Sick of Star Wars Prequel bashing.... — Page 4

No, it's not just that.  I like soap opera plenty, and that's not enough for me to stomach the PT.  You really have to be able to overlook bad writing, wooden acting, sterile uninteresting sets, and a bland score.  At least on General Hospital, the actors playing Luke and Laura were able to consistently make eye contact with one another...

When I was young, the Original Trilogy was all I had, so in the end, I didn't need the prequels. In fact, the mystery of what happened to Darth Vader was one of the things that always excited me, but that was because I had an imagination.

I never needed to see it. I agree it had so much potential to be a great story, I just never felt it. We never got a glimpse of the great man Obi Wan said he was. We never saw that. If you feel something for an asshole turning evil, more power to you.

George could've pulled some tears out of some people if he'd made Anakin a likable person.

I still like some things about the movies, I don't know if it's the score, or the fact that there are occasional glimpses at what is to come, but without the OT, my interest in the prequels would be nonexistent. Your great films only stand because people that saw the OT wanted to see more.

OBI-WAN37 said:

I was just about to get a possible answer to my arguments I made in the three posts just before yours. And, although I'm not totally sure this is by coincidence, someone always seems to prevent a direct response from coming from an OT fan after his argument is challenged well, whether it's the OT fan making the argument or someone who's watching, and this seems to be one of those times. So, I'm asking as politely as possible, can any of the individual posters I was responding to please give me a response to the response I gave them in any of my previous three posts?

 Sure.

OBI-WAN37 said:

Ryan McAvoy said:

OBI-WAN37 said:

I'm amazed at how many very minor flaws people on this site manage to find in the prequels.

The make-up on ian mcdiarmid? First of all, I didn't notice anything wrong with it when I watched the prequels, and secondly, even if there was, it's not a big deal.

Secondly, the plot for the Phantom Menace was great: saving an endangered planet (naboo). And the plot for Attack of the Clones was good enough, and the plot for Revenge of the Sith was fantastic (Anakin's turn to the dark side).

Thirdly, I don't even care about the not-so excellent dialogue. Sure some of it was cliche. Like Darth Vader's "nooooooooooo"... but who cares? The films were an awesome tragedy.

Fourthly, the original trilogy wouldn't mean nearly as much to me if the prequel trilogy didn't exist. I mean, sure the acting's better. But not by much. I mean look at Ewan McGregor, Samuel Jackson, Ian Mcdiarmid, Liam Neeson, Christopher Lee.... all fantastic actors from the prequels.... and sure the story in the Original Trilogy was just as good as (but not better than) the prequels when you compare the two trilogies as individual episodes, but overall as one big, single movie the original trilogy just wasn't as good as the overall story of the prequels was as a single movie....

I mean, you can't deny that the awesomeness of the action in the prequel trilogy was far greater than the awesomeness of the action in the original trilogy... and the ships abundance of great-looking ships was greater too... combine that with the awesome story of the prequels and you have one pretty fantastic trilogy.

 Setting the top image aside for a moment (And that the bottom one is unfinished),

You say "The plot for Attack of the Clones was good enough" and "I don't even care about the not-so excellent dialogue. Sure some of it was cliche. Like Darth Vader's "nooooooooooo"... but who cares?"

Too quote Luke "I CARE!". Since when was mediocrity acceptable in films? Plus since when was admitting that something was average a valid defence of how good it was? (We're through the looking glass on this one chums).

 Okay, you must admit you didn't mention how I also said that the story for the phantom menace was great and that the story for revenge of the sith was fantastic, and how I also said that the story for the prequel trilogy as one full story was even better than the original trilogy as one story, and you also didn't mention how I called the story a "fantastic tragedy". So that is how the prequel trilogy is still fantastic.

 I didn't repeat you saying the story in TPM and ROTS was great because I obviously disagree with that (And it was a ridiculous statement), but I thought I'd voice my agreement with your other points.

Leaving the godawful TPM and AOTC aside. I actually think ROTS is okay-ish, I can tolerate it just fine but to say it is superior to the OT is madness. I'll defend the few things that are good and I have before.

e.g. Hayden gets a bad rap IMO. He was a young inexperienced actor faced with the impossible task of essentially introducing a new character (Little Annie was a different character played by a different actor in a different time) that had to immediately turn bad before we were given a chance to like or even know him. If George had cast Hayden in TPM and Hayden had a whole film of adventuring for us to like him (The way we liked Hamill's Luke) before he ever does anything bad, then TPM and by extension AOTC and ROTS would have been better films as a consequence (Not fantastic but watchable).

Also Hayden has said that George wouldn't let him play the character the way he wanted to (The way he was allowed to in ROTS) during AOTC. I really like the Anakin we see during the opening act of ROTS for about 15 mins (But it was too little too late, we should have spent 4hrs plus with that guy up to that point). Also all of Hayden's good scenes are on the cutting room floor because George had no idea what he was doing on the PT. I also suspect that all the good takes from all the actors are on a hardrive somewhere in the archive.

I really wish I could love the PT because the 6 hours of Star Wars that the OT offers isn't enough for me. I've even done my own fanedits of the PT to get them into a state where I can watch them more comfortably but as I've said to imagine that they can ever be better than the OT is just silly.

I actually enjoyed TPM when it first came out.  It was after about the 3rd viewing that I started realizing what rubbish it is, as a movie.

It is one thing to enjoy a movie, and another thing to declare it to be a "good" or "great" movie.  I enjoy quite a number of movies that I also admit aren't good movies.  For instance, I enjoy "Rookie of the Year" quite a lot.  It just makes me laugh.  But frankly, it isn't a very good movie.  It just happens to tickle my funny bone.  Rocky IV is a guilty pleasure, but objectively, it's really terrible.  There are also some great movies that I don't enjoy all that much - "Sound of Music" is one of them (although I love "The Music Man" - go figure).

Similarly, I still enjoy TPM, mainly because the lightsaber duel is fun, and it's great to see Tatooine.  I watch it occasionally and enjoy it when I do.  But a quality movie it is not - the script, acting, editing, and story are simply not good movie-making.  The script alone is probably irreparable.  There is a reason it gets the ratings that it does.  And likewise, there is a reason that Star Wars ("ep.4" for the younglings) is perennially on AFI's top 20 list of all time greatest movies.  Script, character development, timing, editing, score, all impeccably done with timeless effect.

I have no doubt that there are many people who enjoy the prequels, just as I enjoy "Rookie of the Year".  There's nothing wrong with that, and far be it from me to tell someone what to enjoy.

OBI-WAN37 said:ed when I bring that up.

Ok, I don't know what you're talking about when you say your first post, but as to what Pluggo said,

 Meant to mention that I rather like your spin on my name.  I may need to adopt it as an evil twin or something.

Of all the prequel movies at least episode I is a film even if a Mediocre one.  II and III were shot on low quality HD cam and starred that horrible Hayden Christensen.

II and III have aged really badly because of their really cheap fake green screen made sets and bad cgi.  But above all the acting is atrociously bad and so is the plot especially in episode III.

II is just unwatchable at any level.  And III technically a C- but an F in terms of execution of the plot and acting.

All three suffer from unlikable characters but most strongly in II and III.   Bad pacing, bad editing.  Extremely sophomoric directing hard to believe its the same man who directed the original star wars, American Graffiti etc.

They were not superbly written by any means but Anakin and Padme were sort of likable in Episode I even at a poorly done level.Heroic, plucky and noble. 

In II and III they are insufferable, selfish arrogant and pretty much evil people.

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

OBI-WAN37 said:ed when I bring that up.

Ok, I don't know what you're talking about when you say your first post, but as to what Pluggo said,

 Meant to mention that I rather like your spin on my name.  I may need to adopt it as an evil twin or something.

 "Ugh, here comes Pluggo. Only shows up when he's got something to sell us."

OBI-WAN37 said:

xhonzi said:

OBI-WAN37 said:

I mean, you can't deny that the awesomeness of the action in the prequel trilogy was far greater than the awesomeness of the action in the original trilogy..

"A special effect without a story is a pretty boring thing."

-George Lucas

 

 But I already said, the story for the Phantom menace was great, the story for Attack of the Clones was good enough, the story for revenge of the sith was fantastic, and the story when you look at the trilogy as a complete single movie was amazing.

Oh, you already said.  Well then, it's settled, isn't it?  Maybe we should put it up for a vote.   

The plots to the PT films are okay.  Probably 'decent enough' but the story is oh so horrid.  The story is weakly told, weakly acted, weakly presented.  It has no gravitas, no verisimillitude, no swashbuckle.  It's insipid, infantile and dull.  All of these factors lead to low emotional impact, which really causes the action scenes to suffer. 

Two characters having a silent argument is more interesting than a laser sword battle on a spaceship orbiting a black hole in a galaxy far far away if you care about the disagreeing characters, and have no connection to the sword fighters.

You said that no one can deny the awesomeness of the action in the PT.  I easily deny it.  Far from awesome, I find most of it to be stupid.  It's so much flash and so little substance, that I can't be bothered to care about it.

tl;dr- Buzz droids.  I rest my case.

OBI-WAN37 said:

No, I just don't see it. I don't know why so many of the original-trilogy-fans tend to hate the prequels. I guess it's just a cultural phenomena. I love the prequels.

doubleofive said:

OBI-WAN37 said:

No, I just don't see it. I don't know why so many of the original-trilogy-fans tend to hate the prequels. I guess it's just a cultural phenomena. I love the prequels.

Son, you came to the wrong place.

Reality?*

OBI-WAN37 said:

No, I just don't see it. I don't know why so many of the original-trilogy-fans tend to hate the prequels. I guess it's just a cultural phenomena. I love the prequels.

I don't hate the prequels... unless they put prequel-related parasites in OT of course (ghost scene change etc.). I just don't enjoy AOTC and ROTS since are essentially a soap opera about an extremely unlikeable character. The only prequel I can enjoy to some extent is TPM since it is still an adventure... unlike AOTC and ROTS.

Bingowings said:

TPM prompted a rage in me I would not feel again until Prometheus.

The other two were worse films but I knew what to expect by then.

 Isn't Prometheus also the first of new prequel trilogy to a well loved 20th Century Fox movie series?