Crooklyn said:
The latter. I was posting in the BB forums around Sep 03, and left just around the release of BB (because this place was just full of new idiots), so I doubt you'll know who I am anyway.
I might, I might not. I actually did lurk for a little while here before BB came out because I was looking for trailer links, screecaps, and reviews of the film. It took me a while to decide to join, but just before the film came out there was enough going on here that it seemed like it was time to join.
I consider it "very good". I'd rank ESB above it. As for popularity/quality, I think there's a certain line where that statement doesn't apply. As in, when a film reaches such a point that everyone is in love with it and makes tons of money. It's possible that the film is crap, but it's also highly improbable.
Not really. Star Wars brought a lot of innovation to the table, and successfully created a convincing universe where all this crazy stuff could realistically be shown to happen. It was something nobody had ever done before. It isn't terribly well-written but it was well-made, on a technical level. It was addictive just to look at it. I don't know about you but when I first watched ANH, it was the POSSIBILITIES presented by that universe that really got my attention and captured my imagination. It doesn't necessarily take a great movie to do that, but it does take something unique and special, and Star Wars is certainly that.
To be honest, I don't really know. It's hard to imagine anyone else playing Obi-Wan during that time. Guinness had tremendous film cred, but I don't think that takes anything away from ANH. Regardless if he was there or not, I'm pretty sure ANH would've held its own. Guinness didn't make the film for me.
Now I'll tell you why Lucas went after Sir Alec for that role. Basically, ANH hinges on Obi-Wan. He's the Gandalf character. Luke is the rising hero, but Obi-Wan is the one who is going to guide him on his journey. Obi-Wan is the voice of the past, the one who clues Luke in (and the rest of us) as to what is going on in that big, bad galaxy. Any actor playing that role had to be able to bring a texture and a depth to the character that went beyond the dialogue and the robes.
Obi-Wan has always been my favorite SW character, and the reason for it has always been because of Alec Guinness' performance in ANH. It's the subtlety of his performance that sells it for me. Watch his eyes. In every scene he's doing something with his eyes. When Luke asks how his father died, Obi-Wan's eyes bug a little at the question, he pauses, rubs his thigh as though he is hesitant to answer.
Now, at this time I understand that Lucas did not have the Darth Vader = Anakin plot in place. Sir Alec was just feeling the role and for whatever reason chose that response, perhaps a certain reluctance to tell the boy of the circumstances of his father's death, perhaps because Vader was Obi-Wan's pupil and Obi-Wan clearly felt responsible.
The wistful way he tweaks his moustaches as he speaks of the glory days. The cynical narrowing of his eyes when Han delivers the "less than twelve parsecs" line, because Obi-Wan knows that what Han has just said does not make any sense.
A lesser actor would not have delivered that subtlety.
And if the role had been performed so well, the entire movie would have collapsed like a house of cards. Obi-Wan is the conduit by which the rich "history" of the Star Wars galaxy is explained to us in ANH. If you don't have a great Obi-Wan, you have nothing.
Also, in those days audiences did not take SF flicks seriously because they were never very well made. Lucas needed a credible name like Alec Guinness on the marquee in order to generate some measure of interest and credibility, pre-release. In all honesty I don't believe that ANH would have been a hit without Sir Alec.
Since we're on the subject I'll give you another item to ponder. The prequels are every bit as deep and intelligent as the OT (which is quite a bit) but also as clumsily written. That's right -- I think the Star Wars movies are smart. They're not great, they're not very well-crafted in a literary sense. But they are rather intelligent in their way. If you look past Jar Jar, there's a lot of very boring but very smart political intrigue in TPM. It doesn't make a very exciting movie, but it IS an extremely well thought-out one.
I wasn't referring directly towards you, just that from what I've seen, the arguments discussing a film's quality often resort to that in the end. Like I said, it's an endless cycle.
Well, you're right enough that they often do. But again I reassure you, you needn't fear it from me.
I do look forward to discussing TDK with you in the future though. I sense a lot of potential debates. Maybe when this place stops focusing on casting threads, we could get through with that.
Right on. There aren't many threads here that I deem worth contributing to at the moment, but they'll come in time, and I'm looking forward to it too.
TMAN!
t:
