Does the Star Wars series have only one good movie?

[Disruptor]

Star Wars (A New Hope, it's later redesignation) is it. That's the film. That's the pop culture icon/phenomenon/obsession that people have devoted too much of their lives to.

Everything after that got more and more commercial.

ESB is the best overall made of the films, yet still owes so much of its mojo to ANH.

ROTJ seemed too obligatory in some ways. Let's wrap this thing up, even if we have to cop out to do so...oh, Leia is Luke's sister...Vader nearly had her murdered without sensing a damned thing? Suddenly the rebel alliance is chock full of non-humans when the only one before was Chewbacca. Destroying the Death Star this time means the war is over? Sure, the Emperor is dead...and his armies just quit? (Though as the EU goes, maybe I like that idea better.)

The Phantom Menace is the only prequel that seemed thought out and that's kinda scary, since it's still not a good film. After that, it was attempts to cash in on elements that fans would go for, Mandalorian bounty hunter, stormtrooper-like Clone...but still couldn't overshadow an awful love story with dialogue almost as bad as THE ROOM's. Revenge of the Sith again, like Jedi, felt obligatory wrap up...only this time to end a war we barely got to see and tie into the original trilogy as much as possible. It's lightsabre fights and Anakin angst for over 2 hours, some of it works but it still feels like the end to a saga that never took off, like there should've been a film in between AOTC and ROTS, because the relationship between the characters feels like you've missed something. Oh, Anakin sees Palpatine as a mentor...really? Obi-Wan and Anakin are like brothers...really? They seemed to bicker mostly in episode 2. Epic war...for 3 years...yet to us it seems like Dooku was just introduced at the end of one film and then killed off in the beginning of the next, making us wonder why he existed or why Grievous existed...why did there need to be both other than for obvious homages to the original trilogy (and to sell merchandise).

And that was another mistake overall, the prequels were too busy referencing the original movies rather than being their own entities.

 

[cooleddie74]

The podrace scenes alone keep TPM afloat halfway through the film. Since Jake Lloyd wasn't a particularly gifted child actor, Ewan McGregor was going to be stuck back at the Queen's Royal Starship for the duration of the film's stay on Tatooine and Darth Maul wasn't going to see any action until Anakin and the Jedi leave the planet Lucas knew he needed a great and thrilling action sequence at that stage of the movie. A sequence that required almost no lines from Jake Lloyd and depended almost entirely on some pretty great CGI racing effects. Even people who didn't like the rest of the film tend to say that they liked or even loved the Boonta Eve Podrace.

 

[Gojira]

One of the thoughts I always had was you could have made one movie about Anakin becoming Darth Vader instead of dragging it across three films. If you had Anakin become Vader in one movie you had a lot of room to be creative and do something different in the other two.

 

[Mage]

None of this is accurate IMO. This is a film nominated for Best Picture we're talking about.

So? Just because it got nominated doesn't make it perfect or anything. Nothing is. Every movie has some flaws, and ANH does aswell, in my opinion. If the flaws I feel it has, don't apply to you, more points to you. That means you can enjoy it more then I can. But it has a lot less suspense then it could have had, because of some bad pacing. Empire build up suspense far better, thanks to a director who knew how to actual shot a movie instead of only special effects, and a good editor/director team who made sure scenes weren't drawn out to long.

Yes, it as a classic, for so many reasons! But, like my girlfriend says, just because it's a classic, doesn't mean it's a good movie.

As SF fans we tend to grade some movies as 'classics', while honoustly, they are pretty cheesy flicks.

 

[Kalontas]

In the ROTJ era, poodoo meant "fodder". As depicted in the KOTOR game, bantha fodder is a food that bantha eat. It's only with the advent of the prequel era that poodoo now seems to mean "shit".

Perhaps in Galactic Basic "fodder" is a swear word. Just like in different human languages different words can be considered swear words.
Let's compare English with Polish (my native language). Equivalent of "shit" in Polish is very faint swear word - not exactly cultured, but not a major swear like in English and can sometimes even get uncensored in day time TV. Now, the major swear equivalent in level to English "shit" is either "whore" or "cholera", which are both pretty tame in English. Now, I won't even mention the N-word - its closest Polish equivalent is not only completely PC, it's also commonly used and acceptable form of referral to black people! In fact calling them "black" in Polish sounds worse.
As you see, different languages have different values of profanity, so it's not unthinkable that word that translates literally as "fodder" is a swear word in Basic.

 

[stj]

Most of this discussion seems to focus only on the conventional notions of good film art, without paying any attention at all to what the first movie did that was so different.
The very first scene, where the ship enters the screen from behind and overhead, was visually stunning. I suppose that was in the script, so doesn't count as "direction" but it was exactly the sort of thing that make Star Wars remarkable.

Further, it was Star Wars more than any other movie that revived neoromantic film scores. Lesser composers than Williams have slightly tarnished this feat, but for a long time, emotional music was dismissed as sentimental and manipulative.

Also, there is an absurd distinction between The Empire Strikes Back and The Return of the Jedi. Just because there was a natural caesura written in doesn't make them any less one movie. If you don't like the end of the original trilogy, then you don't like Empire, because otherwise Empire doesn't have an end.

The prequel trilogy of course had no such originality. Plus, there are lots of bizarre ideas about how Darth Vader should have been cool. If he was so cool, he wouldn't have turned to the dark side. Evil isn't cool, nor is it tragically justified, nor is it remarkably sexy. Attack of the Clones does suffer from the bad romantic dialogue, but I don't think it's Christenson's performance that leaves them without the desired impact. Christenson seems like he's 1.)horny 2.)indifferent to the consequences of acting on his impulses and 3.)creepily obsessed. To my eye, it's Portman who isn't sexually excited. Perhaps it's significant that her most notable film role is about a sexually repressed ballerina. And her motivation in Revenge of the Sith is very poorly conveyed.

Aside from lacking originality, the prequel trilogy doesn't have a hero throughout, no Luke Skywalker. Harrison Ford may have gotten the attention but his performance in the original trilogy wasn't outstanding, even given the awkward dialogue, in my opinion. Mark Hamill's was. He just did a male ingenue, which never is appreciated by teenage boys of all ages and sexes. Speaks too strongly to secret fears?

 

[BillJ]

One good movie: The Empire Strikes Back

And three that are entertaining to various degrees: Revenge of the Sith, A New Hope & Return of the Jedi

 

[Set Harth]

None of this is accurate IMO. This is a film nominated for Best Picture we're talking about.

So? Just because it got nominated doesn't make it perfect or anything. Nothing is.

Once again, I never said it was perfect. "Nothing is perfect" is just a re-run of the same pointless strawman. I said "bad pacing, bad directing, bad dialogue" was not an accurate description. If you allow no middle ground between that description and "perfect", you're creating a false dichotomy which serves no purpose other than creating a smoke screen for a dubious position.

Perhaps the underlying assumption here is that Lucas cannot possibly have directed any good movies, that the very idea is inconceivable, and thus ANH cannot possibly have been a well-directed movie because it has the abhorrent stigma of the Lucas name attached to it? We mustn't allow prequel hate to rewrite history.

ANH is a relic from the old era of filmmaking, when you could engage in world-building without immediately losing the overstimulated audience. There's nothing wrong with its pacing.

Yes, it as a classic, for so many reasons! But, like my girlfriend says, just because it's a classic, doesn't mean it's a good movie.

It was nominated for Best Picture of 1977. Is there any discernible correlation between the meanings of the words "best" and "good"?

 

[sonak]

much of this stuff about ESB being head and shoulders above, and ROTJ being a notch below, is much more recent than you'd think and not from the time they were released. The "Ewoks" stuff yeah, but not the rest of it. Sadly, I think the prequels' botched job on Anakin's character and fall have taken A LOT out of the value of the Luke-Vader confrontation in ROTJ. In fact, ROTJ is reeally the movie most ruined by the prequel revelations.(Obi-Wan's speech on Dagobah is filled with more lies, Leia DOESN'T remember her real mother, and Anakin was never much of a good guy at all.)


as to the topic, I think it's the opposite-there's really only one not very good film in the saga and that's TPM, although Anakin remains the weak link of all the prequels.

 

[JRoss]

Star Wars has three good movies, ANH, ESB, and half of RotJ combined with half of RotS. That is all.

 

[CaptainMatt]

You know, I grow so tired of so-called fans beating down The Phantom menace, let along the prequels as a whole. grow up and quit regurgitating the same stuff over and over. Episode I at least was a fun film with a simple story that properly introduced us to Star Wars.

 

[cooleddie74]

Yeah, Episode I had a truckload of flaws but it was a good film. Nobody except the most brainwashed geeks and nerds were expecting it to be AS good as the original movie or Empire. I certainly didn't go into the theater thinking it would be. Parts of it annoyed and let me down but when I walked out a little over two hours later I felt I definitely got my money's worth. Not every movie has to live up to most of its predecessors to be worth watching. Shit, there wouldn't be a James Bond franchise if that were the case.

 

[sonak]

Yeah, Episode I had a truckload of flaws but it was a good film. Nobody except the most brainwashed geeks and nerds were expecting it to be AS good as the original movie or Empire. I certainly didn't go into the theater thinking it would be. Parts of it annoyed and let me down but when I walked out a little over two hours later I felt I definitely got my money's worth. Not every movie has to live up to most of its predecessors to be worth watching. Shit, there wouldn't be a James Bond franchise if that were the case.

well I guess if you really wanted to lower expectations for films you go see, I can see this attitude working.

 

[cooleddie74]

Yeah, Episode I had a truckload of flaws but it was a good film. Nobody except the most brainwashed geeks and nerds were expecting it to be AS good as the original movie or Empire. I certainly didn't go into the theater thinking it would be. Parts of it annoyed and let me down but when I walked out a little over two hours later I felt I definitely got my money's worth. Not every movie has to live up to most of its predecessors to be worth watching. Shit, there wouldn't be a James Bond franchise if that were the case.

well I guess if you really wanted to lower expectations for films you go see, I can see this attitude working.

On the contrary, I went into Episode I with positive but realistic expectations. I had hoped that it was going to be as badass as the Original Trilogy but early reviews knocking the film or outright panning the thing settled my balloon back down a little closer to earth. Since JEDI hadn't been as good as HOPE or EMPIRE sixteen years earlier I was preparing myself for a film that would in likelihood not live up to all the impossible fanboy expectations. Lucas hadn't directed a STAR WARS film in twenty-two years at that point or been involved in production of one in sixteen. Nine times out of ten that means you're going to be rusty, sometimes severely so.

I had a 90-99% chance of liking it because I've always been a self-professed SW nerd. I just didn't think after all the factors I mentioned above that it was going to be AS good as the original or EMPIRE. And I was right. I don't think I poisoned my own well by listening to the critics and reviews. On the contrary, their negativity steeled my spirit and made me want to enjoy the movie even more just to prove the haters wrong. But I'm old enough to know how Hollywood operates. If you wait sixteen years between films in a franchise you might get a good movie out of the wait. Maybe even a really good one(2010 anyone?). But you're probably not gonna get A NEW HOPE. And we didn't.

All that said, I really dug Episode I. It entertained me even if it didn't change my outlook on life like the original films.

 

[Cutter John]

It amuses me no end that most fans seem to hate the Prequels with the heat of a bunring sun. Yet you can't go to a convention without seeing a few Jedi running around.

I admit the they had their problems, but generally I just ignore the parts I didn't like, and focus attention on the things I thought the movies did well. Honestly, fanboys need to just get over it.

 

[The Dominion]

I really only like the first two. ANH is Star Wars at its most basic and fresh, and I think the pacing is fine. RotJ is a decent end only because of the Vader/Luke fight and space battle at the end. The Ewoks were ridiculous to begin with, but having them fight the fucking Empire was a joke. And the whole scene in Jabba's Palace doesn't make a damn bit of sense plot wise, and is drawn out just for the slave Leia stuff.

The new trilogy got progressively better, but even at it's best in RotS, it still mostly pales in comparison to the first two. That said, I did enjoy AotC though it was far from perfect.

 

[cooleddie74]

It amuses me no end that most fans seem to hate the Prequels with the heat of a bunring sun. Yet you can't go to a convention without seeing a few Jedi running around.

I admit the they had their problems, but generally I just ignore the parts I didn't like, and focus attention on the things I thought the movies did well. Honestly, fanboys need to just get over it.

This.

Hardcore fanboys who live in their basements and nitpick every molecule of a film like they're quantum physicists will never be satisfied by movies like the STAR WARS saga. When a prequel's not as good as one of the originals they piss and moan about how their childhoods got raped at gunpoint or how the creators
"owe" the fans a certain kind of movie. I'll be the first to admit there are flaws in the prequel trilogy. Some big ones. But they were never going to BE the original movie. That era was long over by the time Episode I hit theaters in 1999. The way of making movies(for better or worse)changed irrevocably after mega-blockbusters like JAWS and A NEW HOPE ingrained themselves on the public psyche. Attention spans changed. A new generation came of age that had different tastes. There were many factors involved. But expecting Episodes I-III to be a cosmic revelation and then threatening to burn all your childhood STAR WARS bedsheets because they didn't live up to your highly improbable expectations is a bit too much. Accept the prequels for the flawed, modern movies they are. Which is: mostly good. Occasionally great. Periodically annoying. Sporadically shitty.

Just like STAR TREK films. And James Bond films. And Indiana Jones films. Etc. Ad nauseam.

 

[Set Harth]

Obi-Wan's speech on Dagobah is filled with more lies

Such as?

 

[CaptainMatt]

It amuses me no end that most fans seem to hate the Prequels with the heat of a bunring sun. Yet you can't go to a convention without seeing a few Jedi running around.

I admit the they had their problems, but generally I just ignore the parts I didn't like, and focus attention on the things I thought the movies did well. Honestly, fanboys need to just get over it.

This.

Hardcore fanboys who live in their basements and nitpick every molecule of a film like they're quantum physicists will never be satisfied by movies like the STAR WARS saga. When a prequel's not as good as one of the originals they piss and moan about how their childhoods got raped at gunpoint or how the creators
"owe" the fans a certain kind of movie. I'll be the first to admit there are flaws in the prequel trilogy. Some big ones. But they were never going to BE the original movie. That era was long over by the time Episode I hit theaters in 1999. The way of making movies(for better or worse)changed irrevocably after mega-blockbusters like JAWS and A NEW HOPE ingrained themselves on the public psyche. Attention spans changed. A new generation came of age that had different tastes. There were many factors involved. But expecting Episodes I-III to be a cosmic revelation and then threatening to burn all your childhood STAR WARS bedsheets because they didn't live up to your highly improbable expectations is a bit too much. Accept the prequels for the flawed, modern movies they are. Which is: mostly good. Occasionally great. Periodically annoying. Sporadically shitty.

Just like STAR TREK films. And James Bond films. And Indiana Jones films. Etc. Ad nauseam.

Thank you for your very honest and sincere, openiminded posts friend.

 

[cooleddie74]

It amuses me no end that most fans seem to hate the Prequels with the heat of a bunring sun. Yet you can't go to a convention without seeing a few Jedi running around.

I admit the they had their problems, but generally I just ignore the parts I didn't like, and focus attention on the things I thought the movies did well. Honestly, fanboys need to just get over it.

This.

Hardcore fanboys who live in their basements and nitpick every molecule of a film like they're quantum physicists will never be satisfied by movies like the STAR WARS saga. When a prequel's not as good as one of the originals they piss and moan about how their childhoods got raped at gunpoint or how the creators
"owe" the fans a certain kind of movie. I'll be the first to admit there are flaws in the prequel trilogy. Some big ones. But they were never going to BE the original movie. That era was long over by the time Episode I hit theaters in 1999. The way of making movies(for better or worse)changed irrevocably after mega-blockbusters like JAWS and A NEW HOPE ingrained themselves on the public psyche. Attention spans changed. A new generation came of age that had different tastes. There were many factors involved. But expecting Episodes I-III to be a cosmic revelation and then threatening to burn all your childhood STAR WARS bedsheets because they didn't live up to your highly improbable expectations is a bit too much. Accept the prequels for the flawed, modern movies they are. Which is: mostly good. Occasionally great. Periodically annoying. Sporadically shitty.

Just like STAR TREK films. And James Bond films. And Indiana Jones films. Etc. Ad nauseam.

Thank you for your very honest and sincere, openiminded posts friend.

I hope that's an honest pat on the back and not sarcasm. When I get on a roll about STAR TREK or STAR WARS I don't shut the hell up until I make my points.