From wikipedia:
In 1983, there was talk of a 9 epic saga, but apparently parts seven through nine were only vaguely conceived. Lucas currently airbrushes away talk of Eps 7-9.
Spoiler! Not Really! :
If the Star Wars universe is anything like the Star Trek universe, it’ll get exponentially better once its creator dies. I’m sorry, but the two seasons of ST:TNG were embarrassingly bad. It’s amazing it made it as far as it did!
Ultimately, he made it into what he felt was the best reflection of his ideas. I’m pretty sure that he likes the prequels, and all the other stuff that’s come since, quite a lot. They made him another space-freighter full of cash, and he likes them, so I tend to doubt he thinks that he’s “killed” the franchise.
I feared it was inevitable the redlettermedia video would be drug into this, it’s like internet law now or something whenever this topic is discussed.
Truth be told, I am a fan of the comedic internet review genre, and the videos in question are pretty well done and they do bring the funny in my opinion. But this does not make it the end all discussion on the movie, all it does is aggregates the same tired critiques we’ve all heard for 11 years and tops them with an admittedly humorous bow.
Basically all of the points themselves can be classified like this, in decreasing order of occurrence.
-
Nitpicking and tiny continuity issues. A similarly exhaustive treatment could just as easily be given to the original trilogy, or any other fantasy film for that matter. It’s cool to be cynical about TPM (since it didn’t meet impossible nerd standards), so they just keep piling on the supposed flaws.
-
Some things that are real flaws or omissions, but can just as easily be fanwanked away. No normal (non nerd) person would ever notice this stuff and it doesn’t influence the quality of the film itself.
-
Just being upset that the kind of story being told isn’t what they were imagining while the years of hype were festering in our brains. This is really the root of the issue, people were emotionally invested in something that just couldn’t deliver in the way they wanted, so it’s personal.
-
Some actual flaws, but we know them already, and some of us choose not to miss the forest for the trees.
I could honestly sit here and address every single criticism the review brings up, and maybe I will someday, but I hardly feel like writing a novel at the moment.
Even aside from the mountain of nitpicks, it’s the broadest points in that review that drive me the most crazy. The guy gets a lot of mileage out of the idea that the movie doesn’t always follow the most basic of plot structures. He spends a lot of time telling us that a protagonist should be easily identifiable at this point and the conflict should be more like such and such as if he’s professor plot, and he’s met by a chorus of internet cheers. I can’t help but feel that criticizing a movie for not adhering to traditional devices wouldn’t go over quite as well if the subject weren’t so fashionable to hate on.
You know, I don’t think the PT is as good as the OT, but it’s still the same kind of fun I always had with SW movies, and I think it actually strengthens the originals when it’s all put in context. The prequels are about how the characters got to the point where they needed “A New Hope”, it’s about all the mistakes they made and the dangers of excess. It’s not a flaw that the Jedi weren’t as eastern and sage-like as they were presented in the originals, that’s exactly the point. It may not be the kind of story that you would have told, but it’s not the steaming pile of cinema that it’s made out to be.
TPM failed on several different levels. A blockbuster movie aimed mostly at kids while presenting the back story for the older fans should have stuck to its convention at its core. I brought up Red Letter Media because it showcased a popular presentation of an amalgam of viewpoints in a comedic way. Non-traditional movies don’t tend to cater to young children or long-time fans of a recognized movie series.
The movie wasn’t good, plain and simple.
Count me as voting with the “it’s a steaming pile of cinema” faction. I loved the original trilogy and I was eagerly awaiting the prequel. My concern with the prequels is not some kind of “hey, in one scene the guards were wearing insignia for the emperor’s guards, but in the very next scene they were wearing insignia for the royal squadron” or some dumb fanboy nonsense.
I just think the movies are dopey. I thought the kid playing anakin was awful. I thought the Jar Jar Binks character was stupid. I couldn’t figure out what the hell was going on most of the time and not in a John LeCarre, intricate plot kind of way, more in a “this movie is just sort of dopey and who the hell cares” kind of way.
I thought it was cool how yoda kind of jumped around and got in the sword fight but I thought most of the action was goofy.
The story of Anakin’s corruption to the dark side just doesn’t hold together. At the end of ep. 2, it’s the jedis who show up to save Anakin, Padme, and Obi Wan. At the beginning of ep. 3, the Emperor is practically salivating for Anakin to kill Count Dooku. It’s absolutely clear that the Emperor will lie about anything, kill anyone who’s been loyal to him, to get his way. Anakin is there when most of those things are happening. Yet, when push comes to shove, he believes all the promises that it’s the only way to save Padme. And if she’s his prime motivation for everything he does, why does he keep doing it once he finds out how much it repels her? It just don’t add up.
Mob movies get criticized for glorifying crime, but they have to do that for the movies to work. They have to show that the trappings of that life are appealing, and tempting. We have to understand how they can be seduced into what’s happening to them. So how is Anakin seduced; what’s the lure, what’s the payoff? For the prequels to work, they had to have been willing to glorify the dark side. It’s not enough for characters to just talk about how tempting it is, we have to see it.
Well the obvious answer here is that nobody wants a Star Wars movie that feels like a mob movie. SW was always supposed to be more broadly mythological, you’re asking for a psychological study.
That said, there are plenty reasons that are shown for Anakin’s eventual turn to the dark side. These include
-His constant desire to be able to control his circumstances. This is due his condition of slavery as a child, his inability to save his mother,etc. This need manifests as a desire for power.
-
His stunted and rather simplistic understanding of politics and power relations as shown in his conversations with Padme about government (someone wise and good should be in charge of everything), his unwavering loyalty to the centralized power of the Republic, even in spite of it’s growing corruption and inefficiency and also in spite of his friendships and obligation with the Jedi.
-
His deep fear of loss as seen in his attachment to his mother and his codependency with Padme.
-
His relationship with Palpetine, who massages Anakin’s sense of pride and offers a sense of understanding that the relatively emotionless Jedi Order is unable to offer.
There may not be a whole lot of screen time to do it all deep psychological justice in a movie that’s also supposed to be fun too, but you should be able to put those pieces together to understand Anakin’s decisions enough to just enjoy the much broader action fantasy story.
Now that I think about it, was there anything in TPM that was critical to the later movies? I don’t remember any later Qui-Gon references. Jar-Jar can just be a goofy-talking incidental character without need for a backstory. Anakin’s mother was a slave who eventually died… no additional details required. There was no early romantic tension between Anakin and Amidala. The Jedi Council don’t seem to really mind Anakin being trained, though they won’t do it themselves. Palpatine is a schemer, but how much backstory do you need for that? The trade federation guys show up again, just long enough to be slaughtered…
If someone had just watched Eps 2 and 3, would they have any trouble following the story?
The prequels were mob movies, just not very good ones.
“General Grievous is a pimp. He never could have outfought the jedis. But I didn’t know until this day, that it was Palpatine all along.”
Think about it, all the business with the trade federation (the conference with the heads of the families), trying to wield influence over the senate (Don Corleone refusing to use his influence to help drug peddlers), the slaughter at the end to consolidate power. All that was missing were oranges and “Obi Wan sleeps with the fishes.”
Yes, he may have indeed craved all those things, but how is becoming Palpatine’s loyal lapdog supposed to get him any closer to having them? It’s absolutely clear that turning to the dark side will leave him with no independence, no power, and no attachment to Padme.
Okay, now you’re on to something. The Emperor fed his ego and his desire for approval. I just don’t think that would be enough to override everything else.
If Lucas had accepted the need to show real temptation with the dark side, it would have made the movies so much simpler, not deep and psychological. If he weren’t constantly trying to explain all the plotting and scheming, there would have been more screen time for action, as the consequences of Anakin’s choices were revealed.
I’m not saying it would be easy. A great mob movie (and a lot of great non-mob movies) can show us people gleefully doing things that we know will turn out very badly in the end. I don’t know if Lucas had the filmmaking skills to pull off that kind of story, but it would have been something. As it is, we’ve got three films about someone who turns into a complete monster for no reason at all.
Well nobody ever accused the character of acting rationally, but a lot of your assumptions about the information Anakin had to consider is based on the fact that we are omnipotent viewers and we know how it all ends.
Sure it’s clear to us that Palps isn’t the most loyal and loving friend in the world, but Anakin has a very clouded perspective. He had been yanked from slavery as a child and suddenly told how special he was, chosen one and all that. Then Palpatine spends a few years telling him how powerful he is and how the Jedi are too scared of his power to ever really give him his due. It’s not crazy to believe such a damaged person may be deluded enough to think that the easy path to power held great things for him. Furthermore, in the tradition of the Sith, it was likely Anakin anticipated that he would eventually overpower his master and himself become the biggest power broker in the galaxy, so the lapdog thing could conceivably pay off pretty big.
Basically what you are saying is sober rational people like you or I wouldn’t go all evil and stuff and so you don’t buy it. That’s fine, but I really don’t count that as a strike against the movie. The only think else they could have done is spent a lot more time building up some more ambiguity that would have only drug down this modern day fable, and then we’d have had plenty more for people to complain about.
Where, exactly, in the OT did they rabbit on about trade disputes and blockades?
Ah, but as far as the hopelessly deluded go, you can’t say this and not be considered a fanboy wanker with exceptionally unrealistic expectations.
You’re so right. Discussions of governing policy are très kid friendly.
As RedLetterMedia mentioned, there is truth in the saying “Art through adversity.” It’s quite clear that if George Lucas had had the technological tools and creative control in the '70s as he does now he would have made the original trilogy in exactly the same way as he made the prequels.
I thank God that he didn’t direct Empire Strikes Back. At least we still have it to remember.
Randall: do you want to be leader of this gang?
Strutter: No, we agreed: No leader!
Randall: Right. So shut up and do as I say
That’s what it boils down to, doesn’t it? “You can have all the power in the galaxy. Now, do as I tell you.”
If he’s so irrational, then what’s the point? If his corruption is capricious and unpredictable, then his redemption is equally random.
And what I’m suggesting would remove the ambiguity from the movies, not add to it. The prequels are basically six hours of ambiguity; of the Emperor trying to manipulate events to turn Anakin to the dark side. It would have been a whole lot simpler to just show us what he wants, and why he thought the dark side would bring it to him.
The idea is that palps, being the foremost living expert on the dark side, was in a position to teach Anakin the tools that would make him the most powerful bloke in the galaxy. The whole master/apprentice thing comes with the religiosity of the force. And like I said, the Sith apprentice lives in hopes that he will overthrow his master and become the new top guy. All of this is pretty explicitly stated in the opera scene in RotS, I really don’t understand the confusion.
I honestly don’t know what kind of carrot you think could have been dangled to justify a turn to the dark side. The dude wanted certain things ( specifically named in the movies) and his moral failings led him down dark path to achieve them, it’s pretty much the same thing that always makes people do bad things both in fiction and reality. I seriously ask what sort of incentive you would have preferred?
I like this. I agree. That was the heart of the story, and there was no drama to it, no emotion, no dread sense of his taking the wrong path. All the blathering about trade federations, the silly rubber costumes, special effects, and big 'splosions combined did not make up for this major failing.
The problem is that we don’t see any of this. Those things may be *named *in the movies, but we never actually see them. And that is the single biggest flaw in the movies. All telling, no showing.
In the originals we see Luke being tempted by the Dark Side in order to save his friends. I mean we actually *see *it. We don’t just hear Yoda say to Ben “That Luke, he always acts irrationally to try to save his friends” That is what Luke wants, and that is how the Sith tempt him. We see him when he fails because of this, and we see him when succeeds,and we can see him being manipulated by the Sith placing his friends in danger. We see him being a friend to these people. We see him when he is a good person, so his descent into being bad person when he wildly attacks the Emporer is much more dramatic and poignant.
There is a claim that Anakin wants “to be able to control his circumstances”, but we just get told this. We never see nay evidence at all that this is so. He joins a military order, then he joins a slave cult. There is no evidence in there of man who wants to control his destiny. Lucas could have handled that plot element so easily. Have Anakin temporarily leave the Jedi and stike out on his own, as a man who wants ot control his own destiny actually would. Then have him either persuaded return to the Jedi, or else join with the Sith as a free agent. A amn who leave the military to join the branch Davidians is not showing any signs at all of wanting to control his won destiny, no matter what words people say.
Similarly we need to see Anakin when he wasn’t a total shithead. At age 18, when he has never even heard the word “Sith”, he literally murders and then mutilates men, women, children and dogs. The worst thing he does when he is supposedly corrupted by the Dark Side is… he murders some children and men. All his corruption has done is made him milder so he doesn’t kill the women and the dogs as well. There is no descent into darkness here. This is Lancelot being corrupted by desire. It’s someone who was a sociopathic arsehole his entire life who became increasingly sociopathic as time went on.
Contrast this with the originals, where Luke is portrayed very effectively as being a normal, likeable hero figure. He then transforms into a violent savage in response to great provocation. It’s believable. We never see this for Anakin. He is never actually likeable. he never even does anything heroic that I can recall. He’s just a typical soldier doing typical soldier things.
And that is the biggest flaw of the prequels. We get told that certain things are true, but the evidence of our eyes is exactly the opposite. Anakin wasn’t corrupted. He was always corrupt, he just used Jedi his powers to help him be an arsehole. The Republic wasn’t better than the Empire, it was objectively worse. Anakin didn’t love Armadillo, he used her. The Jedi weren;t noble nights, they were nasty slave owners who acted as the secret police of the Republic and who hid in the shadows and always refused a fair fight And so on and so forth. Lots of exposition about how things are supposed to be, but what we actually see doesn’t gel with what we are told.
A simple test to show this.
How do we know the good guys are good in the first movies? Because they act good. They do good things They risking their lives against extreme odds to rescue a captive or to help their friends, and they do it for no reward at all. Even materialist Han ends up risking his life for no reward. Sure they’re two dimensional cowboy heros. But they are still seen acting heroically.
And how do we know they are the good guys in the prequels? Because we are told so in the screen crawl. That’s it. They never actually do anything good or heroic. The Jedi are just soldiers who do what they are ordered. The big bad is actually more heroic because he is prepared to face two Jedi at once to carry out his orders. The Jedi cheat at games to win money, they force slaves to fight and die for them, they prop up a government that tolerates slavery and can’t even prevent genocide.
And that’s the difference. In the first movies we are shown. In the prequels we are told, and then shown something completely different.
A lot of confusion comes from how quickly Anakin turned from troubled-guy-with-a-few-doubts to hardcore-master-of-evil. In a span of about an hour, he went from:
- learning that Palpatine was behind everything, and knowing he had to be stopped.
- Disarming (heh.) Mace after Mace decides to execute Palpatine (something Anakin to be considers un-jedi like). Morally grey area here, I can understand why Anakin took the action that he did.
- Bowing down and pledging loyalty to a Sith Lord? wtf?
- Killing defenseless little kids. WTF?
I think the main issue is the jump from 2) to 3), which should have been more fully fleshed out (how does Anakin go from trying to do the right thing and stop a cold-blooded execution to pledging himself to the dark Lord of the Sith?), and then from 3) to 4) which was completely unnecessary. Plus, Anakin shortly finds out that Palpatine doesn’t even know how to save people from dying- Palpatine gives him a B.S. line about how they will discover it together after some research. Anakin should have been furious.