Effects: Good Star Wars Prequels

[John Fredrick Parker]

Since many of us are getting a good idea of what better prequels would look like, I thought I'd ask: What would be the wider effects on pop culture? On the nation and world at large?

[Glen]

Originally Posted by John Fredrick Parker

Since many of us are getting a good idea of what better prequels would look like, I thought I'd ask: What would be the wider effects on pop culture? On the nation and world at large?

I think in part that would depend on the nature of the changes thazt lead to the differences. Of course the part that might be easiest is to talk about the impact on Lcas and then his future.

[John Fredrick Parker]

Originally Posted by Glen

I think in part that would depend on the nature of the changes thazt lead to the differences.

Not necessarily -- for example, OTL you had big blockbuster films telling the story of a Republic falling to tyranny from the inside in the years following 9/11 -- only they sucked. I can see Lucas having an even greater impact among liberal critics -- though potentially even more among Truthers -- if they had been even halfway decent...

[Ace Venom]

You see, I thought they were good. But I could see where you're going with this. I read the novelizations by Terry Brooks, R. A. Salvatore, and Matthew Stover before watching each film. Trust me when I say the books were better. If the movies had been as good as the books, they might be more well regarded. That's just my two cents.

[Glen]

Originally Posted by John Fredrick Parker

Not necessarily -- for example, OTL you had big blockbuster films telling the story of a Republic falling to tyranny from the inside in the years following 9/11 -- only they sucked. I can see Lucas having an even greater impact among liberal critics -- though potentially even more among Truthers -- if they had been even halfway decent...

That would be a possible but rater fringe change.

[Magniac]

It would inspire the commissioning of US network TV space opera. At least one good series must come from that, surely.

Originally Posted by Glen

That would be a possible but rater fringe change.

Yeah, people looking for political subtext would still go with more highbrow fare, whether it be 'grownup' movies, or cable television. (Even then, do politically opinionated folk look at LoTR as a political text any more today than they did before Jackson's adaptions?)

I was surprised at how 'Lost' didn't become as successful in that respect as other shows/movies.

[thekingsguard]

Perhaps the Lord of the Rings films would be more/less successful?

Firefly stays on the air?

Indiana Jones 4 is never made?

[Tyr]

Old star wars fans say the modern ones suck and having recently sat through episode 1 again...oh how it does....but lots of kids who grew up with the new ones think the opposite. Time will tell.
And may god help civilization.

[Wolf Tengu]

I don't think the prequels as a whole were bad.

But we're looking at if they were good...

Perhaps SW becomes more popular outside of traditional circles again?

[SergeantHeretic]

Originally Posted by Glen

I think in part that would depend on the nature of the changes thazt lead to the differences. Of course the part that might be easiest is to talk about the impact on Lcas and then his future.

Cut out the nonsense about "Midichlorians" that will start you off good right there. Leave the force i nthe realm of quasi religious mystisism where it belongs. "Midichorians were an answer to a question that NO ONE asked, and that is why they hurt the prequels.

[Easterling]

Originally Posted by Tyr

Old star wars fans say the modern ones suck and having recently sat through episode 1 again...oh how it does....but lots of kids who grew up with the new ones think the opposite.

This. The truth is that there is no realistic way for the Star Wars prequels to be subjectively seen as "good" , because fans of the originals had seen them as children and tended to look at them through rose-coloured glasses. So the preqeuls failed critically because they were marketed towards people that had unrealistically high expectations of them fueled by an unrealistically high esteem for the originals.
Unless one can demonstrate that the original trilogy is objectively better than the prequels, we can not imagine an alternate universe with "good star wars prequells"

[Glen]

Originally Posted by thekingsguard

Perhaps the Lord of the Rings films would be more/less successful?

Firefly stays on the air?

Indiana Jones 4 is never made?

Good thoughts butI do not see any of those as a direct consequence without more elaboration.

[Glen]

Originally Posted by SergeantHeretic

Cut out the nonsense about "Midichlorians" that will start you off good right there. Leave the force i nthe realm of quasi religious mystisism where it belongs. "Midichorians were an answer to a question that NO ONE asked, and that is why they hurt the prequels.

Agreed. Sooo agreed.

[SergeantHeretic]

Originally Posted by Easterling

This. The truth is that there is no realistic way for the Star Wars prequels to be subjectively seen as "good" , because fans of the originals had seen them as children and tended to look at them through rose-coloured glasses. So the preqeuls failed critically because they were marketed towards people that had unrealistically high expectations of them fueled by an unrealistically high esteem for the originals.
Unless one can demonstrate that the original trilogy is objectively better than the prequels, we can not imagine an alternate universe with "good star wars prequells"

I sure as heck can!

Step one do more work to define Obi, Anni and Padme as Charecters, not just charectaturs.

Step two NO MIDCHLORIANS! they were an answer to a question NO ONE asked!

Step Three lay off the digital charecters, would it kill Lucas to have his protagonists acting with other actors and not talking to blue screns/green screens?

Step four: The Trade Federation, sinister anphibians with asian accents thick as soy sauce, REALLY george?

Step five, the Pod race, Kill it. I have never SEEN a more contrived scene or sequence in any film, just let Qui Gon buy Annie's freedom and get us to Coruscant!

Jar-Jar can stay, if the franchise can survive the Ewoks, Jar-Jar can't touch it.

[Glen]

Originally Posted by Easterling

This. The truth is that there is no realistic way for the Star Wars prequels to be subjectively seen as "good" , because fans of the originals had seen them as children and tended to look at them through rose-coloured glasses. So the preqeuls failed critically because they were marketed towards people that had unrealistically high expectations of them fueled by an unrealistically high esteem for the originals.
Unless one can demonstrate that the original trilogy is objectively better than the prequels, we can not imagine an alternate universe with "good star wars prequells"

Of course differentpeople will dispute which are better just as they do between movies in the original trilogy. But most fans agree they were all good and just dispute order of goodness. No one is doing that for the prequels. Make them at least good enough that most everyone agrees the six films are good and then argue over which is better.

[Brady Kj]

I don't believe the new trilogy was any worse than the old trilogy, but I do believe they failed to mesh continuity together and did a few other unnecessary things that irritated fans and could have been avoided.

I think Indiana Jones 4 would almost certainly be made. Or perhaps a similar film would be made earlier. There would still be a demand for bringing back older movie franchises, and that demand may be even stronger than OTL, and there would be a stronger demand for science fiction films. Chrystal Skull is a movie from an old franchise, that has science fiction jammed into it. It's similar to how the original Star Wars film encouraged the existence of Moonraker.

[Glen]

Originally Posted by SergeantHeretic

I sure as heck can!

Step one do more work to define Obi, Anni and Padme as Charecters, not just charectaturs.

Step two NO MIDCHLORIANS! they were an answer to a question NO ONE asked!

Step Three lay off the digital charecters, would it kill Lucas to have his protagonists acting with other actors and not talking to blue screns/green screens?

Step four: The Trade Federation, sinister anphibians with asian accents thick as soy sauce, REALLY george?

Step five, the Pod race, Kill it. I have never SEEN a more contrived scene or sequence in any film, just let Qui Gon buy Annie's freedom and get us to Coruscant!

Jar-Jar can stay, if the franchise can survive the Ewoks, Jar-Jar can't touch it.

I would tend to agree with these except to note that to keep Jar-Jar you need o tone down the camp and give him some sort of edge

[SergeantHeretic]

Originally Posted by Glen

I would tend to agree with these except to note that to keep Jar-Jar you need o tone down the camp and give him some sort of edge

Yeah, make him less silly and give him kind of a crazy edge.

[Ace Venom]

Originally Posted by SergeantHeretic

I sure as heck can!

Step one do more work to define Obi, Anni and Padme as Charecters, not just charectaturs.

Take it or leave it. Lucas uses classic mythological archetypes in his films. The acting hurt it more than anything, but I felt the characters themselves were fine.

Step two NO MIDCHLORIANS! they were an answer to a question NO ONE asked!

This is where I will agree with you. Making it biological flies in the face of what we know about evolution. Force sensitivity would be biologically advantageous, so it would stand to reason that EVERYONE would be Force sensitive.

Step Three lay off the digital charecters, would it kill Lucas to have his protagonists acting with other actors and not talking to blue screns/green screens?

I don't think this was really a big deal even though people did make a deal about it. Many of these same people did not mind Gollum in Lord of the Rings being digital rather than a puppet.

Step four: The Trade Federation, sinister anphibians with asian accents thick as soy sauce, REALLY george?

Ewoks and Wookiees living in the jungles and Jawas in the desert should have clued you in on the fact that Lucas likes to portray aliens as very different. Would giving them all Russian accents made them more believable? In order to get rid of this, you have to get rid of George Lucas. That's not happening.

Step five, the Pod race, Kill it. I have never SEEN a more contrived scene or sequence in any film, just let Qui Gon buy Annie's freedom and get us to Coruscant!

The pod race was an homage to the chariot race in Ben Hur. I thought it was one of the more exciting parts of the film.

Jar-Jar can stay, if the franchise can survive the Ewoks, Jar-Jar can't touch it.

Agreed. Jar Jar represents the comic relief that Lucas likes to write into his stories. C-3PO and R2-D2 represented that in the SW original trilogy. Rool and Franjean represented that element in Willow. The only issue with Jar Jar is that he did not have a comic partner. If only only had C-3PO and no R2-D2, C-3PO never would have worked. Lucas would have done better following his own convention here, which he corrected by emphasizing C-3PO and R2-D2 a little more in Episode II. C-3PO left alone is very annoying as you can see in Episode II.

As a Star Wars fan who liked the prequels, this is what I would have done.

1) Hire a director. Lucas had a producer (Rick McCallum), who didn't really serve as much more than a yes man for Lucas. In the end, writing and production should have gone to Lucas. Someone with more experience directing actors in front of green screen would have improved the acting considerably. Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, Ewan MacGregor, and Hayden Christensen (seriously watch the guy in independent films) are all capable actors.

2) Change Jar Jar into a comic duo. I already explained this and it would be in line with the Lucas convention.

3) Get some assistance with the writing. I don't think this requires much explanation. Terry Brooks, R. A. Salvatore, and Matthew Stover all delivered solid written adaptations of the films. I know screen writing is not the same as writing a novel, but the potential was there to improve the writing.

[Glen]

Originally Posted by Brady Kj

I don't believe the new trilogy was any worse than the old trilogy, but I do believe they failed to mesh continuity together and did a few other unnecessary things that irritated fans and could have been avoided.

I think Indiana Jones 4 would almost certainly be made. Or perhaps a similar film would be made earlier. There would still be a demand for bringing back older movie franchises, and that demand may be even stronger than OTL, and there would be a stronger demand for science fiction films. Chrystal Skull is a movie from an old franchise, that has science fiction jammed into it. It's similar to how the original Star Wars film encouraged the existence of Moonraker.

I will have to disagree with you in terms of the otl prequels being on par with te originals though I will grant that the originals had their flaws as well.

I agree Indy four will get made.