PT Is it just me or do the prequels seem to be "cool" again by people? (see warnings on pgs. 9-12)

GL's methodology is to repeat himself & make movies that are very similar to what has come before.


“I create themes and I repeat those themes, in different chords and different arrangements. It’s very, very clear that I’m putting the characters in pretty much the same situations, sometimes even using the same dialogue.” - George Lucas. http://www.starwars.com/news/parallel-journeys-why-the-star-wars-films-are-more-connected-than-you-think

“Instead of destroying the Death Star [like Luke], [Anakin] destroys the ship that controls the robots. It’s like poetry. Every stanza kind of rhymes with the last one.” - George Lucas, The Beginning: Making Episode I Disc 2, The Phantom Menace DVD.

“It’s very, very clear in the two trilogies that I’m putting the characters in pretty much the same situations sometimes even using the same dialogue so that the father and son go through pretty much the same experience.” - George Lucas, Audio Commentary, The Phantom Menace DVD.

 

Ah, but the primary difference in this case is that if something is expressly repeated, it's either for a thematic purpose (the father-son thing) or intended to be obvious. For example, the respective scenes of Vader's/Anakin's turn (Palpatine using his lightning powers while he stands there in conflict trying to decide what to do) is an intentional and without a doubt obvious thing. But, as with the Death Star/control ship parallel, it isn't a direct "recreation" so to speak so much as just a thematic parallel. They both save the day by destroying the bad guys' space station that allows Naboo to win the battle and the Rebellion to live another day, respectively

Much as I love TFA, it did well in some aspects, especially Han and Kylo Ren's confrontation (my favourite scene in the movie, possibly the whole saga) was an excellent example of this, but the whole Starkiller Base battle felt arbitrary and somewhat shallow. The real action is going on on the planet. It mirror the tension created by the Death Star aiming at Yavin IV by having it ready to fire at Dqar's system, but the battle itself is.... well, I suppose just there for the sake of recreating a big space battle involving the goal of destroying a superweapon. They could've frankly removed Starkiller Base as a factor entirely and TFA would have been more or less the same movie

Tl;dr - the space battle with the TF control ship is put in as one of several things to both recreate and thematically push forward one of the PT's main ideas, while the space battle at Starkiller Base (just as an example) is put in to recreate the Death Star battle without much real substance to it

 

Fair points but couldn't you say the same thing about the Death Star in RotJ? In fact the term "second Death Star" became a generic description of any repeated plot device long before TFA. So IMO Lucas had plenty of history with "rehashing".

As for SKB, I agree with some of the criticism. Only from an out of universe storytelling pov though. In-universe I have no problem with it. It makes perfect sense. A Death Star type of weapon is the nuclear bomb of the GFFA. A super-weapon invented a few decades ago that can destroy an entire city in our world, & a planet in SW. Once it was invented it was never going away. It would only be improved & upgraded over time. I doubt anyone today in the Nth Korean regime, or Russia or the US for that matter are saying "you know these nukes have been around for years. Don't you think it's a bit unoriginal for us to keep using them? We look like we're just rehashing".

 

Along that same line of thought, it is just like real life in that it's not quite the same weapon. Death Star II was an improvement of the original in almost every way. I dunno if it was old EU or somewhere in new canon, but DSII would've been indestructible unless they somehow pulled some Kronos gambit had Palpatine not been so overconfident. Likewise, compare the world's first nuke to the Tsar Bomba to, rather fittingly, the best WMDs today

I like the idea of SKB but just not the implementation and way it was removed as a story factor, and my main criticism is it's through that execution and removal that I feel it's a bit shallow as a "poetic rhyme" which is what makes a lot of people say "rehash" and, indeed, through that perceived misuse, makes it feel like the franchise is stuck in the past rather than reusing a previous idea and freshening it up or making it fit in to push forward

That might be one of the longest convoluted sentences I've written

 

I think that the Death Star 2 in RotJ is exactly why SKB was a misguided choice. If we'd not seen a DS since ANH I wouldn't have had a problem with it. There was certainly enough difference in design & aesthetic for me to find SKB interesting. But being the 3rd DS type weapon in just 4 movies chronologically...?

 

I guess its purpose was to show the audience that these Imperial wannabes are ready to repeat the same mistakes as the Empire.

 

True, & at least SKB was far more effective than the DS. Destroying the Republic Capitol is a far more significant result than just Alderaan. As for the second DS, that barely fired a shot.

 

Personally, I was hoping the SKB would have a redemption arc. Oh well.

 

Yep. And at the end of the day, the weakness in these weapons was exposed once

And clearly, destroying the Capitol is not the end of the Republic as Hux claims. What if the New Republic (surely significantly more than one system and the fleet that was orbiting it) decide to build their own superweapon?

 

Isn't this about the prequels being cool again? Not quite sure what Star Killer Base or even the second DS have anything to do with the topic.

 

bait removed

 

I guess the year they came out, they were considered "cool" but I'm not really surrounded by Star Wars fans so I really can't know for sure. And considering how Hayden's appearance at Celebration was received, we can tell he's not really as hated as some wants to believe around here.

 

The idea of anyone giving a negative reaction to any actor's presence at a Celebration is absurd.

It's not surprising at all that Hayden's unexpected appearance prompted gracious and welcoming applause.

Should the stars of TFA expect anything different just because of the similarly undue prominence of internet scorn?

The anticipated scandal that is expected to accompany the focus of a few people's hyperbole, along with the gnashing of teeth and pulling of hair that follows something as innocuous as Rick Carter remarking that he's in "a real desert" induces only one thing in me regarding fellow Star Wars fans of any persuasion - embarrassment.

 

I was more amused he felt the need to point out the obvious as if previous Star Wars movies didn't do that in both prequels and originals without never mentioning it. Can't forget "it's not a true Star Wars movie if it isn't shot on film."

 

Being in the Arabian desert is worth remarking on to camera if one is shoved in your face, whether you've been in a desert before and you are shooting Star Wars or not.


Shooting on film, by the way, does not preclude using CGI to do whatever you need CGI to do. Shooting of film is not a rejection of CG.

Can you provide a link to the quote Carter stating what is or isn't true Star Wars?


Here's a quote from him in the meantime.

“There’s something that’s going on with the computer and with hybrid moviemaking. It’s very fluid and I’ve noticed this now in the next generation. There’s no real line. I know that movies are going into a new zone and that’s what’s exciting about it: we don’t know, but can we carry this aspect of who we are into it. Of course we can—cinema requires it.”

https://creators.vice.com/en_uk/art...star-wars-vii-production-designer-rick-carter


Incidentally, Rick Carter has been nominated and won Oscars for some of the most lauded films to incorporate CG design and effects over the past twenty odd years. Forrest Gump, Avatar, War Horse

 

Know what? All this stuff makes me glad I'm not surrounded by SW fans, only young kids and they have no issues with Hayden

 

Yes and let's consider the way he realizes this.

ROTS is a remake of ANH.

TFA is a remake of ANH.

Lucas in a sense remade ANH (which itself is a reworking of The Star Wars) 5 times in TESB, ROTJ, TPM, AOTC and ROTS.

People realize quite quickly TFA is a remake of ANH but the connection to the other 5 Lucas movies being so is far more complex because of the way it's done on every level of the film-making.

 

When looking closely at Hayden Christensen's acting performance in the way of making faces and showing expressions, it really becomes clear he's actually a very skilled actor whose talents weren't very well used because of the bad directing. It is Hayden who delivers some of the PT's most roasted lines like "I don't like sand" or " from my point of view the Jedi are evil", but his acting becomes marvellous when he's not saying a word.

 

You have a point. But I guess I'll stick to my usual viewpoint, no bad writing in Anakin's lines but Lucas' unique approach in presenting a "medieval" romantic love story in a modern environment (maybe just a LITTLE like the 1996 Romeo + Juliet????), plus him being inexperienced and sometimes having a hard time expressing himself. Again, for me the whole thing works, in spite of all the criticism.

 

The PT came out back during the height of angry reviewers who did use the PT as low hanging fruit and lazy gags. However, the popularity of angry reviewing and raging against disliked films has declined.

 

Tell that to Batman v Superman fans lol

 

They exist?

 

I still don't know what's wrong with Anakin's line about sand. Also, I don't think I've ever heard someone complain about "From my point of view, the Jedi are evil".

 

It's a completely appropriate line because it sums up Anakin's naivete.

But there are complaints surrounding that line that are somewhat justified, I feel.

Some people hoped that Anakin's descent wouldn't be defined by more than just naivete and nightmares.

Or they might have hoped that Obi Wan could have replied something along the lines of "No, we're not evil, Anakin. You know that's not true. We've made mistakes, we may have lost our way but we tried our best! I still want to try. You were a Jedi once too, remember?"


The line itself is fine. It's just that, for some, it is too isolated and comes off simply as a little soundbite during a pause in their duel., alluding to a subtext that could have been a compelling part of the text.