Celebrating pro-PT articles/videos

Yeah, it kinda sounds like he's already on the fence and verging on changing his mind, but there's some obstinacy preventing him from doing it. On the other hand, it's hard to truly alter our tastes, even if we know we're sometimes being a bit uncharitable or unreasonable. 


Maybe. I think he's saying the prequels are still the best example of the Internet having a ridiculously negative reaction, and that never quite being the truth of what was going on; with people having mixed opinions, liking one film or another, and those of us -- or the "millennial" generation he cites -- actually enjoying them or seeing some underlying value in them from the start. And then, yeah: some people may genuinely warm up to them in time, once they see what passes for meaningful entertainment today.


Heh. It's David Stewart. I think he has pretty much always existed, or always spouted opinions, between those two poles. He's neither lover nor hater. I respect, I guess, a milquetoast appraisal of the PT, but I prefer a more impassioned response overall. 

You might be right. Flashing forward to the summary section of his three prequel reviews ("General Effect"), his analyses are more positive than I remember. Then again, I do remember them being fairly positive, just loaded with qualifications.

I suppose my recollection was slightly skewed, perhaps because some of us prequel fans have grown tired of having every positive checked with a negative. His analyses appear to be pretty sincere and reasonably thorough (relatively speaking -- one could talk about the prequels for hours and barely scratch the surface of any of them).

TPM ("General Effect" @ 56:45)



AOTC ("General Effect" @ 38:56)



ROTS ("General Effect" @ 46:36):



I think why I remember things being said or communicated a certain way might be chiefly to do with his TPM review. Right before his "General Effect", he goes over the story and characters, and then adds further comments -- most of which are negative.

For instance, this is what his text slide says for "Story - Characters" in his TPM review (the full slide appears around 32:42):


These criticisms really fail to methodically deal with the film text as-is. They are instead a typical laundry list of complaints that show an ignorance of Lucas' storytelling imperatives. As usual, there is some kind of obtuse normalisation at work, wherein the film's complexity and heterodox nature are clearly being wished away (even as the narrator ostensibly seeks to elucidate understanding); and what is actually there is being judged against a much more mundane -- if unspoken -- set of criteria. In other words, he is implicitly asking, "Why can't this movie be more like the original?" (cf. his complaint that Jar Jar "fails to provide the same comic relief as C-3PO"). 

Skipping ahead to his "Other Thoughts" section, he closes his entire analysis of the story and characters with the following remark (56:38):


He ends up awarding TPM a 6/10. 

To be fair, he is more positive toward AOTC and ROTS, and ends up awarding them 8/10 and 8.5/10, respectively. 

And he makes insightful remarks in all three of his reviews. I like, for instance, how he acknowledges that AOTC is "the most plot-heavy Star Wars movie" and has "some awkward moments designed to expose the setting while advancing the plot". So he sees artistic/aesthetic intent when he wants to. He's just a bit hit and miss. 

Overall, I think the problem is that he thinks a bit too conventionally about these films -- which will always be a critic's downfall. But he also has a more elastic and esoteric attunement in places, which allows him to obliquely grasp some of the films' brilliance. Ultimately, however, it is clear that the subtle artistic majesty and no-holds-barred personality of the films have eluded him.

One key thing I think people need to remember is that the prequels are mysteriously one film, two films, three films, and six. One because you can, and in some senses, need to treat each film individually. Two because you ought to also regard each film as existing in a pair formation. Three because three films make a trilogy, and the PT is, in many ways, its own trilogy -- distinct from all else for all of time. And last but not least: Six because there are also six chapters in a wider story being told, which itself is comprised of two trilogies; or a five-part story with an overture.

People's insensitivity to what Lucas was shooting for is a fatal flaw in virtually all prequel analysis. Failing to deal with Lucas' vast structural and architectonic ambitions is where so many people go wrong. This unique slab of art was slammed into the public square by a unique person with unique talents, who was strongly animated by a desire to leave a big mark on the world. Until that is properly seen and understood, the prequels will continue to be denied what is rightfully theirs: i.e., their innate yearning (via their Maker) to be taken seriously as an epic work of masterful craftmanship -- a rich artistic happening.

Ah, okay. I pulled his scores from his "General Effect" section. I didn't sit down last night and watch every minute of every video, so I think I missed the fact he actually has an "Overall Score" right after. I'm not sure what the point of that is. The former section ("General Effect") is his summing-up part. Giving another score immediately after that is confusing and unnecessary. I also think that his score for TPM of 6 out of 10 is probably more accurate toward his actual feelings. If he thinks the characters are poor and the story is incoherent or mismanaged, giving the film a 7 is a bit high, perhaps? Or, I guess, we could split the difference and pretend he actually rates it 6.5 out of 10.


Yeah, I'm not critiquing his approach. Like I said, I think he aspires to be thorough and comes across as sincere. The real issue, which I think you just touched on, is that this is all subjective at the end of the day. I mean, he awards AOTC high marks for its presentation and technical brilliance; but there are a lot of other fans that think AOTC has aged the worst and looks like crap! 

If I have a bone to pick with him, I think I outlined the problem above: He basically treats TPM as ANH 1.2, instead of looking at it as its own thing (even though I think he also tries to do that). Comparing Jar Jar to Threepio, for example, seems to miss the point of the two characters. They have a similar role in some ways, and maybe a similar capacity to annoy people both sides of the screen, but they are clearly not identical guides or foils within the story, and they look and sound rather different.

Indeed, there's a bit of an in-joke in the film, where Threepio privately derides Jar Jar -- to R2 -- as "a little odd". In this way, Jar Jar is clearly a simulacrum of Threepio, but in a "Living Force", prequel-y way. To take it a step further: Jar Jar is a synecdoche, or a mascot, for the PT as a whole. Behind every fussy protocol droid, there's a gangly Gungan outcast. Every journey begins with a first step. When someone puts down Jar Jar, I tend to think they don't really understand the prequels at all. Call me biased if you like.   


I don't know. Everyone is free to change their mind. But you might think a more serious, soul-searching revision of opinion would be more apt to take place in a lengthy film breakdown, especially if spurred on by a strong dislike of the ST. There still seems to be this hankering that the PT be a bit less embarrassing and more "normal". Less of the gay. But the plain and simple truth of the matter is that the PT is happy to be queer forever. 

I can't tell you how many times I've rewatched movies I originally hated, only to do a complete 180 on them and fall in love the second time (often years after the fact). Tron: Legacy is a great example.

.

I figured I'd start the new year off with this article from Den Of Geek which not only praises the Prequels but also extols the virtues of Jar Jar and his importance to the story.

www.denofgeek.com/movies/in-defence-of-jar-jar-binks/

"We need to see past people for their annoyance and look at their inherent worth. Jar Jar saved the day and brought two nations of people together because just one person saw through the fog of annoyance. It’s a valuable lesson that would be well learned by those who seem to have the most hatred for Jar Jar. That’s one of the strongest morals to be learned in The Phantom Menace, and that’s why I’ll stand up for Jar Jar."