Attack of the Clowns

[Darth Badly]

Attack of the Clowns has the worst dialogue in any film I’ve seen in years. *It manages to mess up more of the Star Wars universe. *It’s a shoddy shockingly bad piece of film making. *It’s got a love story with such silly scenes that the audience I saw it with were just laughing at it. *It’s got a story that’s just full of holes and just doesn’t make much sense. *

For example: * *

If 10,000 star systems want to leave the Republic then so what? *
* What’s so bad about that? *Why not let them leave? *Isn't that their democratic right?
* Why must there be a war? *You surely don't have a war to stop people leaving a democratic organisation? *

* If Chris Lee / Count Duckula is really working for the future Emperor then why tell Obi Wan the truth about there being evil in the senate??? *This is ridiculous – as is Yoda dismissing the entire idea as him trying to spread paranoia. *Surely the Emperor would kick Duckula's behind? *

* Why does the future emperor think that if he puts a dark hood on then no one will know who he is? *Why does this work? *Why does he bother with this silly Superman/Clerk Kent identity swap when anyone who sees him as Darth will instantly recognise him as the chancellor?

* Given that the future emperor now has ultimate power anyway what is the point in trying to manipulate people into a war? *(If that's indeed what he's doing?) *Since the future emperor is the most powerful man in the universe anyway AND is widely liked and trusted, why on earth blow it all and become the most hated man? *Why not just flipping enjoy it?

* Who ordered that clone army in the first place? *If Count Duckula ordered it then how come there’s no reaction when it’s used against him? *And if he did order it, then why create an army of robots as well?
Who hid that whole solar system of the Grey cloning aliens and how and why? *How come no one flew into the hidden sun over the last ten years? * Surely moving to a new planet would have been a better idea than cloaking an entire solar system which any three year old could work out was still there. *(Although not Obi Dimbo Wan it seems.)
How come no one noticed given that the fatty alien who helps out Obi Wan can't be the only one who's heard of the grey aliens. *How were the grey alien cloners paid? *And by whom? *
And MOST OF ALL, why in God’s name didn't the grey aliens get in touch with someone over the ten years? *It is utterly ridiculous that they would be working away for an entire decade without once checking to see what was happening or making any kind of contact with the people they were working for. *What if the people who ordered the clone army were all dead?

Why chose an unstable bounty hunter who's not very good at his job and gets killed real easy (here and again in Return of the Jedi) as your model for one million fighting clones? *(Actually, given that all Stormtroopers die real easy and are terrible shots - perhaps this is one thing that does make sense - although WHY is another matter.) * Having chosen him why let him go on dodgy missions where he can leave clues that will allow people to find you after ten years of careful hiding?
*
Why hasn't the Republic got a proper bloody army in the first place? * Surely there must be some real people willing to serve?
* Why are there seemingly only about 30 Jedi knights in the whole galaxy available for the final battle at the end???
* Why are the Jedi so short in numbers in the first place?
* Why is the 'force unbalanced' and what the heck is that supposed to mean??? *

* Why can just anybody (Yoda) turn up and assume command of the clone army? *All Obi Wan needed when he turned up was a good Jedi Knight costume available at any good fancy dress shop?

Why is there just one funny joke (Obi Wan’s line about ‘Death Sticks’) in 140 minutes of film? *Why has the charm and wit of the original films been replaced by horrible computer graphics and soulless war games.

* Why does Yoda and the Jedi counsel spend all their time in one small room at the top of a horrible skyscraper?

* How and why is the very obviously evil future Emperor able to disguise his very clearly evil intentions? *How and why is he allowed to remain in office as Chancellor seemingly forever, when Princess Portman was only allowed to be Queen of Naboo for two terms. *
And anyway, why did the idiots on Naboo elect a queen so young and inexperienced as her? *Surely on the entire planet there must have been someone better?
*
Why can't Yoda or anyone even get a fleeting feeling that the Chancellor is pure evil - even when they already know that there are Dark Lords out there? *AND still can't even at the end when Obi Wan has been directly warned by Count Duckula?
*
Why did they make a big point of saying - that only a really brave senator would propose giving the future emperor extra powers and then when JarJarTosser Binks does so he is immediately clapped as a hero by everyone like it what everyone wanted all along? *
*
Why is Count Duckula holding secret meetings with such really important and interesting people as the losers from the trade federation, the National Institute of Librarians, and the Nation Union of Estate Agents? *What the heck have they got to do with anything? *

Why does R2D2 push C3PO on to that conveyer belt in the droid factory? *(Other than to start yet another poorly directed set piece that’s more like a video game than a film, of course.)
*
Why is Princess Portman so important in things given that although pretty in photographs she has no charm or sex appeal? *
If the future emperor wants her dead why not poison her coffee or something? *Why get Count Duckula to hire the idiot bounty hunter / assassin Fett who then hires a silly girl assassin to try and kill her in the very building where the future emperor is staying anyway. *Isn't this taking subcontracting a little too far? *(And of course it’s this terrible idea that leads to Obi Wan eventually finding the clone army.)
*
Why doesn't Darth Vader recognise C3PO in the original trilogy? *Why doesn't C3PO recognise Vader as the maker? * If C3PO has his memory wiped at the end of Episode III then all character development here is meaningless.
*
Why do you have to have a chase through an asteroid belt and a Skywalker getting their hand cut off, just because it's the middle film in a trilogy? *
*
Why doesn't Darth Vader show any sense of having been to Tatoonie before in the opening of Star Wars? *He must surely hate the place? *It’s not true to say that the identity of Anakin is entirely lost to him because if it was Luke being his son would mean nothing to him and is clearly (in Empire) means a lot.

* If young Anakin loves his mother so much that he has wet dreams about her being banged by Sand People then how come he hasn't visited her in 10 flipping years? *That's a bit slack isn't it? *He and Obi Wan have been all over the galaxy - they must have been back near Tatoonine. *Surely he must have had a weekend off? *Why hasn't he even bothered to communicate with her via one of those holographic things? *What no cards on mothers day?

* Why is Yoda just computer cartoon now instead of a poorly operated muppet?

* Why is he suddenly happy to command SS style Nazi clones into battle? *
Why isn’t Yoda smart enough to work out it’s a bad thing?
* Why has George lost his mind?
* Why must we suffer this badly written nonsense???

[Teek]

Why must you ask so many pointless questions?

Some of those questions are matters of style, but many of them are answered in the movie itself... I'm not sure why you're making many of the assumptions you are. Kamino wasn't cloaked, it's record was merely removed from the archives. Ever heard of the American civil war? Sometimes keeping a democracy together for the right reasons is worth the fight. That's actually an interesting question though, should the Republic have fought to keep itself together? It's not as flipant a question as you make it out to be. And Dooku knows about the clone army, if you watch the movie you find out he helped create it and the whole point is to have the Republic Army fight the seperatists, to further Palpatines control of the universe when he will be needed as absolute ruler to make the needed decisions. Watching his powerplay is one of the most fascinating things about the Prequels. Everything that happens is usually caused by him, or he uses it to his favor. That makes his overconfidence in ROTJ all the more powerful. (He really COULD manipulate people and get what he wanted, now we know why he was so confident) When did C-3PO and Vader sit down to hold a chat? Last time Anakin saw 3PO he was probably grey. I would say 9 out of 10 of the questions you posted can be answered by actually WATCHING the movies and making logical reasoning, not being critical for the sake of being critical. You're so blindly critical it just serves to weaken your argument that AOTC is a bad movie.

[Darth Badly]

Come on be sensible. It's obvious that Darth Vader doesn't have to sit down for a chat with C3PO to be able to recognise him. They don't know each other for the simple reason that Uncle George makes up this nonsense as he goes along. Hence the Luke snogging his sister thing, Ben lying to Luke about what happened to his dad then trying to wriggle out of it in Jedi, and all the other nonsense in the new film that I've tried to draw to the viewers attention in my post.
All the questions are valid.
It's also worth saying that from the reactions of normal people I know that have seen it (ie people that have seen the other films but wouldn't call themselves fans) hardly anyone understands the big plot. Not because it's hidden in mystery in an exciting way, but because it's confused and silly.

[Darth Badly]

Quote: "Sometimes keeping a democracy together for the right reasons is worth the fight. That's actually an interesting question though, should the Republic have fought to keep itself together? It's not as flipant a question as you make it out to be."

I wasn't being flippant at all. As you kind of admit its a very valid point. How would you justify not letting planets leave a democratic organisation if they want to? You refer to the civil war by the issues there were slavery - something worth fighting over. The issue hear has been vaguely explained only that the other folks want to leave. Since this underpins the entire first (ie new) trilogy its rather an important point, don't you think?
I wasn't being flippant. These last two films are a cancer at the heart of the original trilogy.

[padmehlc]

? You surely don't have a war to stop people leaving a democratic organisation?


As you kind of admit its a very valid point. How would you justify not letting planets leave a democratic organisation if they want to? You refer to the civil war by the issues there were slavery - something worth fighting over. The issue hear has been vaguely explained only that the other folks want to leave.

True there were other issues to the Civil War but the main fact is - they WERE TRYING to work those out at a bargaining table and even Lincoln said that he ONLY Freed ALL the Slaves BECAUSE they broke the union - he wasn't going to - just RESTRICT more strongly the territories from becoming NEW slave states - the War in it's immediate cause to actually fight with Arms not just words was nearly 100% I'd even say 95% minimum because the South Dared break the Federation and then attack Fort Sumter - because it was on "Thier" territory - that was the only reason we went to Arms - States Rights Vs the good of the Whole - and as we all know the WHOLE won. To break a Democracy is in a way to destroy it - it no longer functions properly with any of it's parts missing - and all suffer - I would call it a very good reason for most people to start a war - we were not the only ones to do so - many historical wars started with the end of a Democracy like that - either to keep it together or get as much of the land from it as possible to "recreate" your new State.


As for the rest I agree with Teek the answers are all there - and the ones that aren't yet we just have to be patient - we still have another 140 minutes or so to the story - things will be more clear in 3 years....

As for the 3PO Vader thing - who says Vader DIDN'T recognize him? For all we know he could have just not cared - 3PO was obviously sold many times I doubt Vader would automatically make the connection just cause he was there - If I were him I'd just assume someone on board just happened to buy that one - not to meantion there are alot of identicalish proticol droids floating around out there - we even SEE another when he follows it into the room on Bespin and not forgetting the one on hte Viceroy's ship in TPM - for all we know Vader has seen enough protocol droids that he just disregards thjem - he wouldn't be looking for 3PO so he jsut looks him over as another one of those droids - not important. As for 3PO not recognizing him - well Vader certainly doesn't LOOK at ALL LIKE ANAKIN! How could you recognize someone as someone when they no longer look anything like what they did before? He recognizes him in AOTC as he's only grown up - and you can see the little kid in people you know really well even years later but he doesn't have X-Ray vision - he's jsut a droid he can't see Anakin under the mask - and we don't know if he ever learned that that is what happened to his maker.

[NelsonCoressel]

3PO is JUST A ROBOT! What's to recognize? He was in pieces and wearing a different skin by Episode 5 anyway. And we see lots of similar-looking protocol droids throughout the story. In fact, we see several in TPM before we see the unfinished 3PO.

Anyway, many of the questions posted by the originator of this topic certainly are valid, but in a "I'm here to convice you it's a piece of ####" sort of way.

I was actually suprised at how good the dialogue was in AOTC! There are parts of ESB that make me cringe more than AOTC.

I think people have put all of Star Wars on an untouchable peak that they won't allow themselves to lower. ALL of the Star Wars movies are silly. All of them have goofy, illogical actions. All of them are a bit of fun with a dash of mythology and classic movie references thrown in. That's the charm.
I fail to see how AOTC is any worse than the others in the series.

[Darth Badly]

Well thanks for admitting that. You seem to be the only person here prepared to admit that it might not be perfect. In fact the reason for the original post sounding like its trying to convince readers was that I simply could not believe how positive the reviews were here. OK, look Attack of the Clowns is not quite as hopeless as The P Menace but it's not much better.
I'm not very concerned with Darth recognising C3PO or not really because we all know the simple reason he doesn't is that the other films were made first - and that George hadn't worked things out nearly as well as he'd like us all to believe.

However, loads of my original questions are important and highlight some very poor decisions taken by Uncle George in the new films.

Why on earth did the Clown Army have to be grown by hidden grey aliens? Why not (for example) a CIA type hidden clone factory within the Republic under the secret control of the bad guys? Why are the new scripts so bloody humourless? Why are they both such soulless, by-the-numbers efforts at film making. I think the two new films show that Star Wars (the original) was the fluke in George's career and that Howard the Duck is about his average score and the true level of his talent.

[Tovor]

Darth Badly, your willingness to contemplate and think out the reasoning of an actually serious and conspiracy-revealing plot is, well, badly shown. If the name fits, go with it, right?


Why must there be a war? You surely don't have a war to stop people leaving a democratic organisation?
The Seperatists were building an army in order to, as Dooku said, "Hold the Republic for a ransom", or something to that effect. Obi-Wan overhead that meeting while spying on them and reported back to the Chancellor and Jedi Council that the Seperatists were preparing for war with the Droid Manufacturing plant on Geonosis. That was why the Republic launched its war on Geonosis, to wipe out the Seperatists' ability on that planet to threaten the peace of the Republic.


If Chris Lee / Count Duckula is really working for the future Emperor then why tell Obi Wan the truth about there being evil in the senate???
This is an excellent question that is leading us in other threads to discuss it to a greater degree. Possible answer #1: Dooku wanted OBi-Wan to trust and join him to help him kill and take Sideous' control and use it himself. Possible answer #2: Dooku and/or Sideous wanted to throw the Jedi Council into confusion and paranoia by leaking that bit of info.

This is ridiculous – as is Yoda dismissing the entire idea as him trying to spread paranoia.
Not at all. As I just said, I think that was the plan. Cause confusion and paranoia; and by Yoda assuming that was his intent all along, the charge is dismissed and they don't suspect the Senate or above all the Supreme Chancellor. If you appear to be a liar and accuse a criminal of being a criminal, then nobody will believe that the criminal is guilty. Get it?


Why does the future emperor think that if he puts a dark hood on then no one will know who he is? Why does this work? Why does he bother with this silly Superman/Clerk Kent identity swap when anyone who sees him as Darth will instantly recognise him as the chancellor?
But who else but Dooku, another Darth, and the foolish Trade Feds have seen Sideous in his hood? Nobody else, that's who, and that's why the disguise works.


Given that the future emperor now has ultimate power anyway what is the point in trying to manipulate people into a war? (If that's indeed what he's doing?) Since the future emperor is the most powerful man in the universe anyway AND is widely liked and trusted, why on earth blow it all and become the most hated man? Why not just flipping enjoy it?
You refer to him as the future emperor, but at this point in the prequels that role is not yet definate and final. He cannot become the future emperor unless he carries out his current plans to gain the war powers that a Chancellor is denied without a major Senate vote. We do not yet know what the term length of a Supreme Chancellor is, so Palpatine may be looking to ensure that his time as king of the hill does not run out. Plus, he does not love democracy nor the Republic. He loves power and control. He does not care about being widely liked and trusted, he wants to be widely feared and in complete control of everything. Plus, he is confined to the (rather spacious) office of Chancellor. He wants his mansions and villas and slave harems. He does not want to be the President of the U.S., he wants to be the endulging power loving Emperor of the Roman Empire. Does standing in the Senate surrounded by senators thrill him, or standing at his window watching the air traffic go by with people who do not fear and live in submission to him thrill him? No, but standing at the balcony at the end of the film like Adolph Hitler watching his, yes, HIS, armies and warships in formation preparing to launch and wage war for his benefit...that is what thrills him.


Who ordered that clone army in the first place? If Count Duckula ordered it then how come there’s no reaction when it’s used against him? And if he did order it, then why create an army of robots as well?
There is another thread to discuss who Sifa Dyas was so I won't venture a guess here. But Dooku knew about the Clone army, as did Palpatine, long before Obi-Wan discovered it. The Senate would not have voted for a Republic army unless there was an absolute need for one to protect the otherwise unthreatened Republic. And the Seperatists with the droid armies provided the threat that Palpatine needed to convince the Senate to give him war powers. And then, when it was most needed, there was an army ready and able to serve Palpatine to protect the Republic, so he got to use it. Dooku knew about the Clone army that was being prepared in secret to serve his Master, he just wasn't expecting it to show up when it did to attack Geonosis. The Trade Feds and the Geonosians were all pawns used to render the Clone army necessary, and Dooku left them to suffer the onslaught of the advancing Clones while he went to be praised by his Master. He told his Master Sideous, "Good news, my lord, war has begun", and Sideous replied, "Everything is proceeding as planned." So Dooku knew full well what was planned and what was happening, and the Geonosians and Trade Feds who were promised victory by him would eventually suffer defeat while Palpatine gains everything. And this is how a Chancellor controlled by the Senate vote and held back from his personal desires, managed to become Emperor and all powerful. You said a few times, Darth Badly, he is the future emperor. Yes he will be, but not unless he can pull off what is happening in Episode II and III.


Who hid that whole solar system of the Grey cloning aliens and how and why? How come no one flew into the hidden sun over the last ten years?
I believe Teek explained this very well so I won't d it again.

How come no one noticed given that the fatty alien who helps out Obi Wan can't be the only one who's heard of the grey aliens.
The galaxy is a very big place, you know, and I'm sure no one without extensive charts can keep track of every single planet and species in the galaxy. And, as Dexter told Obi-Wan in the diner, Kamino was outside the Republic. Thus, the Kaminoans would not even have a senator representing them in the Senate. Obi figured his friend might know something since he had spent many years prospecting beyond the edges of the established Republic perimeters.


How were the grey alien cloners paid? And by whom? And MOST OF ALL, why in God’s name didn't the grey aliens get in touch with someone over the ten years?
Good question, but perhaps they were already so wealthy that they were willing to wait 10 or more years for payment by an establishment as trustworthy as the great Republic. Perhaps they enjoy their solitude and would not have allowed any visitors anyway, except for a Jedi they thought was representing the Jedi Master who commissioned them. Maybe they have such long lifespans that 10 years was a small amount of time for them and not so long as we consider it. So for them there was plenty of patience in wait of payment and delivery.


Why hasn't the Republic got a proper bloody army in the first place? Surely there must be some real people willing to serve?
A good question which I had wondered about for years, having so long wanted to see Republic fleets going against enemy fleets like the Star Trek Federation warring against Klingons or Borg. But by now I've realized that it is because of the Senate meetings and votes which usually manage to avoid conflicts between worlds and systems. And there were the Jedi to enforce peace and justice when conflicts arose. So until the current threat of the Seperatists there apparently has not been a need for an army.


Why are there seemingly only about 30 Jedi knights in the whole galaxy available for the final battle at the end???
Why are the Jedi so short in numbers in the first place?
I went into this in the "Things You Noticed in AOTC" thread. Perhaps you should read that thread and other discussions to get some idea rather than writing such a long list of complaints that I somehow feel I have to fill you in on. The Jedi were spread across the galaxy on countless other missions and could not be recalled and used at a moments notice. There were only a certain amount of Jedi available on Coruscant at the time so they were all utilized. There were far more than 30 in the arena, since after many were killed there were roughly about 25 at least surrounded by droids in the last stand before the Clone ships arrived. According to Teek and info he quoted, there were 200 Jedi brought to fight in the arena mission to save Obi-Wan.


Why is the 'force unbalanced' and what the heck is that supposed to mean???
The Force requires harmony and peace to be in balance, just as the Jedi needs to be passive and at peace to use it (accroding to Yoda in TESB). When evil beings such as the Sith use the Force for means in contrast to goodness and peace, the Force is disrupted and those who are attuned to the good side of the Force can feel that disruption. LIke ripples in a pond. When at peace the water is flat and undisturbed, but when the violence of a rock or other falling object disrupts it, ripples are sent out in all directions, and other living beings floating peacefully atop the surface can feel that disruption. In the SW story, the more power the evil Sith attain and the more evil they prepare and carry out, the more the ripples grow and spread, until they are like crashing waves. The only way then to bring balance back to the Force is to eliminate the powerful force causing the disruption to the harmony of the Force. At the end of ROTJ, Anakin drove the dark side out of him and returned to the good side of the Force, and destroyed the Sith Master who had caused the imbalance in the first place. And that is what brings the Force back into balance, when the dark side manipulator was deprived of his ability to disrupt the harmony of the tranquil Force.


Why is there just one funny joke (Obi Wan’s line about ‘Death Sticks’) in 140 minutes of film?
Oh ye of little sense of humor. I guess its just a matter or personal taste. I for one do not look for humor nor care for it in SW, since I prefer serious drama and conflict. But I thought 3PO at the last part of AOTC was an instigator of quite a few laughs from myself and the audience around me when I saw the film.


Why does Yoda and the Jedi counsel spend all their time in one small room at the top of a horrible skyscraper?
Why does the American Congress spend so much time in the Capital dome discussing laws and policy? Why does the U.S. president spend so much time in the Oval Office meeting with his staff? Why does, for your sake, the British leaders spend so much time in Parliament Hall (is that what it's called?) in meetings? The Jedi Council room seemed a big round room, but why is the skyscraper horrible?


How and why is the very obviously evil future Emperor able to disguise his very clearly evil intentions? How and why is he allowed to remain in office as Chancellor seemingly forever, when Princess Portman was only allowed to be Queen of Naboo for two terms.
ROTFLMAO. Please tell me how a princess served as Queen? And, "Princess Portman"? Amidala was never a princess, she was a queen in movie one, a senator in movie two. Why say Princess Portman with the actress's name rather than the character? Are you making note of Natalie's heritage and calling her a Jewish-American-Princess?


Why do you have to have a chase through an asteroid belt and a Skywalker getting their hand cut off, just because it's the middle film in a trilogy?
Did you not pay any attention to ROTJ, when Luke observed his father's severed hand, and released that his father had lost his hand the same way, and that he was becoming just like him? I knew then, 19 years ago when I saw that movie, that Anakin Skywalker had lost his hand in battle, and fully expected to see it happen in the prequels. The hand-losing scene in AOTC was not to copy the hand-losing scene in TESB, it was meant to explain the significance that Luke realized at the end of ROTJ.


Why doesn't Darth Vader show any sense of having been to Tatoonie before in the opening of Star Wars? He must surely hate the place?
This is a subject we have had a lot of enjoyment over discussing rather than critisizing. Perhaps the pain he felt at losing his mother caused him to dread thinking about Tatooine at all.


If young Anakin loves his mother so much that he has wet dreams about her being banged by Sand People
Now this is quite sick. Is that what you percieved by Anakin's fears of his mother's fate?


then how come he hasn't visited her in 10 flipping years? That's a bit slack isn't it? He and Obi Wan have been all over the galaxy - they must have been back near Tatoonine. Surely he must have had a weekend off? Why hasn't he even bothered to communicate with her via one of those holographic things? What no cards on mothers day?
The Jedi do not allow contact with former lives and emotional attatchments. Yoda indicated that to Anakin in TPM, as he also did to Luke in TESB when Luke wanted to end his training to save his friends. Anakin was a mere padawan, so he could not leave his Master during the 10 years. He wanted to become a Knight so he could go off on his own and save his mother. So he felt that it was taking too long to become a Knight, which is partly why he was angry at his Master and blamed Obi-Wan for holding him back, after his mother had died. And, there is no Hallmark in the Republic.


Why is Yoda just computer cartoon now instead of a poorly operated muppet?
How in the world could you manage a lightsaber duel using a muppet?


Why is he suddenly happy to command SS style Nazi clones into battle? Why isn’t Yoda smart enough to work out it’s a bad thing?
#1, because he thought the army was needed to eliminate the threat, and without it the Seperatists and their droid armies would have wiped out the Jedi on Geonosis and caused death and destruction to others in the Republic.
#2, He did figure it out. When the Clone trooper told him the droid army was retreating, didn't you see Yoda appear suddenly downcast and possibly regretful, as if he was just realizing what kind of power the new army could yield for a formerly peaceful Republic? Did you not notice how downcast and contemplative he was during the last meeting with Obi-Wan and Mace Windu? Obi-Wan commented about how fortunate it was that the Clone army had been there, and Yoda corrected him indicating that it was not a victory but that the shroud of the dark side had fallen. I think at that point that Yoda was realizing that he was a mere puppet being controlled by the strings of the Dark Lord of the Sith.


Why must we suffer this badly written nonsense???
What George wrote, or what you wrote? style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif

[Smeghead]

"I smell troll, get an ax..."

OR

"Mmm... I *love* the smell of Flamebait in the morning"

[Smeghead]

Also, when you refuse to call something by it's real name, you lose much of your credibility. Basically, you sound like a 10 year old calling someone "Poopy-head"

[Darshia_Lynx]

about vader not recognizing 3p0 and vice-versa,Yes there are practicly countless nembers of proticol droids how can you recognize one if you have been around so many and you havn't seen that particular droid in a long time.As for the 3P0
droid's momory can be erased!!!And if Owen and Beru died in the first film the death star plans and the message to kenobi would have been deleted.Droids memories are deletable!!
And besides.It's just a movie.Why do people try to make it a point in there lives to downgrade something that means so much to people.And of course the plot has holes in it.What movie doesn't?The lines in AotC were good,almost like poetry
George Lucas is deffinatly a master storyteller and I am sure that everyone here agrees with me.
As for people saying this movie was horrible let me ask you this question:Was Spiderman any better?Seriously it was okay but...i dunno boring to watch all the way through.

[Darth Badly]

I called her Princess Portman because her name in the film is so dumb it really doesn't matter what you call her.

Heavens! You guys don't like critisim do you? I dare to criticise the new film and its not long before you resort to the race card implying I made some comment on the actress' background - which I certainly didn't. And also attacking me personally - 'Darth Badly by name' and remarks about writing badly.

Hey guys - notice something here ok? I'm not attacking any of you. I'm just raising some serious questions about a not very good movie.

Questions you're finding rather difficult to answer I can see. Either posters say 'Who cares' - well I do as a paying member of the audience or you use circular logic to fight your corner. Example - no one notices that the chancellor is really Darth under his silly cloak because so few people see him in his disguise and they're all on his side anyway. So what is the point of the disguise then???

Also you kept saying 'IF' he becomes emperor. But the point is that we all know he does. So there is absolutely NO suspense or drama about 'IF' he does.

[Teek]

Darth Badly, personally I think you're just trying to incite some flame posts yourself with the way you phrased some of your questions. If you don't like the movie, that's your right, but I think Tovor answered most of your questions in a clear and easy manner. If those answers don't satisfy you, perhaps you should just skip Ep. III since GL is disappointing you so much.

[NelsonCoressel]

Also you kept saying 'IF' he becomes emperor. But the point is that we all know he does. So there is absolutely NO suspense or drama about 'IF' he does.

It was either Laurence Olivier or John Gielgud who once said that the trick is "to play an Othello or a Macbeth who might NOT go through with it..." That makes it even more dramatic and suspenseful.

What we are seeing now is a set of episodes that shows us what happened before the other movies. One thing that impresses me about both TPM and AOTC is that they don't assume we've already seen the last half of the story. Now that would be crappy storytelling, to say "yeah, yeah, you know this part... move along..."

[haemadroid]

Hmm. I can see what Darth Badly is getting at. I sat through the film in a state of pure puzzlement. I thought the plot was childishly simple but was made to seem complicated by those interminable debates and discussions between the various Jedi which were entirely unnecessary. Mr Lucas has committed the cardinal sin in movie making of 'telling' instead of 'showing'. We poor audoence were told at length what was going on, instead of being shown, on a minor level this meant we were subjected to Annakin's whines (and let's face it that's what they were) about his dreams instead of letting us see those nightmares. It would have been a much stronger film if it had started with that, to convey the angst and fear he was experiencing - whioch surely is what the film was supposed to be dealing with. Other examples include those interminable council meetings where various senators/jedi/whoever go into blah de blah mode whilst spaceship fly past the window. I'm sorry but that does not make for an interesting movie.

I went to this film hoping to be enthralled as I was when I was 13 when I saw "A New Hope" but was so disappointed. Ewoks and men with big headphones on cloud city I could accept but not this. Please can some explain a few things to me?

Firstly, why did the clone army not even look like Jango Fett? When Obi wan saw them eating in the refectory they looked more like the man with the eyepatch than Jango, surely if they were supposed to be a slightly younger version of Jango then all they had to do was use the Jango actor and use a bit of eye liner on him or something, that all added to the confusion.

Whilst Obi Wan is fighting Jango, why did he have to really make an effort to use the force on the doors of the facility instead of just walking up to them and letting them open automatically like they did when he arrived?

Why are the majority of the performances so very poor in the movie? Apart from the superb Christopher Lee it looked like no one was trying or had no idea what they were supposed to be doing.

Why do the people of Naboo vote very young girls to be their queen when there are much more experienced people around only to boot them out after a couple of terms when they're just getting good at it? Besides, wasn't the Brian Blessed voiced character given the leadership at the end of the last film?

Why did I constantly feel as though I was watching a promo for the video game instead of an exciting segment of a great movie?

Why does Yoda pretend to limp and have a stick when he obviously doesn't need to? What pleasure does he derive from impersonating a handicapped creature? Is it to avoid his speeder getting clamped?

Why was Annakin so bothered about Amidala falling prettily on to a sand dune?

Why was his hand replaced with something that looks like it couldn't grab a cuddly toy from a fair ground vending machine? The technology there is so advanced that it can make droids etc but can only come up with a really rubbish fake hand that looks horribly primitive even in our society. That's just ridiculous.

Was anyone else reminded of a similar scene in Galaxy Quest during that over long conveyor belt sequence?

I appreciate that the next film will tie up lots of loose threads but I really do think that this one and the Phantom Menace before it should be able to stand up on their own as individual movies which I don't feel they do. Okay, so what if Sidious is not the same person as Palpatine, merely a clone copy, its a bit late to tell us that in film 3. The audience has given up caring by then.

To sum up, I was very saddened by this movie and have already packed away my posters and other merchandise and consigned them to the Sue Ryder shop up the road. I won't play the soundtracks any more and I've given my C3PO alarm clock to my nephew. I guess that all I can do now is forget about that galaxy long long ago and wait for the Two Towers to come out this christmas (now that's fabulous story telling).

Mr Lucas, you have let me down.

[haemadroid]

oh dear, many apologies but I appear to have sent my last posting twice. Sorry about that.

Incidentally quite a few of the matts in this film were the dodgiest I've ever seen, I was shocked at how sloppy and crude they were. Haven't seen anything that bad since Blake's 7 but at least that show had decent stories and proper characters. (note to self: must dig out my old Liberator model and hang it up where my falcon used to be)

[WhatMeWookie]

Friends

I find this division between Star Wars fandom most distressing...

Just as Senator Palpatine is intent on forcing two sides into conflict that technically he holds in control (a) Dooku has the separatists in his hands and should also have controlled the delivery of the clone army with Jango a semi-permanent resident on that planet and in his pay (b) Senator Palpatine has easily assumed control of the Republic and is successfully manipulating everyone very nicely thank you - one can only imagine Palpatine wants a big war because he is basically an dark side anarchist and thinks it's all a bit of a lark.

Similarly, it is my feeling that Lucas in his older years has metaphorically turned to the dark side himself and that he is on a voyage of self-destruction, betraying all of the strengths of the original trilogy with this poor, dull, lifeless fare. It is my belief that part of his personality (perhaps that which recognises that his best creative days are behind him) is feeding off the chaos that these shoddy pieces of film-making is causing between his own fans.

Darth Badly - I salute you for your courage.

I recommend that in 20 years when George looks at re-releasing special editions of I & II that they should basically last 2 minutes long with the opening and end credits shown only and the nonsense in between deleted.

What I object to is that the very atmosphere and mystery of the back story that made the original trilogy so enjoyable and stretched our imaginations is systematically being wiped out and that the answers to the past sadly betray all that we have loved dearly.

The excessive use of CGI has turned these films into cartoons. The depth and layered levels of story-telling are gone and substituted with a messy and dull story that weekly fills the gaps that did not need explanation and should have been well left alone.

As for characters... please!!!! There are none that are worthy and even the superb Ewan McGregor (who certainly tries hard in Clones) is clearly not in love with his own work on these films having labelled Episode I correctly as flat.

It's all a bad dream and Lucas is walking over my childhood and the principles of film-making

Darth Badly - you are an example to us all.

Fellow fans - search inside yourselves. The truth will out and we can't go on living in denial. These new films are terrible and a travesty.

George - please end this sad madness soon.


WhatMeWookie

[Senator Theant]

My question: Why do some users, such as Darth Badly and WhatMeWookie, seemed determined to "wake up" fellow Star Wars fans to the quality of the film? What makes them more qualified to ajudicate the film and inform us of their findings?

True, some of the questions asked are mysteries that only Lucas may answer, but other questions seem to carry no train of thought whatsoever. In addition, it seems that these certain users are as unwillingy to accept or even consider the answers that have been made by other users as I am to accept the fact that Star Wars sucks. If you have problems with the movie, thats fine. But why carry on this unwarranted debate if the range of topics is too broad and certain users simply seem to be stubborn. There are certain forums for these topics. In which case a train of thought may be easily apparent and the debate will actually GET SOMEWHERE. I think its interesting to note that 9/10 of the posts made by the users DarthBadly, haemadroid, and WhatMeWookie have come in this forum alone. Folks, may I suggest that you read the posts of fellow users in other forums and use this medium to express your judgements of the move?

I will make no attempt to answer the questions, I would take time and space when this argument needs to ends soon and abrubtly, as too allow our friends the opporuntity to concentrate on the topics in other forums. User Tovor stated the answers quite clearly enough, without depriving too much from other forums. Thats what I think.

[RollaFett]

I really liked AOTC, that said I am not proclaiming it as the best movie in history. I have found some faults, those of which I have mentioned in various threads. I don't have a big problem with what Darth Badly or WhatMeWookiee have written in this thread. What I do have a problem with is this: If you are going to pose your complaints in the form of a question. then please...DON'T IGNORE THE ANSWERS TO YOUR QUESTIONS!!!!! There is nothing worse than a narrow-minded individual who cannot listen to any other opinion unless it agrees with his/her own. In all honesty, I actually agreed with some of your points, but I also allow some other opinions to filter into my brain in hopes of maybe learning a little more. Sadly, it appears as if you have no intention of aknowledging a differing opinion. A shame it is.

[kyris00]

all i have to say is this: some of us must of left our English skills somewhere. or maybe it's you just never learned any when you were high school. too bad you cannot come to english class with me tomorrow, my english teacher would maul you for your ignorant questions because you don't know the text. and yea star wars is complex and takes some intelligence to understand. too bad, maybe you should go see spider-man; the plot is too easy to get lost in.

[DanielSkywalker]

Gosh, please lighten up. The user who started this post and the others who share the same viewpoint as he/she are entitled to their own opinions. But, come on, I truly and honestly believe that you set yourselves up for this big dissapointment with AOTC and TPM. I am sure that when you saw the original trilogy, you were much younger and didn't have this preconcieved idea of what it should be. There were no expectations because it was new and didn't have a legacy or prerequisite to fulfill. Well, with the prequel trilogy, it seems that many fans/so-called fans are expecting the films to be exact CLONES of the originals. Well, they're not. There is a whole different story to be told here. A story which, I truly believe when finished, will make EP IV, V, and VI much, much better films. I am not saying that AOTC was the best Star Wars movie i've seen (the best would of course be ESB), but it was a far cry better than TPM, and possibly as good if not better than ROTJ or ANH. I knew upon walking into the theatre before viewing TPM for the 1st time that it was not going to be just like IV, V, and VI. For one, it has mostly "new" characters, and there is no empire or rebellion. But, to me it felt like a Star Wars movie. Go back and watch the original movies again and look for bad dialogue or cheesy moments. You will definitely find them. Whenever I pop in my copy of A new Hope, Empire, or Jedi, i instantly go back to being an 11 year old. I go back to a time when the dialogue or cheesy cliches were just fine with me. Perhaps many of you have forgotten what Star Wars is all about. It's a way to escape the everyday life we know so well, and get lost in a wonderful galaxy that Mr. Lucas has created for us. Am I looking forward to EpIII? You bet your bottom dollar collar I am. Like I said above, you are all entitled to your own opinions, but, I fear you have lost what made you become a Star Wars fan in the first place--your youth, innocence, and imagination.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by Senator Theant@May 23 2002 - 22:32
My question: Why do some users, such as Darth Badly and WhatMeWookie, seemed determined to "wake up" fellow Star Wars fans to the quality of the film? What makes them more qualified to ajudicate the film and inform us of their findings?

True, some of the questions asked are mysteries that only Lucas may answer, but other questions seem to carry no train of thought whatsoever. In addition, it seems that these certain users are as unwillingy to accept or even consider the answers that have been made by other users as I am to accept the fact that Star Wars sucks. If you have problems with the movie, thats fine. But why carry on this unwarranted debate if the range of topics is too broad and certain users simply seem to be stubborn. There are certain forums for these topics. In which case a train of thought may be easily apparent and the debate will actually GET SOMEWHERE. I think its interesting to note that 9/10 of the posts made by the users DarthBadly, haemadroid, and WhatMeWookie have come in this forum alone. Folks, may I suggest that you read the posts of fellow users in other forums and use this medium to express your judgements of the move? *

I will make no attempt to answer the questions, I would take time and space when this argument needs to ends soon and abrubtly, as too allow our friends the opporuntity to concentrate on the topics in other forums. User Tovor stated the answers quite clearly enough, without depriving too much from other forums. Thats what I think.
As far as I can see nowhere in any of the posts that try to talk about and discuss the many many flaws in the new film does anyone claim to be "more qualified to adjudicate" anything. *The reason I used the term 'wake up' was because I really could not believe the number of people who were raving about what a good film it was.

I was just raising some talking points and expressing my own humble opinion that it was a bad film and bad piece of story telling. *(The plot is a bit of a house of cards and once you question one element you realise how silly most of it really is.)

Now you've misquoting me and suggested that people ignore this discussion. *People don't have to read / post if they don't want to. *Doh! *

In answer to your suggestion that I should raise the points/problems in the other forums - in some cases that's a fair enough idea, but since so many people seemed to love the movie I did think that one forum out of all the dozens on the board could deal with how much the movie sucks as a whole. *It that too much to ask?

I have read all the replies so far very carefully. *Some of the posts have raised sensible points that explain or at least go someway to papering over the holes in the plot. *Many holes, muddles, and silly bits of nonsense remain though and many of the answers offered contradict each other revealing a certain amount of confusion even among the experts.

My big point and what I really wanted to get across is this: *Why did Uncle George have to make the backbone plot for these two movies so muddled? *As heamadroid's post says - the basic idea that the evil future emperor wants to have a big war to kill loads of people, exterminate the Jedi, and take control of the entire universe is fine. *BUT I have huge problems with the confused and silly plot that he has chosen to express that basic idea.

[NelsonCoressel]

I dunno, I'm really intrigued by the confusion, the pulling the wool over everyone's eyes. *However, I do think a lot needs to be explained in Episode 3. *That's why I think the major revelation in that movie will be the basic truth that Palpatine is Sidious, that he has been orchestrating all of this the whole time.

It may seem muddled and silly now, but I have a feeling that it will all make sense after Episode 3. *If it doesn't, then I'll almost have to agree with you on some points. *But for now, I'm willing to be patient and see how it all shakes out.

[haemadroid]

Its all very well saying wait till episode three to find out what's going on with the Sith etc but Lucas has stated that he is making these films so that they stand on their own, in which case you shouldn't have to wait until the next instalment.

Incidentally, my Liberator model is now hanging up and looks great amongst the glo stars at night!

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by Meche@May 24 2002 - 11:12
I think that what the other posters have a problem with is that you seemed a little condescending. *I mean, if anyone here happens to like the film, then there's a problem with that person? *Of course they're going to complain.

Changing the character names in the course of your first post was kinda weird, and it doesn't prove your point any, only expresses an individual opinion. *Think the name Padme Amidala is dumb? *I agree actually, I dislike the name Padme at least, so I usually call her Amidala. *That's just a plain old opinion though.

Man, thing is a lot of your questions are good. *I have a lot of qualms about this movie myself (mainly the rushed love story). *I still liked the movie though, and I don't think that it means I'm not awake. *If you watch Ep. II again, think logically, and actually wait for Episode III, then I think you'd get a lot of your questions answered. *If you still don't like the film, if you don't like how the plot was handled, but your opinion boils down only to your individual perception of beauty, then there's no sense in looking down on the rest of us who have a different idea of what beauty in a SW film is. *The questions you asked about AotC are really good and show you're alert to what's happening and want things to make sense. *I personally am tired of the more die-hard fans who love every single thing about this movie and don't question anything. *Questioning is good. *I admire that. *But some of us don't like that you haven't seemed open to the idea that there may be answers to every thing you said, and that you may in fact like the movie once your quest for logic here is satisfied. *If you still don't like it personally, that's quite acceptable.

I went through your questions, but I agree. *Tovor seems to have answered them better than I could. *They explained a lot of things to me too actually, there were a lot of things in AotC I didn't get. *Palpatine's power play I DO understand though, and it's the thing I look most forward to seeing: his rise to emperor and true absolute power (his being chancellor is NOT absolute power; he needs votes and permission).
[QUOTE]

Changing the names (or rather poking fun at the names) wasn't supposed to prove anything. *I think a lot of the new names are very silly. *And to be honest I have a hard time keeping track of them because the names are getting so daft.

I'm open to people explaining things - that's why I posted the questions in the first place. *
There were two main reasons: 1/ To perhaps raise awareness of some of the holes or muddles in the plot which people just seemed to be accepting and 2/ To get some answers. *Some of the answers that people have been kind enough to post have answered SOME of my many questions. *But far from all.

My main concern is still that the original trilogy could be understood and enjoyed by the public at large while this new lot can only be entirely understood with the aid of a roadmap and character guide and extensive knowledge - not to mention helping Uncle George fill in the gaps when he messes up.

Heamadroid (brilliant name) makes a very good point that the films should stand alone. *The originals form a trilogy but each are rewarding in their own right - while Episode II: Attack of the Clowns really makes no sense if seen alone. *(And very little, I would argue, if seen in context.)

[DanielSkywalker]

Well, let's see, so, you're telling me that The Empire Strikes Back explained everything at the end, and there was nothing that needed to be cleared up in Return of the Jedi? If there ever was a cliff hanger in the Star Wars saga it was ESB. Han's fate unknown, The true identity of Darth Vader unknown, Why does is seem that Vader and The Emperor are contridicting one another concerning Luke? Did Obi-Wan lie or is Vader the one who's lying? I'd say there were quite a few loose ends to be tied up. AOTC has it's loose ends as well, but i feel that it does stand alone as a great film just as Empire does. EPIII will (hopefully) explain all of our questions and tie the whole entire saga together.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by haemadroid@May 24 2002 - 11:53
Its all very well saying wait till episode three to find out what's going on with the Sith etc but Lucas has stated that he is making these films so that they stand on their own, in which case you shouldn't have to wait until the next instalment.

Incidentally, my Liberator model is now hanging up and looks great amongst the glo stars at night!
[QUOTE]

When I came back from seeing the two hours of slack nonsense that was Episode I:The JarJar Menace I took down all my Star Wars collection and put it all away. I had a view to sell it, but in the end a big bonfire (a la the end of Jedi)proved more enjoyable.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by DanielSkywalker@May 24 2002 - 12:43
Well, let's see, so, you're telling me that The Empire Strikes Back explained everything at the end, and there was nothing that needed to be cleared up in Return of the Jedi? *If there ever was a cliff hanger in the Star Wars saga it was ESB. *Han's fate unknown, The true identity of Darth Vader unknown, Why does is seem that Vader and The Emperor are contridicting one another concerning Luke? *Did Obi-Wan lie or is Vader the one who's lying? *I'd say there were quite a few loose ends to be tied up. *AOTC has it's loose ends as well, but i feel that it does stand alone as a great film just as Empire does. *EPIII will (hopefully) explain all of our questions and tie the whole entire saga together.
[QUOTE]

The Empire Strikes Back is very much a cliffhanger ending, but the difference is the Empire is a satisfying film in its own right.
You understood everyone's motivations and what they were trying to do in Empire while in Clowns it's just a confusing mess.
(At least for me, heamadroid and the general public.)

[Vibroblade]

Members, do yourself a favor and ignore this guy. There's nothing more depressing than seeing good posters waste there time in debates such as these.

DarthBadly doesn't like the movie...great for him...move along now.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by Vibroblade@May 24 2002 - 13:07
Members, do yourself a favor and ignore this guy. There's nothing more depressing than seeing good posters waste there time in debates such as these.

DarthBadly doesn't like the movie...great for him...move along now.
[QUOTE]

Hey - Exactly who put you in charge of closing down discussion and free speech?

"debates such as these" meaning anyone who doesn't think exactly like you do?

You're right that I don't like the movie - but it's not just me.

[Smeghead]

Well, actually, the guy who runs the board put him in charge. And we're being nice about it. You wanna see a crackdown on free speech, try posting a dissenting opinion on TF.N and see how far you get. And he hasnt closed down discussion, only warned people of the futility of arguing with you.

And "debates such as these" meaning debates where neither side is going to change their minds, and all that will be accomplished is everyone getting pissed off.

You don't like the movie, and you're entitled to that opinion, but you're not entitled to flamebait everyone on the board.

[NelsonCoressel]

Lucas has stated that he is making these films so that they stand on their own

I've never heard Lucas say that. What he has said is that all the movies together are supposed to make up one big 12-hour movie.

Also, I remember how pissed and dissapointed some people were when ESB was released, and most of the relatively few negative bashings I've heard about AOTC are pretty much redundant of the 1980 reviews.

[shaps]

Often people on these boards, at least in the past, have simply said, it's a movie, just go with it... suspend your disbelief....

That's all fine and good... BUT... being that we're posting messages about Star Wars we all are commenting, raving, ranting about something we love (or at least have a marginal interest in).

So, let's keep an open mind and understand that what some people love, other people hate.

If there's no debate, there's no growth... and as long as we do keep things in perspective that we're discussing a movie, not life and death situations, we should all be able to get along fine.

[haemadroid]

I've never heard Lucas say that. What he has said is that all the movies together are supposed to make up one big 12-hour movie.[QUOTE]



Well just because you've never heard him say that doesn't mean its not true. I HAVE heard George say that.

As Darth Badly said, the previous trilogy did contain stand alone films which contained cliff hangers in the same way that The Fellowship of the Ring had a cliff hanger. The story might not be wrapped up at the end but its a great self contained film with a wonderful journey for the characters and the audience. That's what film making is about, not throwing some haphazard jumble at people and expect them to figure out what's going on because you haven't done your job properly.

Okay, I do realise that the plot is basic and childishly simple but Lucas then went and tried to make it appear complicated by having extremely tedious (yes they were and you can't pretend that they weren't) scenes stuffed with exposition set in the council chamber. Looks to me like he thought his original storyline was too simplistic and so started fiddling with it and ended up making this convoluted mess.

I know that many of you here don't agree with that view and that's really wonderful for you, I'm afraid that my tastes are different. George let me down and, just like Darth Badly says, he has made me put my toys away. (Apart from the Blake's 7 ones) I wonder if I should get into daleks again - wee wifie won't like that!

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by Smeghead@May 24 2002 - 13:24
[color=green]Well, actually, the guy who runs the board put him in charge. And we're being nice about it. You wanna see a crackdown on free speech, try posting a dissenting opinion on TF.N and see how far you get. And he hasnt closed down discussion, only warned people of the futility of arguing with you.
Well, gee - I guess I should be really grateful for that. It's really generous of you all. Thanks so very much - oh land of the free & brave.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by Vibroblade@May 24 2002 - 13:07
Members, do yourself a favor and ignore this guy. There's nothing more depressing than seeing good posters waste there time in debates such as these.

DarthBadly doesn't like the movie...great for him...move along now.
Err.. "there" should be "their". Actually.

[Mara1Jade]

You are going to correct a frequent grammatical error now? I think you really are intending upon starting some pointless flame war.

And you asked somewhere up there why the people of Naboo would have elected a 14-year old queen. Check your history books, things like that have happened in the "real world" too.

And Tovor has done a superb job of answering most of your questions.

One more thing...why doesn't anyone recognize Sidious as Palpatine? Who says the ones who have seen him don't know that. I fully believe the Trade Fed guys knew that.

"I will have the Senate bogged down in procedures."

"In the Senate, I will see that things stay as they are."

Now, how praytell can he say something like that to the Nemodians and them NOT know that Palpatine and Sidious are the same. If they don't know, they've gotta at least know Palpy has control.

And it is quite likely that, until the events of Episode I, Palpatine was barely known by most senators. It's a big galaxy. There are alot of Senators. They meet in a biiiiig ole chamber in "boxes" where they talk when their chair is recognized and raises up. You think someone could really, really SEE the guy well enough to remember his face that well?

And as someone pointed out up there I think, NOBODY KNEW WHO THE HECK SIDIOUS WAS ASIDE FROM A SMALL FEW WHO HAD SEEN HIM/MET HIM/BEEN USED BY HIM. You knocked this as a stupid answer, but let's think about this:

"At last we will reveal ourselves to the Jedi. At last we will have revenge."

The Sith were undercover. Sidious wouldn't have been trotting around in that black robe in the local catina.

"Hard to see the darkside is."

The Jedi thought they had it peachy-keen. They could be merely FEET away from Palpatine and not know he was the bad dude. They don't have a clue in heck as to who Sidious is. They don't even know if Maul was the Master or the Apprentice. And if the JEDI can't figure it out, the average person is certainly not going to.

Finally, you are forgetting that "Always in motion, the future." Sure, Palpatine/Sidious might have FORESEEN himself as Emperor, but that title wasn't going to fall in his lap without him doing anything just because he had foreseen it. He'd forseen that he COULD be Emperor. But no pain, no gain.

Now, you may blast all my points as much as you like. But I know they are valid. And I dislike being implicated as some sort of idiot because I liked AOTC. Your tone is rather degrading.

[Teek]

Darth Badly, now you're not even hiding the fact you're trying to start a flame war. You're being warned, chill out. Stop making things so personal. Having an opinion can be talked about rationally without resorting to sarcastic wisecracks about those who hold differing opinions than you.

[Darth Badly]

What I've done here is to get a serious discussion going about some of the many points I thought were not so good about Attack of the Clowns - for heaven's sake, as I've said before - 1/ I'm not attacking anyone who likes the film 2/ It's just an opinion 3/ It's just a (crappy) movie not real life.

[Vibroblade]

Sorry about the gramatical mistake...It's this typing thing. Usually, I write things by hand and I don't worry about grammer. No one can ever read a physician's writting anyway:)

I'm not trying to stiffle your right to free speech, to having an opinion, to anything. You posted several questions, and many posters responded to them. I couldn't see that anyone's opinion was affected so I simply said move along.

I will not let this discussion degrade into a shouting match like some of the debates after TPM.

[Smeghead]

Originally posted by Darth Badly@May 24 2002 - 17:19
Well, gee - I guess I should be really grateful for that. It's really generous of you all. Thanks so very much - oh land of the free & brave.
Hey, I live to serve, man...


And that'd be "land of the free, and *home of the brave* ;o)

[NelsonCoressel]

Converstation = interesting.

Debate = enlightening.

whizzing Contest = BORING.

:tounge:

[Tovor]

Darth Badly,
I apologize for my insults and sarcasm in my response to you. I do have a habit of being at times very sarcastic, and since I felt that your opening post was not meant to seek out answers but to insult those who liked AOTC, I let my sarcasm have full rein. *In regards to my JAP comment to your "Princess Portman" comment, I thought it was bad form to refer to a former queen/current senator as a princess, and use the actress's name to boot. In actuality I had not assumed you were using the race card by referring to her as a JAP; no, that was my sarcasm added on for impact. *In reference to implying that your user name indicated your writing style, well, with my sarcastic wit faced with a name like "Badly", how could I resist? (Maybe I should be the one named "Vibroblade", since my comments can be more sharp and cutting than his.)

Now, moving on, I thought your introductory message was condescending to those of us who enjoyed AOTC (and TPM too.). *On this forum, and the previous one before it, posters like Vibroblade and I, and several others, spent endless time discussing all of the issues we did not understand about the SW saga, and contemplating how the new trilogy would unfold, how Anakin would turn to the dark side, how Palpatine would gain absolute power, ect. ect. *We love and thrive on pulling the saga apart and turning it around and upside down and right side up again to get a better perspective on what the overall story is about, and about how the hidden storylines and conspiracies that the casual movie-goer misses are moving the story forward to tell the full story we have waited 2 decades to be told. *And that is why, when someone barges in and announces that the themes we pull apart and analyze are childish and simple (I am not quoting you, only talking in generalization), and that we are ignorant for appreciating AOTC and the first trilogy in general, many people react in the way they do. *

I have gripes about TPM, lots of them, but I loved the movie. *I have some gripes about AOTC as well, although they are not as major as those for TPM. *Sure, these episodes are not as simple and easy to follow as the old trilogy, but that is what I love about them. *Not that the old trilogy did this, but I don't care for movies that are simplified for a dumbed-down audience, with only action and violence and small amounts of storyline and intrigue to keep the action scenes going. *I love AOTC and TPM for their complexity in the secret plans of Palpatine and his manipulation of the Senate, the organs of commerce, and the Jedi. *

Somebody said, either you or haemadroid, that the films of the old trilogy stood on their own, unlike AOTC which made no sense to those who hadn't seen TPM. I do not agree. First off, what makes the SW saga so interesting is that it is a continuing storyline rather than one movie and a bunch of copycat sequels. *Second, if you hadn't seen ANH would you have understood who the ghost in TESB was who told Luke to go to some planet to be trained as a Jedi, and how that person became a spirit? *Maybe that would not matter since all you really need to know is that the rebels are fighting the empire and Luke wants to be a Jedi. *But could ROTJ possibly stand on its own without ANH and TESB before it? How did Han become carbon frozen, and why? Who is that fat slug and why is he mad at Han? Vader is Luke's father? Who is Vader, and who is this spirit who explained his story to Luke from a certain point of view? Who is that green guy with the pointy ears who Luke returns to? How did Luke get a bionic hand? *There are so many plot points wrapped up in ROTJ that without the first two you could never understand the movie. *

So I say, SW is not like ST with a new movie having little to nothing to do with the story of the movie before it or after it. *SW is a continuing story told in 6 chapters, and I would not like for each movie to be a scaled down wrapped into-one-movie story. *What do you think about the "Matrix", "Matrix Reloaded", and "Matrix Revolutions"? *Do you think any of those movies could stand alone without seeing the first one to begin following the story? *And for that matter, the LOTR movies are the same way I think, one continuing story told in 3 different books and movies. *

On a personal level, I am a writer (unpublished as yet), and I have written drafts for a 2 part Star Wars series (with the chance that it could become a trilogy) which tell two complete stories but one main continuing story. *The first one is great with a neat cliffhanger, and the second one would be difficult to follow if the reader did not read the first one first. I am also working on a NON-SW sci-fi/fantasy/war/adventure series that is nine books long, telling nine individual stories as part of several ongoing storylines and one main story, and I don't intend for any of them to stand alone without being part of the overall saga. *With that said, I think the prequel story told throughout 3 movies is my kind of brainfood.

Darth Badly, I strongly urge, recommend, and invite you to go to the "Who Was Sifo Dyas?" discussion thread and read the 3 following messages: The 1st by myself on 5/19 at 13:53, the 2nd by Senator Theant on 5/19 at 19:48, and the 3rd by Nathan Butler on 5/24 at 19:26. *Those 3 posts, as well as several others, discuss and detail the plans and means of Palpatine/Sideous in a manner you would find enlightening.

I also invite you to go to the Communications section and find the "Tovor's Star Wars Fan Survey Thread" (at least I think that's what I called it!) and answer the survey questions and read those of the others who participated. *My survey is a way to help all of us get to know each other, and if you are to be a part of this message board, there is a good place to start.

Also, I know my sarcasm was strong in some of my wording, but I urge you to reread my message where I addressed several of your complaints about AOTC. *You may still not agree with AOTC fans or with me, but I would appreciate it if you would consider the points I made and respond to them. *That is what we enjoy doing here anyway, what makes this site so much fun.

Cheers,
~Tov

[Vibroblade]

whizzing Contest = BORING

Depends on the wind condition it does.

[haemadroid]

[QUOTE] *Second, if you hadn't seen ANH would you have understood who the ghost in TESB was who told Luke to go to some planet to be trained as a Jedi, and how that person became a spirit?


Well yes, you would because the explanation is contained in that movie, having a ghost pop up in the beginning of a story isn't something new you know, it happened to a chap called Hamlet and no one watching that thought, "Damn this must be Hamlet II, I missed the first one."

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by Tovor@May 24 2002 - 23:52
Somebody said, either you or haemadroid, that the films of the old trilogy stood on their own, unlike AOTC which made no sense to those who hadn't seen TPM. I do not agree. First off, what makes the SW saga so interesting is that it is a continuing storyline rather than one movie and a bunch of copycat sequels. *
I entirely agree that what makes Star Wars more (potentially) interesting in the continuing story. I think the BIG difference between our views on the films standing alone is this:

In the original trilogy of course there were many plot lines left dangling between the films BUT for me each film could have been enjoyed without knowing every last detail of the plot that went before it because in each film even the casual viewer could understand the motivations for what was happening. (Vader wants to capture Luke or rebels want to blow up Darth Star II).

My BIGGGGGGGGGG problem with Attack of the Clowns is that I really couldn't understand why people were doing things or at times exactly what they were doing. This wasn't due to well written mystery (as in what will become of Han now he is frozen?) but because the writing / dialogue and plot were (to me) muddled. Even if some of the nonsense can be explained afterwards (and I've looked through your answers to my questions very carefully and as I've already said they do answer SOME of my points) it surely can't be a storyteller's aim to confuse his audience?

[WhatMeWookie]

People, people

Have been out of the loop on this one for the past two days as my real life has been rudely intruding.

I take my eye off the ball and look what happens, we all descend into squabbling and bickering, in a way that is most undignified and again further evidence of the divisiveness that Eps I & II have caused (n.b. my Lucas/psychological dark side theory from my previous post and take heed of this tension that grows amongst us).

We all share something here and I think it's worth reminding everyone of this. We share a common bond. We are or have been in love (at least at some point) with the same "woman" here (and I mean that deeply respectfully and with no intended anti-feminist offence). When I say "love" I really mean it - just look at the passion of the arguments submitted over the past few days.

The trouble is for many years, I loved the original Star Wars trilogy - not because of the merchandise, or the detailed encyclopaedia's, books, novels and comic books that attempted in their own way to fill in the gaps of the saga - but because my true passion is cinema and the cinematic arts.

In many respects, it's been great to fantasise about the different aspects of the Star Wars universe...and occassionally to have the help of the accessories mentioned to aid that.

But, for me and I think a great deal of fans..Star Wars will always be about the movies... and this is the problem.

I feel - and I think we should all respect this - great sadness that haemadroid and darth badly, in particular, have been so "betrayed" by the clear object of their love that the whole Star Wars experience now feels like a broken marriage. darth badly claims to have burnt his collection and Haemadroid is putting up models of terrible old British shows in place of the design classics that the original Star Wars trilogy offered. This is really really sad.

Why is this happening??? It comes down to the poor story-telling and film-making of I & II - which whilst - in certain cold respects - may be technically dazzling is vastly inferior to the original films. Now before, I get shouted out - that is just my opinion and nothing more in this debate. Apologies but there you have it and I'm not going to lie.

Forget the original trilogy (hard to do I know) - and let's look at I & II in their own right. The films may be above average in terms of Summer blockbuster fare, but that's only because we have all had our standards decimated by the onslaught of tired, hacked rubblish that has been coming out of the system over the past few years. We've all been drained by the pop video stylised, live life in 3 minutes, bullet time photographed, CGI reliant nonsense that takes bucks , because we all still love the movies - but what do they deliver. I want a decent movie that leaves me walking out of the theater shaking, moved and feeling every emotion. Buzzed in a way that makes me feel as if I had lived life for two hours just like the characters and particularly the protagonists. That what they had experienced felt as if it had happened to me.

Is this the experience we have been delivered by I & II. Well for me no. Whether George did or did not say the movies should stand alone.. the fact is that is entirely what they should do. It's not about open story lines or cliffhangers. ESM stood by itself because it was a complete movie experience in its own right.

But with I & II would they have worked so well without the critical mass of fan support worldwide built by the original trilogy. That's what they should have delivered....but they didn't. Yep they sold tickets, just like the routine James Bond films do 40 years after Dr No - but they sure didn't sell the merchandise as evidenced by the licensing chaos of TPM and the completely revised approach taken for AOTC. That's not because of bad merchandising or too much...it's because consumer demand has been suppressed by its general lack of inspiration from these films.... and that my friends is down to the story-telling.

I never remember such confused debate about what happened in the original trilogy. Everyone was united, on what had happened, when and why. The open questions were mutual across the Star Wars fanbase. We all looked for more and waited for new material to pop up... but we always had the movies as the firm base. Not so today. Listen I love Chinatown, Terry Gilliam movies and occassional glimpses into David Lynch's personal mental health.. I don't necessarily want answers on a plate, but is a discussion about the voting procedures for the senate really something worthwhile pursing???

If we do make comparisons with the originals...
Are any of the craft or designs as strong as the classics from the original. After ANH, every kid on the block knew a TIE fighter, X-Wings, Death Stars, Landspeeders. Not so today.

Are any of the entirely new characters or side-kicks as unforgettable or personable.

And what of the villains. Darth Maul and Count Dooku (despite a good peformance by Lee) hardly do anything and their lines are not as chilling or effective as the well-rounded villains of the original.

Some of you may say yes - I really wish I could say the same too. But I can't.

Now to go back to my "love" analogy. I feel slighted. I feel like I've been loyal and married to the same woman for years and then sadly she slaps me round the chops, tells me she's never loved me and walks off with the kids. It's that degree of hurt I'm feeling. .. and I feel the same must be true for Darth badly and Haemadroid.

I'm not denying anyone's right to an opinion - I just wish someone would compare these films to something cinematically worthy (even aside form the original 3).They may be better than Spiderman - but is that such a great thing.

Where are the good movies????


WhatMeWookie

[haemadroid]

WhatMeWookie asks "where are the good movies?" the only answer I can give is that the best film I've seen lately is Jackson's Fellowhip of the Ring and I for one will be buying both versions of the dvd when they appear. Cinema is all about storytelling, involve me in a terrific plot with great characters and I'll buy into big time. Sadly, alas, Lucas has failed to do that twice now and I'm not holding out any hope for the third episode in his shambolic merchandising exercise.

As for "terrible old British shows" I'm shaocked! Any one episode of Blake's 7 stands up (story and character wise) to I and II. As for Dr Who, well I'd much rather watch an episode of the dire McCoy years than have to sit through the cotton picking Gungans again.

[Smeghead]

Bah, Red Dwarf is far superior to Dr Who or Blakes 7... ;)

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by WhatMeWookie@May 25 2002 - 21:28
Now to go back to my "love" analogy. I feel slighted. I feel like I've been loyal and married to the same woman for years and then sadly she slaps me round the chops, tells me she's never loved me and walks off with the kids.
[QUOTE]

It's worse than that. I feel she's slapped me round the chops, told me she's never loved me, and walked out and left me WITH the kids.

Given the consensus of opinion seems to be that as a movie Attack of the Clowns is somewhere between a bit dodgy and utter rubbish, I can't see how there's any hope that things will be any better with Episode III.

Uncle George is now two thirds of the way through his new epic of nonsense - too late to pull it back from being an utter let down even if the third part isn't as crappy.
(Which I'd be happy to bet money right now that it will be. Probably it'll be the worst of the lot because of all the many many questions that have to be answered. So much has been left unclear and unexplained by the first two new films – how on earth is he going to make it all make some kind of sense. R2 & C3PO memory wiped in the last scene, I bet? Ugh!)

Anyway, given that, what can we do? Is there anyway to persuade Uncle George to NOT make Episode III? I'm sure you would agree it’d be doing us all a big favour. Does anyone have any good ideas for how to get him to stop?

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by Smeghead@May 26 2002 - 09:56
<span style='color:green'>Bah, Red Dwarf is far superior to Dr Who or Blakes 7... *style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif</span>
Red Dwalf rips off ideas from both those great shows and still manages to be unfunny rubbish aimed at teenagers.

[Mara1Jade]

OK, so you didn't like Attack of the Clones. *I'd like to know where you got that the "general consensus" is that the movie was "dodgy" to "utter rubbish." *Then again, maybe I don't wanna know. *It's not enough for you to say "I don't like the film because of X, Y, and Z." *You've gotta slam and degrade every person who liked the film. *Which, unless I'm really off the mark, is more people than DIDN'T like the film.

And that last comment of yours was totally uncalled for. Does it make you feel better by retitling the movies/shows you don't like or something???

[Smeghead]

Originally posted by Darth Badly@May 26 2002 - 11:32
Red Dwalf rips off ideas from both those great shows and still manages to be unfunny rubbish aimed at teenagers.
Well that's a damn fine coincidence, as I happen to be a teenager. And really, as far as flamebait goes, that was pretty weak...

[moocat]

Darth Badly........Bored Now style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sly.gif

[Darth Badly]

Agggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg! See below. This is terrible news!


"The bigger news of today though was MTV apparently re-iterated rumours that Natalie Portman has signed on to be a part of the new scenes being filmed for Episode VI: Return Of The Jedi - she'll shoot scenes during the production of Episode III which'll then be reinserted to the DVD release of 'Jedi'."

[NelsonCoressel]

How is that terrible news? Sounds relatively interesting to me...

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by NelsonCoressel@May 28 2002 - 07:44
How is that terrible news? *Sounds relatively interesting to me...
Are you kidding me? It's terrible news because not content with producing new films which are crap, Uncle George now seems set on messing up the original trilogy.

Why can't they just release a nice DVD of the original cimema release of the first three. That's all I want. Don't mess those up too.

[NelsonCoressel]

I for one would love to see ROTJ get a little more of a work-over, if anything to give it a stronger sense of being the finale of the whole story.

Who knows what this scene with Portman will be? *Maybe it's a flashback sequence while Leia is trying to remember her mother ("she died when I was very young..."), a scene which needs all the help it can get.

I'm dying to see what the complete Star Wars Saga will look like in a few years, new scenes and all. I'd rather see it, then criticize it, which is why to me it sounds interesting rather than immediately "terrible news."

[WhatMeWookie]

Oh my word

This is a disaster. It's like taking the Mona Lisa and going back to paint a moustache over it. Doesn't anyone respect the art of cinema anymore or are classic films to merely become corrupted and mutated into inferior fare.

You wouldn't do this to a Kubrick or a Hitchcock and Lucas degrades the reputation he once held by trivialising his earlier work and infecting it with his blind passion for CGI cartoon tomfoolery.

Someone should stop this. It's an offence to cinema and the arts in general. Hey a little cleaning up and respectful enhancement of certain effects maybe, but screw with the narrative and you're on thin ice. All the special editions, especially the new Jedi ending suffered from such tinkering.

Anyone heard the expression ... if it ain't broke...

I think just like classic buildings are looked after and protected from these kind of adjustments... so should films be treated that way.

And if Jar Jar Binks or any of his sorry kind make their way into the cantina scene. I'll just... I'll just cry actually.

WhatMeWookie.

[NelsonCoressel]

. All the special editions, especially the new Jedi ending suffered from such tinkering

Well that's interesting, I actually find the Special Edition ending of ROTJ to be far superior to the 1983 print. In fact, I find it hard to watch the earlier versions of any of the Star Wars movies now. The SE's are the only version worth seeing.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by NelsonCoressel@May 28 2002 - 19:44

. All the special editions, especially the new Jedi ending suffered from such tinkering

Well that's interesting, I actually find the Special Edition ending of ROTJ to be far superior to the 1983 print. *In fact, I find it hard to watch the earlier versions of any of the Star Wars movies now. The SE's are the only version worth seeing.
The "special editions" have Han Solo looking straight at Jabba's belly - where the eyeline of the human Jabba would have been in a scene which is utterly pointless and only slows down the story.
A few of the extra exterior shots in Empire look pretty BUT they failed to clean up the stuff which really needed help in the opening battle.
AND worst of all they totally messed up the music in the closing sequence of Return of the Jedi.

As WhatMeWookie says if it ain't broke why fix it - other than to milk the fans for yet more money of course.

The originals already suffer from enough of Uncle George changing his mind as it is. The whole 'killed your father' bit which Obi Wan has to admit he lied about later and the sister thing. Now we're supposed to stand for even more tinkering and all becasue the idiot can't plot out the story in advance. Doh! Hasn't he heard of writing a synopsis first?

It's too much.

[WhatMeWookie]

I think when the '97 special editions came out... we'd all been waiting a long time for anything new and had had to make do with the merchandise and spin offs.

So hungry were we all, that catching sight of new pieces of footage tagged on to an existing masterpiece seemed a great idea... but I feel like Yoda at the end of AOTC in thinking just like using the fascistic clone army might have been a bad idea, so was the excessive use of new technology for the Special Editions.

You just shouldn't treat cinema and movie-making like just another collectable.

I really didn't like the new ending of Jedi. Those last few minutes feel disjointed in terms of editing and the new music actually is one of the weakest orchestrations in John Williams career (and listen even though I detest TPM, credit where credit is due "Dual of the Fates" is a fantastic piece of music that is sadly wasted but worthy of the original trilogy).

Even if you hate Ewoks (who I think are unfairly maligned and see as a powerful symbol of the meek overwhelming technology and therefore the system - George please take note of the moral of your own story here) the Ewok song fitted naturally with the last few minutes and the choral high switching into the main theme was beautifully realised. Now all gone. What do we get Star Wars:The Animated Series CGI. I think it was seeing this that I guessed we were heading for the troubles with TPM and AOTC.

As for Amidala now entering ROTJ... why... what do we get another blue tinged spirit in the line up giving old Anakin a cuddle. I'll barf. If I have to watch the spirit of Anakin and Amidala skip around singing "The Hills Are Alive .. with the Sound of Music", as we came so close to getting in AOTC., I will blow chunks.

WhatMeWookie

[NelsonCoressel]

BUT they failed to clean up the stuff which really needed help in the opening battle. *


What the hell part is that? What are you talking about??


AND worst of all they totally messed up the music in the closing sequence of Return of the Jedi

I'll take the newer version of the closing ROTJ music over "yub yub" any ####in day, thanks... *:biggrin:


Hasn't he heard of writing a synopsis first?

Come on, man... why is it so hard for people to see this like a modern-day Wagerian opera meets Flash Gordon?
Wagner wrote his Ring cycle pretty much "backwards," then put it all together in sequence with revisions 30 years later. And it's the "Special Edition" we see at the Met every time.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by WhatMeWookie@May 28 2002 - 20:28
As for Amidala now entering ROTJ... why... what do we get another blue tinged spirit in the line up giving old Anakin a cuddle. I'll barf. If I have to watch the spirit of Anakin and Amidala skip around singing "The Hills Are Alive .. with the Sound of Music", *as we came so close to getting in AOTC., I will blow chunks.

WhatMeWookie
'The hills are alive'

Excellent idea!

Kylie can be the green fairy of the Force and all the jedi ghosts can have a right old East End knees up together. Why? Because they can can can...

My bet is they'll do a wavy screen flashback when Leia is droning on about the mother.

But why stop there? Perhaps in the classic and most marvellous scene between Luke and Ben when Ben tells him that Darth Vader killed his father, young Anakin's voice could be heard on the soundtrack shouting "No, I bleedin' didn't you dodgy English twatt."

Things can only get better.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by NelsonCoressel@May 28 2002 - 20:36

BUT they failed to clean up the stuff which really needed help in the opening battle. *


What the hell part is that? What are you talking about??


AND worst of all they totally messed up the music in the closing sequence of Return of the Jedi

I'll take the newer version of the closing ROTJ music over "yub yub" any ####in day, thanks... *:biggrin:

Hasn't he heard of writing a synopsis first?
Come on, man... why is it so hard for people to see this like a modern-day Wagerian opera meets Flash Gordon?
Wagner wrote his Ring cycle pretty much "backwards," then put it all together in sequence with revisions 30 years later. And it's the "Special Edition" we see at the Met every time.
The opening battle in Empire has some very dodgy effects in it. I love the film - but even to me there are some shockingly bad matt jobs.

As for Wagner - I didn't grow up with his early work. And I didn't buy nearly as many of the toys.

[Pepper]

Well shoot. *I don't think I can really add anything substantial to the discussion, but I have read everyone's comments. *Really, this particular discussion was dead from the start. *Not that it shouldn't have been started, but there's just no way anyone's going to convince anyone else with an opposite opinion to change his mind. *But for the sake of the thread's main topic, I really liked AOTC. *In fact, there were some parts that I consider true gems. *Sure, it's very very heavy on the CG stuff, but c'mon people, we knew they would be like that before we even saw any footage from TPM! *Lucas forewarned us that he was ready to make the Prequels BECAUSE the CG technology was where he wanted it to be! *And honestly there's no (realistic) way these movies could be done otherwise, regardless of how well/poorly the scripts are written. *OK, there's my take on the Prequels. *(And before anyone accuses me of being a brainless fanboy, yes, I do have problems with some things in the Prequels, but that's not my point here.)

One of the gems I found in AOTC was the scene at the Lars home with Anakin and Padme after he killed the Tuskens. *I was very impressed with Hayden's performance, and was very moved by that scene. *This ranks up there in my mind with the Ben/Luke scene in Ben's home in ANH, the Qui-Gon/Anakin scene at the dinner table in TPM, and Luke's confrontation with Palpatine in ROTJ. *Those are some of my very favorite scenes in all of SW. *

Another thing I was impressed with was Mace Windu. *I really like how he was portrayed in AOTC. *He proved himself to be a truly great warrior and a strong and decisive leader. *Too bad we didn't get to see him duel with a lightsaber, but here's hoping we'll see that in Episode III.

Concerning the SE ending of ROTJ...
I loved it!! *And actually it was the main reason why I went to see ROTJ:SE three times in the theatre. *(That and Fett's flirting scene.) *As Coressel said, it was MUCH better than the Yub-yub junk. *I never liked that stuff. *But again, I don't expect to convince anyone who didn't like it, and I don't knock you for disliking it, or the Prequels, or anything else about SW. *You have your reasons, and that's just the way it is. *I'm sorry you've been turned off to SW, but I don't know how I could change that. :sad:

At first I was rather upset that Lucas had made changes to the Original Trilogy, and I'm still very unhappy with some of the changes he made. (The Greedo shoots first scene, for one.) But my opinion is that if he wants to change stuff, well, I may not like it, but there's really no legitimate reason why he shouldn't if he so desires. It all boils down to this: they're HIS movies!

Like it or not, and no one says you have to like it.

[technorat]

ANYONE! Who thinks Attack of the Clones was a bad movie has the intelligence of Bantha faequal matter.

[Jedi_Zachaa]

Ok... I don't see how you see this as news. It says that MTV has "reiterated RUMORS" (emphasis mine). Come on people, RUMORS!!! I think we all need to calm down and stare at that word.

And if it IS true, if we say from the start it's going to be terrible we'll stick with that and it WILL be terrible for us, and there will be no chance of it being good. Try to have an open mind.

[WayoftheGungon]

I have to say I'm a starwars fan. So I have a make shift handicap from the get go. Personally I get excited anytime anything new that is starwars related comes out. Its interesting to me to read all these comments about how horrible Episode II is and how horrible it would be to brush up the OT once again. Personally I loved Episode II, I rank it up there with Empire which happens to be my favorite. And I love the idea of seeing new footage for the OT added in. Now I will admit some of the stuff in the SE was really cool when I saw it in the theater then later on I kinda shook my head at it, but nevertheless it was still really cool to see new footage added in. And as for Episode II, it simply does a wonderful job giving us homage to the old films, while adding in some massive CGI fight scenes that to me are very impressive. I duno I'm really rambling here. To bring it all together as best as possible I have nothing against fans that hate or dislike Episode II, while I don't understand why they dislike it they can say the same for those of us who do like it. And adding scenes does not hurt the OT. You can watch the OT and enjoy it, just as much as you can watch the SE's and enjoy or dislike it. Its not the end of the world if he tiners around with his vision. Ignore it and go watch the Original editions.

[WhatMeWookie]

Originally posted by Meche@May 28 2002 - 20:33
I don't like the idea of yet another re-touching of RotJ, it remained my favorite movie even after the special edition though. *I certainly don't like the idea of Amidala showing up, but hey, it might be good. *I'm open to seeing how it looks. *Can't take it [/i]that[i] seriously anyway. *I can just watch the original-original version and remember it however I want.
Meche - at last the voice of reason - I salute you

My worry is that - okay if we get the choice to watch what we like then it's a democracy.

But will we!

Will Lucasfilm allow the untouched original versions to be included in the DVD release - which I have heard is now scheduled for Spring 2063 - allowing fans the choice to ignore the corruptions of the SE and any subsequent naffness planned.

I suspect we may not be given that choice. Personally I'd like to see the very first version of Star Wars that never even mentioned "Episode IV - A New Hope" as that may allow me the chance to wipe out from my memory the nonsense of I & II and unavoidable nonsense of III.

If we're allowed the chance to see the originals as they were flaws and all (and flaws are a natural quirk of great art) - then maybe the changes become an optional curiosity much like deleted scenes.

Can I get a consenses that this would be the right way to do things from you guys. Will democracy prevail??? Or does everyone want to see the memory of once great-film-making wiped out.

Alll those in favour say "Aye".

As for the end of ROTJ, yub-yub was good, the penny whistle music played by the Jonny Williams Four was yuk yuk....

And also how comes across a whole universe does everyone suddenly unite in glee at the demise of the Emperor or Death Star 2. It would take years for repressed people that had been under the control of an Empire to work out what was great or not. And if they were that annoyed in the first place, why didn't they just stand up, join the rebellion and out number their foes. Seems to me that everyone in the Star Wars Universe is worried about their tax positions more than the quality of life and surely everyone in the Universe would need to consult their accountants and wait for the Rebel Alliance budget to be pushed through before being able to determine if they were financially better off. Those scenes of thousands jumping for joy made no sense and did not edit well into the original ending.


WhatMeWookie

[Tovor]

Will Lucasfilm allow the untouched original versions to be included in the DVD release - which I have heard is now scheduled for Spring 2063 - allowing fans the choice to ignore the corruptions of the SE and any subsequent naffness planned.


Pardon me, Spring, 2063? Are you sure about that date? Lucas will be dead by then, and so will some of us long-time fans. Those of who aren't will likely be too old, going blind, and hard of hearing to sit through the SW saga again. On the plus side, some of you who hate the prequels will finally be so old and forgetful you will have finally forgotten about the movies you hated.

[WhatMeWookie]

And in case we are forgetting how things started... back to AOTC

Star Wars used to set trends and lead the path in effects design and action set piece sequences.

Is it just me or did the whole flying car chase sequence at the beginning rip off "The Fifth Element". Are the run of ideas so exhausted that Lucas has to rip off nonsensical naff French fare....

Oh calamity!!!

[NelsonCoressel]

unavoidable nonsense of III

You've seen Episode 3? Cool.



And also how comes across a whole universe does everyone suddenly unite in glee at the demise of the Emperor or Death Star 2.

Maybe those images are a time-lapse.
Even if not, they do have hi-tech communication systems in the Star Wars universe.

Again I ask, why is it so hard for people to even try to see Star Wars as one complete story? *Other artists have revised, changed and enhanced their work over a 30-year period until they were satisfied with it. Why is Lucas not allowed to?

[Vibroblade]

technorat

ANYONE! Who thinks Attack of the Clones was a bad movie has the intelligence of Bantha faequal matter.

I do believe that post would qualify as a flame..this is a warning. If you have points of arguments, please feel free to express your opinion. However, do not attack posters on a personal level. Such behavior is not conducive to intelligent debate.

[NelsonCoressel]

Also, WhatMeWookie, do you also see a "calamity" in the fact that the 1977 Star Wars movie has dozens of rip-off moments from Kurosawa's Samurai epics and John Ford Westerns?

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by WhatMeWookie@May 29 2002 - 08:30
And also how comes across a whole universe does everyone suddenly unite in glee at the demise of the Emperor or Death Star 2. It would take years for repressed people that had been under the control of an Empire to work out what was great or not. And if they were that annoyed in the first place, why didn't they just stand up, join the rebellion and out number their foes. Seems to me that everyone in the Star Wars Universe is worried about their tax positions more than the quality of life and surely everyone in the Universe would need to consult their accountants and wait for the Rebel Alliance budget to be pushed through before being able to determine if they were financially better off. Those scenes of thousands jumping for joy made no sense and did not edit well into the original ending.


WhatMeWookie
I wondered exactly that when I saw the regiged Return of the Jedi. The cheering crowd scenes didn't sit well with me at all. It took me a while to work out why. I think it's because in the three (original) films you don't really see that many peole who really really hate the Empire. I mean sure lots of people have "no great love for the Empire" but only the rebels seem to hate it. Then suddenly stuck in are several scenes of computer ants cheering like they gave a s**t.

I don't have any problem with them knowing what's happened so quickly - just that they did seem like a big bunch of fakers.

[NelsonCoressel]

I guess it's just a matter of perspective. When I first saw ROTJ in '83, I felt let down at the end and wondered "what about the rest of the galaxy?"

I find the new ending of ROTJ to be far more fulfilling.

Anyway, this is getting a tad off topic I guess...

[Winston_Sith]

Originally posted by WhatMeWookie@May 29 2002 - 08:30

I just noticed something curious:

People (at least on this board) who hate the PT, and the SE's of the OT, LIKE the Ewoks, and cry about the removal of "Yub-yub" from the closing sequence of ROTJ??!?!

What up with that?

Your credibility is in sever danger of meltdown with revelations like these. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by Winston_Sith@May 29 2002 - 14:20
People (at least on this board) who hate the PT, and the SE's of the OT, LIKE the Ewoks, and cry about the removal of "Yub-yub" from the closing sequence of ROTJ??!?!

What up with that?

Your credibility is in sever danger of meltdown with revelations like these. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif
The Ewoks were originally my least favourite thing about the original trilogy at the time. *But as WhatMeWookie has pointed out they did come to represent the victory of the common people (or common teddy bears in this case) over the evil and technologically advanced Empire. *Their silly teddy bear games of smashing apart the Empire's finest war machines using logs and thick twine was fun.

They weren't my favourite thing, but boy I didn't know when I was well off did I? *

Bottom line? *I'd rather sleep with a hundred Ewoks than kiss one JarJar.

[lotos]

[QUOTE: And also how comes across a whole universe does everyone suddenly unite in glee at the demise of the Emperor or Death Star 2. It would take years for repressed people that had been under the control of an Empire to work out what was great or not. And if they were that annoyed in the first place, why didn't they just stand up, join the rebellion and out number their foes.]

Oh, COME ON!!!

Gosh, you Americans! Do you know anything other than DEMOCRACY?!?!?! Have you ever heard anything about dictatorship and tyranny? Do you know what it means not to have something like FREEDOM OF SPEECH? Let alone a possibility to “stand up and outnumber the foes”. Goodness! Study some history (other than the US) WhatMeWookie!

When you’re under an Empire (like the USSR, Nazi Germany or China) you don’t question whether what’s coming next is going to be better or worse, you just know it’s not going to be as bad as it is. So, when it’s over – YOU REJOICE!


So all right, ATOClowns is not the best movie ever made. It’s not even the best SW movie. It has cliché dialogues and doesn’t have the charm of the old trilogy.

But to be honest, Hollywood is making trash most of the time, with the crappiest dialogues and story lines you could ever imagine. And yet everyone watches them. When was the last time you saw a good, low-budget, European film with a deep plot and sensible dialogues? Oh, and LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL doesn’t count, ‘cause in a sense it was a bad “science-fiction” film. If that’s where you get your history lessons about dictatorship and “standing up”, no wonder you’re making such “thought out” conclusions. You're not interested in the good movies, because you want to be entertained.

But what I really don’t understand is this – why spend a whole week and your precious time on something you hate so much? You hated the film; we got the point. We’re really sorry you threw your toys away. It’s not the last time you’re going to be disappointed about something in life, you know?

I’m a Star Wars fan.

I agree with Darth Badly and WhatMeWookie that ATOC (and TPM) had some disappointing moments.

I’m still a Star Wars fan.


P.S. Don’t take this too personally. I’ve lived under and Empire, so I got a bit too emotional. And it’s natural that you can’t understand it, because you grew up in one of the greatest countries in the world - The United States of America. Be aware people that the same thing that's happening to Anakin in not going to happen to your country. Be the Jedi, try to foresee the dark side. Seriously, great danger I sense.

[moocat]

Gosh, you Americans! Do you know anything other than DEMOCRACY?!?!?! Have you ever heard anything about dictatorship and tyranny? Do you know what it means not to have something like FREEDOM OF SPEECH? Let alone a possibility to “stand up and outnumber the foes”. Goodness! Study some history (other than the US) WhatMeWookie!


This my friend is not a good way to start.

It's hard to not take it personal as you say when your tone is like that.

[NelsonCoressel]

Yeah, that's true moocat. But I must say, lotos is my new hero!
:biggrin:

[WhatMeWookie]

Originally posted by lotos@May 29 2002 - 15:49
Oh, COME ON!!!

Gosh, you Americans! Do you know anything other than DEMOCRACY?!?!?! Have you ever heard anything about dictatorship and tyranny? Do you know what it means not to have something like FREEDOM OF SPEECH? Let alone a possibility to “stand up and outnumber the foes”. Goodness! Study some history (other than the US) WhatMeWookie!

When you’re under an Empire (like the USSR, Nazi Germany or China) you don’t question whether what’s coming next is going to be better or worse, you just know it’s not going to be as bad as it is. So, when it’s over – YOU REJOICE!

But to be honest, Hollywood is making trash most of the time, with the crappiest dialogues and story lines you could ever imagine. And yet everyone watches them.

But what I really don’t understand is this – why spend a whole week and your precious time on something you hate so much?

P.S. Don’t take this too personally. I’ve lived under and Empire, so I got a bit too emotional. And it’s natural that you can’t understand it, because you grew up in one of the greatest countries in the world - The United States of America.
Lotos

Glad to have you on board and appreciated the depth of your post. A few pointers though:

1) I am not American and do not live in the US - to reveal my origins would spoil the mystery now wouldn't it, but it would be fair to say that I am currently sitting on the other side of the Atlantic.

That being said, I am a great admirer of the US. Ultimately I feel that one should judge people on an individual basis and not by their nation of origin.

2) Not that I'm going to get all intellectual on you, but I have studied history both social, political and economic internationally. Totally accept that people would rejoice in their sudden freedom. I think my main point was that to suddenly open up the ending of ROTJ from a focused story on a specific corner of the universe and on specific characters, it made little sense either dramatically, visually or cinematically to introduce the celebration of the unknown masses. This all felt cold and detached. Focusing on the celebrations of the protoganists (and I lump in the Ewoks into that as a symbol of the oppressed) had more of a dramatic meaning.

3) Yep cinema has taken a turn for the worse in recent years and that's partly because the system is failing us. Too many films are rushed into production because the A list cast have an opening in their diary and somebody has agreed to finance the film. The one area that consistently gets forgotten is the blueprint ... the script.

I think a focusing part of the debate launched by darth badly is that we all do have to wake up and not just about AOTC. We're consistently buying movie tickets and giving the system false confidence that it is delivering us what we want, just because our curiosity always gets the better of us and damnit we love the movies. Meanwhile our sense are dullened to the point where our points of comparison in analysing a film are the most recent weak offerings. This is no justification that AOTC is a good film. This is really not trying to be patronising by any means, but some you guys should check out Hitchcock, Kubrick, Lean and Kurosawa and see what these pioneers were doing with the medium decades ago. Lucas and his contemporaries had a deep appreciation of these visionaries and certainly in their earlier work built on solid foundations of a wonderful history of cinema.

The original Star Wars films were flawed only by the technological limitations of their time. But one should accept these limitations because it makes subsequent generations appreciate how brilliantly forward thinking and inventive these films were. That is part of the true appreciation of their genius. Constant revision loses something and certainly throws these films out of their historical context.

4) Why spend a week and my precious time on something I hate so much? Because I care! Because the weak movie-making and the acceptance of such is a poor reflection of the direction of our global society is taking. Because by challenging & engaging in this kind of debate, we're testing the system and making use of the very gift we have in our hands "freedom of speech". Believe me, that's not something I take lightly.

Yeah sure to some degree "It's only a movie", but the power of cinema and its influence on our lives is far greater than that.

5) As for your personal plight I was intrigued by your personal situation and hope that things are now better for you and your people.

Finally and this is a general point. I was not a huge Ewok fan, but I liked the metaphor and think ROTJ took a really bad wrap in '83. My concerns at the SE ending are more about the interruption to the dramatic context of the story-telling. Yub Yub may not have got into the top #20, but I always had a tear of joy in my eyes as the choral end switched into the Star Wars theme. Damnit even if you hate the Ewoks that had to get to you. Whereas the SE ending and music is flat. Watching a bunch of unknowns whoop it somewhere across the Universe (even if it is Coruscant) just had no dramatic meaning.

Oh and whoever spotted the cinematic references that Lucas had drawn upon... I'd say they were appropriate homage rather than rip off. I don't think ripping off Fifth Element counts as homage.

Phew!!!

[Vibroblade]

Actually Moocat, I respected his post.

I've mentioned before how I thought Americans were arrogant jerks in their assumptions about the way life should be ( and I'm American ). I can't remember the number of times I've had to tell posters that they DO NOT have freedom of speech on these boards ( when they've made inflammatory comments ). Other examples come to mind: such as comments people have made on Israel and the Middle East in threads on the old council.

In all honesty, we can't understand what it would be like to live in a country where freedoms are repressed. That not something to be ashamed of, but one we must be aware of when conversing with friends from abroad.

[NelsonCoressel]

Oh and whoever spotted the cinematic references that Lucas had drawn upon... I'd say they were appropriate homage rather than rip off. I don't think ripping off Fifth Element counts as homage.


What exactly makes it a rip-off?
Whether it's an homage or a rip-off, it is keeping entirely in the visual and stylistic language that has been the basis of Star Wars for 25 years.

If something in AOTC is ripped from The Fifth Element (a real piece of crap, in my opinion), then TPM steals from Ben Hur, ANH swipes more than a few bits from The Searchers, etc...

[Kit Fisto]

Wow. That was easily the most entertaining conversation I've ever read. Someone really ought to make a movie out of this material.

That said, although I have qualms with it, I liked AOTC.

I'm sorry some people didn't, but that's their perrogative.

I like Ewoks.

Jar-Jar is the bane of my existence, although I thought his being the scapegoat in AOTC was well done.

Greedo shouldn't even know how to shoot, let alone first.

I liked the New ROJ ending, although I'd love to see some combination of the two in the DVD version, if Lucas is again tinkering with it.

I'm American, and I agree that (in general) we are way to unaware of other countries.

Those are my opinions. Enjoy. Have a great day, y'all.

Oh and I guess I should add something new: Why can't they be bloody consitent with Jabba. I didn't mind them changing his look abit for EpIV SE, but if they're going to imply he looked like that prior to ROJ, then for Pete's sake don't make him look a thrid way in EpI! Oh Well. Doesn't really matter, now does it?

[WhatMeWookie]

Originally posted by NelsonCoressel@May 29 2002 - 21:05
What exactly makes it a rip-off?
Whether it's an homage or a rip-off, it is keeping entirely in the visual and stylistic language that has been the basis of Star Wars for 25 years.

If something in AOTC is ripped from The Fifth Element (a real piece of crap, in my opinion), then TPM steals from Ben Hur, ANH swipes more than a few bits from The Searchers, etc...
Homage/Rip Off - Fine line indeed and open to interpretation.

I'll have a crack at the definition. A homage can be an original idea that has at its centre a tribute to an earlier work, but that builds on that idea with a new twist or approach that is injected with fresh creative energy.

A rip off is a tired, drained and unoriginal copy that thinly disguises its source.

So picture this... tall futuristic skyscrapers block the horizon so tall it would take 5 years to walk down the stairs if ever there was an occasional fire drill. Flying cars zoom in and out forming hectic but somehow orderly freeways in the sky. In between the myriad of buildings, a person jumps willingly freefalling at great speed and smashing into a car many thousands of feet below without ending up looking like ketchup.

Which film am I describing Fifth Element or AOTC - you decide?
TPM did "Rip-off" Ben-Hur you are entirely correct and my definition above applies.

What scenes from "The Searchers" were ripped off in A New Hope - sounds interesting but I just can't remember.

[NelsonCoressel]

In "The Searchers," John Wayne and his buddies rush back to the ranch to find that it has been attacked by indians. The shot of the burning homestead, even the dramatic music cue that accompanies it, is replicated perfectly in ANH when Luke finds Owen and Beru's remains.
There are other moments from that film as well as others that are referenced in Star Wars.

Thanks for attempting to define the difference between a reference and a rip-off. It's a question I've had rattling around in my brain for awhile now. :biggrin:

[Tovor]

Is it just me or did the whole flying car chase sequence at the beginning rip off "The Fifth Element". Are the run of ideas so exhausted that Lucas has to rip off nonsensical naff French fare....Oh calamity!!!

Funny that. *I thought the flying car chase scene in The Fifth Element ripped off the car chase in The French Connection. *Funny also is that 3 years ago, right after seeing Coruscant in TPM, one of the first thoughts I had was that I hoped in one of the next 2 films there would be a "French Connection"-like air chase through the skies of Coruscant, because the potential for a visually dynamic chase should not be passed up. *Almost 3 years ago, in fact, in a thread on the older Jedinet boards called "What do you want to see in Episode II?", I stated that I hoped to see an air chase between and around the spires of Coruscant. *And then, over 2 years ago, I began writing a Star Wars novel (as yet unpublished) which is set 300 years after ROTJ, in a fully restored Republic and rebuilt Jedi Order, and then 2 years ago I wrote a high speed intense air chase scene into my novel, based not on Fifth Element but on what I so wanted to see in my story and in a SW movie. *So when I saw the chase in AOTC I thought, "Wow, but GL must have stolen my idea!" j/k, but I never considered that GL stole the idea from 5th Element, which I thought was a weak and dull movie to begin with.

[lotos]

My previous post was written in a fume of anger. So this is a personal apology to Moocat and all the others. By no means I wanted to offend Americans. To be honest, I love you people. And I’m probably the most “Americanised” non-American in the world. It’s just that I’ve met 42-year-old Americans who don’t know who Mocart is, not to mention world history. And that notion about Ewoks rejoicing being silly kinda vexed me.


But I’m just wondering what’s the purpose of this discussion now. Some people think ATOC was great. Others think it was stupid. Neither side is about to give up their opinion.

Regards the SW originality – well, it’s about the good guys fighting the bad guys. Not too original in my opinion. Come one people, you’re getting into silly details, which don’t really matter. No film is entirely original. You’re sitting there trying to prove something that’s not really necessary to be proved.

And one more thing, just for the record, couldn’t you - Darth Badly and WhatMeWookie find anything appealing in ATOC? I don’t know, at least a few funny lines, the costumes, the scenery, the music? Being sceptical I have to admit there were things that I liked about it. OK, OK, apart form the script.


An interesting observation: When attacked, you unite people (I mean on this discussion board), so that’s good. You’re not that hopeless. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif

[Darth Badly]

Just for the record - I didn't start this thread to make people give up their opinions. I don't mind people disagreeing with me at all and it would certainly be a boring world if everyone instantly changed their minds.

This thread started off discussing very specific holes and problems that I (among others) had with Attack of the Clowns. Very interestingly, it's developed into a more general discussion of Uncle George's efforts at film making post (say) mid 90s when the new era of new Star Wars material began.

I do wanna get back to some of the very specific nonsense in Attack of the Clowns but to comment on what's just been said more recently first.

I agree entirely with WhatMeWookie about the difference between rip off and homage.
All films draw on the cinema that's gone before as their source. I loved the original trilogy because it did exactly that, but in a new and fresh way. Yeah, NelsonCoressel is exactly right when he references The Searchers as a very likely inspiration for the scenes he mentions in Star Wars.
But the point there is that Uncle George is taking an image from the wild west of America and putting it into deep space. The images are familiar enough to speak to us deeply, but are entirely new in context. That was old Uncle George. New improved computer generated video game Uncle George isn't like that any more.

As WhatMeWookie brilliantly used as an example, The flying car chase at the start of Clowns is exactly the same (to all intends and purposes) as the chase in 5th Element. It's exactly the same science fiction context. Nothing original has been added (except some piss poor dialogue between Obi Wan and Anakin AND of course the madly silly, makes no sense moment when Anakin jumps onto exactly the right car. If they were trying to show just how amazingly powerful Anakin was, I'm afraid that moment just lost me completely. I just didn't believe it.)

A general guide for me as to the difference between homage and rip off is that if while you're watching it for the first time you're aware of what's it was inspired by then it's failed. As I sat there watching the flying car chase I was thinking that it was a poor version of the Bruce Willis sequence even then. (I liked 5th Element by the way ; as deposable pop science fiction. Loved the blue lady singing. Not a great or even good film overall though.)

Tovor ; I'm not saying that just because 5th Element did a flying car chase no one can even do one again. Just that if they try it, they'd better have some original, attention-holding stuff in there. Uncle George didn't. SW used to set the agenda for such things and it's a great sadness to me that it's now reduced to ripping off things and is not longer the benchmark against which stuff can be measured. (And was it just me or did the Clowns bit in the arena where Obi/Anakin/Senator fight the digital tigers, sorry ; alien creatures smell a bit too much of Gladiator???)

Likewise on the design front. The original trilogy was stuffed full of the most fantastic designs in the world. Design classics like the Stormtroopers outfits, the ships, Darth Vader's helmet, Yoda, X-Wings. Where oh where are the new designs in the new films that take your breath away? Either they're poor rip offs (no, not a homage) to the original stuff or they just re-use the old stuff. Anyone - is there a single design classic in the two new films? (The Senator's silver spaceship is pretty, but I'm not sure I'd recognise it if not for the colour ; if you see what I mean.)

Lotos ; great posts. Many thanks for wading in like that. Your take on the people rejoicing was good to have. My own point about the cheering crowds at the end of the SE of Jedi was that I found the scenes intrusive into the more personal story on Endor. I didn't care (sorry) about the cheering crowds because I didn't know who they were and the scenes seemed (to me) to be very out of place. I wasn't saying that people in our real world who face similar Empire style problems wouldn't be happy ; only questioning them impact of the narrative end of the film.

You also asked:
And one more thing, just for the record, couldn't you - Darth Badly and WhatMeWookie find anything appealing in ATOC? I don't know, at least a few funny lines, the costumes, the scenery, the music? Being sceptical I have to admit there were things that I liked about it. OK, OK, apart form the script.

OK, (and this is gonna hurt me more than you.) Here goes everything I can think of:

1/ The ;You want to go home and rethink your life; line was funny.
2/ It was nice to see Christopher Lee back on the big scene in a big way. After Lord of the Rings (and he's in Part II much more) he has (temporarily) cornered the market playing mad old villains. Good for him. I've just got The Wicker Man on DVD and he's great in it.
3/ The music was ok ; themes from the past were used well. (I'm getting desperate here.)
4/ Nat Portman looks nice when she's not talking and has a nice midriff.
5/ Some of the scenes on the love story ; like when Anakin feel off his ride and pretended to be hurt made me laugh really loud ; but I'm not sure if they were supposed to.
6/ Likewise Anakin's wet dream. I knew well enough what was supposed to be happening BUT in the context of a late teenage boy who fancies the Senator and isn't getting any: I did find it laugh out loud funny.
(This started a ripple of laughter going around the cinema. I had to sit there in an audience of people actually laughing AT a Star Wars film. Not a happy moment given that I would have happily died to defend them when I was 10.)

As an aside:
I saw the film with a friend who insisted we see it together as we'd seen every other SW film at the cinema together.
I knew we both had hated it and at the end I turned to him:

ME: Happy now?
HIM: I am. It's over!
BOTH OF US: HAHAHA

We suddenly realised that we had become the two old men who sit in the balcony on the Muppet Show.

I'm off to Paris for the weekend with my girl. You all be good while I'm away and don't let me catch any of you saying anything nice about Attack of the Clowns, OK? J

Look forward to reading your posts when I get back.

(Blizzard edited out the cut and paste ’s)

[Teek]

I would question the fact the end battle looks like Gladiator except for the fact this movie was being shot when Gladiator was released two years ago and was in production about a year and a half before Gladiator was released.

[NelsonCoressel]

I would guess the arena battle in AOTC is more closely related to Spartacus or some other 50's epic rather than Gladiator.
Just my impression anyway...

[moocat]

Vibro - I'm an American currently not living in the US. Living outside and looking in gives you a whole new perspective.

His opinon is fine, but the view that we are all arrogant, ignorant, and greedy is something that is perpetuated repeatedly. The world media often does not look kindly on us.
While there is some truth to it, it's still an unfair generalization.

As far as freedom of speech goes I think we've all abused that phrase at one point of another, but in terms of the message board you of course have stick within the confines of board rules. people forget that.

Oh and Lotos welcome and thank you for the kind words toward us. No harm no foul.

[lotos]

"His opinion is fine, but the view that we are all arrogant, ignorant, and greedy is something that is perpetuated repeatedly. The world media often does not look kindly on us. While there is some truth to it, it's still an unfair generalization."

I never said that Americans are arrogant, ignorant and greedy. To be honest, I don't think that's what the world thinks. What I do know, lots of people think Americans are stupid (but your posts here are quite intelligent). And since mass media can't say that, they say you're arrogant, ignorant, etc.

Now, I would never generalize to say that all Americans are stupid (after all, you’re the ones who went to the moon and founded Microsoft), however statements like “Europe is a big city” and “Belgium is the capital of France” have come from the lips of grown-up American citizens. So, maybe in this respect you really are arrogant.

And then of course there are some political moves that haven’t been too smart either.

By the way, tying this together with the film: Obviously GL made TPM and ATOC very political. I would say, he’s implying to some problems you have in US politics. And I find quite interesting the way he does it, but perhaps that’s just ‘cause I study Political Science.

So you can think of yourselves as the Jedi council and GL as Count Dooku, who’s showing you the symptoms, which you don’t see or don't want to see.

Well, that’s just a thought about politics.


P.S. And… not that I mind, but I'm a she.

[NelsonCoressel]

P.S. And… not that I mind, but I'm a she.

Ok, you're my new HEROINE... ;)

[moocat]

Lotos - Whoops. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wacko.gif *Sorry ma'am. *

I wasn't referring to you directly in my response just making a point about world view. Sorry if you saw it that way. It wasn't intended as a dig at you. Once again my apollogies.

I think I'll leave this discussion now since I have nothing I wish to add to the original point of the thread other than I dissagree with a large chunk of Mr. Badlys' *points. *style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/thumbsup.gif

PS- I'll be the first to admit some of our political moves have been horrible.

Also I think one of the reasons we're perceved as arrogant is the fact that we never really have to leave the country. We have every major climate, and a very diverse population coupled with the size of the country means you could probably live your whole life and never really see all of it. That's probably why somthing like only 20% of all Americans have passports. We don't really need them. Just some food for thought. Although I did go outside the USA for love of my life, and that is why I am currently not in the country.

[lotos]

Yeah, now that Darth Badly has gone off to Europe, let's just use the situation and put an end to this discussion. It would be really great if I could sum up everything that's been said here, but I'm afraid I wouldn't be excellent at doing that.

I hope you’ll all agree that this movie really isn’t about logic. Which, in my opinion, makes most of the posts, including Darth Badly’s questions at the beginning, totally unnecessary.

So let's stick to the fact (that's not a good word though) that ATOC was not that bad, it did have quite a few good moments, however admitting that the story line and dialogues could have been better.


Gentlemen, it's been a pleasure talking to you! :biggrin:

[WhatMeWookie]

So is that it Lotos... you get the last word on what has been a lively and enjoyable debate. Not likely old chum. Yes at times things got a little heated, but out of respect to all posters that's because we all care about something.

Nevertheless - it's been great to have you around and I'm really intrigued to know which part of the world you're from....but don't tell us...it will spoil the mystery. I'm still reeling from the shock revelation that you're a she. Please keep an eye on us and you're welcome back in the ring when things take an interesting turn.

I for one have found this to be an excellent forum, challenging, engaging and with some excellent digressions. I Hope someday darth badly will return. Yeah sure he may say stuff we may not want to hear, but it has certainly got me thinking and has challenged the conventional view that Saint George can do no wrong.

As for the Love/Hate relationship with America... there is intense jealousy in Europe and other parts of the world for the US. I think Moocat's point about the sheer size of an amazing country reducing the focus on international matters is spot on... but recent sad events have changed that. The world is getting smaller.

Moocat - you left your country for the love of your life. That is really romantic. Hope things work for you.

Actually, what really disturbs me is the stereotyped portrayal of the English in the Star Wars movies. Aside from C3PO, who is basically a robotic butler and comic foil. English people get classed as the bad guys. This goes back to Grand Moff Tarkin through to the twin team up of Count Dooku (with Mr. Lee) and damnit the Senator /Sideous (Mr. McDiarmid).

English people are always the bad guys these days - especially in Mel Gibson movies. Okay so that country had an Empire once and technically controlled America, but a lots changes since those days. Will their ever be any English heroes in the Star Wars sextuplet???

It's just not cricket.

[Pepper]

Well, we already have Irish and Scottish heroes in SW. *I suppose an English hero could be possible, but I don't know. *I think we're just too used to the English being good villians. *For what it's worth, in my opinion the villians are usually the most interesting characters, and usually steal the show. *And hence they require a very good actor. *And England is, to me, known for putting out some very good actors.

Strange; I was just thinking about this recently, how that a good villian requires a very good actor. *On the other hand, a good hero does not necessarily require a good actor. *Only a passable actor, or one who is simply not a horrible actor, will usually suffice. *On the *other* other hand, not all good villians have been played by English actors. *There's Jack Nicholson's Joke, Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor, and more recently, Willem DeFoe's Norman Osborn/Green Goblin. *Those were IMO excellent portrayals by excellent actors.

And of course, as we know, there are many sensible people who realize that not all Americans are stupid or foolish (although far too many are astonishly ignorant, thanks to the poor state of the family and education in our society), and so there are many sensible people who realize that not all English are evil. *And yes, I'm as American as they come, and I can't stand the utter ignorance and superficiality that is rampant in my own nation.

Oh yeah, and I don't count Microsoft as one of our most notable accomplishments (unless you're talking about Windows 2000, which IMO is a very good operating system. Still not sure about XP, though.) However, I am very proud of IBM, Intel, and Motorola, to name a few.

[Pepper]

Quote: "statements like “Europe is a big city” and “Belgium is the capital of France” have come from the lips of grown-up American citizens."

Lotos, I am not at all surprised by that. It's very sad to me, but I know that that sort of thing is true. I've met a certain American, who was a very nice person, and an intelligent person, who didn't know that the moon orbited the earth. I guess you had to be there, but I was astonished. I am determined that I or my children (if I ever become a father) will never ever be so ignorant.

[Kit Fisto]

English Hero?

COUGH - Obi-Wan - COUGH - Alec Guiness - COUGH


Whew. Hairball.

[Two-Gun Qui-Gon]

As WhatMeWookie brilliantly used as an example, The flying car chase at the start of Clowns is exactly the same (to all intends and purposes) as the chase in 5th Element.

So then I guess Luc Besson was ripping off that crappy film Judge Dredd (1995) when he made The Fifth Element (1997)? I mean, Dredd featured mega-skyscrapers with a chase featuring flying vehicles. So obviously Besson was "inspired" by that, yes?

Good lord, flying cars, mega cities, and flying "car chases" have been around in sci-fi and space opera for a very long time.


Likewise on the design front. *The original trilogy was stuffed full of the most fantastic designs in the world. *Design classics like the Stormtroopers outfits, the ships, Darth Vader's helmet, Yoda, X-Wings. *Where oh where are the new designs in the new films that take your breath away?

The Stormtroopers were based on the facelss androids from Lucas' THX-1138, Vader's helmet/costume was inspired by the armor of the Samurai, Yoda evolved from a gnome-like creature, most of the weapons are based on real firearms, C-3PO was based on the robot from Metropolis, Count Dooku's "unique" saber handle can be seen on countless real world swords, and so on, and so on.

Everything in Star Wars is based on things from the real world, or things we've seen before. When I look at the gun turrets on the Falcon, I think of similar turrets on WWII bombers. When I see Republic assault ships storming Geonosis, I see Russia Hind helicopter gunships. I look at the design-work on Padme's AOTC Tatooine costume, and I see Native American clothing.

There is always something familiar in the fantastic that lucas puts in Star Wars, and it continues in the Prequel trilogy. If you don't like the look of the Prequels, fair enough. But don't act like he's not doing the same thing when he made the first three films.

[Two-Gun Qui-Gon]

Next, somebody will say that Lucas was "inspired" by Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. After all, one of the main characters on that show was a shapeshifting Changeling, and the AOTC bounty hunter Zam was a shapshifting member of the "Changeling" species. Obvously he couldn't come up with anything original and had to copy Odo. How unoriginal.

Or maybe he just got the name/idea "changling" from various fairy tale/mythical creatures that could assume different shapes? You know, sense Star Warss is basically a fairy tale in space, and that's where he gets many of his ideas from.

[moocat]

WhatMeWookie you'll be happy to know my wife is English. :D

Oh and thanks for the kind words.

[NelsonCoressel]

...Next, somebody will say that Lucas was "inspired" by Star Trek: Deep Space Nine...

LOL! This is all taking me back to 1977 when I was a smartass 12 year old. My first experience with Star Wars was in early June, 25 years ago. I loved it, but I also now remember thinking a number of things: The up and down sliding doors reminded me of Star Trek (which I had already made fun of for years), the little robed faceless midgets music made me think of Lost in Space (which again I only watched for laughs), I thought Princess Leia was played by Linda Blair, Harrison Ford's attitude reminded me of my own and while the whole experience was amazing, I still saw the flaws... and winked at them in return.

[Two-Gun Qui-Gon]

When I was a kid, R2-D2 always reminded of my mom's old Rainbow vacuum cleaner. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif

Star Wars has always been about having fun. I mean, so far in this saga we've had bar fights, flying car chases, killer teddy bears, talking frogs spouting fortune cookie wisdom, talking slugs, pirates, gigantic space slugs that look like sock puppets, sword fights, and a whole bunch more. How can people not have fun with this series? style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif

[Mara1Jade]

Actually, Ewan McGreggor is Scottish. Just ask any of the obsessors. Heh.

[Kit Fisto]

AH - Alec Guiness - CHOO!

[WhatMeWookie]

Ben (nee Obi Wan) Kenobee

English Hero Or Not English Hero

Seems like there's an awful lot of coughing going around.

1) Mara1Jade hit the nail on the head.... Ewan McGregor is Scottish not English

2) If you check out Alec Guinness on IMDB, his bio reveals his true name as Alec Guinness de Cuffe. Now, to my knowledged despite his birth being in Marylebone London...you don't get English people with "de" in their name. They're usually of French descent.

3) That lovely Guinness warble mimicked by McGregor has a touch of the lapsed Scot about it.

So I think this idea of Obi-Wan being English is tenuous.

I still think Lucas has got it in for limeys and thinks they're (as the Germans used to say) savages in dinner jackets.

Fur-balls anyone.

[ClonePilot]

I just dont really care , anything that has to do with SW I like unless they happen to be tall , orange , big eared and have a high pitched voice

[wook]

I just found this thread and I haven't yet had the time to do more than skim it, but I'm hearing the lyrics of a song in the back of my head:

"We're gonna party like it's 1999"

I still haven't had time to see AOTC yet, so I am not going to comment on it. However I do want to say that it seems truly unfortunate to see SW fans at each other's throats once again. This wasn't the case in 1980 (sigh).

[Teek]

In 1980 we didn't have a forum to discuss and bitch so freely! :tounge:

[wook]

Even if we did, there wasn't nearly so much to complain about.

[NelsonCoressel]

I've said hundreds of times that I remember lots of complaints when ESB first came out. *Several friends of mine back then bitched and moaned about how ESB "sucked" and how Yoda being an unconvincing puppet was "stupid," etc...
And the New York Times recently reposted all their old Star Wars reviews from 1977 - 1983 and it's amazing how similar the negative comments from back then are being all but quoted word for word now with the prequels.

It's just now that ESB is 20 years old that people say it's "brilliant," which it isn't.

[wook]

A good percentage of the old criticism was along the lines of "this isn't exactly Shakespeare". We all know that that is not what the SW films are supposed to be about, so I would expect that kind of criticism to be constant across all the films.

Some fans were suprised that ESB was a different kind of story from SW, and it had its share of holes in other places, but the biggest complaint was its unresolved ending. People felt like they had already waited 3 years and were (rightly so IMHO) annoyed to find out that they would have to wait another three years for the resolution. It seems that even then GL was looking to lock in a guaranteed audience.

With ESB there may have been nits about unconvincing puppetry (tho I thought Yoda worked well enough), unrealistic stop-motion effects, and the like, but the integrity of the characters and story was never called into question. There wasn't any criticism of the film being "dumbed down" to appeal to 5-year olds and turned into a toy commercial as has been the case ever since ROTJ.

Once GL knew that he did have a guaranteed audience, who would pay to see anything with a SW label, he was free to indulge his whims & "play with the toys" without having to worry about producing a quality story in order to ensure sufficient revenue to pay for it all.

I still see this as the source of the division among fans, tho since I haven't seen AOTC yet I'm going to qualify my remark with a disclaimer that I am not including AOTC in my analysis. So you tell me: is this the same reason why this thread has had so much bickering & flame bait?

[NelsonCoressel]

I think the bickering and flame bait is here because people get off on it. If there was nothing to whine about, they'd make up something.

[wook]

uh oh, sounds like more flame bait.... :^)

[NelsonCoressel]

lol :biggrin:

[QuigonWindu]

Darth Badly if you hate it so much then why are you here why dont you go to some forum to discuss how bad and meaningless star wars is. Its people like you that give star wars and the rest of us a bad name. Why do you waste your "precious" time watching and discussing it if you dont like it. Maybe it wasnt the best SW movie in your opinion most of us still like it so why dont you take your star wars hating self outta here. And stop making fans like me listen to your crap.

[Count Dooku]

Lol. Do you think Dooku is that weak? Look buddy he was one of the most strongest Sith lords to ever appear in the triliogy. Emperor wouldn't beable to beat Dooku that easy, Dooku has lightning just like the Emperor, and has unique skills with a lightsaber.

[Teek]

quigonwindu, stop with the personal attacks. I'm warning you, anymore and you'll be banned.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by quigonwindu@June 05 2002 - 16:20
Its people like you that give star wars and the rest of us a bad name.
Take some gulps of air there my friend. This topic is clearly labled as being err... even so slightly critical of Attack of the Clowns so if ya don't wanna read this stuff (ie interesting discussion) then enjoy the many many other fine threads on this board instead. Does that sound pretty fair?

As for giving people bad names, they don't come much worse than Darth Badly. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif

[SKYWALKME]

Interesting thread. I think one of main reasons why I do like SW so much is because it DOES make you ask questions to yourself. SW does make you think, gotta say that much. But most of all, I think it's Goerge Lucas' creation and he has said before that it is his movie and his vision. I tend to mentally separate the two trilogies, simply because they are so different from one another. They both have their own unique feel, characterization and sense of style. I wouldn't want the PT to be like the OT, personally. Years ago I might have felt differently about that, but Lucas would only be cheating fans if his only intent was to capture what has already been done before (as much as we loved it). Now, I like seeing new planets, new aliens, new characters, and new backgrounds. And Padme is such an unusual name; I have never heard, or even expected Luke and Leia's Mother to be named Padme. The prequels are already adding so much more depth to the OT (to me anyway). I can watch scenes from say ROTJ now, particulary the lightsaber father/son duel, and visual images of Padme and Anakin come to mind. I know the background and ROTJ is deeper in meaning for me now. More questions have been answered, though each film had many possibilities and directions the story could have sprung off to.

Well, to sum up, SW isn't always logical, in my opinion. it's not always about story and structure--but is also deep-rooted in myth, imagery, and symbolism too. With that said, if I'm making any sense whatsoever, eh, I think Lucas isn't exactly striving for a saga that answers everyone's questions outright. I think he's striving for a saga that will make you think, and think, and think, then wonder about the many possibilities that it could have offered an audience. Hope this makes sense.

[WayoftheGungon]

Could you please stop typing out Attack of the Clowns. It is getting old.

[RollaFett]

Wook- What is wrong with creating a storyline with a cliffhanger that 'guarantees' an audience? No, really, I don't seem to understand your complaint there. It is simply a continuing story, nothing new in the realm of storytelling, I might add. You come across it in books, television, theater, and yes, movies. If you have such a big problem with Lucas trying to make a buck while telling HIS story, then you don't have to buy a ticket. At this point, it seems as though you have done just that with AOTC, so what is your problem with a 'guaranteed audience'? Do you honestly beileve that Lucas has just gone into cruise-control and not put any effort into his latest films because he knows they will still generate huge box office numbers? Do you really think that? He is not Jerry Bruckhiemer. Could ROTJ and TPM benn better? Sure they could have been, but I have a hard time chalking them up to a 'why worry about a story when I can make money regardless' excuse. He simply didn't get it done with those films, plain and simple. I honestly think that he does care about this whole saga he has created, and tries his hardest to make the best movies that he can. Now that doesn't mean he always succeeds. It doesn't mean that he makes the best decisions (Example: Rick McCallum over Gary Kurtz; chhosing to direct himself; where the hell is Lawrence Kasden anyway?!), but I really think that he tries.
Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong. ;)

[Foozbond]

Now there are many questions here that were nicely answered by either Teek or Tovor or someone else, but there is one thing that I believe remains unsaid (I could have just accidently passed it by, there is much to read here.).
About the dialouge, for Pete's sake IT'S AN OUTER SPACE SCIFI FILM! Have you ever seen a bloody movie that was like Star Wars that DIDN'T have strange "bad" dialouge?! I am not saying I disliked the movie because I personally LOVED it but I don't think anyone has a reason to beat down on the dialouge. It's just something non-fans or people who just didn't like the movie and had no real reason why say so that they do have a reason! I mean honestly look at the dialouge from some of the other SciFi movies. Star Trek: "Beam me up Scotty!" I mean honestly, that's just stupid, but no one makes fun of that! (Star Trek sucks by the way) Another one, Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi: "Who--Who are you?" "Someone who loves you." Honestly there are so many other things I could nitpick at in any SciFi movie. Dialouge is just a stupid thing to complain about, PLEASE cut Lucas some slack here!

[DanielSkywalker]

Right on, Foozbond. I think we're on the same page here. I personally loved AOTC as I stated earlier in this thread, and also noted that people need to realize that their dissapointment with the PT is largely their own fault and not Mr. Lucas'. I haven't really bothered replying in this thread since way back on the first page because I realized then that this discussion was going nowhere. Even after several posters gave very valid answers to the many, many silly questions, they still persisted on bashing AOTC. No one can change their minds. I know how I feel about the PT, and I don't care what they think. It doesn't change the way I feel about the films or George Lucas. Well, I guess I'll quit rantin' and ravin' now.--I'm out.

[Tovor]

Even after several posters gave very valid answers to the many, many silly questions, they still persisted on bashing AOTC.

Not only did they continue to bash the movie, which is their right and this SW forum should have a place for that IMO, but they did not bother to respond to what I wrote point by point. Much of this whole forum is to discuss what we like, dislike, speculate on and question, praise and complain, but if a basher with questions refuses to reply to someone who has replies for almost each of his issues, then what's the point of listing his issues?

(Yes, Darth Badly, I'm referring to you. I even apologized for my sarcasm, so why not reply to my answers point by point?)

[DanielSkywalker]

Yep, I wouldn't have had the patience to respond to everyone one of those questions, but you did, and did very well in my opinion. After your response, there were practically no questions left unanswered, but he kept on blah blahing over and over about attack of the clowns. I guess some people just can't admit it when they're wrong. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by Tovor@June 07 2002 - 02:23
Much of this whole forum is to discuss what we like, dislike, speculate on and question, praise and complain, but if a basher with questions refuses to reply to someone who has replies for almost each of his issues, then what's the point of listing his issues?

(Yes, Darth Badly, I'm referring to you. I even apologized for my sarcasm, so why not reply to my answers point by point?)
Hello matey - I greatly appreciated the time you took to answer (or try to) the many questions I raised and I salute you and thank you for that.

I would say that your answer could be divided into three types (all only my opinion here, of course). Those being:
1/ Questions answered by your in depth knowledge of the back story. (These were interesting to read and thanks).
2/ Questions which came down to a matter of taste & opinion - (I know all of this is just people's opinion's but...)
3/ Questions that (for me anyway) remain BIG problems with the narrative.

I'm fighting real life deadlines at the moment, but I do intend to reply to your long list of counterpoints as soon as I can. I certainly appreciate the time you took to reply and have very much enjoyed the interesting (and sometimes heated) discussion that has followed.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by Foozbond@June 07 2002 - 00:09
About the dialouge, for Pete's sake IT'S AN OUTER SPACE SCIFI FILM! Have you ever seen a bloody movie that was like Star Wars that DIDN'T have strange "bad" dialouge?
To come back to Foozbond, actually I do think that the dialogue in ATTACK is particularly poor.

You're right to say that the dialogue in most science fiction films isn't exactly Shakespeare, perhaps that's especially true for SF TV series like the many Star Treks where much of the dialogue in today's scripts is technobabble which has replaced the good old fistfights of (the gorgeous) Captain Kirk's day.

That said though, my big problem with the dialogue in ATTACK was its lack of wit and humour. And that wasn't because the story was darker, think of how many funny lines there are in EMPIRE.

ATTACK'S dialogue was predictable, functional, and clumsy. There was only one funny line in the whole thing AND what quotable lines were there? How many lines from the original Star Wars film ended up on tee shirts? What lines are there in ATTACK that will stand as classics in ten or twenty years? (Or right now?) I would suggest none.

The worst lines were reserved for the slow and embarrassing love story. The general non-fan audience that I saw it with were actually groaning aloud at some of Anakin's dialogue in the love scenes. Young Anakin spouted nonsense that sounded like had been written by British children's author Enid Blyton fifty years ago as dialogue for a twelve year old school boy who was in love with the gym mistress.

I really don't understand where Uncle George didn't get someone in just to do a diologue polish on the nearly finished script. Anyone know why this didn't happen? (It's very common practise in film these days.)

[Foozbond]

I don't know about the dialouge being "especially bad" in AOTC, I believe that it depends on your taste, you may have thought that there was only one line that was funny, but when I went to the midnight premiere (and many other showings) I found people laughing at many lines other than the death stick thing, which I believe was the one you liked. For example, many thought the C-3PO thing was hilarious. Also, the bit where Anakin says, "I transmitted the message to Coruscant, Master....and then we decided to come and recue you." And Obi-Wan replies, "Good job." I personaly thought that was the funniest thing in the whole movie. It was filled with more humor than most of the other films. Just my opinion.

[Foozbond]

Oh right, I almost forgot hehe style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif Maybe there are no lines that will always be remembered as well as the whole "No, I am your father." thing, but I've already heard many people talking about some, especially Mace Windu's "This parties over." But...does memorable lines make up a movie? I don't believe so.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by Foozbond@June 07 2002 - 23:51
Oh right, I almost forgot hehe style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif *Maybe there are no lines that will always be remembered as well as the whole "No, I am your father." thing, but I've already heard many people talking about some, especially Mace Windu's "This parties over." *But...does memorable lines make up a movie? I don't believe so.
I think you're right to say that memorable lines aren't the most important thing about a movie. But since you were defending the dialogue that was what we were talking about. (Heaven knows there's enough other stuff wrong with the film).

I would grant you that the "good job" line from Obi Wan did get a laugh with the audience I saw it with.

I didn't care for the "This party's over" line - which to me sounded more like something a NY detective would say that a Jedi knight.

[Foozbond]

LOL I like your thinking of "She looks like she's on top of things." And yes, I have heard a lot about the deathsticks bit as well, I was just using "This parties over." as an example of what I have heard quite a lot. I guess people just like different things. Uh...I just forgot what I was going to say so when I remember I'll come back lol.

[RollaFett]

Meche- I whole-heartedly agree with your assesment of GL's directing skills. He has readily admitted on many an occassion that he has no joy fo directing, so it continues to baffle me as to why he insists on doing just that for these films. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wacko.gif

Darth Badly- Your point about bringing in another writer to 'polish' up the script is a valid one, unfortunately he actually did that with Jonathan Hales and it didn't work out to well. Hopefully, he doesn't stop at just one extra writer with EP 3.

[Darklord]

Darth Badly


Tell us which is your favourite film, so we can attack it and take it to pieces.

[Teek]

Darklord, don't take it personal and don't make it personal.

[Foozbond]

I don't know if you have already done this but can you give us a list of examples from the dialouge that you didn't like? I would like to see it.

[DarthVaderJediKnight]

People, we are all Star Wars fans, Right?? *Why do we sit here and critize AotC (which by the way, was a great movie if u accually took the time to pay attention).
My friend Darth Badly, Good job of finding ways to intise people!! *I think that you all will be amazed when Epsiode 3 comes out (Knightfall) *It will bring all this madness together and I for one can't wait!! *Im interested to see how Darth Vader comes about, we got a taste of him in AotC but not what all us hardcore fanz want!! *We want the black, metal head costume back!! *style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif . *Im only 17, but i can honestly say im a hardcore Star Wars fan. *I wasnt alive when the originals came out, but am happy to be apart of the new ones now. *People, let us not hate the AotC or TPM, We knew they wouldn't be like the origianls, i think they make then better.

"......But i wanted to go to the Tashy station to pick up some power converters!!?"

[Count Dooku]

I thought AOTC was awesome. People ignore the man. Im not gonna say anything but I enjoyed the movie. That's all that matters to me.

[Tovor]

Darth Badly,

If 10,000 star systems want to leave the Republic then so what? What’s so bad about that? Why not let them leave? Isn't that their democratic right? Why must there be a war? You surely don't have a war to stop people leaving a democratic organisation?

Darth Badly, I must have SW on the brain, or else why would I be thinking about this discussion today while at work? Maybe I hate my job and SW is my escape from its stranglehold on my imagination. Anyway, my point...
Am I correct in my presumption that you are from Great Britain? If you are or not my point remains: Why did England go to war in 1776 when the colonies declared their independance? Why did Britian wage war to stop the colonies from establishing their own country? What was so bad about the colonists foresaking the motherland; why not let them leave? You get the idea. In the case of AOTC, it wasn't the Republic which wanted war against the Seperatists (aside from Palpatine, of course, who engineered the whole Seperatist threat) but the Seperatists who threatened the Republic with their droid armies and talks of war against the Republic.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by Darklord@June 09 2002 - 09:14
Darth Badly


Tell us which is your favourite film, so we can attack it and take it to pieces.
Darklord - Since you ask my favorite film of the last few years has to be FIGHT CLUB which I thought was just a stunning piece of film making. I'm only letting you know this fact so that you can be happy that I, Darth Badly, like such head-spinning nonsense.

As I've said many times, the point of the discussion here IS NOT to attack your favorite film (as you seem to think) but to discuss (and pick apart, sure) ATTACK which like it, love it, or loath it we are all interested in. If you really can't bare to watch it being taken apart then you're free to pull the bed covers over your head.

Oh, I also like The Clangers, the old Adam West Batman series, and anything with Daleks in it. Happy now? style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by Tovor@June 09 2002 - 23:23
Darth Badly,

If 10,000 star systems want to leave the Republic then so what? *What's so bad about that? *Why not let them leave? *Isn't that their democratic right? *Why must there be a war? *You surely don't have a war to stop people leaving a democratic organisation? *

Darth Badly, I must have SW on the brain, or else why would I be thinking about this discussion today while at work? *Maybe I hate my job and SW is my escape from its stranglehold on my imagination. *Anyway, my point...
Am I correct in my presumption that you are from Great Britain? *If you are or not my point remains: Why did England go to war in 1776 when the colonies declared their independance? *Why did Britian wage war to stop the colonies from establishing their own country? *What was so bad about the colonists foresaking the motherland; why not let them leave? *You get the idea. *
Tovor - One of my big problems with the new prequels is the big plot running through them. Instead of good verses evil (Luke Vs Darth, X-Wings Vs Death Star), the first prequel turned out to be about tax levels and import duties and trade (how exciting) and the second is about the clone army of an incompetent bounty hunter fighting some more (yawn) droids (with 30 mostly nameless Jedi thrown into Act III- wow).

Anyway, Tovor manages to put his finger on exactly one of my problems with the big back story to ATTACK. He compares the Republic to the British Empire.

Well, here's the thing. In the original trilogy the old Republic is talked about with great affection as if its downfall and loss were truly tragic. It is spoken of as a democratic and truly good organisation. Well, pardon moi, but that doesn't sound like the bloody British Empire. (No offence to Brits out there. ) The British fought wars to stop countries leaving the Empire because the Empire was in no way democratic. It was an empire which ruthlessly exploited its subjects (especially abroad) for the enrichment of Britain and the crown just as the evil empire is Star Wars does. (Hey - maybe the Emperor and Queen Victoria might be related?)

That's why I listed the question: "If 10,000 star systems want to leave the Republic then so what? What's so bad about that? Why not let them leave? Isn't that their democratic right? You surely don't have a war to stop people leaving a democratic organisation?" at the very top of my list.

How can I make sense of the fact that in the original trilogy the Republic sounds like a wonderful place to live and the very model of democratic peace and justice but when we actually see it, Lucus has kinda changed his mind (to suit the purposes of the story he now wants to tell) and shows us a Republic behaving exactly like the British Empire or Roman Empire would have done.

Now I know that some of you guys are going to come back and say that it is the evil future Emperor pulling the strings to create the need for war. And sure, that's what he's trying to do, but the rest of the galactic senate didn't take much convincing did they? Blimey.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by GollaFett@June 08 2002 - 19:45
Meche- I whole-heartedly agree with your assesment of GL's directing skills. He has readily admitted on many an occassion that he has no joy fo directing, so it continues to baffle me as to why he insists on doing just that for these films. * style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wacko.gif

Darth Badly- Your point about bringing in another writer to 'polish' up the script is a valid one, unfortunately he actually did that with Jonathan Hales and it didn't work out to well. Hopefully, he doesn't stop at just one extra writer with EP 3.
GollaFett - I thought Hales got a joint credit? I was refering to script doctors - the kind who do a last minute polish a couple of months before shooting starts and don't usually (hardly ever) get an on-screen credit.

[RollaFett]

Oh, my bad. Yeah you're right, Hales did get that type of credit. And I never did hear anything about a script doctor, but then I don't ever recall hearing about that with any other SW film either. Upon further review, I would say he just needs to hire a top-notch screenwriter from the get-go, and try to remain 'hands-off' as far as the script goes. I mean, it IS his story so he should provide the plot and all, but a screenplay is too much for him, IMO. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening. But if EP 3 stays away from real heavy romantic themes then it might not matter too much anyway. They were the weakest points of AOTC.

[DanielSkywalker]

Well, Darth, it looks like we finally agreed on something. Fight Club truly is a great film. I've seen it at least a dozen times.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by DanielSkywalker@June 11 2002 - 02:15
Well, Darth, it looks like we finally agreed on something. *Fight Club truly is a great film. *I've seen it at least a dozen times.
...falls over in amazment... style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif

[wook]

Gollafett, sorry not to reply sooner. Things have been hectic to say the least.

I recall a while back (maybe after ROTJ was released) an interview with GL where he said that his real interest was in making the kind of movies that he wanted to do -- these would be "nonlinear" as he put it, and would not use the more traditional plot, narrative, characters, etc. In that interview GL also bemoaned that fact that films were very expensive to make, so what he wanted to do was set up a mechanism that was guaranteed to make enough money to finance them. GL has also said in other interviews that he prefers to occupy himself with the more technical parts of filmmaking rather than writing, developing characters, plots, and such.

So it seems to me that with the SW films GL has found a way to do much of what he wanted: a way to produce films that are guaranteed to make money and also provide him with the "toys" that he loves to play with. With the SW label on it, there is no question that a film will do well at the box office regardless of content.

Unfortunately for us what this means is that GL now has no incentive to make a film that is good by *any* standard (not even his own). If it's certain to be paid for, then why bother to make it "good" if that would interfere with his desire to "play with the toys"? To him these SW prequels are throwaways in that regard, and in the interviews I referred to above, GL even mentions that he wants the ability to say, "oh, that was a bad one" without any accountability (financial or critical).

In the first two films GL was very worried about the films being a financial success, so he had to produce something that would be considered a "good film" by most critical standards. For the second film he even put away his ego enough to hire a decent writer and director. However it is interesting to note that since financial accountability was removed, every SW film has been generally inferior to its predecessors in some way (some more than others). Also note the general increase in pandering to toy and videogame marketing in the films -- a move solely designed to increase royalties, as it has no other benefit in terms of storyline or even "playing with the toys".

GL has often said how much he hates writing, so why does he still do it? Personally I think it's ego: he sees the saga as his own creation and no one else's ideas are good enough for it. Or perhaps he is actually afraid that if he incorporates the ideas/inputs of others into the storyline, they will turn out to be better and make him look bad. Or maybe he just doesn't want to share the glory of creation with anyone else.

I don't have an objection to a "cliffhanger" when it is used to tell a better story, but that's not what GL has done. He knows he has a hooked audience, and he is exploiting this so that he can finance his desire to play with toys and feed his "grand storyteller" ego. But he gave his best effort in 1977-1980, and has yet to give the fans a story with any fresh ideas.

And no, I don't think GL is trying to produce the best films possible. If he were, we would have handed the writing, directing, and producing off to other, competent filmmakers (remaining perhaps as executive producer). He's out to indulge himself and feed his ego -- he knows all he has to do is slap the SW label on it and it and the audience will buy it. If it were really about making the best film possible, then he wouldn't be trying to do it with discarded ideas from earlier films, nor under conditions where the conclusion has already been reached and truly creative hands would be effectively tied.

To anyone who thinks that this is an unfair assessment, sorry but my response would be to take off the rose-colored glasses and look at it objectively: the trend is inarguably downhill. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it gotta be a duck (tho with GL it's probably Howard the Duck).

Note that I'm not including AOTC in this trend as I haven't seen it. But based upon some of the reviews that I have seen and the general tone of this thread, I think it is fair to conclude that something ain't completely right. If you could take the SW label of ROTJ or TPM and it turned out that these would still rate say 3-of-4 or 3-of-5 stars (or better), then there would be far less division among fans.

[darthfool]

Wook
OK lets say your right. Suppose George doesn't care about the films, he does have an ego that's Jim Cameron times ten, that he just sticks the star wars label on any two hour piece of crap and then has no concern other than how much money it makes. . .

I STILL LOVE IT!

TPM is flawed. Definetly. ROTJ isn't as good as the first two. Correct. BUT a lot of people love them. Many people actually list Jedi as their favourite of the films and a smaller group of people (much smaller) list Menace as their favourite.

Now personally I'd only rate TPM as average but I *still think it sets up the series well.
Jedi? Well there are a few minor problems with it but otherwise fine. No complaints.

As for Clones well go see it yourself. You might like it. It's IMHO better than Jedi and it's brought back fans who felt let down by TPM. I mean everyone was grinning like they were 8 again.
Well obviously a few people didn't like it, although I didn't come across any until I went on the internet. But like I've said before some people don't like Empire. I mean ???
If you don't like it then that's fine (if a little strange) it's just your opinion. Just realise that we like it because we like it. Not because we're all retarded or something.

My Opinion
-----------
I personally feel that Lucas is making the films because he wants to. and a lot of care has gone in to the making of them.
He's not just interested in the films making money - the merchandise does a much better job of that (which by his own admission they have exploited).
He's built up his empire so he can make the films he wants to. Surely that is what is desired by most filmmakers the freedom to be able to make films for yourself first.
As for him ignoring other peoples input, well for one he trusts Nick Gillard with the fight scenes.

[bodhisattva yoda]

did i just use 'crapload' and 'buttload' in the same paragraph? gee, i've sure got a crapload of words in my vocabulary. :hmmm:

[Foozbond]

LOL crapload and buttload style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif

[Tovor]

Now you're talking. Fight Club is without doubt one of my top ten favorite films. *The first time I saw it on video I immediately watched it a second time right after and then experienced it in a whole new way. *The first time, you get pulled along thinking you know what the story is about, then get to the wham bang surprise plot twist and your perception of what you thought it was about changes completely. *Then the second time watching it, knowing the real story behind it, you then notice all the clues and hints that you hadn't taken into account the first time, and the story changes for you into something far deeper than what you thought you had perceived the first time.


Anyway, Tovor manages to put his finger on exactly one of my problems with the big back-story to ATTACK. *He compares the Republic to the British Empire.
Not really. *I used the British Empire and the Revolutionary War as an example, not a comparison.



How can I make sense of the fact that in the original trilogy the Republic sounds like a wonderful place to live and the very model of democratic peace and justice but when we actually see it, Lucas has kinda changed his mind (to suit the purposes of the story he now wants to tell) and shows us a Republic behaving exactly like the British Empire or Roman Empire would have done.

DB, I have news for you, the story never changed from its original intention. *Have you read the original Star Wars novelization from 1977? *In the intro the Republic is described as having been great and grand for a very long time, but toward the end it had slipped into corruption and greed and the Senate became ineffective to the needs of the people.
* From the novel: “The old Republic was the Republic of legend. *Greater than distance or time, there was no need to know where it was or from whence it came, only to know that it was the Republic. *Once, under the wise rule of the Senate and the protection of the Jedi Knights, the Republic throve and grew. *But as often happens when power reaches the unattainable, there appear those who have greed to match. *So it was that like the greatest of trees, able to withstand any external attack, the Republic rotted from within though the danger was not yet visible from the outside. *
*“Aided and abetted by ruthless power hungry individuals within the government, and the massive organs of commerce, the ambitious senator Palpatine caused himself to be elected president of the Republic. *He promised to reunite the disenfranchised of the embittered peoples and restore the Republic’s forgotten glory… (I’m sorry, I can’t find my book and I’m writing this from memory.) …(and then it said something about once he was secure in office he turned his back on the people and the promises he made them, and became more and more isolated as ruthless warlords used his name and the power he had given them to increase their own wealth and status, “…and the people’s cries for justice did not reach his ears.”

So you see, from the very beginning, going back to the 1977 novel and 1973-75 when GL was working on the drafts, the idea had always been that the once great Republic was in sorry shape near the end and was slipping so badly that Palpatine used the corruption and greed in the senate to further his plans. *Ever since 1977 when I read that line “Aided and abetted by ruthless power hungry individuals within the government, and the massive organs of commerce, the ambitious senator Palpatine caused himself to be elected president of the Republic”, I have always wondered what the massive organs of commerce had to do with the corruption in the senate and his rise to power. *But TPM showed us the Trade Federation and the corruption in the senate, and AOTC showed us not only the Trade Federation but also the Banking Clan, the Commerce Guild, the Techno Union, the “massive organs of commerce” that formed the Corporate Alliance which Palpatine/Sideous manipulated through his subordinate Dooku/Tyrannus to enable him to gain further power and control.

To quote you again:

Lucas has kinda changed his mind (to suit the purposes of the story he now wants to tell) and shows us a Republic behaving exactly like the British Empire or Roman Empire would have done.
He did not change his mind. *This was his intent all along, and what was in the 1977 novel intro and part of the story from the very beginning. *Now, I will agree that one of my disappointments in TPM was that I had wanted to see the Republic still in its greatness and then sink to its darkness as I knew it had done, but with only 3 movies to film, GL started the trilogy with the shape of the Republic already close to rock bottom, and only Senator Palpatine’s line “The Republic is not what it once was” to tell us that it had previously been a greater galaxy to live in. *But this was the story all along, not something new that Lucas came up with out of nowhere.



One of my big problems with the new prequels is the big plot running through them. *Instead of good verses evil (Luke Vs Darth, X-Wings Vs Death Star), the first prequel turned out to be about tax levels and import duties and trade (how exciting)
Yes, like I said, GL showed how Sideous/Palpatine used the massive organs of commerce to further his rise to power. *TPM did not have such an outright obvious evil threat to be defeated, like a Death Star or a Dark Knight leading evil soldiers into battle against the good guys, but look at the title, The Phantom Menace. *What is a phantom? Webster’s defines it as “Something perceived to be a threat but not actually there.” And, “Something not known to be a threat which turns out to be real.” *The Trade Federation was a threat to Naboo, but not to the safety of the Republic as a whole, right? So they were perceived to be a minor threat but not the real threat. *Then there was Darth Sideous, someone not known to be a threat, who turned out to be the main threat after all. *Palpatine was the phantom menace because his threat was invisible and he used it to his advantage. *The import duties and tax laws may not have been exciting, but what I found exciting about it all was how the master villain used such a mundane issue to gain his stranglehold on the galaxy.

I know what you would have vastly preferred, and as I indicated regarding this in my post from last week or so, I expected this as well: The Republic fleet and army defending the galaxy against an invading empire with giant warships to fight in a manner we would expect from a Star Wars story. *Who would have expected the most dangerous invader of all to be the quiet senator who manipulated trading and shipping corporations (the massive organs of commerce) to enable him to conquer the democratic Republic from within? *To tell the truth, clashing fleets and raging battles are visually exciting, but the way in which the devious schemer and plotter quietly gained control from within the unbreachable Republic is far more intellectually stimulating and exciting. *But don’t get me wrong, I would still have loved to see the Republic Assault Ships from AOTC clash with the TF Battleships, and I hope to see a major fleet vs. fleet battle in Episode III with a lot of dog fighting from star fighters, but I am enjoying Palpatine’s inconspicuous journey to the throne and title of emperor. *Don Corleone, in the novel Godfather, stated that you can gain more power with a briefcase and the right words than with a machine gun, but Don Vito has got something to learn from Darth Sideous!

Here is something else to consider, Badly: The brilliant film Fight Club. *You go through thinking you know what its all about, then the end plot twist throws you for a loop and you suddenly see the whole movie in a different light. *The plot twist did not so much change the movie around, but it brought the true story into the light and changed how you saw the story as a whole. *That is what Lucas is trying to do with the prequels. *Not change the Old Trilogy around, but bring the deeper story into the light and change how you see it. *After seeing the end of Fight Club, you watch it again and notice things in the movie you hadn’t realized before. *You’ve already seen the end of the SW saga, but now that you’re seeing the beginning for the first time, when you get to the end again you will notice things you hadn’t realized before.

[wook]

> Wook
> OK lets say your right. Suppose George doesn't
> care about the films, he does have an ego that's
> Jim Cameron times ten, that he just sticks the
> star wars label on any two hour piece of crap
> and then has no concern other than how much
> money it makes. . .
>
> I STILL LOVE IT!
>
> TPM is flawed. Definetly. ROTJ isn't as good as
> the first two. Correct. BUT a lot of people love
> them.

Please understand that this is not a criticism of loving the SW films, but this is exactly my point. This is what gives GL his "guaranteed audience" and frees him from financial accountability.

> As for Clones well go see it yourself. You might
> like it.

Every person who ever enjoyed a SW film will go see the next one for exactly this reason. I'm not faulting anyone for *wanting* to like these films -- SW and ESB were the kind of films that made you want to see more, flaws and all.


> he makes them for the child within him- not for the
> fans, not for the critics

True enough. But he uses the fans to pay for them, and does not deliver on what he promises. Thus he destroys the integrity of what he has done in the past. To paraphrase one critic: he puts just enough into each film that he leaves the audience thinking that the next one is definitely going to be better.

And BTW what exactly does "the child within him" mean -- perhaps something to do with a desire to "play with the toys"? Small children are noteworthy for how they will ignore things that need to be done so that they can go off and play.


> if only people would appreciate the films for what
> they are and not what they arbitrarily believe they
> should be, everyone would be a buttload happier.

I think that applies both ways.

[THX1138]

OK, so some of the characters' names may seem weird, but has anyone considered how odd names like John, Mary, Smith or Nicholson may seem to the fictional characters on Naboo, Coruscant or Tatooine?
I don't have the time to waste answering all Darth Badly's questions and frankly many of them don't deserve replies. Can we not all just remember that these are simply movies created to entertain us (and increase Lucas's wealth!). If we don't like them (and I do), we find something better to do with our lives.
Live long and prosper (oops - I can hear a whole new can of worms being opened!) style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/devil.gif

[darthfool]

Wook

Please understand that this is not a criticism of loving the SW films
Ok Wook, sorry.
It's just that when there's a SEVEN (and counting) page thread bashing something you love, that claims it is a complete inconsistant mess and in everyway conceivible just plain s h i t e, it's hard not to take it personally.

True we shouldn't, but lines such as "he knows all he has to do is slap the SW label on it and the audience will buy it." have the appearance of suggesting we are in someway wrong to like these films.


And BTW what exactly does "the child within him" mean -- perhaps something to do with a desire to "play with the toys"? *Small children are noteworthy for how they will ignore things that need to be done so that they can go off and play.
As bodhisattva yoda said, it's Lucas' personal nostalgia *as shown in scenes such as the diner. Also pod racing (and really any fast moving vehicles in the SW universe) are based on his racing cars during his youth.

Anyway enough of that. Now that it's established that you aren't attacking us fans for liking it, I'll let you like whatever parts of the story you like and I'll see which screening I can make it to next.

[Darth Mount]

Dear God Darth Badly, i fell asleep after two lines of your freaking pointless questions! style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sleeping.gif You are trying to find something wrong with the movies, you're very passive agressive. chill your tube. tovor and teek are dead right! You can watch the movies and answer any of those questions. As for Lucas not having everything figured out, he wrote all of the movies in his same little notepad before he made any movies!!!! You were obviously about six when you saw the originals which i didn't like as much as the preq's, and now you only act like it. I am one of George's close friends an i assure you he hates you and whatmewookie and anyone else who cares to take your opinions so biasely to the core.
You are a fool to challenge me-Boba fett

[Smeghead]

Darth Mount, that is awful close to a flame. Don't take it personal and don't make it personal.

[RollaFett]

Hey Wook, thanks for getting back to me.

First off, I can see your point about GL's ego. It has most probably gotten the better of him. That said, after he reached financial sucess with ANH, then ESB, he went out and remained executive producer for ROTJ. That, at a time when he could've very easily taken over the reigns again. So I believe that he can make wise decisions at times. Now ROTJ didn't turn out great, but I don't chalk that up to lack of effort. He simply missed with that film. Now you reference earlier interviews where he states how the films are there for him to come up with new technology and play with new toys, etc., and a dud could come along as a result. Well, it's his product to do so with. Is it a slap in the face of the fans that he may not take this saga as seriously as the fans do? Hmmm...maybe. Overall, I think that it is his right. One thing to consider: There is only one more movie to go now. In all, there will have been 6. if he really wanted to stick it to us fans, he could keep making them after EP 3, and there would be nary an opposing voice. He is stopping, however. There is something to be said for that in light of your argument.

All of that said, I do believe I agreed with you on several other key points. The main one being his refusal to hand off the directoral and screenwriting duties to more qualified individuals who actually enjoy the work. There again, I agree that his ego has gotten in the way.

Conning the fans, if you will, is not part of the plan. I just don't see it the same way as you, Wook. People have control over what they want to spend thier money on. Is there a lot of Star Wars merchandise out there? Yes. Too much? Who's to say? Not to sound overly patrotic or anything, but this is a country where an individual is able to create a product and make money from it. If anything, GL is simply a capitalist, and he has played that part well. There is a demand out among the public for Star Wars. He has supplied it. Should you begrudge him that? No, of course not, you just don't have to purchase his products. Like I said before, it seems that that is what you are doing. I don't see it as taking advantage of the fans. Before 1977 action figures were but a blip on the toy radar. Star Wars changed all of that. Millions upon millions of kids were very happy about that, so whats the harm? It almost seems as though you are opposed to GL making money off of his creation. Why shouldn't he? He's not asking others to finance his projects, the money he makes he puts right back into his companies, he pays for his movies.

All of that said, I will say that this massive empire that he has wrought has given him an enormous head, which has led to some poor decisions related to the making of his movies, but I just don't see it as intentional.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by GollaFett@June 13 2002 - 04:56
One thing to consider: There is only one more movie to go now. In all, there will have been 6. if he really wanted to stick it to us fans, he could keep making them after EP 3, and there would be nary an opposing voice. He is stopping, however. There is something to be said for that in light of your argument.
GollaFett - Well let's hope that Uncle George sticks to that. Don't forget though that the guy is only human and quite capable of changing his mind. He's changed his mind about the intended plot of the series numerous times during the making of the (so far) five films giving rise to all the stuff which doesn't work or make sense or that needed fudging over - "from a certain point of view".

Most importantly, don't forget that late in the 1980s George said that he wouldn't be making anymore Star Wars films at all. Then he changed his mind about that and decided on the prequels. It'll be interesting to see what will happen if George has a series of post-Episode III film flops.

Maybe in ten years time, if his other films doesn't work, he might decide to return to the computer-generated toy-machine cash-cow which our beloved Star Wars has become.

And hey, since Darth Mount and Uncle George are pals, maybe Mount could ask him next time they have dinner together? I'm sure it won't be long before that happens.

(And before anyone comes back and says that George was "waiting for the technology to catch up": 1/ Sure he was. 2/ He didn't say that at the time cc 1988 3/ He could say the exactly the same thing in ten years when cinema is digital 3-D smellovision or whatever the future has in store for us.)

[NelsonCoressel]

in the 1980s George said that he wouldn't be making anymore Star Wars films at all.

Not exactly. He said "no" to answer a media question like "will there be another SW movie in 3 years?" At the same time he said he would like to someday go back and do the first 3 parts, but it would be awhile. In this instant gratification attention deficit disorder world we live in, everyone hears that as an unequivocal "NEVER!"

[darthfool]

Well I may not be trying to change or defend peoples opinions anymore but I would like to give my view on...

Darth Badly

(And before anyone comes back and says that George was "waiting for the technology to catch up": *1/ Sure he was. 2/ He didn't say that at the time cc 1988 *3/ He could say the exactly the same thing in ten years when cinema is digital 3-D smellovision or whatever the future has in store for us.)

I always thought it was due to needing a bit of a break and the family thing. A fact even anti-Lucas writings seem to acknowledge.
Then the CGI thing happened and he decided to let the effects get to a level he was happy with before getting started.
That isn't me claiming he was waiting for the technology to catch up. Had CGI not taken off I suspect he would have made them not too dissimilar to the originals.
Which (to save you writing it) I think would actually have *helped in some areas. The films would visually match better and we would probably have been spared Jar Jar.

[tunafishman]

***Pause discussion for commercial ****

Okay, all this talk about Fight Club the movie has me very excited. If you love the movie, you should read the book by Chuck Palahniuk. It's FREAKIN' insane, and even better than the movie. The funny parts are funnier, the philosophical discussions are better, and some of the things about the movie that are kinda weird (like the ending) are much better in the book.

I just want you all to read it because I'm a HUGE Chuck fan, and I think if you like the movie, you'll like the book...and then you'll read his other books, which are just as good. Yum Yum. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif

**** End commercial and continue discussion/arguement*****

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by tunafishman@June 13 2002 - 10:37
***Pause discussion for commercial ****

Okay, all this talk about Fight Club the movie has me very excited. *If you love the movie, you should read the book by Chuck Palahniuk. *It's FREAKIN' insane, and even better than the movie. *The funny parts are funnier, the philosophical discussions are better, and some of the things about the movie that are kinda weird (like the ending) are much better in the book.

I just want you all to read it because I'm a HUGE Chuck fan, and I think if you like the movie, you'll like the book...and then you'll read his other books, which are just as good. Yum Yum. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif

**** End commercial and continue discussion/arguement*****
I can only agree 100% with what Tunafishman just said.

The book is (even) better than the film.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by darthfool@June 13 2002 - 10:19
I always thought it was due to needing a bit of a break and the family thing. A fact even anti-Lucas writings seem to acknowledge.
Then the CGI thing happened and he decided to let the effects get to a level he was happy with before getting started.
That isn't me claiming he was waiting for the technology to catch up. Had CGI not taken off I suspect he would have made them not too dissimilar to the originals.
Which (to save you writing it) I think would actually have *helped in some areas. The films would visually match better and we would probably have been spared Jar Jar.
My memory was that in about 1986-9 or so just about everybody in the whole world had given up hope of ever seeing another ST movie again - at least in their lifetime. I agree about the family thing though. The original trilogy had run it course, and Uncle George needed to do other things so no argument there.

I just wanted to point out to GollaFett that it's not out of the question (by any means) that George will return to the ST universe again another ten years after Episode III comes out. Either as a cash cow or because he's thought up more stories he wants to tell. (Or more likely because his new Howard the Duck trilogy is not the hit it deserves to be.)

I agree with you about the use of computers - hurting both the first two prequels though. Curse those perky machines.

[wook]

Just an additional $0.02, I wanted to say that I think the "waiting for the technology to catch up" line is very telling. If GL advocates that as his position, then I submit this constitutes inarguable evidence that he is more interested in the toys than the story. If his true goal were to expand the SW saga and tell interesting stories, then he would use whatever state-of-the-art FX technology was available to him at the time. To delay the story until the FX are available is a pretty clear sign that the FX are the priority, not the story. (Remember, FX are always going to be getting better -- in another 10-15 years we could have 3D holograms or whatever, so why not wait for that?)

I don't think there can any question that GL has compromised himself as an artist, and has become an exploiter rather than an innovator. Since he seems to change his tune to suit his whims, I would take anything that he says today with a (large) grain of salt. It could be quite a different song tomorrow -- whatever it takes to keep the flow of $$ moving in his direction.

[wook]

Also WRT the ego thing: it's hard for me to imagine anyone doing what GL did and *not* end up with a galactic-sized ego. I am not saying anything about how good/bad that is, just that it's probably inevitable to some degree simply because it's human nature. (Likely I would handle it myself worse than GL has.) But it is unfortunate to see the effect of it.

[bodhisattva yoda]

it isn't necessarily the quality of the effects that george is focusing on, but rather the creative freedom they allow him. there's no way he could have pulled off even the shots of the galactic senate by 1986, not to mention kamino, the clone battle, and the myriad of creatures which exist in the prequel.

[wook]

I've said this in the past, but too much creative freedom is not necessarily a good thing. To concentrate on the look of the Galactic Senate, or battles, or creatures at the expense of the stories/characters is a grave mistake.

[lijijil]

In my humble opinion AOTC was a diferent genre to TPM.

TPM was more about Palpies efforts to get control of the Senate for future stepping stones.

AOTC was about setting up Anakin for the trip to the Dark Side as well as alerting the Jedi Council to the emerging threat.

Sadly AOTC was less entertaining than TPM

Just a thought

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by wook@June 13 2002 - 14:23
I've said this in the past, but too much creative freedom is not necessarily a good thing. *To concentrate on the look of the Galactic Senate, or battles, or creatures at the expense of the stories/characters is a grave mistake.
I agree Wook. I love big set piece battles, but one of the major dissappointments (for me) of the first two prequels has been the amount of time spent fighting flipping robots/droids. There was the fight at the start of TPM, the Act III big battle, and then another droid fight for the conclusion of Attack. Without the "advantage" of computer graphics Uncle George would have had to use men in suits - either as troopers or creatures - and I'd have prefered either.

[WhatMeWookie]

Originally posted by SKYWALKME@June 06 2002 - 00:56
The prequels are already adding so much more depth to the OT (to me anyway). I can watch scenes from say ROTJ now, particulary the lightsaber father/son duel, and visual images of Padme and Anakin come to mind. I know the background and ROTJ is deeper in meaning for me now. More questions have been answered, though each film had many possibilities and directions the story could have sprung off to.
Been out of action for a while as I've been on the road, but glad to be back amongst friends...

The quote from Skywalkme possibly sums up my conceptual problems with AOTC and the intent of the prequels. Has any one out there ever been in the classic waste of time debate about Films versus books. You know the kind of thing, when someone pretentious tells you that books are better than films (and I love both anyway) because you can use your imagination etc etc. That kind of argument really annoys me because, okay cinema is visually oriented, but good story-telling always inspires the imagination in any medium and certainly the initial SW trilogy achieved this.

I remember watching each OT film and yearning to know more about the characters - both good and bad - that I had come to love... but I also loved the mystery being just that a mystery. Somethings are just best left unsaid and shouldn't be explained because you lose part of the magic and it encroaches on the freedom of your imagination.

Aside from the poor storytelling of PM and AOTC, what really gets me is that I can't watch the OT without now having it poisoned by the poorly executed backstory in the prequels. And those gaps which inspired have been filled with third rate pulp. I loved imaging how Darth and Obi-Wan battled all those years ago. But I don't want to see it (and may well not do so with Ep III).

I loved the mystery of Boba Fett never being answered. I think one of the strengths of the trilogy was building up the mystery behind this character getting everyone to wait 3 years between ESB and ROTJ and the literally bumping him off in a comedy moment when a blind Han accidentally sends him flying into the Sarlac Pit (don't think I spelt that right!). "Boba Fett. Where Boba Fett!" That's genius. It comes from having the richness of storytelling to play against audience expectations, surprise them and being able to dispense with a major character, because you have so much other great stuff to tell. It' like the classic scene in Raiders when you think Indy is going to fight the swordsman in the sqaure, but he takes him down with a single casual shot. It's the pinacle of film-making. The whole Jango Fett storyline is nonsense and both Maul and Jango are similarly under-developed villains who fail to capture our imaginations, because they actually have littel character, only functional dialogue, very little intelligence beyond handling weapons and get killed really easily.

I wish the back-story and the gaps of the OT were just left open and PT and AOTC could be erased from my memory so that I could enjoy the OT again. But it has been seriously eroded. And if a blue tint Pamde turns up in Jedi the ultra edition... I'll seriously cry.

And another thing...the arguments about bad dialogue being acceptable in space saga's. People - dialogue is key to drama - you can't defend the storytelling and say who cares about the dialogue anyway - which is key to installing drama, passion, emotion feeling, humour and wit. I remember defending the OT, because some people thought it was just a lightshow when there was so much more going on... but PT and AOTC are CGI lightshows.

And Finally... Fight Club... Genius Film. If you haven't seen it watch it once, watch it twice listen to the DVD commentary and you'll see truly great film-making that credits it's audience with intelligence. Also Chuck Palahnuik's book is wonderful and if you like that try Survivor too.

And remember.. tis' better to be a beautiful and unique snowflake than a space monkey.

[bodhisattva yoda]

the only thing i'm looking forward to more than episode three is palahniuk's new novel.

[lotos]

… couldn’t resist to come back :p

WhatMeWookie, what you say about Darth Maul and Jango Fett being under-developed villains with very little intelligence and getting killed really easily – well, you’re right. But isn’t that always the case? Stallone, Schwarzenegger, James Bond – villains in these movies DIE; no matter how developed and intelligent they are. So, sorry, but I don’t think that’s really an argument. In my opinion, even the Emperor dies way too easily at the end of ROTJ. And think about the way Bobba Fett dies, he hits against a wall and falls into the pit. If you ask me, even Jango’s death makes more sense.

"I wish the back-story and the gaps of the OT were just left open and PT and AOTC could be erased from my memory so that I could enjoy the OT again."

Why did you start watching the prequels in the first place? What did you expect? Honestly, I don’t think the problem is that you don’t like TPM and AOTC, I’m sitting here reading, and the more I read, the less I understand what is it that you hate about it.

"People - dialogue is key to drama - you can't defend the storytelling and say who cares about the dialogue anyway - which is key to installing drama, passion, emotion feeling, humour and wit."

Do you really consider SW a drama? I thought it was a science-fiction film. And like noted on this post before, OT had crappy dialogues too.

"I remember defending the OT, because some people thought it was just a lightshow when there was so much more going on... but PT and AOTC are CGI lightshows."

Was there really going on so much more? Are you sure it wasn’t just the way you perceived the whole show back then? When you talk about the OT you’re getting emotional. I think you (in fact we all) have this concept about the OT, where you look at it as something sacred. But is it?

OK, so a bit about myself again… in my county (because of the same Empire) no one got to see Star Wars at the time they were released, because it was considered by the top people a CAPITALIST CRAP. Just by chance I got to see it when I was 11 years old, and that was in 1991. I loved it. However, all the people who watch the movie today can’t understand what the fuss is about. People HATE IT. And they hate the OT more than the prequels. They have no idea what the story’s about, but they still hate it. And sometimes I feel like a total idiot trying to convince my friends that Star Wars is really not such a bad movie, that there is a story, and that there’s something there. They don’t get it. The point is, I have no idea how old you are, but considering that most of you saw the films back in 77 and the 80s, I’m guessing you’re somewhere around 30-40. So I guess, unless you were a small kid or saw it back in the 80s when it was something totally new to the movie business, you’re likely to dislike the whole SW thing. I mean all the people who watch the OT today say exactly the same things you’re saying about TPM and ATOC.

And one more thing: Why do you (people in general) hate Jar Jar Binks so much? He seems a nice chap to me. A little bit difficult to understand, but other than that, I think he’s all right.

[WhatMeWookie]

Originally posted by lotos@June 14 2002 - 15:14
"WhatMeWookie, what you say about Darth Maul and Jango Fett being under-developed villains with very little intelligence and getting killed really easily – well, you’re right. But isn’t that always the case? Stallone, Schwarzenegger, James Bond – villains in these movies DIE; no matter how developed and intelligent they are." So, sorry, but I don’t think that’s

Do you really consider SW a drama?

Was there really going on so much more? Are you sure it wasn’t just the way you perceived the whole show back then? When you talk about the OT you’re getting emotional

"I’m guessing you’re somewhere around 30-40. So I guess, unless you were a small kid or saw it back in the 80s when it was something totally new to the movie business, you’re likely to dislike the whole SW thing. I mean all the people who watch the OT today say exactly the same things you’re saying about TPM and ATOC.

And one more thing: Why do you (people in general) hate Jar Jar Binks so much? He seems a nice chap to me. A little bit difficult to understand, but other than that, I think he’s all right.
Thanks Lotos

Here's my replies;

"WhatMeWookie, what you say about Darth Maul and Jango Fett being under-developed villains with very little intelligence and getting killed really easily – well, you’re right. But isn’t that always the case? Stallone, Schwarzenegger, James Bond – villains in these movies DIE; no matter how developed and intelligent they are."

James Bond is a perfect example of what I'm getting at and the series faces a similar problem. The villains James Bond fans most favour are "Goldfinger", "Blofeld" (who hasn't appeared in the series since 1971 save for a cameo in For Your Eyes Only"...and that's for copyrights reasons) and okay maybe for novelty value "Jaws". The early films were strong inventive cinema with villains that had charm, guile and intelligence, but these days since the later Moore's and certainly with the shopwindow dummy acting of Pierce Brosnan - they're really not up to much beyond cheap thrills. The early villains were unique and memorable to the extent that average cinemagoers (and not your anal retentive freaks such as myself) could remember them. These days ... I don't think your average cinemagoer could name one villain's name from the James Bond series for over twenty years...Try me out on this. And why, because they are functional. They do bad things and Jimmy B kills them. Big deal. You should try to expect more from the films you see.

But we're all captive audiences for the Bond's as much as SW... so the producers just don't have to try and are to scared to change things or freshen the franchises up for fear they'll disrupt their cash flow charts.

"Do you really consider SW a drama?"

Lotos, please... I wasn't defining genre. I am talking about the very nature of screen-writing here and the foundations of all good film-making. Drama is in every play, movie or book....even in slapstick comedies. It's not just about divorces or hospitals. It is the very life of every script and refers to the nature of relationships, how they play out and how we (should) get drawn in as a reader/audience.

The script is a blueprint for the film. You wouldn't put up a building if the blueprint designs didn't work out or if the architect hadn't finished a few floors. Yet increasingly films, especially blockbusters are getting made with unpolished screenplays because of time pressures on finance, release dates and actor's schedules. To the extent that films are getting re-written while they are being shot because the director's and actors realise they don't make sense or don't have impact. The result... a mess and increasing reliance on lightshows.

SW is not a "drama", but the OT were highly dramatic and they play (at least in their original versions before they were spoiled by CGI nonsense with the special editions) now as well as they did then. That's because of the power of the storytelling... not just 25 year old special effects. Thye've only been weakened by the undermining of the story-telling by these thin prequels.

"When you talk about the OT you’re getting emotional"

Yep - I agree and that, as I have stated in the past, is because I care. I loved the OT for 20 years before it was poisoned by the prequel cash machine and it upsets me that standards for good film-making are dropping because we expect a theme park ride now more than an emotional, moving, engaging, humourous experience at the movies. Darth Badly launched this debate with the cry for people to wake up... and I hear exactly what he means. The more accepting we are of this nonsense that we're getting and the "pups" we're being sold - the less chance we have of signalling to the system that we want better movies with better writing.

"I’m guessing you’re somewhere around 30-40. So I guess, unless you were a small kid or saw it back in the 80s when it was something totally new to the movie business, you’re likely to dislike the whole SW thing. I mean all the people who watch the OT today say exactly the same things you’re saying about TPM and ATOC."

I'm guessing you're from C.I.S. or Eastern/Central Europe where I have travelled widely since glasnost and it's an amazing part of the world. I think part of the problem is that SW and the OT have established themselves as an in-built part of late 20th Century culture in the West...and if that experience was not there at the original time of the films release due to censorship...then SW forms less of part of the social psyche.

Certain parts of Western Europe are not so hot for Science Fiction such as Holland where such movies seriously underperform comparatively and I suspect that Science Fiction - because it has always been rooted in parable, satire and allegory is less part of the Central European or Russian mind-set - at least for a chunk of the older generation, because it encourages thinking and censorship attempts to suppress that.

Bad film-making also attempts to suppress thinking.. which is why I am so disappointed in George and so determined to support Darth Badly and others to encourage debate and to challenge what we have been given by him.

Age has nothing to do with this as I still love nostalgic or modern fare for children or the family if it is based on strong story-telling. Please don't be ageist.

"And one more thing: Why do you (people in general) hate Jar Jar Binks so much? He seems a nice chap to me. A little bit difficult to understand, but other than that, I think he’s all right."

You do yourself no favours with this last point. People in general don't like him because he is getting the blame for everything else people don't like about the new films... but they have been so brow-beaten by terrible cinema of late that they've lost the capacity to debate or argue intelligently about film. So they point to the rabbit guy because he is (deservedly) an easy target.

Anyone like "The Prisoner" out there. Sure it's old, but gee there's science-fiction that gets you thinking and the first serious attempt to bring film-making skills to the small-screen. If you like thinking (and if you're a Fight Club fan you do) then give this series a whirl).

I seriously think any true SW fan should just not show up for Ep 3. I think that is a very sad decision I'm going to have to make out of principle. I can't believe, I 've just written that. I'm in shock. Still I am weak and will probably crack and turn up at the theater for another final slap round the chops.

Anyone else feel the same way.!!!

[RollaFett]

Hmmmm...very well thought out points. Cudos to you all.

First off, sure GL could change his mind and make 3 more down the line. I'm just convinced that he won't.

Secondly, one thing I believe most of you are missing is this: The OT and the PT are NOT THE SAME! Yes, they do tie into each other, but they are not the same. Also, they are coming out many years apart. Lotos makes an excellent point about the age of most of the fans who don't like the PT. When you first saw the OT you were all a lot younger and captivated more easily. Not everybody, of course, but on average I would say that was the case. Now most of those fans are older, more cynical, have been treated to more and more films like "Fight Club", and have very little tolerence for annoyances like Jar Jar and seemingly overthought plots concerning Star Wars. (For the record, I don't like Jar Jar either)
I"m starting to ramble a bit now, so let me just say this: Nothing will ever replace the OT, I wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment. However, do we really need to find someone to blame for this? GL is putting a lot of effort into this PT. His ego probably does get in the way, but I don't think he is at his ranch scheming about how to get more dollars out of our pockets.
In closing, let me throw this out there: If you were between the ages of 25-50, do you think you would enjoy seeing the OT if you were seeing it for the first time? Conversely, if you were between the age of 8-17, do you think that you would enjoy seeing the PT if you were seeing it for the first time?

One more thing, I'm 27 enjoy both, but do see faults in all of them. Except ESB, that movie rules!

[Clone02]

style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sleeping.gif <Clone2 awakes>*:doze:
style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/notify.gif *Huh?!... still goin' at it, eh?

Tovor,
you said this VERY well, "That is what Lucas is trying to do with the prequels. *Not change the Old Trilogy around, but bring the deeper story into the light and change how you see it. *After seeing the end of Fight Club, you watch it again and notice things in the movie you hadn’t realized before. *You’ve already seen the end of the SW saga, but now that you’re seeing the beginning for the first time, when you get to the end again you will notice things you hadn’t realized before."

I'll add that epIII *style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/alien.gif will be a FORCE to be reckoned with!!!

PS- My favorite quote from the movie was "It's always a pleasure to meet a Jedi..." from Jango Fett. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif

[padme_rocks]

Darth Badly,
I know that every person has different opinions on everything. The first time I read your review of the movie I was so ticked that I couldn't right because I did want teek to get mad at me ;) . I think that if you have presented you self a little more professionally more people would have responded calmly. I did not enjoy you little nickname for people it seemed more like you were trying to offend than review. I think maybe you may have set you self up of a disappointment before you entered the theatre. I hope you give this film one more try. Look for the positive this time instead of the negative.

[lotos]

WhatMeWookie,

OK, I agree about the old villains, they did have charm, guile and intelligence. But still… they died. Villains always die. That’s just the way it is.

And I did understand what you meant about drama, I guess it’s just that I have a different perception on it. I look at the prequels more as money-makers than drama (even though I’d prefer it not to be that way).

With all respect, but you two sound like grumpy old men who dislike CGI, just because it’s not something you grew up with.

“Darth Badly launched this debate with the cry for people
to wake up... and I hear exactly what he means. The
more accepting we are of this nonsense - the less
chance we have of signalling to the system that we
want better movies with better writing.”

EXACTLY!!!

And if you think about it then who’s to blame for the film quality we get? Us – the viewers. They give us whatever we demand.

And to be honest, I’m more concerned about movies like American Pie, Austin Powers, Waterboy, etc. (I haven’t seen any of them, but please don’t persuade me that those are good films.) than CGI films. OK, so they (CGI films) may not have a plot, but I can AT LEAST go watch them and say: “Wow, I really admire the way they did it.”

CGI is here to stay for a looong time (if not forever). And there’s nothing we can do about it. It’s inevitable. Would I like the films to be more dramatic and make more sense? Yes. But there’s a majority of people who don’t care about it. And I don’t think this discussion board is going to change peoples’ perception on this subject. Instead of saying: “Hey, people, the whole movie business sucks”, you come out and say: “Star Wars sucks.” So in the end I defend Star Wars just because it’s Star Wars. Yes, I know, that’s stupid.

To stop the guessing - I’m from Latvia. And if you ever want to go on vacation and you’ve seen London, Paris and Rome, I highly recommend you come and visit me. It’s really nice here. Sandy beaches, old castles, beautiful towns and plenty of people who hate Star Wars. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif

"Certain parts of Western Europe are not so hot for
Science Fiction, because it has always been rooted in
parable, satire and allegory is less part of the Central
European or Russian mind-set - at least for a chunk of
the older generation, because it encourages thinking and
censorship attempts to suppress that. Bad film-making
also attempts to suppress thinking…"

This almost sounds insulting (but I’m sure you’re not saying that about me style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif), but one of the reasons why we broke away from USSR was probably, because we did some thinking and because we just couldn’t bare to live any longer under that absurd regime.

Age has nothing to do with this as I still love nostalgic or
modern fare for children or the family if it is based on
strong story-telling. Please don't be ageist.

I’m not being ageist. But I think you’re more likely to like SW if you’re a little boy, just as you’re more likely to like Cinderella if you’re a little girl. And I’m not being sexist here.


- Why do you hate Jar Jar Binks so much?
- You do yourself no favours with this last point.

Ehw, and I wanted to make such a good impression on you style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/satisfied.gif

I loved Fight Club though.

[padme_rocks]

What I want to know is if Darth Badly is even still reading this. I mean if he/her started something that he knew would start a topic like this...why doesn't he/her respon anymore. If I belived in something so strongly as he/she did when this started I could't just let it go.



By the I LOVED Fight Club

[RollaFett]

Lotos- Completely unrelated to the topic. My wife is from Latvia!!!! Cool, maybe that will help turn her into a SW fan.
Do you live there now, or have you moved? Just curious.

[lotos]

Unrelated to the subject.

-----------------------------------------------------
GollaFett,

Now that's a surprise! Most of the time I have to hear stuff like - What's Latvia? However it's good to meet people (from time to time) to whom I don't have to explain it's a country.

No, I haven't mooved. I live here. Have lived here all my life.
-----------------------------------------------------

[WhatMeWookie]

Lotos

Great post - here's my take...

"Villains always die. That’s just the way it is."

Agreed - but you have to respect them (and the character design) along the way otherwise you just don't care.. and this applies just as much to the Grand Moff Tarkin's of the SW universe as it does for the front-line players such as Darth V and the Emperor of the OT. That's just the problem with the new prequels, I just didn't respect Maul or Jango before they were shuffled off as casualties. What did these guys actually do that really meant anything apart from strut around in their costumes and fight badly. Neither has a decent line of dialogue between them.

"And I did understand what you meant about drama, I guess it’s just that I have a different perception on it. I look at the prequels more as money-makers than drama (even though I’d prefer it not to be that way)."

Agreed - that 's just exactly it. You've hit the proverbial nail on the head and I agree entirely. That's not what good cinema is about. The cash made by the OT and merchandising was a happy incidental for Mr. Lucas and those friendly folk at Fox. Riches beyond that we can possibly imagine should be a by-product not the driving force (a lesson it took Han Solo 3 movies to learn, but seems to have been forgotten by Lucas).

"With all respect, but you two sound like grumpy old men who dislike CGI, just because it’s not something you grew up with"

I think my pounding of CGI is more to do with being used as the principal means of dazzle rather than solid storytelling. Storytelling should surpass the technology used to realise the story. In Terminator 2, as an example, Cameron crafted a strong story that used pioneering effects and enhanced the smart script and direction. CGI was not relied on alone to deliver "wows" to the audience.

I ain't against progress, just more in sympathy with humanity outweighing the importance of the technology it pioneers - very much a symbolic message in ROTJ with the simple Ewoks (like 'em or hate 'em) against the Empire.

"OK, so they (CGI films) may not have a plot, but I can AT LEAST go watch them and say: “Wow, I really admire the way they did it.”

I'm in admiration of the effects techniques as much as anybody as along as they complement strong story-telling, direction and the other disciplines that combine to make unique movie-going. I want a good movie, not the contents of a good "art of" book.

"... And if you think about it then who’s to blame for the film quality we get? Us – the viewers. They give us whatever we demand."

Agreed - because are minds are being turned to mush. It's time to think and turn on the system. Not just roll over and take it. Darth Badly gave us the message and we should all listen.

"So in the end I defend Star Wars just because it’s Star Wars. Yes, I know, that’s stupid."

And that I understand. It's not stupid to care compassionately about something. But be careful that you're not looking at it through rose-tinted spectacles. That's what most of us do in love anyway. But there comes a time when you have to come to terms with the reality of a relationship... especially when it doesn't deliver the goods.

"To stop the guessing - I’m from Latvia. And if you ever want to go on vacation and you’ve seen London, Paris and Rome, I highly recommend you come and visit me. It’s really nice here. Sandy beaches, old castles, beautiful towns and plenty of people who hate Star Wars. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif"

Thanks - may take you up on that. By the way - you guys did a great job as hosts to the Eurovision song contest. I watched the whole thing...

" * * "Certain parts of Western Europe are not so hot for
* * *Science Fiction, because it has always been rooted in
* * *parable, satire and allegory is less part of the Central
* * *European or Russian mind-set - at least for a chunk of
* * *the older generation, because it encourages thinking and
* * *censorship attempts to suppress that. Bad film-making
* * *also attempts to suppress thinking…"
This almost sounds insulting (but I’m sure you’re not saying that about me style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif), but one of the reasons why we broke away from USSR was probably, because we did some thinking and because we just couldn’t bare to live any longer under that absurd regime. "

No - absolutely not insulting at all. Deeply respectful. This comes from watching International box office trends and research into how cinema works comparatively internationally and cultural trends. It's based on statistics not any prejudice on my part and sorry of that came across that way. Will be delighted if more liberal governments encourages the rise of popularity of Science-Fiction.

"I’m not being ageist. But I think you’re more likely to like SW if you’re a little boy, just as you’re more likely to like Cinderella if you’re a little girl. And I’m not being sexist here."

Yeah, but Lotos - I can watch Toy Story, The Batman Animated Series and even Spongebob Squarepants and appreciate quality writing, freshness and originality as if I was still 12... Good story-telling transcends age and can keep generations under it's spell. That's why the prequels just disappoint - they're job is to appeal to the 12 year old in all of us and they don't come up to scratch.

* *
"- Why do you hate Jar Jar Binks so much?
- You do yourself no favours with this last point.

Ehw, and I wanted to make such a good impression on you style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/satisfied.gif"

Hey Nobody's perfect and was only kidding.

"I loved Fight Club though."

Well then there's a lot of hope for you yet... my old pal.

Respect.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by padme_rocks@June 16 2002 - 16:13
What I want to know is if Darth Badly is even still reading this. I mean if he/her started something that he knew would start a topic like this...why doesn't he/her respon anymore. If I belived in something so strongly as he/she did when this started I could't just let it go.



By the I LOVED Fight Club
Rest assured that I'm following every post with great interest, padme_rocks. (And it's not been that long since I've posted, you cheeky little monkey.)

I do feel very strongly that Attack of the Clowns is a piece of computer generated nonsense, and I've been delighted to see the number of other people who have started to take a little bit of a more critical look at Uncle George's latest effort since I started this thread three zillion years ago.

(Also as I said I do intend to get back to Tovor's very wonderful attempt to paper over the cracks in that piece of dull and uninspired film fare, but I am loathed to interupt WhatMeWookie and co in full flow. How that pulls your mind at rest, true believer.)

[darthwicker]

It's just a shame you couldn't think of anything more original than 'Attack of the Clowns'.
Thats' very poor man, very poor.
Is George your uncle? Because it's so embarrassing when you call it him.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by darthwicker@June 17 2002 - 11:30
It's just a shame you couldn't think of anything more original than 'Attack of the Clowns'.
Thats' very poor man, very poor.
Is George your uncle? Because it's so embarrassing when you call it him.
No, George Lucus is not actually my uncle, but thank you for your intelligent question.

Would you honestly say that ATTACK OF THE CLONES was a better title than if it really did say CLOWNS? Really?

[NelsonCoressel]

Yes.

[padme_rocks]

Darth Badly,
* * *I am sorry that I didn't see you latest post."Rest assured that I'm following every post with great interest, padme_rocks. *(And it's not been that long since I've posted, you cheeky little monkey." Do we really have to stoop to name calling...not that cheeky little monkey really hurt my feeling, but I mean really how pity is that.

[auntberu]

You know, Darth Badly, you've shown a complete lack of respect for the other senate members here. *Now you've resorted to name-calling. *It's not my decision, but I hope that Teek puts an end to you making inflammatory remarks. *You're clearly not trying to have an intelligent conversation here - you're more interested in calling people by names like "true believer", "uncle George" and "cheeky little monkey". *A little common courtesy would be appreciated.

[WhatMeWookie]

Originally posted by auntberu@June 17 2002 - 18:30
You know, Darth Badly, you've shown a complete lack of respect for the other senate members here. *Now you've resorted to name-calling. *It's not my decision, but I hope that Teek puts an end to you making inflammatory remarks. *You're clearly not trying to have an intelligent conversation here - you're more interested in calling people by names like "true believer", "uncle George" and "cheeky little monkey". *A little common courtesy would be appreciated.
auntberu

I think I have to step in here and say, lighten up a little.

Darth Badly has not been name-calling anyone. Playful maybe.

Calling someone "Uncle" where I come from is deeply affectionate and highly respectful. So is calling someone "aunt" "auntberu" abusive????? Perhaps time to change that name of yours???

Equally, I think Darth B's use of "cheeky little monkey" is also affectionate and meant to be humourous and endearing not insulting. People, let's not lose our sense of humour round here...it's sometimes all we have left.

Give the guy or girl (whatever) a break...I mean yeah his opinions may not hold much water amongst most of the folk round here (though he gets my vote), but I think trying to undermine his usually constructive and well-debated points just by making him look abusive, when he's not - doesn't get us anywhere. Just put it down to style.

As to Darth Badly...as a gesture of goodwill time to kiss and make up I think. Okay perhaps no kissing this time.

That's just another two cents when I think between us this thread is upto fifty bucks.

[Vibroblade]

Rest assured that I'm following every post with great interest, padme_rocks. (And it's not been that long since I've posted, you cheeky little monkey.)



I suspect this was meant to be in jest DarthBadly, but obviously it was not taken as one. I feel an apology is in order. Consider this an order.

[Wolfe_13]

Ouch!!!!!! style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sly.gif

[RollaFett]

Unrelated to topic.

Lotos- I know what you mean. my wife is a waitress and has to hear those type of questions constantly! When people ask about my wife, I have to deal with it as well. We live in the U.S., so it's not much of a surprise here. :) She was actually born in the Ukraine and moved to Latvia at a very young age. We're currently waiting on her green card (over 3 years!), and she isn't a citizen of any country right now. She's legal here right now, but has no citizenship anywhere. Hopefully we'll get that over with soon. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif
What part of Latvia do you live? What do you do? If I'm asking too many questions, just let me know. Sorry if I'm prying.

[lotos]

WhatMeWookie,


“..being used as the principal means of dazzle rather than
solid storytelling.”

Well, isn’t that what the world does? It dazzles. And the more dazzling and sparkling it is, the more the average crowd cheers. Our society hasn’t changed much since the Roman Empire times. And to be honest, I’m not pretending here to be the smart one; I admit I often fall in for this stuff.

“Storytelling should surpass the technology used to realise
the story.”

Well yeah, but if there is no story then I prefer to watch a good CGI show rather than stupid actors saying silly lines and making idiotic faces, which are SUPPOSED to be hilariously funny.

"I want a good movie, not the contents of a good "art of"
book."

I agree, but only partially. There are moments when I don’t mind watching pretty images rolling on the screen. I’m not sure though if that’s the case with ATOC. However this is a matter of taste.

Well, anyway, art IS a funny thing. Sometimes I don’t understand if I’m retarded, the world’s crazy or what. Like, I went to see this French film - “La Pianiste”. The whole Europe was chanting about what an “arty, stylish, elegant, tragic, dramatic” film it was. So I sat there for 2 hours, watched it and in the end I didn’t know what to make out of it. Oh, I knew right then that I didn’t like it (probably, ‘cause I couldn’t relate to the subject or maybe I’m just too young for films like that), but I couldn’t figure out if it wasn’t one of the cases when nobody knew what to make out of it. You know, kinda like - I don’t know what to say, technically I hate it, but just so I don’t come across like a total idiot, I proclaim it’s art.

Sometimes I walk out of the theatre and I feel spiritually raped (sorry for using that word). And I hate that feeling. It wasn’t the case with ATOC, so maybe that’s another reason why I’m defending it.

"It's time to think and turn on the system. Not just roll
over and take it."

I wish I were that optimistic. The business is rolling; I don’t think there’s any stopping it. But I could be wrong.

"It's not stupid to care compassionately about something.
But be careful that you're not looking at it through rose-
tinted spectacles."

This is minor, but this sentenced made me smile, ‘cause I AM wearing rose-tinted spectacles. Literally. But don’t worry I got your point.

"Good story-telling transcends age and can keep
generations under it's spell. That's why the prequels just
disappoint - they're job is to appeal to the 12 year old in
all of us and they don't come up to scratch.

You know, I think it’s not just that the movie business has changed - we have changed (and I don’t mean age here). We have become so sarcastic and … … can’t think of a good word. Anyway, we’ve become so sarcastic about the teen love stories (Padme & Anakin) and I don’t think it’s just because of poor dialogue. I don’t know, perhaps it’s just us, Latvians, but whenever Anakin or Padme opened their mouth to say their wows, the whole audience just started to roar. I’m not sure if I’m being clear here.


Darth Badly,

"I do feel very strongly that Attack of the Clowns is a
piece of computer-generated nonsense."

I give up on you. You’re a tough one.style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif


GollaFett,

Latvia is so small, there are not that many places to choose from. However I'm from the capital - Riga.

[lotos]

And people, I'll have to agree with WhatMeWookie, I don't think DarthBadly was calling anyone names.

Am I supposed to get offended just because WhatMeWookie called me his old pal? I'm not old, and I'm not his pal.

Come on!!!

Don't take everything so seriously arround here.

[Tarnished Knight]

Ok..just a few things in response to snowflake's post...Most of the questions can either be answered by paying attention in the actual movie, or watching the other movies...or MAYBE...just maybe....the questions are suppossed to be there until the next movie. *I'll answer ALL the questions
the way they are, will be, or should be in order:


1. *Don't confuse bad dialogue with bad directing. *Any good
acting in a George Lucas film was either by...or directed by
Harrison Ford. *Dialogue is fine. *Bad directing in front of
blue screens all day is the problem.

2. *As far a 10K planets leaving a repbublic...you really have yet to step into a history class as an American or go to public school. *It was the whole point of the civil war and the right of independent sovereigns to make decisions without being forced to by other states with armies. *I have to agree with others on here that the pre-1860s mess in the U.S. could have been avoided with good politics. *This point is lost on most non-Americans which I'm thinking you aren't. *It's also about how much power people give to government and how government is ever increasing to perpetuate itself. Point--it's a republic..not a democracy. Some of those systems could be tuled by tyrants.

More systems = more money = more power. *Next topic.


3. *Star Wars trivia. There can only be 2 Sith. *In order for the apprentice to become a Master, he must kill the master. Plus, Dooku is trying to kill him and is being sucked over to the Dark Side. The Emperor will manipulate Dooku to his death
much the way he did with Darth Maul.


4. *Palpatine is there as decoy. He is a clone of Sidious so that the Jedi can't detect dark side powers in him. *When the sh** hits the fan, Darth Sidious will take Palpatine's place as a sympathetic survivor of an assasination attempt on the part of the Jedi (totally false..but good public support to wipe them out).

5. *The same reason the Chancellor tries to start war is the same reason why politicians exclude themselves from their own laws and keep everything secret. *Life sucks when you have everything...AND CAN BE VOTED OUT AT NEXT ELECTION. *Solution: *I'll be king for life!!

6. *Dooku (Tyranus) ordered the clone army. *As everyone else has been saying...watch the movie. *Kill Trade Federation guys to control trade while getting an army to enforce your carte blanche will against the universe. Superb.

7. *Someone with access to Jedi records. Tyranus used to be a Jedi and ordered the army so he probably did it. *I don't know why no one flew over that sun in the last hundred years...maybe it's remote and the same reason most people don't fly over 90% of Alaska or the Pacific. *

8. *The Diner Alien was just there for George to relive American Graffiti stuff. Cheesy..but just a plot instrument.

9. *The grey cloners were probably paid with clean DNA that would build clones that don't ask ridiculous questions. *Who cares?

10. *If I got paid a lot of money up front, why the hell would I be in a hurry to work for it. *There was also a implied deadline..the army is ALMOST ready is what Obi Wan was told. Pay attention.

11. *Gee, Jango dies only after getting bested by the second best Jedi Knight of his time. *As for everything else...all I have to say is that if I was a Mandalorian....I'd never strap that rocket on my back. *Bad, unreliable juju.

12. *I suggest going back to colonial and early America to find out why a national army was feared..particulary go back to Thomas Jefferson's presidency to see about the reasons for building the first U.S. Navy....and then go back to seeing how the North in the Civil War enforced its will on the other states. *Clones are also probably viewed as not-quite human and expendable...plus you only have to make one size uniform "Aren't you a little short for a stormtrooper?"

13. * *30 Jedi Knight = budget. *The Jedi have been getting killed and are all over the universe. *How come no CIA agents were stopping the Twin Towers bombing. *They're Jedi...not always on demand, be everywhere they're suppossed to be plot tools.

14. *Yeah.? Why the hell is the force imbalanced?! *It's because Lucas came up with this stupid messiah BS seeing as how he has plagerized everything to make star wars..why not rip off God's story?

15. *Let's see: Army built for Jedi. *Head of the Jedi council shows up.....I guess we can deliver the army now. Next question.

16. *The reason that the film has bad acting is becasue Lucas is directing all these films without Harrison Ford.

17. *Hey, when you can close your eyes and see galaxy's far away without leaving your sofa, why would you. *If I had my own bumpies, I'd never leave the house.

18. *Palpantine is probably a clone genetically and otherwise controlled by Sidious. *Why did Franklin D. Roosevelt become president for 16 freakin' years? *People are morons. Next.

19. *Well, Naboo is about beauty and have you seen Natalie Portman in the movie........Old enough to breed..Old enough to lead......maybe the same reason Tibet serves a child...different cultures.

20. *Once again....Yoda can't get a reading because Palpatine is a clone. *Plus..the Jedi are losing their powers.

21. *The real brave senator comment is like a really smart senator proposing to raise taxes...the senator is neither smart, nor brave, but proposes something the rest of the senators want to do for their own political careers and not neccessarily for the republic.

22. First of all, it was the banking clan,the trade federation, and the robot makers. *This is getting ridiculous stating the obvious. If I were going to challenge a republic and convice people I had a fighting chance, I'd rally the money in the universe, get an army, and control trade. *The reason the north one in the American Civil War...troops, money, and Industrial capacity. Next question.

23. *Because R2D2 is an impatient punk!! Like 3PO would have EVER jumped. Always has had the opposite feelings of C3PO.

24. *Bad directing. *She has been sexy in other movies. *Nothing gets you in the mood like being in a room with lots of blue screens.

25. *The Emperor didn't want her dead. Hands off man. Hands off. I had nothing to do with that. Let Dooku handle it. The Trade Federation wanted her dead to join the alliance. *Seeing as how every idiot on the news gets caught when they directly hire the assasin...I don't disagree with the approach. *Watch the movie.

26. *Pratically...Vader doesn't recognize him because Lucas hadn't written it. Plot wise, you get to see what Vader might be debating behind the mask in the original trilogy and the 'battle' that Luke felt going on inside him. *I hate to tell you this...but character and memory aren't neccessarily the same thing...plus...there are other characters.

27. *Asteroids are cool. *I'm sort of dissapointed that I haven't seen A GOOD chase scene, fighter battle in this prequel. *But futhermore, WHY NOT?!

28. *Maybe Vader does have a sense of being on Tatooine. Maybe that's why he didn't go down personally and rather sent stormtroopers. *Behind the mask battle stuff going on. *Vader also tried to kill Luke a few times in the second movie. *Don't underestimate the power of the darkside!!!

29. *Hello. Jedi. *Monastic cloister. *He's not permitted to see his mother and has a growing sense of resentment towards the Jedi which will grow when they object to his marriage to Amidala which will grow when he gets hurt fighting Obi Wan..... which will grow into RAGE when he thinks the Jedi killed Amidala.

30. *Yoda is whatever he wants to be because his lightsaber says Bad Mutha F**ker all over it!!!

31. *Gee, he looked real happy leading them into battle.

32. *Knowing something is bad in the long run and having no alternative in the present is a bad situation.

33. *George lost it about the same time he got 8 figures in his bank account and tried to make up movies for his kids out of guilt for spending too much time at the Playboy mansion. *Actually, more like when he gave up on his premise that special effects are there to only help tell a story rather than the current idea that a story is only there for an excuse to move through well-crafted story boards.

34. *The reason that you had to 'suffer' through ATOC is your own fault or maybe just a bad hangover from Episode I which was one of the worst films I've ever seen. *Bottom line is that you have to 'suffer' because YOU HAVEN"T MADE YOUR OWN SPACE EPIC FILMS FOR US TO HACK TO BITS!!!!

*:mad:

[WhatMeWookie]

Tarnished Knight

Impressive...Most Impressive.

Am both puzzled and intrigued as to the extent you justify the thin plotlines of AOTC which still comes across as smoothing over giant cracks that still make very little sense to me. There's a thin line between explanation and excuse. Still I think George should hire you as his lawyer. Fantastic stuff.

But your points #32,33,34 just do it for me bigtime.

I salute you. Your my hero of the day.

[darthfool]

And now let us pause for a serious thought:

Your focusing on the negative. Be mindful of your thoughts. You could see her nipples.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by lotos@June 18 2002 - 02:28
And people, I'll have to agree with WhatMeWookie, I don't think DarthBadly was calling anyone names.

Am I supposed to get offended just because WhatMeWookie called me his old pal? I'm not old, and I'm not his pal.

Come on!!!

Don't take everything so seriously arround here.
I did try to get on last night to post this, but either my darn machine or the website wouldn't let me.

Sorry, padmerocks, - "Cheeky little monkey" was being said with an affectionate smile. Certainly not meant to be insulting or name calling or to hurt anyones feelings at all.

auntberu, I have always referred to Uncle George as err.. Uncle George and 'true believer' came off the keyboard because I had just read an interview with the great Stan Lee - currently riding high on his Spider-Man success. (And good luck to him. I remember seeing Stan The Man when he was at the Roundhouse in Camden Town. Entertained 3000 people for a whole evening. Quite a guy.)


I love you all and thank you for your time and for your intelligent thoughts in our on-going discussions.

As WhatMeWookie and lotos have both suggested, there was no disrespect intended to anyone. Lighten up people.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by Tarnished Knight@June 18 2002 - 05:08
2. *As far a 10K planets leaving a repbublic...you really have yet to step into a history class as an American or go to public school. *It was the whole point of the civil war and the right of independent sovereigns to make decisions without being forced to by other states with armies. *I have to agree with others on here that the pre-1860s mess in the U.S. could have been avoided with good politics. *This point is lost on most non-Americans which I'm thinking you aren't. *It's also about how much power people give to government and how government is ever increasing to perpetuate itself. Point--it's a republic..not a democracy. Some of those systems could be tuled by tyrants.
Thanks for your long and interesting post, Tarnished Knight. I found it a strange combination. You seemed quite happy to be very negative about Uncle Georges directing skills and slap them to the floor, while also going out of your way to defend some of the illogical and silly elements in the plot he had created. Interesting. (And I certainly agree with you that TPM was one of the worst films I have seen in recent years.)

Both you and Tovor have tried to explain the 10K star systems wanting to break away from the Republic in terms of other earth based historical events.

Tovor used the example of the war of Independence. This did not work for me because in this the colonies were fighting against the British Empire – an organisation not that far removed from the evil empire of the original trilogy. Certainly the British Empire was ruled by the Crown with the main motive of making money and keeping power. It was not a democratic structure at all.

Tarnished Knight uses the civil war as a comparison. BUT in the civil war (and no argument from me about the pre-1860 mess, by the way) the two sides were squaring up over a vital and all defining issue – that of slavery. One side believed that it was fine to keep and profit from the buying and selling of (mostly black) fellow human beings while the other side had come around to the passionately held conviction that is was morally wrong.

For Tarnished Knights comparison to work there has to be an issue that is just as important at the heart of this break away group and there is not. All we are told is that some star systems want to leave the Republic. The reason is kept extremely vague. (And all this is told through very poor drama, by the way. Uncle George breaks the important story telling rule of SHOW NOT TELL, as he only ever tells us that all this is happening off screen somewhere.)

Tarnished Knight says: "It's a republic. Not a democracy." the point surely is that a republic is exactly that. My dictionary defines a republic as "a state completely governed by elected representatives."

The workings of this back story are important because they undermine the entire prequel trilogy.

A fairer comparison would be if (say) Canada and Turkey suddenly decided that they wanted to leave NATO – a democratic organisation. Do you imagine that the other countries would prepare to send in an invading army by force?

[padme_rocks]

Darth Badly,
* * No harm done. I just didn't know what you ment by the comment that was made. I didn't think my post back to you was going to make such a nosie around here. I never ment it in a bad way *style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif. Sorry everyone I didn't mean to be so uptight *style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif.

[Vibroblade]

Thank you for diffusing the situation DarthBadly.

I have no stake in this at all, but I must step in at times to diffuse the situation.

I was certain the comment was meant in jest, but, in an environment such as this ( where facial clues cannot be read ), one must be very cautious least their comments be taken out of context.

[lotos]

Tarnished Knight,

Good posts, however quite useless. Nothing’s gonna make DarthBadly change his mind. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif I don’t think it’s so much about logic and explanation to him.


But DarthBadly, please stop being so stubborn about certain things… it’s not about blacks or whites, democracy or republic, British empire or Galactic empire.

It’s REALLY hard for me to imagine what it would be like living in a democratic galaxy, with billions of planets and billions of citizens (this point alone is absurd, ridiculous and impossible), however if we bring it down to earthly proportions (your comparison of Canada and Turkey getting out of NATO was not a good one. NATO is an organisation.) think of something closer to you… like… what if New York, Florida, Oklahoma, L.A. and Michigan decided to leave USA. Honestly, I don’t think George Bush would smile and say: “What a great idea! How silly it never crossed my mind. We encourage you to do that and we promise to give you all the support you’ll need. Don’t worry about the economical inconveniences and chaos that’s gonna break out. Everything’s gonna be just fine. We live in a democracy after all. If that is what you want and believe in then we’re gonna support you.”


I have to agree with Tarnished Knight – the prequels have their weak moments BECAUSE OF GEORGE’S POOR DIRECTING SKILLS.

And one more thing: even though this doesn’t bother me personally, I do believe it’s a bit weird that in order to understand a two hour film, you have to watch 4 other films, gather as much information as you can, join discussion boards, read comics and books and even then remain clueless. And disappointed.

[WhatMeWookie]

Lotos Quote: "I have to agree with Tarnished Knight – the prequels have their weak moments BECAUSE OF GEORGE’S POOR DIRECTING SKILLS. "

Amen - Lotos - Amen!

Lotos Quote : "And one more thing: even though this doesn’t bother me personally, I do believe it’s a bit weird that in order to understand a two hour film, you have to watch 4 other films, gather as much information as you can, join discussion boards, read comics and books and even then remain clueless. And disappointed."

Agreed and I still don't understand it...although I have a much better understanding of the underlying political issues behind the American Civil War???

Lotos - you criticise Darth Badly for searching for a purpose behind the story of the break up of the Republic - which is at the centre of the story. Darth B didn't throw in the analogies, others have and I agree they don't stand up.

Even if the Civil War had been the inspiration for AOTC it has been poorly represented and as Darth Badly has said, the Civil War had a central issue that presented a choice core to our very humanity. Slavery... now there's something worth fighting for. WWII now that also had human issues and values at it's core (and that also seemed to be represented in the OT). Aside from tax issues, the driving force behind AOTC is all a bit muddled, certainly not inspiring.

I think it was Bart Simpson who once said... "There are no good wars except for the American Civil War, World War II and the Star Wars trilogy". He was right... at least for the OT.

It's interesting that during the course of this thread - a lot of people have changed from unquestioning devotion to AOTC. Champions of the prequels are starting to recognise and acknowledge bad direction, acting and story-telling - all disciplines core to the generation of good film-making. That has to be a good thing!!! What really puzzled me is that if the foundations are recognised as bad, how and why are people still clinging to the mis-guided belief that there is anything of value in PM and AOTC? This really interests me.

Now onto something else. I find the Sith order of two idea nonsensical and laboured. Why must there be two? This makes a complete nonsense of ROTJ in that the Emperor's attempted recruitment of Luke to the Dark Side would clearly represent a threat to Darth Vader's status and potential existence. Yet Darth V. has willingly complied in bringing his son into the fold. Why would he? Is he mad? If the order of two makes sense then dramatically Darth V. would have recruited Luke himlelf, keeping his existence a secret and then the idea would have been for Team Skywalker to take out Palpy by surprise.

Equally, the Emperor facing two powerful number two's would also face potential challenge to his own autonomy, so why recruit Luke (who certainly must represent a powerful recruit worthy of number 2 status otherwise why base a 3 part trilogy around him). Surely his advisors in HR would have told him that this would have had a demoralising effect on his other staff (namely Darth V). And it's not as if Darth V hadn't been effective in his role.

I hated this idea intensely as introduced in PM (along with the Metachlorian rubbish which seems to make the Force unattainable fully unless you're genetically superior - and the virgin birth idea which is ultra-lame).

Honestly...Why two? It's a lousy plot device, narrows the scope of the story-telling and makes the dramatic sense of the end of ROTJ (and the 6 part saga) a complete joke.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by WhatMeWookie@June 19 2002 - 05:58
Now onto something else. I find the Sith order of two idea nonsensical and laboured. Why must there be two? *This makes a complete nonsense of ROTJ in that the Emperor's attempted recruitment of Luke to the Dark Side would clearly represent a threat to Darth Vader's status and potential existence. Yet Darth V. has willingly complied in bringing his son into the fold. Why would he? Is he mad? If the order of two makes sense then dramatically Darth V. would have recruited Luke himlelf, keeping his existence a secret and then the idea would have been for Team Skywalker to take out Palpy by surprise.

Equally, the Emperor facing two powerful number two's would also face potential challenge to his own autonomy, so why recruit Luke (who certainly must represent a powerful recruit worthy of number 2 status otherwise why base a 3 part trilogy around him). *Surely his advisors in HR would have told him that this would have had a demoralising effect on his other staff (namely Darth V). And it's not as if Darth V hadn't been effective in his role.

I hated this idea intensely as introduced in PM (along with the Metachlorian rubbish which seems to make the Force unattainable fully unless you're genetically superior - and the virgin birth idea which is ultra-lame).

Honestly...Why two? It's a lousy plot device, narrows the scope of the story-telling and makes the dramatic sense of the end of ROTJ (and the 6 part saga) a complete joke.
I agree completely WhatMeWookie. It was one of the points in Tarnished Knight's long and interesting post that I couldn't believe. The idea of there being just two of these bad guys at any one time is so silly. And who on earth is going to take on an apprentice to tarin up when he's obviously going to try and kill you. No bloody wonder they are crapy villains (both in the sense of being useless on screen and in the wider sense.) Why on earth did Uncle George decide to go with this idea instead of say 50 trained jedi fighting 50 trained sith lords? It's just too daft for words...

[darthfool]

And one more thing: even though this doesn't bother me personally, I do believe it's a bit weird that in order to understand a two hour film, you have to watch 4 other films, gather as much information as you can, join discussion boards, read comics and books and even then remain clueless. And disappointed.
Am I really the only person who isn't having trouble following? I mean background material - watch The Phantom Menace. Unansweared questions - watch Episode III: When Rancor Met Jar Jar


Champions of the prequels are starting to recognise and acknowledge bad direction, acting and story-telling - all disciplines core to the generation of good film-making. That has to be a good thing!!! What really puzzled me is that if the foundations are recognised as bad, how and why are people still clinging to the mis-guided belief that there is anything of value in PM and AOTC? This really interests me.
Well TPM was never exactley a fan favourite now was it? So no change of opinion there.
AOTC? The fact that some people don't like George's style of directing and/or have minor gripes with some areas of the story is hardly a U turn of their opinion. As time goes on they are mearly pointing out problems they have with an otherwise great film. So that is why people still believe there is A LOT of value in the film.
What puzzles me is how you and clan can see nothing of value in the prequels.


Now onto something else. I find the Sith order of two idea nonsensical and laboured. Why must there be two? *This makes a complete nonsense of ROTJ in that the Emperor's attempted recruitment of Luke to the Dark Side would clearly represent a threat to Darth Vader's status and potential existence. Yet Darth V. has willingly complied in bringing his son into the fold. Why would he? Is he mad? If the order of two makes sense then dramatically Darth V. would have recruited Luke himlelf, keeping his existence a secret and then the idea would have been for Team Skywalker to take out Palpy by surprise.
hghjkgyjkkghtfhtgfdhjklghjrkuihtrlguitrfjklgfkl
Your not really asking this? Are you?

Well this is my last post in this thread cus let's face it it isn't going anywhere *(gee I wonder what response that's set me up for).
As my final act I would like to suggest that this thread is closed and a new forum added entitled I hate Star Wars.
This thread has covered 3 of the films so there's already plenty we know of that would soon fill up the forumn. Then of course there is the Ewok movies, the holiday special, Special Editions, DVD editions, EU and let's not forget problems with the other 2 films. Add to that the fact that some people are guarranteed to hate Episode III and I hate Star Wars could well become the most populour forumn on the site.

Go on moderators. It'd be great.

[NelsonCoressel]

I thought the "only two" thing was just a rule or a Jedi code, and that rules can be and often are broken.

[WhatMeWookie]

NelsonCoressel Quote: "I thought the "only two" thing was just a rule or a Jedi code, and that rules can be and often are broken."

Dunno - seems like the rules keep chnaging round here just to fudge over the cracks in George's prequel fare. I thought they said that there could only be two Sith Lords at any one time in PM. If that's true, then by point about the end of ROTJ stands.

Darthfool: "I Well this is my last post in this thread cus let's face it it isn't going anywhere (gee I wonder what response that's set me up for).As my final act I would like to suggest that this thread is closed and a new forum added entitled I hate Star Wars."

Dude - if you can't take the heat.... but seriously we'll miss you and you're lively contributions to this grand debate. Personally Ep III When Rancor Met Jar-Jar would
do it for me. I felt that if Ep II opened with the floppy-eared freak getted hunted and killed by Jabba the Hutt as a cinematic tribute to the Bugs versus Elmer Fudd Chuck Jones classics "Ssssh, be vewy vewy qwiet, I'm hunting Jar-Jars"...then Lucas may well have earned back my respect.

I don't hate Star Wars. It's a part of my life close to my heart.
As I said in an earlier post...."I just feel slighted. I feel like I've been loyal and married to the same woman for years and then sadly she slaps me round the chops, tells me she's never loved me and walks off with the kids."

Please don't go!!!!

[lotos]

"I feel like I've been loyal and married to the same woman
for years and then sadly she slaps me round the chops,
tells me she's never loved me and walks off with the kids."

Well, women do that. :D

I was sitting here and wondering what would have happened if George Lucas had done the films in the right order I-VI. I don't think I II and III would have made more sense in the 70s than they do now. Do you think you would have liked it? If not then there's gotta be something wrong with the whole story to start with.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by lotos@June 19 2002 - 11:47
I was sitting here and wondering what would have happened if George Lucas had done the films in the right order I-VI. I don't think I II and III would have made more sense in the 70s than they do now. Do you think you would have liked it? If not then there's gotta be something wrong with the whole story to start with.
I think it would have been a lot better. I hate the fact that the new prequels are messing up the back story that I invented in my head. Now obviously it's Uncle George's story not mine, but I think I loved the mystery and lost in time myth that was the Old Republic. Now we are seeing the downfall of the Jedi up close it doesn't work for me and that undermines the originals. In other words I rather he hadn't gone back at all. I don't think the story need to be shown and was the stronger for being just prologue.

I think Tovor liked the prequel experience to watching Fight Club a second time and getting more out of it once you get the twist. Sadly, I can't agree. Fight Club is a great film in it's own right. The prequels are (so far) naff.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by lotos@June 18 2002 - 14:09
however if we bring it down to earthly proportions (your comparison of Canada and Turkey getting out of NATO was not a good one. NATO is an organisation.) think of something closer to you… like… what if New York, Florida, Oklahoma, L.A. and Michigan decided to leave USA. Honestly, I don’t think George Bush would smile and say: “What a great idea! *How silly it never crossed my mind. We encourage you to do that and we promise to give you all the support you’ll need. Don’t worry about the economical inconveniences and chaos that’s gonna break out. Everything’s gonna be just fine. We live in a democracy after all. If that is what you want and believe in then we’re gonna support you.”
The other comparisons didn't work and, with great respect because I love you, this is the weakest so far.

To compare planets millions of miles apart in entirely different star systems with cities in the same physical country doesn't cut it.

Maybe the best analogy would be to compare the Old Republic to the British Commonwealth - a democratic organisation of different states. Again my questions hold water - over the years a couple of countries have requested and left the commonwealth - the others were sad to see them go, but respected their wishes as it was a democracy.

[WhatMeWookie]

Originally posted by lotos@June 19 2002 - 11:47
I was sitting here and wondering what would have happened if George Lucas had done the films in the right order I-VI. I don't think I II and III would have made more sense in the 70s than they do now. Do you think you would have liked it? If not then there's gotta be something wrong with the whole story to start with.
These prequel stories never existed in the '70's in any significant shape or form. Those of you thinking there were 3 well developed screenplays all in the bag pre-1976 and the shooting of SW New Hope are really kidding themselves.

Writing a screenplay, if its done properly, takes months if not years -if you bother to edit, re-write and re-write again as you should... Even the screenplays for PM and AOTC as shoddy as they are would have taken months to develop... as sad as the end results are.

My guess is that they were a few notes in a notebook that hinted at the backstory to help George Lucas develop in his own mind the shape of the SW Universe. That's what writers do.

In any literary study, it's clear that all writers follow this discipline. They have to get things straight and play with a much bigger canvas in their own mind, before they carefully select what makes sense to set in print and present to an audience/reader.

Even George worked out that the prequels as thinly as I guess he would have sketched them out, needed to be edited out in entirety by kicking off with the New Hope story.... and that's how it should have stayed unless the prequels could have been fleshed out or not so entirely focused in taking us to point we've already dramatically reached...in knowing that Anakin screws up.

My guess is that there would have been a few pages only on the Republic, that there would be large scale battles and possibly on the idea of the rise and fall of a knight and a princess. There you go, I managed to sketch that out in 4 lines myself.

I'd bet cash that there was never any mention of Jar Jar Binks. There's no way that the full stories would have been realised. I'd even bet that Boba Fett wasn't even thought of until after the New Hope was released and successful and George was cooking up a second outing. As for Jango, who cares anyway.

I hope one day after Ep. III George might allow a notebook to be published showing his pre-1983 notes on the original films to see how his prequels concept was developed.

I think he'd cooked up most of this nonsense in the '90's when his goals were ego - rather than talent driven ... and not in the days when he was a real talent that was establishing himself as a pioneering film-maker and not just as the CEO of ILM and his merchandising arms.

But, hey that's just one guys opinion.

[tunafishman]

Okay, I've been catching up on this thread and I just want to give a few responses to things people have said that no one responded to.

Darth Badly - you mentioned that the problem with comparing AOTC to the Civil War because the issue for leaving isn't mentioned in AOTC. And your totally right. I agree, George should have included this, and it only would have taken an extra line or two from Palpatine. But, in the book (BIG disclaimer here-this is in the book, not the movie, so it really is a moot point, but just wanted to add it in) - they mention that the systems that do leave are all involved in business in the galaxy in some way, and the reason they leave is to gain financial independence from a beaucratic Republic with rules telling them how to run their business. So if they had mentioned this, the civil war comparison would work a little more.


Yet Darth V. has willingly complied in bringing his son into the fold. Why would he? Is he mad? If the order of two makes sense then dramatically Darth V. would have recruited Luke himlelf, keeping his existence a secret and then the idea would have been for Team Skywalker to take out Palpy by surprise.
WhatMeWookiee - Darth Vader did try to recruit Luke for himself (in TESB). I totally agree though that George did screw up by adding the rule of two. It does make this whole trying to get Luke to join them thing a little screwy. I do have some theories on it in other threads, but its purely speculation.

Lotos-you mentioned in a post about seeing an artsy film that you didn't find appealling and yet everyone thought it was great. When you said people just said it was artsy not to look stupid - I think this fits for Star Wars fans too. Sometimes we get to the point where we won't say a SW film is bad because it would be sacrielege to say so as a fan, or we're just tricking ourselves because to think SW is bad would be a bad fan. Well, just as you said in an even earlier post, we the moviegoers have the real power. If we don't like a movie and yet say it is good, we're only helping to make more bad movies that we will say are good. It's okay to say a SW movie is a bad movie, your no less of a fan, your just allowing yourself the freedom of thought.

[lotos]

DarthBadly,

"The other comparisons didn't work and this is the
weakest so far. To compare planets millions of miles
apart in entirely different star systems with cities in the
same physical country doesn't cut it.

I KNEW YOU WOULD SAY THAT!!!

However I don’t agree (but by that I’m not implying my comparison was exceptionally good)! Like I said, I CAN NOT imagine the PROPORTIONS of a galaxy. So, considering the fact that a galaxy is a part OF a galaxy cluster here’s how I see it:

· A galaxy cluster – the Earth (which we are not shown)
· Galaxy – A country
· Planets – States and cities of the country

I’m not saying that is GL’s idea (though the Galaxy could be an analogy of USA), but I mean, there’s no way you can think of our understandings about galaxies and pull them together with the film. At least that’s how I see it.

Sorry, but comparing the Galaxy to the British Commonwealth works as little as my comparison. It’s just too small.


WhatMeWookie,

I totally agree and GL has said himself that the whole story wasn’t complete back then. I don’t think he had 4 lines, but he definitely didn’t have scripts.

Now, if you’re saying that the PT would have been better back then then it turns out it has nothing got to do with the story: you would’ve accepted only 2 Sith lords at a time, Jango Fett, etc., etc. You hate PT because you have OT to compare it to.


“...not in the days when he was a real talent that was
establishing himself as a pioneering film-maker…”

You really think he ever was a real talent? I don’t think so (that’s only my opinion of course). He had a great idea, but he NEVER was a good director or a good screenwriter. Another guy directed ESB, which all of you love so dearly. So…

[lotos]

Yeah, well the Emperor can still change the rules in Episoed III and make it only 3 Sith lords at a time. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif But this isn't really the point I'm having troubles with. It's the cheesy lines.

And Tunafishman (welcome on board if this is your first post here), I'd never say Star Wars is great art, elegant and a must see. Even about the OT.

Come to think of it… what am I doing here then?

[WhatMeWookie]

Tunafishman - B-I-G- respect to your entry.

Tunafishman Quote: "Darth Vader did try to recruit Luke for himself (in TESB). I totally agree though that George did screw up by adding the rule of two. It does make this whole trying to get Luke to join them thing a little screwy."

Agreed - but it's not as if Darth V. kept the whole Luke thing a secret from his master - nor had he turned him to the dark side when all 3 get together at the climax. Screwy it is because of the rule of 2 - which is a bad concept anyway as I think for years we imagined the Sith to be an effective counter-force to the might of the Jedi. Now that would have made sense. But what the heck is the point of an order of two anyway that everyone knows about. Not exactly easy to encourage new recruits and you're hardly going to get much done. The only reason Palpy gets so far ahead with his plan is because he's already de facto head of the Galaxy anyway, so taking it over is not really much of a dramatic stretch is it????"

Tunafishman Quote:"Sometimes we get to the point where we won't say a SW film is bad because it would be sacrielege to say so as a fan, or we're just tricking ourselves because to think SW is bad would be a bad fan. Well, just as you said in an even earlier post, we the moviegoers have the real power. If we don't like a movie and yet say it is good, we're only helping to make more bad movies that we will say are good. It's okay to say a SW movie is a bad movie, your no less of a fan, your just allowing yourself the freedom of thought."

Amen to that - This encapsulates everything this thread was set up to achieve and why I've enjoyed being a part of it. We have to think ourselves beyond merely being suppressed fans. If we can't see beyond the cracks then this is a cult movement and that's dangerous. This continues to be a healthy debate.

Fact is, what has worried me and people like Darth Badly who launched this debate - and now others too is - this "blind devotion to that ancient religion" acceptance. It's as if we're treating these prequels as if they have been delivered to us as holy scriptures akin to the tablets of the 10 Commandments. They're not....although the OT came as close as damn it.

Lotos Quote: "I'd never say Star Wars is great art, elegant and a must see. Even about the OT.

Come to think of it… what am I doing here then?"

Well, I do think the initial trilogy was great art (on its level) and still holds - save for the battle damage from the mess of PM and AOTC. They blend strong story-telling with good direction, character-based acting and pioneering visual design which has left a firm inprint in a generation and beyond's imagination. That's hard to achieve. I'm not being pretentious, but neither does art have to be either....and there are the flaws there, but we live with them in the case of the OT because they're outweighed by the strengths...not so with the thin prequels.

It's hard to imagine that the last few Summers' crop of blockbusters will capture the imagination and hold it for so long.

And... that last question of yours ... and the well constructed debate you have consistently presented I think shows you're responding to darth badly's call. It's wake up time.

Lotos Quote:"You really think he ever was a real talent? I don’t think so (that’s only my opinion of course). He had a great idea, but he NEVER was a good director or a good screenwriter. Another guy directed ESB, which all of you love so dearly."

Yes I did think so. It can't be denied he has been a major contributor to cinema in his time. SW is not Shakespeare, but he blended all the disciplines from Music to effects and even acting (the performances ain't Macbeth, but there just right for the material and have resonance). Back in the '70's and '80's George was clearly democratic and a team player. There's no question that Kershner and Marquand were people he respected enough to pass over the director credit so that he could play a very much hands on elder statesmen and give his attention to pushing everyone to the limit to realise his vision. Those guys were very much guns for hire and were not there to fulfil the role of empassioned autuer. Lucas had the confidence, and generosity to share credit. But that balance and approach has gone and so to the spirit and quality that existed in the OT. It's as if the soul has been sucked out of the man and his work.

Lotos Quote: "You hate PT because you have OT to compare it to."

That's a little unfair. I would hope that my debating points and persective have shown that my disappointment in Lucas, PM and AOTC is rational and analytical, not just emotional. besides, hate's a bad thing... I mean hate leads to suffering.... (oh no, you got me quoting PM).

[NelsonCoressel]

This whole conversation is getting a little too "Trekkie" for my taste.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by WhatMeWookie@June 19 2002 - 12:26
These prequel stories never existed in the '70's in any significant shape or form. Those of you thinking there were 3 well developed screenplays all in the bag pre-1976 and the shooting of SW New Hope are really kidding themselves.
I agree WhatMeWookie. I Uncle George did have the nine films maped out in his notebook something along the kines of "nine films set in space about the fall and rise again of a force for good the Jedi" but that's about it.

It's clear to me that if you look at the original Star Wars movie - at the point of writing the shooting that screenplay Uncle George hadn't even made up his mind that Vader was Luke's dad. If he had either planned that or thought that was a major option for the future then he surely would not have used the line "betrayed and killed your father".

He could so easily have had Ben say nearly the same thing ("Darth Vader ended your father's existance") in a slightly more vague and ambiguous way so that it could have been understood in more than one way post viewing EMPIRE.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by WhatMeWookie@June 19 2002 - 21:04
Tunafishman Quote:"Sometimes we get to the point where we won't say a SW film is bad because it would be sacrielege to say so as a fan, or we're just tricking ourselves because to think SW is bad would be a bad fan. *Well, just as you said in an even earlier post, we the moviegoers have the real power. If we don't like a movie and yet say it is good, we're only helping to make more bad movies that we will say are good. *It's okay to say a SW movie is a bad movie, your no less of a fan, your just allowing yourself the freedom of thought."

Amen to that - This encapsulates everything this thread was set up to achieve and why I've enjoyed being a part of it. We have to think ourselves beyond merely being suppressed fans. If we can't see beyond the cracks then this is a cult movement and that's dangerous. This continues to be a healthy debate.
This exactly encapsulates the reason that I started this thread. Thank you both.

[WhatMeWookie]

Originally posted by NelsonCoressel@June 19 2002 - 21:58
This whole conversation is getting a little too "Trekkie" for my taste.
Hey Nelson

That's a tough one. We're all part fan-boy (or girl) geeks here and there are no excuses.

But seriously, can you make sense of the end of ROTJ when there is this rule of two stuff for Sith-type people???

No answers yet in to explain this and would love to know if this makes sense to anyone???

[Master Goeweins]

I always liked Obi Wan saying that Vader killed Anakin. When Anakin started towards the Dark Side he lost himself to the point where he was no longer the same person. That new being then went about ending any connections to the old being, i.e. killing all the Jedi. So when Vader came into being, in a way he killed anything that was Anakin before. It was heavy symboligy.

I also understood the rule of two was not a rule that they set up for themselves, it was just the way it always worked out. By nature the Sith are evil and greedy, consumed with self empowerment. The master would raise an apprentice (how more self important can you get than ruling over another Sith), then the apprentice gets greedy and overthrows the master and begins to repeat the chain. When Vader asked Luke to join him, he knew it was to eventually overthrow the Emperor. The Emperor wanted Luke because he knew that Vader would eventually try for a power play, and he wanted Luke to stop that and take Vader's place. Who knows, maybe the Emperor saw more potential power in Luke and was going to kill Vader himself...

I know this is all a little geekie (How come we don't have a name like the Star Trek Fans?) but it is such a grand myth.

[Tovor]

But seriously, can you make sense of the end of ROTJ when there is this rule of two stuff for Sith-type people??? *
No answers yet in to explain this and would love to know if this makes sense to anyone???


WhatMeWookie (would it be okay to just write "WMW" when responding to you?), I too had always dreamed of seeing an army of Jedi fighting an army of Sith warriors in a Braveheart-like clash, and I was dissappointed by the 2-Sith rule. *However, I let it grow on me because I saw other story probablilities. *I think this: The two Sith rule continued on into the time of the original trilogy. *It was Vader who suggested that Luke be turned when Palpatine wanted him destroyed; Vader who planned from that point to use his son to eliminate the Master and become master in his place, with Luke as his apprentice. *In ROTJ, I think there was more than one battle going on in the throne room. *

There never would have been 3 Sith lords surviving the throne room to control the empire, there could only be 2 even after Luke was turned to the dark side.
Vader knew of the 2-Sith rule and realized that Palpatine would turn Luke and then destroy him, so he hoped to turn Luke to his side and kill Palpy first.
Palpy wanted to preserve the 2-Sith rule and planned without a doubt to kill Vader after turning Luke to his side.
Palpy had to have known that Vader knew of the 2-Sith rule, and would have deduced that Vader would destroy him after turning Luke, so both he and Vader were in an unspoken battle of wills to turn Luke and kill the other before the other killed him. *

WMW:

I'd bet cash that there was never any mention of Jar Jar Binks. There's no way that the full stories would have been realised. I'd even bet that Boba Fett wasn't even thought of until after the New Hope was released and successful and George was cooking up a second outing. As for Jango, who cares anyway.

I hope one day after Ep. III George might allow a notebook to be published showing his pre-1983 notes on the original films to see how his prequels concept was developed.


He did do that, the Annotated Screenplays. *I have the book. *Didn't I reply to you a long while back on that, and quote you a section from the book that dealt with a Jar Jar-like character early in the 1973 notes? *I thought it was you but I don't remember if it was early in this thread or in another, and I don't know if you (if it was you...I think it was) replied to it. *But although it would not make you love the prequels or Jar Jar, it would show (prove) that a bumbling, cowardly character who winds up affecting the main storyline was always present in GL's mind and notes.

So, how much cash were you willing to wager?

[Darth Badly]

Tovor quote: I have the book. Didn't I reply to you a long while back on that, and quote you a section from the book that dealt with a Jar Jar-like character early in the 1973 notes? I thought it was you but I don't remember if it was early in this thread or in another, and I don't know if you (if it was you...I think it was) replied to it. But although it would not make you love the prequels or Jar Jar, it would show (prove) that a bumbling, cowardly character who winds up affecting the main storyline was always present in GL's mind and notes.

Tovor: The question isn't whether Uncle George planned to have some kind of "bumbling, cowardly character" which is a hugely vague and open description: rather the question is if he had already written/planned the floppy-eared cretin JarJar.

As I said in a post a few hours ago, we all know George had the saga planed out along the lines of "it's nine films set in space" what's in question is the detail. The more we look at the gaps in logic between the six films the more obvious it becomes that Uncle George had no grand plan worked out in any great detail at all. (See my posting on him not having decided Vader was Luke's dad.)

I'm quite happy to accept that George always planned to include a bumbling character, but so what? That wasn't what WhatMeWookie was saying. He was saying that it wasn't a fleshed out version of Jarjar.


Tovor Quote: There never would have been 3 Sith lords surviving the throne room to control the empire, there could only be 2 even after Luke was turned to the dark side.
Vader knew of the 2-Sith rule and realized that Palpatine would turn Luke and then destroy him, so he hoped to turn Luke to his side and kill Palpy first.
Palpy wanted to preserve the 2-Sith rule and planned without a doubt to kill Vader after turning Luke to his side.
Palpy had to have known that Vader knew of the 2-Sith rule, and would have deduced that Vader would destroy him after turning Luke, so both he and Vader were in an unspoken battle of wills to turn Luke and kill the other before the other killed him.

Tovor: I respected many of the answers that you came up with for my original list of 2000 questions. (Respect being not the same as agreeing with.) But, with respect, this is wishful thinking. No way did any of this come across in ROJ either on first viewing or now with Fight Club style hindsight.

Why on earth would the Emperor want to replace Vader (a powerful and loyal servent for years) with Luke (an untested and untrusted one)? That makes no sense.

If Vader wanted to beat the Emperor then he surely would have made certain of having turned Luke to his own side FIRST before he fought him. Not during the battle.

How the new rule of two (which is clearly utter bollocks) affected the end of Jedi was (I have to admit) not something I had considered before WhatMeWookie drew it to public attention.

He is quite right though: either the ending of Jedi makes a nonsence of the rule of two OR the rule of two makes a nonsense of the ending of Jedi.

No way do the two work together.

(And anyway what would happen if the rule of two were broken??? So what? Would terrible things happen to the two Sith that broke it? Oh, no they're going to kill/betray each other anyway? Would the Force become unbalanced? Oh no, it is unbalanced already? It's just rubbish. Can anyone out there marry the ending of ROJ with the rule of two?)

[lukabrazzi]

Here are my thoughts on some of Darth Badly's criticisms -

You surely don't have a war to stop people leaving a democratic organization. *No, but this is a very corrupt democratic organization. *Also, the parties at the helm of the separatist movement were the big-money movers for the galaxy. *The Republic proper supported an army under the guise of maintaining the integrity of their long-standing democracy, but rest assured that they were watching out for the interests of their own people's financial well-being.

Why would the gray aliens continue creating their army without any contact or payment from the Republic? *I bet they were getting paid serious bank. *The novel preceding The Phantom Menace goes into some of Palpatine's financial clout. *He falsifies records to create a scandal surrounding then-Chancellor Vallorum, which is how he assumes that same office. *The novel also reveals that Palpatine staged attacks on Trade Federation ships, in which huge sums of money went missing. *This would probably not be enough to fund the clones, but it shows that Palpatine was a baller with a budget. *Also, a condition of the clone contract was probably that no contact with Coruscant was allowed. *The Kaminoans would go along with this, as long as they were getting paid.

Why did the people of Naboo elect such a young queen? *That is the way of that planet, and the novel for AOTC goes a little bit into this, and hints that Naboo residents equate youth with charisma, intellect, and good intention. *Maybe in their past they decided that older folks were too easily corrupted. *Also, the novel mentions that Amidala was nearly too OLD to serve as senator, confirming that she was elected queen in accordance with the traditions of her planet.

Why doesn't Darth Vader show any sense of having been to Tatooine before in the opening of Star Wars? *He must surely hate the place. *I bet he does hate the place. *He is, at this point in the saga, a creature of hate. *What is he going to do, have a rap session with the Star Destroyer's on-duty therapist? *Tell his subordinates that he really doesn't feel up to any mission around this planet? *NO! *He does what he has to do, and avoids personally overseeing recovery of the Death Star plans on the planet's surface. *No doubt, Vader must have been feeling enormous hesitation about even being around this planet, making it all the more ideal a hiding place for Obi-Wan.

Most of the questions you posted are at first glance legitimate ones, but with a little bit of research can be easily explained. *Now, here's what you didn't post, but should have. *I love the whole Star Wars saga, but the Anakin-Padme dialogue in the middle of the film, and right before the arena, was very thin. *I understand, Lucas has to write to several different generations, but come on! *Only in a galaxy far, far away could even a Jedi expect to pull any tail with those weak lines. *And Padme's confession of love right before the execution scene was awful! *Both Portman and Christensen are great actors, and have wonderful chemistry throughout the film, but the romance writing was very weak. *

Other than that, it was a great flick. *Darth Badly, just because your parents flogged you and dressed you funny doesn't mean you have to poison something that is loved and revered by many others. *

"I am Jack's smirking revenge."

[RollaFett]

Now, if you’re saying that the PT would have been better back then then it turns out it has nothing got to do with the story: you would’ve accepted only 2 Sith lords at a time, Jango Fett, etc., etc. You hate PT because you have OT to compare it to.


Lotos, I really like your train of thought there (and not just because you and my wife are from the same country style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif ).

As far as the rule of two goes, I thought that Tover covered it well. But I'll try to provide an angle as well. The Sith had this rule of two because a power struggle almost destroyed the order, oh so long ago. Well, I think what you see at the end of ROTJ is yet another power struggle. Even as a kid I was under the assumption that the Emporer was recruiting Luke to replace Vader. In ESB, Vader attempts to recruit Luke for himself. Sure, he suggested the idea to the Emperor, but perhaps he was lying? Hmmm...hard to imagine that. Back to ROTJ, the Emperor is quite pleased when Luke has Vader at his mercy, but disappointed when he doesn't finish him off, and attempts to kill Luke himself. The fact that the Emperor couldn't be satisfied with the structure of the dark side ultimately led to his downfall. The structure that we all know of is that there is a master and an apprentice. Eventually, the apprentice grows strong enough to kill the master and take on his own apprentice, and so on and so on. Why is it suddenly so difficult to accept the fact that the Sith order was in danger of becoming what had caused its original downfall? History does have a tendacy of repeating itself at times, does it not?

All of this said, I am not some blind loyalist to the Star Wars saga and GL. I have posted here in the past supporting both sides of the fence on various subjects in this thread. *style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/hmmm.gif

[Winston_Sith]

Originally posted by GollaFett@June 20 2002 - 23:42
:::Back to ROTJ, the Emperor is quite pleased when Luke has Vader at his mercy, but disappointed when he doesn't finish him off, and attempts to kill Luke himself. The fact that the Emperor couldn't be satisfied with the structure of the dark side ultimately led to his downfall.
Well, no. I have to disagree.

What would the Sith Master rather have; a cocky, arrogant apprentice, who *thinks* the Light Side is more powerful than the Dark side, or the same apprentice you already have; and if this Light Side punk messed him up a little, he can *always* be fixed, like he always has, right?

The Emperor was just toying with Vader and Luke the whole time; he would have accepted either one as his apprentice; but it was decision time; he had to go with what was familiar, and REAL RESISTANCE (I'm betting, even from Yoda, all those years ago...) was NOT familiar, but Vader's unquestioning loyalty was.

THAT was the ultimate weakness that lead to Palpatine's ultimate downfall, not his dissatisfaction with his own Order.

[WhatMeWookie]

Darth Badly Quote: "Why on earth would the Emperor want to replace Vader (a powerful and loyal servent for years) with Luke (an untested and untrusted one)? That makes no sense.

If Vader wanted to beat the Emperor then he surely would have made certain of having turned Luke to his own side FIRST before he fought him. Not during the battle.

(WhatMeWookie) ...is quite right though: either the ending of Jedi makes a nonsence of the rule of two OR the rule of two makes a nonsense of the ending of Jedi."

Thanks Darth Badly and well put. It's definitely the latter as again, I doubt the rule of two existed pre-1983 and if it is a sketch book note - then it should have been dropped as it totally undermines the ROTJ ending. As stated, it's a pleasure being a part of debate, but sometimes it feels as if you need to watch the PM and AOTC with a black-hearted Lucasfilm lawyer standing next you to verify the intent of his client. This never happened in the old days...and fan debate used to be a healthy and mutual co-operative exploration of the possibilities lying within the trilogy, not the legal dispute it sounds like these days.

People have so far tried to patch up the logic of the rule of two and its impact on ROTJ, but no-one has managed to achieve this yet.

It's a serious flaw. The rule of 2 is just a weak and poorly thought out idea that betrays Lucas' current inability to spin yarns like he used to. It's just totally unnecessary as a plot device or even as a thin attempt to build on the Sith mythology. It just doesn't work and is not credible. SW villains have never been stupid so why sign up to a cause that will ultimately see one's demise. And how can the master -apprentice relationship work effectively if everyone has to watch their back all the time. Hah! No wonder the Sith have been out of business for a 1000 years (or whatever nonsense number they came up with in PM).

It's just nonsense cooked up without any real thought because it sounded half decent in principle and George was desperate to get the machine moving and the cash rolling in.

Tovor Quote:"There never would have been 3 Sith lords surviving the throne room to control the empire, there could only be 2 even after Luke was turned to the dark side.
Vader knew of the 2-Sith rule and realized that Palpatine would turn Luke and then destroy him, so he hoped to turn Luke to his side and kill Palpy first.
Palpy wanted to preserve the 2-Sith rule and planned without a doubt to kill Vader after turning Luke to his side.
Palpy had to have known that Vader knew of the 2-Sith rule, and would have deduced that Vader would destroy him after turning Luke, so both he and Vader were in an unspoken battle of wills to turn Luke and kill the other before the other killed him."

Tovor - man I really admire your devotion here and loyalty (really wish it was genuinely being rewarded) and wouldn't want to be there when it hits you and you see through the prequel facade - BUT cos' I respect you, I just want to let you know I'll be there for you man - it's rough when your world comes tumbling down.

Honestly - none of your hypothesis was in play in 1983 at all. If you graft these dynamics over the ending of ROTJ (a) you're reading way too much into it and (b) it still comes up as dramatically nonsensical and unnecessary. Just ask yourself as Darth Badly has done "W-h-y-?" Superb power-players and machiavellian geniuses don't limit themselves with rules that reveal way too much about themselves, narrow their options of achieving their aims or threatens their ultimate power and control. It just does not add up.

The rule of 2 stands along with Metrochlorians (or whatever the spelling is) and the virgin birth ideas as ultra-lame and desperate... They're also unnecessary nonsense and the films could have all been made without throwing in these lame ideas - probably insulting our intelligence slightly less and without so deeply betraying the logic and myth created by the OT. They don't work and they certainly don't contribute anything. They actually just poison the logic and romance of the mythology created successfully within the OT.

Any other players want to take a crack at defending the rule of 2. I think we just saw the logic for the whole sextet go up in smoke, I think Lucasfilm should issue an apology for PM and AOTC and withdraw the films from distribution..or maybe he could have Anakin wake up from a bad dream, along with the rest of us at the beginning of Ep III - dismiss PM and AOTC and use his last 2 hours + to make a decent film..

[darthwicker]

The name of this thread now works great.
Seeing as though that's what it's become.

[WhatMeWookie]

Originally posted by darthwicker@June 21 2002 - 07:11
The name of this thread now works great.
Seeing as though that's what it's become.
Savaged By the wit of Oscar Wilde!

Not!!!

Sticks and Stones Darthwicker

[qui-riv-brid]

After reading the post that started the thread I have to say I'm amused .

Some of the answers that you want will be revealed in
the next movie. Others are already there if you look for them
and others come down to the vagaries of adventure storytelling where if you look too closely you will never
be satisfied.

You are looking at it like a logical exercise.
Movies are about emotion and flow to a story if you analyse
ESB for example what logical reason is there for Boba Fett
to follow the Falson to Bespin? If he knew that the Falcon
was hanging on the side of the Star Destroyer then why the hell didn't he tell Vader and capture them there. He still
gets his bounty from Vader and takes Han to Jabba
why screw around? Cause if he did they if would kill
the rest of the movie and become a lot more dull
no suspense, intrigue, danger, escape no set up to the next movie.

Really if a movie is too simple one segment of people complain
and if it is a liitle more complex someone else complains,
if you want to that's fine as long as you are getting something
out of it. Which apparently you are.

[RollaFett]

This latest debate on the rule of two just baffles me. We are talking about evil, right? The bad guys, the guys with the black hats (black robes, in this case).
The fact that the Emperor screws around with the rule of 2 in ROTJ doesn't have to make a lot of sense. He is a bad man. He is selfish and power hungry. He had Vader, wanted Luke, but had to have just one. What's a good way to accomplish this? Have them fight each other. I don't see how anyone really thought that 3 sith lords were coming out of that throne room.
Tover is right on this. It's so clear and in plain sight. Have any of you watched that movie at any point in the past 19 years? It sure doesn't seem like it. It seems as though there just needed to be soemthing else for people to rip on this thread. Some of the complaints here are valid, this is not one of them.

[WhatMeWookie]

Originally posted by GollaFett@June 21 2002 - 13:07
This latest debate on the rule of two just baffles me. We are talking about evil, right? The bad guys, the guys with the black hats (black robes, in this case).
The fact that the Emperor screws around with the rule of 2 in ROTJ doesn't have to make a lot of sense. He is a bad man. He is selfish and power hungry. He had Vader, wanted Luke, but had to have just one. What's a good way to accomplish this? Have them fight each other. I don't see how anyone really thought that 3 sith lords were coming out of that throne room.
Tover is right on this. It's so clear and in plain sight. Have any of you watched that movie at any point in the past 19 years? It sure doesn't seem like it. It seems as though there just needed to be soemthing else for people to rip on this thread. Some of the complaints here are valid, this is not one of them.
GollaFett

You're just kidding yourself. With due respect that's just not a defence and ignores the principles of story-telling. You're basically allowing Lucas to pick and choose plot points arbitrarily with no sense of structure or purpose. It's poor writing man.

So basically, what you're saying is hey George, we'll take anything. We're not fussy. If you want to go one way this week, another the next what the hell, we're at your service.

What your saying is no defence of a major hole in the sextet.
There is no fear in Vader's position at the end of ROTJ that his master may turn on him when the proposition is made to Luke. The drive is to bring Luke over to the Dark side. Only Vader is being openly duplicitous because he's mentioned this earlier to Luke. No rule of two is in operation as a sub-text to ROTJ. It just was not a dynamic that was in there. The whole nonsense has been made up to pad out PM

If the Emperor don't have to follow the rule of two in 1983, why bother to make the stupid thing up in 1999. Sorry, but you're case just doesn't hold water.

[RollaFett]

What Me Wookiee- I beleive we are stuck in what is called a stalemate. We agree to disagree on this subject. It's hard to change anyone's mind when thier mind is made up and not open to change.

[lordgossamer]

I think perhaps GL did think up the 2 sith rule in 1983. This ROTJ quote seems to allude to it.

"Now, fulfill your destiny and take your fathers place at my side!"

Is it a dumb rule? Well, I guess that's ones own opinion. Plot holes or not, I still have tons of fun watching these movies.

Sorry if any of that has been mentioned before in this thread. I may have missed some messages.

[bodhisattva yoda]

has anyone considered that vader never knew about the two sith rule? perhaps he didn't feel it would be a threat to the emperor by introducing the idea of turning luke to the dark side. the emperor, of course, knew of it, but we already know his agenda. i personally like the two sith rule. it makes a lot of sense given the nature of the sith, and i don't feel that it is incongruent with the original trilogy.... otherwise, why else wouldn't the emperor have recruted more sith to do his evil bidding? if anything, the two sith rule explains why vader and the emperor are the only two of their kind.

[Darth Badly]

Originally posted by bodhisattva yoda@June 22 2002 - 20:14
has anyone considered that vader never knew about the two sith rule? perhaps he didn't feel it would be a threat to the emperor by introducing the idea of turning luke to the dark side. the emperor, of course, knew of it, but we already know his agenda.
Since we the viewers know two things about the Sith for sure: 1/ They are evil little toe rags 2/ There can only ever be two of them at any one time.

If Darth Vader didn't know about one of the main and most central rules about the Sith clan then what on earth DID he know about them? Otherwise surely he would have tired to recruit other dark side sensitive people down the years between Ep III and the original.

[C3DA]

The charge that, before RotJ, there is no basis for the Sith "rule of two" is blatantly false. *Does not anyone remember what Vader said to Luke at Bespin? *As best as I can remember it:

"Luke, you can destroy the Emperor. *He has forseen it. *Join me; and together, we can end this destructive conflict and bring order to the galaxy. *We can rule the galaxy as father and son. ... *It is the only way."

Vader basically says, "Let's go kill Palpy." *Though this does not prove that the Sith "rule of two" was written in stone before RotJ, the rationale for having such a rule is made blatantly apparent. *Vader, the apprentice, attempts to recruit Luke in order to destroy his master. *There is a "rule of two" because the loyalty of a dark side apprentice is always in question. *

As to the question, "Why didn't Vader first convert Luke and then go after the Emperor?" the simple answer is that Vader tried to do exactly that, but failed. *Luke, by jumping from the platform in Cloud City, basically told Vader that he would rather die than join him. *

Both Vader and the Emperor realize (as the Emperor says in RotJ) that "Only together can we [Palpatine and Vader] turn him [Luke] to the dark side." *Luke reinforces this when he meets Vader on Endor:

LUKE: *I beleive the truth that you were once Anakin ...
You could not bring yourself to destroy me then. *That is why you will not bring me your Emperor now. *
VADER: *Indeed you are powerful as the Emperor has forseen ... You don't know the power of the dark side, I must obey my master.

Vader can't convert Luke on his own and he knows it. *In fact, Luke is as close, if not closer, to converting Vader. *But to challenge the Emperor, Vader needs Luke on the dark side. *

As to the question, "Why does the Emperor allow Vader to seek Luke out, if Vader cannot be trusted?" the, admittedly more complicated, answer is that Vader is still the bigger threat. *

First and foremost, Vader is still the "one who will bring balance to the Force," i.e. kill Palpatine. *On this point, the prequels succeed in enrinching the relationship between Vader and Palpatine. *Vader is not some mere, blindly loyal henchman. *Rather, Vader is the enemy that Palpatine, paranoid as any despot, chooses to keep closer than his friends. *("Keep your friends close, and enemies closer.") *And the line "Good ... Your hate has made you powerful; now finish him, and take your father's place at my side," has much more resonance. *Though he would be fine if Vader killed Luke, the Emperor cannot help but be pleased at getting rid of a prophetic threat. *

Also, Luke functions as a carrot on a stick:

EMPEROR: I sense that you wish to continue your search for young Skywalker ... Patience, my friend. *In time, he will seek you out ... *Everything is proceeding as I have forseen. [evil cackle]

Vader has shown that he will not go after the Emperor without Luke. *As long as Luke remains elusive, Vader is, however temporarily, sidetracked. *Moreover, now that the Emperor knows that Vader failed to convert Luke, he also knows that any such conversion must take place on his terms. *

Which leads me to my next point. *As the conversion of Luke must take place on Palpatine's terms, he places himself in a win/win situation. *By pitting Luke against Vader, Palpatine will get rid of at least one threat. What the Emperor did not count on is that neither Vader nor Luke will kill each other. *For some reason, dark side ambition does not overcome the father-son relationship. *Vader cannot bring himself to kill Luke because of the conflict within him:

VADER: *You were right about me ... Tell your sister you were right. *

Luke refuses to kill Vader even against the advice of Obi-wan:

LUKE: *I can't kill my own father.
OBI-WAN: *Then the Emperor has already won ...

The irony! *Obi-wan makes another mistake. *It is precisely because Luke refuses to kill Vader that the Emperor dies. *

Now, why does Vader take Luke to the Emperor if he knows that only two of them are going to come out alive? *This is a big gamble on Vader's part, perhaps verging on insanity. *But, here again the prequels add some depth. *Anakin/Vader is obsessive to a fault. *Vader is insane. *Must have Padme. *Must have Luke. *Must be most powerful Jedi. *Must rule the galaxy.

[C3DA]

Oh, I forgot to mention that Vader could not secretly seek out Luke because it is the Emperor who informs Vader about Luke:

EMPEROR: We have a new enemy, Luke Skywalker. ...

VADER: ... He will join us or die.

Even if Vader knew about Luke before the Emperor's transmission in ESB, AFTER the Emperor basically says, "I know your son is out there," there is no way for Vader to keep secret any pursuit of Luke.

[Darth Badly]

C3DA - two well argued posts, but right at the end of each you blow yourself and your arguments right out of the water.

C3DA QUOTE: Now, why does Vader take Luke to the Emperor if he knows that only two of them are going to come out alive? This is a big gamble on Vader's part, perhaps verging on insanity. But, here again the prequels add some depth. Anakin/Vader is obsessive to a fault. Vader is insane. Must have Padme. Must have Luke. Must be most powerful Jedi. Must rule the galaxy.

It's not verging on insanity as you siggest, just bad writing. Well, not that there was much wrong with ROJ at the time, but that paragraph shows that ROJ does not work within the rule of two Sith at all.

You're suggesting that the explaination for Vader taking Luke there (even when he knows it might mean the end for himself) is that he's insane. The whole point of Act III of ROJ is surely that Vader is becoming human and sane again. Luke is bringing out his best side, "the good in him".
It would be a better argument (but still a very weak one) to suggest that Vader has no choice in the matter. ie now that the Emperor knows about Luke, Vader is for the chop if he doesn't bring him before the Emperor. But the simply truth is that Lucus hadn't thought of the Rule of Two nonsense back then (thank God) and when he thought of it for the prequels, he hadn't worked out how much it would mess things up. (And neither had I until WhatMeWookie brought it to all our attentions. Thank you again.)

The final proof that there was no Rule of Two working back in ROJ is that lovely dialogue you quoted yourself, C3DA, (and God, isn't it nice to be able to talk about Star Wars films with good dialogue.)

Namely:

VADER: If he could be turned, he would become a poweful ally.

EMPEROR: Yes. Yes. He would be a great asset. Can it be done?

VADER: He will join us or die, my master.

Vader says JOIN US which unless you're going to suggest he's insane or has suddenly lost his ability to speak english: he clearly means "come over to the dark side and combine forces with me (Vader) and you (the Emperor) so that there will be three of us".

There simply was no Rule of Two working in ROJ. It would be better to defend Uncle George's case by saying that the Emperor was so powerful he believed he could and should do wantever he wanted. (Decades of ultimate power and all that.) Rather than pretend George meant something that he clearly didn't or that (even worse) there are other levels of deeper Fight Club meaning to be had in a film full of teddy bears and spaceships.

C3DA QUOTE: "On this point, the prequels succeed in enrinching the relationship between Vader and Palpatine."

The prequels don't enrich anything. They undermine that which we hold dear and serve only to poison the well from which we all drink.

[WhatMeWookie]

GollaFett Quote: "What Me Wookiee- I believe we are stuck in what is called a stalemate. We agree to disagree on this subject. It's hard to change anyone's mind when thier mind is made up and not open to change."

I think you're mis-judging me. I have a completely open mind... and believe me I'd love to be convinced that I was wrong and that PM and AOTC are good movies if you search out their hidden depths. But that's not what is happening here...and there aren't any.

The fact is that even when airtight points of debate are submitted to you guys, the response is "agree to disagree". I just can't accept that.

As Darth Badly has shown.. and please people, pick up your copies of the screenplay of ROTJ in whatever forms they may be. ... there is incontrovertible proof that the rule of two Sith guideline did not exist in 1983. let's quote it again...:

VADER: If he could be turned, he would become a poweful ally.

EMPEROR: Yes. Yes. He would be a great asset. Can it be done?

VADER: He will join us or die, my master.

I'm sorry folks, but this leaves the following options

(a) That George Lucas and not Vader is insane in contrast with C3DA's determined and yet heavily flawed argument. A possibility, although I think cash crazy is more likely.

(b) Having Yoda state the rule of two in the concluding moments of PM i.e. at a point of dramatic importance that's supposed to mean something - has in fact little dramatic importance in fact and we should ignore it. If so, I think one can safely make the same argument for the relevance of PM in total.

&copy; In Ep III George reveals that in fact under a Mos Eisley by-law, the rule of two only applies on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Sunday Afternoons , which might get him off the hook if the end of ROTJ happened outside of these operating hours.

or

(d) I was also forgetting the possibility that maybe the Emperor and Vader were considering Luke for the hitherto forgotten Sith Kids Club.

Please C3DA and GollaFett, it's a mess!!! have the decency to step forward and accept it. Search inside yourselves. You know this to be true.

The prosecution rests, m'lud....

[wook]

(Just got back from vacation at Myrtle Beach. Lots to catch up with here & I'm still working on it.)


"it's nine films set in space"

I don't believe GL even started with a set number of films. He just knew he had a story that was too big for one (if he were to flesh it all out). So, like any writer should, he took the best stuff & made that first film. But the point here is, even before he got to the prequels GL was out of ideas and so all that was left was the previously-rejected chaff. This is why the prequels are so unsatisfying and full of ludicrous, nonsensical fill-ins such as the "rule of two", midicholorians, virgin births, and the brazenly insulting/stupid "Anikin built C3PO".

I still say we all deserve better. But if GL can't do better, then he should rein in his "toymaker's ego" and quit dragging it through the mud (and that includes "Special Editions"). I fear that in another 10 years, the SW saga is going to be thought of as one of those film series that was destroyed by the ego of its own creator.


(BTW don't be too hard on Trek -- may not be your cup of tea but it has a way better track record than the SW saga to date.) :^)

[Port]

If 10,000 star systems want to leave the Republic then so what?
What’s so bad about that? Why not let them leave? Isn't that their democratic right?
Why must there be a war? You surely don't have a war to stop people leaving a democratic organisation?

Answer: Politics and Fear of Change. The current ruling class will want things to stay the way things are. They’ve got a system they think isn’t broken – so it doesn’t need to be fixed. Even this, though, was not incitement for violence. *The discussions about war were because of violent actions from the Separatist movement (see the Holocron website). The Republic was concerned about defending itself.

If Chris Lee / Count Duckula is really working for the future Emperor then why tell Obi Wan the truth about there being evil in the senate??? This is ridiculous – as is Yoda dismissing the entire idea as him trying to spread paranoia. Surely the Emperor would kick Duckula's behind?

It’s not ridiculous. It’s great. Now the Jedi don’t know who to trust in the Senate. Goes with the whole “creating confusion for the Jedi” thing.

Why does the future emperor think that if he puts a dark hood on then no one will know who he is? Why does this work? Why does he bother with this silly Superman/Clerk Kent identity swap when anyone who sees him as Darth will instantly recognise him as the chancellor?

It’s an easy disguise that nobody will suspect even if they stumble on it. If you look in the guys drawers and see a fake moustache and eyebrows or whatever, that’s going to raise suspicion. If you look in his drawer and see a cloak – no big deal. So, he wears it whenever he leaves his secret exits, it keep his face hidden from casual glances if he takes a taxi or whatever and it doesn’t arouse too much attention because it’s stuff that a lot of people are wearing.

Given that the future emperor now has ultimate power anyway what is the point in trying to manipulate people into a war? (If that's indeed what he's doing?) Since the future emperor is the most powerful man in the universe anyway AND is widely liked and trusted, why on earth blow it all and become the most hated man? Why not just flipping enjoy it?

At this point he doesn’t have all the political power he wants and needs because he doesn’t have an army. So, he creates a situation where people give him an army. Now, he can start to use that army to some folks advantage while withholding the army from others. He can threaten some with attack. He can take over if he has enough control over the army. The Supreme Chancellor does not have the kind of power the Emperor ends up having in Episode 4.

Who ordered that clone army in the first place?

All we know now is that Sifo Dyas did.

If Count Duckula ordered it then how come there’s no reaction when it’s used against him?

We don’t know that he did. And if he did, he planned it to be used against him because he’s not really working for the Separatists, he’s working for Sidious (and himself).

And if he did order it, then why create an army of robots as well?

Regardless of whether or not he did order it or not, he created an army of robots for the Separatists so that the Republic would be scared into wanting an army.

Who hid that whole solar system of the Grey cloning aliens and how and why?

Tyranus deleted the system from the Jedi database while he was still a Jedi, probably. He did it to reduce Jedi involvement in that system.

How come no one flew into the hidden sun over the last ten years?

Who says no one did? Who do you mean by no one? No Jedi? If the Sith were controlling that systems access to the Jedi, then the Jedi would have no reason (complaints or incidents) to go there.

Surely moving to a new planet would have been a better idea than cloaking an entire solar system which any three year old could work out was still there. (Although not Obi Dimbo Wan it seems.)

Obi Wan figured out it was there, he was also trying to figure out why it wasn’t in the records. The Jedi haven’t been betrayed by one of their own for thousands of years, so the idea may be foreign to them.

How come no one noticed given that the fatty alien who helps out Obi Wan can't be the only one who's heard of the grey aliens.

I don’t understand this question. Do you mean why didn’t Obi Wan instantly know where the dart came from? Do you mean why didn’t he know what set of cloners the fat alien was talking about?

How were the grey alien cloners paid? And by whom?

It’s obvious since the Jedi were not really involved that the Sith were paying them (maybe through laundered money) through “false Jedi” contacts.

And MOST OF ALL, why in God’s name didn't the grey aliens get in touch with someone over the ten years? It is utterly ridiculous that they would be working away for an entire decade without once checking to see what was happening or making any kind of contact with the people they were working for. What if the people who ordered the clone army were all dead?

Again, the Sith were controlling contact with the aliens. It is not hard to imagine that they provided the kind of authenticity the gray aliens required so that they believed they were working for the Jedi. To explain all the details about how they did this in the movie would have slowed the pace down I’m sure.

Why chose an unstable bounty hunter who's not very good at his job and gets killed real easy (here and again in Return of the Jedi) as your model for one million fighting clones? (Actually, given that all Stormtroopers die real easy and are terrible shots - perhaps this is one thing that does make sense - although WHY is another matter.)

He doesn’t get killed really easy in my opinion. It takes the second highest-ranking member of the Jedi order to kill him. *

Having chosen him why let him go on dodgy missions where he can leave clues that will allow people to find you after ten years of careful hiding?

Using him is worth the risk. And bear in mind that all of this operation for Sidious involves risk. Still, it’s not as risky as Sidious doing the things himself that he has Jango doing. That way Sidious can never be caught in the act.

Why hasn't the Republic got a proper bloody army in the first place? Surely there must be some real people willing to serve?

Probably the Republic set itself up so that its members wouldn’t have to be afraid of it. The members could depend on their own armies to handle local military members, and call for aid from other nearby systems through the Republic system of doing things. That way members could maintain some independence.



Why are there seemingly only about 30 Jedi knights in the whole galaxy available for the final battle at the end???
Why are the Jedi so short in numbers in the first place?

It’s an elite group, and therefore a lot a people are just not going to cut the mustard. I didn’t have time to count the number of Jedi in the arena, but there seemed like a lot more than 30 there.

Why is the 'force unbalanced' and what the heck is that supposed to mean???

I’m eagerly awaiting that answer in Episode 3, though I have a few theories. The whole Prophecy is an animal of the Prequels.

Why can just anybody (Yoda) turn up and assume command of the clone army? All Obi Wan needed when he turned up was a good Jedi Knight costume available at any good fancy dress shop?

Yoda went to the cloning planet and took authority of the army there. Doubtless he filled the army in on who they should take commands from.

Why is there just one funny joke (Obi Wan’s line about ‘Death Sticks’) in 140 minutes of film? Why has the charm and wit of the original films been replaced by horrible computer graphics and soulless war games.

That’s a matter of taste so it’s kinda pointless to even bring it up. I found a lot more humor in the movie than you did.

Why does Yoda and the Jedi counsel spend all their time in one small room at the top of a horrible skyscraper?

They don't spend all their time in one small room at the top of a horrible skyscraper.

How and why is the very obviously evil future Emperor able to disguise his very clearly evil intentions?

Because it’s not obvious to anyone that he’s evil at the time the movie is set in.

How and why is he allowed to remain in office as Chancellor seemingly forever, when Princess Portman was only allowed to be Queen of Naboo for two terms.

The Naboo system of government is different from the Repbulic system of government, though both can work together. This gives the Naboo government some independence, like one of the states in the United States.

And anyway, why did the idiots on Naboo elect a queen so young and inexperienced as her? Surely on the entire planet there must have been someone better?

I’m indifferent about this and it doesn’t really affect the story much. Stranger things happen on this planet, let alone on completely different worlds.

Why can't Yoda or anyone even get a fleeting feeling that the Chancellor is pure evil - even when they already know that there are Dark Lords out there? AND still can't even at the end when Obi Wan has been directly warned by Count Duckula?

Because they don’t have any experience with fighting someone who is actively using the Dark Side of the Force. They may have experience in resisting it (The Dark Side) while using the Light Side, but Sith haven’t been around to fight for a thousand years (that’s longer than Yoda’s been alive).

Why did they make a big point of saying - that only a really brave senator would propose giving the future emperor extra powers and then when JarJarTosser Binks does so he is immediately clapped as a hero by everyone like it what everyone wanted all along?

Jar Jar, though an idiot, has the respectability of Senator Amidala to back him up. In the book they make a big deal about how other Senators admire Amidala. Anyway, it’s going to take someone with a lot of political currency to propose that other member Senators give up some of their power so that the Chancellor has more power. And he wasn’t clapped as a hero by everyone.

Why is Count Duckula holding secret meetings with such really important and interesting people as the losers from the trade federation, the National Institute of Librarians, and the Nation Union of Estate Agents? What the heck have they got to do with anything?

Again, it’s obvious that they are what make up the leadership of the Separatists. They are only important - as far as the story’s concerned - regarding that aspect and what raw materials/power/politics they can bring to the coming conflict.

Why does R2D2 push C3PO on to that conveyer belt in the droid factory? (Other than to start yet another poorly directed set piece that’s more like a video game than a film, of course.)

Because he’s mad at him. The directed set piece quality is a matter of taste – and in my taste I thought it was great.

Why is Princess Portman so important in things given that although pretty in photographs she has no charm or sex appeal?

You said you read the book. The book explains all of that. The charm and sex appeal parts are again a matter of personal taste so I can’t answer that question except to say my taste is different.

If the future emperor wants her dead why not poison her coffee or something? Why get Count Duckula to hire the idiot bounty hunter / assassin Fett who then hires a silly girl assassin to try and kill her in the very building where the future emperor is staying anyway. Isn't this taking subcontracting a little too far? (And of course it’s this terrible idea that leads to Obi Wan eventually finding the clone army.)

Assassination plots have occurred in the very buildings and homes of the people who hired the assassin. It’s not unheard of. Assassination plots always involve risk. That’s realistic.

Why doesn't Darth Vader recognise C3PO in the original trilogy? Why doesn't C3PO recognise Vader as the maker? If C3PO has his memory wiped at the end of Episode III then all character development here is meaningless.

That is an answer we’ll get in the next movie - which I’m going to go see. Are you going to go see it?

Why do you have to have a chase through an asteroid belt and a Skywalker getting their hand cut off, just because it's the middle film in a trilogy?

Chase through the asteroid belt was fun. Skywalker getting hand cut off is thematic.

Why doesn't Darth Vader show any sense of having been to Tatoonie before in the opening of Star Wars? He must surely hate the place? It’s not true to say that the identity of Anakin is entirely lost to him because if it was Luke being his son would mean nothing to him and is clearly (in Empire) means a lot.

Why would he share his intense personal feelings about his mother and Tatooine after becoming Darth Vader? Do you ever hear him talk about his mom when he’s Darth Vader? Nope. He said it all when he told Luke “That name no longer has any meaning to me.”

If young Anakin loves his mother so much that he has wet dreams about her being banged by Sand People then how come he hasn't visited her in 10 flipping years? That's a bit slack isn't it? He and Obi Wan have been all over the galaxy - they must have been back near Tatoonine. Surely he must have had a weekend off? Why hasn't he even bothered to communicate with her via one of those holographic things? What no cards on mothers day?

He’s not having wet dreams about his mom being banged by Sandpeople. Again, you’ve said you’ve read the book, so you know that’s not what was going on. Because he’s part of the Jedi order and it’s easily construed that they don’t normally go for that “staying in touch” stuff. They regularly take babies away from their moms and there are no parent weekend visits.

Why is Yoda just computer cartoon now instead of a poorly operated muppet?

Because he looks better that way. And so he can be more articulate.

Why is he suddenly happy to command SS style Nazi clones into battle?

He doesn’t look happy once during the entire battle and is sad at the end of it. He does what he has to do to rescue the Jedi. Perhaps he thinks he’s taking away a weapon that the enemy was planning to use.

Why isn’t Yoda smart enough to work out it’s a bad thing?

I already answered that.

Why has George lost his mind?

Why haven’t you had him committed if you know he’s lost his mind?

Why must we suffer this badly written nonsense???

If you don’t like it, you don’t have to suffer it. So the word “must” is not applicable.

[wook]

>> Why must we suffer this badly written nonsense???

> If you don't like it, you don't have to suffer it. So
> the word "must" is not applicable.

I beg to differ. Anyone who has been a fan of the original film(s) is naturally going to take an interest in new ones. You can't just stick your head in the sand and pretend that they do not exist. Unfortunately for those who see the new films as seriously flawed, this is always going to seem like a form of suffering.

Remember, no one *wants* to dislike these films, least of all anyone bothering to post to a forum like this.

[Darth Badly]

Port - welcome to the debate and thanks for your post.

I can't say I agree with many of your points. I think that our dear old pal & chum Tovor did a better job (probably the best so far) of defending CLOWNS.

Just for the record: you say several times in your post that I have said that I've read the novel of the film. I've never said that at all.
One of the points of debate in this thread has been exactly how much bloody background material a person (or droid) has to read and commit to memory because the film narrative doesn't cover enough ground or offer enough solid explaination.

I'll quote my question & your answer then my new reply:

QUOTE: Why must there be a war? You surely don't have a war to stop people leaving a democratic organisation?

Answer: Politics and Fear of Change. The current ruling class will want things to stay the way things are. They’ve got a system they think isn’t broken – so it doesn’t need to be fixed. END QUOTE.

This completely fails to address the argument of how a so-called democratic organisation would justify trying to stop members choosing to leave it (wheather by force or by votes.)



QUOTE: If Chris Lee / Count Duckula is really working for the future Emperor then why tell Obi Wan the truth about there being evil in the senate??? This is ridiculous – as is Yoda dismissing the entire idea as him trying to spread paranoia. Surely the Emperor would kick Duckula's behind?

It’s not ridiculous. It’s great. Now the Jedi don’t know who to trust in the Senate. Goes with the whole “creating confusion for the Jedi” thing. END QUOTE

I agree that the Sith would want to spread confusion, BUT the best way to do that is surely not to tell your deadly enemies the actual truth. Surely better to spread other lies like Mace is a Sith or something, anything BUT the truth.

QUOTE: Why does the future emperor think that if he puts a dark hood on then no one will know who he is? Why does this work? Why does he bother with this silly Superman/Clerk Kent identity swap when anyone who sees him as Darth will instantly recognise him as the chancellor?

It’s an easy disguise that nobody will suspect even if they stumble on it. If you look in the guys drawers and see a fake moustache and eyebrows or whatever, that’s going to raise suspicion. If you look in his drawer and see a cloak – no big deal. So, he wears it whenever he leaves his secret exits, it keep his face hidden from casual glances if he takes a taxi or whatever and it doesn’t arouse too much attention because it’s stuff that a lot of people are wearing. END QUOTE:

This was my favorite answer and I laughed long and hard at the idea of the future Emperor sitting in the back of a taxi somewhere. Would he be a good tiper, do you think?
Marvellous.
Actually, I don't think that it's the cloak that's the disguise. I think that's what the Sith actually wear around the house / dark lord's den. I think the Paply suit is the disguise.

QUOTE: Who ordered that clone army in the first place?

All we know now is that Sifo Dyas did. END QUOTE.

Gee that's swell, but we don't know who he is, do we?

QUOTE: If Count Duckula ordered it then how come there’s no reaction when it’s used against him?

We don’t know that he did. And if he did, he planned it to be used against him because he’s not really working for the Separatists, he’s working for Sidious (and himself). END QUOTE.

Well if he did (?) and if he did plan to have it used against himself (what a stupid idea) then why oh why does he look so bloody surprised and pissed off?


QUOTE: Who hid that whole solar system of the Grey cloning aliens and how and why?How come no one flew into the hidden sun over the last ten years?

Tyranus deleted the system from the Jedi database while he was still a Jedi, probably. He did it to reduce Jedi involvement in that system. END QUOTE

But removing a place from a map doesn't stop it being there. How come no one else flew in to that solar system in those ten years? How come that since cloning is a hot topic in that galaxy far far away that no jedi noticed it missing from maps before? (Since it was home to a race of famous cloners.)

QUOTE: Surely moving to a new planet would have been a better idea than cloaking an entire solar system which any three year old could work out was still there. (Although not Obi Dimbo Wan it seems.)

Obi Wan figured out it was there. END QUOTE

But only with the help of a bunch of three years olds targeted by Lucis so he can get their pocket money.

QUOTE: How come no one noticed given that the fatty alien who helps out Obi Wan can't be the only one who's heard of the grey aliens.

I don’t understand this question. Do you mean why didn’t Obi Wan instantly know where the dart came from? Do you mean why didn’t he know what set of cloners the fat alien was talking about? END QUOTE.

No, what I meant by that was that Obi Wan doesn't exactly have to work hard to get an answer does he? He goes to old contact who can tell him straight away and without a doubt exactly where the dart came from and who made it. That must mean that the cloners technology is pretty special, easily recognised, and well known in the galaxy. So if the fatty alien knows about them so must loads of other people.


QUOTE: And MOST OF ALL, why in God’s name didn't the grey aliens get in touch with someone over the ten years? It is utterly ridiculous that they would be working away for an entire decade without once checking to see what was happening or making any kind of contact with the people they were working for. What if the people who ordered the clone army were all dead?

Again, the Sith were controlling contact with the aliens. It is not hard to imagine that they provided the kind of authenticity the gray aliens required so that they believed they were working for the Jedi. To explain all the details about how they did this in the movie would have slowed the pace down I’m sure. END QUOTE

I'm sure it would have slowed down the movie, but that's not my problem is it? I'm not making millions out of doing a sloppy job of writing the thing. Lucus offers almost no explaination of how the cloning thing came about, and I still can't swallow that any race of aliens whatever their lifespan would work for ten years solid without contacting someone or any word from the people who ordered the bloody army. It's just dumb.


QUOTE: Why chose an unstable bounty hunter who's not very good at his job and gets killed real easy (here and again in Return of the Jedi) as your model for one million fighting clones? (Actually, given that all Stormtroopers die real easy and are terrible shots - perhaps this is one thing that does make sense - although WHY is another matter.)

He doesn’t get killed really easy in my opinion. It takes the second highest-ranking member of the Jedi order to kill him. END QUOTE

Well he runs straight at Mace and gets his head cut off about half a second later. That's not much of a fight is it? Before that he fails to kill Obi Dumbo when the odds are all in his favour and then he has to has to run away like a frightened chicken. His clone dies an comedy death in ROJ - a great moment - but it works because Fett II is suddenly reduced from this big threat to nothing in a matter of seconds.
Look, both Fetts have cool outfits and look great, it's just that they're not very good at their jobs.

QUOTE: Having chosen him why let him go on dodgy missions where he can leave clues that will allow people to find you after ten years of careful hiding?

Using him is worth the risk. And bear in mind that all of this operation for Sidious involves risk. Still, it’s not as risky as Sidious doing the things himself that he has Jango doing. That way Sidious can never be caught in the act. END QUOTE.

Look, I can quite see why Sidious would not want to take the risk of getting caught himself. BUT using Jango is far to much of a risk as well because he is the only person who can lead the Jedi back to the cloners.
(Which say it had hapened a few years before MIGHT have meant the discovery and stopping of the entire clone army's production by the Republic.)
How much smarted would it have been to hire another bounty hunter / assassin without having Jango ever leave the cloners planet? Lots.

QUOTE: Why are there seemingly only about 30 Jedi knights in the whole galaxy available for the final battle at the end???
Why are the Jedi so short in numbers in the first place?

It’s an elite group, and therefore a lot a people are just not going to cut the mustard. I didn’t have time to count the number of Jedi in the arena, but there seemed like a lot more than 30 there. END QUOTE.

Well Tovor covered this one pretty good as well. I'm happy to accept that there were more than 30 there - probably there are about 25-30 survivors after the battle, but even so it wasn't much of a Jedi army was it?

QUOTE: Why is the 'force unbalanced' and what the heck is that supposed to mean???

I’m eagerly awaiting that answer in Episode 3, though I have a few theories. The whole Prophecy is an animal of the Prequels. END QUOTE

Well, fingers crossed, let's hope Uncle George has bothered to work this bit out then?


QUOTE: Why can just anybody (Yoda) turn up and assume command of the clone army? All Obi Wan needed when he turned up was a good Jedi Knight costume available at any good fancy dress shop?

Yoda went to the cloning planet and took authority of the army there. Doubtless he filled the army in on who they should take commands from. END QUOTE

I'm sure he did fill them in, but the point is they were all only born / produced ten years ago and have never left the planet so they're hardly going to know who Yoda is are they? I wonder if he had to sign for them?
"One hundred thousand troops"
"Take them I will. A big taxi outside I have. Heavy with the dark side the back seat is?"

QUOTE: Why can't Yoda or anyone even get a fleeting feeling that the Chancellor is pure evil - even when they already know that there are Dark Lords out there? AND still can't even at the end when Obi Wan has been directly warned by Count Duckula?

Because they don’t have any experience with fighting someone who is actively using the Dark Side of the Force. They may have experience in resisting it (The Dark Side) while using the Light Side, but Sith haven’t been around to fight for a thousand years (that’s longer than Yoda’s been alive). END QUOTE.

So you're saying that the Jedi aren't any good at fighting anything unless they've fought it before? This isn't true of Luke in the originals is it? I don't think it's true of them now or in Ep I. It didn't stop Obi Wan killing Darth Maul? There's nothing in the films to suggest this at all.

QUOTE: Why is Princess Portman so important in things given that although pretty in photographs she has no charm or sex appeal?

You said you read the book. The book explains all of that. The charm and sex appeal parts are again a matter of personal taste so I can’t answer that question except to say my taste is different. END QUOTE

As I said I haven't read and book and anyway - if something is important to the film it needs to be in the bllody film not explained by a book afterwards.

QUOTE: Why doesn't Darth Vader recognise C3PO in the original trilogy? Why doesn't C3PO recognise Vader as the maker? If C3PO has his memory wiped at the end of Episode III then all character development here is meaningless.

That is an answer we’ll get in the next movie - which I’m going to go see. Are you going to go see it? END QUOTE.

Oh God. Another movie - what a depressing thought. I imagine my Uncle Ronnie will make me see it. He's a cruel man, you see.

QUOTE: Why did they make a big point of saying - that only a really brave senator would propose giving the future emperor extra powers and then when JarJarTosser Binks does so he is immediately clapped as a hero by everyone like it what everyone wanted all along?

Jar Jar, though an idiot, has the respectability of Senator Amidala to back him up. In the book they make a big deal about how other Senators admire Amidala. Anyway, it’s going to take someone with a lot of political currency to propose that other member Senators give up some of their power so that the Chancellor has more power. And he wasn’t clapped as a hero by everyone. END QUOTE.

Everyone that I could see clapped him.

QUOTE: Why does R2D2 push C3PO on to that conveyer belt in the droid factory? (Other than to start yet another poorly directed set piece that’s more like a video game than a film, of course.)

Because he’s mad at him. The directed set piece quality is a matter of taste – and in my taste I thought it was great. END QUOTE.

Where did you get that idea from? Why is he mad at him - other than he won't jump - and that's hardly surprising.
The sequence which follows this is very poor and if we had the storyboards in front of us, I'd take you through it and show you exactly why.


QUOTE: Why doesn't Darth Vader show any sense of having been to Tatoonie before in the opening of Star Wars? He must surely hate the place? It’s not true to say that the identity of Anakin is entirely lost to him because if it was Luke being his son would mean nothing to him and is clearly (in Empire) means a lot.

Why would he share his intense personal feelings about his mother and Tatooine after becoming Darth Vader? Do you ever hear him talk about his mom when he’s Darth Vader? Nope. He said it all when he told Luke “That name no longer has any meaning to me.” END QUOTE.

I'm not suggesting that Darth would share his feelings, but its obvious that the reason he doesn't react to Tatooine at all (not even a second glance) is because George hadn't made up the nonsense prequel back story then and really did think that Tatoonine was as far from the bright centre of the galaxy as you could get rather than Darth's birth place, home as a kid, the place where he met the Jedi, the only living half-family he has left, and the place where he started his fall into darkness. Why not rename the place Darth World?
(Or just as stupid hide his only son there, back on the family farm, AND better yet, don't even change his surname. What a good idea. It's not like there's a space port nearby, a hive of scum and villainy, who would sell that information to the Empire first chance they got.)

QUOTE: Why has George lost his mind?

Why haven’t you had him committed if you know he’s lost his mind? END QUOTE.

Sadly I don't have that kind of power.

QUOTE: Why must we suffer this badly written nonsense???

If you don’t like it, you don’t have to suffer it. So the word “must” is not applicable. END QUOTE

Fair point. There's no gun to my head that's for sure, but as Wook says how can we be expected to ignore this stuff? It's one thing for your wife to dump you and take the kinds, its another for her to move in next door with her name boyfriend and an army of ten thousand clones of a crap bounty hunter.
(Not to mention the Emperor sitting in the back of a cab just outside your driveway.)

I love you all.






QUOTE:

[RollaFett]

WhatmeWookie- I presented my argument. You don't like it, fine. Maybe accusing you of being close-minded was going a bit too far, my apologies.


The fact is that even when airtight points of debate are submitted to you guys, the response is "agree to disagree". I just can't accept that.

You believe that you presentd airtight points. I, obviously, did not. I argued my point, and you argued yours. Neither one of us seemed capable of changing the others mind. To me, that comes across as 'agreeing to disagree'. Why you view that as if I have nothing more to offer or something is beyond me. Don't read to much into that statement.


Please C3DA and GollaFett, it's a mess!!! have the decency to step forward and accept it. Search inside yourselves. You know this to be true

If you have paid attention to past posts of mine, you will know that I have never thought of these films as flawless. In fact, I have been very critical of several aspects of both TPM and AOTC. That said, I do not agree that 'it's a mess'. Let's all please remember that there is one more movie (like it or not Wook) that has to be made. Perhaps, just perhaps, some of your questions will be answered then.
By the way Wook, have you seen AOTC yet? Last I remember, you had not. But your recent posts were unclear, so i was just curious.

[C3DA]

On the Rule of Two: In Response to Darth Badly and WhatMeWookie
Part I of II (see next post for conclusion and summary)

(The amount of time, let alone intellectual effort, spent on this question should be depressing me, but it's not.)

First, some concessions. *Darth Badly, you are right. *I did cripple my arguments at the end. *As such, two points must be rehabilitated:
1) *Vader's motivation for taking Luke to the Emperor in RotJ
2) *Harmonizing the Emperor-Vader conversation (especially "join us or die") with the rule of two. *

Second, I would like to respond to WhatMeWookie's comment that "Having Yoda state the rule of two in the concluding moments of PM i.e. at a point of dramatic importance that's supposed to mean something *- has in fact little dramatic importance in fact and we should ignore it," first in relation to the prequels and second in relation to the Old Trilogy. *

Now, before addressing these particulars, I would like to concede that I would be foolhearty to try and prove that Lucas had the "rule of two" in mind when writing the OT. *In fact, I do not think that Lucas had it in mind. *The question is not whether Lucas had it in mind. *Rather, the question is IF and HOW it works. *

If the OT was written with the rule vaguely in mind and if the "rule of two" does NOT work, then Lucas is even more at fault than if did not have it at all when producing the OT. *(I think this is part of Darth Badly's and WhatMeWookie's point.) *It is more excusable if Lucas, at the time of the OT, had strayed from his sketchy, unpublished backstory. *It is far less excusable if Lucas, 20 yrs. later, strays from and wrecks the published story (i.e. OT) in favor of some heretofore unknown minutia (i.e. the "rule of two"). *

Again, and I think we can, if we do not already, agree on this, the question is not whether Lucas had the "rule of two" in mind while creating the OT. *Rather, the question is how its addition affects, positively or negatively, the OT. *(By the way, on this point, I am not back-peddling. *I argued last time only that there was a a rationale, or basis, in the OT for the "rule of two".) *

In order to address the particulars, I will first consider how the "rule of two" works in the prequels and OT. *That is, I will be taking the infamous "in-sequence" approach (i.e. viewing Ep. I as if were actually the first movie released) as opposed to the "real-time" approach (i.e. obviously all of us saw Ep. IV-VI first, or "Star Wars", Ep. V, VI for you purists). *As such, I will first be addressing WhatMeWookie's comments quoted above. *

Yoda's comment on the "rule of two" has much dramatic importance. *In the context of Ep. I, the rule allows the Jedi to be certain of the existence of one other Sith. *

In Ep. I, the drama is intensified by the cinematography of that scene and the "parade" music later. *As Mace Windu asks "Which was destroyed? The master or the apprentice?" *the camera pans and we are left with Palpatine's head taking up almost the entire screen. *The camera, in effect, answers Mace's question. *Palpatine, aka Darth Sidious, Dark Lord and Master of the Sith is alive. *Therefore, the apprentice was destroyed. *Also, if one listens closely to the parade music, he will notice it is the Dark Side theme under the "cover" of children's voices and light harmony. *The music reinforces that the Dark Lord--a real "phantom"--whom the Jedi are only vaguely awarebecause of the "rule of two", is the real winner. *

In Ep. II "Attack of the Clowns" (sp?), the "rule of two" also has dramatic effect as we are hit over the head with it at the end. *If I had not read the spoilers and if I did not know that the Sith had an affinity for red lightsabers, then, when Yoda says to Dooku, "The dark side I sense in you," I would have been set ill-at-ease that a misguided Jedi had filled the spot-opening for the Sith. *(Of course, this could not have had an effect on any Star Wars fan, or any regular movie-goer, because we all knew, at the very least, that Christopher Lee was playing a villain.)

In "Star Wars", aka Ep. IV, the "rule of two" plays no role. *That is, either way we look at it, "in-sequence" or "real time", there is no reading up or down. *

[to be continued...]

[C3DA]

On the Rule of Two: In Response to Darth Badly and WhatMeWookie

Part II of II (see bottom for summary)

In ESB, aka Ep. V, the "rule of two" is dragged back into play. *In ESB we are forced to ask, consequent to the Emperor-Vader conversation, "What the **** happened to the rule?!!!" *If the "rule of two" is taken as primary, then the Emperor-Vader conversation will leave one wondering whether the Sith jettisoned the new rule or are suffering amnesia. *

I do not mind this effect because the reason for the rule is reinforced towards the end of ESB. *Vader, by offering Luke half the galaxy and a dead Emperor, reinforces the fact that the "rule of two" is a prudent one. *Sith apprentices are simply not to be trusted. *

So, at the end of ESB, one is left wondering about the status of the rule (of course, aside from wondering about how Luke is going to cope with his new-found family history and what is going to happen to Han Solo). *Vader, gambling that the Emperor is allowing the rule to be swept away with the Old Order, is making what amounts to a subtle declaration of war, to which the Emperor subtely replies, "Bring it on!". *In this case, in saying, "join US or die," Vader would just be covering his bases. *In fact, it would seem that he is intentionally making a statement of loyalty to cover up his treachery. *(By the way, does the Emperor say, "Yes, yes ... he would be a great asset," or "Yes, yes, he would be a great asset to us"?) *

Then again, this could just be "soap-opera" writing at its worst, i.e. inexplicable contradictions. *But it is not inexplicable. *Vader wants to have a family reunion and wants to rule the galaxy. *For Vader, the gamble is worth it. *The Emperor, for his part, is not in a position to force Vader's hand. *

For the Emperor, it is better to allow Vader his gambit than 1) risking an open confrontation, and 2) letting Vader know he is on to him. *Vader is controlling a considerable portion of the Imperial fleet, and, even if some officers are loyal enough to stand up to Vader, the Emperor cannot afford to have the fleet destroying itself while the Rebels regroup and attack. *Even if the Emperor says no to Vader's suggestion and Vader does not openly rebel, then still, chances are, that Vader is going to do what he wants (i.e. convert Luke) anyway. *Since Vader is converting Luke with or without permission, it is better to keep his guard down by giving him permission. *

Finally, RotJ, aka Ep. VI. *In the last installment, it is sufficient that the "rule of two" return only as a motivation for the Emperor. *(This is a departure from my previous position, courtesy of Darth Badly.) *Though it does not at all become apparent until the Emperor says, "Finish him and take your father's place at my side," the Emperor is ever the bearer of Sith tradition. *Having more than two means the apprentices can gang up on the master. *Something that the Emperor has no interest in. *The "rule of two" in no way clashes with the Emperor's motives n RotJ. *It turns out that the Emperor is not willing to share the "great asset" (i.e. Luke). *And he has no attachment to Vader, who is supposed to bring balance to the Force in a galaxy over which the shroud of the dark side has fallen.

Moreover, the contempt with which the line "So be it, Jedi" is delivered brings to mind Darth Maul's "At last we will reveal ourselves to the Jedi. *At last we will have our revenge". *The Emperor's contempt for Jedi, his eagerness to see Vader gone, and his confidence in the "power of the Dark Side" reveal that he is, before all else, a Sith.

If the "rule of two" clashes with anything, then it would clash with Vader's motivation to bring Luke to the Emperor. *If Vader takes the rule seriously, then he should, instead of fetching Luke like a domesticated wolf fetching the Sunday paper, run ... run far away. *If he took the rule seriously, then he should have run off with Luke. *

The simple explanation is that Vader does not take the rule seriously. *In ESB, he was willing to propose what amounts to a declaration of treason because he did not take the rule seriously enough. *The Emperor, who, by the end of RotJ, we know does take the rule and the reason for it, very seriously, was able to coax Vader into a false sense of security by allowing Vader to attempt to convert Luke and being supportive ("Patience, my friend. *In time, he will seek you out.") because, again, Vader does not take the rule seriously enough. *Thus, the opposition for which the rule poses to Vader's motivation for taking Luke to the Emperor ... is removed by the Emperor himself! *

To sum up, the "rule of two" is not in conflict with, nor does it detract from, the OT. *First, the conflict (with Vader's motivation for bringing Luke to the Emperor) that the rule would provide is removed by Emperor's "playing along". *And the Emperor has reasonable motives for "playing along": avoid risking a internal rift in the Imperial fleet; and, since Vader is going to do what he wants anyway, lulling him into a false sense of security. *Second, Vader's "Join US or die" comment can be explained as Vader covering up his own treacherous motives. *

Also, the "rule of two" is not a throw-away plot point. *First, in Ep. I, it allows the Jedi to know that the Sith threat persists. *Second, in ESB, it changes the Emperor-Vader conversation from a simple mission breifing into a scene of political intrigue. *Third, in RotJ, the "rule of two is recapitulated (i.e. "Finish him ... take your father's place") and helps reinforce that the Emperor's primary identity is that of a Sith Lord.

[WhatMeWookie]

Dear Wook (Not Related)

I agree with Gollafett (for a change). Please see this film.

You come across as a kindred spirit and I like you're style... As much as I'd like to protect you, sadly you're worst fears will be realised by seeing AOTC and you should get the process over and done with. We all have to face our destiny even if it is unpalatable.

It's all very hard to accept and I cannot believe that going to see Star Wars movies has now become a chore for many people (such as yourself) who have been loyally devoted to the OT for years.

However, in order to take part in this debate at the highest level that I know you're capable of ... it's time to step on board. Give yourself a few analytical hours after the initial "well it was bad but it wasn't as bad as PM" feeling for your dullened senses to return and the full horror of this empty and poorly conceived experince to hit you. It's a review I'm looking forward to.

[WhatMeWookie]

C3DA Quote "Also, the "rule of two" is not a throw-away plot point. First, in Ep. I, it allows the Jedi to know that the Sith threat persists. Second, in ESB, it changes the Emperor-Vader conversation from a simple mission breifing into a scene of political intrigue. Third, in RotJ, the "rule of two is recapitulated (i.e. "Finish him ... take your father's place") and helps reinforce that the Emperor's primary identity is that of a Sith Lord." ENDQUOTE

C3DA - I admire you're passinate defence, but you're placing you're energies in a poor direction and have backed the wrong horse. The length of your response kind of sums it up.

In Episode I, it's a very cheap writing device to merely signal there's someone else (which the whole audience knows anyway - without Lucas having thought of the consequences.

In ESB - it did not exist and yout attempts to trace it over the drama in ESB and ROTJ are purely revisionist and deny the very facts that you started to accept in your first post...and I quote;

C3DA Quote: "Now, before addressing these particulars, I would like to concede that I would be foolhearty to try and prove that Lucas had the "rule of two" in mind when writing the OT. In fact, I do not think that Lucas had it in mind. The question is not whether Lucas had it in mind. Rather, the question is IF and HOW it works. " END QUOTE

I think it is in fact both questions and one kind of answers the other. There was no requirement to build in the rule of two into the sextet. It's obviously a cheap device that doesn't work otherwise it wouldn't take a lengthy response to underpin it (and then still be left with the fact that the rule of two doesn't work). My point is that George's writing skills have clearly deteriorated over the past two decades and he's throwing in any old nonsense which ends up tripping up the strengths of the OT. All it does is create a mess. Had it not been employed and had those sentences been removed from PM we'd have all been better off.

Your use of the ROTJ quote from the Emperor: "Finish him and take your father's place at my side," is selective and just falls down when you review the full flow dialogue. What the Emperor is doing here is pushing Luke to the point of no return. It's not necessarily a betrayal to the Emperor's main man Darth V. It's a realisation that once Luke unleashes his anger and hate and loses control of himself he will have inherently given himself over to the dark side. Whether he killed Vader or not is kind of irrelevant. It's this pushing of him over the hill that counts. Besides...it's not a new convention to have treachery and disloyalty between the bad guys and that was accepted during the end of ROTJ - especially when one was aware of Vader's thirst for power. It's shoddy writing to limit the bad guys with a rule of two which makes ultimate conflict inevitable and even periodic trust/detente out of the question. This is just stupid.

C3DA Quote:"If the "rule of two" clashes with anything, then it would clash with Vader's motivation to bring Luke to the Emperor. If Vader takes the rule seriously, then he should, instead of fetching Luke like a domesticated wolf fetching the Sunday paper, run ... run far away. If he took the rule seriously, then he should have run off with Luke."

Precisely - you do more in your post to support the general argument that the rule of two is nonsense and dramatically weak than to defend it. Vader should have turned his son before confronting (or accepting the confrontation) in front of his master - if the rule of two meant anything to anyone. That didn't happen in 1983 for the very reason that the rule of two was not in existence and George and Lawrence Kasdan at that time, knew how to tell a good story.

I think in your heart of hearts, that while you have taken a repected and honourable legal defence for the rule of two in the interest of healthy debate - you clearly accept that this is lousy post-OT nonsense.

I think this is what is called agreeing to agree! So welcome on board my brother.

C3DA Quote: "It is far less excusable if Lucas, 20 yrs. later, strays from and wrecks the published story (i.e. OT) in favor of some heretofore unknown minutia (i.e. the "rule of two")." ENDQUOTE

I just couldn't have put this better myself and definitely agree. But the whole of PM and AOTC are littered with such inexcusable and weak minded fare that effectively poisons the mystery and imagination-prompting strengths of the OT.