Recently heard some people going on a rant about how the Prequels had a lot of political and current events relevancy in them and that the upcoming sequels will be doing the same thing seeing as how politicaly active the new crew *aka director and such* are about things.
And I just had to wonder. Were the first 3 movies RELEVENT to their time period? Was there stuff Easter egged in there? Little off the cuff jokes and things? Or was it just a story and left all of that stuff out?
__________________ Banned 30 days for the Crime of "ETC"... and when I "ETC" I do it HARD!!!
Barely. Lucas drew from the past when he wrote the OT. Thankfully.
We saw what happened when je decided to add politics and bureaucracy to the saga. Pure, unadulterated, boredom. Politics and intrigue can work, but just because your movie has them, doesn't mean you handled it well or made it interesting. If Abrams can add a bit of that to his film, more power to him. But it has to be done right. "Relevancy" shouldn't be his drive for adding something to a freaking Star Wars films.
__________________ Recently Produced and Distributed Young but High-Ranking Political Figure of Royal Ancestry within the Modern American Town Affectionately Referred To as Bel-Air.
The relevancy of Star Wars, especially episode 4, was very subtle. GL was producing his movie, using a young group of "rebel" filmmakers and special effect designers, on a small budget and editing against the rules of the "Big Movie Empire" (by not rolling credits in the movie's beginning).
His small group of young, zealous filmmakers just out of school created the biggest blockbuster up to that point, spitting in the eye of the big-budget, big producer, target audience Hollywood Movie System.
Plus the fact that SW changed movie history, by starting a whole new approach to visual fx, editing and by releasing a SUMMER blockbuster instead of releasing it around Christmas. Lots of major changes we now take for granted...