lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: Why people who don’t like the PT don’t like the PT
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 06-08-2010, 06:24 AM   #1
Alexrd
Senior Member
 
Alexrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Portugal
Posts: 2,177
Current Game: UEFA Euro 2004
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Why people who don’t like the PT don’t like the PT

This article was written by a user (MissPadme) on TF.N boards, and I found it very interesting:

Quote:
On this site, I try not to bring too much attention to the negativity aimed at our beloved films but there was a silly bit on i09 (which I won’t link to) on how “neurological” impulses or other has something to do with why “we hate George Lucas.” Naturally there was a lot of PT bashing.

I don’t think you need to have taken classes on neurology to diagnose those fans who heartily dislike the PT. A couple of years ago, I posted on my LiveJournal the main reasons why the PT haters are the way they are. So some of you have already seen the following essay, but many of you have not.

It’s often a basher’s accusation that those who enjoyed the PT are somehow lying because they don’t understand how anyone could not share in their hatred.

On the other hand, due to many years in the trenches and a lot of discussion about this issue, I think I’ve come to understand why there are those who don’t feel the love.

In the interest of fairness, not everybody who dislikes the PT is a basher per se. Bashers, as I define them, heap a lot of cheap shots/personal attacks, emotion, hyperbole, and rhetoric without really explaining why they dislike something. The over-the-top flames are supposed to be their explanation. I’ll give you an example. Criticism is “motive wasn’t sufficiently explained” or “I would’ve staged the scene differently.” Bashing is “so-and-so is a greedy hack and so-and-so is a no talent #$@#$.” I will discuss bashers briefly, but not every disgruntled fan is necessarily a basher.

Whatever the case, it’s my position that even those who genuinely and sincerely dislike these movies haven’t judged them fairly. These fans often accuse me of being blind to faults, but they feel much more strongly about these faults that I’ve noticed don’t necessarily bother them in other movies.

It should also bear noting that I’m discussing those who liked at least some of, if not all of, the OT. Somebody who despised Eps. IV-VI probably despised Eps. I-III for the same reasons (though of course there are exceptions out there).

1. They were pre-disposed not to like the PT

Believe it or not, there were many people who were never prepared to give TPM or its sequels a fair shot. I know because I ran a fanzine through that period and I was reading sites and online groups since the mid ’90s. I personally corresponded online and off with many fans. Those who fit into this category can be subdivided into two categories:

A. Fans who worried about the PT overshadowing the OT

You wouldn’t believe how often I heard or read from fans pre-TPM’s release their fears that somehow these new movies would displace the sacrosanct OT of their youth. Now it seems preposterous. In fact, I think the PT helped keep the OT in the spotlight all of this time. But back during the unprecedented hype post-SE and pre-TPM, this was a real anxiety among some fans. I heard, “No matter how good it is, it will never mean the same to me” or “I’ll never love it as much as the OT.” They felt in order to be loyal to the OT, they had to keep themselves emotionally distant from the PT.

B. Fans who believe Lucas lost his way with ROTJ and never got it back

People who think SW anti-fandom started with Jar Jar’s first appearance in TPM or even with the Special Editions are wrong. The first time I encountered this sentiment among SW fans was in the early 1990s. If there are those who say fans like me believe Lucas can do no wrong (not really true), these are fans who believe that Lucas can do no right. They started off beating up on the “kiddie” ROTJ and went from there, trashing everything new on the SW pike. There was one guy on the AOL SW group who kept posting only how much SW sucked. When fans reported cheering crowds when they saw the Special Edition trailer with Independence Day in 1996, this guy claimed crowds booed or sat in stony silence at the showings he went to. These fans took the opinions of anti-fans like Chris Gore and Mark Altman to heart. They subscribed to the idea only other people were responsible for the OT’s success, not Lucas. They’re the ones who spread every negative rumor about TPM’s filming. They’re the ones who said TPM’s title was “proof” they were right about Lucas. A few claimed they hoped TPM would prove their “fears” wrong, but even then it was hard to believe. You shouldn’t be surprised that these fans became popularly known as “bashers.”

For whatever the reason, if you’re pre-disposed not to like something, you’re going to look for every flaw imaginable and magnify it to prove your point.

2. Some fans wanted the PT to be something SW never was

Before TPM came out, I heard more than a few “OT generation” fans say that they hoped this series would be darker and more adult. At a party I attended a month or two before TPM’s release, someone told me, “We’re the ones who made SW successful. They owe a movie made for us now that we’re adults.” “The Matrix” was cited as an example of what he was looking for.

These fans, along with those pre-disposed to disliking the films, are often the ones who cite poor acting, poor dialogue, poor direction, too much special effects/CGI as the reasons why they didn’t like the PT. Now the PT was certainly darker than the OT overall–after all, not even in TESB were children murdered–but boy, were those “gee I hope this is going to be like ‘The Matrix’” types shocked by TPM.

Others wanted loftier artistic ambitions, feeling that the PT didn’t quite take itself seriously enough. They forgot the OT’s pulpy, B-movie roots.

Whatever the reasons, it’s a bit selfish for fans who enjoyed the OT as family-friendly films in their youth to expect the PT to exclude today’s youngsters just to fulfill their sense of ownership in the saga. Their tastes changed as they grew up, so they expected SW to change to meet those tastes. In a lot of ways, Lucasfilm has tried to address this with the direction the post-ROTJ EU took in recent years. And we know how that’s worked out so far.

3. Some fans wanted the PT to be exactly like the OT

While some hoped for a PT radically different from what SW had been before, others wanted the sense of familiarity and nostalgia overnight. These are the fans who wanted it to be 1977 all over again, or at least what it had become in their minds.

To some degree, I’m sympathetic to these fans. The first time I saw TPM, I felt a little disoriented the first half hour or so by seeing a completely different cast in totally new situations, and I was prepared to give it every chance. Just as fans hold on to that feeling of wonderment years ago, the same fans let that feeling of “What the heck is this?” dominate their perspective of the films.

There definitely were stylistic changes. The “used universe” look is present only here and there in the PT. Everything else appeared shiny, new, and fabulous. The plot isn’t focused on the clearly drawn Alliance vs. Empire conflict. It’s mostly drawn around politics, fear, mistrust, decline, and the lack of clarity. While the OT heroes were not without their flaws, the PT puts its protagonists’ flaws on full display. There was never before a slapstick character like Jar Jar. The personalities of the actors are different.

It was these fans who thought the PT needed a Han Solo character. It was also these fans who probably had the highest expectations for the PT, wanting to be transported to a more simple time and hoping TPM would soar to the top of the all-time box office chart and blow Titanic out of the water.

4. The bandwagon effect

Never underestimate the power of a crowd, or at least the power of who has the loudest voice. Whether it started with fans online who saw the same negative comments over and over until they started to repeat them, or whether it was someone’s will withering in the face of a non-stop media attack, the time post-TPM is a study in “if people hear it enough times, they’ll start to believe it’s true.”

Speaking from personal experience, I can see why all of the negativity could wear someone down. I loved AOTC the first time I saw it, but I was paranoid over the next day or two before seeing it again that maybe I didn’t really love it as much as I thought I did! It would’ve been a lot easier to just join in the hating. Even to this day, I sort of feel put on the spot whenever I’m asked, “What did you think of the prequels?” Like I have to put on my armor or something.

Of all of the reasons I’ve discussed, this one is the most pernicious because the effect of it can go on for years. People can get over their initial disappointment or expectations but somebody who has never seen the movies before can hear over and over how “bad” they are, and will probably judge the films accordingly.

Conclusion

Eleven years ago, Lucasfilm revealed the title of Episode I and judging by the near-hysterical responses on the internet, I had a sinking feeling in my gut that too many fans were not going to give the movie a fair chance. Sure enough, I was proven right months later but even I was surprised at the extent of the backlash directed against TPM. It set the tone for how AOTC was received and while ROTS certainly got the best reception of all of them by a long shot, the haters haven’t given up yet either.
The article can be found here.



Star Wars: In Concert - Lisbon - Some pictures of the exhibition accompanying the event.
Alexrd is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-10-2010, 01:44 AM   #2
PoiuyWired
Unregistered User
 
PoiuyWired's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,503
Well, I don't hate PT, but I think it is a bit weaker compare to OT for the following reasons:

3. Episode 1 definitely got "kiddie-ized" too much with the whole Jar Jar thing. Frankly there is a version out there that cuts out many unnecessary parts of Jar Jar and the movie runs much smoother. THough in Ep2 & 3 GL kinda learn and cut short such sessions. A few funny part is great, but Jar Jar is trying too hard. He can be both funny and serious as portrayed in the novels and what not. Also I think that is how PT starts off with a bad leg for some.

2. Trying to include too much cool stuff. Yes, this is especially true to Ep2 where they deliberately include elements just to awe audience (and esp fans) The huge jedi arena battle, Jango Fett specials and what not, deliberate overplay of yoda's sentence structure... overplaying the crowd pleasing elements overshadowing the story.

1. GL HIMSELF. Well, GL is GREAT when it comes to cool special effects and ideas, and I do mean great and wonderful. That having said, he does need some help on his script writing, and HIS ABILITY TO WRITE DIALOGUES ARE SHIIITTTTTY AT BEST. In OT, where is is not that mega movie overlord he is today, people give him suggestions to his scripts and what not, and he is good with suggestions. But nowadays, enough people would just be yessman to his ideas, hence the inferior result. Also, in OT the good actors help make the dialogues more reasonable, many cool lines in OT are from the actors themselves. (think of ""I love you" "I know" vs the cheesy love scenes in PT that makes me wonder if GL got his wife by the caveman way with a huge club whack on her head)


...
PoiuyWired is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-10-2010, 06:40 PM   #3
Zwier Zak
Junior Member
 
Zwier Zak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Poland
Posts: 254
Let's face it. The prequels are a puke fest. Making up articles about people who don't like them will never change that.
Zwier Zak is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-21-2010, 11:25 AM   #4
noizer
Rookie
 
noizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Holland
Posts: 64
Haters gonna hate. simple as that. if you dont like it simply dont watch it.

People shouldnt make sutch a big thing out of it. both fans and haters.

as for me, i like the OT more but except for ep1 i really like the PT aswell.


.......
noizer is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-19-2011, 09:25 AM   #5
noizer
Rookie
 
noizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Holland
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by katrincarroll View Post
I am a dirty advertising spammer who has just gotten banned.
yes you are


.......
noizer is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-21-2011, 10:47 PM   #6
Kurgan
Headhunter
 
Kurgan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1997
Location: The Dawn of Time
Posts: 18,329
LFN Staff Member 10 year veteran! 
It doesn't have to be mysterious to require some dramatic explanation why people didn't like the Prequel Trilogy. The whole point of making the PT was to fulfill the promise to fans to create the "backstory" to the Original Trilogy, a set of sci fi films beloved by millions for decades. Plenty of fans just didn't find them as compelling, that they didn't live up to the promise. That's that.

There was a long standing myth (somewhat helped by Lucas himself) that the Prequels were not going to be brand new stories, but merely "revealing" what he had "always intended" and planned all along since the beginning. It turns out, and there's monumental proof of this, that he did "make it up as he went along."

Maybe some people didn't like it because they've made Star Wars into a religion instead of just fandom of a couple fun movies. Maybe others didn't like it because they were wanting to backlash against something popular. But I think you should give the benefit of the doubt to anyone who disliked them.

People don't need a "reason" to dislike a movie. It's a piece of entertainment, which is subject to personal taste. But the primary argument in defense of the PT is that it's Star Wars, and the primary argument against it is that it's Star Wars. Maybe the expectations were unfairly high, but on the other hand, the whole reason to make them in the first place was based on the promise of more Star Wars magic. So by that logic, Lucas should never have tried to create them in the first place.

Right?


Download JK2 maps for JA Server|BOOT CAMP!|Strategic Academy|
(JA Server: 108.178.55.189:29070)


"The Concussion Rifle is the weapon of a Jedi Knight Player, an elegant weapon, from a more civilized community." - Kyle Katarn
Kurgan is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-22-2011, 01:50 AM   #7
Samnmax221
I never Kipled
 
Samnmax221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: My hovercraft is full of eels
Posts: 5,784
Current Game: Sex with women
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
The prequal trilogy is just poorly made down to a very fundamental level. When Lucas started out he had limitations and lot of other people to keep him grounded. After achieving much success and taking most of the credit for himself, he was unopposed and could do whatever he wanted. In 1983 he divorced his wife Marcia, who had edited every feature film he'd ever put out, and had done a great deal to keep his feet on the ground. Then CGI was perfected and he was able to put any retarded idea he wanted on the screen.

Lucas is best when constrained by other people, which isn't going to happen anymore thanks to his ego. The man hasn't made a good movie since 1995, and probably never will again.
Samnmax221 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-05-2011, 04:10 PM   #8
Path-x
Rookie
 
Path-x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 36
The reason why prequels fail is pretty simple and has nothing to do with cinematography.

Contrary to popular belief it is not the directing, acting, miss-cast or Jar Jar. The cinematography is decent. The problem is in the story and Anakin's character. Also contrary to popular belief there is a lot of drama and characterization in prequels but it is an annoying kind of drama and characterization. They made Anakin and annoying, repulsive prick with quick temper, childish behavior and lack of self-control. No audience can identify with this kind of main character or feel any compassion fir him. Then the storyline puts him through annoying situations where he utilize his teen rage, whines and does stupid things in the process. All this is completely realistic under the given circumstances and it is well directed/acted for what it was trying to achieve but who on Earth would want to watch that? No one. Star Wars supposed to be fun and enjoyable.

They should have made Anakin a likable, mature character with exceptional qualities. The storyline should put him on fun adventures rather than through annoying situations. The trun to the dark side should be sudden and unexpected. The problem is that, according to what we see in prequels, Anakin never was a good person. He was a repulsive prick. Quite frankly Vader from OT is more lovable character than Anakin from prequels which pretty much sums it up.

Last edited by Path-x; 03-05-2011 at 04:31 PM.
Path-x is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-06-2011, 10:11 AM   #9
Wilhuf
Senior Member
 
Wilhuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Galactic Plumberman Alliance -
Posts: 1,128
Even the bearded-one acknowledged the PTs had 'wooden dialog.'

I think it was a downhill trend starting with the kiddification of ROTJ. So many muppets. A lot of fans liked them. I thought some of them were ok, some of them were not.

But, so what? It's all subjective. Does it really matter what other people think about a set of movies? It's just opinion, in the end. We each have our own unique opinion.

Han shot first.


Wilhuf

Never give in--never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.

Winston Churchill, 1941.
Wilhuf is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-06-2011, 10:44 AM   #10
Pho3nix
#rekt
 
Pho3nix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Nordic Europe
Posts: 3,380
10 year veteran! 
The RedLetter Media reviews pretty much sums everything up nicely.

Pho3nix is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-06-2011, 05:58 PM   #11
Alexrd
Senior Member
 
Alexrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Portugal
Posts: 2,177
Current Game: UEFA Euro 2004
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pho3nix View Post
The RedLetter Media reviews pretty much sums everything up nicely.
Logical fallacies and double standards can't sum anything nicely.



Star Wars: In Concert - Lisbon - Some pictures of the exhibition accompanying the event.
Alexrd is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 10:08 PM   #12
Path-x
Rookie
 
Path-x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pho3nix View Post
The RedLetter Media reviews pretty much sums everything up nicely.
Well although I dislike prequels I think that RLM are just bunch of incompetent attention whores.
Path-x is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 11:43 PM   #13
Samnmax221
I never Kipled
 
Samnmax221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: My hovercraft is full of eels
Posts: 5,784
Current Game: Sex with women
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Path-x View Post
The reason why prequels fail is pretty simple and has nothing to do with cinematography.
Actually the cinematography sucks. So much of it was done in front of green screens that the actors have no idea what they're supposed to be doing, and George just adds it in post. He got so bad that he was taking what he considered to be the best takes from the actors delivering his **** dialogue, then mashed them together. The actors aren't truly reacting to each other anymore and telling us a story, they're just doing the best they can to say their lines to thin air.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Path-x View Post
Well although I dislike prequels I think that RLM are just bunch of incompetent attention whores.
I suppose you could do better?
Samnmax221 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-12-2011, 06:31 AM   #14
Alexrd
Senior Member
 
Alexrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Portugal
Posts: 2,177
Current Game: UEFA Euro 2004
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samnmax221 View Post
I suppose you could do better?
Anyone could. As I said, using fallacies and double standards is not a good way to "review(?)" a movie.



Star Wars: In Concert - Lisbon - Some pictures of the exhibition accompanying the event.
Alexrd is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-12-2011, 09:49 AM   #15
Path-x
Rookie
 
Path-x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexrd View Post
Anyone could. As I said, using fallacies and double standards is not a good way to "review(?)" a movie.
This.

And a decent person would not even consider making that kind of crap.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samnmax221
Actually the cinematography sucks. So much of it was done in front of green screens that the actors have no idea what they're supposed to be doing, and George just adds it in post. He got so bad that he was taking what he considered to be the best takes from the actors delivering his **** dialogue, then mashed them together. The actors aren't truly reacting to each other anymore and telling us a story, they're just doing the best they can to say their lines to thin air.
Well there is no science behind the acting and stuff like that. No measure of quality. It is all up to one opinion.

But even though I dislike prequels I think acting and drama was well delivered for what they were trying to achieve. The problem is that what they were trying achieve was not enjoyable. The actors are reacting to each other and they are telling the story... but the story says that Anakin is an annoying prick and that he always do stupid things. So basically because people don't like the storyline and the main character then they falsely blame the cinematography for it. Probably because they try to look like they are some film experts but they are usually not and they end up looking like idiots. About the blue screen... you could say that they made it pretty realistic and good if you consider they had to work with nothing around them - quite an achievement if ask me. It is way way easier to work with fully constructed sets. It was probably the first time in film history that cast and crew had to work with nothing around them. You could say it was revolutionary and it somehow moved the limits of cinematography. Again, quite an achievement. Sadly the basis on what the worked on (story, main character) was not enjoyable.

Last edited by Path-x; 03-12-2011 at 10:30 AM.
Path-x is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-12-2011, 05:35 PM   #16
SmootheOperator
Rookie
 
SmootheOperator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 156
Current Game: Replaying Gears Of War trilogy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilhuf View Post
Han shot first.
We can all agree on that.

In my humble opinion, the prequels are great because they are pivotal to the story. Everything within the universe expands exponentially because of the amount of information they give. The movies tell the story. In the end, thats what i love about the complete Star Wars saga. It is an amazing story, and has so many stories within it, each of the characters has a different point of view, a different way they came to be who they are. The story is fantastic, whether or not you believe the movies are.

Yes Jar Jar may have sucked, but most of the stuff around him didn't. So i take the movies as a whole, and i like them.


The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done." -George Carlin
SmootheOperator is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-12-2011, 09:44 PM   #17
Samnmax221
I never Kipled
 
Samnmax221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: My hovercraft is full of eels
Posts: 5,784
Current Game: Sex with women
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexrd View Post
FALLACIES AND DOUBLE STANDARDS FALLACIES AND DOUBLE STANDARDS FALLACIES AND DOUBLE STANDARDS FALLACIES AND DOUBLE STANDARDS FALLACIES AND DOUBLE STANDARDS FALLACIES AND DOUBLE STANDARDS FALLACIES AND DOUBLE STANDARDS FALLACIES AND DOUBLE STANDARDS FALLACIES AND DOUBLE STANDARDS FALLACIES AND DOUBLE STANDARDS FALLACIES AND DOUBLE STANDARDS FALLACIES AND DOUBLE STANDARDS AND NO EXAMPLES PROVIDED SO FEEL FREE TO IGNORE THE REST OF MY STUPID POSTS
Quote:
Originally Posted by Path-x View Post
This.

And a decent person would not even consider making that kind of crap.
HHHAHAHAHAH what? Is this because the hook is that he's supposed to be a serial killer?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Path-x View Post
Well there is no science behind the acting and stuff like that. No measure of quality. It is all up to one opinion.
If you're going to drift into relativism you'll get nowhere, as everything you expressed about the PT is also just like your opinion man.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Path-x View Post
It was probably the first time in film history that cast and crew had to work with nothing around them. You could say it was revolutionary and it somehow moved the limits of cinematography. Again, quite an achievement. Sadly the basis on what the worked on (story, main character) was not enjoyable.
No. It's the same thing as this. If you're going to stick them in front of a green screen you at least need to give them some good direction. George's attitude is that they can just add everything in postproduction. No matter how good the actors are they're still working with George's pisspoor direction and dialogue.
Samnmax221 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-13-2011, 12:21 AM   #18
Q
The one who knocks
 
Q's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: ABQ
Posts: 6,643
Current Game: Mowing down neos with my M60
LF Jester Forum Veteran Helpful! 
Why do I dislike the PT? Where do I begin?

1) Bad writing. Screenplays that come off like they were written by a second-grader.

2) Bad direction. C'mon, George. Surely you weren't satisfied with the uninspired, lackluster, two-dimensional performances that ended up onscreen. Oh wait: you were.

3) The dirty, worn, "lived-in" galaxy. WTF happened to it? Well it's gone, along with a hell of a lot of realism and suspension of disbelief; replaced by glossy, cheesy and unconvincing CGI.

4) Flat, soulless, lifeless characters that nobody gives a tinker's damn about, due to crappy writing, equally crappy direction, and the resultant uninspired performances of otherwise good actors. Yeah, that's right. Why are actors who are so great in other movies so horrible in these? Think about it. Duh-uh.

5) A meandering plot that makes little or no sense. Episode I is especially guilty of this. Once again: bad writing.

6) The systematic destruction of one of the coolest villains in the history of cinema. Darth Vader is actually a gullible, whiny, emo ***sy? Greeeaaat.

7) Those god-awful "romance" scenes. Once again: bad writing; bad direction. Blame Hayden all you want.

Really, I could go on and on and on and on, but what's the point? It's all been said before, and more skillfully by other people, notably the folks at RedLetterMedia.

OP, if you want to blame people for not liking the PT, fine, but you're insulting people's intelligence and good taste by doing so. To be honest, this forum has seen some of the most skillfully self-deluding, sycophantic George Lucas apologists that I've ever come in contact with, but all of their combined powers of rationalization cannot work miracles. The PT still sucks, for reasons that are obvious to anyone with taste in cinema, and blaming its detractors is not going to change that by one iota. Bad film-making is still bad film-making.


"They should rename the team to the Washington Government Sucks. Put Obama on the helmet. Line the entire walls of the stadium with the actual text of the ACA.
Fix their home team score on the board to the debt clock, they can win every game 17,000,000,000,000 to 24. Losing team gets taxed by the IRS 100%, then droned."
-Toker
Q is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-13-2011, 07:16 AM   #19
Alexrd
Senior Member
 
Alexrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Portugal
Posts: 2,177
Current Game: UEFA Euro 2004
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samnmax221 View Post
.
Ad ridiculum. Nice.

But you wanted examples? Someone has already made a rebuttal about this. All the examples are there.



Star Wars: In Concert - Lisbon - Some pictures of the exhibition accompanying the event.

Last edited by Alexrd; 03-13-2011 at 07:22 AM.
Alexrd is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-13-2011, 10:42 AM   #20
Path-x
Rookie
 
Path-x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samnmax221 View Post
George's pisspoor direction
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Q
2) Bad direction.
Would you guys please point out some specific examples of "bad directing"? No generalization, be very specific.

Because it is easy for someone who has no idea of what he is talking about to say something as general and random as "bad directing".
Path-x is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-13-2011, 02:41 PM   #21
Q
The one who knocks
 
Q's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: ABQ
Posts: 6,643
Current Game: Mowing down neos with my M60
LF Jester Forum Veteran Helpful! 
The "romance" scenes. No director worth his salt would ever consider that excruciating crap acceptable.


"They should rename the team to the Washington Government Sucks. Put Obama on the helmet. Line the entire walls of the stadium with the actual text of the ACA.
Fix their home team score on the board to the debt clock, they can win every game 17,000,000,000,000 to 24. Losing team gets taxed by the IRS 100%, then droned."
-Toker
Q is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-13-2011, 03:23 PM   #22
Path-x
Rookie
 
Path-x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Q View Post
The "romance" scenes. No director worth his salt would ever consider that excruciating crap acceptable.
That's not a flaw in directing... that's a flaw in writing/dialogue.

Again, the scenes are relatively well acted considering the given dialogue/story which leads to conclusion that it was well directed.

I have the feeling that 90% of people can't differ the bad writing/dialogue from bad directing. If dialogue and story points are not good no director can make it work well. If you are to evaluate directing then you have to evaluate output (acting) COMPARED TO the input (story, dialogue).
Path-x is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-15-2011, 01:09 PM   #23
PoiuyWired
Unregistered User
 
PoiuyWired's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,503
Well, indeed it is more like GL's bad script/dialogue writing than Directing. Hate to say it but I pity Mrs. GL whenever I hear those dialogues.

Although I have to point out that the over-dramatized JarJar scenes are more related to Directing than Script Writing, even with JarJar being a mostly digitized creation.

Then again technically I can say something about some of the bad duel/combat directing in OT also. The dogfight and big battles are fine, but the saber fights shows that they don't have a martial arts weapon expert in the team. While I actually like a less acrobatic fight scene (where the less dynamic movements actually builds more tension), some of their stance position and swing direction are just... amateur.


...
PoiuyWired is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-29-2012, 10:35 AM   #24
Antares Navaar
Rookie
 
Antares Navaar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Virginia
Posts: 19
Current Game: Hello Kitty Online Adventures
I love the PT, but there are a few things of note that could have been done so much better. To be honest, I didn't care about Padme and Anakin. The acting was just terrible between the two, to the point where I really couldn't care less what happened between them. With Han and Leia, it felt very heartwarming when the two actually got together.

Midi-Chlorians. Why? The force was some mystical, inexplicable thing until this came along. It doesn't solve every mystery, but it pretty much says that the Jedi know exactly what's what, and that's not the impression OT gave me. And that's not the impression I'd like, either.

Jar-Jar Binks. As said above, it felt like they were aiming for something for little kids to enjoy, and the many times he jumped in as comic relief was actually obnoxious to the point where it nearly killed the movie for me. I actually crossed my fingers when the Battle of Naboo came. But nope, this guy had to survive.

But seriously, I love the PT. It gave introduction to many amazing characters. It shed light on a dark spot that was Star Wars, giving the saga a beginning, and the story isn't half so bad as people make it out to be. I felt it funny that there were so many Jedi, their order was so vast and alive, but in OT Luke's the last of them. I also do find myself begging internally for Anakin not to betray the Jedi every time I watch 3. As peculiar as his acting can be, he made a good Anakin.


"Neither dark nor light, but both all the same.
Neither hero nor villain, but both all the same.
Neither balanced nor chaotic, but both all the same.
Neither alive nor dead, but both all the same."
Antares Navaar is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-29-2012, 10:40 AM   #25
Antares Navaar
Rookie
 
Antares Navaar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Virginia
Posts: 19
Current Game: Hello Kitty Online Adventures
Quote:
Originally Posted by Q View Post
Why do I dislike the PT? Where do I begin?

1) Bad writing. Screenplays that come off like they were written by a second-grader.

2) Bad direction. C'mon, George. Surely you weren't satisfied with the uninspired, lackluster, two-dimensional performances that ended up onscreen. Oh wait: you were.

3) The dirty, worn, "lived-in" galaxy. WTF happened to it? Well it's gone, along with a hell of a lot of realism and suspension of disbelief; replaced by glossy, cheesy and unconvincing CGI.

4) Flat, soulless, lifeless characters that nobody gives a tinker's damn about, due to crappy writing, equally crappy direction, and the resultant uninspired performances of otherwise good actors. Yeah, that's right. Why are actors who are so great in other movies so horrible in these? Think about it. Duh-uh.

5) A meandering plot that makes little or no sense. Episode I is especially guilty of this. Once again: bad writing.

6) The systematic destruction of one of the coolest villains in the history of cinema. Darth Vader is actually a gullible, whiny, emo ***sy? Greeeaaat.

7) Those god-awful "romance" scenes. Once again: bad writing; bad direction. Blame Hayden all you want.

Really, I could go on and on and on and on, but what's the point? It's all been said before, and more skillfully by other people, notably the folks at RedLetterMedia.

OP, if you want to blame people for not liking the PT, fine, but you're insulting people's intelligence and good taste by doing so. To be honest, this forum has seen some of the most skillfully self-deluding, sycophantic George Lucas apologists that I've ever come in contact with, but all of their combined powers of rationalization cannot work miracles. The PT still sucks, for reasons that are obvious to anyone with taste in cinema, and blaming its detractors is not going to change that by one iota. Bad film-making is still bad film-making.
I couldn't possibly say you don't have a lot of good points, because every point you did make was actually spot-on, some of which I hadn't stopped to think of myself. But the PT does deserve some small amount of credit for all that it brought in to the Star Wars universe. But then, midi-chlorians came in, so maybe I'm wrong on this one.


"Neither dark nor light, but both all the same.
Neither hero nor villain, but both all the same.
Neither balanced nor chaotic, but both all the same.
Neither alive nor dead, but both all the same."
Antares Navaar is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-29-2012, 11:32 AM   #26
Alexrd
Senior Member
 
Alexrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Portugal
Posts: 2,177
Current Game: UEFA Euro 2004
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antares Navaar View Post
Midi-Chlorians. Why? The force was some mystical, inexplicable thing until this came along.
No, it still is mystical. Midi-chlorians are not the Force and were never meant to be. Midi-chlorians do explain Luke's line in RotJ: "The Force is strong in my family. I have it, my father has it, and my sister has it too." Midi-chlorians explain why some being are more connected to the Force (and can therefore use it) than others.



Star Wars: In Concert - Lisbon - Some pictures of the exhibition accompanying the event.

Last edited by Alexrd; 01-29-2012 at 11:38 AM.
Alexrd is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-29-2012, 06:24 PM   #27
Samnmax221
I never Kipled
 
Samnmax221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: My hovercraft is full of eels
Posts: 5,784
Current Game: Sex with women
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexrd View Post
Ad ridiculum. Nice.

But you wanted examples? Someone has already made a rebuttal about this. All the examples are there.
Sure this was almost a year ago now, but this thing is ridiculous. He completely misses the point of RLM, and spends the whole (terribly formatted) PDF whining about the review style, and rarely attempts to refute anything. I'd call him a sperglord if it didn't look like the definition was going to fall out of favor.
Samnmax221 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-29-2012, 06:42 PM   #28
Alexrd
Senior Member
 
Alexrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Portugal
Posts: 2,177
Current Game: UEFA Euro 2004
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samnmax221 View Post
Sure this was almost a year ago now, but this thing is ridiculous. He completely misses the point of RLM, and spends the whole (terribly formatted) PDF whining about the review style, and rarely attempts to refute anything. I'd call him a sperglord if it didn't look like the definition was going to fall out of favor.
That can be applied to RLM's "review". He completely misses the point of the movie, and spends the whole time criticizing aspects of the movie that he chose to ignore. But I'm proably "missing the point" as so many people say. They use it as a basis for their critcism when it's conveninent, and when rebutted, they say that the point was to be only a joke...



Star Wars: In Concert - Lisbon - Some pictures of the exhibition accompanying the event.
Alexrd is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-29-2012, 06:55 PM   #29
Antares Navaar
Rookie
 
Antares Navaar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Virginia
Posts: 19
Current Game: Hello Kitty Online Adventures
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexrd View Post
No, it still is mystical. Midi-chlorians are not the Force and were never meant to be. Midi-chlorians do explain Luke's line in RotJ: "The Force is strong in my family. I have it, my father has it, and my sister has it too." Midi-chlorians explain why some being are more connected to the Force (and can therefore use it) than others.
Ah, now that you put it that way, acknowledged. It seems I did not fully understand what I was saying as I said it.


"Neither dark nor light, but both all the same.
Neither hero nor villain, but both all the same.
Neither balanced nor chaotic, but both all the same.
Neither alive nor dead, but both all the same."
Antares Navaar is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-29-2012, 08:14 PM   #30
Samnmax221
I never Kipled
 
Samnmax221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: My hovercraft is full of eels
Posts: 5,784
Current Game: Sex with women
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexrd View Post
That can be applied to RLM's "review". He completely misses the point of the movie, and spends the whole time criticizing aspects of the movie that he chose to ignore. But I'm proably "missing the point" as so many people say. They use it as a basis for their critcism when it's conveninent, and when rebutted, they say that the point was to be only a joke...
No it can't. RLM is primarily based on judging the movies completely on their own merits. Emptying one's mind, pretending they know nothing about this franchise, objectively judging only what is on the screen. The "rebuttal" is a 108 page bitchfest, within which the author mostly complains about how RLM decided to present their opinions, including the length (Oh the irony). Even if this 108 pages of crap did make some interesting points the author still failed to be entertaining in the least, RLM has him beaten there too. Jorge's complete ineptitude as a filmmaker was just demonstrated yet again, after he decided to spend two years re-cutting a more competent director's work into a complete mess.
Samnmax221 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-31-2012, 08:48 AM   #31
Alexrd
Senior Member
 
Alexrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Portugal
Posts: 2,177
Current Game: UEFA Euro 2004
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samnmax221 View Post
No it can't. RLM is primarily based on judging the movies completely on their own merits. Emptying one's mind, pretending they know nothing about this franchise, objectively judging only what is on the screen.
It can. "Objectively judging" can't be applied to RLM's "reviews", because it's something that's not there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samnmax221 View Post
The "rebuttal" is a 108 page bitchfest, within which the author mostly complains about how RLM decided to present their opinions, including the length (Oh the irony). Even if this 108 pages of crap did make some interesting points the author still failed to be entertaining in the least, RLM has him beaten there too. Jorge's complete ineptitude as a filmmaker was just demonstrated yet again, after he decided to spend two years re-cutting a more competent director's work into a complete mess.
The rebuttal is not meant to be entertaining. Is meant to show the ridiculousness of those videos.



Star Wars: In Concert - Lisbon - Some pictures of the exhibition accompanying the event.
Alexrd is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-01-2012, 11:20 AM   #32
Samnmax221
I never Kipled
 
Samnmax221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: My hovercraft is full of eels
Posts: 5,784
Current Game: Sex with women
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Might I suggest you go watch one of the non-Star Wars, or even one of the non-Lucas reviews. Maybe if it's something you're not so personally invested in, you won't take it all so personally.
Samnmax221 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > Star Wars > Prequel Trilogy > Why people who don’t like the PT don’t like the PT

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:41 PM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.