I don't want to derail this thread too much, but I wanted to point out something interesting here. Before I do I want to make it absolutely clear that I in no way think Hitler was a good person. If evil could ever be personafied, it would have been in Hitler. That being said:
Kai said:
The deeper message is the one I love. A corrupt system of government sometimes needs a tyrant to come into power to straighten it out.
To which you replied:
Originally posted by zipit I see your logic, but do you realize what you're saying? Hitler, Stalin and Chairman Mao comes to mind... True alteration of society has always and will always come from the people...
What I find interesting is, do you realize what Hitler did? After World War I Germany was devistated. It was ripped to shreads had Russia and Britian owning parts of it, the people were poor, hungry, demoralized and generally unhappy. In a few short years, Hitler turned that wiped out country into a power that could have potentially taken over the world.
Stain did pretty much the same thing, but to a lesser extent. WWI was devisating to Russia also (which is why they were so hard on Germany), and Stalin brought the country back from the brink, to be carried to it's height of power by his predecessor.
I think those examples fall exactly in line with what Kai said.
Might as well be, but as the examples you cite, the "solution" then becomes the problem as such tyrants are notoriously hard to remove, once their duty is done.
You know? the most ancient democracies in the world, the greek civilization and then the romans, had a similar system in place. If situation would become dire enough, they would choose a Dictator with full powers to fix what was wrong (usually enemy invasions).
In theory the dictator was supposed to relinquish the power back to the senate/assembly once the emergency was over but guess what? the emergencies tended to never be over and the dictator would cringe to power so much it would take an assassin or a popular revolt to finally oust him.
I prefers a lot more a gradual change to a outright revolution
"If you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day, if you teach him how to fish, you feed him for a lifetime"
Originally posted by azhrarn The first three cost him his marriage. But they were, and remain the most amazing moviemaking ever. The story came first. And it was a masterwork, well planned and researched to be on the pulse of primal human needs.
By the time he got around to the prequels, he'd already become what he once hated -- selfabsorbed, greedy and careless of the end result. It was all about money by that point, and you could definately tell. It stopped being an art thing and became a profit thing in entirety.
I love the man who brought me the first movie. I pity the man who brought me the prequels. Sure, they're both George Lucas, but IMHO, he's no longer the same man, and the man he's become may be wealthier... but money doesn't fix pathetic.
One of the things that is prevalent in ALL the SW movies are the very qualities people are complaining about with the last three releases: bad acting and even worse script writing.
People complain about Haden with the role of Ani, but lets face it, whiny ass Mark Hammil was just as bad as Luke... Again, we tend to romanticize our time period with the SW movies and we fail to realize that the SW movies are really consistent in nature... After watching all six within a short time period, it is clear that these movies all have the same director and writer...
Having said that, I take issue with your above comments, SW movies are some of the most treasured for me however it has nothing to do with the acting or script, it is simply masterful story telling...
Originally posted by Dis_Ordur One of the things that is prevalent in ALL the SW movies are the very qualities people are complaining about with the last three releases: bad acting and even worse script writing. People complain about Haden with the role of Ani, but lets face it, whiny ass Mark Hammil was just as bad as Luke... Again, we tend to romanticize our time period with the SW movies and we fail to realize that the SW movies are really consistent in nature... After watching all six within a short time period, it is clear that these movies all have the same director and writer... Having said that, I take issue with your above comments, SW movies are some of the most treasured for me however it has nothing to do with the acting or script, it is simply masterful story telling...
Personally I think a lot of the draw of the originals are the errors and campyness. It makes them a little funny and you can't look at the too seriously. The prequels suffer from an attempt at perfection and you analyze them because of it. My favorite versions of the originals are the ones I ripped from a VHS recording I made off of a free HBO preview weekend with all of the errors. The reissues just lack something those had to me.
I don't want to derail this thread too much, but I wanted to point out something interesting here. Before I do I want to make it absolutely clear that I in no way think Hitler was a good person. If evil could ever be personafied, it would have been in Hitler. That being said:
Kai said:
The deeper message is the one I love. A corrupt system of government sometimes needs a tyrant to come into power to straighten it out.
To which you replied:
Originally posted by zipit I see your logic, but do you realize what you're saying? Hitler, Stalin and Chairman Mao comes to mind... True alteration of society has always and will always come from the people...
What I find interesting is, do you realize what Hitler did? After World War I Germany was devistated. It was ripped to shreads had Russia and Britian owning parts of it, the people were poor, hungry, demoralized and generally unhappy. In a few short years, Hitler turned that wiped out country into a power that could have potentially taken over the world.
Stain did pretty much the same thing, but to a lesser extent. WWI was devisating to Russia also (which is why they were so hard on Germany), and Stalin brought the country back from the brink, to be carried to it's height of power by his predecessor.
I think those examples fall exactly in line with what Kai said.
OTOH, the classical world had a view of history that suggested that they'd already missed the Golden Age, everything was in decline and that 'all that was once great will be laid low and that which is now low will rise'. Which is one reason the civilised part of society was terrified of the barbarian at the gate.
I tend to subscribe more to the idea that the SW films show a Hegelian view of progress and change where everything is in flux, the things that we think we are fighting to preserve become tyrannical regimes and rebellion comes from below (and in time would eventually become another form of dictatorship).
Though I do think it's possible to think about this stuff too much....
(Wow... that all came out in MASSIVE red letters... maybe it's all more karmic or something?)
********************* So, you all sat in camps and that was fun? *********************
Originally posted by azhrarn Really, if you watch all six in the order he made them, vintage to remix included in chronological order of publish, you kinda see George Lucas struggling in his own fight with the darkside of hollywood corporate BS and falling.
He started out with Star Wars, young, idealistic and determined to make something special, not really believing he'd ever succeed on the scale he did. He challenged the entire industry, fighting bitter, horrible battles with all of the industry guilds and winning, but at a huge personal cost. The results? A legend and nearly killing himself from over exhaustion. The opening of the movies was something he still gets financial shit over.
The first three cost him his marriage. But they were, and remain the most amazing moviemaking ever. The story came first. And it was a masterwork, well planned and researched to be on the pulse of primal human needs.
By the time he got around to the prequels, he'd already become what he once hated -- selfabsorbed, greedy and careless of the end result. It was all about money by that point, and you could definately tell. It stopped being an art thing and became a profit thing in entirety.
I love the man who brought me the first movie. I pity the man who brought me the prequels. Sure, they're both George Lucas, but IMHO, he's no longer the same man, and the man he's become may be wealthier... but money doesn't fix pathetic.
I totally agree...the scripts were a big factor in what made the movies much less of what they should have been. Granted i still enjoyed them but they could have been better. As you point out a lot of it makes no sense other then to setup another scene and is otherwise useless. Also in 1 and 2 especially the dialog did not flow naturally at all. Like the scene where Palpatine cuts off Amedala about her security at the start of ep2. It didn't flow at all...and much of the dialog between Anikan and Obiwan was poor as well with Obiwan referring to Anikan as "my very young apprentice" quite too often and most times when the phrase didn't fit.
Originally posted by InspGadgt Originally posted by azhrarn Really, if you watch all six in the order he made them, vintage to remix included in chronological order of publish, you kinda see George Lucas struggling in his own fight with the darkside of hollywood corporate BS and falling.
He started out with Star Wars, young, idealistic and determined to make something special, not really believing he'd ever succeed on the scale he did. He challenged the entire industry, fighting bitter, horrible battles with all of the industry guilds and winning, but at a huge personal cost. The results? A legend and nearly killing himself from over exhaustion. The opening of the movies was something he still gets financial shit over.
The first three cost him his marriage. But they were, and remain the most amazing moviemaking ever. The story came first. And it was a masterwork, well planned and researched to be on the pulse of primal human needs.
By the time he got around to the prequels, he'd already become what he once hated -- selfabsorbed, greedy and careless of the end result. It was all about money by that point, and you could definately tell. It stopped being an art thing and became a profit thing in entirety.
I love the man who brought me the first movie. I pity the man who brought me the prequels. Sure, they're both George Lucas, but IMHO, he's no longer the same man, and the man he's become may be wealthier... but money doesn't fix pathetic.
I totally agree...the scripts were a big factor in what made the movies much less of what they should have been. Granted i still enjoyed them but they could have been better. As you point out a lot of it makes no sense other then to setup another scene and is otherwise useless. Also in 1 and 2 especially the dialog did not flow naturally at all. Like the scene where Palpatine cuts off Amedala about her security at the start of ep2. It didn't flow at all...and much of the dialog between Anikan and Obiwan was poor as well with Obiwan referring to Anikan as "my very young apprentice" quite too often and most times when the phrase didn't fit.
I agree with most of what ashrarn said, except the script was pretty horrible in all 6 movies, the first three had an interesting story to save it.
I will also add, a lot of the reasons for the sceens that "don't make sense" was another money grab by Lucas in the form of video games.
Originally posted by Malickiebloo I still remeber GL"S line in : From star wars to jedi " A special effect without a story , Is a pretty boring thing " I wasn't wow'd by 1 , 2 and 3 . But compared to most of the crap that comes out of hollywood , They were a Godsend .
I'd argue that the Matrix trilogy buries 1-3 even with the lamer last two parts.
Hell.. Spaceballs was a better movie than Ep1.
I read an interview about Lucas' directing. The actors would ask for a second take so they could do it better, and Lucas would refuse saing the'd fix it in post.
And even though the CGI was incredible, it still felt fake. There were scenes when two people were talking, and Lucas would add a fake trooper walking behind them. It LOOKED fake. He should have gotten an extra in a suit to walk behind them.. but noooo. That'd have looked REAL.
Why do you think Indiana Jones was good? SPIELBERG, not Lucas.
I think The first Matrix was okay but the rest were not much better than ep1 IMO , Didn't enjoy EP1 very much at all .
I do agree about the CGI , In some scenes it was quite amazing yet other times very stale .
I was comparing it to other crap that comes out of hollywood :P Like the War of the Worlds remake or Jason vs Freddy ..
Has there even been a new movie made in the last 6 years ? LOL all i remember are Sequals or remakes .
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Originally posted by Malickiebloo Originally posted by ShaydeOriginally posted by MalickieblooI still remeber GL"S line in : From star wars to jedi " A special effect without a story , Is a pretty boring thing " I wasn't wow'd by 1 , 2 and 3 . But compared to most of the crap that comes out of hollywood , They were a Godsend . I'd argue that the Matrix trilogy buries 1-3 even with the lamer last two parts. Hell.. Spaceballs was a better movie than Ep1. I read an interview about Lucas' directing. The actors would ask for a second take so they could do it better, and Lucas would refuse saing the'd fix it in post. And even though the CGI was incredible, it still felt fake. There were scenes when two people were talking, and Lucas would add a fake trooper walking behind them. It LOOKED fake. He should have gotten an extra in a suit to walk behind them.. but noooo. That'd have looked REAL. Why do you think Indiana Jones was good? SPIELBERG, not Lucas. I think The first Matrix was okay but the rest were not much better than ep1 IMO , Didn't enjoy EP1 very much at all . I do agree about the CGI , In some scenes it was quite amazing yet other times very stale . I was comparing it to other crap that comes out of hollywood :P Like the War of the Worlds remake or Jason vs Freddy ..Has there even been a new movie made in the last 6 years ? LOL all i remember are Sequals or remakes .
Hollywood stopped making original movies the same day SOE ran out of bandaids to stop the hemorraging population loss they had from SWG.
Originally posted by freebirdpat Hollywood stopped making original movies the same day SOE ran out of bandaids to stop the hemorraging population loss they had from SWG.
Hollywood stopped making original movies LONG before SWG was even thought of.
I like the War of the Worlds remake. It was a HELLUVALOT better than the original.
I could have put up with a lot, including the uninspired performances and tons of cgi if only he had picked a bette actor to play young darth vader. By the end of the prequel, the once dark and menacing Darth Vader seemed like nothing more than a sniveling baby who I no longer feared or respected. I realize that much of this was written in, but Hayden's so called performance didn't humanize Vader, it just made me want to kick his ass repeatedly. This not only ruined the prequel, but the first 3 movies as well for me, because i can't seem to watch the old movies without thinking of veder crying like a little baby.
Originally posted by Shayde Right... Lucas let CGI take the place of good acting. Or an interesting, engaging storyline. What other movie has had Sam Jackson, Liam Neeson and Ewan Macgregor in it and THEY ACTED PATHETICALLY? George was so focused on the effects, he didn't care about the PERFORMANCE. He had to tell the story with the acting for the first three, the couldn't rely on bells and whistles. That, and he DIDN'T DIRECT Episode 5 & 6. He's a mediocre director at best.
Perhaps Lucas believed the names were "iconic" and would sell themselves.....
In regards to the storytelling, there was one huge flaw I think of the prequels. That of moral ambiguity.
In the originals, the Empire was clearly evil, and one understood why they were evil. They destroyed a planet of peaceloving people. The murdered those who failed them. And they felt the need to basically act like a bunch of thugs throughout the galaxy. It's tough to love them, rather the Empire one loved to hate them. Darth Vader was the personification of evil. Whereas Obi-Wan was always the wise sage always striving to have Young Luke do good.
In the prequels, sure we hear the Sith are evil. but why? They perform no extreme acts of cruelty. Darth Maul doesn't go slaughtering innocents. He waits for the innocents to clear the room before taking on the two jedi knights. Dooku himself is not a ruthless opposition leader, but once again is one who is more eloquent and classical. About the only indication he is evil is he uses force lightning, big deal.
One knows Palpatine is at best manipulative, if not pure evil. But are the Jedi really that good? They come across as arrogant and aloof, and their insistence they are always right has devestating consequences on the galaxy. Furthermore, they prepare a coup'de'tat for no reason other than "he's overstayed his welcome", but show no evidence why. And while they were furious that Palaptine was attempting to use young anakin as a pawn, they were doing the same. Order 66 becomes entirely understandable, as the Jedi, now seditionists, would attempt to kill Palpatine after their already failed attempt led by Master Windu.
Since there is not (especially in Episode III) a clear marker of good and evil, such sci-fi stories really lose their import and their quality. They went from at least showing evil characters in episodes one and two to just giving up in episode III, in that there was evil on all sides.
Comments
I don't want to derail this thread too much, but I wanted to point out something interesting here. Before I do I want to make it absolutely clear that I in no way think Hitler was a good person. If evil could ever be personafied, it would have been in Hitler. That being said:
Kai said:
The deeper message is the one I love. A corrupt system of government sometimes needs a tyrant to come into power to straighten it out.
To which you replied:
What I find interesting is, do you realize what Hitler did? After World War I Germany was devistated. It was ripped to shreads had Russia and Britian owning parts of it, the people were poor, hungry, demoralized and generally unhappy. In a few short years, Hitler turned that wiped out country into a power that could have potentially taken over the world.
Stain did pretty much the same thing, but to a lesser extent. WWI was devisating to Russia also (which is why they were so hard on Germany), and Stalin brought the country back from the brink, to be carried to it's height of power by his predecessor.
I think those examples fall exactly in line with what Kai said.
Might as well be, but as the examples you cite, the "solution" then becomes the problem as such tyrants are notoriously hard to remove, once their duty is done.
You know? the most ancient democracies in the world, the greek civilization and then the romans, had a similar system in place. If situation would become dire enough, they would choose a Dictator with full powers to fix what was wrong (usually enemy invasions).
In theory the dictator was supposed to relinquish the power back to the senate/assembly once the emergency was over but guess what? the emergencies tended to never be over and the dictator would cringe to power so much it would take an assassin or a popular revolt to finally oust him.
I prefers a lot more a gradual change to a outright revolution
"If you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day, if you teach him how to fish, you feed him for a lifetime"
One of the things that is prevalent in ALL the SW movies are the very qualities people are complaining about with the last three releases: bad acting and even worse script writing.
People complain about Haden with the role of Ani, but lets face it, whiny ass Mark Hammil was just as bad as Luke... Again, we tend to romanticize our time period with the SW movies and we fail to realize that the SW movies are really consistent in nature... After watching all six within a short time period, it is clear that these movies all have the same director and writer...
Having said that, I take issue with your above comments, SW movies are some of the most treasured for me however it has nothing to do with the acting or script, it is simply masterful story telling...
Personally I think a lot of the draw of the originals are the errors and campyness. It makes them a little funny and you can't look at the too seriously. The prequels suffer from an attempt at perfection and you analyze them because of it. My favorite versions of the originals are the ones I ripped from a VHS recording I made off of a free HBO preview weekend with all of the errors. The reissues just lack something those had to me.
I tend to subscribe more to the idea that the SW films show a Hegelian view of progress and change where everything is in flux, the things that we think we are fighting to preserve become tyrannical regimes and rebellion comes from below (and in time would eventually become another form of dictatorship).
Though I do think it's possible to think about this stuff too much....
(Wow... that all came out in MASSIVE red letters... maybe it's all more karmic or something?)
*********************
So, you all sat in camps and that was fun?
*********************
I agree with most of what ashrarn said, except the script was pretty horrible in all 6 movies, the first three had an interesting story to save it.
I will also add, a lot of the reasons for the sceens that "don't make sense" was another money grab by Lucas in the form of video games.
I'd argue that the Matrix trilogy buries 1-3 even with the lamer last two parts.
Hell.. Spaceballs was a better movie than Ep1.
I read an interview about Lucas' directing. The actors would ask for a second take so they could do it better, and Lucas would refuse saing the'd fix it in post.
And even though the CGI was incredible, it still felt fake. There were scenes when two people were talking, and Lucas would add a fake trooper walking behind them. It LOOKED fake. He should have gotten an extra in a suit to walk behind them.. but noooo. That'd have looked REAL.
Why do you think Indiana Jones was good? SPIELBERG, not Lucas.
I think The first Matrix was okay but the rest were not much better than ep1 IMO , Didn't enjoy EP1 very much at all .
I do agree about the CGI , In some scenes it was quite amazing yet other times very stale .
I was comparing it to other crap that comes out of hollywood :P Like the War of the Worlds remake or Jason vs Freddy ..
Has there even been a new movie made in the last 6 years ? LOL all i remember are Sequals or remakes .
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Hollywood stopped making original movies LONG before SWG was even thought of.
I like the War of the Worlds remake. It was a HELLUVALOT better than the original.
In regards to the storytelling, there was one huge flaw I think of the prequels. That of moral ambiguity.
In the originals, the Empire was clearly evil, and one understood why they were evil. They destroyed a planet of peaceloving people. The murdered those who failed them. And they felt the need to basically act like a bunch of thugs throughout the galaxy. It's tough to love them, rather the Empire one loved to hate them. Darth Vader was the personification of evil. Whereas Obi-Wan was always the wise sage always striving to have Young Luke do good.
In the prequels, sure we hear the Sith are evil. but why? They perform no extreme acts of cruelty. Darth Maul doesn't go slaughtering innocents. He waits for the innocents to clear the room before taking on the two jedi knights. Dooku himself is not a ruthless opposition leader, but once again is one who is more eloquent and classical. About the only indication he is evil is he uses force lightning, big deal.
One knows Palpatine is at best manipulative, if not pure evil. But are the Jedi really that good? They come across as arrogant and aloof, and their insistence they are always right has devestating consequences on the galaxy. Furthermore, they prepare a coup'de'tat for no reason other than "he's overstayed his welcome", but show no evidence why. And while they were furious that Palaptine was attempting to use young anakin as a pawn, they were doing the same. Order 66 becomes entirely understandable, as the Jedi, now seditionists, would attempt to kill Palpatine after their already failed attempt led by Master Windu.
Since there is not (especially in Episode III) a clear marker of good and evil, such sci-fi stories really lose their import and their quality. They went from at least showing evil characters in episodes one and two to just giving up in episode III, in that there was evil on all sides.