I just figured out what bothered me about Episodes I and II

[Bouncy Ball]

(of Star Wars).

It didn't have the "heart" of the first three movies (Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi).

I can't explain it any better than that. Episodes I and II were really flashy and slick and all, but they seemed to lack heart.

And by the way, try explaining to a 10 year old about the time frame of these movies.

Let's see, "Star Wars" came out in 1977, right? But that was episode FOUR. Then you had five and six in 1980 and 1983, I believe. To a 10 year old, those years are ancient history.

Then Episode I came out in 1999 and Episode II in 2002. But the STORYLINE was from BEFORE the films that came out in the late 70s and early 80s. I understand just fine, but a kid has a hard time grasping that. She keeps saying "Why didn't they just do Episode I back then?"

Also, I don't remember if it was Episode I or II but Obi-Wan Kenobi is fighting Darth Sith, I believe (I can't believe I remembered that name--red-faced one, I think) and she pointed out, correctly, that she already knew Obi-Wan was NOT going to die at that point because he was an old man in the LATER episodes, which of course were actually made years and years ago.

:crazy:

I've officially thought too much about this.

[LiberalVoice]

1. Obi-Wan fight him in EP. 1

:D

[Neoma]

2. Actually i think the first 2 new movies were supposed to suck..

Well..maybe not supposed to, but its to explain the 3rd movie so it makes sense....

[LiberalFighter]

12. I heard that they were only a filler

[Mojambo]

19. 60 percent of Lucas's story material is in Revenge of the Sith

so the other 2 prequels are splitting just 40 percent of the story. There was a LOT of filler.

The Prequels should have been one and a half movies.

[Left Is Write]

3. Darth Maul.

It's okay that we knew Obi-Wan wasn't going to die when he fought Darth Maul. It's enough that he killed him.

Anybody could have guessed, however, that Qui-Gon was going to die, the nanosecond Anakin said to him, "No one can kill a Jedi!"

[Bouncy Ball]

5. True.

And how surprised am I to find out you are a bit of a Star Wars dork?

:D

[Left Is Write]

6. I've got lots of layers, baby.

Just like an onion. ;)

[SouthoftheBorderPaul]

4. It's more than just 'heart.'

Acting, dialogue, direction, storyline. There's a lot missing. I still like 1 and 2 but you can't judge them on the same scale.

[Bouncy Ball]

10. You really can't.

I almost can't believe they are part of the same story.

It makes me wonder what they would have been like if they had all been made, in order, starting in the late 70s.

Eh, who knows. But I heart the original three.

[yvr girl]

7. Episode I and II relied too much on computer tricks

Too many computer generated characters. The non-humans weren't lovable.

[Bouncy Ball]

8. There ya go.

You said it better. I wanted to feel the same thing for the characters in Episodes 1 and 2, besides, I felt like I already knew them.

And it's not that the actors did a bad job...it was just.....kind of void. Nothing for me to get into with the characters.

Except Ewan McGregor and he doesn't show his bits in these movies, so meh.

[evlbstrd]

9. I can only respond the heart aspect of your post.

I saw the original "trilogy" as they were released, and reluctantly watched Episode 1. It's hard to have heart and warmth when your actors are either 100% digital, or they are always working in front of a blue/green screen with, frankly, lousy writing.

Lucas admitted in an interview on Charlie Rose that he made the last three for the money, so he could go "back" to independent film making.

edit for spelling dammit

[Bouncy Ball]

11. I kinda wondered about the money angle.

As in, let's milk more out of this, people WILL come to see it.

And he was right, of course. We're going to see Episode III on Sunday (matinee). But only because I HAVE to see Anakin's transformation into Darth Vader. I've been wanting to see that since 1983.

[evlbstrd]

15. That may be the only reason I'll see it.

When it's out on DVD and I can watch it on my terms.

When Ray Gun was president, I had chicken wire cage over my teevee. I might need a new one.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

20. You had a chicken wire cage over your TV?

Why was that? To keep from injuring it when you threw stuff at it? Maybe I have NO imagination at all! lol

:evilgrin:

[SouthoftheBorderPaul]

13. Thanks for the edit clarification

I have to edit 95% of my posts for spelling, typos and grammatical errors. Don't sweat it!

[evlbstrd]

16. Did you know that "dammit" passes spell check?

[texas1928]

14. Ok since someone already corrected you I won't.

But to show how much of a Nerd I am.

The Sith - there are always only two, there can be only two. A master and an apprentice.

Episode 1
You had the master - Palpatine/Emperor, The apprentice - Darth Maul

Episode 2
Same master, and the apprentice - Darth Sidous(sp?)/Count Dooku

[WildEyedLiberal]

17. They also lacked a script and believable acting

:crazy:

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

18. Lucas' dialog sucks.

Keep him in the plot and visuals only.

[LiviaOlivia]

21. Hilarious review from the New Yorker on 'R of the Sith'

~snip~

The general opinion of “Revenge of the Sith” seems to be that it marks a distinct improvement on the last two episodes, “The Phantom Menace” and “Attack of the Clones.” True, but only in the same way that dying from natural causes is preferable to crucifixion.

~snip~


http://www.newyorker.com/critics/cinema/

[LSdemocrat]

22. There seems to be a remarkable divergence of opinion on RotS

The New York Times reviewer claims its better than the original Star Wars:

"This is by far the best film in the more recent trilogy, and also the best of the four episodes Mr. Lucas has directed. That's right (and my inner 11-year-old shudders as I type this): it's better than 'Star Wars.' "

http://movies2.nytimes.com/2005/05/16/movies/16star.html?