I thought so too. According to this, it is!
Anyone on this board dislike Star Wars?
- Thread starter heavylids
- Start date
Indeed. See: Jaws. There's no such thing as a slow burn, anymore. No scintillation. No foreplay.
It's like movies don't know the proper way to do in media res. They forget that after the huge openings of, say, Star Wars and Raiders of the Lost Ark, loooong amounts of time were spent immersing viewers in "trivialities" like character and story world.
Hell, look at documentaries nowadays. Even they use shaky-cam, music video quick-edits and such.
Yeah, if you watch A New Hope today, it actually moves rather slowly. It builds, we follow the droids and then Luke for a long time. As Red Letter Media said so well, it built up well and we were ready "for the story to expand" which is what happened once they met Han Solo. the characters are iconic archetypes, and the story is something we are inherently familiar with. But it's all told on a canvas that hadn't been seen before. Like the first Westerns that were not taken off the backlot and put on location to the big canyons in Monument Valley, Star Wars made you feel like you were in space experiencing this awesome adventure!
Or as my friend once said, when Luke sees the Falcon for the first time, he exclaims, "What a piece of junk". Yet it was like the coolest thing the audience had ever seen.
Interesting points about Cloud City and the Millenium Falcon. They remind me of Plinkett's comments regarding the difference in Vader's portrayal in the OT, as opposed to Anakin in the PT.
Initially he's presented as basically just some enforcer-type who is also a throwback to an earlier time. Not everybody respects him or agrees with him. Yet he is exponentially cooler than Anakin in the PT, where suddenly the whole universe revolves around him.
Initially he's presented as basically just some enforcer-type who is also a throwback to an earlier time. Not everybody respects him or agrees with him. Yet he is exponentially cooler than Anakin in the PT, where suddenly the whole universe revolves around him.
I blame hardcore porn.
I saw Star Wars for the first time shortly before their re-release in 1997. I enjoyed them, but not nearly as much as Star Trek.
The Phantom Menace I thought was awful. Unfortunately it turned out to be the best of the prequels.
I still enjoy watching the original movies. I'd rather watch the Plinkett reviews than the prequels.
The Phantom Menace I thought was awful. Unfortunately it turned out to be the best of the prequels.
I still enjoy watching the original movies. I'd rather watch the Plinkett reviews than the prequels.
I've always been a fan of Star Wars. And by "Star Wars," I mean the original trilogy.
The Empire Strikes Back is easily one of the best science fiction/fantasy movies ever made. A New Hope is good, but not quiet as good. I even love Return of the Jedi, Ewoks and all.
The Prequel Trilogy is - for lack of a better term - pure, unadulterated shit. The problem is that they are nothing more adrenaline baths and eye candy. That's not to say that adrenaline baths and special effects extravaganzas aren't enjoyable; they just have to be used in moderation. When you're whole movie is nothing more than that, with no good story to flesh it out, then you got a problem. When three consecutive movies are nothing more than that, with no good story to flesh them out, then you've failed as a movie-maker.
For those who say that the OT is just too slow and boring, I honestly think you've missed the point. It's supposed to be slow. It's supposed to build to something. That way the payoff is that much greater in the end. The whole movie can't be the payoff.
The Empire Strikes Back is easily one of the best science fiction/fantasy movies ever made. A New Hope is good, but not quiet as good. I even love Return of the Jedi, Ewoks and all.
The Prequel Trilogy is - for lack of a better term - pure, unadulterated shit. The problem is that they are nothing more adrenaline baths and eye candy. That's not to say that adrenaline baths and special effects extravaganzas aren't enjoyable; they just have to be used in moderation. When you're whole movie is nothing more than that, with no good story to flesh it out, then you got a problem. When three consecutive movies are nothing more than that, with no good story to flesh them out, then you've failed as a movie-maker.
For those who say that the OT is just too slow and boring, I honestly think you've missed the point. It's supposed to be slow. It's supposed to build to something. That way the payoff is that much greater in the end. The whole movie can't be the payoff.
Or it could be that those who say the OT is "too slow and boring" are not missing any point, but are simply wrong, and the OT is not in fact "too slow and boring" at all.
If the whole movie is the payoff, then nothing is. I'll go further and say that having special effects in every last freaking shot detracts from the story, and encourages its "sluffing off", because the producer isn't as concerned with what's to carry the movie through the parts when the roller coaster isn't going over the drop off.
^ See: Avatar. lol
No.
Yes. lol
It could be, but it isn't. It's simply a valid contrary opinion. Some find Star Trek: TMP to be a slow-burn masterpiece of thoughtful science-fiction. Others find it an over-the-counter substitute for Ambien™.
I was too old when the OT came out to be an obsessive fan boy, but I've always found the films eminently re-watchable. Seeing the PT and OT in HD on ITV recently confirmed my loathing about nearly everything in the PT and my respect for the OT. George Lucas' artistic judgement was on the decline during ROTJ, and greed had obviously kicked in -- hence the Ewoks -- but I'd still watch it over any of the prequels any day.
What do the Ewoks have to do with greed?
Similar threads
