What the Star Wars Prequels Should Have Been (But Weren’t)

Many, many Star Wars fans have spent years wringing their hands, furrowing their brows, and turning away in disgust over George Lucas' prequel trilogy. We nearly all also admit Episode III, Revenge of the Sith, was pretty, pretty, pretty good...but still...our list of grievances against them tend to grow long. As a result, we were all a convoluted mess of hopeful and terrified when it came to waiting for The Force Awakens to be released (You can read my article "A New Hope?: A Wishlist For The Re-launch of Star Wars" to find out what I am worried about.)

Some fans have even taken to writing their own alternate versions of the prequels (more on this below). Some offer slight tweaks and alternate endings, and some change the plot altogether.

A little while ago, as The Force Awakens was reaching fever pitch, Jason Knott, a friend of mine who went to seminary with me, shared his own version of how he thought the prequels should have gone. One aspect of his version gripped me so powerfully I have not been able to stop thinking about it. In fact, while watching the prequels I cannot help but constantly think "If only Lucas would have done this." Over and over I think it, until it ruins my viewing experience. Wait, they were ruined already, so it's a wash.

A New Hope?: A Wish List For the Re-launch of Star Wars

All I want for Christmas is a good Star Wars Movie
Related Articles: What The Star Wars Prequels Should Have Been (But Weren't) & The Greatest Mistake The Force Awakens Makes

I have a friend with an incredibly dry sense of humor (he makes cool videos, which you can watch here: https://www.youtube.com/user/NathanH83), who, about a month ago, came up to me in a coffee shop and said, "Hey, have you heard the news about Star Wars?"

I could only imagine what he was talking about. I had been reading article after article regarding different theories on the new Star Wars film The Force Awakens. Theories about Luke Skywalker and Kylo Ren, theories about Leia's and Han Solo's children, theories about how now that Disney has the rights to them they will never stop making Star Wars films. So I answered my friend "Yes, I've probably heard the news, but what?"

With an entirely straight face he said "Well they're making a new one. It's called The Force Awakens. Isn't that great?"

Quick Movie Review: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

Is it acceptable to feel just plain old conflicted about whether or not you like a movie?

I saw the first installment of The Hobbit film trilogy today, and this is how I feel about it.  In some ways I think I like it, but in other ways it just was not that good.  Does this matter?

(please note, if you have not seen the film and do not want me to ruin it for you, you might not want to read any further)

Here are some examples of why I am conflicted:

1) For the most part I love what the filmmakers added to the film of what was not in the original book, and yet at the same time all the additions and changes do not sit well with me.  It is as if with every change they are saying to J.R.R. Tolkien, “Nice try, but we know how to build dramatic tension a little bit better, don’t you think,” or “We know what you were really trying to say here Professor Tolkien, which is why we added this and changed that.”  For example:

--I love the prologue that explains the backstory of the downfall of Thror’s (Thorin’s Grandfather) kingdom’s, I love seeing Old Bilbo, Frodo, and the Shire again, and I even love the liberty they took in gathering the White Council at Rivendell in order to discuss the rise of the Necromancer, but sometimes it seem like they were trying too hard to connect the narrative of The Hobbit to The Lord of the Rings.

--In relation to that point, I love how serious they have made The Hobbit, but at the same time I feel it is too dark.  It certainly is no longer a children’s story.

--And on top of all this I still do not understand why filmmakers see the need to change plot points (especially those that transition or develop the plot) that really add nothing to the film as a whole and usually end up detracting from the source work’s original intentions (e.g., that Bilbo and not Gandalf distracted the Trolls, how they found Rivendell, the tension between Gandalf and Thorin, Thorin’s bitterness towards the elves, that the wolves and the eagles did not talk, that Gandalf summoned the eagles and not that they came of their own volition, and especially the great anti-climactic showdown at the end between Thorin and the pale-orc Azog).

--I loved that the plot was set at a slow pace.  I felt like we were able to dwell in the scenes and get a real sense of the settings and characters, and yet the movie could easily have been 45 minutes shorter.  That being said, I found all the political stuff much more interesting and easy to follow than any of the indecipherable political gobbledygook George Lucas through into The Phantom Menace.

2) I LOVED a great number of individual performances but the movie as a whole just fell flat for me.  It was just too much spectacle.  There was too much suspended logic, too many impractical fighting and chasing and falling and hanging-off-the-edge-of-a-cliff scenes, too many false dramatic moments, too much overuse of CGI (try counting all the orcs!), that I just got sick of all the Hollywood trickery.  And dare I say, the 3-D (on IMAX too) left me with a resounding "MEH."  Next time 2-D will suffice.  

But MAN were there some great acting jobs in this movie.  

Here are my favorites in order:

1. Andy Serkis as Gollum--he's again excellent: creepy, sinister, sad, helpful, pathetic, playful, etc.

2. Martin Freeman as young Bilbo--Peter Jackson is correct in saying they could not have picked a better Bilbo.

3. Ian McKellan as Gandalf--I seriously want Ian McKellan's Gandalf to be my grandfather.

4. Ken Stott as Balin

5. James Nesbitt as Bofur (I also loved watching Nesbitt in the TV mystery series Murphy's Law)

6. Richard Armitage as Thalin

7. Barry Humphries (Dame Edna!) as the Great Goblin

8. Ian Holm and Elijah Wood and Old Bilbo and Frodo

Actually, this would be my conclusion: There is so much great acting is this movie that taken on that alone I would have to say this is an excellent movie, and yet as a whole I feel the movie does not exactly work.  It is bloated, overlong, and emotionally manipulative (that is, it is a typical Hollywood film). 

And then I have just one last thing to say: Benedict Cumberbatch!

Oh yes, and please check out this brief reflection on how Jackson and company really got the ending of The Return of the King wrong.