Saga Prequels or originals?

Though I have a strong suspicion this thread isn't allowed and might get closed (in which case I apologize to the moderators), which trilogy do you prefer? Why?
I love the entire sage, but I prefer the prequels because it's much more moving, has more interesting story, has more, better looking ships, more action, and more Jedi.

 

http://boards.theforce.net/threads/ot-or-pt.50012439/

I've made this exact same thread.

Originals for me, though.

 

*deleted content of post*

 

OT cuz it's better.

 

ROTS >>> OT

 

Personally I struggle to even see these films as two trilogies, let alone one saga. For me there's a 2/4 split. So...

...how about this for a poll...

SW before 'I am your father' OR
SW after 'I am your father'?

 

My personal pref is still the OT and likely will remain that way. Better acting, a whole lot less CGI/effects, real props, more depth, more credibility, more heart, redemption, the X-Wing, Peter Cushing, and a better story.

However, I do cede that Christopher Lee and Ewan McGregor coupled with Ian are stellar in the PT.

 

Rolf Larsen - OT vs PT threads are permitted, unfortunately they tend to get locked due to certain users being unable to behave properly over the rather divisive issue.

Let's see how long this one lasts.

 

The Originals are more classical and fun.
The Prequels are more experimental and complex.

I like both, why choose one?

PT gets my sympathy vote since it's such a landslide as usual.

 

PT had better story potential, but the OT executed theirs better. So OT wins with me.

 

I like a happy ending.

 

Answer: Original Trilogy
Why: Superior writing, directing, editing and acting.

How Long I Think This Thread Will Stay Open For: 3 pages

Basically this. The OT tells a quite simple story very effectively. The PT tells a more nuanced story in a cack handed fashion.

 

I'm completely of the opposite view. PT is very simple and poorly done, OT is complex and better done.

 

Not voting. The two trilogies work perfectly balancing one another out. The harmony/disharmony and symmetry/asymmetry between the two sets of films make up the real wonder and joy of Star Wars for me. As good as either trilogy is on its own, they become so much more when taken in a larger context alongside one another.

 

Well said. Though I disagree I respect the thoughtfulness of your stance as stated.

 

Why didn't you offer three selections - OT, PT or Both?

 

Mod action: Adding 'Both' option to poll.

 

That's reassuringly succinct.

You're my father?

Good summary.

Yes, indeed. A mythical ouroboros.

I prefer both, but I also prefer the PT.


* * *


Oh, the calamity.

"Prequels or originals?" is a bit like asking "Elvis or The Beatles?"

Just shaddup and enjoy the music.

That said...

I voted PT. It *is* much more layered, complex, and intricate -- to me.

While the OT is fun to watch and superbly-made, I feel the aesthetic brilliance of the PT still needs greater recognition.

Furthermore, Star Wars wouldn't be much of a saga without the PT, in my opinion.

So there.

And Elvis.

 

Maybe a bit more like The Beatles vs The Rolling Stones...

Actually, no, I think it's more like The Doors or Led Zeppelin vs Nirvana or The Dandy Warhols. Context is just as important as stand-alone merit when there's such a massive gap in time between what's being compared. It's not the same as putting ESB against ROTJ.

 

That analogy is probably more apt on some levels.

Even better, maybe, would be putting it as, "Jazz or rock 'n' roll?"

Yes -- what fast-working hands the passage of time has!

We might also look to the world of film and (sticking with George's pal) say, "Munich or Minority Report?", "Schindler's List or Jaws?"

Different films with different aims, whether made a few years apart or a couple of decades.

 

Before this 'Beatles vs Stones' analogy gets out of hand, I realised it's not appropriate. Good rock bands change and evolve with each album (just as filmmakers do) - a more appropriate analogy would be 'SW/ANH vs ESB' being compared to 'Led Zeppelin vs Led Zeppelin II'.

Then you've got, say, Led Zeppelin's 1960s/1970s output being compared against Nirvana's in the early 1990s as a parallel to the OT against the PT, but that's not fair - they're different artists. You'd really have to compare Led Zeppelin against the Page/Plant collaboration in the 1990s, which was just a rehash of old works - which the PT wasn't, it was a new set of films.

The Beatles vs Stones analogy would only really work if you're comparing, say, Star Trek to Star Wars, or maybe James Bond to Indiana Jones.

 

Generally speaking, I find that the OT has a little bit more heart and is better constructed than the PT

You're one of my favorite posters here.

 

I chose the PT. Mainly because of superior writing. I'm not speaking as much about specific dialogue (which is really the most subjective thing ever and - for me - merely a tool to get things across that can't be communicated otherwise) as I'm speaking about plot and character development.

Plot-wise, the OT doesn't work for me as a trilogy. The individual films work fine on their own, but not as a complete piece. In a few words: The Death Star gets blown up in ANH, which leads to a glorious triumph. In the next film, it's all forgotten and - without proper explanation and contrary to previously established storytelling (Death Star destruction) - the Empire is stronger than ever. In the last chapter, there is suddenly another Death Star that gets blown up. This time we are supposed to believe that specific event destroyed the Empire for good, which is again completely against previously established parameters (when it hadn't hurt the Empire a bit after ANH).
The PT works better for me: TPM introduced the shadow master that manipulates the "public" bad guys, their motivation and the Republic's inefficency and curruption are laid out (TF: greed, money business, discontent with the Republic; Rep: not being able to something about obvious injustice) and the shadow master becomes chancellor. This comes back in AOTC when the corporatations have built a military cartel and the shadow master plays both ends against the middle, resulting in emegency powers and his own army. In the last chapter, this is brought to a logical end, with Palpatine eliminating most of his toys and achieving absolute power.

It's similar with the characters. Only Luke's developement works for me in the OT. Han and Leia are mostly living in their own ballon, without being much more than bait for Luke. Unfortunately, even Luke's most pivotal realization can not be witnessed on screen, but has to be assumed ("There is good in him. I can feel it".). I like the handling of the PT characters a lot more. Episode I is in a lot of ways Padmé's film, she is undergoing a nice change. Obi-Wan is introduced a a young student, drawing his master's final lesson. And Anakin's roots are fleshed out, coming back with his mother's death in the next film. The next film also puts Padmé in a position to make a choice that will determine her destiny and Obi-Wan gets his own detective side plot, moving the overall plot forward. In Episode III, the all have to face the consequences of their decisions. Obi-Wan's decision to train Anakin on his own gets back on him, Padmé living a lie with Anakin leads to her end and Anakin's unability to accept change finally sinks him.
Also prefer the writing for some of the minor characters. Shmi is a much deeper character, imo, than Owen and Beru. She is faced with the challenge to let her son go and is very important for Anakin's fall. Owen and Beru's death are never brought back, quickly forgotten. I also like Jango much more than Boba. Jango is bounty hunter with changing alliences, "trying to make his way". But there is also the fact that he wanted to be a father, which is deeply human and makes him a lot more complex and a complete human being. Very glad they showed Boba in AOTC; gave him a bit of depth.

But that's all in short.

I also prefer the PT's cinematography (although TESB's is also excellent), production design, costume work. planetary diversity and overall direction. Leads to a more elaborate usage of visual symbolism: day and night patterns, color design, planetary environment and architecture.....

I like the OT as well, don't get me wrong. The thread's topic distorts it a bit. Luke's journey is - for the most part - wonderful. ANH is a great film. Han is also good in that film. TESB has very, very strong parts with Yoda, Luke, Dagobah, Bespin. Lando is a wonderful secondary character, underrated imo. Darth Vader is an iconic villain.
But I probably wouldn't care for them much if the PT hadn't been made. I have to be honest and endure other user's incomprehension

 

Could you elucidate this point? I am intrigued.

 

Another great post from you, Samnz.

Your point-of-view is beautifully articulated; and it's one I find myself largely in agreement with.

Thanks.