PT An Essay on the Prequels (why I think they are just as good)

I'm curious what you mean by this. You admit that the prequels couldn't really have been about these things, yet you still think they should have been?

I kind of disagree anyway. The prequels were about friendship, courage, and belief in yourself. But they were about the reasons people sometimes fail in spite of those things.

 

Poor phrasing on my part. It couldn't be about triumph over evil but it could have been about the other things.

Prime difference between PT & OT. . .

PT: Anakin defeats the federation ship all on his own and mostly accidentally.

OT: Luke joins the Rebel attack & shows his camaraderie with Biggs, but is soon alone with Vader on his tail. His friend Han Solo shows up & shoots down the TIEs to allow Luke to blow up the Death Star.

They are way in over their heads but through courage and friendship they triumph.

 

Loved the Essay, don't completely agree but it makes some valid points. FWIW I think that Plinkett does to but still do greatly enjoy the prequels.

looking at your headings
I agree that the TPM was released to incredible hype and that was always going to be hard to live up to, so yeah I agree that the film was held to a higher standard. That said I do think it is weaker than A New Hope, especially as an introduction to Star Wars. It really does not work as an introduction to SW as a whole. On the other hand if you have seen Episode IV, you should have enough background to enjoy it. The Force is not explained and neither are the Jedi, note that Qui Gon uses a mind trick on Boss Nas with no explanation of mind tricks at all ( in fact, its easy enough to miss even if you do know.). Lucas mentions in one of his commentaries he enjoyed being immersed in an unfamiliar culture in film school with his exposure to Japanese film and liked the idea of doing the same so I guess he now had the confidence to do that ( fair play) but in fairness some viewers are going to want things explained to them.

With Jar Jar, I agree he was supposed to be obnoxious and he certainly does not deserve all the hate ( Personally I don't mind him at all). That said, He is just sort of tagging along with Qui Gon and Padme and I don't really care about him. The same, unfortunately is true of Anakin. I have no problem with him as such but its difficult to relate to a nine year old as a hero. So I think the real problem comes with half of the climatic battle being shown solely from the POV of two characters the audience don't care about. Worse yet their scenes are interspersed with the most epic Lightsaber battle to date.
I think that having either and older Anakin and keeping Jar Jar. or Keeping a younger Anakin and replacing Jar Jar would have been better. both of them is simply too much.

With Episode II and the older Anakin, Overall I think that the Christensen delivers a good performance, and Anakin being awkward and Whiney is fine but he does go a bit far. I really get the impression he dislikes Obi Wan from the performance and there is not really anything to balance out that impression ( It really does not help that Anakin decides to go to Tatooine to save his mother, against Jedi orders but having just lost his mother decides he cannot go to Geonosis to rescue the man who is effectively his other parent).

The romance - Its not great but then its not supposed to be that healthy. Anakin's attachment to Padme goes back to childhood and its not unreasonable to suppose that he is as much in love with the idea of Padme and with Padme herself. He is emotionally very immature so yeah the way he handles it makes sense. On the surface Padme's reaction is less so but she is a woman who has put her career before romance and has been surrounded by politicians all her adult life so I think the uncomplicated and devoted Anakin holds a surprising attraction to her. She too may well love the Idea of Anakin, In so far as he is a Jedi and a symbol justice and good. The romance plays a lot better with a couple of the deleted scenes put back in TBH.


The Plot - Have to say, no problems there it all moves in a straight line. There are amusing things to nitpick at ( as Plinkett does, and I DO laugh at some of the characters stupid decisions ) but thats true of the OT as well. In the first one the one thing that really bugs me is not being given the details of the tax dispute, except in passing late in the movie, especially since the line " Queen Amidala herself, at last we are getting results" implies that Naboo is either taxing the Trade Federation or refusing to pay their taxes ( as it is the line makes no real sense and Palpatine mentions, in passing that it was the Senate that taxed trade routes).
That may seem trivial but I think that some of the audience really start out not knowing the stakes, which is jarring.

The ambiguity of the Chancellors kidnap in the third movie is equally annoying in that regard. the films move past this quickly enough, and arguably they are not that important but at the opening they irritate. That said overall the plot is quite straightforward throughout the trilogy

The Main characters - Whilst they do not develop with the same intimacy as in the OT ( again because of Luke as a POV character) its unfair to say they have no personality. Out of the gate and with the caveat that you know what Jedi are ( so have seen episode IV) the audience already knows what Qui Gon and Obi Wan are and what to expect from them ( and indeed the audience should feel some familiarity with Obi Wan). Both characters are well portrayed, with a good student- teacher dynamic and with strong personalities, Neeson in particular sells every scene he is in and certainly remains engaging and memorable ( more than one friend described his Batman Begins character with reference to Qui Gon).
Obi Wan shines too and over the three movies He really grows, McGregor nails Obi Wan's character. Plinketts assertion that they have no personality is unfair, though Obi Wan is horribly underused in the first movie and his character suffers as a result.

Its more we see the character trait through how they behave than how the interact with each other so it seems a bit more distant. Its all there though, if anything especially in ROTS, its an in your face operatic style ( which TBF fits a grand tragedy very well)

The Little stuff - yeah some of the CGI was a bit ambitious and suddenly you are watching a video game. This is annoying, its a sad fact that CGI does seem less real than other effects for some reason and given Lucas was really pushing the envelope its not surprising it happens now and then, That said The Rancor didn't look entirely great either. I think this is probably more a problem for old timers and those who grow up with CGI effects will be fine with it ( As an aside I reckon that while us old timers were blown away by bullet time in The Matrix, our kids will look at it and be non-plused).

As for the midichlorians, well they annoy me and I really could have done without them in a way BUT its ridiculous to say they demystify the Force. The Midichlorians are like, the most mystical thing ever - they create Anakin, a fatherless child, and the Chosen one in an ancient prophecy. That's closer to what Plinkett called " Space Jesus" than science. It changes the whole dynamic of the OT which some may hate, but its all ancient mysticism not blasters if you see what I mean.

Things they did right
Palpatine - yep he is fantastic, McDiarmid is clearly having a ball playing Palpatine and he steals every scene he is in. His manipulations are great and TBH when ever I watch the movies there is a part of me rooting for him to win. As a bad guy I like him much more than Vader. Its like watching Hannibal Lecter. Its a grand guinol performance but its so cool you want him to get away with it, even better HE DOES.

Politics - Its fine, in fact my biggest problem with the politics is that some of it was a bit vague and some of the intrigue could have been more developed. A whole political subplot was cut out of ROTS and putting it back in makes the movie better.

Parallels between Luke and Anakin - this is something Lucas mentions in his commentaries but TBH I think it was poorly done. It really needed us to see Anakins training for example, and the turn to the dark side holds little comparision. One of the biggest parallels is Anakin having Dooku at his mercy and killing him, compared to Luke refusing to Kill Vader, but ( as is done in the novelisation of ROTS) if it had had Anakin and Dookus battle with Palpatine urging him to use the dark side to win, and Anakin clearly giving in to his hate and fear it would have been so much better.

Finally I agree there is a lot to enjoy some of the music and action is fantastic, and the scope is breathtaking at times. It does have an epic feel. It seems to me that Lucas has grown more confident in his style since the OT and, as he says is using the whole medium of film to tell the story, so emotion is heavily conveyed by visuals and by the music. Its a slightly different style of storytelling and the films look better viewed in that light.

 

who is simon pegg? Ive never heard of him. Lol at the get a life comment.

 

He's the guy who played Dengar in The Clone Wars.

 

Great essay. Not only do you make some excellent points (although some of them are based on generalizations), you get bonus points for the following:
the plot in EVERY movie is clearly stated in the opening crawl. Maybe people are too lazy to read?"

 

The PT and OT characters are from different times and circumstances. This is totally intentional.
There is no question that the OT characters are more relatable and easier to care about. Movies where the good guys are clearly good and the bad guys are clearly bad doing good and bad things and one side are the faces and the other side are the heels in wrestling terms is easy.

The PT has good and bad but it's not so easy. The character cues and personality types that denotes good and bad are appropriately grey. In the PT we have Jedi and Queens, Senators, Chancellor, Counts etc who live in a different strata. They are the top class. They live in an age like Victorian England. They don't show their emotions easily. They are bound by duty and form and class. It's a more civilized age.

In this world no one can fully be trusted. Yes the Jedi are good but flawed. They want to maintain a status quo that is corrupt in the first place. Palpatine is the bad guy but much of what he wants actually is "good" from a certain point of view. He can bring peace but to do that he starts a war and his "peace" will destroy and enslave the many to benefit the few which really is not so different from what the Republic is doing already in many ways though not with the killer edge but one of neglect and inaction.

I can relate to Anakin's plight. He and Padme are the most relatable people because they are the young people who rebel against the form of their elders. They have their secret love and Anakin questions those around him. He's part right and part wrong. He's right in many ways but goes about it the wrong way plus of course he, like everyone else in the films, is totally played by Palpatine.

Some people say they wish Anakin was like Luke. Well he is like Luke in some ways but I think that a repeat of Luke would have been totally wrong. This difference was the point. Luke had a great destiny but didn't know it until he was about 20. Anakin found out at 9 he was this Chosen One and knew how ultra powerful he would become. Luke is like Peter Parker becoming Spider-Man while Anakin is if his school bully Flash Thompson became Spider-Man. IIRC Flash later became Venom.

The prequels tell a story that no one ever really does. It's about how the bad guy wins. Virtually every other movie or series of movies ever is about how the good guys win. Their win is inevitable. The only time the bad guy ever wins in those movies is if they are in charge already and/or it's seen in flashback. This time the villain's win in the inevitability. No matter what the heroes do we know they are doomed which goes against all story telling principles from the beginning of time where good triumphs over evil.

In the normal course of events Anakin would overcome his fears for Padme, rise to the occasion and at some point even after even maybe first turning to the Dark Side go back to the light. So for example let's say ROTS plays out exactly the same but Anakin does leap over Obi-Wan cuts him down but holds off killing him right away. Then he brings Obi-Wan back to the ship as the Emperor arrives. Then he truly sees what he's done to Padme and Obi-Wan. Maybe Padme even dies (after the kids are born) and then her loss taps into the good left in him then he battles the Emperor sacrifices himself by taking them both into the lava. That is your traditional cathartic ending whch the prequels could never have delivered unlike...just about everything ever for the kind of story that is told.

 

@Sariel: You talk about how the Force isn't explained in TPM, which makes that film a weaker introduction to Star Wars than ANH, but I would offer the counter-argument that the Force doesn't NEED to be explained in any greater terms in TPM than it is, because we're dealing with characters for whom no major expository explanation about the Force is needed.They already know what's going on.

The OP talks about Obi-Wan being the primary 'hero' of the PT, and while I would agree with that, I would argue that he's not the character who undertakes the archetypal 'hero's journey' that Joseph Campbell talks about in his writing and that defines both trilogies' overall narrative. Rather, I would submit that, in a rather brilliant inversion of Campbell's archetypal structure, Lucas gives the 'hero's journey' to a 'side character' (Anakin Skywalker) and has the 'primary characters' (Obi-Wan and Padme, largely) shape and propel that journey much in the same way that the 'side characters' shape and propel Luke (the primary hero)'s 'hero's journey' in the OT. IOW, Lucas is effectively 'mirroring' the archetypal structure and underpinnings of one trilogy with the other.

 

Now i need to look up who Dengar is......