I don't see those things as mutually exclusive. That was the high point of AOTC.
Phantom Menace is the best Prequel.
- Thread starter TheLobes
- Start date
I don't see those things as mutually exclusive. That was the high point of AOTC.
I always thought Yoda fighting was the same as Mr. Miyagi fighting in the Karate Kid. It was weird seeing them kick ass at first, until you realize the scene is just there to show how badass they are.
That isn't saying much. Seeing the wise, monk-like character from the originals flipping around like a frog on acid wasn't something I ever cared to see.
Don't worry, I'm sure in a future cut of AOTC we'll see what Lucas "really wanted" and Yoda will acquire a Invincibility Star from Super Mario Brothers before he takes on Count Dookie.
Seriously, WTF was that? 98% of the time he can barely move even with the aid of a cane but all of the sudden for a few moments he moves like a Cirque du Soleil performer doing a parkour course.
Seriously, WTF was that? 98% of the time he can barely move even with the aid of a cane but all of the sudden for a few moments he moves like a Cirque du Soleil performer doing a parkour course.
Last edited:
IIRC, it's something about the Force augmenting your speed, etc. To yourself you would be moving normal but to everyone else, you would like the Flash.
That said, I like the analogy to Mr Miyagi and would have preferred slow but completely accurate and precise moves at always just the right moment to the hyperspeed frog we got.
Lucas was Producer on the Indiana Jones movies, not director or writer IIRC.
Yeah the movie turned out fine. I've read that the experience itself wasn't that good. Pressure was really high on Marquand and he was always concerned about doing it how Lucas would want it, so why not just have Lucas do it.
Aside from the music and a few fancy moves, the duel in TPM did nothing for me. The reason is expressed at 5:55 of this video. Though I will say that the actors were good. Maul was damn interesting. I loved when he used the force to throw something against the door to open it. I also loved his jumping advances after his saber was cut in half. He almost seemed better using a normal single-bladed saber. Also, Qui-Gon did quite well against him, backing him up through the hallway. But the scene wants to give you the emotional oompph, and it doesn't. I remember feeling empty and certainly not thrilled when Darth Maul was killed. It looked silly, actually.
Yes, it was absurd. The prequels for some reason made it necessary that every Force capable character be light saber wielding.
Back when AOTC was released, and I was a high school sophomore, I scoffed when a bunch of kids came to class the day after its premiere, saying it was badass and a lot fun.
"Please," I said, "it'll suck unless Yoda really throws down." (Having avoided as many spoilers as I could, I assumed he just sat around all the movie as before.)
"Oh, don't worry," one of them said, "he does."
Now, the thing was that I'd been joking. I thought seeing Yoda getting down and dirty would be cool, but only because I hadn't thought through its implications.
... Let's just say I learned the error of my ways on that one.
Christopher Lee looks pretty silly in the fight too. Most of the fights with Dooku were actually a stunt double with Lee's face pasted on (The main exception being his battle with Obi-Wan, which was actually the most 'classic' of the fights in the whole trilogy). At least in LOTR his character didn't do obviously fake backflips and stuff like that(and he had a better performance in those films to boot. He just seems very, very tired in the prequels).
The Yoda vs. Palpatine fight was better, but neither character really needed a lightsaber in the films.
The Yoda vs. Palpatine fight was better, but neither character really needed a lightsaber in the films.
Actually, I think the character is supposed to be "tired". He is low on gas, and frankly, only holding onto his position because he views the alternative as worse.
Sidious/Palpatine knew this, too, that's why he was angling for replacement.
Sidious/Palpatine knew this, too, that's why he was angling for replacement.
Talosian said:
There's nothing absurd about it. What you're seeing here is consistency with the almighty OT. ROTJ called the lightsaber "a Jedi's weapon", not "the weapon of some Jedi but not the really experienced ones". The same fact is expressed by Obi-Wan in ANH: "the weapon of a Jedi Knight". Also, Yoda was said to be a capable fighter in the EU even before AOTC. The Jedi are knights. Knights wield swords. The same goes for samurai.
Whofan said:
Well, in LOTR that sort of thing wasn't called for, going by the books. For the most part, all Saruman really has to do is stand around and act Saruman-y.
Trekker4747 said:
That's all well and good, but it's still just the opinion of one person and as such ultimately "proves" nothing. Some of us watched the film with first-time viewers in analogous circumstances who had seen the OT and had the opposite reaction. Those data points should count for something.
Last edited:
Dooku never made any sense to me.
If there can be only two Sith at a time, why would Sidious turn to the very-over-the-hill Dooku to replace Darth Maul as his apprentice? (Unless Dooku is really just a Dark Jedi and not the Sith apprentice Darth Tyrannus, like all the merchandise stated.)
Okay, the Wookiepedia article on Dooku explains some of it.
You know what the world needs? A Dooku/Tarkin team-up. Maybe they have to go a castle haunted by Force Wraiths and acquire an unholy perversion of science for Darth Sidious. Yeah, if I ever wrote a Star Wars comic, that would be my pitch...
Except that in Empire Yoda scoffed at the idea that wars make someone great, and that anybody should be judged by their size. He never once taught Luke to use the light saber, and in fact Luke "failed" the test where he used his light saber!
The overall impression given in Empire was that Yoda was a deeply spiritual Jedi who was beyond using violence to solve problems, and who was strong enough in the force to not need to use violence.
Then along comes Clones, and Yoda is general Patton, leading troops into a battle where they die by the thousands, and not hesitating for a second to execute those he sees as a threat.
Hell, even Obi Wan in the first film said "there are alternatives to fighting", which flies in the face of Obi Wan as depicted in the PT. Why the sudden change in both their personalities? Did the years in isolation chatting with Qui Gonn soften them a bit?
Except that according to the PT, the light saber is a Jedi weapon and a Sith weapon. When the Emperor calls it a Jedi weapon, he makes it sounds as if he would never touch one.
But along come the PT, where we see he keeps one hidden in his sleeve!
Good question. I can only speculate that Dooku was much stronger than Maul. After all, he did take on Yoda, when Maul was beaten by Obi Wan.
Either way, the idea that there can only be two Sith is one of the silliest proposed in the PT. How can the Sith "rule the galaxy", as the Emperor proclaims they will do, when there can only be two?
It can't be that silly as it ended up working.
I guess my point is that any belief system or political movement is interested in increasing it's numbers. It's silly that the Sith would blindly accept that "there can only be two" with no explanation. What if a Jedi decides he wants to be a Sith? Does he have to then track down and kill one of the only two out there? Doesn't make much sense to me.
When I think of "ruling the galaxy" or any large population, I think of there being a large network of said individuals in power over the population. With two Sith, they no more ruled the galaxy than the Ewoks did. That would be like saying African Americans rule the US simply because the president happens to be part of that group.
I believe the Sith used to end up warring with each other all the time and that led to them never getting anything done so the rule of two was created.
Ask the Emperor and Vader in the OT. Apparently, this alleged failing on the part of the PT is actually the result of OT silliness, and the PT simply being consistent with the OT. So sorry, OT. Better luck next time.
TremblingBluStar said:
Vader used a lightsaber in the OT, just a differently-colored one. It would only make sense for Sith to use lightsabers given their aggressive tendencies.
TremblingBluStar said:
Wars and lightsabers are not synonymous. The Jedi are knights ( in either trilogy ). Jedi use lightsabers in a peacekeeping function even when there is no war, as we have seen in the films and other sources. It was Yoda's ally Obi-Wan who gave Luke the lightsaber in the first place. Also, not judging someone by their size doesn't in any way serve as an anti-lightsaber stance; in fact, it adequately reflects on Yoda's saber prowess.
TremblingBluStar said:
Actually, he did, but it was cut from the film. It appears in the novel and the comic adaptation.
TremblingBluStar said:
That's the problem with impressions; they're subjective. The problem with the concept that Yoda was strong enough in the Force to not need to use a saber is demonstrated by AOTC and explicitly highlighted in its dialogue: with a sufficienly Force-strong opponent a stalemate can be reached.
Last edited:
For a little over twenty years in millennia of galactic history? Color me not too impressed.
