Poll: Why is "The Empire Strikes Back" more highly regarded than "Star Wars"?
- Thread starter Sixcess
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I think the duel between Obi Wan and Vader gets a lot of unfair criticism. It's more of a dramatic scene than a special effects spectacle, a final battle between two old men who are shadows of their former selves. In any case, I'd much rather have Alec Guiness being brilliant throughout the rest of the film than someone else who could have, perhaps, done a flashier fight scene. Regardless of his well known subsequent dislike for the film, he's superb, and has a ton of great scenes - including, from a dramatic point of view, that final fight.DaftPivot XXX said:
Besides that, Empire has the best duel of any of the films - original trilogy or prequel. Not only is it better shot and more impressively choreographed, but it tells a story and you can see Luke and Vader developing as characters throughout the fight.
When I think of the prequel duels I think mostly of opportunities missed. There's some nice choreogrphy in the Maul fight in Episode 1, and Yoda is great (and highly amusing) in the other two, but generally it's just sound and fury and drowned in superfluous special effects.
And I'll never forgive them for having the opportunity of choreographing a fight between Obi Wan and a four armed General Grevious and completely blowing it by almost instantly chopping off two of his arms. That just felt lazy.
I definitely felt the drama in this scene without question. Becoming one with the force was Obi Wan's final role, his saga coming to a close. I like the way it was done, I would have preferred it more epic, but for it's time, that's what they had and they made it awesome in all respects. I suppose I'm only holding it up in comparison to the Maul fight and subsequent battles because I saw them first. Watching in that order, I can't help the let down of one of my favourite characters not receiving a good send off after all his tribulations. Obi Wan I just feel got one upped in epic deaths by his master. Now Yoda, I would never change how he went out, that made sense and it was perfect. But I agree, dramatically, perfectly executed.Sixcess said:
As for best duel, I'd have to disagree, but mostly only because of my favouritism of Qui-Gon Jinn.
Also, I find myself agreeing with you on the missed opportunities, not for that particular scene (It's not fresh in me memory) but for the gawdjamminsquiqqittexpletive bull**** duel in the third episode. Words cannot express my hatred for whomever thought Saesee Tinn, Agen Kolar and Kit Fisto, aided by Mace Windu (All considered some of theee best duellists in the order) should be cut down in 5 seconds... (Alright six for Fisto) in what -should- have been the greatest duel in the entire saga. It's so depressing thinking about it, what it -could- have been... I'm hurt Mr. Lucas, in a bad way.
I was raised with the starwars films, my parents both loved them and I knew who Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader were before I knew who Queen Elizabeth II(as a Canadian she's on our coins) was.
As much as I love and can appreciate the original trilogy, as good as they are, my rose coloured glasses put "The Phantom Menace" as my favourite movie. I recognize what people say makes it bad, and I agree it is by no means a perfect film, but at the time of it's release I was the target audience(I was 10 when it came out), I saw badass lightsaber fights, cool spaceships, kickass Jedi fighting menacing villain(almost said Villians but everyone minus Darth Maul was laughable), and a Hero tailored to appeal to my demograph. Even now looking back JarJar annoys me, Anakin could audition for Pinocchio, the list of faults one can find with it goes on, but I will never forget how I felt watching it for the first time. That for me is enough to see past it's faults.
As much as I love and can appreciate the original trilogy, as good as they are, my rose coloured glasses put "The Phantom Menace" as my favourite movie. I recognize what people say makes it bad, and I agree it is by no means a perfect film, but at the time of it's release I was the target audience(I was 10 when it came out), I saw badass lightsaber fights, cool spaceships, kickass Jedi fighting menacing villain(almost said Villians but everyone minus Darth Maul was laughable), and a Hero tailored to appeal to my demograph. Even now looking back JarJar annoys me, Anakin could audition for Pinocchio, the list of faults one can find with it goes on, but I will never forget how I felt watching it for the first time. That for me is enough to see past it's faults.
The reason being is that "Empire" is the middle movie of a series where most of the action takes place. The first movie, like the beginning of most trilogies sets the stage and largely shows that the idea has potential and some big ideas at work. "Empire" sets everything up, creates the jeopardy, and ends at a cliff hanger. The third movie, "Return Of The Jedi" which is perhaps the weakest one is the movie that has to outdo the others, beign the final act, where everything needs to be brought to a final and triumphant conclusion that was worthy of both the initial premise and promise, and the build up in the second movie. Like many things, Star Wars flubbed the ending, but didn't do so on a spectacular enough level to ruin the rest of the series, unlike say Mass Effect. It ended on a high enough note where you could still care about what happend in the other movies.
To some extent the "best" movie in the series was as the middle chapter the easiest one to make, because they didn't need to worry about the set up, or concern themselves too much with making a workable finale. Star Wars being pretty much forumula for trilogies or series.
The biggest problem with Jedi I think was specifically that they couldn't ever make things as cool or dramatic as the second movie. In the final equasion the stupid ewok puppets could not produce as awesome a battle as what we saw in "Empire", and the final scene between Vader, The Emperor, and Luke which should have been the most awesome confrontation in the entire series, making the battle with Vader in Bespin look pathetic in comparison, was kind of cheezy and fairly anti-climactic. Sure it was dramatic enough in it's own way I guess, but didn't quite achieve highs equal to or surpassing the lows brought about by the second act.
That's my take on it at any rate you had a good movie, an excellent movie, and a fair movie.
You'll also notice that this is par for the course with most things, to the point where the exceptions really stand out. Take "Lost" for example, the set up for the series captured imaginations, the middle parts of the series were the easiest to make because all they had to do was keep shooting out wierd crap left and right, and worry about tying it all up later once their audience started to get bored. When it came time to end it and tie all of that together they failed to create an ending that was worthy of all the stuff they had going on in the second act (so to speak) and thus it ended on a sort of "meh" note.
Star Wars did have the advantage of doing so well at it's good moments that people wanted more of it, long after it was done (as we all know) which is rare. The epic moments it delivered, in all three movies, can make it easy to forgive it's downside. In the ending the final scene of Vader chucking the emperor into the reactor core for example was cool enough even in the height of highly contrived cheese that it was enough to make you want to forgive how utterly tortured that entire scene/confrontation was until it got to the point. All meaning aside, some goober in a robe going "embrace your hate" just wasn't going to match the awesome inherant in the series other confrontations, even with the quick battle with Vader that took place and the arm-cutting parallel.
Such are my thoughts.
To some extent the "best" movie in the series was as the middle chapter the easiest one to make, because they didn't need to worry about the set up, or concern themselves too much with making a workable finale. Star Wars being pretty much forumula for trilogies or series.
The biggest problem with Jedi I think was specifically that they couldn't ever make things as cool or dramatic as the second movie. In the final equasion the stupid ewok puppets could not produce as awesome a battle as what we saw in "Empire", and the final scene between Vader, The Emperor, and Luke which should have been the most awesome confrontation in the entire series, making the battle with Vader in Bespin look pathetic in comparison, was kind of cheezy and fairly anti-climactic. Sure it was dramatic enough in it's own way I guess, but didn't quite achieve highs equal to or surpassing the lows brought about by the second act.
That's my take on it at any rate you had a good movie, an excellent movie, and a fair movie.
You'll also notice that this is par for the course with most things, to the point where the exceptions really stand out. Take "Lost" for example, the set up for the series captured imaginations, the middle parts of the series were the easiest to make because all they had to do was keep shooting out wierd crap left and right, and worry about tying it all up later once their audience started to get bored. When it came time to end it and tie all of that together they failed to create an ending that was worthy of all the stuff they had going on in the second act (so to speak) and thus it ended on a sort of "meh" note.
Star Wars did have the advantage of doing so well at it's good moments that people wanted more of it, long after it was done (as we all know) which is rare. The epic moments it delivered, in all three movies, can make it easy to forgive it's downside. In the ending the final scene of Vader chucking the emperor into the reactor core for example was cool enough even in the height of highly contrived cheese that it was enough to make you want to forgive how utterly tortured that entire scene/confrontation was until it got to the point. All meaning aside, some goober in a robe going "embrace your hate" just wasn't going to match the awesome inherant in the series other confrontations, even with the quick battle with Vader that took place and the arm-cutting parallel.
Such are my thoughts.
I was born after the movies came out, so when I came of age to be able to both watch AND understand the films and I watched all three back to back. So I have never really considered them three seperate movies, therefore I don't really prefer one over the other.
I know as a kid, the whole Yoda scene was my least favorite part of the films and that takes place in the second one for the most part. I have come to enjoy those scenes much more now that I am older, I love the design of the swamp.
So yeah, I think Dangit2019 said it pretty good as to why the second one is the most popular, but for me I enjoy them all about the same. Episode IV MIGHT be my favorite though if I had to pick.
I know as a kid, the whole Yoda scene was my least favorite part of the films and that takes place in the second one for the most part. I have come to enjoy those scenes much more now that I am older, I love the design of the swamp.
So yeah, I think Dangit2019 said it pretty good as to why the second one is the most popular, but for me I enjoy them all about the same. Episode IV MIGHT be my favorite though if I had to pick.
I personally prefer Attack Of The Clones due to childhood nostalgia followed closely by The Empire Strikes Back then finally The Phantom Menace. I have already seen that hour long analysis of why the first film was so bad and I agree with almost everything the narrator said. That does not make me like it any less.
I agree with these. You have to understand that the "Reveal" moment was a big deal. It was the climax of Empire Strikes Back to find out who Luke's daddy is. It's like Knights of The Old Republic when you discover who Revan is. Great story telling.Akratus said:
Return of the Jedi is my favorite because Empire was so good. I make a case for Jedi - Luke comes into his own, the whole sequence at Jabba's palace was terrifying and exhilarating - I saw it at a drive-in movie theater with analogue sterio sound, which is how everyone should see it. Luke's back flip to retrieve his saber. The bad-ass forest sequence when Luke cuts the bike with his saber. The depth of Vader's voice. The "discussion" between Luke and the Emporer - the fact that you get to see the Emporer as the one pulling all the strings. There's just too much to talk about. Empire sets up Jedi so nicely it's not even funny.
Both movies had an amazing sense of scale - the 4 legged and 2 legged walkers, the M. Falcon, the Death Star, Rancor...all of it looked believable. You believed that Vader and Palpatine were powerfull. You believed in Luke. 1-3 don't even compare and Lucas knows it. He's been given his chance and he decided to make 3 movies for 11 year olds. 4-6 is for everyone.
I think it builds a good character structure without ever telling us anything. Just go watch the fight with Luke and Vader; Luke is throwing himself bodily into Vader trying to crack him through brute strength and Vader is holding him off one freaking handed! Obi-Wan said Anakin was a great Jedi and this lets us see it (since the Obi-Wan/Vader fight is embarrassingly bad).
It lets us see that Luke's confidence in his week(?) worth of training is worthless compared to a real Jedi and that the Sith really are powerful in their own right.
It also expands the universe a bit; ep. 4 hinted at the wonder of the force and the power of the Empire, ep.5 expanded it so we get a better idea of how things work.
...and that's all I've got. Honestly I think it's like hearing a dull music album and picking your favourite based on what sucked less. The originals are dull (seriously even Han looks like he's falling asleep during the films) and have next to no depth while the prequels are flashy and interesting to look at but with even less depth than the originals. Star Wars is good but not to the level everyone seems to think it is.
It lets us see that Luke's confidence in his week(?) worth of training is worthless compared to a real Jedi and that the Sith really are powerful in their own right.
It also expands the universe a bit; ep. 4 hinted at the wonder of the force and the power of the Empire, ep.5 expanded it so we get a better idea of how things work.
...and that's all I've got. Honestly I think it's like hearing a dull music album and picking your favourite based on what sucked less. The originals are dull (seriously even Han looks like he's falling asleep during the films) and have next to no depth while the prequels are flashy and interesting to look at but with even less depth than the originals. Star Wars is good but not to the level everyone seems to think it is.
I am in the minority in that I prefer A New Hope to Empire Strikes Back. Of course, I don't like Jedi(The light saber wielding kind, not the movie) and I enjoyed the greater focus on other things in the original movie. Especially that it came down to a space battle and not a light saber duel.
That isn't to say Empire isn't awesome.
That isn't to say Empire isn't awesome.