star wars prequel poll

note 3: for all the ludicrous attention to detail that was paid in stringing together all these lovely set pieces you think there may have been one person on the payroll who could have pointed out that Anakin Christiansen is hauling nothing more or less than charcoal SAMSONITE LUGGAGE as he accompanies harvard's hottest jewess on their lakeside holiday.

― El Tomboto, Sunday, October 7, 2007 1:54 AM

you should have put "Lucas in Carbonite" as an option

gotta be III rite

This movie-cycle was an excuse to stretch what was maybe -- maybe -- one decent script into a new, self-important "prequel trilogy." The only installment with any life whatsoever was III, so that one gets my vote. Also, it has the "best," most natural dialogue and performances, which isn't saying much.

2 is my fave because it brings the lols.

I fell asleep in the theater during the second one. Only time that's ever happened.

Went with the hird one for this:

http://www.anaitgames.com/wp-content/darth_vader_nooo1.jpg

hird = third, obv.

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/5/54/DONOTWANT_Vader.jpg

Perhaps this question has been asked before, but was the purpose of the prequel trilogy to eliminate any sense of gravitas or menace whatsoever from Darth Vader's character in the trilogy proper? Because if so, then kudos.

I liked the first one... I thought there was a genuine sense of OMG Star Wars excitement to it. The other two were increasingly rubbish. I know that most people think that if anything the films improve. They are wrong.

the wonder aside, DV, the first one is really, really quite awful.

i preferred the second one, but tbh i'd never watch any of the prequels again.

I didn't get much OMG excitement out of the first one, except for the lightsabre scene with Darth Maul, which was epic. But the next two were so much more asinine in every single way.

I'll have to go with Phantom. For me the least horrible one of the lot. Why? Because it looked, smelled and tasted like a Star Wars movie. It had a lot of dudes walking around in silly costumes, had a great scene with the pod race and a very intriguing looking villain, Darth Maul (who got killed too soon too easy). The inclusion of Jar Jar is unfortunate, but he didn't itch me more than the Ewoks ever did.

The other two movies are cgi-jam fests straight out of the realm of the Matrix. To me they had nothing to do with what Star Wars is all about. Also, as mentioned above, they provide Darth Vader with a legacy destroying background.

what I liked about the first one was all the shady political machinations. Also the fites and stuff. And little Anakin is quite cute (I especially love the bit in the pod race where he looks like he is going to start crying).

the second and third films had some entertaining spectacle, but they were fundanentally stupid. And they had a crucial problem - the whole story of Anakin turning into Darth Vader is something that requires a good actor in the central role and a director who has some understanding of human emotion; they had neither.

well, particularly the second.

the second requirement, that is, not the second film

wow i really didn't think anyone out there could prefer I over II or III but ilx never fails to amaze

essentially the best thing about II is Christopher Lee and the best thing about III is Ian McDiarmid. if they'd used Maul more in the first film he could've been the best thing about that too (maybe he was anyway).

absolutely he was.

the only things i really hate about ROTS are:

- the stupid dream sequences Anakin had (i think this went too far outside traditional storytelling dimensions of SW)
- the corny cartoonish droid voices
- Windu/Emperor/Anakin scene was so clunky and Anakin's turn to dark side too quick and unconvincing
- handling of the kids (the one who talks to Obi-Wan is the cringeist moment by far) - not even that bothered by 'younglings' term that's how pompous Jedis talk whatever
- Padme's birth-giving scenes and death
- Vader not getting to pick his own costume design
- everything after that feeling very rushed altho the final shot was absolutely the right way to end it

It just occurred to me that I've only seen each of these once, in the theater. Which was enough for me, apparently.

You have reminded me that I saw TPM three times in the cinema. Thought I'd suppressed that particular horror, but no.

Should win this poll for the lightsaber battles though.

what I liked about the first one was all the shady political machinations.

This is totally OTM. The biggest thing that's been lost in the vortex of bad acting that is Jake Lloyd/Hayden Christensen is the idea of how cataclysmic events can build from the humbles of beginnings; Palpatine and his machinations shift everyone around so effortlessly and takes such quick advantage of openings that it's breathtaking when you aren't cringing at Jar-Jar or rolling your eyes at how fucking terrible Anakin is as a character. (Was Lloyd incapable of doing temper? There's so much of this trilogy that could have been better had they actually been able to show Anakin as an "any-means-necessary" good guy rather than a "pouty-milquetoast-oh-whoops-he's-evil-now" good guy.)

I was going to vote III but there are sequences in all 3 movies that make me reconsider.

wow i really didn't think anyone out there could prefer I over II or III but ilx never fails to amaze

To my memory at least, the first one was maybe 40% active stupidity, 40% boredom and 20% interesting or fun. The other two were just 100% eye-rollingly, painfully stupid.

The gladiator fight in II was great, as was the lava fight in III.

III had the moment when Yoda walks into the Emperor's office and smacks down his two guards with the Force without even looking. Worth the price of admission.

That makes it sound like some bizarro police procedural movie.

It kind of was.

2 is my fave because it brings the lols.

Yeah, I've actually watched 2 again on tv because it is so funny -- I wouldn't bother rewatching the other two.

NOT VOTING

ALL SHIT

I went with Episode 1. Ignoring the words "Star Wars", it's actually not a bad sci-fi film for kids.
It seems a lot freer than the other two, both of which showed signs of being made by someone gripped with panic from the backlash. Which of course they were.
I liked a lot of the designs in this. The chrome spaceships, Amidala's costume, the palace and so on. The shoot-out at the palace was a good scene too. That's another thing the other two lacked - decent (ie not over the top) laser gun shoot-outs. They were also more concerned with piling on endless, boring lightsabre duels. Phantom had that one big one which was arguably the best of the entire series.

actually yeah, there was a lot of nice design stuff in the first one.

I agree with Christopher Lee and Ian McDermid being great in the other ones. Especially Ian McDermid, who is also great in the first one.

Do you reckong that in going over to the Dark Side, Anakin had to put out for Palpatine?

i reckon that to get the part hayden had to get pretty dark on lucas' casting couch, maybe

This is totally OTM. The biggest thing that's been lost in the vortex of bad acting that is Jake Lloyd/Hayden Christensen is the idea of how cataclysmic events can build from the humbles of beginnings; Palpatine and his machinations shift everyone around so effortlessly and takes such quick advantage of openings that it's breathtaking when you aren't cringing at Jar-Jar or rolling your eyes at how fucking terrible Anakin is as a character. (Was Lloyd incapable of doing temper? There's so much of this trilogy that could have been better had they actually been able to show Anakin as an "any-means-necessary" good guy rather than a "pouty-milquetoast-oh-whoops-he's-evil-now" good guy.)

I was going to vote III but there are sequences in all 3 movies that make me reconsider.

― I have a set of penises leftover from some bach party somewhere (HI DERE), Wednesday, August 26, 2009 9:24 AM (57 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

ya 1 of my pet theories is that lucas shdve done the prequel story as a 12-episode miniseries on hbo focusing on the political machinations of the galactic senate like i claudius or something

http://hollywoodjesus.com/movie/star_wars_2/82.jpg

^sums up the shittiness of the prequels pretty well

I watched the first one out of genuine excitement; I watched the last two out of a sense of duty

NOT VOTING

ALL SHIT

― the people vs peer gynt (goole), Wednesday, August 26, 2009 2:04 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

I tried to decide for about 3 full minutes. I really hated all of them.

voted for 2 because, as said above, probably brings the most LOLs. but also because there was at least some sense of course correction, no matter how inadequate, from the problems of the 1st one, before the 3rd came along and affirmed that, no, they're not going to wrap this up in any remotely satisfying way.

i've also seen it the least (got dragged to 1 in the theater at least a couple times, seem to catch bits of 3 on cable more than the others), which in this kind of situation is a plus.

before the 3rd came along and affirmed that, no, noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo, they're not going to wrap this up in any remotely satisfying way.

before the 3rd came along and affirmed that, no, noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo, do not want, they're not going to wrap this up in any remotely satisfying way.

the screengrab am0n post is more interesting than anything i remember from 1-3

posted

Palpatine and his machinations shift everyone around so effortlessly and takes such quick advantage of openings

Perhaps Palpatine was able to do this so effortlessly because everyone else sat around talking endlessly about oh!, the terrible politics of it all, and the fate of the empire, and the grand significance of the battle between venerable institutio . . . zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz . . .

like ilx

At least we're better actors.

NOT VOTING

ALL SHIT

― the people vs peer gynt (goole), Wednesday, August 26, 2009 2:04 PM (1 hour ago)

yep

This summer has reintroduced me to what a truly horrible big-budget movie is ("Transformers", "Terminator Salvation") and all three Star Wars prequels are better than that.

bad boys 2 was out like 5 years ago fyi

I liked "Bad Boys 2", though.

i think you need to think about what you said dan

NOT VOTING

ALL SHIT

― the people vs peer gynt (goole), Wednesday, August 26, 2009 2:04 PM

come on, this is a given. just pick a turd any turd

Dan OTM re the prequels being better than Transformers 2 and T:S. wow...

Transformers 1 and Terminator 3 > SW prequels tho

I really like #1 (pod racing! darth maul!) but I haven't seen/thought about 2 and 3 for a long time.

cgi yoda spins around a lot in some fight scene, there's some horrible falling in love sequence, darth anakin screams "noooooooo"

= all I can recall about 2 and 3

We introduced my kid (then just my girlfriend's kid) to Star Wars last summer. I gave him my three original trilogy DVDs. Then one day while I was at work, my girlfriend bought him the prequel DVDs because all the Star Wars toys at Toys 'R' Us were of Anakin.

He spent three months watching the Revenge of the Sith and the cartoon network show and when I mentioned Han Solo in passing last week, he said "Who?"

hmm ok i pick 2 cos i haven't seen it

why do people use memory as barometer of quality as opposed to YOUR MEMORY REALLY SUCKS?

I won't defend "Transformers" or "Terminator Salvation," neither of which I've seen but both of which I'm sure are terrible. The Star Wars prequel is still horrible, depressingly-bad product.

Why?

lol was that "why?" to me?

Yes.

I just don't see how anyone can look at all of the Star Wars movies and not see that all six of them have the same set of problems acting and plotwise; it seems very much like nostalgia colors people's impression of the original trilogy to the point where the prequel trilogy wouldn't have stood a chance even if it hadn't had Jar-Jar and had actually contained a sensible portrayal of Anakin Skywalker.

(I freely admit that I like the original trilogy better but that is largely because Harrison Ford is way way way better than anyone in the prequels.)

Yeah – Return of the Jedi is just as terrible as the prequels.

Why are the Star Wars prequels terrible? Long stretches of useless scenes, weighted down with stilted, unnecessary dialogue that's made worse by wooden acting, all leading to a single short story about the transformation of a Jedi into Darth Vader that could have been told much more powerfully and economically in a single movie.

oh the challops

Star Wars I and II are a big cut above the others. As bad as III was, I can't put it equal to or below IV -- IV.

I'll concede the acting problems range throughout the six, but tonally and plotwise the originals are genuinely better, IMO.

Long stretches of useless scenes, weighted down with stilted, unnecessary dialogue that's made worse by wooden acting, all leading to a single short story about the transformation of a Jedi into Darth Vader that could have been told much more powerfully and economically in a single movie.

Invert "Darth Vader" and "a Jedi" and you've also described the original trilogy.

lol. Nah, there were problems of the same type, but hardly to the same degree, in the originals.

I'll concede the acting problems range throughout the six, but tonally and plotwise the originals are genuinely better, IMO.

Return of the Jedi is pretty bad: the action's all bang-bang. Characters appear and disappear at will (when Lando turns up, it's like he's meeting the cast for the first time) and the final confrontation between Luke and the Emperor is just embarrassing ("Soon I'll be dead...and you with me" wtf)

a lot of the acting/scenes in all of these movies is embarrassing and useless it's just that some are much more noticeable than others, and it's part of the fun, too

I'm totally opposed to the idea that because you loved something as a child you somehow cannot judge it with your normal critical faculties. Your original feelings are going to colour your judgement, yes, but all art is dependent on context. There's plenty of stuff I loved as a kid which I now think is shit, and the original trilogy is not amongst them.

i mean when i watch these movies, i'm not looking for *great* acting

Return of the Jedi is just as terrible as the prequels.

hmmmm, no

Of all these films Attack of the Clones is the only terrible one. And Empire Strikes Back and Temple of Doom are the ones to save in a fire.

How is acting relevant to the role of Luke Skywalker?

not necessarily a big deal but would've liked to have seen in the prequels a scene that matched R2 and 3P0 separated and wandering in the desert for the sense of space and an intriguing tension. unfortunately the story for I-III didn't really allow for such "quiet" moments.

i'm kind of looking for some awesome swashbuckling and some bang bang and cool shit to look at

Oh, I don't think the originals were great movies. Just way better than the prequels.

Booty Call, now there's a great movie.

a lot of the acting/scenes in all of these movies is embarrassing and useless it's just that some are much more noticeable than others, and it's part of the fun, too

unsurprisingly I am 100% with Que here

that's the first Star Wars to a T.

morbs it really blows my mind that you, ever the holder of the torch for mature adult intelligent filmmaking, don't think star wars 1 & 3 are terrible movies.

imo there is no good argument for 2 being significantly worse than 1 or 3

they are all shit

enjoyable shit vs. unenjoyable shit

this has given me a thread idea

oh its been done

Worst Movie I Own

Is it something about clusterfuck thread topics that reach 1,000 posts in one day? Cause I'm looking for that one.

xp

oh but this would be 'Worst Movie YOU Own' and not a poll

ever the holder of the torch for mature adult intelligent filmmaking, don't think star wars 1 & 3 are terrible movies.

bullshit, I like pulp & escapism, just not bad examples of it, eg the C. Nolan Batmans.

so you think the phantom menace is a good example of it. just for the record.

2-1/2 stars.

I'd actually prefer not to think of these goddamn minor movies ever again. plz check out my Lucrecia Martel thread on ILF.

if new answers are invading your brain and forcing you to think about stuff you should really say something on the mod request board

imo there is no good argument for 2 being significantly worse than 1 or 3

― unban dictionary (blueski), Wednesday, 26 August 2009 16:45

big portion of 2 involves tediously unmoving love scenes between robotic actors. same can't be said for 1 or 3.

The sand dialog kills me every time.

I'd actually prefer not to think of these goddamn minor movies ever again. plz check out my Lucrecia Martel thread on ILF.

― Indiana Morbs and the Curse of the Ivy League Chorister (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, August 26, 2009 12:58 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

shoulda done it on ILE!

I think kids that come of age now are going to continue the idea that Episodes IV - VI are better due to received knowledge -- kind of like how there have probably been a couple generations that have "discovered" what's termed "classic rock" by this point.

I dunno - I'll check back with my little cousins in a few years... they expressed profound dismay/incredulity when I was cornered into admitting that I thought the new movies were complete shit.

(to be fair I've come to regard Jedi as complete shit too, and a fair amount of the first one I just can't watch. Empire is good though)

'there have probably been a couple generations that have "discovered" what's termed "classic rock" by this point.'

do kids today care about "classic rock" other than as a source for rock band levels? I'd be surprised if kids even had equivalent enthusiasm for the prequels as with something that was truly "theirs" like say harry potter.

The sand dialog kills me every time.

― kill puppies when the kicking stops (Nicole), Wednesday, August 26, 2009 4:23 PM

"I don't like the sand. It's coarse and rough and irritating -- not like you. You're soft and smooth."

^good pickup line in bars btw

especially bars in the desert or on the beach

or in a sandbox

but really any bar

pants pockets hold sand

I'll put my nerd regalia on full display here but also part of what made the prequels so bad was that they made the Star Wars universe so small - like coming after a decade or so of good sci-fi writers doing good things with the expanded universe, Timothy Zahn and Dark Horse et al, and then explaining the Force using...midi-chlorians?

also I have my wedgie proof underwear on and have abnormally large lung capacity, so I dare you guys to try anything funny

that midi chlorian stuff was total shite. Interesting that they just gave up on it for episodes 2 and 3.

there was no reason to mention it again. i suppose there was no real need to bother trying to explain how the force actually worked at all tho (but if so, what would be a better way of doing it?). instead of this they should've spent more time explaining how lightsabres are made and work.

as if george lucas has a clue how light sabres work

My fan response:

In a decade or two maybe it will be possible to plug your brain into a computer and generate a video depicting anything you can think of and if these prequels had never been created that sort of thing would result in so many awesome versions of 'what might have been'. I remember being 10 years old and imagining the climactic Vader/Obiwan battle and other prequel scenes and it was poetic, cinematic, epic, and beautiful, and I'm sure most of an entire generation of 80s kids did the same.

Now that these crap have polluted our collective unconscious, the pre-New Hope Star Wars history is no longer a realm of fantasy but of lousy moviemaking.

....All that said I knew the prequels were done when the first alien showed up and talked in a ridiculous English accent. The second one is probably the best for sheer entertainment but the volcano scenes/last half hour at the end of 3 approaches success so I voted for that. I loved the "NOOOOOO" in 3 and the Yoda fight in 2, even though it reminded me of the Super Nintendo games more than anything.

Oh yeah, "Luminous beings we are, not this crude matter"......that and midichlorians

lightsabers are made from gems xxxp

(serious answer)

Palpatine and his machinations shift everyone around so effortlessly and takes such quick advantage of openings that it's breathtaking

If this connotes

taking of breath = drawing the life out of me through soul crushing boredom

then yes.

how clever, it's no wonder your rapier wit was too quick to be entertained by these movies

wow I had never seen the end of part III before last night.... anyone who thinks that's a halfway decent movie, all I have to say to you is.... "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO"!

i thought II and III were really really bad. just boring. I liked the last 15 minutes of I so i choose that one.

"explain how the force actually worked at all tho (but if so, what would be a better way of doing it?)"

I think "The force is a magic hyper-dimensional field that can be mastered by anyone through rigorous discipline and training" is more populist and a better message for kids to swallow than "the force is enacted by tiny animals that are heritable traits of the noble elites, like blue eyes and blond hair"

I mean, it's pretty bad storytelling when being militantly politically correct would demonstrably improve the movie at every corner.

pretty sure kids would take the 'tiny animals' over a 'hyper-dimensional field' is the thing

you can't see the tiny animals, it's not like you get close-ups of microscopic ewoks! of course it being more of a mysterious magical thing is generally more appealing to kids.

I remember tom paulin spewing out an incredible theory about one of the prequels, which he saw as an allegory about the US as a republic with jedis as the constitution, I guess Palpatine as Bush and maybe Jabba as a tinpot dictator. In fact I have found it http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/review/2004350.stm The details there are all nonsense but the sense of a huge power eating itself away is pretty strong in the early films, and something you get a big sense of from the originals, where the past is so integral to the plot. Alec Guinness was so good at adding mystery alluding to the past w/his lying, casual force using&wily eyes, he came off too straight and insufficiently English in the prequels. Likewise pre-dementia yoda completely worthless, gone from giggling round his grotto fighting with r2d2 to worthy pope at the centre of everything dealing out heavy sentiments in now-inexplicable syntax. I thought these guys would have come off more subtly obnoxious and overbearing, a colonial vibe maybe.

Best: pod race, sounds, robot tanks humming over the grass, good looking planets, boba fett as bogan, buildings on tattooine, some of palpatine being sinister. Worst: lack of proper core of characters/bad use of r2d2&c3p0, darth maul being irrelevant and having nothing to do, all the acting, all the jedi shit, all the massive battles, all the wank looking aliens, worthless lightsabers, ruining chewbacca, ruining natalie portman, not tying things up properly. DavidM very correct w/reasons for 1 being best, more laid back, no intense anakin and assoc. terrible dynamics, less cramming in of dross.

I think "The force is a magic hyper-dimensional field that can be mastered by anyone through rigorous discipline and training" is more populist and a better message for kids to swallow than "the force is enacted by tiny animals that are heritable traits of the noble elites, like blue eyes and blond hair"

RIP Teddie Kennedy.

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

Well, that settles that.

youse are all wrong, but at least youse are all wrong in the right direction