How is the story bad?

"I wholeheartedly agree with cometgreen. I wish I had the patience to deal with the ignorant, whining bashers like he does."

How am I being ignorant or whinning. Killing the Tuskens was wrong of Anakin, thats what GL is trying to convey. I find it odd that so many of the peopel who claim to be loyal to Lucas and his vision are often the ones grossly misinterpreting the movies themselves. What Anakin did was wrong. It was his first big step towards the darkside, yet constantly I hear Gushers defending what Anakin did as right.

People he's going to turn evil thats the whole point of the PT.

"Sorry, but you seem to forget: Luke forgives and loves a murderer who is 100 times eviller than Anakin-----Dath Vader. "

But if Vader had lived, its not as though he'd be absolved of his crimes, he would probably be executed or spend his life in prison. He was redeemed specifically to Luke with one las act of goodness. Its not like Luke forgave him after a murder, it was when he saved Luke. The man was also moments from death, what mattered was that moment, not anything else.

SW is about Luke's search for his father, and this is its resolution. Its not so much that Padme forgives Anakin, its the way the scene plays out from her side that seems off. Personally I think the scene worked fine in theatres, but the changes made for DVD ruined it.

Not to mention that Padme is set up as the uber peace activist, who speaks out against any wrong, and commits her life to peace and humanitarian work.

 

Thank you all who have replied to my post you all have very interesting insights to the movies.

Cometgreen:

Interesting points, but I respectfully disagree with some of the points you make in your analysis of my previous post. As you did with my post, I will try to address your post on a point-by-point basis.

1. "Anakin - Midicholrine rich and immaculately conceived force whiz kid born as a slave.

Just goes to show that you didn't do any research before writing up such a long rant. What a waste.?

See Phantom Menace, ?Over 20,000. Not even Master Yoda has a midichlorine count that high.? (Obi-wan to Qui-gon). See also Phantom Menace, ?There was no father. I carried him. I gave birth to him. I can?t explain it.? (Shimi to Qui-gon). See further Phantom Menace, ?It is possible he was conceived by the midichlorines themselves.? (Qui-gon to Mace) See again Phantom Menace, ?He deserves better than slave?s life? (Shimi to Qui-gon). Midichlorine rich + immaculately conceived + slave = Anakin.

2. ?Love is truly blind. He will vigorously question, by lots of yelling, any bounty hunter who dares to attempt to kill his beloved and won't give up the name of their employer.

So...you also wouldn't yell or question a bounty hunter who just tried to kill you, your father figure, and your girlfriend? DAMN you're patient.?

You?ve hit the nail right on the head. Anakin is patient, not me. He?s the one turning to the dark side, not me. The question is why didn?t he do more? The scene as it stands now is laughable. It skips a great opportunity to illustrate Anakin?s darker side. Why not a hint of the force choking for which he is famous?

3. ?She's not against war. God, when arguing, would people pay attention to the dialogue? Padme is anti-Army. She is all for defending the Republic, but she is against building an army unless absolutely necessary.?

Anti-Army but pro-war? Anti-army carries the connotation that she is also anti-war. Defending the Republic? No. She should be the poster child for the separatists. See Phantom Menace ?It is clear to me now that the Republic no longer functions.? (Padme to Palpatine). Padme states her position and then wages war to free her people. In Attack of the Clones, not only is she a Senator but also she is also the leader of the loyalist committee and is against raising an army to defend the republic against the "separatists." This is an about face for sure. She becomes part of a system she rejected ten years ago because she said that it didn't work, then is one of its strongest supporters and is against war to keep the republic together after she waged war to protect her planet. Why is okay to fight for Naboo and not the Republic? This is one of many weak points in Padme?s character.

4. ?You've never said or thought bad things about your father? Wow, you must be Jeebus himself.?

I am not Jeebus.

5. "He holds a childhood crush on Padme for 10 years and, despite the worst lines in cinematic history and committing mass murder,

Try using a different term than mass murder. It gets repetitive and annoying. And they're certainly not the worst lines in cinematic history."

Point taken. Perhaps then it may be the performances that are in question. Instead of mass murderer my new term will be homicidal maniac.

6. "still convinces her to fall in love with him.

He's talented."

And she?s desperate for love.

7. "This ignorant bitch is Luke and Leia's mommy?

Ignorant? Bitch? Calm down."

You?re right. I apologize to the forum. I should not have used that term to describe the character. Please replace with ?disillusioned individual.?

8. ?Sorry Enron, but from your post, you seem to be just another whiner who's mad at Lucas for not making the story your way.?

Cometgreen, there is no need to attach labels when debating opinions on movies. See U.S. Constitution - First Amendment. What I am guilty of is expecting too much from Lucasfilm. The prequels have set me straight on that point - twice. I just don?t t

 

Then by all means skip it, umkay.

 

Bingo, DarthSil.

 

Anakin - Midicholrine rich and immaculately conceived force whiz kid born as a slave.

I'm not a very religious man, but I do need to call you to task for that statement. Anakin, like Jesus, was conceived without intercourse. That is NOT, however, what immaculate conception means.

Immaculate conception is an idea created by the Catholic Church to get around a theological problem. Jesus, they believed, was God in human form. God is perfect, and not sinful. Man, however, in inherently sinful. Therefore, how could a human woman give birth to God? The major flaw in this thinking is that they neglect to realize that Jesus subjected himself to the human condition, including the temptation to sin. However, the Church fathers decided that Mary must not have been born in sin. She, not Jesus, is the immaculate conception.

 

Well since we've discussed the heros pretty thoroughly, what say we turn our attention towards the villians.

GL tried something interesting with Dooku in that he doesn't appear until two thirds into the film.

What does everyone think of this?

And once he does appear, do you think he was pulled off well?

Feel free to discuss Jango as well.

 

"Well since we've discussed the heros pretty thoroughly, what say we turn our attention towards the villians.

GL tried something interesting with Dooku in that he doesn't appear until two thirds into the film.

What does everyone think of this?"

I originally thought it a good idea, but judging by some things abou Ep. III which I can't really say here, I don't think it's going to work out. Rebel Scumb, I think you know what I'm talking about.

 

Yeah, I know what you're getting at.

The idea of not having Dooku in the first two thirds of the movie is not a bad one in my opinion, but it was executed poorly.

The problem is that Dooku is not talked about enough before we see him.

The best example I can think of is the movie SE7EN. The villian John Doe does not appear until the last 10-15 minutes of the movie, and is basically only in one or two scenes. Thats it.

But it works really well because his presence is felt throughout the movie, and the two lead characers played by Pitt and Freeman are both looking for him relentlessly. These two detective characters I might add are both very simialr to Obi-wan and ANakin. The calm rational mentor, and the hot headed student.

When John Doe does finally appear, it is a huge event, because its been so built up, and from then on he owns the movie.


The problem with Dooku is that when he showed up, he had no grand entrance. Remained vague as to his intentions (vague does not equal mysterious in my books) stood around watching the arena battle (which makes up the bulk of his screen time) then engaged in a saber battle, that while impressive in appearance, was dramatically hollow for lack of personal conflict between combatants (Dooku had never even heard of Anakin much less met him).

The other thing is that Jango needed to carry the movie a bit more until Dooku showed up. And once he does, Jango should not have dissappeared out of the movie for as long as he does. (and of course Jango should get killed by his nemesis Obi-wan)

 

OK, quite a few posts to respond to. And in good ole point-by-point format.

Apollo68: "Cometgreen - Less than six months shooting scenes with actors (that includes pick-up scenes usually done the following year) & TWO YEARS of making everything pretty speaks for itself."

No, it doesn't. Exactly how long do you expect filming to take? The LOTR trilogy, which equates to about 10 hours of film (with the extra footage in the extended DVDs) took about a year of principal photography, I believe. How long should a 2 hour 20 minute movie take? A lot of films only have 20 or 30 days to shoot. And let's not forget that digital camcorders speed up shooting times.

Besides, it seems like your beef rests with the script, which took a year to write.

And from the "Puppets to Pixels" documentary:

"George comes into ILM every Tuesday and Thursday to check up on us." In fact, I think he says Tuesday and Thursday morning. Those two years aren't just CGI (or models ). There was also editing, sound design, music, etc.

"Enron may have been harsh, but to say the acting & character development in the PT is on the level of the OT is riduculous."

Or it could be that to say the acting and character development in the OT is on the level of the PT is ridiculous. When looking at it analytically, they are pretty much equal. Except that PT characters have more life changing times, whereas the OT characters, I think, slowly develop throughout the trilogy.

"It's insulting to hear Lucas say that he has basically "dumbed down" the characters so the acting is equal to that of the OT."

Where was this?

"Thanks George, from everyone out here over 30!"

And below 30 too!

"As for Enron "whining" - is this not the place to say what you think? His "whining" is his opinion."

Of course it is. I don't care what he thinks about the film. But his original post, to me, seemed like he was only "whining" about how certain story points and characters were not as he (and, admittedly, most of us) expected them to be. The fact is, we have seen Obiwan be reckless, we have seen Yoda instructing him, and it doesn't matter if Anakin is 9 years old in TPM.

"It's great to see criticism. Too many times I see people get personally offeneded because someone doesn't see SW as perfection."

You rarely see critiscism on this board? Not every topic is simply "The prequels are great." "I agree old chum!" "Yes, that Jar-Jar is fantastic." "Yes indeed!"

"To some people it is, to some people it isn't. Because I see flaws does not make me less of a fan or devotee."

Nobody has stated otherwise. Most of us here see and acknowledge the flaws.

"I don't "blindly follow" just because it's SW."

Who do you know that does "blindly follow"?

"Yeah, I expected WAY more from the PT. But the story belongs to Lucas. He admittedly makes these movies for 13 year-old males - that's something we all have to respect. I think alot of the people who saw the first movie in 1977 expected the story and the way it's told to mature & cater to the 30-some year old audience who has grown up with it. I did - that was my mistake. I've learned to accept them for what they are - but I can say what I think about them too!"

Again, nobody's saying you can't. I expected a lot from the PT, and I got a lot in return.

"There was a post directly following Enrons that said:
"At least we can all agree to disagree" - or something like that. Good point - Great post!"

I don't agree to that!

EDIT: Round two...

Enron: After reading your post, I see that you are not just a whiner who signed up to call Lucas names. I salute you!

"Interesting points, but I respectfully disagree with some of the points you make in your analysis of my previous post. As you did with my post, I will try to address your post on a point-by-point basis."

And here I go.

"See Phantom Menace, ?Over 20,000. Not even Master Yoda has a midichlorine count that high.? (Obi-wan to Qui-gon). See also Phantom Menace, ?There was no father. I carried him. I gave birth to him.

 

"but when it turns out the Separatists are preparing for war, he quickly agrees that an army is needed. I believe that Padme would do the same."

But thats just it, I would see this is contradictory characterization. The characters should stick to their guns, not just when its convient for the plot.

 

But negotiations are no longer an option.

"The Separatists are preparing for war, there is no doubt about that." - Bail

The Separatists are preparing an army and have captured Obiwan (not without cause, of course, but still). If they don't get an army, then, as Dooku puts it, "The Jedi will be overwhelmed. The Republic will give into any demands."

Cometgreen, who knows that his quotes are probably somewhat wrong

 

I think there are 2 ways to look at the storyline.

1) The story based on all of the spoilers speculation and discussion, combined with the movie.

or

2) the movie by itself.

Going with # 2 is not nearly as fulfilling. For example take Count Dooku. Anyone around hear before the movie came out was certyain that Dooku was an "elegant" Sith, full of class, grace and so much more intelligent and talkative than Maul. He was aslo supposed to be a serious trash-talker during duels. But did he live up to this billing? I don't think so. not even close. He does not really have much of a role in the film.

If you want to see how a film can be done with a real msyterious, "never-seen" phantom villain, see Usual Suspects. That's how it's done. Star Wars, with all of its money, fanbase and time, should be able to achieve a real mystery. I don't think the storyline is that bad but I think that a lot of people on these boards are biased by all of the background info we had going into the film. These movies force us to fill in way too many blanks to be seen as great stories.

 

" see the biggest problem with EP1 and EP2 is how people take to the Politics.

I remember after ROTJ in an interview Lucas stated that the first 3 would be much more political and people wont like this very much, but it is necessary.

Kinda funny how he foresaw this."

I guess he knew that he had trouble writing political stuff.

 

But thats just it, I would see this is contradictory characterization. The characters should stick to their guns, not just when its convient for the plot.

In TPM she does not fight until that is the only option left. In AOTC she does not fight until that is the only option left.

 

I jsut wanted to apologize, there is a post I made above that is actually a copy/paste of someone elses post from way back in the thread, it was suppose to be a quote with a comment from me agreeing, but something screwed up and now I can't edit it.

Anyways, I didn't write that, but I agree wholeheartedly with it.

 

>>>>I think there are 2 ways to look at the storyline.

1) The story based on all of the spoilers speculation and discussion, combined with the movie.
or
2) the movie by itself.

Going with # 2 is not nearly as fulfilling.

I could not disagree more.

Spoilers spoil films.

>>>>For example take Count Dooku. Anyone around hear before the movie came out was certyain that Dooku was an "elegant" Sith, full of class, grace and so much more intelligent and talkative than Maul. He was aslo supposed to be a serious trash-talker during duels. But did he live up to this billing? I don't think so. not even close. He does not really have much of a role in the film.

So, you're saying that having spent nearly 3 years building up your own idea of what the "charismatic seperatist" was going to be before you saw the film, then finding out that the guy in the film didn't quite match up with the character you'd invented who you were looking forward to, this makes the film more fulfilling?

 

No, I'm saying so much info appeared building up Dooku to be an important character, and ultimately he proved less developed then Darth Maul.

But for those who read all those spoilers, and offical discriptions and cut scenes, they formed an image of Dooku that is much deeper and more indepth then what is on screen, yet not in anyway contradictory, so when they watch the movie they see Dooku as a much more fleshed out character then he is.

 

Well, you could say exactly the same thing about EU or fanfic; the "fleshing out" of the character is being done by someone who didn't create the character.

The thing is, it's like having someone make you a meal with pheasant, then putting in a load of chicken; yes, it's more fleshed out than it was (ho ho...), but the finished product simply isn't what it was originally supposed to be.

 

Your missing my point.

I'm saying that a lot of fans who read spoilers went into AOTC with an advantage, and had a different perspective on Dooku while watching the movie then the average audience member.

It makes Dooku seem like a better character then he is.

 

Oh, I agree that they had a different perspective. I jsut don't think that it's an advantage.

Surely the same thing would apply to someone who has read about a character/event etc. in an official novel (or indeed, the novelisation of the film itself) before seeing the film; in fact, I'd say that it's more the case, where as well as getting additional information about the character, the information isn't sketchy second/third hand reports about what was seen by someone on a bluescreen-filled set, subject to months of speculation and over-analysis on the internet.

My point is that the information that comes through spoilers and spy reports doesn't come from Lucas, and includes stuff that doesn't make the finished film- the stuff that presumably gets taken out for a reason.

I mean, look at the number of anonymous characters who have no characterisation whatsoever in the films, but a whole background, history etc out there for those who buy into the EU. Does that make the films better for those people? (Depends what you think of the books, I guess...)

Incidentally, I wonder if George Lucas could name the members of the Jedi council...

 

I'm not saying its Lucas' fault, I'm just agreeing with the statement that many fans are inclined to believe Dooku is a more indepth, elaborate character then what is actually presented on screen (which is quite sketch vague and 1 dimensional) because they had years of build up and read a lot of info about him both offical release and unoffical.

Thats all. I'm not assigning blame. GL does not figure into this, its hardly his fault. I'mm jsut saying people have convinced themselves there is more to Dooku then there is.

 

up!

 

Ok the thing about both Maul and Dooku is that they are both tools. One is just raw power. The other is more brains then raw power.

They are there for a reason. First Maul if you look at him he is a powerful Sith young, fast, strong. Yet he is taking orders from some old guy named Palpatine. (I know what his sith name is but I don't use it.) It showed that he was not as powerful as Palpatine.

For Dooku he was able to get the Sep's to trun on the Repbulic. He was once a great, wise Jedi. But know he is working with Palpatine taking orders form him. Again it goes back to the fact that Palpatine is know a lot more then Dooku.

Anakin/Vader in the OT is both Maul and Dooku. Powerful, with brains. But there's a reason why he does not go up agaisnt Palpatine. Because Palpaitne would kill him. (Note ROTJ that Vader had to attack Palpatine when Palps had hsi back truned. )

So in the end Dooku and Maul are not suppoesd to be any more then what they are TOOLS.

 

yes but your just looking at them in that context. You have to look at what role they are needed to play in the drama of the movie we are watching, which is to add tension and danger.

They can still be tools, but more emphasis needed to be put on them

after all by your logic Vader is just a tool.

 

yes but your just looking at them in that context. You have to look at what role they are needed to play in the drama of the movie we are watching, which is to add tension and danger.

No the don't need to be the ones adding that tension. That Palpatines rule and only his rule.