|
Post by lildude8218 on May 18, 2014 22:41:37 GMT -5
What does this have to do with Star Wars? They're releasing The Originals on Blu-Ray
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2014 23:18:47 GMT -5
Me neither. They are fine as dazzling special effects reels. Lots of spaceships flying around and lightsabre fights. My only bone of contention is when prequel fans try to argue that the plots make any coherent sense at all. Let me know when you figure out when the Ewoks had the time to plan their massive forest traps to defeat the Empire. Mind you, "Jedi" has a whole bunch of issues. Like Luke, Leia, Han, Chewie, Lando, and the droids basically murdering Jabba's non-combatant denizens via ship explosion because they just so happened to be on the barge. But I would say that's the problems of the original trilogy are way outnumbered by the prequel's problems. The films suffer in almost every aspect of filmmaking. It's unbelievable how much Lucas missed the mark with the prequels.
|
|
|
Post by Ryushinku on May 19, 2014 3:22:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by James Fabiano on May 19, 2014 9:04:30 GMT -5
Let me know when you figure out when the Ewoks had the time to plan their massive forest traps to defeat the Empire. Admittedly the role of the Ewoks is the weakest part of the original trilogy. However it would have been avoided entirely had Lucas stuck to his initial plan and used the Wookiees instead. His cited reason that the Wookiees are technologically advanced and he wanted a primitive culture to overcome the Empire in a Vietnam analogy doesn't hold up since the battle only turns when a Wookiee ironically seizes control of an Imperial scout walker. In a sense, the inclusion of the Ewoks could have been a sign of the creative rot that would be seen in much greater scope in later Star Wars movies. But I don't think that the lamest part of the original trilogy compares with the systematic problems contained in the prequels. Ewoks still >>>>>>> Gungans.
|
|
|
Post by N E O G E O B O Y S on May 19, 2014 9:20:10 GMT -5
Like I said, I really think that the original movies aren't this super well written movies who deserve complete praise as untouchable examples of how to make movies
At least lucas always had stupid flaws, the problem is that with the prequel things got worse and the original fanbase grew up
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on May 19, 2014 10:18:52 GMT -5
Unsurprisingly, the movie with Lucas' least amount of direct involvement (Empire) is widely considered to be the best of the six.
Lucas has always had a ton of ambition and was a visionary in terms of special effects and its use in movies. I think his contributions to production in Industrial Light & Magic and Skywalker Sound are going to be a lasting, overwhelmingly positive part of his legacy. And I think he has a good handle on directing as far as cinematography goes. In the technical aspects of film-making, he's fantastic.
Unfortunately, his two biggest weaknesses are in directing actors and scriptwriting. That is where the prequels failed and also where the original Star Wars was most flawed. I've seen Hayden Christensen in non-Star Wars movies and he's legitimately a really good actor. Shattered Glass was a really good performance. And Natalie Portman is a well-deserved Oscar-winning actress. But their acting was so stilted in the prequels and I have to blame the director for that. And it didn't help that some of the lines they had to deliver were corny as hell.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2014 10:36:12 GMT -5
I think Hayden's best moments as Anakin/Vader were the ones where he didn't have to say anything, such as that yellow-eyed glare on Mustafar.
EDIT: I just thought of a line. Although his performances were spotty, his delivery of "I HATE YOU!" was pretty beastly in Revenge of the Sith.
|
|
|
Post by Wolfman Rose on May 19, 2014 11:16:47 GMT -5
I think Hayden's best moments as Anakin/Vader were the ones where he didn't have to say anything, such as that yellow-eyed glare on Mustafar. EDIT: I just thought of a line. Although his performances were spotty, his delivery of "I HATE YOU!" was pretty beastly in Revenge of the Sith. This. Whatever about when he is speaking that inane script, his presence and non-vocal acting was amazing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2014 11:29:18 GMT -5
As long as old man Anakin is at the end of Return of the Jedi, I'll be fine, although I do agree about that "Nooooo!" being completely unnecessary.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2014 11:47:39 GMT -5
The Prequels are nowhere near as bad as people make out.
I think the situation is that people who were children when the original trilogy came out grew up and forgot that they were always childrens films designed to sell lots and lots of merch.
Then after a decade and a half or so of waiting along comes the prequels and of course they aren't going to live up to what you expect them to be when you've waited so long, plus you're not seeing them for the first time as a child, instead you are a cynical adult and not the target market.
I mean the ewoks are just as silly as Jar Jar Binks really, it's all fun and games at the end of the day.
Episode 2 did suck though, but as someone who went to the Cinema to see The Phantom Menance when I was like 7 that film holds a special place in my heart
EDIT Posted this before reading the rest of the thread, but I do indeed have very fond memories of the likes of Jar Jar, Watto and Darth Maul (I don't care what anyone says he was such a bad ass)
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on May 19, 2014 14:19:10 GMT -5
Like I said, I really think that the original movies aren't this super well written movies who deserve complete praise as untouchable examples of how to make movies At least lucas always had stupid flaws, the problem is that with the prequel things got worse and the original fanbase grew up I think part of the problem is when some folks try to build up (either for their own beliefs or to knock down somebody else's) the original trilogy as some kind of Citizen Kane-esque achievement. It was never that. However, the originals were a cultural touchstone, and in plenty of circles remain just that, and they attained that status in a variety of ways. There were script imperfections, not all the acting was top-notch, and we could hammer on about the Ewoks until the cows come home, but, end of the day, they reached a level of cultural significance that arguably no other movie series has approached. The prequels suffered by never truly connecting with the audience, and I think it shows in the way it gets reactions from younger fans. I've taught both elementary and high school since 2007, and while I certainly recall grade school students in 2007-2010 with Star Wars merchandise most often bearing characters and designs from the Clone Wars cartoon, I'm currently a high school teacher and almost none of my current students still react to it at all. Even when I make jokes in class about the prequels being bad, I often just get quiet looks from students who seem to just not remember a whole lot about them. We could discuss how this came to be the case, but the discussions about what went wrong with the prequels is in excess of a decade old now. From my own totally skewed perspective, I think what sets the two series apart is that the originals, again despite any flaws, had more of the "grand adventure" scope to them, where it felt like you were constantly discovering new things. It's one of the (many) reasons the Dagobah scenes have such a timeless quality, and work so well playing off of the scenes in Cloud City; they're fresh new environments, they feel real in their own way, and each location has a distinctness that makes you notice when the scenes turn from one to the other. If the new trilogy is going to resonate with people, I think it needs to get back to that sensation, which admittedly is not an easy thing to do in a CGI-spoiled era where it really does feel like we've seen everything there is to see in films.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2014 14:35:12 GMT -5
The original trilogy was an achievement of sight, sound and myth. Movies did not look or sound that good back then. In the process of making the trilogy, they literally needed to create new kinds of technology to do what they wanted it to do. They spent what they could, innovated what they needed, were watched over by the bean counters and performed miracles on a budget. (And along the way, he got sole merchandising rights from a company that didn't really think any of this was going to make them any real money.)
They were also written and plotted to adhere to those tropes of classic mythology. The heroes, the villains, the companions, the settings, the dramatic twists and origins.....it was all constructed to be a classical story. Disassemble the plot and lay it all out and you have something that can be compared with Greek tragedies and Chaucer and Shakespeare.
"The magic of myth" plus the special effects genius that went into it provided the cultural impact and the technological impact of STAR WARS.
.........the prequels were a rich guy who did all that before doing it again. But this time he had all the money he wanted, no objecting oversight or editors to keep him in bounds, all the special effects tools he had built for the rest of Hollywood at his disposal, the students of his original moviemakers geeking out about making the new Star Wars movies, and a less critical way of building the story and a more keen desire to let other mediums tell the details of the story for him.
Oh, and merchandising, merchandising, merchandising.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on May 19, 2014 14:48:35 GMT -5
I disagree. At the time of the original trilogy, merchandise wasn't nearly as assured a revenue source as it is today. That's why Lucas was able to gain the merchandising rights, because the studio didn't think there was any money in it. Also, even in theory if they were meant as children's films (which is highly debatable in itself) it's no excuse for the prequels having such shitty scripts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2014 14:49:15 GMT -5
See, I grew up in the era of the prequels. I was 8 when Phantom Menace released. They were "my" Star Wars films, I was the target audience for them and yet I have almost no attachment to them like I have towards the original trilogy. I went to see Phantom Menace on opening night and fell asleep 20 minutes in and woke up at the final lightsaber duel. I went to see it again a few days later and struggled to stay awake, luckily I reached the pod race becausethat kept me up. I was so pumped for the prequels after seeing the trilogy for the first time a year before. I played the video games, brought the toys, everything. Yet, I left disappointed.
That decade saw great Star Wars material, but none of it was on the big screen. I loved KOTOR, Battlefront and The Clone Wars cartoon. It was those things that fueled my love for Star Wars enough to go to the theaters for Attack Of The Clones and Revenge Of The Sith. It was like an obligation, "I might as well finish it". I always go to the opening crawls of Episode I and IV to show just how bland the prequels were and the lack of excitement that was present throughout the trilogy compared to the originals.
I don't know about anyone else, but when I was a kid, I was clamoring for some taxation and shipping disputes in my summer blockbusters. And political debates?!! This was like Christmas came early. Talk about high stakes, will the Jedi be able to settle these very interesting conflicts?!
Civil War. Evil Empire. DEATH STAR. Restore freedom to... THE GALAXY. This one sounds amazing but I just don't know if it'll be good without all that sweet sweet trade federation debates.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2014 15:02:46 GMT -5
I disagree. At the time of the original trilogy, merchandise wasn't nearly as assured a revenue source as it is today. That's why Lucas was able to gain the merchandising rights, because the studio didn't think there was any money in it. Also, even in theory if they were meant as children's films (which is highly debatable in itself) it's no excuse for the prequels having such shitty scripts. Exactly. There are films that are actually meant for children that tell incredible stories, invoke genuine emotion, have a sense of wonder and excitement... All of which the prequels failed to accomplish.
|
|
|
Post by N E O G E O B O Y S on May 19, 2014 15:15:40 GMT -5
My major gripe with the prequels was that the movies felt way too long without telling anything
|
|
|
Post by benstudd on May 20, 2014 0:32:38 GMT -5
The prequals are just not what I believe would have happened. So I will be happy if they become non cannon. To tell that story, it will need to be a very dark, violent and extremely disturbed set of movies, which show everything falling apart and the end of the Jedi. Not really suited to Star Wars target audience. Yep. You watched the Prequels and you thought:"there's no way these three flicks were the basis for these three great flicks that were Episode 4, 5, 6". No freakin way. At least Lucas should have retained that aestethic of the original flicks. And not go all CGI. I know it's impossible to demand given how the guy became a slave to technology but still....
|
|
|
Post by benstudd on May 20, 2014 0:37:50 GMT -5
I thought the plots made perfect sense. They weren't good scripts mind you, but good and making sense don't need to go hand-in-hand. Yea that goes with my theory how Lucas became too cold and tech-driven when he wrote the prequels and as such while it made sense on the page, they probably were not the sort of the stuff that would make good movies to watch.
|
|
SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on May 20, 2014 1:21:26 GMT -5
My problems with the prequels were more from a storytelling point of view. The love story especially was lame. And Anakin was not nearly as deadly or powerful as the later Vader would have you believe (in addition to him basically being an emo pussy). And I thought the only time I saw a glimpse of true friendship between Anakin an Obi-Wan was right before Obi heads to Utapau.
As for the kids movie stuff. Here's my problem. While I realize all the films had children in mind, only in the prequels with Jar Jar did I feel beat over the head with it. It was just too silly and over the top and not even remotely amusing. At least with the Ewoks, as much they looked like Teddy Bears, they were still hunter/gatherer/warriors who sprung sweet traps and were actually useful. Jar Jar is basically the Hornswoggle of Lucasfilm. He exists solely as a cartoon buffoon that doesn't quite fit within the narrative unfolding around him and often, in spite of him.
|
|
|
Post by Jedi-El of Tomorrow on May 20, 2014 2:02:26 GMT -5
I think part of the problem is when some folks try to build up (either for their own beliefs or to knock down somebody else's) the original trilogy as some kind of Citizen Kane-esque achievement. It was never that. Well yeah it wasn't a Citizen Kane-esque achievement, the original trilogy was fun. Sorry, just didn't like Citizen Kane, had to do it.
|
|