They were never bad. Boomers just hated them because they were different. These movies have more thematic depth and world building than the original trilogy
They were never bad. Boomers just hated them because they were different.
They were never bad. Boomers just hated them because they were different. These movies have more thematic depth and world building than the original trilogy
The only one I'd consider a bad movie would be attack of the clones which is the only movie to have a co-writer for the story outside of Lucas. Hmmm
I don't fully disagree. I think the biggest flaws are the clunky dialogue and awful direction to the actors resulting in almost universally wooden performances by everyone by Ian McDermott and the cartoon characters. An exception is Jimmy Smits, who is just a bad actor.
They are certainly more ambitious in plot and themes and there is subtext that is never fully dragged out and explained to the viewer or shown in a more complex way. Who's responsible for Anakin's fall? His own character flaws? The coercion by Palpatine? His nobility pushing him to make bad decisions? Or the rigidity of the Jedi Order? The last seems to be the most important one but is allowed to be very overshadowed.
Also . The romance is awful. And the Clone Wars as an idea is so underwhelming. It's just clone soldiers. No deep cover operative clones being used for subterfuge. No clone force users. It could have been complete chaos being put to film. He could have made that film seem 100x better with a cliffhanger of just one good guy having been cloned and then fricking up the Republic's plans in Ep. III
Anakin's main flaw is made very obvious. It's his susceptibility to emotions and inability to control them. The trilogy is based Buddhist morality themes instead of Christian which tends to piss people off.
It was definitely the worst. TPM wouldn't be considered as bad if it didn't have Jar Jar
>TPM wouldn't be considered as bad if it didn't have Jar Jar
or just balance him out with Darth maul, the coolest villain they've ever made and insanely hyped before it was released? why create maul and then give him less screen time than Hannibal lecter gets in silence of the lambs? would anyone have complained if Darth maul got 30 minutes of screen time and we cut sebulba, watto, the Chinese guys?
Darth Maul was better because he didn't have screen time. You morons think he'd be cool if he was like the sperg he is in TCW where's he's constantly going on monologues? No. He's awesome for the same reason boba Fett was awesome. He's cool and mysterious.
You make the movie first, not the marketing.
Reminder that no matter how bad the sequels are, the prequels are still shit and always will be. Cinemaphile only pretends otherwise to be contrarian. No one actually likes them. That's the point. Is something popular (this case being the correct opinion that the prequels suck)? Then Cinemaphile will take the opposite opinion. It's very close to the hipster mentality. Watch, once a new trilogy comes out, Cinemaphile will love the sequel trilogy all of a sudden and will be posting "Apologize" threads about JJ.
No one can explain why exactly the prequels are bad outside of their subjective opinions. The plinket reviews were themselves moronic and full of dumb criticisms such as "why would they support palatine if he looks evil!" Ignoring his speech where he said the Jedi left him deformed.
Only boomers hate them and pretend the original trilogy was peak cinema.
The prequels are shit and always will be. Redlettermedia was right about everything. The plinkett reviews are legitimately far more entertaining.
plinkett is the reason why disney’s star wars is the way it is
Only morons and schizos and morons believe that.
i hope he sees this, bro.
case in point.
Who?
Mike has said it though.
The plinket reviews are full of flaws and easily taken apart. RLM are moronic. They called Force Awakens good and Stanley Kubrick overated. I wouldn't trust anything those fat fricks say.
I can
Bad execution of great themes and ideas..he also would ruin his own scripts during filming and post production by constantly toning the more adult
stuff down in order sell toys and or spite his crew members when they had better ideas durring production. The original script for Episode 3 (3rd Draft)is AMAZING,and its a crime it wasn't filmed as written, you guys were robbed.
>No one can explain why exactly the prequels are bad outside of their subjective opinions
Such a stupid thing to say. It's a fricking movie, not a scientific paper.
also had massive gatekeeping online from Gen-X neckbeards
by the late 00s most people had either stopped hating or stopped caring about the prequels, but once that RedLetterMedia homosexual released the plinkett reviews you weren't a REAL fan unless you said the prequels raped and murdered your childhood
same people are why gaming YouTubers until like 5 years ago ALWAYS had to have stupid 80s Nintendo shit in the background of their videos (even if those were 20 years before they were born) or they'd get flamed as fake gamers
fricking neckbeard Gen-Xers
True. Shows what NPCs the majority of people were online. Even more hilarious considering how flawed those reviews were.
There was no human element for audiences to relate with. The story is also convoluted, with some of the most crucial events taking place off screen. This is why audiences rejected them. They spoke sort of old-timey in the OT, but they didn't stand stiff in place giving Shakespearean-era monologues. The only characters who aren't completely dry Shakespeareans are the goofy comic relief aliens and robots for kids, but comic relief is not necessarily the same thing as having a human element (See: The MCU). Stoklasa's a washed up hack, but he was dead on about all the characters being weird, sexless aliens.
It's funny how many of these pro-prequel arguments could now apply to Rebel Moon.
>Thematic depth!
>World building!
Doesn't matter if none of your characters act like relatable humans.
There's plenty of human element to it. Almost everyone I know irl has been sad at at least one character death be it Qui Gon Jinn or Anakin's immolation. Everyone is so terminally online they think the prequels were universally hated at launch.
Also don't act like the originals didn't have key story elements off screen such as the plans being stolen or lukes transformation into a Jedi. Time skips have always been a part of Star Wars.
>the prequels were universally hated at launch.
I was there. The first one was absolutely universally hated. There had been too much hype for a movie that ended up being too bizarre. But a lot of people kept hope that the next two would be better. So with the second one, there was a minority of people who said they liked it. The third one was about 50/50 of people loving it and others making fun of NOOOOOOOOO. While the general reception to the movies did get better with each installment, by the time ROTS came out, the massive zeitgeist that had existed leading up to TPM was pretty much fizzled out. When I saw the trailer for ROTS, I got hype, but at the same time, I realized that I had forgot they were still making the prequels. At no point were the prequels treated with an amount of love anywhere comparable to the OT.
I also was there. We walked out of Phantom menace mostly puzzled. One of my friends called Amidala Queen Acidiphilous. We all hated Jar Jar. We all thought the pod races went on too long. The Japanese aliens were weird. Boss Nass was weird. Darth Maul was barely in it and died. Maul was the major factor in many of us being excited about the movie. It was false advertising. This was all before the internet ruined society.
>Everyone is so terminally online they think the prequels were universally hated at launch.
Little kids mostly liked them, especially AotC and RotS. Only RotS had any broader positive cultural reception, and even that was still controversial.
it's true. I'm a millennial and I loved them from the beginning. it was gen x morons who b***hed and moaned about them, like they b***hed and moaned about fricking everything.
genx was the first generation raised entirely on israeli media, israeli pop culture, israeli philosophy. And the main lesson israelites taught genx was that complaining about something was peak intellectualism.
millenials were fine with the prequels. they werent the best thing ever, and a lot of the 1950s references went over their teenage heads, but who gives a shit. its just a movie. or rather a series of movies.
the plinketshit was entertaining and introduced the world to the long form video essay, but ultimately it was about some old homosexual treckies just shitting on starwars, which is what homosexual treckies always do. Zoomers just dont understand: millenials had their console wars.... and genx had their gay scifi wars. Treckies versus starwars was the biggest space-fandom fights, but it also spilled into bullshit like battlestar and babylon 5.
based
>it was gen x morons who b***hed and moaned about them
This tbqh, hating the prequels is basically a dead giveaway that someone is from the homosexual generation.
Who the frick is Syfo Diaz? No one knows.
Attack of the Clones and the Matrix sequel was the first time movies went from just having tie ins, to actually NOT EXPLAINING SHIT IN THE MOVIE unless you were up on all the cartoons and video games and shit
absolutely totally unforgivable just for that alone. straight fricking line from Syfo Diaz to "somehow Palpatine returned" (play Fortnite)
nothing in these movies make any sense. I watched attack of the clones a few weeks ago after many years
>no we didn't authorize an army, they sound VERY suspicious
>show up ten minutes later using the army like they're best friends
>kamino makes a giant fricking army just because some guy asks, presumably without credit
>padme likes anakin because....??? he has to for the plot?
>c3po is fricking moronic
>yoda fricking ruined yelping around with a lightsaber like some moron
>dooku is useless
>stupid assassination plot because .... trade federation is mad at a woman whose planet they invaded is mad at them? who gives a shit
>count dooku hires jango fett who hires zam who hires a robot who hires worms
>obi wan is an butthole
>shmi gets fricked over for no reason
>ooooooh a planet was ERASED but this child can figure it out I'm sure, and this alien from a 50s diner will also know
>CGI looks like shit, half the backgrounds don't need to be fake, half the scenes are missing shadows or other critical details, etc
idk I'm too tired to keep going. I know more prequel lovers are bait but I wish we could just agree that yes the ships and worlds are pretty cool and aside from that the prequels are garbage. Oh and they're hard carried by John Williams
>kamino makes a giant fricking army just because some guy asks, presumably without credit
I always assumed Sideous committed some type of gift card scam and the jedi temple doesn't have a bookkeeper.
as someone who was actually a star wars fan back when we thought ROTJ was gonna be all there was, everyone had so many cool ideas about what the "clone wars" could have been. bodysnatcher shit, people replaced right before important decisions got made, maybe they were soulless Replicants and immune to the force?
anyway the real version of what it turned out to be, the Republic just replacing it's armies with clones of a known criminal who tried to kill an officer of the law, is by far the dumbest and flattest idea of what the clone wars were i ever heard
What were they supposed to do? It was their best bet to raise an army and the plot twist was great. Not making them generic monsters was a good decision.
anything else? after phantom menace they could have written any plot they wanted. there's no reason there had to be a recruiting crisis. maybe the trade federation gives up on the droids and does the covert cloning, replacing important people type stuff like face dancers in dune. maybe something totally different i never thought of. recruitment problems and attrition of the Republic army didn't have to be factors
Do you have a brain? Imagine trying to recruit an army big enough to moderate a galaxy. In real life America is already struggling to keep our military up and Rome died because they couldn't recruit enough soldiers to rule over all the lands they won in conquest.
well apparently they'd been moderating a galaxy for thousands of years so doesn't really seem like an issue.
agree, but I also think the prequels are much weaker without a consistent villain (yes I know palpatine is in the shadows but his whole plot is moronic)
they were pretty commonly acknowledged to be duds. RLM didn't invent prequel hate. But yeah, kids are gonna enjoy star wars and it made a shitload of money so it's fine.
this
Sure the OT (especially jedi) has plenty of little gaps, but they generally don't require as ridiculously huge suspension of disbelief as the prequels. It's not unconceivable that a large ship has a small vulnerability in the same way that the creation of a enormous clone army is just handwaved away.
As for yoda, it's one thing to not be a pacificst but the OT made yoda (and the emperor) out to be above lightsaber combat, and they were that much cooler because of it. My problem isn't him condoning a fight, but the actual execution of his duel with dooku. Lucas was uncreative that even for high level force users he could only think of 1 - throwing things at each other and then 2 - back to lightsabers
You're just repeating RLM points. The original trilogy never said they couldn't use lightsabers. They made them out to be to old to. In prequels you get to see the younger characters and you actually get some character development with Yoda being represented as more arrogant and cold.
it's not character development lmao. Lucas didn't know how to write the conflicting points so the best he could come up with was that the dark side was making them make stupid decisions, which is probably the worst storytelling device of all time. I haven't watched the RLM things in 10 years so Idk what the frick you're talking about but prove the point wrong if it is, otherwise don't complain some other dude's used it.
It is character development. Do you think the scene where the Jedi question qui Gon about the return of the sith is supposed to paint them in a positive light? You should listen to the audio commentary if you think Lucas is a moron in regards to his writing
You can nitpick the originals in the same way as well. Why did the death star have a self destruct button? Why didn't they fix it? Star Wars has always thrown out some logic in the plot to have cool scenes.
Also Yoda was never a pacifist. If he was so anti war then he wouldn't have been training Luke to kill Darth Vader. I agree attack of the clones is dumb but that's a dumb thing to put against it.
>You can nitpick the originals in the same way as well.
ya but you don't because they were good, that's the point. Jurassic Park is lousy with nitpicks, it was incredibly sloppy made, but no one cares because it sold it. the prequels didn't succeed like that because they were bad outside of being nitpickable.
The prequels weren't horribly received. phantom menace and revenge of the sith were beloved by their primary target audience and are beloved today more so than the original trilogy.
depends on what you mean by "received". there was big game of thrones season 7 energy where people were convinced for months they were good but a year after everyone admitted they sucked
as for more beloved than the OT sure I can believe some people liked sith more than return of the Jedi but absolutely no one likes the prequels more then ESB unless they're clinically moronic
"Everyone"
Terminally online star wars fans
fun fact, Sifo Dyas was originally supposed to be Sido Dyas (Sidious - palpatine) which is hilarious because:
1 - it actually makes more sense if it's sidious making an evil clone plot and presumably he'd be able to come up with funding more than some random jedi
2- lucas thought sido dyas was a clever name to hide sidious
>These movies have more thematic depth and world building than the original trilogy
but worse performances, and too much dumb shit. ROTJ was pushing the limits with the ewoks already, and only the fact that the throne room scene is so good allows it to get away with it. the prequels don't have any similar great scenes to compensate for their missteps.
even worse, they have scenes on the verge of being powerful they ruin. cut from boba fett picking up his dads head right back to the colorful lizard circus. ruin the birth of Darth Vader with the NOOOOOOOO. cut away from slaughtering the tuskens with a zany wipe after 4 seconds
the prequels feel so badly put together it's almost self parody, like they were real movies but what we see on screen is a YouTube poop edit purposely trying to destroy the gravitas
Arguably there's good performances. Qui-Gon, Palpatine, Obi -Wan, and even Anakin all had good performances. The main flaw was the dialogue which at times was also superb.
I like the art direction, the music, and the cast isn't bad. But the plot itself is terrible. It barely makes sense on its own, and it sacrifices a lot to unnecessarily tie things back to the OT.
>I like the art direction
whoops wouldn't let me post file
ok, I just thought the ships look cool
What's so bad about it?the only one that's actually dumb is attack of the clones
I'll start off by saying that I'm a dumb action story guy and I don't really realize plotholes unless someone spells it out for me, but honestly I had a really great time watching the 2nd and 3rd one, I couldn't make it through the first one because it was pretty cheesy but Anakin killing those Tatooine natives and regretting it and then all the kino meme moments in the 3rd one were great, I mean sure the cgi looked like shit and i guess some of the characters needed more build up but..... idk I liked it
>Boomers
Gen Xers were the prime prequel haters. Boomers were ambivalent to confused by it.
I agree. Frick RLM and their shitty opinions.
Original Trilogy: Shitty 80s cheese dialogue with shitty one-liners
Prequel Trilogy: Masterfully Crafted, Epic Melodrama with fitting, stale dialogue to accurately paint an ancient, yet completely foreign universe with inhabitants that communicate in a much different way than us
people only hate them because their favorite YouTube celebrity has told them to
Unfortunately the fate of a lot of good media
A tad light on plot but more than make up for it with the eye candy. ROTS though had some incredibly stupid creative decisions.
Such as?
Putting the cape on vader straight off the operating table for one.
I still insist, and will continue to insist, that they did a piss-poor job of developing anakin's fall, extending back over the previous movies, so his transition to nobody-likes-me everybody-hates-me guess-I'll-go-kill-younglings comes off way too abrupt and total despite the setup.
>guess-I'll-go-kill-younglings
"If you are not with me, then you are my enemy"
In AOTC Anakin shows that he considers anyone on the side of his enemy, even children, valid targets. The younglings were on the side of the Jedi, who had manipulated him from childhood, let his mother die, and told him to let Padme die.
He obviously didn't want to kill the younglings, you can see him tearing up over what he had to do before, and crying over it afterwards. But Palpatine was his only chance to save Padme's life, and if killing children on the side of his enemies is what he had to do to save her, he was willing to do it.
It can be seen as abrupt, but there had to be a point in which he fully embraces the dark side, a point where he gets pushed to the point of no return. Once he killed Windu, he could never return to the Jedi order, and eliminating every threat to himself and Palpatine was the only way he and Padme had a chance of surviving
zillennials trying to rehabilitate prequels is probably the single saddest astroturf on this entire site
Real and true
>These movies have more thematic depth and world building than the original trilogy
you're a moron, they are bad. im not a boomer, saw them as a kid in theaters.
3 is the best in the series
It has shit mullets and bad acting. Stfu zoomer.
"Bad" is too strong a word for the prequels. They were mediocre.
The sequels aren't "bad" either -- they are horrendous, idiotic, and vile.
The first is the careless work of a hack who couldn't tell a story if his life depended on it, and who somehow thinks that's some kind of strength.
The second is the work of a different kind of hack, one who insists to himself that he can tell stories but subconsciously realizes that he can't, and so despises the work of people who do.
The third is corporate horse shit, the result of options created by clueless brainstorming sessions to generate option that were then chosen by focus groups.