MovieChat Forums > Star Wars (1977) Discussion > It aged, face it.

It aged, face it.

posted 9 years ago by TheArtOfBeingRandom34523
57 replies | jump to latest

I used to love this movie as a child and I still enjoy it now.
But recently i rewatched the OT and... well... I have to say that I was disappointed.

I couldn't see the charateristic menace and the stage presence of Darth Vader, i only saw a ridiculous guy in a ridiculous suit, the costumes aged badly, the acting, except Mark Hamill and (of course) Cushing and Guinness is pretty bad, the plot is inconsistent, and it all seemed like a campy, cheesy b-movie.

Anyway it's certainly far from bad and it's still better than Return of the Jedi, which had a lot of potential but failed thanks to those little CENSOREDCENSOREDCENSORED that CENSORED and CENSORED CENSORED Ewoks, but even ROTJ is far from bad.

But hey, the first chapter doesn't always have to be the defining, and The Empire Strikes Back is still a Masterpiece.

[–] chriscougar7 9 years ago

Somethings have aged like the visuals and haircuts but most still holds up just fine including the plot which is just classic heroes journey. All the costumes are iconic

[–] Volley2020 9 years ago

Ridiculous guy in a ridiculous suit? Darth Vader's suit is one of the most impressive and iconic of all science fiction suits.

[–] barajasb97 8 years ago

Still looks ridiculous

[–] motioneccentrica 8 years ago

Its taken from Japanese samurai, greatly inspired by Akira Kurosawa.

You know what the Queen said? If I had balls, I'd be King.

[–] Kruleworld 9 years ago

la la la la la. what's that you said, i can't hear you 😝

"He's dusted, busted and disgusted, but he's ok"

[–] Kojiro_Vance 9 years ago

It aged, but it still looks good, given its almost 40 years old. Wanna see something that aged terrible and is not old? See AOTC. The. Entire. Movie.

http://img.thesun.co.uk/aidemitlum/archive/01861/Yodaembed_1861053a.jpg

I'm just on my way up to Clavius.

[–] TheArtOfBeingRandom34523 9 years ago

Lol AOTC and TPM are two of the worst aged movie ever.
ANH aged but it is almost like a good aging sometimes, because practical effects don't really age, but crappy CGI does.

[–] jamalinoski 8 years ago

You say that because you grew up with crappy practical effects and not crappy CGI effects.

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 7 years ago

I grew up with crappy CGI effects and I second his statement: practical effects look more authentic, natural and are usually more pleasant to watch than CGIs. Even though sometimes CGIs can be VERY impressive while some practical effects may look lame, it doesn't change the fact that his statement is accurate: If I have to choose between crappy practical effects or crappy CGIs, I'd go with practical all the way. At least I know that some real effort was put into the making instead of having most of the work done by a computer.

If you honestly can't see where he has a good point, you might be too young to rightfully appreciate movies.

[–] Frogarama (12942) 7 years ago

Wtf, I hate that stupid statement. CGI is not easy and the computer doesn't do most of the work. I've done plenty of CG work and it's tedious. I would rather put together a model from raw materials than build something from scratch in a modeling program. CG artists work magic and your disrespect of that is an affront to the entire concept of creating imagery.

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 7 years ago

What the fuck?? I never denied that making cgi is a lot of efforts. I just say that looking at practical effects feel more natural and it's my personal preference.

And I point out clearly that cgis can be outstanding.

[–] Cheepshooter (672) 7 years ago

I like a subtle mix. Practical effects when possible are my preference, then CGI touch ups to clean up the edges - like the underneath of the land speeder.

[–] Line-of-Flight 9 years ago

It feels like a campy, cheesy b-movie because it *is* a campy, cheesy b-movie, bur one of the best ones of all time.

[–] TheArtOfBeingRandom34523 9 years ago

NAILED IT!

[–] super-sapien 9 years ago

nothing cheesy about star wars except for c-3po. and it's not campy. i think you just heard some loser dork say it and are copying him. oh and it's not a b movie. the effects for the time were very very high end and the effects are better then the cheesy cgi effects of the cheesy campy movies of today.

this film is epic. let the haters hate because they don't understand art.

____

I AM
____

[–] imustkillthequeen 8 years ago

Totally agree. Part of the reason the OT trilogy succeeeds so well is BECAUSE it lacks camp. The film is swashbuckling good time, but the characters believe this bizarre world they inhabit, and they take it seriously. No wink wink nonsense that characterizes campy B-movies.

[–] Conan-1982 9 years ago

"I used to love this movie as a child"

It's not the same movie anymore after 20 years of pointless tinkering from Lucas, that's why it doesn't work.

Get the De-specialized Editions and you'll reconnect with your childhood : magic shouldn't be tinkered with.

Trust me, it will work: get the De-specialized Editions.

What's best in life ?

[–] TheArtOfBeingRandom34523 9 years ago

Sadly I grew up with the special editions and when i rewatched it i made myself sure to get the DeSpecialized ones.

[–] SinisterCreep 9 years ago

Get the De-specialized Editions and you'll reconnect with your childhood : magic shouldn't be tinkered with.

Trust me, it will work: get the De-specialized Editions.

That's nonsense. the special editions might have their faults like Greedo shooting first but the new cgi for the most part made the film look a lot less dated. unfortunately some people like yourself are just totally biased against the special editions and won't acknowledge they actually improved some things.

like it or not but many of the original special effects look dated now. they should actually finish off redoing all the bad special effects like when the X wings crash and it's just a puff of smoke.

Walking on water is like finding a non fake female profile on a dating site...a miracle!

[–] CathodeRayTubesRock 8 years ago

Some of the 'new' CGI is good, but a lot of it is bad. Surprisingly bad and rather needless.

Sig, you want a sig, here's a SIG-sauer!

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 7 years ago

"unfortunately some people like yourself are just totally biased against the special editions and won't acknowledge they actually improved some things."

Or simply people who want to see the movie like it was originally made?? The changes Lucas did for the Special Editions GENERALLY don't bother me (of course there were a few totally pointless and almost insulting ones). This been said, I see how it could bother many fans. I had the chance to see the Original versions (or at least, they weren't so obviously modified) before seeing the remastered ones years later.

And no matter how these new cgis don't really change my appreciation of the OT, nothing would beat the authentic look we can get from seeing the original movies which came out decades ago. Why? Because the old look give me, for the least I can say, a part of the full experience like the one people got back in 1977.

Changes like at the end of ROTJ when they put the new Anakin instead of the original Anakin as his ghost was unnecessary, out of its element and sincerely disrespectful to the original actor who is dead. I can't see how exactly Lucas thought it was relevant or appropriate. It was probably done in order to the younger generation to make a quick link, but if people over 30 years ago could make the connection, people today can as well.

So no sorry but your message is quite arrogant and stop assuming that everyone who are bashing the new versions are "biased". There is a thing called nostalgia for those who have seen the movies in theaters and for those who didn't have the chance, they may only wish to see the movie in the original form that made its success.

[–] furiousstyles (4392) 7 years ago

special editions are freakin awful , the original new hope aka star wars is still epic

[–] pgcpaul2 8 years ago

I agree that all the changes made in Mos Eisley spaceport make things appear "Cluttered" . WHat is with the baby raptors.....lol

[–] !!!deleted!!! (55817158) 9 years ago

Sorry you feel that way but I strongly disagree.

Sure it's not a flashy movie and the effects are dated but whenever I watch the OT back I can't help but get the undeniable feeling of enjoyment that only a great story can deliver, regardless of age or aesthetics.

[–] Hendry_William_French 9 years ago

I guess it was filmed in the mid 70s, so it does have that unmistakable tone running through it especially with the do's on the imperial honchos & rebel pilots and 'aged' look (or classical as I call it haha).

It doesn't make it dated, it's just part of its charm, imo. It's still a great looking movie. It may look dated, but it doesn't feel dated. It's a timeless fable. That's the most important aspect of it.

He was my C.O. in Nam. CIA listed him as MIA but the V.A. ID'd his M.O. and put out an APB.