if george made the prequels first and the originals during the 90s u people would complain about them too

Yeah if they were poorly done too.

Its not the story I dislike about the PT. In fact I actually prefer it in that its far more political. What I dislike about it simply the quality of the acting and cinematography within the movies that ruins what should of been spectacular. Theres no way around it, George is not a good director anymore. That's why I prefer the novelizations. RotS is my least favorite movie while simultaneously my favorite book of the six. Thats all I really need to say to explain my feelings right there. Story good, film bad.

I agree with you OP, I like all the prequels a lot. I guess we're just in the minority. I think a lot of people like to jump on the hate prequel bandwagon.

Yes I'm afraid you are, the original trilogy had poor graphics, but a decent plot, the prequel trilogy is the exact opposite, good graphics but a poor plot.

I don't hate the prequels, and to a stong degree I will say I enjoyed them considerably. From a critic standpoint, I saw many aspects that could have been made better with a bit more forethought and storyline charting to protect continuity. There were enough glaring plotholes to cause the plausibility of the original trilogy to fall to pieces. Also, keep in mind that the new trilogy was all George, where as the original trilogy passed the torch between three distinct directors. I feel this kept the story fresh and the approaches just subtly unique enough to keep them distinct and fascinating.

I won't bother with pointing out WHAT parts of the story diminished the series, since this forum is saturated with those threads. I just feel that with better planning on the writers and directors part, they could have created an unparralleled masterpiece, and they simply got lazy and didn't.

I agree with you OP, I like all the prequels a lot. I guess we're just in the minority. I think a lot of people like to jump on the hate prequel bandwagon.

I think the problem is a lot of people take too much of Star Wars for granted. The Original Trilogy was such a big hit because it was new and exciting, with incredibly imaginative concepts and amazing visuals. But now we just take all that for granted, completely ignoring all the amazing new concepts that the Prequels brought to the universe - the Rule of Two, clone and droid armies, warships and dreadnoughts, a galactic senate, the Geonosian Arena, the origins of the Death Star, the Jedi Temple - instead they just complain about bad acting, poor love stories etc. etc. But is that what Star Wars is really about? For me Star Wars is a concept, its much much more than just a movie.

You're missing the point. Good graphics and concepts don't make the PT good. The reason people hate it is the quality of the acting and cinematography. The movies come off as sterilized hollywood flicks, all flash no depth. The ideas that George TRIED to express are great, its the end product of his attempts to express them that failed. Meanwhile the OT didn't. You can ***** all you want about Ewoks and outdated visual effects but you can't knock the quality of the cinematography. When you needed to understand a characters feelings, they made you understand. You get whats going on in Lukes head. You get whats going on in Vader's head. The fight scenes were more then just popcorn munching flash bits, they contained real character growth. Look at the last fight scene, you really feel Luke's struggle with the dark side. You can't say the same about the PT. The characters come off shallow. The fight scenes are bland, all flash no character depth. You can fill in the depth with your own imagination but that doesn't mean the movie achieved its goal. THAT is why people don't like them. Not because they think the core story was bad. As I've said I actually prefer it. I love the politics of the PT. The novelization of Ep3 is my favorite book of the saga. I just hate the quality of the movies in expressing all that great stuff.

And this isn't just an issue with Star Wars. A lot of movies these days are sterilized, dumbed down to this basic form of intelligence insulting popcorn entertainment. I'm sure all you guys who love the PT also love other movies I can't stand. Like the new Marvel flicks or Transformers.

The PT was good but they had to use their "imagination" most of the time when they acted. I mean the majority of the set was green screen. Heck I saw a scene where OBi wan and Anakian was cutting at NOTHING but thin air. They had to just pretend they were cutting something (in this case battle droids) It why Liam Nelson has been scared of Green Screen acting ever since. There no feeling to it.

The original had to be shot on location and sets had to be build, the actors had a good sense where they were and how they should act. It help with their immersion. IN the PT I bet they felt a bit silly fighting a bunch of non existant characters.

However I still liked it and I think what they should have done was Episode 1 and a T.V series to bridge the game to Episode 2. Then the Clone wars series like now. Then finally finish it off with Episode 3.

You're missing the point. Good graphics and concepts don't make the PT good. The reason people hate it is the quality of the acting and cinematography. The movies come off as sterilized hollywood flicks, all flash no depth. The ideas that George TRIED to express are great, its the end product of his attempts to express them that failed. Meanwhile the OT didn't. You can ***** all you want about Ewoks and outdated visual effects but you can't knock the quality of the cinematography. When you needed to understand a characters feelings, they made you understand. You get whats going on in Lukes head. You get whats going on in Vader's head. The fight scenes were more then just popcorn munching flash bits, they contained real character growth. Look at the last fight scene, you really feel Luke's struggle with the dark side. You can't say the same about the PT. The characters come off shallow. The fight scenes are bland, all flash no character depth. You can fill in the depth with your own imagination but that doesn't mean the movie achieved its goal. THAT is why people don't like them. Not because they think the core story was bad. As I've said I actually prefer it. I love the politics of the PT. The novelization of Ep3 is my favorite book of the saga. I just hate the quality of the movies in expressing all that great stuff.

 

And this isn't just an issue with Star Wars. A lot of movies these days are sterilized, dumbed down to this basic form of intelligence insulting popcorn entertainment. I'm sure all you guys who love the PT also love other movies I can't stand. Like the new Marvel flicks or Transformers.

Hey now, don't lump Avengers in with Michael Bay's trash. The lead-in films for Avengers weren't great, but the actual movie itself was quite well done. You had character growth, dramatic tension, and some great dialogue.

Back to Star Wars... the fighting in the PT was awful. It was too flashy, and had no meaning or depth to it. There was no effort put into making anything matter. The Clone Wars are a boring conflict because no one is fighting for anything, the only emotional scenes in the PT were when the Jedi were killed off and Anakin burned the temple down. You could see the strife in Anakin, and appreciate some of the tragedy of the Jedi being betrayed by the Clone troopers they trusted.

The rest of the time, it was boring, uninventive dialogue, shot in uninteresting ways with the same camera angles and repetitive scenes. Everyone was just standing around talking, or sitting down and talking, or walking in a hallway and talking. The dialogue never related to their environment, and the actors rarely expressed any indications that they were in a real place. It felt overly sterile, unlike the OT where every scene created some immersion through the camera angles, the actors interactions with each other and the environment, etc.

Hey now, don't lump Avengers in with Michael Bay's trash. The lead-in films for Avengers weren't great, but the actual movie itself was quite well done. You had character growth, dramatic tension, and some great dialogue.

Got to disagree, the Avengers Assemble had a good pace, and was full of action, but the plot lacked depth, and the acting was off. Having said that I did enjoy the film, just could see the flaws.

You're missing the point. Good graphics and concepts don't make the PT good. The reason people hate it is the quality of the acting and cinematography.

So we've got excellent visuals, excellent concepts, excellent story and excellent music - and then everyone craps on it because the acting isn't that great and the lightsaber duels overly flashy, acting as if the Original Trilogy was somehow not just as flawed, which is was, in different ways but still flawed.

This point of view is made even more ridiculous by the fact that some of the cinematography was actually pretty awesome e.g. the Battle of Coruscant. And some of the acting as well e.g. the performances of just about everyone excluding Hayden Christensen who wasn't even that bad.

P.S. For the record I don't rate the Avengers of Transformers. Admittedly the Avengers has some good acting and excellent cinematography, but fails concerning storyline. Transformers started off well but grew progressively worse, not that the concept of transforming robots could ever yield that much anyway.

So your saying that they count for nothing? You do realise that's partly why the Original Trilogy was so successful? And that films win Academy Awards based on those merits? Let's not forget story as well. Sure the love scenes weren't brilliantly acted, and the politics scenes a little dull for some - but I think the story itself was pretty excellent. Oh and that's without mentioning the musical score, which was also incredible.

 

So we've got excellent visuals, excellent concepts, excellent story and excellent music - and then everyone craps on it because the acting isn't that great and the lightsaber duels overly flashy, acting as if the Original Trilogy was somehow not just as flawed, which is was, in different ways but still flawed.

 

This point of view is made even more ridiculous by the fact that some of the cinematography was actually pretty awesome e.g. the Battle of Coruscant. And some of the acting as well e.g. the performances of just about everyone excluding Hayden Christensen who wasn't even that bad.

 

P.S. For the record I don't rate the Avengers of Transformers. Admittedly the Avengers has some good acting and excellent cinematography, but fails concerning storyline. Transformers started off well but grew progressively worse, not that the concept of transforming robots could ever yield that much anyway.

I was stating the most common reason why people don't like them, not why you shouldn't. If nice visual effects and enough flash to make you consume a bucket of popcorn make a movie good for you then thats your prerogative.

So your saying that they count for nothing? You do realise that's partly why the Original Trilogy was so successful? And that films win Academy Awards based on those merits? Let's not forget story as well. Sure the love scenes weren't brilliantly acted, and the politics scenes a little dull for some - but I think the story itself was pretty excellent. Oh and that's without mentioning the musical score, which was also incredible.

The music was all John Williams, and we weren't talking about the music. It's probably the only reason the PT is memorable at all, was because John Williams carried the torch. To say the love scenes weren't brilliantly acted would imply that there even exist actors who could make those scenes into something that wasn't atrocious. The political scenes simply didn't make sense, they revolved around overly complex schemes that were never explained to the audience.

So we've got excellent visuals, excellent concepts, excellent story and excellent music - and then everyone craps on it because the acting isn't that great and the lightsaber duels overly flashy, acting as if the Original Trilogy was somehow not just as flawed, which is was, in different ways but still flawed.

The visuals are good, the concepts and story were absolute trash. Not one single part of the plot made any sense when you sat down and thought about it. The original trilogy was at times a little cheesy, and Return of the Jedi was a bit contrived, but the first two films were outstanding. They had a tight story, and kept you on the edge of your seat.

This point of view is made even more ridiculous by the fact that some of the cinematography was actually pretty awesome e.g. the Battle of Coruscant. And some of the acting as well e.g. the performances of just about everyone excluding Hayden Christensen who wasn't even that bad.

Which cinematography, exactly? The CGI opening shot for Revenge of the Sith? That was hardly impressive, and the battle as a whole was never really made clear to the audience. You just saw a chaotic jumble of ships and explosions, and then the Jedi land on Grievous' ship... how dramatic.

The political scenes simply didn't make sense, they revolved around overly complex schemes that were never explained to the audience.

Thats why I Love James Luceno, he's done so much justice for Palpatine by detailing all the political maneuverings he goes through. The movies don't really explain how it happens at all. They skip all the meat and just show you point A, point B and point C.

The problem for me was that the movies didn't explain everything about what was happening, like why the trade federation blockaded Naboo, what the hell the serperatists were doing at coruscant, and this Count Dooku person who was mentioned very early in the movie but didn't appear till towards the last third of the movie. All three things explained outside of the books.

Considering the actors had hardly any background when they were doing anything pretty much, i thought they did fine.

The movies make more sense when you know what happened before and after each one.

The music was all John Williams, and we weren't talking about the music. It's probably the only reason the PT is memorable at all, was because John Williams carried the torch. To say the love scenes weren't brilliantly acted would imply that there even exist actors who could make those scenes into something that wasn't atrocious. The political scenes simply didn't make sense, they revolved around overly complex schemes that were never explained to the audience.

 

The visuals are good, the concepts and story were absolute trash. Not one single part of the plot made any sense when you sat down and thought about it. The original trilogy was at times a little cheesy, and Return of the Jedi was a bit contrived, but the first two films were outstanding. They had a tight story, and kept you on the edge of your seat.

 

Which cinematography, exactly? The CGI opening shot for Revenge of the Sith? That was hardly impressive, and the battle as a whole was never really made clear to the audience. You just saw a chaotic jumble of ships and explosions, and then the Jedi land on Grievous' ship... how dramatic.

Your also making a lot of general, blanketing statements here, for example all of the concepts were bad. Yet I liked most of them including every single planet, the Nubian starships, the Separatist and Republic warships, Jedi starfighters, the Jedi Temple, Jedi Padawans, a ecumenopolis, various alien species e.g. Geonosian, Zabrak, Muun, Neimoidian, Skaoan, Kaminoan etc., pod racing, the various battle droids e.g. Super battle droids, Magnaguards, crab droids, spider droids etc. I could go on, these are all concepts, yet you claim they are all 'absolute trash'. Yet I would consider them to incredibly inventive and imaginative, better than any other sci-fi I've seen. Your opinion is quite strange because that means you consider the majority of the Star Wars universe to be 'trash' - its a wonder your even playing this game.

Also not one single part of the plot made sense? What about the part were the Sith Lord Sidious commenced Order 66, a kill order directed at Jedi, and the clones started killing Jedi? That made sense to me... Please explain to me how everything in the Prequels makes no sense whatsoever.

I also liked the opening to Revenge of the Sith, you seem to think its lacklustre, but it had the exact opposite effect on me so again, matter of opinion I guess.

And that's one of the most glaring problems with the Prequels' plots. Nothing makes any sense without books and novelizations to attempt to explain what the movie was about in the first place.

Wait, we're talking about the Prequels right? In their entirety, which includes music along with anything else. It obvious that a lot of the flaws of the Prequels are subjective opinions. For example I thought the story was very well done, especially the central crux of the Clone Wars which was really all a ploy of Palpatine designed to grant him ultimate power. I thought that idea of taking over the Republic from the inside was very clever. I also liked the explanation behind the origins of the Death Star, very cool.

 

Your also making a lot of general, blanketing statements here, for example all of the concepts were bad. Yet I liked most of them including every single planet, the Nubian starships, the Separatist and Republic warships, Jedi starfighters, the Jedi Temple, Jedi Padawans, a ecumenopolis, various alien species e.g. Geonosian, Zabrak, Muun, Neimoidian, Skaoan, Kaminoan etc., pod racing, the various battle droids e.g. Super battle droids, Magnaguards, crab droids, spider droids etc. I could go on, these are all concepts, yet you claim they are all 'absolute trash'. Yet I would consider them to incredibly inventive and imaginative, better than any other sci-fi I've seen. Your opinion is quite strange because that means you consider the majority of the Star Wars universe to be 'trash' - its a wonder your even playing this game.

Perhaps you misunderstood what I meant when I said "concepts", I didn't mean the actual things that appeared on the screen, those are visuals. The starships, droids, etc. all looked cool, and they were inventive. However, their implementation frequently felt forced.

Also not one single part of the plot made sense? What about the part were the Sith Lord Sidious commenced Order 66, a kill order directed at Jedi, and the clones started killing Jedi? That made sense to me... Please explain to me how everything in the Prequels makes no sense whatsoever.

Well, even that part really didn't make sense when compared with the plot as a whole. Sure, the Clones were programmed to murder the Jedi on command... but not one single person in the entire Republic stopped to ask,

"Hey, umm.... where'd all these armies and gunships come from? I thought we were still arguing about that military creation act in the Senate? Doesn't it take years to grow Clones?"

The Jedi just blindly accepted this plot device, without any reason beyond "The script calls for a Clone War, so we're bloody well going to have one!"

Sure, it's clever and sneaky of Palpatine to take over the Republic from the inside, but the War seemed entirely meaningless and without consequence. Clones and droids are dying, few citizens of the Republic seem affected by the war. When Palpatine declares himself Emperor, everyone is cheering. Coruscant appears completely unchanged since the war began, no shortages or other signs of hardship. By all appearances, everything is fine and dandy under the Empire. It is completely unclear why the Rebel Alliance would ever form under this regime.

Furthermore, the Jedi seem more than willing to just play along with Palpatine. They never discuss peace terms, nor do they make any inquiries into the source of the Clone Armies, or publicly call Palpatine out for not being willing to step down when his term is complete.

I also liked the opening to Revenge of the Sith, you seem to think its lacklustre, but it had the exact opposite effect on me so again, matter of opinion I guess.

Again, it looked neat, the warships were cool. However, the entire beginning of the film made no sense. Why was the chancellor being kidnapped? If he was such a valuable prisoner, why was he guarded by a couple droids which everyone knows posed little to no threat to the Jedi?

Dooku and Grievous were on the same ship? Why didn't they confront the Jedi together? Apparently Grievous had no idea that Palpatine was Sidious... so it would have been kind of awkward if he had killed Anakin and Obi-Wan, or worse, decided that executing Palpatine was preferable to having him rescued by the Jedi. Not one character in the entire film takes any sensible actions.

It's painfully obvious that George Lucas was just flying through the script, and no one was bothering to call him out on inconsistencies or plot holes. I think they actually worked off first drafts for the most part when filming. It's this huge lack of believable characterization that killed the Prequels, as well as the plot being incomprehensibly stupid. I've thoroughly enjoyed watching the films while intoxicated, because the plot holes bother you a lot less when you're just watching the pretty visuals. Otherwise, it's painful to watch the prequels.

Perhaps you misunderstood what I meant when I said "concepts", I didn't mean the actual things that appeared on the screen, those are visuals. The starships, droids, etc. all looked cool, and they were inventive. However, their implementation frequently felt forced.

But I understand your point, and partly agree. (Although the existence of a Clone Army was explained.) Also notice that the war itself took up little of the story, sure there were lots of battles but these were always revolving around greater themes. However again, I would agree - overall the prequels were rushed and I think they could have benefited from being significantly longer. But that's the only major problem I have with them. Maybe that's because I understand the whole story, or maybe they just appeal to me *shrug*.

I liked the Prequels. Sure they had issues, but I don't let those issues get in the way of my enjoyment of the movies.

I think my favorite part of the Prequels was Order 66. Prior to seeing the movie, I had thought long and hard on how the Jedi would be destroyed, but Order 66 never occurred to me. The surprise and moving music of Order 66 and the attack on the Jedi Temple was one of the best moments in the Prequels.

After that, I think the two duels against Sidious are also my favorite moments.

But for those who didn't like the Prequels. Entertainment is subjective. Just roll with it.