Should Kirshner have directed ROTS

only the reality is it is HIS and he does what he thinks works. and millions agree.

I'm one of those "millions".

STAR WARS EPISODE III: REVENGE OF THE SITH, directed by George Lucas.

 

I don't understand your point, Kershner never directed ROTJ. The thread is about Kershner directing ROTS, and would it be better. You can say all you want that ROTJ isn't perfect, I will probably agree with you on most points you made, cause that was Richard Marquands movie to direct.

Alot of OT fans put ANH & ESB as the classics and ROTJ as the weak link, and alot of them, including myself love ESB cause Kershner directed the movie and the characters differently then the other 5 SW movies.

You can blast ROTJ all you want, cause as an OT lover, I have just as many problems as you do, cause the OT trilogy is not perfect, but ANH & ESB are perfect, and Kershner directed one of them.

 

And Lucas directed one of them.

 

In answer to the question - NO!

Empire has always been my least favourite of the OT so I have absolutely no desire to have Kershner direct ROTS.

George Lucas directed my favourite SW movie - ANH. And he also directed my equal second favourite - ROTS!

 

I ran out of time when I wanted to edit it, but Lucas did direct my favorite movie of all-time, the original SW. You have no argument here.

 

the point i was making is that people will still blast Lucas even when he does make a great movie. he gets blasted for things like JarJar, but people still forget about the ewoks . which are not much different. i know the thread is about Kirshner, and i know who directed what. but the thread is also about Lucas. and i was pointing out that GL made a movie that was better than Rotj, IMO. but because it's a prequel movie , it can't be as good as a OT movie . and i used Jar Jar as a example because he is the one of the biggest beefs people have with what GL did uin the PT. and i was trying to remind people that the two trilogies are closer and more similar than some might think,or want to admit. and i don't hate ROTJ. but if Jar Jar sunk TPM, and ruined a lot of the PT, then Ewoks easily did that for a lot of people too.

 

[/i]

There is a thread for Jar Jar, and though the ewoks are bad, Jar Jar ruins every scene he is in for me, so Jar Jar is far worse than the ewoks, but I admit they are both bad.

I will agree that many wont give Lucas credit for ROTS, and here is why:

ROTJ, which to me is the weakest of the OT, is helped by two classic movies that came before it, so people are not that hard on one movie from a trilogy that the last hour is great, so they will always say 2 1/2 great movies.

ROTS, which to me is the best of the PT, and will agree as good as ROTJ, suffers from two average movies that came before it, so people are more apt to criticize it, or not look at the merits, because even if it is great or good, is one quality movie out of 3 a great trilogy?

My biggest beef with ROTS is the whole turn scene. Not what Anakin was doing it for, but the way the whole scene is done, to me it is just awful. The mace fight is bad cause McDiarmid doesn't look good fighting, even though they use a double sometimes. Palps frying his face is totally stupid cause why wouldn't he stop? And then him yelling "Ultimate power!" or something like that as he is frying Mace.

Then the whole turn scene is just underwhelming, "What have I done" is just so wrong for that whole sequence. If you're gonna make him turn George, for god sakes just make him turn to darkside, he gets redeemed in ROTJ, so we don't need confused Darth Vader now, when he turns he should be evil!

ROTS is really good movie, but the turn scene is worse now, cause in the commentary Lucas say he originally shot it for the scene when Palps tells Anakin he is the sith, but Lucas didn't like it cause he thought Anakin turned too quick. So Lucas then does it in the next scene!

That scene was the key to the movie, and the prequels, and if Lucas couldn't sell me on that scene, what the hell is the point of watching three movies to see him to turn to Darth Vader? Lucas directed it, and I blame him 100% why many fans think the scene is bad.

 

There is a thread for Jar Jar, and though the ewoks are bad, Jar Jar ruins every scene he is in for me, so Jar Jar is far worse than the ewoks, but I admit they are both bad.

yeah i know. thanks teach. like i said i was making a point. so stop negating everything i say. yours is just one opinion of many. so i say Ewoks ruin ROTJ for me. my point was still on topic and relevant.

 

Well he sold me big time, and he sold many others as well. Most of the complaints about Anakin's turn have nothing to do with when, but why. They didn't want him to turn because he loved Padme too much, they wanted him to be seeking revenge cause the Jedi killed his favorite second cousin (see Last Action Hero). Lucas chose a more sublte and far more rewarding reason and some (including Time Magazine) thought it was great enough to list RotS as better than the Original SW, or at least in the top three.

Some of us are more than satisfied with the result.

 

ESB is masterful. The Kirshner formula cannot be duplicated, not for the PT not for anything. Which is unfortunate.

 

Kirsh's other directing credits:

Seaquest
Robocop 2
The Return of a Man Called Horse

Now, I love Empire, it's my favorite in the series, but it's unbelievable that people say that Lucas' was "lucky" when he directed episode IV. He also happened to direct to other great movies before that.

With Kirsh, I'm afraid it's a variant of that old saying: "Even a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut."

His nut was ESB.

 

He attacked Mace to kill him. He didn't care if his face was destroyed. He wants him dead and the boy on his side. Period. When that failed, he pleaded weakness and used it to get the job done.

Well it's a final insult. The Dark Side is all about power and what it can do for you. He's telling Mace that he's not weak. He's now stronger than ever. The Jedi believe that the Dark Side gives you nothing, but the Sith believe it will give you everything. All you need is power.

"He didn't realize Palpatine was going to kill him (Mace). So up to that point he was trying to do the right thing but now he realizing that with Mace dead he?s crossed over the line and he sorta succumbs and says 'Yes, I?ll do anything you ask so you can allow me to keep my wife alive. Then he (Sidious) says, 'Ok, I?ll do that but now you have to go and kill all the Jedi. Leave none alive or they will come back and get us - even the kids.'"

--George Lucas, ROTS DVD Commentary.

The part where Anakin questions what he has done shows that he still has good in him. That he didn't want no one to die over this. But now he has to do what Palpatine wants, because there is no turning back from this.

Lucas changed it because his friends (Speilberg, Howard, Coppola) told him to change it. That it wasn't working the first way and that he had to do it this way. They told him that we needed to see his anguish and indecision. Afterwards, he came to a decision.

"So I had to ask myself, what was I trying to say and didn't I say it? Did it just get missed or is it not there? I had to look at it very hard. I had to ask myself, 'Is this how the audience is going to react?' Fortunately, Steven confirmed that most of everything was working. So I may lose a certain demographic - maybe, maybe not."

--George Lucas, The Making of ROTS, page 188.

And that's how he came to this scene at the end.

 

I never said that saving Padme was my problem, and as I said many had problems not ALL. I am giving you the opinion for people that didn't like the scene, of course there are people who liked it, that is why we are debating it.

 

In answer to question. No, I don't think so.

Although ESB is my favorite movie of the six, the only problem I've had with GL is his ability to write dialogue. Especially "love story" dialogue.

But overall I think GL did a pretty good job with RotS.

 

Let me ask you, this is the cr

 

If anything, Kirsh should of directed AOTC. He did great with developing the characters and developing the romance between Han and Leia and AOTC needed that kind of character development most. It would of been nice to see what Speilberg did with Episodes 1 or 3.

I am the biggest PT fan though so it doesnt matter to me.

 

I would have HATED to see Anakin and Padme's romance played out like Han and Leia. They are NOT Han and Leia. The funny, jazzy, samppy dialouge of Han and Leia is just not warrented in AOTX, where the whole point is that these two people are entering into the doomed relationship which will eventually destroy them both. Its a tragic romance, and as such, I find it's played out touchingly well, personally.

Oh, and I've always looked at it that the reason Palpatine chose to let his face be fried was two-fold;

1. He had to put Anakin in a situation where he had to choose. Slowly, throughout the first half of ROTS Palpatine is cranking up the pressure on Anakin, and this moment with Mace is where Palpatine finally orchastrates the scenario so that Anakin HAS to make a choice.

2. He needed to make The Jedi's treason look believeable. "The attempt on my life has left me scarred and deformed, but my resolve has never been stronger." His look plays well to The Senate, because it does actually look like the Jedi have harmed him.

 

He didn't want Anakin to stop him. He wanted Anakin to see that the Jedi will do whatever it takes to keep their power. That's why Palpatine attacks. He has to attack Mace to provoke the appropriate response. When Mace kicks him and puts him in a corner, he tells Palpatine that he is under arrest again. Palpatine needs to get Mace to change his mind about that, because faking that he's too weak will just get him arrested. He cannot have that. So he attacks him. When Mace successfully blocks his Lighting, that's when Palpatine adjusts his plan. His face changes, but he doesn't care. All that he cares about is doing this. Between putting all his anger and hate into attacking Mace and having it reflected back, Palpatine's face changes and he can feel it. So he shifts gears and fakes being weak.

Lucas did have a plan. Which was to have Palpatine change throughout. He didn't like that idea and made it into what it was. The eu just made a guess. They cannot always predict what it is Lucas will do. They've said that for years. Tom Veitch came up with that idea to justify "Dark Empire".

Well, Riddler wasn't in Batman 89. He was in Batman Forever and Batman 66. Palpatine is basically saying "Sucker!". He's the classic villian. The ones inspired by Flash Gordon, which has served as a partial inspiration for the Star Wars Saga. And he's laughing because he's enjoying himself. He's won. He's defeated the Jedi. Where Darth Malak, Darth Traya, Exar Kun, Darth Nilihus, Lord Kaan and Naga Sadow failed, he succeeded.

Lucas wants everyone understand why someone who is inheritently good would what he did. In fact, people still didn't get it even with the crying and what not. They thought it was revenge. It was just greed.

 

I enjoyed ROTS and consider it a better film than ROTJ in most respects, although my favorite scene in ROTJ is when Vader's mask finally comes off. However, I and others (I think) feel that the Ewoks were an abomination that I never thought would be eclipsed until Jar Jar came along.

Of course, as we have seen in ROTS, Jar Jar's character slips from "critical" to forgotten, the beneficiary of one small "scuse me" after the opening sequence. To say Jar Jar was a tragic mistake is an understatement.

A couple of things on the making of Empire. Yes it went over budget, yes it was late. But this was the result of frequent ILM delays - not the actors or director. And Kirshner has stated that the reasoning behind his decision to not direct ROTJ stemmed from Lucas being upset by the delays and the initial treatment of ROTJ changing dramatically. In short, most of the characterization and depth developed in ESB was thrown out in ROTJ.

In ROTS, the turn scene, as tyrannus and I have been discussing, leaves alot for each of us, but on different levels. I consider Anakin's reason for turning to be too quick and his submission to the Dark Side way too easy. When Anakin cut off Mace's arm, his decision has been made. Whether he ruminates about it I believed to be half hearted and rather unecessary. Anakin's turn should have been gradual, almost invisible.

True, I consider some of Hayden's performance to be less than stellar - particularly in this scene, but the scene doesn't necessarily work for me because his turn is fast and unbelievable.

Perhaps Kirshner did get lucky. he would be the first to tell you he probably did. But the delays and budget busting sure paid off!

 

A couple of things on the making of Empire. Yes it went over budget, yes it was late. But this was the result of frequent ILM delays - not the actors or director.

That's not at all accurate. Filming on Empire began on March 5th, 1979 and ended on September 24th, 1979. That's 7 months of principal photography and that work has nothing to do with ILM
which was a separate unit operating on the other side of the planet. There were 64 sets on Empire, that is a staggeringly huge film production. The stunts, physical effects on set,
blue screen work, the complex scenes of shooting Yoda with all the puppeteers helping Frank Oz, and the grueling location work in Norway all contributed to Kersh taking much, much longer than originally planned. That's perfectly understandable. His experience had been in making much smaller, character-driven films...he had never made an epic film before.

The movie debuted in May 1980, just as planned.
But the shooting went WAY over schedule, way late.

An excellent book by the way is Alan Arnold's Once Upon a Galaxy, The Making of the Empire Strikes Back.

 

I'll turn it around on you guys, I thought these movies were Lucas's visions, and he makes them the way he wants to?

 

Has anyone mentioned the Directors Guild trouble Lucas got in mentioned in the OT DVD specials disc? Lucas probably COULDN'T get most directors.

Dare I say it... but I don't consider The Empire Strikes Back as highly ranked as most of the prequel haters, do. In fact, it's probably 4th on my ranking of the Star Wars films... Not a bad movie, by any means, but not the best of the popcorn flicks we know as Star Wars.

 

I don't necessarily think that Kersh was the major reason that ESB turned out the way it did. Sure, he may have related to the actors better than GL. But the basic playbook for ESB, supplied by GL and fleshed out by Kasdan and Leigh Brackett, was already there. I don't think ESB would have been radically different if GL had been directing. Kersh's major contribution to ESB's success? Letting Harrison Ford ad lib the "I know" response to Leia's " I love you" in the carbon-freeze scene.

GL did a fine job with ROTS (and the other prequels IMHO). It all worked.

 

Don't forget that they reshot several key scenes, which takes even longer to go through. ANH and ROTJ had about four months or so, for filming. ROTS had the least amount. 66 days, plus pickups.

Palpatine didn't care much about his face. All the better to manipulate Anakin and to gain sympathy in the Senate, if this works out. In the novelization, he looks at himself in the mirror and lamments about his face. Saying that he will miss his original appearence, but this one will do nicely.

I never minded how the Dark Empire books talked about Palpatine's change. Even Lucas read the first TPB and enjoyed it. But it didn't have any bearing on his decision to change his mind.

It's all transitionary. Here he's reveling in his victories. In ROTJ, it's business as usual. Besides, the Joker's just plain ******* nuts.

It's not just Lucas. His friends, quality directors, who felt that he needed to open up.

This is true. But he has always been open to feedback from his friends. From the very beginning, he's turned to his friends and asked them what they thought. Often they praised his work and occassionally told him where to make changes. In this case, he as