ShermanM4
Posts: 298
Joined: 7/14/2003
Status: offline
|
quote:
Of all six Star Wars movies I would have to rate "Star Wars" and "The Empire Strikes Back" as the best from the first trilogy.
As for "The Return of the Jedi", I have only one word to say: "EWOKS"! I almost left the theatre. Fortunately, the scenes between DV and Luke were so good I stayed.
In the second trilogy, it sounds like episode III is the best.
In the first films Lucas focused more on the characters. In subsequent films he went manic with special effects...
Did I happen to mention there were "EWOKS"!?
I have to agree with you completely. I am a rabid Star Wars nut! I have spent a lot of time watching the movies, playing Tie Fighter and Rebellion, and reading some of the books. By the way, the Timothy Zahn series called "Heir to the Empire" was probably the best of all of them. For anybody wondering why Episodes VI, I, and II were terrible, here is my two cents worth.
There is nothing especially unique about Lucas' screen play. The diologue and acting in Episodes IV-VI was nothing different than any of the conventions of the time. Here are some examples. One, Han Solo is plain cool. He's a rogue on the run, and he's got the ride to do it in. He's quick on the blaster, and yes he did shoot first in the Mos Eisley Cantina. Even though he is somewhat of a thief and smuggler you want to keep watching him and see what he will do next. Another memorable scene from Empire Strikes Back, the best in my opinion, you see sweaty, greasey, tired Princess Leia trying to fix something on the Millenium Falcon. Enter Han Solo, he puts his big manly arms around her to help her with her trouble. Booyahh! She doesn't need him, and bats him away. You know she wants him, and the underlying love tension is romantic and sappy. Again, a conventional mode of the day. Stuff like this makes you want to keep watching to find out what will happen next.
Several years later Revenge of the Sith comes out. Many Star Wars fans are very optimistic about this new frontier, but they are shocked and not sure about Star Wars after seeing it. Lucas tries to pass a conventional mode by making Anakin a sweet blond and innocent child. Who would ever suspect he would become Darth Vader? The problem was why should we care? The ultimate climax scene which was the only good part of the movie was the Pod Racing scene. Though very cool, I don' think anybody was sure what this had to do with the Star Wars Galaxy.
Anakin and Amadala was not cute at all. You wanted to see Han and Leia, but Annie and Amadala was just gross and stupid. There was nothing enticing about it at all. It, also, displayed terrible acting. Star Wars aciting in the original films was nothing legendary. After seeing Episode I and II, I thought to myself that was some of the worst acting I have ever seen in my life, and how could it be worse than the original when it was not that great to begin with? It kind of seemed like Lucas was just filling time and getting us there.
After seeing Star Wars Episode III I was pleasently surprised. It showed the clone battles, how the Jedi all died, dilemmas between good and evil, power and authority, Anakins transformation to the dark side, the rise of the Galactic Empire, the seeds of Rebellion, and the splitting of Luke and Leia. Why did it take two movies to get to this?
Lucas said in an interview that "everybody wanted too see a story about Vader killing people, but that was not the story I wanted to tell. No body wanted to see the story I wanted to tell." I think everybody just did not understand what he was trying to do because it was flawed, and no one was sure what it had to do with the Star Wars universe established in Episdoes IV-VI.
_____________________________
 "Perserverance and spirit have done wonders in all ages." ~General George Washington
|
Printable Version
RE: Off-topic: NY Times says Episode III is better than... - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread