Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[MechaGodzilla]

Originally Posted by balthazar_bee

But it's odd, or at least misleading as a ranking, because I'd say that every Star Wars film has at least one sequence that's more exciting than any that's found in TFA.

This criticism I can understand and even agree with to an extent. I think that, at least for me, the problem is that TFA is so relentlessly paced and filled to the brim with action that it becomes a bit numbing after a while. By contrast the other movies all spaced things out in a way that gave the big set pieces more impact once we got around to them. That's the single biggest problem I have with it.

I feel like this movie could benefit hugely from an extended cut that mainly focused on adding some breather moments in between all the action. Like the deleted Senate scene, for example.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by BluBonnet

The problem is that this isn't a case of a "poorly made passion project" - it is a superbly well made but poorly understood trilogy.

You really need to stop spouting this nonsense and get the fact that we can both "understand" the movies just fine and have differing opinions on their quality. I actually LIKE politics and the core plot and themes of those movies, I just think they're poorly executed.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by BluBonnet

I agree with everything except the part about the PTs. There was a lot more original stuff in any one of the prequels than there likely will be in all of the new trilogy. I mean, Lucas created that universe to begin with, so he's the one with the real imagination. Others will simply try to borrow from or elaborate on what he created.

What do you mean when you say original stuff?

There were some cool things but nothing really jumped out as all that original. A city that covers a planet is a cool idea but the execution looked really Blade Runnerish, didn't it? Don't get me wrong, that's not a bad thing but it didn't really seem all that original.

Same with the underwater city. As jaw-droppingly cool as it was, I didn't really get any real sense of 'wow, I didn't know movies could do this'.

CGI characters? A lot of people were working on that (with different degrees of success). One could argue that he advanced CGI by pumping money into it and that in some senses he hit some benchmarks first but none of it was all that original. I mean, it's not like he came up with the idea of using computers to make pictures.

Ditto digital cameras.

[Falaskan]

Originally Posted by octagon

What do you mean when you say original stuff?



There were some cool things but nothing really jumped out as all that original. A city that covers a planet is a cool idea but the execution looked really Blade Runnerish, didn't it? Don't get me wrong, that's not a bad thing but it didn't really seem all that original.



Same with the underwater city. As jaw-droppingly cool as it was, I didn't really get any real sense of 'wow, I didn't know movies could do this'.



CGI characters? A lot of people were working on that (with different degrees of success). One could argue that he advanced CGI by pumping money into it and that in some senses he hit some benchmarks first but none of it was all that original. I mean, it's not like he came up with the idea of using computers to make pictures.



Ditto digital cameras.

None of them had a droid carrying secrets, a weapon that could destroy planets, or a dessert planet for the third time around being central to the plot tho.

[Arawn]

Dessert planets are very tasty.

[ambient_indie]

The fact that The Force Awakens is mostly a remake of A New Hope doesn't diminish my enjoyment of the film because I find it to be a very good remake of A New Hope. it's a great start off for our new characters.

Will it bug me seeing remixed bits again? Well yeah probably. But for the first time since the 90s when I first saw the Star Wars Trilogy, I felt invested in the characters, the action, and the relationships. And I mean, Rey, Finn, Poe and Kylo Ren. It's not just seeing all of the familiar characters.

I find Kylo Ren to be one of the scariest, most true to life tortured antagonists ever in the Star Wars films. Because he is a kid with a weapon who uses his emotion over reason. Don't believe me, watch the news. Adam does a better Anakin than Hayden.

And besides Hollywood has been remaking movies since the beginning. Ben Hur and the Maltese Falcon are remakes. Every trailer and spot was very remenincent of A New Hope. It didn't surprise me. I cannot wait for what's ahead.

[kidglov3s]

Originally Posted by Falaskan

dessert planet

[iamsometal]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Same here, it's third in my ranking too. And yes, it's not perfect! Unfortunately the first two prequels suffer from an excess of ideas over coherent storytelling, and although the story FINALLY comes into focus for Ep III (by Lucas' own admission it contains the most meat of his original outline) Lucas still wasn't able to fit everything in because he left himself too much story and too little time to tell it. But I still love it for what it is, it's Lucas most assured directorial SW effort by far and that opening shot alone is greater than anything I saw in TFA.

Can't disagree more. That opening shot in Sith would have been impressive had it been followed by a fun, riveting space battle, but it was followed by an embarrassingly boring, needlessly silly, poorly written mess of an opening scene. Then followed by what I consider a movie as painfully written and poorly acted as Attack of the Clones was. Yes, it's Lucas at his most assured, but sadly that's not a good thing when it comes to writing believable dialogue or directing actors in order to get half-decent performances. Sith is second-to-last in my ranking. Every time my kids force Sith on us it gets worse and worse. Clones will forever be the worst SW movie, but Sith may end up tied for last if I have to keep watching it. I cannot wait for the day when my kids can tell crap from quality filmmaking.

[MechaGodzilla]

Originally Posted by octagon

What do you mean when you say original stuff?

There were some cool things but nothing really jumped out as all that original. A city that covers a planet is a cool idea but the execution looked really Blade Runnerish, didn't it? Don't get me wrong, that's not a bad thing but it didn't really seem all that original.

Same with the underwater city. As jaw-droppingly cool as it was, I didn't really get any real sense of 'wow, I didn't know movies could do this'.

CGI characters? A lot of people were working on that (with different degrees of success). One could argue that he advanced CGI by pumping money into it and that in some senses he hit some benchmarks first but none of it was all that original. I mean, it's not like he came up with the idea of using computers to make pictures.

Ditto digital cameras.

Yeah, I don't know what was all that original and creatively bold about the prequels. Suddenly people are building the PT up as this crazy unique vision that never stood a chance with critics and fans simply because it was so new, so daring and innovative. Lucas didn't play it safe and that is the only reason why it failed in the eyes of some.

I can't say I really see that though. Sure Anakin and Obi-Wan had to be involved since it was always going to be about them, but he brought in every character from the OT he possibly could in some capacity, with most of them having no real reason to be there aside from fan service. Did we need cameos from Jabba and Chewie, to see Boba Fett as a kid with his dad who happens to wear the same armor and fly the same ship with a different paint job? Was making TPM a sort of "soft remake" of ANH (with some ROTJ sprinkled on top for good measure - a movie that in itself already did rehash ANH to a lesser extent) 15 years before TFA did the same thing one of those bold moves? Anakin having pretty much the same backstory as Luke, having grown up on Tatooine even (where he built 3PO - who by chance ends up on the same planet to meet Anakin's son some 30 years later)?

People use characters like Jar Jar as an example of how Lucas did his own thing, fans be damned, but I don't think Lucas created Jar Jar as an "in your face!" move. He genuinely thought the character would be liked, but when that backfired Jar Jar suddenly got much less screen time in the second movie and had almost disappeared by the third. Similarly, he knew a certain portion of the fanbase were obsessed with wanting to see Star Wars become "dark" and after the very lighthearted TPM the sequels got progressively darker until we arrived at ROTS which is probably the darkest movie of them all.

Some say this is all coincidence, that Lucas wasn't at all trying to please the fans at any point of the process, he stuck 100% to his "vision", but I'm not so sure about that. I'd argue the PT was just as safe, retreading old ground and pandering to fan desires as TFA is accused of being right now. Note that I'm not trying to "hate" on the PT here, I actually mostly enjoy the trilogy and feel it's much more of a mixed bag with some good and some bad than the outright disaster it's made out to be. I just don't agree that it was so daring and new.

Originally Posted by Falaskan

None of them had a droid carrying secrets, a weapon that could destroy planets, or a dessert planet for the third time around being central to the plot tho.

Not a weapon that could destroy planets, but the droid control ship in TPM filled the same basic function the Death Stars and Starkiller Base did. This big spherical thing in space the villains wield that the heroes need to take out at the last minute. Tatooine returned in all three movies and was pretty central to the plot in the first two especially, and we got a bonus second desert planet in Geonosis which is pretty important too keeping in mind what goes on there (like the Death Star being designed by its inhabitants).

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by iamsometal

Can't disagree more. That opening shot in Sith would have been impressive had it been followed by a fun, riveting space battle, but it was followed by an embarrassingly boring, needlessly silly, poorly written mess of an opening scene. Then followed by what I consider a movie as painfully written and poorly acted as Attack of the Clones was. Yes, it's Lucas at his most assured, but sadly that's not a good thing when it comes to writing believable dialogue or directing actors in order to get half-decent performances. Sith is second-to-last in my ranking. Every time my kids force Sith on us it gets worse and worse. Clones will forever be the worst SW movie, but Sith may end up tied for last if I have to keep watching it. I cannot wait for the day when my kids can tell crap from quality filmmaking.

I'm not attempting to convince you with this reply, just outlining further why I like it so. Yes, it still has something of the goofiness of the prior films but I love how Padme is no longer this flat, emotionless robot. Not much can be done about young master Skywalker, granted, but he's much less of a whiner and more this poor put-upon lad who's being leant upon by all sides until he cracks under the strain, something which a LOT of people seem to miss completely. And because Lucas had something of a firmer idea of how he was going to fit the film together the music doesn't get all hacked up like it did on Clones, whenever I hear something like Anakin's Dark Deeds or Battle of the Heroes the hair on my neck still stands up. Love me some Revenge of the Sith.

[Dunemoon]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

You really need to stop spouting this nonsense and get the fact that we can both "understand" the movies just fine and have differing opinions on their quality. I actually LIKE politics and the core plot and themes of those movies, I just think they're poorly executed.

Well, look at you trying to control what other member's post.

[mjbethancourt]

Originally Posted by MechaGodzilla

he knew a certain portion of the fanbase were obsessed with wanting to see Star Wars become "dark" and after the very lighthearted TPM the sequels got progressively darker until we arrived at ROTS which is probably the darkest movie of them all.

I would have to disagree and argue for the reverse, that the reason why TPM was so light and whimsical is precisely because he knew that in order to tell the rest of the PT story, it was going to have to get very dark and negative, so TPM was his one shot at pitching the PT to the little kids (I believe I've even heard Lucas say this, in some BD extra). I mean, it's not as if the decision to turn Anakin into Darth Vader, have Palpatine take over the galaxy and raise his empire, and kill all the jedi, were decisions made on the fly, those things were all part of the story since at least 1980.

[motorheadache95]

Originally Posted by mjbethancourt

I would have to disagree and argue for the reverse, that the reason why TPM was so light and whimsical is precisely because he knew that in order to tell the rest of the PT story, it was going to have to get very dark and negative, so TPM was his one shot at pitching the PT to the little kids (I believe I've even heard Lucas say this, in some BD extra). I mean, it's not as if the decision to turn Anakin into Darth Vader, have Palpatine take over the galaxy and raise his empire, and kill all the jedi, were decisions made on the fly, those things were all part of the story since at least 1980.

Yeah, I kind of "get" The Phantom Menace and what Lucas was going for. He probably envisioned it to be a standalone lighthearted story before the darkness started-- establishing the state of the universe and characters before getting into the meat of the story in the next two episodes. Not really that dissimilar in concept to the original Star Wars. And he thought making Anakin a little kid would make people interested in seeing how he goes from that to Darth Vader-- I guess making the tragedy seem larger.

The problems with that-- The characters all feel so disconnected from that movie to the next two. I don't really connect 19 year-old "Hayden" Anakin with little kid "Jake" Anakin at all. Episode II had to re-establish virtually everything from plot to characters, which really made Episode I just seem that much more pointless. Factor in that Attack of the Clones really didn't have that much going on either, leaving Episode III to have to basically tell almost the entire story the prequel trilogy was supposedly about.

[MechaGodzilla]

Originally Posted by mjbethancourt

I would have to disagree and argue for the reverse, that the reason why TPM was so light and whimsical is precisely because he knew that in order to tell the rest of the PT story, it was going to have to get very dark and negative, so TPM was his one shot at pitching the PT to the little kids (I believe I've even heard Lucas say this, in some BD extra). I mean, it's not as if the decision to turn Anakin into Darth Vader, have Palpatine take over the galaxy and raise his empire, and kill all the jedi, were decisions made on the fly, those things were all part of the story since at least 1980.

Hmm, well I think I stand somewhere in the middle on this. Like you say, the story by its very nature would call for something a bit darker when we got to that point, definitely. But at the same time, the OT was able to go to some pretty dramatically heavy places too without making the overall tone of the movies as dark as ROTS did. I believe that at least part of it was to give the fans that "dark" movie they were clamoring for.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by Falaskan

Does anyone appreciate the PT more, now that TFA is basically ANH 2.0?

I like all seven films. They each bring something exciting to the overall saga.
Looking forward to VIII & IX.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by motorheadache95

Yeah, I kind of "get" The Phantom Menace and what Lucas was going for. He probably envisioned it to be a standalone lighthearted story before the darkness started-- establishing the state of the universe and characters before getting into the meat of the story in the next two episodes. Not really that dissimilar in concept to the original Star Wars. And he thought making Anakin a little kid would make people interested in seeing how he goes from that to Darth Vader-- I guess making the tragedy seem larger.

The problems with that-- The characters all feel so disconnected from that movie to the next two. I don't really connect 19 year-old "Hayden" Anakin with little kid "Jake" Anakin at all. Episode II had to re-establish virtually everything from plot to characters, which really made Episode I just seem that much more pointless. Factor in that Attack of the Clones really didn't have that much going on either, leaving Episode III to have to basically tell almost the entire story the prequel trilogy was supposedly about.

Agreed on all counts. We know WHY Lucas did it like that (a bit of light before the darkness etc etc) but the execution fell flat for me because it left too much of a schism from one film to the next. It's almost like there's three story threads there: Ep I on its own, then II and II together, then IV-VI.

Hell, if they'd just made Anakin a bit older to start with and so were able to use the same actor across the entire trilogy then there would've been no need to place such a huge gap between I and II, and personally there would be so much more resonance for the boy who became a monster (even if they told the story much as it is now, timelines aside). But Jake is so far apart from Hayden that they might as well be two different characters, and yes: I do realise that we change dramatically when growing up, but not being able to actually see that transition happen across the films hurts TPM quite a bit in the grand scheme of things IMO.

[mjbethancourt]

Originally Posted by MechaGodzilla

Hmm, well I think I stand somewhere in the middle on this. Like you say, the story by its very nature would call for something a bit darker when we got to that point, definitely. But at the same time, the OT was able to go to some pretty dramatically heavy places too without making the overall tone of the movies as dark as ROTS did. I believe that at least part of it was to give the fans that "dark" movie they were clamoring for.

However, with the OT, the "good guys" were always going to win, so no matter how treacherous a scenario was, you knew it would work out in the end. In the PT, the "bad guys" were destined to prevail, and it would seem really inappropriate to have a light or positive tone in a story about how everything goes to hell. I don't know if you ever read Tolkien, but his last unfinished work, The Silmarillion, had a similar challenge... how to follow up a story about how the best within people can bring about the triumph of good and light against overwhelming odds, with another, darker, and more philosophical work about how the worst within people can cause the whole world to fall apart in epic tragic proportion; and just like with PT Star Wars, it ends with a spark of Hope being secreted away from the wreckage, to wait for the right time for the light to rise again. Personally, I enjoy that duality, I firmly believe that the most powerful forces in the world are things like stupidity, madness, desire/greed, anger/fear, etc. and yet somehow in spite of that the world keeps turning and good occasionally prevails over evil. That is essential and mythical, the Greeks gave us the legend of Pandora's box, in which all the evils and vices are unleashed upon the world, and only one thing remains in the box to stand against them: Hope. Small, frail, nascent, and yet still the only thing the "good guys" ever really need in order to prevail over evil.

[MechaGodzilla]

Originally Posted by mjbethancourt

However, with the OT, the "good guys" were always going to win, so no matter how treacherous a scenario was, you knew it would work out in the end. In the PT, the "bad guys" were destined to prevail, and it would seem really inappropriate to have a light or positive tone in a story about how everything goes to hell. I don't know if you ever read Tolkien, but his last unfinished work, The Silmarillion, had a similar challenge... how to follow up a story about how the best within people can bring about the triumph of good and light against overwhelming odds, with another, darker, and more philosophical work about how the worst within people can cause the whole world to fall apart in epic tragic proportion; and just like with PT Star Wars, it ends with a spark of Hope being secreted away from the wreckage, to wait for the right time for the light to rise again. Personally, I enjoy that duality, I firmly believe that the most powerful forces in the world are things like stupidity, madness, desire/greed, anger/fear, etc. and yet somehow in spite of that the world keeps turning and good occasionally prevails over evil. That is essential and mythical, the Greeks gave us the legend of Pandora's box, in which all the evils and vices are unleashed upon the world, and only one thing remains in the box to stand against them: Hope. Small, frail, nascent, and yet still the only thing the "good guys" ever really need in order to prevail over evil.

Sure, but I still don't think the overall tone of ROTS would necessarily have to be as dark. It wasn't set in stone that the rise of the Empire, Padmé's death and the birth of Vader would all have to had come at once, or even happen on-screen at all, for example. If it had all been spread out more, like if the Empire had been established earlier in the trilogy, Anakin being injured and put in the suit had happened differently or off-screen and Padmé died earlier or even lived, there wouldn't have been the same sense of "everything's going to hell and the tone needs to reflect that". Had he chosen to tell the story that way he could have gotten away with making it feel more like ANH or something.

I should clarify here that I personally don't mind the tone of the film, all I'm saying is I think Lucas made it the way he did partly to please/shut up the fans that want everything to be "dark". I'm not convinced it was part of his master plan.

[happydood]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Agreed on all counts. We know WHY Lucas did it like that (a bit of light before the darkness etc etc) but the execution fell flat for me because it left too much of a schism from one film to the next. It's almost like there's three story threads there: Ep I on its own, then II and II together, then IV-VI.

Hell, if they'd just made Anakin a bit older to start with and so were able to use the same actor across the entire trilogy then there would've been no need to place such a huge gap between I and II, and personally there would be so much more resonance for the boy who became a monster (even if they told the story much as it is now, timelines aside). But Jake is so far apart from Hayden that they might as well be two different characters, and yes: I do realise that we change dramatically when growing up, but not being able to actually see that transition happen across the films hurts TPM quite a bit in the grand scheme of things IMO.

Agreed. I don't hate Hayden- he's serviceable (if nothing else) in a young Mark Hamill sort of way. Had we more time with him (and I know the peanut gallery is imagining burning me in effigy right now) I think he could have sold a transformation better. He's proven to be pretty good in other projects after all.

But say what you will about Lucas- the doddering old man and inept and idiot savant characterizations of him say more about those doing the labeling than the labeled. My reality is that these movies are by no means perfect and by no means the worst movies ever made. But again, some 'critical thought,' which is nothing of the sort, wants to make them one or the other.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

And because Lucas had something of a firmer idea of how he was going to fit the film together the music doesn't get all hacked up like it did on Clones, whenever I hear something like Anakin's Dark Deeds or Battle of the Heroes the hair on my neck still stands up.

Yeah, this can't be underestimated. I don't think Lucas really brought the writing or performances home in Sith, but he did a much better job directing and that is a big reason why a lot of people put that movie above the other two prequels.

Originally Posted by Dunemoon

Well, look at you trying to control what other member's post.