BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Star Wars - Episode III - Revenge Of The Sith (SPOILERS)

 
  

Page: 1 ... 1213141516(17)181920

 
 
Benny the Ball
19:04 / 10.06.05
They were in a radio dramatisation of the script. Also, the history of Han and Chewy I remember was that Han punched out a superior officer who was ill-treating wookie slaves, and rescued him, losing his job (isn't Han from Corsucrant?). Also, yes, the whole history of Bobba Fett was that he adopted the Mandalorian armour as his own because it carried a certain hard-bastardness about it as they were involved in the wiping out of the Jedi/clone wars.

Still, none of that matters anymore, as he's ignored all his own crap and rewriten it as a porochial slight of hand (ie, conning people into thinking that they're okay films because they a) contain references to the OT, and b) having a couple of decent parts out of 600 minutes of near tripe).
 
 
Benny the Ball
19:06 / 10.06.05
Also, why not just kill Anakin? I mean WHY?! He loves him, but he'll leave him there, legless and on fire rather than putting him out of his misery with a swift sabre blow to the head.
 
 
Keith, like a scientist
22:55 / 10.06.05
solo is from Corellia (so the EU story goes...he's a freaking Prince. haha)

apparently the Biggs scene was filmed... is this principal photography, was it ever in the theatrical film...i dunno, but you can watch it and other cut scenes here:

http://www.blueharvest.net/video/cut.shtml
 
 
Longinus
23:29 / 10.06.05
Also, why not just kill Anakin? I mean WHY?! He loves him, but he'll leave him there, legless and on fire rather than putting him out of his misery with a swift sabre blow to the head.

It reminds me of a scene in the modern film version of All Quiet On The Western Front where the (anti)hero stabs a French enemy and due to incoming fire is forced to spend a day in the foxhole with him. The Frenchman's mortally wounded, but the German can't bring himself to kill him. In the end it would've been alot more humane if he'd just slit the guy's throat and got it over with instead of having a long one-sided conversation with him, but that's human nature.
 
 
Jack The Bodiless
16:49 / 11.06.05
That. Was. Utter. Shit.

So many faults. So much badness. All in one movie. Terrible performances. Lucas' trademark horrible dialogue (from the man who refers to dialogue as a sound effect, and has himself described his own dialoue as 'clunky', this is not a surprise, of course). Huge, huge gaps in internal logic.* Every character is irredeemably thick except for Palpatine (explaining why he can take over the Republic virtually on his tod), especially the Jedi, who come across as arrogant, humourless, hidebound and reactionary.** All the action is like a fucking video game, and some of the CG is so ropey it looks like stop-motion. There's no sense of time passing or distance - Padme's entire pregancy takes place in the blink of an eye, and she never looks that big anyway. The pacing is rambling and disjointed. The music is inappropriate and intrusive. And they destroy Vader as a cultural icon in barely two minutes.

Fucking shocking. I went in with reasonably high expectations because of all the positive press the movie got, and... Dude. Absolutely awful. Almost no redeeming features at all. A new hope? A new low.

* Kenobi refers to Palpatine as 'the Emperor', when he has no way of knowing what's literally just occurred in the Senate, and when he'd be far more likely to refer to him as a Sith Lord. Padme somehow knows exactly where Anakin is at the end, even though, as far as I recall, he never told her. Kenobi watches CCTV of the bad guys conspiring (ha! fucking stupid baddies!) and, despite the fact that we've LITERALLY JUST WATCHED THE SCENE THE FOOTAGE IS BASED ON, Lucas thinks we won't notice that all the dialogue is from a different part of that scene (CCTV - The Director's Cut!). Kenobi and Anakin fight right next to an ocean of lava without appearing even to get that sweaty. Dr Droid tells Kenobi Padme will need to be operated on to save the twins lives, and then we see her give birth naturally ten seconds later. Etc. Etc. Etc.

** Kenobi has that glorious moment when he 'realises' that Padme and Anakin have been fucking (some best buddy). The Jedi Council don't trust Palpatine, and Windu even mentions that he's, like, covered in the Dark Side, and then they SHOCK! HORROR! discover he's the Sith Lord they've been scratching their bonces about. Anakin even listens to him tell stories at the opera about Sith Lords and unnatural force powers and doesn't immediately twig. Palpatine kills the Jedi, the galaxy's ancient police force, and tells the Senate they've gone bad, and gets a standing ovation when he arbitrarily announces a new Empire.
 
 
diz
12:46 / 12.06.05
solo is from Corellia

yes. and there's still plenty of time for Chewie to be enslaved by the Empire and freed by a young Han Solo.

so the EU story goes...he's a freaking Prince.

no.

(warning: what is to follow may be the geekiest thing i have ever posted anywhere)

one of his ancestors was briefly ascended the throne of Corellia on false pretenses, was found out, overthrown and lynched or something. Threepio seems to have caught a partial reference to these events, and mistakenly informs Han he's the rightful Prince of Corellia.

later, he realizes his error, and nearly interrupts the wedding of Han and Leia to correct the story, but someone (Luke, i think), shuts him up.

as such, some may believe Han is a prince, including Han himself, but he is not. in any case, all of this is moot since Corellia has not been a monarchy for some time.

Lucas' trademark horrible dialogue (from the man who refers to dialogue as a sound effect, and has himself described his own dialoue as 'clunky', this is not a surprise, of course)

it seems bizarre and unfair to me to lambast Lucas for his crappy dialogue at the same time that you acknowledge that he considers dialogue to be a sound effect.

realistic dialogue is clearly not a priority to him, because the narrative weight in the SW movies is meant to be carried by the visuals, not the dialogue. it seems that you are criticizing him for his failure to do something he's explicitly not trying to do.

he's trying to tell a story primarily through visuals. this is a world where you know that someone's become evil because they enter stage left having changed lightsaber colors and put on a black cloak. that's the narrative meat - the dialogue is just window dressing. you could probably watch all six movies and follow the entire story with the sound off, or at the very least without the dialogue but with the score. that's his intent, and on that level i think it succeeds. to a certain extent, i would be more inclined to call the work a failure because it includes dialogue at all, when it's clearly superfluous, than making an issue of the quality of the dialogue.

There's no sense of time passing or distance

i'm not sure what you mean here.

Padme's entire pregancy takes place in the blink of an eye, and she never looks that big anyway.

it's worth noting that the twins are delivered early due to Padme's injuries.

The pacing is rambling and disjointed.

the pacing in the beginning is totally fucked, and to a certain extent this throws off the rest of the movie, but i think it gels a lot better after the clunky space battle is over.

And they destroy Vader as a cultural icon in barely two minutes.

well, i will disagree here only because i think Vader's a big enough cultural icon to withstand the awfulness of that scene.

Kenobi refers to Palpatine as 'the Emperor', when he has no way of knowing what's literally just occurred in the Senate, and when he'd be far more likely to refer to him as a Sith Lord.

i don't recall exactly how that part of it went down, but if nothing else, i'm sure that kind of thing gets broadcast publicly. i'm sure he could have been listening to C-SPAN on his gizmo or something. it's not like it's a secret.

Kenobi watches CCTV of the bad guys conspiring (ha! fucking stupid baddies!) and, despite the fact that we've LITERALLY JUST WATCHED THE SCENE THE FOOTAGE IS BASED ON, Lucas thinks we won't notice that all the dialogue is from a different part of that scene (CCTV - The Director's Cut!).

it's not from the previous scene. it's new footage. the scene we saw was in Palpatine's office in the Senate. the security footage is from inside the Jedi Temple. Anakin swears himself to the Sith, goes over and kills everyone in the Temple, then Palpatine comes over to make sure things went OK. i will agree that the scenes are too similar, and that that's caused a lot of confusion, but that's a separate issue.

Padme somehow knows exactly where Anakin is at the end, even though, as far as I recall, he never told her.

you recall poorly. he tells her he's going to Mustafar to kill people or whatever. from the looks of the planet, there aren't many places on it he could be.

Kenobi and Anakin fight right next to an ocean of lava without appearing even to get that sweaty

and TIE fighters make screeching sounds in the vacuum of space. what's your point?

this saga has never been about that level of realistic detail. i mean, if you're complaining that they don't seem to be sweaty enough, why not point out that they should probably be choking to death on poisonous fumes or suffering heatstroke?

Kenobi has that glorious moment when he 'realises' that Padme and Anakin have been fucking (some best buddy).

he's known. it's just not polite to bring it up under normal circumstances.

Palpatine kills the Jedi, the galaxy's ancient police force, and tells the Senate they've gone bad, and gets a standing ovation when he arbitrarily announces a new Empire.

it's more complicated than that. one, Palpatine has always played up the reluctant leader shtick. two, the Jedi aren't very popular because they sit up in their Ivory Tower with their heads up their asses while the galaxy falls apart, and they were unable to prevent the war. three, the Jedi are unpopular because Dooku is a Jedi, and people believe that the whole war may have been a plot by the Jedi to take over the galaxy. finally, the Republic's pretty unpopular because it's non-functional, as seen in Episode I where they can't pass a freaking tax bill without starting a war.

the whole point of the prequel trilogy is that people are generally willing to support a tyrant when they've been made to fear chaos and disorder and trumped-up outside enemies. it's definitely something that could have been explored more, you're right, but it makes perfect sense in the movie.
 
 
haus of fraser
09:44 / 14.06.05
realistic dialogue is clearly not a priority to him, because the narrative weight in the SW movies is meant to be carried by the visuals, not the dialogue. it seems that you are criticizing him for his failure to do something he's explicitly not trying to do.

he's trying to tell a story primarily through visuals. this is a world where you know that someone's become evil because they enter stage left having changed lightsaber colors and put on a black cloak. that's the narrative meat - the dialogue is just window dressing. you could probably watch all six movies and follow the entire story with the sound off, or at the very least without the dialogue but with the score. that's his intent, and on that level i think it succeeds. to a certain extent, i would be more inclined to call the work a failure because it includes dialogue at all, when it's clearly superfluous, than making an issue of the quality of the dialogue.


Yes the famous Art House movies? Comparable to Buster Keaton in the visual narrative.

WTF- biggest load of crap i ever read for a justification of shitty dialogue. Do you really really believe this? The biggest movie franchise ever see's dialogue as unimportant?!

Yes all part of teh master plan...
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
10:28 / 14.06.05
it seems bizarre and unfair to me to lambast Lucas for his crappy dialogue at the same time that you acknowledge that he considers dialogue to be a sound effect.... it seems that you are criticizing him for his failure to do something he's explicitly not trying to do.

Um, yes, and? That's like saying "this terrible blokeish novel about shagging secretaries was never intended to actually contain good writing, so you can't blame it for not having good writing!". Lucas' ideas about movies are hideous and bad and harmful to the world, and his execution of those ideas produces predictably hideous and bad and harmful results. It's not unfair to point this out, especially if one cares and has ideas about what cinema should be (and I don't mean in some high art sense - plenty of action/genre blockbusters out there with decent pacing, dialogue and characters).
 
 
I'm Rick Jones, bitch
10:31 / 14.06.05
it's worth noting that the twins are delivered early due to Padme's injuries.

What fucking injuries? They fucked the whole thing: she has no reason to die other than she isn't in the OT. Lucas fucked up for no good reason other than he's a shitty writer.

Like one of my friends said: Imagine if they'd given this to Peter Jackson...
 
 
FinderWolf
22:35 / 14.06.05
read some accounts of the recent George Lucas lifetime tribute awards thingie: from aint it cool news - Harrison Ford was there and said to Lucas from the stage "If you want to make a fourth Indiana Jones movie, better hurry up!! Because Sean Connery is getting too old to play my father!"

Also, Spielberg was there introduces Lucas...(begin transcipt from article):

>> ...[Speilberg] announces George as the 2005 recipient, and up comes George through the crowd to thunderous praise. He stops to hug Peter Mayhew (now back in tux) and Carrie Fisher. Gives nice talk, thanks parents and kids. And ACTUALLY thanks the FANS - something I'm not used to hearing come out of George. Not only did he say that making the movies would be pointless if we didn't go to watch them (so he could get our $$$, of course), but he also jokingly referred to himself at one point as "the King of wooden dialog," at which point the audience howled.

Love that last line.
 
 
FinderWolf
22:39 / 14.06.05
apparently the tribute special will be aired on the USA network on June 20th.

Also, it opens with William Shatner coming in and talking about Star Trek and how it revolutioned entertainment and sci-fi. After a few minutes 2 stormtroopers come onstage and grab him; he then says he'll comply and agree to talk about Star Wars. Cute.
 
 
This Sunday
02:44 / 15.06.05
On the dialogue thing:
I dunno, I don't like the dialogue, but if Lucas is just using it as a sound-effect, as he claims, then criticizing it for being wooden, hokey, or just plain bad... is like criticizing a porno movie for not putting a little moral lesson for the kiddies on at the end. Or, bashing 'Manhattan' for lack of color. The fact there's no digital effects in 'Kissing Jessica Stein'. No laugh track to 'Doctor Who'. If you set out to do X and you do X, good on you. If X is surpassed, all the better. But unless something falls short of X... I liked 'Razor Blade Smile' so I should probably not even get into this sort argument.
 
 
Bastard Tweed
05:57 / 15.06.05
In that case, I agree completely and the real crime of Lucas movies isn't that the dialogue is wooden and clunky but that he bothers including comprehensible words in the first place.

I decree that from this day forward all of his films shall be presented in Esperanto devoid of subtitles. The occasional superimposed caption on blackscreen will be acceptable.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
06:58 / 15.06.05
then criticizing it for being wooden, hokey, or just plain bad... is like criticizing a porno movie for not putting a little moral lesson for the kiddies on at the end.

No, it's like criticising a porno movie for being unsexy, misogynistic, badly filmed and overlong. I'm sure there are many dunderheads who would then say "but that's what all pornos are like, you can't criticise them for that!" Just because something is an accepted convention or the intention of the filmmaker doesn't give mean it should be given a free pass. Demand a bit more from your world, people.
 
 
diz
08:22 / 15.06.05
Lucas' ideas about movies are hideous and bad and harmful to the world, and his execution of those ideas produces predictably hideous and bad and harmful results.

i would agree with the second part in many cases, just not the first. i think it's perfectly valid and interesting to try to make the kinds of movies Lucas is ostensibly trying to make. his execution is at best uneven and at times catastrophically awful, but i don't think it's a bad thing that he's trying to do.

No, it's like criticising a porno movie for being unsexy, misogynistic, badly filmed and overlong. I'm sure there are many dunderheads who would then say "but that's what all pornos are like, you can't criticise them for that!" Just because something is an accepted convention or the intention of the filmmaker doesn't give mean it should be given a free pass.

well, yeah, it does, actually, to some extent. that's like criticizing Warhol for not being Rothko or something. you can really only judge a work of art by how well it accomplishes its own aims, and it's pretty much unavoidable that those aims can only be properly understood in the context of some genre or movement or other, which in turn means its kind of silly not to understand and accept the conventions of that genre on some level.

it has nothing to do with "demanding more from your world" - it's about not imposing one narrow set of aesthetic ideals on everything, and trying to jam the square pegs of what something is into the round holes of what you think it should be.

========

just for the record: let me be clear that i understand that i'm waaaaay too deep into SW geekdom to really be able to look at this movie objectively.
 
 
Benny the Ball
08:38 / 15.06.05
The further away from having watched this film I get, the more I realise how shit it was.

Also, dialogue is not a sound effect, go watch 12 angry men with the sound turned down, playing a cd of BBC's sound effects of doorbells ringing and police sirens, let me know if it still plays as a good film.

Fact of the matter is Lucas has never been a good dialogue writer, and not really the best actor director around, which is why Empire, with a real director and rewriten script, stands out so strongly against the other films.
 
 
haus of fraser
09:08 / 15.06.05
On the dialogue thing:
I dunno, I don't like the dialogue, but if Lucas is just using it as a sound-effect, as he claims, then criticizing it for being wooden, hokey, or just plain bad... is like criticizing a porno movie for not putting a little moral lesson for the kiddies on at the end. Or, bashing 'Manhattan' for lack of color. The fact there's no digital effects in 'Kissing Jessica Stein'. No laugh track to 'Doctor Who'.


if you really believe this then- imho you are an idiot.

dialogue as another sound effect... well if you put the sound of a slowly deflating balloon over the death star being detroyed- it don't work- if you give actors lines as clunky and awkward as anything Natalie portman said in this movie- it don't work.

Open your eyes fools you are making excuses for something that can't be excused- the movie has dreadful dialogue- FACT. The bad dialogue is not a style choice or an affectation of the genre its just not very well written/ directed.

Unlike some of the anti SW sentiments i actually enjoyed the movie- the dialogue was crappy and huge chunks needed rescripting but i like silly sci-fi with space battles and light sabres so a part of me forgives the fuck-ups, and like many of us here i was a huge SW fan as a kid and wanted to see what happened. However please stop making excuses and placing so much blind faith in the man that gave us howard the duck and Jar Jar Binks...

IMHO our best hope for the movie we want is to wait till lucas is dead and someone can remake the whole lot (maybe with Han Solo as a lady though...)
 
 
diz
09:13 / 15.06.05
Also, dialogue is not a sound effect, go watch 12 angry men with the sound turned down, playing a cd of BBC's sound effects of doorbells ringing and police sirens, let me know if it still plays as a good film.

not every film has to be 12 Angry Men. i don't mean that to mean that "we should have lower standards" but rather that we have to move past this notion that every film "should" be narrative, linear, dialogue-driven, etc.

this attitude that film should somehow be theater, except with a camera rolling, is insane, as is the idea that the standards and expectations appropriate to that style of film can and should be applied to all films as a sort of transcendent measure of quality.

dialogue is not a sound effect in 12 Angry Men, but that doesn't mean that it cannot be used as a sound effect in other types of movies. dialogue is a tool in the filmmaker's toolkit. nothing more, nothing less. it can be put front-and-center, not used at all, used sparingly, or whatever, depending on what kind of movie the director is trying to make.
 
 
haus of fraser
09:19 / 15.06.05
The dialogue is not meant as a sound effect, its just some of it isn't very good.

To say this insults every single actor/ soundman/ script superviser/ producer that worked on the movie- and each time you say it you make yourself look more and more foolish.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
09:28 / 15.06.05
this notion that every film "should" be narrative, linear, dialogue-driven, etc.... this attitude that film should somehow be theater

Who put forward this notion and this attitude?

That's a very different idea from the idea that it's possible to object to the intentions behind a work of art as well the execution of same.

Was watching the beginning of House of Flying Daggers again last night - tried to imagine, once more, how anyone could think a Star Wars film could be the best-looking movie they'd ever seen. What kind of inner aesthetic poverty must that require? Felt sad.
 
 
Spaniel
09:58 / 15.06.05
Yes, that disturbs me also.
 
 
Yotsuba & Benjamin!
10:32 / 15.06.05
Yeah, that was me. I'm pretty sure I made a distinction between "aesthetically pleasing" and "accomplished rendering of imaginative detail," citing, among other things, Rushmore's Remote Control Airplane Scene which contains, inarguably, the most well composed shot I'd seen since the last shot of The Third Man.

Man, I missed some top arguing.

But, anyhoo. As far as the dialogue goes, yeah it's a sound effect but yeah that's not the best defense, but the key here is, I stopped giving a fuck about Star Wars dialogue the very first time I heard it. It may come as a shock to some, but the human brain is made up of tons of little tiny wrinkles and different areas for different kinds of thought. It happened to work out, in my case, that there's a part of my brain that can enjoy Star Wars films on their own merits (and if you feel that they have absolutely ZERO, well, so goes the realm of your personal preference) and there's several other distinct parts that can enjoy more "artistically accomplished" films, books, pieces of music, etcetera. I've never understood the argument that you're somehow obligated, FOR THE SAKE OF AN ARTFORM, to avoid this thing or that thing. Just say you didn't enjoy it, but claiming that the success of Star Wars is bad for film as an artform is just atrociously illogical. Miraculously, when I returned home from a screening of Star Wars III, my Criterion Collection had not disappeared. Future Generations will still have The Rules Of The Game to watch and inspire them. Scott Pilgrim Versus The World is coming out today, the same week as Gambit #12. Every artform is perfectly capable of surviving the inneffiient renderings it appears in, with or without our patronage.
 
 
Spaniel
10:42 / 15.06.05
I'll take it your word for it that you were attempting to make that distintion, but...

This was probably the best looking movie ever.

How many movies have you seen?

Well, I've seen at least a couple hundred, and I'm inclined to agree with him.

Not so clear.
 
 
Evil Scientist
10:42 / 15.06.05
The dialogue was no worse than in the last two (and by that I mean it was badly written and badly delivered by actors who should really be able to do better).

I still came out of it grinning and making lightsabre noises though. I'm in that happy stage where I've only seen it the once.

I feel they could have made more of the point that Anakin does end up bringing balance to the Force. It ends up with two Sith Lords and two Jedi. How much more balanced do you want?

It may have only been my sci-fi-geek gland spasming throughout the prequels but I interpretted it as the light side of the Force had now become too powerful and this was a way of restoring things.

Didn't the Sith rule before the Jedi? Perhaps it's a cyclical thing, brief periods of total balance followed by one side growing in power until it's limited back down by the other side.
 
 
Benny the Ball
11:03 / 15.06.05
But Lucas isn't putting forward this idea that his films are anything but narrative driven space operas or serial's from when he was a kid - okay, on that line, try watching flash gordon the seriels without sound - then tell me how good it was.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
11:05 / 15.06.05
that there's a part of my brain that can enjoy Star Wars films on their own merits (and if you feel that they have absolutely ZERO, well, so goes the realm of your personal preference)

The first film (and its two sequels to greater or lesser extent) have a lot of merits. Han Solo's cool, cynical rebelliousness, which rapidly became archetypal, powered largely by Harrison Ford's own opinion of space opera. (Almost everybody wanted to be Han, didn't they? Do you think anyone wants to be Qui Gonn Linn?) Luke Skywalker's desire to escape his crappy provincial farmboy life and do something exciting and BIG. That was something a lot of people can relate to. Go on, try to persuade me that the new films have characters people can relate or aspire to. Mace Windu? He's a sop to a well-known actor's desire to act out his childhood fantasies, rather than a character who will inspire new ones.

I don't hate Star Wars, just its transformation into a bloated prog-rock franchise, and the denial that such a change has occurred.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
11:07 / 15.06.05
I mean, they idea that it's all one seamless thing, that there's no break in the narrative of the creation of these films that in turn results in a substantive difference in aesthetic and quality... Jesus! Buy into Lucas propaganda wholesale, why doncha? Swallow it all up!
 
 
multitude.tv
12:56 / 15.06.05
I enjoyed ROTS, which is not to say that I think it was a well made film, though I do think that it stands on its own merits. There have been a lot of scathing statements made here, particularly about the dialog of the film, and by extension the value of dialogue in film. Folks often confuse what they liked or disliked about a film with why the film is good or bad on its own merits. Additionally rants about a film can either be to justify ones bias or to examine how the film works on its own, whereas I would say a good critique does not bash a film or applaud it but rather shows how the film may be a means for elucidating events, views, history or what have you, both internal to the narrative structure of the film and external to it.

Surprisingly no one has pointed out that film is a medium that began primarily (and many would argue remains) visual. The first films were silent. Following that, the first films with sound to accompany were set primarily to musical scores, that is the two initial periods in film were marked by reading (which Lucas utilizes in the refrain of the scroll) and by orchestra (John Williams’s score is certainly as important as the actors or the lines they say). One of the innovations of film to begin with was that it made it possible to present a narrative (on a mass scale) with complex character development that was primarily visual. Star Wars (the franchise in total) is certainly a film that relies on visuals first, soundtrack second and dialog a far third to convey a narrative. Lucas’s view of dialog as sound effect is not out of line with the history of cinema. My criticism would be that the characters say too much, that the acting and the visuals get the affectivity of the characters across fine, and that any dialog there is is simply to reinforce what is going on to those who are illiterate concerning visual codes and need every detail spelled out for them; the same dolks who get pissy about what is not explicit (read: Obi-Wan knowing Palpatine is the Emperor).

``The first film (and its two sequels to greater or lesser extent) have a lot of merits. Han Solo's cool, cynical rebelliousness, which rapidly became archetypal,``

Han Solo is obviously based upon the anti-hero such as Sam Spade from the Maltese Falcon; Indiana Jones is even more based on the Bogart characters, to some degree Fords performances in general are roles that Bogart would have also played well- You are right, these films (the prequels) have no obvious anti-hero to be ``cool`` in the macho-mook sense of the term, by the way, Obi-Wan is a character I can relate to, he is IMO much more complex than nearly anybody I have read gives him credit for. If Solo is the only character in the series you can relate with I suggest going to more films with Bruce Willis.

``Luke Skywalker's desire to escape his crappy provincial farmboy life and do something exciting and BIG. That was something a lot of people can relate to.``

Again, the classic example of this is of course the Wizard of Oz, Lucas is salvaging the archetypes of myth and film for his narrative structure. Lucas is fairly adept at this, and lest we forget that Anakin is in a similar situation. He is a slave that becomes free, however his destiny is only to throw the entire galaxy into a fascist state. The film (the prequels) is as you say about something BIG, that is the fall of republics into empires and the values that maintain a well functioning state (Padme and the Jedi) and those that bring it to totalitarianism (the Trade Federation and the Sith).

Now some people can’t get past CGI, and some people don’t like black and white films, some don’t like Sci-Fi, and some don’t like westerns, and some folks just love romantic comedies, political dramas or what have you, etc. That’s fine, but those sorts of biases if not held in check will 1) keep the viewer from ``buying into`` the film to begin with (and thus finding it enjoyable outside of the MST3K sense), and 2) usually be the basis for spewing out haphazard opinion as absolute truth of the value of a film.
 
 
This Sunday
13:28 / 15.06.05
First off, I don't really like *any* Star Wars, and it's more like some of this stuff just lodged in my backbrain as a kid and extrapolated from there, but I stand by my statement that entertainment/art ought to be taken and judged on the basis of what it wants to achieve. If you set out to make, say, 'Split Second' and you make 'Split Second', great, good. If you set out to make 'Touch of Evil', which had Mexi-Heston going against it and all, and you only manage to make, oh, Star Wars Episode 2, you, in my opinion failed, not only because you've got the wrong script, the wrong directon, wrong pacing, wrong cast... you just haven't made the movie you, as filmmaker wanted. And in the end, I'd rather the artist be happy, whether I am or not.
I won't toss money at things I don't enjoy (except to find out if I might enjoy them, obviously), but still, I did not purchase that video with the two Clive Barker silent black and white shorts, expecting 'My Dinner with Andre' and I doubt that was what Barker had set out to make, either.
Nobody is arguing that dialogue is just a sound effect in all films, just Lucas'. He makes them with that in mind, his action-adventure heroic myth thingies, like SW and Indiana Jones. You can watch Star Wars with no dialogue, but with music and other sound effects, and follow along just fine.
There's room in the world for this treatment and the integral dialogue treatment. Just as there is room for black and white film, color film, or solarized, neon, animated film.
What I won't stand for is telling anyone, 'Look you've got to do it this way, and only this way, I don't give a fuck what you want or like, it's this way.' Mainly, because it's silly, and secondly, experimentation and exploration are good things. Even when the results might not be entertaining, there's something to be gained, I suspect. Even, just, don't do that again, that sucked horribly.
 
 
Keith, like a scientist
13:30 / 15.06.05
star wars rulez?
 
 
haus of fraser
13:34 / 15.06.05
Star Wars (the franchise in total) is certainly a film that relies on visuals first, soundtrack second and dialog a far third to convey a narrative. Lucas’s view of dialog as sound effect is not out of line with the history of cinema..

It amazes me the bullshit you guys will make up to justify poor direction of actors and a bad script.

As flyboy rightly pointed out the first films had a cool story- much more interesting characters (han solo, leia) that developed when taken out of Lucas's hands.

The new trilogy relies on this story too - which in turn requires a cool script- something it often fails to deliver/ live up to expectations. imo - and probably many more SW fans the prequels had a story- its just it wasn't well written/ delivered and sadly could have been much better- but theres always a fan boy with blind faith and an excuse for every fuck up that happens in these movies- surely a little bit of you thought after each of the movies- it could've been better.

Back on the dialogue thing was Lucas's intention to have Darth Vadar mime 'i'm your father Luke' ? Or maybe show us through the medium of dance how the story progresses? What the fuck was he gonna use if not dialogue.

If you truely believe that the story is the 3rd most important thing in a Star Wars film you may as well go wank over a graphics card demo as haus suggested a couple of pages back- as you are missing one of the finer points of film making....
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
13:37 / 15.06.05
Star Wars (the franchise in total) is certainly a film that relies on visuals first, soundtrack second and dialog a far third to convey a narrative.

Patently untrue. The dialog is required, if nothing else, to explain repeatedly and in a stilted fashion what trade negotiations are occuring today. The idea of "dialogue as sound effect", which seems to have been bought into uncritically, fails to comprehend that dialogue is necessary to tell the viewer what is happening and why at any given moment in films which use dialogue. The Star Wars films have a linear plot that is explained, along with the motivations and backgrounds of the characters, through dialogue (and a fair chunk of monologue). For example, without dialogue how exactly would the audience work out the Qui-Gonn has discovered what a lot of midichlorians young Anakin has. You may suggest many ingenious answers, none of which was used in the film. So, although apalling, the dialogue is doing one of the things that dialogue should - it is just failing to do other things that it is being expected to do due to the structure of the film, such as make the characters convincing or likeable.

So, although your revelation that early films did not have soundtracks is astonishing and most edifying, the status of Revenge of the Sith as what we in the industry call a "talkie" renders it somewhat redundant. Lucas had the option of using dialogue as a sound effect, and chose not to employ it. To claim subsequent bad scripting as some sort of auteurial decision is to fall into the trap of watching the director, not the film.
 
 
Keith, like a scientist
13:42 / 15.06.05
i think this discussion of the "dialogue as sound effect" has become a bit ludicrous...it probably wasn't the wisest course of defense for Lucas and now it's just snowballed into a weapon against the people who like ROTS... 'ah ha! see? lucas acknowledges he can't write! therefore, it is provable that ROTS sucks ass. nyah. nyah. nyah.'

you either enjoyed the movie or you didn't. it either hit the points you wanted it to hit, and you know that it's not Godfather at heart, but it's star wars, you like star wars for what star wars is, and you like it....or...you are let down by it's profound difference in 'quality' than the OT, it's lack of that...special something that the OT had.

Me...well, I like the big polished, shiny Old Republic universe...like the big action, the big tragedy, the shiny ships.

i don't think there is a way to prove to anyone that ROTS is good or bad. there is no winning this topic discussion. of course, i will be quoted in bold face, and told that this is just a way to admit defeat and a classic example of having no real comeback.
 
 
Yotsuba & Benjamin!
13:47 / 15.06.05
[Insert Opening Laugh Off 'Feel Good Inc']
 
 
FinderWolf
13:50 / 15.06.05
I don't think it's been mentioned, but I've heard from several sources (one being Roger Egert) that Tom Stopppard himself was called in to do dialogue rewrites for Ep. III. Pity it doesn't show.
 
  

Page: 1 ... 1213141516(17)181920

 
  
Add Your Reply