Jump to content

Star Wars Prequels


rushgoober
 Share

In retrospect, do you think the Star Wars prequels should have been made or not? Which option fits you best?  

38 members have voted

  1. 1. In retrospect, do you think the Star Wars prequels should have been made or not? Which option fits you best?

    • I'm glad they got made - they were great - a worthy addition to the Star Wars universe!
      5
    • They weren't as good as the originals, but I'm glad they're there.
      14
    • I'm ambivalent - decent movies - fine with them, would have been fine without them.
      7
    • They were ok or not so great - it would have been better they never existed - they tarnish the Star Wars legacy.
      6
    • WTF was George Lucas thinking with this craptacular trilogy? What a way to ruin a franchise!
      6


Recommended Posts

I've been thinking about this lately.

 

When the first prequel came out I was perplexed - I was overwhelmed by the visuals, but felt the story was overly-complicated and didn't see how a lot of it was relevant. Upon further viewings I got super annoyed with Jar-Jar Binks and the horrendous acting of the young Anakin and his mother. The pod race scene seemed just an unnecessary bit of fluff to later sell video games.

 

The 2nd and 3rd movies were far better, but nowhere near the quality of the original trilogy. Yes, the special effects were fantastic, I mean REALLY amazing, but the characters all seemed so wooden, and some of the dialogue was atrocious. The romance between Anakin and the Princess was really pretty bad, bordering on embarrassingly bad.

 

Basically, it was like 3 movies that at best matched the quality of the 2nd and 3rd Matrix movies, so I'm of the opinion they should never have been made. Similarly, the 2nd and 3rd Matrix movies should never have been made. That said, I've watched all of them several times, and I'll watch them again over time, but the prequels tarnished the legacy IMHO...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, I'm not a huge fan of the original trilogy. I like it, I just don't think it's the greatest thing ever. With that said, the prequels are horrible. Especially The Revenge of the Sith.

 

I'll watch any movie from the original trilogy again. The prequels, no way.

 

Oh yeah, one thing that George Lucas got right - casting Ewan McGregor as Obi-Wan Kenobi. He's the only thing worthy of being compared to the cast of the original movies.

Edited by ReRushed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chose the middle option.... The overall plot stepping points throughout were good..... alot of what made the journey was not...

 

Jar Jar is an obvious flaw, followed second by Hayden Christiansen's portrayal of Anakin Skywalker in the second movie (the third movie he did decent)....

 

George Lucas should have had other writer's contributing....his scripts have the direction right, but everything else wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Apr 19 2010, 10:29 PM)
First off, I'm not a huge fan of the original trilogy. I like it, I just don't think it's the greatest thing ever. With that said, the prequels are horrible. Especially The Revenge of the Sith.

I'll watch any movie from the original trilogy again. The prequels, no way.

Oh yeah, one thing that George Lucas got right - casting Ewan McGregor as Obi-Wan Kenobi. He's the only thing worthy of being compared to the cast of the original movies.

That summed it up nicely. Lucas screwed up the SW legacy not only with the prequels, but with the re-edits of the original three movies.

 

This comparison between "The Phantom Menace" and the original trilogy was posted in another thread a while back, but it's worth another look. It's long and in seven parts, but it's not only insightful, but funny as hell.

 

"It's almost mindboggling how complex the awfulness is."

 

Pt. 1 -

Pt. 2 -

Pt. 3 -

Pt. 4 -

Pt. 5 -

Pt. 6 -

Pt. 7 -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (1-0-0-1-0-0-1 @ Apr 20 2010, 03:10 AM)
QUOTE (ReRushed @ Apr 19 2010, 10:29 PM)
First off, I'm not a huge fan of the original trilogy.  I like it, I just don't think it's the greatest thing ever.  With that said, the prequels are horrible.  Especially The Revenge of the Sith.

I'll watch any movie from the original trilogy again.  The prequels, no way.

Oh yeah, one thing that George Lucas got right - casting Ewan McGregor as Obi-Wan Kenobi.  He's the only thing worthy of being compared to the cast of the original movies.

That summed it up nicely. Lucas screwed up the SW legacy not only with the prequels, but with the re-edits of the original three movies.

 

This comparison between "The Phantom Menace" and the original trilogy was posted in another thread a while back, but it's worth another look. It's long and in seven parts, but it's not only insightful, but funny as hell.

 

"It's almost mindboggling how complex the awfulness is."

 

Pt. 1 -

Pt. 2 -

Pt. 3 -

Pt. 4 -

Pt. 5 -

Pt. 6 -

Pt. 7 -

I spent the morning watching this. Funny, and true.

 

The thing is, this is only the tip of the iceberg with what's wrong with it. Delve deeper into the plot and you find still more things which make no sense. I like what he says about the whole "Trade Federation" conflict that starts the action, how it's very confusing. Get to Episode 3, after the "Separatists" and the Clone Army have been introduced, and it's only more confusing to understand each character's motives - why do they do what they do? It's all the more confusing to us because we know Palpatine and Darth Sidious are the same character, and one shows allegiance to one faction while the other shows allegiance to another; it's supposed to be an act on Palpatine's part, why he says and does what he says and does. This deception was intentional on his part, enabling him to achieve his goal... ummm, what was his goal again? His motivation? confused13.gif Trade? Separatists? Clones? I need a nap!

 

Another good point: why not combine Qui-Gon Jinn and Obi-Wan Kenobi into a single character, called "Obi-Wan Kenobi"? We don't care about Jinn anyway, and it would give Kenobi more to do.

 

What this reviewer says at the end of the 7th part sums it up nicely: nobody challenges George and they all fear him... so he does what he originally wants and is never questioned along the way. Nobody dares say, "George, this makes no rational sense" or "All this diplomatic manuevering by the characters will confuse the viewer." Nobody at Lucasfilm challenges Lucas: "George, these characters suck."

Edited by GeddyRulz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (The Owl @ Apr 19 2010, 07:30 PM)
George Lucas should have had other writer's contributing....his scripts have the direction right, but everything else wrong.

This was the main problem. George Lucas definitely needed some script fixers to come in and tell him what didn't work and tweak some elements, especially the dialogue. The ideas were great, but the execution was often terrible.

 

One of the most well known and worst offenders:

 

"From the moment I met you, all those years ago, not a day has gone by when I haven't thought of you. And now that I'm with you again... I'm in agony. The closer I get to you, the worse it gets. The thought of not being with you- I can't breath. I'm haunted by the kiss that you should never have given me. My heart is beating... hoping that kiss will not become a scar. You are in my very soul, tormenting me... what can I do? I will do anything you ask."

 

All I can say is 062802puke_prv.gif

 

Who the f*ck talks like that? Sounds like an embarrassing adolescent diary entry. Can you imagine Han Solo saying this to Princess Leia? She would have laughed in his face.

Edited by rushgoober
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (1-0-0-1-0-0-1 @ Apr 20 2010, 01:10 AM)
Lucas screwed up the SW legacy not only with the prequels, but with the re-edits of the original three movies.

I disagree, I loved the re-edits of the originals, and they were pretty minor - small added scenes, improved sound and picture, some added CGI.

 

Really, the biggest change was the ending, removing the stupid ewok song and showing celebrations all over the galaxy, giving the victory by the rebels the true scope it was lacking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (rushgoober @ Apr 20 2010, 07:24 AM)
QUOTE (1-0-0-1-0-0-1 @ Apr 20 2010, 01:10 AM)
Lucas screwed up the SW legacy not only with the prequels, but with the re-edits of the original three movies.

I disagree, I loved the re-edits of the originals, and they were pretty minor - small added scenes, improved sound and picture, some added CGI.

 

Really, the biggest change was the ending, removing the stupid ewok song and showing celebrations all over the galaxy, giving the victory by the rebels the true scope it was lacking.

Agreed. Jedi is arguably BETTER than it was before and Empire is barely affected at all....(stuff like backgrounds, etc.).

 

Star Wars was the worst of the lot, as far as changes went.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wanted to like them. Really I did but gawd almighty they're just so bad. Visually they're stunning and are serious eye candy. But great CGI does not a good film make.

 

I can't get past the B-movie acting (except for McGregor & Neeson) and the whole Jar-Jar thing...just can't get past it all. Grating & irritating & childish to say the least. Perhaps if I was 7 again I'd enjoy them but I ain't. And there's too much going on...one group of bad guys is all that's needed. Plot wise it's a mess and the dialogue is, well, pathetic.

 

For my tastes The Clone Wars series on Cartoon Network is much more compelling, interesting and much better written.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (rushgoober @ Apr 20 2010, 07:24 AM)
QUOTE (1-0-0-1-0-0-1 @ Apr 20 2010, 01:10 AM)
Lucas screwed up the SW legacy not only with the prequels, but with the re-edits of the original three movies.

I disagree, I loved the re-edits of the originals, and they were pretty minor - small added scenes, improved sound and picture, some added CGI.

 

Really, the biggest change was the ending, removing the stupid ewok song and showing celebrations all over the galaxy, giving the victory by the rebels the true scope it was lacking.

I think all the additions and re-edits are fine and enhance the movies... except one. Sorry, but Greedo should NOT have shot first. I remember my first impression of Han Solo in 1977. At first, we knew nothing about him other than the fact that he haggled over money and then fried an alien with his blaster. These two combined acts made me think "Maybe we shouldn't be trusting this guy"... which is exactly what the audience should be thinking at that point in the film! Having Greedo "shoot first" ruins the appropriate questioning-of-Solo's-character that the audience should be doing at that stage of the film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GeddyR, I think you nailed it. The prequels are like a Pollack painting: visually interesting but what the hell is going on? A mess. In the originals the characters were interesting and the setting and effects, while surely a big part of the story, weren't what carried the movies. Other than hating Jar-Jar and laughing at Sam Jackson I don't have a connection with the overwhelming cast parading before the screen.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (theredtamasrule @ Apr 20 2010, 11:00 AM)
GeddyR, I think you nailed it. The prequels are like a Pollack painting: visually interesting but what the hell is going on? A mess. In the originals the characters were interesting and the setting and effects, while surely a big part of the story, weren't what carried the movies. Other than hating Jar-Jar and laughing at Sam Jackson I don't have a connection with the overwhelming cast parading before the screen.

Sometimes you watch a movie for the first time, and it has a plot so dense that you say to yourself, "I need to see this again," hoping to make all the plot connections the second time around. You see it again, maybe you pick up things you missed the first time, and everything makes sense.

 

"LA Confidential" is a good example. The second time I saw it - *CLICK* - the almost labyrinthine plot came together perfectly. I've seen that movie at least 10 times now, and it gets better with each viewing because even though it's complicated, the character development is rich and flawless, the acting and directing is spot on, and the story is expertly plotted.

 

I was hoping that was going to be the case with "Phantom Menace." The first time I saw it, I was baffled. That didn't change after the third viewing. There was no fourth viewing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (1-0-0-1-0-0-1 @ Apr 20 2010, 10:21 AM)
QUOTE (theredtamasrule @ Apr 20 2010, 11:00 AM)
GeddyR, I think you nailed it. The prequels are like a Pollack painting: visually interesting but what the hell is going on? A mess. In the originals the characters were interesting and the setting and effects, while surely a big part of the story, weren't what carried the movies. Other than hating Jar-Jar and laughing at Sam Jackson I don't have a connection with the overwhelming cast parading before the screen.

Sometimes you watch a movie for the first time, and it has a plot so dense that you say to yourself, "I need to see this again," hoping to make all the plot connections the second time around. You see it again, maybe you pick up things you missed the first time, and everything makes sense.

 

"LA Confidential" is a good example. The second time I saw it - *CLICK* - the almost labyrinthine plot came together perfectly. I've seen that movie at least 10 times now, and it gets better with each viewing because even though it's complicated, the character development is rich and flawless, the acting and directing is spot on, and the story is expertly plotted.

 

I was hoping that was going to be the case with "Phantom Menace." The first time I saw it, I was baffled. That didn't change after the third viewing. There was no fourth viewing.

laugh.gif

 

I read your first paragraph and thought: "L.A. Confidential." And there it was in paragraph two. trink39.gif

 

The plot is dense and hard-to-follow, but further viewings explain it all. It was there all along, to the sharp detectives onscreen and any filmgoer with a strong attention span.

 

The SW prequels, well... the politics get complicated, and repeated viewings shed no new light on them. I can't tell you today what the "separatists" were about, if my life depended on it. Dooku is allegedly one of them, but Dooku is aligned with Palpatine, who is not. Palpatine's partnership with Dooku is one in which Dooku is just being used by Palpatine, who publicly treats him as the common enemy of himself (Palpatine) and the rest of the Senate, whose trust he's trying to gain and maintain. That's as best as I understand it... but it's confusing, eh?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edited by GeddyRulz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (GeddyRulz @ Apr 20 2010, 06:57 AM)
I once thought as you did.  I thought the prequels were inferior, yes, but not horrendous.  And I thought the Maul-vs.-Kenobi-and-Jinn duel was worth suffering all the other sub-par stuff in Episode One.

Even before I realized the Phantom Menace was seriously sub-par, I never ever liked the Darth Maul character. Yeah, the light saber thing was cool, but he barely spoke a word, there was zero character development about him, and then he died. He always just seemed to me to be "random evil character you're supposed to hate." I never got a real feeling of menace from him, more that the movie needed an obvious antagonist since so many other elements were so confusing.

Edited by rushgoober
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (GeddyRulz @ Apr 20 2010, 11:41 AM)
QUOTE (1-0-0-1-0-0-1 @ Apr 20 2010, 10:21 AM)
QUOTE (theredtamasrule @ Apr 20 2010, 11:00 AM)
GeddyR, I think you nailed it. The prequels are like a Pollack painting: visually interesting but what the hell is going on? A mess. In the originals the characters were interesting and the setting and effects, while surely a big part of the story, weren't what carried the movies. Other than hating Jar-Jar and laughing at Sam Jackson I don't have a connection with the overwhelming cast parading before the screen.

Sometimes you watch a movie for the first time, and it has a plot so dense that you say to yourself, "I need to see this again," hoping to make all the plot connections the second time around. You see it again, maybe you pick up things you missed the first time, and everything makes sense.

 

"LA Confidential" is a good example. The second time I saw it - *CLICK* - the almost labyrinthine plot came together perfectly. I've seen that movie at least 10 times now, and it gets better with each viewing because even though it's complicated, the character development is rich and flawless, the acting and directing is spot on, and the story is expertly plotted.

 

I was hoping that was going to be the case with "Phantom Menace." The first time I saw it, I was baffled. That didn't change after the third viewing. There was no fourth viewing.

laugh.gif

 

I read your first paragraph and thought: "L.A. Confidential." And there it was in paragraph two. trink39.gif

 

The plot is dense and hard-to-follow, but further viewings explain it all. It was there all along, to the sharp detectives onscreen and any filmgoer with a strong attention span.

 

The SW prequels, well... the politics get complicated, and repeated viewings shed no new light on them. I can't tell you today what the "separatists" were about, if my life depended on it. Dooku is allegedly one of them, but Dooku is aligned with Palpatine, who is not. Palpatine's partnership with Dooku is one in which Dooku is just being used by Palpatine, who publicly treats him as the common enemy of himself (Palpatine) and the rest of the Senate, whose trust he's trying to gain and maintain. That's as best as I understand it... but it's confusing, eh?

When you put that much effort into trying to understand a movie, and it still doesn't make sense, then the movie is worthless. Lucas messed up, and he's probably the only person who doesn't know that because nobody will dare tell him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...