moiraesfate Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 How about how little things like how is Chancellor Palpatine also from Naboo when it seems that all other politicians are former queens? How did Leia become princess when her dad was senator? There are so many weird inconsistencies that it just makes no sense. Add to that just bad writing and terrible acting and it is clear that it was more an excuse to show off special effects than to tell a story that made sense. Bail Organa is from the family that rules Alderaan. Bail married into the family. It was his wife that was royalty. Leia is a Princess. Albeit, an adopted one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DuchessOfDork Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Lucas, though - he had his nine hours here, and - unlike the first series, which is flawed but stands up well - the prequel trilogy just meanders along in mediocrity it didn't deserve. Everything about these movies is about wasted potential. I couldn't have said it any better, myself. Darth Maul had the potential to be one of the coolest, most frightening, most eerie creatures/villains in cinematic history. Instead, we get a few minutes of Ray Park flipping around and a guy cut in half. Woo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zag_Stratos Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 The expansion of the Star Wars universe was fantastic in the prequels. The lore itself was simply brilliant and I must add that games like Dark Forces, Jedi KNight, Kotor and SWTOR have been doing a superbe job on expanding and growing this wonderful modern sci-fi fantasy world. So what actually sucked in prequel? Aside from Obiwan and a few highlights, the acting was generally terrible. What made the original star wars so great was that each characters were very iconic. You wanted to be Han Solo or Luke, you wanted to be Leia and part of the Rebel alliance. In the Prequels, I doubt you see yourself as Anakin or worse, Amidala. Why would you want to be in the Jedi Council or a clone for that matter... it was cold and not as personal as the original. So aside from the amazing lore and visual presentation, you had nothing to keep you locked in the movie. Anakin in Clone Wars (CGI show) is much more interesting and fun to follow. You actually feel for the guy and get attached. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esnoble Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Bail Organa is from the family that rules Alderaan. Bail married into the family. It was his wife that was royalty. Leia is a Princess. Albeit, an adopted one. I agree the Organas are a ruling family, but the concept of royalty is a bit weird, no? Why is he senator then and never prince? Why are the Naboo royals term limited? The whole thing is just weird and it is never explained in the movies, but left to others to try to explain. My point is these are not well explained in the movie and we need to come up with ways to explain the weirdness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moiraesfate Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 I agree the Organas are a ruling family, but the concept of royalty is a bit weird, no? Why is he senator then and never prince? Why are the Naboo royals term limited? The whole thing is just weird and it is never explained in the movies, but left to others to try to explain. My point is these are not well explained in the movie and we need to come up with ways to explain the weirdness. JonahGrimm and Zag, you hit it too. As to royal families... different royal families do things different ways. For example, though Prince Philip of England is a Prince, he can never be King no matter what happens (as long as there is an heir) because he was not born a Prince, it was a title given to him later. It's possible that, in that royal family, a commoner can never be given the title of Prince. Or that the title of Prince was just never used even though he did have it. As for Naboo, that never made sense to me either. Royal titles aren't given that way in any royalty I've ever seen. They are not elected. Royalty has always been a "birth" thing or "marrying into" thing, not an "elected" thing. She might as well just have been called a Senator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markatisu Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 It was the writing, I mean look Natalie Portman won an Academy Award but the cast was given lines like "she died of a broken heart" They also made Anakin extremely annoying and petty, I mean whining does not even begin to explain his dialogue. The actor is fine, the material was horrendous. Clone Wars the animated mini-series and the CGI CW Series both portray Anakin much better than the prequels did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eillack Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 It was the writing, I mean look Natalie Portman won an Academy Award but the cast was given lines like "she died of a broken heart" They also made Anakin extremely annoying and petty, I mean whining does not even begin to explain his dialogue. The actor is fine, the material was horrendous. Clone Wars the animated mini-series and the CGI CW Series both portray Anakin much better than the prequels did. The begining of A New Hope showed Luke *****in for 1/4 of the movie....Anakin was nothing compared to his son. And Ep II / III anakin was showing fear and the beginings of a lust for power...and that he knew that he was "The Chosen One." He got cocky becasue he was the best of the best. MAde 100% sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PellonSW Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 The begining of A New Hope showed Luke *****in for 1/4 of the movie....Anakin was nothing compared to his son. And Ep II / III anakin was showing fear and the beginings of a lust for power...and that he knew that he was "The Chosen One." He got cocky becasue he was the best of the best. MAde 100% sense to me. The reasons make sense but the criticism revolves around dialogue and how Anakin's descent to the dark side was portrayed on screen. We weren't witnessing Anakin's transformation to Darth Vader. We were watching an adult behave like a total *********** child. You can blame Lucas for that since he's never known to be a good writer. Great visionist of course. I've always felt the best and most well acted scene involving Anakin was in Episode III where he was alone in his room conflicted between his duty as a Jedi vs his love for Padme. That scene had zero dialogue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lutherus Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 (edited) Lore wise? Fine. Movie quality wise? Ehhhhhhhhhhhh. Certain characters bugged me a lot. Anakin was too immature (too adolescent?). A lot of acting was.. meh. Some actors were fine. Somewhat too much reliance on special effects? Felt like it kinda watered down Star Wars as a whole, cheapened it. Writing could have been better. Edited December 22, 2011 by Lutherus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auricli Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 The original three movies were not good movies. Bad acting, an unoriginal and unfounded story, plot holes, and really really cheesy. People let their feeling cloud them from what is actually there. I get it though. The characters are iconic and people "relate" to them. The story has been told a million times over, but it's what people know and understand, even without explanation (What were the rebels fighting for? Certainly it wasn't because of taxation without representation). In my opinion though, I couldn't care less about the original three movies. But, it is the original three movies that paved the way for the entire Star Wars universe (this game included, which is awesome and I wish I was playing right now). I for one enjoyed the prequels. I didn't go in expecting to be wow'd by stellar acting. I went in wanting to be entertained. And I was. I liked seeing Jedi actually be amazing (with the force, with a lightsaber, and with their piety). We saw Jedi portrayed in a completely different way than the original three. Also, the motives and corruption that lead to the dark side was better explained. I feel as though the prequels did a very good job explaining and fortifying the Star Wars universe, especially in comparison to the original three. They were bold, and as a whole, a very worthwhile story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord_Method_Man Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 They ruined the entire concept of Darth Vader, who previously had been the greatest villian in film history. Now he is just a whiney brat who can't act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikemartel Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 One word: Mitichlorians. I could forgive Jar-Jar. I could forgive "Baby Ani Built C-3PO." I could forgive killing Darth Maul instead of letting his evil percolate for another movie. I could even forgive "Anikin was born of Virgin Birth" But to reduce the All-Powerful Universe-Binding Force to little more than a blood infection ... man, that tore everything else for me. This is the best answer provided on this whole subject, it should have ended there, Mitichlorians just destroyed everything that was amazing about the force. Now you can mesure how strong or weak one is. It's just sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle_Tarquinas Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 Jar Jar Binks /thread Its also for that reason that Episode 3 is the best of them. He barely shows up at all in that movie iirc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stanjoly Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 I personally have enjoyed all the Star Wars films. Though I was brought up on IV, V & VI. I did however recently watch this http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/star-wars/ which is not only amusing, but also quite interesting with some of the things he points out. NOTE: There are some things in those videos people may disagree with, I'm not responsible for them, I am only sharing what I believed to be an interesting watch/read. -Stan p.s. It gets a little weird/creepy at some points. fair warning. Know that it is all staged/fake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanscholo Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 Rather than picking them to pieces. I can probably sum it up by saying the story telling was poor. Way too many things pulled me out of the moment, either bad acting, bad script, poor editing, poor sound design etc TBH, episode I as maligned as it was, is easily the best of the three in terms of design and plot. Episode II was, without doubt, the worst edited movie i have ever seen. Such a shame because it had sooo much potential. Episode III, went someway to making up for II but anakins fall to the dark side just didnt work and that ruined what otherwise was a very well made movie. I never believed anakin was a sith lord, not for a moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthbuchamo Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 Id have to say rather than hating the movies that they could have just been done a lot better, they seemed rushed. The Phantom Menace had it right with introducing such a brutal Sith Lord Darth Maul, only to be killed by a Padawan. in my opinion they should have kept Maul and Palaptine should have brought Anakin as his second secret apprentice to eventually take Mauls spot. instead Lucas just crapped out too many characters and never gave his fan base time to really get to know any of them, but I admit the more I watch them the more tolerable i get of them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bielduwyn Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 The original three movies were not good movies. Bad acting, an unoriginal and unfounded story, plot holes, and really really cheesy. People let their feeling cloud them from what is actually there. I get it though. The characters are iconic and people "relate" to them. The story has been told a million times over, but it's what people know and understand, even without explanation (What were the rebels fighting for? Certainly it wasn't because of taxation without representation). In my opinion though, I couldn't care less about the original three movies. But, it is the original three movies that paved the way for the entire Star Wars universe (this game included, which is awesome and I wish I was playing right now). I for one enjoyed the prequels. I didn't go in expecting to be wow'd by stellar acting. I went in wanting to be entertained. And I was. I liked seeing Jedi actually be amazing (with the force, with a lightsaber, and with their piety). We saw Jedi portrayed in a completely different way than the original three. Also, the motives and corruption that lead to the dark side was better explained. I feel as though the prequels did a very good job explaining and fortifying the Star Wars universe, especially in comparison to the original three. They were bold, and as a whole, a very worthwhile story. I can't even read that with a straight face, so I'll just assume you didn't write that with a straight face, well played, I needed that chuckle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Begano Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 Nothing beats the original! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhudian Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 For me? I could survive Jar-jar. He didn't get much screen time, and didn't really steal that many scenes. The most painful and cringeworthy stuff was the "romance." Poorly written dialog can be forgiven, even believable: I can remember spouting even less meaningful and comprehensible drivel with a girlfriend that I was completely retarded over. The acting in those scenes, though--to call it 'wooden' doesn't do it justice. They seemed like they each found the other totally revolting. The scenes make more sense to my minds eye if I can picture them on separate towers of Coruscant, divided by traffic, screaming, "I am really a homosexual!" at one another, and poorly lipreading it as, "You are obligated to pretend to love me!" It felt... disappointing, and perhaps a little sleazy and insulting that the producers, directors, and editors thought that those two would convince anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xerodotus Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 Hayden Christensen's terrible acting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikemartel Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 For me? I could survive Jar-jar. He didn't get much screen time, and didn't really steal that many scenes. The most painful and cringeworthy stuff was the "romance." Poorly written dialog can be forgiven, even believable: I can remember spouting even less meaningful and comprehensible drivel with a girlfriend that I was completely retarded over. The acting in those scenes, though--to call it 'wooden' doesn't do it justice. They seemed like they each found the other totally revolting. The scenes make more sense to my minds eye if I can picture them on separate towers of Coruscant, divided by traffic, screaming, "I am really a homosexual!" at one another, and poorly lipreading it as, "You are obligated to pretend to love me!" It felt... disappointing, and perhaps a little sleazy and insulting that the producers, directors, and editors thought that those two would convince anyone. When you consider the fact that the romance between anakin and padme is the whole reason why luke and leia are born, it's kind of essential. And what kind of other plot could make Anakin go on the dark side so fast? Love is a strong feeling and driven by emotions. A jedi is suppose to set his emotions aside, so a love story was kind of an obvious choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moiraesfate Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 When you consider the fact that the romance between anakin and padme is the whole reason why luke and leia are born, it's kind of essential. And what kind of other plot could make Anakin go on the dark side so fast? Love is a strong feeling and driven by emotions. A jedi is suppose to set his emotions aside, so a love story was kind of an obvious choice. Whoosh, and the point of the original post totally flies over your head. Wow. Just, wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juntts Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 I may only be saying this because I'm not some 40 year old man who grew up with the Old Trilogy, but in all honesty I had more fun watching the New Trilogy than the Old Trilogy. Many people get mad at me for saying that but I can't help it! I just love the newer movies so much! Although, I'm not saying I don't like the Old Trilogy, in fact, it's very tough to decide between which trilogy I like more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BladeStrike Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 (edited) Bad acting in general. Hayden was terrible in Episode II, better in III but still far from perfect. Considering he was basically the main character he stuck out. Ewan McGregor was the best. A fine job indeed. Another thing is the storylines for I & II were wasted. They could have done so much more but George just waited until Episode III to pile on everything important. Edited December 23, 2011 by BladeStrike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Mark Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 I agree with the idea that the prequels were missing a reliable 'party' ship and a Solo style everyman character. Wouldn't even have to be a prototype Han, just someone fighting the good fight who ISN'T a Jedi or a princess. I can imagine a Gunslinger typer character working pretty well, Lucas should have written his own Malcolm Reynolds/The Man With No Name (Eastwood.) Would have been a nice reference to the OT's Western influences as well as the samurai movie influences that the prequels wore on their sleeve (the OT was more subtle with this influence in plotting, see The Hidden Fortress.) Also, he gets to ask the questions we want answers to, as Han generally does the OT. Perhaps that's why he's such a fan favourite. But yes, a good ol' fashioned scoundrel was sorely lacking! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts