Star Wars "boring political talk" Makes it More Real

[VulcanJedi]

Like the beat up used look of the hardware, the "boring political talk" in Star Wars helped make it real. Spoken from the mouths of British stage actors, along with the "alien language" subtitles, the fancy dialogue segments, and of course the famous dents and carbon scoring are all integral parts of the grand illusion. Forget all the problems with the prequels---the "boring political talk" in my estimation was always there to make kids feel more like they were watching something for adults. The children didn't need to understand---but there was something about having Alec Guinness or Christopher Lee babble in dialogue fit for a parliament floor discussion or CSPAN broadcast that complimented the laser shootouts and space battles. Kids felt like it was more than a child's movie---it was something very serious. Forget all the valid criticisms of Lucas----he has that part right. Boring political scenes, military jargon, mechanical jargon techno-babbble or Edwardian, Victorian or whatever era stuffy language should always have a place in Star Wars.

 

[Jedi_Master]

This thread will likely get moved into the Star Wars subforum.

Combing through my rusty memory banks I cannot recall a great deal of "boring political talk" in the Original Trilogy.

The Prequel Trilogy didn't have an excessive amount of it either, but what it did have felt very, very clunky.

 

[JWPlatt]

Is "boring political talk" anything like "gritty realism?" Because I'm bored of it. I want stories of fantasy and science fiction - not more real life and deconstructed heroes with flaws to make them more like us.

 

[martok2112]

I like watching shows that make me forget somewhat what genre they represent.

I loved the Battlestar Galactica remake because it didn't always come across as a science fiction show. Sometimes it came across as a good drama or action show.

I loved the Dark Knight trilogy because it didn't always seem like an over the top, gee-whiz comic book hero movie. Sometimes it felt more like 24 than a typical Batman movie.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Is "boring political talk" anything like "gritty realism?" Because I'm bored of it. I want stories of fantasy and science fiction - not more real life and deconstructed heroes with flaws to make them more like us.

Exactly. People who want realistic political talk should watch the news on TV. There's a reason this is called fiction...

 

[shivkala]

Star Wars is fantasy. It should not be realistic.

 

[Silvercrest]

^Oh, no worries there.

The boring political talk didn't make the PT any more realistic. It just made it boring.

 

[JWPlatt]

It is similar to Midichlorians. Things given a more rooted and expanded exposition are better suited to Star Trek than Star Wars.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I've never had a problem with the so-called "boring political talk" in Star Wars. One of my favorite scenes in the 1977 film is the first scene aboard the Death Star. The way that Palpatine corrupts the Republic from within is a brilliant and essential element of the PT, all the more so because it was eerily paralleled in the real world. I wouldn't trade any of that in.

Signed,
A ginormous Star Wars fan

 

[DarKush]

I like politics so the political talk in Star Wars wasn't a problem for me. Palpatine's machinations were one of the best things about the prequels. That being said, I think starting the prequel over a trade dispute was too obscure or unimportant. It should've been something more visceral, like a coup on Naboo or something. That way it still could be political, but still easier to grasp.

 

[Amaris]

It is similar to Midichlorians. Things given a more rooted and expanded exposition are better suited to Star Trek than Star Wars.

Nah, I don't want it there, either. We're not looking at future documentaries, or perspectives from a long time ago in a galaxy far, far, away. We're watching fiction and fantasy. I can make pretend that a starship is traveling faster than light without having the protagonist engineer spend 15 minutes describing to me the inner workings of the Matter/Antimatter reaction chamber.

In the original series, Scotty would say one or two technical things to back up his prediction of doom, and that was enough. In TNG, they dedicated whole sections of dialogue to it, and by the time VOY and ENT rolled around, 50% of the damned show was technobabble. So no, no, they can keep the "expanded exposition" all to themselves.

 

[Zaku]

Combing through my rusty memory banks I cannot recall a great deal of "boring political talk" in the Original Trilogy.

Something about the Senate in the New Hope..?

 

[DWF]

I like politics so the political talk in Star Wars wasn't a problem for me. Palpatine's machinations were one of the best things about the prequels. That being said, I think starting the prequel over a trade dispute was too obscure or unimportant. It should've been something more visceral, like a coup on Naboo or something. That way it still could be political, but still easier to grasp.

I think that was kind of the point, nobody would've suspected Palpatine's hand in the blockcade enabling him to overthrow Volurium(SP).

 

[Mach5]

Is "boring political talk" anything like "gritty realism?" Because I'm bored of it. I want stories of fantasy and science fiction - not more real life and deconstructed heroes with flaws to make them more like us.

Exactly. People who want realistic political talk should watch the news on TV. There's a reason this is called fiction...

I think you meant fantasy? Because last time I checked, the literary works of Tolstoy or Dostoevsky, or the films of Lars von Trier or Jim Jarmusch were also referred to as fiction. As opposed to, well, non-fiction.

This said, I have no problem with "gritty realism", if it's moderate (not over the top, like in Children of Men, or certain episodes of nuBSG). I makes everything look more believable. The immersion and the suspension of disbelief are easier. The Dark Knight is the prime example of this, in contrast to the the MCU, which never really manages to trick your brain into believing it's a real place.

Star Wars is a whole other animal. No one expects to buy the "galaxy far, far away" as the real place. Or Middle-Earth, for that matter.

 

[Sci]

I have no problem with the presence of politics in SW. I thought it was cool seeing the Senate, and I thought the sequence in RotS with Palpatine throwing the Senators' pods at Yoda during their fight was a nice visualization of the way he was tearing down democracy in the Republic.

My problem with the politics in the SW PT wasn't that they were there. It's that they were implausibly stupid. Non-Senators have a right to call a vote of no confidence? No formal political parties? High-ranking Senators can be all of 24 years old and rely on 19-year-old Padawans for protection? The media is virtually non-existant? 14-year-olds can be elected Queen of an entire planet? Nobody bothered to check and see who paid for the clone army? Nobody thought there was anything convenient about the clone arm showing up just when the Senate passed a bill raising the army?

C'mon. The Republic was not well-organized.

 

[DarKush]

I like politics so the political talk in Star Wars wasn't a problem for me. Palpatine's machinations were one of the best things about the prequels. That being said, I think starting the prequel over a trade dispute was too obscure or unimportant. It should've been something more visceral, like a coup on Naboo or something. That way it still could be political, but still easier to grasp.

I think that was kind of the point, nobody would've suspected Palpatine's hand in the blockcade enabling him to overthrow Volurium(SP).

I get that, and for a novel perhaps it might work, but for a movie I think it needed to be something more straight forward. Like how Episode 2 opened with the Republic on the verge of civil war. I think that's an easier concept to grasp and also the importance of than a minor trade dispute on a relatively minor or backwater planet. It did led to Palpatine's elevation, which is great, but I think it wasn't the right move to make to kick off the prequels and seemed a bit too removed from the Clone Wars, even if it gave us hints that something was rotten in the Republic while also introducing key relationships (Palpatine-Anakin, Padme-Anakin, Obi-Wan-Anakin, Anakin-Jedi, Threepio-R2D2).

Star Wars isn't House of Cards. I think it needs to go for the gut whenever possible. That doesn't mean it can't have interesting or profound things to say about politics. Though overall I think Lucas-perhaps well intentioned-bungled how to show a democracy falling into dictatorship.

And while the characters within the film didn't grasp that Palpatine's machinations were behind Naboo, or the Clone Wars, until Episode 3, Lucas didn't do much to hide Palpatine's involvement from early on in Episode 1. So for the audience it wasn't much of a surprise.

 

[DarKush]

I have no problem with the presence of politics in SW. I thought it was cool seeing the Senate, and I thought the sequence in RotS with Palpatine throwing the Senators' pods at Yoda during their fight was a nice visualization of the way he was tearing down democracy in the Republic.

My problem with the politics in the SW PT wasn't that they were there. It's that they were implausibly stupid. Non-Senators have a right to call a vote of no confidence? No formal political parties? High-ranking Senators can be all of 24 years old and rely on 19-year-old Padawans for protection? The media is virtually non-existant? 14-year-olds can be elected Queen of an entire planet? Nobody bothered to check and see who paid for the clone army? Nobody thought there was anything convenient about the clone arm showing up just when the Senate passed a bill raising the army?

C'mon. The Republic was not well-organized.

You make some very good points. Also, was Jar Jar elected a representative for Naboo or did Padme just make him her replacement? And how does that work? Heck, even the Clone Wars cartoon got into the bad management. Something like the Republic paying their member planets power bills.

It bothered me too that Padme would be opposed to the Military Creation Act. I mean outside of her having an anti-war/pro-peace kind of bent, it doesn't make sense to me. If there had been a Republic army in Episode 1 then the Trade Federation blockade likely wouldn't have happened and Valorum could've sent soldiers and not two Jedi. To me it made more sense for Padme to be a proponent of the Act. That would also make Dooku wanting to assassinate her be for more political reasons than fulfilling a personal grudge from the Trade Federation. And it would've been nice to see Padme in Episode 3, realize the horror of her mistake, of how she had played a part in the death of the Republic, even if for an ostensibly noble reason.

 

[DWF]

I like politics so the political talk in Star Wars wasn't a problem for me. Palpatine's machinations were one of the best things about the prequels. That being said, I think starting the prequel over a trade dispute was too obscure or unimportant. It should've been something more visceral, like a coup on Naboo or something. That way it still could be political, but still easier to grasp.

I think that was kind of the point, nobody would've suspected Palpatine's hand in the blockcade enabling him to overthrow Volurium(SP).

I get that, and for a novel perhaps it might work, but for a movie I think it needed to be something more straight forward. Like how Episode 2 opened with the Republic on the verge of civil war. I think that's an easier concept to grasp and also the importance of than a minor trade dispute on a relatively minor or backwater planet. It did led to Palpatine's elevation, which is great, but I think it wasn't the right move to make to kick off the prequels and seemed a bit too removed from the Clone Wars, even if it gave us hints that something was rotten in the Republic while also introducing key relationships (Palpatine-Anakin, Padme-Anakin, Obi-Wan-Anakin, Anakin-Jedi, Threepio-R2D2).

Star Wars isn't House of Cards. I think it needs to go for the gut whenever possible. That doesn't mean it can't have interesting or profound things to say about politics. Though overall I think Lucas-perhaps well intentioned-bungled how to show a democracy falling into dictatorship.

And while the characters within the film didn't grasp that Palpatine's machinations were behind Naboo, or the Clone Wars, until Episode 3, Lucas didn't do much to hide Palpatine's involvement from early on in Episode 1. So for the audience it wasn't much of a surprise.

Keeping the characters of the loop is something a hallmark of the old serials, the Captain Marvel serial kept people guessing I'm sure, but in the third Flash Gordon, Flash had no idea Ming was still alive and behind the purple death.

 

[DWF]

I have no problem with the presence of politics in SW. I thought it was cool seeing the Senate, and I thought the sequence in RotS with Palpatine throwing the Senators' pods at Yoda during their fight was a nice visualization of the way he was tearing down democracy in the Republic.

My problem with the politics in the SW PT wasn't that they were there. It's that they were implausibly stupid. Non-Senators have a right to call a vote of no confidence? No formal political parties? High-ranking Senators can be all of 24 years old and rely on 19-year-old Padawans for protection? The media is virtually non-existant? 14-year-olds can be elected Queen of an entire planet? Nobody bothered to check and see who paid for the clone army? Nobody thought there was anything convenient about the clone arm showing up just when the Senate passed a bill raising the army?

C'mon. The Republic was not well-organized.

You make some very good points. Also, was Jar Jar elected a representative for Naboo or did Padme just make him her replacement? And how does that work? Heck, even the Clone Wars cartoon got into the bad management. Something like the Republic paying their member planets power bills.

It bothered me too that Padme would be opposed to the Military Creation Act. I mean outside of her having an anti-war/pro-peace kind of bent, it doesn't make sense to me. If there had been a Republic army in Episode 1 then the Trade Federation blockade likely wouldn't have happened and Valorum could've sent soldiers and not two Jedi. To me it made more sense for Padme to be a proponent of the Act. That would also make Dooku wanting to assassinate her be for more political reasons than fulfilling a personal grudge from the Trade Federation. And it would've been nice to see Padme in Episode 3, realize the horror of her mistake, of how she had played a part in the death of the Republic, even if for an ostensibly noble reason.

As we learned in ATOC there hadn't been a war since the foundation of the Republic, they'd relied on the Jedi to keep the peace. Ob-Wan told Luke the Jedi were the guardians of peace and justice in the old Republic. I'm srue that in most people's eyes there's no need for an army if there's no war. Palpatine created a war and the need for an army.

 

[Reverend]

I never really got the complaints about the politics in the PT.

To my recollection there was one or two brief scenes in each of the films. The senate scene in TPM in was pivotal to the plot. It showed how ineffectual the Republic Senate had become, gives us a first real glimpse at the deep game Palpatine is playing and of course propels our protagonists to take action, which will take us all the way to the finale. The scenes in AotC were similarly crucial to the plot because if you're going to tell a story about how a war got started, then politics *has* to come into it because it's the reason for *every war ever fought*. And in RotS, you're witnessing a democracy becoming a dictatorship. Politics is sort of the whole thing there.

Yeah, the scenes themselves are stilted and awkward, but so is just about every exchange of dialogue in this trilogy. Which is the real underlying flaw of just about everything wrong with the PT. The execution. Lucas struggles at directing human interaction, always has. Hell, his first movie wan a minimalist avant-garde affair about a world in which emotions are tightly controlled and the world is ruled by an accounting computer program. Which is perfect for his skill set.

I do feel sorry for him since I remember before the films were made he was saying he didn't want to direct them. That at most, he'd direct the first to sort of set the tone and get others to direct the other two while he writes & produces. It's only now coming out that he did in fact approach some *big* name directors and they all turned him down, saying he should do it.

George seems to be at his best when he's collaborating and it's damned had to collaborate when you're surrounded by yes-men, which is what seemed to happen if you look at some of the behind the scenes footage.

Indeed, the genuinely high quality of TCW seems to bare this out as that was being run by a very talented and creative team, with Lucas on as basically a story consultant. Some of the best stuff there came pretty much directly from him.