Jump to content

Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope


Recommended Posts

swposter.jpg

Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope (Originally titled Star Wars) is an Epic Space Opera film directed by George Lucas and released in 1977. The film stars Mark Hamill as Luke Skywalker, a young boy turned Jedi, who embarks on a quest to stop the Imperial Empire and stop the dreadful Lord Vader. The film is notable for its groundbreaking special effects and its incredible influence on the Science Fiction genre.

[spoiler=My Review]

4/5 Stars

 

The film is great, but it needed improvement. Its storytelling is spot on and its special effects great. The acting on the part of the cast is remarkable to say the least. The problem this movie has is mainly in the set pieces and cuts. There are moments when the Jedi fight scenes are overtly cut at times in order to keep continuity and a lot of the blaster scenes become unrealistic as sometimes guards are hit with lasers and don't die.

 

Another issue is with the plot development of the destruction of Alderaan. I have always been a sharp critic of what I call the "God mod of the Death Star". It honestly felt unnecessary and made the Empire look a little too powerful. It was almost as if Lucas attempted to make the Empire look like an impossible feat. Which it did, however this disrupted feeling in the protagonists and their goals against the empire.

 

Han Solo's development is too vague and rigid. One day he knows people and the next you wonder "Who the f*ck is this son of a b*tch?" Most of the set pieces shown in here are not completely explained, such as the Millennium Falcon and its origins.

 

Having the Jedi as such a rare kind in this movie is iffy with me. On one hand I guess it permeates the legendary and mysterious status of them at this point. However, it generates confusion and a lack of explanation into their origins and background. Ben Kenobi felt wasted with his extremely slow fight scene with Vader and his death was extremely out of sorts. His assisted suicide didn't make any sense. He could have helped in more ways than one and instead he decides to die. I suppose he felt he had run his course but what was with doing it when Luke entered the damn room? Did he want Luke to see his death above all else? What did that teach?

 

It is still an epic movie of epic proportions, but I can't give it a 5/5.[/spoiler]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean?!?! XD I can post my opinion on things because it's... Guess... THE INTERNET!!! :P Star Wars Episode 3 is still the best of all 6!

 

 

I am just saying you might want to be more specific next time. It could have easily been taken the wrong way.

 

-

 

Let me make myself as specific as possible about that opinion.

 

NPQPnST.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do realize those movies are bad regardless of how epic the originals were, right?

 

Like, Attack of the Clone has one of the worst scripts I've ever seen.  Not to mention the acting in that movie alone is pretty terrible.  It has to do mainly with the script given, but not even Ewan McGregor or Sam Jackson could save it.  

 

Revenge of the Sith was alright, but the script was still pretty pathetic, and the chemistry between Haydenson and Portman is nonexistent which makes the dialogue between them pretty damn unbearable.  Haydenson is a pretty shitty actor in general, though.

 

The Phantom Menace was pretty good, but Jar Jar and his entire race just kind of fuck things up for the movie.  Without them I probably wouldn't have too much to nitpick at.  I mean the kid who plays Anakin is kinda cheesy as fuck but I mean, Liam Neeson makes up for that.

 

My point though, is that the originals are just better films entirely.  I mean, you can have your opinion, but that doesn't mean its technically fact.  My disliking of his opinion wasn't based on nostalgia or bias. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do realize those movies are bad regardless of how epic the originals were, right?

 

Like, Attack of the Clone has one of the worst scripts I've ever seen.  Not to mention the acting in that movie alone is pretty terrible.  It has to do mainly with the script given, but not even Ewan McGregor or Sam Jackson could save it.  

 

Revenge of the Sith was alright, but the script was still pretty pathetic, and the chemistry between Haydenson and Portman is nonexistent which makes the dialogue between them pretty damn unbearable.  Haydenson is a pretty shitty actor in general, though.

 

The Phantom Menace was pretty good, but Jar Jar and his entire race just kind of fuck things up for the movie.  Without them I probably wouldn't have too much to nitpick at.  I mean the kid who plays Anakin is kinda cheesy as fuck but I mean, Liam Neeson makes up for that.

 

My point though, is that the originals are just better films entirely.  I mean, you can have your opinion, but that doesn't mean its technically fact.  My disliking of his opinion wasn't based on nostalgia or bias. 

Ugh okay I am going to try and separate my rebukes to these...

 

I will start with Phantom Menace.

Honestly, The Phantom Menace was never meant for a higher tear audience. It was actually primarily aimed for kids whether people admit it or not. Jar Jar Binks was a comedy relief actually meant for kids about 12 years or younger and he was a hit with them. I still love Jar Jar Binks to this day simply because he employed a very important message of redemption and that even though you may have little skill, you may find you are more special than you think. Jar Jar Binks became a symbol of that and even to this day I admire that. I loved the acting of Liam Neeson and Ewan McGregor and the direction is high quality. The CGI was good and the villains were inventive and awesome.

 

Now on to Attack of the Clones.

Yes, it really did f*ck up. Hayden Christensen is a bad actor, everyone knows it. The directing was sub par and some cameos were generally unneeded but I still sort of liked it. It had politics, it had structural debate. The movie didn't just become a Sci-Fi experience, it became an informational one as well. Although the politics for the movie were based off the screenplay which were made in the 1980's. The plot hit Nonsense Central but it at least stayed together for a bit of the time, and the Battle of Geonosis remains one of my favorite battles in cinema history. That and Jango Fett was a great villain, not on par with Boba of course.

 

Now for Revenge of the Sith.

No, just no. That movie was a failure on all accounts. It squandered a horrible screenplay with some very cliche dialogue. Hayden Christensen's acting got worse (if that is even possible) and the entirety of the plot just felt so off. Th eonly redeeming qualities this movie had were the battle between Annakin and Obi-Wan and the battle between Mace Windu and Co. and the Emperor. The battle between Yoda and The Emperor felt so ridiculous and cheap. I still stand by this opinion to this day; the scene where Annakin kills the children and Padme watches on video was unneeded and ridiculous. That was just plain wrong and it didn't belong in a Star Wars movie at all.

 

I don't know how you could pick Episode III over episode II in my view, but that is your opinion, who am I to judge?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That man's voice annoys me to no end.

He's performing, so yeah. It makes a lot more sense if you watch all 7 parts of that review.



Having the Jedi as such a rare kind in this movie is iffy with me. On one hand I guess it permeates the legendary and mysterious status of them at this point. However, it generates confusion and a lack of explanation into their origins and background. Ben Kenobi felt wasted with his extremely slow fight scene with Vader and his death was extremely out of sorts. His assisted suicide didn't make any sense. He could have helped in more ways than one and instead he decides to die. I suppose he felt he had run his course but what was with doing it when Luke entered the damn room? Did he want Luke to see his death above all else? What did that teach?

...why does it sound like you watched Episode I first?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, you can throw around words like "nostalgia" and "haters," but that doesn't change the fact that the prequels were objectively terrible.

 

Also, Lucas felt the need to ruin the original trilogy and say that this is how he always envisioned it, so I've become convinced that he made Star Wars good by accident. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, you can throw around words like "nostalgia" and "haters," but that doesn't change the fact that the prequels were objectively terrible.

I disagree and have already posted reasons why. I will agree that III was terrible and II mediocre, but I truly believe Episode 1 to be one of the best Star Wars films of the series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree and have already posted reasons why. I will agree that III was terrible and II mediocre, but I truly believe Episode 1 to be one of the best Star Wars films of the series.

 

Eh, I still really don't like it.  I mean, in all honesty, the plot and setup are actually really good.  But the characters... >.< 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Well, the first Star Wars movies are the best I've ever seen, at least the un-edited versions. For the Sequels, I wanted to rip my eyes out after watching Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith. Episode 1 was best of the three sequels, but I will still hate it to the day I die. I dont like the CGI Yoda in the sequels. He made me sick, litteraly. The dialouges are terrible and acting even worse. Dont understand people that likes the sequels. Only reason I watched the sequels was cause my friends talked me in to it. And of course Liam Neeson.

 

Anyway, as most TRUE Star Wars fans say, the sequels actually ruins the franchise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...