Episode III versus Episode V: Which is darker?

Whoa, good post!

To sum it all up, I agree. I think RotS is the darkest of the entire Saga. Not only because of mood, but because of pure emotion. In the beginning of RotS we see Anakin and Obi-Wan as friends, both happy. At the end we see these friends try to kill each other. It's such an emotional roller-coaster that you cant help but feel that this film is darker because of the 180 degree turn it takes from the beginning.

 

If only Irving directed ROTS. With all the resources GL now has, it'd prolly woulda smashed ESB upside the head, and that's tough, and ESB is my fave as well.

 

I don't think Kershner needed to direct ROTS, Lucas and Spielberg (for the sweeping LOTR esque wide, long CGI special effects digital shots) did a fine, brilliant JOB IMHO.

However, it indeed could have used another screenplay writer, and perhaps a more superb job out of the cast members, or just some differently casted actors.

 

If only Irving directed ROTS. With all the resources GL now has, it'd prolly woulda smashed ESB upside the head, and that's tough, and ESB is my fave as well.

Kershner has made some bad pictures himself, including "S*P*Y*S" and "Robocop 2," so having him direct "Revenge of the Sith" would not automatically make it an artistic success ? he is as capable as anyone of producing a poor movie. Nevertheless, I don?t think this thread is intended to discuss the shortcomings of "Episode III," or who should have directed it, etc., but rather to explore the dark, brooding qualities contained in Episodes III and V; in other words, this isn?t a discourse on "which film is better," but "which film is darker."

 

Irvin Kershner did a fine job on ESB, but that does not mean he would've done likewise on ROTS. I don't go for this idea that Kershner is some alchemist who can turn straw into gold, or that his presence on a SW movie would automatically make it good. Had he directed ROTS, perhaps it would've been better, perhaps not. As it stands, I like the movie immensely, and though ESB remains my favorite, I still see its flaws. Yes, Virginia, ESB does have flaws, and Kershner is a fallible human being who has his share of mediocre or even poor movies on his resumé.

Similarly, I don't go for the idea that if Lawrence Kasdan had written the screenplay for ROTS, as many have said he "should" have, it would've been better. Though Kasdan wrote what is arguably the strongest SW screenplay (ESB), he also wrote what is arguably the weakest (ROTJ), and as for his other projects...well, for every "Body Heat," there's a "Dreamcatcher."

To answer the question posed by the originator of this thread, ROTS is darker. However, ESB is moodier.

 

ROTS is the darkest of the sage by far. It has a much bigger emotional level than ESB.
There are many more deaths, more suprises (If you were a little kid and you went in order in the movies).

Good Stuff

 

I think also part of the image of ESB being so much gloomier and dark (there's that word again ) is that, at the time, and indeed all the way up until the release of TPM in '99, that was all the heroes and the audience had. That was their world...the Rebel Alliance, Han, Luke, Leia, Chewie et al...so for ESB to end with so much of that in peril, it feels bad. Even with the 'note of hope' in the ending.

For some that have seen the OT first, they could never feel the same way about the world of the Old Republic. They know that it will collapse, they know that Anakin will fall and become Darth Vader, and so on. Only some will, but still...they will, so ESB will always feels darker to them.

But for future generations seeing the Saga in numerical order, the Old Republic will be all they know in turn. That will be the universe that they're starting to get comfy with, with Obi-Wan and Anakin and Padme zipping around the galaxy fighting the bad guys and so on. And so the tragic events of ROTS will carry even greater weight, and I believe that it's ROTS that will always feel the most down-beat, the most oppressive and gloomy, out of all the films for our child and their children and all the generations to come when the Saga is finally viewed as a whole.

But don't let me stop your enjoyment of ESB. As I said, there's more to a film rather than just whether it's the darkest or not...

 

Excellent post, DamonD!!

I'm from the OT days and personally, I couldn't wait to see that Old Republic and how everything went so horribly wrong. And even though, I knew what had to transpire, it was HOW it all happened that grabbed me. The whole Palpatine/Sidious plot was brilliant, the clones and Order 66 - that one really leapt out and grabbed me by the throat. I never cried watching a Star Wars movie until I saw ROTS. And because of it, I now cry watching ROTJ. Hell, I even cry now at the bit in ANH when Obi-Wan gives Luke, Anakin's lightsaber.

So in answer to the question - definitely ROTS.

 

More gruesome things happen in ROTS that is certain. However, the tone of TESB is a lot darker.

But for future generations seeing the Saga in numerical order, the Old Republic will be all they know in turn.

That's if future generations watch the film in that order. Over at Census, most members indicated they are going to show their kids the films in the order they were released. If that trend continues, most people will never watch the films in the order Lucas intended.

 

True, but how many people are we talking about here exactly?
Even a sample size of, say, 50,000 people wouldn't even be 1% of Star Wars' total fanbase...

But I'm getting off the point here...

 

21 vs. 18

 

ROTS had more deaths by far but ESB was stil a dark film. I would have to say ROTS was darker because of the events that took place that led to the death of the Republic, the erradictation of the Jedi, and the birth of the Empire.

 

Definitely Episode III in my view. I never really considered ESB to be dark, just more serious.

 

Not "undoubtedly." Your opinion is not fact.

The AOTC love dialogue is corny, but other than that, I don't think AOTC's screenplay is weak. Mostly I think it suffers from some bad editing; the working screenplay flowed much better than the movie.

 

RotS, at least for initial impact.

When we had ESB, we didn't have the prequels, we didn't have the true depth of the stories. With RotS we knew everything except exactly how the ending would play out. Given that we knew more, we were hit with more of an emotional impact as part of the entire Saga.

 

And tell me how there's one piece of interesting bit of dialogue with some actual flavor and unstiltedness to it without the essential equivelance of a doormat in the AOTC script? Tell me how the ROTJ screenplay is arguably the worst...

 

How can I "tell" you that, Wester? It's all opinion, although you have already stated your opinion as fact. Given how you have replied to me before, anything I say will be mocked, sneered at and dismissed by you.

Interestingly, I'm the one who used the term "arguably." You used the term "undoubtedly."

I can see the reply already: "You didn't give any examples! So you can't show that ROTJ has a weaker script than AOTC!"

 

Whatever Shelley, I never stated or implied in any way that opinion is the equivelant is a "fact", I'm just curious why you think ROTJ has a weak screenplay in contrast to AOTC. And don't even start about sneering, mocking, dismissed attitudes.

 

True, but how many people are we talking about here exactly?
Even a sample size of, say, 50,000 people wouldn't even be 1% of Star Wars' total fanbase...

Once you get big numbers (in the hundreds or thousands) you start to see stable trends. However, since the sample was taken exclusively from this site, you have a point. It might just be that TF.NET members feel this way. In other words, it isn't a random sample and possibly biased.

 

Yes you did. Or was it someone else who used terms like "undoubtedly"?

Hit the nail too squarely, did I?

 

Well that's certainly a way to make narrow, bold proclaims about a person you don't really know.

Undoubtedly IN MY HUMBLY HONEST OPINION.

Err, what's with all the hostility all the sudden? I'd just like to know why you prefer AOTC's screenplay over ROTJ's.... is that such an atrocity to ask?

 

You know the discussion is going no where when it starts to focus on the exact wording and grammar of a post.

 

Let's try to keep it on topic without attacking each other.

 

Yeah. When you get right down to it, Kerschner's a pretty overrated director. While he deserves kudos for getting the best possible performances out of the actors he certainly doesn't deserve credit for the whole of the film's production, especially in terms of the visual direction. Kerschner, at best, is a chameleon-like visual stylist, whose asthetic sensibilities adapt to the project he's given. In other words he has no unique style of his own and just copies the visual mannerisms-- or just lets somebody else direct the film visually altogether-- of somebody else.

Take a look at Eyes of Laura Mars. There, Kerschner rips off of noted photographer Helmut Newton throughout the whole film. Each of Kerschner's sequels-- Return of a Man Called Horse, Robocop 2 and Never Say Never Again, the most lackluster Bond film ever made-- plays like a pale carbon copy of the prior films in the series. The production of ESB, remember, was fraught with tension between Lucas and Kerschner over who was really in charge of the film (earlier Lucas biographies talk about this, like Skywalking, but nowadays it seems everybody involved would rather forget those troubles ever happened).

By and large the ones responsible for ESB's immaculate images are George Lucas and cinematographer Peter Suschitzky, who is all too often the forgotten hero of the film. Also to be commended for their roles in the film's visual creation are, of course, Ralph McQuarie and Joe Johnston, who personally led the storyboarding during pre-production with Lucas, effectively aiding the saga's creator in directing the film in compositional terms before a single frame was even shot. Remember that a big film like this would have to be shot according to a tight, demanding schedule in which the storyboards would have to be followed as closely-- if not closer-- than the shooting script itself. This, and Lucas' involvement in the movie's visual style along with Suschitzky, probably helped Kerschner focus on working with the actors onset.

Lucas' position on ESB as "Executive Producer" holds much more authority and claim to the film's greatness than most fans are aware of, or would like to concede to him. The reason ESB so often outshines the rest of the saga is because everyone involved was working according to their best talents and skills: Kerschner with actors, Lucas with the story and visuals, Suschitzky with the subtleties of the lighting, Kasdan with the dialogue, etc. It's important to remember this, and not discount Lucas as a director simply because of his difficulties with actors, just as Kerschner shoudln't be elevated to the status of brilliance simply because he's good with them.

Remember: if Lucas had directed ESB himself, the acting wouldn't have been as good, but the film would have looked exactly the same. If Kerschner had really been allowed to direct ESB's visuals, or had been the director of ROTS, then the film, in either case, would have likely looked like crap.