GOOD things about the prequels?

I'm trying really hard to convince myself the prequels are good, but something deep inside is saying they are not. Please help me. Here are the things I found.

1. The Action - while it's no Mad Max level stuff, it can be exciting sometimes.

2. Darth Maul - Probably the one good thing in the Phantom Menace George Lucas had anything to do with. He's just awesome and kicks butt.

3. That Death Sticks scene in Episode II - Self explanatory. Probbaly the only good thing in Attack of the Clones.

4. The Music - As usual, John Williams is a genius. If he wasn't scoring, these movies would cause no emotional reaction at all.

5. The Emperor - Best character in this whole trilogy. Has a clear goal, shows emotion, and actually drives the plot. Maybe he should have been the protagonist.

PS Who is the main character of The Phantom Menace.

The score is great. The Naboo palace is beautiful. The scene in II in the arena with the beast before the other Jedi came was pretty good. That's probably all

Ian McDiarmid and John Williams

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/What-we-like-about-the-Prequels/topic/11950/

I find the better portion of the scores in the prequels to be just servicable. Duel of the Fates and Across the Stars are fantastic, but the rest of it lacks the fire of the originals for me. Also, I've never understood everyone's insistence on how good Ian McDiarmid was. By ROTS his performance was self-parody.

StarChewyWar said:

I'm trying really hard to convince myself the prequels are good, but something deep inside is saying they are not.

That something is telling you the truth.

The prequels may have some good elements in them, but by-and-large, they are just BAD. 

joefavs said:

I've never understood everyone's insistence on how good Ian McDiarmid was. By ROTS his performance was self-parody.

Lucas had McDiarmid's voice digitally altered.

Voice alterations or no, his scenery chewing made Shatner look like Olivier.

TV's Frink said:

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/What-we-like-about-the-Prequels/topic/11950/

 ^THIS

joefavs said:

 Also, I've never understood everyone's insistence on how good Ian McDiarmid was. By ROTS his performance was self-parody.

 I think it is because he looks to at least have fun with his role. Unlike almost everyone else.

Ian bad? How can you tell that shakespearean Tony award winner he was bad? I think he knows more about acting than anyone here so I put his opinion above anyone else here.

Being good in general is no insurance against being bad in a particular movie, especially a Star Wars prequel. Natalie Portman has an Oscar, after all. All I know is that the Palpatine v. Mace Windu confrontation makes me cringe almost as hard as Jedi Rocks, and it's not because of Sam Jackson.

joefavs said:

Being good in general is no insurance against being bad in a particular movie, especially a Star Wars prequel. Natalie Portman has an Oscar, after all. All I know is that the Palpatine v. Mace Windu confrontation makes me cringe almost as hard as Jedi Rocks, and it's not because of Sam Jackson.

 I second that.  Ian is an excellent actor, but not in ROTS.

joefavs said:

Being good in general is no insurance against being bad in a particular movie, especially a Star Wars prequel. Natalie Portman has an Oscar, after all. All I know is that the Palpatine v. Mace Windu confrontation makes me cringe almost as hard as Jedi Rocks, and it's not because of Sam Jackson.

Ian said that he disliked having to perfrom that scene. 

https://youtube.com/watch?v=GjdycGgeaIY

Ian McDiarmid also indicated that many takes were done, and that he did it differently in each one to offer Lucas the choice of what he wanted in editing (since everyone knew 'fix it in editing' was his way of working).  It is quite likely that the more hammy versions are what ended up getting used, even if they shouldn't have been.

Pretty much everything about that scene, from the way it was written, shot, and edited, is just plain bad.  Even good actors can't salvage something so disastrously misconceived, so if it doesn't work it's hardly their fault.

hairy_hen said:

Pretty much everything about that scene, from the way it was written, shot, and edited, is just plain bad. 

 But...but...without that scene, we wouldn't know why Palps was all wrinkly and shit.

I distinctly remember watching RotJ as a kid and thinking:

Why is the Emperor all wrinkly?   There must be some pat explanation for that.

I sure hope they make a movie one day that accounts for all those wrinkles in one single, climactic scene!

Darth Id said:

hairy_hen said:

Pretty much everything about that scene, from the way it was written, shot, and edited, is just plain bad. 

 But...but...without that scene, we wouldn't know why Palps was all wrinkly and shit.

I distinctly remember watching RotJ as a kid and thinking:

Why is the Emperor all wrinkly?   There must be some pat explanation for that.

I sure hope they make a movie one day that accounts for all those wrinkles in one single, climactic scene!

 They could have at least been consistent and shown us why Beru aged 50 years in 20 due to that moister vaporator accident.

Nostalgia critic 11 good things abut the star wars prequels. don't necessarily agree with them all, but he makes some decent points.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buXz4BYS8kw