[Just your average movie goer]

Interesting... but enough of your Knights of the Old Republic discussions. Take them to Helena's new thread. That's what it's there for.

PS - Your moving avatar is tiring on the old eyes. It's like watching a... (shudder) ... modern video clip.

if thats true, then the prequel trilogy is a success. Lucas was never intended on making films for us. like the originals (and i stand by this) they were always meant for kids.

Yes, it is a success.... a financial success. Fine. I will not argue over the rhetoric of this matter any more. However, Lucas DID abandon the fans who got him where he was in the first place. This is BAD - and there are no two ways about it.

I don't want to repeat myself so I will just quote myself instead....

THESE FILMS SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE FOR THE ORIGINAL FANS BECAUSE...

I disagree that these films should be for kids. It was not the kids of today who made George Lucas rich and built his franchise over the past twenty odd years. It was us, the kids of yesterday. We got him where he was. We supported him when Star Wars was a new and risky venture.

And we were the ones who have been patiently waiting for these new films for over a decade. The kids of today haven't been waiting. Half of them have probably never seen the original Star Wars movies. Judging by the comments of the ones I have encountered, many of them don't even like them anyway.

How on earth does Lucas think it is fair to make the new movies for them? This is one of my biggest grievances with the prequels. George Lucas abandoned the original fans for a new generation who he believes are a better financial investment.

The prequels are, to me, bad movies, yes.... but they are not just normal bad movies. People make bad movies all the time and generally it does not concern me. But these were movies that were eagerly anticipated for many years by the people who had supported George Lucas all the way. These were supposed to be our movies - the wonderful reward for our dedication and loyalty. And at the end of it, George Lucas and all of us would all be happy.

But this was not what happened. I feel cheated, very cheated, by these films.

They should not have been made for the kids of today, but the kids of yesterday.

and

I'd just like to repeat that it is not good that Lucas abandoned the older fan base. We are the true fan base you alluded to earlier, not these young children of today. Give them something else, or let them watch Star Wars when they're older.

We made George Lucas rich in the first place. We bought the original movies, the Kenner merchandise and fuelled the interest in his films. And above all else, WE were the ones who were waiting for over a decade for these films.

Of course, he can make the movies for whatever target audience he so desires, but if he had any integrity whatsoever, or any remote sense of decency... then he should have made these films for the people who were waiting for them.

and

QUOTE 
so if Lucas has suceeded in doing exactly what he wanted to do, making a film for kids to enjoy. how has he failed exactly?? I promise you that in 20 years time those same kids will be reminising like we are now about 1,2 and 3. and if episodes 7 8 and 9 are ever made, will be complaining in the same way. 



I don't care if those kids are reminiscing over Episodes I, II and III in 20 years. What about US? Without us, Lucas would be nowhere. Skywalker Ranch, Lucasfilm, Industrial Light and Magic, Lucas Arts... a franchise empire worth millions and millions of dollars... Lucas has ALL of this because of us.

And again (and I feel like I've said this a hundred times already), does that fact that we waited over a decade for these films mean nothing to you?

We waited and waited and waited... and when we finally got these films, discovered that George Lucas had made them for an entirely different audience who for the large part, knew almost nothing about Star Wars.

I know I'm not alone when I say, I feel betrayed.

Wakatta?

This post has been edited by Just your average movie goer: 24 August 2004 - 04:29 AM

[Just your average movie goer]

Wait... not quite finished. Two more points -

George Lucas himself gave the impression that these films would be for us over twenty years ago... when he retitled the original Star Wars film Episode IV.


Next point... you are always going on about how Star Wars is for kids. So I want you to think about this.

Think to yourself, what is the best of the Star Wars movies? And then ask yourself... is that movie a kids movie?

Thank you.

[Helena]

jariten, I can tell you that hatred for Lucas is nothing to do with why I dislike the Prequels. I didn't grow up with Star Wars so I had no prior expectations of them. I saw the OT films and thought they were reasonably good; I saw the Prequels and thought they were crap - that's all there is to it. Then, recently, I played KOTOR and rediscovered my interest in Star Wars, whereupon I came across Chefelf's lists while surfing the Net. I thought they were spot on, so from there I came to here.

As for Anakin's 'character development', I've already explained in great detail what I think of it in many previous posts. Let me just briefly summarize what I see in each film:

TPM - a goody-goody little kid who behaves like no nine-year-old in the entire world.

AotC - a hugely immature, whiny, annoying teenager who develops an obsessive crush on a girl he's supposed to be protecting, then suddenly and without warning turns into a psychotic killer.

RotS - not clear, but from what I've heard, even more temper tantrums and acts of random violence.

ANH - a coldly evil but mature and intelligent grown-up who has somehow managed to rid himself of his psychotic rage, despite now being completely under the sway of the Dark Side (isn't it supposed to bring out your darker emotions, not suppress them?).

ESB - the same person, but experiencing a few pangs of regret as he discovers the son he never knew.

RotJ - a more human villain who is experiencing some regret over his past, but feels that the Dark Side's grip on him is too strong for him to turn back.

Put like this, do you see why I have a problem with Anakin's character arc? Yes, you can probably find a way to link these people together if you try hard enough, but I don't see why I should do Lucas's work for him. I see no connection between the Anakin of TPM and the Anakin of AotC, or the Anakin of AotC and the Vader of the OT, and I have the feeling that the people watching the films in the right order are going to have exactly the same problem. "Hey, who the hell is this Vader guy? What - you're telling me that's supposed to be Anakin Skywalker?"


Lynxfox, about KOTOR: It's nothing to do with communism. The examples you give are of monopolies, not 'capitalism'. Monopolies are harmful to capitalism because they reduce competition, which is the basis of a free-market system.

In the first case, the doctor selling the medicine (he doesn't 'give it away for free' as you claim) charges only enough to cover his costs, which is actually what the outcome would be under a system of perfect competition. The other guy would have sold it at a monopoly price which only the richest could afford. In the second case, a man tries to destroy something which would be a vast benefit to his entire community, simply in order to retain his status as the only shopkeeper in the village. I fail to see how this can be regarded as anything other than insanely greedy and stupid.

[Just your average movie goer]

Put like this, do you see why I have a problem with Anakin's character arc? Yes, you can probably find a way to link these people together if you try hard enough, but I don't see why I should do Lucas's work for him. I see no connection between the Anakin of TPM and the Anakin of AotC, or the Anakin of AotC and the Vader of the OT, and I have the feeling that the people watching the films in the right order are going to have exactly the same problem. "Hey, who the hell is this Vader guy? What - you're telling me that's supposed to be Anakin Skywalker?"

That's the best summary of the problem I've read so far. Well spoken, Helena.

And I don't see why you should do Lucas' work for him either, Helena. What I don't understand is why Jariten thinks he should.

[Helena]

Precisely! I honestly don’t see any evidence of the ‘grand plan’ jariten seems to think Lucas has for Anakin’s character – and I’m not stupid; I’ve been analysing characters in films and literature for years. I don’t think Lucas is some kind of misunderstood genius; I just think he’s a very, very bad writer. Whatever talent he had at the time he made the OT has completely deserted him – the characters in Star Wars may have been a bit one-dimensional, but at least they don’t annoy the fucking hell out of me the way Anakin does.

Lucas’s attempts to portray Anakin as ‘conflicted’ go way, way over the top, which is why it's so difficult to relate the 19-year-old Anakin to his other incarnations. He demonstrates ‘frustration’ by being whiny and childish, ‘love’ by behaving like an obsessive stalker, and ‘anger’ by going on a killing spree! Let me just compare one of Anakin’s lines with one of Bastila’s from KOTOR (OK, I was lying earlier). Both of them are Jedi Padawans frustrated by the restrictions placed on them by their Masters.

BASTILA: I've often dreamed that I might be able to confront Darth Malak myself. I dream I can use all this power I have to kill him and stop all the death and destruction. I just think about all the evil that the Sith have caused and I... I get so furious... Yet we are told that these feelings are the path to the Dark Side.

ANAKIN: Someday I will be... I will be the most powerful Jedi ever! I promise you, I will even learn to stop people from dying. (...) It's all Obi-Wan's fault. He's jealous! He knows I'm already more powerful than he is. He's holding me back!

See the difference? It is possible to portray someone as ‘conflicted’ without having them come across as an overgrown ten-year-old or a dangerous lunatic. What’s more, Bastila’s character develops throughout the game, yet remains consistent – you can see the relationship between how she is at the start and how she ends up later on, and understand why she ended up that way. I can’t do that with Anakin.

[Xombie]

Civilian's point in comparing the Godfather Part II to the PT is well taken. let me add one point. Even though the characters in those films are infinitly richer and more complex than anything Lucas is able to conceive, the rise of Vito story takes little more than an hour to tell. The reason: EVERY scene does work.There are no ten minute pod races that chew up up the clock and do nothing to advance the theme or the story.
We get the sequence of his family being murdered by a mafioso in Sicily and having to flee at the age of 9 on a boat to America where he is put in Quarantine. Then we get to see him ten years or so later as an honest immigrant and family man working as a grocer's assistant in New York. The local mafioso forces the grocer to fire him and hire his son. We see the scene where he meets up with Clemenza who shows him the ropes of petty crime. We see how he commits his first murder when he kills the local mafiosa rather than pay him out of their criminal enterprises. We get a sequence showing how the early up and coming criminal don worked the community and did favors for it to put people in his pocket. And then we get the final sequence of his return to Sicily to take revenge on the man who murdered his family.

AND THAT'S IT! Copala knew that that was all we fucking needed! Why does Lucas think he needs THREE movies to tell this story. Its a one movie story.

[Just your average movie goer]

Why does Lucas think he needs THREE movies to tell this story?

So he can include pod-races and mega-man games... because he thinks this is what Star Wars is all about.

I think actually George Lucas doesn't have a clue why people liked the original movies - or any of his movies.

It's not just Star Wars - take Indiana Jones for instance.

People responded so well to Raiders of the Lost Ark because they liked its fun-adventure element, the great humour, the exciting stunts, the lovely heroine and the rollicking story.

Yet Lucas must have thought that what made the movie such a hit was Indiana Jone's clothes, as that is the only element that was maintained in the god-awful sequel Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. Indiana Jones wasn't even in it - just Harrison Ford in Indiana Jones' clothes.

Seeing the special editions and the prequels, it becomes apparent that Lucas had the same problem with Star Wars.

You see, I thought the original Star Wars movies were popular because of their exciting stories, grand scope and endearing characters.

But I think Lucas must think that the reason they were so popular was because of Leia's dresses (okay, I guess that is technically true with Return of the Jedi but...)...

and so he's honed in on that, by taking it to the extreme with Amidala's wardrobe...
and not worrying about those other not-so-important things (exciting stories, grand scope and endearing characters).

Okay, maybe I'm wrong about Leia's dresses. I was just guessing. But my point is that I don't think Lucas understands why we all loved the original Star Wars movies... or he would not be doing the things he is doing now. Either that or, as I've hinted at previously, he is just a total jerk.

And Helena,

I don’t think Lucas is some kind of misunderstood genius; I just think he’s a very, very bad writer.

So simple, so eloquently put and above all else, so TRUE. I love reading your posts by the way. They are excellent.

[Helena]

So simple, so eloquently put and above all else, so TRUE.  I love reading your posts by the way.  They are excellent. 

Thanks Yours aren't bad either.

[civilian_number_two]

You too get a room! Wait! First let me get my camera ...

Wow, so much to respond to, so little time:

Jariten, God bless you for loving the prequels as you do. Don't despair. We have different tastes. But no, you're wrong to say I wanted the films to be bad. I so very much hoped that TPM would be good. It just isn't, and that's all there is to that. It's a bad film, and it's a bad kid's film, even if I'm supposed to pretend that's what STAR WARS was always meant to be. a GOOD Kid's film is HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN. The only thing missing was Richard Harris as Dumbledore. Alas.

I like how you hold fast to your analysis of Anakin's "growth," but I want you to consider this: Lucas never actually touches on what it is that happens when a person "gives in to the Dark Side." It doesn't look to me that Palpatine is controlled by anything; he's just wicked. And Vader is not giving in to pragmatic violence in service of a Dark cause: he enjoys the violence he dishes out. I'll throw out a good example of the sort of guy that grows up to become Vader:
Alex from A CLOCKWORK ORANGE. Or of course the Paul Bettany character from GANGSTER NO 1, which I still say you ought to see.

Now Anakin, as we know him in AOTC (about which I know very much, never having seen it, and what I learned yesterday about 3P0 and his Stan Laurel gags takes the cake over Dooku's sail-powered spaceship any day), Anakin is remorseful, like a power is controlling him, like there's something to this "Force takes over" nonsense, even if it's not evident in the other evil characters, Dooku, Maul, Palpatine, and of course Darth Vader. So Anakin is more like Renard in THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH, the singular most weepy and regretful Bond villain ever. A genuine psychopath, which Vader is not. Vader is more like Hannibal Lector to Anakin's Charles Manson.

Do I need to keep going with these examples? Yes? Okay, a couple more: Anakin is not credibly taken over by his rage and the power of the dark. A couple of over-the-top cartoon villains I'd like to introduce are Sam Raimi's DARKMAN and Jos Whedon's charcter Willow from the end of season 4 of BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER. Whether you liked those stories or not, you understood why the character had gone evil, it was well-established that the power was the curse (magic put Willow into a power-hungry trance, likened too literally to a drug addiction; Darkman's power came directly from his unchecked anger). With Anakin it's means-to-end writing. we KNOW he'll become Vader, and so if we're the right kind of viewer (you are the right kind of viewer), then we will make the leaps of faith necessary to fill in the gaps left by Lucas's writing (I will not make the leaps of faith necessary).

Anyway, enough of that: The general comment about how these movies were always meant for kids: Fine, if they were that's not an excuse for them to be BAD. If you do a careful study of it (I have) you will see that the only time anyone ever brings up the argument "they were made for kids" is to justify how bad they were. I never heard anyone say "THE LION THE WITH AND THE WARDROBE is a fantastic novel! You know it was written for kids?" So I can't meet jyamg on the level and insist these films needed to be made for the adult fans of the OT; I don't mind them being a little kiddy and stupid, with "walking carpet" comments and "laugh it up fuzzball." I just wanted them to be GOOD! And good kids' films I can stand.

Xombie: everything you said about THE GODFATHER, and the way you said it, is right on the money. I should pay you to ghost-write my posts when I'm busy, because, damn.

Helena: Capitalism does not preclude monopolies. Anti-trust laws were created by governments (socialism) to reduce cartels and monopolies and to encourage "free trade," but free trade is not inherent to capitalism. The system by definition will produce monopolies and cartels, since the more money you have, the easier it is to encourage the growth of your market share. History has shown this, hence the anti-trust laws. Anti-trust is a form of socialism. The argument that it is a paternalistic act taken to defend the people from money-hungry businessmen, well don't you see how necessarily anti-capitalist that is? In the world of capitalism, men destroy things that would be good for the people, all the time, in the name of profit. Just like in your video game. It was the business plan of the Ford Motor company for decades, and of Microsoft since it began. Buy up your competitor, or reverse-engineer his product and sell it at a loss only you can afford (or offer it for free), until you put competition out of business and you get to buy their offices for cheap. I could offer other examples, but do I need to? "Free market" is as much a dreamer's myth as "benevolent dictatorship," and the example you give, of the pharmaceutical industry selling only a little above cost and this being "the way it would operate in a free market" is about the worst example your might have offered. And the dreamiest. Pharmaceuticals made to operate in a free market would leave the sick and the dying to remain sick and to die. Research outweighs the profitability, so no polio cure if we can make Viagra and Rogaine instead. Why develop cancer treatments? Cancer victims can't afford them! if the doctor sold the cure at cost, the average AIDS sufferer could pay; sure the cost of treatment is now relatoively low, but the research and development would not have been done without government money. And if you happen to get ovarian cancer, the cost of a clinical study could net you a small apartment. This is pretending there was never the research to make the study worthwhile. The countries that have the best pharmaceutical industries (ie the US) have government-sponsored research, and so the costs are brought DOWN by none other than the evil socialism (the soft North American word for "communism").

So hooray for the Jedi, those pinko commie pigs. And this sounds like a really shitty game, btw. I think I'd rather play BLACK AND WHITE. I can teach my cow to throw peasants for distance and accuracy, and he's so happy when I rub his belly after!

[Just your average movie goer]

And this sounds like a really shitty game, btw.

That was brilliant, Civilian. Cracked me up.

That'll learn you guys for continually bringing it into all our discussions.

This post has been edited by Just your average movie goer: 24 August 2004 - 11:14 AM

[Jordan]

Civillian is a walking text book. I bet if he was wrong about something, it would still come across as sounding right. WTf?

This post has been edited by Jordan: 24 August 2004 - 12:12 PM

[Helena]

Helena: Capitalism does not preclude monopolies.  Anti-trust laws were created by governments (socialism) to reduce cartels and monopolies and to encourage "free trade," but free trade is not inherent to capitalism.  The system by definition will produce monopolies and cartels, since the more money you have, the easier it is to encourage the growth of your market share.  History has shown this, hence the anti-trust laws.  Anti-trust is a form of socialism.  The argument that it is a paternalistic act taken to defend the people from money-hungry businessmen, well don't you see how necessarily anti-capitalist that is?  In the world of capitalism, men destroy things that would be good for the people, all the time, in the name of profit.  Just like in your video game.  It was the business plan of the Ford Motor company for decades, and of Microsoft since it began.  Buy up your competitor, or reverse-engineer his product and sell it at a loss only you can afford (or offer it for free), until you put competition out of business and you get to buy their offices for cheap.  I could offer other examples, but do I need to?  "Free market" is as much a dreamer's myth as "benevolent dictatorship," and the example you give, of the pharmaceutical industry selling only a little above cost and this being "the way it would operate in a free market" is about the worst example your might have offered.  And the dreamiest.  Pharmaceuticals made to operate in a free market would leave the sick and the dying to remain sick and to die.  Research outweighs the profitability, so no polio cure if we can make Viagra and Rogaine instead.  Why develop cancer treatments?  Cancer victims can't afford them!  if the doctor sold the cure at cost, the average AIDS sufferer could pay; sure the cost of treatment is now relatoively low, but the research and development would not have been done without government money.  And if you happen to get ovarian cancer, the cost of a clinical study could net you a small apartment.  This is pretending there was never the research to make the study worthwhile.  The countries that have the best pharmaceutical industries (ie the US) have government-sponsored research, and so the costs are brought DOWN by none other than the evil socialism (the soft North American word for "communism").

Civilian, there is no need to explain to me about capitalism and socialism; I'm studying for a degree in economics and politics. I certainly didn't intend to make a statement about the merits of one versus the other. I'm well aware that capitalism doesn't preclude monopolies (if it did, they wouldn't exist) - I was simply pointing out that capitalism generally works best where monopolies do not exist. I also realise that perfect competition and totally 'free' markets are a pipe dream, and that government intervention in markets can be a good thing - in fact I'm in favour of it myself.

What I was trying to do was explain to Lynxfox that what we see in KOTOR is not an example of communism. I'm fed up with hearing people throw around the words 'communism' and 'capitalism' without understanding the basic principles of what these things actually are. If you want to get nitpicky about it, communism is not the same thing as socialism - 'socialism' is a very broad term that covers a huge range of the political spectrum, from centre-left to far-left. 'Communism' is a particular form of Marxism, which itself is just one particular form of socialism.

[Rory]

Civillian is a walking text book. I bet if he was wrong about something, it would still come across as sounding right. WTf?

Let's not go THAT far! lol

Lucas never actually touches on what it is that happens when a person "gives in to the Dark Side." It doesn't look to me that Palpatine is controlled by anything; he's just wicked. And Vader is not giving in to pragmatic violence in service of a Dark cause: he enjoys the violence he dishes out. I'll throw out a good example of the sort of guy that grows up to become Vader:
Alex from A CLOCKWORK ORANGE...

Actually, he does seem to touch on it quite a bit through Luke in ROTJ and even Anakin in Episode 2 (regardless of how well this portrayel may have been done). From my somewhat cursory analysis, giving in to the dark side seems to be giving in to your hate and fear, to the point that you act on it above most all else; coupled with this is the use of the force, the mystical energy that binds all things together or what have you. Mystical Energy+Extremely Negative Emotions= Bad Times. So, while you are I might be able to throw a temper tantrum, or get really angry and beat someone up, and then calm down and go to work the next morning like nothing happened (maybe), someone who uses the force while engaging in such acts will find it much harder to do so. The Dark Side, the desire to give in to our anger and our fear and all that terrible stuff begins to consume such a force user like it ain't no thing, if you get my drift.

Yeah, Alex probably could become Vader... providing he was reduced to a shell of his former self or something, yeah. Though who knows, maybe Alex would just become bored with his life of ultra dark side violence and settle down and raise a family. Besides, he doesn't really strike me as having enough ambition or drive to rise to such a position of power. I mean, I guess he kind of likes power, but he kind of likes just sort of being a jerk... and vader seems to be into the power, at least somewhat.

To tell you the truth, anakin from the prequels seems like a much better choice for vader. Sure, hes sort of dorky, and whiny. But presumably that gets fixed when his body becomes all mutilated and he doesnt have anyone to whine to. Other than that, he's got lots of ambition, and hes a bit reckless... thinks with his heart and all that junk. Dark side material all the way.

[Vwing]

Actually, he does seem to touch on it quite a bit through Luke in ROTJ and even Anakin in Episode 2 (regardless of how well this portrayel may have been done). From my somewhat cursory analysis, giving in to the dark side seems to be giving in to your hate and fear, to the point that you act on it above most all else; coupled with this is the use of the force, the mystical energy that binds all things together or what have you. Mystical Energy+Extremely Negative Emotions= Bad Times. So, while you are I might be able to throw a temper tantrum, or get really angry and beat someone up, and then calm down and go to work the next morning like nothing happened (maybe), someone who uses the force while engaging in such acts will find it much harder to do so. The Dark Side, the desire to give in to our anger and our fear and all that terrible stuff begins to consume such a force user like it ain't no thing, if you get my drift.

Definitely. I hate to use a quote from Spider-Man, but "With great power comes great responsibility." Anger for a Jedi is not like anger for a normal person. He can do more good than normal people, but on the other end of the spectrum, he can also do much more bad than normal people. I thought that was touched on enough to give us an idea abaout the dark side.

[Helena]

I’m with you lot on Vader. Civ, would you really prefer a villain who’s just a simple psychopath, with no back-story? Yeah, I know the Emperor is presented like that but he’s a minor character compared to Vader. Or maybe Lucas could make another set of prequels showing how he turned to the Dark Side... oh, God, I dread to think...

The scene: Councillor PALPATINE’s campaign office on Naboo. The young politician is anxiously awaiting the results of the local council elections. Suddenly DEREK, his campaign team manage, bursts through the door.

DEREK: Councillor, the results are in! I’m... I’m afraid you lost by 137 votes.

PALPATINE: Nooooooo! (Grabs pickaxe and hacks DEREK to death, then runs through the neighbourhood smashing up everything in sight. Finally he collapses in a sobbing heap.)

PALPATINE: It’s not fair! It’s all Derek’s fault, he held me back! I shall be the most powerful politician ever... I shall crush the entire galaxy beneath the soles of my feet! Oh, see how tormented and confused I am!

DARTH ANE: Hello there, young fella. How’d you like to be a Dark Lord of the Sith?

PALPATINE (brightening up): Yes! Yes, that is how I shall gain my revenge! MUAHAHAHAHA....