This guy has a more realistic assessment:

"Here's another interpretation: Lucas, afflicted with Sequel Syndrome, decided he'd take the most iconic images and sequences from the first trilogy and retread them. In some cases, as in Queen Amidala's assertion that she will not let her people suffer and die while the Senate discusses the invasion "in a committee", it's quite powerful; in others, such as many of the examples you list here, it just doesn't quite work. As for examples such as Luke kneeling while watching Leia kneel in the recording, that's a complete stretch of the imagination, especially since she never actually kneeled; at most, she leaned forward to shut off the recorder."

Some of the observations the writer makes in that article are likely intentional and work to enhance the dramatic depth of the series; others are hamfisted and pointless harkening back to the originals, retreading the same ground for the sake of fans like any franchise does, or perhaps out of sheer lack of imagination and the desire to give them more of what they want. Other observations are sheer ridiculousness and are really reaching to make his "mirror" observations more far-reaching than it actually is. It's really just a few instances of Lucas retreading his old scenes and trying to make some sort of profound statement about "destiny" and "fate" and other such terms thrown about in the films.

This guy sums it up perfectly:

"I buy that there's mirroring, but Lucas - who was undone long ago by his smug hubris - just wanted to convey some hokey sense of fate or destiny by drawing similarities, like the ones you point out, between the trilogies."

And even in the instances where Lucas might dramatically succeed by drawing trilogy parallels, at the end of the day the argument goes no further than what this guy writes:

"He might have indeed done all you said above, but it was done in a shoddy manner with cringy dialog. No matter how hard you try, you can't theorize yourself out of that." 

TheBoost said:

Anchorhead said:

The L.A. Times squelched my comment. Even after I verified my email per their request.

Guess they don't dig the truth because it exposes their "guest essay" for the fanboy masturbation that it is.

 

Although I can guess it's general topic, what was your comment?

It was a link to Kaminski's Star Wars site.  Nothing inflammatory, nothing off-color.  I thought it might be because it was a link, but I see there are others.

Monolithium said:

Wouldn't the mirroring idea work better if Dooku had convinced Anakin to join him?

Oh, it would, but you forget that:

Much later, as I began to consider certain very strange scenes in the new trilogy, I realized that they were all elements of a hidden story, adding up to a precise opposite of the original trilogy

In the Bizzaroverse the Prequel Universe, opposites are encouraged.  The Hoth battle had walking tanks, the prequel Mars planet place had rolling tanks.  Exact and precise opposite.  The classic trilogy was well written and directed.  The prequel trilogy was brilliantly opposite of this!

I'm liking this new tool of logical argumentation.   I'd bet I could prove all sorts of new ideas!

adywan said:

They also removed my comments so i'm going to write one again.

Heh, this article you flagged up was some piece of work adywan.

I felt compelled to comment too, lol...which I did as 'DisappointedSWFan' on page 3 of the comments after it.  And I thought some of the points raised on the same page by commenter 'Andy Havens' were interesting...if not a little depressing, especially the reminders about how the whole 'Anakin's mum/birth' deal was handled.  (you know, Shmi's unlikely, unsatisfactory 'explanation' to Qui-Gon in TPM could also be interpreted as a complete 'lie' to Qui-Gon when he has the audacity to ask about it, lol.  At the end of the day, we don't get to know what 'kind' of slavery she's involved in, and maybe she didn't 'know' who Anakin's dad was...  And although there's been some comments about how a 'protocol' droid seemed an unlikely choice to help her out...it would be perfect for interpretive dealings with various alien unsavoury types on her behalf/Watto's behalf, if you get my meaning...  No, no, surely not...)

ImperialFighter said:

 

you know, Shmi's unlikely, unsatisfactory 'explanation' to Qui-Gon in TPM could also be interpreted as a complete 'lie' to Qui-Gon when he has the audacity to ask about it, lol.  At the end of the day, we don't get to know what 'kind' of slavery she's involved in, and maybe she didn't 'know' who Anakin's dad was...  And although there's been some comments about how a 'protocol' droid seemed an unlikely choice to help her out...it would be perfect for interpretive dealings with various alien unsavoury types on her behalf/Watto's behalf, if you get my meaning...  No, no, surely not...)

Would explain why Watto was much more willing to give up the boy. His mom was the money maker. Otherwise you'd think he'd rather keep the younger one who would live longer, become physically stronger and therefore do more work.

TheBoost said:

Watto wanted to wager Shmi. Qui-Gon wanted the boy and Watto wanted to roll for it (probably with loaded dice). Qui Jedied the dice during the roll and Watto was pissed.

Oh, ok. Well damn. Thought I finally found something interesting about that movie.

-JOKES! That's not interesting either.

It's a toss-up whether this reasoning is any worse than the 'immaculate conception' origin for Anakin that GL gave us.  I'm torn...

But seriously, if I recall correctly, adywan is planning on not having Anakin build his mum a 'protocol' droid to begin with, for his eventual TPM:Revisited, which helps.  And I'm kinda hoping that he'll simply omit that part of the Qui-Gon/Shmi conversation, when the time comes.

ImperialFighter said:

It's a toss-up whether this reasoning is any worse than the 'immaculate conception' origin for Anakin that GL gave us.  I'm torn...

Honestly, I'd rather she told Gin that she was raped. Would leave questions about who it was, weather he was or wasn't a sith himself, give a very dark origin for Anikin and could bring up risque moral discussions about rape victims getting abortions.

But then I also think Star Wars should be for children as well as adults, and that could rule out most young folks being able to see the film.

Heh, now that's an equally dark scenario ray_afraid...

I think on balance though, that I'd rather the origin/parentage of Anakin had been left unsaid and unrevealed onscreen, and left to the imagination as a mystery...no matter where anyone's imagination might lead them about it, lol.

The Lucash Apologists just get more and more creative all the time.

They are finding all sorts of good things about the prequels that are not there.  Ironically they are being far more creative and imaginative in their defense of these crap movies.  Then Lucas responsible for their creation.

I'm glad you got here, skyjedi, we needed someone who actually hates Lucas as much as some of the new people seem to think we all do! ;-)

skyjedi2005 said:

The Lucash Apologists just get more and more creative all the time.

They are finding all sorts of good things about the prequels that are not there.  Ironically they are being far more creative and imaginative in their defense of these crap movies.  Then Lucas responsible for their creation.

To me, that's the funniest\saddest part of all of their constant exposition.  Lucas isn't even close to being as deep as they want to think he is.  If they weren't so closed-off to the actual history of the first trilogy and the truth behind making them, they would see that he just doesn't get it.  Had Marcia and Kurtz not stepped in, Star Wars would have been a mess. Same with American Graffiti.  

He isn't a good story teller at all. He has some great ideas, but he constantly struggles to flesh them out.

• Hiring two people to write two different sequels to Star Wars because he didn't have one himself.
• His wanting to cut emotional moments from the original Star Wars because he didn't understand why they worked. (thank you Marcia for stepping in).
• His attempt to add depth with the Vader\father change.
• His going ahead with the "no, there is another" scene - before he even thought of who it would end up being.

• His ham-fisted fix for the "no, there is another" scene, which shrunk the universe & weakened the story even more.

• His pathological lying about his "Original Vision".

Those are not the practices of a savant story teller. They are the practices of a hack who got lucky in 1973, 1977, & 1980 - thanks in large part to his wife\editor, his producer, and a director.

Which proves my point that Lucas was a fraud all along, and should have been some tobacco businessman, and left SW to other people. The prequels only confirmed his fraudulence, not his genius.

It would be an interesting interpretation of the prequels if it were not for one small detail which breaks the thesis.

The PT is badly made on almost every level.

If the films were as well made as well the OT (at least the first two) we could all stroke our chins and nod at most of the points brought up here but seeing as the PT episodes are so comprehensively screwed up any such observations are like reading tea leaves from a cuppa someone piddled in before giving it to you to drink.

The PT is badly made on almost every level.

Quite right. The only area wherein the PT excels is the production values. Technically, the CGI, costumes, props, sets (what few there were), etc. were virtually flawless. But at the end of the day, the PT is still almost unwatchable. High production values can be extremely helpful in telling a story, but when the production values themselves become the foreground and the story becomes the background, chaos ensues. The cinematic tools become the main thing, and the actual main thing is sacrificed on the altar of technological innovation and showy, flashy visual effects. That the dialogue was so artificial and the acting was so cringe-worthily bad, only added to the train wreck.

Akwat Kbrana said:

The PT is badly made on almost every level.

Quite right. The only area wherein the PT excels is the production values. Technically, the CGI, costumes, props, sets (what few there were), etc. were virtually flawless. But at the end of the day, the PT is still almost unwatchable. High production values can be extremely helpful in telling a story, but when the production values themselves become the foreground and the story becomes the background, chaos ensues. The cinematic tools become the main thing, and the actual main thing is sacrificed on the altar of technological innovation and showy, flashy visual effects. That the dialogue was so artificial and the acting was so cringe-worthily bad, only added to the train wreck.

Nope the CGI is frequently flawed, the costumes, frequently bland or narratively function free and the few physical set that did exist were often screwed up by digital 'enhancements' which were inconsistent, often pointlessly showy and also flawed.

The PT is a real mess but an interesting challenge for anyone trying to get anything good out of them.

John Williams comes through it all with most of his integrity intact though.

Ric left too many obvious points not pointed out devilishly handsome though.

Like your integrity was ever in doubt, Ric.  BTW, are you still hot for that Amidala?  She's 14, you know.

The sad thing to me is that the prequel novels weren't that bad for what they were.  Luckily, my imagination was able to provide decent actors.