PT The prequels should have been longer.

And not just that but Clone Wars isn’t just a “cartoon series,” which is Very American I might add. It’s an animated TV show not a “cartoon” which implies it’s made just for kids. The themes explored in many episodes are very adult. It’s just a cultural thing (not present in Asia or evidently many other countries) that in the US people think not live action = kiddie. For budget reasons and storytelling reasons an animated series made the most sense and frankly looks better. You couldn’t have those epic episodes in live action on a TV budget lol.

Lucas also oversaw Clone Wars very carefully, it was his last gift really to the fans and frankly the one I treasure the most because it’s the most hours of Star Wars. I love it. It gives the Clone Wars the attention I think they deserve. But the prequel trilogy keeps the focus squarely on Anakin where it belongs and yes as a result we lose some fantastic scenes about Padme specifically in ROTS but that’s Lucas maintaining focus. In the same way I would argue the sequel trilogy thus far keeps focus on Rey and Kylo rather than giving us a big long back story about Snoke or maybe showing Leia earlier in TFA, etc. You need to focus primarily on a single protagonist for script clarity and while you can break that rule you should be careful about how often and where you do it, with the preference being that whatever else you show does go back eventually to that protagonist.

Us SW fans want to know and see everything but feature films are pretty confining with how much time you have to explain anything. That’s why TV was such a good medium for Clone Wars.

 

Revenge of the Sith should have been the longest film, really.

I think the final cut is done very effectively, but if Lucas had made it longer it could have fleshed out the fall a little more and it would mean Anakin's turn could still remain sympathetic without him being so duped by Sidious.
In the final cut he is very much tricked and is less accountable relative to Palpatine, I think if we had time to see him aligning with Palpatine's philosophy then the instant "sold his soul" turn wouldn't have been as necessary.

 

I think TPM and AOTC are possibly slightly too long and could've lost a few minutes.

ROTS could have done with at least one "birth of the Rebellion" scene being left in and the scene with Obi-Wan and Padme before he leaves for Geonosis should've been left in too.

 

Apparently Lucas once thought to make Revenge of the Sith a 4 hour movie

 

The original cut of TPM was nearly six hours and Lucas had to shave a lot to keep audiences attention. He put some stuff back in as soon as it hit DVD, and then we have all the deleted scenes that have been revealed so far.
To be honest I could easily see all three of them being at least 3 hours, with ROTS maybe being longer.

I only ever watch the Extended versions of LOTR (two 3.5 hour films, one 4 hour film) and they are FAR superior to the theatrical. It is highly likely that we'd reach a similar level of improvement with an extended Prequel trilogy. (maybe even an extended original)

Unfortunately since they are now out of the Eternal Editor's hands, we're unlikely to get any more.

 

I've never heard this. Source?

 

So, you think that voting for Queens is logical? You think that it’s logical for a supposedly advanced society to elect a literal child to a position of supreme executive power? As Monty Python said, “You don’t vote for kings!” And name me a single country that has elected a child as its leader through the democratic process (and I mean a literal child, not petulant man-child like Donald Trump).

Well, I hate to tell you this, but you’re wrong. Those things are illogical and dubious…and yes, both of those elements are there because George Lucas decided to have the entire first film take place when Anakin Skywalker was 9 years old. How do they connect? Well, I could explain that, but since you already blew off my explanation of how they connect, I don’t feel like going over it again.

Similarly, repetitive plot points. Because Anakin was 9 years old, that meant he wasn’t a Jedi, couldn’t be a bodyguard, nor could he start courting Padmé Amidala. Thus, Lucas needed to put her in peril again to justify the sympathy vote that would elevate Palpatine to Chancellor. But that meant that in the next film, he had to endanger Padmé again to make Anakin her bodyguard so that they can fall in love so that he can endanger her yet a third time to motivate Anakin to turn to the dark side. It also meant he, yet again, had to repeat the plot point of Palpatine using convoluted political schemes/games, explained through lengthy expository jargon, to gain power. Had Lucas been able to condense it to one event (i.e. the start of the Clone Wars), the lengthy political jargon likely wouldn’t have gotten as many complaints. Furthermore, the threat of secession and the start of a Civil War is much more exciting than some dispute over the taxation of trade routes.

Yes, the decision did lead to illogical or dubious plot situations and repeated story points. That’s not a matter of opinion. That’s an objective fact. Now, if you’re willing to overlook that, that’s fine…but it did lead to those things.

I’ll believe it when I see it.

I can confirm that this is true. The film was to begin with a massive war montage, battles taking place simultaneously on seven planets in the closing days of the Clone Wars. A teenage Boba Fett would be seen seeking revenge for the death of his father at the hands of the Jedi. A 10-year-old Han Solo living among the Wookiees. A pursuit across the galaxy to hunt down the dangerous Count Dooku. The transformation of the Galactic Republic to the Galactic Empire and the fall of the Jedi as Anakin betrays them, even as Padmé works to lay the groundwork for the Rebel Alliance to stand against Palpatine’s authoritarian state. And the climactic duel between master and student that would leave our hero a mechanical monster. It was too much. This was easily a 4-hour film and part of what was making Lucas drag his feet writing it was knowing that. Much like with the original Star Wars script, stuff was going to have to be excised if he was gonna have this be a reasonable length. Reluctantly, he finally accepted the situation, brushed all his elaborate plans aside, and brought it firmly into focus. The plan for all this time was to see Vader’s fall in Episode III, so the key to resolving this was to leave the central pillar of his tale in place and sculpt around it. As I previously mentioned, he had spent the most time refining the concepts around the descent of Anakin and the rise of Vader, so by keeping the film centered around this character, he was playing to the tale’s strengths. He’d had time to flesh this stuff out. The details might be somewhat fluid, sure, but it was the most carefully structured of the prequel trilogy and consequently, the core of what he needed. Focusing on Anakin and Vader first and foremost would marginalize other characters, sure, but it would avoid diluting the strength of the work.

 

I agree about AOTC. The scenes with Padme's family should have been left in. With those scenes, the romance story with Anakin works so much better. Padme revealing that she loves him before the Arena is a lot less jarring.

 

Well sometimes you do. Poland used to vote for their kings.
I agree with you on the later. I think the problem is that George wanted to have a traditional queen/princess, but didn't want to go against his love of democracy. TPM works much better if Padme is the hereditary queen at a young age.

I disagree with this. I think making Anakin 9 in the first films works very well, the problem is that there is then a lack of time to tell the rest of the story, but this could have been fixed by George saying "I am going to do four films."

Similarly, repetitive plot points. Because Anakin was 9 years old, that meant he wasn’t a Jedi, couldn’t be a bodyguard, nor could he start courting Padmé Amidala. Thus, Lucas needed to put her in peril again to justify the sympathy vote that would elevate Palpatine to Chancellor. But that meant that in the next film, he had to endanger Padmé again to make Anakin her bodyguard so that they can fall in love so that he can endanger her yet a third time to motivate Anakin to turn to the dark side. It also meant he, yet again, had to repeat the plot point of Palpatine using convoluted political schemes/games, explained through lengthy expository jargon, to gain power. Had Lucas been able to condense it to one event (i.e. the start of the Clone Wars), the lengthy political jargon likely wouldn’t have gotten as many complaints. Furthermore, the threat of secession and the start of a Civil War is much more exciting than some dispute over the taxation of trade routes.

Yes, the decision did lead to illogical or dubious plot situations and repeated story points. That’s not a matter of opinion. That’s an objective fact. Now, if you’re willing to overlook that, that’s fine…but it did lead to those things.

I’ll believe it when I see it.

That's why I believe they should have been four films. In the third film we should have seen the Clone Wars in full force. This film should really have been a condensed version of the clone wars.

 

Well just think of it like this. They are electing what amounts to a president they just call it a queen or a king

 

Stat Wars isn't real. It's a fantasy. They have an elected position with a royal title retained by tradition. Padme is a child queen because Star Wars is a fairy tale which harks back to older modes from history while adding some fantastical embellishment. Do you also balk in disbelief at Batman employing the child Robin as a sidekick in his dangerous war against crime?

Out of all the implausible contrivances inherent to the Star Wars universe, these are the things you find hard to believe?

From just a couple weeks ago in this thread:

I assume an apology is forthcoming.

 

A hereditary child Queen would make sense. Elected child Queen? No.

But of course, Lucas couldn’t have her be a hereditary Queen because he needed her to be a Senator in the next movie so that Anakin could be her bodyguard. Hence, her time as Queen had to be over. But he needed her to be a figure of importance in the first film so that she could be put in a position of peril to justify the sympathy vote for Palpatine.

I’ll concede that Lucas put himself into a bad position by having the entire first film take place when Anakin was 9 years old, and that out of the bad options he had, he probably chose the best one. But it was a bad option. I’ll offer sympathy and understanding to the position he was in. I won’t pretend that it was a deliberate, well thought-out act of genius because…it wasn’t.

So yes, Lucas had her be an elected child Queen not because it was a fairy tale, but for reasons that I’ve already explained in detail. Refusing to acknowledge that and trying to spin this into an act of brilliance only emboldens the haters.

But from now on, anytime someone complains about how the master dark side villain is kept to a near-stalemate by the guy who empties his waste basket, I’m just gonna say, “You can’t complain about the illogic of that because it’s a fairy tale.”

I said I’d believe it when I saw it. I’ve seen it, now I believe it, although ironically, I actually disagree with this one. I think Hayden Christensen’s acting is notably improved in Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005). The doomed, tragic figure that Anakin has become is a better fit for Christensen than the petulant teenager of the previous film.

 

This is really reaching and so I'm basically just going to let it stand as its own evidence.'

Like, really. Oh, a hereditary child queen would make sense, of course, but not an elected one, obviously. LOL.

Apology accepted.

 

The PT should have been 6 movies.
TPM, an Anakin/Obi-Wan movie between TPM and AOTC, AOTC,
A Clone Wars movie, ROTS and an aftermath movie.

 

Yes, it does, and here’s why. Padmé’s parents died when their ship crashed and she was the only heir to the throne, hence the role of Queen was thrust upon her at a young age. That’s logical.

The idea that the people of Naboo, a supposedly advanced and enlightened society, would elect a child to a position of supreme executive power? Not so logical.

 

Except the Naboo weren't an "enlightened" society. They were an oldschool society. As seen by their segregation from the Gungans.
There is a lot of reasons for the electing of very young kings & queens, and much of it was explored in the real EU. But it seems this argument started over the NAME of the office, and now the goalpost has been hastily moved to criticize the age of the person in office, since the original point was so well refuted.

And it has next to nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

 

That's pretty typical with that user. He claims Anakin was extremely violent and obsessive all the time and when you refute that he shifts it to something else.

 

Well I don't know about longer films as such but I do think there is a bit of problem with the amount of content in each film.

There has been talk that the PT films have 20/20/60 % of the story over the three films.
I have my doubts of that but to me, I do feel that RotS is a bit rushed and a bit over-stuffed with plot.
So many things has to happen that at the end it did feel like a checklist, this had to happen, that had to happen and so on.
So not all of it felt well developed or organic.

I know why Lucas made Anakin nine in TPM and his reasons for it.
I just don't think that was worth all the trade-offs that came as a result of it.
Obi-Wan getting reduced to a bit player in TPM and had little to do character wise.
His and Anakin's friendship was not developed or even set up.

Anakin knew Padme but given their age, it could not be a romance.
So him having spent ten years thinking about her was both a bit awkward and a little creepy.

And Anakin had to be recast and acted so differently that he could almost be a totally different character.

A lot of the other stuff don't really impact the rest of the films, Maul is never mentioned again.
Qui-Gon gets one or two mentions but nothing much.
And what the TF did and that the courts didn't manage to convict them.
That could have been used to show the seps side of things.
That they see this as a sign how corrupt the senate/republic is.
And how their rights are not being taken care off.
I do think that the seps could have been smaller systems, like Naboo, that are fed up with how the senate is in the pockets of big business, like the TF. And so they want to leave.
And the big companies would be on the side of the republic.
Would have made for some interesting drama where the Jedi/Padme have to work with the TF.
And maybe Naboo would consider leaving the republic, putting Padme in a delicate situation, on one hand, she believes in the republic. On the other she has to follow the wishes of her people.

And the time gap between TPM and the other two does stick out a bit. Ten years as opposed to three years between AotC and RotS. And the three OT films don't have this big a gap between them.

I think that if Lucas really needed TPM as it's own film, make it four films and call that "The Prologue" or EP 0.
If he had come out and said that for the story he wanted to tell, he needed four films to make it justice.
I don't think a lot of SW fans would have a problem with that.
Heck, most would have been thrilled by the prospect of four films instead of the three they thought they would get.

Lastly, about not having flashbacks as it it not part of the SW films.
Lucas can do anything he wants and had he used it in EP I and it worked well, I don't think people would object.
So make it a part of SW.

Bye for now.
Old Stoneface

 

I think Episode 1 wasted it's screen time. Episode 1 should have been the setup and launch of the Clone wars. Episode II should have been Episode 1.

 

While I would have liked see some of the deleted scenes in the films themselves, such as the early rebellion scenes in ROTS, I think they do just fine without them and are long enough. ATOC especially would feel bloated as the film at time feels too long as it is to me.

 

OK, this one’s so easy to disprove. Even the United States, back in the days of slavery, knew that it was a bad idea to elect children to positions of supreme executive power.

But maybe being Queen of Naboo is more akin to being a Governor than to being President of the United States.

I currently live in Maryland, so we’ll use their laws as an example. In Maryland, you must be 30 years old to run for Governor. And yes, Maryland still had Jim Crow laws on the books when they passed that law.

Now we know that Naboo is more advanced than the United States for two reasons.

1. Padmé seems shocked by the existence of slavery on Tatooine, implying that the very concept is inconceivable on Naboo.

2. The integration of the Naboo and the Gungans seems to be a pretty easy thing. You don’t have any government officials preventing Gungan kids from going to school. You don’t have law enforcement officials spraying Gungans with fire hoses or unleashing attack dogs on them. You don’t see thuggish, racist cops blinding Gungans with their billy clubs during the big parade at the end of the movie. You don’t hear crowds hurling racial epithets at the Gungans.

So yes, Naboo is more advanced than the United States and the fact that they elect child Queens stretches credulity.

In my very first post on the subject, I explicitly said:

I assume an apology is forthcoming. Moreover; the Monty Python argument has NOT been refuted, at least not very well.



As for the expanded universe, I don’t care. You see, I paid for my theater ticket, so I expect the necessary information to be in the film. If I have to buy an expansion pack in order for the plot to make sense, then the plot of the film sucks. And if George Lucas isn’t going to sell me a complete film, then there’s no reason I should pay full price for the ticket. It’s like charging somebody for a full pizza but only giving them three slices. I call it a rip-off.

 

Don't count on it, since you haven't achieved anything.
It's sweet that you think this this thread revolves around your first comment tho.

 

And so go any assumptions of good faith. Instead, from this point forward, I shall assume that you’re an apologist, attempting to concoct convoluted fake arguments to preserve the indefensible.

 

I imagine it must be in great shock to find people who like the prequels in the prequel section. But sure, keep pretending your non-existent argument have any value.