STiD, Kirk and the Abrams Team

[Shaka Zulu]

^THIS.

Face it, people just wanted clones of Luke, Leia, Han & Chewie in the prequel trilogy, and when they didn't get it, they went apeshit and claimed that Lucas had 'lost it' and a whole lot of other bullshit. Unlike Gene Roddenberry, Lucas didn't lose it, didn't believe that he was a visionary, and produced better work than Roddenberry did in the first season of Star Trek: The Next Generation. Saying that Jar-Jar was racist when the guy who was the voice and the body was a black man and saying the the Nemoidians were racist when the accent wasn't meant to be Japanese (or any other Asian race is proof of that apeshitness in the fans who hated it.

D. Trull said it best in his essay about how hard it is to write something like the prequel trilogy:

Any sequel to a successful movie automatically faces a hard time earning the audience's acceptance. People are going to complain if it's too much like the original, and they're going to complain if it's too different from the original. There will always be the cynical assumption that the new production is motivated solely by an attempt to cash in on the success of its predecessor. A sequel looks even more suspicious if it comes along many years after the original, when it looks like the filmmaker has run out of ideas and got desperate enough to fall back on a tried and true moneymaker from his glory days. And with a few notable exceptions, the plain truth is that most sequels aren't very good.

A prequel faces an even harder time of winning people over. When a sequel tells the events that happened before the first movie, people have a hard time understanding why they should care. If you already know how everything's going to turn out in the end, why bother? If the prequel goes back in time any considerable span, the movie may have few if any of the same characters or actors as the first one, which alienates the audience ever further.

Now, it's tricky enough to do a single prequel, in which all the characters and plot threads cleanly match up to the story the audience already knows. But imagine the challenge of embarking on a series of three prequels, over the course of which the audience will be left disoriented in a precarious state of dramatis interruptus, having the beginning and the end but waiting for the middle. The whole story won't be apparent and won't make sense until the end of the third prequel... assuming the audience still cares by then.

Sixteen years passed between Return of the Jedi and The Phantom Menace. Aside from the Indiana Jones series, Lucas has had no major successes during that span. He is perceived as an out-of-touch has-been, who came limping back to his old cash cow after his creative powers have all dried up. (Most people don't know or don't care that Lucas has planned on eventual prequels all along.)

Some other things that Mr. Trull said that also sum up what fans are:

Audiences demand that a new Star Wars movie has to be the most visually astounding and most action-packed movie of all time. But over the years audiences have become accustomed to monumental special effects in every big blockbuster, so they're much harder to impress. The intense expectation for action and effects also makes people impatient with dialogue-heavy dramatic scenes, which come across disproportionately as seeming boring and out of place.

Audiences demand immediate gratification and stories that are all tied up at the end in neat, easy-to-digest little packages. They don't have the patience to wait for two more movies before they get the complete story, and they don't have the foresight to envision how the first prequel will ultimately fit into the greater scheme. If everything was revealed and spelled out for us in the first one, there wouldn't be much surprise left to keep the next two interesting. But audiences don't care about what tomorrow may bring -- they want it all now, now, now!

Why I Love The Phantom Meanace

 

[MakeshiftPython]

I'm talking about the criticisms that go beyond "a lot of people hate it, therefore I hate it too". Besides that, there are things Lucas did that many didn't want out of the prequels that you can't blame them for criticizing: Bad writing and bad directing.

I think if one watches them without trying to compare them to 'The Original Trilogy', there's a lot to like about them. But, I don't think they could ever live up to the original trilogy, I'm not sure the Abrams films will either.

The original trilogy of films were movies that were in the right place at the right time (much like Star Trek:TOS) and they hold a special place in many people's hearts, and any prequels/sequels are going to be judged in a much harsher light because of it.

To this day, Lucasfilm has had no issue selling the prequel trilogy over and over again (I'm betting Paramount wishes The Final Frontier and Nemesis sold as well) and was even able to spin the Star Wars: The Clone Wars animated series off of it. Not bad for a set of movies everyone supposedly hated.

I think on their own they're still bad and only got so successful because Star Wars is such a popular and beloved franchise. Let's not forget that kids/families play a huge factor into the franchise's success, which might also explain why REVENGE OF THE FALLEN was such a big hit despite being regarded among many as a horrible film. I know if I was 6 years old I would have eaten up these prequels with a big grin.

 

[JarodRussell]

Bullshit. The prequels aren't just criticized because it's the popular thing to do, they're also criticized for being subpar. I don't think they're the worst things to ever come out of cinema, but they are certainly not that good. Plenty of bad films made it big at the box office despite not being good, such as TRANSFORMERS: REVENGE OF THE FALLEN.

How I Met Your Mother had an episode about the Star Wars prequel split, and it hit the nail on the head. The prequels are not bad by any means, you're just not part of their target group.

 

[BillJ]

I think on their own they're still bad and only got so successful because Star Wars is such a popular and beloved franchise. Let's not forget that kids/families play a huge factor into the franchise's success, which might also explain why REVENGE OF THE FALLEN was such a big hit despite being regarded among many as a horrible film. I know if I was 6 years old I would have eaten up these prequels with a big grin.

It wasn't six-year old's who were buying tickets to the prequel trilogy. It was people who were six-years old when the original trilogy came out and they were pissed that Lucas didn't help them recapture their youth.

I think that's where Abrams succeeded and Lucas stumbled. When I watch the Abrams Trek films, I feel like I'm six-years old again sitting in front of my family's floor model color TV. The prequel trilogy never gave me that warm nostalgic feeling inside.

It'll be interesting to see Abrams take on the Star Wars franchise and if he can succeed where Lucas stumbled.

 

[BigJake]

If there's any proof that the original trilogy is susceptible to nostalgia bias, it's pretty much the whole of Return of the Jedi.

Nostalgia bias is pretty much the lifeblood of the Star Wars franchise at this point. However I don't know that ROTJ necessarily "gets a pass." The Ewoks were more generally despised than anything else in the franchise until Jar Jar Binks came along, and ROTJ was AFAIK the least-liked of the original trilogy films. It's still better than the prequels, mostly (with the possible exception of Revenge of the Sith), but that's not saying it's all that great.

Face it, people just wanted clones of Luke, Leia, Han & Chewie in the prequel trilogy, and when they didn't get it, they went apeshit and claimed that Lucas had 'lost it' and a whole lot of other bullshit.

If there was actually anyone who wanted "clones" of any of the old characters instead of just wanting good movies, I've certainly never observed them in the wild; they must have been a small cohort indeed. Watching you rant and rage at what appear to be the voices in your head is amusing, but AFAICS you still have absolutely no idea at all why other people say anything or believe anything. (Dr. Trull's speculations on what "audiences expect" or "audiences demand" are not much better.)

I know if I was 6 years old I would have eaten up these prequels with a big grin.

Exactly. Basically the prequels trilogy was marketed to children with the idea of leveraging their parents' money. This obviously worked, in part because children aren't all that discerning. It is possible of course to market to children without your product looking like garbage to adult eyes, as Pixar (for instance) has amply demonstrated; Lucas just didn't do it.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

If there was actually anyone who wanted "clones" of any of the old characters instead of just wanting good movies, I've certainly never observed them in the wild; they must have been a small cohort indeed. Watching you rant and rage at what appear to be the voices in your head is amusing, but AFAICS you still have absolutely no idea at all why other people say anything or believe anything. (Dr. Trull's speculations on what "audiences expect" or "audiences demand" are not much better.)

The voices in my head aren't anywhere numerous as the voices in yours; please stop trying to guess the state of my mental health due to a supposition I made about fandom that anybody else would probably have also made (and may have done so already.) If you disagree with me and what I said, fine, but now you're heading into personal insults.

 

[BigJake]

please stop trying to guess the state of my mental health due to a supposition I made about fandom that anybody else would probably have also made. . .

"Anybody else" does not routinely and with maximum shrillness try to dismiss large swathes of fandom as nutcases via rather ironically nutty-sounding "suppositions" about their motives. You do. FWIW I am not really speculating on the state of your mental health, I'm sure you're as sane as any of us; I'm just pointing out how make yourself appear by constantly doing this.

Let me give you a bit more specific example:

Saying that Jar-Jar was racist when the guy who was the voice and the body was a black man

... actually, it's fallacious to say a character conception isn't racist because the guy playing it was black. It doesn't work that way. Minstrelsy and blackface were likewise produced by black entertainers like Bert Williams; that has nothing to do with whether the basic dynamic was racist, as black entertainers have been putting food on the table by selling black caricatures to whites for a long time. Jar Jar rubbed a lot of people the wrong way by being arguably just another iteration of that wrapped up in digital effects.

and saying the the Nemoidians were racist when the accent wasn't meant to be Japanese (or any other Asian race is proof of that apeshitness in the fans who hated it

The original Nemoidians of Phantom Menace were instantly recognizable to any number of critics, fans or not, as digitally-costumed Fu Manchu stereotypes out of the 1930s and 40s. The criticism doesn't come out of nowhere; if you're familiar with film and comic books from that era, the parallel is extremely obvious, whether or not it was "intended". And note that this criticism actually seemed to hit its mark: Lucas tacked away from the Fu Manchu accents for most of the Nemoidians, save those who'd already been established, in subsequent films.

For the reasons I've just outlined, trying to dismiss the above points as "apeshitness" looks like exactly the kind of thoughtless, kneejerk reaction you claim to be criticizing.

 

[The Doctor]

The difference between ROTJ, the admittedly last-place of the OT, and the entirety of the PT is that ROTJ makes sense, has some sense of narrative and functions as a film, rather than (simply) a merchandising vehicle.

Move your sights to Empire and all bets are off. Empire is a fantastic film, full stop. It's full of witty dialogue, character intrigue, relatable romance and genuine performances. You can't say that about any of the PT.

They're just bad movies: they take talented actors and strip them of all their talent. We get Ewan McGregor and Samuel L. Jackson reduced to flat line-readings. The action is nonsensical and the persistent green-screen sets rob the films of the immediacy and tactileness that made the world of Star Wars so engaging. The scripts are beyond dumb and the direction is dull and lifeless.

But the kids love em. And that's great. Kids loved the OT too. Difference is, so did their parents.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

It wasn't six-year old's who were buying tickets to the prequel trilogy.

Of course, it's the parents who buy those tickets. One of my coworkers went to see THE PHANTOM MENACE when it came out last year in 3D, because his son wanted to see it, even though the father didn't think it was any good.

 

[M'Sharak]

If there was actually anyone who wanted "clones" of any of the old characters instead of just wanting good movies, I've certainly never observed them in the wild; they must have been a small cohort indeed. Watching you rant and rage at what appear to be the voices in your head is amusing, but AFAICS you still have absolutely no idea at all why other people say anything or believe anything. (Dr. Trull's speculations on what "audiences expect" or "audiences demand" are not much better.)

The voices in my head aren't anywhere numerous as the voices in yours; please stop trying to guess the state of my mental health due to...

Everyone can stop those right now.

If you (general "you") have a valid point to make, it ought to be possible to do so without speculations, suppositions, insinuations, etc. concerning the mental state of any other fans or fan groups. Just don't do that.

 

[Sindatur]

Bullshit. The prequels aren't just criticized because it's the popular thing to do, they're also criticized for being subpar. I don't think they're the worst things to ever come out of cinema, but they are certainly not that good. Plenty of bad films made it big at the box office despite not being good, such as TRANSFORMERS: REVENGE OF THE FALLEN.

But, on the other hand, that opinion is mostly from folks who grew up on The Original Trilogy (Or are heavily involved in Star Wars Fandom, rather than casual Star Wars Fans). There's a whole bunch of younger folks who grew up on The Prequel Trilogy and/or don't have the Nostalgia of growing up on The Original Trilogy when it was brand new, that love the Prequel films. Then of course, now we have kids growing up on the Clone Wars cartoons that love The Prequel Trilogy as well.

I grew up on The Original Trilogy, and Jar Jar annoys me, and, The Pod Race seems to go on for hours, but, other than those things and the awkwardly directed Romance, I mostly get enjoyment out of The Prequels.

 

[BigJake]

But, on the other hand, that opinion is mostly from folks who grew up on The Original Trilogy (Or are heavily involved in Star Wars Fandom, rather than casual Star Wars Fans).

In point of fact, TPM was widely panned both inside and outside fandom both at the time of its initial release and on the screening of the 3D version.

 

[Set Harth]

Kids loved the OT too. Difference is, so did their parents.

Unless their parents were certain professional film critics.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

I love this one a lot:

Thank you so much for putting into words what has been on my mind since the release of TWOK. I feel that fandom is more than spoiled. We are blind? blind to what STAR TREK really is. As Harlan Ellison once pointed out, we have taken a form of entertainment, a TV show, and made it more important than it was ever intended to be. We have raised it to the level or perfection. Each one of us has put so much of ourselves into our view of the STAR TREK universe that anything that does not agree with the view is immediately dismissed as bad Trek. Poor Gene Roddenberry, in producing ST:TMP he had to feed the needs of thousands of fans who had been dreaming and fantasizing their own individual STAR TREK universes for ten years. There was no way he could have pleased us all. Harve Bennett was in no better a position than Roddenberry. Bad press plagued him from the start. Now that TWOK is out some fans are upset because it did not live up to their own interpretations of STAR TREK. They accuse it of being a cheap movie made with no other purpose than to make a quick buck. Yes, TWOK was made to make money, so was ST:TMP, and so was the original STAR TREK series. We must keep in mind that that is all STAR TREK is, a form of entertainment, is long as we keep this in mind, and stop making more out of it than it really is, we will enjoy TWOK and the movies that will follow it.... I have been so disappointed at the back-biting and the narrow-mindedness of most fans I see in INTERSTAT. Fandom as a whole seems to have lost the fun and the friendliness I enjoyed so much when I was active in it five years ago. It seems to have lost the qualities that it loves so much in the series. If we cannot be open-minded to one another, how can we expect a future seen in STAR TREK? How can we criticize TWOK for its lack of ideology, when we are so cruel to each other? I am thankful to you for allowing me to express my opinion. INTERSTAT is a very important zine for just that reason.

This only proves the old saying 'The more things change, the more they stay the same.'

 

[donners22]

It's curious. I find Reddit's Trek sub to be a LOT more positive about the shows and other movies than these forums, but for Into Darkness it seems to be reversed - it is generally a lot more positive here and negative there.

 

[Phoenix219]

Return of the styrofoam rocks!

Well, that would be one way to fix the aesthetics and canon between Enterprise and TOS.... just keep reducing the budget until they are filming on STC's sets...

 

[Hey Missy]

It's curious. I find Reddit's Trek sub to be a LOT more positive about the shows and other movies than these forums, but for Into Darkness it seems to be reversed - it is generally a lot more positive here and negative there.

Despite this forum's claim that "Only a vocal minority of fans hate Into Darkness" (with extra condescension), it's the only place I've been to where it's praised.

 

[M'Sharak]

Well, that would be one way to fix the aesthetics and canon between Enterprise and TOS.... just keep reducing the budget until they are filming on STC's sets...

Despite this forum's claim that "Only a vocal minority of fans hate Into Darkness" (with extra condescension), it's the only place I've been to where it's praised.

While I'm sure good reasons must exist for bringing this thread back to life after three years of inactivity, I'm not convinced they're present in these posts.

Go back to sleep, thread.