Slashdot Mirror
11,000 Words on the Star Wars Trilogy DVDs
The Barking Dog writes "On Monday, September 27th DVD Verdict posted a bantha-sized review of the Star Wars Trilogy. Written by ten people and weighing in at over 11,000 words, it's probably the net's most thorough, extensive review of not only the DVDs, but Star Wars's impact on sci-fi and filmmaking in general. And as one of the contributors, I think that's a good thing."
And as one of the contributors, I think that's a good thing.
Well you would.
How is a large review of the DVD set of 25-year-old movies a good thing? Is the number of words supposed to impress readers? Does it provide any significant insight not already published about the movies? Is it full of "gee whiz, I sure liked Star Wars!" commentary?
Reviews are meant to be shorter than the movies themselves.
At least the submitter owned up to being one of the authors of the review. Others haven't been as scrupulous. :)
"On Monday, September 27th DVD Verdict posted a bantha-sized review of the Star Wars Trilogy. Written by ten people and weighing in at over 11,000 words..."
That's nothing. I've seen more effort put into discussions concerning the far-reaching ramifications of Greedo shooting first and Han stepping over Jabba's tail alone.
How is this interesting?! If I posted
"I bought the DVD, and it's definitely NOT worth it, regardless of other people's opinions."
would that be modded up too? lunacy
I thought the point of the "ghost" was to show the Jedi at (presumably) the latest point in their life they were "good".
If that's the case (and maybe it's not), isn't the importance of Anakin Skywalker's redemption somewhat diminished if his apparition doesn't really reflect the fact that he abandoned the Dark Side at the end?
This is probably a debate for bigger Star Wars nerds than I, but I thought I should at least throw that out to the discussion.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
It was a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away. Where do you get this "future?"
Hate to break it to you, but Gene Roddenberry began work on the new Star Trek in 1975 (Two years before Star Wars had any sway)... Originaly for TV, it evolved into a Motion Picture later on. Not to mention the cartoon between 1973 and 1975.
:)
Star Trek was HUGE in the 70s, moreso than when it was in original runs.
Methinks that maybe you weren't born when Star Wars or Star Trek made their original theater runs
(my first ever MPU! post)
Absolutely, it was all about the redemption!
And to erase the redeemed Anakin is to nullify the moment when he saw his son being zapped by the Emperor, deciding "fuck it, it was never supposed to be this way", and taking the Emperor out.
I didn't buy the DVDs, nor do I plan to, especially since now I wonder whether in "Lucas' Vision" Anakin ever got redeemed, or if Anakin was truly destroyed by Vader.
Not that it really matters, but it does change the premise of the movie.
If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
So how the hell did Luke recognize him?
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Han fired first. Period. The fact that he did speaks to his character, and changing that changes his character.
In the 2004 edition, Han fires pretty much simultaneously as Greedo. Maybe slightly after, but IMHO so shortly afterwards that it can't have been a reaction to Greedo, but more that both was thinking the same thing, and firing about the same time.
What I think Lucas tried to do in the Special Edition wasn't to make Solo look like a wimp, but to make Greedo look evil. He is more evil than Han Solo after all. You can say he's as much as a scumbag as you want, but he do belong to the good guys. So I think Lucas considered it logical to make Greedo shoot first in SE, then realized his mistake and tried to fix it up while maintaining Greedo's intents (that it -- to not just sit there waiting to get killed).
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!