Wolfninjajedi Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Let's see, starting with the main villain in the OT films stayed on throughout all 3 films (Darth Vader). His motivations were explained (the Empire exists to impose order on the galaxy, but he wants to overthrow the Emperor and rule with his son as his apprentice), and he's fleshed out (his inner conflict that eventually leads to his redemption). Let's look at the protagonist of the OT films (Luke Skywalker): we see his beginnings (a farm boy on a boondock planet who dreams of getting away by joining the Academy to be a pilot like his friend Biggs already did). Luke then begins his start as a Jedi through his meeting with Obi-Wan where he also learns about his father. He becomes a hero by blowing up the Death Star and starts off ESB as a ranking officer in the Rebel Alliance. He begins his Jedi training in earnest with Yoda, but rushes to save his friends from Vader and learns the hard way that he is not ready yet. He progresses further in his training by the time of RoTJ but has to face the ultimate trial by facing his father and the Emperor. Luke is able to help his father redeem himself by appealing to the good side of him in the nick of time, while his friends blow up the 2nd Death Star. He is able to see the ghost of his redeemed father, then rejoins his sister and friends as they face the universe following the fall of the Empire. No, the characters in the PT films were nowhere near as complex as those in the OT films. Ya ok your using 2 main characters who are suppose to be complex, compared to characters who are not the main focus ya thats completely fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G_Vega Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 (edited) This thread really got me thinking about the whole series. I think that we are looking at it all wrong. The entire Star Wars saga is the story of C3PO. It is the story of how a robot built in secret on a desert planet by a nine year old suffered through all types of adversity, overcame it to become King of the Ewoks. Edited February 24, 2012 by G_Vega Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RagnarokJC Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Ya ok your using 2 main characters who are suppose to be complex, compared to characters who are not the main focus ya thats completely fair. Let's look at Anakin and Obi-Wan, arguably the 2 "main" characters of the PT films: Anakin is a little child who grows up to be a whiny teenager who is powerful in the Force. He is also an idiot, because he allows himself to be led around by the nose by the main bad guy over some promises. He likes his master but also hates his master, as this is apparently how "great friendships" work. Obi-Wan is a whiny padawan who becomes a knight after killing the sith guy who killed his master. He trains Anakin only as a promise to his master, which showcases his ability to make a liar out of himself when it comes to what he tells Luke later in ANH. Obi-Wan can't train Anakin well enough because he's so annoyed with him all the time (I think), and then cuts off his arms and legs so that he can become Darth Vader. The end. Now let's look at the villains: Palpatine is an evil old man who likes to make plans that blow up in his face as part of some master plan to take over everything. He is able to take over everything because the Jedi are idiots. The end. Count Dooku is a former Jedi who turned to evil for some reason that we're never told. He leads the Separatists, beats up Obi-Wan/Anakin the first time he runs into them, fights Yoda to a draw before running away, then gets his head cut off by Anakin in their next meeting. General Grievous is a cowardly "Jedi killer" who collects lightsabers. He runs from Obi-Wan twice before getting killed when his inexplicably exposed inner organs are fried by a blaster. Darth Maul is Darth Sidious' apprentice. He likes to stand with his arms crossed looking bad ***. He fights Qui Gonn and Obi-Wan; he kills the former before being inexplicably killed when he stares at Obi-Wan while he cuts him in half. The end. I won't forget to mention that all the villains were made into expensive and cheap toys after their 5 seconds of screen time in the PT films. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajinEddie Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 This thread really got me thinking about the whole series. I think that we are looking at it all wrong. The entire Star Wars saga is the story of C3PO. It is the story of how a robot built in secret on a desert planet by a nine year old suffered through all types of adversity, overcame it to become King of the Ewoks. This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JtheHogg Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 I think he makes a number of relevant arguments in this. I think that the failure of the new trilogy lies not in the writing or plot, but instead in the actors for their inability to convey the emotions of the characters. When compared to the Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, and Alec Guinness they just seem so cardboard. I agree that the new movies are much more complex and intricate, though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkerus Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 (edited) I've watched it and I still like the prequels, and he doesn't really "rip" them he just seriously nitpicks so hard on them. What do you mean by TRYING to? I can describe the characters, its not that hard. Nitpick? He points out why they are awful movies! When were jedis experts in trade laws? Why did they open the door right after gassing them. WHY DID PALPATINE TRY TO KILL THEM IF HE NEEDED THEM TO LIVE!? And thats just the first 2 minutes. head asplode OH LOOK, I'm riding a pretend dinosaur and general grievous is a WHEEL! I'm a cardboard character reading from an awful script! OH LOOK A COUCH! Edited February 24, 2012 by Arkerus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustrumRidcully Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Actually, I thought the article was quite clever, and the writer has an interesting perspective on the plots of the six movies. Although I was raised in the time of the Luke Skywalker age (I was 9 when SW came out), and I loved those movies like crazy, the article writer has a point, the plots in the prequels are much more complicated, and have a more intricate construction, than the basic, good vs evil in the '4,5 and 6' episodes. The characters are far more complex in the prequel...Where I used to see Luke's jedis as heros, I see the truth of it more now, owing to the prequels. The jedi were manipulative and dark too in their own way. Look at how Anakin was treated...he did so much for them, and when he questioned their orders to spy on a friend, he was treated like an outcast. Funny how their dogma only applies when its for their good. I suppose its like history says...evil is a point of view, and whoever wins the war, writes the history. The republic is no better than the empire, they just won is all. I think the Prequels had elements that very modern and could have made them better and more complex than the Original Trilogy. But they failed at delivery. The dialogs and the acting were terrible. The SFX may have been great on a technical level, but were cluttered and existed more for their own sake then to help tell the story. The fights lack emotional impact and are pure choreography. The character were mostly not likeable - and I can't really call them "complex" either. Unrefined, underdeveloped may be it. They have some aspects that would make them complex (turning from a lover to a mass murder requires quite some complexity and story arc), but the movies don't really show this in a believable manner. And so - no, they aren't better than the Original Trilogy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarjarsgenius Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 (edited) It's totally a subjective matter. The Imperial Trilogy writing/acting wasn't stellar either, but you can overlook that because of the world-building. To me, the Republic Trilogy failed at absolutely nothing, though I can understand how certain parts might annoy certain people. I'm all for debate and differing opinions, but not when it comes down to one side calling the other objectively wrong on a subjective matter. And that's what this discussion has become all over the internet. Full Saga Fans (and there are more of us than you'd think) are being put down, disbelieved, and called trolls by the element of the "fan" base screaming about how Lucas ***** their childhoods (an offensive statement on several levels). That I indentify with the two most verbally criticized aspects of the newer films (Jar Jar for his good-natured clumsiness, and Anakin for his inability to control his emotions among other things) is my business. I'll be glad to share my thoughts with you and I understand if you respecftully disagree. I won't tell you you're wrong, so don't insult me by saying I'm wrong. Is it too much to hope that the discussion be at least civil, and the fact that there are fans who have all sorts of differing preferences on all six films be recognized without disdain? Edited February 24, 2012 by Jarjarsgenius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishfishstinks Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 It's odd how you bring up the idea that people liked the OT films more simply because they grew up with them while including the words I highlighted. This is because kids generally go for the action, explosions, and fancy effects over things like good story, dialogue, character development, etc. Try watching the films in 5+ years when you've had the chance to grow up, expand your horizons by watching good films, and finishing your formal education. I prefer the story of how Anakin became Darth Vader over the story of Han, Luke and Leia on their space quest. Those exposed to 4-6 at an early age do have a bias. It's probably rare to find someone like me that actually never paid attention to SW until recently and watch 1-6 for basically the first time and get their opinion. Anyway I must not justify my opinion further, I will always remain young at heart and never "grow up". I will continue to prefer the action-filled 1-3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RagnarokJC Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 I prefer the story of how Anakin became Darth Vader over the story of Han, Luke and Leia on their space quest. Those exposed to 4-6 at an early age do have a bias. It's probably rare to find someone like me that actually never paid attention to SW until recently and watch 1-6 for basically the first time and get their opinion. Anyway I must not justify my opinion further, I will always remain young at heart and never "grow up". I will continue to prefer the action-filled 1-3. You're honest about your opinion at least. Kudos to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feztonio Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 anyone who says the preq's were better was born in the 90s and grew up with them. if you're older there's no doubt that the original trilogy is best. don't pout little sprouts. someday you'll learn; you may even touch a girl too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandonSM Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 anyone who says the preq's were better was born in the 90s and grew up with them. if you're older there's no doubt that the original trilogy is best. don't pout little sprouts. someday you'll learn; you may even touch a girl too ^You were born in the 2000s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nindoriel Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 (edited) I prefer the story of how Anakin became Darth Vader over the story of Han, Luke and Leia on their space quest. Those exposed to 4-6 at an early age do have a bias. It's probably rare to find someone like me that actually never paid attention to SW until recently and watch 1-6 for basically the first time and get their opinion. Anyway I must not justify my opinion further, I will always remain young at heart and never "grow up". I will continue to prefer the action-filled 1-3. Why do those people have a bias? I grew up with Episode 1-3. I watched 4-6 after I saw Episode 2 in cinemas, and I still think Episode 4-6 are better in terms of characters and story. I do have to say that I kinda like the fight choreography in the new films, but if you watch the fights between Darth Vader and Luke you can clearly see that the fights are not about shoving as much action in as you can. They are not over the top action scenes, more like classic sword fights, and every move has a meaning and its packed with emotion. If you say someone who grew up with the old movies is biased, doesn't that mean someone who grew up with the new movies must also be biased? Edited February 25, 2012 by Nindoriel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishfishstinks Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Maybe I do have a bias, here's how I originally saw them... but I personally did not care about anything Star Wars related until like a year ago. I saw 4, 5 and 6 when I was a kid but never paid attention because I found them really boring. Then I saw 1 2 3 in the theatres and still didn't care for them. It wasn't until I brought all the movies with me on a trip and watched them in George Lucases "order" that I decided to pay attention to them. Don't get me wrong, I found 4-6 did have good points, ie: Han is definately better than Jar Jar and Leia is hotter than Amidala. I didn't like the politics in 1-3. Overall, 4-6 seems very dry to me and I love the light sabers and story of Anakin in 1-3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matth_Stil Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Perhaps many went to the prequels WANTING them to suck? Whilst canonical set-ups for the original trilogy, the prequels were physically separate bodies of work - not part of Lucas' original hefty script which he had to split in three - and thusly construed as competition to the holy trinity... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustrumRidcully Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 I prefer the story of how Anakin became Darth Vader over the story of Han, Luke and Leia on their space quest. I would have preferred that story as well. But I didn't get anything that felt like a good or believable story for me. The awkward love dialogs, the endless whining, the sudden turn to child murderer. Meh. I expected that Darth Vader's fall would actually be relatable and understandable. It wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matth_Stil Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 It's totally a subjective matter. The Imperial Trilogy writing/acting wasn't stellar either, but you can overlook that because of the world-building. To me, the Republic Trilogy failed at absolutely nothing, though I can understand how certain parts might annoy certain people. I'm all for debate and differing opinions, but not when it comes down to one side calling the other objectively wrong on a subjective matter. And that's what this discussion has become all over the internet. Full Saga Fans (and there are more of us than you'd think) are being put down, disbelieved, and called trolls by the element of the "fan" base screaming about how Lucas ***** their childhoods (an offensive statement on several levels). That I indentify with the two most verbally criticized aspects of the newer films (Jar Jar for his good-natured clumsiness, and Anakin for his inability to control his emotions among other things) is my business. I'll be glad to share my thoughts with you and I understand if you respecftully disagree. I won't tell you you're wrong, so don't insult me by saying I'm wrong. Is it too much to hope that the discussion be at least civil, and the fact that there are fans who have all sorts of differing preferences on all six films be recognized without disdain? Bravo, sir / madam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lunafox Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 I think the Prequels had elements that very modern and could have made them better and more complex than the Original Trilogy. But they failed at delivery. The dialogs and the acting were terrible. The SFX may have been great on a technical level, but were cluttered and existed more for their own sake then to help tell the story. The fights lack emotional impact and are pure choreography. The character were mostly not likeable - and I can't really call them "complex" either. Unrefined, underdeveloped may be it. They have some aspects that would make them complex (turning from a lover to a mass murder requires quite some complexity and story arc), but the movies don't really show this in a believable manner. And so - no, they aren't better than the Original Trilogy. Funny thing, I never said they were better, just more complex in certain aspects. Tbh, I love both sets of movies, and I am 43, and I was 9 years old when Luke and his crew started up. I can love both for what they are...not sure I can pick from either set...Star Wars has been in my blood for a long time. I do agree with you in that some of the delivery and acting were flawed in the prequels, but then again, some of the acting is a bit cheesy in the originals too. Some of the dialogue in those make me cringe too...what was that line with Han calling Leia 'sister' at the end of it? *wince* lol I just thought the article by the OP was interesting, and had a lot of good points. I still hold to the fact prequels were more complex and intricate (just Palpatine's machinations alone make it awesome) rather than the fun good vs evil plots of the originals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xCyberpunkx Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 (edited) Just because some schmuck gets his opinion posted on Yahoo doesn't mean that his opinion holds and more weight than it would on these forums. Just imagine if he posted that garbage up here. It's not difficult to get anything less than a coherent sentence published on the web. Edited February 25, 2012 by xCyberpunkx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustrumRidcully Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Funny thing, I never said they were better, just more complex in certain aspects. Well, going by the thread title, someone things that the Star Wars prequels are better than the original trilogy. In other words, someone is wrong on the internet! I agree that Palpatine's plan indicates complexity. But - I don't feel the movies are doing it justice, on so many levels. Heck, if we were just to take Palpatine's plan, the OT would also be complex, since the Rebel assault on the second death star was part of Palpatine's plan as well, and everything preceding to it may have been as well. It's not really enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lordgeneral Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) This literally sums up the second movie. The only part I did enjoy was the actual clone attack at the end, but the rest of it is summed up in this video pretty much perfectly. also jaja could be a lot worse... Edited February 26, 2012 by Lordgeneral Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matth_Stil Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) Do you agree with RLM? Edited February 26, 2012 by Noviru quoting removed content Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nindoriel Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Do you agree with RLM? This requires explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustrumRidcully Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) I think he means Red Letter Media, that famous Prequel dissection video blog thingy that everyone cites, as it basically contains everything that's bad about the prequels. He may presume you know it, and also identify the acronym. Or he's really trying to make you crazy. Edited February 26, 2012 by Noviru Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noviru Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Hello everyone, This is a heads up that we recently had to remove several posts from this thread. As a gentle reminder to everyone, please remember the following: Insults - Please do not resort to or use them in any way in your posts. Posts should be productive, not destructive.Disruptive Behavior - Please do not post messages that are purposefully designed to provoke, antagonize, or otherwise elicit a negative emotional response.Agree to Disagree - Be respectful of others' viewpoints even if they are opposite of your own. Discuss disagreements constructively.Flag, Don't Fight - Utilize the Flag Post feature to report possible rules violations, rather than responding to or fighting them. Regardless of the topic, please try and make sure that your posts add constructive content to the discussion at hand. Thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts