2006-09-03 19:38:52 · 18 answers · asked by Pistol Pete 3 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
3 reasons
1.) George Lucas, at best is an average director. These three films were all filmed on green screen. In order to make that work, you need a strong director. For evidence of this look at a few of the actors Sam Jackson, Ewan McGregor, Jimmy Smits, and Natalie Portman. I've seen them ALL in other films, and I know they can act... and act well. Yet, they don't seem to be doing much more than reciting rediculous dialogue. On the other hand look at Sin City... ALSO all green screen... yet, the performances in that movie POP... hmmmm, I guess Robert Rodriguez might know how to direct a "green screen" based film.
2.) When you have 13 hours of film based on a prophecy of balance... and YET, none of the brilliant Jedi masters, or even younglings took a moment and thought "Hey, wait a second here. Sure things are out of balance. But it's IN OUR FAVOR?!!??!?" Think about it, at the top of Episode I, there were 2 Sith and 10,000 Jedi. At the end of Episode III, there are 2 Sith and 2 Jedi. Well, you got your balance their Yoda! Way to go Brainiac!!!! Um... Hello... balance is a BAD thing in this case. DUH (Major plot hole.)
3.) I could go with you on "The Force" but... "MIDICHLORIANS"??? what in the holy heck is THAT????
(Honorable mention... Jake Lloyd and Hayden Christensen made the Ewoks look like brilliant actors!)
2006-09-03 21:10:55 · answer #1 · answered by baseballfan 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because of the high expectations of them to all be just as good as The Empire Strikes back was (the best overall IMHO). The thing is, 1,2 and 3 were basically back story, character study and introduction to set up 4,5, and 6. I feel that if Lucas HAD gone ahead with his original plans to do 3 MORE films, they would not have been as good because the suspense, intrigue and drama of 4,5 and 6 would be gone with the end of Return of the Jedi. (Besides...No Vader.. no Star Wars)
Funny thing is.. I actually liked the newer Trilogy.
2006-09-04 02:47:42 · answer #2 · answered by DFantum 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
1. All style, no substance.
2. The original trilogy had a better cast (including Harrison Ford, and Alec Guiness).
3. George Lucas isn't a very good director. He's an "idea" guy, with a great deal of imagination, but he needs someone more competent to actually helm his projects, and get the most out of his cast and crew.
4. The idea of doing a three-part "prequel" (knowing where the story is already headed) is pretty anti-climatic to begin with.
2006-09-04 03:36:27 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because Lucas is a "Nuts and Bolts" kind of guy..and doesnt know squat about telling a good story. The ONLY reasons the 1st 3 took off at all was because no one had treated the genre that well before..so kids automaticially loved it...Ive never understood the adult craze tho..except to say that humans arent maturing very well these days at all. Have YOU ever been to a TREK Convention?? LOL
2006-09-04 02:43:08 · answer #4 · answered by G-Bear 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I didn't like the first prequel that much, but the progression grew, throughout. I thought Episode III fit in more with the original series, the best.
2006-09-04 03:30:20 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i actually like the prequels. except number I! it sucked II and III were awesome. hayden is so hot
haha
2006-09-04 02:56:53 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's what happens when IV, V, and VI are made first...it put the end of the story before the beginning. Wait until VII, VIII and IX !
2006-09-04 02:44:55 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The force sucks from where?
2006-09-04 02:46:18 · answer #8 · answered by ★Greed★ 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because prequels suck. You already know what's going to happen.
2006-09-04 02:42:43 · answer #9 · answered by Stranger in a Strangeland 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
STAR WAR FILM ARE OK GOOD ACTOR AND HAS A STORY YOU CAN FOLLOW
2006-09-04 02:46:09 · answer #10 · answered by The Cat 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋