As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Forget it, Jake! It's [Star Wars].

1235799

Posts

  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    MagicPrime wrote: »
    Ewan McGregor and Ian McDiarmid carried the prequil trilogy. Liam Neeson was great as Qui-Gon Jinn.

    While McGregor did an increasingly good job (honestly, by the third movie, even I thought he was a lot like Obi-Wan Kenobi), I keep wondering why Ian McDiarmid doesn't get more credit for taking a hilariously badly written character ("He's a conniving politician! And a military genius! And a galactic dictator! And a dark sorcerer! And, hell, a fish! Do you know he's not a fish?!") and actually making him a pleasure to watch, despite what felt like Lucas' efforts to constantly sabotage the whole thing (just to make sure we don't forget he's evil and all).

    Really, it feels as though the character of Senator/Chancellor/Emperor Palpatine is supposed to have absolutely zero redeeming features (Christ, even Hitler liked dogs and hiking), and yet, McDiarmid makes him tolerable, and even enjoyable within the film. It might be Hayden Christensen's doing partially, but by the time those prequel ended, he was one of the few characters I could stomach. Christopher Lee seemed and Samuel Jackson both seemed to get screwed by their parts (cool fight, bad line, then death), and the comparably non-famous McDiarmid manages to steal the whole goddamn movie because he's 1) actually relevant and 2) doesn't say things like "you're breaking my heart". Hell, even "UNNNLLLIMITED PPPPOWWER!" didn't seem that bad by comparison.

    EDIT: On a side note, besides the problem of length, something else comes to mind with the idea of turning the Thrawn Trilogy into a bunch of movies or a miniseries--who do you get to play the title character? I mean, getting people to play the main cast would be hard enough. "Dispassionate, cool-headed tactical mastermind" would be difficult too, especially since none of the scenes are ever from his point of view.

    Synthesis on
  • MagicPrimeMagicPrime FiresideWizard Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Synthesis wrote: »
    MagicPrime wrote: »
    Ewan McGregor and Ian McDiarmid carried the prequil trilogy. Liam Neeson was great as Qui-Gon Jinn.

    While McGregor did an increasingly good job (honestly, by the third movie, even I thought he was a lot like Obi-Wan Kenobi), I keep wondering why Ian McDiarmid doesn't get more credit for taking a hilariously badly written character ("He's a conniving politician! And a military genius! And a galactic dictator! And a dark sorcerer! And, hell, a fish! Do you know he's not a fish?!") and actually making him a pleasure to watch, despite what felt like Lucas' efforts to constantly sabotage the whole thing (just to make sure we don't forget he's evil and all).

    Really, it feels as though the character of Senator/Chancellor/Emperor Palpatine is supposed to have absolutely zero redeeming features (Christ, even Hitler liked dogs and hiking), and yet, McDiarmid makes him tolerable, and even enjoyable within the film. It might be Hayden Christensen's doing partially, but by the time those prequel ended, he was one of the few characters I could stomach. Christopher Lee seemed and Samuel Jackson both seemed to get screwed by their parts (cool fight, bad line, then death), and the comparably non-famous McDiarmid manages to steal the whole goddamn movie because he's 1) actually relevant and 2) doesn't say things like "you're breaking my heart". Hell, even "UNNNLLLIMITED PPPPOWWER!" didn't seem that bad by comparison.

    And once he got back in to the Palpatine makeup he really embraced it. It's funny that he was younger playing an older Palpatine. Then he was older playing a Younger Palpatine.

    MagicPrime on
    BNet • magicprime#1430 | PSN/Steam • MagicPrime | Origin • FireSideWizard
    Critical Failures - Havenhold CampaignAugust St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    MagicPrime wrote: »
    Synthesis wrote: »
    MagicPrime wrote: »
    Ewan McGregor and Ian McDiarmid carried the prequil trilogy. Liam Neeson was great as Qui-Gon Jinn.

    While McGregor did an increasingly good job (honestly, by the third movie, even I thought he was a lot like Obi-Wan Kenobi), I keep wondering why Ian McDiarmid doesn't get more credit for taking a hilariously badly written character ("He's a conniving politician! And a military genius! And a galactic dictator! And a dark sorcerer! And, hell, a fish! Do you know he's not a fish?!") and actually making him a pleasure to watch, despite what felt like Lucas' efforts to constantly sabotage the whole thing (just to make sure we don't forget he's evil and all).

    Really, it feels as though the character of Senator/Chancellor/Emperor Palpatine is supposed to have absolutely zero redeeming features (Christ, even Hitler liked dogs and hiking), and yet, McDiarmid makes him tolerable, and even enjoyable within the film. It might be Hayden Christensen's doing partially, but by the time those prequel ended, he was one of the few characters I could stomach. Christopher Lee seemed and Samuel Jackson both seemed to get screwed by their parts (cool fight, bad line, then death), and the comparably non-famous McDiarmid manages to steal the whole goddamn movie because he's 1) actually relevant and 2) doesn't say things like "you're breaking my heart". Hell, even "UNNNLLLIMITED PPPPOWWER!" didn't seem that bad by comparison.

    And once he got back in to the Palpatine makeup he really embraced it. It's funny that he was younger playing an older Palpatine. Then he was older playing a Younger Palpatine.

    It seems as though McDiarmid, of the handful of actors who realized just how bad some of the writing was, he was the only one who actually managed to swallow it without becoming violently ill.

    "Say, uh, George...I meant to ask you. Palpatine completely tosses years of carefully laid scheming and inhibitions to the side, his face barbecued, and then addresses the galaxy in about ten minutes?"

    "Yeah."

    "....oooo-kay, so how about this: 'UNNNNLIIMMITED POOOWWER!'"

    Synthesis on
  • BubbaTBubbaT Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Given a choice between the two movies, I'd probably watch Sith.

    It's just better action adventure.

    It gets a lot of hate for 'wasted potential', and 'oh but Jedi aren't supposed to be able to be killed by clonetroopers', but frankly those are faults more on behalf of the audience than the movies themselves.

    It's the audience's fault that Lucas shows every Jedi in the universe being able to deflect thousands of blaster shots both before and after the Order 66 scene?

    Even Luke as a farmboy with zero training in Ep 4 can deflect blaster shots while wearing a helmet with the blast shield down.

    BubbaT on
  • YarYar Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Tomanta wrote: »
    If I fast forward through Tatooine and pretend that Anakin isn't there, I actually enjoy Episode I.
    Yeah, this. I've argued since it came out that if you remove about 30min or so of Ep 1, most of it contiguous, mind you, not talking about hacking up every scene, and most of it JarJar and a few silly things (why the hell does Ben do that split kick twice?) - then you get a pretty good movie.

    There's a great scene in the features on Ep 1 where Lucas remarks during storyboarding that that entire success of the movie will rest on the success of the CG character (JarJar). And really, I think that was a well-conceived character, just poorly executed. There's also some great footage of the initial screenings to Lucas' cohorts, and the looks on their faces and their comments are obviously in the tone of "let's be nice but also raise red flags here..."
    BubbaT wrote: »
    GREATEST FORCE-RELATED EXPLOITS
    Original Trilogy: The Force lets you pull your lightsaber with telekinesis and aim missiles without a computer.
    Or lift a fighter out of a swamp and move it to dry land. Kinda kills the rest of that argument, doesn't it?

    Anyway, it seems that while FatBoy's argument is well articulated, it is quite in the minority. Like I said, all of the original trilogy have always been in the American Film Institute's top 400 American Fiction Films, none of the prequels were nominated either time that the list was generated. And judging by each argument FatBoy makes, I'm still pretty well convinced that he is confusing a comparison of 6 vs. 4/5 and 3 vs. 1/2 for a legitimate comparison of 3 vs. 6. Despite surprising flaws, there is a lot of pure Star Wars magic and brilliance in Jedi. The character of The Emperor, the operatic triple-play final battle and all its juxtaposing, the entire progression from Luke warning Jabba to Jabba's entire ship being destroyed, and so forth. Sith, at best, successfully conveys some decent drama and action, but nothing on such a scale, nothing worth remembering. It ties up the ending in a neat and tidy manner that was way too expected. And dare I say it and get flamed? Lucas's obvious stabs at the Bush Administration. Way to whore it out to a political cause.

    Yar on
  • BubbaTBubbaT Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Page- wrote: »
    When I said Wraith Squadron I meant all the Wraith books. Not just the first one. Thought that was implied.

    Stackpoles's books got a little stale the moment I realized that Corran Horn was the best at everything, ever. And gets all the chicks. And is also a badass Jedi. And can walk on water. And is a massive Gary Stu.

    Wraith Squadron, though. I cried.

    This.

    Allston pretty much states the same at the beginning of Wraith Squadron, with Wedge talking to Ackbar about how Horn being this flawless goody two-shoes CorSec pretty boy makes him unrelatable to ordinary people.

    BubbaT on
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Yar wrote: »
    And dare I say it and get flamed? Lucas's obvious stabs at the Bush Administration. Way to whore it out to a political cause.

    The worse part is what godawful bad job he did whoring it out. If you're going to push a political point, it doesn't help you to be unbelievably sanctimonious. In the actual fiction, isn't their bottomless reserves of sanctimony why a lot of people don't like the Jedi? Lucas seems to make the same mistake.

    I strongly disagree with the Bush Administration with...wow, pretty much everything you'd expect a left-leaning foreign national to disagree with them. But by the third film, I wanted the Republic to shrivel up and die, if it meant an end to their not-so-funny incompetence and unending sanctimony. Winston Churchill was wrong--the worse case against democracy is having Natalie Portman get all watery-eyed at a camera and declare, "So this is how democracy dies--to thunderous applause". By the time that line rolled around, Lucas certainly had me wanting to hate democracy in the context of Star Wars.

    Synthesis on
  • Brian888Brian888 Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Let's look at RotJ scientifically. What are some of the bright spots? Jabba. The Rancor. The battle over the Sarlaac Pit (coupled with 3PO's rather chilling description of what happens to those poor bastards who fall in). The Emperor, every bit of him. The speeder chase. The space fight, which is still probably the best of its kind ever put on film. Luke's final duel with Vader. Admiral Ackbar.

    Not so bright spots? OK, the dialogue sucks in parts, and some of the acting is wooden. Also, Ewoks. But you know what? You get to see Ewoks get killed like motherfuckers, so you already have some awesome built-in to the suck.

    RotS has the shitty dialogue and wooden acting in SPADES, and none of its bright spots (I can't think of any, actually, but there probably are a few) can equal those in RotJ. RotJ is just the better film.

    Brian888 on
  • WashWash Sweet Christmas Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    I think its easy to know hes lost the plot when he says that Obi and Vader only had a slow, non-flippy fight because they were fucking old to excuse his ridiculous choreography.

    Then has Yoda and Palpatine have a fucking flippy fight.

    This bothered me throughout the prequels. Every fight to come after Episode 1 was acrobatic and insane, and even the non-combat scenes like when Anakin has the balls to free fall on Coruscant during that chase. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but when the fights were more grounded, and the Jedi's physical abilities were only a little supplemented by the force, I enjoyed them more. The big fight of RotS was too over the top to impress me. It's like there's a line when awesome turns silly, and they crossed it.

    Wash on
    gi5h0gjqwti1.jpg
  • JacobkoshJacobkosh Gamble a stamp. I can show you how to be a real man!Moderator mod
    edited September 2009
    tsmvengy wrote: »
    I feel like we always knew that Owen and Beru weren't really Luke's uncle and aunt...

    We knew no such thing. They're called his aunt and uncle constantly and that is never ever questioned. More to the point, Obi-Wan's story describes an Anakin who had a difficult relationship with his brother - they knew each other enough for Owen to resent Anakin's "crusades," and for Beru to comment on how Luke is like his father, which doesn't jibe with them meeting like twice ever.

    Jacobkosh on
    rRwz9.gif
  • Burden of ProofBurden of Proof You three boys picked a beautiful hill to die on. Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    I just cannot accept Vader's redemption now.

    He murdered defenseless children.
    He murdered an entire tribe of Tuskens in a genocidal rage; including men, women, and children.
    He choked his heavily pregnantwife.
    He not only maimed his son, but actively tried to kill him.
    He tortured his daughter.
    Utterly destroyed the Order who helped him escape a life of slavery.
    He acts an enforcer for a oppressive and racist government that regularly destroys entire planets, and doesn't even treat his inferiors well.

    And then he's redeemed and becomes a "Force Ghost" because lazily pushed an old man off a balcony? Apparently, becoming a Force Ghost is even easier to get in than Heaven.

    Burden of Proof on
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Eh, that problem applies to pretty much every death bed conversion.

    Couscous on
  • WashWash Sweet Christmas Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Force Ghost was more a matter of skill with the Force than being a good person. It wasn't a reward for living a good life, but something that could be taught, as Obi Wan was taught by Qui Gon after RotS.

    Wash on
    gi5h0gjqwti1.jpg
  • DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2009
    I dunno about you guys but I never associated Anakin with Darth Vader ever and I don't mean in an 'Anakin died that day' kind of way. I mean that Anakin is nothing like Vader even when evil, doesnt have the same build, height anything nor does he look anything like the end result of redeemed Vader. So anything in the first three movies which I've only watched 2 of just doesn't even register any impact on the character of Vader at all, thankfully.

    And Lucas could really have destroyed that character.

    DarkWarrior on
  • TomantaTomanta Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Force Ghost was more a matter of skill with the Force than being a good person. It wasn't a reward for living a good life, but something that could be taught, as Obi Wan was taught by Qui Gon after RotS.

    RotS presents it as Qui-Gon discovering how to do it for the first time, teaching Obi and Yoda.

    Which raises the question about how the hell Anakin was able to learn it.

    Just one of the many plot holes created by the prequels.

    Tomanta on
  • YarYar Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    This bothered me throughout the prequels. Every fight to come after Episode 1 was acrobatic and insane, and even the non-combat scenes like when Anakin has the balls to free fall on Coruscant during that chase. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but when the fights were more grounded, and the Jedi's physical abilities were only a little supplemented by the force, I enjoyed them more. The big fight of RotS was too over the top to impress me. It's like there's a line when awesome turns silly, and they crossed it.
    Well, again, the explanation initially served well. Jedi in the OT were a neophyte teenager never properly trained, three old dying hermits, and a cyborg cripple. In the PQs they were in their prime, identified early on through galaxy-wide bloodtesting, trained on Coruscant in the Tower at the height of the golden age of Jedi badassitude where they had thoroughly unbalanced power. From what I understand, they were toned down quite a bit, from an original conception where prequel Jedi would basically float up into the air and light would shoot out from them and everything evil on the battlefield would explode. That's not an exaggeration.

    Having Yoda and what's-his-name have a flippy fight sort of hurt this explanation, because they were "old." But not as old, so it still serves.

    My problem was more that the OT had a more balanced cast of characters. Almost every character of note in the prequels is a force master. The entire story is laden with light sabers and force pushes and future-seeing. The OT had Han and Chewy and Jabba and Leiah and Lando and Porkins and droids that weren't merely comical; and the Force and Jedis were a powerful mythological back-story and undercurrent, not an overwhelming dominant theme that blanketed everything. Sure, you could explain that in a similar way, that Jedis and the Force were just way more dominant and relevant in that time, but that still doesn't mean it they have to dominate the cast and plot.

    Yar on
  • DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2009
    Yar wrote: »
    This bothered me throughout the prequels. Every fight to come after Episode 1 was acrobatic and insane, and even the non-combat scenes like when Anakin has the balls to free fall on Coruscant during that chase. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but when the fights were more grounded, and the Jedi's physical abilities were only a little supplemented by the force, I enjoyed them more. The big fight of RotS was too over the top to impress me. It's like there's a line when awesome turns silly, and they crossed it.
    Well, again, the explanation initially served well. Jedi in the OT were a neophyte teenager never properly trained, three old dying hermits, and a cyborg cripple. In the PQs they were in their prime, identified early on through galaxy-wide bloodtesting, trained on Coruscant in the Tower at the height of the golden age of Jedi badassitude where they had thoroughly unbalanced power. From what I understand, they were toned down quite a bit, from an original conception where prequel Jedi would basically float up into the air and light would shoot out from them and everything evil on the battlefield would explode. That's not an exaggeration.

    Having Yoda and what's-his-name have a flippy fight sort of hurt this explanation, because they were "old." But not as old, so it still serves.

    My problem was more that the OT had a more balanced cast of characters. Almost every character of note in the prequels is a force master. The entire story is laden with light sabers and force pushes and future-seeing. The OT had Han and Chewy and Jabba and Leiah and Lando and Porkins and droids that weren't merely comical; and the Force and Jedis were a powerful mythological back-story and undercurrent, not an overwhelming dominant theme that blanketed everything. Sure, you could explain that in a similar way, that Jedis and the Force were just way more dominant and relevant in that time, but that still doesn't mean it they have to dominate the cast and plot.

    They were only like 30 years older at best. For someone like Yoda and Palpatine that 30 years is insignificant and yet apparently made all the difference. I'd take a skilled sword fight over Matrix rip off shit any day of the week.

    DarkWarrior on
  • YarYar Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    All I'm saying is that there is a lot of good groundwork in the prequels that just got executed very poorly and could have gone much differently even with the same basic outline and premise. Palpatine was never much of a saber duelist, 30 years is a long time for humans, and Yoda clearly fell ill in that time.

    Yar on
  • mightyspacepopemightyspacepope Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    I hate (most of) the arena fight in Episode 2.

    Every single random Jedi extra looks like a dumbass flailing their lightsaber around. I thought maybe they took random crew members and let them go to town in front of the camera, but apparently they were members of a local fencing club. For shame.

    I do have to give props to Ewan and Hayden, though. If you watch some of the behind-the-scenes stuff, they were gung ho about the saberfighting and regularly destroyed their prop fighting sabers.

    mightyspacepope on
  • MagicPrimeMagicPrime FiresideWizard Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Yar wrote: »
    This bothered me throughout the prequels. Every fight to come after Episode 1 was acrobatic and insane, and even the non-combat scenes like when Anakin has the balls to free fall on Coruscant during that chase. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but when the fights were more grounded, and the Jedi's physical abilities were only a little supplemented by the force, I enjoyed them more. The big fight of RotS was too over the top to impress me. It's like there's a line when awesome turns silly, and they crossed it.
    Well, again, the explanation initially served well. Jedi in the OT were a neophyte teenager never properly trained, three old dying hermits, and a cyborg cripple. In the PQs they were in their prime, identified early on through galaxy-wide bloodtesting, trained on Coruscant in the Tower at the height of the golden age of Jedi badassitude where they had thoroughly unbalanced power. From what I understand, they were toned down quite a bit, from an original conception where prequel Jedi would basically float up into the air and light would shoot out from them and everything evil on the battlefield would explode. That's not an exaggeration.

    Having Yoda and what's-his-name have a flippy fight sort of hurt this explanation, because they were "old." But not as old, so it still serves.

    My problem was more that the OT had a more balanced cast of characters. Almost every character of note in the prequels is a force master. The entire story is laden with light sabers and force pushes and future-seeing. The OT had Han and Chewy and Jabba and Leiah and Lando and Porkins and droids that weren't merely comical; and the Force and Jedis were a powerful mythological back-story and undercurrent, not an overwhelming dominant theme that blanketed everything. Sure, you could explain that in a similar way, that Jedis and the Force were just way more dominant and relevant in that time, but that still doesn't mean it they have to dominate the cast and plot.

    They were only like 30 years older at best. For someone like Yoda and Palpatine that 30 years is insignificant and yet apparently made all the difference. I'd take a skilled sword fight over Matrix rip off shit any day of the week.

    I have always felt that the best lightsaber battle in the PT was Maul vs. Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon.

    Yes there were some acrobatics, but all the acrobatics were on the part of Obi-Wan and Darth Maul. Which made since because both were young and in their prime. Even when they jump across the bridge. Maul does a flip, Obi-Wan does a flip. Qui-Gon just leaps across. And the fight itself is pretty solid all around. You get the feeling that Maul is a Badass, Obi-Wan is a young Jedi in his first "real" lightsaber fight and Qui-Gon is the aging Master who still has some fight left in him, (Especially when he gets the upper hand on Maul and shoulder-checks/backhands him off the walkway.)

    MagicPrime on
    BNet • magicprime#1430 | PSN/Steam • MagicPrime | Origin • FireSideWizard
    Critical Failures - Havenhold CampaignAugust St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
  • YarYar Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    I hate (most of) the arena fight in Episode 2.

    Every single random Jedi extra looks like a dumbass flailing their lightsaber around. I thought maybe they took random crew members and let them go to town in front of the camera, but apparently they were members of a local fencing club. For shame.
    Yes that scene was terrible. Maybe they could have used, I don't know, actors?

    Yar on
  • AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    I just cannot accept Vader's redemption now.

    You make a strong point. Before the prequels came out, I always figured Anakin became a mass-murdering psychopath out of twisted ideals and tragedy, i.e., he's such a loyal soldier to the Empire he sees its enemies as evil and kills everyone for the greater good. One justifiable death leads to a handful leads to a group leads to hundreds, that kind of thing. Plus, super-pissed because some Rebel or someone killed his babymama.

    Instead, it turned out:
    Anakin: "Hey, Mace, can I have more authority?"
    Mace: "Uh, no, kid. You're like nineteen and fucked-up enough as it is."
    Anakin: "You're just jealous, man! I'm gonna kill you now."
    Palpatine: "Told you, dude. You should join my team. I'll give you a title and let you kill all the children you want."
    Anakin: "Sold!"

    Atomika on
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Most of what annoyed me about the prequels is that they show that the Galactic Empire rose and fell in less time than it takes me to make a sandwich. Forcing the story into such a tiny timeframe makes it feel incredibly claustrophobic.

    durandal4532 on
    Take a moment to donate what you can to Critical Resistance and Black Lives Matter.
  • YarYar Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Yeah no doubt Anakin's conversion could have gone so many other ways better.

    I mean, I always assumed it would just be Padme's death that sent him over the edge. That would be quick and easy and make more sense with the whole pain and fear and anger and such and tie back into his mother.

    Yar on
  • AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Most of what annoyed me about the prequels is that they show that the Galactic Empire rose and fell in less time than it takes me to make a sandwich. Forcing the story into such a tiny timeframe makes it feel incredibly claustrophobic.

    Yeah, if you're going to establish the Republic as some great body that lasted tens of thousands of years, seems a bit implausible it tanks in like, five years.

    Plus, I could never see anything particularly evil or illegal about the Confederacy separatists. It was all kind of like the Civil War, but in reverse.

    Atomika on
  • MagicPrimeMagicPrime FiresideWizard Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Yar wrote: »
    Yeah no doubt Anakin's conversion could have gone so many other ways better.

    I mean, I always assumed it would just be Padme's death that sent him over the edge. That would be quick and easy and make more sense with the whole pain and fear and anger and such and tie back into his mother.

    Also, in the script I do believe the force choking of Padme was supposed to lift her up in the air like Obi-Wan in the first fight.

    But they felt that a force-choke/crucifixion on a pregnant lady would be bad form.

    I personally would have liked it better and the scene would have had more impact.

    MagicPrime on
    BNet • magicprime#1430 | PSN/Steam • MagicPrime | Origin • FireSideWizard
    Critical Failures - Havenhold CampaignAugust St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
  • WashWash Sweet Christmas Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    I might be the only person in here who preferred Episode 1 to the rest of the prequels. The fight scenes were awesome without being ridiculous, the Pod Race was really cool, teenage Anakin wasn't around to ruin any scenes, and the big fight at the end of the movie, where you've got the Gungan battle, the infiltration, the space battle, and the best lightsaber duel in the prequels going on at the same time, was pretty sweet. Plus the bad acting wasn't as noticeable. Oh, and I don't know about the rest of you, but it didn't seem as heavy-handed with the CGI to me. 2-3 went crazy with the CGI space monsters and the greenscreen work, 1 wasn't as reliant on that technology.

    Wash on
    gi5h0gjqwti1.jpg
  • Pi-r8Pi-r8 Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    I see that, as usual, everyone is wrong except me.

    Watch 4 again, and try to do it without any nostalgia factor or knowledge of the other movies. It has some cool special effects, a few classic scenes like the bar scene, and Han Solo is a great character. That's it. Luke is unbearably whiny, Vader and Obi-Wan are completely wooden and cliched, and the story is basically "wizard gives a kid a magic sword, and they head off to battle an evil wizard and rescue a princess from his fortress of doom".

    I hated episode 1 when it came out. But you know? It's really grown on me. Yes, Jar-Jar is stupid, but he's no worse than C3PO and he's not very important. Obi-Wan and Qwai-gon Jin make a great team, and their fight with Darth Maul is the best saber fight ever. Why? It has modern technology, actors trained in actual fight choreography and martial arts, and doesn't rely on CGI-Yoda or old man Count Doofus. Also, this movie DOESN'T have Hayden Christianson as Anikan. God what a terrible actor that man is. And there's no cheesy love story.

    The double princess twist was cool, the fight with the drone army was cool, the fight on the trade federation ship was cool, the galactic senate was cool- really there's a LOT to like in this movie. If it had Harrison Ford in it, or a comparable actor, it would be the best star wars movie.

    Pi-r8 on
  • Pi-r8Pi-r8 Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    I might be the only person in here who preferred Episode 1 to the rest of the prequels. The fight scenes were awesome without being ridiculous, the Pod Race was really cool, teenage Anakin wasn't around to ruin any scenes, and the big fight at the end of the movie, where you've got the Gungan battle, the infiltration, the space battle, and the best lightsaber duel in the prequels going on at the same time, was pretty sweet. Plus the bad acting wasn't as noticeable. Oh, and I don't know about the rest of you, but it didn't seem as heavy-handed with the CGI to me. 2-3 went crazy with the CGI space monsters and the greenscreen work, 1 wasn't as reliant on that technology.

    yeah, all this too.

    Pi-r8 on
  • AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Ah, the old revisionist historian chestnut arrives at last.


    Who had 1pm-2pm on the grid? They've got like $200 coming their way.

    Atomika on
  • flamebroiledchickenflamebroiledchicken Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Pi-r8 wrote: »
    And there's no cheesy love story.

    "Are you an angel?"


    Child Anakin is just as bad as teenage Anakin.

    flamebroiledchicken on
    y59kydgzuja4.png
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Yar wrote: »
    My problem was more that the OT had a more balanced cast of characters. Almost every character of note in the prequels is a force master. The entire story is laden with light sabers and force pushes and future-seeing. The OT had Han and Chewy and Jabba and Leiah and Lando and Porkins and droids that weren't merely comical; and the Force and Jedis were a powerful mythological back-story and undercurrent, not an overwhelming dominant theme that blanketed everything. Sure, you could explain that in a similar way, that Jedis and the Force were just way more dominant and relevant in that time, but that still doesn't mean it they have to dominate the cast and plot.

    The Prequel Trilogy was TERRIBLE at layering the Jedi story with the politics story.

    It didn't help that there was only 1 character in the politics story on the "good" side (Portman), and she wasn't even very interesting.

    shryke on
  • ProPatriaMoriProPatriaMori Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Most of what annoyed me about the prequels is that they show that the Galactic Empire rose and fell in less time than it takes me to make a sandwich. Forcing the story into such a tiny timeframe makes it feel incredibly claustrophobic.

    You know what else makes it feel claustrophobic? Every goddamn thing that happens in that galaxy happens to about 10 people. I distinctly remember having characters pop up--maybe it was the introduction of the droids, I forget exactly which now--and just groaning and holding my head.

    ProPatriaMori on
  • MagicPrimeMagicPrime FiresideWizard Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Wizzah!

    MagicPrime on
    BNet • magicprime#1430 | PSN/Steam • MagicPrime | Origin • FireSideWizard
    Critical Failures - Havenhold CampaignAugust St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
  • WashWash Sweet Christmas Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Pi-r8 wrote: »
    And there's no cheesy love story.

    "Are you an angel?"


    Child Anakin is just as bad as teenage Anakin.

    Not really, no.

    He has one cheesy line, and maybe a few cute little moments with Padme. Episode 1 is not guilty of the same crime as 2 and 3, in which every scene with those two together was unbearable. There was nothing like the 'coarse sand', or the 'love has blinded you' speeches.

    Wash on
    gi5h0gjqwti1.jpg
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Most of what annoyed me about the prequels is that they show that the Galactic Empire rose and fell in less time than it takes me to make a sandwich. Forcing the story into such a tiny timeframe makes it feel incredibly claustrophobic.

    Yeah, if you're going to establish the Republic as some great body that lasted tens of thousands of years, seems a bit implausible it tanks in like, five years.

    Plus, I could never see anything particularly evil or illegal about the Confederacy separatists. It was all kind of like the Civil War, but in reverse.

    Fighting to keep a government unified has little to do with legality or morality. The United States fought its civil war to continue surviving as the major power of the western hemisphere. Naturally, slavery factored into the equation, but do you think the Union would have just thrown up their hands and said "Well, good day then," if the South had abolished slavery, then succeeded? Of course not. Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and the central-Asian Soviet republics lacked the will stop the Baltic republics and others from succeeding what was, in reality, an even looser federation of states in many regards. The end result was a disaster from the standpoint of military and political clout.

    tl;dr--being a superpower is a means unto itself, unfortunately. So is staying one. Unethical, but extremely common in history.

    Apparently, the Separatists also roped in a number of systems loyal to the central government into their movement for strategic reasons, so it's not really a surprise that the Republic would elect to mobilize a huge army and stomp on their asses. They're incompetent, but not that incompetent.

    For Vader....I wonder, do the prequels make him less redeemable? Then again, I didn't think of him as all that redeemable to begin with, given that he basically was made out to be the Empire's version of Lavrentiy Beria. Besides normal conduct in warfare (shooting down enemy pilots, etc.), he demonstrated a willingness to kill senior officers of the Imperial Navy, not because they had committed any illegal or traitorous acts, but because they had failed to meet his expectations or, worse still, rendered upon him some sort of insult. This sort of thing makes Stalin's purges of the Red Army Officer Corps look reasonable and organized.

    Killing children is bad, plenty bad. So is strangling a pregnant woman (or rather, nearly strangling her?). But the actions of war, as portrayed in the original trilogy, are difficult to reconcile in any way. Hell, we think of Winston Churchill as a good guy, despite the fact that he lead an avowedly racist government, ordered the firebombing of a near-defenseless German city, and was partially responsible for 3 million deaths in the Bengal Famine. But goodness knows that racist cigar-chomper has been redeemed by history. You can get away with anything, especially if you come back as a nice blue ghost.

    I suppose the biggest disappointment is that the Jedi Order, a group that is expected to police itself and hold itself to a very high moral standard, basically ignored the fact that Anakin murdered an entire village in the second film. Good grief, did they cover their ears and scream every time someone got a sense of that, or are they really just that stupid? I have no idea.

    Synthesis on
  • Rogue_KRogue_K Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    I might be the only person in here who preferred Episode 1 to the rest of the prequels. The fight scenes were awesome without being ridiculous, the Pod Race was really cool, teenage Anakin wasn't around to ruin any scenes, and the big fight at the end of the movie, where you've got the Gungan battle, the infiltration, the space battle, and the best lightsaber duel in the prequels going on at the same time, was pretty sweet. Plus the bad acting wasn't as noticeable. Oh, and I don't know about the rest of you, but it didn't seem as heavy-handed with the CGI to me. 2-3 went crazy with the CGI space monsters and the greenscreen work, 1 wasn't as reliant on that technology.


    I would agree with you and was definately in love with Episode one.



    Till...
    jar-jar.jpg

    Rogue_K on
    And through it all i gamed.
    ssig-654898.jpg
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Am I the only one who thought the pod race was..kind of unnecessary? I mean, it was cool, sure, but it basically just served to show that young Anakin was 1) apparently destined to do lots of stuff and 2) a crack pilot.

    Couldn't that have been a lot easier and a lot shorter in something else? Then again, it almost feels as though the whole first movie was built around that. I'm probably in the minority when I say it feels like it should be the center focus on some non-Star Wars movie.

    Synthesis on
  • WashWash Sweet Christmas Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Jar Jar wasn't lame enough to spoil the movie for me. I get all the hate, and I'm not fond of the character, but him showing up didn't cancel out everything good about the movie.

    Wash on
    gi5h0gjqwti1.jpg
  • RocketSauceRocketSauce Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Anakin turned out to be really fucking stupid more than anything. He ended up believing the blatantly evil dude over all of the people who mentored his whiny, unappreciating ass. They took the most badass villain in movie history and turned him into a douchebag.

    RocketSauce on
This discussion has been closed.