The original and prequel trilogies are worthwhile viewing. The sequel trilogy, however, presents a different case. While George Lucas provided story treatments during the 2012 sale, these were ultimately discarded. The sequels also marked the end of the Expanded Universe, removed from canon to allow creative freedom for filmmakers. Given that the stories deviate significantly from Lucas’s original vision, is there really a compelling reason to watch them?

    • vvilld@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      12 minutes ago

      There’s problems with them, especially with dialogue and the existence of Jar Jar. But they were also incredibly prescient for the modern political climate. I think it’s an important story about how a scared and lonely child raised by people who told him to suppress and ignore his emotions can turn into a fascist while also telling the story of how a manufactured political crisis can get a populace to support the transition from a liberal representative democracy to a fascist dictatorship.

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      17 hours ago

      The prequels are bad because it highlights Lucas’s failures as a director and dialogue writer.

      The prequels are memorable because they highlight Lucas’s talents as a producer and whatever equivalent to show runner that movie franchises have.

    • Termight@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Reasons? Despite their flaws, the prequels remain connected to Lucas’s original vision, making them a worthwhile watch for understanding the Republic’s fall and Anakin’s transformation.

      • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        17 hours ago

        The reason I’ve seen is that Lucas’s flaws were on display in the prequels since he had the kind of power to make decisions with little pushback, while production of the original trilogy shows that Lucas worked best with people around him to help refiine his vision.

        Outside of Ian McDiarmid and Ewan McGregor, the acting is bland and sterile. Hayden Christensen had a far better idea that would lead to the fall of Skywalker without changing much of the films. Major sequences are far busier than anything which came before, making the sequences pretty but less resonant and hard to follow. The four separate storylines in the climax of I was too much, especially as most people were there for the best lightsaber duel ever. The camera work for talking scenes is shockingly basic for someone as talented as Lucas was with film.

        I like the prequels well enough, but I can see why some don’t like them.

        • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Hayden Christensen had a far better idea that would lead to the fall of Skywalker without changing much of the films.

          What idea?

        • ephrin@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          17 hours ago

          This.

          Also, they’re objectively bad films. If Phantom Menace wasn’t a Star Wars film then the rest wouldn’t have been made.