logo Sign In

When did you realize the Prequels sucked? — Page 3

Author
Time

@ Farlander

Regarding the PT handling the turn to the dark side better than the OT, I'm not sure I understand where you're coming from.  First of all, in the OT, I always thought that the difference between the light and dark side of the force was pretty clear: the light side uses the force to achieve a sense of connectedness, understanding, patience, and faith, while the dark side uses the force for physical domination and self-aggrandizement.

As for Vader and Palpatine turning Luke, I don't think there's anything unbelievable about what they're doing.  As Yoda cautioned, the dark side is alluring: it promises seemingly more power than the light side, and does so more quickly.  As an analogy, think of some D&D type game: a spell that allows you to cast a fireball may look more powerful than, say, a spell that allows you to heal, but ultimately the latter spell might prove more beneficial than the former (wow, a fantasy RPG example to explain Star Wars... doubly geeky).  Anywho, taking that into consideration, it's not hard to see why Luke (or anyone for that matter) may be tempted to venture down the dark path.  As for how believable it would be for someone to side with someone who has hurt them?... ever heard of Stockholm syndrome, or read 1984?

“It’s a lot of fun… it’s a lot of fun to watch Star Wars.” – Bill Moyers

Author
Time

I don't know why, but I never really thought the prequels sucked.  A lot of people point out things like Jar-Jar and how stupid he was, but that is no different than how stupid the Ewoks were in ROTJ.  Then some will say that GL put some stupid droid humor scenes in the PT, but even in ANH, when Chewbacca roared at that small droid on the Death Star, and the droid ran away, I thought that was really stupid as well.  They both have their flaws, but overall, they are both really great trilogies.  They were just made in a different cinematic era. 

To compare the two, the PT definately has more action, but the OT has more powerful scenes.  Again, I think both were great trilogies, but they were made too far apart to really tie together seamlessely. 

Author
Time

One thing struck me the other day.  Often, supporters of the PT say, correctly, that when SW came out in 1977 it too got its share of negative press as. The argument goes, that the OT too faced similar criticism as the PT, and that some critics bemoaned weak script and acting, just like we do for the PT. All of this is true.

However, there is one very big difference. It didn't take long for general view of the original SW 1977 film to change radically. Less than one year, in fact. It ended up being nominated for six academy awards (including best picture and best supporting actor), and winning six of them. It quickly became heralded rather universally as a classic, important film. That is, it recovered from its initial criticisms very, very quickly, certainly within a year or two.

By contrast, it has been 11 YEARS since the Phantom Menace came out, and its reputation only continues to worsen. By any objective measure, as far as its status as a major motion picture is concerned, it has already lost the test of time.

People of all ages - even people who don't like SW - can reel off a half dozen icons, or quotes from SW... it not only revised movie-making, it impacted our culture. But even saga fans are hard-pressed to recall a single memorable line from any of the prequels (except in jest some of the bad ones). Not a single icon, or even so much as a tiny remnant of the PT can be found anywhere in our lives.

I would like to add that I still enjoy TPM.  I even watch it now and then. The lightsaber duel and accompanying music is thrilling. But I'm perplexed as to how anyone with objective reasoning skills could put it in the same class as SW, ESB, or even ROTJ.

"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars

Author
Time

Regarding the adventure style of Star Wars. I understand people who don't like the change of the tone, from a swashbuckling adventure to Tragedy of Darth Vader. But, I suppose everyone understood by now that I personally grew up with Star Wars being the Tragedy of Darth Vader (I will list a parallel about this matter in the post-scriptum of the post). And, frankly, Star Wars as a Saga is very inconsistent in tone and atmosphere. It's doesn't even feel like two trilogies, more like three duologies, with RotJ and TPM forming quite a pair. I don't really want to argue on this matter, because no matter what the arguments are, it will still be like arguing over a religious topic.

Just one thing about joining the Dark Side argument. I do want to raise some points about this particular matter. Some KotOR spoilers in this paragraph, be warned. Btw, I didn't read 1984, and Stockholm syndrome is not really related to anything joining the Dark Side could be related to. Anyway, in KotOR, there was this moment, when Malak tortured Bastila to make her feel the power of the Dark Side - essentially what Palpatine was doing in RotJ and what he would presumably do if Vader brought frozen Luke to him. The next time we see Bastila is when we meet her as a Dark Jedi, and she acted like a total ****. Sure she wasn't the calmest Jedi ever, nor was Luke or Anakin, but the way she turned to the Dark Side was, with no disrespect to anyone, it's just my opinion, bullshit.

"Strike your father down, and your journey to the Dark Side will be complete". Like, what, if Luke had killed Vader, he would instantly become Palpatine's apprentice? He would instantly forget his sister he wanted to protect, his best friends he had gone through lot of adventures with, and act like a censured word? And he wouldn't try to strike down Palpatine? Let's suppose he tried and did kill Palpatine. You want to say that Luke would proclaim himself the Emperor at that moment? The answer to all those questions is no. Because if yes, then I would think about it the same way I think about Bastila's turn. One could say that Luke could start abusing his new powers (killing Vader and Emperor) that would make him slowly turn more like them... That may be a valid point, but a) Luke was already abusing his powers during the Tatooine rescue mission and maybe even before that, and b) I think the reason would be more like feeling of guilt because of a failed attempt to save his father, which would then evolve. But certainly not because he felt the POWER of the Dark Side.

That's why I find attempts of turning Luke to the Dark Side in the OT implausible, and Anakin's turn to the Dark Side in the PT more believable (aside from the mentioned before "What have I done?!" part followed by "I'm a powerful Sith Lord" click moment, which is how I feel OT would've handled Luke's turn). Because it was brewing there, inside him. His will to do good led to a search of power to do that good which then transformed into a simple lust for power. And still, if not for the growing distrust Anakin had for other people, and some other things, he wouldn't had fallen. Long story short, in my opinion, it's much more plausible. My opinion is also based on my point of view and perception of life, but, even if you don't agree with me on every matter, I do believe that I raise at least some valid points.

Now for the promised post-scriptum.

PS. I've already mentioned PotC and it's sequels, Dead Man's Chest and At World's End. PotC is light-hearted fun swashbuckling adventure with a quirky plot. And then came the sequels which tried to change the atmosphere and turn it into a deep story. Needless to say, I don't like PotC sequels.I can still bear DMC, but not AWE. Maybe, I wouldn't have enjoyed PT if I knew about OT. Or maybe I would. Because it is actually not a surprise to find people who have enjoyed the prequels even watching them after the OT. But these people lurk mostly along the casual viewer territory, not Star Wars fan territory.

Author
Time

Finlander said:

First, I want to say that "Finlander" is freakin' great! :D Seriously, no one ever mispronounced my nickname like that before, I had a good laugh (no excuses needed, btw).

Totally accidental.  You have my most sincere apology, and it won't happen again.  Let's just chalk it up to being old.  ;)

Farlander said:

<does every sequel change how you see the original(s)?>

You asked this question, and I think the answer you came to was 'no'.  However, the answer for me is 'mostly yes.'  I like all of the Matrix movies, though there are things in the 2nd and 3rd movies I don't like (and there are things that I really, really like) but I won't get into that more here.  Absolutely PotC is a good comparison or what is going on now with Lost is another good one.  In the case of PotC or Lost, story threads were intentionally left dangling in Dead Man's Chest (which I loved/love) or Lost Seasons 1-5 that it is now the burden of AWE or Season 6 to resolve.  And in the way that both of these properties are totally ruining the final chapter... it makes it really hard to go back and enjoy the 2nd to last chapter.  (Hopefully these sentences are making sense to everyone else...)  Let me rephrase a little: Part of what makes everything up til the end exciting is the anticipation of what will come in the end.  If the end then sucks, then the entire venture up to the end also sucks.  I really liked DMC, and I really disliked AWE... I think I still like DMC, but in a more confused way.  What's the point in watching DMC if all of the storylines are wrapped up so poorly in AWE?  I don't know, I haven't watched DMC in a little bit so I can't say for sure.

Hop over to my 'Trading on Promises; thread  http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/A-New-Hope-Trading-on-Promises-or-Trailer-for-the-SW-Universe/topic/11379/ for some similar ideas, but I'll reiterate.  Prequels/sequels/endings, etc... absolutely affect how I see/enjoy the rest of the franchise.  In the case of Star Wars, as I've mentioned, the only way I enjoy the OT anymore is to FORCEfully remove the PT from my brain.  I mean, if there were a PT, which there isn't.

Frinklander:

PS. And nobody answered on how Palpatine and Vader planned to turn Luke to the Dark Side of the Force. :p OT-wise.

The PT (which doesn't exist) did make me consider this scene.  As you may know from seeing my posts from around the site, I'm very interested and have wasted many an afternoon (and Sunday Sermon) thinking about how to rewrite/reboot the Prequels and actually make some sense.  What I've learned in this process is some of the shortcomings of the OT and how what might see like a very clear issue from 10,000 ft becomes very hard to understand once you take a closer look at it.  The ages of Obi-Wan and Vader in respect to Luke is one such thing (is Anakin Luke's grandfather, perhaps?) and the turn scene is another.  As oposed to going on any further here, let me direct you to some other threads discussing this very same question:

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Luke-VS-the-Emperor-What-if-Vader-hadnt-been-there/topic/11026/  (my thoughts on your question really get going at post 17)

and here:

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Why-the-hell-did-the-lazy-Emperor-even-think-Luke-would-join-the-dark-side-and-become-his-new-apprentice/topic/8657/

Baronlando and CO basically said:

The OT wasn't deep, it was FUN!

 

Corellian77 essentially said:

Dudes, it's both!

And I agree with C77.

mfastx said:

but I never really thought the prequels sucked. 

 

That is why you fail.</yoda>

RE: Puggo.  Good points.  I think that time will be less and less kind to the PT as... er... time goes on.  You're right, it's already happened to some degree.  I'm also afraid that the PT is bringing the OT down with it for new generations that dont' know the difference.

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

D'oh!  And here I went making a new thread to further explore this very topic.  Oh well.

“It’s a lot of fun… it’s a lot of fun to watch Star Wars.” – Bill Moyers

Author
Time

xhonzi said:

 

That is why you fail.

 Yes, you are correct.  I fail at thinking the PT "sucks."  They're just different types of films, made in different eras. 

Author
Time

mfastx said:

xhonzi said:

 

That is why you fail.

 Yes, you are correct.  I fail at thinking the PT "sucks."  They're just different types of films, made in different eras. 

With 'different' acting, storylines and special effects, right?

Author
Time

Judge said:

With 'different' acting, storylines and special effects, right?

 Storyline was different, special effects were much more advanced. 

Acting: Overall the OT had better actors, but the PT had a few good ones like Ian McDiarmid, Ewan McGregor, and Samuel Jackson.  Hayden Christensen definately was not on par with those actors, he was just OK I guess. 

I know you are being sacrastic, but I'm just giving you a straight answer, as if your post was serious BTW.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I realized it on the way home from the theater after seeing Episode I (didn't see it on opening night, but within a week or so of it coming out, iirc).

 

Of course I "hoped" against hope that the other movies would be better and as my good friend said "I'm hoping that when viewed in the context of the Prequel trilogy, Episode I won't suck, so I'm reserving judgment."

Episode II was better, but did have a lot of crap in it (which I was forced to admit once I'd seen the IMAX cut which was far superior). Episode III had those awful moments that ruined an otherwise diamond in the rough.

 

As a trilogy, I realized the Prequels would suck once I finished watching Episode III, there was just no way it could hold together as a series to stand up to anything approaching the OT.

 

I don't hate the Prequels per se, but I was defiantly let down by them, and not just because my expectations were so high. The continuity lapses with the OT were just inexcusable.

 

Mainly I agree with the claim that the characters in the OT were more likable, and their onscreen chemistry was better. The story was more upbeat (generally) and hence lent itself to that adventure theme that reminded you of having fun at the cinema. I'm not saying a dark, political feel was wrong for the Prequels, but that "deadly serious" atmosphere mixed with random cartoonish "humor" just didn't work well. The characters were too stiff and there were too many of them to keep us caring about any of them. Too often Lucas dialed down the suspense to give us self-indulgent moments of ships landing and goofy aliens doing slapstick. It's like he just wanted to play in the world and remind us what an artistic genius he is, rather than tell the story and get us to identify with the characters and their struggle.

I think the Star Wars name works against the Prequels. Had they just been a set of sci fi films set in a different universe, I don't think they would have been so harshly criticized, but the catch 22 is that I don't think they would have made as much money, since so many people went to see them out of obligation as fans or in expectation of seeing something approaching the "magic" of the original trilogy.

FYI: I avoided spoilers like the plague for all three prequels. I actually wonder though, if people who "spoiled" themselves silly for the movie beforehand were more disappointed or less than those who avoided them?

Author
Time

The Zahn trilogy was sucessful in the 90's because it was the further adventures of Luke, Han and Leia and the Rebels, or now New Republic.

Nobody cares about Hayden Skywalker/Vader, or any of those prequel cardboard cutouts supplemented by videogame graphics.

 

Now that i have seen how bad the prequels are and how he ruined the originals i am almost glad their is no episode 7, episode 7 would be as bad as crystal Numbskull, only worse because it would have been directed by Lucas not Spielberg.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time

Kurgan said:

Mainly I agree with the claim that the characters in the OT were more likable, and their onscreen chemistry was better. The story was more upbeat (generally) and hence lent itself to that adventure theme that reminded you of having fun at the cinema. I'm not saying a dark, political feel was wrong for the Prequels, but that "deadly serious" atmosphere mixed with random cartoonish "humor" just didn't work well. The characters were too stiff and there were too many of them to keep us caring about any of them. Too often Lucas dialed down the suspense to give us self-indulgent moments of ships landing and goofy aliens doing slapstick. It's like he just wanted to play in the world and remind us what an artistic genius he is, rather than tell the story and get us to identify with the characters and their struggle.

Love this post... you make a lot of good points Kurgan.

Kurgan said:

I think the Star Wars name works against the Prequels. Had they just been a set of sci fi films set in a different universe, I don't think they would have been so harshly criticized, but the catch 22 is that I don't think they would have made as much money, since so many people went to see them out of obligation as fans or in expectation of seeing something approaching the "magic" of the original trilogy.

Funny, as I read this I kept thinking how exactly the same is true about the new Star Trek film.

Kurgan said:

FYI: I avoided spoilers like the plague for all three prequels. I actually wonder though, if people who "spoiled" themselves silly for the movie beforehand were more disappointed or less than those who avoided them?

I was spoiler-free for Episodes I and II, but spoiled myself rotten for III.  Ultimately, I disliked most of TPM, liked AOTC better, and really liked ROTS, so not sure what that says regarding the correlation between spoilers and enjoyment of the films.

“It’s a lot of fun… it’s a lot of fun to watch Star Wars.” – Bill Moyers

Author
Time

1.Midichlorians.

2.The Midnight screening of AOTC-the tap of Yoda's cane and the theater is so silent that you can hear a pin drop. Then they start throwing cartoon rocks and lightning. Then Yoda pulls a miniature lightsaber and jumps around yelling, and there was "thunderous applause". Part of me died inside.

3.All of Anakin's whining.

4.The complete ignorance and stupidity of all the Prequel characters.

5.When James Earl Jones said Prequel dialogue.

6.Jimmy Smits.

7.Lucas in a cameo.

8.The avalanche of bad tie-ins, especially the video games. (Jedi Power Battles you and I have a score to settle...)

9.The criminal misuse of Christopher Lee and then quick dispatch in ROTS.

10.When people began talking Prequel nonsense as if it were gospel.

11.When I felt a great sense of relief at the end of ROTS.

12.When I realized how everyone was underused, and how I saw nothing that I had really wanted to see.

13.When I felt bad for Ewan McGregor.

14. When I thought ROTS should have started at the ending and just been about damn fool old Obi Wan sitting in the back of the Cantina drinking and wandering around the Jundland Wastes full of pain and regret.

15.How much time and effort went into garbage.

16.When I read the Heir to the Empire trilogy twice in a row for cleansing.

17.When I saw all of the "little touches" that were supposed to remind us of the original films and instead only served to make me realize just how great they were.

18.When I associated with Alec Guinness and began to hate SW.

and finally...

19.Someone's very bad attempt at expressing denial and a Frankenstein impression.

 

 

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader

Author
Time

I can't say that I knew right off the bat that there was anything was wrong with the PT. I was a kid when I saw the first two prequels, so I wasn't quite able to see the faults of the films at that time. From the beginning I felt that the PT was inferior to the OT, though I didn't see them as bad until much later.

 

I first saw TPM about a year after I watched the OOT for the first time on video. I never saw it in theatres, but I had read a few novelizations (both junior and adult). I frankly found the novelizations dull when I read them, so when I did see the film I wasn't expecting anything groundbreaking.

In the end I did end up liking TPM once I saw it - much more than its novelizations. It wasn't as good as the OT, I thought, but still decent.

 

AOTC didn't impress me nearly as much. I didn't like the overuse of CGI, and thought the acting wasn't so great (I had seen Hayden before in over work, so I kinda knew what to expect from him). At the end I was like "So that's how Anakin lost his hand ... so Boba Fett's a clone ... so the Clone War clones were all cloned from some lame bounty hunter ... uh ... okay".

My distaste for AOTC only grew with subsequent viewings, but I didn't hate the film at that point. It was a Star Wars film, and even the least impressive entry in the series had to be okay, right?

 

I then later read the ROTS novelization ... and I thought "So that's how Anakin turned? That's how the Jedi were wiped out? What, Padmé died? So Obi-Wan didn't believe there was any good in Anakin after he fell after all? Obviously this isn't how things were originally supposed to unfold, and not how I would have done it, but overall a satisfactory conclusion to the saga".

Then I saw the film itself ... and I knew right away that it was worse than the book that was based on it. Worse acting and dialogue than ever before, and even more overuse of CGI. All the faults I found and accepted in the novelization were amplified in the film, and made utterly unbearable.

It was then that I knew something was wrong, but I still managed to convince myself it was a good movie. "Beyond the CGI and bad dialogue it is still a Star Wars film", I thought, "I still feels like a Star Wars film". 

 

It wasn't until I finally got a computer and Internet access that I came to hate the PT, all of it. Prior to that point I had never had regular access to the Internet, and had been sheltered from most of the diverse views the fans held (frankly, up til then I had assumed that pretty much every fan accepted anything SW).

After learning that many fans were distressed by the changes made to the OT and the discrepancies created by the PT I was able to put two-and-two together, and my own dissatisfactions boiled over into outright hatred.

 

This is my first post, BTW. Sorry if I rambled on there a bit ... =)

 

 

Author
Time

1.  The Phantom Menace.  I'm not convinced this one totally sucks yet; the Phantom Edit did a good number on it.

2.  Attack of the Clones, or Snore Wars.  I never liked this one.  Saw it twice in theaters, have no desire to see it again.

3.  Revenge of the Sith.  This came out when I was in 6th grade, and I thought it was... well, okay.  Saw it with my dad while vacationing in Lanai, which is a good memory associated with it.  Haven't seen it in full since.

 

So basically #2 and #3 are the ones I'd say really suck; 2 I knew right away, and 3 is in retrospect.

A Goon in a Gaggle of 'em

Author
Time

bkev said:

3.  Revenge of the Sith.  This came out when I was in 6th grade...

STOP MAKING ME FEEL OLD!!!

Author
Time

bkev said:

1.  The Phantom Menace.  I'm not convinced this one totally sucks yet; the Phantom Edit did a good number on it.

2.  Attack of the Clones, or Snore Wars.  I never liked this one.  Saw it twice in theaters, have no desire to see it again.

3.  Revenge of the Sith.  This came out when I was in 6th grade, and I thought it was... well, okay.  Saw it with my dad while vacationing in Lanai, which is a good memory associated with it.  Haven't seen it in full since.

 

So basically #2 and #3 are the ones I'd say really suck; 2 I knew right away, and 3 is in retrospect.

I'm guessing you haven't seen the Plinkett reviews.

Author
Time

bkev said:

 

I never liked this one.  Saw it twice in theaters,

 lol.

Sorry, bkev.  Something about that really made me laugh.

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

I'm curious, did anyone get ahold of that guy?

Author
Time

Erm... which guy, Zombie?

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)

I don't think the prequels sucks. I think they have worst acting than the OT, but as movies they are not bad. They just didn't brought back those who saw the OT in theaters to their childhood memories. Also, I believe many who say that the prequels suck were influenced by some bashers over the years. When I came out from the theaters in '99, I remember that everyone applauded, and the reactions of the public when interviewed at the end was mostly positive. Liking the prequels is not cheating the OT movies, as some may think.

Author
Time

Ah, it's been too long since we've had a PT/OT argument.

http://chzgifs.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/vista.gif