Movie The Star Wars prequels vs Force Awakens comparison thread. Why the prequels are infinitely better.

[Dan26]

18 months after its release, the novelty of The Force Awakens has worn off. I thought it would be interesting to look at the movie through an unbiased lens with the passage of time - something we couldn't do 12 months ago. I'm sorry to say that it doesn't hold up on repeat viewings, especially compared to the George Lucas directed prequels, which are going through a bit of an internet resurgence as people realise how flawed (and boring) The Force Awakens really is.

I've got about 15 reasons why the prequels are better than the rubbish Disney served up 18 months ago. I will post those reasons gradually. Here are the first three:

1.) The storyline has no originality whatsoever. The plot is basically a re-hash of A New Hope with bits of Empire and Jedi thrown in. This is unforgiveable, given that the movie started with a clean slate and no limitation on where it could go. The prequels were constrained, in that they had to end a certain way, yet despite this, they STILL have more originality and world building than a movie with unlimited possibilities. This is an indictment on the writers of Episode 7.

2.) Han Solo's death is s**t. Han Solo is a hero; one of the greatest heroes in movie history, yet he goes out like a punk. Remember Randy Quaid's character in Independence Day? The crop dusting loner? He was a bit like Han Solo - flawed, yet heroic and a bit of a scouldrel. In the end, Quaid's character sacrifices himself by flying into one of the ships, destroying it and showing everyone else how to blow them up. Han Solo should have gone out in a similar way - making a sacrifice, where he kills himself but by doing so saves the day. Getting stabbed by his son having a "conversation" was just pathetic.

3.) The movie destroys what the good guys accomplished at the end of episode VI. Han Solo is back to being a smuggler? WTF. Leia is still a general of sorts? WTF. I thought she was supposed to learn the Force? Are you telling me she didn't accomplish any meaningful Force capabilities under Luke over 30 years when the whole galaxy knew there were no Jedi left and it was therefore important for her to do so? Give me a break.

Every other Star Wars movie picks up where the other left off - even with the 20 year gap between Episode 3 and 4. Think about it. At the end of 3, Luke is an infant on Tatooine, Obi-Wan is on Tatooine, the Death Star is getting built, the Empire rules the galaxy. 20 years later at the start of A New Hope NOTHING HAS CHANGED. Luke is still on Tatooine, as is Obi-wan. The Death Star has just been completed. Nothing important has happened to Luke - every important development happens IN the film/s not between the film/s

Same deal with the 10 year gap between Episode 1 and 2. At the end of 1, Obi-Wan states that he will train Anakin. 10 years later at the start of episode 2, even though Anakin is now 20, we havn't missed anything. Anakin is still training under Obi-Wan, he isn't a jedi yet, and all the important developments happen IN the film, not in between films. Nothing of any consequence happens between the films, even with the two largest "gaps" (between 3 and 4.... and between 1 and 2)

Star Wars films have always, always, always picked up exactly where the other left off, yet we miss a whole movies worth of developments that happened between Episode 6 and 7. The fact that there is a 30 year gap is no excuse. The 20 year gap between 3 and 4 had no meaningful developments off screen. The trend and themes in all Star wars films is for all of them to pick up where the previous one left off, even if it was many, many years earlier.

 

[Exe Gesis]

18 months after its release, the novelty of The Force Awakens has worn off. I thought it would be interesting to look at the movie through an unbiased lens with the passage of time - something we couldn't do 12 months ago. I'm sorry to say that it doesn't hold up on repeat viewings, especially compared to the George Lucas directed prequels, which are going through a bit of an internet resurgence as people realise how flawed (and boring) The Force Awakens really is.

I've got about 13 reasons why the prequels are better than the rubbish Disney served up 18 months ago. I will post those reasons gradually. Here are the first three:

1.) The storyline has no originality whatsoever. The plot is basically a re-hash of A New Hope with bits of Empire and Jedi thrown in. This is unforgiveable, given that the movie started with a clean slate and no limitation on where it could go. The prequels were constrained, in that they had to end a certain way, yet despite this, they STILL have more originality and world building than a movie with unlimited possibilities. This is an indictment on the writers of Episode 7.

2.) Han Solo's death is s**t. Han Solo is a hero; one of the greatest heroes in movie history, yet he goes out like a punk. Remember Randy Quaid's character in Independence Day? The crop dusting loner? He was a bit like Han Solo - flawed, yet heroic and a bit of a scouldrel. In the end, Quaid's character sacrifices himself by flying into one of the ships, destroying it and showing everyone else how to blow them up. Han Solo should have gone out in a similar way - making a sacrifice, where he kills himself but by doing so saves the day. Getting stabbed by his son having a "conversation" was just pathetic.

3.) The movie destroys what the good guys accomplished at the end of episode VI. Han Solo is back to being a smuggler? WTF. Leia is still a general of sorts? WTF. I thought she was supposed to learn the Force? Are you telling me she didn't accomplish any meaningful Force capabilities under Luke over 30 years when the whole galaxy knew there were no Jedi left and it was therefore important for her to do so? Give me a break.

Every other Star Wars movie picks up where the other left off - even with the 20 year gap between Episode 3 and 4. Think about it. At the end of 3, Luke is an infant on Tatooine, Obi-Wan is on Tatooine, the Death Star is getting built, the Empire rules the galaxy. 20 years later at the start of A New Hope NOTHING HAS CHANGED. Luke is still on Tatooine, as is Obi-wan. The Death Star has just been completed. Nothing important has happened to Luke - every important development happens IN the film/s not between the film/s

Same deal with the 10 year gap between Episode 1 and 2. At the end of 1, Obi-Wan states that he will train Anakin. 10 years later at the start of episode 2, even though Anakin is now 20, we havn't missed anything. Anakin is still training under Obi-Wan, he isn't a jedi yet, and all the important developments happen IN the film, not in between films. Nothing of any consequence happens between the films, even with the two largest "gaps" (between 3 and 4.... and between 1 and 2)

Star Wars films have always, always, always picked up exactly where the other left off, yet we miss a whole movies worth of developments that happened between Episode 6 and 7. The fact that there is a 30 year hap is no excuse. The 20 year gap between 3 and 4 had no meaningful developments off screen. The trend and themes in all Star wars films is for all of them to pick up where the previous one left off, even if it was many, many years earlier.

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/star-wars-the-prequels-thread.1154444/

 

[Dan26]

4.) The Maguffin in the storyline doesn't make any sense. A Maguffin is a "thing or object" that both the good guys and bad guys want. Whoever gets it wins. The most obvious Maguffin is the Ark in raiders Of The Lost Ark. The Death Star plans in A New Hope were the Maguffin - whoever gets the Death Star plans "wins."

In The Force Awakens, it is made clear that the Maguffin is Luke Skywalker, or the map to Skywalker. It is made clear that whoever gets to Luke first wins. Luke is apparently so important, that the bad guys want to kill him and the good guys need him. Yet he's not actually important at all. The bad guys were able to blow up the Hosnian system without finding Luke. The good guys were then able to blow up StarKiller Base without needing Luke's help. A maguffin is supposed to be something so damn important that a failure to acquire it means certain defeat, yet Luke's whereabouts stop neither side from achieving their goals in the film. The first half of the movie revolves around the plot of finding Luke, yet half way through the movie, this Maguffin is tossed aside when StarKiller Base miraculously appears and Luke is not heard from again until the finals scene, by which time the good guys have already defeated the bad guys anyway.

 

[Underarm]

The force awakens had to be similar enough to ANH, which was the most well known. When given the chance to do anything they wanted with the story they stuffed it up big time.

 

[Dan26]

5.) The visuals are boring an uninspired. The prequels has different planets, different environments and settings that were "Un-Earth" like. The sinkhole planet of Utapau in Episode 3, the underwater city in Episode 1, Coruscant (which even though it is a city is unlike any city on earth), the lava planet Mustafar, the montage of worlds shown during the order-66 purge.


Now what do we see in The Force Awakens? Jakku is a Tatooine rip-off. I could understand if it was actually set on Tatooine, but Jakku is a different planet. Why, creatively, was it made to be exactly like Tatooine?? It could have literally been set in any other environment. George Lucas made sure he had 3-4 different environments in each film, and that they were as different as possible from movie to movie. Just because Rey lives in desolation doesn't mean "sand" has to be the visual backdrop.

And when we visit Maz's planet, the Resistance Base planet and Luke's planet, they are basically all the same - Grass, a lake, trees, green hills, water... all of them are just like Earth. Would it have killed them to put a giant planet or moon in the sky on Luke's planet (a bit like how Yavin IV has the gas giant taking up half the sky). George Lucas would have NEVER allowed such boring and uninspired visuals to be part of any Star Wars movie he made.

 

[Ochre]

But how do the prequels compare to Essendon in 2000?

 

[Dan]

Why am I here?

 

[Dan26]

6.) Rey achieves in one film with no training what took Luke three films WITH training. It's just lazy filmmaking. JJ Abrams wanted the glory of showing Rey kick ass, without realising that her doing so makes no sense. Even if she's some super-powerful re-incarantion of the Force, she still has to know what the Force is, and it's clear at the start of the films she knows very little. So, how is she able to do the Jedi mind trick???? If she could do that, why wasn't she using it on Unkar Plutt back on Jakku?
Her fight with Kylo Ren is the equivalent of Luke in A New Hope using the telekenesis to grab Obi-Wans lightsaber after vader strikes Obi-Wan down and then duelling Vader on the Death Star and beating him. That would have been ridiculous, just as Rey defeating Kylo Ren is ridiculous.

7.) There is a ridiculous scene where Han and Finn accidentally stumble across Rey on StarKiller base. This is a planet FFS. How could they accidentally stumble on her? In A New Hope, Artoo finds out where Leia is being held prisoner on the Death Star and Han and Luke find out where that is and go there. They don't just "stumble" across Leia on a moon-sized space station. Han and Finn just accidentally "stumbling" across Rey on StarKiller base is unbelievably stupid, and lazy filmmaking. It's like crash landing on Earth in Siberia and running into your own mum.

 

[BobbyMorri]

Why am I here?

Im here because i am procrastinating.

I feel very motivated to finish that work now.

 

[Seeds]

5.) The visuals are boring an uninspired. The prequels has different planets, different environments and settings that were "Un-Earth" like. The sinkhole planet of Utapau in Episode 3, the underwater city in Episode 1, Coruscant (which even though it is a city is unlike any city on earth), the lava planet Mustafar, the montage of worlds shown during the order-66 purge.


Now what do we see in The Force Awakens? Jakku is a Tatooine rip-off. I could understand if it was actually set on Tatooine, but Jakku is a different planet. Why, creatively, was it made to be exactly like Tatooine?? It could have literally been set in any other environment. George Lucas made sure he had 3-4 different environments in each film, and that they were as different as possible from movie to movie. Just because Rey lives in desolation doesn't mean "sand" has to be the visual backdrop.

And when we visit Maz's planet, the Resistance Base planet and Luke's planet, they are basically all the same - Grass, a lake, trees, green hills, water... all of them are just like Earth. Would it have killed them to put a giant planet or moon in the sky on Luke's planet (a bit like how Yavin IV has the gas giant taking up half the sky). George Lucas would have NEVER allowed such boring and uninspired visuals to be part of any Star Wars movie he made.

What the planet in the first part of the movie is not even Tatooine? It's exactly the same planet. I liked the recent Star Wars movie visuals and scenes but I agree the ones on Force Awakens were shockingly unoriginal and plain boring.

 

[Seeds]

Keep them coming. I hated this film with passion but never articulated why. You are doing a brilliant job.

 

[JackOutback]

I watched The Force Awakens for a third time recently, and I have also recently rewatched the prequels. So I feel particularly well placed to say the prequels are still s**t (including the third film, which some people absurdly rate as very good) and the Force Awakens is still fun. Also, most of your reasons don't make the argument that the prequels are better.

The prequels are more original? Original films can be s**t.

You don't like the Macguffin or Rey's training? They haven't been fully explored or explained yet.

Han Solo's death is s**t? That's your opinion, I think it was fine.

Han's still a smuggler? It makes sense that if someone loses everything important to them, they might revert to old habits.

But keep them coming.

 

[Exe Gesis]

The idea that the galaxy didn't progress after the battle of vendor, and that turmoil and danger still looms, with things like a marriage break up between solo and Leia, including a son gone dark side, torching much of Lukes efforts.....I think all that was SPOT ON by Abrams. That tho victory was had, it was short lived and indeed the good side had their tolls and costs.

I've been reading all the star wars novels post-endor, (aftermath, bloodline, etc), and it was a great direction Disney took, with these novels really painting a full picture of all this. The empire defeated but still rallying commanders and battle ships to keep the fight up, the rebels trying to win over many planets who were happy with the empire, times still tough for Leia and han, still battles going on, conflicts raging, and setting up that whole "how snoke emerged from the shadows of all this uncertainty in the galaxy to stake a claim for a new improved empirical rule".

The worst thing for ep7 would've been all hippy happiness, with han and leia happily married, cushy jobs, raising happy kids, with Luke turning into all-powerful Neo from the matrix, no set backs or adversity.

In saying all that, Abrams erred in many ways with TFA, such that the movie kinda feels flat overall, not a rollicking adventure to inspire like so many other well made movies like Ep4, the princess bride, Harry Potter, and such.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

The Force Awakens being a redo of A New Hope doesn't make the prequels any less terrible.

 

[Dan26]

8.) Artoo had the remainder of the map all along (which wasn't even important anyway, see point 4) and they couldn't get it out of him because he's in "low power mode." A galaxy with faster-than-light speed travel can't download a map out of a 60-year old droid? Give me a break. That's just stupid.

9.) We didn't see any of the politics of the galaxy. One of the great things about the prequels was the fabulous world building which included the Senate and political scenes. Some of the best scenes are the Senate scenes. Despite what some people say, there isn't "too much politics" in the prequels at all. The political scenes take up very little time, but they are important and innovative - particularly the visuals of the Senate pods in the huge chamber, and the scenes of Palpatine acquiring more power. We know virtually nothing about the First Order, the Resistance and the Republic, yet they are the main backdrops for the story. Why are these groups fighting each other? It's never really made clear. The political capital gets destroyed, and yet we know nothing about this planet, any of the political leaders or any of the backstory for the political landscape. Even in A New Hope there was information about the Emperor "disbanding the Senate" and the "last remnants of the Republic have been swept away." We don't see any of this in The Force Awakens. The prequels are choccas full of all this good stuff.

10.) The two warring gangs aboard Hans freighter all are boring humans. Why? That guy with the irish or Scottish accent or whatever it was? Why is he a human? Star Wars has thousands of different species. Yes, it's important for the main characters to be human so we as movie-watchers can identify with them, but secondary characters like that could have easily been non-humans. It could have been a gang of Rodians (Greedo's species) or a gang of Hutts, or literally anything else, but they best they could do was two gangs of humans. Just because one of the gangs looked Asian hardly counts. In the prequels we see dozens of different species. In fact, virtually every planet we go to, we see the indigenous species for those planets, hence the far superior world-building.

 

[Dan26]

Han's still a smuggler? It makes sense that if someone loses everything important to them, they might revert to old habits.

It's utterly ridiculous that he's a smuggler again. And even more ridiculous that he's a smuggler without the viewer having SEEN the change that forced him to be a smuggler again.

See point 3. EVERY Star Wars movie picks up where the other left off, even if there is a 20 year gap between them (such as between Episode III and IV)

If Han is going to regress and become a smuggler again, then.... SHOW IT. Every major change to every major character in all six films takes place on screen. Even with the 20 year gap between 3 and 4, nothing of any consequence happens to Obi-Wan. He was in the desert at the end of III and is still in the desert at the start of IV. Same with Luke in that time span. Same with Anakin in the 10 years between I and II.

Regressing Han Solo's character makes no sense and goes totally against the style and themes of all other 6 films, where all the heroes progesss and mature, and do so ON SCREEN

 

[Dan26]

You don't like the Macguffin or Rey's training? They haven't been fully explored or explained yet.

They need to at least make sense within the film. Sure there is a wider story arc, but Episode 7 still needs to make sense and stand alone with a plot that works and is plausible unto itself.

The maguffin is ridiculous. They are all after Luke, because apparently he;s so important to the film. No one finds him until the movie is finished. The bad guys (by blowing up the Hosnian system) don't need to kill Luke to be able to achieve that destruction. And the good guys (by blowing up Starkiller base) don't need Luke to help them to win the day.

The whole maguffin of the film is utterly pointless.

 

[JackOutback]

They need to at least make sense within the film. Sure there is a wider story arc, but Episode 7 still needs to make sense and stand alone with a plot that works and is plausible unto itself.

The maguffin is ridiculous. They are all after Luke, because apparently he;s so important to the film. No one finds him until the movie is finished. The bad guys (by blowing up the Hosnian system) don't need to kill Luke to be able to achieve that destruction. And the good guys (by blowing up Starkiller base) don't need Luke to help them to win the day.

The whole maguffin of the film is utterly pointless.

That's because there's a wider story at play. Luke didn't defeat the Empire after Star Wars, he only defeated the Death Star, that doesn't mean the movie doesn't count as meaningful. The end goal is not the destruction of the Hosnian system or Starkiller base, and no one said Luke was essential for those tasks, it's about control of the galaxy. And for the answer to that, you will have to wait until episodes VIII and IX. The film still makes sense in its own right.

 

[Dan26]

That's because there's a wider story at play. Luke didn't defeat the Empire after Star Wars, he only defeated the Death Star, that doesn't mean the movie doesn't count as meaningful.

A new Hope does make sense, because the Maguffin (the death star plans) are in the hands of the good guys. If the bad guys get them, they win, if the good guys keep them, then they win. The wider story arc doesn't affect the individual plot of the film. A film, even if part of a series, still needs to stand on its own.

When you closely examine the plot of Episode 7, nothing about it makes sense. Episodes 1-6 all have logic and make sense as individual movies, even if you ignore the wider story arc.

 

[Gasometer]

Force Awakens lacked the comic excellence of Jar Jar Binks.

That alone imo is enough to make it inferior.

Hoping for Jar Jar to be Prez in the Universe by the end of this next series.

 

[Dan26]

Force Awakens lacked the comic excellence of Jar Jar Binks.

That alone imo is enough to make it inferior.

Hoping for Jar Jar to be Prez in the Universe by the end of this next series.

Hilarious material. Gee I havn't heard that before. What are we in 2001?

 

[Seeds]

Rei magically getting the force just by um errrr..... comedy gold. Rei magically running into Finn on the planet like ship. It's really is utterly ridiculous.

 

[Dan26]

11.) StarKiller Base is stupid.
Apart from being a Death Star Rip-off, nothing about it makes any sense.

i.) The economics of building it don't make sense. In A New Hope the Empire rules the galaxy - they could legally plunder any world they want to build it. The First Order essentially rules nothing. Where do they get the funds to build such a thing?

ii.) The idea of eating a sun is so stupid, it's as if an 8 year old came up with the idea.

iii.) The idea of eating a Sun is also stupid, because it means the weapon can only be used once, and therefore everyone on the planet will die because there is no Sun to orbit. Retro-fitting a canon excuse such as "it can move" is just stupid because you know.... DUH!, it's a planet. Planets can't fly around the galaxy. A flying planet with an engine is so dumb, even for Star Wars. How could an adult come up with such a stupid idea.

iv) Finn watched the destruction of the Hosnian system from million of light years away in real time. This was just disgraceful. I know Star Wars is science-fantasy and doesn't have to be 100% scientifically accurate, but it does have to be plausible. Virtually everything else in episode 1-6, whether it be hyperspace or lightsabers can be explained through advanced technology. Witnessing something that happened light years away in real time cannot be explained through advanced technology. It makes no sense.

v.) The laser bean is supposed to travel "faster than light." Yet we see Kylo Ren watching the beam go past his ship and see the beam hit the Hosnian system. I thought it was supposed to be travelling at faster than light speeds????

vi.) it's blown up by half-a-dozen X-wings. A planet. Blown up by a few small ships. Ugghh.

 

[Dan26]

12.) The Resistance pretty much only has X-Wings. In the first 6 fiims and in all the prequels there are heaps of different kinds of ships. A-Wings, Y-wings, and others. Yet in 30 years, the best Disney could do was show more X-wings and paint them black? That's it? Same deal with the First Order and the Tie Fighters. In 30 years we couldn't see a few more cool looking DIFFERENT looking ships in addition to our usual favourites?

13.) The laziness of the writing regarding Han "crashing" on StarKiller Base. Basically the writers couldn't come up with a logical way of getting Han and the crew onto StarKiller Base without being detected, so they come up with this implausible stupid idea of Han coming out of hyperspace manually, within the atmosphere. They are travelling a few hundred-thousand miles per second, and he does it manually (which is something only a Jedi could do) just because not one writer could come up with a more logical suggestion. There could have been a stolen First Order shuttle (has been done before, but at least it would make sense), or better yet have them stow away aboard a First Order ship on it's way to StarKiller Base. They could have done virtually anything, but they chose the least plausible stupid idea.

 

[glenferry23]

Some excellent points revisited here, particularly about the one dimensional planets, lack of creativity with the other worlds and Rey's rapid development of the force. The ease of how Starkiller Base was firstly infiltrated, and then destroyed was probably my major gripe.

But the lacklustre end product which was The Force Awakens doesn't necessarily mean the prequels are better. They're two completely different things, mutually exclusive.

One doesn't negate the other, the prequels are still terrible IMO and TFA still has significant deficiencies. The prequels aren't automatically improved because of this, there's still a clear distinction between what we're dealing with here.