I think I'd only place ANH, ESB and maybe RO above it. I love ROTS, it's a cracking star wars film.
Ewan McGregor Is "Really Happy" About the Recent Embrace of the Prequels
- Thread starter Mach5
- Start date
I think I'd only place ANH, ESB and maybe RO above it. I love ROTS, it's a cracking star wars film.
Personally, I've never seen the point of ranking subjective works of art. It betrays a rigidity of thinking and ropes people into the notion that there's an objective framework by which qualitative value can be definitely measured.
Even within the context of one's own preferences it strikes me as pointless. What I might consider my favourite Star Wars movie varies from one sitting to the next, just like my favourite song, food or colour can change entirely depending on my mood. I can't imagine what it'd be like if such things were internally locked in place, crystallised so no actual thought is needed, which aside from being a horrifying way to think, entirely defeats the purpose of appreciating and/or criticising art in the first place.
Someone recently posted a link to this scene from 'Dead Poets Society' over in the Dune thread, and it's seems fairly apt here too.
Even within the context of one's own preferences it strikes me as pointless. What I might consider my favourite Star Wars movie varies from one sitting to the next, just like my favourite song, food or colour can change entirely depending on my mood. I can't imagine what it'd be like if such things were internally locked in place, crystallised so no actual thought is needed, which aside from being a horrifying way to think, entirely defeats the purpose of appreciating and/or criticising art in the first place.
Someone recently posted a link to this scene from 'Dead Poets Society' over in the Dune thread, and it's seems fairly apt here too.
i can certainly measure my own personal level of enjoyment and satisfaction, and compare it to other people's perception and experience.
PT and ST are polar opposites, each having the other's strength as weakness and vice-versa.
PT = hackneyed dialogue and no franchise feel the way the OT had created, but has a story narrative (that is passable, but misplaced and could have been better.)
ST = has the feel people expect but has hackneyed and uninspired regurgitated plotting and no discernible story. Unless it was already made 40 years ago.
The PT was flawed because we knew how it would end, therefore continuity fluffs would be even harsher - and some clearly exist. But I do appreciate Lucas was trying to expand the lore and universe. And while at times the PT had technology the OT that precedes it didn't but should have had, it easily could have been far worse. But why not have the 1997-2005 movies be sequels instead? Did we really need to see young Yoda, firm Ben, sexy wood plank Anakin as ANH and TESB pretty much told us all we ever needed to know? I never was jonesing for Knowing Yoda's past. Not all who start out a way end up the same way anyway, it'd be a Marty Mary Gary Gnu Stu Stereotypic Stew if they had?
The PT does have its strengths, McGregor isn't wrong to be sure. But if the PT had been polished up at the time, nobody would have needed decades to revisit what are still clunky movies despite the narrative Lucas was aiming for. Maul is barely used and quickly dispatched. Binks never leaves. The lightsaber fights go from being personal and intimate to generic wide shot CGI blobs with glowing blue and green waving around in increasingly silly and protracted manner. The only memorable line contains the word "sand" in it, and not in a good way. Names like General Grievous slap audiences in the face. And the PT proves big name talent can't always rescue scripts that aren't in the best of shape. One little rewrite to polish what WERE solid ideas could have turned a mediocre prequel into a fantastic one.
And I still do prefer TLJ over RotS. TLJ also does a rehash of the "I failed my student" routine, but the dialogue is comparatively better. There's also a greater sense of sorrow, given Luke's past - which we never really saw of young Kenobi (which means Ben failed, twice, but keep in mind the ST also has Han calling his kid "Ben" despite never knowing Kenobi! The ST isn't perfect but it isn't dross either. But I digress.) RotS, which also should have been a cakewalk given it is the culmination of eps I and II (which it is a lot better than, as a whole) and sets up for what ANH tells, has so much clunky dialogue that it is hampered too much. The visuals do more to induce laughter, why didn't the orchestra belch out a 60s surfing song during the lava skateboarding scene just to prove how over the top the yet-another-protracted-silly-scene really was? The teaser didn't intrigue me at the time and I waited until the movie got on blu-ray in a 6-movie collection, then put on sale, before I finally saw it. I just did not care about SW after eps I and II.
PT = hackneyed dialogue and no franchise feel the way the OT had created, but has a story narrative (that is passable, but misplaced and could have been better.)
ST = has the feel people expect but has hackneyed and uninspired regurgitated plotting and no discernible story. Unless it was already made 40 years ago.
The PT was flawed because we knew how it would end, therefore continuity fluffs would be even harsher - and some clearly exist. But I do appreciate Lucas was trying to expand the lore and universe. And while at times the PT had technology the OT that precedes it didn't but should have had, it easily could have been far worse. But why not have the 1997-2005 movies be sequels instead? Did we really need to see young Yoda, firm Ben, sexy wood plank Anakin as ANH and TESB pretty much told us all we ever needed to know? I never was jonesing for Knowing Yoda's past. Not all who start out a way end up the same way anyway, it'd be a Marty Mary Gary Gnu Stu Stereotypic Stew if they had?
The PT does have its strengths, McGregor isn't wrong to be sure. But if the PT had been polished up at the time, nobody would have needed decades to revisit what are still clunky movies despite the narrative Lucas was aiming for. Maul is barely used and quickly dispatched. Binks never leaves. The lightsaber fights go from being personal and intimate to generic wide shot CGI blobs with glowing blue and green waving around in increasingly silly and protracted manner. The only memorable line contains the word "sand" in it, and not in a good way. Names like General Grievous slap audiences in the face. And the PT proves big name talent can't always rescue scripts that aren't in the best of shape. One little rewrite to polish what WERE solid ideas could have turned a mediocre prequel into a fantastic one.
And I still do prefer TLJ over RotS. TLJ also does a rehash of the "I failed my student" routine, but the dialogue is comparatively better. There's also a greater sense of sorrow, given Luke's past - which we never really saw of young Kenobi (which means Ben failed, twice, but keep in mind the ST also has Han calling his kid "Ben" despite never knowing Kenobi! The ST isn't perfect but it isn't dross either. But I digress.) RotS, which also should have been a cakewalk given it is the culmination of eps I and II (which it is a lot better than, as a whole) and sets up for what ANH tells, has so much clunky dialogue that it is hampered too much. The visuals do more to induce laughter, why didn't the orchestra belch out a 60s surfing song during the lava skateboarding scene just to prove how over the top the yet-another-protracted-silly-scene really was? The teaser didn't intrigue me at the time and I waited until the movie got on blu-ray in a 6-movie collection, then put on sale, before I finally saw it. I just did not care about SW after eps I and II.
I've tried to cut back on my prequel hating. Because they were someone's first exposure to Star Wars and they aren't the worst things ever made, they're just movies that I didn't really connect to. My first Star Wars was the Ewok Adventures and as cheesy as they are, I just love them.
If you don't love Ackmena you're not a Truefan.™
And that's perfectly fine. I never said you shouldn't compare an contrast the merits of such things.
It's just for me, personally, I don't get the point of ranking personal preferences. Aside from the aforementioned concept that preferences change; a ranking system implies that a thing can be objectively better in every way than all the other things down the list and objectively worse than everything above. It's a wasted effort and I think it actively hampers critical thinking in regards to art appreciation.
To give an example; I'm obviously a Star Wars fan, but I'm also a Ghostbusters fan. So how would I rank those two movies in relation to each other? Well Star Wars is a superior mythological adventure story with richer cinematography and ambitious storytelling. But Ghostbusters is by far the superior comedy, with more diverse and dimensional characters, better chemistry, arguably more quotable lines and manages to make a giant walking corporate logo seem both credible and threatening in a grounded setting.
The point is, you really can't rank things even within one's own subjective preferences. The points of comparison are entirely arbitrary.
I completely agree. To me, ranking art is an arbitrary exercise in utter futility. Art is making of evoking a response in the audience. In that instance, TPM falls rather flat as I walked out feeling rather uninspired.
On the other hand, I can truly state that all three of the OT have been in as my "favorite SW film" at one time or another. Now, I just wait to see if I enjoy the story. If I do, then that is successful for me.
Regardless, I'll not begrudge personal enjoyment of art. I just want to understand.
I dunno, it's always seemed an enjoyable thing to do for me. We're talking star wars films here not star wars vs ghostbusters, so in my view it's an apples to apples comparison by and large. Besides, it's not like I can't appreciate the merits of the movies I rank below my top ones is it? Ranking your preferences isn't that black and white.
It can come across as very black and white at times. Certainly I agree there is a lot of shades of color, but I see the constant comparison game as counterproductive to actually enjoying the films.
I remember seeing TPM, I think on opening day. I was the last person in the theater. I stayed for the music in the credits. The movie has moments, good and bad. It wasn't exactly what I expected. But then the end of the credits came....and that music started. Quietly and briefly the first time. I sort of did a double take the first time. "Did I really just hear that?" The music continued for a little longer...than that music played again...louder and obvious. With a very recognizable sound accompanying it. My reaction? "Lucas, you son of a bitch. You're going for the long game."
The music in question? Anakin's Theme plays last in the credits....with the Imperial March (Darth Vader's Theme) at the end. And the sound? Darth Vader's breathing.
The music in question? Anakin's Theme plays last in the credits....with the Imperial March (Darth Vader's Theme) at the end. And the sound? Darth Vader's breathing.
I heard it too, spooky sound
Isn't the 'long game' inevitable in this context due to it being a prequel, though? I mean, unless you thought TPM was supposed to be in a divergent timeline from the originals, Anakin was always going to be Vader.
I don't think anyone expected Anakin to be 9. That's a long game.
Given what I thought at the time, I was thinking that Anakin would have turned near the end of the second film, and the third would be him hunting down the Jedi, with Obi-wan on the run with Padme and the secret Skywalker twins (based on the line from Leia remembering her mother from RotJ). That sort of happens, but I was thinking it was going to be longer. But back, then I would have thought Anakin was going to be around Luke's age in ANH, or slightly younger (around Padme's age at the youngest), thus the love story part could have began in the first film, rather than the second.
Although making Anakin a slave boy both heightens the pathos and tragedy surrounding his life and allows both him to mature to young adulthood and experience the pains of adolescence as well as Palpatine to slowly consolidate his power after being elected Supreme Chancellor during the Naboo Crisis. Both come together at the right time, Anakin an angry and mistrustful young man who feels that the Jedi are holding him down and hiding things from him and Palpatine a Sith Lord manipulating the Separatist movement and the Clone Army behind the scenes so that when the right moment comes he can use both the Clones and Anakin to achieve his ultimate goal.
Similar threads
