Saga Recomended way to watch the entire saga?

Discussion in 'Star Wars Saga In-Depth' started by Pimpsy, Oct 31, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Moderators: Darth_Nub, Lt.Cmdr.Thrawn
  1. sinkie Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 27, 2004
    star 1
    Since last time I checked we are still the ones making the laws that determine how we interpret what we, as humans do with our time here. For example, we could have a completely different understanding of what an individual is and what it is they "own". If a society decided an individual was basically a node through which passed many ideas and to which that individual could apply itself to explore, reshape and release the ideas in new forms, there may very well be a more collective ownership philosophy. This "node" might then be compensated (in both material gains and reputation/status) but not necessarily seen as possessing sole ownership. A clearer view on what is actually happening in the creative act (or a distorted view or alternate view) would still be something we collectively agreed upon, even if we think we have hit upon some universal truth. So, to your what that's what I say. As for when? It is constantly in flux and being renegotiated all the time even if that means simply tweaking and upholding the status quo.

    I put ownership in quotes to show that the understanding of what this means is not as solid as we might like to think. There are different breeds of ownership. I for one think there is a kind of ownership that once you experience a work and especially when you do not dismiss it, you, as an individual and as a node and participant in the societal discourse now possess this as a part of your vocabulary, your arsenal of ideas and visions if you will. You have participated in bringing it to life and making meaning by watching, engaging and interacting with it on all sorts of levels. And once such things (popular films, books, ideas, philosophies, constitutions, creeds, understandings, etc) become a more or less "fixed" part of our cultural landscapes, we do, in a very real way, own them. They are a part of us now, we cannot be made to let go of them. If own is the wrong word, maybe we could use something like adopted? So we don't have any legal rights (except when copyright expires, which used to be much faster....which already shows an entirely different approach to the idea of the ownership of ideas etc) but we now have close to us, integrated into our thoughts, these new visions and ideas. Legally, once the law has been negotiated and agreed upon, things like who gets to do what with it and for how long and in what fashion does attempt to overcome perhaps some natural tendencies of "adoption" and in that sense, of course most of us realize that this has to be respected to a degree. But it does not mean it cannot be challenged. As it has been in the past and continues to be especially by large corporate entities such as Disney.

    Yes the movie does not exist independently of our interaction with it. It does not clearly communicate single, unified, fixed ideas or emotions or whatever. We, the audience do this work without even realizing it. The artist brings to it pointers and suggestions to varying degrees but there is always room to interpret and feel and react and bring things to the "table". Which is exactly why boards like these go in circles.
  2. Jango_Fett21 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 9, 2002
    star 3
    I dare sinkie or anyone else who genuinely believes that a given fictional creative work ceases to be the sole property of the person or persons who created it once said persons release it to the general public to make a legal case that they deserve genuine legal ownership of said property and see what kind of response they get.
    obi-rob-kenobi4 likes this.
  3. sinkie Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 27, 2004
    star 1
    Wait, what? You mean try to go to court and argue for it? Of course you'd get nowhere. The laws are not in your favour. It takes larger societal shifts to bring about changes to law. So your challenge is beyond the means of one individual who believes the legal situation should be otherwise. So I don't accept your dare because it is not a realistic one. I dare you to disprove or at least argue a different case than my point however that there is a sort of cultural adoption and therefore a type of ownership taking place through interaction with a work. Those are the grounds upon which I am arguing for a different approach to understanding, not a legal one, that comes after the other foundations have been laid. I'm attempting to expand the debate, even if I'm wrong in the end, not to stay within the confines of the (changing) legal landscape.
    Last edited by sinkie, Nov 4, 2012
    V-2 likes this.
  4. obi-rob-kenobi4 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 17, 2007
    star 4
    @sinkie

    Thats enough now.

    You really need to stop. You are just plain embarrassing yourself at this point. What you are trying so hard to describe is not reality. Not how the world works in any sense legally or otherwise and it is only YOUR personal opinion. You also really need to re-evaluate things or you will never be at peace with the thing you clam to be a fan of --as well as remember to put "IMO" in front of your opinions when posting in this community.
    Jarren_Lee-Saber likes this.
  5. sinkie Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 27, 2004
    star 1
    (siren noises) Uh oh! Here comes the chief constable of the Star Wars police-fan force! Everybody with a contrary opinion put down your words and put your hands up!

    Get over yourself and let others who may have a different set of life experiences, interests, ideas, philosophies and strengths have their say...oh wait, they will, because they can just ignore you.

    Argue against me with points and observations or just don't bother trying to silence me.

    And I already put IMO in front of lots of what I say. If my name is beside it with the avatar, just assume it is my opinion, or something I hold to be true that is free to be debated and argued against. There is no rule. If there is, you yourself just broke it by not putting it in front of your own statements.

    I am not embarrassing myself because I feel no shame in the opinions I have articulated. I stand by them and I challenge you or anyone else to debate me on them without resulting to it becoming personal. I enjoy this kind of exploration of the assumptions we hold. Sorry it had to stray into a topic on how to watch the 6 films. Not even sure how it happened.
    V-2 likes this.
  6. PiettsHat Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 1, 2011
    star 4
    I think the term you use -- cultural adoption -- is a good one, but I don't think it should be conflated with ownership. People have adopted Star Wars into their lives. They have accepted and integrated it and made it part of their identities. But they have no greater a claim to it than a person who has never heard of Star Wars in the first place. Buying a ticket grants you one viewing to a film, purchasing an action figure gives you an amusing toy to play with, buying a novel gives you something to read. It does not, however, grant you a stake in the creative control of Star Wars. The audience is a consumer, not a producer, and thus, they don't have a say in the direction the Saga takes. That's largely what I'm arguing. I adore Star Wars, but I don't for a second believe that because I consider myself a fan that that gives me any more ownership of the Saga than someone who spent as much money on it as I did, but now feels ambivalent to its fate.
    Last edited by PiettsHat, Nov 4, 2012
    Valairy Scot and obi-rob-kenobi4 like this.
  7. Lars_Muul Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 2, 2000
    star 6
    I recommend trying out as many different viewing orders as possible. That way, you'll realize many fascinating things about this multilayered saga.
    The order I'd recommend for the first-time viewer, though, is I-VI. Not all of them in one day, mind you, but in that order. It's just an incredible experience and too good to miss out on.





    Mix and match!
    /LM
  8. The Corellian Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Sep 16, 2012
    star 1
    I started out with watching the OT then moved onto the PT. I always look at watching them in that order as having the PT basically providing some backstory after you finsih ROTJ
  9. -NaTaLie- Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 5, 2001
    star 4
    I'd drop AG unless you're a baby boomer with nostalgia for the good old 60s. Sure it has Harrison Ford's cameo and SW references it a few time but it's not scifi and I is probably the most mainstream of Lucas's works.
  10. StampidHD280pro Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 28, 2005
    star 4
    Well, I like it this way because it says a lot about Lucas himself that continues with the prequels. The racing thing in particular. The other big reason is that it represents a sort of paradise (pre-war) existence that we also see in Episode I and II.

    I used to watch THX 1138 between ROTS and ANH, and that works very well tonally, even visually, but I think its even more interesting to see three different movie styles at the start of the saga.
  11. Yunners Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 30, 2006
    star 2
    No love for Radioland Murders or Willow?
    V-2 likes this.
  12. StampidHD280pro Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 28, 2005
    star 4
    Willow? No. I tried with Willow. Something about it doesn't work for me within the Star Wars saga. Also, it's a bit too close to Star Wars in some ways.

    Radioland Murders, YES! I grew to really enjoy that movie, and it fits with the other films Lucas directed, but at the end of the day Radioland Murders and More American Graffiti don't add much more to the experience.

    If you wanted to, you could try this as a trilogy. American Graffiti, Radioland Murders, More American Graffiti.
  13. THE PortmanLuvva Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 26, 2012
    star 2
    I always watch them 1, leave it a week or two to kinda simulate anakin growing up!, then 2, 3, same thing again, 4, 5 and then 6. These things have to be done right!:-B
  14. Frank T. Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 6
    Watch STAR WARS 20 times in a theatre. Then rent THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK on VHS 30 times. See RETURN OF THE JEDI on a big screen then A couple years later on HBO. Go through puberty. See the SPECIAL EDITIONS in a theater one per month. Then stand in a long line. Then sit in a long line and see THE PHANTOM MENACE in a theatre. Then go see it again. Then go see it a at budget theatre a few more times. Wait a couple years then see ATTACK OF THE CLONES a couple times in a theatre. Wait a couple more years and see REVENGE OF THE SITH a couple times in a theatre. And finally watch a transfered copy of the original THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK on a widescreen TV as often as possible.:)Good times!
  15. Master Jedi Kenobi Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Nov 7, 2012
    This thread clearly shows it's a matter of personal taste.
    Also it seems to depend on which order you viewed them the first time around, i.e - if you were lucky enough to see the originals first (like me!!!) you sort of have to do 4,5,6,1,2,3

    Like someone mentioned previously, once you've seen them all once you don't have to worry about spoilers/following the narrative. You can just sit back & enjoy!

    For the record i'd happily watch it in this order - 5,5,5,5,5,5......

    You can't beat THAT ending! just epic :)
    V-2 and Frank T. like this.
  16. EUdiscoverer1136 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 18, 2012
    star 1
    In all seriousness, I would watch 1, 2... The Clone Wars, (so far... and in chronological order, if possible), then 3, 4, 5 and 6. I found, watching them in order WITH the Clone Wars is more of a rewarding experience than you would think. And the Saga (IMHO), works much much better that way. (Yes, I know, TCW isn't one of the movies, it's just my opinion. I am right though, lol!)
    Jarren_Lee-Saber likes this.
  17. Samuel Vimes Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 4, 2012
    star 4
    About the subject of ownership, here is what Lucas thinks about it:

    Personally I have no problem with Lucas making newer versions and such things. However he should also take proper care of the original versions. For the sake of film history, his legacy and the legacy of all those that worked on those films. Their hard work should not be erased from history.
    There is room for both his prefered versions as well as the originals and his prefred versions are not hurt in any way by having the OOT out there.

    As for the subject at hand, I favor 4-6, 1-3. That is the way they were made and I would think that an large majority of people have seen them in that order. I would also say it is clear Lucas intended the audience to see them in that order because otherwise he made three films that he didn't want people to see.
    I also think that 1-3 were made with the assumption that people had already seen 4-6 and they were designed accordingly.
    Bye for now.
    Old Stoneface
    Last edited by Samuel Vimes, Nov 10, 2012
  18. CoolyFett Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 3, 2003
    star 4
    Watch it 1-6 or 6-5 Never watch it 2-1 or you could just watch 2-4.
  19. EUdiscoverer1136 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 18, 2012
    star 1
    Well, he's always stating that the saga is meant to be viewed 1 through 6, as "one long movie".
    The reason for doing the second trilogy first was that it was more adventure oriented, as opposed to the intricate plotting of the first. During the 70's, after the turmoil and unrest of the 60's, Viet-Nam, and especially Watergate, I don't really think a trilogy of films about politics and corruption would have been very successful. Yes, yes... I know all he had was a rough outline for the prequals, but the underlying theme would have been that, nonetheless.
    During that era, people were too eager to escape reality.. to seep into mindless entertainment. Star Wars delivered that to the movies, the same as Disco and Soft Rock delivered people from the heavy handed protest songs of the 60's. Indeed, if conditions were NOT that way at the time, I doubt very much Star Wars would have been the smash that it was. But I think it would have been very much overlooked if he had started with the beginning. Didn't mean to give a history lesson.. but my point is, both trilogies are signs of the times in which they were released.
  20. Lars_Muul Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 2, 2000
    star 6
    Good points there! I'd also like to add that, no matter what we think we know about GL's original intentions, we can't deny that the PT was made with the intention of being viewed before the OT. That's why the episodes in it are called episodes I, II and III and not VII, VIII and IX.
    When you think about it, it's rather ironic that these movies popularized the term "prequel" and were even marketed as such, since that's not really what they were made to be. A true prequel should logically be a sequel that takes place before the original. In order words, it should be treated as a sequel by being viewed after its predecessor. These episodes, however, are meant to be treated as predecessors to the episodes that came first - again, the numbering of them makes that clear.





    "The last remnants of the old preconceptions have been swept away"
    /LM
    Last edited by Lars_Muul, Nov 12, 2012
  21. Samuel Vimes Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 4, 2012
    star 4
    We do know that when he made Star Wars he had some backstory yes but wheter he ever intended to make a movie out of that is very doubtfull. Most moives have some sort of backstory that sets up the characters and the story but that doesn't mean that backstory is ever intended to be a full movie.
    The huge succes of Star Wars changed things around a lot and Lucas could now make more films. But initial drafts of ESB had that titled "chapter II" and not Ep V. For a while there was talk of twelve SW films but that got trimmed down to nine, a trilogy of trilogies.
    Ep I-III would feature young Anakin and Obi-Wan but ep VII-IX would not feature them much as both of them would be dead.
    Then Lucas scrapped ep VII-IX, at least until recently, and said that I-VI is "The tragedy of Darth Vader" and SW always was this.
    Which isn't really accurate, ep IV-VI is Luke's story, which Lucas has said in the past. Ep I-III deals more with Anakin but that does not mean that IV-VI change because of this. They are still focused on Luke, his father is a big part of his journey but not the ONLY part.

    About true prequels, I think that ep I-III were made knowing that most of the audience had seen the first three so they were made accordingly. True prequels should not spoil narrative suprises in later films. It would be making a HP prequel where Snapes true allegiance is made clear and then say that this prequel should be seen first. This would destroy the suspense of wheter Snape is friend or foe. I strongly suspected he was a good guy for a while but letting people know ahead of time would be poor story telling.

    In closing, to me, ep I-III have little winks and nods to people that had seen the OT and some things were not explained as they had already been explained before. I-VI destroys more suprises than IV-VI, I-III in my view. Many of the suprises in the PT are not hidden all that much and can be spotted if one pays a modicum of attention. The reason, I think, is that Lucas knew that most of the audience would be aware of them so there was little need to try to suprise them.

    Bye for now.
    Old Stoneface
    Yunners likes this.
  22. Darth_Nub Saga, Classic Trilogy and Film Music Manager

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Apr 26, 2009
    star 4
    Late 1950s-early 1960s, followed by 1930s, followed by 1970s. OK...

    Radioland Murders was crap. Not a dreadfully made film, but about 50-60 years too late for that sort of cornball silliness, unless you want to include heaps of toilet humour, nudity and really bad taste (cf. Farrelly Brothers). It's surprising they even bothered - I got the impression LFL only made it for sentimental reasons (being one of the original 1970s Lucasfilm projects) & it had been sitting in development hell for so long they just wanted closure.

    More American Graffiti, while interesting, was a very ill-conceived sequel to a film that didn't need one in the first place. Everything that was appealing about American Graffiti - largely the nostalgia value and the coming-of-age story so many could identify with - was completely absent.
  23. PiettsHat Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 1, 2011
    star 4
    One of the distinctions, I think, though, that you're not taking into account is that while OT can stand on its own just fine, that I don't think Lucas designed the PT to be viewed after the OT, in spite of making them later. It's clear that, sometime in 1979, Lucas decided that there was a backstory to the OT. Whether or not he decided to tell it is another question, but when he made the PT, I do think he made it with the intention that it should be watched before the OT.

    I also think that there's nothing wrong with saying that Episodes I through VI is the "Tragedy of Darth Vader." That does not preclude Episodes IV through VI from being the "Adventures of Luke Skywalker" -- the two overlap. But Luke's story doesn't really begin until Episode IV while Anakin's begins back in Episode I. And who knows, the "Adventures of Luke Skywalker" might extend into Episodes VII through XI. Episode IV-VI don't change and aren't diminished by being included as part of Anakin's story while still being Luke's story as well.

    I respectfully disagree. I don't really think that the prequels spoil the narrative surprises of the OT because they, in many ways, introduce their own. Unlike in the Snape example above, there's no "suspense" about the revelation of Luke's father -- it's a complete surprise and is confirmed early on in Episode VI by Yoda. For audiences waiting from 1980 to 1983, there surely was suspense, but I don't know of anyone who would really wait a significant amount of time between Episodes V and VI to have Yoda confirm the truth. Moreover, narratively, they don't mull over the point of Vader being Luke's father -- ESB ends quite quickly after it, there is Jabba's palace in ROTJ (which doesn't touch upon it), and then it is confirmed by Yoda.

    The PT, however, does introduce a level of tension by making the audience wonder how Luke is going to take it when he realizes Obi-Wan is lying. Will he even discover it before he kills Vader? Imagine the tension of watching ESB, when Luke departs to fight Vader -- the audience is worried about what will happen to Luke and what the meeting with his father will be like. It adds a much greater intensity to the fight because we, as the audience, are aware that if Luke did succeed, he would be killing his own father without knowing it. At the same time, we can wonder how Anakin will react to his son.

    Plus, I think you greatly, greatly overestimate how overt the surprises of the PT are, especially for younger viewers. Palpatine being a Sith Lord wasn't a huge shock, but almost everything in ROTS is -- Anakin's fall, the destruction of the Jedi, Padmé's death, etc. And that makes for an extremely compelling narrative.

    Here is also a major point on why I think Anakin's fall is a far superior plot twist in comparison to Vader being Luke's father revelation: it actually stems from character actions. Vader's revelation, while shocking, did not fundamentally change who Luke was on any level -- he was still the same person, he had just been made aware of his heritage. But who he was, the core of his being, was not altered by the identity of his father being revealed. With ROTS, though, everything that occurs is precipitated by character actions -- we see them make choices that affect who and what they are.

    Or, to give you a comparison (spoiler alert!), in Avatar:The Last Airbender, probably the biggest plot twist (that made the fandom go insane) was that Prince Zuko, at the end of Season 2, did not join our heroes, but instead stayed on the side of the villains, although it had seemed like the Season was building towards him joining the "good" side. This was a really shocking twist because the fandom, for a while now, had seen how the creators were subtly setting him up to realize that he was fighting on the wrong side. So when he didn't join the heroes, when he instead helped to almost kill the main hero, it was one of the most emotionally captivating moments of the series.

    On the other hand, the revelation that Zuko was a descendant of Avatar Roku (one of the people on the heroes' side) while unexpected, did not have nearly the same effect on viewers. It was shocking, to be sure, but it didn't fundamentally change the character on any level. It added drama in many ways because it made his decision on who to join more complicated (just like Luke's feelings towards Vader became more complicated upon revelation that Vader was Anakin) but it didn't change him on a personal level.

    Because of that, I really think I through VI is the best order. It adds so much to Luke's story because having seen his father fall, the possibility of Luke himself falling seems that much more powerful.
    Last edited by PiettsHat, Nov 13, 2012
    Valairy Scot and obi-rob-kenobi4 like this.
  24. Samuel Vimes Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 4, 2012
    star 4
    As I said, when Lucas made the original Star Wars he had some backstory, as most films have, but that doesn't mean that this backstory was intended to be a film. He had some plans for low budget sequels and it was only after the first film became such a smash hit that he ever considered the idea of doing movies of the backstories. Also "one long movie" doesn't really work to me because you have large gaps in the narrative and you switch protagonist several times.
    Ep I. Qui-Gon, ep II Obi-Wan/Anakin, ep III Anakin, ep IV-VI Luke.
    The three LotR films you could cut together to make one long film but if you take the six SW films and cut opening and end credits and make it all one film then it doesn't work as well. The films are designed to be episodic so they can't really be fused as one.

    You fully agree that SW was very much counter to the films at the time, which tended to be bleak and filled with cynical anti-heroes. SW was a tale with clear cut good guys and bad guys. That probably had an impact with audiences and probably one of the reasons why it went over so well.

    Bye for now.
    Blackboard Monitor
  25. Darth_Nub Saga, Classic Trilogy and Film Music Manager

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Apr 26, 2009
    star 4
    It's not quite as simple as that, and some recent developments have complicated the issue even further. The backstory being developed as an episode of its own was considered as early as 1975, but back then, it was only realistically considered that the two sequels to Star Wars could ever be realised as books, barring a miracle (ho ho) and presumably the backstory/Ben Kenobi story as well (it would have had a somewhat different storyline, though - Vader wasn't Luke's father yet).

    The "low-budget movie sequel" concept seems to have been a brief vision of SW that occurred around late 1975/early 1976, when GL asked Alan Dean Foster to write a sequel to Star Wars that could be realised as a low-budget film, and was eventually published as Splinter of the Mind's Eye. The story it told doesn't match what GL discussed in 1975 about the sequel to Star Wars, which he described as "Gone With the Wind in outer space", heavily involved Han Solo in a love triangle with Luke & Leia, and sounds like a very rough outline of what eventually became ESB. Han Solo doesn't appear in SotME, because Harrison Ford wasn't signed for any more films.
    It looks as if GL had enough hope that SW wouldn't bomb completely, so he figured he might carry on with a few low-budget sequels using costumes & props from the first film (including the actors contracted for sequels), and setting SotME on a fog-shrouded planet could reduce the set budget considerably. Anything more ambitious would be out of the question, so the grander plans, including the prequel, were put to the side.

    Beyond that, recently posted scans of GL's notes outlining a 12-film saga show the prequels encompassing five episodes. Half of the outline appeared in JW Rinzler's Making of ESB, the second half was posted on SW.com a few weeks ago following The Announcement - throwing various theories a few of us had about the first half out the window.
    Unfortunately, there's next to no details regarding the content of the individual films in this outline, other than a rough summary of Star Wars (Episode 6 in this outline, but it's what we know as Ep IV), Episode I being referred to as a 'Prologue', Eps 2-4 being a 'Clone Wars Trilogy', Ep 5 is an 'Epilogue', Eps 6 & beyond are 'trilogies', and Ep 12 is the 'conclusion'.

    Confusing? You bet your ass it is.

    [IMG]
    Last edited by Darth_Nub, Nov 13, 2012
    obi-rob-kenobi4 likes this.
Moderators: Darth_Nub, Lt.Cmdr.Thrawn
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.