logo Sign In

theprequelsrule

User Group
Members
Join date
2-Jun-2011
Last activity
30-Sep-2023
Posts
899

Post History

Post
#1477005
Topic
Did Lucas forget that Obi Wan served Bail Organa in the Clone Wars ?
Time

Channel72 said:

George Lucas may not have forgotten about Obi Wan serving Bail Organa… he probably just didn’t think that one throwaway line, written at a time when the Jedi backstory was hazy at best, fit with his evolving conception of the Jedi. In fact, that line about Bail Organa is a vestigial remnant of Lucas’s original conception of the Jedi.

That line actually helped form my conception of what the Jedi were like, before the Prequel films came out. But the Jedi turned out to be very different from how I imagined them. That line about serving Leia’s father (Bail Organa), along with Obi-Wan’s recollections to Luke, the use of the word “crusade”, and Kurosawa’s influence on Lucas, suggested to me a Jedi order that was more like some combination of Medieval Knights and Samurai, who served the nobility during the Old Republic. I imagined Obi Wan was in service to the royal family of Alderaan. But I certainly never imagined the Jedi were actually more like celibate Franciscan monks.

The scarce info we get about the Jedi in the OT suggested to me that the Prequel era was something closer to Knights of the Old Republic, with the “high fantasy” element cranked up a bit more than was evident in the militaristic OT era, and the Jedi Knights existing less as a monastic order and more like an elite class of warriors associated with the nobility.

It turns out my conception of the Jedi was very close to the way Lucas originally envisioned them - he imagined them as the personal bodyguards of the emperor, and as an elite group of warriors who were killed off by a rival warrior sect, the “Knights of Sith”. (This is how Lucas describes them in the 1974 draft.) Obviously, Lucas’ conception of the Jedi changed drastically over time. He ultimately made them less “Knights of the Round Table/Samurai” and more “celibate Franciscan monk” for some reason. But that line about Bail Organa is a vestigial remnant of Lucas’s original conception.

All this is correct. Earlier scripts talk about Kenobi commanding “The White Legion” during the Clone Wars.

I mentioned somewhere else that I always envisioned the Jedi to be similar to these guys: https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Imperial_Knight

Honestly, the KOTOR games vision of the Star Wars Universe is second only to the OT, maybe even equal.

Post
#1476496
Topic
The Kenobi <s>Movie</s> Show (Spoilers)
Time

jedi_bendu said:

I agree. With the prospect of duelling Vader again, despite his lines in Star Wars, it feels like Disney are contradicting the original trilogy for fan service. I’m definitely accepting that all of this will happen and am still looking forward to seeing it - I might as well enjoy it! - but I’m getting a strong feeling I may criticise it a lot once it ends.

But why Jedi_bendu? Why support this stuff?

Post
#1476340
Topic
Re-evaluating Revenge of the Sith
Time

Omni said:

Haarspalter said:

I think a lot of goodwill towards ROTS comes from the fans which grew up with the Clone Wars animated series.

I hear this a lot, but I don’t think it’s the case. Most people just really enjoy the movie regardless of the EU. Anecdotally I know more people that like the movie better than the show than the other way around.

So strange, as the characters were so much more likeable in CW then any of the live-action Prequels. And CW is no more juvenile in content than a lot of the antics in those films.

Post
#1476337
Topic
What do you think of The Prequel Trilogy? A general discussion.
Time

I watched TPM for the first time in over a decade a couple of years ago. I was truly astonished at how bad the dialogue was and/or how badly delivered it was. As I have aged it gets worse and I cannot ever see myself watching TPM ever again.

Without hyperbole I feel that 95% of the dialogue is terrible or terribly delivered. Qui-gon and Obi-wan were obviously given direction to play the Jedi as calm…but they come off like robots, Jar Jar is Jar Jar, Jake Lloyd is Jake Lloyd, and Portman seems to think her character is a Jedi - the way she plays it so robotically. God!

Post
#1476332
Topic
Re-evaluating Revenge of the Sith
Time

Fan_edit_fan said:

fmalover said:

I thoroughly enjoyed the lightsaber duel between Obi-Wan and Anakin on Mustafar and still do to this day.

What’s wrong with loosening up and enjoying some spectacle? This is an adventure after all, not some psychological thriller.

Well a spectacle without any feeling to back it up is a boring thing. What may have been “neat” for 2005 audience’s grows stale over time.

Exactly. Apathy towards the characters means apathy as to what they are doing.

Post
#1476312
Topic
What do you think of The Prequel Trilogy? A general discussion.
Time

Channel72 said:

In retrospect, the biggest problem with the Prequels is they’re told in a way that often ignores their own premise. In theory, the most interesting thing about the Prequel story template should be Anakin and the circumstances behind Alec Guinness’ wistful recollections to Luke in ANH. This is a classic “good guy turns bad” story. The problem is that this type of story is very difficult to write convincingly. This type of story was done in the Godfather Part I and also Breaking Bad - but the latter had 6 seasons of television to pull it off, and the Godfather involved a much less extreme transition from good to bad than is required for Anakin, who has to go from Obi-Wan’s good friend to a mass murdering tyrant in only 3 movies.

This is just a REALLY hard story to write convincingly in only 3 movies. It requires a lot of upfront planning of story structure. Yet bizarrely, it seems that Lucas wasn’t even primarily interested in Anakin’s story and the obvious drama that could be mined from it. Instead he wrote Episode 1, which was a meandering side-story that introduced us to the world of the Prequels, but barely connected with the other movies. It seems clear that Lucas didn’t see the “Tragedy of Anakin Skywalker” as the primary reason for writing the Prequels. Rather, Lucas saw the Prequels as more like a general backstory to the OT that showed how the Republic turned into a dictatorship and the Jedi order was destroyed. That could certainly be interesting as a political/military drama if done correctly, but Star Wars movies are generally simple character driven stories. It seems by the time Revenge of the Sith came around, Lucas suddenly realized this saga was supposed to be more about Anakin and less about Palpatine’s crazy schemes to get elected or mysterious clone conspiracies. But by that time, it was virtually impossible to make up for lost time and write a compelling arc for Anakin in only one movie.

Most of all, it’s eternally baffling to me that so much of the Prequels are framed around MYSTERY plots. Episode 1 is about a mysterious hooded figure who operates in the shadows. Episode 2 is a detective story about a conspiracy involving a mysterious clone army created decades ago for unknown reasons. But none of these mysteries are ever really explicitly resolved because ultimately they’re superfluous to the story. More importantly, why would anyone frame a PREQUEL around mystery plots, when we all know how everything turns out? We know the mysterious hooded guy is the Emperor and that all the Jedi die, so why pretend the story is some kind of deep, compelling mystery or political conspiracy thriller? The only reason the Prequels really should exist is because the story of Anakin and his mentor/friend Obi-Wan had the potential to be an amazing character-driven drama and fantasy/sci-fi adventure story.

Very good points, ones I never thought of specifically before. A much better script for all 3 prequels is needed to tell both the fall on The Republic and the fall of Anakin Skywalker simultaneously.

I really thought the whole plot where Palpatine is basically running both the Separatists and The Republic really strained credibility. At least have the reveal that Dooku was a Sith take place in ROTS - make the audience think he is truly a rogue Jedi fighting against a hopelessly corrupt Republic and that The Separatists were actually the good guys.

Also; remember how evil Tarkin and company were in SW77 when they are all sitting around the conference table on the Death Star? Now remember the similar scene on Geonosis, with all those weird comical looking aliens? Creates a completely different feel. The Separatists seemed like a joke.

Post
#1476135
Topic
What do you think of The Prequel Trilogy? A general discussion.
Time

Servii said:

I’ve gone back and forth on the prequels a lot over the years. I have very mixed feelings on them, but they’re fascinating movies to pick apart.

The OT works because it got general audiences invested in its characters. That’s why it caused reactions in the theater like this:

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

Star Wars movies only really work when they’re character-driven, and when you have compelling heroes and villains that stick out in the audience’s minds. There isn’t really an exact formula for how to achieve this, and I think George tried his best to recapture that magic when he made TPM, but failed.

At the start of ANH, R2 and 3PO are our audience proxy characters that we follow, up until we meet Luke, who then becomes the primary POV character. R2 and 3PO have great chemistry as they play off each other, and adults and children alike enjoy their back-and-forth, even after the main POV shifts to Luke. Meanwhile, the film’s plot centers around Leia, and the film does a good job of getting us to sympathize with her plight while also seeing how bold and resilient she is.

In TPM, our initial POV is Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan, who are very stoic and flat, outside of an occasional snarky comment from Obi-Wan. The central character, the Queen, is also very stoic and flat. Then, the role of audience proxy is filled by Jar Jar, which, in theory, isn’t a bad idea, except for the fact that it’s…well, Jar Jar. Unlike the droids, his appeal as a character is to a much narrower demographic.

I think George realized the cast was too stuffy and stoic, so he tried to counterbalance that with Jar Jar and kid Anakin, but the result is that we get two extremes with little balance or chemistry between them. With the OT, the main hero characters had more of a balance between serious and lighthearted, which endeared the audience to them and allowed for people to latch onto those characters and their relationships.

Michael Arndt talked about how satisfying SW77 was because of the brilliant ending. I’m quoting from another website which describes Arndt’s admiration for it:

"…in order for an ending to work, the story has to have from the beginning an effective set of stakes, which Arndt divides into three types—external stakes, i.e. the main conflict that drives the narrative; internal stakes, i.e. the protagonist’s emotional and psychological conflicts; and finally, and most importantly, the philosophical stakes, i.e. the story’s larger moral conflict, expressed as a conflict between the “dominant values” of the world and its “underdog values.” As an example, Arndt uses Star Wars, in which the external stakes are the rebellion’s conflict with the Empire, the internal stakes are Luke’s personal desire to be more than just a moisture farmer and escape Tatooine, and the philosophical stakes are whether the force is real (the underdog values) or whether, as Han says, it’s just “hokey religions and ancient weapons” (the dominant values).

A great ending, then, according to Arndt is one in which (among other things) the underdog philosophical values triumph over the dominant ones. In Star Wars, for example, Luke’s decision to switch off his targeting computer and allow the force to guide him while firing at the Death Star, along with Han’s decision to return and help Luke, confirm the power of the force and represent a victory of the film’s underdog values. In this same moment, the external and internal stakes are also resolved (the rebels win and Luke achieves a personal self-actualization by proving himself a great pilot), which Arndt also emphasizes is important for a powerful ending—the three sets of stakes converge onto one moment and are resolved all together."

It is a tragedy for Star Wars that Mr. Arndt struggled so much with the script that he had to leave the ST.

Contrast the end of SW77 with TPM where dumb luck allows both Jar Jar and Anakin to bring victory to our underdogs. Horrible, horrible writing.

Post
#1476094
Topic
What do you think is the most <em>underrated</em> Star Wars story?
Time

Riquendes said:

Genndy Tartakovsky’s 2003 Clone Wars series.

It is mad, fun, highly stylized, and is canon (before Disney said it wasn’t in 2012, which doesn’t mean much to me). It also feels very Star Wars, despite not being anything like it in that universe before. It is not for all tastes, but that is okay too.

I think Tartakovsky did an awesome job with the series, and is a bit of shame we had to wait until the recent Star Wars: Visions anthology series to see anything this different again.

+1

General Grievous was much more compelling as a villain. And we got introduced to Asaj Ventress.

Post
#1476092
Topic
Ranking the Star Wars films
Time

Current Rankings. Also divided into tiers

Once a Generation Great

  1. Star Wars

Great

  1. Empire Strikes Back

Very Good

  1. Return of the Jedi

Good

none

So-Bad-Its-Good

  1. Solo
  2. Rise of Skywalker

Mediocre

  1. The Force Awakens
  2. The Last Jedi
  3. Rogue One
  4. Revenge of the Sith

Poor

none

Bad

none

Almost Unwatchable

  1. The Phantom Menace

Unwatchable

  1. Attack of the Clones
Post
#1476091
Topic
What do you think of The Prequel Trilogy? A general discussion.
Time

I will again reiterate the fact that we did not get a story that made much sense in terms of Anakin’s fall.

The Jedi Council had grave concerns about training Anakin, yes? So why make him the student of a just-promoted new “Master”? Stupid! Of course it never matters; we get no hint whatsoever that Obi-wan fails to “train him as well as Yoda”. In fact Obi-wan is supportive of Anakin in ROTS all the time - even when the rest of The Order has its doubts.

As many others in this thread have pointed out, Lucas was unconcerned about making the PT and OT makes sense as a whole. He wanted to tell a specific story about how Anakin went to the darkside even if it was not believable and contradicted his original films!

Post
#1475953
Topic
What do you think of The Prequel Trilogy? A general discussion.
Time

BedeHistory731 said:

I know how to do the close readings and find those parallels, but that doesn’t make something good or deep or even important. It’s cool if you see it and want to make those arguments, but that’s not going to stop some people from saying that you’re full of shit or are going way too deep into something that never had this level of thought put into it (outside of post-facto interview statements).

Some of the mental gymnastics people put themselves through to justify some of the questionable plot points in the PT is pretty funny to watch, such as George Lucas wanting the Jedi Order to be unlikeable etc.

Big problem with the prequels: no good villain. Maul should not have died at the end of TPM. Each movie they introduce a new baddie - Maul, then Dooku, then Grievous. No real buildup.

Post
#1475910
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

I defend the use of The Emperor, both in Dark Empire and ROS. I like the idea of this immortal being of pure evil energy as the villain throughout the whole saga. The problem is that there is no set-up or hints given that 'Ol Palpy might still be alive and behind it all in TFA or TLJ. That could have been the surprise in TLJ; it was the reason Luke has been in exile - he sensed Palps was behind what was going on and was looking to track down his location. Wait…is that the explanation Force Ghost Luke gives towards the end of ROS? I forget.

Anyway, it would have been cool if the Falcon comes out of hyperspace at the end of TFA in the middle of a fleet of Imperial-class Star Destroyers instead of finding Luke.

Post
#1475907
Topic
The Kenobi <s>Movie</s> Show (Spoilers)
Time

Servii said:

Realistically, Kenobi could be set exclusively on Tatooine, and I’d have no issues if that was what they did. The problem is that they chose to set so much of Mando and BoBF on Tatooine, also. That was the mistake. People are getting Tatooine fatigue now, right when we’re getting a show where it actually makes sense to have Tatooine.

And Tatooine is supposed to be a backwater, anyway. It’s meant to be the boondocks of the galaxy. It’s important on a meta level, but not in-universe.

Ugh…it made no sense for Han to be on Tatooine in SW77 if it was the home base of Jabba and he had a price on his head. He was obviously supposed to be laying low on a backwater planet. Tatooine is the wild west with Mos Eisley acting the part of a small frontier town.

Everything is relative of course. If Coruscant and the other planets of the Core Worlds are the equivalent of a developed and urbanized first world country on Earth, then a “small frontier town” in the SW Universe might be huge by our real world standards. But the point of it being a backwater gets lost if you show that like the Special Edition, the prequels, and I guess these new series are showing.

Post
#1475851
Topic
What do you think of The Prequel Trilogy? A general discussion.
Time

BedeHistory731 said:

What is there to be said that hasn’t already been said? They’re good movie (TPM) and two crimes against cinema (AOTC and ROTS). This trilogy needed TCW to save it and explain things it couldn’t. A side effect of TCW is that it made ROTS infinitely less enjoyable as a finale to the PT and a finale to TCW.

TROS is very rushed and sloppy, but I’d contend that ROTS is similarly flawed (albeit to a lesser extent in this regard). It’s burdened with telling the PT’s entire arc in most of the movie, suffering from the dilly-dallying in the previous two movies. Also, deciding Anakin’s fall through reshoots is somewhat noticeable in the final product. It’s not super-sloppy, but the whole fall feels like it was scribbled on a napkin.

The accusations of “nostalgia bait” should also apply to the PT after Phantom Menace. That movie had such an excellent aesthetic, largely divorced from anything we’d seen in the OT. The later two movies, however, give in to the baiting/universe shrinkage with characters (the Fett family, Chewbacca, and the Vader suit being the main marketing push of ROTS) and reshaping the aesthetic to be more OT-like (but not slavish OT replicas like the ST). I get wanting to push towards the OT as it got closer timeline-wise, but part of me thinks it was responding to TPM backlash.

The meta reasons for disliking the PT are also there. The creation of the Special Editions, compressing the saga’s timeline, the proliferation of unfunny memes, and how Lucasfilm tried to reframe the entire saga as “The Tragedy of Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader, the chosen one.” When looking at the OT, it makes very little internal sense to interpret it as the continuation of “Vader’s tragedy.” If there is one good thing the ST did (I’d argue it did many), is that it removed the chosen one reframing.

I know there’s been pushback on the idea that George needed other people to reshape his stories to make them better and that he needed to have fewer “yes” men around him (e.g., Rick McCallum). Well, it’s still true. A movie made with a few more passes on the scripts and with a different director (still making George’s story, mind you) would’ve been better than what we got.

When comparing them to the ST, I like the ST more. I simply do. Those movies are incredibly flawed and made by a wretched entertainment conglomerate, but there’s something about them that feels more in tune with the OT (and not in a nostalgia-bait way). TLJ is an excellent piece as a distant epilogue to the OT, much like how TPM is a fantastic distant prologue to the OT (just change it to be 50 years before the OT instead of 30). The Abrams movies are forgettable (but improved with fanedits), but I’ll take forgettable over whatever the later two PT movies were.

I agree with most of what you have written here. The transformation of the saga to The Tragedy of Darth Vader in particular really bothered me. It is really a stretch. But this leads back to my original post that the wrong story is being told. The OT is Luke’s story, and the PT should have been Obi-wan’s. Vader is the thread that ties them together, but it is not his story.

I also agree that Lucase made creative decisions based on what he thought (or people were telling him) the fans wanted more of after TPM. I honestly feel like the Fetts were shoehorned into AOTC. But that movie is a total mess in terms of pacing, motivations etc.

I think Hayden gives a good performance in parts of ROTS.

Qui-gon Jinn was a mistake. His character serves only to delay our exploration of Obi-wan and Anakin’s friendship. This was a rare case of what the films needed and what the fans wanted being in accord.

Really, the PT did not need a female lead. The romance thing again takes away from developing the Obi/Ani friendship. Mother Skywalker should have been relegated to a supporting role, with a few short cameos. But of course Lucas decided that she was going to be the reason for Anakin’s fall so…

But the acting quality also plays a role, even though I said I didn’t want to touch on it. There is great chemistry developed between our leads in the 45 minutes we are on the Death Star in SW77 - more than is developed between the leads through the course of 6 hours in the PT. I feel also that the way the films are shot plays a role. Am I crazy in feeling that the OT tried to shoot Fisher so that we wouldn’t notice how short she is, whereas in the PT there is no attempt to frame Portman in the same way. She always comes off as a teenager in appearance. Even the pitch of her voice seems like it. Maybe she should have kept the Amidala accent?

Probably my favourite single shot of the PT is the closeup of Padme on when she arrives on Mustafar, with her head on her hand wondering how it could have come to this, where did it all go wrong. A meta moment if ever there was one!

Post
#1475763
Topic
What do you think of The Prequel Trilogy? A general discussion.
Time

To start off I will ignore bad dialogue and/or acting. No; for me, after 17 years (!!) Since the last prequel came out, the biggest problem was that it told the wrong story.

It should have been about a young Jedi Master called Obiwan Kenobi and how his renegade, unsanctioned, training of Anakin Skywalker ( a gifted pilot and incredibly strong in The Force, but mentally unstable) lead to the downfall of The Republic.

Despite my issues with TPM, there is the beginning of this idea at the end of the film - but it is never continued into the following films.