Inv8r wrote:No way, I disagree
Inv8r wrote:No way, I disagree
Alexrd wrote:None of that denies that in the PT "the environment is just a fact of life you take for granted". And the added scenes in Mos Eisley or long sequences in RotS are only meant to show the scope of the environment they are in (and the galaxy they live in). That's one reason for why I like Star Wars so much. The scope and the "lived in" galaxy.
Inv8r wrote:The asteroid sequence is just a way to make the story visually more interesting,
Inv8r wrote:Or if you like, in RotS this is played out as a long, long, opening sequence with no other addition to the story than "Here they are flying towards a big ship and landing on it". Nothing in that sequence moves the story forward apart from the opening waterfall, our heroes shooting out the shield generator, and then crashing on the ship.
The rest adds NOTHING, and takes the story NOWHERE. For proof of this, check out some of the fan edits which have been done to essentially pare it down to that - they loose NOTHING in the storytelling by that cut. It's screentime wasted on showing off the work generated and acting like a tourist in the universe rather than being ruthless with moving the story forward.
Inv8r wrote:The asteroid sequence is completely in service of moving the story forward.
The whole trip into the Slug needs to be there because 1) the story needs a break in the pace so we can catch our breath after the snow battle and asteroid chase and 2)The characters need time to move forward, which they don't have while panicked and on the run.
Treadwell wrote:They didn't just gawp at Gooba Fish out of the window.
Longtime_Sunshine wrote:I think you'd have a 30 minute movie of ships taking off and landing in the PT. i thought george was an editor who "thinks in shots"? the pace is worse off because of the close ups of landing gear and dust settling
E_CHU_TA! wrote:The giant fish and sea killer aren’t there to be gawped at. Like every other monster in the PT and OT, they try to eat the heroes. This concept ties back to the selfish, cannibalistic, and (apparently) animalistic nature of the Sith. Qui-gon unconsciously makes a verbal connection to Sidious – the “bigger fish” in the Saga.
Inv8r wrote:The asteroid sequence is just a way to make the story visually more interesting,
Alexrd wrote:Make the story visually more interesting is an excuse that can be used for every shot you are "complaining" about. Well, not an excuse, since it's probably the real reason behind those shots.
Treadwell wrote:But what I am saying is that, outside of any of these other justifications, there just aren't enough scenes with characters interacting and developing the way they do in, for example, the asteroid scene in TESB.
Or take Leia and Han in the corridor on Hoth as another example, how animated they are, how their movements are used, how one of the Rebel extras walking down the same corridor is integrated into the emotions being expressed. And then compare it to any number of scenes with characters walking and talking down corridors, providing exposition, in the prequels - they are all just so boring by comparison.
Inv8r wrote:E_Chu_Ta, you're wrong, it's not being simplistic (also, I disagree about the asteroid sequence needing to be there to cross-cut the story with Luke's training; no reason you HAVE to slow the other story down as well, in fact in RotS they do this - intercutting the fight with Grevious with the quieter stuff of Anakin talking to Palpatine, works fine).
I'm not sure what development in the relationship you are referring to. We meet our heroes again, Anakin is having a blast being a Jedi and going on adventures (here's where the fun begins!). He sees things which he considers to be more important than his assigned mission (saving the clones), and behaves recklessly. Obi-Wan is more responsible and slaps him down. Then they split off on separate SUB detours within the main pointless detour, and when they meet up again Obi Wan slaps Anakin down for being reckless... again.
What exactly is new here?. We've just spent 2 hours in AotC watching this exact dynamic established. The only real new wrinkle in their relationship we see is once they are almost at the Hand, Obi-Wan panics (aside - wasn't he supposed to be the serene master who had been reckless in his youth, so was I, if you remember.) and we see that he frequently relies on Anakin, when he needs Anakin to bring the shield down.
Inv8r wrote:That one point is totally irrelevant at all to your argument though, as it takes place AFTER the pointless detour. Everything from the waterfall to them almost at the Hand takes the story and relationships NOWHERE, leaving them exactly where we started the sequence, nothing learned, nothing accomplished, nothing changed. That a massive narrative no-no, particularly in a sequence which was absolutely savaged in editing because it was already running too long.
E_CHU_TA! wrote:Yes, Lucas didn’t appear to be overly concerned with audience identification for the PT characters. And maybe, the type of actor blocking you described in the Hoth corridor didn’t happened as often in the PT. But, to me, the depth of the story and characters, along with the richness of the production design compensate for the technical shortcomings of the PT films. As such, I still find the PT films as interesting and as significant as the OT films.
Treadwell wrote:show me one nice design from the prequels, and I will show you 10 designs from the original trilogy that have become iconic the world over...
Alexrd wrote:So, it's not about how good the design is, but how iconic they became?
Alexrd wrote:I don't think becoming iconic has anything to do with design merits, but how the movies as a whole (specially ANH) were recieved.
Alexrd wrote:I think the design is one of the things the PT is better than the OT.
Inv8r wrote:There are way more establishing shots of just...stuff in the PT. Every shot in the OT moved the story along in some way, I actually seem to remember Lucas interviewed at one point saying that he was brutal with himself - if it didn't move the story forward, it had to go, even if he might have enjoyed spending some time indulging in certain things. In the PT way more is spent wandering around in the environment without neccessarily moving the story along.
Treadwell wrote:Well I'd say it has to play a part.
Treadwell wrote:I am guessing the implication here is that the designs merely "became" iconic because they happened to be contained within a movie that became phenominally successful. I'd suggest that the movie could not have become so phenomenally successful without its incredible design aesthetic, so, like I said, I don't see how those things can ever be mutually exclusive.
Treadwell wrote:Well, to each his own I guess.I don't think the original designs created for the PT come anywhere near the look of the OT. I mean, I am literally talking species, creatures, characters, vessels, environments, buildings, technology and shit here... but I think you are too, yes?
CoGro wrote:For example, it's clear Lucas intended the Naboo starships to be to the PT as the MF was to the OT. The problem is it looks like a fucking plastic toy and the interiors are sterile. That's also true of most PT locales because of the simple fact that they're all filmed on blue screen sets so of course they look sterile.
CoGro wrote:The problem with the PT design is that it's overdesigned.
CoGro wrote:Then, on the other side he talks about the complexity and sophistication of the PT era design, necessitating it because the prequels take place during "more civilized age."
CoGro wrote:The PT designs look so fantastical, so "this needs to be CG to be accomplished" that it takes away the realism Lucas admitted was required for Star Wars to work. That, to me, is the starting point for the PT design "flaws." You don't believe any of it is real so the designs don't resonate as much. For example, it's clear Lucas intended the Naboo starships to be to the PT as the MF was to the OT. The problem is it looks like a fucking plastic toy and the interiors are sterile. That's also true of most PT locales because of the simple fact that they're all filmed on blue screen sets so of course they look sterile.
Treadwell wrote:What I'd add is that a lot of the designs also suffer from being either very intentionally derivative of something we have already seen, or intentionally trying to be something very different to what we have seen before. There was no real middle ground, very little uninhibited, genuine original design, and a lot of the stuff looked too contrived to be taken for what it was really - at the end of the day, just another vehicle in a familiar universe.
ETAndElliot4Ever wrote:That waitress robot is also a prime example of where the prequels stop resembling Star Wars movies and enter Pixar territory.
E_CHU_TA! wrote:Yes, Lucas didn’t appear to be overly concerned with audience identification for the PT characters. And maybe, the type of actor blocking you described in the Hoth corridor didn’t happened as often in the PT. But, to me, the depth of the story and characters, along with the richness of the production design compensate for the technical shortcomings of the PT films. As such, I still find the PT films as interesting and as significant as the OT films.
You’re arguing that a sci-fi serial shouldn’t devote a few additional minutes of screen time to a space battle. That seems like a simple pov to me. By your own reasoning, the ANH climax probably be halved as a good part of it has little to do with making Luke and Han heroes. Sorry, Red Leader and every other rebel pilot, we need to get Luke and Han to the medal ceremony as quickly as possible.
Regarding the relationship change, you sort of answered your own question. In AOTC, Obi-wan is the teacher and Anakin is the novice who spends most of the film failing. From a professional competency standpoint, Anakin is portrayed to be as to good if not a little better than Obi-wan. Also, for the first time since TPM and for the last time in the film, Anakin gets to be the hero.
Did you mean that nothing important happens to characters from the Waterfall sequence in AOTC to the opening of ROTS?
Inv8r wrote:In any event....sooooo....about that 2006 DVD vs BD.....
Treadwell wrote:Does George Lucas, today, know what actually made Star Wars so good/successful/popular in the first place?
Treadwell wrote:I mean, that's the bottom line isn't it, at least for anyone who feels that the regime of alterations to the original trilogy is pulling the saga away from what it once was, as opposed to "improving" it.
Alexrd wrote:Again, that's all subjective. I, for example, think that most of the changes and additions improve the movies.
Alexrd wrote:That varies from person to person.
TroyObliX wrote:Plus, I always felt Polis Massa was the PT's 'Cloud City', except we don't stay too long and there's no disco theme. It's diversionary inclusion never really bothered me. It was good material for 'Battlefront II'.
Inv8r wrote:I'm saying that if you are going to spend screentime, the shot/sequence needs to do something other than look pretty.
Rule of movie-making no. 1; everything needs to serve a purpose, and being pretty simply isn't a purpose. A few minutes showing off scenery is fine, AS LONG AS IT MOVES THE STORY FORWARD. I hate to keep beating this one over the head, but the asteroid sequence in ESb is a perfect example of how this looks. Yes you get scenery, but it's all moving things along first and foremost.
The diversions in the PT don't meet this requirement, therefore they fail this litmus test. If you can just plain cut something out altogether without it affecting the flow of the film, that's a great big flashing warning sign that it shouldn't be included.
You can cut the bulk of the opening of RotS out with NO narrative consequences, and what that means is that we spent time on ultimately irrelevant stuff in favor of showing things like the seeds of rebellion, Palpy's full persuasion of Anakin as to the necessity of seizing control by any means, and giving Padme an reason to exist in this movie other than being an incubator (no saving her from death doesn't count, because that's all internal to Anakin, not anything Padme does).
No, the ANH end does what it does to show how Luke ends up the hero, when he was the newest recruit, the rawest pilot, and logically that's not who you would have on your critical bombing run. Each little mini-story (the Y-wing attack, then Red leader's attack run) serves to up the ante and show how desperate the situation is, how difficult what they are attempting is, how time and hope is running out, and then in a dramatic and logically satisfying way, leaving it all on Luke's shoulders. See? Each part of the battle moves things forward narratively and emotionally toward the climax.
Inv8r wrote:Can't agree on this one either.
Sure, Anakin has that first step down the dark path in AotC, but he also gets plenty of chances to be the hero as well. And as far as ability, he is clearly already more talented than Obi-Wan, which is the whole center of his frustration. He is just also reckless and impulsive.
Exactly what we get shown again in RotS; this is the same dynamic. And are you saying that Anakin isn't playing the hero once they're aboard the Hand? Despite what Palpatine goads him into, Anakin is the hero of the whole adventure from landing to the crash on Coruscant. He succeeds where Obi-Wan fails in battling Dooku; he resuces Palpatine, and Obi-Wan, AND saves the lot of them when the ship starts disintegrating around them. He gets all the hero time he needs without the pointless space detour.
Inv8r wrote:Sorry, should have been clearer on my terminology.
By "waterfall", I mean the waterfall shot which opens RotS, not the - shudder - romp by the waterfall in AotC. The waterfall shot introduces the battle, shows the scope, and that our heroes ( flying side-by-side as brothers in arms) are headed to The Hand. Bang. That does everything the sequence needed to do, and everything you're saying there shoud be time spent on.
We see that the Republic is looking more and more militaristic and Imperial-like, we see there's a MASSIVE battle going on, in an interesting space environment (see? fine here as it's moving things along), and we see that our heroes are flying into the maelstrom to rescue the chancellor. All done in one great shot.
Then the story momentum screetches to a halt as they pointless detour for 10 minutes putzing around with missles and buzz droids, until finally we're back to approaching the Hand and resume the story.
Treadwell wrote:Lucas, today, know what actually made Star Wars so good/successful/popular in the first place?.
Treadwell wrote:As with all things in life.
Doesn't make it any less of a question, just makes it impossible to answer easily or confidently... but possible to debate and discuss...
Inv8r wrote:In any event....sooooo....about that 2006 DVD vs BD.....
Inv8r wrote:Lastly, back to the 2006 vs BD topic, well, it's really a question of a shitty-ass transfer in an obsolete video standard (let's not pretend that this is an acceptable video presentation for something put out in the 21st century - it isn't, and I think that was by design) and glaring video defects vs shitty-ass transfer with not quite as glaring defects AND shitty-ass changes in a current standard.
Yeah the BDs are visually better than the 2006 discs, and I will say the uncompressed audio for the most part sounds GREAT except that there's a serious underutilization of the LFE channel it seems, but they are a long, long way from reference quality, and they should have been so much more. But that's going to take a new 4k or better scan of something like the IB prints to correct at this point.
Personally right now I'll take Harmy's 720p SW, Ady's corrected ESB HDTV broadcast, and (sadly as Ady didn't complete the OT corrections) Wookiegroomer's RotJ HDTV. I actually sat down to flip between Ady's ESB and the BD ESB the other night, and while the HDTV may, may have been slightly softer, honestly the colour was so much better, the image so much brighter without becoming milked, that I was tempted to switch over to the HDTV rip to finish watching the movie.
ETAndElliot4Ever wrote:I think part of the problem is it isn't any fun. That gave Jabba's palace scenes a pass.
ETAndElliot4Ever wrote:I think part of the problem is it isn't any fun. That gave Jabba's palace scenes a pass.
Treadwell wrote:...I mean, that's my main problem with that opening - the whole rescue up to "another happy landing" - I come away from it feeling like... was all of that actually necessary?
foxbatkllr wrote:It's amazing...the logical somersaults that some people will do to insist something from the OT is okay while that same thing in the PT is not.
http://bios.weddingbee.com/pics/44117/h ... _eagle.jpg
edmaul1 wrote:Thank Christ they didn't put those deleted scenes in there. They were terrible. That is why I bought this set just in case ib the future he decided to add all the craptacular deleted scenes. IMO the only ones that should be added would be the probe droid in tpm and the slightly extended lightsaber battle in tpm and anakin and padme interacting with her family in atoc and one formation of the rebellion from rots
Inv8r wrote:Kinda says everything right there about why prequels are never a brilliant idea, doesn't it?
Inv8r wrote:Yeah, some interesting things may happen along the way, but you'll never really have much in the way of discovery in a prequel.
If it wasn't for the prequels, I wouldn't be a fan. I grew up watching the original trilogy but never really gave a shit until I saw The Phantom Menace. Then the original trilogy took on a whole new level of importance for me. The fandom prompted by the prequels and Clone Wars shoots your entire theory to hell as far as creating a gateway into the saga for newer audiences.Inv8r wrote:Kinda says everything right there about why prequels are never a brilliant idea, doesn't it? We know where everything ends up, we know what happens to all of these characters, so there's never any kind of dramatic tension if you know the original story. Yeah, some interesting things may happen along the way, but you'll never really have much in the way of discovery in a prequel.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests