[sum1]

Originally Posted by Fastbak (View Post) I like Liam Neeson as Qui-Gon but it's not the best work he's done.

His best work is in Schindler's List and Michael Collins, but his TPM work is very impressive and I think he's generally on a higher level in his films in general than McDiarmid and McGregor are. To be honest, I'm inclined to think the degree of respect McDiarmid gets from some people is more to do with him being old and British (people tend to assume older British actors are automatically great) than to do with the actual quality of his work. I've seen him do some good performances outside Star Wars and I think he was very good in ROTJ and I think he was good in the prequels apart from his awful hamming in the later part of ROTS, but I've never seen anything from him that I'd consider brilliant. Neeson's performance in TPM may not have been his best, but it WAS brilliant. McGregor can do some very impressive work (as in Beginners), but I actually wasn't all that impressed with him in the prequels. I don't think his work there measures up to what Neeson did in TPM. Obviously, some people, like yourself, rate McDiarmid and McGregor's prequel performances more highly than I do.

And as for believing that "guff", it was Qui-Gon who said Anakin was the "Chosen One", and since you're the one who said he gave the best performance...

An actor giving a good (or even brilliant) performance doesn't mean the exposition they're given to say by the writer amounts to anything good. The quality of that material and its ideas are a function of the writing, not the acting. The whole Chosen thing is something Lucas thought up for the prequels. It wasn't part of the original Star Wars story (Star was wasn't even about Vader/Anakin originally -originally it was "The Adventures of Luke Skywalker"). As such, I view it as an artificial forced retcon and I dislike it. I find it all a bit of a stretch (and all the more so when you add in the virgin birth). Of course, that doesn't mean others can't have a different view of it and like it , but that's how I see it.

[Subject87]

I actually always thought that the chosen one made sense if you think about it, Anakin really did get rid of the Sith like it was foretold, it never said he wouldn't have to destroy himself to get rid of them

[sum1]

Oh, it's easy enough to see how Lucas meant it to work out , but I've always seen it as an alien imposition on Star Wars, something that didn't fit with what went before. And turning Anakin into Jesus makes the whole story less credible, in my opinion (there have been other stories of virgin births other than Jesus, but Jesus is the one best known in Western culture, the only one most people know, and therefore it looks like that's what Lucas was alluding to with Anakin's virgin birth). Plus I have a hard time believing Hayden's and Jake's Anakin bringing balance to anything beyond maybe a bicycle.

The Chosen One wasn't the first retcon Lucas made to Star Wars. Vader as Luke's father and Leia as his sister come to mind. But those retcons I found convincing, because I found the films they were in to be convincing. But I never found the prequels convincing. In a whole host of ways I find the prequels less convincing than the OT. One obvious example is the cgi cartoon characters like Jar Jar and Boss Nass (Grievous fits in there too -classic cartoon villain). These characters come off like they belong in an old kids' cartoon. With characters like that there's an automatic level of taking things less seriously, of not believing in the reality of the imagined world as much. Once characters like that have been introduced into Star Wars it's hard (for me, at least) to take the new Star Wars Star Wars wars stories (such as the prequels) as seriously, to believe in their story as much. That's not a problem that appears in the OT, but in the prequels it's one of the many things that make me feel they're not for real, so that I can't really believe in their story. And ultimately I think Lucas introducing such characters indicates that HE doesn't believe in the Star Wars story as much anymore. The original films strove to be believable, but the prequels don't, because introducing characters like Jar Jar is like a statement of "Don't take this seriously, I don't really mean it."

Obviously some people find the prequels convincing and some people find the Chosen One prophecy convincing. I've got no problem with that. Everybody's entitled to enjoy Star Wars their own way.

Originally Posted by BehrItAll (View Post) I Salmon Fishing in the Yemen. It was SO GOOD! You should watch it. Everybody should watch it.

I hear McGregor is very good in it.

[Subject87]

I did have issues with the midichlorian thing, made them seem like a comic book super hero; but I did like jar jar (I like a little.comic relief) but other than that I didn't have an issue with anakin's birth it connected with the themes of faith you see in the Original trilogy. Yeah then virgin birth was kinda dumb but it did go along with the force being a matter of faith instead of mystic powers from "midichlorians"

[BehrItAll]

Oh wow, a lot to catch up on

I'll do so tomorrow when I am more awake.

I hear McGregor is very good in it.

He is.

[Fastbak]

The Chosen One wasn't the first retcon Lucas made to Star Wars. Vader as Luke's father and Leia as his sister come to mind. But those retcons I found convincing, because I found the films they were in to be convincing. But I never found the prequels convincing. In a whole host of ways I find the prequels less convincing than the OT. One obvious example is the cgi cartoon characters like Jar Jar and Boss Nass (Grievous fits in there too -classic cartoon villain). These characters come off like they belong in an old kids' cartoon. With characters like that there's an automatic level of taking things less seriously, of not believing in the reality of the imagined world as much. Once characters like that have been introduced into Star Wars it's hard (for me, at least) to take the new Star Wars Star Wars wars stories (such as the prequels) as seriously, to believe in their story as much. That's not a problem that appears in the OT, but in the prequels it's one of the many things that make me feel they're not for real, so that I can't really believe in their story. And ultimately I think Lucas introducing such characters indicates that HE doesn't believe in the Star Wars story as much anymore. The original films strove to be believable, but the prequels don't, because introducing characters like Jar Jar is like a statement of "Don't take this seriously, I don't really mean it."

Or it could be your old as ******.

[sum1]

Originally Posted by Fastbak (View Post) Or it could be your old as ******.

I am probably older than you, but hardly old. And I don't think age has any effect on the validity of one's viewpoints.

Originally Posted by Subject87 (View Post) I did have issues with the midichlorian thing, made them seem like a comic book super hero; but I did like jar jar (I like a little.comic relief) but other than that I didn't have an issue with anakin's birth it connected with the themes of faith you see in the Original trilogy. Yeah then virgin birth was kinda dumb but it did go along with the force being a matter of faith instead of mystic powers from "midichlorians"

I don't think the original vision of the force was quite so religion-like as that. Nothing in the OT would lead one to expect virgin births. At least that's how it seems to me.

[Jerry D]

Originally Posted by Fastbak (View Post) Or it could be your old as ******.

A post like this is totally uncalled for and won't be tolerated here. We have great discussions on this board, and some of us like the Prequel Trilogy and some of us don't, but all of us treat each other with respect, and I expect you to do the same. We have a friendly atmosphere at this board, and we want to keep it that way, so I highly suggest that you refrain from rude and unnecessary comments like this in the future.

[Jerry D]

Originally Posted by sum1 (View Post) Oh, it's easy enough to see how Lucas meant it to work out , but I've always seen it as an alien imposition on Star Wars, something that didn't fit with what went before. And turning Anakin into Jesus makes the whole story less credible, in my opinion (there have been other stories of virgin births other than Jesus, but Jesus is the one best known in Western culture, the only one most people know, and therefore it looks like that's what Lucas was alluding to with Anakin's virgin birth). Plus I have a hard time believing Hayden's and Jake's Anakin bringing balance to anything beyond maybe a bicycle.

That last line his hilarious!

Originally Posted by sum1 (View Post) The Chosen One wasn't the first retcon Lucas made to Star Wars. Vader as Luke's father and Leia as his sister come to mind. But those retcons I found convincing, because I found the films they were in to be convincing. But I never found the prequels convincing. In a whole host of ways I find the prequels less convincing than the OT. One obvious example is the cgi cartoon characters like Jar Jar and Boss Nass (Grievous fits in there too -classic cartoon villain). These characters come off like they belong in an old kids' cartoon. With characters like that there's an automatic level of taking things less seriously, of not believing in the reality of the imagined world as much. Once characters like that have been introduced into Star Wars it's hard (for me, at least) to take the new Star Wars Star Wars wars stories (such as the prequels) as seriously, to believe in their story as much. That's not a problem that appears in the OT, but in the prequels it's one of the many things that make me feel they're not for real, so that I can't really believe in their story. And ultimately I think Lucas introducing such characters indicates that HE doesn't believe in the Star Wars story as much anymore. The original films strove to be believable, but the prequels don't, because introducing characters like Jar Jar is like a statement of "Don't take this seriously, I don't really mean it."

Great post, sum. Obviously, when Lucas made the first Star Wars, he probably never envisioned that it would be a huge success, so he added to the “legend” of each character as he went along, and in the Original Trilogy, it worked, but in the Prequel Trilogy, it didn’t in my opinion. I never understood the whole “Chosen One” legend, and I didn’t buy the idea that Anakin was this Christ-Like figure that was created by (I assume) Darth Plagueis. I think that it’s really too bad that Lucas didn’t put the care into the Prequel Trilogy that he put into the Original Trilogy (which he seems to love to tamper with, much to my chagrin) but what’s done is done.

[sum1]

Much to my chagrin too!

In my opinion, the prequel trilogy seems informed by an entirely different mindset from the OT. There are so many differences. In particular I find the later two prequels to be lacking the sympathetic humanity of the OT. The Phantom Menace is a bit better. I feel it's mid-ground between the OT and the other two films. Still having the problems of the prequels, but with more real humanity and feeling and with more of a general Star Wars feel. Plus Liam Neeson did an excellent job there and Padme was better there than in the later two films. The visual style of TPM was more vital too. The look of the later two prequels is a bit washed-out, which affects how the films feel. TPM still doesn't feel to me like a real Star Wars film, but there are things I like about it, which I can't really say for the later two. Of course, it has lots of Jar Jar, but I think there are worse things in the prequels than Jar Jar. The portrayal of Anakin is the element in the prequels I have the most trouble with and while I'm distinctly unimpressed with the Jake Lloyd version it's the Hayden version that I'm most bothered by.

[BehrItAll]

I like the PT. I don't think it was as good as the OT, but I still found them enjoyable and appreciate them in some ways.
And if they are not totally perfect and reconed in certain aspects, I do consider them to be canon.

I didn’t buy the idea that Anakin was this Christ-Like figure that was created by (I assume) Darth Plagueis.

That depends on your point of view To quote Obi-Wan.
I feel the Force created Anakin, not Darth Plagueis.
The Chosen One angle is fun to explore in fan fics, I must say.

Anyway, the word "chagrin" will forever remind me of the Twilight novel.

[sum1]

Buffy's the Chosen One, not Anakin.

[Jerry D]

Originally Posted by sum1 (View Post) Buffy's the Chosen One, not Anakin.

That's interesting about The Force itself creating Anakin Steph. Was it ever said anywhere how Anakin was created? I thought that Darth Plagueis used The Force to create Anakin. Am I wrong about that?

[sum1]

Darth whatsisname creating Anakin is somewhat hinted in ROTS and it's a good bet that it's what Lucas intended, but nothing is spelled out.

[Jerry D]

Originally Posted by sum1 (View Post) Darth whatsisname creating Anakin is somewhat hinted in ROTS and it's a good bet that it's what Lucas intended, but nothing is spelled out.

Oh, okay thanks.