Was the first three movies all that?

endacl

elfy4eva wrote: »

They'll always be two separate trilogy's to me and I recon most of the fans. In my opinion they severely underestimated and undervalued how good the original movies were in their original cut.

They really weren't all that good.

Don't get me wrong, I do love them. But c'mon? Seriously?

Myrddin

endacl wrote: »

They really weren't all that good.

Don't get me wrong, I do love them. But c'mon? Seriously?

You're aware this is the Star Wars forum?

elfy4eva

endacl wrote: »

They really weren't all that good.

Don't get me wrong, I do love them. But c'mon? Seriously?

I disagree, I feel the original trilogy was well ahead of its time it paved the way for the sci-fi genre (even in it's cheesy costumed, stop-motion glory).

LeftBase

Sorry if this is a little off topic but I have a plot related question for all you Star Wars people!

I was watching Ep3 the other night and it occurred to me that the Emperor tells Darth Vader that Padme(probably mis-spelled) is dead and that he killed her in his rage. This drives Darth Vader into a grief stricken rage and seems to be the final nail in the coffin of his "good side"....now the problem is this for me. In the Empire Strikes Back I think it is the Emperor tells Darth Vader that Luke is the son of Anakin Skywalker. At this point Darth Vader would realise that the Emperor lied to him and that Padme lived to give birth to Luke. Given that Anikin's plan was to overthrow the Emperor and have a future with Padme as ruler's of the galaxy no doubt this revelation would leave him no longer loyal to the Emperor and furious he had been lied to. Had he known she was still alive he most likely would have sought her out.

Perhaps I am missing something here but it seems like a little bit of a plot gap to me..

endacl

EnterNow wrote: »

You're aware this is the Star Wars forum?

Yeah. But it is a valid point of view. Well, insofar as a rambling nerdy chat with a bunch of late 30-something peers can become a valid view.

This chat happened about a couple of months ago when a gang of us who grew up together met for a day of nostalgia, beer and pizza, including the trilogy. TBH Indiana Jones dated better, and we ignored the modern muck from that one too. We all enjoyed SW, don't get me wrong, but eventually the subject was (nervously) broached as to whether they were objectively actually 'any good'. Consensus was broadly 'no, not very'.

Now, that doesn't detract for a second from our enjoyment of, or affection for, the Star Wars universe. In fact, I had a Qwertee 'Game of Clones' shirt in the post today. The fact remains though that, despite the moments of brilliance in terms of scope, sfx, and lightsabers, the movies themselves a quite thin, and relatively woodenly acted.

I still love them, but I found myself having to be realistic about them. A valid point of view.

Maybe its because I never got that ATAT!

elfy4eva

LeftBase wrote: »

Sorry if this is a little off topic but I have a plot related question for all you Star Wars people!

I was watching Ep3 the other night and it occurred to me that the Emperor tells Darth Vader that Padme(probably mis-spelled) is dead and that he killed her in his rage. This drives Darth Vader into a grief stricken rage and seems to be the final nail in the coffin of his "good side"....now the problem is this for me. In the Empire Strikes Back I think it is the Emperor tells Darth Vader that Luke is the son of Anakin Skywalker. At this point Darth Vader would realise that the Emperor lied to him and that Padme lived to give birth to Luke. Given that Anikin's plan was to overthrow the Emperor and have a future with Padme as ruler's of the galaxy no doubt this revelation would leave him no longer loyal to the Emperor and furious he had been lied to. Had he known she was still alive he most likely would have sought her out.

Perhaps I am missing something here but it seems like a little bit of a plot gap to me..

I agree that's definitely a bit of a loose string there, They could make up some flimsy lore to explain it like "ohhhh vader was too far down the dark path at that stage"

But honestly it's purely because the story in the new films doesn't do a very good job at tying in with the old ones and that has allowed for plot holes.

Myrddin

endacl wrote: »

I still love them, but I found myself having to be realistic about them. A valid point of view.

It's a valid point of view of course, as in when it's your own personal view. But bare in mind this is a forum for fans of the franchise, sweeping statements won't wash well & in much the same way you wouldn't wander in to the Soccer forum & say "Yeah I watched a few games back in the day, but football isn't all that good is it? Cmon, seriously?"...you would be on the back of a ban for trolling pretty swiftly I'd imagine.

The general consensus is, from an artistically critical point of view, no, there are many, many flaws with the Star Wars films. But from a fan perspective, they do combine together to be more than the sum of their parts. It's a regurgitated mish-mash of all the great story telling cliches, but put it all together, somehow, it just works. There's a magic in the original trilogy that was captured somehow, & despite their many flaws, they remain, for me & my young son alike, wonderful fun to watch.

endacl

EnterNow wrote: »

It's a valid point of view of course, as in when it's your own personal view. But bare in mind this is a forum for fans of the franchise, sweeping statements won't wash well & in much the same way you wouldn't wander in to the Soccer forum & say "Yeah I watched a few games back in the day, but football isn't all that good is it? Cmon, seriously?"...you would be on the back of a ban for trolling pretty swiftly I'd imagine.

The general consensus is, from an artistically critical point of view, no, there are many, many flaws with the Star Wars films. But from a fan perspective, they do combine together to be more than the sum of their parts. It's a regurgitated mish-mash of all the great story telling cliches, but put it all together, somehow, it just works. There's a magic in the original trilogy that was captured somehow, & despite their many flaws, they remain, for me & my young son alike, wonderful fun to watch.

I agree entirely.

There's a huge cohort of fans of my age though, who in all likelihood feel the same. I didn't 'watch a few games back in the day' though. I was completely saturated in SW, as many were. For a few pre-teen years SW was the central fact of my existence. I still love the movies. I don't watch them, but if I had to put together a Desert Island DVD show, they'd be on it. And probably ahead of Indiana Jones. Interestingly weird...

Foe many fans of my generation, they do indeed combine more than the sum of their parts, but I'm not so sure its in the way you describe. I think it has more to do with the shared experience, at that time, and at that age. Maybe that's a little part of what your son is picking up.

You see, I am a fan of the franchise. I'm just not so sure its about the three movies.

No need to hint at bans though. I get it. I'll save it for pizza night...

Nody

//MOD I've broken out the side discussion into a separate thread; all please try to stay on topic in which ever thread you post or I'll need to start pulling out cards and a whining of a thousand spammers may be heard through the force if I do...

//END MOD

ziedth

It's hard to know, the age thing is a huge part for my love of the films and even though I have seen the trilogy what must be one hundred times I'll admit it has been a couple of years since I saw them last.

I feel a little sorry for my kid who just isn't going to "get it" when he is old enough to watch them.

I have to admit as films they aren't as strong as films like LOTR and even films such Serenity are which are similar walk all over it in terms of pace and character interaction.

In a nutshell I love them, I'm praying to all that is good in the world that Adrams comes in and knocks it out of the park and kickstarts the whole thing again but I can certainly see that they aren't the best films ever made but to me definitely the best trilogy

Dude111

endacl wrote:

They really weren't all that good.

Don't get me wrong, I do love them. But c'mon? Seriously?

They were THE BEST 3 part movie ever AND SHOULDNT HAVE EVER BEEN ME$$ED WITH!!

To me STAR WARS IS ONLY 3 parts! (original releases)

brianregan09

I just finished watching Return of the Jedi and those scenes at the end with Vader Luke and Emporor just crackled ...there is nothing remotely close to those in the newer trilogy so for me they still stand up massivly

Chazz Michael Michaels

Empire is amazing. The other five are meh.

astonaidan

I guess Im in a minority who wasnt part off Star Wars movies scene growing up who enjoyed them, I honestly didnt watch them till after the first off the new ones came out

Cork boy 55

Why do imperial scout troopers have white uniforms?


Why cannot imperial storm troopers hit anything they shoot at?

DazMarz

Cork boy 55 wrote: »

Why do imperial scout troopers have white uniforms?


Why cannot imperial storm troopers hit anything they shoot at?

In the expanded universe, there are Swamp Troopers (essentially the same as Scout Troopers) who have camouflaged armour.

Stormtroopers are highly drilled, highly skilled warriors of the Empire... but there is obviously a big lack of shooting ranges in the Imperial Academy on Carida... :P

But there is a reason for the all-white armour that I heard before; it had something to do with uniformity. That all Imperial troops would wear identical uniforms to hammer home the point that they are not unique in any way; they are simply one of many cogs in the Imperial War Machine. Their names are stripped away, they have nothing unique or identifying about them. The all-white armour is also used instead of camouflaged armour to instil fear in enemy troops and to show that Imperial troops do not fear being seen. Bloody stupid, but that is something that I heard before.

In later years, after the Battle Of Endor, when Imperial troops were not ten a penny and when recruitment dropped off, the expendable nature of troops, fighters and equipment was not as big as it was. They couldn't send thousands of troops into battle and not care if they lost a huge percentage of them any more. They had to keep as many troops alive as possible. Hence the changing from all-white armour, putting shields on TIE Fighters, etc.

Cork boy 55

DazMarz wrote: »

In the expanded universe, there are Swamp Troopers (essentially the same as Scout Troopers) who have camouflaged armour.

Stormtroopers are highly drilled, highly skilled warriors of the Empire... but there is obviously a big lack of shooting ranges in the Imperial Academy on Carida... :P

But there is a reason for the all-white armour that I heard before; it had something to do with uniformity. That all Imperial troops would wear identical uniforms to hammer home the point that they are not unique in any way; they are simply one of many cogs in the Imperial War Machine. Their names are stripped away, they have nothing unique or identifying about them. The all-white armour is also used instead of camouflaged armour to instil fear in enemy troops and to show that Imperial troops do not fear being seen. Bloody stupid, but that is something that I heard before.

In later years, after the Battle Of Endor, when Imperial troops were not ten a penny and when recruitment dropped off, the expendable nature of troops, fighters and equipment was not as big as it was. They couldn't send thousands of troops into battle and not care if they lost a huge percentage of them any more. They had to keep as many troops alive as possible. Hence the changing from all-white armour, putting shields on TIE Fighters, etc.

I have only seen the 6 films TBH
Don't have time to delve into the expanded universe and would not know where to begin!

Watched the org 3 films over Xmas for first time in years and these things bugged me
The storm troopers shooting on the death star in episode 4 is comically bad
White uniforms for Storms is understandably to some degree but for scouts pfftth

Myrddin

Just to play devils advocate, why the need to camouflage the troopers on the Endor moon? Presumably, the moon was in the Empires hands & a scan would have revealed no threat given the only indigenous life was animal & primitive tribe 'beings'. Who would they exactly be hiding from? The stolen shuttle was only able to land because it had a valid code...seems the moon was pretty secure?

sbsquarepants

endacl wrote: »

They really weren't all that good.

Don't get me wrong, I do love them. But c'mon? Seriously?

Not trolling or anything, I do know where I am! But, I just can't see the attraction - they are terrible, terrible films.

Nody

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Not trolling or anything, I do know where I am! But, I just can't see the attraction - they are terrible, terrible films.

Care to elaborate a bit why you find them terrible, terrible films? It's a bit hard to discuss the topic with out a bit more on the table so to speak.

sbsquarepants

Well probably the thing I disliked most was that they have all this super advanced technology yet basically behave like primal tribes, living in huts and fighting with super high tech sticks - makes no god damn sense.

Myrddin

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Well probably the thing I disliked most was that they all this super advanced technology yet basically behave like primal tribes, living in huts and fighting with super high tech sticks - makes no god damn sense.

Just another perspective on that, fourty years ago we put a man on the moon, & yet today there's people living in cardboard boxes. Civilizations tend to encompass a lot of things, not just one aspect.

sbsquarepants

Myrddin wrote: »

Just another perspective on that, fourty years ago we put a man on the moon, & yet today there's people living in cardboard boxes. Civilizations tend to encompass a lot of things, not just one aspect.

Well that's true, but when's the last time in those almost 5 decades that any space faring nation went into battle with sticks?
The whole series just grates on me, In fact I so disliked the first 3 that I haven't bothered (and most likely never will) to watch the prequels. I just thoroughly disliked practically every character in the whole 3 films (with the possible exception of Harrison Ford, but then he doesn't really know how to be shít!) Those god damn robots are quite possibly the two most irritating characters in all of cinema history, or take yoda for example, if he's so bloody smart why has he not been able to master the rules of grammar - I'm afraid again, no sense it makes:)

Myrddin

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Well that's true, but when's the last time in those almost 5 decades that any space faring nation went into battle with sticks?

Who went into battle with sticks? The Ewoks? They weren't a technologically advanced race though & were tribe like, reflective of tribe like cultures that exist today. Just because we have nuclear weapons, doesn't mean there aren't people fighting with arrows etc

The whole series just grates on me, In fact I so disliked the first 3 that I haven't bothered (and most likely never will) to watch the prequels. I just thoroughly disliked practically every character in the whole 3 films (with the possible exception of Harrison Ford, but then he doesn't really know how to be shít!) Those god damn robots are quite possibly the two most irritating characters in all of cinema history

If you dislike the originals so, I'd steer well clear of the prequels if I were you

or take yoda for example, if he's so bloody smart why has he not been able to master the rules of grammar - I'm afraid again, no sense it makes:)

I'm gonna take a wild guess here & state English wasn't his first language Again, though in different ways, there are ethnic groups today who speak English perfectly well, but the grammar & syntax can be all wrong...certain Eastern Europeans, certain Asians etc for example, have nearly their own dialect of English where obviously the rules of the own native tongue, influence how they convey a learned language like English etc. I'm reaching I know, but it's not such an 'alien' like concept

TerrorFirmer

Always thought Return of the Jedi was a bit of a turd (incidentally the only one I got to see in the cinema), love A New Hope and Empire though. The prequel trilogy is entertaining enough as a sci-fi spectacle but totally forgettable. Retrospectively, the much loathed Episode I, I find to actually be the strongest of them.

Nody

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Always thought Return of the Jedi was a bit of a turd (incidentally the only one I got to see in the cinema), love A New Hope and Empire though. The prequel trilogy is entertaining enough as a sci-fi spectacle but totally forgettable. Retrospectively, the much loathed Episode I, I find to actually be the strongest of them.

Anything containing Jar Jar Binks is by definition garbage binned on principle alone...



I see were you come from Squarepants but I see it more as a reflection of the universe being represented what's on earth. You have the people who're relatively poor farmers who have some tech but really don't have a lot of money to throw around, you got the high rollers (Sky city) and of course in a future were there's a dictator who's relying on the army (which dictator don't?) they got all the funding for the big toys. From that perspective the tech difference make sense because once you get to see the rebel force you'll note they are not using gun powder weapons to fight back because they can get hold of the good stuff and fight with lazors as well (even though outnumbered which is the usual state and hence limited to hit and run rather then big walkers).

If anything I think what's missing is really fleshing out the universe to explain for example how the rebels could afford starships (I'd guess they are not exactly free to build or maintain) or how the global commerce works out.

sbsquarepants

By fighting with sticks I was referring to the light sabres, it's an idiotic weapon - think of the technology that would be required to "freeze" a laser beam, then think of what it added to the weapon - absolutely nothing, it achieved the exact opposite in fact, instead of shooting your opponent with it from a mile away you've put gazillions of space dollars into limiting it so much that he can kick you in the nuts when you try to use it on him! Why?:eek:
And I get what you both say about life on earth, there are fairly primitive living tribes people and so on with smart phones and satellite communications and so on, but should push come to shove they don't clamber out of stealth bombers to throw stones at each other or bang each other on the head with hammers. It makes zero sense to make weapons less effective or more dangerous for the user - it just doesn't happen intentionally, anywhere, ever - except maybe in some galaxy far far removed from common sense.

DazMarz

biko

I don't know how old you guys are but when I saw the first movie it was the first science-fiction film I've seen and it absolutely blew my mind.

Myrddin

sbsquarepants wrote: »

By fighting with sticks I was referring to the light sabres, it's an idiotic weapon - think of the technology that would be required to "freeze" a laser beam, then think of what it added to the weapon - absolutely nothing, it achieved the exact opposite in fact, instead of shooting your opponent with it from a mile away you've put gazillions of space dollars into limiting it so much that he can kick you in the nuts when you try to use it on him! Why?:eek:
And I get what you both say about life on earth, there are fairly primitive living tribes people and so on with smart phones and satellite communications and so on, but should push come to shove they don't clamber out of stealth bombers to throw stones at each other or bang each other on the head with hammers. It makes zero sense to make weapons less effective or more dangerous for the user - it just doesn't happen intentionally, anywhere, ever - except maybe in some galaxy far far removed from common sense.

Not to be pedantic here, but you do realise Star Wars is sci fi...it isn't a Panorama documentary. Personally, light sabers I thought were in the words of a great man, "Not as random or clumsy as a blaster, & an elegant weapon, for a more...civilized, age." They were a sidearm, issued to highly trained 'guardians of peace & justice", akin to a highly trained Samurai wielding a finely crafted blade.

The saber battles, such as the Luke & Vader confrontation in Cloud City....or in the Emperors Throne Room...look absolutely jaw dropping in conjunction with the tense soundtrack & story all in context. I for one, think Star Wars owes a lot of its success to the light saber.

sbsquarepants

Myrddin wrote: »

Not to be pedantic here, but you do realise Star Wars is sci fi...it isn't a Panorama documentary. .

I do. I love sci fi in general and I understand the requirement to suspend disbelief in some cases, but it just doesn't work here for me.

Myrddin wrote: »

Personally, light sabers I thought were in the words of a great man, "Not as random or clumsy as a blaster, & an elegant weapon, for a more...civilized, age." They were a sidearm, issued to highly trained 'guardians of peace & justice", akin to a highly trained Samurai wielding a finely crafted blade. .

Meh, should world war 3 break out here on earth samurais won't feature too heavily. Pit my lazy untrained ass, with a cheap shotgun, against the worlds most highly trained samurai and his finely crafted sword and all you end up with is a dead samurai and a nice sword as a memento.

Myrddin wrote: »

The saber battles, such as the Luke & Vader confrontation in Cloud City....or in the Emperors Throne Room...look absolutely jaw dropping in conjunction with the tense soundtrack & story all in context. I for one, think Star Wars owes a lot of its success to the light saber.

All I think is, if he was really interested in defeating him, he'd have shot him from across the room at the first opportunity. To-may-to, to-mah-to I suppose:)