PT EP III should have the Siege of Coruscant in the beginning

EP III should have the Siege of Coruscant in the beginning, I just watched the CW episode again it's just so freaking awesome.Not to say it could give movie viewers more clue about what's going on.

 

No, it's explained in the opening subtitles...

 

But it's much better to show this in the beginning, just like we don't see they simply explain Leia's capture in the opening subtitle of EP IV.

 

Personally, I think panning down to a wedge-shaped juggernaut clinging to the tenuous upper atmosphere of the galactic capital, then using that ship to wipe into battle, is the perfect opening for the final prequel movie.

 

Then how about fleets attack Coruscant, the Jedi fought the CIS, Grievous broke into the office and start the long chase?

This would also help people understand the situation better and know better about Grievous' character.

 

Isn't all that in the earlier CW cartoon series already?

Grievous is more your vintage serial henchman. He's not really a character one is meant to "know".

The situation -- like a lot of the stuff in the PT, especially AOTC -- is also ambiguous and ephemeral.

The Machiavellian nature of the prequel plot means we get swept from one conflagration to another: details are elided.

But this is also true of the OT: this excision of connective tissue began there.

I enjoy the film starting the way it does. The crawl, in describing Grievous sweeping into the capital (there's that verb again), has a propagandistic panache about it. This has already happened. We're now seeing the immediate continuation of that. It's a little more jilting and sudden: giving you some backstory and asking you to act out a part, step into a fictive world.

Also, the first reveal of Grievous, in my opinion, is just perfect. The doors open, we hear his theme, we see him lit by something resembling a sewer grating, and it's even the way he SOUNDS (like he's speaking from a sewer). It's one of those ta-da reveals that Star Wars does so well (half its dramatic power -- the deeper, primal kind -- seems to come from these reveals). We're seeing the bad guy in his element, the trap laid, hostage at the ready. Anything less/more than this would be a diminishment: an over-egged repudiation of the brash, serial form.

 

Haven't seen the episode so I'm not sure exactly what it would comprise, but I like that we only follow Anakin and Obi-Wan throughout the battle. Elsewhere in the series the point of view sprawl works for big battles, but ROTS, despite mapping the final fall of a civilization, seems the most driven by personal character conflict. I think we see just what we need to here, the sham war providing a chaotic backdrop that Anakin and Obi-Wan brazenly enter in carefully choreographed unison, and exit by way of destructive chance.

 

You can't tell the people to go watch the cartoon when the movie didn't explain it well enough.

He's not a henchman, Durge is, but that's not my point.

In the movie we should know why is Grievous so important to end the war, what makes him so terrifying, having him to capture the chancellor, killing countless clones and two Jedi Masters are a very nice way to show this villain. Just like in EP IV we get to see Vader choke people and kick ass from the beginning.

 

Yeah, this thread should go on forever.

 

The battle could be similar to this cinematic especially the end, beside replace Malgus to GG and the Sith to his Magna guards.

 

The zingers just keep flowing!

 

Why not?

Though, for the record, I don't believe I was saying that.

The films are the films. The CW cartoon is an ascititious extra that people are free to peruse at their leisure.

They're related, but separate. One doesn't truly "explain" anything about the other, unless you want it to.

Okay, but he is. When serial henchmen go to bed at night, they pray at the shrine of Grievous.

Grievous is, ultimately, a lackey: like Darth Vader. The more ruthless, cartoon-y portrayal of Grievous helps a viewer better appreciate that aspect of Vader.

He must have got those existing lightsabers from somewhere. The killing of Jedi -- whether by his own hand or because he got his robotic bodyguards to do it for him -- is implied by his ownership of explicitly Jedi weapons (though maybe I'm just concocting a variant fallacy of the faulty presumption Anakin makes: "I saw your laser sword...").

You should try and look at Grievous in bigger terms. He embodies the craning perversion of life that was marked by a Sith Lord's election to power at the end of Episode I. In II, things kicked up several notches with the secret development of an entire clone army and the outbreak of war: an infection that spreads throughout the galaxy, even tearing up remote outposts (the "Outer Rim Sieges") that ostensibly have nothing to do with the CIS or the Republic.

Grievous is a ruined being trapped in a bony carapace and probably reanimated against his will, twisting him beyond recognition (like Anakin-Vader). It's a measure of the impact of the Clone Wars and the warped technological developments that have taken place since. A WAR LEADER now demonstrates technological experimentation on a trans-national scale (his dependency, his machine makers' triumph) and stands as a hero to many; selling a bill of goods -- embodying progress in the name of manufacture and industry -- to a galactic populace. The message, to a buying public, distanced from Grievous' true nature, is clear: technology can revive you. Support the war effort. And buy, buy, buy.

That's my reading, anyhow.

 

Yes, that proved my point, so the movie should include this siege to let people understand the situation better.

I mean he was not "hired" by Dooku like Durge, but bore the hatred against the Republic and want to support the CIS, while he was deceived by Dooku and Sidious.

Yes, so it's better to show these in the movie(He killed Jedi Masters and added Shaak Tii's lightsaber to his collection) to let people understand better of his character and story without looking at EU, the rest of the information you post was never introduced in the movie.

 

Best thread I've read in a while, mainly because it has micro series connections.

 

Why?

The Siege of Coruscant isn't all that relevant to the story.

 

What was happening in the beginning of the movie?

 

I thought the "Siege of Coruscant" was featured in one of the post-ROTJ novels featuring Admiral Thrawn.

But the battle featured at the beginning of ROTS was the "Battle of Coruscant".

 

Siege of Coruscant was in The Last Command