Truth about the prequels

yes i do i grew up on the old ones i know them by heart the new ones seem too newish not like old ones but more graphix and effects

Out of the prequel trilogy, I think the movie that really go bashed was the first, The Phantom Menace. The complaints that I recall hearing was that it was blatantly catering to children, with all the child characters, Jar Jar Binks and the Gungans (they get my vote as one of the worst Star Wars aliens ever, but they still don't top the Ewoks). The thing is, that the first episode dealt with a main character that was a child, so what can you expect. Although, it is in stark contrast to Episode III, that had many reviewers saying it was not kid-friendly, and was teetering on an R-rating for violence and dark imagery. Be that as it may, I agree with the premise of one of the responders, that many look more fondly on the Original Trilogy because it is a nostalgic memory from their childhood. There does tend to be a cut-off age for Star Wars fans, and it falls into the category of those who were kids and teens when the Original Trilogy was released. I imagine that the Prequels have spawned their own generation of fans, that will be populating Sci-Fi conventions for decades to come.

I think that's a good point. I also agree with one of the other posters about hte acting in the latest movies. The original trilogy had much better actors, and Lucas had less power so the actors were able to stretch their roles a bit.

all of the movies are great, but the the second is the best of all.

Well, you could find the answer to that question by asking someone who saw the original trilogy as an adult! I saw them as a child, so yes they do hold a special place in my heart. However, I approached the prequels with an open mind and was generally disappointed. I found the acting generally poor, and the obvious use of CGI for backgrounds took away a lot of the realism. Compare battles on Hoth and Endor with the new trilogy and they look for more "realistic". Nick

I think the O.T. was just great (still do). One of the reasons the prequels were so panned, well, maybe it was Lucas' choice to have the infamous Jar Jar Binks and that his Anakin couldn't act his way out of a wet paper sack.

I know the second in the prequal got some very bad reviews from people I know but over all I didn't hear a lot of bashing. Most I talked to loved them as much as the original trilogy, myself included in that. I watched Star Wars A New Hope in the theaters when it first came out and I grew up seeing the others. When they came out with the new ones I was thrilled and loved them as well. Not sure who bashed them, if it was the critics don't take much stock in that. They bashed the original Star Wars as well.

The question "why weren't episodes 1, 2, and 3 nearly as good as the original ones" is a common one and viewed by most as very apt. The reason why may entail many things. In my humble opinion, the newly created episodes weren't as good of films as the original three by any means. However, I think they were interesting and important to Star Wars fans. I say this because I think they simply portray the background to a chain of exciting events. (These "exciting events" being episodes 4, 5, and 6). While in and of themselves the new Trilogy isn't an exciting storyline, it tells of an unknown history that our encridibly large human curiosity feeds on. So to real Star Wars fans, the movie was good in that respect - not a great stand alone film, but a simple yet highly desirable quench for thirst that fills in the blanks.