Original Star Wars Trilogy

[Tony-OH]

Disagree with your assessment of Jedi. The Ewoks I always felt got a raw deal -- sure they're a tad annoying but they don't bother me all that much. Some people make it out as if they ruin the entire movie. Team Solo needed help on Endor to win the battle -- should the Ewoks have been more savage? Less furry?

If Han Solo had died my childhood would have been traumatized.

Luke matures A LOT, I felt, between Empire and Jedi. Yea he still has the same boyish looks, but he's more stoic -- I feel like he means business.

Maybe it's because I'm younger, but I'll only ever know Billy Dee Williams as Lando Calrissian.

I have to agree with all of this. Although I did find the Malt 45 thing to be pretty funny.

The one thing I remember was being a pissed off 11-year old when Empire ended. I was like, WTF? I really didn't understand the whole trilogy back then.

[Pedro Cerrano]

Ya, Empire doesn't really have a beginning or ending. Just the nature of a trilogy.

[tennOsfan]

Empire was flat-out brilliant. I was 10, and we had endless discussions for three years over that would all shake out. Kids today can just pop in the next disk -- seems so unfair.

I don't possess the same hostility towards the prequels the way some people do. They are what they are -- background for the main story. There was a valid reason why Lucas chose to make the three he made first. They were the most compelling part of the story. For me, Return of the Jedi is a much better film with Episodes II and III existing. Without knowing the full story of Anakin's fall, his ensuing redemption doesn't hit home like it do now. And without Episode I going into the Jedi legend, you don't fully understand that Anakin truly was the chosen one, and just how close the whole deal got to Sith taking over for good. And without the prequels, I don't think you can appreciate the massive improbability of Luke being able to turn his father back to good; no one, not even Yoda, could have foreseen that a person could come back from the dark side.

Plus, without the prequels, you don't really "get" what Vader was trying to do in attempting to turn Luke to the dark side (the long history of Sith apprentices always getting power hungry and seeking their own apprentices to overthrow their masters is never understood in Episodes V and VI without the prequels). I had always thought Vader doing that was to keep from destroying Luke b/c he had some affection for him, but the prequels open up the thought that perhaps this is just another Sith apprentice power grab. As Yoda says, greed and power and such things are tools for the dark side, and they lead to bad consequences. Vader isn't trying to turn Luke b/c he loves him; he's just doing what the dark side naturally does. If he did turn Luke and they ruled the galaxy together, Luke would naturally look to overthrow Vader and so the cycle continues. That's not a good system for good galactic government. With this six-movie story, Lucas is trying to illustrate to us why things like fear, anger, greed, revenge and power can corrupt. The prequels help make his mission more clear.

[NewMarketSean]

The OT had some pretty lame dialog, too. I think the difference was that better actors were delivering the lines and acting on real sets -- not in front of a green screen -- and the stakes were higher, plot-wise

The NT are basically one big special effect with actors talking to a tennis ball. Hard to get good performances with that when half the script is clumsily written political doublespeak. And until the end of Part III there as nothing ever really at stake. And even then, we generally knew what was going to happen.

[Stotle]

Empire was flat-out brilliant. I was 10, and we had endless discussions for three years over that would all shake out. Kids today can just pop in the next disk -- seems so unfair.

I don't possess the same hostility towards the prequels the way some people do. They are what they are -- background for the main story. There was a valid reason why Lucas chose to make the three he made first. They were the most compelling part of the story. For me, Return of the Jedi is a much better film with Episodes II and III existing. Without knowing the full story of Anakin's fall, his ensuing redemption doesn't hit home like it do now. And without Episode I going into the Jedi legend, you don't fully understand that Anakin truly was the chosen one, and just how close the whole deal got to Sith taking over for good. And without the prequels, I don't think you can appreciate the massive improbability of Luke being able to turn his father back to good; no one, not even Yoda, could have foreseen that a person could come back from the dark side.

Plus, without the prequels, you don't really "get" what Vader was trying to do in attempting to turn Luke to the dark side (the long history of Sith apprentices always getting power hungry and seeking their own apprentices to overthrow their masters is never understood in Episodes V and VI without the prequels). I had always thought Vader doing that was to keep from destroying Luke b/c he had some affection for him, but the prequels open up the thought that perhaps this is just another Sith apprentice power grab. As Yoda says, greed and power and such things are tools for the dark side, and they lead to bad consequences. Vader isn't trying to turn Luke b/c he loves him; he's just doing what the dark side naturally does. If he did turn Luke and they ruled the galaxy together, Luke would naturally look to overthrow Vader and so the cycle continues. That's not a good system for good galactic government. With this six-movie story, Lucas is trying to illustrate to us why things like fear, anger, greed, revenge and power can corrupt. The prequels help make his mission more clear.

I think the issue with the prequels isn't so much the broad concepts, but the fact that they are highly underdeveloped and presented through an atrociously written, porous plot, paper-thin characters, and cringe-worthy dialogue.

Now, I think people romanticize the original trilogy. There are numerous significant holes in those stories as well, in addition to cheesy dialogue. It just isn't as prevalent as it is in the prequels.

[Tony-OH]

Empire was flat-out brilliant. I was 10, and we had endless discussions for three years over that would all shake out. Kids today can just pop in the next disk -- seems so unfair.

I don't possess the same hostility towards the prequels the way some people do. They are what they are -- background for the main story. There was a valid reason why Lucas chose to make the three he made first. They were the most compelling part of the story. For me, Return of the Jedi is a much better film with Episodes II and III existing. Without knowing the full story of Anakin's fall, his ensuing redemption doesn't hit home like it do now. And without Episode I going into the Jedi legend, you don't fully understand that Anakin truly was the chosen one, and just how close the whole deal got to Sith taking over for good. And without the prequels, I don't think you can appreciate the massive improbability of Luke being able to turn his father back to good; no one, not even Yoda, could have foreseen that a person could come back from the dark side.

Plus, without the prequels, you don't really "get" what Vader was trying to do in attempting to turn Luke to the dark side (the long history of Sith apprentices always getting power hungry and seeking their own apprentices to overthrow their masters is never understood in Episodes V and VI without the prequels). I had always thought Vader doing that was to keep from destroying Luke b/c he had some affection for him, but the prequels open up the thought that perhaps this is just another Sith apprentice power grab. As Yoda says, greed and power and such things are tools for the dark side, and they lead to bad consequences. Vader isn't trying to turn Luke b/c he loves him; he's just doing what the dark side naturally does. If he did turn Luke and they ruled the galaxy together, Luke would naturally look to overthrow Vader and so the cycle continues. That's not a good system for good galactic government. With this six-movie story, Lucas is trying to illustrate to us why things like fear, anger, greed, revenge and power can corrupt. The prequels help make his mission more clear.

Maybe they give you a little backstory, but to me, the first three movies were great because they were character driven with characters you actually liked. the prequels failed in my opinion because Lucas just couldn't develop characters that you actually cared about and it's hard watching a guy who murders a bunch of kids and will become Darth Vader. Personally, I would have rather had a movie about Luke, Lei and Han's childhood/teen years rather than the crap Lucas spewed on us.

There were bits of goodness in each film, but mostly they were just terribly forgettable, unlike his first three which are classics for no other reason then they were good character-drive movies that had special effects instead of special effects that had unlikeable characters.

[Tony-OH]

The OT had some pretty lame dialog, too. I think the difference was that better actors were delivering the lines and acting on real sets -- not in front of a green screen -- and the stakes were higher, plot-wise

The NT are basically one big special effect with actors talking to a tennis ball. Hard to get good performances with that when half the script is clumsily written political doublespeak. And until the end of Part III there as nothing ever really at stake. And even then, we generally knew what was going to happen.

Here in lies my main problem with any prequels. We basically know the ending or at least the results of the ending. I've never been a fan of prequels, but unless you are going to explore things about the characters we didn't know (like how the freshened up the new Star Trek series) then you are just trying to make money off of something that was successful.

[Tony-OH]

I think the issue with the prequels isn't so much the broad concepts, but the fact that they are highly underdeveloped and presented through an atrociously written, porous plot, paper-thin characters, and cringe-worthy dialogue.

Now, I think people romanticize the original trilogy. There are numerous significant holes in those stories as well, in addition to cheesy dialogue. It just isn't as prevalent as it is in the prequels.

Perhaps, but the fact they had characters you liked and rooted for was enough to overcome them. Hell, "The Warriors" had some of the cheesiest dialogue ever but it doesn't stop me from from enjoying them fight there way across New York.

[Pedro Cerrano]

I really encourage all of you to watch the Plinkett reviews that were posted earlier in this thread on Red Letter Media. Yes, they are very long (I'm talking like over 90 minutes) but they're broken down into parts, they're hilarious and they're very very insightful.

[NewMarketSean]

I really encourage all of you to watch the Plinkett reviews that were posted earlier in this thread on Red Letter Media. Yes, they are very long (I'm talking like over 90 minutes) but they're broken down into parts, they're hilarious and they're very very insightful.

Just tried to but his voice is pretty annoying.

[Pedro Cerrano]

Just tried to but his voice is pretty annoying.

That's part of what makes it funny.

[DuffMan]

"Hold me like you did by the lake on Naboo"

[Stotle]

Perhaps, but the fact they had characters you liked and rooted for was enough to overcome them. Hell, "The Warriors" had some of the cheesiest dialogue ever but it doesn't stop me from from enjoying them fight there way across New York.

But you have emotional ties to those movies because of your age when you saw them. I do agree that the character development was much better, and plays a large roll in the superiority of the original movies.

[Pedro Cerrano]

"Hold me like you did by the lake on Naboo"

Welp, dunno about any of you guys, but I'm aroused.

[Tony-OH]

But you have emotional ties to those movies because of your age when you saw them. I do agree that the character development was much better, and plays a large roll in the superiority of the original movies.

Yep, can't argue there. But my kids, who obviously did not grow up on the originals, like them much better than the prequels. I really think the fact that Luke, Han, R2D2 before jet packs, C3PO and Chewwy were so much fun to root for, even if Lei was a bit of a biatch at times, especially during the first movie.