IDK, I kind of agree with them. As a 90s kid, the originals didn’t really impress 12-year-old me. The acting was amateurish and cheesy, the “special effects” were cheesy, the story was extremely cliche by that point, the writing was 18-month aged Parmesan cheesy. To 12-year-old-me, the prequels had slightly better acting, better special effects, a much more compelling and interesting story, and the writing was still pretty cheesy. Maybe the dark, brooding main character really did it for my 12-year-old emo self, I dunno. But yeah, I don’t think it’s that crazy to prefer the prequels to the original trilogy. Like, looking back, neither trilogies really hold up, but the originals are very much propped up pretty much just because they were “revolutionary” nearly fifty years ago.
As another 90s kid that watched the prequels in theatres as they came out: I enjoyed the originals, even though I was only about half your age at the time. Probably worth noting that my mum made sure that I watched the original trilogy before Phantom Menace. And I’m sorry but the acting in the PT is supposed to be better than in the OT? What? No. Nothing against the actors because a lot of it was due to writing (especially for Anakin and Padmé’s shared scenes, especially especially in II where Anakin is such a fucking creep) and direction, but no.
Yes, the acting is better in the prequels than the original trilogy. The main character actors in the prequels had no idea what they were doing, and you could tell. I think part of that was writing, and part was inexperience on the actors’ parts. The prequels kept the bad writing, but at least had more experienced actors reading that terrible script for the most part, which makes a noticeable difference in acting quality. Keep in mind, the prequels have more characters in them than Anakin and Padme - I feel like you’re tunneling on those two.
IDK, I kind of agree with them. As a 90s kid, the originals didn’t really impress 12-year-old me. The acting was amateurish and cheesy, the “special effects” were cheesy, the story was extremely cliche by that point, the writing was 18-month aged Parmesan cheesy. To 12-year-old-me, the prequels had slightly better acting, better special effects, a much more compelling and interesting story, and the writing was still pretty cheesy. Maybe the dark, brooding main character really did it for my 12-year-old emo self, I dunno. But yeah, I don’t think it’s that crazy to prefer the prequels to the original trilogy. Like, looking back, neither trilogies really hold up, but the originals are very much propped up pretty much just because they were “revolutionary” nearly fifty years ago.
As another 90s kid that watched the prequels in theatres as they came out: I enjoyed the originals, even though I was only about half your age at the time. Probably worth noting that my mum made sure that I watched the original trilogy before Phantom Menace. And I’m sorry but the acting in the PT is supposed to be better than in the OT? What? No. Nothing against the actors because a lot of it was due to writing (especially for Anakin and Padmé’s shared scenes, especially especially in II where Anakin is such a fucking creep) and direction, but no.
Yes, the acting is better in the prequels than the original trilogy. The main character actors in the prequels had no idea what they were doing, and you could tell. I think part of that was writing, and part was inexperience on the actors’ parts. The prequels kept the bad writing, but at least had more experienced actors reading that terrible script for the most part, which makes a noticeable difference in acting quality. Keep in mind, the prequels have more characters in them than Anakin and Padme - I feel like you’re tunneling on those two.