The Problem with Star Wars

No the Jedi were arrogant weenies. Bring a sword to gun fight. Works only if you are very very very good. What I hated was sfx when you could have story? Did we need a ping pong Yoda Gummi Bear boucing around the scenery? It would have been better is the 2 foot guy fought the 6 foot with both feet on the ground.
Too much eye candy not enough peace.

Empress said:

I don't particularly dislike the movies he made, I'm just pining for what could have been.

Click to expand...

My position on the movies exactly. Although even then, I don't think the stories that they do tell are unsalvagable, it's more the execution of them that stinks. Anakin as a little boy in TPM automatically means that chemistry with Natalie Portman is going to go out the window. Ponderous, unnatural dialogue will bring even the best story down, as will uneven pacing and focusing too much on drawn-out "emotional" scenes that aren't.

It's kinda sad, in a way, when the new Star Wars movies aren't as good as recent Star Wars video games like Knights of the Old Republic 1 and 2.

I'm still quite excited about RotS, just as I was about AotC and tPM, but their legacy will be nothing like the OT, when they really should have been. All these claims that "the Internet" or "the fans" have killed Star Wars are preposterous, as are claims that "we're just not appreciating the Star Wars movies for what they are." Face it; the Star Wars prequels just had some serious flaws. They weren't nearly as strong as the OT. I didn't have unreasonable expectations of the movies; after all, you don't see my griping about Return of the Jedi, do you? I think my expectations of the movies were actually quite reasonable, and I would have been in a mood to be quite forgiving of flaws in the movies, but they still didn't meet even my lowered expectations.

I agree with Henry that tPM is worth it for the lightsaber battle alone, but it's pretty sad that I really can't watch the movie anymore without skipping ahead to the lightsaber battle and missing most of the rest of it.

Aris Dragonborn said:

Just enjoy the Prequels for what they are: Star Wars movies.

Click to expand...

Good points, in all.

I have never expected the greatness of A New Hope or Empire Strikes Back in the prequels. That is unfair. Those 2 films are 2 of the best ever put to screen and I'm not just talking about genre films. Yes, there have been a few misteps and some things that just sucked. I like what I read in Empress' post and that would have been another way to go. After reading the novel of tPM, the movie was a little harder to swollow (loved it when it came out and still like it overall). Kid Anakin in the films was for the most part, corny. He didn't ruin it but the version in the book was much more "Anakin" to me.

[SPOILERS for the book ahead] That version had him going on personal adventures before he ever met the Jedi. He survived the Dune Sea and befriended one of the sand people. We got that he was a great pilot from the movie but it was too kid-like. Having fate, not Anakin, destroy the droid control ship hurt his story. Or at least the way it was shown. Could be the actor or the director - I'm not sure. But that was tPM and it is one of the weaker films of the 5 we've seen.

Also, the tone (as mentioned) was a little jarring. But things need to start off lighter before you can get to the crushing darkness that needs to be Episode III - the film that needs to be the darkest of the 6, or barring that at least as dark and depressing as ESB. It's not an excuse as I can see why Lucas went the route of showing young Anakin. It wasn't just to show him but to show a different era: a period before the Dark Times, before the Empire.

John Crichton said:

It's not an excuse as I can see why Lucas went the route of showing young Anakin. It wasn't just to show him but to show a different era: a period before the Dark Times, before the Empire.

Click to expand...

May be the reason tPM featured Lil' Anie (aka Tiny Vader, aka Dark Lord of the Napkin, ...) was that Lucas thought that young kids could relate to that character, and therefore like the movie better.

This thinking is flawed from the beginnig, though - it nearly never works that way. Young kids don't dream about being heroic young kids; they dream about being heroic adults. (Btw, that's the reason why nearly every superhero comic featuring kids failed miserably.)

jasper said:

Did we need a ping pong Yoda Gummi Bear boucing around the scenery?

Click to expand...

Yes.

Flyspeck23 said:

May be the reason tPM featured Lil' Anie (aka Tiny Vader, aka Dark Lord of the Napkin, ...) was that Lucas thought that young kids could relate to that character, and therefore like the movie better.

This thinking is flawed from the beginnig, though - it nearly never works that way. Young kids don't dream about being heroic young kids; they dream about being heroic adults. (Btw, that's the reason why nearly every superhero comic featuring kids failed miserably.)

Click to expand...

Except for Superfriends!

Yes.

Click to expand...

No.

Flyspeck23 said:

May be the reason tPM featured Lil' Anie (aka Tiny Vader, aka Dark Lord of the Napkin, ...) was that Lucas thought that young kids could relate to that character, and therefore like the movie better.

This thinking is flawed from the beginnig, though - it nearly never works that way. Young kids don't dream about being heroic young kids; they dream about being heroic adults. (Btw, that's the reason why nearly every superhero comic featuring kids failed miserably.)

Click to expand...

Although that flies in the face of the logic on the success of Harry Potter, though.

Aris Dragonborn said:

The plot of the origianal trilogy was swashbuckling/pulp in nature, where good and evil were clearly defined; the prequels are more intrigue/noir, where nothing is as it seems.

Click to expand...

This actually is what bothered me most about tPM. Everything is exactly as it seems. There's no "phantom menace" at all. Every villain is clearly defined. There is absolutely zero subtlety in the plot at all. Every line Palpatine delivers is filled with evil design, regardless of whether he's wearing his Emperor outfit or not. And when Yoda asks in the end whether the apprentice or the master was killed, there's absolutely no question that the apprentice was the one who got whacked.

Like Empress, my disappointment wasn't with the movies themselves. I loved the lightsaber battles in tPM and in AotC. They're decent popcorn flicks. But I can see so much wasted potential. Why not give me a Palpatine that might actually be a good guy in the first movie? Make me wonder whether Palpatine is already evil, or whether he is being corrupted by Maul.

And speaking of Darth Maul...what a waste of a great character design. When the new trilogy was first announced, I didn't think Lucas could create a villainous image as striking and symbolically powerful as Darth Vader. Then comes Darth Maul, and I'm pleasantly surprised. The Devil to Vader's Death. The imagery was powerful, the potential symbolism impressive. And then the character is wasted in a cheap death, and we get Count Dooku, the old guy with a bent lightsaber...?! *sigh*

jasper said:

Did we need a ping pong Yoda Gummi Bear boucing around the scenery? It would have been better is the 2 foot guy fought the 6 foot with both feet on the ground.

Click to expand...

When I first heard of the Yoda fight before the movie came out, I originally envisioned Yoda merely standing in place, with one (or more) lightsabers whirling around him, wielded by nothing more than Yoda's mind. That Yoda had such precise control over the force that, unlike others, he could actually saber-duel using the Force as his hands.

But I didn't mind the way they went with it. Yoda on Gummy Berry Juice was entertaining in its own way.

Lord Pendragon said:

This actually is what bothered me most about tPM. Everything is exactly as it seems. There's no "phantom menace" at all. Every villain is clearly defined. There is absolutely zero subtlety in the plot at all. Every line Palpatine delivers is filled with evil design, regardless of whether he's wearing his Emperor outfit or not. And when Yoda asks in the end whether the apprentice or the master was killed, there's absolutely no question that the apprentice was the one who got whacked.

Click to expand...

You would be surprised how many non-fans I know who STILL have no idea Palpatine is Sidious. I just explained it AGAIN the other day when one of the undergrads in my lab was watching the trailer and freaked out when he saw Palpy charge Mace and his little posse.

And speaking of Darth Maul...what a waste of a great character design. When the new trilogy was first announced, I didn't think Lucas could create a villainous image as striking and symbolically powerful as Darth Vader. Then comes Darth Maul, and I'm pleasantly surprised. The Devil to Vader's Death. The imagery was powerful, the potential symbolism impressive. And then the character is wasted in a cheap death, and we get Count Dooku, the old guy with a bent lightsaber...?! *sigh*

Click to expand...

"...the character design is wasted in a cheap death"
Fixed that for you. There was an interesting character design, but no character there to speak of. And as for Dooku.... blasphemy! I was thrilled to see an ACTUAL villain in the apprentice role instead of style over substance.

Plus, the sword-fights with him did a much better job of looking like someone who knew what he was doing. That asinine double-lightsaber was the second worst idea in TPM.

When I first heard of the Yoda fight before the movie came out, I originally envisioned Yoda merely standing in place, with one (or more) lightsabers whirling around him, wielded by nothing more than Yoda's mind. That Yoda had such precise control over the force that, unlike others, he could actually saber-duel using the Force as his hands.

Click to expand...

It is, however, dramatically useless. It is impossible to lose such a fight. Without the constraint of a body hooked to the sword, it can slip around any attack instantly and end the fight in about 1/4 of a second.

Besides, I find it to be of dubious coolness. Using the Force to propel his 800+ year old body into battle is cool, even if I dislike some aspects of the execution. Personally, I think they should have spent some more time studying the couple of Kali and Silat masters who are about 4'8". How those guys fight a tall opponent is freakin' cool.

Aris Dragonborn said:

For me, TPM was a let-down - initially. Repeated viewings seemed to improve the experience, but it still seemed as if something was wrong.....

And then, one day, I realized that I had been watching the movies from the perspective of the original trilogy, and that wasn't going to work. The original trilogy was set in a "dark time for the galaxy", where the Emperor ruled absolutely, the Jedi were non-existent, and no one had the courage or the strength to rise up against the Empire. No one, that is, until that fateful day when a Corellian smuggler took on a charter consisting of an old man, a farmboy, and their two droids....

The Prequels, on the other hand, depict a universe that, while on the decline, is still a much happier place than it would be in the future. Slavery is virtually non-existent (except in the Outer Rim territories), and non-humans had as much freedom. The Jedi were a force (no pun intended) for peace and justice throughout the galaxy, and were generally held in high regard (unless you were a criminal, that is). Sadly, the corruption of the government only hastened the Republic's decline. Things were looking up when a greatly respected senator form Naboo was elected Chancellor.........Looking up, that is, until a headstrong Jedi Master and his Padawan found a young boy who seemed to possess tremendous force-potential, and took him to be tested and eventually trained at the Jedi Temple.

Click to expand...

I'm going to agree with you to a point. When I went back and watched AotC recently, it struck me that the period Lucas was showing in many ways mirrored our own history at the beginning of World War I. At that time, people believed that society as a whole was enlightened and striving towards great progress (the reality may not have reflected this, but idealistic socialites rarely concern themselves with the plight of the working folk who put money in their pockets). Industrialization was seen as a good thing, and no one even conceived of the horror that would be WWI, WWII, or the nuclear bomb. Going into WWI, people thought they would go out, fight their enemy, and be home by supper. It was the first modern war, and it was more terrible than anything they had ever seen before. There was a definite naivety on the part of almost everyone involved, and had they known that it would become an extremely costly war of attrition, both warring alliances would probably have worked out a peaceful solution. I think that there are some definite parallels between that period and the period in the prequels.

In addition to this, Lucas definitely wanted to show how Palpatine did not steal his power, it was willingly given to him. Its a commentary on how governments work, and how people are ruled. Lucas has a pretty good grasp of Machiavellian thought when it comes right down to it, and should serve as a cautionary allegory for what might happen in the free countries of the real world.

While the political aspects of the story are not nearly as entertaining as the swashbuckling of the original trilogy, it does setup the back story upon which the original was built. Lucas himself said that the reason he started with IV, V, and VI was because he felt that they were more a entertaining story. Given that this is what he thought in the beginning, it should come as no surprise that the prequels aren't being received as well as they could be. He just isn't telling the same type of story.

Despite this, I agree that he could have done a better job with the directing, the pacing, and the characterizations. Jar Jar and pod racing ruined TPM for me (as if the title itself wasn't bad enough), and there were some story elements that probably should have been scrutinized a bit before being committed to film. All in all, they're OK movies that could have been better, but they also could have been far, far worse.

Whisperfoot said:

In addition to this, Lucas definitely wanted to show how Palpatine did not steal his power, it was willingly given to him. Its a commentary on how governments work, and how people are ruled. Lucas has a pretty good grasp of Machiavellian thought when it comes right down to it, and should serve as a cautionary allegory for what might happen in the free countries of the real world.

Click to expand...

Rather a mirror of what did happen to the Weimar Republic in the 30s. I don't think it's a coincidence that Palpatine's official rank in the government is Chancellor; the same as Hitler's.