What Did the SW Prequels Do Better Than the Originals?

It's pretty much become officially accepted that the original Star Wars films are better than the more recent ones and the prequels have been bombarded with criticism. However, many would argue that they aren't that bad and I have seen that Revenge of the Sith, which earned a respectable 79% on Rotten Tomatoes and 7.7/10 on IMDb, is actually a reasonable amount of people's favourite out of the lot. What areas, if any, do you think that episodes 1, 2 and 3 are better than the first movies in?

I didn't like any of the movies.And that would probably include the most recent one as well, judging from what I saw, read and the spoilers I've heard.

They were better at being terrible.

Choreography, obviously.

Lightsaber duels. TPM had the best duel and RotS had a solid one between Obi Wan and emo boy.

The lightsaber duels. The Phantom Menace had the best fight IMO

Music. I think the Prequels had a more epic mix.

Choreography. That's really it.

If we count Clone Wars, then it has better character development.

Lightsaber duels definitely.

As others have said, lightsaber choreography.

I'd also give the prequels the benefit of showing the diversity of the SW Universe; we got to see a lot of cool new aliens and some of the more exotic planets.

Choreography... except for the final fight in Episode II, which I have come to hate.

Like everyone said choreography. And they didn't do this better per say, but they did expand the lore. Oh and Obi Wans actor... Perfect casting.

QFT

Ewan McGregor <3

Music. Imo March on Jedi temple is better than Imperial March.

@thetruebarryallen: Yeah he was everything I wanted out of a young Ben Kenobi and then some.

World building, the prequels had some of the coolest and best designed planets thanks to cgi.

@thespoiler: exactly what I came to say.

@thetruebarryallen: @the-seeffiss17: he has the high ground!

The fights obviously

I vastly prefer Ewan McGregor as Obi-Wan

The fight scenes were better, I slightly prefer the aesthetic of the era, Ewan McGregor, the music is ARGUABLY better, the Sith were made out to be much cooler, and the story is IMHO a little more... convoluted and less cliché in a way. I personally like the idea of political turmoil and government action. Really, the prequels had the potential to be absolutely fantastic, but the execution was just awful.

Nothing really. The lightsaber duels just came off as over choregraphed to me.

I will give credit for the artistic design of the film. Though it had a lot of flash over substance, the flash was pretty darn flashy. For instance, the detail devoted to all the different types of combatants and vehicles in the film really show a lot of imagination, and they felt perfectly natural when adopted for projects like Star Wars Battlefronts II. Almost all the aliens look memorable and interesting. Darth Maul's lightsaber (and his entire aesthetic) still blows my mind every time I see it.

I think those who are praising the lightsaber fights are being a little selective in their memories. Sure, the fight against Darth Maul and the Obi-Wan/Anakin fight were entertaining spectacles, but there were some lousy fight scenes as well. Mace vs. The Emperor? Severely underwhelming especially considering that they are supposedly two of the best duelers in the Star Wars universe. Anakin vs. Count Dooku in Clone Wars? Laughably bad. Even the scenes where the action is tight debatable lack the edge that the originals had because the new ones look too choreographed much like Arrow's fight scenes.

Other than the music score and looking pretty...nothing IMHO

All these people pretending Watto isn't awesome.

Lightsaber duels, bigger and better (yet CGI filled) worlds, The Emperor, Liam Neeson

There are some other things I like, but nothing else that's better than the originals.

Action in both execution and scale. Space battles, land battles, lightsaber duels and yes, even the podracing part was better than the ROTJ speeder scenes.

Aesthetics aside, it also presented the Jedi order and the clash of Sith vs Jedi better. Well of course, the original trilogy did not have the luxury of showing that. But yeah, the contrasting (and sometimes similar) ideologies were fleshed out more in the prequel trilogies.

I could also add the minority (for lack of a better word) roles. It was not a world full of white male people. Well the original trilogy was not as well but if you think about it, Padme had a bigger role than Leia, Mace had a bigger role than Lando, Jango was literally everywhere, etc. But then again, you got some stereotypes with Watto and the Viceroys and whatnot so it kinda steps backward as well.

Prequels had better: choreography, the overall plot, effects,

Originals had better: atmosphere, acting (not really by much though), characters and especially...they were first.

Lightsaber duels.

They were better at expanding the universe and ideas IMO.

The Choreography and the introduction of the clonewars.

They did nothing better. The prequels havery great moments, and I don't hate them, but they do nothing better than the OT.

Idk :D

jar Jar Binks

Better battles

Better music

More diversity

Better lightsaber duels

And they had Jango Fett :D

They had Sir Christopher Lee.

I honestly feel the prequels were more emotionally charged, and deeper thematically than the OT. In the original films character connections happened so fast that it was hard to believe that the characters were really as close as they were made out to be. The prequel trilogies built up the explosive confrontation between master and student through three films, whereas the most emotion in the OT came from Luke vs Vader.....and even then....he barely knew him....On top of that, the overall story was simpler than the prequel trilogy. Of course, that doesn't take away the fact that they were executed much better, but still, they weren't working with as much. Then, of course, you have the better cinematography, duels, and the usual that the prequel trilogies contained. Hey, IMO, if Hayden Christensen had a deeper voice and better acting skills, RotS would be the best of the series, easily. While he was believable in some parts, it really was his unconvincing portrayal of a character that was supposed to be the badass chosen one that turned a lot of people off.

The battles, choreography, and music(imo)

The fights were better, however I understand and appreciate the fights in the original movies and can see why the Force Awakens is moving away from the prequels fighting.

Lightsaber fights and they showed more of what the Force was capable of but I can't think of much else.

Universe-building is creative wheel-spinning that can only distract people and subtract from the mystique of the world unless it's grounded in the story. The only time it should be done for its own sake is in fictional encyclopedias and the like. And all the special effects and choreography actually made the fights worse. All the CG wide-shots and acrobatics were a detriment to Obi-wan and Anakin's final duel by making it a spectacle instead of focusing on the relationship it represented, for example. The prequels were worse than the originals in every way that mattered. TFA pretty much fixed everything though. It is roughly the equal of the prequels (superior in many ways, but also quite derivative).

Maul and the music were the only good things about them.

As well as visual(that's because of the time period more than anything, so you can disregard this, honestly), acting, choreography, and music.

Well, in my opinion at least.

The Clone Wars redeems the prequel trilogy.