UnfrozenCaveman Posted April 19, 2003 Posted April 19, 2003 The question refers to the timeframe in which the first movie (and consequently the next two) was released. Think about it- it was a totally new genre. The special effects at the time were top of the line, and that mad up for the not so good acting of Mark Hammel. It was something new that was never done before, and as a result it was a big smash hit. I guess what I'm saying is, the newer movies (episode I and II) didn't seem to be as big of a hit as the first three were. Well, at least to the people outside the StarWars world. --Most of the people I know that aren't big SW fans thought the first two movies sucked. I happen to disagree with them on both accounts. They were great movies!-- Is this because GL is still thinking in terms of the 70's? His actors aren't all that great (which can be overcome if there is a good story line), the main bad guys, IMO darth maul and Jango Fett, were under developed. There should have been more going on with DM in the first movie and Jango shouldn't have died that easily. I guess what I'm saying is, that if the first movie was released today with all of the advances in technology, would it still be a great epic saga- that millions of people would love because of it's mythical qualities. Or would people just look at it and go, "ehh, it's not bad."
BobaWP Posted April 19, 2003 Posted April 19, 2003 If A New Hope came out today then yeah I think it would be bigger because I thought 4,5, and 6 were the best ones and with the technology we know today about computers and graphics then yeah it would be huge.
legameboy Posted April 19, 2003 Posted April 19, 2003 all the people who havent seen star wars, they would love it, and the fanatics would to, the storyline was too quick in episodes 1 and 2
setsuko Posted April 19, 2003 Posted April 19, 2003 Of course, any work that is novel and original deserves a lot more respect than something that just follows something else. Star Wars was the first to provide a gritty, cool and believable sci-fi setting. Compare it to the clean, white environments of Star Trek, its main rival at the time. If Star Wars arrived today (given that the sci-fi scene would evolve the same way without SW, which it wouldn't), it would not have the same impact, no. It's the same reason why people are blown away when new music genres suddenly evolve: it's something new, something fresh, and therefore so much better than what you are used to. And in the same way, Picasso got recognition for his invention of cubism, while anything I'd paint in the same way would at best be a rather good copy. Original art, good. New angles, goood. Tired copies, baaad. This is exactly what happened with the new episodes, people expected George Lucas to, again, provide us with something totally new, something fresh. What we got was a warmed up can of the sci-fi we've been used to the last twenty years. That's one of the reasons why people got dissapointed.
Jan Gaarni Posted April 19, 2003 Posted April 19, 2003 Firstly: *yoink* Secondly: For me, the prequels just lacked soul. There was no feel to it. You couldn't care less about the characters to be honest. Except Padme. Padme is a Godess. Like the sweet honey on .... ehrm ... where was I .... Oh yeah ... Thirdly: Why do I keep hearing about Mark Hamil's bad acting? I don't see it. If you ask me, he nailed the character right smack on the head.
Exar_reborn Posted April 19, 2003 Posted April 19, 2003 IMO, Episodes 1 & 2 were fine. They just lacked certain necessary details. Like in TPM they should have mentioned or showed that Dooku was Qui-Gon's master. But we also have to undertand, as much as we want it to be all about Star Wars, it can't be. They DO need to make money, lol and I doubt the general public would go for a pure Star Wars history movie. In example: Podrace, Videogame hit and brought anakin to Qui-gon. And in AOTC the whole love story kinda killed it, but it was necessary b/c its part of the entire story.
BobaWP Posted April 19, 2003 Posted April 19, 2003 Episodes 1 and 2 didnt impress me as much as when i saw episodes 4,5, and 6. Episode 3 will have to phenominal to make me like Episodes 1,2,and 3 more than 4,5,and 6.
swphreak Posted April 19, 2003 Posted April 19, 2003 I agree with Jan about MH's bad acting. I don't see it. I will always think of Luke Skywalker as Mark Hamil. and the prequals are not as good as the OT.... bad dialog. Not acting, they acted fine, it's the lines they had that sucked.
setsuko Posted April 19, 2003 Posted April 19, 2003 That is kind of Mark Hamills curse, he is so closely knit to Luke Skywalker that he never did get a good acting job after the movies. Sure, if you check on imdb.com, he has featured more than 100 times, but this is mostly in tv series, voice acting and movies no-one has ever heard of. EDIT: I got a few shocks when I checked it, I had no idea he was in Icewind Dale!
Lord Helmet Posted April 19, 2003 Posted April 19, 2003 hey i thought...padme was the worst actor there....actually they were all pretty bad...the story was NOT compelling...at all..especially when she didn't say thank you to yoda...sickening..."i want to to know who is trying to kill me" ...ewww...u cant act..
Jan Gaarni Posted April 19, 2003 Posted April 19, 2003 Your words are as true as the helmet you wear. I'm alittle confused about what you mean with that, Set. In reality he doesn't wear that helmet, as far as I know, so does that mean you don't think what he said is true?
setsuko Posted April 19, 2003 Posted April 19, 2003 I happen to take people's avatars deadly serious.
swphreak Posted April 19, 2003 Posted April 19, 2003 wow.... I had no idea Mark Hamill was the Joker... and how in the heck can he be Larry 3000 in Time Squad! It doesn't even sound like him! *shocked* So you think of me as some guy that can go transparent?
setsuko Posted April 19, 2003 Posted April 19, 2003 Indeed, Mark Hamills filmography is really interesting. Here's the link for those out there who are lazy!
Jan Gaarni Posted April 19, 2003 Posted April 19, 2003 Yeah, he's been in alot. Even that swedish movie, Hamilton, as the bad guy. Only thing I don't like is that he apperantly won't do the voice of Luke Skywalker in games and such. I loved that Lando had his own voice in JKII though.
setsuko Posted April 19, 2003 Posted April 19, 2003 Hamilton is a bad movie. About a bad fictional character. Don't read the Hamilton novels (there's like 20 or something)! They suck!
swediot=) Posted April 23, 2003 Posted April 23, 2003 Originally posted by Lord Helmet hey i thought...padme was the worst actor there....actually they were all pretty bad...the story was NOT compelling...at all..especially when she didn't say thank you to yoda...sickening..."i want to to know who is trying to kill me" ...ewww...u cant act.. i think liam neeson was actually an ok actor but um ........ whats the name of that guy who plays anakin in ep II... i dont remember anyways he :swear:en sucked
Wraith 8 Posted April 23, 2003 Posted April 23, 2003 yes star wars would ROCK OUR WORLDS when it came out now... because of the old star wars.. all other movies relied on ILM....... so without ILM.. all other movies would still be crappy...... and star wars would still rock
UnfrozenCaveman Posted April 23, 2003 Author Posted April 23, 2003 Good point. I've been thinking about this, just waiting for this thread to develope some more ideas. I think, that if the original were released now, they'd still be a big hit. A lot of people like them because they appeal to us on so many levels. Not only that, but the Star wars saga is a modern Myth. http://www.jitterbug.com/origins/myth.html I just think that the original films are superior to the newer ones. But, maybe this is because for almost thirty years all we had were the original ones and we watched them over and over and over until we put them on a stool so high that no new star wars movie could bring them down?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.