PT Red Letter Media and other Prequel Reviews

Discussion in 'Prequel Trilogy' started by Obi-Wan McCartney, Feb 12, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Moderators: Bazinga'd
  1. windu4 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 15, 2008
    star 4
    I see the "irony" in that post but at the same time if you guys disagree with my criticism of the PT then I'm allowed to disagree with any criticism of the OT.

    I guess you don't know much about George Lucas and his ideals during the Original Trilogy. Watch this:

    [youtube]
    vinsanity likes this.
  2. Arawn_Fenn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2004
    star 7
    Because it was already done. The most the PT could have done would have been things like helping to cement the potential of CGI in film, ushering in the era of battles between fully CGI armies, and converting the concept of a "prequel" from something unheard of to an industry fad. Wait, it did those things?
    Andy Wylde and Samnz like this.
  3. windu4 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 15, 2008
    star 4
    Lord of the Rings had already tackled the idea of full CGI Armies at war. It was just over a fantasy setting The PT spent the majority of its funds on creating a CGI setting that sucked out the soul of the movie. Acting like prequels didn't exist before the PT came out is just silly.
    vinsanity likes this.
  4. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7
    Who gets to decide what criticism is "true" or "valid"?

    If you want to point out what you disliked about the PT, then by all means do so, but I'm not following how your criticisms would be more "true" or "valid" than someone else's praise, or someone else's criticism of the OT. It's all opinion on a work of art. Do you really feel that it's important for those who don't share your opinion to be "proven wrong" somehow, or can you simply have an opinion?
    Andy Wylde, SlashMan, kainee and 5 others like this.
  5. PiettsHat Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 1, 2011
    star 4
    I hope you realize that when you say things such as the above, it makes it exceedingly difficult to have a meaningful dialogue about the films. And it's extremely frustrating as well. When I criticize the OT, I do so not to "excuse" the "flaws" of the PT -- rather, it's because I have legitimate issues with elements of the original trilogy. I'm sure that you don't criticize the PT simply to bolster the OT -- you have legitimate grievances with the prequel films and I expect you simply want your opinion to be taken seriously and respected. That's all we're asking. There's no devaluation going on. I just happen to like the PT a tad more than the OT overall, although there are elements from both trilogies that I prefer.

    And the PT revolutionized cinema as well. The first completely CGI character and digital ring any bells? Plus, your argument is flawed -- just because something revolutionizes some elements of cinema doesn't make it a particularly good movie. Avatar revolutionized 3D filmmaking but I found it to be a poor film overall.

    It's your right to prefer Luke Skywalker to Anakin. I disagree. I relate to the characters of the PT a bit better and I very much like their stylized dialogue. I love the action of both trilogies. But you must see how subjective this factor is and that I'm able to like the PT as much as you like the OT.

    Plus, I don't particularly feel the comedy in the OT was better than the PT. C3PO at the end of ESB is probably the worst example of "comedy" for me because it jars so heavily with the intensity of the Luke and Vader duel. Plus, I don't think that Jar Jar was a racist caricature. If anything, he seemed to be a reference back to Charlie Chaplin.

    And while you're free to say the PT is on a lower level than the OT for you, for me it's the opposite -- I found the PT to be of a higher quality than the OT (although this is just my personal opinion). And in no way do I think that's "ridiculous." To be honest, your calls for "respect" seem kind of hollow when you say things like that.

    You'll find there's many people who will disagree with you in regards to the OT relying on special effects. If you look at the video someone posted earlier, the reviewer being interviewed said that they were being "generous" in saying the OT was 90% special effects. I disagree with them very strongly (as I think the OT tells a beautiful, human story), but they are entitled to their opinion. And I know people like that reviewer.

    In addition, I disagree with your assessment of the special effects. One of my favorite pieces of scenery was the Jedi Temple library, which is based on a real-world library. I'm actually not that fond of the Hoth base because it looks rather generic in comparison. I've always liked planets such as Tatooine, with unique structures and lots of aliens, a lot more than Hoth or Dagobah, which are a bit one-note.

    Also, more models were utilized in the PT than the OT and they look lovely, in my opinion. And TPM had a ton of location shooting as well. Most interestingly to me is that all of Anakin and Padmé's romantic scenes were shot on location.

    And it's not "Period" or "end of discussion" -- mutual respect means accepting that people will have wildly diverging opinions from your own but that, regardless of how you may feel about the films, their opinions are just as legitimate as your own.
  6. son_of_skywalker03 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 7, 2003
    star 4
    Wow. I didn't realize that Fellowship of the Ring (2001) came out before The Phantom Menace (1999)...oh, wait. It didn't.
  7. Arawn_Fenn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2004
    star 7
    I'm not hearing any examples. Godfather II doesn't count because it's part sequel.
  8. battlefrontboy Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Nov 17, 2012
    star 1
    Muppet Babies. Young Sherlock Holmes. Young Indiana Jones Chronicles, wait that was Lucas too.
  9. -NaTaLie- Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 5, 2001
    star 4
    Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. Technically a prequel but still a self-contained story. And that was Lucas's story, too.

    While the word "prequel" had existed before the PT, it was definitely Episode I that popularized the word and made the whole concept viable on big screen. Consider all the high profile films that happened after the prequels, including Star Trek (J. J. Abrams), X-Men: First Class, Prometheus, The Hobbit. Most of them are a mix of prequel/reboot, which means that unlike Lucas, the writers don't even bother with trying to keep the same continuity.
    Andy Wylde likes this.
  10. Arawn_Fenn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2004
    star 7
    I meant prequel films specifically - and ones tied to specific earlier films.
    Last edited by Arawn_Fenn, Dec 25, 2012
    Andy Wylde likes this.
  11. Sistros Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 24, 2010
    star 6
    good to see everyone is getting along in this joyful season :p

    again I must stress, films are a work of art, it's the exact same as looking at a portrait in a gallery, you cannot "prove" it's good or bad either way, it all depends on the preference of the person looking at said picture

    we might aswell be arguing this

    Person X: hate this picture, it has too many swirls in it

    Person Y: i like swirls

    Person X: you're kidding right? well I heard this kid outside hates swirls too, he's popular you know everyone agrees with hgim, even art scholars

    Person Y: good for him, but this guide said this critic said it's a masterpiece

    Person C: yeah well I listened to this popular kid, it has too much purple in it, what a disgrace

    Person T: I like purple, I'm not the only who does

    Person C: well I'm not the only one who dislikes Purple

    I'll say this one last time though

    there is nothing NOTHING special about this RLM bloke, he neither is the oracle of true art nor is he even an established film critic with years of study, he's a person with an opinion that many people agree or disagree with

    but his words ain't gospel, and not a defense against "poor art"
    Last edited by Sistros, Dec 25, 2012
  12. FRAGWAGON Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 3, 2012
    star 4
    Windu4, you really do need to sit down sometime and watch the documentaries on how Episodes I-III were made. Do you have the DVDs or blurays?

    Also, if you're looking to the past to prove your points on visual FX, you will be profoundly dismayed.

    The basic thing is, for the OT as well as the PT, they were criticized for relying on visuals at the expense of storytelling. The point always missed is that the stories in these films are driven by visual and special effects. And the music!
  13. Legacy Jedi Endordude Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 9, 2012
    star 3
    Question is, which movies did you grow up with the OT or the PT? My guess is that you grew up before the PT.

    I personally find BOTH trilogys to have very relatable characters. While i perfer Luke over Anakin, I never really liked Luke to much till ROTJ. And Anakin, I liked him right off the bat! Why, cause I grew up, with all 6 of the movies. And about the whole Jar Jar thing, he's no diffrent to C-3PO, except he is a bit more anoying, and, a bit more funny at times. Serously, there are times i wanted to shoot C-3PO in the OT.

    I find both trilogys about the same, in almost every way. Except PT Yoda is better than OT Yoda, well at least when it comes to fighting.
    Andy Wylde and kainee like this.
  14. Legacy Jedi Endordude Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 9, 2012
    star 3
    don't bother looking on the BluRays, they are a peice of Junk when it comes to Prequel Documterys. Every thing else though, gold material!
  15. Valairy Scot Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Sep 16, 2005
    star 5
    ^:)^

    And if someone does NOT mention that the OT wasn't perfect either, one is accused of being an uncritical gusher who apparently agrees that the "OT is perfect" but is not capable of recognizing the same when it comes to the PT.

    What do you wish us to say? We like the PT and we're so overwhelmed by, well, something, we overlook its flaws?

    We no more overlook its flaws than those of the OT and happen (usually) to like both, but are forced to "defend" our liking of the PT but saying "See, we hear you on what you see as PT flaws, but we've got to point out the OT has some, too - see, we're not uncritical fanboys."

    It is very frustrating that "apparently" some have decided that one cannot appreciate the OT if one appreciates the PT.
  16. windu4 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 15, 2008
    star 4
    I'm not denying that the Original Trilogy had flaws. It did have flaws. I just feel that the Prequel Trilogy is a loosely disjointed "story" that doesn't compare to the OT and if you like it then fine. That's your opinion. I just have the opinion to say it sucks. I have the opinion to say that I think it sucks harder than Michael Bay movies or whatever the Matrix trilogy was supposed to be. Believe me I've watched documentaries, commentaries and all that other stuff. If I hadn't than I wouldn't have this opinion. It just so happens that when I saw the Red Letter Media reviews they explained my problems with the Prequel Trilogy perfectly. Just because Plinkett insults people (again out of humor) doesn't mean his points are valid. His whole spiel about playing a character who kidnaps women and murders people is basically a humorous statement on how the whole person who would sit down and create these 90 minute reviews is a crazy person who has no life.

    I grew up with the Prequel Trilogy (I was born in 1993) and while I did see the OT first as a little, little kid I did see all the PT in theaters and it did nothing for me. It didn't inspire the awe and wonder that the OT did. All it did was leave more questions, more frustrations and me asking "why?". I feel this way because I am a huge fan of movies and as someone who is a huge fan of movies there are rules and guidelines that George Lucas simply did not follow. Anakin Skywalker didn't develop into a likeable character until the 3rd episode in my opinion. In the TPM he was too cute and too tiny and I couldn't relate to him. In the 2nd episode he whined his way through everything and massacred a tribe of people (many who didn't deserve it) and while I did appreciate Obi-Wan's character I just feel that I can relate to the OT better. The PT? Not so much.

    I am almost certain that I am getting nowhere by arguing here since I am apparently the only one who holds this stance. I still maintain the fact that me being outright called subhuman wasn't necessarily appropriate. Especially since I haven't been tossing around insults. Me saying that one's opinion is ridiculous is different from insulting the person who said such opinion. I am as passionate about Star Wars as you guys. I just happen to be on the other side of the table when it comes to opinions about where the saga has been taken.
    vinsanity likes this.
  17. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7
    OK. I've asked this before and I'm probably wasting my time again, but I'll give it one more shot: who exactly is entitled to make these "rules and guidelines" around which the rest of us are supposed to wrap our opinion on a work of art?

    I have no problem whatsoever with people having a differing opinion on a film, however, I have a big issue with being told that I only hold my particular opinion because I am ignoring "rules and guidelines" for--what? Having an opinion on a work of art? Since when does having an opinion on a work of art require rules? Or to put it another way, I have an issue with being told that my differing opinion is less valid because I am not following your or Stoklasa's arbitrary list of "rules and guidelines". It is possible to have differing opinions on a work of art and have interesting discussions on how our own perceptions bring us to our differing conclusions, without devolving into the "my opinion is better than your opinion" stance that Stoklasa pushes (in a very insulting manner) and which you apparently endorse.

    You aren't, which is why this thread is 37 pages long according to my browser.

    Care to point out the post in which someone here called you "subhuman"? That's what the "report" button is for. Calling Stoklasa or Plinkett "subhuman" is not the same as calling you "subhuman" unless you are, indeed, Stoklasa and haven't told us.

    Exactly. Let your buddy Mike know for us, will you?
    Andy Wylde, Samnz and kainee like this.
  18. windu4 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 15, 2008
    star 4
    For the last time. I never condoned Plinkett calling you guys names. How many times do I have to say that I don't necessarily think his humor or name-calling is funny?

    This is what I mean about the whole thing about movie critics and what not. Due to over a century of movie-making there is a formuliac pattern that all movies follow. Some people stray from the pattern on purpose. Some stick to the pattern or create movies that are basically homages to the movies who created said pattern. George Lucas' OT fits into the latter. He follows the whole idea of heroism as outlined by Joseph Campbell. I feel that he allowed himself to get sidetracked from this when he created the PT.
  19. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7
    So in your opinion, a movie that does not "stick to the pattern" is a bad movie?
    Andy Wylde, Samnz and kainee like this.
  20. windu4 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 15, 2008
    star 4
    That is not what I said. There was no pattern at all to the Prequel Trilogy. As I said not all the movies have to follow a pattern. Some filmmakers are skilled enough to not need one. In my opinion George Lucas didn't have a pattern to his movies or anything at all that most movies need to be successful. I couldn't relate to the characters, the action was so repetitive it was dull, the storyline was both complicated, boring and simplistic and the CGI was just too much.
  21. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7
    OK, so you didn't enjoy the films--that's fine. Enjoyment is a matter of taste, no one has to be right or wrong. I enjoyed the prequels but no one else has to do so. I would argue with your statement that "most movies need a pattern to be successful," however. Once I see enough movies and start seeing formulaic "patterns," I get bored.
    Andy Wylde, Darth Chiznuk and kainee like this.
  22. Valairy Scot Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Sep 16, 2005
    star 5
    I *sort of* agree with you, but less strongly so, on the Anakin character (his "bad" outweighed his "good" IMHO but both sides were present), yet I still like the PT.

    And to say that an evolved pattern is the only pattern for movies is, well, meaningless to me. Maybe there's new patterns developing that are as valid as established ones.
    Andy Wylde and kainee like this.
  23. PiettsHat Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 1, 2011
    star 4
    And I love the PT and I am a huge fan of movies as well. Heck, during my time in high school, I generally watched at least five new films a week, so I've seen quite few movies (which is easy enough when you're renting). In all that time, though, I've never seen a single, strict set of "rules and guidelines" that filmmakers utilize. In fact, should such criteria exist, I believe it would stifle creativity rather than encourage it. Also, as anakinfansince1983 pointed out, who decides this criteria? Expert movie critics? Famous film makers? If that's so, don't you think it's a bit galling of you to say that you are more qualified to assess such guidelines than George Lucas -- the man who directed the second-highest grossing (adjusted for inflation) film of all time? It's why I find the idea that there's some sort of codified system to filmmaking to be absurd -- people like and dislike media for a variety of reasons and there's no accounting for these differences empirically. It's wonderful that you can relate to the OT characters so well. I relate to the PT characters better and I don't think such emotional responses can be so simply described in "rules and guidelines." Our personal experiences and dispositions will greatly shape our reactions.

    You most certainly aren't the only one who holds your particular stance, but consider where you are posting -- the PT forums. Obviously, a lot of PT fans are going to congregate here. I'm not quite sure why you're posting here. Perhaps simply to share your views. If so, I have to be honest and say that your views are ones which I have seen expressed a million times before (in reality, ten pages back on this thread) and, although it's your right to hold them, I don't personally find them convincing in the slightest. Just to clarify, I don't mean that your opinion is "wrong," but that doesn't make it "right" either.

    Have you never paused to consider, however, that Lucas might intentionally be deconstructing many of the elements of the OT throughout he PT in order to heighten and reinforce those factors when they do appear in the Original Trilogy? Take the Clone Wars, for example, which were a sham war that was propagated by bureaucrats and corporations. Portraying it as such is essential to reinforcing many of the themes of the OT -- of brotherhood and idealism -- because it is through these bonds that the Rebellion succeeds while the Jedi fail. Or that by portraying the Jedi as an imperfect Order, Lucas essentially demonstrates that much of their wisdom of the OT was hard-earned, learned through failure and personal experience, but that even so, Luke had to transcend many of the restrictions they still clung to? Or that by portraying Anakin as a neurotic rather than an unassailable, perfect hero, that Lucas was saying a lot about the nature of evil, its inherently pathetic nature, and the internal fragility of its practitioners? The unmasking of Anakin Skywalker and showing him as a ruined, old man in ROTJ segues perfectly into this.

    I'm not saying you're wrong for perceiving the PT the way you do, but I am saying that there are differing perspectives on the films. And those perspectives are just as legitimate as your own. And from some of those perspectives (such as mine), the prequels are wonderful films and make the OT even better than it is on it's own.
    Andy Wylde, kainee and Valairy Scot like this.
  24. FRAGWAGON Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 3, 2012
    star 4
    Didn't you say you were born in '93? How could you not relate to Anakin when he was older than you at the movie's release? Makes absolutely no sense. Being older (born in '71), I've noticed kids these days reach a certain age where they are embarassed by their kid stuff....perhaps this is the case. I'm also going to guess you've felt some pressure to criticize these movies from your peers or older people.

    The thing you honestly need to know, and you are very young, is that these movies have always been designed for children. It's nothing to be ashamed of, Windu4. My generation had Underoos and yours has whatever yours has. It's a Space Robot Movie for kids.
    Last edited by FRAGWAGON, Dec 26, 2012
  25. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7
    I was born in '71 as well and I didn't need to relate to TPM Anakin; he was a cute kid. And AOTC Anakin reminded me of the teenagers that I worked with for years. Whereas when the OT premiered, Leia was the one I wanted to be when I grew up.
    Andy Wylde, kainee and FRAGWAGON like this.
Moderators: Bazinga'd
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.