The Star Wars Prequels are good movies. (spin-off from: A Thread For Bold Claims)
- Thread starter Sparhawk
- Start date
- Status
A Thread For Bold Claims
Wow. They are flat out terrible. And not just in a "they are not the original trilogy way". Just in a "no one involved looks like they could pull off a high school play" way.
A Thread For Bold Claims
I think that people that grew up with the OT were expecting movies that filled in their own expectations of what happened before. The movies are not bad in their own right, but we didn't have any real "investment" into the movies since we KNEW where everything was supposed to end up. There is corny dialog in them, there was in the OT also, there are scenes that should have had a different hand leading them, but I think that every single movie has that problem.
I think that people that grew up with the OT were expecting movies that filled in their own expectations of what happened before. The movies are not bad in their own right, but we didn't have any real "investment" into the movies since we KNEW where everything was supposed to end up. There is corny dialog in them, there was in the OT also, there are scenes that should have had a different hand leading them, but I think that every single movie has that problem.
A Thread For Bold Claims
The prequels are absolutely bad in their own right. I have no idea what you're talking about with the "different hand in leading them" stuff.
The prequels are absolutely bad in their own right. I have no idea what you're talking about with the "different hand in leading them" stuff.
A Thread For Bold Claims
I never said you shouldn't like them. I am just saying you like three shitty movies.
I never said you shouldn't like them. I am just saying you like three shitty movies.
A Thread For Bold Claims
I dunno spar, they were just poorly done movies that ignore every basic idea of even mediocre storytelling. I've tried but... I cant' find anything redeeming in those cold soulless boring films.
I don't think I've ever actually met anyone who liked them... at least in real life...
I dunno spar, they were just poorly done movies that ignore every basic idea of even mediocre storytelling. I've tried but... I cant' find anything redeeming in those cold soulless boring films.
I don't think I've ever actually met anyone who liked them... at least in real life...
A Thread For Bold Claims
Overall, for fans of the OT, there was no suspense at all in the Prequels. You knew what the fate of Obi-Wan was the second he was on screen. You knew what was to happen to Anakin before his first word was uttered. Everything had an end already, we were just seeing how it all began. In Harry Potter, if book 7 had come out first, the first 6 books would have been the same way, you knew what was going to happen to everyone, but didn't know all the steps between.
I enjoyed them for telling a visual story. Do I wish some parts were different, wish that some of the dialog was better, but overall I'm not fixated on the aspect that everyone gets in a bunch about, because, it didn't rape my childhood. I separate the two trilogies. The OT had it's shortfalls also, and had more added in the "special" editions, but it tells a good story. Same with the prequels, if you turn off memory about what is going to happen, they aren't bad. To me, the biggest gripe that people had, outside of Jar Jar, was that it wasn't what they had imagined it would be. People had built up an image in their mind about how this and that were supposed to happen, and then weren't happy when it was revealed that Lucas had a different vision than they did. I would have loved if we had gotten a taste of the Death Star blowing up Naboo, leaving the "forest moon Endor" orbiting alone, but that isn't what was on film.
Overall, for fans of the OT, there was no suspense at all in the Prequels. You knew what the fate of Obi-Wan was the second he was on screen. You knew what was to happen to Anakin before his first word was uttered. Everything had an end already, we were just seeing how it all began. In Harry Potter, if book 7 had come out first, the first 6 books would have been the same way, you knew what was going to happen to everyone, but didn't know all the steps between.
A Thread For Bold Claims
Part of what may influence my view about them is the fact that I saw the movies with kids that really hadn't been exposed to the OT. I got to share in their excitement about what was happening on screen, and not dwell on my knowledge of what happened with every one of the characters.I would have just settled for something that wasn't boring and lifeless, reliant upon decent CGI instead of actual storytelling.
But honestly, I'm glad you liked them, I got no problem agreeing to disagree
A Thread For Bold Claims
Ep 1-3 were crappier because the people involved were all fat and comfortable by then. Ep 4-6 were awesome because the people involved were all hungry and out to prove something, as well as completely committed to what they were doing. Happens alllll the time.
--Patrick
Ep 1-3 were crappier because the people involved were all fat and comfortable by then. Ep 4-6 were awesome because the people involved were all hungry and out to prove something, as well as completely committed to what they were doing. Happens alllll the time.
--Patrick
A Thread For Bold Claims
Honestly, I believe that it does. You take away the suspense of "Is he gonna die?" from scenes in the prequels and you lose lots of storytelling ability. Obi-Wan vs Darth Maul, Obi-Wan vs Grevious, Obi-Wan & Anakin vs Dooku, Yoda vs Palpatine, none of those have any suspense because you know that Obi-Wan, Anakin and Yoda all survive. From the eyes of a child that hadn't watched the OT, it was a whole different atmosphere. They didn't know who was going to win, they didn't know that Padme` was gonna die at the end (I agree, dieing of a broken heart was stupid, as was the complete collapse of a vibrant character to the shell she was at the end...) and from the view of not knowing what was going to happen it is a much better movie than the fanboy in me wanted.
As much as Star Wars fans wanted more Star Wars, the prequels were the wrong way to go. There was absolutely no suspense of not knowing what was going to happen. Now, bring on 7-9, following Luke, Leia and the gang, or even further in the future of that universe, and you'd have the fanboys all a-twitter again by the end of the trilogy. Not gonna happen, but I can dream...
Honestly, I believe that it does. You take away the suspense of "Is he gonna die?" from scenes in the prequels and you lose lots of storytelling ability. Obi-Wan vs Darth Maul, Obi-Wan vs Grevious, Obi-Wan & Anakin vs Dooku, Yoda vs Palpatine, none of those have any suspense because you know that Obi-Wan, Anakin and Yoda all survive. From the eyes of a child that hadn't watched the OT, it was a whole different atmosphere. They didn't know who was going to win, they didn't know that Padme` was gonna die at the end (I agree, dieing of a broken heart was stupid, as was the complete collapse of a vibrant character to the shell she was at the end...) and from the view of not knowing what was going to happen it is a much better movie than the fanboy in me wanted.
As much as Star Wars fans wanted more Star Wars, the prequels were the wrong way to go. There was absolutely no suspense of not knowing what was going to happen. Now, bring on 7-9, following Luke, Leia and the gang, or even further in the future of that universe, and you'd have the fanboys all a-twitter again by the end of the trilogy. Not gonna happen, but I can dream...
A Thread For Bold Claims
And 7-9 would still be terrible movies if made by the same people who made the prequels. The only criticism you can deflect from the prequels is any whining due to OT viewing is about "what they did to [character], they ruined him". From effects choices, editing, narrative direction, even basic character development, and direction of actors, pretending the OT never existed, 1-3 are terrible movies. They are not well made, well written, or well told.
Suspense is only a piece of storytelling, but only thrillers and horror films can get away with depending on it. Removing the suspense for viewers of the OT should still have left competent films for them to view, even if they weren't on the edge of their seats with character concern. Not to mention, the Clone Wars cartoon was considered great, but it's still in the same timeline as the prequels. No suspense there either.
They'd be all a-twitter if anything Star Wars is announced.
And 7-9 would still be terrible movies if made by the same people who made the prequels. The only criticism you can deflect from the prequels is any whining due to OT viewing is about "what they did to [character], they ruined him". From effects choices, editing, narrative direction, even basic character development, and direction of actors, pretending the OT never existed, 1-3 are terrible movies. They are not well made, well written, or well told.
Suspense is only a piece of storytelling, but only thrillers and horror films can get away with depending on it. Removing the suspense for viewers of the OT should still have left competent films for them to view, even if they weren't on the edge of their seats with character concern. Not to mention, the Clone Wars cartoon was considered great, but it's still in the same timeline as the prequels. No suspense there either.
A Thread For Bold Claims
He was very wrong.
YES. Somewhere along the line Lucas got mixed up and decided that big effects and blue screen + lots of exposition= story.
He was very wrong.
P
Philosopher B.
A Thread For Bold Claims
Also, as far as the acting goes, yeah, the original movies were kinda cheesy, but a lot of the cast hadn't done anything too spectacular before that ... in the prequels, Lucas had a pretty damn fine cast (well, aside from Hayden Christensen maybe, but I haven't really seen him in anything else). But the characters just weren't that well defined, to the point where the actors couldn't do much of anything with those roles. Ewan McGregor? Liam Neeson? Natalie Portman? That's hella talent right there.
Who was it that did that video in which a bunch of people were asked to describe the traits of characters from the original movies and then the prequels? That says a lot about the difference, I think.
Heck, one of the few Star Wars books I read (and the only one I read more than once), namely Darth Maul: Shadow Hunter, was tight and well-written enough that despite the fact you knew Darth Maul would have to win out by the book's end and that certain outcomes would occur, it still managed to entertain.
To me, the original Star Wars movies represent cheesiness with heart, while the prequels represent stilted lifeless moviemaking.
Also, as far as the acting goes, yeah, the original movies were kinda cheesy, but a lot of the cast hadn't done anything too spectacular before that ... in the prequels, Lucas had a pretty damn fine cast (well, aside from Hayden Christensen maybe, but I haven't really seen him in anything else). But the characters just weren't that well defined, to the point where the actors couldn't do much of anything with those roles. Ewan McGregor? Liam Neeson? Natalie Portman? That's hella talent right there.
Who was it that did that video in which a bunch of people were asked to describe the traits of characters from the original movies and then the prequels? That says a lot about the difference, I think.
Heck, one of the few Star Wars books I read (and the only one I read more than once), namely Darth Maul: Shadow Hunter, was tight and well-written enough that despite the fact you knew Darth Maul would have to win out by the book's end and that certain outcomes would occur, it still managed to entertain.
To me, the original Star Wars movies represent cheesiness with heart, while the prequels represent stilted lifeless moviemaking.
A Thread For Bold Claims
Because it told a visual story? You just gave the prequels props for BEING A MOVIE. When just the simple fact of BEING A MOTION PICTURE is praiseworthy, you know you have something godawful. "Yes, the movies ruled because there was in fact light and sound." Lucas is a master, I saw and heard things at the same time!
Because it told a visual story? You just gave the prequels props for BEING A MOVIE. When just the simple fact of BEING A MOTION PICTURE is praiseworthy, you know you have something godawful. "Yes, the movies ruled because there was in fact light and sound." Lucas is a master, I saw and heard things at the same time!
A Thread For Bold Claims
I think that the hurdle of knowing how it ends is overcome with good storytelling and character development. Everyone who has seen the prequels knows the end results, yet the Clone Wars TV show takes place between Ep II & III and is fantastic! Because the characters are developed and interesting.
Ep I-III, ended up being little more than toy commercials.
I think that the hurdle of knowing how it ends is overcome with good storytelling and character development. Everyone who has seen the prequels knows the end results, yet the Clone Wars TV show takes place between Ep II & III and is fantastic! Because the characters are developed and interesting.
Ep I-III, ended up being little more than toy commercials.
A Thread For Bold Claims
I could never get into the clone wars cartoons. I can't watch the 2D ones without feeling they are some kind of star wars parody from Dexter's lab and the 3D ones are so slow and boring that the only times I've watched it, it was because there was nothing else on tv and I was having dinner or something alone.
I could never get into the clone wars cartoons. I can't watch the 2D ones without feeling they are some kind of star wars parody from Dexter's lab and the 3D ones are so slow and boring that the only times I've watched it, it was because there was nothing else on tv and I was having dinner or something alone.
fade
Staff member
A Thread For Bold Claims
If you listen to Lucas himself, this is exactly the way he wanted it to be. The Word of God is that the fights frankly sucked in the originals, because they were between an inexperienced kid, a multiply handicapped old man, and an old man. In the prequels, they took pains to develop styles (which you can read about until your eyes bleed on starwars.com) and make the fights realistic.
Why did you spin this off? It's talking about a bold claim from the thread and isn't really a derail in any way?
Episode one: Bad
Episode two: OK/fairly good in retrospect.
Episode three: The third best of the 6 films. (even with the lame excuse for Pandabear's death.)
Episode two: OK/fairly good in retrospect.
Episode three: The third best of the 6 films. (even with the lame excuse for Pandabear's death.)
C
Chazwozel
Six, you and I have very different taste.
Episode one: Bad
Episode two: So much worse.
Episode three: The best of the 3 prequels, but that isn't saying much.
Episode one: Bad
Episode two: So much worse.
Episode three: The best of the 3 prequels, but that isn't saying much.
Yeah, I tend to put 1 and 2 on the same level: Horrible, with 3 being at least watchable but... not good.
fade
Staff member
I still argue with "prequels are bad/originals are much better". They all seem about the same to me. Esp. if you watch all of them in a row. They have the same feel, the same quirks, and the same bad aspects. Hell, half the things people berate in the prequels are present in the original. I think romance plays such a huge role in this claim. I won't go so far as to say the prequels are "good", but I certainly don't think they're significantly worse than the originals in an objective comparison that forgets about your 1983 Millennium Falcon playset and flame-retardant skintight pajamas.
The original trilogy follows good story arcs and strong character building that every good story needs. The prequals ignore every basic, foundational idea of creating interesting characters and story arcs. It's fine to disagree but everybody talking about all this "oh nostalgia is what makes you think they are good" is missing the point completely.
The Emperor was well acted.
Padme in scenes with out Little Orphan Annie was good, she was even good in most of those scenes.
Jake, Hayden, and JarJar really hurt those films. Once past the romance crap in II, Hayden got better.
I just wish Lucas would have handed the director's job off like he did in V and VI. He is a great idea man, but bad to mediocre director.
Padme in scenes with out Little Orphan Annie was good, she was even good in most of those scenes.
Jake, Hayden, and JarJar really hurt those films. Once past the romance crap in II, Hayden got better.
I just wish Lucas would have handed the director's job off like he did in V and VI. He is a great idea man, but bad to mediocre director.
This is one of the biggest problems with the 1-3 movies. Lucas is not a good director. He just isn't. If he handed off the directorial duties to someone else, it might've saved the first trilogy but they would also have needed to recast Anakin. Both actors that played him were just painful to watch and have forever marred one of the greatest movie villains of all time.
Like the Matrix and Pirates sequels, I don't hate the prequels. In terms of quality, they're nowhere NEAR the originals. But there's things to like about them. The special effects are fantastic (can't wait to see how they look on Blu-Ray) and Williams' score is, as always, superb.
The acting? Yeah, it's pretty bad, most especially the romance crap. McGregor made it worth watching most times. His emotional "YOU WERE THE CHOSEN ONE!" was believable because you really felt like his heart had broken. It was one of the very, very few good moments as far as acting goes, though. The Emperor was good most times, but got really campy in the third installment.
I've mentioned this pretty much every time the prequels are brought up, but a friend of mine had a BRILLIANT theory before the third movie came out that I wish had come true:
Anakin was using the Force to make Padme love him. My friend's evidence was how quickly the romance progressed, and a particular line Padme said; something like "I don't like when you look at me like that." If they had gone that route, then Vader's role as the ultimate villain would have stayed put, especially if they didn't do the stupid "NOOOOOOO!"
The acting? Yeah, it's pretty bad, most especially the romance crap. McGregor made it worth watching most times. His emotional "YOU WERE THE CHOSEN ONE!" was believable because you really felt like his heart had broken. It was one of the very, very few good moments as far as acting goes, though. The Emperor was good most times, but got really campy in the third installment.
I've mentioned this pretty much every time the prequels are brought up, but a friend of mine had a BRILLIANT theory before the third movie came out that I wish had come true:
Anakin was using the Force to make Padme love him. My friend's evidence was how quickly the romance progressed, and a particular line Padme said; something like "I don't like when you look at me like that." If they had gone that route, then Vader's role as the ultimate villain would have stayed put, especially if they didn't do the stupid "NOOOOOOO!"
The prequels went into the cliche business.
"I have a bad feeling about this..." was used way too often.
And the Yoda-speak was far worse in the prequels. I guess that all those years in the swamp, taught him to speak "common" better.
- Status