PT A Thread For Prequel Fans To Discuss New Star Wars Content (spoiler tags required)

Filoni to me is the next George Lucas for me

In a good way meaning I think he will be with star wars for a long time.

Also his hat

 

I'm sure they will...and then they'll go back and say, "You know, it really wasn't that good. I saw it 10 times in one day to convince myself that I liked it, but it really wasn't a good film."

 

they already start reviews that have nothing to do with Star Wars that way.

 

Huh, this is an interesting thread idea

No tag in post 1 though. No love for another fan who loves the whole saga?

(I'm jk'ing, I don't take offense to anything really xD)

Well I think it's a given that, come time for critic reviews, the ST will be compared to the stereotype of "The PT sucks" and it's already a given that it will most likely suffer some of the same discrimination

The only real fear I have about TFA in particular is their emphasis on "fewer CG effects" and crap. It sort of shows. I think the practical BB-8 is glorious, but that painfully obvious background at the beginning of the second trailer is.... godawful. There's no depth to it. I've seen more impressive backgrounds in movies from the 1940's. A background like that could easily and seamlessly be achieved with CG, but it'll be used by critics to

Eh, not gonna complete that sentence

 

One trilogy is going to have to be at the bottom of people's favorite lists regardless. OT-PT-ST, OT-ST-PT, PT-OT-ST, PT-ST-OT, ST-PT-OT, ST-OT-PT. Not much you can do about it really.

 

Yeah, he's currently one of the few people involved in Star Wars right now that I trust to treat it properly. I can probably list the others on one hand.

 

I really love this comment here. TPM is worlds away from the Star Wars we see in the Original Trilogy, but by the time we reach the end of RotS everything gels. Similarly, TFA looks like a very OT-inspired world, much to some PT fans' dismay (which is pretty in line with J.J.'s comments about capturing that original feel and Han's "We're home"), but it has to be remembered that this is only the start of a trilogy that can -- and, if I were to bet my money on it, will -- expand greatly and move forward with its own unique identity as it strays farther from the original material and grows into its own thing with each installment.

 

I could only tag 10 users, I tried to tag more but it wouldn't let me

 

Truth. Agree 100%. PT fans applaud how easily the ending of ROTS leads into the beginning of ANH. Why shouldn't ROTJ easily lead into TFA? Episode 7 is not the end. Episode 9 is. I can wait until then to get the whole picture. Anakin and Obi-Wan played decent sized roles in the OT after the PT but the PT fans would have us have the living OT characters in minor roles or ignore them completely and jump to the new guys at once.

 

Regarding the practical vs CG spin, I wonder if doing more practical (if that is indeed what they're doing) will be sustainable in the long run. Here's why:
In the making of Phantom Menace, George Lucas looked at a side by side comparison of a head replacement Jar Jar vs a full CGI Jar Jar. They really had to keep things within budget, so he went with the CG one, because the head replacement cost a lot more. Of course, with new tech, these things are easier. But will Disney really want to use practical in cases where nobody would know the difference? It seems inevitable that they'll start making hard budgetary decisions, the way that George Lucas had to. They might be trying as hard as they can now, to prove themselves, but in the long run, I wonder if it will make sense to them to stick to earthlike locations and sets. In the end, they will have to wow audiences with sights unseen. Miniatures have clear advantages, especially when depicting large alien locales unlike what we see here on earth.

 

I think part of the "practical rennaisance" logic is that we've been in an era of boundless CGI entertainment for so long, that people are becoming desensitized to pure spectacle. I can absolutely understand that logic. I think back to the last 3 years, 2011-2014, when it seemed like every single blockbuster contained at least 3 skyscrapers (if not an entire cityscape) tumbling down in glorious CGI detail. After a certain point, all of that impressive detail and scale ceases to be impressive, and it's easy to become cynical about all of it. What was new has become old hat.

Practical effects are, largely, just a sort of false messiah for people to cling to, because it's easier to look at CGI as the villain in all of this. But it doesn't really matter. Within 10 years, CGI will in most cases be indistinguishable from practical effects. It's already started, honestly. I couldn't possibly tell you what was practical or CGI those Falcon shots from the TFA trailer, and I'm perfectly fine with not knowing. Eventually, all that is really going to matter is the quality of the director's artistic vision. If they continue to merely attempt at overwhelming our senses with falling skyscrapers and thousands of grey soldiers battling for who-knows-what, then audiences will continue to be cynical and unamused. But if a director gives us unique, exciting new sights and sounds backed by a gripping story and characters worth caring about, then audiences will eat it up.

 

The fact that you reached the limit and still had some names in mind can only mean that it's clear the whole "everyone hates the PT" thing is a load of bull

 

and end with "it is clear J.J. Abrams understands Star Wars much better than George Lucas."

 

Then I will write a strongly worded letter.

 

If audiences can no longer be wowed, then maybe it's time for sci-fi fantasy to go back to being niche films again, like they were pre-Star Wars. Star Wars really hit because of the wow factor. Without it, then it's niche. Lucas always intended it to be niche. He did not expect people to be so enamored with the special effects. That was just for the small convention crowd to enjoy. Methinks Disney missed the boat when it comes to spectacle, and now they must rely on marketing and hype with short term returns using the bored teenager crowd as their target market. Lightning does not strike twice in the same place. Once bored teenagers are bored by it, forget about it.

Also, shouldn't A and B wings be like the new Rebel ships, since those were introduced in Episode 6? It would be more of an evolution, unless they were worse than the x-wings.

 

Ken, i couldn't disagree more. Sure, Star Wars had a wow factor for the time, but there have been many wow factor films since then which have not become part of the culture the way Star Wars has. Now Disney will hype and market, no doubt. Its one thing they do as well, or better, than anyone else. The question with the success (or failure) of these movies will be how they connect to the fan base.... And perhaps more importantly, do the films generate new fans?

We wont know until this time next year, but I like what I'm seeing so far.

Wanted to add.... The A and B wings serve different purposes that the X-wing, in the same way that our air forces have different planes for different purposes.

 

It's one thing to show a CGI building falling down as something in the background of a massive city battle, because if you've seen one, you've seen them all. But give me a reason to care about that CGI building falling down, put characters I care about inside of it, make it count, make me feel something, and I'll watch it happen on the edge of my seat for as many times as you're able to invest me. Humans have a very small capacity to be wowed by something; it's partly why we we feel driven to continuously move forward and invent and see new and exciting things. In contrast, we like being emotionally moved, and we've cared about and been emotionally moved by exactly the same things for as long as storytelling has existed. Special effects are simply modern ways to tell those stories in visually exciting ways. Now, are a lot of the effects sequences in Star Wars exciting? Yes, they are, but it's not the technology, it's the weight behind it. I can watch the original version of the Death Star assault and, although it's done with nearly 40 year old effects, be excited by it over and over. I can watch the latest Transformers with cutting edge CGI and feel nothing but boredom and disinterest. It's like Lucas said, "A special effect without a story is a pretty boring thing." Those large scale CGI extravaganzas might "wow" audiences for the short term, but they're not going to last the way the original trilogy, or even the prequel trilogy will.

 

That wouldn't really make logical sense to me. Lucas created Star Wars.

 

Not all of us have said that. In fact for me, I hope Luke gets a significant role, similar to Yoda in the PT. It will be interesting to see how he changed between trilogies like Obi-Wan did.

Edit: Apologies for the double post

 

I think Force Smuggler probably meant "some (more extreme) PT fans" ...I've found FS to be a reasonable, fair-minded poster and I think he is aware that there are a lot of us Saga fans (who IMO probably greatly outnumber any "PT-only" fans) who also love the OT Big 3 and and don't want to see them only in minor roles or ignored altogether.

 

Indeed he is, I was just clarifying

 

yay (edit: I thought that ^was probably the case, but wanted to chime in)...group hug all around

 

What is everyone's thoughts on Rogue One? I for one am excited to see it

 

First of all I want to say it's nice to have a thread where we Prequel fans can talk future without OT fans trying to tear us down.

Onto my main post: I'm excited to see Rogue One and as a fan who grew up with prequels I don't give two %$££'s whether it's about this famous "rogue squadron" or not! I'm just glad we're getting more star wars.