If the Saga isn't perfect, where did it go wrong?

I'm going to jump in with a correction to an earlier post I just noticed:

To the best of my knowledge, Lucas has never claimed that the Star Wars saga is one large movie broken into smaller parts, which is true of Lord of the Rings, but that it is one story told in two trilogies, by definiton, totalling six movies. That is a key aesthetic difference.

 

The Saga is Episodes 1 - 6, nothing more. Not even the EU.

 

Jamiebacca, this thread isn't about the SW fan culture, it's about the movies. Stay on topic.

Jamiebacca was posting about the movies. I believe Jamiebacca was trying to state that there is nothing really wrong with all six movies. It's the fans' expectations and perceptions of the movies that warped the saga's qualities. Of course, I could be wrong. But whether Jamiebacca is wrong or not, I agree.

I won't claim that the saga is flawless. But . . . it is excellent - both the Prequel and Original trilogies. And there is nothing like it anywhere else . . . so far.

 

I'd have to see your example to answer that.

Well if you are going to expect me to believe that Lucas is a liar, you will need to prove it to me. I personaly don't go around accusing people of lying unless I have proof.

If you don't need proof to make that accusation, that's your deal.

How do you know that it wasn't?

 

It was a rhetorical question, to which your 'answer' has already been given, as shown by your reaction to BlackPool's statements about "contradictions".......and, it's a good bet that you already realize that the conclusive answer to my 'question' is an unflattering one, either way it goes.

You obviously missed where I said this: "when establishing how SW was conceived and developed involves working in the realm of probabilities ?"


You're missing the point.......the point isn't about whether Lucas is a liar or not, or accusing him of being such. The point is about establishing, or attempting to draw-out, how Star Wars was conceived and developed, which, with the circumstantial evidence that we do have, involves dealing with what's probable and what isn't; the after-the-fact testimony of one man doesn't cut it, I'm afraid.

The treatment and all the drafts of SW are a good indicator that it wasn't........as falsifiable evidence, they are much more reliable than unfalsifiable claims such as "it was all in my head; I didn't tell anyone", or the opposite claim of the "Tragedy of Darth Vader" treatment/story (ep3 doc), or the "Skywalker Family Reunion" SW script that Francis Coppola is supposed to have read back in '75, but doesn't seem to remember.

 

So in other words, you can't prove he's lying. Thanks I was worried my world view might suddenly shift, now I realize it won't.

 

It seems I mentioned that the topic of GL's honesty wasn't on-topic for this thread, that seems to have been forgotten. You can speculate what he did or didn't have planned out (if you think that has bearing on if the series did or did not "go wrong"), that's really a separate issue than if he lied about anything. Find a different thread to argue his honesty in.


Actually it says that the regional governors will have direct control when the senate is gone. The Death Star was an instrument of fear, not a political tool.

Right, but there were already regional governors (Tarkin, for example) so the problem of keeping the system in line could not be solved solely by using governors instead of a political machine. It seems the governor's needed the beurcracy to get things going, wthout it they needed that agent of fear - the Death Star. At least, that's what I got from that scene.


I think he is serious when he says that he had one story for three films. He might not have had all the details of the second and third acts, but he knew that there was enough room to do those two.

Sure there was room, but pre-opening day SOTME was the most likely sequel. It really looks to me like he had only thought in terms of SOTME as a sequel and then ROTJ (in a different form) as a follow-up. That would explain why practically none of ESB was in the larger ANH drafts.


Jamiebacca was posting about the movies. I believe Jamiebacca was trying to state that there is nothing really wrong with all six movies. It's the fans' expectations and perceptions of the movies that warped the saga's qualities.

The former is about the movies, the latter is not. They are not interchangable. Movies are movies, period. Fans are people, period. Fans are not the movies, movies are not the fans. It's perfectly legimate to say there is nothing wrong with the movies, as you and Jamiebacca said. It's both legimate and on-topic. However, to try and back up an opinion by pyscho-analysis those who disagree is intellectually lazy, and generally borderline trolling. It's basicallt saying you don't want to back your opinion by staying on topic, and so you result to jabs at people. I don't really see why you think the Saga mods should allow or encourage this behavior.

You can accept that this is the standard of Saga and deal with it accordingly, or you can continue to try ignore what Spike and I am saying and then I will just have to go back to old modding practice. I've already explained and reasoned this out with everyone, and treated everyone like adults. My old modding practice in dealing with this is to employee the "films\fan" rule and then start handing out bannings after the first warning (which, in this case, would already have been issued, so at this point we could skip the warnings and go right to the bannings). If you've posted around me in SWC and PT, you would know I have no problem modding in this fashion. I'd prefer that we all act like adults and not require me to come in and play bad cop, but that's entirely up to you all at this point. Now, can we stay on-topic?

 

So in other words, you continue to miss the point......

And as long as you limit your 'methodology' to one of relying on one man's 'integrity' in order to substantiate claims, you've already gone well beyond having to worry about your world view shifting on you.....such is the 'power' that hand-waiving away circumstantial evidence brings.



p.s. If you haven't figured it out by now, not rebutting each (quoted) response doesn't exactly speak well of your ability to argue a point...

 

Right, I hinted as much. I can list off all the ideas that were reused in the other four films, but very little of it is in TESB. That was the one film where everything was totally brand new. There might have been a couple of ideas circa May 1977, but these weren't as fleshed out as they are by 1978.

In telling a story, it usually begins with an idea. A scene that comes to mind and you have to write around it. Take the third Indy film. One idea came to mind, namely a haunted castle and from that came the castle scenes in the final film. Not haunted, but a castle filled with Nazis and Henry Sr. So the idea of say a Jedi redeeming a Sith Lord, while in his own way redeeming his family legacy came to mind early on. But it evolved into what it is now. Annikin Starkiller redeems his father, by proving that the Starkiller line was worthy of being a Jedi. While the other redemption is bringing another man back into the fold of goodness. It then evolved into what we know.

 

Where did it go wrong? ROTJ is the movie where Lucas could have taken SW two different directions:

1. Go for the mass audience and make a boat load of money, but in the same vein have to cater to those audiences (Ewoks, Jar Jar, etc.)

2. Go for a niche fanbase and make less money, but really expand on the whole tone of ESB.

Lucas chose #1 because after ESB he realized SW was an entity now that could make him a gazillion dollars, and by making ESB too dark in 1980, it did not make nearly as much as ANH did in 1977. ROTJ appealed to kids more and in turn made more money, but hurt the quality of the saga as Lucas continued on with the SE & PT movies.

If Lucas would have continued on with the tone of ESB with ROTJ and even a Prequel Trilogy, it wouldn't have made as much money, the fanbase wouldn't be as big, and maybe wouldn't have been the juggernaut that was still churning from 99-05. But I contend the movie quality would be so much better looking at the saga now.

After ESB, Lucas was all about merchandising, video games, and the movies were a way of keeping that product fresh. That is why you have characters like The Ewoks & Jar Jar in a universe that shows a bounty hunter getting his head decapitated and a man burning up in flames too.

Lucas tried to appeal to every audience, and the movies after ROTJ show it. Each one of the movies has a grownup, adult story that was written to go right over kids heads, but is executed sometimes in the same vein to appeal to the little kiddies, and TPM is a perfect example.

No little kid is going to understand Palpatines scheming through the whole movie and all his political moves to get to become Chancellor by AOTC, but they will understand Jar Jar stepping in doo, Jar Jar getting his tongue caught in binders, and Jar Jar fumbling and bumbling in the junkyard like the three stooges. But the title is The Phantom Menace, will any kid under the age of ten even know who that is?

After watching all 6 movies recently, the fatal flaw is that Lucas tried so hard to preach to every fanbase after ESB, that now it actually does the opposite. Kids will get older and get annoyed with Jar Jars antics, as many kids my age who have grown up and did the same with the Ewoks. Many fans will grow up and now notice the childish stuff in the movies that takes away from the very adult story it is trying to tell.

I still look at the cave scene as the turning point of the saga, cause that scene was never duplicated again. It is a scene that has no explanation, it is just presented in front of you, and the viewer has to come away with he or she perceives it without any actor telling them what just happened. All Yoda says is, "Remember your failure at the cave!" Later in the movies, we get everything held up with a sign telling us what just happened: Anakin, "My powers have doubled Count since the last time we met." Translation (If anybody hasn't figured out yet, Anakin is alot stronger in ROTS then AOTC.)

The Saga is a cool story to watch if you can turn off the bad things that clutter it, but those bad things that so many people have problems with were intentionally put in there to appease everyone, unfortuanetly I just don't think that really worked out in the end. I don't blame Lucas for making a boatload of money, cause who can blame him? I just think he sacrificed quality in the process.

 

YES!

It's the expectations which warp the perceptions of the qualities. We take all the SW info we have in our heads when we watch the films, whether we realize it or not. This includes the other movies, the bloated eu, and even the words we read in forums like these.

Thanks for having the grey matter to sift between my sardonic lines and pull out what I was trying to say. I was happier than Chewie's dad watching the virtual porn in the Holiday Special when I read this answer.

 

It is possible to have outside influences effect one's experience of a movie, yes, I do understand that point, but again this thread is about the works themselves, not the culture.

And, to take one point you made further, Chewie's dad just wasn't watching virtual porn, he was having cyber sex... on a network, prime time TV show!! It blows my mind to this day that this is a part of the SW legacy. (Funny enough, cut that scene was cut when it was shown in France, for that very reason).

 

It blows my mind that those cigarette-eating porn-lovers banned anything.

 

If this thread isn't the place to discuss how a viewer's approach could have effected their enjoyment, I can't think of any that would.

I still don't understand why Star Wars' critics are protected from critique themselves.

Judge not lest ye be judged.

 

wwwwwwwwwWHAT?

 

Mr. Tonic,

I believe you are familiar with the "films, not fans" rule here. That is the answer to your question. Which doesn't mean you can't refute criticism and arguments of films, it means you can't criticize the people making the arguments through your own theories about how they got there. It is the psychoanalysis of those who dissagree with you that is not permitted, not refutation of their arguments. I think you know this, however.

I, too am sometimes frustrated by this Films, not Fans business (for very different reasons than you), but thems the rules here, there are other sites where this rule is not in force. However, on those other sites, I highly doubt you and I would post in the same thread, unless it was a sanctioned "flame war" thread.

So, go ahead and think the "saga" is perfect, and I will stick to my position that it got derailed when the plot shifted from Galactic Good vs. Evil to the story of the Skywalker/Vader family. But this isn't a psychotherapy session and I am not sure, but doubt you are a psychiatrist anyway!

 

Dr. Tonic, how much do you charge your patients an hour for their therapy on the SW saga, and do you prescribe prozac to all your patients who don't see the saga equally?

 

As was said, there are message boards that let you say whatever the heck you want to or about other people, but TFN isn't one of them. It has never been my practice to allow people to be pyscho-analyzed or be the target of cheap shots. I don't care what they think of the movies, good or bad. Go-Mer, I think in the five (plus) years we've been posting in the same forums, and the (almost) three years I've been modding in forums you post in that this conversation would be entirely unnecessary.

And Boba16, that comment was also unnecessary. It would fall into the realm of cheap shots.

Now, can we get back on topic?

 

Right. Except thats very very different from what Lucas and you were previously indicating. Lucas says that he wrote everything in a massive script and then sectioned that ultra-long script into thirds, giving us episode IV, V and IV. Thats very different from having a few vague, broad concepts and stringing together a constantly-evolving plot as you go that has little specific relation to the original germination.

 

uhh... the first SW was pretty damn new.

 

Darth-Stryphe,

I understand why the "films not the fans" rule exists, I just don't see why Lucas is exempt from it. He is as human as any one of us, and he was a Star Wars fan before any of us even knew what it was.

DarthPoppy,

I don't think the saga is perfect, I just don't excpect it to be.

 

I believe the "Films not the Fans" rule exists on this website, not the world at large.

 

Yeah, but I like this place.

 

George is the creator of the saga, therefore he is open game when talking about it. It's all debate and it's all good.

 

I just think it's unfortunate that this site is more worried about protecting the feelings of the Saga's detractors than it is about the feelings of the one guy who made all of this possible in the first place.

If Lucas is open season because he is the creator, we should be open season for being it's fans.

Judge not less ye be judged.