|
 |
Jay-Sherman
Junior Member
Registered: Jul 2001
Location: U.K.
|
GL's origional vision of star wars was a trilogy of trilogys, impossible now, for more reasons than not due to Harrison Ford's refusal to take part. Granted you never said that so in that many words, it was clearly insinuated. Say what you want, the queen was never efficiently/properly characterised in the ways you claim despide a great deal of screen time, largely due to the incompatibility of NP's dodgy, inexpressive accent and the typical SW script and the story being further confused by the secret amidala/padme same person thing.
|
Jul 22nd, 2001 10:59 AM |
|
|
| |
|
finti
Senior Member
Registered: Dec 2000
Location:
|
Well Jay Sherman have you ever heard the royals talk. They have no dialect, no tone kind of real dull way of talking, dozy talk. I think NP did a good job of portraying a royal when she was Queen Amidala, as Padme she talked diffrently.
|
|
Jul 22nd, 2001 02:25 PM |
|
|
| |
|
yerssot
Senior Member
Registered: Jul 2001
Location:
|
Well, originally there were going to be 3 trilogys. One of the fall of the Republic, one of the fall of the Empire and one if the rise of the New Republic. GL thought years later that there was nothing to say about the rise because he said in the movie that there were no Jedi left, so he thought there wasn't much action going on.
|
|
Jul 22nd, 2001 02:28 PM |
|
|
| |
|
Ushgarak
Paladin
Registered: Sep 2000
Location: Chelmsford, Essex, UKCo-Admin
|
My main worry now is that Natalie Portman's heart isn't in it, which sounds a bit cruel but I can't help thinking that she regretted signing such a long-term deal.
Howeveer, you are right, and I think everyone has a lot more room to manoeuvre, as it were, in Ep. II
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
"You've never had any TINY bit of sex, have you?"
BtVS
|
|
Jul 22nd, 2001 05:13 PM |
|
|
| |
|
Ratcat
Senior Member
Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
|
Well, she has said that she doesn't see herself remaining in the acting profession.
|
|
Jul 22nd, 2001 09:57 PM |
|
|
| |
|
Jay-Sherman
Junior Member
Registered: Jul 2001
Location: U.K.
|
Given the oppertunity, Lucas would make nine movies. Episode one was a huge disappointment, I'd have to care an awful lot about SW in the first place to be so disenchanted. The comic book characterisations were/are short but brutally efficient, you understood the characters the second you herd them talk or in some cases saw them, for a number of reasons, NP's character never came across as intended and you did not become emotionally attached to her. Also you assume to much.
|
|
Jul 22nd, 2001 10:18 PM |
|
|
| |
|
Ratcat
Senior Member
Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
|
Well, I personally would not like to put words into George Lucas's mouth. He said that he now intended 6 movies, so six it is. Nine was a plan 20 years ago, for whatever reason. But six it is now.
As the story is basically the life and times of Anakin Skywalker, quoted from a George Lucas press conference.
Q. How do you make ther judgement that Padmé never came across as intended? To my knowledge Lucas has never made this statement. As writer and director surely he is the only one who could make that determination?
Also, a catch all statement that "You did not become emotionally attached to her character" assumes that everyone feels as you do.
NOW THE EMOTIVE BIT: Are you actually going to address the counter-points being made to your arguements, or just glass by them and try a new tact?
|
|
Jul 22nd, 2001 11:58 PM |
|
|
| |
|
Ushgarak
Paladin
Registered: Sep 2000
Location: Chelmsford, Essex, UKCo-Admin
|
From my experiences of people who have seen the movie Amidala does not seem to have got across to them in the way I think she should, that's all I can really say.
@A dull Princess Leia' os what most of them say. Not really what was intended, I am sure. No talk of her inner conflict, need to protect her people or young child being thrust into galactic politics.
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
"You've never had any TINY bit of sex, have you?"
BtVS
|
|
Jul 23rd, 2001 03:36 AM |
|
|
| |
|
Jay-Sherman
Junior Member
Registered: Jul 2001
Location: U.K.
|
From 1977 untill recently, Lucas had directed a single substandard film, based on that, any changes he made to the star wars story during that time, are suspect. QA came across with little/none of the charm that we associate with star wars characters, clearly this was not Lucas's intention. 'Did not become emotionally attached' is based on public opinion, one of the main complaints about Episode one was the lack of loveable characters. The target audience for the first film (and it's sequels) were children AND sci-fi fans, the original films were of such high quality that they had universal appeal, THM falls short of this, I would expect GL of all people to be able to make more than just a kids movie.
|
|
Jul 23rd, 2001 03:40 AM |
|
|
| |
|
Ratcat
Senior Member
Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
|
I don't think that there was an inner conflict, from the novel, with isn't strict canon I know, but the best source in this instance, it said that she had been trained from a very young age to forefil the role of queen. Makes it sound like she was almost pre-ordained for the role.
Personally I liked the queen, guessing here that others didn't For me the most annoying charactera were Obi-Wan and Qui-Gonn.
It is interesting to note that the whole Qui-Gonn the maverick is being pushed heavily by official sources now, more so than when TPM was released.
|
|
Jul 23rd, 2001 03:42 AM |
|
|
| |
|
Ratcat
Senior Member
Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
|
The point STILL remains that Lucas dumped the idea of 3 trilogies a long time ago. To infer reasons that were never stated is rather silly. WHATEVER the reason was, Lucas made his decision and therefore any reference to a three trilogy series is null and void.
You can't argue with the facts.
As far as Natalie Portmans performance goes, she was pretty much universally complimented on her performance.
On the whole, I can't understand why you would even be bothered about the next movie if you hated TPM so much. You don't sound like you enjoyed at all with all the poor acting, shoddy effects, terrible scripts, superflous scenes & characters and minimal character development.
As I said before, it may not be perfect but it is still true to the Star Wars of the 70's and 80's.
What it seems to me, and this is purely my opinion, based on what I have read so far, is that you enjoyed the original trilogy so much, but being much older now you found TPM to be somewhat immature for your tastes.
Personally, I enjoyed TPM, but for quite different reasons to the OT. My enjoyment came from being able to share with my son something that had been a big part of my youth. Seeing the awe and wonder in his eyes that I first experienced in 1977.
THAT is how I know that TPM was spot on, because that target audience loved the film, watched it again and again on video and even went back and watch the OT. Star Wars is basically a family film and has to appeal to the family market, always has and always will. That was Georges vision, and in that I don't think he has changed. Look back at the influences for Star Wars. Saturday morning Flash Gordon at the Nickelodian. Kids films, that's really all there is to it.
Sorry if all this "crazy stuff" doesn't rest well on you BTW.
[ July 22, 2001: Message edited by: RC ]
|
|
Jul 23rd, 2001 04:06 AM |
|
|
| |
|
Ushgarak
Paladin
Registered: Sep 2000
Location: Chelmsford, Essex, UKCo-Admin
|
They digitally lowered NP's voice in ome scenes to make her sound more 'regal', I understand... I am not sure if that was quite such a good move; impersonating one of the Royal Family is more than just low-toned expressionless speech, thought that is in the right general area.
It must be said, though, that looks aside, Amidala did not connect with much of the TPM audience in the way that she should have done to make the dramatic link. I don't think its because of her performance; I think the story structure was as such that she never really came across quite the way she should have done.
And it's a shame, because her character development over the course of the film was very much in keeping with traditional Star Wars, but in the end it did not work out as well as it should have done. Maybe the direction is to blame.
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
"You've never had any TINY bit of sex, have you?"
BtVS
|
|
Jul 23rd, 2001 04:42 AM |
|
|
| |
|
Ratcat
Senior Member
Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
|
But you could never blame that on Portmans ability as an actor.
Think back to Luke, how much development did he really get in ANH? If you take it as a single entity then you may see a fairly cmparable development.
Remember, as Lucas said, we have only seen Act one of a a three act piece.
|
|
Jul 23rd, 2001 04:54 AM |
|
|
| |
|
Ratcat
Senior Member
Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
|
Just realised I missed responding to the points raised by Jay Sherman. Not much to say really, but a couple of things spring to mind.
The fact that Lucas hads't directed a substandard film sine 1977 is hardly a surprise when he hasn't directed ANY films since 1977. His IMDB profile will confirm this fact, though it is common knowledge.
An expectation of Lucas? Yeah, I can se that but if he is aiming to make a kids movie then he is aiming to amek a kids movie and there's not much we can do about that. You can't critisise the movie for not being adult enough if it is being made for kids. Actually I thing the audience demographic aimed for is 10-23 or something like that, but don't quote me back on that cos I can't back it up.
As far as the Queen goes, taken as just the queen, without the Padmé parts it is hard to say that any kind of boding was possible. This may be in part due to the split-personality of the character. I am not aware of many reviews or public surveys that exist that would point to your claims, however that is not to say they do not exist.
Personally I had no problem with the Queen or Anakin but did have issues with both QGJ and OB1, neither of which engaged me at all. Ewans interpretation of OB1 was too still and prickily for my taste and the way that QGJ acted did not fit with being a Jedi Knight either. these latter issues appear to be being addressed in the way the QGJ is being built up by TOWS as more maverick. I think this will come out in Episode-II a little more, as will the development of OB1.
|
|
Jul 23rd, 2001 11:54 PM |
|
|
| |
|
Ushgarak
Paladin
Registered: Sep 2000
Location: Chelmsford, Essex, UKCo-Admin
|
Well, that's all down to aaste, I guess. because I think QGJ is the best charatcer they have introduced since A New Hope; I thought he was bloody marvellous.
But these differences are all part of the fun of being a fan...
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
"You've never had any TINY bit of sex, have you?"
BtVS
|
|
Jul 24th, 2001 01:33 AM |
|
|
| |
|
yerssot
Senior Member
Registered: Jul 2001
Location:
|
Curious, that there are no JarJar fans here?
|
|
Jul 24th, 2001 01:35 AM |
|
|
| |
|
Ratcat
Senior Member
Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
|
NOt a fan as such, but I didn't hate him. I thought he was fun.
Yes, Ush, I agree, but then people come along and quote "public feeling" or "public opinion".
Problem is that I as much public feeling" or "public opinion" can be produced for both arguements.
Anyhow, bottom line is that it's a matter of taste as you say and I liked the majority of what I saw, though I was disappointed with the Jedi.
However, my final opinion will be posted in 2005 when all 6 films are out there. Only then can we really give a fair comment on the achievements of George Walton Lucas Jr.
|
|
Jul 24th, 2001 03:17 AM |
|
|
| |
|
insanewookie
Junior Member
Registered: Jul 2001
Location: Massachusetts, U.S.A. Ear
|
Not going to bother mentioning the dreadful dialogue of JJ and Anakin. Instead would have liked to see TPM focus on Obi Wan/Anakin. I felt that Lucas only put Qui Gon in Ep I to "spread the blame" for Ani's fall. That way it doesn't look like it's all Obi-Wan's fault that he fails at his training. Scrap QG, focus on Obi/Ani, and a HINT of who the Sith really are and their past with the Jedi and the movie would've worked much better. Less silly CGI characters and more human relations and emotion...'Nuff said!
|
|
Jul 25th, 2001 12:00 PM |
|
|
| |
|
Ratcat
Senior Member
Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
|
O think Lucas wanted to portray Ob1_Wan as having taken on Anakin when he didn't really want to. I know that the Anakin/OB1 relationshgip is to be explored in Episode-II, according to the report on the OWS yesterday.
Back to the whole JJ/Anakin Dialogue thing though, I still think that Anakin was supposed to be played as a naive child with big dreams, whilst he knew how to look after himself, he was naive of the real world, only knowing Tatooine. That is how he came across to me, and that seemed right under the circumstance.
Also, I know that young children related well to Anakin. Whilst a lot of adults questions didn't "get" Anakin, children did, and they also loved Jar Jar too. Once again it is clear that the target audience "got" it whilst the adult audience found it irritating.
|
|
Jul 25th, 2001 12:21 PM |
|
|
| |
|
Ushgarak
Paladin
Registered: Sep 2000
Location: Chelmsford, Essex, UKCo-Admin
|
I fundamentally disagree on scrapping QGJ making it sem more Obi-Wan's fault. I am pretty sure that QG would have amade a good job of traching Anakin. Obi-Wan's first mistake- the source of it all- was his promise to his dying Master to train Ankin, a task he was not adequate for.
Good stuff, I thought.
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
"You've never had any TINY bit of sex, have you?"
BtVS
|
|
Jul 25th, 2001 10:26 PM |
|
|
| |
|
| All times are UTC. The time now is 01:34 PM. |
|
|
| |
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
Text-only version |
|
|
