ROTJ Usenet discussions circa 1984

Status
Not open for further replies.

NumberTwo

Paper or plastic?
Has anyone seen these before? Seems even back then there were heated discussions involving continuity and nitpicking about scripting decisions. The more things things change, the more they stay the same it seems:

_Star_Wars_

by Kelvin Thompson

_Star_Wars_, yet another entry in the recent spate of "Space Operas," is
a bad, morally empty movie. Look, quick!! It has lights!! It has
zooming spaceships!! It has laser flashes!! It has explosions!! Look
closer, and it has nothing.

The plot of _Star_Wars_ is certainly nothing new: a bunch of good guys
try to overthrow an evil space empire. Ruling the evil space empire
are an evil count, James Earl Jones (a Negro), and an evil spaceship
commander, Peter Cushing
(_Dracula_A.D._1972_, _The_Curse_of_
_Frankenstein_). Among the good guys are a princess, Carrie Fisher
(_The_Blues_Brothers, _Shampoo_), an old warrior, Alec Guiness
(_The_Man_in_the_White_Suit_, _Murder_by_Death_), a young warrior, Mark
Hammil (_Corvette_Summer_, _Three_Women_), a mercenary, Harrison Ford
(_Witness_, _The_Conversation_), and assorted robots and aliens.

From its opening scene, where two spaceships chase each other around a
planet while trying to blow one another to smithereens, the movie loses
any semblance of realism. The spaceships make swishing and humming
noises as they maneuver about, and their lasers make zapping noises as
they fire -- all despite the fact that it has been scientifically proven
that there are absolutely no sounds in space.


In another gaffe later in the movie, a robot supposedly manages to go up
and down a staircase, even though it is quite obvious that it is
structurally impossible for the robot to do so. The camera cuts away
just as the robot gets to the staircase, but the viewer is again jolted
by the obvious impossiblity.

More important than any scientific error, however, is the glaring lack of
any moral statement. In a time of mass starvation in central Africa,
terrible human-wave battles in the Middle East, repression of civil
rights in the USSR, legalized racism in South Africa, and rampant
terrorism everywhere, this movie just hums merrily along in its
rose-colored glasses.

For example, when Hammill, the supposed hero of the movie, sees the
burned corpses of his parents, he responds by turning his head sideways.

No tears, no shouts of outrage, just a crick in the neck and they are
forgotten. Later, when an android buddy of his is discriminated against
in a space-bar, he accepts the wrong without a blink. Late in the film,
when an entire *planet* full of billions of sentient beings is
annihilated, the good guys just sort of go, "Gosh, that's too bad."
The
bad guys, of course, smile cruelly. These kinds of responses to murder,
discrimination, and genocide certainly do not encourage the kind of
consciousness needed to overcome today's problems.

_Star_Wars_ contains a lot of action sequences, so it will no doubt have
a strong draw on today's young people. Nonetheless, parents should make
every effort to keep their children away from this morally bankrupt movie
and direct them toward a film which takes a useful stand on some of the
issues facing our world. And, naturally, all ethical adults should stay
well away from it themselves.

Thread:
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/net.movies.sw/9p-xuzbQRAA

Newsgroup:
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!forum/net.movies.sw

This is way before my time, so are these legit?

EDIT: Oops. I was also reading a ROTJ discussion when I posted this.
 
That's about Star Wars, not Return of the Jedi. The responses indicate the post is a joke, but I don't know if it's actually from 1985 or not.
 
For example, when Hammill, the supposed hero of the movie, sees the
burned corpses of his parents, he responds by turning his head sideways.
No tears, no shouts of outrage, just a crick in the neck and they are
forgotten.

they weren't his parents ya dangus
 
That's about Star Wars, not Return of the Jedi. The responses indicate the post is a joke, but I don't know if it's actually from 1985 or not.

I think this is legit (though you're correct: that post in particular is about SW not ROTJ). There were some early internet impressions that I've seen about ROTJ... that movie was not as beloved as it is today.

I don't think RotJ is all that great either; there are too many things that
gave me that "hey, wait a minute" feeling---badly done effects (not poorly
conceived, most of the time, but poorly done (out of focus, bad scale,
funny-looking perspective)), bad pacing, and a final scene that looks more and
more like bad amateur theatricals every time I see it. But I don't think
Spielberg can grow into the shoes Lucas may have given up---if only because
he takes himself too seriously.

The only new features were some aliens (mostly disappointing)
and the sky cycles. The Orkish creatures guarding Jabba's house were
cartoon imitations. Jabba itself was a combination of one of the early
muppets from the first year of "Friday Night Live", and Sidney Greenstreet.
( The setting of jabba's room was reminiscent of the fat man's bar from
Casablanca. ) All the space scenes are now dull, after 6 years of
space-special-effects-exploitation movies.
It has been mentioned that the introduction of characters was confusing,
if you did not see the previous films. But even so, I got the feeling that
someone was acting with a green fozzy-bear muppet in one of the scenes.

NO; this film did not add anything to the genre of SF movies, but just
gave children, producers, and trivial space opera boffos something

Discrete Review: I started off not liking it, but changed my mind about half way
through once I got used to the nauseatingly cute Ewoks (they had "New Star
Wars Toys" spelled out all over them) and something else I'm surprised I only
saw mentioned once so far.

I thought that RotJ was very heavy on gratuitous violence compared to both its
predecessors. It bothered me that the audience would laugh every time a
Stormtrooper smashed into a tree on his motorcycle. It ended up reminding me of
nothing more than a live-action Road Runner cartoon. This casual attitude
toward death was reinforced when all the good guys ended up coming back as
holograms anyway. Kicked the bucket? Not to worry - you just get a bit
translucent, that's all. Sort of takes away something in the dramatic impact
department, though.

The plot: And now for something completely different. (The Larch). Did we
really need to see *another* Death Star blow up? ("It blowed up good", "Yeah,
it blowed up *real* good"). Is the plot of this series being recycled mod 2 or
what?

Worst muppet: the blue elephant - gimme a break.

Worst scene: the mushy stuff with Han & Leia on Endor. Also, the
strangulation of Pizza the Hutt was just not convincing. That chain didn't cut
into Jabba's neck (such as it was) at all.

Best part: when Luke slices off DV's hand, sees the machinery, and then flexes
his own mechanical hand wondering if the Emp is right about his "destiny".

Best joke: when Han is hot-wiring the back door and says "I think I got it", and
another set of doors closes. Thank goodness at least the Millenium Falcon
worked this time.

Although I thought the final confrontation with the Emperor was the best scene
in the movie, I agree with the comments that it was a rather hokey way for him
to go, down the hatch that is. I don't understand why he didn't just turn his
high-voltage arcing on Darth Vader when he lifted him up. He just stood there
frozen, uselessly zapping the ceiling on his way to be dumped. But it was great
the way all the excess blue stuff came splashing back up the well after he hit
bottom. Boy he sure had a lot of it stored up!

RotJ had its moments, but I think my thirst for SW movies has now been
quenched.
 
Seems about right, I was arguing with friends at school about the plot. No youtube or DVD to back up your arguments then though, so you had people with different memories of the same scene arguing with no way to prove which was right.
 
"James Earl Jones (a Negro)", when speaking about being a supreme ruler almost, almost makes it sound like a complement after 2008.
 
More important than any scientific error, however, is the glaring lack of
any moral statement. In a time of mass starvation in central Africa,
terrible human-wave battles in the Middle East, repression of civil
rights in the USSR, legalized racism in South Africa, and rampant
terrorism everywhere, this movie just hums merrily along in its
rose-colored glasses.

Wat.
 
I find usenets extremely fascinating. It is a look back at an age almost three decades in the past, but I find it interesting of how similar these discussions are to the present day forum format. The fact that a lot of these discussions are archived really provide insight on the development of online communications and the internet.

Does anybody have links of archives of political debates? It would be really interesting to see discussions of stuff such as the Soviet War in Afghanistan, the fall of the Berlin Wall, the dissolution of the Soviet Union, etc.
 
More important than any scientific error, however, is the glaring lack of
any moral statement. In a time of mass starvation in central Africa,
terrible human-wave battles in the Middle East, repression of civil
rights in the USSR, legalized racism in South Africa, and rampant
terrorism everywhere, this movie just hums merrily along in its
rose-colored glasses.
Looks like nothing changed in the past 3 decades.
 
More important than any scientific error, however, is the glaring lack of
any moral statement. In a time of mass starvation in central Africa,
terrible human-wave battles in the Middle East, repression of civil
rights in the USSR, legalized racism in South Africa, and rampant
terrorism everywhere, this movie just hums merrily along in its
rose-colored glasses.

The bolded must be about the Iran-Iraq war.
 
Looks like nothing changed in the past 3 decades.

Yeah, that's what makes me laugh. I feel like a lot of people in our generation think we're so different from past generations, but the same types of people and discussions have been going on for ages.
 
Wish I could find it, but there was a usenet thread posted from 1984 or so in the Michael Jackson thread. There was a post in that 1984 thread that could have been written by Patrick Bateman.
 
I didn't really like the first movie. Holy shit at "a Negro" wth.


On the topic of posting, I'm glad we can use italics. _Words_Like_This_Are_Annoying. Even when I don't have the ability to use italics I use a single underscore before and after titles, ie _This Is A Title_. Far less obnoxious.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom