Josh-da-man

Sci-Fi Universe magazine, Feb. 1997: Fifty Reasons We Hate Return of the Jedi

This was BEFORE the prequels, and in the early days of the internet. Since the magazine is date Feb 1997, the article inside dates back to at least the autumn of 1996. This was the first piece I remember reading that was critical of Star Wars in the mainstream science fiction press, which, at the time, was mostly limited to magazines like Starlog that ran puff pieces.

mcnabb

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is EXACTLY my personal feelings towards the films.

Here is my exact evolution:

1977: Loved Star Wars when I saw it at 5 years old, and that has never changed

1980: Did not like Empire when I saw it at 8 years old. Too dark, Yoda scenes were boring, didn't like the bad guys winning and thought the no-ending was lame.

1983: Loved Return when I saw it at 11 years old, ranked it right under Star Wars as my 2nd favorite of the trilogy

1990: Watched the Holy Trilogy when I was in HighSchool on SciFi Presidents Day Weekend for the first time in a few years. Totally reevaluated the movies: Empire was clearly my favorite now as it just hit me how great it was and how wrong I was as a kid. Star Wars was still great, but ranked #2 now. Noticed many flaws with Jedi now as the Jabba part went on too long, the Ewoks were lame, and Han's character was a shell of himself from Star Wars and Empire.

2014: Nothing has changed as Empire is my favorite, Star Wars is a close 2nd, and Jedi ranks a distant 3rd.

james2025a

I had a similar timeline to the last poster, however i continued to revisit the movies throughout the years on a regular basis. I loved all three movies when i first saw them. I was a child through all of them and so they were easy to love. Empire was always my favorite of the three. The movie felt different from the other two both esthetically and in the storyline. It felt like the heroes had gone from being champions at the end of the first movie and were in shit deep from the beginning of Empire. The colors, worlds and characters just made it even more interesting.

I look back at these movies and i can see why people have a problem with Ewoks, but to my 10 years old self at the time it was no big deal. A lot of movies in the 80's had similar type of creatures in their movies and it just seemed to be part and parcel of the time. But ROTJ had so much to love in it. The Jabba sequence was fun. Same for the Sarlac Pitt sequence. Endor was nicely realized and it has one of the best lightsabre duels and THE best space battle sequence out of al the movies.

In hindsight, i can see why Star Wars gets the respect (ahead of its time in special effects, good characters which is rare in a lot of Sci-Fi), but i actually find it rather dull. The one duel scene is really boring, the end X-wing tunnel run seems to go on forever, and there is something about the feel of the movie that is not as polished as the other two. I am probably one of the few people that prefers both sequels to the original Star Wars.

taffer

I agree. ANH is my least favorite of the trilogy. I prefer them in reverse order. ROTJ is my favorite. ESB second, and ANH third. I preferred them that way as a kid, and I still prefer them that way today.

The Obi-Wan/Vader duel in ANH is just painfully bad to watch today. It is so very slow and clunky. I realize that the actors were older and had no formal fighting skills, but man, it is just not fun to watch especially even moreso after some of the prequel fights like Maul vs Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon.

I also agree the Death Star trench run went on too long. It seems like Vader locks on to an X-Wing and says, "I have you now" and then five minutes later he actually fires. If you have him, then why does it take you so long to fire?

I also always wondered how Vader even survives the ending. Yes, his TIE is ricocheted away and not actually destroyed, but how does he get back to wherever the nearest Empire base is? The movie made it a point earlier to point out that a TIE isn't a deep-space capable craft. I don't think any Empire bases would be near Yavin, or else that wouldn't have been a very good hiding space for the Rebels. So Vader's TIE should have been stranded in deep-space, and he would have died. In ROTS, Palpatine could sense Vader in trouble on Mustafar, so maybe he could sense Vader in trouble at Yavin too. That's a bit of a retcon answer though since we didn't previously know Palpatine was capable of that until the PT.

mcnabb

I actually think if Star Wars never had any sequels, I think it would be alot more revered then it is now. Because of the sequels/prequels/special editions, etc, the original story that Star Wars told in 1977 has been lost.

Let's just say this was 2014 and Star Wars was like E.T. or Lawrence of Arabia and could be seen as a standalone movie from ALL viewers. I don't think it would have as big as a fanbase as it does now (simply because there are so many SW fanbases: OOT, Saga, EU, etc.). But you would have the fans that love it from 1977, along with all new fans through the years that weren't tainted with comparisons of other SW films. Plus Star Wars wouldn't be a punch line that it is now because of the Prequels, or the fans in costumes getting interviewed by Conan O'Brien. And the fact that EVERYTHING that is said in it by Kenobi is a lie!


I don't blame you for feeling this way, but this goes to my point of the context of the films ruining the Original Star Wars. Lucas has said that the Lightsabers in 1977 were suppose to be heavy like swords from mid-evil movies (Conan The Barbarian, Excalibur), so it was deliverately supposed to be a slow fight. But Kershner asked Lucas when they were filming ESB if he could make the lightsaber appear lighter to make the duel quicker and more acrobatic, and that is why Vader fights with one hand in ESB, yet they HAD to fight with 2 hands in ANH.

james2025a

I think thats a valid point. If Star Wars never had sequels then it would be seen as more of a Sci-Fi classic in the realms of War of the Worlds, Forbidden Planet and the Time Machine. The sequels changed the perception, and also i guess the box office changed it to a large extent. It became a cultural phenomenon.

rocket1312

Come on. Not this old argument again. For the millionth time, Vader crashed landed his wrecked ship to the planet Vaal which was the home of Imperial Relay Outpost V-798. Everyone knows that. Geez.

mcnabb

Exactly. You would have your legion of Star Wars 1977 fans today and nothing else. Right now you have Star Wars 1977 fan like myself and then a younger generation of kids who grew up with the PT saying its too slow or the effects are outdated. Along with fans who like Empire more, and as many stated here they like Return more. So you have this constant comparing from the 6 films, and eventually 9 films, along with the Special Editions Changes, along with every plot point that was revised from the Original in terms of nobody being related to everyone being related.

And it would have been interesting where George Lucas's career went if he stopped with Star Wars and directed other non-SW projects. Well, he would be alot less rich!

Timber

No ILM, no Skywalker Sound. A lot more Howard the Duck's and Red Tails.

rocket1312

I'm pretty sure both companies predate the release of Star Wars.

Guru Askew

I pretty much think the exact opposite. Star Wars is a phenomenon because of the sequels, prequels, merch and EU. It would be seen as the start of the special effects revolution but it would also be dwarfed by movies that came out only a year or two later like Superman, Close Encounters and Blade Runner.

I also think that making the OOT a mythical unobtainable object has boosted their status a lot too. If you think the original unaltered Star Wars would hold up today visually then you probably haven't seen it in a while.

rocket1312

I don't think there's any doubt that the phenomenon that is Star Wars would be lessened considerably had it begun and end with the first movie. However, the cultural impact that the original had in it's day was pretty much unheard of. People would have eventually forgotten about it and moved on, but there have been precious few films in the 35 years since that have moved the needle like Star Wars.

I feel just the opposite. After years of SE rationalization and Lucas revisionism, when I finally sat down and watched the originals for the first time in a couple of years, it occurred to me just how pointless the upgrades in the SEs were. Other than the death star battle at the end of Star Wars, there were hardly any wholesale effects changes. Most of the changes were either changes for the sake of change, or digital recomposities. As far as the quality of the effects and whether or not they hold up, I'd agree that the first film certainly shows it's age and feels a little creaky, but on average I think the effects hold up remarkably well.

Mike86

The problem with the changes to the original trilogy is that mostly everything that's been done sticks out like a sore thumb compared to the rest of the scenes in the films and doesn't seem to fit. That and a lot of the add ons are just pointless shit that ultimately add nothing to the films. The changes that I would have made if any would just have been cosmetic things to fix errors or clean up scenes. The revisionist changes to make the originals more in line with the prequels for the most part don't work.

I guess I also tend to disagree about A New Hope being too slow. Overall the film moves at a pretty good pace if you ask me and there's a good sense of fun and adventure throughout most of it. The lightsaber battle maybe isn't the most exciting one in the franchise but for what it is it works fine. I wouldn't expect Obi-Wan to be doing a lot of fancy shit or anything in his old age and its the first lightsaber duel in the franchise so it gets a pass from me.

I don't really know if I have a particular order in mind for the trilogy. If I really had to I think I'd probably say The Empire Strikes Back is overall the most solid of the three. A New Hope probably is second best just because its the original and a lot of fun to watch. Then last would probably be Return of the Jedi even though I overall do still like it. I guess looking back on it from when I recently watched it the problems are more evident but still not enough that I really dislike the film. I just think it should have been more than one film to resolve the storyline from the original trilogy.

stvn1974

Obi-Wan should have done back flips and walked on the ceiling in A New Hope. Lucas should have changed that scene to match with Dooku's Olympic gymnast moves in the prequels.

mcnabb

Yes, but you're saying that the special effects are what draws fans to the film almost 40 years later, and its the characters and story that has made it timeless. Don't get me wrong, the special effects were gravy to already great movie in 1977, but the reason I continue to watch it 37 years later has more do with the characters, the mythology, the drama, the humor, the story, then the special effects.

The same goes for the Wizard of Oz, as my niece and nephews love it just as every generation has since 1939. Yet, the movie looks just as 'outdated' as Star Wars, but each generation continues to love the movie.

That is why I keep saying if there weren't any sequels/prequels to Star Wars, there would be no context to say, "The effects are outdated compared too...." People would watch Star Wars in context that the movie was made in 1977, just like people watch The Wizard of Oz in context that the movie was made in 1939.

taffer

While I don't want anything like that done in a new "Special Edition" it is pretty painful to watch the Obi-Wan/Vader duel in ANH right after watching their duel in ROTS. I have marathoned the six movies in one weekend before, and that especially makes it stick out like a sore thumb watching the old slow clunky duel in ANH.

TGM

I think it's a rather appropriate decline in fighting skills.

One was an old man, and the other was double dipped in lava. They were bound to be a little slow with the swordplay.

mcnabb

You've just made the argument for watching them 4-6, 1-3, and sort of hurts Lucas's argument to watch them 1-6 Watching it this way lets the viewer experience each movie in the context of the time it was made, so as movie progesses, so do the special effects, the fights, and the overall story.

Guru Askew

I'm actually a big SE supporter and I can get behind the overwhelming majority of the changes. Nobody likes Greedo shooting first, and I'm no huge fan of Jedi Rocks but that's a wash because it replaced scene that was pretty embarrassing and poorly-done in the first place.

But a lot of the stuff works from a story point of view. If you want to leap to your own conclusions as to why the RotS fight is so different than the ANH fight you can chalk a lot of it up to the physical differences both characters went through in the years between as well as their own maturity as combatants. It becomes more of a mental showdown than a physical one and I can buy that. Similarly, the space battles in the OT are much smaller and have a different dynamic altogether but the story itself supports this by virtue of the fact that the OT battles are always fought between a small entity and a larger one vs. two more-or-less equally-matched armies in the PT.

I usually watch the movies in chronological order and aside from a couple wonky little quirks like Yoda not being properly introduced by name in TPM and all the botched stuff with Leia being a Skywalker the saga actually works, and the SE/DVD/Blu changes go a long way towards making that happen.

james2025a

Hell, i even found the duel in ROTS to be boring. They were just twirling their lightsabres all the time and it felt rather stilted and to be trying too hard to be showy. "I have the high ground....." Ok. I understand the advantage, but just because of that Obi-wan beat Anakin? Kind of a pathetic way to win and i hoped for a legendary battle, but got another yawnfest.

Solid Snake

Eh. I rather like the Old Ben vs. Vader fight. There's some emotional elements in the lightsaber uh...play that make it worthwhile.

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/8kpHK4YIwY4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Obi-Wanma

That explanation worked until the PT gave us Dooku and Yoda flipping around like maniacs.

RichC2

After the prequels, any kind of narrative drive will be appreciated. The light saber and other fights were so bad because it seemed like nothing was actually at stake.

Mike86

I think its for the best if we all just pretend like the prequel trilogy never happened.

Solid Snake

I decided to watch some of the fights in the PT films. Jesus. I barely remembered them but holy fuck is there any lack of impact in them. Emotional or physical. It just lacks any impact whatsoever. Christopher Lee especially should have had no reason to be in there. That man could barely move in the scenes he has action in and then he goes cgi and it's jarring as hell.