|
Cantide posted:The misadventures of Jar Jar Binks and how he created the Empire. There's a quote I saw several years ago (probably here on SA) that explains this. So all the clones (including Boba) are clones of Jango Fett, a man so dangerous, he can take on jedi and win. The clones are shown on screen as being roughly on par with the droid armies. Jar Jar Binks takes out legions of droids in TPM just by being comic relief. Jar Jar Binks is the most powerful being in the Star Wars universe.
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 17:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 09:44 |
|
|
Again...quote:You can say "it was supposed to be hectic," but it completely failed at eliciting any emotion besides, "what the hell" with that. ..."hectic" is not mutually exclusive from "engaging." This whole conversation is basically some people explaining why they don't find something enjoyable (which is mostly to do with form/construction) and people countering with "but it meant this." The RLM review is basically all about how the details of how the films were constructed on a technical level make them completely un-engaging experiences (and contrast movies with similar themes that were able to do BOTH, and show why). "It means" is not an acceptable response to that. For another example, having Obi Wan and Anakin fight each other with blue lightsabers at the end of the movie is acceptable from a thematic standpoint, but on an aesthetic level, it is not as engaging as if the lightsabers contrasted, and actually takes "feeling" away from the fight while doing so. However, if, say, they had complimentary CLOTHING color choices with one major visual distinction, the same thing would be said, while providing the visual aesthetic of clashing lightsaber colors that worked so well in Episodes 1/4/5/6. Especially since lightsabers make a better direct extension of emotion.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 17:23
|
|
|
You're welcome not to enjoy a thing, but there's nothing wrong with other people explaining why that thing had merit and meaning. Some people actually did engage with the 'completely un-engaging experiences'.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 17:48
|
|
|
I feel the prequels can be addressed in two separate ways their technical production merits and the actual story lines Clearly, their technical production is awful, the CGI doesn't age well, the acting is wooden, and the sets are like Xbox games, the lighting is often Joss Whedon levels of TV-bad. Dialogue scenes are just characters sitting down, talking, standing up, going to a window, looking over their shoulder while blandly reading lines of dialogue. I don't think people really will argue with that. The story, however, is worth discussing because whether or not you like the PT, they happened and provide context for the OT. I'd agree with the idea that Lucas has no idea why the OT worked so well, (even if he is the god of the universe) because of the insertion of midichlorians in TPM. He started down a path to demystify the force and wrap it in science which on that grounds alone proves that he doesn't really understand the appeal of the Star Wars universe. However, death of the author and all that could point to the fact that the Jedi themselves didn't really get the force either and they were trying to wrap it in science and quantify it themselves too. Essentially, you can bundle up all the bizarrely weird and bad Lucas story elements and incongruous PT and OT threads into a package that they are perfectly representing the Jedi being failures and retarded, but the truth is that Lucas is just a poor story teller. However, it's perfectly fine to ignore Lucas in the discussions and engage in an interesting meaningful analysis of the movies themselves. TLDR: here's a lightsaber blaster I designed when I was twelve: 
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 18:32
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:If the prequels give you a strange, awkward feeling, chances are Lucas wants you to feel that way. Say the prequel trilogy really is a grand, meta satire. What could the films have done differently in order to break the spell of the OT and get more viewers to appreciate that satire? edit: wrote prequels instead of OT Ave Azaria fucked around with this message at 19:44 on Dec 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 18:40
|
|
|
Ave Azaria posted:Say the prequel trilogy really is a grand, meta satire. What could the films have done differently in order to break the spell the prequels and get more viewers to appreciate that satire? Have them be directed by Mel Brooks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 18:46
|
|
|
Jerk McJerkface posted:I'd agree with the idea that Lucas has no idea why the OT worked so well, (even if he is the god of the universe) because of the insertion of midichlorians in TPM. He started down a path to demystify the force and wrap it in science which on that grounds alone proves that he doesn't really understand the appeal of the Star Wars universe. However, death of the author and all that could point to the fact that the Jedi themselves didn't really get the force either and they were trying to wrap it in science and quantify it themselves too. I've read (in the Secret History of Star Wars book) that the real reason that midichlorians were introduced was simply so that Anakin could be objectively demonstrated to be really strong in the force. Lucas thought he needed this because with the way he had written up the Jedi Order, he couldn't think of any other way they could be convinced to allow Anakin to be trained. He didn't intend to demystify the force, it was just a quick story patch. It's actually kind of fascinating to read how many of the things that got people so outraged were simply story fixes that Lucas didn't think through the implications of. In particular, the contortions that they went through to attempt to resolve the tangled storylines created by the repeated revisions to Skywalker family history are just nuts. For the longest time, Lucas was going to have Uncle Owen turn out to be Obi-Wan's brother and an impostor. Which kind of does lend more weight to the Death of the Author argument. If we're going by authorial intent, why should we consider these things any more important than Lucas did?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 19:35
|
|
|
INH5 posted:He didn't intend to demystify the force, it was just a quick story patch. Which lends credence to my statement that the prequels are, from a film-making perspective, terrible films. Lucas shot them all from a rough draft, with the proper treatment to work them into decent scripts. The introduction of midichlorians immediately makes no sense to most people that are familiar with the mythos of Star Wars, yet the creator gives them no thought at all. Had he taken another couple months, or passed the scripts on to a different writer, maybe these ideas would have been fleshed out and made workable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 19:40
|
|
|
Lets! Get! Weird! posted:It's also kinda weird because you also do this death of the author thing while still ascribing it to Lucas - Lucas didn't want you to think Obi Wan was stupid he's just notoriously bad at writing human beings (and directing them). You're giving the man a lot more credit than he should get, and seem completely unaware of how awful accepting that prequel nonsense makes the characters in the original trilogy. Luke still listens to Yoda in the end. He doesn't say you must kill Vader - he says you must confront Vader which is what Luke does. This is from a couple pages back but I noticed you harping on this point that Yoda doesn't say Luke must kill Vader and I think there's something interesting that you missed. You're right that Yoda says Luke must confront Vader, so it's ambiguous whether Yoda thinks Luke needs to kill Vader; however, Obi-Wan clearly does think that Luke needs to kill Vader. When Luke says "I can't kill my own father," (ghost) Obi-Wan says, "Then the Emperor has already won."
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 20:29
|
|
|
Vogon Poet posted:This is from a couple pages back but I noticed you harping on this point that Yoda doesn't say Luke must kill Vader and I think there's something interesting that you missed. You're right that Yoda says Luke must confront Vader, so it's ambiguous whether Yoda thinks Luke needs to kill Vader; however, Obi-Wan clearly does think that Luke needs to kill Vader. When Luke says "I can't kill my own father," (ghost) Obi-Wan says, "Then the Emperor has already won." Yeah, I agree with this. Obi-wan and Yoda are shown as not having the best relationship. Yoda doesn't want to train Luke, and Obi-wan of sasses him, basically calling him senile. Obi-wan was always shown having an agenda by lying to Luke. However, comically enough, the lies Obi-wans tells are all also due to Lucas' poor writing and changing direct from movie to movie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 20:35
|
|
|
Jerk McJerkface posted:but the truth is that Lucas is just a poor story teller. No, that's your opinion. Normally the distinction goes without saying but I feel it gets lost when talking about certain films and filmmakers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 21:47
|
|
|
Cheesus posted:I've always defended the prequels but you've hit one of the few instances where I was incredibly disappointed. Wow, that's really interesting to hear. I'm shocked it got so far into being produced without making it into the movie somehow, or even as a 'deleted scene'. I wonder if it was largely because they couldn't convince Liam Neeson to do the voiceover work (could be wrong, but I thought it was that he just didn't want to do it, and it wasn't just scheduling).
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 21:57
|
|
|
INH5 posted:the real reason that midichlorians were introduced was simply so that Anakin could be objectively demonstrated to be really strong in the force. Lucas thought he needed this because with the way he had written up the Jedi Order, he couldn't think of any other way they could be convinced to allow Anakin to be trained. He didn't intend to demystify the force, it was just a quick story patch. Think about this a second. He didn't intend to demystify the force, he only intended to write the old Jedi as a group that relies primarily on objective scientific measurements, and would not be able recognize their religion's equivalent of the resurrected Christ without the help of a portable blood-scanning device. This is as bad with inference as when Obi Wan looked at a map and wondered how a whole planet could disappear. "What is this? A solar system for ants?!"
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 21:58
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:He didn't intend to demystify the force, he only intended to write the old Jedi as a group that relies primarily on objective scientific measurements, and would not be able recognize their religion's equivalent of the resurrected Christ without the help of a portable blood-scanning device. I don't think you understand what intent means. I mean it's totally valid and cool to read it that way but it wasn't what Lucas intended as the person you quoted said. You should have mentioned the librarian instead of Obi Wan though. Plus the fact the guys who disagreed with the blood test about their Jesus and used the Force were right. Maxwell Lord posted:No, that's your opinion. Normally the distinction goes without saying but I feel it gets lost when talking about certain films and filmmakers. Does everyone have to qualify a statement with "I think" or "generally regarded as"? It's funny anyone would quibble with someone saying Lucas is a poor weaver of tales. Lets! Get! Weird! fucked around with this message at 23:31 on Dec 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 23:28
|
|
|
Lets! Get! Weird! posted:I don't think you understand what intent means. I mean it's totally valid and cool to read it that way but it wasn't what Lucas intended as the person you quoted said. You should have mentioned the librarian instead of Obi Wan though. The guy said that Lucas thought he needed this because of "the way he had written up the Jedi Order." If the Jedi Order was being written such that they needed something where "Anakin could be objectively demonstrated to be really strong in the force," then that's saying that the Jedi Order is losing/has lost their connection to the force as a mystical essence. Note that Palpatine doesn't need a blood test, he can just sense that Anakin is strong in the force. In the OT, Vader is able to sense this in Luke while they're in separate spaceships. But Lucas felt that the Jedi Order, as they were in the prequels, needed something different. Lets! Get! Weird! posted:Does everyone have to qualify a statement with "I think" or "generally regarded as"? It's funny anyone would quibble with someone saying Lucas is a poor weaver of tales. Not everything needs to be qualified with "I think," but some things shouldn't be stated as "the truth is...". And, yeah, George Lucas made Star Wars. It's reasonable to quibble with someone saying he's a bad storyteller. Sir Kodiak fucked around with this message at 23:43 on Dec 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2013 23:39
|
|
|
This was neat https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgICnbC2-_Y
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 00:10
|
|
|
I've been lurking this thread for a while and am genuinely shocked that people are arguing that the prequels had any good elements, let alone that they could be called good films. Even if they weren't trying to tie in with OT they'd be three boring, blandly shot films. I'm really wondering how old the people defending them are because I'm 26 and even at 12 years old I hated TPM.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 00:31
|
|
|
Action Serious posted:I've been lurking this thread for a while and am genuinely shocked that people are arguing that the prequels had any good elements, let alone that they could be called good films. Ok.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 00:35
|
|
|
Counterpoint: I saw Phantom Menace when I was 8 and loved the hell out of it. There's something to be said for appealing to the kids in the audience. Shame the appeal wasn't as universal as the OT's
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 00:35
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Think about this a second. Ben Stiller would have owned as Obi Wan, he would have done that expression with his face when Anakin did something dumb and everyone would have laughed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 00:37
|
|
|
Do you think there's any merit to the idea that if the OT were released today they'd be panned? There's no way we can know for sure, of course, but I can't imagine a film like ROTJ being released today not being savaged on the internet. "Teddy Bears defeat the best of the Empire? BS!".
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 00:41
|
|
|
redshirt posted:Do you think there's any merit to the idea that if the OT were released today they'd be panned? There's no way we can know for sure, of course, but I can't imagine a film like ROTJ being released today not being savaged on the internet. "Teddy Bears defeat the best of the Empire? BS!". So many films rip off conventions started by star wars that asking this question creates a time paradox
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 00:45
|
|
|
redshirt posted:Do you think there's any merit to the idea that if the OT were released today they'd be panned? There's no way we can know for sure, of course, but I can't imagine a film like ROTJ being released today not being savaged on the internet. "Teddy Bears defeat the best of the Empire? BS!". That hypothetical has the problem that the original Star Wars had such a huge impact that, had it not been released when it was, the current state of Hollywood as well as pop culture in general would be very different than what it is now. So you'd need to do some alternate history writing and describe the actual context of this universe in order to answer that question.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 00:46
|
|
|
Rita Repulsa posted:So many films rip off conventions started by star wars that asking this question creates a time paradox Or you could just look at John Carter and see how the granddaddy of Sci-Fi faired (hint: poorly).
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 00:50
|
|
|
I haven't read the whole thread but have people seen Siskel and Ebert defending Star Wars? It's funny hearing the same complaints about the OT as the new ones. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ky9-eIlHzAE
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 00:53
|
|
|
e: nvm
Baronash fucked around with this message at 01:00 on Dec 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 00:54
|
|
|
Rita Repulsa posted:So many films rip off conventions started by star wars that asking this question creates a time paradox This- we'd be dealing with an entirely different film industry. (The studios would probably have worked out some kind of "blockbuster" idea, but beyond that...)
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 01:45
|
|
|
I ask the question only because it seems we, the audience, are more likely to be critical today than audiences in the past. Mainly because of the Internet. The PT is constructed in much the same way as the OT - as a kid's movie, mainly - but the same techniques used in the OT are critically panned in the PT.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 01:53
|
|
|
I know someone said if Prometheus was released in 1979 and Alien was released in 2012 Prometheus would be seen as the hugely innovative movie while Alien would just be a slasher movie with old people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 01:57
|
|
|
Corek posted:I know someone said if Prometheus was released in 1979 and Alien was released in 2012 Prometheus would be seen as the hugely innovative movie while Alien would just be a slasher movie with old people. I imagine people would have been especially impressed by the special effects from 33 years in the future.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 01:58
|
|
|
INH5 posted:I imagine people would have been especially impressed by the special effects from 33 years in the future. I'm assuming it would just be a grey-painted guy on greenscreen. Kind of like Klaatu.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 02:00
|
|
|
redshirt posted:I ask the question only because it seems we, the audience, are more likely to be critical today than audiences in the past. Mainly because of the Internet. It's not that audiences are more critical necessarily, it's that things that were novel are kind of boring these days because it's been done so much. Again, look at John Carter.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 02:03
|
|
|
People are products of their times when movies attempt to be timeless. The question of how people would see a movie if it was released at a different time says a lot about how fallible and overopinionated people can be, we should try to just enjoy stories for whatever they are. I liked John Carter.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 02:37
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:I liked John Carter. What did you like about it? (honest question)
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 02:40
|
|
|
redshirt posted:Do you think there's any merit to the idea that if the OT were released today they'd be panned? There's no way we can know for sure, of course, but I can't imagine a film like ROTJ being released today not being savaged on the internet. "Teddy Bears defeat the best of the Empire? BS!". I didn't find a source for it in my very brief search, but I seem to remember reading that RotJ was the worst reviewed of the six movies when looking at reviews upon original release.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 02:59
|
|
|
While I think most people would agree that the prequels were failures on some level, I think they're failures of execution and not of vision. We could easily have ended up with something really safe and crowd-pleasing like we're likely to have with the upcoming sequel trilogy, but Lucas instead aimed for something a lot more downbeat at its root and full of kind of bizarre moments. It's not a ton fun to watch, but I'm still kind of glad the PT exists.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 04:21
|
|
|
Frackie Robinson posted:While I think most people would agree that the prequels were failures on some level, I think they're failures of execution and not of vision. We could easily have ended up with something really safe and crowd-pleasing like we're likely to have with the upcoming sequel trilogy, but Lucas instead aimed for something a lot more downbeat at its root and full of kind of bizarre moments. It's not a ton fun to watch, but I'm still kind of glad the PT exists. Most of the problems with the prequel trilogy stemmed directly from Lucas trying to create a "crowd-pleaser". Terrible writing and directing aside, the films were desperately PG and filled beyond the brim with fan service. The only thing I really enjoyed about the prequel trilogy was how well the lightsaber combat was choreographed in The Phantom Menace.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 04:41
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:What did you like about it? (honest question) The comedy scenes were good, it had a sense of humour to it that I quite liked, the conversation that kept getting interrupted by attempts at escape was fantastic. Also visually it was great, it was very good at creating an alien environment and even the completely CGI characters had life to them. It did a good job of adapting the pulpy nature of the books, although it carried over the aspects of the overarcing story it didn't need to and messed with Carter's character somewhat. I enjoyed it. Obviously not a perfect movie, but like the prequels it just does something for me that makes up for it. EDIT: VVV No, you see the point is the fights are ridiculous and overchoreographed. The Jedi are such elaborate over-the-top fighters that they are no longer even practical at it and you could probably just walk up and stab them while they dance around in circles. (I am mostly joking, that video's great) Hbomberguy fucked around with this message at 04:57 on Dec 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 04:50
|
|
|
Wonderful Bread posted:The only thing I really enjoyed about the prequel trilogy was how well the lightsaber combat was choreographed in The Phantom Menace. I suppose that purely from a choreography standpoint, the prequels had some decent fight scenes. This video is worth a watch though: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0mUVY9fLlw
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 04:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 09:44 |
|
|
JohnSherman posted:I suppose that purely from a choreography standpoint, the prequels had some decent fight scenes. Yeah, those fights were actually terrible, but at least they weren't that one in RotS. You know the one. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 04:56
|
|
