Rivero

Most. Ridiculous. Post. Of. 2004.

Congratulations.

Gyno Rhino

Guy is just expressing his opinion. Why not add something constructive instead of this?

It's not like it'll be hard to pick apart his argument. I can't quite understand how someone can put Episodes I and II above IV and V (anything above VI is perfectly understandable... ROTJ sucks bad).

Qui Gon Jim

Good christ! Would you like a LITTLE melodrama with your whine?

While I think that GL is the pot calling the kettle black here, this vitriol is a bit over the top over a freaking movie! Sheesh!

Qui Gon Jim

When it comes to Rivero, it is best to just not feed the troll

baracine

To make my opinion perfectly clear: What I don't like about Episodes IV and V is a fault in the "art of the narrative" (story-telling ability). They are so cluttered, visually and otherwise, that it is hard to understand who is doing what to whom and in what location, unless you watch it a dozen times with subtitles (unavailable), a map of the universe (hard to get) or a group of dedicated fans (expensive to feed and hard to get rid of). In that respect, it is a lot like watching bad porno (think about it).

In all justice, George Lucas tried every single quick-and-dirty device for exposition, clever or otherwise, ever used in 30's and 40's serials, but his story deserved the invention of new ones, because its whole was actually more important than its parts.

There is only so much John Williams' inspired music can do to lubricate abrupt transitions, tell you where you are, who you're looking at, what you should be feeling, clarify story points or develop character psychology. I won't comment on the pathetic "comic relief" in those films, which makes Jar-Jar Binks look like a Bernard Shaw creation.

I think things actually improved, story-wise, in "The Return of the Jedi". It had a clearer sense of place. Too bad that place happened to be a planet peopled by Care Bears gone bad, but that's another story.

That is why, IMHO, I think those two films deserve all the improvements and the tweaking they can get to smooth over their rough edges. As for the fans who want to be able to look back to the undesacrated original theatrical releases, what are they hoping for? To be brought back to the very first time they told themselves: "Great flick. I'll have to see it again though because so much of it escaped me"?

flyboy

yes

ckolchak

i find this sentiment bizarre because all the 'improvements' found in the first two films are either
1) superficial enhancements ( cgi ship turns and pivots to a greater degree than the physical model could, a new sunset background plate, a new hovering spybot floats around in frame, the dewback gets up and walks for no particular reason)
2) opportunites to indulge in cgi at the expense of much poorer storytelling (the clear redundency of the Jabba dialouge, and the fact that the scene now deflates the former sense of urgency that part of the film had-
also, all the comic relief of the rontos and three stooges-like droids during the Mos Eisley entrance- formerly, the 'release of tension' was found in the assortment of outlandish creatures suddenly springing up in the Cantina, except that in the former verison, the sense of the comic did not undercut the mood of this part of the film- it was 'creepy comic' as opposed to silly comic- much more in concert with bridging the sequence of Luke coming to a crossroads after the death of his aunt and uncle, along with the implied torture of Leia to the shady dealings with the pirate.
all the new bits of business in the entrance to ME, is quite unneccessary, and worse- changes the 'pitch' as we enter this passage of the film.

El-Kabong

You know, I found the message board to be a much more pleasnt place after I plonked Rivero into the ingore file. Now he can troll all he want and leave me in peace.

Supermallet

Baracine, I know you get a lot of crap on this forum, and I know that movies are completely subjective, so don't think I'm attacking you, but you are honestly and truly the very first person I have ever met who has found Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back confusing. These films aren't Lost Highway. I just wonder what exactly about these films confused you so.

Qui Gon Jim

While I don't agree 100% with Baracine, I can understand where he is coming from. There is a lot of backstory that is untold at the begining of ANH. When ESB starts, there is untold backstory in between the two films. Growing up with SW and reading about it as many of us have, we now fill in these untold plot points and move on. When you watch it the first time, it can be a bit jarring but you just have to kind of take those bits to the side and hope they'll be explained later.

That is the nature of serial entertainment like serial films or comic books or soap operas or ongoing drama TV. It can be a bit daunting to jump in during the middle. I think that is the feeling GL was trying to capture with SW and to a similar extent ROTLA.

So while Baracine sees it as a problem, I see it as a success since that is GL's intenent. Same goes for TPM and the senate drama. It is also why I think these film are not critical high points for cinema. The stories are fairly weak and derivative, and the acting and direction is so-so. The editing is tight though and the films are just plain old fun to watch.

I think Baracine makes an excellent point about the pacing of ROTJ though. It is an action sequence followed by a "catch your breath" sequence followed by another action sequence and so on. To be honest, I like ROTJ better than ANH.

edited to add: I also give Baracine credit for explaining his views thougthfully, and not just saying "Luca$ is an a$$ hat who raped my childhood blah blah blah..."

Gyno Rhino

Apparently this is the case. Viewing his last posts reveals he is, indeed, a troll.

Kicker_of_Elves

rennervision

Flyboy, you can "whine" all you want. This perfectly summarizes the whole problem with Lucas these days. He wants to dumb down the original trilogy so it shares the same quality as the prequels. (And merge apples with oranges - which is quite hypocritical considering his recent quote about colorizing.)

I think he's truly forgotten the sense of wonder all of us felt watching the original trilogy for the first time and asking ourselves, "Wow! How did they do that?" Now it's a simple answer - CGI. CGI sensory overload for those who are bored by little things like dialogue. So much CGI that Jake Lloyd doesn't even have to act; Lucas just uses a computer to change the expression on his face. (Yes, that is absolutely true.)

And I do not expect people whose usernames were taken from Star Wars:Episode I to understand.

steebo777

BOOM!!! I think that qualifies for b*tchslap of the year

Qui Gon Jim

Wrong! You try to fit your 30 year old sensibility into the PT. Do I think they are better than the OT? No. But they are pretty good films and not near as bad as people make them out to be. Further, I agreed that Lucas should keep mum on this topic.

THESE ARE MOVIES! FB's original post was so full of melodrama about what a child raping bastard LUCA$$$$$ is that it is truly difficult to take anything he says seriously.

Finally, nice personal attack. Rarely can those on the opposite side of the coin rise above such base arguments. Since you decided to go low, I consider this argument won.

rennervision

I'm sorry if my observation that your username was borrowed from a movie you like to get defensive about appeared to be a "personal attack."

And I also doubt either side will ever win these arguments.

flyboy

What I said and what I will say to everyone is that the people that saw the original movies when they were originally released have a different appreciation of these films. Someone who saw Star Wars in say 1985 for the first time will never see the magic that we saw in 1977....its just one of those things that "you had to be there as it was happening" to get the full impact. And good ol Georgie has forgotten us...the ones that were faithful fans all those years ago....

rennervision

Yes. You definitely had to be there. Today's audiences can never relate to what it was like to see alien monsters and robots in a sci-fi film that, for once, was not a cheesy B-movie. The audience laughed during the cantina scene, and applauded when Han returned in the Millenium Falcon to save Luke's X-wing. All of this is ordinary summer-time movie stuff now. But back in 1977, this was the FIRST TIME anyone had seen anything like this.

The experience can never be duplicated. Not even The Empire Strikes Back could duplicate the feeling of seeing Star Wars for the first time. (By then, Hollywood had churned out so much sci-fi, it was a common movie theme.) So all that can be done now is to preserve the essence of it for the sake of film history.

Unfortunately, Lucas, who advocates treating things like "The Three Stooges" according to the time period in which it was created, doesn't see the blatant contradiction that his outraged fans have noticed.

jarofclay73

No hypocrisy here because the issue is colorizing black & white movies. It's not about changing the look of a movie (and as far as I know Lucas only changes the movies he makes).

Now, if it were Ted Turner making that statement, then THAT'S hypocrisy!

filmfreak

Wrong. Changing the color is altering the original form of the films, George is absolutely right about that, however, George is complaining about the very thing he is doing to HIS Star Wars films, but in a different way…he’s doing something much worst, George is changing the tone of certain scenes, changing the dialogue in scenes and destroying certain characters on his path to making the original films blend with the prequels.

George Lucas quote: “But by putting it in black and white, it puts it in a context where you can appreciate it for what it was”.

If George Lucas leaves the original films alone, it puts the films in a context where we can appreciate them for what they are…..

I really wish fan boys would stop making excuses for George Lucas (sheesh!). This is hypocrisy regardless of who is actually responsible for making the films. Lucas in his own words said that these films (The Three Stooges) should be reserved in their original form (black and white) and not be colorized (or made shiny and new) to appeal to a new breed of fans, that’s the point he’s trying to make, and doesn’t that sound familiar? This drivel is the very thing he is doing with the original Star Wars Trilogy in order to match them with his new films.

I realize that the original-original trilogy is available in other inferior and illegal formats, but the fact that the original films doesn’t exist in George Lucas’ mind tells me what he feels about reserving films in their original form. It’s hypocrisy period.

ckolchak

Star Wars and ESB both contain all you need to know to follow the film, within the film.
material that is left unembellished or alluded to is left for the viewers imagination to fill in.

i guess these days viewers need to be spoonfed every little piece of information, wich seems to be the reason that the prequels are telling the stories they are.

people seem to get personally offended if they have to use their imagination a little

Terrell

Um, no! ROTJ rules. End of muthaf****in' story!!!!! Only whiny, cynical, jaded farts can't enjoy ROTJ. It completely and utterly destroys 95% of the garbage released today. Garbage like Chronicles of Riddick, AvP, Van Helsing, ID4, etc., etc., etc.

For once you and I agree. I liked Episode II quite a bit, and found it overall to be quite an improvement over TPM. But the originals still reign supreme.

Qui Gon Jim

Believe me, I agree with you that SW and ESB are not hard to put together, but there are many that just give up if they have to do that. There are many people that don't want to or know how to use their imagination. That is why the Riddicks and Basd Boys of the world become hits.

I know many people who hate Moulin Rouge since it is hard to follow. I always tell them to watch it twice and that they'll probably like it once you can follow it.

Dead

Rivero, I'm seeing way too many trolling posts from you. Either contribute to the discussion or don't post. If this continues administrative action will be taken against your account.

baracine

What you are saying is: People who have reservations about the story structure of Episodes IV and V are either slow, stupid or unimaginative.

What I am saying is: There is always room for improvement and Lucas has matured a lot since those heady formative years.

Episode IV - which I saw as an adult and had to translate into French on sight for the benefit of my 8-year-old nephew - was actually the first film I had ever seen in my life that prompted me to ask outloud: "Who are those people?!" because of the general lack of exposition. What I perceived then as a fault actually became a fashion, culminating in the "James Cameron principle of exposition", which states that all important backgound information on the characters and the situation has to be delivered by screaming underlings competing for attention during some noisy event like the landing of an helicoper at sea.

If you are curious about the art of exposition and how it should be done, I refer you to the very classics Lucas tried to emulate, i.e. 30's and 40's swashbucklers like The Sea Hawk (Michael Curtiz, 1940), which are absolutely transparent in their exposition and character development in spite of the action covering half the globe and some very complicated political intrigues.

Also compare the first minutes of Episode IV to the first minutes of The Fellowship of the Ring.

BTW: The problems with Moulin Rouge actually start when you begin to understand what's going on...