4 ms·

> I really dislike the fan mob that it's starting the hate because RTMI is not going to be a throwback and retro-game. That is the same blow-back that George L

> I really dislike the fan mob that it's starting the hate because RTMI is not going to be a throwback and retro-game. That is the same blow-back that George Lucas caught when he made the Star Wars prequels. When George Lucas made the original Star Wars he set out to make a state-of-art sci-fi movie, and in fact he pushed the state-of-art ahead by a huge leap in that movie. A decade or two later, with the evolution of cinema effects, the original trilogy stopped being seen as state-of-art, but kept its cultural influence now under a new lens, it started being seen as a type of retro-futurism. So when George Lucas set out to make the prequels, he again intended to make state-of-art sci-fi movies*, as is his right, and as he should, but many of the fans instead wanted the new trilogy to match the retro-futurism feel they now assigned to the original ones, hence the many complaints at the time. Interestingly enough, later when Disney made the sequels they went the other way completely, and bet heavily on the retro-futurism feel (down even to the story arcs), so they got blow-back from the fans that instead wanted a state-of-art sci-fi. * If he achieved that state-of-art goal is debatable, my personal opinion he did, but just barely, failing to leap forward like the original did on its time, so they do feel a bit like "generic late 90s/early 00s sci-fi".*

smudgy 4y ago
I'm not sure a major problem with the prequels was the aesthetic. It never bothered me that it felt more "modern" than the original trilogy, it bothered me (and plenty of others) that the story wasn't good. For something that was in his head for such a long time, it came out half-baked.
- Cthulhu_ 4y ago
  It's the same with the sequels, they're making big jumps in the established lore, and they made the huge mistake of not actually fleshing out the story beforehand (like e.g. the MCU), leading to three disconnected movies full of attempted nostalgia and pushing merchandise; they made fanservice instead of good films.
  - speeder 4y ago
    Actually from what I heard they DID flesh out things. But then they made the serious error of hiring Rian Johnson AND giving him free rein with the direction of the movie. Rian Johnson already stated himself, he likes making divisive films. He also stated he doens`t like Star Wars... So he proceeded to ignore the plans that they had, and just do whatever he wanted. 1. He ignored several planned story arcs and just shoved things. 2. He ignored past movies and create a lot of non-sense. 3. He ignored the Extended Universe but in a bad way, Extended Universe books had a look of technical information and whatnot that circulated back into canon, with movies and canon TV series using that information, RJ just ignored that information. I fully expected Lucasfilm to just give up and not even attempt to make Film 9, that is how bad Film 8 fucked up the plans... But seemly they made an honest attempt to save the franchise in Film 9 by making it fanservice on top of fanservice and hope fans forget all the continuity errors and non-sense the plot became riddled with in Star Wars 8...
    - halostatue 4y ago
      I find Ep 7 to be mostly unwatchable because it’s almost all fan service without a real story to be found. There was no plot for Ep 8 to hang itself on, just a few coathooks widely spread. Ep 8 had some really interesting character arcs, but also made some basic errors. As a movie, I think that it’s the strongest of the three sequels. Given a lack of plot points to really hang off, Johnson seems to have done something interesting, but left even fewer plot points to hang off than Abrams left him. Let’s be clear: if Lucasfilm had disagreed with his direction, they would have taken him off the project. Ep 9 was more fan service (who can we throw into this scene?) with an even more inexplicable plot hook (if the Emperor was coming back in any way, there should have been hints of that in Ep 7). I do not understand the fascination with J J Abrams. He claims to be a fan of various media, but IMO he is the shallowest type of fan out there, appreciating only certain aesthetics without looking any deeper. His Star Trek films are the absolute worst of all the Star Trek films, even worse than Star Trek V: The Final Frontier. Why are they the worst? Because they have become Generic Action Films with a Star Trek veneer. (This is more or less my complaint with Picard.) I dread the idea of seeing J J Abrams touch any more science fiction properties because he just doesn’t get them and turns them into Michael Bay films (but with lens flares instead of explosions).
- hutzlibu 4y ago
  My first impression was the same, but later I came to the conclusion that it was just way more deep. The first star wars was glorifying rebellious david against goliath setting and fun adventures. A young nobody becomes a hero for the good side. People identified with luke skywalker. The later was way more about politics, intrigues and corruption of power. Not a bad story, but much more heavy (and depressing). A young nobody becomes a dark lord. Identifying with a dark lord? A bit harder. (And the disney movies try to be simple again, but are too shallow for my taste, but are well shot)
the_af 4y ago
The Star Wars prequels simply weren't good for storytelling/plot reasons, not just visuals. The characters weren't interesting, or even worse, were universally reviled like Jar Jar. The main character (both as a kid and as a teenager) was annoying as hell. The story didn't mesh well with the established Star Wars movies, like that thing with midichlorians that was thankfully played down in subsequent movies. For some reason, Lucas moved The Phantom Menace from "Young Adult" territory (as was the Original Trilogy) to "kid's movie", but halfway and inconsistently, so you get Jar Jar and "yipeee!" but also Trade Federation taxation routes -- what the hell? To be fair, the visuals were also abused by Lucas. I think there's a legitimate criticism to be made of George Lucas and his "horror of the void": when he didn't have the tech/budget, he had to live with vast empty spaces, and the movies got that "Spaghetti Western" barren look that actually made them better. When CGI became cheaper and easier to use, George Lucas decided to fill every bit of empty screen with some gizmo or cute alien screaming at the screen, and his movies suffered because of this.
- ffhhj 4y ago
  Lucas planned Jar Jar to be revealed as the Sith Lord in the second movie, that's why the character is unlikeable, but it would have been an interesting plot twist and would have made the first movie rewatchable since he place many little clues. Authors shouldn't be scared to develop their vision, and then create something to please them that will suck anyway.
  - kemayo 4y ago
    I'm pretty sure that Darth Jar Jar is only a fan theory, without any commentary from Lucas confirming it. (We can speculate, but I dislike saying it so confidently.)
  - the_af 4y ago
    I think Darth Jar Jar is an amusing fan theory, but fan theory nonetheless. Yes, Ahmed Best (the actor) said it wasn't out of the question, but there's no official confirmation this was even considered. All there is, is fan based theories speculating about circumstantial evdience.
dleslie 4y ago
Episode 1 is a terrible movie. I tried watching it with my kids as a marathon of Star Wars for May the Fourth, and they became bored with the trade federation and Senate, and were annoyed by Jar Jar. The pod racing was the saving grace, in their eyes, but even it was only mildly amusing. I turned it off when they left the room when the pod racing finished.

smudgy 4y ago

I'm not sure a major problem with the prequels was the aesthetic. It never bothered me that it felt more "modern" than the original trilogy, it bothered me (and plenty of others) that the story wasn't good. For something that was in his head for such a long time, it came out half-baked.

Cthulhu_ 4y ago
It's the same with the sequels, they're making big jumps in the established lore, and they made the huge mistake of not actually fleshing out the story beforehand (like e.g. the MCU), leading to three disconnected movies full of attempted nostalgia and pushing merchandise; they made fanservice instead of good films.
- speeder 4y ago
  Actually from what I heard they DID flesh out things. But then they made the serious error of hiring Rian Johnson AND giving him free rein with the direction of the movie. Rian Johnson already stated himself, he likes making divisive films. He also stated he doens`t like Star Wars... So he proceeded to ignore the plans that they had, and just do whatever he wanted. 1. He ignored several planned story arcs and just shoved things. 2. He ignored past movies and create a lot of non-sense. 3. He ignored the Extended Universe but in a bad way, Extended Universe books had a look of technical information and whatnot that circulated back into canon, with movies and canon TV series using that information, RJ just ignored that information. I fully expected Lucasfilm to just give up and not even attempt to make Film 9, that is how bad Film 8 fucked up the plans... But seemly they made an honest attempt to save the franchise in Film 9 by making it fanservice on top of fanservice and hope fans forget all the continuity errors and non-sense the plot became riddled with in Star Wars 8...
  - halostatue 4y ago
    I find Ep 7 to be mostly unwatchable because it’s almost all fan service without a real story to be found. There was no plot for Ep 8 to hang itself on, just a few coathooks widely spread. Ep 8 had some really interesting character arcs, but also made some basic errors. As a movie, I think that it’s the strongest of the three sequels. Given a lack of plot points to really hang off, Johnson seems to have done something interesting, but left even fewer plot points to hang off than Abrams left him. Let’s be clear: if Lucasfilm had disagreed with his direction, they would have taken him off the project. Ep 9 was more fan service (who can we throw into this scene?) with an even more inexplicable plot hook (if the Emperor was coming back in any way, there should have been hints of that in Ep 7). I do not understand the fascination with J J Abrams. He claims to be a fan of various media, but IMO he is the shallowest type of fan out there, appreciating only certain aesthetics without looking any deeper. His Star Trek films are the absolute worst of all the Star Trek films, even worse than Star Trek V: The Final Frontier. Why are they the worst? Because they have become Generic Action Films with a Star Trek veneer. (This is more or less my complaint with Picard.) I dread the idea of seeing J J Abrams touch any more science fiction properties because he just doesn’t get them and turns them into Michael Bay films (but with lens flares instead of explosions).
hutzlibu 4y ago
My first impression was the same, but later I came to the conclusion that it was just way more deep. The first star wars was glorifying rebellious david against goliath setting and fun adventures. A young nobody becomes a hero for the good side. People identified with luke skywalker. The later was way more about politics, intrigues and corruption of power. Not a bad story, but much more heavy (and depressing). A young nobody becomes a dark lord. Identifying with a dark lord? A bit harder. (And the disney movies try to be simple again, but are too shallow for my taste, but are well shot)

the_af 4y ago

The Star Wars prequels simply weren't good for storytelling/plot reasons, not just visuals. The characters weren't interesting, or even worse, were universally reviled like Jar Jar. The main character (both as a kid and as a teenager) was annoying as hell. The story didn't mesh well with the established Star Wars movies, like that thing with midichlorians that was thankfully played down in subsequent movies. For some reason, Lucas moved The Phantom Menace from "Young Adult" territory (as was the Original Trilogy) to "kid's movie", but halfway and inconsistently, so you get Jar Jar and "yipeee!" but also Trade Federation taxation routes -- what the hell? To be fair, the visuals were also abused by Lucas. I think there's a legitimate criticism to be made of George Lucas and his "horror of the void": when he didn't have the tech/budget, he had to live with vast empty spaces, and the movies got that "Spaghetti Western" barren look that actually made them better. When CGI became cheaper and easier to use, George Lucas decided to fill every bit of empty screen with some gizmo or cute alien screaming at the screen, and his movies suffered because of this.

ffhhj 4y ago
Lucas planned Jar Jar to be revealed as the Sith Lord in the second movie, that's why the character is unlikeable, but it would have been an interesting plot twist and would have made the first movie rewatchable since he place many little clues. Authors shouldn't be scared to develop their vision, and then create something to please them that will suck anyway.
- kemayo 4y ago
  I'm pretty sure that Darth Jar Jar is only a fan theory, without any commentary from Lucas confirming it. (We can speculate, but I dislike saying it so confidently.)
- the_af 4y ago
  I think Darth Jar Jar is an amusing fan theory, but fan theory nonetheless. Yes, Ahmed Best (the actor) said it wasn't out of the question, but there's no official confirmation this was even considered. All there is, is fan based theories speculating about circumstantial evdience.

dleslie 4y ago

Episode 1 is a terrible movie. I tried watching it with my kids as a marathon of Star Wars for May the Fourth, and they became bored with the trade federation and Senate, and were annoyed by Jar Jar. The pod racing was the saving grace, in their eyes, but even it was only mildly amusing. I turned it off when they left the room when the pod racing finished.