Ok Star Wars fans, so which is the worst of the Star Wars prequels?
Alright, we all know the prequels, well except Revenge of the Sith ruined our beloved series.. So it all comes down to which movie sucked more? The Phantom Menace or Attack of the Clones?
My vote goes to The Phantom Menace.. Nothing can get more annoying than Jar Jar Binks or Jake Loyd as young Anakin.. P.S, the movie as a whole was a big bore.. Even Darth Maul's short but epic fight in the end was unable to save the movie..
Attack of the Clones, was pretty much bad but I have to say, it had some potential.. The action sequences were pretty much alright, and the Count Dooku fight could have been done better.. Above all else, it was a gigantic improvement over its predecessor..
Phantom Menace is definitely the weakest of the prequels, although I think it stands on its own the best. What I mean is that the movie is a terrible addition to the Star Wars universe, but it's the only film in the trilogy that doesn't rely on the other 2 movies to tell its story. Interestingly, everyone complains about Jar Jar being so annoying, yet he was the least of my worries. I thought the biggest problem was the abysmal acting. Ewan McGregory and Natalie Portman (both are good actors) were totally lifeless and boring to listen to. Samuel Jackson even seemed dry in the few lines that he had. But nobody was as bad as Jake Lloyd playing Anakin; that is without a doubt the worst acting I have ever seen in a major motion picture. I know he was just a kid, but look how great Haley Joel Osmont was in The Sixth Sense that same year! The plot is also pretty pointless. Aside from Anakin meeting Obi Won, nothing relevant happens in the entire movie.
Attack Of The Clones was almost as bad, and Hayden Christiansen was almost as bad of an actor as Jake Lloyd. The dialogue was terrible. Some of the CG effects were downright silly looking. And again, not enough ground was covered in terms of story. The love story between Anakin and Padme was just pitiful. Lastly, I think people were too easy on Revenge Of The Sith. Sure it wasn't as bad as the previous 2 movies, but that isn't saying much at all. That's like saying rotten bolgana is better than decaying roadkill. In some ways, it's the biggest disappointment of all the films because you were expecting the most out of it. Anyway, I'm getting on a rant here so I'll just put my soapbox away before I get too far into it.
BQ: Empire Strikes Back is the best in my opinion. Not because it was so dark, but the storyline unfolded big time (I'll take story over action in a saga any day). The acting had also improved a great deal from New Hope. Lastly, it's the only Star Wars film that actually seemed to improve with the changes that George Lucas made to it.
All of you people are idiots, except the last person who listed the 91 reasons for Revenge of the Sith. The Phantom Menace kept true the Star Wars mythos, and NONE of you are (seem to be) old enough to even judge any of the films. I was 7 when Star Wars was released, so I know that The Phantom Menace was the only prequel film that stayed true the story structure of Star Wars: A New Hope.
Both have a young boy born on a desert planet; a princess from a far away place being pursued by powerful enemy; an older Jedi unknowingly burdened with the fate of the young tatooine boy, only to find that both Their fates are intertwined; also the fated group are joined by a reluctant hero.
A final dual of the fates takes place prior to the princess being returned, the consequence of which engages the final showdown between good and evil (with the help from an unwilling allay [E1: Jar Jar Binks, E4: Han Solo] - that's why Jar Jar Binks was in the film - without him giving that speech to Queen Amedala on Coruscant, she never would have dreamed of asking the Gungans for help against the Trade Federation) and finally an unknown future for both princess and the young boy in the wake of a greater menace.
The fact that all the "complaints" focus on action sequences and CGI is why I give no credit for judgment to any Star Wars "fan" under 30 years old.
BQ: Empire Strikes Back, it was my first theatrical exposure to Star Wars, as my Mom would not let me see Star Wars when it premiered. Empire was my 12th birthday present. Seeing the First Star Wars Re-release was the second part of the present.
I was in college when the first Star Wars movie came out. I'd been a fan of written SF from childhood. Up until then most SF films were pretty bad (I have to add that I was not a fan of Star Trek. I hated the cheesy sets and overacting).I guess that's why the good films are so memorable. When we (SF fans) saw the trailers for SW we were excited and hopeful. And the movie did not disappoint us In some ways The Empire Strikes Back was even better. I wasn't very happy with Yoda. He was so clearly a puppet. Then we get to The Return of the Jedi. I was unhappy from the first. Puppets and more puppets and those stupid Ewoks. A few years ago I rented the first two prequels. I did not like them. I really don't remember if Jar Jar Binks was in the first one, the second one or both. But I (like most people) hated him. I must confess that I didn't see the third one. I saw it as a a waste of time and money. I don't direct any hate towards the prequels. I just didn't like them.
Oh God, Phantom Menace SUCKED. I mean, Darth Maul's a total badass, but not even that could save that movie. I totally agree Revenge of the Sith was pretty sweet though.
BQ: No doubt about it, it's A New Hope. There's something about that movie that make me never get bored of it. Probably has to do with something about Han Solo being in a Stormtrooper costume. Still, Episode V was cool too. You can NOT go wrong with VI either.... Ahh, don't make someone with the username "The Gamma Geek" decide between her favorite movies!!!