I like some of the bits, but I zone out during the conversations with Hayden Christensen unless there are lightsabers/guns involved. If not - I just look at Natalie Portman, if she isn't there, I chew on my nails until the bits with either her or lightsabers in it or the whiny boy is gone.
VanCleef wants you! Join the Defias Brotherhood and hang out on a yacht all day!
Darth Vader is a total badass, and that's all there is to it.
There were prequels? I wasn't aware of this? There can't be any prequels.... *checks IMDB* Nope, no prequels ever happened. Nope. Nope.
I'M NOT LISTENING. NO PREQUELS. NO. NEVER HAPPENED. *cries in corner*
The actors in the prequels weren't all that bad. It's just that George Lucas forgot how to direct after the year 1980-something(hell even the best SW movie wasn't directed by him), and made the mistake of surrounding himself with nothing but yes-men.
Killed the franchise for anyone over the age of 13.
"So, Miss Piggy's going to be explaining the Medichlorians to Qui-Gonn's ghost on this greenscreen platform here."
"Uhhh...sure, George."
Personally, I think it makes him far more interesting. It was easy to look at Darth Vader as a soulless monster in the original trilogy, barring his last few moments. But now that we know far more about him, it's easier (and far more fascinating) to consider what and how he was thinking.
But apart from that, I don't consider him to be any different. Just... more understandable.
Prequels? Oh i must have supressed the awful memories of those movies.
After seeing this link, you'll never see Darth Vader as an evil ego-maniac that he is in the Star Wars movies
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R55e-...ayer_embedded#
Revenge of the Sith wasn't bad...the other two completely sucked when Natalie Portman wasn't around.
I just hate the prequels because they ruined Return of the Jedi with that ending...
I once had a character named "Clamslam" but Blizzard deemed it inappropriate.Retired from WoW: February 19, 2011. It was fun Blizz.
I am dyslexic and proud to be so.
so you dont like how I spell ?
To bad learn to be human or gtfo.
I see Vader the same way as I've always had, I just understand the character more now. And really, am I the only one who actually liked the prequels? o.O Sure, The Phantom Menace wasn't that good (fu Jar-Jar) but I don't see much to complain about the second and third movies. The action scenes are way better as well, Obi-Wan vs Anakin is my favorite battle scene of all time (ALL TIME).
Don't get me wrong, I like the originals better, and the action scenes there got their own feel that I like, but the prequels are way better than most movies I see these days.
And about Anakin being a crybaby, you pretty much have to be an emotional wreck to be turned to the dark side, be it by sadness or hatred. I actually see the dark side as better than the light, as they do things based on both emotion and logic whereas the Jedi doesn't allow you to feel at all. EVERYTHING leads to the dark side ._. Seriously, you can't be sad that someone you love is about to die, because sadness leads to grief that leads to hatred that leads to the dark side. REALLY? The Jedi are cold-hearted, and they call the sith evil?
Last edited by BHD; 2011-03-01 at 10:21 AM. Reason: crybaby, dark side, yoda's an ass.
Cave Cave Deus Videt
I just can't belive that Darth Vader from episode 4-6 is the same guy as that whiny cry baby Anakin from episode 2-3.
I'll always see those two as two completly different characters, so no it didn't change my look on Darth Vader.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDKiQfBs9lo
I'll just leave this here.
Dear Blizz. Please put Crumpets into the game.
And this has anything to do with Darth Vader because?
Just because the acting/script and directing was bad doesnt mean that Anakin wasnt justified for being emotional. My point is that his emotions justified his falling to the darkside AND justified his rather soulless persona in the original trilogy. You guys think he was a cry baby, I think he was justified with experiencing such grief and responding to it with the hatred and temper...it led him to the dark side. Fear turns to anger and anger turns to hate. Fear (being a crybaby or whining) is the initial step and Anakin had much fear.
Why do people keep saying that it was the prequels that "made Vader more human"?
That's the point of Episode VI. Before, all you saw was evil Vader, an unstoppable force. That's the reason why, when Luke takes off his mask as he is dying, you see that's he's little more than a broken old man inside that armor. All the prequels did was reinforce that image.
Yes, I'll admit he's whiny in the prequels, especially in Episode 2 somehow, so I understand why people dislike him in the prequels, but... Well, put it like this, who amongst you, hell, in the world hasn't been a bit whiny in their childhood/adolescence?
I'm glad that I didn't bother to see Episode 2 or 3 after the first one. I was only eleven when Episode 1 came out, but even then I knew it was garbage.
So no, the prequels didn't change how I see Vader.
I never understood the hate for the 3 prequels, and probably never will.
For me, a person who watched Episode 1-3 before 4-6, the 3 originals are garbage.
The acting and the effects in the originals is so fucking horrible that everything just seems lame. Darth Vader, evil? Oh really? Looks (and sounds) more like a clown with breathing problems imo. As for Anakin being whiny in EP 2 and 3, I say, no. He's a little whiny at times in EP 2, but in the 3rd one he is more cocky and arrogant than whiny.
And yes, Jar-Jar sucks, but the originals had more of that crap (Those fucking silly bear ppl in EP 6).
On topic: Darth Vader lost his badassness when he got his armor^^
Go on, flame me as much as u want. But if u look at it without all the nostalgia that the ppl in this thread obviously have, the Prequels are much better than the Originals, both story-, acting- and effectwise
They're (short for They are) describes a group of people. "They're/They are a nice bunch of guys." Their indicates that something belongs/is related to a group of people. "Their car was all out of fuel." There refers to a location. "Let's set up camp over there." There is also no such thing as "could/should OF". The correct way is: Could/should'VE, or could/should HAVE.
Holyfury armory
I think that sums it all.