Jump to content

Star Wars Disenchantment


John

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Arpy said:

Why?

 

🤔

 

It completely doesn't add up with the previous two films and - for some reason - not even with the prequel trilogy.

 

It reads like a really poor attempt to recapture the lightening in a bottle that was "I am your father!".

 

It has no weight watsoever because, unlike the Vader reveal, it has no direct implication upon character with the exception "you also have that power."

 

A lot of the way its sold isn't too great, either. Luke comes to the realization that its Leia out of the blue - its shown rather than told, and even the scene where its revealed to Leia just doesn't work all too well.

 

Not to mention that it set in-stone this aesthetic in which everyboy's related and everything that's even vaugley meant to be a plot twist results in the exposing of some hitherto unknown familial tie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its hardly a bad film, but its not terribly good either.

 

30 minutes ago, Quintus said:

Everything on screen is practically mounted, the [admittedly tame] stunts are shot on location, the pyrotechnics are staged for real; there's no need to suffer eyebleed at the sterile sight of green screen work and weird uncanny valley CG creatures polluting the frame just because they can. 

 

There's rear-projection in Return of the Jedi that has aged just as poorly as any CGI would. I'm thinking some of the desert vistas behind Luke and Han and they're led to their execution, and some of the shots in which Luke is in the same frame as the monster.

 

Even some of the puppets just don't look convincing. I showed it to a young cousin of mine. Those swine-things in Jabba's palace cracked him up. If an effect isn't believable, it isn't believable, CG or not CG. If the large battle in Attack of the Clones feel right out of who framed Roger Rabbit, The whole Jabba sequence feels like something out of Sesame Street.

 

I also disagree that the stunts were tame. There was a little of it in Empire Strikes Back, but Return of the Jedi begun in earnst this aesthetic with regards to fighting choreography in which the characters leap all over the place and do backflip after backflip, which I've never cared for. It reached super-saturating in Attack of the Clones.

 

30 minutes ago, Quintus said:

intercut with well-paced precision (not a given with Star Wars flicks *cough* TLJ *cough*)

 

Return of the Jedi is anything but well-paced. Its not a long movie (although it is longer than the previous two) but it only starts an hour into its own runtime, and later takes another detour with the introduction of the Ewoks.

 

The piling-up of multiple subplots come the climax is also not a good device.

 

30 minutes ago, Quintus said:

we have the Emperor+Vader Vs Luke scenes anyway, which in their own right are arguably top tier Star Wars sequences and actually some of most memorable and beloved moments in the entire saga.

 

That's right. Plus, it didn't really leave any plot thread from the previous film (and the prequels) unresolved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Return of the Jedi is anything but well-paced. Its not a long movie (although it is longer than the previous two) but it only starts an hour into its own runtime

 

The same thing could be said about the original SW film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first act of the original Star Wars ends 42 minutes into the film, true. However, the first act of Return of the Jedi starts 45 minutes into the film. Jabba's Palace has NOTHING to do with the main plot of the film. It isn't an integral part of the conflict between The Rebels and the Empire; its just a narrative detour to get Han back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

There's rear-projection in Return of the Jedi that has aged just as poorly as any CGI would. I'm thinking some of the desert vistas behind Luke and Han and they're led to their execution, and some of the shots in which Luke is in the same frame as the monster.

 

Weren't the rear projections digitally redone for the special edition, so they're not rear projections anymore?

 

2 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

The first act of the original Star Wars ends 42 minutes into the film, true. However, the first act of Return of the Jedi starts 45 minutes into the film. Jabba's Palace has NOTHING to do with the main plot of the film. It isn't an integral part of the conflict between The Rebels and the Empire; its a narrative detour.

 

Well, they had to save Han.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At any case it never looked convincing.

 

There's little to nothing of that in the original. Some of the shots of the ships in the snow battle in Empire don't look too good, but nothing as deletrious as the rear-projection in Return of the Jedi.

 

As for Han, yeah its kind of an unfortunate thing that the movie was stuck with, but if it had been made into a shorter sequence and functioned more like an action opening, James Bond-style, it could have been better. 

 

Still, a good movie. But just barely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

There's rear-projection in Return of the Jedi that has aged just as poorly as any CGI would. 

 

This is true, but for me there's a "I can see the strings" charm about it. The Rancor fight does look frickin' awful though.

 

Quote

 

Even some of the puppets just don't look convincing. 

 

 

See: charm

 

But they were never intended to be photorealistic anyway. CG creatures, on the other hand, are.

 

Quote

 

Return of the Jedi is anything but well-paced. 

 

Keeping my point in the intended context, the pacing in the third act of RotJ is far better than its frankly amateurish equivalent in TLJ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're very structurally different films, those two.

 

Both Return of the Jedi and The Last Jedi have three simultaneous threads running through their climax, which I almost never enjoy. The exception is that The Last Jedi than pulls a "psyche! that's not the ending of the movie!" and while I still think that its just too much for one movie, at least the real ending has little to no crosscutting. Its almost completely focused on Luke vs. Kylo, a confrontation which I greatly enjoyed.

 

Although, while I maintain that the idea that Luke and Leia is sibling is idiotic beyond belief, that little moment they had, with the Luke and Leia theme...that was pretty special.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Quintus said:

This is true, but for me there's a "I can see the strings" charm about it. The Rancor fight does look frickin' awful though.

 

But TESB looked so slick! Perfect really. Cutting edge for its time. 

 

What happened?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Stefancos said:

Joe will never accept that.

Because they are bad Even the film novelizations might as well be written in crayon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Arpy said:

I think it could've been told better, for sure, but there are more problems with Return of the Jedi than that.

 

 

 

It’s always been my least favourite. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its easy to be disenchanted with the Star Wars franchise because Star Wars is beyond great. ESB is also great. Half of Jedi is good, there are interesting parts in the mostly bad Phantom Menace, aotc is a recipe for garbage and rots is film diarrhea. TFA is a nostalgic love song and TLJ is half terrific and half aotc/rots bad. Rian (its Ryan you tard) Johnson surprises no one in his mediocrity as a filmmaker. I will give him props for a great ending bleak and somber. People commit suicide for less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see what's so bad about Luke and Leia being siblings. In my 43 years this is the first I've heard anyone complain about it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a FANTASY!

 

In a universe populated with magical space wizards and giant slugs that live in asteroids, fantastical plot points and scenarios are to be expected. And I've never minded that particular twist in ROTJ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not that its fantastical, its that it tears down the continuity and the expanse of the canvas. Since that reveal, Star Wars is expected to be Modern Family in Space.

 

Plus, Star Wars is indeed a fantasy...for kids. I don't think having the first two movies set up was is in retrospect an incestous love triangle is something to not be frowned upon.

 

As a piece of writing, its beyond moronic, not to mention lazy. You can just see Lucas (or Kasdan?) saying: "Well, when a hitherto-unknown familial tie between two established characters was revealed in the previous film it really worked - lets hit the replay button and see what happens!" which is a complete misunderstanding of what made that reveal work on a dramatic level, as opposed to this one.

 

The Vader reveal - while it also tempers with continuity - at least has impact because the entirety of the previous film was spent building up Vader's character so as to make that reveal powerful. Just as importantly, the nature of the reveal is such that it sheds a new light on the characters and the conflict. Being that Vader is Luke's father, having the hero kill him now becomes that much more complex, and being that Luke is Vader's son, there's the suspicion that he may be fallible as his father is.

 

The Leia reveal doesn't do any of it. Return of the Jedi does nothing to build to it - it just gets told (not too well), and it doesn't impact who Luke or Leia are, with the exception of the idea that Leia can use The Force.

 

Its used as a plot device later, of course. But it doesn't change anything fundemental. Its dumb!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Arpy said:

Shut up, Jo.

Eat it arp.

Chen Star Wars is a movie for everyone. Idiot comments like you just made diminish it value. It is one of the greatest films ever made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Demodex said:

I don't see what's so bad about Luke and Leia being siblings. In my 43 years this is the first I've heard anyone complain about it. 

 

When did you join JWFan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1999, the year Star Wars disenchantment began.

 

30 seconds after the opening crawl of TPM to be precise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Stefancos said:

 

Two years after the SE's?

 

The REAL disenchantment, not the first smells of it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, JoeinAR said:

Chen Star Wars is a movie for everyone. Idiot comments like you just made diminish it value. It is one of the greatest films ever made.

 

It is a kids film by the admission of its own writer and director at the time of its making and release.

 

Its not an incorrect statement, either. I mean, it can be enjoyed by all audiences, but its certainly a kids film in my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually George's original exact quote was "young people". He never explicitly said "kids" until the mid-2000's. I always assumed he was referring to people in their teens/20's, which would be around the same age as Luke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, there are people who think it felt natural that Luke and Leia were siblings? This thread is legit the first time I've encountered this opinion. Even as a ten-year-old who thought George Lucas was the greatest filmmaker ever and responsible for everything that made anything with his name on it, like Indy, I thought it was weird and made scenes from the past two movies slightly uncomfortable. Growing up I would hear my friends say the same, and a lot of the people involved in the movies (Williams, Hamill, etc.) joke about it, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are people who think everything classic Star Wars is sacred scripture.  Before the dark times came.  Before he whose name must not be spoken arrived.  And after him, the Great Mouse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Nick Parker said:

Wait, there are people who think it felt natural that Luke and Leia were siblings? This thread is legit the first time I've encountered this opinion. Even as a ten-year-old who thought George Lucas could do no wrong, I thought it was weird and made scenes from the past two movies slightly uncomfortable. Growing up I would hear my friends say the same, and a lot of the people involved in the movies (Williams, Hamill, etc.) joke about it, too.

 

It never felt natural or logical to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, SteveMc said:

Gentlemen.  You can't give personal attacks in here.  This is the Disenchantment thread.

I'm disenchanted with being disenchanted.

22 minutes ago, Nick Parker said:

Wait, there are people who think it felt natural that Luke and Leia were siblings? This thread is legit the first time I've encountered this opinion. Even as a ten-year-old who thought George Lucas was the greatest filmmaker ever and responsible for everything that made anything with his name on it, like Indy, I thought it was weird and made scenes from the past two movies slightly uncomfortable. Growing up I would hear my friends say the same, and a lot of the people involved in the movies (Williams, Hamill, etc.) joke about it, too.

I might be the only one here who didn't have any problem with the relationship. Are their interactions in ANH and Empire weird knowing now that they're siblings? I guess so, but I always thought the love interests in the films were between Han and Leia, where Luke's journey was more singular and personal. 

 

23 minutes ago, SteveMc said:

There are people who think everything classic Star Wars is sacred scripture.  Before the dark times came.  Before he whose name must not be spoken arrived.  And after him, the Great Mouse.

I thought this sentiment was more true in this forum than anywhere else I've been that it's shocking to see people here think the sibling aspect was whack!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Arpy said:

I always thought the love interests in the films were between Han and Leia, where Luke's journey was more singular and personal. 

 

The Luke/Leia angle definitely wouldn't have worked as well as the Han/Leia one did, which is why we ended up where we did. However, Star Wars is trying to establish a love triangle for the sequel, and while Empire Strikes Back focuses on the Han/Leia relationship, it keeps teasing it here and there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

 

The Luke/Leia angle definitely wouldn't have worked as well as the Han/Leia one, which is why we ended up where we did. However, Star Wars is trying to establish a love triangle for the sequel, and while Empire Strikes Back focuses on the Han/Leia relationship, it keeps teasing it here and there.

That's fine, though - isn't it? To tease something like that, because neither the characters or the audience are aware of their true heritage. It seemed (and still seems) natural for Luke to be attracted to a young princess, but as far as the 'teasing' of a love triangle went, I never for one second thought it would end up with a Luke/Leia couple. Han was this rough, sleazy charmer and Leia an uptight princess who didn't have time for Han's advances - then as the conflict climbs and accelerates through Empire, so too do their feelings for one another, leading to a more natural 'opposites attract' relationship. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/18/2019 at 7:10 PM, Demodex said:

I don't see what's so bad about Luke and Leia being siblings. In my 43 years this is the first I've heard anyone complain about it. 

 

Same 'ere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Arpy said:

That's fine, though - isn't it? To tease something like that, because neither the characters or the audience are aware of their true heritage.

 

Yeah, but the audience isn't stupid (well, mostly). Any filmgoer outside of the most dense will understand that the idea of Luke and Leia being siblings just wasn't there before Return of the Jedi came about. You never want to see through a movie like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

 

Yeah, but the audience isn't stupid (well, mostly). Any filmgoer outside of the most dense will understand that the idea of Luke and Leia being siblings just wasn't there before Return of the Jedi came about. You never want to see through a movie like that.

With more serious topics and films, I'd agree, however after watching RotJ as a kid, I didn't come away from the film thinking that their heritage was sloppy writing. To be honest, I didn't care much for it at all. I don't feel as though it was tacked-on or poorly written because it doesn't in any way detract from the main character arcs of Luke and Vader.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.