While I do know a few who don't like the prequels, I have met far more who think the OT is INFERIOR to the prequels, since they (the OT) are more like adventure movies, than the fantasy space epics with grand vistas and intricate storylines, that the prequels are. Also, most everyone I knows enjoys the prequels' look over the OT'. Of course, those tend to be younger, so I guess it's a generational thing. I just wonder why we can't all get along?
I personally believe that it is the UOT fans, who wanted to experience the magic they had experienced in '77 once again, but had turned into men, who along the way, had lost their inner child, who hated on them so passionately, and people who let themselves be swept away by the criticism of the UOT fans. It's hip to hate on the prequels, and on Jar Jar Binks in particular.
I am not saying the prequels are without their faults, but neither is the OT or UOT, if you will. Many UOT fans are still wearing their pink glasses when it comes to judging the UOT, but take them off instantly when viewing the OT, or the prequels. That's a fact, and I get it. It's a combination of a lot of nostalgia, and unforgettable memories, that are unique, but let's be a bit more realistic here, shall we?
For instance, the insanely dumb reviews by the prequels basher, could be done about almost any film out there, including the UOT.
Point is: All of the episodes are still leaps and bounds better than most every other blockbuster that has come and gone since, because the story is timeless. It's an epically told spiritual morality tale, packed into a grand space opera setting.
May the new ones continue this tradition, and stay true to what made SW so special in the first place.
Plain and Simple
I understand why many Star Wars fans don't mind the alterations that were done to Episodes 4, 5, and 6, as they tie-in all that was done from Episodes 1, 2, and 3. What does bother me is the depiction of origin with Episodes 4, 5, and 6. What was done in 1977, 1980, and 1983 should have never been altered to tie-in what was done in 1999, 2002, and 2005. Episodes 4, 5, and 6 depict a time in Hollywood that shows what Hollywood was capable of doing, what George Lucas was capable of achieving, and what movie fans continued to enjoy for the next 16 years. Nevertheless, the same goes for Episodes 1, 2, 3. To alter something to bring stability and cohesiveness is fine, just as long as we get to see what actually did come out from the "Original" three episodes. To alter one generation of fans to please another is shameful, and disrespectful to those who have supported this franchise for over 35 years.
I do believe those that came before have every right to feel left out or insulted. The same may go for Episodes 7, 8, and 9, as well as 10, 11, and 12 (if or when they ever get that far) where we may see alterations of all original six Episodes (1-6), just to tie-in what will be done now and tomorrow. Though the decision by George Lucas in doing just that is not entirely up to him now, it may very well be something that Disney may want to do in the future, or not. All we know is that Disney is preparing for three more films that will continue the Star Wars Saga and may very well be accepted by a generation of us that followed Ep. 4, 5, and 6, as well as the generation of those that followed Ep. 1, 2, and 3.
For any one fan to say to another, “dude, get over it,” “dude, stop crying,” “dude, who cares,” “dude, it’s not up to you,” I strongly feel that they do not, and I mean DO NOT, understand the appreciation many fans of film have for original motion picture art. To say that it is ok to alter a product to please some new customers is fine. Just as it is for any auto manufacture to alter their products looks year after year, just as it is for musicians to alter their products sound year after year. Yes it is ok, but when it comes to restoring a product, just as car enthusiasts restore the look of their car, just as musicians restore the sound of their music (Remastering), we as film enthusiasts should be held to the same standard and respect. If any music album was altered, if any car was modified, I’m sure many admirers would feel embarrassed or dejected. It was just a matter of “restoring.” When you have a selling product, it will continue to sell from its original state. But in the manner of “altering,” you are now venturing into new territory with the same group of investors that enjoyed your product for the way it was. Whether it’s your favorite Star Wars movies, your favorite cell phone, your favorite sound docking music system, your favorite Acura, Ford, Honda, Nissan, Lexis, or Toyota, your favorite denim jeans, or your favorite music artist, many fans may stay and many fans may go, and that is not a recipe for success.
Last edited by Sylentwolf; 11-07-2012 at 10:34 PM.
Reason: Details, It's Always About the Details!
There is speculation that he'll only do EP 7 if they kill off Han which is something Ford has wanted ever since ESB. It explains his flat lifeless performance in ROTJ too.
Now, now, he was only flat and lifeless for the first ten minutes of ROTJ.
('Cause, y'see, he was frozen in carbonite, and....okay, never mind. )
Han dying definitely would have given RotJ more substance. Glad to hear Harrison has no problems being Han again. Han is a great character (an even better one before Lucas castrated him in ANH). Bring on Episode VII!
What I don't understand is that if Ford hated Han Solo so much, why is he all of a sudden enthusiastic about returning to Star Wars?
This is from "a source close to Ford" and the quote is written in exactly the same just-casual-enough yet perfect-journalistic-quote delivery that all "a source close to" or "a friend of" quotes are written in tabloid papers that, deep down, you know are bullshit but they need a quote to prop up their story or, more often than not, speculation.
As such I don't believe that this is really a quote from anyone close to Ford and, until he or someone representing him says otherwise, he hasn't changed his mind about Star Wars or decided about the new films one way or another.
If all of these sources - such as this one and the Matthew Vaughn one - are so well informed and willing to speak out then how come none of this came out before the announcement?
Is Harrison Ford still coherent? No offense to the guy, but when he did his red carpet interview at the Super Bowl in 2011, he looked like it had no idea where he was.
While I do know a few who don't like the prequels, I have met far more who think the OT is INFERIOR to the prequels, since they (the OT) are more like adventure movies, than the fantasy space epics with grand vistas and intricate storylines, that the prequels are. Also, most everyone I knows enjoys the prequels' look over the OT'. Of course, those tend to be younger, so I guess it's a generational thing. I just wonder why we can't all get along?
I personally believe that it is the UOT fans, who wanted to experience the magic they had experienced in '77 once again, but had turned into men, who along the way, had lost their inner child, who hated on them so passionately, and people who let themselves be swept away by the criticism of the UOT fans. It's hip to hate on the prequels, and on Jar Jar Binks in particular.
I am not saying the prequels are without their faults, but neither is the OT or UOT, if you will. Many UOT fans are still wearing their pink glasses when it comes to judging the UOT, but take them off instantly when viewing the OT, or the prequels. That's a fact, and I get it. It's a combination of a lot of nostalgia, and unforgettable memories, that are unique, but let's be a bit more realistic here, shall we?
For instance, the insanely dumb reviews by the prequels basher, could be done about almost any film out there, including the UOT.
Point is: All of the episodes are still leaps and bounds better than most every other blockbuster that has come and gone since, because the story is timeless. It's an epically told spiritual morality tale, packed into a grand space opera setting.
May the new ones continue this tradition, and stay true to what made SW so special in the first place.
How many exactly are those "far more...?"
The fact is people bash the prequels because the films are just plain awful. The only film with any redeeming qualities is Ep. III, and that too was prevented from greatness by atrocious dialogue, wooden acting and bloated scenes that add nothing except to "show off" the latest in SFX.
Jar Jar was one of the worst movie characters ever, certainly one of the worst FX creations.
Grand vistas and intricate story lines? it's so obvious the "grand vistas" are FX generated and the "intricate" story lines are tedious.
I give GL all the credit in the world for creating the Star Wars universe and the OT, but he deserves a lot of heat as well of the prequel trilogy, because they added nothing to the saga. The idea of prequels may have been good, but its execution was poor on all levels: story, acting, dialogue.
I think the issues with the prequels wouldn't have been so noticeable if Hayden Christensen wasn't such a horrible actor. Yes, the dialogue was pretty bad, but I feel like Ewan and Natalie did the best they could with what they had, and Natalie had the unfortunate job of trying to force chemistry with a whiny block of wood. With a different actor as Anakin, I don't think Attack of the Clones and parts of Revenge of the Sith would have been SO cringeworthy.
I think the issues with the prequels wouldn't have been so noticeable if Hayden Christensen wasn't such a horrible actor.
Is he? Well, it all comes down to personal opinion, but I don't see him as a bad actor nor do I think he showed any bad acting on those movies, aside from a single scene in Episode III.
Is he? Well, it all comes down to personal opinion, but I don't see him as a bad actor nor do I think he showed any bad acting on those movies, aside from a single scene in Episode III.
is this going to be your response to every criticism heaved at the prequels? Newsflash, everything said when discussing a films quality is an opinion. I bet if I said "man those prequels...they were mindblowingly extraordinary pieces of work!" you wouldnt throw out the "its your opinion" card. Its really annoying and childish. Either debate the point or dont respond at all.
How many exactly are those "far more...?"
The fact is people bash the prequels because the films are just plain awful. The only film with any redeeming qualities is Ep. III, and that too was prevented from greatness by atrocious dialogue, wooden acting and bloated scenes that add nothing except to "show off" the latest in SFX.
Jar Jar was one of the worst movie characters ever, certainly one of the worst FX creations.
Grand vistas and intricate story lines? it's so obvious the "grand vistas" are FX generated and the "intricate" story lines are tedious.
I give GL all the credit in the world for creating the Star Wars universe and the OT, but he deserves a lot of heat as well of the prequel trilogy, because they added nothing to the saga. The idea of prequels may have been good, but its execution was poor on all levels: story, acting, dialogue.
True Dat.... I hate the prequels because they are AWEFUL, I tried watching eps 1-3 again when the blu-ray set came out. I could BARELY make it through ep 1. 2-3 weren't as bad but still we pretty darn crappy movies.
and Hayden?? hot DAMN that boy can't act.. Jumper, Awake, Takers, the boy just CAN'T act worth a damn.
and Hayden?? hot DAMN that boy can't act.. Jumper, Awake, Takers, the boy just CAN'T act worth a damn.
Shattered Glass shows that, with the right material, he can be a very good actor.
And NYorker, I can understand calling Jar Jar a horrible character but saying he was "certainly one of the worst FX creations" is simply not true. As a piece of VFX he was fine, in 1999 he was fantastic - it was just overshadowed by how grating his character was. And there are certainly much, much, much, much worse FX creations in the history of film. Stick Jar Jar up against the Scorpion King from Mummy Returns or creations of that ilk - he looks like Gollum compared to those.
How many exactly are those "far more...?"
The fact is people bash the prequels because the films are just plain awful. The only film with any redeeming qualities is Ep. III, and that too was prevented from greatness by atrocious dialogue, wooden acting and bloated scenes that add nothing except to "show off" the latest in SFX.
Jar Jar was one of the worst movie characters ever, certainly one of the worst FX creations.
Grand vistas and intricate story lines? it's so obvious the "grand vistas" are FX generated and the "intricate" story lines are tedious.
I give GL all the credit in the world for creating the Star Wars universe and the OT, but he deserves a lot of heat as well of the prequel trilogy, because they added nothing to the saga. The idea of prequels may have been good, but its execution was poor on all levels: story, acting, dialogue.
Oh, please. The only prequel that didn't add anything to the saga was Episode I. I mean, when you look at it, what lasting elements did Ep. I add that wasn't laid out by the later prequels? You could start watching the saga from Ep. II and you wouldn't miss a damn thing.
Oh, please. The only prequel that didn't add anything to the saga was Episode I. I mean, when you look at it, what lasting elements did Ep. I add that wasn't laid out by the later prequels? You could start watching the saga from Ep. II and you wouldn't miss a damn thing.
You'd miss out on Darth Maul. The only truly good thing to come out of ANY of the preqels.
You'd miss out on Darth Maul. The only truly good thing to come out of ANY of the preqels.
He's hardly a character at all. Maybe if Lucas didn't kill him off so early on in the trilogy, maybe he might have been better (something he was actually regretful of, I think).
He's hardly a character at all. Maybe if Lucas didn't kill him off so early on in the trilogy, maybe he might have been better (something he was actually regretful of, I think).
Another reason to watch the Clone Wars TV series do improving second-drafts on Lucas's ideas...
He's hardly a character at all. Maybe if Lucas didn't kill him off so early on in the trilogy, maybe he might have been better (something he was actually regretful of, I think).
I have to agree. I will never understand why Lucas made the decision to kill him off! Maul could have been THE guy for the entire PT just the way Vader was in the OT. It could have climaxed where Anakin had to kill off Maul to take his place.
As it stands, like Qui Gon Jin, he truly was an inconsequential character to the saga. I agree 100% with those who say Episode 1, by and large, is not necessary. You really can start watching this saga from Episode 2 forward and no really miss anything story wise.
All countries
Argentina
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Estonia
Denmark
Finland
Greece
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
India
Latvia
Lithuania
Malaysia
New Zealand
Norway
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Singapore
South Africa
South Korea
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
History Altered : 1977-1983
)
Linear Mode
