Poll of the Day > Hot take: The prequel trilogy is better than Rise of the Skywalker.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Yes


---

Ice cold

---

I'm still letting it sit.

Rise of Skywalker was definitely worse than the best of the prequels, Revenge of the Sith. It was visually impressive but the plot was a total mess.

---

All of the sequels are better than all of the prequels

---

I dont care if its been almost 2 decades since the prequels, they did NOT get better over time. They were and always will be shit.

the sequels are actually enjoyable and not that bad

---

That's not even a hot take. Most would agree at this point that the PT>ST, which is pretty remarkable.

---

Metalsonic66 posted...

All of the sequels are better than all of the prequels

---

True, I just saw the final movie and I would compare it approximately to Suicide Squad in quality

I'd agree although I think attack of the clones is worse.

---

wwinterj25 posted...

I'd agree although I think attack of the clones is worse.

AotC's biggest offense are the horrid Anakin and Padme scenes, which admittedly take up a lot of time. They are poorly acted, the writing is awful, largely pointless, and a stupid plot point that sets up an even dumber plot point (Anakin's reason for falling in RotS).

But TRoS's Palpatine non-sense and completely loose way they apply the Force shits on the entire series canon and point, which is a greater sin than anything else.

---

Metalsonic66 posted...

All of the sequels are better than all of the prequels

This.

RoS is the worst of the sequels, but it's still better than the dross that was turned out in the prequels.

---

3 > 9 > ugh who cares

---

RoS was way better than the last jedi

---

The story of the prequels is okay, just executed poorly. Rise of Skywalker always fighting an uphill battle given what it inherited from the previous film.

No Darth Maul fight guarantees this.
---

Who cares about the Disney fanfic?

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F574Z59IEkk

---

I am starting to get the feeling that a lot of the outcry over the sequels has to do with something being made obvious, that was only implied in the prequels and the originals and might have flown over people's heads before.


---

4=5=6 >> 8 > 7 > 9 >> 1 >> 3 > 2

---

I havent decided where I rank Rise of Skywalker yet, but I do know I like it more than The Last Jedi (which I still like, but its my least favorite of the main numbered saga).

That said, Revenge of the Sith is still my favorite after the originals, but The Force Awakens is very close after that.

---

What's this in my pocket?

A tiny monk!

I'm high as fuck.

---

The prequels are dumb, but they are still memorable.

There were a lot of original things that happened and were created, even if they were dumb.

The Disney Trilogy is kind of just forgettable.

Years from now people will still be making prequel memes because there is memorable stuff in those dumb movies.

But people won't be talking about the Disney Trilogy anymore outside of "plan your trilogy, don't just wing it movie to movie".
---

TigerTycoon posted...

The prequels are dumb, but they are still memorable.

There were a lot of original things that happened and were created, even if they were dumb.

The Disney Trilogy is kind of just forgettable.

Years from now people will still be making prequel memes because there is memorable stuff in those dumb movies.

But people won't be talking about the Disney Trilogy anymore outside of "plan your trilogy, don't just wing it movie to movie".

The prequels have the Clone Wars to really bolster the characters imo, and 3 was good despite it's flaws, both of those are way more loved than Disney's bs it seems

Disney has one dimensional characters and shits on the OT

---

Yes TC, I agree.

---

Muscles posted...

The prequels have the Clone Wars to really bolster the characters imo

Any movie trilogy that needs double digit hours of ancillary material covered in a completely different medium to wallpaper over its flaws has done something seriously wrong with its life.

Muscles posted...

Disney has one dimensional characters and shits on the OT

And the PT doesn't?

Seriously, have people forgotten that the PT turned Darth Vader, arguably the most iconic fictional villain ever, into an angsty teenager that leg-humped his way to the dark side? Or that it turned the Force from a mystical energy field into a bacterial infection? Or that the Jedi were portrayed not as a sect of enlightened warrior-mystics, but as a bunch of scowling old guys that sat in a circle and talked about politics all day?

And this is without touching the myriad of plotholes that the PT opened up, like how Leia could possibly remember her mother when she was all of three minutes old when Padme suddenly died of the dumbest cause imaginable; or how Obi-Wan somehow completely forgets R2-D2 (and vice versa) and also claims to have never owned a droid despite, y'know, owning a droid in Episode III; or how Obi-Wan claims Anakin was already an amazing pilot when he met him despite the fact that Episode I shows us that Anakin had never even set foot inside a starship when he met Kenobi (and also that he was nine years old).

I feel like people have forgotten just how badly the PT fucked with the OT and just straight-up ignored things it had already established when it was convenient to do so. Say what you will about the ST, at least the characters were consistent with their OT incarnations. At least it didn't inspire the creator to go back and retroactively edit the originals and add in a bunch of pointless bullshit that actively makes them worse.

TigerTycoon posted...

The prequels are dumb, but they are still memorable.

The Room is similarly memorable and for pretty much the same reasons; that doesn't mean it's a good movie.

---

darkknight109 posted...

The Room is similarly memorable and for pretty much the same reasons; that doesn't mean it's a good movie.

You realize that while nobody thinks the Room is a good movie, they love the Room as a movie, right?

It's the defining "so bad it's good" movie.

The prequels can't even claim to be that.
---

Threepio was built by a kid in a cave with a box of scraps

---

Metalsonic66 posted...

Threepio was built by a kid in a cave with a box of scraps

Well I'm sorry, I'm not Force Jesus.
---

darkknight109 posted...

Or that the Jedi were portrayed not as a sect of enlightened warrior-mystics, but as a bunch of scowling old guys that sat in a circle and talked about politics all day?

The OT does not make a good case for the Jedi's enlightenment at all. Both Obi-Wan and Yoda made stupid decisions, but for some reason people overlook that and then get upset when the Prequel Trilogy made it a bit more obvious and then the Sequel Trilogy outright states the Jedi were idiots.

---

TigerTycoon posted...

You realize that while nobody thinks the Room is a good movie, they love the Room as a movie, right?

It's the defining "so bad it's good" movie.

The prequels can't even claim to be that.

Sure, but you're pretty much restating my point here.

The Room is beloved because it's bad (actually because it's a level beyond bad). The movie itself isn't entertaining, the absolute awfulness of it is what's entertaining.

And if people were saying the same thing about the prequels, fine. If they're saying that the movie was so terrible that its awfulness actually becomes entertaining... well, I'd disagree (as you pointed out, the PT can't even claim that small solace), but I'd see the logic.

But no, you have people saying that the prequels unironically were good movies because they provided a bunch of memes. Which is all kinds of ridiculous.

---

Ben Swolo was a good meme

---

darkknight109 posted...

Seriously, have people forgotten that the PT turned Darth Vader, arguably the most iconic fictional villain ever, into an angsty teenager that leg-humped his way to the dark side?

That's not shitting on canon, though- hell, there's almost no way Anakin WOULDN'T be angsty. As it's repeatedly stated, becoming moody, short-tempered, and impatient is a natural path to the Dark Side. Anger>Fear>Hatred>Dark Side. Having Anakin be a stone-cold, evil hearted bastard would be unrealistic and stupid.

What was clearly weak was WHY he became angsty- Padme. He should have just been written to be impatient and frustrated that the Jedi were holing him back, possibly out of their own fear. Which the movies DO show, it's just that Padme and his prophecy ending up becoming the lynch-pin reason, which is dumb.

Or that it turned the Force from a mystical energy field into a bacterial infection?

As fucking stupid as that is, it doesn't really change anything, though. It just attempts to apply a science-y way to measure the Force. Dumb, but this doesn't ultimately matter, and is never mentioned after TPM.

Or that the Jedi were portrayed not as a sect of enlightened warrior-mystics, but as a bunch of scowling old guys that sat in a circle and talked about politics all day?

And...why wouldn't that be the case? The Republic is portrayed as a relatively stable enterprise, that's just starting to break apart in civil conflict. It makes perfect sense for them to be more political and communal.

On top of that, I'm not sure what movies you were watching, but a big part of II and III WAS showing the Jedi be badass, enlightened warrior-mystics.To the point where a plot point of emphasis is that the Jedi don't have the numbers or time to be the Republican's personal army. Hence the need for the Clone Army.

And this is without touching the myriad of plotholes that the PT opened up, like how Leia could possibly remember her mother when she was all of three minutes old when Padme suddenly died of the dumbest cause imaginable; or how Obi-Wan somehow completely forgets R2-D2 (and vice versa) and also claims to have never owned a droid despite, y'know, owning a droid in Episode III; or how Obi-Wan claims Anakin was already an amazing pilot when he met him despite the fact that Episode I shows us that Anakin had never even set foot inside a starship when he met Kenobi (and also that he was nine years old).

Only the first one is a plothole, but one that ultimately doesn't really matter or affect anything. It really can't be justified how Lucas fucked that point up with Leia. That said, it's just a bad continuity error, and doesn't ultimate affect the story or change anything, which is what you're confusing the PT for doing, when the ST ACTUALLY is guilty of this- a LOT (more on that below).

Obi-Wan claiming to not own a droid isn't really a plothole, because it's debatable if their Star Droids are just assigned to Jedi and their ships, rather than being "owned" by them. This is clearly different than Anankin, say, owning C-3PO. And no one seems to have ever concretely owned R2-D2, beside from maybe Luke from Empire onward.

And Anakin being an accomplished pilot comes from A) his Pod-Racing B) his exploits on the Battle of Naboo, which Obi would have heard about later.

Say what you will about the ST, at least the characters were consistent with their OT incarnations.

Yeah, no. Largely the biggest gripe with TLJ and the ST as a whole is how badly they fucked up Luke's character. Leia and Han are barely in it enough to matter.

Now, compare this to actually shitting on the OT, like:
-Completely doing a 180 on Luke's character
-breaking the lore of space travel in half: "Holdo maneuver" (shouldn't be possible) or Hyperspeed skipping (literally impossible as established by the OT. Entire scenes revolve around the plotpoint that going to Hyperspeed needs to be done in a speific way)
-Taking absolutely hilarious liberties with The Force, allowing it to randomly now teleport objects, interact with objects physically from far away/via the Force, heal, life drain, apparently the ability to ghost possess people (or something), Force Ghosts can physically and metaphysically interact with the real world, etc. jesus I can;t go on
-Basically rehashing the entire OT in general

And that's just speaking strictly within the confines of "shit on OT." There's SO much else that's bad in addition to this. How much random shit happens in TRoS without any explanation alone is staggering. There's a lot bad about the PT, but the ST look like they were made by someone who has no idea what Star Wars is, or simply doesn't give a fuck,


---

If I went into RoS blind, knowing nothing of 40 years of Jedi lore, I'd think it was a decent movie.

That being said, THAT'S NOT HOW THIS WORKS! THAT'S NOT HOW ANY OF THIS WORKS!

from "the dead speak" in the opening crawl, to "somehow Palpatine has returned" to the "Force dyad" shenanigans...what the literal fuck?

---

Copypasta

---

I still have a soft spot for the prequels though.

I mean, they gave us Ewan McGregor as Obi-Wan, Christopher Lee as Dooku, Samuel Jackson as Windu, etc.

Xfma100 posted...

I still have a soft spot for the prequels though

same. It was a mostly cool story that was just executed pretty badly. The ST is a terrible story with a lot of polish on it to make it look shiny.

---

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

That's not shitting on canon, though- hell, there's almost no way Anakin WOULDN'T be angsty.

Sure there is.

There's plenty of "original sins" that could have been substituted for teenage angst. Jealousy; arrogance; anger; impatience; there's no reason why Anakin's fall had to be so incredibly cringy.

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

Dumb, but this doesn't ultimately matter, and is never mentioned after TPM.

"Darth Plagueis was a Dark Lord of the Sith so powerful and so wise, he could use the Force to influence the midichlorians to create...life." - Palpatine, Revenge of the Sith.

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

And...why wouldn't that be the case?

It's certainly not what Yoda and Obi-Wan suggested in their own representations of the Jedi and the Force in the OT.

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

On top of that, I'm not sure what movies you were watching, but a big part of II and III WAS showing the Jedi be badass, enlightened warrior-mystics.

The only action the Jedi saw in Episode II was a fight in an arena, where they got their asses handed to them until the cavalry arrived in the form of the clones. In Episode III we saw a bunch of them get shot in the back by glorified stormtroopers. That is basically the sum-total of their characterization in the prequel trilogy.

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

And no one seems to have ever concretely owned R2-D2, beside from maybe Luke from Empire onward.

Which doesn't change the fact that even though R2-D2 wasn't owned by Obi-Wan they still travelled together and had extensive adventures. ANH was far from their first time meeting. Even if Obi-Wan had (somehow) forgotten all about his apprentice and partner's droid, there's a zero percent chance that Artoo would have forgotten about him.

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

And Anakin being an accomplished pilot comes from A) his Pod-Racing B) his exploits on the Battle of Naboo, which Obi would have heard about later.

Pod-racing isn't piloting, though. And Naboo was literally his first time flying a ship, where he won a battle almost completely by accident. Hard to call him "already an amazing pilot" based on that resume.

---

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

-Completely doing a 180 on Luke's character

I have never agreed with this idea.

TLJ is completely consistent with OT Luke. People seem to think that Luke is some pacifistic flower child, wise and patient, when that is literally the polar opposite of how he was portrayed in the OT. Luke was a creature of passion. He was reckless and impatient, always going with his gut instinct instead of thinking things through, one who habitually leaped before he looked, and one who frequently allowed his aggression to get the better of him.

These traits, particularly his emotional and empathetic nature, were sometimes his greatest strength and sometimes his biggest weakness. He ignored the advice of two experienced Jedi Masters when he rushed to confront Vader in ESB out of fear his friends were in danger, something that very nearly got him killed; he did it again in RotJ when they told him that Anakin Skywalker was dead and that the only way to deal with Vader was to kill him. The first one was a bad call, the second a far better one. In ESB he was the first one to draw his weapon against Vader and he made the first strike, showing his aggression; in RotJ, he very nearly lost himself to his rage when Leia was threatened and came within a hair's breadth of falling to the dark side and fulfilling the Emperor's plan.

And in TLJ? We find him a bitter, broken man and we eventually find out why. Because he failed. Because the son of his beloved sister and best friend was entrusted to his care and Luke was not able to save him from his inner darkness. Worse, Luke himself is the one who gave him the final push over the edge. When Luke glimpses inside Ben's mind and sees the darkness festering within, he panics - he is reminded of Vader, his own father and the man whose incredible power ended the previous Jedi order and brought the galaxy to its knees, ushering in three decades of darkness and tyranny that was only ended at a horrific cost in lives and treasure. And Luke knew those costs better than most, having lost friends and loved ones to Vader and his minions. So his instinctual reaction, his reflexive response to seeing a threat that could bring back the darkness that he had lost so much to was to end it then and there. That momentary panic, that spark of aggression is entirely in character and Luke immediately realizes it is wrong... but too late to save himself from the consequences of his actions.

I see absolutely nothing inconsistent in that characterization. I'm not sure what people were expecting from a sequel-era Luke, because from where I sit he was written perfectly (and Mark Hamill's acting was fucking fantastic - best character in TLJ and it's not even close).

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

Hyperspeed skipping (literally impossible as established by the OT. Entire scenes revolve around the plotpoint that going to Hyperspeed needs to be done in a speific way)
-Taking absolutely hilarious liberties with The Force, allowing it to randomly now teleport objects, interact with objects physically from far away/via the Force, heal, life drain, apparently the ability to ghost possess people (or something), Force Ghosts can physically and metaphysically interact with the real world, etc. jesus I can;t go on

Pretty much all of this comes from RoS, and I'm not even going to attempt to defend that one. The hyperspace skipping scene was my least favourite scene in the entire sequel trilogy (I'm not sure what that says about it. Or me). Episode IX is the one movie where I completely agree that the charge of shitting on previous canon and just doing cool things for the sake of being cool, its viability based on previous lore be damned, is entirely warranted.

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

How much random shit happens in TRoS without any explanation alone is staggering.

Again, I completely agree. RoS was a movie that had some cool moments, but only if you ignore the massive amounts of bullshit that were used to set the stage.

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

There's a lot bad about the PT, but the ST look like they were made by someone who has no idea what Star Wars is, or simply doesn't give a fuck,

I mean, I guess that's the real difference.

The PT are terrible movies with bad scripting, bad acting, and massive logical jumps, but there is actually a narrative arc underneath that's reasonably consistent.

The ST are better quality movies with far better scripts and acting than the PT could manage even at its best, but the underlying arc is a mess.

Xfma100 posted...

I still have a soft spot for the prequels though.

I mean, they gave us Ewan McGregor as Obi-Wan, Christopher Lee as Dooku, Samuel Jackson as Windu, etc.

Of those, the only one who actually turned in a decent performance was McGregor who, bless his heart, acted his guts out on a trilogy of movies that didn't deserve him.

Jackson and Lee were, respectively, the first and second-biggest wastes of big names and acting talent that the prequel roped in. Lee looked like he was going to be able to give some interesting commentary on the Republic, the Confederacy, the Jedi, and the Sith given that he was in the fairly unique position of having been associated with all those entities at different points; instead, he's introduced near the end of the second movie and is dead by the end of the opening scene of the third, and never manages to do anything particularly noteworthy in his limited screen time that makes him worth of remembrance (beyond being acted by Chris Lee).

Jackson is the one that still bothers me. You have Samuel fucking Jackson on your cast and you can't find something better for him to do other than sit and scowl at people? Jackson could have been amazing in the prequel if he was cast as anything other than a Jedi master. Make him a Republic general, make him a crime boss, make him a bounty hunter, make him something where he actually has a chance to show off his acting chops and play to his strength! Or, if you absolutely must have him as a Jedi master, at least give him something interesting to do. I've always thought it would have been incredibly intriguing if the Jedi were more "factionalized" - like if there was a group that advocated for a greater, more active role in the Republic as generals and warriors, with Windu as their "leader", and another who felt that it was not the Jedi's place to in