Vader's "NOOOOO" when he hears he "killed" Padme

It's just Vader, Palpatine and a few droids. He's not out in public, with a whole bunch of strangers walking around. Sidious is actually very happy and I doubt the droids feel awkward, scared is more like it since he just crushed some of their friends.

 

But you feel the awkwardness. And Vader and the fictitious me in the previous post do not--at least at that time. We can recover our senses and later feel embarrassed or even humiliated. And I doubt Vader would want Palps to think him weak--though as we know Palps is pleased that Vader has this rage and nothing else to hold on to, but that is beside the point.

So, perhaps many viewers did find the scene awkward. More than likely it was bc it was suited Vader who did this.

 

Oh I see what your saying. So that awkwardness added to the effect of how Vader felt? Yah, I suppose. I've noticed that the first time I watched it, it stood out like a sore thumb. I really didn't like it. Then, over time, it seemed to just fit because I tried not thinking about the actor in the suit or the person doing the voice (which is what happens when a scene goes wrong), but Vader and it seemed a little fake to me, but it was a lot better.

 

i agree with those opeople who thought the delivery was bad. The concept of Vader going "Nooooooooo" isn't really bad. but the way it was said in the movie was practically comical.

I advise people to check foreign language versions of ROTS on the chance they catch some of the "Noooooo's" like the French version i talked about or the Spanish version someone else brought up...
Maybe they are the same one?

 

Honestly, I don't think the delivery was half bad. Matter of fact, that was Hayden's best acting moment in the entire prequel trilogy. Mostly because he didn't have all that much to do with it.

 

Not much of a Hayden fan, eh?

That's an interesting idea about viewing the foreign language versions. I'll have to give it a try.

 

The french version of the Noooooooo is much better

 

*would love to hear that version!*

The German one was imbearable!!!

*has big problems to like the whole PT voices, but did like the OT ones!*

And about this NOOOOOOOO buisness. GL should have gotten the Golden Raspberry and not Hayden!

*will ask her master and commander if there is a chance to get the Dutch version of...*

Dang, the Dutch have subtitles. Clever people!

 

Actually Azure, there should also be a Dutch language version, for the kids. ... I don't know anyone that saw it, mind you, but still, the DVD should have it!

You do have a good point PEV, it might have to do with it being the suited Vader to show emotion; we previously only saw that in RotJ when he was already being worked upon by Luke; for the rest he mostly showed distant and superior anger.

 

It's worked well in The Simpsons, Family Guy... and just about every comic-book series ever published.
Gotta love the exaggerated 'NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO'.

 

I didn't think the Nooooooooooo! was so bad, it felt a little out of character but it was OK.
My favourite usage of this device was when Christopher Reeve did it in the original Superman movie after finding Lois dead in her car. Although he didn't technically scream out Noooooo!, he had so much emotion in his voice that you actually felt his pain. Maybe GL should of had Vader yell a similar thing rather than Noooo!
eMiLy

 

A bit of a harsh statement. I personally think Hayden's acting and performance improved in ROTS. The Vader scenes were definately not his high point in terms of acting.

 

Haha one of my personal favourites would have to be in Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back, when Jay thinks Justice has been killed in the van explosion.

'JUSTIIIIIIIIIIIIICE!!'

Answered by the operatic choir replying: 'Is dead! Or so Jay thinks!'

 

I find it terrible, it makes me shiver in antipathy everytime I think about it. That moment is so much the Vader I never wanted to see.

 

This is an AWESOME line...it embodies all of Vader's pain and heartache...it's perfect...once again Lucas has shown that his writing and directing are far superior to anyone else.

 

Anytime you try to pass off a cliché "movie moment" as dramatic you're going to have problems. The reasoning for the line is there... but it just doesn't work on screen. It's too embedded in the public's minds as corny that they're just not gonna buy it. (Or at least the majority won't.)

 

I thought it was to be honest. Would be more in place in a spoof!

 

And the fact that it's now become a running joke in both mass-market mags(EW), and geek community mags(ToyFare) is a strange compliment to this scene. It has a train-wreck kind of watchability.
And when you watch a movie over & over, the good parts are that much better, and the (IMO) bad parts get that much worse. If a movie is only seen one time, these scenes just don't stick in your mind, like a bit of popcorn stuck way back in your gums that you can't get out no matter what.

 

The French 'NOOOOOOOOOO' version is better, indeed! (In the Dutch DVD version you can choose to synchronise, French voice or original and choose between 7 types of subtitles-from English, French, Dutch to Turkish)

I'm from Holland and subtitles are very handy, but somehow I always wind up watching Star Wars without subtitles and the original voices.

I refuse synchronising, it puts the movie out of it's context.

 

I liked the scene, and I am not ashamed to admit it.

I liked the scene in general, and Vader?s maligned "NOOOOOOO!" was not, to my mind, nearly as bad as certain portions of the public have made it out to be. That said, I can appreciate why some people don?t like it ? it could have been orchestrated more smoothly, perhaps, or performed differently by James Earl Jones (who knows how much of his delivery was embellished using audio equipment).

While I don?t like Lucas' zoom out in the shot, which is miscalculated, I do think the underlying concept behind the scene was correct. It would have been a mistake to emphasize Vader?s anger in an elaborate, bombastic scene of destruction, because providing the audience with a viscerally exciting piece of stylized violence might undermine the more central issue of Anakin/Vader?s tragedy ? in other words, the point here is that Vader?s ambulatory life-support system is not so much an imposing piece of machinery that evokes terror and villainy, but a constant reminder of his tragic undoing, as well as the incitement of his wife?s death (Vader?s "force choke" in the OT now gathers another level of meaning).

Lucas focuses on the isolative emotional pathos that is contained within Vader?s character at this juncture ? he is very much - both literally and figuratively - a "broken man." The director?s choice to tap into "horror movie" clichés (namely Whale?s "Frankenstein," and its sequel, "Bride of Frankenstein") as an aesthetic apparatus from which to construct the set piece does ground the passage in a kind of mythic pulpiness, but it also helps to infuse the sequence with a sprawling, melodramatic grandeur that effectively reinforces the idea that Anakin has become something like a monster, both emotionally and physically.

I have read (never mind where) that it is categorically impossible to defend the scene in question, because it is "empirically bad." If a defense of the maligned Vader sequence is not viable, then it is puzzling to me that other films which contain hammy Nooooooooo?s have somehow managed to avoid concentrated scrutiny. Take, for instance, the following examples:

In "Spider-Man 2," Doc Ock?s anguished "NOOOOO!" after he has dispensed with an operating room full of surgeons and medical attendants (he is also responsible for his wife?s death, incidentally, and his wailing represents [in part] his remorse after coming to that realization, along with all of the other destruction he has caused). Director Sam Raimi?s camera zooms out slowly as Octavious screams.

[image=http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/6602/pdvd0101ep.png]

In Peter Weir?s "Dead Poets Society," which was nominated for several Oscars, including Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Actor (and actually won the Original Screenplay award), there is a climactic scene in which actor Kurtwood Smith screams "Nooooo!" upon making a tragic discovery. Weir (unfortunately) plays this scene in slow motion, and Smith?s drawn out cry sounds not unlike a small airplane passing overhead.

[image=http://img110.imageshack.us/img110/5519/pdvd0082dk.png]

I loved aotc. The fire scene and all.TPM had its flaws but come on I can say the samething about the rotj.

I liked those films as well (for what it?s worth, I don?t think any of the SW pictures are flawless).

 

It is relatively easy to assail any Star Wars film if one chooses.

Does that mean that the "nooo" event -- taken to mean the line, the delivery, the visuals and everything accompaying the scene at this moment -- is inherently flawed or flawless? That is down to the individual. Art can only become truth, and truth can only become art, when one surrenders to their heart and mind. When the heart and mind take over, truth is rendered from art, and art is rendered from truth. In no way at all is anything within Star Wars -- save for externals (e.g. film ratio, film brightness, length of film, loudness etc) -- actually empirical. Being able to measure something in a universally agreed fasion is the antithesis of art. I don't want to hear anyone crossing their opinion into the realm of fact -- it is a false economy.

I personally think that the "nooo" event was reasonably well done. The intention was certainly sound, and the execution, while not brilliant, is certainly passable. To me at least.

Tyranus, as ever, I greatly enjoyed your preceding contribution. But you missed a very "local" example: Luke's scream of "nooo" in "The Empire Strikes Back". I find it amusing how this film gets a free pass form many quarters. While Luke's own primal shock may be more palatable in some senses -- because we see his face and the camera makes no embellished movements -- it is also arguably more uncomfortable and absurd. The very fact that we see his face and the camera stays with him is a double edged sword: as honest and unencumbered as it is, it also forces the viewer to watch the entire exhortation up close. The audience is made to confront the melodrama head on with no recourse to escape. The effect can be hilarious. TESB fanatics can claim otherwise if they wish, but in my experience, their own precious installment is equally, if not more, naked and fallible here. Note: I enjoy TESB a great deal and find it the best of all six films, but the OT and the PT are similar in almost every way, including their quest for greater parody...

 

It is relatively easy to assail any Star Wars film if one chooses.

Yes, that?s true.

Does that mean that the "nooo" event -- taken to mean the line, the delivery, the visuals and everything accompaying the scene at this moment -- is inherently flawed or flawless? That is down to the individual.

To some degree that is correct.

Art can only become truth, and truth can only become art, when one surrenders to their heart and mind.

To some extent that is true, although the artist has some responsibility for the presentation of his or her art; obviously, the artist cannot control certain variables, such as how the work will be received, but he or she can shape the material so that it best conforms to their underlying intentions.

When the heart and mind take over, truth is rendered from art, and art is rendered from truth.

Usually the "truth" in question is emotional or intellectual, not factual.

In no way at all is anything within Star Wars -- save for externals (e.g. film ratio, film brightness, length of film, loudness etc) -- actually empirical.

That?s true, although I have observed protestations to the contrary. The only reason I brought up the matter of empiricism is because it was suggested (in an article of sorts) that the Vader sequence was "empirically bad," and that there were no grounds on which a person could possibly justify an admiration for it.

Being able to measure something in a universally agreed fasion is the antithesis of art.

Yes, while opinions and details can be endlessly debated, a person?s immediate, subjective response to an artistic property is not inherently wrong or incorrect. In that sense, a piece of art, regardless of its form, is a relative entity ? relative to the stylistic parameters of its creation, as well as the opinions or biases of the persons assessing it.

I don't want to hear anyone crossing their opinion into the realm of fact

Then you had best acquire a pair of earplugs.

-- it is a false economy.

No, it?s actually quite modest...

...or is it?

I personally think that the "nooo" event was reasonably well done. The intention was certainly sound, and the execution, while not brilliant, is certainly passable. To me at least.

I think nearly all of Lucas' structuring and composition (in the "birth of Vader" scene) leading up to the guttural wail was managed very well, including the "force tantrum," which was effective in communicating Vader?s anger and pathos without undermining the emotional content of the scene. The maligned "NOOOOO!" is admittedly a hit-or-miss moment, but I don?t really think it is as awful as some make it out to be.

Tyranus, as ever, I greatly enjoyed your preceding contribution.

Thank you again for the very generous compliment.

But you missed a very "local" example: Luke's scream of "nooo" in "The Empire Strikes Back".

I deliberately chose not to mention it, and instead focus on a couple of other relatively well-known and successful films that contain a "clunky" or awkward wail. I am sometimes wary of scrutinizing the OT films in this regard because of the reiterated commentary which attends it in response, somewhere along the lines of, "Oh, well you?re just bringing the OT films down to the level of the PT," and so forth. Not constructive, but I?ve seen it brought up before.

I find it amusing how this film gets a free pass form many quarters.

I have observed Luke?s scream in the picture being derided on more than one occasion.

While Luke's own primal shock may be more palatable in some senses -- because we see his face and the camera makes no embellished movements -- it is also arguably more uncomfortable and absurd.

Luke?s multi-octave scream could certainly be described as somewhat hammy or over-the-top. I think it works within the context of the scene, but that doesn?t mean it has not been attended with chortling in some capacity.

The very fact that we see his

 

I thought the "Noooo!!!" was a wonderful reminder to the audience that however serious and dramatic the film was, Star Wars will always pay homage to camp.

I thought it was appropriate, and giggle at those who CRY out in anguish over this part of the film. Is that ironic?