It’s nothing personal towards anyone at all what I am saying.
I don’t feel insulted by what you say in any way. I just think it’s silly that the only reasons you seem to ever give why someone would disagree with you is that they just don’t understand the prequels. The prequels are not difficult to understand. The very, very last thing they are is subtle, and the amount of “visual literacy” you need to comprehend them isn’t that much.
It isn’t really that hard to figure out what something like this is trying to say.
Nor is George Lucas’s visual storytelling particularly unique or complex.
None of this is a dig at the prequels, by the way, and “hard to understand” is not a good goal to have when writing a Star Wars movie.
My point is,
This all merely means I think it could be examined more closely instead of just assuming there’s no deeper meanings behind certain things
People absolutely do think there’s deeper meanings to the prequels, examine them, comprehend them correctly, and still come away with the conclusion that the prequels are bad. The debate over the prequels is not between people who know what they were trying to say and people who don’t know what they were trying to say, it’s between people who liked what they were saying and people who don’t like what they were saying.
Visual literacy is more than strictly visuals alone. I understand different people get something different from the Prequels and it’s not per say that I think people don’t understand them but that I think they don’t understand them in contexts to how George Lucas saw them. It’s more in line of how they contextualise and equally add new meaning to what something meant in the Original Trilogy. I see it as some still view them as a seperate trilogy but not as a collective whole about The Tragedy of Darth Vader and what would’ve been his legacy in George’s Sequels. It’s when you watch them as a collective whole of I-VI I find is when you’re able to draw connections with juxtapositions and poetry between the films. You also see the plot holes aren’t really plot holes but what you perceived something as with the information you had at the time. It’s equally about what is done visually. You’re right it’s not that complex but still it’s misread sometimes. I would though say it is very unique. Especially on say Mustafar. That’s not to say I think people misunderstand the Prequels when they see them as separate in every sense as I’m like this too as I get something different when I watch them as individual films but that’s different from the collective whole that I’m getting at with what I’m saying. I don’t mean that as a personal insult to anyone as I know it’s a hard leap to make for some as it’s hard to break the cycle of your perception of something in the order you viewed them first or how you feel the story is supposed to be. That’s perfectly okay but there’s another side to the story and that George wanted them viewed.
I don’t think they’re really meant to be hard to understand.
Here’s a great video that shows how unique it truly gets in Revenge of the Sith and where visual literacy can take you. It’s as much personal as it is a tool for understanding author’s intent: