Star Wars :: What was wrong with Ep. 1-3

[Trill Co$by]

I've been searching around everywhere to figure out just what the hell was wrong with the prequel episodes... And now I have to come and ask... Just what was wrong with Episodes 1-3?

When you stop and watch (instead of criticizing) you find that the plot line is very believable and helps you get into the story. It also gives you a further understanding of why Anakin became Darth Vader.

I'm just looking for some guidance on it because personally I find Star Wars Ep. 1-3 to be far more entertaining than the original trilogy... maybe it's because of the better affects Lucas and company had in hand, but even still it was better.

So anyone who can tell me what was wrong and how it ruined the franchise, it would be appreciated.


And further more, I see nothing wrong with the Clone Wars movie and currently airing TV series.

 

[Blade]

Well let's see what I can come up with:

- Firstly, there were some just flat-out boring scenes, which there never were in the original trilogy. There were scenes that would just drone on and on, talking about things that the audience didn't particularly care about. We didn't care about the political issues facing the galaxy. We don't care about the bureaucracy or the Trade Federation, we just want to see the battle between good and evil, and the awesomeness that is the force. While the story of the Republic's downfall was obviously going to be included in the original trilogy, it didn't need to be so boring and dragged out over the 3 movies.

- Secondly, they seem to rely far too much on the great special effects. Lucas sort of became Michael Bay for these movies, thinking that the big explosions and lightning quick lightsaber battles made up for the poor storytelling, and they just didn't.

- The quality of the actors in the original trilogy was far superior. Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher were all talented actors and played their characters so well. Liam Neeson was good, but he died in the first one. And that left Ewan McGregor with the only good performance in the original trilogy. Natalie Portman had better performances and Hayden Christensen was just plain awful.

- 'You've grown too. Grown more beautiful, I mean.'
Sometimes the script was just cringe-worthy.

- Jar Jar fucking Binks.

- The dark side... Ok, Darth Maul and his double-bladed lightsaber was cool and always will be. But Count Dooku was just lame. As a character, he was boring and shallow. And Anakin's turn to the dark side would've been far more captivating if he'd been played by a more competent actor.

They're not terrible movies, they had their good points. Like I said, the visual effects were fantastic, and there were some good performances. The lightsaber battle in the volcano in the 3rd one was as good as some of the best scenes from the original trilogy. But the new trilogy also had too many boring scenes, too many unneeded sub-plots and some performances unworthy of Star Wars.

 

[IrishCanadian25]

My wife and I actually LOVED the prequels and watch them regularly. I keep trying to tell her that Empire Strikes Back is the best of the series - she's stuck on Episode 2 (partially because she's a sucker for love stories) so we're at an impasse.

But Blade really nailed a lot of major reasons. For those who have issues with E1-3, it seems to be because of the general feeling the films had of trying to "cash in." There was such a reliance on CGI that the creativity and charm of the 70's films were missing. It all seemed too easy.

I also think the originals were acted better. Mark Hammil and Carrie Fischer went on to decent careers, but Harrison Ford became a legend. The films were cast with actors and actresses who were not yet famous, so they were out to prove themselves and become one with the character.

I think the storyline also gets buried under the special effects. It's sort of like the Shawn Michaels / Razor Ramon ladder matches - the matches themselves were so impressive that fans often forget what led up to them. It's not always easy to realize that you're really starting to like and identify with Anakin Skywalker, and just in time for you to root for him, he becomes the greastest villain in movie history. Maybe seeing what he once was softens the blow of how evil he was in the originals - makes him a sympathetic villain. I'm not sure.

Oh, and Jar-Jar Fucking Binks. Spot on, Blade. AWFUL sell-out character.

 

[Reddannihilation]

What was wrong with the prequel trilogy?

The shitty dialogue, the shitty acting, the pointless characters invented for merchandising. A lot was wrong with the prequel trilogy. When you can take quality actors like Christopher Lee, Ian McDiarmid, Ewan McGregor etc. and give them such terrible dialogue that it makes genuinely talented people look bad at their jobs, than you are a master of destruction.

Fact is the best Star Wars films didn't have George Lucas direct them, he's a shitty director. Hayden Christensen is a horrible actor, look no further than the scene in Attack of the Clones after he kills the band of tusken raiders, he sounds like a whiny bitch on his period, not a pissed off adult who just killed the people who murdered his mother. Another one, Palpatine's "Unlimited power" line during the Windu fight, shockingly bad. Episode 1; young Anakin saying "yipeee". I'm sorry the future dark lord of the sith started off saying yippee.

As for your argument that the story made sense, it didn't make any at all. What was Palpatine's plan? I'll convince the Trade Federation to invade Naboo, under the hope that two Jedi will be sent to negotiate, those two will then break the queen out of captivity, bring her to Coruscant, get me elected, the I'll create a fake civil war and gain power over the entire galaxy...and no one will know.

There are so many plot-holes in the films that it's painful to watch. I'm expected to believe that the Jedi, arguably the most organized and intelligent grouping of people in the known galaxy are able to lose track of a planet, but a guy in a diner knows where it is? A 12 year old apprentice is able to take out multiple Clone troopers, but a jedi elder isn't? Count Dooku was supposed to believe that despite the "rule of two", which every high ranking jedi was aware of, somehow getting Anakin on the side of Palpatine wouldn't have a negative effect on his life? The existence of Midi-chlorians, tiny cells within you that an abundance of will enhance your connection to a super natural force? The fact that in 3 years Anakin went from confiding in Obi-Wan to a man who he had almost no connection with? Somehow R2 had more functions in the prequels than the sequels?

The prequel series was terrible. Plot holes, bad acting, poor characters. Everything about it screamed "I want money" from George Lucas. I still watch the prequels, to quote the terrible lines and then laugh at them. The sad thing is, when they came out, I liked them, I was a bit younger and never stopped to realise how bad they were. By the time of ROTS I knew TPM sucked and after watching ROTS 3 times I noticed the problems it had.

So basically, what was wrong with the prequel trilogy? Everything.

 

[Барбоса]

As well as the acting, character flaws and script problems already mentioned, the prequel trilogy suffered badly from having to live up to the reputation of the originals, where it be the ground-breaking ANH, one of the best sequels ever in ESB and the epic tripartite ending to ROTJ. They never stood a chance really.

There still are many stand out moments in the prequels that are somewhat forgotten, whether it was the pod race, activating of the droid army, the rolling droid decars and the battle between the Kenobi/Jinn/Maul with the "Duel of the Fates" soundtrack of TPM; Jango/Kenobi particularly the sonic concussion bombs in the asteroid belt, the Jedi battle in the arena, Yoda going mental on Dooku and the foreboding use of the "Imperial March" as the Grand Army of the Republic is launched in AOTC or General Greivous, Christiansen's acting once he embraced the dark side (and spoke a lot less) and the confrontations between Vader/Kenobi and Sidious/Yoda of ROTS

 

[Aeon Mathix]

I didnt like episode 2 at all, but i loved 1 and 3. thats just my opinion though. Actually i only loved 1 because of darth maul (go figure right? lolz), but i still stand by i think 3 was really good. I agree hayden christiansen is one of the worst actors out here, i can never buy anything he does or says in a movie and i knew they could have found someone better for anakin.

 

[Ferbian]

I have enjoyed all of the movies pretty much equally. I don't see any difference between them. Mostly because I wasn't born around the time where the first 3 of them were produced, I didn't feel the same hype for them. I knew of them and had watched a few of them, but I didn't see the difference between them and 1-3 which I have managed to see during the days where they were considered extremely popular.

I don't see why anybody would say that 1-3 is anything bad anyway. They managed to fill you in on what happened in the past, they still produced a great story. And ultimately, they kept the crowd entertained, while pulling in a fair share of money. They all pretty much did that.

 

[Fire Marshall Bill]

Most things on here are already covered, but I do have to almost defend one of the biggest, most common arguments I hear about the prequels. Hayden Christiansen. I'm not saying his acting is good or great or anything. I am just going to comment on his character. First off, yes, the dialogue between him and Natalie Portman is god awful. I mean it's atrocious. Even in the first one when he's a kid it is. But people also get pissed off that he's not "angry" in E2 and 3. They complain he's a whiny little bitch basically. To me, that was the intention. Think of it in a more general sense, who's more easy to manipulate? A young adolescent who's just angry all the time? Or a young adolescent who has zero self esteem, is hopelessly in love and is completely encouragable. He's completely suckered by Sidious and Kenobi didn't have a chance at winning that mentoring battle.

This doesn't make his acting or the movies great in any means. But at least don't misinterpret what they went for. He wasn't angry, he was confused. He was a whiny little bitch, but I think that's what they were going for.

 

[Mitch Henessey]

Star Wars Epiosde I: The Phantom Menace- I know a lot of people literally hated Jar Jar Binks here, but he wasn't too bad. I thought he was highly annoying, but not the cancer that some people made him out to be. The kid who played Anakin Skywalker was pretty good, and I really liked how they portrayed a young and innocent Darth Vader. Then there was Darth Maul. He was a very intriguing character, and the 3 way ligtsaber fight at the end is by far my second favorite lightsaber duel ever.

Overall, I thought this was a good film. The acting was good, and this was a nice way to kick off the new generation of Star Wars.

Star Wars Episode II: Attack Of The Clones- I didn't like this one. I thought Hayden Christensen was fucking terrible here. His acting sucked so bad. The only good part he had in this film is when he explained how he killed all of the Sand People to Padme(Natalie Portman). He truly looked evil. Then there was the lightsaber fight between Yoda and Count Dooku. For years I wondered how Yoda would look in a saber fight. Well, when I finally saw THE Jedi Master throw down, I was thoroughly disappointed. The fight looked so ridiculous. I laughed the entire time, and the lightsaber fight that took place before this one wasn't any better.

The only good thing here was Anakin's killing spree, and of course we didn't see as much of Jar jar.

Star Wars Episode III: Revenge Of The Sith- Easily the best film out of all the prequels. I couldn't stand Christensen in the first one, but he really improved in Revenge Of The Sith. His portrayal of Darth Vader was superb towards the end of the film. Now this one featured a ton of lightsaber fights. Of course the best one was between Vader and Obi-Wan at the very end. Mace Windu VS Palpatine/Sidious was decent, and Yoda VS Sidious was a lot better than Yoda VS Dooku. Not only was the fight better, but it was cool to see both masters going at it.

I seriously loved Portman's performance here. She did such a great job. You could actually feel her heartbreak over Anakin's decision to turn to the dark side. She is such an awesome actress. We all knew what was going to happen in this film, but still, Revenge Of The Sith was a very good Star Wars film. The drama and suspense was excellent, and the acting from almost everyone was good or great.

 

[Phoenix]

For me, the main problem is that right from the word go, they milked the episodes and even actually wasted a film in my opinion when they could have used it to further the development of the problems. When I see Episode I, I just think how much of this could have easily been cut as it carried no true relevance to the overall plot, it was truly trying to basically say that Luke's story of becoming a hero was the same as his father but to a point where it simply dragged out. You could have kept things like the Duel of the Fates and the Trade Federation elements, but the scenes on Tatooine really didn't need to be there as much, it could have been on any other planet and would still be the same movie. You could have even combined Episode I and II into one movie, leaving room for something else, then Episode III

As covered Jar Jar Binks was a thorough cancer too, I wonder how many fans were disappointed that he wasn't killed during Episode III.

The Prequel Trilogy effective plays down the impact of the Original Trilogy, that the dark times of the Empire seemed to be more of an improvement over what the days of the Republic were doing. No character truly stood out and made their presence felt like say Han Solo or Luke Skywalker, and that's down to the script and Lucas directing the film himself. It truly wasn't until Episode III where this was being felt, and I do enjoy episode III, I've even said at times that I would probably rank it over A New Hope (I love ESB and ROTJ).

But I think the main problem people have is that where the Prequel Trilogy exists, there's some true plot holes in some part like the fact it takes 16 years to build one Death Star when a second seem to been done in less than a quarter of the time, among other things. But it's more the impact it's done by what Lucas did to change the trilogy to compensate for the newer films. Changing dialogue, re-doing certain scenes, redubbing of Boba Fett, jeez, I remember how badass he sounded from the originals and then he just lost his cool factor, I understand respect continuity but this was murder!

It takes a minute for it to kick in:
[YOUTUBE]/v/qBFEXbVXBWc&hl=en_GB&fs=1[/YOUTUBE]

Fact is that Episodes I-III were not built with the Originals thoroughly in mind and the fact that Lucas went all out to actually change what was done originally just to make the newer films look equal really has downplayed how awesome the Original Trilogy was. I think many are just angry because he didn't simply make three extra films that could be overlooked for fans of IV-VI, but just the fact that these films led to the classics being heavily overhauled and not respecting the memory of how it was for the fans. You can't see a good quality DVD of the originals without it being a make over (I heard the DVDs with the original formats were poor quality cause they simply copied from Betamacs rather than fine tune it from the original film).

 

[Kenny Powers]

I enjoyed going to the Star Wars movies as a teenager, but the biggest problem was not only the lacking of acting, but the story as well. It was too long and boring. Too much time was spent talking about the political process that I just tuned out. It didn't help that the movie was more of a cartoon then anything. All of the robots and space creatures had their own voices and made stupid jokes.

The CGI was nice, but that can only get you so far. There were plot holes like how could the Jedi not know or prevent their downfall? How could Annakin's mother become pregnant without a father? Was she the Virgin Mary? Did it just magically happen? The actors that played Anakin were complete fools. Anakin was made to look like a pussy with mommy issues. Liam Neeson and Ewan McGregor did a good job in their roles. Natalie Portman wasn't bad either. I couldn't understand why Samuel L Jackson was a Master Jedi Knight aka Mace Windu. Jackson is best in action movies where he tells people to shut the fuck up. He was out of place in Star Wars.

The villains were terrible too. Count Dooku and General Grievous? Seriously? The light saber duels were enjoyable though. Yoda and Darth Maul really added something special that was lacking in the original series. If the new Star Wars prequel had the acting of the original Star Wars along with a good story, then it would be flawless. There was just too much going on at once. Too many creatures and organisms taking away from the actual story.

I enjoyed Anakin's transition into the dark side, but the Hayden Christensen is garbage. I can't believe that they put him in the original ending of Return of The Jedi, standing next to Obi Wan and Yoda. Don't get me started on how annoying and what a waste of time Jar Jar Binks was.

There were some good parts to the prequel. The CGI and light saber duels were obviously better then the original series. Episode 3 was rated PG-13, and was more darker then any previous Star Wars films. The actor that played Lord Sidious did a great job too. Overall though the prequel was too silly and cartoonish.

 

[kissfan85]

I love episodes 1-3,
I love 4 5 and 6

I love 2 because you watch the relationship grow with Padme and Anikin

On youtube I don't know if it's there anymore but there was a video put together R.I.P Padme and Anikin and it was to MeatLoafs Paradise by the dashboard Light.
I had that video on my myspace page for a couple years

I enjoyed going to the Star Wars movies as a teenager, but the biggest problem was not only the lacking of acting, but the story as well. It was too long and boring. Too much time was spent talking about the political process that I just tuned out. It didn't help that the movie was more of a cartoon then anything. All of the robots and space creatures had their own voices and made stupid jokes.

The CGI was nice, but that can only get you so far. There were plot holes like how could the Jedi not know or prevent their downfall? How could Annakin's mother become pregnant without a father? Was she the Virgin Mary? Did it just magically happen? The actors that played Anakin were complete fools. Anakin was made to look like a pussy with mommy issues. Liam Neeson and Ewan McGregor did a good job in their roles. Natalie Portman wasn't bad either. I couldn't understand why Samuel L Jackson was a Master Jedi Knight aka Mace Windu. Jackson is best in action movies where he tells people to shut the fuck up. He was out of place in Star Wars.

The villains were terrible too. Count Dooku and General Grievous? Seriously? The light saber duels were enjoyable though. Yoda and Darth Maul really added something special that was lacking in the original series. If the new Star Wars prequel had the acting of the original Star Wars along with a good story, then it would be flawless. There was just too much going on at once. Too many creatures and organisms taking away from the actual story.

I enjoyed Anakin's transition into the dark side, but the Hayden Christensen is garbage. I can't believe that they put him in the original ending of Return of The Jedi, standing next to Obi Wan and Yoda. Don't get me started on how annoying and what a waste of time Jar Jar Binks was.

There were some good parts to the prequel. The CGI and light saber duels were obviously better then the original series. Episode 3 was rated PG-13, and was more darker then any previous Star Wars films. The actor that played Lord Sidious did a great job too. Overall though the prequel was too silly and cartoonish.

Anakins mother became pregnant via the Force remember, just further proves the point that Anakin was the chosen one to bring balance to the force

 

[Geeker]

Hayden Christiansen being a bad actor - I disagree. I think there are just a lot of people pissing and moaning. The older fans of the original trilogy had this thought in their head about who Anakin was and a love scarred man child wasn't it. Hayden wasn't the problem, peoples high standards were.

Jar Jar Binks - What about him?

Plot holes - There are some, but it's not that bad. People critic and look far into some things. Someone mentioned something about the rule of two. I took it as more of a guideline than a rule and even then the sith are the bad guys, if they want to break the rules then let them.

Some people even compare Natalie Portman with Carrie Fisher - I think Portman is way hotter. In fact I don't think Fisher is even remotely good looking. For the kids that saw Jedi when it came out I can understand their fascination with her, but for us younger crowd or even guys who look at their face and not if they are showing skin, she's kind of ugly.

FX - Yeah they are better in the new trilogy. But really Lucas made some groundbreaking discoveries with the original. Okay so I'm not sure what my point is with this one.

Boring scenes - There are some, but a lot of great movies have them. And what one person thinks is boring another might thing is great.

Overall I think the people who grew up loving the originals are the main one who hate the new trilogy. Obviously there are exceptions, but I think people just nitpick too much and can't enjoy a movie for what it is.

Personally, ANH is my least favorite. Hate on me all you want for that one.

 

[Reddannihilation]

Hayden Christiansen being a bad actor - I disagree. I think there are just a lot of people pissing and moaning. The older fans of the original trilogy had this thought in their head about who Anakin was and a love scarred man child wasn't it. Hayden wasn't the problem, peoples high standards were.

No it was Hayden, look at other films he's been in like Jumper. Hayden sucks.

Jar Jar Binks - What about him?[/QUUOTE]
aside from being a representation of a group of stereotypes and racism, his character was more suitable for a saturday morning cartoon.

Plot holes - There are some, but it's not that bad. People critic and look far into some things. Someone mentioned something about the rule of two. I took it as more of a guideline than a rule and even then the sith are the bad guys, if they want to break the rules then let them.

The rule of two is the code by which the sith existed since the time of Darth Bane, one master, one apprentice. When the time comes the apprentice will challenge the master and the victor will seek out a new apprentice, to continue building the strength of the Sith until one so powerful could eliminate the Jedi.

Every Jedi knew this, but apparently Dooku just sort of figured there'd be a three man team.

Some people even compare Natalie Portman with Carrie Fisher - I think Portman is way hotter. In fact I don't think Fisher is even remotely good looking. For the kids that saw Jedi when it came out I can understand their fascination with her, but for us younger crowd or even guys who look at their face and not if they are showing skin, she's kind of ugly.

Who cares? The films still sucked.

FX - Yeah they are better in the new trilogy. But really Lucas made some groundbreaking discoveries with the original. Okay so I'm not sure what my point is with this one.

the difference is that the prequels were wank fests of cgi.

Overall I think the people who grew up loving the originals are the main one who hate the new trilogy. Obviously there are exceptions, but I think people just nitpick too much and can't enjoy a movie for what it is.

Well of course the majority of people who don't like the prequels saw the originals first. In fact anyone born prior to 1998 probably saw the originals first, which would make them the majority.

Personally, ANH is my least favorite. Hate on me all you want for that one.

Yeah you pretty much suck.

 

[Geeker]

I don't have a lot of star wars fans to talk to so this thread is quite nice. As far as im concerned we are both expressing our opinions. I hope thats how you are taking it to. (I am of course talking to Reddannihilation).

I liked Jumper.. And the movie couldn't have been too terrible if they are considering a sequel. Also if he was such a bad actor why didn't they recast him? How is it that he showed up on the film to begin with? He has more than just Star Wars under his belt.

Just what about Jar Jar has anything to do with racism? Jar Jar was a bumbling idiot and he is a lot of peoples biggest gripe with TPM, but he isn't really that bad.

I stand by my original statement with the sith thing (they are bad guys). Though you do have a point. The entire reasoning behind the rule of two was because of them being back-stabbed (or the prevention of it). But that is only something die hard fans will know. They never expressed that in the movies. And if you want to get really into it: the practice was abolished after sidius and vader where killed. And if you want to go farther into it Vader had a secret apprentice in the force unleashed. rules change all the time.

Well that's barely an argument.

I don't see how that is even remotely true. I thought they looked pretty good. And the third one was just amazing.

I didn't say "seen the movies first". I meant the people who love the original and grew up with em. I seen the original before seeing the prequels and loved them, but I didn't grow up obsessing over them like Eric does on that 70s show. (mostly cause I couldn't since I was born a year after Jedi came out) I took them for what they were enjoyed them enough to play the games and read some of the comics. When the prequels came out it just made me love the star wars world that much more.

Yeah, I expected that much. But just because I liked ANH the least doesn't mean I didn't like it. The story was great. I mean I loved it. But there where more spaceship battles and less hand to hand combat that the others have that just make them better in my opinion.

If this means anything to anyone, Empire is my favorite.

 

[Reddannihilation]

I don't have a lot of star wars fans to talk to so this thread is quite nice. As far as im concerned we are both expressing our opinions. I hope thats how you are taking it to. (I am of course talking to Reddannihilation).

It's all in good fun but it's called Star WARS, for a reason.

I liked Jumper.. And the movie couldn't have been too terrible if they are considering a sequel. Also if he was such a bad actor why didn't they recast him? How is it that he showed up on the film to begin with? He has more than just Star Wars under his belt.

Jumper was awful, I think you might have listened to the rap music too often, it gives you the brain damage. Just cos Hayden can get jobs doesn't make him good, Channing Tatum gets jobs, he gets them because teenage girls pay to see him take his shirt off.

Just what about Jar Jar has anything to do with racism? Jar Jar was a bumbling idiot and he is a lot of peoples biggest gripe with TPM, but he isn't really that bad.

Jar Jar Binks has a lot of characteristics often associated with Afro-Carribean stereotypes, especially the way he speaks. Add that to the fact that the originals had subtle humour from the likes of C-3PO, Jar Jar is literally an over the top slapstick character.

I stand by my original statement with the sith thing (they are bad guys). Though you do have a point. The entire reasoning behind the rule of two was because of them being back-stabbed (or the prevention of it). But that is only something die hard fans will know. They never expressed that in the movies. And if you want to get really into it: the practice was abolished after sidius and vader where killed. And if you want to go farther into it Vader had a secret apprentice in the force unleashed. rules change all the time.

Many sith, Rule of Two, rule of One. Doesn't change the fact that Dooku had to be an idiot to think a much more powerful force user would usurp his position.

Well that's barely an argument.

Well tbh, finding Natalie Portman attractive doesn't help or hinder the films.

I don't see how that is even remotely true. I thought they looked pretty good. And the third one was just amazing.

I'm guessing you misunderstood the term wankfest, there's too much CGI in them, it rarely looks real. It's over the top.

I didn't say "seen the movies first". I meant the people who love the original and grew up with em. I seen the original before seeing the prequels and loved them, but I didn't grow up obsessing over them like Eric does on that 70s show. (mostly cause I couldn't since I was born a year after Jedi came out) I took them for what they were enjoyed them enough to play the games and read some of the comics. When the prequels came out it just made me love the star wars world that much more.

Well I grew up in the 90's and that didn't stop me from loving the original Star Wars far more than the prequels.

Yeah, I expected that much. But just because I liked ANH the least doesn't mean I didn't like it. The story was great. I mean I loved it. But there where more spaceship battles and less hand to hand combat that the others have that just make them better in my opinion.

It's quite funny this discussion is happening on a wrestling board, allow me to explain, in the fight scenes of the new star wars there's very little "story telling" yeah the main duels are epic, but too many flips, etc. The original duels had emotion and story, Obi Wan becoming one with the force etc. The new Star Wars is very flashy and over the top, which took away the impact of the overrall story. Not to mention the horrible dialogue. Godawful.

If this means anything to anyone, Empire is my favorite.

Redemption.

 

[Geeker]

Jumper was awful, I think you might have listened to the rap music too often, it gives you the brain damage. Just cos Hayden can get jobs doesn't make him good, Channing Tatum gets jobs, he gets them because teenage girls pay to see him take his shirt off.

I hate rap music. I guess Hayden's acting is just going to be something we have to agree to disagree on. Regardless, his ability in the acting is what Lucas wanted. In the end that's whats important since it is his baby.

Jar Jar Binks has a lot of characteristics often associated with Afro-Carribean stereotypes, especially the way he speaks. Add that to the fact that the originals had subtle humour from the likes of C-3PO, Jar Jar is literally an over the top slapstick character.

There's rumors that Watto is a Jew as well. I guess I take people for who they are not the color of their skin, or where they came from. (That's in no way an attack on you.)

Many sith, Rule of Two, rule of One. Doesn't change the fact that Dooku had to be an idiot to think a much more powerful force user would usurp his position.

I'm not sure I even understand the basis of this argument. What exactly is it that we are complaining about with Dooku?

Well tbh, finding Natalie Portman attractive doesn't help or hinder the films.

Well there's some hindrance on it, I think. I mean people are going to compare her to Carrie Fisher. There was nothing that could be done about that. So they needed to find someone attractive. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder though. It's like the new movie SALT with Angelina Jolie. I personally find her hideously unattractive, and because of that reason I have boycotted the movie. There are some that think shes amazingly good looking.

I'm guessing you misunderstood the term wankfest, there's too much CGI in them, it rarely looks real. It's over the top.

Yeah, well Yoda looked really funny in Episode 1. I think they should have stuck with the puppet. And his battle scenes where he's bouncing around and flipping all over the place was over the top. On the other side of it though people can complain that the original trilogy (not the new-mastered ones) are boring looking. I've heard on more than one occasion about how you can see the dowell used for lighting up lukes saber in when hes training. obviously technology wasn't as good back then but that's a pretty serious oversight..

Well I grew up in the 90's and that didn't stop me from loving the original Star Wars far more than the prequels.

I also grew up in the 90's. But the funny thing is I was talking to one of my uncles who grew up loving the originals and enjoys the new trilogy. He likes the originals more but he doesn't have much complaints.

It's quite funny this discussion is happening on a wrestling board, allow me to explain, in the fight scenes of the new star wars there's very little "story telling" yeah the main duels are epic, but too many flips, etc. The original duels had emotion and story, Obi Wan becoming one with the force etc. The new Star Wars is very flashy and over the top, which took away the impact of the overrall story. Not to mention the horrible dialogue. Godawful.

Well we can PM if you want. It's getting to the point where it's just the two of us now, but we are both still on topic.

Redemption.

If we took the trilogies as a whole then the original is easily better. Better writing, better storytelling, more originality. But, that's not to say the new trilogy was bad. (Or at least that's what I'm trying to say.)