Landlord
Banned
Because overall as an entire package, and also in certain specific distinctions but not all, they are quite mediocre at best.
Star Wars: Episode VII **NO SPOILERS**
- Thread starter Landlord
- Start date
Because overall as an entire package, and also in certain specific distinctions but not all, they are quite mediocre at best.
EbylHusker
Banned
You don't rack up that many Razzie nominations, not to mention winning some of them, without the movie sucking some serious sh#t. Far worse than mediocre. And they racked up those Razzie nominations in the big categories that are usually used to define how "good" a movie is - director, actor/actress, movie, screenplay, etc. Most of the prequels' "success" with other awards came in the technical areas - sound, visuals, music, costumes, etc.
So while I will give you that the sound, music, visuals, costumes were decent (the visuals being the technical aspect, not the aesthetic part of it - like how FFXIV 1.0 had fantastic tehcnical graphics, but absolute sh#t aesthetics), that's not nearly enough to pull all three of those movies out of the cellar. Directing, acting, story, characters, etc - everything that is actually a reasonable judge of a good movie, were total sh#t.
I suppose you could play the soundtrack on your stereo and run the movies on mute, and then, MAYBE, someone could pretend they're even decent. But that's a big stretch just to defend a trio of worthless movies.
So while I will give you that the sound, music, visuals, costumes were decent (the visuals being the technical aspect, not the aesthetic part of it - like how FFXIV 1.0 had fantastic tehcnical graphics, but absolute sh#t aesthetics), that's not nearly enough to pull all three of those movies out of the cellar. Directing, acting, story, characters, etc - everything that is actually a reasonable judge of a good movie, were total sh#t.
I suppose you could play the soundtrack on your stereo and run the movies on mute, and then, MAYBE, someone could pretend they're even decent. But that's a big stretch just to defend a trio of worthless movies.
Landlord
Banned
Hoosker
All-Conference
To Anyone Defending the Prequels...
Please do me and everyone else a favor and answer this:
How does Yoda using a lightsaber NOT completely ruin his character and, in turn, the entire mythology of the saga?
During the ending of Episode II: Attack of the Clones, we see Yoda pull out a lightsaber during his duel with Count Whoever. He has to jump all around the room and do all sorts of acrobatic things just to keep up because he's so much smaller. He has a handicap based on his size when his character should be above that sort of thing. "Size matters not. Look at me! Judge me by my size, do you?" Complete contradiction right there.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but what made Yoda so magical in Empire was that you didn't expect this tiny creature to be a Jedi master. We all had this image of who Yoda was or what he might look like based on what we assume a "great warrior" to look like. By making Yoda a little guy, they were illustrating that the Force was something beyond the physical.
This is only one of the many things I could criticize about the prequels. I believe it to be the most convincing proof that the prequels were not only bad movies on their own, but were damaging to the original trilogy as well.
Please do me and everyone else a favor and answer this:
How does Yoda using a lightsaber NOT completely ruin his character and, in turn, the entire mythology of the saga?
During the ending of Episode II: Attack of the Clones, we see Yoda pull out a lightsaber during his duel with Count Whoever. He has to jump all around the room and do all sorts of acrobatic things just to keep up because he's so much smaller. He has a handicap based on his size when his character should be above that sort of thing. "Size matters not. Look at me! Judge me by my size, do you?" Complete contradiction right there.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but what made Yoda so magical in Empire was that you didn't expect this tiny creature to be a Jedi master. We all had this image of who Yoda was or what he might look like based on what we assume a "great warrior" to look like. By making Yoda a little guy, they were illustrating that the Force was something beyond the physical.
This is only one of the many things I could criticize about the prequels. I believe it to be the most convincing proof that the prequels were not only bad movies on their own, but were damaging to the original trilogy as well.
Last edited by a moderator:
Army_Allen
All-Conference
That's what you're upset about? You know he's embracing the force when he's jumping right? Every Jedi could do those moves and Yoda is no exception. Why not use his size to his advantage there? He was also younger in the prequels and more nimble in that span of 30-40 years I'm assuming. So that's gotta be taken into account. You guys are all just racist cause Mace Windu isn't a Jedi all you David Sterlings!!!
/Sarcasm
suh_fan93
Heisman Trophy Winner
Haha exactly. Yoda using a light saber isn't even on the radar when I think of things I may not have liked about the prequels. Less Jar, Jar, a lot less of the love story between young Vader and Padme and some other dialogue edits and the killing off of Darth Maul way too soon for me anyway they're not nearly as bad as a lot of people think imo.
Last edited by a moderator:
Redux
Assistant Coach
Siize matters not. Look at me! Judge me by my size, do you?" Complete contradiction right there.
Actually both those statements enforce the idea size is not a determining factor.
Yodas abilities were a tad over the top but it was fun and gave some backstory to one of the franchises most iconic characters. He was a jedi and therefore could likely overcome his handicap when the situation called for it, but in dong so it visibly weakend him. Its not like he couldnt move giant objects in the Empire.
Actually both those statements enforce the idea size is not a determining factor.
Yodas abilities were a tad over the top but it was fun and gave some backstory to one of the franchises most iconic characters. He was a jedi and therefore could likely overcome his handicap when the situation called for it, but in dong so it visibly weakend him. Its not like he couldnt move giant objects in the Empire.
Redux
Assistant Coach
As for the whole Hayden Christensen factor as Darth Vader Ill go out on a limb and say he wasnt that bad really. Those who think he came off cocky and awkward...........well, yeah that was kinda the point. Didnt you expect young vader to be a littke flamboyant and wild? His acting wasnt bad, it was done that way to portray him as aggrivated with the world. Constantly at odds with himself and everyone around him he would likely always have that pissed off look which he did. I honestly dont thinkbit mattered who portrayed teenage Anakin, they were doomed to be hated. Same thing with Padme really.
Landlord
Banned
Nah his acting sucked. Hayden Christensen is just a lousy actor, but that was magnified 100-fold by George Lucas' inability to create engaging dialogue. Sam L. Jackson, Natalie Portman, Ewan McGregor and other proven quality actors struggled with it too, but not nearly to the same extent.
Redux
Assistant Coach
Im not going to pretend hes ever going to win an oscar but I really feel part of it was by design. Vader wouldve been an awkward dude. Haden IS an awkward dude. It was likely less his technique as an actor and more his actual persona that landed him the role. And once the outroar from the community came down it was too late to make a change.
Plus Lucas never has had an issue sticking to his guns even if it meant pissing off the masses.
Plus Lucas never has had an issue sticking to his guns even if it meant pissing off the masses.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Dude
Heisman Trophy Winner
