Why are Star Wars episodes I-III deemed so bad?

Recommended Videos

Deacon Cole

New member
Jan 10, 2009
1,365
0
0
Country
USA
Nicktrip said:
Having first watched the films as a 'tween' I couldn't really see what was so bad about them; epic battles, cool sci-fi gadgets, an extensive universe to work with. But, 11 years after the fan-rage started, I can't help but wonder what exactly set them off. (And yes, I have seen the originals.)

Opinions please.
It's very simple. The story was dog shit. Without a good story with believable and sympathetic characters, all of the pic battles, cool sci-fi gadgets, and extensive universes are a waste of time.

Personally, I just think Lucas was sick of Star Wars. Return of the Jedi is by far the worst of the original trilogy. I was twelve when it came out and I noticed the quality was lacking. I chalked it up to Lucas just being tired of doing Star Wars. When I saw Phantom Menace, I realized that nothing had changed.
 

Mr.Petey

New member
Dec 23, 2009
521
0
0
nick n stuff said:
i liked jar jar. star wars always had comic relief. jar jar has become a scapegoat...you don't hate R2-D2 and C3-PO for making jokes do you but Mr. Binks is satan. it's racist is what it is.
Yeah for all his tomfoolery and goofing around, I never had any major issues with Mr Binks whatsoever. C3PO can be a more obnoxious than him at times and you never hear many complaining about that!

My only issues with the prequels is that they tend to do what Enterprise did with Star Trek; have a set in stone canon storyline, complete with references to past events, giving it plenty of prequel material for further films that would tell us what happened in that event mentioned within this episode. Both the SW trilogy and Enterprise ignored the potential in this, leaving in only a few key events

For instance, in Enterprise there was a nice telling of how Klingons look different in the 23rd century until the latter half of that century that could be considered canon and provides a good story+explanation.
On the flipside, it could have showcased parts or at least the start of the Romulan-United Earth war that took place just around 2160 but negated it in favour of the odd nudge and wink espionage themed episodes.

With Star Wars however they did a nice build up to the creation of the Empire but kinda screwed about with the plot of Boba Fett's upbringing which was watchable but went against what was laid out beforehand in novels and such.

Scuse me, I'm done now. I don't hate the prequels but merely wish they did more referencing to prior titles and other sources
 

brainfreeze215

New member
Feb 5, 2009
594
0
0
Because, despite the noble efforts of Liam Neeson and Ewan McGregor, all three films had some of the most terrible acting the modern cinema has ever seen.

Also the plots were convoluted without justification and someone has yet to convince George Lucas that adding more special effects does not save a mediocre plot.
 

Crimsane

New member
Apr 11, 2009
914
0
0
If they were games, they'd be like sequels in which the developers decided to scrap the original game's focus on story and gameplay and instead go for amazing graphics. End result is a mediocre yet very pretty product. See: Morrowind vs Oblivion.

Also, heavy amounts of nostalgia.
 

Dane Tesston

New member
Jul 27, 2010
136
0
0
Honestly, I feel it's nostalgia filter in effect. Star Wars is something a lot of people grew up with and cared about, so of course they'd get up in arms about the details. Now, I probably shouldn't talk, as I'm just not that big of a SW guy. But thats the thing about prequels; there's a lot of room for error. Messing up established storylines and facts, making unnecessary retcons, fouling up character histories... The list goes on. And of course, there's the fact that you just can't please some people. Of course, I've never been the hardest to please with just about anything, so maybe I'm wrong.

But really, blaming the guy who came up with the thing in the first place for the flaws of future projects? Isn't that a little low?