Subject:
|
Re: Another one of those 'what's wrong with TPM' posts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Wed, 31 May 2000 21:36:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
954 times
|
| |
| |
In lugnet.starwars, Dave Schuler writes:
> > This is my statement to those people: If you can't pay attention to the
> > story, then quit complaining about how bad the plot is.
>
> At the same time, one cannot ignore the actual problems with the plot,
> whether or not someone else decides to "pay attention" or not. Further,
> "paying attention" to the plot doesn't simply mean carefully watching what
> happens--it means noting and relfecting upon the dramatic, rhetorical, and
> narrative choices made in the telling.
But how can you make those notes and/or reflect on anything if you didn't
pay attention to the plot to begin with? I can't tell you how many times I've
asked people to explain their opinion and they can't tell me why they think
the plot is bad, or what exactly is bad about it. That's an indication to me
that they're simply repeating movie critics so they can sound like they're
better than all the Star Wars Geeks (myself included).
<snip>
> Several of the main problems are the absolute uselessness of JarJar, whose
> absense would be notable only for the reduced length of the film. Seriously--
> what point does he serve? More importantly, what could possibly justify his
> inclusion in future installments, since he brings nothing of merit, in terms
> of drama, to the story. Still worse, the fact that his clumsiness allowed him
> singlehandedly to take out an AAT, a Destroyer Droid, and at least several
> Battle Droids cheapens the deaths of anyone who'd fallen in battle against
> these droids.
I agree with this completely. I had a debate with a friend of mine about
this and he kept saying, "But JarJar is part of the Group!" There's no
reason for that CGI monstrosity to be there. His only small function in
TPM was to take the Jedi to the Gungans. Beyond that he's useless.
> Another dramatic failure of the film is the supposedly clever "decoying" of
> Padme/Amidala. As Ive mentioned in another post previously, I have yet to
> meet anyone who wasnt immediately aware that Padme was actually the queen.
> As a result, the mighty Qui-Gons (and everyone elses, for that matter)
> inability to spot the ruse seemed less and less plausible as the film
> progressed, so that the "revelation" came too late to be of any dramatic
> value.
You're assuming that because Qui-Gon doesn't say anything about it that
he doesn't know it. Notice how he doesn't act surprised when Amidala
reveals herself to the Gungans.
> There are any number of ways this could have been played to better
> effect, and the fact that George consistently showed "the queen" in full
> regalia indicates that he realized some misdirection was in order.
> Nonetheless, since Amidala is a central character, and since she drops more or
> less completely out of the film while "Padme" is onscreen, the deception
> becomes obvious.
> Since these (JarJar and "the decoy") comprise a sizable chunk of the story,
> it is only fitting that their success or failure should have a great impact on
> the story overall. For that matter, why wouldnt the Viceroy order both "the
> decoy" and "the queen" slain when both were standing in front of him?
Maybe he wanted to hang them over the pit with mutated sea bass with
lasers on their heads.
~M
|
|
Message has 2 Replies: | | Re: Another one of those 'what's wrong with TPM' posts
|
| (...) We're basically agreeing here, though our aesthetic opinions are in conflict. Thoughtful criticism demands close viewing/reading. Perhaps the problem is less specifically with plot than with particular elements of pacing and story. The (...) (24 years ago, 31-May-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Another one of those 'what's wrong with TPM' posts
|
| (...) George Lucas, most notably. (...) At the same time, one cannot ignore the actual problems with the plot, whether or not someone else decides to "pay attention" or not. Further, "paying attention" to the plot doesn't simply mean carefully (...) (24 years ago, 31-May-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
94 Messages in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|