The Official Mysteries of the Sith hints and tips thread

Hey, Roger Roger, you seem to have some info readily at your disposal. I call upon thee this challenge:

Find one negative review of TPM from May, one, in a newspaper, magazine, or web site, that does not spend at least a few paragraphs sneering at the fans who will go see TPM anyway.

Once you've read a few film reviews for a particular publication, you've pretty much read them all...

I salute the bashers...they have in them great love of Star Wars and much combined neural activity.

But they're siding with the snobs. That cannot be forgiven...

 

Sith Acolyte: Welcome!! A supporter, its been awhile since I have met any.

I read your post on the other thread, I welcome a kindred spirit into the safety of these walls.

 

Well, many of them just revel in being the naysayers, they see themselves as the little boy who shouts, "The Emperor is naked." But, they have not turned their back on SW, almost all of them admit to enjoying the film, they just want to talk about the flaws.

 

I have seen TPM 3 times (I'm from England where it is out next week and I plan to see it another 7 times.) I love it.

Now over here all of the movie mags are reviewing the film, most giving it 4-5 stars out of 5. One mag went as far as to say that the critical hammering it received in America was one of the industries biggest blunders. More of an anti-Lucas sentiment than ANY sort of critical appraisal. It seems that you Americans are adopting the truly British trait of tearing down the successfull.

Just my 0.0002 pence worth.

 

Hmmm...an interesting point. I'll certainly buy that there's a degree of resentment between critics and moviemakers...one wonders if it was always so...

I think the critics just hate the fact that we had no interest in critical appraisals of TPM beforehand. Perhaps this was our mistake...of course, we'll have even less regard for them in the future.

I should like to read some of the British reviews...I wonder what the French think... http://216.32.191.104/forum/

[This message has been edited by Sith Acolyte (edited 07-05-1999).]

 

Saw TPM again yesterday and it keeps getting better. The story is amazing, probably the most interesting of all 4 movies just based on the political moves of Palpatine/Sidious. It has the same level of political positioning as Braveheart and several other of my favorite movies. It is so great to have a movie with an intelligent plot instead of the standard "We have so many hours to save the earth" story that we get every summer. TPM is one of my favorite all time movies. I just saw "Shakespear In Love" last night and man was that a dissapointment. Not one original moment in the whole film. If that is oscar quality then the academy can leave TPM alone. Lucas rules.

I like this thread. It is great to see that there are some actual Star Wars fans on the forum and not just angry, whinney, teen age boys who have nothing better to do than say stuff sucks. Most of the "basher" threads are like reading hours of Beavis and Butthead transcripts.

May the Force be with us.

 

I thought this would be interesting to put a 1977 review together with a 1999 review from the same paper, The Boston Globe:

'Star Wars' is a blockbuster
By Bruce McCabe, Globe Staff, 05/26/77

STAR WARS - A film written and directed by George Lucas. At the Sack Charles. Rated PG.


"Star Wars" is quite simply, one of the best family entertainment buys you can make this summer. It's a gorgeous, fantastic toy, a marvelous science fiction film that anyone can enjoy, sci fi fan or not.

Written and directed by George Lucas, who made "American Graffiti," "Star Wars" projects a "Graffiti"-like innocence and zest, along with a determination to keep you entertained and enchanted for almost every minute of its two hours.

It's the kind of film you inventory more thatn criticize. We can begin with the characters -- people and machines with names like Luke Skywalker, Princess Leia Organa, See Threepio (C3P0) and Artoo-Detoo (R2-D2) -- and the fantastic plot, which involves Luke's intergalactic search for the kidnapped rebel Princess from planet Alderaan. Luke is joined in his search by Ben Kenobi, the last of the Jedi Knights, the people who were the guardians of peace and justice in the old days before the "dark times" came to the galaxy ...

But I don't want to linger on the plot, which looks funny on the printed page. It photographs marvelously, especially against a brave new world backdrop and some extraordinary special effects. The dialogue and the narrative surges through it all with the smartness of a cracked whip.

A cast of earnest and fresh-faced actors (Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher) is counterpointed by Alec Guinness, who portrays a sort of revolutionary Socrates. There is also a perfectly menacing villain, Lord Darth Vader, played by David Prowse.

What enhances the actors is the costuming (the costume designer is John Mollo) and the makeup (the makeup supervisor is Stuart Freeborn), both of which combine to create unforgettable characters.

But all these aspects, good as they are, are merely elements in a total concept. Lucas has been thinking of "Star Wars" since 1971, before "Grafitti," and the thinking and the research show. There are elements in the film from "Flash Gordon," Edgar Rice Burroughs and Jules Verne, not to mention other genres, like westerns and war movies. Yet Lucas never gets distracted. His fidelity to the story and to his determiniation to amaze you never waver.

Of all the things I enjoyed in the movie, I have to rank the comic strip-like dialogue near the top. I mean, lines like "We're doomed, there'll be no escape for the the Princess this time," and "We don's serve your kind around here." The last is muttered by a bartender in a cafe filled with creatures from outer space to two robots, a sequence that is truly a riot. Not the least of the attractions of the film is its freewheeling, uninhibited, tongue-in-cheek spirit.

But I'm running out of adjectives. "Star Wars" is not a film to be written about, it's an experience. It's that rare experience for both adults and kids that shortchanges neither. Go -- and enjoy.

(Now for the TPM review)

MOVIE REVIEW
All sizzle, no soul

'Phantom' characters, story forced out

By Jay Carr, Globe Staff, 05/18/99


STAR WARS: EPISODE I - THE PHANTOM MENACE
Directed and written by:George Lucas
Staring: Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, Jake Lloyd, Ian McDiarmid, Pernilla August, Ahmed Best, Frank Oz, Samuel L. Jackson, Ray Park

Playing at: Cheri, suburbs

Running time: 130 minutes

Rated: PG (sci-fi action violence)



The new "Star Wars" prequel is good enough, but only just. It's got the hardware but neither the characters, the imagination, nor the resonance one had hoped for. What fans will want to know, now that the hype can be replaced with actuality, is whether "The Phantom Menace" is sufficiently of a piece with the first three films to make it worth seeing. The answer is yes, but not by much. George Lucas, perhaps inevitably drawn back into the "Star Wars" gravitational field, has talked a lot about te

 

I disagree, Barada's buddy Garindan.

If the critics believe, in their opinion, that Episode 2 is better than Episode 1, most of them will say so. If they think EP2 is great, then they'll rave about Star Wars once again like they used to.

The cynicism about filmmaking is the result of people being more informed about what goes into the making of movies, the compromises that are made for the sake of commercial success.

 

Yeah, and Lucas didn't make any compromises for money or the fans. Rob Coleman even brought how annoying he thought Jar Jar was to George Lucas' attention and George didn't care about Rob Coleman's or anyone else's opinion. Remember how Lucas test screened the SE and everyone wanted him to change the "greedo shoots first" scene?

My god, people are smug!

 

Sith Acolyte,

The first and last paragraphs from the review of TPM from Empire magazine, personally, I think the best film mag in England...

'Be it cheerleaders at "soccer" matches or the popularity of Mariah Carey, the Americans occasionally display a remarkable capacity for getting things wrong. And so it came to pass with US press screenings of Episode 1. "Star Bores" screamed the tabloids: "Lacklustre Lucas" shrieked the broadsheets. Thumbs down was the cowardly consensus. Yet, by seeking a story rather than reviewing a movie, the Yanks missed the point entirely. For while never scaling the heights of Episode IV or V (but definately besting VI), the Phantom Menace is a much more triumphant movie than any level-headed movie fan had the right to expect.

The last paragraph:

'Ultimately, how much you enjoy Episode 1 will depend on preconception: if you expect a life-changing, generation-defining experience, you'll be sorely disappointed; if you expect a superbly fashioned blockbuster, then The Phantom Menace delivers. After a 16 year wait, it turns out it is only a movie after all. Just as well its a bloody good one."

**** out of *****

The picture with the review is a wide shot of the two Jedi battling Maul with the caption: 'The opera of The Phantom fulfils the mythic stature it always promised.'

 

I must thank Roger Roger for providing the following excerpt by some critic:

Visually, the idyllic
capital of Naboo, the peaceful planet ruled by Amidala and coveted by the trouble-making Dark
Lord of the Sith, suggests a cross between Marin County and the patina-domed campuses of
Stanford and the University of California at Berkeley. The elaborate sci-fi towers of the
Federation's capital city of Coruscant suggest "Metropolis" passed through a computer. Darth
Maul, the bad guy in the climactic laser sword fight, suggests a hooded wannabe from the rock
group KISS. Lucas even has fun with "Monday Night Football" in the character of a two-headed
announcer at the pod races. The big victory celebration seems like a halftime show.

This critique has managed not to evaluate the movies visuals, but simply to spew forth his own mind/word associations. He think Theed/Naboo looks like points west, I think it looks like many of the European places I've seen, most notably Rome and Venice. Note he doesn't really tell us that looking like a bunch of college campuses is bad...that is merely implied. Had he said...the sets lacked credibility, they were jarringly colored...anything other than his empty puffery, I might have been able to read the review without chuckling mightily at this marveouls example of just how un-helpful critics are. I'd say you are hoist by this particular petard, Rog.

Of critics in general....Rog states that they are a legitimate bridge. I differ. Criticism as a profession was self-invented in the 19th century to inform the newly enriched middle classes what they "ought" to like. Prior to that time, art and music were in the hands of a knowledgeable elite and did just fine sans critics, thank you. With the web, critics are passe. The opinions I've read in this forum are far better than the example Rog provided. Further, we are all familiar with the stifling effect of those 19th century critics when faced with the Faves, Impressionists, etc. The critics were, practically en masse, busy condeming that which was new. My favorite annecdote about the intelligence of critics is still the one where they gave very favorable reviews to paintings executed by apes. I leave it to the TPM bashers ape the these critic!!

 

I was disturbed to read the post from Sandfarmer which said: "I like this thread. It is great to see that there are some actual Star Wars fans on the forum and not just angry, whinney, teen age boys who have nothing better to do than say stuff sucks. Most of the "basher" threads are like reading hours of Beavis and Butthead transcripts."

HeHeHeHe...these comments like...uh, really SUCKED...HeHeHeHe

Beavis and Butthead??!!?? Hey, Sandfarmer, our stuff isn't like that at all! It's really very intelligent, tasteful and classy stuff. We're talkin' AT LEAST "South Park"-level, man!

 

Well done, wizzle!

I find critics to be a generally worthless bunch. Only the most educated among them can offer any insight, and that's only if they can lift their heads from the sand and think about a movie as a whole instead of chopping it into parts.

The rest of them will swoon any time a movie has one of the following:
a) period costume
b) Italians shooting one another (Godfather, Goodfellas, Casino, like these aren't all the same movie)
c) Naked people with subtitles
d) Gay men on a voyage of discovery (not that there's anything...)

Down with the tyranny of self-important English Lit Majors! We have nothing to lose but a few lame sections of newspapers!

FANS OF THE WORLD, UNITE!

Crix, thanks for the British review...I agree with most of that...

 

wizzle,
I knew I should have explained a bit further when I posted those reviews, but I was counting on some folks here to have read or at least to have glanced through the thread before taking their shots.

I wasn't posting those reviews as examples of good criticism. I put them up for the comparison of tone, to let people see how critics gushed in their reviews of the original Star Wars, but were less than enthusiastic about TPM for whatever reason, good or bad.

My post was simply another illustration to counter the assertion that film critics generally have always disliked Star Wars.

 

I'd like to belabor my point about using critics as "experts" a bit further. Please refer to the excerpt I posted a few threads up.

As previously stated, the critic provided only bombast, no real evluation. However, even more painfully, he chose to attack the visuals of TPM like Theed and Darth Maul, which are it's strongest assets. He likens Maul's make up to Kiss. And?? Does that make Maul any less a VERY fierce and effective image, particularly when exploited as GL did with that fab bit where Maul walks back and forth behind the force screen like a caged tiger.

Now....had any of our humble selves posted such a shallow bit of "criticism" or "reverse criticism, e.g. we love it" (especially us lamented newbies) on this board what do you suppose the Ba****s would be saying? Down with the fools, of course!!

As a mental exercise....try doing a thoughtful criticism on the Basher Thread. Words like "repetitive, gratuitous violence, unoriginal, no substantive bashing, etc." come to mind. Yes...I know it's all in fun (I get it I get it).

Now....a couple of rebuttles to the Ba****s (who ARE better than the critics):

1. Wooden acting - I found the understated Jedi's very effective. Rather in the "speak softly but carry a big stick" mode. By the time they got down to Naboo, I could understand why the TF didn't want to tangle with them. Some bits like the pacing in front of the force screen were wonderful. The only scene I thought was mis-handled was Anakin's parting from his mom....he should have RUN back and buried his head in her skirt as he grabbed her legs....and cried.

2. Character developement - see an excellent evaulation by a Marine on the cnn board for an interesting discussion of Amidala's development as a leader...I believe he was using some of the critical tools from a leadership class he took or was taking (sorry I can't remember the thread #).

3. No good lines - I refer you to the "pants" thread on this very board. Looks to me like we will have a whole new compendium.

4. Jar Jar - my idea of the stereotypically obnoxious teen who won't listen but manages to pull off some cool stuff anyway. Kids are amazing...but admittedly not for everyone.

The visuals and costumes were outstanding. On a par with one of my all time fav movies "Man for All Seasons." TPM is by far the "prettiest" Star Wars movie. Putting a costume epic in space .....GL does it first again.

 

Roger Roger:

Hmmm...and you thereby conclude that this change is due to the fact that TPM is a bad movie?

Or don't you? I'll not presume...

On the other hand, we all assume that critics didn't like it because they didn't want to like it. That might be just as inaccurate.

Or, as the posts have begun to point out, just as irrelevant...

[This message has been edited by Sith Acolyte (edited 07-05-1999).]

 

Rog...

Yes...I understood your point about "then" versus "now." However, you managed to provide some wonderful fodder to criticizing the critics. And since the Ba****s like to re-inforce their own opinons by quoting the critics, I feel pointing out how very shallow a piece that was is fair. I was also reacting to your words about the legitimacy of criticism on yet another thread.

BTW....even as a new member I'm capable of reading an entire thread...even two. You have much to unlearn about new members.

 

wizzle

I haven't been here too long myself, but I was here when the debate was quite pitched (it has naturally died down). All through those battles, the fans who had criticisms rarely relied on what film critics said. Most on all sides of the debate have relied on their own opinions, except for a few who rely heavily on the Word of George.

The only reason I have posted these reviews (and I have done so with hesitation) is to demonstrate that many critics did thoroughly enjoy the first movie in 1977 (I was accused a while back of not having the evidence to back this up).

Of course, who cares what critics think, unless they agree with you ("you" meant in the general sense). Then you can paste snippets of their wisdom on this thread to bolster your case. I'm glad to see they are good for something.

[This message has been edited by Roger Roger (edited 07-05-1999).]

 

Star Wars movies are not character driven! They never have been and it's part of their charm (like it or not). And the dialogue is not supposed to be realistic or even witty. It's supposed to be straight-forward and have a sort of rhythm ("Relax." "You overdid it."). This is what makes the movies so quotable and fun.

Star Wars has also undoubtedly brought us the greatest heroes and villains in the history of film (I think we can all agree on that). And this is true for Episode-i as well. Anyone who can't appreciate this has something very wrong with them. So you can honestly say you were "disappointed" or that it's your "least favorite Star Wars film" but anyone who claims it "sucks" is either a liar or a complete moron.

And many people complain that Jake Lloyd did not burst into tears when leaving home. I really think he should not have. Jake Lloyd is good in TPM but he is a child actor and there is a limit to the emotion that he can pull off. Any good director knows this.

The Phantom Menace is a very straight-forward movie, the story is very linear and the film never attempts to be cool or pretend that is something it's not. It's the most un-pretentious film I've ever seen and that's one of the things I love so much about it. Anyone who does not understand this does not "get it."

 

Ok, you can add my name to the list of people who are in full support of Lucas' latest masterpeice. I loved this movie and even though people are entitled to their own opinion, i really dont care. If you dont like TPM the screw you, i dont feel like hearing you whine about it, i just cant even be around TPM bashers. I find them to be incompetent fouls.

 

Ok, you can add my name to the list of people who are in full support of Lucas' latest masterpeice. I loved this movie and even though people are entitled to their own opinion, i really dont care. If you dont like TPM the screw you, i dont feel like hearing you whine about it, i just cant even be around TPM bashers. I find them to be incompetent fouls.

 

yeah phantom menace rules
I'm seeing it tomorrow for my 4th time

and i'll take you all on!!!!!!

 

I love it!! actual discourse concerning the movie!!!

Roger Roger: I just think that the same things that the critics lauded in 77, they are criticizing in 99. I also think that there is a certain premise that critics follow that reads: I am above the public. There are very few movies that critics love that are heavily hyped. I can't think of any. Roger Ebert, however, seems to be the exception (this usually led to the best arguments with Siskel).

Darth Derringer Please, you have a long way to go before you reach the sophistication of Beavis and Butt-head.

 

Tell me, Sith-Lord 35, do you find your tusks get in the way of chewing mutton?

 

Another TRUE FAN present.

Cheers to George and HIS creation. That's right SW is Lucas' creation and I am glad NON-FAN LOSERs don't have a say.