Star Wars TFA vs ANH

Started by jinXed by JaNx14 pages
Originally posted by quanchi112
TFA isn't a remake and it was far more enjoyable than ANH.

Yes, for all intents and purposes it was a remake. If you take out all of the story telling beats that the original had, this movie could NOT have existed on it's own. Saying that it's more enjoyable is purely objective and considering how lazily written it was. I don't mind the fact that anyone would find this movie enjoyable but to say that it's a better movie than ANH is just ridiculous and absurd. The entire story relied on retelling the original but did it more lazily.

I prefer the word 'Inspired' then remake in this case.

Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
Yes, for all intents and purposes it was a remake. If you take out all of the story telling beats that the original had, this movie could NOT have existed on it's own. Saying that it's more enjoyable is purely objective and considering how lazily written it was. I don't mind the fact that anyone would find this movie enjoyable but to say that it's a better movie than ANH is just ridiculous and absurd. The entire story relied on retelling the original but did it more lazily.
This is subjective and I always thought ANH stunk. The acting was hideous and even Lucas the came who came up with it said he was disappointed.

Opinions vary.

ANH no questions asked

Originally posted by Agusto Pinochet
ANH no questions asked
Nah.

Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
I don't mind the fact that anyone would find this movie enjoyable but to say that it's a better movie than ANH is just ridiculous and absurd. The entire story relied on retelling the original but did it more lazily.

👆

Originally posted by Kazenji
I prefer the word 'Inspired' then remake in this case.
Yah. I agree, I don't think it was lazily done, I think it was a movie that provided fan service to the OT fans, while grounding us back in That more believable universe.

They played it safe, but I don't blame them. They wanted to distance themselves from the PT, and they did it mostly well. Hell, the first words spoken are "This will begin to MAKE THINGS RIGHT" It was like a literal jab a the PT.

That being said, I still thing comparing the two in context to what movie was more important/impactful for it's time? It's no question ANH is the winner.

Originally posted by Kazenji
I prefer the word 'Inspired' then remake in this case.

It's not a remake, it's a rip-off. Just like Tanya Grotter was a rip-off of Harry Potter.

I guess "Inspired" is a better word than "rip off" considering it's the same franchise.

But whatever the word used doesn't put it above being criticised for its lack of originality.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
I guess "Inspired" is a better word than "rip off" considering it's the same franchise.

No, it's still a rip-off.

When it's different franchises then it's called a copyright infringement, but ignoring the legal mumbo jumbo and looking at it from solely a creative perspective it's the same thing.

I don't know that i'd call it a "rip off" it was just a poorly written story. "Rip off" implies that the story was used to get something that the audiences didn't expect. Un fortunately i think all of the fans got what they were expecting but it may have taken a few groggy eyed viewings To let the people know what they, wanted.Either way we were ultimately reminded of what it means to be a, Star Wars Fan. So, in that that regard, the movie succeeded.

Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
"Rip off" implies that the story was used to get something that the audiences didn't expect.

No. Rip-off implies that the story—or the elements therein—has already been told by someone else.

Tanya Grotter would still be a rip-off of Harry Potter if the audience expected a similar story.

Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
Un fortunately i think all of the fans got what they were expecting but it may have taken a few groggy eyed viewings To let the people know what they, wanted.Either way we were ultimately reminded of what it means to be a, Star Wars Fan. So, in that that regard, the movie succeeded.

A lot of fans felt that the movie tried to carry itself on its nostalgic pandering to compensate for its predictive and unimaginative story.

I was speaking solely, in the instance of this movie. Anyone could, for all intents and purposes, call this movie a rip-off. but, i truly believe this movie was meant to be something more than what it was received.

Originally posted by Astner
It's not a remake, it's a rip-off. Just like Tanya Grotter was a rip-off of Harry Potter.

In that case

'Zelda: A link to the Past' is a rip off of the previous ones before it.

ALttP had vastly different gameplay from the second Zelda and an actual plot players could actively be engaged in to differentiate it from the first(while borrowing some gameplay elements like the perspective). There be better video game examples. Especially since one of the biggest criticisms lobbied at Nintendo is that they often rely too much on repeating the same formula over and over again(to varying degrees).

A better example would have been using film series that are similar from film to film. Like Bond, Die Hard, etc. Problem there is that unlike those films, Star Wars has never really been all that similar between films. TPM was a story focused on a significant dispute that planted the seeds for the Empire and the discovery of the Chosen One. AotC was a flick about a romance between the Chosen One and a forbidden love, showing signs of his eventual fall, and the machinations of Palpatine to create a war from whole cloth. RotS was a film about the fall of the Chosen One, the Jedi, and the rise of the Empire. A New Hope was a story about a young plucky desert kid discovering his potential with a magical power and, with the help of some unconventional friends, dealing a powerful blow to the Empire. ESB is of course about our hero grappling with the complexities of his powers, a romance, and the Empire doing what it does in the title. RotJ is about our heroes finally proving themselves capable of the impossible and destroying the Empire for good while Luke wins a personal battle that proved he was right.

Which is not to say that the PT never bothered a lot from the OT, of course they did. It's not even heresy for a film like TFA to be similar in a lot of ways to the OT. But it is certainly something new for the series that a film so blatantly taking a lot of the structure and plot elements from a former flick in the franchise.

For my part, TFA reminds me a lot more of Eragon that ANH. Which is....not what many would want to hear.

The actors in EP7 sucked besides Harrison Ford tho EP1s actors were far better. EP7 actors had no charisma/skill total lightweights. I liked the movie but just stating facts.

The acting sucked? The one thing that almost everyone agrees on is that the acting was the best it's ever been in a SW flick.

Originally posted by ares834
The acting sucked? The one thing that almost everyone agrees on is that the acting was the best it's ever been in a SW flick.
'

Well I wouldn't say best out of all Star Wars but yeah I liked the acting.

Originally posted by AuraAngel
ALttP had vastly different gameplay from the second Zelda and an actual plot players could actively be engaged in to differentiate it from the first(while borrowing some gameplay elements like the perspective). There be better video game examples. Especially since one of the biggest criticisms lobbied at Nintendo is that they often rely too much on repeating the same formula over and over again(to varying degrees).

But i'm not talking about the gameplay specifically more to do with some of the things you see in it, So really its not much different to what they did with TFA.

Originally posted by AuraAngel

A better example would have been using film series that are similar from film to film. Like Bond, Die Hard, etc. Problem there is that unlike those films, Star Wars has never really been all that similar between films.

I agree. Kristian Harloff from Collider Jedi Council was justifying this rehash comparing it to Creed. But Rocky films do have a pretty similar story in all of them. Star Wars has always been about Originality IMO.

Originally posted by ares834
The acting sucked? The one thing that almost everyone agrees on is that the acting was the best it's ever been in a SW flick.

Better than the Prequels for sure. Not too sure about being better than the OT acting at it's best.