Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Star Wars Prequels Media Movies

Star Wars Prequels' Art Director Doug Chiang Talks 119

Posted by timothy from the screw-a-lid-lid-on-jar-jar dept.
inherent writes: "Recently, representatives of three fansites covering Westwood's upcoming release, Earth and Beyond Online had the opportunity to interview Doug Chiang, Art Director for the Star Wars prequels, and the designer of the spacecraft models in Earth and Beyond Online. Chiang speaks on topics like the differences between film and digital animation, advice for upcoming digital artists, and the now infamous Jar Jar Binks. The interview transcript is available at Earth and Beyond Portal"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Star Wars Prequels' Art Director Doug Chiang Talks More

Star Wars Prequels' Art Director Doug Chiang Talks

Comments Filter:

  • Know what i'd like to see? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Bowie J. Poag ( 16898 ) on Monday April 29, 2002 @05:19AM (#3428140) Homepage


    Killing off Jar Jar in Episode 3 would make the fans happy, as well as providing a pleasant "Mr. Hooper's gone" introduction for children to learn the realities of death.

    Besides that, I (and others, no doubt..) would actually go see one if I knew Jar Jar was going to get snuffed out beforehand.

    My $0.02,
    • At this point, I'm glad that Jar Jar's in the movie. And I'm glad that Watto's back, changed his name to Pierre du La Pomf from France and taken to wearing berets. And Lucas might as well have Jar Jar become a Jedi knight while he's at it.

      Since he's obviously going to painfully attempt to recreate ESB in a formulaic manner so unimaginative, no one else would have imagined it, I'll make an increadibly obvious prediction: Anakin looses his hand in the climatic lightsaber duel. Maybe it'll happen in episode III, but I'm still betting on episode II.

      If people want to pay to see Lucas wallow in his own crapulance, its a free country, and if it looks like it will be worth a $5 laugh at his ... err my expense, well maybe I'll join them.
      • [SPOILER ALERT] Actually, it's an entire arm [theforce.net]. [/SPOILER ALERT]
      • Since he's obviously going to painfully attempt to recreate ESB in a formulaic manner so unimaginative, no one else would have imagined it, I'll make an increadibly obvious prediction: Anakin looses his hand in the climatic lightsaber duel. Maybe it'll happen in episode III, but I'm still betting on episode II.

        Seeing as we know he has a robotic arm in Return of the Jedi, that prediction is more than obvious. If he doesn't lose an arm, it's a gross continuity error.

        Relax, dude, it's just a movie.

    • Besides that, I (and others, no doubt..) would actually go see one if I knew Jar Jar was going to get snuffed out beforehand.

      Whew! Because I hear George is having a hard time getting people to show up for the SW movies!

      He'll be glad to read this!

  • interesting interview (Score:2, Insightful)

    by MiTEG ( 234467 )
    When did you discover your gift or abilities?

    This looks to be a somewhat interesting interview. From the looks of it though, the questions deal mostly with the aspects of Chiangs life rather than any details of the upcoming movie. Frankly, I don't really want to hear is life story, or what website I can go to if I want to learn more about is past work. I want the lowdown on production, like what they used for the animation, props, and all that cool stuff.

    I've been a Star Wars fan since the late 70's- I even bought a Millenium Falcon with my allowance (though I sold it at a garage sale when I was a teenager, boy am I kicking myself for that one). Anyway, this movie looks like it's got quite an all star production crew. I'm looking forward to seeing it, hopefully in one of the digital theatres if it's not too expensive. Though I sometimes wonder at the dedication of the people willing to sacrifice 3 months of their lives to wait in line.

  • good advice... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by nostromo_42 ( 130573 ) on Monday April 29, 2002 @05:32AM (#3428161)
    in terms of setting yourself out from the crowd, at least in graphic design terms, there is no substitute for having classical training in the visual arts. too many people think that they're hot stuff just because they can use photoshop.

    • Re:good advice... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by mav[LAG] ( 31387 )
      Indeed. If you look at Doug Chiang's work in the Art of Star Wars - Episode One (Amazon [amazon.com] will probably have it - I got it as a present), you'll see all of his conceptual work is in traditional media - watercolour, pen and ink, and pencil.

      I recommend any of these books if you want to look behind the scenes at concept design, particularly how creatures and sets evolve in the mind of the artist. Doug Chiang seems to have designed 80% of the Episode I universe based on the sheer number of his works in the book. What's even more interesting is that he claims Lucas has an incredible sense of design and vision which just gave the artists that final inspiration or push in the right direction just when they needed it most. Not basic whip-cracking either - more tweaks or overhauls to things that just gave them The Right Look. Say what you like about him as a director, he obviously still knows how to design cool stuff.
    • "too many people think that they're hot stuff just because they can use photoshop."

      Ohhh come on now. I can make fake ID's with it and no one can tell the difference. Talk about getting beer man!!

  • Hmm... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by CmdrTaco (editor) ( 564483 )
    Now, I don't want to sound like a troll here, but why are so many fans so dedicated to the Star Wars phenonema? From what I can see, Star Wars was originally part of a social movement, the gradual change of geeks, if you will, from the shadows to the mainstream. I can't thank Lucas enough for that. But, I do have a problem with the methodology used today by the Lucas empire.

    I find George Lucas and all his productions much like Steve Jobs and all he has done. Lucas began as an innovator, creating a new genre and shaping society as we know it. Jobs, along with Wazniak, did the same thing- creating what the people wanted, an affordable personal computer, and shaping society along with it.

    But both individuals evolved, and from my standpoint, grew corrupt with the power (like Anakin). Jobs controls Apple again today with an iron fist, and Lucas stifles creativity with his quest for profits. I no longer have any interest in buying an Apple computer, as it no longer stands for what it did, just the same as I no longer have any interest in seeing the upcoming Star Wars movie. Both are sellouts, and I will never forgive them for that.

    Does art reflect society or does society reflect art? The evils we see today, the corruption, the violence- it all occurs in the media. So I ask you, if you choose to see this Star Wars film, while you're watching it, think about how the capitalistic creed of these men and how many lives they will destroy.

    • Re:Hmm... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Em Emalb ( 452530 ) <ememalb@gm a i l . com> on Monday April 29, 2002 @05:51AM (#3428196) Homepage Journal
      Taco, you wrote:

      "From what I can see, Star Wars was originally part of a social movement, the gradual change of geeks, if you will, from the shadows to the mainstream."

      I sort of agree with this statement. However, I think you are missing the larger picture here. The awesome thing about Star Wars is that you don't/didn't have to be a geek to enjoy it. It was a huge part of life for us children of the mid/late 70's and early 80's. It was hugely successful because it appealed to all classes, races, and creed. It was a magical movie that could make you forget all your problems for a couple of hours, or if you were lucky, several months on end in toys, etc.

      Now, IMO, here's the issue for Mr Lucas. He made the mistake of creating his best art at an early age. The rest of his life has been spent trying to recapture it, and he has (so far) failed. Imagine if you were in his shoes...would you pump out lack-luster fare trying to recapture the magic you created, or move on? I doubt you *COULD* move on. Not many people can say they shaped a generation, he can. Too bad he's now trying to shape another generation into being little zombie consumers. Just my opinion of course ;)

      • Re:Hmm... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Murdock037 ( 469526 ) <tristranthornNO@SPAMhotmail.com> on Monday April 29, 2002 @06:12AM (#3428238)
        You're right on.

        Lucas is the very definition of a wonder boy. He had a stunning success early on that he was never able to top in his later years. (The minor caveat to giving him that label is that he was not entirely from out of left field. American Graffiti was a decent film, especially for such an inexperienced director. But even with that considered, "Star Wars" was a shock to everybody.)

        Fortunately for us, he hasn't seemed too interested in commiserating on his one success-- he's done since pretty much what it seems like he's wanted to do, from Indiana Jones to ILM to, uh, Willow. Unfortunately for us, he's insisted on continually tinkering with both our memories of that one success and the product itself for his own amusement and profit (by churning out lackluster sequels, except Empire, and by revising his work years later in "Special Editions" with his in-decline instincts as a filmmaker).

        It's testament to the strength of the original movie that a generation was so impressed by it as to put up with the shitty prequels today. But by accepting these shitty prequels and giving Lucas our money,* we're condoning them, and so he's just going to continue on his current path. I don't know any kid that speaks of Episode I with awe in his voice. The recent movies are just not good enough to hold that sway, and the goodwill earned by the first two is all that's keeping the current series afloat. The returns are diminishing.

        So what's next for Lucas? Episodes II and III, followed by Indiana Jones 4, of course. Yes, he did great work in his younger days, but these days it's pretty much all shoddy work built on the good craftsmanship of years past. It's too bad. If Star Wars hadn't been the monster success it was, maybe he would have still been challenged as a filmmaker in some way or another. But that's what happens when nobody around you says "no."

        All IMO, of course. Please debate.

        *I should disclose that I'm not even immune to the problems here, as I was actually watching my Episode I DVD when this story was posted. Sigh.

        • Re:Hmm... (Score:1, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward
          The thing I don't undersatand about many Star Wars fans in particular, is they insist that a new Star Wars movie should live up to much higher standards than other films.

          But then when it comes to TPM, they can't even entertain the possibility that there is a whole lot about the film that just can't be appreiciated in only a few viewings.

          Honestly, I know you guys think TPM is a lackluster addition to the saga, but really it is at least on par with the classic trilogy.

          When A New Hope came out, there was no way to deny the obvious jump in special effects, and the music was spot on. But many reviewers, while giving the films very high scores cited the characters as being too "2 dimensional". They cited the dialogue as being "dicey", and the story was branded "unbeleivable". It wasn't until ESB and ROTJ came out that these characters got the depth everyone seemed to be missing, and now 20 years later, the idea that the characters were ever 2 dimensional has completely disappeared.

          I feel the same thing will happen after Attack of the Clones and Episode III are released.

          I mean come on, we are still talking about the one man who brought us "I am your father". Why is it so hard to entertain the possibility that Lucas has something up his sleeve that none of us have thought of yet?
      • Now, IMO, here's the issue for Mr Lucas. He made the mistake of creating his best art at an early age. The rest of his life has been spent trying to recapture it, and he has (so far) failed.

        I agree. Everything that came after THX 1138 has really really sucked. That THX is now known as a really loud and annoying chord is a travesty!! Now eat your pills and ask Taco for forgiveness.
      • From what I can see, Star Wars was originally part of a social movement, the gradual change of geeks, if you will, from the shadows to the mainstream.
        I sort of agree with this statement. However, I think you are missing the larger picture here. The awesome thing about Star Wars is that you don't/didn't have to be a geek to enjoy it.

        I don't think he's missing it, I think that's exactly what "geeks to mainstream" implies.

    • ...but I agree with the sentiment. This article [salon.com] on Salon says things better than I could, and this one [salon.com] covers the values put forward in Star Wars pretty well.

    • Re:Hmm... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by invid ( 163714 )

      Have you ever wondered why so many creative people produce wonderful material when they first start out, but when they become rich and famous their material sucks? In many instances the reason is that when someone is not well known they listen to other people's advice and criticism, and this limits certain excesses that might spill out of their work. Once they become big names they get the belief that they can do no wrong. Worse still, other people become too intimidated to criticize them. Read any recent Steven King book. Look what Gene Rodenberry did to the first Star Trek movie. He was allowed to create his complete vision, and it was simply too much of his vision. That's what happened to Star Wars Episode One.

  • D: What was your reaction when you saw Jar Jar in the context of the film the first time?
    DC: Oh, I loved him.

    *shudder*
  • I remember seeing pictures of Jar Jar before the film came out and even bought into the excitement of the character as all those pre-release articles came out. Hell, Jar Jar even made the cover of Vanity Fair (among others).

    Of course, then I went and saw the movie and was horrified as soon as Jar Jar opened his mouth. This just couldn't be!

    I kinda thought he would be more like a Chewbacca characater. He kind of looked like could be a monkey-wrenching wise-cracking type of character.

    So, if you separate the Jar Jar "design" from the actual character (admitted it's very hard), he's a pretty cool looking character. At least when he's not snatching food with his tongue.

    • Re:What Jar Jar could have been (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Chewbacca was a "wise-cracking type of character?"

      I don't remember this. I suppose I should learn Wookie.
      • "But sir, no one worries about upsetting a droid."
        "Droids don't rip people's arms off when they lose. Wookies are known to do that."
        *Chewbacca puts his hands behind his head and looks smug*

        Kierthos
        • And of course the big hairball never _does_ rip arms off, in any of the movies. The most he does is whine and shove people around, really. He gets by on wookie reputation, but the truth is that the rest of the wookies can't stand the wimp. All he does is complain. ;)

          Next up: why Yoda is really an evil dark jedi turd, and not a good guy in any way. :)

    • So, if you separate the Jar Jar "design" from the actual character (admitted it's very hard), he's a pretty cool looking character.

      He might look okay when he's standing still but his movements all seemed very unnatural to me. He almost seems like a rubbery, elastic creature in the movie. His walk is not smooth, his motions are not very crisp. I remember thinking to myself that "that frog-dude must have tendons of steel" to avoid being constantly injured just from everyday motions. Everyone ooh-ed and ahh-ed about the fact that Lucas was able to make a 100% computer-animated character fit in with the movie. But for me, it was just one more example why CGI should be limited to non-lifeform effects.

      GMD

    • I felt the same way about Jar Jar and all those trade federation droids. Man, in the previews they looked threatening, thousands of them. But when they turn out to be comical bumbling idiots, it ruined everything. Amazing.

  • Movies vs. Video Games (Score:3, Interesting)

    by z_gringo ( 452163 ) <z_gringo.hotmail@com> on Monday April 29, 2002 @06:11AM (#3428233)
    He seems to be saying that the special effects type work of Video games is more difficult and detailed than the same type of work in Movies. I thought that was pretty interesting, as I would have though the opposite. Of course I never have been much of a game player.

    But there have been many games based on movies, and they seem to be able to produce / create a game much faster than a movie. Also, I never have seen a video game budget approach the numbers they give for some of the big movies these days. (Yes, I realize they have to pay the actors and such)

    It still seems to me that making a movie would be much more time consuming and diffucult than a video game. IF for no other reason than the fact that you have to mix the reality and digitally created scenes perfectly, whereas in a video game, it is all digital.

    I guess Final Fantasy would be the best type of comparison, since it was all digitally generated.

    • His main point is, I think, that in a modern 3D game you have to do more overall design of your objects. In a movie, if you have a spaceship (say, given the subject) that is barely onscreen or is way off in the distance in all shots you can get away with a low detail model that doesn't have all the parts..maybe it doesn't even include the sides of the ship that will be away from the camera. In games, on the other hand, you have to assume the player may go out and take a better look at that ship in full 3D, so you need to design and model accordingly.

      Of course, in general, movie models are designed in more detail for the parts that ARE shown, because of the higher resolution of film, and the fact that they don't have to worry about realtime rendering.

  • In this interview there seems to be the tacit agreement that Jar Jar Binks was a character "for" 13 year old girls.

    What does this mean? Normally, when I think of characters designed for this demographic, I think of something of the "heartthrob" type. If any character in the Phantom Menace was "for" 13 year old girls, it would probably be Ewan McGregor's Ben Kenobi.

    If Jar Jar is supposed to appeal to any demographic, it probably be those people who appreciate slapstick humor: the very young, the perpetually immature, or those old enough to remember a time before other types of humor (e.g., irony, wordplay) were invented. Basically, anyone who likes Daffy Duck.

    Personally, I thought he was great. But I would not expect any 13 year old girls to agree with me.

    • daffy duck and bugs bunny are far from mindless slapstick. in fact, your examples of other types of humor (irony, wordplay) would be better descriptions. sure, there's an element of slapstick, but there's so many other levels it's working on.
    • Well, I like Daffy Duck, and I can't stand Jar Jar, so what does that say about your theory?

      With Daffy, it's perserverance in the face of adversity (usually caused by his own actions). With Jar Jar, it's just stupidity. IMAO, Anakin should seal his link to the Dark Side by slicing Jar Jar into little bits while laughing maniacally.

      Kierthos

  • Call me a skeptic... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Rhinobird ( 151521 ) on Monday April 29, 2002 @06:25AM (#3428267) Homepage
    Color me a skeptic, but I'll believe in this so called 'Star Wars Episode II' when I can go to theater and see it with my own two eyes. Don't believe everything you read, this 'StarWars' is pure fiction. Pictures can be faked, and video can be edited. I'm waiting for some good solid PROOF of this 'Star Wars: Episode II'. Until then it's just so much hokem.

    Wait, what were we talking about? Jar-Jar must die? I'm down with that. But so many people here want to see Jar-Jar die. I want to see something else happen. I want Jar-Jar to be turned into that monster in Jabba's palace from "Return of the Jedi". That would rock, cause then Jar-Jar would be this painfully, horribly disfigured creature, AND we would have all seen him die a painfull death already, no waiting.
  • Mmmmm...black text on a dark grey background...that has to be one of the worst designed websites I've ever seen !!

    Well, at least I could read the 'printer friendly' version.

  • Jar Jar must live, deal with it (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 29, 2002 @06:40AM (#3428287)
    Jar Jar is important to the story line. Yes, he is silly, he talks like mickey mouse on crack, and he flops around stupidly, but had it not been for Jar Jar, there would be no episode 2 or 3.. or the rest even. If Qui Gon and Obi Wan had not stumbled across
    Jar Jar, they would have never gotten transport to the naboo city, nor would they have cannon fodder types to fight the war with the battle droids. The trade federation would have won, and the evil sith schemes would have prospered.. probably would have started the elimination of the jedi a few years earlier.. So, next time when you bash jar jar, realize that he is important to the story.
    • "The trade federation would have won, and the evil sith schemes would have prospered"

      perfect, then maybe they wouldn't have killed off possibly the _best_ villian of all time after giving him 3 lines and about 3 minutes of screen. On the other hand, if jar jar wasn't there, i'm sure qui gon would have raised his hand and said "oh don't worry, the force will take care of everything". Then he would look like he was bored and falling asleep as they narrowly avoided danger and defeated the entire trade federation.

    • Jar Jar wasn't important to the story line. But then, neither was Anikan or the Jedi.

      The whole battle with the droids was pointless; Palpatine was going to show up in a day or two to remove the blockade and be a hero anyway.

      The Senator still came out smelling like a rose, and ready to take over the job of chancellor.

      Jar Jar just managed to drag his people into a war that ended up pointlessly killing a lot of his people.

      Though, the real problem there is that the story just didn't make any sense.

      • Re:Jar Jar must live, deal with it (Score:1, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        George has a chance here to please his fan-base: by making JarJar turn into a credible, mature character. Imagine he inherits the title of leader of his race ? And find himself involved into the interstellar-sized plot of Palpatine ?

        In the original SW episodes, Luke grew from an uncaring, impatient personality, to a self-confident Jedi (compare Luke arguing with his Uncle and Aunt in episode 4, with Luke facing Jabba in the episode 6).
        Imagine Anakin and JarJar going through the same process. IMO this could lead to really interesting twists in the general Clone Wars story.
    • Actually, were Lucas a better writer, Jar Jar would not simply have been unimportant to the story, he wouldn't have been there at all.

      That's the great trick with writing original fiction-- you can do ANYTHING YOU WANT. And when you're making a movie based on your original fiction by fully funding it yourself, you have complete control.

      So let's say Jar Jar didn't exist. Qui Gon and Obi Wan have no transport to the Naboo city? Fine, write in a new excuse to get them there. And have it make sense. Simple as that. That's what your average writer would have done.

      A good writer, of course, would have made the sequence work both on its own and as part of the larger tapestry of the story, while being gripping for the audience at the same time. And since we're talking first act here-- and I'm fairly certain George knows three-act structure, I'll give him that-- this is all a part of introducing our characters and laying the foundation for everything that will occur in the second and third acts (essentially giving the audience all the tools they need to get through the rest of the movie).

      Star Wars belongs exclusively to Lucas. He doesn't HAVE to include Jar Jar, because he should be able to write his way around that shit. He only has to include Jar Jar if he wants to sell kiddie merchandise crap and piss off twenty years' worth of loyal fan base.
    • Jar Jar is important to the story line

      Microsoft Internet Explorer is important to Microsoft Windows.

      Yes, he is silly, he talks like mickey mouse on crack, and he flops around stupidly, but had it not been for Jar Jar, there would be no episode 2 or 3...or the rest even.

      Yes, it is unstable, it has no security inherent in its design and it gives users almost no control over its behavior, but had it not been for IE, there would be no file browser in Windows XP or ME, or Start Button even. After all, the file browser depends on IE.

      If Qui Gon and Obi Wan had not stumbled across Jar Jar, they would never have gotten transport to the naboo city, nor would they have cannon fodder types to fight the war with the battle droids.

      If Microsoft had never integrated MSIE into Windows, we never would have had a way of downloading files or accessing the Internet from Windows computers.

      The trade federation would have won, and the evil sith schemes would have prospered...probably would have started the elimination of the jedi a few years earlier

      The Internet would have collapsed, and geeks suffered...probably we would have started moving away from computers a few years later.

      So, next time when you bash jar jar, realize that he is important to the story

      So, next time when you bash MSIE, realize that it is important to our livelihoods.
      • Oh, brother. Only on Slashdot would you see MS-bashing brought into a discussion that has _absolutely nothing_ to do with MS. It wasn't even a terribly good analogy. Take the karma-whoring elsewhere, please...

  • On the poll [ea.com] that Westwood are running on their Earth and Beyond Online site, their ae some very interesting results :

    What operating system do you have installed on your primary gaming system?

    • Windows XP 6738 30.98 %
    • Windows ME 2677 12.31 %
    • Windows 2000 1939 8.92 %
    • Windows 98 4736 21.78 %
    • Windows 95 192 0.88 %
    • Mac/OS 353 1.62 %
    • Other 5112 23.51 %
    TOTAL 21747 100.00 %

    Thats almost a 25% market share that this Windows only version will be missing out on :/

    Will there be a Linux or Macintosh version?No.

    It's a shame really! Why do some companies instantly dismiss making Linux version's of games? With SDL etc. and the speed of computers nowadays, not developing for Linux is quite imho stupid. Thank heavens for NeverWinter Nights \o/

    • It's a shame really! Why do some companies instantly dismiss making Linux version's of games?

      I'm just stabbing in the dark here, but probably because there's not a single instance of any game selling anywhere near enough units to even dream of making even the most modest profit.

      Honestly not trying to be a troll here, but with a sub-1% desktop marketshare, you can't be surprised that expensively produced games aren't being produced for Linux yet.


  • And so when the reaction comes out that the character wasn't as appealing to myself or someone else is really irrelevant, because we're not the audience, and we shouldn't be the critiques of that.


    Ok, yes, I know the concept of demographic groups and marketing to them. And, apparantly, Jar Jar was supposed to appeal to 13 year old girls.

    Thing is though, you can't target market like that when you're also marketing to a broader market. Why? Because when you target that intensely you're going to inherently turn off the rest of your audience. Which is exactly what happened.

    Target marketing works fine for commercials and advertisements. It even works fine in TV shows and some movies which are supposed to have a limited appeal. But this was a movie (allegedly) designed for broad appeal to most of the Western world. What on earth were they thinking?
  • from the transcript:

    Jar Jar was actually the best possible combination of shapes and personalities and elements that
    George wanted.

    (emphasis mine)

    translation:
    Jar Jar was actually the best possible combination of shapes and personalities and elements that
    anyone could make out of a sack of crap.

    Yuck yuck yuck! If anyone involved in the conception and realization of JJ Binks ever qualifies him by saying "well, he was designed for kids" again, I am going to move to a different planet.
  • Just wanted to say that the ships in EB look really great... I've been betatesting the game for a few weeks now... still buggy, but the graphics are really good.
  • He graduated from UCLA Film school a number of years ago (doing Animation?) I thought I'd slip in an a reference to my alma mater :)

  • Jar Jar is NOT what was wrong with Phantom Menace (Score:4, Informative)

    by hyacinthus ( 225989 ) on Monday April 29, 2002 @12:24PM (#3429858)
    I'll tell you what _did_ suck about _The Phantom Menace_.

    Try that confused mess of a political subplot, something to do with Naboo and the taxation of trade routes and a Trade Federation that came from God knows where and controls God knows which and wants God knows what from Naboo--hell, does _any_ of that make any sense?

    Try Johnny one-note characters like Qui Gon, Obi Wan, and Amidala: Qui Gon hardly utters anything other than gnomic pronouncements about the Force and the prophecy (I know, one can argue that Obi Wan from _Star Wars_ was little better, but Alec Guinness is ten times the actor that Liam Neeson is, and he makes Obi Wan interesting in a way that Neeson, with his monotonous delivery, utterly fails to do with Qui Gon.) Obi Wan has hardly any dialogue of importance at all; he's there to swing a lightsaber. Amidala is the concerned child queen and nothing else, aside from a few lines of painful dialogue (e.g. "My caring for you will remain.")

    Try the finale of the climactic battle, which uses the "single ship sneaks in and blows up the great fortress" plot for the _third time in four movies_. That it's done by _accident_, by a character whose most memorable dialogue in the whole sequence is, "Let's try spinning, that's a good trick!", makes it all the more painful.

    In comparison to all this, Jar Jar is a positive breath of fresh air. I hate to think of how dreary some of the scenes in _Phantom Menace_ would have been without him--hell, in all those interminable scenes at the beginning of the movie where Qui Gon and Obi Wan are trying to get off Naboo, Jar Jar is the only interesting thing on the screen. He's goofy and silly, yes, but oddly thoughtful at times (such as when he tells Amidala that the Gungans aren't going to give up without a fight--he's still proud of the people who banished him.)

    But everyone hates him, of course. At least, everyone _here_ hates him. I guess it's all part of that attitude, so prevalent among fans of things like Star Wars and Babylon 5, that _hates_ children and everything that is perceived as childish or reminding one of childhood. I daresay that, considering that many fans are probably only recently emerged from childhood themselves (or, depending on your point of view, still there), this attitude is understandable. Jar Jar, so the conventional wisdom goes, is for the kids--therefore, the sooner he dies a gruesome death, the better.

    hyacinthus.
  • Sign Our Petition! [petitiononline.com]

    That's right, a petition to Cast Steve "Crocodile Hunter" Irwin in Star Wars ep. 3! Combining the coolness of Star Wars with the great character that is everyone's favorite Australian. Sign the petition and let George Lucas know who you want to see in the final Star Wars Prequel!
  • If you want it, click here [missingleftsocks.com]. There are many Star Wars downloads in the downloads section as well.

  • Why Lucas Sucks (Score:3, Interesting)

    by zephc ( 225327 ) on Tuesday April 30, 2002 @02:30AM (#3434358)
    If you want to read a really stallar critique of Lucas and the Star Wars movies, check out this Salon article [salon.com] by David Brin. It was written after SW:TPM came out, and I think it does a great job of tearing Lucas apart >:) IMO, Lucas is basically a hack with a really high budget.

Slashdot Top Deals

Disclaimer: "These opinions are my own, though for a small fee they be yours too." -- Dave Haynie

Close