Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[blonde_devil]

Originally Posted by KaineKinetic

This is why I prefer Episodes I, II and III over Episodes IV, V and VI.
The Originals have NO plot...
There's no plot or motivation other then, "Lets overthrow a Legitimate Government/Lets destroy the Rebellion."
Only once Vader reveals himself as Anakin, does a Plot start to happen, and it's only in VI that it really comes to form. Backstory for "everything" is finally given. And then, only Vader, The Emperor and Luke really have any Motivation to really do anything.

That is because of Lucas changing his tune midstream. Star Wars was supposed to be the old serial movies - light on story but tons of action. And that is what the original movie is. Sure it is a classic but the story is pretty straightforward and simple. It was only after it was successful that he started changing how it was done and try to make it this epic space opera. There is a noticable difference between Star Wars and the rest of the movies because of this. For story, yeah I-III is better as there is more of a progression than in the other films but they were designed that way.

[RayCRP]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

No. I think we've all learned by now that if you change existing movies, the fan base rebels. I also think that there are far more plot holes in the PT than this and that those films cannot be fixed by adding back a few scenes or fixing dialogue here and there. The plot holes that you and others have pointed out serve to demonstrate just how incompetently these films were made. And one of the reasons is because the actual screenplays were largely not written until the productions were well underway.

There's a difference between changing something that's completely arbitrary (blinking Ewoks) or, worse, alters the tone of a scene and conflicts the original characterization (Han shooting second), versus changing the prequels to make the entire six-movie saga more cohesive and more consistent (CG Yoda in TPM).

Why did Obi-wan and Yoda disappear when they died?
Why did Yoda's philosophies in the OT starkly differ from his in the PT?

This scene between Qui-Gon and Yoda, which was planned but ultimately left out, answers those few but burning questions. It validates Qui-Gon's "maverick" nature within the Jedi Order, and humbles the arrogant Yoda of the PT to one that must unlearn what he has learned. It gives greater purpose to Qui-Gon's inclusion in the saga, allows Yoda to finally become the great Jedi he should be, and answers questions fans have had since the original trilogy.

[mrr1]

Originally Posted by blonde_devil

I don't think they ever get mentioned again. and worse, they are in the "first" film yet you never hear about them again and the later movies seem not to care about them!

That's untrue - in 'Revenge of the Sith', there is a scene where Palpatine teaches Anakin about how Darth Plagueis the Wise learned how to manipulate the midichlorians to create life, and how he taught his apprentice everything he knew.

This leaves open the idea that this is possibly how Anakin was conceived (seeing as how his mom told Qui-Gon that "there was no father"). Either Anakin's mom was lying, or Palpatine (or Darth Plagueis) used the midichlorians to impregnate her.

I hated midichlorians and I hated Anakin's alleged "virgin birth" until Palpatine talked about it in Episode III - now I think it's a great plot device.

[Gold Ranger]

Originally Posted by mrr1

That's untrue - in 'Revenge of the Sith', there is a scene where Palpatine teaches Anakin about how Darth Plagueis the Wise learned how to manipulate the midichlorians to create life, and how he taught his apprentice everything he knew.

This leaves open the idea that this is possibly how Anakin was conceived (seeing as how his mom told Qui-Gon that "there was no father"). Either Anakin's mom was lying, or Palpatine (or Darth Plagueis) used the midichlorians to impregnate her.

I hated midichlorians and I hated Anakin's alleged "virgin birth" until Palpatine talked about it in Episode III - now I think it's a great plot device.

And so, once again, the debate about "Force-Rape" starts again....
This will turn out just like the starwarz.com forum....

[manunited1]

It is just some quick mirroring of Jesus obviously, no rape or planned force impregnation. There is not much thought behind it I am sure. Just "hey thîs would be cool if he was like Jesus cause he is the prophecised chosen one"

Honestly I don't think Lucas thought about these as much as we hoped he did. The scripts were cranked out very fast. I don't think he pre planned any if his stories tbh.

The dark side and Plagueis is about defying death and the way of the force is just embracing it as he next step. The dark side does not create, it destroys and defies so I don't think they could make Anakin or anything.

[blonde_devil]

Originally Posted by KaineKinetic

And so, once again, the debate about "Force-Rape" starts again....
This will turn out just like the starwarz.com forum....

now all I can think of is bad jokes: "Huge? baby it can reach across the galaxy!", "Can you FEEL the force", etc.

[Gold Ranger]

Originally Posted by manunited1

It is just some quick mirroring of Jesus obviously, no rape or planned force impregnation. There is not much thought behind it I am sure. Just "hey thîs would be cool if he was like Jesus cause he is the prophecised chosen one"

Honestly I don't think Lucas thought about these as much as we hoped he did. The scripts were cranked out very fast. I don't think he pre planned any if his stories tbh.

The dark side and Plagueis is about defying death and the way of the force is just embracing it as he next step. The dark side does not create, it destroys and defies so I don't think they could make Anakin or anything.

Originally Posted by blonde_devil

now all I can think of is bad jokes: "Huge? baby it can reach across the galaxy!", "Can you FEEL the force", etc.

These are actually pretty close to some of the posts from there from all those years ago...

That forums is really dead now...
Actually, I haven't logged in there since before the sale of LucasFilm...

[chip75]

Originally Posted by mrr1

This leaves open the idea that this is possibly how Anakin was conceived (seeing as how his mom told Qui-Gon that "there was no father"). Either Anakin's mom was lying, or Palpatine (or Darth Plagueis) used the midichlorians to impregnate her.

I think that's Tatooine code for she got hammered and couldn't remember were she parked the Bantha ...

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by KaineKinetic

This is why I prefer Episodes I, II and III over Episodes IV, V and VI.
The Originals have NO plot...
There's no plot or motivation other then, "Lets overthrow a Legitimate Government/Lets destroy the Rebellion."
Only once Vader reveals himself as Anakin, does a Plot start to happen, and it's only in VI that it really comes to form. Backstory for "everything" is finally given. And then, only Vader, The Emperor and Luke really have any Motivation to really do anything.

That's as may be, but the prequels are often deathly dull because there's too much plot, if anything. The originals fly by the seat of their pants, and they're more enjoyable on a purely visceral level as a result. I don't think too many people were leaving the theaters over the summer of 1977 saying "that was a good film but it needed more trade disputes".

Don't get me wrongo, I genuinely like the prequels - well, 2 and a half of them anyway - because of how the intricate plotting still twists my brain into knots some 15 years after the debut of Phantom Menace, and they've got some terrific action beats. But when they slow down, MAN do they slow down, and Lucas' shortcomings re: writing and performance (him being a fan of that ridiculously stilted serial style) become painfully obvious. This is also true of the originals, but the characters are so feisty and spiky that they paper over the cracks a heck of a lot better.

[Panama Jack]

Didn't Liam Neeson refuse to be part of Eps II & III after really not enjoying working with George in Ep I? Isn't that why for Ep II they basically just reused old dialogue snippets Liam had recorded for Ep I?

I thought I read that Lucas tried everything he could to get Liam to return for his scene in Ep III, but when Liam's terms got so burdensome, Lucas threw up his hands and said screw it, I'll just cut the scene?

[BouCoupDinkyDau]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I don't think too many people were leaving the theaters over the summer of 1977 saying "that was a good film but it needed more trade disputes".

But when they slow down, MAN do they slow down, and Lucas' shortcomings re: writing and performance (him being a fan of that ridiculously stilted serial style) become painfully obvious. This is also true of the originals, but the characters are so feisty and spiky that they paper over the cracks a heck of a lot better.

Two words:
Harrison Ford

The man just has screen presence. Could you imagine how unwatchable Crystal Skull would be if Tom Selleck had originally gotten the role for Indy?

It was Ford and Fisher that shored up a lot of Lucas's stilted dialogue and gave their characters more life. Kershner only added to this winning combo when he was brought in to direct Empire. Sure, Hamill and most of the others do their parts to keep things lively, but I credit Ford's cocksure performance (that often teeters on the edge of comedy without going overboard) in epis IV and V that injected a great deal of the fun into the franchise.

[blonde_devil]

Originally Posted by Panama Jack

Didn't Liam Neeson refuse to be part of Eps II & III after really not enjoying working with George in Ep I? Isn't that why for Ep II they basically just reused old dialogue snippets Liam had recorded for Ep I?

I thought I read that Lucas tried everything he could to get Liam to return for his scene in Ep III, but when Liam's terms got so burdensome, Lucas threw up his hands and said screw it, I'll just cut the scene?

maybe but he did return for the Clone Wars so apparently all was forgiven. Apparently there was some heat because once the manditory "good press" was done, Neeson did trash Phantom Menace a bit. but you do have to wonder when why Lucas didn't just hire a voice actor to record the lines.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by BouCoupDinkyDau

Two words:
Harrison Ford

The man just has screen presence. Could you imagine how unwatchable Crystal Skull would be if Tom Selleck had originally gotten the role for Indy?

It was Ford and Fisher that shored up a lot of Lucas's stilted dialogue and gave their characters more life. Kershner only added to this winning combo when he was brought in to direct Empire. Sure, Hamill and most of the others do their parts to keep things lively, but I credit Ford's cocksure performance (that often teeters on the edge of comedy without going overboard) in epis IV and V that injected a great deal of the fun into the franchise.

Every single word = truth.

[mrr1]

Originally Posted by manunited1

It is just some quick mirroring of Jesus...

And countless other mythological figures and heroes.

[RayCRP]

Originally Posted by Panama Jack

Didn't Liam Neeson refuse to be part of Eps II & III after really not enjoying working with George in Ep I? Isn't that why for Ep II they basically just reused old dialogue snippets Liam had recorded for Ep I?

I thought I read that Lucas tried everything he could to get Liam to return for his scene in Ep III, but when Liam's terms got so burdensome, Lucas threw up his hands and said screw it, I'll just cut the scene?

Not sure where I remember it from, but I'm fairly certain the AOTC "No, Anakin, no!" was newly recorded. I specifically remember, because I was initially surprised when I heard it, when I originally assumed it was a recycled recording from TPM.

Then, I remember prior to ROTS coming out (but after the novelization excerpt with Qui-Gon leaked), Neeson was on some late night show (maybe Leno? I used to watch Leno before NBC gave Conan the shaft) and the rumor regarding his involvement came up. I recall him not being sure, as if he hadn't been contacted yet, but he seemed very hopeful.

[Gold Ranger]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

That's as may be, but the prequels are often deathly dull because there's too much plot, if anything. The originals fly by the seat of their pants, and they're more enjoyable on a purely visceral level as a result. I don't think too many people were leaving the theaters over the summer of 1977 saying "that was a good film but it needed more trade disputes".

Don't get me wrongo, I genuinely like the prequels - well, 2 and a half of them anyway - because of how the intricate plotting still twists my brain into knots some 15 years after the debut of Phantom Menace, and they've got some terrific action beats. But when they slow down, MAN do they slow down, and Lucas' shortcomings re: writing and performance (him being a fan of that ridiculously stilted serial style) become painfully obvious. This is also true of the originals, but the characters are so feisty and spiky that they paper over the cracks a heck of a lot better.

Clones is the one that confuses me...
All of the Clone Creation, Syfo-Dyas and Dooku and the timeline and who did what....

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by KaineKinetic

Clones is the one that confuses me...
All of the Clone Creation, Syfo-Dyas and Dooku and the timeline and who did what....

Leaving all the EU stuff aside, it's basically this: Dooku, as Sidious' apprentice, recruits Jango as the template for the Clone Army, the order for which is placed legitimately by Jedi master Sifo-Dyas (presumably under some sort of influence from Sidious or Dooku) who is then killed, and the location of Kamino is erased from the Jedi Archives, probably by Dooku just before he leaves the Jedi Order. This all happens about 10 years before Attack Of The Clones, i.e. around the time of Phantom Menace (which, given how the Senate is in turmoil due to the Trade Federation's blockade of Naboo, is a good time to do these things whilst everyone else is distracted).

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by BouCoupDinkyDau

Two words:
Harrison Ford

The man just has screen presence. Could you imagine how unwatchable Crystal Skull would be if Tom Selleck had originally gotten the role for Indy?

It was Ford and Fisher that shored up a lot of Lucas's stilted dialogue and gave their characters more life. Kershner only added to this winning combo when he was brought in to direct Empire. Sure, Hamill and most of the others do their parts to keep things lively, but I credit Ford's cocksure performance (that often teeters on the edge of comedy without going overboard) in epis IV and V that injected a great deal of the fun into the franchise.

I wonder how much we would even be talking about Star Wars and Indy today without Harrison Ford. Hard to imagine another actor that would have done that kind of job as you alluded.

[BouCoupDinkyDau]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

I wonder how much we would even be talking about Star Wars and Indy today without Harrison Ford. Hard to imagine another actor that would have done that kind of job as you alluded.

A chief complaint of some of my friends and family that didn't like TPM when it released (I was in HUGE fanyboy denial until Clones came out) was that they didn't like any of the characters.

It's understandable. When you loose someone like Ford's Solo or Fisher's spunky Leia, you better have a damn good replacement character and an actor to back it up. With Star Trek's first spinoff (TNG), this was one of the studio's major concerns. How can you replace that iconic trio and the absolute belief they had in their roles? Well, they couldn't, and a lot of people felt the new characters didn't hold up to the older ones. Eventually, Picard and his buddies prevailed as they grew on the audience, but with the SW prequels there wasn't a single character to love and very little of the fun that Ford brought in the original trilogy.

Acting is believing, and Ford believes in his characters. He doesn't recite lines and try to mimic facial expressions in an attempt to fool the audience. When he is Indiana Jones, he is Indiana Jones.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by BouCoupDinkyDau

A chief complaint of some of my friends and family that didn't like TPM when it released (I was in HUGE fanyboy denial until Clones came out) was that they didn't like any of the characters.

It's understandable. When you loose someone like Ford's Solo or Fisher's spunky Leia, you better have a damn good replacement character and an actor to back it up. With Star Trek's first spinoff (TNG), this was one of the studio's major concerns. How can you replace that iconic trio and the absolute belief they had in their roles? Well, they couldn't, and a lot of people felt the new characters didn't hold up to the older ones. Eventually, Picard and his buddies prevailed as they grew on the audience, but with the SW prequels there wasn't a single character to love and very little of the fun that Ford brought in the original trilogy.

Acting is believing, and Ford believes in his characters. He doesn't recite lines and try to mimic facial expressions in an attempt to fool the audience. When he is Indiana Jones, he is Indiana Jones.