What would be your response to someone who says AOTC lacks heart, soul, charm and a sense of wonder?

Good point lagniappe. For all the dialogue in AOTC that tried to convey emotions/love/friendship, most of it still felt insincere and hollow.

Another complaint is that it seems the most emotional scenes in AOTC, as we've heard time and time again, are not given enough time and are rushed through, like Lucas was sweating about the running time and was eager to whisk us away to another location. As a result, I think the romance scenes, for instance, was robbed of any real resonance it could've had.

Recently, I just watched A Beautiful Mind and I noticed that the film has many wonderful silent moments. No dialogue is spoken, but there are plenty of meaningful glances, a caress of the face, or even holding of hands that signify mutual affection. Ron Howard knew how to take time, and the film reminded me that not every character has to have a spoken line of dialogue just to convey feelings. There is great power in gestures and actions as well. (Show, not tell)

I felt the John/Alicia Nash romance in A Beautiful Mind was MUCH more convincing and tender than the stale Anakin/Padme one. What makes it even more dissapointing was that the Anakin/Padme one was supposed to be one of the central themes in the film, and it turned out to be one of the greatest weaknesses of AOTC in my opinion.

 

I don't even give people like that the time of day,they are not that important for me to waste any of my time on.

 

Draculas_guest, thanks for your post. It's funny that I had the complete opposite reaction to you either seeing both films. At the end of AOTC, I turned to my brother and said "That's just about the coolest film I've ever seen". I also saw Spider-Man with my brother and at the end we both agreed that it was good, but nothing special. AOTC had me on the edge of my seat throughout, whereas with Spidey I enjoyed it but I felt somewhat detached (apart from during the aforementioned scene with Uncle Ben). Maybe the fact that I saw AOTC about a month before Spidey had something to do with it - I don't know.
I agree with you about The Shawshank Redemption, though.

 

I felt that AOTC was missing something although I find it hard to say exactly what it was. I had no problem with the plot, the acting, CGI or even the dodgy dialogue (Par for the course for Lucas) but I did not get the same feelings watching it as I still get watching any of the OT. The atmosphere just does not seem right. It may be the pacing of the film because I really enjoyed the novelisation a lot more and naturally that showed a lot more details.

 

Karde:

I believe the MISSING atmosphere you (and many others) feel is absent from the prequels is the tension that a raging galactic civil war(and overwhelming evil empire) brought to the OT.

This always raised the stakes of the events in the SW world. Serious tension is achieved in those films.........even between the battles.

It made everything more immediate.

Now while AOTC doesn't have as much tension as the OT, it has more than TPM. And I believe EP3 will have more than AOTC.

It's just the nature of the Machiavellian story-line Lucas has structured the prequels to be.

A mystery unravels.........By EP3, the plot EXPLODES.

 

I´d simply tell M 2 F O!

 

Anyone who tries to critique only one entry of the six parts of Star Wars is a raving idiot. Star wars is one story, except it's all divided up.

you can critique each individual episode only in terms of technical movie making criteria. But plot, and theme, and significance, and heart and soul cannot be critiqued unless you analyse star wars as a whole story.

 

Exactly!
It´s a classic mega movie!
At least 14 hours of
pure and utter
adventure!

 

Yes you can judge the saga as a whole but each episode must be able to stand on its own as well. It is a cheap and easy defense against any critisism of one of the movies that you have to look at the whole saga.

With reguard to the lack of atmosphere I don't accept that it is down to the plot, either overall story or minor points because I thought the novelisation was very good and built up atmosphere far better than the film. I think it was more to do with the pace and the editing.

 

Attack of the Clones had me by the throat from start to finish. It had everything. It filled stuff in for me I had been wondering about. And it raised a lot of questions for me to think about unti Episode III.

I took my 8 and 10 years old nephews to see it on Thursday. They already seen it twice.
Third time was just as charming. They loved it. SW rules. It aint lost a thing.

 

Now that I think about it, Spider-Man did have more charm than AOTC, because it featured the classic hero's journey and Peter Parker was very easy to like. True, that charm is as much thanks to Stan Lee as Sam Raimi, but the scenes where Peter is just learning to use his superpowers are real feelgood moments. It's just a shame that the last half of the movie degenerates into a series of not very interesting (IMO) bonecrunching fights between Spidey and the Goblin.

AOTC is too complex a movie to really call "charming". We don't get to meet one character starting out on a grand quest like in most classic adventure movies. Instead we are presented with a portrait of a galaxy slowly dissolving into chaos, Jedi falling to the dark side and a Republic slowly becoming an Empire. Maybe it's just me, but I find that **** fascinating

 

I don't see why people love Spider-Man so much. I mean, it's not a bad flick. In fact, it stayed true to the franchise. It had some good acting and set pieces, and the story flowed well and was setup really nice. The character development was really nice, and the action it had was gripping.

But for some reason- I just walked out disappointed. I felt that I was missing something. Just something kept me from loving it. I liked it a lot, I mean I shall own it when it comes to DVD. My girlfriend and her dad didn't even care much for it, and they are both Spider-Man fans.

Well so, we go see Episode II. We came out with grins etched onto our faces. We all three agreed that it put Spider-Man to sleep. I mean... when a true Spider-Man fan as her dad is, you know that's saying something. He has hundreds of the comics and could tell you about anything you needed to know- and he still thought Star Wars was better, and he wasn't a big SW fan at all. In fact, he is more of a Spider-Man fan than a SW fan, period.

He said Episode II had that certain something that he looked for and strived to find in Spider-Man. He said Episode II had the more charming characters, a more dark atmosphere, a better story, better action, better everything.

And I agree. I felt that something was missing from Spider-Man, but it was there from Episode II's opening until the ending. That's just what I think. And what he thought. And what my woman thought. It's up to you to cast your decision. But I truly think Episode II was more epic, was deeper, and had more "charm" than Spider-Man.

 

I agree wholeheartedly, D.Homer.


If there is one thing that irks me most, it is when prequel bashers refuse to acknowledge the gutsy nature of the new films. If Lucas were a cheeze-ball Hollywood hack he would just be replicating what made him a multi-billionaire in the first place.


I give praise to the flanneled one for finding creative ways to make his machiavellian---unhappy "backstory" still work as fun summer entertainment. That takes storytelling talent. Especially when you have to deal with all the bitching the generation weaned on the OT (the most primal hero's journey ever put on film) will give regarding anything that feels slightly askew from the Ep.IV-VI template.

Lucas is aware his backstory is less commercial. He started with the more conventional (READ:MAINSTREAM) Classic trilogy for a reason. The prequels have alot more complexity and shades of gray. But they also have the crutch of being followups to the pop-classical Luke Skywalker story. A focused, personal tale of redemption. When you add the kind of tension a raging galactic war gave to ALL the proceedings, it's easy to see why some critics compare the prequels unfavorably to the OT.


Props to Lucas for finishing HIS story anyhow. I know I find it compelling.

Viva la difference!

 

That same tired argument, eh Mecha?
Almost as moronic and self-serving as the whole "media conspiracy" thing.

 

Now see, that's what I don't like about bashers such as yourself. You just won't stop and let other people enjoy themselves.

 

Not an argument, dahveed.

I just don't like intellectual bullies. And many bashers take the high road acting like the OT is a more sophisticated enterprise than the PT or that GL has lost the picture, yada, yada, ad nauseam.

I disagree. I explained why. And I also clearly pointed out that regardless of whether one likes the flicks or not (always your prerogative), most bashers refuse to SEE the risks these prequels are to the SW franchise.


NO ONE has ever attempted something like this before. If you really ponder it, it's a mad enterprise. It goes against everything Hollywood stands for. The sheer nerve of this experiment is never acknowledged.


Sequels to STAR WARS, EMPIRE, and JEDI would have been so easy, so safe. Lucas could have produced further adventures in a post-Empire universe for the rest of his life, cranking out product year after year, and the market would have been there. To go back and write prequels that can only end on a resolutely depressed and bleak note is not the safe bet people like to accuse him of.


These films are challenging because they don't replicate the exact formula that made Lucas a billionaire. They risk (and have) alienated a good chunk of the fanbase. For that alone (whether you like the results or not), you should be able to take a step back and give props to Lucas for continuing to follow his own muse.

 

Q: What would be your response to someone who says AOTC lacks heart, soul, charm and a sense of wonder?

A: Who cares about all that, its Star Wars. Did you Jango's head get cut off?

 

my responce?

"drop dead, and get a life"

 

foxbatkllr, you fricken nailed it. If any of you didn't read foxbat's post, go to the 1st page and read it. Right now. Good job fox.

 

I dunno Unstable_Jedi. I just re-read foxbatkillr's post, and I found it overly shallow and simplistic.

Here's how I would respond to the thread's question (the intellectual high road, of course):

"You think so? Please explain what factors lead you to this conclusion, and we'll discuss."

I thought Jabba's post (also on the front page) pretty much nailed it for me though. My opinion, just.

 

I just re-read foxbatkillr's post, and I found it overly shallow and simplistic.

Yeah. All posts need to be like yours, Tokyo. I read one of your posts once, and it was so brilliant, so vibrant, so complex and deep- I just gazed at your words and was lost in a sea of perplex and intelligent thoughts.

It was an out-of-body-experience, man.

 

Gilgamesh2 wrote: In regard to the Matrix. The Characters were not all that great. But the Sense of Wonder made up for it as well as trying to sit thier and understand the Matirx.

It did have a great bad guy with Agent Smith. Some of the side characters were also pretty good and Morpheus wasn't bad. Did I feel for them? No, but they held my attention.

Exactly

...and I might add that agent Smith was pretty funny in a dry sort of way and I found the close contact punching to be extremely amusing! With the Matrix you get a director who knows how to develope characters and relationships.

Agent Smith:

"What good is a phone call if you can't speak."

"Luietenant, you're men are already dead."

Classic!

I think what struck me most about the Matrix was the intrigue...especially when Morpheus is describing the Matrix, itself, to Neo and presents him with that Alice In Wonderland twist.

AOTC has intrigue when Dooku comes on to the scene but unfortunately it was too little too late

 

The Matrix had a neat premise, cool effects and some great action. That was about it, as far as I'm concerned.

 

To answer the question of this topic:
"I suppose we didn´t watch the same movie. Heart, soul, charm and a sense of wonder lie in the eye of the beholder. But different tastes are different, I guess."

 

My answer : Get a life. And go and try to find a better movie.