ROTS: The Book vs The Movie

I am about 2/3 of the way through Matthew Stover's book.

I think that the book ADDS a whole new dimension to the film by filling in a lot of the "gaps". To be honest I think they were designed to go together.

The book transends the "story-book" feel of the first two and dares to add new meat to the table.

As a suggestion to my fellows who may feel disappointed in some parts of the movie, I suggest reading the book. It answers nearly every question that is being posed on these boards.

Also, I think that it's easy for some people to forget that Star Wars is DESIGNED to be a cheesy space opera. The acting is ON PURPOSE. Its not supposed to be TITANIC or Lord of the Rings. Star Wars stands on its own greatness.

 

Well, actually, George called ROTS Titanic in Space...

The novel rocks.

 

the novels of movies are always better than the movie as the book can go deeper into the story than the movie

 

Good point about George and Titanic

I found that the VERY short duel with Dooku had so much more depth after reading the book. Dooku gets PUNKED lured into over confidence. It's funny and sad too.

 

The book is actually better than the film- for which GL gets a knuckle rapping of huge proportions- and reading it makes ROTS better, which is a failure for the film.

Read it to enhance your ROTS enjoyment

Yours SHB JR
Who liked the movie, and liked the book more

 

That's what's frustrating, I shouldn't have to read the book to enjoy the movie. If LOTR can go on for 3.5 hours, why couldn't ROTS. They should have included more of the back story and detail to give the movie more guts. It would have made for a more interesting movie. It's the last movie in the series and it's supposed to tie up all the loose ends. The movie was great, but it could have been greater.

 

I actually agree with you Trekjedi

I think that Lucas feels that the work will come off as slow. But for crying out loud if we can tolerate Hobbit-Hugging from Jackson we can put up with a little detail in ROTS.

 

Well, I have to disagree with what appears to be the general consensus.

The movie is far better that the book.
The book is an interesting book.
The movie is a fantastic movie.

But, you can't really compare the two.

Everything that is in the movie is in the book.
But not everything that is in the book has anything to do with GL's vision of SW, it has to do with Matt Stover's interpretation of GL's vision.
And I'm not particularly interested in that...

Is the computer game of the movie better than the movie?
Is the Sticker Album?
The bubble bath?

No.
Only the movie is the movie.
Only the movie matters.

 

I agree...

Lucas, we 'will' embrace a 'long version' (Lord of the Rings style). Everyone will, please restore all the politics and the backstories. Make the movies the way you have always wanted to make them, restore everything that needed to be cut for the 'theatrical versions' and release your anger... [waves his hand across the screen]

oops, I got a little too carried away there...

 

So I'm not they only one who thinks that the book is better than the movie. What a relief.

But it doesn't surprise me. For one thing, the dialogues are a lot better in the book than in the movie; they don't sound forced or unnatural. In fact, everything in the book, even Anakin's fall, looks more believable to me. The book rocks!

 

I haven't read the book, but I think George Lucas should have kept the movie at 2.20 in length. (Which he did.) After all, at least according to one quote, his intention is to make a movie that a group of people can have a lot of fun watching together. I would have liked a longer movie, in a way, as would many of you, obviously, but I still think Lucas wanted to keep consistency with the other movies, and direct a film that everyone could enjoy--not only the fans. Whether he suceeded is hard to know for sure, but I can say that my four friends who aren't Star Wars fans liked it a lot. I don't think they would have as much if it was three hours or longer.

 

If the first 1\3 of the novel wasn't dedicated to the first 10 minutes of the film it would have been brilliant.

 

GIG, i am rather surprised that you say that. While i read and acknowledge all opinions in the forums, yours is one of those that i TRULY respect, and would like for you to elaborate as to why you like the movie better? i mean, the book details the state of mind of each character, outlines their motivations throughout the entire episode AND details anakin's thought process moreso than the film did. given all of that,what about the book DIDNT you like?

 

Well said, Get_in_Gear.
There is no 'vs'.

Still, you gotta admit, some scenes (ie the Obi-Ani farewell scene, the force choke) got more exposition, and thus went deeper than in the film.

 

Helmet,

That first 10 minutes is of such VITAL importance. Everything hangs in the balance there. It is Anakin at his best. . .the chosen one as he SHOULD be.

 

I loved the movie, wouldnt have had it any other way. However i read the book before the movie was released, so as the movie went on i knew about those "Gaps". Which made the movie that much more enjoyable.

Loved them both, I know i'll see the movie several more times encluding a few trips back to the theater, and i'll read the book again eventually to.

 

The book and the movie are meant to go together, the back story and character insight is curtial to understanding what is going on with the film.

 

Helmet,

That first 10 minutes is of such VITAL importance. Everything hangs in the balance there. It is Anakin at his best. . .the chosen one as he SHOULD be.

I think 80 pages would have been enough.

 

"Lucas, we 'will' embrace a 'long version' (Lord of the Rings style). Everyone will, please restore all the politics and the backstories. Make the movies the way you have always wanted to make them, restore everything that needed to be cut for the 'theatrical versions' and release your anger... [waves his hand across the screen]"

He can't. B/c people would complain about it being too long. Having too much politics and too much story. Lucas truly can't win.

 

The novel added greatly to the experience of the film, and vice versa. The book gives the context to "The Age of Heroes" (that we could only otherwise catch a hint of by watching The Clone Wars) that makes the Ani/Obi tragedy so poignant.

At the same time, there's just no way to visualize the scope of the story without letting George Lucas' visual storytelling into it...

 

I have to say i thought the book, story wise, was far superior to the movie.

I thought the movie was rushed from the time mace died onward, and it left me feeling like far too much of what should come after that was left on the cutting room floor.

I compair it to the theatrical version of RotK, which i thought was one of the worst films i've seen not because it was bad in and of itself, but because it left so much of the story out.

On the subject of RotK, the special extended version is awesome, and should have been released in the theater regardless of running time.

I can only hope GL comes to his senses and puts out extended versions of AotC and RotS, but honestly given his history i don't see it happening.

 

On the whole "first 10 minutes" bit, it's a case of Stover needing to be able to write the book so that you can have the knowledge of what has occurred before so that a lot of the stuff that will follow really quickly is completely understood, thus it is added in as partial segues in the fly-through. I think that of the various possible ways that it could have been done this is probably the best for Stover's style since it would have otherwise required a chapter of background exposition.


I do agree with the "there is no 'vs'" thought, as they are two sets of media that play to different strengths. There is almost no Kashyyyk battle in the book both because it wasn't fully realised on final edit, and also because it would have been an unnecessary drag in the middle of the story. On the other hand because you are able to you get to see more of the motivations and emotions that led to everything spiralling down into the climax of the story.

One gives an entirely different look at events that can add to the other but cannot be directly compared as individual entities.

 

Anakin's fall is so much more in the book. And it's too bad the political story disappeared--it is Padme's story. I happen to like the political side of the story in the prequels, so I wish we'd seen more in all 3.

The story of Darth Plagueis has a more telling ending in the book. Anakin asks what happened to the apprentice and Palpatine says, "he went on to become the greatest dark lord of the Sith..."

 

I remember reading the novels that DELREY published from the OT. They really helped understand the OT better, and having read a few bits from the ROTS novel, I can tell that it would be the same experience. For me the novel always makes the movie much more enjoyable, because in my mind I know the back story or the info that fills the gaps, so the movie leaves me with less questions. I think that's part of GL's genius.

 

I, like a lot of you, don't like to compare the two--the media are so different. You do have more freedom to explore the story in a book, since you can assume that your audience isn't going to be reading it in one sitting (although I did, ahaha, I couldn't put it down).

Overall, though, except for Stover's unnecessary fondness for italics, I loved the book. I thought it was much better written than the previous two novelizations and most of the EU books.

One thing I do wish had been integrated into the movies is the witty banter between Obi-Wan and Anakin. We see a tiny bit of it, but after the opening scene the movie is pretty much universally lacking in humor. Which works fine enough, but their verbal exchanges were a great indicator of their deep friendship, making it all the more devastating when it came to the final fight on Mustafar.

Another thing I thought was interesting in the novel, though, was that Anakin didn't lose his sense of wit when he became Darth Vader. He was a little bit less silent and brooding, so we get lines like "But we were promised a reward! A handsome reward!" "I am your reward. You don't find me handsome?", which are kind of darkly reminiscent of Anakin's pre-Vader penchant for wit.