STAR WARS: EPISODE VII Pre-Release - Page 20

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrknudsen 

The interesting thing about prequels is that you know more or less how things are going to end up. Lucas played to that strength ........

Ok, two major flaws in your logic here.

A.  Prequels are not interesting.  period.  Knowing how everything will turn out makes it fuck near impossible to create any real tension in the story, plus it really hamstrings the creative possibilities.

B. There was no strength for Lucas to play to, and even if there was, the guy couldn't find it with two hands, a flashlight and an entire corporation full of yes men.

Sorry to call your bluff, but no.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackson 

A.  Prequels are not interesting.  period.  Knowing how everything will turn out makes it fuck near impossible to create any real tension in the story,

You don't ever watch movies more than once, do you?

I've seen Aliens dozens of times, but I'm always completely swallowed up by Ripley waiting on that platform for Bishop's save with the Queen in pursuit.  Whether you know the inevitable outcome or not is irrelevant; it's all about execution.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dark Shape 

 

You don't ever watch movies more than once, do you?

 

I've seen Aliens dozens of times, but I'm always completely swallowed up by Ripley waiting on that platform for Bishop's save with the Queen in pursuit.  Whether you know the inevitable outcome or not is irrelevant; it's all about execution.

This has absolutely no relevance to the point I was making.  I in no way implied that I am unable to enjoy multiple viewings of a much loved movie which I have already seen a thousand times.

Your analogy is flawed. 

You can't see the difference between rewatching and enjoying a masterfully made film, and wading through a by the numbers slog whose sole purpose is to put all the players in place as an unnecessary set up to a much better film?  A wholly separate film which does little but trade on the nostagia of a much better work through constant riffing and knowing nods to the audience.  Do you not see the difference?

The Star Wars prequals, The Thing 2011, Hannibal Rising, the painfully rushed last few minutes of Xmen First class (the only possible exception to my list, if not for that crappy rushed ending), Texas Chainsaw the beginning.  Awful awful sloggs all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackson 

You can't see the difference between rewatching and enjoying a masterfully made film, and wading through a by the numbers slog whose sole purpose is to put all the players in place as an unnecessary set up to a much better film?  A wholly separate film which does little but trade on the nostagia of a much better work through constant riffing and knowing nods to the audience.  Do you not see the difference?

Prometheus is a prequel.  Was Prometheus' sole purpose to put all the players in place as an unnecessary set up to a much better film?   (And no, I'm not arguing Prometheus' worth as a film, simply that its status as a prequel doesn't damn it from the start.)

I'm arguing that a film being a prequel doesn't automatically make it a lazy bore, which is pretty much everything you're saying.  If I can rewatch a film knowing every beat that will happen while still being riveted by it, then you're damn sure it's possible that I could watch a prequel and be gripped by the story.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dark Shape 

Prometheus is a prequel.  Was Prometheus' sole purpose to put all the players in place as an unnecessary set up to a much better film?   (And no, I'm not arguing Prometheus' worth as a film, simply that its status as a prequel doesn't damn it from the start.)

 

I'm arguing that a film being a prequel doesn't automatically make it a lazy bore, which is pretty much everything you're saying.  If I can rewatch a film knowing every beat that will happen while still being riveted by it, then you're damn sure it's possible that I could watch a prequel and be gripped by the story.

You are intentionally misunderstanding, or misrepresenting what I said.  

I said, "Knowing how everything will turn out makes it fuck near impossible to create any real tension in the story, plus it really hamstrings the creative possibilities."  

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.  I have yet to see any movie, read any comic, book, or play any video game who's sole purpose is to tell me more detail about the back story of the main characters, or events from a completely separate work which I found to be even remotely as interesting as the primary work was in the first place.

Prequels are inherently flawed in the sense that they cannot fully grow into individual and self contained works.  They always have to play connect the dots and set up the pieces for the preexisting story, thus they are simply after though preambles.

Now, to your point about Prometheus.  Functionally Prometheus in it's best parts (of which there are scant few), is simply a story set in the same universe, not a functional prequel.  In fact, I would argue, as many would, that this film is at it's worst when it is trying to shoe horn itself into the Alien franchise by forcing the iconic bits from that series of films.

I'll add that prequels, on a creative level, are even more bankrupt than the most ill conceived sequels.  They are a way of trading on the brand recognition, nostalgia, and box office of the original work without having to take any real chances or make any risky decisions.

Make a story with the same, or similar characters, recycle elements, or even whole plots, just make sure you throw a bunch of stuff in at the end to make it dovetail with the existing work.  There is no pressure to create anything original, because the only purpose of the film is to literally set up the events which have already been established in another film.  It's nothing more than an appetizer.  Structurally, it can't grow beyond being a small bowl of soup, or a couple of breaded shrimp with a tasty, yet ultimately unfulfilling spicy orange sauce.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackson 

 

A.  Prequels are not interesting.  period.  Knowing how everything will turn out makes it fuck near impossible to create any real tension in the story, plus it really hamstrings the creative possibilities.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackson 

I'll add that prequels, on a creative level, are even more bankrupt than the most ill conceived sequels.  They are a way of trading on the brand recognition, nostalgia, and box office of the original work without having to take any real chances or make any risky decisions.

Excising the hyperbole, I think your first argument is fair as a general rule, with a few exceptions. I'd throw The Godfather Part II and Spartacus: Gods of the Arena in as prequels that successfully supplement the existing fiction while crafting unique, compelling stories of their own. It is certainly more difficult generating tension without the element of surprise, but then again pretty much any movie grounded in history faces a similar dilemma. We win WWII, the astronauts make it back, suck our hockey you Commie bastards etc. etc. There, as with prequels, it becomes a matter of execution and generating interest in the immediate story of the characters rather than the ultimate outcome, which is why I think your second point is the more accurate cause of the comparatively low quality of prequels. I think you're quite right in saying that prequels (especially the weird rebootquels ala "The Thing") are a crude hodge-podge of  attempting to recreate past success for a new crowd/market while maintaining "continuity" to appease fans of the original, neither goal driven by anything but profit. As you said, even sequels (and I'd argue straight reboots) are more risky and offer a greater chance for new creative ideas even as they build on the success of what came before. Again however, I think the ultimate determinant of quality isn't as simple as "is it a prequel," but rather is based on the competence of the work and the intent of its creators. To me, it falls into the same camp as remakes/reboots: it's an easy avenue for cynical exploitation and most often the result is far inferior to the original, but even if it comes at the cost of a dozen Pushers' and Get Carter's those few great stories that manage to succeed within the framework make me reluctant to dismiss the concept as a whole.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul C 

Prequels aren't inherently anything except stories set before other stories and usually made after. The idea that they must always fail because we know where things end up is the old 'why bother watching a movie about the Titanic? We know it sinks!' argument, which misses the point of everything.

But the thing is, the story would never be about The Titanic, The Titanic would simply be the setting for the 100's of stories that take place on it. Yes we know the ship sinks at the end, but there are characters on that ship that have stories to tell and dramas to play out - there was a film released about 20 years ago now that was quite successful.

Imagine a prequel to Titanic that followed Jack around his adventures in Europe where he's continually put in dramatic life-or-death situations - you know he dies in Titanic so where would the tension in those scenes be? They're just totally redundant. Same with Anakin and Obi-Wan - we know their fates, so why show us admittedly great looking action scenes that ultimately hold no tension or drama? In this sense, Anakin and Obi-Wan are The Titanic as going into the movie we already know their outcome, but there are 100's of lives connected to them that we know nothing about where the story could go anywhere.

Damnit, I just wrote a, to my mind very elegant, and very long, response to this, but here are the cliff's notes:

Star wars prequels are the story of Anikan Skywalker.  We already know his fate, ho hum.

Spartacus, Gods of the Arena is the story of Gannicus, a new and original character, who's fate we don't yet know.  Yes, it sets up elements to be in place for Blood and sand, but the heart of the story is about Gannicus.

Godfather 2 is a sequel, with prequel elements, and is primarily the story of Michael.  We get flash backs of Vito's rise to power, which contrasts and contextualizes' Michael's story. It's success is in large part due to the skill of Coppula as a film maker.

My argument is about functionality, telling a new story about a new character, who's fate is unknown is not a prequel.

All of this again has nothing to do with continuing to enjoying a film you have already seen on a rewatch.  It's apples and oranges.  My argument is about the enjoyment of new stories about new characters which may or may not be set in a familiar universe.  That is why Riley Scott was very specific about Prometheus not strickly being an Alien prequel.

I think a lot of stories are labeled as prequels for brand recognition, or clarity reasons.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackson 

 

Godfather 2 is a sequel, with prequel elements, and is primarily the story of Michael.  We get flash backs of Vito's rise to power, which contrasts and contextualizes' Michael's story. It's success is in large part due to the skill of Coppula as a film maker.

Another major factor in Godfather 2's success: it came straight after the first one. The audience hadn't had years to get increasingly attached to their imaginations of Vito's beginnings, and that freshness meant that Coppola was meeting them while they were still in a relatively fresh state.

Star Wars, Alien - These are properties that had already been passionately loved for years, with generally accepted snippets of backstory provided by non-canon sources (As the creators have long since left the franchises behind), onto which everyone had projected their own version of how things started. Then the creatorst come along, say "I'm gonna tell you how things really happened, and it's the last thing you're going to expect!!' and the fanbase immediately hate this new version, a) because it tramples on their own vision of the story, and b) because the creators themselves are very different artists and their often markedly different visions for these new films by and large fail to live up to the originals.

Godfather 2 is Coppola, still the filmmaker who made the first one, expanding the story while the original is still fresh. Then, of course, pulling the same trick as above many years later with Godfather 3 to much the same results as Lucas and Scott encountered.

While you don't want a prequel to be a lazy connecting-the-dots exercise, time changes a creator and an audience and after a point maybe they just cease to be on the same page.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackson 

 

 

Ok, two major flaws in your logic here.

 

A.  Prequels are not interesting.  period.  Knowing how everything will turn out makes it fuck near impossible to create any real tension in the story, plus it really hamstrings the creative possibilities.

 

B. There was no strength for Lucas to play to, and even if there was, the guy couldn't find it with two hands, a flashlight and an entire corporation full of yes men.

 

Sorry to call your bluff, but no.

Way to cut out the part where I actually explain what those strengths were and how Lucas failed to utilize them properly...

Anyway, another example of a prequel playing to the strength of the audience knowing how things are going to end up is one of the Dune prequel books (otherwise not very good books, but I remember this one chapter): In the original Dune books, we are told that Duke Leto's father was killed by a bull. So a scene in the prequel books takes place in a bullfighting arena and I believe Leto's father is encouraged to fight the bull. He survives, but that scene is extra tense because there's a very real risk of him being killed by the bull. It's all about playing with the audience's expectations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrknudsen 

 

Way to cut out the part where I actually explain what those strengths were and how Lucas failed to utilize them properly...

 

Anyway, another example of a prequel playing to the strength of the audience knowing how things are going to end up is one of the Dune prequel books (otherwise not very good books, but I remember this one chapter): In the original Dune books, we are told that Duke Leto's father was killed by a bull. So a scene in the prequel books takes place in a bullfighting arena and I believe Leto's father is encouraged to fight the bull. He survives, but that scene is extra tense because there's a very real risk of him being killed by the bull. It's all about playing with the audience's expectations.

But Lucas didn't go anywhere near anything like calling the audience's bluff, he simply set up a load of plot points 30 years previous and showed them one after the other, culminating in the Obi-Wan/Vader duel in Star Wars - where they were both alive and one kills the other. There is abolutley no tension whatsoever in showing Anakin/Obi-Wan in any life-or-death battle because we know there is zero mortal stakes. None. We know they both survive. It was simply one pew-pew fest after the other.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrknudsen 

It's all about playing with the audience's expectations.

This is ultimately what it comes down to for me. There were a million different ways Lucas could have added tension and intrigue to the prequels, but at every step, he made choices that boxed him into a small realm of thinking and writing.

Darth Vader is infinitely fucking interesting as a character, and part of what makes him interesting is his mysterious background. Where does he come from? How did he end up at odds with Obi-Wan and ultimately become a traitor? Why did he go from being a protector to a mass murderer with no conscience?

Instead of crafting an interesting story about a man who goes from a hero to the (second) worst villain in the universe, Lucas strips the character of any interesting qualities every chance he gets. Anakin has no interesting back story because he's the product of an immaculate conception and lives a happy life with his mom. Okay... not a single bit of mystery or tension there, and no seed is planted for this kid to grow up to be Hitler with a space fleet. His downfall isn't because of a finely-crafted seduction or some inherent terrible flaw or trauma that causes him to snap. It's because he falls in love with a pretty girl. You've got to be fucking kidding me. You've taken two realms of great possibility in crafting a character and you've completely sealed off one, and made the single most uninteresting and cliche choice possible with the other.

Then Lucas realizes that he's written such a flimsy and uninteresting character, and he overcompensates by having him be conflicted one minute, and murdering little kids in the next. I couldn't stop giggling in the theater and I ended up getting nasty looks from my friends because I couldn't get over how silly the logic and writing in the film were. A guy does not go from being remorseful about playing a role in a murder, and then suddenly march into another building and start killing kids without batting an eye. You can't just suddenly decide upon these shifts in character, and then drop them into place one right after another.

Which brings me to my point: a better storyteller could have created a great, intense and satisfying story with these prequels, regardless of whether or not we know the ultimate outcome. It's the choices in how we reach that outcome that matter, and Lucas didn't understand that at all. Which is why we have three films that go out of their way to mimic the original three films, do a terrible job of doing so, and sacrifice any semblance of good storytelling while they do it. Lucas himself was too caught up in the fact that we already know the outcome, and he immediately puts us in his mindset, which makes the films boring as all hell.

Yes yes, to D.T. you listen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by D.T. 
His downfall isn't because of a finely-crafted seduction or some inherent terrible flaw or trauma that causes him to snap. It's because he falls in love with a pretty girl.

Um, he is taken away from his mother as a child.  She later dies in his arms, which he blames himself (and by extension, the Jedi) for. That's not enough of a trauma?  He ends up craving the power to never let that happen again.  That's not a character flaw?

If it was ever mentioned again after the scene it happened in, maybe.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tits Pervert 

Um, he is taken away from his mother as a child.  She later dies in his arms, which he blames himself (and by extension, the Jedi) for. That's not enough of a trauma?  He ends up craving the power to never let that happen again.  That's not a character flaw?

He had the powers of a god and in 10 years never thought to go get her himself? His mother's death was nothing more than a convenient plot point. He had the power to save her for the past 10 years but did fuck all to help her.

If anything, Shmi's near-death speech should have gone something like: "Annie? Annie? You've grown so big. Where have you been the past 10 years? I nurtured and fed you and kept you safe. Where have you been? You selfish cunt... uuurgghh....."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tits Pervert 

Um, he is taken away from his mother as a child.  She later dies in his arms, which he blames himself (and by extension, the Jedi) for. That's not enough of a trauma?  He ends up craving the power to never let that happen again.  That's not a character flaw?

Anakin chooses to go, he doesn't even bother to contact his mother for a decade, suddenly has a bad dream, then rushes off to Tattooine acting like Mommy is his whole life.  No that's not remotely believable, and not a good enough justification for the villain he would later become.

ETA: This has been written and commented on add nauseum, but the structure of the prequels focuses on the absolute least interesting parts of Anakin's life possible.  The entire first movie is wasted in his relatively happy childhood.  He is a slave, but apparently that doesn't matter, because he has plenty of stuff, obviously isn't starving, and isn't worked to death, because he has plenty of extra time to build robots and race cars.  The other two movies completely skirt around the Clone Wars, so we don't even get a glance of how the horrors of war have shaped him as a brash, impressionable young man.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stale Elvis 

He had the powers of a god and in 10 years never thought to go get her himself? His mother's death was nothing more than a convenient plot point. He had the power to save her for the past 10 years but did fuck all to help her.

 

If anything, Shmi's near-death speech should have gone something like: "Annie? Annie? You've grown so big. Where have you been the past 10 years? I nurtured and fed you and kept you safe. Where have you been? You selfish cunt... uuurgghh....."

That doesn't make any sense.  She knew what letting him go meant.  She told him not to come back.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tits Pervert 

 

That doesn't make any sense.  She knew what letting him go meant.  She told him not to come back.

In your first quote you said he was taken away, and that was a traumatic experience.  Which is it?  Did his mom send him on the most incredible adventure of his life or was he violently ripped away from the only person who ever loved him?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackson 

 

Anakin chooses to go, he doesn't even bother to contact his mother for a decade, suddenly has a bad dream, then rushes off to Tattooine acting like Mommy is his whole life.  No that's not remotely believable, and not a good enough justification for the villain he would later become.

 

ETA: This has been written and commented on add nauseum, but the structure of the prequels focuses on the absolute least interesting parts of Anakin's life possible.  The entire first movie is wasted in his relatively happy childhood.  He is a slave, but apparently that doesn't matter, because he has plenty of stuff, obviously isn't starving, and isn't worked to death, because he has plenty of extra time to build robots and race cars.  The other two movies completely skirt around the Clone Wars, so we don't even get a glance of how the horrors of war have shaped him as a brash, impressionable young man.

But it's not the horror of war that changes Anakin, it's his complete inability to let anything go.  I personally find that well-intentioned selfishness to be more interesting than, "I've seen some evil shit, so now I'm evil."

Why are we arguing about the prequels, guys?  Literally every word we type has been volleyed over the last 13/10/7 years.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tits Pervert 

 

That doesn't make any sense.  She knew what letting him go meant.  She told him not to come back.

If my mother was a slave and I had the power to go back, rescue her and litterally crush the life of the little shit who enslaved her, you can bet I'd be back on the next bus to Tatooine as soon as I fucking could, regardless of what she told me. If you wouldn't do the same you're not fucking human.

Agreed, I was just thinking the same thing.  Why the fuck are we arguing about those shitty movies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackson 

 

In your first quote you said he was taken away, and that was a traumatic experience.  Which is it?  Did his mom send him on the most incredible adventure of his life or was he violently ripped away from the only person who ever loved him?

It was a traumatic experience.  It was also a choice.  Doesn't make it any less difficult.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stale Elvis 

If my mother was a slave and I had the power to go back, rescue her and litterally crush the life of the little shit who enslaved her, you can bet I'd be back on the next bus to Tatooine as soon as I fucking could, regardless of what she told me. If you wouldn't do the same you're not fucking human.

And you'd be kicked out of the Jedi.  That's your choice.  Congrats!  And you probably wouldn't have felt as guilty as Anakin did when he eventually did rescue her.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tits Pervert 

And you'd be kicked out of the Jedi.  That's your choice.  Congrats!  And you probably wouldn't have felt as guilty as Anakin did when he eventually did rescue her.

Oh no, I've been kicked out of the Jedi!

Does that mean I lose my force powers too? No? You mean I get to keep them? Aaaaand I can now happily bang Natalie Portman and not get grilled for it? Bonus! Wow this is great! Makes me wonder what the benefit of being a Jedi was in the first place!

If only George had eh?

Word on the street is that Yoda finds all deserters and uses the Force to tear their penises off.

Hey Tits, what's your midichlorian count?

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dark Shape 

 

Why are we arguing about the prequels, guys?  Literally every word we type has been volleyed over the last 13/10/7 years.

I really think Michael said it best.....

All of us should just go grab an Orange Julius and watch The Empire Strikes Back.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stale Elvis 

 

Oh no, I've been kicked out of the Jedi!

 

Does that mean I lose my force powers too? No? You mean I get to keep them? Aaaaand I can now happily bang Natalie Portman and not get grilled for it? Bonus! Wow this is great! Makes me wonder what the benefit of being a Jedi was in the first place!

 

If only George had eh?

Dude, nobody wants to be a Jedi School dropout.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bailey 

Hey Tits, what's your midichlorian count?

Don't get me started about what's RIGHT with midichlorians.....

This is gonna be messy.  Me no watchin'.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tits Pervert 

Don't get me started about what's RIGHT with midichlorians.....

Ah we can all agree on something then.

Were midichlorian the one thing about the prequels that everyone agreed to hate? I mean almost everyone disliked Jar-Jar to varying degrees but I've never seen anyone not wearing plaid defend the existence of midichlorians.

Nor do I want to.

Quote:

Originally Posted by D.T. 

 

This is ultimately what it comes down to for me. There were a million different ways Lucas could have added tension and intrigue to the prequels, but at every step, he made choices that boxed him into a small realm of thinking and writing.

Exactly. It's how Lucas approached the stories of the prequels that made them lackluster, not the simple fact that they were prequels. That audiences know how the overall story arc will end up doesn't not automatically make the journey of getting there pointless. For most movies, we already know how they're going to end: the good guys win and the bad guys lose. It's how that transpires that makes or breaks the movie.

Sunset Boulevard isn't a terrible movie because we now from the very beginning that Gillis will end up dead in a pool -- if anything, that makes it more interesting.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrknudsen 

Sunset Boulevard isn't a terrible movie because we now from the very beginning that Gillis will end up dead in a pool -- if anything, that makes it more interesting.

Wait, what?

FFS!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stale Elvis 

Ah we can all agree on something then.

 

Were midichlorian the one thing about the prequels that everyone agreed to hate? I mean almost everyone disliked Jar-Jar to varying degrees but I've never seen anyone not wearing plaid defend the existence of midichlorians.

 

Nor do I want to.

The midichlorians have never particularly bothered me, but I come from a geeky scientist family (mitochondria!) and always felt "the Force runs strong in your family" in the OT meant some people had access to it more than others, so the concept didn't limit the nature of anything in my view.

That said, I don't think they're particularly good, either.  The best thing about midichlorians is Ian McDiarmid sinking his teeth into the word in Episode III.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackson 

 

Dude, nobody wants to be a Jedi School dropout.

Am I the only one who read that sentence in Frankie Avalon's voice?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bailey 

Hey Tits, what's your midichlorian count?

If I had a dime for every time I've said that...

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackson 

 

Dude, nobody wants to be a Jedi School dropout.

This whole argument about the prequels is stupid....but now I really hope DIsney makes a mash up HIgh Scool Musical & Star Wars with covers of the songs from Grease:

"Jedi School Dropout....no graduation day for you

Jedi School Dropout...flunked rock lifting and lightsabers too!" 

Edited: Oh Man...Chaz beat me too it...that's what I get for trying to make up lyrics.

Edited again: Just thinking about my own suggestion - Holy Crap that would be so awful it would be fantastic!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaz 

Am I the only one who read that sentence in Frankie Avalon's voice?

He he he.  I'm glad somebody got my Grease reference.

I kinda want to subscribe to Jackson's newsletter because I think prequels tend to SUCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK.

Quote:

Originally Posted by skierpete 

 

This whole argument about the prequels is stupid....but now I really hope DIsney makes a mash up HIgh Scool Musical & Star Wars with covers of the songs from Grease:

 

"Jedi School Dropout....no graduation day for you

Jedi School Dropout...flunked rock lifting and lightsabers too!" 

 

Edited: Oh Man...Chaz beat me too it...that's what I get for trying to make up lyrics.

 

Edited again: Just thinking about my own suggestion - Holy Crap that would be so awful it would be fantastic!

You have no idea how close we may have gotten. I could suggest you go onto YouTube and look up Kinect Star Wars (At work, so can't embed videos, unfortunately) and look up Kinect Star Wars... But I won't. That would be bad.

Nope, the tomato was Lauren's. I had the rotten head of lettuce.