quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: In this case, however, the "No!" both sounds dumb, and is considerably less powerful than the original. Seeing the cold black mask, seeing him look between son and Master, and then the sudden movement where he grabs the Emperor, that's just a powerful scene, you can see him making the choice, which is impressive considering his mask betrays no emotion.
The "No" just takes the wind out of it.
See, George Lucas does not understand this basic concept. Honestly. I mean, it's truly impressive that these films were made so well in the first place with him involved. It's a testament to everyone who worked as hard as they could to get these things done without him screwing them up. His contribution to the films is unquestionably great. The sweep and the grandeur and the scale of them are all his. But he knows *nothing* about emotion, inflection, or human detail. If he added those sounds, it's because for him, "that" makes sense of this scene. The ambiguity and the silence of Vader's actions- his stoicism, makes no sense to Lucas at all.
I'm shocked he hasn't overdubbed the "I know" line from Empire Strikes Back to "I love you too." Because to him, that's love. Not humor, not a shared moment of understanding and irony- of a grim need to hang on to your bravado in the face of losing your loved one, possibly forever. He doesn't understand that.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I tend to think it's a bit simpler than that. It wasn't some large miracle that the films were great in the first place, and it wasn't due to other people squeaking through the cracks of his inadequacies.
I think it's just a case of, initially, he had less confidence, direct personal involvement, and more community input. In IV, he was boss but not unquestioned dictator. He also had people he trusted-people he trusted when he was still an up-and-comer. In V, unless the various documentaries I've seen are misleading, he voluntarily gave the show over to Kershner, and when they disagreed gave his ideas a shot.
But from everything I've heard, it was always super-important to him that he be in charge of his stories. I think that over time, though, as his initial communal-stories yielded him more and more power, he kept doing what he was doing initially-exercising as much control over his stories as he possibly could.
But, well, what made `em great in the beginning was part that aspect of his, and part other things. And perhaps in later episodes he remembered wielding as much control as he could in the earlier episodes...and forgot that his max changed things less at first than it did later.
I was still mad as hell that the difference between the first three and the second was so stark, though, and so often deeply stupid from a movie perspective.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The second three suffered from more than just poor dialogue. While I think they did a great job on the macro scale, of showing the galactic-political changes and how Palpatine rose to power, they never should have started with Anakin being so young, and Obi-Wan finding him as a child.
They should have started with him as a teenager. It would have given them a lot more time to develop the character and show a far more natural progression. There was one, maybe two plot points from Episode 1 that were actually important as the series went on. II and III did all the heavy lifting for the plot.
I don't even mind Jar Jar. A lot of people compare him to how insufferable C-3PO is, but, 3PO's over the top pessimism still strikes me as rather amusing. I could have done without Jar Jar, but it's not like he ruined the movie or anything.
I wonder what would have happened if they'd let Lucas do all the action scenes, and let Alfonso Cuaron do any scene requiring emotion and plot development.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: The second three suffered from more than just poor dialogue. While I think they did a great job on the macro scale, of showing the galactic-political changes and how Palpatine rose to power, they never should have started with Anakin being so young, and Obi-Wan finding him as a child.
They should have started with him as a teenager. It would have given them a lot more time to develop the character and show a far more natural progression. There was one, maybe two plot points from Episode 1 that were actually important as the series went on. II and III did all the heavy lifting for the plot.
Exactly! By the time II starts, Anakin is such a different person that the little boy in I is completely irrelevant. There's no continuity of the character at all—he went from being an innocent little boy to a smug and obnoxious teenager, and we have to be filled in on his and Obi-Wan's relationship through exposition. And little-boy Anakin is such a poor hero that he ends up awkwardly sharing that role with Obi-Wan. Luke rescued a princess and blew up the Death Star. Anakin, on the other hand, wins a pod race (hooray?) and accidentally, improbably blows up an enemy ship not through use of the Force but gee-whiz dumb luck. He's a lame, uninteresting hero.
And someone who missed Episode I altogether would need to be filled in on only a couple of points, as you said:
The Sith are back and want to destroy the Jedi.
Anakin is the "chosen one", whatever that means.
And it would be better to pretend that Anakin and Padme are meeting for the first time in Episode II, because it makes things (somewhat) more believable and definitely less creepy. Expanding Anakin's development and descent toward the Dark Side during the Clone Wars would have been far more fascinating and rewarding than a pod race and Gungan–droid army battle.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: "Once again they're like Poetry... they rhyme... I hope it works.."
:frightened expression:
"In fact, this is so genius, I have a feeling George Lucas had nothing to do with it and in fact probably fought against putting it in the movie." ...
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm reminded of Don Bluth mentioning that when Land Before Time was mired in development hell, and there was a good chance they were going to axe the whole thing, Lucas flew out to their studio and they had an all night writers session. Bluth indicated that he gained enormous respect for Lucas as he completely reworked some of the characters, plot points, and dialogue.
Lucas is a great idea man, he conceptualizes all sorts of interesting things. Like that idea that he wanted to create scenes that echo the previous Star Wars films, that could have been very cool. Star Wars absolutely would not exist without him, but in a strange way it could only exist without him because after the initial movie, he was not intimately involved with everything. The director of the second movie was a mentor of his, and so he wrote his ideas and let the director go to work.
Look at Indiana Jones, the first movie Spielberg took a lot of Lucas' ideas, but absolutely said no to just as many as he said yes. The movie was fantastic, Lucas wanted more of a say in the next movie, and Spielberg reluctantly agreed, so we got The Temple of Doom. Finally Spielberg said I'm not making another one unless I'm directing it the way I want, and we got The Last Crusade. It happened again with Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Lucas wasn't put in check enough. Lucas simply needs a filter, somebody who can listen to him talk about all these great ideas he has, and then say, "Hey that is a great idea, or no, that idea won't work." And doesn't just get bowled over by Lucas' personality or influence.
In THX I absolutely love the idea that the bad guys stop pursuing the protagonist because budgetary expenditures had outpaced the perceived benefit of capturing him. It's a funny way of resolving the conflict, and it's a sort of jab at the movie industry which wouldn't fund an idea, no matter how interesting, if it wasn't going to make money. I don't like the rest of the movie.
Anyway, Lucas should churn out ideas, provide money for other artists to realize them, and he shouldn't direct the movie adaptation.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
George should talk to Steven King...I hear he has a great editor (ever try and wade through the extended edition of "The Stand"?).
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The second three suffered from more than just poor dialogue. While I think they did a great job on the macro scale, of showing the galactic-political changes and how Palpatine rose to power, they never should have started with Anakin being so young, and Obi-Wan finding him as a child.
The problems with the second three is far more basic. The first trilogy was an heroic epic. Its the story of a young boy rising to heroism. Its the story of good vanquishing evil. That's a story that can reasonably told well through action rather than words.
The second trilogy is a tragedy. Its the story of a young hero falling and evil triumphing over good. Tragedies are simply much harder to tell. To work, they must be character driven. The audience has to first come to care about the hero and then come to understand how the hero is draw to the dark side. That isn't a story that can be told through action alone, it's got to rely on well written and delivered words.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:The second three suffered from more than just poor dialogue. While I think they did a great job on the macro scale, of showing the galactic-political changes and how Palpatine rose to power, they never should have started with Anakin being so young, and Obi-Wan finding him as a child.
The problems with the second three is far more basic. The first trilogy was an heroic epic. Its the story of a young boy rising to heroism. Its the story of good vanquishing evil. That's a story that can reasonably told well through action rather than words.
The second trilogy is a tragedy. Its the story of a young hero falling and evil triumphing over good. Tragedies are simply much harder to tell. To work, they must be character driven. The audience has to first come to care about the hero and then come to understand how the hero is draw to the dark side. That isn't a story that can be told through action alone, it's got to rely on well written and delivered words.
*nods head* And it's a shame we'll never get that story told properly.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Could somebody please explain for me the logic behind the ROJ Blu Ray change where Vader says "No....NOOOO!" As he dispatches the Emperor?
I mean somebody, somewhere, making a lot of money, must have thought it was a good idea, and I can't wrap my brain around it no matter how hard I tug.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The real question is, brand new death star, and no budget for railings? You are just begging for a work place accident.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it's because of how old I was when I saw it, and the Williams score, but that moment without any dialogue was and is *really* powerful for me. I understand that someone, without any editorial brakes on 'em, can fix and fix and fix until something is broken, but the specifics, such as this, baffle me.
Who on Earth said that scene was broken?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
More changes (link with videos) are in store for us from George Lucas, creator of Star Wars, for the Blu-Ray release. I, for one, am not enthusiastic about these changes. When you watch old movies, it can be for nostalgia. That feeling of nostaliga just won't be as strong when the movie changes.
It'd be great to watch the originals on HD Blu-Ray, but there are no plans to release them.
Posts: 338 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think some of the silences in the original trilogy, or at least, the unusual responses, were some of its greatest strengths.
Vader tossing the Emperor over the railing with the camera focusing on his mask, that was powerful. I can think of a couple more, but in particular, I like the whole Dagobah sequence where Luke goes into the cave. The whole "what's in there?" "Only what you take with you," thing is cool in part because from the moment he enters the cave there's no dialogue, and we realize along with Luke that when he kills the faux Vader to find himself inside, what he brought in with him was his fear, rather than just his lightsaber. The shock on his face was far more communicative than any sort of dialogue was, or what a post-scene chat with Yoda would have done.
The only similar scene of silence I can think of in the second trilogy was when the Clones mowed down all the Jedi masters. That was cold, and harsh, and emotionally jarring. Talking might not have ruined it, but it wouldn't have been as powerful to me.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
