Among film enthusiasts and critics, the prequels in the Star Wars franchise (The Phantom Menace, The Attack of the Clones, The Revenge of the Sith) are regarded generally as ‘bad’, ‘unwatchable’, and at times ‘a dumpster fire’.
I don’t really have any respect for anyone who thinks those films are good. They’re not. (They’re) a monumental misunderstanding of what the (original) three films are about. It’s an exercise in utter infanticide … (like) George Lucas killing his kid.
Out of the currently released seven Star Wars movies, the prequels have been slammed more than any others, and in my opinion, for a good reason. The invalidity of the prequels as any kind of follow up or preclusion to the originals can be proven through a logical syllogism:
Premise 1: A ‘certified fresh’ (steady Tomatometer of 75% or higher after a set amount (80) of reviews on rottentomatoes.com) movie is objectively good (as considered by professional critics and reviewers).
Premise 2: Star Wars IV-VII (“The Originals”) have an average tomato score of 89.75%.
Premise 3: Star Wars I-III (“The Prequels”) have an average tomato score of 66.3%.
Conclusion: Therefore, The Prequels are not good movies.
Premise 1 is the weakest of the three. It takes an average score of largely North American and European reviewers to give as best of an objective score as is largely popular. However, this is not a perfectly objective fact. I believe it could be identified as true by most logicians, and so I will treat it as such.
Premise 2 and 3 are objective facts as calculated by the RottenTomato score (average of 80+ reviews each) of each movie in each category (Prequels or Originals). These will hold up as true, assuming that RottenTomatoes can be agreed upon as an objective source of movie quality ratings. These will be considered as true.
The conclusion is valid because of the law of categorization in logical syllogism. If a ‘certified fresh’/good movie is the largest circle in a diagram, The Originals would be inside of that circle. The Prequels would not be included inside the circle of good movies, and is therefore not a good movie. This is a valid conclusion to draw from three true premises, and therefore, the argument is sound under the assumptions outlined above.
Ideas in popular fiction often gain momentum in a snowball effect. People unexposed to the pure vitriol of the internet that watched the prequels in their youth, when anything Star Wars was sacred, may think that they are good movies. Sure, they might pick up on the weird, in-your-face CGI, the wonky acting, or the subpar dialogue at times, but the uninitiated would never pick up a hatred for the prequel franchise like people involved in the internet discussion have. This snowballing effect plays into the idea that mob mentality can crush individuality in opinions. On the r/movies community of reddit, a distaste of the prequels is not enough. For the true, die-hard Star Wars elitist, there can only be hatred, which fuels logical syllogisms such as this one being created and widely held. While I personally believe that there are very few redeeming qualities in the prequels as films, they provide an interesting diversion to the overall story arc of the franchise and created a good second chapter in a chronicle of Skywalkers.
While the prequels are not ‘good movies’ by any stretch of the objective mind, they do hold value. This syllogism may be sound and also widely supported, but I believe this is largely a result of steamrolling opinions to fit in with the group collective.
But don’t be confused – the prequels are not good movies.