JoshRollins Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Or has he admitted they didn't turn out as great as he wanted them? Because I don't see how anyone In their right mind could be satisfied with how Anakin was handled in those movies. So yeah has he tried to address the criticism at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfninjajedi Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Why should he care about what other people think? He made them the way he wanted to, thats all that should matter to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jmannseelo Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Why should he care about what other people think? He made them the way he wanted to, thats all that should matter to him. And, it should be noted, they all did very well at the box office. Win/win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ch_Zero Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 I thought episode 1 was decent. 2 was bad 3 was awesome... Everything i ever wanted from star wars.... I thought they were better than 4,5 and 6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
behirbehir Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 George Lucas doesn't care if he makes a bad movie. He realizes that if you hype a movie up well, then people will pay to see it. After they've paid for it, who cares what they think. This kind of mentality is also responsible for Indiana Jones and the crystal skulls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KahnyaGnorc Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Or has he admitted they didn't turn out as great as he wanted them? Because I don't see how anyone In their right mind could be satisfied with how Anakin was handled in those movies. So yeah has he tried to address the criticism at all? He doesn't think they are bad. He thinks we are bad for thinking they are bad. Just like he thinks we are bad for not thinking Greedo shot first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfninjajedi Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 He doesn't think they are bad. He thinks we are bad for thinking they are bad. Just like he thinks we are bad for not thinking Greedo shot first. Well to be honest, complaining about a scene that is 2 seconds long over a *********** DECADE is really stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KahnyaGnorc Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Well to be honest, complaining about a scene that is 2 seconds long over a *********** DECADE is really stupid. Except that short scene said so much about Han's personality (and as Han is the archetype of smugglers, the smuggler personality) when Han shot first. It is those quick "Blink-and-you'll-miss-it" moments that reveal more about people and characters than long expositions ever can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfninjajedi Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Except that short scene said so much about Han's personality (and as Han is the archetype of smugglers, the smuggler personality) when Han shot first. It is those quick "Blink-and-you'll-miss-it" moments that reveal more about people and characters than long expositions ever can. I'm not arguing that, but lingering on a small scene that happened over a decade ago isn't healthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Camilladilla Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 I'm not arguing that, but lingering on a small scene that happened over a decade ago isn't healthy. Well it's not as though people are approaching random strangers and ranting at them about Greedo shooting first. It's a minor gripe people have about a scene. I admit that it still annoys me today to see that scene, but I'm not hung up about it either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RixoFutu Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Han wasn't any hero from beggining, he was a ******, he shot first. And he went from heartless smuggler to republic hero type. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gratulor Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 He doesn't have to address anything or defend them. A large portion of fans like the prequels. The films are what they are and I don't see any reason for him to come out and apologise to those that felt they were terrible films. Just my opinion. If I make food that some of my guests don't like, I won't say "I'm sorry I made terrible food". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapWinterz Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 when Han shot first. It is those quick "Blink-and-you'll-miss-it" "Han shot first" Implies that Greedo shot at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackdots Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 actually, the rumor is that it's the original trilogy with which he's displeased and considering remaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilikaa Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 The Pre-quals were pretty decent movies. There are two big problems with them though 1) Too much was spent on Effects and CGI. This left the story telling weak at times. 2) This is my biggest gripeabout Eps 2 and 3...HAYDEN CHRISTENSEN! He was so horrible in those films. He was so bad that in every scene with Natalie Portman you could tell it was forced, there was zero chemistry there. Should Lucas say anything about these movies? While I or anyone else may wantan explanation or clarification he does not have to give us one. He's sticking to his vision and I have to give him some credit for that. And for the record, Han shot FIRST, Vader does not yell NOOOOOO!" in RotJ and Hayden's image is not there in spirit form at the end of RotJ. GL doesn't have to apologize for those mistakes but we don't need to acknowledge them either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshRollins Posted March 3, 2012 Author Share Posted March 3, 2012 Before the PT, I considered Anakin Skywalker a fallen hero, someone who was a good person but was seduced by the dark side and became a monster. After the PT I considered that Anakin Skywalker was always a whiny half-crazed sociopathic man-child with all the grace of a common street thug and about half the intelligence. I think the issue is that they spent so much time flaunting Anakins 'evil' so to speak. In the prequels he was very rarely a heroic type of character. He was always brooding, had done something wrong or had some reason to be upset. They never gave him enough stage time as a Hero character for us to fall in love with before he turned dark. I mean young Anakin maybe, but Jar Jar went ahead and destroyed that movie. Mid-way through, a lot of conflict over himself and love and mother. Makes sense. Lots of reckless moves. I think a lot of the evil choices he makes are understandable. But his immediate submission to Palpatine was really... bland. Save my wife please evil dude. Because that makes sense. I think the murdering younglings thing was dark enough that they could of cut some of his brooding prior to that event, it would allow for a clearer understanding of how far the Jedi can fall. Its not really a fall from grace sort of story. We got to know Anakin as, a young boy (no jedi) a young jedi who was lustful, hateful, and had trouble listening or obeying orders. Finally he is in his prime, powerful Jedi, the chosen one. Coming to the peak in his life. And he spends most the movie being angry and whiny still, murdering Dooku who was defenseless etc. He didn't get enough 'be a hero' time for his downfall to be that believable. I always imagined Anakin as some great Jedi who fell through some real heavy duty stuff. Sure palpatines a master mind, and he loves his wife. But it was just too easy for him to give in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Fal- Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 If millionaires/billionaires had to explain things... oh what a world it would be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jmannseelo Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 (edited) I think the issue is that they spent so much time flaunting Anakins 'evil' so to speak. In the prequels he was very rarely a heroic type of character. He was always brooding, had done something wrong or had some reason to be upset. They never gave him enough stage time as a Hero character for us to fall in love with before he turned dark. I mean young Anakin maybe, but Jar Jar went ahead and destroyed that movie. Mid-way through, a lot of conflict over himself and love and mother. Makes sense. Lots of reckless moves. Even though I personally love the Prequels, I have to agree. Anakin's fall would have held a lot more weight had we spent more time with him as a hero, and therefore really feeling how far he fell. Fortunately we now have TCW cartoon to fill that void, but taken purely on their own merits I would agree it is a shortcoming of the films. I think a lot of the evil choices he makes are understandable. But his immediate submission to Palpatine was really... bland. Save my wife please evil dude. Because that makes sense. While this also falls under "not enough time spent" to a degree, it was pretty firmly established that Anakin and Palpatine had built a friendship through the years, and that Palpy was using that friendship to cultivate Anakin's darker traits. Just look at the way he appealed to his sense of pride in AotC, or his righteous anger in the beginning of RotS. Perhaps more scenes could have been added to reinforce, but the dynamic was still very present. Also worth noting that Anakin didn't simply say "save my wife" and turn evil. To the contrary, he stopped Mace Windu in the heat of the moment (a Jedi who was quite a jerk to Anakin from the start) from killing Palpatine first......both because Palpy claimed he could save Padme's life and because of their lifelong friendship. It wasn't until Sidious finished Windu off that Anakin felt backed into a corner and became Sidious' apprentice. And even then, once he realized that he had been duped (How could Gunray possibly know his Sith name "Vader" unless Sidious told him?) he was ready to betray Palpatine/Sidious and take over the Empire on his own. It wasn't until Sidious tricked him into thinking he killed Padme and turned his rage and loathing inward that he truly became his lackey. So yeah, perhaps a bit more time spent for emotional impact, but it wasn't nearly as black and white as you make it sound. Edited March 3, 2012 by Jmannseelo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TKMaster Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Im sure he sits on his bed at Skywalker ranch at night tore to peices and restless because a handfull of lifless twits cry all over the internet for decades because they didnt like his films.... Oh wait, he lives in reality, nvm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLonelyTusken Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 im sure he sits on his bed at skywalker ranch at night tore to peices and restless because a handfull of lifless twits cry all over the internet for decades because they didnt like his films.... Oh wait, he lives in reality, nvm. qft!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angrydurf Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 Well in short yes and no. He defends them in a way as he believes them to be more true to his vision than the Original trilogy. On the other hand he doesn't even try to get into anything about why he thinks they are good beyond that. On a related note. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/escape-to-the-movies/5357-The-Phantom-Menace-13-Years-Later a really really well put explanation of why the prequel hate is quite so overblown. In short they are not the best movies ever and our ten year old selves can't cope with that. They are also not nearly as bad as the fan rage makes them out to be. Personally any vitriol I had towards the man has been largely ameliorated by the unspeakable things Michael Bay has done to my childhood with his entire 'film' career. If I'm gonna get my hate on for lousy let downs of a beloved franchise there are many better options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suromir Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 The Pre-quals were pretty decent movies. There are two big problems with them though 1) Too much was spent on Effects and CGI. This left the story telling weak at times. 2) This is my biggest gripeabout Eps 2 and 3...HAYDEN CHRISTENSEN! He was so horrible in those films. He was so bad that in every scene with Natalie Portman you could tell it was forced, there was zero chemistry there. Should Lucas say anything about these movies? While I or anyone else may wantan explanation or clarification he does not have to give us one. He's sticking to his vision and I have to give him some credit for that. And for the record, Han shot FIRST, Vader does not yell NOOOOOO!" in RotJ and Hayden's image is not there in spirit form at the end of RotJ. GL doesn't have to apologize for those mistakes but we don't need to acknowledge them either. 1 - No the story telling was weak because Lucas can't write. It had NOTHING to do with the budget spent on special effects. Lucas has a good imagination but he can't write nor direct. 2 - a slight continuation of my point in 1...Hayden Christensen is not THAT bad an actor. The FAULT lies in Lucas. Hayden is by no means of the caliber of McGregor (who was able to pull off a decent performance) but he's NOT the reason his character sucked. Lucas 100% responsible for that. Hayden actually isn't that bad. Far from great. But the hate everyone gives him is misplaced. It's Lucas that should bear the brunt of the hate towards the older Anakin, not Hayden. Case-in-point..Jeremy Irons is a good actor. Now go watch him in Dungeons and Dragons (he plays the main antagonist) absolutely HORRIBLE. Let's drill this in - LUCAS IS TO BLAME FOR HAYDENS CRAPPY PERFORMANCE, NOT HAYDEN HIMSELF. and like it or not Han didn't shoot first. And it doesn't change his character at all. Hand was still getting his blaster out and intended on killing Greedo. Nothing changed. It's just yet another stupid thing people claim too in order to find more to whine and cry about with the changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KahnyaGnorc Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 Lucas is a "visionary." Visionaries are NOTORIOUSLY bad at details and day-to-day running of things. Good writers and directors both have to be good at details and day-to-day running of things. When Lucas tries to write, direct, or deal with details (Midiclorians(sp), etc.), he fails miserably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lannen Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 Since the topic is being discussed I'm actually really surprised no one's linked Red Letter Media's Plinkett Reviews, http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/star-wars/ Which I'd argue are the most well-explained breakdown of the failings of the prequel trilogy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandonSM Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 Lucas is a "visionary." Visionaries are NOTORIOUSLY bad at details and day-to-day running of things. Good writers and directors both have to be good at details and day-to-day running of things. When Lucas tries to write, direct, or deal with details (Midiclorians(sp), etc.), he fails miserably. Midichlorians? Why do so many hate them? They tell how powerful a Force User can become when they reach their full potential. Their like represenatives of the Force not the actual Force in Science stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts