Worst thing Lucas did with the prequels (besides Jar Jar ) was killing Maul at the end of Phantom. There is really no continuity between PM and AOTC. Lucas didn't kill of Vader in ANH? Why the hell did he think it would be a good idea to kill Maul in PM?

As much as I like Darth Maul, I don't think that he was the apprentice that Darth Sidious needed during the Clone Wars. Better to kill him off in battle (or not, if you've seen the animated Clone Wars ) than to have Sidious dispose of him offscreen.

I felt like yoda had evolved in the force to the point where he did not even need a lightsaber anymore. I thought all the buzz saw jumping around was very out of character for him. I love the yoda from ESB. I would have liked to see him walk in, with annoyance deflect dookus lightning, then pin him to the wall with the force. I also think that 2 jedi fighting one sith is dishonorable.

Phantom Menace would have been easy to fix too. Just make obiwan a jedi, whose padawan gets killed by maul, and ben, takes maul out and takes ani as his new student. It would had more impact having ben and ani having more of a father-son relationship, than brother/brother one.

Phantom Menace would have been easy to fix too. Just make obiwan a jedi, whose padawan gets killed by maul, and ben, takes maul out and takes ani as his new student. It would had more impact having ben and ani having more of a father-son relationship, than brother/brother one.

But isn't that the same relationship he has with Luke?

After the fall of Ani, Ben becomes the father figure to Luke, although very briefly. It would make Obi Wan in ANH a slightly different character and to my eyes slightly sadder.

He spends the rest of his life being a father to other jedi to appease the loss of his padawan. I prefer the fact that he looses a mentor and a younger brother thus forcing him to constantly question if he is doing the right thing whilst training Ani and knowing that he must train Luke better.

To fix Phantom Menace, remove the superfluous Gungans and make Ani a couple of years older, at least the same age as Padme.

As cool as Darth Maul is, there's a few reasons he was killed off.

First was to show the need to groom Anakin, as without the young stud in Maul, he didn't have time to raise a new apprentice from youth. Dooku was a nice temporary fill in, but he was super old.

Second, does anyone think that Maul could have been charismatic enough to be the separatist leader? Plus that fact that he was a former jedi I'm sure made potential separatist systems think, "if he think the jedi order is corrupt, maybe we should too!"

If you really miss Maul, watch the clone wars.

Let's face it, they had some good special effects but were terrible in all other respects. That, however, isn't the problem. There are a gazillion terrible movies with pretty good special effects out there.

The problem is that they could have been great, the fall of Anakin Skywalker could have been cool. The rise of the Empire could have been cool. Seeing Obiwan training Anakin could have been cool. Anakin's romance with Amidala could a have been cool. None of it was.

The tragedy of Episodes I-III is not that they were bad science fiction movies, it was that they were a lost opportunity. I spend decades of my life thinking about what might be in these prequal movies. That possibilities was one of the things that intrigued me so much about Star Wars. But then we got the movies and they were bad. That potential of more cool Star Wars out there was ripped out of my soul.

The real tragedy is there was no reason why they should be bad. They were going to make money no matter what. They did make tons of money. If they were produced by a big Hollywood studio their would have been huge pressure to cut corners. Why spend more money when people were going to see the movie anyway. (Think X-men 3)

But this was to be Lukas's Magnum Opus, He didn't need the money, he could have spent what ever he want to make it them of the truly great movies. I am not going to talk about what went wrong. But it went wrong.

At least I still have my originals (all but that lame Han and Greedo Scene and the Han and Jaba Scene).

Only from a certain point of view.

The biggest problem I have with TPM is the amount of time spent on baby Anakin. Introduce the conflict, introduce the boy, fast forward to show some training and starting to run into Padme, age 'em up nicely and take the second half of the first movie to truly set the stage by having Maul kill Qui Gon while Anakin watches the battle from a corner, foreshadowing Boba seeing his father die.

Obi-Wan delivers proof of Sith involvement, and now the galaxy descends into chaos.

Something like that.

Screw the podrace is what I'm saying.

I spend decades of my life thinking about what might be in these prequal movies. That possibilities was one of the things that intrigued me so much about Star Wars. But then we got the movies and they were bad.

"You fought in the Clone Wars?"

"Yes I was once a Jedi Knight, the same as your father."

When the prequels were announced I was SO EXCITED, expecting we would get an action packed trilogy about the Jedi and whatever-the-hell the "Clone Wars" were! (Star WARS, after all...)

Imagine my jaw-dropping "WTF" to finally realize that the exact thing that I was so excited about was basically glossed over as "Stuff what doesn't really matter that all happens between Eps 2 & 3. (What I've seen of the cartoon is alright, but it's also irritating and can NEVER be the same as some big budget blockbusting Old Republic Jedi ass-whuppery.)

(And I'm not even going to get into the tingling, breathless anticipation leading up to the first new crawl sequence, only to crash back into my seat, muttering "taxation of trade routes???")

First and foremost, it is OK to like bad things. My DVD collection is littered with terrible but awesome movies. Some aren't that awesome.

The OT was not the masterpiece people recall. It would good, solid story telling, solid directing and acting (with some stand outs) and amazing special effects for the time, world above what was out there.

That's where the prequels fall apart. The storytelling was sub-par, the acting ranged from competent to terrible (with a few stand outs that really helped the movies) and while the special effects were well executed they were pretty standard for the day. TPM was competing with The Matrix and The Mummy which had comparable special effects.

The Red Letter Media reviews, while they do get nit-picky at times, do hit on some pretty major points. Who was the protagonist of The Phantom Menace? What did Padme die of? Why would you make yourself dependent on an army of clones modeled on a guy who just tried to kill you? How does Darth Annie go from, "I have doubts bout the order" to "killing a room full of kids is OK!"?

I think the worst crime of the pre-trilogy is they skipped the most interesting part of the Clone Wars, the war. Everything between the second and third movies is replaced with a crawl. We don't learn Dookoo's plans, we don't have any idea who Grievous is, or why he has so many light sabers, The Clone Wars fixed that later, but seriously, giving us the Naboo trade embargo over the frigging Clone Wars! seems like a waste and adds almost nothing to the story. Many of the things it did add (Anikin's miracle birth, mitichlorions, whatever was going on with Naboo in the first place) seem to get completely dropped in the second two movies. All we get is Annie is going to be a Jedi, vague prophecy, and there is a sith out there, which coulda been covered in a craw. Heck, imagine Attack of the Clones opening with the Darth Maul fight, how much cooler would that have been?

But still, new game, Arc-70. that is what we should focus on.

I don't get how there is even a discussion about this, you can find several websites stating the blatant inconsistencies about the prequels to the originals. As well as subject matter, scene choices, props, etc. If you take everything else away, like disney has, you still have TPM which in itself doesn't fit rest of the movies.

Now, you have no choice but to accept SW 1-6 + Clone Wars, Rebels as STAR WARS.

The only degradation to EU is the lack of consistency between all media. I wish GL would have read some of EU stuff and went, "****, that's better than what I wrote" LMAO.

I feel the Red Letter Media reviews have done more to hurt Star Wars than anything Lucas ever did.

I can't count how many people I've read online who said they were kinda on the fence about the prequels, but then watched those reviews and now realize they need to hate them.

If he nitpicked and bashed the OT to death as well I might take his reviews a bit more seriously, or if he admitted it was all a joke to sound like a bitter fanboy. But since neither has happened I'm very disgusted with them.

I'm not saying none of his points are valid, but I think you could nitpick ANY film to death, and make it seem much worse then you originally thought. It's like why even watch movies?

He actually nitpicked A New Hope pretty good. He recorded an audio commentary and nitpicked all the silly things about it and the bad parts. But at the end of the day that movie is great. And you are right, you can nitpick ANY movie. But he even says in his prequel reviews that all the nitpicking isn't whats wrong with the films, he says that they fail to connect with the audience, they fail to make an emotional connection. THAT is the main issue he says. The rest is just entertaining to watch.

At the end of the day I'd rather watch a terrible Star Wars movie over a summer blockbuster. When someone ask me who shot first Han or Greedo I usually respond with what ever version I watched last. The prequels were not the best moments in Star Wars. But it's still Star Wars. If Disney makes 20 more SW movies and 10 are great and the other half are so so. It's still 20 more stories that the fans get to see on the big screen.

Not very contraversial.

They have thier place in the galaxy but without the OT they would have probably been viewed as pretty bad cinema. Was I entertained? Hells ya! Was it Star Wars? Yep? Could it have been more? Definitely! Was it still worthwhile? Absolutely.

There is a lot of hate for the prequels (not clone wars...that's awesome!) but because of them we have the new trilogy coming. That's old enough for me AND they did add at least a little more magic to the SW universe.

(And I'm not even going to get into the tingling, breathless anticipation leading up to the first new crawl sequence, only to crash back into my seat, muttering "taxation of trade routes???")

I've got a degree in political science, so my attitude was "yay the Republic will fall over mundane matters handled poorly!" But that's just me.

So the story of Anakins downfall wasn't worth seeing, plus proper lightsaber battle, which if we are all honest was the only poor thing with the originals.

The battle between Vader and Obi-Wan on the Death Star actually looked to me very much like a Kendo battle (Japanese katana fencing) between two older men. Compare:

Kendo battle:

Vader vs Obi-Wan (EP 4):

In Kendo, you revere your opponent's weapon as well as your own. This seems in line with combatants who know that their opponent's weapon (as well as their own) is a stick of super-heated plasma (or something equally as nasty), don't you think? From my own Kendo experience, running around and doing flips (which was prevalent in the prequel saber battles) seems to me to be a waste of energy and likely to leave one open to attack?

Ya'll need Mr Harry S Plinkett and his trilogy reviews in your lives

As a discipline, I have a lot of respect for Kendo. As a sport, I prefer fencing.

Fighting in the OT is closer to a real sword fight, they take their time and make sure to not let their guard open.

In the prequels...

As cool as Darth Maul is, there's a few reasons he was killed off.

First was to show the need to groom Anakin, as without the young stud in Maul, he didn't have time to raise a new apprentice from youth. Dooku was a nice temporary fill in, but he was super old.

Second, does anyone think that Maul could have been charismatic enough to be the separatist leader? Plus that fact that he was a former jedi I'm sure made potential separatist systems think, "if he think the jedi order is corrupt, maybe we should too!"

If you really miss Maul, watch the clone wars.

He did need killed off but not for these reasons.

Firstly Palpatine needed to groom Ani? Palpatine would have known about Anakin being the Chosen One and would have already foreseen his downfall. He did not need to train Anakin only turn him (same as Luke). In fact he only started to lecture Ani about the Sith ways in Episode 3. So no need to kill Maul off to train Anakin then. Let the Jedi's do the grunt work.

Secondly, charisma played little part in keep the seperatist in order. Dooku was a Jedi, yes and charismatic. But it was fear of Palpatine and his apprentice that kept the seperatists in order. They know he is powerful and very dangerous. It is plain from the opening scenes in TPM that the federation are scared of Palpatine not persuaded by his charm. They are just as scared by the fact that Jedi have been sent to negotiate. The seperatists are portrayed for all intensive purposes as weak minded and scared and as such easy to manipulate by the Sith Lord.

Darth Maul could easily have been kept alive until the third film.

Imagine if at the end of TPM if the three way duel had ended with Maul escaping instead of being stupidly cut in half. Obi Wan would havefelt responsible for the death of Qui Gon as there was nothing he could have done about it. He would feel responsible for Anakin but conflicted over whether he was good enough to train him.

Skip to ROS and Anakin goes to confront Maul on Mustapha (at the end instead of the Dooku at the beginning) at the behest of Palpatine. Obi Wan learns of this and goes to help Anakin thinking he is in danger and not realising that Palpatine has tured him.

3 way battle ensues.

Anakin to take over from Maul and kill Obi Wan. Maul to defeat Jedi and remain Apprentice. Obi Wan to avenge Qui Gon and turn Ani back to the Jedi way. Out come the same.

But this is the underlying flaw with all the films, OT & Prequels. We can all see ways in which they could have been better.

Obi Wan in the OT is unnecessarily vage when talking about Vader to Luke. He knows of Leia. He knows that Vader is his dad. Why not prepare Luke better for these bombshells and prevent intergallactic incest?

Here's words I never thought I would utter:

I really have to rewatch the prequels, it's been too long.

I'm vague about the aftermath of Maul's death. But I think keeping him alive would've started a hunt and Palpatine wasn't ready to declare himself just yet. A dead Sith however gave him the opportunity to corrupt the Jedi Order further and sow more distrust all around.

And Obi-Wan never lies, he just tells the truth, from a certain point of view.

Wasn't that addressed btw in one of the EU novels with Luke angry at Ben for not telling him?

But they still have fantastic moments in them, apart for the obvious superior lightsaber action, The whole tragic story of Anakins downfall is immense, the dialogue in the battle between Obi-Wan and Anakin just superb. I could go on but really guys I just don't understand the beating these films get I know they are not as good as the originals but at the end of the day they tell a story and it's Star Wars!

I would really question that the prequels' lightsaber fighting is better than the original series... ok, better than a 60+ year old man and a guy who can't see out of his suit blindly batting at each other, and occasionally making really slow spins, but I think the Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi fight scenes are far better. Less frenetic, yes, but I actually think that is better. Firstly, all the fights in the original films have much greater purpose and relevance to the story rather than a "Whoo flashy swords" aspect to them. They have actual emotional purpose, and they tell you something about the characters. Empire Strikes Back, Darth Vader clearly outclasses Luke. He is batting aside Luke's attacks almost casually, and Luke has to run away and hide. Return of the Jedi, and it is clear that they are much more evenly matched, and when Luke really goes for it he actually beats through Vader's defence. Secondly, they look like actual sword fights, which the prequels don't.

And I actually think Anakin's downfall is not very well handled. It just feels simplified and weak. They almost do something good with it in the 3rd film, where we almost get the idea of Anakin finding himself in the position of taking one small step to evil and then finding himself unable to get out from a downward spiral... However, they don't quite achieve this, and it ended up just being a switch ("Conflicted loyalties and doubts about who is right... to child murder. Whoops, no sense of a gradual fall to the dark side at all.") , and it was already undermined by war crimes committed by Anakin in the previous film ("Oh, so you have murdered an entire tribe... but you aren't evil yet?"). Also, Anakin actually being a kid in the first film? Bad move. Make him a cocky young man of 18-21, an actual pilot fighting in the Clone Wars (as the original films claimed). It would have made more sense, and would have mirrored Luke's journey much better. Frankly, if Anakin was too old at 10, and we see how badly that turned out, why would Yoda overturn that objection for a young man in his early 20s (Luke)?

Oh, seems everyone has essentially made my points for me.

The original films did have their bad bits. The first film is actually quite... bad at points, the dialogue is clunky at times in all the films and since I have grown up the Ewoks just irritate me. However, the first film saves it by being a fun pulp adventure romp and understanding the limitations of it. Having a few good actors who save the whole thing, and even the weaker ones have improved as the films go on. Mark Hamill is just bad in the first film. Luckily, while his character is the lead he doesn't have much too him. As he becomes more complicated his acting skills improved. I wouldn't have called him a fantastic actor by the end of the trilogy, but he could do what the character needed. Anakin was just flat out bad almost all the way through the series. I am going to say the scripting is probably to blame for most of this. The prequels just got the worst bits of the original films and dialled them up while not having the same good stuff from the originals.

On Maul: He was a terrible villain. His character amounted to "I have a double ended lightsaber. Oh, and it's red, which alongside my sharp teeth, head spikes, red painted face and gravelly voice lets you know I am a bad guy." Good riddance frankly. Christopher Lee's character was better... if even then a bit weak and underused. At least he had more than about 5 lines of dialogue, and you felt he had a plan.

A couple of months ago I was watching the Star Wars films with my girlfriend who isn't all that familiar with Star Wars, and when we got to Revenge of the Sith, just after the duel with Dooku she exclaims: "Oh my god the Chancellor is evil!". It was a total surprise to her, she had no idea that Palpatine becomes the Emperor.

It makes me wish I could watch the Prequels once without having seen the OT to see how that would effect my opinion of them.

A couple of months ago I was watching the Star Wars films with my girlfriend who isn't all that familiar with Star Wars, and when we got to Revenge of the Sith, just after the duel with Dooku she exclaims: "Oh my god the Chancellor is evil!". It was a total surprise to her, she had no idea that Palpatine becomes the Emperor.

It makes me wish I could watch the Prequels once without having seen the OT to see how that would effect my opinion of them.

See this is what I mean about how you first viewed them.

I'll almost guarantee that those arguing that the OT are infinitely better than the Prequels are those who watched the films in release order.

For younger or newer viewers the assumption that Palpatine is evil or that Anakin becomes Vader is lost and they can view the prequels without foresight.

This totally changes the movies and our preception of the Prequels.