The biggest fault in AOTC was...

You left out the 'wink' at the end of my post.



I'm not bashing Lucas at all.


I'm saying that he accepted the take that was eventually used. People refer to Carrie Fisher's lack of acting skills, Natalie's lack of acting skills, Hamill's lack of acting skills, and so on.


What is the director doing while these people are 'acting badly'?


Is he saying "We can fix it in post"?


Is he saying that it's "good enough"?


Is he saying "Perfect! That's exactly what I wanted"?

 

And Ani's and Padme's love story isn't a traditional one?

Well, not too many love stories go, "Boy meets girl, boy spends the next ten years obsessing over girl, boy creeps out girl, boy slaughters children, girl shrugs it off, girl marries boy after having known him a week."

Like most romances of old, the Ani-Padme story features the concept of love, but that and all other similarities are superficial; the actual structure of the story is quite different. (Let's not forget that Guinevere was married, Romeo and Juliet had more stopping them than rules, and Robin Hood never went on a killing spree.)

 

Well, when you put it that way...

 

I'm trying to say that in SW, Mark Hamill sounding a bit whiney or Carrie sounding British in one scene and American in another is okay..... who cares? Did you have fun watching the movie? Obviously yes..... If Brando went in-annd-out of his Don Corleone accent in Godfather then the acting bashing is warrented.... but SW is a visual story.... it's meant to be seen and experienced.... the acting is fine, it's passable, I don't care if Hamill isn't Russel Crowe or Sir Laurence Olivier......

Whiney lines or British accents are there, but it was a fun movie, unlike anything I've seen in a movie then or since...... remember fun?

 

Well, not too many love stories go, "Boy meets girl, boy spends the next ten years obsessing over girl, boy creeps out girl, boy slaughters children, girl shrugs it off, girl marries boy after having known him a week."

Like most romances of old, the Ani-Padme story features the concept of love, but that and all other similarities are superficial; the actual structure of the story is quite different. (Let's not forget that Guinevere was married, Romeo and Juliet had more stopping them than rules, and Robin Hood never went on a killing spree.)

Padme loves Anakin. Through all his faults and failures she does.... he makes mistakes, the guy had a hard life, his mother was just killed and beaten by the people he lashed out against..... it's not like he walked into a jawa village and started slashing..... I would hope Padme would still love him despite his flaws.... Anakin was wrong, he didn't like what he did..... he needs help...... should Padme just turn around and leave the guy she loves because of it? And people get married after a short period of time every day.... some work some don't... and what's the offical time lapse on their time together anyway?

Guinevere was married.... ok, so another case of forbidden love, thanks for proving my point, and the same with Romeo & Juliet..... I'm not saying the stories are identical in structure, but there's no doubt they're similar..... and was Anakin on killing spree? I don't think so... a killing spree is Son of Sam or Jack the Ripper....

 

JediRandy, you're confusing me. You admit that the PT has it's flaws, and you point out that the OT does as well.


Yet whenever someone points out what they see as a flaw, you passionately defend it, no matter how small the criticism.


I can understand Anakin's anger and actions towards the Tusken village. But slaughtering an entire village qualifies as "a killing spree", in my book.

 

If the ESB love story was done today the basher's would be using the same lines we hear now. Mark Hamill would be bashed like Hayden is and Carrie Fisher like Natalie. Put some things in prespective.

Wow, so sure you are. HELLO, the Han and Leia romance has the same spark that was found in so many classic movies like Gone With the Wind, His Girl Friday and the films of Ernest Lubitsch and other Howard Hawk movies. (Leigh Brackett, the original scribe for ESB, wrote for Hawks -- maybe that's what Lucas wanted in the Han-Leia romance) There's a reason Lawrence Kasdan (a great screenwriter) and Lucas wanted to pattern their ESB romance to what has worked. That's why those classics hold up after 60 years. Maybe you should go out and rent some movies before you make your wild statements. YOU put things into perspective. It's so easy to take something that worked back then and just assume it would get trashed today. If the ESB romance worked back in 1980, it'll work today. Tastes do not differ so drastically in 20-25 years.

 

I'm sorry if I'm being confusing.... I'm just trying to get accross that if you say the acting sucks in the PT, then the same argument can be made for the OT.

I presonally don't think the acting sucks in either the PT or OT.... it's not stellar but it doesn't suck.... it doesn't make or break the movies for me. IMO

My point is that many of the complaints made against the PT can and should be made of the OT..... but bashers won't do it.... the "Holy Trilogy" is untouchable and viewed through rose-colored glasses.....

 

Tastes do not differ so drastically in 20-25 years.

So sure are you. If tastes don't change then how did we get all those teen movies that were more about sex then love?

 

JediRandy, I agree. I think that all five films have had great moments, as well as elements that could have been better.


They're still my favorite films.



Edit: I should have qualified my statement to say that while I love all five films, I have to admit that the series has it's ups and downs. That's inevitable.

 

I don't need to rent your list of movies to understand a classic love story.....I've seen them... move on.... it has nothing to do with the point I'm trying to get accross....

go back and read my posts and spare me the baiting.... I'm not going to ruin a fun debate in here by getting started with you JW....

I agree that the ESB love story works... the same way I think the AOTC love story works..... I'm just stating that IMO bashers do not look at both trilogies the same way. The love story can be thought of as "Forced" in both films but it's AOTC that gets the brunt of the criticism.....why?



And spare me the film history lessons.... you went on about Ernest Lubitsch and Howard Hawk but you had no idea about the points we've been discussing in here....

 

The "unconditional reverance of the OT" argument has never been valid and will never be valid. It can be discredited and hung out to dry simply by bringing up ROTJ, which is widely known to be bashed to no end among fans that were less than enamored with the PT. ROTJ came out only three years after ESB, and yet it's almost universally looked down on by the PT "bashers".

So much for the age argument.

 

If I'm not mistaken, the exterior of Topico City actually was a model while elements like the water and rain were CGI composites.

Has anyone seen the Discovery Channel show "Mythbusters"? I watched the New Years Day marathon and the intro for the first few episodes showed one of the hosts, Adam Savage, working on the Tipoca City model. He's credited in AOTC as an ILM Model Maker. Interesting little factoid. Pretty good show.

 

My point is that many of the complaints made against the PT can and should be made of the OT..... but bashers won't do it.... the "Holy Trilogy" is untouchable and viewed through rose-colored glasses.....

I saw the OT for the first time in 1995/1996 or so. I saw the Phantom Menace in '99, and AOTC in 2002. HOW the heck did I get rose-colored glasses in just three/four years, tell me Mr. Randy? Stop making your ridiculous accusations. Maybe you haven't watched the OT in a long time and got sucked into loving the PT, so you're suffering from OT-amnesia.

anidanami124: So sure are you. If tastes don't change then how did we get all those teen movies that were more about sex then love?

I think we got them in the 80s and we still get them now. There were crude teenage comedies and boring teeny-bop romances back then, and today, we still get movies like Van Wilder and Chasing Liberty.

Tastes in subject matter will change somewhat, but a good movie is still a good movie, and a bad one will still be bad.

Flaws:
On a scale of 1-10 in terms of flaws, 10 being a very flawed movie where I cannot enjoy it anymore, and 1 being a slightly-flawed movie, I give the OT a "2-3" (more for ROTJ) and I give the PT a "6-7". I'm not going to change my rankings for you or anyone. This is why I criticize. I feel as if the films are not on the same level, and this is one saga, one story. I know both trilogies have flaws (duh!) but the difference FOR ME is one can be enjoyed and one has debilitating flaws. It is no coincidence that the 6-7 ranking is almost the percentage I skip or am bored with if I watch the PT. I would only watch 20% of the films, like the Maul duel or the Pod race.

 

Being that we're discussing the acting of Mark Hamill, the love story in ESB vs the love story in AOTC..... and the overall view of the OT in comparison to the PT, the agrument is a VERY valid one.....

ROTJ's bash is the Ewoks..... not the story itself....

 

And spare me the film history lessons.... you went on about Ernest Lubitsch and Howard Hawk but you had no idea about the points we've been discussing in here....

Then spare me your blanket statements that the ESB romance would be trashed "just the same" if it were released today. There is a point in me bringing up those films and directors.

 

You're still baiting JW..... have fun... chill out.


to say the OT isn't viewed by most people with rose colored glasses is crazy..... it's proven in the JC day after day. It's not ridiculous .... what is ridiculous is your inability to post without baiting or flaming....

 

Which is not for you to point out, as it only serves as a bait...which makes you both equally guilty. Save the attacks, flames, and baits for inside your heads. Don't type it out. Thanks.

 

Randy:

Sometimes people stick with the wrong partners, and sometimes people marry in a hurry?but both at once? To a confessed mass murderer? No way.

If tastes don't change then how did we get all those teen movies that were more about sex then love?

Because sex was invented in 1983.

Seriously, though, movies about sex have been around since the silent era; they were just censored more heavily back then.

The late seventies and early eighties were packed with sex comedies; Animal House, Porky's, Zapped, and so on. It's nothing new.

 

RoG's opinion is just as valid as the next guys. He does not need to go base it off of a critical reivew. Or even a prevaling opinion from here. It's his opinion.

Ah, anidanami. lol I find it very interesting that you believe personal opinion to be the "God's honest truth". If a person thinks Heaven's Gate or gigli are great movies does that mean they are? How could a person believe him? Would you not want some evidence as to why he thinks that beyond personal opinion?

I think one person said it best, when a poster offers an alternative review of TPM or AOTC, they are derided but if someone offers a rave review of Sw - well blessed be the king.

So when a person explains all of the glorious things about either film, you're telling me that I can't challenge that person? I can't ask him why he thinks one way but 300 people think a different way?

I'm not sure why, when a person offers up an innocent comment on the acting inability of Portman, SW lovers cannot look at the comment made, analyze it, and provide an explanation as to why they think otherwise, rather than crying double standard.

No double standard exists fellas and ladies.

 

Then spare me your blanket statements that the ESB romance would be trashed "just the same" if it were released today.

You think ESB's love story wouldn't be trashed.... what proof do you have? Your statement is every bit a blanket one as mine. They're both opinions... I believe in mine and you in yours. Try discussing them instead of flaming mine.

There is a point in me bringing up those films and directors.

Okay, what is the point? Please tell me.

 

Telling people they are wearing rose-colored glasses, and presenting it as fact as you did, is flaming.

 

The double standard is there if we all accepted the bad acting, writing and editing of the classic trilogy, but refuse to do so with the prequels.

 

Perhaps to some, the flaws of the OT are like a mosquito bite, whereas the flaws in the PT are like being stabbed in the eye with a knitting needle.



(Just playing 'devil's advocate'.)