THE GALACTIC SENATE

Going by encarta's three different definitions of what makes a masterpiece, would you consider the prequels to be one?

Can I post the definitions here, so it's easier for people to respond? =P

1. great artistic work: an exceptionally good piece of creative work, e.g. a book, movie, or performance

2. artist's best work: the best piece of work by a particular artist or craftsperson

Personally, I don't think the 3rd one applies since it's a medieval term.

Anyway, from the 2nd definition, the prequels definitely aren't a masterpiece. I'm pretty sure everyone agrees the original trilogy was lightyears better than the prequels.

And I think the same applies to the 1st definition. I mean, the original trilogy had great characters like Jabba, the Emperor, Darth Vader, Tarkin, Han Solo, Leia, Chewbacca, C3P0, R2D2, Lando, Yoda... the list goes on and on (in no particular order). The prequels have Jar Jar and Little Annie. And the story was just so much more powerful in the original trilogy, with lots of quotable moments. So, yeah, the prequels don't cut it in my opinion.

That's just my opinion, though.[/b]

I for one consider the prequels to be George's masterpiece. For beyond the swashbuckling action, epic battles & high speed chase, therein lies an intriguing tale of the Dark Side. And (surprise!) going by critical reception, the prequels were actually better reviewed than the originals. That alone perhaps hints at something great...

Heh... well I have to say I disagree about the prequels being a masterpiece then =)

I guess we'll have to wait 20 years and see what people think then... haha

And talking about intriguing tales of the Dark Side, I found that the expanded universe actually delved much deeper into it and came up with more interesting things. The dark side stuff in the prequels were, to me, a little too vague for my liking. It sounded good, but didn't really have all that much depth when I thought about it.

Perhaps I too am getting biased by the "classic" status of the films, and the nostalgia of being a fan for so many years... but if I am, I can't help it!

I guess different people have different opinions.

The prequels appear to look better as it had the advantage to take advantage of developments in the field of CGI, computer animation etc. etc. Where story is concern, it had the advantage of contributions from many other story tellers who had developed the Star wars universe, of course, I agree, most were for after ep IV to V.

Episode I to III, GL had 3 movies to expand the characters like Anakin, whereas IV to V, tends to concentrate on winning over the Empire rather than on character development. Even the SW sound tracks were better for Ep I to III.

In contrast, by doing Episode IV, GL had to put everything he had into it without knowing he will be bankrupt. He faced the same while doing Ep V. As he did not have this problem doing Ep I to III, he has a lot more room to develop. Hence the Prequels had many advantages that Ep IV to VI do not have.

Having mention that, I do not feel look upon Ep I to III as a masterpiece. If there is any masterpiece in Ep I to VI, to me, it is Ep IV. It is the launching pad for the whole SW universe. If Ep IV had not been properly done and captured the audience who became die-hard fans, we can forget about Ep V and VI, let alone I to III.

Both are masterpieces!

Darsha Assant wrote:Both are masterpieces!

In a certain sense I agree totally, however, I view in the sense of comparison, if there is no bad, then there is no good, if there is no evil, then there is no good.

This means for me at least, if all 6 episodes are masterpieces, then there is no masterpieces at all,


That's why if I had to choose just one, I choose Episode IV.

There's not right or wrong here, it is just an opinion. I respect all opinions.