Star Wars Prequel Trilogy: Underrated?

Whilst most people love the Original Trilogy and despise the Disney Trilogy. The 2000's prequel movies often polarize people.

Saint or Sinner?

I'm personally rather mixed on them. The Phantom Menace is shite but Attack Of The Clones is a relatively enjoyable popcorn flick and Revenge Of The Sith is the only post 1983 Star Wars film that I hold with the same affection as the original three.

It gets a free pass for showing Natalie Portman's stomach...

That's a good point.

I could take or leave them really. They seemed to take three whole films to finally start getting interesting, and whilst Revenge of the Sith packed quite a lot of fraught, dramatic punch.... overall they were a bit of a needless addition to an already complete and solid body of work.

Okay I'll break it down, film by film.

The Phantom Menace. The acting was a bit shockingly null in this. Anakin and Jar Jar were obviously the most annoying elements. When the action and spectacle kicked off, it was actually quite edge of the seat, but I just came away thinking it was a bit of a rubbish live-action cartoon really, and certainly not up to standard.

Attack of the Clones. I'm actually not sure why I ended up seeing this, given I hadn't been left caring all that much by the previous film (I was with a friend and I think we were stuck for what to do that day, and nothing else was on at the cinema that we were interested in). I just know I found it largely dull and couldn't follow any of what was going on. And yes the teenage Anakin was a real headache. In a rewatch a few years later, I actually found the Gladiator pit scene a real highlight, but it's a real ordeal to sit through for that.

Revenge of the Sith. Actually I really enjoyed this one at the time, to the point I went to see it again three more times. In all departments it was much better. Even Hayden Christensen was beginning to show engaging promise. Palpatine was really good at carrying the film. The atmosphere really followed me out of the cinema for several days.

If I watched it again now though, I'd probably think it needed to cut to the chase a lot more, some character transitions needed to be ironed out, and a lot of the moral/political hectoring didn't have to be quite so on the nose. But I suspect a lot of the good elements would still hit my sweet spot.

What I will definitely say, however is that none of them killed Star Wars in the way The Last Jedi did. George Lucas may have botched the execution but he clearly made the films with love for the art of storytelling and world-building. The Last Jedi seems to despise all those things. It couldn't care less about storytelling or cause and effect. It's just a vacuous mess that seems to have contempt for the fictional universe it takes place in. And as a result, it makes Star Wars impossible to care about anymore.

Even the worst prequels are masterpieces by comparison.

The first one is shit.
The second one is slightly less shit, and had Christopher Lee to its benefit.
The last one isn't too bad. If it was Dr Who it would be in Season 15.

Pepsi Maxil wrote:It gets a free pass for showing Natalie Portman's stomach...

Really? I thought that was far from her best ASSet.

A Hive thread isn't complete without some sort of fap material

Episode I has a few highlights, I kind of appreciate all the political wrangling in it now, Neeson carries it great lightsaber duel at the end.

Episode II is terrible outside of Christopher Lee, Reylo is more convincing than Aname.

Episode III is great for the meme-worthy acting and overall does a good job of developing a belivable rise of the Empire and fall of Anakin

The prequels had a good story and good intention, just needed better directors, script polishers, and acting...but they all distinctly feel like Star Wars and the expanded material for it (The Clone Wars) was excellent

Yes, though I think opinion is shifting - after the sequel travesty people are starting to appreciate George's art and vision.

So far as I'm concerned the prequels had all the qualities that made the originals great - imagination, design, music, a sense of wonder - alongside the same flaws.

Most people became stuck on a bandwagon, promoted by those who were always going to be disappointed, subsequently justifying their emotions with criticism that was clever enough, but rather 'missing the point' as to what made the originals good in the first place.

I agree equally with Ronnie and Zarius.

Speaking of lame sequels I've just been watching the car chase sequence in Spectre again. Lacking in other cars, believable acting, consistent tone or grittiness - just another shiny aston martin advert. Probably a precursor to the Waller-Bridge effort.

From my point of view the prequels are good

arse wrote:From my point of view the prequels are good

You certainly have the high ground sir.

Clones is the one I find the most watchable. Obi Wan's detective work is pretty cool and  the cinematography during the Naboo segment is very easy on the eye. The storytelling is incredibly messy, though. I also hate the fake zooms and take issue with the fact that C-3PO works for the Lars family. How does Owen not remember him in Star Wars? That said, I do like it more than Revenge of the Sith.