Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Beast

And how is the Trade Federation superfluous, when they're a part of the greater Separatist Alliance?

The blockade of Naboo set up absolutely nothing. It could have been completely removed without changing anything in Clones or Sith. Ditto the Gungans.

If you want to say it was interesting filler or entertaining filler that's fine. I have no quarrel with that. I thought the pod race was incredibly tedious but I get that other people like it.

But to say that any of that 'set up the story'...

Originally Posted by Beast

And Anakin and Padme's backstories arn't important? Seriously? I guess we didn't need Luke's either.

No, we didn't need Luke's backstory. We met Luke when he was eighteen or so and about twenty minutes before he started fighting the Empire. Thirty years later we saw him for ten seconds as a newborn.

Everything in between? Completely blank.

And we've been fine with that.

[MrJoeKalel]

The statement about "did the movie entertain you" is what I also agree answers the question of whether or not a movie is good. Leave the whole 'artsy' 'illuminating' things about movies...if a movie honestly entertains you, that's what matters. Did TPM entertain me? The first, and maybe second time, not the rest. The only thing to watch for is the podrace and the duel at the ending, otherwise, it's Bantha poodo.

Originally Posted by Beast

You're kinda twisting what he said. But TPM is a set-up movie, and sets up the universe and how things operate. Such as the Jedi Order and the Senate. It's so they could hit the ground running without having to spend time establishing things. ANH operates exactly the same, as a pure set-up film... allowing ESB and ROTJ to also hit the ground running. Though I think TPM does a much better job, since ANH also operates as a Stand Alone picture.

That's a very weak argument because ANH DOES stand on its own while being enjoyable.

Originally Posted by nathan_393

I enjoy TPM for nostalgic reasons and I like many of the sequences - but I can at least acknowledge its flaws. I'm excited for some people on this thread to do the same one day. Maybe. Hopefully.

ANH is definitely not just a set-up film either, but okay Beast. Have it your way.

QFT.

[Shaft Windu]

Originally Posted by Beast

Guess we didn't need to see Luke's beginnings on Tatooine either. Character arc? Pfft. What's that!

We didn't need to see him grow into the man he did over the course of the films. That's utterly unimportant.

Exactly! To say, we could have skipped how Anakin became a jedi ist the same than saying we could have started with Luke already a member of the rebel-alliance. That's ridiculous and noone would ever demand such a thing!

The core of the issue is that certain people won't grant the PT the same status and epic nature as they do the OT. They see the OT as the main-attraction and the PT as a prelude or a foreword that has no value other than complementary the old movies. They wanted to quickly skip the introduction via a montage of the hints given in the OT (follow Obi Wan on Crusade, Clone Wars, Turn to the Dark Side because it's cooler) and spend the rest with showcasing Vader hunting jedi, Stormtroopers, Stardestroyers, bounty-hunters and smugglers...

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Shaft Windu

Exactly! To say, we could have skipped how Anakin became a jedi ist the same than saying we could have started with Luke already a member of the rebel-alliance. That's ridiculous and noone would ever demand such a thing!

The core of the issue is that certain people won't grant the PT the same status and epic nature as they do the OT. They see the OT as the main-attraction and the PT as a prelude or a foreword that has no value other than complementary the old movies. They wanted to quickly skip the introduction via a montage of the hints given in the OT (follow Obi Wan on Crusade, Clone Wars, Turn to the Dark Side because it's cooler) and spend the rest with showcasing Vader hunting jedi, Stormtroopers, Stardestroyers, bounty-hunters and smugglers...

I actually wish they'd make 3.1 but I doubt it will happen at this point, would love to see strange new worlds and Vader hunting down wayward Jedi Knights and Masters.

[Beast]

Originally Posted by octagon

The blockade of Naboo set up absolutely nothing.

I think you missed the scenes with Senator Palpatine/Chancellor Palpatine.

It could have been completely removed without changing anything in Clones or Sith.

Other than the driving focus of the films. But who needs that. Guess that means we don't need A New Hope either as a film.

Ditto the Gungans.

And get rid of Chewbacca, C-3PO, R2-D2, and all the aliens in the OT also. They "Serve No Purpose".
Though the relationship of the Gungans and the Nabooians does play into the the larger story of symbiotic relationships.

No, we didn't need Luke's backstory. We met Luke when he was eighteen or so and about twenty minutes before he started fighting the Empire. Thirty years later we saw him for ten seconds as a newborn.

We saw what we needed to see of Luke's backstory, just like we saw what we needed of Anakin and Padme's. We wouldn't care about him without his character arc. We saw Luke at the start of his journey, his "First Step Into A Larger World", just like we saw Anakin's.

[42041]

Originally Posted by Shaft Windu

Exactly! To say, we could have skipped how Anakin became a jedi ist the same than saying we could have started with Luke already a member of the rebel-alliance. That's ridiculous and noone would ever demand such a thing!

That would've worked fine, really. The script/story would have to be reworked obviously but I don't think it's inherently a weaker start.

[Beast]

Originally Posted by 42041

That would've worked fine, really. The script/story would have to be reworked obviously but I don't think it's inherently a weaker start.

Sure it would have been. It destroys the character arc. It would be like having Frodo introduced to us at the Council of Elrond.

[Shaft Windu]

Originally Posted by Beast

I think you missed the scenes with Senator Palpatine/Chancellor Palpatine.

Other than the driving focus of the films. But who needs that. Guess that means we don't need A New Hope either as a film.

And get rid of Chewbacca, C-3PO, R2-D2, and all the aliens in the OT also. They "Serve No Purpose".
Though the relationship of the Gungans and the Nabooians does play into the the larger story of symbiotic relationships.

We saw what we needed to see of Luke's backstory, just like we saw what we needed of Anakin and Padme's. We saw Luke at the start of his journey, his "First Step Into A Larger World", just like we saw Anakin.

Honestly, Beast, you're all right! You just have to give a little more love to "The Godfather"... Maybe you just have to watch it again in the correct viewing order: Part 2, after that Part 1 as a flashback and Part 3 last

[Beast]

Originally Posted by Shaft Windu

Honestly, Beast, you're all right! You just have to give a little more love to "The Godfather"... Maybe you just have to watch it again in the correct viewing order: Part 2, after that Part 1 as a flashback and Part 3 last

I have tried. God have I tried. And I have probably seen the entire film over the numerous times I've tried.
The movie just bores me to tears and/or puts me to sleep. I just don't like Gangster type movies.

[Shaft Windu]

Originally Posted by 42041

That would've worked fine, really. The script/story would have to be reworked obviously but I don't think it's inherently a weaker start.

On second thought, maybe you could also lose Episode 6. Just ONE movie starting on Hoth, (skip Yoda) the Bespin-confrontation in the middle and the finale on the Death Star at the end!

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Beast

I have tried. God have I tried. And I have probably seen the entire film over the numerous times I've tried.
The movie just bores me to tears and/or puts me to sleep. I just don't like Gangster type movies.

Exactly how I feel about most of Episode I and part of Episode IV. I like SOME gangster films, like Scarface and Heat. Have very low expectations for the SW show in development.

[nathan_393]

Originally Posted by Beast

And water is wet. EVERY movie has flaws. So that's kinda a nonsensical statement.

Yes. It's also a Stand Alone movie, like I said. Might want to start paying attention.

It's structure and pace is much like TPM, but TPM does the job a lot better in a number of ways.

Stand-alone movies are not "set-up" films. A true "set-up" film would mean sequels are necessary. The definition of a stand-alone film precludes it from being described as a "set-up" movie. You might want to start paying attention to the English language.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by Beast

Hyperbole much? There's plenty of people who like if not love the film. Pay attetion.

Originally Posted by Shaft Windu

No he's not! Millions of Star Wars fans love it!

Pay attention? I had to look up what hyperbole meant. I thought you meant hyperspace.... that often leaves me feeling woozy.

As for hyperbole people often tell me I exaggerate things a billion times over. I think like a hundred thousand people have said that to me.

A greater man than I could ever dream of being once said: "One swallow does not make a summer, neither does one fine day; similarly one day or brief time of happiness does not make a person entirely happy."

I'm glad you commented on the least serious part of my post (and I'm quite fond of TPM). What I was trying to say was we could have got rid of most of Phantom's plot in the crawl and really hit the ground running:

Episode I (yes it's a prequel)

THE PHANTOM MENACE

Turmoil has engulfed the GALACTIC REPUBLIC. AAA no longer comes out to Tatooine to fix Nabooan starships. Apparantly it's no longer part of their service: They should have read the small print, always read the small print!!

Game of Chance cheat QUI-GON GIN has endangered Queen Padmé Amidala's (she also cleans droids on the side) life and that of a very small Force sensitive young boy PLEASE-CAST-AGAIN SKYWALKER for an expensive bit of scrap metal in a deadly Podrace. Aided by his padawan OBI-WAN KENOBI (he doesn’t leave the ship which is ironic as he’ll spend twenty years living in a hut later on) our heroes make it back to CORUSCANT the home of the Galactic Senate to be told nothing they witnessed is of any good to anybody. Even the sworn testimony of ‘Special’ representative JAR-JAR BINKS is useless.

After another long journey back to Naboo a fierce battle erupts between the Droid Army and the Gungans thousands of miles away from a palace (here Jar-Jar runs around screaming like an idiot when his friends are killed in front of him) which houses the only starfighters on the planet (whose pilots have been sitting in-front of for DAYS) young Skywalker cleverly takes off into space and destroys the Trade Federation shield generator which deactivates the controls of the fearsome Droid Army. Meanwhile the brave Jedi gang up on one Sith Warrior (don’t worry he has two lightsabers so it’s an honorable fight). Our wise hero Qui-Gon is slain leaving Obi-Wan to defeat the evil DARTH MAUL and train the young progeny Skywalker, even though everyone says ‘Don’t Do It!’

We join our heroes as Skywalker begins his training with an 80’s montage....

[Beast]

Originally Posted by nathan_393

Stand-alone movies are not "set-up" films. A true "set-up" film would mean sequels are necessary. The definition of a stand-alone film precludes it from being described as a "set-up" movie. You might want to start paying attention to the English language.

Sure they can! See: Terminator. It's a stand-alone movie, but also serves as a set-up film. Cause it doesn't answer everything.

Same with Alien. Hell, even Planet of the Apes. They manage to accomplish both things. Just like A New Hope does.

[nathan_393]

Originally Posted by Beast

Sure they can! See: Terminator. It's a stand-alone movie, but also serves as a set up film.

Same with Alien. Hell, even Planet of the Apes. They manage to accomplish both things. Just like A New Hope.

The fact that the film was followed up with a sequel does not automatically equate it to set-up status. It relegates the follow-ups to "sequel" status. Very different.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Beast

Other than the driving focus of the films. But who needs that. Guess that means we don't need A New Hope either as a film.

And what exactly is the driving focus of the films? That's not rhetorical, I'm honestly curious.

[42041]

Originally Posted by Beast

Sure it would have been. It destroys the character arc. It would be like having Frodo introduced to us at the Council of Elrond.

What does Luke's characterization on Tatooine really establish that couldn't have been established any other way? Are the rebels some kind of highly trained elite soldiers that a somewhat naive, eager teenage recruit couldn't possibly be part of? There are many ways to tell a story, and a movie can only present a small slice of the overall "life" of the characters, so you better make sure you focus on the interesting bits, not when they're obnoxious 8-year-olds.

[Shaft Windu]

Originally Posted by 42041

What does Luke's characterization on Tatooine really establish that couldn't have been established any other way? Are the rebels some kind of highly trained elite soldiers that a somewhat naive, eager teenage recruit couldn't possibly be part of? There are many ways to tell a story, and a movie can only present a small slice of the overall "life" of the characters, so you better make sure you focus on the interesting bits, not when they're obnoxious 8-year-olds.

You REALLY should read "the hero with a thousand faces"...

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by 42041

What does Luke's characterization on Tatooine really establish that couldn't have been established any other way? Are the rebels some kind of highly trained elite soldiers that a somewhat naive, eager teenage recruit couldn't possibly be part of? There are many ways to tell a story, and a movie can only present a small slice of the overall "life" of the characters, so you better make sure you focus on the interesting bits, not when they're obnoxious 8-year-olds.

He was only obnoxious when he was 8? Actually after viewing the 3 films again recently, I have to say I think kiddie Anakin is a better character than the adult. Even taking into considering all the terrible acting and dialogue. The kid is more tolerable because the teen adult is so immature and easily influenced. Still one of my favourite character arcs of all-time though.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Darth Anakin

He was only obnoxious when he was 8? Actually after viewing the 3 films again recently, I have to say I think kiddie Anakin is a better character than the adult. Even taking into considering all the terrible acting and dialogue. The kid is more tolerable because the teen adult is so immature and easily influenced. Still one of my favourite character arcs of all-time though.

The arc could have been even better had they not essentially skipped over the single most interesting part - how did he actually become a douchebag in the first place?

We did get to see him fly into his first murderous rage but he grew from normal, decent, lovable little Ani into an adult capable of murderous rages entirely off-screen.

How did he change? Why did he change?

Eh, these things happen.