brandonh83
Banned
Ehhhhh hmmmm. I don't think that a Star Wars movie should be obligated to do this.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The Prequels Strike Back - documentary defending the Star Wars prequels
- Thread starter Shaanyboi
- Start date
- Status
Ehhhhh hmmmm. I don't think that a Star Wars movie should be obligated to do this.
Ring Theory is bullshit (IMO) because the last time I saw someone describing it (and I don't care to see another), they pointed out how amazingly beautiful it was that George Lucas created a structure that could go A > B > C > C > B > A (repeat), or C > B > A > A > B > C (repeat). Except for that one point where the structure went ABCABC. Or that other point where it went ABCCAB. But really there are very few structural errors. At least 50% of the time, the Star Wars movies are following this Ring Theory that George Lucas has never claimed to make.
If you're going to hang all of your hopes and dreams on structure, at least make sure it's a structure that works 100% the time. It's just the Prequel Defense Force grasping and clinging for any straw they can use to try and make the argument that the Star Wars Prequels are somehow good movies. The more obvious explanation is that George Lucas is a bad writer, and he made a hamfisted attempt to put all the characters in the places where they needed to be as he backfilled his prequels. As a result, the structure was broken and ass-backwards more than 50% of the time in the Prequels.
Whenever the Prequel Defense Force trashes Bob Anderson choreography to try and claim that the Prequels have better choreography because they have modern choreography, I always picture them trying to talk smack about John Williams (in an alternate universe where John Williams went off to New Zealand to work with Peter Jackson on Lord of the Rings like Bob Anderson did). "The Prequels have great music! The Original Trilogy is all orchestra and old man music. The Prequels have dubstep, and dubstep is newer, and newer is better."
BTW, Duel of the Fates is awesome, but looking at the Prequels as a whole, Auralnauts seems to fit better with them than John Williams does.
Dance of the Fates
In the Zone
If TFA actually did that, it would be a better film because none of that is explained or even hinted at. The idea of a radicalised group of young people looking to change the world, but taking it in a dark direction seems completely appropriate. Luke as a King Lear type leader who lost his way, compared to Anakins Othello like journey. The Idea that the First Order is a group founded by Luke and his belief in the Neutrality of the force is inherently interesting. The Idea of Klo Ren as a Stannis Baratheon type number two who is being asked to lead because it's his "birthright" The idea of Klo as a leader who means well but is damaging things because of his overt ruthlessness and a belief that the ends justify the means. That's interesting.
TFA isn't that film, and by waiting until near the end to unleash the twist. TFA wastes most of its potential emotional impact by not telling the personal story of legacy it hints at through sidelining the
Solo family unit.
Every single Lucas written Star Wars film has done this. The word "Wars" is in the title for a reason
Ep 3 is genuinely good. A lot of new comers seem to really like that too based on my experience. Ep2 and 4 are my least favourite, especially A New Hope, it's old and that gets it so far in terms of goodwill being awarded but it really is hard to watch.
TFA, ESB, ROS are the best movies in the saga.
TFA, ESB, ROS are the best movies in the saga.
TheRedSnifit
Member
The prequels are shit-tier. Sad but true.
DragonSworne
Banned
Why not call this the "phantom documentary" or "attack of the prequels" or "revenge of the prequels"?
If the prequels are so great you'd think they would pick a title from the prequels to name their documentary after.
If the prequels are so great you'd think they would pick a title from the prequels to name their documentary after.
Glass Shark
Banned
That's the thing, though... even if Ring Theory were legit and airtight, it doesn't make the movies good! No amount of "poetry" bullshit excuses bad lighting, bad CG, bad dialogue, bad acting, bad pacing, bad plot structure, and on and on and on...
The movies are flat-out bad and if they didn't have "Star Wars" attached to the title they would have been box office bombs or straight-to-DVD schlock.
brandonh83
Banned
Yep and... we have the Resistance and the First Order. There are star wars in this Star Wars movie too.
I think your missing this "/s"
QuantumZebra
Member
The prequels don't get enough hate.
They assassinated what could have been one of the most compelling fictional characters in history (Anakin) and butchered what should have been a home-run trilogy (the story was already essentially in place beforehand).
As a *massive* Star Wars fan (my house is covered in OT and TFA gear and toys and my family adores the series as well), I think the PT should be wiped from existence in every form. It was a mistake.
UnemployedVillain
Member
Prequels : GT :: VII : Super
Not in terms of the original creator's involvement, but reception and perception
Not in terms of the original creator's involvement, but reception and perception
the worst thing about TFA fanfiction is that is it almost always better than the vapid brand building exercise we got.
thankfully it didn't take long for the penny to drop on that turd.
thanks for the laugh
Yep. It must be terrible to claim to be a "hardcore fan" of something while only enjoying half of that something. I love all 7 movies!
brandonh83
Banned
Star Wars threads are the best.
Or worst. Actually not terribly sure.
It's just harder without Bobby.
This made me laugh way harder than it should have.
Nah, it's really not. It's fine to love the majority of SW main films (and even parts of EP3) and accept that the PT are just poorly made movies that failed the brilliant ideas and potential they were built on.
Nothing terrible about it. There's been absolutely no better time in history to be a SW fan. I'm actually pretty damn happy and look forward to EP8 more so than I ever have in terms of an upcoming SW release.
And I've got no hate for those who enjoy the PT. I just strongly disagree with the opinion they're good films and worthy of the excellence of what came before and after.
I watched that popular fan edit of the first three movies on YouTube recently. I'd heard a lot of praise that it makes for a better movie than any of the movies themselves did. While I'm not particularly a fan of the prequel trilogy or think they are very good, I have to say that someone just starting out is better off either not watching them at all or watching all of them. This midway point of trying to "cut the crappy parts" out of the prequel movies into a "good cut" just makes it feel like a brief summary of events instead of a work of fiction. It was entirely unsatisfying. Especially the bizarre choice to leave in TPP's final fight with Maul and Liam Neeson and Obi-Wan.
I literally just rewatched AOTC and I've got to say... the movie wasn't that bad. Not nearly as bad as TPM. In fact, I'd call it a thoroughly average movie. Okay pacing, improved acting (outside of Hayden and Portman) and pretty well directed. The cgi has aged but I wasn't bothered. The real drag is the romantic plot and Hayden and Portman's acting and lack of chemistry. That's also were the writing is very weak. Overall I was pleasantly surprised. I don't like what it does to Darth Vader and Yoda but I'm not concerned with canon and I've still got the originals. I'm actually excited to rewatch Revenge and Awakens to see how I'd rank all the movies now. The gap between the prequels and Awakens might be smaller than I originally thought/remembered. Neither come close to the originals though.
You should rewatch TFA if you really think the PT and ST have a small gap between them. It's directed, acted, and paced better with more interesting characterizations and interactions.
I've rewatched TFA a couple of months ago and I still didn't really enjoy it. It feels like a typical Abrams movie, with similar pacing and story issues. Honestly, I think Abrams' Star Trek was a much better movie. I like all the actors in TFA but the characters weren't fleshed out and the movie felt too hurried, with contrived conflict after contrived conflict, to ever really get a feel for Finn or Rey, let alone Poe. Like I said, I think I still like it a little better than the prequels but after rewatching AOTC ( TPM really was dreadful) I've realized they might be pretty close. After TFA I've come to terms with the fact that Star Wars, at leadt in terms of 'main story', just means the OT for me. I'm not interested in seeing it continue in the form of new episodes. I will keep an open mind with regards to movies like Rogue One though.
"Well then you are lost!"
There's lots of subtleties in terms of character development I catch with each rewatch (I've seen it over 10 times) and a surprisingly lack of handholding with a lot of these moments. I agree we didn't get to spend quite as much time as I'd liked with each main character, but there's a layer of depth you wouldn't expect if you pay attention.
I'm still finding lots of these moments when I watch. Really helps to set the tone for what to expect in the next two episodes and keeps me on my toes.
You'll never find anything like this in the PT because that's not what they were about (character development). They've got nothing more to offer via rewatches other than the revisiting the various CGI setpieces that are now horrifically outdated.
crackhead_bob
Member
If there's anything positive to take from the prequels, it is that they exist as a warning and blueprint to all future writers and directors that even successful franchises can be fucked up if they're in the wrong hands. TFA wasn't perfect, but I think it was a much needed cleanser to help remind fans why they still loved Star Wars.
I'm definitely looking forward to episode VIII, but I'm even more interested in what will come down the pike in the next 10 to 15 years -- both in films and in television. I do hope that if Disney decides to produce a live action Star Wars television series that they broadcast it on Netflix, because anything on Network will only drag it down and keep it from being what it needs to be. Not in terms of budget and set pieces, but that network shows inevitably carries all the negative baggage that shows like Game of Thrones and The Wire don't have to deal with.
-Plasma Reus-
Service guarantees member status
These are a bunch of CRAZY PEOPLE.
This attitude is very indicative of what's wrong with TFA and what the Prequels got right.
TFA planning meeting.
OK people we need heroes and villains. in the preexisting 6 movies we've had the Rebel Alliance and The Republic. So our next hero group should be called something that starts with the letter R for brand synergy.... Minutes later. Resistance it is. Sure the dominant political power is the new republic but people hated the prequels so we don't want to align to closely with that branding.
So now we need Vilans. Let's just come up with a generic fantasy name like "the first order" or " the Knights of Ren". Who are they? The bad guys. Why are they fighting. "Because they want to be bad" too on the nose. Hmm... Now they are conflicted, "they are bad, but sometimes they want to be good" Perfect.
How the prequels set it up. All of which is explained in the first few minutes
The major political force in the galaxy is a republic, formed by planetary nation states as a way to regulate trade between worlds and create a stable society. This republic is democratic in nature and ruled by a senate in a political system that mirrors the ancient Romans. While most planets have their own military's, peace is enforced by the Jedi. The Jedi are a religious sect devoted to the idea of peace and balance, who's members understanding of "the force" gives them superpowers such as telekinesis, mind control and the ability to predict the future. These abilitys have been refined by the Jedi for combat and they are prolific Warriors supposedly only with the desire for peace.
The conflict begins when a faction within the republic senate known as the trade federation takes an aggressive Millitary position against Naboo in order to gain their natural resources. An attitude that reflects the position of the day, where the American Millitary Industrial complex was in the process of invading the Middle East to claim and control the natural resources of the region under the pretext of searching for "Weapons of mass distruction" WMDs.
That's all within the first few minutes of Episode One.
I agree with this.
TFA went like "Ok so the empire was destroyed and we have an iconic scene were everyone celebrates the fall of the empire, what would be a good idea for the new villains?"
"Well a new Empire of course! We will even have a dark old new guy sitting in a throne, it will be perfect!"
"You know, we could explore something more complex, like different Jedi philosophies clashing with each other and questioning Luke Skywalker's teachings, similar to the Cristians"
"Not-Empire it is!!"
This sums up my feelings toward TFA, except for the fact that the plot structure mirrored ANH too closely for my taste. The prequels deserve hate, but they had good world-building(which led to some superior video games), where as TFA didn't.
matrix-cat
Member
But does any of that make the movie more enjoyable to watch? I wouldn't argue that more thought went into establishing a universe in the Prequels, but... who gives a shit? If it isn't in service of making the movie better, why does it matter? I don't want to know about how space laws are passed in the space Senate.
Personally, I much prefer the way TFA did it. There's nothing complex or subtle about it because there doesn't have to be. It isn't a flaw; they didn't want to tell a story about warring factions, so they didn't. The movie is Rey and friends going on an adventure and discovering themselves, not an update on the politics of the Star Wars universe at large. There's exactly as much world-building as there needs to be to for the story to work, and not a moment more.
If you don't want to tell a story about warring factions then why make a film called STAR WARS: EPISODE 7. As for the world building. They didn't do any. If that works for you... Cool I suppose
While I could also do without seeing Jar Jar give a speech in the senate. Ultimately this care and love shown to world building does improve the films for me. It helps me to suspend my disbelief by grounding it to terms and concepts I'm familiar with. It's the type of care that gives the individual moments emotional weight. (Which the films largely waste)
I guess that when I watch these films I feel like I know these characters. So even though some of the lines are tripe I feel the emotions of the scene anyway.
Except episode 2. That film sucks
Hyperbole, but they really are awful movies if you take into account of all the manpower, passion (not talking about George Lucas here) and money that was put into them.
To all the defensive Prequels fans and Prequels haters (like myself I guess); There's nothing wrong with enjoying or liking the prequels, I personally like a lot of films that I "objectively" would consider bad and awful. I just personally have a hard time entertaining people's delusion that there's nothing wrong with the prequels and that they are just as good as the original trilogy, I'm saying that as a person that don't think the OT are impeccable or even that super amazing either.
context is important. until the prequels there was only the original trilogy. until the force awakens there had only most recently been the prequel trilogy. abrams and company had to establish star wars again and revive faith in the franchise. the force awakens is almost the perfect movie in what it needed to do and what it accomplished. save the deep shit for tv shows, spinoff films, and future episodes.
matrix-cat
Member
The original trilogy is also called 'Star Wars', and it doesn't deal with warring factions any more than TFA does. The Empire is run by an evil cackling monster man, the Rebellion is unquestionably good and righteous; there's absolutely nothing more to it than that. Those movies don't tell us anything about the system of government on any planet, or show any of the characters punching the clock at their day jobs, because it's totally irrelevant to the main story.
TFA absolutely has world building, by the way. Like I said, it tells you everything you need to know to enjoy the movie you are currently watching. It establishes at the very beginning that the First Order rose from the remnants of the Empire, and Luke is in hiding after everything went bad, and everything else unfolds naturally as you watch the movie. That's all you need.
I am so powerfully not interested in that. I find the world the Prequels established profoundly dismal; some of the most miserable revelations in fictional history. Jedi went from awesome warriors with laser swords to weird monks inexplicably forced to be celibate, only allowed to use their powers when the government tells them to. The fanciful Wild West in Space turned into government planets and trade embargoes, votes of no confidence, so many excruciating scenes of sci-fi C-SPAN. The mystical, unknowable Force? Oh, it's bugs that live in your blood, and the more blood bugs you have to better at swordfighting you are. I never asked for the exciting sci-fi adventures I enjoyed to be grounded in the mundaneness of real life; I was perfectly fine enjoying them as delightful escapism.
crackhead_bob
Member
To be fair, I thought that The Clone Wars did a decent job at portraying the politics that took place in the Star Wars universe. And had the prequels been more competently handled, I don't think there'd be as much backlash at the concept of depicting the policy making. If you put yourself back in the early 1990's, before Phantom Menace was released, wouldn't you at the very least be intrigued with idea of exploring this? I just wish it had been handled more properly.
IMO, it wasn't the aesthetic of the Senate scenes that turned me off, but it was in how there were little to no context behind any of the speeches. It's like everyone had to become retarded in order to make Palpatine's scheming work. And as someone on another thread pointed out earlier, one of the main problems with the Senate scenes is that all of the important stuff, like Palpatine's appointment as chancellor, took place offscreen.
It's too bad that all the ill will stemming from the prequels prompted Abrams into excising this concept right out the gate. Could a Star Wars film explore the theme of galactic politics going forward one day? Who knows? Perhaps it's better kept on television, like what they did in Clone Wars. Or they could explore it in a Netflix series. Not on the same level as what George Lucas attempted in the prequels, mind you, but in a more peripheral way, that complements plot and character development, as opposed to functioning as a primary expositional vehicle.
KeyBladerXIII
Member
Agreed whole-heartedly.
I don't buy the argument that they had to "restore faith" in Star Wars. It's fucking Star Wars. If people weren't already going to see it just from hearing there was going to be a new one, the return of the OT cast was certainly going to clinch it. The amount of people who watched one of the prequels, threw their Dengar action figure across the room and shouted "Ruined FOREVER!!!", are miniscule compared to the audience that are ingrained to this franchise.
Here is the world building that occurs in the first few minutes of STAR WARS: A NEW HOPE.
- The opening craw begins by telling the audience that there is a period of galactic civil war.
- It then established that the Dominant political force in the galaxy is an Empire... Which is obviously ruled by an Emperor
- it then says the Empire is actively being opposed by an organised Rebellion which indicates that the conflict within the civil war is uneven
- it says that this Empire is evil, and that point of view is reiterated when the crawl says that the empire is in control of a Death Star
- this is further enforced in the second line of Dialogue when C3P0 the first character to speak worries about being sent to the Spice mines of Kessel. This gives the audience the understanding that the empire punishes desenters with hard manual labour.
- Princess Leia is introduced in the opening crawl, and her title tells the audience that while the galaxy is ruled by an empire, individual planets have their own unique customs that are held
- In Darth Vaders first scene minutes into the film he murders a man who appears to be the ships captain. This man says that the ship is a consulate ship and has diplomatic immunity. He literally quotes a law at Darth Vader.
-Within Princess Leia's first few lines in the film she states that she is a member of the imperial senate, on a diplomatic mission to Alderan. This gives the Audience further insight into the political situation within the Galaxy.
All of that political talk/writing occurs within the first 8 minutes of the origional trillogy
Edit: Salty talk about TFA.
After rewatching the opening crawl for TFA I'm feeling extra salty. TFA opens with what's essentially a lie about Luke being the last Jedi.
It says that the first order rose out of the ashes of the empire, but says nothing more. So it's really saying LOOK ITS THE EMPIRE 2.0
It then says that the Galaxy is controlled by a Republic, yet Leia now a general and the key figure in the foundation of the new republic is now joining THE RESISTANCE which is seperate from the republic, is funded by the republic. Yet through the the film there is little evidence of the first order as an occupying force. So what exactly is being resisted? In the end the NEW SUPER DEATH STAR destroys the republic in one special effect making it the second time TFA has retconned its own preamble.
It says that the first order rose out of the ashes of the empire, but says nothing more. So it's really saying LOOK ITS THE EMPIRE 2.0
It then says that the Galaxy is controlled by a Republic, yet Leia now a general and the key figure in the foundation of the new republic is now joining THE RESISTANCE which is seperate from the republic, is funded by the republic. Yet through the the film there is little evidence of the first order as an occupying force. So what exactly is being resisted? In the end the NEW SUPER DEATH STAR destroys the republic in one special effect making it the second time TFA has retconned its own preamble.
If that's all you got out of the star wars universe out of the OT, I don't know what to say. Personally, I like star wars for the universe(and the video games), not any particular characters(Except the ones in KOTOR 1 and 2). Couldn't imagine just being in it for the characters, even in the original trilogy.
in the years since i first watched the star wars films, i had never ever paid attention to leia saying she was part of the imperial senate. it was only a clip shown of star wars rebels where it's made known that that's her job when i had to do some digging because it didn't feel right.
it's almost like george lucas took that one line and use it as the basis for the government preceding the empire. and then he made it really really really dumb. like there are a shitload of jedi. so many jedi that the evil badman has them all killed, and all blamed for wanting to take over the government as the basis of why he should actually be in charge.
and then you have han solo shrug off the jedi as being whatevers and you have a dude not give a shit about them to vader's face. it makes no sense.
it's almost like george lucas took that one line and use it as the basis for the government preceding the empire. and then he made it really really really dumb. like there are a shitload of jedi. so many jedi that the evil badman has them all killed, and all blamed for wanting to take over the government as the basis of why he should actually be in charge.
and then you have han solo shrug off the jedi as being whatevers and you have a dude not give a shit about them to vader's face. it makes no sense.
It's literally the second thing she says.
1. Vader you stink
2. I'm a senator
3. IM A SENATOR
Then Vader calls her Rebel Scum.
The Imperial senate is mentioned later when Vader is interrogating Leia and he tells her that the Emperor has disbanded it.
In addition to that an event known as "The Clone Wars" is bought up almost as soon as you meet Luke
Edit: Hans attitude after seeing the prequels makes complete sense. All living Jedi were supposedly killed by Clone Troopers in the events of Order 66. Anakin Skywalkers survival and extermination of the Jedi is one of the closest held galactic secrets. The weapon of choice of those clone troopers. A handy blaster.
So for the majority of his life Han has been told via constant imperial propaganda that a regular human with a blaster is superior to a trained Jedi. With no Jedi left to disprove this sentiment. Hans cynicism is well founded
yeah and i skip right on over that part because rebel scum seems a lot more important to that immediate relationship. but we don't get a focus on the rebel part in the prequel. we get a focus on the senate part. it's an odd choice.
the clone wars is a bit more important: you're building a prequel series, specifically around anakin, and obi-wan was supposed to be good friends with him. even though it's something that didn't need explanation in the original trilogy, it sets a certain timeline for the prequels so that we know at least obi-wan and anakin were once friends, and at least through the clone wars... whatever those were.
the senate thing has no point being a focus in the prequels.
Raiden1018
Banned
I just dont understand how someone can go:
"You know what? I might just watch Attack of The Clones today!"
and then proceed to watch it seriously for over 2 hours
It's really baffling lol
"You know what? I might just watch Attack of The Clones today!"
and then proceed to watch it seriously for over 2 hours
It's really baffling lol
Except when Luke is at Obi Wans place on Tatoine Kenobi literally says that " the Jedi knights were the guardians of peace and prosperity for over a thousand generations of The Old Republic before the dark times, before the empire"
After moments earlier establishing himself as a Jedi Knight. Kenobi clearly and succinctly spells out the key events of the prequel trillogy in a few minutes during the opening act of A New Hope
Edit: The Imperial senate, specifically its dissolution is the first thing spoken of by Moff Tarkin. He then goes to detail the specific systems of governance now in place and name drops the fact that The Empire until very recently was a Republic
The Trade Federation invaded Naboo, at the behest of Darth Sidious/Senator Palpatine due to its location along what was a vital trade route.
The ability to maintain supply lines in a major conflict is crucial to winning a war and by invading Naboo, Palpatine was essentially trying to cut the republics supply line, giving them limited access to those resources in any future war.
TLDR Yes. The natural resource the Trade Federation wanted was a refuelling location/Shipping lane
Dreams-Visions
Member
yes.
So I got some time to finally watch this, some good points made and provided valid insight into the structure of the prequels that makes me appreciate what Lucus was trying to do, even if he didn't pull it off.
The study into the music of the prequels just blew my mind, like, life changing stuff in there. Man John Williams is a genius. Also how the older films were pretty much shat on but there was no internet to spread people's thoughts on the movie, so broadcast of disappointment was limited. I agree with people interviewed, that the only hate ive come across on the prequels is on the internet, outside of it I believe it wasn't as bad as the most vocal of fans try to persuade others it is.
And I guess, most of all is that I really do respect George. He changed cinema, he setup companies to realise his vision and we're all better because of it. He made his movies, that's what he's always wanted and focused on, I can only admire him for that. Great man, terrifying burden.
The study into the music of the prequels just blew my mind, like, life changing stuff in there. Man John Williams is a genius. Also how the older films were pretty much shat on but there was no internet to spread people's thoughts on the movie, so broadcast of disappointment was limited. I agree with people interviewed, that the only hate ive come across on the prequels is on the internet, outside of it I believe it wasn't as bad as the most vocal of fans try to persuade others it is.
And I guess, most of all is that I really do respect George. He changed cinema, he setup companies to realise his vision and we're all better because of it. He made his movies, that's what he's always wanted and focused on, I can only admire him for that. Great man, terrifying burden.
That's because Adam West Batman is brilliant, tongue-in-cheek satire and people either didn't wan't that or didn't get it.
One of the funniest shows ever made, way ahead of its time. The most brilliant thing might be that it's also truly faithful to the source material. This was before Batman got gritty.
The Prequels aren't trying to work on multiple levels, they aren't poking fun at their own absurdity, they aren't self-aware or funny or clever.
They're campy, but they're dull as fuck and shitty in execution.
crackhead_bob
Member
Some good points you have. I also was thinking about the fact that since the Tim Burton film in 1989, there's been a wide array of different Batman depictions on television, films, and videogames -- enough to allay the notion that Batman equals camp. There's a Lego Batman movie coming out next year, and I'll bet even the most hardened Dark Knight fan are chomping at the bit to check this out. My older brother who loves the Arkham games also loves the Lego Batman games as well. So there's no longer the threat factor involved when assessing the Adam West Batman in the larger pop culture matrix.
For the prequels, it's hard to predict how they'll be viewed years from now. As more and more Star Wars films come out, I feel the prequels are only going to become even more marginalized, because I don't think Disney and Kathleen Kennedy are going to look to them as inspirations to draw from, at least in terms of acting performances. Maybe people will warm up to them and begin to like them in an ironic way, but that's going to require alot of time, as well as the accretion of enough good Star Wars films to balance out the bad taste left from the prequels.
What are your thoughts on a possible Lego Star Wars movie? Do you think fans would be as opposed to a campy Lego film as they would in casting Hayden Christensen in a cameo role in Episode VIII?
A New Hope was nominated for a Best Picture Oscar. The prequels were summarily ignored for any Academy Awards beyond Special Effects. I think it's dumb to say that if the 1977 public was given a social media megaphone, they would have vocally hated the original films.
Were there contemporary reviews of A New Hope that were harsh? Sure. The film is braindead wish fulfillment, the movie is extremely lacking compared to the groundbreaking and cerebral films of the 1970's. Negative opinions were bad by comparison to some of the most incredible works of cinema ever created (Godfather, Stanley Kubrick, etc), . The Star Wars prequels don't even hold up to contemporary popcorn cinema of the same era, though. Most people would rather watch The Matrix than The Phantom Menace.
- Status