A Certain Point of View on the Star Wars Prequels – Part III
The Structure
It helps to remember that this is a trilogy built upon deceit and manipulation. Certain aspects of the plot remain inscrutable from time to time, but then again, the protagonists in the Prequels are far more lost than the audience. The story’s broad motions are easy enough to follow, and the character arcs (as articulated in Part II) are clear.
The Devil whispers in her ear.
Meanwhile, there are some great ideas within the Machiavellian storyline, which is itself largely the making of Palpatine’s own “plot.” For instance, the two armies we see fighting in the Clone War are both mass-produced proxy forces, representing two opposing sides, which are actually both fighting for the same single person. Palpatine is one evil dude.
Honestly, I don’t know exactly how to defend the quality of the plot without writing a whole ‘nother post, but I can touch on the myriad ways Lucas ties these movies together. I’ve already alluded to a lot of structural elements by this point, but I’ll rattle off some “rhyming” scenarios in the series that I particularly like:
— In TPM, Anakin wins the final battle by accident (“Maybe… this one!”). In ANH, Luke wins the final battle through understanding (“Use the Force, Luke.”). Also, Luke proves he can “let go,” something Anakin never did.
— Upon reaching a dead-end retractable catwalk in AOTC, Padme and Anakin fall into a mechanical maze. Under similar circumstances in ANH, Luke and Leia swing to freedom.
— Saber colors: Green shows wisdom/maturity. Blue shows immaturity/recklessness. Red obviously shows evil. Watch for these:
Red and blue cross in front of Anakin as he debates killing Dooku. Blue against blue as the misled Anakin and shortsighted Obi-Wan clash on Mustafar. Obi-Wan wields green when he puts his focus in the here and now as his master advises, but reverts to blue while attempting to train Anakin according to Jedi doctrine. Luke first loses to Vader with blue, but switches to green before his final, successful confrontation in ROTJ.
— What about this one? In AOTC, Anakin loses his right arm fighting with a blue lightsaber given to him by Obi-Wan. In TESB, Luke loses his right hand fighting with a — yeah.
— In ROTS, Obi-Wan defeats Anakin when Anakin tries the same jumping move Obi-Wan uses to defeat Maul in TPM. He should have used green…
Hopefully the significance of those will be self-evident, but here’s one I’ll elaborate on:
At the end of ATOC, an militarized army advances from right-to-left on walkers, trying to destroy a rebel force, as that force focuses on escaping from their hidden bunker into the safety of space. In ESB, this happens again, only now we’re at the beginning of the movie. It’s a complete mirror of what came before (or, of what comes after).
This is an elegant way of showing the dynamic change that happens between the two trilogies. As mentioned before, the Prequels tell a story of misguided people whose hubris and complacency are their own undoing. They wage a pointless war in the name of an insidious villain, letting the once-great Republic turn into an evil Empire. Listen to Padme in ROTS: “Have you ever considered that we may be on the wrong side?”
The ending sequence of this movie is just phenomenal.
When we revisit the scenario again in TESB, we’re with the good guys. Things may appear dire, but there’s hope and goodness lurking under the surface. The galaxy, it seems, is beginning to turn itself the right way ‘round again.
So there you have it. I’m gonna leave this series here (though I don’t promise I’ll never write on these movies again). I haven’t covered every criticism leveled against the Prequels, but I think I’ve hit most of the big ones.
It would be impossible to really delve into things like acting or plot in a post of this format, so my hope is that — over the course of these three essays — I’ve articulated some of the admirable qualities of these movies, if sometimes only in broad strokes. If you revisit the saga with an open mind, there’s way more there than I’ve managed to cover.
Well, from a certain point of view, of course.
great series
I think that you lost me in the last post but after reading this I think that we just have VERY different concepts of what constitutes “good acting”. I’m glad you’ve found a way to enjoy the prequels but it’s a path I (and most people) can’t follow.
Simply saying that there is no one way to write dialogue doesn’t mean that Lucas’ way works. Even the lines you point out are terrible…he has no idea how to do subtle foreshadowing, he hits you over the head with everything. Hey look, we are going to say one thing then the opposite is going to happen. Over and over again. Usually within minutes.
But forget about foreshadowing, lets turn instead to the second movie. I don’t really understand how anyone can watch the scenes of Padme and Anakin frolicking in the fields without wanting to retch. I can handle sappy romance, when it is done well. This scene makes me yearn for the literary boon of Twilight.
And yes, Hayden Christensen is acting like someone in turmoil. He just isn’t doing it well. When you watch him, you see someone who is…acting like he is having a tantrum, you never really believe he is a tortured soul. Heck, even Natalie Portman’s performances in these movies is pretty poor, especially when she dies of a broken heart (I’m not even going to get into the fact that the only major female character does nothing but have kids and die in the third movie, or the fact that she dies not heroically, but because she can’t live without her man).
I’m sorry, I can understand some of your points about the plot and the links to the original trilogy being underrated by some. But if you are defending Lucas’ writing and directing (I blame him for the performances) you are searching too hard for a reason to like the movie. There is a reason he didn’t write or direct Empire and Jedi…these roles were not his strong point.
Star Wars was never about great acting. It wasn’t “high cinema” for lack of a better term. Ewan proved something in that regard by managing to maintain some dignity throughout the prequels. Dignifying the writing for these films is ridiculous, though.
The love story of Padme and Anakin was not believable. He’s going off about favoring dictatorships, hating his job/boss, and lusting after her (not that her choice of outfits helps) with his childhood crush being the most wholesome relationship element between them. I’m still not sure what she did (aside from look hot, poorly fake running through sand, and have vacuous conversations with Anakin) throughout the prequels besides play along as Palpatine expected.
Their interaction is painful. The way Anakin’s character flaws/convictions are explained/shown is similarly relying too heavily on how the audience largely knows what to expect. It’s lazy. Anakin’s time as a slave was an opportunity to explain his becoming Darth Vader but Lucas opted to keep TPM kid-friendly. Shmi’s dying at the hands of savages gives us some idea he understands loss and regret but it’s still a far cry from him calling for a dictatorship, committing (on a small scale) genocide, turning on the Jedi, etc. Why were the sand people into taking old women and beating on them anyway? For that matter, what was Anakin so worried about getting some title within the Jedi Order for? He seems awfully perturbed about Obi-Wan holding him back but what’s he going to get from advancement? All we’re led to believe is that he wants Padme but it’s not like he’s going to get permission to wed…
Shouldn’t a story make some sense? How would these movies stand on their own merits alone? That’s the trouble, isn’t it?
p.s. – I was spending more time than I wanted to on this above so I sort of lost my organized train of thought at some point, sorry.
I’ve enjoyed these points of view quite a bit. I’ve been a huge fan if Star Wars since I was about 2. (32 now). I enjoyed the hell out of the prequels! Parts bugged me quite a bit, but overall I enjoyed what Lucas created. A lot of game hated them, but I consider myself to be a huge fan who has stuck up for the prequels. Nice to see I’m not the only one…
You have to be just trolling with these articles right? I really can’t believe that you are saying that the prequels are in fact good right?
To sum up how bad the prequels are and how horrible the story is all you need do is watch the end of ROTS when Padme dies giving birth. She dies not from birthing complication nor from the wounds Anakin inflicts no she dies because “She lost the will to live” seriously she just gave birth to two kids and she has no will to keep on living because she wont have the whiny ass that is Anakin constantly bitching about how he isnt good enough???!?!?!?
It’s like Lucas took a dump on the script and said yea thats how we’ll end this because even though its the future and you can have cyborg villains the main character will die because she loses the will to live…..
Well, thank god you started this entry with a quote from George Lucas saying George Lucas shameless cash grab was much deeper than we might have thought, or I might not have believed it…
I think you lose some steam each time you started to fight in favor of something (the dialogue, for instance) only to wrap up the section on an apologist note. That said, it at least makes you seem capable of logic. The other spot I really feel you lost the bubble on your defense of the series, and a large portion of your credibility, was every time you mentioned “Haden Christensen” and “Acting” in the same paragraph. If Lucas really wanted a poor, wooden, 2D character for the role, it’s good casting on his part… but that’s about as far as you can go in defense of Anakin. Portman was a travesty, as we at least know her to be capable of much more.
I enjoyed the sequals for what they were, but they weren’t much.
Enough with the Star Wars prequels. They have been out for years now, it’s way too late for you to add your extreme minority opinion to everyone else’s.
Well, having read and commented on your three posts about the prequels I think I have identified the reason why you think they are good films.
It’s because it’s Star Wars.
That’s the only reason I can see. You like the prequels precisely because they mirror the OT so much. It’s essentially more of the same, with only slight and cosmetic differences that enable us to claim they are “different”. The performance of actors is irrelevant because it’s Star Wars, the style of the story and the justification or lack thereof for character’s motivations and actions is irrelevant because it’s Star Wars. Adding in more of the base triggers that people want like: Lightsaber fights, Sith, large battle scenes etc to try and cover for the lack of direction and storytelling just infuriated fans who felt as though they were being treated like the children Lucas was actually pandering to.
I will give you one thing. The concept, Palpatine’s secret war where he controlled both sides is really quite good. But it is a good idea poorly executed and terribly presented (in the way the story is communicated to viewers). As I commented on your last post, if you need to view three other films in order to see the magic of the prequels then there’s something wrong with the film you’re sat in front of.
@kasper – You bring up so, so many great points. But just to piggyback on your comments about foreshadowing, since the dialogue portion of the post made me a little crazy: there is a difference between foreshadowing and telegraphing. One hints at a larger development to come, and when done really well, may not even be noticeable in the moment it’s occurring. The other insults the intelligence of the viewer and dashes any hope of suspense, drama, or catharsis when the telegraphed moment hits. I was rolling my eyes all through the prequels. Jesus, George, we get it. I wish he would actually stick to broad strokes, since all his moments of hackneyed “foreshadowing” almost always occurred when he tried to zero in on the characters and their relationship (or lack thereof) to each other.
That being said, I’ve really enjoyed reading this series. This particular entry did not do anything to convince me, but I did really like the part in the second one pointing out the sort of unholy trinity that is Maul, Dooku, and Grievous, of which Vader can be seen as an amalgamation. I never thought to look at it like that before. And hey—that may even be an example of good foreshadowing! But I just don’t know if I can give Lucas enough credit to believe he did that on purpose.
Now that we’ve all presumably seen The Force Awakens, were you foreshadowing or telegraphing the eventuality that J. J. would later telegraph his plot so much more than Lucas ever could? 😉
Once again I’m glad to see someone who likes the films as well. While I might not look as deeply into the films as some I can still enjoy the series as individuals and as a whole. I also agree with Sara C. about the Maul, Dooku, Grievous angle.
Lucas isn’t the “king of wooden dialogue,” he’s the king of long-winded filler dialogue. that’s why the acting seemed unnatural in the prequels and more genuine in the sequels – when the written dialogue is stripped down and to the point it allows for more emotion and conviction bc the actors are working more with actual feelings than with feelings written down for them in a script.
What color was Obi-Wan’s lightsaber when Vader kills him in New Hope? Blue. You’re giving Lucas too much credit/reading too much into his “method”. And your “rhyming” examples weren’t that at all, they were Lucas’s misguided attempt at tying everything in the 6 movies together to 1. please the fans 2. please himself by having the fans be pleased by him, and that’s why the 3 prequels failed – everything seemed/was forced (no pun intended).
And on that note, what does a purple lightsaber mean within the confines of this analysis?
a purple lightsaber means Lucas had to sway Samuel L Jackson to the movie somehow. Jk jk, but really…
Here’s my biggest beef with the new ones. And let me say, I really want you to address this in a future post. The way they were filmed. Have you ever watched the extras on the DVD for ATOC or ROTS? Every freaking character is standing infront of a blue screen (or green screen). In the director commentary Lucas even remarks he digitally touched up Obi-Wan’s beard in a few shots. WHAT? The digitalization of Star Wars is what killed them. As you have pointed out here the acting, the dialogue, the characters, the symbolism is all the same from original trilogy to the prequels, the difference is in how they look.
This is why TPM was my favorite of the prequels, it had that classy, old school, SPACE look. Space is mysterious, odd, empty. It is supposed to be limited by the lack of special effects… that’s what made space movies back in the day good. Have you ever seen the new Star Trek? One reason it was so good is that so much of the set is real, not digital. Go look at TESB and the background for Cloud City sets; that an’t digital, it’s a beautiful painting yo that is REAL. It just gives it a quality of being more believable. I think this is such a huge thing people miss when comparing the new and old. There is a reason the old ones were good, the lack of “superior digital quality” gave them a classiness the new ones (especially ATOC and ROTS) do not have. Less than perfect special effects allow the audience to be more forgivable and acceptable of any less than perfect acting. As I said, easily the biggest distinction between the old and new, and in my mind, the straw that breaks the camels back.
Well, clearly someone swallowed the kool aid, but regardless, I thought I’d point something out…
You mention red, blue and green sabers as if three is some deeper meaning behind them. It’s worth pointing out that Lucas simply liked green and wanted it in the original (ep 4) and even tried to recolor it green in the special edition but it didn’t work out too well. Had it worked, then Anakin’s saber, ultimately lukes, would ALWAYS have been green, under Lucas’ intention. Thereby negating your entire argument.
More importantly, Yoda has a green saber, yet demonstrates none of the traits you suggest, only a calm arrogance. Every decision he makes is poor and yet his own sense of self clouds his judgement. He sits directly across from the ultimate evil and senses absolutely nothing. More importantly, he has no power or calm or center with the force, instead needing to jump around like a hyper active squirrel monkey to fight, when instead he should have been able to deactivate his opponent’s saber with a wave of his finger, and deflect, rather than moronically try to levitate, the large object about to crush Ben and Anakin.
It’s easy to cherry pick dialog intended to sound clever or get a laugh and ascribe some deeper totemic meaning behind it, but all most of that dialog was for was laughs, without anything richer beyond. And keep in mind, Lucas did little more than a rough treatement for Empire, considered the best of all the films, and even Star Wars was written more by Kurtz than Lucas, though you’ll never hear Lucas admit ANYONE helped him or had any hand in the work.
Sorry, but the last three movies spoiled what was brilliant about the original movies. It does make a larger story, but a larger story with no impact, no soul, and one with questionable motives. Vader should have been lying all along. Jedi was a bad movie, and the prequels even worse.
These really are some great points but, again, choosing to interpret a bad film in a way that makes it sound better on paper, in no way changes the experience of actually WATCHING said film. When you put the film in and watch it play out on screen, no amount of reminding yourself of the “hidden brilliance” will change what you’re actually seeing.
““The interesting thing about Star Wars is, and I don’t ever push this very far, there’s a lot going on there that most people haven’t really come to grips with yet. But when they do, they will find it’s a much more intricately made clock than most people would imagine.” – George Lucas
^^That’s in case you think I’m reading too far into these movies.”
Have you ever heard of begging the question?
When arguing artistic intent, the closest thing there is to empirical evidence is a statement from the artist. It’s no definite proof, but it turns an uncorroborated opinion into a somewhat corroborated one. That’s an admittedly weak position–unless the opposing position is just some other guy’s uncorroborated opinion. And oh–guess what? Yeah. I’m afraid that’s as good as it gets in this case.
Begging the question would be citing a point of criticism from Red Letter Media, as many do, because accepting their assertion (which is not proven) means that your identical assertion must be true! Suggesting such an assertion has merit because so many people say the same thing is called “appeal to popularity” and so on.
Ultimately, the vast majority of prequel bashing boils down to an arm-waving “look at this crap, isn’t it just objectively, obviously awful?” That is begging the question in its purest form. And when someone finally answers “no, it isn’t,” then what? That was the whole basis of the argument. Stalemate. Nothing left. So of course the haters resort shouting down any other equally subjective opinion, all aghast with equally insubstantial “but how could you possibly not agree with mine?” or even personal insults. After all, there’s nothing else for it.
And GOD FORBID anyone should come around with an insightful, logical, reasonably well-supported defense of the prequels. Then we have to counter with “too bad they’re still awful movies (simply because I say they are)” or by feebly attempting to poke little holes in the tiniest, least significant parts of the argument. **ahem**
I’ve seen these before, and the message in the comments is always “stop defending what I don’t like and let me have my opinion.” But people never stop attacking what others DO like. It’s almost as if they’re terrified of the idea that someone else got a fun movie to enjoy and to add to their childhood memories, when they themselves have grown too old to go back to Neverland for that adventure.
Can’t believe this turned into a 3 part series.
I commend you only on the fact that you put more effort into defending those aweful movies then George Lucas put into writing them.
Here’s the one truth I’ve found in life. The more you have to defend and\or explain something to the masses to make your case that it is good, the more likely that its complete and total garbage.
There is no interpretation of what Lucas meant for these movies. There is no…well look at it this way. Its either works or it doesn’t.
The concept behind episode 1, 2, and 3 is good. The execution was not. The idea that “That’s how kids are growing up” didn’t fly when it came out and sure as hell doesn’t fly now. We don’t go to the movies for realistic depictions of children. Or at the very least meet us halfway with something that doesn’t make us roll our eyes. At no point growing up did I ever roll my eyes at 3, 4 or 5….maybe the scene when they were to be dinner for the ewoks, but other then that.
Might I suggest folks watch this 7 part review of Phantom Menace: http://youtu.be/FxKtZmQgxrI When Lucas himself says *runs hands across his face* “I may have gone to far”. Its telling and zeroes in on the core problem with Lucas: the dude tries to do to much with a story and it doesn’t work out.
“Here’s the one truth I’ve found in life. The more you have to defend andor explain something to the masses to make your case that it is good, the more likely that its complete and total garbage.”
Must be true. Look how much it took to defend your opinion! (I guess mine must smell like roses right now: no effort required!)
“And on that note, what does a purple lightsaber mean within the confines of this analysis?”
It means Bad Mother F*cker.
To those who think the prequels were all green screen and no sets/miniatures/whatever, it’s not true. They made more sets, miniatures, and objects in comparison with the original trilogy.
Thanks for writing these, David. It’s always great to see people approach these movies from a logical and stylistic/artistic point of view. Too many people rush to degrade them in irrational, emotional ways based on their many unique qualities when compared to the originals. They expected to see the same side of the coin, but instead they got the opposite side that completed and informed the other and vice versa.
The complaints about acting and dialogue (as if they had ever been five-star quality in Star Wars) and Jar Jar and CG and et cetera — they come after the reaction to the new and unexpected. They’re scapegoats to mask and potentially legitimize the outrage these people felt for receiving something they didn’t expect.
This will pass someday.
Before I begin I would just like to say that I agree with you and that most people miss the point of this article: The movies weren’t great, and for sure arent as special as the OT but they certainly not as bad as you all portray them to be.
” I’m sorry, I can understand some of your points about the plot and the links to the original trilogy being underrated by some. But if you are defending Lucas’ writing and directing (I blame him for the performances) you are searching too hard for a reason to like the movie. There is a reason he didn’t write or direct Empire and Jedi…these roles were not his strong point. ” @ kasper
i) How can you look at some of these reply-posts and not say that anything about the movie is not underrated, no movie really deserves the criticism that I’ve heard and read (across the whole internet)
ii) Perhaps you are searching the easy way out by completely shitting on the movies that really don’t deserve that magnitude of offense.
” Enough with the Star Wars prequels. They have been out for years now, it’s way too late for you to add your extreme minority opinion to everyone else’s. ” @Grand Wazoo
All I can say in response to this one is that there was a time when the “majority” believed that blacks and Jews were “garbage”, doesn’t make the statement or OPINION any more true. And that’s all this really is, an opinion.
” Here’s my biggest beef with the new ones. And let me say, I really want you to address this in a future post. The way they were filmed. Have you ever watched the extras on the DVD for ATOC or ROTS? Every freaking character is standing infront of a blue screen (or green screen). In the director commentary Lucas even remarks he digitally touched up Obi-Wan’s beard in a few shots. WHAT? The digitalization of Star Wars is what killed them. As you have pointed out here the acting, the dialogue, the characters, the symbolism is all the same from original trilogy to the prequels, the difference is in how they look. ” @David
Since when is attention to detail a bad thing?
By all means, like the author of these tree articles was trying to say, I am not saying that the prequels were as good as the OT. There are interesting developments in both. How can you watch the scene where Darth Vader is assembled in ROTS and not go “that so epic” or when you find out that Darth Vader used to be this little innocent little boy. The length of these articles was great but it dosent even begin to compete with all the shit you all put out in criticizing Lucas for his movies. The TV Series and a pointless MMO; now that’s stuff to be really upset about. Both of these trilogies were different and special in their own right.
Actually, the acting in the Original Trilogy is no better or worse than the acting found in the Prequel Trilogy. The style of the dialogue is more relaxed and less formal – except in a few scenes featuring Leia. But the cheesiness and occasional awkward dialogue and acting were there.