So were the Original Star Wars movies any Good?
Apr 24, 2019 16:51:26 GMT -5
Roquefort Raider, Prince Hal, and 3 more like this
Post by codystarbuck on Apr 24, 2019 16:51:26 GMT -5
Are they good? Hell, yeah!
Forget nostalgia. Star Wars was a great adventure film, period. It encapsulated the stuff of great movies, both thematically, technically, and vie homage/blatant swipe. It was it's own, self-contained little feature, building a world and characters and setting them off on adventure, with a rousing end. The acting was no better or worse than adventure films since the silent era. Anybody who says it is just nostalgia needs to watch movies beyond their own generation. It is filled with time tested stuff and succeeds. Sure, the intended audience is young; but, that doesn't make something inherently bad. Some of the best film and literature was aimed at the young. The best didn't talk down to them. Unlike Disney, Star Wars let you come at this stuff without schlock.
Empire is good on so many levels, from better character writing to better direction for the performances. It expands on what we saw before and stands as its own film.
Return of the Jedi is the weakest; but, hardly what I would call schlock. It's uneven, to be sure, and the cutesy ewok moments are hard to take, if you are over the age of 8. However, they also manage some actual emotional content with the ewoks, in a few scenes. Luke has some terrific moments and Han is pure fun. They waste several opportunities, such as Boba Fett vs Han, or the default of a Death Star attack (which was bad in 983 and worse when Abrams did his rehash of things). The lightsaber battle is filled with emotion and drama, while the space battle is extremely well rendered, with some great stuff in it. In fact, it is the one that had to be contended with when they went back to the series, feeling like they had to top it, yet mostly rehashing its beats.
As far as acting goes, I think that is a factor of experience and director. Most of the cast were young in Star Wars, with Lucas providing little guidance. Empire gave them a seasoned director who helped them focus on character. Jedi was a less-seasoned director, with Lucas dictating many elements. Still, by that point, Mark Hamill had grown as an actor. Carrie Fisher was having issues then, which affect her performance (not to mention the script gives her little to do, after she is caught in Jabba's palace.
Star Wars, though, is a phenomena that goes beyond the experience of watching a film. At that time, it was something fresh (or, rather, a revival of classic film, in the wake of the New Hollywood). It was a kids' movie with something for adults. it was an optimistic, good vs evil film, in a cynical time (or the tail end of one). It was also a visual treat. 2001 had been revolutionary in its effects work; but, it also had a pace that turned off many. Star Wars gave them visual delights and did it at a 1000 mph. That's not to say they did it better, just in a broader way.
Filmgoing was different then, too. Multiplexes were only just dawning and films had longer runs, and would build business. Star Wars was held over for the better part of a year, in some places, or brought back. That was nearly unheard of. This was an event film for a generation, much as things like Gone With The Wind had been, in the past. It was a return of old fashioned swashbuckling and fantasy adventure, in a sci-fi sheen, that didn't have (many) cheesy monsters. It understood that a hero needs a really good villain and delivered on that.
The original trilogy is the only one that really delivers both a strong story and mostly entertaining films. Everything since has been pretty much a remake of those films, with minor variations.
Forget nostalgia. Star Wars was a great adventure film, period. It encapsulated the stuff of great movies, both thematically, technically, and vie homage/blatant swipe. It was it's own, self-contained little feature, building a world and characters and setting them off on adventure, with a rousing end. The acting was no better or worse than adventure films since the silent era. Anybody who says it is just nostalgia needs to watch movies beyond their own generation. It is filled with time tested stuff and succeeds. Sure, the intended audience is young; but, that doesn't make something inherently bad. Some of the best film and literature was aimed at the young. The best didn't talk down to them. Unlike Disney, Star Wars let you come at this stuff without schlock.
Empire is good on so many levels, from better character writing to better direction for the performances. It expands on what we saw before and stands as its own film.
Return of the Jedi is the weakest; but, hardly what I would call schlock. It's uneven, to be sure, and the cutesy ewok moments are hard to take, if you are over the age of 8. However, they also manage some actual emotional content with the ewoks, in a few scenes. Luke has some terrific moments and Han is pure fun. They waste several opportunities, such as Boba Fett vs Han, or the default of a Death Star attack (which was bad in 983 and worse when Abrams did his rehash of things). The lightsaber battle is filled with emotion and drama, while the space battle is extremely well rendered, with some great stuff in it. In fact, it is the one that had to be contended with when they went back to the series, feeling like they had to top it, yet mostly rehashing its beats.
As far as acting goes, I think that is a factor of experience and director. Most of the cast were young in Star Wars, with Lucas providing little guidance. Empire gave them a seasoned director who helped them focus on character. Jedi was a less-seasoned director, with Lucas dictating many elements. Still, by that point, Mark Hamill had grown as an actor. Carrie Fisher was having issues then, which affect her performance (not to mention the script gives her little to do, after she is caught in Jabba's palace.
Star Wars, though, is a phenomena that goes beyond the experience of watching a film. At that time, it was something fresh (or, rather, a revival of classic film, in the wake of the New Hollywood). It was a kids' movie with something for adults. it was an optimistic, good vs evil film, in a cynical time (or the tail end of one). It was also a visual treat. 2001 had been revolutionary in its effects work; but, it also had a pace that turned off many. Star Wars gave them visual delights and did it at a 1000 mph. That's not to say they did it better, just in a broader way.
Filmgoing was different then, too. Multiplexes were only just dawning and films had longer runs, and would build business. Star Wars was held over for the better part of a year, in some places, or brought back. That was nearly unheard of. This was an event film for a generation, much as things like Gone With The Wind had been, in the past. It was a return of old fashioned swashbuckling and fantasy adventure, in a sci-fi sheen, that didn't have (many) cheesy monsters. It understood that a hero needs a really good villain and delivered on that.
The original trilogy is the only one that really delivers both a strong story and mostly entertaining films. Everything since has been pretty much a remake of those films, with minor variations.
