Anybody Who Liked the Prequel Trilogy?

Originally Posted by Big One

I can back up the idea that I is the best of the prequel trilogy. Honestly I thought the acting and dialogue was a lot better than the next two movies, which were practically ruined by both of those and the excessive amounts of CG. Star Wars Episode II is seriously one of the worst movies I've ever seen.

I would agree, except I found Episode III to be worse than Episode II. I thought the acting in II was decent enough compared to the atrocity that it was in III. And a major portion of III was CGI, I believe much more than II.

Yep, its a surprise that supporters of the prequels are in the majority.

My order in the prequels:
1. RotS
2. TPM
3. AotC

I hated Episode 3. Hayden Christianson played Anakin horribly and the script was pretty terrible. The only thing that was good about that movie was the battles. Thats it. Movies should be about more than fighting. Here is an example of the epicness that is Episode 3:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWaLxFIVX1s

Just watch this scene with a straight face and tell me that the movie was good...

Every Star Wars movie is filled with laughably stupid writing like that, the Originals are no exclusion.

Originally Posted by Muzzy

I hated Episode 3. Hayden Christianson played Anakin horribly and the script was pretty terrible. The only thing that was good about that movie was the battles. Thats it. Movies should be about more than fighting. Here is an example of the epicness that is Episode 3:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWaLxFIVX1s

Just watch this scene with a straight face and tell me that the movie was good...

That movie was good.

Originally Posted by Deckard

That movie was good.

Wheres the straight face, though? I can't see it through the monitor!

All of the Star Wars movies have cheesy writing, but nothing was as bad as THAT abomination of a scene. At least they had good actors that weren't Ewan McGregor in the original triligy as well...

There was nothing wrong with that scene. I'd like to see you do it better.

Originally Posted by Deckard

There was nothing wrong with that scene. I'd like to see you do it better.

There were several things wrong with that scene, but I will not say any more about the scene to ruin it for you if you like it that much...

I thoought the prequel movies were really good. Could Episode one done without Jar Jar? Yes. COuld episode too have a few less scenes of anikan and pademe frolicking in the flowers. definitly. However thay are not as bad as people make them out to be. Sure there not as good as IV-VI but there still good.

Originally Posted by ATRUEZELDAFAN

I thoought the prequel movies were really good. Could Episode one done without Jar Jar? Yes. COuld episode too have a few less scenes of anikan and pademe frolicking in the flowers. definitly. However thay are not as bad as people make them out to be. Sure there not as good as IV-VI but there still good.

If they took out Jar Jar, Hayden Christianson, and everything else you mentioned, I'd probably actually like the prequel trilogy a little better... But, alas, that will never happen...

Originally Posted by Muzzy

I hated Episode 3. Hayden Christianson played Anakin horribly and the script was pretty terrible. The only thing that was good about that movie was the battles. Thats it. Movies should be about more than fighting. Here is an example of the epicness that is Episode 3:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWaLxFIVX1s

Just watch this scene with a straight face and tell me that the movie was good...

Although I respect the boundaries of personal opinion, I am going to have to completely disagree. While yes, it is true the prequels weren't as good as the original. They still had great potential in story telling. Sure the writing wasn't too good but it was a god damn good story.

That scene with Darth Vader was especially a great scene. It was capturing the emotion of Vader to show that even though he is a dark villain. He still has a heart. Also shown at the end of Episode 6. Not to mention that James Earl Jones' voice was quite a treat even if it was just a few words.

Give me a break, the prequels where entertaining.

I'd like to be fair for a moment: I didn't think Hayden Christensen was that terrible. He didn't do a good job in Episode II - I'll readily admit that - but I chalk that up to inexperience; Attack of the Clones, if you would recall, was the first major role the actor had ever starred in. I'd imagine he just wasn't entirely sure how to handle himself. Whereas his acting became much better in Episode III, especially his fall to the dark side, where he successfully came across as a menacing, unstoppable force, especially with his fight against Obi-Wan. He wasn't perfect, but he wasn't bad. I blame much of the flak Christensen receives in Revenge of the Sith on George Lucas; Lucas is a horrible scriptwriter, and I admit it's a bit hard to take Anakin seriously when he's been given lines like, "From my point of view, the Jedi are evil!" I'm pretty sure Christensen wasn't responsible for that. XD

I just hate how Hayden Christianson made Anakin look like a whiny baby in those movies! Sure he's not Ben Afflec horrible, but he's pretty bad! You are right that it is part of George Lucas' fault too, but that didn't seem to stop Alec Guiness from delivering a great performance in A New Hope...

Alec Guiness was an acting veteran, Muzzy; his acting career started in 1934, which means he had forty-three years of experience before playing Obi-Wan in 1977. Compare with Hayden Christensen, who only had seven years of acting experience before he acted as Anakin Skywalker in 2002 (none of his previous roles were major either). I think there's a great experience gap between the two of them that makes it unfair to be comparing these two actors. XD

Alec Guinness also stated several times during interviews that he absolutely hated Star Wars and only thanked it for the money.

But Ysionris has a strong point. The experience gap is tremendous.

Did I forget to mention Mark Hamill? He was pretty young back then and barely had any acting experience... In fact, Hayden Christiansen has more experience than him when he started Episode 3 and 2. Several young actors are great from the start. I don't really think you have to be experienced to be a good actor, you just have to be.... good.

I don't think you can compare the two. They're two sepearate stories and on top of that they're 30 years apart from each other. I enjoy the pre-quil trilogy and I enjoy the original trilogy and the hype and controversy over "the pre-quil is a discrace" just doesn't make any sense to me.

Can we all agree, at least, that aside from acting, Lucas was a/the major reason the films weren't done to their true potential?

Originally Posted by Bingo675

Can we all agree, at least, that aside from acting, Lucas was a/the major reason the films weren't done to their true potential?

I can agree with that.

Originally Posted by Bingo675

Can we all agree, at least, that aside from acting, Lucas was a/the major reason the films weren't done to their true potential?

What? WHAT? BLASPHEMY!
Naw, just kidding. You're completely right.

Originally Posted by kreebby

I don't think you can compare the two. They're two sepearate stories and on top of that they're 30 years apart from each other. I enjoy the pre-quil trilogy and I enjoy the original trilogy and the hype and controversy over "the pre-quil is a discrace" just doesn't make any sense to me.

I would disagree with pretty much everything you've said here. They are not (in my opinion) seperate stories. The whole "The prequel sucks" controversy is simply because the prequels did not live up to what they should have been - movies just as awesome as the original trilogy. Sure, they were pretty good, I guess, but they should have been awesome.