Reasons to hate the OT I dare speak my heresy.
#1
Posted 20 October 2004 - 04:46 AM
Over the next week I'll list out my reasons why I believe the original Star Wars movies are just not that good. In fact, I believe they (mostly) suck.
1) The redemption of Darth Vader. This is the only reason that transcends aesthics. As I have stated elsewhere on this forum, it is the most morally repugnant element I have encountered in ANY movie. Every other reason I will list, if accepted, merely point to the movies being bad. The theme of seeking redemption for a genocidal murderer and having it achieved at virtually no cost and, further, that it should be seen as a source of rejoicing is sickening. Lucas is a piece of filth for foisting this sick excuse for a morality play onto children.
2) The Emperor is the most ludicrous master villian ever. Cackling like Mr. Burns from the Simpsons, grinning like a pervert while he tries to get Luke to "give in" to his hatred. Jesus Christ, how come Lucas never gave him a handlebar mustache to twirl?
3) The two sides of the force are NOTHING more than good and evil. That's it. Replace all talk of the dark and light side of the Force with those two words and you have exactly the same story except now it is revealed as the sophomoric writing that it is:
"Luke, you have no idea of the power that comes...from being EEEEVIL."
At least ep. 4 suggested that Vader might have become evil by cutting corners and making sacrifices. By ep. 6, its established that you can become EEEEVIL just by getting mad.
Rubbish.
(more to come)
#2
Posted 20 October 2004 - 06:28 AM
Right now just one point. Reason No 3.
Look, every great epic in this universe is about good and evil. Starting from the Bible, tale of Gilgamesh, Beowulf, right down to Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter.
ALL these are just about forces of light and darkness.
We need it, we desperately crave literature, films and drama who give us this clear guidance of what is wrong or right. What do you want from it apart from struggle between good and evil? I am quite satisfied. If I want to watch some existentialism crap about lousiness of the human existence, I'll watch Leaving Las Vegas. Now you cannot really find two worlds more apart.
And the rest of the points, I believe JYAMG will clarify this. You are basically including ROTJ into OT, which is really questionable, according to some people in this forum.
#3
Posted 20 October 2004 - 06:48 AM
However, I'd like to say I understand your points though... if I'm reading it right, you mean the problem with the light and the dark side of the force is that they make it out as if Luke is constantly being tempted by the dark side. The problem is with such a name, no do-gooder would ever give it the time of the day.
"Luke. Join me. You don't know the power of being EVILLLLLL!"
"No, Vader. I'm not that kind of boy."
"Okay. Join me. You don't know the power of the dark side."
"Hm... the dark side, eh? Sounds interesting. I might just check that one out."
#4
Posted 20 October 2004 - 07:58 AM
Everything you say about evil, and the redemption of Darth Vader, is on the money. It's also all in RETURN OF THE JEDI, which we all know sucked.
I have cited this great bit of writing before, from sci-fi author David Brin. It's been largely ignored, mainly I think because there are few STAR TREK fans here. I am no fan of STAR TREK - it's all soft-core porn now, and who needs soft-core? - but I agree with everything said here:
http://www.salon.com...main/index.html
#5
Posted 20 October 2004 - 08:08 AM
yeah!!!
purge all memories!!!
Also: The Chefelf.com Lord of the Rings | RoBUTZ (a primative webcomic) | KOTOR 1 NPC profiles |
Music: HYPOID (industrial rock) | Spectrox Toxemia (Death Metal) | Cannibalingus (80s style thrash metal) | Wasabi Nose Bleed (Exp.Techno) | DeadfeeD (Exp.Ambient) |||(more to come)
#7
Posted 20 October 2004 - 09:10 AM
Um... he died. Wouldn't you call that a cost? I agree with you that the 'all is forgiven' attitude is a bit nauseating, but at least he died regretting what he had done and managed to save Luke (and by extension the Rebellion). If that final scene on board the Death Star had been the last time we saw Anakin, rather than having him appear as a happy ghost on Endor, I wouldn't have a problem with this.
As for the other two reasons, I'm with MC. Yes, the Emperor is OTT and yes, of course the 'good vs. evil' storyline is simplistic, but the whole point about Star Wars is that it's basically a fairy-tale. One that many adults enjoy, but a fairy-tale nonetheless. It's pure escapism - if you want gritty real-life drama or deep philosophical stuff, you really shouldn't be watching Star Wars.
- J m HofMarN on the Sand People
#8
Posted 20 October 2004 - 09:41 AM
While I am much easier on ROTJ than a lot of my fellow PT-haters, I will certainly agree with Xombie on the point of the Emperor. While I'm not as offended by the Emperor's character as I am by, say, Mace Windu's... I admit that it's a bit over the top.
Buy the New LittleHorse CD, Strangers in the Valley!
CD Baby | iTunes | LittleHorse - Flight of the Bumblebee Video
Chefelf on: Twitter | friendfeed | Jaiku | Bitstrips | Muxtape | Mento | MySpace | Flickr | YouTube | LibraryThing
#10
Posted 20 October 2004 - 10:50 AM
"Um... but we're getting our asses kicked left right and centre."
"Well... I didn't say that I foresaw bode well for us... I'm just saying that it's what's going on right now."
---
ah, I just got so sick of his 'foreseeing' everything, his "Good! Good!" and general gloating.
I also hated the fact that he SLOUCHED in his chair. What kind of powerful evil leader SLOUCHES? He looked like a fat couch potato, rather than a poweful and feared ruler.
#11
Posted 20 October 2004 - 02:05 PM
1. The article Civ posted was a very interesting read, and I agree with it, to a certain extent. There is a good point that this critic does not touch: Vader dies, he sacrifices himself for his son and the rebels. (In christianity, that usually does the trick if you want to go upstairs. Not that I advocate any real religion here and I'm almost certain that the author rejects it, but I think it's a good comparison.) I agree with Helena on this subject, remove Anakin as a happy ghost and it's no issue at all.
Also, I don't see the rebels as fodder in the OT, merely included to lift their "demigod" up high. Star Trek isn't without this type of thing, the red uniformed security guards in Trek always get snuffed first. But he's spot on about anger, any type of anger, making you Eeeevil. That's just stupid. Alternate episode VI title: "The Righteous Wrath of the Jedi"
2. Yes, he could have been made much better, much scarier.
3. Of course they are, good and evil. What did you expect? I always thought Vader should have become evil due to some terribly tragic events, like Dracula losing his bride, or being betrayed by the ones he love. Getting Evil by getting mad however see point 1.
But remember: Anakin is getting Evil by being a whiny shit and staring at girls like some drooling perv. I'd love to hear Alec Guiness say: "And then your whiny piece of shit dad turned to the dark side for no apparent reason."
#12
Posted 20 October 2004 - 02:38 PM
If Jen participated in this forum she'd be sure to tell everyone that I have very little chance of becoming a powerful evil leader.
Hey Lucas, less Christian crap, more cool mystical crap!
And about the "good vs. evil" thing... I think that's really what builds a strong story. In my opinion this is the reason why Star Wars was such a great story and so much other Sci-Fi is just crap. Star Wars focused on the archetypal struggle between good and evil while other SF films just showed off some cool spaceships and made up dozens of pseudo-space jargon to explain stuff. The reason Star Wars was interesting is because rather than explaining HOW they blasted off in the hyperspace they just did it. They let the viewer's imagination try to explain it if they could. This was what made Star Wars infinitely more interesting to me than Star Trek.
That was, until the prequels where they decided they needed to explain stuff (i.e. Midichlorians, etc.).
Oh great... now I'm sad.
Buy the New LittleHorse CD, Strangers in the Valley!
CD Baby | iTunes | LittleHorse - Flight of the Bumblebee Video
Chefelf on: Twitter | friendfeed | Jaiku | Bitstrips | Muxtape | Mento | MySpace | Flickr | YouTube | LibraryThing
#13
Posted 20 October 2004 - 03:51 PM
"By contrast, the oppressed "rebels" in "Star Wars" have no recourse in law or markets or science or democracy. They can only choose sides in a civil war between two wings of the same genetically superior royal family. They may not meddle or criticize. As Homeric spear-carriers, it's not their job."
What? So one Skywalker dictatorship will replace the old one? If the Emperor has his way perhaps. But come on! Luke is a knight in the service of the Alliance which seems to be governed by wise and benevolent leaders like Mon Mothma. Democratically elected? Seems very likely.
Also, I never saw a trace of evidence that the rebels follow Luke, or Leia, like mindless sheep who do not meddle or criticize.
I understand what the author is trying to say and to a certain extent I agree, but I think in his eagerness to prove his point grossly exagerrates his arguments. It seems that he wants to prove that not only Lucas films are bad in a sense that they inspire belief in elitism, but all similar fantasy as well. Is Tolkiens world as bad as Star Wars? I always thought that these stories inspire benevolence and tolerance, courage and justice. The very same things the Star Trek Federation values.
"Gene Roddenberry's vision loves heroes, but it breaks away from the elitist tradition of princes and wizards who rule by divine or mystical right."
They do not rule. The alliance, including Luke and Leia, are trying to topple a dictatorship and install a democratic republic. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't one of the major points of the saga anti-dictatorship? Anakin chooses to rule, he chooses the path of the dictator and subsequently turns into a monster.
The two worlds are very difficult to compare. Star Wars is not sci-fi. It is a fantasy fairytale, in a sci-fi guise perhaps. Star Trek however, is pure sci-fi. I like 'em both, for different reasons. But claiming one is morally superior to the other is stepping out on very thin ice.
Is the author perhaps a Trekkie wanting to deliver a large turd to the doorstep of Skywalker ranch? God knows Lucas deserves it, but not neccessarily for these reasons...
This post has been edited by HK 47: 20 October 2004 - 03:52 PM
#14
Posted 20 October 2004 - 05:16 PM
#15
Posted 20 October 2004 - 06:31 PM