Worst thread title ever.

We all think Gary Kurtz would have saved them, but Lucas grew balls around 1982.

Gary would have been fired as soon as he looked like he was gonna say George's story sucked.

This thread is not what I thought it was going to be.

Oh no...

Pretty much all the actors did a terrible job in the prequels. Its not their fault though. Portman can act, Neeson can act, McGregor can act, Diarmid can act alright perhaps Lloyd can't. Christensen can act too.

But in the prequels it was very very bad. The Director has control over that. Lucas fault.

Just a shame someone didn't have a dirty little secret they could hold over George so they wouldn't get fired when they should of told him "your doing it wrong"

Even Yodas backward talking was a bit over the top.

"Around the survivors a perimeter create" WTF

Irvin Kershner at the helm would of been great. Hell, get Spielberg to do it they are friends I doubt Lucas would of sacked him.

I wish I lived in an alternate universe where the prequels were as good as the originals and were heralded as cinema master pieces.

What could of been.

Quackula said:

Probably would've been best if Lucas just penned the overall story and acted as a general advisor, and let other directors and writers and everything else handle the actual production. He doesn't seem to trust other people with his "vision" for some reason though.

Pretty much all the actors did a terrible job in the prequels. Its not their fault though. Portman can act, Neeson can act, McGregor can act, Diarmid can act alright perhaps Lloyd can't. Christensen can act too.

I think is says a lot that Lucas managed to coax a crummy performance out of someone as experienced and talented as Christopher Lee.

I forgot to add Lee as well. Good point.

And your right on the money with Lucas just penning the story and supervising rather than taking the reigns of everything.

The Empire Strikes Back is the best example. Done right.

GB Please change the title of this thread ASAP.

WTFWYT?

Thank you Moth3r.

The old perennial "George Lucas Gift Wrapped My Childhood" is a bit near the knuckle and I can understand some people not enjoying the possible trivialisation of a very nasty crime but the object of that statement is an abstract notion of a period time not a child.

Child molestation is too raw a metaphor, especially in a discussion forum thread title.

twooffour said:

[Actually, playin devil's advocate and all, calling the films "child(hood?) molestations" is a fun exaggeration of the common silly "prequels ruined my childhood" complaint - if it's meant seriously, it sucks, but come on... bad adaptations are constantly referred to as "abominations" and "raping the originals" and what not, and mostly it's all tongue-in-cheek.]

Fun?

...

...

FUN????????

FFS

I'm with Frink, Baron, Tobacco, and Bingo -  title was too low brow for a serious discussion, or even a ranting\venting post. Want to be taken seriously (and as a board, we do), then the angry guy on the internet posting needs to be toned down.

Besides -  the "Lucas has completely destroyed the future of cinema as we know it" threads are best left to a professional..... 

;-)

twooffour said:

Yea, but come on - you're seriously acting as if the prequels were the only bad films ever released to cinema. Just how many movies in cinematic history have TRULY bad effects, horrific acting and asinine plots? How comes you can view them all on DVDs, or on Youtube / the internet?

btw, I sort of halfheartedly defend the prequels, but you can't compare the PT to Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot when it comes to disappointment.

Ghostbusters said:

Screw you guys I thought it was funny. I thought the "creative adjective" would be more amusing than "bad".

Yes, child molestation is hilarious.