Saga Positive comments on the Prequel Trilogy

I wanted to share these comments I found online. I get a bit irritated reading all the Plinkett inspired comments on the Prequel Trilogy online, so I found the comments below refreshing. Personally, I like all six Star Wars movies, and most non TCW pre ROTJ EU. I think the prequels and the associated EU is some of the most fascinating, thought provoking fiction I have read and watched. I also think the prequels enhance the Original Trilogy, especially ROTJ. Anyway, some positive comments on the Prequels:

From here: http://chris.pirillo.com/star-wars-prequels-vs-the-original-trilogy/

"I first saw Star Wars in 2005. I was literally dragged to see ROTS. I'll admit, I negatively judged Star Wars for years but ROTS and watching the saga as a whole changed my mind. Since, I saw Star Wars as a whole in a short time span, my perception might be different than some others who waited decades to see the next SW movie. I went in with no expectations and was even negatively biased against it. No one was more surprised than I was to find that I actually enjoyed it. There are flaws in both trilogies. I don't wear any rose-colored glasses or have nostalgic memories of a Star Wars filled childhood to dispute that. However, despite the flaws, I still like both the originals and the prequels equally. (This isn't about which is better but what I personally enjoyed...in the end, it's all subjective)

The prequels gave me this glimpse of a living universe filled with a working political system, a Jedi Order etc. Of course, we can't really get that in the OT because the rebels are fairly isolated from the rest of the galaxy. I enjoyed the prequels because of the sword of Damocles that's hanging over everybody. We all know everything's going to go to hell in a hand basket but the characters don't. They go about unsuspecting till it blindsides them. I find Palpatine fascinating. His machinations really sucked me in and as a poli sci/literature major, I loved the political disintegration along with the Greek tragedy aspects of it.

I hate black/white stories. The prequels are definitely not that. There are so many grey areas: Anakin's many faults, the Chancellor's shifting identities, the Jedi who're so blind to the embodiment of evil that's living right next door etc. I mean, for most of the prequels, the Republic/Jedi don't even know who the true evil is! By the time they do, it's too late..The flaws of everyone in the prequels that lead to their tragic ends is fascinating to me. This lack of gray area is probably why ANH is my least favorite of the originals. However, Empire is amazingly gray and I loved the darker themes.

I loved the originals for very different reasons. The way I see it, I love the prequels for the themes and I love the originals for the plot. And I don't feel that I could love either fully without the other. If I had seen the originals first and seen Vader's redemption, it wouldn't have impacted me as much if I hadn't known where he came from. The inevitable collapse of the Empire, the death of Palpatine wouldn't be as satsifying. There are several silly things in Star Wars like the Ewoks and the Gungans but I just focus on what I like. As someone who would have never watched Star Wars without having seen the prequels, I hate seeing people bash it.

I liked it. I was 22 years old when I saw the whole Star Wars. I wasn't a kid like some people derisively say that the prequels were made for. I don't care about CGI or even lightsaber duels. I couldn't name much of the ships/technology. The romance is secondary to me. But the characters and the themes of the prequels were what resonated with me. As for the originals, nothing beats the father/son storyline for me as I am a sucker for redemption tales. Nothing gets me like the last moments of ROTJ. This was super long winded but I had to say my piece."

 

Other comments:

"I agree. I grew up with the prequels and they will always hold a special nostalgia for me. I became a fan with Episode I, a fanboy with Episode II and a nerd with Episode III. That's when I realized I hadn't ever watched the originals all the way through. I saw bits and parts on TV with my dad, but they never held any charm for me. A Star that can destroy a planet? A puppet Yoda? Ewoks? Everything just looked fake. But I never watched them all the way through. I watched the first one and something inside of me just clicked. I realized that thirty years ago, George Lucas had created a masterpiece that remains to this day. I started looking past silly things like the Death Star and special effects and learned to enjoy the films as I had the prequels. Now, these films hold a special place in my heart as well. I see Star Wars as Lucas intended it to be seen. One big saga, not two separate trilogies. I think they "balance" (sorry for the pun) each other out. For what the original trilogy lacks the prequels make up for. For what the prequel trilogy lacks, the originals make up for. I hope future generations will enjoy all six movies, not just three of them."

" The story of the prequels hold so many historical references, mythological elements and psychological truths that many professors in the subjects rave about the movies. Even big film makers like Peter Jackson and Kevin Smith. There are so much more to the stories than you can see. You have no right to say George Lucas' story is bad especially when every story he's ever created has been brilliant and has become an instant hit.

The reasons people have always been more favorable to the originals are these. The Originals were fun films. George had brought back the old fashioned romantic fun movies that had been missing for so long. The story was about the rise of the rebels. Who would hate fun movies with fun iconic characters? Of course it stuck.

The new ones are more depressing and dramatic which is cool as well, but a larger audience (especially the fans) wanted another fun ride which wasn't possible with the exception of TPM. Of course they're not gonna think much of it.

Fans from the 70's ruined Star Wars. They've been talking so much hate since 1997 and have been putting it in their kids heads and the heads of those who think they're smarter by liking old things. They've started a bandwagon so strong that anyone who watches Star Wars has to at least get some blow from it. So everyone is being told this rhetoric all the time which causes them to hop on like everyone else. Even though they really have no arguments.

The hate on the prequels has kept the prequels from rising to where they could have been up there. The same would've happened if everyone started hating on Empire when it came out, then Jedi. The only real famous one would be A new hope. A movie can only be so great until it needs support from fans to rise.

Sorry dude, but I think you ruined your own memories of Star Wars. I think if you just take your hate cap off and watch them with un bias eyes, you won't hate them so bad. Worked for me."

"I have a few things to say, not sure where to begin:

Ultimately, when the entire story and themes and everything previously deiscussed here were established, could there have been some filmmaker who would have accomplished it all it a far more artful and realistic level? Could someone have made that story and those characters as epic as Peter Jackson and LOTR? Obviously. In hindsight there is always a better way to do something. The point is, George Lucas made it happen and had the vision to start this whole universe, and if for nothing else, we should be grateful and appreciate him for that much. Do we say the Wright Brothers are crappy engineers because they couldnt invent a 787?

In a similar vein, I believe very strongly that star Wars does not, cannot, and should never exist in the solitude of the movies. Star Wars has long been embellished, enriched, strengthened, and made infinitely cooler and deeper through the various forms of media it has experienced. Star Wars hasn't REALLY belonged to George Lucas exclusively for a very long time. I know most people dont have the interest or time to do this, but Star Wars has to be understood within its continuity. there's 30,000 years of history in books and other media. Taking a look at almost any of this for perspective on the Anakin Skywalker saga will reveal something that is so much bigger, more important, and infinitely more interesting than the movies alone. Star Wars, to me, is not defined by the films; the films are a part (albeit an important and entertaining part) of a cultural phenomenon that continues through today and I dont think will ever disappear."

 

"http://chris.pirillo.com/star-wars-prequels-vs-the-original-trilogy"

Relocating to Saga.

 

I think that you are completely right SWfan1020. I grew up with the prequels and I think they are all good and that the prequels have some grey areas and really silly/cheesy. But I also think that people that say they don't like the prequels do like them but just don't want to accept the fact that they do. My dad he loved the original trilogy but he didn't care for the prequels much but he did say that he was glad that they made them because he found closer on what happened with Vader and how he got in the suit and how Leia and Luke were separated and what happened to the rest of the Jedi.

And over all i also agree that they are meant to be looked as a whole not separate because they are probably one of the most epic stories of all times. Like LOTR,The Iliad, and The Odyssey.

 

Devil's advocate: what makes you think this is the case?

 

Could you relocate this back to the prequel section? The title of the link is prequels vs original trilogy, but I only posted the link to show the origin of the comments. The actual subject of this post was to display some positive remarks people made about the prequels in comments on that link, not to debate the prequels versus the original trilogy.

 

Double post

 

Because some of them talk crap about them and say they suck but yet they still watch them

 

Based on the saga-heavy comments in the first two posts, this thread is in the right place.

 

I have to agree with the OP
The Prequels, while perhaps not my personal favorite, are still some of my all time favorite movies; I see no reason to bash them at all.
What I like about the Prequels:
Better battles
Thicker plot
Cooler ship designs
Those are just a few of the things that I really like about it.

 

I don't know why people get all bent out of shape when someone criticizes a movie or set of movies they love. I grew up with the OT, and half of my friends loved them like me and the other half just never took to the movies and didn't see the big deal. I never took offense to the ones who didn't like them, and they were never demeaned because of that.

Like them because you like them and who cares what other's think or what other's perception of the movies are. I like the PT, but love the OT more, plain and simple, and there isn't going to be anyone who convinces me otherwise.

And I can't wait for the ST, while most of my friends could care less at our age.

 

tbh we can say the same for people who criticise the PT. besides imagine the horror of certain fans if people bashed the OT

 

Ah, the Howard Stern effect...

I see your point, and there may be something to it. However, I tend to think that PT-haters that continue to watch are watching because they want to like the films, and are hoping to find something redeeming upon repeat viewings.

I, myself, fell somewhere in the middle. I had enormous expectations for the prequels, but was disappointed when the were released. I didn't hate them, though. I found myself going back, because I did like many components and I was indeed hoping that an appreciation would grow over time. It did. Some scenes and line deliveries still make me roll my eyes, but I've adjusted my expectations and have come to really enjoy the PT, "warts and all" (as they say).

 

I would have to agree with you on that point as well. But I still think there is always something that they will like about Prequels even if its something as small as a non important character or whatever.

 

...It's 2013 and people still can't seem to flatly say something good about the prequels without bringing up some sort of apologetic statement about the OT also being good. At best, I've seen people say the PT is as good as the OT...

Well here's my consolidated, unwavering, wholehearted opinion:

The Prequels are far better than the Originals.

George Lucas started the saga with a trilogy that relied on overused themes and a cliche narrative and really grounded it with the Prequel Trilogy that deals with basic humanity.

Everyday, I'm amazed by how much the Prequels accurately depict real life and real society. One of a million examples in today's society would be how the U.N. has arguably turned a blind eye to Syrian atrocities just as the Republic turned a blind eye to Naboo's plight with the Trade Federation. Or how the League of Nations ignored countries during the rise of German fascism in the 1930's. The Prequels were so ambitious, and so flawless, in depicting how things in reality transpire.

The Prequels delve into humanity and society, into the lives of me, you, our choices, and our consequences. In the Prequels, we get to see nearly everything represented in humanity's history of conflict.

I could write a 10,000 paged essay on the Prequels and still be nowhere near completely detailing the magnificence and complexity of the Prequels. That's because of the Prequel's ability to depict issues and situations that have existed since the dawn of humanity.

Real life is not so easy as good rebels vs big, bad empire. The Prequels, like real life, deal with issues such as dirty politics, moral grayness, different points of view, private interests preceding public welfare, desire(both basic and complex), and the idea of taking a hard look at ourselves and our actions.

 

In so many ways, I agree -- though, at the same time, it must be said that the dialectic of the prequels/originals (saga) is much bigger, and much more complex, than simply a thematic narrative like "man and civilization".

On the other hand, yes. Armond White, reviewing "The Dark Knight Rises" -- some might say mauling it -- claims in one sweeping passage: "Kids don’t realize Nolan is peddling used goods (The Matrix III: Revolutions); or how short he falls of cinema’s classic visionary style and existential paranoia–which Fritz Lang mastered almost a century ago." I believe that George Lucas shows mastery in those areas, too. And I agree with White, provisionally, that populist/blockbuster art nominally fails in those areas.

To expand on this, or maybe to muddy the waters further -- the latter being just as welcome as the former -- I will quote from a film I just acquired and saw for the first time the other day: a little piece of French existentialism called "Celine And Julie Go Boating" (one of Jacques Rivette's more commercial films of the day, if you want to know):

- "I've no idea where they came from. But it's odd, though. They mean something to me, their faces are familiar. They come from far away"
- "Yes, they must"
- "From very far, but they don't seem at all travel-stained"
- "Where do they come from? Zanzibar, Mozambique..."
- "When you've finished with your zzzing and your childishness..."
- "Look who's talking"
- "I don't know if my mind went blank or it's hazy dreams. It's a mishmash. It's like four petrified images of puppets"
- "Yes, puppets... but they shout... eat sweets, faint..."
-"...tell stories... fade from grey to blue... and they swoon"
- "Totter down stairs... and to spice the sauce, a little blood. Wonderful!"

Don't believe me? Watch "THX". Lucas is similarly eccentric / existential (if a very pragmatic thinker all the same).

But yes, I love the themes, love the tapestry. The way one image folds into another. The endless extrusions and tessellations. Jar Jar. Yes, Jar Jar. He, the battle droids, and General Grievous -- they're keys to the whole thing. The big galactic tragedy of ROTS countenanced by the fairy-tale-esque, whimsical scope of TPM. How TPM and AOTC feature location shooting, while earthly locales have been sublimated to the background (literally) in ROTS. The allusions to wuxia and samurai films. The way both TESB and AOTC are extended references to the "Hanged Man" tarot card. The chicanery of Palpatine, the manic symbolism of Amidala's dresses. Planet core sequence. The last 45 mins of each episode. The episode titles. The way the start of the ROTS crawl locks hands with the last spoken word of TPM ("Peace!" / "War!"). The shifting look of Obi-Wan and Anakin in each movie; the more subtle acquiescence to time that Padme shows. The ship designs. The planets, especially Utapau. The art nouveau look of the Gungans. All the beams and barriers in the first episode, all the levitation/flotation in the second, the constant egg symbolism in the third. Buzzy electricity/plasma that keeps cropping up (peace globe, Obi-Wan's confinement beam, Palpatine's handcuffs). AOTC's dream-like, soft-focus look and tone. Dooku, the Neimoidians. The copper-brown look of Geonosis and how Dooku's cape continues this aesthetic, however briefly -- and because it's briefly -- in ROTS. The ambiguous conclusion to AOTC's lightsaber duel(s). Kaminoans. Chrome. Thrones and headdresses. Tion Medon's "weeping blood" eyes. The tone poem of Anakin alone after the slaughter on Mustafar. Order 66. Felucia. The blast doors opening to reveal Maul. The little transitional bit in TPM after Anakin has said goodbye to his mother, heading to Coruscant, with Jar Jar asleep. Holograms. The colour purple. The dynamic "concept shot" (homage to Spielberg) of the camera panning toward the cockpit of the crash-landed "Invisible Hand". Anakin's own CG hands in AOTC and ROTS (specific shots with him and Padme were altered in editing). Anakin zooming into the heavens inside the N-1 cockpit (a bubble confinement canopy). That needle-like gun that Padme uses in TPM. Panaka's costume. The meth-white interior of the Tantive very briefly gracing the filmic canvas of ROTS for the first time as Bail paces with subordinates. Anakin and Padme's pastoral romance. Yoda battling Dooku, Yoda battling the Emperor. Smashed senate pods. The music for the end credits. I could go on and on.

These movies have bloody huge visuals and huge themes. They're epic and apocalyptic. Indeed, all the transitions are wonderful -- chiefly, how things start so unassumingly (yet still so very, very suggestively) at the start of TPM, while the trilogy basically ends in hell in ROTS; yet with a peaceful, hopeful epilogue (an elegy for the series as a whole). Erm, the consumption motif, and in what may be the best scene ever, I recently realized, Jar Jar, as described in the script, is eating, or about to eat, a "dead frog" creature (chuba), hanging on a wire (hmmm), before that vendor immediately seizes upon him, tells him the price, and Jar Jar spits it out in horror/disgust. In some sense, Jar Jar is eating himself, and is appalled when he discovers his own consumption has a price. Padme: "I don't know". What I'm trying to say in all this, I imagine, is that these movies are a huge sandbox: the complicated web of meanings are there, as long as we're prepared to make them; and by making, we see. Just as thrillingly, the movies have a very rich and rewarding "inner" mirror or parallelism with the "making of" the movies -- their own self-assembly; their own self-seeing -- taken into account. Ya know, I was just going through "The Making Of Revenge Of The Sith" (an utterly fabulous book, by the way) and I came upon a cut image of Anakin and Padme kissing near that window in Padme's bedroom (the excised capper to the "I want more and I know I shouldn't" scene -- AKA Chapter 19 (note: also Anakin/Hayden Christensen's age in the former movie) "A Hero Lost"). You know what's beautiful about it? The lighting in the first two-thirds of the image, left-to-right, is wonderfully photo-realistic (while being shot entirely in a studio), with the actors bathed in a delightful tungsten glow (the cinematography of these films is so horribly underrated it's untrue), with the last third of the image -- actually, it's more like the last quarter -- taken up by incongruous lime-green (screen). That absurd juxtaposition is gorgeous: the finished-unfinished look of it; visual poetry in itself. And it's plain, if you flick through the aforementioned publication, that the imagery of the book seems arranged to show different blue/green-screen, backgrounding (and even foregrounding) different photos in different hues. Now, imagine, it will be filled in, but it hasn't been -- yet! In its nascent form, such imagery offers an ascetic lure of its own: you can revel in the purity of its stark, emotive colouring. I think it's Rothko-esque in its beauty.

And never forget the immense operatic sweep of these films: the scope of the melodrama. It's just enormous. And that makes me absolutely love the idea that TPM is so removed from it in some ways (it's more of a prelude), while ROTS, in perfect contrast, is the catastrophic fulfillment of it. Though, AOTC, by Spielberg's own reckoning -- at least, back in 2002 -- is/was Lucas' most operatic movie. And damn, is that a good pick. So, yeah. But Jar Jar. Really, Jar Jar. His overt presence in TPM, versus his profound diminution in II and III, is startling in its thematic potency. Think of it like a symphony. It's really helpful if you do. The music is so lush and vibrant to begin with, but then changes in ways that are mostly subliminal and unsettling; one of the series' brashest -- and most bashed -- components is suddenly almost vanquished in III. Jar Jar has been banished at the start of TPM, gets himself unbanished (kinda) at the end of the movie, but has been banished again, in a deeper way, by the close of ROTS. It's a really stirring motif. It's honestly something to meditate on. These films are, themselves, a meditation. And meditation is necessarily a private affair. As broad and as bold as they are, they also turn away from the viewer at every step, encouraging the viewer to do likewise -- turn away and look inward. But back to music. I like the way each film is structured, with TPM, in particular, being more like a sonata: Naboo, Tatooine, Coruscant, return to Naboo. Lovely.

And before I run out of time -- or is that space? -- I must comment on time. I recently noticed something very weird (when I'm not noticing myself, 'course). "A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away". Obi-Wan in TPM: "Master, we're short on time." Obi-Wan in AOTC: "There's no time." TPM crawl: "While the Congress of the Republic endlessly debates this alarming chain of events". Alarms. Chains. Debates. ENDLESSLY. What's actually going on here; if anything? These films are very, very strange -- or as strange as you want them to be. Accept nothing at face value; but assume it probably has a face and a value. And rejoice in the glorious whole.

 

So... I've seem to drawn out Cryogenic from his slumber. Great!

I've read several of your posts, especially the ones you posted on the RLM's rebuttal thread where you just steamrolled the pathetic attempts of self-proclaimed Star wars fans(although they're nothing of the sort) trying to literally craft false problems. You, Jim Raynor, and LukeSkywalker did a great job, although it was kind of overkill since it only takes one levelheaded person to tear down all their "problems" with the film. I'm sure you'll be as fun talking to as Jim Raynor and I'm glad you replied to my post.

Before I digress into other things, I'd just like to say that I think George Lucas himself went through a remarkable growth between the two trilogies and the two trilogies are a testament to his evolution. With the original trilogy, although full of several brilliant, complex, and insightful ideas (the conception of the GFFA, the force, Jedi), the plot was fairly basic and Lucas fell back on common, more simplistic, and arguably weaker, i.e. cliche, narratives. But overall, the Original Trilogy was superb: bringing forth such a captivating universe.

But if the Originals were groundbreaking, then the Prequels were breathtaking. The Prequels are so dense, beautifully extrapolating from history, culture, psychology, etc. Ever watched the youtube video "What if Star Wars Episode I was good?" on youtube, Cryo? It completely strips all the complexity of TPM and yet the masses on youtube think it's outstanding...

TPM, AOTC, and ROTS manage to showcase a plethora of themes and events that are extremely complex but are still yet so enjoyable to watch. The lighsaber duels and action are the most strikingly pleasing, but even the most dialogue-heavy and political gravitas scenes are fascinating to watch. I've always considered Star Wars prequels the greatest stories to be told; the stories, in my eyes, make Shakespeare and Hemmingway look like 2nd grade writers.

Quick question, Cryo: Have you read Matthew Stover's ROTS novelization? If so, give me your comments.

Anyways, I know you're a big enthusiast of imagery, diction,symbolism, and the more erudite and literary aspects. Your post was too long to quote in full, but that's not a bad thing, so I thought I'd quickly give some thoughts on the Dooku and Obi-Wan scene you brought up:



It's just as Rick McCallum said: "There's so much going on in every scene." The scene does a laudable job in visually symbolizing Dooku's ambiguity and Obi-Wan's(and the Jedi Order's) confusion. Dooku keeps on walking in and out of the sunlight breaking through the room and the dark chamber, symbolizing the uncertainty of his character: do we take him as a good guy or a bad guy? Also, Dooku circling Obi-Wan can also represent the mental circles Dooku is running around Obi-Wan as he continuously bombards Obi-Wan with flat out lies, half-truths, and even complete truths. Obi-Wan's electro-shackles can also represent how the Jedi shackle themselves by not allowing themselves to consider, let alone believe, the idea of a Darth Sidious existing and controlling the Senate.

 

Heh. I need some literal slumber shortly. Long hours awake, short ones spent asleep. I'm all bug-eyed at this end. Just give me a few more hours and I'll be ready to invade a planet and talk with a Charlie Chan accent.

Well, thank you. I tried my best. I could have been a lot more objective about it, though -- *sigh* -- if only I'd studied the films more closely and relied less on memory or my own self-deceiving platitudes. Jim Raynor, on balance, did a much better job than me (with the rebuttal; and in many of his posts/replies for what it's worth). I did, however, enjoy piping up in defence of the prequels when they suddenly became a steaming-hot potato again.

Well, he got married, adopted kids, got divorced, built up several very successful film/production companies, possibly became something of a bookworm, experimented with burgeoning digital technology, lived through Reaganomics, and then made it through a second trilogy in one piece and lived to tell the tale.

As I've (kinda) said before, the OT is more homogeneous, while the PT is heterogeneous; at least, where its lead Skywalkers are concerned. Anakin's journey is chimerical -- the good little boy is corrupted and falls to temptation (then, eventually, at the close of the OT, rises back to good) -- while Luke is a goody-two-shoes: a fundamentally decent guy who ... stays decent.

One trilogy demands nuance up-front; the other can be nuanced if it wants to be. In retrospect, I don't think it's all that surprising that Lucas started in the middle, then went back on himself, but only years later. I guess he still felt he had "much to learn".

Nice phrasing.

I've watched that video and commented on it; much as I commented on the RLM videos.

The masses on YouTube make me shudder for all sorts of reasons.

Well, I dunno if I'd go that far, but it is interesting to note that Lucas has adroitly blended comedy and tragedy together in one unified saga -- which is primarily visual, not verbal. In fact, Star Wars has a deep suspicion of written/spoken language. Consider Threepio's babbling and his rough similitude with the wordy (and gold/yellow) opening text, which is heaped on the screen like an imposing ziggurat after a smothering explosion (the series' title card). We have to get away from the endless deceptions of conventional language; the pan-down (or pan-up in the case of AOTC) is a means of freeing us from the decayed myth of language -- fossilized poetry -- and transports us into a realm of lively analogy and epic visual experimentation.

No, I've never read it. Not in full. It's interesting, though, how Stover describes Anakin's Dark Side -- IIRC -- as a sleeping dragon; and Obi-Wan rides a dragon creature in the movie.

I didn't directly bring it up. More in fragments. But okay.

You can also go in a more esoteric direction with this stuff:

- globes
- spotlights
- rock/carvings
- levitation
- orange/brown/blue/white
- subterranean cavern/caves
- elocution/electrocution
- revelation/resistance
- rotation/ambulation
- crossing swords
- bands/belts/chains/etc.

And so on.

It's like free association -- in essence, just say what you see, then try and group your observations into rough patterns/pairs, etc.

And also be mindful of patterns within the patterns:things that have some linguistic, historic, psychological, material, philosophical, or visual similarity.

It's quite easy. And good fun.

What else I notice about that scene -- jumping back in near the top of my list -- is that the spotlights are like beams cast down by alien spaceships/flying saucers (a thematic preoccupation that Lucas would return to with the last "Indy" movie). In hovering within a bright beam, it looks like Obi-Wan is being abducted and pulled into the mother ship. It's like a slow ascent to heaven. Maybe a measure -- just one reading, remember -- of how much Obi-Wan has grown? Though, of course, his growth must continue (his feet are still barely off the ground), and so he is soon released from the beam and brought back down to solid ground. There is also a slight punishment being enacted on Obi-Wan, of course, and he is electrical (watery/rain/Kamino) blue to his apprentice's (in the next movie) flaming orange/red.

I like what you said about Dooku circling Obi-Wan. I have to think that that whole room and the device were designed to drive the victim mad -- just spinning and spinning with an unsympathetic light overhead (reprise in ROTS: Anakin strapped to a table with harsh light overhead). In some way, the distancing between Obi-Wan and Dooku perhaps represents -- again, just one tiny reading -- how the outer systems are mobilized, now, against the stagnant Republic/Jedi, which is/are literally just spinning on an axis.

There's a slightly erotic component to the scene, too. Anakin is earlier shown in a lacy garment, and at one point, turns away from Padme and the gaze of the audience, with his muscular back emphasized as he draws breath, and now, Obi-Wan is hoisted up against his will, powerless, for the mean time, to stop Dooku's interrogation: female-male and male-male interest respectively. I also feel like Dooku wants a good look at a modern Jedi Knight here. Again, there's a slightly erotic charge to it, but it's more about sizing up his enemy, and maybe lamenting what he's left behind, I think -- though you can really put the emphasis where you want. Dooku does have to literally look up to Obi-Wan a bit, while Obi-Wan is slightly looking down on Dooku. Obvious allusions apply. These men are, ultimately, looking at each other from the wrong angle.

Just a few basic thoughts.

 

Yes, I think that Star Wars greatly benefited from his hiatus, allowing time for both his skills, and thus the movies, to grow and sharpen. Of course, his imagination was already stellar as seen in the first trilogy.

I thought TPM really delivered the key aspects of Anakin's nature as a child: spirited, optimistic, talented, adventurous, and driven by a sense to help others.

On the nuance, I don't think many had a problem with it. The RLM crowd seem to be jaded in their spite for all things within the movie, good or bad, and the nuance was another scapegoat for the bashers to pin their blame upon.

Yeah? How'd that go? I've heard of that they block all those who do not slavishly agree with their absurdity.

True, but you did bring up a lot of stuff in fragments.


I've never really delved into the shooting and visual directing of the films, although to my untrained eye, I thought they were excellent. But I like how you brought up all of the apt shots and fluidity within the movie, comparing them to a symphony. Of course, one would never hear about the sensationally aesthetic side of the prequels in a discussion with a prequel basher; they are always quick to omit the 99% of the movie that they watched and then complain about suffering from a "confusing plot" or a "poorly directed" movie.

 

Oh, they know a Dark Lord exists... "only the Dark Lord of the Sith knows of our weakness"...

But accepting that Dark Lord's alleged control of the Senate is a different story.

 

I have always thought the PT just as good as the OT. The OT has its share of flaws too, ROTJ especially. In fact, ROTJ is my least favorite SW film.

 

Sometimes criticism reveals just how much a person loves something. When we deeply and intimately love something or someone, it sort of gives us permission to critique it or them. Also, when fans complain, it shows in an inverted way how much they really do care about the films and plight of the characters, instead of just responding to them with apathy.

 

Wow, I am starting to see a few negative comments about the OT here, as I hope the Mods start to warn people about OT bashing (Since this is a POSITIVE thread about the PT) the same way they warn people about PT bashing when its vice versa.

I still don't understand why this is in the Saga Forum, when its about the PT???

 

Because the link in the OP's post mentions the original trilogy.

 

Two things:

1. There are plenty of positive things to say about the PT, without having to pretend you know the psychology of people who feel they are poorly made. Can't one just accept that some people don't like them?

2. The complexity, accuracy of real life parallels, thematic ambition, and human truths embedded in the prequels have absolutely nothing to do with the prequels as *movie going experiences*. These are all the virtues of the basic story line, which more people seem to love than their execution. If you're going to pretend to know the psychology of "haters", I think it will help diminish the frustration of those who appreciate the prequel *stories* on a deep level, like I do, to distinguish between the storyline and it's *execution*. Maybe most of the criticism springs from the latter and not the former. People finding the latter lacking, so they arndt sticking around long enough to appreciate the former. A parallel might be if the only production of Hamlet ever produced were a bad high school production. Would people really appreciate the genius of the Hamlet play if that was their introduction to it?