Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

i love the prequels as much as the originals

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > STAR WARS Discussion
i love the prequels as much as the originals

Ventessel's Avatar


Ventessel
03.06.2013 , 05:08 AM | #11
Quote: Originally Posted by Doctoglethorpe View Post
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 Meanwhile the OT didn't. You can ***** all you want about Ewoks and outdated visual effects but you can't knock the quality of the cinematography.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.
The Heir to ChaosAdded Chapter Sixteen-- 17 APR 2013
“People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.” ~ George Orwell

AlexDougherty's Avatar


AlexDougherty
03.06.2013 , 07:35 AM | #12
Quote: Originally Posted by Ventessel View Post
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.
Peace can be found, above all passions. Through passion, I may gain strength.
Through strength, I may gain power. Through power, I may gain victory.
But for every enemy fallen, a new foe rises.
For every chain broken, new chains bind me. Only the Force can set me free.

Beniboybling's Avatar


Beniboybling
03.06.2013 , 12:46 PM | #13
Quote: Originally Posted by Doctoglethorpe View Post
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 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.

calypsissmexy's Avatar


calypsissmexy
03.06.2013 , 03:09 PM | #14
The prequels were awful.
Just take my money [togruta species]

Doctoglethorpe's Avatar


Doctoglethorpe
03.06.2013 , 09:30 PM | #15
Quote: Originally Posted by Beniboybling View Post
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.

Ventessel's Avatar


Ventessel
03.06.2013 , 09:49 PM | #16
Quote: Originally Posted by Beniboybling View Post
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.
Quote: Originally Posted by Beniboybling View Post
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.
Quote: Originally Posted by Beniboybling View Post
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 Heir to ChaosAdded Chapter Sixteen-- 17 APR 2013
“People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.” ~ George Orwell

Doctoglethorpe's Avatar


Doctoglethorpe
03.06.2013 , 10:05 PM | #17
Quote: Originally Posted by Ventessel View Post
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.

hyperdragon's Avatar


hyperdragon
03.06.2013 , 10:40 PM | #18
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.

Doctoglethorpe's Avatar


Doctoglethorpe
03.06.2013 , 11:51 PM | #19
I've said it before, the movies to me these days feel more like visual guides then accurate descriptions of events. Watch the movie to know what characters and settings looked like. Use virtually any other provided materiel to actually learn what happened with them.

Ventessel's Avatar


Ventessel
03.07.2013 , 12:23 AM | #20
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.
The Heir to ChaosAdded Chapter Sixteen-- 17 APR 2013
“People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.” ~ George Orwell