The Three Problems with Writing Prequels l Crimes of Grindelwald and Star Wars
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 01. 2019
- If you love my content and want to support out Supreme Leader Mishka (thank you!) - patreon/discord community: / hellofutureme
Want to stop slavery AND get an awesome t-shirt?: www.teepublic.com/user/hellof...
Learn more about our channel-sponsored charities:
A21: www.a21.org/index.php?site=true
WWF: www.worldwildlife.org/
My SECOND CHANNEL can be found via a link on my main page or at 'TwotheFuture'. Come join us!
Email fanart/fanmail: hellofuturemeyt@gmail.com
Twitter: / timhickson1
Facebook: / hellofutureme
My website: timhicksonyt.com
IF YOU WANT TO SUBMIT WRITING TO BE FEATURED:
timhicksonyt.com/featured-com...
IF YOU WANT TO SEND THINGS TO ME (address):
Tim Hickson
PO Box 69062
Lincoln, 7608
Canterbury, New Zealand
The artist that designed my display pic! serem01.deviantart.com/
The artist who design my cover photo:
- raidesart.deviantart.com/
- / raidesart
- / raidesart
Credit for the background music I use in a LOT of my videos:
Kevin MacLeod "Music for Manatees"
Stay nerdy,
~ Tim
![On Worldbuilding: Hidden Magical Worlds [ Fantastic Beasts l Black Panther l Trollhunters ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wYC6UeRja4U/mqdefault.jpg)
![On Worldbuilding: Hidden Magical Worlds [ Fantastic Beasts l Black Panther l Trollhunters ]](/img/tr.png)
![On Writing: Civil War + COVER REVEAL [Capt. America l Avatar l Russia ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/p5b6S3II68M/mqdefault.jpg)
![On Writing: Subtext (and how to use it)! [ Tarantino | Thrones | Gatsby ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/58FyvzttlIg/mqdefault.jpg)
I've never done content quite like this, and while it was a lot of fun, it was a huuuuuge project. If you'd like to see more of this heavily edited/set/costumed stuff, then consider supporting Supreme Leader Mishka and myself at www.patreon.com/hellofutureme for a couple of dollars a month. Let's discuss the relationship between prequels and the original work! Also, to be clear, there are some prequels I love (Bumblebee, X Men: First Class, and I actually think Revenge of the Sith is an emotionally resonant film).
~ Tim
Honestly not a fan, Im here for your mind not your body dude 😘
Hello Future Me I have conflicted feelings of your live action skits. One one hand, I love your drawn avatar, and I imagine it would take less time to draw those than do the live action skits so more videos, but on the other hand, there is a certain cheesy charm to them. I feel like a nice compromise could be drawing skits.
I like what you did with this, the exploration of theory and focus on live skits and examples.
Maybe you could do it but just at the beginning? Is a little annoying.
(Funny, of course, but a little annoying)
Love the effort you've put in. And the content is great. But I think the format really distracts from the content. For example, when you talk in front of the fire, you are way more difficult to follow. Don't forget that your regular talking is really clear and nice to listen to.
I think _The Hobbit_ makes for an... interesting case. The book _isn't_ a prequel, and has none of the typical prequel issues, but the films _are_ prequels and have _all_ the typical prequelisms. Funny how that works.
@UC_djdilW51r_qKCddzeN7GA The overuse of CGI and over-the-top stunts is certainly an issue, but it's not the only one, the films are also padded to there and back again. How does one book get turned into a trilogy just as long as the previous one which was based on _three_ books? They easily could've fit the story into a single film, or _maybe_ two, tops. All the stuff about Gandalf has no bearing on the story of The Hobbit, but it's in there anyway because these are _prequels_ now, and we need to pad out the runtime; same goes for shoehorning in Legolas, or that elf woman they made up so they could add an unnecessary romantic subplot.
They could have done a trilogy well if they gave characterization to the Dwarves. And not the cliche elvish love triangle. They could have thrown in Legolas as just a part of the Elvish army leadership with his father. It wasn't too shoehorned since that is where he is from.
@@aeronarcana7774 I really disagree with this assessment. The Hobbit is a beefy book in its own right but the world of Middle Earth is among the largest in fiction. It felt long and drawn out for a separate reason: The movie fails to humanize its characters. The reason the Lord of the Rings movies were able to sustain these massive action segments is because the characters had established chemistry. The suspense is built with unprecedented shots of massive armies with the heroes commenting on the odds and dwindling hope. Then, after the battle begins, between the hordes of orcs dying are Legolas and Gimli competing for a higher score. Or Gimli being asked to be thrown into a horde of Uruk Hai. And, as the movie reaches its climax, these in-between moments go from refreshingly comedic to daringly heroic. Theodan's last ride or Eowyn removing her helmet before striking a killing blow.
These action scenes never felt too long because we identified with the characters. We believed the situation was dire when we see the fear in our hero's eyes. We laugh when the heroes use humor to dispel the tension. And we all felt heroic seeing flawed, human characters triumph in spite of their struggles.
The Hobbit feels drawn out because the action lacks these in-between moments. Not because it didn't try to have these moments - but because they never took the time to get us to care about the characters. The Battle of Helm's Deep and the Siege of Gondor are what you remember about the original movies but it's the Fellowship that should get all the credit. It takes time to establish characters individually, then it takes time to establish a group dynamic. The Hobbit failed to take that time - shoving you into the action so quick I couldn't even remember the names of the characters on screen. When you don't care it becomes samey and monotonous and drags on forever - even if an objective assessment of the spent is roughly equivalent.
@@gorgoth2420 And I still say this is due to padding and prequelitis.
The Hobbit, at the end of the day, is a children's story; it isn't as long as the LotR trilogy, it isn't even as long as a single installment of that trilogy. And, perhaps most importantly, it _isn't_ "epic fantasy", it's an adventure story about a meek everyman who gets roped into a crazy expedition, visits exotic locales, and discovers his own courage along the way. And the story's decidedly more laid-back and whimsical tone reflects this.
The Hobbit was never meant to be a high-action fantasy epic. And the films' failure to recognize this is the reason they feel so bloated. The action scenes feel like padding because _they are,_ most of them weren't present in the original. The characters feel underdeveloped because the focus of the original was almost always on Bilbo himself, not the dwarves. The same holds true for the pointless orc villain they made up, the pointless elven love interest they made up, the pointless shoehorning of Legolas, and the pointless Gandalf sidequest that has nothing to do with the plot and exists solely to foreshadow LotR.
@@aeronarcana7774 I think labeling the Hobbit a 'children's story' is ridiculous. It's 300+ pages. Not a whole lot of elementary schoolers reading novels. And if you're commenting on the content and not the page count it's pretentious to frame your argument by associating a novel's readers with children. It's a derogatory and reductive generalization in the context of your statement.
As for the films themselves we seem to identify the same issues but attribute them to different underlying problems. I think the shoehorning of already iconic characters into the movie was FAR more about getting them into the trailer than a thoughtful decision to enhance the plot. "People go to the movies because of good trailers, not to see good movies" sums up the current philosophy in Hollywood pretty well. The additions weren't "pointless" but inevitable results of a failure to get the audience attached to the new characters in the first film.
I really think the narrative would have been stronger if audiences wanted to see MORE of the new characters. But, instead, the decision was made to shoehorn familiar characters into the movie when the first film failed to live up to expectations - crippling the plot and pacing. This may seem speculative but, since there were extensive re-shoots of the second movie after the first one panned (including the addition of the love triangle - not present in the film until the re-shooting), I think it's a reasonable argument.
As a Brit, I can confirm I regularly drink wine in front of a youtube video of a fireplace while sitting in the dark in a German mountain castle.
As an American, I can confirm I regularly drink beer (with a British accent) in front of a youtube video of a fireplace while sitting in the dark in a German mountain castle. :)
As an American I’m confused and don’t give a crap crap crap crap crap crap i like the word crap
As a German, I wonder what you are all doing in my castle, I don't remember letting you in...
@afootineachworld It isn't.
@afootineachworld If you wanted to say, they they should leave ,,Sag ihnen, dass sie abhauen sollen'' would be ok.
"fantastic beasts at it's best when it's telling the story of of newt scamander saving magical creatures"
no, it's at it's best when it's telling the story of a muggle baker dealing with all the crazy shit going on.
I wouldn't have thought 10+ years ago that I'd cheer for a muggle among all wizards and witches in a Harry Potter prequel.
Ehh, I'd argue that the best parts are the bits that come about because of the interactions between those things. Take either away and it sort of falls over.
It was at its best when JK just shut up about the lore and world building and just let it be a buddy comedy.
Just like Harry Potter was at its best when JK just shut up about the lore and world building and just let it be an escapist power fantasy for kids.
@@EvilSandwich Nah, she did it before in the original books, and it was fine, it's just when she goes out and tries to justify and explaing EVERYTHING is when it gets to be too much, especially with all of her recent(ish) comments on twitter
Lmfao
Lmao “My English friend” *cuts to a castle in Germany*
That was germany?
Somewhere *fancy*
@@we_see_you_opal Pretty much looks like Schloss Neuschwanstein. And according to Felix A. Kronenberg it is the most used depiction of a castle in american advertising.
Just 'cause Casper is English, doesn't mean he's in England right now....
Lol with Russian classical music
I liked the first Fantastic Beasts because it was more of a spin-off than a prequel. And then Crimes of Grindelwald... well :(
Yeah, I've always felt the only way to make/extend a franchise which wasn't designed around it is to distance the stories as much as possible. Honestly, I hate bad sequels even more because it destroys the entire possibility space that exists in the audience's mind. Tie-ins are ok but I always prefer it when something relatively unimportant is explained/expanded in a prequel/sequel. That still gives you those "aha!" moments while broadening the scope for audience engagement rather than diminishing it.
No you actually not understand what the word prequel means? Like SERIOUSLY?! It was not more of a spin-off. That doesn’t make any fucking sense. It’s both regardless.
I’m really sick of explaining basic shit to people in CZcams comments.
Anti-HyperLink oh boy. Fantastic beasts being more of a spinoff makes sense. Your inability to comprehend something that is quite simple if you just took a second to think about it doesn’t mean it doesn’t make sense. It’s about the dude who wrote the school textbook in Harry Potter where he journeys through New York finding some lost magical creatures. The plot points involving credence and “Graves” seem like a side story at first and only near the end is it pushed front and center. So a person saying it seems more like a spinoff makes total sense. And you literally say it is both so I don’t see what the issue is.
I’m sick of people like you in CZcams comment sections. Seriously, getting this angry over someone’s opinion on the type of movie something is? You’re pathetic.
Anti-HyperLink and it’s funny that you talk about understanding the English language yet write this; *No you actually not understand.*
@@Anti-HyperLink go back to English class and learn some critical thinking skills
"I'll let my English friend tell you about that..."
*shows footage of a place in Bavaria, Germany
seems legit :D
Hey, he could be an Englishman who decided to move to Germany. We were only told "somewhere fancy".
He's supposed to portray a member of nobility. They're all German...
What we really need is a complicated backstory as to WHY he is in a fancy German castle.
@@estellevu8076 I have two British friends (one of them Welsh) who live in Bavaria ,;)
@@NapoleonCalland Cool.
There was more chemistry in the opening skit than in the actual movie.
The tragedy the actors totaly where adorable togeather . . . . Behind the camera!!!
@CallMeCactusSok
Do you expect a guy who's trained to be a warrior monk who relinquished all worldly attachments to be a sudden Casanova with the first girl he meets?
DemonicRemption I at least expect chemistry between the actors, if not the characters. Also, if he really is a wooden, utterly unappealing warrior-monk devoid of personality, why would Padme find him so irresistible? The whole idea was that Anakin joined too late to be fully indoctrinated into the Jedi mindset, which is why he was so easily manipulated by Palpatine. He was a warrior, but the monk shit never took hold. It’s why he showboats all the time, and why the romance should have either been written better, had another actor as the lead, or been scrapped altogether.
fate zero is the perfect prequel
TBH Stephen Hawking could have delivered those lines better than Christensen.
The whole “Han shot first” controversy is because in the original there is no indication that Greedo shot at all, let alone shot first. Then when the special editions came out, they clearly showed Greedo shot first, and miss terribly, then Han shoots him.
Every edition since has been re-edited to make it look that little bit closer. The problem is, it made sense for Han to shoot first. It was clearly self defence even if Greedo never shot, and it suited Han’s ‘scoundrel’ persona (considering he was a criminal found in a bar full of criminals).
Your point about lack of tension in the SW prequels it spot on, as the whole thing is designed to be watched starting at Ep. 1, where the tension regarding the rise of Vader and Empire works. The only problem is, everyone had already seen the later movies, so it was like watching the original after watching the sequel, knowing how it ends.
Rogue One worked so well because we knew they would get the plans, but by focusing so heavily on the characters, as opposed to if they would win, we care less about the overall mission (already knowing the outcome) in favour of the outcome of the characters themselves.
I agree with you on Rogue One.
I think it was cinemasins who pointed out that the star wars prequels and OT have a big spoiler problem, which is no matter which order you watch the two trilogies you get a major reveal spoiled for you, in the connection between Anakin and Vader.
i agree. i hate more plot driven stories because they feel boring and cliche as compared to character driven stories. like, oh we need lots of action so the character just exists to fit that cookie cutter mold
Luckily, I watched episode 3 first.
I don't understand the argument of "We already know what eventually happens" against prequels because it's not the end goal that's interesting in the first place; it's the how/why of coming to the already known conclusion. Like a tragic play; the end isn't the main point, how we get there is.
Primary example of how to do a prequel well: Red Dead Redemption 2.
So did you just have that wig and dress laying around or...
For my convincing Padme cosplay of course.
~ Tim
Blame Tim clone number 37
@@HelloFutureMe you would make a stunning drag queen
@@HelloFutureMe What, I thought that you had some how kidnapped Natalie Portman and made her do it.
Do you want the answer to that? Or...would you like an explanation over your imagination? ;)
I’ve always interpreted “Han shooting first” as defense either way.
I mean, greedo was threatening him. So Han Solo isn’t exactly space hitler for shooting first.
Which he totally did 🤷🏽♂️😭
Greedo was holding a gun on him and threatening to kill him. Shooting him wouldn't even be illegal in modern Western countries.
Robert R Yes it would.
@@Anti-HyperLink No it wouldn't. Self defence can be pre-emptive if you have a reasonable fear that you're going to be harmed. It's slightly more complicated than that but someone holding a gun on you and saying they're going to kill you definitely meets the standard.
@@Robert399 not where I live (England) you must do the least harm possible while keeping your own protection
@@lookihaveausernametoo4231 That's true but if a gun's being pointed at you and you can't escape (like Han who's trapped in a corner) then you can kill them. There's nothing else he could have done; trying to disarm him across a table would have no chance of succeeding.
In my mind, a prequel should strive to lend weight and deeper meaning to elements that did not capture the reader's attention and grant new dimensions to passing references that were largely disregarded in the works they precede.
This is such a good comment and needs way more likes
I think Better Call Saul is a good example of this
While Saul is a great character in Breaking Bad, he’s mostly used for comic relief and as a plot device to get Walt out of bad situations by knowing a guy who knows a guy
Though there were little hints here and there that he had something more going on
Then BCS came along and made him one of the most sympathetic and complex characters in the story
Stranger: Prequels are always bad
Me: looks like I Better Call Saul
I was going to mentioned BCS but you beat me to it. One of the best shows ever made.
I'd liked to chuck in "Black Sails" as another really good prequel series too
Video game, not film/TV, but I'm throwing Red Dead Redemption 2 into this ring as well
@@theomegajuice8660 i never considered Black Sails a prequel honestly.
Fate/Zero, Clone Wars, Joker, X-Men: First Class
The moment I saw him in the Padme outfit, I thought "This is a man who suffers for his art."
Tim : "I'll let my English friend tell you about that." Me : "Is this gonna be you in a costume?" Tim in a costume : "Oh hello there"
One reason why that cut didn't work(for me) is that we had already seen in this vid Tim play-act other characters without comment, so by announcing the "expert" hs set up an expectation it would genuinely be a real person(A few CZcamsrs habe done Death of the Author do would be suiable for an insert).
*General Tim*
Still very nicely done though. I enjoyed the cosplay.
@@mateuszmarciniak2828 You are bold one
Ray Ojeda general kenobi
Conversely, if someone grew up with the prequels and watched them in chronological order rather than release order then it's presented as one long sprawling narrative taking place over about 80 years
I never found the "knowing how the story ends removes tension" argument compelling. Many people like to read history books, and we all know how history turned out, it's our world. Sometimes the 'how' is more interesting than the 'what'.
After seeing Fantastic Beasts I, I thought Newt was one of the sweetest and most original protagonists put to the screen, and a lot of that is obviously thanks to Eddy Redmayne's stellar performance. A trilogy about him and his crew would have been perfectly fine for me. It might even have picked up the abandoned SPEW storyline from the original books, and focused on the rights of non-wandwielding magical beings, or centered on the Leeta Lestrange love triangle, but there was no reason to shoehorn Dumbledore and Grindelwald into it
Well it was JKR intention to make all of the movies about Grindelwald and tell his story and the biggest fight of all in the Potterverse. Newt's just a means to an end.
I agree, something focused on Newt would be great. But I am actually interested in the Grindelwald part. I just hope the rest of the series is written in a better way..
For me personally Newt is such a cool character, but he's forced to take a back seat to the grindelwald aspect. The movies feel like they can't commit to either focus, and as a result they feel really muddled
Either that, or not have included Newt in TCOG and simply brought in a new cast to tell Dumbledore's and Grindelwald's story. It was too much to take some old stuff from Fantastic Beasts and try to put it into a movie where Newt and his beasts weren't the main focus.
I agree; Newt was a very interesting protagonist, and it would have been great if they focused more on him and his group than on Dumbledore vs Grindelwald (though I honestly think how they handled the Leeta Lestrange love triangle, with Newt choosing that American auror and Leeta being engaged to Newt's brother) was probably one of the best ways that they could've handled it; though I'm biased as love triangles in popular media are something I absolutely loathe, so it almost not even being much of a love triangle made me breathe a sigh of relief in the theatre.
While I did find some of the costumed and edited skit stuff genuinely enjoyable. I think you may have went a bit overboard. While some of them seemed to aid in your ability to get your points across or illustrate your point in a more engaging way (see the “WHY DONT YOU LOVE ME” bit) , but others (namely Casper) seemed less helpful and more of a hinderance. I found myself rolling my eyes when you brought Casper back, and I think in part because of that, you may want to cut back a bit on the skits. Not do away with them altogether, but make sure the ones you choose to utilize are actually helpful in illustrating your points. Still love your videos tho! Keep up the good work!!
Agreed there. Some of the inserts just prolong everything unnecessarily (Casper was speaking incredibly slowly for example and with too much banter, which annoyed me more than it probably should have and I freely admit to using the speed-up option. Sorryyyy xD) and hindered your point getting across as well as it could have.
Still liked the video of course. Because you did have really good points. And the sketch at the beginning was hilarious tbh. :)
Agreed. In fact, I liked all of them except for the Casper one, which I found immensely distracting, for three reasons. First, the lighting. Far too dark. Second, the accent. Unnecessary. And third, the pacing of the monologue. Your voice and well-articulated pacing are arguably the best qualities of your videos. With Casper those are lost.
Loved everything else though!
Thanks for the kind and really constructive feedback. I'm still new to all this, and not everything I try will land. That's okay. I can do better next time.
~ Tim
Also agreed. Tim's humor works best in the little short cuts he often does in his other videos. I admittedly only half paid attention during the Casper bits, and wandered down into the comments while I was listening the second and third times he appeared. Of course I think it's good that he's trying out new styles, but like you said the skits and their timing definitely need some refinement.
Edit: I was talking to a friend about this video and I realized the reason why I think I didn't like the skits as much is because they are the opposite of the quick wall of text cuts, which I love. The walls of text aren't important to the video, but they do enhance it by diving a little deeper into the particular topic at the time of the cut. The skits feel sorta like the opposite, where they only reiterate something that was either just said or is about to be said and take up time without really adding a lot. I do like the humor, but again like tj nova said, I think they could either be a little shorter, or have there be a little less of them.
@@HelloFutureMe I think Caspar could have worked in shorter doses, but I also think that a characterture like that needs to be more egregiously stereotypical i.e. in this case, more arrogant and snobbish. Also, it would perhaps be interesting if there was some over arching plot with Caspar which went for several videos and was slowly fed in amongst the relevant details for the current topic.
The Planet of the Apes prequels were pretty excellent. They're great specifically because they don't treat the end results (the original movies) as a grand pre-destined event like Star Wars. Instead, it recognizes that backstories are more interesting if they played out like they do IRL. Largely random events and moments of chance mounting into a greater whole. The key events are perpetuated for good intentions, but none of the key-players are aware of the ramifications of their actions.
The drug that made the apes super-intelligent but proved fatal to humans was meant to be an Alzheimer's cure. Caesar became a revolutionary specifically because his kind were being mistreated by humans, despite him being just as smart and emotional as them. None of this was "meant to be".
Better Call Saul is a prequel, and it's really good. Granted, it's not a movie, but it definitely measures up to Breaking Bad, maybe even surpassing it in many ways.
proonify oh yeah, last summer this year, my parents basically watched that show several times after breaking bad, even my brother watched it as much as they did.
No, it doesn't measure up at all. The first season is atrocious
I think the best chance a prequel has to be good is to focus on events that are not at all central to the original's history. Aka focusing on a secondary character like Saul, rather than the backstory of the main villain and fall of the entire Jedi order....
@@CartwAalbiel
Exactly.
The prequel works because Jimmy is an independent character who's story only intersects slightly with Walt's.
Yes! BCS is at times better than BB. Jimmy's story stands on its own. The only weakness the show has is in some points in Mike's story where we're getting a step-by-step 'how it came to be' for Gus's empire. But, even that is well done.
I've never liked the argument that just because you know where a story is going, there's no tension. If the what is all that matters, then reading a Wikipedia synopsis of a movie is the same as watching a movie, and that's obviously ludicrous. The why and the how matter more than the what. This is also the reason I've never minded spoilers. I often enjoy a work more the second of third time through. Think about A:TLA. By genre conventions alone, we know Aang is probably going to defeat Ozai, but the drama comes in the relationships between the characters and how they grow throughout the journey.
Think of Zuko and Azula's duel. I know that ending. But it still is emotional cause it built to it. When he reunites with his uncle I still feel it. When Suki comes back I feel the joy.
Yea, it's also why people that come to story by hearing about an awesome spoilery event usually still enjoy the story. You don't just want to know what happens, you wan to know how and why it happens.
That's exactly what stories that start in medias res rely on, we know one of the things the story leads to, we may even know how it ends, but we have no idea who these people are, why they are doing what they are doing, why they are there and why on earth x is doing y now. And generally we'd like to know that.
Not knowing the what can still add to the impact of the story. Which is why I myself do mind spoilers. On iously I don't mind "Aang defeats Ozai". That's obviously going to happen. But I do mind when something is intended to be a twist.
Spoilers are a really finicky subject (and of course subjective, so this is my opinion). It really depends on what's being spoiled. Spoiling something like "Aang defeats Ozai" doesn't really matter, becuz you know that it's going to happen, you just don't know how. Spoiling _how_ Aang defeats Ozai would be really crappy tho, becuz that's what makes it actually interesting. Now, let's take [not spoiling, I promise] Avengers Endgame, and how a character's death was spoiled for me. The movie was kind of ruined becuz I spent the entire time wondering "are they gonna die here? Nope, ok are they gonna die here? Nope ok" and it was really frustrating. You could say that spoiling it even more (at least finding out WHEN it happened) would have alleviated my anxiety about it. But ideally, I wanted it to be a surprise, period. On the other hand, I watched Infinity War long after it had already come out, and so obviously I knew that Thanos succeeds his snap. However, I didn't know how or when, and so I audibly gasped in surprise when it actually happened.
In fact announcing the ending of a story right at the beginning is a powerful literary tool. See Gabriel Garcia Marquez' chronic of an announced death.
This is why The Silmarillion works so well. They are all their own stories not shackled to LOTR at all. But simple events that help pain the background. Of course it helps that Tolkien wrote his stories with a universe in mind, so I guess they aren't REALLY a prequel.
In the world of games Tales of Berseria is also an amazing prequel to Tales of Zesteria because it has all its own Characters and still subtly explains concepts that show up in Zesteria without explaining too much.
Mae govannen fellow Tolkien fan. I agree, in fact it is more like LOTR is a sequel of the Silmarillion
Building the world first is , I think a better approach
@Peter Duchesneau yea thats what i thought too. Tolkien was very clever, as he built his foundations first and went on from there. thus he did not contradict himself. UNLIKE J.K ROWLING!
I agree the the silmarillion is great because it very separate from lotr.
@@brokensky2378 it depends on the writer. the world is a tool that serves the story, not the other way around. creating the world first can actually limit your plot and character development. but each approach has its pros and cons. the best one is to build off of each part. but it's totally up to the writer.
The Star Wars movies are interesting to me because, of course, anyone born before the prequels likely saw the original trilogy first.... but the Phantom Menace is over 20 years old, and there's going to be more and more kids who watches the series not in order of release but from episodes 1 through 9. They may not have heard "Luke I am your father" referenced before seeing episodes 1-3. Their understanding of how the movies relate to each other will be SO DIFFERENT.... and I'm genuinely intrigued by that notion. They won't be shocked by the reveal in episode 5 because they saw episode 3. They will cringe when Leia kisses Luke in Episode 4. I just... i think about all this a lot.
And i loved the first Fantastic Beasts movie. In fact, it's my favorite of the whole Harry Potter movie universe, because it was the only time I had NO IDEA what would happen. I could get so absorbed in the world not nitpicking what was different from the book or anticipating scenes to come. I could just revel in the world and the characters and be completely lost in the story for the very first time.
I watched the movies in order from 1-6 as a child. Anakins decent to the dark side was a shock for me and very sad watching him become Vader.
I tried watching them in order and got really bored during Attack of the Clones. Three years later, I watched the original trilogy back to back over a weekend and thought it was okay at least.
Exactly. I grew up watching the prequels and I love them. They're a part of my childhood.
When my husband and I (Gen. Xers who saw the first trilogy when we were 7) first showed the Star Wars Saga to our children (Gen Z), we showed them in that same order: 456, 123, 789- so that spoilers like “Luke, I am your father,” weren’t blown by the prequels. Since then we’ve all watched them in numerical order and agree that the saga as a whole is less impactful, largely because of the poor setup of the prequels.
I think that might be why I really enjoyed the Clone Wars series (even the "oh yeah, this is supposed to be a kid's show" episodes) while I was just okay with the Prequel trilogy. The series was not entirely focused on Anakin, but showed stories of other characters wrapped up in the time frame. And the episodes that did focus on Anakin used a (mostly) more subtle view of his descent, and a better view of Palpatine's manipulations - rather than the quickly forced in scenes in the movies. It did have one major advantage: time. Well, that and a director who wanted to see more than "All Anakin, All the Time". But five full seasons plus gave it the time the movies could never have. It allowed them to look at the story from different angles. And I think that helped it quite a bit.
So in short, it actually did what the prequel trilogy sat out to do. Tell the rise of the Empire and downfall of the Jedi, as opposed to how Anakin pissed all over it.
@@insaincaldo Pretty much, yes. Though, in an attempt to be fair to the movies, as I said before, they just didn't have enough time to do it properly. And I don't think it could have really been done any other way.
I actually hate Anakin in TCW mostly because it feels like character assination
Can you watch the show without having seen any of the movies?
@@ceve There are a few points of the movies that definitely help you understand ... certain aspects of the series, but yeah, I think you probably could.
You missed another problem: when the prequel gets something from canon factually wrong. Not just something imagined by fans from a mystery but actual, recorded facts in the original work which are butchered in the prequel.
Sometimes small things (I'm looking at you, McGonagal), sometimes large things, but things which regardless of size will yank a fan out of the prequel because they'll be stuck thinking, "Hang on, that's not right. That doesn't fit at all." It can be jarring to witness a prequel pull shit like that.
MIDICHLORIANS!!!! GAAAAHHH!!!!!
@@MonkeyJedi99 never have figured out why that was something people got hung up on. All we're told is that these things exist and counting them gives some idea of the individual's potential capability with the force. We're not even told, that I recall, if it's a measure of power, or if it indicates how easily they can draw on the force even without training, or... Anything. All we know (at least as of the Phantom Menace) is that they are related to the force Somehow and having a lot of them is significant in some manner.
Personally, I quite like the idea that have a stronger force presence or whatever attracts more midichlorians. The midichlorians being a measurable Effect of the immeasurable force... Whatever. Which actually aligns with existing worldbuilding and Makes Sense, unlike tge idea that they're responsible for it.
Now, admittedly, that's just from what's in the movie, but that's all I'm talking about anyway.
Of course, I never understood the whole Jar-Jar Binks hatedom either. He wasn't as funny as he was clearly Intended to be, but... If nothing else, C-3PO in the original trilogy was more annoying, to my mind.
@@laurencefraser I mentally reconciled midichlorians as extradimensional organisms that leave evidence of their interactions in the blood, that Jedi have learned to detect. And I always liked Jar-Jar.
@@laurencefraser It's because in the OT, the force is an energy, it's mystical, abstract, and mysterious. In the PT, all of a sudden there is a scientific test you can conduct to measure it quantitatively. It is jarring in the same way that someone looks at a Michelangelo sculpture and marvels at how lifelike it is and Michelangelo's creativity, and then someone else comes along and takes a 3D scan of the sculpture and says, runs a statistical test against scans of human bodies, and concludes that the statue must be lifelike and creative. The second might be true, but it turns mysticism into procedure and saps the mystery out of the whole thing.
It goes for other things too. In the OT, Vader was seduced by the dark side, but in the PT, Anakin was horny, naive, and very gullible, as mentioned in the video. And we're supposed to believe that being "seduced" to the dark side is a sweet little boy who becomes an rebellious teenager, who then decides to commit genocide because his mom was moved to a new slaveholder, and then is suddenly a paragon of legal virtue for the rest of the movie, only to not show any more signs of moral ambiguity until Palpatine is like, "hey, wanna hear a very suspiciously detailed fairy tale that would only be known by your sworn enemies who are currently in hiding?", and Anakin is like "sure, whatever, you can have my soul. I had a nightmare, and that's never happened before. /s"
Like in Minions when it’s revealed the minions are immortal beings instead of having been created by Gru
Look. the problem I had with the edits to make Greedo shoot before han is it comes offf more that they pulled the trigger at the same time rather than 'han reacting and thus not being a cold blooded killer,' but more to the fact greedo outright said that he was here to kill han, han's back was literally to a wall with Greedo blockign the exit, and there was no help or distraction. So when Han's attempts at getting this guy to tell his boss the money's on the way let me go because dead men pay no rent, Han acted smartly by defending himself froma clear threat to his life.
The 'Han is a cold blooded killer' logic is flat out wrong because of this clear intent on Greedo's part.
This is my exact argument for "Han shot first." If I'm cornered with a weapon and someone with their own weapon starts to monologue exactly what they'll gain by killing me, you can bet I'd pull the trigger. The intent, means, motivation, and unwillingness to compromise were all visible onscreen.
Hm... in his video, he makes it seem like greedo still shot in the original cut. Didnt greedo not even get a chance to shoot before han shot? Not sure if Im remembering it correctly...
yep! I found some legal geeks and they agree that he was within his rights to protect himself!
MrSeals1000 Greedo does shoot and it goes over Hans head if I recall but my view on that was always he was about to pull the trigger and Han having been in these situations before read him and knew that. Shot just before to save himself, not in cold blood, and then Greedo’s finger squeezed the trigger as he was shot.
Also, when they edited the scene to make Greedo shot, it makes him look like really bad at it, like "how are you missing if Han is sitting just across the table??"
I love how when discussing how prequels are made we see the scenes where Papa Palpatine is telling Ani about Darth Plagueis the Wise. That scene was the only movie moment I know of him being mentioned. The book written from that was one of my favorite star wars novels ever.
It's not a story the Jedi would tell you
My favorite thing about your videos is audience participation. By that I mean, I need to constantly change my volume because your audio balancing is horrendous.
Hahaha, nice one:D
Hahaha audience participation 🤣
Savage.
Now thats how you give criticism!
"They had us in the first half, not gonna lie." 😂😂 True tho.
Feedback - there are a lot of lore channels, and yours is special because of your enthusiasm and personality. You could probably develop your skits some more, but when I see a new video from Hello Future Me, I think, "I want HIM to tell me" versus the other channels. If you made your skits as shorts all to themselves it may be better.
I am currently a BA student of English Language & Culture. When my professor discussed the death of the author, his main argument was that *only* looking at what the author intended limits the work. If you are a writer, you might recognise this when you read your previous work. You remember how you intended it to be, but now that you reread it, you realise there is another layer. You have (accidentally) done *better* than you intended! The intention of your younger self and the interpretation of your current self can exist side by side.
This is obviously the more positive example, but the other side can be said as well. Say a poet wants to say we should, for example, kill all the Jedi, but he does this by writing a series of love poetry, then the author *failed* his goal, and since it quite clearly did his interpretation becomes irrelevant.
Not ascribing to the idea of the death of the author, therefore, limits the text. It can be so much more, or something entirely different.
(also, without the idea of the death of the author I would literally not have a job so ..... And +HelloFutureMe you explained it very well!)
A major issue with “Fantastic Beasts”, is that it takes place in the years leading up to and during WWII. This is a very well-known event, and the series is a magical take on history’s darkest chapter. There is a very fine line being tread, in regards to taste.
Nobody:
Casper: Beg me.
TIM I AM UNCOMNFORTAMBLE.
While I appreciate your effort in creating this heavily edited/set/costumed video, I'd be much more content and satisfied if it was entirely done in your previous format. We respect you for your genuine enthusiasm about the topics which we too are all passionate about, and it works like a charm.
These fillers were unnecessary, IMHO :)
Edit: Unnecessary might be an incorrect word. I was not fond of the fillers. Maybe with slicker editing in the future or less fillers or shorter video span may work. Trial and error, I suppose :)
eh i saw it more as Tim flexing his editing skills.
its often good to change this up abit. constantly using one format may get boring and such.
I think they are generally a good thing, but there were sentences and parts that he should just have cut to make it more pointed.
I thought remaking the fruit scene was ingenious. And the obvious use of split screen in the duel was used to great comedic effect. But to each their own.
Seconding this. Skits can be funny when use sparingly, but quickly go down hill.
Yeah opening was great. Maybe one cut away to fancy guy. But overall it was just over used. Still great points and content though.
7 minutes in:
Where is supreme leader mishka?
what happened to mishka?
How is the empire supposed to work without mishka?
edit: I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one concerned about the well-being of our supreme leader mishka.
edit 2: though I'm still concerned as of right now...
We need a prequel, explaining to us the tale of why our Supreme Leader Mishka chose not to grace us with Their presence in this video
End of video:
Still nothing!? HOW? WHY? WHYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!???????
this is a time before Mishka back when the tim clones relied on the rich and powerful clone Casper who was then the governor of the tim channel later in the vid he Casper was overthrown by the hero and overlord emperor Mishka who we know is the supreme deity all hail Mishka the video itself was a prequel
Where is Mishka? Is he alright?!
18 minutes in WHERE IS SUPREME LEADER MISHKA
I call the Mythologies bit "the Noodle Incident Principle" after the infamous vague event from Bill Watterson's Calvin & Hobbes strip. Sometimes what people imagine happened is more powerful than anything anyone could ever think of so it's best left vague and unspecified. It's similar to how a story always feels better in your head than written down or explained. The question is more powerful than the answer.
The sad irony is, that the very power of the question is not only the reason why it might be better not to answer it in a prequel, but also the reason why that ill-advised sequel is so damn irrestistible for the expensive suits calling the shots...
I think that's the Budapest incident of the Avengers. I'm glad they seem to have resisted the temptation with Black Widow (don't know for sure yet, though) to explain it because I doubt anything will match fans' imagination.
@@stellaluna6421 Yes! Exactly!
@@stellaluna6421 Pft! It's a running joke in Avengers that nobody in their right mind should care about. If you've built it up in your head so that no film can ever live up to it, then you're the problem, not the film.
A reasonable person won't have thought much about it at all and will just appreciate it if it ever gets put to film for what it is. If it's good, then it will be entertaining. If it's bad, then we'll move on...
@@CrashSable I respectfully disagree for all of the reasons said in this video--the Budapest incident is way more fun when we don't know what it is. It's not like I have it on a pedestal as the epitome of mystery or something. For all I know, it could be anything from a rival organization saving the day to intelligent squirrels with nuclear codes to hallucinogenic bananas that make them say embarrassing things to an ordinary date that goes embarrassingly badly. It's just: consider the way half the fans reacted to learning Goose the cat/flergen was responsible for Nick Fury's eye. I think a lot of fans were mildly let down? IDK, I just think noodle incidents are best left to the imagination unless they've got significance to character development.
Fate/Zero would like to speak with you
Plus Yuki Kajiura's music does it justice
Even F/Z still has continuity issues with F/SN, you just can't get it perfectly with prequels.
@@SuperFeatherYoshi really? Can you list them? Because i think I've missed them
@@edwardvandermeer7455 For starters, FSN said that Kiritsugu could *slaughter Servants*.
@@SuperFeatherYoshi I think that's because the novel FZ assumes you aleready played the visual Novel FSN. It's hard to get through at the beginning but overall I love it.
"And we'll go back to Casper..."
*cranks up playback speed*
Quality production value here Tim :)
I love it. Just some professional advice: I'dve preferred it if you just sat there in awe, as the bisected pear was repeatedly smacked into your face. This is just my personal profession, but I know for a fact that it would have been better that way. I have a doctore title at this. No, this is not a typo.
Intro was one of the most amazing and horrifying things I have ever seen. 10/10
It turned out Anakin just wanted to NOOOOOOOOOOOO what Love Is.
“Han shot first” for me has always been about humor and cleverness. He has to kill or be killed, but he’s so cool he says something badass.
Your Padme smile is amazing.
I love your work, but I have to say that the part that hinges around the 16:31 mark is unfair to the character of Anakin. We're talking about premonitive dreams that trigger his lifelong experiences of emotional repression, bereavement and fear of losing his wife and child after losing his mother in a situation where his duty to the Jedi prevented him from saving her from a horrible death (pushing him over into revenge that entailed slaughtering an entire tribe)… As for his relationship with Palpatine, it's explicit in the story that he's been mentored by the Chancellor since his childhood, and when Palpatine says "I need your help, son", I think we hit the reason for Anakin seeing Palpatine as the kindly elder statesman and sensei he's been showing his apt pupil for over a decade. I think most of us would probably have become Sith by halfway through the interim between Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith, rather than waiting for sleep deprivation, the Jedi asking us to spy on a friend and mentor, probable loss of two loved ones (including our own unborn child), and being pointedly given a taste of promotion without the rank and title that go with it. The fact that the Jedi trip themselves up by using the same language as Palpatine (e.g. "he is / was too dangerous to be left alive") is one of the things that I personally thought was brilliant about the prequels. We get a realistic, edgy teenager who never stood a chance (because Qui-Gon's death means that the only mature adult with good intentions for him is eliminated, dropping sole direct responsibility for his entire future on poor Obi-Wan's shoulders) getting figuratively and literally abused, tortured, mutilated, let down or betrayed by just about everyone, and ends up doing things that ultimately warp his conscience in the hope of saving the people he loves most.
I'd have preferred a silent scream (like the one in The Pawn Broker), or just a blood-curdling primal AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH! (like the one in Caligula) when he learns that he's apparently killed them both, rather than the Hollywoodian one that we got. But the triumphant smirk on Darth Sidious's face behind Darth Vader's back was perfect, as was the destruction of just about everything else in the room, before the gracious pathos of nervous Imperial officers watching Lord Vader glide up to the Galactic Emperor and Grand Moff Tarkin, and look out at the construction site of the Death Star 1.0, over the strains of the Force theme and the funeral dirge used in Episode I merging into a leifmotif from the Imperial March.
Yes, this. So many people look at the surface of what the Prequel Trilogy was and magnify its (many) faults, but don't bother to look deeper, like the meaning and reasons for what they show us. BTW, I never noticed the "too dangerous" symmetry. Dooku, the man who lead the enemy, cut of my arm, and taunted me for three years, who just put up a massive fight is definitely too dangerous to be left alive. Palpatine, the man who mentored me, showed me sympathy, and offered me a way to save my wife, who's backed up cowering against a wall with a hard-liner Jedi who deeply offended me last week standing over him is surely not too dangerous.
Theres's even a video about this : The Case against the Jedi Council. I disagree with the (mis)use of the term "Stoicism"' to mean repression or denial of emotion, but with that caveat in mind, it's worth watching and reflecting on czcams.com/video/tUPD1w78D5I/video.html
Thank you for addressing this - I literally paused at that moment in the video with a 'wait, what?' impression. You spell out what I wanted to without my having to do the effort, thanks.
I know I'm 4 years late to this, but since I have no life I'm just going to reply. All of this ignores the fact that Anakin accepts whatever Palpatine says at face value even though Palpatine ADMITS to being a Sith Lord who orchestrated the conflict of the prequels and was in cahoots with Maul and Dooku, and this is on top of all the red flags he gives off through the trilogy. Qui Gon dying and Dooku lopping his hand off can be attributed to people carrying out Palpatine's orders. All the death Anakin witnesses throughout the war can be attributed to palpatine. The fact Palpatine was close with Anakin would make the lies sting worse not less. It should make him more skeptical not less. So yeah, Anakin is a horny, gullible, dimwit
Chronicles of Narnia is an example of a series with several successful prequels. Books like The Magician's Nephew and the Horse and HIs Boy are not generally thought of as prequels, but technically they are, since they were written later.
TIL magician's nephew (my favorite of Narnia) and Horse were prequels. Although, now that I think about it, it makes so much more sense, since it always felt kinda jarring going from Magician to Lion to Horse to Caspian
Great video, I'm just highkey distracted by the Zuko/Katara poster in the back !!
"Because we NOOOOOOOO where the story was going" lol XD I laughed so hard...
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic is a good prequel
Darth Kai You’re god damn right it is!
Don't know that you can really consider that a prequel though. It does take place before the events of the main Star Wars movies, but the events are totally self-contained (outside of a few references).
It's a great game, but calling it a prequel doesn't exactly fit.
Not a prequel. Spin-off.
Except it’s not really a prequel, just a different story set in the same universe, with totally unrelated characters. Children of Hurin isn’t a Lord of the Rings prequel, it’s a story set in the same world, but has basically no effect on the story of LOTR
It's entirely unconnected to the originals though so does it actually count?
I feel like the author is entitled to their own interpretation of events, but they should have to support it with evidence like any other theorist if they expect people to believe it.
I like this very much, because it still allows the author an opinion, just not a privileged one. :)
I’m a big fan of “Change anything you want, but justify it with in-universe context.” It bugs me when a storyteller just says “Nah, it’s like this now” or “No, I totally meant this” when that’s not supported by the story that was told. Provide new information that explains why the prior interpretation was different, great.
Easy primary example: Darth Vader’s relationship to Luke and Obi-Wan in New Hope vs the same relationship in Empire and RotJ. That was an unplanned change when the first was made, so when they introduced it in the second they had to explain it in the third (“From a certain point of view” conversation). It…worked, but was a bit sloppy. One where they didn’t give us that much: Leia in RotJ remembers her real mother, but in RotS, she literally lost her mother minutes after birth.
Here to watch Tim, not Casper.
This video was actually super helpful for me. I've been working on building a big world to fit multiple stories into, and they cross paths here and there, and there are recurring characters. You resolved some of my worries about knowing certain outcomes and such breaking the tension; and reinforced the idea that for these individual stories to be separate in the same world, they need to ask their own unique questions. Well done and thank you!
But yea, not big on Casper.
casper is certainly.. a character lol
The absolute best thing you can do in a prequel, imo, is leave the 'central' backstory in the background. Tell a story that's related to it, fleshes out the mindset of the villain or mentor or whatever, but otherwise doesn't step on any previously-established toes.
When he talked about the Dark Bishop's crisis of faith story, I started to imagine a basic outline, with it ending when the Dark King goes up to him saying "Will you stand next to me in the battle?" It would be the only real hint that he'll be part of the upcoming battle. (BTW, don't ask about the outline itself, it was pretty much all absent-minded and almost subconscious.)
Counterpoint: Fate/Zero is the best prequel I've ever seen and is fundamentally about the central backstory (in the process fleshing out multiple mentor characters and villains).
I suspect a large part of its success is how it _starts_ by quietly subverting audience and making the audience wonder how they get from the beginning to where they already know the story has to end (playing out much as a classic Greek tragedy, where the audience knows the ending from the beginning)
I think FB could've been this if grindelwald was involved so heavily, and it was 95% about Newt Scamander and his buddies
I think the best way to make a prequel is to make it clear it's set in the same world as the original and maybe even have younger versions of some known characters make brief cameos, but mostly just write a self-contained story.
I find myself engaging with the ambiguity of Casper Buckworthington's 'duties' in the castle.
We -need- *do not need* a prequel revealing the details.
Also guessing that Casper _pronounces_ his name "Buckwitton", or somesuch. :-)
Spoilers: It's in Germany
Before Lucas started to muck about with his earlier films, there wasn't a controversy about who shot first, because the script literally said Han shot first, and also, well, Greedo didn't actually shoot at all.
"From forth the fatal loins of these two foes / A pair of star-cross'd lovers take their life" (Rom. Prologue) - The Bard did not seem to think knowledge of the end of a work determined if narrative tension was present.
That's true of most tragedies.
@@silentdrew7636 And it seems like most prominent prequels I've seen are tragedies, both the successful ones and the unsuccessful.
There's a yes-and-no.
As mentioned with the chessboard, we may know how the match ends. The crucial thing, though, is that tension is maintained in how we get to that ending from where we begin. This is why the other pieces are important: the game isn't just the King and the Rook but a myriad of pieces acting and reacting.
Which is also brought up by Tim in his mentioning how people will reread the same books or rewatch the same movies, knowing the end. Because there's things happening aside from just getting from Page 1 to (say) Page 350.
Knowing the outcome is a nice story telling tool sometimes. Like Romeo and Juliet. Starwars' prequels tell a story about how the fall of the Jedi took place. And the theme of connections, cycles, and balance in the force changes.
It was interesting to watch this after your critique of "Beginnings", since that's another good example of the problem with prequels removing mystery by stating a concrete answer for how and why things came to be.
One movie that I feel works as a surprisingly good prequel despite its flaws is Monsters University. We *know* that Mike is never going to cut it as a scarer despite all his knowledge and attention to detail, but it's still interesting to see his development into a top scaring coach. We know he's going to be best buds with Sully eventually, but it's interesting to see the gradual transformation of their rivalry. It's perhaps a story that didn't need to be told, but that might be a strength since it doesn't particularly remove any of the mystery of MI. And it somehow even manages to have a neat twist to its ending despite, well, being a prequel.
"an orgy of metal and explosions", well, I just found my new album name.
0:00 - 0:53 the new Star wars movie teaser looks great, finally Star Wars has become great again :D
The rat-tail-keychain on Anakin killed me. That intro was wonderful 👌
I’m sorry but when Casper’s background fireplace showed it’s time stamp, that was peak comedy
The SW prequels are bad?
It's treason then!
This is outrageous! This is unfair!
I prefer the PT over the OT as a whole
Hello there
AYeet Paister General Kenobi! you are a bold one
I really wanted to give a thumbs up, but it's at 66 and that's just wonderful. :)
3:04-3:46
I find your lack of green screen.....
Refreshing.
I always love the analysis you give as yourself, and I think everything you do through Casper can be achieved more readily through your regular persona. Thank you for all your awesome commentary and analysis.
So, I am English. You get an automatic thumb's up for not making me cringe with a painful English accent! A truly rare thing, much appreciated.
This is the first video of yours I have ever seen, came here from Shadiversity who gave you a name-drop.
I liked the Star Wars prequels(expect the first one), but I saw them before the original trilogy so I never knew about Anakin becoming Darth Vader. And Revenge of the Sith is my favorite of all the Star Wars movies I think. But admittedly I haven't seen the prequels in many years now.
Same here I was a kid so I had no idea that they were even prequels
Revenge of the Sith is my favorite as well.
Please go back and watch episode 2. The anakin padme scenes are hilariously bad
I wish i had, too, but...well, here we go. Still, sometimes the more interesting part of the story are the unseen ones. They made cartoon series for the missing parts
Revenge of the Sith is my fav
When you dissected the pear scene:
"Yeah, this guy did NCEA English"
I find the discussion around the Star Wars Prequels soooo interesting. I've gotten into more than enough arguments about the prequels with my friends simply because I have seen them before the original trilogy. And because of that I enjoyed the prequels way more than a lot of my friends. They felt this "cheap" expanding of the story so much more then I did because for me the story just made sence in the order 1-6 for them it did not. I don't think that the prequels are a masterpiece but some people think they are a disgrace to the Story which I could never understand.
Age of Resistance is a masterclass in prequel-making.
We all know how it ends, but it's still tense af and incredibly done.
I love Newt's character, and the focus on the actual magical beasts - most of the first film focuses on this and avoids all the usual pitfalls. I think it would have worked fine as a stand alone film and without the reveal of Grindelwald at the end...but studios just gotta get that $$$ don't they 😑
So ... important questions first .... is this Casper Guy single? xD
This out of the way: Very nice introduction into this theory. And really (!) nice work. You can clearly see the love that gone into this project :3
One of my favorite prequels is the Beka Cooper trilogy of books by Tamora Pierce. It's distant but includes elements that we see in the other books without detailing things that were mentioned specifically in them. The world is a way, here's a small glimpse of the start of one element of the society, in the background of this story.
star wars: the clone wars (tv series) would like to know your location
while the sketches were fun i feel they take away from the script as the changing presentations make it more difficult to follow the speech
You had a lot of fun making this video
Have you read any of Anne McAffrey's "Dragonriders of Pern" series? It has amazing world building. The series spans over 3000 years. She does an amazing job with prequels by bringing to life things she mentioned happened in the distant past. The history and life she creates goes so far beyond characters, but still has well rounded characters.
Dragonsdawn, the prequel of that series, was better than all the other books combined, I thought.
it's crazy because i actually like the starwars prequels a lot. i think it adds more to the story and universe of starwars as a whole. yes it's obvious that the writing wasn't good but it gave way to the clone wars series that really helped paint the picture better for why anikin did what he did. i have my own interpretation of the prequels that actually makes me like them a lot.
Example of good prequel: Fate /Zero
Plus Yuki Kajiura's music does it justice
It made a lot of lore additions that made fate series a whole mess to read through games and shit to find out what the cool new terms mean and why they didnt use it in the future
@@kitty.miracle It happens before the first instalment of the series, so it is a prequel. It is a planed prequel which helps it being good :)
@@kitty.miracle No the light novels were written in the mid 2000s, fairly soon after the stay night vn so it very clearly was written as prequel.
Also I agree that it is p great prequel since it introduces many new characters who it treats with same level as attention as the reappearing characters which keeps the narrative tension up.
although a few little red-cons were needed in order to make all the ufotable anime's fit together, but still the changes from visual novel to anime were surprisingly consistent.
i think a good prequel needs to pay close attention to detail and build up new character's then giving there individual character ark's proper climaxes therefor the expected conclusion feel's earned rather than forced
I love your videos despite not being a writer, and this one was highly informative as always. But I hope "Casper" doesn't make a return too frequently if ever. I think I get what you were going for with it, but I really wasn't a fan of those bits.
@more content fer yas um, what? I don't understand what you're trying to say.
Sovereignwind more content is just a troll, ignore him. He types something unreadable waiting for people to tell him to talk normal and then just laugh at his own joke about wanting people to use more brainpower. You can get some of what he reads if you’re used to dealing with people who don’t know how to type and use autocorrect, though a good portion of it is just on purpose
The Hobbit movies are the perfect example of this. They could’ve told a fun adventure story that didn’t rely on shoehorning in references to LOTR but they didn’t take a chance on that.
Captions: "you know bubble feet now he has a tragic backstory"
Hahahaha, some hilarious parts in this :p "I have the high groundelwald" good job my friend
You content is so witty and interesting and deep.
Keep going ♥️✨
Lmao I love how your fireplace calls you out at 9:59
This video reminded me of the Redwall series. Almost half of the books were technically prequels, but that didn't harm many of the books. While there were foregone conclusions, Brian Jacques focused mainly on what we didn't know. Some of my favorites were Mossflower, Martin the Warrier, and the Legend of Luke, three prequels focusing on the very mythological of Martin.
Mossflower demythologizes him in general, along with the origins of Redwall.
Martin the Warrior and The Legend of Luke do this for some of the mysterious aspects of Martin that remained after Mossflower was written.
Despite this, I enjoyed all three, the tension was based on other aspects, usually the individual characters.
I must admit I spent a lot more time nitpicking "Crimes of Grendelwald" then it's predecessor "Where to find them".
You're extremely talented and knowledgeable.. well done, I was well informed and entertained along the way.. 🤘
Very insightful! As an independent writer who's been considering a prequel for one of my storylines, these are really great points I hadn't fully considered. Thank you!
"My English friend" --> shows a German castle
*screams in European*
We agree, HFM.
Also, I believe when prequels are written as sidequels, it helps to avoid some of the common downfalls of prequels like The Crimes of Grindelwald and Star Wars. By investigating life on the other side of the coin, some epic outside of what we know or suspect, it can preserve the imaginative journey we cherished and hold onto in the originals as well as help to develop the unknown unknowns of the world. To put it briefly: There should be more to the world of prequels than the things we know we don't know (e.g. Clone Wars, fall of Jedi, Old Republic, Darth Vader). I'd say Prometheus is a good example of that.
Since I watch your videos, I feel that I have learned a lot and right now that I am about to write the prequel to my story, I found this video. Really thanks and I can barely, I will buy your book.
Giancarlo Tripi, Lima - Peru.
I am really enjoying how much enjoyment you got out of making this video! XD
Tim, I appreciate you taking and risk and trying something different. I can tell you had a lot of fun with this video and put a lot of work into it. But I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that it was a little too much. I don’t mind the costumes or alter egos, but it shouldn’t interrupt your analysis. It just draws out the conclusion and makes it harder to follow.
In short, not an explicitly bad turn, just tone it down in future videos. Keep doing what you love!
1973? Star Wars came out in 1977.
Here's a thing about death of the author: It only really applies to things like morals and emotions that are already subjective. It doesn't apply to events and facts within the universe. Han shooting first or second isn't a subjective question within the universe, it's a concrete, objective fact that Han shot second, as dictated by the creator, as is absolutely the creator's right to do. If members of the audience misconstrued that event because the presentation was confusing, even if their confused idea of the event might make for a better story, that doesn't make their misinterpretation any less wrong. The moral implications of the characters and emotional reaction of the audience should be left for the audience themselves to decide without the author forcing them towards any particular reaction, but the actions of the characters within the universe are not up for debate, even within the original death of the author theory, and it is the author's right and duty to lay them down clearly and concretely, even if we don't like the choice they've made.
Let me tell you a story.
A work of art which has been enjoyed for decades by people all over the world, a real treasure of world. The painter however, is tired of how people view it and tare it apart, right in the museum he sold it to years ago. People react in anger and despair, he responds "That's the reaction I had always been looking for."
Chris East That is quite possibly the worst analogy I’ve ever read in my life and I’m not exaggerating lmao. How people are viewing the work and the messages they’re taking from it IS the subjective thing he’s talking about. Just because everybody in the audience thinks an apple is actually a pear doesn’t magically make it a pear or negate any duty for the painter to explain that they’re seeing something concrete incorrectly.
I don't think you understand the "Han shot first" controversy.
In the original film, sceenplay, and novelization, Greedo had Han at gunpoint and threatened to kill Han, so Han shot him dead (under the table). Greed never got a shot off.
Years later, Lucas re-elected the scene for the Special Edition release, to show Greedo shooting first (and missing from 3 feet away), with Han shooting second.
This was later re-elected _again_ to make both shots simultaneous.
"Han shot first" isn't an argument about what is actually happening on screen in what order. It's a statement of preference for the original version.
Yes and no.
Han shooting first is is an ambiguous event, least of all as originally written and presented. It, FURTHER, employs explicit moral discourse as whether or not Han shot first directly leads into dialogue about whether Han was justified to shoot Greedo.
This is highlighted even more since a person above you in the comments section even goes so far to state (albeit without reference) that "the (original) script literally said Han shot first, and also, well, Greedo didn't actually shoot at all." If we take their statement as true, then George Lucas's retroactive statement that Greedo shot first is literally wrong. It becomes "a concrete, objective fact that Han shot (first), as dictated by (the creator's own intentional writing and directing of the script)".
"Even if their confused idea of the event might make for a (more-heroic character), that doesn't make their misinterpretation any less wrong."
Of course, the claimant of this "original script" may be wrong, maybe the original script did have Greedo shoot first. But if it's to be presented as fact, then that's on the person wishing it to be taken as fact to present evidence for.
-----
-----
On a similar note, let's take another work: Psycho. The plot of the movie is that in a female criminal spends a night at a shady motel, gets killed by the hotel's owner, and police following the thief investigate her murder. IN THE TEXT OF THE FILM, a criminal psychologist explicitly states that Norman Bates (the murderer) suffers from Dissociative Identity Disorder, which is why he takes on the persona of his deceased mother.
Despite THIS INTENTIONALLY UNAMBIGUOUS STATEMENT OF FACTS, there are laws in America and the UK being proposed (if not passed) THIS VERY MINUTE where the entire IRL trans-community is likened to "transgender characters" such as Norman Bates or Buffalo Bill. It does not matter what the authors actively stated, or else transphobes (and similar conservative policy-makers) wouldn't be using the fictional actions of characters who are explicitly not transgender as the basis for laws that serve singularly to deny trans-people the same rights and legal protections afforded to cis-people.
-----
So, like...
If the Author is "Dead" when it comes to what's specifically written in the text (as is the case of said serial killers explicitly stated as not being trans) then the Author must also be "Dead" when it comes to something the text intentionally leaves ambiguous (as is the case of who shot first in Star Wars).
And all of that ignores how Mr. Lucas' retroactive claim oversimplifies a fair moral discourse. After all, Greedo did just threaten Han. So even if Han shot first, there's a case made that Han acted in self-defense or, at the very least THOUGHT he was acting in self-defense. Many states in real life cover this with "Stand Your Ground" laws, in fact. Which denies Lucas his interpretation that Han shooting first necessarily makes him a 'cold-blooded murderer'.
It was the creators choice- in 1977 when he chose it. He can’t change history, even if he made it.
All I'm gonna say is that Revenge of the Sith was and still is my favorite movie to this day.
Sith is definitely the strongest of the prequels, and I have fond memories of seeing it in the theater.
The first two movies just felt like filler to get us to Revenge of the Sith. That's the story we really wanted to see and that's the story Lucas really wanted to tell. There's so much more emotional depth to that movie than either of the first two.
2:37 It's french - "non-magique = non-magic." Makes sense given that this was occurring in Paris
I actually think this fits amazingly well with Grindelwalds character...
best prequel i seen was fate zero for fate stay night
was going to write the same
Fate/Zero is the best prequel I've ever seen too. I was also going to say the same thing. It's damn good
I absolutely agree! Fate/Zero should be a model on how to do prequels.
And you know what's the fun part?
Canonically speaking, it's not a prequel!
Zero wasn't written by the author (Kinoko Nasu) but from another writer friend of Nasu (Urobuchi, the writer of Madoka Magi and Psycho Pass basically).
Nasu obviously had his version of the 4th HGW, but he didn't write It directly. He said that various things of Zero were not as he thought them, but since his narrative universe is a multiverse...Who gives a damn?
This means that more freedom to Urobuchi produced a better work
@@Hyperversum3 yeah i know it was written by gen urobuchi but just goes to show how a good writer makes all the difference even if its not the original one
Lucas actually always intended to do the prequels, "when technology had advanced enough to make his vision work"
George Lucas wasn’t controlled by any studio, he had full control of Star Wars.
Star Wars was released in 1977, not 1973.
The reason everyone says Han Solo shot first is bc in the original print, Han shot Greedo without Greedo firing at all. It was only until later, when George added in Greedo firing a blast, did that argument start.
Late response: he had more of a team back then, and wasn’t a legend not to be questioned. And while he wrote them, he didn’t direct Empire or RotJ, only the first movie.
@@jlighter1 only because he didn’t want to direct them. He didn’t want to direct the prequels, either. He asked Ron Howard, Steven Spielberg, and Robert Zemeckis. They all turned him down, saying he should be the one to direct them.
@@jlighter1he was also completly in charge tho very few things changed like Han Solo adlibing the I love you.
I love hello future me video but the prequels even if they aren't good stories I'd disagree aren't flops due to lucas losing his edge or being prequels.
They are panned cuz of the dialogue, pacing and some genuinely wonky story ideas.
Most of the first two.
You can see a vision of Anakin falling and it's honestly the story I wanted to see a Republic fall and a failed hero turn into a failed antagonistic much more than the ot.
And I love it but we have a lot of good good vs evil stories.
Not cautionary takes of how selfishness and authoritarianism corrupt
Honestly, your normal style of deep diving into a subject is better without the characters. They break up the flow and take away from the honest fact that I enjoy hearing you talk about in your own voice. I can't tell you put work into it, but I preferred it when you did not include the characters and skits.