The Hermit's Journey. To arms, prequel defenders, to arms!

[Yukaphile]

Well, the novels do a lot better job fixing up the movie's plot holes.

[Draco Dracul]

I wonder what would have happened if Di Capprio had taken the role of Anakin. I don't disparage Christiansen, but Di Capprio is one of the best actors of his generation. While the issues with direction would have still been there, it's possible that Di Capprio would have had enough clout to at least get some of the more cringe inducing dialogue changed. Of course, he might have been stifled by the role and done major damage to his career.

[LavarosVA]

Di Capprio didn't really come into his own as an actor until after his heart throb era in my opinion, which is where he still was when Episode 2 and 3 where being made. I sincerely doubt any actor could of done a better job with episode 2's material given what there was to work with.

[Beastro]

I have to say this series is producing a secondary effect with me with regard to Lucas.

Whatever he did with Star Wars, that's one thing, but his popularization of digital film making is making me begin to loath him on a level SW fans must have felt with the Prequels.

It's a recent thing that's sunk in for me, but I realize watching old films how much the film quality establishes a feel for movies to the point where I can guess when a movie was made based purely upon on. Like the feeling most black and white in the 50s and 60s had that was sharper than what came after it when colour was introduced that produced the noticeable blurriness and rich colouring of 60s and early 70s film and TV that then lingered on in bad low budjet movies, or that unique feeling late 80s and early 90s ones did that I struggle to find the words to explain, but brings a sense of familiarity to me just seeing the opening credits of movies thanks to the sheer quality of it.

Now, everything looks the same in the same sharp, clean fashion and it hit me recently that it's looked that way for a decades.... and I fear it's not going to change in another decade. If it does I'll be happy as it will date TV and movies in that good way older ones were, but if it doesn't it'll rip out the heart of the sentimentality that decades bring, something that is itself a very particular American thing the country spawned in the 20s that it successfully exported abroad without realizing.

All of it screams that so much of the heart of Star Wars from Lucas himself was coincidence and that in his heart, hes just a technical minded guy who has deeper things fly right over his head as he fiddles with tehcnology, something sadly ironic given what he's famous for even in THX 1138.

quote="Agent Vinod"]

I love the prequels, every bit as much as the originals and maybe more, I just prefer them as the novelizations given how bad Lucas's directing was. Especially Matt Stover's take on Revenge of the Sith. Seriously, if you have not read that, go do so now. It's AMAZING.

I say ROTS was okay, but the rest was bad.[/quote]

For me it's the opposite where the Prequels got orse as they went along.

Revenge of the Sith is personally a desperate wimper to try and finally put out what the trilogy should have been about, but was too late and shoved into one movie.

Well, the novels do a lot better job fixing up the movie's plot holes.

That kind of thing might as well not exist. I don't like when a movie has to rely a novel or something else to fill in what isn't in the movie. It's worse when that is deliberate, like the stupid backstory comic books and such put out for movies like Cloverfield.

Outside of previous movies a movie is connected with, no research should be required to acquaint yourself with what is going on.

[RobbyB1982]

Filmmaking would have gone digital eventually regardless of Lucas's push. Someone would have done it, be it James Cameron or Peter Jackson or Marvel trying to be different. Being able to shoot unlimited film and not have to change the cameras or worry about the expense of film stock is just too huge an advantage. How much easier and sharper it makes things would have eventually gotten it to be the default, it just might have taken a little longer. The resolution has gotten higher since AotC and they've learned how to do camera work to get other results out of it, but it was inevitable progress.

Same way Hobbit was filmed at 48 fps in 3D to push the envelope. 48 was a mistake because you don't really get the quality difference until 60 and 48 is just a weird middle ground, but eventually 60 fps will be the standard instead of 24. 24 is mostly the standard because of 100 years of tradition and it's what people are comfortable with, its "the look of film." But that'll change eventually when someone makes a huge blockbuster at that rate and imitators rush to follow.

It's funny that people think higher frame rates look cheap because television is already at the higher rates, but it is what it is. People were also really jarred when they switched from standard to HD, it was TOO sharp and good...but now we're all used to HD quality. And our tvs default come in widescreen now.

[Karha of Honor]

Filmmaking would have gone digital eventually regardless of Lucas's push. Someone would have done it, be it James Cameron or Peter Jackson or Marvel trying to be different. Being able to shoot unlimited film and not have to change the cameras or worry about the expense of film stock is just too huge an advantage. How much easier and sharper it makes things would have eventually gotten it to be the default, it just might have taken a little longer. The resolution has gotten higher since AotC and they've learned how to do camera work to get other results out of it, but it was inevitable progress.

Same way Hobbit was filmed at 48 fps in 3D to push the envelope. 48 was a mistake because you don't really get the quality difference until 60 and 48 is just a weird middle ground, but eventually 60 fps will be the standard instead of 24. 24 is mostly the standard because of 100 years of tradition and it's what people are comfortable with, its "the look of film." But that'll change eventually when someone makes a huge blockbuster at that rate and imitators rush to follow.

It's funny that people think higher frame rates look cheap because television is already at the higher rates, but it is what it is. People were also really jarred when they switched from standard to HD, it was TOO sharp and good...but now we're all used to HD quality. And our tvs default come in widescreen now.

I will always want some westerns shot on film.

[Madner Kami]

It's funny that people think higher frame rates look cheap because television is already at the higher rates, but it is what it is. People were also really jarred when they switched from standard to HD, it was TOO sharp and good...but now we're all used to HD quality. And our tvs default come in widescreen now.

It's mostly an issue of camera-handling, I think. For almost a century, people tried to make what happens on the 24 FPS-base look realistic. Now they apply the same techniques, out of habit and because they learned it that way, to twice the framerate. What instantly hits the eye is, that movement just looks speed up for example. It will take time for the camera-work to be adjusted, so that it appears "normal".

[Karha of Honor]

I wonder what would have happened if Di Capprio had taken the role of Anakin. I don't disparage Christiansen, but Di Capprio is one of the best actors of his generation. While the issues with direction would have still been there, it's possible that Di Capprio would have had enough clout to at least get some of the more cringe inducing dialogue changed. Of course, he might have been stifled by the role and done major damage to his career.

This is not a studio movie. It was funded by George, his influence would had been irrelevant.

[TGLS]

I wonder what would have happened if Di Capprio had taken the role of Anakin. I don't disparage Christiansen, but Di Capprio is one of the best actors of his generation. While the issues with direction would have still been there, it's possible that Di Capprio would have had enough clout to at least get some of the more cringe inducing dialogue changed. Of course, he might have been stifled by the role and done major damage to his career.

This is not a studio movie. It was funded by George, his influence would had been irrelevant.

I'm pretty sure that Christiansen read the script, and said to himself, "Well, this dialogue is pretty bad, but George Lucas has made really great movies before, and I'm just a greenhorn. I'm sure he knows what he's doing."

A more seasoned actor may have said to himself, "This dialogue is pretty bad. I got to talk to George about this before it sinks my career!"

[SuccubusYuri]

So, as to today's entry, I have to say I side with Lucas on the point of Anakin's fall. Maybe thats not very "movie going public", but the idea of Vader as a reflection of the galaxy that would just go along with this shit makes way more sense, to me. And I can prove that because that's the characterization The Clone Wars emphasizes, and it rings much more authentic there then the movie fall ever did for me. All the little bits about how Anakin deviates from the Jedi, seeing the order as an instrument of the Republic, and thus its elected body the Senate, rather than the wholly separate church the seasoned Jedi still believe it is, despite their entanglement with the military and Senate both, those little nudges show the shape of Vader through Anakin and inform him quite well.

Of course I'm sure the choice was down to Lucas cutting whatever he had around, in a script written by him, so sure, those traits probably weren't as well portrayed as in the cartoon.