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

Have we wrapped back around to nothing in the PT mattering as long as Anakin ends up in a robot suit? I swear this just happened like 6 months ago.

 

So again...

"he's a Sith who doesn't care about other Sith or their legacy, but goes along with their rules and customs and so forth, so...he's a Sith...but not really, but he is"

have I got this right?

 

Palpatine is going to be whatever he needs to be in order for you to lose this argument. If you say that Palpatine is a human, someone will come in here and tell you that Palpatine is a Trandoshan.

I've had persons tell me that the reason the characters in the PT don't act logically is because they're not technically humans, they're just aliens that look like humans and their thought process is different.

Welcome to the PT forums.

 

"Makes sense" is not the same thing as "necessary for the story". Which in this case, it isn't.

The characters and factions in the prequels are plenty three dimensional. The obsession with knowing more about the history of the Sith is a personal problem, not the movie's problem. Which could be explored in future feature films or shows. And it should, probably. But there was no place for that in any of the prequels, nor should there have been.

Literally no one said that. I take the usage of hyperbole as a white flag. Thanks for conceding in this moot point that you made in the first place.

 

this is a genuine question, and not meant to be flippant, so if you would answer genuinly I'd be grateful:

would you be alright with the title 'The Musings Of The Talking Walking Cotton Blue Candy?' for EP III?

if not, why not?

lol

I....really wouldn't know how to respond to that

I would like people whose backs are up in this thread to know I do not hate the PT, I dare say it's my fave trilogy precisely because of the flashy lightsaber fights, corny dialogue and pretty planets.
That being said...those of us who are not saying they are perfect are not bashing or attempting to belittle what you enjoy. We are simply saying what could have made the saga even better! Saying we'd like a little back story here and there and for character motivations to make sense is not 'pissing' on the films as somebody said before. It's acknowledging that these movies, like any movie, are not perfect. It's not a personal attack. And it's also ok to say 'yeah I suppose they could have added a line here' nobody needs to come out with spontaneous head canons for things.
Just my two cents

 

I haven't spoken to you or tagged you at all today before right now. Just because you read something in here doesn't mean it's directed at you. And I'm not conceding anything. Do not put words in my mouth.

I've explained a handful of times in here that the "Lucas bashing" I'm accused of is simply me holding the films he has made to the exact same standard I hold every other film. I simply refuse to look at the PT with the "Lucas Curve" as I've dubbed it.

 

Oh I didn't. I can interpret your posts any way I want to. After all, you do the same with the prequels.

 

wait, now wanting to know more about the villain in a story is an 'obsession'

*sigh* ok.

And no, it's a movie problem.
I've seen these movies with non SW fans, they had no idea why the bad guys were doing anything...'guess that's their problem...'

exactly, any film that proclaims to be iconic should be held to scrutiny. Whether that's MCU, Star Wars, or the freakin' Alien franchise.

 

Most non-star wars fans I have watched the PT with generally have questions about the relationship between the Jedi and the Sith.

edit/ I have had friends who knew some info from the old EU. I wonder how they feel now that most all of that is not canon anymore.

One of the main issues that the MCU had when it first started was that the villains were basically hald-dimensional characters. Had GL directed an MCU movie... I can't image the mental gymnastics that would have come into play.

 

no, the details you ask will just humanize them. the only villain in star wars that is humanized is anakin skywalker. the rest are very well placed.
when you write a story, you need to be very careful with the villain. because too much information makes the audience have sympathy towards them.

every detail qui-gon gave us was part of the story. past battles between the sith and jedi ? not so much.
even if no one said that the the sith rule once again, and even if palpatine was the first sith, the story would still stay exactly the same.

these details are important for the story because they explain why they want to help/kill john connor. why his mother is in mental institute and what she did to get there. why they want to destroy a computer lab. unlike star wars, terminator 1 and 2 are not dependant on previous movies. they are part of the same franchise, and its a sequel but it is also a standalone. that is why they need to explain everything THAT MATTERS for the story.
the universe of terminator is much bigger, we just see the things we need to see. other stuff appears on the comics.
did you know they wanted to film the entire time machine and going back in time sequence of T2 ? but it was too expensive and it wasnt important for the story and would take too much time, so they removed it from filming alltogether.
EVERYTHING in terminator 1 and 2 is told because it is meant to be told. especially terminator 2. terminator 2 is the best movie ever made, story, writing, special effects, directing, filmography, acting and everything else. all is 100% perfect.
the uncut even adds extra stuff, they just dont matter. they show the terminator learns to smile (which is why he smiles in the bunker). for the super-fans, its fun to see. for the normies, theatrical release explains everything.

you dont want to use terminator as an example with me...

 

so you know they found interest in the film.
but the film never wanted us to dwell on the animosity between the two factions. there was too much going on for that.
the TF and naboo animosity was more important. the republic and the seperatists animosity was more important. anakin and the jedi as a whole animosity is more important.

a film is a film is a film. scrutiny for just having a certain title is silly.
scrutiny because of being fan, sure, i can see that. but simply because its a star wars movie ? nope.

and MCU isnt iconic. its not even original. disney just bought rights for characters and make movies about them from already existing stories. its also extremely boring.

 

Not really. They all liked the special effects, but thought Hayden was embarrassingly bad as Anakin and were legit curious why everyone kept saying Anakin as a good person when he's clearly not.

Like what? Oh, I see you've provided examples.

We still have no idea why the blockade was even such a big deal other than it being mean.

We still have no idea why the Separatists wanted to leave the Republic. They just wanted to.

We still have no idea what the prophecy even means or who wrote it or why it's important. How does destroying the Sith make the force balanced? How did it get unbalanced? What is happening?

If GL didn't want me wondering what the Sith were taking revenge FOR then he should have called the movie something else.

Simply put, if GL wanted me to like his PT, then he needed to explain what was happening. I'm not just going to like whatever slop he puts up on a screen by default. You can't just throw in bits of meaningless backdrop info, not explain villain motivations beyond "They're the bad guys" gloss over entire character changes (looking at you Anakin going from TPM to AOTC) and expect me to see your film as anything else than a disconnected millionaire trying sell toys.

 

watch TPM and read the opening crawl.

watch AOTC and read the opening crawl.

watch episode 1-3. the jedi said several times they might have misread the prophesy.
george lucas said in interview that anakin brought balance to the force in episode 6.

but all the information you ask, there is either no reason for us to know or george simply didnt want to tell us. the only reason he said that anakin brought balance to the force is because someone asked him.

well... ok.

but i was talking about the "STAR WARS" title. not the ROTS sub-title.

 

I did. Doesn't say. Enlighten me.

I did. Doesn't say. Enlighten me.

Actually, no. They only say that one single time.

It sounds like you need to watch these movies again. They don't contain the info you say they do.

You can't make an entire trilogy about evil people attacking from the shadows and then get upset when people want to know what is happening in the shadows. If you don't want people asking questions about certain topics... then don't bring up those certain topics.

And according to some fans in this very thread, all the info about the Sith taking revenge isn't even pertinent because, apparently, Sidious' motives have next to nothing to do with the Sith. Am I right about this, @Dandelo ? Is that what we've been told?

 

what in your opinion are the motives of the sith ?

unlike the jedi, the sith is NOT an order. its a school that is taught master to apprentice. they are very selfish people, they each have their own personal goals. some simply want to be stronger with the force, some want to rule, some want to destroy jedi because its their ideal enemy, some wanting to leave past allies. some want to save the people they love. they all align themselves with the sith to gain their own selfish objectives.

but the jedi are very organized. they follow a very specific teaching. mainly to gain power to protect others.

 

the trilogy features villain who fight in the shadows, but it does not revolve around them. i dont know where you got that idea.
the movies revolve around the achievements of obi-wan kenobi and the life of anakin skywalker. it revolves around the fall of the republic. eventually all together.

 

why? did you study the film for twelve years?

that's what I'm being led to believe yes, that and the movie is just a title that might as well have been called Star Wars: Dip Dee Doo

Order
Noun
the arrangement or disposition of people or things in relation to each other according to a particular sequence, pattern, or method.

so, yes it is an order.

ok, so you just described Sidious

ok, so you described Anakin

ok, so you described Maul

ok, so you described Dooku

ok, now you've just described Anakin again.

Great, so now tell us why as a collective, they want revenge...

 

no. darth plagueis the wise.

i cant tell you something i dont know. george lucas never told us this because it wasnt part of the story he was telling. and if you want to know the meaning of the title, ask the guy who wrote it.
but if you ask me, its just to boost the hype. it is a great title after all.

maybe he had a script for that. i dont know. but at the end of the day, the answers to this question will not affect the characters which the story revolves whatsoever. it will give a backstory about the sith but guess what, this isnt a sith story. this isnt a jedi story. this is an anakin story.

 

You just said the story wasn't about Anakin and now you're saying it's his story.

These two things contradict each other.

 

i think you accidentally took two quotes from different places, mixed them up and then told me they contradict.

i think you should look back at the things you quote so you wont get the wrong message (like you did now)

*and by the way, you mixed two separate sentences.
**its not the first time you "mistakenly" misquoted me. STOP THAT.

 

No, details will give them a motivation beyond "I do what I do because I am an Evil bad guy", which you seem to think is all that is needed. It will add depth and layers to them, make them more interesting and fleshed out. And it might also add to the world building

Ex 1, X2 and Stryker. He is the villain, the antagonist and what he wants to do is wipe out all mutans. That is pretty horrible. But he is given a backstory that adds details to him. That he isn't just "I want to kill mutants because I am evil." His son was a mutant with mental powers and he asked Xavier to "cure" him, which Xavier did not do. And his son blamed his parents for his situation so toyed with their minds and in the end, his wife killed herself. This gives Stryker a personal motivation. Still does not make what he does right or give the audience a reason to cheer for him.

Ex 2, take Magneto in the first X-Men, the scene in the concentration camp at the start. That is part of why Magneto does what he does. He is still a murderer, he is still wrong but it gives him more depth and fleshes him out rather just being a mutant bad guy. You could do the first film without that scene and just have Magneto be a mutant who believes in mutant supremacy and that is why he does what he does.
But to me, the film would be lesser for it and the character less interesting.

In short, well written villains and antagonists quite often have a backstory, something that gives some reason why they do what they do and why they are this way. And not just "I am Evil."
Final ex, compare Loki in Thor 1 and the Dark Elves in Thor 2. Both are the antagonist but the former has been given depth and nuance, real character, the latter just want to destroy the Universe because they hate the light. So no surprise which character has shown up more than once.

That Sith want revenge, that is part of the story but what we are not told is why and a motivation is not asking for too much.
The prophecy is part of the story but not why it is so important to kill all the Sith. What about them makes killing them necessary? Who made the prophecy, what makes it different from normal Jedi ability to see the future? Why do the Jedi even bother with a prophecy that apparently says "Someone will kill all the Sith." when they think the sith are centuries dead?
It is Anakin's job to kill all the Sith so it would make sense that he be told about them, what they can do, their powers and why he has to do this.

Apparently I do because you first rather missed the point.
You argued that there is no place for it in the film, that is wrong, a good place is Anakin asking Qui-Gon what a sith is aftet they left Tatooine. We do have a scene where Anakin asks Qui-Gon what midis are.
You argued it would be forced, also wrong, it would give us a motivation of the main bad guy, a reason why they do what they do beyond "I am an evil bad guy". It will also add texture and details to the world building.

Second, ex from ANH. Obi-Wan says "For over a thousand generations, the Jedi Knights were the Guardians of Peace and Justice in the Old Republic." Was that bit 100 % necessary for ANH? No, but it added to the worldbuilding. We now have an idea how long the Jedi have been around and how long the Old republic have been around. About 20-25 000 years so a really long time. We also have some idea what the Jedi did in the Old Republic. Small details but they add to the film and the story.

The same is found in both Terminator films, Kyle adds details, like how he grew up in the ruins, starving, hiding from HKs. He also talks a bit about earlier versions of infiltrators and Terminators, like the 600 series that had a rubber skin and how they spotted them easily. But these new ones look human.
Details that flesh out the universe and character.
We have several scenes with Kyle in the future, the only thing that one could argue is really needed for the plot is that we see them using dogs, which Kyle then talks about, and the photo of Sarah.
So one could be cut, maybe both and the plot would remain the same. But they are there to flesh out the world, the character and really show the horror of the future. Because the first Terminator film is in part a horror film.
In the second film, the Terminator does not just say "Miles Dyson is responsible." and they go from there. He adds dates, more details, how SkyNet began to learn and how it became self-aware and how they tried to shut it down and this lead to it striking back. Again details that are not 100% needed for the plot but are there to add to the film, to explain why SkyNet launched the nukes. It was not because "It was an Evil AI", it did it because humans tried to "kill" it. So it now has a motivation.

Also, Anakin in the PT is there to kill the Sith, that is why the Force created him, if it was the Force.
So in a way, Anakin is a Force Terminator, his only function is to kill the Sith.
But while the Terminator in the first film had a reason, so that John Connor is not born and thus SkyNet will not loose. Anakin just has to kill the sith because..

Details are everything in writing, that is what separates good writing, like in T1 and T2, and not so good writing in the PT.
In T2 we have Sarah tormented by nuclear nightmares and so she almost becomes like a Terminator and does what it tried to do her, kill. That is set up and we see why it happens and can understand it.
The PT have a story where stuff just happens because the plot needs it. In TPM they bring a nine year old kid to a war zone because plot needs it.

So thinking that more developed characters and a motivation would be good for the film is now an "obsession"? Nice.

As I said above, a motivation is not too much to ask for. And a motivation of "I do what I do because I am an Evil Bad Guy." is not much of a motivation and it does not make the character three dimensional. It does not even make them two dimensional. They are just "I am the villain!"

If we are not to give any history or explanation of the Sith then they are just "Bad Guys" that do what they because they are "Bad Guys" and needs to be stopped because they are "Bad Guys".

Ex,

See?

The separatists are not given a motivation as to why they want to leave. They just do. Dooku mentions that they have demands but not what those are.
What does the TF want with Naboo? They want Padme to sign some treaty that will give them control over the planet but why? What is so important about it?
The TF want some trade tax gone but how does getting control over Naboo help them in that?
The blockade was a protest of sorts against this trade tax but if the blockade is removed and Naboo becomes part of the TF, then how does that get rid of the trade tax?
Characters and organisations are given the most barebones of reasons to why they do what they do and as a result, some of them are not developed or fleshed out and the story lacks depth and the players lack dimension.

Also as I said above, Obi-Wan adds details to the Jedi in ANH that is not strictly speaking needed for that film. But it adds layers and depth to the setting and makes the world building better.
Giving some details about the Sith, what happened, who and what they are, will add to them as characters and assist in the world building. But that is clearly asking for too much.

Bye.
Blackboard Monitor

 

You can't tell me the story is about Anakin when it suits you and then tell me it's not about Anakin when it suits you.

That's called flip-flopping. And it shows that you're willing to change the entire basis of your argument just in attempt to """win""".

I think we're done here.

 

They don't see Anakin as one of "the villains who fight in the shadows".

The "I don't know where you got that idea" sentence and the "movies revolve around Obi-Wan's achievements and Anakin's life" sentences are two separate sentences.

 

@Iron_lord
@cantthinkofone

I will admit I misread that. But use spacing between paragraphs. We're in a message board. This stuff is hard to read on my phone.

And GL's own thesis statement about the PT was that it's about a good person turning bad (which happens off screen betweens 2 and 3). And about a Republic turning into a dictatorship. So... That second point is a direct link to the Sith acting in the shadows... Unless someone is going to tell me that the Sith had nothing to do with the Republic turning into the Empire. In which case... That's a stretch.

 

his transformation wasnt a five minute thing. it happened because of his events which occurred throughout his entire life, even before before qui-gon. but the ones that really put him on the other side is in revenge of the sith.

republic turning into a dictatorship because of the sith ? not necessarily. a man who is a sith took advantage of a crumbling republic. the fact that he is a sith is helpful for his goals, but its not the only reason. at the end of the day, palpatine is an opportunist.
hitler took over a crumbling republic and made it dictatorship and he wasnt a sith.

what im trying to say is that you put too much emphasis on the fact that the villains are sith. episode 1-6 never put the emphasis on jedi and sith. they were all humans first. (something that disney didnt get).

so no, the story is not about the relationships between the jedi and the sith. it never was with GL's star wars. its about characters.