Only the original unedited first three Star Wars movies are legitimate Star Wars.... all the other prequels and sequels are illegitimate and phony.
As for those who think they are legitimate, genuine and authentic, then they are wrong. They show they do not have artistic, filmmaking, cinematic, narrative-coherent, integrated-visionary judgement...they are just consumers. People can like what they want, but only the original three films are legitimate. I only watched 20 mins of the first prequel and rightly boycotted the rest of the commercial, social engineering, populist distortion. They can fool some of the people but not all of the people.
You can't start changing the whole character, culture and technology of a story after you have told it.
You can't start changing scenes after you have announced, advertised and presented them.
Sure, you can make alternate versions with these cuts and remakes, but to eliminate the original history of the story, the original vision that people held in their minds, emotions and memories...to be replaced with some fashionable, artifically forged, rubbish? No.
Changing original movies and eliminating the original vision is one act of destructive butchery. Another act of fabricated inauthentic nonsense is when you make prequels and sequels that betray the nature, culture, coherence, integrity and vision of the original story. You can't say "The world is like this, a supernatural horror or sci-fi war between tradition and corrupted modernity, step inside..." and then later down the line, say "I've changed my mind, now we are in a cowboy comedy or a party political broadcast for the socially corrupt, morally degenerate party." If you want to do that, then just become a politician, be part of the government education system or work for the mainstream media in the sphere of political and social commentary.
How about if song writers, musicians and composers start eliminating their original published versions, changing both the meaning and the sound in some new concoction which retains the same title?
How about if two people get married and after the wedding reception, contract, vows and marriage ceremony, the husband says to the wife, "What I mean now is that you are not a wife but a house maid?"
When a filmmaker releases a movie to the public, not to a preliminary test audience before the movie is completed, he is making a contract with the viewer. He is effectively saying, I want to take you on a journey in a world I have crafted, do you want to come with me? Do you want to accept and be part of what I show you? Do you want this to be part of your conceptual tapestry, your cultural experience, your artistic, psychological and emotional memory? Do you accept this to be part of your social and experiential background? They then accept and watch it and the movie becomes part of their history and a socio-cultural reference point, it may well be a basis for important conceptual allegories and symbolism they may draw upon in the wider world.
So on the basis of that heavy mental implant being accepted, the viewer, the observer, wants to relive the story again, perhaps to share the experience, message and key moments with a new audience. And then he finds the key scenes missing or changed. His trust has been betrayed, history has been wiped, the vision has been smashed and the trance broken.
You are sitting with your wife, friends or children, wanting to show and share with them an experience and suddenly you find yourself robbed. Where the hell did this scene go? Who the hell corrupted the vision? Who has vandalized this story? This is unforgivable, what is this rubbish?
If you do this as a filmmaker, as a director or whatever, then you will no longer be trusted. Your next movie, you want people to buy into it? You want them to have confidence in this story or is that just some experimental junk which you will play with after you sold it? No, you will be just be regarded as a cheat now, a liar, a fraud. You are not a filmmaker but a story breaker.
If an audience accepts this sort of thing then they themselves do not understand the cinematic experience, they don't understand the necessary coherence and continuity of story telling. If they accept this then they are in fact illegitimate viewers, they are invalid spectators, they are inwardly deaf, dumb and blind. They are probably the sort of people who like to see a trailer before a movie or listen to a critic's review before seeing the movie themselves.
And as for all those new 'actors' in the recent illegitimate star wars prequels and sequels who think they are part of the Star Wars world...Sorry, you are not part of it, you are just part of some fabricated counterfeit commercial joke.
You must be really fun at parties man.
ReplyDeleteI don't go to parties, but when I did I won the dance competitions and told the jokes. But one man's fun is another man's misery.
Deletegrow up snowflake
ReplyDeleteFunny as there was snow today. If only life was easy as falling down from the sky in the form of a beautiful geometric shape and then melting. Movies can be a trivial issue, if it were not for the fact of them being used for mass social-engineering.
DeleteI really enjoy and absorb your writing's, Zayd. If you wrote an article about the true state of humanity and the human heart, I would read it. You know how people like to say that most people are good people? I'm not so optimistic. For example, when Adolph Hitler came to power people were calling the authorities on each other right and left for the pettiest thing's to the point that even Hitler was surprised by how quickly people can turn on each other. It make's me wonder what people are really like underneath it all... Maybe we're all waiting to rip each other apart over the last Twinkie. Just a thought, I haven't seen a book or anything about this before.
ReplyDeleteTimothy Whitney
Amen. I actually watched all of "episode I" to see what happened, but the sense of chagrin and betrayal made me livid then, and now.
ReplyDelete