I loved the origanal three movies but wasnt so keen on the new three. Is this because they were not as good or because I was young (10) when the first ones came out. Is it cause of the movies or because I was to old to enjoy the new ones as much?
2006-12-08 00:54:40 · 25 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
maybe its because when the original films came out it was 70's and 80's and the special effects were not as far advanced and so when they came out it was brilliant but these days nearly every film has that kind of stuff in it and its lost some of its appeal as a result.
2006-12-08 01:01:24 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Better dialogue in the originals? 'Never been a more wretched hive of scum and villainy' 'as if a million voices cried out then were silenced' oh PLEASE - and you can tell how much better Lucas has got at scripting dialogue for characters in the Phantom Menance (what a title!) when Qui-Gon Jin says 'that is the sound of a thousand terrible things'...
Look the original 3 (NOT the prequels) were good because they were new. Rather than sci-fi they form a fantasy epic, they have a farm boy who becomes a knight, a princess, an evil wizard... I think what made the 3 prequels so horrifically bad was not the special effects - which are good enough to make me sit through them - but the plot and dialogue. Not only was it all very predictable but the movies were just... well, awful! I think the problem was that George Lucas through accident or design had surrounded himself with a lot of gutless yesmen and wanted to have every final decision to himself. From the look of the movies nobody ever said to George (god if only they had) 'Hey George thats a stupid idea, lets do something different for that bit'. Reading the making of the prequels is all about loads of talented artists looking to get a thumbs up from the big guy George Lucas. As a footnote I saw George Lucas at the premiere of Star Wars 3 in San Francisco, seemed like a nice guy.
There're so many great sci-fi books which could be turned in to movies. What about Asimov's Foundation series? With special effects like those from star wars they could be incredible.
2006-12-08 06:21:00 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
George Lucas has sort of answered this himself really. He said no matter how good he made episodes 1,2 and 3 they would never live up to people's expectations because episodes 4,5 and 6 are so well loved by the fans. I don't think the new films are as good as the old ones but it's mainly to do with the fact that the first trilogy was something completely new and have had so long to become part of modern cinema culture. The new films aren't as dreadful as people say and the old films aren't as wonderful as people remember. But the new films never stood a chance because of the original trilogy's legacy.
2006-12-08 04:53:57 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nerd alert!
I agree with your assesment completely. The first Star Wars movie I saw was Episode IV and my parents took me to that when I was 2 so needless to say I've seen those movies a few times.
The newer Star Wars trilogy are visually more appealling but appealling visuals can only get you so far. As visual technology became more 'in tune' to what Lucas wanted he unfortunately sacrificed story for more special effects.
The original trilogy was far more engaging characteristicly and motivationally. The dialoge was sharper and the characters were more well rounded as opposed to the cardboard, chiched, and sometime racist, cut outs such as Jar-Jar Binks and the entire Trade Federation.
As far as acting goes... The original trilogy wasn't going to win any Academy Awards for Best Actor but the actors (All the way around) were definitely better than that of Episodes 1 through 3. On a side note the best actor who had the best writing for the new three was Ewan McGregor.
I remember thinking that I was never going to complain about Luke being a whining mass of protoplasm again ("I was going to go to Tashi station to pick up some power converters!") after seeing what a massive schmuck Anakin was. (There's too many bad lines to mention here.) You never really cared for Anakin. Seeing that his character was the central figure for the whole series it's worth mentioning. His character's decisions were too quickly made, his motivations were weak and Hayden Christiansen's acting was ham handed and painful to say the least.
All in all I can understand wanting to tell the whole story but this epic tale suffered from revealing it's origins. I've sat through all six and the only ramifications I can find for the first three is making one of Darth Vader's lines that much more poignant.
Vader: "Luke help me take this mask off."
Luke: "But you'll die."
Vader: "Nothing can stop that now."
Alright I'm done now.
2006-12-08 01:30:14 · answer #4 · answered by jokerscrowbar 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I agree. I think Lucas would have been better not making his most recent three ones. Apart from childhood nostalgia the fact they were new for their time added to the feel of the movie, but the new ones are second rate standard sci fi fare, no originality to them at all, and in fact quite boring. The fact that he also edited the originals with all the expensive special effects astounds me and scuppers any respect I had for the man as an intelligent film maker, there is a fantastic South Park send up on his re-editing the original ones.
2006-12-08 01:04:44 · answer #5 · answered by stephen m 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Age has a lot to do with it, so does originality. Back then no one had seen anything like that before. You can't blame G. Lukas for the movies that has been made between the first 3 and the latest 3. I think that all 6 were great movies with good special effects and good stories.
2006-12-08 02:38:51 · answer #6 · answered by Rob 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nah, I think everyone prefers the old movies. The new ones try too hard with the special effects and it detracts a little from the story.
The old movies relied more on the characters and the chemistry they had together. Star Wars VI, V and VI will always be classic movies, I can't honestly see the newer ones being so revered in years to come.
2006-12-08 01:10:24 · answer #7 · answered by Bel 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I liked the 3 prequels because (at least I thought so) they help you to understand the relationship between Anakin Skywalker (Darth Vader) and Senator Padme Amidala; the parents of Luke and Leia from the original Star Wars movies.
2006-12-08 01:19:10 · answer #8 · answered by dramaqueen00469 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am 24 and I had never seen the old star wars movies until after I saw the new ones. . I liked the new ones better. It's probably just a matter of opinion.
2006-12-08 00:57:57 · answer #9 · answered by mississippi_girl_9265 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it is a style difference, the old three feel more simple and down to earth and the new ones more regal and formal as if it were a classical period. It is harder to connect with characters that do not represent anyone in our current times as well as the manner in which they speak. It might be because Lucas didn't direct the acting in Empire and Jedi. That is also a possibility.
2006-12-11 04:10:30 · answer #10 · answered by prometheus81 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
well both, dont forget you were open to new things when you were young, you were blown away by the starwars universe, and then 20 years after you have thought about it and loved the characters, however they arent that bad and the first ones arent so good. I challenge you to go buy all six and watch the first three back to back then the next week watch the second (i mean watch i ii iii first then iv v vi second) and then re think it!
good luck, i plan to do this as well
2006-12-08 00:58:21 · answer #11 · answered by Michael T 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋