Kinda a perfect storm of recent stuff led to me making this topic. Last night I was going through some of MovieBob's old "Escape to the Movies" reviews and I stumbled across his "Phantom Menance Wasn't So Bad" video in which he asserts that Episode 1 wasn't "I wanna murder George Lucas" bad, but rather simply a "meh" worthy movie. Edit: Linking in Bob's review just for the record, and to prevent further responses like the first one to this topic. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/escape-to-the-movies/5357-The-Phantom-Menace-13-Years-Later
Come on this morning and I see this topic: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.391617-Star-Wars
Posted by an Escapist who, amazingly enough, claims to have never seen the original trilogy and is asking if it's any good.
And finally it was this response:
Was it completely doomed from the start due to nostalgia for the first trilogy? Did those movies capture our hearts and imaginations as children and thus ensure that absolutely nothing could live up to that magic since NOTHING is after as good as it was for a child once that child becomes an adult (except the first Land Before Time movie...that is still a fantastic coming of age movie and no one will ever convince me otherwise
). Yes, there were a lot of facepalm-worthy things in the movie...like changing The Force from a mysterious energy that flows through every living creature - thus the name The Force - to simply magical powers that come from symbiotic microbes in your bood. And yes, we all know that every time JarJar opened his mouth you'd immediately want to shut it again with a baseball bat. And yes, we know that pretty much any actor that played Anikan butchered the role beyond belief.
But going along the lines of what Bob discussed in his video, what makes the prequel trilogy so frickin' bad as to deserve the endless supply of hate and death threats thrown at George Lucas? Just like Bob, I'm not trying to convince anyone that the prequels were stellar movies that were worhty of praise rather than ire, simply trying to get people to see them as mediocre rather than down-right sinful sci-fi movies.
I mean really, other than the complaints that I mentioned as examples about the Force being retconned, JarJar's very existence, and Anikan having terrible actors, I really can't think of anything that made those movies absolute pieces of shit. Truth be told, I was actually surprised when I heard - after the original release of the three prequels - that the vast majority of fans wanted to go burn George's house down after wathing them. I hated JarJar as much as the next person, but I still thought Phantom Menace was fun. But for me personally, I'm a big lightsaber fan, and there was plenty of lightsaber action to be had, including a 2 v 1 duel involving a frickin' double-blladed lightsaber. That fight alone - to me at least - makes up for pretty much everything that happened on Tatooine in that movie.
As for the second one, I really didn't understand the hate behind this one. Yes, the love story seemed awkward and forced and there wasn't much true chemistry there. But it had to be there since we all know it was the cause of Anikan's eventual fall. But beyond that, why were the riots in the streets (figuratively speaking) after that? "Jango was just an attempt to pander to the Boba fans!" Was he? Or was he a badass Mandalorian that was needed so that they had someone to clone for the Clone Wars - which is mentioned in the original trilogy - army? The clones had to come from somewhere and it's established in SW lore that Mandalorians are amongst the best soldiers in the galaxy, so why not have Boba's predicessor? And personally, I liked the climactic battle in the 2nd one. Watching all those lightsabers go up as the order of Jedi Knights officially goes to war. And how can you top a Sith with a double-bladed lightsaber in the first movie? How about a jedi dual-weilding lightsabers in the 2nd?
Which brings me to the 3rd. The ire for this I really don't understand. Yes, Anikan's acting is still prettyy shoddy, but other than that, what was wrong with this one again? I really can't think of any complaints myself. Well, I did find it a bit goofy when Obi calls out that he's got the highground, implying that it gives him +2 to all saving rolls.
So there you have it. Again, I'm not trying to say that the prequels were all fantastic movies worthy of our praise, but like with Bob's review of Phantom Menace, I'm just trying to see if I can't convince some people that the prequels aren't as bad as they were made out to be.
.....wow, really didn't mean to make this OP this big. :3
Captcha: "Crunchy Nut: please type "It's Super Delicious". It most specifically is not, and I find it offensive that I'm forced to say it is just to make a damn post. *grumblegrumble about Captcha ads and those annoying banner ads that cover up half the fucking page*
Come on this morning and I see this topic: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.391617-Star-Wars
Posted by an Escapist who, amazingly enough, claims to have never seen the original trilogy and is asking if it's any good.
And finally it was this response:
...that made me decide to make this topic. So, borrowing from MovieBob's theory on Phantom Menace, I'm asking the question just why DID everyone hate the prequel trilogy?BloatedGuppy said:Nonsense. The prequels are perfectly even. They're utter rubbish from start to finish.Swyftstar said:...as the prequels are horribly uneven in terms of quality from scene to scene.
Was it completely doomed from the start due to nostalgia for the first trilogy? Did those movies capture our hearts and imaginations as children and thus ensure that absolutely nothing could live up to that magic since NOTHING is after as good as it was for a child once that child becomes an adult (except the first Land Before Time movie...that is still a fantastic coming of age movie and no one will ever convince me otherwise
But going along the lines of what Bob discussed in his video, what makes the prequel trilogy so frickin' bad as to deserve the endless supply of hate and death threats thrown at George Lucas? Just like Bob, I'm not trying to convince anyone that the prequels were stellar movies that were worhty of praise rather than ire, simply trying to get people to see them as mediocre rather than down-right sinful sci-fi movies.
I mean really, other than the complaints that I mentioned as examples about the Force being retconned, JarJar's very existence, and Anikan having terrible actors, I really can't think of anything that made those movies absolute pieces of shit. Truth be told, I was actually surprised when I heard - after the original release of the three prequels - that the vast majority of fans wanted to go burn George's house down after wathing them. I hated JarJar as much as the next person, but I still thought Phantom Menace was fun. But for me personally, I'm a big lightsaber fan, and there was plenty of lightsaber action to be had, including a 2 v 1 duel involving a frickin' double-blladed lightsaber. That fight alone - to me at least - makes up for pretty much everything that happened on Tatooine in that movie.
As for the second one, I really didn't understand the hate behind this one. Yes, the love story seemed awkward and forced and there wasn't much true chemistry there. But it had to be there since we all know it was the cause of Anikan's eventual fall. But beyond that, why were the riots in the streets (figuratively speaking) after that? "Jango was just an attempt to pander to the Boba fans!" Was he? Or was he a badass Mandalorian that was needed so that they had someone to clone for the Clone Wars - which is mentioned in the original trilogy - army? The clones had to come from somewhere and it's established in SW lore that Mandalorians are amongst the best soldiers in the galaxy, so why not have Boba's predicessor? And personally, I liked the climactic battle in the 2nd one. Watching all those lightsabers go up as the order of Jedi Knights officially goes to war. And how can you top a Sith with a double-bladed lightsaber in the first movie? How about a jedi dual-weilding lightsabers in the 2nd?
Which brings me to the 3rd. The ire for this I really don't understand. Yes, Anikan's acting is still prettyy shoddy, but other than that, what was wrong with this one again? I really can't think of any complaints myself. Well, I did find it a bit goofy when Obi calls out that he's got the highground, implying that it gives him +2 to all saving rolls.
And killing off Padme or however it's spelled seemed REALLY forced considering the fact that they come out and say that there was nothing medically wrong with her. But again, she had to die to officially give rise to Vader, but really I think they could have just as easily said that there were complications during the birth of Luke and Leia and that the mother wasn't going to make it. Do that and her death is perfectly fine, don't do that, and we get responses like the Dr. Ball parody from Robot Chicken:
So there you have it. Again, I'm not trying to say that the prequels were all fantastic movies worthy of our praise, but like with Bob's review of Phantom Menace, I'm just trying to see if I can't convince some people that the prequels aren't as bad as they were made out to be.
.....wow, really didn't mean to make this OP this big. :3
Captcha: "Crunchy Nut: please type "It's Super Delicious". It most specifically is not, and I find it offensive that I'm forced to say it is just to make a damn post. *grumblegrumble about Captcha ads and those annoying banner ads that cover up half the fucking page*