logo Sign In

The Merits of the Prequel Trilogy and the "Saga" — Page 13

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Jumpman
Tiptup,

Are we talking about the primary focus of Episode III pertaining to Anakin or the plot? Because, I thought the ideas expressed in the film, whether you agree or not, were pretty clear, from the Anakin arc.

And the reason Prequel "defenders" don't discuss positive aspects of the films (especially here) is because the debate is framed by Original Trilogy fans...which always veer toward the "suppose" negatives of the Prequels.


Well, I've heard you state what you thought the important focus of Episode III was. I also stated how I could understand that focus to be interesting and perhaps even enjoyable. However, when actually watching the film from my point of view, that focus was communicated in an unimportant and hypocritical way. Therfore, I would like you to describe or explain your point of view more. I want to objectively know what would allow you see that focus as the important, over-arcing theme of the film.

As for the debate veering towards negatives, I would think that is anavoidable. But, you can answer those problems in substantial ways if you were to describe the point of view where those problems become unimportant. In other words, if a problem isn't worthy of discussion from your point of view, then you don't need to defend it unless you want to.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
At this moment I would simply like to take a second to communicate my prequel trilogy experience and then quickly respond to some other good posts that I haven't had time to reply to yet.


Go-Mer seems to have the impression that I didn’t like the prequel trilogy simply because it wasn’t the original trilogy and that certainly wasn’t true for me. I’m guessing he thinks I couldn’t handle the differences or some such nonsense. In actuality, the way I liked and disliked the films was far more complicated and heartbreaking for me.

I wanted to love the prequel trilogy in a very substantial way. I badly wanted to love these films. I even desired to enjoy these films so much that I was willing to overlook fairly big flaws. I didn’t need perfection so long as the stories could work for me in one way or another.

Then, the first time I saw each of the prequel trilogy films, I thought they were actually great! Phantom Menace I liked a lot and I watched it nine times in the theaters. I don’t like it quite as much now that the newness of the film has worn off, but I still can find it viewable today. With Attack of the Clones I was bit less interested simply because the dialogue was so horrible and the acting was bad, but otherwise I really liked it the first time I saw it. The battle at the end was ‘awesome,’ I thought. It wasn’t until the second viewing of AotC came along that I began to have second thoughts. Then with Revenge of the Sith, I thought it was absolutely fantastic the first time I saw it. I even went so far as to say it was the best of the prequel trilogy films and I even felt it sort of saved the prequel trilogy and matched up to the original trilogy to a sufficient degree. The acting was good and so was the drama in a surface sense. Heck, even Hayden acted like Darth Vader should have acted (the whiny-ness was gone). Sure, maybe the “Noooooo!” at the very end was lame, but I was willing to overlook that. So, then, the question is: what happened to me?

How could I go from enjoying the scene where Yoda fights with a lightsaber to hating that scene? How could I go from enjoying the idea of Jango Fett to thinking he shouldn’t have even been in any of the films? How did I go from loving many of the small OT references to thinking they were way too overdone and convenient? How did I lose so much of the initial enjoyment I had for so many of the prequel trilogy’s concepts? I’d have to answer that the newness of having something related to Star Wars finally wore off.

Seriously, after growing up watching the original films endlessly, how could I not have loved seeing the episodes that were “intended” to come before them? How could I not have loved seeing Star Wars themes and characters in new adventures and with fresh content? And, why do I now find so much of the prequel trilogy films to simply be cheap and hollow sensationalism? Because they actually were all along. I just allowed myself to be blinded by my love of Star Wars at first. Like a kid who enjoyed some crappy cartoon show as a small child and then grows out of it, I realized that what I was watching wasn’t very good. That’s what brings me down the most about all of this. I wanted to enjoy the prequel trilogy and I actually did initially enjoy its supreme glitz and superficial drama, but when I began scratching beneath that surface I found the films to be very lacking.

With Attack of Clones, I even actually liked Anakin at first. Seriously, it was so awesome to finally see him and Obi-Wan in action! Yet, while my like for Obi-Wan in the film increased as time went on, I began to be annoyed more and more with Anakin. “‘I killed them!’ I see. ‘I killed them all.’ Mmmhmm. ‘Not just the men.’ Yep. ‘But the women’ Yeah I get it, you said “all.” ‘And the children.’ Yeah, shut up about it already!” Then Padme just stared blankly at everything he did! Uhg. It’s all just so hollow to me and I never wanted to envision Anakin as such annoying whiner. It makes Darth Vader into someone stupid.

Then with Revenge of the Sith, I had perhaps the most interesting transition. I was really into the moving dramatic scenes. I thought Anakin’s love for Padme was clearly evident and the acting was actually decent for a change. Then, after his change, Anakin almost seemed like the Darth Vader I had always imagined behind the mask in terms of the way that he spoke and brooded over his feelings in the film. I thought it was wonderful. So much of the film’s content really tugged on my emotions despite being stuffed in-between many long and boring sequences that were otherwise meaningless and pointless to me. For instance, the scene where he murders children didn’t move me in a good way or a bad way at first. It seemed so odd and un-relatable that I sort of just accepted it and didn’t think too much about it at all. If Darth Vader had a strong reason to kill children I knew that he could have gone through with it. But then, as weeks went by, I began to analyze the film in my mind, over and over again. It began making less and less sense to me. Without having the on-screen emotions and the music to make me feel as if I was empathizing with Anakin’s motives, I soon discovered that there was actually nothing for me to empathize with him about! He was a totally heartless murderer/evildoer and he committed his heinous atrocities over the most dubious of reasoning! It was sick and it was the very last straw for the prequel trilogy as far as I was concerned.

So, my favorite villain of all time was a whiny punk and a psychopath who basically murdered children like a coward? He even murdered his own wife (in a way) because his whiny selfishness was so powerful? What on earth was left for me to enjoy about any of the films anymore?! Darth Vader became revolting to me.



Originally posted by: CO

I always say that Lucas wanted it both ways with the PT, and that is why so many have not loved it, or chose to acknowledge as their saga. He wanted to tell a different story, with different characters, in a totally different time period, but still use the exact things that made the OT great, and that is why it came off so cheesy and cringworthy at times, and really just takes you out of the movie.

That’s true, but I believe you should even go further with that statement. The primary problem with the prequels is not just one between the lighthearted approach and the serious approach, but a whole host of incompatible concepts. In fact, with every new film in the series, including Empire, George Lucas has tried cramming more and more conceptual approaches into his films. It’s very interesting when you see what he’s done in this sense. It is as if George Lucas is man obsessed with so many different ideas, all fascinating on their own, but rarely does he stick to any one idea in a way where he does it sufficient justice.

The prequel trilogy suffers from this the most. Is Anakin a messiah or a monster, a tragic hero or a passionate victim, an innocent boy or a whiny coveter, a selfish megalomaniac or an altruistic warrior? Is Star Wars supposed to be a morality play using traditional mythological themes or an intentionally cheesy serial? Is it supposed to be a comedy incorporating wisecracking droids and a bumbling idiot or a serious drama delving into our darkest motivations as people? In the end, I don’t think George could keep his mind straight in terms of how to make all of the disparate concepts harmonize. At best, I’d imagine that he was only able to remember his favorite approach for disconnected scenes at a time and even then his attention could only care so much before becoming bored or lazy (if I had to guess).


Originally posted by: zombie84

Really, is it any surprise that in a series of 6 films, two are great, one is okay and three are below average? I think it is incredible that not just one is great but that two are.


Well, you make a very good point there. Yet for some reason it is very frustrating for me, as a Star Wars fan, to have seen the films fall to the place where they are now. I know they aren’t the worst films ever, but they could have been somewhat good.

Perhaps I believed Lucas’ own self promotion a little too much. Perhaps I shouldn’t have believed he was a genius who single-handedly built the original trilogy as he tried to claim (despite that no being true at all). Perhaps, then, the prequel movies and the SE wouldn’t be so frustrating for me now.


Originally posted by: vote_for_palpatine

Honestly, there is one PT moment that has the same amount of gravitas for me:

"Anakin, my allegiance is to the Republic! To DEMOCRACY!!"

I wish they hadn't used "You were the chosen one!" in the trailers, or that might have been another moment I would have liked. But showing it in trailers let all the air out of that balloon.


Hah! Yeah, the “chosen one” line was definitely a moment for laughter in the way the trailer presented it. It seemed so generic and I thought it was going to be so cheesy. Then, in the movie, it actually made me very sad. The emotion that McGregor pours into that line is very potent.

Now that I think about it. Every truly memorable moment in the PT involved Ewan McGregor for the most part. He consistently acted well and the best story elements always surrounded him. That “Democracy” line was a good moment, but so were a number of the scenes where he took on the bad guys with good humor or intensity. Not only that, but the best OT references were from his character, like how Anakin would “be the death” of him or that “uncivilized” line about using the blaster. Just goes to make me believe even more that Obi-Wan should have been the central character of the prequels and not Anakin.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Tiptup

Well, you make a very good point there. Yet for some reason it is very frustrating for me, as a Star Wars fan, to have seen the films fall to the place where they are now. I know they aren’t the worst films ever, but they could have been somewhat good.

Perhaps I believed Lucas’ own self promotion a little too much. Perhaps I shouldn’t have believed he was a genius who single-handedly built the original trilogy as he tried to claim (despite that no being true at all). Perhaps, then, the prequel movies and the SE wouldn’t be so frustrating for me now.
.


I think this is how we all feel who were underwhelmed by the PT, or what I call duped in thinking that Lucas is this messiah. I say that in the context that Lucas is not the messiah as everyone states that he is and was even during the OT days, cause I still feel the quality drop started with ROTJ, continued with the SE nonsense, and sent red flags to me as a fan with the PT.

Even with ROTJ being a good but not great sequel, the O-OT is a very coherent trilogy that for 3 movies that Lucas made up as he went, actually flows really well. The one beef I have with the OT is that Luke's last name is Skywalker, and Vaders name is Anakin Skywalker? They should have had Anakins last name be Starkiller in ROTJ, so atleast it shows an attempt to hide Luke when he was born.

Watching the O-OT for the first time in about 10 years, I noticed how better written and better executed the whole trilogy is to the PT. The biggest problem with the PT is that Lucas just didn't know what to do with certain characters when the OT they all had a specific reason for being in the movie and weren't just used as plot points.

Just look at the first shot of each character as they are introduced in the O-OT movies:

-Obiwan comes in howling as this great wizard to save Luke
-Vaders entrance on Tantive IV shows the first minute this guy is a badass
-Yoda as first seen by Luke is some bumbling idiot who plays him like a fiddle, but turns out to be the smartest guy in the movie.
-The Emperor is talked about in SW, shown in a hologram in ESB, and then makes a huge entrance on DS II in ROTJ.
-Jabba is talked about for two movies, but never shown, and again is finally shown in ROTJ as ruling all the scum on Tatooine
-C3PO & R2D2 control the first 15 minutes of SW, and have a purpose in each movies, rather than just having a part in the PT. C3PO plays a huge role in Leia, Han, and Chewy getting caught on Cloud City cause he is blown to pieces. R2D2 saves the day for them constantly by opening doors, stopping trash compactors, and turning on Hyperdrives.

The PT has so many characters come in and out of the movie with more of a purpose of just getting from point A to point B, and it is comes off that Lucas was literally writing this stuff as he shot the movies sometimes. Everything in the O-OT is subtle in the way it flows, you don't have one huge movie of Jar Jar, and then never see him again. You have 2 1/2 movies minus Bail Organa, then he suddenly has this big role in the last hour of ROTS, only cause he has to. Uncle Owen who has strong feelings on Anakin & Kenobi in SW, has about 5 minutes of screentime in AOTC.

The O-OT really did a better job of sticking with the characters, and actually building on them better then the PT did, even the secondary characters like Lando. The O-OT characters all had character arcs by the end of the trilogy:

Luke: Farmboy to Jedi who saves his father and the galaxy
Han: Rogue who is all for himself but becomes a team player by ROTJ
Vader: Bad guy who saves his son and kills the Emperor
Lando: Selfish guy who sells out his friend Han, but eventually blows up DSII
Leia: ?????????? Leia is the only one I think they dropped the ball with in ROTJ, cause when Lucas made her Lukes sister, it takes her away from being head of the Rebellion in which is the strength of her personality.

Zombie is right that we should be lucky with 2 Great movies in SW & ESB, and as I said, I never really buried ROTJ that much before the PT, cause we had 2 classics and 1 good sequel. But looking at the saga, there are more bad then good movies!! Now I don't hate any PT movies cause I can enjoy ANYTHING with SW in it, but that doesn't mean I am not naive to think they are all OK movies that could have been better.



Author
Time
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
About force jumps, I still don't see the problem. Luke's jumps were already fantastic, and to me, most of the Jedi jumps in the prequels aren't all that much higher than Luke's. I understand -that- you prefer more subtle jumps. I don't quite understand why. I see. So, this is still a very extreme issue for you then? Interesting. I am truly sorry Go-Mer. I mean, I understand that you have a fixation upon this subject, but as I have already stated many times, I do not. The super jumps are not any kind of an extreme problem for me at all. I simply mentioned it off the top of my head in my first post. It was something that didn’t match up with the rest of the “saga” to me in a vague sense and that’s all. I’m now sorry that the Jedi jumps have now struck such a strong nerve with you. As I have already said before in this thread, and for many of the precise reasons you outlined in your last post, I am easily able to overlook this issue and pretend it somehow works.

Sure, I’ll admit that I still consider the super-jumps to be small flaw in the sense that the previous movies had already ingrained such a strong image of the Jedi into my mind. They moved like ordinary people for the most part and could only perform miraculous feats with great labor and concentration. Perhaps Luke was just an unskilled novice as you say, but I always got the impression that Luke was a pretty capable Jedi in terms of his physical capabilities. But, as you said, I never knew any of those things for certain, and I’m thus able to overlook and accept the super jumps. Oh good, I misunderstood. I thought this was a big deal that you couldn't roll along with. My mistake.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
What I’m unable to overlook or accept however is your outright dismissal of my point of view. You have implied that I am supremely illogical for gathering the impression that I did. Apparently, to formulate a general concept of the Jedi, based upon what the movies themselves have made me accustomed to, is some sort of supreme crime in your eyes. I’m sorry but I find that odd. After all, I able to understand your point of view to a degree, and yet you somehow cannot even see where I am coming at all. Well maybe "illogical" isn't the right way to put it. I guess it's just a difference in the way we each approached these new movies. I certainly never assumed that Jedi would be doing all of the things they did in the PT on my own going on the classic trilogy. Certainly there are more fantastic qualities to some of the things the Jedi can do in the prequels. Still, I didn't see that as an "artistic" or "logical" flaw, it was just the way things were in this story. I then adjusted my perception to fit with this new information, replacing my assumptions with how things "really" were. To me it all clicked and made perfect sense as I watched these movies for the first time. Instead of folding my arms and saying: "Hey Luke never did anything like that in the classic trilogy" I put my hand under my chin and said: "So -that's- how Jedi were when they were the guardians of peace and justice in the old Republic." Obviously, this wasn't a big deal for you either, so really the lack of logic here was in my perception that it was.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
I get the impression that if George Lucas were to decide tomorrow that Jedi could shoot beams of radiation from their eyeballs and melt storm troopers in a single second with them, you would then wholeheartedly accept that concept. And, if I were to then express even the slightest reservation about that power, I can only guess that you would accuse me of being completely illogical and unfair. Now come on, we were talking about how an existing force power from the classic trilogy was portrayed to more of an extreme in the prequels, not a force power that magically appeared out of nowhere. Some of the things the Jedi do in the prequels that they never did in the classic trilogy such as Jedi speed (seen in the beginning of TPM), I can see as being something more out of left field.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Obviously to you this is a fairly large deal, and one you have a hard time rolling along with. Uhh, no, I already said in this thread that this issue isn’t a “fairly large deal” to me at all. In fact, I have stated the opposite a number of times now. For crying out loud, the first time I watched The Phantom Menace, I didn’t even notice the jumps were as high as they were! It was not until a later viewing that I saw how extreme they were and, sure, became somewhat bothered by them. But still, it’s not this important to me. It is nothing to debate to the extreme degree you apparently want to debate it. I’ve been trying to dispense with the issue for a number of my posts now. I already stated that they can work from a different point of view. Again, I misunderstood, my mistake.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
I think it's nonsense to question the logical veracity of Jedi that can jump twice as high as Luke. Hmm, once again, you have the arrogance to completely dismiss my point of view as “nonsense.” Is that what you call being open-minded Go-Mer? If so, then I’m impressed by your gall. It was only in response to your complete dismissal of the fact that light sabers aren't any more logical than Jedi being able to jump as high as they do. I was making a point about how light sabers go beyond what we know about in our own existence just as some of the more fantastic Jedi powers do, and you told me that the difference was that there was in inconsistency between the way Jedi jumping in particular had been portrayed in the prequels as opposed to the classic trilogy.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Again, the reason I had a small problem with the super jumps was because the previous films had given me a far more subtle concept of the Jedi in terms of their physical prowess. I’m glad that you are making me restate that so many times. Quite frankly, it’s not an extreme problem for me. My previous concept of the Jedi was not that important to me and I’ve stated that many times now. I am able to accept the new jumps and overlook my previous concept. Can we move on now? One gripe down, how many do we have left? Yes, I am sorry I thought you found this to be a problem.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Forgive me, but I believe it's stupid to absolutely "assume" that Jedi in their prime wouldn't be able to jump as high as they ended up doing in the prequels.
Ahh, well I’m beginning to think that you are stupid for assuming that I “absolutely” believed Jedi couldn’t make super jumps. I never said that anywhere in this thread and I have even clearly denied that sentiment a number of times now. You have provided no reasons to accuse me of making such an extreme assumption and yet you keep accusing me of it. Why is that, Go-Mer? I don't know I'm just used to disagreeing with people who don't like the prequels I think. I appreciate your patience with me.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Here is what I was keying in on that you had said in response to me explaining that light sabers don't make logical sense, because lasers wouldn't just stop at one end like that without something to reflect or absorb the energy.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Nonsense. Light sabers were always presented in a very logically beautiful way in the films. They were mysterious and magical weapons that somehow needed the force to work and, unlike what you claim, they were clearly different from the laser blasters in the film (please don’t make flippant points). All in all, light sabers are a very simple and acceptable subject from a logical standpoint, and very enjoyable from a logical standpoint as well. Now, if we were to have logically delved deeper into how light sabers supposedly worked in the films themselves and talked about plasma and shit like that, sure that might well have been an unsuccessful addition, artistically speaking. There’s no way for us to know though, since the films never went that route. Wow, so that’s where you were going with that? You’re so brilliant Go-Mer!

Of course, first let’s totally miss the fact that I have already communicated why light saber problems and my super jump problems are not similarly problematic, like fifty times. And, lets overlook the fact that I can overlook my problem with the super jumps, but let’s instead talk about how incredibly smart you are, Go-Mer. Stop it. Really, you're making me blush.

Oh wait, I think I see where my misunderstanding came from. You are saying that the reason why Jedi being able to jump a bit higher than Luke is not the same kind of issue as the concept of a light saber because there is a consistency with the way the light saber is portrayed within the films, whereas the Jedi jump has progressed to become more intense. I can see how you had an expectation for the Jedi to have similarly more subtle powers as Luke displayed, and understand how making them more extreme can approach "hoakie" status, I just think that the light saber is also fairly "hoakie" from the get go. It looks cool but there's really no logic behind it, it just is.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Ahh, but wait, you said that you believe that lasers “wouldn’t just stop at one end,” Go-Mer? Well, in that “keying” text you quoted of mine, I actually stated why that was a clearly stupid assumption for you to make. Light sabers are not laser guns! They’re light sabers! According to the story, according to the way they look, and according to the way they are used, light sabers are clearly designed to work like swords and not laser guns! Yeah, but light doesn't just stop unless there's something to absorb or reflect it. I think the only laser we see in the classic trilogy is the Death Star super laser. The blasters are firing some kind of energy bolt, there's more to it than just light.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Your light saber problems are not directly comparable to my small problem with the super jumps. Again, over a long period of time, the previous films gave an impression of what Jedi could do, and from that artistic standpoint, the super jumps seemed to be outside of those capabilities. (Nothing more, nothing less. I have no extreme opinion on this matter.) Your problem with light sabers on the other hand is based upon nothing in the films or anything in reality for that matter. Why don’t you focus on a more difficult, prequel problem, Go-Mer? Are you afraid that you can’t defend them with your straw-man arguments as easily? Absolutely terrified. I do see what you were saying now. I personally didn't assume Luke would be a reference for the full spectrum of what a fully trained Jedi in the prime of the Jedi could do, so that's why I don't think there's a problem with it, but I can see what you are saying, and I don't mean to imply it's invalid. It is just a problem that never came up for me is the best way to put it.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
By not seeing anything there to reflect it, and knowing how lasers seem to work here on Earth, that's how I can assume that. Assumptions by their very nature rest on perception and limits of imagination, and are not dependant on facts.
That’s PRECISELY why you shouldn’t rigidly hold to your assumptions, Go-Mer. As I said in my previous post, sometimes it’s good to approach something with wonder and NOT have a clear perception for everything that you experience. I’ll state this once more: There was nothing in the films to intelligently support your assumption that light sabers were “lasers.” There were also no intelligent reasons in the film to support your assumption that anything concerning light sabers needed to be “reflected.” Therefore, to argue that light sabers have a problem on either basis is far from intelligent.
I agree. They don't get into the light saber concept enough to be able to disprove it's possibility in reality. That's why you and I were able to accept it at face value -without- over thinking it.Originally posted by: Tiptup
On the other hand, my general concept of the Jedi and their physical capabilities does have a small degree of support in the actual films. Is it a super strong degree of support? No, and I never said that it was. Can I openly reject super jumps as illogical? No, I have never said that I could. I simply said that I don’t particularly like them from an artistic standpoint, not that I could reject them completely. I would hope that you can finally get that into your skull, Go-Mer.
Okay, so it's not that it doesn't make sense that the Jedi are more powerful than Luke, you just don't like that they are. It's not "artistically" pleasing to you. I'm sorry it took so long to understand that.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
I think you might need a lesson in logic, Go-Mer.Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Do I now? I would suggest that you could use a lesson in fantasy.
Yes I do actually think you might need a lesson in proper logic, in fact your last post was horrendous in this regard. And, I believe your suggestion is empty, since I am well versed in fantasy as a method, thank you.
Thanks for guiding me back on track. Originally posted by: TiptupOriginally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
I'm the one making "unfair" comparisons? I'm just illustrating what I find to be a huge double standard here.
Light sabers are not a double standard for me. There’s no valid reason you can provide to prove that I am being hypocritical here. (Though, if it is not obvious to you and you need everything to be clearly stated, I will say that you have so far tried to present many invalid reasons in your attempt to label me a hypocrite, but that I have now explained why those reasons are wrong. If you are unable to understand my explanations then I would certainly be willing to help clarify.)
I think I have it now, but you never know.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Similarly to the way you pretend the logical problems with the concept of a light saber don't exist?
Similarly is an adverb.
I am altering it's meaning, pray I don't alter it any further. Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Well we know Jedi have powers of telekinesis, it's not that illogical to me to assume that if they were falling, and they were concentrating hard enough on their landing, they could use that kind of telekinesis to help slow their fall before impact. In other areas where I can think of Jedi being far more fragile, they were falling from a great height while they were unconscious, which would handily explain this to me.
Hmm, that’s an interesting concept. I would ask, then, why cannot Jedi levitate? Or are you suggesting that Anakin used his telekinesis to alter the hover-car’s movement in order to lessen the impact? If so, then how come it doesn’t look like the hover car is being moved through telekinesis? And, either way, why doesn’t Anakin look as if he is concentrating on the force to use his telekinesis?
I imagine it to be like a force push. You can't just levitate yourself, but you could lessen your impact if you were falling. To me it looks like Zam Wessel's speeder was impacted by Anakin landing on it.Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
To me it's important to enjoy these movies as much as possible.

The focus of Revenge of the Sith to me is the manifestation of the grey area involved with good and evil. The morals of ROTS are very similar to the morals presented across the entire saga. That love is better than hate, and compassion is better than greed, but also that life doesn't always make the right choices very clear. On the one hand, saving Padme and Shmi are noble, compassionate things. Anakin strives to obtain the power to control these things, and is then consumed by the desire to control the plight of the entire galaxy, so he "can make things the way he wants them to be", but as Padme asks, "at what cost"? It's an examination of what's "right" for an individual and at what point that becomes less important than what's "right" for the greater good.
First, why is it important to enjoy the prequels “as much as possible”? Do you say that with every movie or just with movies that are related to Star Wars? Do you say that with every TV show that happens to come along? Isn’t better to enjoy what you actually find enjoyable and not force yourself to enjoy a film simply because it’s a film or simply because it’s related to Star Wars?
I say that with any movie I am watching. To me the point of watching a movie is to be entertained. The more I enjoy it, the more I have gotten out of the deal. For that reason, I try to work with the entertainment as much as possible. The Star Wars Saga is just where I happen to get the most enjoyment out of the deal when it comes to movies.

Also I'm not saying that I force myself to enjoy things that aren't enjoyable, I just strive to see what the filmmaker was trying to get across, and don't let my pre-conceived notions about "how it should be" get in the way of enjoying it for what it is. I don't spend a whole lot of time second guessing the film maker, and instead just enjoy what he has done as much as possible.Originally posted by: Tiptup
Otherwise, I see how you could enjoy that focus from the prequels. However, I have trouble seeing that focus in the films. How are you able to overlook the many times that the films are clearly hypocritical in regard to that focus? I see many times where the films display the fact that what’s “right” for an individual is what actually determines what is then right for the greater good more than anything else. To me that clear display seems to contradict the focus you enjoy. Therefore, how are you able to overlook inconsistency? Why is that seeming hypocrisy unimportant to you?

I really do want to understand your point of view, Go-Mer. Assuming you can act with a reasonable mind.
Could you be more specific as to what you find to contradict what I am seeing? To me Anakin's desire to save Padme from possible death is a good thing. It's personal for Anakin because he has a personal interest in keeping her around because he loves her. The path he goes down in pursuit of that goal pushes the whole galaxy into the dark times of the Empire. In that way, Anakin put himself above the rest of the galaxy and it ended up being bad for everyone.Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
I really don't see why you would say it's incoherent.
From my point of view, RotS is either incoherent or Anakin is a psychopath. Either way I can’t enjoy the movie. I’ve already told you this before and you totally failed to reply. Oh well, if you can’t understand my point of view even to the slightest degree, then you can hardly claim to have an open mind.
Only a Sith lord deals in absolutes! (I love that line ) Anyway, I don't see Anakin as a complete psychopath.

When it comes to the Tusken Raider slaughter, Anakin knows what he did was wrong after he did it, so you could argue temporary insanity brought on by the trauma of having his mother die in his arms because of them.

As far as slaughtering the younglings and betraying the Jedi order, he did rationalize that even if only to himself:"I will not betray the Republic."

"My loyalties are with the Chancellor, and the senate, and with you."

"From my point of view the Jedi are evil".
Anakin had it all worked out in his head that what he was doing was for the greater good of the galaxy, but it was all really motivated by his selfish desire to save Padme from a potential death. His rationalization was just how he coped with that decision.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: CO
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Well, you make a very good point there. Yet for some reason it is very frustrating for me, as a Star Wars fan, to have seen the films fall to the place where they are now. I know they aren’t the worst films ever, but they could have been somewhat good. Perhaps I believed Lucas’ own self promotion a little too much. Perhaps I shouldn’t have believed he was a genius who single-handedly built the original trilogy as he tried to claim (despite that no being true at all). Perhaps, then, the prequel movies and the SE wouldn’t be so frustrating for me now.
. I think this is how we all feel who were under whelmed by the PT, or what I call duped in thinking that Lucas is this messiah. I say that in the context that Lucas is not the messiah as everyone states that he is and was even during the OT days, cause I still feel the quality drop started with ROTJ, continued with the SE nonsense, and sent red flags to me as a fan with the PT. See, I don't remember Lucas or anyone associated with Lucasfilm claiming that Lucas is a "messiah". I only saw him as a filmmaker. A really good filmmaker, but still human and imperfect. Maybe that's part of the reason I was able to roll along with the imperfections of the prequels, because I didn't see the classic trilogy as being the work of some kind of holy man. I know most people feel ANH and Empire are the best in the series, but I can't help but wonder how much of that was because of what Lucas brought to the table with his film, and how much was because of what –we- brought to the table in regards to our imagination. Truly wonderful the mind of a child is. I know I am in a minority here, but I think all the films are at about the same level give or take a bit here and there. I think they all have logic hurdles, dicey dialogue, hit and miss acting, and effects that aren't always 100% real looking.
Originally posted by: CO
Even with ROTJ being a good but not great sequel, the O-OT is a very coherent trilogy that for 3 movies that Lucas made up as he went, actually flows really well. The one beef I have with the OT is that Luke's last name is Skywalker, and Vader’s name is Anakin Skywalker? They should have had Anakin’s last name be Starkiller in ROTJ, so at least it shows an attempt to hide Luke when he was born.
It's a stretch, but I always figured it was okay because Luke was more or less stashed away from the Empire on Tatooine. It's not like he was attending imperial high school or anything like that.Originally posted by: CO
The O-OT really did a better job of sticking with the characters, and actually building on them better then the PT did, even the secondary characters like Lando. The O-OT characters all had character arcs by the end of the trilogy:

Luke: Farmboy to Jedi who saves his father and the galaxy
Han: Rogue who is all for himself but becomes a team player by ROTJ
Vader: Bad guy who saves his son and kills the Emperor
Lando: Selfish guy who sells out his friend Han, but eventually blows up DSII
Leia: ?????????? Leia is the only one I think they dropped the ball with in ROTJ, cause when Lucas made her Luke’s sister, it takes her away from being head of the Rebellion in which is the strength of her personality.
Anakin: Slave boy to powerful Jedi to Sith Lord.
Obi-Wan Kenobi: Apprentice Jedi to one of the top Jedi's in the order to desert hermit.
Padme: Naive puppet politician to headstrong leader.
Jar-Jar: Societal outcast to important representative.

I see what you mean about being tied to "what has to happen", but I think Lucas made a decent attempt to balance that out with as much character development as he could with that requirement.Originally posted by: CO
Zombie is right that we should be lucky with 2 Great movies in SW & ESB, and as I said, I never really buried ROTJ that much before the PT, cause we had 2 classics and 1 good sequel. But looking at the saga, there are more bad then good movies!! Now I don't hate any PT movies cause I can enjoy ANYTHING with SW in it, but that doesn't mean I am not naive to think they are all OK movies that could have been better.
You are lucky to have enjoyed 2 movies out of 6, and I can see why you would rather enjoy 2 out of 3 than 2 out of 6.

I feel pretty lucky to have gotten 6 amazing films, because for me they form the Voltron of movies, something that I don't think anyone else has even come close to achieving.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: CO

You have 2 1/2 movies minus Bail Organa, then he suddenly has this big role in the last hour of ROTS, only cause he has to. Uncle Owen who has strong feelings on Anakin & Kenobi in SW, has about 5 minutes of screentime in AOTC.

Yeah, considering how much the movies revealed every major revelation in the OT, they sure shortchanged Uncle Owen and Bail Organa. Though, ideally, from my perspective, the PT should have kept most the OT plot a secret and shouldn’t have had either of those characters present in the films in any revealed way. I feel the same way about Yoda.

I also agree that the main characters of the prequel trilogy were pretty flat. In a basic sense they had roles, much like the OT characters, but those roles were never used to any great dramatic effect. And Go-Mer listed some transitions for those same characters, but those transitions seemed pretty empty as well. The prequel trilogy was so superficial that you never actually felt the character’s going through their major transitions in a personally visceral way. It was more like, “Okay, Annie, you’re a Sith Lord now . . . and that means you’re evil . . . Oh! Obi . . . you’re a dessert hermit now . . . Padme, you have a broken heart . . . yeah, I’m afraid that means you’re dead.” It was more like a dry checklist than a truly heartfelt portrayal of personally devastating consequences (more often than not).




Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic

I can see how you had an expectation for the Jedi to have similarly more subtle powers as Luke displayed, and understand how making them more extreme can approach "hoakie" status, I just think that the light saber is also fairly "hoakie" from the get go. It looks cool but there's really no logic behind it, it just is.

Well, the reason I believe the super jumps take on a cheesy nature is because they don’t really serve a purpose to me. Sure, we get how they’re uber-professional Jedi compared to Luke, and Jedi jumps are just cool in general, but, the smaller force jumps weren’t amazing enough? Do we need to make it so the Jedi can jump so high? It seems to cheapen the fine edge of frailty for the Jedi that I had always imagined.

And the lightsaber is hardly a corny or forced concept if you as me. If anything it was very cool and got my imagination very excited. Hell, lightsabers should excite the imagination of just about anyone. They’re just awesome! (Oh, and I love the cool stuff that Qui-Gon did with his lightsaber in Menace.)


Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic

Okay, so it's not that it doesn't make sense that the Jedi are more powerful than Luke, you just don't like that they are. It's not "artistically" pleasing to you. I'm sorry it took so long to understand that.

Well, first, technically, we don’t know that Luke couldn’t have jumped higher since we aren’t really aware of too many situations where he wanted to jump higher.

The heart of this matter is that I’m a fan in this discussion. A fanatic. By definition I become extremely devoted to the way certain things are. Having Jedi powers depicted in the more subtle style of the OT is something I was really attached to. Therefore the Jedi in the prequels just seem too extreme to me. I know they were supposed to be even more amazing back in their heyday, and their skills were goose-bump inducing in the opening scene of Phantom Menace, but after that, over and over again, the endless portrayals began to seem cheap to me. It was as if Jedi powers weren’t really special to anyone making the films anymore. The Jedi could do a little too much if you ask me. Their capabilities became gratuitous.


Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic

I am altering it's meaning, pray I don't alter it any further.

Heh, alright.


Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic

I imagine it to be like a force push. You can't just levitate yourself, but you could lessen your impact if you were falling. To me it looks like Zam Wessel's speeder was impacted by Anakin landing on it.

Well, assuming Jedi can force-push themselves, if that is what Anakin did in that scene, I never noticed any clue in the film showing him doing that at that moment. Therefore I deem that scene to be overly sensational and cheap. :\


Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic

To me the point of watching a movie is to be entertained. The more I enjoy it, the more I have gotten out of the deal. For that reason, I try to work with the entertainment as much as possible. The Star Wars Saga is just where I happen to get the most enjoyment out of the deal when it comes to movies.

Also I'm not saying that I force myself to enjoy things that aren't enjoyable, I just strive to see what the filmmaker was trying to get across, and don't let my pre-conceived notions about "how it should be" get in the way of enjoying it for what it is. I don't spend a whole lot of time second guessing the film maker, and instead just enjoy what he has done as much as possible.


I understand that point of view. It’s good to at least try to enjoy what you spend your time and money on. But there should be limits to that. When you said that you try to enjoy movies as much as “possible,” I got the impression that you were arguing that you should force yourself to like everything when sometimes there are simply things in movies that are bad and cannot be enjoyed.

I too am always trying to understand where a filmmaker is coming from. I see no point in forcing him or her to meet my preconceived notions about what good movies supposedly should have. However, starting with that as a basis, sometimes a filmmaker can fail when it comes to communicating their artistic point of view. I personally believe that George Lucas failed to communicate what he wanted the PT to communicate in a way that is highly enjoyable for most audiences. Did he have enjoyable moments? Yeah. Are the movies horrible? No, they just aren’t very good.

Even worse for me though, is that Star Wars already had so much established content that was already very enjoyable, and his additions lessened my enjoyment of that content. His new additions didn’t heighten my enjoyment of what was already so masterfully communicated. He irrevocably altered what those films were already successfully trying to “get across,” in my estimation.


Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic

Could you be more specific as to what you find to contradict what I am seeing? To me Anakin's desire to save Padme from possible death is a good thing. It's personal for Anakin because he has a personal interest in keeping her around because he loves her. The path he goes down in pursuit of that goal pushes the whole galaxy into the dark times of the Empire. In that way, Anakin put himself above the rest of the galaxy and it ended up being bad for everyone.


No, what you are seeing there is totally accurate. The problem is when you try to say that personal values are somehow evil or less important than universal values. That is a simplistic and wrong concept even if you only analyze the motivations from the prequel movies. There were many, many times where prequel-trilogy characters acted from personal motivations to intentionally accomplish things that are good for everyone. They personally desired things that were compatible with and helped work for the greater good.

Seriously, how can you even value the “greater good” if you don’t value the greater in a “personal” sense? Also, did not Anakin of the prequels believe that his personal desires for power were for the greater good in some way?

In ethics, there is no clear distinction between personal values and universal values. The greatest goal in this regard is to seek a state where our personal desires are compatible with the greater good. Even the prequel trilogy teaches this in a straightforward sense, over and over again. The characters have personal desires that are good because they are on the side of the greater good. To have the movies preach an ethic that contradicts the ethic that is taught through its portrayed deeds and motivations seems a little pathetic to me. There’s no way you can say that the Jedi in the prequels throw away their personal desires or sentimental attachment. They just don’t. I can pick out numerous examples where they acted in personal ways.


Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic

Only a Sith lord deals in absolutes! (I love that line )


That line is actually dumb to me since Obi-Wan uses the word “only.” He can’t attack the use of absolutes by using an absolute. Plus, the Jedi talk in terms of absolutes all the time if you follow the prequel trilogy alone. It’s a totally hypocritical line of dialogue. I don’t know what George was thinking . . . he probably wasn’t.


Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic

Anyway, I don't see Anakin as a complete psychopath.

When it comes to the Tusken Raider slaughter, Anakin knows what he did was wrong after he did it, so you could argue temporary insanity brought on by the trauma of having his mother die in his arms because of them.

As far as slaughtering the younglings and betraying the Jedi order, he did rationalize that even if only to himself:
"I will not betray the Republic."

"My loyalties are with the Chancellor, and the senate, and with you."

"From my point of view the Jedi are evil".

Anakin had it all worked out in his head that what he was doing was for the greater good of the galaxy, but it was all really motivated by his selfish desire to save Padme from a potential death. His rationalization was just how he coped with that decision.


I see how that works. But that’s really stupid. Anakin would have needed to be completely retarded to ever believe that rationalization justified his actions. Its far too weak otherwise. I never saw Anakin’s intellect debilitated in that way though, so again, I believe we can only conclude he was a psychopath. Either that or George Lucas just messed up.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
So...I'm new to this forum, and seeing as I've just re-watched the entire PT, I thought I'd add my two cents to this thread. Hopefully I can add a somewhat fresh perspective.

I think all three prequels are highly entertaining films. I think they tell the story in a way that makes the OT even more enjoyable than it already was. It adds more depth to the whole story. It creates a broader story. And it tells that story very competently, I think.

People say that there aren't any truly memorable moments in the PT that will stand the test of time next to the most memorable moments from the OT, but I completely disagree with that.

I think that Qui-Gon/Obi-Wan/Darth Maul dual at the end of TPM is absolutely brilliant. I think it surpasses any Luke/Vader fight in terms of sheer excitement. Darth Maul is seriously bad-ass.

I love the Pod Racing aspect of TPM; It's visually very stimulating and exciting, and it also serves the purpose of giving us some insight into what Anakin's life was like, as a slave child, before he ever touched 'the ways of the Jedi'. The pod race is iconic - especially the parts where the pod is actually coming towards you and the pod's beam goes across the whole screen.

I absolutely LOVE Yoda's line and Frank Oz's delivery of, "Everything! Fear is the path to the dark side! Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to SUFFERING.....I sense much fear in you......" - possibly my favorite line of dialog from the entire PT.

And say what you will about Jar-Jar - and he can be a *little* annoying at times - I can't really imagine TPM without him. He is to the PT as Chewie was to the OT.

The first film just does a very good job of getting Anakin started on the Jedi path by pure chance(they ran into him while taking refuge on Tattoine) while also showing Palpatine/Sideous start manipulating the entire galaxy to meet his own desires.

AOTC, imo, differs from the other two prequels in that TPM and ROTS are both very plot-driven while AOTC is more about just weaving together the advent of the 'Army Of The Republic'(Clone Army)(future Storm Troopers) and several different(albiet lengthy) battles(including Obi-Wan v Grevious, Yoda v Dooku, and Jedi v Droid Army) with the goal of showing how Palpetine/Sideous is slowly but surely controlling everything while accumlating more and more power, while also portraying the meat and potatos of the Anakin/Padme love story. Out of all SIX films, AOTC has the least 'big' events in it. The main point of ATOC is to show that everything is changing right underneath the noses of the Jedi, that the Republic is already being transformed into the Empire and no one even knows it. And, of course, to set the stage for ROTS. I had previously said that this was the weakest of the prequels - perhaps it is - but now I appreciate more than I ever have, because where before I was looking for those 'big' events, I now appreciate the more subtle approach of this film in that it is content to just progress the story and the development of the characters.

ROTS, on other hand, is all about the 'big' events. Some people have argued, even earlier in this thread, that the motives for Anakin's downfall aren't consistant throughout the film. That one minute it's because he doesn't want Padme to die and the next it's because the Jedi are evil. I actually think this dynamic works to the benefit of the character of Anakin and of the quality of the story. The way I see it, Palpetine/Sideous's relationship with all of his apprentices(Maul, Dooku, and Anakin/Vader) is all about taking ownership of the apprentice's mind, about playing with the apprentice's mind, twisting it, contorting it, confusing it. I think that the viewer watching the film isn't the only person who is confused about why Anakin is all of a sudden pledging himself to the Sith lord. I think Anakin is just as confused about it. I think Sideous is such a master of mind control that at this point he already has Anakin just repeating whatever he says. "You want to save Padme". "The Jedi are narrow-minded and dogmatic(paraphrasing)." I think that Sideous just totally takes control of Anakin's mind and uses Anakin's mind - and emotions - against him. I think that's why Anakin looks so lost at the end of the film(crying when Padme arrives, sort of expressionless during the dual with Obi-Wan) - he doesn't know exactly why he's doing this. I mean, you can't just say that Anakin made a concious rational decision to go to the dark side because of Padme, because the only reason Padme dies is because he betrayed her. If he doesn't betray her, she won't die, and he won't have to save her because there won't be anything to save her from. Sideous uses Anakin's fear to force him into making a decision he has ABSOLUTELY NO need to make. Sideous is playing Anakin's mind like a piano.

As for the rest of the film - I think it's brilliant.

I thought the entire last hour of the film was really very moving. When Sideous tells the clone army to execute "Order 66" and all of the Jedi are systematically murdered, there is a shot of Yoda on the wookie planet, and he is completely distraught. Same when Obi-Wan realizes that Anakin killed all the kids(and everyone else, but especially the kids) in the Jedi temple. He is completely heartbroken. His reaction to this is, in fact, almost like him finding out the Anakin has died. He starts with denial("no...no, it can't be") and then moves on to grief, as evidenced during the dual.

Obi-Wan's heartbroken-ness shines during the Obi-Wan/Anakin dual. You can literally see and feel how much agony Obi-Wan is in during this dual. You can see in Obi-Wan's eyes that this dual, the act of killing, or even attempting to kill, Anakin, will be the hardest thing he ever has to do. He spends most of the dual trying desperately to coax Anakin back from the dark side before he's lost to it forever. In Anakin's eyes, during this dual, you see a man who, upon seeing Padme and now fighting Obi-Wan here on this planet, is more confused than he's ever been. At this point, there's, as Padme says, 'still some good in him'. At this point, he still knows in his heart of hearts that everything Obi-Wan says during this battle is right, but he's still mostly consumed with the dark side, and without his new master there to tell him what to think, he just says the opposite of whatever Obi-Wan says, as though it were a reflex("From my point of view the Jedi are evil"). Only when Obi-Wan finally slays Anakin and leaves him burning in the lava is Anakin finally lost for good(well, until ROTJ anyway). Obi-Wan's monologue at this point is arguably the best piece of dialog in the entire PT:

"Obi-Wan: You were the chosen one! It was said that you would destroy the Sith, not join them! You were to bring balance to the force, not leave it in darkness!
Anakin Skywalker: I hate you!
Obi-Wan: You were my brother, Anakin. I loved you....

In those 30 or so seconds, you really feel that as Anakin has become Vader, Obi-Wan has become a broken man....he has become 'Old Ben' in spirit. You feel Obi-Wan's anger, grief, anguish, and you can feel the very moment that Obi-Wan officially gives up on Anakin and on any chance of remaining an active Jedi - when he picks up Anakin's lightsaber and starts walking back to his ship.

The whole thing was very, very, very well-done imho.

And the other big dual, Yoda v Sideous, was just tremendous. The shot where they're fighting with their light sabres on the middle platform of the senate chamber as it RISES into the chamber, with the ominous music in the background, is cinematically brilliant and very, very symbolic. It's the master of the light side vs the master of the dark side, fighting for control of the galaxy. It's a very exciting fight, but Yoda, of course, loses in the end, and Sideous siezes total control of the galaxy and creates the Empire. I think that whole scene is just very, very, very powerful.

In the OT, they did a great job of showing that there was no hope for the Jedi and that Luke was the only one who could bring them back, and they did a great job of showing Yoda and Obi-Wan being pessimistic about Luke's chances, at portraying Yoda and Obi-Wan as broken Jedi Knights who had all but given up hope. At the very end of ROTS, as Yoda and Obi-Wan go into exile after losing their fateful duals, you can really, REALLY, feel that cloud of hopelessness and darkness and anguish overtake them - when Yoda says "Into exile I must go. Failed, I have", and when Obi-Wan says he'll take Luke to Tattoine and that HE'LL STAY THERE, it's like an admission that there's nothing else he can do now, other than look after Anakin's son.

And, say what you will, but I think the shot of Vader rising, in the suit, for the first time, and saying 'Yes, Master', is a truly memorable shot that will stand the test of time, along with the Maul dual and pod race from TPM, the big battle at the end of ATOC, and countless moments in ROTS.

I think the film dad a GREAT, GREAT job of dramatically portraying the fall of not just Anakin, but of the Jedi, and I think that was very neccessary, because a RETURN of the Jedi isn't very dramatic unless the initial FALL of those same Jedi was equally dramatic. And it was.

I've been shaky at time, but, overall, I feel that the PT did a very, very good job creating a story that leads right into the OT. I think the TPM and ROTS are both GREAT films, while AOTC is just a step blow, but still entertaining and of a high quality, if not as cinematically pleasing as the other two.

I understand why so many people don't appreciate the PT - they feel that it's too childish, or that the dialog isn't good enough, or that the acting isn't good enough, or that the overall execution is fundementally flawed....I agree that there are childish parts of the PT, but I don't really see them as being anymore childish than certain aspects of the OT(Ewoks, C-3PO's constant blabbering[I mean I love it, but], Chewie, etc). I'd be a fool not to see that the dialog is often cheesy and sometimes just not very good. The acting, while certainly not academy award material(except for MAYBE Obi-Wan in the final ROTS dual), is better, imho, than a lot of you give it credit for. I think Liam Neeson was good in TPM. Jake Lloyd wasn't great, but he was just a little kid. Natalie Portman is just fine throughout - in fact she is very effective in the contrast between "Queen Amidila" and "Padme" in TPM. Ian McDiarmid was possibly the strongest overall actor throughout the trilogy. Ewan McGregor was very good as Obi-Wan for the most part. Hayden Christensen wasn't great overall - just good in AOTC, but I thought he was really pretty good as a lost Jedi descending into the dark side in ROTS.

All of this(plus special effects) adds up to create the overall execution of the films. I think that whether or not you enjoy films like this lies in LARGE part in perception. Everyone has their own perceptions and their own feelings and their own ideals about how and what things should be, especially in context of the OT, and there's no way any filmmaker could have made the prequels in a way that would please all of the HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of SW fans out there. Therefore, I'm not going to make any arguements in the vein of trying to make those of you who don't like the prequels change your mind. I think I've already done a good job of laying out what I enjoy about the PT and why I think it does nothing but elevate enjoyment of the OT.

I will say, however, that these so-called "OT Purists" make me sad sometimes. This is because, for a decent number(but certainly not all) of these purists, it's not just "The prequels suck". It's that ANYTHING Star Wars related that isn't in the OT, doesn't matter. There is a huge amount of "Expanded Universe" stuff that is "canon"(whatever the hell that means), but there are OT fans that simply don't care. There is huge amount of story, before the OT(and even before the PT) and after the OT, a huge amount of other characters, a huge amount of this FANTASTY GALAXY that's been created that is left unexplored by many.

I, for one, would love to see a film that takes place before the PT, in which we see "The Tragedy Of Darth Plageus The Wise" - the training and apprenticeship of Darth Sideous, and the surpassing and murder of Plageus.

Anyway, these are my thoughts on the PT. I can't really change your opinions, but hopefully I've offered something new for you to read. I just don't understand all the Lucas-bashing where the PT is concerned. If you're going to bash Lucas, do it for what he's doing to the OT.

Where the PT doesn't make me think less of Lucas, what he's doing - tampering - with the OT does make me think less of him. Some of the changes are utterly pointless...no point in making Greedo shoot first, no point in giving away the surprise in Empire, no point in putting Hayden at the end of ROTJ. But what really bothers me isn't the changes themselves, but Lucas's attitude towards the whole thing. According to him, the SE's are "canon", as in, they're the only "official" version of the OT now. The OOT isn't "official" anymore. The OT SE is now the only one that matters. It's that attitude that bothers me the most. If Lucas had just included a fully restored version of the OOT/OUT with the DVD release of the SEs in 04 to begin with, I would've just said, "knock yourself out George". The changes are pointless, but they don't matter as long as we have the originals. And that's where Lucas gets on my nerves. He doesn't acknowledge the OOT as "mattering" anymore.

But I'm rambling now. I guess I'm done. I hope you've enjoyed my thoughts.

And Yoda is without a doubt the coolest character in the history of Sci-Fi.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: dagobahexile

I will say, however, that these so-called "OT Purists" make me sad sometimes. This is because, for a decent number(but certainly not all) of these purists, it's not just "The prequels suck". It's that ANYTHING Star Wars related that isn't in the OT, doesn't matter. There is a huge amount of "Expanded Universe" stuff that is "canon"(whatever the hell that means), but there are OT fans that simply don't care. There is huge amount of story, before the OT(and even before the PT) and after the OT, a huge amount of other characters, a huge amount of this FANTASTY GALAXY that's been created that is left unexplored by many.
.


Dagobahexile, that was a good and honest assessment of the PT, and the thing about this site is you aren't going to get crap from people when you are just giving your honest opinion.

I will address this part of your post, and I think this is the reason the OT appeals to a mass audience rather than a niche audience. The OT is very basic in its story, if you wipe away all of the dust off the glass, it is trilogy of good vs evil where you root for the good guys for 6 hours, and they win in the end. A simple formula in Hollywood.

The OT was able to combine that storytelling yet have drama,mythology, humor, groundbreaking effects, action that was marketed as a scifi/fantasy adventure. I understand there are more stories before and after the OT movies, I have friends who love the EU, and like the PT cause it is more SW.

But the OT I believe was able to capture the average movie fan like me, a person who wasn't a big scifi fan, a person who wasn't a big action summer blockbuster fan, and a person who never loved these type of films in general. And the OT grabbed a whole market of non scifi fans cause even though it was SciFi/Fantasy it had other elements that made me a fan. The OT has that rare quality of great films that are fun to watch, and I believe the PT, because of the story that it presents are not as fun to watch, cause it is a tragedy. Most great films I watch are heavy dramas that you have to be in the mood for, yet the OT movies I feel the same way as movies like Schindlers List and The Godfather in terms of dramatics, yet they are fun as hell to watch.

So for most fans, I don't think they really cared about what happened after Episode VI, and what happened before Episode IV, yet they got sucked in in 1999 because it was more SW. There is nothing wrong with loving the EU and The PT, but those are for the true diehards, and I firmly believe many, not all of the OT fans were never going to love the PT no matter how great Lucas executed it. The PT did not contain Luke, Han, and Leia, it was not about the good guys winning, it was not about adventure for 2 hours, the PT and EU are just different, they are more SW'ish in a way, and the more SW'ish the movies get, the more I don't love them.

I have always said, the O-OT to me is like being a World War II buff or Civil War buff, there is a hell of alot of stuff that comes before and after it, but this one is the most interesting. I think there is a reason Lucas started with the OT, and not the PT, he knew what the masses would love, cause even though they do form one story, the OT can form one story from the galaxy, or more of just a snapshot in time.

Author
Time
The prequels ARE full of striking, memorable images and moments, but they have to click just as regular movies, too. When the audience laughs at Anakin and Padme, something's not right. Maybe the regular test screening process would have helped, instead of just showing it to Ron Howard and Spielberg. The IMAX version of Clones was 20 minutes shorter. Whether it was better or worse, just that fact that that was even POSSIBLE should be a clue to something. I actually don't think that Jake Lloyd was a bad actor, he was given a part essentially written as a 13 year old. When you're 9, that is a huge gap, and is just never going to seem natural. On top of that it's Star Wars dialogue, which is hard for even the likes of Alec Guinness. I'm actually amazed he worked at all.
Author
Time
Wow, I didn't see this last post of yours. Finally someone who gives Lloyd some credit. I'll have to take some time to catch up with other posts I've not read yet, but I plan on responding more later on tonight.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Actually, that's a "Guy Caballero" post, but I do agree with almost everything he said. Jake Loyd was a decent Anakin (perhaps even better than Hayden in my estimation). Otherwise, I thought the age difference between him and padme was an interesting idea. If there was a problem, it was the fact that it didn't seem authentically portrayed in terms of a boy's crush. All in all, there's no huge criticism here for me. Phantom Menace is the only prequel that I believe has good qualities that outweigh the bad.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
That poor kid. His first scene he has to express a schoolboy crush, AND explain he's a slave, he's a pilot, he used to be owned by a hutt, and tell Padme she's an angel. I don't think a human exists who could totally pull that off, let alone a child. Lucas' instinct to cast a "regular" boy over a trained Dakota Fanning-type mini-adult was okay by me. But he should have followed through by keeping it simple for the kid. Everyone can relate to liking that older girl in school, or in the neighborhood, a look and one simple line of dialogue would have said it all.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Could you be more specific as to what you find to contradict what I am seeing? To me Anakin's desire to save Padme from possible death is a good thing. It's personal for Anakin because he has a personal interest in keeping her around because he loves her. The path he goes down in pursuit of that goal pushes the whole galaxy into the dark times of the Empire. In that way, Anakin put himself above the rest of the galaxy and it ended up being bad for everyone. No, what you are seeing there is totally accurate. The problem is when you try to say that personal values are somehow evil or less important than universal values. That is a simplistic and wrong concept even if you only analyze the motivations from the prequel movies. There were many, many times where prequel-trilogy characters acted from personal motivations to intentionally accomplish things that are good for everyone. They personally desired things that were compatible with and helped work for the greater good. Well I don't think personal values are evil or less important than universal values, it's a balancing act between the two.
Seriously, how can you even value the “greater good” if you don’t value the greater in a “personal” sense? Also, did not Anakin of the prequels believe that his personal desires for power were for the greater good in some way?

In ethics, there is no clear distinction between personal values and universal values. The greatest goal in this regard is to seek a state where our personal desires are compatible with the greater good. Even the prequel trilogy teaches this in a straightforward sense, over and over again. The characters have personal desires that are good because they are on the side of the greater good. To have the movies preach an ethic that contradicts the ethic that is taught through its portrayed deeds and motivations seems a little pathetic to me. There’s no way you can say that the Jedi in the prequels throw away their personal desires or sentimental attachment. They just don’t. I can pick out numerous examples where they acted in personal ways. I'm not sure I follow. The whole saga seems to show both sides of the same coins. In the prequels, we see things from the perspective of a "good" establishment that is fighting an "evil" rebellion, and in the classic trilogy we see things from the perspective of a "good" rebellion that is fighting an "evil" establishment.

I don't think Lucas is preaching as much as he's showing both sides to everything and letting the viewer come to their own conclusions about what is "right and wrong".
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic

Only a Sith lord deals in absolutes! (I love that line )


That line is actually dumb to me since Obi-Wan uses the word “only.” He can’t attack the use of absolutes by using an absolute. Plus, the Jedi talk in terms of absolutes all the time if you follow the prequel trilogy alone. It’s a totally hypocritical line of dialogue. I don’t know what George was thinking . . . he probably wasn’t.
To me that's more interesting than if it wasn't questionable. The whole saga is about the concept of good and evil. The message is a lot of that comes down to point of view.Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Anyway, I don't see Anakin as a complete psychopath. When it comes to the Tusken Raider slaughter, Anakin knows what he did was wrong after he did it, so you could argue temporary insanity brought on by the trauma of having his mother die in his arms because of them. As far as slaughtering the younglings and betraying the Jedi order, he did rationalize that even if only to himself:
"I will not betray the Republic."

"My loyalties are with the Chancellor, and the senate, and with you."

"From my point of view the Jedi are evil".

Anakin had it all worked out in his head that what he was doing was for the greater good of the galaxy, but it was all really motivated by his selfish desire to save Padme from a potential death. His rationalization was just how he coped with that decision.
I see how that works. But that’s really stupid. Anakin would have needed to be completely retarded to ever believe that rationalization justified his actions. Its far too weak otherwise. I never saw Anakin’s intellect debilitated in that way though, so again, I believe we can only conclude he was a psychopath. Either that or George Lucas just messed up.
We have a situation where Anakin has been told since 9 that he is "the chosen one". That the Force created him for the purpose of "bringing balance" to the force. He has the Jedi in one ear talking about what they see as what's good. He has the Emperor in the other ear talking about what he thinks is "right". He knows that all the chaos and war are the direct result of these two Force based religions, and as you pointed out, the Jedi aren't exactly saints in the whole matter either.

He knows Sidious is evil. He sees all the ways the Jedi have been acting selfishly, against the Jedi Code itself. To me it isn't such a huge leap to see why he would see fit to judge them all. After all, he was bringing balance back to the Force. If he was the chosen one, then why shouldn't he be the one to make them agree?
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
There's a name for threads like this:


OVERANALYSIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Holy Mother of God, they're just movies! Give it a rest!

http://i.imgur.com/7N84TM8.jpg

Author
Time
Some of us like to talk about movies. Some of us even register accounts on web forums dedicated to certain movies so we can talk about them. Pretty geeky, huh?
"It's the stoned movie you don't have to be stoned for." -- Tom Shales on Star Wars
Scruffy's gonna die the way he lived.
Author
Time
I'm putting my foot down. The merits are that it had some cool fx. Oh don't even get me started on how well animated that fart scene was in TPM. Woo boy, that was amazig

but no they sucked sucked sucked. An entire main character was even so bad he had to be written out almost completely by the time it was over. That's how it is. No amount of focus will change that pure fact.

To fans, movies are everything, aren't they... my advice...Just watch the pt for the pretty explosions and lightsabers if that's all star wars is to you. At least that's just what I think it's good for besides the JW music. The story is shite.

And... I believe that it's horrible that so many just don't care about the standard the ot set back in the day. That was something phenominal as we know... Yet I see some gladly just sit by and watch lucas piss all over them with his half assed stories he had... what.. lets see... 16 fucking YEARS to figure out, (sorry for cursing but come on, it was nearly two decades he had to come up with something really great, and we got jar jar binks, Annie, Midichlorians, NOOOOOOOO, and goodbye chewbacca.) but STILL couldn't craft the films as a cohesive whole that it damn well should have been. People discuss the Pt as if it should be looked upon as if someone without a billion dollars and decades of experience in the film industry was behind them; that all the ameteuristic mistakes and terrible writing and directing were just common faults of a novice director and should be overlooked because your focus determines your reality. No, the reality is that Lucas half assed it, delivered poorly done films full of his cgi experiments, ruined continuity with the originals, just funked up and got away with it for the most part... How horrible... just horrible to watch something you love be treated so recklessly and yet... unbelievably some who claim to love the OT praise it... eh so be it... I seriously stopped carring a long time ago about all the online star wars discussions at tfn and such. There comes a point when it ceases being about the films and one's perception of them, but more a shouting match or 'who can write the most words' contest. I don't absolve myself from that sort of thing from time to time but it's typical isn't it nowadays...

Anyway, yeah mate, just movies of course. But something inside me says to a fan they're not just movies, they're HISTORY in the making. And considering how rich and powerful lucas was/is, doing three great movies or at least two great ones, one mediocre or average one, would have been just viewed as me as what's to be expected from a man in his position. How the hell did he make star wars when he was this nobody director, then when he's really got the power and control he's wanted, he delivers below his established standards and even goes back and shits on his earlier work while he's at it. It boggles the balls. Whatever, george.




He big in nothing important in good elephant.

"Miss you, I will, Original Trilogy..."

"Your midichlorians are weak, Old man." -Darth Vader 2007 super deluxe extra special dipped in chocolate sauce edition.

http://prequelsstink.ytmnd.com/
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Wesyeed
I'm putting my foot down. The merits are that it had some cool fx. Oh don't even get me started on how well animated that fart scene was in TPM. Woo boy, that was amazig. You should see the version they used on the extended pre race scene on the 2nd DVD. There's even a wind up before the Eopie farts (yeah that's spelled correctly).
Originally posted by: Wesyeed
but no they sucked sucked sucked. An entire main character was even so bad he had to be written out almost completely by the time it was over. That's how it is. No amount of focus will change that pure fact. If you are reffering to Jar-Jar, I thought he was awesome, and Lucas says he was always meant to fade to the background as the story got darker and centered in on the main characters.
Originally posted by: Wesyeed
To fans, movies are everything, aren't they... my advice...Just watch the pt for the pretty explosions and lightsabers if that's all star wars is to you. At least that's just what I think it's good for besides the JW music. The story is shite. I think it's one of the best stories ever told in cinema, and the whole saga taken as a whole is an unmatched accomplishment in film.
Originally posted by: Wesyeed
And... I believe that it's horrible that so many just don't care about the standard the ot set back in the day. That was something phenominal as we know... Yet I see some gladly just sit by and watch lucas piss all over them with his half assed stories he had... what.. lets see... 16 fucking YEARS to figure out, (sorry for cursing but come on, it was nearly two decades he had to come up with something really great, and we got jar jar binks, Annie, Midichlorians, NOOOOOOOO, and goodbye chewbacca.) but STILL couldn't craft the films as a cohesive whole that it damn well should have been. That stuff is cool, and it all came together as a cohesive whole to me.
Originally posted by: Wesyeed
People discuss the Pt as if it should be looked upon as if someone without a billion dollars and decades of experience in the film industry was behind them; that all the ameteuristic mistakes and terrible writing and directing were just common faults of a novice director and should be overlooked because your focus determines your reality.
No I think the PT is befitting a director who put as much money into it as Lucas did. I only expected them to be on par with the classic trilogy (which wasn't perfect either). I think it's unrealistic to expect perfection.Originally posted by: Wesyeed
No, the reality is that Lucas half assed it, delivered poorly done films full of his cgi experiments, ruined continuity with the originals, just funked up and got away with it for the most part...
Wow that's so weird, because he also "half assed" the classic trilogy, delivered films that by his account were not finished, and not up to his standard of quality, that were full of motion control SFX experiments, ruined the continuity within the classic trilogy, (Vader murdered your father/That was just pillow talk, "I'm the monkey woman emperor/No I'm the Ian McDiarmid Emperor"), just fucked up and got away with it for the most part...Originally posted by: Wesyeed
How horrible... just horrible to watch something you love be treated so recklessly and yet... unbelievably some who claim to love the OT praise it... eh so be it...

There were people like you wondering what we all saw in the classic trilogy in the first place. Some people blamed Lucas for the "dumbing down" of cinema. This was over the classic trilogy mind you.Originally posted by: Wesyeed
I seriously stopped carring a long time ago about all the online star wars discussions at tfn and such. There comes a point when it ceases being about the films and one's perception of them, but more a shouting match or 'who can write the most words' contest. I don't absolve myself from that sort of thing from time to time but it's typical isn't it nowadays...
I hope you don't see my words as shouting. I try to remain reasonably calm as I discuss the movies.Originally posted by: Wesyeed
Anyway, yeah mate, just movies of course. But something inside me says to a fan they're not just movies, they're HISTORY in the making. And considering how rich and powerful lucas was/is, doing three great movies or at least two great ones, one mediocre or average one, would have been just viewed as me as what's to be expected from a man in his position. How the hell did he make star wars when he was this nobody director, then when he's really got the power and control he's wanted, he delivers below his established standards and even goes back and shits on his earlier work while he's at it. It boggles the balls. Whatever, george.
He didn't shit over anything. It all turned out rather well. Better than most movies these days.

But as with any movie, not everyone will appreciate them.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
I think it's one of the best stories ever told in cinema, and the whole saga taken as a whole is an unmatched accomplishment in film.
Do you ever watch anything apart from the PT and SEs? Your statement suggests that you don't explore cinema at all.
Don't you call me a mindless philosopher...!
Author
Time
Point me in the direction you think I'm overlooking.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Come on, of course I watch other movies.

Which ones do you think trump the SW saga?
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Here's the sort of thing I take my lead from. It's not for everyone, I know, but if we're talking about quality and impact on cinema history, then who better to ask than these people?

In 2002, The film magazine Sight & Sound conducted their sixth ten-yearly poll of international critics and directors. They asked for a top ten from each of them and then compiled a top ten for each group based on number of votes.

The critics' top ten:

Citizen Kane (1941) - 46 votes
Vertigo (1958) - 41 votes
The Rules Of The Game (1939) - 30 votes
The Godfather & The Godfather: Part II (1972 / 74) - 23 votes
Tokyo Story (1953) - 22 votes
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) - 21 votes
Battleship Potemkin (1925) - 19 votes
Sunrise: A Song Of Two Humans (1927) - 19 votes
8 1/2 (1963) - 18 votes
Singin' In The Rain (1951) - 17 votes 256

The directors' top ten:

Citizen Kane (1941) - 42 votes
The Godfather & The Godfather: Part 2 (1972 / 74) - 28 votes
8 1/2 (1963) - 19 votes
Lawrence Of Arabia (1962) - 16 votes
Dr. Strangelove Or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Bomb (1963) - 14 votes
Bicycle Thieves (1948) - 13 votes
Raging Bull (1980) - 13 votes
Vertigo (1958) - 13 votes
In The Woods (1950) - 12 votes
The Rules Of The Game (1939) - 12 votes
Seven Samurai (1954) - 12 votes

Critics' top ten directors:

Orson Welles - 69 votes
Alfred Hitchcock - 69 votes
Jean-Luc Godard - 43 votes
Jean Renoir - 40 votes
Stanley Kubrick - 39 votes
Kurosawa Akira - 38 votes
Federico Fellini - 36 votes
John Ford - 31 votes
Sergei Eisenstein - 30 votes
Francis Ford Coppola - 28 votes
Ozu Yasujiro - 28 votes

Directors' top ten directors:

Orson Welles - 52 votes
Federico Fellini - 50 votes
Kurosawa Akira - 39 votes
Francis Ford Coppola - 38 votes
Alfred Hitchcock - 35 votes
Stanley Kubrick - 34 votes
William Wilder - 33 votes
Ingmar Bergman - 28 votes
Martin Scorsese - 25 votes
David Lean - 23 votes
Jean Renoir - 23 votes
Don't you call me a mindless philosopher...!
Author
Time
The critics' top ten:

A breakthrough in it's day, trumped by plenty of movies since: Citizen Kane (1941) - 46 votes
Wondeful film, not nearly as ambitious as Star Wars. Vertigo (1958) - 41 votes
Haven't seen this one, do you think it's better than Star Wars? The Rules Of The Game (1939) - 30 votes
Another great movie series, still not quite better than Star Wars. The Godfather & The Godfather: Part II (1972 / 74) - 23 votes
Haven't seen this one either. But I bet it's in black and white. Tokyo Story (1953) - 22 votes
Great boring movie. 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) - 21 votes
Haven't seen it, probably black and white. Battleship Potemkin (1925) - 19 votes
Haven't seen it, probably black and white. Sunrise: A Song Of Two Humans (1927) - 19 votes
I have seen 9 1/2 weeks, and I love the kitchen scene, but still not as good as Star Wars. 8 1/2 (1963) - 18 votes
Well made movie, still not as good as Star Wars. Singin' In The Rain (1951) - 17 votes 256

The directors' top ten:
Again great movie, boring compared to Star Wars. Lawrence Of Arabia (1962) - 16 votes
Wonderful peice with a lot of political commentary, still not as much fun as Star Wars. Dr. Strangelove Or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Bomb (1963) - 14 votes
Haven't seen it, probably black and white. Bicycle Thieves (1948) - 13 votes
Awesome movie, but not as much fun as Star Wars. Raging Bull (1980) - 13 votes
Good movie, not as good as Star Wars. In The Woods (1950) - 12 votes
Haven't seen it, probably in black and white. The Rules Of The Game (1939) - 12 votes
Wonderful film that just isn't as cool as Star Wars. Seven Samurai (1954) - 12 votes
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
call me a slob if you will, but I'm with Peter Griffin.....I just did not care much for the Godfather films.

I haven't seen Dr. Strangelove but my brother says it's highly overrated. Kubrick has been hit and miss with me, I like Clockwork Orange and The Shining but I hate 2001: A Space Oddessy well....since those are the only movies of his I've seen I guess I shouldn't really comment.

I know I'm really late for this discussion also, but correct me if this has already been stated. Wasn't the use of Midiclorians a way of determining how well a Jedi could use the force? I have to ask, how would they have determined how one was powerful in the force without an example? Would they have just "known"? Would it have been an instinctual thing? Midiclorians was one of those things I never really bothered about and never knew it was such a problem till I heard people complaining about it on the net, however even if not completely accurate wouldn't that be a better way to get an approximation of ones abilities with the Force? I mean "feeling" one is powerful is one thing, but it still doesn't let you KNOW how powerful they are. That to me doesn't really take away from the mystism of the Jedi Knights.
http://img416.imageshack.us/img416/7823/starwarssuppersmallerxx5.jpg
Author
Time
Go-Mer, why revel in your own film ignorance?

You freely admit that you haven't seen most of those lauded films, but insist Star Wars must be better than them. I hold Star Wars in the highest regard, and consider it among the best of the best. But I will not denegrate any of those great films (admitting I have not seen a couple of them) so that Star Wars could somehow take the place of one of them.

They are each Great in their own way, as is Star Wars, and comparing films for ranking purposes is pure folly. Still, I think the point is that neither Star Wars nor George Lucas are generally considered amont the world's best movies or filmmakers by top critics and filmmakers. Perhaps Star Wars is simply not weighty enough (I note only one other "popcorn" type flick on the lists) ... but for whatever reason, it's not the be-all and end-all of cinema that our particular affection for it would consider as its due.


But go out and see a few more of those films, Go-Mer. Oh, and if you want to reveal your limited critical abilities by dissing 2001: A Space Odyssey as "boring," you throw into perfect relief the worthlessness of your love for the godawful Star Wars prequels.

.