Slashdot Mirror


Star Wars TV Show Tainted By Memories of Jar Jar

bowman9991 writes "Can George Lucas' new Star Wars TV series, the first Star Wars spin off with real actors, atone for the flawed follow-ups to his original classics? Producer Rick McCallum calls the new series 'much darker,' a 'much more character-based series' and 'more adult,' while George Lucas himself calls it more like the first Star Wars film. The new TV show takes place in the 'dark times' between the last prequel Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith and Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope, when most of the Jedi and anti-emperor politicians were hunted down and killed. The characters of Boba Fett, C-3PO, and the Emperor Palpatine will return, and casting has now begun. Mark Hamill, the actor who played Luke Skywalker from the original movies, believes George Lucas lost his way, 'making it bigger and bigger and bigger and bigger until you're just exploding with special effects all over the screen like some fireworks display,' but thinks the new show is a 'positive' step forward. Hopefully George Lucas can wipe the memory of Jar Jar Binks, Anakin and Padme's romance, his shameless merchandising, and some lame attempts at humor from everyone's minds once and for all."

474 comments

  1. OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by judolphin · · Score: 1

    Hopefully, this show will get it right, and have a little bit of depth to it.

    --
    The Institute of Incomplete Research has determined that 9 of out 10
    1. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by altoz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      if by depth you mean CG animation in the background, yes, it will.

      if by depth you mean actual storytelling, i'm afraid this won't. if episodes 1-3 proved anything, it's that lucas just doesn't know how to tell a good story unless he's ripping off kurasawa.

    2. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Rary · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hopefully, this show will get it right, and have a little bit of depth to it.

      Well, for starters, it is set in the best possible time frame. Rather than the time of the wooden Jedi Council and the useless Senate holding endless meetings, it's set in the time of the rise of the Rebel Alliance. There's so much potential for a good show in that era.

      Also, George plans to hand the reins over to someone else after writing and producing the first season. So, it might have a slow start, but the possibility of a decent series growing out of it is actually fairly high — depending, of course, on who takes over in season two.

      --

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

    3. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      don't have seen a kurosawa ripoff until you watch a sergio leone's western.

    4. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Dachannien · · Score: 5, Funny

      Mark Hamill is probably just bitter because he never did get those power converters.

    5. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Morricone's music is anyway much better than John Williams' :)

    6. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He should give it to Joss Whedon.

      That way he could subtly retrofit Firefly's untold storylines in.

    7. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by jalefkowit · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Assuming it survives to season two. One season is plenty of time for Lucas to drive it into the side of a mountain.

    8. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      John Williams? I thought all the music in Star Wars was by Gustav Holst!

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    9. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      No there isn't. It's a fertile ground for a movie, maybe a movie trilogy, not an unending episodic series in which every forty minutes there comes a time when "everything goes back how it was."

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    10. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by natehoy · · Score: 1

      Joss Whedon...

      So you're saying that the Jedi will now consist largely of beautiful women who dress like wild west characters and are able to change personalities at will?

      What would this new series be called?

      Dollfly Wars? Firewars House? Firedoll Wars? Flying Stardoll Firewars?

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    11. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by ex_ottoyuhr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For some reason, I have a bad feeling about that.

    12. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by cptnapalm · · Score: 3, Funny

      Copying anyone other than Kurosawa is ripping off that person.

      Copying Kurosawa is making something more awesome than it has any business being.

    13. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by hazydave · · Score: 1

      Well... yeah, it could. The best possible case is that George Lucas takes on the role of "executive producer" or some such. Maybe even suggests some story ideas, or Star Wars Universe ground rules. But really, he needs to do this from a galaxy far, far away from any actual work on any actual scripts.

      The first rumors of a Star Wars TV show had Kevin Smith leading the project. This would be great.. particularly because "Star Wars" would now be set in New Jersey, rather than that afore-allusioned-to galaxy. Or maybe they'll save that for "Star Wars: 2014"... which will feature Boba Fett and Master Yoda, riding around the Garden State on golden motorcycles, solving individual problems, while the rest of the rebel fleet hides somewhere, for no particular reason other than to save money on FX shots.

      But, particularly if they do it as a Star-Trek style episodic rather than a Babylon 5-style serial, they should make like the old Twilight Zone and Star Trek:TOS folks and solicit stories from actual writers. Otherwise, they had better find some spectacular staff writers, or they'll wind up as boring as most of the post-TOS Star Treks were. Sure, they had a few good stories in there, but way too many "holodeck malfunction" tales, and way, way, way, way too many deus ex machina endings.

      --
      -Dave Haynie
    14. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Weren't Episodes 1-3 also set in a best possible time frame before they saw the light of day? The only way this could be good would be if it were left to the imagination.

    15. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Ybrog · · Score: 1

      Like Battlestar Galactica?

      --

      bleh

    16. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by hazydave · · Score: 3, Interesting

      But Kurosawa himself admittedly ripped off John Ford. Nothing's really made in a vacuum. Ok, apparently, Star Wars: Episode 1 was... so I'll restate: nothing good is made in a vacuum.

      And since I didn't see it here, if you didn't like "Phantom Menace", you need to see this truly epic review: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI&feature=player_embedded.
      If you did like it, you still need to watch, do that you can fully realize, to quote the review, "what an idiot you are".

      --
      -Dave Haynie
    17. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Things don't go back to how they were, that's the point. It's a transitional period, where the Rebel Alliance is forming, the remaining Jedi are being hunted down and exterminated and the Empire is consolidating. There is lots of scope for episodes that change major things.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    18. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by stonedcat · · Score: 1

      As great of an idea as this is and as awesome as the show would be, the network would cancel it because they don't understand.

      --
      You can't take the sky from me.
    19. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by altoz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, for starters, it is set in the best possible time frame...

      Are you kidding me? The prequels had so much potential, a great subtext for plots and whatnot. Think about it. The reason Lucas made the films in the first place is because everyone was curious about how Darth Vader became Darth Vader. If that's not a good setup to a story, I don't know what is. The corruption of Anakin Skywalker is an amazing setup for a good story. Instead, it was Lucas that bogged down the prequels with useless CG, pointless Senate meetings and a Jedi Council that really wasn't anything more than a showcase for Yoda. Lucas was the one that felt the need to recycle every character from the first films.

      Put a talented writer like Joss Whedon on a project with such clear boundaries and he would have made an amazing film. We could have seen the slow moral corruption of an innocent Jedi. The seduction to the dark side by the emperor. A realistic romance between Anakin and Padme. Several brand new characters that would have depth to them and interesting plot twists could have been made all around. Instead we got a train wreck full of discombobulated stories about characters that no one finds interesting. In short, the story was set up well by episodes 4-6. Lucas just blew every advantage he had in Episode 1. He had three fat pitches down the middle and he swung and missed every one.

      Compare that to the setup for this series. You have an already evil Darth Vader hunting down Jedi. Somehow, the emperor is going to show his evilness to the world such that rebels will start rising up. You think senate hearings are boring? How else are you going to show any protest by rebelling planets? Remember that the emperor doesn't dissolve the senate until ep. 4. What about action? The Jedi are mostly already dead. Yoda and Obiwan are supposed to be hiding. What can you anchor the story around? Some Jedi that's running away? A planet that keeps getting oppressed (how exactly? through trade embargos)? It's not obvious and not easy to tell a good story in such a setting. This is like a slider away that you have to hit. A single is possible. A strike is more likely.

    20. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No there isn't. It's a fertile ground for a movie, maybe a movie trilogy, not an unending episodic series in which every forty minutes there comes a time when "everything goes back how it was."

      On the other hand, you can have a series with a major story arc that gets advanced. Regardless of whatever else you think about Bablyon 5, it very much was not a collection of unconnected episodes where the setting was re-initialized after the closing credits of each episode. Another recent example, although to a somewhat lesser extent, would be Farscape.

    21. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by mujadaddy · · Score: 1

      everyone was curious about how Darth Vader became Darth Vader

      Citation needed

      --
      Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
      "Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
    22. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by srpape · · Score: 1

      Just because it has potential doesn't mean George can't screw it up.
      Maybe having a smaller budget will actually improve the special effects frenzy, but he can still screw up the plot.

      I hope he proves me wrong.

    23. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by GMFTatsujin · · Score: 2, Funny

      You know Lucas won't be able to keep himself from fucking with establish events. In this version, Luke goes to Tashi Station first.

    24. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Hadlock · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Perhaps 15 years ago I would have followed this story more closely. Lucas didn't have any quality control for the animated series (of which I only watched 3 before losing interest) and you'd have to pay me to get me to waste 30 minutes watching this. This is probably the last Star Wars tv series headline I ever click on.
       
      However, I'd love to see a Star Wars "reboot" [b]without any Lucas input[/b]. Get the writing crews from BSG and the Batman reboots plus the BSG production crew together and now we're cooking with gas.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    25. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by cgenman · · Score: 1

      Young Indiana Jones was actually pretty good. I have fond memories of that show, and feel it didn't get the run that it deserved. And television is a far dirtier process that should allow other people's creativities to flow into what goes on-screen. Maybe that will make up for Lucas's atrocious dialog. Let's hope the actors can ad-lib.

      That having been said, wanting a 400 run show is just asinine. Planning for 2 or 3 parallel spinoffs 3 years down the line is the kind of bloated, dillute thinking that put all the good parts of Episode 1 - 3 right at the end. They need to make the first season worth watching, and coming up with enough compelling material for 15 hours is incredibly difficult. That's what they should be focusing on, not taking good bits here and there and saving them for the sequels.

    26. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by dangitman · · Score: 1

      There's so much potential for a good show in that era.

      Naturally, this means it will almost certainly be screwed up beyond belief. It's always the things with the most potential that fail the hardest, while those that seem improbable and unlikely are the most successful.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    27. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Azghoul · · Score: 1

      I, for one, am okay with your supposition.

    28. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Asic+Eng · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ok, so a movie about space operates in a vacuum, that's not really a fair complaint, is it?

    29. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Moheeheeko · · Score: 1

      ITS A TRAP!

    30. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah, George Lucas is really creative enough to give us another B5. It most certainly won't be "Hercules: the Legendary Journeys: But in Spaaace: Again" Where the heroes will definitely not get themselves into a situation where they end up on some (conveniently cheap for sfx) crapsack world filled with arboreal rainforest and corrugated tin shanty-towns (brilliantly founded in played out mines for some reason...) forever.

      I mean, sure you could do it right. It's possible to do another B5 or Space: Above and Beyond, but Star Wars is a Franchise and one thing that established franchises do not do is take risks. And one of those "risks" is pinning down an ending so you can't "keep it going" and milk as much profit as possible. (ironically guaranteeing a short, unprofitable run. Doctor Who notwithstanding, TV audiences are not nearly as forgiving of bad sci fi as Movie audiences.)

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    31. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Haxzaw · · Score: 2, Funny

      If he's bitter, it is more likely because Carrie Fisher ended up being his sister.

    32. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Electric cookers are more efficient, and that's what the force is purified energy. Get with the game mang.

    33. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      He's not Luke Skywalker to me anymore. He's now the Joker.

    34. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Richy_T · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Only if you have the Batman writers and BSG production crew beat the BSG writers to death with baseball bats.

    35. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Rary · · Score: 1

      Assuming it survives to season two.

      Which is why I'll wait it out, patiently, and only if/when Season Two starts will I begin watching Season One.

      --

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

    36. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by halcyon1234 · · Score: 1

      Also, George plans to hand the reins over to someone else after writing and producing the first season.

      He already did that. It was called Star Wars: Clone Wars (no, not that one).

      It was absolutely awesome.

    37. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by stonefry · · Score: 1

      John Williams? I thought all the music in Star Wars was by Gustav Holst!

      Burn!

    38. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by stonefry · · Score: 1

      How about Buffy the Dolljedi Flying Firewalker?

    39. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by stonefry · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't care how the stuff that I like was made, I just like the stuff that I like.

    40. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone needs to hook him up with an Oscillation Overthruster, then.

      Buckaroo, where are you?

    41. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by shmlco · · Score: 1

      Not really, in that they suffer from the "Titanic" problem: You know the boat is going to sink. The only real question is whether or not you can make the process interesting. Titanic was so-so. Apollo 13 did it very well. Star Wars sucked.

      Many people attribute this to Jar Jar, but my money is on Anakin. Lucas turned Darth Vader -- Darth Vader -- into a petulant spoiled brat full of teenage angst and who was always whining about being misunderstood and about how he wasn't being given enough attention, and so on, and so forth.

      The fact that the Emperor could corrupt a child isn't a story, anyone can corrupt a child. They lack the experience to know better. Now if Anakin had been an adult, with an adult's background, knowledge, and convictions... and THEN had been corrupted and turned...

      THAT would have been a story.

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    42. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Tekfactory · · Score: 1

      You misspelled Wagner and a whole lot of other composers

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_music

    43. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      No, that was by Deep Purple.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    44. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you sure you don't mean suppository? Because that's what GP should do with his ideas.

    45. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      The reason Lucas made the films in the first place is because everyone was curious about how Darth Vader became Darth Vader.

      Speak for yourself. In Star Wars, Darth Vader was the bad guy. He wore black. He did mean things. He was a scary guy. Every fable has a bad guy, and in Star Wars, Darth Vader was it. Never, not for one moment, did I ever think to myself, "Gee, I wonder what Darth Vader was like when he was a little kid?"

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    46. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by socceroos · · Score: 1

      At least, have the guys who wrote seasons 3, 4 and 5 beaten to death.

    47. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, it'll have to be over Lucas' dead body.

      Anyone got a shotgun?

    48. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      Pretty sure it's the same group of writers from pilot to season 5. That's the problem with writing a series that has a clearly defined storyline. Unless you can pull a gilligans island it stagnates really quick if you try and drag it out.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    49. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd suggest having the series centered around a small group of people that are trying to start the rebellion, trying to out senator palpatine as evil, sabotage imperial plans/bases, find out about the secret weapon the empire is building, help the remaining jedi that are being hunted by Vader all while being chased relentlessly by the empire and trying to get people to join them in their fight.

      Plenty of ground there to make a decent show, but very much doubt they will manage. Can they instead just give it to HBO to make it?

    50. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Sleen · · Score: 1

      heh mars

    51. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fair enough, but weren't you interested in the Vader/Obi Wan backstory? Not even a little curious? Turning a Jedi into a Sith isn't a bad plot in principle. The prequels had potential. Lucas failed to find it.

    52. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Clemsonuee · · Score: 1

      A baseball reference on Slashdot? You must be new here.

    53. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by DrStoooopid · · Score: 1

      If you paid attention in the first 3 movies, you wouldn't HAVE to be curious about how Vader came to be.

      Face it, some things are best left to the imagination, and Darth Vader's origins was one of those things.

      The second 3 movies, had great potential, but as Mark Hamill said, Lucas lost his way. Hell the extended universe in book form is more exciting than the 2nd three movies. I'd be more interested if he decided to set the TV series either in the time of the Solo twins (or even after) or back during the time of the Old Republic...or even the Sith wars.

      I used to have nightmares about Darth Vader when I was a kid back in 1978 when the original came out. Imagine my disappointment when I found out he was just a whiny emo kid that beat up his girlfriend.

      --
      There are 2 groups of people you can make fun of on the Internet without fear of attack. The illiterate, and the Amish.
    54. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Phoghat · · Score: 1
      Oh please. Like 7 Samurai = The Magnificent 7 is a bad thing?

      OTOH, " Mark Hamill, the actor who played Luke Skywalker from the original movies, believes George Lucas lost his way, 'making it bigger and bigger and bigger and bigger until you're just exploding with special effects all over the screen like some fireworks display,' but thinks the new show is a 'positive' step forward"

      What makes him so smart? Lucky guy, in the right place at the right time.

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    55. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by tbannist · · Score: 1

      The problems with the Star Wars prequel are both pretty deep and pretty simple:

      The movies were treated as a mechanism for delivering special effects. The stories were dumbed down for American children (or more accurately, American parents). What you were left with was a series of special effects segments that had to be linked together into a somewhat comprehensible story. Thus the real problem is that the prequel stories are less important that action scenes and it shows.

      I expect the TV show will be 40 minutes of "story" whose sole purpose is to lead up to one or more fight scenes about half of which will involve light sabers. The way George Lucas explained it as being more "talky" only serves to further lower my expectations.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    56. Re:OMG, Luke Skywalker is right! by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, it didn't have a clearly defined storyline. Moore was making it up as he went along and that's really why it suffered. He wrote himself into too many corners.

  2. Much like the Holocaust by Trinexx · · Score: 0

    Jar-Jar will never be forgotten.

    1. Re:Much like the Holocaust by Carewolf · · Score: 4, Funny

      Jar-Jar will never be forgotten.

      Who??

      And there are no prequels, and there is no way to ever make any. Any possible existence of Star Wars prequels have been curiously eliminated in the space time continuum. Interestingly the same applies to the much later stand-alone sci-fi movie Matrix (in case anyone wondered why no sequels were ever made). No one knows why this stands as such immutable facts though.

    2. Re:Much like the Holocaust by VShael · · Score: 1

      Interestingly the same applies to the much later stand-alone sci-fi movie Matrix

      Yeah, well, while it might be fun to speculate on what a Matrix sequel, or even trilogy would have looked like, it's probably a good thing that they didn't make any. I mean, have you seen Speed Racer? Chances are the Warchowski brothers would have f***ed it up with pretty special effects, piss poor plotting, and live-action versions of Japanese animation. And who would want that?

      Great sci fi movies don't always need sequels. Blade Runner doesn't need a sequel, neither does the Matrix.

    3. Re:Much like the Holocaust by Stregano · · Score: 1

      I don't think you shold be repressing your memories. They will come back and something awful might happen

      --
      The world is how you make it
    4. Re:Much like the Holocaust by daid303 · · Score: 1

      Star Wars prequels.

      The biggest hoax in human history.

    5. Re:Much like the Holocaust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So I heard you like Ewoks...

    6. Re:Much like the Holocaust by Sobrique · · Score: 1

      The same could be said of Dune. As we all know well, there were only ever 3 Dune books.

    7. Re:Much like the Holocaust by MadJo · · Score: 1

      I, for one, am glad that there were no sequels to the matrix, it would only have made the whole story worse. I can just see them try to pull off a biblical-type story with Neo as some sort of prodigal 'son'. Including a (second) rebirth. *shudders at the thought* No, better leave well enough alone. :)

    8. Re:Much like the Holocaust by hattig · · Score: 3, Funny

      What? Doesn't "Bobby, milkman to the Emperor's pet cat OF DUNE" count?

    9. Re:Much like the Holocaust by Kokuyo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, imagine a combined flashback of Matrix sequels and Star Wars prequels. I shudder at the mere thought.

      Me, I have this dark corner in my mind where those things are huddled together being watched by all my childhood heros. One step out of line, and BAM, they'll open a can of whoopass on those things that should never have been.

      I remember them. But I control the pain and fear, not the other way round.

    10. Re:Much like the Holocaust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, its a conspiracy man. Just a way for the man to get us into the movie theaters to controls us. Think of it... Government asked George Lucas to create another series to help keep the US out of recession and help control the populace so they would not backlash on the government cuz of its mismanagement.

      They all knew...

    11. Re:Much like the Holocaust by garg0yle · · Score: 1

      Or like a mythical fourth Indiana Jones movie... That would be so awesome, seeing Indy one final time, but I guess Harrison Ford is getting a bit old now.

      --
      Modding "-1, Troll" is not a proper response if you disagree with me. Try reason.
    12. Re:Much like the Holocaust by lgw · · Score: 1

      Was this the proposed short film in which the defenders carefully constructed powered battle armor with no actual armor? Yeah, that was never made, there's some law of physics that prevents you from being strupider than "The A-Team".

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    13. Re:Much like the Holocaust by natehoy · · Score: 1

      I'm also curious as to why only one sequel was done to Terminator, and "Alien" never really got much of a followup either.

      Oh, well, at least they didn't turn Lord of the Rings into a movie series.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    14. Re:Much like the Holocaust by ex_ottoyuhr · · Score: 1

      It's easy to see why they abandoned that series, though -- it was jinxed. I heard it was supposed to be a trilogy, plus either six or nine subsequent movies, but apparently no one dared attempt a third film after George Lucas was run over by a speeding cheeseburger-mobile in 1979, and Leigh Brackett and Lawrence Kasdan were both killed in a freak Tauntaun accident...

    15. Re:Much like the Holocaust by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Just as there are no movies starring the character of John Rambo after First Blood, or any sequels to Lethal Weapon. Thank goodness they stopped both at one, or you could just tell it would have devolved into some lame cartoon.

      Of course some movies I believe were paid for by the government to have a way to torture suspects without leaving a mark, such as "Grease 2: Electric Bugaloo", "Battlefield Earth" and "Freddy Got Fingered". Of course they should be ashamed of themselves, because being forced to watch even one of those movies, much less all three, should be a crime against humanity.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    16. Re:Much like the Holocaust by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      Oblig. XKCD reference: http://xkcd.com/566/

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    17. Re:Much like the Holocaust by delinear · · Score: 1

      It's the same way they only ever made two Indiana Jones movies - Raiders and Last Crusade. It's weird because you'd think if they made two great movies that were a box office hit, they'd definitely go for at least a trilogy, if not try and squeeze four out of it. But nope, definitely only ever two made. Fact.

    18. Re:Much like the Holocaust by magnusrex1280 · · Score: 1

      Ok, I take issue with this. What's wrong with Temple of Doom?

    19. Re:Much like the Holocaust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Temple of what now? Temple of Doom?

      Never heard of it.

    20. Re:Much like the Holocaust by rleibman · · Score: 1

      My kingdom for modpoints!

    21. Re:Much like the Holocaust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, I take issue with this. What's wrong with Temple of Doom?

      Other than it sucked? Nothing.

    22. Re:Much like the Holocaust by Carnildo · · Score: 1

      And there are no prequels, and there is no way to ever make any. Any possible existence of Star Wars prequels have been curiously eliminated in the space time continuum.

      I've heard that George Lucas made some big-budget fanfiction, though. Any idea how that turned out?

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
  3. Hey, Polyanna by geminidomino · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hopefully George Lucas can wipe the memory of Jar Jar Binks, Anakin and Padme's romance, his shameless merchandising, and some lame attempts at humor from everyone's minds once and for all.

    Don't bet on it.

    1. Re:Hey, Polyanna by dkf · · Score: 5, Funny

      Don't bet on it.

      There are worse things. The Star Wars Holiday Special. Absolutely nothing in episodes I-III is as bad as that...

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    2. Re:Hey, Polyanna by Rary · · Score: 1

      There is no such thing as the Star Wars Holiday Special. There is no such thing as the Star Wars Holiday Special. There is no such thing as the Star Wars Holiday Special.

      My god, the memory burns in my mind.

      --

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

    3. Re:Hey, Polyanna by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I consider myself lucky never to have watched more than 10 minutes of Star Wars. I know lots of people like Star Wars and that's fine with me, I don't mean to start any flame wars, but to me Star Wars seemed like what the past (a century before Christ) would have looked like if suddenly they stumbled upon some 1970's robot technology and learned how to use it through trial and error. My opinion of Star Wars is reflected in what I believe Star Wars should have been titled instead:
      "Spartacus meets the Muppet rejects: the robot years"

      To me anything Star Trek based (except the Scott Bakula crap) is way better than Star Wars.

      I will probably get modded down by some mod in his Chewbacca costume, but I just wanted to express my opinion without insulting anyone, except for Scott Bakula, that retard has really tainted Star Trek for me.

    4. Re:Hey, Polyanna by naz404 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Speaking of Star Wars "side-movies", you can find a copy of the spliced-together reconstruction of the ultra-rare official mockumentary "Return of the Ewok" starring Warwick Davis and the ROTJ cast here: http://www.gappon.com/star-wars-return-of-the-ewok-1982-583635.html

      More info about it at Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Return_of_the_Ewok

      It's not available commercially anywhere, so I guess sharing the download link is historical/digital preservation and not piracy.

    5. Re:Hey, Polyanna by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      Anakin and Padme's romance

      To do that, wouldn’t he have to kill off Luke and Leia?

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    6. Re:Hey, Polyanna by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I don't think romance causes pregnancy. Maybe they could (for some clumsily set up and obviously telegraphed reason) down a bottle of Tihaar and, ... you know... just do it.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    7. Re:Hey, Polyanna by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      Then he’d have to re-write that part of the movies. Getting people to “forget” didn’t necessarily imply re-writing the movies.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    8. Re:Hey, Polyanna by Tatarize · · Score: 2, Funny

      I don't know, if the Star Wars holiday Special existed it would probably be as terrible as the chemistry between Padmé and Anakin if they existed.

      --

      It is no longer uncommon to be uncommon.
    9. Re:Hey, Polyanna by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Wait for the second Star Wars Holiday Special. With Jar Jar’s gay family, lots of shameless merchandising plugs, and the worst singing in human history.

      And THEN wait for 4Chan to turn it into a porn film. Guess what the shamless plugs will represent. ;)
      (Reminds me of that troll with the greased-up Yoda doll, and this . [If you have a weak heart, don’t click!])

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    10. Re:Hey, Polyanna by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Getting people to "forget" didn't necessarily imply re-writing the movies.

      So instead of the characters getting drunk the audience should?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    11. Re:Hey, Polyanna by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      If the TV show is good enough, maybe the audience won’t be driven to alcohol.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    12. Re:Hey, Polyanna by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Getting people to "forget" didn't necessarily imply re-writing the movies.

      So instead of the characters getting drunk the audience should?

      I've tried it. Doesn't make them any less agonizing.

    13. Re:Hey, Polyanna by mlush · · Score: 1

      There is no such thing as the Star Wars Holiday Special. There is no such thing as the Star Wars Holiday Special. There is no such thing as the Star Wars Holiday Special.

      My god, the memory burns in my mind.

      There is as ever an xkcd about that..... and because noone ever listens

    14. Re:Hey, Polyanna by Elbowgeek · · Score: 1

      Call me a complete nutter, but I laughed til I cracked a rib at the special. It really does reach the "So bad it's good" threshold for me; perhaps not for everyone, but I loved it.

      However, Jar-Jar... No, just no...

      --
      Who is this delectable creature with an insatiable love of the dead?
    15. Re:Hey, Polyanna by d3ac0n · · Score: 1

      Heh,

      I NEARLY did what the alt-text on that one says. I stopped before actually watching it though. I just burned it to DVD, labeled it and stuck it on the shelf.

      What can I say; I'm a collector.

      --
      Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
    16. Re:Hey, Polyanna by formfeed · · Score: 1

      Well, since it's supposed to be with real actors and "darker", JarJar will not only come back, but we will also be introduced to Aunt Jemima Binks, who make 'em dambest pancakes in the whole 'hood. - Happy African American history month everyone.

    17. Re:Hey, Polyanna by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Considering the way Anakin was portrayed in those movies, I imagine it would take more than one bottle for anyone to want to sleep with him. I never thought I would see a human actor outclassed by CGI creatures, but there you go.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    18. Re:Hey, Polyanna by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No need to wipe the memory of anything, because the prequels were fantastic. Everyone knows it except those who jumped on the Lucas-bashing bandwagon. Even those people plopped down their $10 to see each and every prequel, probably more than once. Jar Jar, Anakin/Padme, etc were a perfect addition to the saga, and anything else GL wants to do is just fine. As for "shameless merchandising"....man you people crack me up. Is he not supposed to sell things? Is he not supposed to make money? Why is it okay for every other movie to showcase toys and collectibles for a profit, but yet when GL does it, it becomes "shameless"? LOL....keep on bashing, you know you'll be glued to the TV when the series comes out.

    19. Re:Hey, Polyanna by inKubus · · Score: 1

      Obligitory link here. Enjoy?

      --
      Cool! Amazing Toys.
    20. Re:Hey, Polyanna by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      You can't prove anything with a sample of one.

      So obviously, I'll have to give it a go sometime. Purely in the interest of science, you understand.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    21. Re:Hey, Polyanna by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I never thought I would see a human actor outclassed by CGI creatures

      I've seen human actors outclassed by the scenery. Roger Moore, Nicolas Cage and Paris Hilton are the first that spring to mind.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    22. Re:Hey, Polyanna by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Billiant!

      I'll notify your next of kin.

    23. Re:Hey, Polyanna by Provocateur · · Score: 1

      [waveshand]This isn't the reboot you're looking for. Move along.[/waveshand]

      --
      WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
  4. Frist Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Star Wars franchise like Star Trek is beginning to feel a little worn out. Time to try something new.

    1. Re:Frist Post by ircmaxell · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I wonder if Lucas is going to do what's been happening to most other movie series (James Bond, Batman, Spider Man, Star Trek, etc) and do a ground up restart on the series. Take it back to a darker, rougher and more realistic level...

      I'm not saying that's what it needs, but just seems to be the theme of late in Hollywood...

      --
      If a man isn't willing to take some risk for his opinions, either his opinions are no good or he's no good
    2. Re:Frist Post by Sobrique · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually Star Wars very definitely has potential to do 'dark and nasty' and do it well. I mean, think about the key themes in there. It's about a rebellion - freedom fighters, or perhaps 'terrorists'? It's about an oppressive regime, spreading out and being racist (ok, species-ist) across the galaxy.
      You'd have plenty of framework to make a political commentary on the war on terror. Mix in a little bit of fundamental differences in culture - the Empire plugs one ideology to people who just don't think that way - and maybe mix in a bit of crooked shenanigans, spaceships and just a shade of jedi mythos/persecution. (Not convinced it needs it though - way better to have a couple of 'dark jedi' bad guys, and have the good guys running scared).
      Could be pretty good. Fairly sure it'll never happen mind - George Lucas will want creative control, and he'll go all fluffy and cute.

    3. Re:Frist Post by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      I think right up until Enterprise Star Trek was doing a pretty decent job of keeping things fresh. Actually, hell, even with Enterprise they were doing a decent job:

      • ToS: Five year deep-space mission
      • TaS: Never saw, so... I don't know, actually.
      • TNG: Regular old "mission of the week" Star Trek, does much to expand the universe
      • DS9: Changes the setting from a ship moving around to a station; first Star Trek series to have story arcs that span multiple seasons
      • VOY: One lone Starfleet ship in a completely unexplored sector of space
      • ENT: A flashback to the time before the Federation was formed

      There's still tons of stuff they could do and do well:

      • A show about Section 31, the Federation's version of the CIA/Tal Shiar/Obsidian Order
      • A show about Starfleet Academy, think Dawson's Creek with phasers and shuttlecraft
      • A show about the Federation in the "Temporal Cold War" period, timeships and all

      Sadly, the mishandling of Enterprise really screwed the pooch for future prospects.

      The one hope we had - the reboot movie - fucked things up too IMO. They had the chance to undo all of the time paradox, technobabble bullshit and actually make a coherent story. Instead, in the first goddamned movie we already have alternate universe shit going on. (If you can't tell, I hated all of the "Mirror Universe" episodes as well as nearly any episode or arc involving time travel with the exception of that huge-ass temporal cannon spaceship in Voyager.)

      If they did Star Trek in the style of the reimagined BSG - where it doesn't have a whole buttload of technobabble, shaky physics, and continuity errors - then that show would be wildly succesful. But instead, just like comic books, we're going to be befuddled with the same messed-up continuity for decades to come.

    4. Re:Frist Post by Artifakt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Star Wars veered away from 'dark and nasty' when they shied from the Midiclorian stuff. If Jedi were 'superior' because of an innate biological feature, the struggle became one where both sides were feeding the common people a mass of propaganda, and moral issues would be a mix of gray tones at best. It would still be possible to show one side as having better reasons to justify the propaganda than the other, and even to create audience empathy for the Jedi - after all, even if both sides were manipulating the general populace, only one side ended up blowing up whole planets. Still, the idea of Jedi who don't like to admit it's all about the Midiclorians even to themselves, and who take the 'controlling your emotions' philosophy to dangerous extremes as a result, would be a great basis for dense, nuanced scripts that would give good actors a chance to shine and, it's hoped, be remembered come Emmy time.
              Not gonna happen, of course.
           

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    5. Re:Frist Post by lgw · · Score: 1

      In case you were lucky enough to miss it, the prequels were Lucas's politcal commentary on the war on terror. And his attempt at a dark story - the protagonist killed the younglings, after all. I'm sure it will continue. Maybe someone will watch it and post a review on SLashdot.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    6. Re:Frist Post by natehoy · · Score: 1

      Remember that the whole purpose of the Star Trek "Reboot" was to form a new timeline so they could finally and completely destroy the Trek Canonical that every Trekkie has on the tip of his/her tongue. The new series happens in a completely new universe, starting with Kirk getting his ship (probably), and when the Gorn appears on screen no one can pull out their (ok, "our" - grin) detailed notes on Trek and say there are four too many pimples on his left testicle and that his growl is 1/1000 octave too low.

      Using a time warp was a cheap trick, but it was very effective in getting the job done. The Trek universe we grew up watching has been relegated to "parallel universe" status and needs never be referred to again in regards to the new series.

      "Lens Flare" Abrams is now free to change the curtains in the Ready Room without invoking a Trekstorm. And pretty much any other damned thing he wants to change.

      And that's actually good. If we're going to have a reboot, it needs to bring a fresh perspective. The old Trek universe was collapsing under its own weight.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    7. Re:Frist Post by Battle_Ratt · · Score: 1

      You'd have plenty of framework to make a political commentary on the war on terror.

      Please no more political commentary on the "war on terror" from Hollywood. Pretty please.

    8. Re:Frist Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, just because it's contemporary social commentary doesn't make it clever or good automatically. In fact, it would probably weaken the story, relative to the originals, because the originals try to tell a timeless tale of good vs. evil instead of an allegory that might lose its meaning in 10-15 years.

    9. Re:Frist Post by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      You don't need midiclorians for that. It was shown in the original movies that strength with the Force was inherited (which made it odd that the Jedi had to be celibate in the prequels), so they were already a hereditary oligarchy. Vader was responsible for hunting down anyone with Force sensitivity; it wasn't like you could just get anyone off the street and train them to be a Jedi, you needed an innate ability.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    10. Re:Frist Post by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      The sad thing is is that it shouldn't be too hard for a paid staff of writers to maintain continuity. There's no excuse in this day and age.

      Battlestar Galatica, for instance, had a series bible for all writers to refer to. It had everything from detailed backgrounds on the characters to hard facts.

      So let's take a standard Star Trek fact - the only appropriate matter/antimatter intermix ratio is 1:1. Yet I recall seeing in a few episodes here and there that different intermix ratios were used. As I understand it, this wouldn't work at all.

      They need to think a little more long-term when they put a fact onscreen. If they say that the trip from Point A to Point B is three weeks at Warp 9, then it should be a mathematically correct length of time for Warp 6. But I'm sure lots of mistakes like this were made.

      I do hope that if a new series comes out they give it the proper treatment. Hammer out all of these important facts in pre-production. If there's a continuity error on-screen, the Trekkies will spot it.

    11. Re:Frist Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't need midiclorians for that. It was shown in the original movies that strength with the Force was inherited (which made it odd that the Jedi had to be celibate in the prequels), so they were already a hereditary oligarchy.

      What you are missing is that it was explicitly stated that the Jedi were forbidden romantic love, not sex. So while they might have been celibate, they didn't technically have to be chaste. Although, I really don't think the prospect of a series of emotionally-void hook-ups would've been appealing to most Jedi. This is because even the most elitist Jedi being would have to do a lot of rationalization to justify using other people purely as a means of personal sexual gratification. It just doesn't fit with their self-imposed role as society's ultimate protectors, counselors, and healers!

    12. Re:Frist Post by Rary · · Score: 1

      I wonder if Lucas is going to do what's been happening to most other movie series (James Bond, Batman, Spider Man, Star Trek, etc) and do a ground up restart on the series. Take it back to a darker, rougher and more realistic level...

      I think there is about a 0% chance of that ever happening. Which is too bad. Personally, I'd like to see it, although I'd like to see it done by someone who isn't George Lucas.

      --

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

    13. Re:Frist Post by d3ac0n · · Score: 1

      You'd have plenty of framework to make a political commentary on the war on terror

      NO. JUST. NO.

      Half of the problem with Ep1 was Lucas's infantile far-left obsession with the American politics of the day. ("Nute Gunray" as a bad guy? Good God that was LAME!) Watching it now just makes the "political commentary" look dated and silly.

      There have been PLENTY of films that have made "political commentary" on the WOT. ALL of them, save Avatar, have been complete and utter FLOPS.

      Why? Because Americans of the political center-left, center, center-right and right persuasions DO NOT want to watch a movie where the far-left preaches to us about how horrible America is and how stupid/greedy/racist/bigoted/homophobic/ugly/bad hair-ed/smelly and generally bad all Americans are. (except the "enlightened" far leftists, of course)

      The only reason Avatar is getting away with it is because it's such a special-effects extravaganza that people are able to overlook it's inherently stupid storyline. (That, and apparently WAY more Americans are into Furry Porn than anyone guessed.)

      If Lucas tries to pull this with the Star Wars series, it will end BEFORE the first season is done because NOBODY but the far-left Star Wars fans will watch it. Sorry, but that's not a large enough base to support a Star Wars sized series.

      Nothing against Far-Lefties. They are entitled to their opinions just like the rest of us. It's just that pretty much nobody else wants to watch those opinions squeezed out like shit-icing all over a perfectly good franchise.

      Keep the politics of the day OUT of Star Wars. It has it's own politics to deal with, no need to layer over our own (of ANY persuasion) on top.

      --
      Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
    14. Re:Frist Post by dummondwhu · · Score: 1

      The truly sad thing is that film/television makers can't just say, "Hey, we'd like to take everything in a little different direction that doesn't necessarily jive with the past," because people will act like someone shit in their Cheerios. Instead they have to add time line altering events to new movies for the purpose of getting around that. Not that I didn't like the movie, but people really do get a little overly wrapped up into franchise canon when it comes to Star Wars, Star Trek, etc.

    15. Re:Frist Post by Ltap · · Score: 1

      I always assumed that Jedi being celibate was just the stupidity of the Jedi Council and the rather wrongheaded philosophy that controlling your emotions means severing every emotional attachment (which might have been wise, considering Anakin's revenge-kill because of his mother...) In the EU this is more or less ignored, and random Force-sensitive kids are generally the children of some great Jedi who had a fling on a backwater planet.

      --
      Yet Another Tech Blog
      (but so much more, including game and movie reviews)
      http://yanteb.peasantoid.org
    16. Re:Frist Post by mqduck · · Score: 1

      spreading out and being racist (ok, species-ist)

      Actually, that's a real word.

      --
      Property is theft.
    17. Re:Frist Post by dwillden · · Score: 1

      I didn't realize Lucas was so Prophetic. Which he would have to be to support your theory as tPM came out in 1999 before Bush was even the Republican nominee for President. ATotK was in 2002 meaning it was mostly filmed prior to 9/11 and the start of the War on Terror. RotS is the one that was made mostly during the early stages of the war, and could thus be seen as making commentary on it.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    18. Re:Frist Post by natehoy · · Score: 1

      but people really do get a little overly wrapped up

      -1 severe understatement. :)

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    19. Re:Frist Post by dummondwhu · · Score: 1

      I was just trying to be kind. ;)

    20. Re:Frist Post by Zot+Quixote · · Score: 1

      Honestly, when it was all said and done, I'm a bit skeptical that BSG really did have a series bible.

    21. Re:Frist Post by lgw · · Score: 1

      Yep - the prequel trilogy was always intended to be a story of a republic falling due to a (litererally) manufactured war, though it's hard to be sure from the nonsensical plotline of I in this area. Lucas did his best to make III a contemporary political commentary - it's hard to say whether that made it any worse, as I'm not sure how it could be any worse.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    22. Re:Frist Post by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      Nope, it exists.

      I assume after all things Galactica are said and done it will be released in printed form to much fanfare. For now they can't because it still holds a lot of plot points that they can still use in future stories.

    23. Re:Frist Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You want dark? Do the Yuuzhan Vong invasion. Kill off Chewbacca and Anakin Solo, who was still just a kid. Show Jacen Solo going rogue and then dark side. It'll put Anakin, Sr.'s "fall" on the big screen to shame. Put _that_ on TV and call it Star Wars, then see what everybody thinks.

      I didn't care too much for the New Jedi Order series, but at least you can't complain there was no character development. And it seemed to last 400 episodes, too. Just what Lucas ordered. ;-)

      But, no, it will be fluffy and cuddly and cute, as you say. That's the world we live in now. We didn't wear seat belts in the back of station wagons over really big hills to get zero G thrills around the time Star Wars IV came out, now kids are in booster seats until they're 10.

    24. Re:Frist Post by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      Honestly, when it was all said and done, I'm a bit skeptical that BSG really did have a series bible.

      Sure it did. It was the _story_ they were making up on the fly, not "facts" like character backgrounds and how fast a ship was.

  5. Thanks a lot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Hopefully George Lucas can wipe the memory of Jar Jar Binks, Anakin and Padme's romance, his shameless merchandising, and some lame attempts at humor from everyone's minds once and for all."

    I had managed to block all that crap from my consciousness. That is, until you brought it up again just now. Thanks a lot - you can expect to see my therapist's bill.

    1. Re:Thanks a lot by tfm55x · · Score: 1

      Oh, but lest we forget the *first* attempt at a Star Wars television show. It might have been close to 30 years ago, and Lucas may want to officially deny it even exists, but the "Star Wars Holiday Special will forever more be burned into our collective memories. So let's hope the franchise doesn't get that out of hand again.

    2. Re:Thanks a lot by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      ...and the Ewok movies. We can't forget those.

      First live-action spinoff my *ss.

      So lets review...

            This will not infact by the "first live action spinoff".
            We have 1) The Holiday Special
                            2) The Ewok movies

      Hell, now that I put it like that Jar Jar seems f*cking inevitable.

      "moichandizing! moichandizing! moichandizing!"

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    3. Re:Thanks a lot by hack++slash · · Score: 1

      You forgot The Ewoks cartoon and Droids cartoon.

      --
      To do something right, you often have to roll up your sleeves and get busy.
    4. Re:Thanks a lot by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Ewoks and Droids weren't "live action".

      "Have you had your Threepeeos this morning?"

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    5. Re:Thanks a lot by Kokuyo · · Score: 1

      I just thought: A sequel to Spaceballs that revolves around making fun of sequels. Frankly, that might actually be very awesome ;).

    6. Re:Thanks a lot by natehoy · · Score: 1

      I thought Lucas did a good job of that with Episodes I, II, and III. Anything Brooks could do with that would be undoubtedly brilliant, but -1 Redundant.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    7. Re:Thanks a lot by RamonArjona · · Score: 1

      The Ewok movies were _awesome_ but were not a TV series. They were just two one-off movies, featuring a few people and a lot of muppets.

  6. Humm by Hognoxious · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hopefully George Lucas can wipe the memory of Jar Jar Binks, Anakin and Padme's romance, his shameless merchandising, and some lame attempts at humor from everyone's minds once and for all.

    I find your excess of faith disturbing.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    1. Re:Humm by maxume · · Score: 1

      "Shameless marketing" gives Lucas way to much credit; it assumes that he is in control of himself and cynically exploiting the Star Wars brand. I find it to be much more likely that he thought Jar Jar 'added' something to the 'vision' of the movie.

      (And if he still cares about money, he is completely nuts)

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:Humm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find your lack of faith disturbing.

    3. Re:Humm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find your lack of originality tedious.

  7. The Xmas Special Effect by Fiverx2 · · Score: 1

    As long as its better than the Xmas special that most of us try to forget, I'll give it a shot.

  8. Never mind prequels by rossdee · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We want sequels to Return of the Jedi. Wasn't he originally going to do 3 sets of trilogies: with the 3rd set later on, and the only common characters would be the 2 droids?

    1. Re:Never mind prequels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. Children of the Jedi was kind of good, though I must admit I am not a fan of movie-verse literature, as a rule.

      If not sequels, then what about an removed timeline? Kotor springs to mind as a place to start, but that would be kind of cheap. Maybe somewhere in between. What would really be exciting to me is the time when the Jedi were wiping out the Sith (causing the initial imbalance in metachlorient distribution [wth?]). I guess with less developed tech one has less room for a special effects fireworks display.

    2. Re:Never mind prequels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but that involved the Emperor surviving VI, only to be defeated in IX by Han and Leia's offspring. Can't be done now.

    3. Re:Never mind prequels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The storyline for what would have been the third trilogy was compressed into Return of the Jedi. There is no third trilogy waiting to be made.

    4. Re:Never mind prequels by TBoon · · Score: 1

      Among one of the things I've heard was that he said (at the time of making the prequels) that he didn't want to make episode 7-9 because he "would be too old for that" by the end of it... Guess he changed his mind, as well as the setting and format...

    5. Re:Never mind prequels by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      No, in the original 1980-1986 "trilogy of trilogies" plan (the reason they added the "Episode IV" to the title sequence of Star Wars in 1981) Lucas was going to produce three sets of movies of three each (three prequels and three sequels to the originals)--with R2D2 and C3PO being the only characters to consistently appear in all three sets of films. I think either you're joking or you got the "Han and Leia's kids fighting the emperor" things from the (much later) books--or from some Lucas revisionism (he's been about half-batshit crazy for many years now and makes all kinds of claims that contradict both his earlier statements and interviews from those who worked with him during the time of the originals).

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    6. Re:Never mind prequels by vegiVamp · · Score: 1

      The bad guy *always* has a way to survive.

      --
      What a depressingly stupid machine.
    7. Re:Never mind prequels by dreamchaser · · Score: 3, Informative

      In the post Star Was novels it was revealed that Palpatine had clones of himself. His 'essence' fled Endor and moved into a clone.

      Luke even went over to the Dark Side for a time, but Leia pulled him back and together they defeated Palpatine.

    8. Re:Never mind prequels by FlyingBishop · · Score: 1

      It's been done, re: The Thrawn Trilogy by Timothy Zahn. They could film it, but there's not much point.

      What I want to see is a Ron Moore re-imagining of the original trilogy. Truth be told, what we have here might not be too bad. It sounds like it's going to follow Boba Fett's journey to becoming badass assassin/bounty hunter extraordinaire. Actually, if it's basically a film noir type private detective thing with Boba Fett as the antihero, it could be very very good.

    9. Re:Never mind prequels by nomadic · · Score: 1

      As far as I understood it, none of the SW books were canon.

    10. Re:Never mind prequels by kungfugleek · · Score: 1

      He was originally going to do a movie called "The Star Wars". He was kinda thinking of making a loosely-based series of movies in that setting, but more of the feeling of Saturday matinees when he was a kid; not really any kind of grand space opera. I believe that the very earliest reels of Star Wars didn't even have the Episode IV subtitle. He didn't come out with the idea of making 3 trilogies until a little while later, at which point Episode IV: A New Hope was added to the opening scroll of Star Wars. I think this happened during the film's first theatrical release, but I'm not sure.
      Sorry for lack of citation -- there was a book about all this... something like "The History of Star Wars".

    11. Re:Never mind prequels by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      Really I understood the opposite most of them are. Lucas used to be a lot more controlling of the IP and the first Star Wars book was Shadows of the Empire. More recently its been more or less whatever.

    12. Re:Never mind prequels by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      I don't think 'originally' applies. I'm old enough to remember the first movie premier, and the talk about sequels and such started in the press after the film proved to be an unexpected hit. The mention of multiple trilogies began after quite a few other rumors had circulated in the press for a few weeks, in a way that suggested, to me at least, that it wasn't really the plan all along but something the studio now wanted to claim. As Episode 5's pre-release hype built up, the line about 9 films was pushed a lot, maybe because the public would accept a whole film where the good guys mostly lose better, if it was seen as a smaller part of the whole.
            I know the scrolling bit at the start of the original said Episode 4, but as Raiders of the Lost Ark proves, there was much interest at the time in recapturing some of the old Republic serial feel for films, and it builds dramatic tension by suggesting the film is part of a larger whole set in the same fictiverse. That doesn't prove much else in the fictiverse was even roughed out, let alone developed. Lucas's mental notes for the rest, at the time Episode 4 was released may have been just "It's a place where a lot of wars between whole planets have happened."
            In the same way, lines from the first film, such as the reference to Obi-Wan knowing Luke's father from the Clone Wars, sound like throw away lines - where the writer in effect says to themselves "Let's see, I can't say they met in Nam, because it's Sci-Fi, and just saying they met in the war sounds too generic, so what do I call the frelling war?" Probably, when Lucas wrote the line, he had no particular idea why the war was called the Clone Wars, or which side the Clones were on, or any of that - it was just to present a surface gloss of verisimilitude. Writers do that when they don't plan on needing more detailed answers, then an unexpected demand for sequils leaves them looking back through the original script for things they can develop.
            A good example of this might be the point in the original Matrix where Trinity tells Neo he's been down that road before. That line could have been used to spin off a matrix sequel very different from the ones we got, and the studio would doubtless have claimed that it was the plan all along if that had happened.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    13. Re:Never mind prequels by domatic · · Score: 1

      The only Star Wars novel I ever bothered read had "Grand Admiral Thrawn" as the heavy. He was a Napoleon/Genghis Khan style military and political genius who had command of a large remnant of the Imperial Fleet after the events of Endor. The most interesting subplots involved him using highly innovative military strategies to thwart the "New Republic". Nice stuff but Lucas would never go for it when there are endless fluffy things that can be done big explosions, wooden acting, and badly realized mysticism.

    14. Re:Never mind prequels by IorDMUX · · Score: 1

      Episodes VII, VIII, and IX have been written by Timothy Zahn.

      Now, there are certainly a few metric craptons of post-trilogy Star Wars books out there (trust me, I read way too many of them when I was younger), and some of them are bad. I mean Really Bad. So bad that Timothy Zahn basically devoted chapters of his later Hand of Thrawn series to "apologizing" for the other authors and trying to fix the plot holes and character messes that had been scattered over the Star Wars Universe since he single-handedly founded it in 1990

      So yeah. Those three novels are good Star Wars reading, and most fans have been willing to accept them as the unofficial follow-up trilogy which it looks as though Lucas will never write. Don't expect the next Dune--Zahn writes his Star Wars novels at a level only moderately more difficult than Harry Potter--but I've enjoyed the series each and every time I re-read it.

      Just to put the May 1991 publishing date of the trilogy in perspective, the Star Wars Trilogy Special Edition did not come out until 1997, with Episode 1 following in 1999. The flood of Star Wars novels by other authors began about five years after the success of Zahn's trilogy, reaching its peak around the millennium. ... Did you know that Timothy Zahn invented "Coruscant"?

      --
      >> Standing on head makes smile of frown, but rest of face also upside down.
    15. Re:Never mind prequels by oatworm · · Score: 1

      Hmm... Dune-Star Wars... that could be mildly entertaining. Plans within plans within plans. The Force must flow. Anakin/Vader is the Kwizatz Haderach, who brings balance to the force (largely by eliminating it) and order to humanity, but Luke must execute the Golden Path and enslave the new Rebellion in over a thousand years of darkness. Meanwhile, Han Solo is reborn over and over and over again for various reasons.

      On second thought, let's not do this and say we did, mmkay?

    16. Re:Never mind prequels by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      We want sequels to Return of the Jedi. Wasn't he originally going to do 3 sets of trilogies: with the 3rd set later on, and the only common characters would be the 2 droids?

      Read the Kevin J. Anderson novels from the Expanded Universe and realize that they're probably better than what Lucas could come up with. And Kevin J. Anderson novels were the worst things in the Star Wars universe before the prequels.

      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    17. Re:Never mind prequels by daniel.b.douglas · · Score: 1

      First Star Wars book is Splinter of the Mind's Eye from 1978, if I recall correctly. Shadows of the Empire wasn't until 1996. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splinter_of_the_Mind's_Eye

    18. Re:Never mind prequels by pjtp · · Score: 1

      In the post Star Was novels it was revealed that Palpatine had clones of himself. His 'essence' fled Endor and moved into a clone.

      I have a real problem with that, and I hope that it never finds its way into canon.

      It completely devalues the sacrifice Vader/Anakin makes in saving his son.

    19. Re:Never mind prequels by IorDMUX · · Score: 1

      So... Admiral Motti gains another hundred or so pounds and takes on the role of Baron Harkonnen?

      --
      >> Standing on head makes smile of frown, but rest of face also upside down.
    20. Re:Never mind prequels by IorDMUX · · Score: 1

      over the Star Wars Universe since he single-handedly founded it in 1990

      Oops... I lost a word, there: It should be "the Star Wars Literature Universe", which had its modern origins in Zahn's novels.

      --
      >> Standing on head makes smile of frown, but rest of face also upside down.
    21. Re:Never mind prequels by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      It completely devalues the sacrifice Vader/Anakin makes in saving his son.

      and is an insipidly cheap plot device.

      I used to read some of the Star Wars novels. Kevin Anderson's were the only ones I thought tried to be Star Wars novels in spirit/archetype. Zahn's read like D&D set in Star Wars Land.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    22. Re:Never mind prequels by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      I used to read some of the Star Wars novels. Kevin Anderson's were the only ones I thought tried to be Star Wars novels in spirit/archetype. Zahn's read like D&D set in Star Wars Land.

      When I look at the Star Wars comic books these days, my mind boggles. There is not one thing that is recognizably "Star Wars" in any of them. The costumes, the space ships, the weapons, the aliens... nothing says "Star Wars" to me. It's as if they told the writers and artists, "OK, so you know Star Wars, right? It's basically a pastiche of every shitty space opera written since the 1930s? So just do some more of that."

      (Oh, and that whole Palpatine being a clone thing? I think he's actually talking about a plotline from Star Wars comic books. And those were the good ones.)

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    23. Re:Never mind prequels by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      It really makes you wonder why people are actually buying the stuff. I mean, if you want good comic books, those are available. If you want more Star Wars stories, then "these aren't the comics you're looking for."

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    24. Re:Never mind prequels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We want sequels to Return of the Jedi. Wasn't he originally going to do 3 sets of trilogies: with the 3rd set later on, and the only common characters would be the 2 droids?

      Read the Kevin J. Anderson novels from the Expanded Universe and realize that they're probably better than what Lucas could come up with. And Kevin J. Anderson novels were the worst things in the Star Wars universe before the prequels.

      Really, I've never read any of the Kevin J. Anderson novels but I have hard time believing they were worse than this one. Which I'm sad to say, I did read.

    25. Re:Never mind prequels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like it's time for a Start Wars Crisis series.

    26. Re:Never mind prequels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh! Palpatine was a cylon! Makes so much sense now.

  9. The first is still the best by aurispector · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I recall watching the original Ep.4 as a 12 year old. The bar scene was particularly intense because it showed humans as a bit player in a big, bad universe. Fast forward to the updated remake with the CGI singer - just another funny looking alien to laugh at. The two headed announcer in the pod race scene is another example - funny aliens who exist primarily for the amusement of a human dominated universe. I don't think Lucas ever grasped this difference.

    --
    I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
    1. Re:The first is still the best by kenp2002 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The "first" film was the best because you were 12 years old at the time. Talk to a 12 year old now and they love pod races.

      Nostalgia is a lie. I liked Jedi the most because it appealed to me at my age at that time.

      We hate the prequels because we expected to see them like we were all 10 years old again. The problem was we are all now in our 30s for example trying to watch a film made for young kids and expecting to see it like a young kid. The fact is the prequels were not made for us, they were made for kids and teens. The same way the original 3 were made. Have a 30 year old watch Star Wars for the first time and, on the few times I've been able to find someone who has never seen it, gotten the same 'meh' response I had to the Phantom Menace.

      We like Firefly\Serentity because we can RELATE to it better. That is the key. My nephew loves the first 3 movies and is rather 'meh' about the last 3.

      For all those "stop raping my childhood"... it's not your childhood. Your childhood is gone, past, finished... you are an adult now and you can't go back. it's now you children's childhood so "stop suppressing their childhood by trying to force your childhood upon them."

      Let them reinvent Transformers, Thundercats, Voltron, Star Wars, Star Trek, Gobots, Silverhawks, Speed Racer, DBZ, and anything else they want to. None of you seem pissed that Barbie keeps getting rebooted every generation or would you prefer she stayed in the Kitchen barefoot and pregnate while Ken worked his union job driving a bus and threatening to punch Barbie "To the moon?"

      --
      -=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
    2. Re:The first is still the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think you've realised you've grown up.

      Children are much easier to impress. They don't see the logical fallacies and they fill in gaps with their own imagination. As an adult you just think "that's shallow crap". Kids these days probably like Teletubby Jarjar or the 2-headed announcer.

      When I look back at the movies and series I loved as a child/teenager I can only shake my head in amazement that anybody could have liked this trite crap :)

    3. Re:The first is still the best by Anonymusing · · Score: 1

      None of you seem pissed that Barbie keeps getting rebooted every generation or would you prefer she stayed in the Kitchen barefoot and pregnate while Ken worked his union job driving a bus and threatening to punch Barbie "To the moon?"

      Sir, I salute you in lieu of mod points that I don't have. You captured my sentiments exactly.

      --
      Liberal? Conservative? Compare perspectives at Left-Right
    4. Re:The first is still the best by p4ul13 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Perfectly stated!

      Or more accurately, stated in a manner that completely agrees with my stance, which of course I consider to be perfect.

      --
      Paul Lenhart writes words!
    5. Re:The first is still the best by OzPeter · · Score: 1

      There was no Ep. 4 .. there was only StarWars

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    6. Re:The first is still the best by CrackedButter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, I think the parent makes a good point. The aliens are remarkably different from the two different trilogies. It doesn't matter if you're a child or not, as an adult we can see the difference between the treatment of the aliens.

    7. Re:The first is still the best by crazybilly · · Score: 1
      Well said. I do think that Episode I feels substantially different (note how shiny the ship is vs. the decroded Mellinuium Falcon), but those are pretty purposeful thematic choices (even if they're not as cool).

      The best way to address this lack of perspective is from a quote from Episode IV that threatens to ruin the movie with its overwhelming lameness almost as much as Jar-Jar did Episode I:

      You came in that? You're braver than I thought!"

      Don't forget to feign incredulity.

    8. Re:The first is still the best by sammy+baby · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's an easy test to your theory. Go find some people who saw all of the movies as adults and ask them what they think. So far, everyone I've asked who was an adult for both sets of movies (including a bunch of friends in the office and my dad, a lifelong sci fi fan) thought the original films were much better.

      I'm not saying they were masterpieces. But chalking it all up to the audience having grown up is just willfully denying what everybody really knows.

    9. Re:The first is still the best by ibwolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Have a 30 year old watch Star Wars for the first time and, on the few times I've been able to find someone who has never seen it, gotten the same 'meh' response I had to the Phantom Menace.

      Anyone who hasn't seen Star Wars by the time they turn 30 are not going to enjoy it. Not because it doesn't appeal to 30 year olds, but because if that person was likely to enjoy fantasy/sci-fi movies he or she would have watched the movie a long time ago. It's not like the Star Wars movies are a well kept secret.

      Back in 1977 there were literally millions of 30+ year olds queuing up to see the movie (and enjoying it!).

      The thing is, the original Star Wars was a movie for all ages. Episode One (in particular) was a kids movie with little regard for the kids' parents.

    10. Re:The first is still the best by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Given the nature of the subject matter in the prequels it SHOULD have been something that a 30 year old could relate to better.

      It should have been more Dune and less Howard the Duck.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    11. Re:The first is still the best by master_p · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It has nothing to do with "Star Wars being for children only".

      If Star Wars was only appreciated by 12 year old kids in '77, it would never have been so successful. The original Star Wars was successful in adults, not only in kids.

      Nowadays Star Wars-like films do not appeal to 30 year old adults, because expectations are different. Society has changed. What was acceptable back then it is not acceptable now. It has nothing to do with "SW being for kids".

      And that's why successful franchises are being reinvented, as you say. Today's tastes are different than those 33 years go.

    12. Re:The first is still the best by kungfugleek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For some, maybe. But Return of the Jedi was my favorite of the 3 when I was a kid. Watching them now, Jedi is pathetic but Empire is awesome. Episodes IV and V were actually very good sci-fi adventure movies. They have a lasting quality that is lacking in Jedi and the prequels. They don't have to be the sci-fi equivalent of the Godfather in order to still be enjoyable by adults. But they do have to be fun and engaging. The first two are that. The last 4, not so much.

    13. Re:The first is still the best by SuperGT · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not sure if you were generalizing to everyone, but... I watched the original trilogy when I was 18. I loved it. I watched them because I went to see Episode 2 (at my friends' insistence) and I decided to watch the originals to understand the story better. I later watched Episode 3 (which I loved) and then Episode 1 (which I hated). I can say, having watched all six around the same time, that the original trilogy is way better than the prequel trilogy - the only saving grace being Episode 3.

      Just a few examples:
      The chemistry between Leia and Han is much better than Anakin and Padme.
      The humor is worlds apart - not only were the droids a lot funnier than Jar Jar (I realize the droids were in the prequel movies as well, but they weren't as prominent), but Han was funny, the whole Han/Leia/Luke "love" triangle was funny, etc...
      I did not like Hayden Christensen's acting, but I also believe that a good director would've fixed that. If it's a bad take, you do it again. He was awkward and it made me cringe a few times.

      So it's not that the original trilogy was cooler because I was younger when I saw it. It really was better, imo. I think if any of the kids enjoy the prequels more than the original, it's because it has prettier CG and more action.

    14. Re:The first is still the best by BlueParrot · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The "first" film was the best because you were 12 years old at the time.

      The first film was not that good tbh. It's just a classic adventure IN SPACE! The opening is a work of art however. Easily the best bit of the movie.

      Empire strikes back is my favorite. The entire movie builds up the Darth Vader character as a cold and heartless tyrant who will kill even those closest to him merely because they disappoint him, before finally revealing at the end that he's the protagonist's father. You just didn't see it coming. The introduction of yoda is genious and completely ruined by the decision to include him in the prequels. They should have just referred to him without ever showing him on screen so you could watch the movies and still be surprised when the little green fella reveals who he is in empire strikes back. The constant failures on the millennium falcon and the tricks they need to turn to in order to hide from imperial star-destroyers is orders of magnitudes better than the mindless car chases you see in most action films. Basically Empire Strikes back is actually a pretty good film, while the other ones are a bit "meh".

      I'd say revenge of the Sith is actually fairly good as well, but it Anakin comes off as too much of a kid, which kinda ruins the buildup to turn him into vader. He comes of more as a whining brat that a jedi corrupted by fear and anger.

    15. Re:The first is still the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have a 30 year old watch Star Wars for the first time and, on the few times I've been able to find someone who has never seen it, gotten the same 'meh' response I had to the Phantom Menace.

      Anyone who hasn't seen Star Wars by the time they turn 30 are not going to enjoy it. Not because it doesn't appeal to 30 year olds, but because if that person was likely to enjoy fantasy/sci-fi movies he or she would have watched the movie a long time ago. It's not like the Star Wars movies are a well kept secret.

      Back in 1977 there were literally millions of 30+ year olds queuing up to see the movie (and enjoying it!).

      The thing is, the original Star Wars was a movie for all ages. Episode One (in particular) was a kids movie with little regard for the kids' parents.

      Let me put this argument to rest since I am one of the rare people who has not seen Star Wars as a child so I can comment on this based on my personal experience. I was 32 when I happened to watch the pod racing episode - I thought it was very silly and stopped it half way through.

      However, when my son was about 5 y.o (a couple of years later) he was given old VHS cassettes with the original trilogy. I don't know if that was because we watched them together, but I thought they were excellent immediately! Enjoyed them immensely, and even the newer episodes started to make sense afterwards - even the pod racing one.

      If you want my opinion, the newer CGI-rich episodes are nothing without the original trilogy where the real drama and the real story is. However I would not say they are rubbish, they are certainly different in style and they need to be watched after the original ones - otherwise nothing make any sense at all.

    16. Re:The first is still the best by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Nostalgia is a lie.

      I wouldn't go that far, but it sure isn't as good as it used to be.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    17. Re:The first is still the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you make some very good points and I wish I could have stated them as well as you did. I do think however that you are somewhat incorrect in thinking that the last three were as good as the first ones.

      I have a kids that grew up in the middle of the two trilogies (currently ages 20, 16 and 16) and from what I'm able to tell, the last 3 movies didn't have the staying power of the first ones. While "A New Hope" was several year old the first time they saw it they were just amazed as the original viewers were (I didn't see any of the original movies when they came out in theaters, so I don't think I just thought they liked them). The same could be said for the whole original trilogy. The last three movies didn't have the same affect however. While my kids were the age the movies we created for, they just didn't have the same impact. There were only had a few characters they really responded to in the last movies.

      I'm not saying the movies were created poorly, etc (it may be just because people knew what to expect) but I don't think they improved the franchise. I think most people couldn't care less if there was another trilogy or not, after the last one. It could be due to the fact that there are so many other things to entertain kids now, but I can't help but think that the simple concept of "good vs evil", good guys vs bad guys (white hat cowboys vs black hat cowboys) put to space is what made the first movies capture our attention. It just used a great formula for story telling that generations hadn't seen in a while. It also changed our concept of what "outer space" could be like. I don't think the last three movies changed our thinking of "what's out there" beyond what the first ones did. It's almost impossible to do with a "follow-up" movie.

    18. Re:The first is still the best by shadowrat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While i agree my opinion of the original trilogy is heavily colored by nostalgia, you can't just wave away arguments that the first three films were better.

      There are other films that i loved as a kid that don't do it for me now. I absolutely loved Disney's The Black Hole. I've seen it recently and it's not good. It does feature some pretty impressive spacecraft models though. I thought Krull was the coolest shit ever, eh, it's not so good anymore. I think we can recognize when something was good vs when something was just overwhelming us as kids.

      When i watch star wars, yeah, it's nostaligic. It ruled my childhood. But it looks dated. The setpieces are stuck in the 70's. the acting is often stilted and hamfisted. However there's also a solid, if simple, story there. The motivation for the characters makes sense. There is a sense of danger and discovery. I think it's a better film than the prequels, weather i'm a kid or not.

      Star Wars wasn't just popular with kids either. It captured the imagination of the world. Adults were seeing it again and again. It's imagery was showing up in adult settings like sports events and SNL.

      It probably continues to influence movies today. The reboot of star trek seems to be aimed at making it more star wars like with dog fighting spacecraft and sword fights.

      It's not citizen kane, but i think it was a very revolutionary and influencial film. The prequels were not.

    19. Re:The first is still the best by mcgrew · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The "first" film was the best because you were 12 years old at the time.

      I was in my twenties, and loved it. It was simply the best science fiction film made (at the time; there have been better sci-fi films since).

      IMO the worst one was episode Six. I hated that one, thought even Jar Jar was better than Ewoks. Most slashdotters were terribly disappointed in episodes 1-3, but I thought they were all well made, entertaining movies. Face it, even episode 4 wasn't exactly deep.

    20. Re:The first is still the best by JerryLove · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That "because you were a kid" explanation is used by Lucas too, and "the good-old days weren't all that good" is certainly a rant of mine.

      But, as someone who at 12-ish didn't like RotJ because the Ewoks were silly: EpIV and EpI simply are not the same. The relatively sophisticated abbot-and-costello of the driods, or the interactions of Han, Chewie, and Leia are replaced with Jarjar stepping in 'camel' poop, getting farted on, and shocking his tounge numb. That's not metaphorical, all three happen and are used a jokes.

      Where is the comparative piece in New Hope or ESB? They are not there. Character-based situational comedy, often with a dark edge (notice that Lucas re-edited SW to remove, for example, Han shooting first) is replaced with farting.

      And for the record: I think Empire was the best. I thought it when I saw it and I think it now.

    21. Re:The first is still the best by bjk002 · · Score: 1

      Well said sir!!

      --
      Opinion:=TMyOpinion.Create(Me);
    22. Re:The first is still the best by skorch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think you're overlooking something for the sake of making your point. For the first 3 films, there were plenty of adults and children who loved the films, whereas with the last 3 films there were only children who loved them. This is because, children have a much lower threshold for enjoyment, but are still capable of enjoying things that also appeal to older crowds. So it is possible to make something that appeals to all ages (Pixar have largely mastered this), but some filmmakers think that the only way to get to children is to patronize them. While this works, it effectively shuts out the older crowd.

      You can make a good film, and children will like it without the need for inserting slapstick cartoon characters with the mental capacity of a 4 year old, but putting those in will turn away adults though. Children don't necessarily care about or appreciate good acting, coherent plots, and subtlety, but including those things doesn't necessarily turn kids away. The first three films had a lot of the former and only a bit of the latter, whereas the last three films had a lot of the former and almost none of the latter.

    23. Re:The first is still the best by dswensen · · Score: 1

      Oh, well, if your dad thought so, case closed!

    24. Re:The first is still the best by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      There's an easy test to your theory. Go find some people who saw all of the movies as adults and ask them what they think. So far, everyone I've asked who was an adult for both sets of movies (including a bunch of friends in the office and my dad, a lifelong sci fi fan) thought the original films were much better.

      They too were young when they saw the original movies - everything is better when you're younger. That's the grandparent's entire point.
       

      But chalking it all up to the audience having grown up is just willfully denying what everybody really knows.

      One thing I've found over the years, that what "everyone knows" is usually false.

    25. Re:The first is still the best by Rary · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Anakin comes off as too much of a kid, which kinda ruins the buildup to turn him into vader. He comes of more as a whining brat that a jedi corrupted by fear and anger.

      Anakin as we saw him in the prequels turning into Vader as we saw him in the original trilogy was so beyond implausible that it hurts. Vader was pure evil. Like you said, he was "a cold and heartless tyrant who will kill even those closest to him merely because they disappoint him". Anakin was a whiny brat with some questionable politics that he didn't really seem to hold too closely to anyway who became bitter and jaded because his wife died. It's like we need a whole other trilogy to find out how the bitter kid from Episode III turned into the evil tyrant of Episode IV-VI, because as it stands, there just is no connection.

      Of course, Vader's turn-around at the end of ROTJ was just as contrived.

      --

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

    26. Re:The first is still the best by gkfischer17 · · Score: 1

      I'm in agreement. I can't wait to see the 'new' ideas of old days past. However, I would like to see more of the creativity that we saw back in those days show up today. Cartoons today are just not what they used to be. The prequel series were not as bad as everyone would think (but I'm not trying to convince you, just my opinion). The books were better, but as we all know, such is the case most times. I hope Lucas and his producers pick out good directors, good story tellers, and make the live show something spectacular. The Clone Wars 3D is actually not bad, and I would like to see some of that writing into the new series. The new Battlestar was pretty awesome, so you never know what could happen. We all have our own ideas of what would be good. A suggestion would be read the books and make up your own mind of what the characters should like, sound, do, etc. That is one reason some older generation folks won't go see Lord of the Rings. They have their own vision and don't want anyone else to 'show' them theirs. My 2 cents.

    27. Re:The first is still the best by dcollins · · Score: 1

      "The 'first' film was the best because you were 12 years old at the time."

      No, the first film was among the best because at the time, Han shot first. And many similar things of which the elder Lucas was no longer capable.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    28. Re:The first is still the best by Battle_Ratt · · Score: 1

      "Episode One (in particular) was a kids movie"
      Every one keeps parroting this, simply because Episode one just made no sense, so the only possible audience it would appeal to is children who can't really follow plot anyway, or don't actually care as long as the eye candy was good.

      Tell me if it is such a kids movie, what the heck was a trade embargo, attempt to "negotiate" same trade embargo, the senate appeal, chancellor meeting room discussions, assassination attempt and the oh so ham handed midi-chlorians crap all about?

      Kids just love politics don't they? Well don' they?
      It was a train wreck, plain and simple.

    29. Re:The first is still the best by arb+phd+slp · · Score: 1

      The chemistry between Leia and Han is much better than Anakin and Padme. ...snip...

      I did not like Hayden Christensen's acting, but I also believe that a good director would've fixed that. If it's a bad take, you do it again. He was awkward and it made me cringe a few times.

      I cringed more than a few times. I can't watch Episode 2. It's the worst of the the three to me.

      To make it all worse, the Han/Leia love story is subplot; it isn't essential to the story. It certainly adds something, but it all still works without it.
      The Anakin/Padme relationship is the pivot on which the whole story arc depends. Everything that happens from episodes 2-6 is a result of what happens between them and I didn't believe any of it. (Faster-than-light travel, force fields, laser swords, traveling in a submarine through the core of a planet... all acceptable, but she's with him? No.)

      It needed a script doctor who knows how to do romantic dialogue (isn't this what Carrie Fisher does in Hollywood? Can you imagine the fan reaction to that?) and a director who knows how to get decent acting out of a cast (Christiansen isn't great, but he's capable of more than we saw in Episode 2).

      --
      There's a perfect xkcd for my sig but I'm too lazy to look it up. sudo someone go find it.
    30. Re:The first is still the best by foo+fighter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The "first" film was the best because you were 12 years old at the time.

      I am so fucking sick of this patronizing line being trotted out and modded up on every single fucking Star Wars thread.

      I probably saw the first film when I was three- or four-years old. I was too young to remember, but my dad told me he picked up the laserdisc shortly after it came out in 1982 and let me watch with him. Honestly, I loved the toys more than the movie.

      But now, almost thirty years older, I still like the first film the best.

      The are so many fucking legitimate reasons for that, you ignorant tool:

      * It is a story told cleanly and effectively. It isn't cluttered with too many plot-lines, a major failing of the prequels. ESB, good as it is, begins the slow descent into plot-line hell with Luke separated from Han and Leia. RotJ cleans things up a little, but the prequels are absolutely, mindnumbingly confused about what story they are trying to tell.

      * The characterization is fantastic and the acting is good. ESB and RotJ simply manage to not completely fuck up the characters introduced in Star Wars. Who can deny Han Solo and Darth Vadar are two of the greatest characters of all time? Harrison Ford's portrayal of Han is rightfully legendary. And Vadar wouldn't have been nearly as fearsome without David Prowse's physicality and James Earl Jones voice. Mark Hamill's acting throughout the original trilogy is underrated, btw. He's winy and annoying in the "first" one because Luke is a fucking brat. Carrie Fisher's Princess Leia is no Disney princess: yeah, she's hot, but she takes no shit and can use a gun. Again, ESB just continues the character development begun in Star Wars and none of the other films introduce a character worth remembering or feature performances worth watching again.

      * The sound. Holy shit the sound. Blasters, light sabers, even ships in space. "There's no sound in space," you say. I say fuck you these are the greatest space sounds ever. Do any of the other films introduce any better sounds? Do any use the sounds introduced in Star Wars better?

      * The score is a modern classic. The later films introduced new themes and variations on the themes introduced in Star Wars, but none could do better than the first.

      * The cinematography is some of the best ever. From the opening shot of the star destroyer filling the screen, to the landscape shots on Tatooine, to the claustrophobic interiors of the ships and Death Star, to the trench run at the end, it is some of the best ever. Yes, many of the shots are homages to earlier works, but the elevate and often exceed the originals.

      * Do I have to even mention the production: set design, costumes, aliens, etc? Fucking fuck.

      In conclusion, fuck you. Star Wars is a fucking classic film and a great work of art. Fuck you, you ignorant cunt. You think Firefly would ever have existed without Star Wars? You think 30-year-olds "meh" reaction to Star Wars might be because they're your friends and you've self-selected people as dense as you are? Or that they've been exposed to thirty-plus years of films that have been hugely influenced by the original film?

      If you can't watch Star Wars as an adult, appreciate it as a masterpiece of film-making, and understand why someone could love it as their favorite film of all time, let alone their favorite "Star Wars" movie, you are a pitiful, pathetic person. Fuck.

      --
      obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
    31. Re:The first is still the best by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Episode One (in particular) was a kids movie with little regard for the kids' parents.

      Because, as the 70-minute review said, there's nothing kids love more than political drama about trade disputes. Were long Senate scenes really meant to appeal to kids? The entire premise of the first prequel was some trade dispute that didn't even make much sense to adults, let alone children.

      The problem I had with the prequels was that, by the time I saw them, I'd read the Timothy Zahn sequels. The characters had a lot more depth in those, and you got to see what someone competent could do in the Star Wars universe. Watching the originals after reading those books made them seem quite shallow, but even then they were nowhere near as bad as the prequel trilogy.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    32. Re:The first is still the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If by reinvented you mean Dragon Ball Kai then you don't know what you're talking about. I'm watching it now and its still just as awesome as Z was back then. WHAT NOW HUH

    33. Re:The first is still the best by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      We still have a matter of context though. Star Wars came out when Cinema was dying and Sci-fi movies were typically cerebral and pretty slow. Movies in general were at that time.

      Star Wars started with two spaceships shooting rayguns at each other! Real action sci-fi stuff. It gave us spectacle. We had swordfights and swinging across chasms and dogfights. These days they look pretty tame. The fight at the end of Phantom Menace was way more exciting and action packed, and the pod race was pretty thrilling as well. So from the point of view of action, prequels work a lot better.

      Where ANH scores is story structure. It's a pretty basic plot, a heroes journey basically recycled from thousands of ancient stories, but it's tried and tested so it works. TPM has lots of decent enough ideas that could work as a story but simply don't fit together. It could have been great but Lucas seemed to be only interested in spectacle.

    34. Re:The first is still the best by lymond01 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We like Firefly\Serentity because we can RELATE to it better. That is the key. My nephew loves the first 3 movies and is rather 'meh' about the last 3.

      Any movie or book is about what moves your emotions. If you're not moved, you're going to come away with a feeling of "meh". Episode IV had the tried and true (some would say overdone) story of a youth going on a great adventure, and with the help of a handsome and wily rogue, rescuing a princess from the dark lord. I liked it, and still like it, for the highs and lows, the humor, and for Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher's characters. Even C-3P0 and R2D2 had some great lines. The movie made me laugh ("I am not a committee!") and cringe ("Shut down all the compactors on the detention level!") and cheer ("Let's blow this thing, kid."). Episodes 1-3 did not. They only had one great scene and that was the lightsaber battle at the end of episode 1 with Darth Maul.

      You can look at a modern trilogy for the same blaring difference: Pirates of the Caribbean. First one was great -- humor, wit, action, subtle glances, great characters and great lines. The next two seemed to be completely different films from the first with the same actors and costumes. Slapstick comedy ruled...all we needed was a slide trumbone and a cymbal for when Depp would fall and a laugh track. They lost all sense of what everyone enjoyed about the first one. I wouldn't even say they "dumbed it down" for the kids. They just didn't put any work into the script and relied on silly comedy and special effects. Kids appreciate humor, even subtle humor. I daresay they went from British humor (understated) to American humor (brash, in your face, "Buy a truckload today!")

      If a movie makes me laugh, cry, cheer...then I generally remember it as "worth watching". If it doesn't, I forget about it pretty quickly. Firefly, to come full circle, and Serenity, had scripts that George Lucas would kill for. Never since the first Star Wars was I so enthralled with a sci-fi movie than Serenity (I saw the movie first).

    35. Re:The first is still the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't see the OT until after the Prequels, which was in my mid teens...And I can still say they are absolute garbage. No nostalgia goggles here.

    36. Re:The first is still the best by Elbowgeek · · Score: 1

      From my perspective, what mostly captivated young audiences of the original move was the special effects. They were phenomenal for the time and in some ways had an influence on the video gaming industry to come.

      The plots, to my mind, always had a sort of thrown together at the last minute appearance to them, with little thought to the overall story.

      --
      Who is this delectable creature with an insatiable love of the dead?
    37. Re:The first is still the best by domatic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The "first" film was the best because you were 12 years old at the time. Talk to a 12 year old now and they love pod races.

      Nostalgia is a lie. I liked Jedi the most because it appealed to me at my age at that time.

      We hate the prequels because we expected to see them like we were all 10 years old again. The problem was we are all now in our 30s for example trying to watch a film made for young kids and expecting to see it like a young kid. The fact is the prequels were not made for us, they were made for kids and teens. The same way the original 3 were made. Have a 30 year old watch Star Wars for the first time and, on the few times I've been able to find someone who has never seen it, gotten the same 'meh' response I had to the Phantom Menace.

      I see this meme a lot but I was there in the 70s and it just ain't so. People of ALL AGES were lined up around the block (literally) to see those movies and many saw them multiple times. Going to see a movie you thought especially badass several times was more common then because video rental and VCRs were still five years from being common consumer items.

      The first three movies were hotly anticipated because there wasn't anything else like them at the time and they were very fun action/adventure films. Kids watched them. Teens watched them. 20, 30, 40, 50, etc somethings watched and enjoyed them......

      In the years since, we've gotten cable, video rental, internet video, gaming consoles and many many more ways to spend an entertainment dollar. The multimillion dollar special effects extravaganza become much more common too and most ARE indeed marketed at teens and twenties since they form most of the shrinking audience for movie theaters. But it is a mistake to assume that just because the original Star Wars Trilogy was a special effects action extravaganza that everything true of one today applies to it WHEN IT WAS FIRST RELEASED.

      Anything Star Wars that comes out these days has to be marketed and survive in a much different environment than the original trilogy.

      Now if you want to argue that the first movies were re-edited with extra little-kid insipness and the last three made with to be purely insipid then I'll agree with you. I would also agree that even the un-"enhanced" trilogy is more Space Opera than sci-fi but what of it? They were some of the summer movies of their day and even fully mature adults today don't mind turning their brains off for an hour and a half and taking one in.

    38. Re:The first is still the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing should EVER be less Howard the Duck.

    39. Re:The first is still the best by NEW22 · · Score: 1

      Umm, the parent to your comment said "Find people who saw all of the movies as adults". As in "I never saw any Star Wars movies until I was 30, then I watched all 6." You've missed the parent's entire point.

    40. Re:The first is still the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Huh? No way. The original movies were the best movies EVER! The other ones sucked.

      Now GET OFF MY LAWN!!!

    41. Re:The first is still the best by Asic+Eng · · Score: 1
      * The score is a modern classic.

      The only point there I disagree with. The score is basically Holst' "The Planets". It's not a modern classic, it's simply excellent classical music. It fits the subject of the movie very well, but of course Holst wrote it to be space music.

    42. Re:The first is still the best by LiquidAvatar · · Score: 1

      I agree completely about Episode One being a kid's movie. But, I also feel obliged to point out that some fans have fixed it with a version called "The Phantom Edit". If you google it, you should be able to find a copy. Be aware that there are multiple copies (I've seen at least 2 versions); the one that I really enjoyed was made by MagnoliaFan78@hotmail.com and is titled "Episode 1: Balance of the Force (in the opening scroll). It tells a much darker story (in addition to cutting out the Midichlorians and all of the "yipee"s), by reversing the audio for most of the aliens and subtitling them. I was shocked to, by the end of the movie, find that I had actually enjoyed Jar Jar's contributions.

      --
      It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.
      -Voltaire
    43. Re:The first is still the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, I'll bite, as I was 27 when the original Star Wars appeared.

      It was great fun, because it was like a comic. Not much plot, no real characterisation, noise in space (!!) and one really great actor - I don't believe that the franchise would have succeeded if not for Alex Guiness.

      Empire Strikes Back - starting to take itself seriously.

      Return of the J - oh dear, those bloody furry things were far too Disney for my liking.

      "Episodes 1-3" I have no interest whatsoever. Everything I've read about them and the small clips I haven't been able to avoid all add up to a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury signifying nothing.

    44. Re:The first is still the best by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Yoda isn't ruined. Simply because it makes no sense to watch the prequels first. Think of it as repressed recent history that is now that the emperor is dead it's a big story in flashback.

      Otherwise, it's not just Yoda. Nothing makes sense. The happenings of the prequels just can't result in what happens in the original movies.

      Revenge of the Sith is one of those films that might be ok if it was just an every day actiopn flick. But it's supposed to be the story of the Anakin->Vader corruption/transition/conversion/whatever-you-want-to-call-it and it fails miserably given the potential. It wasn't helped by the idiocy of I and II with respect to Anakin

      Of course given ROTJ I'm still amazed anyone had any hopes about the prequels (I didn't bother seeing any of them at the cinema).

    45. Re:The first is still the best by _xeno_ · · Score: 1

      I did not like Hayden Christensen's acting, but I also believe that a good director would've fixed that.

      The funniest thing (to me, at least) in Episode III was listening to James Earl Jones try and mimic Hayden Christensen when the new Darth Vader asked about Padme.

      Which may mean that the director actually wanted Anakin to sound like that.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    46. Re:The first is still the best by NEW22 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think a good test is to explain what Episode 1 and Episode 4 were about, and which seems most likely to appeal to kids. I don't see how someone could honestly expect children to understand the plot to Episode 1, or even adults or George Lucas himself.

      Episode 4: A poor water farmboy has dreams of leaving the farm, visits a hermit who exposes him to an exciting greater world that needs saving. Returning home he sees his family has been killed, leaving him with no ties to home and thrusting him into a grand adventure where he meets a rogue and a princess, learns magic and blows up an evil Empire's greatest weapon, saving untold planets.

      Episode 1: Some warrior diplomats come to discuss a trade dispute, trade federation blockades planet, then for some reason starts a war. Diplomats try to warn the princess, but instead end up coming across some aliens before getting to the princess and leaving the planet. Princess needs to convince the Senate to intervene. On the way to the Senate they stop at a planet and come across a little kid who races pods and has potential. After the Senate does nothing, these same people, with a kid in tow, go back to the planet and start a big fight. The day is saved when the kid they picked up accidently flies a ship into a space station and blows it up.

      The only reason I could like one over the other is because of the age I was when I saw it...

    47. Re:The first is still the best by Reziac · · Score: 1

      You nailed it. The first film got everything RIGHT. The original was also the only time I've ever seen a whole audience -- mostly adults -- spontaneously stand and cheer at the film's climax.

      Since then it's wobbled and finally fallen down.

      And then there's things like III just whizzing on by the critical character-changing scenes involving Anakin's transition to Vader, as if they meant nothing. (I never did go see I or II, and I'm not sure I missed anything.)

      If a TV series can get back to the character-driven grit of the first film, perhaps Lucas will finally come back from the Dark Side.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    48. Re:The first is still the best by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1

      The "first" film was the best because you were 12 years old at the time. Talk to a 12 year old now and they love pod races. Nostalgia is a lie. I liked Jedi the most because it appealed to me at my age at that time.

      I'm not going to deny that there's some nostalgia involved. But we don't have nostalgia for every movie from our childhood. No-one's waiting for the Blu-Ray of Battle Beyond the Stars.

      Star Wars was a reasonably serviceable story with some well-defined characters that was visually groundbreaking.

      The prequels weren't this. The stories were a mess, the characters were a mess. That's basic filmmaking. That's what makes The Terminator, Pretty Woman, The Incredibles, The Wizard of Oz and Goodfellas work. You care about the characters and the story. Kids know this. The generation of kids who were around when the prequels came out will be nostalgic about Pixar movies, not Star Wars prequels.

    49. Re:The first is still the best by DerekLyons · · Score: 0

      I hate to point this out to you, but "saw the movies as adults" means "saw the movies as adults", not "saw the movies as [over thirty] adults [and then saw all six at once]". Had the OP meant that, I assume that's what he'd have said.
       
      So either he needs to learn to write, or you need to learn to read. I suspect the latter based on the rest of his post.

    50. Re:The first is still the best by HungWeiLo · · Score: 1

      I think you hit the nail on the head.

      I'm a 30-year-old who just watched all 6 for the first time 2 weeks ago (All of them the Special Editions. Don't kill me). I watched them in the 4-5-6-1-2-3 order.

      I've previously caught parts of Empire Strikes Back before when I was much younger, and I remember being really really impressed by the Imperial Walkers battle. This time around, not so much.

      I really thought dug the ominous and grave tone of Ep 3. But in both Ep II & III, Hayden Christensen must have thought he was a date rape suspect in an episode of Law & Order. Although he was magnificent for most of Ep III.

      So like you said - he's tailoring for a more "modern" audience.

      --
      There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
    51. Re:The first is still the best by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      Of course, Vader's turn-around at the end of ROTJ was just as contrived.

      No, it wasn't. He was betrayed by his emperor just 2 minutes before his turn-around, remember? Camera showed him deliberating a bit and I remember thinking that what was probably going through his mind was "My emperor tried to kill me, my son tried to save me even at the end by risking his life - hmmmm who should I help?"

      Not really contrived - expected.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    52. Re:The first is still the best by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      Okay, now are you sure about that? :-)

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    53. Re:The first is still the best by Hikaru79 · · Score: 1

      Wow. Nerd rage is serious business.

    54. Re:The first is still the best by HungWeiLo · · Score: 1

      I'm 30 years old and just watched all 6 for the first time (I've caught parts of Empire Strikes Back beforehand) 2 weeks ago, and I liked them all for what they are - mostly summer blockbuster-ish entertainment. I watched only the Special Edition versions (don't kill me). I wasn't bored through any of it.

      I have over 1000 DVDs in my collection - though a lot of it film snob stuff (think stuff from the Criterion Collection). So this may have influenced my viewing of the SW films - I constantly thought about Mifune in the Hidden Fortress as I watched Ep 4, for example. Or that I really enjoyed the gravitas towards the last half of Ep 3.

      As for my sci-fi viewing credentials, I've seen films like 2001, Alien, Terminator, Back to the Future countless times, so I really am not biased against sci fi.

      Oh did I mention I've never seen Blade Runner before?

      --
      There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
    55. Re:The first is still the best by SuperGT · · Score: 1

      Hmmm... you make really good points. I guess you're right about the subplot... I mean, even if I didn't like it (which I did), it wasn't essential for me to like it. And it was very much in the background. On the documentary, the director of Empire Strikes Back, Irvin Kershner, explains that he wanted romance, but no smooching... and I think he did great. And to me, it wasn't really that I couldn't believe that Padme would want Anakin - although it IS weird - but it's more that they had no chemistry.

      And it seems like George Lucas really limited himself when he decided to make a prequel trilogy (as opposed to more movies). He had to compress a lot of story into each episode. I mean, the first episode couldn't have a love story with Padme, cause he was a child. Then we see a sort of courtship in ep2, even though they get married too fast. And then with episode 3, we're supposed to believe that his fear of losing Padme is the thing that drives him to turn to the dark side? And it wasn't even a slow turn... it was him slicing off Samuel Jackson's hand and that's it. In the original trilogy, Darth Vader doesn't turn back to the light side in an instant... it's built up from two movies. So when it happens, you're happy for him, not incredulous that one of the most powerful men in the universe would sacrifice himself like that for a son he never really knew.

    56. Re:The first is still the best by curare19 · · Score: 5, Interesting
      I'm in a very rare group. I saw both sets of movies as an adult - within two years of each other. Although I love sci-fi, I grew up with parents who had zero interest, and somehow got through high school and college without ever having seen Star Wars. I think it never even occurred to my friends that I hadn't seen it.

      I went to see the first set of Star Wars when it was re-issued to movie theaters. When Leila kissed Luke, someone in front of me said "Ewwww! They're siblings!" I said "WHAT?! They are?? Thanks for ruining it!"

      At that moment, my friends came to the realization that I had never seen the movies before. At subsequent movies, they announced to the surrounding moviegovers that I had NEVER SEEN IT and to make SURE to not reveal any upcoming secrets (including the "big one").

      It was great, actually - my friends, who were born around the time of Star Wars, were super excited to see someone's first reaction to the movies.

      Anyway, as a perfectly controlled experiment, I agree that the first set of movies was far superior to the second set. The prequel seemed hacked together in order to resolve things from the first set, and over-reliant on special effects and lame jokes to the exclusion of the storyline.

    57. Re:The first is still the best by foo+fighter · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I almost totally disagree with you.

      Yes, there are nods to previous symphonic works. Not just Holst and _The Planets_ (I just listened to Gardiner conduct it with the London Philharmonic on my iPod at work yesterday), but also Stravinksy, Strauss, and other Romantic composers and earlier film scores. Even more important than those, however, are Prokofiev's _Romeo and Juliet_ and Wagner's Ring-cycle. The use of character- and place-based motifs throughout the Star Wars score give it much of its power. But ultimately, Star Wars is it's own work even if John Williams stood on the shoulders of giants in creating it.

      To say the score to Star Wars isn't a classic is simply wrong. If there is a more familiar work of symphonic music from the past 30-years I can't think of it.

      --
      obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
    58. Re:The first is still the best by aztektum · · Score: 1

      It isn't that he raped anyone's childhood per se. Back in 1977, Star Wars had massive general appeal because it was just that different. Come 1999-2005, all we got were 3 movies that only stood out as Star Wars because of the intro logo. On OPENING NIGHT, at a midnight showing for Phantom Menace, there were people walking out of the theater I saw it in; a big difference from people getting back in line for the orig Star Wars. They didn't offer people anything engaging and new as the originals did for their time and I think people who really clung to that felt let down. Those that I talk to that have that "raped my childhood" mentality, recognize they still can relish those old memories, but were really looking for that magic again and felt boned.

      I think nerds are poor communicators.

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
    59. Re:The first is still the best by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      The are so many fucking legitimate reasons for that, you ignorant tool:

      Well, at least you're respectful about it. You ignorant tool.

    60. Re:The first is still the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      * The score is a modern classic.

      The only point there I disagree with. The score is basically Holst' "The Planets". It's not a modern classic, it's simply excellent classical music. It fits the subject of the movie very well, but of course Holst wrote it to be space music.

      What are you smoking? Most of the music made for the original Star Wars movie was either about specific characters (e.g. Luke's Theme) or tailored to the dramatic events on the screen (e.g. The Imperial March). While I like The Planets suite about as much as the Star Wars music, just because the former is older and related to space (and really it was as influenced as much by Greco-Roman mythology as the conception Holst had of the physical planets) does not imply that the latter somehow has to be derived mainly from the former! This theory makes only slightly more sense than believing all nautically-themed songs in the past couple of centuries are derivatives of "What do you do with a drunken sailor?"

    61. Re:The first is still the best by mqduck · · Score: 1

      The problem was we are all now in our 30s for example trying to watch a film made for young kids and expecting to see it like a young kid. The fact is the prequels were not made for us, they were made for kids and teens. The same way the original 3 were made. Have a 30 year old watch Star Wars for the first time and, on the few times I've been able to find someone who has never seen it, gotten the same 'meh' response I had to the Phantom Menace.

      I saw Episode I when I was 14. I basically felt like everyone else, that it sucked. I just watched episodes IV and V again (haven't got around to VI) for the first time since I was even younger, and I admit that I was a bit underwhelmed: not as good (now) as I remember them (then). However, they're still profoundly better than the prequels.

      Incidentally, from what I understand, the original trilogy was a big hit with all ages when it came out.

      --
      Property is theft.
    62. Re:The first is still the best by JD-1027 · · Score: 1

      I agree this is an insightful post, but it would have been much more so had you not used Junior High language. It degrades Slashdot. Take a second to compare the discussion sections of this site and others.

      I'm actually disappointed the mods didn't take that into consideration.

    63. Re:The first is still the best by Wraithlyn · · Score: 1

      Episodes 1-3 did not. They only had one great scene and that was the lightsaber battle at the end of episode 1 with Darth Maul.

      Great choreography maybe, but c'mon, Darth Maul was just a prop, not a real character.

      I'd take Obi-wan leaving Anakin to die on the hill at the end of Ep III over that, it's the only scene in the entire prequel trilogy that even remotely approaches some semblance of dramatic depth.

      --
      "Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
    64. Re:The first is still the best by icylucifer · · Score: 1

      none of the other films introduce a character worth remembering or feature performances worth watching again.

      Umm... Lando?

      In conclusion, fuck you.

      Well said.

      --
      Endut! Hoch Hech!
    65. Re:The first is still the best by ukemike · · Score: 1

      My son is bored through long sections of each of the prequel episodes. He loves every minute of the original trilogy. QED

      --
      -- QED
    66. Re:The first is still the best by ari_j · · Score: 1

      The 70-minute Youtube critique of The Phantom Menace, posted to Slashdot recently I believe, made a lot of points indicating why the movie sucked. Interestingly, it spent 70 minutes coherently bashing the film without once saying that Jar Jar Binks was a problem. Anyhow, its first major criticism is also the most poignant: Who is the main character? Who is the person whose story we are supposed to care about? If you compare A New Hope with The Phantom Menace, rationally and without reference to nostalgia, the former is a much better piece of literature and a much better movie. It has a coherent plot that people can identify with and care about, a main character that people can cheer for from start to finish, and very few plot elements that don't relate to the plot.

      Was it the best science fiction movie of all time? Frankly, it might have been, and you will find plenty of people who can make a rational argument for why it was. By contrast, nobody thinks that about Episode I.

    67. Re:The first is still the best by ari_j · · Score: 1

      Fuckin' A, Cotton.

    68. Re:The first is still the best by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      Episode One (in particular) was a kids movie with little regard for the kids' parents.

      The taxation of galactic trade routes is in dispute. A pseudo military/industrial organisation is involved in a sepratist campaign to split the galactic republic. Senators endlessly debate the issue and fail to reach a resolution on allowing humanitarian aid into a world that has been blockaded. Yup, a real kid's movie.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    69. Re:The first is still the best by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you can't think of any reasons why Star Wars was an objectively better made movie than Phantom Menace then you're hopeless.

      You can relate to Firefly/Serenity better because it has better characters. Star Wars had great characters. It had characters even no-name actors could bring life to and make memorable. Phantom Menace has characters so boring even outstanding actors can't do anything with them.

      You can relate to Firefly because it has intelligent dialogue that developed the characters. Star Wars can't measure up here, but it had quite a few good moments of banter and dialogue that made the characters seem like real people you could relate to. Phantom Menace was a disaster in this respect.

      You can relate to Firefly because it had plots that got from Point A to Point B in a reasonable manner. Star Wars had a classic story told with tight pacing and without extraneous crap. Phantom Menace had a train wreck of a plot which it's completely laughable that a child could even follow or care about, with random segues thrown in because Lucas had to shoe-horn in all the characters in even if it made no sense for them to show up.

      Basically, the reason Firefly and Star Wars are better than the prequels isn't because of age groups they're targeting vs when I saw them. There's lots of movies "targeted at kids" that I absolutely love, because they're great movies. The reason they're better is because they are well made and tell good stories with good characters. Lucas once knew how to make good movies. Even Jedi is a well crafted movie. The prequels go against every precept of quality moviemaking except in some of the most basic mechanical aspects.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    70. Re:The first is still the best by foo+fighter · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Fuck you too.

      --
      obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
    71. Re:The first is still the best by foo+fighter · · Score: 1

      Umm... Lando?

      Ah, yes. How could I forget Uncle Tom?

      Well said.

      Thank you very much.

      --
      obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
    72. Re:The first is still the best by foo+fighter · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Fuck you, asshole. Like a snot-nosed student in junior high these days could properly use "you're", let alone arrange their thoughts into coherent paragraphs.

      --
      obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
    73. Re:The first is still the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you don't get this, and I'd be surprised if you do, but it doesn't matter how cogent your argument is when you present it as a stream of rabid, hate-filled invective. Whoever modded this 'insightful' aught to be stripped of privileges for the lowering of civilized standards and the general brutalization and stupidifying of public discourse.

      This the not the post of a man in his mid-thirties. It's the posting of an adolescent in the midst of hormonal melt-down, and it needs to be modded in the basement where we keep the socially mal-adjusted and the criminally insane. Anyone who goes off like that about a subject so mind-shatteringly unimportant is someone who needs to refill their meds at the pharmacy and be kept away from sharp objects, children and helpless animals. Come on. Even nerds have some social standards, don't they?

    74. Re:The first is still the best by NEW22 · · Score: 1

      I understand that "saw the movies as adults" means "saw the movies as adults" and not necessarily the exact scenario I laid out. Still, I guess your point is that this isn't a childhood vs. adulthood thing. Are you claiming that I will like a movie I saw at 23 more than I will like a movie I see at age 33 just because I was younger when I saw it? If that is the case, I wouldn't agree with you. I can accept the childhood nostalgia thing as a possible influence, but I think that at some point in adulthood you will have some critical facilities that a child does not have. So, I think you could even legitimately claim childhood nostalgia as an influence for adult viewers who saw the movies at some point in their childhood as well. But, if a person was an adult of any age when they 1st saw the movies, in whatever order, I think the original poster's (sammy baby's) point stands. I believe he was referring to people who saw all movies 1st as an adult, and I have doubts that adults' nostalgia for their earlier adulthood is somehow what is influencing the opinion that the newer movies are much worse.

    75. Re:The first is still the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The are so many fucking legitimate reasons for that, you ignorant tool:

      See? It is possible to have a rational discussion on ./!!

    76. Re:The first is still the best by lymond01 · · Score: 1

      What you say is true about the Anakin scene but since pretty much every character in those 3 movies was just a wooden prop, I'll take the fight scene choreography and "Duel" music piece over the other 6 hours of film. :-)

    77. Re:The first is still the best by prichardson · · Score: 1

      The dialogue and characters were for kids. The plot (trade federation blockade) was definitely for adults.

      No person existed who could both stand the lame dialogue and 1-dimensional characters who could also understand the plot.

      --
      Help I'm a rock.
    78. Re:The first is still the best by foo+fighter · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Lighten up, cunt. We're talking about Star Wars here, not nuclear proliferation or health care reform or crop rotation strategies. What the fuck?

      --
      obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
    79. Re:The first is still the best by foo+fighter · · Score: 1

      Thanks. I try.

      --
      obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
    80. Re:The first is still the best by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      I can't watch Episode 2. It's the worst of the the three to me.

      Agree! Episode 2 is absolutely unwatchable. I saw it in the theater, hated it. Later I thought my reaction must have just been because of some kind of prejudice, and that it probably wasn't as bad as I remembered. Then it came on cable and I had to change the channel after about 15 minutes. That movie is a piece of garbage.

      I actually kind of like Episode 3, but funnily enough, my favorite scenes are the ones between Anakin and Palpatine. They're quiet and carry real menace. Imagine it's not a science fiction movie, and Palpatine is trying to turn Anakin on to kiddie porn or something. It works. Then Samuel L. Jackson uses the Force to turn Palpatine's face into a bad rubber mask and I lose all interest again. The actions scenes, for the most part, are incredibly tedious.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    81. Re:The first is still the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speak for yourself.

      I was about 11 when I watched the whole trilogy the first time and 13 when I saw the episode I. I prefered the trilogy then, but liked the new film. I've never seen episodes II and III.

      I watched the whole original trilogy in again 2008 when I got the boxed set as a birthday present. The first one was absolutely great, second one OK and the last one horrible crap. But the point is that I still liked the first one.

      When the special effects were what they were, they had to have a good story. Compare that to the TV nowadays. I don't give a fuck about the quality of the picture (to certain extent), but I want to see a good story. That's the same reason I still play X-com and Transport Tycoon (OpenTTD) nowadays.

    82. Re:The first is still the best by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      I don't know, I can still watch older star wars movies and enjoy them more than the newer ones. The older movies had less special effects and more character development. That works universally better than pure CGI.

      Of course 12 year olds today are impressed with the pod racing. Its fun to watch. But I bet those 12 year olds are not going to be moved by the movies enough to watch them again at age 40.

    83. Re:The first is still the best by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      This theory makes only slightly more sense than believing all nautically-themed songs in the past couple of centuries are derivatives of "What do you do with a drunken sailor?"

      Especially since that tune is actually from Oró Sé do Bheatha 'Bhaile.

    84. Re:The first is still the best by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      The older movies had less special effects and more character development. That works universally better than pure CGI.

      Actually the older movies were stuffed full of state-of-the-art special effects, which they won an Oscar for. But they also had character development. Which is why they're the better movies.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    85. Re:The first is still the best by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      True. I should have said 'compared to the new movies, the old movies had less cgi' to be more accurate.

      I bet if todays CGI were available back then, Lucas would have used it to the detriment of character interaction.

    86. Re:The first is still the best by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      I bet if todays CGI were available back then, Lucas would have used it to the detriment of character interaction.

      I honestly don't think so, because I think that the tools he had were perfectly sufficient to ruin the movie with if that was the route he was going to take. Back then, Lucas said that special effects were just tools for helping to tell a story, and were pointless if they weren't helping tell the story, and I think he really meant it.

      I don't think it's the tools, I think it's Lucas that changed. He forgot what makes a story good. He forgot why you can't plaster over the holes in your plot with special effects, CGI or otherwise. He forgot that the reason people loved Star Wars wasn't the mythos, it was the characters. And he forgot to have anyone around him who dared tell him that his ideas weren't totally awesome.

      Personally, I bet that if CGI had never been invented that the prequels still would have sucked, especially in the character department. It's not like Qui Gon, Anakin, or Padme didn't have enough screen time to establish themselves as characters. It was how they were written that sapped them of all life.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    87. Re:The first is still the best by aurispector · · Score: 1

      This is condescending nonsense. I've watched all the star wars films in every version. The original cut of ep 4 is still the best. Why? Because it isn't laden with stupid "look at the funny alien" humor. It's dark, violent and unforgiving and the protagonists aren't aware of having super magic "I win" powers. The one Jedi in the film who does is killed. The humor is largely sarcastic and many sympathetic characters are slaughtered - Luke's family, the Jawas, many of the rebels. Even the Jawas are a little scary. Compare that to the Ewoks, who are just walking teddy bears. The bar scene alone has 3 killings. Nowhere in the series does Lucas's ineptitude show more clearly than with the stupid CGI singer dropped in the middle of this scene.

      There's plenty of movies I liked as a kid that I couldn't bear to watch now. Why do you assume I'm unable to apply a critical eye to this film when the others are so comparably bad?

      --
      I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
    88. Re:The first is still the best by wdef · · Score: 1

      This is a fair point, but it still doesn't detract from the simple fact that Lucas's first Star Wars movie was the best by any measure and for any age group, and that the sequels or prequels or whatever they were got progressively more leaden and boring. To the point where I really find all of those follow-ups unwatchable.

    89. Re:The first is still the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's Vader, not Vadar.

      Now whose the ignorant cunt?

    90. Re:The first is still the best by Altus · · Score: 1

      Clearly its not a kids movie then. But I know that as an adult I find trade disputes, endless debate and embargoes very very interesting.

      No, wait, the other thing... Tedious.

      Its not a kids movie, its certainly not an adults movie, its just a bad movie.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    91. Re:The first is still the best by Altus · · Score: 1

      Jedi starts pretty strong too. Right up until the the totally bad ass bounty hunter you all collected UPC symbols for gets killed for a burp joke.

      Though honestly, Carie Fischer telling Han she was "Someone who loves you" in her most coke addled voice was a bit of foreshadowing.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    92. Re:The first is still the best by Altus · · Score: 1

      True, if vader had said "I had to help you son, your Midichlorian count was higher than the emperors, I was compelled by their power" THAT would have been contrived.

      Luckily Lucas didn't get that idea until later.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    93. Re:The first is still the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or the third option, YOU need to learn to read.

      It's quite obvious that the OP was referring to people who first saw Star Wars when they were adults.

    94. Re:The first is still the best by kenp2002 · · Score: 1

      Episode 1 (from a 8 year old) greedy aliens working for the bad guys plans are stopped by the Jedi while meeting a slave kid that becomes Vader.

      --
      -=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
    95. Re:The first is still the best by kenp2002 · · Score: 1

      Star Wars had great characters

      No it really didn't. Han could have been plucked out of any Buck Rogers or Flash Gordon radio serial. The Princess had virtually no character development. The Aunt and Uncle of Luke didn't have enough screen time. Obi Wan, despite Alec's performance didn't have much development beyond touching foreheads and babbling on about the Force. Vader didn't have any development and neither did Boba Fett. The only decent character was Luke that had any real development, motivation, etc.

      Breakdown of poor character development:

      A: How does a princess from a planet that doesn't have any weapons becomes a member of a rebellion? And if it is a peaceful planet why would they care one way or another about the Empire? She was a prop with no identity except to be saved in the first movie. Then a prop to rescue Han in the second movie, then to be rescued again from tree huggers....

      B: Why is Han partnered up with a 7 foot tall carpet?

      C: Where the fuck did Billy D Williams character come into this out of nowhere. We still don't know how Han got the Falcon...

      D: Why was Uncle Owen so bitchie about Ben Kenobi?

      E: If all the Jedi are dead and no one knows Obi Wan is alive, why does Leia know to seek him out?

      F: Where is Toshie's Station and why would Luke want to go to the academy if he is so juiced later on to join the rebellion? (Pre-uncle\aunt deaths...)

      G: What is the reasoning behind Hans shifting loyalty? What takes a smuggler from a life of crime to joining a rebellion against the Empire. We never see any reasoning for Han to dislike the Empire versus the Republic as far as the life of a smuggler goes...

      I mean shit I could go on and pick apart the original 3 as badly as that guy picked apart the prequels... sans the trapped hooker in the basement.

      They persist because of nostalgic hype, nothing more. They are, at best, average movies. The prequels are also average films.

      From an objective viewpoint:

      Episode 4 had some of the worst camera work and got lucky on the opening sequence and the two suns shot. Greatly improved on episode 5 and the best camera work came on 6. The camera work was also excellent in Ep 1 and 3. Shoddy in the second one.

      Lighting was greatly improved in the prequels also and more consistent use of thematic coloring of light.

      Greatest crime of the prequels was bad acting all around and bad dialog.

      --
      -=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
    96. Re:The first is still the best by Asic+Eng · · Score: 1
      While I like The Planets suite about as much as the Star Wars music, just because the former is older and related to space (and really it was as influenced as much by Greco-Roman mythology as the conception Holst had of the physical planets) does not imply that the latter somehow has to be derived mainly from the former!

      You are right, just because it's earlier doesn't imply that it influenced star wars. However the fact that it's a straight copy does imply that. The emperors theme is "Mars" from Holst. No change to it in any way.

    97. Re:The first is still the best by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      No it really didn't. Han could have been plucked out of any Buck Rogers or Flash Gordon radio serial. The Princess had virtually no character development. The Aunt and Uncle of Luke didn't have enough screen time. Obi Wan, despite Alec's performance didn't have much development beyond touching foreheads and babbling on about the Force. Vader didn't have any development and neither did Boba Fett. The only decent character was Luke that had any real development, motivation, etc.

      An interesting archetypical character is better than one who's a completely original piece of cardboard (not that they were original). A character with personality and little character arc is much better than one with no personality and no character arc. Yes Luke had by far the most development over the film and films, but it was his story. The other characters were actual characters with recognizable personality traits other than "boring". They were more than just automatons making the plot go.

      A: How does a princess from a planet that doesn't have any weapons becomes a member of a rebellion? And if it is a peaceful planet why would they care one way or another about the Empire? She was a prop with no identity except to be saved in the first movie.

      LOL. Because she was lying, genius! You might as well ask "how can the rebel base be where Leia said it was but also somewhere else?!" And I guess you didn't notice her role in her own rescue, or how in three lines of dialogue during the rescue she showed more personality than Amidala showed in three movies.

      B: Why is Han partnered up with a 7 foot tall carpet?

      Because this is Star Wars and humans working with aliens isn't something that requires some complicated explanation? And gee, what use would a criminal have for a pilot who can also rip people's arms out of their sockets. Hmmmm.... Also, his beef with the Empire was they made his job harder than it was under the Republic, and the reason he turned around is because hanging out with Luke and Leia inspired him to care about something more than just money -- that's called character development.

      D: Why was Uncle Owen so bitchie about Ben Kenobi?

      Yeah, it's almost like they new more about him than they let on, and had reason to think he was trouble and might tempt Luke to fly off and join the rebellion.

      I mean shit I could go on and pick apart the original 3 as badly as that guy picked apart the prequels... sans the trapped hooker in the basement.

      You could try, but if these are examples then you'd suck at it. "Why did they introduce a new character who had an unexplained history with one of the other characters?" Really? That's supposed to be "picking apart" Star Wars? LOL.

      You're making my point for me here!

      They persist because of nostalgic hype, nothing more. They are, at best, average movies. The prequels are also average films.

      Such nonsense. Nostalgia can make something seem better in your memory. It can't make the actual re-watching enjoyable, as so many examples from my own life have shown -- Transformers: The Movie, animated The Tick, and so on. But Star Wars is actually a very good film that's held up surprisingly well, and the prequels are mediocre except on the most superficial, surface-presentation level.

      Nostalgia made me want to love the prequels, and I tried tell myself I enjoyed them just as much, but I couldn't hide the fact that something was obviously... crappy... starting with the opening crawl. You can claim nostalgia is the only thing that makes people think one movie is better than another, but that just doesn't hold water.

      Nostalgia isn't going to save the prequels, either. Kids who watched Ep. I are going to rewatch it in thirty years and realize the plot they didn't care about as kids still makes no sense and neither do the characters, and that they should just skip ahead to the lightsaber fight at the end.

      From an object

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    98. Re:The first is still the best by sammy+baby · · Score: 1

      They too were young when they saw the original movies - everything is better when you're younger. That's the grandparent's entire point.

      Everything is better when you're young. There's plenty of crap that I loved at the age of ten, then viewed again at thirty and found stupid. It's difficult to say the same about things I viewed when I was twenty-seven.

      I'm down with the notion that we tend to view the past with rose-colored glasses, et cetera. But it's a lot easier to win over a ten year old with the zoom and the pew-pew than it is to get a thirty year old.

    99. Re:The first is still the best by CODiNE · · Score: 1

      Dude... I'm in the 3rd world, there's pirate movies on every corner and LOTS of old classics people have never heard of. I actually have several friends who've never seen Star Wars and I'm gonna have a party with them all over for it. I'd say there's hundreds of millions if not over a billion who've just never even heard of the thing. Inuit man! INUIT!!

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
  10. Yes, wipe away shameless merchandising... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...with more merchandising! I'm so glad the marketing department approved of this plan!

  11. Greedo shoots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    ...first in the opening sequence of every episode

    1. Re:Greedo shoots by delinear · · Score: 1

      Oblig: Nooooooooooooooo!!

  12. Memories of Jar Jar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Memories of Jar Jar sounds like a fragrance that George Lucas would put on the market.

    1. Re:Memories of Jar Jar by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Don't give him ideas. If there's the chance of making a buck, he'll try it.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    2. Re:Memories of Jar Jar by catd77 · · Score: 1

      That and Taun Taun Inards Musk.

    3. Re:Memories of Jar Jar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jar Jar: "PEE-YOUSA!"

    4. Re:Memories of Jar Jar by srmalloy · · Score: 1

      Memories of Jar Jar sounds like a fragrance that George Lucas would put on the market.

      If it's the aroma of a smoking pile of ash tinged with the roast-pork smell of burned flesh, it would probably sell strongly, if only for the humor value.

  13. Release Date by CFBMoo1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    "There is no fixed release date for the show, but it's expected sometime in 2011 or 2012..."

    Lets see, the Mayans called it in 2012.
    Nostradamus called it around 2012.
    People are all end times for 2012.
    Then we had Jar Jar... DEAR GOD NO!

    --
    ~~ Behold the flying cow with a rail gun! ~~
  14. Must be said by kenp2002 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Your computer runs on smoke. Once you let the smoke out, you can't put it back in thus your computer has stopped working.

    Or in the old days: "Once you let the cat out of the bag..."

    The fact was Lucas proved you can in fact destroy a successful cannon of work. Most of the hard core Star Wars fans I knew growing up washed their hands of the whole thing (some even went to the dark side... Trek...)

    The whole "Joss Whedon is my master now" was a slap in the face to Lucas I'm sure but I think it is too late for damage control. The MMO crew I play with were chomping at the bit to beta test damn near everything out there with one exception.... the new Star Wars MMO coming out. With the first 3 films plus that train wreck of an MMO and it's subsequent "fixes" the franchise is dead. The inital 3 month subscription figures will be telling on how bad the damage has been.

    Warhammer and most AAA MMOs should clear around 500,000 copies in the first 90 days and should clear at least 200,000 in pre-orders. Watching this new MMO release may gauge how much damage the franchise has taken over the years.

    Comic runs, novels, etc are all factored into the success. Prior to the first 3 films in the series at the local book store there was an entire section (4 shelves high, arm span length) of Star Wars books. Now it is a single shelf post-prequels. That strikes me as significant damage. That puts the book count equal to Terry Brooks Shannara series and they haven't even gotten a film yet (which is suprising, the first three books strike me as very film\mini-series friendly. In fact now that I think of it the first book The Sword of Shannara would make a pretty good 3 season series or 4 part mini-series. The special effect requirement for his works is actually rather low until Scions...)

    --
    -=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
    1. Re:Must be said by bkr1_2k · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think you've hit the nail on the head. Finding Star Wars books that weren't in the "young adult" section used to be much easier, and they were even decent pulp, if not great novels. Lucas is a shitty writer and horrible director. If he writes the first year of episodes I can guarantee I won't be watching any of it.

      Reading the article mentioned they wanted it to be like "Young Indiana Jones", which I was surprised to hear about for the first time. If it has the same success, I suspect this star wars "series" won't last very long.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    2. Re:Must be said by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Honestly, I could not make head nor tail of your entire post, despite re-reading it several times. "Single shelf"? "Book count"? You're sure you're a fan of a movie, and not someone in the publishing industry?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    3. Re:Must be said by kria · · Score: 2, Funny

      Despite having approval on the novels (at least, that's what I've heard), Lucas let a lot of things go into the novels that he later contradicted with the prequels. I feel tremendous sympathy for these novelists scrambling to reconcile what has been written and things that are now, for good or ill, considered canon.

      Re: GP's comments about the MMO, I got the impression that Bioware and the Old Republic era works have a much better odor among fans. I know that my husband, who is a much bigger fan than I am, is chomping at the bit for TOR to come out. (And I assure you, he is definitely anti-prequel. He's currently running a D6 WEG Star Wars tabletop game in which he has repeatedly hammered home to the players that the events of the prequels are NOT what happened in his game.)

    4. Re:Must be said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well that's funny, I had no problem making sense of her post. Maybe you're just incredibly slow?

    5. Re:Must be said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you're a F-ing moron who has no idea that his tiny ideas have no application in the greater world?

    6. Re:Must be said by kungfugleek · · Score: 1

      FWIW, the Old Republic (the new Star Wars MMO) has been described by critics as "more Star Wars than any of the prequels". But your point is still valid. Damage to the franchise name has been done.

    7. Re:Must be said by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Most of the hard core Star Wars fans I knew growing up washed their hands of the whole thing (some even went to the dark side... Trek...)

      Sorry, but I was watching Star Trek for over a decade before Star Wars ever came out. It's not an either/or proposition. You just have to remember that first, film making technology was over ten years more advanced than Trek when Wars came out, and second, Trek was on a TV show budget, not a multimillion movie budget.

    8. Re:Must be said by kenp2002 · · Score: 1

      Despite having approval on the novels (at least, that's what I've heard), Lucas let a lot of things go into the novels that he later contradicted with the prequels. I feel tremendous sympathy for these novelists scrambling to reconcile what has been written and things that are now, for good or ill, considered canon.

      Re: GP's comments about the MMO, I got the impression that Bioware and the Old Republic era works have a much better odor among fans. I know that my husband, who is a much bigger fan than I am, is chomping at the bit for TOR to come out. (And I assure you, he is definitely anti-prequel. He's currently running a D6 WEG Star Wars tabletop game in which he has repeatedly hammered home to the players that the events of the prequels are NOT what happened in his game.)

      Yes and they could just as easily screw up TOR as they did that first steaming pile. The question is how many of the fans, burned by the movies, burned by the first MMO are going to put down their money. I'm not arguing the % volume, I am interested in the % change from the last one. Going from 90% to 85% is huge in a demographic change versus say 90% to 89%. Gratz to hear PnP is still alive, truely a dying artform for story telling...

      --
      -=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
    9. Re:Must be said by magnusrex1280 · · Score: 1

      My theory about the Shannara series is that it's so blatantly copycat from LOTR that no studio would want to sink money into it, for fear of box office failure. Don't get me wrong, I love the books, but the whole thing is copied from Tolkien almost verbatim.

    10. Re:Must be said by kenp2002 · · Score: 1

      Translation: In sampling the number of published books and inventory we see a dramatic change pre-sequel vs. post-sequel.

      If a book store kept an inventory of 2000 Star Wars related book prior to Ep 1-3 then afterwards only maintain an inventory in the 150 count 3 scenarios are possible:

      A: the demand dropped so low they no longer stock a large number of copies per title.

      B: The number of published titles dropped so low that maintaining the same number of copies per title drastically reduced the number of works.

      C: A combination of both.

      If there are 10 title with 3 copies each there would be 30 books on the shelf.

      If there are 4 titles with 3 copies you get 12 total books.

      If there are 2 titles with 2 copies of each you get 4 total books.

      Like wise heading up this afternoon to the bookstore I counted 89 Star Wars books. Converly there were 130 Shannara books and just for shits and giggles I counted 61 Dr. Who books. I checked Star Trek and stopped counting after 300.

      --
      -=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
    11. Re:Must be said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lucas let a lot of things go into the novels that he later contradicted with the prequels.

      Not just the prequels, but even the original trilogy.

      Case in point: the relationship between Luke and Leia. Originally, they were not going to be brother and sister. Han Solo was going to die, and Luke and Leia were going to fall in love and eventually get married. Alan Dean Foster wrote Splinter of the Mind's Eye with the intention that it might turn into the second Star Wars movie. In it, there is sexual tension between Luke and Leia. Although it got scrapped as a movie due to the first movie being successful enough that George decided to make the big budget Empire Strikes Back, he still alluded to the possible future of Luke and Leia by including the now infamous kiss scene. Then, he went and threw all that out with the bath water when he decided in Return of the Jedi to make them suddenly related.

    12. Re:Must be said by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1

      Or in the old days: "Once you let the cat out of the bag..."

      You can restore things. But it takes some extra effort. It's going to take George Lucas to recognise that his role in Star Wars is as Executive Producer, to hire a talented team of writers, directors and producers and let them get on with making whatever comes next in that universe. That means hiring someone with some vision who is prepared to argue with you to defend his vision.

      Personally, I never even saw EP3. I saw EP1 & 2 and then read Maddox's summary of how Vadar turned bad and just gave it a miss. I'll watch it on TV sometime, maybe. I'll have to hear some amazing buzz on the next Star Wars thing before wasting my time on it.

    13. Re:Must be said by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      That was my take on it too when I first read Sword of Shannara so many years ago.

      Unfortunately, everything Brooks writes is tailor-made for a Hollywood script. They ALWAYS feature the hapless young boy thrust into greatness by circumstances beyond his control, bumbling his way to victory while being completely and totally clueless for the entire quest. There's ALWAYS an evil shapechanger lurking in the good guys' camp; sometimes he throws in two for the price of one. There's always a strong magical male protector of the hapless idiot, standing in as a father-figure while not actually being the idiot's father. There's ALWAYS a comedic sidekick character, for the lulz.

      Hollywood likes that formula plenty. I personally hate it, but nobody listens to me.

    14. Re:Must be said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      West End Game's Star Wars... god those were good times. I've always related the original vs. prequels to D6 Star Wars vs. D20. The former of those pairs were about a great story taking place in a fantastic setting, and finding out that setting was highly marketable and inclusive. The latter were about exploiting those discovered marketplaces and earning a buck.

      Art vs. Business.

    15. Re:Must be said by wdef · · Score: 1

      Most of the hard core Star Wars fans I knew growing up washed their hands of the whole thing (some even went to the dark side... Trek...)

      Trek is not the dark side. Blake's 7 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blake's_7 is the dark side, and a rich and fertile darkness it is, too. Which is why "they" are going to remake it. Hope they don't ruin it.

  15. "Jar Jar Binks, Anakin and Padme's romance" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    There's a 3-way my mind could have done without.

    1. Re:"Jar Jar Binks, Anakin and Padme's romance" by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      could have been worse, someone could have mentioned with that tongue jar jar could do oral sex on someone's fallopian tubes or large intestines

    2. Re:"Jar Jar Binks, Anakin and Padme's romance" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *facepalm*

    3. Re:"Jar Jar Binks, Anakin and Padme's romance" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      could have been worse, someone could have mentioned with that tongue jar jar could do oral sex on someone's fallopian tubes or small intestines

      FTFY.

    4. Re:"Jar Jar Binks, Anakin and Padme's romance" by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1

      What about Han, Leia and Chewie? "Well, you did say you'd rather kiss a wookie".

    5. Re:"Jar Jar Binks, Anakin and Padme's romance" by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      Annie!

      thx, now I have to pour bleach on my brain... 'cept maybe the Padme parts, those are ok...

  16. Circling further down the drain as soap drama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "much darker," a "much more character-based series" and "more adult,"

    That sounds like Stargate Universe all over again: a once great Scifi universe gets turned into another whiny soap drama.

    Who said Hollywood was out of ideas ;)

    1. Re:Circling further down the drain as soap drama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stargate was never high octane Sci-Fi, but it was fun, and they established 15 seasons of workable formulaic style and 15 seasons of cannon, and then SGU comes along and they have to make it younger, hipper and edgier and more character based, and they ended up with, not a space opera, but a soap opera in space. It was a real shame. As a stand alone show it might not have been so bad, but the premise itself and much of what has happened has been dependent on those 15 seasons of cannon. Well, I will always have my DVD boxed sets of SG1 and SGA.

    2. Re:Circling further down the drain as soap drama by vegiVamp · · Score: 1

      15 seasons ? Is Atlantis (I assume you're counting that) really so good that you take it in stride ?

      --
      What a depressingly stupid machine.
  17. Do, or do not. There is no try! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yoda had it right: you can either produce something great that is actually worth watching, or you make something crappy and forgettable. The more Lucas was involved in the projects the crappier they became, so here's hoping he'll let other more skilled people do the work.

  18. Easy, George, Let Somebody Else Direct It by ScottyB · · Score: 4, Insightful

    George, there's an easy way to go back to the "good old days" before the prequels (if you haven't seen the 7-part, 1+-hour-long review of the Phantom Menace on youtube, go now and find it). Let somebody else direct them, and you just be a producer. It's clear that nobody on your staff is willing to contradict your "artistic vision," and thus we end up with crap results. Let somebody else direct, and then you throw in some criticism for a back-and-forth, and maybe these won't suck.

    But smart money would be on them being terrible.

  19. Why is "darker" seen as "better"? by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why do so many screenwriters equate "something that adults will enjoy" with "darker"?

    Most of Raiders of the Lost Ark was not "dark", but I loved it when it came out, and I still really like it. There was action, adventure, wonder, and surprise. There was no soul searching over life's moral ambiguities, or "deep" plot elements where Indy tortured bad guys with car batteries. Similar with the first Star Wars movie (episode 4).

    If this is Lucas' attempt to atone for past mistakes, it seems like he's still off the mark.

    1. Re:Why is "darker" seen as "better"? by memnock · · Score: 1

      i suppose it's perceived as a more realistic representation of human behavior or society.

      i know that i don't walk around all day long with a big smile on my face, like i'm worry-free and happy. i'm not trying to say all stories portray life as full rainbows, but i suppose if they don't have some kind of stressful issue involved, even if it's somewhat minor, they don't seem as real.

    2. Re:Why is "darker" seen as "better"? by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's a matter of what you want to get out of seeing a movie.

      If you want to be morally and philosophically challenged, it might be good once in a while to see a movie that wrestles with the ticking-timebomb torture scenario. Or if you want to be reminded that we're all capable of evil, once in a while you might watch a movie that makes you delight in the torture of the main character's enemies. Then afterward you can reflect in disgust (perhaps) about how you got into it.

      But there are many other themes and purposes that can make good cinema:

      • Movies that inspire us to do better. I.e., about Ghandi's patience and pacifism. Or the "Band of Brothers" series from HBO, which has inspirational accounts of bravery, sacrifice, and excellent leadership. Or "Schindler's List" (which I haven't seen), which I'm told is an inspirational story of one man's self-sacrifice to save others. (These are noteworthy because they're realistic about the human condition, but not dark.)
      • Movies that simply entertain, temporarily freeing us from our daily burdens of worries. For example, "My Big Fat Greek Wedding", "Raiders of the Lost Ark", or "Something about Mary".
      • Movies that teach us while entertaining us. E.g., some parts of that popular movie (I forget the title) about the game-theoretician Nash; or "March of the Penguins".(
    3. Re:Why is "darker" seen as "better"? by delinear · · Score: 1

      Not only that, your hero has to suffer if their victories are going to seem anything but hollow. Luke had his only family massacred, was dragged into a war he didn't want, found out he was destined to be some hunted warrior monk, had his tutor and friend killed in front of him, found out the guy that had been trying to kill him was his father, found out that Ewoks (not Ewoks anything, just Ewoks), that's some pretty tough crap to deal with but it elevates his victory over adversity. Anakin, on the other hand, lost his mum and... yeah that's pretty much all I've got. In light of that he seems more like a spoiled brat and not really someone you want to empathise with.

    4. Re:Why is "darker" seen as "better"? by ari_j · · Score: 1

      I think that darker == better in the Star Wars universe because of how well-regarded Empire is. If the most depressing movie in the series is the first or second most popular out of six, they're going to do all they can to repeat that.

      Similarly, while the penguins are my favorite characters in the Madagascar movies, they work because they are not the plot. They are interjections of humor and they are a critical plot device to allow the stories to move forward and to be resolved, but the plot is not penguin-centric. The penguins get maybe ten minutes of screen time in a ninety-minute film. So, because millions of people agree with me that the penguins are frickin' awesome, what do they do? They make a horribly shitty TV series based on the penguins.

      The movie (and broader entertainment) industry is ridiculously myopic. That's all there is to it.

  20. Article Starts With a Flawed Premise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    The opening sentence of the article states "In the history of cinema it's hard to top the utter disappointment felt when watching George Lucas' follow ups to the original Star Wars movies."

    I don't know about that. I saw Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

    1. Re:Article Starts With a Flawed Premise by delinear · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, the movie that finally outdid Jumping the Shark with Nuking the Fridge. I was unfortunate enough to see it at the cinema, but not as unfortunate as the group of obvious die-hard Indy fans who came out of the cinema in their Indy hats and jackets looking like someone just killed their puppy.

    2. Re:Article Starts With a Flawed Premise by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      And Wargames 2 only slides past on a technicality-- it was direct-to-video.

      http://blakeyrat.com/2008/09/wargames-the-dead-code/

  21. Memories of who? by davidwr · · Score: 1

    "There was no Jar Jar" *wave of hand* - Master Lucas

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  22. "Much darker" my ass by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These days "Much darker than its predecessor" has become Hollywood doublespeak. It means nothing. "This Harry Potter movie will be much darker than the last one" is just the studio's way of trying to get more adults to come see it (at the end of the day, it still ends up being the same PG-13 rated CGI-fest).

    Here's a good rule of thumb, if they have to *say* it's much darker, it probably isn't. If you want to see if it's just doublespeak, ask the simple follow-up question "But it's still suitable for kids, right?" If they fall over themselves saying yes, then you know the "much darker" thing is just a con.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:"Much darker" my ass by Assmasher · · Score: 1

      Exactly, when they say "much darker" I'll be interested if they mean "as in Dark Knight" darker; ergo, NOT suitable for children - or my wife.

      --
      Loading...
    2. Re:"Much darker" my ass by paulhar · · Score: 1

      > These days "Much darker than its predecessor" has become Hollywood doublespeak. It means nothing.

      Maybe they're much darker because they're 3d?

    3. Re:"Much darker" my ass by jzarling · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Much Darker" just means more poorly lit sets.

      Gritty means there will be rain, garbage strewn about, and major set pieces will be taking place in either abandoned industrial complexes, or abandoned buildings.

      --
      It is better to be the hammer than the anvil.
    4. Re:"Much darker" my ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, the potter movies, just like the books, do get darker as the series progresses.

    5. Re:"Much darker" my ass by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Either that or it means they didn't light the scenes properly.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    6. Re:"Much darker" my ass by PawNtheSandman · · Score: 0

      the last Harry Potter and The Dark Knight were both much darker than their predecessors.

    7. Re:"Much darker" my ass by dcollins · · Score: 1

      "These days 'Much darker than its predecessor' has become Hollywood doublespeak. It means nothing."

      Agreed. My guess is that where Ep. I had Jar-Jar "step in the poopy" for no good effect, this stuff will see one person awkwardly killed for no good plot reason.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    8. Re:"Much darker" my ass by OglinTatas · · Score: 1

      heh. Blade Runner is all dark and gritty... I think you're on to something there.

    9. Re:"Much darker" my ass by Vorpix · · Score: 1

      gritty!? the new show will be garbage if it doesn't feature natalie portman naked and petrified and covered in hot grits.

      (P.S. mods: this is a homage to vintage /., not a genuine troll)

      --
      frog blast the vent core
    10. Re:"Much darker" my ass by BoredAtWorkWhatElse · · Score: 1

      It works pretty well for games though. Like: "Doom 3 was much darker than it's predecessor."

    11. Re:"Much darker" my ass by domatic · · Score: 1

      "Much Darker" also means the body count of the minor characters will go up. Might as well put red shirts on Sirius Black and Cedric Diggory.

    12. Re:"Much darker" my ass by delinear · · Score: 1

      The darkness shows off the Now With Added Lense Flare(tm) better.

    13. Re:"Much darker" my ass by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      No, "Much darker" is an R rating.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    14. Re:"Much darker" my ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, darker means less smiles and more torment. Less hope and more suffering. Evil succeeds more often than good. A hero's fears and doubts and suffering are more prominent than his strength and good will.

      "Darker" can be empirically tracked and emotionally felt. If a movie doesn't feel darker despite everyone else saying it is then you're simply desensitized to the suffering and evil dominating the movie.

      Being child suitable is not a measurement for darkness. If darkness = "suffering, death, corruption, evil, hate, anger, depression" then clearly a movie's darkness determines if it's child suitable. Not visa versa.

  23. Latter Canceled. Need New Avenues. by eldavojohn · · Score: 4, Informative

    We want sequels to Return of the Jedi. Wasn't he originally going to do 3 sets of trilogies: with the 3rd set later on, and the only common characters would be the 2 droids?

    Yes, those were the initial plans. Although there was a very important if in their plans. From what I've heard through rumors, Lucas had two trilogies he could tell and he picked the stronger of the two (prequels) to do first. If that was financially successful and well received then he would continue with the sequels. I think this strategy changed with the release of the first or second episode and the latter sequel was canceled altogether.

    Keep in mind that Harrison Ford turned down a Han Solo spinoff and opted instead for Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (with a fifth shaping up).

    I don't want later sequels. If anything is done in the Star Wars universe, I want the Timothy Zahn Trilogy done as three movies. Thrawn is badass. I want a TV series that takes stories like the "Tales" series of SW books and brings them to life.

    Personally I think the characters in Episodes I, II and III were so weak that we need new characters that aren't supposed to fulfill some other plot line's obligations.

    --
    My work here is dung.
  24. Hire the right person by Montezumaa · · Score: 1

    I suggest that Jorge tell Rick McCallum to go away and hire Mr. Plinkett: http://www.youtube.com/user/RedLetterMedia At least the guy can point the series in the proper direction.

  25. more than just three characters by iggymanz · · Score: 3, Informative

    star wars horse has been beaten to death, skinned, gutted, bones and hooves boiled to glue. Then Lucas squatted over the offal and took a shit lasting for years. Time to forget the whole damn thing.

  26. Re:You want good Star Wars episodes? by Deisatru · · Score: 1
    If Joss gets involved, they could bring jarjar back, I am sure he would kill him with gratuitous amounts of gore quickly. I figure we would see everyone but leiah and luke die if Joss gets involved. While I think Joss is an excellent screenwriter, I am still pissed about Wash.

    I am a leaf on the wind, watch me soar.

  27. Christmas special by Via_Patrino · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Who doesn't remember that Christmas special? Can't be worse than that.

    1. Re:Christmas special by Cornwallis · · Score: 1

      I was going to add that here comes an opportunity to do another Christmas special. I finally saw it a few months ago and my eyes are still leaking.

  28. Force Unleashed by djnforce9 · · Score: 1

    I don't know about you, but I think he should somehow include the storyline used from the game "Star Wars - The Force Unleashed". That was really well done, fits nicely between episodes III and IV, and would make a great film adaptation (or multi-part TV episode).

  29. REAL ACTORS! by orateam · · Score: 1

    "Can George Lucas' new Star Wars TV series, the first Star Wars spin off with real actors" It would be the first time real actors were used in the entire Star Wars Saga.

    1. Re:REAL ACTORS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Alec Guiness, Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing, Jimmy Smits. I rest my case.

    2. Re:REAL ACTORS! by gmuslera · · Score: 1

      Alec Guiness and Peter Cushing in the 1st movie wasnt exactly unknown nor unreal actors at that time. And if a prequel was ever made, maybe would had some known actors of that time, but sadly (fortunately?) that never happened.

    3. Re:REAL ACTORS! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      It would be the first time real actors were used in the entire Star Wars Saga

      What? Alec Guinness isn't an actor? He got an Oscar for that role! And he had a stllar acting career long before Star Wars; he was respected in his profession. Ewan McGregor wasn't bad, either. How about James earl Jones, the voice of Darth Vader? He's not an actor?

      WTF?

    4. Re:REAL ACTORS! by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      "Guinness won the Academy Award for Best Actor in 1957 for his role in The Bridge on the River Kwai. He was nominated in 1958 for the Academy Award for Best Writing, Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium, for his screenplay adapted from Joyce Cary's novel The Horse's Mouth. He was nominated for Best Supporting Actor for his role as Obi-Wan Kenobi in Star Wars in 1977. He received an Academy Honorary Award for lifetime achievement in 1980. In 1988, he received an Academy Award nomination for Best Supporting Actor for Little Dorrit."

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alec_Guinness#Awards_and_honours

  30. Euwww by Chrisq · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hopefully George Lucas can wipe the memory of Jar Jar Binks, Anakin and Padme's romance

    I must have missed this perverse threesome when I watched the film.

    1. Re:Euwww by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was the only thing worth watching.

    2. Re:Euwww by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This made me laugh out loud. Thank you! Oh and George Lucas........drop dead.

  31. Re:Latter Canceled. Need New Avenues. by Rary · · Score: 4, Informative

    As I understand it (and most of this is, of course, rumour and speculation), the original trilogy was supposed to go on much longer than it did, with ROTJ not being the last episode. Darth Vader (intended to be a somewhat minor villain) was to be killed, while the hunt for the real villain, the Emperor, would continue in the subsequent episodes. Han Solo was supposed to be killed off, paving the way for the love affair between Luke and Leia (the brother/sister idea was only thrown in at the last minute).

    Unfortunately, with Lucas' failed marriage weighing on him, he got sick of making these movies and decided to just wrap everything up quickly and not-so-cleanly in ROTJ.

    If he had plans later on to attempt to create a sequel trilogy (of this I have no doubt), it was more of a "milk the cash cow" idea than even the prequels were, because there really is no story left to tell after the destruction of the second Death Star and the death of the Emperor. At least, not a particularly relevant story. I really hope he doesn't ever head down that road.

    --

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

  32. Re:You want good Star Wars episodes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Oh, uh, actually "Watch how I soar" is actually my line. Hehe." :)
    (Alan Tudik, Serenity bloopers)

  33. JARJAR's happy fun adventures of whimsy!!! by happy_place · · Score: 2, Funny

    Darn, and I was hoping for something along the lines of Peewee Herman's BigTop adventures, with Jarjar the main character, constantly breaking the third wall to talk to a juvenile audience about toy endorsements, "Can yousa kids say to Mommy, "Meesaw want Jarjar action figures!" "

    --
    http://www.beanleafpress.com
    1. Re:JARJAR's happy fun adventures of whimsy!!! by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 2, Informative

      *fourth wall. Stage right, stage left, stage rear, audience.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    2. Re:JARJAR's happy fun adventures of whimsy!!! by camperdave · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe JarJar will be so clumsy that he will break the third wall.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    3. Re:JARJAR's happy fun adventures of whimsy!!! by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      *fourth wall. Stage right, stage left, stage rear, audience.

      Maybe JarJar will be so clumsy that he will break the third wall.

      I guess most people would be happy for him to break as many walls as is required to have the building collapse on him.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  34. Re:Latter Canceled. Need New Avenues. by TiberiusMonkey · · Score: 2

    I think I must be about the only person in the world that detested most of the early Extended Universe (Zahn included) stuff as much as he detested the prequels that followed some years later. No idea what the later stuff was like as I never bothered with it, Han Solo calling someone a "panty waste" and lame story after story was just too much for me.

  35. meh by rarel · · Score: 4, Funny
    I'll be waiting for CSI: Coruscant

    "We found him in the Academy sewers and the burns on the decapitated corpse indicate lightsaber cuts, which means the killer is probably... *beat* It's not a Jedi that I'm looking for. Please move along. Move along!"

    1. Re:meh by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 5, Funny

      David Caruso: Judging by the scorch marks and angle of trajectory, you could say that, even with eyes like that, this Rhodian...*puts on sunglasses*...never saw the shot coming...
      YEEEEEAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!

      --
      Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
    2. Re:meh by bar-agent · · Score: 1

      I'll be waiting for CSI: Coruscant
      "We found him in the Academy sewers and the burns on the decapitated corpse indicate lightsaber cuts, which means the killer is probably... *beat* It's not a Jedi that I'm looking for. Please move along. Move along!"

      Actually, there is a Coruscant Nights book series written like a noir detective story.

      And if you like that idea, I can also recommend The Sword-Edged Blonde, She Murdered Me With Science, and The Case of the Toxic Spell Dump.

      --
      i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
  36. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  37. I actually liked Episode 1-3 by f0rk · · Score: 1

    I actually liked Episode 1-3. No trolling. I did !
    I liked the new style, even tho it's not "Star Wars", but i still liked it.
    He painted an epic world with an infinite amount of possible side stories and spin-offs.

    He described a world more then actual characters.

  38. More Sith by camperdave · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hey Lucas,

    Instead of rehashing the train wreck you made of the Skywalker Saga, why don't you tell the story of the splitting of the Jedi and the Sith. In The Phantom Menace, Darth Maul says "At last we will reveal ourselves to the Jedi. At last we will have revenge." Tell THAT story: why they are in hiding; what are they getting revenge for.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    1. Re:More Sith by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      ... through the medium of interpretative dance!

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    2. Re:More Sith by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... through the medium of interpretative dance!

      Great, thanks to this I have an mental image of "George Lucas, Lord of the Dance" in my head!:p

  39. Lucas on Daily Show by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you see Lucas on the Daily Show? He really could care less. Based on that interview he should change his name to Count De Monet.

  40. Didn't Jar Jar become a senator? by Mr.+Ascii · · Score: 1

    "when most of the Jedi and anti-emperor politicians were hunted down and killed."

    You know what to do George.

  41. Can Lucas erase the memory of JarJar? by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 0, Troll

    Missa no think so!

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  42. Maybe G. could jump on the franchise-reboot train! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And they should get David Cronnenberg to direct it! Would be tempting to see how he portraits Yoda... or the Jabba and Leia part..

  43. snap poll by PopeRatzo · · Score: 0

    Can I get a show of hands?

    How many of you believe that spacefaring races that travel among the stars will still have princesses?

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:snap poll by kenp2002 · · Score: 1

      Can I get a show of hands?

      How many of you believe that spacefaring races that travel among the stars will still have princesses?

      The same number of hand go up that think that in the 21st century we'd still have kings, queens, princesses, sultans, and warlords.

      The same number of hands that didn't find the feudal society Frank Herbert presented in the Dune series jarring but oddly fitting...

      There has always been an elite in societies and there will likely always be elites in society. They may not call them King or Queen but in the end your head may roll if you piss them off ;)

      --
      -=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
    2. Re:snap poll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  44. Boba Fett? by Johnberg · · Score: 1, Interesting

    When did he become a major character? He had, what, 5 lines in all of the movies combined?

    1. Re:Boba Fett? by delinear · · Score: 1

      It's pretty telling that he's one of the most loved characters despite, or maybe even because of his minimal dialogue - people like the mystique, they don't need ridiculous explanations for everything and everyone.

  45. No Hero's Journey by geoffrobinson · · Score: 1

    The reason the original trilogy wasn't nearly as good (although I felt Episode III was very good) is that the type of story that everyone loves is the hero's journey. Reluctant young kid is someone special and didn't realize it and with help of some wizards/wise older guys triumphs over great forces of evil.

    Well the prequels couldn't be that. One, it had to be a tragedy. Two, you also had to explain how the emperor rose to power. I think the second set of stories is what really drug down the prequels. That's where all the "who built the clones?" and the intergalactic trade federation crap came in. It became interesting in the third act but made for a boring overall story in the first two.

    Plus, all the setup for Anakin's fall had to be there. And, frankly, that was all somewhat boring as well. In other words, it wasn't a hero's journey type of story.

    --
    Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
  46. Spaceballs by Yvan256 · · Score: 0

    LONE STARR: But, Yogurt, what is this place? What is that you do here?

    YOGURT: Merchandising.

    BARF: Merchandising? What's that?

    YOGURT: Merchandising. Come. I'll show. Open up this door. Ha, ha, ha, come. Walk this way. Take a look. We put the pictures name on everything. Merchandising. Merchandising. Where the real money from the movie is made. Spaceballs - the T-shirt, Spaceballs - the Coloring Book, Spaceballs - the Lunch box, Spaceballs - the Breakfast Cereal, Spaceballs - the Flame Thrower.

    DINKS: Ooooooo.

    YOGURT: The kids love this one. Last, but not least, Spaceballs - the Doll. Me.

  47. It's far too late... by fuzznutz · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I was a huge fan of Star Wars until the abomination that was episode 1. I watched episode 2 at the theater we affectionately call "The Welfare Flicks", a second run theater. For the third, I just rented the DVD and that was just for closure. Now, I have no more interest in Star Wars. He f*cked up the originals, and I just don't even care anymore if he ever releases a decent DVD of the originals.

    As for my kids, their only interest in Star Wars is a video game with little characters made out of Legos. They couldn't care less about the movies. If they run any of the movies on cable, their attention span is about 15 minutes.

    George Lucas killed Star Wars.

    1. Re:It's far too late... by Noexit · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I wish I had mod points. You'd get '+1 Damn Straight'.

      --

      Never argue with a man carrying a water buffalo

    2. Re:It's far too late... by Timex · · Score: 1

      When my oldest son watches the Star Wars films, he says it's "research" for his Lego Star Wars game.

      We have the first three films (Episodes 4-6) and Episode 1 on DVD. I still haven't decided if I want to bother with Episodes 2 and 3.

      --
      When politicians are involved, everyone loses.
    3. Re:It's far too late... by motorhead · · Score: 0

      I'd like to see Farscape come back.

      I'm just saying.

      --
      Employee Of the Month - Cyberdyne Systems Corporation - September 1997
    4. Re:It's far too late... by Zot+Quixote · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm glad you don't overreact or anything. If people saw things as they were, we'd get less OMG THIS IS THE BEST THING EVER U MUST MAKE A SEQUEL THERES NO IT CAN SUCK and less OMG THIS IS THE WORST THING EVER I HOPE LUCAS DIES AND HIS CHILDREN AND ALL HIS MIDICHLORIANS Ouch...I think I hurt my caps lock

    5. Re:It's far too late... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol

      only on slashdot would some loser taking *children's films* this seriously be modded at +5. at least it's as "interesting" instead of "insightful".

    6. Re:It's far too late... by dangitman · · Score: 1

      I watched episode 2 at the theater we affectionately call "The Welfare Flicks", a second run theater. For the third, I just rented the DVD and that was just for closure.

      You watched episodes 2 and 3? Why? Didn't episode 1 teach you not to watch any more Star Wars, ever again?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    7. Re:It's far too late... by d3ac0n · · Score: 1

      Episode 2 is largely a waste like Episode 1. Ep3 is MUCH better, mostly because you get to see the lightsaber battle between Obi Wan and Anakin, and you get to see Anakin turn evil.

      To be honest, the "love story" arc between Anakin and Padme that starts in Ep2 and finishes in Ep3 with Anakin's "Darthing" and Padme's death in childbirth is actually pretty good. Sadly, Lucas leaves the full story unexplored and manages to fuck up what he does go into with shitty dialog and wooden actors.

      About the only emotion that the Anakin actor (can't even be bothered to remember his name) pulls off beleivably is (surprise!) Anger. This serves him well as he is becoming Darth Vader, but up until that point he is wooden and dull as dishwater.

      Natalie Portman's performance, while massively improved since Ep1 (someone got acting lessons!) really only shines at the end as she is giving birth, a truly painful scene that is utterly destroyed by a "nursebot" that says (I shit you not) "Oooba Dooba" to Padme as she is giving birth . (Apparently the Ooompa Loompa hospital was the only one within reach at the time.)

      But if you can overlook some of that (sadly typical) Lucas stupidity, Ep3 is worth the watch.

      --
      Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
    8. Re:It's far too late... by buswolley · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry. My kids, AND THE WHOLE neighborhood of kids obsesses over Starwars. Obsessed. The streets are littered with oft-played-with plastic light-sabers. The Clone Wars TV series is a huge hit. They think the movies are fine too. If I hear the kids ask me another question about who can beat who, I'll go nuts.

      --

      A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

    9. Re:It's far too late... by farble1670 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the original star wars movies were extremely cheesy and mark hamill, carrie fisher, et al., were terrible actors. when i watch the original movies i get chills of embarrassment for them. at the time episodes 4-6 were packed with state of the art flashy special effects. as for the story ... let's see. a moon-size space station that is destroyed from a tiny fighter with a single shot ... and then destroyed again (whoops!). a planet of teddy bears that defeat the hardened imperial stormtroopers? i can go on.

      the real difference between episodes 4-6 and 1-3 is *you*, not the films. when i saw episodes 4-6 i was a child. when you are a child, you don't tend to get caught up in bad acting and less than stellar plots. your mind is flexible enough to fill in the blanks, skip inconsistencies, and expand on ideas. you just need a theme. now that you are an adult, you want the whole thing laid in front of you perfectly and when you don't get it you whine all over the internet about how mr. lucas committed a crime against nature.

      fine if you don't like episodes 1-3, but don't pretend that 4-6 were any better.

      personally, i liked episodes 4-6. the acting bothered me to some degree. there were some aspects of the story like the anakin-padme love affair, jar-jar, and the boy anakin parts. i'm willing to get over that and enjoy one of a very few decent sci-fi movies.

    10. Re:It's far too late... by paro12 · · Score: 1

      He f*cked up the originals, and I just don't even care anymore if he ever releases a decent DVD of the originals.

      They did release a DVD of the original theatrical release. Sure it comes coupled with the 2004 re-release with all of George's "Fixes", but you can get it

    11. Re:It's far too late... by An+ominous+Cow+art · · Score: 1

      Yeah. My 9-year-old nephew has a more encyclopedic knowledge of Star Wars than I do, and I'm not sure how that's possible.

    12. Re:It's far too late... by JWW · · Score: 1

      I agree. My kids and I like the Clone Wars cartoons a lot. I think there is so much potential material between Ep. 2 and 3. The big mistake Lucas made was having Anakin be so young in Episode 1. Ep. 1 should have been scratched and the prequels should have started with 2 and made a real War Movie (ala the clone wars series) in between 2 and 3.

    13. Re:It's far too late... by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      I was a huge fan of Star Wars until the abomination that was episode 1. I watched episode 2 at the theater we affectionately call "The Welfare Flicks", a second run theater. For the third, I just rented the DVD and that was just for closure. Now, I have no more interest in Star Wars. He f*cked up the originals, and I just don't even care anymore if he ever releases a decent DVD of the originals.

      I still like the originals. I don't want to see the CGI-sharted touchups, give me the originals. Haven't had the urge to watch them again but I'll download them when I do. He's not getting another fucking dime. But the expanded universe stuff, the video games? Oh, god, it's so much artless shit. I read up on that new legacy of the force series they did with luke's great great godson or whoever, Wankstain Skywalker I think they called him. All darker and edgier like Rob Liefeld came up with him.

      Used to be a Trek fan but they ran that one into the ground so hard it's actually ruined my enjoyment of the better shows. I can't even manage to enjoy TNG because I can't get the taste of Voyager out of my mouth.

      Whoever said it above said it right -- Lucas should have found himself a 20-something wunderkind from the current generation of directors and handed artistic control over to him while staying a producer. He could have still retained the title of brilliant this and that while getting good art created in his name. There's plenty of interesting pathos in showing how a republic fell, how a vader was made. Still not a fan of flashback movies but I am a fan of showing how something you cannot accept comes to be. Even the villain is the hero of his own story as they say. Can he convince you of the injustice of his position, the necessity for his revenge? And how exactly could a good man fall into such darkness yet still have it be said of him that there is good inside? But that story will never be told now.

      I fully equate the Star Wars prequels with the Matrix sequels. It's hard to find anyone who can appreciate the Matrix these days without wincing and saying "Yeah, if only you can ignore the sequels."

      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    14. Re:It's far too late... by fuzznutz · · Score: 1

      I was in junior high when the first movie was released. There are definitely some cringe moments in the original three movies, but nothing like the prequels. Episode 1 was an incomprehensible mess. It made no sense and despite Lucas' ham handed attempts, failed utterly to flow and fit with the original movies. There were more holes in the "plot" than Swiss cheese. There were glaring errors in common sense logic throughout. It wasn't just a bad Star Wars movie or a bad SciFi/Fantasy movie, I was just a plain bad movie.

      The bulk of the CGI was pointless and inconsequential to the storyline. The hype surrounding its release only made the obvious more obvious.

      Have I changed? Yes I have, but I still enjoy SciFi movies. I enjoy gee-whiz CGI movies. I paid twice to see Avatar. I still enjoy cheesy "B" movies too. But I stand by my opinion of Star Wars.

    15. Re:It's far too late... by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      well. box office records would tend to prove you wrong. episodes 1-3 ranked 7, 27, and 11 of all time, respectively.
      http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/domestic.htm

      i asked my 5- year old if he liked jarjar the other day (really, we watch the movies often). he said yes. and he loves the movies. just because the movie doesn't cater to your demo doesn't mean it's a bad movie. kids like jarjar, they like the plot, and the acting doesn't bother them. star wars is *huge* among kids these days, especially due to the "clone wars" series on the cartoon network (which i also like). kids really like the clones for some reason.

      i would like hear why you think ep 1 was "incomprehensible". really i am not trolling you. i even went and re-read through the plot on the wikipedia page and just as i recall it seems like an okay story to me.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_Episode_I:_The_Phantom_Menace

      the wikipedia page doesn't rag on the plot. it does mention to slant towards kids (jarjar, young anakin performing fantastic feats despite being 5 (6?) years old).

    16. Re:It's far too late... by fuzznutz · · Score: 1

      Watch the episode 1 review from this guy's You Tube videos. http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/12/17/watch-this-70-minute-video-review-of-star-wars-the-phantom-menace/ He gives it way better criticism than I can on a short Slashdot post. If you watch all 70 minutes of his review and still not see how bad the plot is, you can overlook more than I can.

      I don't know about your kids, but mine sure don't care about Star Wars movies. They do not watch the cartoon shows. They certainly do play with "light sabers", as do all of the neighborhood kids, but don't collect action figures, lego sets or any of the like. They do watch and study other incomprehensible gibberish like Bakugan and Chaotic, which seems to be the hot fads in my area.

      As for box office receipts, they marketed the shit out of the prequel movies. And the cost of a ticket was about half in 1977. Yet the episode 4 ranked #4 on your same list. I take the rankings with a grain of salt. I'd put it like this: If episode 1 was the first movie in the Star Wars franchise, there would be no Star Wars franchise. There would be no episode 2.

    17. Re:It's far too late... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I honestly believe the greatest thing 4-6 had was a guy by the name of Harrison Ford. He made every other actor better just by being there, helping us overlook the blatant cheese. Episodes 1-3 had no Han, no character we hated to love.

      They also had no consistent evil we loved to hate. Oh Vader how I miss hating your vile evilness.

    18. Re:It's far too late... by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

      And the theatrical release versions are taken from the Laserdisc masters. Non-widescreen. Laserdisc-quality video. I'd still get it if I didn't have the 2004 boxset already.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    19. Re:It's far too late... by bug1 · · Score: 1

      especially due to the "clone wars" series on the cartoon network (which i also like). kids really like the clones for some reason.

      I enjoy the cartoon series almost as much as the movies, some episodes are really good. They are very "full", lots happens in a short time.

      I dont know why they would bother with a "real actors" series when the cartoon is going strong.

    20. Re:It's far too late... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      the original star wars movies were extremely cheesy and mark hamill, carrie fisher, et al., were terrible actors. when i watch the original movies i get chills of embarrassment for them.

      And yet the characters they created are a hundred times more real and more memorable than any in the prequels with vastly superior actors. Natalie Portman could act circles around Carrie Fisher*, yet Princess Leia is dynamic, interesting, and memorable while Princess Amidala was as flat and boring as possible. Portman could do nothing to make her interesting, because there was nothing interesting about her. Leia had personality, Padme had none.

      Characters is the number one reason why the original trilogy is good, and the prequels are crap.

      as for the story ... let's see. a moon-size space station that is destroyed from a tiny fighter with a single shot ... i can go on.

      Yeah because it had the stereotypical reactor that would explode like a gigantic bomb at the tiniest hit. And? You're complaining because the plot included something that was physically improbable? You forgot to mention that the fighter pilot used magic to make the shot!

      That's not what makes a plot good or bad. A plot is good if it's reasonable and engaging. The story of Star Wars was simple, but it progressed in a straightforward and logical way and at an engaging pace. The Rebels try to steal plans to the Empire's super weapon, but are captured, so the droids get sent to find someone who can help rescue the Princess and get the plans to the Rebels. They succeed, but the Empire tracks them back to their hidden base so they have to attack and destroy the Death Star before it can destroy them.

      Clear motivations on the parts of all characters, logical actions, logical conclusions.

      I'm not even going to try to summarize TPM. I would get about two words in and start having to talk about trade routes and treaties that never made any sense and never really mattered anyway even though it defines what's at stake and why. Characters, especially villains, act against their own interests, even their "secret" ones and it only comes together because it has to.

      the real difference between episodes 4-6 and 1-3 is *you*, not the films.

      Nonsense. I'm perfectly capable of seeing when something I liked as a kid is really crap, and there's plenty of kids movies that I first saw as an adult that I love. Nostalgia made me want to watch Transformers: The Movie again. Nostalgia couldn't hide the fact that after the first five minutes (when they've finished clearing the slate for a new batch of toys) that movie is painful to watch.

      when you are a child, you don't tend to get caught up in bad acting and less than stellar plots. your mind is flexible enough to fill in the blanks, skip inconsistencies, and expand on ideas. now that you are an adult, you want the whole thing laid in front of you perfectly

      I'm a lot better at filling in the blanks and expanding on ideas now, actually. I quite enjoy mentally filling in back story for things that aren't explained in the movies. But in reality it's the prequels that laid everything out in front of you "perfectly", and by "perfectly" I mean in agonizing, complicated, nonsensical and yet ultimately irrelevant detail. I guarantee you there aren't any children out there who even followed the plot of Phantom Menace, much less "expanded on ideas". They probably did "skip inconsistencies", as in the everything having to do with trade and treaties and votes of no confidence and basically the whole plot itself. A kid probably is happy just knowing that an evil droid army is attacking Naboo without really caring why. That doesn't mean there's no difference between a plot that a kid can follow and a plot they don't care that they can't!

      fine if you don't like episodes 1-3, but don't pretend that 4-6 were any better.

      Ha! Don't pretend they're the same! Despite the cheese, the or

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    21. Re:It's far too late... by bdh · · Score: 1

      the real difference between episodes 4-6 and 1-3 is *you*, not the films.

      The real difference between episodes 4-6 and 1-3 is the difference between the 1970s and the 2000s.

      Star Wars existed in a vacuum. Episodes 1-3 were planted in a forest.

      People forget, or don't know, what the movie landscape was like in the mid to late 1970s. If you ever check out movie listings in 1970s newspapers, you'll get an eye full. In post-Watergate America, movies were depressing. Occult movies were all the rage, as were cops-on-the-take pieces. Movies almost uniformly presented a dismal view of the world. Everything was corrupt, evil, or pointless. The number of kid- and family-friendly movies was almost exclusively limited to Disney flicks.

      There were movies for 5-10 year olds, mature movies for 18+ year olds. And porn. Teens had a choice between sneaking into R-rated flicks, or seeing "family fare" aimed at six year olds. I remember one weekend checking the movie listings, and out of something like 25 movies, 20 were R-rated, 4 were kid flicks, and one was a documentary.

      Keep in mind that these were the days before the internet, before cell phones, and before personal computers. Television had three networks: ABC, CBS, and NBC. There were five for us Canadians, we got CBC and CTV too, but mostly they just showed American shows, so it wasn't all that different.

      In other words, Star Wars didn't have a whole lot in the way of competition for people's attention, compared to today.

      Star Wars was the first movie in years which a family could see together without boring the teenagers out of their minds, and without traumatizing the pre-teen set. It was the first movie in something like five years where parents didn't have to cringe going into the theater, and weren't afraid to take their kids to.

      Star Wars was also a throwback to the old Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers serials that many of those parents had back in their own teenage years.

      I think the original Star Wars trilogy was a good, fun, series. I don't think that it deserved the adulation it received. It was a decent film that happened to appear at exactly the perfect time for it to become a phenomenon.

      Star Wars made theatrical movies fun again. It made it okay to make family friendly movies, something that even a year earlier would have been sneered at as unsophisticated.

      So, basically, Star Wars got an unearned reputation as being the second coming of science fiction. People had low expectations, so they were pleasantly surprised by a fun film which, in all honesty, doesn't really stand up to deep inspection.

      Episodes 1-3 were exactly the opposite. People had sky high expectations, and both TV and movie offerings of science fiction had blossomed since the 1970s.

      That having been said, episodes 1-3 also sucked like a Hoover because they failed at storytelling. The original series fails the logic test, too. But it's interesting enough that it distracts most people from noticing that fact until after they leave the theatre. Episodes 1-3 had people physically rolling their eyes and groaning in the theatre.

    22. Re:It's far too late... by DeadS0ul · · Score: 1

      you're one of the people that should watch the 70 minute the phantom menace review. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI

    23. Re:It's far too late... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well. box office records would tend to prove you wrong.

      They might if he'd said that nobody went to see it. But he didn't. You stupid cunt.

  48. It doesn't matter by roc97007 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Star Wars is tainted by more than the memory of Jarjar. There's three loud, busy, but ultimately empty prequels, terrible acting by people who should know better, idiotic plot developments, a painfully pedestrian, bizarrely animated series, and years and years of disrespect towards the fans from whom he got his wealth.

    Never again. I don't care if the new series ignored everything made after Empire Strikes Back and was produced by Ridley Scott and directed by Martin Scorsese. (Which it won't be; it'll be ham-fisted ol' George at the helm, as expected, and he'll make a mess of it, as expected.) Let's all face it -- George Lucas is never going to repeat the success of 1977. It's time to move on. And even if by some bizarre set of circumstances he did, who cares? I'm so through with Star Wars that I was reluctant to spend two minutes to write this. Never again. That ship has sailed. Life is too short for bad TV.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  49. Re:Latter Canceled. Need New Avenues. by Fozzyuw · · Score: 1

    I want the Timothy Zahn Trilogy done as three movies.

    Absolutely, the Thrawn series is awesome and a great read... but, the problem I have with that is the Luke, Leigh, Han characters are firmly ensconced in Ford, Hammil, and Fisher and they're a little bit past their ability to really pull off the "hey, I'm like a year or so older than RotJ". I don't think SW is in the same place as Star Trek in terms of being able to do a "reboot" of sorts or work like Batman where the lead character could be played by anyone.

    However... in the "future" timeline that was written about in great detail, there's lot of potential to create an original series around new characters. As beloved as the Skywalkers are, they've had their lime light and destiny and the SW universe is far more than just that important family.

    In terms of quality, I've been rather impressed with the "Clone Wars" animated series. Watching that has really stilled more excitement in Star Wars for me. It almost makes me think episode I-III weren't that bad... until I watch them again.

    Of course, Lukas could also go and do series about The Old Republic, but I would hate for that to corrupted the up-coming Bioware Old Republic MMO they're making by writing really bad story-lines that hamstrings that world. I'm playing through Knights of the Old Republic right now and so far that's a pretty good game.

    Of course... no matter what, I'll never forgive George for writing the stupid metaclorin or whatever part into the story. *shudder*

    --
    "The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth." ~1984 George Orwell
  50. The ESB by Jinjuku · · Score: 0

    If they can keep it in tone, tempo, and temperament of the Empire Strikes Back they will have my vote. Easily the best of the series.

  51. Re:Latter Canceled. Need New Avenues. by Sobrique · · Score: 1

    If they did a 3 film set about the Timothy Zahn stuff - they really wouldn't have to change much either, and ... acutally really _shouldn't_ change much - then you'd get something really cool. Thrawn was a brilliant character - a very plausible 'bad guy', and the rest of the storyline fit really quite well indeed.
    Actually, yeah. I think I'll go re-read those :)

  52. I, for one, am tired of the anti-Jar Jar nerdrage by axl917 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    coming from 40-somethings whose prepubescent selves likely giggled with glee when a bunch of teddy bears with spears and slingshots defeated an Imperial garrison.

  53. No...but thanks for trying by voss · · Score: 1

    The reason why todays 12 year olds dont like episode IV as much as the new ones is the original trilogy for the most part wasnt made for 12 year olds.

    It wasnt originally marketed to 12 years olds, they didnt even have the action figures ready for the first film. It showed the grandpa figure getting killed in front of the
    audience.

    It had good actors (Alec Guinness and Christopher Lee) and tight well written script.

    We didnt like it because it was a kiddy film we liked it because it was a good film.

    1. Re:No...but thanks for trying by mujadaddy · · Score: 2, Informative

      episode IV

      It had good actors (Alec Guinness and Christopher Lee)

      Sir. Your geek card. Hand it over. Now.

      --
      Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
      "Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
  54. It's what the Star Wars fans want by erroneus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We want some drama and action. It's a simple formula really. We don't need "comic relief" and especially not in a TV series.

    But there is another thing wrong with the prequels and this series as well. Unless nearly all characters are completely new, we know who will live and who will die -- it's worse than the guys named "smith and jones" wearing red shirts on Star Trek. We KNOW the characters will live and in what state they will be in by the time Episode 4 comes around. (I think the family guy star wars spoof said it plainly and accurately when it was said "we have most of the major characters in this story on this ship. I'm pretty sure we'll all make it through just fine" or something like that.) Not knowing what will happen next is an important factor in a good story.

    Will Darth Vader die? Nope! Will he turn away from the dark side? Nope! (Might be tempted here and there I presume.) Will he remember that he built C3PO?

    Now here's a question -- will characters from "The Force Unleashed" be in this series??? Will there be aspects of X-Wing vs. Tie Fighter and related games in this series? I seriously hope so -- those were great games with great stories.

  55. Does this also explain highlander? by Tatarize · · Score: 1

    I've always though it strange that Highlander went from 1 to 3,4,5.

    --

    It is no longer uncommon to be uncommon.
    1. Re:Does this also explain highlander? by LateArthurDent · · Score: 1

      I've always though it strange that Highlander went from 1 to 3,4,5.

      You almost got it right. There's no 5. There could never be a 5. I'm pretty sure they'd never find a source of inspiration for a fifth.

    2. Re:Does this also explain highlander? by Ltap · · Score: 1

      3, 4, 5? What are you saying?! Remember, THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE.

      --
      Yet Another Tech Blog
      (but so much more, including game and movie reviews)
      http://yanteb.peasantoid.org
  56. king troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jar Jar was the product of people wanting to sound savy and smart in the ticket lines that carried over to the rest of the series. I remember going to the first showing of episode 1 and people complaining about jar jar without even have seeing the movie yet. He's not even that big of a distraction. And the love story in ep 2 is great, the prequels are awesome and I don't understand how people can dislike them so much. I can only rationalize that some people are more influenced by the internet and hear say then what they actually crave and like about in life.

    So it's bad for Lucas to want to push the envelope in CGI but it's all fanfare for James Cameron's Avatar? Internet swarms infecting blank minds and forming opinions for you hurray. Haters gonna hate.

  57. At the risk of crossing the SciFi streams by sizzzzlerz · · Score: 1

    Its dead, Jim.

    1. Re:At the risk of crossing the SciFi streams by east+coast · · Score: 1

      I could only wish that Lucas would cross in the streams...

      Not being a Star Wars fan myself, my opinion may matter little to people but it's time to put it to rest for a while. No reboots, no remakes, no fan mash ups pr fan fiction. Just put it to bed, George.

      --
      Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
  58. This could lead to some interesting story ideas by TrippTDF · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This guy had some good ideas in this essay. You could expand on some of this and have a great story line.

    1. Re:This could lead to some interesting story ideas by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Good ideas, true. Also has the benefit of throwing old characters into a new light *without* breaking them, so to speak. Now that I've read this, it's the story I want to see.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  59. All hail Irvin Kershner, god of light and joy! by dswensen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No fan will ever forget Jar-Jar, or indeed any mistake Lucas has ever made. Hating Star Wars is now an integral part of liking Star Wars. Fans will never let it go, regardless of the quality of future product. They'll continue to enthusiastically shove C-3PO cereal into their mouths, yowling "this cereal tastes so awful it raped my childhood!" until the goddamn sun goes dark.

  60. Re:You want good Star Wars episodes? by imakemusic · · Score: 1

    they could bring jarjar back, I am sure he would kill him with gratuitous amounts of gore quickly.

    Ok, now I'm interested.

    --
    Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
  61. Give us a new story! by Jim+Hall · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Dear George,

    Look, I was a huge Star Wars nerd back in the day. I saw the original 'Star Wars', like, 1000 times in the theatre, and about a hojillion times on VHS. I had all the toys - it was easier to count the things I didn't have in the little Star Wars catalog/pamphlet that came with the toys, than count the things I did have. Loved 'Empire', and tried my best to love 'Jedi' even though it had dancing Ewoks in it. Honestly, though, you lost me with Episode 1, and totally killed that Star Wars geek in me with Episodes 2-3.

    You won me back (somewhat) with 'The Clone Wars' animated series. I think it's that I don't really mind cheesy dialog when spoken by CGI-animated puppets in a CGI-animated show. (Note the difference between that and Jar Jar.) I really dig this show, and I watch it every week.

    But I'm really worried about your plans to do a show about the "Dark Times" between Episodes 3-4. We know how that ends; you end up with Luke, Leia, Han, Chewie, Ben, Darth, and the gang. I don't want to see Luke Skywalker grow up, I don't want to know what it was like when he got his first pimple or kissed his first girl (or Jawa, whatever they do on Tatooine for entertainment.) I don't want to see how they built the first Imperial Star Destroyer, or installed the freaking air conditioning system in the Death Star.

    If you must do something in the Star Wars universe, please please please give us a new story. What happens after the Empire crumbles, who takes charge then, how does the new Jedi order come about? There's a whole Expanded Universe Storyline you can play with there. And we don't know how any of it ends.

    Sincerely,

    a worried fan (reformed)

    1. Re:Give us a new story! by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1

      I want to see what happens with Han, Chewie and Leia. Let's face it... Han's a bit of a scoundrel, so once the big romance has been going for a few years, he's going to want to go out with Chewie, maybe sink a few beers, see some strippers, watch the game. And Leia's hardly going to be the Stepford Wife about it.

      You could do it on a low budget, get someone like PT Anderson, Jane Campion or Wes Anderson to direct.

    2. Re:Give us a new story! by mqduck · · Score: 1

      whatever they do on Tatooine for entertainment

      Shoot womp rats? Jesus, I'm not even a big fan of the movies and I knew that. :-P

      --
      Property is theft.
  62. Re:Latter Canceled. Need New Avenues. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Keep in mind that Harrison Ford turned down a Han Solo spinoff and opted instead for Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (with a fifth shaping up).

    So he was offered to ruin Han Solo and instead opted for ruining Indiana Jones. This is probably the saddest story I have ever heard.

  63. More of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I do not like the whole thing and I will not expend any time (only this 25 seconds to say: lucas retire now, avoid more idiotic shows)

  64. Not that there's anything wrong with that by dswensen · · Score: 1

    Because most "adult" Star Wars fans are really still thirteen year old boys at heart and want to see Darth Vader mowing people down with his lightsaber non-stop because that would be soooo cooool.

    Either that or they're still laboring under the illusion that somehow risky, thoughtful, intelligent sci-fi is going to bleed from the Star Wars stone, which will never happen.

    1. Re:Not that there's anything wrong with that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Either that or they're still laboring under the illusion that somehow risky, thoughtful, intelligent sci-fi is going to bleed from the Star Wars stone, which will never happen.

      I don't know about "risky", but most of Timothy Zahn's Star Wars EU works are above average when it comes to being "thoughtful" and "intelligent" plots and characters in modern sci-fi. The Star Wars milieu isn't really compatible with true hard science fiction, but that doesn't mean well written stories can't take place within the setting!

    2. Re:Not that there's anything wrong with that by dswensen · · Score: 1

      Oh, I have no doubt that it can... I was talking about the television and film offerings, which I think will always remain deeply rooted in juvenile pulp. (And don't get me wrong, I like juvenile pulp.)

  65. If they want to rip something off.... by jameskojiro · · Score: 0, Troll

    They should rip off Blakes 7. They should follow a Jedi Knight who was away on trade mission or presumed dead before the Jedi Holocaust. He can come back to the Galactic Center finding a galaxy that has changed. So he starts his own little rebellion.

    In the last episode have him killed off like the cast of Blakes 7.

    --
    Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
  66. Re:Latter Canceled. Need New Avenues. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If copyright lasted 28 years as originally envisioned, multiple follow-on movies would have been made over the past few years. But I guess If Lucas stopped receiving payment a decade ago, he never would have bothered to make StarWars in the first place.

  67. Not another dark scifi.... by hort_wort · · Score: 1

    "It's a much darker, much more character-based series, much more adult, and we're hoping that it will go on for up to 400 episodes," he said.

    Is it just me, or does every new dark scifi show just look like another Battlestar Galactica ripoff? I (and I realize I'm in the minority) was extremely disappointed with Stargate Universe when it was obvious trying to just redo BSG. I got enough of that perpetually poorly lit episode of Jerry Springer after the first hour.

    *Please* scifi writers, go back to the humorous fun of Firefly and original Stargate SG-1. Stop with the dark stuff. Star Trek Enterprise flopped amazingly fast because it was trying to be dark. I thought after seeing an amazing title like Star Trek go down so fast, people would get the hint that dark scifi isn't good. Sure, BSG was successful. Do you know why I watched it? It was because it was the only thing around. Dark scifi is like the lone ugly hooker across the street.

    1. Re:Not another dark scifi.... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, the only Stargate I've been able to watch has been Universe.

      Firefly, humorous fun? They had humor but the plots were never humorous fun, unless Mal and Wash being tortured, cannibalistic space madness, organ smuggling/harvesting and killing prostitutes are your idea of "fun".

  68. Candidate to watch films as an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was also 12 when Episode IV came out, and I remember how excited I was to see it, especially after reading the hype build up in sci-fi magazines of the time(Fangoria?)

    I recently worked with a guy, almost 20 years my junior, who had never seen any of the films, and didn't want to. He is a major geek, but a geek with zero interest in sci-fi, which struck me as an interesting "anomaly" of sorts in the IT world. While I would throw Star Wars analogies into discussions about Exchange or Cisco IOS, he had no clue what I was referring to.

    He would be the perfect candidate to watch the films as an adult.

  69. Re:You want good Star Wars episodes? by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    Well... we'd get some decent dialogue at least. Wouldn't say everything Joss does is perfect though, and he's really bad at dealing with studio interference.

  70. Episode Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just want an episode where they show the planning for building the Death Star.

    "So we'll have a completely open tube leading from the outside straight to the extremely unstable reactor core."
    "If someone could get a bomb down the tube it could destroy the entire station?"
    "Right, but that'll never happen. In fact I'm so sure I won't even design a grate for the opening or even put a bend in it."
    "You sir, have a gift!"

  71. Watch it! by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Holocaust denial (and by extension by the parent post - Jar-Jar denial*) is a crime in some countries.

    *Actually, just comparing the holocaust to a imaginary comedy relief CG character might get you into trouble because of the "gross minimisation... of genocide or crimes against humanity".

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  72. Re:Latter Canceled. Need New Avenues. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

    The Zahn novels are far too long to work as movies, unfortunately. Each one could possibly work as a season of a TV show, but, really, why bother? They're good as movies, do something else. I recall reading a few years back that Lucas had bought the rights to the Thrawn character, but never did anything with them, which is a shame. Introducing Thrawn in the prequel TV series could be good.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  73. Re:Adult Viewpoint by Phrogman · · Score: 1

    I first saw Episode 4 in the local theatre when it came out. I was about 18 at the time. I loved it, up until then SF had had relatively few good films, and special effects were generally lacking in quality.
    I liked the second film a lot as well. The third film had the ewoks in it, and it was the beginning of the downfall. George lost his way there.

    The 3 prequel films were horrid abortions. The only thing I could think when I watched them was that Lucas probably secured the manufacturing for the toys first, then built a film around it, ignoring all those old tropes like good characterisation, plot, and above all hiring actors that can, you know, actually act. The kid who played Anakin was positively painful to watch, and only a complete fucking idiot would ever have hired him for a part as a wall ornament, let alone a key role. I have to assume George thought it would help with merchandising to have him as Anakin. The prequels are, and will always remain to me, attempts to make money by throwing together action sequences intended to sell toys and other merchandise, not serious attempts to make a movie.

    I think if they try to make a "dark" Star Wars spinoff (in otherwords, a "Battlestar-Galactica-was-successful-so-maybe-copying-it-will-make-us-more-bucks" approach), the only way it will be successful is if George Lucas has nothing to do with it beyond giving permission to make it. He just doesn't get what attracts people to the original movies at all. If he is making it, it will suck, period.

    Now of course, the above hollywood unoriginal approach to copying a previous success because they don't know what made it good, hasn't worked for Stargate:Universe as far as I can tell. The show is painfully bad - and NONE of the characters are likeable. As a result, I - as a long time Stargate fan - could care less if any of the whiney self-centred SG:U assholes dies. I stopped watching after 4 shows that were predictable and unenjoyable.

    I doubt a gritty Star Wars will work well either, because it takes a special touch to make it work, and I doubt Lucas Arts and Lucas himself, has that touch.

    --
    "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
  74. Harshing the buzz by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    Talk to a 12 year old now and they love pod races.

    Hell, I was in my late 30s and the pod race was the only thing I liked about TPM. If I can't have a rational story or plot, at least go to the backup plan of eye candy. :-)

    Have a 30 year old watch Star Wars for the first time and, on the few times I've been able to find someone who has never seen it, gotten the same 'meh' response I had to the Phantom Menace.

    Not sure that's universally true. I like a lot of SF movies that were before my time- Forbidden Planet, Colussus: The Forbin Project, 2001, etc. Heck, I like a lot of films of all types that predate me by decades. I would think that an intelligent, young SF fan today could at least see that Lucas accomplished what he set out to do with the original Star Wars. And if you look back it seems plenty of adults at the time enjoyed the film. I know my parents and other older family members did. So did a couple of my teachers.

    For all those "stop raping my childhood"... it's not your childhood.

    Agree 100% here. I don't give a gant's fart what they reboot, and sometimes the reboots are actually good.

    Your childhood is gone, past, finished... you are an adult now and you can't go back.

    OK, OK! No need to bum us all out. ;-)

  75. Darth Aku by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 0

    Let Genndy Tartakovsky have another go. His Clone Wars show was nine levels of awesome. Set the new series in the time of The Old Republic. And because I'm a big capitalist, I'd suggest cross promoting it with Bioware's upcoming MMO.

    And let Genndy bring Samurai Jack to some closure as a side project.

  76. Re:Latter Canceled. Need New Avenues. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No story left to tell? Apparently you havent seen the multitude of books that take place after Return of the Jedi. Most notably, the excellent X-Wing series.

  77. Re:I, for one, am tired of the anti-Jar Jar nerdra by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone who's 40 now would have been 13 years old in 1983. Hardly prepubescent.

  78. darths and droids will clean you mind by solsang · · Score: 1

    Darths and droids has succesfully made me overcome my star wars traumas and even feel happy with jar jar binks and anakin; start at the beginning here: http://www.darthsanddroids.net/episodes/0001.html Warning: after this you will never be able to see star wars in the same way again;)

  79. Jar Jar one of the better things about SW1-3 by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Good things
    Jar jar creating character conflict as occurred in the first three films (eg. irritated the other wise cipher like Gui kan (sp) "NO!".
    Palpatine (well written and well acted)

    bad things

    mitochlorians
    jedi fighting for hours without any talking at all against pretty backdrops.
    running out of time to do a decent corruption of Anakin and having him improbably able to kill helpless small children way too soon to make sense.
    assuming a child killer *could* be the ultimate hero of the series (sorry, but it changes the darth vader of the original 3 considerably).
    Utter lack of character conflict (except Jar Jar).
    Too many "just so" scenes to list.
    Some of the worst acting I've ever seen from a lot of really fine actors (which tells you the problem was Lucas, not the actors).

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    1. Re:Jar Jar one of the better things about SW1-3 by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      jedi fighting for hours without any talking at all against pretty backdrops.

      This was my favorite part of Ep.I and of all the duels in all the movies. I don't care about technobabble and trying to discern the purpose of every cool-looking machine in the background. Who wants to watch two jedi fight in a parking lot? And, in just about every fight scene in any action movie, you get the corny one liners or scolding from the good guys and recalcitrant evil responses from the bad guys. In TPM, they had no emotional connection to Maul. He was just a bad ass they had to kill, not best with wittiest jabs between jabs. Plus, the scene capped off the entire theme of the movie, the student exceeding his teacher. All of the emotions were perfectly laid out during that fight and it didn't take a bit of dialog to do it.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    2. Re:Jar Jar one of the better things about SW1-3 by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      It's not the technobabble. I don't like technobabble either.

      It's the character interaction. Which was present in Vader vs Obiwan. Which was present in Luke vs Vader.
      Which was absent almost entirely from those three movies and in that fight scene.

      I saw no emotions by anyone. I guess I'm in the camp that agrees violently with the recent 70 minute review.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  80. Re:It's far too late... OT by cgenman · · Score: 1

    Sorry for the offtopic message, but Lego Universe is going into Beta, which your kids may enjoy.

    http://www.neoseeker.com/news/13104-lego-universe-beta-sign-ups-now-open/

    I love how a loved old property from our childhood (Star Wars) is just a pretty facade onto a loved new property from our kids' childhoods (the Lego games).

  81. Where? by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

    In that article, I couldn't find any information on what network it will be on in the US. Is it going to be syndicated?

    And its not going to be out till 2011 or 2012, so why are we talking about it before it's been cast?

  82. Lowest Common Denominator by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Simple.

    On one side you have "fun for all" and on the other "appropriate for adults".
    Which translates to "Family/Kid friendly" and "Sex and Violence". Because if it is "appropriate for adults" it is implied that it is inappropriate for children.
    And since you can't have sex on TV in the USA (real sex - not shows like "Sex and the City" that TALK about the sex but are actually about shopping) - all you are left with is violence and its consequences (How many cop/crime shows are currently airing?).

    Why such a limited choice? Because the LoCoDe has no intellect nor does it appreciate culture. It lives a bit to the left of the top of the national IQ bell curve.
    But it watches the commercials and listens to their advice. And it LOOOOOVES the shiny! GOD DOES IT LOVE THE SHINY!
    So they make the shiny with sugar for the kids/family pack, and with spice for the adults.
    And the LoCoDe lives happily ever after.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  83. Better let the new kids decide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have shown Star wars phantom menace to my 4 and a half year old boy and Star wars episode 4

    Guess what? Star wars episode 4 won hands down.

  84. Use BSG crew by Micahsa · · Score: 1

    The most well done sci-fi drama in recent years (arguably the best drama of last few decades) is Battlestar Galactica. BSG got it right becuase they focused on the character development, writing and realism (accuracy is probably a better term) rather than focusing on the amount of sci-fi content and adding the rest later on. Viewers who would cringe to watch anything science fiction related were quickly absorbed into the show in the same way non-sci-fi readers become absorbed in Orson Scott Card's 'Ender's Game' series -- becuase both creations are GOOD, WELL WRITTEN, WELL EXECUTED DRAMA'S in a science fiction setting. You could forget about the cylons and the prophecies and all the rest because the drama was excellent and not dependant on any special effects or sci-fi knowledge.

    If a Star Wars spinoff were to have Larson and Moore (BSG writers) and a few of the associate producers from BSG as well, I could see it doing very well. Of course, all the good writing/production in the world can't overcome bad acting and vice versa, and while many of the actors/actresses in BSG were limited in depth, they were so overshadowed by those like Olmos and McDonnel that it didn't matter much.

    What I see happening instead is a show similar in feel to Stargate Universe, which is a decent show, but feels as if it's been edited for TV and toned down so network TV viewers can feel good watching it. Which would be very very sad.

  85. jellybabies? by Turbo_Button · · Score: 1

    He should have a jedi that uses the force to time travel, possibly in some sort of box that's larger on the inside than on the outside, and have them fight monsters that look like salt and pepper shakers.

  86. Re:Latter Canceled. Need New Avenues. by Syberz · · Score: 1

    because there really is no story left to tell after the destruction of the second Death Star and the death of the Emperor

    You've obviously never read some of the expanded universe novels spanning the period after episode VI. Timothy Zahn and others managed to craft some really good stories in the post Episode VI universe.

    --
    ~Syberz
  87. Original is Classic Film making by pauls2272 · · Score: 1

    >But now, almost thirty years older, I still like the first film the best.

    Star Wars had a farm boy, a princess, a wizard, a pirate and comic relief. What is not to like? That is Classic Moving Making and story telling!

    The 2nd film explored the characters and made the characters make tough decisions - Should Luke go try to rescue his friends or let them die when letting them die is the smarter move...

    The 3rd film is where Lucas started going wrong - trying to appeal to 5 year olds and boost the merchandising aspect of the movies instead of telling a story and letting the merchandising take care of itself.

    It has been all downhill since then and as long as Lucas equates TOYS = $$$$, his stuff will always suck.

    1. Re:Original is Classic Film making by foo+fighter · · Score: 1

      Obviously the characters and broad themes in Star Wars are based on ancient tropes. But the way they were used was novel and very well done. Star Wars is to be admired for its excellent technique in the use of tools, even if the tools themselves are quite old and even boring on their own.

      --
      obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
  88. No, no NO and NO again by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    Stop being so goddamn conceited and think that you as a kid were the only thing that mattered. ADULTS watched the original movies AND enjoyed them. It was NOT a made for kid movie even if you saw it at matinee with other 5yr olds.

    Really, your kind is responsible that animation == kids in the west. Hell, return of the jedi was PG-13.

    Stop it with this dumb idea that Star Wars was this big hit for kids only.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  89. Stupid jedi mind tricks, tonight on letterman.... by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    *waves hand*

    These are not the prequels you are looking for.

    Move along.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  90. Lets hope he just means less shiny by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    Quick show of hands, who wants the millenium falcon and who the silver thingy from the prequels? What is its name again? Oh you don't know? My point exactly.

    The original movies were a less clean then the prequels. Obi-wan is not the perfect jedi. Solo is a smuggler. Skywalker just a farm boy (and in a new hope he ain't the destined one the way his father is made out to be) and the princess has lost everything.

    Compare this with the prequels which are practically a period piece with all the nobility running around.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  91. Oh geez god no by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    You are EXACTLY what is wrong with the prequels. To much. Star Wars was Star Wars precisely because it wasn't over the top comic book stuff. Obi-wan never jumped all over the place, the fight was between minds, not bodies. Yoda was not great because he bounced of walls but because he had his emotions under control. It is REAL samurai vs the kind of stuff you get in anime. Control vs Flashy effects.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Oh geez god no by djnforce9 · · Score: 1

      I never really read any of the books so I wouldn't know how the characters were originally meant to be (I am only judging by the films). Books are never the same as movie versions anyway (and never up to par for that matter). I was just pointing out that the "Force Unleashed" storyline was very well put together and fits nicely within the context of the "movies".

      Also, there's no need for personal attacks here. I am NOT solely responsible for the way the prequels turned out and I am definitely not what is wrong with them in general. Blame the producers (and anyone else involved in their creation) for that one. I just watch the films after they are released.

  92. Re:Latter Canceled. Need New Avenues. by Hecubas · · Score: 1

    You are not alone. The Zahn trilogy felt completely contrived. Thrawn was just way over the top and the anti-force monkeys were just too convenient.

    --
    Hecubas
  93. Re:yes, but... by xirusmom · · Score: 1

    I sure I watched star wars when I was a kid, but it did not make such a big impression on me. Sure it was cool, but it was not a life changing event, as it was for my husband.
    Than I married a geek and started watching them again( and again, and again...). An even without the "stop raping my childhood" feeling, I can say the originals are much, much better than the prequels. Why?
    (1) The originals are indeed darker, like everything else that was done in a time when we did not use to protect children from every single fact of life.
    (2) The romance,... I will take Han over Anakin any time. The stupid love story combined with incredibly bad acting is too central tho the prequel's story, and it turns me off completely. Han and Leia have more of a sexual tension that works a lot better, plus, it is funnier.
    (3) Abuse of CGIs. By all means, use it, but please, use it when you need it, not just because it is there. All in all, I think the lack of resources in the first movies lead to more creativity in general.
    (4) Han shot first.

    And as for everything else (cartoons, xmas specials, etc...), running the risk of joining the trenches : - George, please STOP it already! Haven't you have enough money? Can't you do anything else with your life? Don't you have any new ideas? Stoooooooooooop!

  94. Jar Jar more popular than you think. by Berkyjay · · Score: 1

    You do realize that Jar Jar is the most popular Star Wars character with kids right? Us arrogant adults assumed that Lucas was making the prequels for us but he didn't. It was made for kids of this generation and to them Jar Jar was pretty funny. I can't even get my nephew to sit through the original trilogy. All he ever wants to watch of Star Wars is the Phantom Menace.

  95. Re:I, for one, am tired of the anti-Jar Jar nerdra by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1

    I was old enough to be annoyed at little kids laughing at the ewoks.

    On the other hand, I'm going to defend the ewoks... The main thing about the ewoks is that they are small, primitive and yet, take on the empire and win. And yes, they look like teddy bears, but they're quite badass (like they're going to eat everyone at the start).

    Jar-Jar, on the other hand, was just annoying.

  96. Re:Latter Canceled. Need New Avenues. by An+ominous+Cow+art · · Score: 1

    In terms of quality, I've been rather impressed with the "Clone Wars" animated series. Watching that has really stilled more excitement in Star Wars for me. It almost makes me think episode I-III weren't that bad... until I watch them again.

    Same here. A couple of months ago, I decided to watch an episode, not expecting much. I was very pleasantly surprised - it was quite good! There are still a couple of annoying things, like occasionally re-using the "I have a bad feeling about this" line, but nothing major. Anakin and even Jar-jar are a lot less annoying, too.

  97. Re:Latter Canceled. Need New Avenues. by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

    ... there really is no story left to tell after the destruction of the second Death Star and the death of the Emperor. At least, not a particularly relevant story. I really hope he doesn't ever head down that road.

    Yup. It'd be as pointless as season 5 of Babylon 5 turned out to be. Pity the studio didn't give JMS a guarantee that there'd be five seasons earlier, the shadow war could have been fleshed out better in season 4 and not rushed, and the Earth civil war could have filled season 5. Instead we had season 5 filled with filler material about some silly telepath war that I personally didn't give a toss about, and some faceless motive-less baddies called 'raiders.' When a story's done, it's best to leave it.

    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
  98. Re:Latter Canceled. Need New Avenues. by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    there really is no story left to tell after the destruction of the second Death Star and the death of the Emperor. I always thought he was setting us up for Luke to follow in his father's footsteps, and Leia to be trained by Yoda to become the last Jedi and default Luke. Remember when Yoda said "there is another"? He could only be referring to Leia.

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  99. Queue the remakes... by eyebum · · Score: 1

    Why not! Every other story in Hollywood gets remade eventually anyway. Some good (Battlestar Galactica, Star Trek), Some not so well (Psycho, Godzilla, Planet of the Apes...the list goes on). What will happen to the franchise when some young rebel takes the Star Wars story and tells it in their own style? I mean, aside from the massive merchandising tribute that would still need to be paid to Lucas, of course. What if JJ Abrams took on 'Empire'? Not much of a Michael Bay fan, but do think the battle for Endor in ROTJ might be scrapped in favor of the original battle for Kashyyyk with him at the controls? It could happen...

  100. Re:It's far too late... OT by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

    I love how a loved old property from our childhood (Star Wars) is just a pretty facade onto a loved new property from our kids' childhoods (the Lego games).

    Pfft... *Lego* was the loved old property from *my* childhood.

    --
    "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  101. Amen Brother by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why the obsession with "Dark"... why not just make an evil show, about the Sith, dwell on evil, revel in it, and just freakin' come out of the closet... it's apparently what they really want to do.

  102. Re:I, for one, am tired of the anti-Jar Jar nerdra by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're not very good at arithmetic, are you?

  103. Re:OMG, Joss Whedon is overrated by Oldstench · · Score: 1

    Put a talented writer like Joss Whedon...

    Haha.
    HAHHAHAHahaa.
    AAAAHAHAHahAHAHHAaha!

  104. Re:Latter Canceled. Need New Avenues. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You do realize that 9 movies were planned from day 1? Even the first Star Wars starts with "Episode IV" right there in the opening titles (no, I dont mean in the RE-MADE version, but even in the ORIGINAL first release!)

  105. Re:Latter Canceled. Need New Avenues. by TheQuantumShift · · Score: 1

    The milking of the cash cow started 2 seconds after New Hope hit theaters. Empire and Jedi were merely grabs for cash, although maybe not quite as blatant as ep. 1-3. Lucas is the Wachowski Brothers of the seventies, except he may have actually written the original movie.

    --

    Shift happens. Fire it up.
  106. Re:Latter Canceled. Need New Avenues. by Rary · · Score: 1

    You do realize that 9 movies were planned from day 1? Even the first Star Wars starts with "Episode IV" right there in the opening titles (no, I dont mean in the RE-MADE version, but even in the ORIGINAL first release!)

    Actually, no. When Star Wars hit the big screen in 1977, the title sequence just said "Star Wars". There was no "Episode IV". There was no "A New Hope". All of that was added when it was re-released in 1981 (after Empire Strikes Back).

    --

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

  107. I liked the loveable Jar Jar Binks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I liked Jar Jar Binks. He made the movie seem so real.

  108. To all the prequel haters: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shut up nerds.

  109. The Phantom Menace: youtube review by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

    if you haven't seen the 7-part, 1+-hour-long review of the Phantom Menace on youtube, go now and find it

    As a public service, here's the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI&feature=PlayList&p=1C22FB1EC9D3C45E&index=0&playnext=1

    I can recommend it. You'll find the reviewer has more character than you can find in TPM, more comic relief than Jar-Jar, and tells a side-story with a more coherent plot than any of the prequels.

    Plus, he has some well-articulated and well-argued criticisms of the film.

    (Now someone needs to review my meta-review, just for the recursive fun)

  110. funny but true by XLR8DST8 · · Score: 0

    to me. i've never seen the prequels and i don't want to. i think i've seen one matrix sequel but i don't even remember it. i refuse to watch any of the matrix sequels again. i won't see the star wars prequels. i will watch the originals made in the late 70s & i will watch the original matrix. my mind has not been tainted & for that i'm grateful.

  111. Re:Latter Canceled. Need New Avenues. by TiberiusMonkey · · Score: 1

    Oh gosh, THANK you. Honestly I really did think I was alone in this but what you say was just how I felt, Thrawn was contrived and the whole anti-force thing just felt really way to "oh, how convenient".