The Star Wars Prequels vs The Star Trek Pre-boots?

[Ipodman]

Depends who you ask I guess...

 

[Solidus]

Well I say it mostly because i see them as nothing more than cold, soulless, products of marketing. Abrams had no particular investment in the franchise. In fact, he even says so. Not to say they aren't competently made, just nothing remarkable about them.

Star Wars is Lucas' baby. Might be an ugly baby (the prequels, that is), but the man had passion, and a unique vision.

Ironic because those are the words that a lot including myself use to describe the Prequel Trilogy. Whereas ST at least had lots of soul, emotional connection and great characters. The PT was clearly trying to sell more product then anything. It's why he made Anakin a little kid, or always had little kids with lightsabers ect. The PT was much more products of marketing mainly just look at all the merchandising, and video game tie ins. And just everything else. Books, toys ect from 99-2005 there was PT stuff everywhere in every single capacity. Trek...they did some but not near as much. Actually I'd say Trek is far from that.

Additionally, all the old Trek films are not "remembered" by the general populace today like Star Wars. People don't remember any iconic scenes, or lines. Most had no idea who Khan was (even adults) when I watched STID. So it's not like JJ's films mean they are not good just because a lot of Trek films really don't have the memorability of Star Wars. Hardly anything does. Also the reason the PT is or will be possibly more remembered (some for its bad things) is the fact that it is tied into three of the most influential movies of all time. The OT will always be in the history books, and the PT is just linked to them, so ya they will be more easily recognizable.

Lastly making something memorable 20 years down the road does not make it any better. In 20 years if I sat down with someone that knew of both but had never seen either. I bet letting them watch ST09, and Episode I, most would probably prefer ST09 since it was a better made film in most eyes. So the point of this thing I don't think was "Which is more memorable?"

The question is which films are better, and to me (and many others it seems) that choice is somewhat clear. I again would say no way in hell would I ever call ST09 or STID soulless, that's the phrasing I use for the PT mainly because of the cardboard characters and lack of emotion. Whereas yes JJ was clearly not much of a Trek fan, and made Trek light for sure, but that does not take away from the films being well made, and entertaining stories.

 

[sueb1863]

I had no problem with them making Anakin a child because if you're going to tell the story of Darth Vader, starting him out as a child makes sense. I just wish Lucas had had the guts to make him a lot more angry and dark-spirited as a child, or at least let someone write the script who knew how to create real drama. Some of the set pieces worked - the pod race for example - but a lot of it didn't, at least for me.

The direction also had major issues. I read one critic say that you really have to work to get a *bad* performance out of Liam Neeson, but Lucas managed it.

I wasn't a huge fan of the second ST movie but I didn't have any issues with the performances or the direction, they're mostly with the plot. So they win out over the SW prequels for me.

 

[DarKush]

I liked Star Trek '09 better than The Phantom Menace.

I liked Attack of the Clones better than Star Trek Into Darkness.

 

[DarKush]

Ironic because those are the words that a lot including myself use to describe the Prequel Trilogy. Whereas ST at least had lots of soul, emotional connection and great characters. The PT was clearly trying to sell more product then anything. It's why he made Anakin a little kid, or always had little kids with lightsabers ect. The PT was much more products of marketing mainly just look at all the merchandising, and video game tie ins. And just everything else. Books, toys ect from 99-2005 there was PT stuff everywhere in every single capacity. Trek...they did some but not near as much. Actually I'd say Trek is far from that.

Additionally, all the old Trek films are not "remembered" by the general populace today like Star Wars. People don't remember any iconic scenes, or lines. Most had no idea who Khan was (even adults) when I watched STID. So it's not like JJ's films mean they are not good just because a lot of Trek films really don't have the memorability of Star Wars. Hardly anything does. Also the reason the PT is or will be possibly more remembered (some for its bad things) is the fact that it is tied into three of the most influential movies of all time. The OT will always be in the history books, and the PT is just linked to them, so ya they will be more easily recognizable.

Lastly making something memorable 20 years down the road does not make it any better. In 20 years if I sat down with someone that knew of both but had never seen either. I bet letting them watch ST09, and Episode I, most would probably prefer ST09 since it was a better made film in most eyes. So the point of this thing I don't think was "Which is more memorable?"

The question is which films are better, and to me (and many others it seems) that choice is somewhat clear. I again would say no way in hell would I ever call ST09 or STID soulless, that's the phrasing I use for the PT mainly because of the cardboard characters and lack of emotion. Whereas yes JJ was clearly not much of a Trek fan, and made Trek light for sure, but that does not take away from the films being well made, and entertaining stories.

A few things...

I don't think the prequels were soulless. Even in the wretched Phantom Menace I felt Jake Lloyd's good bye scene with his mother, Qui Gonn's death, Palpatine meeting Anakin for the first time. And while the romance was bungled in AOTC, I think Anakin's simmering anger and his grief over his mother was effective. And ROTS might have been hampered by Lucas shoving too much in and some clunky dialogue, but I still think Palpatine, Anakin, and Obi Wan all sold their parts and the tragic betrayal of the Jedi was very effecting.

I don't completely disagree that TPM had marketing on it's mind, but one could argue that the previous films (TESB and ROTJ) also did as well. And Trek '09 was heavily marketed as well. It was the first time I saw Trek toys and merchandise in stores like Target. I still regret not getting one of those phasers.

Star Trek never has had the marketing muscle of the Star Wars franchise, though it's odd though that there was no big marketing push for Into Darkness, no toys or anything that I saw anyway. Even the novelization came out a week or two after the film. (I can only imagine that the mystery surrounding Cumberbatch's identity might have played a role in at least holding back the novelization), but still the marketing push for Into Darkness was anemic.

Despite the negative grumblings about the prequels Star Wars has also made a lot of novels, comics, video games, toys, and etc. that help lessen the venom, IMO, that those films might still generate. And the crowning piece of that is 3-D The Clone Wars cartoon. It's perhaps helped capture a new generation of SW fans in a way the prequels didn't.

I've long thought that Trek could learn a thing or two from Lucas about marketing and building on their franchise. Trek '09 largely failed to build on its success and the general public's acceptance of the new crew and timeline. I think the dip in the domestic box office was a reflection of the Trek stewards not keeping that pump primed and not going more after the young audience.

 

[DarKush]

I had no problem with them making Anakin a child because if you're going to tell the story of Darth Vader, starting him out as a child makes sense. I just wish Lucas had had the guts to make him a lot more angry and dark-spirited as a child, or at least let someone write the script who knew how to create real drama. Some of the set pieces worked - the pod race for example - but a lot of it didn't, at least for me.

The direction also had major issues. I read one critic say that you really have to work to get a *bad* performance out of Liam Neeson, but Lucas managed it.

I wasn't a huge fan of the second ST movie but I didn't have any issues with the performances or the direction, they're mostly with the plot. So they win out over the SW prequels for me.

If they were going the kid route I agree with you that they should've showed an angrier kid. I smacked my head when I saw in the deleted scenes a scene where Anakin is fighting another kid. I'm like, why in the heck did Lucas take that out? It was far more effective at foreshadowing than having a bunch of Jedi Masters pass judgment on Anakin, telling us he was dangerous without showing it.

Though I would've preferred that Anakin start out as a teenager. That way they could've spent more time developing his relationships with Padme and Obi Wan.

 

[Lord]

It's gonna be a massacre, why don't we do a Star Wars Episode IV and Empire strikes back vs Abrams star trek movies next huh?

 

[Snow Queen]

Abrams Star Trek. The prequels are awful.

 

[Solidus]

A few things...

I don't think the prequels were soulless. Even in the wretched Phantom Menace I felt Jake Lloyd's good bye scene with his mother, Qui Gonn's death, Palpatine meeting Anakin for the first time. And while the romance was bungled in AOTC, I think Anakin's simmering anger and his grief over his mother was effective. And ROTS might have been hampered by Lucas shoving too much in and some clunky dialogue, but I still think Palpatine, Anakin, and Obi Wan all sold their parts and the tragic betrayal of the Jedi was very effecting.

I don't completely disagree that TPM had marketing on it's mind, but one could argue that the previous films (TESB and ROTJ) also did as well. And Trek '09 was heavily marketed as well. It was the first time I saw Trek toys and merchandise in stores like Target. I still regret not getting one of those phasers.

Star Trek never has had the marketing muscle of the Star Wars franchise, though it's odd though that there was no big marketing push for Into Darkness, no toys or anything that I saw anyway. Even the novelization came out a week or two after the film. (I can only imagine that the mystery surrounding Cumberbatch's identity might have played a role in at least holding back the novelization), but still the marketing push for Into Darkness was anemic.

Despite the negative grumblings about the prequels Star Wars has also made a lot of novels, comics, video games, toys, and etc. that help lessen the venom, IMO, that those films might still generate. And the crowning piece of that is 3-D The Clone Wars cartoon. It's perhaps helped capture a new generation of SW fans in a way the prequels didn't.

I've long thought that Trek could learn a thing or two from Lucas about marketing and building on their franchise. Trek '09 largely failed to build on its success and the general public's acceptance of the new crew and timeline. I think the dip in the domestic box office was a reflection of the Trek stewards not keeping that pump primed and not going more after the young audience.

I agree with a lot of that. I still just disagree about the emotion. There was some, but not as much as the OT. But to eaches own. As for the rest I agree with what you are saying.

 

[Tequilla]

Both of them are nothing to write home about.

Being Star Wars an enormous presence in my childhood , i certainly enjoyed Return of the Sith much more than any of the jj start trek films , but i can't say consciously that they are better films.

 

[sueb1863]

If they were going the kid route I agree with you that they should've showed an angrier kid. I smacked my head when I saw in the deleted scenes a scene where Anakin is fighting another kid. I'm like, why in the heck did Lucas take that out? It was far more effective at foreshadowing than having a bunch of Jedi Masters pass judgment on Anakin, telling us he was dangerous without showing it.

Though I would've preferred that Anakin start out as a teenager. That way they could've spent more time developing his relationships with Padme and Obi Wan.

Yeah, that might've worked better. I'll have to track down that fight scene, sounds interesting! And it certainly would have been an improvement over everyone saying how angry and dangerous Anakin was, when he spent almost the entire movie acting perfectly normal and chipper and yelling 'Yippee!' This is the kid who's going to grow up to be the epitome of evil, but there doesn't seem to be anything in his makeup to account for that. In 'Clones' he just sort of snaps after his mother's death, and in 'Sith' the Emperor tricks him into turning evil so in the end it's like it isn't even his choice. It makes him look, well, sort of stupid, and when I saw the first movie in 1977 I *never* thought of Vader as being stupid. I would have been much more satisfied if they'd shown him turning evil because he wanted to, instead of him being duped into it. Oh, well!

 

[Solidus]

Actually in The Clone Wars TV series (which is a superb show this is from some one who did not like the PT at all) actually really does a great job with Anakin, and how he should have been.

It should not show him be "evil" like your saying for the sake of it. The true fall of a hero happens because how grey the line between right and wrong gets, and how they keep crossing that line in hopes to do good. One episode I just watched with TCW was where Anakin's padawan Ahsoka, is in trouble and about to die. And there is one of the Geonsians Poggle, I think (you see him in Episode II) knows how to save her. The Jedi tried to do it their way but Poggle is immune to Jedi mind tricks. So Anakin goes into the integration room, tries to do it the Jedi way. And in anger he snaps because he fears for his padawans life and grabs Poggle and starts to punch him. Then he starts to Force choke him lifting him off the ground.

Now on paper it sounds like what ever. But in that series they do a great job showing a hero Anakin that is a little hot headed, but always wants to do what he thinks is right. And sometimes you agree with him, sometimes TCW shows the incompetence of the Jedi and their ways. And sometimes you understand why Anakin does some of these "darker" things. But the nice thing is that sets up a snow ball that they should have done for Episode III. Or the entire PT actually. But I think TCW actually has a good grasp on how Anakin should have been betrayed. The hero that means well that falls into the grey slippery slope and falls to the dark side.

 

[Octoberist]

They were playing the Prequels in a toilet at a public restroom recently. It was poo.

Seriously, I just remembered now I just tried so hard to defend Epsiode One at school; the condition is dubbed 'Geek Denial' now these days. But then in harmony my friends all hated it. It was a surreal experience.

 

[DCW]

I was listening to the score from the Phantom Menace a few days ago and one things for damn sure, the music in the prequels is phenomenal. Much better than that in Star Trek.

 

[Deserana]

I remember almost nothing about Attack of the Clones and I've seen that twice. It's just so boring. Sith is okay but the CGI really distracts it is literally used in every shot, for me it is a clear sign of someone who is a completely different person at a different stage in their life trying to replicate something they have clearly lost touch with. That goes for the whole trilogy.

Menace is just plain bad.

ST09 was fantastic and the surprise of the year, maybe even the 00's for me as I previously had absolutely zero interest in any form of ST before that, even the trailer was meh but a friend dragged me. I saw it 4 times at the theater in the end.

STID however though felt like a group of people who needed to make a sequel rather than wanted to. It was slow, lacked the intense fun of the 09 film and just lost its... spark. From the trailer itself it seemed a little off.

STID ultimately felt (without acknowledging the WoK third act rehash and basing it on its own merits) like the first part of a two part film. Nothing happened till the last 20 minutes that couldn't itself have been done in 20 minutes. When Harrison finally had control of his ship THAT was the only time I had a smile on my face and thought "here we go" but then I realised it was 1 hour 50 minutes into the goddamn film. It was such a slapdash sequel IMO.

I'd still rate it above the prequels but probably he second weakest of the big hitters of 2013 so far for me (losing to the frankly awful Iron Man 3).

 

[flickchick85]

Well, I agree with the general notion that the new Trek movies are probably better SW movies than they are Trek movies, but the dialogue and acting in them didn't make me want to claw out my eyes and ears on a regular basis, so they win.

 

[psylockolussus]

Star Trek reboot movies for sure!

I didn't even see the first ten Star Trek films before I saw Star Trek 11 but I really enjoyed ST11 and STID.

 

[Octoberist]

It's funny how the prequels really affects people, including me. I thought back then that maybe the prequels' reputation would get better in time. So far..nope!!! Even though it's a moot point how, with horse beaten to death... the prequels didn't pull a Blade Runner where the appreciation grew over time, or was seen as a misinterpreted masterpiece that was ahead of it's time.

 

[Gianakin_]

Really really like the ST Preboots.

But I love the SW Prequels.