PDA

View Full Version : Why the OT is better (at least for me)



Exhaust Port
05-27-2003, 08:31 PM
It took me a couple viewings of the PT to figure it out but here it is. Don't get me wrong I like the PT but the OT is still better and more enjoyable to watch over and over again. At first I thought it had to do with the nostaglia of the OT that made it the favorite series but I don't think that's it any more.

The PT is just too freakin difficult to follow. The plot is WAAAAAYYY too complex. I remember leaving the TPM theater scratching my head trying to remember why there was a trade blockade, what happened in the Senate or how the Sith fit into all of that? That doesn't make for a good movie.

It's seems that GL knows that Episode 3 is the big pay off that will set up for the OT. The PT, in his vision, needs to be planned as a whole with each part building on the last. The OT wasn't like that. Each movie had a beginning, middle and end. Sure there were a couple unanswered questions after ESB but we knew who the bad guys were and the background explanations were short and sweet. Now were building to a 3 movie explaination of why/how Palpatine became the Emperor. 8 hours of background information for a character that makes an appearance requiring no background information in RotJ?

In the OT the bad guys were just bad, no questions asked. Well we're now spending 3 movies getting answers to those questions that no one was asking. Sure we were all a bit curious how Vader became so evil and how Luke and Leia were associated with that but just have Obi Wan say to Luke "your father couldn't control his anger after his mother was killed." Bam! We saved 8 hours right there. More time for space adventures and less time needed watching Space Senate Hearings. Star Wars CSPAN? No thanks.

stillakid
05-28-2003, 12:57 AM
Of course I have to chime in on this. ;)

More or less, I agree with your assessment, except that for me, it isn't the political manueverings that bother me so much as the clumsy way it is all going down.

For instance, the dinner table scene in TPM is an example of the cardinal mistake of amateurish writing. Sitting your cast down at a table to discuss the plot is supposed to happen in pre-production, not in the movie itself.

The reason a movie is a movie is because it affords the storyteller the ability to show things instead of having to rely on characters telling us everything.

This is a recurring problem throughout Episodes I and II that contributes to the very problem you've described above. The only time the "plot" is discussed like this in the OT is in the Ewok village when 3PO is recapping their adventures in Ewokese.

The OT story is just as "complicated" as anything the Prequels have presented. The difference is that all the questions are dealt with, if they ever come up at all. As you mention, plot points in the Prequels are concocted without reason simply for the express purpose of clumsily advancing the story to the next scene. The Midichlorians are an excellent example of this. Instead of constructing a sequence which shows Ani's potential power, Lucas instead invented a completely random and extraneous method to tell us all about it (in tandom with the aformentioned dinner table scene).

The politics of the Prequels are interesting, but the manner in which the entire story is being presented is just plain clumsy, non-subtle, confusing, and convoluted. I think that this is why some people make the claim that the OT is "too simple" and the Prequels are "deep and complicated." In my opinion, they're confusing "seriously disorganized" with "depth."

But hey, that's just my opinion. :)

mini-rock
05-28-2003, 02:24 AM
I hear what you're saying EP, but I love the prequels just as much I'm sure as you love the OT.:D

scruffziller
05-28-2003, 08:36 AM
I guess for me it is because they were there first.

The Overlord Returns
05-28-2003, 10:01 AM
Originally posted by stillakid

The only time the "plot" is discussed like this in the OT is in the Ewok village when 3PO is recapping their adventures in Ewokese.



The Only time?

1. Tarkins conversation with the governors in ANH is pretty much the same thing. Plot talk with a wee glimpse of Vaders ability.

2. Bens conversation with Luke in his home. Again, sitting down, talking plot.

3. Lando's encounter with Han in the dungeon post interrogation. Again, much talk of what is going to happen in about 5 minutes time.

4. ROTJ in general is rife with these sorts of scenes, however, 3po and r2 walking toward jabbas palace stands out in my mind at the moment......

stillakid
05-28-2003, 10:39 AM
Originally posted by The Overlord Returns
The Only time?

1. Tarkins conversation with the governors in ANH is pretty much the same thing. Plot talk with a wee glimpse of Vaders ability. I'll concede that one. :) But it's not a concocted scene in the same way as the Ep I dinner sequence.


Originally posted by The Overlord Returns
2. Bens conversation with Luke in his home. Again, sitting down, talking plot. eh. Sort of. But again, Luke's meeting with Ben wasn't as manufactured as the group just magically running into Anakin and for no reason at all, being invited to dinner.


Originally posted by The Overlord Returns
3. Lando's encounter with Han in the dungeon post interrogation. Again, much talk of what is going to happen in about 5 minutes time. Huh? Lando and Han never exchanged more than a couple sentences between them.


Originally posted by The Overlord Returns
4. ROTJ in general is rife with these sorts of scenes, however, 3po and r2 walking toward jabbas palace stands out in my mind at the moment...... Again, they are doing something on their way to doing something else. The action is plausible and justified in the course of the story.

I wasn't suggesting that characters never express their future plans. What I was saying was that in a well-told story, you don't merely sit the characters down and have them discuss everything about the story ahead of time. The TPM dinner sequence tells us repeatedly about Ani's force ability, but we are never ever shown anything about it until Episode II (aside from the Romper Room magic mirror stunt which was uber-lame).

The Overlord Returns
05-28-2003, 01:16 PM
Originally posted by stillakid
I'll concede that one. :) But it's not a concocted scene in the same way as the Ep I dinner sequence.


Well....technically, every scene in a film is "concoted" ;)



Originally posted by stillakid

eh. Sort of. But again, Luke's meeting with Ben wasn't as manufactured as the group just magically running into Anakin and for no reason at all, being invited to dinner.


Wait....ben just "happens" to be walking by at the moment when Lukes life was threatened and your complaining about Jinn and co. meeting anakin in a atuo supply store. At least they were looking for something. Also, he invited them in because a sandstorm was coming and they needed shelter. Of course it is more likely that Ben was keeping an eye on Luke the entire time, however, no explanation is given to prove this.


Originally posted by stillakid

Huh? Lando and Han never exchanged more than a couple sentences between them.


Lando essentially tells us what happened before Han and crew arrived. He then goes on to tell them about the real plan, which, funnily enough, plays out in front of us about 5 minutes later. Sure, he isn't "sitting", but everyone else is ;)


Originally posted by stillakid


Again, they are doing something on their way to doing something else. The action is plausible and justified in the course of the story.


Ok, I'll concede that one.


Originally posted by stillakid


I wasn't suggesting that characters never express their future plans. What I was saying was that in a well-told story, you don't merely sit the characters down and have them discuss everything about the story ahead of time.


What it basically comes down to is expository dialogue and, whether characters are sitting or walking, both trilogies are rife with this sort of exposition.

stillakid
05-28-2003, 06:34 PM
Originally posted by The Overlord Returns
What it basically comes down to is expository dialogue and, whether characters are sitting or walking, both trilogies are rife with this sort of exposition.

I disagree with that one. When I first started learning how to write screenplays, I picked up a random "how-to" book which happens to "coincidently" have been the best one. Anyhow, in it, the author made an outstanding point which I haven't forgotten to this day. He said, it's great for your story to have a theme, just don't let any of your characters know what it is. The point being, as soon as one of them finds out (from the author) what the "big picture" is, invariably he is going to say it onscreen.

While the expository dialogue does exist in the OT as it does in just about every film ever made, the Prequels make the mistake of "explaining" nearly everything, from the plot (who, what, and most terribly...why) to the science of how things work (Midichlorians). In our real world, we don't get in a car and ask, "hmm, Master Qui Gonn, what's a gasket?" The OT didn't give a rats arse about the "how." It wasn't important. The spaceships were just a run of the mill method to get from point A to point B. The Force was just this magical thing that could be used as taught by Old Ben and Yoda.

But the Prequels felt the necessity to try to explain it all. Midis'? What for? Why tell us this? What did we gain by knowing about Midichlorians that we couldn't have gotten instead from a scene that showed us that Anakin was special? That's the point. Show me...don't tell me. The OT was a rollercoaster adventure ride that didn't have to stop to "explain" itself. TPM stopped cold outside on the gantry when the story had to "explain" something that had been said a few minutes prior..."Master Yoda said something about Midichlorians...what are Midichlorians?" Exactly. Why bother? It just creates the necessity to concoct a clumsy moment at a ridiculously random moment in the story to "explain" something that had no true purpose in the first place.

DarthChuckMc
05-28-2003, 07:16 PM
Originally posted by stillakid
.."Master Yoda said something about Midichlorians...what are Midichlorians?" Exactly. Why bother? It just creates the necessity to concoct a clumsy moment at a ridiculously random moment in the story to "explain" something that had no true purpose in the first place.

If GLu just left us hanging with "His midichlorian count is higher than Master Yoda's", we would've have been scratching our heads about that, too.
I don't mind the "explaining" so much. It answers most of the questions that people have been asking about ever since the OT came out.
My impression of why we are seeing so much Senate discussions, is that we are being shown how much turmoil and disarray the galaxy is in, how strong Palpatine's grasp is on it, and the few people that are willing to stand up to the corruption that is causing all of this mess.
If the story started with Palpy just taking control, creating an army, taking out the jedi, and everyone in the universe just bending over and taking it, it would make for a pretty boring 2 hours IMO.

mini-rock
05-28-2003, 08:20 PM
Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
If GLu just left us hanging with "His midichlorian count is higher than Master Yoda's", we would've have been scratching our heads about that, too.
I don't mind the "explaining" so much. It answers most of the questions that people have been asking about ever since the OT came out.
My impression of why we are seeing so much Senate discussions, is that we are being shown how much turmoil and disarray the galaxy is in, how strong Palpatine's grasp is on it, and the few people that are willing to stand up to the corruption that is causing all of this mess.
If the story started with Palpy just taking control, creating an army, taking out the jedi, and everyone in the universe just bending over and taking it, it would make for a pretty boring 2 hours IMO.

Very much agreed.


The thing about presenting a positive prequel opinion to stilla is it's a wasted effort b/c after stilla makes his post the blinders go on, and anything I, TOR, DCM, or anyone else who has positive things to say about the prequels, or a logical explenation is offered, goes ignored. Then you can be sure to expect him to state his opinion all over again, but this time also breaking down your own to try in some futile attempt to make himself look better. He will keep coming back forcing his opinion (in stilla's mind these are facts BTW) on everyone regardless of how much your opinion makes perfect sense. Everyone in the world could agree with you, but in stilla's world he convinces himself everyone agrees with him and you are 100% wrong in stating your opinion.

stillakid
05-28-2003, 10:51 PM
Originally posted by mini-rock
Very much agreed.


The thing about presenting a positive prequel opinion to stilla is it's a wasted effort b/c after stilla makes his post the blinders go on, and anything I, TOR, DCM, or anyone else who has positive things to say about the prequels, or a logical explenation is offered, goes ignored. Then you can be sure to expect him to state his opinion all over again, but this time also breaking down your own to try in some futile attempt to make himself look better. He will keep coming back forcing his opinion (in stilla's mind these are facts BTW) on everyone regardless of how much your opinion makes perfect sense. Everyone in the world could agree with you, but in stilla's world he convinces himself everyone agrees with him and you are 100% wrong in stating your opinion.

Hardly...and how would MR know as he ignores everything except the positive. :rolleyes:

The fact is that I listen to everything said, and if it is backed by logic and reasoning, then it is valid. Not all "opinions" always are valid nor do they make sense. Let me give you an example similar to one that I used before. If I decided to "interpret" the Saga as being about the Metro Transit Authority's dealings with the salt industry and the ramifications it has on carpeting in the castles of Bavaria, then by MiniRocks definition, my interpretation is just as valid and correct as the next guys. Right? Would anyone in their right mind agree with that? I doubt it. Why? Because most people could pick my ridiculous "interpretation" apart piece by piece and illustrate exactly why I was wayyyy off base. That's all I've "successfully" done with many of MiniRocks "interpretations" and he just plain ol' doesn't like being shown to be mistaken.

Plus, I've never once told anyone that they were "wrong" for liking something. I like some poorly written and executed films too. :)

stillakid
05-28-2003, 10:59 PM
Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
If GLu just left us hanging with "His midichlorian count is higher than Master Yoda's", we would've have been scratching our heads about that, too.
Very true, but the question arises about why they were even introduced in the first place (thus necessitating the later explanation). They weren't needed to achieve the goal of showing the audience that Anakin was special. Any number of visual (non-verbal) things could have been done which would have been far more effective.


Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
I don't mind the "explaining" so much. It answers most of the questions that people have been asking about ever since the OT came out. Such as....? What questions did the OT ask that the Prequels have since answered?



Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
My impression of why we are seeing so much Senate discussions, is that we are being shown how much turmoil and disarray the galaxy is in, how strong Palpatine's grasp is on it, and the few people that are willing to stand up to the corruption that is causing all of this mess.
If the story started with Palpy just taking control, creating an army, taking out the jedi, and everyone in the universe just bending over and taking it, it would make for a pretty boring 2 hours IMO.
Agreed! :) We have to see "change" occur or else there is no buildup of drama and thus no need to tell a story. In one of GL's early interviews, he described his idea for the Prequels to be "Machevellian." I might add, he also said that most people wouldn't like the films because they would be [paraphrase] "less action oriented and more political." Had this actually been the case, I think that the Saga's aging fanbase would have actually enjoyed these films more. But GL seems trapped in this double-world where he is trying to play to the existing fanbase, but also dish out enough simple video-game-like action to attract the new generation. It's not an impossible task, but it takes a deft hand at the keyboard to pull it off. Too bad. :cry:

DarthChuckMc
05-28-2003, 11:51 PM
The problem here is very simple. George Lucas created Star Wars, not us, the fans. No amount of us bickering and disputing each others theories or opinions will change the way the movies have been made. It's easy for us to criticize the movies, and pick them apart, because we aren't the ones in control of any aspect of the them.

The movies are what they are. Get out the VHS copy, and a pair of scissors and make your "ultimate edition". Don't like a part, cut it out. Have a better idea, film it and edit it in.

If any of us were 1/100 as creative as George Lucas, I can't imagine we would be posting b**** and moan sessions on an internet forum. We'd probably be somewhere like Austrailia, getting ready to film the final chapter of our multi-million dollar movie series.

.....but alas, we are but the armchair quarterbacks of the Star Wars universe. Shoulda woulda coulda.


On a side note:
Starting arguements with people because they don't see your point of view is ridiculous. Attacking someone's intelligence because they don't see things your way, or because you think their opinion isn't valid is just being asinine.

Now quit the bickering and let's talk some FOOTBALL!!.......I mean STAR WARS!!! :D

DarthChuckMc
05-29-2003, 12:03 AM
Originally posted by stillakid
Very true, but the question arises about why they were even introduced in the first place (thus necessitating the later explanation). They weren't needed to achieve the goal of showing the audience that Anakin was special.

They were used to explain why Anakin was so powerful. SHowing him racing a pod across the desert or building a protocol droid simply isn't enough.


Originally posted by stillakid
Such as....? What questions did the OT ask that the Prequels have since answered?

Where Darth Vader came from.

How the Emperor came to power.

Who Luke and Leia's Mother was.

Where the Death Star came from.

Were Stormtroopers came from.

Were the Stormtroopers robots or not.

Who owned R2 and 3PO before Captain Antilles.

Why was Anakin so powerful.

Was Yoda really a great Jedi.

Where the Rebel Alliance came from.

What the CLONE WARS were.

Why Ben lied to Luke about Anakin.

Were the Jedi really powerful or just hokey magicians.

I could go on.

These are questions I wondered as a kid, and as an adult, and I'm finally getting some answers.

Exhaust Port
05-29-2003, 01:35 AM
The thing I was getting at is the PT answered questions that were never really asked. The OT just layed it out there and didn't need any explaining to carry the story forward. Where did the DS come from? I never cared. It was just a massive battle station that someone built and the Emperor was using to spread terror with. Nuff said about that. All that I did care about was that the Rebel blew it out of the sky before Tarkin decided to smoke another planet. Along those lines, I don't care where Tarkin came from or who his tailor was. He was just an evil man that needed to be stopped.

mini-rock
05-29-2003, 01:47 AM
Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
The problem here is very simple. George Lucas created Star Wars, not us, the fans. No amount of us bickering and disputing each others theories or opinions will change the way the movies have been made. It's easy for us to criticize the movies, and pick them apart, because we aren't the ones in control of any aspect of the them.

The movies are what they are. Get out the VHS copy, and a pair of scissors and make your "ultimate edition". Don't like a part, cut it out. Have a better idea, film it and edit it in.

If any of us were 1/100 as creative as George Lucas, I can't imagine we would be posting b**** and moan sessions on an internet forum. We'd probably be somewhere like Austrailia, getting ready to film the final chapter of our multi-million dollar movie series.

.....but alas, we are but the armchair quarterbacks of the Star Wars universe. Shoulda woulda coulda.


On a side note:
Starting arguements with people because they don't see your point of view is ridiculous. Attacking someone's intelligence because they don't see things your way, or because you think their opinion isn't valid is just being asinine.

Now quit the bickering and let's talk some FOOTBALL!!.......I mean STAR WARS!!! :D


Well said, and I fully agree.:)

2-1B
05-29-2003, 02:21 AM
Midichlorians are in the first film to show that the force is not so much mystical as it is scientific. They give more reason for Luke and Leia to have "inherited" their father's ability. ANH as a stand alone movie misleads the viewer into thinking "anyone" could use the Force if he just believed devoutly enough (mystical / religious) while the rest of the OT shows that in fact the Force does have hereditary traits.

Midichlorians also exist in a larger sense to show symbiotic relationships but I think Lucas' execution of that angle was pretty weak -- besides, he already had the cool Naboo / Gungan symbiotic storyline going on.

:)

Exhaust Port
05-29-2003, 09:47 AM
I don't think ANH is misleading. In TPM no indication is given that most people have no Midichlorians. In fact, if I remember correctly, Qui Gon says that Midichlorians are found in the cells of all living things. Luke and Leia inherited their fathers strong Midichlorian concentration making them more in tuned with the Force than the average person. I'm under the impression that any SW character could learn to use the Force just the weaker ones wouldn't be very good no matter how hard they try due to a their low count.


I also wouldn't give GL too much credit for the SW creation. Look at all the talented people involved in the creation of the movies. John Williams for the amazing music, the ILM staff for the very cool spaceship models and other special effects, THX technicians for the great sounds and the large number of other artists involved in the creation. Heck he hasn't even directed all the movies. How's that for creating SW?

Yes, GL had a vision but he also let a lot of other people run with it and that is what made SW what it is today. He says "build be a cool ship" and some guy spends a week putting together what he thinks a "cool ship" looks like. The area where GL has the most influence is the story. Well, guess what most fans have a problem with in the PT? The story. Just because a man has created fine art in the past doesn't mean that everything he touches will be good. Here are 3 words to prove that point:

Howard the Duck

Rogue II
05-29-2003, 10:06 AM
hahahahaha he said Howard the Duck

Well, I already posted my thoughts on midichlorians here. (http://www.sirstevesguide.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=253124#post253124)

Exhaust Port pretty much summarized my thoughts on why I like the OT better than the PT. ATOC and TPM were not bad movies, and TPM does not deserve the title "Worst Sequel of all time" as noted in another thread. I simply just did not enjoy them as much as the OT.

Did someone say something about football?

stillakid
05-29-2003, 11:50 AM
Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
The problem here is very simple. George Lucas created Star Wars, not us, the fans. No amount of us bickering and disputing each others theories or opinions will change the way the movies have been made. It's easy for us to criticize the movies, and pick them apart, because we aren't the ones in control of any aspect of the them. I don't understand your statement? "It's easy for us to criticize the movies because we aren't the ones in control..."? So, what you're saying is that if we were in control, it would be harder to criticize them? If that's the case, then you'd agree that perhaps George can't see the problems because he is too close to the project?


Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
The movies are what they are. Get out the VHS copy, and a pair of scissors and make your "ultimate edition". Don't like a part, cut it out. Have a better idea, film it and edit it in. That's EXACTLY my plan. With the new digital editing technology that George himself (with help from Apple and Microsoft) pushed through, "armchair" quarterbacks (here's the FOOTBALL! ;) ) CAN sit at home and "pick apart" bad movies and turn them into better ones. Albeit, they'll be a bit shorter and might miss some necessary bridging elements, but the idea is there.


Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
If any of us were 1/100 as creative as George Lucas, I can't imagine we would be posting b**** and moan sessions on an internet forum. We'd probably be somewhere like Austrailia, getting ready to film the final chapter of our multi-million dollar movie series. George himself admits how lucky he was that Star Wars hit it so big. But beyond that, success in Hollywood unfortunately doesn't rely on "creativity." Believe me when I tell you that there are more than a fair share of "politically", um, "appointed" people in positions that would better be filled by outsiders who are far more creative, talented, and skilled. But because they don't have family or friend connections, the opportunity to show their stuff never materializes. So, unfortunately, "creativity" is no way to measure any of us and our lack of parallel success to George Lucas.




Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
They were used to explain why Anakin was so powerful. SHowing him racing a pod across the desert or building a protocol droid simply isn't enough.

Yes, exactly! What I'm saying is that there were better options out there for him to use which wouldn't have introduced any potential story problems the same way the Midi's did. Midi's got him from point A to point B in the story. Fine. But shouldn't George be striving for greatness instead of mediocrity?



Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
Where Darth Vader came from. We kinda knew that already, but alright. I suppose the Prequels are all about just showing us the microcosm of events. The hope is, though, that George doesn't muck up the surprises and drama that were so carefully built into the OT in doing so. One that he can't avoid is the Yoda-identity surprise. No way around that one. Now we wait to see if he blows the Anakin is Darth Vader thing and the twins identity/existence thing.


Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
How the Emperor came to power. YES! This one is what George originally claimed what the Prequels would revolve around. The Saga never was originally supposed to be the chronicle of the Skywalker life and times. But alas, things change.


Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
Who Luke and Leia's Mother was. True, that's kind of interesting. But the question is really what made her sad. The build up in Ep I and II are just filler until we find this answer out in III.


Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
Where the Death Star came from. They built it. What's the question?


Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
Were Stormtroopers came from. Presumably, they were conscripts from a thousand worlds taken over by the Empire. Remember, Star Wars was written and conceived during a political tumultuous time in our history. If not an allegory for the US, a case can certainly be made for it paralleling the threat of communism. In any case, the idea was that, just like Nazis, any population can be convinced that it is doing the right thing so long as its leadership says so. Looking at the saga this way, it certainly makes more sense and says a lot more about our own society if the Stormtroopers are all human and not mindless drones created in a petrie dish. The question that arises out of that situation is how far will a conscripted army go before it realizes that it is committing atrocities in the name of "good"?


Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
Were the Stormtroopers robots or not. Why would this question ever come to mind? There is nothing whatsoever in the OT that would suggest such a thing.


Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
Who owned R2 and 3PO before Captain Antilles. Who cares?


Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
Why was Anakin so powerful. He was powerful because he "became" disenchanted with the Republic and was also seduced by a Sith Lord. With no help from microscopic parasites, he learned to use the dark side of the Force until he was better at it than almost everyone else. Well, that was the story until George refused to let anyone help him with the EpI script. :rolleyes:


Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
Was Yoda really a great Jedi.
Huh? Why wouldn't he be? What information in the OT would prompt that question?


Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
Where the Rebel Alliance came from. uh, just like any population under threat of oppression, a rebel contingent gradually coellesces until it is can mount meaningful combat. I don't understand the question.


Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
What the CLONE WARS were. Good question. I think that this one has been everybody's mind.


Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
Why Ben lied to Luke about Anakin. :) We've trodden through this one many a time. I'll say it once then drop it: BEN DID NOT LIE TO LUKE. Ben made a distinction between the body and mind. While Anakin's body continued to live (though helped along by mechanical parts etc "He's more machine now than man, twisted and evil"), Ben truly believed Anakin's spirit to be D.E.A.D. dead. Telling Luke that his father was alive would have been the lie...to Obi Wan. This is why he says later "...point of view." He wasn't lying to Luke. He was telling Luke the truth as he saw it. Fully. Completely. Besides that, Ben has since been painted as being this dirty, untrustworthy, manipulator. But I have yet to see anywhere in the saga, particularly in the Prequels, where Obi Wan displays any such behavior. If you have, I'd be happy to hear about it. :)


Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
Were the Jedi really powerful or just hokey magicians. This sounds like a better poll question. ;) I vote, hokey magicians. Yeah, they could bend spoons with their minds and pick up chicks by feeding them from 6 feet away, but other than that, they were just playing cops and robbers in funny monk robes.


Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
I could go on. Please do, this is fun! :)


Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
These are questions I wondered as a kid, and as an adult, and I'm finally getting some answers. For that, I can share in your joy. :)



Originally posted by Exhaust Port
The thing I was getting at is the PT answered questions that were never really asked. The OT just layed it out there and didn't need any explaining to carry the story forward. Where did the DS come from? I never cared. It was just a massive battle station that someone built and the Emperor was using to spread terror with. Nuff said about that. All that I did care about was that the Rebel blew it out of the sky before Tarkin decided to smoke another planet. Along those lines, I don't care where Tarkin came from or who his tailor was. He was just an evil man that needed to be stopped. Yep!



Originally posted by Caesar
Midichlorians are in the first film to show that the force is not so much mystical as it is scientific. They give more reason for Luke and Leia to have "inherited" their father's ability. ANH as a stand alone movie misleads the viewer into thinking "anyone" could use the Force if he just believed devoutly enough (mystical / religious) while the rest of the OT shows that in fact the Force does have hereditary traits. I think "misleads" is too strong a term to use there, particularly since as the first out of the gate, that film should be used as the standard by which the rest have to follow. Also, the only other mention in the OT about how this all seems to work in terms of heredity is in ROTJ. The ESB soliloquey from Yoda most definitely describes the Force as something that anyone could tap into.

But as you say, ROTJ, seemed to veer from that course a tad, although Luke just telling Leia that she "has that power too" isn't really enough to turn the tide that the first two films set up. It is only with the Midichlorians in Episode I that Luke's ROTJ line appears to have more of a genetic bent to it. So for that, I'll blame TPM for suggesting something that wasn't really there to begin with.


Originally posted by Caesar
Midichlorians also exist in a larger sense to show symbiotic relationships but I think Lucas' execution of that angle was pretty weak -- besides, he already had the cool Naboo / Gungan symbiotic storyline going on.

:)
Yeah. I never quite grasped why George was going there or what he planned on doing with it. The two mentions in TPM of symbiotic relationships, that you bring up, are it. No more. So I am still perplexed as to the purpose of that road he never really utilized. :confused:


Originally posted by Exhaust Port
I don't think ANH is misleading. In TPM no indication is given that most people have no Midichlorians. In fact, if I remember correctly, Qui Gon says that Midichlorians are found in the cells of all living things. Luke and Leia inherited their fathers strong Midichlorian concentration making them more in tuned with the Force than the average person. I'm under the impression that any SW character could learn to use the Force just the weaker ones wouldn't be very good no matter how hard they try due to a their low count.


I also wouldn't give GL too much credit for the SW creation. Look at all the talented people involved in the creation of the movies. John Williams for the amazing music, the ILM staff for the very cool spaceship models and other special effects, THX technicians for the great sounds and the large number of other artists involved in the creation. Heck he hasn't even directed all the movies. How's that for creating SW?

Yes, GL had a vision but he also let a lot of other people run with it and that is what made SW what it is today. He says "build be a cool ship" and some guy spends a week putting together what he thinks a "cool ship" looks like. The area where GL has the most influence is the story. Well, guess what most fans have a problem with in the PT? The story. Just because a man has created fine art in the past doesn't mean that everything he touches will be good. Here are 3 words to prove that point:

Howard the Duck Quack! :) well spoken!

2-1B
05-29-2003, 12:55 PM
Originally posted by Exhaust Port
In TPM no indication is given that most people have no Midichlorians. In fact, if I remember correctly, Qui Gon says that Midichlorians are found in the cells of all living things. Luke and Leia inherited their fathers strong Midichlorian concentration making them more in tuned with the Force than the average person. I'm under the impression that any SW character could learn to use the Force just the weaker ones wouldn't be very good no matter how hard they try due to a their low count.

That's exactly what I was getting at. Yes, "they" all have midichlorians, some people are just more able than others.



Okay stillakid, "misleads" was a strong term -- I take it back. :)

Would you prefer "hoodwinked" ? :D :crazed:

The Overlord Returns
05-29-2003, 01:13 PM
Originally posted by stillakid

But the Prequels felt the necessity to try to explain it all. Midis'? What for? Why tell us this? What did we gain by knowing about Midichlorians that we couldn't have gotten instead from a scene that showed us that Anakin was special?

I won't argue with you about Midi's, as I personally feel it was a mistake in the prequels to "explain" the force. Notice how absent they were from AOTC? I think George may have realized as well.....


One problem with TPM, I feel, was having anakin be a child. The thing with kids is, they do ask those bloody annoying "how does this work" questions. GL was only having the lil pest be a kid. I personally would rather Have anakin be only slightly younger than Luke in ANH (hell, maybe even the same age) when he is discovered. It would make his aptitude for the force that much more impressive, helping to solve your "show us anakin is special" problem.........

mini-rock
05-29-2003, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by Exhaust Port
I also wouldn't give GL too much credit for the SW creation. Look at all the talented people involved in the creation of the movies. John Williams for the amazing music, the ILM staff for the very cool spaceship models and other special effects, THX technicians for the great sounds and the large number of other artists involved in the creation. Heck he hasn't even directed all the movies. How's that for creating SW?

Well, gee who wrote the stories in the first place? How much more "CREATOR" do you get than that:confused:? Yeah there were many other talents that helped (realize) bring GL's vision to the big screen, but that's what they were...help. THX, JW, ILM, the art dept, Mark, Harrison, Hayden, Natalie, etc. didn't create these movies, GL did.

I'm not sure if you have seen "The Beggining" on the EP1 disc or the 2 docs on the EP2 disc, but you can clrearly see that even though other talents are creating certain parts of the film, GL is still the final word on whether it goes or stays.

Exhaust Port
05-29-2003, 01:29 PM
I agree that explaining the force with something as strange as "it's little beings found in all living creatures" somewhat ruined the concept. It served no point.

I also think it was pointless and perhaps ruined it a little to have the mention that Anakin was a Virgin Birth. The implication of a religous overtone to the Anankin character was stupid.

Exhaust Port
05-29-2003, 02:18 PM
Originally posted by mini-rock
Well, gee who wrote the stories in the first place?

Well considering that a movie is a visual medium, the writing can't be given the entire credit for a good or bad movie. When a film wins an award the director gets the award not the writer. Why's that? Because he made the film.

Yes GL has final say on what makes the fill but that's the easy part. For example, you put in a request to a car manufacturer for a sleak sports car. They come forward with a Mustang, Ferrari GTO and Corvette. You feel the Corvette meets your vision so you take that one. Who gets the credit for creating the look of the car? The designer, not you.

The big thing GL is responsible for is what the characters say as he is the writer of the series. The problem most fans have had with the PT is the WRITING.

As I said in my first post, I like the PT but they're lacking. The big difference in the 2 series is I've discovered is the much too complex or over-written scripts. K.I.S.S.

DarthChuckMc
05-29-2003, 03:25 PM
Originally posted by stillakid
I don't understand your statement? "It's easy for us to criticize the movies because we aren't the ones in control..."? So, what you're saying is that if we were in control, it would be harder to criticize them? If that's the case, then you'd agree that perhaps George can't see the problems because he is too close to the project?

I'll try and clear up my thoughts on that statement.

We the viewers, can/will sit back and pick every piece of these movies apart, just because we can. We express our likes and dislikes about every minute detail, instead of just enjoying the films as a whole. We criticize the choices that GL made about any number of things, but we were not involved in any way in the outcome. Had we been there, actually calling the shots, writing the stories, coming up with concepts, choosing actors, etc., we probably wouldn't be as hard on the movies.

What you see as problems, GL more than likely doesn't. He obviously thinks what he has come up with works, and works well. If he thought something wasn't done right, he would've edited it out, or as we've seen with the SE, replaced.

I don't think GL being "too close to the project" is a bad thing. It's his vision. He knows what the message is he's trying to convey. Some people just have the opinion that it isn't coming across the "right" way, or "their" way.

You (not YOU Stilla or EP) may have done things differently, but the fact remains, you didn't make the movies. It isn't your vision. It isn't your concept. To bash and belittle a movie series because it didn't meet your expectations seems odd to me.

For some reason, it seems, to me at least, that people expected the PT to change their lives (like the OT did for some). To be something so profound, that they would walk out of the theater with a new outlook on life and the world we live in. The truth is...these are movies made to entertain the masses. They are a means of putting more money in GL's and 20th Century Fox's pockets. They are here to take you away from all of the drama and strife that you deal with on an everyday basis, and just let you "get away" for a couple of hours.

In short, go see the movies, eat some popcorn, drink a Cherry Coke, and ENJOY yourself. It doesn't HAVE to make sense. It doesn't HAVE to change you. As long as you're entertained.....even if it's not as good as you think it used to be.

HAVE FUN PEOPLE, quit worrying yourself over the little things, and enjoy the (BIG) picture.

mini-rock
05-29-2003, 03:28 PM
What you said was that you "would'nt give GL too much credit for the SW creation" b/c of all the different talents involved. The fact is that GL did create SW. He wrote the story for all of the films, not THX, not Skywalker Sound, not Kasdan or Kurtz or McCallum or Kersh or Brakett, or Williams. SW came from GL's mind. Now if you don't want to give him "too much credit" for his creation then that's up to you, but the fact is he did create SW.:)

"Yes GL has the final say on what makes the fill but that's the easy part."

Are you in the industry? Are you a director? You have done this kind of project before on this scale? If so please let me know what you have done so I may se you POV more clearly.

As for your car analogy GL didn't "put in an order" for an already made product. He told these guy's how he wanted it from the start. He gives his ideas from the get-go (story boards, etc.) to ILM to have his "vision" made not to buy an already finished product. Like I said this is made clear in the docs in the EP1&2 DVD's.:)

Exhaust Port
05-29-2003, 04:06 PM
Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
To bash and belittle a movie series because it didn't meet your expectations seems odd to me.

Just because a fan liked one installement of the series means that they can't critique any of the others? Movies are art and art is critiqued. Go to any gallery and listen to the fan of cubism discuss/critique different artists work. It's the nature of the beast.

Are you also against movie reviews? Aren't they nothing more than a critique of the directors vision and ability to pull it off? Roger Ebert who has seen more than 1 movie can be a lot harder on a particular film than any of us can. What's wrong with that? Nothing, that's the privilage of being the consumer.

Movie or TV series create expectations. That's how they work. They take information from a pre-existing example and build on it. Sometimes it's done well and sometimes it isn't. Star Trek 4 was great. Star Trek 5 sucked beyond imagine.

I'm no more incorrect in disliking a movie than one is for liking it. I feel the writing is weaker in the PT and you can't fault me for thinking that.


Originally posted by mini-rockthe fact is he did create SW.

I'm not denying that but the fact is we are discussing a movie as a whole not script writers. If you watch the end of any movie you'll realize that there are 100's of people that create what we see on the screen.

For example, ESB the story was written by GL but the screen play was written by Leigh Brackett and Lawrence Kasdan. The movie was directed by Irvin Kershner. How much of ESB do you hold GL responsible for? Surely you can't say 100%.

Remember those people at ILM and THX are artists not robots. GL asks for a bulky cruiser he calls the Millenium Falcon and it took an artists mealtime inspiration to create the ship we know as the MF now.

This is what my car example was trying to show. You put in a request for a sleak car and the manufacturers bring you 3 of their designs. GL does the same. He doens't draw out a Tie Fighter as we know it and say "build that." He doesn't draw a Stormtrooper and say "build that." He gives direction but lets the artists create the final product.

No I'm not a director but most of us have been in a position of managing large groups of people at one point and we know that it's easy to bark directions than perform the work. And it's not like GL is managing every freakin person.

The writing stinks, you can blame the writer. The movie stinks you blame the director. In this case those 2 positions are filled by the same person. The film's are enjoyable = Good Job GL. The film's writing is poor = Bad Job GL.

mini-rock
05-29-2003, 04:34 PM
Well, I'm off to see The Matrix Reloaded again, but you can bet when I get back we will finish this debate buddy!!;):):p:D:crazed:

Exhaust Port
05-29-2003, 04:35 PM
:( But I don't want to wait. ;)

stillakid
05-29-2003, 04:49 PM
Originally posted by mini-rock
Well, gee who wrote the stories in the first place? How much more "CREATOR" do you get than that:confused:?

Yes, you are confused as evidenced by your question. George Lucas shopped around a version of The Star Wars to every studio in town. If you've read one of those early drafts you'll see some very significant differences in what he wrote down and what eventually ended up on screen.

After getting some help from his friend Francis Ford Coppola, George managed to get the attention and committment from 20th Century Fox. The screenplay, by all accounts, was a mess and required significant rewriting if Fox was going to go through with it. Summoning the help of his friends, Willem Huyck and Gloria Katz, Star Wars was reshaped into the story that we all (except MiniRock) love today.

The tradition of help continued with The Empire Strikes Back when Lucas hired Leigh Brackett to write the screenplay. Unfortunately for her, she died before completing it. Lawrence Kasdan was brought in. He started all over and turned out what has arguably become the "best" Star Wars film yet, at least as far as the general rumbling goes.

Kasdan returned to write the screenplay for ROTJ.

A few years later, George Lucas chose to write the screenplay for TPM entirely on his own. I'll remind you of that early draft of The Star Wars which was a mess according to all involved. Not surprisingly, there are eerie similarities between that early draft and the style and substance of TPM. Not coincidentally, Lucas had help with neither of those.

Presumably, in reaction to the groundswell of fan discontent with TPM, Lucas brought in a co-writer for AOTC, Jonathan Hales, although, according to the murmers around town, Mr. Hales was given little of the creative freedom that had been afforded Huyck, Katz, and Kasdan some years previous. Political move? Maybe.

There was a rumor for a while prior to TPM that Frank Darabont would be brought in to write the screenplay, but apparently (not apparently really, it's pretty much fact), Mr. Lucas deigns to hire union (WGA) members if he can help it, so that plan was off. For some reason, he (as well as chaps like James Cameron) aren't keen on using production talent from the States who are guild affiliated. Go figure.

Anyway, that's the long and short of it. Did George create the idea? Sure. He's a great visionary. Did he write the stories and screenplays? No, not the OT ones.

stillakid
05-29-2003, 05:02 PM
Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
I'll try and clear up my thoughts on that statement.

We the viewers, can/will sit back and pick every piece of these movies apart, just because we can. We express our likes and dislikes about every minute detail, instead of just enjoying the films as a whole. We criticize the choices that GL made about any number of things, but we were not involved in any way in the outcome. Had we been there, actually calling the shots, writing the stories, coming up with concepts, choosing actors, etc., we probably wouldn't be as hard on the movies.

What you see as problems, GL more than likely doesn't. He obviously thinks what he has come up with works, and works well. If he thought something wasn't done right, he would've edited it out, or as we've seen with the SE, replaced.

I don't think GL being "too close to the project" is a bad thing. It's his vision. He knows what the message is he's trying to convey. Some people just have the opinion that it isn't coming across the "right" way, or "their" way.

You (not YOU Stilla or EP) may have done things differently, but the fact remains, you didn't make the movies. It isn't your vision. It isn't your concept. To bash and belittle a movie series because it didn't meet your expectations seems odd to me.

For some reason, it seems, to me at least, that people expected the PT to change their lives (like the OT did for some). To be something so profound, that they would walk out of the theater with a new outlook on life and the world we live in. The truth is...these are movies made to entertain the masses. They are a means of putting more money in GL's and 20th Century Fox's pockets. They are here to take you away from all of the drama and strife that you deal with on an everyday basis, and just let you "get away" for a couple of hours.

In short, go see the movies, eat some popcorn, drink a Cherry Coke, and ENJOY yourself. It doesn't HAVE to make sense. It doesn't HAVE to change you. As long as you're entertained.....even if it's not as good as you think it used to be.

HAVE FUN PEOPLE, quit worrying yourself over the little things, and enjoy the (BIG) picture.

I didn't and don't expect the Prequels to "change my life." What I had a very justified expectation to see was a continuation of the series in the same high quality form that had been established by the original films.

On top of that, I'm not judging these films by what I want to see. I'm judging them based on what's there and whether it works or not relative to the basic guidelines of good storytelling. I could care less if TPM is a Star Wars movie or not. In a vacuum, it is a poorly told story. Relative to the rest of the films, it's even worse. Not because I wanted it a different way, but because it just is a poorly told story.

And you're assuming the best of Mr. Lucas. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt also, but I also know when to cut my losses and face uncomfortable truths. Lucas screwed up. Not only that, he KNOWS it. He admitted it on camera, and they included it on the DVD extras for TPM. The man is not infallable. Just because he says something is "the best it can be" does not mean that it is.

And just because I wasn't there involved in the process does not preclude me from being able to critique it, for good or bad. It just means I wasn't there. But I did watch it. That ability coupled with my own experience with writing and film production give me more than enough credibility to break the project down, see what worked, what didn't, try to figure out why, and come up with a conclusion based on something more than how I felt that day. There's more to critique than blowing steam and opinions around.

There is a process to examining a film, which amazingly enough, is very similar to the process that writers use before the screenplay is even finished. Sadly, Mr. Lucas chose to not engage in that process during the writing, during actual production, nor after general release.



Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
It doesn't HAVE to make sense.
Really? Why not? Isn't it more enjoyable when it does make sense? Again, I've said this before and I'll say it again, I was just as pumped as anyone else to see a new Star Wars film after all those years. I didn't go in looking for problems. But when they leap off the screen at you just like a 3D spectacular might, it's hard to ignore and "just sit back and ENJOY."

DarthChuckMc
05-29-2003, 05:36 PM
Like I mentioned....NONE of the comments I made were directed at YOU or Exaust Port, or anyone in this forum in particular. It was meant as a general statement covering a broad audience related to actual conversations I have heard and had with other SW fans and "regular" movie goers.


How you get that "Lucas screwed up" is beyond my thought process I suppose. Maybe I'm just too close minded or simple to understand your position on the matter. Everyone on here may not be as intelluctually gifted as others are, and maybe that is the real problem. The rest of us PT loving 'tards just don't get it, and probably never will because we are too vapid to comprehend the atrocity that GL has delivered to us in the form of the PT. We are just the spoon fed drooling idiots of the world, and we have latched on to the SW universe because it has pretty shinny robots and laserbeams.

Why only one sect of the discussion can have an opinion and everyone else are just sucking the teet in which GL has layed before us, seems shallow and childish.

BTW, were you an only child? Just curious....

stillakid
05-29-2003, 05:40 PM
Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
Like I mentioned....NONE of the comments I made were directed at YOU or Exaust Port, or anyone in this forum in particular. It was meant as a general statement covering a broad audience related to actual conversations I have heard and had with other SW fans and "regular" movie goers.

Same for me, though others like to personalize my comments as if I am going for their throats. I like to discuss the topics themselves, not the people involved. There's no point to the latter.


Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
How you get that "Lucas screwed up" is beyond my thought process I suppose. Maybe I'm just too close minded or simple to understand your position on the matter. Everyone on here may not be as intelluctually gifted as others are, and maybe that is the real problem. The rest of us PT loving 'tards just don't get it, and probably never will because we are too vapid to comprehend the atrocity that GL has delivered to us in the form of the PT. We are just the spoon fed drooling idiots of the world, and we have latched on to the SW universe because it has pretty shinny robots and laserbeams.

Why only one sect of the discussion can have an opinion and everyone else are just sucking the teet in which GL has layed before us, seems shallow and childish.

BTW, were you an only child? Just curious....

No. :)

And every sect is allowed an "opinion," but not every opinion is based on solid reasoning. That goes for anything in this world, not just films. Hitler had the opinion that Jews weren't worthy of life. Heck, he's entitled to his own opinion, but I challenge anyone to suggest that his reasoning was sound. Like it or not. That's up to the individual and has never been argued.

mini-rock
05-29-2003, 10:18 PM
Originally posted by Exhaust Port
I feel the writing is weaker in the PT and you can't fault me for thinking that.

I'm not sure if this was directed at me, but I do not fault you for your opinion. Where I'm confused is when you said that you "wouldn't give GL too much credit for the SW creation" when it's clear that if GL had never sat down and with a pen & paper and wrote the rough draft that would later become SW no one else would have. I do agree with you EP that to get it up on screen it took many talents, but the fact still remains GL is the creator of SW. If he had never wriiten it (created it), we wouldn't be sitting here having this discussion. :)

Exhaust Port
05-29-2003, 10:27 PM
I feel GL's initial creation and what we as fans see as a final product are not the same. Beyond writing the story every other item needed to pull a movie off changes/delutes the script. Sure GL gave us the SW genre but it was all the other people invovled who made it what we see in the movies.

Again, my only complaint with the PT is the method of the plot. That is a writing thing not a techinical issue like Special FX or casting.

DarthChuckMc
05-29-2003, 10:37 PM
Who's sitting? I'm standing on one leg. Isn't everybody?

I don't expect everyone to agree on everything. (Not that anyone implied that I do) I just know that I see one guy getting beat up in multiple threads about the same thing...his opinion. I understand EP and Stilla's position on liking one trilogy better than the other. To each his own, but lay off the personal stuff fellas.

You may say that the fact that you saw the OT through a childs eyes hasn't skewed your opinion of the PT, but I can't believe that at all. Maybe I can just imagine myself as a kid again, watching the PT the same way I watched the OT, in shock and awe.

Call me what you will, but everytime I hear the Fox fanfare and see the Lucasfilm logo, chills run through me, and I get a little misty eyed, because I know what's coming next. It makes me feel like I've been transported back to 1977, and I'm living the excitment all over again.

Maybe I'm the only one. :(

Exhaust Port
05-29-2003, 10:58 PM
My problem of the plot for me stems from the fact that I watched it through a childs eyes. Trade Federations? Blockades? Senate hearings? It's all a bit too confusing for the sake of being confusing in my opinion. How can a kid be excited the same having to slug through the dialog and plot when the OT is a bit more clean cut and stream lined.

I still like the PT don't get me wrong.

DarthChuckMc
05-29-2003, 11:12 PM
I agree about the streamlined plot.

My kids don't seem to mind. They went with me to the theater 4 times to see TPM and 2 for AOTC. When TPM vhs came out, they watched it everyday for about 2 months, I actually had to buy a second copy. Since AOTC came out on DVD, they've watched it probably more than even I would like...and I LOVE AOTC!
I started them on OT practically from birth. My son is 7 now, and my daughter is almost 9. They actually leave the room when I put on my OT dvds...except for Jedi, they'll sit through it with me.
Maybe Stilla is on to something about the way the PT play out like video games. All we had to do back in the 70s and early 80s was go see SW, play with our toys, and watch cartoons. Kids today have ALOT more options available. If GL IS making the movies to be appealing to children, maybe he's purposely adding the "video game" feel to keep the youngsters interested. He's a marketing madman! Of course, that doesn't make some of us fans happy, because it isn't the same "feel" as the OT had, but these are different times, and they call for different measures. If he wants to keep future generations interested in his mythos/saga/morality plays, he has to rope them in while they're young, so they can tell their kids how GREAT SW is, and the cycle will continue like it has for the last 25 years. It is all happening as he's forseen......bwah-hahahahahahahahaha

stillakid
05-29-2003, 11:22 PM
Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
If GL IS making the movies to be appealing to children, maybe he's purposely adding the "video game" feel to keep the youngsters interested. He's a marketing madman!

See, I don't mind having that element in there...heck, in any film for that matter, just so long as it isn't at the expense of telling the story. George, that is, the younger George, always talked about how the FX were just the tool to telling the story. He didn't have a lot of wide shots of things, like Jabba's Sandbarge, to just show off the work they did. Stuff like that.

For that matter, the OT is full of "video game" potential. Forget potential, I've played Star Wars games since Atari gave me a snowspeeder to fly. (It was cool then)

But the difference is that the OT wasn't written with that kind of "marketing" in mind. He (with plenty of help...with the OT) wrote a story that just happened to have some elements in it that lent themselves to the burgeoning video game market, whereas the Prequels have sequences that are gratuitously designed around that theme (see: Megaman sequence in AOTC).

I like playing in the Star Wars Universe as much as the next guy, whether it be with my action figure collection or on my Gamecube. But the movie should be the story...the toys should be the toys...and n'er the twain shall meet. In my opinion. :)

mini-rock
05-29-2003, 11:31 PM
Originally posted by DarthChuckMc
Who's sitting? I'm standing on one leg. Isn't everybody?

I don't expect everyone to agree on everything. (Not that anyone implied that I do) I just know that I see one guy getting beat up in multiple threads about the same thing...his opinion. I understand EP and Stilla's position on liking one trilogy better than the other. To each his own, but lay off the personal stuff fellas.

You may say that the fact that you saw the OT through a childs eyes hasn't skewed your opinion of the PT, but I can't believe that at all. Maybe I can just imagine myself as a kid again, watching the PT the same way I watched the OT, in shock and awe.

Call me what you will, but everytime I hear the Fox fanfare and see the Lucasfilm logo, chills run through me, and I get a little misty eyed, because I know what's coming next. It makes me feel like I've been transported back to 1977, and I'm living the excitment all over again.

Maybe I'm the only one. :(

No, there is another. (Bet you didn't see that one coming ;):D)

stillakid
05-29-2003, 11:35 PM
Originally posted by mini-rock
I'm not sure if this was directed at me, but I do not fault you for your opinion. Where I'm confused is when you said that you "wouldn't give GL too much credit for the SW creation" when it's clear that if GL had never sat down and with a pen & paper and wrote the rough draft that would later become SW no one else would have. I do agree with you EP that to get it up on screen it took many talents, but the fact still remains GL is the creator of SW. If he had never wriiten it (created it), we wouldn't be sitting here having this discussion. :)

I think that it's a question of percentages. I mean, when you've got an art form which requires the participation of literally hundreds of people, what right does any one individual have to claim that the final product is "his"? This very question has plagued the Writer's Guild forever when it has to mediate situations in which multiple writers were hired and versions upon versions of the same story were hashed out.

So, yeah, Lucas dreamed up this great place which would tell the classic mythology's while using influences from early Japanese culture to his own teenage cruising years. But, aside from that general outline and the guidelines set forth, how much credit should Lucas claim as it is a quantifiable fact that so many others shaped the specifics of what he only laid out in generalities? The auteur theory is as outdated as Smell-o-vision, yet that myth of filmmaking "genius" still exists even today.

Speaking of Smell-o-Vision, maybe Lucas still subscribes to it which would explain why he took a stab at producing a non-polished screenplay for TPM. Or maybe he just decided that he wanted to see what he could accomplish on his own...sort of a self-test. Heck, he can afford it, so why not? :) But did he have to test his mettle with this franchise? :cry: Why couldn't it have been Howard? :(

JediTricks
05-30-2003, 04:59 AM
Originally posted by The Overlord Returns
I won't argue with you about Midi's, as I personally feel it was a mistake in the prequels to "explain" the force. Notice how absent they were from AOTC? I think George may have realized as well..... Agreed, though as I often point out, even in TPM nobody else really supports Qui-Gon's take on midiclorians; they admit they exist, but beyond that QGJ gets nobody else to admit the midis are what he suggests.

Originally posted by The Overlord Returns
One problem with TPM, I feel, was having anakin be a child. The thing with kids is, they do ask those bloody annoying "how does this work" questions. GL was only having the lil pest be a kid. I personally would rather Have anakin be only slightly younger than Luke in ANH (hell, maybe even the same age) when he is discovered. It would make his aptitude for the force that much more impressive, helping to solve your "show us anakin is special" problem......... Totally agree, I've always felt that way. And even in the illustrated screenplay, you can see that initially, Lucas had the character more as a 12-year-old than a 9-year-old (played by a 7-year-old).


Originally posted by Exhaust Port
I also think it was pointless and perhaps ruined it a little to have the mention that Anakin was a Virgin Birth. The implication of a religous overtone to the Anankin character was stupid. In the screenplay, Shmi is more vague about this, the line reads:
SHMI: There was no father, that I know of.
It's left more vague that way, she's a slave so she could have been used in less-than-honorable ways with this result and not know. I think this would have lent balance to the rather striking revalation in the film, but sadly he didn't.

Exhaust Port
05-31-2003, 01:27 PM
Originally posted by JediTricks

SHMI: There was no father, that I know of.

I never did understand that comment/answer. She doesn't know if there was a father? Was she not there? It's either a yes or no answer. Did you have sex? Yes! Than that person is the father. No? Than it's a bit strange that there would be a kid.

mini-rock
05-31-2003, 01:59 PM
I prefer the line she used in the movie "There was no father. I carried him, I gave birth to him. I can't explain what happened." Something like that. Qui-Gon knows this kid is strong with the force, and when he here's Shmi's answer he's like HOLY CRAP!! Is this the one who will bring balance? I love that part, perfect.:)

Exhaust Port
05-31-2003, 02:33 PM
That line is much better. It's strange that Qui-Gon didn't question more about the virgin birth. Any normal person would have been asking tons of questions regarding the whole issue. Qui-Gon was more along the lines of "Ahhh.....the good ol' Virgin Birth" like it happens enough that it's not a suprise.

mini-rock
05-31-2003, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by Exhaust Port
That line is much better. It's strange that Qui-Gon didn't question more about the virgin birth. Any normal person would have been asking tons of questions regarding the whole issue. Qui-Gon was more along the lines of "Ahhh.....the good ol' Virgin Birth" like it happens enough that it's not a suprise.

It's not said anywhere in the film that Shmi is a virgin, only that for Anakin there was no father. And I'm sure there isn't a single Jedi who doesn't know of the one who will bring the force back into balance. Qui-Gon is still not sure if Ani is the one, and is why he has his midi count taken after Shmi gives him the info.:)

stillakid
05-31-2003, 06:03 PM
Oh for god's sakes. One post he backs up the claim that this is a virgin birth...the next he refutes it because EP uses the line in vain. I can't keep up with MR's shifting logic. I'm I the only one?

For cryin' out loud, Shmi says as much that hmm, there was NO father...I don't know what happened. Sure, maybe her plantation owner took some liberties on those cold lonely Tatooine nights, but that's not what she was saying in response to Qui Gon. This was a VIRGIN BIRTH. Lucas was creating a Jesus parallel through and through.

mini-rock
05-31-2003, 08:01 PM
I watched that scene just a little bit ago just to be sure on the dialogue between Qui-Gon & Shmi, and I was right. There is no mention of her being a virgin.

I remember I first got TPM DVD I watched it with a friend of mine who is a yoth minister, and mentioned the "virgin birth" reference to him before watching te film, but after he pointed out that nowhere was it even mentioned that Shmi was a virgin. He is right, and I had only assumed that she was a virgin. So, anyway I just thought I'd let you know Exhaust Port that I thought the same thing at one time, but in the film and docs there is no mention of Shmi being a virgin.:)

James Boba Fettfield
05-31-2003, 08:13 PM
Virgin birth, meaning she didn't have "relations" during the timeframe that Anakin was conceived.

Having a virgin birth is different that being a complete virgin in my eyes.

Exhaust Port
05-31-2003, 09:22 PM
I agree with that JBF. I understand a Virgin Birth to mean no sexual relations conceived the child. I didn't mean to say or ever felt that Shmi was a virgin. It always seemed to me from the dialog that she had not had sex that resulted in Anakin.

mini-rock
05-31-2003, 10:14 PM
Originally posted by Exhaust Port
I agree with that JBF. I understand a Virgin Birth to mean no sexual relations conceived the child. I didn't mean to say or ever felt that Shmi was a virgin. It always seemed to me from the dialog that she had not had sex that resulted in Anakin.

OK I see.:D

stillakid
06-01-2003, 07:58 AM
Originally posted by mini-rock
OK I see.:D

Two years later. :rolleyes:

My theory of "bright shiny objects" distracting people from the story itself seems to be gaining ground. ;)

Exhaust Port
06-01-2003, 11:44 AM
I'm not a religous person but the only implication that making Anakin the result of a virgin birth is that he was god-like. The only virgin-birth story that I'm aware of is Jesus. Now we have GL make the "chosen one" come about as result of a virgin birth and then he has to prove his position by performing miricles of a sort.

Now we're all aware that GL takes inspiration from legends, lore, etc. but I must say my first reaction (even as a non-religious person) was of disappointment that he stooped to drawing parallels between his story and the story of the savior of one of the most popular religions in the world. Of all the reactions that I remember from the opening night of TPM, I distinctly remember a overall "oh please :rolleyes: " in the theater when that issue was addressed by Shmi and Qui-Gon.

I wouldn't mind when the Archival SW series hits DVD that this scene was redone.

stillakid
06-01-2003, 01:21 PM
Originally posted by Exhaust Port
I'm not a religous person but the only implication that making Anakin the result of a virgin birth is that he was god-like. The only virgin-birth story that I'm aware of is Jesus. Now we have GL make the "chosen one" come about as result of a virgin birth and then he has to prove his position by performing miricles of a sort.

Now we're all aware that GL takes inspiration from legends, lore, etc. but I must say my first reaction (even as a non-religious person) was of disappointment that he stooped to drawing parallels between his story and the story of the savior of one of the most popular religions in the world. Of all the reactions that I remember from the opening night of TPM, I distinctly remember a overall "oh please :rolleyes: " in the theater when that issue was addressed by Shmi and Qui-Gon.

I wouldn't mind when the Archival SW series hits DVD that this scene was redone.

As I've mentioned previously, I actually enjoyed the IMAX version of Attack of the Clones. Though I have no idea for sure, it appears as though other more rational minds made the editing choices which excised most of the worst moments from the original release.

In any case, I certainly wouldn't mind seeing the same doctoring done to The Phantom Menace. Aside from chopping out some of the more stupid stuff, as the one you mentioned above, that movie also needs some alternative scenes added to bridge certain sequences and concepts together better. It's a big job, but then again, Lucas has the resources. Now all he needs is to first admit that there are problems and second, the will to do it.

2-1B
06-01-2003, 01:52 PM
Lucas has said more than once that the Anakin origin is NOT primarily a Jesus reference. He was looking more at Eastern religions . . .

If you think Christianity is the only religion with a virgin birth, you're quite mistaken. :D

Exhaust Port
06-01-2003, 02:12 PM
I'll be the first to admit that I don't know everyting about religion. What other religions are there that have a virgin-birth for their main figure?

mini-rock
06-01-2003, 02:15 PM
Originally posted by Caesar
Lucas has said more than once that the Anakin origin is NOT primarily a Jesus reference. He was looking more at Eastern religions . . .

If you think Christianity is the only religion with a virgin birth, you're quite mistaken. :D


And this is exactly why I said "OK I see" to EP's and JBF's POV, to avoid getting into a religious discussion. I know what the bible says and anyone who has read the bible more than once knows as well. I leave it at that.:)

2-1B
06-01-2003, 02:43 PM
I think it's safe to "discuss religion" within the boundaries of Star Wars. It's not like we're arguing for or against a certain belief, just drawing comparisons.

As for other religious stories of virgin births, here's a list I swiped online. :D


An Egyptian Virgin Birth story told about two thousand years before Christianity was founded, with many details identical with those to be found in the Gospel stories. Another virgin goddess and child. The virgin birth of Horus. Statuettes of the virgin Isis and the child Horus used to represent Mary and the infant Jesus. Other pre-Christian figures similarly employed. The miraculous birth of Apis. The virgin mother of Ra. The virgin births of Attis, of Dionysos, of Jason, and of Perseus. The religions in vogue at the time when Christianity arose. How all the men-gods worshipped in these religions were said to have been miraculously born. Adonis, Osiris, and Mithra. Legend about Plato's virgin birth. Glorification of virginity. The story of Hypermnestra. Unicorns and virgins. Vestal virgins. Chinese myth about the race being descended from a virgin mother. The virgin birth of Gautama, the Buddha. Details of this story which correspond to the later Christian story. Rama's miraculous birth. The virgin and otherwise remarkable births of many other Indian divinities. The Pandavas, Karna, Kansa, Kartikeya, Garuda, Ganesa, Marisha. A god incarnate in a human being so late as the seventeenth century. Kings looked upon as gods and assuming divine titles and honours. Legends about their births. Sons of gods. The Pharaohs. Alexander the Great. The love of gods for mortal women; Silvia and the god Mars. Rhea Silvia, the mother of Romulus and Remus. Laymen and priests posing as the divine lovers. Examples in fact and in fiction. Mundus. The god Astrabacus. The birth of Hercules. Nectanebus. Women as mistresses of the gods. Mortals hailed as gods and given divine titles. Ptolemy. Lysander. Demetrius and others. The rise of new religions in the East. Legends of the virgin or otherwise unusual births of great conquerors or their ancestors. Zingis Khan. Togrul Beg, the Seljuk. Nurhachu. Targitaus. Scythes. Sargon. Gudea. Caesar. Macduff. The virgin or otherwise remarkable births of the founders of the great world-religions. Lao-Tzu. Confucius. Zoroaster. (Mohammed.) The virgin birth of Terebinthus, the legendary originator of the doctrines of Manes. An ephemeral legend about St. Dominic. A Christian sect which believes that John the Baptist was conceived by a kiss. Fairy tales about the miraculous impregnation of women. A tale from Sicily. Danae. A Siberian tale. General belief in the truth of such stories. How gossip spreads, and how some people boast of seeing things which have never occurred. The virgin-birth stories of Mexico. Huitzilopotchli. The birth of gods and goddesses fully armed. Karna. Athena. Conception by the touch of a flower. Mars. The virgin mother Here, and the recovery of her virginity when lost. Stories from the South Pacific, from China, and from North America. A virgin-born being who lives a life of self-sacrifice for the good of others. Gods incarnate in animals. Archaic virgin-birth myths. Sources of the myths. Phallicism. Astronomy. The virgin goddesses and the mothers of the gods in Roman and Greek mythology. Mary as "the mother of God," a refined version of the older conceptions. Christian attempts to give a spiritual explanation of the story of a physical act.

There certainly ARE parallels between Anakin / the prophecy / Christianity, there are just so many more that predate the Christian story. Lucas has acknowledged his interest in so many different religions and myths . . . it's just natural for us to draw an initial comparison to Christianity since a good number of us are most familiar with that religion. :)

Then again, I also found another website which claims

No other religion can claim such a powerful truth. Then Christianity is more than a religion. The virgin birth saw to that.

Of course, now we are getting into matters of "truth" so I better stop. :D

Exhaust Port
06-01-2003, 03:08 PM
Interesting read.


Wow, could this be the first SAFE religious discussion in SSG history? :)

stillakid
06-01-2003, 03:47 PM
Originally posted by Exhaust Port
Interesting read.


Wow, could this be the first SAFE religious discussion in SSG history? :)

Joseph Campbell discusses the numerous influences that Lucas drew from in his book, THE POWER OF MYTH. In it, he surmises (with considerable proof) that most of our modern religious beliefs and stories were derived from similar sources.

For example, most of the practiced religions across the globe have some kind of "flood" story in which the "god" wipes the world clean of sin and sinful people to allow it to be reborn. And, in fact, many of those "stories" sometimes derive from, what we think are, actual historical events. Not that some guy named Noah built an ark and filled it, but that a specific area did experience flood conditions enough so that the "primitive" inhabitants would have thought that their entire world was endangered. Of course, those simpler times encouraged natural events like that to be blamed on a higher power. Once you've done that, then the question arises as to "why." Naturally "sin" would be the favorite idea and POOF! the mythology spreads and becomes engrained into religious dogma.

I'm not up on my "virgin births" mythology, but Lucas clearly had intentions of indoctrinating that concept into his own fictional story. Schmi's dialogue pretty much says so:


SHMI : There was no father, that I know of...I carried him, I gave him birth...I can't explain what happened.

If she was just uncertain as to which schlep was the daddy, she wouldn't have said it that way. I suppose she could be implying that Watto came in and took advantage of that slave/master relationship one night, but that also seems unlikely.

As far as the specific "Catholic" references go, the only one I recall being specific was the costuming of the Emperor's Imperial Guards. The red cloaks weren't meant to sort of emulate the Cardinals in the Vatican.

Exhaust Port
06-01-2003, 03:54 PM
I remember that the Code of Hammerabi (sp?) reads the same as the 10 Commandments. Hey, once you come up with a good idea why change it?

mini-rock
06-01-2003, 05:21 PM
First let's make sure that EVERYONE has the correct line that was said in the movie.

"There was no father. I carried him, I gave birth, I raised him. I can't explain what happened." - Shmi

stillakid
06-01-2003, 06:36 PM
Originally posted by mini-rock
First let's make sure that EVERYONE has the correct line that was said in the movie.

"There was no father. I carried him, I gave birth, I raised him. I can't explain what happened." - Shmi

I took my quote from the screenplay, but the actual film quote is even more direct about it being a virgin birth. Thanks for the clarification and agreeing with everyone here. :)

Exhaust Port
06-01-2003, 08:58 PM
I swear I hear her mumble something after that line. Next time you watch it, see if you can hear her say very quietly "I was so drunk." :D

stillakid
06-01-2003, 10:19 PM
Originally posted by Exhaust Port
I swear I hear her mumble something after that line. Next time you watch it, see if you can hear her say very quietly "I was so drunk." :D

I think that Shmi was in a sororiety (I Phelta Thi, I think). ;)

mini-rock
06-01-2003, 10:45 PM
Originally posted by Exhaust Port
I swear I hear her mumble something after that line. Next time you watch it, see if you can hear her say very quietly "I was so drunk." :D

LMAO! :D That must be where her skank of a grand daughter Leia get's it from.:)

JediTricks
06-02-2003, 03:45 AM
Originally posted by Exhaust Port
I never did understand that comment/answer. She doesn't know if there was a father? Was she not there? It's either a yes or no answer. Did you have sex? Yes! Than that person is the father. No? Than it's a bit strange that there would be a kid. She could have been drugged, mentally blocked the sexual abuse, or if you like outrageous theories...

Qui-Gon Jinn - in an attempt to fulfill an arcane prophecy about 'a vergence in the Force creating a chosen one who will bring balance to the Force' so he can solidify the "living force" Jedi sect's beliefs - fathers Anakin with a slave living in the outer-rim and then wipes her mind of the events. :D



Originally posted by Caesar
I think it's safe to "discuss religion" within the boundaries of Star Wars. It's not like we're arguing for or against a certain belief, just drawing comparisons.That would be correct. So long as the focus is honestly and directly within the boundries of SW without proselytizing, have at it.


BTW people, this discussion seems to be totally focused now on a non-Classic Trilogy item... wouldn't it make more sense in the Ep 1 section?

stillakid
06-03-2003, 01:07 AM
Originally posted by JediTricks

Qui-Gon Jinn - in an attempt to fulfill an arcane prophecy about 'a vergence in the Force creating a chosen one who will bring balance to the Force' so he can solidify the "living force" Jedi sect's beliefs - fathers Anakin with a slave living in the outer-rim and then wipes her mind of the events. :D


In DUNE, a story which George admits fully to borrowing from, the Bene Gesserit are derived from an even older order known as the Missionaria Protectiva. What the M.P. did was wander the known universe and plant the seeds of "prophecy" in order to protect future generations of the order in the event any of them ever ran into trouble. These weren't true prophecies, but rather they were essentially lies implanted into the religions of gullible primitive people.

I haven't really explored this idea fully as it relates to The Phantom Menace, but it has occurred to me that perhaps this "prophecy of the One" business was concocted by Lucas in a similar vein.

Thoughts?

Exhaust Port
06-03-2003, 09:40 AM
So perhaps there is a master race or cult that is responsible for spawning the Jedi and Sith with the Force/Midichlorians being their seed? Very interesting thought. I think that story would be great to see explored in movies VII and beyond. :D

JediTricks
06-04-2003, 02:59 AM
Perhaps the Bendu would be this race, but I'm not suggesting anything as grand of scale, more like QGJ believing in a relatively minor, vague prophecy that can be interpreted to support his views and beliefs on midis and the living force. His belief is in minority and not supported by the Jedi council, so in desparation he artificially fulfils the prophecy (which in of itself may be self-fulfilling this way, but that's awful complicated/convoluted to go into here) so his actions based on fear indirectly destroy the Jedi order.

2-1B
06-04-2003, 05:18 AM
Wow JT, for a character inserted into the script so late in the game, QGJ sure has a big role to play ! :p

Hmmm, had Lucas just gone with Obi-Wan and not added Qui-Gon, would the midichlorians still be a part of TPM? My guess is yes they would. Obi-Wan would have been the one going on about the midi count . . . would we be led to believe that Obi-Wan was "wrong" about them as you suggest Qui-Gon is?

I can't answer that for sure, however from that perspective I think it is fairly certain that Lucas DID intend for Jinn's midichlorian discovery to be 'factual' within the eyes of the Jedi.

I'm not sure if my point is coming across clearly, all I'm suggesting is that there is no conspiracy revolving Jinn and the midis. He's not "wrong" about them. Maybe Lucas wrote it poorly or didn't explain enough, that's certainly up for debate. :)

The Overlord Returns
06-04-2003, 09:57 AM
Originally posted by Exhaust Port
So perhaps there is a master race or cult that is responsible for spawning the Jedi and Sith with the Force/Midichlorians being their seed? Very interesting thought. I think that story would be great to see explored in movies VII and beyond. :D

Man, those Illuminati really get around....... ;)

Dar Basra
06-04-2003, 11:14 AM
Originally posted by Shmi
"There was no father. I carried him, I gave birth, I raised him. I can't explain what happened." - Shmi
Maybe the problem is that Shmi's Mother just never had that little talk with her explaining the birds and the bees, so Shmi doesn't realize that the one-night stand with the tramp freightor pilot in a Mos Eisley back-room is what led to the birth.

Exhaust Port
06-04-2003, 11:40 AM
Maybe one drunk night she wandered into the fertility clinic and <BAM> next thing she knows she's pregnant.

stillakid
06-04-2003, 11:50 AM
Originally posted by Dar Basra
Maybe the problem is that Shmi's Mother just never had that little talk with her explaining the birds and the bees, so Shmi doesn't realize that the one-night stand with the tramp freightor pilot in a Mos Eisley back-room is what led to the birth.

Shmi: But it's not mine! I swear! I have no idea how it got in there officer.

:D

JediTricks
06-10-2003, 12:22 AM
Originally posted by Caesar
Wow JT, for a character inserted into the script so late in the game, QGJ sure has a big role to play ! :p If you're gonna add a red herring at the last minute, why not a biiiiig one? :D His character in the film is almost everything originally written for Obi-Wan.


Originally posted by Caesar
Hmmm, had Lucas just gone with Obi-Wan and not added Qui-Gon, would the midichlorians still be a part of TPM? My guess is yes they would. Obi-Wan would have been the one going on about the midi count . . . would we be led to believe that Obi-Wan was "wrong" about them as you suggest Qui-Gon is?

I can't answer that for sure, however from that perspective I think it is fairly certain that Lucas DID intend for Jinn's midichlorian discovery to be 'factual' within the eyes of the Jedi.That's a MASSIVE stretch there IMO, you're guessing that the midis would be in the script no matter what based only on your opinion, right? I disagree with the assumption that they must have been in the story when QGJ didn't exist and Anakin was 12 years old, midichlorians don't seem to be a major hinge point in the story at all, merely a mechanical plot device to give a quantifiable value to how powerful Anakin is with the Force.

If Lucas doesn't solidify the midis in Episode III, I think there certainly is wiggle room for Ep 1 add-ons like this and the 2nd Force ("the Living Force" theory that QGJ subscribes to and teaches to Obi-Wan even when in contrast to Master Yoda's teachings) because only 1 movie character ever in the franchise has shown them to the audience in specific ways with positive support (I don't think you can count Padawan Obi-Wan since he's learning from QGJ in the film and shows no substantial belief in them in Ep 2 or Eps 4 through 6) and that character is shown to be a rogue.

2-1B
06-10-2003, 01:06 AM
Yes JT, I am basing that assumption only on my opinion - I have read nothing from Lucas or anyone else which would give me that impression.

I WOULD really like to hear from Lucas as to when exactly the midichlorians came into the picture. They didn't hide the fact that Jinn was inserted late in the game . . . but something tells me that no matter what the real story is, Lucas would tell us that the midchlorians were "always" meant to be a part of TPM. ;)

I dunno, Lucas seems pretty fond of the midis during the TPM commentary so that's why I doubt that he was using them as a red herring.

Oh well, we may learn more over the next 2 years . . .

JediTricks
06-10-2003, 02:37 AM
Yeah, Lucas never changes anything after the fact. ;)

I'd only like to hear from Lucas on the issue if he really got down into the meat of it, I'm sick of McCallum-style pat answers and press-release-quality pseudopinions. Star Wars' origins are fairly well documented, so whenever Lucas says things like "I always meant to do that" with stuff such as Greedo firing first, I feel like he's either lying to us or to himself; nowhere I've seen has Lucas ever brought up midichlorians or anything of the like in his building of Star Wars.

Dar Basra
06-10-2003, 10:58 AM
I personally wish he had avoided the whole "Midi-chlorians are microscopic life-forms that reside within the cells of all living things" theme as well, but if he had to do it, could he have at least invented a word that didn't sound so much like "mitochondria are microscopic organelles that reside within the cells of almost all living things"?

stillakid
06-10-2003, 12:12 PM
Originally posted by Dar Basra
I personally wish he had avoided the whole "Midi-chlorians are microscopic life-forms that reside within the cells of all living things" theme as well, but if he had to do it, could he have at least invented a word that didn't sound so much like "mitochondria are microscopic organelles that reside within the cells of almost all living things"?


I could have lived comfortably with the Midi's had he integrated the concept with a more defined purpose instead of just using it as a clumsy plot device to illustrate how much potential Anakin had.

...or not. Because I'm not a huge fan of "sci fi" or any story for that matter "inventing" some "new" element or crystal or magic rock thingie that doesn't really exist anywhere and isn't likely to ever. Kind of like in the movie "The Saint," when Elizabeth Shue's character just happens to whip up the formula for cold-fusion in a "couple of hours." :rolleyes: Why bring that crap into a story at all? Star Wars certainly wasn't screaming for a scientific angle to the Force in any way. Plus, based on Yoda's soliloquey in ESB, we had a perfectly logical and masterful explanation of what the Force is in that fictional universe which also isn't out of the question in the real world (our world).

Exhaust Port
06-10-2003, 12:27 PM
My favorite made up science moment in a movie is in Predator 2. After pulling the Predator's spear tip out of the ceiling they 2 police characters take it to the lab to be analysed. The scientist informs them that it's composition doesn't match anything on the periodic table. Um, what? I'm pretty sure we've nailed down all the possibilities of the electron, proton, neutron combinations.

As soon as something ridiculous is spouted, usually it turns off most of the audience. We don't like to be looked at as mindless boobs drinking in everything the writer says. I love Sci-Fi, but the most successful movies that stand the test of time are those that DON'T even try to explain the science that makes it happen. You'd think that GL, being a student of the movie masters, would have already known this lesson.

The Overlord Returns
06-10-2003, 12:30 PM
Perhaps all those drugs he and Spielberg were doing back in the 70's have come back to haunt him???

Exhaust Port
06-10-2003, 01:18 PM
That would be a good anti-drug program: "Do drugs and you'll be seeing Jar-Jar."

The Overlord Returns
06-10-2003, 01:21 PM
Originally posted by Exhaust Port
That would be a good anti-drug program: "Do drugs and you'll be seeing Jar-Jar."

Hell, it would keep me clean! ;)

stillakid
06-10-2003, 07:13 PM
Originally posted by Exhaust Port
That would be a good anti-drug program: "Do drugs and you'll be seeing Jar-Jar."

Well, it was only one Jar, but the "special dust" blurred his vision so that he saw two.:crazed: