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?"
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?
The Wookie christmas special didnt help either.
and realized the original trilogy was never that great after all.
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.
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!!
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.
Shutupshutupshutup! He might readWell, no, but still, someone might tell him...
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.
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.
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.
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.