(Possible) flaws with the prequel trilogy?

Before I get to the main point of this post, I want to clarify something:

I can not be considered a PT basher by any stretch of the imagination. I was first introduced to Star Wars almost exactly three years ago by a friend when AotC was first coming out in theaters. He gave me his copy of The Phantom Menace, which was the first SW film I ever watched. I liked it enough to see AotC in theaters the next day, which completely blew me away. It was only after watching these two films that I was able to watch the original trilogy. When I first watched the OT it seemed almost like a letdown, and I didn't enjoy any of them (with the exception of RotJ) as much as I had PM and AotC. However, over time, my views of the two trilogies have more or less evened out.

But while I still enjoy the PT, I am bothered by something that keeps eating away at me: the fact that the PT could have much better than it was.

I understand that this is Lucas' story, and he can do with it what he wants. But it still seems to me that somewhere along the line he made a couple of extremely important mistakes that have made the entire PT flawed in at least one manner.

My first point is in regards to The Phantom Menace. We know how the first film of a trilogy must set up the story, and introduce the characters and settings. Both PM and ANH did this, and both are enjoyable as stand alone movies. But with the OT, Lucas followed ANH up with ESB, which takes place anywhere from a couple of months to a couple of years after ANH. In the PT, Lucas followed PM up with AotC, which takes place an ENTIRE DECADE after PM.

By going with a film that takes place 10 years after the first film, Lucas has to essentially re-introduce EVERYTHING that he spent Episode I introducing. This more or less makes PM a wasted film, because, while it is certainly enjoyable to watch, it simply doesn't hold up well in the context of actual moviemaking and storytelling. It also affects AotC, because Lucas must spend a large portion of the movie reintroducing everything, instead of moving the story along with characters we already know. This is especially true with the character of Anakin, who, despite being the main character in PM, is basically a COMPLETE STRANGER to us in the beginning of AotC.

I guess I'm also thinking that the big "problem" in AotC (the rather clunky love story between Anakin and Padme) is directly a result of this. I know the dialogue has taken a heavy beating, and while some of the dialogue is terrible ("I truly, deeply, love you")most of it doesn't bother me that much. The fireplace scene, for example, "works" for me if I suspend belief (i.e. that anyone in our world today would ever talk like Anakin does in that situation). The bigger problem to me is that the relationship between the two seems a) rushed, sandwiched as it is between everything else that Lucas must squeeze into the movie; and b) just not believable. I know this has been discussed ad nauseum, but looking at this objectively, we really don't see convincing motives for Padme's falling into love in this film. It's easy to understand to see what Anakin sees in Padme, but as far as Padme goes, it's a lot harder for me to suspend belief in this case.

I am curious what would have happened if Lucas had chosen to close the gap between PM and AotC, or shuffled around the characters in PM. For example, instead of making Anakin a nine year old slave and Padme a 14 year old queen, why not make them both nine year old slaves (or 14 year old slaves) who have grown to become best friends during their enslavement? Doing this would still allow the storyline with Anakin's mother, and if Lucas had still chosen to go with a 10 year gap between PM and AotC, it would help explain the love story a lot better. Anakin and Padme would both be freed, but would be separated at the end of the movie because Anakin is taken to Coruscant under the guidance of the Jedi.

Any thoughts, comments, criticms on this idea?

Strilo e

 

I have to agree that the decade thing was a really bad idea. He spent half of AOTC reestablishing everybody.

 

You are right. There is nothing more to say.

 

I agree for the most part.

I think that it would have been more fluid if Anakin were about 12 or 13 in TPM. It would have closed the gap and made Anakin more believable. He doesn't even seem like the same person because in essence, Jake Lloyd looked and acted like he was 5 or 6, extending the gap even further between he and Padme.

Padme being a Queen had no significance. It built no story for her. Why was she a Queen? Elected? That makes no sense. In other words, there was NOBODY eligible or qualified to be an elected Queen on Naboo other than a 13/14 year old naive girl?

I would have liked it if Padme was Queen due to something that happened to her parents, making her the Queen by default. Then we'd see that Naboo was vulnerable, having been forced into a situation of having a young monarch. It would have been seen as more desperate and also as though Palpatine would have even more influence over her since he is the older, wiser statesman. We could have used our imagination to realize that Palpatine was behind the death of Padme's parents long ago.

The idea of a an elected Queen is rediculous and meaningless.

I am one of few who think that AOTC works perfectly and should not be changed. Maybe the only change I would make is having mentioned that Anakin and Padme DID see each other or make arrangements to see each other in 10 years but never got around to it (kinda like pen pals). But I think that the main thrust of TPM was weak in retrospect and the only good parts came in the suggestions at the end of the movie.

 

I think that it would have been more fluid if Anakin were about 12 or 13 in TPM. It would have closed the gap and made Anakin more believable. He doesn't even seem like the same person because in essence, Jake Lloyd looked and acted like he was 5 or 6, extending the gap even further between he and Padme.

TPM is the foundation of the PT. There are many subtle things in the story that are not meant to be "spelled out" at that time. Anakin's reaction to Ki Adi when we senses his thoughts about his mother for example. The audience can identify more with Anakin because it's understandable that he would miss his mom.

Padme being a Queen had no significance. It built no story for her.
Why was she a Queen? Elected? That makes no sense. In other words, there was NOBODY eligible or qualified to be an elected Queen on Naboo other than a 13/14 year old naive girl?

Keep in mind this is Star Wars. Without going to far off topic. There are other concepts of ruling that involve "youthful minds" Young men and women uncorrupted by the cynicism of the world maybe open to new and different ideas and ways of solving problems. Remember in AOTC. Obiwan lost a planet. Yoda asks for "a thought". It was a youngling that says the archive had been erased. Meanwhile, the librarian said "if an item is not in our records, IT DOESN'T EXIST" and Obiwan simply thought it was impossible for the archive file to be erased.

I would have liked it if Padme was Queen due to something that happened to her parents, making her the Queen by default. Then we'd see that Naboo was vulnerable, having been forced into a situation of having a young monarch. It would have been seen as more desperate and also as though Palpatine would have even more influence over her since he is the older, wiser statesman. We could have used our imagination to realize that Palpatine was behind the death of Padme's parents long ago.

This is WAY beyond the scope of the issues in the film and is really a different story altogether. The problems on Naboo weren't caused by a young monarch. But rather the grip of the Trade Federation.

The idea of a an elected Queen is ridiculous and meaningless.


I disagree. It allows GL to give an example of the beauty that existed in the republic before the "dark times". At the same time have the innocence of a child that has no clue about the dangers that lie ahead. But to each his own.

I am one of few who think that AOTC works perfectly and should not be changed. Maybe the only change I would make is having mentioned that Anakin and Padme DID see each other or make arrangements to see each other in 10 years but never got around to it (kinda like pen pals). But I think that the main thrust of TPM was weak in retrospect and the only good parts came in the suggestions at the end of the movie.


Interesting.

 

I think it's a waste of time to ask questions like "Why didn't GL make them both 9 years old?"

How about why didn't GL call Ewoks "Teddygrams"

How about why is the sky blue?

I like your name though, RIP Calvin and Hobbes

 

Please note I didn't ask "why didn't", I asked "what would"

 

I happen to think clones is more of a throwaway than TPM. In fact i saw the possibility of them falling in love in TPM (granted I knew she would play mama skywalker at the time). So even though the clones relationship is a little sketchy you can see that she had feelings for him way back when everything started getting complicated, then if you skip clones entirely the relationship works well again in sith. just something about attack of the clones that doesn't fit...

 

I know this has been discussed ad nauseum, but looking at this objectively, we really don't see convincing motives for Padme's falling into love in this film. It's easy to understand to see what Anakin sees in Padme, but as far as Padme goes, it's a lot harder for me to suspend belief in this case.

I think this is a valid point. But does anyone think AOTC gives Padme a good reason to fall for Anakin? I'd love to hear opposing views.