glor
Rohan
Sep 12 2017, 12:11am
Views: 6737
|
The Hobbit movies are flawed. They are not as good as LOTR (in most ways), but on a scale of 1-10, the Star Wars prequels are a 1, and The Hobbit movies are probably a 6 or 7. This. This is the issue that is rarely discussed and, I may enrage a few Star Wars fans by doing it but here goes. The prequels are compared unfavorably, to the original trilogies from which they emanated but it is not like for like. The original 1970s Star Wars trilogy was and, is an important piece of film history. It was the birth of the blockbuster, new methods of movie making and creating movie magic but they were not, and are not, artistically in the same league as LOTR. The original Star Wars films still stand up, they are entertaining classics, joyous in fact, yes they were extremely important to the industry but, they were never placed up there with masterworks such as Battleship Potemkin, Kieslowskii's Three Colours trilogy, The Godfather Trilogy and other feted and award winning pieces of cinema, LOTR was and is. Writing, directing, editing, acting, all things acclaimed in LOTR then and now, but not Star Wars, which has something LOTR doesn't have, a naive, exhilarating energy that spreads through the trilogy, rather than the set piece action of LOTR. When ROTK won those 11 Oscars, it was the moment when the blockbuster gained true artistic kudos and it wasn't just the Oscars. So, when comparing the prequels to their progenitors the comparisons are unfair. The Star Wars prequels were a mess, because they lacked everything about the original trilogy that made it great: energy, exuberance, innocence the feeling of something genuinely new ( I was 10 in 1977). In fact the prequels were the opposite, stagnant, stilted, commercial to the point of cynicism. It's actually sad because the original trilogy could have so easily been improved upon by a well acted, written set of prequels that didn't have the joy sucked out of them by the cynical commercialism up there on screen. TPM still looks like the biggest and longest toy commercial ever. The Hobbit on the other hand lacked the magic and coherence of LOTR, but the acting, if not always the script was IMHO improved on the original trilogy. The adaptation itself failed because it lacked focus, direction and didn't know what elements of Tolkien's story to adapt. It also suffered because the nature of the tale itself, needed more special effects (CGI) than the original trilogy. The Hobbit is though of a very high standard for a major film series or blockbuster, you only need to look at the succession of truly awful blockbusters of the last few years to see how in so many ways, the Hobbit succeeded. Where the Hobbit didn't succeed was in matching one of the most artistically acclaimed trilogies in the history of cinema, LOTR and no one has since. That is still IMHO why it is torn apart, for not being the Mona Lisa part 2, it's just a very good portrait, that's worthy of a grand wall, it just not, The Mona Lisa. In a nutshell; It was almost impossible to match or top LOTR with the Hobbit, not such a major task with the Star Wars prequels, compared to the original trilogy. You are correct when comparing the prequels alongside each other not, comparing them to their hallowed originals., The Hobbit is a massive improvement on TPM and subsequent films in that threesome, that made Natalie Portman look wooden, perhaps the SW prequels greatest achievement.
No mascara can survive BOTFA
(This post was edited by entmaiden on Sep 12 2017, 1:37pm)
|