Masket’s right, ROTS is best

I’ve generally avoided the latest outbreak of Star Wars nerd discussion, which started when Kevin Drum decided to publish his heretical claim that ROTJ was the best Star Wars movie, but I felt obligated to offer my support when Seth Masket put in a vote for ROTS.  Left the following comment at his blog (edited it a little):

Well done – I agree with your estimation – but one thing I note in all of the nerd discussion is that it’s all very subjectively character- and plot-focused. “Characters you can care about” or “dislike,” or, even worse, “characters that audiences can care about.” So what? Audiences are stupid. A major reason that the Ewoks are so deplorable is that they were technically very poorly executed, or well enough executed only if you are six years old – in other words done down to a perceived audience segment level. Aesthetically, Jar Jar was the same mistake, but with the new digital f/x technologies.

Sith > Any of the Others because by the third time working with virtually unlimited budgets and contemporary technology, Lucas finally got it all mostly right, and produced a cinematic Gesamtkunstwerk beautiful to look at and listen to, as well as to “read.” The final Obi-Wan v Annakin fight that you highlight is a scene on the shores of Hell, but it’s led up to by the action of the entire second half, which, beginning approximately at the fight with Windu sweeps forward, propelled by the score, through a series of masterfully choreographed battles/duels – to the finale and epilogue: During the latter, the multi-leveled birth/deaths – Annakin dying/Darth being born, obviously Luke and Leia being born – while simultaneously ending and giving (re-)birth to the entire series as we know it.

ROTS is not flawless, in my view – I’m not really even a big Star Wars fan – but it is a far better work of cinematic art than ROTJ, and the best of the entire series.

Home Page  Public Email  Twitter  Facebook  YouTube  Github   

Writing since ancient times, blogging, e-commercing, and site installing-designing-maintaining since 2001; WordPress theme and plugin configuring and developing since 2004 or so; a lifelong freelancer, not associated nor to be associated with any company, publication, party, university, church, or other institution. 

3 comments on “Masket’s right, ROTS is best

Commenting at CK MacLeod's

We are determined to encourage thoughtful discussion, so please be respectful to others. We also provide a set of Commenting Options - comment/commenter highlighting and ignoring, and commenter archives that you can access by clicking the commenter options button (). Go to our Commenting Guidelines page for more details, including how to report offensive and spam commenting.

      • That’s fair. Better cinematic art. I’ve always found it interesting that “nerds” are so involved in Star Wars. To me, Star Wars was all about heart, not mind. The original movie is so much better than the rest as to make comparisons on a level of importance and fun ridiculous. The original movie was as important and fun as a Hollywood movie can be. It changed culture. It made an entire culture unconsciously at least aware of Jungian psychology. No small achievement and it did so without being at all artful. I watched the original once, just after being schooled by a senior TV writer who had an actual list of dos and don’ts. One of his biggest don’ts that made sense to me was to never have your main characters ask questions. It weakened them was the point and there was always a better way to get where questions take you. When I watched Star Wars I was struck by the number of questions Luke and Hans asked. There were whole scenes in which they did nothing but ask questions. But the art aspect was so inconsequential it didn’t matter. Star Wars was (is) all heart. Along with the Wizard of Oz, then, and for the same reasons, I consider Star Wars to be the most important movie ever. Why I feel that way is what surprises me about the nerd factor. Is someone really still a nerd if they love a movie because of its heart? Or, maybe you can only be a nerd if you’re all about heart. Certainly, the actual Nerd movies have nerds connected to their hearts more than their brains.

Commenter Ignore Button by CK's Plug-Ins

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *



Noted & Quoted

TV pundits and op-ed writers of every major newspaper epitomize how the Democratic establishment has already reached a consensus: the 2020 nominee must be a centrist, a Joe Biden, Cory Booker or Kamala Harris–type, preferably. They say that Joe Biden should "run because [his] populist image fits the Democrats’ most successful political strategy of the past generation" (David Leonhardt, New York Times), and though Biden "would be far from an ideal president," he "looks most like the person who could beat Trump" (David Ignatius, Washington Post). Likewise, the same elite pundit class is working overtime to torpedo left-Democratic candidates like Sanders.

For someone who was not acquainted with Piketty's paper, the argument for a centrist Democrat might sound compelling. If the country has tilted to the right, should we elect a candidate closer to the middle than the fringe? If the electorate resembles a left-to-right line, and each voter has a bracketed range of acceptability in which they vote, this would make perfect sense. The only problem is that it doesn't work like that, as Piketty shows.

The reason is that nominating centrist Democrats who don't speak to class issues will result in a great swathe of voters simply not voting. Conversely, right-wing candidates who speak to class issues, but who do so by harnessing a false consciousness — i.e. blaming immigrants and minorities for capitalism's ills, rather than capitalists — will win those same voters who would have voted for a more class-conscious left candidate. Piketty calls this a "bifurcated" voting situation, meaning many voters will connect either with far-right xenophobic nationalists or left-egalitarian internationalists, but perhaps nothing in-between.

Comment →

Understanding Trump’s charisma offers important clues to understanding the problems that the Democrats need to address. Most important, the Democratic candidate must convey a sense that he or she will fulfil the promise of 2008: not piecemeal reform but a genuine, full-scale change in America’s way of thinking. It’s also crucial to recognise that, like Britain, America is at a turning point and must go in one direction or another. Finally, the candidate must speak to Americans’ sense of self-respect linked to social justice and inclusion. While Weber’s analysis of charisma arose from the German situation, it has special relevance to the United States of America, the first mass democracy, whose Constitution invented the institution of the presidency as a recognition of the indispensable role that unique individuals play in history.

Comment →

[E]ven Fox didn’t tout Bartiromo’s big scoops on Trump’s legislative agenda, because 10 months into the Trump presidency, nobody is so foolish as to believe that him saying, “We’re doing a big infrastructure bill,” means that the Trump administration is, in fact, doing a big infrastructure bill. The president just mouths off at turns ignorantly and dishonestly, and nobody pays much attention to it unless he says something unusually inflammatory.On some level, it’s a little bit funny. On another level, Puerto Rico is still languishing in the dark without power (and in many cases without safe drinking water) with no end in sight. Trump is less popular at this point in his administration than any previous president despite a generally benign economic climate, and shows no sign of changing course. Perhaps it will all work out for the best, and someday we’ll look back and chuckle about the time when we had a president who didn’t know anything about anything that was happening and could never be counted on to make coherent, factual statements on any subject. But traditionally, we haven’t elected presidents like that — for what have always seemed like pretty good reasons — and the risks of compounding disaster are still very much out there.

Comment →
CK's WP Plugins


Extraordinary Comments

CK's WP Plugins