Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[Beast]

Originally Posted by JamesKurtovich

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/george..._b_828962.html

Pretty cool article by George, if anyone is interested.

That's what I have always appreciated about Lucas. He's incredibly down to earth, regardless of how people claim he's lost touch. Just look at how he has a sense of humor about himself, when you look at the interviews he did on the Family Guy: Blue Harvest BLU. And that he's always been one to use his wealth to not only advance technology for movie making, but also to try to make the world a better place. This and the recent news story where he gave away half his fortune to charity are impressive. If only most people in Hollywood gave as much of a crap as he does.

[Lincoln6Echo]

Originally Posted by JamesKurtovich

I was unaware for most of my life. If they had said his name in the OT, then it would just be my own forgetfulness but if not then I can't say that I should have known. I don't read the books or own cards or anything like that.

IIRC, the name Palpatine was used for the Emperor action figure from the original ROTJ Kenner line from the '80s. He was known as Emperor Palpatine. So when we meet Senator Palpatine in Phantom Menace, it was no surprise as to who he really was.

[Lincoln6Echo]

Originally Posted by Silo5

They did put a PG-13 rating on it. You can't blame him if you don't follow the MPAA ratings.

Exactly. ROTS was the first PG-13 SW film. Because it was a much darker film that showed us Order 66 and the transformation of Anakin to Vader and Palpatine to Emperor, it was going to be a bit more graphic.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Lincoln6Echo

Exactly. ROTS was the first PG-13 SW film. Because it was a much darker film that showed us Order 66 and the transformation of Anakin to Vader and Palpatine to Emperor, it was going to be a bit more graphic.

Anakin's immolation was the only reason it got a PG-13. Otherwise it's a hard PG.

[Beast]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Anakin's immolation was the only reason it got a PG-13. Otherwise it's a hard PG.

Not exactly. The murder of all those Jedi, especially children, probably played a part as well.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Beast

Not exactly. The murder of all those Jedi, especially children, probably played a part as well.

It's all done in the style of the other films, particularly Attack of the Clones where we actually see more Jedi mowed down on screen than in ROTS.

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

Right on that.

One of my friends took his eight year old(I believe that was his age) to see RotS because he became a huge Star Wars fan due to the prequels being geared directly towards young children. So when he took him to see part III, they had to leave during the Emperor's 'Monster Mash' transformation scene as that was too much for him take, and then he ended up puking in bed later that night. And when he told me about this, I mentioned that they were lucky to get out of there before those later scenes showing major third degree burns.

Way to go there Mr. Lucas.

It's n not Lucas' fault your friend didn't adhere to the rating. So Lucas made a darker story. And? There is clearly a rating for a reason. A story about the fall of a hero, of course it was going to be dark. It's easily the darkest chapter of the whole saga. I just can't imagine anyone blaming Lucas because a kid got scared. If a movie is PG-13 and the kid is 8, then proceed with caution. It might be too intense for them. That's the point of the rating, so people know whats in the movie. Not to mention Star Wars isn't a kids movie, it's a family film I'd say, in line with the Indiana Jones films. Sure, Episode I might have been aimed a little bit more kids with Jar Jar, but Episode II wasn't at all, and neither are the rest of the movies. It's a family film, not a kids film. But really, adhere to ratings and it wouldn't happen. You can't blame Lucas for it at all.

[Beast]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

It's all done in the style of the other films, particularly Attack of the Clones where we actually see more Jedi mowed down on screen than in ROTS.

I think the young Jedi Padawan on the Landing Platform suggests otherwise.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

or even how George Bush got to fight the war in Iraq by claiming there was positive evidence of WMDs when there wasn't and creating an atmosphere where the Democrats couldn't say no for fear of looking like they were supporting terrorism.

Um, talking about simplifying things!

Not to get political but I couldn't let this particular misrepresentation of history pass:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...987822,00.html

To pretend otherwise would be partisanship at its worst.

[mrpink134]

Originally Posted by tilapiah6

According to your home theater gallery, he has you firmly by the balls. Others just want to be entertained for a couple hours.

Also, you seem quite certain that some Blu-ray.com members are kids, and use it as an insult. This, in itself, is immature and childish.

Nice toy collection, by the way.



LOL, take a gander at his home theater gallery/original trilogy museum.

I was thinking the same thing

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by mrpink134

I was thinking the same thing

I was wondering if you're ever going to contribute anything useful or positive to this thread.

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by Walts Ghost

It's n not Lucas' fault your friend didn't adhere to the rating. So Lucas made a darker story. And? There is clearly a rating for a reason. A story about the fall of a hero, of course it was going to be dark. It's easily the darkest chapter of the whole saga. I just can't imagine anyone blaming Lucas because a kid got scared. If a movie is PG-13 and the kid is 8, then proceed with caution. It might be too intense for them. That's the point of the rating, so people know whats in the movie. Not to mention Star Wars isn't a kids movie, it's a family film I'd say, in line with the Indiana Jones films. Sure, Episode I might have been aimed a little bit more kids with Jar Jar, but Episode II wasn't at all, and neither are the rest of the movies. It's a family film, not a kids film. But really, adhere to ratings and it wouldn't happen. You can't blame Lucas for it at all.

My beef with Lucas on this is that he drew in all these younger fans with poo-poo/fart jokes, Jar-Jar and a child actor in the first movie. And then for the second one we get another child actor(minor role though, but "get em daddy, get em" lines) along with a very juvenile love story and cartoon style violence. So for the final movie, he radically changes the style to a PG-13 rating which then excludes a large portion of the newer generation of fans that saw the first two movies.

'The Empire Strikes Back' was a dark movie and look at how excellent that one turned out to be. It just seems that George got very confused at what type of movies he was trying to make when he attempted to create these prequels.

Some people say that the two trilogies and not compatible together, but ironically the same might just be said for the first three prequels themselves.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

My beef with Lucas on this is that he drew in all these younger fans with poo-poo/fart jokes, Jar-Jar and a child actor in the first movie. And then for the second one we get another child actor(minor role though, but "get em daddy, get em" lines) along with a very juvenile love story and cartoon style violence. So for the final movie, he radically changes the style to a PG-13 rating, which then excludes a large portion of the newer generation of fans that saw the first two movies.

Your argument makes little sense. It would if kids didn't, you know, age.

If you were 7 when you saw The Phantom Menace then you'd be 13 when you saw Revenge of The Sith.

I didn't see people crapping on JK Rowling when she wrote Harry Potter and The Goblet of Fire. She knew her readers were growing up.

[BasicGreatGuy]

I am hoping George Lucas reaches a deal with this great song writer and includes his music in the new release.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SK-p3mtyhRc&NR=1

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

My beef with Lucas on this is that he drew in all these younger fans with poo-poo/fart jokes, Jar-Jar and a child actor in the first movie. And then for the second one we get another child actor(minor role though, but "get em daddy, get em" lines) along with a very juvenile love story and cartoon style violence. So for the final movie, he radically changes the style to a PG-13 rating which then excludes a large portion of the newer generation of fans that saw the first two movies.

'The Empire Strikes Back' was a dark movie and look at how excellent that one turned out to be. It just seems that George got very confused at what type of movies he was trying to make when he attempted to create these prequels.

Some people say that the two trilogies and not compatible together, but ironically the same might just be said for the first three prequels themselves.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Your argument makes little sense. It would if kids didn't, you know, age.

If you were 7 when you saw The Phantom Menace then you'd be 13 when you saw Revenge of The Sith.

I didn't see people crapping on JK Rowling when she wrote Harry Potter and The Goblet of Fire. She knew her readers were growing up.

Thank you, PeterTHX this was exactly what my argument was going to be. The audience that started with Phantom Menace was growing up. I was 9 when Phantom Menace came out, so I was 15 when Revenge of the Sith came out. The story has to grow with the audience. J.K. Rowling knew this when she was writing Harry Potter. And I've heard parents complain about those as well. I was 8 when the series started, 17 when it ended. Should she have left the books kids books? Absolutely not. There would be no growth in these characters at all and the payoff of the last half of the series would have been much weaker.

I understand your beef is that Lucas made the first movie a kids movie, but he knew he had to grab a new generation, and he knew we'd be older by the time he was finished. He was counting on it. And it paid off. Honestly, there is a ratings system for a reason. It's not fair to say he can't make the story darker when it was aimed at an audience that had grown up since Phantom Menace.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Walts Ghost

Exactly, this was going to be my argument as well. The audience that started with Phantom Menace was growing up. I was 9 when Phantom Menace came out, so I was 15 when Revenge of the Sith came out. The story has to grow with the audience. J.K. Rowling knew this when she was writing Harry Potter. And I've heard parents complain about those as well. I was 8 when the series started, 17 when it ended. Should she have left the books kids books? Absolutely not.

There would be no growth in these characters at all. I understand your beef is that Lucas made the first movie a kids movie, but he knew he had to grab a new generation, and he knew we'd be older by the time he was finished. He was counting on it. And it paid off. Honestly, there is a ratings system for a reason. It's not fair to say he can't make the story darker when it was aimed at an audience that had grown up since Phantom Menace.

Says the guy who probably rolled his eyes when

[Show spoiler]Palpatine sent Darth Anakin to slaughter all those youngling Jedi.

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by Darth Anakin

Says the guy who probably rolled his eyes when

[Show spoiler]Palpatine sent Darth Anakin to slaughter all those youngling Jedi.

Haha what? I didn't roll my eyes at that at all. That was one of the most eye opening scenes to me in the movie.

[Show spoiler]To me, Anakin killing a group of small children was a fantastic way to show how far he had changed. He really had reached the Dark Side.

It was senseless murder, and I'm glad they included it.

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Your argument makes little sense. It would if kids didn't, you know, age.

If you were 7 when you saw The Phantom Menace then you'd be 13 when you saw Revenge of The Sith.

I didn't see people crapping on JK Rowling when she wrote Harry Potter and The Goblet of Fire. She knew her readers were growing up.

OK, what about young kids watching them now? So if they happen to watch the first two, then its sorry junior, but you are going to have to wait about seven years to find out how this story resolves itself. - LOL -

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

OK, what about young kids watching them now? So if they happen to watch the first two, then its sorry junior, but you are going to have to wait about seven years to find out how this story resolves itself. - LOL -

That's what one of my friends is doing with one of his kids. He lets them watch one and two, The Clone Wars cartoon, and the original movies. But he's waiting to show them Episode III until he thinks his kids can handle them. There's nothing wrong with that at all. Different kids can handle things at different ages. It depends on yours kids. You still can't blame Lucas for aging for the audience that was young when it was released. He doesn't have to aim for kids with all of them. That would be absolutely ridiculous.

[Beast]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Your argument makes little sense. It would if kids didn't, you know, age.

If you were 7 when you saw The Phantom Menace then you'd be 13 when you saw Revenge of The Sith.

I didn't see people crapping on JK Rowling when she wrote Harry Potter and The Goblet of Fire. She knew her readers were growing up.

Exactly. He's even noted in the extras on the DVD's that each film got a bit darker to appeal to the kids who were little when they saw The Phantom Menace and now were much older and could handle the darker elements of Revenge Of The Sith. Same reason the Potter books/films got more serious with each release. So yeah, the scene is pretty intense and could easily scare little kids. But Parents need to have some responsibility to pay attention to ratings and if you're worried your kid might not be able to handle something, watch it first yourself. And discuss it with them afterwards. Parents seem to use TV and Movies as nothing more than babysitters rather than paying attention to what their kids are watching.