Back to the Future’s version of Johnny B Goode is better than the original version. And I’m saying this as someone who loves Chuck Berry.
Michael Jackson is overrated. Yes, I said it.
I am a UFO nut, so my favorite Spielberg movies are Close Encounters of the Third Kind and ET the Extraterrestrial.
I don’t agree with the idealized view many people have of Qui-Gon. While it’s true he was more open-minded, understanding and willing to listen than the Jedi Council, he was still a fairly orthodox Jedi who followed all the rules of the Order. In my opinion, he might have delayed Anakin’s fall, but he wouldn’t have been able to prevent it entirely.
I’ve had a change of heart recently. At this point, I think the Disney deal was a huge mistake.
Why the change?
'Cause he watched The Acolyte, probably.
This would be very foolish and I think the ignorance of those people only becomes more and more evident with time. It’s better to leave those things alone and not do a much worse version of them. Like we’ve said in other threads I think the ideal, more realistic solution would be to let authors work within the Legends continuity if they want.
You’re absolutely right, and what you’re saying is what 90% of EU fans actually think.
I have been an atheist and a convinced materialist for most of my life, up until 2021. However, from 2021 to 2023, I went through a phase where I started believing in the existence of a single, omnipotent God, and I also started believing in the existence of Hell and Heaven, though I didn’t follow any specific religion. I extensively described the spiritual beliefs I had at the time in a post I published in this thread on May 14, 2023. A few months after I published that post, I returned to being an atheist and a convinced materialist.
Now, while this shift from being an atheist to believing in God and the afterlife might seem sudden, it actually made sense given the circumstances. In 2021, I underwent a very complicated surgery, and I wasn’t sure if everything would turn out well. That uncertainty caused me to abandon my usual rational mindset and place my hope in a higher power, something larger than myself. It was a deeply emotional and vulnerable time, and my belief in God, Heaven, and Hell emerged from that.
However, after reflecting on those experiences in the months following my May 2023 post, I eventually returned to my previous stance. I’m still an atheist and a convinced materialist to this day.
I’d also like to add that in my view, a very important distinction needs to be made between atheists and anti-theists. From what I’ve experienced in my life, your average atheist rejects God personally but has no problem with others thinking otherwise. Its the anti-theists who go nuts every time religious people (especially Christians) take a stand, hurling insults and character attacks.
I consider myself a staunch Communist, fully convinced that scientific atheism should replace all forms of religion on Earth. However, I, along with every other Communist who has ever lived, don’t believe that this process should be carried out by force, but rather by peaceful education. Furthermore, I’m often the first to defend Christians when I see them being unfairly attacked due to misconceptions others may have about their religion. While I do philosophically oppose Christianity, and religion as a whole, I also believe in intellectual honesty. So, if someone criticizes Christianity for reasons I don’t agree with or based on flawed perceptions of Christian theology, I’m the first to defend it against those unjustified and misguided attacks. Do you think this stance counts as anti-theism?
Even if Baris’ plan made any sense, Ahsoka’s only argument is, “But they should trust me!”… like they trusted Count Dooku, who Mundi and Windu stood up for, someone who was like a brother to them, only to then get betrayed on Geonosis? They gave him the benefit of the doubt and got their back stabbed, and you’re actually gonna pull that? What a complete lack of empathy. Almost as if we’re just supposed to see Jedi Masters as blocks of wood and not human beings. She expects them to just throw all evidence out the window, I guess. Guess they should’ve also trusted Vader even after those security holograms.
I don’t agree with your defense of the Jedi’s actions. Yes, they had a bad experience with Count Dooku, but that shouldn’t cloud their judgment. If they can’t rise above their past failures, what’s the point of all their training? A Jedi should be able to control their emotions and fears, and while it’s wise to be cautious, they shouldn’t let previous bad experiences dictate their present actions. Sure, Dooku turned out to be a traitor, even after they gave him the benefit of the doubt. That was a harsh lesson, no question. But it doesn’t excuse them for letting that experience influence their decisions in the future. In the end, even they don’t seem capable of upholding their own Code, and yet they go around preaching it to others. And after it was revealed that Ahsoka was innocent, you’d expect the Council to at least formally apologize to her, right? But no. The only one who even tried was Plo Koon. Obi-Wan was so embarrassed he couldn’t say a word, and Mace Windu just washed his hands of the whole thing, with his “the Force works in mysterious ways” nonsense. That’s like telling someone who’s just lost a loved one that “God’s plan works in mysterious ways”. No surprise people didn’t like the Jedi in that arc.
^ I think the fact you looked up the weather in Oklahoma may have sort of crossed the line, and come off as stalker-esque, intrusive behavior. That obviously wasn’t your intention, but it might come off that way, at least to a neutral, outside observer like myself. At the very least, confronting someone with “evidence” that runs contrary to what they’ve already told you will of course come off like an accusation, even if that wasn’t the intention.
I understand your point of view. To be honest, at first I was unsure whether or not to mention the fact that I had checked the temperature in Oklahoma, precisely because I thought she might take offense to it. However, I ultimately decided to include that part anyway, because I thought it would not have been a big deal. To be fair though, that point was a relatively minor detail in the message I sent. I didn’t focus entirely on it — I simply brought it up at the end to use it as an example before saying: “Are you sure you are telling me everything? If something is wrong, do not be afraid to tell me, because I want to be there for you.” Also, as I mentioned in my previous post, she and I have known each other for a year and a half. We are no longer strangers, and she knows how to read my behavior. I have always been incredibly patient with her, and I have consistently put her needs before my own. There were times when I wanted to continue our online role-playing games, but she wasn’t in the mood, and I was always willing to give her space. She knows this. So, if I am worried about her, it’s because I genuinely feel that something is wrong. It’s not impatience talking — it’s my intuition.
I would like to complain about something that has happened between me and one of my online friends.
I first met her about a year and a half ago on a Star Wars forum. We both shared a strong interest in online role-playing games, which is how our initial connection was formed. Over time, we became good friends, and although we lived far apart — she resides in Oklahoma — we managed to stay in close contact. Eventually, we moved our conversations from the forum to Discord, where we have been communicating regularly ever since.
For most of that time, we spoke almost daily. We exchanged long messages, discussed many different topics, and of course, spent a great deal of time playing together. However, things began to change around mid-July. She became much more distant and quieter than usual, and I have not been able to determine why. Our frequent conversations diminished, and soon we were only speaking once every three days. When we did talk, the exchanges were brief and formal. I would reach out with a message like: “Hello, how are you?”, and three days later, she would reply: “I’m fine, don’t worry. How are you?” I would respond immediately, but it would again take her three days to reply. This continued in a similar fashion. In the last two weeks, the situation worsened. Our communication intervals stretched even further, and now we only speak every five or six days. Even then, the conversations are brief and superficial — just enough to ask how the other is doing.
Eventually, I felt compelled to address the situation. I sent her a long message expressing my concern over the recent changes in our communication. The message was not worded exactly like this, but it was essentially as follows:
“I wanted to talk to you about how things have been between us lately. It seems a bit strange, and I am becoming increasingly worried. The last time we had a proper conversation that lasted more than a minute was back in mid-July, and now it is almost October. You have mentioned that you are busy with family and that the heat in Oklahoma has made it difficult for you to concentrate, but are you certain that these are the only reasons? Are you sure you are telling me everything?
If something is going on and you have not told me because you are concerned about how I might react, please don’t feel that way. If something is wrong, I would much prefer to know, so that I can try to be there for you or at least offer some form of support. I don’t want you to feel as though you need to hide things from me in order to avoid making me worry.
Also, I checked the weather in Oklahoma, and it was around 71.6°F when I last looked, which does not seem as unbearably hot as you have described, especially considering that autumn is approaching. I just want to know if there is something else going on. As I said, I would rather know if something is wrong so I can offer my support, in whatever way I can.”
A few days later, she responded, but her reply was not what I had anticipated. She was upset and felt as though I was accusing her of lying. She told me, in essence, that she didn’t owe me any explanations, and that just because she was busy didn’t mean she was hiding something from me. I could tell that she was offended, though this had not been my intention at all.
I responded again, attempting to clarify my position. I explained that I didn’t mean to accuse her of being dishonest. I acknowledged that I had expressed a belief that she might not be telling me the whole truth, but I emphasized that I was not suggesting she was lying for the sake of it. I simply feared that something might be wrong, and that she was not telling me in an effort to prevent me from worrying. In my final message, I tried to soften the tone by including sad emojis and apologizing for upsetting her. I made it clear that I was sorry for having caused her distress and that she had misunderstood my intentions. I was genuinely concerned about her well-being and only wanted to help.
However, despite my apology, her reaction has left me even more convinced that something is wrong, and that she simply does not wish to tell me. When someone responds so defensively, it usually indicates that there is more to the situation than they are willing to admit. If everything were truly fine, I believe her response would have been different. And now, that is where things stand. She is still upset, and I am waiting for her to reply to the last message I sent two days ago.
I don’t know how to feel about the whole situation.
Let’s be honest here, the main reason you like the idea of Anakin being the Chosen One is because it turns Darth Vader, who is your favorite character, into the most important person in the entire galaxy. 😂
If Anakin was not conceived to be the Chosen One of an ancient Jedi prophecy, the Prequels could have been written with the same story, and nothing would have changed at all.I won’t deny that. I figured you’d agree since you like the Prequels just as they are.
Actually, I like the Prequels, but I would like to edit some things to make them more fluid and enjoyable. I created my own edit of Attack of the Clones some time ago. I wanted to create edits of The Phantom Menace and Revenge of the Sith too, but I can never find anyone who is willing to help me with that. In general terms, I think that the Prequels are a great story that is not very feasible for three movies, and should have been developed through a multi-season live action TV show instead, something similar to Stargate SG-1.
It elevates Darth Vader
Let’s be honest here, the main reason you like the idea of Anakin being the Chosen One is because it turns Darth Vader, who is your favorite character, into the most important person in the entire galaxy. 😂
If Anakin was not conceived to be the Chosen One of an ancient Jedi prophecy, the Prequels could have been written with the same story, and nothing would have changed at all.
Wouldn’t that have been a twist!
Kylo leaving with the Resistance on the Falcon after Luke helps to redeem him and Rey staying and taking control of the First Order with her dark side powers unleashed.
TLJ ends with Ben and Leia reuniting.
That would have been awesome.
I have the Dorling-Kindersley Star Wars Visual Guide of the OT, which came out in 1997, and there it says the Emperor looked the way he did due to his lifelong immersion in the Dark Side.
After watching TPM I expected there to be a progression of his Dark Side corruption becoming more evident with each passing entry, and I was sorely disappointed when ROTS establishes that actually it was due to Mace Windu deflecting Force Lightning back at him. So stupid.
I recall the official SW website came up with some bullshit explanation that actually Palpatine was using the Force to project a non-corrupted looking version of himself. Yeah right.
I think it was a mistake bringing McDiarmid back for the prequels. No shade against his acting ability, but Palpatine really needed to have been played by a much younger actor to drive home the severity of his dark side corruption. James Marsters I feel would’ve been the perfect choice.
Nah, McDiarmid was fine in the prequels. My only real pet peeve is how Lucas chose to portray Palpatine’s Dark Side corruption, as it should have been a gradual thing instead of the idiocy of having Force lightning deflected back at him.
Ian McDiarmid has the rare distinction of playing a character’s younger self years after playing an older version of the same character, which I think is pretty neat.
If Palpatine’s physical corruption had been shown gradually throughout the films, the Jedi would have noticed. Seeing the Chancellor of the Republic slowly become more deformed over the years would naturally raise suspicions. If Lucas had gone this route, it would have made the common complaint that “the Jedi are idiots because they don’t notice things” much stronger, amplifying it tenfold.
The titles of the Sequel Trilogy films could actually work well as alternative titles for the Original Trilogy films.
Starting with The Force Awakens, this title could apply to A New Hope since it marks the moment when the Force truly resurges in the galaxy through Luke. The Force, long dormant, becomes active again, and Luke begins his journey to become a Jedi, embodying the awakening of hope and the Force. The Last Jedi fits The Empire Strikes Back, where Luke is not only trained by Yoda but also faces the growing responsibility of potentially being the last Jedi left. The burden of carrying on the Jedi legacy is central to this film, especially with Yoda’s death seeming imminent. Lastly, The Rise of Skywalker could be a fitting title for Return of the Jedi, as it marks Luke’s ultimate rise as a Jedi Knight. It also signifies the redemption of Anakin, the original Skywalker, who returns from the Dark Side. The title encapsulates the final triumph of the Skywalker family line.
In this sense, the Sequel Trilogy titles could capture the key themes of the Original Trilogy just as well.
I definitely feel like I can edit down the duels, tone down the color grade, remove overly cartoonish stuff and the overly busy nature of so many shots (we don’t need random shit constantly thrown on the screen). Perhaps I can find the resources on the internet to make OT style mattes too. However, some ideas are beyond my capabilities.
A lot of this stuff will also not hold back release of this edit. Because even without it, I feel I’ll make something pretty good. But it’s a dream.
At this point, I think it would be much more simple to just rewrite the entire trilogy.
I think Star Wars needs to take a break. A very long break. I don’t think the universe needs to get bigger but smaller. For me, less is more when it comes to Star Wars. For me, Star Wars was at its best in the pre-prequel era because projects were coming out minimally, and when they did, it was special. I feel like there was a more quality over quantity approach. We need to get back to that. Rather than having 10 shows running at the same time, I would rather have one show with all those resources put into it. That would be an Emmy award-winning masterpiece like breaking bad, or the Sopranos or Game of Thrones. Instead of releasing 100 books a year release three, but make the contents, super impactful to the universe and significant.
I agree with everything you said here.
I think the old Tales of the Jedi comics did the thing we’re talking about. It felt like older tech and clothing…a.more interesting visual style than Jedi robes and Tie Fighter looking ships from the KOTOR style era.
Indeed. It’s like creators post-1998 got together and said “We don’t have to be creative anymore; we got the prequels now.” SW has been a coprophagic ouroboros ever since.
You know, I think that even if the prequelization of the Jedi and Sith orders was introduced in-universe only after the Battle of Russan, you would still say that the EU authors were not creative enough. Why? Because the vast majority of the stories within the EU take place between 1,000 BBY and 4 ABY, so you would still have the majority of EU stories portraying the Sith and the Jedi in a prequelized way.
Of course the good guys and bad guys should never be as one-dimensional as you describe. Taking the OT as an example, Luke, Han and Leia are protagonist heroes who are undeniably flawed (though I’m sure you weren’t referring to them). At the points in the narrative where Darth Vader is pure evil and Obi-Wan is pure good, there’s still dimension and nuances to their characterizations. Vader and Obi-Wan aren’t just evil and good respectively, they’re a particular flavor of evil and good. They still have traits, goals, views, and rudimentary backstories. This is understandable, they’re not the protagonists. As the movies go on, they’re given more depth as we learn more. Vader actually has deeply repressed vulnerability underneath his cold hardened personality. Obi-Wan lied to Luke and either actually failed Anakin or is too hard on himself. Yoda and the Emperor are the embodiment of good and evil, but even still, have character traits.
I don’t have a problem with the characterization for Obi-Wan and Yoda in the Prequels either, I take issue with the idea that the Jedi’s beliefs are corrupt and incorrect and putting so much blame on the Jedi for their tragic fate. Protagonist Jedi characters should be good people with flaws, but the religion is the enlightened path, and the flaws of the characters (understandable and human) strays from Jedi philosophy (like Luke’s). The one PT Jedi flaw Lucas agrees with, the participation in the war, is a departure from their philosophy (though his intent is that they’re involuntarily drafted). There’s also still a place for characters like Yoda, who should be all good, because his purpose in the narrative is to be the wise mentor. You don’t see people begging for Gandalf to be given a massive amount of depth.
If a character is intended to be portrayed as a good person with flaws, then those flaws need to be properly shown, not overlooked. However, whenever you criticize Lucas’ portrayal of the Jedi in the Prequel Trilogy, it almost seems as though you expect every Jedi to be perfect. The problem is, if every Jedi is perfect, we are no longer talking about well-meaning individuals with flaws; we are talking about flawless people, which is an entirely different thing. For instance, hypocrisy can be considered a flaw, and if someone wanted to depict the Jedi as well-meaning but flawed individuals, it would be reasonable to portray some of the Jedi as hypocritical, at least when it comes to the Jedi Council. Yet, whenever someone suggests that the Council may have acted hypocritically, you tend to dismiss the idea outright, saying that you don’t like it. So, I believe you need to make a choice: either the Jedi are perfect, or they are not. If they are not, then their flaws must be recognized, and they need to have real consequences.
I understand that you don’t like the idea of portraying Anakin as a victim. However, the fact that he made his own choice does not mean that the Jedi didn’t play any role in his downfall. They were responsible for raising him and teaching him to control his emotions. And if they failed, it wasn’t solely because Anakin refused to listen, because there are many examples of individuals who come from challenging backgrounds and refused to listen at first, but who still managed to learn discipline and internalize good values. Yes, Anakin made his choice, and that cannot be denied, but portraying the Jedi Order as entirely blameless isn’t a realistic perspective either. Moreover, criticizing the Jedi Order is not an attack on their philosophy, but rather on the institution itself. The religion and its core principles are sound — no one is disputing that, not even many of those who criticize the Jedi. However, the institution, its rules, and its practices deserve to be examined and critiqued. This, again, has nothing to do with the core tenets of Jedi philosophy, such as controlling your emotions, living at peace with yourself, following the will of the Force and trying not to cause harm to anyone.
To give an example, the Expanded Universe often portrayed the Jedi as the good guys, while also highlighting their flaws. The EU authors were clear in their intent: while the fundamental beliefs of the Jedi religion were portrayed as correct, the institutionalized Jedi Order and some of the Jedi rules in place during the Prequel era were open to critique, like the ban on romantic relationships. In the old EU the authors were more inclined to make a distinction between healthy and unhealthy romantic relationships, suggesting that healthy romantic relationships were not impossible for a Jedi to maintain, while unhealthy ones — like Anakin and Padmé’s relationship — were wrong. This is an approach to the Jedi, their philosophy, and their rules that I agree with, as opposed to Lucas’ own interpretation.
It’s not a matter of it being “hard to believe”. I don’t like it. You can’t take a character ppl love, take away from some of what they loved about him and expect ppl to be cool with it.
I completely understand where you are coming from, and I respect your love for the way Darth Vader is portrayed in the Original Trilogy. However, I think it is unrealistic to expect him to be as agile as he was before he got the suit, especially after everything that happened to him in Revenge of the Sith. As I have already said, the guy had both of his legs and one of his arms cut off, and then he was left to burn alive for hours before Palpatine arrived on Mustafar to save what little was left of him. After going through all that, it wouldn’t make sense for him to move with the same speed or agility. However, his physical limitations are part of what makes him so intimidating, at least in my opinion. The fact that he can still fight with such ferocity despite those injuries shows how powerful he really is. Even though his mobility has been reduced compared to his younger self, he has learned to adapt. He is no longer the fast, acrobatic duelist he was as Anakin, but now he is this unstoppable force who fights with pure power and precision. His strikes are heavy and deliberate, and that makes him terrifying in a different way. So, I think that his reduced mobility actually makes him even more intimidating. And let’s be honest, just looking at the suit, it is clear that it is heavy and uncomfortable. It is not the kind of thing anyone would want to live inside, much less fight in. You can tell right away that it would restrict his movements. But that only adds to the character in my opinion, because despite the fact that the suit looks cumbersome, Vader still manages to dominate his enemies. It is part of what makes him so menacing — he is pushing through immense physical pain and limitations, yet he is still one of the most dangerous beings in the galaxy. That’s what makes him powerful, even if he is not as agile as he once was.
Making the Jedi corrupt means there’s no good role model. That’s the role Obi-Wan and Yoda have in the OT; they’re the good mentors leading Luke to the enlightened path. You need that in a story that, while for everyone, children should be able to follow, unlike The Godfather, clearly for adults.
I understand your perspective, but I don’t think the Jedi need to be perfect to be role models. In fact, showing their flaws makes the story more relatable. The idea that “everything was perfect until Anakin and Palpatine destroyed it all” is way too simplistic, because life is not that black and white. People and institutions, even well-meaning ones like the Jedi, can make mistakes, and those mistakes can have serious consequences. A Republic that has lasted for thousands of years does not collapse simply because a guy with a bad childhood and an evil sorcerer decide to team up. Things are not that simple, and it is wrong to portray them so simplistically. There is a reason why people these days don’t appreciate simple fairy tales as much as they used to, and that’s because real life doesn’t work like fairy tales, and people don’t like simplistic stories anymore. There is a difference between trying to be positive and spread a good message and writing unrealistic stories where the good guys are perfect and the bad guys are basically demons with no soul. Furthermore, what makes Obi-Wan and Yoda compelling mentors is not that they are flawless, but that they learn from their failures. They are still guiding Luke toward a better path despite the mistakes the Jedi Order made in the past.
While the films don’t explicitly state that Vader’s suit made him weaker compared to his younger self, the idea isn’t hard to believe.
After his battle on Mustafar, Vader suffered catastrophic injuries — losing his arms, legs, and being severely burned. In Revenge of the Sith, we see that the process of placing him into the suit involved a highly invasive and complex surgical procedure. Furthermore, when Vader first stands up, we can clearly see that he struggles with basic movement and has difficulty walking. This strongly suggests that the suit restricts his mobility, preventing him from being as agile or physically capable as he was before the suit. Vader’s menacing appearance in the suit may give the impression that he is all-powerful, but this doesn’t necessarily mean he’s the most dominant force in the galaxy. Often, things that appear imposing or invincible aren’t as indestructible as they seem, and Vader’s intimidating presence doesn’t automatically equate to unparalleled strength.
I’ve never had an issue with the fact that the duel between Vader and Obi-Wan in A New Hope feels completely different from their fight on Mustafar. I’ve always chalked it up to external factors, mainly the limitations of special effects at the time, rather than trying to find an in-universe explanation for the contrast between the two duels. The difference never bothered me because I understood it was more about the practical constraints of filmmaking, rather than something that needed to be justified within the story itself.
I will always be grateful to Lucas for creating such an incredible universe and for all the amazing things he contributed to it. Without him, none of this would exist, and for that, I will forever owe him my thanks. However, after Revenge of the Sith, I don’t really care about anything that he largely contributed to. I prefer the Clone Wars Multimedia Project over George’s Clone Wars show; I prefer what we got of the history of the galaxy in the EU over anything Lucas has said concerning how he views the history of the Star Wars universe; I don’t like George’s ideas for the Sequel Trilogy, as opposed to stories like the Thrawn Trilogy and the New Jedi Order series. In general, I find myself more drawn to what other creators have contributed to the Star Wars universe, rather than the later works that Lucas himself had a hand in.
I will say that the Darth Plagueis book does a magnificent job of turning the prequels into a coherent setting where almost everything does actually make sense in context, but that’s just the issue, it takes an entire extra book’s worth of context. People that have read that book are going to retroactively imagine details in the movies that were never there and were not explained at all.
I said it before, I will say it again. The Prequels are a really good story if you take the time to explain everything in detail. But three movies are not enough to explain everything that needs to be explained in detail, and the Prequels should have never been movies in the first place. The Prequels should have been either a long, live action TV series (4+ seasons), or an Expanded Universe multimedia project of books, comics and video games that are interconnected to each other, something along the lines of the Clone Wars Multimedia Project that existed in real life, but including the main story of the movies too. The problem is not the story that Lucas was trying to convey to the audience, but rather the fact that the story is not suitable to be portrayed in three movies. The story is way too complex and contains a lot of information. Three movies are not enough.
I think the problem was the story he was trying to convey, or at least the details of the story. The extra details that fleshed it out and made it make sense came later from other people doing their own interpretations, and those extra details didn’t exist at the time. There essentially was an EU multimedia project, just not all at once. But there shouldn’t have to be. It’s a movie series that exists to be watched as movies, and it’s unreasonable (especially in 1999-2005) to expect everyone to invest time, money, and energy into puzzling together your story for you like homework. You have almost 7 full hours of screentime, plus the direct exposition from opening crawls. So much of that is wasted, or in the case of the “taxation of trade routes” thing we’re talking about, actively makes it less clear.
I think that you missed the point of what I was trying to say, though. I didn’t say that you are required to spend money and time reading and experiencing EU stories to fill in the gaps, I said that the Prequels should have been conceived as an integral part of the EU from the very beginning. We shouldn’t have Prequel movies, we should only have Prequel books, comics and video games, and possibly a TV show. This is the only way to preserve the core elements of the story that Lucas was trying to convey, while simultaneously expanding them, exploring the overall setting, locations and characters in detail, and making everything feel more believable. The Original Trilogy is able to stand on its own, because it is a simple adventure, a classical hero’s journey that doesn’t require a very complex world-building. But Anakin’s story from his childhood to his transformation into Darth Vader? The Clone Wars? Palpatine’s rise to power? Nah, these are all things that necessarily require a complex story, a lot of world-building and a lot of explanations, all of which are not feasible for three movies, unless you end up making movies of 6 hours each.
I will say that the Darth Plagueis book does a magnificent job of turning the prequels into a coherent setting where almost everything does actually make sense in context, but that’s just the issue, it takes an entire extra book’s worth of context. People that have read that book are going to retroactively imagine details in the movies that were never there and were not explained at all.
I said it before, I will say it again. The Prequels are a really good story if you take the time to explain everything in detail. But three movies are not enough to explain everything that needs to be explained in detail, and the Prequels should have never been movies in the first place. The Prequels should have been either a long, live action TV series (4+ seasons), or an Expanded Universe multimedia project of books, comics and video games that are interconnected to each other, something along the lines of the Clone Wars Multimedia Project that existed in real life, but including the main story of the movies too. The problem is not the story that Lucas was trying to convey to the audience, but rather the fact that the story is not suitable to be portrayed in three movies. The story is way too complex and contains a lot of information. Three movies are not enough.
I’m just happy you’re not citing Erich Von Däniken’s legitimately racist garbage.
I didn’t cite him because I don’t support the Ancient Astronaut Theory. I have explained my general opinion about the UFO phenomenon in an extremely detailed post I have published in this same thread. To put it short, I think that some UFOs might be extraterrestrial spacecraft, but I don’t support the Roswell/Majestic-12/Area51 mythology, and I don’t support the Ancient Astronaut Theory. The entire Roswell/Majestic-12/Area51 mythology was created in the 1980s by two admitted disinformation agents, William Moore and Richard Doty, who worked for the Air Force and were entrusted with the task of spreading false stories within the UFO community in order to intoxicate it, while the Ancient Astronaut Theory was created by people who don’t understand anything about ancient history (Erich Von Däniken, Zacharia Sitchin and others).