main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

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

Discussion in 'Prequel Trilogy' started by Seagoat, Jan 17, 2016.

  1. Samuel Vimes

    Samuel Vimes Force Ghost star 4

    Registered:
    Sep 4, 2012
    To me, the OT did a pretty good job of explaining the differences between the light side and the dark.
    The dark side was fueled by aggression, fear and hate. And it was something that could easily join you in a battle. Hence why Jedi had to be careful when they fought. They could not loose control and let their anger fuel their actions of let blood-lust cloud their thinking.
    They have to remain calm.

    Which is an interesting problem to overcome when your are fighting someone that is taunting you and trying to get you angry.
    If you given in to their taunts and get angry, you loose.

    The case with Luke was quite clear, if you use the Force and kill in hate, you turn to the dark side.
    And given that Vader said he MUST obey his master, the same thing will happen to Luke.
    He would not want to obey Palpatine but he would have no choice. Palpatine can simply bend him to his will.
    Yoda warns Luke to not underestimate the powers of the emperor, or he will suffer his fathers fate.

    Yoda also said that the dark side and consume you and turn you into an agent of evil.
    So it is not a power you can use as you see fit, it corrupts you, poisons your mind and can make a good person into an evil one.

    It is not unlike the One Ring in LotR.
    The Ring was Evil and no one could use it without the danger of becoming evil.

    In the PT, somehow Anakin can kill in hate not just once but loads of times and not turn.
    He can even murder Dooku and not turn.
    Here, the PT and OT seem to use different rules.

    DrDre
    Totally agree.
    Dooku doing his flip down the stairs in RotS not only looks fake to me, but it is also quite pointless.
    He had a staircase right there. Was he trying to show off to the Jedi?

    Again agree. In the OT, I felt that what made a great Jedi is who you were, not what you could do.
    In the PT, the Force is just superpowers that has attached itself to random people.

    I have both heard and many times argued the same thing.
    The the PT has rather weak and underdeveloped villains.
    Sidious works well as the behind the scenes villain.
    But the rest, Maul has no character and dies in the first film.
    Dooku has more character and is played by a better actor but is introduce late in one film and is killed off early in the third. Griev has a character but I found him to be a pointless waste of time.

    For two of these villains, there was a lot of style over substance. All surface and no depth.

    And I have several times heard people defend the weak villains by saying that they were supposed to be underdeveloped and replaceable because they were just placeholders for the real villain, Vader. So the argument was that we couldn't have a strong, well developed villain because that would take the spotlight from Vader.

    Christopher Lee, I feel is a bit wasted in the PT. He does have some good scenes and does what he can with them. But I think there was so much potential that was wasted here.

    Bye for now.
    Old Stoneface
     
    Force Smuggler and DrDre like this.
  2. Dagobahsystem

    Dagobahsystem Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Sep 25, 2015
    Multiple viewings of ANY film inevitably leads to greater understanding and appreciation, imo.

    Rewatching and even studying and analyzing films is a highly enjoyable and edifying hobby.
     
    StartCenterEnd and Gamiel like this.
  3. JoJoPenelli

    JoJoPenelli Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Aug 14, 2000
    Absolutely.

    But such shouldn't be *required.*
     
  4. 11-4D

    11-4D Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 6, 2015
    You didn't adress the fact that Anakin completely changes his personality in between 3 and 4. Vader wasn't a whiner. That's not character development, that's character inconsistensy.
     
  5. Subtext Mining

    Subtext Mining Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Apr 27, 2016
    How many young men act the way Vader acts in the OT? Palpatine molded him into what we see after Episode III. Not to mention his own journey with the Darkside. Anakin is buried under the ashes of the events of III. From then on, it is Vader who lives (for the next 20 or so years, at least). Two different personas. For him not to change would be... strange to say the least.

    Besides, I'm sure it's safe to say Vader felt Sidious was holding him back, etc. He just finally learned to know his place.

    I actually find it endearing that Anakin wasn't afraid to speak his mind when he felt it was right, or when he felt comfortable enough to vent to someone who would listen, by also amending his complaints with praises. It's sad to see how as Vader he was beaten into submission by an evil psychopath. A slave once again.
     
    Huttese 101 and wobbits like this.
  6. Qui-Riv-Brid

    Qui-Riv-Brid Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 18, 2013
    It's a likeable whine apparently.

    Actually I have to say that I never really noticed what a bunch of whiners inhabit the movies outside of 3PO whose whining and whinging is hard to ignore.

    But once those people started complaining about Anakin I actually noticed that they also didn't notice the fine whine in the OT.

    Not at all.That is part of the consistent character development. Now do we get every single step? No, that isn't possible in the movies so we get to a point then the time in-between movies is where the rest happens.

    Look at Anakin/Vader. He's different in every single movie. TPM 10 years later AOTC, AOTC 3 years later ROTS, In ROTS he becomes Vader, ROTS 19 years later R1, ROTS 19 years later ANH (These two versions are at the same time but somewhat different), ANH 3 years later TESB, then finally TESB and a year later ROTJ.

    Anakin as Anakin and as Vader has character development from movie to movie just as Luke does. That is what happens with main characters that the story is built around.

    So like I said the difference is Luke is a polite whiner while Anakin is a rude one.

    The whining point is still in place. Of course Anakin has known Obi-Wan for 10 years at that point as opposed to Yoda a few minutes. The entire context of their relationships is completely different so why would anyone think Anakin would be the same as Luke?

    It simply doesn't work.

    Luke mouths off to Obi-Wan in the cantina when Obi-Wan is trying to hire Han so Luke is rude to his mentor and not keeping quiet then of course Luke is also whining to Obi-Wan about Yoda training him. So again by your standard very rude of Luke.

    Too much like his father indeed!
     
  7. theMaestro

    theMaestro Jedi Master star 3

    Registered:
    Oct 16, 2015
    Although he has known Uncle Owen his whole life, but doesn't say rude things to or about him. So the comparison still holds.

    No he doesn't. Luke does not mouth off to Obi-Wan. You're making that up. And asking Obi-Wan to tell Yoda that he's ready is not rude towards Yoda. Yes it's whiny, but that's not what we're debating here. Anakin clearly shows more disrespect to his mentors.
     
    Martoto77 likes this.
  8. Visivious Drakarn

    Visivious Drakarn Jedi Master star 3

    Registered:
    Apr 20, 2013
    Yes, it was.

    Oh, and Luke's jumping above the sarlacc pit and later on the DS, with his back somersault jump, that wasn't about the Force, it was about his physical training with Yoda. So, that's OK. But it's mostly OK because that's the OT.

    There are some thing I don't like. Like TFA. Yet I'm not wasting my time there nor am I trying to rub other people noses of how bad the movie they like really is.

    And that's because Obi-Wan and Vader set the standards. I understand that Obi-Wan lived in the desert for nearly two decades so his abilities have weakened and that Yoda lived in that swamp planet the same amount of time so, defeated as he was, lost all his will to fight. And that Dooku trained Qui-Gon, successfully, so he kept his physical skills. But those facts are not important here.

    So have I. Since that's been repeating for the last 12 years, it's hard to miss it.

    Saruman was once of them, the powerful good guys. Under the lure of the dark forces he switched sides, tried to turn one of the main heroes, he failed, and then he sent an army to conquer the Middle Earth. Eventually he died because the dark lord had more pressing business to do.
    Yes, Lee was used better here.
     
    DementedMeerkat likes this.
  9. DrDre

    DrDre Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Aug 6, 2015
    Visivious Drakarn
    This is the PT criticism thread. Nobody is forcing you to read this stuff. I don't tell you what to write in your posts.
     
    Martoto77 and 11-4D like this.
  10. trikadekaphile

    trikadekaphile Jedi Knight star 2

    Registered:
    May 6, 2015
    I would think that would be obvious. Anakin takes the exact opposite path that Luke takes in the OT. He falls to the Dark Side, while Luke rejects it. What, should him falling to the Dark Side have been a decision he makes "maturely"?
     
  11. DrDre

    DrDre Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Aug 6, 2015
    Except, Saruman was one of the main villains in two films. He wasn't introduced at the end of one film, only to be bumped off at the start of the next. As such, there is no "eventually" for Dooku, more like "immediately". So, while the basic concept is similar, the execution is what turns Count Dooku into a weak character for me, and Saruman into a good one.
     
    Martoto77 likes this.
  12. Daxon101

    Daxon101 Force Ghost star 6

    Registered:
    Jan 7, 2016
    I think the situation between luke and anakin was different because anakin was in the jedi order and had to follow rules, guidelines and fit in within the jedi organisation... while luke only had yoda and obi wan and so had much less pressure on his shoulders since by the time of ROTJ its not like he had mentors keeping him in check.

    Anakin also had attachments that he felt he had to hide from the jedi order, which was also manipulated to a certain degree by Palpatine.

    While i dunno how much for sure these things would reflect on the characters they certainly must have had some impact on who they are as people.
     
  13. 11-4D

    11-4D Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 6, 2015
    Yeah, except it's not. Luke's basic personality remained the same throughout the trilogy, just developed. Anakin did a complete 180 between ROTS and ANH. Lucas messed up, because he made Anakin become more and more emotional as he got closer to the dark side, when it should have been the opposite. Vader wasn't emotional, he was a cold, calulating emotionless bad guy. Anakin should have became less emotinal and more cold as he turned into Vader. Vader never had physcotic breakdowns when he got angry, he remained calm and in control of his emotions. He never yelled or screamed when he became angry. He raised his voice, sure, but he never needed to yell or whine to get his point across. It's just inconsistent between the movies.
     
    Martoto77 likes this.
  14. Qui-Riv-Brid

    Qui-Riv-Brid Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Actually it is. That Luke is whining is exactly the point. Then as per usual the parameters are moved to the type of whining.

    Somehow I think that if Anakin did what Luke in the above did then the reaction would not be the same or as forgiving.

    Actually many people have noted how very different Luke was from ANH to ROTJ. This is a timescale that is only a few years.

    I don't see what is 180 about it compared to where ROTS ended and R1/ANH started almost 20 years later.

    Actually not at all. If he had been the opposite then he would have never fallen. That is the point. He let his emotional attachments get the better of him. The Dark Side is about passion and emotion the Sith which is not the way of the Jedi. It's about the application of emotion.

    Vader wasn't emotional? I would suggest looking at the OT era Vader again. He's very emotional but also cold and calculating. The Sith constantly use their hatred and anger. They don't constantly show it. That is the difference between the Darth Vader in ROTS and what he learned in-between those years. Hatred is an emotion that he uses in droves just because he presents it calmly most of the time doesn't mean there is no emotion.

    He did over time but not right away and in the heat of the moments after the turn. That said he coldly executed Jedi and immediately started manipulating Padme so he was learning quickly.

    I really don't know how this conclusion works. Working backwards from the Vader of the OT and then saying that 20 years earlier when he was either not a Sith of that experience or just newly turned that he should someone be exactly the same simply doesn't make any character sense.

    What you seem to be arguing against is having any character development take place at all.

    Also in terms of Psychosis it is an abnormal condition of the mind that involves a loss of contact with reality. So how that applies to Anakin if at all I don't know. I know people like to use terms liberally but how they really apply is another matter. Vader lost contact with the reality of being Anakin Skywalker so the psychosis is something that is always present in a man who sees his original self as another person.
     
  15. Daxon101

    Daxon101 Force Ghost star 6

    Registered:
    Jan 7, 2016
    There is a 20 year gap and i imagine Vader has gone through some **** in that time, let alone you either learn to find peace with your emotions or you flip out like kylo at very failure.

    Although talking of Kylo its kinda interesting how more menacing and in control he seems when wearing the helmet and how small and insecure he seems when its off.

    Maybe he feels stronger with the helmet since he is trying to be like Vader but still.

    Only time i remember vader seeming on the verge of being pissed off was his opening in ANH with the line "bring me the passengers, I want them alive!" and thats because of the tone of voice JEJ used
     
  16. Martoto77

    Martoto77 Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 6, 2016
    Whining and rudeness are entirely different things. Just to be clear.

    The only time that Luke is rude is to Yoda before he knows it's Yoda. And it's purely to illustrate Luke's preconceptions about what makes someone "great".
     
    theMaestro and 11-4D like this.
  17. 11-4D

    11-4D Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 6, 2015
    Of course character development should take place, I'm saying the problem is that we never get to see it happening. ROTS leads right into ANH with the Death Star being in contruction, R2 and 3PO are on the Tantive, etc, it's made to appear like nothing even happened in between the movies. And you don't think it's a mistake to not show us the most pivotal moment of Anakin's journey to the dark side, when he actually turns into Vader? I'm not talking about the suit or the name, but when he actually turns into the guy we see in the OT. We missed that completely. Character development that "might have happened at some point" doesn't cut it, especially not when it's supposed to be the main story of the PT.
     
    DrDre, theMaestro and Martoto77 like this.
  18. theMaestro

    theMaestro Jedi Master star 3

    Registered:
    Oct 16, 2015
    "Parameters are moved"? What an odd way to look at it. It's simply the natural flow of discussion. Once we establish that both characters whine, the question still remains of why people find Anakins character more irritating than Luke's. I think I've provided a sufficient answer: Anakin is more rude, disrespectful, and entitled than Luke is.
     
    DrDre, Martoto77 and 11-4D like this.
  19. Qui-Riv-Brid

    Qui-Riv-Brid Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 18, 2013
    I don't know what it is you want to "see". Luke develops over his 3 movies of the saga and Vader does over his 6 movies.

    No that is 19-20 years later.

    That is clearly NOT the case.

    We do see that right in ROTS.

    Yes in ROTS. His greed and lust for power turns him into the Sith Lord that is all about himself and his selfish goals.

    We got that completely.

    Which is exactly what we got. The actual real important development. Not how he adjusted to the suit or got a new Lightsaber or chasing Jedi down.

    I don't see how. The nature is to try to deflect away from the point of the whining to the type of whining. It's a step up to be sure because so many don't even want to concede the whining point at all.

    This is hardly some revelation and is already know beforehand so bringing it up afterwards like it's some new point doesn't really work.
     
    DementedMeerkat likes this.
  20. theMaestro

    theMaestro Jedi Master star 3

    Registered:
    Oct 16, 2015
    On the other hand, the nature seems to be to try and cling to the "whining" point because it can quickly be disproved by just listing off examples of Luke whining in the OT. But that doesn't get us anywhere closer to figuring out why so many people dislike Anakin's character, now does it? It just a cheap and easy way to "win" the debate, and I can see why one who might be more into that would take issue with the discussion actually moving forward with new points.
    Well that's okay, I'm certainly not expecting to win a Nobel Prize or anything! But I think it does work in the context of this discussion in which we're comparing Anakin and Luke. There's no rule that each and every point made has to be new. Otherwise the entire forum would be a ghost town. And old as they may be, at least my points aren't making up facts from the movies, like suggesting that Luke mouths off to Obi-Wan in the cantina, for example.
     
    DrDre and Martoto77 like this.
  21. 11-4D

    11-4D Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 6, 2015
    So your opinion is that Anakin greatly resembles his OT self? Alright. I don't think so, and I stated my reasoning behind it. All you're saying is "no, it's the opposite lel". Can't really argue against nothing, so I'll just leave it at that.
     
  22. The One Above All

    The One Above All Jedi Knight star 1

    Registered:
    Apr 11, 2017
    Noticed this thread hadn't had any entries in a while, so I decided to share my some of my thoughts:

    Personally, I think Attack of the Clones handled Jar Jar worse than Phantom Menace. At least in PM, being a comic relief felt like it fit his character. Trying to force him into the role of a serious politician was cringe-worthy to watch, IMO. And also, I really do think that his greeting Anakin and Obi-Wan, when they step off the elevator, was ten times more grating than anything he said, or did, in Episode 1.
     
  23. darkspine10

    darkspine10 Chosen One star 8

    Registered:
    Dec 7, 2014
    If Jar Jar being a politician made you cringe... then that''s exactly the intention of his role in the movie.

    Jar Jar is a naive idiot, as totally unprepared for politics as he is being a general in TPM. Jar Jar makes an innocent enough decision to support Palpatine, to 'save' the Republic from the Separatists, and in doing so, hands Palpatine executive powers to create an army, which directly leads to him being able to execute Order 66 and wipe out democracy for good. This also stems from Jar Jar's background. His people have a 'grand army', which is exactly the term Palaptine gives to the Clones. It makes a lot of sense for the person from a war-like culture to believe in the use of the army.

    There are also links to the wars in the Middle-East, Palpatine has created his own opposing force to be a boogeyman for the Republic, to make himself strong. He sends his forces to attack a desert world. The Separatists are even working on 'weapons of mass destruction'. The parallels are fascinating to me.
     
  24. trikadekaphile

    trikadekaphile Jedi Knight star 2

    Registered:
    May 6, 2015
    I find it curious that there multiple threads in which people can complain about the prequels, but even the mildest criticism of TFA is strictly forbidden, and any criticism of the poor, put-upon, defenseless, multibillion-dollar, uber-powerful, media-darling corporation Disney is practically a capital offense, whereas vicious attacks on Lucasfilm, and Lucas, are encouraged permitted.
     
  25. HevyDevy

    HevyDevy Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 13, 2011
    It's human nature.