I agree. And I don't mind if Lucas is not a great actor's director. Where he seems to have dropped the ball is in allowing the actors to make the characters, if Lucas can't. It seems that in the hectic pioneering times of the OT, the actors had that room. Maybe due to Lucas developing the ideas, dealing with all the stress and having no idea if it would work out with the effects… so maybe he just HAD to rely on story and characters more.
The PT shows he can do anything and he seems to have forgotten the heart of SW… too bad. I hope Abrams can find it again.
Yeah, during the Production of the first original Star Wars Lucas wasn't the super-rich tycoon the success of Star Wars made him, so he had to put heart into the story to make it work, with the effects used as "a tool to tell the story".
With regards to acting-directing: It's an important part of filmmaking that actors have a director that they click with, who listens to them, who they can bounce off of, and who tries to bring out the emotional tones in the scenes and characters. That's where the direction in the prequels was horrible, on top of the awful dialogue. Most of the shots and scene constructions are so flat and uninteresting and the acting mostly consisted of actors standing around or sitting and spouting exposition dialogue without actually doing anything.
Ewan McGregor said that the acting in Phantom Menace was like a "frowning exercise" and that most of what he had to do was stand around and look up.
Ive said it before, I'm excited for Abrams directing 7. the actors he's worked with speak very highly of him as a director and as a person, his camera work is usually fast paced and engaging, and he knows how to bring out great emotional tones in scenes.
He's proved that for me with his Star Trek reboot (I'm one of the fans of it) and with Super 8.
I hope he lets his love for Star Wars, and passion shine through and Episode 7 will get Star Wars back on the right path. He's been saying all the right things, but needs to execute those words into a great movie.
Yup. I like Abrams, but Super 8 and the second Star Trek movie kinda displayed an homage happy director, which didn't do the movies a lot of good. Super 8 felt more like ticking off the boxes of seventies/eighties sci fi than making a new original. Same with ST: ID.
That's my only fear for SW7: to much referencing and homaging…
Depends on the referencing though, i'd be fine if Episode 7 was a carry on of Remnants of the Empire or the Sith being the bad guys, and if the story had some loose ends from the Originals that have come back to haunt the Good guys, but I don't want to see characters being overhauled and ruined.
EG: I don't want to see a 70 year-old Han Solo still the main hero in the Falcon, I wouldn't mind him appearring in the film, but I think a new generation should be the lead characters (With the casting it looks like that's the root they're taking).
I don't want the Emperor or Darth Vader or even clones of them as the main villians. Vader was way overblown far too much in the prequels as this be-all-end-all space Jesus, and his younger self and fall to the dark side were terribly written. and the Emperor had his time.
Just leave them alone as the badass of the originals, and now it's time to get someone new in. Villian could maybe be a loyal follower of the Emperor who wants revenge on the Rebels/New Republic.
Wouldn't mind seeing Luke Skywalker as the wise old seige, Obi-Won original type, and Grand Jedi Master, but again I don't think he should be the main character in the sequel story.
Would be very cool with stormtroopers being back as the bad guy soldiers.
Would be very cool with seeing the Millenium Falcon again.
Would be very cool with R2 and 3PO being in the sequel if they are written and used well.
These are just my opinions and what I want to see happen, feel free to comment your thoughts
Well, I'm rather hesitant about stuff like R2 and 3PO and stormtroopers and Millennium Falcon. I'd say you need to have good reasons to re-use them. They certainly didn't have them in the PT other that saying: hey, it's SW… SW is also heart and story. Not just recycling stuff from previously used elements (like Boba Fett en his dad in the PT).
Star Wars is heart and story. Full stop. I think the Millennium Falcon and Stormtroopers were part of classic Star Wars, and if they can be well fitted into the story, then great. I mean, for your audience, as well as the story, you do need Star Wars elements in there to appeal to them, though I agree that they shouldn't be just recycled and reused like the Prequels did, if they are in there it's primary focus needs to be to add to the story and the tension.
Exactly. Personally I felt the PT, despite the addition of many (too many?) new worlds, the universe got a lot smaller… everybody keeps bumping into each other.
First off, we need a good protagonist with a good story. Then he needs a good antagonist, and then other characters that compliment him or her, and if there are some good characters from previous movies that can actually serve a purpose, then by all means…
Do you think the Son of JarJar will be the next protagonist?
Yeah, most of that was down to lack of originality or as fan services (Eg: C-3PO, R2-D2 and young Boba Fett)
Hahaha so long as his dreadlocks are alot shorter, he doesn't speak with the same annoying accent, and he decapitates his father within the first 5 minutes of the film
The interesting thing about Lucas is that he never set out to be a filmmaker. His passion was art, and when he ventured off to school he thought he was taking an art class when it turned out to be a class on cinematography. Got lucky there.
It can be debated all day long whether or not he ruined Star Wars by using too much green/blue screen technology, although if you think about Lucas' original passion for art, then the pieces of the puzzle kind of fit.
By using this technology, then much like a painting, your imagination is the limit since anything can be crafted out of it. I'm not saying this is right by any means, but simply that I can identify with what Lucas was going for. He is, and always was a visual story teller. The OT is certainly the more "human" and character driven trilogy, but I think the pedestal it gets placed on sometimes is a little overboard.
Is the OT really a "great trilogy" or a trilogy that started off good in the beginning, got better in the middle, but under-delivered in the end?
Is Return of the Jedi really a good movie? As a stand alone piece, sure it is. Compared to ANH is ESB....is it a letdown? I think so.......
Call me crazy, but there's a few PT films I would take any day over ROTJ.
Did Lucas really fail with the PT? The fact that legions of us still continue to talk about these movies 14 years later proves otherwise in my opinion.
Well the funny thing about that is sometimes things have a way of coming full circle down the road. One to think about also.....would Lucas have pocketed 4 billion dollars from Disney if he hadn't kept SW alive with the PT...something he funded with his own money? One can only wonder.
Yes, I agree with most of that. There's no doubt Lucas is a clever business man. THe PT's, the idea in the 70s that he claimed rights over all the merchandise (while that wasn't hot at the time), the setting up of corporation like ILM… the guys use had vision. And I am not sure he made the PT so he could sell SW to Disney. I think he made the PT because he wanted to (and that it was bound to make a lot of money).
I agree with your OT assessment, although I do feel that the Luke-Vader-Emperor scenes outclass anything from the PT (the Ewoks are along the lines of the lesser parts of the PT) that no, I'd prefer ROTJ to the PT.
The OT at least shows restraint, wether forced by the technical limitations or not. The PT did not and did everything Lucas wanted. The absence of other writers that really had a say about the script is part of the problem mostly I think. Maybe LUcas is an artist, but he's also an intellectual and I still believe he wanted to cramp in everything in the PT that things get silly. Like the thing he said in the Making of TPM, that repeating identical situations was like poetry… That certainly made no sense at all. Repetition isn't the same as rhyme, isn't the same are reminding, isn't creating rhythm or reflections… it is what it is: repetition, more of the same.
And that's what the PT is a lot: more of the same but then bigger and mostly more…more of the same. And certainly less heart, less story, less embodiment, less believable, less… yes, less real.
It was part of the restraints that brought out more of a realism to Original Star Wars. It was part of its charm, the run down universe, the practical effects, real locations, characters. And you could tell that determination and heart was put into making them.
George Lucas lost that understanding when CGI came about. Now CGI is cool if its used well and adds to the story your telling, but the human eye can detect CG very well. The problem with the CG in the prequels, was George completely lost his way with it, and by Revenge of the Sith had completely pigged out on it. The battle sequences all felt like tensionless, cluttered playstation 2 cut scenes.
We Star Wars fans still hate the prequels because original Star Wars tapped into the minds and touched the hearts of so many people, that when 3 bad films like that come around we get cross about it, yet I also still remember that I can still watch those 3 ones I do like whenever I want.
Have you ever thought that maybe then wooden acting and "soulless" feel of the films were done on purpose to counteract the original trilogy? I honestly like the feeling. They feel very artificial, which is exactly what the Republic represents. It's big, beautiful, complicated... but it has no heart behind it. Same with the Jedi Order. Contrast that with the originals: they are an organic, rag-tag trilogy which feature people striving for a deep purpose and meaning.
I dunno, I love all 6 movies and I like the contrast between the two trilogies.
I can only wish it was done on purpose… but why would you want to make something entirely heartless?? It doesn't rhyme with the rise of the Sith who operate only on passion and desire? Shouldn't we at least see some of that??
And the OT OB1 claims TWICE that Anakin was such a good friend, don't you think we should at least SEE that??? So we can feel the loss when Anakin falls??
And Lucas made these movies also to show the Jedi in their prime. Well, all I see is a bunch of passive, blind, lazy bunch of people that can't see what's going on and serve really no purpose at all… So if this is what Lucas INTENDED, I'd say he succeeded in his goal, by making quite flawed, emotionless and often very boring movies.
Movie IS emotion. If you like the heartlessness of society, of a cool and organized society and if you like to see how that would work in a movie check out movies like Room with a View, Howard's End, Sense and Sensibility: a controlled world where emotions start brewing under the surface waiting to erupt… and when they erupt they are very mild from an objective point of view, but huge in that world. This is something you must be able to master…. I doubt Lucas can.
Dec 3rd, 2013 06:32 PM
