Why the 'Star Wars' Prequels Are Better Than the Original Trilogy

[TheLonelyTusken]

Poor character development

Too many family and childish themes showing Lucas's aging mind (Indiana jones and the crystal skull anyone?)

Horribly written romance scenes, bordering on twilight quality

Poor choice of characters such as Jarjar to try to take a "chewie" type role and making all the main characters jedi with no real wildcards like Han

Boring buildup including one movie that can be summed up as "yippie"

A race scene that is unexciting, because it's obvious you know who the winner must be

Badly written dialogue

Plot holes so numerous and contrived that I could drive a truck through them

A campy feel, as if you're watching a 60's batman version of star wars

The kid scenes with space fighting and even a light saber fight while jedi masters are gunned down in seconds

A scene with childbirth (sorry im sick of seeing this in movies, pet peeve of mine)

A focus on palatine who is more a charactature than a character, absolutely noone irl would muhahaha, come on

Fanbois like the OP who enjoy putting down things older than them as if anything not new is of diminished worth

 

I'm sorry, but the focus on palpatine is widely considered the best part of the entire prequel trilogy. The plot unravelling and the superb acting performance give him the perfect transition from prequel tonoriginal.

 

What do you mean by "Noone would muhaha in real life?" you realize this is high fantasy, correct? Him being delightfully evil is his complete character and cackling maniacly is the best part.

Edited February 14, 2012 by TheLonelyTusken

[MajinEddie]

http://movies.yahoo.com/news/why-star-wars-prequels-better-original-trilogy-160300514.html

 

It verges on cinematic treason to suggest that the "Star Wars" prequel trilogy is in any way superior to the original trilogy. However, history has proved that treasonous behavior is just as often necessary to stimulate progressive revolution as it is to endow malevolent forces with unrestricted authority necessary to obstruct basic human rights. So here goes: the first three episodes in the saga of Anakin Skywalker

 

are deeper, better structured, and more politically astute than the final three. Not only is that why the prequel is superior, it is also a pretty decent elucidation of the original trilogy's greater popularity.

 

That the "Star Wars" trilogy embraced by American moviegoers is the one that presents a far less complex universe is not incidental to the rabid rebuke of the prequel. "A New Hope," "The Empire Strikes Back," and "Return of the Jedi" reflect the Cold War milieu in which they were created, offering up a comforting us-vs.-them story told in bold strokes lacking nuance, complexity, or intellectual ambiguity.

 

That isn't to say that times have changed much; with the exception of "The Phantom Menace," the second and third installments of the prequel were released to an America that had embraced absolute views even more so than the original trilogy.

 

The difference is that the original trilogy appealed directly to the simplistic moral perspective of an America above reproach and always on the side of right in global geopolitics, whereas the much more subversive prequel trilogy stands in defiant counterpoint to the much more dangerously simplistic moral absolutism of the Age of Bush.

 

The original trilogy holds a special place in the bosom of American moviegoers precisely because we view ourselves comfortably in place of the Rebels. Americans revel in their historical construct as rebellious underdogs constantly at war against an easily identified and unquestionably evil empire. Hence, the reason most Americans love the original trilogy has much to do with placement of ourselves in the role of the inheritors of the mantle of the Jedi.

 

The problem is that the post-9/11 world meant Americans also were forced to identify themselves with the Jedi in the prequel trilogy as well, and we don't like the face we see in the mirror. Let's face it, the Jedi don't exactly come off too swell in the prequel. This time around they are the guys in charge, and it is painful to watch them screw it up, especially when the way they hand over the keys to the Empire is so eerily familiar to a historical era defined by words like "signing statements" and "Patriot Act."

 

Just in case you didn't notice in your rush to castigate Jar-Jar Binks and complain about the wooden dialogue of the prequel, the peaceful Galactic Republic in place at the beginning of "The Phantom Menace" doesn't turn into the dark empire in place at the beginning of "A New Hope" due to an invasion by a foreign element. The Republic falls as a result of due democratic process, albeit due democratic process that is manipulated through lies and deception. Again, sound familiar?

 

Watching the "Stars Wars" prequel trilogy is like the most entertaining lesson in civics ever given -- specifically the way it reveals how even a republic peopled by representative leaders with the best of intentions can make decisions that result in disastrous policies, accompanied by devastation and the crumbling of great ideas. Yoda's observations about anger, hate, fear, and suffering are not said lightly; they may be the most prescient words spoken by a movie character in recent memory.

 

Not much less important is another quote associated with "The Phantom Menace," a quote that hasn't proved anywhere near as memorable as Yoda's but nonetheless plays a huge part in the events that will follow. Chances are you don't even remember these words of Darth Maul: "Fear is my ally." One can well imagine that slogan scrawled across the office walls of men like Scooter Libby and tattooed across the back of Dick Cheney.

 

Nowhere in the original "Star Wars" trilogy is there any sequence of events nearly as profound in their application to real life as Palpatine's manipulative orchestration of the separatist movement "headed" by Count Dooku. Palpatine's nefarious scripting of events allows him to go before the senate and ask for special "emergency powers" to deal with the growing threat facing the peace of the republic. Perhaps if Americans had embraced the prequel in the way they did the original "Star Wars" trilogy, they would recognize the danger when an elected member of a representative republic asks for "emergency powers" to combat a threat.

 

Palpatine's actions in the prequel are positively Machiavellian, and his evil in those first three movies is far more chilling than his appearances as the emperor in the original trilogy. In those movies, Palpatine is so far removed from us we can only approach him from the perspective of a Hitler. We must always remember that Hitler didn't ascend to dictator by using tanks, but the ballot box.

 

Just as Palpatine is far more chilling as a politician abusing the system than he is as an emperor in comprehensively malevolent control, so is Anakin Skywalker far more chilling as a powerless pawn than he is as powerful Darth Vader. No more alarming scene exists in the entire "Star Wars" canon than the political conversation that takes place in "Attack of the Clones" between Anakin and Amidala when the boy-who-would-be Vader suggests the system is broken and needs to be replaced with something where one person in charge has the power to enforce laws he feels are for the good of the people. Amidala replies, rightfully, that what Anakin is talking about sounds like a dictatorship. And then these all-too-familiar words from Anakin: "Well, if it works."

 

Anakin's justification that if authoritarian control works in keeping us safe was being repeated on a daily basis by those in charge at the very time the scene was being projected onto multiplex screens around the world. Too many Anakin Skywalkers existed then and, amazingly, exist right now in this country who are far too eager to give up hard-earned civil rights for the illusion of security. And it is the very fact that one can write about Anakin without calling him either evil or good that elevates the prequel above the original. Try naming a single character in the original trilogy that can attain such an authentic level of ambiguity.

 

There is absolutely no element or character in the original trilogy that isn't delineated in stark black and white terms. Episodes IV through VI tell a much happier story, one that is consistent with the birth of the American democracy through acts of rebellion by a ragtag group of people who held the moral high ground. Episodes I through III, by contrast, tell a much less happy story about how a democracy can come to an end -- not at the hands of foreign interlopers, but directly through the democratic process itself. More people may prefer the original "Star Wars" trilogy, but there is no question that the prequel is a more challenging, illuminating, and superior work of art.

 

You hit it right on the money. Not everyone is as perceptive as you. Just have to learn to live with the simple minded people.

[Rayla_Felana]

The OT wasn't great, but it wasn't complete garbage either, like the PT.

 

Now that wasn't hard was it?

[Guildrum]

I may not agree with you on some areas, but at least you have an intelligent and well-reasoned opinion rather than just jumping on the "lolbinks" bandwagon.

 

Edit: I mean... "BURN THE HERETIC!"

 

But I actually agree on some stance, I watched the PT before the OT and to be honest, the OT is ridiculously simplistic, though entertaining.

 

Just think of Episode IV this way, droids land on desert planet, find farm boy, farm boy meets hermit, hermit and farm boy go off to save the princess, meet "rogue" character and sidekick, they go off, save the :cool:in' princess, hermit dies, they fly off into space, the end.

Edited February 14, 2012 by Guildrum

[Smokedalmond]

 

So here goes: the first three episodes in the saga of Anakin Skywalker are deeper, better structured, and more politically astute than the final three. Not only is that why the prequel is superior, it is also a pretty decent elucidation of the original trilogy's greater popularity.

 

More people may prefer the original "Star Wars" trilogy, but there is no question that the prequel is a more challenging, illuminating, and superior work of art.

 

Smart troll is smart.

[Enkhrypthor]

Some months ago, my wife asked me to watch with her all the star wars movies.

 

 

we saw tthe following order

 

Sat. night:

Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope

Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back

Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi

 

Sunday night:

 

Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace

 

she and i became sleepy passed 30 minutes. we manage to sleep.

 

 

 

 

Do the test by yourself.

[luzzo]

http://movies.yahoo.com/news/why-star-wars-prequels-better-original-trilogy-160300514.html

Palpatine's actions in the prequel are positively Machiavellian

 

It's funny you mention that because i thought palpatine was more like hitler in early 2k

 

Then i realized that an aluminum airplane would crumple up on the side of a steel building(even if it hit the lexan windows) due to the difference in mass and tensile strength in aircraft aluminum and structural steel.

 

Kinda reminiscent of the "rebels" "attacking" imperial worlds in the original trilogy eh?

[luzzo]

but as far as the original vs the prequels, luke is a whiney goon and yoda and obi wan are old and crippled, and vader swings his lightsaber aroudn like a baseball bat...

 

in the prequels the jedis actually use force powers (other than lifting things up), lightsaber combat is REALISTIC(plasma swords were invented last year before you troll me), and palpatine is fricken awesome compared to being a mean old coot

 

then again no han solo so i gotta go with the originals >.>

only cuz they jammed 5 movies into 3 movies for the prequels tho...

Edited February 14, 2012 by luzzo

[DragonAgeOrgins]

Anyone else care to offer their 2 cents, and for those who haven't read. This is a good read, hit's the critical points.

[Senul]

Poor character development

Too many family and childish themes showing Lucas's aging mind (Indiana jones and the crystal skull anyone?)

Horribly written romance scenes, bordering on twilight quality

Poor choice of characters such as Jarjar to try to take a "chewie" type role and making all the main characters jedi with no real wildcards like Han

Boring buildup including one movie that can be summed up as "yippie"

A race scene that is unexciting, because it's obvious you know who the winner must be

Badly written dialogue

Plot holes so numerous and contrived that I could drive a truck through them

A campy feel, as if you're watching a 60's batman version of star wars

The kid scenes with space fighting and even a light saber fight while jedi masters are gunned down in seconds

A scene with childbirth (sorry im sick of seeing this in movies, pet peeve of mine)

A focus on palatine who is more a charactature than a character, absolutely noone irl would muhahaha, come on

Fanbois like the OP who enjoy putting down things older than them as if anything not new is of diminished worth

 

I stopped reading when you compared it to a movie saying it was bordering twilight quality when twilight came out years after star wars....

[Keihryon]

I swear it is like watching Modern Warfare fans and Battlefield fans...

 

Or Gran Turismo fans and Forza fans...

 

If the script and directing had been better the PT would have been the superior movies. As they stand, they are slightly worse. IN MY OPINION. That should be all that matters to anyone's personal preferences with the two trilogies, their opinion.

 

All these charts and graphs and 8x10glossies with descriptions on the back about why your preferred version is better than that guys preferred version..over and over and over again.

Don't you get tired of it?

 

 

And no, my opinion is the OT is the better trilogy, Though I would like to see him replace every FX scene with improved CGI...as long as he offers uncut versions for those that don't want it. Of course I also want a new X-Wing game with 2012 graphics for much the same reason, X-Wings > Lightsabers.

Edited February 15, 2012 by Keihryon

[Liquidacid]

I like the OT more so it is better....

 

/thread

[esnoble]

The article actually makes a few interesting points. Essentially, as I read it, the argument is the prequels have a more complex premise. As to that point, I agree (to a point). There was more potential maybe for a good movie there, but it was horribly realized.

 

If they wanted to make Star Wars: West Wing (or House of Cards if you prefer), that is all well and good, but that is not what the movies really were. They were disorganized and jumbled with no real character development at all. Further, the characters that did exist were often acting in bizarre ways that made little internal sense (e.g., how do you warn the Naboo of an invasion if you go down WITH the army???) If the story had focused on Palpatine and his rise to power and manipulating Skywalker and Obi Wan like puppets, well that would have been interesting. Instead, we see only a few scenes with Palpatine and they are all as subtle as a brick in the air. (See e.g., "It's not a story the Jedi would tell you. It's a Sith legend...")

 

So sure, there was the potential to be good. It was just fumbled horribly.

 

Instead, watch the original trilogy. You will see characters you care about. The Empire is more or less a force of nature that is unstoppable and even the small victories matter. Incidentally, one of the reasons Ep. VI is so much less successful is that the Empire actually collapses, breaking the concept of the David vs. Goliath struggle.

[Pantheros]

http://movies.yahoo.com/news/why-star-wars-prequels-better-original-trilogy-160300514.html

 

It verges on cinematic treason to suggest that the "Star Wars" prequel trilogy is in any way superior to the original trilogy. However, history has proved that treasonous behavior is just as often necessary to stimulate progressive revolution as it is to endow malevolent forces with unrestricted authority necessary to obstruct basic human rights.

 

I stopped reading when you made historic parallels with what is your likely godawful review.

[DragonAgeOrgins]

I stopped reading when you made historic parallels with what is your likely godawful review.

 

If you haven't read the entire thing ..your not qualified to comment ...let's like me eating a taste of new ice cream shake and saying "disgusting", how do you know it's awful. Also reported for rude post.

[RagnarokJC]

If you haven't read the entire thing ..your not qualified to comment ...let's like me eating a taste of new ice cream shake and saying "disgusting", how do you know it's awful. Also reported for rude post.

I read it and found it to be a pile of pretentious crap.

[MaverickXIV]

http://movies.yahoo.com/news/why-star-wars-prequels-better-original-trilogy-160300514.html

 

It verges on cinematic treason to suggest that the "Star Wars" prequel trilogy is in any way superior to the original trilogy. However, history has proved that treasonous behavior is just as often necessary to stimulate progressive revolution as it is to endow malevolent forces with unrestricted authority necessary to obstruct basic human rights. So here goes: the first three episodes in the saga of Anakin Skywalker

 

are deeper, better structured, and more politically astute than the final three. Not only is that why the prequel is superior, it is also a pretty decent elucidation of the original trilogy's greater popularity.

 

That the "Star Wars" trilogy embraced by American moviegoers is the one that presents a far less complex universe is not incidental to the rabid rebuke of the prequel. "A New Hope," "The Empire Strikes Back," and "Return of the Jedi" reflect the Cold War milieu in which they were created, offering up a comforting us-vs.-them story told in bold strokes lacking nuance, complexity, or intellectual ambiguity.

 

That isn't to say that times have changed much; with the exception of "The Phantom Menace," the second and third installments of the prequel were released to an America that had embraced absolute views even more so than the original trilogy.

 

The difference is that the original trilogy appealed directly to the simplistic moral perspective of an America above reproach and always on the side of right in global geopolitics, whereas the much more subversive prequel trilogy stands in defiant counterpoint to the much more dangerously simplistic moral absolutism of the Age of Bush.

 

The original trilogy holds a special place in the bosom of American moviegoers precisely because we view ourselves comfortably in place of the Rebels. Americans revel in their historical construct as rebellious underdogs constantly at war against an easily identified and unquestionably evil empire. Hence, the reason most Americans love the original trilogy has much to do with placement of ourselves in the role of the inheritors of the mantle of the Jedi.

 

The problem is that the post-9/11 world meant Americans also were forced to identify themselves with the Jedi in the prequel trilogy as well, and we don't like the face we see in the mirror. Let's face it, the Jedi don't exactly come off too swell in the prequel. This time around they are the guys in charge, and it is painful to watch them screw it up, especially when the way they hand over the keys to the Empire is so eerily familiar to a historical era defined by words like "signing statements" and "Patriot Act."

 

Just in case you didn't notice in your rush to castigate Jar-Jar Binks and complain about the wooden dialogue of the prequel, the peaceful Galactic Republic in place at the beginning of "The Phantom Menace" doesn't turn into the dark empire in place at the beginning of "A New Hope" due to an invasion by a foreign element. The Republic falls as a result of due democratic process, albeit due democratic process that is manipulated through lies and deception. Again, sound familiar?

 

Watching the "Stars Wars" prequel trilogy is like the most entertaining lesson in civics ever given -- specifically the way it reveals how even a republic peopled by representative leaders with the best of intentions can make decisions that result in disastrous policies, accompanied by devastation and the crumbling of great ideas. Yoda's observations about anger, hate, fear, and suffering are not said lightly; they may be the most prescient words spoken by a movie character in recent memory.

 

Not much less important is another quote associated with "The Phantom Menace," a quote that hasn't proved anywhere near as memorable as Yoda's but nonetheless plays a huge part in the events that will follow. Chances are you don't even remember these words of Darth Maul: "Fear is my ally." One can well imagine that slogan scrawled across the office walls of men like Scooter Libby and tattooed across the back of Dick Cheney.

 

Nowhere in the original "Star Wars" trilogy is there any sequence of events nearly as profound in their application to real life as Palpatine's manipulative orchestration of the separatist movement "headed" by Count Dooku. Palpatine's nefarious scripting of events allows him to go before the senate and ask for special "emergency powers" to deal with the growing threat facing the peace of the republic. Perhaps if Americans had embraced the prequel in the way they did the original "Star Wars" trilogy, they would recognize the danger when an elected member of a representative republic asks for "emergency powers" to combat a threat.

 

Palpatine's actions in the prequel are positively Machiavellian, and his evil in those first three movies is far more chilling than his appearances as the emperor in the original trilogy. In those movies, Palpatine is so far removed from us we can only approach him from the perspective of a Hitler. We must always remember that Hitler didn't ascend to dictator by using tanks, but the ballot box.

 

Just as Palpatine is far more chilling as a politician abusing the system than he is as an emperor in comprehensively malevolent control, so is Anakin Skywalker far more chilling as a powerless pawn than he is as powerful Darth Vader. No more alarming scene exists in the entire "Star Wars" canon than the political conversation that takes place in "Attack of the Clones" between Anakin and Amidala when the boy-who-would-be Vader suggests the system is broken and needs to be replaced with something where one person in charge has the power to enforce laws he feels are for the good of the people. Amidala replies, rightfully, that what Anakin is talking about sounds like a dictatorship. And then these all-too-familiar words from Anakin: "Well, if it works."

 

Anakin's justification that if authoritarian control works in keeping us safe was being repeated on a daily basis by those in charge at the very time the scene was being projected onto multiplex screens around the world. Too many Anakin Skywalkers existed then and, amazingly, exist right now in this country who are far too eager to give up hard-earned civil rights for the illusion of security. And it is the very fact that one can write about Anakin without calling him either evil or good that elevates the prequel above the original. Try naming a single character in the original trilogy that can attain such an authentic level of ambiguity.

 

There is absolutely no element or character in the original trilogy that isn't delineated in stark black and white terms. Episodes IV through VI tell a much happier story, one that is consistent with the birth of the American democracy through acts of rebellion by a ragtag group of people who held the moral high ground. Episodes I through III, by contrast, tell a much less happy story about how a democracy can come to an end -- not at the hands of foreign interlopers, but directly through the democratic process itself. More people may prefer the original "Star Wars" trilogy, but there is no question that the prequel is a more challenging, illuminating, and superior work of art.

 

Prequel Trilogy: More intelligent/deep plot.

 

Original Trilogy: Better dialog, acting, and characterization.

 

When taken for its raw storyline/plot, then the prequel trilogy does have a "deeper" message than the original trilogy. The OT, however, is just a more fun movie-going experience in every other way.

[DragonAgeOrgins]

I read it and found it to be a pile of pretentious crap.

 

Your opinion is false, and you are likely just jealous.

[RagnarokJC]

Your opinion is false, and you are likely just jealous.

Since opinions aren't true or false, you are quite clearly as ignorant as the person who wrote that steaming pile of PT-loving review. I'm never jealous of ignorance. Try again, junior.

[DragonAgeOrgins]

Since opinions aren't true or false, you are quite clearly as ignorant as the person who wrote that steaming pile of PT-loving review. I'm never jealous of ignorance. Try again, junior.

 

You know what sucks about your post the most. The person who wrote it, wrote very clear in detail critical points given an in depth review and you blasted it with a single sentence giving NOTHING to back up anything. I think I'm done replying to you and letting you bask in the glory of replying to me. Carry on Troll.

[AzureDarkstone]

I think folks are going to prefer the story with characters they can identify with. I felt like I was watching a Star Wars documentary with the Prequels. Visually they were nice but you didn't feel like the characters were in galactic changing events like the pilots in the battle of Yavin. There were no Biggs or Porkins whose minor appearances still had an impact and even the major characters seemed like they were sleepwalking through their roles.

 

On the other hand, my step-brother fell asleep when he watched the original Star Wars movies and liked Anakin as the 'misunderstood one'.

[RagnarokJC]

You know what sucks about your post the most. The person who wrote it, wrote very clear in detail critical points given an in depth review and you blasted it with a single sentence giving NOTHING to back up anything. I think I'm done replying to you and letting you bask in the glory of replying to me. Carry on Troll.

Basically, you're running away and claiming to be the victor. I didn't feel a need to address any points in that review because it is all a steaming pile. Enjoy your "victory", junior.

 

[meshade]

Some months ago, my wife asked me to watch with her all the star wars movies.

 

 

we saw tthe following order

 

Sat. night:

Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope

Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back

Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi

 

Sunday night:

 

Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace

 

she and i became sleepy passed 30 minutes. we manage to sleep.

 

 

 

 

Do the test by yourself.

 

You should watch it in chronological order, If I watched 3 SW movies in one night I couldn't be arsed to do it again the next day.... especially with episode 4

[Man-Kar]

Fine opinion, which again outlines that every creation strives from the values and socio-cultural environment of its age.

 

Just one little notice - if you talk about "works of art", you can't actually name one or another as "superior". They just are - coexist in their own paradigms. Superiority is a subjective matter.

[Dire-Wolf]

Great article. Basically sums up why I've always felt the prequels where much better then the originals, minus all the references to America.