Seriously, WHY Do People Consider The Star Wars Prequels to be Horrendous?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5
 

kortin:

The Original Trilogy was utter garbage and Lucas knows it. That's why he invested so much in graphics and special effects in the Prequels, because he knows he can't write a good story, so he might as well make it entertaining to watch. How about we take off those rose-tinted glasses now, eh?

I liked it when he worked with people, accepting his faults and taking advice, rather than steamrollering. Oh 1970's Lucas, how I miss you!

MorganL4:
My theory, existed as a way to offer you a way out of being verbally attacked by throngs of bloodthirsty SW fans... You just closed the loop hole. Good Luck......

I didn't need your help. Appreciate the effort, but it wasn't needed. I knew what I was getting into by posting my opinion in the first place.

It's not just a matter of subjective opinion.

I thought the original trilogy was good. Thought the third was the weakest but also had probably the best climax of the first three films.

The prequels just missed the point. There are no "common people" in them. The nearest thing they have to commoners is Jar Jar Binks, and he's a senator by the end of the first one. Nobody we care about is at stake. The characters are nonexistent. They're all beauty, no heart. And to this day, "lava surfing" remains my go-to example of a scene in a film where the need for spectacle just overtakes everything else, to the point where the film just disappears up its own backside.

As a non-fan I couldn't stand the prequels. Any of them. No heart, no soul, no likeable characters, forgettable villain with ridiculously convoluted scheme, unlikeable "heroes", no real protagonist, nobody I can root for or against. They're just... nothing. I mean, what am I supposed to take from them? Anything?

The problems these films have aren't just a matter of "subjectivity". I mean, you might enjoy the films in spite of their flaws - I've enjoyed plenty of objectively bad films in my time - but that doesn't magically mean the problems of character and structure just go away. If you enjoyed the prequels, I'm glad you got more from them than I did. That doesn't make them good films by any yardstick that I would use to measure the "goodness" of a film though.

Basically every single thing Qui Gon does or says is complete and utter nonsense -- his ridiculous decisions the whole way through ("lets stow away on separate droid ships and meet down on naboo", "lets take Jar Jar and some handmaiden girl instead of Obi Wan or the Captain guy who are actually a) sensible and b) capable in a fight", "let's not check any other shops besides Watto's in order to get the part we need, especially seeing as the shop owner presumably won't be immune to jedi mind tricks", "lets stake everything we have on the hunch that this child can win Death Race 2000 in the most confusing, convoluted bet ever placed") are just so ...ridiculous that it becomes unwatchable.

Besides that, the characters are all, without exception, completely two dimensional, the fight scenes are really visually impressive but at the same time just not as engaging as those from the original trilogy, especially all of the parts with the battle-droids, who are somehow even less menacing than the Stormtroopers, who were almost laughably incompetent at their jobs, don't fucking get me started on Jar Jar Binx, the child acting was horrendous, however so was that of Ewan McGregor and Natalie Portman.

tippy2k2:
I hate when people use that video as their argument (nothing personal Flamezdudes :). I'm not about to watch a one hour video to get your opinion...just tell us why you don't like it: That's what I do!

Hey. I'm totally with you concerning the very concept, the contagious mind-numbing wasting disease that is sequelitis idiotica.

But... here's my thoughts on Mr. Plinkett's epic Star Wars prequels reviews: They're awesome and way more entertaining (and enlightening) than the three sequels by themselves. I'd go so far as to say that they're the best thing that could possibly arise from the pus-covered clusterfuck that is the Star Wars prequels.

When I first got sent the links to an 'hour-long Phantom Menace review' I laughed hard, LOL style. Eventually, though, I'd watch it, and then I watched them all, never being bored or plain not entertained.

I could say the reason that the prequels sucked was because they give an outline of them in the original trilogy, and do NOTHING with that material. Here are a few pointers:

Leia knew her mother. Yep, she says she remembers her even though she died when she was young. Infants don't know their mothers, and don't consider themselves YOUNG. Whoever whatshisnames wife was, that was NOT leia's mother, and she probably wouldn't get all glassy-eyed about her step-mother.

Obi-wan really liked anakin skywalker. He was the best pilot in the galaxy and a good friend. The goofy shit in episode I where he 'accidentally' gets in a SOMF ship and shoots down a bunch of stuff is complete crap. Luke and Han, you can believe they were good friends. Obi-wan and anakin didn't even like each other. Their friendship was about as forced as his romance with Padme.

Droids: They are mass produced. C3P0 mentions other jobs he did before he was on Leia's ship. Making Anakin build him makes no sense. Having R2D2 in the series makes no sense. Invent some other kind of droid that would have been around 20 odd years before the original trilogy. If they had C3P0 in the Knights of the Old Republic series, you are sure as shit people would toss the bullshit flag.

Clones: The clone wars are mentioned in the original trilogy, but they NEVER say that storm-troopers are those clones, or any clones at all. On that note, Jango fett really doesn't deserve to be the 'father of the clones'. That essentially makes Boba fett a storm trooper in all but costume.

Like I said earlier, you could have taken a few sentences from the trilogy and made a movie with a fighter pilot befriending a jedi, having epic adventures and eventually falling to the dark side. Instead we get a nonsense plot where they find a KID who is TOO OLD to begin the training, so they saddle a freshly minted Jedi to train him in their stead. Then there is some nonsense where he falls in love with a queens maid(?)(seriously, why the makeup and all the look-a-likes. Then she is supposed to be some sort of ambassador or something.). The final movie was completely forced and makes no sense. It's just a bad movie. All three of them fail as movies individually, and combined they drag down the entire series.

There are so many things that were wrong wtih the prequels, but in the interest of brevity, I'll sum it up by citing the primary failing across all three: they failed to accomplish their purpose.

What purpose was that you ask? The saga of Star Wars in its entirety was intended to be a story of one man: the rise, fall, and redemption of Darth Vader (Anakin Skywalker). The last half of this was done in the first three movies, where we saw the great evil that was Darth Vader, a man willing to destroy entire worlds, and who in the end, gave his life to save his son and stop the greater evil in the galaxy.

Now the prequel trilogy was intended to set up the rise and lead into the fall; it was to show us the great hero Anakin once was; someone who fought for good and justice and had the admiration of the people (as well as the audience). When we saw what a great hero he was, it would make his fall all the more tragic to witness, making that ultimate fall a moving and evocative emotional experience.

But here is where it failed: in these movies, Anakin was never a hero; he never really ascended past the level of whiny brat (like father, like son I suppose, but at least Luke grew out of it by the end). He never demonstrated any heroic attributes or personality. His only redeeming qualities were a talent for the Force and skill with a lightsaber, and a shiny sword does not a hero make. The point is that he was never a character the audience could really care about, and as such, when the fall eventually came, it was less of a tradgedy and more of an inevitability. Whether this was the fault of the writing, the acting, the directing, or a combination of all three is up for debate, but ultimately what matters is that it failed miserably. It is said that good cinema moves the audience to emotion; the Star Wars prequesl simply moved people to apathy.

If I had a dollar for every "why do people have X opinion?" thread I saw here I would be a rich man. Because we have different standards and values on what constitutes a good film?

The prequels are not "especially hated" by everyone. They get the same fair review as all films that I like or dislike. I hate Avatar and yet the general public gave that a free pass on the overuse of special effects and completely boring story.

LaughingAtlas:
Personally, I mostly liked the prequels, (except for the second one) worts and all, and I while I can certainly understand why most people don't, here's another way to remember them: The movies as a D&D campaign in web comic form.
It's entirely possible you'll end up liking Jar-Jar, or at least his player.

Oh Lord that comic is priceless!

For me the prequels hold a tonne of missed opportunity. It was too kid-orientated, too full of characters and scenes designed to be fun for the younglings to watch, and no proper peril or actual dark themes in case that scared them. The original trilogy was really quite dark plot-wise, and had some deep characterisations and real exciting and memorable scenes because of it. The prequels were badly explained, full of plotholes, never more than the popcorn peril of "oh, how are they going to get out of this one?" and everything was just really shallow.

Ahh RedLetterMedia.

That series of videos is overused, and people treat it as a sort of "Bible" for criticizing the Star Wars prequels.

While it has several valid points, I don't agree with the main thesis that the problems stem from George Lucas being incompetent.

I maintain that he made those films with the SOLE PURPOSE of merchandising above all else, and every problem with those films is directly or indirectly related to that premise.

Apart from the CGI and merchandising, I find a great lack of effort on everything else:
-The script is utter nonsense when you stop and think about it (for ANY of the prequels)
-Erratic pacing and editing (transition shots are all over the place, or just missing entirely)
-Painful lack of character development
-Boring acting/Poor direction. (They have A-list actors giving C-list performances for D-list direction)
-Pointless sets/characters made to create fodder for more toys and games
(Kashyakk in Episode 3, Pod Racing in Episode 1, or anything involving the Gungans)
-A "disposable" attitude towards the main villains (this is a personal pet peeve of mine about the prequels)

I could list volumes of examples, but it's not really the topic at hand here.

If it wasn't obvious, I personally don't like the prequels.
Not because of "George Lucas Raped my Childhood", but because they're boring and stupid.

This thread comes up about once a month and is always the same... I always think haters are gonna hate.

But the one thing I wonder is what people who grew up watching the new films will think about them in say, ten years time.

kortin:
I love the prequels.

I was so unbearably bored with the original trilogy. The only good thing about it was Mark Hamill and Harrison Ford's acting.

Opinions are opinions, but you might want to borrow this for later:

image

Daystar Clarion:
Because they are horrendous?

'I had a dream about my wife dying and a Sith Lord told me he could save her, so I choose to ignore years of Jedi training to trust a Sith Lord even though said Jedi training would have involved me learning that Sith Lords are not to be trusted.

Also, I'll just go an kill all the young padawans for reasons.'

The writing is fucking awful.

I would point out even more stupidity in the film, but this just about summed it up.
The continuity errors are numerous and let's be perfectly honest. It was sort of convincing that he'd give into the Darkside seeing his mom die a horrible death by sand people, but then his confession to Padme was so damn forced that I couldn't take him seriously.

Not to mention the entire romance of how it started between Anakin and Padme was so forced you could practically see how uncomfortable the actors were.

Nimcha:
This thread comes up about once a month and is always the same... I always think haters are gonna hate.

Sheeple gonna sheep?

Seriously, dude, it doesn't make you a shining beacon of reason and intellect to spout off one of the most thoughtless and closed-minded slogans ever invented. People aren't hating just for the fuck of it, as it implies, people hate those movies because they suck, and there are reasons for that. Reasons you can argue.

Maybe you like them, I don't know why you would, but fine. Coming in here and pretending like none of the criticism is valid by trying to paint the critics with statements like these is one of the most deeply disingenuous things you can attempt to do on a forum. I hope you realise how worthless a statement "haters gonna hate" actually is. I have a hard time believing this is the best you can do.

It's just because people were expecting one thing and got another. People wanted a compelling story, great action scenes, etc, and they got... Jar Jar Binks.

kortin:

Ieyke:
You're going to the special hell. They remodeled to make space just for you and your kind. It's now for child molesters, people who talk during movies, and people who think the Star Wars prequels were good while the originals sucked.

First off, thanks for the insult, I appreciate it.

He's referencing Firefly. It's a geek joke, and not actually intended to offend anyone.

Shepherd Book tells Mal that he's going to the special reserved for (See above), an absurd punishment for a crime Mal wasn't going to commit. It's like 10 years old, come on.

A warning for that is really really harsh.

I thought that Star Wars, episode one was okay really. My only two gripes tbh were the reducing of mystic force powers to nothing more than how many parasites were in your body and.. Jar Jar. I don't mind his character really, I just wish he had been a cool, witty outcast instead of a clumsy, mildly retarded gungan. To use a quote from the movie Tropic Thunder, "Never go full retard".

I'm not a huge Star Wars fan, I thought the originals were a bit meh to be perfectly honest. I liked Episode One the most out of all six. There were awesome fight scenes, and the podracing scene was really cool. Plus, you know, Liam Neeson. Also, Darth Maul was an awesome villain. The view that the prequels were abominations mined from the deepest bowels of hell is certainly not universal.

the prequels took themselves way too seriously in the wrong way, and were way too silly in a different wrong way.

Well for me...

None of the characters are interesting, the script is convoluted and dull, the acting is weak, the script is silly, the visuals are bland (reliance on shiny things over visual aesthetics) and well... there is nothing remotely memorable. When taken on their own, they are forgettable sci-fi flicks, but as a Star Wars film, in the shadow of a classic trilogy, it's well... shit.

If you like it; good for you. However, for me the Star Wars prequels are truly mediocre.

Jar Jar Binks.

"Your skin is like sand. I hate sand" (somehow this is romantic despite seeming to mean he hates her skin)

Anakin, as a kid, flying a ship 'by accident', blowing up enemy ships 'by accident', destroying massive space station an entire fleet of trained fighters couldn't destroy 'by accident'.

Lucas's attempt at romance.

Wooden acting (I blame filming entirely in front of a green screen and having no environment to interact with. Also, Lucas apparently doesn't give the actors much direction other than 'follow the script)

Jar Jar Binks.

The jedi went from 'mystic warriors' to 'BLAAAAARGH KILL IT WITH MAGIC'

The entire concept that Jedi cannot form attachments. If they had treated it so that some of the jedi disagreed with the rule and made it more of a grey area that could have been interesting, but from the start everybody is just like 'yup, I can't care about anything at all because I'm a Jedi. AND I'M OKAY WITH THAT!'
Shoe-horning in characters from the originals because.... uh, the originals.

Bad pacing all around.

Over-reliance on CGI (despite saying back in the 70's that the biggest mistake a director can make is relying too much on effects)

That animal with the four asses that farts in Jar Jar Binks' face.

The idea that we were not supposed to realize that Padme was actually the queen in disguise as a handmaiden. I was 12 when I saw this movie, and was only surprised when I found out that I was not supposed to have known that. Seriously. Look at the other characters faces. They had no freaking idea.

Jar Jar Binks.

Anakin Skywalker. First he's a whiny kid we all hate. Then he's a whiny adult we all hate. At least he's consistent, though.

Padme dies because she 'loses the will to live'. Despite just having had two children that she should feel some sort of responsibility for. And having technology WAYYYY more advanced than what we have now (and btw, being choked and thrown to the ground? Totally something we could keep you alive from, assuming you weren't killed instantly).

The bungled attempt at slapstick with 3P0. And for that matter, having 3P0 thrown into the movie for almost no reason.

Jar Jar Binks. But hey, he doomed the galaxy at the end, so at least he had a point to the story.

I will give credit where credit is due, though. At least the first movie FELT like Star Wars. I think it was because they actually used some sets, lending a more organic feel to the actors performances and interactions. But Clone Wars (possibly the worst one of the prequels) didn't feel at all like Star Wars, and the third one, while the best of the three, still seemed to be missing that little spark of life.

The writing is garbage, the characters are dull, and the directing is lazy. Most episodes of any Star Trek series had better camera work. John Williams score is really the only good thing to come out of them. Red Letter Media makes many good points, and I love watching thier reviews more than the movies, but I came to many such conclusions myself far before seeing those videos. I was in middle school when Ep. 1 came out and even through the glamer I really felt I could have written some better dialog.

I was basically raised by the original trilogy, but there's just more there, and miniatures are better than CGI, they just are aside from the effects being revolutionary for their time they look alot more convincing, and shots aren't cluttered with ****.

LaughingAtlas:
Personally, I mostly liked the prequels, (except for the second one) worts and all, and I while I can certainly understand why most people don't, here's another way to remember them: The movies as a D&D campaign in web comic form.

Can't agree with you, but I'm digging this three pages in.

RJ 17:

Flamezdudes:
inb4 red letter media review.

I'l just post this here before anyone else to save trouble.

http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/star-wars/star-wars-episode-1-the-phantom-menace/

And just like with Bob's review, I'll simply say "This video aside..." :P

Please try again my friend.

So you want me to explain to you why I hate the prequels WITHOUT using any points from a video that sums up every reason I can come up with?

Well I guess you win in that case? If you wanna call it that...

But seriously the red letter media review explains perfectly why the prequels are terrible (at least the Phantom Menace). The Phantom Edit does fix a few problems though.

I don't hate them, prefer the older films, but I like the idea of the prequels, just the execution of the idea that flopped a bit for me.

But we wouldn't have a lot of the cool Star Wars games, comics etc if it wasn't for them. Battlefront I & II and KotoR owe a bit to them.

For me, I could not follow how the Clone Wars progressed. How did a trade dispute on Naboo end up in a galactic civil war? I couldn't follow how they got from point A to point B. Plus, I am of the generation that read Timothy Zahn's trilogy of novels, and that had a far better idea for the origins of the Clone Wars than 'it is a war, with clones in it'. It was poor writing. There were some good ideas there, but they weren't put on paper well at all. I've said before that they feel like Lucas pulled out the back stories he wrote prior to episode 4 and just made a script out of them without bothering to edit or update them at all.

I also got the feeling that it tried far too hard to tie everything to the original trilogy. Why did C3P0 have to be made by Anakin? Why did Obi-Wan actually have to own R2? other little things like that (like the Republic fighters with the completely pointless s-foils other than to make an x-shape (see, they have X-wings!). Why not use craft that have already been established as being old in the original trilogy, but would have been brand new in the prequels, like Y-wings and Z95 headhunters?). It didn't feel natural, just forced.

On the subject of video breakdowns, I prefer Confused Matthew's take on the series.

Major Tom:

I also got the feeling that it tried far too hard to tie everything to the original trilogy. Why did C3P0 have to be made by Anakin? Why did Obi-Wan actually have to own R2? other little things like that .

its called pandering....

also the dissconnect between works when going back to somthing old

LaughingAtlas:
here's another way to remember them: The movies as a D&D campaign in web comic form.
It's entirely possible you'll end up liking Jar-Jar, or at least his player.

I would just like to say thank you, I have just spent the past 2 days staying up reading this and it is my new favourite webcomic.

Y'know who get's the worst rap in the SW univers.... The Ewoks.

Personally, I liked them, there, I said it. Little furry dudes running around the forest, smashing stormtroopers, forming cross-species crushes. But that was maybe just my age at the time, I was 8 - and the whole setting was tangible... like we could go into the woods and play star wars, and the toys from that movie were the best of the whole series - speed bike things, AT AT walkers, if you had some SW toys and a back yard then the 80's was a fun decade. Ewoks brought Star Wars down to an 8 year olds level. Plus by the time ROTJ was released on video/TV etc, and became properly accesible for everyone - movies like Trolls and Labyrinth were out, the Ewoks fitted the era, just so long as you were in the right age bracket. People talk about Empire as being the best SW movie, but for me I can barely even remember that movie - it's all over the place, at least ROTJ has a firm plot, it starts off awesome and ends up awesome, you just gotta be 8 at the time.

I don't mean to be insulting but see when you get asked this question about why you like the prequels (and indeed why you like them better than the originals) and your response is "because the fights were more awesomer!"

I can't even...

It's completely...

It totally renders me speechless when I see replies like that.

Cos I don't even consider myself a huge Star Wars fan, and even I realise that if thats your reason for "liking" the prequels then you have entirely - ENTIRELY - missed the point of Star Wars.

While for some movies it's okay to be as thin and "weak" as the prequels, it is not okay for Star Wars.

Example:
The Transformers movies.

They are literally movies with the lamest, weakest, stupidest storylines and characters ever. And let's face it guys the only reason we like them is cos "Yay! Optimus Prime!"

They are completely popcorn movies that from the very start were intended on being that way. And thats completely fine.

I love them for that, and completely do not agree with the criticism levelled against them for that simple reason. They are supposed to be that way.

Star Wars on the other hand was never about the flash, the light sabers, the force, or even the universe. It was about the characters, and about the struggle of good versus evil. And in the prequels the characters are probably the weakest and lamest characters ever written. Almost all of them are caricatures.

Also I forgot to mention either.

Every single time a character said that Anakin was meant to "bring balance to the force" by destroying the dark side according to that lame ass prophecy, I wanted to epic face palm. Even when the prequels first came out and I was only in my early teens it made me groan.
You don't achieve balance by destroying the other side! It makes no fricking sense!

If the prophecy was something like he would bring "peace" to the force, or something it would have made sense.
Imagine a set of scales.

The left side has 150 grams of weight on it. And the right has 250 grams of weight on it.

The left represents the light side, and the right the dark side.

To balances the scales you would shift 50 grams from the right to the left, or remove 100 grams from the right.
You would not fling the whole 250 grams away. Then there is no balance at all, nor any chance of balance.

Almost enough to make you wish Kreia had succeeded, and the force had died.

Baron_Rouge:
I'm not a huge Star Wars fan, I thought the originals were a bit meh to be perfectly honest. I liked Episode One the most out of all six. There were awesome fight scenes, and the podracing scene was really cool. Plus, you know, Liam Neeson. Also, Darth Maul was an awesome villain. The view that the prequels were abominations mined from the deepest bowels of hell is certainly not universal.

I find it interesting that the one specific scene you cite as "really cool" was practically lifted in its entirety from another movie*. Sure Lucas put a Star Wars skin on it, but it was clearly not Lucas' creation. I've never seen a more blatant case of cinema plagarism passed off under the guise of "homage." What does it say about the movies when what you think is the best scene actually belongs in another movie?

*For the young'uns who watched Phantom Menace and were oblivious to the reference: the pod race was a remake of the chariot race from "Ben Hur". You should watch it, it's a really good movie, a cinema classic and a piece of film history.

RJ 17:
Last night I was going through some of MovieBob's old "Escape to the Movies" reviews and I stumbled across his "Phantom Menance Wasn't So Bad" video in which he asserts that Episode 1 wasn't "I wanna murder George Lucas" bad, but rather simply a "meh" worthy movie.

That statement gives you all the information you should need. Think about it for a moment, The original trilogy was and still is pretty damn close to godhood in terms of popularity. While I feel that not all of that popularity is deserved, it still is an excellent series, one that I thoroughly recommend the tiny percentage of people who haven't seen it to see.

By comparison, the prequels, particularly phantom menace, are not only "meh", but upset a great deal of the original SW lore. As a result, yes, rabid fans are pissed.

In somewhat related news, I just heard on the radio that George Lucas has sold Lucasfilm to Disney, and they are planning to release Star Wars: Episode 7 in 2015. Here's hoping Disney can do less to screw up the series than Lucas did; is it too much to wish for the Zahn trilogy as movies?

Here's a source on the sale: http://247wallst.com/2012/10/30/the-force-lucas-sells-out-to-disney-star-wars-is-coming-back-with-disney/

Blackbird71:

Baron_Rouge:
I'm not a huge Star Wars fan, I thought the originals were a bit meh to be perfectly honest. I liked Episode One the most out of all six. There were awesome fight scenes, and the podracing scene was really cool. Plus, you know, Liam Neeson. Also, Darth Maul was an awesome villain. The view that the prequels were abominations mined from the deepest bowels of hell is certainly not universal.

I find it interesting that the one specific scene you cite as "really cool" was practically lifted in its entirety from another movie*. Sure Lucas put a Star Wars skin on it, but it was clearly not Lucas' creation. I've never seen a more blatant case of cinema plagarism passed off under the guise of "homage." What does it say about the movies when what you think is the best scene actually belongs in another movie?

*For the young'uns who watched Phantom Menace and were oblivious to the reference: the pod race was a remake of the chariot race from "Ben Hur". You should watch it, it's a really good movie, a cinema classic and a piece of film history.

But movies do that sort of thing all the time, don't they? There's a fine line between plagiarism and tribute. In any case, if I was saying that the first Star Wars was a life changing experience that was moving, artistically beautiful, and a movie everyone should see, then that'd no doubt be a concern. However, I'm only saying that I found it the most entertaining out of a series of movies I didn't particularly enjoy. All it had to do was entertain me for 2 hours, and it did, through cool scenes like that.

The Shawshank Redemption succeeds in every aspect, as do Inception, Fight Club, American History X, and (500) Days of Summer. They succeed in not only holding my attention for a few hours, but in really making me think. They're fantastic pieces of cinema. For Star Wars Episode one, I had much lower expectations, and it exceeded them just by being better (in my opinion) than the original trilogy.

I put the complaints regarding the Prequels (after careful thought) under the same banner as the complaints about Mass Effect 3, Derpy, and a thousand similar events.

Fanboy pissing and moaning.

I loved the prequels. Especially Anakin. He was one of my favorite things in those movies, and Christensen quickly became on of my favorite actors.

Hardcore fans of anything will complain to the umpteenth degree about source material not lining up with their supposed ideal of what it should be. You gotta just ignore that. Sure the Prequels have some cheesy or otherwise ham-handed or even bad moments, but no more than the originals did.

Fish swim, birds fly, Republicans practice bigotry, and hardcore Star Wars fans cry at the drop of a hat.

Bhaalspawn:
I put the complaints regarding the Prequels (after careful thought) under the same banner as the complaints about Mass Effect 3, Derpy, and a thousand similar events.

Fanboy pissing and moaning.

I loved the prequels. Especially Anakin. He was one of my favorite things in those movies, and Christensen quickly became on of my favorite actors.

Hardcore fans of anything will complain to the umpteenth degree about source material not lining up with their supposed ideal of what it should be. You gotta just ignore that. Sure the Prequels have some cheesy or otherwise ham-handed or even bad moments, but no more than the originals did.

Fish swim, birds fly, Republicans practice bigotry, and hardcore Star Wars fans cry at the drop of a hat.

We have ourselves a winner! You are one of the few people on this thread who is not a raging fanboy!

I want to examine some of these complaints of the prequels:

1. CGI Effects
What is the point of this complaint? Having a lot of CGI isn't too awful as long as that isn't all the movie is, and people who complain about this don't even say that it's bad. They just say "Too much CGI, that sucks". CGI has helped to make the battle scenes be pretty awesome, without interfering with the story. If the CGI makes the movie look more awesome, without being just a montage of CGI effects, what's the problem. As for the complaint about Yoda being CGI: as opposed to him being a weird looking hand puppet like he was in the originals? Yeah, nice nostalgia goggles you got on there, where did you buy them?

2. Anakin being "whiny"
This one I really don't understand. People are looking at this more as a movie to entertain them rather than what would make sense in a real life situation. Here's what I mean: "Anakin needs to stop talking about romance and Padme and go do something cool!" or "Anakin turns into Darth Vader he starts complaining about his girlfriend! What a whiner!". Okay, so the thing between Anakin and Padme is annoying and shouldn't be in the movie because romance apparently doesn't belong in Star Wars, even though it develops the character as something besides "I'ma go kill stuff with mah lightsaber." What about that thing between Han Solo and Princess Leia? That was okay because it was in the original movies, nostalgia goggles are selling like hot cakes! And when he still cares about Padme when he turns into Darth Vader, it shows he was still human on the inside even with his badass Darth Vader exterior. Yeah, his girlfriend DIED, and it's wrong for him to show some emotion? That makes you sound like a moron who is a terrible judge of writing.

3. Jar-jar
Not going to disagree with this one, he was a silly character that appealed to the kids and was a slap in the face to the adult fans.

4. Characters doing something that is the opposite of what their character should do
People say Obi-Wan broke character when he calls Anakin reckless and then goes and does the most reckless thing possible. It is possible that that was exactly what the movie was trying to show, that he acts like Anakin is really reckless when he is ironically just as reckless as he is, to show that he's not a complete tight-ass of a Jedi master. But I'll allow this complaint, but there's just one problem with it. When does this happen to anyone else outside of one or two scenes with Obi-Wan? It's supposed to be complaint about the prequels when it's about just what one character does in a couple of scenes. This complaint is definitely a minor one, for reasons I have listed.

5. Anakin turning to the dark side makes no sense
Really? Even as a child I could follow this one pretty easily. The Jedi knew about that "chosen one" thing, so they constantly treated Anakin kept criticizing him for doing anything and treating him like a child. So Anakin, being somewhat young and impressionable still, of course turns to the dark side with some convincing by Emperor Palpatine. If Anakin were like 40 and had extensive training, this backstory would have indeed been pretty nonsensical. But he wasn't. And really, couldn't you say the same about ANYONE who chooses to go to the dark side? Why does ANYONE hate the Jedi that much? The "chosen one" thing already predicted that he would have a lot of hatred and evil inside of him, that's basically the entire checklist for being a sith.

6. Clone Wars plotline came out of nowhere
Not really, they spent the entire second and third movies developing it. What, is that not enough time to be able to follow it? They cloned a guy who is an excellent fighter, and made an army of excellent soldiers. Cloning, even on a mass scale, isn't far fetched for a sci-fi movie. It works just fine, and it makes sense. You have the means to make an entire army of somewhat disposable humans for you, sounds like a good idea to me (if I were part of a government that really cared that little about sentient life). And since they never seem to explain the origins of the stormtroopers in the original movies, and their faces are never shown, it fits into the story well enough.

7. The midichlorians ruined The Force
Yes, because developing a small piece of backstory for something that makes no sense is a bad thing. I'm sorry but seeing as The Force is supposed to be this magical force of nature in a universe where there is nothing else "magical" to be found seems pretty ridiculous to me.

And now for some postives of the movies:

1. The Soundtrack
I don't need to explain this, everyone knows John Williams is one of the best composers ever.

2. Lightsaber Duels
Do I need to explain this one as well? These scenes are just plain badass, and John Williams' awesome music perfects it.

3. They offer some backstory for the original trilogy
Also needs no explanation.

And I'm not even a George Lucas fanboy. I agree he should NOT have edited the original trilogy, they were fine just the way they were. The most that should have been done to them was to improve the quality to high-definition or something.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked