PT Editing in the Prequel Trilogy

First off, I am not a prequel basher. I feel the prequels are a valuable part of the saga and I appreciate much of what they bring to the GFFA. That said, I experienced something when watching the prequels (both in the cinema on original release and on later viewings) that I haven't experienced with any other films. I am usually not particularly aware of the "mechanics" of film making when I watch a film, I tend to get swept up and carried along, but with the prequels I keep coming across moments that sort of trip me up. Instances, where I'm left thinking "that edit feels about a second too late" or "is that really the best take of that scene that they had?".

For example, I still remember watching The Phantom Menace in the cinema and loving the sinister atmosphere as Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan land on the Trade Federation ship and are led to the meeting room, but in the sequence where the protocol droid gives them both drinks it feels as if the scene goes on too long. To me, the rhythm of the scene and the film to that point demands a cut after Qui-Gon takes his drink, but instead the scene lingers to allow Obi-Wan to take his drink too and even a fraction longer, to the point where I get the distinct impression that Liam Neeson and Ewan McGregor are just waiting for someone to shout "cut". It screams out at me every time I see it.

Another example is also from the Phantom Menace, the scene on Naboo towards the end of the film as Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan wait for the Gungans to be located. Qui-Gon is saying that Obi-Wan is wiser than him and will become a great Jedi. The whole take seems off to me. Almost like it was a warm-up run. Liam Neeson even seems to stumble over one of his lines a little bit. He certainly doesn't give the impression of being comfortable with the dialogue. Whenever I see that scene, I find myself thinking "why did Lucas not say 'great, let's give it another go'?" Perhaps he did, but in editing they still chose that take.

The point I'm (slowly) coming to is that the prequels often come under heavy fire on a number of fronts. Many of the attacks are plot or character based. I don't agree with those criticisms. I mean, I see why people take issue with some of those aspects, but to me they are amongst the most interesting parts of the prequels. In some ways Lucas seems to have made a conscious choice to do things differently - to go without a Han Solo-type character; to make the Jedi seem rather ... reserved and unsympathetic; to switch between characters without a clear driving protagonist. I like that Lucas was aiming for something different and unexpected and, if I squint, I think I can kind of see what he was trying to achieve.

For me, what lets the prequels down are not those points that seem to be genuine creative decisions, but rather lots of individual moments where the basic mechanics of film making seem to be slightly off. A New Hope was famously criticised in some quarters as slow, plodding and at times dull in the original rough cut, before George Lucas (along with the credited Editors) used all his editing skill (which we are often led to believe is his real passion) to sharpen and hone the film into a lean, exciting movie that zips along and ruthlessly retains the viewer's attention. For me it is this that is missing from the prequels, the viciously tight (Oscar winning) editing that gives the original trilogy films so much of their energy and pace. There are numerous dialogue scenes in the prequels that just feel loose and lacking in energy and I wonder if the original Star Wars felt this way before Lucas set to work with his razor blade, trimming wasted seconds of silence, adding cuts to give some energy to scenes that were falling flat.

Does anyone else have problems, like I do, not with the prequels as a whole, or at a conceptual level, but rather with lots of individual moments that feel like they could have been sorted in post-production with a tighter, more creative and more selective edit?

 

Well, editing is mostly subjective, nobody can really say "this is right" or "this is wrong" (after all, if it's edited that way we must assume at least the editor/director FELT it was right).

Personally, I do pay attention to the "mechanics" of filmaking (framing, editing, lighting, camera movement....) and I find that I like the way Lucas edits his movies very much. I like the brisk, quick and energetic pace of his movies, his way of creating emotion with a lot of restraint and apparent "coldness" (lack of slow-motion, close-ups...). But I admit that's just me. Often I find certain styles of filmmaking that pull me out of the movie, thinking "that angle is wrong, that cut was too quick/long", but again, I know it's my personal taste and style. (for example, I find that the last four Harry Potter movies are totally wrong from an editing point of view).

Long story short, I can't agree with you. I don't feel such a different between the prequels and the originals, honestly. All the movies are fast paced, tightly edited (in fact, that's a common criticism at the SW movies, and specifically the prequels, which are overall even more fast-paced than the originals!).

I think discussing the specifics of the editing of each scene would be fascinating, but I'm afraid we would find every one of us has a different opinion. For example, the scene you mention about Obi and Qui-Gonn having a drink, for me the cut is just right. Is it because I've become used to it? Is it because the music demands to wait that long? (very often the music helps to make an edit feel "right") Is it because I just happen to like that pace? For whatever reason, where you feel the editing is wrong, I find it's right just the way it is.

(but I would certainly argue that the prequels are indeed faster-paced and edited than the originals, the average lenght of each scene is clearly shorter in the prequels).

 

Personally I don't find any problems with the editing.
To be honest I find it better than in Episodes 4-6 .

 

I've done a fair amount of editing (some professional, some for fun). I think ROTS is a terrifically edited film, possibly the best paced and cut in the entire saga behind A New Hope (for me, nothing in cinema history beats the editing skill shown in sequences like the Trench Run), for me at least. But with AOTC and TPM, I do get a little of what you are saying. I think part of it may be because Episodes 1 and 2 are simply the most mundane films of the saga. The focus is not yet on a galaxy immersed in death and destrucion, our heroes are not fighting a war or on the run, and so by nature of the story we are exposed to many more mundane sights than we do in the other films. There's a greater frequency of conference table meetings, meals, politicians standing in half circles, establishing shots of people pacing slowly across an elegant Coruscant room, etc. Because the Original trilogy established Star Wars as this very raw, tightly wound action roller coaster, seeing this other side can be really jarring, and if the camera lingers on it for even half a second longer than "desireable" by an audience member, the effect can be displeasing and make the film feel sluggish.

Obviously, not everybody has that problem. I have a suspicion that few on this section of the forums will support your assessments. But I get what you are saying.

And lastly, I agree with you on that Qui Gon line. I LOVE Neeson in TPM, but that line read has always felt a little off to me, almost like it was actually his first time saying it out loud.

 

I love editing decisions like that

Some still frames that linger for a moment with the characters not really doing anything seems a little stylistic of the PT; I'm assuming George might have had a fascination with that technique back then

One of the most prominent moments of that I can think of is when Padme asks Anakin to hold her in ROTS, where she vents her frustrations/sorrows about the war and what's going on, and it shows a good 2-3 seconds of them simply embracing with no real movement or activity going on

This tends to happen a lot in the OT though, but not as noticeably. For example, one could, I suppose, complain that the camera lingers on a little too long when Vader is brooding to himself on Endor after Luke is captured, but I think it adds something

 

What reads or looks right varies person to person. Sometimes moments of non-action are meaningful and add impact. Pacing on the whole likewise varies person to person. I much prefer the pacing of RotJ and SW to any other in the Saga. But then, I am not much for action.

 

I agree that lingering, long shots are not in and of themselves a bad thing. A film needs to breathe, and flow, with slow sections and fast sections. To look at your example, the scene you mention of Vader brooding after his conversation with Luke feels perfectly timed to me. It was a powerful moment and we were being given time to imagine the thoughts that might be going through Vader's mind at that point. The long pause seemed like a completely appropriate decision. However with the example I gave, holding the shot so we can watch Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan take their drinks lacks the necessary context to make the pause have any value. The audience is not being given time to empathise with a character or to draw a breath (we're only a minute or so into the film) with the result that it feels ... odd, to me at least. Also, the prequel trilogy has several of my favourite slower scenes from the whole saga - Anakin appearing before the Jedi Council from The Phantom Menace, Qui-Gon and Anakin both at night on Tatooine and on the landing platform before the return to Naboo, Obi-Wan and Dooku on Geonosis, Palpatine's scene with Anakin at the opera from Revenge of the Sith. These are slow scenes, but the editing feels tight, each cut feels meticulously timed, pauses are held just long enough to enhance the scene rather than undermine it.

Also, to address a point brought up by Oierem, about the prequels having shorter scenes than the original trilogy, I think that is more about the writing than the editing. The prequels tend to follow separate and parallel plot threads while the originals largely tend to follow one dominant plot thread (with the exception of the Luke/Han & Leia split in Empire), meaning the prequel cuts back and forth between the different storylines, resulting in shorter scenes. Where I think the "slack" editing in the prequels is most obvious is in the dialogue scenes, which often feel quite still and lifeless.

The original trilogy has some lengthy dialogue scenes too, but none that sag under their own weight, in my opinion. Ben and Luke talking in Ben's hut, Luke complaining to Owen and Beru over dinner, Yoda and Luke while Yoda is cooking, Han, Luke, Ben and Chewie as they discuss rescuing Leia, 2 different Death Star assault briefings, are all fairly dialogue heavy scenes in one room, but the camera moves, the cuts between characters are well timed and pauses between dialogue are kept to appropriate lengths. By comparison, in many of the office-based dialogue scenes in the prequels, the shots chosen and the timing of those shots feel very basic, like a rough cut that no one got around to tightening up. I think the best way I can put it is that, with the original trilogy it feels as though the edit is controlling the raw footage, making what was shot on the day into something else, while in the prequels, it often feels like what was shot on the day is controlling the edit.

I realise this is all subjective, but I guess I'm trying to put my finger on what it is about the prequels that I find difficult and wondered how other people felt. I understand and respect the choices Lucas made re plotting. I like the characters. I don't think the dialogue is necessarily in a worse league than the original trilogy, and the cast are undeniably extremely talented. I don't even mind Jar Jar. But something about them feels off at time, and the only way that I can describe it is a certain flatness to many of the scenes, often the ones in which little is at stake. When the prequels want to go for grand emotion, I feel they hit it. I feel the "big" moments almost all work (and Revenge of the Sith which is full of big moments works best of all), as do many of the quiet, thoughtful moments. It is the mid-level scenes, often the sequences of characters talking about the plot in a semi-circle where it sometimes feels like all the life is sucked out of the films, and that reminded me of the description of the original rough cut of Episode 4, before Lucas got creative with the editing and dragged the film into shape. I wonder if some tighter editing in those scenes I find flat in the prequels might improve them.