Terrell

Yep! For me it comes down to TPM having more egregious flaws than the other two films had. Yes, AOTC had some stiff, unconvincing love scenes and some bad dialogue. But it didn't have Jar-Jar screwing up every scene. It didn't have any fart and poop jokes. It didn't have Jake Lloyd or any ridiculously silly dialogue during perilous situations, except for may 3PO in the Arena, which should have been cut. I could go on. I can respect someone liking TPM more. But that's why I prefer AOTC, and especially ROTS. The worst I can say about ROTS is some of the subplots felt unnecessary and tacked on, like the Utupau and Grievous storyline, and perhaps even the Kashyyk scenes. However, those scenes for the most part were extremely well done, so I didn't mind them too much. A few bits of bad dialogue here and there, but even that was far less noticeable than in the first two films, combined.

However, scenes like the Yoda/Palpatine duel, the duel on Mustafar, the birth of the twins, the birth of Vader, the opening space battle, and Leia taken to Alderaan, were the best scenes in the entire prequel trilogy, and were scenes Lucas nailed.

jaeufraser

I agree. And one thing that keeps me watching, even the bad TPM, is that Lucas is first off a great visual stylist. I think the man is fantastic in creating just great imagery and a great action director. That and TPM does have a very good underlying story, both on the political end and even on the adventure side. It's too bad the adventure story was so poorly done...like you said the ending...where two of three subplots involve our leads (in this case the most annoying leads possible) accidentally beating the bad guys. Just irritating.

But there was a good story pulsing under there. Honestly I really loved the overall story across all the prequels...it's just the execution of some of the dramatic elements and characters that bugs me the most.

Terrell

I've said it from day one. I honestly don't think Lucas' direction was the problem. People may disagree, and that's fine. But I think dialogue and bluescreen hurt the actors more than Lucas' direction. I believe that Lucas should have hired a great screenwriter and given him some creative freedom so he could craft a great screenplay. Lucas needs to relinquish some duties like screenplay and editing. Editing wasn't that bad in the prequels, and was actually quite good in places. But that's just one more thing he tried to do himself. He needs to trust others rather than trying to do everything himself.

das Monkey

I think he needed to relinquish screenplay and human directing. The story is cool. The special effects are awesome. The creature effects are awesome. The humans, save McDiarmid and McGregor (hmm ... the two Scots), are awful. Certainly the silly dialogue hurt their performances, but there are some stellar actors in these films. When you have such stiff performances from so many talented people, it's more than just the words. They needed guidance from a director. At the least, he should have hired a "No Man", an independent eye to take a second look at some of the stuff that was shot and shake his head. It really feels like for many of the human scenes, they just indiscriminately took the first take or filmed the practice read-through. If he didn't want to turn over the direction entirely, he needed someone to assist the actors, because they really seemed lost, and maybe someone to say, "I think we need another take."

das

jaeufraser

I agree he should've trusted others in the terms of writing, but I do fault him for the wooden acting. Direction of actors is an aspect of directing and as such, I have to fault him for what I see as some terrible performances and choices. Granted he's said it himself he's no actors director, and it shows. But that doesn't change the fact that I think some of the things he did were fantastic. Fortunately, in Episode 2 and particularly 3, the fantastic far outweighs the bad.

Terrell

Well, we'll just have to disagree on the direction aspect. Any man that directed THX1138, American Graffiti, and Star Wars, and got good to very good performances from less accomplished actors than the prequel actors, is a damn good director. I'll never say he's a great actor's director. But he never had this much of a problem in the past. Of course it always comes down to opinion. Either way, the acting in all three of those films is far superior to anything Jake Lloyd, Natalie Portman, and Hayden Christiansen did in the prequels. Funny thing is, Lucas is blamed for the bad performance and dismissed entirely when it comes to the good performances like McDiarmid, Lee, and McGregor.

I don't know. We could argue this for days and not agree. Lucas can still direct. You can see it everywhere in the prequels. I think screenwriting is the big thing that's holding him back. Stop writing and let other's handle it. Perhaps he also needs a "no" man, but that's doubtful.

Simple question. Should Lucas stop directing forever, simply because there are those that think he a hack director? If so, how can you explain his first three films. You can't say he got lucky 3 times. Not trying to be condescending at all. Just like some thoughts on that.

cactusoly

As a full fledged Lucas apologist I really find little fault in the prequels.

the only problem I find in TPM is Jake Loyd, well he's a kid and can't act. big deal I don't dwell on it. (and as a side note I still don't get all thae hatred for Jar Jar, he's not my fav charactor but he is one of many why dwell on it)

In AOTC my only problem was how they handled Anakin's charactor. he was too winey and I thought he and Obi wan were not raelly shown as friends. This was corrected in Sith but it was a little too late. I thought it would have been better to have the him change after the tuskin scene.

My only problem with Sith was the whole died of a broken heart thing. I see why it was done, but it would have made more sense if it was just said Anakin killed her.

And not to leave the original trilogy out, Jedi was too much of a remake of Star Wars ie. another Cantina (Jabba's Palace) and Death Star 2. and I hated the whole 'Jedi Rocks' thing in the SE. (thats the only addition I didn't like in the rereleases)

Every thing else I loved in all 6 movies and they are the only films I can enjoy over and over again. I am sick of being chastized for the films I love. I know some will say I have no taste and bla bla bla. to them on you

FRwL

Actually the Death Star was to be introduced in Jedi. Lucas put it in the first one for the audiences.

Terrell

There's only one thing in the entire original trilogy that bothers me. Leia kissing Luke. It's obvious Lucas thought of the brother/sister thing. I actually like the fact that they're brother and sister. It gives the film a strong dynamic. I just wish Lucas would have thought of it before ESB.

cactusoly

I know that... but he still rehashed it.

kahuna415

Star Wars will always be defined by the Original Trilogy. I grew up with it and it remains the dominant set of films over the new ones. I find the new ones interesting and really enjoyed ROTS, but the OT defined American culture and how we grew up as kids.

FRwL

Well it was for Jedi originally, but added for Wars so... yes it was rehashed for Wars.

J-DAM

My thoughts exactly.

enrage

the sequels to the Matrix never happened. at least thats what i have to keep telling myself

Terrell

Good point! That's exactly why the Original Trilogy would always be defining films regardless of how the prequels turned out. The prequels could have been superior to the originals in every respect, and the originals still would have been the dominant, genre defining films.

caligulathegod

We actually had a huge discussion on this in another thread. The gist was that they weren't originally siblings. There was originally supposed to be a love triangle between Luke, Leia and Han. It is present in the Radio Dramas. When they were putting the film together they realized that Luke had his own path and they couldn't really put Luke and Leia together. Luke's destiny was to be a Jedi. Since Leia was going to end up with Han anyway, it seemed not only pointless to hint at Luke and her but also detrimental to the plot. By the time we get to Empire and Luke is off on Dagobah, if we still had any hope that Luke would get with Leia then we would start to hate Han for making time with Leia while Luke was training. We'd also want Luke to leave his training early. They basically cut every reference to Luke and Leia ever getting together. Even the much discussed kiss is a simple closed mouth put-on to piss off Han. Anytime Luke and Leia have a conversation they talk about Han. There is no triangle surviving in the film. Watch them again objectively and it becomes obvious (more so than it seemed in 1977 and 1980) that they completely manipulate the film to have Han with Leia with zero suggestion of Luke and Leia. Han and Leia even meet cute while Leia has maybe one conversation Luke in the first two films (about Han!). Anyway, when they got to Jedi they needed a reason for Luke to get pissed off at Vader during the final battle they came up with the idea of Leia being Luke's sister. Since they had cut out all references to a romance between the two, it fit. Now, since we didn't know at the time (we still thought Luke might get Leia), when we see the Kiss, we think it's gross. Watch it again and you'll see it's so much a non-event that it's no big deal at all. Any thought of "incest" is in the eye of the beholder, because it's NOT IN THE FILM.

That's all I have to say about the subject. I'll let my full argument in the other thread stand.

Playitagainsam

caligulathegod,

You have PM with technical questions...

caligulathegod

I seem to be unable to access PMs. I've sent a message to the administrator. Gimme a day or so.

Playitagainsam

The PM page can only be accessed by administrators, it seems... however, if I try to send you a PM, it will go to the e-mail address you have stored in your profile. Make sure you check it - or update it, if needed (I know I had to!), and, if necessary, let me know, and I'll send the message again.

Cheers,
thanks in advance.

caligulathegod

Oh, ok. I'll be able to check it when I get home (I work nights).

Terrell

That seems like a reasonable point of view, and I've never really looked at it in those terms. However, it's something I'll probably think about everytime I see that scene on Hoth where Leia kisses Luke. Otherwise, I agree with you that there's no real romantic relationship between Luke and Leia and it's never really implied other than maybe a couple of lines in the first two-thirds of Star Wars. That and the fact Leia only kissed Luke to piss off Han. It's the way she kisses him and how he reacts.

Demontooth

I wouldn't kiss my sister like that but hey, look at Angelina Jolie and the smoochfest she had with her brother.

caligulathegod

Yeah, you're right. They didn't know at the time (Lucas either), but even what's there is completely platonic. I wouldn't kiss my sister like that, but I might kiss my girlfriend's sister like that and not feel guilty. A joke is a joke.

As to Terrell's last point, there's a brief snippet of a scene that was cut where Leia is about to kiss Luke for real when C3PO interrupts them. Then Han comes in and the scene goes as it normally is. Kind of a shame they had to drop that whole angle, but it's understandable why. Luke's reaction in the film, though, is entirely put on for Han. I actually think it underscores my point because it's so exaggerated.

Oh, and I forgot the other point that was made. Luke called psychically through the Force to Leia, strengthening the argument that Lucas knew they were sibs. Or does it? Originally, Obi Wan's spirit (!!!) was supposed to tell Leia to turn back. Eventually, they simplified it and had Luke do it. They were at the end of the movie, so they shortened it to not belabor the end. Luke had the Force (which is not truly defined), so it wasn't unreasonable that one of the powers was to call someone in an emergency. Why Leia? Who else? Han was frozen and Luke didn't know Lando. Only other character was Chewie. He called Leia by default. It's not a strong argument that they were sibs at that point because it can be explained away easily. By the time we get to Jedi, they knew they were sibs, so the Force power of telecommunication could be retconed as being between relations. Of course, Anakin communicated to Sideous that way, so it doesn't have to be relations. Why don't the other Jedi use it? Three words: Deus ex machina. It was a quick way to get out of the story.

I still remember my disappointment back in 1980 when I saw Han and Leia on the poster in an embrace. Now when I watch it, it seems completely telegraphed from the first moment Luke mentions Leia to Han. Of course years of romantic comedies helps make it easier to see the formulas used. And hindsight is always 20/20. Look at the Vader revelation. At the time, it seemed so ambiguous. Watching it now, it doesn't even look like they tried to hide it with doubt.