember how evil Tarkin and company were in SW77 when they are all sitting around the conference table on the Death Star? Now remember the similar scene on Geonosis, with all those weird comical looking aliens? Creates a completely different feel. The Separatists seemed like a joke.

I find myself sympathizing with Stardust1138 because I often lack tact in my strong opinions.

But he does have some ideas that bear looking at. If you miss some of the things that George included in the prequels (especially if that led to not liking them and not wanting to watch them again) then your hate of one or more of the prequels might be based on not having really understood the story. There are things I didn’t catch right away (at least not consciously) that have added to my understanding of the story. I’m also not content with just the films, but in learning more about the backstory behind the story. For the prequels there is a lot in the OT, but there is more in other places. George’s original vision of the Emperor was that he was a puppet (ANH novelization). He took that and the powerful Sith lord he created for ROTJ and merged them into the same character by making him duplicitous. So you have the public face of Palpatine. He’s is a nice guy, friendly, amicable. He seems genuinely concerned. A bit of a pushover really. But then you have the real power - the Sith Lord. He is using the force to manipulate votes and get his way. He uses the Trade Federation blockade of Naboo to become Chancellor. He lays the plan for the Clone Wars by picking the source for the clones and having order 66 instilled in them. He plays the victim when he is disfigured. It is a brilliant political move. And it is the reason the separtists are a joke. He intends them to fail. He wants to destabilize the Republic and seize power for himself. He made an enemy of the Trade Federation and this seems in part revenge.

And then there is Anakin’s fall. Something I didn’t consciously catch until recently is that Palpatine uses the force on Anakin to bend him to his will. Anakin was susceptible after he stopped Mace Windu and you can hear the special effect in Palpatine’s voice when he gives Anakin instructions to take then Jedi Temple.

It is all about what you noticed and how that impacted your opinion of the films. I had a bad first viewing of TFA and I don’t think I will ever truly like that film because of it. So really get that once your opinion is formed it is hard to change. But hey, this is Star Wars. Isn’t it worth digging deeper and seeing if you missed something that might change your mind and giving each film at least a second chance? I think it is. I keep giving AOTC and TFA more chances. Basically without an edit both of them are doomed as far as I’m concerned. But the rest of them can stand in their theatrical forms and I can appreciate them.

The other big thing that I think colors our opinions of films is expectations. If you expect too much or something too different from what we got, that can ruin a film. I try to avoid having any story expectations. I still get them. I felt sure that Rey was a real Skywalker after TFA. Or a Kenobi at least. The whole nobody and then Palpatine could have thrown me but I didn’t go into the film expecting that. I went in and let the story flow. I was totally unsurprised that Han died in TFA or that Luke died in TLJ. From how Lucas and Hamill talked, I knew Luke was going to die to pass the torch. I expected that Harrison would want Han to die. He got one of the most awesome death scenes as far as I’m concerned. The look, touching Kylo’s cheeck, everything was so perfect.

But we can’t all of us have the same opinion. Just remember how divided the fans were over TESB and ROTJ. We have some members here who all these decades later still don’t like TESB or ROTJ. And I bet there are many who would like to change their minds - for them to give it another chance. If they only saw it this other way. Well, that obviously is not happening at this stage. I think every Star Wars film deserves a second chance, but if your issue isn’t going to go away, then that might not do it. Though there have been some that have given these films a second chance and have revised their opinion of them.

So some opinions are never going to change. They are set and some of us don’t understand it, but there is nothing to do about it. Everyone has a right to their own opinion and tastes. It doesn’t mean the rest of us are wrong, we just aren’t on the same page. But likely there are a few films we do agree on.

Post
#1476051
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

What I’ve been able to uncover about what George’s treatment for VII was going to be about was very similar to what we got. Even before Lucas sold Star Wars to Disney, Luke was pushed out of VII and into VIII. VII was going to be about finding Luke. I think it would have been better if we hadn’t seen him and the end of VII was more like the end of TESB with Rey and Chewie going off to find Luke and then a gap between the two films. But Rian Johnson really nailed the opening of TLJ with out Abrams left TFA. Really all 3 films have an epilogue (Rey finding Luke, the broom boy, and Rey burying Luke and Leia’s sabers). I think TFA is the weakest one. It sets up the story and most of the flaws consistently pointed out in the other two films stem from what Abrams setup in TFA. I don’t agree that they are necessarily flaws, but I feel that Abrams set them up. Some of them Lucas setup. Lucas had the girl as the Jedi in training. Lucas had Luke in exile. I love what Rian Johnson did with Luke because given what Abrams established in TFA, Johnson mined ANH and TESB for qualities and traits that Luke had the might resurface in the face of a tragedy that would make him go into self-exile.

I’ve studied how movies develop, particular the Star Wars movies, and what I see in Lucas’s original ideas and the pre-Abrams draft of IX are a basis for how the films developed and mutated into what we go. TESB and ROTJ went through similar mutations. I think Abrams played it too safe with TFA and make some bad story telling choices. I think if he would have been more daring like he was with TROS that it would have been a better film.

Post
#1476047
Topic
Re-evaluating Revenge of the Sith
Time

Funny to read this. I consider ROTS to be considerably lesser than the OT. I just can’t put my finger on it. I think that the script just wasn’t polished enough. Lucas didn’t have any help on this film and I think it shows. He needed script help to make a good film. Someone to edit his work and curb his worst ideas. I definitely don’t consider ROTS to be a masterpiece. The best of the PT for me is TPM because I think it captured the right mood. I feel the script is polished. I know some people don’t like Jar Jar or some other characters, but those things have never bothered me.

Post
#1476044
Topic
What do you think of The Prequel Trilogy? A general discussion.
Time

I felt The Phantom Menace felt like Star Wars but set in the Old Republic. I love Qui-gon. I do not hate Jar Jar. Jake Lloyd was not bad as Anakin. After spending time with 9 and 10 year olds recently, some of them sound like that. And I also saw something he did right before he played Anakin. I have nothing to hate about this movie. I love it. The theatrical version anyway. I do not like the DVD cut. I do prefer CG Yoda over the puppet. That was one horrible puppet. And the CG makes it fit better with the following two films.

Attack of the Clones is mostly good, but it has some terrible stuff in it. The droid factory sequence is probably the worst in all of Star Wars. Comic relief is one thing, but that was over the top and totally ridiculous. And the way Anakin acts does not fit with his character. Not Hayden’s acting, but the way the part is written. That argument in front of Padme is out of place and the way he acts when Padme falls out doesn’t fit. He’s attached to her and madly in love with her, but he isn’t a total idiot.

Return of the Sith is mostly great. It is dark, but the story doesn’t play out quite as expected (based on the other 5 films that came out before it). There isn’t anything I can put my finger on, just a feeling that something is off.

Overall the Prequels setup the story nicely for the OT. They aren’t as good, but prequels rarely are. I really feel that Lucas spent time on TPM and did it right, but rushed the other two and didn’t have a good partner to make sure the script was top notch before filming them. He had too many people who weren’t critical enough of his work and the films suffer for it. AOTS in obvious ways and ROTS in more subtle ways.

Post
#1475271
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

thebluefrog said:

A major problem with all 3 movies was Rey’s constant winning and Kylo’s constant losing.

A hero and their journey is only as good as the villain and their antagonism.

Imagine if Obi-Wan had WON the very first lightsaber duel back in 1977.

That would’ve killed Vader’s character from the start.

Kylo’s loss at the end of TFA was the first crack. Then losing against Rey again in Snoke’s room. And then being humiliated by Luke. And then losing again to Rey again 1/2 of the way through Rise. Also, her ability to beat Luke while training didn’t help any character progression either.

Rey had no consistent hero’s journey. Yes, yes, you can make all sorts of arguments about scene x or development y, they’ve been done before–the point is that the growth of the heroic character overcoming obstacles isn’t coherent. Since Kylo was neutered as a threat midway through TLJ, they had to use Palpatine to give her a new challenge, which didn’t thematically fit at all from her starting point.

One theme is Star Wars is redemption. We see Anakin return to the light so Ben returning to the light fits very well. And Kylo didn’t really lose in TFA. Chewy shot him and he was fighting injured and the ground split open before their duel was finished. And he didn’t really lose in TLJ, the saber broke and he didn’t want the pieces and left Rey to fend for herself. And he filled Rey with doubts about her identity. Luke’s journey was defined by doubts about his ability. Rey’s journey was defined by doubts about her identity. Bringing back Palpatine was brilliant in terms of her identity crisis, echoing Legends, echoing the Flash Gordon serial origins of Star Wars, and is mythic

Post
#1475012
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

Those who don’t like these films find ways to explain why they don’t like them. That some don’t like them because they are too different and others don’t like them because they are too similar shows that both views are in they eye of the viewer. Apply the same critiques to the PT and you will get the same result. They are either too similar or too different. TPM, ANH, and TFA all have similar beats and echo each other. In each one a young person with no direction finds a mentor and before the mentor can impart very much, they die. In each one there is a space battle where the hero plays a decisive part (in TFA Rey helps plant the explosives that opens the whole for the destruciton of Starkiller base where in the other two Anakin and Luke are the fighter pilot who fires the shot that destroys the base). The hero meets the other two in the trio that carries through the trilogy. TPM doesn’t have any plans or map as a McGiffin. And I could go on, but why? I think I made my point.

Post
#1474602
Topic
<strong>The Book Of Boba Fett</strong> (live action series) - a general discussion thread - * <strong>SPOILERS</strong> *
Time

Buzz Lightyear said:

I enjoyed it. Not as much as the Mandalorian, but that’s okay. It was still a good time and a nice little bridge between Mando season 2 and 3.

People really need to stop projecting so many expectations onto Star Wars. Actually modern fandoms need to do that in general, I swear there’s not a single fandom
nowadays where the fanbase collectively enjoys more than 1% of its content.

Life is more fun if you learn to just sit back and enjoy the ride, instead of picking everything apart and fixating on how you’d have personally handled various details.

^^^^^
This!