Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="stevelabny" data-source="post: 1303314" data-attributes="member: 9298">personally, i think answering any of these prequel-trilogy questions without seeing the third movie is silly. i think the third one will validate the making of the three movies, even if it doesnt change peoples minds about how good they are.what i am really curious about,if ANYONE can help me, is why my opinions on phantom menace and clones are almost exactly opposite of other peoples.i pretty much LIKED phantom menace. it started a little slow,and had a few things that were just bizarre but that was ok, because Jedi had a few scenes that made me cringe too.Clones on the other hand was mostly awful. Shoehorning Boba Fett into the storyline in the most awkward way possible just to cater to Fett-fanboys, having your "villian" be a very unimpressive old man, the love story from nowhere  "no anakin, no anakin, ok, i love you",  having some of the worst special effects caught on film since the 80s, and the old-school crime-movie diner scene which I just can't sit through without mocking. The only part of Clones I DID like was...anakin.  I absolutely loved the way Hayden delivered his "they're animals, and i slaughtered them like animals" and all his stupid sappy dialogue to amidala.  Of course, unless he's using the little-mentioned jedi-mind-rape technique, theres no way she would ever fall for him but that problem is with Amidala's script and Portman's cardboard acting, not anakin.  Anakin was the only saving grace of the movie for me. And the part most other people say they hated most.Can anyone explain this phenomenon?</blockquote>

Verification