ST What does the ST add to the Saga? What is its story purpose?

@godisawesome thanks for your insight and your thoughts on the matter. Though I don't agree with your assessment of the sequel trilogy, I do appreciate your take on overall fandom as it relates to the PT and the ST.

@ChildOfWinds I completely understand how/why you view the ST as you do. You know how you are expressing the fact that the ST totally devalued/decimated/disrespected the ST? This is how an enormous amount of SW fans felt about TPM and the PT at large.

It's not for the same reasons, but, there are some that honestly feel that the PT completely trashed and tarnished everything that was good about Star Wars. As it's been over 2 decades since TPM debuted, so much of that venomous discourse has quieted down, but it doesn't negate the fact that the TPM fractured Star Wars fandom and changed it forever.

 

I think you are getting too caught up in the word 'characterization' itself - perhaps that was too broad a word choice. It is not a prevalent argument that characters in the PT did not grow and develop, that their backstory did not inform their actions in a meaningful way, that there personalities and behaviors were not clearly defined, that there actions were not generally consistent with their previously established personalities and traits, etc. Okay, maybe Padme in a few situations. This criticism is FAR more prevalent in discussions of the ST.

We are a lot of posts removed from the original point, but I think we were talking about angsty, rebellious, cocky teenage heroes on their way to becoming villains. Framing the PT as the story of how Anakin goes from being a slave to the big hero is a very strange way to look at it. It isn't supposed to be 2.5 movies building up the hero with a GOTCHA: villain twist at the end. It is primarily the story of how the hero becomes the villain. They have to establish him as the hero to make the tragedy meaningful, but his hero's journey runs always concurrent with his villain's journey.

 

The main difference between Star Wars and the MCU is artistry. Lucas set the tone with the former, as he was a filmmaker who cared about the art of filmmaking. So Star Wars’ visual language is far superior to the schlocky MCU in that respect. To me, that’s everything, as film is a visual medium. That said, I understand why people form a connection to the MCU characters.

 

I have to agree . . . at least in terms of the six films that Lucas had made.

 

I think Rogue One, Solo and the Mandalorian are light years better than even the best of the MCU.

 

Believe me, I don't think that characterization is a main reason fans were dissatisfied with the PT. I was merely disputing Darth PJ's assessment that it wasn't an issue at all. I said many fans did have issues with the characterizations (especially Anakin and Padme) in some instances. Also, I agree that it is much more a point of contention in regards to the PT.

I hear you. My point is this: Anakin did not have to be written/portrayed as an angsty, rebellious, or cocky to be a hero* that descends into The Dark Side/villainy.

Anakin's journey is not predicated on having a personality that many found insufferable. It was not mandatory that a young Darth Vader had to be kind of a creepy dick. There are plenty angsty, rebellious, cocky teens that are better written and endearing. If George Lucas was going for a James Dean-esque anti-Hero, or tragic hero, he missed the mark for a large portion of SW fans.

*Consider Anakin's characterization in TCW, if we'd have seen a little bit more of that Anakin, his tragic fall to the dark side might have been even more heart wrenching for many disgruntled PT fans.

 

How could the PT possibly “ trash and tarnish” everything that was good about the OT, when the OT was basically Luke’s story, and Luke was only an infant with about a minute or two of screen time in the whole PT? How did it ruin the story of the conflict and relationship between Luke and his father? How did it ruin Luke or Han or Leia, who were the main characters of the OT? How did it take away the victories of Luke, Han, Leia, and Anakin / Vader? How did it keep Luke, leia, and Han from leaving legacies? How did it ruin the happy ending of RotJ?

The PT did NONE of those things. The OT came first. It is the foundation upon which all other trilogy SW films, and the old EU books, and comics were built. The PT didn’t change the OT. It only added a back history to the story, but the OT itself remained intact and unchanged. Some people may not have liked the PT films, but they did no damage to the OT films or characters. They didn’t take away that wonderful RotJ ending or turn the OT characters into losers and failures and take away all of their achievements while giving them miserable lives and terrible endings. The PT didn’t make the OT pointless and null and void or destroy and kill off the OT characters. You cannot say the same thing about the sequel trilogy. The ST took everything away from Luke, leia, and Han, including their satisfying, happy ending, and their very lives. The ST even went so far as to take away Luke Skywalker’s personality, integrity, and core traits. The PT took away Anakin/ Vader’s achievement of destroying the Sith by killing Palpatine, because Palpatine is back in the ST. The PT did not do any of those horrible things.

So, no, I don’t agree that the PT “trashed and tarnished everything that was good about Star Wars”. That’s true hyperbole. It didn’t ruin the OT story or characters the way the ST did.

 

Listen, I love the PT and I think it enhanced and enriched the OT. I am not trying to convince you otherwise.

That said, there is a large contingency of SW fans that view the PT negatively as negatively as you view the ST. Surely you know this.

Furthermore, I feel that it's dismissive to chalk up such sentiment from people that hate the PT as "hyperbole" especially when you use similar language when conveying your feelings about the ST. Are their feeling about the PT less valid/justified than yours about the ST?

 

I non-hyperbolically dislike both the ST and the PT.

 

Trying to belittle me or “ shame” me is not going to change my mind.

Yes, there probably are some people that view the PT as negatively as I do. I never denied that. That’s not what we were discussing. You made the claim that some fans said that the PT “ trashed and tarnished everything good about SW,” and I DO think that’s hyperbole for all of the reasons that I mentioned in my last post. The PT didn’t change the OT or OT characters. It didn’t trash the OT films or make them meaningless and unnecessary. It didn’t trash the OT characters or destroy their achievements. The PT didn’t ruin the perfect ending of RotJ. So, the PT didn’t trash and tarnish all that was good about SW, as you said some fans claimed. On the other hand, the ST films DID do all of those terrible things, so they did trash and tarnish the OT.

Some folks may have hated the PT films, but the PT films did not change or negatively impact the OT films or characters, so that comment about the PT “ trashing and tarnishing everything good about SW IS a gross exaggeration. I sympathize that some people didn’t like the PT films, but I strongly disagree with their claim that it “ trashed and tarnished everything good about SW. The great story told in the OT; the great characters and characterizations; the fantastic world- building; the Victories and accomplishments; the wonderful music; the profoundly satisfying ending of RotJ.... ALL remain intact after the PT is over.

Again, the same is NOT true after the ST is over.

 

Its about simple facts the PT doesn’t completely change the story of the OT it adds context and history to the story. The only character it greatly changes is. Vader. The ST directly affects the OT as it features the characters and their legacy. Now the PT could personally ruin someones Star Wars expérience but to say it ruined the OT that is hyperbole and straight up not true the OT story characters and ending remain intact and unchanged after the PT. The ST the shows up and essentially just wipes the slate clean that’s about the only thing i can think of in terms of purpose for it.

 

Then your argument is subjective, based on a personal criteria selected by yourself. Video blogs certainly took off in the late 90's early 2000's... as I watched many of them. Not only did they 'take off' during that period, the prequels were a source of income for them to expand and legitimise their existence. Point being, there's still more on-line ST criticisms (specifically around TLJ/TROS).

You fudge the point in hand. If any set of films could be accused of 'damaging childhood memories', it would be the ST, as many fans feel that the characters they grew up with, and loved, have had their legacies undermined/destroyed. That can't really be levelled at the PT. The reason that some of the kind of vitriol that was aimed at the PT isn't used in criticising the ST (or contemporary movies in general), is simply because that kind of language is no longer deemed as appropriate. It really isn't in the zeitgeist of bloggers in 2020 to vent spleen at the screen using language associated with sexual violence (although you'll always find the exceptions). It's my perception that the majority of on-line bloggers etc. try to be a little more contained with their criticisms, even if they are baseless, and even if one does't agree with them.

Don't be silly. Let's be honest, anyone who agrees with the sentiment that Lucas 'raped their childhood', automatically loses the argument. It has no more legitimacy as a criticism of the PT than it does the ST, or a new Batman film. It's use as a criticism, or any similar type of hostility, certainly doesn't indicate demonstrable evidence that one film is more divisive that the other.

As per the above, I'm finding it uncomfortable that you are trying to legitimise that use of language. Please desist.

'General public backlash'? Where is your evidence for this when TLJ gets the worst audience scores and TROS the worst critic scores?

As per above, there was just as much internet blogging during the PT. That there's more volume directed at criticising the ST is something you're just going to have to accept.

What I can see is you failing to make a valid/logical argument for why the PT era bashing (and let's face it, it was predominantly centred around TPM), that focused primarily on Jake Lloyd, Ahmed Best and George Lucas, was somehow 'legitimate', whilst any similar criticism of ST being as a result of racism/bigotry/ or sexism.

I can't speak for the masses. Rose was an extremely poorly written character, that had absolutely no utility in the story of TLJ. That Abrams decided to relegate the character to the point she had less dialogue than Babu Frink, either shows Abrams agreed with my assessment, or that he agreed with those racists/sexists you refer to?

This conversation has been about relative divisiveness amongst Star Wars Fans. I'm happy to debate perceptions of what general audiences think of the ST, but suggest we keep it to the fans for now... However, I do think that fans and general audiences aren't alien races... they share views.

Again, semantics. I'd like to think we are both cognisant of what is being discussed here i.e. how characters behave, their interaction/relationships with other characters, their function and utility within the story. I am not talking about Adam Drivers lack of chest hair, Hayden's delivery of "I don't like sand", Chewie's seemingly younger appearance in the ST or Padme's wardrobe.

That's a wholly subjective statement. Of course TPM was divisive, but I could always get someone to talk about the prequels. Nobody wants to discuss the ST, outside of forums like this, because many people have been turned off Star Wars by the ST (IMHO). They find it absolutely vanilla and irrelevant now. I long for the days where I could have a conversation about 'digital versus practical' or 'who is the best Obi-Wan?'. These days, very few engage because there's no real interest. I'd be interested to know what the membership number was here, during the ST (notably after TLJ), compared to what it was during the PT. I've noticed that many pro TFA fans disappeared off the radar after TLJ. Either because that film killed it for them, or that they knew it would just be a bit of a blood bath in the forums. I know for a fact that other sites took a big hit after TFA.

As per above. I'd be interested to know the figures for this place. I know lots of people who left this place, and other sites, after TLJ.

Why does it empirically make her character "less that it was"? Why should it? Is Padme not permitted to fall in love with anyone who doesn't align to the Hollywood image of 'perfection' and 'wholesome' hero? I don't agree with you. However, yes, Padme's roll is reduced somewhat in ROTS (IMHO)... she's less proactive and takes a back seat, until she feels moved enough to go find Anakin on Mustafar. However, this needs to be viewed in the context that many of her scenes were cut (so she would have had a more physical presence if nothing else), and as a character, she's supposed to be heavily pregnant... which isn't easy to write around in a big action movie.

You're taking the line too literally. Obi-Wan isn't there is he? So we assume that it was Anakin that was tasked with keeping a check on the monitors. That's a reasonable assumption is it not? Therefore, Padme would automatically address Anakin and not Obi-Wan. If Anakin had said 'she doesn't like us watching her', that sounds a lot more creepy to me, as it implies they are all watching her at the same time.

She clearly feels the Jedi watching her every move is a step beyond 'reasonable' security. That's a logical assertion to make. That she feels like she's being staked by Anakin, the man she later tells 'I love you', is an illogical assertion... unless you just mean it's a form of romantic embarrassment that Padme is feeling?

I'm paying you the curtesy of being direct. Why do you construe that as 'flippant'? If you see Han Solo and the Mando as 'bad men', I understand your issues better with Anakin in the PT. I'm being honest.

Again I think you are confusing yourself. If the definition of 'anti-hero' is outlaw, then that makes Batman, Spiderman, The Lone Ranger, Robin Hood etc. etc. not heroes. Indeed, it wouldn't leave that many heroes left. Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia themselves are outlaws (or rebels) in the OT. You're better off thinking of them as having unconventional heroic traits. Anakin has many of those. He is not a conventional hero. That's how he's written.

Which is where the hyperbole comes in... as TPM could not possibly 'destroy Star Wars' itself.

I'm sure there are fans who like how Luke was handled in the ST, just as I'm sure there are fans that like Jar Jar Binks and Jake Lloyd as Anakin. That some fans like it wasn't in dispute. All power to them.

LOL - you clearly don't understand the issues that many have with the ST then.

It was you who brought up the notion of Tusken Raiders being analogous with Native Americans, not me. I am neither offended by that comparison, nor do I care... I just don't agree with you...

You seem to be using the word 'savages' in its pejorative sense there... Tusken Raiders were shown to be a tangible threat to the protagonists, that could not be reasoned with, that were shown to be the clear aggressors and that were not a benign species. Alluding to the notion that an alien species, in Star Wars, were animalistic, brutal and not human, is obviously a million miles aways from comparing those qualities to Native Americans... which one is doing by default when making a comparison. How Tuskens are portrayed going forward is up for grabs.

I clearly stated "I can't think of many successfully written angsty, rebellious, cocky teenage heroes, in fiction, that go on to become killers of women, children and men. Can you? It's a short list". Again you purposely misunderstand to score points... Try again please... I double dare you...

Again... enough with this PT bashing in an ST thread. "See through you we can"...

Who said anything about 'unlikeable'? You really are the King/Queen of straw men. Do you practice much???
I doubt Lucas wrote Anakin to be specifically unlikeable. He's a complex character. As such, as with 'real' people, there are elements one likes and dislikes. The key thing is, IMHO, that Anakin was written as a character that the audience could understand... not necessarily identify with... and if not empathise with, they could sympathise with. And I believe Lucas was successful with showing how a good person could be consumed by the darkside... there was logic to Anakin's fall, I believed it (for the most part)... certainly more so than anything in the ST... certainly Kylo/Ben.

 

This thread is depressing.
I need to get out more.

 

Please don't misquote me Jamie. I never stated anywhere that characterisation "wasn't an issue at all"... as if I were claiming the PT to be perfection. I wasn't, however, willing for your to straw man defend yet another criticism of the ST by claiming the PT had the same fundamental issue. It doesn't. The PT has its flaws/critics, but characterisation isn't usually called out as one of them.... because most people tend to understand the characters behaviour/function within the story. That isn't the case with the ST. There are multiple characters who pop in, pop out, have no real purpose, and behave in an irrational/unconvincing manner that seems disconnected to previous films (even within the ST itself).

 

That’s what Rapunzel said.

 

@Darth PJ

I have not the time, nor energy, nor interest to debate you point for point. I appreciated your time, you thoughts, and your interest. The snide personal shots/name calling...not so much.

That said, I'll leave you with this. I will admit, TLJ is more divisive amongst fans currently, than TPM is.
I do maintain that the backlash that TPM received by fans (and the general public/media) was far greater than anything that came along with TLJ and that the PT was more divisive overall than the ST. Again, I don't really have a dog in the hunt as I like the PT and ST about the same.

I am interested in how old you are. Do you mind sharing? I question your age, because if you were around/active/participating in fandom in the prequel era, a lot of your questions/claims would be framed differently. Anyways, thanks for the chat. This article articulates my sentiments fairly well.

Take care.

 

The PT was plenty devisive back in the day. At least the first 2 entries. I was online at the time, although the internet was in its infancy in 99. (I liked the PT) At least with people my age.

 

The problem is that many people's reasons for finding Anakin's personality in the films "insufferable" often miss the point of his character. He isn't meant to be some generic cool dude like TCW tries to make him out to be. TCW's Anakin less "gets Anakin right" and more completely misses the point of what his character actually is. Besides, Anakin's a lot less creepy than a lot of the rebellious and cocky characters that people find somehow redeeming (i.e. TESB Han).

 

I like them a lot too. Yet, it was arduous being a PT fan (especially on these forums) back then.
The article I linked above really captured that conentious time in SW fandom:

"....The response from the fans of the original films was brutal, especially on the actors and Lucas. Ahmed Best, the actor behind Jar Jar Binks, noted that he contemplated suicide, while Jake Lloyd noted that the reaction turned his life into a “living hell.” (He’s since left the film industry.) Lucas aired his frustrations in another interview, asking 'Why would I make any more, when everybody yells at you all the time and says what a terrible person you are?' "

1. I think most fans/audience members realize that PT Anakin is supposed to be conflicted, prone to the dark side, and full of mommy/attachment issues. The problem is, even in his good/heroic moments that we are supposed to understand and empathize with him, Anakin often comes off as creepy and unlikeable.

For sure, part of it is trouble with the dialogue and it's delivery. This article is a (modern) take on why Anakin (and AOTC) was/is so problematic for some of the anti-PT crowd. Now, I don't agree with much of what's written here (I love AOTC) but I do feel like it articulates some of the big anti-PT arguments that were/are so prevalent amongst fans and the general public.

2. Why do you dismiss Anakin's characterization in TCW? George Lucas was responsible for this portrayal/characterization of Anakin as well. No? Furthermore, TCW Anakin is not the "generic cool dude" as you categorize. The character has more depth and conflict than you are claiming. In fact, many fans cite TCW as being a show that enhanced/improves Anakin as a character as well as the overall PT. For many, TCW featured an Anakin that was provided with genuine moments of heroism that were lacking in the PT.


3. You are claiming that Anakin Skywalker in the PT is less creepy than Han Solo? Interesting. Anakin was largely knocked by critics and fans as being insufferable, creepy, etc. Han is usually regarded by both as being a charming rogue, and (arguably) the saga's most beloved character.

 

Some of Han's antics have aged poorly, but Ford is quite good at playing the charming rogue.

 

Yeah, I'm going to have to disagree with this in bold, in all caps, screaming from the rooftops because, yeah, I don't remember Han killing a whole village of beings, for one thing. Anyway....

 

I too have appreciated your time. Your penchant for using straw men, misquoting and criticising the PT in order to defend the ST, not so much.

That was kind of the point of the debate wasn't it?

If you admit that TLJ is more divisive than TPM, I'm not sure your argument that the PT is more divisive than the ST holds up. But anyways, let's agree to disagree.

I'm in my 30's... I was right here (and elsewhere) during the prequels.

 

Very well said. I haven't cut myself off to the degree that you have, but I have skipped the last two movies in theaters, and I don't intend to watch any of the TV series. A decade ago that would've been unthinkable to me, now it's routine.

I also sometimes wonder about the names you don't see around here anymore. A decent number were all in for Disney's Star Wars between 2012-2015 and left not too long after.

 

That said, I'll leave you with this. I will admit, TLJ is more divisive amongst fans currently, than TPM is.

Not exactly. I agree that, in this very moment in time, TLJ is more divisive amongst fans and has been since its release.

Yet, I still think the TLJ fan backlash is not quite as sizable, incendiary, or divisive as what was witnessed in the immediate aftermath/years following TPM.

I think it's an interesting topic to explore (likely in another thread) and I'd surely be willing to do a deep dive with you on it if we could agree on what metrics to use to gauge this.