It’s one thing to tell a story of Machiavellian plotting and conspiracy, but what it really lacks is:

1) A sense that the plotters can lose. Ok, we know they’re not going to lose, because this is a prequel. But it would be nice if from the very beginning there had been a small group of Jedi and Senators who were suspicious of Palpatine but who couldn’t convince anyone else, who were trying to counter-plot and investigate. Suppose that Qui-Gon goes to Naboo even though he’s not ordered to, because he thinks something’s up. Suppose Obi-Wan investigates the Kamino cloners on his own iniative, and comes close to really cracking the plot rather than being led by the nose. But this would probably require Yoda to be something other than all-knowingly wise. Unless Lucas made Yoda not the head of the Jedi Council but instead a sort of wise old respected mentor whom doesn’t quite have the pull in the Council that he used to have, which might also have had dramatic appeal.

2) Along the same lines, the whole story really needs a Cassandra–a single character who for some reason really sees the whole plot unfolding, but isn’t believed even by the counter-plotters.

In the earlier script scene-by-scene I didn’t bother to link to, it’s clearly stated that Yoda gets dropped on Dagobah by Bail. Dagobah, it’s established elsewhere in the EU, was the choice because of the Force Spot that Luke later encounters the “version” of Darth Vader, which supposedly conceals Force probing over a larger area, thus concealing Yoda.

I added an addendum with later thoughts on this, by the way.

“…a very significant number of people who have no problem with fantastical names for things have a big problem with the way Lucas executes his romance scenes.”

Sure. I’m less than fully impressed myself. See also the comments on the dialogue that I added to one of my posts.

“People who say they didn’t like all of Star Wars must be narrow-minded racists!”

No, I wasn’t trying to say that, and I apologize for any such implication. I’m simply as irritated at how careless much of the criticism is, as some are at the flaws of the films, not saying that the films can’t or shouldn’t be criticized.

“If it’s as epic as all that, it can surely sustain some criticism, never mind a bit of fun poked at….”

Sure. It’s just that I find the on-target criticism and mockery amusing and interesting, not the casual swipes of those who never liked any of it in the first place. But I’ll not harp further on that. I’ve already posted my own views on the flaws of the dialogue.

I just rewatched Star Wars last night, and the one thing it has (besides Han Solo, and I do miss his archetype in this prequel series) that’s lacking in this prequel trilogy is a sense of fun. I get the feeling watching it that the actors were largely goofing around, having a great time (with the exception of Sir Alec Guinness, anyhow), and in general enjoying themselves. This time around, they seemed very serious, as if they Had To Tell A Story(tm), and weren’t having nearly as good a time with it.

People who say they didn’t like all of Star Wars must be narrow-minded racists!

Probably best to make sure that one demonstrates that one is above all those millions of people stupid enough to enjoy any of the later films as frequently as possible, then. It’s both polite and illustrates the superiority of one’s own taste.

People who say they didn’t like all of Star Wars are only saying this because they think it makes them look superior to those who did! There are no independent reasons not to like all of Star Wars!

Give over, Gary. If it’s as epic as all that, it can surely sustain some criticism, never mind a bit of fun poked at the conversational world of Padme and Anakin, which appears to be constructed from CG elements, just like the spaceships in the background. As Carrie Fisher says on the bonus DVD documentary, “So I think I got, ‘Governor Tarkin, I thought I recognized your foul stench,’ which, you know, I don’t know about you but I’m always talking like that. We used to say you can type this stuff, but you can’t say it.”

So far as I can tell, the immense hilarity in this is that “Naboo” is, like, a silly word. It’s not even in English! I recommend that folks who feel this is a precious point not read Carolyn Cherryh, or science fiction or fantasy in general. Their heads are apt to explode. Probably good to avoid any real languages that aren’t English, too, and also anyone who is Afrocentric.

“We’ll always have Paris” is probably equally hysterical if you think “Paris” is a knee-slapper.

“I feel that with Star Wars films, the shit has been hitting the fans since the closing credits of The Empire Strikes Back.”

Probably best to make sure that one demonstrates that one is above all those millions of people stupid enough to enjoy any of the later films as frequently as possible, then. It’s both polite and illustrates the superiority of one’s own taste. A twofer.

Re “younglings”: “… but that kinda falls down in that all the ones we actually saw were apparently human.”

I suggest rewatching the relevant scene in Attack of the Clones.

The weird flatness of the first two prequels seems a little clearer after seeing Sith. The Jedi are these superhuman types who have to sit on their hands through roughly 1.8 very long movies looking concerned but not really doing anything about it. Episodes One and Two were essentially the longest, most involuted Act One in the recent history of drama – and Acts Two and Three happened in the space of an hour and a half in Sith (starting, respectively, with the second Dooku duel and Order 66). You’ve almost got to give Lucas credit for the amount of attention he paid to worldbuilding and stage-setting in those two Episodes (though it’s a pity he forgot about the Writing and the Acting and the Directing, et cetera).

Ditto pxib re: sarcasm – I think Lucas probably got so into his Story that he forgot it also had to work as Movies. Oh well.