PT The Prequel Trilogy and Historical Revisionism

With the release of The Force Awakens, the history of the Prequel Trilogy is being subjected to another bout of historical revisionism, and so, I wanted to create a thread to address this topic.


Myth: The Prequel trilogy is hated or strongly disliked by the general public today.

Reality: The idea that the Prequel trilogy was/is a complete failure is a narrative perpetuated by the media-geek-internet complex, websites like Screen Rant and Cinemablend for instance, and without a doubt, most people who write for those sites believe that the Prequel Trilogy was a failure.

However, by any metric I can find, it seems to be the case that the TPM and ATOC are considered by the general public to be average-to-okay films with IMDb scores of 6.5 for TPM and 6.7 ATOC similar to the scores of Captain America: 6.8 and Wolverine 6.7.

Furthermore, ROTS falls somewhere between very good and great, but falls short of outstanding, as ROTS has an IMDb score of 7.7.

Compared with ROTS, only 3 out of 30+ Marvel films have scores higher by any significance at all (GotG 8.1, Avengers 8.1, X-men: DoFP 8.0); and only 1 out of 25 James Bond films has a score higher by any significance at all than ROTS (Casino Royale, 8.0). Thus, despite 10 years of negative press towards ROTS (which can't help but hurt public opinion), ROTS is still considered to be at least a very good film by the general public.

Truly hated films have scores like these: Batman & Robin (3.7), Superman IV (3.7), Fantastic 4 (4.3), Battlefield Earth (2.4) -- Wow, that's low!

Very bad films have scores like these: Green Lantern (5.6), The Fantastic Four (5.6), Godzilla (5.3), After Earth (4.9) -- but, hey, let's hire the guy who wrote this turd to write a spin-off film because he disliked the PT!

ROTS also placed in Empire Magazine's Greatest Films of All Time as determined by its readers. It was ranked 224. ROTJ was ranked 120, ANH was 6, and TESB was 1.



Myth: The Prequel Trilogy was made for adult fans of the Original Trilogy.

Reality: Lucas made the Prequel Trilogy with the exact same intention as he made the Original Trilogy: to make a modern mythology for children.

As far back as a 1977 interview with Rolling Stone magazine, Lucas said that his goal with Star Wars was creating a modern mythology for a generation of young people who had none. Furthermore, it's very clear Lucas succeeded in his goal. Virtually every one of us who is here fell in love with Star Wars when we were children or at least teenagers. I doubt more than 5% of posters here were exposed to their first Star Wars film when they were adults.

As such, I would argue the PT works just as successfully as the Original Trilogy for its intended audience. (A Gallup poll released after the release of TPM shows that 90% of parents whose children had seen the film said their children thought the film was good, great, or one of the greatest films ever.) If you plop an 9-year-old in front of the TV, that kid will enjoy the PT films as much as the OT films. What is more, that kid really doesn't even distinguish between the OT and the PT; to him, it's really one big story. Sure, kids will watch a lot of junk on the boob tube, but they haven't become enamored with many franchises in the way they have with Star Wars, including the PT. Harry Potter is perhaps its biggest rival among children. It was the PT that rejuvenated the franchise by helping to create another generation of Star Wars fans, and the value of Lucasfilm increased greatly after the release of the PT.



Myth: the PT was widely rejected by Star Wars fandom.

Reality: While it is hard to measure this, it seems that the PT did 2 things: 1) It split the fandom and 2) It also created many new fans. Furthermore, from all appearances, they were very enthusiastically received by children who are among the most passionate fans of Star Wars out there.

Among adult fans of the OT, the reaction to the PT after its release was mixed: some loved it, some liked it, some thought it was okay, some mostly disliked it while acknowledging some interesting elements, some hated it.

However, the PT also created many new Star Wars fans. These new fans are not second class citizens. They are part of fandom too, just as new fans created by TFA should be considered Star Wars fans.



Myth: Within fandom, the average opinion of each Prequel film is inferior to those of the Original Trilogy films.

Reality: By the best measures at our disposal, it does seem that 2 of the 3 PT films are considered inferior to the OT films. At the same time, however, ROTS is considered on par or superior to every OT film except TESB.

Starwars.com conducted a poll that asked Star Wars fans to select their favorite Star Wars film. With more than 70,000 respondents, these were the results for favorite Star Wars film: TESB 42%, ROTS 21%, ROTJ 16%, ANH 12%, AOTC 5%, TPM 4%.

The Saga forums also has a ranking thread for the original Saga films. Here is the breakdown after 499 votes for favorite Star Wars film:TESB 44%, ROTS 21%, ROTJ 15%, ANH 11%, ATOC 4%, TPM 4%.

When 2 different data sets reflect virtually the same results, that indicates that those results are very predictive. In short, these polls accurately reflect fandom sentiment.

Thus, there is very strong evidence that while generally TPM and ATOC are generally the least well-regarded Star Wars films among fans, ROTS is highly regarded, as ROTS has been rated the 2nd favorite film of the franchise in 2 different but apparently highly accurate surveys.

Some might argue: "Well, ROTS is only so high because Prequel fans like it so much." 2 responses to this. 1) PT fans are Star Wars fans too, so even if that were true, that doesn't matter. 2) That doesn't seem to be true. If you look at the results at the Star Wars films ranking thread, you will find that most lists intermix PT and OT films. Only a minority have all 3 OT films at the top, and even fewer have all 3 PT films at the top. Since most lists mix OT and PT films, this shows that ROTS's high regard does not only stem from fans who favor the PT, but rather from fans who appreciate the entire Saga. (http://boards.theforce.net/threads/...vorite-to-least-favorite-poll-added.50020703/).

For the results for "favorite Star War film of the original Saga" from the rankings thread, click here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...Yyup5rApkqj1w4/edit?pref=2&pli=1#gid=64242003



Myth: The original Star Wars is the favorite or 2nd favorite Star Wars film among fans.

Reality: While A New Hope is considered 2nd only to TESB by the general public according to IMDb rankings and its ranking on the recent Empire magazine poll, ANH places 4th in both our internal Saga poll and the Starwars.com poll. It is considered the favorite Star Wars film by only 11% of forum poll respondents, after ROTJ 15%, ROTS 21%, and TESB 44%, and it is considered the favorite Star Wars film by 12% of respondents on the starwars.com poll, again after ROTJ 16%, ROTS 21%, and TESB 42%.



Myth: The Phantom Menace was met with a lukewarm or negative reception by the general public initially after its release.

Reality: While The Phantom Menace received mixed reviews by critics, TPM received a strongly positive response by the general public.

Gallup conducted 3 sets on polls in the weeks after the release of TPM.

These were the results for their poll asking participants to describe their reaction to TPM

......................................TOTAL................May 21-23..................June 4-5..................June 11-13
1 of the greatest films........5%.......................9%.............................5%..........................3%
Outstanding......................38%.....................52%...........................30%........................33%
Good................................36%.....................32%...........................32%........................40%
Fair...................................17%.....................15%...........................20%........................18%
Poor...................................4%.......................2%.............................3%..........................6%

Some interesting things about these results. 3 different polls were conducted, yet as you can see, the results for each poll were pretty similar. This is indicative that the polls are accurate. You'll also notice that the response to TPM moves in a very slight negative direction as time goes by. IMDb ratings always follow this trend as well: starting off higher and then slowly drifting downwards.

If you are wondering about the accuracy of the poll, this is how Gallup describe the poll:
Survey Methods
The results below are based on telephone interviews with randomly selected national samples of 925, 1,053, and 1,022 adults, 18 years and older, conducted May 21-23, June 4-5, and June 11-13, 1999 respectively. For results based on this sample, one can say with 95 percent confidence that the maximum error attributable to sampling and other random effects is plus or minus 3 percentage points. In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

(In other words, there is 95% chance that each percentage that appears in the chart above is correct to within 3 percent above or 3 percent below the actual number in the chart. Thus, when it says 38% found the film outstanding, that means that there is 95% chance that between 35% and 41% of people found it outstanding. For those who doubt the accuracy of polls, I would just point out that polls were able to predict the correct outcome in 49 out of 50 states in the last US presidential election.)


Furthermore, according to Gallup, here is what the reaction of its intended audience, children, to the film was:
When asked about their children's reactions to the film, 90% of parents who said their children had seen The Phantom Menace indicated that their children thought it was "good," "excellent" or "one of the greatest he or she had ever seen."



Myth: The initial response by critics to the PT was less positive than the initial critical response to the OT.

Reality: When only looking at the initial critics' response to all six original Saga films on rottentomatoes.com, the PT does just as well the OT films, if not better. In fact the initial average score for the PT films of 69% was slightly higher than average score for the OT films at 66%.

Here's how the 6 original Saga films compare based on their initial critical opinion according to rottentomatoes:

ROTS: 80%
ANH: 74%
ATOC: 67%
TESB: 63%
ROTJ: 61%
TPM: 60%

According to these numbers, if initial critics' reviews were predictive of the response of fans or the general public, then TFA with its 93% positive score would wipe the floor with all 6 Saga films, with only ROTS and maybe ANH being in the same ballpark. In fact, if JJ's 2 Trek films, which many say feel more like Star Wars than Trek, actually were Star Wars films, then Trek 09 at 95% and Into Darkness at 87% would exceed the initial critical response of every Star Wars film that he did not direct.

http://metro.co.uk/2015/10/29/using...s-the-best-its-not-the-one-you-think-5468108/

Another survey of reviews conducted by the staff of Rotten Tomatoes itself found that the OT fared even worse in comparison with the PT when it came to its initial critical response:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/sta...uels_actually_better_reviewed_than_originals/



Myth: TFA's present high IMDb score proves that it is far more well-received by the general public than the Prequel films.

Reality: It is hard to make any comparisons between TFA with TPM or ATOC since IMDb was not well-established at that time. However, by the time ROTS was released, IMDb had established its Top 250 list, and for the first couple of years after its release, ROTS had an 8.0+ score and placed in the bottom of the top 250. Right now, less than 3 weeks after its release, TFA score has fallen from a 9.5 to an 8.5 by the date of this post. My bet is that it will have a rating of about 8.2 one year from now, placing it at the bottom of the top 250, about the same as ROTS's rating and placement a year after its release. Of course, that's just my prediction.



If you have any additional fact-based analysis to add to what I've posted, please share it. Also, as with any thread, feel free to share your thoughts on this subject.

 

I enjoyed the prequel trilogy. The movies weren't perfect and I didn't enjoy them as much as the OT, but I still thought they were very worthy entries into the saga. Let's be honest, there was no way these movies were going to live up to the anticipation.

 

Excellent post. The revisionist history surrounding the public (or even the fans and critics') reactions to the Prequel Trilogy are one of the things that really bug me. It ignores or even covers up the facts, dismissing the opinions of numerous Prequel fans for an often hateful narrative. Just today, I saw someone on CNN saying that the Prequels "were not well received at all." I'd been considering whether to make a big post such as this, with a bunch of stats and facts about the reaction toward the Prequels. Something to help set the record straight, and which could be quoted or linked to by others when faced with anti-Prequel myths.

 

Can you just, like, repost this over and over again in the 7SA forum whenever someone wants to make a sweeping generalization about the supposed negative reception of the prequels? Well done.

I can't help but laugh whenever someone makes a comment like, "TPM would have made more money if it was good!" Like...$430 million in 1999 before IMAX and 3D ticket prices, let alone 16 years of inflation...TPM was a monster movie in 1999! Let's not rewrite history here just because it didn't crack $600 million like a few summer blockbusters have recently (due to aforementioned inflation and 3D ticket prices).

 

Myth: Theater audiences hated the Prequel films.

Reality: Polling for each of the Prequel films was positive, as shown by CinemaScore.

CinemaScore is a market research company that performs polling which is paid for by the movie studios and entertainment media. On opening night, it asks a random sample of audience members in 25 major cities to give letter grades to a new film they had just watched, ranging from "F" to "A+". Combined with demographic data from the respondents, these letter grades have been used to accurately predict future box office performance and tweak marketing campaigns.

In general, mainstream audiences appear to be more easily pleased (or less is that less hateful?) than vocal hardcore fans on the internet. An old newspaper article reported that "Most movies get easily a B-plus". If a film gets a grade of "B-" that is usually a cause for concern. Grades in the "C" range are considered terrible, and "D" or "F" grades are so bad that they're outliers. While plenty of hit movies score in the "A" range, an "A+" grade is also rare.

I was curious so I spent some time doing some gradual self-research to confirm this. I Googled the CinemaScores of every mainstream theatrical release over a period of two recent years, and I found that the median grade was indeed a "B+". Hollywood seems quite capable of satisfying the average moviegoer, which is no surprise since it continues to stay in business.

With "B+" as a baseline, how did the Star Wars Prequels do? A quick search on CinemaScore's own website shows that the three Prequels all scored the same "A-" grade. Not perfect, but strong nonetheless. It's the same "A-" grade as their contemporary Spider-Man films, as well as the first Lord of the Rings movie. Those were sort-of rivals to the SW Prequels at the time and no one questions their success.

Grades for the Original Trilogy aren't available (A New Hope predates the creation of CinemaScore, and many older films haven't had their grades revealed). The Force Awakens did grade higher with a solid "A" grade.

By this measure at least, the Star Wars films with available grades have done very well with audiences. The only exception is the animated Clone Wars movie which got a "B-".


Myth: Theater polling is meaningless. People still hate the Prequels!

Reality: Just to shed some light on another set of numbers, I'll bring up customer ratings on Amazon.

Original Trilogy (collection): 3.8 out of 5 stars with 5,181 votes
A New Hope: 3.9 stars with 1,451 votes
The Empire Strikes Back: 4.2 stars with 748 votes
Return of the Jedi: 4.0 stars with 649 votes

Prequel Trilogy (collection): 4.4 stars with 1,179 votes
The Phantom Menace: 3.6 stars with 3,175 votes
Attack of the Clones: 3.5 stars with 2,446 votes
Revenge of the Sith: 4.0 stars with 1,867 votes

Now these aren't random samples, since votes are cast by people who have bought the product or have an interest in it. Still, hundreds or thousands of votes represent much more people than the vocal segments of most fan forums.

TPM and AOTC scored lower than the Originals, but still had solid averages with more likes than dislikes. ROTS has a score on par with the originals.

The Original Trilogy scores are tainted with some people giving poor ratings in protest for the Special Edition changes. But even that vindicates George Lucas in another way. Taking a bunch of anti-Special Edition votes into account, the Original Trilogy still scores well overall. Most people don't really seem to care. For people born since 1997 (which includes legal adults now), the Special Editions are the only Original Star Wars Trilogy that they know.


Myth: The Phantom Menace was a big box office hit because everyone went to see it before poor word of mouth got out.

Reality: According to Box Office Mojo, TPM made about $1 billion dollars worldwide off of a $65 million opening weekend in the US (adjusting for inflation, this is a $1.42 billion total and $92 million opening in 2015 dollars).

That opening weekend is downright modest compared to today's theater environment, where hit films have utterly massive openings but are much more front loaded. For comparison, The Dark Knight opened with $158 million, The Avengers started with $207 million, and Jurassic World achieved a short-lived record in 2015 with a $209 million opening.

Movies these days are said to have "legs" and staying power if they endure a second weekend box office drop of about 50% or less. Subsequent weekend drops of 50% or more are common.

TPM had a second weekend drop of just 20.7% (if the Memorial Day Monday is added to that figure, then it was actually a 3.2% gain), with subsequent weekend drops of 36%, 22.1%, and 26.4%, and 25.2%.

1999 was a different environment from today, or even just a few years later in the mid-2000s. In general, movies weren't as front loaded. However, the fact remains that TPM had a very leggy run in the theaters.


Myth: The Phantom Menace's box office was the result of Lucas's monster marketing campaign.

Reality: A New York Times article from May 14, 1999 (before the movie's release) reported that TPM's advertising budget was only $20 million. This would be $28.4 million in 2015 dollars, which is still utterly tiny in comparison to current day blockbusters that often spend somewhere in the range of $150 to $200 million on marketing.

According to Howard Roffman, vice president of licensing for Lucasfilm at the time, "If there's any hype at all, it comes from the media...They see this as an important story that will get viewers and sell newspapers and magazines. It has resulted in a level of attention we frankly are not seeking ourselves."

 

Myth: If you don't think TFA is flawless, you're a bitter prequel fanatic.
Reality: The above is a McCarthyist way of thinking.

 

Great post. Can confirm I was born in 1997 and the SE is the only OT I know. Lol. I did rent the original ROTJ once but I didn't like it for some of the Muppet scenes.

 

Lol whats this?! Everyone knows the PT where the worst movies of all time! ALL TIME! *sarcasm*

Seriously great post.

 

I have talked to many people who are considered general audience and they really do think the PT was bad.

Like for every 1 person I met who likes the PT 20 don't.

 

Myth: The lower box office for AOTC and ROTS reflect audience dissatisfaction with TPM.

Reality: Not all sequels make more than the original. If AOTC and ROTS are failures for living up to TPM's box office, then so are TESB and ROTJ for failing to live up to ANH.

TPM made about $1 billion worldwide in 1999 dollars. Adjusting their box office to 1999 dollars, AOTC made $603 million (a 40% drop) and ROTS made $722 million (a 28% drop).

ANH made $775 million in 1977 dollars. TESB and ROTJ made less money, but what makes that even worse is the sharp inflation that occured during the early 1980s. In 1977 dollars, TESB only made $215 million (a massive 73% drop), while ROTJ made $290 million (a small comeback, falling short of the original film by just 63%).

So much for the idea that TESB is untouchable and universally regarded as the best Star Wars movie ever, by far (see the mixed critical reviews in the first post by Darth Nerdling for a dose of reality). Anecdotally, a lot of the kids in my school disliked TESB for its inconclusive downer ending but loved ROTJ for its epic final battle. Nobody I knew in real life had a problem with the Ewoks either.

The fact is that sometimes lightning just doesn't strike twice even with a super successful franchise. The novelty wears off and box offices can fall very short of the first movie in a series.

 

I really miss seeing your posts! Lots of anti prequel posts have been happening in the prequel forum and the force awaken.

 

This post is a thing of beauty. As a related aside, anyone who hates Revenge of the Sith can...find a different movie to like, anyways, because it's MINE.

 

I have said it a hundred times before and I'll say it again - I have never met a person in actual life who hates the prequels. I see it everywhere on the Internet. But in real life, I still haven't met that person. I have a bunch of friends who say things like "ROTS was cool, but the other two were just okay"; or "they weren't as great as the OT, but I still like them." But in person, I've never had anyone tell me they strait up hate the PT. I find that odd and consistent with your view it's a myth.

Second, I wanted to add something. There has been a lot of talk about how TFA is doing so awesome at the box office and how it has brought Star Wars back. THIS idea is absolute revisionism (or it's the result of people not understanding inflation). Adjusted for inflation the original Star Wars blows every other Star Wars film out of the water, and for that matter is the second best selling movie ever behind Gone With The Wind.

TFA is doing great. Don't get me wrong. It is still well behind TPM but will likely catch it. That doesn't mean, however, that the PT did terribly. In fact it was quite the opposite.

AOTC did the "worst" of any Star Wars film at the box office in terms of profit, yet it still did about the same as Avengers: Age of Ultron did this year. By any measure Age of Ultron made a fortune, yet when it comes to the PT people say "they didn't do that well."

Likewise, Revenge of the Sith performed about the same as Spider Man 2. Spider Man 2 is a hit Sony milked for three more movies because of its great success.

For anyone interested, here is the link:

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm

 

all 3 were well received when they came out. then by the time ATOC came out TPM was made fun of. Then by the time ROTS came out ATOC was made fun of. for about 5 years after that ROTS was well regarded. now they're all lumped as terrible. the reasons have varied over the years. first it was jar jar, then it was dialogue, now all of a sudden it's the cgi. if there was no internet there wouldn't be a quarter of the hate.

 

The anecdotal is strong with this one.

 

Feel free to copy and paste it over there all you want. I don't spend a lot of time over there, but after reading some posts there, I realized that many misconceptions about the PT are still being spread over there as conventional wisdom. I think much of what I posted above is pretty much understood as the "real" truth among long time posters here, but some newbies here might need some educating! So, share away!

Here's what each Star Wars film has earned during its initial run adjusted for inflation:
ANH: $1,299,000,000
TPM: $730,000,000
ROTJ: $697,000,000
TESB: $679,000,000
ROTS: $511,000,000
ATOC: $448,000,000

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=starwars.htm&adjust_yr=2016&p=.htm

So, TPM performed 2nd best among Star Wars films during its initial runs. TESB and RTOJ were only able to surpass it by a little after re-releases. In addition, as Jim Raynor points out above, TPM had long "legs" at the box office. Its gross fell very little from week-to-week. That is typically an indicator of good word-of-mouth.

Also, TPM didn't have the advantage of higher Imax and 3D pricing that boost ticket prices today. Finally, the US population was 279 million people when TPM was released. Now, it's 323 million people or 16% higher. So adjusted for population and inflation, TPM's adjusted gross would be $847 million, and that's still without Imax and 3D pricing boosts.


ANH's initial box office gross adjusted for population and inflation is an incredible $1.8 billion dollars. Of course, people went to movies much more back then since they wouldn't get a chance to see a film a 6 months later whenever they want on DVD or Blu Ray, so that also helped give a boost to the OT.

Now here's the one that boggles the mind. If you adjust Gone with the Wind's gross for both population and inflation, then it turns out it would have made a whopping $4.2 billion dollars just in the US!!!!!! Sure, it was re-released multiple times, as was common back then, but that's just insane!

Yep, let's just lock the thread now. Everything I posted is pointless in light of this new bit of knowledge!

 

I feel like volumes could be written on most of these. In particular, I recall The Phantom Menace being very negatively received, not just among people I knew in 1999, but in the media. I'll probably make a post about that one in the future, if I can find any evidence--though I admit I may not be able to.

But I'd rather address this for now:

This is...a confusing defense. I often see it touted by prequel fans, but I must admit that I don't understand it at all. I suppose the implication is that detractors were expecting an "adult" story, and operated with the faulty assumption that Star Wars movies were "adult" movies.

First of all, whatever Lucas calls them, I question the premise that Star Wars films are children's films. Family-friendly films, sure (and the numbered movies should stay that way). Inherently appealing to kids? Absolutely! The movies capture a childlike sense of wonder, innocence, and adventure at their very best. However, either Lucas sort of missed the mark in making exclusively children's films or that wasn't quite his intention in the first place. Star Wars was appealing to everyone.

The fact is, as a kid, it wasn't just the kid-friendly stuff that appealed to me; it was the character of Han Solo, the redemption story, etc. True, I didn't appreciate the more philosophical elements of The Empire Strikes Back and true, I loved Ewoks and flashy pew-pew fights, but at the end of the day, what was appealing to me then is appealing to me now, and frankly, it was appealing to my dad when he first watched the original in his 20s. I liked the outlaws, the gritty atmosphere, and some of the darker elements of the story as much as I liked the stuff that...well, that reminds me of the prequels.

Now, you could argue that the prequels worked for adults as well, and that might be correct. But surely, they don't require this defense if that's the case. And if they do require this defense, then perhaps you ought to consider that the audience didn't misunderstand the film, but that the issue of them being children's films isn't even relevant to most people's enjoyment. Either way, I feel like the argument falls on its face.

There's also an implied excuse here. "Oh, they're children's films, so you can't appreciate them." Or, "They're children's films, you have to watch them differently." But that's absurd.

Around 2011, I finally sat down and watched Avatar: The Last Airbender, which a lot of people had been recommending to me. I think it's safe to call it a children's show, but this wasn't really racing through my mind as I marathonned it. What was hitting me was, "I haven't felt this way since I watched the original Star Wars trilogy." Here's a children's show that held my attention and didn't let go. Likewise, I watched Princess Tutu perhaps a year later, a magical girl children's show. Here was a genre I had no experience with, and I, a 26-year-old man, was watching a show apparently made for babies. Once again, it blew me away, and once again, its status as a children's show was completely unimportant. I don't think I need to go into detail about Pixar (Up, Toy Story 3, Ratatouille, Wall-E), Dreamworks (How to Train Your Dragon 1/2, Kung Fu Panda), and Disney (Wreck it Ralph, Tangled, Frozen, Big Hero 6) I've either liked or fallen in love with as an adult, all of which are (gasp!) children's films! The Dark Crystal is one of my favorite movies of all time, and I first saw it less than a year ago! I know I'm not alone here--there are tons of adult fans of all of these properties who were introduced to them as adults.

Back to The Phantom Menace. In 1999, I was in eighth grade, reading The Hobbit. Loved it and picked up Lord of the Rings immediately. If anything, The Hobbit made me hungry for more great children's stories--and for me, The Phantom Menace didn't deliver. I had just turned 13, so I think I fell within its demographic.

The point is, why do these movies need defending if they're children's films? And what kind of defense is that, anyway? If they are or if they aren't, they haven't quite worked for me as a child or an adult. This doesn't seem like a constructive argument at all.

 

Outstanding post Darth Nerdling and JimRaynor55! Very informative. I have to admit that I'm one of the 5% that just recently introduced to Star Wars as an adult.

I love the prequels but there are certain aspects that I hate/dislike as well. I mean, I hate Jar Jar as a character. I also don't like that Anakin accidently destroys droid control ship. I still like TPM even though It's still my least fav of the 6. On the other hand, I really like AOTC and love ROTS. As a whole I love the entire saga (Ep 1-6)!

What I'm trying to say is that it's not black and white situation.

I think there is an gross generalization of PT as a whole caused by vocal PT bashers that unfortunately affects how mainstream media view this trilogy. It's also kinda of sad that Episode 3 (my fav) got hated by some people just because it's part of the prequels.

 

Darth Nerdling This was a very good post!

There's so much research and work behind it. Your posts are always very well constructed. These are the main reasons why I always like them even if I don't always have the time to read every single one.

 

I think there is a bit of revisionism and 'bubble' mentality involved in terms of prequels. If you're someone who sees all your friends hating on it, it's very easy to think that's the general reaction.
It's clear a lot of people went to see them and liked them; but here is where I diverge from the premise.

The vast majority of the people who liked them would probably also go see Transformers 4 and rate it highly. These are the bulk of your movie-going public that drive BO ticket sales;

I also think this is where both sides are talking past each other.

For me, there's a few key metrics you want to look at. AOTC failed to be the #1 film of 2002 and its WW cume collapsed compared to TPM. Yes, the middle trilogy earns the least, but its relative underoerformance even when compared to ESB is noteworthy.

Even more important, the fandom that tried their best to see AOTC as the Empire of the PT felt burned after it all. I know this because I was one of those guys. I still remember feeling relieved by Harry Knowles' (anyone remember him?) breathless recounting of the final sabre fight from a bootleg(?) someone showed him in a hotel room days before the movie came out, and how it would change everything because of the use of force powers.

Thinking back that fight was out of place and awful and AOTC felt like 3 movies stiched together. A Star Wars noir anthology film set in coruscant that held some promise; a pointless detective story in Kamino and a bunch of action scenes on Geonosis. The love story didn't even work.

I'm focusing on AOTC here because this is retrospectively the least liked film of the PT and the film that turned tepid concern and dislike for Lucas to outright rage.

ROTS I think had way too many 'freebie' elements tying into OT to mess up (though I have my reservations about a great many decisions in the end that made scenes humorous instead of emotional) but AOTC was championed as the Empire Strikes Back of the PT and ended up being worse than TPM in so many ways. After that, the few people in my circle who kinda clung to Star Wars left the fandom. I couldn't even talk Star Wars with them anymore.

This is just the truth. I felt so burned out after the prequels that for close to 10 years, my yearly ritual of rewatching the OT didn't happen. I only took out the DVDs to rewatch certian scenes and bits. I haven't seen TPM for 15 years until recently. It took TFA to rekindle that joy. And I'm not even a fan of RedLetter Media's take on the PT. Those videos are just mean, and provide a lot of lazy fodder for bandwagon haters to crib notes from. But I know my feelings on this and the PT took a lot of wind out of the sails of the people who mattered and split the fandom. Things were pretty dire.

My only note for those who loved the PT and feel like TFAs success is unfairly maligning the PT is to see this from the perspective of the rest of the fandom. What is good for Star Wars is good for EVERYONE. We don't need to tear down one film to make another film better. And more importantly, we need to face the reality of the prequels.

Yes reaction was mixed and the PT films sold a lot of tickets, but they could have done so much more business as evidenced by TFA's historic run.

I can only imagine what ROTS Box office run could have been had it been the capstone of a beloved trilogy. It would have been historic for a 2005 movie.

 

Very good post, however, while it is true that GL said he made Star Wars for young people, young people does not equate to children. It is hard to deny that both Star Wars and TESB have more adult content, and less child friendly additions, than ROTJ to an extend, but TPM especially. In fact I would argue TPM was designed to be most attractive to the very young, because GL hoped to get a new generation on board for the saga, that would be heading towards adolescence by the time ROTS would be released.

A also agree with earlier posters, that the children's film defense is pretty weak. Disney has been making children's films for decades, and many of them are also very much appreciated by adults.

 

Excellent post. Very well constructed.

 

Simply not true. The reviews for TPM were very mxed. I read some shockers here in the UK. Same for AOTC. ROTS got much better reviews than the first 2.

Whilst others are at it I'll also throw in some anecdotal evidence that I can't back up with any physical evidence A good straw poll I've noticed over the years has been friends and work colleagues who are just casual viewers. They've seen the films but aren't as big a fan as we are and I've always found people to be very disappointed with the PT and regard it as not as good as the originals. The same comments always come up, Jar Jar first and foremost, bad acting, rubbish Anakin, a boring story, too many effects that aren't convincing, central characters that aren't engaging enough. I can't back that up with figures but seeing as we're banding around lots of personal evidence as fact I thought I'd mention it

It used to get me really uptight that people didn't like new Star Wars as much as I did. I've now realised that its not something to be protective or upset over, its just how it is. Because if I think the PT is not seen as inferior to the OT outside of this forums bubble then I'm just burying my head in the sand.

 

I saw all three prequels in theaters in their initial runs. I remember liking the Phantom Menace then and going back to theater at least three more times over the course of the summer of 1999. I don't remember thinking about how I ranked TPM back then, if you asked me I would probably say it wasn't AS GOOD as the originals but really that is a freaking high bar to surpass. I honestly don't remember giving Jar Jar that much of a thought, I mean granted I wasn't thrilled to death about him but I didn't hate him either, honestly I was pretty neutral, I knew he was meant to be the comic relief but certainly I didn't consider him to be an abomination on the series that many do today. I actually liked the political elements many people found so boring, it really made me a fan of Palpatine as a character, he is THE Phantom Menace the title refers to. Also while I do like The Force Awakens better than The Phantom Menace I will say one thing about the latter where the former failed, at least in TPM I was never confused about the political makeup of the galaxy and I always knew what was going on and what the stakes were for everyone, some might say TPM had too much exposition but I think that is better than too little exposition.

If anything I remember being more cringed out in the initial run of Attack of the Clones because of the love scenes. That is not to say I didn't like AOTC as a whole initially because I did in fact even then I probably preferred it slightly over TPM because it stepped up the story a bit. Honestly since AOTC was a middle chapter of the trilogy I probably didn't have sky high expectations but they were met. Also if anything Jar Jar had a more significant role in AOTC even though he had less screen time, he gave Palpatine emergency powers, I think that was an interesting move by Lucas and you can read into that several things. Also the whole mystery behind Count Dooku, i.e. is he working for or against Palpatine, and the whole who set up the Clone Army thing. So AOTC was a success in that it left some things unexplained mysteries but at the same time we knew enough to know what was going on. I think The Force Awakens is better than AOTC but AOTC is an example of a film with a very ambitious story with mediocre execution, TFA had a safe story but with good execution in general.

Revenge of the Sith I thought was awesome on the first viewing and I still feel that way today. I prefer Revenge of the Sith over The Force Awakens but that is no insult to TFA rather it is reflective of how highly I regard ROTS. For a time I even considered this on par with or even better than A New Hope, honestly the latter is only ranked higher because of the charm and chemistry between Luke, Leia and Han. Honestly ANH and ROTS compliment each other very well even though they are both very different films. ANH is a more intimate small scale story with loads of fun and charm, ROTS is a movie of epic scale, it is about the downfall of a galactic Republic and an ancient religious order (the Jedi). This kind of sums up why the prequels are misunderstood and the originals are held in such higher regard. The prequels had such an epic story arc that it sometimes came at the expense of individual characters. Whenever the focus was on politics, the nature of power and manipulation, the nature and fragility of Democracy, the struggle between good and evil, i.e. the whole Palpatine story arc the prequels were EPIC and exceeded even the originals in the messages about society. However the prequels were far less successful when it came to individual characters (sans Palpatine) and the charm and chemistry between characters that made the original so good, this is why the love scenes were so cringy and that Jar Jar didn't work, heck it is even why Anakin's character development was kind of mixed, all of those scenes felt kind of lost in all of the political subtexts and exposition of the grand scale of galactic culture. ROTS was really the only film where the individual stories kind of worked but that is only because it was a tragic film, the emotions of revenge and betrayal are easier to show in the epic context of the story. ROTS not only compliments ANH for the reasons I explained above but it also enhances Return of the Jedi because now we fully understand how epic the finale truly is, I think those who don't understand the prequels also tend to be those who don't fully appreciate Return of the Jedi. ROTJ is really about a restoration of everything that was lost in ROTS, in some ways these two films represent what Star Wars is really all about and both films are the best in their respective trilogies. The challenge for the sequel trilogy is for them to build up to an equally worthy finale, in fact it needs to go a step beyond that in reconciling the differences between the prequel and original trilogies and make all nine episodes ONE coherent story.

This is why the historic revisionism about the prequels is so dangerous, with The Force Awakens and the sequel trilogy still trying to find it's own footing we ignore the prequels at our own peril as Star Wars fans. The prequel trilogy excels at being epic, the original trilogy excelled at being intimate. Maybe "balance to the force" is analogous for the sequel trilogy trying to find a balance between the epic and the intimate.

 

I saw "historical revisionism" and thought this was going to be about how Lucas' story of his plans for the saga never changed over the years and was always mapped out by him, despite evidence to the contrary. Or about how the PT contradicted the OT in so many places as for there to be major plot holes.

I've only been active on these forums for the last month, and it seems like apologetics accounts for most of the newly created threads in the PT section?