What I Like About Star Wars
- Thread starter Tan Djarka
- Start date
Timmythekid
Sr Member
Then you were a 16 year old with the emotional maturity of a 5 year old. Or you were high. It was the '70s, it's okay man.
I KID I KID!!!!!!! I was just saying that it defined storytelling and it's development was perfectly synched for an entire generation of us.
Rotwang
Sr Member
What I like about Star Wars is that it blows all the contemporary S-F films out of the water. We were being served a steady diet of films that showed how the future was going to be horrible, where intelligent speaking apes would force us to live in underground cities, eating Soylent Green and then have us tossed in the carrousel at 30 and outside mutated spiders or strains from outer space would kill us in horrible ways, IF we were spared by Lord Humongus ... It brought the fun and excitement back in Science Fiction films.
jun
Well-Known Member
The very first time i watched a Star wars film was not 'A new hope' but ROTJ. Of course ROTJ is the ending to the whole Star Wars story so i thought Star Wars was just this one movie, the ROTJ! I was only 8 at the time, and no one told me there was ANH and ESB. One day i went over to my friend's house and he said, lets watch Star Wars (ANH). I say ok, thinking its ROTJ but its a completely different movie! It was good knowing that there are more Star Wars movies to watch!
After all these years, I'll watch Star Wars whenever i wanted to get back to my childhood memories, and that's why i love it, its a transport bringing me back to my childhood.
After all these years, I'll watch Star Wars whenever i wanted to get back to my childhood memories, and that's why i love it, its a transport bringing me back to my childhood.
niennumb1
Master Member
It is not timeless according to George Lucas' needs of "updating" them.
Aside the amount of sadness I have toward all the things that screwed up some of the way I loved seeing the OT, Star Wars will always be a huge part of my life and It will never leave my blood. Amongst all the complaining I've done over the last 10 years on it I will always love it.
Galactifan
Sr Member
I like that even when there's no chance they can do it...the good guys always win! Goota love the Original Trilogy for having a roller coaster good time fun-filled ride!
Colin Droidmilk
Sr Member
And yet.... the usually acerbic film critic Alan Frank was no child when in 1977 in his book 'SciFi Now', he went absolutely gaga over the film, rating SW as no less than the 'intellectual maturing' of the SF genre, placing it even above 2001... Then there was that middle-aged guy on the Fox board of directors who, weeping, called it the greatest film he'd ever seen... And hey, even my Dad loved it when he took us ( he was 33), and so did my first girlfriend's Dad. And Kubrick liked it. And Hugh Hefner watched it through twice. And when Dino de Laurentiis asked Federico Fellini to direct Flash Gordon, he replied, 'there's no point, George Lucas has already done it'.
I think the above shows it's more than a movie for kids, it unlocks the kid inside the adult too. Some adults anyway, lol...
Like Steve, the ships, it was always about the ships. I wasnt the kid who looked at them as spaceships though, i looked at them as models, and wanted to see where they tied the wire that made them fly lol.
Even back then, i just wanted to see how it all worked, it changed my life, at least, formed the way my spare time would be spent.
Oh and the freezing chamber scene on Cloud City, ALWAYS gives me goosebumps.
All in all, i love everything about Starwars, its a kids movie and FUN movie, period, adults today who bag on it, are just grouches that probably yell at kids to stay of there lawn's, and are too pished they didnt get to work on it anyway.
lee
Even back then, i just wanted to see how it all worked, it changed my life, at least, formed the way my spare time would be spent.
Oh and the freezing chamber scene on Cloud City, ALWAYS gives me goosebumps.
All in all, i love everything about Starwars, its a kids movie and FUN movie, period, adults today who bag on it, are just grouches that probably yell at kids to stay of there lawn's, and are too pished they didnt get to work on it anyway.
lee
CJS
Well-Known Member
I think that times just change. If the prequels were released way back they would be just as loved. Watching 4,5,6 as kids and the watching 1,2,3 as mostly adults everything will be different. Your imagination and how they get the rabbit out of the hat is different. Everyone that grew up on the originals will have a hard time "growing down" to appreciate the newer stuff. I'm naturally immature, naive, bewildered, live in my own world and a massive space cadet when it comes to the life so they are all cool to me. lol
Solo4114
Master Member
I disagree about the whole "It's the nostalgia thing" in the difference between PT and OT.
I think you can argue that the OOT's f/x have aged, but that many of us who grew up on it don't see it that way because of nostalgia. So, when I say that "The OOT looks more real than any CGI crap out there!!" that's me being a nostalgic curmudgeon. I think you'd at least have a decent argument there, if that's what folks tried to argue.
However, while admittedly not the greatest drama of all time, the first two Star Wars films (ANH and ESB) still hold up as stories, even if the f/x have aged. And I think they do that a LOT better than the PT. Sure, there are some similarities in terms of the quality of each. Both have their moments of clunky dialogue. Not every performance across the board is top-notch.
But overall, I think the story of the OT and the characters of the OT are better realized and more interesting than the story and characters of the PT. I could rattle off my reasons why, but I think that the "you're looking at it through different eyes" thing, while true, only gets you so far.
As has been discussed above, adults within the industry generally applauded Star Wars. It wasn't just that it was a monumental f/x feat. It was also that it was just a solidly told cracking good adventure story. It spoke to the "childlike wonder" in plenty of adults because of how well it was done.
I don't think the PT's story, characters, etc. hold up nearly as well, though, and that there are large swaths of it that go beyond mere "childlike wonder" and in to the realm of "juvenile nonsense." And while that was present to some degree with the OT, I think it's a much higher degree in the PT.
Actually, this got me thinking about the degree to which the PT is both the victim of invidious comparison, and the beneficiary of brand name associations.
On the one hand, you can argue that the PT isn't nearly as bad as many of its detractors make it out to be. Sure it's a lousy film, but the DEGREE of hatred that people have for it stems more from invidious comparison -- it's so far below the OT that cannot help but actually look worse. Kind of like how a beat up car just standing on its own might not look quite so bad as it does when you sit it next to a pristine classic. Even one that may have had some modifications made.
On the other hand, though, I cannot help but think that many of the people who claim to love the PT really love the PT simply as "more Star Wars" rather than as films unto themselves. By this, I mean that if you stripped out the Star Wars IP from the PT, would people like it as much? Almost certainly not. If the film was titled "Fall of the Galactic Democracy", and a couple of Star Paladins ran around trying to figure out what was going on, and Anakin was renamed Albion and would later fall to become the Black Star Paladin Necrol, and Palpatine was the Star Warlock Baron Nefaar, and the hero's mentor was Kel-Dror instead of Obi-Wan, and they used monomolecular blades suspended in a magnetic containment field instead of lightsabres....people probably would just think of it as some lame Star Wars knockoff that doesn't hold a candle to the originals. Or was, "Eh, ok, but nowhere near as good as the Star Wars movies. And boy was that Vaur-Vaur guy annoying." But instead, slap on the Star Wars name, call those characters Anakin, Obi-Wan, and Palpatine, and all of a sudden you've got lead into gold. The alchemy of branding.
I think you can argue that the OOT's f/x have aged, but that many of us who grew up on it don't see it that way because of nostalgia. So, when I say that "The OOT looks more real than any CGI crap out there!!" that's me being a nostalgic curmudgeon. I think you'd at least have a decent argument there, if that's what folks tried to argue.
However, while admittedly not the greatest drama of all time, the first two Star Wars films (ANH and ESB) still hold up as stories, even if the f/x have aged. And I think they do that a LOT better than the PT. Sure, there are some similarities in terms of the quality of each. Both have their moments of clunky dialogue. Not every performance across the board is top-notch.
But overall, I think the story of the OT and the characters of the OT are better realized and more interesting than the story and characters of the PT. I could rattle off my reasons why, but I think that the "you're looking at it through different eyes" thing, while true, only gets you so far.
As has been discussed above, adults within the industry generally applauded Star Wars. It wasn't just that it was a monumental f/x feat. It was also that it was just a solidly told cracking good adventure story. It spoke to the "childlike wonder" in plenty of adults because of how well it was done.
I don't think the PT's story, characters, etc. hold up nearly as well, though, and that there are large swaths of it that go beyond mere "childlike wonder" and in to the realm of "juvenile nonsense." And while that was present to some degree with the OT, I think it's a much higher degree in the PT.
Actually, this got me thinking about the degree to which the PT is both the victim of invidious comparison, and the beneficiary of brand name associations.
On the one hand, you can argue that the PT isn't nearly as bad as many of its detractors make it out to be. Sure it's a lousy film, but the DEGREE of hatred that people have for it stems more from invidious comparison -- it's so far below the OT that cannot help but actually look worse. Kind of like how a beat up car just standing on its own might not look quite so bad as it does when you sit it next to a pristine classic. Even one that may have had some modifications made.
On the other hand, though, I cannot help but think that many of the people who claim to love the PT really love the PT simply as "more Star Wars" rather than as films unto themselves. By this, I mean that if you stripped out the Star Wars IP from the PT, would people like it as much? Almost certainly not. If the film was titled "Fall of the Galactic Democracy", and a couple of Star Paladins ran around trying to figure out what was going on, and Anakin was renamed Albion and would later fall to become the Black Star Paladin Necrol, and Palpatine was the Star Warlock Baron Nefaar, and the hero's mentor was Kel-Dror instead of Obi-Wan, and they used monomolecular blades suspended in a magnetic containment field instead of lightsabres....people probably would just think of it as some lame Star Wars knockoff that doesn't hold a candle to the originals. Or was, "Eh, ok, but nowhere near as good as the Star Wars movies. And boy was that Vaur-Vaur guy annoying." But instead, slap on the Star Wars name, call those characters Anakin, Obi-Wan, and Palpatine, and all of a sudden you've got lead into gold. The alchemy of branding.
Colin Droidmilk
Sr Member
This is a bloody good point.
Solo4114
Master Member
Oh!! I thought of something I really dug about the PT: Ewan MacGregor's Alec Guinness impersonation. I honestly enjoyed it. I think he's the best thing in the later two films, and is only edged out of the first film by Liam Neeson.
I think, for me, because I fall into the former "invidious comparison" camp, that I'd actually ENJOY a "Star Wars knockoff" featuring the adventures of Liam Neeson and Ewan MacGregor as Star Paladins or whatever. But I'd enjoy it far less as a "Star Wars" film.
I think, for me, because I fall into the former "invidious comparison" camp, that I'd actually ENJOY a "Star Wars knockoff" featuring the adventures of Liam Neeson and Ewan MacGregor as Star Paladins or whatever. But I'd enjoy it far less as a "Star Wars" film.
Zombie_61
Master Member
Except for the "life savers" thing, this is true for me as well. I was raised with Christian dogma forced upon me (no pun intended) and, even though I never really accepted any of it, I went along with it to make my parents happy. The Force, even though it was a "fictional" construct, resonated with me far more than any of the religious teachings I'd been exposed to. It wasn't until many years later that I discovered how many similarities there were between The Force and the study of metaphysics.
I concur. Ewan McGregor's performance as the younger Obi-Wan Kenobi perfectly complimented Sir Alec Guinness' portrayal in the Original Trilogy.
I love the original Star Wars trilogy because it's a modern mythology. It follows the hero cycle in a way that transcends words. The visual metaphors tell the story and the music gives it resonance. Good casting, great production design, archetypal plot, and nearly perfect editing.
I love the production design of the Prequel trilogy, the music, which was the ONLY thing I wouldn't have changed at ALL. John Williams is a genius through and through. Good casting. Some great actors, that sadly were never given a chance to act in the films.
But on a positive note, Star Wars resonates with me because it's a journey and it's just DAMN FUN TO WATCH!
I love the production design of the Prequel trilogy, the music, which was the ONLY thing I wouldn't have changed at ALL. John Williams is a genius through and through. Good casting. Some great actors, that sadly were never given a chance to act in the films.
But on a positive note, Star Wars resonates with me because it's a journey and it's just DAMN FUN TO WATCH!
No Countdowns! Old sci-fi always had a countdown before they did anything.
"Changing course in 5..4..3..2..1..Fire!" "Firing retros in 5..4..3...2..1..Fire!" "opening the door in 5...4..3..2..1.."
Even Star Trek had "come to course 123.54 on my mark.............Mark!"
There was a need to copy modern day NASA for some reason. Star Wars just did it. They got in and drove away.
It had great sets, not cheap crap, yet didn't shove them in your face.
It was fast paced and edited for short quick cuts. That was rare then.
Great music.
"Changing course in 5..4..3..2..1..Fire!" "Firing retros in 5..4..3...2..1..Fire!" "opening the door in 5...4..3..2..1.."
Even Star Trek had "come to course 123.54 on my mark.............Mark!"
There was a need to copy modern day NASA for some reason. Star Wars just did it. They got in and drove away.
It had great sets, not cheap crap, yet didn't shove them in your face.
It was fast paced and edited for short quick cuts. That was rare then.
Great music.
Excellent post. Thank you for your perspicacious comments. I'd not thought of the "countdown" absence from the Star Wars galaxy.
The Wook
Colin Droidmilk
Sr Member
MacGregor was very good, yes, and the Bergman actress also lent a bit of weight. One of the other things I liked about the film was that - putting the kid and Jar Jar aside - the Tatooine stuff felt sort of like something from a Bible epic, as it had done in the original. It's just a pity that, along with the rest of the movie, half of it made absolutely no sense.
MFP 2020
Sr Member
I was 12 in 1977. Star Wars rocked my world. It was magic.
"The Death Star will be in range in five minutes."
?
Except that Lord Humungus didn't make the scene until 1981.
"The Death Star will be in range in five minutes."
?
Rotwang said:
Except that Lord Humungus didn't make the scene until 1981.
That's not a countdown. That's to show how long the Rebels have. If they sat there and went 5:00....4:59....4:58...4:57....
Similar threads
