Why the PT will never be as good as the OT

This has probably been done before, but I didn't fell like looking for a thread on it.

Now don't get your panties in a bunch over the title if you are a die-hard fan of the prequels...I love them, but these are the reasons I don't think they will ever be as good as the original trilogy:

1) CGI - Now as much as I like the planets and creatures GL can create with CGI, it has too much of a "cartoony" feel to it. If you watch the OT, it's all very real looking. Even the stop motion animation of things like the AT-AT look better than CGI IMO, because they are real. Of course, the end battle in AOTC wouldn't be as grand and a lot of the things in the PT wouldn't be possible without CGI, but you just can't beat the feel of realism.

2) Characters - In the PT, I just can't seem to attach myself to the characters like I could in the OT. One of the reasons for this is because the PT is just introducing too many new characters all the time, whereas we followed only a handful of characters in the OT. Also, in the OT we had a very concrete and well developed villian in Darth Vader who was present in all 3 movies. In the PT, we had Maul who was very cool and could have rivaled Vader if he would have been a little better developed, but unfortunately was killed off after one movie. Now we have Dooku, who IMO has a little more background story to him, but is nothing more than an old man. Nothing really "catchy" about him.

3) Good vs Evil - In the OT, even for a 3 year old it was easy to determine who the good guys and bad guys were and that the movie was about a plight against evil. Very simple to understand, but still had enough mysticism and subplots to make them great. However, in the PT, it's not so simple. All of the characters are deceibtful and the line between good and evil is a blur. Sure, it can make for a more interesting story, but also a very confused, mixed up one. I would hate to be on an acid trip and try to figure out what the hell is going on during AOTC.

4) Acting and Chemisty of the Cast - I know this has been beaten to death, but it is one of the reasons. The OT may not have had great acting, but the chemistry was there. Now, in AOTC, I think Hayden and Ewan did a great job, but Natalie just doesn't compliment Hayden's performance very well. All of her lines were very flat and personally, they took me out of the movie. Hayden would draw me in, and Natalie would push me out.

5) Last, but not least: No Chewbacca!!! - Okay, I understand that Chewie being in the PT would not fit into the whole story very well, and personally I would hate it if he has a cameo in Episode III, but there is no loveable alien character in a main role that we can fall in love with. Sure we had Jar Jar, but he's no Chewbacca.

Remember, I love the PT, but I don't think it will ever be as good as the OT.

 

*Official* AOTC's place in the Star Wars saga

**Official** Acting Discussion thread.
**Official** Special Effects - Digital Effects - CGI discussion thread.
Too much CGI in the PT? (lenghty read)

 

[image=http://www.animecowboy.com/gallery/Cowboy_Bebop/Spike_Spiegel/spike05.jpg]

 

I don't think this really falls into any of those threads YodaJeff.

 

If you're talking about the entire PT, and not AOTC in particular, than this really belongs in Misc...

 

I think it's because we're not kids anymore and alot of people are tearing the PT apart and putting it down for many of the same drawbacks that the OT had.

Plus the PT is not about a small group of rebels fighting on backwater planets it's about a galaxy crumbling from political manipulations. The story is not as straight forward and you have to really read into things this time around.

CG is actually pretty awesome.

 

Good grief, there are several AT-AT shots that look awful. Their movement and the ambient lighting is completely inconsistent with the rest of the shots in the battle. And don't get me started on the stop motion tauntauns, or the puppet Rancor, or the space sock puppet. They look glaringly fake, more fake than any CGI creation looks.

 

You know what your right.

I am going to send Lucas a letter to actually BUILD a galaxy and film episode 3 there to make it ACTUALLY REAL!

give me a break.

 

I do not not understand why fans are so upset by the CGI in AOTC. Fans have been far more critical about the CGI effects in AOTC than the film critics. I thought the effects in AOTC looked fine. The only effect that looked bad to me was Count Dooku on his speeder bike.

 

Yes the fx in the OT are pathetic. If anyone used things like that now they would be a laughing stock.

 

I'm not trying to say that the CGI was pathetic or that I didn't like it. I'm just saying it doesn't have the realistic feel that the OT did, and that's why I like the OT better. You guys are making it sound like I hate the PT. I love it, but not as much as the OT, and I'm trying to point out the reasons why.

 

SDJ makes a good point: seeing the PT in one's 20s and 30s means you can't really compare it to the OT which you saw before you were a teenager.

With regard to special effects, both the PT and OT pioneered fx technology for their time. This doesn't mean there aren't flukes:

PT: Jabba and the "Banking Clan" alien look like refugees from a second-rate video game.

OT: two words -- Gamorrean Guards.

 

Yeah those matte paintings and stop motion puppets really made you think it was all real.




Why the PT will never be as good as the OT:

1) The PT will always be judged more harshly than the OT

End of list.

 

Gamorean guards? Drool impresses you that much? It's true that the jabba puppet is a work of art but that took 6 months to build and put them behind schedule.

PT: one word Yoda

 

I think a lot of the OT SFX still stand up well.

Look at the effects in the first few Star Trek films or Superman and compare them to those in any of the OT. They look terrible, whereas a lot of the OT effects are still quite breath-taking....

 

No, SDJ, drool doesn't impress me. I sited the Gamorrean Guards as an example of bad special effects technology in the OT.

 

Oh sorry Sterling...and I agree. I just misunderstood.

 

I don't think the CG doesn't feel real because the clone troopers sure felt real. I think it's the fact that you know it's not there that make it seem fake. It's in your mind.

 

Not to be rude or anything, but you know what's funny about this board? All of the hipocrisy. I hear people on here all the time talking about how the OT is still better than the PT, but when someone tries to give reasons why, everyone turns into a flamer. If I would have posted a topic that read Why the PT is better than the OT, everyone would be taking the opposite side of things. Lighten up. Forums are for discussion, not flaming. If you want to be a flamer, move to San Fransisco.

 

Well, the PT to me just looks too sharp and too clear in terms of CGI. In a way though, for the first two films (AOTC and TPM) maybe even for the third film too, that can go along with the whole Age of Elagance before the dark times bit. But i bet that in E3, it will look like a very sharp dirty galaxy.

The PT as a whole to me has a slightly weaker story than the OT, or it may just be more subtal, or Padme's Bra (what a strange name?) may be right and i am just being harsher on the PT.

 

>>If you watch the OT, it's all very real looking. Even the stop motion animation of things like the AT-AT look better than CGI IMO, because they are real.<<

I don't understand this. Just look at the explosion of Alderaan in ANH...it's downright ugly. The battle of hoth looks equally as phony as any CGI creation. At least CGI creatures are colorful and lively, not like those walking teddy bears (ewoks) and the horrible looking things in jabba's place IMO. That huge blue thing in jabbas little party room in ROTJ looks like a fat pillow with eyes. The CGI yoda is far superior to the puppet...the facial expressions done with CGI are very good, not to mention the fight scene. Some people will never accept the technology I guess. Personally I hate chewbacca, but that's just me.

 

Of course, Harrison Ford helped the OT, but many people forget just how good Mark Hamil's character was. I don't even think Ewan Mcgreggor could match Hamil.
Let's not forget Leia as Jabba's moll.

 

The whole cgi/effects in general thing bugs me. I can understand, say, a fondness for the Yoda puppet, but come on:

Rancor vs. Opee Sea killer(sp)
Winner: PT

Leia puppet on speeder bike vs. Anakin on speeder bike
Winner: PT

Artoo magically gliding down stairs into Falcon Hanger in Mos Eisly vs. Artoo using 3rd leg to actually walk down stairs
Winner: PT

Space shots where box outlines can be seen around various elements of composite shots vs space shots without...
Winner: PT

 

I prefer the OT over the PT primarily because of the OT cast.

However, I find most of the crticisms of the CGI in the prequels to be ridiculous. I tend to pick apart the quality of special effects in films. Yet, I can't find any major problems with special effects AOTC except for the Dooku speeder scenes. Many fans say that the ships like Obi Wan's fighter "look too CGI". I thought the look of his ship and others in the prequels look fairly consistent with the OT.

However, maybe I am just blind or something.

 

An observation:

When I was a kid, Star Wars was more than just a movie. It was a phenomenon. Every kid had Star Wars toys. Television shows and commercials used oblique references to Star Wars, confident that eveyone in the audience would "get it."

That doesn't seem to be happening with the PT. TPM and AOTC seem to be just another couple of blockbuster movies and not the cultural touchstone that the OT was.

Comments?