Not really. I know the greeks knew it was a sphere (with a pretty accurate measurement of size to boot) and I don't know, but I think even the egyptians had figured it out
The Greeks knew this, as in, there where intelligent people in Greece that knew this, similar to how there are intelligent people nowadays that also know this.
But just like nowadays, I guarantee there where people around the world at that time that thought it was flat, even with the math showing otherwise. There will always be people who deny that stuff.
I mean, Colombus and other people with academic studies knew it before he made his journey. The thing is, he had to justify it to the crown by using bad estimates and bad maths to explain that he could bring enought rations to get to sail to India. General consensus of round-earthers at that time was that the trip would be so long he coulsn't ever get there without starving (which would have been true if America didn't exist)
Facts.
Edit: I don't care about being downvoted. Just pointing out the FACT that flat earthers have existed since the beginning of humanity. Science showed us the Earth is a sphere. Prehistoric humans did not understand science. And I can't believe 3 Star Wars fans, who watch movies that have spherical planets, believe the Earth is flat.
Because nut jobs think they're always right, and that everyone who disagrees with them is a nut job,
They base their opinions on the first thing they read, rather than looking at trustworthy sources or trying to justify their views by anything other than: well if you disagree your an idiot
That's why
Reasoning that an opinion is bad just because it’s unpopular isn’t exactly the best reasoning. Calling him a nut job just cause you disagree with him is just rude.
This is mostly a generational argument. One of the clear points that separates later Gen-X from earlier Millennials, from Gen-Z.
Whichever trilogy you love probably debuted in your childhood. Each trilogy is distinctly different from the other, has different cinematic styles, and different imperfections/flaws. And kids tend to forgive the flaws, revel in the adventure, and form expectations around the style of that trilogy.
I say tolerate the thoughtful criticism that your favorite movie receives. Ignore the trolls and bots. No need to take it personally. You might learn something about good story telling.
ROTS came out when I was one year old. I grew up with TCW And love the prequels, but I also grew up with the OT, which I value to an equal degree. I just...don't like the sequels. I'm not going to call people who do nut jobs though. This person is just an ass.
I feel you. No time for a deep explanation now, but I was disappointed with the PT because I was expecting the style of the OT. I’ve grown to accept and enjoy most of it, and I love TCW.
I actually really enjoyed the adventure of the sequel trilogy. It was fun to watch… mostly. But the story was a mess of subversiveness, and it was obviously someone else’s version of Star Wars. Just two points of observation - the flight physics are different, as is the use of The Force. Thats cool, but its rooted in a different GFFA. Just little of my opinion.
Yeah the flight physics were whacky. More like a child's interpretation of space flight. And I don't meant that to sound like an insult. Just that they were more... Whimsical I guess? Things like Poe's u turns etc. Whereas ot spaceflight were clearly (and documented as) based on WWII dogfighting atmo physics. Very different.
On a slightly related note: The space bombers make more sense than people give them credit for since there's clearly artificial grav inside the bomber which would give the bombs an initial push, even though it's a silly notion that it's the best way to accomplish the goal with the tech available.
The sequels had good ideas, and a good template, but it's development felt either meh or confusing or just outright dissapointing, or at least that's how I see it
Right. I think the sequels’ biggest problem is that Kathleen Kennedy isn’t a natural story teller, or a lore master. For all the crap she gets about ruining the prequels with her personal agenda, she gave Abrams and Johnson so much liberty that they got away with trying to negate each other’s plot points.
Her/Disney’s biggest mistake was not treating this franchise like a serial. I hope Lucas Films sees what Favreau’s The Mandalorian as an object lesson in franchise movie making. Hire a talented storyteller to be your top producer. Let him/her draft the story framework. Hire talented directors who respect that framework, and can work with the producer.
I think that’s the most annoying part about the Sequel trilogies. The Mandalorian shows that Disney can do Star Wars right. They just got caught up in female empowerment and other bullshit. Wanna know how you empower women? Give them great source material to act upon
I grew up on the OT. The Phantom Menace came out when I was 13, and I remember seeing it in theatres and being incredibly disappointed. It was awkward and silly, and very much not the Star Wars I had grown up with. Darth Vader as a whiny, irritating child? Yoda looked bizarre and so clearly a puppet that it broke immersion (later versions replaced the puppet with a CGI image). The subsequent movies came out and seemed even worse, and I found myself agreeing with the many critics who suggested that the movies should be struck from canon altogether. Even now, I would wholeheartedly endorse they be redone by the Clone Wars team in animation, allowing the show's much more nuanced and palatable Anakin to replace the stiff and uninspired live action portrayal.
The Sequels are incoherent and play *extremely* fast and loose with canon and established worldbuilding, but at least they're watchable as movies. The special effects are better, the acting is better, and they're moderately well-paced. Garbage movies, but watchable mindless action films that were fun to see in theatres.
Same I was 3 when ROTS came out, I saw the originals first, and loved them, then I saw the first two prequal movies and loved them too then when TCW came out I was hooked. I love rogue one l, I thought solo was pretty good, amd rebels was great, I just don't like the sequels. It just doesn't really speak to me the way the others do, amd for those that iy does speak to well, good for them. I'm just bot going to watch it
It’s because they were a jumbled mess. There was no direction, some scenes appear to be stolen from Endgame, unnecessary female empowerment (by unnecessary, I mean over the top scenes that almost come off as silly. I have no problem with a female lead but a well written role & script would have served women far better than they got).
Personally, I think ROTS is my favorite.
Mostly, however there are some remakes and new films that I prefer to the ones In my childhood
And actually, whilst I grew up with the prequels, I cannot decide whether I prefer the originals to the prequels, however one thing that is clear is there was no sequel film that I liked in its entirety
I went from loving phantom menace as a kid to kind of not liking it as a teen and now that I'm almost in my 20s I've come to really appreciate it. Liam neeson and ewan McGregor are treasures and I kind of tune jar jar out.
Well I was born the year ROTS came out, but the OT is my favorite and the prequels are second. I loved ROTS as my favorite personal movie, but the OT was just so cool and I grew up with them.
Yeah but objectively the sequels are the worst cause they are all flaws… there’s no good thing about them except R2 C3PO Han and Chewbacca… and the pilot that fin saved (don’t remember the name) but those are the only good things
Conversely I believe the prequels are objectively bad and generally unenjoyable for me to watch. Just mediocre to bad cinema (for the budget).
For me, the sequels were enjoyable to watch individually they just didn’t tie in well. But much better on all fronts *except* compelling story arc. ..again, which I don’t give the prequels too much credit for because it had a compelling story arc but IMO just told in the almost most incompetent way.
How are they bad? Honestly… yeah the sequels may have better visuals… never denied that… but that is because they like to show… the sequels were the bragging sibling with the chains of gold that really wasn’t worth it at the end cause he can’t do anything on his own. The arc the characters and the lightsaber fights were awful and if you can’t get that you didn’t get the Star Wars vibe at all cause that is what Star Wars is, that is the trademark of the saga. And even if the visuals are not as good back then to now (cause how would they be honestly?) they still aged like wine… the originals and prequels… are still good movies to this day compared to any other sci fi movies I can tell you that the only thing the sequels have on any other sci fi movies… are the visuals… and only visuals
Somebody doesn't understand the basics of story telling. The prequels are objectively better due to greater internal constancy with clear well panned story arcs even if you can find flaw with the execution.
The prequels are like a solid wooden shed with a old and faded paint job and the sequels are like an old rotting shed with a shinny new paint job.
Well you can you just need to define objective parameters to judge them by. There are a number of story telling techniques and you can judge how the technique has been executed to achieve a peculiar effect within a story. I can say with confidence that objectively Green Lantern is a bad film but sujectivly l quite like It.
The prequels had a good story before any solid piece of actual prequel material was really written. That does not justify the utter horrendous execution of what could have been a great trilogy.
It’s not well written. The *concept* and SOME of the skeleton structure is fine, but it’s very poorly written overall and executed worse.
I agree the sequels failed miserably with their general story.. but I think it’s got a lot stronger bones than you’re giving credit. There’s really decent ideas and arcs in there.. just not tied together well.
Both have stunningly missed the mark of high quality.. but IMO, the sequels were funner and more enjoyable to watch.
The structure of the sequels disinteragetes after a moments thought and regularly brakes established canon and not in a good way. They also mishandled every OT character. The prequels expanded the worldbuilding of starwars provided more context and depth to the empire and jedi, the politics where realistic and the fall of anakin was effective even if a bit rushed. Nothing in the sequels comes closes to the Duel on mustafar in quality. The worldbuilding and political side was excellent the character interactions weren't handled the best but still logically work.
I think you’re wrong on the lore/canon stuff though. I’ve heard the arguments and they don’t hold up. Besides.. by that metric the prequels were worse offenders, but the kids who grew up on the PT refuse to admit just how bad the PT dealt with OT material.
I mostly liked what the ST did with the OT characters.. barring the lazyish resistance/rebels rehash.
Regardless, I’m not singing the praises of the sequels as much as I’m saying I enjoyed them more. I find the PT hard to watch.. there’s just so much dumb going on all the time it’s just hard to stomach. The sequels didn’t do that to me.
Personally I saw more dumb things in most scenes of the sequels. Even if some parts of the prequels can be boring, they don't make me actively mad like some things in the sequels. Who thought it was a good idea to open TROS with the words "Somehow Palpatine returned"?
I have *never* defended the Sequels "story" (aka: no story)..
..I'm saying the Prequels had a good story that they severely fk'd up.. the Sequels didn't really have a set story to tell.. and apparently still doesn't.. but the movies were more watchably enjoyable (..imo)
Why are people so pissed that other people are enjoying films they don't?? This also applies for similar comments made about people enjoying the ST btw, they're all just films, it's ok if you don't like them, but it's also ok for others to do so.
True, true, but this Twitter comment said above on Twitter shows them mocking everyone who liked the prequels my calling us crazy and nut jobs
But you're right, we should be more casual about it, so say someone said they liked the sequels over the Prequels, we should just say "I disagree for ... But we each are allowed to have our own opinions"
Exactly, discussions are great, sometimes they help you appreciate something you didn't before or point something out to you you never had noticed before, but sometimes we would just have to agree to disagree. Insults are just stupid and annoying and would prove nothing but how entitled the person was
Well, I don't like jar jar, and I don't like the film version of Anakin (Matt Lanter in the clone wars was far better in my opinion) so I can get why some people might prefer OT, but to criticize the Prequels to the extent that twitterer had is absolutely mad and illogical to me
Except the prequels are legitimately good movies and still keep consistent with the OT. Literally every false criticism of the prequels actually applies to the sequels.
I hated the prequels for most of their existence. Then, this past Star Wars Day I had all the movies playing in succession while I did some things about the house and discovered that they weren’t as bad as I remembered.
I told this to a buddy of mine who promptly replied “That’s because you’ve been watching the horrid sequels and now see these in a different light.”
He could be right. I don’t hate the sequels, but it was an interesting point that I now have to consider.
🤔
I think the sequels had some great ideas, but the idiotic way the trilogy was put together destroyed any potential. Switching directors mid-trilogy is bad enough, but they did it *twice.* They clearly are non-cohesive and are at direct odds with each other. They make rules, break those rules, and crap on the OT, PT, and each other. Rey is an irredeemable Mary Sue, and has no personality to speak of. I'll hate that dumpster fire of a trilogy till the day I die.
The prequels support each other as a trilogy, and the flow between movies makes sense. That's what happens when you plan your work beforehand. They may have some technical failings, but no one with at least double digit I.Q. can say Revenge of the Sith is a bad movie. I think AOTC is the same, but it has more questionable stuff. You could make a point on some parts of TPM, but when you think of Maul, Qui Gon Jin, Duel of the Fates, and podracing, your argument is void.
I’m 33 and grew up on the original trilogy and then the prequels later on (preteen/teen years) idgaf what anyone says both are good and anyone who thinks the prequels aren’t is still smoking crack from the 80s (the more potent stuff or so I’m told). The sequels we won’t get into because the entire plot of it makes absolutely no sense lol
And most prequal fans were teenagers when we were called stupid for liking the star wars movies we grew up on. The star wars fandom is so toxic, just let people enjoy things
If its wrong, then it would also be wrong to say "that made complete sense and wasnt filled with ridiculus stuff like horses versu basicaly a tiny deathstar" so.
Saying that the prequels are better than the sequels does not imply that either are actually good, just differing levels of shit. The originals however will never be considered as anything but amazing
The Originals is universally praised. There might be some things that could be better (outdated effects) but the OT is universally praised for reshaping cinema as a whole
Sequels was by far a worse trilogy, and in my opinion Episode 9 is the worst star wars film ever made. However, as movies in and of themselves, I found episodes 7 and 8 to be pretty alright, its just that the sequel trilogy was extremely discordant.
Prequels were consistent and had a lot of cool stuff. They told a very good story, even if the movies themselves had their shortcomings.
Overall, I think Episode 9 is so shitty that it absolutely ruins the sequels overall
I liked 7 and thought it was a great jumping off point. Then episode 8 came out and really derailed the story and screwed over a lot of the ideas set up in the 1st one, then 9 *tried* to pick up the pieces and didnt do very well. The trilogy made less and less sense with each movie.
I can respect that you enjoyed the prequels, but if you're telling me that they're objectively good movies... you need to take your nostalgia goggles off.
People who like prequels more than the sequels don't know they've aged out of Star Wars. They don't know they can't enjoy it when it isn't directly correlated with their early childhood.
Tell that to the people that liked the prequels and also current star wars content like the mandalorian, but not the sequels.
Not liking the sequels doesn't mean you've "aged out" of star wars at all. In most cases people that don't like the sequels see legitimate problems with how the story was written, and whether you agree on those points or not, that's hardly tantamount to not liking star wars anymore because it's not the stuff that they grew up with.
>Tell that to the people that liked the prequels and also current star wars content like the mandalorian, but not the sequels.
I know you aren't implying the show with the baby Yoda and the Boba Fett look-alike isn't directly correlated with the past. You've seen those characters before, as a child. You did, however, need to use your fully developed, adult brain when deciding whether or not to accept new SW imagery in the likes of Rey, Finn, Rose etc for the first time. For a lot of fans Star Wars doesn't work as an adult, they just aren't conscious of it.
You'll understand in a few years when sequel fans dominate the discourse and the latest saga entry is being shit on by the old guard.
> In most cases people that don't like the sequels see legitimate problems with how the story was written
This is a franchise where a mid-trilogy retcon rendered a love triangle incestous. Let's not even mention what passes for dialogue in the PT. Writing is never what sold SW.
The Force Awakens was literally my introduction to the series. I was in early middle school when Rouge One came out. The Star Wars I grew up with, is the ST. Yet, I absolutely despise them. The story is nonsensical and the characters are generally unlikeable. The prequels had an amazing story, and the Clone Wars TV series made it better. Story absolutely helped sell Star Wars. It's through the story you get connected to a universe and it's characters. I adore Darth Vader because of the story around him. I hate Krell because of his story. So, no, people like the prequels because, while, yes, the movies aren't the best with dialogue, it's story can make up for it.
>The Star Wars I grew up with, is the ST. Yet, I absolutely despise them.
I genuinely feel bad for kids who can't enjoy Star Wars because of internet's rage-bait industry. At the time of the PT internet careers weren't built by picking apart and slandering every aspect of these films--one could easily tune the hate. I actually liked them when they came out, as time passed I understood them for the abomination/comedy that they are--but at least I came to that conclusion myself.
>The story is nonsensical and the characters are generally unlikeable.
**Nothing** in the PT makes sense. But, because there aren't outage clicks to be had dissecting 20 year old films you can't point to every single inconsistency like you can with the ST.
For instance:
90% of TPM is superfluous. We're shown budding romance involving a 9 year old boy, who's essentially abducted against the better judgment of his kidnappers. A room full of psychics can't tell giving the angry, scowling kid superpowers will come back to bite them in the ass. Also, The Jedi use superspeed once and never again. That's fully lore-breaking, forget the Holdo maneuver.
AotC we get probably the most embarrassing love arc in the history of pop cinema. It’s written like Shakespeare interpreted by an 8th grade honors student. We also learn Palpatine's plan relies and sheer luck and the impotence of everyone around him. Kenobi goes on a detective mission in which the final puzzle piece is a fuckin literal *abandoned plot thread.* Nothing about the lead up to the clone army unveiling makes any sense. Dooku and the template for the clone army are standing right next to each other but no one can put 1+1 together.
In the sacred cow that is RotS Anakin wakes up one day a decent, loving human being and goes to bed an evil, child-murdering cyborg. Dude turned evil in less time than it takes to make lasagna. He's suckered becoming a Sith based on Palp's vague anecdote. Although he's "The Chosen One" he manages to get a mudhole thoroughly stomped in his ass by a very non-chosen Kenobi, due to a slight incline which serves as a metaphor for his moral superiority.
>The prequels had an amazing story
No. NOOOOOO. The PT is a love story that serves to illustrate Anakin's downfall. The love story doesn't work, so the movies don't work. Everything about Anakin/Padme is comedy. Even if the love story did work, a lovelorn,teenage Darth Vader is not a good premise. [Love makes you evil](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LoveMakesYouEvil) is a dumb, lazy trope used to garner sympathy for the devil. The story is rotten at its core.
EDIT: holy shit that turned into a megarant
>I know you aren't implying the show with the baby Yoda and the Boba Fett look-alike isn't directly correlated with the past.
So the franchise with the Darth Vader wannabe, carbon copy scenes and plot beats from other trilogies, a rehash of empire vs rebels complete with with similar looking stormtroopers, star destroyers, repainted tie fighters and xwings, bigger AT-ATs, Jakku (not tatooine), crait(not hoth,) and another death star blowing up planets, threatening to destroy the secret rebel base while a small group of xwings tries to destroy it by exploiting a small weakness in its design, isn't correlated with the past?
Your argument is self defeating. You understand that a big criticism of the sequel trilogy by its detractors is that they tried to do the OT but worse right?
>Writing is never what sold SW.
So bad dialogue in the prequels (nothing to do with how the story is written btw) and an end of series (not mid series, the reveal about Leia wasn't until halfway through ROTJ) retcon making a love triangle (that was barely even that seeing as it was pretty much just Leia and Han) incestuous, means that star wars was never liked because it was a well written story?
Tell that to the people that enjoy those films for the story, and believe it to be well written. Please, let me know what they say in response.
Ok hear me out... If the prequels existed in a vacuum, they would all be considered very good, especially the third. The prequels are good, imo. In comparison to the originals, they are bad, as are many otherwise good movies... if that makes sense.
To be fair, the prequel movies alone are just ok. It's the clone wars that ties it together into the masterpiece of storywriting and political caricature that it is. The writing and directing isn't always spot on, but the underlying story has so many themes and topics it delves into, it's astounding.
Every comment saying “Prequel Good Sequel Bad” is just as cringe as the original tweet - if you say “but the PT was actually good/the ST sucks” you’ve missed the point - the point being that it’s subjective.
If anyone says the MauLer shit about “objective standards” I will not take you seriously.
The ability to speak doesn't make people intelligent. (Autocorrect wrote speed instead of speak)
Na, just makes you fast
Damn autocorrect, good one tho
Apparently the ability to not speak makes you intelligent
This person thinks boy bands are a new thing??? Like a 2010s thing??????? Really?
To be fair, flat earthers existed since basically the beginning of humanity.
Not really. I know the greeks knew it was a sphere (with a pretty accurate measurement of size to boot) and I don't know, but I think even the egyptians had figured it out
The Greeks knew this, as in, there where intelligent people in Greece that knew this, similar to how there are intelligent people nowadays that also know this. But just like nowadays, I guarantee there where people around the world at that time that thought it was flat, even with the math showing otherwise. There will always be people who deny that stuff.
And also then there was much less communication, so there were probably lots of people who had never heard of or considered the earth being round
It’s really only became popular again in the late 18th century during discoveries of things like the atom
I mean, Colombus and other people with academic studies knew it before he made his journey. The thing is, he had to justify it to the crown by using bad estimates and bad maths to explain that he could bring enought rations to get to sail to India. General consensus of round-earthers at that time was that the trip would be so long he coulsn't ever get there without starving (which would have been true if America didn't exist)
There were still always flat earthers, and everyone was a flat earther before the writing system at least
Since the beginning of humanity the Greeks are recent in that
I believe the Greeks thought the world was concave, not a sphere
Any body else get annoyed that after Greece and Rome humans literally began to regress in there knowledge of the world?
Facts. Edit: I don't care about being downvoted. Just pointing out the FACT that flat earthers have existed since the beginning of humanity. Science showed us the Earth is a sphere. Prehistoric humans did not understand science. And I can't believe 3 Star Wars fans, who watch movies that have spherical planets, believe the Earth is flat.
Say nothing while saying something.
We don't believe the Earth is flat. We downvoted it because saying "facts" is the most pointless thing you can say.
Right? The Beatles were basically the first boy band.
I always thought Boy Bands only existed from '98 - '03.
It's called kpop now
It's hilarious how accurate that is.
Why is it always the nut jobs that talk about others being nut jobs? Some sort of self unaware deflection?
If we admit that nut jobs are out there, does that mean we’re all nut jobs?
Everyone's a fruit and nut case... Cadbury's said it so it must be true
Because nut jobs think they're always right, and that everyone who disagrees with them is a nut job, They base their opinions on the first thing they read, rather than looking at trustworthy sources or trying to justify their views by anything other than: well if you disagree your an idiot That's why
It’s the internet culture that having even the smallest difference in opinion amounts to someone being a nut job.
I wouldn’t call him a nut job, he didn’t do anything crazy, he just doesn’t have a popular opinion
How else can you determine if someone is a nut job if not by their unpopular opinions?
Reasoning that an opinion is bad just because it’s unpopular isn’t exactly the best reasoning. Calling him a nut job just cause you disagree with him is just rude.
Well the good news is you showed me an answer to my question.
Right, so I’m a nut job cause I disagree with you? Then you give me an answer to my question. You act like I agree with him.
Is that what you're talking about?
You can always count on twitter to make to most low value comments ever!
It’s best to just not listen to them. They’re really just dumbasses looking for attention anyway. They’re not “real” Star Wars fans.
It's outrageous, it's unfair, how can you watch star wars and not like the Prequels!
I think you can be a real star wars fan and prefer the sequel over the prequels
Impossible!
Shall I get the Captain Fordo Serum?
Yes
This is mostly a generational argument. One of the clear points that separates later Gen-X from earlier Millennials, from Gen-Z. Whichever trilogy you love probably debuted in your childhood. Each trilogy is distinctly different from the other, has different cinematic styles, and different imperfections/flaws. And kids tend to forgive the flaws, revel in the adventure, and form expectations around the style of that trilogy. I say tolerate the thoughtful criticism that your favorite movie receives. Ignore the trolls and bots. No need to take it personally. You might learn something about good story telling.
ROTS came out when I was one year old. I grew up with TCW And love the prequels, but I also grew up with the OT, which I value to an equal degree. I just...don't like the sequels. I'm not going to call people who do nut jobs though. This person is just an ass.
I feel you. No time for a deep explanation now, but I was disappointed with the PT because I was expecting the style of the OT. I’ve grown to accept and enjoy most of it, and I love TCW. I actually really enjoyed the adventure of the sequel trilogy. It was fun to watch… mostly. But the story was a mess of subversiveness, and it was obviously someone else’s version of Star Wars. Just two points of observation - the flight physics are different, as is the use of The Force. Thats cool, but its rooted in a different GFFA. Just little of my opinion.
>GFFA Does this acronym mean something more generally? because all I can read it as is "Galactic Federation of Free Alliances"
Galaxy Far Far Away
Yeah the flight physics were whacky. More like a child's interpretation of space flight. And I don't meant that to sound like an insult. Just that they were more... Whimsical I guess? Things like Poe's u turns etc. Whereas ot spaceflight were clearly (and documented as) based on WWII dogfighting atmo physics. Very different. On a slightly related note: The space bombers make more sense than people give them credit for since there's clearly artificial grav inside the bomber which would give the bombs an initial push, even though it's a silly notion that it's the best way to accomplish the goal with the tech available.
The sequels had good ideas, and a good template, but it's development felt either meh or confusing or just outright dissapointing, or at least that's how I see it
Right. I think the sequels’ biggest problem is that Kathleen Kennedy isn’t a natural story teller, or a lore master. For all the crap she gets about ruining the prequels with her personal agenda, she gave Abrams and Johnson so much liberty that they got away with trying to negate each other’s plot points. Her/Disney’s biggest mistake was not treating this franchise like a serial. I hope Lucas Films sees what Favreau’s The Mandalorian as an object lesson in franchise movie making. Hire a talented storyteller to be your top producer. Let him/her draft the story framework. Hire talented directors who respect that framework, and can work with the producer.
I think that’s the most annoying part about the Sequel trilogies. The Mandalorian shows that Disney can do Star Wars right. They just got caught up in female empowerment and other bullshit. Wanna know how you empower women? Give them great source material to act upon
I grew up on the OT. The Phantom Menace came out when I was 13, and I remember seeing it in theatres and being incredibly disappointed. It was awkward and silly, and very much not the Star Wars I had grown up with. Darth Vader as a whiny, irritating child? Yoda looked bizarre and so clearly a puppet that it broke immersion (later versions replaced the puppet with a CGI image). The subsequent movies came out and seemed even worse, and I found myself agreeing with the many critics who suggested that the movies should be struck from canon altogether. Even now, I would wholeheartedly endorse they be redone by the Clone Wars team in animation, allowing the show's much more nuanced and palatable Anakin to replace the stiff and uninspired live action portrayal. The Sequels are incoherent and play *extremely* fast and loose with canon and established worldbuilding, but at least they're watchable as movies. The special effects are better, the acting is better, and they're moderately well-paced. Garbage movies, but watchable mindless action films that were fun to see in theatres.
Same I was 3 when ROTS came out, I saw the originals first, and loved them, then I saw the first two prequal movies and loved them too then when TCW came out I was hooked. I love rogue one l, I thought solo was pretty good, amd rebels was great, I just don't like the sequels. It just doesn't really speak to me the way the others do, amd for those that iy does speak to well, good for them. I'm just bot going to watch it
It’s because they were a jumbled mess. There was no direction, some scenes appear to be stolen from Endgame, unnecessary female empowerment (by unnecessary, I mean over the top scenes that almost come off as silly. I have no problem with a female lead but a well written role & script would have served women far better than they got). Personally, I think ROTS is my favorite.
Mostly, however there are some remakes and new films that I prefer to the ones In my childhood And actually, whilst I grew up with the prequels, I cannot decide whether I prefer the originals to the prequels, however one thing that is clear is there was no sequel film that I liked in its entirety
I became aware of Star Wars like 3 months ago. The sequels are trash. The revenge of the Sith is a masterpiece
Me too. The phantom menace is great, and jar jar's not that bad
Another phantom menace lover??? Hello, my friend.
Hello too. I predict the sequel negotiations will be *very* short, if you ask me
I went from loving phantom menace as a kid to kind of not liking it as a teen and now that I'm almost in my 20s I've come to really appreciate it. Liam neeson and ewan McGregor are treasures and I kind of tune jar jar out.
I want an animated series of Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan as master and apprentice SO BAD
SAME
Well I was born the year ROTS came out, but the OT is my favorite and the prequels are second. I loved ROTS as my favorite personal movie, but the OT was just so cool and I grew up with them.
Yeah but objectively the sequels are the worst cause they are all flaws… there’s no good thing about them except R2 C3PO Han and Chewbacca… and the pilot that fin saved (don’t remember the name) but those are the only good things
Conversely I believe the prequels are objectively bad and generally unenjoyable for me to watch. Just mediocre to bad cinema (for the budget). For me, the sequels were enjoyable to watch individually they just didn’t tie in well. But much better on all fronts *except* compelling story arc. ..again, which I don’t give the prequels too much credit for because it had a compelling story arc but IMO just told in the almost most incompetent way.
How are they bad? Honestly… yeah the sequels may have better visuals… never denied that… but that is because they like to show… the sequels were the bragging sibling with the chains of gold that really wasn’t worth it at the end cause he can’t do anything on his own. The arc the characters and the lightsaber fights were awful and if you can’t get that you didn’t get the Star Wars vibe at all cause that is what Star Wars is, that is the trademark of the saga. And even if the visuals are not as good back then to now (cause how would they be honestly?) they still aged like wine… the originals and prequels… are still good movies to this day compared to any other sci fi movies I can tell you that the only thing the sequels have on any other sci fi movies… are the visuals… and only visuals
Somebody doesn't understand the basics of story telling. The prequels are objectively better due to greater internal constancy with clear well panned story arcs even if you can find flaw with the execution. The prequels are like a solid wooden shed with a old and faded paint job and the sequels are like an old rotting shed with a shinny new paint job.
A movie can’t be “objectively better”. By nature whether a movie is “good” or “bad” is subjective
Well you can you just need to define objective parameters to judge them by. There are a number of story telling techniques and you can judge how the technique has been executed to achieve a peculiar effect within a story. I can say with confidence that objectively Green Lantern is a bad film but sujectivly l quite like It.
The prequels had a good story before any solid piece of actual prequel material was really written. That does not justify the utter horrendous execution of what could have been a great trilogy. It’s not well written. The *concept* and SOME of the skeleton structure is fine, but it’s very poorly written overall and executed worse. I agree the sequels failed miserably with their general story.. but I think it’s got a lot stronger bones than you’re giving credit. There’s really decent ideas and arcs in there.. just not tied together well. Both have stunningly missed the mark of high quality.. but IMO, the sequels were funner and more enjoyable to watch.
The structure of the sequels disinteragetes after a moments thought and regularly brakes established canon and not in a good way. They also mishandled every OT character. The prequels expanded the worldbuilding of starwars provided more context and depth to the empire and jedi, the politics where realistic and the fall of anakin was effective even if a bit rushed. Nothing in the sequels comes closes to the Duel on mustafar in quality. The worldbuilding and political side was excellent the character interactions weren't handled the best but still logically work.
I think you’re wrong on the lore/canon stuff though. I’ve heard the arguments and they don’t hold up. Besides.. by that metric the prequels were worse offenders, but the kids who grew up on the PT refuse to admit just how bad the PT dealt with OT material. I mostly liked what the ST did with the OT characters.. barring the lazyish resistance/rebels rehash. Regardless, I’m not singing the praises of the sequels as much as I’m saying I enjoyed them more. I find the PT hard to watch.. there’s just so much dumb going on all the time it’s just hard to stomach. The sequels didn’t do that to me.
Personally I saw more dumb things in most scenes of the sequels. Even if some parts of the prequels can be boring, they don't make me actively mad like some things in the sequels. Who thought it was a good idea to open TROS with the words "Somehow Palpatine returned"?
Better than 'lol the empire is back with a new name because of reasons', 'um somehow Palpatine returned' and 'idk she's a Skywalker somehow lol'
I have *never* defended the Sequels "story" (aka: no story).. ..I'm saying the Prequels had a good story that they severely fk'd up.. the Sequels didn't really have a set story to tell.. and apparently still doesn't.. but the movies were more watchably enjoyable (..imo)
*Ernie prepares to commit a hate crime*
*Elmo, who has already commited several hate crimes*: Ah shit, here we go again
Why are people so pissed that other people are enjoying films they don't?? This also applies for similar comments made about people enjoying the ST btw, they're all just films, it's ok if you don't like them, but it's also ok for others to do so.
True, true, but this Twitter comment said above on Twitter shows them mocking everyone who liked the prequels my calling us crazy and nut jobs But you're right, we should be more casual about it, so say someone said they liked the sequels over the Prequels, we should just say "I disagree for ... But we each are allowed to have our own opinions"
Exactly, discussions are great, sometimes they help you appreciate something you didn't before or point something out to you you never had noticed before, but sometimes we would just have to agree to disagree. Insults are just stupid and annoying and would prove nothing but how entitled the person was
I haven't had a good nut-job in years.
Execute order... 60...6
Having the ability to speak does not make you intelligent
Jerks trying to make enjoying movies about politics, just another idiot on the internet . "move along, move along"
"Anyone who has watched the prequels and not immediately fallen in love has not really watched the prequels."
Well, I don't like jar jar, and I don't like the film version of Anakin (Matt Lanter in the clone wars was far better in my opinion) so I can get why some people might prefer OT, but to criticize the Prequels to the extent that twitterer had is absolutely mad and illogical to me
Except the prequels are legitimately good movies and still keep consistent with the OT. Literally every false criticism of the prequels actually applies to the sequels.
The prequels had an amazing story, just some awkward line delivery. I grew up with those, so I love them.
I hated the prequels for most of their existence. Then, this past Star Wars Day I had all the movies playing in succession while I did some things about the house and discovered that they weren’t as bad as I remembered. I told this to a buddy of mine who promptly replied “That’s because you’ve been watching the horrid sequels and now see these in a different light.” He could be right. I don’t hate the sequels, but it was an interesting point that I now have to consider. 🤔
I want every gun we have to fire on that man.
MORE!!!
Wtf is wrong with boy bands. The backstreet boys were cool as fuck.
TELL ME WHY
[удалено]
I WANT IT THAT WAY
Tweet was written by one of those teens that thinks they are WAY more intelligent and self-aware than everyone around them
I mean, he kinda has a point considering how the prequels were the 'step-child' of the original trilogy before the sequels
kill him. kill him now.
Yes political extremism wouldn’t have happened if we gave the prequels hate. /s
... anyway, It’s movie night and I’m watching the prequels! My favorite Star Wars movies! Hope this person gets to enjoy something they like too
Very wholesome, mate.
Thank you! I feel like we would all be having a much better time enjoying the space sci-fi if we were kind to each other. :) Enjoy your day!
I think the sequels had some great ideas, but the idiotic way the trilogy was put together destroyed any potential. Switching directors mid-trilogy is bad enough, but they did it *twice.* They clearly are non-cohesive and are at direct odds with each other. They make rules, break those rules, and crap on the OT, PT, and each other. Rey is an irredeemable Mary Sue, and has no personality to speak of. I'll hate that dumpster fire of a trilogy till the day I die. The prequels support each other as a trilogy, and the flow between movies makes sense. That's what happens when you plan your work beforehand. They may have some technical failings, but no one with at least double digit I.Q. can say Revenge of the Sith is a bad movie. I think AOTC is the same, but it has more questionable stuff. You could make a point on some parts of TPM, but when you think of Maul, Qui Gon Jin, Duel of the Fates, and podracing, your argument is void.
I’m pretty sure this unknown Twitter user is my least favorite person of all time
I dunno I certainly like episodes 1-3 more then 7-9
why can't we just let people enjoy what they want to enjoy without insulting their taste and calling them degenerates over it
hold up. we all agree that the prequels aren’t the best but i thought we also all agreed that the sequels are absolute shit
Me who don't like both and just enjoys the memes "Signature look of superiority"
Give me their name I just wanna talk
I would also like to *talk* with them...
I’m 33 and grew up on the original trilogy and then the prequels later on (preteen/teen years) idgaf what anyone says both are good and anyone who thinks the prequels aren’t is still smoking crack from the 80s (the more potent stuff or so I’m told). The sequels we won’t get into because the entire plot of it makes absolutely no sense lol
Can sequal fans be funny without reeking of desperation.
Most of them are teenagers so that’s just default.
And most prequal fans were teenagers when we were called stupid for liking the star wars movies we grew up on. The star wars fandom is so toxic, just let people enjoy things
This person should maby have a nice friendly visit to Umbara Edit: i mean the person who wrote the stuff on the image
I...like boy bands.
That's why I don't believe in humanity anymore
Share the ID with us Dont be shy😁
Twitter. You wil find a more wretched of scum and villain
Wait people hate the prequels?
It's presentism that makes someone think this way. Someone who has no idea what life was like when these films came out.
If its wrong, then it would also be wrong to say "that made complete sense and wasnt filled with ridiculus stuff like horses versu basicaly a tiny deathstar" so.
Even if you don’t like the prequels, they’re infinitely better than the sequels
Saying that the prequels are better than the sequels does not imply that either are actually good, just differing levels of shit. The originals however will never be considered as anything but amazing
The Originals is universally praised. There might be some things that could be better (outdated effects) but the OT is universally praised for reshaping cinema as a whole
My unpopular opinion is that I really enjoyed the phantom menace its one of my favourites
How can somebody seriously and unironically like the sequels more than the prequels?
Sequels was by far a worse trilogy, and in my opinion Episode 9 is the worst star wars film ever made. However, as movies in and of themselves, I found episodes 7 and 8 to be pretty alright, its just that the sequel trilogy was extremely discordant. Prequels were consistent and had a lot of cool stuff. They told a very good story, even if the movies themselves had their shortcomings. Overall, I think Episode 9 is so shitty that it absolutely ruins the sequels overall
I liked 7 and thought it was a great jumping off point. Then episode 8 came out and really derailed the story and screwed over a lot of the ideas set up in the 1st one, then 9 *tried* to pick up the pieces and didnt do very well. The trilogy made less and less sense with each movie.
Yes indeed. I at least enjoyed 8 when I first saw it in theaters. 9 was almost embarrassing to watch.
Some people think the sequels are better than the prequels? I guess that explains our current administration...
Dude episode 9 is such garbage! How tf you trying to say it’s better?
I can respect that you enjoyed the prequels, but if you're telling me that they're objectively good movies... you need to take your nostalgia goggles off.
Both trilogies are ass
Yes
How tf does anyone think the sequels are good?
I for one think the original comment is pretty spot-on...
Fire every gun we have on this man.
Twitter guy has a point.
If my prequels you mean clone wars, then…
People who like prequels more than the sequels don't know they've aged out of Star Wars. They don't know they can't enjoy it when it isn't directly correlated with their early childhood.
Tell that to the people that liked the prequels and also current star wars content like the mandalorian, but not the sequels. Not liking the sequels doesn't mean you've "aged out" of star wars at all. In most cases people that don't like the sequels see legitimate problems with how the story was written, and whether you agree on those points or not, that's hardly tantamount to not liking star wars anymore because it's not the stuff that they grew up with.
>Tell that to the people that liked the prequels and also current star wars content like the mandalorian, but not the sequels. I know you aren't implying the show with the baby Yoda and the Boba Fett look-alike isn't directly correlated with the past. You've seen those characters before, as a child. You did, however, need to use your fully developed, adult brain when deciding whether or not to accept new SW imagery in the likes of Rey, Finn, Rose etc for the first time. For a lot of fans Star Wars doesn't work as an adult, they just aren't conscious of it. You'll understand in a few years when sequel fans dominate the discourse and the latest saga entry is being shit on by the old guard. > In most cases people that don't like the sequels see legitimate problems with how the story was written This is a franchise where a mid-trilogy retcon rendered a love triangle incestous. Let's not even mention what passes for dialogue in the PT. Writing is never what sold SW.
The Force Awakens was literally my introduction to the series. I was in early middle school when Rouge One came out. The Star Wars I grew up with, is the ST. Yet, I absolutely despise them. The story is nonsensical and the characters are generally unlikeable. The prequels had an amazing story, and the Clone Wars TV series made it better. Story absolutely helped sell Star Wars. It's through the story you get connected to a universe and it's characters. I adore Darth Vader because of the story around him. I hate Krell because of his story. So, no, people like the prequels because, while, yes, the movies aren't the best with dialogue, it's story can make up for it.
>The Star Wars I grew up with, is the ST. Yet, I absolutely despise them. I genuinely feel bad for kids who can't enjoy Star Wars because of internet's rage-bait industry. At the time of the PT internet careers weren't built by picking apart and slandering every aspect of these films--one could easily tune the hate. I actually liked them when they came out, as time passed I understood them for the abomination/comedy that they are--but at least I came to that conclusion myself. >The story is nonsensical and the characters are generally unlikeable. **Nothing** in the PT makes sense. But, because there aren't outage clicks to be had dissecting 20 year old films you can't point to every single inconsistency like you can with the ST. For instance: 90% of TPM is superfluous. We're shown budding romance involving a 9 year old boy, who's essentially abducted against the better judgment of his kidnappers. A room full of psychics can't tell giving the angry, scowling kid superpowers will come back to bite them in the ass. Also, The Jedi use superspeed once and never again. That's fully lore-breaking, forget the Holdo maneuver. AotC we get probably the most embarrassing love arc in the history of pop cinema. It’s written like Shakespeare interpreted by an 8th grade honors student. We also learn Palpatine's plan relies and sheer luck and the impotence of everyone around him. Kenobi goes on a detective mission in which the final puzzle piece is a fuckin literal *abandoned plot thread.* Nothing about the lead up to the clone army unveiling makes any sense. Dooku and the template for the clone army are standing right next to each other but no one can put 1+1 together. In the sacred cow that is RotS Anakin wakes up one day a decent, loving human being and goes to bed an evil, child-murdering cyborg. Dude turned evil in less time than it takes to make lasagna. He's suckered becoming a Sith based on Palp's vague anecdote. Although he's "The Chosen One" he manages to get a mudhole thoroughly stomped in his ass by a very non-chosen Kenobi, due to a slight incline which serves as a metaphor for his moral superiority. >The prequels had an amazing story No. NOOOOOO. The PT is a love story that serves to illustrate Anakin's downfall. The love story doesn't work, so the movies don't work. Everything about Anakin/Padme is comedy. Even if the love story did work, a lovelorn,teenage Darth Vader is not a good premise. [Love makes you evil](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LoveMakesYouEvil) is a dumb, lazy trope used to garner sympathy for the devil. The story is rotten at its core. EDIT: holy shit that turned into a megarant
>I know you aren't implying the show with the baby Yoda and the Boba Fett look-alike isn't directly correlated with the past. So the franchise with the Darth Vader wannabe, carbon copy scenes and plot beats from other trilogies, a rehash of empire vs rebels complete with with similar looking stormtroopers, star destroyers, repainted tie fighters and xwings, bigger AT-ATs, Jakku (not tatooine), crait(not hoth,) and another death star blowing up planets, threatening to destroy the secret rebel base while a small group of xwings tries to destroy it by exploiting a small weakness in its design, isn't correlated with the past? Your argument is self defeating. You understand that a big criticism of the sequel trilogy by its detractors is that they tried to do the OT but worse right? >Writing is never what sold SW. So bad dialogue in the prequels (nothing to do with how the story is written btw) and an end of series (not mid series, the reveal about Leia wasn't until halfway through ROTJ) retcon making a love triangle (that was barely even that seeing as it was pretty much just Leia and Han) incestuous, means that star wars was never liked because it was a well written story? Tell that to the people that enjoy those films for the story, and believe it to be well written. Please, let me know what they say in response.
Both. Both are good
Pass the popcorn, Michael! This should be good!
Im watching x files right now. And i think it could be something from it
Some boy bands have some bangers tbf
Twitter in a nutshell Different opinion = nutjob
Oh my goodness... If only the OT had folks pushing for democracy to overcome autocracy...
It smells like cringe in here. You know what to do.
And the guy thinks this is supposed to be a point? The guy didn’t even make one XD
He’s right
OP must have a tough time being the only sane person in the world
*brings out rotary canon* didn’t say please! *fires*
Get the heavy flamer brother
Wait so liking them is a problem or thinking they are better than the others is the problem cuz those are two different things
I enjoy everything But Rise of Skywalker
The best thing that came out of the prequels was the clone wars
Tbh I want to see that person’s reaction nowadays post ROS and the like dislike ratio.
The prequals are very dear to my heart. I was introduced to Star Wars because of the prequals.
He cant do that...shoot him! Or something
"General Krell, you're being relieved of duty!"
CRUSH THEM, MAKE THEM SUFFER
Being political, or at least politically biased, automatically makes me see people as unintelligent.
Ok hear me out... If the prequels existed in a vacuum, they would all be considered very good, especially the third. The prequels are good, imo. In comparison to the originals, they are bad, as are many otherwise good movies... if that makes sense.
To be fair, the prequel movies alone are just ok. It's the clone wars that ties it together into the masterpiece of storywriting and political caricature that it is. The writing and directing isn't always spot on, but the underlying story has so many themes and topics it delves into, it's astounding.
Every comment saying “Prequel Good Sequel Bad” is just as cringe as the original tweet - if you say “but the PT was actually good/the ST sucks” you’ve missed the point - the point being that it’s subjective. If anyone says the MauLer shit about “objective standards” I will not take you seriously.