Even Rogue One? (I happen to agree with you mostly by the way, I'm not a fan of TFA or TLJ and prefer the PT)
Why Do People Hate the Star Wars Prequel Trilogy?
- Thread starter VulcanMindBlown
- Start date
Even Rogue One? (I happen to agree with you mostly by the way, I'm not a fan of TFA or TLJ and prefer the PT)
I put RO with the OT, then the PT, and last the ST
I liked Rogue One...more so the second time, but it felt like the abridged version of a longer movie. There's not much of a story there. I want to read the novelization(I read "Catalyst" and really enjoyed it, even though it made me sympathize with Krennic above all, and made Galen look like an @-hole")
Star Wars is telling a story through visuals and sounds. It's a good story. Complaining about the Prequels being "so cgi" is either a)ignorant- people just aren't aware of what is actually cgi in these movies, which is often the case, and/or b)hypocritical- in light of more recent star wars movies, that utilize cgi for far more than the prequels did.
Or we could go beyond Star Wars and look at all the big comic/fantasy/sci fi movies of the last 5-10 years. If we must complain about the prequel's use of cgi, we must first complain about Captain America, Superman, Avengers, Justice League, et al. I mean, who get's more screen time, the actors who play Captain America and Superman, or their digital stunt doubles? Or how many scenes are the Avengers actually on location in New York, vs a green screen set, that is then made to look like New York?
The story is the steak. Visuals are the language of film. Charming dialogue and witty banter are the special sauce.
Please watch the video if you have time. I think it's less than 10 minutes long.
Star Wars is telling a story through visuals and sounds. It's a good story. Complaining about the Prequels being "so cgi" is either a)ignorant- people just aren't aware of what is actually cgi in these movies, which is often the case, and/or b)hypocritical- in light of more recent star wars movies, that utilize cgi for far more than the prequels did.
Or we could go beyond Star Wars and look at all the big comic/fantasy/sci fi movies of the last 5-10 years. If we must complain about the prequel's use of cgi, we must first complain about Captain America, Superman, Avengers, Justice League, et al. I mean, who get's more screen time, the actors who play Captain America and Superman, or their digital stunt doubles? Or how many scenes are the Avengers actually on location in New York, vs a green screen set, that is then made to look like New York?
The story is the steak. Visuals are the language of film. Charming dialogue and witty banter are the special sauce.
Totally agree. I though RO was excellent.
If it detracts from the story, then it's like too much of a spice.
Now, please note this. I don't care about the CGI in the PT, any more than I care about it in the OT or the ST. There are moments in all three that pull me from the film. My struggle with the PT is that there is little in the visual storytelling that is keeping me engaged, mostly because the characters are not that engaging.
So, is it a visual tale? Certainly! But, it lacks that emotional hook that keeps me coming back to the story.
"Rogue One" is not part of the Sequel Trilogy. Thank God. Which is probably why I have a higher regard for it than the two Sequel Trilogy films. That film did not have J.J. Abrams or Rian Johnson mucking it up.
Still had Disney and LFL and we all they are messing everything up in Star Wars...
Still had Disney and LFL and we all they are messing everything up in Star Wars...
And? I haven't changed my mind. I prefer "Rogue One" over the two Sequel Trilogy films. I just about prefer any Star Wars movie over those two films.
'Twas a sarcastic remark made in jest, as a reaction to the amusement I derived from the fact that Disney and LFL are considered horrible and destroying Star Wars because of the ST, and yet RO is fine...highly amusing to me.
Your antipathy towards the ST is dully noted as well.
I don't.
I haven't seen the Prequel Trilogy as many times as the Classic Trilogy, but that was as much about the price of movie tickets, and limitations on my time, as anything else. It's only because there's a local theatre with 1970s prices that I found the fact that I'd missed some details to be a compelling reason for me to not only see TLJ twice, but twice in just over a week.
(On the other hand, digressing momentarily to another franchise that had a long-delayed sequel, I found Tron: Legacy to be vastly inferior in terms of storytelling, and in terms of look-and-feel, to the original. Not to mention that Daft Punk are definitely no Wendy Carlos.)
I haven't seen the Prequel Trilogy as many times as the Classic Trilogy, but that was as much about the price of movie tickets, and limitations on my time, as anything else. It's only because there's a local theatre with 1970s prices that I found the fact that I'd missed some details to be a compelling reason for me to not only see TLJ twice, but twice in just over a week.
(On the other hand, digressing momentarily to another franchise that had a long-delayed sequel, I found Tron: Legacy to be vastly inferior in terms of storytelling, and in terms of look-and-feel, to the original. Not to mention that Daft Punk are definitely no Wendy Carlos.)
I think one thing Tron: Legacy did that the original didn't was make that universe feel stylish, like it was a place you'd really want to get lost in. The original Tron with the hockey helmets, spandex, and foam appliances was the height of un-cool, hence the memes.
New vs. Old:
That would be "Picture Show, MainPlace Mall, Santa Ana, California." They seem to also have locations in Altamonte Springs, FL, Berlin, CT, Bloomingdale, IL, Colorado Springs, CO, East Windsor, NJ, Fall River, MA, Grand Junction, CO, Marietta, GA, Mesa, AZ, Phoenix, AZ, Prescott, AZ.
And the original TRON's use of the horrendously cumbersome process known as Backlit Animation gave it a "beyond-otherworldly" look that was sorely lacking in Tron:Legacy, where the "electronic world" scenes just looked like Coruscant, or Canto Bight, or any number of high-tech worlds visited in various Star Trek series.
And the original TRON's use of the horrendously cumbersome process known as Backlit Animation gave it a "beyond-otherworldly" look that was sorely lacking in Tron:Legacy, where the "electronic world" scenes just looked like Coruscant, or Canto Bight, or any number of high-tech worlds visited in various Star Trek series.
I love Tron legacy. And Olivia Wilde.I think one thing Tron: Legacy did that the original didn't was make that universe feel stylish, like it was a place you'd really want to get lost in. The original Tron with the hockey helmets, spandex, and foam appliances was the height of un-cool, hence the memes.
New vs. Old:
The theatrical versions of the OT had no CGI in them. That was only added a decade afterwards by Lucas and was one of many complaints with those "special editions."
Agreed. The OT had so many interesting relationships and Dynamics: Han and Leia, Luke and Han, Han and Chewie, Luke and Vader. Heck, even the relationship between the two talking droids was fun to revisit. In the PT ..nothing. I know I'm suppose to care about Anakin and Padme and Anakin and Obi wan but the character interactions tended to be so boring that I just didn't care as much as I should have when the inevitable happened. I didn't get to learn anything about the other Jedi so when they start getting wiped out I had the same feeling I did when watching victims die in a random slasher flick.Meh.
Also, with the exception of Episode III, the stories themselves just aren't that interesting. Episode 1 is about conflict over a trade dispute with the focus on a child who couldn't act. Episode 2 is mostly a love story with obi wans sleuthing as a side plot. I'm not a fan of love stories to begin with and its even tougher when the supposed "hero" is an obnoxious brat.
I also see slagging on the new movies and all I can say is Episodes 1 and 2 couldn't hold their lightsabers. Characters are much more engaging, the writing is so much more clever and the storylines much more interesting and less predictable.
Ideal? There is nothing ideal in the OT relationships. Ridiculous standard is ridiculous.
Meh, I much prefer to look of Legacy over the original Tron.
Consider the glowing markings on costumes, sets, and props: In the original, they looked like they were glowing from within, thanks to BLA (which could certainly be simulated in CGI, without the astronomical cost). In T:L, it looked like lights were simply pasted on.
(And yes, I'll say it. I was peeved that Daft Punk didn't even recognizably quote Wendy, and that Cindy Morgan, who would have been happy to appear as Lora/Yori, wasn't included.)
(And yes, I'll say it. I was peeved that Daft Punk didn't even recognizably quote Wendy, and that Cindy Morgan, who would have been happy to appear as Lora/Yori, wasn't included.)
I don't particularly care about Star Wars, but they were fun movies for me as a kid (the original trilogy).
What I find most hilarious, though, is how despite his numerous 'fixes' if you watch any prequel and then the originals, even to the most 'up to date' version, anyone with any common sense will be like "This isn't even the same universe, let alone the same continuity."
Kinda comical how "Sith" still, is never once said a single time in any version of the original trilogy.
What I find most hilarious, though, is how despite his numerous 'fixes' if you watch any prequel and then the originals, even to the most 'up to date' version, anyone with any common sense will be like "This isn't even the same universe, let alone the same continuity."
Kinda comical how "Sith" still, is never once said a single time in any version of the original trilogy.
Similar threads
