For people than complain the new star wars films are not good/ruin the originals

The Original Trilogy, bar the special effects for the time, were bad movies. Dialogue, plot, acting, all just so terrible. I saw one thread mention that is because the new movies pander to 'SJW's' which I don't think I agree with even. They are movies for pre-teens just like all the others that came before them.

The original trilogy is a solid, well made series of Science Fiction- fantasy films with good characters and well aged special effects. Yeah, there are plenty of flaws, but that's true of any movie, regardless of what it is (this includes films like the Godfather). The new movies are a mixed bag. TFA was a great way to reintroduce the Star wars we like to the masses, and TLJ was nothing if not ballsy, although alot of the risks it took didn't necessarily pay off.

The REAL response to someone complaining the new movies are ruining the legacy of star Wars is to point to the prequels. Anybody who thinks the new movies are the worst thing about the franchises have either forgotten or are deluding themselves about the quality of the prequels.

I dont think the originals where bad, highly over rated absolutely!

The people crying about what they see as SJW issues with the new ones are people in serious need of some therapy.

The world is going completely insane

If anything, the worst part about the new movies is how they try so hard to ape the originals' structure. Movie one: hero discovers they have the power to control the force, heads to a seedy bar, then sets out to destroy a planet destroying superweapon with the help of some rebels and a rougish flyboy. Movie two: As the Rebels go into hiding one group of heroes goes on a quest to an out of the way planet while the force wielder seeks out an aged Jedi master to train with before recklessly running off to confront the Dark Jedi. Odds are that movie three will be the rebels recruiting unlikely allies to destroy a superweapon while Finn undertakes a mission to ensure the success of the attack and Rey confronts Kylo in the final lightsaber duel.

Maybe in complexity in KOTOR 2, but not KOTOR 1. All it has going for it is the reveal you are Revan, which Empire Strikes Back has a far superior scene thematically similar, which The Last Jedi attempted to mimick awfully. With the reveal one of the most memorable scenes in cinema history, and not just because of the revelation, but everything leading up to it being expertly done.

My beef with the new movies is the lack of originality and the very low risk taking. Sure, the original movies were badly acted and cringy and the prequels were corny and cheesy AF but at least they were trying to tell a new story...

thats a stretch.

the stories then really were not that revolutionary or risk taking frankly.

not that these are either but all of them if you know Hero with a Thousand Faces, Masks of God, and/or Power of Myth you can see what is being conveyed although rather simplistically.

This is false. George Lucas used an amalgamation of different elements in a way cinema goers had never really scene before.

e.g. the opening scene and robots taken from The Hidden Fortress, placed in a sci-fi settings, with space nazi's, space pirates, wizards, princess, a boys journey etc... presented like an old fashioned serial from the pre-40's mid story.

Prior to Starwars, you had sterile sci-fi and fantasy movies as two distinct elements. Even in movies like the MCU we see it's influence. Guardians Of The Galaxy being the most obvious example.

-

Along with Aliens it's had a massive influence on games. One of the earliest example being Phantasy Star.

After how shit the prequels were I am fine with where the new movies are at. Nothing ground breaking, but fun.

True, but if you drop Campbell's work into a conversation about originality then no story is taking risks. it's like saying your story progression is only original if it breaks the MICE Quotient...I didn't claim the OT was a masterpiece of quality writing but you can't compare the "freshness" of the franchise as a whole in the 70's and today.

perhaps, not really an expert in this area. but the movies content really didnt seem that controversial even for its time like lets say Midnight Cowboy was for example

but its always nice to see a liberal view point on the subject...HA! just had to joke there

I can not remotely parse a single solitary sentence in what you are saying. makes no sense at all to me.

True, but if you drop Campbell's work into a conversation about originality then no story is taking risks

what? does that even mean?

I assumed that would be the case :) You dropped some titles in order to make your answer look better than it really was and it didn't work for you; it happens :) Maybe read the books you've mentioned and then we'll talk. Listening to writing podcasts is not enough ;)

lol..

that was hysterical. that is your response? ok well you made your point not revelant to anything so I guess I will just move on.

oh and for the record, I have, at least some of his work, not all but a good amount

'all stories are controversial'?

what the ****? does that even mean.

The 'stories' cambell refers to are not fucking 'controversial' the conclusions of their similarities are, which isnt even a point in the god damn movies!

@tryit:

Nobody used the word controversial in this thread except you. It's like talking to a drunk man. Sometimes I can't tell if you're a good troll, a bad troll or worse...dead serious. Either way, it's a bit scary.

@korvus

let me try to explain better. The mythological 'motif' is not controversial. its just a pattern of story telling that works well and is compelling because it speaks to a human experience. not radical, not even risk taking.

the risk taking in Cambells work is the conclusion that these myths are all telling the same story which is separate from Star Wars. NOT that someone took the metaphors of them and put them into a sci-fi setting and hid them behind various frivolous fun action sequences

So for example, the trash compactor being a metaphor for the belly of the whale doesnt mean dick to anyone really other than intellectuals who are into that kind of thing

ooook..

replace everything I said replacing the word 'controversial' with 'risk taking'

conclusion is still the same, in fact give me a second and I will do it for you

let me try to explain better. The mythological 'motif' is not 'risk taking'. its just a pattern of story telling that works well and is compelling because it speaks to a human experience. not radical, not even risk taking.

the risk taking in Cambells work is the conclusion that these myths are all telling the same story which is separate from Star Wars. NOT that someone took the metaphors of them and put them into a sci-fi setting and hid them behind various frivolous fun action sequences

So for example, the trash compactor being a metaphor for the belly of the whale doesnt mean dick to anyone really other than intellectuals who are into that kind of thing

But that's literally what all stories are. There are no true original stories out there; they all follow a path that's been used hundreds of times before; sometimes mixing and matching but even that's been done by now. We've been telling stories for thousands of years and they're all aimed at eliciting one or two of only a handful of reactions so it stands to reason that there's not many untraveled roads anymore. So yeah, A New Hope was not groundbreaking in terms of storytelling (it was groundbreaking in other aspects though) but my point is that The Force Awakens (or The New Hope 2.0) by the lack of merit of being almost a carbon copy of the 1977 movie, is even less so. Do you disagree with this statement?

There are many forms of risk taking in story telling media, and they don't all have to be tied to narration or the storytelling itself. Genre mixing that has failed in the past makes for risk taking when it's attempted again, trying to reach a different audience that a type of book/movie/music/whatever is normally aimed at is risk taking, etc, etc.

Sure, most people who aren't interested in the behind-the-curtain of writing will probably not have names for all the things they know have been used again and again but they can still see through them. You don't have to have read Campbell of Orson Scott Card's works to see this. Lowering the quality level a lot but improving the easiness of access for anyone, just go to TVTropes and search for any "original idea" you think you had and you'll not only see there's a name for the trope you just used but there's already hundreds of movies/books/games that used it before.

If we are going to judge a movie's originality based on it never been done before we'd come up with an empty list. Instead we need to look at market saturation, delivery, retention and a lot of other factors and in that case there's no denying A New Hope was a lot more groundbreaking than Disney's SW movies are.

Thank you. I get why a lot of people don't like the new ones, but anyone who says the prequels were better needs to be strapped to a chair and forced to re-watch all three in a row.

no..ALL stories are NOT the heros myth. I am sorry but they are not.

furthermore, the controversy is not in the metaphor, in fact it never is, its at the more obvious layer, not the metaphor underneither it.

Example:

A gay male prostitute goes on an adventure into an unknown underworld of the city.

4 people are stuck in a trash compactor.

BOTH have mythological metaphors to them, which do YOU think is more 'risk taking'?

Considering you cut off and ignored the part of my post where I answered the question you just asked I can only assume you're not really searching for an answer but instead changing the question (and purposefully misunderstanding people's answers). This tactic works well on Political Gamers or System Wars but it's considered very boring in OT. You might want to start writing down these conversation closers you've been hitting lately; they might come in handy.

sorry I just scanned that looking for something related to what I said but I dont see anything so I will move on.

but again:

A gay male prostitute goes on an adventure into an unknown underworld of the city.

4 people are stuck in a trash compactor.

BOTH have mythological metaphors to them, which do YOU think is more 'risk taking'

fascinating thanks

The Force Awakens was awful in every sense, I remember leaving the theater bored to death more than the prequels.

But The Last Jedi was the best one I've seen since the original trilogy.

Wow, that's a huge step from the first movie to the second. How did they win you back? Don't get me wrong, TLJ was better than TFA but I felt very annoyed with it...they had all the tools to do something other than the obvious and then time and time again they discarded it in favour of what everyone was expecting to happen. By the end I wished I had left the theatre 2/3 into the movie before it all went downhill.

by not being horrifically terrible is all it took..lol

sorry I am not speaking for needhealing. my impression is that the latest one was at least tolerable unlike most which are not tolerable.

My main gripe with The Force Awakens is that I felt I was watching a remake, not a new original film. It honestly bored me to death. Last Jedi was way more original and exciting.

as a side note, Star Trek Chain of Command was far more 'risky' then anything Star Wars has ever done

A remake without an iconic bad guy?

-Horgen

I'm sure there are some things I found bizarre that can be explained easily by hardcore SW fans. I'm sure that for the other things people have come up with very elaborate explanations. And not everything has to make sense. It's just the sheer amount of nonsense (to me) in a row that continuously broke my suspension of disbelief that made me incapable of enjoying the newer SW movies.

But yes I won't contest that the original 3 had their own problems. As a kit I was always a fan of the universe that SW created but not so much the movies themselves.

@tryit: Your narrative and BS approach to posting (trolling) is getting really old and tiring.

I think the new ones are terrible, my opinion and I do not go up to people who think otherwise to tell them they are wrong. Why you feel the need to address a personal issue is completely bonkers.

then its your job to ignore my posts. we have already had this conversation

I understand what you are saying @PresidentLogan, but you lack context.

Keep in mind that, during the 1960's and 1970's, your typical science fiction film was actual garbage. I'm talking Barbarella, Logan's Run, Rollerball...I mean what was the best space-based sci-fi before Star Wars? Star Trek? Star Wars is a MASSIVE improvement over that.

So, yes, in the context of modern film and especially modern science fiction, the original Star Wars might be found lacking. The actors are not well known or particularly talented (Harrison Ford excluded), the writing is not amazing, and the budget was not as high as people think. In fact, inside-people thought the movie was going to bomb so it didn't get much support.

But then it comes out and blows people away. That's because at the time nothing like it had come out before.

Star Wars was unique and good enough to be an amazing experience for people.

Maybe it's coz people viewed the original when they were young so it left a positive impression.

Okay, you have bad taste. Good to know.

The originals may be overrated but The Last Jedi is still a shit movie. The end, lets move on.

@sakaixx: TLJ was far from shit, if you want that watch any of the prequels.

I don't know. I actually like UFO and Space 1999 (at least, the first season). That said, I'm one of the few who had no problems with all the Star Wars movies. Got the originals and prequels on DVD. I'll probably get the most recent three on Blu Ray.

While I don't think that any of the original movies are GREAT, I think it's a little bit silly to say that they were terrible.

Having said that, I think that a lot of Return of the Jedi kind of sucks. The awesome space battles and the Luke vs Vader confrontation make it worth watching. But I honestly thought that the whole Jabba thing was kind of a bore and went on way too long. And then a lot of the other cool stuff was tainted by the f***ing Ewoks being around. It's not a bad movie in my opinion, but it comes close. If they hadn't nailed the Luke vs Vader confrontation, then I'd be saying differently.

Still, I think there's a difference between "bad" and "terrible". Especially if we're taking into account historical significance (which I think we should). I'm not some rabid fan who thinks the movies are the pinnacle of good cinema, but I think all of the movies in the original trilogy are worth watching. I don't think any of them are "bad" (aside from possibly Return of the Jedi) and I certainly don't think any of them are "terrible".

Oh sorry. Here, "The Last Jedi, Episode 1 and Episode 2 is still a shit movie". thanks for the correction.

@sakaixx: Episode 3 was complete ass also. It had slightly better cig over the first two and that's about it. TLJ is Oscar worthy compared to those turds.

Oh ok then let me revise this again " episode 1 and episode 2 is shit, the last jedi is even shitter it should not even exist"

@sakaixx: TLJ is still miles better then the prequels, you'll get it right at so.e point.

Yeah, I guess I will accept The Last Jedi someday from the worst star wars movie I have ever watch to "just" one of the worst star wars movie I watched.

@PresidentLogan: I actually agree with you. When I saw the prequels with a girlfriend years ago, they were so bad that I said don’t judge Star Wars by them, and then rented the remastered originals without actually having watched them myself in decades. I got about halfway through Empire when I realized they were all bad.

way to ruin star wars, guys :)

Another job well done! Until next time citizen. Party-pooper away!

I find it very hard to like this new heroine. She's too good at... everything.

I get enough of that crap in anime, don't need it to leak onto my western movies.