Disney buys Lucasfilm

[Amentep]

It tended to lots of subplots and character arcs that all got resolved, expanded upon the workings of the Force, and ended with one of the shocking twists in cinema.

Perhaps my memory is faulty, but my memory is that almost all of the important subplots and character arcs in EMPIRE got resolved in RETURN, not in EMPIRE.

 

Han captured - Return

Luke's vision quest - never resolved

Luke and the Dark Side - Return

Han and Leia's romance - Return

Lando's betrayal - Return

 

Heck the shocking twist (although I'd rate, say, the end of Chinatown a bit more surprising, for example) is all about "tune in next time..."

 

As I said, it has been awhile since I've seen the film, but I can't think of an important story element in EMPIRE that isn't just left dangling at the end of Empire.

 

To my mind, that's part of the point - ESB was always the one that could most replicate the Flash Gordon serials of yesteryear that Star Wars patterned itself after.

[TheChris92]

 

It tended to lots of subplots and character arcs that all got resolved, expanded upon the workings of the Force, and ended with one of the shocking twists in cinema.

Perhaps my memory is faulty, but my memory is that almost all of the important subplots and character arcs in EMPIRE got resolved in RETURN, not in EMPIRE.

 

Han captured - Return

Luke's vision quest - never resolved

Luke and the Dark Side - Return

Han and Leia's romance - Return

Lando's betrayal - Return

 

Heck the shocking twist (although I'd rate, say, the end of Chinatown a bit more surprising, for example) is all about "tune in next time..."

 

As I said, it has been awhile since I've seen the film, but I can't think of an important story element in EMPIRE that isn't just left dangling at the end of Empire.

 

To my mind, that's part of the point - ESB was always the one that could most replicate the Flash Gordon serials of yesteryear that Star Wars patterned itself after.

 

Well, yes, it does set up things for a sequel, but the subplots in Empire are nicely wrapped to a satisfying degree -- Perhaps you could call it a 'resoluted',  in a narrative sense -- it is not necessarily a dramatic problem that's fixed, but a thematic question that's answered. Kind of like how a fight is over when you're knocked out, not when you're helped to regain conciousness.  Luke, the boy who has no patience, rushes off to have his ass handed to him, mentally and physically. Han gambles with the lives of people he loves, and is punished for doing so - he's wrong, and Leia's there to see it, just like she wanted. It might end with the promise that things are to be rectified in the next instalment, but the characters make journeys that are fully satisfying. At this point I almost feel like writing a review of the film, but I don't feel the need to justify my opinion, since it'll at best fall on deaf ears, so it's futile either way. Although I am always up for writing an analysis for fun in the movie thread whenever I get back to watching it again I suppose.

Edited April 30, 2014 by TheChris92

[Amentep]

I still tend to think the movie feels unresolved (deservedly, aping the serials of the past) but I see your point as well.

[Calax]

This discussion does remind me of the Honest Trailer for Star Trek, especially the bit at 2:20 that explains 2009 Star Trek was essentially a Star Wars demo reel.

 

ZTo be fair. in the directors commentary for Trek 09, Abrams specifically mentions that they watched and patterned the new movie after the Star Wars movies rather than the old Trek ones.

[Tale]

I'm not worried about Abrams. I liked the first new Trek. It's the second that I really dislike. And given Damon Lindeloff's involvement with Prometheus, I'm tempted to blame him for the both.

 

Kasdan worries me in a different way. Yay, he wrote Empire. But he's not really had any work in the public eye for a decade. So whatever skill he had might not be skill he still has. And even then, whatever he liked to write might not be what he still likes to write.

 

Am I just a bitter pessimist?

[Malcador]

It will suck, regardless of staff.  

[Tale]

I can't agree. Even the things I worry about only lend to being less than their potential, not inherently bad. The movie is going to have an uphill battle, particularly with having to deal with the 30 year time skip and passing the torch. But uphill battles can be won, they're just hard.

[Malcador]

Well, was more a comment on the reaction it will get rather than a prediction on how the movie will be.  But like a new CoD release, I will probably see it.

[Hurlshort]

Hah, honestly the prequels are all perfectly entertaining.  The first one was considerably weaker than the rest, but it still has fun moments.  But hey, expectations are a pain.  

[Tale]

Dismissing criticism by blaming expectations doesn't sit well with me. There's been plenty of good work out there that was met with high expectations and still pleased the audience. Peacekeeper Wars and Serenity to point to two examples that are dear to me. But there exists numerous other sequels, reboots, and TV seasons that are all well received despite following a high bar, standard, or simply an insular and rabid fanbase.

 

Broadly dismissing criticism like that only strikes me as an unwillingness to understand the criticism.

 

The problems with the Star Wars prequels are probably the most broadly discussed. So not at least acknowledging its failings and saying that you prefer the parts it did well, such as special effects, strikes me as perhaps intellectually dishonest. If not purposefully blind.

[Hurlshort]

You might be reading too much into what I wrote.  As I said, I thought the prequels were perfectly entertaining.  Do I consider them timeless classics like the originals?  No, not at all.  Even my 3 and 6 year old get that.  My daughter wants to see Princess Leia, and my son wants to see Darth Vader.  They don't clamor for Natalie Portman or Hayden Christensen.  The prequels clearly lack that.

 

But I don't need all my movies to be timeless classics.  That's hard to live up to, that's all I'm saying.  

[Zoraptor]

 

Mark Hamill hasn't done any proper acting in years, and it's been a while since Lawrence Kasdan has written a good script. Taking that into considertaion it can still easily flop especially with that hack J.J as director. I do, however, approve of Max von Sydow & Oscar Isaac and would have liked to see Ryan Gosling or Billy Dee returning, hmm.

 

Hack as compared to what, George Lucas?

 

 

Dunno, I can imagine Abrams saying "jerkier, more lens flare" instead of "faster, more intense" as Lucas supposedly did. Certainly late model Lucas is worse that current model Abrams, but...

 

I always end up comparing Lucas to McCatrney in the Lennon McCartney partnership. So long as Paul had John there to tell him when he was retreating up his own fundamental orifice he was fine, solo Paul though was a mess of self indulgent tripe all the more so because you could see where it could have avoided it. Once Lucas insulated himself from criticism you started to get incomprehensible stuff and pointless tinkering (like with 1414) that really just needed someone to stand up and say "that won't work George", but you got the distinct impression that that seldom if ever happened and was ignored if it did. The story in the prequel trilogy could have worked, it desperately needed a good script editing and better character direction, but the visual style and set pieces were still fine and even with the execution botched the 3rd makes (IMO) a better conclusion to its trilogy than RotJ made to its. But SW-RotJ is better overall because it had George's vision and strengths such as the exceptionally good and massively influential visual design, but brought others in to cover his weaknesses. (Well, not so much RotJ.)

 

Abrams hasn't reached Lucas levels of success yet, so it remains to be seen if he'll end up with the same problems. Probably not, since Lucas had his own production company as well- but I watch Abrams' stuff and get this rather... Michael Bay feeling. It's all very kinetic and stylish, but there doesn't seem to be much beneath that.

[TheChris92]

George's "vision" is what made Kingdom of the Crystal Skull a terrible movie -- It's quite simple ,because he's not cut-out as a director, and definitely not a screenplay writer, examples of that being Willow or the Prequel trilogy -- Because what George Lucas writes isn't so much writing as it is vomiting through a pen. He probably has some ideas but they should be taken with massive amounts of salt.

Edited May 1, 2014 by TheChris92

[Blarghagh]

Hah, honestly the prequels are all perfectly entertaining.  The first one was considerably weaker than the rest, but it still has fun moments.  But hey, expectations are a pain.  

 

I must be the only one who liked Phantom Menace more than Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith. It helps that I was still a kid when I saw it so I didn't have the years of adult anticipation to be disappointed by, but I thought Phantom Menace felt mostly true to adventurous feeling of Star Wars where the other two didn't at all. I mean, it's got serious flaws, most notably the political subplot being boring and Jar Jar being annoying, but I consider the Pod Race and the Darth Maul duel to be the last good Star Wars moments to come out of George Lucas.

 

In contrast, I consider the entirety of Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith to be faux-gritty padding, awful dialogue, wasted oppertunities and video game graphics because George obviously didn't know how to fill the time before Anakin turned Vader, plus whereas Jar Jar was annoying in Phantom Menace, EVERYBODY was annoying in those movies to make up for his absence with especially Anakin and the extremely flanderized C-3PO out-running Jar Jar in the irritating department so much that I can't believe Jar Jar even still registers as a blip on peoples radar.

 

I mean honestly, I'll take ten Jar Jars over Hayden Christensen peeing his pants trying to act angry and Ewan McGregor visibly smiling because he's laughing at how ridiculous his lines about killing "younglings" are.

Edited May 1, 2014 by TrueNeutral

[Hiro Protagonist]

 

It tended to lots of subplots and character arcs that all got resolved, expanded upon the workings of the Force, and ended with one of the shocking twists in cinema.

Perhaps my memory is faulty, but my memory is that almost all of the important subplots and character arcs in EMPIRE got resolved in RETURN, not in EMPIRE.

 

Han captured - Return

Luke's vision quest - never resolved

Luke and the Dark Side - Return

Han and Leia's romance - Return

Lando's betrayal - Return

 

Heck the shocking twist (although I'd rate, say, the end of Chinatown a bit more surprising, for example) is all about "tune in next time..."

 

As I said, it has been awhile since I've seen the film, but I can't think of an important story element in EMPIRE that isn't just left dangling at the end of Empire.

 

To my mind, that's part of the point - ESB was always the one that could most replicate the Flash Gordon serials of yesteryear that Star Wars patterned itself after.

 

 

I agree with Amentep.

 

A New Hope was a story in itself. It had a beginning, middle and end with celebrations. And left it open with a sequel.

Empire felt like a new story. It felt like the first half of that new story. The start of the Han/Leia romance. New characters were introduced. Yoda saying, 'There is another?'. Huh? Who? A lot of new and unresolved questions. They split up at the end.

Return finalised those plot points. The romance. We find out who is the other? Those questions are answered. Everyone gets back together. Celebrations ensue.

 

It was similar with the Prequels and used the same formula.

The first had a beginning, middle and end with celebrations. And left it open for a sequel which we all knew would come.

Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith (set years later) were two parts of the same story, and resolved in the latter.

Edited May 1, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist

[Amentep]

I still don't get the hate for Crystal Skull, to be honest. Is it Raiders of the Lost Ark?

 

No.

 

But then neither was Temple of Doom or Last Crusade.

 

About the prequels, I agree with Hurlshot they're entertaining films. I think they have problems (I think the biggest is that it was a mistake to not start the story with Anakin being age-wise analagous to Luke in ANH; this decision created a domino effect of story and character issues, IMO). But as I mentioned some of the problems in the prequels are definitely on display in Willow also featuring a screenplay only worked on by Lucas.

 

I think the argument is, generally, that Lucas works better with a strong collaborator in scripting (Katz and Hyuck on American Graffitti, Brackett and Kasden on EMPIRE, Kasden on Return, Kaufmann on Raiders, etc.) You may think "But hey, STAR WARS - the biggest of them all - was Lucas alone". Well yeah, technically, but remember he'd been talking it over with his film friends for years (if you recall the famous story of Brian DePalma lambasting the story idea) and worked on at least one draft with Katz and Hyuck.

[Drowsy Emperor]

I think the second prequel movie is one of the worst films I've ever seen, although the first one is a close contender. Its tough to say what was worse, the acting, the script or the directing. If it was set in any other universe other than SW it would have been forgotten day after release. The third one was merely mediocre.

 

KOTOR 2 had a better Star Wars story than all the prequel movies combined.

Edited May 1, 2014 by Drowsy Emperor

[Raithe]

The really weird thing was the novelisations of the prequel films were a lot better then the films. They structured it out better, they provided more depth to the plots and why things were happening and showed the reasons characters made the choices and reactions they did.

 

But when you have a series of films that can be entertainingly cheesy to a point, you shouldn't have to rely on the novelisations for it to really click.

[Tale]

But I don't need all my movies to be timeless classics.  That's hard to live up to, that's all I'm saying.

Maybe I am reading too much into it. But the problems with those movies isn't that they're not timeless classics. It's that they're bad. That's kind of my point. The criticism isn't because they're not as good as the originals. The criticism is because they're bad movies. Expectations aren't a factor.

 

They're not Sharknado bad, which is also a movie some people enjoyed, but that's not ultimately a valuable standard.

 

If they hadn't been part of an already successful franchise, two thirds of them wouldn't have been made at all. John Carter was better and it's not getting any sequels.

[Hurlshort]

What I'm saying is

 

 

But I don't need all my movies to be timeless classics.  That's hard to live up to, that's all I'm saying.

Maybe I am reading too much into it. But the problems with those movies isn't that they're not timeless classics. It's that they're bad. That's kind of my point. The criticism isn't because they're not as good as the originals. The criticism is because they're bad movies. Expectations aren't a factor.

 

 

But when you look at the actual critical reviews, I mean people that are published critics, Episode I is the only one getting bad marks.  Episode II got decent marks and Episode III got great marks.

 

And honestly as TN pointed out, Episode one was more of a kids movie.  It was hugely popular among the young audiences.  But that didn't sit well with the folks that were kids when the originals were released.  The next two films struck a better balance.

 

Comparing any of these to a silly low budget film like Sharknado isn't fair for either film.  They have entirely different goals.  

[Tale]

It was hugely popular among the young audiences.

It is fairly easy to be popular among young audiences. They share the direct-to-DVD market with b-movies, you might have noticed.

 

What is a noteworthy achievement is being popular with the entire family. Getting it to be something that the parents enjoy sitting down watching with their children.

[Oerwinde]

 

It was hugely popular among the young audiences.

It is fairly easy to be popular among young audiences. They share the direct-to-DVD market with b-movies, you might have noticed.

 

What is a noteworthy achievement is being popular with the entire family. Getting it to be something that the parents enjoy sitting down watching with their children.

So they need to be as good as the Tinkerbell movies.

[Blarghagh]

 

But I don't need all my movies to be timeless classics.  That's hard to live up to, that's all I'm saying.

Maybe I am reading too much into it. But the problems with those movies isn't that they're not timeless classics. It's that they're bad.

 

If you look away from the fact that the originals are timeless classics, they're pretty bad too. Well, New Hope and Return anyway. Empire still holds up pretty well.

[Tale]

 

 

But I don't need all my movies to be timeless classics.  That's hard to live up to, that's all I'm saying.

Maybe I am reading too much into it. But the problems with those movies isn't that they're not timeless classics. It's that they're bad.

 

 

If you look away from the fact that the originals are timeless classics, they're pretty bad too. Well, New Hope and Return anyway. Empire still holds up pretty well.

 

I've seen that claim before. They're not bad the way the prequels are, not in the same way or the same degree.

 

Last time I saw that someone was complaining about the camp. But at least camp has emotion in the characters and it's not a bunch of wooden people talking. The fights aren't completely self-indulgent, they carry the emotion and relationships with them. Every fight with Dooku is completely void of character. The fights with Grevious have nothing. The fight with Maul has nothing until the second half. The one fight in the prequels that really does have character to it is dragged out way too freaking long and with some truly dreadful choreography. It needed to be cut to a third of what it was.

 

The originals weren't that bad. The fights existed to show the character relationships, not just flash lights around. And they kept themselves short, which helped focus on the emotion.

[TheChris92]

I think the argument is, generally, that Lucas works better with a strong collaborator in scripting (Katz and Hyuck on American Graffitti, Brackett and Kasden on EMPIRE

Lucas was a consultant on the story, but he didn't write Empire, that was all on Kasdan & Leigh - The originalscript was headed by Leigh, which is quite different from what Empire eventually turned out to be when it was re-written.

I still don't get the hate for Crystal Skull, to be honest. Is it Raiders of the Lost Ark?

It's about asgood as it gets with Lucas is all I'm gonna bother to say about that pile of tripe.