Fixing The Prequels: 'Star Wars' Fans Tighten Up The Divisive Trilogy

From Quora user Zachery Chapman:

Put Dooku on the Jedi council in Episode I, and make him the lone voice on the council in support of training Anakin. When Qui-Gon dies, Dooku storms out raving about the incompetence of the Council and of the Republic as a whole for electing a chancellor that only he has the political acumen to sense is corrupt. One of the last scenes in the movie shows Dooku being approached by a hooded figure…

From Quora user Michael Wellen:

Add more scenes with Anakin and Obi-Wan in them, together, just hanging out. First, this would establish Anakin and Obi-Wan’s strong friendship. Second, it would give a way to show us Anakin’s conflict through a deteriorating friendship, rather than telling us directly through dialogue.

This sentiment is carried over on Reddit as well, with Redditor u/lupatine offering this perspective:

[Anakin and Obi-Wan] aren't friends, it is a dysfonctionnal sibilings relationship where the older brother had to take the place of the father when he didn't want to. And it [messed] up their relationship.

Anakin needed a stronger parental figure but Obi-Wan stepped out of this role the moment he could to go back to being buddies. [Anakin] needed what he became to Ahsoka, I think it isn't a mistake he choose to "parent" her like he does.

And Obi-Wan was too young and [inexperienced] to take on a padawan, let alone the Chosen One.

From Quora user Michael Wellen:

Have Padme pursue Anakin. When older Anakin is first established, he doesn’t seem like a good man or a good Jedi. Instead he comes across as a creepy, possessive punk. It’s frankly rather difficult to see why a woman like Padme would be interested in him. If Padme is the pursuer, however, it does several things.

First, it establishes Padme as a character with agency.

Second, it would make us like Anakin more, since Padme’s love for him would act as social proof for the audience.

Third, Anakin’s resistance to this pursuit would establish his commitment to the Jedi order, and his surrender to love would show that he is corruptible. Most usefully, this change would play into some of the oldest tropes in world history, including Adam and Eve, Samson and Delilah, Lancelot and Guenivere.

Going against tropes is sometimes good, but tropes are around for a simple reason: they work.

From Quora user Jason Reynolds:

Don’t make Jango an obvious bad guy.

Give the audience credit for being able to grasp subtlety. By making him a villain who they find out works for Count Dooku makes the Jedi look like idiots for EVER trusting the Clone Army.

I’m sorry but if [Mace Windu] has to cut [someone's] head off I am not going to be trusting an army of the [same person's] clones. We should have some reason to question if the Clone Army is actually a good thing but it doesn’t need to be so hamfisted. It should be obvious the Jedi made a mistake to trust the Clones in Episode III but not from the very beginning.

If you've been on the Internet, chances are you've come across the Darth Jar Jar fan theory from Reddit back in the mid-2010s. While certainly plausible if you follow George Lucas's philosophy of "rhyming" his trilogies, there were much simpler ways to give Jar Jar Binks some semblance of characterization that wouldn't have completely changed the course of the films.

From Redditor u/Digitlnoize:

Anakin ("Annie") first meets Jar Jar in Episode I as a very young boy. Jar Jar calls him Annie. Even in Episode II, he calls him Annie...in the same scene where he and Padme share their uncomfortable "my...you've grown" bit.

...I was convinced his character existed for a reason besides selling toys. I told my friends, "You'll see. Jar Jar is meant to serve as the audience's emotional link to the little boy Anakin. So when he becomes Vader, we'll still have good old Jar Jar calling him 'Annie.'"

When Episode II came out and opened with Jar Jar saying, "Annie!" I though my suspicions were confirmed. He's still calling him Annie. Emotional link confirmed. I thought, "wouldn't it be great if Anakin kills Jar Jar when he turns to the dark side?" I was absolutely convinced this was going to happen.

Then, it didn't. Episode III came and went without an Anakin wasting Jar Jar scene.

All we needed was a quick scene after Anakin turns, but before he kills all the Younglings, showing Anakin running into Jar Jar (who calls him "Annie" of course, despite the fact that Annie has that "I will cut you" look on his face). Perhaps Jar Jar tries to find out what's wrong, perhaps he's just annoying. Either way, "Annie" gets p*ssed and kills him.

Regardless. This one scene would have made his entire character have a point. A true plot-driven point. Jar Jar should have served as our emotional link to the little boy from Episode I. Instead, he's a just a sad joke.

TL;DR: Jar Jar should have been the audience's emotional link to young Anakin. Vader should have killed Jar Jar late in Episode III to illustrate just how far he'd fallen.

From Redditor u/Intelagents:

Get rid of the accent [or broken dialect] so the audience can take him seriously.

From Quora user Gene Su:

Why did the Trade Federation blockade Naboo? 

The Trade Federation would have attempted to blockade Naboo not over trade routes or tariffs, but over a rare natural resource that Naboo has. It could be used in building something important such as hyper-drives. Nations don’t go to war over trade routes. They go to war over land and resources such as oil (think of America’s meddling in the Middle East). We can even have the Trade Federation attempt to install a rival government or royal family to fight against Padme Amidala. It’s a habit of more powerful nations to install puppet governments in less powerful nations.