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
      3
      ·
      9 hours 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.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        But they were also incredibly prescient for the modern political climate.

        Maybe for people who know nothing about real history… It wasn’t prescient, it was based on events that had already happened in real life. Like I’m glad that those shitty movies were able to teach some kids about fascism, but there was nothing groundbreaking about what you just described.

        • vvilld@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Get over yourself. You’re not better or smarter than everyone else. Yes, the PT both mirrored and predicted IRL events. That’s what good social commentary does. And, yes, you could learn the lessons taught in those movies through other media or history, but the same could be said about tons of stuff. You could say literally the exact same thing about Andor, which is deservedly getting a lot of praise right now.

          Every generation needs fiction that speaks to them and meets them where they’re at. Maybe you could learn the same things taught in the PT by watching something else or reading about history. But that’s not as accessible and engaging to everyone, especially the children who the PT was geared towards. Get off your high horse and recognize that not everything needs to be perfect or groundbreaking to have a genuinely important contribution to society and culture.

          • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 hours ago

            OK, but my point is that it wasn’t “prescient”. I think it’s fucking silly to pretend that The Phantom Menace is some kind of prophetic piece of media. Like come on dude.

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 day 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.

      • golli@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Agreed. The prequels have flawed execution, but imo a good base. It’s the reverse with the sequels that are mostly style over substance, chasing some pretty shots regardless whether it makes for a good movie. And I take the former over the latter any day. Especially if we remember that Lucas asked other directors to make them.

    • Termight@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day 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
        14
        ·
        1 day 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
          5
          ·
          14 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
          ·
          1 day 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.