PT should we drop the "prequel" tag from the prequel trilogy ?

if you watch the movies on a chronological order (as george lucas said it meant to be seen) we dont get a 'prequel' narrative, but instead we get one saga divided by 6 chapters with time skips between each, with new characters added [almost] every movie on different roles.

so after all 6 movies were released, the prequel kids grew up, the movies titles were changed to episodes 1-6 and lucas said how he wants people to watch his movies, does it really still stands as a prequel anymore when we dont get a prequel narrative ?

 

source

Yes, it's still a prequel. If a movie comes out AFTER the original, but takes place BEFORE the original, it is a prequel. That's what it is named.

 

Absolutely not. I think these are the films that, if not invented, certainly popularized the term "prequel."
Also, despite what GL may, or may not have said, SW still (imo) plays better viewed in order of release.

Episode 1 isn't nearly the easy access point into the SW universe/narrative that Episode 4 is. You wanna know why? Because TPM is still treated largely like the 4th film in a series. It assumes the audience has seen the other films in how it unfurls information and leans on drama.

 

I think this is something that will happen eventually down the line in the distant future . The Prequels will cease to be known as the “The Prequels” anymore, but simply come to be known as the first three episodes of Star Wars as Lucas intended . It will happen when the original/prequel trilogy generation has gone .

Well there's many sources of George Lucas stating exactly what @cantthinkofone was talking about: Star Wars Episode III: The Chosen One Featurette 1:38 " You've got to remember this is one movie, and it's meant to be seen I-VI. So I think when you watch the films in the order they're meant to be seen, it'll become very clear that Anakin is the chosen one." Vulture Magazine interview 2015 when asked on the best viewing order: "I II III IV V VI, that's the way they're supposed to be done . Just because it took a long time to film it doesn't mean you don't do it in order". Well, I think I've given you enough sources to prove how George feels on the subject.

I disagree respectfully. As someone whose done thorough research on the making of the first six SW films, it becomes clearer and clearer when studying the making of the prequels and George's thought process on the films, that he wasn't really making them as "prequels" but as the first three films in the SW saga that would be watched before the original trilogy. Episode IV tells you what a Jedi is, Episode I shows you what a Jedi is . A New Hope tells you about the force some 35 minutes into the movie, The Phantom Menace shows you the force right at the beginning . There are also tons of things The Phantom Menace shows you that are completely independent from the other films which are being showed for the first time as well as subtly hinting at the under workings of the plot .


I've seen reactors watch SW for the first time on YouTube starting with The Phantom Menace (I thought it'd be interesting seeing someone watch the films in that order and how it turned out).They had somewhat of a different interpretation of the film than someone who'd watched the originals first, and yet they were still able to pick up on things like not trusting Senator Palpatine and his intentions, I've even seen a few reactors already suspecting he was the hooded figure talking to the Neimodians. They also always love little Anakin and like Jar Jar until he gets annoying, but it's not enough for them to get taken out of the film by any means. In fact, I've never experienced a point while watching one of these videos where the watcher states they feel confused about the plot or saying the movie sucked. Every reactor I've seen in this situation absolutely liked the film and were pleasantly surprised saying they thought SW would be completely different and couldn't wait to watch the next film.


Watching the films in release order is obsolete now that we have all the movies. Something that Lucas also said when Revenge Of The Sith was released was that the fans had invented alternate orders with how to view the films and that he thought it was really interesting because depending on how you view them, you could have a different, yet just as profound, of an experience. Chronological order is the way to view SW as it was intended by the storyteller, but Machete order (IV,V,I,II,III,VI) is a close second in my experience after watching reactors on YouTube. When they get to Revenge Of The Sith and realize Luke and Leia are twins, it's always amazing .


I don't know if you guys have seen any of Rick Worley's brilliant YouTube videos on SW, but he details how he believes the prequels are designed to work best viewed as the first three films "I think most of the problems people have with the prequels is that they insist on viewing them as the second trilogy rather than the first . For instance, it can be a huge plot contrivance that Anakin built C-3P0 if you watch the originals first. But if you watch them in order, it's no contrivance at all, the two characters started together and then drifted apart naturally as the story progressed ".

 

I think we should keep the tag, and drop the prequels.

 

Cmon Bro

 

I think the 1-6 crowd assumes that any newcomer already knows the story from cultural osmosis.

Going into this franchise completely blind; 4-6, 1-3, and then 7-9 is the way to go.

 

Take the old five Planet of the Apes films. "Escape" and "Conquest" are prequels/sequels. "Escape" has some characters from the first film but the film is set before the first one. So prequels really.
How many do you think start watching that series with "Escape" and "Conquest"?

I would say pretty few.

And I disagree with this, the films were made to be watched in release order, because that is how they were made.
Lucas knew that the OT existed so structured the PT accordingly.
Your own example shows this, ANH explains what the Force is and then we see it used. So we have an explanation that Jedi have super-human powers. So when Obi-Wan uses the "mind trick" and Vader uses the choke, we get how they can do this.
In TPM, we just see Jedi do "magic" without much explanation as to how it works.

Other example, in ESB, the Vader reveal is structured to be a surprise to both Luke and the audience. We see this very clearly with Vader and the emperor talking. They talk about Luke but are careful not to mention that Vader is his father. But in RotJ, when Vader and Palpatine are talking about Luke, they do not try to hide that Luke is Vader's son. Vader says "My son is with them." because now the cat is out of the bag so no need to obfuscate anymore.

The prophecy is made a significant plot issue in the PT, it is never mentioned at all in the OT.
So if you watch the PT first, you could wonder why it is suddenly dropped.

Palpatine and Yoda are major characters in the PT but are not seen in ANH. The emperor is mentioned, that is all.

That Leia is Luke's sister is also no longer a surprise and the clear attraction Luke has for her in ANH now comes off as odd.

People could argue that Anakin turning is now the surprise. But I disagree, that Anakin will turn bad is very heavily hinted at. Yoda drops some ominous warnings in TPM and in AotC, he commits mass-murder.

Or take Yoda, he is mentioned early in TPM and we see him but when is the character named as Yoda? Pretty late from what I recall. But if you had seen the OT that is no issue but if not, then you hear about this Yoda and don't know who that is.
Mace Windu is never named at all in TPM from what I recall.

Bye for now.
Blackboard Monitor

 

I don't know about this. For a few reasons:

1. The Prequels will always be prequels by definition : a story or movie containing events that precede those of an existing work. This will ALWAYS be the case with the Prequels.
You are fighting against time and space. The Original Trilogy will always have been released first. People refer to films as prequels/sequels based on when they came out, not based on their chronological order. No?

2. Now, will the Prequel Trilogy always be referred to as such? It depends. Lucasfilm has, and continues to, refer to this trilogy as The Prequel Trilogy on it's merchandise, promotions, etc. It's been marketed as such for decades and, at this point, Lucasfilm would need to make a concentrated campaign effort to "undo" this branding. They could, but why would they? What would be the reasoning from a commercial standpoint?

So, are we hypothetically talking about 50 years from now or more? A person that viewed Episode 3 as a 10 year old (PT generation) could easily live until until 2075. If this is the case, I change my answer to your original question to: Sure, but not in our lifetime.

While I really appreciate your thorough research, I am well aware of Lucas's intended viewing order. Again, he's the one that dictated emphasis on the word Prequel. As stated, he might not have invented it, but Lucas certainly popularized the term.

Furthermore, Lucas still often refers to the Original Trilogy as such as that's what it is. He calls Episode 4 "the first film" as just as often as not. If you have done your research, you would know that the original story was the saga ANH, ESB, and ROTJ. What would become the PT, only existed as a vague/nebulous backstory.

Again, Lucas's preferred order, or watching the films in chronological order, doesn't negate (again) the fact that Episodes 1-3 were made/released after Episodes 4-6. It doesn't change the fact that HE popularized and marketed these films as The Prequels. Once again, prequel designation simply does not change based on preferred viewing order. Even if you start the saga by watching Episode 1 you are still starting by watching The Prequels.

Consider: People often erroneously refer to Indiana Jones and The Temple of Doom as a sequel to Raiders of the Lost Ark. That mistake doesn't actually make Temple of Doom a sequel, though. It's still a prequel and forever will be. Questions arise: Did Lucas intend for people to watch Temple of Doom first? Is this a popular practice amongst Indiana Jones viewers?

Consider other franchises: In years to come are people going to stop watching franchises with the initial entry/film?Are we supposed to go back and watch Ridley's Scott's Prometheus, and Alien: Covenant before the original Alien?

This is because Jedi Knights* were largely the backstory to the Original Trilogy.

You are essentially saying: Episode 4 talks about backstory and the films about backstory actually shows you the backstory. Yep, that's how prequels work.

Listen, I love the prequels. Yet, Obi-Wan's explanation of The Force 35 minutes into Episode 4 better sums up the concept than the 2 hours of showing and talking that occurs in Episode 1.

Plus, this explanation is followed by multiple followup demonstrations/explantations in ANH as well as ESB and ROTJ. Hell, the Yoda portion of ESB is basically the entire manifesto about the Jedi philosophy behind what The Force is and how to use it. The knowledge Yoda drops is invaluable when watching Anakin's descent into the Dark Side in the prequels. Also, this knowledge/exposition is also largely absent from Episodes 1-3.

Point being: We get a base level of knowledge about all things The Force/Jedi in Episode 4. With each additional film we get sequential scaffolding of additional knowledge that increase the scope of our knowledge. This base knowledge is NOT presented in Episode 1. In fact, Episode 1 presents extra refinements to our previous knowledge (midichlorians, living Force, Sith, The Chosen One) that build on what viewers saw/learned about The Force in Episodes 4-6.

If you were only going to show a brand new viewer one movie that best introduces and encapsulates Star Wars is, you are choosing The Phantom Menace over A New Hope?

Listen, I am not saying one shouldn't/cannot start with Episode 1. Certainly the movie is self contained enough that one can get the gist without having seen the previous films in the series.

Yet, despite George Lucas's (sometimes dubious) intentions/claims that it's meant to be viewed in chronological order...he simply did not design/create films that way and you can tell. Simply stated: Watching The Prequels first is a less holistic experience than watching the OT first.

Again, much of the drama in Episode 1-3 relies on foreshadowing. Knowledge of the future past is key to the stakes. This is because the prequels are, in fact, the 4th 5th and 6th film in the series. The Prequels lose a lot of narrative drama if the viewers haven't seen 4-6. Certainly you know this.

Now, I'm not saying they are bereft of any drama, intrigue, etc. Certainly The PT kicks butt on its own. Yet, you are certain to get every reference, wink, nod, thematic connection, and foreshadowing.

There are a lot of holes in this statement.

First of all, again, I'm sure that people can watch the PT first and have a great experience. They are kick ass movies. I'm just saying, viewers are leaving a lot of meat on the bone and they are forced to make connections retroactively. Now, I'm positive that can be it's own fun viewing experience. I'm not even opposed to it. Yet, removing the idea/title of Prequels just obfuscates the issue and also removes some of the choice that comes with the categorizations of PT, OT, ST as they currently exist.

Secondly, I'm not sure if watching youtube reaction vids is anything but anecdotal/soft evidence. I am confident in applying this statement to every aspect of life. Youtube is not reality, it's a fake as the Kardashians.

Not only is this statement hyperbolic and untrue, it contrasts with what you said next:

Not obsolete after all, I guess.

Bottom Line: I am all for the Prequels. I love 'em. I am all for people watching Star Wars in whatever order floats their boat.

There is no shame or stigma in any film being labeled a prequel. There is no shame/stigma for SW films being labeled as The Prequels. That's what they are! Removing that label will only obfuscate the issue and it will not somehow make The Phantom Menace be as honored, revered, and beloved as the actual first Star Wars movie is.

 

if you hate the prequels with passion (god knows why), why are you in this part of the forums ? just stay in the originals.

for some reason many star wars (specifically originals) fans think star wars is all about one sentence "no, i am your father". its a critical part of the story, but the arc is waaay bigger than that. the arc starts from episode 1 and ends in episode 6.
IF the story was only about luke skywalkers and his adventures, than i guess the prequels could act as explanations for his adventure, but it is not. the story is all of it. and i know many star wars fans objects, but anakin skywalker is "the guy". the one whos story is being told all over the 6 chapters. i didnt say it. the creator of star wars did.

if you read a book with 20 chapters. wouldnt be redundant to call the first 10 'prequels' ? wouldnt they just be earlier chapters of the same story ?

 

Where's the fun in that?

 

reported for trolling.

 

I dropped it years ago precisely because these films aren't prequels. The fact that they popularized the term - and that GL himself uses it - is irrelevant. They are designed, not to mention numbered, as the first episodes in the series.
TPM works splendidly as an introduction to the Saga and that's because it was made to be viewed first.
ANH, by contrast, is now far stronger as a follow-up to ROTS.

They could easily have been numbered VII-IX and there would've been no question about the viewing order. Then, "prequel trilogy" would've been perfectly applicable.

These days, I usually go with Anakin's Trilogy.

 

Prequel trilogy is always perfectly applicable, because that is exactly what they are. What order you watch them in, how they are numbered, and all that stuff is entirely irrelevant when debating the point of whether the movies are prequels or not. They are prequels, they will always be prequels because you can't undo the past. The main story of Star Wars came in three seperate trilogies. The original trilogy, the prequel trilogy that - as the name implies - came out later but tells a story that happened before the originals, and the sequel trilogy, which are sequels to the originals.

There is no reason to drop the prequel tag, because
a) they are prequels
b) they are called that by almost everyone, including official sources
c) it is a perfectly fine description that helps define the eras and is easily understood by viewers

While I agree that once you know the movies going 1-9 is the most logical way to watch the story, that doesn't change the fact that the 9 movies happened to be made in three trilogies of three, seperated by quite a bit of time between the releases.

 

The Vader reveal is important but not what SW is all about. But it is very clearly designed to be a surprise to both Luke and the audience. If you watch the PT first, then that surprise is gone and not the only one.
Leia, Yoda, the emperor and his power.

As for what Lucas says, I would take it with a large grain of salt as he has contradicted himself more than once and is not always very precise in what he says. Lucas did say back in the day that Star Wars was the story of Luke Skywalker. That changed. But the OT isn't about Anakin, it is about Luke. Anakin /Vader is an important character sure but he isn't the main character, the main focus.
The focus is and always was Luke, his journey, his struggles and his triumph at the end.

Except that isn't the case with the PT and OT. A prequel is;

If the book you mentioned was written as a whole and published as such, then the first chapters are not a prequel. It might be backstory or set up but by definition it is not a prequel.

The PT were made years after the OT and are about events that lead up to the OT. So they are prequels, there is no point in denying that.

Ex, the first Narnia book written is "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe." but the first book in In-Universe chronology is "The Magician's nephew" And if you buy a collected volume of the Narnia books, it can be first one in the collection. Does not make it any less of a prequel. And would it be a good way to start the Narnia books? Don't know about that.
And if one insists in getting everything in In-Universe chronological order then one has to stop towards the end of "The Lion..." and read "The Horse and His Boy" and then go back to that book.
Would most people do that? Unlikely.

The list of prequels in books, plays and films is pretty long.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prequels
For ex, the two Ewoks films are apparently prequels to RotJ so should we watch those before watching Jedi?

Prequel is not a foul word, look at the list, there are some highly praised works that are prequels.
So why is the label "prequel" an issue?

Bye for now.
Blackboard Monitor

 

Yeah, but that's a different situation entirely. They didn't create "Escape" and "Conquest" to be viewed first. They didn't number those films as POTA 1&2 respectively, and then retroactively go back and number the original POTA as 3. Lucas did do that, and he is also the original creator. The Original Star Wars has been renamed Episode IV A New Hope since before Empire was released. If they had numbered the POTA films as I pointed out, perhaps people would watch them in that order.

Yeah, in a way. Perhaps Lucas both made Episodes I-III as prequels to the original trilogy because the originals were done first obviously, and for the fans of those films. And at the same time, constructed them to be viewed as the first three films by future generations who by then would have all the episodes. I mean it's obvious. If he wasn't about doing that, he wouldn't have gone through the trouble of numbering the episodes. He wouldn't have retroactively gone back and changed the first film from simply being called "Star Wars" to being called Episode IV A New Hope. If he wasn't about I-III being viewed first, he would've simply done exactly what the old POTA films did.

Ok so as you say, ANH explains what the force IS, and after that we see Obi wan use a Jedi mind trick, Vader choke an unfaithful imperial, and then at the end of the movie we see Luke destroy the Death Star by trusting in the force. That's it, and it's nothing compared to how many times the jedi and sith use the force in TPM. Qui Gon and Obi Wan first mention the force not more than 3 minutes into the movie and then go on mentioning it numerous times afterwards. They display abilities like being able to sense danger, precognition, telekinesis, superspeed, ability to jump really high, mind trick and lightsaber combat. I can't speak from experience because unfortunately I saw the films just like how you guys did (release order). But from all I've stated, it's far from improbable someone watching the films this way couldn't come to the same conclusion (without it being explained to them through expository dialogue) that "ok, the jedi have superhuman powers that seem to stem from their connection to some energy source called "The Force"."

Anyways, SW has become so ingrained in pop culture, pretty much anyone whether they've seen the films or not, knows the Jedi use the force. And does it really matter that it's explained in ANH?? I mean don't get me wrong, it's a great scene. But HOW exactly does the force as Obi Wan explained it translate to someone being able to perform a mind trick on an individual? Hmmm I don't know, seems a bit like magic to me. Didn't someone say that? . Didn't Alec Guiness refer to Star Wars as "a bunch fairytale rubbish"?

The Darth Vader reveal takes on a different meaning if viewed in chronological order, and the twist is moved to happening in Revenge Of The Sith when Anakin turns to the dark side. It might be obvious to you and me having seen the originals first, but based on the reaction videos of people who watched the prequels first, it is actually pretty darn shocking that Anakin turns to the dark side, let alone becoming Darth Vader whose image has again become so ingrained in pop culture that pretty much everyone knows that name and his appearance, it's always pretty epic seeing them realize it "wait... he's Darth Vader ??".

Even though Anakin shows dark tendencies from time to time, he's not shown to be a bad person, but more of a tragic case. Someone who was failed in almost every way. BTW when you say, "he committed mass murder", you're leaving out a lot of contexts which is both outrageous and unfair. Anakin's mother was brutalized, and God knows what else by the sand people, he was having visions of her suffering and the jedi kept telling him they were only dreams. It got to the point to where he couldn't ignore it anymore, but he was too late, she dies in his arms. If he had not listened to the Jedi and Obi Wan, he would've been able to save her. In his great rage, he loses control and slaughters every sand person in that village. If any of us were in Anakin's shoes in that exact situation, having that power, we likely would've done the same. After all, you wouldn't be thinking about it, people don't think about things when they're in an emotional rage.

Anyways, getting back on track. Anakin turning to the dark side and being revealed to be Darth Vader is a very underrated twist that OT fanboys don't seem to notice. Based on the videos I've seen, I think it could even rival the "I AM YOUR FATHER" twist since when people experience that one, it's not even definitive. Vader could be lying in order to seduce Luke. The Vader scene in Empire now remains a revelation for Luke but changes into something different for the viewer, since as the viewer having seen I-III, this is something you would've been waiting for Luke to hear to see how he'd react to the truth, and in that way the scene retains a lot of its gravitas despite not being a twist anymore. Vader talking to the emperor and him talking about how Luke is "the offspring of Anakin Skywalker" isn't weird either since it's been established by Yoda in Episode III, that Vader and Anakin are basically different people, which explains how Obi Wan comes to believe that Vader killed Anakin.

Yeah, it's pretty alarming. I guess the one caveat in this situation, people who saw I-III first would understand how R2 feels about the whole thing. When Leia kissed Luke in Empire, R2 was definitely like "wow, yeah this is getting pretty out of hand".

Hmm, So what? There's lots of star wars characters not namedropped in a specific movie they appeared in. Boba Fett wasn't namedropped in Empire Strikes Back, he's just called "bounty hunter" by Vader and Lando (didn't hurt his popularity). Bib Fortuna wasn't namedropped in ROTJ, and neither was Salacious Crumb (lovable little fellow) or Max Rebo, also the Rancor had a name, she wasn't just "Rancor". Sure, Mace Windu says some lines. But he's not really integral to the story until AOTC and ROTS. Yoda is somewhat more involved being the grand master of the Jedi order, but his role in TPM is the smallest out of all the films he appears in other than ROTJ. The characters most integral to the story of TPM are Qui Gon, Anakin, Padme, Obi Wan, Jar Jar (the key to all this), and Palpatine (The Phantom Menace) .

 

Nope.

The numbers are relevant, because they tell you the order of things.
What's irrelevant is that this trilogy was made after the other. These aren't simply stories that take place before/after each other; they're episodes of a series; ONE story that is clearly mapped out over the course of six chapters. One experience that begins in TPM and ends in ROTJ.

There's no original movie with sequels and prequels here, just a series. That the episodes were made out of order has no bearing on that, nor does anyone's viewing order.

 

I actually agree, Lucas made them as prequels. But that doesn't mean he didn't also design them to be viewed as the first three chapters in the saga for someone who had never seen the films. I think he made it a point to make it work both ways, for both people who grew up with the originals and for new people to experience in a way that was unique for them. From a commercial standpoint, LucasFilm will probably never refer to them as anything but "The Prequels" and as you say, why should they? My argument isn't really should we drop "The Prequels" tag, but rather is release order really the best way to view Star Wars. The first Star Wars film I ever saw was The Phantom Menace in theaters, I was five years old. It was the first experience I had in the cinema, and I've loved Star Wars ever since. I immediately got into the originals (even had the original versions on VHS released in 1995), and my main goal was to get Obi Wan's lightsaber from The Phantom Menace (all toys r us ever had was Qui Gon's which was cool too, but I already had it).

Eventually I saw all the prequels in theaters as well as TFA and TLJ (never got around to watching TROS, I read the leak online months before it came out and was let down when I found out it was true, all of it...). But of course, I saw the films like most other people, in release order pretty much, so unless I erase my memory LOL, I can never see the saga like how George Lucas intended. But people can do that now, and I think more people should do that instead of just watching it the way we did. The prequels as you say, will always be known as prequels most likely, but that doesn't mean they can't or shouldn't be viewed first.

I agree

This is a different case similar in comparison to what @Samuel Vimes pointed out with the Planet Of The Apes films. Two out of those five films were actually prequels to the first movie, but the writers of those films never went back and numbered the films as Lucas did. Temple Of Doom is a prequel, but Lucas and Spielberg never went back and numbered those films and made TOD INDY1 and Raiders INDY2. In Indiana Jones movie box sets, TOD is always the second DVD because it's the second movie despite being a prequel. This is NOT the case for Star Wars, in the DVD boxsets, The Phantom Menace is the first DVD and labeled episode I. See? That's the difference.

Yes, and also because someone starting with The Phantom Menace will need to see what a Jedi Knight is, what is so special about them, what is their purpose, what are their abilities etc etc.

That's how the films work for us, as prequels because we've seen the originals already. Obviously, it works quite different for someone who hasn't seen those films and so they wouldn't view them as prequels necessarily even if that's what they're called. They'd see them as the first three episodes of Star Wars.

Yes, Obi Wan explains what the force is. And then later on in the film, we see a couple of things force users can do: mind tricks, choking people, and Luke trusts in his instincts to destroy the Death Star. I'm not even going to attempt to list all the force abilities we see in Episode I but let's just put it this way: we see about 4 Jedi mind tricks, and one failed one. I think it's a matter of opinion whether Obi Wan's dialogue of what the force is, is better than seeing what a Jedi is, and all the different things a Jedi can do with the force.

If I were showing a brand-new viewer the STAR WARS SAGA for the first time, I'd definitely show them The Phantom Menace first. If I was showing a brand-new viewer one Star Wars movie, just one, I'd definitely show them A New Hope. (Or maybe the Holiday Special, hmmm IDK depends on how much I like them.

Hmm yes because The Prequels are busy showing you what's wrong with The Jedi (except for Qui Gon, God bless him). Yoda was enlightened and humbled substantially by his terrible defeat in the prequels, as was Obi Wan. The Jedi in the prequels are flawed, dogmatic, arrogant and complacent after experiencing 1000 years of no Sith. Qui Gon was the closest one to a true jedi out of all of them even Yoda, and he wasn't even allowed on the council. In fact, he continually argued with them. Qui Gon was the one who was supposed to train Anakin and was the only Jedi Palpatine truly feared, even more than Yoda.

Because if Qui Gon doesn't die in The Duel Of The Fates (of Anakin and the galaxy), he goes on to train Anakin, and Anakin never then turns to the dark side because he has the father figure he always needed (that isn't Palpatine) and Qui Gon definitely would've went back to save his mom. It was Anakin's destiny to destroy Palpatine, and it was the duty of the jedi to train him correctly. Instead, they became war generals, let an impressionable young boy (who is the chosen one, don't forget that) hangout with the chancellor (Satan) and allow him to be corrupted for 13 years right under their noses, as they continued to do Satan's bidding themselves. Mace: "we're keepers of the peace not soldiers" "oh but you need generals to lead the clones Chancellor"? "we'll do it. All in the name of the republic, all in the name of peace and justice in the galaxy". They fell right into Palpatine's hands, as he continued to play them like a fiddle.

Yoda knew it was over as soon as he lost the battle to Palpatine, he knew the Jedi were wrong and had allowed this to happen. He knew he had to survive in order to teach the new generation of Jedi the right way. And wouldn't you know it, by the time of ANH and ESB, both Yoda and Obi wan are more like Qui Gon than how they were in the prequels (makes sense, they were training with him for years learning how to become one with the force). Obi wan tells Luke to feel the force flowing through him, he never said anything like that in The Prequels, Qui Gon did: "Remember, concentrate on the moment, feel don't think, trust your instincts". But not Obi wan, no he was all about his weapons, he once told Anakin "This weapon is your life". Yoda doesn't even have his lightsaber anymore at the time of "Empire" because he knew he didn't need it. He tells Luke before he enters the cave to face his darkness "your weapons, you will not need them", he also says "ah great warrior, war does not make one great".

The contrast between the Prequel Trilogy Jedi and the Jedi Obi Wan and Yoda eventually become in the originals is a very underrated aspect of the saga and great character development by Lucas. But as great as they became as Jedi, it all culminated in the Jedi Luke became. He made the action truest to any Jedi, by making the ultimate sacrifice. By saying No, I'd rather die than kill my father "Never, I'll never turn to the dark side." "I am a Jedi, like my father before me". He was the only one who was able to still see the good in his father, despite all the terrible things he'd done. And it was the nobility of that sacrifice that allowed Anakin to free the dark sides grip over him and save his son. Anakin chose to sacrifice himself to save his family, and it was this act and destroying the Sith that brought him back into the light. Something that Obi Wan, Yoda, and Palpatine thought impossible.

In episode III, Anakin gave up his soul and everything dear to him to learn how to prevent death. Because of all the horrific and terrible things he did, he ended up killing the woman he loved and subsequently having his humanity burned away as he had to live the rest of his life in hell (an iron lung, as half machine/half man). After Anakin dies from his injuries, Luke takes his armor and cybernetics (the body disappeared as he became one with the force) and burns it on a pyre (A funeral for a Jedi). If you watch the films in order (I,II,III,IV,V,VI), this is the culmination of everything. Anakin burning on a pyre is direct parallel of course to Qui Gon's funeral in Phantom Menace where Obi Wan first promised Anakin "You WILL be a Jedi... I promise", but even more it parallels to Anakin's immolation scene in Episode III when he had his humanity burned away from him. Now the machinery and Vader burns. If you don't watch it in order, you don't get this. If you watch the originals first, then this is the first time you see such a scene, and there's no connective tissue between this and Qui Gon's funeral, or Anakin's immolation. It's only connected if you watch it in order.

I don't think so based upon what I just said. I think you can watch the original trilogy by itself and get a great story that has a happy ending. I think you can watch the prequels by themselves and get a great story that has a dark and tragic ending. But I think if you watch the originals after viewing the prequels, you get the greatest film saga of all time with a bittersweet ending.

 

I disagree. I think the release order shows more of a structure and dramatic unfolding of information that I think viewing in chronological doesn't. Or, at the very least, a viewing of 4/5/1/2/3/6

 

Well, yeah. And vice versa: The chronological order gives you a structure and dramatic unfolding of information that the release order doesn't.
But this isn't about viewing orders. It's about what these films are - and that depends on your point of view.

 

it is a nice twist in episode 5, but everyone knows vader is the father of luke. it hasnt been a reveal since the 80s when empire released.
people in the tribes of africa have heard of "lukehhhhh, i am your father chhhhhhh"
and since the prequels were released and changed it from a twist to an emotional reveal between two characters, it was no longer just an intended twist. it becomes a reveal in irony.

dagenspear said: ↑
I disagree. I think the release order shows more of a structure and dramatic unfolding of information that I think viewing in chronological doesn't. Or, at the very least, a viewing of 4/5/1/2/3/6
tell that to those who watched the entire series chronological. who saw darth vader torture his own daughter. and luke and vader tries to kill eachother. all while the viewers say "omg its your family!"
i personally enjoy ironic narratives, i find them extremely powerful emotional tools. release or even worse, machete, ruins it.



but again, this is not our discussion.

 

how to delete my posts ?

 

Honestly both orders work wonderfully so it is IMO totally personal choice.

I agree TPM requires a little knowledge of prior released films, but this only matters on your very first screening. TPM and ANH enhance each other either way.

The dramatic irony 1-6 is indeed a strong point of the chronological approach.

 

Here's the thing: The Phantom Menace simply isn't narratively structured like a movie designed to introduce new viewers to a galaxy far, far away. Especially when compared to A New Hope. This was well detailed with examples by @Samuel Vimes previously.

Cool. This is a different conversation then. I think there is a multitude of ways that one can view the saga for a multitude of experiences. My prefrence for newbies is in the order of release. I feel like the films build off of each other in order of release. Although this may not be GL's intention, he can be the expert on making SW movies and I'll be the expert at watching them.

Again, you seem to be stating that we should watch the movies as the artist/creator intended. I get this. However, just as I really had no say in how GL makes, changes, designs his films... he has no say in how I watch them.

Problem is: GL also hasn't invented time travel, or neuralyzers... yet. So fans are always going to like what they like how they like it.

There is no "right" way to watch these movies. People can do anything they want. Personally, I think SW is like sex and pizza. Even when it's bad it's pretty good and there are a lot of different experience to be had.

Sometimes I watch 1-9. Sometimes I go 4-6, 1-3, 7-9. Sometimes I get weird and go: 4-5, 1-3, 6-9. Sometimes I only watch one trilogy. Sometimes, I watch only Rogue One and ANH back to back. You are younger than me. Rejoice that you have streaming and so many options. I'd not be able to be as agile in my viewing habits with VHS and rewinding and tracking. Do you know what tracking is?

Right. Because TPM largely deals with Jedi Knights. Yet, you go into the movie seeing these robed/hooded dudes doing magic right away with no context for any of it. Right?

Unless you rely on the fact that, because of the OT and it's permeation into our culture, people generally know what Jedi Knights are before ever watching TPM even if that's the first SW movie they watch.

Well, yeah. That sounds right. They are the first three Episodes, but not the first three films in the franchise/series.

I'm not sure what you are saying here.

Pretend, hypothetically, that you have a first time viewer who has no knowledge of Star Wars. They are somehow unaware of cultural touchstones like The Force, Jedi, Darth Vader, Yoda, etc.

For the first 30 minutes of TPM, what is this viewer to assume about how these two robed dudes are able to do magical things if they have no knowledge of previous SW films? At what point in the movie does this get explained? When Qui-Gon is talking to Anakin's mom? When is The Force explained in TPM?

Listen, you don't have to explain the prequels to me. I know 'em, I love 'em.

Yet, none of this long portion you wrote after this is a reason to show someone Episode 1 first. It's the opposit.e I mean, look how convoluted and longwinded your writing was to explain it to me (a hardcore fan). I think this is just more evidence that states Episode 1 is not a better entry point in the series than the first film (Episode 4) is.

Again, what you just said was a HUGE explanation to someone who is a fan and you felt compelled to explain/write that much. That is an indictment of your Episode 1 for newbies campaign.

All of that said, I have enjoyed our chat. Again, I want to reiterate that folks can choose to watch the saga in any order they want and still get a fun experience....I just think the Prequel Trilogy should be called what it is and forever with: The Prequel Trilogy. Which, of course, begins with Episode 1...the fourth film in the franchise.

 

George is on record on writing the story that be realised it was way too long for one film, or one trilogy. He said he decided to begin in the middle of the story. Even the very first scene implies this is the middle of the story, in a middle of a chase even, as Rogue one confirms. I find it very satisfying that even with all the new cartoons and tv shows Episode 4 is no beginning.. its the precise middle