Jump to content

Attack of the Clones


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

He should have drawn the line with himself.     This! Yeah I wanted to see Anakin struggle more and wrestle with his conscience, but ultimately embrace evil.  Willingly.  Not the way he di

The thing that the ST writers/directors don’t understand is that the Dark Side isn’t just making evil choices - it’s actually a malevolent supernatural power that consumes you once it’s invited in. 

My go to analysis is now that I say the PT is a bunch of horribly executed great ideas, while the ST is the opposite— a bunch of terrible ideas amazingly executed.

Sorry to flog a dead horse, but I only got the impression the dark path was only "easier" and "quicker" because users are not constrained by any kind of sense of ethics or morality.  They don't have to worry about anyone else. And that doesn't necessarily make the acquisition of strength in the force any quicker or easier in the literal sense. 

In regards to kylo, I was under the impression he wasn't a naturally evil or selfish guy but he was perusing the dark path for the power and his conscience was the pull to the light and he was trying to free himself of what he saw as weakness: compassion etc. So in that sense being temped by the light totally makes sense 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Quetzalcoatl said:

Is it just me or did those clones that Obi-Wan saw on his tour of the cloning facilities look nothing like Jango?  They looked more like that security guy who worked for Padme.  Typhoid?  I always thought that was weird.   

No it’s not just you. I thought the same thing upon my very first viewing of AOTC and have never been able to unsee it. That stage of clones looked just Padme’s head of security. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Odine said:

Sorry to flog a dead horse, but I only got the impression the dark path was only "easier" and "quicker" because users are not constrained by any kind of sense of ethics or morality.  They don't have to worry about anyone else. And that doesn't necessarily make the acquisition of strength in the force any quicker or easier in the literal sense.

I always thought those two went the same. The acquisition of strength in the Force was quicker and easier because the dark side had no constraints, thus why Yoda refers to it as the quick and easy path. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, but I don't think one can simply shed ones conscience particularly easily. Which was the point of Kylos struggle. And in the end, he failed in trying to rid himself of his conscience.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Odine said:

Sure, but I don't think one can simply shed ones conscience particularly easily. Which was the point of Kylos struggle. And in the end, he failed in trying to rid himself of his conscience.

His entire arc was about "killing" his past. He killed Han, he tried to kill Leia-- tbh now that it is said and done, Kylo Ren is the only part of the ST that I think worked. We had the exact sort of conflict I wanted to see with Anakin in the PT. I think his journey was actually more satisfying than Rey's./ I think Kylo's path was the ONLY thing that Abrams and Johnson agreed on, so it actually worked.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I agree with you. Think we ae saying the same thing in different words? 

He wants to kill his past but the entire time he's wrestling with his conscience to do so 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tank said:

His entire arc was about "killing" his past. He killed Han, he tried to kill Leia-- tbh now that it is said and done, Kylo Ren is the only part of the ST that I think worked. We had the exact sort of conflict I wanted to see with Anakin in the PT. I think his journey was actually more satisfying than Rey's./ I think Kylo's path was the ONLY thing that Abrams and Johnson agreed on, so it actually worked.

Don't forget, he tried to kill Luke, and in a way, he did.  Luke had to die to stop him from wiping out what was left of the resistance, including Leia.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the point that I was trying to make about Kylo was that he never seemed truly "taken" by the dark side, despite all the bad things he did.  In ROTS, Anakin became all drunk with power once he turned.  He suddenly had all these ambitions about ruling the galaxy that he didn't have before.  It may have initially been about saving Padme, but he became power hungry because supposedly the dark side does that once you get a taste of it.  But Kylo never really seemed motivated by power, though.  Instead, it seemed like it was more about trying to prove something to himself.  Its like his whole sense of self-worth was tied up in being a bad guy and destroying his past, and that's the only reason he was doing villian stuff.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Tank said:

They had an intermediate stage between Daniel Logan and Temura Morrison played by a third actor.

*smacks forehead*

It never once occured to me that I was looking at the clones at some intermediate age.  I feel kinda dumb now.  I don't know why that never occured to me before.  I guess its because that actor looked nothing like Jango.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Quetzalcoatl said:

I guess the point that I was trying to make about Kylo was that he never seemed truly "taken" by the dark side, despite all the bad things he did.  In ROTS, Anakin became all drunk with power once he turned.  He suddenly had all these ambitions about ruling the galaxy that he didn't have before.  It may have initially been about saving Padme, but he became power hungry because supposedly the dark side does that once you get a taste of it.  But Kylo never really seemed motivated by power, though.  Instead, it seemed like it was more about trying to prove something to himself.  Its like his whole sense of self-worth was tied up in being a bad guy and destroying his past, and that's the only reason he was doing villian stuff.  

The thing that the ST writers/directors don’t understand is that the Dark Side isn’t just making evil choices - it’s actually a malevolent supernatural power that consumes you once it’s invited in. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Fozzie said:

The thing that the ST writers/directors don’t understand is that the Dark Side isn’t just making evil choices - it’s actually a malevolent supernatural power that consumes you once it’s invited in. 

Arguably, once Kylo killed Han, he WAS consumed by evil.  He saw Vader as someone to live up to, and he did surpass him.  He killed Snoke, and basically until we got Rick-Rolled with the Emperor being alive after all, Kylo accomplished what even Vader didn't accomplish: becoming the supreme leader.   It wasn't until Rey healed him and he spoke to "Ghost-Han" (which was really his conscience) that Kylo turned back to the light.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/28/2021 at 1:37 PM, Tank said:

His entire arc was about "killing" his past. He killed Han, he tried to kill Leia-- tbh now that it is said and done, Kylo Ren is the only part of the ST that I think worked. We had the exact sort of conflict I wanted to see with Anakin in the PT. I think his journey was actually more satisfying than Rey's./ I think Kylo's path was the ONLY thing that Abrams and Johnson agreed on, so it actually worked.

Im not sure of this. I really do think Johnson's intent with Rey closing the door on him at the end of the TLJ was that he was done with his chances to come back. Having said that although I to think turning him back was the wrong choice it's not indefensible. Plus some of the decisions used in his redemption were right like having it be a memory of his father that pushed him in that direction. As opposed to the decisions with Rey which are kind of hard to even fathom how anyone could think they were good decisions. 

Its funny though I almost don't even consider TROS when thinking of Star Wars. Not in some "head cannon" way where I pretend something else happened. I just don;'t even think about it. Ive watched the movie 3 times. Twice in the theaters and then once when it came out on Disney+. I can;t imagine ever watching it again. Im not angry about it, I just don't care about it. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't have to be mad to ignore a bad movie! TROS qualifies for being ignored because it IS a bad movie. I say that without anger, too. It's just a stinker of a movie, as well as a bad Star Wars movie.  I'd honestly say that it is worse than the PT.  I don't think it will hold up over time. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Darth Krawlie said:

"Over time?" I don't think it held up well over the opening weekend.

I agree, its the only Star Wars movie I've ever left the theater unhappy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Choc said:

Im not sure of this. I really do think Johnson's intent with Rey closing the door on him at the end of the TLJ was that he was done with his chances to come back. Having said that although I to think turning him back was the wrong choice it's not indefensible. Plus some of the decisions used in his redemption were right like having it be a memory of his father that pushed him in that direction. As opposed to the decisions with Rey which are kind of hard to even fathom how anyone could think they were good decisions. 

Its funny though I almost don't even consider TROS when thinking of Star Wars. Not in some "head cannon" way where I pretend something else happened. I just don;'t even think about it. Ive watched the movie 3 times. Twice in the theaters and then once when it came out on Disney+. I can;t imagine ever watching it again. Im not angry about it, I just don't care about it. 

 

 

I’m not saying it was well done, or even consistent— just that Kylo’s arc was something that was at least, on paper, the same between the films.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/2/2021 at 3:34 PM, The Choc said:

I agree, its the only Star Wars movie I've ever left the theater unhappy. 

I left having not fully processed what I had just seen.  The unhappiness came later.  I've seen it twice in the theater and have no need to ever see TROS again.  It's like a bad dream that I already have half forgotten.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/2/2021 at 3:56 PM, Tank said:

I’m not saying it was well done, or even consistent— just that Kylo’s arc was something that was at least, on paper, the same between the films.

I think a lot of the presentation issue for Anakin was the way he was directed.  DO you agree, or was it strictly the writing, or does it just come down the the actors for you?  What do you think it is in the Anakin VS Kylo debate (Kylo's journey being more satisfying)?  Was it HC not having the acting chops or driver being a better actor, or was it the direction?    HC seems a competent actor to me, and was much better in ROTS, but I think Driver is a better actor overall. However, I tend to think the direction was what hurt HC's performance in AOTC the most.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

There’s different types of actors and different types of directors.

Some directors really focus on performance, others, others the visuals, some are technicians that are more about the process and finished product as opposed to working a single scene to death. Lucas falls as a hybrid of the last two. He director from video village wanting to see what the final product was on his monitors. He was less concerned about the acting as he was composing. Some directors get back there with the DP to make sure it’s all blocked and framed the way the want, then trust the DP to stay on point and they’ll go get into the depth of the scene on set with the actors.

I would add to that even the best written stuff can seem stilted when you are on set and just looking at raw footage without grading or proper sound. 

And yea, the script was god awful. But some actors can rise above the material. Ewan McGregor has some of the worst lines in the PT but we all love him and his portrayal. He has a way of making it work.

Some actors can’t do that on their own. A lot of actors need to have a director (or even writer) to help them. Actors have weird brains. On my TV we rotated directors and they were there to block and motivate— but there were a few times the actors needed to know deeper motivations, or stuff that was coming, things that they maybe haven’t even read yet. That’s when I would step in to talk to them. The best performances require really tight collaboration between the actor, director, and the writer/script.

Hayden Christiansen and Natalie Portman have both been stellar in other films, but we’re awful in the PT. They needed a director to really work with them, and Lucas wasn’t really into doing that— watch any BTS footage of the PT, or even the OT, and you can see it.

So at the end of the day, it’s on Lucas. Triple so, as he wrote, directed, and cast the film.

This is actually why I bet both HC and EM agreed to do the Obi-Wan show. They are going to have a chance to revisit things with better writing and directing. TCW sort of worked as an apology for the PT, and Mando absolutely gave fans what they wanted from the ST. I think the Obi-Wan show will be the biggest make-right apology yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Zathras said:

I think a lot of the presentation issue for Anakin was the way he was directed.  DO you agree, or was it strictly the writing, or does it just come down the the actors for you?  What do you think it is in the Anakin VS Kylo debate (Kylo's journey being more satisfying)?  Was it HC not having the acting chops or driver being a better actor, or was it the direction?    HC seems a competent actor to me, and was much better in ROTS, but I think Driver is a better actor overall. However, I tend to think the direction was what hurt HC's performance in AOTC the most.  

Lucas deserves 100% of the blame that Hayden gets. Somehow Natalie avoids it, even though her performance isn’t any better than his. But then it was Anakin’s story.

Overall, though, Driver is a better actor, the dialogue was better written in the ST, and the directing was also better. The PT and the ST are mirrors of each other in a lot of ways. The problem with the PT is bad dialogue and bad direction, but good ideas. The ST is good dialogue and good direction, but horrible ideas.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for Kylo— they gave him all the same weakness we knew Anakin was supposed to have— impatient, more powerful than he should be, and selfish. They just did it without making him petulant and whiney. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fozzie said:

 

Overall, though, Driver is a better actor, the dialogue was better written in the ST, and the directing was also better. The PT and the ST are mirrors of each other in a lot of ways. The problem with the PT is bad dialogue and bad direction, but good ideas. The ST is good dialogue and good direction, but horrible ideas.

My go to analysis is now that I say the PT is a bunch of horribly executed great ideas, while the ST is the opposite— a bunch of terrible ideas amazingly executed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Tank said:

My go to analysis is now that I say the PT is a bunch of horribly executed great ideas, while the ST is the opposite— a bunch of terrible ideas amazingly executed.

I wish I could argue with you. If you look at the ST as one 7 hour story though you are just 100% correct. If you compartmentalize it TFA and TLJ are both great and I don't let TROS detract from my enjoyment of either of them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...