STAR WARS VIII - "The Last Jedi" - Movie Discussion

[jeff_14]

46 minutes ago, citymorgue said:

Basically, from the looks of it the people who actually like the prequel trilogy are generally of the age where they were very young when they first came out.  I was young too and even then I enjoyed them to a point.  I only watched them maybe once or twice, but the original trilogy, I've seen many, many, many times over.  You may call it rose colored glasses, but I think those that always try to defend the prequel trilogy as the ones seeing with rose colored glasses.  Those movies are pretty much horrible in every aspect.  We could've done without the episode 1 period.  They could've thrown out all the politics, which covers about half the remaining films.  Get rid of the insanely rapey (sorry if this is against the terms, but there was wayyy to much free candy in an old van vibe to it,) vibe of the love story between Anakin and padme, and you have probably about 40 minutes total watchable film between all 3, and those still really aren't even watchable minutes either.

You know just because a movie started out well doesn't mean that it's a good movie.  Once the beer goggles wore off, and rewatched it after the initial adrenaline rush kicked in when it was first announced, people started to realize they were duped with those movies.

I would LOVE to know where that came from.  I've heard a lot of opinions about people like episode 3, but almost never have I heard anyone rank it better than any of the original trilogy.

And even then, that entire movie was completely pointless.  Finding out that was in George Lucas' head for how Vader became Vader, destroyed who Vader was imagined.  He just apparently turned out to be a stupid whiny little b**** ******* that deserved to die for that alone. 

If you don't have the episode 1 period you lose most of the story beats that pay off over the trilogy. You could watch the OT without watching New Hope. Basically everything they tell you about Darth Vader is a lie and they give you all the info you need to know to understand what happened in that movie in Empire. You can see a Death Star get blown up in ROTJ and have it be fresh and original. 

The beer goggles wearing off is exactly what's happening with Force Awakens. I realized we'd been duped the moment the death planet appeared and now people looking back on it realize they were tricked into watching a movie they'd already seen before. Disney never advertised it as a remake but that's what we got. I'll take an original story over a remake anyday. At least it's new. The PT movies have an ongoing story which appeals to those of us who enjoy layered stories like Game of Thrones. The OT was thrown together movie to movie. Look at how much of the Darth Vader stuff had to be awkwardly retconned in each movie. Originally Boba Fett was supposed to be the main villain in ROTJ and then they made him a joke and decided to go with another Death Star. I keep finding that people who hate the PT are really just upset that Lucas didn't remake the OT, as has just happened with Force Awakens. What really made the OT work was how they defied expectations. No one had ever seen anything like New Hope before, and Empire looked nothing like New Hope. ROTJ is considered the weakest because it recycled a few plotlines and threw in the stupid Ewoks. It's a damning indictment of movie fans that they reward remakes over trying to broaden the story. Oh look, the next Star Wars movie has a death star too. How original. 

[jeff_14]

16 hours ago, jbacunn said:

So you wanted them to build an entire ice covered planet with a lethal planet destroying weapon built inside of it?  

I'd rather they skipped the ice planet entirely and come up with something other than another Death Star. But in the base itself, the effects are weak. None of the backgrounds look real, especially the cavernous rooms they are crawling around in.

[citymorgue]

8 minutes ago, jeff_14 said:

If you don't have the episode 1 period you lose most of the story beats that pay off over the trilogy. You could watch the OT without watching New Hope. Basically everything they tell you about Darth Vader is a lie and they give you all the info you need to know to understand what happened in that movie in Empire. You can see a Death Star get blown up in ROTJ and have it be fresh and original.  

HAHAHAHAHA Seriously right?  Who cares about a kid Anakin.  It was just one bumbling mess after another, and the kid was annoying enough as it is.  I'm sorry, but Darth Vader in the original trilogy, never came off as a whiny little b****.  He was a badass with obviously conflicting emotions near the end to see his son all grown up and resist the power to the dark side.  You can feel the conflict within Vader to believe he could change as well.  He was able to convey all of that without a single line of dialogue.  On the other hand, we had to listen to Hayden Christianson tells us every single time something was wrong with him, as if the audience is too stupid to figure it out themselves.  Not to mention that the two personalities period don't match up.

And I see where you are going, but we do need ANH to set up the other stuff.  Without the plans and ensuing plot to destroy the first death star, we wouldn't have any idea what these people were fighting for to begin with.  Or what the deal with any of the conflict is going on.  Plus the prequel trilogy ruins so many things outside of vader.  They ruined the Jedi.  They ruined the force. Etc.  It was just pure garbage films, with crappy dialogue that no one in any universe would ever say.

Quote

The beer goggles wearing off is exactly what's happening with Force Awakens. I realized we'd been duped the moment the death planet appeared and now people looking back on it realize they were tricked into watching a movie they'd already seen before. Disney never advertised it as a remake but that's what we got. I'll take an original story over a remake anyday. At least it's new. The PT movies have an ongoing story which appeals to those of us who enjoy layered stories like Game of Thrones. The OT was thrown together movie to movie. Look at how much of the Darth Vader stuff had to be awkwardly retconned in each movie. Originally Boba Fett was supposed to be the main villain in ROTJ and then they made him a joke and decided to go with another Death Star. I keep finding that people who hate the PT are really just upset that Lucas didn't remake the OT, as has just happened with Force Awakens. What really made the OT work was how they defied expectations. No one had ever seen anything like New Hope before, and Empire looked nothing like New Hope. ROTJ is considered the weakest because it recycled a few plotlines and threw in the stupid Ewoks. It's a damning indictment of movie fans that they reward remakes over trying to broaden the story. Oh look, the next Star Wars movie has a death star too. How original.

It's interesting that you are essentially saying the prequel trilogy is better than TFA, which is laughable in it's own right.  And so what if they recycled plots?  Disney didn't need to advertise it as a remake, because it's a sequel!!!  It takes place 30 years later.  It's on the same timeline as the original.  It cannot by definition be a remake. They used a lot of similar devices, but it's to wash that nasty taste of the prequels out and remind everyone what star wars is about.  And besides, the torch is being handed over to a bunch of new characters that are infinitely more interesting than any of the throwaway characters from the prequel trilogy. 

The bolded part has got to be the funniest thing written.  The prequel trilogy is not anywhere NEAR the level of story writing that Game of Thrones is on.  George R R Martin actually knows how to write a universe with compelling characters that you can truly root for.  The prequel trilogy reads like a damn 5 year old wrote it.  In fact the dialogue is just as clunky and unbelievable as 50 shades of grey.  Pure garbage writing.

With regards to Boba Fett.  I'm glad he wasn't the main villain.  Don't get me wrong, Fett is cool and all, but he does go down like an amateur in the movies.  It didn't take much to foil his evil plots.  Not exactly the scariest bounty hunter.

And no, most people aren't upset with Lucas because he didn't 'remake' the OT.  They are pissed because he gave us the abortion of a trilogy that is Episodes 1-3.

Of course you can pick apart the movies for the Death Star and everything, but none of the movies were going to win any high awards for storytelling.  It's the adventure it takes you on that's the key.  TFA recaptures that feeling so well.  There is a reason that people went back multiple times to see it.  Even crappy movies can make a ton of money, but eventually people will get the hint, and it will disappear quickly.

[jeff_14]

1 hour ago, citymorgue said:

HAHAHAHAHA Seriously right?  Who cares about a kid Anakin.  It was just one bumbling mess after another, and the kid was annoying enough as it is.  I'm sorry, but Darth Vader in the original trilogy, never came off as a whiny little b****.  He was a badass with obviously conflicting emotions near the end to see his son all grown up and resist the power to the dark side.  You can feel the conflict within Vader to believe he could change as well.  He was able to convey all of that without a single line of dialogue.  On the other hand, we had to listen to Hayden Christianson tells us every single time something was wrong with him, as if the audience is too stupid to figure it out themselves.  Not to mention that the two personalities period don't match up.

And I see where you are going, but we do need ANH to set up the other stuff.  Without the plans and ensuing plot to destroy the first death star, we wouldn't have any idea what these people were fighting for to begin with.  Or what the deal with any of the conflict is going on.  Plus the prequel trilogy ruins so many things outside of vader.  They ruined the Jedi.  They ruined the force. Etc.  It was just pure garbage films, with crappy dialogue that no one in any universe would ever say.

It's interesting that you are essentially saying the prequel trilogy is better than TFA, which is laughable in it's own right.  And so what if they recycled plots?  Disney didn't need to advertise it as a remake, because it's a sequel!!!  It takes place 30 years later.  It's on the same timeline as the original.  It cannot by definition be a remake. They used a lot of similar devices, but it's to wash that nasty taste of the prequels out and remind everyone what star wars is about.  And besides, the torch is being handed over to a bunch of new characters that are infinitely more interesting than any of the throwaway characters from the prequel trilogy. 

The bolded part has got to be the funniest thing written.  The prequel trilogy is not anywhere NEAR the level of story writing that Game of Thrones is on.  George R R Martin actually knows how to write a universe with compelling characters that you can truly root for.  The prequel trilogy reads like a damn 5 year old wrote it.  In fact the dialogue is just as clunky and unbelievable as 50 shades of grey.  Pure garbage writing.

With regards to Boba Fett.  I'm glad he wasn't the main villain.  Don't get me wrong, Fett is cool and all, but he does go down like an amateur in the movies.  It didn't take much to foil his evil plots.  Not exactly the scariest bounty hunter.

And no, most people aren't upset with Lucas because he didn't 'remake' the OT.  They are pissed because he gave us the abortion of a trilogy that is Episodes 1-3.

Of course you can pick apart the movies for the Death Star and everything, but none of the movies were going to win any high awards for storytelling.  It's the adventure it takes you on that's the key.  TFA recaptures that feeling so well.  There is a reason that people went back multiple times to see it.  Even crappy movies can make a ton of money, but eventually people will get the hint, and it will disappear quickly.

You have misread most of my post which makes me wonder how much you failed to understand about the movies. I am not saying the PT is better overall. I am saying it does some things better. I still prefer the OT but my enjoyment is not a blind cult-like obedience that requires me to hate everything that is the PT. I have serious problems with the PT but nothing that makes me think they are garbage or should not have been made. It's hard to take you seriously with your spewing hate and use of words like abortion. Criticizing the PT for clunky dialogue is pretty hypocritical given that the OT is notorious for it. It was all written by the same person. It was Harrison Ford who told Lucas on set "You can write this stuff but you can't say it". That's one reason why Alec Guinness thought the OT was rubbish and told a child to stop watching it. TFA copies the adventure from A New Hope. To paraphrase Princess Leia, if remakes are all you care about it, then that's what you'll receive. Disney will be only to happy to take your money and sell you the exaxt same thing again and again. Aim higher. It's more satisfying.

Edited May 12, 2016 by jeff_14

[fuzzy_bricks]

2 hours ago, jeff_14 said:

Your entire evidence for something not being accurate is one poll of 471 people? There are many other polls with much broader samples that say otherwise. There is nothing unwatchable about them at all. Hamfisted acting, corny dialogue? This is Star Wars we're talking about. That's the OT in a nutshell. There was nothing complicated or boring about the politics. Maybe you just didn't understand it. My 10 year old gets it just fine. 

Please provide a source for these other polls, I would be interested in seeing them.

[jeff_14]

20 minutes ago, fuzzy_bricks said:

Please provide a source for these other polls, I would be interested in seeing them.

Here's one. Some little site called Rotten Tomatoes. Worst grocery delivery service ever. According to this Revenge of the Sith was actually the best.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/star-wars-the-force-awakens/best-worst-movies-poll/

Edited May 12, 2016 by jeff_14

[tjj1984]

3 hours ago, jeff_14 said:

Your entire evidence for something not being accurate is one poll of 471 people? There are many other polls with much broader samples that say otherwise.

Five Thirty Eight is a website dedicated to opinion poll analysis, so I put more trust in their polling methods than say, an MTV.com poll.

3 hours ago, jeff_14 said:

There is nothing unwatchable about them at all. Hamfisted acting, corny dialogue? This is Star Wars we're talking about. That's the OT in a nutshell. 

I'll grant you that there are some corny lines in the OT, but I challenge you to find a line from the OT that is worse than any one of the following:

"Love won't save you, Padme. Only my new powers will do that."

"I don't like sand. It's coarse and rough and irritating and it gets everywhere."

"Now this is podracing!"

"I don't care what universe you're from, that's gotta hurt!"

"Yousa think yousa people ganna die?!"

And, of course, my favorite:

That is a fantastic actor being hamstrung by awful dialogue. Which is the PT in a nutshell: good concepts, poor execution.

 

3 hours ago, jeff_14 said:

There was nothing complicated or boring about the politics. 

The opening crawl of The Phantom Menace reads like the beginning of an NPR segment:

"The taxation of trade routes to outlying star systems is in dispute ... The congress of the Republic endlessly debates this alarming chain of events..."

The main problem with the politics in the prequels is that it is over-explained (see also: Midochlorians). The political messages of Star Wars are better told through archetypes and allegories than exposition on an intergalatic senate floor. I am glad, however, that Lucas didn't have Padme exclaim "Now this is politicking!"

 

3 hours ago, jeff_14 said:

Maybe you just didn't understand it. My 10 year old gets it just fine. 

Sick burn.

 

 

Edited May 12, 2016 by tjj1984

[jeff_14]

4 minutes ago, tjj1984 said:

Five Thirty Eight is a website dedicated to opinion poll analysis, so I put more trust in their polling methods than say, an MTV.com poll.

I'll grant you that there are some corny lines in the OT, but I challenge you to find a line from the OT that is worse than any one of the following:

"Love won't save you, Padme. Only my new powers will do that."

"I don't like sand. It's coarse and rough and irritating and it gets everywhere."

"Now this is podracing!"

"I don't care what universe you're from, that's gotta hurt!"

"Yousa think yousa people ganna die?!"

And, of course, my favorite:

That is a fantastic actor being hamstrung by awful dialogue. Which is the PT in a nutshell: good concepts, poor execution.

 

The opening crawl of The Phantom Menace reads like the beginning of an NPR segment:

"The taxation of trade routes to outlying star systems is in dispute ... The congress of the Republic endlessly debates this alarming chain of events..."

The main problem with the politics in the prequels is that it is over-explained. The political messages of Star Wars are better told through archetypes and allegories than exposition on an intergalatic senate floor. I am glad, however, that Lucas didn't have Padme exclaim "Now this is politicking!"

 

Sick burn.

 

 

Do you put more faith in 538 which no one has heard of versus Rotten Tomatoes? 

Bad dialogue -

II wonder if he cares about anything, or anyone" "I care". Groan. 

"I was going to pick up some power converters at Toshe Station" in a really whiny tone. 

Leia calls Han "laser brain". 

Laugh it up fuzzball

She can make the Kessel run in 12 parsecs.

It is the name of your true self. You've only forgotten. I know there is good in you. The Emperor hasn't driven it from you fully. That is why you couldn't destroy me.

I know....somehow...I've always known.

I recognized your foul stench when I was brought on board. 

I could go on,.......

 

The opening crawl scenes are 3 paragraphs and tell you all you need to know about the situation. Please tell me 3 paragraphs is not too difficult to manage. It's not like they get into discussions over tax rates or quotas or anything. They just say taxes, like once. The American Revolution began over taxes. This isn't hard or out of left field stuff. 

 

[fuzzy_bricks]

39 minutes ago, jeff_14 said:

Here's one. Some little site called Rotten Tomatoes. Worst grocery delivery service ever. According to this Revenge of the Sith was actually the best.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/star-wars-the-force-awakens/best-worst-movies-poll/

I wouldn't really call that a poll.  They only looked at the original reviews at the time of release.  If you visit Rotten Tomatoes now, when you can view everything in context, the prequel trilogy doesn't fare as well, even The Force Awakens takes it down.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/search/?search=star+wars

16 minutes ago, tjj1984 said:

I'll grant you that there are some corny lines in the OT, but I challenge you to find a line from the OT that is worse than any one of the following:

"Love won't save you, Padme. Only my new powers will do that."

"I don't like sand. It's coarse and rough and irritating and it gets everywhere."

"Now this is podracing!"

"I don't care what universe you're from, that's gotta hurt!"

"Yousa think yousa people ganna die?!"

Don't forget this gem.

 

[jeff_14]

2 minutes ago, fuzzy_bricks said:

I wouldn't really call that a poll.  They only looked at the original reviews at the time of release.  If you visit Rotten Tomatoes now, when you can view everything in context, the prequel trilogy doesn't fare as well, even The Force Awakens takes it down.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/search/?search=star+wars

Don't forget this gem.

 

I really don't care which film was better or best. My point was that there are people who quite enjoyed the PT, and in some cases more than the OT. This example proves just that. I don't see the point in anointing the OT as some cinematic masterpiece and treating the PT as the 7th sign of the apocalypse. They all have a lot of similarities and they each have their own areas that they do better or worse than the others in. Bad dialogue is one where they all tie for a dubious award. When George Lucas won a lifetime achievement award he thanked Francis Ford Coppola for improving his dialogue from atrocious to awful or words to that effect. I worry that people who have almost a pathological need to assault 3 movies that are generally well enjoyed by most people (and which have decent IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes ratings) and to insult people because they enjoy them are not the kind of fans Star Wars or any property needs. 

[fuzzy_bricks]

5 minutes ago, jeff_14 said:

I really don't care which film was better or best. My point was that there are people who quite enjoyed the PT, and in some cases more than the OT. This example proves just that. I don't see the point in anointing the OT as some cinematic masterpiece and treating the PT as the 7th sign of the apocalypse. They all have a lot of similarities and they each have their own areas that they do better or worse than the others in. Bad dialogue is one where they all tie for a dubious award. When George Lucas won a lifetime achievement award he thanked Francis Ford Coppola for improving his dialogue from atrocious to awful or words to that effect. I worry that people who have almost a pathological need to assault 3 movies that are generally well enjoyed by most people (and which have decent IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes ratings) and to insult people because they enjoy them are not the kind of fans Star Wars or any property needs. 

I'm not attacking anything, but you said there were many polls that showed people like Revenge of the Sith more than A New Hope and I just wanted to see that evidence.  If you look at Rotten Tomatoes and whether the audience liked the movie or not, which seems more like a "poll" to me than critics' reviews, those scores certainly tilt one direction.

[exciter1]

I think most of "The Phantom Menace" is better than the first 3/4 of "Attack of the Clones".  I've seen AOTC many times, but there are parts of the first 3/4 of that one that are very hard to stomach.  For the most part, I don't mind skipping through to the Battle of Geonosis and starting from there.  I'm not sure why I'm jumping in here?  Certain generations will enjoy what they are familiar with, regardless of quality.  Nostalgia often wins...

[citymorgue]

57 minutes ago, jeff_14 said:

The opening crawl scenes are 3 paragraphs and tell you all you need to know about the situation. Please tell me 3 paragraphs is not too difficult to manage. It's not like they get into discussions over tax rates or quotas or anything. They just say taxes, like once. The American Revolution began over taxes. This isn't hard or out of left field stuff. 

Yes, they may explain that, but the fact that they kept going on and on about senate this, tax this, blockade this, etc, etc.  They just went on about politicking, and it's just not necessary, when in the end, none of the politicks matter anyways because it ultimately did nothing to stop anything.  Not to mention that the dialogue across the board was still more unbearable than the OT.

44 minutes ago, jeff_14 said:

I really don't care which film was better or best. My point was that there are people who quite enjoyed the PT, and in some cases more than the OT. This example proves just that. I don't see the point in anointing the OT as some cinematic masterpiece and treating the PT as the 7th sign of the apocalypse. They all have a lot of similarities and they each have their own areas that they do better or worse than the others in. Bad dialogue is one where they all tie for a dubious award. When George Lucas won a lifetime achievement award he thanked Francis Ford Coppola for improving his dialogue from atrocious to awful or words to that effect. I worry that people who have almost a pathological need to assault 3 movies that are generally well enjoyed by most people (and which have decent IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes ratings) and to insult people because they enjoy them are not the kind of fans Star Wars or any property needs. 

Yes there are people who enjoy the Prequel trilogy, and although they may enjoy it, they are way over glossing the fact that they are in general terrible movies.  No one, not even me are saying that the OT are cinematic masterpieces, but they are 100 times better than the crap Lucas gave us, no matter how much you want to live in denial about it.  No they do not tie in bad dialogue.

I'm not attacking anyone, other than the movies.  The movies are garbage, and I'm glad we were able to wash ourselves clean with episode VII.  The prequels can just be a footnote in what movies shouldn't be.  Just like the myriad of terrible movies out there.

53 minutes ago, fuzzy_bricks said:

I wouldn't really call that a poll.  They only looked at the original reviews at the time of release.  If you visit Rotten Tomatoes now, when you can view everything in context, the prequel trilogy doesn't fare as well, even The Force Awakens takes it down.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/search/?search=star+wars

Which points back to my beer goggles.  Once the initial buzz of Star Wars wore off, people realized they were bamboozled.

2 hours ago, jeff_14 said:

You have misread most of my post which makes me wonder how much you failed to understand about the movies. I am not saying the PT is better overall. I am saying it does some things better. I still prefer the OT but my enjoyment is not a blind cult-like obedience that requires me to hate everything that is the PT. I have serious problems with the PT but nothing that makes me think they are garbage or should not have been made. It's hard to take you seriously with your spewing hate and use of words like abortion. Criticizing the PT for clunky dialogue is pretty hypocritical given that the OT is notorious for it. It was all written by the same person. It was Harrison Ford who told Lucas on set "You can write this stuff but you can't say it". That's one reason why Alec Guinness thought the OT was rubbish and told a child to stop watching it. TFA copies the adventure from A New Hope. To paraphrase Princess Leia, if remakes are all you care about it, then that's what you'll receive. Disney will be only to happy to take your money and sell you the exaxt same thing again and again. Aim higher. It's more satisfying.

What does it do better? I really don't see where it did anything better?  It's not a cult-like obedience.  It's just the prequel trilogy doesn't deserve to get glossed over the multitudes of horrible decision making to attempt to make it a watchable movie.  I've read many opinion pieces about what people have perceived to be better, and most of the time they looked at insignificant details, like oooo look at all the lightsabers.  Oooo look at Darth maul, yet completely gloss over the glaring story and script, problems.

Again, I do not think you understand the difference between a remake and a sequel.

[tjj1984]

1 minute ago, jeff_14 said:

Do you put more faith in 538, which no one has heard of versus Rotten Tomatoes? 

Yes, I put more faith in FiveThirtyEight. I'm guessing you don't read the NYT or follow American politics, so I'll fill you in on FiveThirtyEight's bona fides. The founder, Nate Silver, helped pioneer big data analytics in sports and politics. In 2012, he and his group correctly predicted the outcomes of all 50 states in the Presidential election, and he authored a NYT best seller that went on to be named the number 1 non-fiction book of 2012 by Amazon.com. That's not to say that there was as much thought put into this particular poll, but this type of polling is one of their areas of expertise.

Rotten Tomatoes is useful, but not in a scientifically rigorous way. Their aggregate system is a dubious way to measure something like a film's "quality". In the FiveThirtyEight poll, people were asked specifically to pick the best movie out of the six, and only the responses from people who had seen all six movies were considered. The RT "study", on the other hand, was not a head-to-head comparison. The reviewers of one movie may not have even seen the others, or may not have submitted a review for the others. To further muddy the water, the RT "study" cherry-picked original release reviews. This is a questionable methodology because it ignores contextual biases. For example, Jedi may have been perceived as a disappointment because it directly followed A New Hope and Empire. Similarly, Eps I and II set the bar pretty low for Sith. On the other hand, one could argue that the prequels were such an unfamiliar departure from the OT that it artificially deflated their initial reception. These contextual biases make an objective comparison difficult, particularly when comparing reviews from two narrow and distinct time frames. Keep in mind that these reviews, assigned a number score, were written within the context of their respective contemporary summer blockbusters. Furthermore--even without consideration to those contextual biases--there are many films currently celebrated as classics that were dismissed by critics upon their debut, only to be rediscovered and re-appraised years later. Critics change their minds, films grow or diminish in stature, and this project ignores all of that to arrive at its conclusion.

No study, poll, or person is completely free from biases, which is what allows this debate to continue on ad naseum. However, when trying to gauge consensus opinion among fans, the most appropriate type of poll is one which ranks the films relative to one another (i.e. head to head). 

I will say that this debate has been somewhat illuminating to me. I had no idea that there were people in the world who would argue for any of the PT over any of the OT. Even the attached IMDB results surprise me.

 

[jeff_14]

One of the things I and many others love about the PT is that a central theme of the trilogy is about how good men lose their way and even turn evil. It's not just about Anakin doing this. It's about the Jedi Council failing to stick to its principles and becoming soldiers rather than peacekeepers, democracy being subverted for authoritarian purposes aided and abetted by business etc. I have friends who are teachers who have used these movies as starting points for civics discussions in class with kids who grew up with these movies and for whom the PT IS Star Wars and for whom the OT is not nearly as cool and is very slow. The politics is not a sideshow, it's part of the entire point of the story. This is what I mean about how the PT is more ambitious in scope and design than the cobbled together nature of the OT. Seeing Palpatine play the system like a fiddle is part of what makes him such a compelling bad guy. He's infinitely more interesting than just an old man who zaps people when they're not expecting it. He dupes the Jedi into starting his war while directing both sides of it and then makes the Jedi the fall guys when it ends, all of which contributes to Anakin being fed up and seduced by a darker path. Sure the acting and dialogue is cheesy at times, but on the other hand Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Samuel Jackson, Christopher Lee and Ian McDiarmid among others turn in fantastic work for a kids movie in spite of Lucas. The military battles in AOTC and Revenge are insane, the lightsaber battles in all PT movies are technically superior and more energetic than all the OT ones, the music is fantastic and if you're anything like my son and his friends the clones are the highlight of the entire franchise. There's a lot that was done very well in those movies and for those reasons I can't write them off as trash. And certainly one thing that I never felt while watching them that I did while watching Force Awakens was "I've seen this movie before". That alone is worth a lot of brownie points to me. And if the rumours about Episode VIII are true, you're going to have to reconcile yourselves to this era as Hayden Christensen and Ewan McGregor are coming back in a plot twist that comes right out of these movies. 

[Pedilego]

I think you're walking too deep into the weeds, Jeff. You're arguing sub-points on sub-points without everybody understanding your broader position. Let me try to sum up your stance:

• OT was great all-around cinema. PT was conceptually great but poorly executed. TFA was conceptually un-original (but in my own words: pretty well executed).
• Most look at it from a cinematic perspective so OT > TFA >>>> PT. But you appreciate that Lucas aimed for Mars (despite his rocket exploding before it even left the atmosphere) whereas it disappointed you that Disney was content to return to the moon, so OT > PT > TFA.

It's not an outrageous position like people are suggesting. Had Lucas been able to recruit other directors successfully (he tried) then I do think that the PT (same outline and all) could've been awesome (and better than TFA) for the reasons you've outlined.

[jeff_14]

3 minutes ago, Pedilego said:

I think you're walking too deep into the weeds, Jeff. You're arguing sub-points on sub-points without everybody understanding your broader position. Let me try to sum up your stance:

• OT was great all-around cinema. PT was conceptually great but poorly executed. TFA was conceptually un-original (but in my own words: pretty well executed).
• Most look at it from a cinematic perspective so OT > TFA >>>> PT. But you appreciate that Lucas aimed for Mars (despite his rocket exploding before it even left the atmosphere) whereas it disappointed you that Disney was content to return to the moon, so OT > PT > TFA.

It's not an outrageous position like people are suggesting. Had Lucas been able to recruit other directors successfully (he tried) then I do think that the PT (same outline and all) could've been awesome (and better than TFA) for the reasons you've outlined.

You complete me. 

I've said many times that there was nothing really wrong with Lucas' scripts, just that he directed the PT ones. Any other director would likely have removed or improved bad dialogue, made Jar Jar a likeable outsider, etc. much the way Abrams made a fantastic remake. I think an opportunity was missed for Lucas to let someone else direct the PT, and also for Abrams to have directed a Lucas script for Episode 7. Imagine what could have been in the latter case.

[Darth_Raichu]

10 minutes ago, jeff_14 said:

You complete me. 

I've said many times that there was nothing really wrong with Lucas' scripts, just that he directed the PT ones. Any other director would likely have removed or improved bad dialogue, made Jar Jar a likeable outsider, etc. much the way Abrams made a fantastic remake. I think an opportunity was missed for Lucas to let someone else direct the PT, and also for Abrams to have directed a Lucas script for Episode 7. Imagine what could have been in the latter case.

If the director needed to revise too much of the scripts then it would mean the writing was not tight enough 

In any case, your dream scenario would have worked only had Lucas stayed with plotting and writing and NOTHING ELSE, no backseat directing, or editing, or SFX, or music composing  

 

[jeff_14]

2 minutes ago, Darth_Raichu said:

If the director needed to revise too much of the scripts then it would mean the writing was not tight enough 

In any case, your dream scenario would have worked only had Lucas stayed with plotting and writing and NOTHING ELSE, no backseat directing, or editing, or SFX, or music composing  

 

I don't think too much revising would be needed. In the Jar Jar example, you don't really need to change the plotting or even much of the dialogue. Just don't make him such a joke. Some scenes you just leave out, like the slapstick humour, getting his tongue stuck in the podracer, etc. Abrams credits the Harrison Ford injury for giving him the time and perspective to realize the Finn-Rey relationship was not working as written and so he rewrote parts of it to make it work. This is what a smart director does. I'd be fine with keeping Lucas in the plotting area only. That's all they retained him for on Episode 7 and then they decided to toss his script. Oh well. Maybe in some alternate Legends universe.

[CrabslayerT]

So a little update on whats happening here at the minute:

Today, Mark Hamill, Daisy Ridley and Adam Driver arrived for filming. Seems like its going to be a pretty important part since Adam Driver is on location too. Possibly a fight scene between Kylo Ren and Luke Skywalker? Something similar to Episode IV??????

[jbacunn]

So a little update on whats happening here at the minute:

Today, Mark Hamill, Daisy Ridley and Adam Driver arrived for filming. Seems like its going to be a pretty important part since Adam Driver is on location too. Possibly a fight scene between Kylo Ren and Luke Skywalker? Something similar to Episode IV??????

It's like we have our own BP reporter on the scene. Keep it coming.

[CrabslayerT]

I do try......

They are staying in a hotel 5 minutes away, no real need for security here, Its a remote place (the only thing that lives in fear are the sheep!). tempted to go for a pint but cant be arsed!  lol

11 minutes ago, jbacunn said:

It's like we have our own BP reporter on the scene. Keep it coming.

 

[CrabslayerT]

So the Circus that was Star Wars has finished(filming anyway) and the long process of returning everything to its natural condition, Bird sheet'n'all, is slowly underway. What have we learned? Well, apart from sneaking over a mountain with a telescopic lens might get you arrested, or worse, have your photos deleted (thank zod for IT). Confidentiality Agreements aren't worth a Folk in rural Ireland! Mark Hamill can't pour a pint of Guinness. And well, just see the pics below.....

[CrabslayerT]

Here are some pics of another site for filming, this time in Co.Kerry. Dingle I think. They have built replicas of the early monastic structures that are on Skellig Michael, I can say this is because Skellig Michael is a Unesco World Heritage site and cant be abused. I hope you enjoy the photos.

[thoroakenfelder]

So, can we retitle the thread with the movie's subtitle, or is it still too soon to call?