Spartacus01

I like the addition of the “NOOOO!” at the end of ROTJ.

Personally, I don’t mind that they discarded Lucas’ ideas for the Sequel Trilogy, because I wasn’t a fan of his concepts anyway. What really bothers me, though, is that they threw out his ideas only to come up with something even worse. If they had rejected his vision but delivered a solid, well-crafted trilogy, I wouldn’t have had any complaints. Unfortunately, they chose to abandon his plans just to create something that manages to be even more disappointing than what he originally envisioned.

There was no question about the EU. Shame on you.

I do not blame Filoni for the discrepancies between The Clone Wars and the Clone Wars Multimedia Project. However, I do believe that spending too much time around George Lucas may have negatively influenced him.

Initially, Filoni wanted to tell a completely different story, centered on an entirely original cast of characters who would embark on adventures at the edges of the galaxy, far removed from major figures like Anakin and Obi-Wan. He did not want to heavily involve the main characters because, at the start, he cared about continuity and sought to avoid contradicting the Republic comics and other materials from the Multimedia Project. However, it seems George Lucas was not fond of this idea and insisted that the series focus on the main characters from the films, which inevitably led to contradictions with the previously published material. So, I do not blame Filoni for these inconsistencies, because in the beginning, he wanted to create an entirely new story and genuinely tried to respect the existing Canon.

That said, I am also convinced that over time, being in close proximity to George Lucas altered his perception of the franchise. While he initially seemed interested in preserving continuity and avoiding major contradictions, spending so much time with someone who famously stated that “continuity is for wimps” must have changed the way he views Star Wars. It turned him into someone who, much like his mentor, has little regard for maintaining consistency within the universe, which explains his disregard for any previously established continuity (weather it is Legends or Canon) in subsequent years.

Omni said:

A film should work within itself regardless of what Episode it is or something. ROTS is quite competent at establishing their relationship and what is it that falls apart - ditto for Anakin!s relationship to Padmé. Not a surprise it was reviewed more positively than all other Lucas SW films upon release - with the exception of the original.

Absolutely, I completely agree. The chase scene in Attack of the Clones, as well as the entire opening act of Revenge of the Sith, are completely dedicated to showing positive interactions between Anakin and Obi-Wan. I too think they could have included more moments like these, but some people act as if the two were constantly at odds throughout the Prequel Trilogy and never had any positive interaction — which just isn’t true. In the first half of Revenge of the Sith, they share plenty of good moments. Even when Obi-Wan tells Anakin that the Council has asked him to spy on Palpatine, he doesn’t blame him for anything and even apologizes to him later.

I have updated my personal Canon once again. After several months, I have moved away from being a strict Legends purist and have decided to include what I consider the best material from Disney’s New Canon. Additionally, I have removed stories I never truly cared about to streamline my collection. Here’s my revised personal Canon:

• Dawn of the Jedi (comics)
• Tales of the Jedi (comics)
• Knights of the Old Republic (comics)
• Knights of the Old Republic I
• The Old Republic: Revan (novel)
• Knights of the Old Republic II
• The Old Republic: Deceived (novel)
• The Old Republic (comics)
• The Old Republic: Return (cinematic trailer)
• The Old Republic: Hope (cinematic trailer)
• The Old Republic: Deceived (cinematic trailer)
• The Old Republic (original game)
• The Darth Bane Trilogy
• Darth Plagueis (novel)
• Jedi Apprentice (series)
• Republic comics (from issue 1 to 6)
• Cloak of Deception
• Episode I: The Phantom Menace
• Bounty Hunter (video game)
• Jango Fett: Open Seasons
• Republic comics (from issue 7 to 49)
• Jedi Quest (series)
• The Approaching Storm
• Episode II: Attack of the Clones
• Republic Commando (video game)
• The Clone Wars (2002 video game)
• Republic comics (from issue 50 to 83)
• The Cestus Deception
• Star Wars: Jedi (comic series)
• Shatterpoint
• The MedStar Duology
• Secrets of the Jedi
• General Grievous (comics)
• Obsession (comics)
• Jedi Trial
• Yoda: Dark Rendezvous
• Star Wars: Brothers in Arms
• Labyrinth of Evil
• Episode III: Revenge of the Sith
• Dark Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader
• Kenobi (novel)
• Star Wars: Purge (comic series)
• Star Wars: Dark Times (series)
• Darth Vader and the Lost Command
• Darth Vader and the Ghost Prison
• Darth Vader and the Ninth Assassin
• Darth Vader and the Cry of Shadows
• Star Wars: Andor
• Star Wars: Extinction (comics)
• Star Wars: Empire (comic series)
• Rogue One: A Star Wars Story
• Episode IV: A New Hope
• Star Wars: Rebellion (comic series)
• Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back
• Shadows of the Empire
• Episode VI: Return of the Jedi

My personal timeline concludes decisively with Return of the Jedi, which I believe provides the ultimate resolution to the Saga, tying together themes of redemption, hope, and the restoration of balance to the Force. I used to think differently in the past, but over time, I have come to realize that Return of the Jedi is such a powerful and satisfying ending that nothing should happen after it, as any continuation would risk undermining the emotional and narrative finality that the movie achieves. Furthermore, despite my strong preference for the original Expanded Universe, I made the deliberate choice to include Andor and Rogue One in my timeline. Andor impressed me with its mature storytelling and complex exploration of the Rebel Alliance, offering a grounded perspective on the galaxy’s struggles. Similarly, Rogue One complements the Original Trilogy beautifully, providing a heroic and tragic lead-in to A New Hope. Both feel worthy of inclusion, because they respect the spirit of Star Wars while adding depth in meaningful ways. Lastly, my timeline includes some of the deleted scenes from Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith; however, I am quite selective with the deleted scenes I choose to include. In fact, even though there are some deleted scenes I genuinely appreciate — such as the one where Anakin and Padmé have dinner at her parents’ house, or the various moments where Padmé discusses with the other senators the possibility of forming a rebellion against Palpatine’s rule — there are also deleted scenes I find either unnecessary or outright bad — such as the scene where General Grievous kills Shaak Ti, or the one where Obi-Wan has the Kaminoan poison dart analyzed by one of the Jedi Temple droids. For this reason, I include some of the deleted scenes from Episodes II and III, but not all of them. As a final footnote, I kind of pretend that the scene where Anakin confesses his massacre of the Tusken raiders does not exist.

Channel72 said:

ESB, you have Luke fighting the man who killed his father (or so he believes), and in ROTJ you have a son fighting his own father.

However, it should also be pointed out that Luke did not interact with Vader at all in The Empire Strikes Back, nor did Vader have any particularly special relationship with Luke up to that point. The only thing Vader knew about Luke was that he was his son, but the two had no meaningful connection, and prior to that duel, Luke had never even spoken to him. Therefore, all the tension in that duel exists solely because you, the viewer, imagine what the two of them might be feeling in that moment. Which is essentially the same as imagining Anakin and Obi-Wan having more positive interactions off-screen compared to the ones that were actually shown in Attack of the Clones.

Channel72 said:

CGI lava effects

The lava was not created using CGI. Footage was taken from Mount Etna — a real volcano located in Sicily, Italy — and then composited into the background. The only CGI related to the lava involved the instances where it rains down just a few inches away from them. Otherwise, the scenes used real footage of Mount Etna. Furthermore, there are not many alternative ways to simulate such a scenario other than CGI and real imagery pasted in the background, as there are not exactly many practical effects capable of convincingly simulating lava, and it is not like you can start throwing real lava at the actors.

ken-obi said:

Stardust1138 said:

ken-obi said:

Firstly, if people enjoy the Prequel films then all power to them. It is pleasing that some people enjoyed these films. A younger generation of fans have now come through online: and the young kids who enjoyed them at the time are now grown up and want to talk about them and why they enjoyed them. Good for them.
 

But for those of us that didn’t enjoy them:

George seemed to forget the golden rule of making movies with the Prequels:

Show. Don’t tell.
 

Show: George should have done was delivered on what he promised - the story of a great man and his fall into darkness. Although The Phantom Menace is probably the best of the three films, but it served little purpose in the greater narrative. He could have centered the first two films on an intelligent, thoughtful but conflicted Jedi who was lured to the Dark Side. The third film would have then chronicled the crusade of a tortured, Vader who traveled the galaxy hunting down the remaining Jedi.

But instead George gave us something very different - the adventures of an annoying hot-shot child who got lucky in a repeat of a space battle seen twice before in previous Star Wars movies, who then started a toxic controlling relationship with the mother of Luke and Leia, and somehow inexplicably morphed into Vader. George also gave the audience countless contradictions to what had already been explained and established in the previous Original films.

When you consider what could have been, and probably should have been, it is difficult not to feel letdown. Disappointed. Frustrated. In need of a good Fan Edit or 50! 😃
 

Don’t Tell: Since the backlash on the Prequel films George, Lucasfilm and many Prequel fans has spent considerable time and effort to explain why the Prequel films were what they were, and that people who didn’t like them just didn’t understand them, or that in not liking the films they were being mean to him. Mental gymnastics is required to take George at his word, And that is a problem in itself - George had the opportunity to show us the films he later espoused about, but he didn’t. The quality, the heart, the thrill, the story, the talent, all in abundance in the Originals, just wasn’t there for the Prequels. The later explanations and attempts at reasoning why the Prequels weren’t widely liked mean little to the people who paid their ticket money on these much hyped and publicized films at the time, sat down to watch them, and left disappointed. Or people who just plain didn’t like them or thought they were “merely okay”. Or just don’t want to watch them again.
 

Licensed books, animated and live actions series trying to explain the contradictions and plot holes between the two trilogies really only serve to remind people how poor, lazy and incoherent the Prequel films were. Selective interviews from George with friendly journalists and pre-approved questions, more retcons, extensive PR campaigns, videos, blogs, articles - all trying to justify, explain, or give some reason why the Prequels were better than we think or remember, or that we just didn’t understand them - all fail in their purpose: to get more people to watch, like and appreciate these films.

Why would George and others who champion the Prequels think people who didn’t enjoy these films want to read articles and watch videos and so on, or have it explained to them they were somehow wrong not to like these films? Or that they didn’t understand them? It seems a waste of time and effort to me, and yes, we understood them perfectly fine, thank you. George would probably have more respect from fans if he was more honest, about his own shortcomings in approaching the Prequels and the films themselves. Answer the tough and hard questions, not avoid them. Sometimes films don’t work out - not every film is going to be a smash and that is okay. It is also okay to say you “got it wrong” or could have done it differently. Many of us would rather find other Star Wars content to enjoy, whether new games, books, comics series and films.

Enjoy what you like. Leave what you don’t enjoy behind.

There’s a great documentary about this from History Channel. It’s just the Prequels tend to get more unfairly treated because the media tended to propel the backlash to continue as they attacked Ahmed Best, Jake Lloyd, Hayden Christensen, Natalie Portman, and Rick McCallum. They attacked George too. Why would they want to listen to people who are going to accuse them of being racists, poor actors, yes men, or out of touch mainly deprived from not giving fans what they want? You get nothing from attacking people personally. Instead that’s exactly what happened and still does with a different group. George did listen to critics but he also recognised most were circlejerking around the ideas of things that just weren’t true about him or his colleagues. Most critics tend to view the films from the view of what they wish had happened in the films versus the actual stories and understanding them for what they are. An artist is equally not obligated to tell you their intentions. Andrei Tarkovsky or even Stanley Kubrick never explained themselves. George doesn’t need to either.

“Many don’t understand the Prequels and even Original Trilogy for that matter.”

“racists, poor actors, yes men, or out of touch mainly deprived from not giving fans what they want? You get nothing from attacking people personally”, and “most critics were circlejerking”

WTF? I just don’t like the films. Like I said before many people just don’t like them too, and has nothing to do with what you listed above.

“Most critics tend to view the films from the view of what they wish had happened in the films versus the actual stories and understanding them for what they are.”

No, they don’t. Critics may offer possibilities and alternative scenarios sometime after - but they can also understand the actual films for what they are.

“Andrei Tarkovsky or even Stanley Kubrick never explained themselves. George doesn’t need to either.”

I completely agree, and said before George “doesn’t need to”, yet George continues to attempt to explain them, retcon them, and bridge them so many years afterwards? Again, show - don’t tell.

"What matters I think though is you try understanding the author’s intentions and how successfully they achieved what they set out to do." and “at least give things a chance from the filmmaker’s prospective instead of brushing them off off and thinking only about what you thought could’ve been better”

No. What matters is people making their own mind up if they enjoyed watching a series of films or not. Again, show - don’t tell.

If people decided they did not enjoy them, they do not need to be labelled or associated with, as you did above, as being inferior minded people, accusers of others being racist, people who personally attack others, or are people who don’t understand the Prequels, or other films. Yes, a minority of those toxic fans exist, but they do not speak for the vast majority of those who simply did not enjoy the Prequel Films. A running theme with your posts is that if people critique the Prequel films (or George) then they somehow do not understand them. So there is no point in continuing this discussion with you.

I am happy you and others do enjoy these films, but the many that didn’t enjoy the Prequels certainly don’t need lectures on how we just “don’t understand them”.

 

SparkySywer said:

Really, I just can’t understand why Revenge of the Sith is considered by anyone to be some operatic masterpiece. The only good qualities it has comes from depicting the interesting events ANH describes, but even then it butchers them. It’s really just an uncompelling story, shot and directed as blandly as possible, with a healthy helping of bloat and a completely tangential VFX reel every 15 or so minutes to make sure you don’t fall asleep.

Fanedits of Revenge of the Sith that cut out the cheese and the bloat completely fail for me because once you cut that out, the movie has very little left.

I agree for the most part of that, especially when depicting the events that are described in the original film (that don’t contradict it). It does feel at times that the filmmakers wanted it to be over and done with, and as long as “the boxes were ticked” it was somehow “good enough”. It seemed very flat and uninspiring, and not at all what you expect for the climax of the final Prequel film.
 

JadedSkywalker said:

Star Wars was from the Adventures of Luke Skywalker. It was about him and he was the main character. Darth Vader wasn’t his father, and there was no long planned out saga of Darth Vader. Vader was Tarkin’s henchmen. With the first film obviously, then Lucas started rewriting from Empire on.

Lucas made it all up as he went. Its very clear he only started writing the prequels in 1994. He never bothered to watch the original movies again to keep continuity.

It certainly appeared that way given the many contradictions, and the mental gymnastics required to even to attempt to make some them more coherent, in the Prequels.

I think you have partially misinterpreted my views on this subject. Yes, some of Anakin’s reactions in the Prequel Trilogy do come off as exaggerated — even over-the-top, especially in Attack of the Clones. There are moments where he should use more restraint, and I do think that some of his reactions should be toned down. I will not deny that; in fact, in the Prequel edits I am planning to create, I intend to remove certain moments that are simply too over-the-top. However, I still believe it is fitting for Anakin to be more emotionally expressive in the Prequels than he is in the Original Trilogy. Anakin’s heightened expressiveness does not feel out of character to me. After all, he is still young, still learning to navigate his immense power and the emotions that come with being the Chosen One. So, while I plan to moderate some of his more exaggerated reactions in these fan edits, I also intend to keep his character a bit more openly expressive than Vader in the Original Trilogy. This intensity — even if occasionally dramatic — reflects his inner conflicts.

As you pointed out, in the Original Trilogy we can certainly see Darth Vader as a character who appears far more controlled and repressive. I will not deny that. (Just to be clear, when I asked you to give me some examples, I was not trying to be sarcastic. I genuinely wanted you to give me some examples, because I did notremember them.) Yet, there are still moments in which the Original Trilogy’s Vader recalls that same passionate Anakin from the Prequels. For instance, in A New Hope, when Vader captures Leia and accuses her of being a spy and a traitor. His line, “You are part of the Rebel Alliance and a traitor. Take her away!” has a fierceness that feels very much like Prequel-era Anakin, revealing the passionate core that has always been a part of him. Both trilogies show these two sides of Anakin’s character — his struggle to suppress his emotions and his inability to do so at times. In the Prequels, while he may seem overly expressive, there are also instances where he tries to hold back. Take, for example, when he tells Padmé, “Jedi do not have nightmares.” In this moment, he is suppressing his vulnerability, trying to project the calm and control that a Jedi should embody. And I have not watched the films in quite some time, but I am certain there are other moments in the Original Trilogy where Vader’s reactions are similarly spontaneous, as well as other moments in the Prequel Trilogy where Anakin tries to deny his own emotions.

In my opinion, both of these aspects — sometimes repressing his emotions, sometimes failing to contain them — are part of Anakin’s character arc. It would be unrealistic to expect him to behave consistently in one way across every situation, especially given the intense, conflicting pressures he faces. So yes, while I do plan to reduce some of Anakin’s more exaggerated reactions in my fan edits, I believe his expressive nature as a young man adds depth to his character. It shows us the raw conflict within him — a conflict that defines both Anakin and Vader in different ways across the trilogies.

PS: I apologize if my previous response was brief and did not address all your points as thoroughly as this one. Last time, I responded a bit too quickly and without much thought. I tend to fixate on certain things, and having unread messages or unresolved responses really bothers me. So sometimes, just to ease that feeling, I end up sending answers that are not fully thought-out, simply to get it off my chest.

Z6PO said:

Spartacus01 said:

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.

But the phone call that follows, even if it’s a time paradox, is an unfortunate racist joke. That short scene could have been left on the cutting room floor and the movie would not have been changed at all (besides being slightly less racist).

Why is it a racist joke?

G&G-Fan said:

Anakin in fact should be expressive, but also have a tendency to repress his emotions in distress, forming a cold persona. This doesn’t mean he can never fly off the handle either. He goes cold because he cares too much.
As I’ve noted, this is shown in the OT. Vader regresses into his cold persona immediately after he admits something vulnerable or Luke says something that gets to him. In Anakin’s death scene, now having abandoned the dark side, we see he is very caring and sentimental.

In the Prequel Trilogy, Anakin was in his early 20s, while in the Original Trilogy he was in his early 40s. It is natural that his behavior and mannerisms would have changed over time. Twenty years separate the events of these two trilogies, and it is uncommon for individuals to retain the same attitudes and ways of behaving in their 20s as in their 40s. This is especially true in Anakin’s case, given that he fell to the Dark Side and became a Sith Lord. It is entirely realistic for a person to evolve over such a span of time. Thus, Anakin’s transformation reflects both the natural passage of years and the profound personal experiences he underwent in his journey from Jedi Knight to Darth Vader. Furthermore, I do not remember any particular instance where Vader represses his emotions in front of Luke. Could you provide some examples?

I feel like a lot of you are a cheating. If we are talking about a complete reboot, then it means that you have to imagine ideas to reboot every film. To say that “The Original Trilogy should not be remade” is cheating. Otherwise, this thread would be called “How would you handle a hard reboot of the Prequels and the Sequels.”

Do you remember the alien from the first Men in Black movie? The one that was killed by k at the beginning of the movie? I think his name was Mikey. Well, the Gungans should have been portrayed with that appearance.

One thing that I think should be eliminated from Revenge of the Sith is Anakin’s hesitation after the so-called “Padmé’s ruminations” scene.

in my opinion, the moment when Anakin truly decides where his loyalties lie should be when we see him crying while standing in front of the window in the Jedi Council chambers. His tears should symbolize his decision. He cries because he already knows what he is going to do, and he understands that it’s wrong, but he has made up his mind, and there’s no going back. He has chosen to side with the Sith, and even though it pains him, it’s the path he has committed to. Because of this, all the hesitation Anakin displays when he arrives in Palpatine’s office and sees Mace Windu fighting him should be removed. The only dialogue from Anakin that would be necessary to keep are the moment when he says he needs Palpatine, and the moment where he cuts off Mace Windu’s hand with his lightsaber. Additionally, the line where Anakin says, “What have I done?” should be cut, as it contradicts the idea that he had already made his decision beforehand.

Do you guys think it would be possible to implement these edits?

G&G-Fan said:

Something that’s insane to me is that Lucas when making the Prequels’ attitude towards Darth Vader. He spends the entire trilogy neutering the hell out of him, telling us he was a brat and that his iconic badass suit was actually hampering him (which doesn’t make any sense with how he established the Force to work), and even making him pathetically whine “Nooo!” like a cartoon. He doesn’t do this to any other villain. But at the same time, he gave into how much of a sensation Vader is by plastering him all over the advertising and making the entire saga surround him. It’s like he wanted to have his cake and eat it too. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a creator have such a contradictory mindset about a character.

Don’t take this the wrong way, but I think that your argument is not logical. In my opinion, it is influenced more by your strong attachment to Vader as a character, and by the fact that you want him to always be portrayed as cool and badass, rather than by a rational analysis of the broader narrative and character development that the story is trying to achieve.

To expect a character like Anakin to be consistently badass throughout the Prequel Trilogy is, frankly, an overly simplistic expectation. Characters with depth experience growth, regression, and internal conflict. Anakin was never supposed to be flawless or permanently in control. His youthful arrogance and emotional volatility were central to his character development, showing how his eventual descent into the Dark Side was driven by personal flaws, fears, and the manipulations of others. The fact that his iconic suit was portrayed as limiting is a reflection of how far he had fallen — once a powerful Jedi, he was now imprisoned in a life-support system due to his own choices and actions. This is not a contradiction of the way in which the Force was portrayed in the Original Trilogy, but rather a symbolic representation of how his anger and fear led to his own destruction. Also, this type of criticism is not new. In fact, very similar arguments were made when Lucas released Return of the Jedi. Many fans at the time felt that Lucas had weakened Vader by introducing the internal conflict between his role as a Dark Lord and his role as a father. Some felt that his redemption arc made him appear less intimidating, as they had only known him as the menacing figure from the first two films of the Original Trilogy. However, over time, this portrayal of Vader as a conflicted character struggling with his humanity became central to what makes him so compelling.

The idea that Lucas simultaneously “plastered” Vader all over the advertising while exploring his vulnerability does not seem contradictory to me. Vader was always meant to be a central figure, and his popularity as an icon is undeniable. However, being an iconic villain does not mean that the character should be static or devoid of complexity. Lucas’ decision to show Anakin’s flaws and weaknesses was not about diminishing the character, but about showing the human side of him — one that eventually succumbs to darkness. I find that labeling this as Lucas trying to “have his cake and eat it too” oversimplifies what he was attempting to achieve with these films. Characters are not meant to be eternally unchanging symbols of strength. Anakin’s journey was always intended to be a tragic one, and part of that tragedy lies in the fact that he was not always the infallible, imposing figure fans initially saw in the Original Trilogy. Ultimately, the Prequels show that even someone with incredible power can be brought low by their own decisions, insecurities, and inability to control their emotions. To me, this nuanced portrayal enriches Anakin’s character, rather than diminishing him.

Of course, it is undeniable that Lucas went too far with certain aspects of Anakin’s portrayal in the Prequel Trilogy, and is absolutely true that there are moments, particularly in Attack of the Clones, where Anakin’s character should have been toned down. However, despite these missteps, I still believe it is right that the younger version of Vader is shown with flaws and vulnerabilities. Anakin should not have been the same badass figure that we see in the Original Trilogy because his journey was one of growth — and ultimately failure. It makes sense that, as a younger man, he would be reckless, emotionally unstable, and struggling with his identity. These traits serve as the foundation for his fall to the Dark Side, which is the very heart of his arc. Anakin was, after all, human. It is fair that he should have weaknesses, especially in his youth, when he is still grappling with the immense pressures placed upon him by the Jedi, his own ambitions, and the temptations of the Dark Side. His insecurities and fear of loss are what drive him to make the choices that eventually transform him into Darth Vader. To portray him as badass or already as imposing as he is in the Original Trilogy would have undermined the depth of his character and the story Lucas wanted to tell.

In the end, I think that the decision to show Anakin as a deeply flawed young man, despite some over-the-top moments, makes sense for his character’s progression. It allows us to understand the gravity of his transformation into the Dark Lord we all know, and it gives us insight into the personal weaknesses that the Dark Side preys upon. On the other hand, it seems like you want the young version of Vader to be portrayed exactly like Vader in The Empire Strikes Back, with the only difference being that he is more good-natured. But this is not retroactive character development — this is simply depicting the same character in the exact same way, with a few minor alterations.

Between Anakin and Padmé, I think Padmé was the dominant one in bed. ;p

This thread is similar to the Out of Context Thread. However, unlike the other thread, in this thread you can post random quotes that come from any possible source, weather it is a book, comic, article, TV show, movie or whatever. Though, you need to post the source of your quotes.

Channel72 said:

People often assume that critics of the AoTC love story performances want Anakin to be all suave like Han Solo, and deliver polished, teen-heartthrob romance dialogue. But nobody really wants that. We’re fine with Anakin being slightly awkward. Luke was awkward and whiny and acted stupid as well. That’s fine. What we really want is for Anakin to not come off so much like a creepy asshole. At one point Anakin actually channels Malcolm McDowell from Clockwork Orange as he Kubrick-stares at Padme while grinning, prompting her to say she feels uncomfortable. Anakin can be really clunky and awkward, but he shouldn’t be creepy and grating to the point that I am physically compelled to want to skip all those romance scenes.

I understand your point, but I have one objection. Yes, in that specific scene, Anakin does have a rather creepy expression. However, I don’t think it’s anyone’s fault — neither George Lucas’ nor Hayden Christensen’s. Hayden has distinctive facial features, and every time he tries to pull off a smug look, it comes across as a bit creepy. This happens in other films he’s been in as well. It’s just a feature of his face, and you can’t really blame anyone for that. Unfortunately, there’s no way to cleanly remove this from the film without disrupting the flow of the scene. Every attempt at fan editing to fix this ends up feeling incomplete, and you immediately realize that the scene has been cut, because the transition between that scene and the next scene doesn’t feel natural.

The worst thing is that nothing happens in AOTC that really explains why Padme even likes this guy. I guess she feels bad about his mom or something, but you’d think any sympathy she had would dissipate after finding out he committed mass murder.

In my edited version of the film, I kept the scene where Anakin carries out the massacre, but I eliminated the scene where he confesses it to Padmé. This way, you can assume that Anakin didn’t kill the women and children, only the men. Plus, Padmé wouldn’t know about it either, making her reaction in Revenge of the Sith — when she finds out he killed younglings in the Temple — feel more natural and believable. In any case, I believe that if they wanted to include a scene in which Anakin confesses to having carried out the massacre, then he should have talked about it with Palpatine, and Palpatine should have strengthened Anakin’s beliefs by saying that he had done nothing wrong, and that revenge is a natural thing.

G&G-Fan said:

I’ve been recently rewatching (and enjoying) 30s monster movies (Frankenstein & Bride, The Invisible Man, etc.) I can say 100% that the romance scenes are never as cheesy as the AOTC ones. Sometimes it’s a bit on-the-nose, but it’s charming rather then grating (tho I will say, the romance in The Wolf Man hasn’t aged well, due to the social conventions of the time).

The performances play a part of it too. Claude Rains eats up his power-hungry monologues as Jack Griffin as much as James Earl Jones does as Darth Vader OT, and his scenes with Gloria Stuart are flowery but charming. Both Rains and Stuart were theatre actors, and thus knew how to pull off compelling melodrama. Same with Colin Clive as Henry Frankenstein and the two actresses that played Elizabeth.
Meanwhile, it feels like Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman are uncomfortable with the dialogue. They’re not experienced with that theatre melodrama, so it’s just awkward.
It’s also why Ian McDiarmid and Christoper Lee fare better with their material. McDiarmid is a theatre actor and Lee was basically reprising his role as Dracula.

The problem with the love story in Attack of the Clones is that they removed a lot of scenes where the dialogue and performances were far more natural, and kept scenes that add absolutely nothing to the development of the relationship. For example, if they had replaced the balcony scene by the lake on Naboo with the dinner scene at Padmé’s parents’ house, and had trimmed some of Anakin’s awkward dialogue, it would have worked much better. The romance would come across as more natural and believable with just a few small adjustments. Unfortunately, they made a lot of mistakes in the editing of the film. They cut scenes that would have helped the love story feel more organic and kept others that serve no purpose, which is why the romance feels so rushed and unnatural.

It makes sense that Anakin is a bit awkward and does not know how to be charming. After all, Anakin is a Jedi, and flirting with girls is not exactly part of Jedi training. It is not surprising that he would not have the smooth, confident demeanor of someone like Han Solo, because his life has been focused on discipline, duty, and developing his abilities — not on romantic relationships. Padmé is inexperienced too. She has not had much time to think about romance or boys, since she devoted herself to politics for most of her teenage years. So, it makes sense that some of their interactions feel a bit awkward. Neither of them knows exactly how to navigate the situation. But the awkwardness should not be overdone. There needs to be a balance between the natural awkwardness of two people who are inexperienced in romance and the natural flow of dialogue. This could have been achieved with a few small adjustments, but again, they made mistakes in the editing. They could have found that balance with just a bit of tweaking, but unfortunately, they didn’t, and that’s why some of the scenes feel off.

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.

Servii said:

rocknroll41 said:

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.

Vladius said:

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.

Moviefan2k4 said:

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?