BTW adobi, did you add the quotes after you posted this thread?
You know its funny you mention that. After I copied and pasted it from amazon.com I was going to put it in red text. Though I confidently felt you guys would probably have undertood my comments from the other guy just by putting qoutes on it. My Bad. I post then leave, do stuff, come back, and there is like 4 pages of posts. I was like what the hell? Then I found out it was nothing but this flame war going. I gotta be honest I didn't see that coming. So since this thread will be closed if I don't do something, I will re post the main thing I found interesting (with color this time).
In Ryan Lockwood's post on amazon.com, he asked this question about how people would think about Episode 3, and I found it interesting:
"If this movie wasn't based in the Star Wars universe, would I still think it's so great?"
This is what I (Ob1-adobe said):
Well If I tried to imagine watching Star Wars for the first time by watching episode 1 first, would I still like it? Well yeah I think so. It still has more imagination than Dude Wheres My Car, and could be argued to be better than The Matrix Trilogy. Why would I, and probably many more would still like it.
2 Words: Light Saber
That weapon, and the duels alone will make you interested in watching the whole saga. Also no other sci-fi movie will ever use a laser sword, and if they did, they are only doing a comedic parody. Believe it or not Star Wars has never been a great emotional expierences from great actors, instead they have basically always been great eye candy, and entertainment with an amazing story and great characters in a fantastic world. And episode I has all of that, if you think about it.
I have always been interested in finding out how future generations will look at these films. Mainly because they will have a different outlook, and I think their opinions will be more honest, and not so much biased like Ryan Lockwood's.
There a a few things about the newer movies I don't like, but I think there are more things I do like than things I don't like. Someone in another thread said something about how they viewed the newer SW movies from a standpoint of appreciating how they lend more understanding to the older ones, and I kind of adopt the same view myself. And even though my view could be biased because I've been a SW fan since I was 2 years old, here are some other facts to consider:
- When A New Hope first came out , movie-goers were awed by special effects which were groundbreaking and new at the time, as well as a story that was exciting, and great chemistry between the actors onscreen.
- The Star Wars movies have seen the likes of some legendary and accomplished actors over the years, as well as some very moving musical scores by John Williams. There's probably not enough space or time to go into those aspects here.
- After having watched the OT movies(maybe I've seen them a hundred times each in my life, who knows) I still find them quite entertaining, and I really do find amazing talent and genius in the story and character development.
Anyhow, I could go on, but there are a few thoughts to think on there..
🙂
a few comments though, KB...
- at the time of ANH, the FX in other movies were just terrible, so, yes, ANH totally rocked with using new FX and improving the old ones. BUT that's exactly what TPM did! they had perhaps 200 shots without CGI in the entire movie... but people didn't pay attention to it. Why? because almost every movie these days is loaded with FX and it just didn't stick as "earthbreaking" anymore
- Sorry, but I only see (currently) Harrison Ford as big actor... and the TPM has Samuel L Jackson as big one
- look in the PT how Sidious manipulates the entire trilogy😉
regardless of GL's intentions, the PT is an entirely different animal than the OT. its just a product of a man waiting close to 20 years to finish his story...or rather begin it.
many people, like myself, hoped to go into ep1 with the same feel of the PT, and walked out of the theater a bit diappointed. but then i realise that it's close to impossibe to make another part of a series so far seperated, and have them match.
its been tried before, and with no success.
any godfather fan will know exactly what i mean when they think of godfather3, a quality film, but seemingly alienated from the first two, which kinda ruins it.
although ep3 will tie in to ep4, dont expect to be immersed in 1977 when the film hits its last 15 minutes, and you just may leave he theater happy. and dont be mad at GL, what he hopes to pull off is like turnng water to wine.
it just wont happen. but it can still be the kicka$$ film of the decade...so long as he doesn't screw it all up.
so lets keep our fingers crossed🙂
to finish my point (almost forgot)
being that the PT is it own trilogy, so long as its completed with no screwing up, it stands alone as its own trilogy, sparing it the fate of godfather3.
GL says view it from 1-6, but i say hell no. if you have kids and want to introduce them to star wars, sit them down to OT first. let them feel the same chill up their spine when vader says "i am your father"
and watch them get up and cheer when vader tosses palps over the rail.
thats what im going to do 🙂
Originally posted by yerssot
- at the time of ANH, the FX in other movies were just terrible, so, yes, ANH totally rocked with using new FX and improving the old ones. BUT that's exactly what TPM did! they had perhaps 200 shots without CGI in the entire movie... but people didn't pay attention to it. Why? because almost every movie these days is loaded with FX and it just didn't stick as "earthbreaking" anymore
thumbsup ✅
And PVS I agree they need to be watched for the first time, at least, in the order they were filmed.
Its a strange thing with the past films, he cant reproduce the eccense of the original trilogy, too many factors have changed, for me he's just filling in the gaps in..
Its like horror films, they used to be scarry and now they are pants, the original texas chainsaw still scares the pants off me, but the remake is dogs explosion sex liquid!!(sorry bit graphic)
I agree they need to be watched for the first time, at least, in the order they were
Yeah that can be fun to, but for the sake of it only being a science experiment, I really want to get someones thoughts who watched it sequentially for the first time. Mainly because it is something we will never know ourselves.
Me, I am going to watch it backwards, forwards, sideways, and up the middle. I have nothing but the up most confidence that Episode 3 will be fine. Though I garauntee all of you something, or somethings in the movie will make you cringe because you thought it was so bad. But everyone of these movies has more cool than not cool moments, and each one is worth watching.
Originally posted by yerssot
a few comments though, KB...- at the time of ANH, the FX in other movies were just terrible, so, yes, ANH totally rocked with using new FX and improving the old ones. BUT that's exactly what TPM did! they had perhaps 200 shots without CGI in the entire movie... but people didn't pay attention to it. Why? because almost every movie these days is loaded with FX and it just didn't stick as "earthbreaking" anymore
- Sorry, but I only see (currently) Harrison Ford as big actor... and the TPM has Samuel L Jackson as big one
- look in the PT how Sidious manipulates the entire trilogy😉
Well, concerning the actors I was really thinking of differences to the acting of then and the acting of now. Not in any way to take away from the actors in the PT, who I think are good, but there is a difference. I was thinking of some of the older ones like Sir Alec Guinness, Peter Cushing(Grand Moff Tarkin), who really made viewing the film a treat.
Concerning TPM and the CG, I agree with you, in fact, I actually wish they wouldn't use CG so much, I think it bothers my eyes if used too much.
anyway.. as far as the subject matter is concerned, i do think the prequel trilogy does have less great acting (oh my god! yes i said it!! yes, they actually did good acting in the original movies..... harrison ford can act, billy dee williams can act, carrie fisher can act, mark hammil is luke skywalker - therefore he doesn't have to act). The humor in the original trilogy was superiorer, yoda didn't have a face that looked like he's strung out on a meth binge, and Samuel L. Jackson wasn't in it trying to act a part he's not meant to play. RS-D2 actually sounded like he said stuff when he made his noises, and now it just sounds like they randomly use old cliche artoo noises for the prequal... and to top it off, the love story didn't start out with "are you an angel?" delivered by a little boy who again - COULD NOT ACT.
The original movies were not epic just because of eye candy.. what a cop-out statement that is. The original trilogy was great because..... IT WAS GREAT..
there's so much more i could add, but i'll end on a positive note and say that i do think that episode II did hit the mark much more closely, and i'm hoping that episode III will be so goddamn awesome (for numerous reasons) that there won't be much room to complain about bad acting or cheezy dialogue... plus, i do believe that Hayden will do good being bad and angry... otherwise i don't think he's much of an actor... especially when it comes to scenes with dialogue like "Master Obi-won would be very grumpy" or "aah man, not again".. or his awful excuse for a goodbye scene to his mother when she passed away..... thank god he redeemed it with a badass short moment of slaughtering tuskens.
anyway, crossing fingers and guessing by episode III it will be even better... since GL has that video village, there will be no excuse for not noticing poor performances that show up on screen.
whatever others may think (including Liam Nesson) who tought that the prequels are not redeeming OT, GL dont give much tought.
he made up a story, made lots of money, and he was out to make more.
Imagine you are in the seventies; you are GL and your imagination runs through you like a wild river about to burst its banks. you decide to write a story called STAR WARS.
you then show it to your classmates, friends, parents, relatives and movie studios and everyone LAUGHS THEIR HEAD OFF AT YOU !!
They tell you that you are a fool if you hope to make this a movie out of it.
They tell you that you are crazy. They tell you your story is the worst one ever and the plot is jam-packed shit . Its ridiculous, incoherent, overrun by fantasy and impossible to imagine. at that point GL would or should have tought that he take the story to the field, throw it in a rusty canister and burn it hoping no-one would ever bring it up as a fruit from a far too trippy brainhead.
" HEY GUYS, GL had so much acid in his youth that his brain has gone cuckoooooooooo "
But no; GL had the guts to ignore the opinions, the dissing & mockery he was subject to and went ahead making his movie STAR WARS ; A NEW HOPE.
My point is that whatever anyone comments on OT or PT is to GL irrelevant. He will go ahead and do it and so far (and as far as i know) he is one of the richest beards in Hollywood.
how you think they act is up to you and is personal...
but I think that the archetypes who weren't in it or didn't got enough time were in it for something.
Cause what do we see in TPM as archetypes?
A very wise and very old master... got five minutes screentime
A very powerful and evil person ... got 2 scenes
A very funny character... the entire movie where in the OT, the droids were only funny for a few scenes
A person who sets his principles higher than others (QGJ), he got a good part of the movie (and I think he did well)
what else was there? cause it always focused on QGJ and OB1 (who was supposed to be the young one trying to be wise and powerful by the rules but didn't show that well)
In the OT, you have 3 (human) good guys: a princess, a scoundrel and a "local boy"
also an all powerful Wookie, the pure incarnation of evil: Vader, ...
and all got enough screentime
Originally posted by Ken Benobi
Well, concerning the actors I was really thinking of differences to the acting of then and the acting of now. Not in any way to take away from the actors in the PT, who I think are good, but there is a difference. I was thinking of some of the older ones like Sir Alec Guinness, Peter Cushing(Grand Moff Tarkin), who really made viewing the film a treat.Concerning TPM and the CG, I agree with you, in fact, I actually wish they wouldn't use CG so much, I think it bothers my eyes if used too much.
"If the original trilogy never exsisted, what would i think of the phantom menace?"
phantom menace seems lame at least partly because of expectations, like everyone says (and i find it a bit lame myself because of my own expectations - so i'm including myself there).....however, i've always thought that if the original trilogy never exsisted, and episode I was the first film released, how different it would seem to everybody.....
"hey, i saw that new phantom menace movie last night"....
"i saw the trailer on et....what the hells that all about?".....
"it's weird, it's a kid's film, but it's the strangest damn kid's film i ever saw".....
"so what's it all about?".....
"well, it's all set in space, and there's these samurai monk guys, kind of a cross between a religious cult and a sherrif in a western, and they discover some kid who's a virgin birth and supposedly will fulfill some kind of quasi-religious prophecy, meanwhile an evil cult, like an evil version of the samurai monks is secretly taking over the galaxy etc. etc.".....
sorry, but it's hard to think of any movie that would seem as outright weird and unhinged as this would seem....and i for one would probably be intrigued and respectful, in a different way to how i feel now about the ot sure, but nonetheless....
"If this movie wasn't based in the Star Wars universe, would I still think it's so great?"
it would be a hollywood remake of a kurosawa film wouldn't it?.....