Star Wars: The Mandalorian

I also watched The Last Skywalker and it wasn't nearly as horrible as folks have been saying.

I know this may be unpopular, but the most recent trilogy is simply better than the "prequels" in just about every respect. The "you were a spice runner?" exchange, for instance, was a much better bit of dialogue than in all of the prequels.

Paleocon wrote:

I also watched The Last Skywalker and it wasn't nearly as horrible as folks have been saying.

I know this may be unpopular, but the most recent trilogy is simply better than the "prequels" in just about every respect. The "you were a spice runner?" exchange, for instance, was a much better bit of dialogue than in all of the prequels.

I don't know if I can agree, but I honestly haven't rewatched AotC or all of RotS. I think the problem with the sequel trilogy is there wasn't much of a bar to cross and it still failed. As much as some people want to, these movies are not in a bubble and are considered against other movies in and out of the franchise.

I've rewatched the prequels and the sequels recently and I actually think the prequels are better. They're highly flawed, but at least they commit to telling a cohesive story.

The only redeemable part of the sequels, IMO, is The Last Jedi.

I stand by I'm fine with Force Awakens as a new baseline to build off of. Nothing new or amazing, but it hit the right nostalgia buttons to get me excited again. Of course, nothing was built off of it, so...

I really liked Force Awakens. Felt it hit the nostalgia right and was a good introduction of the new main characters. I really liked all the new characters too. The parts of The Last Jedi that work for me I love. The set pieces and visuals were the best in the series. I even liked the message and felt it nailed a lot of what it was going for (except the Fin stuff).

lunchbox12682 wrote:

I stand by I'm fine with Force Awakens as a new baseline to build off of. Nothing new or amazing, but it hit the right nostalgia buttons to get me excited again. Of course, nothing was built off of it, so...

I am with you on this take. I am a fan of beginnings generally anyway. It was fine.

I am far more entertained by the newest trilogy. That said, the prequels have a definitive beginning middle and end as a trilogy whereas the newest movies are three separate movies involving the same characters. Ultimately, I don't feel the need to re-watch any of them when I have the original trilogy and a ton of new content run by Dave Filoni.

Paleocon wrote:
WizKid wrote:

Somehow the Emperor has returned Grogu escaped.

Somehow, I think he'll be fine.

Yeah. There is no way Disney goes that dark. They didn't even do an evil Jar Jar even though it would have rocked.

George Lucas did an evil Jar Jar but then noped out before revealing the big reveal that Jar Jar was the Sith Lord all along.

DSGamer wrote:

I've rewatched the prequels and the sequels recently and I actually think the prequels are better. They're highly flawed, but at least they commit to telling a cohesive story.

The only redeemable part of the sequels, IMO, is The Last Jedi.

One of the only things the prequel does is tell a cohesive story, but it does so with awful dialogue and barely passable acting.

Was there a single good space fight in any of the three movies? The lightsaber action scenes were a step above what came before mostly, but I feel like outer space was treated more as a place to pass through than a place to be in. The podrace in Ep. 1 and chase sequence on Coruscant in Ep. 2 are likely considered (by the creators) as effective replacements.

garion333 wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

I've rewatched the prequels and the sequels recently and I actually think the prequels are better. They're highly flawed, but at least they commit to telling a cohesive story.

The only redeemable part of the sequels, IMO, is The Last Jedi.

One of the only things the prequel does is tell a cohesive story, but it does so with awful dialogue and barely passable acting.

Was there a single good space fight in any of the three movies? The lightsaber action scenes were a step above what came before mostly, but I feel like outer space was treated more as a place to pass through than a place to be in. The podrace in Ep. 1 and chase sequence on Coruscant in Ep. 2 are likely considered (by the creators) as effective replacements.

Not really, no. Anakin's space station battle in Ep1 is the only one I can think of and wasn't good. The two scenes mentioned were pretty good. Now that I think of it were there ANY other ship or vehicle combat scenes? All I remember were in the background or really quick scenes to off load the characters into.

But agreed that the PQ trilogy wasn't not strong, it just wasn't as much of a mess as the SQ trilogy.

lunchbox12682 wrote:
garion333 wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

I've rewatched the prequels and the sequels recently and I actually think the prequels are better. They're highly flawed, but at least they commit to telling a cohesive story.

The only redeemable part of the sequels, IMO, is The Last Jedi.

One of the only things the prequel does is tell a cohesive story, but it does so with awful dialogue and barely passable acting.

Was there a single good space fight in any of the three movies? The lightsaber action scenes were a step above what came before mostly, but I feel like outer space was treated more as a place to pass through than a place to be in. The podrace in Ep. 1 and chase sequence on Coruscant in Ep. 2 are likely considered (by the creators) as effective replacements.

Not really, no. Anakin's space station battle in Ep1 is the only one I can think of and wasn't good. The two scenes mentioned were pretty good. Now that I think of it were there ANY other ship or vehicle combat scenes? All I remember were in the background or really quick scenes to off load the characters into.

But agreed that the PQ trilogy wasn't not strong, it just wasn't as much of a mess as the SQ trilogy.

Ep 3 had a true space battle to open, but it mostly focused on close ups of Anakin or Obi Wan to show off Anakin's masterful piloting and shooting skills. It's a very pretty sequence, but utterly forgettable imho because it's not setup, you're just in it as soon as the movie starts.

garion333 wrote:
lunchbox12682 wrote:
garion333 wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

I've rewatched the prequels and the sequels recently and I actually think the prequels are better. They're highly flawed, but at least they commit to telling a cohesive story.

The only redeemable part of the sequels, IMO, is The Last Jedi.

One of the only things the prequel does is tell a cohesive story, but it does so with awful dialogue and barely passable acting.

Was there a single good space fight in any of the three movies? The lightsaber action scenes were a step above what came before mostly, but I feel like outer space was treated more as a place to pass through than a place to be in. The podrace in Ep. 1 and chase sequence on Coruscant in Ep. 2 are likely considered (by the creators) as effective replacements.

Not really, no. Anakin's space station battle in Ep1 is the only one I can think of and wasn't good. The two scenes mentioned were pretty good. Now that I think of it were there ANY other ship or vehicle combat scenes? All I remember were in the background or really quick scenes to off load the characters into.

But agreed that the PQ trilogy wasn't not strong, it just wasn't as much of a mess as the SQ trilogy.

Ep 3 had a true space battle to open, but it mostly focused on close ups of Anakin or Obi Wan to show off Anakin's masterful piloting and shooting skills. It's a very pretty sequence, but utterly forgettable imho because it's not setup, you're just in it as soon as the movie starts.

Ah, totally forgot that one.
I'm also mixing Clone Wars in with the PQ in my head.

Paleocon wrote:

I also watched The Last Skywalker and it wasn't nearly as horrible as folks have been saying.

I know this may be unpopular, but the most recent trilogy is simply better than the "prequels" in just about every respect. The "you were a spice runner?" exchange, for instance, was a much better bit of dialogue than in all of the prequels.

To me, the prequels tell an interesting story in some of the worst ways possible, while the sequels tell a muddled story in some interesting ways. I prefer the second to the first. It matches up pretty well with the original trilogy anyway (which was also muddled story, interesting ways).

EDIT: Personally, I think Disney tried to stick too much to the "winning formula" of the original trilogy where the movies shifted a good amount in tone between each other, and they were generally figuring out the story as they went along.

LouZiffer wrote:

the prequels tell an interesting story in some of the worst ways possible, while the sequels tell a muddled story in some interesting ways.

Well, that about perfectly sums up how I view things.

lunchbox12682 wrote:
garion333 wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

I've rewatched the prequels and the sequels recently and I actually think the prequels are better. They're highly flawed, but at least they commit to telling a cohesive story.

The only redeemable part of the sequels, IMO, is The Last Jedi.

One of the only things the prequel does is tell a cohesive story, but it does so with awful dialogue and barely passable acting.

Was there a single good space fight in any of the three movies? The lightsaber action scenes were a step above what came before mostly, but I feel like outer space was treated more as a place to pass through than a place to be in. The podrace in Ep. 1 and chase sequence on Coruscant in Ep. 2 are likely considered (by the creators) as effective replacements.

Not really, no. Anakin's space station battle in Ep1 is the only one I can think of and wasn't good. The two scenes mentioned were pretty good. Now that I think of it were there ANY other ship or vehicle combat scenes? All I remember were in the background or really quick scenes to off load the characters into.

But agreed that the PQ trilogy wasn't not strong, it just wasn't as much of a mess as the SQ trilogy.

That's where I come down. This isn't a strong endorsement of the prequels, so much as an acknowledgement that as flawed as they were at least they had a vision and a coherent story to tell. The sequels are just a mess overall. As indicated by the fact that for Rise of Skywalker Abrams basically retcons a bunch of stuff in the crawl in order to not have to use The Last Jedi as a jumping off point.

Sadly there was a lot to like about The Last Jedi, IMO. Notably the dynamic between Rey and Kylo Ren could have been explored more. It was the most interesting part of the sequels and somehow only Rian Johnson understood that.

LouZiffer wrote:

EDIT: Personally, I think Disney tried to stick too much to the "winning formula" of the original trilogy where the movies shifted a good amount in tone between each other, and they were generally figuring out the story as they went along.

This is the thing that kills me the most about the sequels: Disney knew they were making a trilogy, but instead of making a plan for a story they just threw it to different people on a per-movie basis. Had they just had sat down and at least drawn up a outline for the three movies it would have been much better.

Or heck, even take the route they did with Marvel, make separate, (mostly) standalone movies that slowly build towards a bigger, meta-heavy climax.

DSGamer wrote:

Sadly there was a lot to like about The Last Jedi, IMO. Notably the dynamic between Rey and Kylo Ren could have been explored more. It was the most interesting part of the sequels and somehow only Rian Johnson understood that.

TLJ was the only one of the sequels with an idea beyond "let's try to remind the audience of how much they liked the OT."

The execution of those ideas was all over the place unfortunately. Not sure how much of that to blame on Johnson and how much on the suits at Disney or what, but the end result wasn't a good movie, just bad for different reasons than the other sequels.

lunchbox12682 wrote:
garion333 wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

I've rewatched the prequels and the sequels recently and I actually think the prequels are better. They're highly flawed, but at least they commit to telling a cohesive story.

The only redeemable part of the sequels, IMO, is The Last Jedi.

One of the only things the prequel does is tell a cohesive story, but it does so with awful dialogue and barely passable acting.

Was there a single good space fight in any of the three movies? The lightsaber action scenes were a step above what came before mostly, but I feel like outer space was treated more as a place to pass through than a place to be in. The podrace in Ep. 1 and chase sequence on Coruscant in Ep. 2 are likely considered (by the creators) as effective replacements.

Not really, no. Anakin's space station battle in Ep1 is the only one I can think of and wasn't good. The two scenes mentioned were pretty good. Now that I think of it were there ANY other ship or vehicle combat scenes? All I remember were in the background or really quick scenes to off load the characters into.

What's this button do? Bam I accidentally blew up the enemy station.

So f*cking awful.

People, we have another thread for this.

Mixolyde wrote:

People, we have another thread for this.

You mean the Bad Batch thread that I'm avoiding because I'd rather it wasn't spoiled?

Mixolyde wrote:

People, we have another thread for this.

Haha. I was thinking we just had this discussion. But I guess it was over there last week.

It's nice to have two Star Wars threads that are a depressing mess rather than just the one.

Mantid wrote:

This is the thing that kills me the most about the sequels: Disney knew they were making a trilogy, but instead of making a plan for a story they just threw it to different people on a per-movie basis. Had they just had sat down and at least drawn up a outline for the three movies it would have been much better.

Or heck, even take the route they did with Marvel, make separate, (mostly) standalone movies that slowly build towards a bigger, meta-heavy climax.

Disney’s reasoning with the sequels was to make back the $4.5 billion dollars they paid George Lucas for Lucasfilms. So for The Force Awakens they went with ‘safe’. And, more or less, it kinda worked. A little uninspired for sure, but it wasn’t a bad film. And it got them their money back.

Then they tried some a little more expansive with The Last Jedi and well, we all know how that turned out. Disney’s willingness to kowtow to the screaming internet hoarded is really quite unedifying. It’s how you end up with abominations like Rise of Skywalker.

Sorbicol wrote:
Mantid wrote:

This is the thing that kills me the most about the sequels: Disney knew they were making a trilogy, but instead of making a plan for a story they just threw it to different people on a per-movie basis. Had they just had sat down and at least drawn up a outline for the three movies it would have been much better.

Or heck, even take the route they did with Marvel, make separate, (mostly) standalone movies that slowly build towards a bigger, meta-heavy climax.

Disney’s reasoning with the sequels was to make back the $4.5 billion dollars they paid George Lucas for Lucasfilms. So for The Force Awakens they went with ‘safe’. And, more or less, it kinda worked. A little uninspired for sure, but it wasn’t a bad film. And it got them their money back.

Then they tried some a little more expansive with The Last Jedi and well, we all know how that turned out. Disney’s willingness to kowtow to the screaming internet hoarded is really quite unedifying. It’s how you end up with abominations like Rise of Skywalker.

Wow, couldn’t disagree more. The Last Jedi was such a pretentious pile of crap that it easily became the worst of all Star Wars films. It was like someone gave a toddler their parents figurines and lego vehicles and said had fun. There wasn’t anything new in the film and it failed on so many levels. I’m not going to rehash what was wrong as I posted this the last time this argument went around GWJ especially since this is not the thread for it

The bottom line was that 8 was so bad that it preemptively destroyed 9 which was left to flail around and waive too much fan service in the hope that people would forget 8 like a really bad night with tequila.

It only destroyed movie 9 insofar that the people responsible for that movie took a hefty crap all over 8 and rollbacked to the save where Palatine was still alive. And this is coming from someone who didn't love 8, but, imo, they should have gone all in and continued what 8 started.

8 didn't destroy 9, but 9 didn't retroactively redeem 8. They remain two movies that are bad both as individual movies and as two parts of what was presented as a trilogy, presumably with a straight face.