Reasons why the Originals are better than the Prequels

Well, I posted a "Reasone why the Prequels are better" thread on the PT Forum, so I thought that I'd go ahead and do one for the OT here.

Well, I have stated many times that I LOVE the series as a whole. It has a symmetry that I love, as well as being chock full of great ideas, great characters, and great action. However, taken as two separate entities, the OT can stand alone, whereas the PT needs the OT to survive. It is only taken as a whole that the PT seems relevant.

So, I LIKE the PT, but LOVE the OT. Why? Well, for many reasons, and no, it's not JUST nostalgia. This is how I break it down:

3 MAIN Reasons why I LIKE the PT: 1) action scenes 2) Storyline and ideas 3) characters

3 MAIN Reasons why I LOVE the OT: 1) storyline and ideas 2) characters 3) action scenes.

For me that's a really big shift, because action scenes should ALWAYS come in last in considering what makes a movie great. The story should always come first, with the characters coming in a VERY close second. And while I like the storylines for the Prequels just fine, and while they do have kick ass action scenes, I do not find the characters as likeable or relatable as those in the OT.

Why? Well because Lucas was going for a different performance dynamic in the PT, and while I admire what he was going for, I ulitmately think he miscalculated his own abilities and should have consulted with someone who was better at directing the type of dialogue he wrote. Lucas is good at directing "real" performances, as evidenced by American Graffitti and ANH...perhaps performances like those he was striving for in the PT are beyond his directing capacity.

At any rate, I think that Lucas was striving to give the PT characters a more "medieval/epic" feeling, ala Lord of the Rings, to fit in with his "more civilized time" motif, and for whatever reason, they simply come across as wooden for a lot of the time. Say whatever you want about the acting in the OT...and I'll be the first to say that they definitely weren't amazing performances...but there was definitely an earnestness there that is missing from the PT. The OT characters interact like real people; the PT characters come across like they are in a medieval play most of the time.

Look at how people talk to Yoda in the PT, and compare that to how Luke talks to him in Empire. Luke makes us believe that he is talking to a REAL creature, because he talks to the puppet as if it WERE a real creature. Luke believes, thus, we believe. Instead of having to concentrate on sounding formal and "medieval," Hamill could simply talk to the puppet like he really would in real life, so it was easier for him to get into character. The "medieval" inspired dialogue that the characters use in the PT remind us that the cast is talking to a computer generated Yoda, because they seem to be concentrating more on how they sound as opposed to who is listening to them. It has been said that the best acting lies in truly REACTING, and that is lost among the spectacle of the PT. It is the action scenes and stories that get me through the prequels, but the characters leave me a little cold.

So in summation, the OT is better because the characters are more relatable and earnest. Let's hear your thoughts...

 

(The PT mods left that open? And it went well so far? Hard to believe, but it's true! Whoa. I'm just saying that usually threads like these are locked long before they get ugly, because usually all of them did get ugly real quick. But I'd love to have a parallel thread, so... let's see)

---

I can't think of much to say on-topic. I'm one of those rare types who like them equally. Maybe for different reasons, like you, but it's not only the action for the PT. CT actually has two better space battles than the one we got in TPM so far. Gotta chuckle here for a bit rememberin the RotS trailer, though ;)
AotC is, along with ESB, my favorite Star Wars movie. Because of the atmosphere. The whole mystery, the assasination plot, the surprises for the Jedi (Clone Army), the feeling of the settings (Kamino is wonderful, and Tatooine is just pure Star Wars (which works towards TPM's advantage)). And how can you not feel something for Anakin? We've all been unluckily in love, we all wish people would let us do what we want/ know we can do... and while only some of us have experiences with the death of a (close) relative, we can feel sorry. If the acting makes us feel sorry is entirely up to your own point of view.

The CT may simply have more of such good moments (debatable), but I do think it's "just" nostalgia. Although the word "just" is cruel there. Nostalgia is a wonderful thing. I actually wonder sometimes why peopl are so adamant on claiming "it's not just nostalgia". As if that lessened their opinion. I'd say it supports that opinion!
The CT is better because it's nostalgic. The PT can't be, it's too new. Sometime it might be, though.

 

I would tend to agree with the first poster, especially with the dialouge. The PT has bad lines to begin with, so itd be dificult for the actors to say them well.

 

Yup dialog definitly better in the OT. Acting way better in the OT except for some bits of ROTJ.

I did absolutely love the Maul fight from TPM. I still think that it is the best action sequence of the entire saga, but i will have to wait for ROTS to pass any judgement. I rank the films as follows...

1. ESB
2. ANH
3. TPM
4. AOTC
5. ROTJ

 

I feel there's not much difference in quality, but I like the originals better because it's the more interesting half of the story.

 

>> At any rate, I think that Lucas was striving to give the PT characters a more "medieval/epic" feeling, ala Lord of the Rings, to fit in with his "more civilized time" motif<<

Actually, I think it's more like the old serialized Flash Gordon/Buck Rogers (with really big budgets) meets Hong Kong Action Cinema.

I wouldn't say Medieval. Feudal, maybe.
The "civilized time" seems represented in the serials.

 

Simply, for me, It's the 3 things that will always seperate the OT from the PT. And these rules apply to most great action adventure films,

1) The element of the ticking clock. The main characters are always on the run or trying to achive a goal before time runs out.

2) Characters that we like. In the first 30 minutes of New Hope, we are introduced to all the main characters that will be part of the saga to the end ( Yoda and Lando charm us immediatly in the next chapter). In those 30 minutes, we know who we like ( and who we like to hate also). It's not a guessing game having to wait until the third film to form an opinion.

3) Humor. No maater how desperate a situation may be, a wise crack or character moment reminds us who these people are. Empire is considered the darkest of the OT,yet has the best lines and laughs.
Also, think Die Hard. Alien(s),Termenator(2),etc.
Who thought "Pirates of the Caribbean" was going to be anything before it came out, but it turned out to be so much fun to watch.

I fail to find much of this in any of the PT.

My underlining point is not so much to bash the PT -AS- the PT. But to point out how bad the PT is because they are just bad films. The earlier post is correct n stating that the PT needs the OT for story connection. But I'll go even farther to say that it needs the OT just for the pre-developed cemented fan worship to keep it alive.

Otherwise if the EP1 had came out without any history to help promote it's anticipation, it would now be remembered on a lower level then other contemperary films as say "Starship Troopers","The Fifth Element, and "Independence Day". Each of these have their good points and faults. No large history to promote it. But each stands on it's own, developes the characters quickly and wraps up in 2 hours. And I prefer watching these supposedly lesser films anytime. Fun, Exciting.

Don't get me wrong, I do see the faults of the OT.
For example, "Jedi", to me, suffers from -NOT- the Ewoks, but from faulty pacing and bad directing and needs the other films more. But at least it follows the above rules.
It's fun to watch and I care about who I'm watching.

The PT is such a bore (so far). Only what is expected in Ep3 should of been the entire PT. I imagine if Ep1 started with the OB1 and Anikin already involved in the Clone wars coming together in a friendship more in the vain as Luke and Han did and focus on that, their characters, while doing their jobs instead of endless senate meetings, jedi council debates and trade federation talks. Ugh.

I've rambled way too long. I just get worked up reading the other boards, although entertaining, as the blind lead the blind.

p.s
It's wonderful to see this topic descussed rationally.
I attempted this ages ago on a PT board and only recieved childish attacks instead of constructive conversation.

 

There's really nothing more I can say that wouldn't sound like a complete rehash of what others have posted. I like the humor, the action, the urgency, the tension, and the overall fun feel you get and WANT to have while watching these movies. The editing is inspiring, the characters well drawn, the villians menacing and powerful. You get a real sense of impending danger for your heros in these movies. The're not perfect. Jumpcuts, wonky sabers, bad fx etc.. and most of that only happened in the new releases. The original versions are far superior to a hell of alot of what Hollywood tries to pass off as a summer blockbuster nowadays.

I can't express how lovely it is to see music put to film so brilliantly like it is in these movies. They showed me things were possible with film that I've never seen any ANY film do before. I like having no jar jar, no yipee, interesting characters with real problems, seriously cool villians, planets getting blown up at the push of a button...

I think everyone should know that RotS is 60% of GL's original PT outline he wrote back when he made the OT, so that films should be a lot closer to the orig. flicks. Some stuff in the PT just isn't executed very well. The duel of the fates really is the best saber fight but look what we had to do to get to that point...and to think Amidala's castle has so many long bridges and power beams in one room... whoooo. cgi much? It's a great collection of ideas, don't get me wrong, but it needes someone there disciplined enough to help bring to the screen in a way that would just work logically.

That's my opinion, free of charge. I hope you like it.

 

Well put Deeysew.

Lucus did better (as most artist) with limitations. He was great. The same can be said for Speilburg too.
In their earlier days, more was said with less and they created masterpieces.
But,
Once all colors possiable are available and no one to pull him back, it's all a muddy mess.

 

First and foremost are the characters. Han, Leia, and Luke we love. They are a pop culture phenomenon. They aren't the greatest actors, that is not the point of Star Wars. But they have great chemistry, and they were all cast to perfection to their part. You really root for these guys. When the classic trilogy was on top, every guy debated who they wanted to be, "Han or Luke." Does anyone now say I want to Obi-Wan or Anakin? That may not be a fair analogy, but it is true.

The originals has the ultimate bad guy, Darth Vader. Again this may not be fair to the prequels, because the bad guys in the prequels are not what they might seem in the first two movies. But Darth Vader is the 3rd baddest villain in movie history according to the AFI list, behind Hannibal Lector & Norman Bates. That is pretty damn good being 3rd against every movie every made!

Finally the expectations of the prequels were tough to meet. A majority of Star Wars fans who saw the original trilogy in the theaters were kids, and now they were adults when the prequels came out. They were expecting the second coming, and I don't think Lucas ever had a chance. I knew this would be a different story, a grey-area story, where there isn't a clear good vs. evil. Many fans didn't want to see a 10 year old Anakin, they wanted a 20 year old already kicking ass. Many fans didn't want heavy romance scenes between Anakin & Padme because they thought it was too cheesy.

I do believer ROTS will bring back those old fans, and I like the way Lucas really developed Anakin from a little boy to an utterly evil person. But unfortunately, after ROTS, many fans, not me included, will say, " Instead of 3 prequel movies,all Lucas had to make was ROTS, that was the movie that had everything I wanted in it."

 

I think the OT are better made films but the PT is much more fun to watch.

 

I like all of them. I think because the Originals are so legendary and the Lucas has been under pressure to make the Prequels just as good as the Originals. With the Orginals there was strickly good vs. evil (aka the rebellion vs. The Empire.)

But the with the Prequels, there's more of a political arena with the story. And that part of the story in the prequels had to be shown because of we had to know just how The Emperor came into power. The politics aspect of it revolves around the Emperor.

I don't dis any of the movies. I love them all just the same.

DK

 

I prefer to look at the films as a saga which consists of six separate entities which constitute two trilogies that are positioned in a deliberate aesthetic and tonal contrast. I view some episodes more favorably others, but each film, while separate, feeds into the collective fabric of the saga. Anyways, that doesn't fully address the matters specified in this particular thread, so let me elaborate on some of those issues.

The original films, particularly "A New Hope" and "The Empire Strikes Back", exhibit a greater narrative and storytelling economy - they have been trimmed of any excess plot threads and extraneous character details, and are consequently the most fluid films in the saga. Objectively, "Return of the Jedi", "The Phantom Menace", and "Attack of the Clones" all suffer from pacing issues which could have been remedied in either the editing room or at the screenplay development stage - certain scenes or parts of sequences in the three aforementioned films seem curiously unformed, flat, and underdeveloped. Yes, "A New Hope" is occasionally slow, but it isn't plodding, and it progresses with a grace and deftness which shames many contemporary productions - Lucas may have made the picture "by the seat of his pants", but his filmmaking is neat and uncluttered. "Empire" is similar in this way - it is drained of all superfluous material, containing only that which is essential to it story, and thus moves in a more cascading rhythmic pattern that is both economical and accomplished.

"It's a kids film" - indeed, the "Star Wars" pictures are geared, save for the upcoming installment, towards children, but "A New Hope", for example, does a better job of negotiating its broad appeal than, say, "The Phantom Menace", which in some ways has been infantized (however, I think that it is a good film). The argument could be made (and it has been, I'm sure) that while "Hope" appeals to children, "Menace" panders to them; I think that there is some validity to these claims in terms of tone and conception, although "Episode I" has a labyrinthine political story that is likely too dense for the younger set - "Hope", on the other hand, is a more classically woven tale which is specifically designed to tap into the recesses of our psyche. The OT characters are archetypal figures who are meant to mirror (and vicariously fulfill) our adventurous wants; they are not adorned with a multitude of flourishes and traits - instead, we are meant, I think, to project our own psychological complexities onto them - the characters become more interesting than they might appear because we tend to personalize and identify with them. The prequel films are not structured in this way, and therefore the same level of accessibility is not inherent in their form - there are more interesting and layered characters, such as Anakin Skywalker, but he isn't superficially endearing, nor a classically-formed hero figure as is the case with Luke in "A New Hope". There is an instant familiarity with archetypes which can cause audiences to feel more comfortable, especially in the context of a strange, science-fiction landscape; the prequels are notably less inviting in that manner.

Dialogue in these films has become a staple for moderately ham-fisted declarative verbiage, which is something I confess to having a weakness for, and yet it is generally more consistent in the OT, as well as less clunky, and wittier. With the prequels, Lucas is attempting to emulate a particular sort of classical formality that is based in Sirk melodramas and 1930s Wyler pictures (for example) - this is a precarious matter which presents for the author a great many opportunities in which to fail, and indeed, Lucas has not overcome some of the deficiencies in his ability to craft exposition and speech. The dialogue in the OT was a bit of a delicate balancing act as well, and while not all of it works (particularly when you consider it more objectively), it is more fluid, natural and amusing. I mentioned wit - the dialogue in the original films is wittier

 

I like the OT because it has better acting and with the exception of the TPM duel I find the battles in the OT to be better, especially the ROTJ DS2 battle. No CG crap can ever replace that battle. Ofcourse I haven't seen ROTS yet and I have heard that is the ultimate space battle that is even better than ROTJ.

 

I can't compare them. I was a kid for the OT, I was a adult for the PT,I percieved each differently , I think they are Star Wars but Separate from each other.

 

To me there is one MAIN reason.

The time.

No movie had those special effects in 79', so when ANH came out...it blew the crowds mind and it changed the movie industry tremedously. If ANH was released in 2000 then it wouldn't have been that big I think. Yeah people would have thought it was a good movie but it wouldn't be revolutionary because people would think it was just another Sci-Fi movie.

 

Now people are spoiled.