Star Wars Episode I is the best of the Prequels

[Mr Bad Example]

1 hour ago, fretgod99 said:

Liam Neeson is the best actor in a trilogy that also has Sir Christopher Lee in it? I don’t even know how to respond to that...

Christopher Lee is an absolute PRESENCE, but great actor? I dunno....

 

....you know what, he probably was. He appeared in a lot of garbage, but I've read that British actors will take work because, well, that's their job* and a crap movie pays the bills the same as a great one; he may not have been a chameleon the way, say, Day-Lewis is, but he does have the charisma where any movie he's in is better because of it (even if it's a relative raising of something from an "F" to a "D-minus") and holy smokes, read his Wiki page, what a life. My grandpa passed away in October at age 91, and we snuck down to the tavern during the visitation and someone proposed a toast of "may we all live as long!" and I felt I had to correct it to "may we all live as WELL"** - and that's Christopher Lee. 


* see "Kingsley, Ben" - as amazing an actor as there is out there who decided that being in BloodRayne was a good idea

** not to brag too much on it, but my fiancee came on the scene after his health had declined and never really got to know him; she was at my side and heard two stories about him literally saving a person's life, founding our community credit union, and...jeez, I forget what else; not bad for a guy who owned a butcher shop, I suppose. 

[Mr Bad Example]

On 12/20/2018 at 9:51 AM, Tyty said:

2. I think Hayden Christiansen did well actually. His character was a dull slave boy that had no one to talk to his entire life but his mom and that dumb floating bug slave dude. Of course he’s going to say and do weird things. I think a lot of his performance though is more on lame writing than him tho tbh. He did fine for what he was: a teenager with more power and responsibility than he knew what to do with

I agree. Christiansen (and also Portman) are good, even very good given the right material, but they aren't people who *elevate* movies. And hoo boy did the PT need elevating. 

[Calvert28]

 

3 hours ago, fretgod99 said:

Liam Neeson is the best actor in a trilogy that also has Sir Christopher Lee in it? I don’t even know how to respond to that...

I would say technically yes, not because of his acting ability but because of his character. Alot of the actors in the prequels are held back due to poorly written characters. Qui-Gon had the most focus on his character in Episode 1. Lee did his best but Dooku is just not that interesting of a character so even with his commanding presence on screen Neeson was just in a situation where he was able to showcase more of his ability then Lee was able too.

[Ty21]

You bastids r making me wanna watch the prequels

[Calvert28]

On 12/21/2018 at 11:00 AM, Deadpulse said:

I am now searching my mind frantically for instances of good character development in the OT and I am having more trouble than I would have thought. Most of Han's development comes during his "courting" of Leia which is more or less time skipped in sky city. Most of Luke's development also takes place off screen between Empire and RotJ. Leia pretty much stays the same throughout. 

The only instances that stand out to me is Ben's sacrifice teaching Luke that adventures are not fun and games and he is much more focused from that point on. The weird force vision quest he goes on in Empire is okay (at best) development, showing him how easy it would be to turn which offers him some perspective for dealing with Vader in RotJ. 

Hans character development takes significant strides in both 4 and 5 when he was continuously put into situations where he finds himself helping out besides doing what a smuggler typically does against the Empire by tucking tail and running. He of course has an extra incentive with Leia but him helping out goes against his typical character model. For example when he showed up unexpectedly and shot down Vader of all people when he should have been on his way to pay Jabba who wanted him dead. He was also debating with Leia at the beginning of Empire about him leaving the Rebels because of that bounty hunter he met some time before that and was afraid of more of them popping up the longer he stays with Leia and the others disregarding his debt and yet he still goes out of his way to care for and save Luke when he got his a$$ kicked by a yeti. Han who is supposed to be a very practical person in what needs to be done constantly goes against his better judgement and self preservation to help out Luke and the others.

Leia is introduced as basically a stuck up controlling beotch in episode 4 and it's through her interactions throughout the trilogy that she starts to soften up and becomes a very different person by episode 6. The most significant development was when she had to listen to Han being tortured and then watch him be frozen in carbonite while finally professing her love for him. So starting Episode 6 when her character was entirely about bringing down the Empire and putting everything on her shoulders she goes out of her way to drop everything and plan a breakout for Han. That would have been significantly out of character for Leia in Episodes 4 and 5 thus showing the turning point of her character to show sensitivity and dependency on those she cares about.

Luke had his first character development when his aunt and uncle were Napalmed by the Empire. Instead of just rebuilding the farm and keep putting off going into flight school. He decides to help out an old man he barely knows to finally make a difference in the galaxy and go and rescue this girl he doesn't even know. Another significant part of his development was Yoda confronting him on his boldness and rushing into things without thinking that scene in the forest where he fights Vader leads him to confront another truth about himself possibly turning to the Dark Side. Then he goes off anyway to fight Vader without completing his training and has 2 tremendous blows dealt in his scene with Vader and it shows with him reflecting on it later on the Falcon. Thus when you see him at the beginning of Episode 6 he decides to put off trying to rescue Han in order to complete his training. There are others in Episode 6 as well as 4 and 5 for him as well as Leia and Han.

Also for him dealing with Vader. Yoda and Kenobi were training him to kill Vader and the Emperor they were just trying to teach him to do it without giving into his hatred and to only do it to rid the Galaxy of the Sith. Yoda, Kenobi, and the Emperor saw Luke falling to the Dark Side if he went to Vader willingly or if he struck him down in hatred. Both things were working in favor of the Emperor because Luke could not overpower Vader without giving into his hatred which is why he had Vader and Luke face eachother. Instead of doing what Yoda and Obi-Wan wanted him to do and just strike Vader down as a Jedi and without feeling as well as the Emperor. He decided to put his faith in his father's redemption and love for him as a way to stop the Emperor once and for all. Old Luke was a shoot first and ask questions later type character and yet everything he argued with Yoda about and sensing good in Anakin. That was the greatest character development of all the characters. His sheer Force of Will basically defied what seemed to be an inevitable future that was laid out for him that was forseen by all 3 of those characters. In that instant when he turned Anakin back to the light by throwing down his light saber that's when he became the new Luke Skywalker that was basically a Demigod in the EU and thus completing his character development.

 

[Xmad]

31 minutes ago, Tyty said:

You bastids r making me wanna watch the prequels

I'll be honest skip 1+2. Watch Revenge of the Sith and then follow that up with the TCW series (Original 2-D, 2003 one) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXmdfbjhxqw (It's in 360p on youtube) I don't think it's streaming anywhere but there are DVDs of it somewhere but I've never been able to find HD versions of it online. 

The 2008 series, is all on netflix including the movie, it's the Canon one not that it matters but ya know and is getting a new season so there's more to see with that one (and IMO it's better) 

https://www.starwars.com/news/star-wars-the-clone-wars-chronological-episodeorder - Chronological episode order if you're one of those people.

https://www.reddit.com/r/StarWars/comments/8kyj84/best_way_to_watch_clone_wars_2003_and_the_clone/ reddit post for more info.

[INbengalfan]

13 hours ago, Deadpulse said:

But why?

The Padme part or the boxed in part?

The Padme part is one of two things.  History is full of men who follow their harts and get themselves into extremely difficult situations over love.  This is no different.  The idea I always believed, and this didn't come from anywhere but me, was that having grown up a slave, Anakin literally had nothing of his own.  Now he does, and they are secretly married.  Couple that with his fear of loss, and the fact that he already lost his ish when his mother died in his arms because he got there just a little too late.  Being strong with the force led him to thinking he could save her too.  Throw in Palpatine offering to "re-discover" the ways of cheating death through the dark side, and you have the perfect storm.  Mace shows up and decides to kill Palpatine immediately, so he reacted.  Which is why he was boxed in.

[Deadpulse]

3 hours ago, INbengalfan said:

Couple that with his fear of loss, and the fact that he already lost his ish when his mother died in his arms because he got there just a little too late.

This is the only thing that sort of informs his decision. My overall point is not that you cant logically say why he did this, because of course you can and you've done it; its that to get there you need to hell me about how history is full of men who follow their hearts over their brains or your own slave theory that you admit was something just from your own head. Can I rationalize his decision so that it makes sense? Yes. They still did a poor job developing his character to the point where the decision seems natural. 

[INbengalfan]

6 hours ago, Deadpulse said:

This is the only thing that sort of informs his decision. My overall point is not that you cant logically say why he did this, because of course you can and you've done it; its that to get there you need to hell me about how history is full of men who follow their hearts over their brains or your own slave theory that you admit was something just from your own head. Can I rationalize his decision so that it makes sense? Yes. They still did a poor job developing his character to the point where the decision seems natural. 

Fair enough.  I teach 10-11 year olds who have no idea why they do what they do.  I literally have to rationalize it ten times a day.  

[fretgod99]

21 hours ago, Calvert28 said:

 

I would say technically yes, not because of his acting ability but because of his character. Alot of the actors in the prequels are held back due to poorly written characters. Qui-Gon had the most focus on his character in Episode 1. Lee did his best but Dooku is just not that interesting of a character so even with his commanding presence on screen Neeson was just in a situation where he was able to showcase more of his ability then Lee was able too.

Except the argument was he’s the best actor. If the argument was best performance sure, we could talk about that.

[MKnight82]

1 minute ago, fretgod99 said:

Except the argument was he’s the best actor. If the argument was best performance sure, we could talk about that.

I think Neeson is a better actor than Lee, that's not a knock on Lee. 

[fretgod99]

23 hours ago, Mr Bad Example said:

Honestly, the biggest misstep was having Ep 1 be all this bollocks and having the execution of the Jedi be a 10 minute montage. The betrayal of the Jedi should've been enough grist for at least one full movie in and of itself. Plus I hate the narrative cheat of, if you watch them in chronological order, Vader's reveal that he is Anakin in ESB is like "well, duh" when it could have EASILY been maintained, even though it's seeped into the firmament and everyone knows it by osmosis; as a filmmaker, I'd be like "I don't CARE, dammit, I want that moment to be a f*ckin' REVEAL whether or not everyone knows it" 

Machete order solves all your problems.

4, 5 (ending on the reveal), 2 (skipping 1 entirely), 3, 6.

It makes the six (five) movies turn into a really nice fall and redemption arc for Anakin. You miss a few decent/important things in 1, like QGJ and a bit of the exposition that would be nice, but cut all the really painful stuff like Jar Jar and midichlorians.

[43M]

22 hours ago, Mr Bad Example said:

I agree. Christiansen (and also Portman) are good, even very good given the right material, but they aren't people who *elevate* movies. And hoo boy did the PT need elevating. 

The only remotely good performance Ive ever seen from Christiansen was when he played a whiny emo....which is perfect for him.

The material he had to work with in Star Wars wasnt good, but his line delivery is laughably bad in both movies,  he had the emotional range of a malfunctioning robot, and while its not all his fault, he made the biggest badass in the galaxy seem like a whiny pansy.  

Sorry,  but even with amazing dialogue and better character development, he still wouldve dragged the movies down because he was nowhere close to being good enough to carry that role. 

[MKnight82]

1 minute ago, FourThreeMafia said:

The only remotely good performance Ive ever seen from Christiansen was when he played a whiny emo....which is perfect for him.

The material he had to work with in Star Wars wasnt good, but his line delivery is laughably bad in both movies,  he had the emotional range of a malfunctioning robot, and while its not all his fault, he made the biggest badass in the galaxy seem like a whiny pansy.  

Sorry,  but even with amazing dialogue and better character development, he still wouldve dragged the movies down because he was nowhere close to being good enough to carry that role. 

[fretgod99]

3 minutes ago, MKnight82 said:

I think Neeson is a better actor than Lee, that's not a knock on Lee. 

Dude was knighted and was awarded a BAFTA Fellowship. Neeson’s pretty good but I’m going with Lee.