Originally Posted By Dave Should a person who has never seen the movies watch them in the order they were released 4-5-6-1-2-3 or should they watch them in order 1-2-3-4-5-6?? The guy I work with had never seen them and I made him watch them in the order they were released. What’s your opinion please?
Originally Posted By Mr X I agree with you, Dave. Who would you rather have a newbie meet first, Han Solo and Darth Vader, or Jar-Jar Binks and Watto? I wonder what George Lucas would say about that though? Hmm?
Originally Posted By WorldDisney I thought the entire point of the prequels is to be able to start from the beginning, episode 1? Let the story fold out in a consitent and continuity matter?
Originally Posted By Mr X Did you mean to write "let the story unfold in a consistant and continuous manner"? If so, I totally don't agree anyway. If NOT, I'd like to know what the fudge you were trying to write! ;p
Originally Posted By itsme Just casue of the years they were released i would say to watch them that way. After seeing the special effects in eps 123, 456 may look cheesy and some may lose a little interest and not pay as much attention to the great storys that they are.
Originally Posted By Mr X 4 5 and 6 will NEVER look "cheezy"! :O And, especially compared to 123, I think they stand up just fine in all aspects. Just my opinion, of course.
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 Watch it as 456123. Then if you like the series and especially the prequels watch it in order.
Originally Posted By itsme Yes they do stand up, Im not putting them down, but in the way some people think today{mostly younger} they dont appreaciate some older movies are as far the effects. Im saying if you compare the 2 series and look at the effects only, Not the storys. I have heard some younger people say well yea the movie was really cool but the effects were goofy looking, I think thats why Lucas has gone back and redone some stuff. They are used to what is done by todays standards only.
Originally Posted By JeffG They definitely need to be seen in release order, not in numerical order. If you watched them in numerical order, you would completely lose the mysteries surrounding the various characters in the original "Star Wars" as well as the surprise revelations in "The Empire Strikes Back" and "Return of the Jedi". The prequels are also very much structured to fill in details about characters that we already know. Episode 3, in particular, gains much of its effectiveness from its inexorable move towards the events of the original trilogy. The extremely effective final shot of the film would also be meaningless without familiarity with the original film. -Jeff
Originally Posted By SFH Lucas says people should watch them in Episode order, not release order. But he can't control that, so it is up to the individual. Yes, the questions become different when you watch them in episode order. I had been hoping that SOMETHING would have been written in to Episode III that would have been an "ah-HA!" or twist to people who had seen 4, 5, 6, and then 1 and 2. But no such luck. It's things like this that made me think Peter Jackson should have retired after LOTR. I mean, where do you go from there?!? How good can Kong be? I consider LOTR the best...trilogy...EVER, though SW Episodes 3, 4, and 5 is a damn good trilogy, too. Ep 6 is kind of hampered by the ewoks being too cutesy. SFH
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I really liked the prequels, and feel that overall the quality is not that far beneath the originals. The main thing the prequels lack is Han Solo, and how are you going to replace one of the best actors (as well as the most interesting character) to ever appear in the series? Anyone who thinks Hayden Christensen or Jake Lloyd were bad should check out Mark Hamill, especially in Episode 3. It is no mystery why he's never had much of a career outside of Star Wars. BUT... Even though I think the prequels are much better than most people give them credit for, I agree that the ONLY way to watch them is 4,5,6,1,2,3. The prequels depend on the viewer having knowledge of the original trilogy. Without that knowledge, it would be a considerably lessened experience.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Anyone who thinks Hayden Christensen or Jake Lloyd were bad should check out Mark Hamill, especially in Episode 3.>> Oops... That would be Episode FOUR. You can see why I've never had much of a career as a movie reviewer.
Originally Posted By cstephens RoadTrip wrote: > Anyone who thinks Hayden Christensen or Jake Lloyd were bad should check out Mark Hamill, especially in Episode 3. It is no mystery why he's never had much of a career outside of Star Wars. To defend Mark Hamill, as I often have to do, he's actually doing quite well outside of Star Wars - they're just not necessarily things that are in the spotlight of the public eye. And no, Mark wasn't great in 4, but I think most people mistake what they dislike as Mark's acting whereas it's really Luke's character. Luke is fairly annoying in quite a bit of Episode 4, but then, he's supposed to be. He *IS* a whiny kid, which makes his transformation through 5 and 6 that much more interesting. In one of my marathon viewings of 4, 5 and 6, I paid particular attention to Mark, and there are a lot of little things that he does that convey Luke's character quite well. And have you noticed how bad Harrison Ford is in the films? He definitely got much better as an actor later, but there are a lot of cringe-inducing scenes and line-readings on his part. Back to the topic at hand, this is one of the instances when I absolutely disagree with George Lucas. He can show his movies any way he wants. Any self-respecting Star Wars fan would insist that the series be seen in the *correct* order - 4,5,6,1,2,3. You would really have a different reaction if you saw 1,2,3 first, because as already mentioned, the reveal of Vader as Luke's father would have no impact on you, and you'd know that Ben was lying to Luke on Tatooine about Vader murdering Luke's father. One of the interesting surprises for me was that after being so used to hating Vader, you actually feel for him as Anakin turns to the dark side in Episode 3, and I at least was very affected by his turn, even though I knew it had to come. /cs
Originally Posted By Mrs ElderP It's not that hard to argue that the Star Wars Stories is an Epic in the stiyle of the The Iliad and The Odyssey. (And you have plenty of amunition if you want to argue against it too.) Anyway, many Epics begin in the middle. For example, once "the credits" are out of the way the Odyssey begins with Zeus telling Calypso that she has to let Odysseus off the island, then eventually through many adventures we learn how the heck he got himself there. Anyway, a lot of literature gooblygook giving justification for what we all know 456, 123.
Originally Posted By peeaanuut If jar jar had been in the 1st starwars ever, that franchise would have been dead on the spot.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 As a star wars Fanatic ( license plate for the past 20 + years JEDI ) - I would say for sake of story I would want someone to watch them 1,2,3,4,5,6 -- gives the advantage of understanding references to clone wars - who the Organa's were - who Old Ben Kenobi was etc..-- also shows the aging of Yoda. Also would get the feeling the moveis ere getting better. As for the special effects -- on the cleaned up versions, not as big a deal to me since 4,5, and sometimes 6 are stronger on story to me than 1,2,3. Again just IMHO ! As for Peter Jackson -- he should not retire until the Hobbit is done as the Lotr trilogy on film ( which I agree is the best trilogy ever) - would be then complete with - the Hobbit. I think it would be an integral part if i wanted to spent 15 hours or so with the extended versions and really get a handle on the stories.
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 I have to imagine that even someone who's never seen Star Wars knows about the big surprise in Empire Strikes Back. <<As for Peter Jackson -- he should not retire until the Hobbit is done as the Lotr trilogy on film ( which I agree is the best trilogy ever) - would be then complete with - the Hobbit. I think it would be an integral part if i wanted to spent 15 hours or so with the extended versions and really get a handle on the stories.>> Whenever I sit down to read Tolkien, I always start with the Hobbit and then Lord of the Rings. Who knows one day I may read the Silmillarion(sp)....one day.
Originally Posted By kmsandrbs If you get to the Silmarillion ... expect a history text. LOTR is my fav book ever. I think the Sil gives great background. But it's a hard read. You almost need a primer to keep people and places straight (almost all have multiple names because of the different languages). It does have some great stories as well, and gives a LOT of background to the world of The Hobbit and LOTR. And the SW series should be by "publication", not chronology, just like the Narnia series
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<If jar jar had been in the 1st starwars ever, that franchise would have been dead on the spot.>> I wesaally like Jar Jar Binks and think his character has been bery unfairly criticized. Mesasa Jar-Jar Binks! Although most ta der time Jar Jar did it unintentionally, he played a pivotal wole in many parts ta der film. Ooh! Mesacky icky goosa! Mesa liked how his character shows that even a bumblin' idiot can occasionally shtumble on to der proper course ta action (kind ta like George Bush). Oh, NOOOOO! Yousa also have to give him credit. Way? Esqueeze mesa. he always WANTS to do der wight thin'. Ooh! Mesacky icky goosa! he just usually mesasses it up. Ooh! Mesacky icky goosa! Besides, Mesa LIKE der way he talks. Oh, NOOOOO!
Originally Posted By RoadTrip ^^^ To give credit where credit is due... Translation provided by the Elibs Funkatizer. <a href="http://www.elibs.com/e/funkatize" target="_blank">http://www.elibs.com/e/funkati ze</a>
