BLOG VIEW  |  HEADLINE VIEW
SUBMIT NEWS  |  RSS FEED  |  SEARCH

Wil Wheaton's Geek In Review: Han Shoots First

WEDNESDAY NOVEMBER 15 2006 12:00 PM

Submitted by WilWheaton. Edited By erin_broadley.

TAGS: Star Wars, George Lucas, movies

Last weekend, Cinemax ran a constantly-repeating marathon of the entire Star Wars series, beginning with Phantom Menace and ending with Return of the Jedi. I watched four of the six movies in their entirety (sorry, but there is no fucking way I will ever sit through Phantom Menace one more time. Fool me once, you can't get fooled again, y'all) but I did my best to watch Attack of the Clones, before giving up about 30 minutes in and letting it run in the background while I played PLO/8 at Pokerstars.

I gave Revenge of the Sith more of my attention, though, because I'd never seen it before, and my nerd friends all agreed that it wasn't as horrible as the other two. (Uh, if the best thing you can say about a movie is that it doesn't suck as much as another movie, that's sort of a problem, isn't it?) After watching the entire thing—which was about 30 minutes too long—I can agree with them. It's not as bad as the prior two, but it doesn't rise to the level of the original Star Wars, and isn't even close to Empire Strikes Back.

After about eleven hours of Star Wars movies, though, I wondered: why exactly is the Star Wars trilogy such a big deal to some of us, even though it's clearly flawed, and ends with a bunch of muppets singing around the campfire? Why do so many of us love it so much? Why did so many of us take it as a personal affront when the new movies and re-releases didn't meet our expectations? Why did most of us go back twice after Phantom Menace, like we were in a dysfunctional relationship, hoping that if we just worked a little harder, we'd find a pony?

To me, and I suspect to many other people in my generation, Star Wars was more than just another movie; it was a cultural phenomenon that carried us through elementary school and primed us for Voltron, He-Man, GI Joe, and all the other action figure-oriented entertainment of our youth. While our parents played Cowboys and Indians, we played Star Wars (and Batman and Star Trek, but mostly Star Wars) on the playground, and in the park, and on the floors of our parents' kitchens. Every flashlight or broomstick we saw was a potential lightsaber, and we dreamed of someday using the Force for real.

We love Star Wars because, when viewed from our complicated adult lives through the lens of childhood nostalgia, we see a simpler, happier time, and recall this phenomenon that was an integral part of our lives. Remember what it was like to see the Death Star blow up the first time? Remember how you just couldn't believe it that they froze Han Solo? If you were young enough at the time, will you admit that you thought the Ewoks were actually kind of funny and cool? (I will.) And how much did you run around the woods near your house, pretending to be on a speeder bike? See, it's more than a movie; it's culture.

And that is why the prequels, especially Episode I, are such a kick in the balls to us. To be fair, it's pretty impossible for George Lucas to create something with Phantom Menace that matches up to the idealized version we all created in our minds, but releasing a movie that felt like an excuse to sell ILM's new toys to studios, and sell actual toys to kids was not a good place to start.

My brother and I sat in line for 18 hours for that movie (it's not the several days that the real Star Wars nerds put in, but everything is relative, and 18 hours on the concrete in Burbank was a significant commitment for us.) To maximize our geekiness, we played Magic: The Gathering for most of the time we waited, and I am not ashamed to admit that I got goosebumps and a little misty when the lights dimmed in the theater, and that iconic music started. It was all downhill from there: "My name is Anakin, and I'm a person!" and "Yeah, the Force? Well, it's not as much a mystical energy that runs through the universe as it is a virus that's carried around by nanites in your blood. Hey, Star Wars fans? Fuck you! I got your money! Ha! Ha! Ha!" And don't even get me started on Jar-Jar Binks. By the time the film was over, I wasn't just disappointed, I was mad. No, I wasn't mad, I was furious, and I didn't bother to watch Episodes II and III until they were on cable this weekend, and even then I ignored most of Episode II, lest my fury rise again.

See, can you imagine having this sort of reaction to anything else? I thought it was lame that Molly Ringwald went with the Andrew McCarthy in Pretty in Pink but it didn't make me mad. I thought Ghostbusters 2 was pretty stupid, but I didn't want to punch a door when I walked out of the theater. Star Wars wasn't just a movie, it was personal.

But now that some time has passed, I can take a longer view and ask: Did Lucas really betray us with the new movies? Well, I don't know if it's fair to say that he did, because I don't think he ever cared about us as much as we cared about them. It's obvious now, especially after watching all of them and seeing what Lucas does when he's left entirely to his own devices, that the movies are just excuses to show off his special effects and sell toys.

But ultimately, all of that matters as much as we allow it to. Yes, the new movies suck out loud and should be dumped into the Sarlacc pit, but we'll always have the original trilogy, and its halcyon memories.

Some of us even have our action figures, so we can recreate that famous scene in Mos Eisley where Han shoots first.

Wil Wheaton picks up all his power converters at Toshi Station.

 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

Next

Zork

Zork

Victoria, BC
August 2003

NOV 15, 2006 08:01 PM

Why did so many of us love the original as much as we did (and do)? Well, here's my reason. Back then, in those days of low-tech, we'd never seen anything like it! It was the first really big special effects spectacular. It blew our minds, because it really was new and amazing. Aside from the solid mythological basis of the story and all, it was just visually overwhelming. It's hard to remember that now... it's hard to see it in perspective, in these days of routine special effects that we take for granted. Y'know... "Serenity... great movie... good dialog... adequate special effects". Now imagine, if you can, that you'd never seen a movie with special effects at all... what would the impact be?

That was Star Wars, back in the day.

interpolantic

interpolantic

Indianapolis, IN
May 2006

NOV 15, 2006 09:25 PM

malkav11 said:

interpolantic said:
You are soooo wrong. I think you're awesome but Revenge of the Sith is the best Star Wars movie. Let go of the Geek Dogma and give it a chance. It is the darkest, has the most action, and did an amazing job of filling into the first movie. Lame.



Darkest, yes, I'll give you that. Most action? Fuck if I know, but it was bad action. There wasn't anything remotely interesting in the big space battle, the saber fight with Dooku didn't actually have any punch to it (barring the finale), General Grievous was made out as this big badass and then turned and ran after fighting Obi-wan for about 3 seconds, and that whole chase sequence was just ludicrous. I guess the Yoda/Emperor duel was mildly amusing, but that's about all, and the climactic duel of the movie was ruined by really bad dialogue. (And not terribly exciting. Honestly, I don't think any of the lightsaber duels in any of the prequel movies were much good. I cheered for the Yoda/Dooku fight in Episode II mostly because it was good to see the old guy kick some ass, not because it was all that great a fight.)

And I'd hardly call "NOOOOOOOOOO!" a great fill in to Episode IV.



Dude, Grevious was injured in the clone wars cartoons, did you not watch that? The conflict between Vader and Obi-won was amazing. He fucking cut him in half. Did you not see that? After he said he was like a brother to him. I get chills everytime I watch that.

Name something in Empire that beats that? You can't.

Also, the action was LAME in all the first 3 star wars because the effects SUCKED. If you can't admit that you are lying to yourself just to be nostagic. That's what I call GEEK DOGMA.

The only thing I will admit is that the acting is better by most of the cast in the originals. However, there is still fucked up dialogue in the originals.


ps - Will I'm in geek awe just talking in the same thread as you. I watch STNG everyday. smile

JeffX

JeffX

Ames, IA
June 2006

NOV 15, 2006 09:51 PM

My nephew loves the prequels as much as I loved the originals when they came out. And when ROTS came out I saw several little jedis running around on halloween. So obviously the movies meant as much to them as they did to us growing up.

On to the movies though. The prequels are not the originals, and can't really be compared. the story that involves the two are completely different. In the originals you have the small force battling overwhelming odds to conquer the evil empire. In the prequels you have to see how this came about. You have to see the story of how the jedi fall, and how Palpatine rises to power. So of course the story isn't going to have all of the action that you might want. And I have to admit some of the dialogue was pretty bad compared to the first trilogy.

Vestril

Vestril

Coronado, CA
February 2003

NOV 15, 2006 09:52 PM

interpolantic said:

malkav11 said:

interpolantic said:
You are soooo wrong. I think you're awesome but Revenge of the Sith is the best Star Wars movie. Let go of the Geek Dogma and give it a chance. It is the darkest, has the most action, and did an amazing job of filling into the first movie. Lame.



Darkest, yes, I'll give you that. Most action? Fuck if I know, but it was bad action. There wasn't anything remotely interesting in the big space battle, the saber fight with Dooku didn't actually have any punch to it (barring the finale), General Grievous was made out as this big badass and then turned and ran after fighting Obi-wan for about 3 seconds, and that whole chase sequence was just ludicrous. I guess the Yoda/Emperor duel was mildly amusing, but that's about all, and the climactic duel of the movie was ruined by really bad dialogue. (And not terribly exciting. Honestly, I don't think any of the lightsaber duels in any of the prequel movies were much good. I cheered for the Yoda/Dooku fight in Episode II mostly because it was good to see the old guy kick some ass, not because it was all that great a fight.)

And I'd hardly call "NOOOOOOOOOO!" a great fill in to Episode IV.



Dude, Grevious was injured in the clone wars cartoons, did you not watch that? The conflict between Vader and Obi-won was amazing. He fucking cut him in half. Did you not see that? After he said he was like a brother to him. I get chills everytime I watch that.

Name something in Empire that beats that? You can't.

Also, the action was LAME in all the first 3 star wars because the effects SUCKED. If you can't admit that you are lying to yourself just to be nostagic. That's what I call GEEK DOGMA.

The only thing I will admit is that the acting is better by most of the cast in the originals. However, there is still fucked up dialogue in the originals.


ps - Will I'm in geek awe just talking in the same thread as you. I watch STNG everyday. smile



You require excellent special effects to make an action scene for you, I get it. I'm sorry to be the one to break it to you, but that the rest of us aren't the same way doesn't make us pathetic adherents to a broken world view. The lightsaber fights were visuall much more kickass in the new movies, I think that's a given, but as far as my interest in them? The only fights that get my motor running in the new movies are: 1) Obi-Wan/Darth Maul after Maul wtfpwned Qui-Gon--it's emotionally charged and interesting, 2) parts of Obi-Wan/Anakin..that was the duel that would never end, but it had some real value to it. I swear to god it was like they were running a marathon in that one, George wanted the fight scenes to last long and look dazzling but for the most part they were flashy, technically interesting and hollow.

By comparison, every single lightsaber fight in the old trilogy felt like it had a point. There is nothing nostalgic about my appreciation for the various action sequences in the old trilogy, they're put together better and the characterization between them makes them more interesting. Are they as cool on the eyes? Obviously not.

As far as Empire Vs. Sith...man, what a wacko. Obi-Wan carves up a punk ass bitch who has it coming VS Darth Vader lopping the hand off of his son. Who was the good guy, not the bad guy. Oh, and the coolest guy in any Star Wars movie is now art. No, not dark at all, that one.

I'm not a complete hater of the new trilogy, but you're comparing movies with heart to movies without. That they're older and the effects aren't as nice I get, but incredibly it doesn't hit me very hard. But then again I can watch "Flight of the Navigator" without getting to upset either. Well, ok, maybe a bit teary eyed.

Westley

Westley

Vatican City
April 2004

NOV 15, 2006 10:04 PM

interpolantic said:
Also, the action was LAME in all the first 3 star wars because the effects SUCKED. If you can't admit that you are lying to yourself just to be nostagic. That's what I call GEEK DOGMA.


I hate to dismiss you, because you seem enthusiastic and all, but this is such a vacuum of logic that it's almost impossible for me to even know how I could possibly appeal to you (Besides, Vestril covered lots of the ground I would have). If way supa rad FX is what it takes to make superior action, then all of my understanding of film, storytelling, and basically all of the things I think that I enjoy, are pretty much out the window. It's kind of hard to know where to go from there in a conversation, ya know?

Characters, man. Characters.

Edited to add: I would rather watch the FX in Metropolis over just about anything in the prequels (which I probably dislike a lot less than most).

Westley

Westley

Vatican City
April 2004

NOV 15, 2006 10:36 PM

Happyboy said:
What bothered me about the recent releases was that since they were trying to keep up with the times and placate today's more sensitized audience, these "episodes" actually came out looking too advanced and futuristic then the ones from 20 odd years ago that they were supposed to precede in the Star Wars series. It was like if some one found a couple tracks that Elvis did before he died that were thought to be lost and, instead of leaving them as is, added in electric drums and had Christina Aguillera and other popstars sing duets with the King thus making it appealling to a younger audience but ignoring, and thus disappointing, the older generations especially the ones who grew up listening to him.


Iin fairness, the time prior to Empire control is considered a renaissance era for civilization in the Star Wars universe. Additionally, the original films take place on more primitive, outer rim planets that were more difficult for the Empire to have full control of.

attn_ho

attn_ho

Brooklyn, NY
February 2004

NOV 15, 2006 10:38 PM

whats that? oh, im sorry, i was watching kurasowa's 'hidden fortress'

[/snark]

malkav11

malkav11

Saint Paul, MN
July 2003

NOV 15, 2006 11:00 PM

interpolantic said:
Dude, Grevious was injured in the clone wars cartoons, did you not watch that?



I watched the first DVD of Clone Wars. I believe there's more, but I'd moved on to other things by then. Someday. But you really can't rely on people to have seen a cartoon series on cable. You have to convey the important plot points in the movie. (You can expect people to have seen the previous movie(s), to some extent, since it's the same basic audience. But even there there are limits.) And even if he were injured in Clone Wars, that doesn't make his role in the movie any less pathetic.

(I snipped the rest of your comment because, honestly, there's not much point in my replying to it. I saw the same movie you did, I didn't enjoy it nearly as much. Opinions differ.)

motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

NOV 16, 2006 02:24 AM

i can almost forgive eps I-II, because they gave us the Clone Wars animated series. i'm not going to say anything stupid like "that's what Star Wars should be!" or anything, but i will say that Clone Wars was some quality cartoonin' that made me hunger for ep III.

which, as noted, was somewhat less of a kick in the balls than I-II.

MschfMayhemSoap

MschfMayhemSoap

Phoenix, AZ
April 2006

NOV 16, 2006 05:16 AM

malkav11 said:

interpolantic said:
Dude, Grevious was injured in the clone wars cartoons, did you not watch that?



I watched the first DVD of Clone Wars. I believe there's more, but I'd moved on to other things by then. Someday. But you really can't rely on people to have seen a cartoon series on cable. You have to convey the important plot points in the movie. (You can expect people to have seen the previous movie(s), to some extent, since it's the same basic audience. But even there there are limits.) And even if he were injured in Clone Wars, that doesn't make his role in the movie any less pathetic.



SPOILERS! (Click to view)
In the cartoon (which segways seemlessly into Ep 3, by the way) Grevious was injured by one of the jedi (I THINK it was Windu, its been awhile) crushed his mid-section, containing the orgaincs he still carried in him. Obi-wan spotted this weakness in their final fight and hit it.



While I agree Grevious shouldve had a more Sinister presence, given the plot twist the cartoon set up, its easy to see why he wasnt meant to hang about dueling Jedi for too long. He has already been seriously wounded prior to the first fight of the movie. Makes me think Lucas thought he was too powerful by the end of Clone Wars and decided to hobble him a bit before the movie set off. A Poor choice if true, in my opinion.

apesamongus

apesamongus

Atlanta, GA
July 2002

NOV 16, 2006 05:39 AM

interpolantic said:
Also, the action was LAME in all the first 3 star wars because the effects SUCKED.


What the hell does one of those things have to do with the other.

CJane

CJane

Toronto, ON
June 2006

NOV 16, 2006 05:51 AM

JeffX said:
My nephew loves the prequels as much as I loved the originals when they came out. And when ROTS came out I saw several little jedis running around on halloween. So obviously the movies meant as much to them as they did to us growing up.



True, and you better believe that some of the kids are looking back at the movies we enjoyed and thinking those were seriously lame compared to the new ones.

zyryx

zyryx

Tyler, TX
April 2004

NOV 16, 2006 08:40 AM

it was the SW figures and ships that came between my younger brother and I. turned a major dislike into hatred. Christmas morning, opening presents. he opens an X-wing, I got the Bespin Cloud car. it was at that point that I knew my parents were morons, and my little brother must die. luckily I used brains over brawn and convinced him that the cloud car was so much better and he should trade me for the X-wing. biggrin

WilWheaton

WilWheaton

Los Angeles, CA
June 2005

NOV 16, 2006 09:55 AM

attn_ho said:
whats that? oh, im sorry, i was watching kurasowa's 'hidden fortress'

[/snark]



+1

malkav11

malkav11

Saint Paul, MN
July 2003

NOV 16, 2006 10:20 AM

The other thing is that the prequel trilogy was seriously lacking in villains. I know, I know, it's meant to set up the rise of the real big bad of the Star Wars universe, Darth Vader, but they kill off Maul in I, give us the not terribly exciting Dooku for II and a little bit of III, and then introduce a potentially really cool villain in Grievous (who kind of shows up out of the blue if you haven't seen the Clone Wars cartoon, which, again, they should not have assumed people had.) only to waste him astonishingly quickly. Palpatine's maneuverings are very villainous, of course, but behind the scenes.

I really think Vader was what made the first Star Wars movies. There was plenty of other great stuff, of course, but he provided the best possible foil to the efforts of the heroes, and is probably the one thing absolutely everyone (even those who haven't seen the movies) takes away from Star Wars (well...him and lightsabers.). His absence and the absence of any equivalent villainous figure cut the prequels right off at the kneecaps.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

Next

PreviousNext

Barack "Blunder" Obama

Comments 153 Comments - Last Comment 3 days ago

OMG APOCALYPSE 2012!!

Comments 113 Comments - Last Comment 1 day ago

Asshole Fuckface Roundup #55

Comments 104 Comments - Last Comment 16 hours ago

Right Wing WALL-E Meltdown

Comments 86 Comments - Last Comment 1 day ago

SuicideGirls Big in Japan

Comments 80 Comments - Last Comment 3 days ago

Comic Con 2008

Last Comment 2 HR by courtneyriot

Comic Con 2008

Last Comment 2 HR

(images only) More ...

Jimmy Fucking Carter

Last Comment 2 HR by RedBstrd

Jimmy Fucking Carter

Last Comment 2 HR

/shrug Well, you decided to participate in a thread that is about the role of Carter and Reagan in advocating/hindering... More ...

Jennifer Lopez: Everything That’s Wrong With Everything

Last Comment 3 HR

Shame on the site for publishing this barely readable column. FAIL. More ...

Life Is Ugly So Why Not Kill Yourself*

Last Comment 5 HR

I've always said, for the most part, if you want to kill yourself, go right ahead. If your life sucks... More ...

Scott Ian's Food Coma: Getcha’ Pull!

Last Comment 10 HR

nice! the part of the story i left out is that i wound up having 8 pints just to prove his perceptions... More ...

Plissken's Shit Food Review: JITB BBQ Bacon Sirloin Burger

Last Comment 13 HR

apparently maple syrup can also ruin bacon. i had french toast at brunch recently and a little bit of... More ...

SuicideGirls Interview: Crispin Hellion Glover: It Is Fine! Everything Is Fine
SuicideGirls Interview: Perry Farrell
SuicideGirls Interview: Terry Zwigoff