Originally posted by DeVi| D0do
IMO the status of the originals has been hindered greatly just by the existance of the Prequel Trilogy.
Are people actually thinking "Oh yeah, Star Wars was great, but once they made those prequels, well, now everything is tainted." Oh brother.
I think there are actually THREE kinds of SW people in the world, OT lovers, PT lovers, and OT and PT lovers! 😎
The battle of Endor and duel between Vader and Luke are what saved ROTJ in my opinion, because the rest of the movie I felt to be pointless fluff.
I was born after the OT came out, having been born in 1986, yet I still MUCH prefer the OT. I first saw it when I was about 10 years old and within two weeks of having bought the VHSs had watched the entire trilogy 5 times. I never actually saw the SEs until the DVDs came out though, as I'd bought the original VHSs less than a year before and saw no real point in spending that much money again 😛 especially as I was so young and that's a lot of cash.
But the OT just is better, I think. Better writing, better directing, better characterization, better plots, better actors...the only thing the PT really has over the OT is the special effect, which ultimately in my opinion mean nothing at all because it always felt to me that Lucas was using all the fun flashy effects to draw attention away from the fact that the movies really were not as good as they could have been.
This is not to say I don't like the PT, because I do. It just isn't as good as the OT, I think.
Originally posted by Lana
The battle of Endor and duel between Vader and Luke are what saved ROTJ in my opinion, because the rest of the movie I felt to be pointless fluff.I was born after the OT came out, having been born in 1986, yet I still MUCH prefer the OT. I first saw it when I was about 10 years old and within two weeks of having bought the VHSs had watched the entire trilogy 5 times. I never actually saw the SEs until the DVDs came out though, as I'd bought the original VHSs less than a year before and saw no real point in spending that much money again 😛 especially as I was so young and that's a lot of cash.
But the OT just is better, I think. Better writing, better directing, better characterization, better plots, better actors...the only thing the PT really has over the OT is the special effect, which ultimately in my opinion mean nothing at all because it always felt to me that Lucas was using all the fun flashy effects to draw attention away from the fact that the movies really were not as good as they could have been.
This is not to say I don't like the PT, because I do. It just isn't as good as the OT, I think.
...Yeah...
Re: Re: What makes the new movies better than old ones?
Originally posted by smoker4
The concept was new then, the special effects were a big thing then, the stories are better especially ESB, its also Nostalgic for someone like me who saw them first time round, if i had been born after they came out my view on it might be totally different. 😮💨
starwars I agree~
Originally posted by Generic Hero
1) Lack of a strong villain. Unlike the OT, where Vader was the man to fear for the entire trilogy, the PT had no strong villain figure. Palpatine just sat in the background scheming and plotting never really doing anything evil until halfway through RotS. Every time we meet a strong villain character (Maul, Dooku, Grevious), they die very quickly and we never get to a point where they could be recognized and feared. If Lucas had let Maul escape after he killed Qui-Gon instead of being killed, then had him lead the seperatists in Episode II before finally being killed by Obi-Wan in Episode III, things would have been a lot better on that front. Or perhaps introducing Darth Tyranus in TPM (Which would have been cool, since he trained Qui-Gon).2) Lack of a strong group dynamic. In the OT, Luke, Leia, Han, Chewie, Lando, R2 and Threepio all knew and interacted with each other in various ways. TPM was able to capture this feeling with Qui-Gon, Obi-Wan, Anakin, Padme, R2 and Jar Jar, but it completely dissapeared after that. It became a "Chain" as opposed to a "net." Padme interacted only with Anakin (which made her seem somewhat like a 5th wheel), who interacted only with her and Obi-Wan, who interacted only with Anakin and Yoda/Mace. See? No group, there. It really hurt the feel and cohesion of the movie. Instead of watching seperate parts of one story that weaved through each other from time to time, it felt like we were watching several completely seperate stories that coalesced into one at the very end.
3) Lack of a strong lead actor and lead actress. Covered above.
4) Lack of beliavability. Anakin's fall to the dark side was WAAAY too rushed. It just felt like "OK, just killed my master in a spur of the moment event. Guess I'm evil now, so I'll go and slaughter everyone I ever knew and loved. I'll even kill the kids so I seem even more evil. Oh... maybe I should be a bit remorseful too, so I guess I'll go off and cry for a bit."
5) Lack of strong space battles. TPM's space battle wasn't bad, but it didn't capture the epic feeling of either of the Death Star Battles. RotS's space scene was ho-hum at best. The whole thing felt like it was on rails a la Starfox.
6) Narrow-view of the Star Wars universe. Again, aside from TPM, the entire series is focused almost entirely on the Jedi and their way of life. In the OT, we had a smuggler, a rebel leader, a Jedi and an business man. Each of these gave us a seperate view of the galaxy. In the PT, it really just felt like you were following an upper-class noble around and had no chance to get a feel for some of the "cooler" parts of the galaxy like the Mos Eisley cantina.
7) We knew the story already. This really couldn't be helped, but it did hurt the movies.
8) Lacked the epic feeling of the OT. In the Battle of Yavin, the fate of the Rebellion was in the hands of a handful of rebel pilots hurtling towards the seemingly-unstoppable might of the Death Star. At the Battle of Endor, the destiny of the entire Galaxy sat on a razors edge as the forces of good and evil clashed in a final battle of titanic proportions. There were no such instances in the PT. Just a sudden takeover by the Empire and a slaughter of the Jedi. Maybe if the Republic had at least put up a fight before it got taken over, things would have been better.
👆 👆 especially #4
Originally posted by Lana
The battle of Endor and duel between Vader and Luke are what saved ROTJ in my opinion, because the rest of the movie I felt to be pointless fluff.I was born after the OT came out, having been born in 1986, yet I still MUCH prefer the OT. I first saw it when I was about 10 years old and within two weeks of having bought the VHSs had watched the entire trilogy 5 times. I never actually saw the SEs until the DVDs came out though, as I'd bought the original VHSs less than a year before and saw no real point in spending that much money again 😛 especially as I was so young and that's a lot of cash.
But the OT just is better, I think. Better writing, better directing, better characterization, better plots, better actors...the only thing the PT really has over the OT is the special effect, which ultimately in my opinion mean nothing at all because it always felt to me that Lucas was using all the fun flashy effects to draw attention away from the fact that the movies really were not as good as they could have been.
This is not to say I don't like the PT, because I do. It just isn't as good as the OT, I think.
This is similar to my story, but the PT goes into some areas that the OT just glosses over, like politics, hypocrisy, and the role of the jedi. I think these things do contribute greatly to our understanding of the OT. I like the PT and OT on a fairly equal basis. What the PT has in political philosophy, art direction, and detail the OT makes up for with sometimes decent scripts, acting, and a philisophical direction of its own.
Originally posted by chinabing
Status? Who cares about status?Are people actually thinking "Oh yeah, Star Wars was great, but once they made those prequels, well, now everything is tainted."
You know what I think was majorly instrumental in the downfall (and I use the word lightly) of Star Wars? Kids. Specifically, Lucas's kids. Think about it... what did we get after Lucas had kids? We got Ewoks, a cheesy musical number, comical and pointless inserts into the SW SE, Jar Jar... All after Lucas started his family. ROTJ, IMO is a noticeably different tone to ANH and ESB... much closer to TPM.
Just a musing I thought was interesting...
Originally posted by chinabing
Status? Who cares about status?Are people actually thinking "Oh yeah, Star Wars was great, but once they made those prequels, well, now everything is tainted." Oh brother.
I think there are actually THREE kinds of SW people in the world, OT lovers, PT lovers, and OT and PT lovers! 😎
And it was a "teachable moment" too. Yoda and Sidious battled to a draw. But Yoda says he failed. Yoda wanted to defeat Sids, but because it was a draw, he says he failed. That's honesty and leadership for you."
PT lovers sound pretty gay to me just like the fanboys start to sound more gay by the day.
As an aside, I was killing time watching Beverly Hills Cop III today, and there in an amusement park was The Maker himself, George Lucas, as a guy whom Axel cut in front of to get on a ride.
So I IMDB'd it and there Lucas was, and so was Joe Dante. Landis was the director, so I was half expecting Spielberg to be in the credits too, but he wasn't there. However, there was Forrest J Ackerman, Arthur Hiller, Ray Harryhausen, and composer Robert Sherman! Lucas was with an actress called Christina Venuti.
I don't get it; it was a terrible movie, but had all these behind-the-lenses hollywood types in cameos.
Originally posted by jollyjim311
At least John Williams kept it together. We can all agree that the music was phenomenal for all six, and that's a plus.
it was the only star from the OT that held its own in the PT. agree 150% . Johnny will never do anything suck-ass. its not in his character, h will continue to write sensational scores until the day he dies.
Originally posted by chinabingIt's because Eddy Murphy is black.
As an aside, I was killing time watching Beverly Hills Cop III today, and there in an amusement park was The Maker himself, George Lucas, as a guy whom Axel cut in front of to get on a ride.So I IMDB'd it and there Lucas was, and so was Joe Dante. Landis was the director, so I was half expecting Spielberg to be in the credits too, but he wasn't there. However, there was Forrest J Ackerman, Arthur Hiller, Ray Harryhausen, and composer Robert Sherman! Lucas was with an actress called Christina Venuti.
I don't get it; it was a terrible movie, but had all these behind-the-lenses hollywood types in cameos.
I don't know, Chinabing or whatever the hell his name is suddenly starts whining about why famous people want to cameo in a movie he finds boring. I thought maybe because Eddy Murphy is such a famous guy, everybody is his friend and it was probably his birthday.
Whatever, I really don't give a F*CK!!