posted
I found this Rolling Stone interview and found it quite interesting. Especially because it gives a nice glimpse, before the original trilogy ended, of how critics, the actors themselves, and the world in general viewed the SW films when they were coming out (especially if you, like me, we just a kid at the time).
What I find fascinating is that many of the criticisms leveled at Lucas about the prequels were there in the OT: Lucas is a control freak that doesn't know how to direct actors, his dialog sucks, the special effects detracted from the actor's performances, how the films did not help (and even hindered) the actor's careers . Yet, hallowed by time and nostalgia, the OT now sits on a pedestal.
The thing is, it's also kind of sad, listening to Carrie Fisher and Hamil beginning to see that their "success" isn't really theirs but GL's and that it's not going to translate into more work for them. Sad, because we know how very right they are.
posted
Since The Phantom Menace came out, it has been my opinion that the only real difference between the originals and the prequels is about twenty years.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
I'd disagree. That is true if you consider the movies only in terms of their dialogue, special effects, and acting - since they all have the same bad dialoque, weak acting, and amazing special effects.
The difference, however, is in the story. The original trilogy has a powerful, archetypal story with compelling characters and intriguing ideas, whose ending we cared about. The new trilogy has a decent but comparatively weak stroy, whose ending we already know when starting, whose characters often seem tacked on for no reason and whose ideas seem unoriginal extensions of the previous trilogy. You know you can enjoy the original without the new trilogy, but you can tell the difference when you try to imagine what value the new trilogy would have had the original never been made.
Posts: 2432 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, so that was somewhat of an oversimplification. I think the prequels have problems that the originals did not have. I think these problems almost entirely stem from two things: starting the prequel storyline at the wrong point in time and not turning over the writing and directing to someone else.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
Pandering to children. He's said he's making movies for kids. But he seemed to have forgotten that kids love the OT and, with a few minor exceptions in ROTJ, it did not pander to them. It was appealing to both adults and kids. There was no need for the Gungan's stupidity. Gungans would have been fine, even if they acted like Ewoks because, will 'cute and cuddly' they weren't stupid. They were alien and initially hostile and did not put morons in charge of anything. Or fart or make crap jokes.
GL should have been willing to listen to others who might have voiced some concern about said pandering.
OTHERS should have been willing to speak up and tell GL where he was going wrong.Posts: 1346 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
