Who hates that cartoon?

Good Actors- Ewan McGregor, Christopher Lee, Sam Jackson, Ian McDeiarmid, and Anthony Daniels

Bad Actors- Hayden Christensen, Nat Portman, Jake Lloyd

This is just my opinion.

Lets face it, these days good actors are hard to find, they're mostly just pretty faces, I think considering the times, GL did a good job at casting.

The animation is merely an interpritation of what happened, just like the comics. Ani didn't really have his chin stick out, it was just the artist's interpretation of Ani.

Ani needed to be a whyny darkside-using brat. If he were mature and responsible like Obi, he would never have turned to the DS. I think that we are suppoded to cheer when Ani becomes Darth Vader because he won't whine anymore. Then when we see all the ppl that he kills, like the Alderaannians (sp?), we start to rethink our cheering.

I think Padme will give Leia to Bail for this reason: Bail along with Mon Mothma, and I assume Padme, will start the Rebellion. Mothma will be the more radically and openly against the New Order. Bail will oppose it, but still stay loved so he can get money to fund the Rebellion. Padme will make Ben give Luke to the Lars' because she knows that they are good people. She and Bail will start raising Leia to take Bail's place when he becomes too old or dies. Padme then finds that Vader is looking for her, she will leave Alderaan to keep Vader away from the kids. Then she gets killed (YES!! THE END OF NAT PORTMAN!!!!).

Wow. That was a mouthfull.

 

Lets face it, these days good actors are hard to find, they're mostly just pretty faces,

Temuera Morrison. Great actor, but not the prettiest face .

BTW, since I hate the cartoon, I don't believe anything that people say happen in it. It's just a stupid cartoon that has the Star Wars name. Has not to do with the real Star Wars.

 

Ani needed to be a whyny darkside-using brat. If he were mature and responsible like Obi, he would never have turned to the DS. I think that we are suppoded to cheer when Ani becomes Darth Vader because he won't whine anymore.

I don't think he necessarily needed to be whiny... it certanly is one route to use, but not the only one. Of course, different routes produce a different overall effect, and I can't say I'm a fan of this one. Not that there's a blessed thing I can do about it, but hey... it keeps me amused and distracts me from my real work.

Another, unused possibility is using Anakin as the tragic hero. I mean, he kind of is, but he's iffy as a hero from the get-go in these. But say he was a hero that everyone loved- charming, rogueish, but with a sort of dark edge that you can't quite put your finger on. He attempts some good deed, but brushes the dark side in doing so. Well, once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny. Later he runs into a bigger, infinitely more important situation, and he just ends up completely falling to the dark side in doing it.

No, I've never drawn up alternate plot lines.

Like I said, it's basically to distract myself from my real work, because one can only take a limited amount of normative and semantic realism in a day. But all you need to do is land Anakin in a situation where all the choices are bad, and he could concievably turn to the dark side.

I know, I know, in the end it's Lucas's story. But I'll probably still continue to play in his driveway, even if he runs over all my toys.

 

vacantlook: I am not sure, and it is my hope that I get to see even a little of Alderaan, but with all that still needs to be seen in EP3 I think that it will not appear in anything more than a passing comment.


Good Actors- Ewan McGregor, Christopher Lee, Sam Jackson, Ian McDeiarmid, and Anthony Daniels

[face_shocked] You forgot Liam Neeson, or did you? [eyes_suspicious]


I know, I know, in the end it's Lucas's story. But I'll probably still continue to play in his driveway, even if he runs over all my toys.

 

Boskone Kennedy:
We have a whole galaxy to play around in and you want to stick all the action on as few planets as possible? No sense.

And you're actually a FAN of the prequels? Wow. In a Saga where already two movies - ANH and ROTJ take place on Tatooine, Lucas sets TPM and AOTC on Tatooine too? You're complaining about Alderaan and Naboo being superfluous? That makes no sense to me.

And I don't care what the animators have to say. I'm wondering why Lucas wanted only 1 minute segments, and finally relented and got them bumped up to 3. A sustained full-length cartoon series would do much more to keep the interest up between episodes II and III.

 

<<<<<<As for the acting, I suppose it's sort of I'm getting the feeling that in a room with five or so acting majors, one of whom was definitely a senior, and two directing majors, that if they all thought the acting was bad, that might be a clue.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

As someone who has worked behind the camera, and seen all the backstage nonsense, I have been thoroughly educated that no one nowhere is any kind of judge on acting. 9 times out of 10 it is a personal dislike of the actor themselves. You can see this on such websites for the razzies for example, where for a long stretch the only people ever nominated for bad acting were Bruce Willis, Demi Moore, Keven Kostner, and Sly Stallone, over and over and over, whether or not they actually made a movie that year.
Someone who is an actor is no judge of it in other people, as it is entirely too personal an experience. Personal to the actor and personal to the one watching.

Personally, the subtlety of the elevator scene in AOTC was grade A acting good enough for the entirety of the movie


<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
and Lucas didn't do it the way I would have. I don't even think Lucas did it the way he would have, if he weren't trying to please all the fans at once.
>>>>>>>>>>>>

Read anything he has ever said or wrote. Lucas does not give a rats rear about what the fans think. I prefer it that way.

 

<<<<<<And you're actually a FAN of the prequels? Wow. In a Saga where already two movies - ANH and ROTJ take place on Tatooine, Lucas sets TPM and AOTC on Tatooine too? You're complaining about Alderaan and Naboo being superfluous? That makes no sense to me.
>>>>>>>

Huh? I am in FAVOR of Naboo. I think the more planets the better. Saying AOTC was "set" on Tatooine is really misleading, as the movie neither began or ended there, and introduced us to two entirely new planets in the bargain, including a vast expansion of Coruscant.

What I am against is calling the lack of Alderaan a negative. There are a zillion ways to play this story out, and just becuase our pet planets dont get mentioned at our convenience is no reason to burn bridges.

BTW it would be physically impossible for Lucas not to visit Tatoonie in the prequels, as we know that Luke ends up there in Episode IV, and the only logical reason for Obi Wan to take baby luke to Tatoonie is if Obi wan knew that Luke had some relatives there, and Obi could only know that if the series had previously visited Tatoonie in the first place.

Far too many people think of these movies as "old" vs "new", and that is a flat mistake. This is ONE STORY, from beginning to end. The beginning must bear some resemblence to the end.

 

MRSSTRAHD = BOSKONE KENOBI just in case that confused people. Wife signs in under her name and forgets.

 

Someone who is an actor is no judge of it in other people, as it is entirely too personal an experience. Personal to the actor and personal to the one watching.

Normally I might be inclined to agree with you on that point, but my theatre friends read that one over my shoulder and were insulted. I'll take a second to quote them:

"We're trained to know what good and bad acting is, because if you don't know, you can't produce it yourself."

This is also a very valid point. And as for the bias factor, which I also think happens in many cases, I asked if previous experience had biased them against the actors. I mean, I honestly don't know much about actors because I don't pay attention to that end of the production. The response I got was as follows:

1. Ewan McGregor is a phenomenal actor in Star Wars and elsewhere.
2. They've seen Natalie Portman do much better work on stage.
3. No previous experience with Hayden Christensen, they just weren't impressed with what they saw.
4. Liam Neeson is an awesome actor, but he's done much better work.
5. Christopher Lee is an amazing actor, but he didn't have a lot to work with in the role.

I've been getting a sort of crash course on good and bad acting... they're much pickier than I am, I must confess. I get to hear all the time about how bad the acting is in our college Gilbert and Sullivan production (most of the performers are conservatory students, not theatre geeks), but I still think they're funny. Star Wars, however, does tend to bother me. The story is okay, I much prefer reading the books, though. That way, the delivery of the lines is up to my own imagination.

 

Yes, I forgot Liam Neeson and Temuera Morrison. They rock!

Thick of how many good actors GL came up with. Then give him an imaginary pat on the back!

Then thinck of all the other bad actors that he didn't coose, Tom Cruise (sp?), that group. Then give him an even more enthusiastic pat on the back!

 

To put it simply Sci-fi is not meant to have fancy dialogue, it's more about the story, the worlds, and the characters that shape it. If you want dialogue, you need to go to such generes as dramas or comedies which are more known for dialogue.

 

1. Ewan McGregor is a phenomenal actor in Star Wars and elsewhere.
2. They've seen Natalie Portman do much better work on stage.
3. No previous experience with Hayden Christensen, they just weren't impressed with what they saw.
4. Liam Neeson is an awesome actor, but he's done much better work.
5. Christopher Lee is an amazing actor, but he didn't have a lot to work with in the role.

So let's think about that logically for a moment.

Ewan, Liam and Saruman were all pretty much fantastic, right?

Nat, Hayden and Jake Lloyd were generally... not. BUT, we know for a fact we'veseen the others have REALLY GOOD acting chops elsewhere (The Professional, Life As A House, etc.). So is it that Lucas can't work with actors, or that Lucas has an issue with YOUNGER actors who may not be as okay in a less-rigid acting environment than older actors who can emote on the drop of a pin?

Think about it...

 

So is it that Lucas can't work with actors, or that Lucas has an issue with YOUNGER actors who may not be as okay in a less-rigid acting environment than older actors who can emote on the drop of a pin?

I think it's more than reasonable to think that perhaps the younger actors need strong direction in order to do their best work, and George Lucas just isn't that strong of a director. Not to say he's a bad director, just not the type that these actors need.

I also don't think it's a coincidence that the two OT movies generally viewed as the best were directed by soemone else. And the screenplay was written by someone else. The story was still all Lucas' work, though.

 

We're getting waaaaaaayyyyyyy off-topic.

Some points:
I was really annoyed that Tatooine has been so heavily used in the prequels. As has been stated: you've got an entire galaxy, why are you constantly going back to a planet that has been described as "a dust ball", "on the outer rim", "If there's a bright center to the universe, you're on the planet it's farthest from."? Go do something else, somewhere else.

Acting: It is totally unfair to criticize an actor based on the SW movies, especially the prequels. The problem is simply 100% that Lucas cannot direct actors. (Ok, maybe it's only 80%) All of the actors in the PT movies have had outstanding resumes (even Jake Lloyd) and turned in what was (for them) a substandard performance. Take a look at Natalie Portmant in The Professional. She CAN act. Lucas provided no direction for her. The dialog in PT was extremely painful and wooden, especially in AotC. It isn't the actor's fault, it's GLs. All of it. Because ultimately, he has the power to change the movies to be whatever he wants, and the budget to do it. It's his failure.

Again, most of this has been off-topic and would be better discused (and has been, at length) in the forums for the movies.

As for the cartoon, I've already said that I don't like the style or the length, and would have been much happier if a studio like mainframe.ca had been put in charge.

In criticising people in not being "true" or "real" fans... The argument is too pointless to bother typing more than this sentence. Grow up. Next there will be arguments over the different flavors of StarTrek (again).

If you like the cartoon, enjoy. If not, don't watch the smegging thing. It's not like your opinion will change GL's mind--he doesn't care.
I didn't like it. I'm not going to watch it. Problem solved.

 

<<<<<<<<<I also don't think it's a coincidence that the two OT movies generally viewed as the best were directed by soemone else.>>>>>>>

WHOA, who exactly has told you that the first SW ranks LAST amongst the OT? I have seen a zillion polls, votes, and simple discussion about who likes what, and whereas EMPIRE is consistently ranked #1, STAR WARS is right behind. Jedi comes in last.

Lucas is a visionary, not an actors director, and to be frank I dont give a rats rear. I like his movies exactly how they are, and havent read a single SW novel yet that knew even half of where Lucas was coming from.

If your theater buddies think they know acting, I am tempted to cry "snob," but that results from a former roommate who was a huge Shakespeare elitist with whom I argued constantly. My personal problem. I'll let the theater buddies say their piece in peace. (ill just be wary, I have seen the anti-actor bias I spoke of here on this very board).

 

WHOA, who exactly has told you that the first SW ranks LAST amongst the OT? I have seen a zillion polls, votes, and simple discussion about who likes what, and whereas EMPIRE is consistently ranked #1, STAR WARS is right behind. Jedi comes in last.

Well, mostly just people I've talked with. After taking statistics, I have a general distrust of polls. But we had a 5-night Star Wars marathon over Winter Term, and discussed it afterwards. But maybe we're just freaks here. Actually, scratch that. I know we're freaks here, it's a prerequisite for admission. We're a school of intellectual hippies. Moving on...

Lucas is a visionary, not an actors director, and to be frank I dont give a rats rear. I like his movies exactly how they are, and havent read a single SW novel yet that knew even half of where Lucas was coming from.

I might suggest that the visionary's place is not as the director, but that's hardly a point worth arguing, is it? And as for the novels, well, I'm glad you're privy to exactly where Lucas was "coming from." I happen to enjoy a good number of them. My favourite one, in fact, has very little to do with Star Wars, but it's an incredible psychological study and is worth reading even if you don't like SW. Then again, that could just be the intellectual hippie in me talking.

If your theater buddies think they know acting, I am tempted to cry "snob," but that results from a former roommate who was a huge Shakespeare elitist with whom I argued constantly. My personal problem. I'll let the theater buddies say their piece in peace. (ill just be wary, I have seen the anti-actor bias I spoke of here on this very board).

And thanks for keeping your own bias out of it. In my honest opinion, I don't think they're snobs. I've seen the department snobs. And considering I got the lot of them to sit down and watch Veggie Tales with me, and they liked it, I think that reduces the snobby factor.

In any case, I think we can put our differences down to artistic preference and taste, and as one of my profs has often told me, "In matters of taste, there is nothing to discuss." I'm a die-hard OT and EU fan, and the PT and Clone Wars cartoons just don't jive with me the way they seem to with you. You might not be in the novel groove as much as I am. And you know what? That's totally cool, because if everyone liked the same stuff, this board would get downright boring.

The prequels aren't all bad. Neither are the cartoons. I even found a couple nice touches in the cartoon, even though it took me 'til Episode 18 to start enjoying anything about them. Even though I don't think I should be laughing when Anakin gets smashed into a tree. It's all good.

 

CommanderDWH: which novel is that?

 

This is so no entirely on topic, but it's Shatterpoint by Matthew Stover. I love that book to death.

Just for the sake of keeping this semi-cartoon-like, Grievous' fighting style made me smile, because that's what I think Vaapad ought to look like. And Vaapad was introduced in Shatterpoint. So that was a spiffy bit in the cartoons. Still don't like 'em overall, but they had a few moments.

 

It's just a stupid cartoon that has the Star Wars name. Has not to do with the real Star Wars.

Damn people are just getting stupid with there reasoning. This is a cartoon but it is a part of the star Wars Universe. Do you think that this is a fake Clone Wars Cartoon. This is covering what happened after the movie. Someone on this site had the nerve to say that they never heard this story before DUH! This is the first time its ever been told. Some of you all just need to go to the darkside of the force and kill yourselves!

 

Do you think that this is a fake Clone Wars Cartoon.

There is always that hope.

 

Some of you all just need to go to the darkside of the force and kill yourselves!

Good morning to you, too, Sunshine.

As for its relevancy to the Star Wars Universe, I suppose it's only fair to put the content of the cartoons on par with the content of the average EU novel, as far as canon is concerned. After all, the only stuff truly viewed as canon is what is on film at the movies. Clone Wars is filler material. Personally, I'd infinitely prefer a book, but not everyone does, so a cartoon is fun for those who don't enjoy the reading aspect as much.

 

People on these boards need to learn correct grammar and usage.

Their: group possessive
There: location
They're: contraction of "they are"

Please make at least a token attempt at following the rules.

 

<<<<Lucas is a visionary, not an actors director, and to be frank I dont give a rats rear. I like his movies exactly how they are, and havent read a single SW novel yet that knew even half of where Lucas was coming from.

I might suggest that the visionary's place is not as the director, but that's hardly a point worth arguing, is it? And as for the novels, well, I'm glad you're privy to exactly where Lucas was "coming from." I happen to enjoy a good number of them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Lucas has made no secret at all about what inspired him, and his original source material is still available today: Sci Fi novels of the 1920-30s mostly(And by a fortunate coincidence, I happen to have read all of them). These were a lot more fun, back before everything was the fault of a supercomputer or evil corporation.

JOHN CARTER OF MARS by Edgar Rice Burroughs(Soon to be a major motion picture), full of action, princesses,
and alien monsters

LENSMEN by E.E. Smith, the books that invented the concept of starfleets, tractor beams and shields with a galaxy wide civilization protected by superpowered induviduals.

Then there are the Flash GOrdon serials, Lucas's interest in anthropology, psychology, and myth, and so on.

Now it is not that the EU novels arent competetant, its just that John Carter of Mars has a freshness that they lack. Its just that I can almost imagine the EU author saying to himself "Well SW had a bunch of lasers and explosions, therefore if my own book has lasers and explosions, then it will be SW." I have not seen any novels, including Zahns, that appreciate that Lucas was putting MYTH first and effects second. They throw jedi and spaceships together and hope for some plotline miracle to occur. I dont think they dug deep enough to find out what SW was at its core. There is ONE book that Lucas said "If I did not have that book, SW never would have gotten written," and I do NOT see the legacy of that particular book in the EU.

ANyone know the book in question?

(BTW, I not only took statistics, I can teach it, and polls sit fine with me. Give em a chance.)

 

If you mean "Hero of 1000 faces" by Joseph Campbell, I'm going to (Edit to prevent disciplining).

That story is a load of excrement. Lucas & Campbell have only a tangential relationship. Campbell's influence on SW is almost non-existant. If you wander arround here long enough, you'll find the detailed list, complete with articles on other sites. I no longer have the bookmarks handy, or I'd post them myself.

Also, this is the wrong forum for this discussion. This is the "Who hates that cartoon" argument thread.

Like it or Hate it? Discuss.

 

I have not seen any novels, including Zahns, that appreciate that Lucas was putting MYTH first and effects second.

Funny, then, how the cartoons are nothing but fighting, and little, if any myth involved.

And while I do enjoy Zahn's stories, my favourite novels are actually the ones by Matthew Stover. I don't know how much they involve mythology, but I do know they involve a lot of philosophy. And, being that I'm toying with the idea of picking up a philosophy minor, this is very fascinating to me. I guess I'm a Star Wars fan, but not a "purist," so to speak.

What can I say? The cartoons had zero intellectual value, they didn't even have the element of myth that Star Wars usually has about it. All it has is lots of explosions, things being blown apart with the Force, and the little running kid who gave Mace Windu water (to remind us of what it is we're fighting for!).