Oh George Lucas, how I long to shake your hand/slap your face
Hi. My name is Gavin, and I’m a Star Wars fan.
Okay, maybe it’s not so bad as to be classified as an addiction, I’m certain there are more obsessed fans than me. However, I do love the Force, I hope it is with me. The Empire Strikes Back might be my favourite film of all time. I love the ice planet of Hoth, the swamps of Dagobah, and the creepy mood in Cloud City when Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker finally face off. It’s compelling and dark.
A New Hope and Return of the Jedi both have their moments. The banter between Han and Leia, throughout all three movies, is some of the best dialogue in film history. “You came here in that thing? You’re braver than I thought.” “Sorry, I don’t have time to debate this in committee.” “I am not a committee!” etc. The world is complex, dirty, and teeming with life. The characters are rich: the wisdom of Yoda, the stoicism of Obi-Wan, Luke’s sense of adventure, Han’s search for redemption, Leia’s guts, Chewbacca’s loyalty, the unique friendship and humour of the Droids… The original trilogy dominates my childhood. Heck, I put a “lightsabre”/glowing sword in No Man an Island.
For years, I hailed George Lucas as a genius. It didn’t hurt that I loved Indiana Jones, too. And so, it was with great anticipation that I awaited Episode One: The Phantom Menace, at the close of the 1990s. Nothing but respect.
And then I watched it. Other than Darth Maul, who speaks one line (and he shouldn’t have spoken that much, it would have been 100 times cooler) not one character was interesting, let alone compelling. Jar Jar? Not funny. C-3PO, created by Anakin? Yeah, right. Anakin – played by a cardboard cut-out? Might have been less dry than the child they chose. Obi-Wan – the one possibly cool casting choice? Almost never important to the film. Seventeen minutes of Pod Racing? Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Twice that on the DVD? WTF? Aarrrrrrrrrrrgh!!!!
It takes tremendous arrogance, or being replaced by a clone, to think that you can direct a great movie in 1977, and then direct another great movie 20 years later, with new, untested technology, and not direct at all in the interim. That’s demented. And the computer graphics look like computer graphics, no matter how sophisticated they’ve become. None of the gritty realism of the original trilogy.
Oh wait, the idiot remastered the original on DVD using computers — so now everything looks too smooth and glossy and fake. And Han no longer shoots Greedo first, coming across not as a bad-ass you don’t want to cross, but as a slow-gun who got lucky. Lame, lame, lame.
I don’t understand it, except as a failure in script-writing and directing. Liam Neeson – good actor, go see Schindler’s List. Ewan MacGregor: anything he’s in, but see Trainspotting for a breakthrough role. Natalie Portman? Shit, she impressed me as a 12 year old in The Professional. I thought maybe it was Hayden’s fault, but then I saw Life as a House, and he can act. So WTF? “The Attack of the Clones” was lame, and “Revenge of the Sith” handled moments that, in my imagination, are pivotal and amazing, with clumsiness. I could write a better “Anakin becoming Vader” script IN MY SLEEP. I felt like I was watching a sixth grader’s version of Star Wars.
So what happened to George Lucas, great script-writer from Star Wars and Indiana Jones? Did he get abducted by aliens? Replaced by a clone? Did money and technology and thirty years of geeky fans worshipping him give him a god-complex? What happened?
I honestly don’t know. But I do know this: I am really worried that he ruined Indiana Jones the same way, although the preview looks pretty cool. However, if the movie is good, I’m going to give credit to Harrison Ford and Spielberg, because they will have kept Lucas under control. I also know this: should I ever meet George Lucas, I’m going to shake his hand and thank him for six great movies, from 1977 to 1989.
And then I’m going to bitch-slap him upside his head, for the disaster of the prequel trilogy and the remastered DVDs. Just a word of warning George – I love you but I hate you man. Learn to duck.
Agreed.
I think the thing is, it should never have been attempted. The truer and more wonderful the original magic was, the more it can never be recaptured. One might think this would be different because it was made by the same director from supposedly his original vision for the series; just goes to show: it’s not. Remakes NEVER work, and we should never go see them, because we’re bound to be disappointed.
Instead, modern film-makers should be forced to come up with original ideas – how about that?
I’d be interested in your opinion of the movie version of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.
My opinion is “meh.” with a hand gesture of a wibble-wobble.
I love C.S. Lewis, the Narnia series is a strong influence on me and NMAI (apparently, I have a lot of influences
) so I was excited and worried about the movies. They changed too much, in my opinion, by concentrating so much on the sibling rivalry between the brothers, instead of on the story of the text.
The cinematography was weird — one moment awe-inspiring, the next just blah. And I didn’t like Liam Neeson as Aslan, it’s just not how it sounds in my head. I’m usually pretty open to interpretations on characters: I have zero complaints about LOTR, and I don’t mind what they added and left out. But somehow Narnia didn’t feel as satisfying. I didn’t like most of their choices for the children either. Peter really bugs me for some reason. It’s not a bad movie, but it’s not in my top ten list either: while the books certainly are.
Agreed about Star Wars. I really liked Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe though…except for that part where the river melted beneath their feet…that was kind of stupid.
I just had higher expectations. I saw a film version of LWW in school, I think it was made by the BBC or somebody in the 80s. It was decent, for a “made for television” kind of movie. While the production values weren’t as high as the recent film version, I felt it stayed closer to the original text and the performances by actors (in my memory anyway) were better.
I liked the Narnia movie in general, except – big except – for the script.
I just don’t get it, how movie makers spend millions on actors and special effects and yet with all the brilliant writers out there (case in point), and the brilliance of the original writing (which I suppose contained too many Englishisms for the globalized mindset) we get these lame, bland scripts.
Example Scene:
Peter has just found out Edmund lied about having been in Narnia before with Lucy, letting the others think she was crazy.
Peter in original book: “Of all the poisonous little beasts…”
Peter in movie script: “You little liar!”
Also, as Gavin eluded to, the movie directors decided to emphasize the theme of “family members should work together instead of against each other”. Fair enough, if they could have managed a little subtlety instead of the over the head bludgeon approach.
However, I loved the creatures in the battle scene! The costumes were cool, and the young actress who played Lucy stole the show. Which is as it should be, as it’s pretty clear Lucy was C.S. Lewis’s favourite charactor.
Now there’s a new one out, which I will go see. Hope it’s good!
I totally agree with your points about the dialogue, and there’s no real excuse for it when the source material is so strong.
The previews I have seen of Prince Caspian look breath-taking, but I actually haven’t heard much dialogue. A Lucy “He’s so cute” for Reepicheep — which put me on the fence really.
What’s the point of a beautiful movie with bland words?