logo Sign In

Article on prequel films. Note: Does not pertain to Godfather II, which isn't a prequel - it's a sequel with extended flashback sequences - or a partial prequel to some. — Page 2

Author
Time

I think one of the reasons the back story in Godfather 2 works,  is that it comes from a section of the novel, The Godfather.   Since both the back story and the story of Godfather 1 come from the same book,  they fit together well.  Any inconsistencies between the two stories could be fixed by Puzo before the novel was released to the public.   Also when Coppola made the first movie,  he already knew the back story we see in part II,  so nothing was done in the first movie that would make the back story seem inconsistent to it.   Also, it was only part of the 2nd movie, which means it didn't have to be expanded and added to too much and there was part of the story that we didn't know the ending to already(the present story about Micheal).

Author
Time

I didn't remember the Godfather II flashbacks being so in-depth in the novel.  Which is to say, I remember that about 1/2 (maybe less) of the flashbacks seen in the movie were present in the novel, the rest being invented (by Puzo) for the second film.  I could be wrong about that, though - it's been a while since I read the book.

The "present day" stuff in Godfather II was completely movie-original, though.

Author
Time

Like films based on Video Games or films made in 3D I don't see a problem with prequels as a principle, it's more that the people making them are just not being creative enough with the idea.

For example in the Tom Savini remake of Night Of The Living Dead some of it was a straight remake, some of it was new and some of it played on familiarity with the original version which made for in my view one of the best remakes I've seen.

If a prequel writer took the story as known and presented the backstory in a way that not only showed the story in an interesting way, preserved the plot as it already existed but showed aspects of a character or an event that ran believably against the grain of what we thought we knew about the backstory it would still have surprises and provoke interest.

I wouldn't have minded finding out the Jedi were far from perfect or that the Old Republic was not as perfect as some of the OT characters seemed to be saying if it was done in a believable way.

I wouldn't have minded having Anakin's fall told slightly off the centre of the page allowing room for characters the fate of which is not shown in the OT to be the main focus so we care more what happens to them.

I think it can be done but if it is to be tried the writer has to recognise the potential pitfalls.

Author
Time

A big problem with prequels is that they introduce elements that aren't even hinted at in the original and, are often at odds with the previous story. Midichlorians in Phantom Menace. STO in Caprica. Wolverine loosing his memory long after the adanmantium procedure.

Sure these things can be filed away with enough hands in ears and, "blah, blah, blah." Adama conveniently forgets the terrorists group that killed his sister. Caused his Father to become neglectfull to him. Forcing him to find an emotional out in the mob. No he's perfectly fine with his Dad and, doesn't mind the resurgence of the same ideals behind his sisters death.
Wolverine despite being tormented with the vision of the adanmantium procedure lost his memory long after that after being shot in the head in an open field. No that bullet wouldn't have caught the attention of Magneto at all when he raised him. Despite Magneto's ability to detect minute bits of metal in the bloodstream.
Midichlorians ... well you know.

All these things and, more give you the sense that if it happened than why wasn't it mentioned at all in the 'future' stories?
It's not so much that the most likely people to mention such things don't mention it in the originals. It's that no one does.
Xavier doesn't remark on the oddity of a bullet in Logan's brain and, subsequent hole which would show up on the X-ray he did. Striker forgets a method to apprehend Logan.

No one in BSG remembers the multi-planet religion with media presense due to terrorists attacks.
Nothing about Midichlorians from Vader, Obi-wan, Yoda, or the Emperor.



http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/7405/cooly.gif

http://twister111.tumblr.com
Previous Signature preservation link

Author
Time
 (Edited)

The minicalorines would have been more palatable if they were introduced either as a Sith or non-Jedi explanation to the powers that Jedi and Force believers maintained came from a mystical Force.

That way you would have the Jedi point of view (as seen held by Ben, Yoda and some of the Rebels in the OT) maintained and an alternate view held by other people and either or both could be true.

The Sith could derive their dark side abilities from scientific and technological approaches to what they see as the source of Force powers where as the Jedi use a mystical/faith based frame-work to describe the meditation techniques and martial arts.

That would be a way of keeping a distance between the world as seen in the OT and any new ideas presented in the PT.

The Emperor could even use this smear the high esteem in which the Jedi are held (they set themselves up as wizards when but everything they do can be explained scientifically and rationally, they are not sharing a branch of science with the rest of the galaxy to keep themselves in power).

The Death Star, even lightsabers and weapons like it could be retconned into being technological applications of scientific ideas based on this view of the Force.

The ability to survive death could be seen as a counterpoint (that perhaps the Jedi are right and there is a mystical element to it).

Having the Jedi suddenly admit that their powers come from a bacterial infection (something not seen or even alluded to in OT) not only chucks a wrecking ball at the existing story but cuts off the story potential in the prequels.

BTW there is nothing inconsistent with Billy Adams, Husker and William Adama.

William Adama's opening speech in the mini series shows a man who acknowledges humanity is to blame for the Cylons, mocks the Cylon belief that a God gave them license to destroy humanity, is troubled by humans taking on a pro-Cylon faith and has seriously conflicted memories of his father. Unlike his son, his reaction to the emergence of a black market in the fleet is pragmatic rather than moral and it's very understandable that he doesn't mention his family ties to the Tauron mob. He also doesn't bat an eye to Gaeta's relationship with a man as he grew up with an uncle who was married to a man.

The only place I can think he might have mentioned his mother and sister's death would have been in relationship to Tom Zarek back in season one (obviously Caprica hadn't been written yet) but he is sufficiently damning of Zarek at that point in the story.

Most of the time they are more concerned with Cylon threats and Cylon violence so mentioning his human slaughtered family members when most of the time they are running from or fighting machines wouldn't make sense.

Basing an AI around an organically evolved consciousness makes a lot of sense.

It explains the sort of creatures they are later shown to be (more human than human).

A purely mechanical consciousness would have rebelled in a more mechanical way.

If anything Caprica was beginning to prove itself as template bucking the trend in terms of story consistency (you can argue about the pacing and tone not being what viewers and some nuBSG fans wanted to see but the story doesn't conflict with what we have seen in the same way that the PT does).

Author
Time
 (Edited)


Bingowings said:
Having the Jedi suddenly admit that their powers come from a bacterial infection (something not seen or even alluded to in OT) not only chucks a wrecking ball at the existing story but cuts off the story potential in the prequels.


I'm gonna ignore the midichlorians defense becuase your just speaking hypothetically how it could have worked. You admit yourself it doesn't work as presented so it's a moot point. We agree.


Bingowings said:He also doesn't bat an eye to Gaeta's relationship with a man as he grew up with an uncle who was married to a man.

Irrelevant I didn't even bring it up.


Bingowings said:
BTW there is nothing inconsistent with Billy Adams, Husker and William Adama.

William Adama's opening speech in the mini series shows a man who acknowledges humanity is to blame for the Cylons, mocks the Cylon belief that a God gave them license to destroy humanity, is troubled by humans taking on a pro-Cylon faith and has seriously conflicted memories of his father. Unlike his son, his reaction to the emergence of a black market in the fleet is pragmatic rather than moral and it's very understandable that he doesn't mention his family ties to the Tauron mob. He also doesn't bat an eye to Gaeta's relationship with a man as he grew up with an uncle who was married to a man.

The only place I can think he might have mentioned his mother and sister's death would have been in relationship to Tom Zarek back in season one (obviously Caprica hadn't been written yet) but he is sufficiently damning of Zarek at that point in the story.

Most of the time they are more concerned with Cylon threats and Cylon violence so mentioning his human slaughtered family members when most of the time they are running from or fighting machines wouldn't make sense.

Basing an AI around an organically evolved consciousness makes a lot of sense.

It explains the sort of creatures they are later shown to be (more human than human).

A purely mechanical consciousness would have rebelled in a more mechanical way.

If anything Caprica was beginning to prove itself as template bucking the trend in terms of story consistency (you can argue about the pacing and tone not being what viewers and some nuBSG fans wanted to see but the story doesn't conflict with what we have seen in the same way that the PT does).

So if another world war broke out tomorrow you'd understand if everyone just forgot the muslim religion ever existed mere 40 years later and, 9/11? To everyone in BSG Cylons, Angels, and Baltar aside the idea of one God seems to be some new fangled thing Baltar's starting. Essentially a multi-planet religion is completely mentionless in BSG. NO ONE said anything akin to "wow, this is just like the STO! I remember reading about this in school." Tell me one scene in BSG that even implies the STO and, I'll admit I was wrong. Mind you, you can't use extended episodes or, deleted scenes. Just what was broadcast counts.


http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/7405/cooly.gif

http://twister111.tumblr.com
Previous Signature preservation link

Author
Time
 (Edited)

If the Swiss declared war on England I doubt that someone in that war would constantly (or significantly casually) bring up the IRA.

There are other Monotheist religions mentioned in the show when Baltar's cult move for equal protection.

Zarek's terrorist past is more prominently mentioned because it is pertinent to the plot at that time.

Baltar's cult is a largely objected to because of Baltar and because of it's links to the Cylons.

The STO were religious terrorists and their links to the Cylons may not be known.

Author
Time

The Death Star, even lightsabers and weapons like it could be retconned into being technological applications of scientific ideas based on this view of the Force.

This would never work under any circumstances.  The reason is simple:

"Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed.  The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the Force."

Author
Time
 (Edited)

hairy_hen said:

The Death Star, even lightsabers and weapons like it could be retconned into being technological applications of scientific ideas based on this view of the Force.

This would never work under any circumstances.  The reason is simple:

"Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed.  The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the Force."

That could be an Imperial 'anti-mysticism' take on the power behind the machine clashing with a former Jedi 'mystical believers' take on the same power.

Motti is saying "Nuke them up! Nuke some sense into them!" while Vader is saying "My God/The Devil made atoms and he has a bigger pair than you" (only in a less poetic fashion).

Motti goes on to call Vader a phony sorcerer with hilarious results.

Author
Time
Anchorhead changed the thread title to:
RE: Article on prequel films. Note: Does not pertain to Godfather II, which isn't a prequel - it's a sequel with extended flashback sequences.

But.. Godfather II is specifically mentioned in the article to which you linked.

IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!

"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005

"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM

"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.

Rewrite the Prequels!

 

Author
Time

xhonzi said:

Anchorhead changed the thread title to:
RE: Article on prequel films. Note: Does not pertain to Godfather II, which isn't a prequel - it's a sequel with extended flashback sequences.

But.. Godfather II is specifically mentioned in the article to which you linked.

Correct. 

But I got too much push-back, so I altered the title.  Seems people couldn't get past that one film.

Forum Moderator
Author
Time
 (Edited)

Anchorhead said:   Seems people couldn't get past that one film.

so what?   This was thread about prequels.  Godfather 2 is a partial prequel.  I don't we were getting too hooked up about it.   But whatever.   

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Warbler said:

I don't we getting too hook up about it.

I'd like the hook up.

Also, what about a Matrix prequel?  I'd dig that if it was done right.*

Author
Time
  • Alien vs. Predator
    An American Tail: The Treasure of Manhattan Island
    Amityville II: The Possession
    Apocalypse III: Tribulation
    Butch and Sundance: The Early Days
    Carlito's Way: Rise to Power
    Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist
    Dumb and Dumberer: When Harry Met Lloyd
    Exorcist: The Beginning
    Hannibal Rising
    Hellraiser: Bloodline
    Kermit's Swamp Years
    The Lion King 1½
    The Little Mermaid: Ariel's Beginning
    Psycho IV: The Beginning
    Retro Puppet Master
    Ring 0: Birthday
    The Scorpion King 2: Rise of a Warrior
    Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace
    Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones
    Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith
    Terminator Salvation
    The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning
    Tremors 4: The Legend Begins
    Underworld: Rise of the Lycans
    X-Men Origins: Wolverine
    Zulu Dawn
     

Went throught the list of film prequals at Wikipedia. Of the one's I've seen (above), the only ones I thought were any good were the origin story of Kermit the Frog, and Zulu Dawn, which like Temple of Doom, is hardly a prequal. The rest, IMHO of course, vary between 'meh' to 'dear god why!?'

Author
Time

 prequal

Gah!  It's even in italics!

IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!

"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005

"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM

"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.

Rewrite the Prequels!

 

Author
Time

But back to the list,

I thought Rise of the Lycans was decent.  It covered pretty much just the story that was briefly told in the first Underworld.  But I found it to be good enough.

And I really liked Terminator Salvation.  Maybe I just have low requirements when it comes to some movie styles...  There are nits that can be picked, for sure, but they don't stop me from digging the movie.

I haven't seen a lot of them (the horror genre seems to be over representin') besides those two, so I'd say prequels are batting about 300... which frankly isn't too far off of sequels.  For me personally.

Mostly....

 

From time to time.

IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!

"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005

"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM

"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.

Rewrite the Prequels!

 

Author
Time
 (Edited)

xhonzi said:

And I really liked Terminator Salvation.  Maybe I just have low requirements when it comes to some movie styles...  There are nits that can be picked, for sure, but they don't stop me from digging the movie.

I agree.  T4 was much better than I expected.  It's fun, regardless of flaws.  And Q2's fanedit fixes some (not all) of those flaws in a nice looking AVCHD.

But wait a minute - how was it a prequel?

Author
Time

xhonzi said:

I haven't seen a lot of them (the horror genre seems to be over representin') besides those two, so I'd say prequels are batting about 300...

If this is a baseball reference, are you trying to say they are batting .300?

Don't feel bad, it's a common mistake. :p

Author
Time

Even I knew that, and I don't even care about sports!

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time

Strictly speaking all films in the Planet Of The Apes (not the remake), Back To The Future and Terminator series are sequels and prequels, the latest Star Trek film is a sequel. prequel. re-boot.

Time travel can screw up narrow classifications like that effect can come before cause.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

xhonzi said:

I haven't seen a lot of them (the horror genre seems to be over representin')

 Because a great horror film comes up with something really cool and iconic, and some shmuck says, "shucks, that needs one of dem oreejens."

"Solomon Kane" one of my favorite literary characters recently got a 'movie' and the director decided instead of actually doing anything like the many classic works the character was in, he'd completely invent an origin story that's basically the opposite of what the character was, because, in his words, "it's not fair to the audience" to not give an origin.

Here's Kane's origin from the book, paraphrased:

Kane was walking along and found a dying girl.
'The bandit Le Loup did this!' she said and died.
'Men will die for this.' said Kane

It wasn't much, but it was enough.

The following characters became loved by millions without origins.

  • Conan
  • Wolverine
  • Indiana Jones
  • Han Solo
  • The Man With No Name/Blondie/Joe/Manco
  • James Bond
  • Shane
  • Leatherface
  • The Cenobite from "Hellraiser"

 

Sometimes origins are integral to the character and the story (Spider-Man, Luke Skywalker) but othertimes they are simply unneccesary.

Author
Time

TV's Frink said:

I agree.  T4 was much better than I expected.  It's fun, regardless of flaws.  And Q2's fanedit fixes some (not all) of those flaws in a nice looking AVCHD.

But wait a minute - how was it a prequel?

It's John Conner meeting young wacky Kyle Reese... setting up "Terminator" (1985).

But it's also a sequol because he knows he has to save Reese because of the events of the first film.

Ouch, my head. 

Author
Time

Bingowings said:

Strictly speaking all films in the Planet Of The Apes (not the remake), Back To The Future and Terminator series are sequels and prequels, the latest Star Trek film is a sequel. prequel. re-boot.

Time travel can screw up narrow classifications like that effect can come before cause.

I reject the strict definition for Terminator.  While we are shown glimpses of the future, the majority (if not all) of each movie takes place during the present, making T4 clearly a sequel and not a prequel.

Author
Time

TV's Frink said:

I reject the strict definition for Terminator.  While we are shown glimpses of the future, the majority (if not all) of each movie takes place during the present, making T4 clearly a sequel and not a prequel.

 Ah... but following T4 will lead immediatly to the beginning of "The Terminator." It's like a fucked up movie moebius strip.