Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
I don't dislike the PT. I think it's entertaining. Some parts are even great. However, some parts are completely cringeworthy. Revenge of the Sith made me laugh at the deaths of children, which means that something was horribly wrong with that scene. You are laughing at the deaths of children, and it's the "scene" that's wrong? I have to say I was in tears for that bit. It hit me really hard when he ignighted his saber on opening night. Every time since I can try to hold it back for that scene, but in the next one when Padme breaks down I always lose it still.
The 6 part tragedy (when, in reality, it doesn't even fit the classification of a tragedy to begin with) of Anakin Skywalker just doesn't fly. The PT is Anakin's story. But the OT is Luke's story. It always was. And saying it's not doesn't change anything.
The whole saga is Anakin's story, but I agree the classic trilogy is still primarily Luke's story with a cameo by Anakin in the end when he finaly "returns". I don't dislike the PT. I think it's entertaining. Some parts are even great. However, some parts are completely cringeworthy. Revenge of the Sith made me laugh at the deaths of children, which means that something was horribly wrong with that scene. You are laughing at the deaths of children, and it's the "scene" that's wrong? I have to say I was in tears for that bit. It hit me really hard when he ignighted his saber on opening night. Every time since I can try to hold it back for that scene, but in the next one when Padme breaks down I always lose it still.
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
But I find the movies enjoyable enough. I didn't, however, ever think that we were "supposed" to watch them in numerical order. That thought never entered my mind, and I can't believe that's the view that George is trying to press. For me it was the way he numbered them that clued me into that prospect.
The two trilogies are two separate stories, and the PT is totally dependent on having seen the OT first. The PT is backstory. It is there to explain the past of the OT. That's its only purpose. I mean, he can deny it all he wants, but it's very obvious in the way he made the prequels. He was obviously trying to cater to fans of the original movies, which just doesn't work if these are the first Star Wars movies you saw. All those useless, jarring, and unncessary cameos and allusions are there only because Star Wars fans will know what they are. Jango Fett and little Boba? Because we know of Boba Fett from the OT. The droids? Because we knew them from the OT. Chewbacca? Because we knew him from the OT. Binary sunset? Because we saw it in the first movie. I will argue that all that stuff sucks, but the point remains that it's only there in the first place because we should have already seen the OT.
If you see the prequels first, then wouldn't it be the classic trilogy with the cameos that are dependant on having seen the prequels? A first time viewer would be just fine seeing the prequels before the classic trilogy, because they get to see the events as they unfold. Nothing is spoiled in this order aside from the "I am your father" surprise (which now becomes "Oh my God, what will Luke do now that he's finally found out the whole truth?") and the "Leia is my Sister", which really to me seems like a pretty convenient development without the prequels to set it up in the first place. Before the prequels it was like they picked "the other" out of a hat, now it seems like it was always part of the story.Originally posted by: Gaffer TapeBut I find the movies enjoyable enough. I didn't, however, ever think that we were "supposed" to watch them in numerical order. That thought never entered my mind, and I can't believe that's the view that George is trying to press. For me it was the way he numbered them that clued me into that prospect.
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
Once again, if he'd wanted them to be watched that way, he would have made them that way. According to Lucas, he made them out of order for a couple of reasons. 1) He figured the ANH part of the story was the most straightforward for an audience. 2) He felt he could pull off the 2nd half of the story easier because it all takes place away from the center of the universe, so he wouldn't have to render something as ambitious as Couruscant.Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
As it is, it makes no sense.
Really it does make sense, I'm telling you it makes perfect sense.Originally posted by: Gaffer TapeOnce again, if he'd wanted them to be watched that way, he would have made them that way. According to Lucas, he made them out of order for a couple of reasons. 1) He figured the ANH part of the story was the most straightforward for an audience. 2) He felt he could pull off the 2nd half of the story easier because it all takes place away from the center of the universe, so he wouldn't have to render something as ambitious as Couruscant.Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
As it is, it makes no sense.
The two trilogies are two separate stories, and the PT is totally dependent on having seen the OT first. The PT is backstory. It is there to explain the past of the OT. That's its only purpose. I mean, he can deny it all he wants, but it's very obvious in the way he made the prequels. He was obviously trying to cater to fans of the original movies, which just doesn't work if these are the first Star Wars movies you saw. All those useless, jarring, and unncessary cameos and allusions are there only because Star Wars fans will know what they are. Jango Fett and little Boba? Because we know of Boba Fett from the OT. The droids? Because we knew them from the OT. Chewbacca? Because we knew him from the OT. Binary sunset? Because we saw it in the first movie. I will argue that all that stuff sucks, but the point remains that it's only there in the first place because we should have already seen the OT.
The 6 part tragedy (when, in reality, it doesn't even fit the classification of a tragedy to begin with) of Anakin Skywalker just doesn't fly. The PT is Anakin's story. But the OT is Luke's story. It always was. And saying it's not doesn't change anything.