Poll - Star Wars Prequels vs. Star Wars Sequels / Anthology

I haven't seen any of the newer films but they probably beat the prequels overall... Just not to my tastes all that much I'm GUESSING.:oldrazz:
 
Depending on my mood, I might rank Revenge of the Sith above Rogue One but for all their flaws, the newer movies are still better than the prequels. Give The Last Jedi all the **** you want, it's still miles better than The Phantom Menace or Attack of the Clones.
 
The sequels. Phantom Menace is a decent film buried under terrible execution, Revenge of the Sith is a decent script with terrible acting, and Attack of the Clones is such an abortion you need Roe v. Wade to defend it. Force Awakens is good, Last Jedi (the best of the bunch after the OT) will get its props once people get used to the idea that Star Wars can't keep doing almost everything the same, and Rogue One is a terrific action film.
 
Sequels hand down, not even a contest. While I appreciate a lot of the stuff they tried to do with the Prequels (It was new, different from what Star Wars had shown before) the execution was, for the most part abysmal. The lines were a whole new level of cringe and 2/3 of the lead trio ranged from completely uninteresting to just downright awful.
 
Definitely the sequels. I have huge problems with TLJ, and I actually think ROTS is under rated. But for overall quality, yeah, the newer movies win that one.
 
Is this even a choice ? New Trilogy and Spin off's easily. It's not even a decision that requires thought.
 
Star Wars Prequels vs. 2 Star Wars Sequels and another prequel.
 
Sequels...by far. But they have yet to reach their full potential. A potential that might be achieved only if they look at the amazing concepts from the Prequels for worlds and the general scale of the conflicts, instead of constantly retreading the same concepts of the original trilogy. Last Jedi cam close, but it should have expanded more upon why the Jedi were bad for the galaxy in Luke's eyes.

I think they need to start making more mythical stories. Stuff like what The Old Republic trailers have given us are exactly the type of stuff i would like to start seeing on the big screen.

[YT]Nzq9epS2b1A[/YT]
 
This is not even a fair fight. While the ST may not be OT quality, the films are at least enjoyable. The PT is just absolute trash. They're poorly written and visually look like a video game with real people inserted into it. They just look awful. The ST actually look like professional films, and while TFA may be guilty of being a rehash of ANH, still is at least entertaining. Loved TLJ. HATE all the prequel films.
 
Force Awakens
The Last Jedi

Rogue One

Phantom Menace
Revenge Of The Sith

Attack Of The Clones
 
Both are crap, but prequels were far more imaginative.
 
I know the trilogy isn't finished yet, but at this point I'm going to go with the prequels. The prequels have a lot of flaws in their execution, but at least there's an interesting and meaningful story there that attempts to do something new. The sequel trilogy is mostly just cashing in on the nostalgia from the OT movies and regurgitating it's basic story beats and designs. Rebels vs Empire 2.0, X-wings vs. Tie Fighters, etc. I also like the characters from the prequels more, they just feel more developed and more grounded to me.

On a side note I think the prequel hate is getting a bit out of hand, and these new movies are fueling it more than ever. As someone who grew up with the OT and the Prequels at the same time, I didn't really draw a distinction between the two until fairly recently. As an adult I realize that the prequels aren't as good as the OT, but I don't think they're quite the abominations that some people make them out to be. A lot of the hate they get seems somewhat retroactive, and I feel like the ST will be equally hated in a decade or so.

Both are crap, but prequels were far more imaginative.

In short, I agree with this.
 
I know the trilogy isn't finished yet, but at this point I'm going to go with the prequels. The prequels have a lot of flaws in their execution, but at least there's an interesting and meaningful story there that attempts to do something new. The sequel trilogy is mostly just cashing in on the nostalgia from the OT movies and regurgitating it's basic story beats and designs. Rebels vs Empire 2.0, X-wings vs. Tie Fighters, etc. I also like the characters from the prequels more, they just feel more developed and more grounded to me.

On a side note I think the prequel hate is getting a bit out of hand, and these new movies are fueling it more than ever. As someone who grew up with the OT and the Prequels at the same time, I didn't really draw a distinction between the two until fairly recently. As an adult I realize that the prequels aren't as good as the OT, but I don't think they're quite the abominations that some people make them out to be. A lot of the hate they get seems somewhat retroactive, and I feel like the ST will be equally hated in a decade or so.



In short, I agree with this.

For some, the PT hate may be retroactive. But the complaints people hurl at them now are complaints I was the first one to voice when they were new. So, it just looks like over time people have come around to my line of thinking. At least a very fair number have. The PT may have had some ideas behind them, but the level of execution is so poor, it ruins any good ideas they had. As far as the characters, I am sorry, but I cannot agree. Give me Rey and Finn over any amount of watching Anakin and Padme. My GOD! The only well done characters in the PT were Palpatine and Obi-Won.

On a design level, those movies look ugly 85% of the time (the CG overload makes them look like bad video games), they lack shot variety (all dialogue scenes have the same Medium, Close-up, medium close-up, etc use...they don't play with the camera at all), and the performances are just lazy. I see more effort in the acting of the ST characters, I can tell there was actual set design and art direction (not CGing everything in later...except maybe a table and/or chair), and the films are dynamically shot. I don't even really agree the PT was all that much more original, as Lucas also with this making things rhyme mentality also rehashed various moments and plot elements in those as well. For me, they are not just bad Star Wars movies, they're just bad movies. The intention may have been there, but the intention was done in the laziest possible manner and showed that Lucas just didn't have it anymore.

I know at the end of the day it comes down to taste and if you like the PT, that is fine...but my hate was there day 1.
 
Last edited:
This is not even a fair fight. While the ST may not be OT quality, the films are at least enjoyable. The PT is just absolute trash. They're poorly written and visually look like a video game with real people inserted into it. They just look awful. The ST actually look like professional films, and while TFA may be guilty of being a rehash of ANH, still is at least entertaining. Loved TLJ. HATE all the prequel films.

I have to disagree a bit. I was watching some clips from the end battle of AOTC the other day, and a lot of it holds up fine. Occasionally there's a video game-looking shot, but a lot of the vehicle/droid effects look great. Most of the shots of the clones are pretty convincing. You also have to keep in mind that the prequels were pretty much the first movies to use CGI at this scale. When you consider that, it's actually pretty impressive.

The main things that look bad to me in the prequels are the creature effects, and I'd argue that a lot of the creature effects in the ST are equally bad by modern standards. I thought the porgs looked bad in almost every shot, and those horses looked terrible and creepy in TLJ. I thought Snoke and Maz Kanata looked bad in TFA.

Honestly, I thought the visual effects in Thor Ragnarok were pretty bad at times. That wolf looked very cartoony, Hela's army looked like a video game effect, and even Hulk looked kind of fake at times. Most people (myself included) say they don't care because the effects fit the world and the tone that the movie establishes. I'd kind of argue the same is true of the prequels.
 
I can't believe someone would hate the ST this much to create this poll.
 
I have to disagree a bit. I was watching some clips from the end battle of AOTC the other day, and a lot of it holds up fine. Occasionally there's a video game-looking shot, but a lot of the vehicle/droid effects look great. Most of the shots of the clones are pretty convincing. You also have to keep in mind that the prequels were pretty much the first movies to use CGI at this scale. When you consider that, it's actually pretty impressive.

The main things that look bad to me in the prequels are the creature effects, and I'd argue that a lot of the creature effects in the ST are equally bad by modern standards. I thought the porgs looked bad in almost every shot, and those horses looked terrible and creepy in TLJ. I thought Snoke and Maz Kanata looked bad in TFA.

The Porgs looked better than that CG Lizard thing in ROTS. My god was that awful.

I will give you the creature things on Canto Bight look bad. That sequence as whole had bad CG. But, that was a bad scene with CG, the PT are pretty much a CG mess. On the final battle front, I don't agree. CG Yoda is bad. The creatures are bad, and I can feel the stunt doubles. While the PT may be using CG before it is where it was today, it changes little. TESB has some dated effects, but Cloud City and such today still look gorgeous and hold up because they made real sets, and largely the newer movies do real sets with CG enhancement, not whole CG environments. That is the visual difference, and for me, it shows. In 20 years, even if the ST CG looks dated by the standards of that future, the real set use they employ will stand the test of time. In 20 years, Snoke's Throne Room still will look good, while the PT environments will only look worse and more dated.

Honestly, I thought the visual effects in Thor Ragnarok were pretty bad at times. That wolf looked very cartoony, Hela's army looked like a video game effect, and even Hulk looked kind of fake at times. Most people (myself included) say they don't care because the effects fit the world and the tone that the movie establishes. I'd kind of argue the same is true of the prequels.

Not that Ragnarok means anything a Star Wars topic, but the SFX in Ragnarok are not always convincing, but they were stylized. If the effects won't look 100% convincing, then stylizing them makes them look better. So, Thor: Ragnarok's SFX I think turned out great for that reason.
 
The sequels without a doubt.
I (re)watched the PT a couple of months ago, it's bad. The dialogues are lame whether in English or French, the CGI are too much and Anakin story is a joke.
To each its own, at least if you like the PT that makes more SW movies to enjoy :)
 
Not even close. The sequels. I do prefer ROTS over TFA, but that's merely the best prequel versus the weakest new film. Every other matchup is in favor of the new ones.
 
For some, the PT hate may be retroactive. But the complaints people hurl at them now are complaints I was the first one to voice when they were new. So, it just looks like over time people have come around to my line of thinking. At least a very fair number have.

I think the amount of hype that TPM got led to a lot of fans being in denial about its quality during its first run. It had more hype than any other film I can remember, even more than Batman 1989 and Jurassic Park, which is saying a lot.

Within about a year though and certainly by the time AOTC was coming out, it was widely accepted that it was junk. The treatment of the prequels was far from the typical fanboy "New Toy Cycle" where it often becomes popular to put down the old films to prop up the new ones like what happened to Sam Raimi's Spider-Man. The prequels were hated while they were current and a decade before the sequels were even a glimmer.
 
Still like TPM. It's not a good movie though. I dislike the other two quite a bit, especially AotC. All three are bad films.

TFA, I adore. TLJ, I like quite a lot. Rogue One was at the very least better then the prequels.
 
I think the amount of hype that TPM got led to a lot of fans being in denial about its quality during its first run. It had more hype than any other film I can remember, even more than Batman 1989 and Jurassic Park, which is saying a lot.

Within about a year though and certainly by the time AOTC was coming out, it was widely accepted that it was junk. The treatment of the prequels was far from the typical fanboy "New Toy Cycle" where it often becomes popular to put down the old films to prop up the new ones like what happened to Sam Raimi's Spider-Man. The prequels were hated while they were current and a decade before the sequels were even a glimmer.

That was my experience as well. TPM, we were all in shock and wanted to so desperately love the movie, but once the shock wore off, the gloves were off. From there, each prequel release had plenty of critics of them. There was never a time the PT as a whole was loved.
 
I wasn't even a teen when TPM came out. What is all your excuses? :o
 
The sequels, and theres no question about it. The prequels are very flawed and while i do like and accept them for what they are, especially TPM and Revenge of the sith, the sequels are already leagues better in every way. Better acting, Better story, and better character development. Rey, Finn, and Kylo ren are already the most compelling characters in Star Wars since the OT. and Kylo Ren is rapidly becoming my favorite Star Wars villain.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
200,509
Messages
21,742,813
Members
45,573
Latest member
vortep88
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"