Originally posted by: Mielr
To me, TPM doesn't deserve to be called "best" anything. That's really lowering the bar. "Least terrible" perhaps, but IMO calling it "best" (and I'm not picking on you, Tiptup, many here have done this) is like being given a list of diseases, and choosing the "best" one to get.
It only seems better because of the two other films it's compared to. Again, just my opinion.
That's fair. I certainly don't claim anyone should like The Phantom Menace if they don't (it has huge flaws that some people can't ignore). I'm just saying that from a weird, sugared-up, attention-span-deficient, could-care-less-about-character-drama point of view, I actually enjoyed the film. Its not very enjoyable mind you, but I still found it fun on the whole. In other words, I don't think it was actually a bad film when I tried to simply let it be its own, weird thing.
Originally posted by: zombie84
Thank you so much for posting that. It is something I came to realise ever since AOTC, explaining the extremely different and entirely dissonant prequel identities. Its ironic that even though the OT is basically a patchwork of improvisations it still feels ten times more consistent and deliberate than the supposedly-planned PT.
To me, TPM doesn't deserve to be called "best" anything. That's really lowering the bar. "Least terrible" perhaps, but IMO calling it "best" (and I'm not picking on you, Tiptup, many here have done this) is like being given a list of diseases, and choosing the "best" one to get.
It only seems better because of the two other films it's compared to. Again, just my opinion.
That's fair. I certainly don't claim anyone should like The Phantom Menace if they don't (it has huge flaws that some people can't ignore). I'm just saying that from a weird, sugared-up, attention-span-deficient, could-care-less-about-character-drama point of view, I actually enjoyed the film. Its not very enjoyable mind you, but I still found it fun on the whole. In other words, I don't think it was actually a bad film when I tried to simply let it be its own, weird thing.
Originally posted by: zombie84
Thank you so much for posting that. It is something I came to realise ever since AOTC, explaining the extremely different and entirely dissonant prequel identities. Its ironic that even though the OT is basically a patchwork of improvisations it still feels ten times more consistent and deliberate than the supposedly-planned PT.
Once you reach the idea of Vader being Luke's father the "deliberate" feeling starts to break down somewhat, but in light of the amazing character drama it accomplished, I really don't mind. Luke being Leia's sister is worse to me, but at least even that resulted in a very intense scene in RotJ. By comparison, telekinesis, which was a "new" idea in ESB, seemed an almost totally natural extension of what the first film presented to me. Unfortunately, I find the prequels are jam-packed with ideas that are not only incoherent with the original trilogies concepts (to varying degrees), but they also don't really accomplish anything emotional for me either (to make up for the illogic). At best I can see how each of the new ideas could have extraordinary merit on their own, just not in my Star Wars saga.
Edit: Oh and FanFiltration, your posts are intelligent and insightful to read. I'm pretty sure that nobody here wanted to say otherwise.