PT A thought on prequel bashing

It seems that what many Star Wars fans most commonly agree on is... that they don't like a large part of Star Wars. Their fandom seems to largely revolve around tearing down large portions of Star Wars. It seems that they do this far more than saying positive things the parts of Star Wars that they say they like.

 

At this point, it's so common that I just let it happen. It's a waste of time arguing. Just enjoy that you're loving something that tons of people aren't. Their loss.

 

I agree 110%. I don't bother trying to defend it anymore. Honestly, there's only 1 Star Wars movie that "Star Wars" fans actually like and that's Empire...basically, the Prequel bashers just want 6 versions of Empire...and that's never gonna happen...

 

Very rarely do people bash Star Wars A New Hope and people consider ROTJ just part of the greatest masterpiece trilogy ever created...

Prequel 'bashers' don't want 6 versions of Empire, prequel bashers just want a movie that involved a better script and more input from the creative people around Lucas. Bomb in the brain, Jar Jar, mid-chlorians, awful cringe worthy dialogue in AOTC & ROTS, the idiot decisions of the Jedi council, boring politics - I could go on and on, but then it would turn into an argument that no one wins. Its great that people can enjoy the prequels and that you can leave your brain at the door and just enjoy the action scenes - but those people who love film and great storytelling, then people have trouble finding entertainment value out of the prequels.

 

Oh boy, here we go again. I love film and great storytelling and that's what I get out out of all six Star Wars movies.

And I like how you say that it's supposedly great that people can enjoy the prequels, but that they have to leave their brain at the doors in order to do so. Sorry, but I take that as an insult. Just because you think so and have read or seen reviews with similar conclusions, does not give you the power to universally declare which movies require you to shut off your brains.

 

You were the one that universally declared that all prequel 'bashers' wanted 6 Empire movies. I take that as an insult.

Yes yes, prequels require all brain activity when watching....Like when Jar Jar stepped in the poo.... Or when Jar Jar electrocuted himself on the pod and made that funny sound.......Or when Jar Jar ran from the blue balls......Or when Jar Jar saw the goober fish and pointed it out....So much brain power used to view these amazing scenes.

There is a GOOD reason EVERY SINGLE article that comes out about The Force Awakens when mentioning the prequels - usually the writer mentions how they are bad films.

 

Really? Where did I say that? Give me a quote.

 

Yes they need brainpower, how about Palpatine's Machiavellian plotting, the complex issue of the clone's free will, the ramifications of Order 66, a brand new look at the Star Wars galaxy, the theory of the ring structure... need I go on.

And just because Jar Jar isn't to your tastes doesn't mean he's pointless and stupid. He represents a comic foil, with aspects of slapstick comedians like Buster Keaton, and is essentially the closest thing to an average citizen of the galaxy in any of the films.

 

According to your logic, Lucas could have put in any type of idiot lame character and you guys would come up with some 'type' that the dumb character represented throughout history. Like if Lucas made a talking banana, you would say "just bc he isnt to your taste doesn't mean his pointless...bananas have a large history with great warriors , which eat them before a battle to keep their health up". Give me a break. You're talking about a cartoon rabbit that was so completely out of place in the Star Wars universe. The only thing he represented was bad writing. That is the one TRUE thing Jar Jar represents....bad writing. Bad ideas. You could interchange Jar Jar Binks & Roger Rabbit - and the audience would not know the difference.

 

No, Lucas himself made the character of Jar Jar with a Buster Keaton reference in mind. We didn't come up with it. And I think Jar Jar fits right into the George Lucas established Star Wars universe. You know, the universe that includes creatures such as Wookies, Ewoks, Hutts etc.

 

I never understood why does Jar Jar bothers people so much... He is hardly that annoying. True to be told, I don't think he is annoying at all, I even find some of the scenes with him funny.

 

I've seen this argument before, you are only a real Star Wars fan if you like the prequels and trying to say that the OT fans only like Empire, etc. It stinks.

 

Never mind that there are hundreds of books, comics, games, tv episodes and more. 6 movies make you a true fan? Give me a break. Until everyone has experienced every movie, book, comic, game and tv episode, no one can claim the true fan thing. The movies are just the tip of the iceberg. There is so much to experience. Been collecting stuff since the late 90's and still have more to do.

 

A thought on prequel bashing? Maybe people just don't like them because they are bad films?? Nothing more - Nothing less.

 

The PT movies aren't the most liked movies ever but they do have their fans.
People do have their criticisms of them though some people do take too much offense to reasonable criticisms. Some hate is over the top but it feels like some PT fans will jump on any tiny criticism and make it out to be worse than it is or won't hear anything against the PT.
Why do all fans have to like everything? Just like what you want to and don't antagonize others.

 

The "too much offense to reasonable criticisms" is unfortunately human nature - an emotional perhaps defensive response.
Whenever you have an extreme wing of any body of thought - and I do consider the people who made 'The People Vs George Lucas' extreme, along with those who claim to have been abused, or wish some kind of sticky end for those involved etc etc - it becomes very difficult on first meeting to know if someone who chimes in with similar views is from the same wing or not.

It seams pathetic to use analogies from politics, but it is essentially the same process subconsciously - you have a beard and muslim dress and are expressing anti west views - mmm....oh actually, yeah I agree, I'm not a fan of the current whatever govenments foreign policy you disagree with, sorry for assuming anything more...

Oh, look this guy is overweight in his late thirties and crying because he has just seen the Falcon in a trailer - I'm guessing he has no Grevious figurines. Maybe I'm wrong - hey look - he has a pod racing helmet in his cabinet !

Again - I apologise for the way over the top comparisons and stereotypes - but it's the same process - it's irrational and emotional but understandble.

Defensible? Depends on how much leeyway you give human nature versus some Jedi code of tolerance and understanding.
Forums are a microcosm of the world.

Difficult this lesson is.

 

Here we go again. Same debate, different thread for 16 years.

Taste in art, including film, is subjective. Some people don't like Citizen Kane because they find it dull; some think it's the greatest film ever made. Who's right? No one. It's all individual. Arguing ad nauseam about what makes a given movie great/crap is ultimately a waste of time. Few opinions will be swayed, if any. And when there's as much emotion, memory, nostalgia, feelings of inspiration and disappointment as there is with this Saga, debates are going to get heated and harsh words will be exchanged. The wiser option may be to avoid it altogether.

 

I understand not liking the PT films. There are lots of popular films that I don't particularly enjoy (Christopher Nolan's films for instance). And even with Star Wars, if we're including the EU, I'm not a particular fan of it. I've seen a few episodes of the TV shows and while they're not bad, they just don't grab me the way the films do. The EU books I've read, though, I've honestly felt were pretty awful (and I've read Stover's ROTS novelization which is apparently among the *best* the EU novels have to offer).

The difference is, I don't feel the need to post over and over and over again about how awful and disappointing they were. Yeah I might mention it every once in a while, but if you look in my posting history, I've almost NEVER posted to the Literature or TV boards because that isn't the part of Star Wars that I like.

If someone doesn't like the prequels, I don't mind. I just scratch my head when they post HERE of all places. Rather than on the classic trilogy board. Or originaltrilogy.com. Or imdb. Or reddit. Or…you know…tons of other places.

Like, I could go on and on and on about how I loathe the politics in Christopher Nolan's Batman films but I'm not going to go to a forum dedicated to BatNolan to tell the fans there that they're fans of a pseudo-intellectual Republican-shilling rich man fantasy piece of propaganda. Even though, at its lowest points, that's what I find Nolan's Batman trilogy to be. Because:

A. I can recognize that it's SUBJECTIVE and not everyone will see the film that way (considering I know quite a few politically liberal people who love Bat-Nolan, that almost goes without saying)
B. What purpose is there in raining on someone's parade like that?

And the excuse that I'm a fan of Batman (my favorite is Batman: The Animated Series to be honest) rings pretty hollow if the forum is dedicated to NOLAN's films in particular rather than just a general Batman forum.

 

Couldn't agree more.

 

I never really got the Jar Jar hate either. The only thing I'd say is that he gets a bit more screen time than necessary. (which makes it pretty odd in subsequent movies when he's unceremoniously shown the door in AOTC & barely gets an ADR line dubbed in just for "old times sake" in ROTS) The "comedy relief" doesn't tend to be in every scene like Jar Jar was in TPM. Couple that with him having taken up a large part of the mid-movie (instead of Obi-Wan) and I can see some fans being resentful. But as a character, I thought he was pretty funny.

 

I have to agree with Thiazzi. I used to spend a great amount of time responding to those who bashed a part of the Saga. Although a great deal of the bashing was directed at the Prequel Trilogy, I have also encountered a good number of bashing directed at the Original Trilogy. And I found a lot of the bashing a bit mindless. After years of responding to the bashing, I realized that it will always be never ending and that I found it exhausting. I think it's best just to ignore it. It's probably hard to do. I certainly found it hard to ignore it. I still do. But really . . . for one's peace of mind, I really do believe that it's just a lot healthier to ignore it.

 

PiettsHat a long time ago after the first Lord of the Rings film, I joined a forum to express my dissatisfaction. I was all full of righteous anger about how it didn't match my experience of the books blah blah blah. Anyhow a ton of bricks fell on me since everybody else loved them. After maybe a few replies I left and never posted again !
It was a short sharp lesson - what is the point of such a position - did I really expect everybody else to go "hey that guys right, these films suck !".

And what if you could do that - change peoples opinions simply by continually posting your indignation - is that a good thing? What do you do then, strut around happy that you removed a source of joy from someones life? Is that ultimately the goal - I'm unhappy about this so you should be as well ?

Eventually after 'The People Vs George Lucas III ' millions of fans will eventually, surely at last see that they are wrong. Then you'll have your revenge?

 

Oh, I'm not against expressing one's dissatisfaction with a film. By all means! Heaven knows that I haven't made an effort to hide my disdain for JJ Abrams' take on Star Trek.

It's just…it's been ten years. TEN YEARS. Ten freaking years since the prequels were released. And I understand wanting to review the films, discuss them, criticize them and see where we can do better (especially in light of a new film on the horizon). But why, for heaven's sake, do people who dislike these films act surprised that their expression of dislike, in places meant for FANS to congregate, is met with hostility?

I don't mind, for example, discussing the merits of the PT and possible flaws in the Saga forum, for example (or even here), but the relentless negativity is exhausting.

I will say probably the strongest lesson I learned about "bashing" happened after seeing the first Hobbit movie. I HATED it. Loathed it -- it bored me to tears. I saw it with my brother (who loved it to pieces) in theater. And when my mother asked my thoughts on it after the film, I didn't hold back and tore it a new one. This really disheartened my brother; he adored the film and he's just a kid. And you know what? I didn't want to be the person that ruined his fun. So when I went to see the other two movies with him, even though I ended up hating both of them, I made sure to emphasize the things I did like about them -- because he loved them and, at the end of the day, they're just movies and his enjoyment means more to me than proving that I'm "right" or making sure that everyone knows I hated it.

 

Ya it just irritates me when people imply that you have no taste or your stupid or you have no knowledge of film if you like the prequels. And since "everybody" agrees, that means they are right. I've seen some really intellectually sound analysys of the prequels on here that reference past films as well as film theory in their praise.

For whatever reason, the feeling that the prequels were disappointing films have become the mainstream sentiment. It doesn't make it true. In the middle ages, the notion that the Earth was flat was the mainstream dominant view that "everyone" agreed on. Another example; everyone today assumes that the US Constitution is this hallowed document that everyone agreed was superior to the previous Articles of Confederation back when they were written. In reality, there was quite a bit of split feelings about the Constitution back in the day. Many were worried that it gave the Federal government too much power and they preferred the Articles of Confederation bc it gave more power to the states. But the Constitution was ultimately voted in over the Articles of Confederation and now everyone sees it as this golden beacon of democracy that everyone agreed upon. Thats not entirely the case though.

I'm not saying that people who dislike the prequels are wrong or their opinions are in invalid, but I am saying that this notion that they are correct bc "everyone" agrees with them IS wrong. I mean if all you read is articles that criticize the prequels then ya you'll start believing in the criticism too. And if that is the dominant view of the mainstream media journalists then ya it will seem like "everyone" is in agreement. If I recall a certain wise old jedi once said, "Your focus determines your reality." And It WASN'T old Ben...

 

I think the bottom line is, most of the argument comes when some people parade in and act like their view is the "superior" one.

To use a non-SW example, I loath TASM movies. But I generally don't walk into any given forum with the opening remark "How 'bout those ASM films? Pieces of ****, eh?" But when people come into a thread mocking Tobey Maguire and "how bad he was", you can bet I'm going to remind everybody how lame Andrew Garfield was in the same role. Don't knock something as "universally" bad, no matter how bad you think it is, unless you want to hear from the opposing viewpoint. Because everything has it's fans.