Slashdot Mirror


When Did Star Wars Jump the Shark?

stm2 writes "As a long time fan of the stories, I watched as Star Wars transformed from one of the better sci-fi stories told to 'Whedon is my master now.' An article at the TechRepublic blog explores the weakness of the sequel trilogy and states that the Midi-chlorians are the culprit. Was it the Midi-chlorians, Jar Jar Binks, the actors? When did Star Wars jump the shark?. A bonus question: Did George Lucas redeem himself in Episode III?"

32 of 640 comments (clear)

  1. In Jedi by maciarc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ewoks. 'nuff said.

    1. Re:In Jedi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The Wookie christmas special didnt help either.

    2. Re:In Jedi by Psmylie · · Score: 4, Insightful
      While it may not have jumped the shark quite yet, the Ewoks definitely put it on the ramp. That was the very first time that I was aware (as a kid) of Star Wars being movies designed to sell merchandise.

      Jar Jar I can almost forgive, because the concept of putting in a fully computer-rendered photo realistic character IS pretty neat. They just really blew it with this particular one. But, Anakin being barely out of diapers when they found him pretty much blew it for me. And he was still too old to start training?!

      Anakin building Threepio and Artoo showing up for no reason (other droids could have been used, why these two?), the painful, "do anything for a cheap laugh" antics of Jar Jar, horrible dialogue... and, of course, the midi-chlorians.. Bah, Episode 1 was so disappointing. Even for what was, supposedly, a movie intended for kids only, it was disappointing.

      On the other hand, I cheered up a friend of mine after the movie by suggesting that, just maybe, midi-chlorians weren't the cause of Force-sensitivity, but the result of it. Like, they grow better in those who are Force-sensitive, but have no impact on the Jedi's ability to use the Force.

      I like that, but I know it's not what Lucas intended. I'm just glad he didn't explore something like genetic engineering or "juicing" with midi-chlorian injections to make some sort of Super-sith.

      --

      psmylie's dictionary: Godzillion (noun) Any number large enough to destroy Tokyo

    3. Re:In Jedi by NormalVisual · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The thing that disappointed me the most with Ep1 wasn't the ridiculousness of Jar Jar, nor the grating performance of Jake Lloyd, nor any of the other stuff that generally sucked. It was that they introduced a truly intriguing character in the person of Darth Maul, cast a gifted athletic actor for him that brought incredible life and action to the lightsaber duels (*by far* the best saber fights in all six of the movies), and then only have him onscreen for ten minutes and kill him like a chump at the end.

      This degree of "fail" in Ep1 did however set us up properly for the journey to the city of Whine that was the teenage Anakin. Maybe if Obi-Wan had back-handed the little bitch now and again and put him in his place ("You're a Jedi, goddammit - act like one! [smack!]"), the Republic could have avoided 40 years of oppression.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    4. Re:In Jedi by uncoveror · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When did you get too old to view things with child-like wonder instead of picking them apart and judging them? That is when Star Wars jumped the shark. People who loved the originals as children and hated the prequels as adults might want to consider how much nostalgia clouds their opinions. While Phantom Menace tried too hard to be kid friendly, Attack Of The Clones and Revenge Of The Sith were not bad.

      --
      The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
  2. in the 20 years between 4 and 1 by themushroom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    First post!

    The trillogy ending where it did in 1983 was just fine. Coming back to it two decades later was jumping the shark.

  3. Too much backstory exploration by Sockatume · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In my humble opinion, it was going back and taking the myths and legends which awed us (who the Jedi and Sith had been, how the Empire changed the galaxy) and acting them all out, while giving the prequels few myths and legends of their own to compensate. It made the series feel too much like some self-contained construct, a fantasy world dreamed up in its entirety, with no mysteries that the audience's imaginations could explore. The huge number of links into the "classic" trilogy also destroyed the sense of scale by making it seem like everybody in the series new everybody else. I know about small world networks, but that's not how an epic should feel. So you wound up with something that had all the enormity and mystery of a plastic diorama.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  4. Probably when I was about 20 ... by Average_Joe_Sixpack · · Score: 5, Insightful

    and realized the original trilogy was never that great after all.

  5. Midichlorians by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah, midichlorians were a pretty big issue for me. I was more than happy to forgive Lucas' usual faults and excesses, but that one was stupid.

    It's been mentioned before, but you also have to remember that he's a shit storyteller. I like to call him the anti-Stephen King: He comes up with some great plots, but when it comes to writing a coherent narrative or three-dimensional characters, he's always been hopeless, and the original trilogy bears that out to a great extent. Most of us were kids at the time and mostly missed all that, we were too busy gawping at the lightsabers and other cool stuff.

    As for Episode 3 being some kind of redemption, sorry no. Granted, all the work he put into 1 and 2 reach some neat and satisfying conclusions, but he still managed to deliver a highly-flawed and (as usual) stodgy movie.

    Plus, it would have helped if we saw more of Darth Vader than than pathetic and brief scene we get of him in the end. I'm not one for ragging on artists when they don't deliver exactly what the fanboys want, but the "birth" of Darth Vader scene was very weak sauce.

    --
    Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
  6. Not Midi-chlorians by niceone · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He says it was Midi-chlorians because "Jedi, you see, aren't made, they're born. They're of the blood, nobility, maybe even a master race". So no point fantasising about training yourself to be one - as the author did during the first trilogy.

    But I think if you had been paying attention in the first trilogy you might also have come to the conclusion that Jedi are born not made - or was is coincidence that two of the most powerful Jedi just happened to be FATHER and SON!?

  7. what it's really about... by HeavensFire · · Score: 4, Insightful

    people are fickle. it really isn't the plot, characters, acting, writing or special effects that people fall in love with -- its how it made them feel at the time. and when a sequal fails to reproduce those feelings, it automatically becomes "not as good as the original," regardless of the technical aspects. this is something you can see the world over in many different areas of interest. (computer games for example.) i don't believe the first trilogy is any better or worse then the prequel -- just different.

  8. Star Wars by king-manic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    star wars is fairly cool in other peoples hands (Original trilogy, KOTOR, KOTOR 2, Republic comanda etc..) but when Lucas has direct and unchecked control of it he ruins it because basically he isn't a fan of his own work. That and he gets really bad ideas along with pretty good ideas. When othe rpeople have their hand in it it editorilizes his ideas and the shit gets dropped.

    Before:

    Lucas: "hey harrison, I want you to shoot after guido shoots at you."

    Harrison: "You know what george, fuck you. Han is supposed to be a bad ass with a good side not a boy scout with a furry for a friend."

    Now:

    Lucas: "I want you to put in a CG rhasta with teeth grindingly bad dialogue"

    ILM grunt: "Yes mr. pays my bills and whose opinion my career hinges on"

    --
    "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
  9. Fuggin chlamydians by Mark_in_Brazil · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I prefer that name. In addition to making fun of one of the stupidest aspects of the prequel trilogy, it also raises an interesting question: could the whole Darth Vader situation (and with it, the Galactic Empire) have been avoided with a simple dose of penicillin?
    In the original trilogy, the Force was magic. There was no need to explain "how it works;" Obi-wan's explanation in ANH of what it is and what it does was sufficient. Nobody has to ask how Merlin's magic or Gandalf's magic works. It's magic, fercryinoutloud! Similarly, there's no need to explain how the Force works. It's the Force fercryinoutloud!
    As much as I was looking forward to Episode I, I was totally disappointed by it pretty much from the beginning, and the moment at which I knew it was totally blown and wasn't going to get better was when Qui-gon started blabbing about the chlamydians or whatever. Stupid technobabble worthy of the absolute worst episodes of ST:TNG (gawd... I now wonder: how do tetrions affect chlamydians?), and worse, it reduced what had been magic to a mere blood condition.
    Also, as TFA notes, being a great Jedi suddenly stopped being decided by training in the Force and became a mere accident of birth, which is much less appealing to me, as it is to the author of TFA.
    Episode III was the least awful of the prequel trilogy, but the world would be better off if the three had never been made. The original trilogy is still great, though. Star Wars (ANH) is still one of my all-time favorite films. I was 8 when it came out, and that was 30 years ago, so you know I'm rapidly approaching 40, but I still feel a childlike sense of wonder when I watch that movie. Even the awful prequel trilogy can't ruin that for me. I just pretend the prequels don't exist. Besides, that way, Darth Vader's revelation to Luke in TESB, and what Luke figures out on Dagobah in ROTJ are actually surprises.
    I plan to show my kids the original trilogy. If they end up somehow seeing the crap prequels afterward, that's their problem, but I won't be responsible for it. I'll show them something awesome and let them decide, knowing how Dad doesn't like the prequels, whether they want to watch them or not.

    --
    "It is nice to know that the computer understands the problem. But I would like to understand it too." --Eugene Wigner
  10. Not very interesting by Zelos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Eps 1-3 are dull because they tell the backstory. We already know how it ends, we already know pretty much what happens. So there's no tension and no surprise. They stretch out what made an interesting few paragraphs in the original trilogy to 3 films.

    1. Re:Not very interesting by Bombula · · Score: 4, Insightful
      dull because they tell the backstory

      This comment is particularly ill-conceived, even for Slashdot Star Wars posts. The prequels are dull, but not because they are backstory. If someone asks you, "what's Christianity all about?" you can answer them in a handful of paragraphs, but that doesn't make the entire 'backstory' of the Bible "dull" because "there's no tension and no surprise." Literature is rich with wonderful exposition of 'backstory'. Even individual stories can be enthralling when they explore 'backstory', which is why the technique of jumping around chronologically in fiction is so widespread.

      The Star Wars prequels were awful for precisely the same reason that 99% of Hollywood films are awful: terrible writing and terrible directing.

      --
      A-Bomb
  11. Presenting a concept vs. beating you over the head by antifoidulus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    with it.

    Many good movies will often have a concept, or a message, or something for you to think about after the credits roll. However, good movies also let you draw your own conclusions from the film and aren't usually incredibly overt in presenting it. This is what the first starwars trilogy did. You had the concepts of good vs. evil, predestination vs. free will etc, but you weren't constantly beat over the head with those themes. The prequels are more like the Matrix sequels in that the messages are repeated over and over again till you just don't care. Also, hiding behind intentionally confusing and/or terse dialog doesn't make you "profound" it makes you annoying....

  12. Re:When Han Shot Second. by Planesdragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't buy it. I'm sorry, but they introduce nothing plausible that would justify that, and yea, sure, it's fiction, but even fiction has to be internally consistent. That's just it -- it is. Star Wars is a science-fantasy where you can pop across the galaxy in a week. where "repulsors" are so cheap and reliable that no one uses wheels anymore, where the speed of light means nothing, tiny space fighters work just as well in atmosphere (and never need heat shielding), and anything that looks vaugely like a spaceship can land, fly, and do pretty much whatever it wants.

    And in this universe, of all things to complain about, you're bitching that a military vessel can't have enough layers of redundancy to limp home after being half destroyed?

    The very first time you heard an X-wing "swoosh" should have told you all you need to know about Star Wars: physics takes a back seat to moviemaking, and the crash landing you're complaining about is entirely consistant with that.
  13. Hayden Christensen by mikkelm · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hayden Christensen. Seriously. I cannot watch the last two movies. It's too sappy for me, and that actor is just infuriating.

  14. Fix What is Broken! by reporter · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The first 3 movies (i.e., "Star Wars IV", "Star Wars V", and "Star Wars VI") were really a medieval tale dressed in high technology. The tale had a princess (i.e., Princess Leia) , a knight (i.e., Han Solo), an apprentice (i.e., Luke Skywalker), the swords (i.e., the light sabers), etc. More importantly, we saw the battle between good and evil.

    In most medieval tales, people have free will to choose between good and evil. Darth Vader chose evil. Han Solo also made the wrong choices, but at the end of Star Wars IV, he made the right choice to not abandon the rebels. Han Solo saved the day by protecting Luke Skywalker as his space ship ultimately delivered a blow against the Death Star -- the ultimate symbol of evil. Of course, in "Star Wars VI", even Darth Vader chose good and became reborn as a good spirit.

    In the first 3 movies, people who chose good and who committed their lives to the ideals of the Jedi could acquire the powers of the Jedi. Of course, one must be open-minded and must be sensitive to the true nature of the universe. This message is a wholesome one for all the bratty kids who adored these movies and who eventually grew up to shape our society (via, for example, the many discussions on Slashdot) for the better.

    Now, fast forward to the 21st century. George Lucas changed the message of the original "Star Wars". In the new "Star Wars", the powers of the Jedi belong only to the people who inherit specialized midi-chlorians in their genes. If you do not have the special genetic material, then you are a loser like the rest of the humanoids.

    In the new "Star Wars", the Jedis are the highest, most privileged class in a caste system (like the one in India). People are born into their fate. Regardless of the amount of effort in abiding by the Jedi ideals, a person can never be a Jedi. Being a good person means nothing.

    George Lucas transformed the Western theme of free will (to choose good and become a Jedi) to the Indian theme of a caste system. That is a terrible message to send to today's children. Though both the old "Star Wars" and the new "Star Wars" have characters (e.g., ewoks and Jar Jar Binks) specifically appealing to children, the underlying message of the old "Star Wars" is a much better inspiration for children.

    Yet, we should not whine about Lucas' tragic blunder. We should create another new "Star Wars" by re-writing the stories and re-developing them into an alternative prequel, which sticks closely to the original theme in "Star Wars IV: A New Hope".

    Fixing a tragic blunder is the plan for a new movie about "Star Trek". This new movie is also a prequel and attempts to return to the original spirit of "Star Trek".

    1. Re:Fix What is Broken! by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, the ability to use the force was also genetic in the first Star Wars trilogy. It just wasn't played up as much.


      No, actually it wasn't, unless you mean by genetic something vague like "Got it from his old man."

      The Force in the first trilogy is mystical, and is inherited, apparently (or at least in the Skywalker clan's case) by blood. The idea of blood being passed down from parents to children is a very old motif in legend and myth (it's the underlying concept behind ideas like "pure blooded").

      The difference between the first and second trilogies is that the first uses an ancient and powerful cultural archetype to describe the powers that Luke inherits, whereas the second uses silly pseudo-scientific technobabble (ala ST:TNG) and thus falls flat on its face. One presents us with an old motif found throughout our ancient literature, and the other sounds like some scriptwriter's hack to explain how the protaganists figure out that Anakin is powerful with the Force.
      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  15. It has to be Jar Jar by dbolger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Return of the Jedi was released five months after I was born. My parents bought me a few Star Wars toys that I must have kept for years because I distinctly remember playing with them as a kid. I also had an original Return of the Jedi blanket and movie tie-in books, so I consider myself to be at the extreme edge of the group who can claim Star Wars as part of their childhood.

    I'm sure some of you who are older than me by a few years will say that the Ewoks ruined the Star Wars franchise, but for me, they have always been an intrinsic part of it. Yes, they were largely a comedic species, but in RoTJ, their nievity - their childish, silly actions and noises served as a contrast to the evil of the Empire. One of the most touching moments in the original trilogy was a scene where one Ewok is killed by an imperial laser blast, and another leans down beside him, prodding him, clearly not realising his friend is dead, and possibly even unfamiliar with the concept of non-natural death itself.

    The Ewoks are often compared to Jar Jar, but I think this is very unfair. Yes, they made the audience laugh, and yes they probably made Lucas lots more money from merchandising, but they served a purpose in terms of the film's plot, and without the contrast that they created, the Empire's actions would have had a greatly reduced impact on audiences.

    None of this can be said of Jar Jar Binks. His "zany antics" serve no purpose but outright slapstick humour, and even this is not done very well. He alone does not create a contrast with the Trade Federation, nor does his innocence underscore the central themes of the film(s). He exists purely because the writers needed a "funny character", and were too lazy to create something better.

    As I have said, I am (by the skin of my teeth) a member of the "Star Wars generation", but because I was not old enough to be obsessively interested in movies, I do not think that the modern trilogy "ruined my childhood" by any means. However, there is a noticable drop in quality between the two sets of films, and for me, the most blatant example of this is the presence of Jar Jar Binks.

  16. Re:Sorry to disagree. by Psmylie · · Score: 4, Insightful
    If I had been 10 when I first saw it, I might have liked the Ewoks a lot more. As it was, I was old enough to find them both amusing and annoying. So, yeah, a person's point of view has a lot to do with how something is received :)

    There is nothing wrong with trying to sell toys, in and of itself. But when something is done solely for the purpose of making people buy things, it kinda takes a lot of the soul out of it. It's like watching a very long and expensive commercial instead of a movie. So, it's not so much wrong as it is limiting.

    Oh, and thanks for reminding me of the whole "Jesus" thing that Anakin had going on, too. I forgot all about that!

    --

    psmylie's dictionary: Godzillion (noun) Any number large enough to destroy Tokyo

  17. Re:Apparently you forgot Luke and Leia doing... by Kythe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It wasn't the swing on a rope. It was the Tarzan yodel while doing it. I mean, WTF?

    One of the most phenomenally stupid moments in moviemaking, IMHO.

    --

    Kythe
  18. Re:When Han Shot Second. by Rary · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You nailed it in your subject line, or at least part of it. The problem with the prequels is the lack of Han Solo.

    You see, Star Wars was supposed to be, in Lucas's mind, about the Jedi. However, the Jedi are really boring, pretentious, one-dimensional characters. By luck (at least, for us, the viewers), he started the story in a time when the Jedi were all but eliminated. Therefore, instead of actually being about the Jedi, the original trilogy was about a rebellion, with a bit of Jedi coolness (ie. light saber duels) thrown in for fun. The star of the show: Han Solo. A cool, bad-ass scoundrel of a good guy.

    Fast forward to the prequels, and it's all Jedi. Where's Han Solo, or at least a cool character like him? There isn't one. There's just stiff pretentious Jedi spouting tripe masquerading as wisdom. Sure, there's lots of light sabers, which is cool. But that's not enough to make a good movie.

    Think about it: the Empire came into existence because the Jedi screwed up and let it happen, and it came crumbling down because Lando Calrissian blew up the second Death Star after Han Solo destroyed the shield generator, while the only remaining Jedi was too busy dealing with personal issues to actually help.

    --

    "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein

  19. The Scream by dogwelder99 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Shark jumpage started with the 1997 re-release of Empire, when Lucas changed the scene of Luke jumping off the Cloud City platform by adding that hollering scream all the way down. Suddenly Luke wasn't a Jedi nobly accepting his own death rather than turning to the dark side. He was just a blithering idiot falling off a cliff, in strangely accurate foreshadowing of the whole Star Wars franchise for the next decade.

    Revenge of the Sith didn't redeem the mess... it was just good enough to remind you of how good the prequels could have been, if someone had taken George's crayons away and hired a screenwriter. ILM should release a Special Edition using CGI to replace the entire trilogy.

  20. The "used future" by Yaddoshi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In my opinion, the biggest contributing factor to the failure of Episodes I, II and even III is the lack of one very important technique that was invented during the making of the original Star Wars. This technique helped make the original films believable, which also in turn made them immersive.

    During the documentary of the making of Star Wars (on the 4th disc of the box set DVD release), one of the film crew members described a problem where C3P0s costume was initially a highly reflective chrome surface and was causing the cameras to be visible during their test shoot. To offset this problem they rubbed dirt and grease into the costume, dulling it enough so that it would no longer be reflective. They then used this technique with other droids, vehicles and anything else in the film. They called it the "used future" - and it was all the more believable because these objects, vehicles, droids and other things really did appear as though they had always been there.

    As we all know, not only was there an overzealous amount of CG in Star Wars Episodes I, II and III, but the real sets and costumes were kept pristine and perfect throughout the films. Hair cuts, makeup, billboards, decorations, vehicles, aliens, etc, all looked perfect 100% of the time. Too perfect.

    Just as human brains are capable of instantly detecting the subtle differences in something that is not really alive (which is a common problem when watching CG special effects in film), it also can detect when something is "too perfect".

    This alone was enough to ruin any immersive qualities the new Star Wars films might have had, and this problem was compounded by the poor dialogue, stupid gags, dragging plot-lines, inconsistencies and the idiotic notion that everything needed to be explained in detail.

    Also, the new films had a practically unlimited budget, and therefore there was less need to innovate or improvise, almost eliminating the possibility of creating "happy accidents" that were part of the magic of the original movies (some of which were later removed by George's "improvements" in the re-releases).

    My favorite Star Wars film is the original Empire Strikes Back, which was not directed by George Lucas, and also happens to be his least favorite of the series. The original film is a perfect balance of action, romance and drama, and should have been left entirely alone. But I suppose until I am as successful as George Lucas in the entertainment industry my two cents are pretty meaningless.

  21. Tying up things up & bad humor by JoeCommodore · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I would say the combination of the bad puns in 1-3 referencing 4-6 as well as the need to tie up everything in a pretty package where EVERYONE was put into their place at the end, Vader has his suit, Kenobi off to Tattooine (Lars being Anikans half-brother), Leia, etc etc. Episode III ended with every thing ready and everyone was in their place waiting for 17 whole years or so for Luke to grow up. Heck they even had the death star plans put in there, I guess they got stupid for those 17 years and just sat around grew old and built the Death Star.

    The plot could have just:

    Let Anikin be good at the force without being some weird plot thing and then would better explain why in 4-6 he was not quite powerful and stiff.

    Beat up Anikin real good and put him out of commission for a while and just gave him a couple more artificial limbs and a lot of destructive anger (so he could earn the rest of his suit)

    Let "Uncle" Lars be his brother, or just as well another fallen Jedi in hiding that unlike Kenobi totally disavowed the order.

    Leaving some things open to speculation and opportunity for fans or authors to fill in the blanks would have been a whole lot more entertaining and interesting in my book.

    --
    "Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
  22. Re:People, just relax by RedBear · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't know about everyone else, but my complaint has always been with how it was written and acted, not how the story line played out. The acting in Episode I was the most god-awful, wooden and just plain wrong thing I've ever seen. I think many of the problems stemmed from their extensive use of digital effects and even completely digital characters. The actors reactions were always off, sometimes by a little and sometimes by a lot.

    But it really comes right down to the fact that apparently George Lucas is an idiot and always has been. If you watch the old documentary about the making of the original Star Wars movie, narrated by Mark Hamill, you will hear at one point Hamill saying that GL wanted to cast an actor with a used-car-salesman slick-talking "Brooklyn accent" as the voice of C-3PO, instead of the smooth English accent of Anthony Daniels. Just think about how awful that movie would have been if such a recognizable modern-day accent were thrust into every other scene, breaking down the veneer of believeability that helps the audience buy in to the fact that this was supposed to be "long ago, in a galaxy far away". So even back then the guy was a total moron. Fortunately decisions like that got shot down somehow, and he ended up making some pretty good movies, instead of Space Balls.

    Fast forward to the new movies, nobody seems to have the nerve to tell GL he's an idiot, so we get movies with characters saying completely idiot non-fitting dialog like the modern-day-talking announcer at the pod race who says, "Ooooh, that had to hurt!" and the robot captain who looks confused and says, "Does not compute!" Way to create the feeling of a totally non-modern-Earth-like environment there, GL. We get actors interacting with an almost entirely digital world so their reactions are all wrong. What do you expect when you have people running around in an empty room with green fabric on every surface? We get people waving lightsabers around with no sense of weight or momentum or the effort required to cut through various different materials and body parts. It ended up looking like they were all swinging toothbrushes around.

    We also got characters like Obi-Wan's Jedi master acting like a complete jerkwad toward characters like Jar Jar for no particular reason, completely going against the calm, self-assured presence created by Alec Guinness and other Jedi masters from the original trilogy. There are many more instances where a character's actions or words simply didn't fit what that character should have been doing or saying at that moment. Again, this is not about the actual events that make up the storyline, because that was totally up to the writer. But there are concrete rules about how any specific character in any specific situation will react, and for those of us who have a sense of how this works, when a character is acting "wrongly", it is quite obvious. I was so disgusted with how often something like this happened in Episode I that I almost walked out of the theater, which I have never actually done nor even had the urge to do before or after watching that film. It was simply THAT horribly bad.

    I'm so glad you enjoyed it, as many others have. But it was quite awful, and Episode II and III weren't much better. It really had nothing to do with me expecting a certain progression of the storyline. The story was OK, and I would have been happy with any other storyline that fit with the original trilogy, as long as it was produced with the same acting and effects quality as the originals. Going completely digital with the effects was a huge mistake, IMO. Combine that with GL's total lack of understanding about the fragility of the audience's suspension of disbelief, and you end up with a disaster.

  23. Re:People, just relax by RedBear · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sorry to reply to my own post, but I forgot to stomp on the "midichlorians". That has to be the single most unbelievably idiotic thing thing that was put into the new movies. You can't use the Force unless you've got some little bacteria-like thingies in your blood? You can measure someone's ability with the Force just like you measure someone's blood glucose levels? Fuck you, GL. Thanks for ruining the entire idea of the Force and the dreams of every young Star Wars fan of becoming a Jedi through dedication and hard work. The moment that concept came up in the movie I just wanted to go find GL and start kicking him square in the balls until I couldn't lift my leg anymore. And this was before I started watching Family Guy.

    The idea of midichlorians ruined the entire Star Wars saga for many of us. The only redemption that could ever be possible is remaking the prequels and cutting out any mention of it. Fortunately I've been able to repress the bad memories, like I obviously did just now in my parent post. Now excuse me while I go wash my brain out with soap.

  24. I just watched Empire again. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Fun movie, but just a movie.

    Interestingly, the myth of Star Wars is stronger than the films. --My memories of Luke's training with Yoda is much more robust than what was actually on the screen. The Jedi and what they mean hold a place in my mind and heart which isn't going anywhere, and which fits into a larger perspective of life as I see it, and I am thankful to have those ideas contained in the myth of Star Wars.

    It's like the stories of the Greek Gods; there are many different tellings from many different story tellers, some good, some less so, but they were just facets of a greater thing. An idea which is 3D to a story's 2D, and which must be approached many times from many different angles to be fully understood, and which cannot be diminished by a bad telling; only the story might be foggy. The idea itself is perfect, and we know this, or we wouldn't argue about how such and such a scene could have been done better. We KNOW there is a perfect idea within it all, and it is what we are all seeking to understand. --And of course I'm not talking about the Greek myths here. They don't do much for us today. I'm talking about the myth that Star Wars looks in upon and which still holds enormous power today even though Lucas coughed and lost his place a few times while telling it as we all sat around the fire.

    There are so many great ideas from Star Wars which can be used to measure and reinforce other stories. A couple of my favorites. . .

    "Fear leads to Anger, Anger leads to Hate, and Hate leads to Suffering. . . I see much Fear in you."

    "You focus determines your reality" "I don't understand." "You will, Anakin. With time and training, you will."

    Other films, even great stories like Lord of the Rings, don't cut to the quick of the experience of this world in quite the same way the Star Wars myth does. --Star Wars shows how politics works in our world, it shows how Spirit moves in our world, and it offers a means to navigate through these interesting times with grace and power. And that's why people constantly re-tell the same myths over and over. They inform our lives.

    Yeah, I'd be happier if Teen-Anakin hadn't been such a weenie. But that was just a movie. The ideas are what count.


    -FL

  25. Western? WESTERN? by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The original Star Wars leaned very heavily on Eastern narrative traditions (drawing particularly on Hidden Fortress by Akira Kurosawa.

    The Eastern narrative commonly relies on two classes of hero: one who is pure of heart and destined for great things and one who initially joins the quest out of self-interest, but finds himself affected by the actions and idealism of his companions. The first type cannot succeed without the strength of the second, and the second cannot succeed without the first showing them the path to enlightenment.

    This archetype can be traced back at least as far as Journey to the West (circa 1590, the source for the TV series Monkey) in which the pure hearted monk Tripitaka (Xuánzàng) is aided by three characters, all of whom have fallen out of favour with the gods and seek redemption.

    Luke is pure archetype number 1. Han Solo was archetype 2, an unreconstructed rogue even to the point of casually shooting Greedo in the Mos Eisley cantina. When he flew back at the Death Star scene, he redeemed himself. Even so, in ESB he was still not fully converted, planning to head off just before the imperial attack started. His buddy Lando Calrisian stepped in to bolster the "soul in need of redemption" role, and by the end of the film, both Lando and Han were fully redeemed. Who did that leave for ROTJ? Yup, the big one: Darth Vader, whose hatred, bitterness and resentment was purged by love.

    Now, when Lucas redid the original trilogy, he took away that first defining moment in Han's character, that cold-blooded, unflinching murder that showed us just how much of heartless, self-driven piece of scum he was. This was when Lucas started moving back into modern Western narrative. In the West, bad guys don't get reformed -- they get "what's coming to them!"

    By the time he finally wrote the first three episodes, any aspirations to Eastern narrative was gone and he we had good people who were good, evil people who were evil and one good guy who was stupid and let the bad guys win. No-one was redeemed, and we made do with western "punishment": Maul, Dooku and Grievous were all cut to pieces before death.

    Oh, if only the story had stayed eastern....

    HAL.

    --
    Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
  26. Re:Sorry to disagree. by MsGeek · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Actually it was the Clone Wars shorts that made me a fan again. Lucas basically kept his hands off, and allowed talented people like Genndy Tartakovsky and Paul Rudish to run the show. They brought the fun back. The problem with Episode I and Episode II was simple: they were no fun.

    Episode III was redeemed by the fact that Lucas seemed to pay attention to some of the things Genndy and Paul were doing. There were still plenty of moments to wince at, but the good outweighed the bad. There was some legitimate fun in Episode III. Can't say that about the other two prequels.

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.