Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Would it not be better to go back and fix the streaming pile of C%$p that are the prequals?

Lets not poke that bear shall we

Yeah Disney is doing the smart thing and just continuing on like nothing ever happened

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Would it not be better to go back and fix the streaming pile of C%$p that are the prequals?

Nah, the prequels aren't as bad as the original trilogy. The original trilogy movies are boring, the plot is cheap, overused and predictable, Luke Skywalker is one of the most awful protagonists ever, scenes that are supposed to be epic feel anticlimactic and everything has horrible, fake-looking special effects. Just compare the fight between Obi-Wan and Anakin in Revenge of the Sith with the fight between Obi-Wan and Darth Vader in A New Hope. The first one is epic, the second is like two rheumatic old men pushing their walking canes together, which is horrible for something that is supposed to be such a climactic event. The Original Trilogy may have been really good back in the prehistoric times of the '70s and '80s, but it has not aged well. They are not bad movies, even now, but they do fall short in many ways when compared to modern movies.
You guys are have grown too old and nostalgic about it to see

I wonder to what extent it is possible to update the Original Trilogy with shiny new effects...

Each to theri own

For me the older film do not suffer from that bane of modern film making - allowing films ot be massively overlong, packed full of bloat.
The fight scene you descibe is ruined for me by the awful slapstick of that Binks abomination - like most of the film its all flash and no substance.

but opinions differ

 cincydooley wrote:
I have no problem with the special editions.

Ditto. The Special Editions added cool shots to the Battle of Yavin, made Mos Eisley a bigger and more interesting place, and even added Jabba into the first film (although the animation was terrible, and was fixed in later revisions). And then in the other two... not a whole lot changed. The most recent change, Vader going "Nooooo!" when Palpy is zapping Luke, that was terrible, but really there was nothing wrong with the changes.

 Grey Templar wrote:

The actors weren't bad.

Natalie Portman, that horrible Anakin kid, 90% of all background / side actors taking extra lessons in the "Try too hard class"? Even Liam Neeson, as hyped as he is, isn't much of a good actor. His skills are limited to "look grim".

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

The actors weren't bad.

Natalie Portman, that horrible Anakin kid, 90% of all background / side actors taking extra lessons in the "Try too hard class"? Even Liam Neeson, as hyped as he is, isn't much of a good actor. His skills are limited to "look grim".

On the other hand, Sir Christopher Lee tried very hard to improve the average acting quality of the films.

Christopher Lee doesn't act. Christopher Lee just walks on stage and makes love to camera

Peter Jackson to Christopher Lee- Imagine the sound of a knife sinking into a man's back for this scene.

Christopher Lee- I don't have to imagine that, I remember it.

The look on his face when the Emperor tells Anakin to execute him is priceless. Betrayal, and too much honor to out his betrayer. I just wish they would have let him truly have a fencing style with his lightsabre.

 Gitzbitah wrote:
Peter Jackson to Christopher Lee- Imagine the sound of a knife sinking into a man's back for this scene.

Christopher Lee- I don't have to imagine that, I remember it.

Is that a true quote? If so wow I recently heard about his war record but I had not heard that............

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

The actors weren't bad.

Natalie Portman, that horrible Anakin kid, 90% of all background / side actors taking extra lessons in the "Try too hard class"? Even Liam Neeson, as hyped as he is, isn't much of a good actor. His skills are limited to "look grim".

I think you are confusing being bad with a simple lack of good directing and a decent script. And its almost impossible to act in a green room. It would be very tough to be even average under those circumstances.

As with everything involving Christopher Lee, the truth is even more outrageous than the myths. BEHOLD!

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/herocomplex/la-et-hc-christopher-lee-christopher-lee-dies-saruman-peter-jackson-20150611-htmlstory.html

Anyone looking for an excellent review on the new films, check out the Mr Plinkett ones.


I'm glad Lucas had little to do with the original films, and nothing to do with this one. Man can't direct worth a damn.

 Gitzbitah wrote:
As with everything involving Christopher Lee, the truth is even more outrageous than the myths. BEHOLD!

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/herocomplex/la-et-hc-christopher-lee-christopher-lee-dies-saruman-peter-jackson-20150611-htmlstory.html

Thanks for sharing - brilliant

I also mostly like the prequels. 2&3 especially. Natalie Portman is a fantastic actor.

I also enjoy Into Darkness quite a bit. I recently found out hardcore nerds seem to hate that too.

I found the new Star Trek movies to be ok movies, but total failures at being Star Trek movies.

 cincydooley wrote:
I also mostly like the prequels. 2&3 especially. Natalie Portman is a fantastic actor.

Aye, I have no complaints regarding Natalie Portman. Everything about Anakin in the prequels, though...

I also enjoy Into Darkness quite a bit. I recently found out hardcore nerds seem to hate that too.

I enjoy it, but then again I've never really liked watching the older Star Trek movies (Wrath of Khan is the only exception). I don't have any real problems with the two newer movies.

 cincydooley wrote:
I also mostly like the prequels. 2&3 especially. Natalie Portman is a fantastic actor.

I also enjoy Into Darkness quite a bit. I recently found out hardcore nerds seem to hate that too.

Yep. As a hardcore nerd, I hate those movies.

But I love Krull.

Doesn't stop me from sharing my opinions.



As for Natalie Portman, like Samual L. Jackson, she seemed to deliver a substandard performance in the prequels most likely because of Lucas's direction. Jackson once said that Lucas cared more about where the actors were standing than how they delivered their lines.

And Into Darkness could have been saved by a talented editor. A talented, merciless editor. Editing makes a huge difference to the emotional weight of a film. For example, John Carter of Mars could have been a much stronger film if an editor hadn't done his best to homogenize the feel and pace of every scene.

 -Shrike- wrote:
Aye, I have no complaints regarding Natalie Portman. Everything about Anakin in the prequels, though....

I think the biggest problem with Anakin was simply lack of time... The movies should have shown a good jedi who slowly slid towards darkness, but because they had so little time to do it in with everything else going on at the same time, we just got 'whiny, randomly homicidal teenager' instead.

People complained about the wooden acting fro the jedi in the prequels, but that was (for good or ill) exactly what Lucas wanted them to be. Unfortunately, that just came across onscreen as bad acting instead of in-ground restraint of emotion.

At the end of the day, though, if they're watched purely as a special-effects extravaganza with stuff blowing up and laser swords, the prequels are fun. I get why people dislike them, but I prefer to enjoy them for what they are, rather than bemoaning what they're not.



And I enjoyed the hell out of Into Darkness. Sure, it has its issues... but none of the Star Trek movies have been without those. It's space opera... not hard scifi. Primarily, it's supposed to be fun, and both of the new Trek movies delivered that in spades for me.

When I watch starwars it's always the theatrical version. Im always surprised at how loud the special editions are. A lot of noise in those films seemed to have been added.

As for the prequels I was 4 when the phantom menace came out. I loved it at the time but I always much preferred the next two. Then I re watched them a few years ago and I can see why it gets hate. I certainly won't be buying those movies. My children can just watch the series from Starwars onward.

My main enjoyment from starwars was seeing the models. When I watched them (Any TV time was spent watching them, all my pocket money went to renting them) I thought it was all computer done. But then I watched the making and saw them putting the models onto stands and doing close ups of it all etc it blew my mind. It was then I wanted to do modeling.

I will definitely buy the original movies in HD if they come out.

I think the biggest problem is they lost the main point of the story. The entire point of the Prequels is to tell Anakin's story of how he fell to the Dark Side. And they totally failed at that.

 Grey Templar wrote:
I think the biggest problem is they lost the main point of the story. The entire point of the Prequels is to tell Anakin's story of how he fell to the Dark Side. And they totally failed at that.

We had a few really good bits in the prequels' story that were clearly meant to be part of telling his fall, but just were never handled quite right or tied together properly. The secret romance with Padme. Slaughtering the Sand People in revenge for his mother's death. Being made to spy on Palpatine. Hearing that story from Palpatine about Darth Plaguis. Perhaps, most of all, what strikes me as the two elements that could have really bookended his decision to fall were when he killed Dooku (he realized it was wrong and not the thing a Jedi would do), and then when Mace Windu made the same decision about Palpatine (essentially confirming his growing doubts that the Jedi aren't what they're supposed to be). In the hands of a master writer and director, all of this could have built up to the tragic fight between him and Obi-Wan, that could have left us in tears at the tragedy of it all, that in falling to the dark side to try to protect the one thing he cared the most for, he ended up losing Padme.

Unfortunately, George is just a good storyteller, and not a good writer or director, and so the prequels failed to deliver.

I don't think he's even a good story teller. He's an idea guy, but he absolutely sucks at delivery.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
I think the biggest problem is they lost the main point of the story. The entire point of the Prequels is to tell Anakin's story of how he fell to the Dark Side. And they totally failed at that.

We had a few really good bits in the prequels' story that were clearly meant to be part of telling his fall, but just were never handled quite right or tied together properly. The secret romance with Padme. Slaughtering the Sand People in revenge for his mother's death. Being made to spy on Palpatine. Hearing that story from Palpatine about Darth Plaguis. Perhaps, most of all, what strikes me as the two elements that could have really bookended his decision to fall were when he killed Dooku (he realized it was wrong and not the thing a Jedi would do), and then when Mace Windu made the same decision about Palpatine (essentially confirming his growing doubts that the Jedi aren't what they're supposed to be). In the hands of a master writer and director, all of this could have built up to the tragic fight between him and Obi-Wan, that could have left us in tears at the tragedy of it all, that in falling to the dark side to try to protect the one thing he cared the most for, he ended up losing Padme.

Unfortunately, George is just a good storyteller, and not a good writer or director, and so the prequels failed to deliver.

This. I think that the prequels could also have benefited from dropping the Phantom Menace, and jumping straight to Attack of the Clones. Use the extra space to help show Anakin just getting worn down trying to be a good Jedi throughout the Clone Wars. Then, in Sith, he gets to decide that the Jedi are flawed, and things go from there.

 Grey Templar wrote:
I don't think he's even a good story teller. He's an idea guy, but he absolutely sucks at delivery.

I agree completely with this. He needed someone to check his crazy like in the original, but clearly had just yes men when doing the newer trilogies

 Grey Templar wrote:
I think the biggest problem is they lost the main point of the story. The entire point of the Prequels is to tell Anakin's story of how he fell to the Dark Side. And they totally failed at that.

I wouldn't even say that. I'd say there are two things the prequel series tried to achieve; How the Galactic Republic became the Galactic Empire, and how Anakin Skywalker became Darth Vader. Now, smart money would have said these two themes should have operated as parallels to one another, with Anakain and the Republic's transformations complementing each other over the course of the films.

Except the films spent too much time explaining stupid stuff like Metachlorians (however its spelled ) and 'oh did you know C3PO was built by VADER like omg no waaaai" and on huge set piece scenes like the Bonta Ev Classic, and space battles. Not to mention all the new characters who were just shoveled into the story line. Seriously. How many characters are even named on screen in the Original Trilogy? A lot less than show up in the Prequels And while a lot of the set pieces were cool on their own, in the overall picture all the random bull gak took up too much time from actual plot work leaving us with a broken and disjointed narrative that at the very least, only lack lusterly delivered on its purpose.

Indeed, Lucas is an idea guy with lots of great ideas. The issue with idea guys is they also have lots of stupid ideas (Jar Jar *shakes fist*) and they really need people with balls around to look them in the eye and scream;




^the video Adam Sandlers friends should have showed him before he made all those crappy movies

 DarkLink wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:

Han shot first.

Han shot.

Someone actually found a copy of the script they used while filming, apparently, and it backs up Lucas's revision. Don't quote me on that, though.

I wouldn't dream of it... I'll quote Kristian Brown instead:

For Brown, the biggest thrill was reading how an original scene featuring Harrison Ford was meant to be.

When Lucasfilm re-released the films in 1997, the special edition altered a scene where Han Solo is met by a bounty hunter.

In the original, Solo fires at the alien, killing it without warning. The 1997 version changed the scene to make Solo look as if he was acting in self-defence. A change which incensed fans.

"I'll tell you one thing, right now," Brown gleefully points out.

"Based on the script, I can tell you 100 per cent, Han shot first."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/copy-of-original-star-wars-script-discovered-in-unb-library-1.3104206

Valete,

JohnS

This is a great book about the difference between the first three and second three Star Wars films.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B008XRNRJ8?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_search_detailpage

I'm kind of a purist on this issue. My hope is that after Episode 9 is finished, Disney will go back and reimagine episodes 1, 2, & 3, and we all quietly forget everything that Lucas did after Return of the Jedi. Like the bad version of 1985 that never happened, and nothing of value was lost.

That said, the original trilogy is quite old and some parts do look dated. I don't have a problem with "remastering" to fix things like colours and effects, but unfortunately a lot of the digital effects that Lucas added, look pretty terrible and superimposed now anyway. If given the choice between dated original effects that fit the style of the films, and dated 90s effects that look noticeably out of place, I'm gonna go with the originals. I think that's what really bugs fans the most. The updated digital effects had some "wow" factor in the 90s, but now they're just an eyesore. Hopefully, someone at Disney will get around to addressing that eventually, either by releasing the original theatrical versions, or remastering them again in a more faithful and coherent style. If nothing else, I hope they will restore the original ending to Return of the Jedi, without Hayden Christensen and Gungans.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Natalie Portman, that horrible Anakin kid, 90% of all background / side actors taking extra lessons in the "Try too hard class"? Even Liam Neeson, as hyped as he is, isn't much of a good actor. His skills are limited to "look grim".

No, seriously, they're very good actors. Go see Neeson in Schindler's List or Rob Roy and you'll realise the guy has serious talent. Similarly Portman's performance in Black Swan shows she's a-list.

Of course, those two, alongside Ewan MacGregor and a bunch of other a-list talent were all pretty wooden and terrible in the prequels, but that wasn't because any of them are actually bad actors. It's because the director matters a lot, and really bad direction can make even the best actors give poor performances.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crazy_Carnifex wrote:
This. I think that the prequels could also have benefited from dropping the Phantom Menace, and jumping straight to Attack of the Clones. Use the extra space to help show Anakin just getting worn down trying to be a good Jedi throughout the Clone Wars. Then, in Sith, he gets to decide that the Jedi are flawed, and things go from there.

Yep, you could drop the first film, put it's handful of important parts in to the second, and then tell the events of the third film as two movies and it would work so much better.

The original series has a classic trilogy structure. The first film works as a standalone movie, it introduces the setting and the characters, has them successfully resolve the plot, but with space left open for a sequel. The second film expands the universe, and makes everything go bad. Then the third film resolves everything.

The prequel structure started out similarly. The Phantom Menace introduced the new characters and the new setting, and had them resolve the plot, but then said that we shouldn't be happy because the good guys were just pawns in the villain's scheme. Attack of the Clones then did the exact same thing, same characters, same setting, and a variation on the same plot, and once again the good guys solved it but we shouldn't be happy because it was just part of the villain's scheme. Then the third film made was about everything going bad as the villain's scheme was finally made overt, with only the last few minutes showing the good guys doing what they can to minimise their defeat.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LordofHats wrote:
I wouldn't even say that. I'd say there are two things the prequel series tried to achieve; How the Galactic Republic became the Galactic Empire, and how Anakin Skywalker became Darth Vader. Now, smart money would have said these two themes should have operated as parallels to one another, with Anakain and the Republic's transformations complementing each other over the course of the films.

Yep, and that was definitely the intent. And with a decent structure and a lot more discipline in cutting out the bad ideas, it would have worked just fine. I mean, it didn't have to be incredible, it's just pulp story telling. The fun is in the characters, the setting and the action.

Indeed, Lucas is an idea guy with lots of great ideas. The issue with idea guys is they also have lots of stupid ideas (Jar Jar *shakes fist*) and they really need people with balls around to look them in the eye and scream

Yeah, the original trilogy was Lucas' baby, but he had a lot of input from wise hands to hammer the thing in to final product.

I agree with sebster on the actors talents, minus that Christenson guy, he's just bad. But I saw an out take with McGregor and Lukas where he was fighting general Grievous, all they are standing in is a green room, Ewen and Lukas are talking about what he's supposed to be doing and Lukas says something like " this guy is a huge scary robot OK." He motions with his hands his big the robot is "and uhhhh... He just scary" and walks back to the camera.


I mean cmon! How is an actor supposed to get into what they are doing, the emotions and character that they need, from that? And watching the fighting scene between the two shows just that. Ewen just kind of shimmies when.Grievous opens up his 4 light saber wielding arms of death. Why? Because he's fighting a big scary robot. Not an 8 foot tall robot with 4 arms spinning light sabers from Jedi he killed, in a propeller of death towards you. He's killed Jedi ewen, several of them, this huge scary robot wants to kill you big time, in the worst ways imaginable. He's stronger than you, and has a pride that only a general that has survived death many times over can have, and he wants your light saber. Huge! Scary! Fething robot! With light saber propeller of death!!!!


That would have worked better I think

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Gitzbitah wrote:
Peter Jackson to Christopher Lee- Imagine the sound of a knife sinking into a man's back for this scene.

Christopher Lee- I don't have to imagine that, I remember it.

Is that a true quote? If so wow I recently heard about his war record but I had not heard that............

I believe the actual quote goes something like:

"Now, imagine the sound of a knife sinking into a man's back."
"I don't have to imagine what that sounds like."

As far as the acting talent goes? Yeah, just about everyone involved in the prequel trilogy has great acting talent... the problem is, Lucas is a terrible director of people. Brilliant technical director... terrible at people.