Saga Prequels or originals?

Discussion in 'Star Wars Saga In-Depth' started by Rolf Larsen, Mar 8, 2014.

?

Which do you prefer: Prequels or Originals

The prequels 17 vote(s) 23.0%
The Originals 29 vote(s) 39.2%
Both 28 vote(s) 37.8%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Cryogenic Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 20, 2005
    star 5
    Wonderful response, Eddie!
    Andy Wylde and Jarren_Lee-Saber like this.
  2. Ingram_I Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 7, 2012
    star 2
    [IMG]
  3. DRush76 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 25, 2008
    star 4

    I can't agree with you there. The OT is different in storytelling style and characterization than the PT. But I don't think it's better. And I'm one who first saw the OT as a kid back in the 70s and 80s.
    Andy Wylde and Jarren_Lee-Saber like this.
  4. Cushing's Admirer Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jun 8, 2006
    star 6
    For me the OT is different and better. Yet, differences aren't bad.Different things appeal to different people for different reasons.
  5. FRAGWAGON Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 3, 2012
    star 4
    I like the PT better because it had more models, miniatures, practical FX and real locations than the OT.
  6. I Are The Internets Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 20, 2012
    star 7
    Both are equal in my eyes.
    ezekiel22x likes this.
  7. Darth Eddie Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 14, 2013
    star 4
    I ALWAYS forget that this is actually true.

    Also true: There's more minimodel work in each individual PT episode than in the entire Peter Jackson middle earth continuum.
    Andy Wylde and FRAGWAGON like this.
  8. Garrett Atkins Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 11, 2013
    star 4
    And yet the CGI-to-models ratio is so much higher. Very misleading.
    Yanksfan likes this.
  9. FRAGWAGON Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 3, 2012
    star 4
    YMMV. For my part, I prefer real, practical FX like the PT.
    Andy Wylde likes this.
  10. Darth Ardyti Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 1, 2014
    star 1
    Darth Eddie, I have to say that for the most part, I understand what you're saying, and actually agree with you on some of it :). Not all, but it would come down to nitpicking and we'd just end up going in circles over a slight difference in opinion.

    I do want to point out one thing though

    That's technically not correct. TPM is among the first to prominently feature a large CGI supporting cast, but Casper, released four years before TPM, was also use of CGI characters in a live action feature film. That's not counting the CGI dinosaurs in Jurassic Park before that.


    Sorry. Personality quirk. Otherwise, you do make some strong, valid points.
    Darth Eddie likes this.
  11. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7
    Amazingly we all agree on a few points:

    The OT is more fun.

    The PT is more thematic and religious.

    For that reason I prefer the OT.
  12. Cushing's Admirer Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jun 8, 2006
    star 6
  13. Jarren_Lee-Saber Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 16, 2008
    star 4
    As a even harder Tolkien-film fan than I am a Star Wars film fan, (and as someone who watched ALL the documentaries on all versions of both LOTR, The Hobbit, and the Star Wars Saga) I'm gonna need evidence of that!
  14. Darth Eddie Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 14, 2013
    star 4
    Unfortunately it's just something I heard somewhere, I don't even remember where exactly. But for consider for a moment that ILM built countless models that would only be seen in a couple shots, like certain Theed, Mos Espa, and Coruscant exteriors, in addition to the bigger setpieces. And then there are all the mini shots that are easy to misinterpret as CG shots, like a lot of capital ships, hangars, the podrace and geonosis arenas, even a bunch interior sets like Kamino were miniatures - and I'm only scratching the surface here. The LotR films had about three of four big setpiece models per film, and they all get a LOT of screentime.

    In short, one model shot of the Courscanti skyline equals like eight Barad-Durs.

    I had the dinos from JP in mind when I said that, but to me they're more of a threat than actual characters. Good call on Casper though, I forgot all about that one, although our buddy Jar Jar was certainly the more sophisticated model.

    Just to throw a bone in Lord of the Ring's direction for Jarren's sake, Gollum was the first CG character who was actually accomplished it mission unambiguously, thanks to unassailable characterization and DAT SUBSURFACE SCATTERING ZOMG.
    Last edited by Darth Eddie, Mar 14, 2014
    Andy Wylde likes this.
  15. Jarren_Lee-Saber Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 16, 2008
    star 4
    Fixed :D
    Don't really want to distract from the actual subject (and I know that each PT film has more models and miniatures than the whole OT), but have you seen the 18+ hours of documentaries on the LOTR EE ??
  16. Darth Eddie Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 14, 2013
    star 4
    Of course I have! Why would I not? :p

    IIRC a lot of those models were re-used from film-to-film too, which counts against LotR's number of models in my book.

    And honestly, the further off-topic, the better. I mean just read the thread title.
    Jarren_Lee-Saber likes this.
  17. Tekro the Bounty Hunter Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Mar 14, 2014
    Original Trilogy because the characters have more humanity in their personalities, the story is hardcore yet fun and light-hearted, and the sets and props feel more real.

    In my opinion the Prequels take themselves far too seriously, there's no focus on who to care about, all the characters feel almost blank and soulless and the actors feel like they'd rather be in another movie. And to make it worse, The Clone Wars cartoon series just plain panders to children for the sale of toys in the very worse meaning of the word.
    Yanksfan, Garrett Atkins and Sarge like this.
  18. Cryogenic Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 20, 2005
    star 5
    An apt summation -- from my POV -- but I don't prefer the OT.

    And the PT's funness is underrated.

    What's also worth noting is that some of the PT's miniature work is startlingly complex.

    The Mustafar lava rig, anyway -- which Camille Paglia, in her fantastic article on George Lucas from 2012, calls a "triumph of installation art":

    http://chronicle.com/article/article-content/134942/

    I'm not sure the sainted OT offers us anything quite that good, for all the practical effects that were used.

    There was certainly a lot of innovative craftmanship that went into the making of the PT.
    Andy Wylde and Jarren_Lee-Saber like this.
  19. Garrett Atkins Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 11, 2013
    star 4
    Most of the miniature modeling was done in I and parts of II. The rest was basically a lot of CGI.
  20. FRAGWAGON Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 3, 2012
    star 4
    The OT did have some great stop motion animation.

    But for sets and models, props and real locations, you can't beat the amazing breadth of the Prequels. It's not a contest, though. IV-VI just end up being more of an intimate tale. At least visually.

    Episode III alone has more model work in it than the rest of the series, combined.
    Andy Wylde likes this.
  21. Darth Eddie Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 14, 2013
    star 4
    The toy marketers pandered to kids because that's their job. The show creatives weren't really in close collaboration with the toy people; they were more focused on expanding the lore and telling fun stories.
    But semi-ironically, George Lucas himself was heavily involved with the toy marketing back before the original film because he saw it as a killer money making oppurtunity - and he was right.

    You're mostly right about that but even RotS tends to have a lot more practical effects that people realize.

    That mustafar duel sticks out the most to me. No other duel in the saga contains so sharp a contrast between the stuff I think is cool and stuff I think is lame. My favorite parts of that fight are all practical - the sabers, sets, choreography, the miniature (and oh my lord that miniature is amazing, thanks @Cryogenic for pointing that out), there's even footage of actual volcanoes used to backdrop at certain points, and you would never tell unless you already knew! And then all the stuff I dislike about it happen to be the CG elements. All that lava and swinging and jumping and... stuff. Eugh, not for me.

    Hmmmm, seen as how I just sorta agreed with Garret on III *not* having that much practical stuff, I might need my memory jogged... Where/what all was models in RotS? Kashyyyk, mustafar, utapau and bits of coruscant I'm sure... the rest of the movie has me pretty much hoodwinked.

    I mean, ONE of us has to be wrong :p
    Last edited by Darth Eddie, Mar 14, 2014
    Jarren_Lee-Saber likes this.
  22. Garrett Atkins Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 11, 2013
    star 4
    Model work does not matter if you are just going to cartoonize it into CGI.

    That's why the OT and TPM look the most realistic in the series.
  23. Ingram_I Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 7, 2012
    star 2
    What does this mean?
    Andy Wylde and Jarren_Lee-Saber like this.
  24. Garrett Atkins Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 11, 2013
    star 4
    For example, build an elaborate miniature of Mustafar and then make the planet look like a video game.
  25. Ingram_I Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 7, 2012
    star 2
    How, exactly, does it look like a video game?
    Andy Wylde and Jarren_Lee-Saber like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.