First time viewer watches them 1-6, writes review
#17
Posted 21 July 2007 - 07:15 AM
So "Jedi" are diplomatic corps? That doesn't explain what they are and what they can do, not even close. Might as well just say "the good guys."
The Jedi are brown robed warrior monks who have telekinetic/mind powers, carry glowing swords and serve the Chancellor of the Galactic Senate in the Republic. They are employed as peace-keepers and diplomats and (during the Clone Wars) soldiers and military commanders.
Listen, if you watch TPM, and still don't know who or what the Jedi are, you're either an idiot, or you fell asleep (which is likely during certain bits).
Jedi- "champions of peace and justice", can use magic, excellent warriors, feared (by some) and respected, spiritual, have a rank and file order, dispatched on missions to resolve conflicts...etc.
All that is in the film. What more do you need to know in order to understand what the Jedi are in TPM?
Thats why, either the guy who wrote the article was lying, wasn't paying attention, or is stupid.
#18
Posted 21 July 2007 - 10:14 AM
Full House?..surely youre not talking about that cheesy 1990's television show set in San Francisco?
#20
Posted 21 July 2007 - 10:16 PM
Jedi- "champions of peace and justice", can use magic, excellent warriors, feared (by some) and respected, spiritual, have a rank and file order, dispatched on missions to resolve conflicts...etc.
All that is in the film. What more do you need to know in order to understand what the Jedi are in TPM?
Thats why, either the guy who wrote the article was lying, wasn't paying attention, or is stupid.
My point was the opening crawl does NOT tell you what the Jedi are.
If you didn't know what a police department was and I just said "To protect and to serve" would that give you any idea? Hardly. If you didn't know what Boy Scouts were and I said "Do a good turn daily, and be prepared" would you know? So the opening crawl is really no help in figuring that out, since it's so general.
He'd have to pick that up as he was watching. Remember, he's watching these on cable, so he doesn't have the option of rewinding and re-watching scenes.
If you think he's stupid or lying, that's your prerogative. I find it funny though that people don't trust him. Why would they create a fake article to bolster the claims of SW purists who insist on watching the movies in production order/think the originals are superior?
It's not a problem that the Jedi aren't described in expository detail (as they are in "A New Hope"), because the vast majority of people watching Episode I have already seen the OT or are at least passing familiar with it. The prequels were not designed to be viewed first, but were primarily targeted at Star Wars fans.
This post has been edited by KurganX: 21 July 2007 - 10:19 PM
#21
Posted 22 July 2007 - 06:55 AM
#22
Posted 22 July 2007 - 07:20 AM
The Scene with Alec Guiness and Mark Hamill in SW4 in Obi Won's hut explained compactly and elegantly what a Jedi was and what the force was, all in a couple of minutes of dialog:
LUKE: What is it?
BEN: Your fathers lightsaber. This is the weapon of a Jedi Knight. Not as clumsy or as random as a blaster.
Luke pushes a button on the handle. A long beam shoots out
about four feet and flickers there. The light plays across the
ceiling.
BEN: An elegant weapon for a more civilized time. For over a thousand generations the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic. Before the dark times, before the Empire.
Luke hasn't really been listening.
LUKE: How did my father die?
BEN: A young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine until he turned to evil, helped the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights. He betrayed and murdered your father. Now the Jedi are all but extinct. Vader was seduced by the dark side of the Force.
LUKE: The Force?
BEN: Well, the Force is what gives a Jedi his power. It's an energy field created by all living things. It surrounds us and penetrates us. It binds the galaxy together.
Let's contrast that with the introduction of Jedis in Episode 1:
NUTE
(shaken)
What?!? What did you say?
TC-14
The Ambassadors are Jedi Knights, I believe.
DOFINE
I knew it! They were sent to force a settlement, eh. Blind me, we're done for!
He might as well have said 'The Ambassadors are two lawyers'. Effect is the same. :-)
This post has been edited by Toru-chan: 22 July 2007 - 07:21 AM
#23
Posted 22 July 2007 - 11:53 AM
#24
Posted 22 July 2007 - 08:21 PM
lawyers suing someone over lack of ethics? LOL indeed! :-)
However 'LA Law in Space' would have been an improvement over the Kids Political Trade Drama that was TPM.
#26
Posted 24 August 2007 - 08:31 AM
I plan to do this experiment myself one day. My first born will have the privilege ( ) of seeing all six Star Wars films back to back to back.
One problem, however, is the PT is not intended to be viewed before the OT, simply due to the order of release. ANH would be extremely redundant to a view that had seen 1-3 right before it, whereas in the real world timeline it was our first exposure to Star Wars.
#27
Posted 25 August 2007 - 04:13 PM
It's to see whether this crap Lucas is spewing these days (that he "intends" for people to see them "in order" 1-6, in the DVD cuts as one complete saga) really creates a better impression on viewers than the traditional way (release order, or just skipping the prequels, or watching the original editions). And on a side note the question of whether (as Lucas and his apologists spew) that the 2004 Editions really "flow better" with the Prequels than the originals.
True, you're not going to get 100% absolute results one way or the other, but I think the average Lucas apologist argument is that 1-6 makes more sense, is cooler, flows better, etc.
A review like this seems to indicate that in fact, all this did was highlight the weaknesses of the prequels, ruined some of the surprises in the OT, and didn't do anything to hide the fact that the OT has obviously been heavily modified with computers since the 80's.
I do have a nagging suspicion that the agenda of some Lucas apologists who put forth the "see the prequels in order first" argument are really admitting to themselves that they know the prequels are weaker films than the OT, and this to them is the only way they can get someone to like them.
That is, a first time viewer who is receptive will watch the prequels and like them... until they see the OT and how superier they are. But with no standard of comparison, a first time viewer will perhaps like the Prequels more than they would otherwise, and the fanboys need validation for their love of the mediocre new films and inconsistent/noticable changes in the SE's. So this is an underhanded way perhaps for them to get more new fans "on their side."
It's just a hunch though.
Personally it really doesn't matter to me what people want to like. Which Star Wars movies are your favorites (if any) is purely a matter of opinion (leaving aside financial success or long term popularity, awards, technical achievement, etc). Eventually the OT will shine through as the superior product I trust.
It's just that it seems silly to force people to suffer through the prequels, because of some desire to fulfill the "intentions" of a producer/director whose intentions seem to be ever-changing.
Now how parents raise their kids is their business (I'll resist the urge to crack a joke about TPM and child abuse!), and probably a young child could get through TPM easier (though they might nod off partway through the politiking scenes), but it's a jump from that mostly childish film to ROTS with its dark, often mature themes and rather graphic (by comparison) violence.
The OT by comparison seems to be consistent in its level of mature themes. The burning skeletons in ANH are a bit scary, as is the wampa attacking Luke in ESB (though it's mostly unseen, compared to the dripping bloody monster in the SE) there's mild profanity throughout and Leia's palace bikini and the the dancing girls in ROTJ might be a little much (though as a kid I never found them distracting or titilating, and those outfits by the standards of today's teeny bopper pop stars may even seem conservative!). But PT is all over the map, going from cutesy and innocent to suddenly heads rolling, melting flesh, domestic violence and mass child murder by the supposed lead character!
#28
Posted 25 August 2007 - 09:00 PM
I don't know how many of you read the "Narnia" books in chronological order, but we all know they weren't written in the order in which it appears in all of the boxed sets. I think it's a strength of that series (which I think had about 4 weak books to 3 good ones) that the books can be read out of order without hurting the reading. That I think is a pretty good basis of comparison when considering whether Lucas was successful with his prequel narratives (he wasn't).
#29
Posted 25 August 2007 - 10:06 PM
Have you ever heard of an ancient storytelling technique called in media res? "In the middle of things" is roughly what it translates to, and that is precisely where we are when TPM opens: in the middle of things. Same goes for ANH.
#30
Posted 25 August 2007 - 10:15 PM
I think the technique that Lucas uses if you watch the episodes in chronological order is more like in media plumbeus.
Of course, it's ridiculous to think of a situation where someone has no knowledge about a Jedi. You don't have to have seen any SW movies to already know what the Force, Jedis and lightsabers all are.
Buy the New LittleHorse CD, Strangers in the Valley!
CD Baby | iTunes | LittleHorse - Flight of the Bumblebee Video
Chefelf on: Twitter | friendfeed | Jaiku | Bitstrips | Muxtape | Mento | MySpace | Flickr | YouTube | LibraryThing