Star Wars [2]

Discussion continued from: http://www.hobbitmovieforum.com/t50p975-star-wars

----------

Pettytyrant101 wrote:I always thought Luke should have gone bad- he is told by Obi Wan to complete his training, but he doesn't and he rushes off, and he does lose it with Vader and succumb to anger. Always seemed obvious to me Luke was the next Vader- hell we even get the scene in the marsh with his face under the Vader mask.

I get what you're saying, though I think that was the main theme in ROTJ.  Of course, one could argue that ROTJ should have handled it a different/darker/less neat and tidy way (one can say that about a lot of things in ROTJ ), but I think the scenes with Luke, Vader, and the Emperor in the third act are really good and Luke's eventual rejection of the Dark Side, after coming so close to giving in, is really powerful.  I'd rather not see that undone by the sequel.

halfwise wrote:This is about the same timeframe from the original series where Vader is informed that he's all that's left of "that old religion".  It wasn't mythologized, but people were scoffing at it.  Apparently the more technologically advanced a culture is the shorter their cultural memory is.

I've talked about this on here before, but it does feel in the Original Trilogy that the Republic and the Jedi were distant relics of an almost-bygone age.  But looking at the timeline for all six films (well, six and counting now), the Empire had only existed for 19 years by the time of the original film.  I used to consider this an instance of the prequels messing with the originals, but then I realized that Luke's age (19) had already fixed this part of the timeline in stone before the prequels were ever fleshed out.  But it still feels like longer and so I've always wondered if it was Imperial propaganda that helped account for this.  Or it could be that because there were relatively few Jedi, most of the Galaxy knew them as little more than legends even at the height of the Order, and our view as audience members is simply skewed by having followed so many Jedi characters.

I think Lucas just had a mismatch between the feelings he wanted to engender and the story he wanted to tell. He also rather oddly has a republic as a mythic element and an empire as the present - reversing the way we think of history. To us an "empire" will always feel old.

I'm not so sure. Obviously it can look that way from an american perspective. But history is full of examples of a wave of egalitarianism being dragged straight back to the in the other direction. Just see revolutionary France and the rise of Napoleon, for instance.

All those liberal constitutions around 1790, were almost without fault met with a more authoritative counter development as a reaction to the radical consequences they entailed. Only the american and the fjordlandian ones survive to this day.

Eldorion wrote:

bungobaggins wrote:Sums up my feelings really well.

It wouldn't be Star Wars without massive amounts of merchandise and cross-promotions.

As someone who works in retail I've learned to be grateful for events like this.

Well I'm glad it works in your favor, Eldo.



I just hope we don't get some stupid hypocritical anti-capitalist message in the movie. Just stick to the story. Don't let modern sensibilities and sensitivities ruin Star Wars.

Blue: good point about differing American perceptions. We also have the rise of Nazism more recently.

http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/videos/flashback-star-wars-phantom-menace-trailer-causes-hysteria-in-1998-20151016

I will not be taken in. Reserving judgment for the movie. PJ tricked me with his AUJ trailer back in 2011. Never again.

I think Lucas just had a mismatch between the feelings he wanted to engender and the story he wanted to tell. - Halfy

I suspect its simpler than that- when they made the first film Jedi ect were supposed to be from a near mythic almost forgotten past that no one seriously believes in any more (ala Hans reaction to the whole thing)- but when they made a sequel they came up making Vader Lukes father- thus setting the timeline in a clash with the tone.

I'd say "keeping expectations firmly in check" is a better way of saying it then "reserving judgement for the movie."
I mean obviously none of us are going to be rating the movie from 1 to 10 before we even see it, or discussing who had the best acting bits or the pace of the chase sequences.

Well, I suppose that is what I meant, but there is this big hype train and I am not going to get excited about something I haven't seen when it has had a record of greatly disappointing me.

bungobaggins wrote:http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/videos/flashback-star-wars-phantom-menace-trailer-causes-hysteria-in-1998-20151016

I will not be taken in. Reserving judgment for the movie. PJ tricked me with his AUJ trailer back in 2011. Never again.

In all fairness, the original trailer for The Phantom Menace is still really good if you can watch it in the mindset of pretending that you don't recognize all the elements already. I know that it's possible for The Force Awakens to be the same deal, but I'm finding myself enjoying the excitement and anticipation sorta in spite of myself.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:I suspect its simpler than that- when they made the first film Jedi ect were supposed to be from a near mythic almost forgotten past that no one seriously believes in any more (ala Hans reaction to the whole thing)- but when they made a sequel they came up making Vader Lukes father- thus setting the timeline in a clash with the tone.

That's a good point about the Vader/Luke connection not being present until they started working on TESB, but even if Anakin Skywalker had been killed during the fall of the Jedi, I'd think Luke's age would still mean that those events couldn't have taken place too far in the past.

Eldorion wrote:

bungobaggins wrote:http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/videos/flashback-star-wars-phantom-menace-trailer-causes-hysteria-in-1998-20151016

I will not be taken in. Reserving judgment for the movie. PJ tricked me with his AUJ trailer back in 2011. Never again.

In all fairness, the original trailer for The Phantom Menace is still really good if you can watch it in the mindset of pretending that you don't recognize all the elements already.  I know that it's possible for The Force Awakens to be the same deal, but I'm finding myself enjoying the excitement and anticipation sorta in spite of myself.

But even just watching that Phantom Menace trailer, it really pales in comparison to this latest Force Awakens trailer. In terms of how they are structured, flow, build up, etc. the PM trailer is really clunky. The FA trailer has a nice pace to it.

edit: okay the first minute of the PM trailer is good with a nice build up to those quick slam-bang clips. But once they start talking about "the boy" it just slams on the brakes. That last minute feels like it takes two because of all the dialogue and messy edits. Yeah all that dialog really kills the pacing of the trailer IMO.

But it's not nearly as bad as this trailer.

https://i.imgur.com/MTXeJHi.gifv

Abstractly funny!

That's a very good costume. But you have to wonder how Vader sees anything - no surprise he couldn't navigate a living room.

If he hadnt have hit that wall that would have been quite scary !!!

I am really looking forward to this new star trek movie.

#toomuchfiskwine

#shewasjoking

I think..

Fun fact: Han Solo was meant to die after he was put into carbonite, but this idea was rejected by Lucas who wanted more sales for his action figures. I've known this for a while, but never thought it would work. However, this paragraph from wikipedia sheds some more light on it.

Wikipedia wrote:The issue of whether Harrison Ford would return for the final film arose during pre-production. Unlike the other stars of the first film, Ford had not contracted to do two sequels, and Raiders of the Lost Ark had made him an even bigger star. Ford suggested that Han Solo be killed through self-sacrifice. Kasdan concurred, saying it should happen near the beginning of the film to instill doubt as to whether the others would survive, but Lucas was vehemently against it and rejected the concept. Gary Kurtz, who produced Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back but was replaced as producer for Return of the Jedi, said in 2010 that the ongoing success with Star Wars merchandise and toys led George Lucas to reject the idea of killing off Han Solo in the middle part of the film during a raid on an Imperial base. Luke Skywalker was also to have walked off alone and exhausted like the hero in a Spaghetti Western but, according to Kurtz, Lucas opted for a happier ending to encourage higher merchandise sales.

For me, RotJ compared to ESB was considerably less dark, so the original plan may have a good route to go if you wanted them to be tonally consistent. You also need in every series a sense of mortality and a legitimate chance of death. Now I'm not saying RotJ should have had a grim 'No Country For Old Men' ending, but maybe not all characters should get to walk away safely. Especially not to the extreme of Rowling's Harry Potter ending.

I'm sure Han's presence will pay off in The Force Awakens though

I'm convinced Han will die in EP 7, as much as I like him as a character, Harrison Ford had a point-Han's arc was already complete in ROTJ-self serving rogue to rebel hero...I'm not sure his likely death will hit as hard now we know he's already had a full life...

bungobaggins wrote:https://i.imgur.com/MTXeJHi.gifv