The prequel hatedom needs to go die in a fire

[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.

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

A hatedom is toxic and is no longer rational about its taste in movie. You can dislike something without turning it into a hatedom, which is what some members here are doing.

[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'?

A hatedom is toxic and is no longer rational about its taste in movie. You can dislike something without turning it into a hatedom, which is what some members here are doing.

Hang on, are you saying members here re just disliking the movie? Or part of "the hatedom"?

I'm not seeing anyone casting a moral judgement on prequel fans. Maybe an aspersion or two about their intelligence I admit but nothing about moral character.

Again it's rich to complain about people imposing a moral judgement on you when you're doing to same thing right back, and 'needs to go die in a fire' is more a severe judgement than I have ever seen prequel fans get.

[ray245]

Hang on, are you saying members here re just disliking the movie? Or part of "the hatedom"?

I'm not seeing anyone casting a moral judgement on prequel fans. Maybe an aspersion or two about their intelligence I admit but nothing about moral character.

Again it's rich to complain about people imposing a moral judgement on you when you're doing to same thing right back, and 'needs to go die in a fire' is more a severe judgement than I have ever seen prequel fans get.

There's a big difference saying you dislike the movie for personal reason and insulting people on a more personal level. Are people stupid because they like a movie you don't? It's being snobbish and elitist about entertainment, which is entirely subjective. Saying someone who liked a movie you dislike is stupid is a personal insult and imposing a moral judgement on them.

It's basically Internet bullying.

Saying the hatedom needs to die in a fire is not a personal attack, but a criticism of a toxic part of the fandom that has been abusive to people, especially the people involved in the production of the movie. It's a culture that cultivate people to be abusive to people and the culture itself should be criticised.

I think anyone that thinks they are more intelligent for liking the "right movie" and disliking the "wrong movie" is cultivating that toxic mindset.

[Crazedwraith]

Hang on, are you saying members here re just disliking the movie? Or part of "the hatedom"?

I'm not seeing anyone casting a moral judgement on prequel fans. Maybe an aspersion or two about their intelligence I admit but nothing about moral character.

Again it's rich to complain about people imposing a moral judgement on you when you're doing to same thing right back, and 'needs to go die in a fire' is more a severe judgement than I have ever seen prequel fans get.

There's a big difference saying you dislike the movie for personal reason and insulting people on a more personal level. Are people stupid because they like a movie you don't? It's being snobbish and elitist about entertainment, which is entirely subjective. Saying someone who liked a movie you dislike is stupid is a personal insult and imposing a moral judgement on them.

It's basically Internet bullying.

If you don't like be called stupid when on opposing sides of an argument this may be the wrong forum for you.

You idiot.

Saying the hatedom needs to die in a fire is not a personal attack, but a criticism of a toxic part of the fandom that has been abusive to people, especially the people involved in the production of the movie. It's a culture that cultivate people to be abusive to people and the culture itself should be criticised.

I think anyone that thinks they are more intelligent for liking the "right movie" and disliking the "wrong movie" is cultivating that toxic mindset.

A hatedom is a group of people. Saying 'you hold this opinion so you should die in a fire' is a pretty personal attack. That's why I'm saying irony.

Looking at Zor's OP, only a tiny part of it is 'people that were abusive to actors' and btw literally nobody is defending the abuse that's illegal and shouldn't happen. Most of it were 'actually the films were pretty good and if you express youe dislike of it now too strongly and at too personal a level you have taken it too far'

So yeah, abuse of people = bad, anything else just put up and shut up because they are entitled to their opinion of the films as you are.

[Civil War Man]

Thing is, by saying people are stupid because they have a different opinion than you about a movie is implicitly saying that you think they are not entitled to their opinion, because if they are stupid for having that opinion you are claiming that their opinion is objectively wrong.

As for the toxic mindset Ray's talking about, I'm going to crib something from the internet and say that some of the stuff I've seen is not the same as the people who send death threats to the actors, but it's the same energy.

[Crazedwraith]

Thing is, by saying people are stupid because they have a different opinion than you about a movie is implicitly saying that you think they are not entitled to their opinion, because if they are stupid for having that opinion you are claiming that their opinion is objectively wrong.

As for the toxic mindset Ray's talking about, I'm going to crib something from the internet and say that some of the stuff I've seen is not the same as the people who send death threats to the actors, but it's the same energy.

I would say there's a difference between 'I think that's opinion's stupid and therefore you shouldn't have it' and 'you are not allowed to have that opinion'

And if we follow your logic that brings us back to there's not much difference between 'this opinion should go die in a fire' and 'holders of this opinion should go die in a fire'.

Again abusing people is bad, Zor and other seems to be extending this to people who just won't let go of 'george lucas ruining their childhood' and won't stop criticising the films. I've yet to see any abuse of people who like the prequel films other than the aforementioned mild criticism of them, certainly nothing abuse level.

And even for abuses I would say abusers should not do that rather than the hyperbolic 'die in a fire'

[Elfdart]

A couple of points:

1) Gen-Xers are a cunty lot and have been for a long time, just like Baby Boomers are narcissists. Not all, but enough of them. This fact explains much of the nerd rage against the prequels.

2) What some call bad or "wooden" acting* I call brilliant camp. My favorite scene in Attack of the Clones is the one that causes so much consternation among incels ("I don't like sand") because I like things that are unabashedly goofy and because I caught the reference to an old Errol Flynn movie in the scene. If people don't like it or don't care about the homage to The Adventures of Don Juan, fine. It's when they assume that what was obviously meant to be silly (everyone from the actors to the writer to the composer were in on it) was just George Lucas being incompetent, that I can't help but ridicule their smug stupidity. It's like the people who didn't catch that Starship Troopers was clearly meant as satire.

The kind of acting that does annoy me is where acting schools and seriously overrated performers have convinced a whole generation of actors and directors that mumbling and whispering all your lines makes for a great performance. This fad is so pervasive on TV dramas that I wasted a trip to the doctor to have my hearing checked because I found myself using closed captioning while watching TV, like the latest True Detective series (Game of Thrones is another offender). But it's all the rage and people get awards for it, no matter how much it sucks -and for the record, my hearing is fine.



* Interesting how those who slam the acting all use the same adjective while also slamming the writing. Self-awareness is clearly not their bag.

[Vendetta]

"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.

And that wasn't the criticism I was making. I was making specific criticisms of the execution and why they caused the movies to be bad.

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.

But not the core thing they are trying to be. You can tell what they were trying to convey, but it's not emotionally resonant. You don't feel the conflict in Anakin Skywalker because the lines and delivery don't make you believe that the actor is feeling it.

They don't work where it matters.

[ray245]

If you don't like be called stupid when on opposing sides of an argument this may be the wrong forum for you.

You idiot.

I think even the mods on this forum has began to realise making personal attacks is not ideal in this forum. You belong to the old-school of users that seems to think being abusive to people on the Internet is perfectly OK. I disagree.

Don't hide behind the old forum policy as an excuse to be abusive.

A hatedom is a group of people. Saying 'you hold this opinion so you should die in a fire' is a pretty personal attack. That's why I'm saying irony.

Looking at Zor's OP, only a tiny part of it is 'people that were abusive to actors' and btw literally nobody is defending the abuse that's illegal and shouldn't happen. Most of it were 'actually the films were pretty good and if you express youe dislike of it now too strongly and at too personal a level you have taken it too far'

So yeah, abuse of people = bad, anything else just put up and shut up because they are entitled to their opinion of the films as you are.

A hatedom is not a group of people, but a collective mindset that people can break away from. Hating something should not be defined as a part of their fandom identity, because this is inherently unhealthy. In my opinion, it is this very attitude that helped to shape some alt-right views within the geek fandoms.

The point is toxicity in a fandom is a slippery slope. It helps to bred an environment where people are encouraged to be ever more toxic. Yes, not everyone in this hatedom will be abusive to actors, but if they can be abusive to their fellow fans by insulting their intelligence, it's easy for some people to become even more arrogant in their views and become really toxic as a result.

A rational response to something as subjective as film and entertainment is to understand and respect the different preferences of everyone. People who liked the prequels aren't necessarily saying there's no flaws in the prequels, but rather saying they don't think those flaws are sufficient to affect their overall enjoyment of the movie.

When people say a movie is good or bad, it does not mean a movie is perfect or flawed. But rather, it depends on the personal taste and experience of the viewer, on what they find is acceptable flaws and unacceptable flaws. I am not a fan of the sequel movies, but I do not believe people are wrong for liking them. I understand that the flaws ( or what I consider as flaws) in the sequel movies are things that won't bother other fans because they have a different perspective of things.

I think how we judge a movie needs to be more "democratic" and be more understanding of how different people can enjoy movies in different ways. No movie is inherently perfect, but the way we enjoy a movie is extremely dependent on someone's personal taste. People talked about how the Transformers movies are trash, but there are people who are able to look past the flaws and find enjoyment in them.

I am increasingly less inclined to think of someone as being less intelligent because they liked "trashy" movies. It's classicism, snobbery and gate-keeping at work here. The old internet culture that we have been cultivating in the forum in the 90s and 2000s needs to end.

People should be less abusive to each other, and I think you should not defend the old forum policies because we have become increasingly aware of how damaging internet bullying can be on people.

We've changed the motto of this forum from mockery of "stupid people" to mockery of "stupid ideas". I think you should get onboard this change as well.

A couple of points:

1) Gen-Xers are a cunty lot and have been for a long time, just like Baby Boomers are narcissists. Not all, but enough of them. This fact explains much of the nerd rage against the prequels.

The Gen-X geek culture always have an element of toxicity in my opinion, which is not helped by the fact that it is extremely male and white dominated. The reaction towards the inclusion of women and minorities in SW seems to be heavily driven by geeks ( who had embraced alt-right ideology) because it posed a challenge to a space that was dominated by people who are white and male. This is why I am very uncomfortable with people that talks about the original movie as some sort of sacred cow because it's the idea of a "pure and idealised" version of the past that created many of the toxicity that we see in the SW fandom today.

[Crazedwraith]

Fuck it, I'm out , the ratio of shit I give to infuriating self-righteousness on your part is not worth it.

[Civil War Man]

I would say there's a difference between 'I think that's opinion's stupid and therefore you shouldn't have it' and 'you are not allowed to have that opinion'

That's splitting hairs pretty finely. It's a pretty short jump from "shouldn't" to "can't", particularly if there's enough anger behind "shouldn't" that the people who have those opinions feel pressured to either hide their opinion or cut off contact with the person who disagrees with them.

And if we follow your logic that brings us back to there's not much difference between 'this opinion should go die in a fire' and 'holders of this opinion should go die in a fire'.

Honestly, there isn't much difference. The reason I'm not particularly worked up about it is because Zor is not saying "I am literally advocating for these people to be burned to death." "Die in a fire" is, at least in the social circles I run with, a fairly common hyperbolic pejorative for expressing annoyance at something. If it's not where you are, I can see the disconnect.

Again abusing people is bad, Zor and other seems to be extending this to people who just won't let go of 'george lucas ruining their childhood' and won't stop criticising the films. I've yet to see any abuse of people who like the prequel films other than the aforementioned mild criticism of them, certainly nothing abuse level.

I think a large part of this is that the most vocal opinions of the prequels have softened in recent years, something I ascribe in large part to the sequels giving the problem fans a new target for their hate. Remember, this was a fandom that hounded Jake Lloyd to the point where he quit acting entirely.

2) What some call bad or "wooden" acting* I call brilliant camp. My favorite scene in Attack of the Clones is the one that causes so much consternation among incels ("I don't like sand") because I like things that are unabashedly goofy and because I caught the reference to an old Errol Flynn movie in the scene. If people don't like it or don't care about the homage to The Adventures of Don Juan, fine.

To add to this, my mom loves the pod racing in Phantom Menace due to its constant homage to Ben Hur.

[ray245]

I think a large part of this is that the most vocal opinions of the prequels have softened in recent years, something I ascribe in large part to the sequels giving the problem fans a new target for their hate. Remember, this was a fandom that hounded Jake Lloyd to the point where he quit acting entirely.

We have people making attack on people who liked the prequels as people who are of lower intelligence in this very thread. This kind of attitude are still here.

[Crazedwraith]

I did say I was stepping out. CWM replied right after, and in a none-infuriating manner. So I shall own to my hypocrisy on this just to address a few points.

I would say there's a difference between 'I think that's opinion's stupid and therefore you shouldn't have it' and 'you are not allowed to have that opinion'

That's splitting hairs pretty finely. It's a pretty short jump from "shouldn't" to "can't", particularly if there's enough anger behind "shouldn't" that the people who have those opinions feel pressured to either hide their opinion or cut off contact with the person who disagrees with them.

And if we follow your logic that brings us back to there's not much difference between 'this opinion should go die in a fire' and 'holders of this opinion should go die in a fire'.

Honestly, there isn't much difference. The reason I'm not particularly worked up about it is because Zor is not saying "I am literally advocating for these people to be burned to death." "Die in a fire" is, at least in the social circles I run with, a fairly common hyperbolic pejorative for expressing annoyance at something. If it's not where you are, I can see the disconnect.

Do people honestly think that I literally think Zor is advocating literally incinerating people that dislike the Prequels too much? Of course it's stupid violent hyperbole, but by their own arguments stupid violent hyperbole and toxicity is exactly what they are trying to get away from.It's hypocritical and appalling and counterproductive. So I enjoy throwing it back in their faces.

I think a large part of this is that the most vocal opinions of the prequels have softened in recent years, something I ascribe in large part to the sequels giving the problem fans a new target for their hate. Remember, this was a fandom that hounded Jake Lloyd to the point where he quit acting entirely.

Yes, as I said, that's a bad thing I do not condone. Likewise the harassment on Kelly Marie Tran is likewise appalling.

But mostly that doesn't seem to be bugging Zor as much as 'fan entitlement' that he and TRR and Ray have banged on about it at length. if people want to pivot and claim that's the real issue one fair enough but it's given much less focus in his OP than just 'they're good films really!' at least as far as I can tell.

Now stepping out for real if you don't mind.

[Zor]

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.

Frankly one of my favorite thing about the prequels is that they broadened the Star Wars world. Let's see the locals of the Orginal Trilogy

1. New Hope: Tatooine, Death Star interior, Falcon Interior and a little time on the Rebel Base.
2. Empire Striles Back: Hoth Base and Glaciers, Dagobah Swamp, Falcon, Imperial ships, Cloud City, bit on Medical Frigate at the end
3. Return of the Jedi: Jabba's Palace on Tatooine, Falcon, Endor Moon, Death Star II, Home One, Executor Bridge

Basically all the locales in the OT are either military bases/warships, Wilderness mostly on the unpleasant side or a backwater craphole with the exception of some of the upper levels of Cloud City. That's not a bad thing as that's where the narrative of the film went and even with all the technical gee-wizery in the world there is only so much you can put into three films and they are well realized. But it is notable that the Prequels decided to show thing radically different from that. We saw Naboo in it's classical elegance and beauty of it's human denizens and the Gungans. We saw the cityscapes of Coruscant from their glittering heights of wealth and government and the Jedi Temple in it's grandeur to the lower depths. Kamino, Geonosis and even the worlds glimpsed in Revenge of the Sith show much more of this universe and helps bring it to life.

That and the Jedi Order was frankly perfectly realized. It was a force for good and operated on rules which made sense, even if they did have some flaws which where ultimately exploited.

As far as i'm concerned the prequels did not demystify the Original Trilogy, they enhanced it.

Zor

[ray245]

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.

Frankly one of my favorite thing about the prequels is that they broadened the Star Wars world. Let's see the locals of the Orginal Trilogy

1. New Hope: Tatooine, Death Star interior, Falcon Interior and a little time on the Rebel Base.
2. Empire Striles Back: Hoth Base and Glaciers, Dagobah Swamp, Falcon, Imperial ships, Cloud City, bit on Medical Frigate at the end
3. Return of the Jedi: Jabba's Palace on Tatooine, Falcon, Endor Moon, Death Star II, Home One, Executor Bridge

Basically all the locales in the OT are either military bases/warships, Wilderness mostly on the unpleasant side or a backwater craphole with the exception of some of the upper levels of Cloud City. That's not a bad thing as that's where the narrative of the film went and even with all the technical gee-wizery in the world there is only so much you can put into three films and they are well realized. But it is notable that the Prequels decided to show thing radically different from that. We saw Naboo in it's classical elegance and beauty of it's human denizens and the Gungans. We saw the cityscapes of Coruscant from their glittering heights of wealth and government and the Jedi Temple in it's grandeur to the lower depths. Kamino, Geonosis and even the worlds glimpsed in Revenge of the Sith show much more of this universe and helps bring it to life.

That and the Jedi Order was frankly perfectly realized. It was a force for good and operated on rules which made sense, even if they did have some flaws which where ultimately exploited.

As far as i'm concerned the prequels did not demystify the Original Trilogy, they enhanced it.

Zor

It's just nostalgia snobbery at work here. I do feel the same about newer adaptations of my childhood entertainment but I do try and recognise my personal bias instead of demeaning the younger fans for liking something "inferior"

The people who complained about the baby boomers for being too influenced by nostalgia and being "grumpy old people" are now doing the exact same thing by being "grumpy middle aged" people to the younger people.

[Dalton]

I want everyone in this thread to review this post.

[Gandalf]

It's just nostalgia snobbery at work here. I do feel the same about newer adaptations of my childhood entertainment but I do try and recognise my personal bias instead of demeaning the younger fans for liking something "inferior"

The people who complained about the baby boomers for being too influenced by nostalgia and being "grumpy old people" are now doing the exact same thing by being "grumpy middle aged" people to the younger people.

Not for me. I only really got into Star Wars in the late nineties, just in time for the prequels. Even then I wasn't particularly taken in by them. Also, I think that overall the sequel films are pretty good, especially TLJ.

The prequels just don't really work as films, in part because of the demystification mentioned before, and also because so much of it just seems all over the place. An example: In the OT we had stormtroopers which made for intimidating opponents (at least until RoTJ's half arsed Vietnam allegory), in the PT it's battle droids for villains and friendly fascist clonetroopers. The CW show made it all worse, but I won't go into it here.

[Khaat]

This one phrase will save you from the Dark Side: "Not My Star Wars".

[Gunhead]

This one phrase will save you from the Dark Side: "Not My Star Wars".

Why would you want that?? Best part of prequels, bunch of Jedi got MDKd. By the time Rots rolled out, I had suffered through one boring and pointless movie and one that was just boring, I was totally ready to suffer through the third just so I could cackle with glee at some wholehearted murder. Truly, the dark side is your friend!

-Gunhead

[MarxII]

This one phrase will save you from the Dark Side: "Not My Star Wars".

Without specific reference to the prequels, I've been thinking on this idea, given the late EU and the wide variety in quality and tone of its many constituent parts. Most especially with the whole sequel brouhaha, I think it might be useful philosophy for a good many fans.

[Kurgan]

There was a lot of disappointment, a lot of just plain bad, and a lot of padding to criticize the Prequels for. I still intensely dislike Episode I compared to the others (little has changed, in other words, for me, since I saw it in theaters). For those who hated the Prequels, I'm sure "TFA" was a breath of fresh air, but to me that's not enough. I could declare any movie good by comparing it to the SWHS, but that wouldn't be saying much. For me, the prequels are like a side story to the original trilogy. I am fully capable of enjoying Star Wars as a stand alone film, the rest just get dragged along somehow, but each trilogy is being made under different circumstances than the original and thus have a different feel, like a different story entirely. I don't exhaust myself anymore trying to force (pun intended) everything to fit into some pre-defined grand narrative. That doesn't mean I don't want Star Wars to be good, but it also means I don't hold my breath in anticipation when I see some new project coming out. In case anyone missed my opinion the first hundred times, of the new movies I've only really cared for Rogue One (but that too I feel was unnecessary and certainly has its own flaws). Did I rant yet about how we were told to forget the EU, then told to buy it again, and then it was used as a basis to remix the OT into these new movies? I was in favor of rebooting it, but to be better, not just the same, just as I'm in favor of new movies if they're going to be actually good, not just recycled. Anyway, back on topic...

What I feel like has been happening is that the defensive reaction of those who DID enjoy the new movies (mainly the last Jedi) or at least felt that they had to like them (let's be real, sometimes that is true), is that they revert back to the previous installment as the scapegoat. The new movies are good, because the previous movies were subpar. Back when the Prequels were coming out (and being nitpicked) defenders were going back and arguing that that original movies had similar (or greater) flaws. Many of us were around when that happened and remember it, so this is nothing new. We never would have gotten prequels had it not been for the success of the originals and the hype that followed. Did we ask for prequels? I think we did, but mainly because we were "promised" them many times. And nobody really foresaw what we would get if we're being truthful.

If in the future, new Star Wars episodes are made (of course they will be) similar discourses will happen. People will say "oh yeah? well TLJ was worse!" "TFA had flaws too!" as excuses. Others will say that Star Wars was at its peak under Kathleen Kennedy and Disney LFL were in charge and they long for the days when they would wait in line for days in December waiting for that logo to appear on screen. They'll say the fandom has become toxic and merch sucks now but it was good (5-10) years ago.

Hype always seems weighted in favor of whatever is newest, brightest, and biggest. And the converse is also true... there is nostalgia for stuff in the past. Its just weird because the whole Star Wars franchise (even going back to the original movie) is based heavily on nostalgia, and the entire series has always been a struggle between the creator (or organizer, or remixer) of that material, and the fans over what is most important and how it should go. That doesn't mean we can't recognize our own hypocrisy (and the hypocrisy of the creators) and admit at the end of the day, sometimes we like bad movies, and sometimes we get taken for a ride by the hype train. The point of Star Wars is to make money and sometimes they just tell us to throw away all of our old crap so we can fill up on new crap. Of course by writing this, it means I'm just an asshole, and should be fired out of a cannon, I know. MTFBWY

[Kurgan]

The Prequels had some "badass fights." That's primarily what I liked about them. The story they told wasn't the best fit for the OT but that's because Lucas' own ideas about what the backstory of Star Wars should have been had changed over the decade since ROTJ. The whole "fan expectations" thing is a red herring to me and not an excuse for any shortcomings. Even if we forgive the continuity incongruities, that's not the extent of the problems with either the prequels or the new movies. It's not "bad" or "good" because it's new, that's for sure, and I just wish more would acknowledge there are good, sane, smart people who have legitimate reasons for not going along with just whatever the company wants you to feel about it now.

Also, I don't think we get to discount negative opinions of an entertainment franchise just because there are rare incidents of crazy fans doing stupid things like sending death threats or driving actors to suicide. "Stupid" fanboys shouldn't get a pass either way, even if they are defending the franchise and issuing threats to those who disagree with them. Leave the zealot cultists out of it. Either it's art for sale, and we can criticize it, or it isn't and we can't praise it either. A good way to break ourselves out of the "fanboy" mentality is to ask ourselves if we'd feel the same way if it were something other than "Star Wars" (in other words, is it the brand we've become loyal to, so the content no longer matters)?

[ray245]

A good breakdown of the strength and flaws of the CGI in the prequels by actual CGI artists who recognised what was considered a landmark achievement at the time as well as the limitation of technology at the time.

[SolarpunkFan]

I'm not a big fan of the prequels, but I don't get why people are so bilious about them. It's not like George Lucas personally went to each and every SW fan, handcuffed them to a theater chair and pinned their eyes open during a showing of them.

Seriously, George Lucas did not "kill Star Wars" with the prequels -though if you only had the hatedom reactions to go by you'd think the films were responsible for ending civilization.

[The Romulan Republic]

I'm not a big fan of the prequels, but I don't get why people are so bilious about them. It's not like George Lucas personally went to each and every SW fan, handcuffed them to a theater chair and pinned their eyes open during a showing of them.

Because they spent twenty years reviewing the OT through nostalgia filters and imagining in their minds the movies they wanted Lucas to make, and when the real thing inevitably was different, they took that as a personal attack.

Seriously, George Lucas did not "kill Star Wars" with the prequels -though if you only had the hatedom reactions to go by you'd think the films were responsible for ending civilization.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure I've seen people (I can only assume very privileged white male middle class westerners) seriously comparing them to rape and genocide.