logo Sign In

What was the "fatal flaw" of the Prequels if you think they sucked? (aka. Let's take a break from hating on the blu-rays) — Page 7

Author
Time
 (Edited)

It's not really a fatal flaw, but the worst thing about the prequels is their effect on the original trilogy, as seen in the post-1997 new editions. The 1997 SE already made a lot of unnecessary "additions", but in the releases afterwards, the original films were mercilessly slaughtered on the altar of the prequels. The true problem with those editions is not that they changed stuff, but that they did so to serve the prequels.

Just consider: Anakin's eyebrows get burned in Episode III, so they have to be airbrushed out of VI. Hayden Christensen plays Anakin in the prequels, so Sebastian Shaw has to be erased from the very ending of the film in which he was the redeemed Anakin, to be replaced by Hayden looking goofy. The prequels added Gungans, so the ending of VI needs Gungans. And of course Boba Fett and the Emperor both get replaced in ESB; and let's not get started on "No... NOOOOOOOO!!!!!"

Apart from the general problems of all kinds of "special editions", all these prequel insertions into the OT add one thing that is even worse: the great films of the OT actually get degraded down to the level of the prequels. The OT thus gets turned into a vehicle for the prequels, a useless piece of crap to be preceded by the prequels with their *~amazing~* CGI.

In George's great artistic vision, new fans will not watch first the OT and then the prequels, but they will watch the films in Episode order, with one (voice) actor playing one character as much as possible, and they'll be like: "Hey, you can tell Boba Fett is a clone because he has the same voice!" He'll probably never have the guts to airbrush Alec Guinness out of history, so that's one thing, but it is these smaller things (Boba Fett's few lines, the Emperor's one dialogue in ESB, etc.) that slowly chip away at the edifice of the OT.

It's one of the best examples of the pig-headed megalomania that defines the prequels, along with the assumption that the potential viewers of the series are all drooling retards: we can't have the Emperor portrayed by two different actors, that would just be confusing! When of course, in reality, that's just how it sometimes goes with film series stretching over decades. Nobody necessarily likes it, but, for instance, the plot of Episode VI required an expansion of the Emperor's role, so they had to get McDiarmid instead of a woman with chimp eyes and a voice actor. That's just how things develop naturally. Trying to pretend that never happened is just clumsy.

The stubbornness about the prequels is the most peculiar, though. Instead of self-critically analysing the prequels and understanding its problems, they said: the prequels are not crap, but to make things more coherent, we must downgrade the original films to better reflect the prequels!

In itself, this wouldn't even be an incredible disaster. If Lucas or anyone else wants to mold all the films into a coherent "saga", then whatever. Maybe he could remake the OT into true "sequels to the prequels", with Hayden and Boba Fett with Jango's voice and all the other prequel goodness, naming it "Star Wars Reloaded", "Star Wars Advanced Generation". "Star Wars X-treme", "Star Wars - the TOTALLY RAD AWESOME Trilogy (TRAT)" or something. Just don't bother the rest of us with the suggestion that it is the original trilogy!

As it is, the prequels and their role in the degradation of the OT do pose a problem, because of the very openly stated desire to erase the OT from public memory instead of marketing it alongside the "Badass CGI Saga" and letting the viewers decide which one they like best (if the prequels and SEs are so good, what are they afraid of?). If you want to modify your own films like that, sure, that's up to you; but when you also want to control the perception of the audience as a whole, when you want to determine what they should see and how they should feel about that, then yes, you're being a bit megalomaniacal.

So what does any of this have to do with the prequels, apart from their unnecessary insertion into the OT? Well, for one thing, without them, there wouldn't be any need to insert prequel stuff into the OT if there weren't any prequels. Some of the worse features of the prequels could already be seen in the 1997 SE (or even in the original RotJ!), but they are all quite explicable and do not ruin the entire experience, even though they deserve criticism. Whereas the prequels mark a very clear and explicit break with everything that made the OT good.

And of course, considering that the prequels do exist, then it is the inexplicable and completely illogical confidence in their qualities that push Lucas to try to jam them into the OT. Without that, subsequent re-releases of the OT would simply feature further tinkering of the 1997 SE variety, but without necessarily eliminating all the good things about the OT.

Author
Time

wwsd said:

It's not really a fatal flaw, but the worst thing about the prequels is their effect on the original trilogy, as seen in the post-1997 new editions. The 1997 SE already made a lot of unnecessary "additions", but in the releases afterwards, the original films were mercilessly slaughtered on the altar of the prequels. The true problem with those editions is not that they changed stuff, but that they did so to serve the prequels.

Just consider: Anakin's eyebrows get burned in Episode III, so they have to be airbrushed out of VI. Hayden Christensen plays Anakin in the prequels, so Sebastian Shaw has to be erased from the very ending of the film in which he was the redeemed Anakin, to be replaced by Hayden looking goofy. The prequels added Gungans, so the ending of VI needs Gungans. And of course Boba Fett and the Emperor both get replaced in ESB; and let's not get started on "No... NOOOOOOOO!!!!!"

Apart from the general problems of all kinds of "special editions", all these prequel insertions into the OT add one thing that is even worse: the great films of the OT actually get degraded down to the level of the prequels. The OT thus gets turned into a vehicle for the prequels, a useless piece of crap to be preceded by the prequels with their *~amazing~* CGI.

In George's great artistic vision, new fans will not watch first the OT and then the prequels, but they will watch the films in Episode order, with one (voice) actor playing one character as much as possible, and they'll be like: "Hey, you can tell Boba Fett is a clone because he has the same voice!" He'll probably never have the guts to airbrush Alec Guinness out of history, so that's one thing, but it is these smaller things (Boba Fett's few lines, the Emperor's one dialogue in ESB, etc.) that slowly chip away at the edifice of the OT.

It's one of the best examples of the pig-headed megalomania that defines the prequels, along with the assumption that the potential viewers of the series are all drooling retards: we can't have the Emperor portrayed by two different actors, that would just be confusing! When of course, in reality, that's just how it sometimes goes with film series stretching over decades. Nobody necessarily likes it, but, for instance, the plot of Episode VI required an expansion of the Emperor's role, so they had to get McDiarmid instead of a woman with chimp eyes and a voice actor. That's just how things develop naturally. Trying to pretend that never happened is just clumsy.

The stubbornness about the prequels is the most peculiar, though. Instead of self-critically analysing the prequels and understanding its problems, they said: the prequels are not crap, but to make things more coherent, we must downgrade the original films to better reflect the prequels!

In itself, this wouldn't even be an incredible disaster. If Lucas or anyone else wants to mold all the films into a coherent "saga", then whatever. Maybe he could remake the OT into true "sequels to the prequels", with Hayden and Boba Fett with Jango's voice and all the other prequel goodness, naming it "Star Wars Reloaded", "Star Wars Advanced Generation". "Star Wars X-treme", "Star Wars - the TOTALLY RAD AWESOME Trilogy (TRAT)" or something. Just don't bother the rest of us with the suggestion that it is the original trilogy!

As it is, the prequels and their role in the degradation of the OT do pose a problem, because of the very openly stated desire to erase the OT from public memory instead of marketing it alongside the "Badass CGI Saga" and letting the viewers decide which one they like best (if the prequels and SEs are so good, what are they afraid of?). If you want to modify your own films like that, sure, that's up to you; but when you also want to control the perception of the audience as a whole, when you want to determine what they should see and how they should feel about that, then yes, you're being a bit megalomaniacal.

So what does any of this have to do with the prequels, apart from their unnecessary insertion into the OT? Well, for one thing, without them, there wouldn't be any need to insert prequel stuff into the OT if there weren't any prequels. Some of the worse features of the prequels could already be seen in the 1997 SE (or even in the original RotJ!), but they are all quite explicable and do not ruin the entire experience, even though they deserve criticism. Whereas the prequels mark a very clear and explicit break with everything that made the OT good.

And of course, considering that the prequels do exist, then it is the inexplicable and completely illogical confidence in their qualities that push Lucas to try to jam them into the OT. Without that, subsequent re-releases of the OT would simply feature further tinkering of the 1997 SE variety, but without necessarily eliminating all the good things about the OT.

Great post.

“Grow up. These are my Disney's movies, not yours.”

Author
Time

IIRC, RLM's answer to this question was "everything".

Author
Time

The "Gladiator" scene in AOTC should have featured one of the creatures from the space-chess game in the first Star Wars.

Author
Time

Sluggo said:

The "Gladiator" scene in AOTC should have featured one of the creatures from the space-chess game in the first Star Wars.

That would've been cool.

(But only if it were done in stop-motion)

<span style=“font-weight: bold;”>The Most Handsomest Guy on OT.com</span>

Author
Time

Aye.  A nice Jason and the Argonauts-style nod.

Author
Time

Sluggo said:

Aye.  A nice Jason and the Argonauts-style nod.

I always felt that this shot was very Ray Harryhausen-y...

Maybe that's just me...

 

<span style=“font-weight: bold;”>The Most Handsomest Guy on OT.com</span>

Author
Time

wwsd said:

It's not really a fatal flaw, but the worst thing about the prequels is their effect on the original trilogy, as seen in the post-1997 new editions. The 1997 SE already made a lot of unnecessary "additions", but in the releases afterwards, the original films were mercilessly slaughtered on the altar of the prequels. The true problem with those editions is not that they changed stuff, but that they did so to serve the prequels.

Just consider: Anakin's eyebrows get burned in Episode III, so they have to be airbrushed out of VI. Hayden Christensen plays Anakin in the prequels, so Sebastian Shaw has to be erased from the very ending of the film in which he was the redeemed Anakin, to be replaced by Hayden looking goofy. The prequels added Gungans, so the ending of VI needs Gungans. And of course Boba Fett and the Emperor both get replaced in ESB; and let's not get started on "No... NOOOOOOOO!!!!!"

Apart from the general problems of all kinds of "special editions", all these prequel insertions into the OT add one thing that is even worse: the great films of the OT actually get degraded down to the level of the prequels. The OT thus gets turned into a vehicle for the prequels, a useless piece of crap to be preceded by the prequels with their *~amazing~* CGI.

In George's great artistic vision, new fans will not watch first the OT and then the prequels, but they will watch the films in Episode order, with one (voice) actor playing one character as much as possible, and they'll be like: "Hey, you can tell Boba Fett is a clone because he has the same voice!" He'll probably never have the guts to airbrush Alec Guinness out of history, so that's one thing, but it is these smaller things (Boba Fett's few lines, the Emperor's one dialogue in ESB, etc.) that slowly chip away at the edifice of the OT.

It's one of the best examples of the pig-headed megalomania that defines the prequels, along with the assumption that the potential viewers of the series are all drooling retards: we can't have the Emperor portrayed by two different actors, that would just be confusing! When of course, in reality, that's just how it sometimes goes with film series stretching over decades. Nobody necessarily likes it, but, for instance, the plot of Episode VI required an expansion of the Emperor's role, so they had to get McDiarmid instead of a woman with chimp eyes and a voice actor. That's just how things develop naturally. Trying to pretend that never happened is just clumsy.

The stubbornness about the prequels is the most peculiar, though. Instead of self-critically analysing the prequels and understanding its problems, they said: the prequels are not crap, but to make things more coherent, we must downgrade the original films to better reflect the prequels!

In itself, this wouldn't even be an incredible disaster. If Lucas or anyone else wants to mold all the films into a coherent "saga", then whatever. Maybe he could remake the OT into true "sequels to the prequels", with Hayden and Boba Fett with Jango's voice and all the other prequel goodness, naming it "Star Wars Reloaded", "Star Wars Advanced Generation". "Star Wars X-treme", "Star Wars - the TOTALLY RAD AWESOME Trilogy (TRAT)" or something. Just don't bother the rest of us with the suggestion that it is the original trilogy!

As it is, the prequels and their role in the degradation of the OT do pose a problem, because of the very openly stated desire to erase the OT from public memory instead of marketing it alongside the "Badass CGI Saga" and letting the viewers decide which one they like best (if the prequels and SEs are so good, what are they afraid of?). If you want to modify your own films like that, sure, that's up to you; but when you also want to control the perception of the audience as a whole, when you want to determine what they should see and how they should feel about that, then yes, you're being a bit megalomaniacal.

So what does any of this have to do with the prequels, apart from their unnecessary insertion into the OT? Well, for one thing, without them, there wouldn't be any need to insert prequel stuff into the OT if there weren't any prequels. Some of the worse features of the prequels could already be seen in the 1997 SE (or even in the original RotJ!), but they are all quite explicable and do not ruin the entire experience, even though they deserve criticism. Whereas the prequels mark a very clear and explicit break with everything that made the OT good.

And of course, considering that the prequels do exist, then it is the inexplicable and completely illogical confidence in their qualities that push Lucas to try to jam them into the OT. Without that, subsequent re-releases of the OT would simply feature further tinkering of the 1997 SE variety, but without necessarily eliminating all the good things about the OT.

This.  Easily.

Since they're like poetry, what with the rhyming and all, I find that I only need to watch three out of the six films.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I'm going to call wwsd's post over-rated. Here's why.

wwsd said:

It's not really a fatal flaw, but the worst thing about the prequels is their effect on the original trilogy, as seen in the post-1997 new editions. The 1997 SE already made a lot of unnecessary "additions", but in the releases afterwards, the original films were mercilessly slaughtered on the altar of the prequels. The true problem with those editions is not that they changed stuff, but that they did so to serve the prequels.

Given that the title of the thread is asking about the fatal flaw of the prequels, it's pretty weird that you're making a post about the problem with the 2004/2011 releases. Particularly strange given the second half of this thread's title: "Let's take a break from hating on the blu-rays"

Just consider: Anakin's eyebrows get burned in Episode III, so they have to be airbrushed out of VI. Hayden Christensen plays Anakin in the prequels, so Sebastian Shaw has to be erased from the very ending of the film in which he was the redeemed Anakin, to be replaced by Hayden looking goofy. The prequels added Gungans, so the ending of VI needs Gungans. And of course Boba Fett and the Emperor both get replaced in ESB; and let's not get started on "No... NOOOOOOOO!!!!!"

Airbrushed eyebrows, Boba's voice, and even the Naboo shot in ROTJ do not particularly impact the OT. They're cosmetic changes, but the only reason they affect the emotional weight of the films is because you hate the prequels. If you saw all six in order for the first time, without knowing the long history and the changes, the movies would be just as good, I suspect. The only change I'll give you is "No... NOOOOO!"; I think it works a lot better silent.

Apart from the general problems of all kinds of "special editions", all these prequel insertions into the OT add one thing that is even worse: the great films of the OT actually get degraded down to the level of the prequels. The OT thus gets turned into a vehicle for the prequels, a useless piece of crap to be preceded by the prequels with their *~amazing~* CGI.

See: above. Other than "NO", they don't make the original trilogy any worse, except that you recognize it as a prequel-influenced change and have a reaction to that. Heck, one of the various changes that many people object to is the 1997 insertion of Jabba, for it's bad CG and changing the film's pacing, and that's not prequel influenced at all. I'll agree that Lucas goes crazy with the CGI, both in the prequels and the SEs, but it does make sense for the SEs if his goal is making the movies more palatable to modern tastes (which is his goal, obviously). I can't really figure out what you mean by "turned into a vehicle", but I do know that the 2004 version of the OT (haven't seen 2011 other than clips of the changes) is still two really great movies and a decent conclusion. They're not a "useless piece of crap" by a long shot. If you're purposely exaggerating because you think it helps make your point... it doesn't.

In George's great artistic vision, new fans will not watch first the OT and then the prequels, but they will watch the films in Episode order, with one (voice) actor playing one character as much as possible, and they'll be like: "Hey, you can tell Boba Fett is a clone because he has the same voice!" He'll probably never have the guts to airbrush Alec Guinness out of history, so that's one thing, but it is these smaller things (Boba Fett's few lines, the Emperor's one dialogue in ESB, etc.) that slowly chip away at the edifice of the OT.

Given that the movies are numbered 1 - 6, the idea that new fans will watch them in that order is not unreasonable. In fact, it's completely logical. If the prequels didn't suck and he hadn't made those changes, I'm sure we'd end up with an internet full of continuity nerds going on and on about how Boba Fett should have at least a similar voice to Jango, because he's a clone. Given that one of George's apparent basic premises is that the prequels don't suck and he wants the movies to fit together as best he can, the decision makes some sense. 

It's one of the best examples of the pig-headed megalomania that defines the prequels, along with the assumption that the potential viewers of the series are all drooling retards: we can't have the Emperor portrayed by two different actors, that would just be confusing! When of course, in reality, that's just how it sometimes goes with film series stretching over decades. Nobody necessarily likes it, but, for instance, the plot of Episode VI required an expansion of the Emperor's role, so they had to get McDiarmid instead of a woman with chimp eyes and a voice actor. That's just how things develop naturally. Trying to pretend that never happened is just clumsy.

There's a difference between trying to pretend it never happened (the current situation?) and replacing chimp-woman. Heck, if the prequels had never been made, but they had gone back and released a version of ESB with McDiarmid in it anyway, because at least then the Emperor would be consistent within the Trilogy, would that have been a problem? This point has little to do with the prequels and more to do with "Not Releasing the Original-Originals"

The stubbornness about the prequels is the most peculiar, though. Instead of self-critically analysing the prequels and understanding its problems, they said: the prequels are not crap, but to make things more coherent, we must downgrade the original films to better reflect the prequels!

Again with the "downgrade". What about the changes (other than "NOOOO", of course, and perhaps Jabba in ANH) actually downgrades the OT?

In itself, this wouldn't even be an incredible disaster. If Lucas or anyone else wants to mold all the films into a coherent "saga", then whatever. Maybe he could remake the OT into true "sequels to the prequels", with Hayden and Boba Fett with Jango's voice and all the other prequel goodness, naming it "Star Wars Reloaded", "Star Wars Advanced Generation". "Star Wars X-treme", "Star Wars - the TOTALLY RAD AWESOME Trilogy (TRAT)" or something. Just don't bother the rest of us with the suggestion that it is the original trilogy!

The correct term, at least around here, is "Star Wars: Revisited", and it is pretty danged good (so far). It's not the Original-Originals, but it certainly is a version of "The Star Wars Trilogy".

As it is, the prequels and their role in the degradation of the OT do pose a problem, because of the very openly stated desire to erase the OT from public memory instead of marketing it alongside the "Badass CGI Saga" and letting the viewers decide which one they like best (if the prequels and SEs are so good, what are they afraid of?). If you want to modify your own films like that, sure, that's up to you; but when you also want to control the perception of the audience as a whole, when you want to determine what they should see and how they should feel about that, then yes, you're being a bit megalomaniacal.

This is the first part of the post that I agree with almost entirely.

So what does any of this have to do with the prequels, apart from their unnecessary insertion into the OT? Well, for one thing, without them, there wouldn't be any need to insert prequel stuff into the OT if there weren't any prequels. Some of the worse features of the prequels could already be seen in the 1997 SE (or even in the original RotJ!), but they are all quite explicable and do not ruin the entire experience, even though they deserve criticism. Whereas the prequels mark a very clear and explicit break with everything that made the OT good.

And of course, considering that the prequels do exist, then it is the inexplicable and completely illogical confidence in their qualities that push Lucas to try to jam them into the OT. Without that, subsequent re-releases of the OT would simply feature further tinkering of the 1997 SE variety, but without necessarily eliminating all the good things about the OT.

As for his inability to admit they're bad, I suspect it's pride? It is probably very hard to admit that you've made bad movies, particularly with all the pressure, and George is just a human.

tl;dr: Post is off-topic and overly zealous. Given that this is ot.com, not surprising, but whatever.

EDIT: Almost forgot to say: Please quote my entire post and say "This" if you agree with me. That will really help further discussion and keep the page concisely scrollable!

ROTJ Storyboard Reconstruction Project

Author
Time

While I'd agree that the "PT-continuity" changes aren't the worst of the changes to the OT, I don't think they are "neutral" except for the PT baggage you bring along with them.

For example, I don't remember much of the PT.  I've seen all three movies, certainly, but I think I remember an annoying giant lizard in AOTC and that's about it.  I wouldn't know an element from these movies if it came up and bit me.  I'm sorry, I just don't remember them enough to hate them properly.

So when Vader's eyebrows disappeared in the OT, my thought was: where the hell are his eyebrows?, not that this was a forced-continuity decision.  All those other planets celebrating in ROTJ, who are they and why do they matter?

That's not to say these are terrible changes on the order of CGI Jabba or Mos Eisley dinosaurs, but these are the sort of changes that make me say WTF is this about while watching the movie, and that's certainly not neutral.  They do degrade the OT, even if just a little.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Fair point. I'd argue that Vader's eyebrows is just because you've seen the films with eyebrows. As for the planets, two of them are Tatooine and Cloud City, so those might have looked familiar? The others are Corouscant, which was a strange thing because it had only appeared in books before its 1997 inclusion, and Naboo which was added in 2004 and is PT. So, half the planets are OT, one is bizarrely EU at original time of inclusion (but was obviously Lucas looking towards the Prequels), and Naboo...well, that is PT.

My point: The eyebrows and half the planets are only strange because you've seen the OT before they were changed. Thus, they don't ruin the films, it's only the difference that's jarring. You're right about Corouscant and Naboo, though, if you haven't seen PT.

ROTJ Storyboard Reconstruction Project

Author
Time
 (Edited)

No, the lack of eyebrows really is a WTF moment.  When human characters get introduced in movies, they tend to have eyebrows, even if they're big freaky old man eyebrows like Sebastian Shaw's.  Every now and then a human character may not have eyebrows, but I'm really having a hard time thinking of one, and I'm willing to bet it comes along with an explanation.

Even my sister has alopecia ariata and she's got SOME eyebrows.  The WTF would come even if I'd never seen Jedi before, trust me.

EDIT: Back on topic, though, the fatal flaw was that they were so TEDIOUS.  The only parts I remember were the parts where the tedium became so unbearable that I actually remarked on it out loud while watching the movie.  The racing scene in TPM and the big lizard scene in AOTC are pretty much all I recall due to their extended terribleness, the latter of which I actually walked out of the theatre and PRETENDED to go to the restroom just so that I could come back when it was over.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)