Did Lucas forget that Obi Wan served Bail Organa in the Clone Wars ? — Page 4

SparkySywer said:

Stardust1138 said:

ken-obi said:

Stardust1138 said:

SparkySywer said:

BedeHistory731 said:

Sure, but sometimes you have to step back and say, “Wow, I’m spending countless hours looking for deeper meaning in family space fantasy movies. Maybe I’m no better than the nerds who memorize wikis.”

I think you absolutely can ascribe deeper meaning to Star Wars movies, even the prequels and sequels. The Star Wars fandom wouldn’t be so passionate if this weren’t the case. Star Wars isn’t indie arthouse kino and George Lucas isn’t Francis Ford Coppola, but he was a friend and close colleague of his. Star Wars isn’t Marvel either and Lucas isn’t Michael Bay.

That said, and I truly do mean no disrespect to Stardust1138 (because this is all an internet argument over above average space movies after all)…

Emre1601 said:

Mental gymnastics and insane stretches have always been required by Prequel fans when in discussion with others who did not enjoy these films or point out the discrepancies between the two trilogies. I am surprised many Prequel fans themselves rarely seem to question why Lucas’ poor writing for the later Trilogy created so many needless plot-holes and contradictions, and still look to use such gymnastics and stretches instead.

This is spot on. I almost feel like it’s a culture within the prequel fandom, because prequel fans talking about the basic plot of the prequels is full of more headcanon than what’s actually shown on screen.

All I’ll say is there’s always another side to every story. Everyone gets something different from what they see as we each have different experiences that shape us. We can choose to view something from a more personal perspective or we can view it from a more artistic perspective. I tend to view it from both but I recognise not everyone cares to go down that rabbit hole. That’s there choice but in my humble opinion especially with something as profoundly moving as Star Wars can be I question why you wouldn’t want to understand George Lucas and his point of view but in life you can’t always understand why people think as they do. I don’t know anymore in life if we truly ever understand each other but it’s human sympathy that is more valuable than ideologies, beliefs, and thought processes.

As others have said on here you assume too much. You assume that others have not also viewed the films from different perspective. You also do not factor in it is possible to view the films from such differing perspectives and still not like or enjoy them.

That is quite a narrow and limited view to take.

I would also counter that by saying I think it’s more to do with the perception of how you view the films.

and

It didn’t bother her in the slightest. She’s not been influenced by me or the years of baggage we as a fandom have with it. She’s taking the story as it’s given to her in the order George wanted her and everyone to see it. Perhaps in general that’s a lesson we can all learn from on both sides that we shouldn’t project but share as the author intended versus what is personal to us until after we give the newbie a chance to form their own thoughts.

As above you assume far too much. People have watched these films in various orders, and some will have watched the Prequels before watching the Original films.

“Baggage as a fandom?”

“A lesson to be learnt?”

“we shouldn’t project but share as the author intended”

But these are only taken into account if we didn’t like the films, right? You seem to be of the opinion Star Wars fans turned up to watch the Prequels with a closed mind, already deciding they didn’t like them before seeing them, and knew nothing of George prior to them. Or if they didn’t like these movies they didn’t simply didn’t understand them.

I would suggest you open your mind to what others are saying to you when they are of the opinion they didn’t enjoy the Prequels very much.

What you are saying is insulting and a little narrow minded. Even when overlooking some brief lip service about “all views being respected” in your posts, it seems obvious you have no respect for people with the view that the Prequels were not enjoyable movies.

I do think a lot of the problems some have lay with they don’t understand it how George Lucas views it. There’s a lot of fans that are simply satisfied with the spaceships and spectacle of it or don’t try understanding things like why the Yoda in Attack of the Clones is different from where we see him in The Empire Strikes Back.

“Everyone who doesn’t like the prequels just doesn’t get them and they don’t think any more deeply about these movies than a caveman.”

I need something more than that and like being able to draw lines between the two trilogies.

“I, the annointed one, however, need a little more than what you Australopithecines seem to sustain yourselves on.”

However that doesn’t mean I think it’s wrong to have your own personal point of view on things with this very thing being what is enjoyed most or not being interested in finding the juxtapositions.

Of course

Again. Don’t misconstrue my words either. It’s nothing personal towards anyone at all what I am saying. It’s simply pointing out that people misunderstand Star Wars sometimes how George Lucas sees it. Like when Balance of the Force is discussed for example. This in a way is no different from Prequel fans who get accused of being worshippers of him and can pick and choose what fits what they want to see. I recognise this is generalised and not a personal insult. It’s merely an opinion some have. It’s all a matter of perception. You can have your personal viewpoint but what George wants and says is Star Wars is different from what is personal except obviously to him who created it and lived it. I try though to get there with his viewpoint as I feel it creates a more rewarding experience. Some don’t feel the need to understand him or the story his way as they want to keep it as a strictly personal experience. This isn’t wrong as we all get something different from it. However at the same time everything you need to know is within the films themselves and yet equally more that isn’t necessarily essential can be discovered when you know him as a person or even watch the The Clone Wars movie and series. His last and final connection to Star Wars that made it to screen. Sometimes as fans we forget what it always meant to him because we are deeply attached and close to it compared to a newbie who doesn’t have preconceived beliefs or because we are getting stories now from somebody else who has a different spin on what something meant like some fans would view it. See the Sequel Trilogy.

I’m simply put relying the same things Sam Witwer says about Star Wars as I feel the same way as he does generally speaking.

Stardust1138 said:

None of what I’m saying is attacking anyone personally. So I’d greatly appreciate if you didn’t put words in my mouth. Please and thank you.

I agree. I never said you were attacking anyone personally, and have not put words in your mouth. I did say “What you are saying is insulting and a little narrow minded.” and “it seems obvious you have no respect for people with the view that the Prequels were not enjoyable movies.”

I am sorry if that is harsh, but it my reading of what you have wrote about people who do not like the Prequel films, in here, and in the Prequel Trilogy thread.

ken-obi said:

Stardust1138 said:

None of what I’m saying is attacking anyone personally. So I’d greatly appreciate if you didn’t put words in my mouth. Please and thank you.

I agree. I never said you were attacking anyone personally, and have not put words in your mouth. I did say “What you are saying is insulting and a little narrow minded.” and “it seems obvious you have no respect for people with the view that the Prequels were not enjoyable movies.”

I am sorry if that is harsh, but it my reading of what you have wrote about people who do not like the Prequel films, in here, and in the Prequel Trilogy thread.

Well, that’s not how I feel. I respect everyone for having a different point of view on how they see Star Wars. I’m simply giving another way of seeing it that aligns with my own personal view and equally viewing it how George himself has talked about seeing it and aligns with what is in the films themselves. This is different in a way from others who I find tend to strictly watch it from a personal viewpoint and wonder why something doesn’t make sense to them. I may wish some people tried to immerse themselves in understanding George and his way of seeing the story but I’m also aware that isn’t how some want to view it. So yes what I am saying can be read as snobby probably to some who don’t get the concepts I’m putting out there but the actual reality is more complicated than that. The reality is that as fans we are very emotionally attached to Star Wars and can sometimes miss details because we’re so invested in the parts of the story we enjoy most. A newbie doesn’t have that opinion. It’s like a newborn baby. A baby is pure. Just like a newbie to Star Wars or whatever it might be they’re learning about for the first time. I’m simply giving information and tools to make it so what is misunderstood becomes accessible instead of wanting someone else’s viewpoint that reinforces what my opinion is already or becomes other than from George Lucas for example, which is always definitive but evolving as all stories do.

I’m sorry if that’s harsh too.

Omni said:

Dude, lots of people see the parallels that are intended, the story beats, character beats, all that. People aren’t as dumb as you think. It’s just that for a lot of people those parallels fail on many levels, or even if said people like the parallels they’re not enough to salvage their low opinion on other aspects of the film that end up dragging it down. I’ve talked to people about AOTC talking about how it’s an interesting mystery story with inspiration from 40s noir and romance pictures, the classical love story, all that jazz, and how I love that.

These people turned to me and said “Yeah, I know. Still awfully written dialogue, poorly directed scenes and the acting is atrocious. The movie looks like a tech demo also. So I think it sucks.” Which is valid. People see the parallels, Palpatine in the throne in ROTS and ROTJ, they see what George was trying to say, they just either think he’s saying something stupid or that he’s saying something nice, but in a very poor way.

Get off your high horse, man. You’re not the only one that gets these movies. And, again, I say this as a major fan of them.

That’s exactly what I am saying as it is valid to have these criticisms. I obviously don’t agree but I do find it fair to have this opinion as long as it’s aware quite frankly the Original Trilogy isn’t perfect either and has a lot of similar problems. Yet I understand why some don’t see the flaws as that was their viewpoint into the series. No film is without flaws though as yes I’m well aware the Prequels have flaws. I think it’s fair and perfectly okay for people to not like certain things about the things they love. However what I find unsettling is when people see the parallels and everything else within Star Wars without understanding the contexts as to why they’re there to begin with like you see with the Disney Sequel Trilogy. It was merely picking and choosing what was personal to the filmmaker and not what it is to George Lucas. That’s not to say I don’t respect them on a personal level for not wanting to go there. I might be annoyed but I also recognise that’s not what some fans get from these movies as that’s who is making these stories now but I do admit I find it absurd some want to take the author out of the picture and that’s what Disney has done. So they’ve got their wish for better or worse. This all merely means I think it could be examined more closely instead of just assuming there’s no deeper meanings behind certain things and that George had no idea what he was doing without certain people. They were part of it but George had final say. I’m happy we can’t all like the same things and that Star Wars means different things to everyone in how they view it. I’m all for personal viewpoint. This is different from author’s intentions.

I’m obviously not an expect in everything Star Wars as I have things to learn too. Both on a fan’s prospective and George Lucas prospective. I just lean more heavily on George’s side than most fans tend to. So it’s not about being on a high horse but merely full respect for the original creator and collaborators on a creative and personal level. It’s the same thing I try having in similar relationships with fellow fans who view things on a level that is personal to them. I may not always agree but I do respect them as people while respectfully disagreeing on certain views on storybeats that I feel contradict George and what is in the films themselves. They are an extension of him and his collaborators. This is natural and part of discussing anything you love. We all get something different. A book read by a thousand different people is a thousand different books but there is one author in the case of an auteur like George that everything was filtered. It’s our choice if we choose to follow along with them on their story or not. This isn’t disrespectful to anyone.

Stardust1138 said:

ken-obi said:

Stardust1138 said:

None of what I’m saying is attacking anyone personally. So I’d greatly appreciate if you didn’t put words in my mouth. Please and thank you.

I agree. I never said you were attacking anyone personally, and have not put words in your mouth. I did say “What you are saying is insulting and a little narrow minded.” and “it seems obvious you have no respect for people with the view that the Prequels were not enjoyable movies.”

I am sorry if that is harsh, but it my reading of what you have wrote about people who do not like the Prequel films, in here, and in the Prequel Trilogy thread.

A newbie doesn’t have that opinion. It’s like a newborn baby. A baby is pure. Just like a newbie to Star Wars or whatever it might be they’re learning about for the first time. I’m simply giving information and tools to make it so what is misunderstood becomes accessible instead of wanting someone else’s viewpoint that reinforces what my opinion is already or becomes other than from George Lucas for example, which is always definitive but evolving as all stories do.

We were all newbies again going into the Prequels. We were all looking forward to them. We all wanted them to be great movies. Unfortunately for many fans this wasn’t the case. Yet we all made our opinions after watching them, whether these were good, mixed or bad. No baggage. No projections. No need to later understand the author’s intentions either.

We haven’t misunderstood them - or simply “do not understand” them. Tools, intentions, a bio on George, visual literacy, additional content and so on are obviously very important to you with these films, and that is great, as you have repeatedly stated many times. But for many fans they are simply not required to like or dislike a film. It feels like I and others are repeating ourselves over and over, but what happens on screen is the most important for many fans. Please stop. Or at least try to respect the OP and stay on the topic of their thread.

ken-obi said:

Stardust1138 said:

ken-obi said:

Stardust1138 said:

None of what I’m saying is attacking anyone personally. So I’d greatly appreciate if you didn’t put words in my mouth. Please and thank you.

I agree. I never said you were attacking anyone personally, and have not put words in your mouth. I did say “What you are saying is insulting and a little narrow minded.” and “it seems obvious you have no respect for people with the view that the Prequels were not enjoyable movies.”

I am sorry if that is harsh, but it my reading of what you have wrote about people who do not like the Prequel films, in here, and in the Prequel Trilogy thread.

A newbie doesn’t have that opinion. It’s like a newborn baby. A baby is pure. Just like a newbie to Star Wars or whatever it might be they’re learning about for the first time. I’m simply giving information and tools to make it so what is misunderstood becomes accessible instead of wanting someone else’s viewpoint that reinforces what my opinion is already or becomes other than from George Lucas for example, which is always definitive but evolving as all stories do.

We were all newbies again going into the Prequels. We were all looking forward to them. We all wanted them to be great movies. Unfortunately for many fans this wasn’t the case. Yet we all made our opinions after watching them, whether these were good, mixed or bad. No baggage. No projections. No need to later understand the author’s intentions either.

We haven’t misunderstood them - or simply “do not understand” them. Tools, intentions, a bio on George, visual literacy, additional content and so on are obviously very important to you with these films, and that is great, as you have repeatedly stated many times. But for many fans they are simply not required to like or dislike a film. It feels like I and others are repeating ourselves over and over, but what happens on screen is the most important for many fans. Please stop. Or at least try to respect the OP and stay on the topic of their thread.

Absolutely but a newbie with a point of view more than likely that already knew Anakin became Darth Vader and that Palpatine was Emperor. This in some way, albeit subconsciously, may have informed and influenced your view on how you felt for example Anakin was supposed to behave and be. It’s why you get so many Original fans complain he’s too whiny and isn’t how they pictured him. This is different from everything I talk about in being important to understanding not just the Prequels but the Originals as well as part of a collective whole. However some fans also grew up with the Prequels ended up not liking them. They and fans of the Original Trilogy first have their reasons for not liking them. It’s perfectly reasonable and okay but that’s subjective reasoning versus everything I describe as tools to understand Star Wars how the author intended. No matter how much we may want to love something sometimes we can’t. It’s perfectly okay. It truly is. However this is completely different from everything I’ve been talking about over and over. Everything I feel you need to know though is within the films themselves. It’s fine some can’t get there but it’s not Prequels fans imagining things more often than not as some want to claim.

However yes, it’s best to keep the topic to what JadedSkywalker intended it to be. There’s no need to continue saying the same things if words are going to be misinterpreted and given contexts that create further impasses.

SparkySywer said:

Emre1601 said:

Mental gymnastics and insane stretches have always been required by Prequel fans when in discussion with others who did not enjoy these films or point out the discrepancies between the two trilogies. I am surprised many Prequel fans themselves rarely seem to question why Lucas’ poor writing for the later Trilogy created so many needless plot-holes and contradictions, and still look to use such gymnastics and stretches instead.

This is spot on. I almost feel like it’s a culture within the prequel fandom, because prequel fans talking about the basic plot of the prequels is full of more headcanon than what’s actually shown on screen.

The same for me too.

The effect of each discrepancy is different for everyone, and some are more notable than others. This particular issue with Obi-Wan not being shown to serve under Bail onscreen in the Prequels isn’t a big one for me, though as others have mentioned it was perhaps a missed opportunity given the quality of Jimmy Smits as an actor, and his quite limited role in the films.

The sheer number of discrepancies and contradictions combined does certainly give cause to question why George included so many in the Prequels. I think a lot of us, whatever we think of these films, are a little perplexed on that!
 

To me, the reasoning that because Bail was a Senator and Obi-Wan as a high ranking Jedi served the Senate, does not quite sit right. It is like saying General MacArthur served under the Senator for Alaska in World War 2, which seems off to me. I am not American so perhaps my comparison is not quite correct.
 

Stardust1138 said:

However yes, it’s best to keep the topic to what JadedSkywalker intended it to be. There’s no need to continue saying the same things if words are going to be misinterpreted and given contexts that create further impasses.

I don’t think there have been misinterpretations, but I do want to say thank you for your apology for your previous posts to me, and also your kind PM.
 

screams in the void said:

and Qui Gon was a late addition to The Phantom Menace , a lot of concept paintings by Doug Chiang show that It was just supposed to be Obi Wan by himself . He is even depicted wearing a modified version of Luke’s Jedi tunic , which was what many thought the traditional garb of the Jedi was supposed to be . And 20 years is not that long in the scheme of things …I am 50 years old and remember events from 20 years ago in vivid detail ."a certain point of view " was just something Lucas pulled out of his ass when he backed himself into a corner writing ROTJ , as was Leia being the other/Luke’s sister , as evidenced in the documentary From Star Wars To Jedi The Making Of A Saga .

Obi-Wan on his own, now that would have made for an interesting story in itself. As much as I like Liam Neeson and think he did well with the role of Qui-Gon it is a cool “what if” to think of a film more focused on Obi-Wan and events surrounding those close to him during the backdrop of the lead up to the Clone Wars and events at that time. Maybe with the focus on Obi-Wan more there would have been fewer discrepancies and plot holes between what we were shown in the Prequels contradicting the OT, and Obi-Wan in particular, too? It also makes me wonder how the effect of Qui-Gon being a later addition to the film perhaps had on the coherence of the story between TPM and the OT.

Anchorhead said:

Stardust1138 said:
…in the case of an auteur like George…

That’s being very generous. To me, Lucas is nearly the opposite. Star Wars is largely derivative. At times, some of the scenes are nothing more than direct recreations of other films, novels, and comic books. Here is one of the many examples. Plenty of other articles, sites, and video comparisons out there. https://youtu.be/WtGAQLxYZJ0

When I think of auteurs, the first ones who come to mind are Hitchcock, Kubrick, Spielberg, Coppola, Fellini, Orson Wells, Penny Marshall, Jordon Peele, Nora Ephron, and a few others.

Now that I’m guilty of further derailing the discussion, perhaps we can get back to it.

I’ll just add that it isn’t uncommon for auteurs or filmmakers to borrow from other works of art. It’s all about the context in how they use it to tell their story. Some equally use paintings like Stanley Kubrick did with Barry Lyndon when he based entire scenes on art from the 18th Century. It’s also like Quentin Tarantino did with using Lady Snowblood as the template for his Kill Bill series. He also used other films. I mean the title of Once Upon A Time in Hollywood is a direct homage to Sergio Leone’s Once Upon A Time in the West. Just like The Phantom Menace is a homage title to Republic Serials that always had some kind of Phantom Something. It’s the most Star Wars-y a title you can get. There’s equally plenty of examples where Ingmar Bergman and Andrei Tarkovsky played off of each other. It’s all about adding different contexts and meaning to how the current artist interprets it within their own work. This only adds if anything to George Lucas being an auteur. Why is he singled out? The others you mentioned and that I mention do the same thing. If you want to go further Bob Dylan does the same thing with music.

Sources:

https://youtu.be/EykTXlhVmTg

https://youtu.be/Wfbkn21yvr4

https://youtu.be/Y4le3EDDAIQ

And Steven Spielberg used a factory in Minority Report just as George did in Attack of the Clones. Both in 2002. So it seems to me like they both drew from each other’s work. Just as George did originally with THX 1138 being based in part on Alphaville by Jean-Luc Godard (who taught George as a guest lecturer at USC) and Metropolis by Fritz Lang. As much as it is in a literature sense based off of George Orwell’s 1984. Just as Attack of the Clones is a play off of The Searchers by John Ford when Anakin searches for his mother. George Lucas also used THX 1138 and equally American Graffiti in Attack of the Clones as a template in more than just the Droid Factory. In Revenge of the Sith even Commander Cody is based off of Republic Serials too as there was a Commando Cody. I could go on and on. Star Wars is as much a direct homage to itself as it is other works. After all the Prequels are the other side to the story told in the Originals. They juxtaposition off of each other as visual and thematic poetry. Characters say the same things and go through similar situations but they must differ to create poetry and symmetry.

It doesn’t make any of these individuals I or you cite are less of an auteur. If anything it magnifies their knowledge of what can successfully convey emotions subconsciously as the same stories have been told for thousands of years. It’s about creating your own unique stamp and on a personal level to me it is really fun to discover the roots of what we love.

SparkySywer said:

Stardust1138 said:

ken-obi said:

Stardust1138 said:

SparkySywer said:

BedeHistory731 said:

Sure, but sometimes you have to step back and say, “Wow, I’m spending countless hours looking for deeper meaning in family space fantasy movies. Maybe I’m no better than the nerds who memorize wikis.”

I think you absolutely can ascribe deeper meaning to Star Wars movies, even the prequels and sequels. The Star Wars fandom wouldn’t be so passionate if this weren’t the case. Star Wars isn’t indie arthouse kino and George Lucas isn’t Francis Ford Coppola, but he was a friend and close colleague of his. Star Wars isn’t Marvel either and Lucas isn’t Michael Bay.

That said, and I truly do mean no disrespect to Stardust1138 (because this is all an internet argument over above average space movies after all)…

Emre1601 said:

Mental gymnastics and insane stretches have always been required by Prequel fans when in discussion with others who did not enjoy these films or point out the discrepancies between the two trilogies. I am surprised many Prequel fans themselves rarely seem to question why Lucas’ poor writing for the later Trilogy created so many needless plot-holes and contradictions, and still look to use such gymnastics and stretches instead.

This is spot on. I almost feel like it’s a culture within the prequel fandom, because prequel fans talking about the basic plot of the prequels is full of more headcanon than what’s actually shown on screen.

All I’ll say is there’s always another side to every story. Everyone gets something different from what they see as we each have different experiences that shape us. We can choose to view something from a more personal perspective or we can view it from a more artistic perspective. I tend to view it from both but I recognise not everyone cares to go down that rabbit hole. That’s there choice but in my humble opinion especially with something as profoundly moving as Star Wars can be I question why you wouldn’t want to understand George Lucas and his point of view but in life you can’t always understand why people think as they do. I don’t know anymore in life if we truly ever understand each other but it’s human sympathy that is more valuable than ideologies, beliefs, and thought processes.

As others have said on here you assume too much. You assume that others have not also viewed the films from different perspective. You also do not factor in it is possible to view the films from such differing perspectives and still not like or enjoy them.

That is quite a narrow and limited view to take.

I would also counter that by saying I think it’s more to do with the perception of how you view the films.

and

It didn’t bother her in the slightest. She’s not been influenced by me or the years of baggage we as a fandom have with it. She’s taking the story as it’s given to her in the order George wanted her and everyone to see it. Perhaps in general that’s a lesson we can all learn from on both sides that we shouldn’t project but share as the author intended versus what is personal to us until after we give the newbie a chance to form their own thoughts.

As above you assume far too much. People have watched these films in various orders, and some will have watched the Prequels before watching the Original films.

“Baggage as a fandom?”

“A lesson to be learnt?”

“we shouldn’t project but share as the author intended”

But these are only taken into account if we didn’t like the films, right? You seem to be of the opinion Star Wars fans turned up to watch the Prequels with a closed mind, already deciding they didn’t like them before seeing them, and knew nothing of George prior to them. Or if they didn’t like these movies they didn’t simply didn’t understand them.

I would suggest you open your mind to what others are saying to you when they are of the opinion they didn’t enjoy the Prequels very much.

What you are saying is insulting and a little narrow minded. Even when overlooking some brief lip service about “all views being respected” in your posts, it seems obvious you have no respect for people with the view that the Prequels were not enjoyable movies.

I do think a lot of the problems some have lay with they don’t understand it how George Lucas views it. There’s a lot of fans that are simply satisfied with the spaceships and spectacle of it or don’t try understanding things like why the Yoda in Attack of the Clones is different from where we see him in The Empire Strikes Back.

“Everyone who doesn’t like the prequels just doesn’t get them and they don’t think any more deeply about these movies than a caveman.”

I need something more than that and like being able to draw lines between the two trilogies.

“I, the annointed one, however, need a little more than what you Australopithecines seem to sustain yourselves on.”

However that doesn’t mean I think it’s wrong to have your own personal point of view on things with this very thing being what is enjoyed most or not being interested in finding the juxtapositions.

Of course

I found that most amusing. Correct too.

SparkySywer said:

Stardust1138 said:

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:

https://youtu.be/Ibkmh72_1pw

Fan_edit_fan said:

“You just don’t understand George Lucas”

Boy you ain’t kidding. Ever since he thought we would all find it funny to have fart and poop jokes from a bumbling fool in SW there was HUGE misunderstanding.

Oh yes because these things weren’t in Return of the Jedi. Oh wait…

It’s all a matter of personal tastes and our own perception in one way of viewing these films. I mean I’m not the biggest fan of this type of humour now that I’m older but I admit to still giggling a little bit. It’s also good fun for kids I find. I’ve never seen a kid complain about it. That’s who these movies were always for after all. He’s said this from the very beginning to namely Time Magazine.

Anchorhead said:

SparkySywer said:

What is that picture?

Sheev Palpatine
- 19 BBY, Colorized

Anchorhead said:

SparkySywer said:

What is that picture? A prequel scene, but what is happening?

It’s from Yoda’s fight with Palpatine in the Senate Building in Revenge of the Sith. Yoda slips off of a senator’s pod when trying to gain the high ground again. He ends up escaping through tunnels but his cloak gets caught. As it so happens Palpatine thinks he’s dead until a clone tells him otherwise. This is really planting a seed to display overconfidence and this key weakness of his that Luke picks up on in Return of the Jedi.

Anchorhead said:

I’m not familiar with the prequels, so I guess it’s lost on me as to why that’s not subtle. Neither here nor there. I’ll never see them, so it doesn’t matter.

No need to watch them if you don’t want to as that’s your personal choice. I mention it though because it’s a subtle set up that has a final payoff later when this very thing is his undoing in a different context. It’s just like when Anakin tells Palpatine on the Invisible Hand that Obi-Wan’s fate will be the same as ours. Not only does it have meaning in the context of that sequence but all three ended up dying on a Death Star. It’s double meaning in retrospect as much as it is laying ground work for payoffs later in the story when viewed as a collective whole.

SparkySywer said:

Maybe the prequels are less clean cut than I thought.

SparkySywer said:

IDK what Stardust’s talking about when it comes to Palpatine’s hubris or whatever.

I’m talking about this moment not long afterwards. Palpatine believes him to be dead. His arrogance and overconfidence is on full display as it is with Luke later. It’s just not called out the time in Revenge of the Sith as he’s surrounded by those who don’t question him. The moments ultimately juxtaposition off of each other and are interrelated. Poetry has to be different to work. There’s loads and loads of examples of this concept between the two trilogies. I’m still discovering them and find it makes for such a rewarding experience when you ask why.