With AOTC/TPM Lucas pulls the rug out from under our expectations

One more interesting observation and I'm finished, I don't know if it falls into the grey area, but it has made me think since TPM & AOTC...

Considering it seems that the Republic is being controlled by "greedy, squabbling delegates" and that Palpatine makes a point about the Trade Federation's control over Valorum's advisors, I think it's interesting that the "rebellion" of the PT is the capitalistic segments of the galaxy...
the TRADE federation, the intergalactic BANKING clan, the TECHNO union...

Since the Republic was being influenced by these segments, it seems to reason that Palpatine would need to eliminate them in order to take complete control over the galaxy.
Yet, in the OT there are is NO capitalistic engine providing the Rebel Alliance with weapons, equipment, or aid, it looks to be nature's creatures (Calamari, Ewoks, Wookiees), royalty and idealists.

What is GL's message there?
We have the engines of capitalism affecting the gov't to a degree that someone like Palpatine can come to power, those same engines are perceived to be the enemy of the Republic!
Yet, they are the ones that could have stopped the gov't from coming under dictorial rule and could have "saved" the galaxy!

Huh?

 

I agree, Punisher -it's time to stop soon. I'm on a laptop, and my eyes are killing me!

Allow me to retort: isn't Palpatine using those massive machines (Trade Federation, Banking Clan, Techno Union) for his own purposes?

It seems no coincidence to me that the so-called separatist movement is comprised of the ultra-capitalists; the movement was created by Dooku, whose master is Sidious!

Or, I suppose it's possible that Dooku originally lead the separatist movement from an idealistic viewpoint, got converted to the Dark Side, and realized the movement would still be useful. One can interpret the Trade Federation et al on Geonosis being "wined and dined" by Dooku in an attempt to get them to join. Obviously Sidious/Dooku could use their vast resources.


-dust

 

Rebel Scumb wrote:

Even the mididchlorian talk of TPM was better then the seeminly irrelevancy of the force in AOTC. To me the force is part of what elevated SW above the flash gordon serial it was intended to be.

I recall hearing somewhere that the apparent lack of regard for the Force was deliberate--showing how the Jedi had come to look on it as a tool and a scientific curiosity.

Of course, just because it's deliberate doesn't necessarily make it a great idea. Much of the ear-punishing dialogue was apparently deliberate, too.

Which brings me to something Jabbadabbadoo said earlier:

did Lucas tell the right story? and
did Lucas tell the story well.

I'll say yes to question one, and to question two I'll say "could've been better." Many of the points above about the storyline being difficult to get across are duly noted. I'm also aware that many of the PT's "flaws" are deliberate.

This deliberate badness got me wondering the other day--why did George pull out all the stops when it came to the film's "extras," the special effects, John Williams' score, etc., and then purposely write wince-worthy dialogue? For that matter, why did he hire actors of Liam Neeson and Ewen McGregor's caliber and then then have them spend most of their time kind of standing around, looking as if someone had over-starched their undershorts?

One possible answer is that Lucas has flipped his lid. Maybe whatever genius he might once have possessed has up and gone the way of the dodo. Maybe.

Another possible answer is that he cannot--or does not care to--see his films with his audience's eyes. The 50's B movie references are completely lost on the young people who make up most of Star Wars' audience. Such references tend to come across as awkward and inappropriate in-jokes, more distracting than they are entertaining.

The third possibility is that Lucas sat down and analyzed why he developed an addiction to crummy adventure films in the first place, instead of being drawn to "quality children's literature." When I thought about that, I started wondering why I became a Star Wars addict instead of becoming fixated on the Chronicles of Narnia, for instance, or Wind In the Willows, or Watership Down.

Honestly, I don't think "good" children's books and movies affect kids' imaginations in quite the same way. There are no gaps in Watership Down--the book is damn near flawless, IMO. Therefore, there's no work for children's imaginations to do. It's a passive transport, if you will--kids need just sit back and watch Richard Adams' world unfold around them. "Star Wars" has a strategic gap--right smack dab in the center, where the characters are. That gap is where kids' imaginations enter the movie. Luke Skywalker is a whiner with a barely detectable personality, but who cares? Every child who sees ANH mentally erases him anyway, replacing him with him or herself. (You'll notice that characters in traditional myths have no personalities, either. I doubt this is because pre-modern people didn't know how humans act in real life).

If your goal is simply to inspire make-believe, it makes a certain amount of sense to go over the top with props, music, and other "scene setting" stuff that makes the fantasy world more "real," and then create place-holder characters so sketchy that the audience must mentally over-write them, projecting their own psychic material onto the movie. (Hence us sitting here, doing this).

That said--I still don't understand why George hired Ewen McGregor and then had him stand in a corner mumbling "Yes, Master" throughout TPM. That's like buying a Jaguar and only using it to drive 2 miles in the slow lane to the local McDonald's Drive Thru. Who knows.

Nor am I quite ready to crown George Lucas an artistic genius for deliberately making his dialogue bad. A few fantasy series--"Harry Potter" and "The Lord Of the Rings" come to mind--manage to be both good in the literary sense and vehicles for imagination.

 

By the time the PT begins, the end had already begun for the Republic's political system. The very first concept we are hit with the is the Trade Federation's unfair taxing of the Naboo and how after the Naboo protested this, a Federation Blockade was formed so that they could do no business and it was "perfectly legal".

This to me means one thing, the Trade Federation has been given an unjust amount of power by the Senate. They seem to have a monopoly over trade routes and they literally have the ability to tax someone into oblivion and then completely cut them off and let them starve if they even question it. How could this possibly be if the Trade Federation had not bribed their way into such unbridled power?

"Now they will elect a new chancellor, a strong chancellor.. One who will not let our tragedy continue." -Sentor Palpatine

In AOTC we see that Nute Gunray, who was caught red-handed leading an illegal land invasion of Naboo, got off scott free and is still leading the Trade Federation. Yet another example of justice bought and not justice served. Obviously the man is being used as a pawn by the Sith who surely have a hand in this, but it still shows that there is an underlying corruption that while not visible, is right below the surface.

The Jedi are controlled by the Senate the same as our armed services are controlled by our govenment. If the governing body has become stagnant and fetid, so too will the soldiers they lead. Pride and arrogance are the enemy of the Jedi just as bureacracy and corruption have become the senate's. I think the Jedi are faring far better, but they rely to heavily upon Yoda for their system to work.

The Sith simply blinded his perceptions in the force and they then could slowly lay down their trap. This all began right at the time of Episode 1, but the true beginning was before it when the Senate began to slide into the hands of the bureaucrats.

The PT is a lot deeper then it has been given credit for by the public.

 

Excellent, Ophelia.

I would hesitate to put Harry Potter on the same level as LOTR, though.

I would say that we won't really know how the prequels measure up until another 20 years has passed.

I still insist that Lucas gave himself an impossible task in attempting to duplicate a masterpiece.

Attempts like Jar-jar really are fascinating, though. I mean, he just grates on my nerves...why not just make him blabber and use subtitles?


Anyway...I think the Force has been quite handled quite well in the PT, although this Qui-Gon/Anakin making the Jedi Ghosts possibility makes me shudder.

I actually thought Qui-Gon was the most compelling character in TPM. And I agree that Obi-Wan didn't do much (which is prolly one reason why Ewan was less than thrilled with the result), but I think that WAS deliberate by Lucas, in order to contrast Obi-Wan as a Padawan with Anakin.

I still insist that Obi-Wan is meant to be the ultimate Jedi Knight in the PT.

Whoops...meaning that he pretty much followed Qui-Gon's lead (and obeyed orders, even a stupid promise to train Anakin), and he now follows the Council's orders.

-dust

 

I couldn't resist... let me look at Yoda...

Someone said what was Yoda's place in the PT?

Let's see...

So far, we see he's one of the heads of the ivory tower and that he represents the oldest of the Jedi and their traditions. It is important to establish Yoda's place in the events leading up to the end of the Republic as well as his relationship to Obi-Wan and Anakin.
Yoda is not in the story because of fanboy wishes or special effects (well, he shouldn't be...)...

I think it make sense for him to be the trainer of younglings due to his wisdom & patience and I'm sure willingness to convey the Jedi tradtions since he looks to be the oldest of them all.
This also covers his training of Obi-Wan.

Since we se him on Dagobah in a natural environment, I think GL is trying to show that since the Jedi have lived in their "ivory tower" too long and gotten away from the "living Force" and that left them open to manipulation and arrogance, or they were totally out of touch with the life that created the "energy field" of the Force. Either way, the end result was the same and they were eliminated.

Yoda in ESB seems much more aware of the manipulations of the Dark Side (the cave), than was possible for him to have on a city planet such as Coruscant with no natural elements at all around him.
Since the Empire was shown as not having any natural environments at all, one can conclude that the Dark Side didn't need such attachments. This is ironic considering that Palpatine hailed from a natural planet like Naboo.

The Dooku/Yoda duel adds to selling the line of "Wars do not make one great", Yoda fought valiantly in the war, he took on the leader of the opposing army!
Yet in the end, his fighting didn't stop the manipulations of Palpatine/Sidious/Dooku from succeding.

I believe that Yoda was very aware of Palpatine's plan, obviously not the details, and that's where a sense of guilt can come in, as much as Dooku being his failed student.
I'm sure once the Clone Wars really took off, Yoda and the Council spent more time worrying about battle strategy than the manipulations of a politican grasping for power.
In the end, the war didn't make them great, it weakened and led to the downfall of the Jedi.

It will be interesting to se how Yoda's storyline plays out in Ep.3.

 

I do agree about Star Wars being left open to the imagination. Even the originals didn't fully explain things and we had to fill in the blanks quite often. That's part of the magic for me. Like what a bothan is or what a Jawa looks like under his cloak. That's why there are so many EU books because Star Wars stirs our imaginations and part of it is because of that vacuum.

I do feel that this has made some people frustrated with the prequels because either they are expecting these movies to tie up all the lose ends (which it wont) or they are upset because it's tying up lose ends in different ways then they wanted. Plus it's creating new loose ends that may never be answered.

I know we all have personal investments in Star Wars and many of us had definite perceptions of what it was like before A New Hope and that is the inherent weakness of the prequels.

 

One last OFF TOPIC comment on GL and GL's work on the films...

I applaud his work on making movies look and sound better.
I appreciate that he did continue the SW stories in other mediums (comics, games, books, etc.).
I'm glad that he does try to encourage his fanbase, if he didn't TFN wouldn't exist and most fan artist and writers would be facing time in court...

Nevertheless, I can still appreciate the world he created, but have issues with the way he presents the story and stylistic choices that he has made.
I can have issues with the way he markets the films and issues with the way his producer (no names) has manipulated the fanbase.
I can have issues with the way he demeans his product and in some case, the fanbase.
I can have issues with his attitude concerning the success of the films.

I have been following SW since I was 4 years old and I have read a lot of contradictory comments from him and articles about him.
Yes, a artist's personal views and life can affect his work or people's view of his work. (Look at popculture, is Michael Jackson such a money maker, creative genius, etc. with all of the plastic surgery and child-rape charges?)

There are two subjects here SW films and the creator... I am a consumer, so I have a right to be critical, I'm a fan so I still feel I have a right to be critical, as much as GL created the saga, I helped pay for it over the years and while I don't expect him to ask me how to make his films, I do expect him to have some responsibity to the previous works he created and to have some sense of taste.

His work has influenced many people from my generation to pursue their vocations and/or personal philosophies on life.
Nevertheless, I don't expect to agree with everything he's done with his films or personal views or feel the need to defend his work or him, especially if I don't agree with it in some way. To defend his work or him, out of sheer loyalty is stupid.

I can still find some entertainment value out of the films, discussions like this prove it, but I can find fault as well.
I tend to think negative or positive comments are a benefit to a discussion and if they didn't exist, this board would be empty.

End of OFF TOPIC observation...

(Or sometimes, I think people like to play the (unspoken) game known as the Basher/Gusher wars, where it's more fun to be the "bad guy". )

 

I...must...go...to...bed.

Stop posting on this topic...I have school tomorrow....


-dust

P.S. Lucas can do what he wants with the films, although I readily agree with some of your other points, Punisher. (Had to get the last word in.)

 

Nor am I quite ready to crown George Lucas an artistic genius for deliberately making his dialogue bad. A few fantasy series--"Harry Potter" and "The Lord Of the Rings" come to mind--manage to be both good in the literary sense and vehicles for imagination. Both of these series started out as books, which may or may not make a difference.

The characters, dialogue and story of HP (which I hated) and LOTR (which I loved) were conceptualized from novels. There is no comparison.

The dialogue and acting in TPM and AOTC are very similar to the OT. What is very different is the atmosphere surrounding the main characters. The OT is about the good guys fighting the evil guys and in the end winning. The PT is about the not so good guys fighting against the not so bad guys who are being manipulated by the even worse bad guys who have blinded the not so good and not so bad guys from seeing that they are being lead on a path to self-destruction... and the story ends with the bad guys winning. Along the way we see Anakin turn into Lord Vader and the death of the Jedi. We also see the birth of the children who will be the main characters in the OT.

Basicly... while all 6 movies are one story they are in reality two very different books seperated into 6 chapters... 3 in each book.

In the Star Wars universe the dialogue is not corny and that speech is not "wooden." That is how they talk and those are the words they use. The fact that many people can't get past the idea that this is a FANTASY movie based on one man's vision and that these same people apply their vision of that world into these movies speaks volumes about the ability of those persons to experience said FANTASY.

RB

 

Punsiher: COuld it be Yoda learnd form out happened 20 some odd years ago. I saw yes. But again on tell Ep 3 we may not know.

 

Ophelia brings up a central point about the success of ANH - boys identified with Luke Skywalker. They could see themselves in his shoes. They liked him. The invested him with their own personality.

Although Lucas often claims that he is making the PT for children and adolescents, he seems to be doing it without providing an equivalent character hook for children to like. Jar Jar wasn't it. Ani in TPM wasn't it either. AOTC has even fewer candidates. Mace is too businesslike. Yoda is too alien. Anakin is too volatile. Padme is too cold and listless. Obi-wan is too harsh and distant.

Giving Lucas credit for doing this intentionally - for intentionally asking the audience to keep its distance emotionally from the protagonists of the PT, you have to wonder why he did it. If it is a deliberate inversion of the style of characterization used in the OT, then what is the justification? What is the reasoning behind it?

I wonder whether Lucas didn't set the bar too high for himself. Having given himself ambitious goals for the PT in terms of thematic inversion and a different style of characterization, I agree with Rebel Scumb that he may have become bogged down in the execution, lost in the visual details. He seems not to have paid close attention to the very elements of his film that would have helped him realize his lofty objectives.

And of course we have to wait for Episode 3 to know whether Lucas's approach to the PT has an adequate payoff.

 

Well I think GL is building the PT from the outside in. Where as the OT is buil;t from the inside out.

To explain, if you look at ANH, what is the story. Not the plot but the story. Save the princess. Everything else is irrelevant next to that.

ESB: The bad guys are coming for you.

ROTJ: My father can be redeemed.

All the subsequent details about the rebellion, the deathstar, yes even the force are all icing on the cake of what is a simple and good story.

But if you look at GLs approach to the PT, it almost seems like it was the opposite.

He wants to have: an anti-corporate political message, a hitlerlike rise to power for the emperor with a machevelian twist, an old and eroding system, a troubled young man and the universal quest to fight ones own demons, a grandeous and and vulptuous romance, betrayll left and right, more humour, lavish intricate worlds, plus all the nessesary plot information to make the OT make sense, which in turn he has decided to skew just to 'surprise' us (or in my opinion alienate, but I'll leave that alone).

But what is the story, GL has set a massive canvas, with dozens upon dozens of beautiful paints at his disposal, and he's going to use em all so help me, not to mention soem which were left over from the first films. But he has to take all this and push it togehter into a story, and their to me lies the qagmire.

Some of you are right, the blame is not all on GL, I have my own ideas about what makes a good PT, and I bring those to the theatre with me. To me the PT should have, if anything been simpler then the OT in design. I wnted something I could watch 1-6, and have the secrets perserved. GL has chosen a different route and decided to give us a different poitn of view on the oT, rather then simply fill in the back story. I would have perfered the latter with some good actrion and quotable dialogue, but that is merely my opinion.


Though for the record I think Harry Potter is infinitly better then LOTR both literarily, and cinematically. I think the original untouched SW trilogy is better in terms of movies, but as a whole I thinkt he potter books are better then the 5/6 part saga we now have. Because of their scope and skillful execution. You can tell she really did plan everything fromt he beginning.

 

Just a few small points to add/argue. Forgive me for not reading every post, but i have been jumping all around looking at allot of the posts...so hope this makes some of you think.

Were the jedi wrong? I mean, originally they didnt want to train the brat, but after that idiot Qui Gon guilted OB1 into doing it, the council caved in. That I think was theit biggest (only?) mistake. Maybe that and letting a jedi who has only been a night for a few hours to train this kid whom all their futures hold.

The only good reason to train him is that the sith are back, and if they dont train him, maybe the sith will...

The jedi were right. If Anakin would have listened to them and avoided attachment, the whole GFFA probably would never have had the empire. Anakin should have seen Padme, taken a cold shower and just protect her (then again, given how the nightmare sceen was taken, who knows how this one would turn out ).

I wonder if in E3, Anakin will sort of be the nexus that the rest of the galaxy turns. I wonder if Anakin will chose how the galaxy will go, whether it falls to darkness, or if the Republic stays. Maybe events will happen around Anakin and affect Anakin, or maybe Anakin will make events. I tend to think that Anakin will play a big part in changing the galaxy, and if he was a good jedi, the empire may never form, we wont know till E3.

If Anakin was a better person, he would have folowed what the council ordered. He would not have used loopholes or interpreted their orders in such ways to get what he wants (like the sterotypical lawer).

In my mind, Anakin did not change that much ways. Yes he was older, but he was still imature, he still let himself get attached to people. He still gets angry (is the Greedo fight sceen cannon?). He was older, but he was not really that much more mature or calm.

Actually I dont really mind that the PT tries to be deep in this way. But maybe it could have been better. For example, if somehow they could have hidden the Sidious/Palpatine thing better (so it was not so obvious) that would have helped allot. But I guess to someone who does now know the backstory of the OT that well, it will be a surprise.

Basicly... while all 6 movies are one story they are in reality two very different books seperated into 6 chapters... 3 in each book.

Actually I see it more as a 2 chaptered book, a 3 chaptered book, and a prequle. Sort of like Fellowship of the Ring/Two Towers, and then Return of the Kind, and the Hobbit.

 

"Actually I dont really mind that the PT tries to be deep in this way. But maybe it could have been better. For example, if somehow they could have hidden the Sidious/Palpatine thing better (so it was not so obvious) that would have helped allot. But I guess to someone who does now know the backstory of the OT that well, it will be a surprise."

Given the amount of Palpatin=Sidious=SifoDyas=Dooku=Mace=Yoda=Qui-Gon=YarealPoof threads on this board, it seems some people have a hard time with the concept that Palpatine and Sidious are the same person.

 

The Jedi are scared of Anakin. His future is clouded. I think that is why they are reluctant to get involved more directly with his training.

 

What if GL had taken this to the next logical step, and completely inverted the hero villan dynamic.

For example what if Obi-wan was the darth Vader of the Pt? Trying to turn Anakin to the light side.

I'll break down the characters as follows with their OT equievlant,

Luke = Anakin
Old Ben = Dooku
Darth Vader = Obi-wan
Yoda = Palpatine
The emperor = Yoda

and jsut to fill out the remaining detials just suppose:

Leia = Bail Organa
Han solo = Padme
Lando = Boba Fett
The empire = the republic
the rebellion = the emerging imperial forces


Now with this structure in place play the OT threw in your mind, substituting all the characters as such. The plot is now Anakin being schooled by a darksider from the get go,a nd Obi-wan, under the leadership of Yoda trying to sway Anakin back towards the good side. When dooku is slain by obi-wan in the first film, Anakin must journey to some secret sith world to recieve full training from palpatine himself. Int he end, Obi-wan and Yoda are unsuccessful in turning Anakin back to good, just as Vader and Palaptine are unsuccessful in turning Luke to evil.

Sort of a bizarro SW world.

Thoughts?

 

(Referring to Rebel Scumb's earlier post) I agree. Again there is an inversion of the priorities of the OT. In ANH an officer walks into the Death Star conference room and announces that the senate has been disbanded and the old republic is gone.

No fanfare, no lingering on the detail. Would it in any way have helped ANH to have shown that scene or the stormtroopers clearing out the senate office building? Nope. That would have muddled the narrative coherence of the story.

In many respects AOTC is a simple recapitulation of TPM. TPM's story: Jedi protect the queen from Darth Maul and the Trade Federation, meet Anakin, discover the Sith and save Naboo while Palpatine takes control of the senate

In AOTC the Jedi protect Padme from assassination, Anakin and Padme fall in love, Obi-wan finds the clone army and discovers the separatists' war plans, and Palpatine takes control of the entire republic.

Unlike ANH and ESB, however, all these elements get equal weight in the PT. Every moment of exposition gets its own scene.

In that sense, the "grey area between good and evil" and the character flaws and bad judgment of the protagonists sort of gets lost in the shuffle. It's just one more detail hurredly addressed in passing.

 

Yes yes yes. I have thought this too. Yoda in ESB is preaching what Qui-Gon was preaching in the TPM. The living force, do not look into the future, at the expence of the present. Yoda telling Luke that he was always looking at the horizon and not looking where he is or what he is doing. Telling him about the trees and rock, the living force. I thought after EPIII Yoda realized his mistake and what Qui-Gon was saying was right. I was just never able to put in terms like you did Jabba. Great job.

 

In that sense, the "grey area between good and evil" and the character flaws and bad judgment of the protagonists sort of gets lost in the shuffle. It's just one more detail hurredly addressed in passing.

Now this I have to disagree with. Given the great insight evident in this thread, it is apparent to me that the moral ambiguity of the prequels is more than just a hurredly addressed detail but one that is subtle and complex. It's one of the many layers to the saga that casual fans don't get to enjoy. I call Lucas' storytelling style Kubrikian simply because like Stanley Kubrik, Lucas doesn't hammer the audience over the head with important details. He throws them out there in a seemingly casual manner and let's the audience make the connections as opposed to the music flourish/close-up combo favored by Hollywood that all but screams, "PAY ATTENTION! IMPORTANT PLOT POINT BEING REVEALED!"

This is one of the many reasons why the Star Wars saga is so successful. On the surface, it can be enjoyed as a simple adventure film with a thin plot, but as you start to put more weight on the inner workings of the plot and characters, you discover that it can withstand a considerable amount of scrutiny.

 

This is one of the many reasons why the Star Wars saga is so successful. On the surface, it can be enjoyed as a simple adventure film with a thin plot, but as you start to put more weight on the inner workings of the plot and characters, you discover that it can withstand a considerable amount of scrutiny.

EXACTLY!

 

Durwood is the first person to convince me that reading ANH through TPM and AOTC can actually enhance our enjoyment of ANH -- add nuances to some of the performances that we could never have experienced without the revisionary work of the PT.

I see the complexity that SWfan2002 and Durwood enjoy so much. I see the magnitude of Lucas's artistic intent. But still I see the execution as being a bit off. I wish Lucas had reigned in the narrative scope of the PT and given more priority to characterization. But it's just a personal preference.

 

Does anyone have any example of anyone going back and attempting to change the meaning of their previosly established work. And not as a means to discredit it, but as a way to enhance it.

Even if people don't agree with the final product, I really do have to applaud him as a storyteller for taking such a huge risk. Sure it's made a lot of people angry, and a lot of people happy, but isn't that what art is supposed to do? As much as it can be called art in this ultra-capitalist society?

 

"I really do have to applaud him as a storyteller for taking such a huge risk."

Absolutely. The more I think about it the more I respect Lucas for trying to step outside what many of us thought were the clearly defined boundaries of Star Wars. It was a worthwhile gamble.

Someone in the TPM forum mentioned that Tolkien rewrote sections of The Hobbit decades after its original publication in order to bring its story in line with Lord of the Rings.

 

Not to continue riding Lucas, but I never cried before at the end of ROTJ until after I saw AOTC. I'm not afraid to admit it.

But I do understand about people's expectations and preferences. It's just mine were met accordingly, and I look foward to seeing if it all pays off in Episode III.

On sidenote and not really to dig at anybody, but even in The Matrix the good guys and bad guys are clearly identifiable.

If someone is going to fail, I'd rather them fail spectacularly. Lucas is using his own money on this, so it's all on him. Even if Episode III doesn't fulfill what we all think, what he leaves us with will surely provoke debate for many years to come.