I know how to do the close readings and find those parallels, but that doesn’t make something good or deep or even important. It’s cool if you see it and want to make those arguments, but that’s not going to stop some people from saying that you’re full of shit or are going way too deep into something that never had this level of thought put into it (outside of post-facto interview statements).
Some of the mental gymnastics people put themselves through to justify some of the questionable plot points in the PT is pretty funny to watch, such as George Lucas wanting the Jedi Order to be unlikeable etc.
Big problem with the prequels: no good villain. Maul should not have died at the end of TPM. Each movie they introduce a new baddie - Maul, then Dooku, then Grievous. No real buildup.
Yes and that’s again another issue with a lack of visual literacy within culture. It goes on both sides. The Jedi though are meant to be flawed and shown as complacent. George has spoken of this in a matter of words but he’s hesitant as any great artist is in discussing their own work. He’s just as much wanting his vision to be accurately represented as he is in letting the viewer take in what they choose to see.
I don’t find that a big problem as each of the villains serve the function of showing us what Anakin will become. They each have their own sense of self and equally a reason for being within the story. I can’t say the same about the Sequel villains.