Official Star Wars Thread
- Thread starter bearfan
- Start date
Yeah, that is a very interesting pic....
love it.
RTC
Libera et impera!
Same. I still regularly play Battlefront 2 modded maps on the PC, although I hear it's going to play more similarly to Battlefield now, which isn't a bad thing, but it isn't keeping to the style of the original two games. Still, I think it'll live up to the hype with the attention to detail DICE have been showing.
One of those concept art images reminds me of that picture that was taken from the air recently, apparently showing a set of the new film.
Since Per put the pic in spoilers, I'll do the same for my reaction:
I assume that's Luke. Robot right hand, and who else would know where to find Vader's burnt mask? My question would then be... why did JJ make Mark Hamill grow a beard, if Luke is hiding behind an iron mask?
Less likely: crossover with Fox's upcoming Fantastic Four movie. That's Doctor Doom.
Less likely: crossover with Fox's upcoming Fantastic Four movie. That's Doctor Doom.
RTC
Libera et impera!
I don't think they'll go that route. They'll perhaps portray Luke like a more sinister version of Yoda in the Original Trilogy, but not to the extent that he's an evil character.
The beard is real, he's been photographed all over with it. Sith Lord is certainly the implication from wearing that robe, but I think Luke wore a dark robe at some point in RotJ, didn't he? The mask is the mystery, unless it's just an opening shot for a quick dramatic reveal, just like how they first showed Star-Lord in GotG.
bearfan
Ancient Mariner
I know the beard is real, but I do not see a reason why a Sith cannot have a beard
I mentioned it because that mask is awful tight for hiding a beard like Hamill is currently sporting. Maybe just a tight fit, maybe shot before the beard, maybe another actor...?
RTC
Libera et impera!
Whether ballsy or not, it would be a bad decision. As you said, the whole point of the original trilogy was Luke's ascension as a Jedi Master. If they made him the main villain, it would either be a copy-paste job from the original trilogy or make the original trilogy irrelevant.
@SMX:
I think it's something more in the vein of the Phantom Of The Opera. The exegesis could be that Luke faced up against the new evil and failed, leading to him and his group going into hiding in separate locations. Luke is scarred mentally and physically, and becomes more of a chaotic neutral character, but still has elements of good to him.
I'm optimistic for Episode 7 personally. I honestly think Episode 1 and 2 are decent, and Episode 3 is very good; they have problems but are nowhere near as bad as people make them out to be. I think the new trilogy has hindsight to improve from the mistake the prequels made, but I don't think they'll outclass the original trilogy.
bearfan
Ancient Mariner
Ya made me look up a word. Well played, young man.
Truth is, for all their flaws, I like the prequels. I'd never claim they're anything like "great", but they had good effects/fights, and the core of a good story was there. I've always thought that if Lucas had limited his involvement to writing the broad story and maybe some special effects only - let others handle screenplay and directing - those movies could have been great.
For instance, the idea of two civilizations on Naboo, and a member of the "wild" tribe joining the Jedi entourage, is a solid story point. The realization, the abomination that was Jar-Jar, is the part that someone else should have handled.
The new trilogy has the potential to surpass the original, based on Abram's past work. It's a tough order but I still hope.
RTC
Libera et impera!
See, I'm actually pretty neutral on Jar Jar. There are times where he can be eye-rolling and annoying, but not so bad that I don't want to watch the film. His position in the film is to add comedic value for children watching it, so as a result, the humour is pretty childish, but pertinent. I totally understand that adults and even teens hold a grudge against the character, but it's not one for them. Are they ways Jar Jar could have been better? Absolutely. But the way he is, he's written adequately for the young audience watching (Lucas didn't go down the toilet humour approach at least). The romance had the right intentions, but was terribly writen.
The midichlorians thing was incredibly stupid though. I'm not going to try and defend it.
The midichlorians thing was incredibly stupid though. I'm not going to try and defend it.
bearfan
Ancient Mariner
I bring this up when I talk to people about Lost and they complain they did not get a full explanation of The Island. It is fiction, some things you just have to take as a mystery without a full explanation. What they said about the Force in the original trilogy was perfect and they should have left it at that ... though I will say the Emperor's explanation of the dark side at that opera thing in Ep III was really cool too.
What I'm interested to see is if they manage to get that balance of interwoven 'serious' plot, action and fun, silly stuff. That was the beauty of the original trilogy for me. They really are films for all the family. I agree with RTC, Jar Jar was in the prequels because they needed something to amuse the youngest end of the audience when the plot was going over their heads.
Although I enjoyed the prequels very much, I felt there weren't as many facets to the plot as there were in the original three. The lighter elements took more of a back seat by the time of Episode III, and other than the romance, the focus on the Jedi/Sith storyline is intense. Although there is plenty of action in the prequels, I also think those films miss having a non-Jedi action hero character like Han Solo. The action hero role is absorbed by the Jedi characters instead, particularly Obi-Wan.
Although I enjoyed the prequels very much, I felt there weren't as many facets to the plot as there were in the original three. The lighter elements took more of a back seat by the time of Episode III, and other than the romance, the focus on the Jedi/Sith storyline is intense. Although there is plenty of action in the prequels, I also think those films miss having a non-Jedi action hero character like Han Solo. The action hero role is absorbed by the Jedi characters instead, particularly Obi-Wan.
RTC
Libera et impera!
I think a fair criticism of the prequels is that they take themselves far too seriously. Sure. there's some light hearted moments here and there, but because the plot is centred around Anakin as a jedi and his transformation to the dark side, it has to go pretty dark. And to be honest, the dark stuff is handled very well. In Clones, the death of Anakin's mother and his reaction to it is a pretty intense moment that does a great job of foreshadowing what he'll become. His eventual transformation in Sith is also done very well, as well as the confrontation on Mustafar. It's the light hearted moments in the films that tend to fall flat, like the romance.
I think an underrated part of the prequels is the Trade Federation/CIS. While the political talk in Menace is a little overboard, they do make for a good adversary. The droid designs, especially the Droideka are all pretty cool, and unlike the Stormtroopers (the most they did was kill Owen and Beru in ANH), they're actually a legitimate threat that do kill a few characters, even if they are minor.
I think an underrated part of the prequels is the Trade Federation/CIS. While the political talk in Menace is a little overboard, they do make for a good adversary. The droid designs, especially the Droideka are all pretty cool, and unlike the Stormtroopers (the most they did was kill Owen and Beru in ANH), they're actually a legitimate threat that do kill a few characters, even if they are minor.