PT Why Are The PT Films criticized? (catch-all thread)

This is how myths are started.

I can show you threads from the TFA, saga, etc, bashing The PT also.

Bashers are apparent, they are everywhere, no matter what side.

 

I personally think the biggest problem with the PT is the story Lucas was telling is very hard to appeal to all audiences, especially kids.

The OT (and TFA) are essentially told in the style of the old serials that Lucas grew up on. They're fun movies that appeal to everyone, but there is more to them like mythology and character arcs if you are really want to delve into them. That's why kids like me growing up with the OT enjoyed it cause Luke was blowing up the deathstar, whereas when I become an adult I started gravitating to more in-depth stuff like the cave.

The PT is a much more adult story in theory as it is telling of a hero who goes bad. The problem is Lucas still wanted to appeal to kids and you can't mix cheese with a dramatic story.

It would like filming Schindler's List or Platoon and trying to appeal to adults and kids, it would come off uneven. Those movies a rated R and made for adults because it's a serious matter.

If Lucas wanted to tell a tragic story of Anakin Skywalker, then once he decided to appeal to kids, something in story would be compromised.

 

Apparently, you can -- to the tune of some two-and-a-half-billion dollars.

 

I think you just proved my point as its more about money then artistic vision as many of you say.

If Lucas decided to tell the Prequels in the same vein as a movie like Platoon that is rated R and only made for adults, it would be a much better movie. He would have the freedom to tell it in a way of not worrying about kids and merchandise. But it wouldn't make as much money cause you would limit your audience to adults only.

I'm actually complimenting the PT story in theory, cause it's a much more bold and adult story. The problem is it comes off uneven when you try to tailor it for all audiences.

 

The thing is, it's not generally the kids that had a problem with the PT - it's the adults. Would the adult fans have preferred something in line with the Matrix? Probably. But I don't think Lucas was particularly interested in making that kind of movie.

 

With all due respect, I think you just missed my point. If you want to assert a personal opinion, fine. But at least have the humility to realize that personal opinions, divorced from wider facts, have limits; or at least look a little sealed-in when wider facts aren't acknowledged or given a moment's attention.

I disagree. The genius of the prequel trilogy, in my opinion, is that Lucas told a complex, frightening story for children/young people, with a lot of diverting craziness and sweeteners thrown in. Name me one other artist that has merged "Macbeth", "Flash Gordon", Ray Harryhausen, Kurosawa, Kubrick, Lean, Coppola, Malick, et al., into one epic stew. The closest comparison I can think of would probably be Walt Disney: classic Walt Disney movies are full of transporting light and shade. But nothing gives you the range of Star Wars, the elasticity of Lucas' imagination.

Yes, you cock your hat to the bold scope of the prequels. I do see that much in your various posts. But to protest that the prequels don't work, because they're too over the map, or whatever, is merely a personal opinion. And, holding the opinion you do, I don't think you're doing justice to the true depth of Lucas' ambition -- which was to speak to young people about a host of deep and troubling issues in human life without talking down to them.

Lucas clearly recognized there was a broad niche that had developed in 20th Century mainstream culture which needed filling; or he'd at least give it a bloody good go. People -- young people especially -- had not only lost touch with a mythic sense of their own being, and how peculiar and exciting life can be, but with the darker, more tragic aspects of existence, as explored in the plays of Sophocles and Shakespeare, and in much religious art. So Star Wars is also a totalizing artwork: an attempt at encompassing the "Great Mystery", or anticipating its many permutations, and at saying everything. A modern odyssey that looks back as well as forward.

And Star Wars isn't tailored for all audiences. It doesn't go out of its way to appeal to hipsters, sadists, nihilists, cynics, lofty art types, or movie critics. It's primarily for the young and the young-at-heart. There is plenty in Star Wars for adults to enjoy -- provided they render themselves open to it. Adults, somewhat by default, tend to be rude, impatient, arrogant, snide, close-minded, and overly judgemental, however. So you could look upon the entire series, especially the prequels, as a test (much like "The Trials" ambiguously alluded to in the Lucasian jazz-riff-dominated installments -- the personal escapades that really annoyed everyone -- Episodes I and II). A test from a wily filmmaker/architect/tinkerer/bearded mason that has always sought to experiment and sneakily push boundaries, executing a non-stop series of Jedi Mind Tricks, a fluidic, meta-Mind-Trick, under everyone's noses (even when they think their nose is comparatively big enough -- reference Watto -- to sniff out every possible trick being pulled on them by a humbly-dressed bearded fellow).

 

The biggest problem was not with the story but with the entitled OT purists who had preconceived notions of what the story should be. Lucas has always meant for the saga to be enjoyed by kids but yes there is enough in there to be enjoyed by anyone. There was no problem with the PT when it comes to the story. In fact I enjoy the story of the PT much more than the simplistic one in the OT. That's not to say the story of the OT is bad but as you said it was a straight forward adventure story inspired by the flash gordon serials. While the PT was a much more shades of grey storytelling.

It boils down to personal taste as in any art form. Though its become quite clear the OT fans only want more of the same thing. They were never going to accept judging by the criticisms a different take on the story and updated special effects. Most of the criticisms of the PT are entirely baseless IMO and are not actual criticms more like personal issues with the viewer. A big example of this is the hatred towards CGI. You can hate CGI all you want but using CGI in a film doesn't make it bad imo "But it looks fake" well newsflash movies are fake and the practical effects look much more fake than CGI ever could IMO. Most of the critics of the PT never judged the films for what it is but instead they judged it for what they wanted it to be. They wanted Darth Vader to always be a monster they didn't want to see a full story of him starting off as an innocent child. They wanted Lucas to cater to them in every way and thankfully he didn't.

Lucas should be commended for being a true artist and not caving into mob mentality. I'm even more appreciative of the PT thanks to TFA as we would probably never get any more daring SW films like the PT ever again which is truly a shame.

 

You know, just because some people don't like the prequels, doesn't mean it's because they "had preconceived notions of what the story should be" or only wanted "more of the same thing".

Maybe where you saw interesting characters, they saw boring & poorly developed ones.
Maybe where you saw complex ideas, they saw a poorly executed story.
Maybe where you marveled at the bold innovation, they didn't think that same innovation was fine-tuned enough.

Saying stuff like "they wanted it to be catered to them" or "they wanted the same thing regurgitated over and over" just sounds like excuses. Now maybe it's true for some people. But to lump everyone who dislikes the prequels into that category just seems like a way to belittle any dissenting opinions. Like "Oh, you dislike the prequels? You must be one of those mindless zombies who just wants to watch the same thing over and over again instead of experience bold new ideas". That kind of mindset is just wrong.

Regarding my own feelings towards the prequels, I don't think they're horrible. I actually enjoy quite a lot from them and for me, they range anywhere from okay to good. I first saw them when I was a young child. And at that age, it was just new Star Wars so of course I liked them. Now, having thought about everything more, I've come to the conclusion that I just don't enjoy them as much as the OT. And it's not because of the "innovative" ideas that are "too different" from the OT. Actually, I think that the story, characters, and ideas were just executed in an "okay" kind of way. It has nothing to do with the CGI. It has nothing to do with hating the idea of child Anakin. And it has nothing to do with "a different take on the story". On paper, I don't mind any of these things. But they just weren't executed in a way that entertained me as much as the OT did. But hey, that's just me. And, like I said, I still do enjoy a lot from the prequels. So I guess my point is that it's not fair to simply say that people who dislike the prequels don't want innovation and complexity; maybe they do, but they just don't see it being done very well the way you do. And that's okay because, you know, different strokes for different folks.

 

I apologize for coming across like I was generalizing all the OT fans as a whole. I hate generalizations myself which is why I take issue when the media always falsely assumes that the PT is universally hated. Believe me I realize human nature when it comes to opinions is not black and white there is a lot of "in between". I'm fully aware some simply didn't like them or likes aspects of them. My post was more directed at the extreme ones that air their hatred for the PT loud and clear. The trolls you see on IMDB as we all some of the critics I have seen on YouTube. It wasn't directed at those like you that simply don't like them as much as the OT or those that don't like them at all but can be respectful about it.

 

My point is Jabba is no more! We have 2 bite back! We Saga lovers r the majority, not the minority!

 

Complementary pairs of opposites. Yin and Yang, dark and light, feminine and masculine, soft and hard. PT and OT. Notice how cleanly the trilogies slip into each of the above groups. By design the PT is Yin, and it is in the very nature of Yin to be overlooked, to be disregarded. On a philosophical level, this is the answer to the original poster's question: the reaction to the PT is simply a manifestation of the trilogy's fundamental nature.

 

Soooooooooooooooooo........................that means...........the ST will bring...............................................................




























Balance!?

 

Probably because they don't like real deserts.

 

Star Wars is old.

The fans who enjoyed it since the original trilogy can easily turn bitter when anyone mentions these three movies in a bad way. 4, 5 and 6 are far from being perfect, but it's simply not common sense to dislike them. Fans will protect these movies and elevate them as classics (which is justified) but will disregard their flaws.

Star Wars 3 (or even 1 and 2, but who would admit that?) being your favorite can easily be justified. The originals are a bit overrated, the prequels are a bit underrated, but the original trilogy was there first, in the '70s, with no competition and a universe no one had seen before.

It's better because it was unique, because of nostalgia, because the new stuff isn't like the old stuff.

 

Count Dooku riding a space scooter over a lava planet.
-------

first reason someone gives happens to be incorrect!

 

That's why I hated Flash Gordon too!

Oh, wait...

 

I think it would be useful for everyone, both those who liked or disliked a film, to try to mention more in posts:

• if they liked something, why it worked for them;
• if they disliked something, how they understood it was supposed to be interpreted and why it didn't work for them.

In general, if one mentions that one disliked the way something complicated was portrayed in a film without explaining how they understood it, then it's natural that others may question whether they understood the full significance of it. It goes the other way too: if one likes something in a film, don't assume that everyone else understood it the same way you did. I've read posts by people who didn't like the PT and they showed that they understood how it was supposed to work, it just really didn't work for them, and it was easy to accept their point-of-view. I've also read posts by people about films they liked which didn't work so well for me and again, the way they explained it made it easy for me to understand why the films worked for them but not for me, and helped me appreciate those films better, even if I personally didn't get very much out of those films. Of course, I understand that it would take too much energy to explain one's views of a film every time one mentions it, but doing it in a few threads that invite greater explanation would really help bridge the divide, I feel.

 

Definitely. Here's a write-up I did where I ranked and explained my thoughts on Episodes I-VI (still haven't decided where to place TFA). I probably could've written a bit more about the first 2 on that list, but I'd be happy to elaborate for anyone interested.

 

"you can't mix cheese with a dramatic story."

George Lucas, Irvin Kershner and Richard Marquand can.

 

What an exquisite point-of-view!

I'll add the following:

"It's a downer. The saving grace is that if you watch the other three movies, then you know everything ends happily ever after. Nevertheless, I now have to make a movie that works by itself, but which also works with this six-hour movie and this overall twelve-hour movie. I'll have two six-hour trilogies, and the two will beat against each other: One's the fall, one's the redemption. They have different tonalities, but it's meant to be one experience of twelve hours."

-- George Lucas, p. 62, "The Making Of Star wars: Revenge Of The Sith" by J.W. Rinzler


Going with your dark/light, feminine/masculine, soft/hard binaries, it's interesting to note that Padme dies as Vader takes his first breath. Vader, from this perspective, most assuredly embodies the OT, as a parodic man-machine Frankenstein creation that eats up the epicene universe, while Padme -- the sad, tragic Sacred Feminine -- is the hauntingly elusive figure at both the centre and the periphery of the PT.

Here, then, at the end of the PT, or the end of the beginning, is where a hugely symbolic changing-of-the-guard occurs: the prequel trilogy gives way to the original trilogy, which supplants it in perpetuity. As Padme's last breath diffuses into the filmic ether, and her Platonic essence merges with the pleroma, so her corporeal realm -- the shattered-crystal, living-painting canvas of the prequels -- is duty-bound to glide to a close.

But, ultimately, as the Lucas quote suggests, the two trilogies are cognate with one another: two chambers in a rhythmic heart. Recall the beating drums at the start of ROTS and Grievous' sack of guts, brutally eviscerated by a non-reflecting Obi-Wan. "Obi-Wan, there's good in him, I know there's still..." Only when we return to the surface naivete of ROTJ, with a deeper truth carried forth after the dark night of the soul of TESB, does the saga, oddly enough, start acknowledging the fullness of its being, again.

Star Wars is constantly losing and finding itself: a cosmic game of hide-and-seek.

Fans should play along.

 

AprilMayJune Our view on Star Wars in a nutshell

 

LOL, it's true, DS.

Star Wars has been combining drama and cheese since, like, the first 5 minutes of Episode 4.

This need that the Internet has to act like cheesiness did not exist in the franchise until the PT showed up is certainly interesting to me.

 

Mine, too!

The original remark, as that beautifully succinct reply you quoted demonstrates, is reminiscent of something a Star Wars villain might say ("Impossible! Nothing can get through our shields!"), or of Threepio remonstrating Artoo at the beginning of the first movie ("It's restricted ... now, come out of there before someone sees you").

Personally, I blanch at the words, "You can't..." I can't do what? Criticize social dogmas? Defend the prequels? Fall in love? Put two teaspoons of instant coffee in every cup? Wear tight-cut clothing? Shave my face? Watch a movie in slow-motion? Baloney.

 

I just get so confused. What did people see in 4/5/6 that was so Hardcore and Super Serious that humor and levity and cheesiness would seem so out of place in 1/2/3? I mean, are we even discussing the same films here? The ones with a mystically-gifted Muppet in a swamp and Wise Old Ghosts and Hidden Secret Pasts and a space smuggler with a Wookie co-pilot and Ewoks? And space wizards with special weapons and powers who make all kinds of Corny Dramatic Pronouncements?

I also love when people refer to OT Vader like he was just majorly terrifying and 100% not at all cheesy, and use this as a reason why PT Anakin Was Oh So Very Disappointing To Us All. I mean, the man is like...Overwrought Drama-Rama Incarnate in the OT. Yes, he's threatening. Yes, he's "scary". But like...he literally makes an entrance in a cloud of smoke while posing dramatically. He's practically never NOT saying something that's kinda cheesy. (BTW, this is something I love about this character through the saga. Of course Anakin would still be all about the drama, because of course he would. )

 

Yes, yes! All of that.

That said, we might also be getting away from JCK's original meaning of "dramatic story".

It is fairly evident he was propounding that the prequels have a fantastically more grown-up storyline than the originals; while the originals are more of a fairytale.

In that vein, cheesy humour fits more with the originals than it does the prequels. Even Lucas originally vouched that the prequels would be "more Machiavellian" and have a more serious quality:

"The first trilogy will not be as much of an action adventure kind of thing. Maybe we'll make it have some humor, but right now it's much more humorless than this one. This one is where all the excitement is, which is why I started with it. The other ones are a little more Machiavellian--it's all plotting--more of a mystery."

Source: p. 107, "George Lucas: Interviews", interview with Kerry Quinn, edited by Sally Kline
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=P2P7pwHeZSkC&pg=PA107&lpg=PA107&dq="more machiavellian" lucas&source=bl&ots=tJmCIV_hjC#v=onepage&q="more machiavellian" lucas&f=false



I use the term "originally" as if Lucas deviated from that. In some ways, he did; but in a "bigger picture" view, well, did he? I'm not so sure. Even with their own brand of humour and goofiness, the prequels are much more sombre, involved, and tragic than the originals.

Lucas likely threw some softeners into the prequels; well, actually, we could speculate at length, but here are a few reasons:

i) He was returning to Star Wars after a long break. He was maybe ready to inject more humour, having spent time away, than he thought he would when he gave that interview, knee-deep in developing ROTJ and trying to wrap up the saga (1981).

ii) He'd become a father in the interim and raising kids gave him a different perspective on life; and, by extension, his saga (which, after all, is meant for young people, when all is said and done).

iii) A more mundane piece of conjecture, but, basically, he had the technology, and the wealth, to try. In short, he'd earned the right to fail, so why not see how intertwining comedy and tragedy, in some grander synthesis than had yet been tried, might work?


Anyway, I think it can be sad, overall, that the originals are still a good deal more light-hearted than the prequels. They're capable of the most exquisite seriousness, but they're still more of a romp than the prequels will ever be.

In June 2005, Rolling Stone magazine published an interview with a contented Lucas. The article begins with Lucas saying, "I accomplished what I set out to accomplish", and he goes on to make the following observation about the (then) two trilogies:

"The first three episodes are a tragedy, and the second three go slightly goofy, but they're inspirational: Even the worst, most evil people find compassion. Darth Vader has compassion for his children, and that's ultimately what children are for."

Source: http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/george-lucas-and-the-cult-of-darth-vader-20050602


I love that phrasing: "go slightly goofy".


And it takes one full circle, right back to Lucas' first comment in the first quote: "The first trilogy will not be as much of an action adventure kind of thing."


And, really, it isn't.


So, I guess, there's mixing cheese and there's mixing cheese.