Alolan_Apples
“Assorted” Collector
Today is Star Wars' 40th Anniversary. The whole multimedia franchise (including cartoons, games, and comics) all started with a live action film that came out in theaters 40 years ago on this day.
The movie that came out was A New Hope, which introduced more advanced special effects and editing. Back then, A New Hope was simply called "Star Wars". It was also very original, steering clear of pop culture references. Since then, there were more Star Wars movies, and more stuff to come out.
What I like to do in today's entry is to compare the Prequel Trilogy and Original Trilogy, and talk about how each is better than each other. Since the Sequel Trilogy isn't complete, I wouldn't go over too much on The Force Awakens.
Many people would say that the Original Trilogy is better, and I agree that it is better. Here's what the Original Trilogy had compared to the prequels:
The Original Trilogy isn't 100% better than the Prequel Trilogy either. Here's what the Prequel Trilogy had compared to the prequels:
That is all. May the Force be with you!
The movie that came out was A New Hope, which introduced more advanced special effects and editing. Back then, A New Hope was simply called "Star Wars". It was also very original, steering clear of pop culture references. Since then, there were more Star Wars movies, and more stuff to come out.
What I like to do in today's entry is to compare the Prequel Trilogy and Original Trilogy, and talk about how each is better than each other. Since the Sequel Trilogy isn't complete, I wouldn't go over too much on The Force Awakens.
Five Ways the Original Trilogy is better:
Many people would say that the Original Trilogy is better, and I agree that it is better. Here's what the Original Trilogy had compared to the prequels:
- Better plots - first of all, the overall plot of the OT was better than the one the PT had. The Original Trilogy had simpler plots, was easier to follow, had more war than politics, had more strategy than discussions, and was more of a good vs evil plot. The Prequel Trilogy has more complicated plots, was harder to follow, had more politics than war, had more discussions than strategy, and was more about how corrupt governments can get. If there is anything the prequels stand out more than the originals, it would be the Jedi subplot. What the prequels focused on was Anakin's path to the dark side. Anakin wanted to become a Jedi, but his character flaws and actions lead him towards the dark side. But in the Original Trilogy, it was more about Luke and his training. He was forced to become a Jedi as a way to survive, but it was harder to train him. Granted, it did include the battle betweem him and Vader, but it wasn't as interesting as the prequels' Jedi subplot.
- Better cast - this is definitely true. The characters in the OT were better than their counterparts in the PT, even Han Solo over PT Obi-Wan, OT Obi-Wan over Qui-Gon, and Darth Vader over the three Sith apprentices we seen in three different movies. We are comparing an unlikeable whiner to a farmboy that became a Jedi, a woman that reduced to the female stereotype to a strong woman that was a static character, an annoying rabbit-like creature that is stupid to a furry beast that is smart, and an irritated righteous man that obeys the Jedi Code to a selfish smuggler that cares about his ship. Judging by the descriptions, we can clearly see that the prequel characters are no better. But if there was anything the prequels did better, it would have to be the development for Obi-Wan Kenobi, Palpatine, and Yoda. In the originals, they didn't have much character. In the prequels, you can see more about how they came to be.
- Better quotes - if you look at the overall dialogue, it appears that the Original Trilogy is better. Both trilogies have their interesting quotes such as "The ability to speak does not make you intelligent", "I don't mind flying, but what you're doing is suicide", "Not from a Jedi", "Shut down all the garbage mashes on the detention level", "Do do not, there is no try", and "That name no longer has any meaning for me". However, the OT has more memorable quotes (qualitative and quantitative) than the PT. The dialogue for the PT is either too cheesy (like Padmé complaining about what Anakin has become) or depressing (like Obi-Wan's 'you were the chosen one' monologue).
- Spaceship development - this is another thing the OT beats the PT in. The PT may have advanced spaceships, but the ones in the OT are less generic. We at least got to see more into the first Death Star, the Millennium Falcon, the Super Star Destroyer, and the Imperial Star Destroyer than we did in the prequel ones.
- More realistic - the Original Trilogy had more special effects, but the Prequel Trilogy used CGI. The problem with CGI is that it makes a live action movie look less realistic. For example, it makes the skin look plastic. Another is that it looks like it's been photoshopped in the movie.
Five Ways the Prequel Trilogy is better:
The Original Trilogy isn't 100% better than the Prequel Trilogy either. Here's what the Prequel Trilogy had compared to the prequels:
- Better visuals - while the CGI use made the movies less realistic, the visuals looked a lot better in the prequels. Even if the prequels were at the same standards in terms of CGI usage, it still was better because of interior design, background design, and other stuff like that. But to be fair, it is natural that newer movies are better visually. At least A-grade films.
- Better planets - while the OT focused on starship building, the PT focused on galaxy building and world building. Even the prequel planets of Geonosis, Kamino, Utapau, and Mustafar were more well done than the original planets of Hoth, Dagobah, Endor, and Bespin. But no planet in Star Wars was as well developed as the two prequel planets of Naboo and Coruscant. Even Tatooine was more developed in the prequels than in the originals.
- Better battles - despite having the most exciting battle in the series, the Original Trilogy isn't as good as the Prequel Trilogy when it comes to battles. Stormtroopers are ineffective, the army sizes during the Clone Wars was huge, and there were more enemies in the PT than OT. And when we discuss lightsaber battles, this is where the Original Trilogy is in serious trouble. The Qui-Gon & Obi-Wan vs Darth Maul was well done. The climatic battle in Episode II shown how powerful Count Dooku was, as well as Yoda. The duel on Mustafar was the most talented battle in the entire trilogy. But the ones in the OT were not as well done as the ones in the PT.
- Better explanation of the Force - one of the key themes in Star Wars was the Force. While the Original Trilogy did explain some of it, the Prequel Trilogy explained it in better detail. It told us about the Jedi, the Sith, and the Chosen One. The light side was the Jedi, as the dark side was the Sith. The Sith was more about power while the Jedi was about obedience, peace, and knowledge. In the OT, we had no idea who the Sith were, but it did say that a Jedi can fall to the dark side. I felt that the PT did a better job. But there was only one weakness, and it's a huge flaw. They made the Force more about science than religion. The OT made the Force seem more like religion than science.
- It explained how the Galactic Civil War happened - the OT had better plots than the PT as it was an Iliad to the Galactic Civil War. But the Prequels were better when it came to explaining how it happened. It all started with high taxtation of trade routes, which lead to the Trade Federation blockading Naboo. Then it began to escalate when solar systems left the Republic. But after the Clone Wars, it was it. The Galactic Civil War has began. As for the rise of the Galactic Empire, it took a tie-in between the political subplot and the Jedi subplot to see it replace the Old Republic.
That is all. May the Force be with you!
