The Star Wars Prequels

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

As many of you will know, I am NOT a fan of the prequels.

I find them a disappointment when compared to the OT in almost every respect. Lacking the characters and sense of adventure and camaraderie of those classic films.

As a stand alone trilogy too I find them simply...boring.

The story, while having some point of interest is both a convoluted mess and a ridiculously spoon fed monstrosity at the same time (if you can image that being possible).

The characters are flat, ill-defined and I am neither interested or emotionally invested in them.

These films contain a plethora of special effects and action scenes, but so little of it is actually memorable. It's just that there is a lot of it.

So as eye candy, as an engrossing story, as a character piece I dont find much to enjoy about these films. And worse of all they insult my intelligence.

I have no doubt that the coming film will be an improvement in terms of story, acting, pacing special effects and hopefully music.

However....they will be films made by a committee, to satisfy a market group, a fanbase.

Whatever it's many faults. The Prequel trilogy are essentially auteur films. Made on huge budgets, but a enormous crew, but all of them working according to the vision of one man. George Lucas.

While I loathe these films, I cannot deny that they are the purest distillation of Star Wars as Lucas envisioned it. Moreso then the OT, which had other writers, directors, studio pressure.

Lucas wrote, directed and pretty much paid for these films, made them using his own company, his own employees.

They are essentially films made without much compromise, which is very rare on large budget productions.

Lucas flew in the face of what fans expected Star Wars to be and crafted a set of films that had a completely different tone and style then the trilogy that made him famous.

The only compromise I think he did make was limiting the presence of Jar Jar in the latter two films.

[Jay 37,364]

Well, what can I say, I agree with everything you say. I doubt many will disagree.

[nightscape94 965]

However....they will be films made to satisfy a market group, a fanbase.

Are Empire and Jedi really any different in terms of goal?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Thats my point. The Prequels represent Lucas' Star Wars at his purest.

[nightscape94 965]

But you certainly agree that the quality is not the same. I think the main problem isn't the "studio effect" or the "merchandising effect" or whatever, but rather Lucas himself. He just made three varying degrees of badly written, directed, shot, and acted films. Too much control for someone who isn't necessarily a great filmmaker.

So in that way I think you can tame some of your fears for the upcoming movie.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I'm not talking about the quality. I am sure the new films will be better made, closer in style to the OT.

Disney isnt about to take any risks.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[gkgyver 1,645]

What's the point of this thread? Do the prequels need to be reheated, again? There is zero left to be said.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Actually no.

With a new trilogy on it's way, and spin-off movies. a re-evaluation of the Prequels will be inevitable.

[Uni 306]

Which would be a worthwhile enterprise, if these movies were worth re-evaluating.

But they're not. They suck the sweat off a dead man's balls, and that will never change.

Whatever it's many faults. The Prequel trilogy are essentially auteur films. Made on huge budgets, but a enormous crew, but all of them working according to the vision of one man. George Lucas.

While I loathe these films, I cannot deny that they are the purest distillation of Star Wars as Lucas envisioned it. Moreso then the OT, which had other writers, directors, studio pressure.

Lucas wrote, directed and pretty much paid for these films, made them using his own company, his own employees.

But are you saying that's a good thing? While we often bitch about the negative influences of studios on the art of film, the original Star Wars trilogy may represent the best example of the positive effect studio decisions can have on a project. The main problem with the prequels is that they are the purest distillation of SW as Lucas envisioned it . . . and the bottom line is the man's a terrible, horrible, no-good, very bad storyteller. He's a good visionary, and there's no denying he brought a fantastic world to life, but he simply cannot write, or inspire, or direct, or do anything on this large a scale without outside help. Everything we love about the original trilogy primarily came from sources other than Lucas. He needs people to translate his stuff into mainstream culture for him.

Frankly, I've always wished we'd gotten a more filtered and "impure" vision of Star Wars in the prequels. They might've turned out pretty well if things had gone that way.

- Uni

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I am not so much saying that Lucas having near complete creative control is a good thing (I think your assessment of of stinky ball sweat is far too mild a description). But what I am saying that this makes the Prequels almost unique. An oddity in the history of big budget cinema.

I always compare Lucas going back almost 2 decades later and make the Prequels with Gene Roddenberry producing Star Trek: The Motion Picture 10 years after the original series. Or producing Star Trek: The Next Generation another decade or so after that.

Roddenberry is undeniably the creator of Star Trek, one of the most popular and enduring Sci-fi franchises ever. Yet when TMP came out, it has lackluster reviews and more importantly many fans struggled with it. It had the required elements, but just didnt feel like it should. Same with TNG, which would become a classic in it's own right, but had a first season that is regarded by many fans as being shit. And after that shitty season Roddenberry was replaced as showrunner which eventually led to the rise of Rick Berman.

[mrbellamy 6,287]

On a side note, are the prequels the most expensive independent films ever produced? They'd have to be, right?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I'm pretty sure they are.

[Jay 37,364]

I think they pretty much have to be, yea.

[Score_Fan 36]

I like the prequels.

[Wojo 2,453]

I like that Paramount could tell Roddenberry to go sit in the corner and color, while more inventive minds entered the franchise and created successful films and shows.

[Henry B 50]

Yes, Lucas had complete creative control over the prequels. He also blatantly pandered by including Boba Fett, Chewbacca and a plethora of visual elements from the Original Trilogy seemingly for no other reason than to appeal to nostalgia and sell toys. His vision wasn't just bad; it was unoriginal and inauthentic.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Thats the weird thing. Even though they are conceived by a single writer, the Prequels never make sense, stylistically.

[Luke Skywalker 1,795]

On a side note, are the prequels the most expensive independent films ever produced? They'd have to be, right?

And I suppose they have been the most economically successfull too.

Maybe not in proportion...but it total ammount of money received.

I mean im sure that there are some independent movies that have costed 1 million $ and earned maybe 40 million $. The prequels may have earn just twice its budget... but earning 200 millions y way more than 39.

[Hlao-roo 389]

It would be interesting to see a remake of the prequels, or even a reboot of the entire franchise, somewhere (way) down the line.

[Trent B 337]

It would be interesting to see a remake of the prequels, or even a reboot of the entire franchise, somewhere (way) down the line.

Dude don't jinx that! Although I wouldn't be surprised if a reboot happens after Lucas bites the dust.

There are some aspects of the Prequels that I like, but over all it could have been handled differently...especially with Maul.

[King Mark 3,631]

This thread is needed for the cycle of JWfan to continue on

[Uni 306]

Sometimes I spend idle moments recreating the prequels in my mind, considering how I would've done the story differently (and better). There are times, when I really squint my mind's eye and go deep, that I can almost convince myself Lucas's versions were never released, and I'm watching the "real" versions instead. (Like any happy dream, however, it always sucks to wake up. . . .)

I always compare Lucas going back almost 2 decades later and make the Prequels with Gene Roddenberry producing Star Trek: The Motion Picture 10 years after the original series. Or producing Star Trek: The Next Generation another decade or so after that.

Roddenberry is undeniably the creator of Star Trek, one of the most popular and enduring Sci-fi franchises ever. Yet when TMP came out, it has lackluster reviews and more importantly many fans struggled with it. It had the required elements, but just didnt feel like it should. Same with TNG, which would become a classic in it's own right, but had a first season that is regarded by many fans as being shit. And after that shitty season Roddenberry was replaced as showrunner which eventually led to the rise of Rick Berman.

That's really a spot-on parallel, Stefan, one I never gave much thought to before but which makes eminent sense. Everyone praises Roddenberry's "positive" view of the future--which wouldn't necessarily be bad if it weren't so uber-goober positive, almost to the point of being saccharine and sterilized. It had its moments, but there was never much chance for the sort of dramatic depth that arises from serious conflict between characters. That's what the other writers and directors brought to the table (much like the case in Star Wars).

- Uni

[Wojo 2,453]

This thread is needed for the cycle of JWfan to continue on

Kill all the quote threads and this is what's left: prequel bashing. My god, we need the titty thread back up and running again.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

I am not so much saying that Lucas having near complete creative control is a good thing (I think your assessment of of stinky ball sweat is far too mild a description). But what I am saying that this makes the Prequels almost unique. An oddity in the history of big budget cinema.

I always compare Lucas going back almost 2 decades later and make the Prequels with Gene Roddenberry producing Star Trek: The Motion Picture 10 years after the original series. Or producing Star Trek: The Next Generation another decade or so after that.

Roddenberry is undeniably the creator of Star Trek, one of the most popular and enduring Sci-fi franchises ever. Yet when TMP came out, it has lackluster reviews and more importantly many fans struggled with it. It had the required elements, but just didnt feel like it should. Same with TNG, which would become a classic in it's own right, but had a first season that is regarded by many fans as being shit. And after that shitty season Roddenberry was replaced as showrunner which eventually led to the rise of Rick Berman.

I think the difference between the Star Trek and Star Wars comebacks was that the Star Trek film and television series' actually improved (mostly, at least for a while) as Roddenberry enlisted the help of a crew of new guys and appreciated suggestions they might have. With Star Wars, Lucas was arrogant and closed-minded. He needs to control everything and everyone. He doesn't provide an atmosphere of trust, and he doesn't inspire these people to go out of their way for him. He's got everybody wound up so tight, there's no joy in anything. I don't think he's a particularly good director.

Oh yeah, and his scripts sucked.

[Red 75]

At this point I feel like there's nothing more that can really be said about them. Red Letter Media's reviews of them kind of said it all from a critical standpoint. Now we look to the future. Star Wars as a franchise, regardless of how Episode IX turns out (better than the prequels to be sure), is in a better place now than it has been for a long time. The irony is that it took the independent, self-made millionaire Lucas selling the property to a gargantuan corporation for that to happen. Lucas had been the franchise's biggest stumbling block when he was its original creator. His story is pretty fascinating if you think about it.

[KK 3,307]

They are essentially films made without much compromise, which is very rare on large budget productions.

Lucas flew in the face of what fans expected Star Wars to be and crafted a set of films that had a completely different tone and style then the trilogy that made him famous.

The only compromise I think he did make was limiting the presence of Jar Jar in the latter two films.

Perhaps that was the problem all along. Sometimes, especially with these high-fantasy concepts, filmmakers like Lucas get lost in their own imagination, pursuing avenues with little logistical sense, going too far, etc and what they end up producing in the end is not nearly the magnum opus they picture. Compromise and studio/producer pressure often helps taper/restrain wilder visions into a better work of art. Case in point, and I hate to bring this up again, look at Fellowship of the Ring vs. Desolation of Smaug. The latter is a incredibly successful filmmaker at a phase in his career where he can practically do anything he wants (though not with the freedom you've mentioned with Lucas here), where with the former, you have a little-known Kiwi filmmaker, known mostly for his B-movies, trying to tackle a difficult blockbuster for the first time, which obviously calls for more control from the studios. Which one's the better film?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

True. Though DoS doesnt fail only nearly as much as the Prequels do, which are substandard on every single level save FX and music.

[Quintus 5,399]

Which would be a worthwhile enterprise, if these movies were worth re-evaluating.

But they're not. They suck the sweat off a dead man's balls, and that will never change.

Says re-evaluation isn't worth it.

But are you saying that's a good thing? While we often bitch about the negative influences of studios on the art of film, the original Star Wars trilogy may represent the best example of the positive effect studio decisions can have on a project. The main problem with the prequels is that they are the purest distillation of SW as Lucas envisioned it . . . and the bottom line is the man's a terrible, horrible, no-good, very bad storyteller. He's a good visionary, and there's no denying he brought a fantastic world to life, but he simply cannot write, or inspire, or direct, or do anything on this large a scale without outside help. Everything we love about the original trilogy primarily came from sources other than Lucas. He needs people to translate his stuff into mainstream culture for him.

Frankly, I've always wished we'd gotten a more filtered and "impure" vision of Star Wars in the prequels. They might've turned out pretty well if things had gone that way.

- Uni

Goes ahead and re-evaluates anyway.

Nobody can resist the dark side!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

King Mark was right!

This Forum was born out of the ashes on the Prequels!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

Star Wars as a franchise, regardless of how Episode IX turns out (better than the prequels to be sure), is in a better place now than it has been for a long time.

So you liked Episode VII and VIII?

[Jay 37,364]

The main difference between the originals and the prequels is that for the originals Lucas surrounded himself with a group of talented young guys who wanted to all make the best movies they could. With the prequels Lucas surrounded himself with Yes Men who would do anything he said.

Though this really started with ROTJ as everyone had to follow Lucas's insistence that it feature teddy bears and another death star after Empire - the film Lucas had the least involvement with - wasn't received as well as SW was.

[Ricard 2,245]

The teddy bears are cool!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I love Indiana Jones' tie in The Last Crusade!

[Trent B 337]

Part of me has always thought that Lucas just either forgot or decided not to even go back to his original rough draft of the series and do a better tie in from the Prequels to the Original Trilogy (almost typed Original Series LOL) on purpose.

Many of you and others have said Anakin should have been the age he was in AOTC in TPM and I agree with that as well. They could have chosen a better actor for Anakin..although part of me didn't mind Hayden if they didn't make him so whiny a lot with AOTC and ROTS.

The Prequels definitely could have been much more than they were...

[mrbellamy 6,287]

They could have chosen a better actor for Anakin..although part of me didn't mind Hayden if they didn't make him so whiny a lot with AOTC and ROTS.

Christensen is a major problem for me. I actually think he's proved himself a respectable actor in other films, but even though certain lines of dialogue were probably not salvageable by anybody, there were certainly ways around simple but crucial lines like "What have I done?" which he just never seemed to find, as opposed to McGregor or McDiarmid who managed to deliver relatively capable performances in spite of it all. I'm definitely not absolving Lucas of his directorial choices or Anakin's shoddy characterization on paper, but I also just don't buy the vast majority of Christensen's performance, and that's down to him (unless it's revealed that all his best takes were inexplicably left on the cutting room floor.)

[nightscape94 965]

He was rather good in Shattered Glass. That role seemed perfect for his strange delivery. Outside of that I haven't cared for him. But in that one role, it just worked.

[mrbellamy 6,287]

Yeah, that was the main one I was referring to. Very impressive.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Thats the weird thing. Even though they are conceived by a single writer, the Prequels never make sense, stylistically.

That's not weird at all. When a single creator writes a script or series of scripts, the output is more likely to have inconsistencies. Without the assistance of a script editor to identify continuity errors and things that don't make sense, these problems are likely to persist.

I'm sure Lucas did hire staff to give his scripts a proof, but I doubt they had the guts to tell their boss that his writing was riddled with big problems in character development, contradictions, convoluted plot devices and awkward dialogue.

[Wycket 36]

I don't get the praise Christensen gets all the time. He was good in one movie, yet in everything else he's been adequate at best. I think he just had the right support around him that one time, and the rest of the time he's proven he's just another pretty boy who can't emote very well. At least Channing Tatum has proven himself a competent comedy actor, but I have yet to find anything Christensen is good at.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

I didn't realize that Anakin guy was good in ANYTHING. I remember seeing him in at least 3 post-Star Wars movies and he was bloody awful! I could have been a better Anakin. We ALL could have been a better Anakin.

[nightscape94 965]

I don't get the praise Christensen gets all the time.

[Wycket 36]

I don't get the praise Christensen gets all the time.

Obviously he's awful, but it seems people are always saying "Go watch Shattered Glass, he can act." My response is "Go watch anything with him other than Shattered Glass, obviously he can't."

[crocodile 8,016]

He has created one of the most memorable horrible performances in cinema's history. I'll have to give him that.

Although, it must be said that Portman gives him a run for his money in the latter two.

Karol

[filmmusic 1,829]

Natalie Portman: 'Stars Wars hurt my career'

Natalie Portman is convinced her performance in the Star Wars prequel trilogy damaged her career.The Black Swan actress portrayed Padme Amidala, the love interest of Anakin Skywalker, in the prequel films from 1999 to 2005, but she struggled to find acting jobs afterwards as no director wanted to work with her.

Late filmmaker Mike Nichols, who died in November (14), had worked with Portman on stage play The Seagull and tried to help her out by recommending her to his fellow directors, but they kept passing her off to colleagues.

Portman tells NY Magazine, "Star Wars had come out around the time of Seagull, and everyone thought I was a horrible actress... I was in the biggest-grossing movie of the decade, and no director wanted to work with me.

"Mike wrote a letter to Anthony Minghella and said, 'Put her in Cold Mountain, I vouch for her'. And then Anthony passed me on to Tom Tykwer, who passed me on to the Wachowskis."

The Wachowski directing siblings cast her in 2006 thriller V for Vendetta.

Portman was nominated for an Academy Award in 2005 for her role in Nichols' film Closer. She won the prize in 2011 for Black Swan.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/news/natalie-portman-stars-wars-hurt-my-career/ar-BBgWU1t

[gkgyver 1,645]

No surprise there.

You're only as good as the director and the shit you're given.

[Jay 37,364]

I think her career turned out fine.

[gkgyver 1,645]

Killed Hayden Christensen though.

No waste there of course.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Many outstanding actors had a tough time keeping afloat in that trilogy. Even Neeson and McGregor...and Christopher Lee himself!

[gkgyver 1,645]

Christopher Lee was a legend well before that travesty called Attack of the Clones.

Had those actors not had names before the trilogy, not many would have survived.