Chefelf.com Night Life: 50 Reasons to Hate ROTJ - Chefelf.com Night Life

Hi.

I read this article recently, and I found I had some problems with it. I'm intending to do a full-fledged counter-article sometime in the near future, but for now I only want to comment on this point:

----------
41. PARADOXICAL LESSONS IN THE FORCE: Yoda says the only way Luke can become a Jedi is to face Vader. Minutes later, he says it's unfortunate that Luke rushes to face Vader. This is in addition to Yoda's assertion in Empire that if Luke faces Vader, he'll become an agent of evil. So he needs to face Vader to become a Jedi, but he can't face Vader or else he'll become a slave to the dark side. This is a paradox on a par with the one Kirk used to confuse and blow up Nomad.
----------

Okay, need I discuss how mind-bogglingly STUPID this complaint is? Let me use a dose of Real Life here: By this logic, if someone tells me "You shouldn't download files yet." It means the same thing as if they said "You shouldn't download files EVER." That's basically what this point is arguing--the writers are totally overlooking the simple fact that circumstances change. Luke wasn't ready when he first faced Vader, he IS ready NOW. I fail to see what's so hard to understand about that.

Actually what happened was the guy missed a word that was said. He thought Yoda said it's unfortunate that you rush to face Vader, whereas he actually said it's unfortunate that you rushed to face Vader, before completing your training. Basically the guy just blew the line, so it's 49 reasons. Not to mention I have many problems with other things in the list, and none of the things I agree with are major enough to make it suck. Civilian, we've discussed ROTJ already, not gettin into another argument here lol.

I agree with everything you just said, Vwing, except for the bit about JEDI not sucking. =)

It's a shame. I was going to do a "X Number of Reasons to Hate ROTJ" until I learned that someone had already done it. It's actually called "50 Reasons ROTJ Sucks" so at least we don't have similar titles to our articles.

... That Return of the Jedi doesn't suck? ^__^

Heh heh hell yea that's the way to show em James!

there's alot of things wrong with ROTJ, but I still have a bit of a soft spot for it. so I wouldn't say it sucks as such (compared to alot of things out there).

when I was a kid the thing that annoyed me the most was the overexposure of the ewoks. and what annoyed me more was 'caravan of courage' and 'battle for Endor'

two films I refused to watch. but now I'm a little curious to see them. to just how bad they suck.... annyone here seen 'em?

Personally I consider ROTJ to be the second best movie of the Original Trilogy. I think the reason some people don't like it is because it isn't as good as the great Empire Strikes Back. I see the same problems people have with ROTJ are the same ones people have with the Godfather part III. I liked bothe ROTJ and Godfather Part III. Both movies were important because the finished their respective trilogies. The Star Wars trilogy makes absolutely no sense if you don't watch ROTJ, much in the same way the Godfather makes no sense without Part III. I hope I am not alonein my views about ROTJ> I really think it was a great movie and even better than the original Star Wars. I think more people nitpick about ROTJ more than anything. Believe me ROTJ doesn't have even half the flaws that Episodes I, II, and III had. Yes, Episode III will be bad. If other people don't like ROTJ that's okay, but I do believe that the star wars fans that appreciate the story that Star Wars was trying will and do like Return of the Jedi. Besides how can you hate any movie that features Princess Leia in a revealing slave girl outfit?

I've seen Battle for Endor. I don't recall it being so bad, though it's obviously nowhere near the quality of the OT.

I agree with this much: both movies have too many Ewoks.

Seriously, I don't like THE GODFATHER PART III, and not for the same reason I don't like JEDI. I just didn't see it as relevant to the story of power and corruption begun in THE GODFATHER. THE GODFATHER has one of the perfect film endings, and there was no need to make another one. PART II ends asking us to wait for a sequel; I'll give you that. We were left needing some sort of follow-up. We just didn't need THAT one! It's all so ridiculously over-the-top. A meeting of big-time mobsters is liquidated by helicopter and mini-gun? Right in the heart of the city? This is a far cry from the complicated process of hiding the gun in the bathroom in THE GODFATHER; it's cartoon violence. And the movie was completely unnecessary, since GOODFELLAS had already come along and kicked GODFATHER in its pompous ass.

Frankly, though, I'll go out on a limb and admit I didn't like PART II either. It's shallow and spread thin. Not having enough material for either a prequel or a sequel, Coppola decided to make both, and seriously, the two sections of PART II are not connected in any interesting way. It's one of the dullest films ever to win Best Picture, but no worries there, since it's in good company; a lot of dull films are given that honour.

Back to JEDI, I see that EMPIRE left us hanging, and we needed some follow-up to complete the story. I just don't think we needed the follow-up that we got. So I agree that EMPIRE would have made less sense without some sort of sequel, but I honestly would like it better had Lucas never got around to making the sequel that he did. Making Leia Luke's sister is about as dumb as Greedo shooting first. And like it or not, putting Boba Fett in that film was more a sign of things to come than a cool nod to the previous film. The whole film is a shallow retread of things we've already seen, right down to another "join me or die" duel and a second Death Star, but with all sorts of dumb gags that would have fit nicely in a Hope/Crosby ROAD film. I would put JEDI on par with the average sequel, which, as you say, is what makes EMPIRE so damn special.

Hmm. Maybe I do dislike both films for the same reason. It's just not the reason you offered. Anyway, welcome back to the forums.

You didn't like Godfather 2? I loved it, probably moreso than the first, which I thought moved slowly at times. I never saw Godfather III, and probably never will, so I can't comment.

If THE GODFATHER, PART II had been a stand-alone film about two generations of a crime family, if there had never been a GODFATHER, people would have been pretty confused by the juxtaposition of the two plotlines. There's an attempt on Michael's life, and he has to get to the bottom of it. Along the road he finds he has to kill Hyman Roth, defend his business in court, and then order the death of his own brother for being involved in the attempt on his life. In the flashback story, Vito meets Clemenza and they steal stuff together while Vito's wife has babies.

It's not really much of a story; it's just a bunch of stuff that happens, and the two threads don't really go well together. And the ending is corny. Fredo praying the rosary just before being shot is a shallow reflection of the baptism ceremony cross-cut with all the murders at the end of THE GODFATHER.

I agree, though, that GODFATHER moved slowly. For all the story it had to tell, it sure didn't need to be as long as it was. And the time spent isn't used to sell details; it's just one long establishing shot after another. It's nothing like GOODFELLAS, whose every frame has some period detail in it [hyperbole]. The GODFATHER is romance, while GOODFELLAS is damn near anthropology.

Yeah I agree Goodfellas is fabulous. What's amazing was how they made it almost a parody of Godfather, just showing them being funny and silly, but because of that and what happens later, just makes you realize all the more how horrible they truly were, that they weren't the civilized family-men of Godfather. They were ruthless killers, and Scorcese shows this, among many other things, brilliantly.

You guys have no respect for the 'classics". Godfather Trilogy is a masterpiece. I think Goodfellas is a great film as well. The difference between the two is that Goodfellas is strictly a docu-drama about the mob-life. The Godfather is a modern Greek tragedy, possibly the most modern attempt at that type of medium. The mafia is only a means by which the story is tol dthrough. You could easily do the Godfather and replace the mafia with U.S. govt and the message would still get across. The Godfather is also very similar to Shakespearean Tragedy in that it has reoccuring themes.. (Family, Corruption, Not Being True to Yourself, and Darwin's Survival of the Fittest). The big message you get in the Godfather is tis-

-The world is filled with corruption and evil, you can't avoid it you can't defeat it, the only thing you can do is make sure you and your family are amongst those that are surviving and thriving.-


Depressing thought, but the Godfather makes you contemplate this,

No listen I love Godfather I and II (didn't see 3), and I wasn't saying there was anything wrong with how it portrayed the mafia, just that I thought Goodfellas was more realistic. Both very powerful, but for different reasons.