Should Kirshner have directed ROTS

Discussion in 'Revenge of the Sith' started by mikadojedi, Jan 23, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Philip023 Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Aug 30, 2002
    star 3
    As I recall from interviews with Kirshner and Kurtz, there was some shooting of scenes that had some special effects shots that were necessary. Not being what Kirshner wanted, he had them reshot to George's dismay.

    Given George's "its good enough" mantra, I think the finished product is reflected of an attention to detail that might not have otherwise been there had Lucas been at the helm.

    of course, it is speculation as to whether Empire would have been the same film had George directed. I would tend to think not.

    Its no newsflash that I do not necessarily think Lucas is a great director in the traditional sense. As a technical director, he probably has no equal. But if he had brought a "two headed monster" to ROTS, I have no doubt it could have been that much better and challenged ANH and ESB as the best.

  2. DamonD Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Nov 22, 2002
    star 6
    Kirch did great with ESB. On the other hand, Robocop 2 was terrible.

    So why was that?
  3. LordMortis Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Apr 16, 2005
    Personally I thought ROTS was the best SW movie directed by Lucas. But I think Kirch would have been ideal for ATOC, which was good, but I think he would have made it a bit darker and more satisfying.
  4. darthvaderv Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 20, 2005
    star 4
    Kirshner would of done a good job im sure, but Lucas had redemption with ROTS, great job.
  5. JamesBatista Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jul 13, 2005
    star 1
    He was great and all, but repeat after me: HE IS TOO OLD TO BE DIRECTING.
  6. RolandofGilead Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jan 17, 2001
    star 7
    Yes, too old to begin directing. :p


  7. Jedi_Ford_Prefect Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 9, 2003
    star 4
    Sigh. If you're going to make this argument, could you at least spell the guy's name correctly?
  8. mikadojedi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 25, 2003
    star 4
    Wow this is the first thread I ever started that got to 4 pages. I'm honored. I really am. Thanks!!
  9. mastersith69 Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Mar 10, 2005
    star 1
    no he sholu not have directed any star wars movie past empire strikes back.
  10. obiwanws2 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 28, 2004
    star 1
    The only thing that might have happened if kirshner directed sith would hv been a better showing at the oscars for sith....nothing else
  11. arabiansanchez Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 17, 2001
    star 4
    I think V is hugely overrated now I can watch all 6. It's jarring in a way VI certainly isn't.
  12. mastersith69 Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Mar 10, 2005
    star 1
    i feel also empire is a bit overrated because dont get me wrong and dont kill me yet but i just dont feel like it was powerful as everyone says it is. sure the father moment was big but that is it. kirschner did a good job on empire but after that his star wars run was over.
  13. Veloz Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 30, 2004
    star 6
    No.

    George did great and imo no one could have done it better.
  14. the_imperial_senate Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Mar 23, 1999
    star 1
    You guys are crazy.

    I admit, out of an entire 2+ hour movie, a couple moments of stilted dialogue existed and an oddball moment when Anakin turned. But the overall movie was fantastic and gripping. Emotional, compelling, an epic. The problem I think is the importance of scenes that were cut showing Anakin's struggle going back and forth which the feeling didn't materialize in the final film. If you read the script, you will understand. Obi-wans first visit to Padme's appt and Palpatine's further coersion of Anakin were huge IMO. Without them, the change felt a little forced. But thats a minor squibble.

    Had another director handled the film, it may not have turned out to our liking. They may have messed up other aspects of the film far more detrimental IMO.
  15. ezekiel22x Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 9, 2002
    star 4
    An interesting question that certainly is valid given that Kershner?s helming of The Empire Strikes Back provided the SW episode I consider the most emotionally, structurally, and dynamically trenchant. This picture succeeded so well in taking the familiar lead characters into bold new developmental territory that drastically altered the larger thrust of narrative tone around them. The result culminated with an overall atmospheric transfer that first and foremost portrayed a sense of innate, chaotic declination in regards to all of the main characters? battles with utterly despairing situations and revelations. Why this drastic shift in tone from that of A New Hope?s decidedly lighter one seemed so natural and necessary was first and foremost a result of the brilliant sense of character development Kershner elicited throughout his picture. I contend that it?s no coincidence that this film?s concentration on human interaction between existing characters over special effects sequences and myriad new alien antagonists is so noticeable because of Kershner?s directorial leanings.

    Flash forward (or backwards perhaps) to Revenge of the Sith, and it?s evident that this picture and The Empire Strikes Back share a multitude of stylistic similarities. Sith also brings about a drastic tone where dark, brooding themes are brought to the forefront of the trilogy?s narrative, while the key characters of the film suffer through interpersonal interactions and revelations that drastically bring about a thematic point of no return. This is where Sith remains a bit problematic for me, as the execution of various key sequences of the film range from brilliant in execution to bumbling with awkwardness. Thus I marvel at the immolation scene, but scoff at the actual mechanics of the duel that brings about the powerful, personal finale. While the silent rumination sequence represents perhaps the strongest, most definitive moment for the character of Padme in the entire prequel trilogy, the birthing scene and her subsequent death leave me scratching my head in confusion. And finally, while the Order 66 montage managed an exemplary level of emotive clarity despite the fact that the Jedi seen dying previously received little to no development, other effects driven battle scenes like the brief wookie battle and the entire first half-hour of the film serve no purpose to me other than providing boredom while simultaneously taking away from the film?s essential level of impending doom.

    Basically, Revenge of the Sith plays like a piece directed by one suffering from an extreme case of dual-identities. In many ways it?s the most jarring of all the episodes, as constantly through the film I?m offered scenes of poetic, affecting beauty interspersed with all too many other moments of contrived absurdity. So in a way, my answer to the question is yes, I do think that the man responsible for directing The Empire Strikes Back could?ve shaped Sith into a much more cohesive, and even personal effort. But as was stated earlier in this thread, the fact that Kershner hasn?t helmed a project in over a decade realistically dictates that to have awarded him such a revered film like Sith would?ve been a pretty big roll of the dice. At the end of the day I?ll have to be content with my belief that a director like Kershner might?ve made Sith into a masterpiece rather than simply an average piece, as well as the knowledge that in the worst case another director might not have managed the few high notes that Lucas did manage to hit.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.