Red Mosquito

wease wrote:

Strat wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:Listen, I've got no problem with the stories in the prequels. It is just how they were executed that I don't like. The casting was pretty much awful with a few exceptions.

The stories were terrible. The basic idea of how Anakin turned to Skywalker could be a fine story, but the stories told in the prequels are so bad.

I kinda agree with Ruddo. The stories themselves aren't terrible. Certain plot points? Sure. (Jar Jar's inclusion, Midichlorians, Jango/Boba Fett, Padme dying due to dying, etc...) It's more the horrible acting and execution of the stories that bring them down.

Trade negotiations

Trade negotiations itself is fine, except Lucas seems to have no understanding of how politics or economics work.

Once again, the execution.

If you look up and really read or listen to the Star Wars ring theory it'll change your mind. Probably about everything apart from performances. Even the musical cues match up across the series. And jar jar apparently is a myth/folklore archetype called the wise fool and is actually vital to the story. As badly executed as it is.


It's good stuff.

dimejinky99 wrote: And jar jar apparently is a myth/folklore archetype called the wise fool and is actually vital to the story. As badly executed as it is.

See? You agree with us.

I'll never argue that there wasn't some bad performances and execution but the overall architecture and structure of themes and cues echoing back and forth across the series is undeniable once you realise it's there.

They are horrible movies and should be treated as such.

Dammit strat

He's right, they are terrible. But the larger macro idea of watching the decline of the republic and the rise of the empire as a backdrop for a story about the destruction of the jedi and the descent of anakin skywalker into vader was a story worth telling. It's just that lucas told it poorly in just about every single conceivable way possible.


An interesting point raised in the star wars storytelling podcasts (I think I read this there) was that anakin had his force child origins to help ensure that the skywalker line starts with Anakin, and not raise questions about who his parents were, what their history was, etc. It was a mechanism for ensuring that the skywalker story didn't have to keep going back in history to find its ultimate origins.

stip wrote:An interesting point raised in the star wars storytelling podcasts (I think I read this there) was that anakin had his force child origins to help ensure that the skywalker line starts with Anakin, and not raise questions about who his parents were, what their history was, etc. It was a mechanism for ensuring that the skywalker story didn't have to keep going back in history to find its ultimate origins.

One that didn't have to be made. Why couldn't he simply be the first in his bloodline? It's not established anywhere that Force users come by it by family. No mention of Qui-Gon's family knowing the ways of the Force. Nothing is said about Obi Wan's dad being strong in the Force. Quite the contrary. We're told that kids are sent from their families at a very young age to become Padawans. There's not any familial ties to the Force UNTIL the Skywalkers.

wease wrote:

stip wrote:An interesting point raised in the star wars storytelling podcasts (I think I read this there) was that anakin had his force child origins to help ensure that the skywalker line starts with Anakin, and not raise questions about who his parents were, what their history was, etc. It was a mechanism for ensuring that the skywalker story didn't have to keep going back in history to find its ultimate origins.

One that didn't have to be made. Why couldn't he simply be the first in his bloodline? It's not established anywhere that Force users come by it by family. No mention of Qui-Gon's family knowing the ways of the Force. Nothing is said about Obi Wan's dad being strong in the Force. Quite the contrary. We're told that kids are sent from their families at a very young age to become Padawans. There's not any familial ties to the Force UNTIL the Skywalkers.

Which is exactly why they had to explain Anakins powers NOT having a family history. His bloodline is the unique one.

wease wrote:

stip wrote:An interesting point raised in the star wars storytelling podcasts (I think I read this there) was that anakin had his force child origins to help ensure that the skywalker line starts with Anakin, and not raise questions about who his parents were, what their history was, etc. It was a mechanism for ensuring that the skywalker story didn't have to keep going back in history to find its ultimate origins.

One that didn't have to be made. Why couldn't he simply be the first in his bloodline? It's not established anywhere that Force users come by it by family. No mention of Qui-Gon's family knowing the ways of the Force. Nothing is said about Obi Wan's dad being strong in the Force. Quite the contrary. We're told that kids are sent from their families at a very young age to become Padawans. There's not any familial ties to the Force UNTIL the Skywalkers.

midichlorians are passed down tho

As Skitch and Ruddo implied, if you're going to posit that Anakin is in some way a prophetic/unique character, not just a unusually powerful force user, you need to account for where he came from. If they had gotten rid of the whole prophecy angle (which would have been ideal, I think), then he can just have normal parents.

The prequels are also to be viewed as the failure and ultimate decline of the Jedi order. Through their own hubris and shortsightedness.

Least that's how Hidalgo and Felloni tell it. Lucas also later said this was the point.

This conversation is more interesting than the prequels

FTR: I can still watch the prequels cause star wars

I also admit to watching the prequels from time to time

Have any of you ever watched the anti cheese edits on YouTube? They makes the movies significantly better.

I don't fuck wit Ep I without Jar Jar

Yeah I wanna watch th anti cheese edits too.

I've seen them. They take away some egregious problems but they can't make the acting less wooden or add soul to what are otherwise souless productions.