What Are the Ways the Star Wars Prequels Could Be Improved???

The problem, as I see it, and others, is that the outcome of the PT is basically the Jedi's fault. The Jedi are entirely unsympathetic, and their imperfections were not just expanded upon, but were rarely, if ever, balanced out by any positives.

 

Then you and I were watching different movies altogether.

Do you understand what the Prequels were about? To me, it wasn't simply about the fall of Anakin Skywalker. To me, it was about how everyone - Anakin, Padme, the Jedi, the Senate included - screwed up and how Palpatine exploited their mistakes and flaws to rise in power. Look at today's current political situations.

Then again, I guess it's easier watching movies about people fight against tyranny, instead of watching movies about how people screw up and allow tyranny to take hold in the first place.

 

It's not a matter of ease. I understand what the PT is trying to do. I don't think it creates sympathetic characters that I, personally, care about. It takes the heroes from the OT and not only paints them as people capable of mistakes, but short sighted, arrogant, with no redeemable features. The characters don't feel real, save for brief moments throughout the trilogy. And I feel like it could have been more.

All of this is my opinion. No demand for agreement, but I'll not be told what to think either. It's not a personal judgement on anyone else's movie choices, or value as a person. It's just differing opinions.

 

with creative editing, they could improve on Episode 1. I really liked that movie, sans Jar Jar.. more Darth maul scenes could be spliced in with Ray park's Darth Maul, and it could be done without affecting the overall story. as for the rest, the sorta stilted love scenes with Anakin and Padme could be cut for some other stuff.. it could make it seem like they really do love each other, by leaving that open and ambiguous. but then again, nothing says love like Han and Leia in the original trilogy.

 

When going into the Geonosis arena:

Anakin: "Padme... I love you."
Padme: "I know"

The continuity with The Empire Strikes Back notwithstanding, It makes more sense if he says it.

 

^Good.

Better:
Anakin: "Padme... I love you."
Padme: "Get away from me you child-killing sociopath."

 

Anakin: Padme, I love you.
Padme: Look Anni, there's something you should know. It's...it's...about Obi-Wan.

 

The Phantom Edit is where you want to be.

Robot Chicken sketch here we come.

 

The problem with that is that Anakin has already admitted to that back on Naboo (awkwardly, but he did). The scene is more for her to admit it in the face of certain death. To be fair to Anakin, he has been saving her life a bit. They do seem to be able to have fun together, and have quickly learned how to probably tease each other. She's also seen his vulnerable side (his crying over his mother's death), though that also showed his darkness with the admitting of killing the entire village in response to the torture and death of his mother.

 

I'm at a bit of a loss as to how killing essentially innocent women and children doesn't constitute falling to the dark side in and of itself.

 

The premise of the prequels is sound and still relevant. The execution was not. I feel the same way about the two Matrix sequels. There's good ideas at the core, maybe even good enough to make you think about them afterwards, but surrounded by bad execution.

 

"Once you start down the dark path, consume you it will, as it did Obi-wan's apprentice".

 

The idea is simply that Anakin has all these little moments that add up to the complete fall.

Anakin demonstrates a lot of dark tendencies though, so the "Fall" is far more gradual, especially visualized through AOTC.

 

Ohh, they weren't human, so it's okayyyy.

 

That's how it always starts.

 

You're not the only one....

 

The Jedi were certainly seriously flawed, but to reduce the outcome to being their fault, as if characters such as Darth Sidious had no agency and therefore no culpability, is a ridiculous position.

 

Just because someone gave in to evil, doesn't mean they're going to remain there. I don't recall Anakin making the decision to become a Sith lord after his slaughter of the Tuskens. And Anakin felt guilt for what he did. Despite his anger, he actually felt guilt and shame for what he had done. And this had continued for at least three years, which was confirmed in "Revenge of the Sith".

I don't get the comment about the Tuskens not being human. Are you claiming that Lucas had excused Anakin's actions because the Tuskens weren't human? If not, what did you mean by the comment?

And why is it that when it comes to morality, a lot of people are incapable of realizing how messy and complex it truly is? Why cling to this black-and-white morality? Why insist that it has to be constantly used in fiction? This seems like storytelling for eight year-olds to me.


By the way, what are "dark" tendencies? Why does anything "dark" always have to be a metaphor for evil? And why does anything "light" always have to be a metaphor for good? Come to think of it, why do so many pop culture fans and geeks cling to the use of "dark" and "light" when discussing morality? They don't even use "good" and "evil" anymore. It's damn disturbing.

Well, that's your opinion and the opinions of many other fans. I don't share them. And I'm also aware that many other fans would feel the same as me.

I love both the Original Trilogy and the Prequel Trilogy. But I'm also aware that both trilogies have their flaws. I cannot take this question about how can the PT be improved seriously, if no one bothers to extend the same question to the OT.

 

I was making a joke. Cliegg Lars says of the Tuskens, "They may walk like men, but they are vicious monsters" or something to that effect.

I think Padme would have felt terrible for Anakin. The Tuskens kidnapped and tortured his mom to death, killed a few dozen villagers. And Anakin went there to rescue her. She would want to be there for him.

 

Which is not my position at all, but I appreciation the elucidation.

Well, Star Wars did start out as a child's film, so that description is very apt, as Darth Vader was very much "evil" and Obi-Wan and the Jedi were good. So, Star Wars started out as very black and white morality.

Why? This doesn't make much sense, as light has long be associated in human history with good and right, and dark with evil or bad intent.

I'm a fan of good and evil stories and really enjoy them. However, the terms have become so watered down as to be meaningless in pop culture. "How are you doing today?" "Good." It's too rote and mindless. Light and dark refer to concepts that people can picture and have power associations. Also, even in Star Wars it has always been Light Side (not in those terms in the original) and The Dark Side. So these objections feel very disingenuous when discussing a property that primarily deals in Light vs. Dark.

Not sure if anyone is being forced to discuss this here or to participate.