127 réponses à ce sujet

[chunkyman]

 This thread is about all things Star Wars!

My favorite Star Wars movie was Revenge of the Sith, but I prefer the original trilogy as a whole. Episodes One and Two were rubbish in my opinion, partly because they weren't well written.

I hate the expanded universe of Star Wars, I think George Lucas ruined the universe by letting people write terrible things and have it become canon. The number of books and video games that conflict with the beauty of the movies is astounding. The Jedi were said to extinct except for Obi-wan and Yoda, but according to canon books the movies apparently lied and about a trillion actually survived...

The two worse atrocities that Lucas allowed to become canon were Luke turning to the dark side and Palpatine cloning himself to stay alive (and return from the dead). The movies had a wonderful ending where Vader was redeemed by sacrificing himself to kill Palpatine, but according to the books that did nothing and he returned shortly after.... 

The Thrawn Trilogy and KOTOR are the only good non-movie canon stories, because they follow the lore made in the movies and are great in their own right.

To lazy and didn't read? Here's a funny Ewok.  

Modifié par chunkyman, 07 octobre 2011 - 06:37 .

[Pacifien]

I personally think Revenge of the Sith is one of the worst movies ever and, of the prequels, The Phantom Menace was the best of the lot. Also, the best thing to happen for Star Wars since the original trilogy was Knights of the Old Republic, which is expanded universe. However, that's like finding a speck of a diamond in a pile of manure, which is debatable as to whether or not it was worth it.

Obviously, my discussion of Star Wars here is off to a bad start so I will provide the following image of Gonk:

Modifié par Pacifien, 07 octobre 2011 - 06:38 .

[IronSabbath88]

Big fan of R2-D2 here. My favourite is probably Return of the Jedi even though most people consider it the worst of the original trilogy, but oh well. I enjoy it and that's all that matters.

[CroGamer002]

Eh, shamelessly promoting my Let's Play!



IT'S RELATED!

[HoonDing]

At least the prequel movies have decent lightsaber duels. And Natalie Portman.

Also, most Star Wars related Dark Horse comics pertaining to the EU, KOTOR included, are pretty decent.

Modifié par virumor, 07 octobre 2011 - 06:45 .

[chunkyman]

Pacifien wrote...

I personally think Revenge of the Sith is one of the worst movies ever and, of the prequels, The Phantom Menace was the best of the lot. Also, the best thing to happen for Star Wars since the original trilogy was Knights of the Old Republic, which is expanded universe. However, that's like finding a speck of a diamond in a pile of manure, which is debatable as to whether or not it was worth it.

The problem I had with The Phantom Menace was that I didn't connect with either the heros or the villains. Darth Maul didn't do much other than look spooky, and I found Qui-gon to be a bit stale. I loved A New Hope because Han Solo and Vader were amazing characters, and it helped my enjoy the story more.

As for the expanded universe, 99% is terrible and often severely breaks logic and lore. Here is a decent article on some of it. The Force Unleashed, apart from being a cheap and boring game, also destroyed the lore of the movies by making a Jedi more powerful than Vader.

[Pacifien]

Natalie Portman might be nice to look at, but I found the character of Padme after The Phantom Menace as being dull and insulting. Because, personally, I find someone who dies of a broken heart when she has two newborns in need of a mother insulting.

As for lightsaber duels, the flashy ones are in the prequels, but the best one I still think is in Empire Strikes Back. Because Luke is trying very hard and Darth Vader isn't trying at all. That's how much better Darth Vader was than Luke. Also, I find the lighting and set design to be superior during that battle as well, but I probably couldn't convey what makes it better than others without a PowerPoint presentation. And I suck at those.

But I am Old Generation Star Wars fan.

[IronSabbath88]

What I hated about the prequels was how they showed what a bumbling fool of a Jedi Anakin was. He could barely hold in his own in most battles, wasn't he supposed to be a highly skilled Jedi as evidenced by Vader in the original trilogy?

[Pacifien]

chunkyman wrote...
The problem I had with The Phantom Menace was that I didn't connect with either the heros or the villains. Darth Maul didn't do much other than look spooky, and I found Qui-gon to be a bit stale. I loved A New Hope because Han Solo and Vader were amazing characters, and it helped my enjoy the story more.

I wouldn't say The Phantom Menace was good, just that it was better than the other two that followed. While Darth Maul provided little else in character development, I'd say that he was easily the master of lightsaber technique only outshone by Yoda because seeing an decrepit little being go bat**** crazy makes for a good joke. I mean, I remember that scene in the theater and the audience went crazy because it comes out of nowhere, but I much preferred the idea of a Yoda who never saw the need for a lightsaber because it depended on crude matter.

Qui-Gon was not flashy, but I appreciate Lucas's attempt at creating a Jedi whose philosophical approach was at odds with the rest of the Order. And he's kind of devious as well. Sure, he swam all the way to the Gungun city, but why swim all the way back when you could just mindtrick into having your own transport?

What I hate about Revenge of the Sith is that I did not care that Anakin Skywalker failed magnificently in the end. Nothing across all three films convinced me that this was a tragic fall in the traditionaly meaning of the word tragic. It was an inevitable fall to a character I never liked.

[Druss99]

chunkyman wrote...

The problem I had with The Phantom Menace was that I didn't connect with either the heros or the villains. Darth Maul didn't do much other than look spooky, and I found Qui-gon to be a bit stale. I loved A New Hope because Han Solo and Vader were amazing characters, and it helped my enjoy the story more.

As for the expanded universe, 99% is terrible and often severely breaks logic and lore. Here is a decent article on some of it. The Force Unleashed, apart from being a cheap and boring game, also destroyed the lore of the movies by making a Jedi more powerful than Vader.

Nice article. I'd agree with all of it except the last one. I think that was actually done in an ultimates comic so it was never cannon. Not that it matters because as of the Clone Wars Darth Maul is alive again anyway and his brother has gone looking for him. I realise how crap that sounds but the reality is even worse. They managed to retconn Darth Maul, Asajj Ventress, the Dathomiri Witches and the race that were invented purely to explain Ventress all in one story arc.

Not all of the EU is completely awful I've occassionally had a good read from it. Matthew Stovers work is usually quite good. The problem is that Lucas Books seem to just let authors do whatever they want, no one reads and says "Um....no this is terrible and goes against the very nature of Star Wars..." they just accept whatever is written. What Karen Traviss alone got away with was unbelievable.

The prequels suffer from the same problem as the EU, no one seems to have said to Lucas "Hang on there George this is utter ******, wise up."  I didn't totally hate the prequels but there was so much wrong with them that its almost as if Lucas just made it up as he went along with the only concern being that his characters would make good toys.

Anakin was the worst possible character to base the story on too, he didn't fall to the dark side, he was an **** from the start. Even in the Clone Wars they struggle to make him appear as anything special, the only difference between him and every other Jedi seems to be that we actually see him in action and he is kind of a b*tch. The "romance" between him and Padme was terrible, it would have been more believable if George actually appeared on the screen rubbing two action figures together and making sex noises. What could she possibly have seen in him? Almost every time they spoke he was either close to tears or bad mouthing Obi Wan behind his back. Mind you she was a bit of a wet drip herself. The only characters who actually seem to come out of the prequels with any credit are Obi Wan and the ones that didn't have that much screen time or have to say too much like Mace Windu.

[Pacifien]

I loved Obi-Wan whenever he wasn't with Anakin. When he was, I swear he comes across as someone who gave up on his child long ago as a lost cause. I mean, he only trained him because his father figure asked him to.

On his own, however, he was snarky, he was light on his feet, he used his fists. He was basically a Jedi Han Solo. He also smiled. And if there's one impression that Alec Guinness gave me about Obi-Wan, it's that he was the sort of person who probably smiled in his youth and enjoyed being a Jedi. And I know some people didn't like Dex of Dex Diner, but I loved the hug he had with Obi-Wan. It showed that Obi-Wan was personable such that you'd want to hug him.

Also, one of the few times I really liked Yoda in the prequels was when he was teaching the younglings. It was the closest we ever got to see the teacher and mentor in him that we would see again in Empire Strikes Back.

[Pacifien]

Druss99 wrote...
The "romance" between him and Padme was terrible, it would have been more believable if George actually appeared on the screen rubbing two action figures together and making sex noises. What could she possibly have seen in him?

No one ever stopped to say how soft and smooth she was until Anakin. *swoon*

[Druss99]

Pacifien wrote...

I loved Obi-Wan whenever he wasn't with Anakin. When he was, I swear he comes across as someone who gave up on his child long ago as a lost cause. I mean, he only trained him because his father figure asked him to.

This bit never sat well with me. Obi Wan was shown as the consumate Jedi who never went against the order or the code. Yet he was willing to go right against that and train someone that they knew could and would be highly dangerous when given Jedi training because Qui-Gonn had a hunch and told him to? The man had just had a lightsaber rammed through his gut and Obi Wan is trusting his judgement over Yoda and the councils? Hanging about with Anakin clearly made him miserable too, nothing in the prequels shows why Obi Wan remembers Anakin fondly. Well other than screaming something about loving him just after chopping him in half but by that point it was all a bit late. He spent too much time sighing, telling Anakin off or having to explain him to the council.

[Pacifien]

It's a failing of the Jedi as a whole really. They gave Anakin to Obi-Wan and said he should train him. On his own. And, you know, all parents screw up their first attempt at raising a child. (Which is why I'm perfect and my brother isn't.)

[Druss99]

Anakin was difficult which makes the fact that they kept training him even more bizarre. He became a Jedi Knight despite clearly being an overly emo git who couldn't be trusted.

A movie series shouldn't really require you to watch other shows in order to make sense. Especially when it began as a movie series in the first place. Plus the original Clone Wars cartoon is no longer cannon so it kind of detaches me from the new one when George could just overwrite it any time he fancies. Will the live action tv show render the Clone Wars non-cannon? If George feels like it then it probably will.

Which brings me to the thing that annoys me the most about the Clone Wars...Ahsoka...14 year old in a boob tube and mini skirt who can hold her own against General Greivous who is never mentioned at all in later years....Why George? Why?

Modifié par Druss99, 07 octobre 2011 - 08:36 .

[Wentletrap]

Pacifien wrote...

As for lightsaber duels, the flashy ones are in the prequels, but the best one I still think is in Empire Strikes Back. Because Luke is trying very hard and Darth Vader isn't trying at all. That's how much better Darth Vader was than Luke.

"The Force is with you, young Skywalker... but you are not a Jedi yet..."

That line alone, delivered by Vader's silhouette, has more dramatic weight than anything in the prequel movies.

My favorite thing about the duel was the great use of the environment (flying debris and broken window). 

I've said it before on these boards:  for the most part, movies were much better before CGI.

 

Modifié par Wentletrap, 07 octobre 2011 - 08:38 .

[Romantiq]

Oh man thanks for posting that Ewok. I stared at that picture for good 15 sec and didnt read anything else

[Jiggasaurus]

Pacifien wrote...

Natalie Portman might be nice to look at, but I found the character of Padme after The Phantom Menace as being dull and insulting. Because, personally, I find someone who dies of a broken heart when she has two newborns in need of a mother insulting.

As for lightsaber duels, the flashy ones are in the prequels, but the best one I still think is in Empire Strikes Back. Because Luke is trying very hard and Darth Vader isn't trying at all. That's how much better Darth Vader was than Luke. Also, I find the lighting and set design to be superior during that battle as well, but I probably couldn't convey what makes it better than others without a PowerPoint presentation. And I suck at those.

But I am Old Generation Star Wars fan.

Agreed, especially on the casting of Padme part, at the end of the day if your handed a crap script and cringe worthy dialogue to work with then there is not much an actor/actress can do about it, but if there is a more vapid character in modern science fiction than Portmans Padme I'd hate to believe so. It is borderline incredible that someone like that is (from a film sense) related to the Skywalker twins, 'this is meant to be Luke & the audacious Leia's mother... get the f*** out of here!

When you get down to the problems of the modern trilogy you just need to go back to the source, having to make a prequel trilogy was always going to be difficult. Lucas wanted to sell more toys for the adapt modern generation who are far more comfortable with science fiction than those in the era that made him the super film developer he was to become, as opposed to appeasing the past generation.

I enjoyed the lightsabre duels of the old trilogy infinitely more, the characters cast were outstanding and you never at any moment took your eyes of the screen for wanting to see what happens next. Even in ANH we get to see the severed arm from the disruptive alien at the canteen bar as Alec Guiness protrayal of Obi Wan, the camera actually zooms in on the limb to show the damage. I guess to expand on that further would be the depiction of 'war' in star wars, we ended up with henchman stormtroopers from the original trilogy, versus henchman robots from the new trilogy and couldn't really give a monkeys as people viewing the film couldn't relate to either. ANH Leia witnesses the destruction of a planet whilst Luke returns to his farm home to see the burnt out corpses of his foster family, you feel emotionaly involved straight from the start to then experience a superb, not just science fiction but action, trilogy. Ranting now anyway, the old v new in star wars depiction has been done many times before.

[Pacifien]

Wentletrap wrote...
I've said it before on these boards:  for the most part, movies were much better before CGI.

It's like a rant I make about comic books, about how anyone can draw a background and then place figures in random poses for the writer to then insert speech bubbles. For some, that's a comic. For me, that's a bad comic. If you're using art as a medium, you need to really work on how you can use art to its advantage to tell the story better.

I mean, you could draw a Jedi with a green saber and a Sith with his red one posing on in a factory. On its simplest level, you're are somewhat showing that these two opposing forces are about to get real. But that doesn't show you what these Force-wielders can really *do* with those sabers that make them a superior weapon to, say, a blaster.

Ugh. I really won't do any good at all with this type of discussion if I don't find some sort of images to back up my criticism.

So, like, what I would like to do is show you an image of the Millennium Falcon at Echo Base in Empire Strikes Back and then one of the Falcon in Return of the Jedi to demonstrate how one is an actual set piece and the other is (or perhaps was, I don't know if Lucas changed it) a matte painting. But I can't find those images so here's Echo Base in Empire Strikes Back:



And then here's the Jedi Temple in Attack of the Clones:



In one image, there is a hanger. It is a functioning hanger. There appear to be pilots and mechanics and snow that is getting everywhere. In the other image, there is... uh... well, Yoda has the right idea by getting around that massive place in a hovering chair, let me tell you.

But this is where George Lucas tends to fail with CGI. It's pretty but it doesn't take advantage of the fact that he is using movie technology to tell a story here unless the additional information he wanted to convey is that the Jedi like to overdo architecture.

Modifié par Pacifien, 07 octobre 2011 - 09:00 .

[Zanallen]

My favorite Star Wars movie is Revenge of the Sith, purely because Obi-Wan is my favorite Star Wars character and I love seeing him kick the crap out of Anakin.

As for the canon discussion: The books can't contradict the movies. The movies are the premiere canon. They trump everything else, along with the scripts for said movies, the novelizations of said movies and statements from Lucas himself. Next comes things like the Clone Wars animated show. Then the books, comics and games.