Star Wars Prequel Trilogy

The Man

Well-known member
glorbes said:
I hear there's a Skywalker Church in Ireland that uses Lucas's half-baked take on Myth, Eastern Religions and Christian themes as fodder for sermons.

Really? I'd nearly seek it out. For a hoot...
 

MaxPhactor23

New member
I’m so sick of the redundant “Fans would have never been pleased” apologist answer. It’s completely become a broken record. I’ll throw my two cents out there; now they can buy themselves an original argument. Point is…what’s with the Lucas apologists? That being the ones that feel this incisive need to make excuses for George Lucas’s blatant shortcomings. It’s so obnoxious. It’s makes people appear so completely brainwashed, like they live for the approval of their nerd god.

Whilst it’s true that George had a lot to live up to, arguably the most anticipated film series in history, he could have certainly delivered an over-all better performance then what he put on our plate. I don’t think it was our unreachable expectations so much as it was that magnified by the undeniably garbage we were given. That just heightened our disappointment. Lucas failed for many people, expectations or not. Anyone that tells you different is just making excuses once more. Someone cannot sit here and tell me that we expected something like Jar Jar Binks from the prequels. No one in their right mind was braced for something like that. Of course you can’t please everyone. That’s a not-so-accepted truth, but you can please a majority! Georgie-boy failed miserably at even that goal. You’re deeply rooted in denial if you feel that he couldn’t have done the prequels better and please more fan. The Original Trilogy skewed nothing. This was a ball full of poor writing, wooden acting, and lame story, nostalgia or not.

The fact of the matter is that George Lucas decided he was nothing but a visual director between Last Crusade and Phantom Menace, thusly putting all his emphasis upon nothing more then eye candy. Storyline and character development were now rendered irrelevant so long as the dim-witted audience had pretty pictures to ogle. He became Dr. Frankenstein with his latest development; digital film and CGI. He ran with it to mask either his terribly concept of a story...or pure laziness.

With the induction of Ewoks, cutesy little teddy bears shamelessly introduced for the obvious purpose of selling cutesy little dolls, this was his public acknowledgement of his multi-million dollar marketing monster. He knew he could make a fortune…it was time to take advantage of it. So money conquered script, ergo sacrifices were made to the prequel storyline for more room to include advert campaigns and shameless proportional ties to junk food. This created the long-running chain of expendable prequel-trilogy villains, each just cool enough for every child to own, but lacking serious amounts of effort in the literary department…then prematurely pasted to make way for a latest gimmicky toy-commercial of a baddie. This birthed the blatantly botched Jar Jar Binks. It’s no coincidence that to get to know new characters introduced in the prequels, even fill in some important gaps left open in the actual film plotlines themselves (Sifo-Dias anyone?)…you have to shell out an amount of cash to buy a novel. These are just some of the many ways George makes-up for his lackluster development, profiting off the fan base's desperation to feel fulfilled.

So to sum George Lucas up; He’s a businessman under the false façade of a filmmaker. Legitimate storytelling has flown out the window and I doubt there will ever be a recovery. Money rules the fate of men...or in this case the fate of men in a galaxy far far away. George doesn't care about what we want or satisfying the fan base...he cares about what's in our wallets. The saddest part is that he's got many wrapped around his finger. Even worse, he knows it.
 
Last edited:

sandiegojones

New member
MaxPhactor23 said:
I’m so sick of the redundant “Fans would have never been pleased” apologist answer. It’s completely become a broken record. I’ll throw my two cents out there; now they can buy themselves an original argument. Point is…what’s with the Lucas apologists? That being the ones that feel this incisive need to make excuses for George Lucas’s blatant shortcomings. It’s so obnoxious. It’s makes people appear so completely brainwashed, like they live for the approval of their nerd god.

Whilst it’s true that George had a lot to live up to, arguably the most anticipated film series in history, he could have certainly delivered an over-all better performance then what he put on our plate. I don’t think it was our unreachable expectations so much as it was that magnified by the undeniably garbage we were given. That just heightened our disappointment. Lucas failed for many people, expectations or not. Anyone that tells you different is just making excuses once more. Someone cannot sit here and tell me that we expected something like Jar Jar Binks from the prequels. No one in their right mind was braced for something like that. Of course you can’t please everyone. That’s a not-so-accepted truth, but you can please a majority! Georgie-boy failed miserably at even that goal. You’re deeply rooted in denial if you feel that he couldn’t have done the prequels better and please more fan. The Original Trilogy skewed nothing. This was a ball full of poor writing, wooden acting, and lame story, nostalgia or not.

The fact of the matter is that George Lucas decided he was nothing but a visual director between Last Crusade and Phantom Menace, thusly putting all his emphasis upon nothing more then eye candy. Storyline and character development were now rendered irrelevant so long as the dim-witted audience had pretty pictures to ogle. He became Dr. Frankenstein with his latest development; digital film and CGI. He ran with it to mask either his terribly concept of a story...or pure laziness.

With the induction of Ewoks, cutesy little teddy bears shamelessly introduced for the obvious purpose of selling cutesy little dolls, this was his public acknowledgement of his multi-million dollar marketing monster. He knew he could make a fortune…it was time to take advantage of it. So money conquered script, ergo sacrifices were made to the prequel storyline for more room to include advert campaigns and shameless proportional ties to junk food. This created the long-running chain of expendable prequel-trilogy villains, each just cool enough for every child to own, but lacking serious amounts of effort in the literary department…then prematurely pasted to make way for a latest gimmicky toy-commercial of a baddie. This birthed the blatantly botched Jar Jar Binks. It’s no coincidence that to get to know new characters introduced in the prequels, even fill in some important gaps left open in the actual film plotlines themselves (Sifo-Dias anyone?)…you have to shell out an amount of cash to buy a novel. These are just some of the many ways George makes-up for his lackluster development, profiting off the fan base's desperation to feel fulfilled.

So to sum George Lucas up; He’s a businessman under the false façade of a filmmaker. Legitimate storytelling has flown out the window and I doubt there will ever be a recovery. Money rules the fate of men...or in this case the fate of men in a galaxy far far away. George doesn't care about what we want or satisfying the fan base...he cares about what's in our wallets. The saddest part is that he's got many wrapped around his finger. Even worse, he knows it.
I don't dissagree with you at all. I did expect something different back in 1998, but I don't blame Lucas for making the film he wanted to.

I did have an expectation of the PT that was primarily based on interviews and back story that Lucas gave in the 15 years in between the films. I never anticipated an 8 year old Anakin, or Jar Jar. I expected to see "adults" in an adventure film and to have truely dark moments as Anakin became Vader. I stated before that in early 1997 when I heard Liam Neeson was cast I was sure he's be Anakin and become Vader. Later when I found out Anakin was 8 years old and not a grown man I was definitely surprised! Then the love interest (Portman) was 14 and supposed to be an "elected" queen of an entire planet and supposed to make grand political descisions. Who elects a queen, especially one that's 14?

I think the only things that were in the PT from on those old interviews was how Anakin became Vader (the lava) and that the clone army was based on Fett (although it should have been Boba, not Jango). Yoda kind of became a joke with all of the fighting too (even though I like the Sidious duel).

I also agree with you about the amount of villains, but I never thought about it as a way to sell more figures, but you're probably correct. The thing is, if he could have weaved Darth Maul though the 3 films and made Jango cooler and a larger part of the story it could have been cool.

I can go on and on too, but I still enjoy the PT for what they are (for the most part). There's a lot of cool and imaginative stuff in the films, even if the execution is not always the best, but I'm not an apologist!

Would anyone like to see Chris Nolan direct a Knights of the Old Repulic film?
 
Last edited:

The Man

Well-known member
From a story-telling point of view, the most glaring flaw has to be that the insightful, know-all Jedi couldn't quite rumble Darth Sidious, even if The Dark Side had clouded matters to a degree.

For Christ's sake, Dooku even told Obi-Wan the whole deal on Geonosis! Two? Plus? Two? Huh?



INT. MEDITATION CHAMBER - DAY

OBI-WAN
Master Yoda, I bring troubling news. Last night I observed Chancellor Palpatine meeting with General Grevious while wearing a 'DOWN WITH THE JEDI' T-Shirt and waving a red lightsaber over his head.

YODA
...Hmmm. Mysterious and intriguing, this development is. Watch him closely, we must. What they seem, things may not be...​
 

mobollux2

New member
I'll give CW a shot, it has potential but personally i would have liked to have seen a CW done by James Cameron during Aliens time frame.
 

Jonesy9906753

Well-known member
Agent Spalko said:
So Harry says Stinky the Hutt and Ziro the Hutt are more retarded than Jar Jar Binks. Jesus H. Christ is there anything that Lucas hasn't completely f***ed up since 1983?!?!?! :confused:

Lucas needs to stop making films. Period.

well there was last crusade in 1989,i wouldnt consider that ****ing up something,its my third favorite indy movie
 

sandiegojones

New member
I saw this on IGN regarding Qui-Gon in Ep III:

While Neeson was set to appear in Episode III as well, a motorcycle accident prevented him from filming his part. Fans can get an idea of how this scene would have played out by reading the novelization.

I never knew that! I hope it makes it onto the future special edition DVD! I'm almost sure GL would re-film if if he wants to. I expect a CGI Yoda in TPM too.
 

Zoetrope

New member
Those unwilling or unable to enjoy the Star Wars films as an old-fashioned serial adventure will doubtless also find some elements - such as the heavily stylized dialogue - distracting and/or unintentionally comic. Enjoying any work of creative fantasy requires a certain suspension of disbelief, or willingness to accept the conventions of the genre. To the extent that film criticism can claim to be objective, it must involve more than the mere cataloging of personal taste, requiring at least the thoughtful consideration of what trade-offs are involved in making changes.

I see the PT as an effective cautionary tale warning against the dangers of complacency, arrogance, misplaced priorities and trust, unchecked emotion, and the corruptive nature of power. It clearly shows the consequences of the poor choices made by the heroes because of their inability to see the bigger picture. They still have good intentions, but we know where those can lead.

This is all conjecture, but the moral ambiguity could be emblematic of a sadder, wiser artist. It?d be pretty hard to remake Flash Gordon when, from your point of view, the bad guys have completely won.

The PT has gone on to show us a far more complex and variegated picture of evil - the means by which it develops, the specifics of what drives a good man to become bad - than we could have previously guessed at. How a selfless little boy, so full of love and light, can become a destroyer of worlds and a merciless warlord, is made painfully evident in the new films. So, from my own perspective, Star Wars shows us the black and the white, and it also shows us the shades of gray in between. It is not, however, morally ambiguous, for the themes of the Saga are quite clear: Loyalty, sacrifice, love and friendship: these are the aspects of life that truly matter, not power, material acquisition or control of others.

The notion that violence is circular ("blood will have blood") is among the most popular of literary themes, perhaps second only to the belief that man's capacity for love is his most redeeming quality, and that with it even death is not to be feared. All of these ideas pervade the Star Wars saga, and help elevate the most recent episodes far above the level of a simple serial adventure.

It is only by mastering the evils that lurk within themselves that its heroes ultimately conquer those that threaten them from without. The failure of many critics to understand this point - the interior rather than exterior nature of moral conflict in the Star Wars saga - probably explains why so many seem oblivious to the extremely literate qualities of the latest films. Yet once these are recognized, it becomes hard not to admire Lucas for his audacity in building such a complex six-part drama, and his willingness to face critical and popular scorn for pushing it through to its logical end.

In closing with this thought, it is worth noting that by virtue of their focus on the technical rather than literary qualities of the prequels, it is not surprising that many critics have overlooked this point. Such a narrow focus trivializes the fundamental strengths of the films as part of a remarkably unified saga. In this case, Lucas surely deserves more objective coverage.
 

Gobi-1

Well-known member
No Ticket said:
ROTS got it most right because it gave the people what they WANTED to see. Except it ends with Vader doing like, nothing.

EVERYBODY wanted to see Vader in like half the movie hunting Jedi. Well, everybody that I knew. It was just lame.

This is the problem in a nutshell. The story Lucas WANTED to tell isn't what some fans wanted to see. They wanted an entire trilogy of Darth Vader killing Jedi and Lucas didn't. He was more interested in how Anakin becomes Darth Vader not necessarily what Vader does afterwards.

That's where The Force Unleashed comes in. It will appeal to the 20/30 somethings who wanted The Prequels to be Grand Theft Auto in a galaxy, far, far away.
 

agentsands77

New member
Gobi-1 said:
This is the problem in a nutshell. The story Lucas WANTED to tell isn't what some fans wanted to see. They wanted an entire trilogy of Darth Vader killing Jedi and Lucas didn't. He was more interested in how Anakin becomes Darth Vader not necessarily what Vader does afterwards.
For some, yes. But this was not really among the primary complaints leveled against the prequels. I mean, most knew that EPISODE I was going to be about young Anakin as a little boy, and were still exceedingly excited.

The problems with the prequel trilogy, as cited by many, generally very have little to do with the story that Lucas was trying to tell, but rather how it fell apart in execution.
 

No Ticket

New member
agentsands77 said:
For some, yes. But this was not really among the primary complaints leveled against the prequels. I mean, most knew that EPISODE I was going to be about young Anakin as a little boy, and were still exceedingly excited.

The problems with the prequel trilogy, as cited by many, generally very have little to do with the story that Lucas was trying to tell, but rather how it fell apart in execution.

Yes I didn't mean that everyone I talked to just wanted Vader killing Jedi. They wanted a truly dark tale, serious. You know, Anakin switches over to the Dark Side like flipping a light switch in EP3, it's almost comical.

But if this had been done right it would have been more interesting. His turn could have lasted three films... the execution of this was poor. What I'm saying is that by Episode III we would have wanted to see Vader in at least HALF the film.

I wanted the latter half of EP3 to feel the most like the original trilogy, with Vader hunting down remaining Jedi (Which is what Obi-Wan said he did, although technically it seems he is like the last one left besides Yoda).

True, it did feel the most like the OT, but you didn't get much of it.

I actually LIKE EP3 but I can't argue TPM and especially AOTC could have been so much more.
 

agentsands77

New member
No Ticket said:
Yes I didn't mean that everyone I talked to just wanted Vader killing Jedi. They wanted a truly dark tale, serious. You know, Anakin switches over to the Dark Side like flipping a light switch in EP3, it's almost comical.
Yeah, it definitely comes off that way. Lucas was trying for something else (the "fall" was definitely meant to begin with the whole Shmi Skywalker thing in EPISODE II), but the execution of it all is just really shoddy. What Lucas had on his hands was indeed a truly mythological, epic storyline, but it just didn't pan out.

No Ticket said:
What I'm saying is that by Episode III we would have wanted to see Vader in at least HALF the film.
That's not a really big deal for me. I was fine with the amount of Vader time we got. Sure, the fan in me would have liked some more Vader, but I can live with it.
 

RocketSledFight

New member
Less Vader is more. The prequels set out to show how Anakin became the Vader we know in the OT, and in that regard I feel that they were successful. I don't feel that he developed as a character very much between that shot of him examining the construction of the first Death Star and his arrival in New Hope.
 

No Ticket

New member
RocketSledFight said:
Less Vader is more. The prequels set out to show how Anakin became the Vader we know in the OT, and in that regard I feel that they were successful. I don't feel that he developed as a character very much between that shot of him examining the construction of the first Death Star and his arrival in New Hope.


Still. All we got was a "NoOoOooOoOoooOoo!!!" and him standing with his arms folded.
 
RocketSledFight said:
Vader is still Vader without the mask. A solid hour's worth of film featured Anakin after he had become Vader.

Wrong. Vader is only Vader with the mask. Without the mask he's just a selfish, bratty, murderous punk. It destroys the image of Vader when he first makes his entrance in ANH knowing what an undisciplined snot-nosed child he was before. Had he been this noble, respectable Jedi who had a tragic fall from grace it would have dramatically sustained the impact of the Prequels instead of a being just a glorified episode of Dawson's Creek.
 

Benraianajones

New member
I agree with that Spalko. Same as when I hear Ben talk ominously about the "Clone Wars" I now have to imagine the pathetic Clone Wars business we are shown in their "full glory" now days. The images the clone wars conjured in my mind to that little peice of music that accompanies Ben's words, and the chill it gave me used to be really interesting. Now it is like - clone wars...that featured Jango, oh and Boba! And also..R2 and 3P0 were there too actually..

also, there were these vehicles that resembled rings that roll on the floor, and...

Also, seeing Vader yell "No!" was so saddening, and he also looked so bulky - Palpatine also plucks his name "Vader" from thin air, and the whole scene/backdrop seems so uninteresting. Sometimes little = more. The prequels abolish any imaginative freedom for the viewers of the originals now.

Also, seeing young Anakin at the end of ROTJ is a total insult. Personally I'd have prefered if a man of Qui Gon Jinn's grace had become Vader, as opposed to what Spalko described above.
 
Last edited:
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/nSTpgR7FXO8&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nSTpgR7FXO8&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
 

Shortie

New member
They would of been so much better if Lucas didn't write the scripts. He got lucky at writing back in the '70s.

I have to agree with Spalko, Vader is only Vader with the mask.
 
Top