Servii

Darth Malgus said:

Yeah, it’s a strange phenomenon. A few years ago, it seemed like prequel fans used to be more laid back and more open to criticism of the movies. They used to be more willing to laugh alongside you at the prequels’ ridiculous moments. But as time has gone on, the prequel fandom has gotten more and more fervent and unironic and sensitive to criticism, which is a shame. Now you have all these video essays about how the prequels are masterpieces and how the flaws aren’t actually flaws.

I don’t want to start an unnecessary controversy, but I want to give my opinion on this topic, since I’m a Prequel fan.
I’m one of those people who’s not bothered by the things that annoy everyone. For example, the dialogue and the love story don’t bother me, as well as Jar Jar. So, I personally don’t see these things as flaws. However, I think it’s wrong to say that the Prequels have no flaws in general. But I think that the people who say that the Prequels have no flaws are driven to do so because, on the other side, there are people who say that they have ONLY flaws. That is, people of one extreme act the way they act because on the other side there are people of the other extreme. Since there are people who say that the Prequels have ONLY flaws, then there are people who, as an automatic reaction, defend everything about the movies and say they have NO flaws. The fact that there are no Original Trilogy fans who defend everything about the movies, is explained simply by the fact that there are no people who say that the Originals have only flaws, unlike the Prequels.

Yeah, I get what you mean. It’s a reaction in the opposite direction from the hyper-critical Plinkett takes on the prequels. I should clarify, I consider myself a prequel fan. I like a lot of movies that other people dislike for various valid reasons. That’s something I’m used to, from being also a Godzilla fan. I think it’s the nature of social media that causes people to get more defensive about the movies they like.

I personally prefer to think that the OT town of Anchorhead was only founded maybe a couple generations before ANH by human settlers, and that KOTOR’s Anchorhead was essentially a different town by the same name that no longer exists by the time of the Empire.

I imagine there would be only a couple hundred residents or so, a large portion of which would be children that young Luke might have played with and befriended. Unlike Mos Eisley, the town would be predominantly human. The town itself wouldn’t have a spaceport, but there would be regular travel between Anchorhead and the closest port towns, like Mos Eisley. Anchorhead would also be close enough to Luke’s home for him to not feel uncomfortable giving Ben a ride there. Basically, the town would have been in the same “neighborhood,” and part of Luke’s mundane world, and so wouldn’t represent the same threshold crossing as Mos Eisley did.

My brother still has our old shared collection in storage. From what I remember, it was pretty substantial. I’m sure it’d be worth something now.

1. Revenge of the Sith
2. Return of the Jedi
3. The Empire Strikes Back
4. A New Hope
5. The Phantom Menace
6. Attack of the Clones
7. Rogue One

I don’t remember the rest of the movies’ musical scores well enough to rank them. Out of these seven, all of the soundtracks are very close in quality to each other except for Rogue One’s, which I think was weak.

Superweapon VII said:

Servii said:

If Ed Wood had been a multi-millionaire with access to early 21st century VFX, he would’ve made movies of exactly the same quality.

That’s part of the charm of the prequels for me, honestly. The fact that they’re so unapologetically George’s movies, with all the good and bad that that entails. It’s preferable to movies that feel like they were made by a board room.

I wish more prequel fans thought this way, really. I can understand loving the prequels, warts and all. What I can’t fathom is the mentality that insists there are no warts.

Yeah, it’s a strange phenomenon. A few years ago, it seemed like prequel fans used to be more laid back and more open to criticism of the movies. They used to be more willing to laugh alongside you at the prequels’ ridiculous moments. But as time has gone on, the prequel fandom has gotten more and more fervent and unironic and sensitive to criticism, which is a shame. Now you have all these video essays about how the prequels are masterpieces and how the flaws aren’t actually flaws.

I’m grateful to everyone who contributed to the OT. The Star Wars OT is the sort of thing where if you take away even one of the elements that made it work so well: the likeable characters, the iconic lines, the innovative special effects, the beautiful musical scores, then it would be lesser than it ended up being. It had just the right ingredients of all these creatives working together, and it all just came together like a chemical reaction.

Marcia Lucas, Paul Hirsch, Richard Chew, Gary Kurtz, John Dykstra, Irvin Kershner, Howard Kazanjian, Richard Marquand, Phil Tippett, John Williams, and tons of others all influenced and left their touch on the saga in their own way. And yes, Gloria Katz and Willard Huyck and everyone else who offered ideas or inspiration to George in his work. George invented Star Wars, but it was the chemistry and collaboration of George with all these people that made Star Wars special.

G&G-Fan said:

Servii said:

The point is, he toes the line of whatever the official canon narrative currently is, but if the official canon narrative is defective and contradictory, then that doesn’t mean much.

Yeah and that’s basically the point of his entire blog. It’s about viewing Star Wars from a Word of God perspective.

I have my own head canons. To me, the sequels aren’t canon, especially TROS, which makes absolutely no sense and probably has some of the most plot holes of any sci-fi/fantasy screenplay. And he has head canons too, if you look at his blog long enough. But for the most part, he talks about Star Wars from a “Word of God” POV and always clarifies when he’s not.

Ok, I get what you mean.

Servii said:

Of course, though, the whole concept of “balance of the Force” is needlessly confusing, in my opinion. The word “balance” implies some sort of equal duality, and since Sith are the opposite of the Jedi, it’s no surprise that people would interpret the Sith as being part of that duality.

It’s called balance because naturally there is supposed to be both light and dark sides of the force. The problem with the Sith is their end goal is always to conquer the entire galaxy and subvert the force. To plunge it into complete darkness. There’s already enough evil going around without them.

I do agree, it wasn’t explained well in the films at all. They do say that Anakin needs to destroy the Sith and bring balance to the force but they don’t explain what balance means in this context. This is another example of Lucas underexplaining things to stick to the bottom line of the story. The funny thing about this method though is more then anything it actually distracts from the point he’s trying to make. He made the prequels to teach people about letting go but now all people talk about is how Anakin was totally in the right because the Jedi are actually emotionally repressive bullies. Because people are desperate to fill in the blanks and his flat dialogue and “tell, don’t show” approach doesn’t give the right impression. The prequels desperately needed an additional writer (contrary to popular belief Lucas did co-write ESB and ROTJ).

I think a lot of confusion would have been avoided if the prequels simply used a different word besides “balance.” Also, it would make sense for the Jedi to mistakenly believe that the prophecy had already been fulfilled.

It also didn’t help that the “destroy the Sith” portion of the prophecy wasn’t mentioned until RotS, and the scene in which it was mentioned also happened to be the scene in which Yoda suggests the prophecy may have been misread.

AotC did have Jonathan Hales as co-writer. But his role seems to have been primarily jazzing up the script and improving the pacing. If George had had someone to bounce ideas off of while writing TPM, the prophecy might have been more well defined.

Of course, though, the whole concept of “balance of the Force” is needlessly confusing, in my opinion. The word “balance” implies some sort of equal duality, and since Sith are the opposite of the Jedi, it’s no surprise that people would interpret the Sith as being part of that duality.

The reason it has to be balanced post-ROTJ is because it’s kinda directly stated that it is. Anakin brought balance to the Force. Even in TROS he says, “Bring back the balance, Rey, as I did.”

Well, it may be the official narrative, but that doesn’t mean it makes sense. The prequels were clear that balance meant the destruction of the Sith, and despite being worse for wear, Palpatine was still alive and scheming and whispering in little Ben Solo’s head. Not to mention, the New Republic was pretty corrupt, ineffective, and filled with secret Empire supporters.

The point is, he toes the line of whatever the official canon narrative currently is, but if the official canon narrative is defective and contradictory, then that doesn’t mean much.

He has some takes and interpretations that I don’t think are backed up well. For example, he has his diagrams showing the state of the balance of the Force at different points in the saga, and he portrays the pre-TPM era as unbalanced because of Palpatine’s scheming and various other negative forces. Yet he claims that the post-RotJ is a time of balance, despite the fact that it has pretty much all the same problems as the TPM era (including a living Sith lord).

The point is, while he’s a good source for quotes from the man himself, his interpretations are still fallible.

If Ed Wood had been a multi-millionaire with access to early 21st century VFX, he would’ve made movies of exactly the same quality.

That’s part of the charm of the prequels for me, honestly. The fact that they’re so unapologetically George’s movies, with all the good and bad that that entails. It’s preferable to movies that feel like they were made by a board room.

I’m just happy we’re having a lively discussion again.

https://www.tumblr.com/david-talks-sw/679554898557353985/bmnl?source=share

I noticed you cite this guy’s lore posts a lot, and I’d just caution against relying too heavily on the words of one fan. I’ve read some of his stuff before, and I wouldn’t consider him the definitive or final word on these issues.

If there is nothing wrong with the Jedi, why do they need the Chosen One to come and balance things?

I don’t think the reasoning for why Jedi think things are out of balance is conveyed well. If the Jedi had become complacent, then they would think that everything is fine and that the Force is balanced. By all outside appearances, the Force does seem to be fine until the Sith start to reveal themselves, and even then, the Jedi are skeptical when Qui-Gon first tells them about the Sith’s return.

I know a common piece of writing advice is “show, don’t tell,” but I sometimes think George should have spelled some things out more clearly, even at the risk of giving too much exposition. Obi-Wan says that Qui-Gon doesn’t follow the code, but we’re never shown or told how he’s not following it. There are some references to Jedi’s connection to the Force being diminished, and we can infer that the Jedi have become too politically minded rather than focused on helping people, but that’s not something the movies acknowledge nearly enough. The films never call out the Jedi for ignoring slavery, for example. That could have very easily been made a major grievance Anakin had with the Jedi Order, but the movie doesn’t address it, which leads me to believe it wasn’t meant to be a moral failing of the Order.

I still don’t really buy the idea that Qui-Gon would have saved Anakin. I know that was Lucas’ intent, but I don’t buy into it.

I was 3 when Phantom Menace came out, but I didn’t see it or know about it at the time. I was introduced to Star Wars through the OT on VHS, then learned about TPM around 2001. I remember being confused at the time, because people kept referring to “the Star Wars trilogy,” and yet there was a new fourth movie.

But I really got into Star Wars in 2002, during the leadup and marketing for AotC. That was when my obsession started, and even though I didn’t actually like AotC that much when I finally saw it, I loved the toys and merch that went along with it. Even today, all of the merch and imagery for AotC gives me a very nostalgic feeling.

Right before AotC came out, I was given TPM on DVD, which was the first Star Wars movie I owned. While my family would rent one of the OT films every other weekend, and we would watch the OT as a family, I was usually the only one interested in rewatching TPM, so I’d most often watch it by myself and skip around to my favorite action scenes.

I saw RotS in the theater when I was 9, and it was a pretty awesome experience. It was my first time being really excited on my way to see a movie, and it really blew my child mind. Though I will admit, even back then, there were some moments and lines of dialogue that were unintentionally funny. Of course, once I got the movie on DVD, I rewatched it like crazy. Weirdly, though, I still don’t get that nostalgic feeling from RotS as much as I do from the first two prequels. I’m not sure why.

That’s a good catch, that moment of Anakin making peace with his death.

It may be more blatantly selfish, but fear of his own death could work as a motivation for Anakin’s fall, or rather having it rolled into his primary motivation of saving loved ones. It could be just a general desire to control destiny and reshape it to his will that seduces him to the Dark Side. That feeling that, within a chaotic galaxy, he needs to force things to be a certain way to keep him and his loved ones safe, and this would draw him to the sense of order offered by the Empire.

Superweapon VII said:

Servii said:

It may not have been handled well or built up well as a twist, but Luke and Leia’s relationship works better as a fraternal one than a romantic one.

Which reminds me.

The decision to all but gut the Luke-Leia-Han love triangle from TESB was a mistake. It’s made it easier for Lucas to shoehorn that terrible sister retcon in when he made ROTJ.

Yeah, I think he just couldn’t come up with a way to resolve that triangle neatly. He wanted Han to win, but at the same time, he didn’t want Luke to “lose”, if that makes sense.

nvm

I’ve realized that Finn had every right to leave on that escape pod in TLJ. He’d been forced to be a soldier his whole life, and he didn’t owe the Resistance anything. He deserved a chance to live a normal life.

It may not have been handled well or built up well as a twist, but Luke and Leia’s relationship works better as a fraternal one than a romantic one.

Omni said:

Isn’t Last One Standing at odds with AOTC? Regardless, solid list.

Shoot, I forgot about that.

I’ll try to give a more proper answer to this. This list can still change if I read/play more EU stories. Also, there are some stories I enjoy (like SWTOR and Rogue One) but that won’t be in this list for various reasons.

KOTOR
KOTOR II
Darth Plagueis
The Phantom Menace
Attack of the Clones
Labyrinth of Evil
Revenge of the Sith
Dark Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader
A Hunter’s Fate: Greedo’s Tale
We Don’t Do Weddings: The Band’s Tale
Hammertong: The Tale of the “Tonnika Sisters”
Play It Again, Figrin D’an: The Tale of Muftak and Kabe
The Sand Tender: The Hammerhead’s Tale
Empire Blues: The Devaronian’s Tale
Swap Meet: The Jawa’s Tale
Trade Wins: The Ranat’s Tale
Drawing the Maps of Peace: The Moisture Farmer’s Tale
A Boy and His Monster: The Rancor Keeper’s Tale
Let Us Prey: The Whiphid’s Tale
Sleight of Hand: The Tale of Mara Jade
And Then There Were Some: The Gamorrean Guard’s Tale
Goatgrass: The Tale of Ree-Yees
And the Band Played On: The Band’s Tale
Of the Day’s Annoyances: Bib Fortuna’s Tale
The Great God Quay: The Tale of Barada and the Weequays
A Free Quarren in the Palace: Tessek’s Tale
Tongue-tied: Bubo’s Tale
A Barve Like That: The Tale of Boba Fett
Skin Deep: The Fat Dancer’s Tale
Payback: The Tale of Dengar
Of Possible Futures: The Tale of Zuckuss and 4-LOM
A New Hope
The Empire Strikes Back
Shadows of the Empire
Return of the Jedi
Heir to the Empire
Dark Force Rising
The Last Command
Specter of the Past
Vision of the Future
The Last One Standing: The Tale of Boba Fett

I learned so many words from Star Wars as a kid:

Rebellion
Empire/Imperial/Emperor
Smuggler
Under/overestimate
Assault
Fleet
Senate
Council
Republic
Chancellor
Federation/Confederacy
Separatist
Clone
Treason
Tremor
Bounty

And loads of others I’m probably forgetting.

BedeHistory731 said:

rocknroll41 said:

Nice to see other people finally becoming sw77 purists like me!

That said, I was watching ESB just yesterday for the first time in awhile and I can at least appreciate how well it’s made from a technical standpoint.

As others here have said, it works very well on its own, but led to serious issues in the long run with the force, saber fights, familial themes, etc.

“Franchise original sin” really is a bitch, isn’t it?

You know, it’s a funny thing. Nearly every Star Wars fan I’ve met believes there was some “line” that Star Wars crossed at some point that marks when the franchise jumped the shark. But no one ever agrees on when that “line” was crossed. Was it 1980, 1983, 1997, 1999, 2015, 2017, etc.

I hear a lot of people say that Mace Windu was a jerk, especially to Anakin. But I don’t really see that in the movies. The worst thing I can think of is him telling Anakin to “take a seat,” but even then, Anakin was clearly the one who was out of line. Maybe it’s because of how he acts in TCW, but going off the prequels alone, I don’t think he’s a jerk.