Movies you just cannot take seriously that want you to do just that.

[71 dB]

I'm a great Star Wars fan as well, however I find the notion that SW somehow constitutes "art" completely ludicrous. Frankly, I think that delusion to be one of the reasons the prequels came out worse than the original trilogy.

Completely ludicrous? 

Have you any idea how much concept art just one Star Wars movie takes? Just all the costumes the characters wear take thousands of sketches. The characters, ships, buildings, planets, weapons, look of visual effects... that's a HUGE amount of concept art made by talented REAL artists. That's the visuals. Sound is half of movie experience according to Lucas. Ben Burt made fantastic job to create the sounds for everything that was drafted by the artists. John Williams added his wonderful scores and all the visual and sonic elements where carefully mixed together. The amount of art in a Star Wars movie is stunning.

The prequel trilogy is not any worse. My ranking of all 6 episodes is:

1. Episode III
2. Episode V
3. Episode II
4. Episode VI
5. Episode IV
6. Episode I

[Haffner]

Completely ludicrous? 

Have you any idea how much concept art just one Star Wars movie takes? Just all the costumes the characters wear take thousands of sketches. The characters, ships, buildings, planets, weapons, look visual effects... that's a HUGE amount of concept art made by talented REAL artists. That's the visuals. Sound is half of movie experience according to Lucas. Ben Burt made fantastic job to create the sounds for everything that was drafted by the artists. John Williams added his wonderful scores and all the visual and sonic elements where carefully mixed together. The amount of art in a Star Wars movie is stunning.

The prequel trilogy is not any worse. My ranking of all 6 episodes is:

1. Episode III
2. Episode V
3. Episode II
4. Episode VI
5. Episode IV
6. Episode I

Hey, you like them, and that of course is just fine  . Maybe I'm just a jaded, middle-aged dude whom has trouble identifying with most "modern" movies.

[71 dB]

Hey, you like them, and that of course is just fine  . Maybe I'm just a jaded, middle-aged dude whom has trouble identifying with most "modern" movies.

Modern movies? I don't care if the movie is new or old as long as it is good. Most new movies (at least from Hollywood) are utter crap made to cash in teenagers. So, I have the same problem you do. Lucas is not a Hollywood moviemaker. He hates Hollywood. He finances his movies from his own pocket in order to have total artistic freedom. Lucas is an independent moviemaker. His movies are just huge in scale (due to amazing imagination) and expensive. Lucas supports independent moviemaking and talks for low budget movies where artistical compromises are not necessory. His lifelong efforts for advancing technology of moviemaking is reducing the costs. New digital technology makes it possible to make low-budget movies with minimal artistic compromises. Lucas says it's better to make 50 independent movies with $4 million each than one blockbuster with $200 million. The new Star Wars movies cost "only" $125 million each which isn't much considering their overwhelming complexity.

Modern does not always mean worse. Future means better possibilities. Lucas is an old-fashioned moviemaker (just watch his style of directing and storytelling. No fast MTV cuts, no "cool" bullet-time effects. He knows what's superficial and what's not). He just uses cutting-edge technology because he is a visionary genius.

[Haffner]

Modern movies? I don't care if the movie is new or old as long as it is good. Most new movies (at least from Hollywood) are utter crap made to cash in teenagers. So, I have the same problem you do. Lucas is not a Hollywood moviemaker. He hates Hollywood. He finances his movies from his own pocket in order to have total artistic freedom. Lucas is an independent moviemaker. His movies are just huge in scale (due to amazing imagination) and expensive. Lucas supports independent moviemaking and talks for low budget movies where artistical compromises are not necessory. His lifelong efforts for advancing technology of moviemaking is reducing the costs. New digital technology makes it possible to make low-budget movies with minimal artistic compromises. Lucas says it's better to make 50 independent movies with $4 million each than one blockbuster with $200 million. The new Star Wars movies cost "only" $125 million each which isn't much considering their overwhelming complexity.

Modern does not always mean worse. Future means better possibilities. Lucas is an old-fashioned moviemaker (just watch his style of directing and storytelling. No fast MTV cuts, no "cool" bullet-time effects. He knows what's superficial and what's not). He just uses cutting-edge technology because he is a visionary genius.

These are some really interesting points, Poju. I guess I kind of gave up when I say (and really disliked) "Return of the Jedi". Shame on me.

[Kullervo]

Actually, even while being a rather commited Star Wars fan (though not more than I am a Tolkien fan), I can assure you that they were not initially meant to be taken all that seriously, either.

And even the "prequel" trilogy, which is on a more "serious" note, is deliberately "cheesy": as per George Lucas' own words! It's just the man's idiom, I suppose. But I still think it works.

Exactly. He wanted to create something in the tradition of the 50s space operas like Flash Gordon, something that your diehard SW fan would be loath to admit nowadays, considering what the franchise has ballooned to.

As much as I love them, it's really B-movie material, but excellently executed — that's what separates it from other cheesy sci-fi flicks.

Is it art? That depends on your own definition of what art is. For me, it isn't.

[toledobass]

Kevin Costner's body of work comes to mind.



Allan

[longears]

These are some really interesting points, Poju. I guess I kind of gave up when I say (and really disliked) "Return of the Jedi". Shame on me.

Nah...it was a big disappointment after the first two, which were a lot of fun: old movie serials with more sophisticated special effects.  But then Lucas lost his way--amazing how often extreme worldly success does that to people [insert wry emoticon here].

I do agree with Pojo about Pearl Harbor--in fact, almost anything with Afleck.  The kids rented it and I sat through about 40 minutes, but not even Kate Beckinsale's beauty was enough to keep me watching.  I told them to see Tora Tora Tora if they wanted a good dramatization, or From Here to Eternity if they wanted a Hollywood drama set against that backdrop.  Crap like Pearl Harbor is to movies what Kenny G is to jazz.

[locrian]

I do agree with Pojo about Pearl Harbor--in fact, almost anything with Afleck.

Did you see Hollywoodland? He wasn't bad in that. I didn't think he could pull it off, but he sort of did.

[Bogey]

Perhaps I misunderstand, Bill.  From the thread title, I expected a thread devoted to movies that want you to take them seriously, but are too ludicrous to regard as anything but a joke--movies like Titanic or Fahrenheit 911, that insult the viewer's intelligence when they ask to be taken seriously.

Granted, I didn't see Rocky IV, but did see Independence Day and certainly nothing about that suggests it's meant to be anything other than a hokey sci-fi/disaster flick!

Yup, this is what I am looking for David....movies that "believe" they are sending civilization a "message" that will inspire or change our thinking when in fact, in the end, they are actually deliver pretentious "crapola" that makes us just shake our heads muttering "what the....", or in some cases making us laugh out loud because in the end they crossed into the realm of "comical genius" without even realizing it. 

[Bogey]

'contact' (carl sagan) - deliver me, it think's it is serious.

Great call.

[71 dB]

Is it art? That depends on your own definition of what art is. For me, it isn't.

If Star Wars is not art I don't know what is. Don't be fooled by the entertaining side of the movies. Lucas is a genius of combining art with entertainment. I'm sure all the artists working hard for Lucas would laugh hysterically hearing claims that Star Wars is not art. It's like saying Beethoven's 5th piano concerto is not music. Creativity is crucial part of art. George Lucas created planets, ecosystems, cultures, speces, etc. Who has created as much?

But then Lucas lost his way

He didn't loss anything. The world became cynical and unable to apprecite his art.

These are some really interesting points, Poju. I guess I kind of gave up when I say (and really disliked) "Return of the Jedi". Shame on me.

Dude, that movie came out 1983. There's 3 new movies now for you to "really dislike". I'm sorry you can't enjoy these awesome movies.

[Bogey]

Lucas is a genius of combining art with entertainment.

As long as Lucas is not be allowed to be within 10 miles of any of the actors, let alone actually sitting in the director's chair, I have no problem with his genius. 

[Daidalos]

Completely ludicrous? 

Have you any idea how much concept art just one Star Wars movie takes? Just all the costumes the characters wear take thousands of sketches. The characters, ships, buildings, planets, weapons, look of visual effects... that's a HUGE amount of concept art made by talented REAL artists. That's the visuals. Sound is half of movie experience according to Lucas. Ben Burt made fantastic job to create the sounds for everything that was drafted by the artists. John Williams added his wonderful scores and all the visual and sonic elements where carefully mixed together. The amount of art in a Star Wars movie is stunning.

The prequel trilogy is not any worse. My ranking of all 6 episodes is:

1. Episode III
2. Episode V
3. Episode II
4. Episode VI
5. Episode IV
6. Episode I

As far as I'm concerned, Lucas dropped the ball very early in the game. The saga became extremely simplistic after Episode V. Recall in the original movie when a point was made regarding faith and disbelief in the Force, as a metaphor for religion. As far as most people in the galaxy were concerned, the Jedi were a hokey, ancient religion. The Force manifested itself subtly, so you could entertain the notion that the metaphor was sound. HOWEVER, later in the movies that subtlety was smashed with wild telekinetic tricks, lightning bolts and god-knows-what. And the then we have the entire dark side thing, which of course lacks any subtlety or nuance. The bad guys go around spouting "give in to the DAAAARK side of the Force", "let the HATE flow through you!!" Lucas could learn alot about evil seduction by reading Paradise Lost, where Satan is slyly persuasive yet irredeemably dark.

And, of course, we have the farce that is the prequels. Virgin birth? Come on. Midichlorians? Puh-lease. It is even more trite and banal than the worst moments of Episode V and VI.

Don't get me wrong, they are exciting movies, but as art I would consider them failures. Lucas is a genius as far as marketting goes, I'll give him that, but Star Wars is no profound artistic statement. Maybe it could have been if Lucas had applied some self-criticism and thought more about the substance of the story, its philosophical implications, rather than overwhelm the audience with gaudy, cartoonish special effects.

[locrian]

I liked the first two movies, meaning Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back.

After that, meh.

[71 dB]

As far as I'm concerned, Lucas dropped the ball very early in the game. However, the saga became extremely simplistic after Episode V. Recall in the original movie when a point was made regarding faith and disbelief in the Force, as a metaphor for religion. As far as most people in the galaxy were concerned, the Jedi were a hokey, ancient religion. The Force manifested itself subtly, so you could entertain the notion that the metaphor was sound. HOWEVER, later in the movies that subtlety was smashed with wild telekinetic tricks, lightning bolts and god-knows-what. And the then we have the entire dark side thing, which of course lacks any subtlety or nuance. The bad guys go around spouting "give in to the DAAAARK side of the Force", "let the HATE flow through you!!" Lucas could learn alot about evil seduction by reading Paradise Lost, where Satan is slyly persuasive yet irredeemably dark.

And, of course, we have the farce that is the prequels. Virgin birth? Come on. Midichlorians? Puh-lease. It is even more trite and banal than the worst moments of Episode V and VI.

Don't get me wrong, they are exciting movies, but as art I would consider them failures. Lucas is a genius as far as marketting goes, I'll give him that, but Star Wars is no profound artistic statement. Maybe it could have been if Lucas had applied some self-criticism and thought more about the substance of the story, its philosophical implications, rather than overwhelm the audience with gaudy, cartoonish special effects.

The ideas of the force and dark side did not go anywhere. Fear and hate are the reasons to jump over to the dark side. The prequels show that the dark side is pretty similar to Jedi side. Midichlorians are just a pseudoscientific way to explain why some people are strong with the force. The prequals are far more complex movies. That's why Lucas needed to wait long for the technology to make them possible. The whole saga deals a lot of philososy and the importance of moral choices in life. Star Wars is a profound artistic statement, one of the most amazing ever.

[Daidalos]

The ideas of the force and dark side did not go anywhere. Fear and hate are the reasons to jump over to the dark side. The prequels show that the dark side is pretty similar to Jedi side. Midichlorians are just a pseudoscientific way to explain why some people are strong with the force. The prequals are far more complex movies. That's why Lucas needed to wait long for the technology to make them possible. The whole saga deals a lot of philososy and the importance of moral choices in life. Star Wars is a profound artistic statement, one of the most amazing ever.

I disagree. You cannot make a profound statement on the importance of moral choices by reducing such a complex question to something as black and white as the dark and the light side. And as far as philosophy goes, it seems to be some watered-down hybrid of Buddhism with a little bit of Christianity sprinkled on top, and some bad psychology: "If you are angry you will kill puppies" and so on. When the villains practically brag of their evil, then it's not very profound. Read Othello and Paradise Lost, then you will see a sophisticated take on the notion of evil and seduction and morality. SW does not have that. It does, however, have lightsabers.

[Kullervo]

Daidalos, do you enjoy unloading lead into fishtanks?

[Bogey]

I liked the first two movies, meaning Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back.

After that, meh.

In full agreement with you and the later of two being the better of these.

[longears]

The ideas of the force and dark side did not go anywhere. Fear and hate are the reasons to jump over to the dark side. The prequels show that the dark side is pretty similar to Jedi side. Midichlorians are just a pseudoscientific way to explain why some people are strong with the force. The prequals are far more complex movies. That's why Lucas needed to wait long for the technology to make them possible. The whole saga deals a lot of philososy and the importance of moral choices in life. Star Wars is a profound artistic statement, one of the most amazing ever.

Is there a thread for posters who want you to take them seriously but...?

[Daidalos]

Daidalos, do you enjoy unloading lead into fishtanks?

Yes, it is one of my favourite pastimes.