The Anti-Prequel Discussion Thread

[Octoberist]

Anakin's fall wasn't really compelling. We never got his perspective on things. I didn't care of the character due to the writing.

 

[chamber-music]

Natalie Portman says Star Wars hurt her acting career

"Star Wars had come out … and everyone thought I was a horrible actress. I was in the biggest-grossing movie of the decade, and no director wanted to work with me. Mike wrote a letter to Anthony Minghella and said, ‘Put her in Cold Mountain, I vouch for her.’ And then Anthony passed me on to Tom Tykwer, who passed me on to the Wachowskis."

[YT]/K5MeGIP43EA[/YT]

 

[Octoberist]

That was a terrible scene. I'm assuming because everything thing in that shot was CGIed, including the Trooper, that's why it had to be one awkward take, to make it easier for the artists?

 

[batfreakforever]

I will never take the fans who turned their back on George Lucas seriously. Just plain ungrateful.

 

[Octoberist]

I didn't turn my back on Lucas that's for sure. It IS ungrateful. I like the guy but he should be called out if some of the movies are underwhelming.

There are fans who blinded by the extremes: the lovers and the haters. But I do value objectivity. I also value some sort of quality control. If that didn't exist, I might as well say that Diamonds are Forever is as good as any Bond movie out there because I'm a 'fan'.

 

[CFE]

He sent Darth Maul to like kill them on Tatooine...why? He needs Amadala to get back to Courescant to declare that vote of no confidence at this point so why is he sending Darth Maul after them?

I know this is from a few pages ago, but this comment is asinine and easily explained in the movie.

Yes, Palpatine needs Amidala. Which is why, in the scene between Palpatine and Maul on Coruscant, he instructs Maul to move against the Jedi and dispatch them so that he can capture the Queen and bring her back to Coruscant to sign the treaty.

In all fairness it's not just you, but I'm starting to see a trend of people nitpicking things in movies in a way that clearly demonstrates they either haven't seen the movie in a while and should freshen up before instigating a current discussion or they're just flat out not paying attention, which is their fault more than the film's.

Another example of this is the Nostalgia Critic's review of "The Matrix Reloaded" when he criticizes the plot point of Neo having to fly "around the world" to save Morpheus and the Keymaker after the Freeway chase.

The critique falls completely on its face if you watch the movie, in which Link clearly instructs Neo he has to fly to "the middle of the city, 500 miles due south"...which is hardly "around the world."

 

[titansupes]

^ That's actually part of why I don't watch those sort of reviews. I was watching the Nostalgia Critic review of ST:Generations and the Red Letter Media review of STiD, and they both just... made things up or twisted things to make them seem like plot holes. There's PLENTY to criticize in those movies, I don't know what they resort to that.

 

[Lord]

RLM watches the films once when doing Half in the Bag, they go in depth when needed, Nostalgia Critic doesn't have as much of an excuse because he got to do complex reviews of the movies, while in RLM, when they do half in the bag, they're just some guys talking about a film they just watched, they don't have the opportunity to watch the films over and over again, or take deeper analysis.

For example, they completely messed up the details in Transformers 3, they simply talk about what they just watched, and most of the time, they actualy give much better reviews than various other critics who had more time to rewatch the movies or to rewrite and perfect their reviews.

 

[CFE]

^ That's actually part of why I don't watch those sort of reviews. I was watching the Nostalgia Critic review of ST:Generations and the Red Letter Media review of STiD, and they both just... made things up or twisted things to make them seem like plot holes. There's PLENTY to criticize in those movies, I don't know what they resort to that.

Absolutely. They can take films to task for what's not working but they should understand that people in the audience are going to know those films and they should know it too. Enough to realize that if they manipulate things, it'll show.

I think that's an unfortunate bi-product of time and reputation.

I mean we're nearly 18 years removed from "Batman & Robin." And while I see its flaws (yet enjoy it in spite of them) any sort of hatred the film gets by now is literally summed up in buzz words of "Nipples," "Ice Puns," "Bat Credit Card" and "Neon."

But the problem is that's where all the attention goes because of how much attention has been heaped on those factors over time.

If one's being fair, that film isn't all bad. The scenes between Bruce and Alfred are an example of this. But why don't they focus on those? Because it's just easier to whip people up into a frenzy over the same old tired things, which I take issue with because after almost twenty years, the level of contempt has shifted (or at least for me feels like it's starting to shift) into this place of just feeling tired and tedious.

There are only so many different ways you can say Bat Nipples are stupid or Jar Jar Binks sucks. We get it already.

There's a difference between hating or disapproving of films and things with sincerity and doing it because geek culture imprints an obligation.

There's actually a terrific pro-Prequel article that discusses this idea of the toxicity of group-think and herd mentality and while it doesn't apply to everyone who disregards the prequel trilogy or any other film of that ilk (i.e. Spider-Man 3, Matrix sequels, etc.) it does shed light on how the bulk of contemporary hatred chalks up to little more than white noise fueled by years worth of prior hate. Sort of a "oh this movie was hated for so long, I'll jump on board so I'm with the majority" kind of deal.

 

[Lord]

RLM doesn't manipulate facts, if they're wrong about something, it's because they don't remember the movie very well.

 

[CFE]

RLM doesn't manipulate facts, if they're wrong about something, it's because they don't remember the movie very well.

Well then it still stands. If they're going to produce a review for something, it might be wise to get familiar with the movie beforehand. That just seems like the responsible thing to do.

 

[Solidus]

RLM's PT reviews are with sincerity. He uses the nitpicks as humor to create entertainment. He goes out of his way not to mention Jar Jar except for once calling him a "cartoon rabbit that steps in the poopy". Actually I saw quite the opposite over the years. Many of us were blinded with the fact that it was Star Wars...and it had to be good...right? Once the dust cleared even more started to see the films for what they were. In the end RLM's PT reviews core elements were actually quite an intelligent look at the film as whole. Mainly as many of us do say it is the, execution, the writing, the directing. These are far from nitpicking, they are the core fundamental elements of a film that the PT failed upon.

You do still see some use Jar Jar or the over use of CGI as the main arguments towards the PT but I think it's mainly because most don't understand film as well as many of us on here and it's just superficial words to describe their disdain. Does not mean they actually like it but they can't explain it. I remember after the midnight showing of TPM there were many of us sitting around a table at a cafe saying..."Maybe we need to watch it a few more times to get it". With many including myself we just could not fathom GL making a bad film back then. We always figured that "Oh well maybe it will get better and as a whole it will work." It's why it took until ROTS came out to make me realize that it did not work.

I don't care if some like the PT, but there are just realities with it. I actually love the Matrix sequels, but I know I'm a minority. I do see people's arguments with them, and they are valid, just for some reason I still enjoy them. (Maybe love was not the right word). I have no problem with people loving them. But the whole "bandwagaon" thing for the PT is not true. If it is, people joined the band wagon of liking them back then just because it was SW.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

RLM's PT reviews are with sincerity. He uses the nitpicks as humor to create entertainment. He goes out of his way not to mention Jar Jar except for once calling him a "cartoon rabbit that steps in the poopy". Actually I saw quite the opposite over the years. Many of us were blinded with the fact that it was Star Wars...and it had to be good...right? Once the dust cleared even more started to see the films for what they were. In the end RLM's PT reviews core elements were actually quite an intelligent look at the film as whole. Mainly as many of us do say it is the, execution, the writing, the directing. These are far from nitpicking, they are the core fundamental elements of a film that the PT failed upon.

You do still see some use Jar Jar or the over use of CGI as the main arguments towards the PT but I think it's mainly because most don't understand film as well as many of us on here and it's just superficial words to describe their disdain. Does not mean they actually like it but they can't explain it. I remember after the midnight showing of TPM there were many of us sitting around a table at a cafe saying..."Maybe we need to watch it a few more times to get it". With many including myself we just could not fathom GL making a bad film back then. We always figured that "Oh well maybe it will get better and as a whole it will work." It's why it took until ROTS came out to make me realize that it did not work.

I don't care if some like the PT, but there are just realities with it. I actually love the Matrix sequels, but I know I'm a minority. I do see people's arguments with them, and they are valid, just for some reason I still enjoy them. (Maybe love was not the right word). I have no problem with people loving them. But the whole "bandwagaon" thing for the PT is not true. If it is, people joined the band wagon of liking them back then just because it was SW.

And I am done taking you seriously.

 

[Solidus]

And I am done taking you seriously.

Like I said later in that post, love was too strong of a word. But I enjoyed them. However I don't deny the criticisms of those films, I agree with almost all of criticisms pointed out by many. But for some reason I enjoy them. I know I'm in a huge minority with that. lol.

 

[Sorath]

RLM's PT reviews are with sincerity. He uses the nitpicks as humor to create entertainment. He goes out of his way not to mention Jar Jar except for once calling him a "cartoon rabbit that steps in the poopy". Actually I saw quite the opposite over the years. Many of us were blinded with the fact that it was Star Wars...and it had to be good...right? Once the dust cleared even more started to see the films for what they were. In the end RLM's PT reviews core elements were actually quite an intelligent look at the film as whole. Mainly as many of us do say it is the, execution, the writing, the directing. These are far from nitpicking, they are the core fundamental elements of a film that the PT failed upon.

You do still see some use Jar Jar or the over use of CGI as the main arguments towards the PT but I think it's mainly because most don't understand film as well as many of us on here and it's just superficial words to describe their disdain. Does not mean they actually like it but they can't explain it. I remember after the midnight showing of TPM there were many of us sitting around a table at a cafe saying..."Maybe we need to watch it a few more times to get it". With many including myself we just could not fathom GL making a bad film back then. We always figured that "Oh well maybe it will get better and as a whole it will work." It's why it took until ROTS came out to make me realize that it did not work.

I don't care if some like the PT, but there are just realities with it. I actually love the Matrix sequels, but I know I'm a minority. I do see people's arguments with them, and they are valid, just for some reason I still enjoy them. (Maybe love was not the right word). I have no problem with people loving them. But the whole "bandwagaon" thing for the PT is not true. If it is, people joined the band wagon of liking them back then just because it was SW.

I think that the prequels are not as good as the original films however they are still really good and enjoyable to watch. The movies had more depth then fans are willing to give the films credit. The directing and acting was not nearly as bad as fans make it out to be.

I also find that almost all Star War fans miss a lot of the hidden layers to the films that give the over all story more depth. Part of the reason they missed this is because they where to busy nit picking the film apart and hating it to notice that those hidden layers give the movie more depth and meaning.

That's my take and my opinion any way.

 

[Solidus]

I think that the prequels are not as good as the original films however they are still really good and enjoyable to watch. The movies had more depth then fans are willing to give the films credit. The directing and acting was not nearly as bad as fans make it out to be.

I also find that almost all Star War fans miss a lot of the hidden layers to the films that give the over all story more depth. Part of the reason they missed this is because they where to busy nit picking the film apart and hating it to notice that those hidden layers give the movie more depth and meaning.

That's my take and my opinion any way.

Well you ignored many of my posts then. It has nothing to do with nitpicking. You ran to the #4 in the list of PT defense. (If you look to many of my posts since October 2012 you will see me talk about these 4 points that PT defenders use.

1. Call them haters.

There are always haters of things, but usually they qualify of the type that just want to hate everything. Many of us that don't like the PT are far from that. Including myself. I don't hate the PT for the sake of it, I was jacked for the PT and actually "liked" them for a time thinking when the trilogy was finished it would work out. After ROTS I realized that was not what happened.

2. Call them nostalgic.

This argument was always something I hated. It's just not true. There are millions of things I'm nostalgic for. Ninja Turtles, He-Man etc ect. However when I get older, I can divide the feelings I has a kid, and realize a lot of them were bad. Or realize that they still are good and timeless entertainment. The PT did aim for lots of nostalgia, but it still did not work in the grand scheme of things.

3. Claim the OT is not that great.

This usually shows desperation few do it, but trying to make the PT look better by tearing apart the OT. Every film has flaws, but the OT does not have the fundamental flaws that the PT had. There is a reason the OT is in lots of history books, film books, and inspired a whole new generation of film makers.

4. Use the "You did not get it" defense.

I've always disliked this. People use this with way too much on the internet. Trying to use the "you don't get it" aka "You are not smart." argument. Having some great ideas, and some smart things in the film did not excuse the poor execution. Having deep ideas don't work that well if the film in general does not either.


Listen, the PT had some deep things going, but that does not change the fact that the execution, directing, writing, and acting was terrible. And no, it was that bad. It really was. Watching the "love scenes" in AOTC was the bottom of that pit.

I won't lie that a lot of the lore was great, and it took The Clone Wars to show how awesome a lot of the Lucas ideas were. The Clone Wars was wonderfully executed and written and brought the PT world to life in a way the films failed to do. Yes there is nitpicking in some instances, but the majority of complaints especially with RLM and others is the core fundamentals of film making. Some will nitpick, and I agree it can go overboard. But the PT's problems are not he nitpicks. It's just the films themselves.

 

[Lord]

Well then it still stands. If they're going to produce a review for something, it might be wise to get familiar with the movie beforehand. That just seems like the responsible thing to do.

But they're not professional critics, they're just 2 guys discussing films they just watched, if we were talking about their longer revews like Star Wars, then yeah, they need to rewatch those movies, and they did, for the longer reviews that go in-depth, they know the movies they're complaining about. Half in the Bag however has always been just 2 guys talking about a movie, no strings atached, the only time they said they would dissect a movie in that show was with Jack & Jill.

 

[Green Goblin]

"From my point of view the Jedi are evil"

 

[dax]

"From my point of view the Jedi are evil"

I'm a big fan of the prequels but even I have to admit that Anakin was out of his mind when he said that.

 

[Octoberist]

Such a weird line. It fails to be endearing and pulpy.

 

[Sterling Archer]

I will never take the fans who turned their back on George Lucas seriously. Just plain ungrateful.

I mean I think the man has consistently proved whatever talent he had has long since faded. I think the quality of the prequels makes people rightfully question how much credit he deserves for the OT in the first place considering the best film in the franchise wasn't written or directed by him, with him just having a vague story credit. Not to mention many people have said that the first cut of Star Wars was prequel levels of terrible and was saved in editing. It's pretty obvious to me when Lucas get's full creative control of a project it turns into a ridiculous mess.

 

[Marvolo]

I will never take the fans who turned their back on George Lucas seriously. Just plain ungrateful.

I know this is an old post, but I feel this needs to be said, we are not a cult and Geoge Lucas isn't some deity or authority we owe unyielding blind allegiance too. If you choose to blindly follow him and ignore his mistakes and faults so be it, but don't expect others to have such blind devotion.

 

[Lord]

I mean I think the man has consistently proved whatever talent he had has long since faded. I think the quality of the prequels makes people rightfully question how much credit he deserves for the OT in the first place considering the best film in the franchise wasn't written or directed by him, with him just having a vague story credit. Not to mention many people have said that the first cut of Star Wars was prequel levels of terrible and was saved in editing. It's pretty obvious to me when Lucas get's full creative control of a project it turns into a ridiculous mess.

To be fair, he was the one who decided to change the original script for Empire and add in the father twist. And when it comes to the original Star Wars cut, it sucked because it was done in an old fashioned way by some guy the studios hired, Lucas let go of the guy and assembled his oun team to edit the movie.

When it comes to the original movie, it realy was Lucas working hard on set, and as talented as the people behind it were, Lucas was the one who was able to put everything in place in the midst of all the anarchy. The reason he has gotten this way is due to him deciding to just sit down in the Producer's chair for the following 20+ years.

In one of the history of star wars books it's mentioned that he was very lazy when he was younger, but started working hard when he wanted to be a Director, it seems to me like the difficulty in making the original Star Wars lead him to want a pause from Directing (he was also having some trouble producing the sequels and assembling the studio and special effects house). I think the 15 years or so he spent without doing much after the hard work of the Star wars trilogy and Industrial Lights & Magic lead him to lose much of his strength as a Director and to the return of his lazy personality.

I actualy think he's a great ideas man, but he sometimes doesn't know what to choose and writting was never his strength. He also had an amazing team to work alongside, the prequels actualy have plenty of interesting ideas, just look at the artwork that was done inside LucasArts and LucasFilms, some of them didn't make it into the films themselves, others were incorpurated in the Expanded Universe, i'm actualy afraid about the creativity in the sequel trilogy, as if they're not careful, they're just gonna end up repeating the exact same beats as the original trilogy instead of coming up with some interesting new ideas.

Talk about execution all you want, but Darth Maul and General Grievous had some great designs, with better writting, they could have rivaled Vader. Maul is certainly one of the most known villains in the SW universe, even if people only know how he looks like and not his name.

Since i'm talking about the Prequels, i also want to add that the designs for Revenge of the Sith had enormous potencial, with the film supposedly having "Hell like" visuals, but expanded universe material like the Visionaries collection and some of the last episodes in The Clone Wars made better use of this idea than Episode III, which went way too over the top due to the Directing.

I think Geaorge Lucas deserves a lot of credit for what he did, he just should have steped down from Directing the Prequels, and let other writers look at his scripts and make the necessary tweaks.

 

[Solidus]

The PT had amazing ideas. Again TCW highlighted them. But they were far from extremely original. Nothing is. My problem with the "rhyming" thing was not the rhyming itself but fans acting like that the beats were not similar in the films. You can distill any film down to its core and have it be like something as accessible as ANH. It's the characters and the motivations ect that changes an entire story. From what I've seen (which is almost the entire chunk of the film from TFA through MSW's call sheets) TFA like TPM and many other films have similar beats. The beats are not what need to be "creative" it's the characters, motivation. The small things that make it different (which TFA does as well it seems from the call sheets).

But saying the PT is somehow not similar to the OT is not true at all. They are, he just used the fancy word of rhyming. Again I'm fine with that, but it's the subtle things that make it different.

Yes I will talk about execution all I want because that is everything. Ideas are nothing if they are not executed well, that's not just in film either. Vader is still more known then those villains will ever be because of it's execution, that is one of the primary things that is required. Execution IS everything. Even if something has similar strokes, execution can completely make or break a film, and give it different life, perception and story.

 

[Octoberist]

There was a public screening of the PT near in LA. It was at a dump.