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?"
Ewoks. 'nuff said.
First post!
The trillogy ending where it did in 1983 was just fine. Coming back to it two decades later was jumping the shark.
Laughter is the Spackle of the Soul.
Jar-Jar and Midi-chorlians were just a symptom of the underlying disease. He only directed one of the first three movies (IV, V, & VI), and in that one, there were people who felt like they could challenge him when the dialogue was crap...Harrison Ford was famous for it, and I doubt very seriously that Alec Guiness would have spouted some of the tripe that came later. Other directors on the other movies made the whole thing more palatable.
Fast forward to the second set (I,II,III) and you see that not only does he feel that he is capable of directing all three movies now (ha!) but no one dares to dispute his character or dialogue choices and unnecesarry plot wankings...Things thrown in just as an excuse for visual effects masturbation. If there had been anyone who felt like they could stand up to him, I can't imagine some of the horrible bad calls (like the dialog of the whole of episode II) would have gone through.
Episode III was by far the best of the new set, but I wouldn't call it great by any stretch. The movie fricking starts with them landing half a fricking starship on a landing strip, rather than, you know, in a giant self-made crater. I know it's sci-fi, but come on. I'd have bought one of them levitating them to the ground using the Force (which doesn't make a ton of sense), but not a fricking crash landing.
In short, the whole mess had potential, but the dialog was terrible, and the actors looked uncomfortable, and there was waaaaaaaay too much "Hey this would look cool!" without a thought to what it meant for the plot.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
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?
and realized the original trilogy was never that great after all.
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!
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!?
ccalam - acoustic versions of new songs.
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.
Ye gods, I know it's a slow news day. But this....
on the front page.....
It's a slashdot of a blog about Star Wars, 8 years after the most recent offensive started, 2 years after it ended.
It's not even a long blog, and it has it's own comment section. Why does this deserve a slashdotting?
Maybe if you ran a banner add over it for the stars wars kitch on ThinkGeek, it might have been excusably evil. But no, you boned that one as well.
And I read it, then I commented...... somebody get me the eye bleach and a shot of common sense.
*sigh*
Easy. Ewoks.
_Return of the Jedi_ ended about five minutes early. After the Rebels blow up the Big Round Thing II, there are a bunch of perfectly good Star Destroyers left in orbit. While the credits are rolling, they fire up their blasters and start toasting Ewoks.
I would pay to see that.
Everything in the SW universe was crap after the first Ewok appeared on screen. That was the moment I realized George Lucas had sold out whatever integrity he had as a story-teller, and that from then on his real customers were the ones collecting cheap tie-in garbage at MacDonald's, Burger King and Toys-R-Us. (The appearance of Jar-Jar merely epoxied shut any hope that Lucas had of redeeming himself. I went to the remaining films only because they were "group morale events" that my employers paid for; I would not have spent my own money going -- and frankly, these events did not do much for anyone's morale, that I could see).
Any sufficiently advanced technology is insufficiently documented.
Lucas almost redeemed himself. Until the entire dumb Anakin kills Padme sequence -- which by itself was probably survivable -- followed by Vader howling in girlish pain over a murder he knew he was going to commit. Also, it is hard to figure, especially after watching Ep 3, just how stoopid Vader had to be to not blame the Emperor and seek revenge for what was obvious: the Emperor pushed Anakin into killing Padme in order to bring him over to the Dark Side.
Lucas took a painfully simple view of human nature. Anakin would have had to have been dumber than a bag of hammers to not get the hustle that was played on him.
Until you actually see the Emperor toying with Vader in Ep 3, it remains believable that Vader would be willing to be the Emperor's lieutenant. When you see how obvious and clumsy the Emperor's actions were, it just makes Anakin/Vader look even more gullible and childish and simple than he already was portrayed in Ep 1 and Ep 2.
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
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."
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
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.
ANAKIN
I want to go.
about ...
QUI-GON
Then, pack your things. We haven't much time.
ANAKIN
Yipee!!
My secret? I just relax and enjoy the ride. I know that this is not MY story, not MY movie but the vision of GL (good or bad). Even today I enjoy reading fairy tales to my son. And inmensly enjoy Pinoccio, Sleeping beaty , etc, and I'm not trying to search the explanation of why the she woke up with the princes kiss... Accpt it: it just happened so.
With the new trilogy I had NO EXPECTATIONS whatsoever. Yes, the episode 1 was sometimes silly whith tehe kid, but I like it. Midiclorians? The force? No diference to me. The could introduce the "infinite Delphian gravity cloack" and I would have accepted it. Jar jar? Silly but OK, as a silly sidekick can be.. The effects where great in my opinion and adeded a lot to the atmosphere.
People bitch as well with any new chapter of a sequel: Harry potter, StarTreck, Lost, you name it. Me? I enjoy the ride . And like them all? I'm I stupid? maybe, but hey, I have double fun.
It's time to realise that Abble's products are the biggest abomination these days. Just say NO to the dumb iAbble way!!
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....
Monstar L
"The Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded."
cb
Oooh! What does this button do!?
Hmm. For the Star Wars Holiday special to have been "jumping the shark" it has to meet the definition of "jumping the shark" and it has to have taken place after the term "jumping the shark" was in use.
in terms of dates, Fonzie jumped the ahark in September 20, 1977. The Star Wars Holiday Special was broadcast on November 17, 1978. So, technically, it could have been, though the JumpTheShark.com web site claims that the term "jumping the shark" was invented in 1985, in which case the 1978 special couldn't have been "jumping the shark".
In terms of substance, the Star Wars Holiday Special is undoubtedly horrible. But to "jump the shark" a TV show needs to be declining, then attempt an "over the top" stunt in order to try to regain popularity. In 1978 Star Wars was incredibly popular, so the special couldn't have been an attempt to recover declining popularity. And, if you've watched it, there was nothing even remotely "over the top" in the special, just pathetically bad.
So I'd say that, both in terms of dates and substance, the Star Wars Holiday Special wasn't when Star Wars "jumped the shark". It was horrible, certainly, but it was a reverse "jump the shark" in that it was a pathetically bad attempt to capitalize on Star Wars' popularity.
Luckily Lucas was smart enough to prevent it from ever being shown again - it was only broadcast once, and never released on videotape or DVD.
Enable 3D printed prosthetics!
I thought casting Hayden Christensen is on this list. The original Vader was played by a fellow who was nearly 6' 7" / 250lbs and a former champion-contender level bodybuilder who has remained committed to his work ever since. The voice was provided by the most iconic voice actor of the last century.
His replacement is about 6' 1" / 190lbs, needed a special effects suit to fake the transformation, and at one point decided "Hollywood no longer interested him" after being handed the role of the decade over some 400 other applicants. (Though IMDB reports he's been involved in a few things since.)
http://www.askmen.com/gossip/hayden-christensen/hayden-christensen-to-quit-acting.html
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
I was 10 when I watched The Return of the Jedi, and I liked the ewoks. Specially funny was the part when Luke used the Force because C3PO refused to impersonate a deity.
I also loved how the Ewoks managed to defeat the imperial forces with lo tech. That was a big plus for me, and in the end, Luke defeated the dark side and rescued dad.
And what's wrong with selling toys? I loved the Jedi action figures and the little two legged transports.
In my opinion, the movie was perfect. Now let me tell you, it was Ep 1 that jumped the shark. Midichlorians, no father, and let's not forget the new adventures of R2D2 and C3PO!
Ep2 was less awful, but Ep3 really screwed it. Even I could have come up with a better plot! I was hoping to see Anakin's corruption and how he began desiring power and destroying cities all along. Big disappointment.
When 800 years old you have reached, a grumpy old muppet you will be. Deter others from training you will attempt. Rely on the old standbys you will.
cb
Oooh! What does this button do!?
Hayden Christensen. Seriously. I cannot watch the last two movies. It's too sappy for me, and that actor is just infuriating.
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".
There were a lot of problems with the original trilogy but I think the biggest two were the Ewoks and having 2 Death Stars (they couldn't make 3 movies without recycling that plot). The other stuff was mostly just sloppy planning or bad writing like Luke and Leia's kiss. There was plenty of that in the last 3 movies (I'd say it was worse) but there were major additional problems.
1. We knew the ending just not exactly how they got there. That works fine if there is some mystery to it or it just seems like an odd outcome you have to work your way to (JJ Abrams did MI:3 and several episodes of Alias like this). It doesn't work that well for Star Wars because the original trilogy is pretty much a spoiler for the last three. The new trilogy hit the requirements of setting the stage for the original trilogy. I think they did it poorly because they tried too hard to bring in old characters and thing like that to tie the movies together without a good reason.
2. The good guys aren't the underdogs like they were in the original trilogy and one of the main protagonists pretty much becomes a strait up villain. Do we root for the guy who's going to become a villain and hunt down and kill the Jedi including kids? Do we root for the second tier character who dies in the first movie of the original trilogy? The answer is we tolerate them and their poor characters until they do cool fights or Jedi tricks.
This stuff made it a lot harder to put up with Jar Jar, annoying kid Anakin, whiny teen Anakin, teen Anakin hooking up with Padme, Midicloriens, the title "Attack of the Clones", a trade dispute war no one gave a damn about, and villains that weren't very intimidating. It was never going to be easy to make a prequel trilogy but they could have done a lot better.
If you didn't come to party don't bother knocking on my door. Prince '1999'
I know I'll be in the minority with this view (possibly a minority of 1) but here goes.
The Internet killed Star Wars.
Long ago, in a galaxy far far away, when people didn't like a film they told their friends not to go see it, then let it go. If you look at the box office records for TPM, you'll see it continued strong in theatres throughout the summer, and hung in all the way to October. This is not the box office of a film that had great hype but no substance; it is the box office of a film that impressed more than a few people.
Of course, the internet says otherwise. For three years the only thing more hated on the internet than George Lucas was Jar Jar. I'll be honest, I have no comprehension of how people can invest the kind of time I saw wasted complaining about TPM.
Worst of all, I think that the numerous online complaints got to Lucas. I think that AotC was dubious and RotS was pure crap largely because Lucas was trying to meet the demands of a group that probably couldn't be satisfied.
I think that TPM is much more like the original trilogy than some people want to give it credit for; most likely because OT was from their childhood, and so it got rose coloured. (movie goers from my mother's generation certainly didn't have as high an opinion about OT as my gen did; perhaps that says something)
(If anyone is dying to respond to this post with arguments about why TPM sucks, my lack of response is because I wasted three hours a day for three years on multiple forums fighting this fight, and at this point I don't care any more. You think that GL ruined SW for you, well people like you ruined it for me.)
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.
I think that Terry Goodkind sums it up nicely in his Sword of Truth series. In that series, there are two types of wizards; those with the Calling, i.e., they want to be, and those with the Gift, i.e., they're naturally talented at it.
in the OT, or at least Epi 4, it was quite clear that any old idiot could use the Force; Kenobi offers to teach some to Solo. That having been said, some people, through luck, or heridity, or whatever, have a particular aptitude or talent for Force usage.
In TPM, all they had to say was 'Midichlorians are ATTRACTED to The Force', not 'CAUSE The Force.' Simple. People with natural aptitudes have higher counts. People with higher counts should probably get some sort of training. Done.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
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
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.
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.
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
In a story with a princess and a destined one? The original three movies just didn't lay it on as thick as the pre-quels but they are BOTH the same story. Luke Skywalker is DESTINED to be a jedi, because his father is one. Han Solo could NEVER become one. This whole upper-cast system has ALWAYS been there, both in the form of born-to-be jedi's and royalty.
Lets be honest here, it is a fairy tale, and in fairy tales the world revolves around nobility because telling a story of how a real peasant becoming a great leader might just be a little upsetting to the people in whose kingdom these fairy tales began.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I know it's been said before by many, but Greedo shooting first doesn't make sense. The reason though isn't just that "Han is a bad boy who would shoot first if his life is in danger", but that the scene is totally unbelievable that way. You have a trained bounty hunter sitting about three feet away from Han with a gun pointed right at him. If he had intended to kill Han, why not just shoot him to start with? How does he miss him over his shoulder? Even if you had never seen the original Star Wars, you would have to ask yourself "What just happened?" Then you have Jabba the Hut, who can't even move in Return of the Jedi so he has his platform move in and out from the wall, meeting Han personally in a busy spaceport. He doesn't take Han in though, instead he lets Han step on him. You also have all the digital creations added to make the space port look busy, like the guy on the motorbike that swerves to avoid the dinosaur thing, causing the digital guy to fall off and hang on by the reigns. Lucas said he always intended Mos Eisley to be a bustling space port, but why? Tatooine was chosen to hide Luke specifically because it was a backwater planet with little interstellar travel. Having all of this digital crap on the screen distracts from the story. It's like he forgot anything he learned in film school about drawing attention to things that are important to tell the story.
The three "prequels" are all about special effects. Now Tatooine is a busy planet with thousands turning out for a spectacular race all the time. Anakin's boss is a ridiculous digital flying creature that could never fly in real life because 1) he's fat, 2) his wings are too flimsy and 3) he has no chest muscles to flap those wings. The story is about some "trade federation" blockading a planet for no other reason it seems than they like to take orders from a shadowy figure over holographic communications. I don't even remember the plots from the other two really, they are just forgettable.
Luke wasn't a jedi until he completed his training and faced vader. Anikin wasn't a jedi until he completed his training and apprenticeship. Leghia (sic?) also had the force, but she wasn't a jedi.
Clearly, the force isn't something that everybody has. And being a jedi isn't just a matter of having the force.
It's being a professional baseball player: it takes natural ability, training, and steroids.
Sure, there were lots of more dramatic signs of failure further down the road, but I say that the signs it was jumping the shark were all present in Jedi.
When I was eleven or so, when Jedi came out, I loved it just as much as I loved the first two. Then Star Wars was all but forgotten until some friends and I dug up Laserdisc copies in high school. And we watched all three straight through several times.
Right away it was apparent that Jedi was a major letdown. If nostalgia was enough to carry a film, then it should have held up as well as the other two, but it didn't. Though it has several inspired moments throughout, it also has far more embarassing bits than the first two films put together.
I'm not going to get into the details since that's a pointless argument, but I bet nearly everyone here, if they watch the whole OT from beginning to end will notice a dropoff in quality for Jedi. If you don't, then it's likely that the nostalgia _is_ enough for you. Which is fine, and honestly I envy you. But for me the nostalgia is gone, and only the first two films hold up for real.
After that it was mostly downhill. There were a few inspired moments spread out in the prequels... several in Revenge of the Sith, but again, not nearly enough to make up for the embarassing misfires.
The "Attack of the Phantom" re-edit of "Attack of the Clones", complete with re-editor's commentary, highlights just how far off Star Wars films got.
Does your significant other love shoes?
I saw "A new hope" when I was 12 years old. It was the perfect matching of audience maturity to film making. The wonder/comedy/romance balance was just right for a 12 years old.
When I saw "The empire strikes back", I had grown slightly more adult and so had the series, it was again almost a perfect match.
Then "Return on the Jedi" and I was now a more cynical young adult. The series had not kept pace. Silly antics and cutsey toy ewoks sullied what could have been a brilliant trilogy capper if the original writing/directing team were kept in place, and someone kept George from going backwards.I thought this was bad, but little did I know...
So a combo of me growing up and George aiming younger and lower. The sharked jumped at ROTJ.
The special edition tweaks were lame. Not just Han turning from calculating badass to a typical good two shoes hero, but all the lame overdone insertions of random creatures all over the landscape. Bleh. But this is more of footnote you can ignore.
The new trilogy: Seriously this was garbage by almost any standard. It sold because of mega marketing dollars and because we are suckers for nostalgia. Though I waited for the 1 and 2 to hit video or TV broadcast,because even the previews were painful to watch. I saw 3 in the theater and it was meh.
So ROTJ jumped the shark, but it got mind boggling worse from there.
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
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'
To call Star Wars "one of the better sci-fi stories told" really exposes a tremendous lack of familiarity with the good science authors over the last 50 years. Star Wars is, and was even in the first movie, nothing but space opera (and not even very GOOD space opera), full of bad or non science, and deus ex machina plot devices.
Read some good science fiction, and you'll quickly see the difference...I highly recommend trying some Robert L. Forward, some C.S. Friedman, some Vernor Vinge, or some Stephen Baxter. If you swing more for the adventure side, check out some of the true classics: Robert A Heinlein, Poul Anderson, Charles Sheffield, Isaac Asimov (for science, not for characters), or John Brunner.
Threepio and Artoo were intended to be the witnesses to the entire saga from the very beginning. As 'droids, they are basically immortal, so long as someone keeps replacing worn out parts. So, who else to take notes?
The Whills, the mysterious entities whose journal is the "source document" for the Star Wars saga, get the story from Artoo, according to some accounts of Lucas' original ideas.
They were inspired by the two bickering peasants in The Hidden Fortress, the Kurosawa chambara movie which inspired the original Star Wars movie.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
...or indeed any of the actors. It's Lucas. The actors can only do what the director wants. I posted about this after Episode 1 was released. Hayden Christensen has been fairly criticized for a terrible performance, but unfairly characterized as a terrible actor. He's anything but. In fact, he's actually quite talented, as anyone who saw his performances in "Life as a House" and "Shattered Glass" can attest. All the featured actors have proven in other films that they can act, but their performances in the prequel trilogy were uniformly cringe-worthy. The common denominator is the director: George Lucas.
I remember an interview with Carrie Fisher from maybe 1978, in which she talked about her experience in "Star Wars" as a young actress (I believe it was only her second film, and she was about 19 when it was shot). Fisher is quite witty, and it's a delight to read interviews with her. She said something to the effect that Lucas wasn't really an actor's director, and spoke particularly about the set-up for the scene in which Leia witnesses Alderaan being destroyed. She asked him what he wanted her to do: "I mean, there goes home, family, record collection, everything. He kind of grunted and waved his arm in the general direction that he wanted me to face. That was it."
Recipe for Star Wars Episode 1:
1) one shitty story;
2) liberal amounts of crappy script;
3) mix in lousy director;
$) PROFIT!!!
Repeat steps 1) through $) for Episodes 2 and 3.
Even in Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart's Zauberflöte (Magical Flute) opera (1791), for example, you get a pretty typical archetype 1 Pamino and archetype 2 Papageno.
I'm sure if I wasn't tired, I could also dig out some old greek myth I've studied presenting the same structure.
Such widespread occurance will probably mean that the myth is very old and did travel with humanity.
Probably, Ughr and Onkr did already tell such tales, when they got tired smashing clubs on each other's head and sat down around the fire,...
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
... when the kids who grew up with the second trilogy are in their early twenties, and realize they don't have to listen to the old generation any more. For them, the second trilogy will seem great through the eyes of their childhood, while the first trilogy will just seem camp.
After the fifth time Jar Jar said "How Wude!" it became apparent Lucas had completely given up on any semblance of craftsmanship. Not only was a lot of dialog recycled, but even R2D2's beeps and whistles simplified, he might have had a vocabulary of 3 or 4 responses (compare R2D2's "speech" in ep 4 vs. ep 5).
Other things were extremely annoying, such as using an off-the shelf SR-71 Blackbird plastic testors model as the Nubian - even the same suggests the original - NO IMAGINATION AT ALL. Don't blame me just because I happen to recognize a Lockheed aircraft that I am annoyed. The paper-thin plot depth & Teletubbies-level conversation tells us who the movies were aimed at - it wasn't adults.
Certainly an empty-headed child can find "childlike wonder" in any Star Wars episode, but the same child can be fascinated & play for hours with an empty cardboard box, I was hoping for a little more depth from a "science fiction" movie.