I haven't read all the posts here, sorry. I was just assuming that the people who don't like the prequels were the "you are killing my childhood" crowd.

I once heard that the "fans" wished that Annakin turned to Vader in the first movie, and that the other 2 should have been about Vader going around killing people and blowing stuff up.

What is it that really would have made the movies better?

A better writer and director. Lucas should have stuck to producing.

QUOTE (Wonkimus_Major @ May 23 2005, 13.17)

What is it that really would have made the movies better?

Dialogue that didn't make you cringe. Highly emotional or intense moments, whether in the drama or action, that weren't ruined ridiculous or just plain silly bullshit. (a bumbling Jar Jar taking out the entire army, Anakin winning the war purely by accident. Completely minimizes the sacrifice and contribution of everyone else who fought in the battle and makes it impossible for us to take it seriously) CGI serving the film, not the film serving the CGI. No Jar Jar. A new kid and as little time spent as Anakin the kid as possible.

A director who knows how to get decent performances out of actors. As little blue screen as possible. A writer that can come up with lines that actual human beings might say.

More Realistic Action:

The action is very pretty and all, but... as it was implemented, it just doesn't work in a dramatic movie (didn't work in the other two, either). Biggest gripe is that the motion of everything done in CG (such as ship motion, all the droids, a large portion of many of the lightsaber duels, etc.) is just far, far too smooth, too organic. Too much fast acceleration in jumping, running, turning - even the body language of Grevious and his cronies is too fast and fluid. Same goes for camera motion in most action scenes - too fluid. Some amount of rigidity would make things appear much more realistic. None of this so far is a problem - so what if all the action scenes require some suspension of disbelief, and the motion isn't all 'real', it still looks cool. Well, the problem is that the story is supposed to be dramatic and laden with emotion, and we have plenty of personal scenes between the actors in which all motion is back to human scale - slower, less fluid, more lifelike and less computerized-effects-like. So there's a real discord in how the world is moving between the dramatic scenes and the action scenes.

That's part of what I think made the original trilogy so good. When you had an action scene (such as the Battle of Hoth) which used a lot of effects to convey what's going on, there wasn't the same rift between the human characters and the "effects" characters (ships and droids and whatnot). Humans walked and moved around in the same way on the battlefield as they did back in the conference room. Machines were powerful, but not uber-fast and uber-smooth, not liquid. And when you saw them together, humans running alongside fighters, walkers, and droids, you could look at the scene and believe that these different things existed together in that world, that they inhabited the same space, that the world in which the battle was being fought was the same as the world in which the characters sat in a conference chamber and talked about, planned, and feared the battle's importance. But with all three of the new movies, you don't have that sense of continuity between the drama and the action. The characters live in one world, and the droids, ships, animals and so on live in another; and when they interact, which they do oh so frequently with many a CG'ed Jedi, its hard not to cringe sometimes.

Films themselves

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that the things everyone wanted to see from the prequels (Anakins descent, rise of Vader, destruction of Jedi, clone wars) didn't actually even start til the last few minutes of Episode 2.

Personally, I thought Episode one was almost entirely irrelevant. Its few high points were the introduction of Qui Gon Jinn, who was a good character (and I liked him), but wasn't exactly essential to the larger story. The Darth Maul fight, which was hardly necessary for the larger trilogy, but was a kick ass action sequence. Otherwise, the film didn't give us much. One tactical manuever by Palpatine. Introducing Anakin. Really, this stuff could have been condensed into a half hour, get rid of the unnecessary subplots. (Jar Jar, invasion of Naboo, bunch of other stuff).

It'd take me a while to come up with a better way for things to have begun, but its rather easy to say that the beginning took far too long. If they're gonna introduce Anakin as a kid, keep it short...get us to the things we all wanted to see. The Clone Wars, Anakins turn, slaughter of the Jedi, etc.

Personally, I think the Clone Wars should have begun by the end of episode 1. Episode 2 could have been spent showing parts of the war, desperation, struggle, victory and defeat. If they're gonna use the Greivous character, build him up here so that he doesn't seem like such a tacked on afterthought in the third film. And definately start the Palpatine/Anakin manipulation here.

In the third film, the seduction started well, it was subtle, believable, and interesting. But once he lopped off Windu's hand, he was suddenly 'Let me slaughter babies for you master!!!' A bit too abrupt to be believable. I'd like a bit of emotional struggle after the fact too ya know.

Plus...what did Vader actually do? He's the root of all evil in the OT, but here...he observes as thousands of clones overrun the Jedi Academy...than he kills a bunch of kids. While killing kids is sinister and evil...its also quite easy. Oh yeah, almost forgot...he killed some bureaucrats too...easier than killing kids no doubt.

There should have been more scenes of evil Anakin kicking ass. I want to be convinced that this is a man not to be fucked with. Have him cut down Jedi, alot of them, easily. Hunt them down and all. Order 66 was pretty sweet and all, but I'd like to see Vader do some shit too.

In either case, it should not have taken 2 full films to get where the story was supposed to really start.

Solo

I another problem with the prequels is they didn't really have any "everyman" characters like the OT had with both Luke and Han. You couldn't really identify with many of the characters in the prequel trilogy, so it was kinda hard to get emotionally attached to them. Plus Han's sarcastic jabs at the dogma and the new ideas the movie was throwing at you made them alot more believable. He's the character that said all the things that we'd probably say if we had the chance. The "Are you fucking serious?" character who brought us all back to reality. Its hard to get connected to the film when all the characters buy into its own propaganda without question.

I could write on this for hours and feel I'm rambling already. I think another already said it in a single sentence.

How do you make these films better?

QUOTE (GJC @ May 23 2005, 13.38)

Get a real writer and director.

I completely agree with both SAJse and EnlightenmentHK. I will not go so far as to say he fucked up everything. I think the story had potential but lost something in the execution.

Reasons why your argument makes no sense:

(1) Do you know who bashes Episodes 1 and 2 the most? Do you know who has the worst opinion of them? Star Wars fans. Professional movie critics generally gave Phantom and Clones consistently mixed reviews, while people who grew up on the Old Trilogy would have you believe that Phantom and Clones are the two worst movies ever made. It's the same with the Matrix sequels. Nobody hates the Matrix sequels more than fans of the first Matrix, even though professional critics generally held an equally lukewarm opinion of all three.

2) The hype for Episode 1 was WAAAAY more than the hype for Episode 3. People were expecting Episode 3 to suck. And when people expect a movie to suck, they look for tiny flaws and concentrate on those flaws and allow those flaws to prevent them from seeing the ways in which the movie is good. Just like what you're doing.

*thinks*

Did Chewbacca do anything useful in the Old Trilogy?

Oh yeah, he put C-3PO back together, incorrectly.

Did C-3PO do anything useful? Oh yeah, he translated R2's stupid bleeping into the language that everyone else used.

Did R2 do anything useful? Oh yeah, he shut down the trash compactors.

Were the trash compactors totally necessary? Did that scene lead anywhere? Not really.

The Old Trilogy isn't better than the New Trilogy, it's just better-acted.

I think R2 saved Luke's life at the beginning of ROTJ aswell. Major plot point there unless the thought of that movie without Luke Skywalker is appealing.

But yeah, I'd rather have good characters than "useful" ones and the droids were amusing in their own little way.

Oh yeah, stashing Luke's lightsaber... pretty important. But if R2 hadn't been able to do that, they probably would have left Han Solo frozen in carbonite.

Did Han Solo do anything useful in Jedi? Oh yeah, he accidentally waxed Boba Fett.

QUOTE (Wonkimus_Major @ May 24 2005, 09.47)

I think the story had potential but lost something in the execution.

And this is my main problem with most of RotS. I thought it had some great, albeit quite obvious, concepts throughout. I just thought they were executed poorly throughout. Birth of the twins/birth of Vader was a great idea, but it was fucked up on both ends of the spectrum. The whiney NOOOO and the 'will to live' bullshit didn't help. Not to mention that was one of the most ridiculous birth scenes I've ever seen in a movie. I (and everyone else in the theatre) should not have to cringe and shake our heads at the emotional high point of the film.

QUOTE (Lockimus Prime @ May 24 2005, 09.52)

2) The hype for Episode 1 was WAAAAY more than the hype for Episode 3. People were expecting Episode 3 to suck. And when people expect a movie to suck, they look for tiny flaws and concentrate on those flaws and allow those flaws to prevent them from seeing the ways in which the movie is good. Just like what you're doing.

Yep, but after the hype for Ep. 1, even if Lucas blew it (and he did), he still had 2 more films to redeem himself. You could hate it without having felt that you wasted hours upon hours of your life.

And you don't have to look for flaws in Ep. 3 (or any of the episodes), they're abundant and quite glaring. And they are by no means tiny. They frequently undermine what should be the strongest points of the film.

And there's two camps of fan boys. Those who have become disillusioned by the slimy shit that Lucas tries to call 'films' and more or less lost faith that the man is capable of anything decent.....and those who will forgive film-making atrocities, overlook the most glaring flaws and amatuer, bush league mistakes...cause hey, its Star Wars. I suspect Force.net is filled with more of the latter, cause the disillusioned ones I suspect are less likely to invest the time and energy.

And lets be clear, I should not have to 'look past' glaring mistakes, awful performances, or cringe-worthy dialogue to 'see whats good'. I shouldn't have to sit through a love story seemingly written by a suicidal 13 year old with a crush. I shouldn't have to sit through the sorry execution of what should be the emotional center of a film. I shouldn't have to appreciate it for what it 'could have been' or 'wanted to be' simply because the director screwed it up.

And for a decent film-maker, these things aren't that hard. Thats the problem with Lucas, its the fact that you know that anyone with even marginal talent could do it 10 times better than Lucas could. These aren't forgivable flaws, these are glaring, bush league mistakes.

Nitpicky Lawyer:

Shit like this is the first line of defense for the detached fanboy who fails to live in reality. Or the 'You obvious don't understand Star Wars' or some other line of bullshit. What do they all have in common? Well, they say nothing of the film, they do not defend or build up the film...they just attack the messenger.

You see this in politics alot, people who're unwilling to attack the merits of the idea...but find it quicker and easier to simply discredit the man who brought up the idea.

Contrary to popular belief, people who criticize Star Wars are not 'Haterz'. We are not 'overly nitpicky'. Nor do we fail to understand Star Wars.

We just find the newer films for a wide variety of reasons to be very poor quality and more than occasionally a waste of film. Let me repeat this one more time to make it abundantly clear,

Saying bad things about the films does not make you 'overly critical' or nitpicky

Thats the problem here, when someone crticizes...many of you think the problem lies with the messenger...when perhaps you should consider if the problem, in fact, lies with the film instead.

QUOTE (Lockimus Prime @ May 24 2005, 11.03)

Did Han Solo do anything useful in Jedi? Oh yeah, he accidentally waxed Boba Fett.

He planted the explosives that destroyed the shield generator on Endor. That was kind of useful.

@ mr. holier-than-thou: Nothing's wrong with the dialogue or acting in 98% of RotS. Get off your fucking high horse already, unless you make a better movie than that.

@ crowden: Oh yeah, he did.

QUOTE (Lockimus Prime @ May 25 2005, 19.03)

mr. holier-than-thou: Nothing's wrong with the dialogue or acting in 98% of RotS. Get off your fucking high horse already, unless you make a better movie than that.

You're once more falling into the typical fan boy defenses. The ones that don't work in the real world. If you want to set the bar so low for Lucas that he needs only make a better movie than I can to be successful, than by all means do so. Are you gonna ask your oral surgeon to hack out your wisdom teeth better than the accountant next door could? Is that good enough for you? When you read a book, is your only desire that it be better written than the one written by the waitress down the street?

Whether I can do better or worse is irrelevant. The question is, can another film-maker do better or worse. You know, a professional in the same field as Lucas. Cause thats the standard he should be judged against, not whether random people with no experience in the field could do it better. Your expectations are ridiculously low, no wonder you liked this.

And trust me, 98% of it was FAR from alright.

Side note:

That was one of the problems with RotJ, they didn't have much for Solo to do. He was the wise-cracking, cynical, brash pirate throughout the first two. One of the best characters throughout. Than in Jedi, they turned him into a lovesick puppy throughout most of it, didn't have much for him to do, and the movie suffered for it. They all but neutered Solo in that film.

I dunno what this "lovesick puppy" nonsense is about. The entire romance angle between him and Leia was almost completely ignored.

And if you want to talk about other professional filmmakers, I can name a good number of them (Paul Anderson, Quentin Tarantino, Paul Verhoeven*, etc.) whose combined filmographies still don't have a shred of the genius evident in Episode III.

And when I had a gingivectomy to expose my wisdom teeth, the dentist did a crappy enough job that I had to go back in myself and finish it.

You shouldn't let imperfect storytelling spoil your enjoyment of a great story.

*Except for Robocop 1.

QUOTE (Lockimus Prime @ May 25 2005, 16.45)

And if you want to talk about other professional filmmakers, I can name a good number of them (Paul Anderson, Quentin Tarantino, Paul Verhoeven*, etc.) whose combined filmographies still don't have a shred of the genius evident in Episode III.

I'm not even gonna bother. You discredit yourself enough right here.

QUOTE (Lockimus Prime @ May 25 2005, 16.45)

You shouldn't let imperfect storytelling spoil your enjoyment of a great story.

And in the broadest sense, it was a great story. A story told a thousand times, borrowing archetypes from a number of different cultures and eras. Most of the themes within are quite universal. The man cursed/blessed with the gift of prophecy, seeing a dire one, and making every effort to prevent it...only to find that his very efforts are the reason it comes about. The talented youth destined for greatness, only to fall from grace. Great men falling due to jealousy or ambition. Virgin birth, good and bad father figures, etc, etc. Many of these themes have their roots in Shakespeare, Greek tragedy's, and other inspirations.

These stories have been told, this is a new version of the old stories. So the question isn't, is the story good? Cause anyone can tell this story. The real question is, is the story told well?

And quite frankly, its not.

Lucas can do broad strokes quite well. He's been more than adept at borrowing themes from other genres and eras. But execution is the key here, as it is with industry. Idea's are a dime a dozen. Idea's that aren't your own are even cheaper. Its how you implement them. That is the key, that is all that matters. And Lucas Blew it.

QUOTE (crowden)

As far as substance and plot and acting and just about everything else that makes a MOVIE, I'd watch a Tarantino movie over Star Wars any day. Kill Bill blows Episode III out of the water. Pulp Fiction is a better movie. Jackie Brown is a better movie.

Excusde me, but what the fuck kind of plot and substance did Pulp Fiction have? It was two hours of totally random and senseless violence, drug abuse, rape, and miscellaneous debauchery. It had NO substance and almost no plot. To even put Star Wars and Pulp Fiction in the same sentence is an insult to film as a medium.

QUOTE (EnlightenmentHK @ May 26 2005, 05.10)

A story told a thousand times, borrowing archetypes from a number of different cultures and eras. Most of the themes within are quite universal. The man cursed/blessed with the gift of prophecy, seeing a dire one, and making every effort to prevent it...only to find that his very efforts are the reason it comes about. The talented youth destined for greatness, only to fall from grace. Great men falling due to jealousy or ambition. Virgin birth, good and bad father figures, etc, etc. Many of these themes have their roots in Shakespeare, Greek tragedy's, and other inspirations.

I've never seen/heard most of those ideas outside of Sith. I doubt that Lucas pays much attention to Greek mythology.

QUOTE (EnlightenmentHK @ May 26 2005, 05.10)

The real question is, is the story told well?

And quite frankly, its not...

But execution is the key here, as it is with industry... Its how you implement them. That is the key, that is all that matters. And Lucas Blew it.

He did a damn good job with a few minor exceptions. That doesn't count as "blowing it" in my book.

QUOTE (Lockimus Prime @ May 26 2005, 09.24)

I've never seen/heard most of those ideas outside of Sith. I doubt that Lucas pays much attention to Greek mythology.

Have you listened to interviews with Lucas? The man has clearly admitted borrowing heavily from Shakespearian and Greek influences, as well as a healthy dose of eastern (most notably Buddist) ideologies. His series is one of historical/mythical archetypes, he knows it and has admitted as such.

Which alone is no knock against him, these stories are often borrowed and updated. But it just goes to prove that its not the story that matters (since the story is by no means original), but how well its told.

Guess you're gonna now tell me that you didn't know the initial setup for 'A New Hope' was ripped almost completely from Kurosowa?

As for Pulp Fiction, well it brought about a minor revolution in film-making. Influenced a new generation of directors, changed the visual style we expect to see in those kinds of films, forever altered expectations as to dialogue. It was a very risky and unique film that pushed alot of envelopes, was universally adored by critics, fans, made a shitload of money, and is regarded as one of the greatest works of the last 20 years.

Its influence of course does not touch that of the original Star Wars trilogy, but you're comparing it to Revenge of the Sith, not the OT. Revenge of the Sith that gave us nothing new, whether in story, dialogue, special effects, or anything else. Nothing revolutionary. Pioneered nothing and experimented with nothing. Add that to the fact that it was quite shitty at far too many major points, and the idea of a comparison between Pulp Fiction and Sith becomes even more laughable.