I thought that was pretty much what I said. But you singled out one statement which made it sound like I was defending the prequels or suggesting they're as good as the originals.

What I was trying to get at is that while the prequels aren't as good as the originals, they have redeeming qualities. Whereas the Clone Wars film is a jumble of everything wrong with the prequels with no redeeming qualities. I remember reading a review way back when Clone Wars released, and just so I could get the quote right I tracked it down again: "Remember how people talked about the Star Wars prequels like they were the worst movies ever made, when really, come on, they weren't THAT bad? The Clone Wars actually IS that bad." That line I read once 7 years ago stuck with me all this time despite the fact that I didn't even bother watching the movie until very recently. I think it sums up my feelings perfectly.

It has its ups and downs in season 1. I think it's a lot better than the first season of Clone Wars -- I haven't watched much past that yet.

That's a funny statement though because under no circumstances in any of the films or other media does the Separatist droid army or its leadership come across as "competent." Except for Grievous in the old Cartoon Network Clone Wars shorts, but they retconned him into submission (rightly so -- that depiction of him was actually overpowered to the point of being ridiculous).

My apologies. I must have misunderstood your post or taken it the wrong way. I tend to do that from time to time. I haven't seen the Clone Wars though. Is that the cartoon movie? If it is, that would be why. lol

Well of course the Separtist droid army were incompetent. Their leaders were a bunch of businesssmen with absolutely no military training.

It's horrible. The CGI models have no flow, and the story is laughable.

I was referring to the Clone Wars animated movie, yes. For what it's worth, the tv series is much better than the film.

Well of course the Imperials on Lothal are incompetent. They have no experience fighting rebels because they encounter so little resistance from the population (and I quote: "No one has spoken against the Empire on Lothal since the Bridger Transmissions." The Bridgers were silenced at least seven years before the start of the series). See, justifying the behavior of characters doesn't make the plot more interesting. When you have a completely nonthreatening antagonist, there's no tension in your story. This is more of a problem for Episodes 1 & 2 (and especially for Clone Wars) than it is for Episode 3, when Palpatine finally steps up as the antagonist and actually gets shit done.

Sort of like Star Wars Rebels after the first few episodes, when the Inquisitor, then Tarkin, then more recently Vader show up. The Lothal Imperials are woefully bad at managing their little rebel problem, so Tarkin has them executed. Basically every encounter with the Inquisitor ends with the heroes lucky to still be alive. They have a few moral victories, but have nothing substantial to show for their efforts. They can't, because the prologue to A New Hope outright states that the Rebellion's first major victory was the theft of the Death Star schematics. Season 1 had a somewhat hopeful ending with the crew of the Ghost joining a larger Rebel organization. But season 2 immediately opens with Darth Vader leading the Empire to injure and scatter the Rebels before they can accomplish anything.

thats like asking atheists what your favourite book of the bible...

ask a star trek fan, they will tell you how good the new movies are.

Ummm.. I would be mildly irked at wasting 10 bucks and an afternoon, and would proceed on with my life?

I really didnt think those Star Trek movies were that great, so my expectations are low.

Care to point out the True Scotsmen from the Not True Scotsmen for me?  Or is the Star Trek fanbase so small we only account for a tenth of the audience?  For the record, I'm a Star Trek fan and the data looks about right from where I sit.