9. You're Robbing The Imagination Bank
Better films succeed in creating a believable world through attention to detail. Part of that inevitably comes from having your film world's history predating whatever happened following the opening titles - And barring flashbacks, films usually can only suggest these things in characterization or dialogue. Crucially, the best franchise films also posit that stuff actually happened inbetween the previous film and its sequel. A great example: Do we know what happened with Han Solo and the bounty hunter at Ord Mantell? No, but it was clearly pretty serious. And real people wouldn't repeat the details of something they'd already know, they'd just mention it appropriately in passing, as it's done in "The Empire Strikes Back". Sticking with "Empire", this actually demonstrates why George Lucas completely missed the plot with his prequels; Boba Fett in particular: The special edition commentaries have Lucas explain Fett's appeal as being "The Man with No Name", a mysterious killer. First off - Clearly, Fett does have a name. And his appeal is actually spelt out in that same scene, no mystery involved. It's more his IMPLIED history that creates such appeal - Vader establishes him with pointed finger and the firm admonishment "NO disintegrations." With under 3 seconds of screen time, we now know: * Vader and Fett have a history. *Fett clearly has no issue ruthlessly disintegrating his quarry. *As Fett's unmoved by Vader's firm threat, he clearly has little fear for the Sith Lord. THAT says a lot about his character too. (i.e. something BADASS.) What created this rapport between them? How did Fett get his reputation? Has Vader employed him before? You love to see these stories' explanation, but at the same time, you likely love that these stories DEFINITELY happened. And they're implied in a way that makes Boba Fett seem unstoppable in a way that Darth Vader, representative of the Sith AND the Empire, feels the need to keep him on a short leash. That's pretty severe. And the effect is that your mind is further hooked on this story, entrenched in imagining things just as good as what you see onscreen, if not better. What doesn't happen is Vader explaining in detail how Fett's killed several times purely for sport. Or, for instance, that Fett's cybernetic implants misfire and make him triggerhappy. Those details answer questions, but don't send your mind racing with stories the way the open explanation in the film does. Prequels pretty much also answer those questions in ways that may never please you. Worse, they may answer them in ways that can be realistic and serve a story, but disappoint you. If I told you Boba Fett was an emo-kid-clone who watched his father get decapitated by Jedi....Well, it probably wasn't as good a story as the ones you pictured Vader and Fett clashing in watching "Empire". Sadly, of those two options the emo-kid one is actual film canon. Want another great example? One Xenomorph trophy skull (from the "Alien" films) on display in "Predator II" says so much more than two crap "Alien vs. Predator" prequels. You'd still probably love to see what put that skull there in that Predator spaceship.....too bad nothing in those other films is probably as good as what you imagined. Prequels by nature are going to do this same thing....but on a MUCH larger scale, answering questions regarding EVERYTHING about the film you love....despite whether you wanted to know or not.
Guilty Parties: I'll let Star Wars off the hook this round; "Prometheus" literally exists to answer questions about one setting in the original "Alien". Debates continue as to whether this was necessary or not or even done remotely well. And while it's a tribute to HR Giger's work on the original film that one set, costume, and spaceship design can prompt an overly elaborate 3 hour film, it can't be denied that nothing in "Prometheus" world-builds or implies unseen history as well as those sets from "Alien." I'm well aware that some upset with "Prometheus" didn't get the story or alien race they wanted - How could they? The design on those "Alien" sets fires and entices the imagination in ways that clinical explanations and linear film never could rival.
Exception: Paradoxically I'll give the "Prometheus" supporters a shoutout here too - The film does at least recognize that to tell a better story about the Xenomorphs, you need to look beyond the basic story in "Alien" and its creatures. This is why the film is so devisive; it does much subjectively right and wrong with its storytelling. But I will agree with its supporters that focusing beyond fleeing/surviving chest-bursters and face-huggers is the right way to go. If "Alien vs. Predator" had taken this approach, those films would be infinitely more watchable.