Replies

"What I got was a punk who was pissed because he didn't get his way. His whole conversion to the dark side was pathetic and weak."

this was without a doubt almost the worst possible job lucas could have done on pre-vader. a petulant teenager? WHO is sympathetic to this character?

casting the first movie at maybe 18ish or so age, the second mid or late 20's, the the final older, with competent writing and a much more credible development of the character, would have really been something.

i guess he sold some of those custom-scene video games though.

WD,

Re: Anakin's fall.
You're completely right. I was amazed that at the end of the movie two things stuck out about Sith 1) GL never convinced me that Anakin was a good guy. Not from TPM when he was a kid (the child was ambitious, was a glory hound/adrenaline junkie and thought second about his mother -- supposedly a key to his 'falling' to the Dark Side). He was petulant and dangerously over confident - he almost got himself and Obi-Wan killed in AOTC, and he wasn't THAT strong -- he got himself b!tch slapped inside of 5 seconds when he fought a skilled warrior (Dooku). I never liked the guy, never thought he loved his wife, and thought he was a fair weathered friend to his mentor, Obi-Wan.

You can't have a fall if there's no room to fall. He was not a good guy: Obi-wan was, Yoda was, Luke et al were, but Anakin got what he asked for. That all seems, kinda dumb.

2) GL crammed about 3:15 worth of movie into 2:20. He really needed to chill and let the movie tell itself. He left out a few key scenes that would have added sooo much to the storyline and to character development. But his pace throughout the PT was awful. TPM was about an hour worth of movie and AOTC about 1.5 hours -- he could have done that in one movie a heck of a lot better and then showed things crumbling in the second movie and then ended with a drama consisting of politics and (at least perceived) personal betrayal. Wouldn't have made for too many sword fights, but you would have connected with the people to the same degree or depth (but in a vastly different way) that folks did in the OT.

ClearBlueSky:
Ah yes, the OT had the kids saving the day (yeah 60s! mentality) and had all of the hope and excitement of a true believer's perception of a revolution. the PT had 'the man' as an undeniable force that would cruch all in it's way. All of the goodness in the galaxy wiped off the map by one (insane) man's ambition. If I were to get hit in the head any harder, I'd have to bring some advil. Ugh!

The staggering absurdity of a Jedi espousing moral relativism in the face of plain and simple evil was beyond the pale. While I do contend that GL has areas where he is supremely talented, I get the feeling that if you were to engage him in a conversation about politics, he would sound like a 9 year old.

My overall thoughts: GL has to be one of the larger control freaks in Hollywood. If he had let Kasden (sp?) write the PT and someone with talent direct and edit the movies, he would probably have not only twice the scratch, but also an incredible artistic gift to humanity-- an theatrically solid and emotionally meaningful intergenerational allegory that blended ancient myth with stunning visuals. Instead, as other posters pointed out, we're left with what we have, IMO the greatest could've been/what ifs in the history of movie making.