Prequel Haters Gon Hate - But why? (BE nice...)

I’m not certain what everyone was expecting, but I liked the prequels.

I liked that we were introduced to the time before the Empire and that a lot of the back story was put on the big screen.

Granted, I am not a fan of Jarjar but that’s just one character. But, for me, this was an opportunity to see part of the story to my favorite Jedi… Obi Wan Kenobi. And I have to agree with Master War Beauty, Ewan Mcgregor did an awesome job of bringing Obi Wan to life and giving that “human” quality.

Then, who wouldn’t want to see Liam Neeson as Qui-Gon? Another one of my favorite actors!

Natalie Portman, we didn’t even know who she was before this… had to be something right.

I think that these movies were geared more toward younger audiences and did not have the same drama of the original three; but, they were good movies. Especially when you consider all the other stuff that has come out over the last several years.

I've got to go with the review videos hands down. So I'll put down my agreements, but I have my own to add as well.

The new Trilogy was fun in action and effects but

1. There was no real protagonist. I couldn't connect personally with anybody through the course of the movies. They were all too distant and de-centralized.

2. The plot course was scattered all over the place, there was no actual flow, partly because of the previous point (no main protagonist), so half the time I had no clue what was going on.

3. Yoda in the new trilogy was not convincing to me in the least bit. His voice annoyed me and wasn't the authentic sounding voice I know yoda to have. His voice acting and writing was very weak.

4. I have to agree with what Akkarin said and put it in my own words... The OT had a clear OVERALL moral set which was clear and strong because it was attached to the main protagonist. The new trilogy was all political, almost completely, so there was very little personal element present because of this, and therefore, there was only room for small little "one-liner morals" of "be patient" yada yada yada, and that's it.

5. The CGI was all fun and exciting but... because it was way too crisp and overly abused, it became very devalued to me. In the OT, in whatever space and even planet scenes we got to see, there was real texturing to the objects because they were real objects and because of the pace at which the effects took place, it allowed for the viewer to absorb the scene and the moment very well and really appreciate the effects that were taking place, and actually FEEL like you are there. I don't have hardly this feeling at all in any of the NT space scenes or most other effects scenes.

Of course I respect all opinions here that favor the new trilogy, they're fun, there's "hawt guys" in them, and the effects are shiny... but... those video reviews pretty much blew away all possible justification for their existence in their current form and I don't see anybody here giving a big enough counter-reason to prove otherwise. lol!

I know this post is fairly old now, but I found a video...

in response to Wescli Wardest's comments.


You were right - "Ewan Mcgregor did an AWESOME job of bringing Obi Wan to life", and he really tried his best to bring Alec (the original Obi Wan) back as well.

Here's proof:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ihqDETf324&feature=related

There just just be more links around here with Ewan McGregor in them..

Reliah wrote: There just just be more links around here with Ewan McGregor in them..

Well, this isn't Ewan McGregor, but it's got Han Solo in it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxLGFFo8Dn4

Bottom line: Star Wars is a 70s-80s movie series.

New Trilogy is a 90s-00s trilogy.

The movies were made for their audience. So, whichever audience you fall into, that's what you'll like more. If you favor the science fiction of the old days, you will probably enjoy the OT more. If you favor the action series movies that dominated the 90s and 00s, then you will probably like the NT more.

All in all, I think it has little to nothing to do with the supposed "philosophical" teachings. I think there were equal amounts in both series. Just of a different kind. To be honest, I've never used an example from the OT. I've never really thought twice about the teachings on Degobah. This was never conscious. But, I have used COUNTLESS Prequel examples. Because, I grew up in the nineties and two thousands. It's just were I was. I lived them as they came out. So, they spoke to me more.

Plus... I might be straight.. but... EWAN MCGREGOR. MMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

Maybe it's been said already...Someone mentioned Qui-Gon and Grevious as being characters introduced in an episode and being killed in that episode...well, so was Obi-Wan in the Original Trilogy. I had to put that in there.

Reliah wrote: Movies have flaws for the same reasons Religions have flaws - people create flaws.
Personally, I love both. My top two are The Empire Strikes Back and Revenge of the Sith. I don't pay attention to things happening in the background, I try to understand what's being portrayed; feelings, emotions, stories, lessons, etc.

People think about things every way they shouldn't - far too often.

Reliah...THANK YOUUU!!! I'll admit, there is a bit of competition between IV and V for my top spot, but Revenge of the Sith is a definite 2nd/3rd placer, and by far the best one of the new trilogy! I feel like Anakin and Obi-Wan developed their characters considerably from II to III. Now don't get me wrong, Revenge is not perfect, but it is one of the greats. The only thing that could have made it more epic is if Liam Neison hadn't gotten into a wreck and was able to appear as Qui-Gon, as he had planned on doing.

To be honest, I liked the prequel movies as well. A lot. The stories were good, the action was fun and the acting wasn't shabby either. Well, occasionally there were glitches, but one can't expect perfection.

Jar Jar Binks was - for me - a comic relief who, though not really required in the movie, set a lighter tone to the scenes he was in. Which is no bad thing! It wasn't until everyone started whining about it that I thought, yeah, I guess he can be viewed in a negative, slightly irritating light. But he's the embodiment of good ole' fashioned slapstick comedy!

There is also the effect the prequels had on gaming. I love games, though having no console of my own makes it difficult to play. Without the prequels, there would be no Old Republic, no Battlefront, no upcoming 1313. One that will always stay with me is the Playstation One game Jedi Power Battles - not only was it addictive, but every time I played it I wanted to watch Episode One again.

RiddleNox wrote:
Plus... I might be straight.. but... EWAN MCGREGOR. MMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

...WOAH....

Darren wrote: Maybe it's been said already...Someone mentioned Qui-Gon and Grevious as being characters introduced in an episode and being killed in that episode...well, so was Obi-Wan in the Original Trilogy. I had to put that in there.

That's a very good point - I never thought of that! And I don't think it was mentioned before. Great job.

That is so true! I remember playing the demo for Jedi Power battles on PS1, I never got to buy it, but I played that demo over a bazillion times!!! I loved Star Wars battlefield 2, on the PS2, it was one of my favs. I have to admit though, at Celebration Station, they had this AWESOME Star Wars arcade game, were you got to duel with Darth Vader as Luke Skywalker in 1st person, and it was amazing. I spent all of my monies on that, but it was worth it. I never got to play the Bounty Hunter game based off of Jango Fett, but I did read all the game mags had to offer on it. (Jango and Boba were my favs from Episode 2.)

hellisforhorses wrote:
Reliah...THANK YOUUU!!! I'll admit, there is a bit of competition between IV and V for my top spot, but Revenge of the Sith is a definite 2nd/3rd placer, and by far the best one of the new trilogy! I feel like Anakin and Obi-Wan developed their characters considerably from II to III. Now don't get me wrong, Revenge is not perfect, but it is one of the greats. The only thing that could have made it more epic is if Liam Neison hadn't gotten into a wreck and was able to appear as Qui-Gon, as he had planned on doing.

Agreed.

Fortesque wrote:
There is also the effect the prequels had on gaming. I love games, though having no console of my own makes it difficult to play. Without the prequels, there would be no Old Republic, no Battlefront, no upcoming 1313.

I also LOVED the Force Unleashed game (at least the first one)and I think we owe the prequels for that as well...the Jedi Temple...the Jedi Purge...etc.

My last post got me to thinking, while I harped on how much I loved Episode III, I never mentioned how disappointed I was with Episode II. But before I get into that, I wanna get something off of my chest. I like Episode I. There I said it. I think Jar-Jar was pointless, and Jake Lloyd wasn't a good child actor, and Haley Joe Osmond would've made a much better Anakin, but that is just trivial things. The fighting scenes were pretty awesome, and although I bash on Lloyd's acting abilities, or lack thereof, I still enjoyed the podracing. But Episode II...ugh.. While Ewan still did a pretty good job as Obi-Wan, Anakin had almost no redeeming qualities whatsoever, and the same can be said about Padme. They weren't good in this at all. (Minus the one awesome scene where Anakin goes beast mode on the Sandpeoples. That was pretty cool.) Jango and Boba Fett were awesome. I loved all of there scenes, and was genuinely moved when Boba held Jango's helmet in sorrow after Jango died. I also enjoyed the Clone Trooper story arch, and thought it was well done. The thing I feel was the worst thing about Episode II though was the fight scene before Yoda vs Dooku. I felt robbed when Christopher Lee (who I love in Dracula) and Anakin had it out. First of all, why didn't Obi-Wan put up more of a fight?! He was amazing against Maul, now before you all say 'Dooku is better than Maul, I get that, but that doesn't change the fact Kenobi could've lasted a minute longer before getting pwoned! Secondly, The majority of the fight was just the glow of the lightsabers on their faces and sound effects. I know Lee is old, but come on, they did great when he fought Yoda, couldn't they afford to keep the stunt double a little longer?!

This is why my list is as follows: V, III, IV, VII, I, II.

SeanChing wrote:

Fortesque wrote:
There is also the effect the prequels had on gaming. I love games, though having no console of my own makes it difficult to play. Without the prequels, there would be no Old Republic, no Battlefront, no upcoming 1313.

I also LOVED the Force Unleashed game (at least the first one)and I think we owe the prequels for that as well...the Jedi Temple...the Jedi Purge...etc.

lol how did I leave that out?! That was definitely an awesome game!!!

In the original trilogy The Force was something that was larger than yourself. Something intangible and ever present that let you influence and understand the world around you in the most subtle and profound way

The Lightsaber too was used only as a weapon of last resort, when someone took out their lightsaber you knew that shizzle was about to go down. That something really big was going to happen. For most of the time you never saw them

That is the beauty of a space opera

Compare this to the prequels. The Force is something that is never explored mystically or in depth. It is used constantly during battle scenes as opposed to being something grander and unknowable

The lightsaber is used constantly throughout the film. Nearly every single fight there is a lightsaber. Ask yourself if that is because George Lucas was using them artistically to explain something big was about to go down? Or was he using them simply because they looked cool

The prequels are basically this: "Lets include lots of shooting and action and flashy lights and explosion noises and that will make a good film." No.

That is the shallowness of someone who treats his audience like fools

There is no depth to the prequels. It is one thing after another after another with a poorly connected plot line and bright lights with loud noises put in between

SeanChing wrote:

RiddleNox wrote:
Plus... I might be straight.. but... EWAN MCGREGOR. MMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

...WOAH....

I'm inclined to agree with RiddleNox there I'm afraid. Ewan McGregor has his own set of rules regarding sexiness. If you ever saw Velvet Goldmine you would:
a) Agree with me wholeheartedly;
b) Wonder about my sexual orientation, or;
c) Both of the above.

YOU BET! haha.

What I have noticed is that younger people, my peers, and generally those who grew up with Prequels like them better than OT. Most of the Prequel haters out there are older people who had "their" original trilogy - I bet it was something almost sacred and important in their lives (the mythology etc.) and then Lucas decided to make the new movies. They were different, of course, as they were designed for younger audiences (as mentioned before). It was a violation of sorts for many of older fans.

I personally as a child loved the rather straightforward messages of Prequels. Not only they were full of action but also had wisdom that I was able to understand. I couldn't grasp the usually subtler teachings of OT when I was little; back then it was more like a somehow confusing and weird action movie. When I became older I started to appreciate them more, but I still have a lot of sentiment regarding Prequels.

I assume that really the fight between those who hate and those who like these 3 movies is in fact mostly a fight between two different generations. Both of the trilogies have got their flaws but they are both also pretty good.

That's just my opinion of course (:

(Also, Ewan McGregor. If nothing else, he's the reason to love Prequels.)