The prequel hatedom needs to go die in a fire

[The Romulan Republic]

They have serious flaws certainly, particularly Phantom Menace- but I think that they get more hate than they deserve because people are measuring them against the OT viewed through rose-coloured glasses. If there was no OT, the Prequels would I think just be... average. Unremarkable. Just another effects-laden Hollywood action/SF franchise, to be enjoyed and then ultimately largely forgotten.

[Vendetta]

I'm fairly sure movies where key scenes that are supposed to sell the character drama are that wooden would have gotten shit no matter what brand they had on them.

All the Anakin/Padme stuff was inexcusably crap. Even if the dialogue hadn't been silly the stiffness and blandness of the delivery would have killed any emotional weight the scene was aiming for.

The emotional core of the prequel trilogy doesn't work because the acting doesn't sell it.

[Elheru Aran]

The emotional core of the prequel trilogy doesn't work because the acting doesn't sell it.

While largely true, it should be noted that there were still some good actors in the PT. Ewan McGregor, Ian McDiarmid, Sir Christopher Lee for example. What failed there was the writing, not the acting. Harrison Ford wasn't kidding when he told Lucas he couldn't write for shit.

No particular excuse for Natalie Portman or Hayden Christensen, of course, especially Portman as she's normally a better actress than she showed in Star Wars.

[The Romulan Republic]

The emotional core of the prequel trilogy doesn't work because the acting doesn't sell it.

While largely true, it should be noted that there were still some good actors in the PT. Ewan McGregor, Ian McDiarmid, Sir Christopher Lee for example. What failed there was the writing, not the acting. Harrison Ford wasn't kidding when he told Lucas he couldn't write for shit.

No particular excuse for Natalie Portman or Hayden Christensen, of course, especially Portman as she's normally a better actress than she showed in Star Wars.

If a normally capable actor delivers a particularly weak performance, my first instinct is to blame the director, not the actor.

[Elheru Aran]

The emotional core of the prequel trilogy doesn't work because the acting doesn't sell it.

While largely true, it should be noted that there were still some good actors in the PT. Ewan McGregor, Ian McDiarmid, Sir Christopher Lee for example. What failed there was the writing, not the acting. Harrison Ford wasn't kidding when he told Lucas he couldn't write for shit.

No particular excuse for Natalie Portman or Hayden Christensen, of course, especially Portman as she's normally a better actress than she showed in Star Wars.

If a normally capable actor delivers a particularly weak performance, my first instinct is to blame the director, not the actor.

Lucas was both writer and director for all PT movies wasn't he?

That said, some other actors managed to pull off a pretty decent performance regardless. Perhaps Portman had some kind of personal issue with Lucas, or Lucas directed her to act a certain way (I think the latter has actually been mentioned before, but I'm not 100% on that). Either way, apart from some obviously unprepared or wooden actors, I feel like a lot of the burden is on the writing. The background is reasonable enough, the effects are spectacular, the overall sequence of events isn't terrible (opinions will vary on that), even some of the acting isn't bad... that pretty much leaves direction and writing, and both of those are reasonably fundamental to a movie succeeding.

[Bob the Gunslinger]

They have serious flaws certainly, particularly Phantom Menace- but I think that they get more hate than they deserve because people are measuring them against the OT viewed through rose-coloured glasses. If there was no OT, the Prequels would I think just be... average. Unremarkable. Just another effects-laden Hollywood action/SF franchise, to be enjoyed and then ultimately largely forgotten.

You are completely ignoring the prequels' biggest sin; destroying the mystery (and fanon) of the OT. They made the beloved originals worse merely by existing. Even if the Prequels don't deserve hatred for their own inherent flaws, they deserve it for the harm they inflicted on others.

As for anyone saying they would be treated better if they weren't part of the Star Wars franchise...they would be Jupiter Ascendings or Valerians at best. Maybe Chronicles of Riddick if audiences feel generous. I'd say they are sub-John Carter, and that movie is considered a failure. The idea that audiences would have seen the prequels let alone loved them if they weren't Star Wars movies is ridiculous.

[KraytKing]

They have serious flaws certainly, particularly Phantom Menace- but I think that they get more hate than they deserve because people are measuring them against the OT viewed through rose-coloured glasses. If there was no OT, the Prequels would I think just be... average. Unremarkable. Just another effects-laden Hollywood action/SF franchise, to be enjoyed and then ultimately largely forgotten.

You are completely ignoring the prequels' biggest sin; destroying the mystery (and fanon) of the OT. They made the beloved originals worse merely by existing. Even if the Prequels don't deserve hatred for their own inherent flaws, they deserve it for the harm they inflicted on others.

Fuck you. This is exactly the sort of thing Romulan and I agree is bad. You're only damaging my point.

[The Romulan Republic]

They have serious flaws certainly, particularly Phantom Menace- but I think that they get more hate than they deserve because people are measuring them against the OT viewed through rose-coloured glasses. If there was no OT, the Prequels would I think just be... average. Unremarkable. Just another effects-laden Hollywood action/SF franchise, to be enjoyed and then ultimately largely forgotten.

You are completely ignoring the prequels' biggest sin; destroying the mystery (and fanon) of the OT. They made the beloved originals worse merely by existing. Even if the Prequels don't deserve hatred for their own inherent flaws, they deserve it for the harm they inflicted on others.

As for anyone saying they would be treated better if they weren't part of the Star Wars franchise...they would be Jupiter Ascendings or Valerians at best. Maybe Chronicles of Riddick if audiences feel generous. I'd say they are sub-John Carter, and that movie is considered a failure. The idea that audiences would have seen the prequels let alone loved them if they weren't Star Wars movies is ridiculous.

Oh man, I just love that you cite "destroying fanon" as their "biggest sin"- and that you apparently mean this absolutely seriously and with a straight face.

That is, indeed, their biggest "sin"- that they could not possibly fulfill the personal headcannon, nostalgia, wishes, and axes to grind of hundreds of millions of individual fans. Because fans refusing to see the difference between "doesn't match my personal fanfiction" and "objectively bad".

[Avrjoe]

The dull nature of the romance is a good point to chain off of. This video says quite a bit about it in part four.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5uf1bkQQ-s

It makes good points in general, but makes an excellent point about the acting in the prequels. These are good actors and there are many scenes where they give good performances. The failure of the Prequels lands not in the story, not in the acting, but in the editorial and directing process.

George Lucas had spent a long time without ever returning to the Star Wars franchise. Some feared nay-saying him would kill his desire to make these movies. Actors who had dreamed of being in the Star Wars mythos were living that dream. It would have likely felt like ingratitude to question the direction they were given. While in the first trilogy you didn't have that insulative history. Harrison Ford famously said "George! You can type this shit, but you sure can't say it! Move your mouth when you're typing!" Dialog was simplified, cut and altered to increase emotional impact.

The prequels needed to spend more time in this process. They could have easily been brought up to the level of the original trilogy. So, not only is the fan backlash at actors, rude, uncivilized behavior that is barbaric at its worst, it's also completely misplaced. If you want to lay the blame on a person, blame George Lucas himself, but it is more fair to say a process failed. The editorial process of reviewing what was written, acted and recorded and improving the product to the point it's ready for release.

[Gandalf]

They have serious flaws certainly, particularly Phantom Menace- but I think that they get more hate than they deserve because people are measuring them against the OT viewed through rose-coloured glasses. If there was no OT, the Prequels would I think just be... average. Unremarkable. Just another effects-laden Hollywood action/SF franchise, to be enjoyed and then ultimately largely forgotten.

You are completely ignoring the prequels' biggest sin; destroying the mystery (and fanon) of the OT. They made the beloved originals worse merely by existing. Even if the Prequels don't deserve hatred for their own inherent flaws, they deserve it for the harm they inflicted on others.

This is one of the better points against the PT. The OT appealed to grandiose and legendary things with the Jedi, Republic, and so on. The sheer demystification took a lot out of the OT's lore.

[Zor]

For God's sake, why is anyone debating that they were bad movies? They were awful, a true pain to watch, and not for what they did to the continuity. The problem with them is that Lucas is an idiot who got lucky once and he proceeded to surround himself with idiots. Everything bad that can happen to a movie or a series did, speaking within the PT. The only things about Star Wars that have improved consistently with time are the score and the choreography in lightsaber battles. Even the second is a bit dubious at times.

Why are you asserting that your view is universal even in light of dissent? There are people who like the prequels. There are those which have argued that Revenge of the Sith is at least better than Return of the Jedi. They have their merits in terms of design, cinematography, narrative and ambitions.

Your opinion on the prequels quality is just that, an opinion. It is not objective truth by an means.

Zor

[Crazedwraith]

Why are you asserting that your view is universal even in light of dissent? There are people who like the prequels. There are those which have argued that Revenge of the Sith is at least better than Return of the Jedi.

Your opinion on the prequels quality is just that, an opinion. It is not objective truth by an means.

Zor

And so is yours jackass.

Only one side led by saying the other side 'needs to go die in a fire' so don't play the moral high ground.

[Zor]

Why are you asserting that your view is universal even in light of dissent? There are people who like the prequels. There are those which have argued that Revenge of the Sith is at least better than Return of the Jedi.

Your opinion on the prequels quality is just that, an opinion. It is not objective truth by an means.

Zor

And so is yours jackass.

Only one side led by saying the other side 'needs to go die in a fire' so don't play the moral high ground.

Ahem...

If you don't like the the prequels, good for you. That's your choice in media. Nor am I saying that everyone who made a "I Don't Like Sand" joke is a horrible person. But the simple level of vitriol directed to them is frankly absurd and only makes Star Wars fans look bad.

My beef is not with people disliking prequels per se. I can object to some of the reasons why they list the Prequels as being bad like anti-CGI BS or that RotS was dark for the sake of being dark (as opposed to being the place where it would have to go tonally given that George Lucas decided to tell this story about how a Jedi became a Jedi, how he fell to the Dark Side while the Republic was taken over by an authoritarian dictatorship) but at the end of the day it's their choice in media. Same principle applies to me and people who like home decorating shows. I don't like home decorating shows but I don't begrudge those that do like them. Same for someone who likes the OT and says "I don't care for the prequels" and leaves it at that. People have brains wired differently and what appeals to one does not appeal to others.

That attitude that the Prequels were the worst thing ever, some form of personalized insult against you and everything you love by George Lucas and they and everyone associated with it need to be attacked and mocked at every opportunity and that all statements to the contrary can only be from wrong headed morons is people constantly making the same joke driven into the ground before the Subprime Mortgage Crisis at best and something which has actually hurt people at worst. It's at the opposite side of the spectrum of fan activity as 501sters (who surprise surprise dress up as Clone Troopers as well as OT Stormtroopers) raising money for charity and helping out sick kids. Instead of people trying to make the world better when they're united by the stuff they love they make an echo chamber about blowing out of proportions the flaws of a set of C- to B+ sci-fi films and end up unwittingly making it worse.

That mindset which has been left to fester in regards to the prequels Needs to go Die In A Fire. It's utterly toxic.

Zor

[Crazedwraith]

You're still the guy telling people to go die in a fire because you disapprove of how much they dislike a film. That's pretty damn toxic to me.

How much other people dislike the prequels is none of your business. Just live and let live man.

I don't think the prequels ruined my life. You know what I do when I see videos and essays about that subject. Ignore them. End of problem.

[Vendetta]

The emotional core of the prequel trilogy doesn't work because the acting doesn't sell it.

While largely true, it should be noted that there were still some good actors in the PT. Ewan McGregor, Ian McDiarmid, Sir Christopher Lee for example. What failed there was the writing, not the acting. Harrison Ford wasn't kidding when he told Lucas he couldn't write for shit.

No particular excuse for Natalie Portman or Hayden Christensen, of course, especially Portman as she's normally a better actress than she showed in Star Wars.

The trouble is that Portman and Christiansen were the actors who needed to carry the trilogy because, as identified earlier in the thread, it's a story driven by the fall of Anakin Skywalker to the dark side.

They are the core throughline of the trilogy and they're the ones that do a bad job.

There are people who like the prequels

"There are some people who like it" is not a useful defence of an activity. Some people have no standards. Some people like Bayformers.

The prequels are bad movies. The scenes which are supposed to carry the emotional weight and meaning of the story consist of leaden dialogue, stiffly delivered, and so the meaning is not effectively conveyed. What's happening around that can't save the movies.

[Zor]

"There are some people who like it" is not a useful defence of an activity. Some people have no standards. Some people like Bayformers.

Some Points

1. That some People don't like it is not a definitive damnation of something, even if they are more vocal. Some people don't like what are considered classic works of literature and cinema.
2. Among the people which liked the prequels are professional film critics. Roger Ebert had his criticisms of Revenge of the Sith, but gave it a 3.5 out of 4 and called it "Great Entertainment".
3. Saying that everyone who disagrees with you on the prequels has no taste is an ad hominem attack.

The prequels are bad movies. The scenes which are supposed to carry the emotional weight and meaning of the story consist of leaden dialogue, stiffly delivered, and so the meaning is not effectively conveyed. What's happening around that can't save the movies.

I got what was meant through text and subtext in those films, especially Revenge of the Sith. There are plenty of instances of design (honestly there is so much in these films which is beautiful), cinematography, atmosphere and so forth which do work in those films. Order 66 is flat out one of the best sequences in the franchise no qualifiers necessary.

I'm not saying that they're perfect, but honestly there is plenty in them which works.

Zor

[Civil War Man]

My take is that the prequels are flawed movies that get way more bile than called for by the sins they committed. The Phantom Menace had a solid foundation, but needed additional script doctoring. With a few changes, I think it could have actually been great. Attack of the Clones has its moments, but is on much shakier ground, particularly since Anakin is such a main focus, but is written to be such a creep. Revenge of the Sith I still consider the best non-OT Star Wars movie, and would actually rank it above the Special Edition Return of the Jedi (though not the original release). There are still a lot of areas where it could have been improved, but it accomplished exactly what it set out to do.

[The Romulan Republic]

You're still the guy telling people to go die in a fire because you disapprove of how much they dislike a film. That's pretty damn toxic to me.

How much other people dislike the prequels is none of your business. Just live and let live man.

I don't think the prequels ruined my life. You know what I do when I see videos and essays about that subject. Ignore them. End of problem.

He just clarified (which I thought was pretty clear from the get-go, really) that he was referring to the mindset, not that he was saying the people should go die.

At this point, you're pretty clearly deliberately misrepresenting his words.

[Crazedwraith]

You're still the guy telling people to go die in a fire because you disapprove of how much they dislike a film. That's pretty damn toxic to me.

How much other people dislike the prequels is none of your business. Just live and let live man.

I don't think the prequels ruined my life. You know what I do when I see videos and essays about that subject. Ignore them. End of problem.

He just clarified (which I thought was pretty clear from the get-go, really) that he was referring to the mindset, not that he was saying the people should go die.

At this point, you're pretty clearly deliberately misrepresenting his words.

His words are right there in the title.

And yeah he's only talking in about the mindset and yeah that still boils down to 'people aren't allowed to have an opinion I personally have deemed too bad'

People can argue that the prequels are unparalleled cinematic masterpieces or childhood destroying awfulness, it's all the same to me. But there are two things that get on my craw. The first obviously being 'people with different opinions for me aren't allowed to have them' which is the essence of what Zor said stating things that forcefully and the second as I've also made clear is when people second guess other's intentions and motivations. When you explain your opinion and the reasons why for some one else to come along and say 'well that's just because you're an entitled fan' or some other such bullshit. Again maybe the reasons people don't like the films are... the reason people say they don't like the films.

[Bob the Gunslinger]

They have serious flaws certainly, particularly Phantom Menace- but I think that they get more hate than they deserve because people are measuring them against the OT viewed through rose-coloured glasses. If there was no OT, the Prequels would I think just be... average. Unremarkable. Just another effects-laden Hollywood action/SF franchise, to be enjoyed and then ultimately largely forgotten.

You are completely ignoring the prequels' biggest sin; destroying the mystery (and fanon) of the OT. They made the beloved originals worse merely by existing. Even if the Prequels don't deserve hatred for their own inherent flaws, they deserve it for the harm they inflicted on others.

Fuck you. This is exactly the sort of thing Romulan and I agree is bad. You're only damaging my point.

I didn't invent midiclorians or turn the Jedi from a mystical order into the X-Men. I didn't remove the mystique of the Clone Wars with roger rogers, buzz droids and ridiculous tactics. I didn't show Boba Fett without his helmet or Yoda meeting Chewy. I didn't take the most iconic villain in cinema and show him as an annoying child. The prequel trilogy did those things, and they had an impact on everyone who saw them.

Modern children will never know a Star Wars series without Jar Jar, Dexter Jetster or "Unlimited Power!" Star Wars has permanently lost some of its dignity, the enchantment of a perfect fairy tale series. It has been harmed.

[Bob the Gunslinger]

They have serious flaws certainly, particularly Phantom Menace- but I think that they get more hate than they deserve because people are measuring them against the OT viewed through rose-coloured glasses. If there was no OT, the Prequels would I think just be... average. Unremarkable. Just another effects-laden Hollywood action/SF franchise, to be enjoyed and then ultimately largely forgotten.

You are completely ignoring the prequels' biggest sin; destroying the mystery (and fanon) of the OT. They made the beloved originals worse merely by existing. Even if the Prequels don't deserve hatred for their own inherent flaws, they deserve it for the harm they inflicted on others.

As for anyone saying they would be treated better if they weren't part of the Star Wars franchise...they would be Jupiter Ascendings or Valerians at best. Maybe Chronicles of Riddick if audiences feel generous. I'd say they are sub-John Carter, and that movie is considered a failure. The idea that audiences would have seen the prequels let alone loved them if they weren't Star Wars movies is ridiculous.

Oh man, I just love that you cite "destroying fanon" as their "biggest sin"- and that you apparently mean this absolutely seriously and with a straight face.

That is, indeed, their biggest "sin"- that they could not possibly fulfill the personal headcannon, nostalgia, wishes, and axes to grind of hundreds of millions of individual fans. Because fans refusing to see the difference between "doesn't match my personal fanfiction" and "objectively bad".

You're never able to understand nuance or look from another point of view. You take the least reasonable interpretation of every post and insult others by assuming they are as dim as you. Stop putting words in my mouth or assigning me an agenda.

Destroying fanon enco oases: Darth Vader had dignity; The Clone Wars were cool; Jedi were worthwhile; characters were consistent; Palpatine was subtle. There were a whole lot of assumptions fans made based on the original trilogy setting up the expectation that Star Wars was a competently made pulp sci fi serial and not garbage. The PT destroyed all that.

And yes, West End games, Thrawn, and other quality contributions to the fanon were overwritten in favor of the PT.

[Bob the Gunslinger]

They have serious flaws certainly, particularly Phantom Menace- but I think that they get more hate than they deserve because people are measuring them against the OT viewed through rose-coloured glasses. If there was no OT, the Prequels would I think just be... average. Unremarkable. Just another effects-laden Hollywood action/SF franchise, to be enjoyed and then ultimately largely forgotten.

You are completely ignoring the prequels' biggest sin; destroying the mystery (and fanon) of the OT. They made the beloved originals worse merely by existing. Even if the Prequels don't deserve hatred for their own inherent flaws, they deserve it for the harm they inflicted on others.

This is one of the better points against the PT. The OT appealed to grandiose and legendary things with the Jedi, Republic, and so on. The sheer demystification took a lot out of the OT's lore.

This guy gets it.

[Ralin]

Oh man, I just love that you cite "destroying fanon" as their "biggest sin"- and that you apparently mean this absolutely seriously and with a straight face.

That is, indeed, their biggest "sin"- that they could not possibly fulfill the personal headcannon, nostalgia, wishes, and axes to grind of hundreds of millions of individual fans. Because fans refusing to see the difference between "doesn't match my personal fanfiction" and "objectively bad".

I mean, it sort of is. The original trilogy, and Lucas's writing style in general, relies heavily on giving just enough information to make it seem like there's a larger world and story out there and letting the viewer fill in the details. His strength is creating a situation where you have no idea what the Sith are much less what being their Dark Lord entails or what the Kessel Run is but you accept it and automatically start spinning it around in your head and that’s fun and there’s a sense of wonder to it. The prequels were all about filling in the backstory, which means they're fundamentally in conflict what was good about the original movies. The EU had the same issue, because even when it churned out good material it was still filling in those gaps with canon. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t make prequels or give backstory, but it does mean whatever Lucas made was and should have been held against the fairly reasonable standard of ‘do I like this better than literally no movie at all?’

[ray245]

It's toxic when people impose some sort of moral judgement on prequel fans, as if they are somehow inferior people for liking what they think is bad movies. This is just toxic behaviour. I hope some people on this forum realised how toxic their actions are.

[Crazedwraith]

It's toxic when people impose some sort of moral judgement on prequel fans, as if they are somehow inferior people for liking what they think is bad movies. This is just toxic behaviour. I hope some people on this forum realised how toxic their actions are.

Do you see the serious irony in posting this in a thread entitled 'The prequel hatedom needs to go die in a fire'?