PDA

View Full Version : Remakes of the Prequels



stillakid
09-24-2007, 02:54 PM
Aside from a few hearty souls, the Star Wars Prequels are universally recognized as being utter crap, not only in terms of being worthy Star Wars films, but also as being just bad movies in and of themselves. The stories don't follow the established continuity set up by the originals. The characters are uneven and uninspiring. The dialogue is unlistenable at times. And while the Production Design is often awe-inspiring in the Star Wars tradition, often it is somewhat "un-Star Wars-like" meaning that the audience is hard-pressed to imagine "those things" existing in the Original Trilogy universe.

This is the opinion of most of the movie-going audience that lives on our planet today. Even George Lucas has been spotted wearing a "Han shot first" T-shirt and has indirectly admitted that the Prequels were "experimental" in nature.

That being the case, would YOU support a wholesale remake of the Prequel Trilogy if it ever was a possibility? Imagine a Prequel storyline that adhered not only to the established continuity, but led naturally into the OT without begging questions of character motivation or plot conveniences. What if George Lucas let go of his egotistical stranglehold on "process" and allowed other writers and directors to continue with the overall vision that inspired so many so long ago? What if George went back to overseeing the overall project, but let great writers rewrite the backstory for the OT that everyone loved? What if he allowed Directors to direct who actually like working with Actors and don't consider them to be an necessary nuisance? Can you imagine what such a Trilogy could be like?

We all collect the toys because the Production Design has remained consistently above par for so long. But imagine being able to also be proud of the films that inspire the toys. What a world that would be!

So, if George Lucas ever caves and allows such a thing, would you willingly toss your existing Prequel notions and support a brand new Trilogy that better suits the Original Trilogy that inspires it?

Rocketboy
09-24-2007, 03:36 PM
No. Its all good.

Droid
09-24-2007, 04:21 PM
I have thought since they made Episode I that I would like to see a remake of the prequels. I think it should be a trilogy of relationships. Episode I - Anakin leaves Owen and the farm behind to join Obi-wan, Episode II - Anakin and Obi-wan's friendship, and Episode III - Anakin seduced by the Dark Side and the Emperor.

Do it now while Anthony Daniels, Frank Oz, James Earl Jones and Ian McDiarmid are still alive!

bigbarada
09-24-2007, 04:21 PM
The Prequel continuity doesn't even match up within the Prequels. For instance, who was Sifo Dyas and why was he only mentioned in Ep2? Why did Obi-Wan and the Jedi Council seem to know who he was and when he died, but nothing was ever explained?

I'm all for a remake, but don't think I would have the patience for an entirely new trilogy. Maybe a single movie that tells the "real" story of Anakin Skywalker and erases the Prequel storyline. Which, if you consider how much of the prequels were actually essential to the story of Anakin, one film is plenty.

bigbarada
09-24-2007, 05:16 PM
At this point, I think the only salvageable part of the Prequels is Darth Maul, and he deserves a more prominent role in the storyline. Everything else can be scrapped, including Yoda's turn as a leaping ninja-frog.

El Chuxter
09-24-2007, 05:31 PM
I'd like to see Qui-Gon salvaged, though his being Obi-Wan's mentor isn't necessary.

Droid
09-24-2007, 05:43 PM
I'd scrap everything. There were some good ideas in there, but now they are just tainted.

I'd have Anakin's wife be a pre-existing marriage when Obi-wan shows up and convinces him to go fight in the Clone Wars by the way. The key relationships in the movie should be the ones I listed in my last post. No love story necessary!

Mister Roboto
09-24-2007, 07:37 PM
I'm all for a do-over. It would take another 15-20 years and that is plenty of time to erase any knowledge of the current prequels.

jjreason
09-24-2007, 07:45 PM
I say leave it. I have no interest in trying to get excited for 3 more SW movies that won't live up to what anyone expects of them. They're movies for kids, yet people STILL have to dredge up this old argument that the prequels should have been for us, the sad geeks who based their entire lives on the OT. What malarkey.

It's easier for all involved if those not liking the prequels simply choose not to watch them any more (and talking about them to no end for that matter) and remain confined to watching 6hrs of the same 3 old "perfect" Star Wars movies from the 70s and 80s from now until they go to meet The Maker.

I've been here too long, because these repetitive topics are more boring to me than ANY number of prequel viewings could ever get. :rolleyes:

Rogue II
09-24-2007, 10:06 PM
After watching the prequels, I don't have enough interest in Star Wars to sit through the upcoming TV series let alone 3 more films. I say leave it.

JediTricks
09-24-2007, 11:03 PM
No, only because the very idea of these prequels stands in the face of what Star Wars was supposed to mean - we're never supposed to actually know what Obi-Wan and Vader are talking about, what history Tarkin is getting on about, those are all elements that the audience can fill in on their own but were supposed to be left vague so we wouldn't know everything that's going on, and so these people and situations could be fleshed out without showing everything.

I've got some ideas for revamping the prequel tales, and if Lucas handed me everything I needed to do it, I'd do it just so I could watch the OT without feeling current PT's weight on it. But it'd be wrong in general, just the lesser of 2 current wrongs. :p

Jayspawn
09-24-2007, 11:28 PM
Aahh, stilla is *****ing again.

Like there are going to be remakes. Must not know George Lucas or his films very well.

CaptainSolo1138
09-24-2007, 11:28 PM
we're never supposed to actually know what Obi-Wan and Vader are talking about, what history Tarkin is getting on about, those are all elements that the audience can fill in on their ownYet they leave out Boba Fett disintegrating someone, probably the biggest forehead slap in the history of movies. Well, I guess there's that whole "Song of the South" thing I suppose, but not showing Fett melt someone is definitely the second biggest forehead slap in movie history. Oh, wait. I forgot about the third "Godfather" film....

Don't get me started on these pices of carp. Don't remake them. Bury the master copies. Don't show the existing ones to your children and if they bring them up feign ignorance (Except for maybe that part on the Queen's starship where she's trying to smuggle grapes onto Geonosis for transplant. That part was sweet.)

El Chuxter
09-24-2007, 11:42 PM
How about getting good directors who aren't past their primes to direct new movies that stick more closely to the novelizations?

Oh, and Episode I should be AOTC. Episode II is Labyrinth of Evil, and the beginning of ROTS (up to the safe landing of the Invisible Hand). And Episode III should be the rest of ROTS, heavily expanded to give some weight to these massive character changes, and combined with a condensed version of Dark Lord.

2-1B
09-24-2007, 11:59 PM
The prequels are so good that it makes me want to impregnate multiple women so that I will have many children that I can indoctrinate with these films.

They are that good.

stillakid
09-25-2007, 12:35 AM
The prequels are so good that it makes me want to impregnate multiple women so that I will have many children that I can indoctrinate with these films.

They are that good.

What flavor Kool Aid you got?

bigbarada
09-25-2007, 01:07 AM
I say leave it. I have no interest in trying to get excited for 3 more SW movies that won't live up to what anyone expects of them. They're movies for kids, yet people STILL have to dredge up this old argument that the prequels should have been for us, the sad geeks who based their entire lives on the OT. What malarkey.

It's easier for all involved if those not liking the prequels simply choose not to watch them any more (and talking about them to no end for that matter) and remain confined to watching 6hrs of the same 3 old "perfect" Star Wars movies from the 70s and 80s from now until they go to meet The Maker.

I've been here too long, because these repetitive topics are more boring to me than ANY number of prequel viewings could ever get. :rolleyes:

Of course they're for kids, so were the original films. The difference is, the prequels stink and the original films don't.

If I watch Underdog and think the movie is a piece of crap, does that mean that I've lost touch with my childhood? Or does it just mean that Underdog was a terrible movie?

jjreason
09-25-2007, 04:58 PM
Likely both. I get to see LOTS of kids movies these days - and many, many of them are really terrible..... but kids love them. If you compare Phantom Menace to, say, "The Barnyard" - you'll quickly see just how good the Prequels are... even "only" as kids' movies.

JediTricks
09-25-2007, 05:11 PM
I wholly disagree with this notion that Star Wars was "made for kids" - Lucas intentionally put in the gruesome burned bodies of Owen & Beru specifically to keep it from being perceived as a kiddie flick with a G-rating. Star Wars was made for everybody, it was meant to tap into a social subconsciousness. When you look at the footage of the 1977 release of Star Wars and you see those giant lines, the newsfootage of people talking about getting in line over and over to see it again and again waiting 4 or 5 hours at a time, those are nearly ALL adults. When Lucas was eating at the Hamburger Hamlet on Hollywood and spied the big crowd at the Chinese theater across the street, not realizing it was his own film, he was most impressed with the limo pulling up in front - that limo was Hugh Hefner and his entourage... OPENING NIGHT, at 1 of only 32 theaters nationwide playing it, no word-of-mouth yet to sell it.



Yet they leave out Boba Fett disintegrating someone, probably the biggest forehead slap in the history of movies. See, now I feel that'd be a prequelized thing, we hear something badass about the guy to establish that even Vader knows he's a loose cannon, and that's cool. But seeing it in person isn't likely to live up to the hype, and we'll end up saying "that's it? That's the big deal behind that line?!?" like everything in the prequels:

"Your father was already a great pilot when I knew him"
turns into a little kid driving racecars and accidentally flying a Naboo Fighter into a battle???

"[My mother] was very beautiful. Kind, but...sad"
becomes baby Leia being born with her eyes open???

"Yoda, the Jedi master who instructed me"
is in reality a kindergarten teacher???

"General Kenobi, years ago you served my father in the clone wars"
gets totally fouled up, and on and on like that. No promise made by the OT seems to be very well paid-off in the Prequels I think, some things are better left unshown.

bigbarada
09-25-2007, 06:42 PM
some things are better left unshown.

Like the Prequels.:D

CaptainSolo1138
09-26-2007, 07:57 AM
See, now I feel that'd be a prequelized thing, we hear something badass about the guy to establish that even Vader knows he's a loose cannon, and that's cool. But seeing it in person isn't likely to live up to the hype, and we'll end up saying "that's it?I agree. My point was that since they explained and/or showed every other throw-away line, why did they pass on the most obvious of all? It certainly couldn't have been a logical decision.

Droid
09-26-2007, 10:46 AM
I agree. My point was that since they explained and/or showed every other throw-away line, why did they pass on the most obvious of all? It certainly couldn't have been a logical decision.

I thought that Luke saying there was something familiar about Dagobah in Empire meant they would have him have been born there or hid there for a short time while they figured out where to hide him permanently.

CaptainSolo1138
09-26-2007, 11:19 AM
I thought that Luke saying there was something familiar about Dagobah in Empire meant they would have him have been born there or hid there for a short time while they figured out where to hide him permanently.Good point, Droid. I forgot all about that one.

Sane person on the set: "Mr. Lucas. Are we going to explain Luke's familiarity with Dagobah? Or show Boba Fett's disintegration of someone?"

Lucas: "No. We're going to show Greedo fighting Darth Vader."

Rocketboy
09-26-2007, 11:41 AM
Lucas: "No. We're going to show Greedo fighting Darth Vader."Which they didn't really show.

Mr. JabbaJohnL
09-26-2007, 10:24 PM
I wouldn't want remakes of any of the films. Retools, fine if they're done well, but no remakes.

I still get a kick out of how many of the anti-PT arguments are "they don't follow the continuity of the OT." How not? People talking about events from 30 years ago aren't going to explain everything. Sorry that you thought they'd be different. Accept them and deal with it. I have to think that people who hate these movies would be able to live much happier lives if they just forgot about them and stopped making threads about them every goddamn day.

stillakid
09-26-2007, 10:35 PM
I still get a kick out of how many of the anti-PT arguments are "they don't follow the continuity of the OT." How not?
Did you actually watch the entire Star Wars saga?



I have to think that people who hate these movies would be able to live much happier lives if they just forgot about them and stopped making threads about them every goddamn day.

Hey! I take Tuesdays off! :smoker:

2-1B
09-26-2007, 11:59 PM
I thought that Luke saying there was something familiar about Dagobah in Empire meant they would have him have been born there or hid there for a short time while they figured out where to hide him permanently.


Good point, Droid. I forgot all about that one.

Sane person on the set: "Mr. Lucas. Are we going to explain Luke's familiarity with Dagobah? Or show Boba Fett's disintegration of someone?"

Lucas: "No. We're going to show Greedo fighting Darth Vader."

For chrissakes, you guys. :rolleyes:

"There's something familiar about this place...like I'm being WATCHED."

Then later Yoda talks about how he WATCHED Luke from that stupid swamp across the stars.

That's familiarity for you. Also, I find it hilarious that people expected Baby Luke to remember Dagobah but when Baby Leia remembers her mom, then its garbage.

stillakid
09-27-2007, 01:24 AM
For chrissakes, you guys. :rolleyes:

"There's something familiar about this place...like I'm being WATCHED."

Then later Yoda talks about how he WATCHED Luke from that stupid swamp across the stars.

That's familiarity for you. Also, I find it hilarious that people expected Baby Luke to remember Dagobah but when Baby Leia remembers her mom, then its garbage.

Yes, you're right. They are both garbage. :)

It reminds me of that scene in Close Encounters of the Third Kind (stay with me) when Richard Dreyfuss's character (Roy Neary) goes to the town meeting with the Air Force. He and others are sitting there with serious and legitimate issues they want to talk about when that numbnut across the table completely destroys the credibility of the discussion by tossing his encounter with Big Foot into it. Of course once a yahoo like that opens his mouth with a completely stupid thought, everybody else with legitimate issues are lumped in with him.

Ya with me? I and others have very honest and proven problems with the storytelling failures of the Prequels that have nothing to do with idiotic suggestions of Luke "remembering" Dagobah, et al.

bigbarada
09-27-2007, 03:26 AM
I have to think that people who hate these movies would be able to live much happier lives if they just forgot about them and stopped making threads about them every goddamn day.

I never said that I hated them, I just think they are poorly-written, ill-conceived and completely devoid of good characterization and storytelling; but by no means do I hate them. And by no means am I angry about them, I just have fun trashing crappy movies.:thumbsup:

JON9000
09-27-2007, 11:00 AM
would YOU support a wholesale remake of the Prequel Trilogy if it ever was a possibility?

No, and for a very simple reason: every post I have seen where somebody says, "they should have done it this way..." winds up as total garbage that is by far worse than what appeared onscreen, which I would have little interest in seeing.

When fanboys get their wishes fulfilled we wind up with Snakes on a Plane

Right now, there's a douche bag out there named Rod Lurie (a film critic) who is so assured that Straw Dogs "didn't work" that he has taken upon himself to "remake" it. Excuse me, but who is this fool? It's the same thing- this guy has a problem with the film because it didn't work for him (although I found it to be great) hence he thinks it should be remade. I've heard his ideas and I think they completely rob the film of its guts.

I think the prequels have a few problems, but I believe most of them to be confined to the first film. Even so, I'll take George Lucas' table scraps over Bruckheimer's best work, thanks.

stillakid
09-27-2007, 11:30 AM
No, and for a very simple reason: every post I have seen where somebody says, "they should have done it this way..." winds up as total garbage that is by far worse than what appeared onscreen, which I would have little interest in seeing.

When fanboys get their wishes fulfilled we wind up with Snakes on a Plane

Right now, there's a douche bag out there named Rod Lurie (a film critic) who is so assured that Straw Dogs "didn't work" that he has taken upon himself to "remake" it. Excuse me, but who is this fool? It's the same thing- this guy has a problem with the film because it didn't work for him (although I found it to be great) hence he thinks it should be remade. I've heard his ideas and I think they completely rob the film of its guts.

I think the prequels have a few problems, but I believe most of them to be confined to the first film. Even so, I'll take George Lucas' table scraps over Bruckheimer's best work, thanks.

That's interesting because the way I see it, the Prequels are nothing but gratuitous pandering to fanboys. Couple that with George's inherent lack of writing skill (plot and dialogue) and his idea that kids are blithering idiots who only respond to poop jokes and we get Eps I, II, and III.

Granted, there are some moronic suggestions out there from fanboys who don't really understand the concept of good storytelling either. So I can understand why anyone with sense would be cautious of a remake, particularly if it came from one of them. But thoughtful writing from professionals who look at the established continuity from the originals could result in a trilogy that everyone truly enjoys and that no one has to defend. I honestly believe that it could be done in way that doesn't resemble a superficial farce.


As far as Bruckheimer flicks go, I rather enjoy them. :) The guy is a car salesman and his movies are pure popcorn, but they are good and enjoyable popcorn and never pretend to be anything more than that. Not every one of "his" movies is good and I don't think any of them are absolutely brilliant. But they are generally solid stories with dynamic visuals that give the audience a fun couple of hours in the theater. Nothing wrong with that.

JON9000
09-27-2007, 11:40 AM
As far as Bruckheimer flicks go, I rather enjoy them. :) The guy is a car salesman and his movies are pure popcorn, but they are good and enjoyable popcorn and never pretend to be anything more than that. Not every one of "his" movies is good and I don't think any of them are absolutely brilliant. But they are generally solid stories with dynamic visuals that give the audience a fun couple of hours in the theater. Nothing wrong with that.

I have nothing against people who enjoy Bruckheimer films. Lots of people do, all one has to do is look at the numbers. I get the sense from your language, however, that you feel the Star Wars movies should be approached from a different perspective, because the thematic issues are more "elevated"? (Which is also a reasonable opinion to have, not that anyone needs permission, and one that I share at moments of scat humor and Jar-Jar induced madness).

El Chuxter
09-27-2007, 11:45 AM
Fanboys getting their way? Isn't that what the absolutely useless link between Boba Fett and the Empire was?

I don't quite think they're garbage, but they could've and should've been better. There's a reason that ANH and ESB consistently top critics' charts, but none of the prequels do: weak story and almost nonexistent character development. When Liam Neeson as a throwaway character evolves more in one movie than the main character does over three, there's a problem. (Don't try to argue that Anakin develops. Sure, his character changes. But we don't see it. We see a cute widdle kid, then a whiny teenager with too much angst, then a secretly married guy who is a little too quick to agree to killing off a bunch of kids. The seeing him change is the important thing, and Lucas apparently skipped the day of class when they discussed that.)

Edit: Jon, you posted while I was writing that. I think that stillakid is right to expect more than mere popcorn from the prequels. Why? That's what we were given in 1977, 1980, and (though some might disagree) 1983. To go from movies that are on par with The Godfather or ET or Casablanca to those that are on par with Rush Hour or Con Air is a pretty remarkable step backwards.

stillakid
09-27-2007, 11:54 AM
I have nothing against people who enjoy Bruckheimer films. Lots of people do, all one has to do is look at the numbers. I get the sense from your language, however, that you feel the Star Wars movies should be approached from a different perspective, because the thematic issues are more "elevated"? (Which is also a reasonable opinion to have, not that anyone needs permission, and one that I share at moments of scat humor and Jar-Jar induced madness).

What I feel is irrelevant and the way the Prequels should have been done should have nothing to do with my own personal preferences or anyone else's. The point I've always tried to make is that any continuing story, be it a Star Wars movie, Harry Potter, etc. has a responsibility to A) be true to any established continuity and B) to be true to the overall "tone/mood/feeling/etc." of the films that came prior. Even the James Bond films made some attempt to maintain some sort of continuity even though they aren't really a continuing storyline...at least up until the latest, Casino Royale, which has more of a Bourne Supremacy feel than a true Bond flick.

For example, despite the feeling from many people that ROTJ is more "kiddie" than ANH or ESB, it still isn't a stretch to imagine those things from ROTJ existing within the established Star Wars universe from ANH and ESB. Now take something from the Prequels and try to imagine it anywhere in ANH. The people, the language they use, many of the creatures, spaceships, locations.... so many things just don't "feel like" they belong in the Universe that ANH established. Add that to just generally poor storytelling, uneven and incomprehensible character motivations, lack of continuity within the same film along with mismatched continuity throughout the saga and the only conclusion one can arrive at is that the Prequels are a mess.

Are they "fun"? There are moments here and there, but it is more like a video game only you don't get any points for sitting there having to endure the unfun parts.

Does it look good? Of course. George always hires good people who have talent.

Does it sound good? Of course again. On a technical level, the saga has always been above par and sets the bar for everyone else. But there's more to a movie than bright shiny objects.

JON9000
09-27-2007, 11:55 AM
Fanboys getting their way? Isn't that what the absolutely useless link between Boba Fett and the Empire was?

I don't quite think they're garbage, but they could've and should've been better. There's a reason that ANH and ESB consistently top critics' charts, but none of the prequels do: weak story and almost nonexistent character development. When Liam Neeson as a throwaway character evolves more in one movie than the main character does over three, there's a problem. (Don't try to argue that Anakin develops. Sure, his character changes. But we don't see it. We see a cute widdle kid, then a whiny teenager with too much angst, then a secretly married guy who is a little too quick to agree to killing off a bunch of kids. The seeing him change is the important thing, and Lucas apparently skipped the day of class when they discussed that.)

Edit: Jon, you posted while I was writing that. I think that stillakid is right to expect more than mere popcorn from the prequels. Why? That's what we were given in 1977, 1980, and (though some might disagree) 1983. To go from movies that are on par with The Godfather or ET or Casablanca to those that are on par with Rush Hour or Con Air is a pretty remarkable step backwards.

In my opinion, the worst example of fan service was the lightsaber fight between Dooku and Yoda. That said, it didn't ruin AOTC for me. I really liked Jango and was glad he made it. I have to agree with you, though- Boba Fett is a minor character and is largely a creation of EU, which I detest. Therefore, spending any time whatsoever on his development seems like time wasted (although it was only a couple of moments). Try not to let Morrison's voice ruin ESB for you, okay?

I really enjoyed the fight between the Emperor and Yoda, though (and I thought the duel between Anakin and Obi-wan was great as well). I think Yoda going off should have been left for the final film.


What I feel is irrelevant and the way the Prequels should have been done should have nothing to do with my own personal preferences or anyone else's.

Well, I'm glad you said it! ;)


The point I've always tried to make is that any continuing story, be it a Star Wars movie, Harry Potter, etc. has a responsibility to A) be true to any established continuity and B) to be true to the overall "tone/mood/feeling/etc." of the films that came prior. Even the James Bond films made some attempt to maintain some sort of continuity even though they aren't really a continuing storyline...at least up until the latest, Casino Royale, which has more of a Bourne Supremacy feel than a true Bond flick.

I agree with all of this, except to say that Bond flicks are all over the map in terms of tone and Die Another Day ripping off XXX was much more of a travesty to me.


For example, despite the feeling from many people that ROTJ is more "kiddie" than ANH or ESB, it still isn't a stretch to imagine those things from ROTJ existing within the established Star Wars universe from ANH and ESB. Now take something from the Prequels and try to imagine it anywhere in ANH. The people, the language they use, many of the creatures, spaceships, locations.... so many things just don't "feel like" they belong in the Universe that ANH established. Add that to just generally poor storytelling, uneven and incomprehensible character motivations, lack of continuity within the same film along with mismatched continuity throughout the saga and the only conclusion one can arrive at is that the Prequels are a mess.

Stilla, I found, even as a child, that there was a world of difference in tonality between the OT films, but I never let it bother me. I didn't care for ESB much when I was little (although I love it now) because it was very dark, as opposed to ANH, which was much lighter. Likewise, ROTJ was completely uneven within itself: Oedipal themes above, while little furry creatures are fighting below! Fortunately, the kid mind can shift gears pretty quickly and handle all of this.

And we've had this conversation a million times, but we got clever bits of Retconning even within the OT, with scenes devoted to "a certain point of view" and Luke beign totally hot what for what wound up being his sister. One of the things I know you dislike is the concept of Midichlorians, those pool-disinfecting subcellular bits- and I don't like them either, but I think the real reason we have a problem is because it demystifies the Force, and our conception of the Force theretofore was completely mystical. But looking back, I have to acknowledge that my ideas about the Force changed as I progressed through the OT as well- when I watched ANH, I thought the Force was something you could pick up if youbelieved in it, all you needed was a trusty light-saber, a guru, and trust in your own feelings. As the story continued, though, we learned a lot more about the dark side, and the fact that manipulation of the Force was basically a super-power, since there were only two hopes in the galaxy.

El Chuxter
09-27-2007, 12:24 PM
Both the Yoda battles were total fan-wank. Worse, Lucas couldn't figure out a way to end either of them.

I've said before (though I don't know if it was here) that there were a few ways Lucas should've considered to end the Yoda/Palpatine fight, rather than a cryptic "I'm going to just let go and fall" that was so clumsy it made no sense without one's reading the novelization (where we learn that the Force reveals to him that he simply cannot beat Palpatine):

First, Palpatine could've been kicking Yoda's a**. Hard. And Yoda slowly sees that he's losing and limps away, or scurries off. Something to clearly visually establish that Yoda knows his a** is grass and he's making a run for it.

Second, Palpatine could've thought he had Yoda at his mercy. Yoda is lying motionless on the ground, covered by his cloak. Palpy moves in for the kill, but at the last second, Yoda seems to vanish under his cloak. Palpatine looks confused, kicks the cloak, and we see that Yoda burned a hole in the floor and escaped. Then we see him crawling through the vents. As fond as Lucas is of parallels between the trilogies, I'm surprised he didn't do this.

Third, and the way to clear up another huge problem with the film: Yoda is fighting valiantly, but is losing. But he still is giving it his all. Palpatine knocks him down a shaft, into another room--something to get Yoda in another location, where we can figure it may take Palpy a few minutes to catch up. As Yoda recovers, we hear Qui-Gon's voice: "You cannot win, Yoda. Only the Chosen One can defeat the Sith. Your last hope lies with the child of Anakin Skywalker." Yoda is surprised, but knows Qui-Gon's not coming back from the dead to lie to him, so he runs the hell away.

bigbarada
09-27-2007, 12:27 PM
I think that stillakid is right to expect more than mere popcorn from the prequels. Why? That's what we were given in 1977, 1980, and (though some might disagree) 1983. To go from movies that are on par with The Godfather or ET or Casablanca to those that are on par with Rush Hour or Con Air is a pretty remarkable step backwards.

QFT :thumbsup:

There seems to be this notion that the Prequels are only hated by Star Wars geeks and that kids and the "unwashed masses" love them because they are just looking to be captivated by bright shiny objects for a couple of hours. It's definitely a very elitist and condescending way to view things.

Most of my friends are not Star Wars fans. They don't hate the series mind you, they just don't care enough about the movies to pick sides. However, they will unanimously pick the original films as the best ones and state that they weren't too impressed with the prequels.

Every kid I know who loves the series will almost always relate more with the OT characters and storylines. My nephew, Matthew, loves reinacting the Battle of Hoth and the space battle in ROTJ; but his first word was "Jar Jar." So, from a kid who's earliest memories are of the prequels to basically ignore the prequels and gravitate to the OT, speaks volumes of the quality, or lack thereof, of the prequel films.

My boss' son, Joey, got introduced to Star Wars when he saw Ep3 on PPV. He became instantly enamored with the series, but his favorite film is ROTJ and his favorite character is Luke Skywalker.

So, even kids are not dumb enough to believe that the prequels are better or even equal to the OT.

The OT gives us a naive farmboy who gets to save a princess and the galaxy, and a cynical loner who, deep down, has a heart of gold. The prequels give us a mystical monk who has sworn to a life of celebacy and a slaveboy/enraged teenager/child murderer as characters to try to relate to.

Is it any wonder why people can understand the OT better?

JON9000
09-27-2007, 12:36 PM
Both the Yoda battles were total fan-wank.

There's no reason for the Dooku battle, so I dig that bit, but I thought having the Palpy/Yoda battle made perfect sense. Two Jedi left, let them try to take out the Sith immediately. Palps gets the high ground, wins. Obi gets the high ground, wins. Sheesh.


There seems to be this notion that the Prequels are only hated by Star Wars geeks and that kids and the "unwashed masses" love them because they are just looking to be captivated by bright shiny objects for a couple of hours. It's definitely a very elitist and condescending way to view things.


So, even kids are not dumb enough to believe that the prequels are better or even equal to the OT.

Thank you for this little lesson on populism/elitism. :rolleyes:

bigbarada
09-27-2007, 12:41 PM
Thank you for this little lesson on elitism. :rolleyes:

:thumbsup: I'm here for YOU, man!

JON9000
09-27-2007, 12:44 PM
Instead of flattering my vanity, you would do better to advance the conversation! :p

El Chuxter
09-27-2007, 12:51 PM
But it's not clear from the film that Palpatine gets the high ground and wins. To me, and to just about everyone I've ever discussed this scene with, they're evenly matched--if anything, Yoda has an edge--and then, suddenly, with Palpy giving ground, Yoda suddenly just lets go of a pod and falls. (In case you're wondering, the others who didn't think that explained it exactly as it's described in the novel, which is absolutely not clear from the scene in the movie.)

JON9000
09-27-2007, 12:54 PM
Okay, then I understand. That was just my immidiate interpretation of the scene.

What I did have a problem with was once Yoda escaped, the dialogue made it sound as though he had something else up his sleeve, so I was let down when it was just an escape.

bigbarada
09-27-2007, 01:10 PM
Instead of flattering my vanity, you would do better to advance the conversation! :p

I admit I might have slipped into the 'false consensus effect' a bit at the end of my argument, but I thought I made some good points.:yes:

Unfortunately, that seems to be the primary mode of argument on the internet and I'm a little annoyed that I fell into it. For those unfamiliar, it's the "me and all six of my friends think this, so it must be the truth." Being totally oblivious to the fact that people tend to surround themselves with others who think the way they do. So, anytime you are talking about less than 100 people, then you are only referring to individuals, not mass public trends.

But read the rest of my post, because it's pure gold.lol

JON9000
09-27-2007, 01:32 PM
It isn't hard to find a consensus that the OT is superior to the PT, because that truly is the general consensus, and a poll might bear that out. I like the OT better, too. But on the question of whether the PT is a worthy endeavour (my opinion) versus Total Garbage that Completely Ruins Star Wars, things are much more divided.

The haters trot out the old reasons- continuity and character development, while the enjoyers suggest that some of this criticism is fair, and some of it not-so-fair.

When we have this conversation, it always devolves very quickly to stating one's opinions as facts, then quickly to calling people names and internet-trolling. So, we can let it go there again and have people banned, or not.

stillakid
09-27-2007, 02:23 PM
It isn't hard to find a consensus that the OT is superior to the PT, because that truly is the general consensus, and a poll might bear that out. I like the OT better, too. But on the question of whether the PT is a worthy endeavour (my opinion) versus Total Garbage that Completely Ruins Star Wars, things are much more divided.

Things are divided because so many people who do claim to be fans CHOOSE to ignore the broader issues of storytelling in favor of enjoying the films "for what they are" or because they truly enjoy the little moments in spite of the greater story. Now, there's nothing wrong with a movie having "moments" to enjoy, but just because a movie has some things in it that are good/fun/enjoyable, does not mean that the whole thing really succeeded as a story. I enjoy very specific aspects of the Prequels too (believe it or not) but I am still capable of realizing that those are merely elements and that the stories themselves are empirically bad.




The haters trot out the old reasons- continuity and character development, while the enjoyers suggest that some of this criticism is fair, and some of it not-so-fair.
Right there in your phrasing is a problem These aren't "old reasons." You say that as if the basic fundamentals of good storytelling are antiquated and us "fogeys" who like the OT more have to somehow "get with it" in the 2000's and enjoy this new brand of entertainment that ignores story, character development and continuity. Granted, this "new generation" who are growing up with superficial videogames and WWF have very low expectations when it comes to being entertained, but that doesn't supercede basic storytelling skills.


When we have this conversation, it always devolves very quickly to stating one's opinions as facts, then quickly to calling people names and internet-trolling. So, we can let it go there again and have people banned, or not.
Look, there are a million ways to tell the same basic story. Therein lies the region occupied by "opinion." But there is FACT when it comes to evaluating a story that has already been told and how well it succeeded or failed. A storypoint may be entertaining in and of itself, but that doesn't mean that it belongs in the story as a whole or conforms to the overall tale. The bit about Yoda jumping around like a frog on a hotplate was amusing (at best), but made absolutely no sense given what we already had learned about the Force, about the Jedi, and about the entire Star Wars universe as a whole. Videogame moments do not add up to create a well-told story.

JON9000
09-27-2007, 02:49 PM
Right there in your phrasing is a problem These aren't "old reasons." You say that as if the basic fundamentals of good storytelling are antiquated and us "fogeys" who like the OT more have to somehow "get with it" in the 2000's and enjoy this new brand of entertainment that ignores story, character development and continuity. Granted, this "new generation" who are growing up with superficial videogames and WWF have very low expectations when it comes to being entertained, but that doesn't supercede basic storytelling skills.

What I mean by that is we have had this conversation on the boards many times, and it doesn't usually lead to anything new. I am not calling anyone an "Old Fogey." But here is a concept I have never talked about on the boards before today a few posts back:

I have thought about the Force and midichlorians and why I really don't like the concept, especially given that it is an almost infintessimally small added wrinkle of knowledge. My conclusion is that my problem with it isn't that it is "new," "out of continuity," but that it provides a scientific knowledge-based answer to what was, for me, a concept shrouded in "mystery".

Given my (and I daresay your) real world preference for hard science to mysticism, I wonder why I would be so averse to the concept of midichlorians. After some evaluation I have come to the conclusion that I, like many other people, am fundamentally attracted to mysticism, mystery, the unknowable, and on some level it helps me understand the attraction of religion to my friends. I just indulge mine in the safe confines of fantasy. but then, if that is my outlet, perhaps that explains why I like Star Wars so much!

El Chuxter
09-27-2007, 03:15 PM
Maybe it's because Star Wars is more a fantasy set in the future (regardless of what the opening crawl says) than actual science fiction.

Or maybe it's because the midichlorions were such a big deal in TPM, but then fanboys griped about it, so they weren't brought up at all in AOTC and glossed over in ROTS.

I've said before and I'll say again: the main problem is ROTS. That movie was not horrible, but it needed to be truly great. Had it been, every other flaw with the first two movies could have been completely overlooked. ROTS should have been the strong third act to which TPM and AOTC are really only backstory. But it wasn't.

And I still maintain that Genndy Tartakovsky captured the essence of the OT better in just over two hours of cartoon shorts than Lucas did in about seven hours of movie.

JON9000
09-27-2007, 03:34 PM
Looking back over your comments and everyone else's, I wonder if any of you feel like some clever editing and a little bit of overdubbing could bring the prequels within the zone of acceptability for you, rather than outright remakes. For example, it wouldn't take much to make midichlorians go away completely, and while we have decried dialogue, if you honestly dropped the yippees and so forth, it might go a long way.

stillakid
09-27-2007, 03:43 PM
Looking back over your comments and everyone else's, I wonder if any of you feel like some clever editing and a little bit of overdubbing could bring the prequels within the zone of acceptability for you, rather than outright remakes. For example, it wouldn't take much to make midichlorians go away completely, and while we have decried dialogue, if you honestly dropped the yippees and so forth, it might go a long way.

Um, no. Although I will say that maybe, with a lot of hard work, the Prequels could be dismantled for parts and possibly a single "decent" movie could be constructed. Maybe. Ultimately, the problems are so fundamental and have little to do with silly visuals or bad dialogue. The entire structure is wrong, Anakin's motivations are uneven and incomprehensible... You can only polish a turd so long, but it's still a brown mass of crap. Put it this way... we could tear apart an Edsel (TPM), a Buick Skylark (AOTC), and a Dodge Viper (ROTS), but the parts could still never be rearranged to make a Ferrari. The pieces available in the Prequels by and large are "wrong" and only a wholesale rewrite and reshoot can fix them.

bigbarada
09-27-2007, 05:09 PM
Maybe you could get the existing footage and splice it all together to create a 20-minute prologue for the OT; but it would have to include an original voice over with a new, more concise and logical story. Similar to what was done for the first Lord of the Rings film.

Without a complete rewrite by a competent writer, the Prequels in their current state will never measure up.

I don't think I'm being unreasonable. If someone made The Godfather 4, starring Nicholas Cage and Chris Tucker and turned into a "buddy cop" picture, do you think we'd be wrong in proclaiming that a total crap idea? This is no different.

JediTricks
09-27-2007, 07:36 PM
I agree. My point was that since they explained and/or showed every other throw-away line, why did they pass on the most obvious of all? It certainly couldn't have been a logical decision.Lucas felt the only way to redeem Boba Fett was apparently to make him a 9-year-old boy. That seems to be Lucas' decision in everything in life - Vader? 9-year-old boy. Boba Fett? 9-year-old boy. Indiana Jones? 9-year-old boy. Perhaps George Lucas' friendship with Michael Jackson was based on having a little too much in common. :p

Anyway, 9-year-old boys don't disintegrate people, only insects.



No, and for a very simple reason: every post I have seen where somebody says, "they should have done it this way..." winds up as total garbage that is by far worse than what appeared onscreen, which I would have little interest in seeing.Even mine? Here's a repost: http://forums.sirstevesguide.com/showthread.php?p=318733#post318733 (Originally posted Nov 27, 2000 - I'd tweak a few things here and there since then but it's basically solid from what I meant to say with it)

BTW, Jerry Bruckheimer produced the Pirates of the Caribbean movies and I like those quite a bit.


In my opinion, the worst example of fan service was the lightsaber fight between Dooku and Yoda.That was up there, it was painful for me. But then you say...

I really enjoyed the fight between the Emperor and Yoda, though (and I thought the duel between Anakin and Obi-wan was great as well). I think Yoda going off should have been left for the final film.Uhhh... how is this not in direct contrast to the previous statement about Yoda + lightsaber? I'm with Chux, they're both fanwank.

2-1B
09-27-2007, 11:18 PM
Yes, you're right. They are both garbage.

I got no beef with you on that one, at least you are consistent. :)


To go from movies that are on par with The Godfather or ET or Casablanca to those that are on par with Rush Hour or Con Air is a pretty remarkable step backwards.

What's this nonsense of putting ET in the league of The Godfather ? :confused:

None of the Star Wars movies are on par with GF1 or 2, either. :p


One of the things I know you dislike is the concept of Midichlorians, those pool-disinfecting subcellular bits- and I don't like them either, but I think the real reason we have a problem is because it demystifies the Force, and our conception of the Force theretofore was completely mystical. But looking back, I have to acknowledge that my ideas about the Force changed as I progressed through the OT as well- when I watched ANH, I thought the Force was something you could pick up if youbelieved in it, all you needed was a trusty light-saber, a guru, and trust in your own feelings. As the story continued, though, we learned a lot more about the dark side, and the fact that manipulation of the Force was basically a super-power, since there were only two hopes in the galaxy.

Jon, I feel this way as well. ANH as a standalone does set Luke up as Batman, but ESB and especially ROTJ transform him into Superman. That was 16 years before Episode I The Phantom Midicholarians was released.


But it's not clear from the film that Palpatine gets the high ground and wins. To me, and to just about everyone I've ever discussed this scene with, they're evenly matched--if anything, Yoda has an edge--and then, suddenly, with Palpy giving ground, Yoda suddenly just lets go of a pod and falls. (In case you're wondering, the others who didn't think that explained it exactly as it's described in the novel, which is absolutely not clear from the scene in the movie.)

The little guy was clinging on to a slippery Senate pod and he FELL. Leave it to an EU writer to have to add a bunch more to it. lol


And I still maintain that Genndy Tartakovsky captured the essence of the OT better in just over two hours of cartoon shorts than Lucas did in about seven hours of movie.

Agreed, it captured quite perfectly the scene from the Death Star where Obi Wan wears stormie armor. lol

JediTricks
09-28-2007, 05:26 AM
Yoda teaches Luke the ways of the Force, that's pretty Batman to me. ROTJ is when he kicks into self-empowered mode, though that can be explained away easily as "he experimented and practiced with the Force in between the films once he had most of this knowledge".

JON9000
09-28-2007, 08:00 AM
Uhhh... how is this not in direct contrast to the previous statement about Yoda + lightsaber? I'm with Chux, they're both fanwank.

I thought the second duel had to happen, or at least a direct confrontation had to happen between Palps and Yoda. It made sense within the context of the story, and the stakes were a lot higher. The Yoda/Dooku fight felt completely tacked onto the end of AOTC. Maybe you don't like the sabers, but they needed to tangle, IMO.

On the topic of fan service in general, I've come to accept that it is almost ubiquitous in tent pole movies. Sometimes I appreciate it (2001 pod in TPM), sometimes I don't (Yoda/Dooku).

El Chuxter
09-28-2007, 10:42 AM
There should've been a fight. The way it handled had a lot of fan wank (albeit some really cool fan wank, like Yoda flattening the guards).

How is Luke Batman? Aside from the parental figures being killed, I don't see it.

JON9000
09-28-2007, 01:55 PM
There should've been a fight. The way it handled had a lot of fan wank (albeit some really cool fan wank, like Yoda flattening the guards).

How is Luke Batman? Aside from the parental figures being killed, I don't see it.

Two things:

1. You could have had the fight with lightsabers or using the force. We got both. I don't know why this is such a problem.

2. The idea behind the Batman comment is contained within my post that Caesar is responding to- that contrary to everybodys' complaining that GL retconned what the force was all about in the PT, he began tinkering long before that, starting with EBS. In ANH, Luke was a kid who picked up a lightsaber, had a guru, and was told to "stretch out" with his feelings. It appears anybody could do it, you just had to believe. That was demonstrated in the remote sequence. Likewise, Batman is a normal human being who uses honed physicality and intelligence as his primary tools.

By the end of ESB, we now know manipulation of the Force is actually more like a superpower, as there are but two hopes left in the galaxy, hence, Luke is arguably super-powered. If you don't buy the analogy, fine, but at the end of ESB, the viewer's hopes of being able to pick up a saber, use the force, and go are dashed.

So, forgive me if I suggest that some of this ranting and raving comes down the credulity of children versus the incredulity of adults, and some of our own pecadilloes about what we "want" the Force to be versus how it has been presented over the course of the films. And before anybody gets defensive, remember, I used my own dislike of midichlorians as an example.

El Chuxter
09-28-2007, 02:02 PM
My point about the fight: it should have ended with a satisfying victory for one, or at least a clear draw. Not "one guy falls backwards, and the other guy (who's been bouncing like a frigging Happy Fun Ball the whole time) just falls down and runs away." And the whole "Failed I have. Into exile I must go" bit? WTF? The Jedi now have this code of honor where they have to live in a swamp if they don't beat an adversary on the first try? Why didn't Anakin have to go to Dagobah after Dooku cut his arm off?

stillakid
09-28-2007, 05:30 PM
We could take nearly every single minute of the Prequels and mostly agree that there are problems either with the minute itself or show how it leads to other problems down the line.

The only real value in deconstructing a film is to learn what it did right or did wrong so that it can be done better the next time.

I rather like the idea of someone else taking it upon themselves to "redo" a poorly made movie. The drag with Star Wars is that the visual design and characters are so distinct that any unofficial remake would be at a disadvantage by not being able to use them.

Qui-Long Gone
09-28-2007, 09:48 PM
Stilla....I feel your pain, but here's something to think about. It helps me...

Note: sorry this response is so long...I generally am not a fan of responses that are more than one paragraph.

I think of the trilogies as 2 different SW stories, similar only in grand themes (i.e. the force, outerspace, etc.), fantastic designs and recurring characters, but different in story (and story quality). I almost think it best to abandon the terms "prequal" and "original," because as far as I'm concerned they are not six stories = 1 (the tale of Anakin Skywalker), they are 3=the tale of Luke Skywalker and the Rebellion and 3=the tale of Anakin Skywalker.

*A good way to think of these trilogies is the way we look at Greek mythology....e.g. Homer (not Simpson) told a version (possibly the definitive) of the Trojan War and Agammenon. Then several Greek playwrights made plays about Agammemnon (Brian Cox in Troy for those keeping score at home) and his family....the Greeks were notorious for doing plays about familiar characters. Some versions were better than others but they all had essentially the same characters and same 'background.'

Now having said that, I think that on their own, the TPM, AOTC and ROTS had some excellent SW moments....some good fights, potentially interesting characters and fine advances in cinematic technology. Where they lost their way was in their inability to give the entire 6 films a thoughful and reasonable through-line....These three films are guilty of the same crimes as the Matrix and Pirates of the Carribean (and we might include Shrek3, Spiderman3, and Godfather3) trilogies: taking a marvelous thought too seriously! Once Lucas set out to give form to the force he lost his way. IT IS THE IDEA OF THE FORCE that makes Star Wars different from anything else....there are a million sci-fi/fantasy stories out there, but let's be honest, its the Force that is "with us always."

ANH, ESB, and ROTJ were sucessful for their fantastic visual and character choices...but it was the mystery that is the Force that gave those films their strong through line: who is Yoda? How did Ben know Anakin? Is Luke a Jedi?
Once Lucas set out to overexplain the Force and establish the Jedi order he clearly stepped into a type of storytelling for which he is....well, sucks.

*The Empire versus the Rebellion is NOT what makes SW special...there are a million stories of civil war that are far more engrossing and dramatically powerful (e.g. see the American Civil War, the War of Independence, the French Revolution, and the Hebrew Scriptures...the Old Testament for those still keeping score at home).

I can't comment on what I would do differently if I had the power to have made the new films: perhaps not gone with Jar Jar as comic relief, had Qui-Gone spill the beans about the bacteria that is the force (:cry:) and thought more about the 'Skywalker love story'....

I am content to like episodes 4-6 as the definitive SW universe, and accept parts of episodes 1-3 (and all comics, graphic novels, etc.) as other 'versions' of the definitive....acceptable on their own terms, but never superior to the original.....opps, I said we should abandon that term.....:D

stillakid
09-28-2007, 10:47 PM
I'd almost be willing to accept the Prequel Trilogy as a "new" Trilogy of stories on their own (because the continuity is wrong with the OT)...

The problem is that each Prequel movie is just flat out bad storytelling, within in each film itself and as a Trilogy. All they have are "moments" and production design (pretty pictures) to look at. Thank goodness for the DVD Chapter search feature! :)

Qui-Long Gone
09-29-2007, 12:53 PM
That's why I didn't understand why Lucas was so bent on directing and writing these....he's a great storyteller (i.e. producer who comes up with a terrific idea....see Indian Jones and A New Hope), and a fine storyteller (i.e. visual director, effects, etc.), but a really baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad storyteller (i.e. writer).

I would love an edited version of the new trilogy, like a highlighted cliff note version of the fine moments.

You know who did a killer pre-qual version of a story: LORD OF THE RINGS. That sort of 10 minute background would do two things: 1.) Spare us the suffering that is Jar Jar, Jango, Padme and, 2.) Take out all unessesary dialogue, i.e. Hayden Christensen.

stillakid
09-29-2007, 01:18 PM
Though I hated the Qui Gon character and never saw the point in having him in the story, the best "Qui Gon" I've seen on screen was Liam Neeson's character in Batman. Perfect blend of philosophy teaching with the physical fighting..

El Chuxter
09-29-2007, 02:25 PM
That's because, when done right, Batman is inherently cooler than Star Wars.

2-1B
09-30-2007, 02:44 PM
2. The idea behind the Batman comment is contained within my post that Caesar is responding to- that contrary to everybodys' complaining that GL retconned what the force was all about in the PT, he began tinkering long before that, starting with EBS. In ANH, Luke was a kid who picked up a lightsaber, had a guru, and was told to "stretch out" with his feelings. It appears anybody could do it, you just had to believe. That was demonstrated in the remote sequence. Likewise, Batman is a normal human being who uses honed physicality and intelligence as his primary tools.

By the end of ESB, we now know manipulation of the Force is actually more like a superpower, as there are but two hopes left in the galaxy, hence, Luke is arguably super-powered. If you don't buy the analogy, fine, but at the end of ESB, the viewer's hopes of being able to pick up a saber, use the force, and go are dashed.

Chux, that's what I was referring to. In ROTJ, it's a hereditary trait - Luke's sister "has" it and she doesn't even know it...

Congratulations on winning the Midichlorians Sweepstakes, Princess Leia. :grin:


the other guy (who's been bouncing like a frigging Happy Fun Ball the whole time)

"Do Not Taunt Happy Fun Ball"

stillakid
09-30-2007, 03:23 PM
That's because, when done right, Batman is inherently cooler than Star Wars.

My point was that because George L. assumes that his audience is full of blithering idiots, he thinks that he needs to blundeon us with dialogue that tells us what he wants us to learn, as in "he is strong with the Force" blah blah blah. Liam was a better Jedi Master (teacher) in Batman than he even approached in TPM. To the same extent, Hayden was a better troubled youth in Life As a House than he even got close to in AOTC/ROTS.

Qui-Long Gone
10-03-2007, 11:34 PM
I thought Qui Gone was a good teacher in TPM....he just had crappy lines....especially the one about force bacteria....WTF?


He was an excellent teacher in the last Batman....and possibly the best villian (at least in terms of relationship to the story) to boot (with Jack as a possible exception)!




He's also a fine lion.......




And he saved a thousand Jews from Nazis....



And chopped Tim Roth in half.....


Liam Rocks!

El Chuxter
10-04-2007, 12:01 AM
The best villain from a Batman film was Phantasm. Sorry, Liam as a rather clever Ras al Ghul/Ducard hybrid.

Qui-Long Gone
10-04-2007, 12:04 AM
No way....although Phant was good (did you see her again in the Justice League's Batman Beyond final?)....


Ducard as the very person who made Batman only to be Ras? How awsome is that turn of events?

El Chuxter
10-04-2007, 03:03 AM
Only we're never sure he is Ras... or even if Ras is just an alias the League of Shadows created. That's the beauty of it.

But Batman's long lost love (who doesn't suck like Katie Holmes) turns out to be the crazed vigilante who's killing the mobsters Batman's sworn to bring down, so that he ends up defending his enemies from the one person who once brought him the only happiness that he's ever known? That's poetry.

stillakid
10-04-2007, 11:26 AM
The point is, in about 20 minutes of screentime, Liam's character (who definitely IS Ras afterall, not that it matters) shows the audience far more "Jedi like" training than six hours of Anakin bumbling around his emotions ever would. Qui Gon was a pointless character and badly acted. Liam is capable of more than that and I'm sure the lack of decent material (and having to become a pointless character) had a lot to do with it. His purpose in the story was to die and utter monotone bumper sticker sayings every once in a while.

What SHOULD have be shown (per the OT continuity and everyone's expectations) was a young, cocky Obi Wan (who we actually kind of got in Ewan's portrayal) deciding that he was good enough to train this slightly younger freighter pilot (Anakin) in the midst of an in-progress war. Anakin displays his flying skills by avoiding something in space, Obi just happens to be there and recognizes the potential. Anakin is already married to Padme, but the Force potential is too much to just let go and the Jedi could use the help. Obi doesn't tell his own master, Yoda, about it because he knows it goes against the rules, but Obi doesn't care because he thinks that he knows better.

War goes on, Palps gets wind of this new kid and seduces him at the same "dangerous time" where Luke was in danger of being swayed. Only Anakin joins up with Palpatine.

Blah blah blah, stuff happens, blah blah blah, and Anakin is leaving for one last battle at the request of Palps, so he and Padme have one last love making session (which results in the twins, unbeknownst to Anakin until ESB). It's during that mission that Obi and Ani fight it out, and Obi believes Ani to be dead. At least to the point where the audience believes Ani to be dead (thus preserving the surprise announcement in ESB). We don't see any sign of a "Darth Vader" until ANH and we don't see Anakin's face again until ROTJ. Obi goes to tell Padme the bad news and they both stare into the sunset as credits roll. The end.

Droid
10-04-2007, 02:22 PM
I want to watch stillakid's prequels, as long as he promises not to call Anakin "Ani" anymore. I hated that. The novels even sometimes called him "Annie." HATED IT.

Qui-Long Gone
10-04-2007, 11:28 PM
All orphans are named Annie....WTF?

Mace Windu = Daddy Warbucks?

Dooku = Punjab


Darth Sideous = Miss Hanagan



I can already see it now.....Broadway presents, Annie the Jedi