So I Just Saw Star Wars...(minor spoilers)

[RINGLEADER]

I'm standing outside the LA premier now...Not as good as I thought it would be...not bad though. Some terrific scenes and great light sabre duels but Lucas also couldn't restrain himself with the out-of-control frenzied FX. Imagine some stupid droid interrupting the middle of any of the sabre battles in the first three movies and you get the jist. Sometimes less is more.

Again, the romance is flat but it's not like that's what you're going to the movie for.

The scenes with Palpatine and Windu that were in the trailer play out magnificently.

There is one scene with Vader though that is IMO one of the most embarrassingly bad scenes I could have ever imagined. You'll have to see for yourself...

But Lucas was brutally honest in showing the extent to which Vader is forced to "do what must be done".

All that said...the Vader transformation - minus the one thing noted above - is worth the price of admission alone. I guess I just was hoping Lucas wouldn't go as nuts with the FX as he did.

Now off to the after-party!

[Ghost]

The only reason I went to the ATOTC premiere was in hopes of a great saber duel like in TPM. The saber duels have been the only thing carrying the new trilogy, everything else has been patchwork acting with little or no character development. What Lucas should have done was pay a sh*t load of money to a quality character director like David Fincher because in my opinion the new trilogy should have had its primary focus on its characters and how Anakin became Vader, not insane amounts of cheesy FX and the worst acting this side of "Dude Where's My Car?"...

[Ghost]

BTW, I don't blame the actors for the acting in the new trilogy, the new trilogy is loaded with quality actors; no the distinction falls squarely on the shoulders of George Lucas, and his cheesecake scripts and directing. Lucas was out of the game too long (did not direct anything for 20 years from ANH to TPM, 1977 to 1997) and it showed in TPM.

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by Ghost

BTW, I don't blame the actors for the acting in the new trilogy, the new trilogy is loaded with quality actors; no the distinction falls squarely on the shoulders of George Lucas, and his cheesecake scripts and directing. Lucas was out of the game too long (did not direct anything for 20 years from ANH to TPM, 1977 to 1997) and it showed in TPM.

What? That's the only thing that's been constant in all of the Star Wars series... Terrible dialogue and even worse acting. It has nothing to do with Lucas being out of the game. It has to do with Lucas not being very good at writing natural dialogue.

[Ghost]

Originally Posted by Taco John

What? That's the only thing that's been constant in all of the Star Wars series... Terrible dialogue and even worse acting. It has nothing to do with Lucas being out of the game. It has to do with Lucas not being very good at writing natural dialogue.

While I do agree, the acting and character development which are the paramount requisites of any movie are far superior in the old trilogy than the new. Lucas only directed one episode in the old trilogy, and that was before he really became enthralled with his ILM horsesh*t which has got in the way of his directing ever since.

[grandllama]

Ringleader, you need to get with the program, I saw Star Wars 28 years ago...

[grandllama]

Originally Posted by Ghost

BTW, I don't blame the actors for the acting in the new trilogy, the new trilogy is loaded with quality actors; no the distinction falls squarely on the shoulders of George Lucas, and his cheesecake scripts and directing. Lucas was out of the game too long (did not direct anything for 20 years from ANH to TPM, 1977 to 1997) and it showed in TPM.

but he produced Howard The Duck....

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by RINGLEADER

Not as good as I thought it would be...!

yet again...


Fortunately, I've learned my lesson. My new requirements for Star Wars movies isn't that it be awesome, groundbreaking or incredibily exciting with interesting and fun characters. My new requirement is that it have at least one relatively kick-ass lightsabre duel.

I'm basically setting the bar so low Lucas can't disappoint me (I hope).

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by Ghost

While I do agree, the acting and character development which are the paramount requisites of any movie are far superior in the old trilogy than the new.

No way. I hear this all the time, and it's nothing more than waxing nostalgic about the good ole days when men were men and Star Wars was perfect. The acting, the dialogue, all of it was infamously wooden. The actors complained about it on the set. Watch the extras and listen to Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher talk about it. It's famously a problem with Lucas. The guy doesn't write crisp dialogue. He wants his characters to blurt out his rushed lines so he can cram as much film in as possible. Personally, I think the method behind the madness is that the story is so huge that he felt rushed. He's famous for directing his actors to "say it with more emphasis and faster.

Empire slowed down a bit. Jedi was a train wreck. Easily the worst of the three, and possibly the worst of the series if it weren't for Jar-Jar. Attack of the Clones is far superior to Jedi, but that's another discussion entirely.

Personally, I think people wax too nostalgic about the old ones, and expected way too much out of the new ones in comparison.

Of course, nothing has touched Empire yet... That's a high bar.

[mcan]

Originally Posted by Taco John

Attack of the Clones is far superior to Jedi, but that's another discussion entirely.

I agree with a lot of what you said, but I have to say that this isn't true at all. Jar Jar isn't the only problem with the first two movies. While Attack... (story wise) is a far cry better than "TPM" it doesn't touch the feel of the first three. I know a lot of people hate the Ewoks, but I never really had a problem with them. They had personality because they were puppateered, and not CGI crap. If Jar Jar was a puppet, I wouldn't have a problem with him at all. An intelligent actor could bring life to him, and even stupid lines would come off as just a stupid being. However, when the droids become CGI and start flying around I lose my lunch. When humans and aliens all look and move like cartoons, then I want to leave. When Yoda looks like a slightly putrid and glowing version of his former self I cringe and when he starts flying around like a Pikachu, I laugh out loud.

The fact is, the new movies aren't built through any kind of sweat. They are engineered behind a computer screen and that just doesn't cut it. They are total shit. ROTJ's story is better, and it feels like it's really happening. The dialogue is wooden, but since all the movies feel this way, it seems like that's just the way the people of THIS world talk. We forgive it. Just like the dialogue in The Shining. It isn't at all natural, but the movie is scarier because wooden dialogue makes you uncomfortable.

[Ghost]

[QUOTE=Taco John]No way. I hear this all the time, and it's nothing more than waxing nostalgic about the good ole days when men were men and Star Wars was perfect. The acting, the dialogue, all of it was infamously wooden. The actors complained about it on the set. Watch the extras and listen to Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher talk about it. It's famously a problem with Lucas...QUOTE]

Well last I heard men are still men and no Star Wars was not perfect, but comparing the product then to the product now, the old trilogy is vastly superior and yes Lucas at one time was a competent director just not anymore. If you wanted to make a real case you should of used Alec Guiness as a reference because in 1977, Ford nor Fisher had worked with any real big time Hollywood director unless you count Ford in "American Graffiti" and a small part in "The Conversation". Guiness's lines IMO are still as fresh today as they ever were, perhaps it is just a shear testament to his screen presence and superior acting, but comparing the characters of the old trilogy and saying they are just as stunted as the characters in the new is being foolish. BTW, WTF does waxing nostalgic mean? Inquiring minds want to know.

[KCChiefsMan]

Originally Posted by RINGLEADER

Now off to the after-party!

after the party is the after party!

[Fire Me Boy!]

Originally Posted by Ghost

BTW, I don't blame the actors for the acting in the new trilogy, the new trilogy is loaded with quality actors; no the distinction falls squarely on the shoulders of George Lucas, and his cheesecake scripts and directing. Lucas was out of the game too long (did not direct anything for 20 years from ANH to TPM, 1977 to 1997) and it showed in TPM.

I would agree the acting is due to Lucas' direction, but it has less to do with the script and more to do with Lucas' direction. The man is known to not be an actor's director. He doesn't like actors. When Ron Howard arrived at the set of American Graffitti, he said he was REALLY intimidated by Lucas because he'd heard stories about how he hated actors. Then the two got to talking about an animation class at UCLA (IIRC that's the college) and Howard said Lucas really warmed up and he thought, "Hey, George isn't all that bad." Then Lucas said his real desire was to make an animated film, because then he wouldn't have to deal with any actors.

Lucas doesn't like actors, and therefore neglects that part of his films.

[MOhillbilly]

I dont see why this comes as a suprise starwars hasnt been good since strikes back.
Anyone who thinks diffrently is FOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLIIINNNNNNNNGGGGG themselves.
Give me a break Ewoks kill Stormtroopers w/ sticks and rocks?

it would have been better to just ram the cool scenes from Jedi,PM & AotC into one giant lightsaber tiefighter vs Xwing dogfight set to music w/ no acting and plot(what youd really miss Jar Jar?)

[beavis]

Originally Posted by Taco John

waxing nostalgic

You like saying that, don't you.