Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[OG Pooh]

Keira Knightly...

I don't see what anyone sees in her. Give that woman a sandwich & make sure she eats the damned thing!

I never really thought about who I'd have used for the Padme & Anakin characters beyond the fact that (IMHO) young Anakin should have been Haley Joel Osment.

[gregmasciola]

Avoid anger, fear, aggression. Just pay it forward.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by octagon

I don't normally believe in stuff like curses or jinxes but that would explain a LOT.

that bad really? I wonder what is the big hatred for Sophia Coppola, not that I actually anything she as done but I wonder what it is.

[STARKILLER--1138]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Buttered rolls? Rolls of fat?

The boulder that rolls after Indiana Jones in Raiders?

Keira was one of Padme's handmaidens/decoys in Episode I BTW.

Mmmm, buttered "rolls"...

[octagon]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

that bad really? I wonder what is the big hatred for Sophia Coppola, not that I actually anything she as done but I wonder what it is.

Godfather III.

She was excruciating.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by octagon

Godfather III.

She was excruciating.

Ah! Got it, I never been past The Godfather.

[drobswim13]

Originally Posted by octagon

Godfather III.

She was excruciating.

She is an excellent director, though.

[motorheadache95]

Originally Posted by OG Pooh

Agreed.

What kills me is how all the PT haters will site the cringe moments, yet seem oblivious to all the ones in the OT. Sure, everybody's performances in the PT weren't Oscar calibur... Have they really watched the OT? There was a lot of bad acting & bad lines there as well. It's funny how all the faults that people find in the PT can very easily be transfered to the OT, yet they still use them to make a case for their hatred of one or the other (yes it goes the other way around too). I like both trilogies. I can find faults with each trilogy, but I can both acknowledge & accept the faults of each because I love the story, the characters and all that goes with the fictional universe that is Star Wars.

I can't say I agree with this statement. None of the main characters come close to approaching the level of bad acting and writing we see in the prequels. I have a joke where the acting caliber of the prequels is equivalent to that one background guy in Empire that says "Two fighters against a star destroyer?"

I could make a list of everything I don't like about the prequels, but I pretty much don't have to anymore. Red Letter Media explains it better than I ever could have. Suffice to say that no, I don't think the OT and PT are on even close to equal, transferable terms. We will disagree on this forever

[beanham22]

Man, I can't wait until some Bluray news gets released. Then we won't have to read about 10 year old complaints, over... and over... and over...

What I never got was the hate for TPM? Yeah Jar Jar is annoying and the gungans in general are almost as bad as Ewoks but really? Darth Maul is on the level of Vader almost as far as bad assery goes, Obi-Wan was awesome, seeing a different part of Tatooine was neat, seeing the senate council that was alluded to in the OT was a good addition imo, the 'Duel of Fates' is the best fight in the saga, Natalie Portman was actually good in this one... .... Oh yeah, Qui Gon Jinn. One of the coolest Jedis in the mythology, played by Liam Neeson no less.

Negatives are; Gungans, "Yippieeeee" , and maybe the Pod Race.

AotC deserves the hate a handful of great scenes saved this one (Kamino, Battle of geonosis (minus the duel), Anakins massacre, and the deployment of Clones )

Examples of the Bad: "You havn't changed a bit, you're exactly the way I remember you in my dreams" (WTF??)
"Don't worry, we have Artoo with us" (HA...HA..)
"I don't like sand... ...but not like here, here everything is beautiful and smooth" (What a lady killer)
"TELL US NOW!"
"OBI? OBI!!!! meesa so happy ya meesa ooki ookie Senator jedi arrived"
And finally the ending duel, worse fight in the Saga. Watchin Obi-Wan get raped was hugely dissapointing, and the Yoda fight was hilariously bad (Which is funny because the Yoda VS Palpatine fight was fantastic)

RotS To CGI-y but still the best Prequel

Star Wars - Masterpiece

ANH - just make Han shoot first please, and be more creative with the Jabba scene, none of that stepping on tail BS .

ESB (both editions) - a better Masterpiece

RotJ - About as good as TPM But ultimately Better because of The Final showdown. Also the Ewoks beating the (small convoy of) Imperials (lol at the retards saying 'the ewoks over threw the Empire') is similar to what happened in The New World and to an extent Vietnam, yes? enough with that complaint.

[drobswim13]

Originally Posted by motorheadache95

I can't say I agree with this statement. None of the main characters come close to approaching the level of bad acting and writing we see in the prequels. I have a joke where the acting caliber of the prequels is equivalent to that one background guy in Empire that says "Two fighters against a star destroyer?"

I could make a list of everything I don't like about the prequels, but I pretty much don't have to anymore. Red Letter Media explains it better than I ever could have. Suffice to say that no, I don't think the OT and PT are on even close to equal, transferable terms. We will disagree on this forever

Right there with you on this one

[OG Pooh]

Originally Posted by motorheadache95

I can't say I agree with this statement. None of the main characters come close to approaching the level of bad acting and writing we see in the prequels. I have a joke where the acting caliber of the prequels is equivalent to that one background guy in Empire that says "Two fighters against a star destroyer?"

I could make a list of everything I don't like about the prequels, but I pretty much don't have to anymore. Red Letter Media explains it better than I ever could have. Suffice to say that no, I don't think the OT and PT are on even close to equal, transferable terms. We will disagree on this forever

If you can't (or don't want to) see it, then you're right, we'll disagree forever. But c'mon, the dialog in the OT (and I love the OT) is pretty much one (three actually) long strings of one-liners after another. While I can't find any real fault with Empire, Mark Hamill's acting in ANH was laughable while Harrison Ford & Carrie Fisher's performances in RotJ were both well below phoned in. As for the stories themselves, the PT is much more complex. When you look back at the OT, a lot of it is in reality, background information created outside the confines of the films that fans just associate with the lore of Star Wars. Believe me, I am not putting down the OT in any way, I'm simply saying that when compared to the PT, it is not superior. People just have a nostalgic thing for the OT that transcends the reality of what the films actually were.

While I'm not a big fan of CGI, I have to admit that the PT simply looks richer. I believe this is a real, populated galaxy somewhere. Where in the OT, it feels like a bunch of isolated sets with no real life going on outside of the events of the films. The OT almost looks/feels like someone filmed plays being performed, rather than grand scale motion pictures. This is one reason I don't mind a lot of the changes/additions made to new versions. Cloud City now looks somewhat like a city, Mos Eisley looks like a spaceport, etc.

I too could go on, but I really don't want to look like I'm putting down the OT, because I am not biased toward one trilogy over the other. I judge each film on it's own. I simply do not see the issues in the PT without seeing them in the OT as well. Sure each trilogy has it's own, seperate issues, but they share a lot as well. I could go on about the PT just as easily, but that's not the issue.

[Agent Bond]

The main reason I despise the PT is because Lucas decided to ruin the Anakin Skywalker character. As somebody else mentioned, he doesn't know how character development works.

[motorheadache95]

Originally Posted by OG Pooh

If you can't (or don't want to) see it, then you're right, we'll disagree forever. But c'mon, the dialog in the OT (and I love the OT) is pretty much one (three actually) long strings of one-liners after another. While I can't find any real fault with Empire, Mark Hamill's acting in ANH was laughable while Harrison Ford & Carrie Fisher's performances in RotJ were both well below phoned in. As for the stories themselves, the PT is much more complex. When you look back at the OT, a lot of it is in reality, background information created outside the confines of the films that fans just associate with the lore of Star Wars. Believe me, I am not putting down the OT in any way, I'm simply saying that when compared to the PT, it is not superior. People just have a nostalgic thing for the OT that transcends the reality of what the films actually were.

While I'm not a big fan of CGI, I have to admit that the PT simply looks richer. I believe this is a real, populated galaxy somewhere. Where in the OT, it feels like a bunch of isolated sets with no real life going on outside of the events of the films. The OT almost looks/feels like someone filmed plays being performed, rather than grand scale motion pictures. This is one reason I don't mind a lot of the changes/additions made to new versions. Cloud City now looks somewhat like a city, Mos Eisley looks like a spaceport, etc.

I too could go on, but I really don't want to look like I'm putting down the OT, because I am not biased toward one trilogy over the other. I judge each film on it's own. I simply do not see the issues in the PT without seeing them in the OT as well. Sure each trilogy has it's own, seperate issues, but they share a lot as well. I could go on about the PT just as easily, but that's not the issue.

I get your argument, and it is more of a pro-PT argument than an anti-OT argument. But this is a case where we're watching the same movies and yet not watching the same movies. You think the prequels look "richer," I think they look artificial, phony, and sterile. I agree that the plotline is more complex, but I don't think it was well thought out at all. Again, I don't really want to go into it, but watch the Red Letter Media reviews-- you may not agree with what he's saying, but you'll at least understand how us prequel-haters see these movies (plus they're funny as hell-- even if I loved the Prequels I would still love those review videos).

Now, I don't think ALL the acting in the PT is bad. Ewan McGregor was absolutely phenomenal as the young Obi-Wan, and Ian McDiarmid (spelling?) is always great. But they had a lousy script to work with. And when two of your leading characters turn in awful performances (Natalie Portman and both Anakins) it really brings the movies down. I blame George Lucas more than the actors-- he actually makes them act badly (he calls it an acting style) and doesn't allow them any breathing room with his script.

I don't know why you would think Hamill's acting is just as bad-- I don't see that at all. The only thing I'll concede is that scene between Han and Leia on Endor was pretty cardboard-- again, I blame that on Lucas' script. But thats an exception-- the same film had the phenomenally dramatic confrontation between Luke and Vader at the end, which was way more dramatically powerful than anything in the PT (IMO). Though it's funny that the one movie Lucas didn't direct himself was by far the best story, script and acting of all the movies.

The bottom line for me is that the OT tells an exciting story with characters that I care about. The PT does not. It was never about nostalgia, or pre-conceived expectations. I think that excuse is BS. I simply think they are poor films.

[drobswim13]

Originally Posted by motorheadache95

I get your argument, and it is more of a pro-PT argument than an anti-OT argument. But this is a case where we're watching the same movies and yet not watching the same movies. You think the prequels look "richer," I think they look artificial, phony, and sterile. I agree that the plotline is more complex, but I don't think it was well thought out at all. Again, I don't really want to go into it, but watch the Red Letter Media reviews-- you may not agree with what he's saying, but you'll at least understand how us prequel-haters see these movies (plus they're funny as hell-- even if I loved the Prequels I would still love those review videos).

Now, I don't think ALL the acting in the PT is bad. Ewan McGregor was absolutely phenomenal as the young Obi-Wan, and Ian McDiarmid (spelling?) is always great. But they had a lousy script to work with. And when two of your leading characters turn in awful performances (Natalie Portman and both Anakins) it really brings the movies down. I blame George Lucas more than the actors-- he actually makes them act badly (he calls it an acting style) and doesn't allow them any breathing room with his script.

I don't know why you would think Hamill's acting is just as bad-- I don't see that at all. The only thing I'll concede is that scene between Han and Leia on Endor was pretty cardboard-- again, I blame that on Lucas' script. But thats an exception-- the same film had the phenomenally dramatic confrontation between Luke and Vader at the end, which was way more dramatically powerful than anything in the PT (IMO). Though it's funny that the one movie Lucas didn't direct himself was by far the best story, script and acting of all the movies.

The bottom line for me is that the OT tells an exciting story with characters that I care about. The PT does not. It was never about nostalgia, or pre-conceived expectations. I think that excuse is BS. I simply think they are poor films.

Lucas didn't direct ESB or ROTJ. Irvin Kershner, who just passed away, directed Empire, and Richard Marquand directed ROTJ.

[motorheadache95]

Originally Posted by drobswim13

Lucas didn't direct ESB or ROTJ. Irvin Kershner, who just passed away, directed Empire, and Richard Marquand directed ROTJ.

Right, I was talking about Empire in that sentence. And you're right about Marquand, but Lucas basically ghost-directed that film himself. He actually hired Marquand because he wanted a director that would basically do exactly what he wanted him to do, unlike Kershner. Lucas also ended up doing a lot of the directing work himself anyway. At that point, producer Gary Kurtz was also out, who was the guy who challenged Lucas' decisions the most when making the first two films.

[drobswim13]

Originally Posted by motorheadache95

Right, I was talking about Empire in that sentence. And you're right about Marquand, but Lucas basically ghost-directed that film himself. He actually hired Marquand because he wanted a director that would basically do exactly what he wanted him to do, unlike Kershner. Lucas also ended up doing a lot of the directing work himself anyway. At that point, producer Gary Kurtz was also out, who was the guy who challenged Lucas' decisions the most when making the first two films.

Ah, see this I did not know. It does make sense, though. I'm actually in love with ROTJ and for many reasons. For one, I really like the Jabba sequence in the beginning part of the movie. People may say it looks very fake and cartoon-like, but I think some of the added CGI in that specific movie looks WAY worse. I mean, would someone please tell George to take out the Sarlaac monster from that scene. It looks awful and totally takes away the eerie feeling you get when you look into the pit. For me, I think it is much more frightening and dramatic for the audience to not be able to see the Sarlaac monster. If all you saw was a large pit with thousands of descending spiked teeth, you would be scared out of your mind wondering how big that thing really is!!

The other thing I really like about that movie is, like you said, the scene with Luke and Vader before they see the Emperor. That is, without a doubt, the best scene (acting-wise) in the saga. It is because you see a complete emotional epitome for Vader that you have never seen and Luke capitalizes on it. It worked very well and I didn't see anything like it in the rest of the movies.

The last thing I will say is that, in regards to the Ewoks, I think the battle on Endor was well done. People may say that there is no way a bunch of little teddy bears could take down about 100-200 stormtroopers and a few AT-STs, but I think with about 20 or so Rebel troops down there and literally hundreds upon hundreds of Ewoks, they could do it. Especially since they knew the territory, unlike the Empire. It may be a weak argument, but i'm sticking to it

[kenkraly2004]

It will be to intrusting to hear how the sound will be for the star wars films on blu-ray in fall of next year 2011. Now we know the prequel films will sound good because they where reacorded in dolby digital ex and dts but the ot was recorded on older formats like dolby stereo the 6-track dolby mix and a mono mix for the 1st films episode 4-6 and for the Speical Editions they where recorded in dolby digital and dts in 1997 and in 2004 for the dvd dolby digital ex. Now the logical choice whould be dolby ture hd for the blu-ray release but whould Lucas go for DTS HD-MA?

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by kenkraly2004

It will be to intrusting to hear how the sound will be for the star wars films on blu-ray in fall of next year 2011. Now we know the prequel films will sound good because they where reacorded in dolby digital ex and dts but the ot was recorded on older formats like dolby stereo the 6-track dolby mix and a mono mix for the 1st films episode 4-6 and for the Speical Editions they where recorded in dolby digital and dts in 1997 and in 2004 for the dvd dolby digital ex. Now the logical choice whould be dolby ture hd for the blu-ray release but whould Lucas go for DTS HD-MA?

That's more a decision for John Williams don't you think, they are his scores after all.

[kenkraly2004]

well yea you've got a point their but in years past like with the dvd releases and the clone wars movie Lucas allways has perfered dolby over dts but your right it is up to John Williams and what ever lucasfilm and skywalker sound wants to do for the blu-ray release.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by kenkraly2004

well yea you've got a point their but in years past like with the dvd releases and the clone wars movie Lucas allways has perfered dolby over dts.

I don't think it'll matter with the old mono tracks what they "upscale" them to, it won't get much better. 1-3 should all be demo discs though and they'll be the ones I watch the most anyway.