The Problem with Star Wars

Joshua Dyal said:

No, every topic does not. This topic was specifically started to go down those same lines. If it bothers you so much, don't come in an rain on everyone else's parade. The reason these discussions are popular is because we're fans of Star Wars after all.

Click to expand...

I suppose I'm to blame for not indicating in my original post that the purpose of this conversation was not necessarily to slam Star Wars as a whole, but to point out that most of the problems for the franchise can be laid at the feet of the man responsible for its success.

I will agree with Ankh-Morpork Guard on the part that fans are partially to blame for our reaction to Star Wars. There really isn't much of a difference in the nature of most of the movies beyond the newness of ANH and the fact that our expectations as movie goers before 1983 weren't as high. Furthermore, our society has turned SW into a cultural event. Over 20 years have passed, allowing us to build these films up to be monumental achievements. To be sure, they were monumental technical achievements and paved the way for successful sci-fi features. But, as stories and acting go, only TESB is truly successful. ANH has some lousy acting from everyone save Ford and... Well, that's it; Guiness wasn't bad, but certainly nothing to brag home about. RotJ is essentially a rehash of the first film. Aside from the stuff with Jabba the Hutt, there's very little that's really good about this film. We go back to a Death Star; we're introduced to ridiculous ewoks; we don't really see a fantastic final light sabre duel; the conflict Vader faces seems forced; we never learn how Luke became so powerful... and never see that power reflected (I'm sorry, but a side-kick doesn't speak power to me). I could go on. When one measures these films against TPM and AotC, the only thing they have over those films is tighter editing, freshness, and a heaping of steaming nostalgia dumped on them. And I'm just as bad. I love ANH. But, I'm willing to admit that, when it's all said and done, there's no real difference between these new features and the old ones.

Lucas doesn't know how to capture the human element and doesn't know how to capture drama. He does know how to create a strong story foundation, but that's the extent of it. He needs other people to get in there and work it out. That's why TESB was a success well beyond the other films to date.

Let's hope that Lucas has truly learned most of his lesson with Episode III. Clearly, he hasn't learned everything since he's still directing, but let's pray that he let someone come in and rewrite the script.

Scripts and direction were my main problems with the first two prequel films, as well. I agree on most points -- if I could go back in time and warn Lucas that he might want to have someone help him with these areas I would. But ... we have what we have. The true test will be Episode III. If he can nail it, I think I can forgive him a couple of lackluster movies.

That said, it is very easy for us to armchair quarterback these films.

Constant comparisons to the old B movies, or old westerns does not justify poor quality acting and direction.

I am hoping that George has learned a bit from the poor quality overall "Phantom", and the much improved (but still quite flawed) "Clones". Despite the flaws, I still enjoyed being entertained by the movies he has created and I will likely enjoy watching the return of Darth Vader.

BTW. It is my understanding that the reason for the bad acting in the movies has nothing to do with the story itself. Lucas keeps the actors from understanding the story, plot, and motivations of the characters by keeping secret scripts, false scripts, scripts that have all the dialog out of order, etc. How can actors give a good performance when they are left in the dark about the story, much less fully deceived by the director, just to keep the story arc secret from the general population.

I think my problems with PM, AotC and maybe (hopefully not) RotS all come down to one thing: the interaction of Anakin, Padme and Obi-Wan. I think it is writing directing, and possibly even acting, but somehow it just does not come together. As a result I just don't feel like I care about these characters other for the fact that I know Anakin becomes Vader, Padme bears Luke and Leia, and Obi-Wan will eventually be the one to start Luke on his destined path. Somehow I found I really cared about Luke, Leia and Han in the first (as in first made) three films. The interactions between them made some sense - sure it was movie sense, but it was believable.

In PM, we got an Anakin who was the Boxy on the original Battlestar Galactica, or Wesley on Star Trek TNG. Characters I couldn't quite believe in, and just kind of annoyed me. Obi-Wan and Padme had a lot of potential in the first film, but the way they had to interact with Anakin just got in the way. Jump to AotC and now you get the angst-ridden annoying teenager, who for some reason Padme falls in love with and Obi-Wan feels strong loyalty towards (OK, the trailer for RotS explains the last a bit with Obi-Wan crying out "You were the chosen one!"). Padme goes from caring about Anakin, kind of like a big sister in PM, to suddenly falling in love with him, but we cannot see why.

If I had my way, Anakin would have started out in PM as a teenager. The romance would have just barely started there, a teenage crush kind of thing. They meet again in AotC as adults and things blossom. Anakin would have not been a whiny teenager who really starts on the path to the dark side because he cannot do as he pleases, but instead been an adult who starts down the path because be starts to believe that he can do more and be more for the Jedi, for Padme for the Republic if he has more power. He justifies all this in his head to start and slowly becomes more and more corrupted. I think this would have created a character that generated more symapthy and would have added more tragedy to the fall of Anakin. Of course nobody asked me what I thought and, like many people my hindsight better than my foresight

smootrk said:

BTW. It is my understanding that the reason for the bad acting in the movies has nothing to do with the story itself. Lucas keeps the actors from understanding the story, plot, and motivations of the characters by keeping secret scripts, false scripts, scripts that have all the dialog out of order, etc. How can actors give a good performance when they are left in the dark about the story, much less fully deceived by the director, just to keep the story arc secret from the general population.

Click to expand...

That's an interesting theory.

EricNoah said:

That's an interesting theory.

Click to expand...

Not so much a theory. Many of the actors including Liam and Samuel were interviewed and hinted at the difficulty with acting out little tidbits of scenes completely out of order and without interaction with some of the other actors who shared the scene (as seen in the final cut). If you want to visualize an example of this, just watch carefully the scene in Phantom where they are all sitting around the table having a conversation about 'helping others'. Watch how choppy the dialog and the characters mannerisms are. Either shot out of sequence or just plain old bad editing.

The actors even had private meetings where they tried to piece their individual scripts together to try to figure out where the plot was going.

Constants in Star Wars production:
A combination of neophyte actors and REALLY good ones.
Poor direction

Difference between OT and PT with regard to this:
The OT great actors were officially slumming it and could afford to relax and have fun, and the new kids weren't burdened with "oh, my god! I'm working on STAR WARS."

Of course, Sam Jackson and Ewan McGregor are going to be taking things much more seriously than Peter Cushing and Alec Guinness. Cushing and Guinness were making a popcorn movie for this eccentric little man with big, silly glasses. Jackson and McGregor have to live up to the EPIC movies of their own childhoods and cope with LUCAS, the independent "artist."

Another key change in the nature of the Star Wars universe:
In 1976, a young rebel filmmaker who had trouble getting money to make his strange movies made a movie about the Rebellion against an Evil Empire.

In 1999, a man who is himself an institution made a movie about the dissolution of a government, including trade disputes and massive bureaucracy.

Arguments about the likability of the characters and their level of snarkiness aside, that's a pretty big difference.

Ranger REG said:

Funny enough, TESB which was directed by George Lucas for the most part, is the best of the three OT.

Click to expand...

Umm The Empire Strikes Back was directed by Irvin Kershner. It is the film that Lucas had the least directorial input on.

Canis said:

Another key change in the nature of the Star Wars universe:
In 1976, a young rebel filmmaker who had trouble getting money to make his strange movies made a movie about the Rebellion against an Evil Empire.

In 1999, a man who is himself an institution made a movie about the dissolution of a government, including trade disputes and massive bureaucracy.

Click to expand...

See, that's what I think makes the difference: the OT was a simple story, the PT is COMPLICATED. The OT evolved (from the adventures of Starkiller), the PT has to build.