• wjrii@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Prequels were trash, but 3 was the worst of them.

    TWO was the worst of them, IMHO, but you deserve credit for realizing that 3 is overrated and a saber battle with lava and a bunch of good guys dying just makes it dark, not good. It has every issue that 1 and 2 do, and adds a few new ones.

    Dial back Jar Jar, age Anakin up 5 years, and accept that Liam Neeson is the lead, and you’ve got a halfway decent Star War.

    Q: Why did Qui-Gon lose to Maul?
    
    A: He was tired from carrying the whole movie.
    
    • eodur@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Two is only “better” due to the fact it was entirely unmemorable. I recall something about a cloning facility on a water world and some robot guy that wasn’t a robot.

      The worst sin in three IMHO was belaboring every little plot point to connect up to four. It was brutal to watch. In many ways it reminded me of the “writing” for the last season of GoT.

      • wjrii@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        55 minutes ago

        belaboring every little plot point to connect up to four

        That would be one of the “new ones” I was thinking of, and they didn’t even do it well. Leia remembers her real mother, explicitly in the script, so Lucas just says, “nah… it’d feel cooler if she died in childbirth.” Make the nerds hand-wave something about the Force until I can rewrite and re-film Ep6.