The Star Wars Prequels...

R

Rachel Smith

New member
... just been re-watching these, am so far on Attack of the Clones, and apart from the terribly criminal bad acting, the films aren't too bad. Well, not as bad as i remember them being, anyway.

I don't see why George Lucas has had so much flack over the years, to be honest. The CGI is phenomenal! The transitions between the real and the fake are really fluent. I know most of the movie was used with blue screen, which is probably why a lot of the performances are bad, but the look of the film is really good. The direction is brilliant and the look of the films will be as iconic as the originals.

Maybe these films will get more appreciation as time goes by? Who knows?

Now i'll wait as people throw flames at me :P
 
They aren't that bad. Just not great, so there's a crushing disappointment there. Indy 4 didn't get as much flack because I think most people were half-expecting a disappointment.

Although they aren't as iconic as the originals at all. :(
 
The prequels suffer from bad acting, very ropey dialogue, and few overly silly moments - but as you say - in retrospect their main probelm was the huge disappointment of it all. Because of this Phantom (which has all the best acting, IMO) gets most of the flack despite the fact that Clones is by far the worst of the three.
 
the problem was that GL sees these as sort of kiRAB films hence Jar Jar and the like although a lot of people see them as adult films that kiRAB also enjoy.

I thought they used CGI too much, try pausing a space battle in the middle and try working out which side is winning ?

The dialogue was poor as GL didn't get anyone to help him and he can't write dialogue very well. The storyline seemed a bit rushed and didn't match up at all.

Phantom should have been just a 30 minute story and get rid of that rubbish line about him not having a father, he isn't Jesus, he's Vader.

They rushed Anakin into becoming Vader with very little of this being in the first or second films, then in the third he was confused but 5 minutes later he was Vader

It seems the so called Clone Wars was really just one battle and then when he finally did become Vader the series ended.
 
The prequels were landmarks in CGI - and they don't get enough credit for that. The fight between Obi-Wan and General Grevious at the beginning of Revenge of the Sith is faultless - it's hard to believe Grevious doesn't exist in real time. Astonishingly brilliant. You wouldn't have had all the CGI battles in Peter Jackson's Lord of The Rings had ILM not established the technology. And how amazing is the end battle - clones vs the Jedis - from Attack of the Clones? Some of the most incredible CGI ever done. Indeed, I would argue it hasn't been bettered. People rave on about Pixar but ILM are/were the greatest CGI company in Hollywood.

Some people dislike the prequels because of Jar Jar Binks and the wooden flat sounding dialogue. It's almost as if Lucas under-directed the actors. :eek: Sometimes less is more but with Lucas less was definitely Less.

My favourite of the prequels is Phantom Menace, which, Jar Jar Binks and Jake Lloyd's dody acting notwithstanding, seemed classic Star Wars. I'm not sure Lucas should continue with more Star Wars - I think it's a bit overkill and flogging the cash cow until it can't make any more milk - but the new animated Clone Wars movie is out soon.

Fans of Star Wars type CGI will be happy to know it lives on in James Cameron's Avatar - coming out next year. It uses similar technology to create its world (virtual sets, virtual actors etc).
 
I actually think the limitations imposed on Lucas when he made the originals helped the films. He was forced to concentrate on story, character and the actors had something real to engage with. The new films are hindered by too much concentration on special effects over delivery of great performances. In a way the actors had to cater their performances to fit the effects.

I do enjoy the prequels, and I don't think the stories in themselves are bad, but there is just too much going on, they are bogged down by dull political wranglings instead of focusing on Anakin's turn to the dark side.

I'm also not fond of the fact that Lucas rather than writing the prequels to fit the continuity of the original films, is now retro fitting the originals to fit the new films. And in other ways he has not bothered to try and avoid plot holes when they could have been avoided so easily. The main one being the birth of the twins and Padme's death contradicting what Princess Leia says in ROTJ (yep I know you can find ways around it, but it could have been easily avoided).
 
Long been a big fan of the prequels. I can't defend some of the acting, but overall for me they give more than they take away. I agree also that Phantom Menace gets too much unnecessary stick. Jar Jar aside (arguably), the film has all the old magic to me. As a kid growing up with Star Wars, I would've absolutely loved to have seen these new films.

I think the biggest mistake George made was simply directing them himself. He was perhaps too close to the stories to really be able to deliver what they deserved to be. Don't mind the retro-fitting of the originals as long as it's done well, which I think it has been for the most part. Jury's out still about Han/Greedo etc, but I still would sooner watch the new set rather than the original releases, and I'm a long time fan.

But they've always been kiRAB films. I remember having a big set-to with a mate when I was about 12 (1985 or thereabouts), and he was aghast at my suggestion they were essentially kiRAB films. Struck me as odd back then that some fans couldn't see it that way, and it still does now really. Like it or not, they were always kiRAB films. But some kiRAB back then obviously thought it intelligent and adult sci-fi! :D
 
Phantom Menace
Plus Points -
Darth Maul
Pod Race
Negative Points -
Jar Jar Binks (*shudder*)
Long winded plotline
The acting
Vader as a small boy (didn't work for me at all - he was like Dennis The Menace RAB)

AOTC
Positives -
Christopher Lee scrapping with Yoda
Boba Fett and his Pop
Negatives -
Everything else

ROTS
Positives -
Opening battle is quality
Grievous
The battles between Obi & Skywalker plus the Emeror against Yoda are pretty decent
Negatives -
Chewbacca impersonating Tarzan
Haydenson as Skywalker/Vader
The completely naff love story - ZERO chemistry
The Queen dying of "a broken heart"
Vader's Dale Winton-esque "Noooooooooooooo!"
And everything else.
 
Of all the Star Wars prequels I actually thoroughly enjoyed Episode 2. It felt like a Star Wars film to me as opposed to Episode 1 which felt more like a swash-buckling Batman and Robin. Episode 3 should have been directed by someone else IMO.
 
Episode 1 is underrated. All people talk about is JJB but it's actually an entertaining film and has a few great set pieces. I wasn't too keen on the whole midichlorians idea, but apart from that storywise it's solid and the acting is decent. Remember too that it's looking at Anakin as a child so is deliberately played at that level.

Episodes 2 and 3 on the other hand are cringeworthy because it's more "adult" subject matter, so should be more convincing dramatically in comparison to other adult dramas. The acting is terrible from the people who matter (or there's no chemistry). If only Heath Ledger hadn't turned down the role.
 
Don't think it's one I'll end up seeing at the flicks. Probably pick up on DVD if it's any good.

Back on topic, my favourite prequel is Revenge of the Sith. It just has all the elements of a rip-roaring Star Wars film in spades, and nothing seems to get in it's way. The CGI is really at it's absolute peak here too for me. I still feel though, that ultimately George should have had someone else direct the films. That way we might have seen better performances. There's definitely an argument that GL is only at his best when directing action and explosions, and isn't so good with actors (witness the love scenes in AotC - sheeesh). Still, the inner kid in me still gets a kick out of finally seeing Yoda wielding a lightsaber!
 
QUOTE=revolver44;25430026

Negatives -
Chewbacca impersonating Tarzan (that was RofJ)
Haydenson as Skywalker/Vader
The completely naff love story - ZERO chemistry
The Queen dying of "a broken heart"
Vader's Dale Winton-esque "Noooooooooooooo!" (whatever anyone else says about this ..... this was a PERFECT response!!!) :o
And everything else.[/QUOTE]
 
Looking back now, my initial reactions when seeing them are pretty close to how I feel now. I saw both Ep1 & Ep3 twice, but Ep2 just once.

I like Ep1 and wasn't that dissappointed with it. Looking back now I really like it, even JJB! It has the right mix of sillyness and action without becoming too much of a parody. The 2 scenes which stand out are the pod race and the Darth Maul duel. Duel of the Fates has to be one of the most increadible parts of a cinema score ever. I think GL made a huge mistake losing Darth Maul so early on in the trilogy. He could have been as powerful a villian as DV was in the original films.

Ep 2 has very few redeeming features other than the inclusion of Jango Fett. For me the Count Dooko / Yoda duel was comical at best. The less said about the love story the better.

Ep 3 started brilliantly and almost managed to pull off the descent of Anakin to the dark side, but it needed a bit more, such as Anakin believing Padme and Obiwan were at it! The final duel needed to be better than the Darth Maul duel, but it wasn't.

Overall, I think the biggest issue was the over-relliance on CGI. It no doubt effects actors' performances and no matter how good it is, it can't be a substitute for practical effects in all cases. Peter Jackson showed in the LotR films how to blend the two. GL has no doubt changed the way films are made and how the film business operates, and I think the majority would say the change has been for the better.
 
Let's be honest, Haydenson bleeding ruined it. Just thinking of him now getting stroppy with Obi like some spoilt teen, I just want to shove a light saber up his arsehole.
 
IMO the prequels were one big lesson in HOW NOT TO DO CGI, the battle scenes were a mess and the chrachter based scenes relied far too heavily on blue screen.

As for claiming that WETA Digital rode on the back of what ILM did, I'd say it was exactly the opposite; as I understand it WETA developed their own systems to make the battles in Lord of the Rings look far more realistic than anything Lucas was doing, and Jackson knew that hand-made REAL sets would do a far more powerfull job than anything CGI based when doing closer shots, making the LOTR trilogy seem so deep and rich in comparison to the shallow, plasticy look of the Star Wars prequels.

I'd say all the effects on all the Star Wars prequels were bettered, many times over, by just about everything in the Lord of the Rings series, and that's before we even get on to the subject of quality writing, acting and directing.



And on this subject I think all fans of Star Wars, and film in general, can stand united.
 
Back
Top