PT The Characters of the PT

Compared to the OT, the PT characters, for the most part, are stiff and hollow.

The camaraderie of the OT characters was well-done. Their interactions seemed genuine, were fun to watch, and were funny at times.

Overall, the PT characters' interactions fell flat (at least in my opinion)

How do you think the script could have been revised so that the PT characters could have had similar camaraderie?

 

I agree about the dialogue. Lucas seems to be much better at creating ideas than at dialogue.

I didn't mean to say that all of the interactions were subpar; the ones you mentioned are good.

It's just that the OT interactions were better, and the majority, not all but most, of the PT interactions felt flat to me.

 

More screentime of Anakin and Obi-Wan together in TPM.

 

Have to agree, but these were done with the old serials in mind so that kind of dialogue probably did not help. Also when you factor in the lack of chemistry certain actors had together it makes dialogue and interactions stand out. A good actor can rise above that though, and several did here.

That said, I agree with the OT sentiments too.

 

It all hinges on Anakin, and his attitude just sinks the whole thing.

Which was sorta inevitable, seeing how he had to fall to the dark side. That's the difference between the OT and PT. The OT was fairly well adjusted folks, while the PT has a maladjusted ticking time bomb ruining all the fun.

But not really, because the dark side doesn't mean you can't be a fun person to be around a significant amount of time. Doesn't mean you can't be charming and funny.

Take Palpatine, he's the dark side incarnate, but he's a fun guy, he knows how to have a good time.

Switch Anakin and Palpatine's personalities and the PT is a hilarious disaster.

 

Having Anakin being played by two different actors didn't help. There was little chance for Hayden and Ewan to form a bond and it showed. I would also have not had Qui-Gon take the role that he did in Menace. From a story standpoint, it really should have been Obi-Wan like in the first draft.

 

TPM should have been Episode 0 and get 3 movies on Hayden. TPM Anakin is nice but completely pointless because of the 10 year jump.

 

First of all, I love the PT and enoy the films as much as they allow me to. But, if it were up to me, I'd have changed the format of the characters a little bit.

I think what was great about the OT is that it had the "big three" (Luke, Han, and Leia). And it allowed us to follow and grow with their characters across three films. The PT should have done that. But instead, we don't get much time when all three of the primary characters here (Anakin, Obi-Wan, and Padme) are together sharing adventures the way that Luke, Han, and Leia did. They are separated for long periods of time, keeping secrets from each other, and played by different actors in Anakin's case. Also, the time gap of ten years between TPM and AOTC was too large, IMO. I get that GL's plan was to have Anakin discovered as a child with high Force potential, but I'd have preferred him be just a regular Jedi in a Star Wars where no Jedi falls to the dark side. Not even Dooku, since that to a degree hampers Anakin's fall. I wanted to fall in love with Anakin, only to be broken hearted by his ultimate decision to betray his friends and all he cared about for the sake of power. I would like it to have felt much more tragic.

Again, don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of the PT and realize that GL gave us his story as he envisioned. That's more important than what I would have done. But if I were in his shoes, I think mimicking the formula of the OT would have done wonders.

 

Nice theories, Among the Clouds. I think George's original idea of an older Anakin would have worked quite well (and still appeal to the younger set.)

I understand and enjoy the Prequels as they are (and like that we see Obi-Wan's growth and failures as much as we do Anakin), but Anakin as ay young Jedi out of the gate would have been fascinating.

 

I like the PT characters, and this is probably a unpopular opinion, but I like them more than the OT characters.

 

I do like a lot of the PT characters (Anakin, Padme, Obi-Wan, Maul, Jango). But the OT probably has better characters.

 

The PT characterisation is a little hit and miss for me.

The OT, particularly ESB, effectively tells the story from the characters' point of view. It makes the characters far more real and relatable. Luke's journey from ANH to ROTJ is the biggest example, you definitely feel Luke's journey and can see how he is responding to situations and his environment, why he does what he does, and how he changes.

For me the PT characters work better on a symbolic level. Don't get me wrong, there are some decent character moments in the trilogy (ROTS particularly is designed around Anakin's arc, the movie "turns" with him), but I get the impression I am watching a mythical representation of archetypes rather than feeling that I'm watching real people. I'm a big PT fan, I think there is a lot put into their make-up that goes unappreciated, but the obvious disconnect in styles between the trilogies perhaps makes the PT demand more from the viewer. You really have to be a fan and watch the movies several times to comprehend and relate to the material, whereas IMO one of the OT's biggest strengths is it welcomes newcomers as well as encourages rewatches. There is stuff going on in both trilogies that encourages some understanding of the material (eg, without ANH's introduction to the force, a lot of the other five movies makes no sense), and somewhat "invisible" arcs/forces have always been a part of Star Wars, but I really think the PT is specifically catered to hardcore fans more.

If you pay attention, the prequels can be pretty complex, and I think some of the characterisation suffers as a result. There are a fair few genuine human character moments (such as Anakin leaving Shmi in TPM), but it helps the PT to look at the big picture and how each moment effects the overall flow of the main arcs. The main story is good, and I don't feel nothing for the characters, quite the contrary, but there is a lot to read between the lines for the character arcs to pay-off, which I think some people don't bother doing.

 

i think part of it is the first movie starts out with a completely different dynamic. There is no romance, there is no lovable rogue. It's basically a father-son movie in a way with Qui-Gonn and Anakin. The Queen is there and she has sort of her own story going. The second one well, some don't like Anakin and Padme's romance. Obi-Wan spends most of the movie on his own. Even in ROTS he spends some pivotal time off on his own on Geonosis. I like all the characters, but i don't think the primary 3--Anakin , Padme and Obi-Wan got as much time together as would have benefited them onscreen.

 

I do enjoy PT somewhat despite being heavily flawed. There are several characters I definitely would change but the main one would be Anakin. I'm sorry but I don't see the "good man" Kenobi was talking about to Luke in the PT. I did't mind him in TPM that much, but in AOTC he came across as whiner, worse then Luke IMO, a bit of a creep, and also a psychopath. In ROTS he was a little better but he was still a idiot for falling for Palps and murdering his own wife for crying out loud. For me, I would change him to be a strong and compassionate leader, someone you would feel sorry for and relate too when he falls. That's just how I would do it as making a character relatable will make the characters turn more tragic.

 

True. I agree with what you said, but I just wanted to chime in that Obi-Wan's abscence at different stages is a significant part of Anakin's character arc. It starts when Qui-Gon is killed and he can't train Anakin, something that symbolically sets up Anakin being more likely to fall.
Obi-Wan's abscence during the Tusken slaughter is actually hinted at in Obi-Wan's dialogue - "Tattooine? What in blazes is he doing there?" - and while Obi-Wan certainly means well I think it shows that he wasn't right for the job of being Anakin's Master. We even ge our first hint that Qui-Gon is still watching Anakin, hearing "Anakin, no!" during the slaughter.
Then in ROTS, the Council, falsely thinking they are defying Palpatine, send Obi-Wan to Utapau instead of Anakin, which ironically leaves Anakin with Palpatine, right where Palpatine wants him. Significant (yet unstated) plot strands like this IMO can account for why some characterisation in the PT is lacking.

I mostly think Anakin's characterisation in AOTC is at fault here. In TPM, while Anakin is maybe a less interesting character than in the other films, the character to me seems to be what he is supposed to be. The Utopian age of innocence represented is significant to me, and particularly since we got to see Anakin as a Jedi in ROTS, the characterisation I find fitting here. Also, in ROTS's beginning, we got Anakin basically as described by Obi-Wan in ANH (yet the dark direction his character heads can make some people think it wasn't enough).
AOTC however, for me at least, seems kind of all over the place. Some argue that we are intentionally meant to dislike Anakin, but I don't believe that, as we see clear attempts at giving him a sense of humour, and some references to his adventures with Obi-Wan to make us connect to him. Without some of the negative aspects of his character in the movie, he clearly is portrayed as (at least the beginnings of) a tragic hero. I just think the kind of up and down nature of his character in this one film throws off the arc for the whole trilogy.

 

Well the characters in the PT for the most part are supposed to be stiff and hollow. Like the Jedi order, politicians, queens, senators etc. That is the way they present themselves. If you look at the OT and you can see the imperials carry themselves very much in the same way the upper class people in the PT do. The way the PT characters represent themselves is just a sign of their times. The OT characters, main characters anyway are more loose and not so regal in their presentation. Leia was the exception. But she also had a more "rebellious" side to her as well. Mon Mothma in ROTJ seemed to carry the PT characteristics about her in that small scene. As well as the rebel leadership too. But the pilots and soldiers of the alliance were very much like the main cast of the OT.

 

If you look at their roles and their places in society one could see that as being true. But I would also use words like regal, noble etc. to describe them. They are not bounty hunters and smugglers and such. So the upper class of the PT would have to act in a particular way. Just like royalty in our own world. Like I mentioned the imperial officers and higher ranking officials have a certain demeanor to them in the OT. Which I see them as upper class citizens that were probably part of the upper class of Coruscant or the inner core worlds of the republic/empire.

 

I didn't say all of them. Just a majority of the senators, leaders, Jedi order. As I also stated earlier in this thread that Leia was an exception. But in the beginning of ANH she carried herself like she was a member of the senate. Then she got rescued and she was suddenly a whole new person.

 

I'm in the agreement that while I enjoyed TPM, it really ends up being practically a non-factor in the grand scheme of not only the PT, but the saga as a whole. It's actual important or points are boiled down to "the Jedi discover the Sith are still around, Anakin enters the picture." Other than that, the film doesn't do anything important as far as development. We don't see Obi-wan interact with Anakin all that much, Anakin and Padme are to young to develop a romance, and Maul is killed off before he has the time to become a primary antagonist.

The second film certainly feels more pivotal, but again, kind of serves a prologue to the actual important part of the story, the clone wars. It explains a lot, and develops a lot, but at the same time it also doesn't really tell enough. Anakin and Padmes relationship is expanded, but frankly, it doesn't matter since Padmes screen time in episode 3 is non existent. It's a lot of wasted potential. Episode 3 is the big movie. It tells what it needs to. It serves as the only good legit PREQUEL, setting the field for the trilogy that preceded it. I enjoy 1/2, but they really don't have much bearing on 4-6. They could just as easily have been EU adventures. 2 less so, but TPM really didn't need to be a film. It's a spin-off really.

The most important part of the PT era, other than RotS, was TCW animated series. The PT really should have been trilogy of TCW, developing Anakin and Obi-wan as brothers, with romance on the side. It would have made his turn more of a pay off, and showed more examples of him being a strong Jedi, other than being whiny.

 

I understand that many feel this about the "camaraderie" differences or the 2 trilogies, but I dont feel any change is needed to the PT in that regard. As an adult, I feel the camaraderie of the OT to be a bit shallow, tropey and dated. I felt the character relations of the PT to be much more subtle and complex, altho no doubt also having a fair share of sappy cliche as well.

 

I think the characterisation of the PT is forced, shallow, and dated.

 

And that is completely your right. I am sensitive to the sentiments you put across point-blank here. They seem quite prevalent. On the other hand, I like the characters inherent to both trilogies, even if I acknowledge that the prequel characters -- and certainly, I think, the "prequel three" -- are a bit colder and more remote.

This, I think, is an excellent point -- though, of course, it doesn't wash away the issues other people have with the characters, nor should it. I think there is a sort of "mosaic" effect at work in the prequels, and the characters are more sympathetic and engaging, in my opinion, if you ride with them through their broader arcs (which you just said). The characters in Lucas' first feature, "THX-1138", are hardly the warmest or cuddliest characters the man has ever come up with, but they keep me interested nonetheless. Arguably, there, as in the prequels, it's the intermixing of visual symbolism, world aesthetics, and subtle emotional beats that is responsible for maintaining my investment and generating meaning that has an intellectual and emotional pull. But to each, their own.

It is completely your right to see it that way, but I just want to throw down with a quick defence of Anakin in AOTC. In large part, the character is meant to be a brooding mass of contradictions, as we're seeing him at the most confused and complicated part of his life, and the very up-down tapestry of the film seems to poignantly reflect that. As Paul McDonald asserts in his excellent book, "The Star Wars Heresies: Interpreting the Themes, Symbols and Philosophies of Episodes I, II and III", at the start of his twelfth chapter, titled "The Learner"....

"As a young man, Anakin Skywalker is very much a center of conflict, both internally and externally. Charged with bringing balance to the Force, he himself is an uneasily balanced whirlwind of contradiction. The narrative (of AOTC) bears this out, with George Lucas not only having to establish him as someone in the mold of the traditional hero, but also having to chip away at and undercut that mold throughout the film ... it requires countless tensions in the performance and execution, not to mention any number of intentional inconsistencies in the character."

Lucas himself more or less says the same thing in the commentary track over the "bedroom"/"whining" scene where Anakin complains about Obi-Wan to Padme for the first time as she packs to leave.

If Vader himself is a mass of contradiction (powerful yet weak, covered-up yet naked, etc.), then there is arguably a great deal of cogency in depicting his mythic middle-passage into villainy with deliberate ambiguity, imbuing his fate with a sense of tragic unmaking, providing a rich kernel of thematic truth as commentary on his fateful decline.

That doesn't mean you have to like the topsy-turvy, herky-jerky world of AOTC or its central character, but many of these fault-lines that AOTC opens up or exposes -- about Star Wars, about its main protagonist -- are quite deliberate, in my view. Indeed, it sort of does ruin a straight-arrow approach to Anakin's journey, even as it remains consistent in a very primal sense with Joseph Campbell's tormented "initiation" stage of the Hero's Journey. Again, however, Anakin is not a hero, but an anti-hero, and I don't find it surprising or troubling (artistically, anyway) that he is shown in a fragmented, contradictory manner.

But the depiction of Anakin in AOTC is clearly a sticking point for many. I won't claim that what Lucas did makes the character easy to like, or was the perfect way to show everything, but he is at least true to a basic schema in Clones, in my opinion. It's a romantically unromantic movie.