Does anyone like the new Star Wars movies better than the originals?

[The Game]

Does ANYONE like the new Star Wars movies more than the original trilogy?

I was just thinking- I might be the only huge, legitamite Star Wars fan who prefers the new movies.

You know how most huge Star Wars fans hated Episodes 1 and 2, mainly because nothing Lucas' could have put out would have lived up to their standards? Well I'm the other way around. I'm such a huge SW fanboy, that I mark out for anything realted to Star Wars, and I just love both of the new movies.

The action sequences are second to none ever created, and they are very enjoyable.

If you ask me, there are parts of the original trilogy that are boring, predictable, and dare I say... Hokey?

The only major downfall of the new movies is simply that the comedy and interactions between the characters aren't there. Plus the acting hasn't been terrific. And there was that huge mistake known as Jar Jar Binks...

I know I'm going to get a million posts back saying how big of a fool I am, but does anyone agree with me?

Anyone?

-The Game

[GL2k2]

These new films will go down in history as the trilogy that allowed the story to take a back seat. The stories are too misconbobulated and are not friendly to anyone who was never really "into" Star Wars", which is about 20% of the population of the earth. But, Lucas has failed to pay close attention to the things he's done in this new trilogy. It seems he's forgotten alot of the things that were essential to the orginal trilogy such as the future is old, less is more, and America rules!

The future is old

steems from Lucas making his props and ships and robots look like they were actually used and working and existed prior to filming. These new films have computer effects that could easily do that, but they have failed to do so. It all looks so fresh and new that it's hard to see that look or feeling. There is no Millenium Falcon that has mechanical problems, R2D2 and C3PO are brand spanking new. This all looks too fresh to the audience.

Less is more

In the initial Star Wars, Jabba the Hutt was mentioned but not shown. Alderan was mentioned and then shown but too late. These were people and places never seen, but we knew they existed because the characters knew they existed. Much like Tony "Rocky Horror" Rockamora and the infamous foot massagein Pulp Fiction . Did we really need to see these things, nope. But we still believed. Lucas has forgotten that.

America Rules

Han Solo, Luke Skywalker, and Princess Leia were very much the only American voices in the original Star Wars. They were up against the evil empire, pick a country in the cold war era. They were rebelling much like Americans do, and Han like any cool kid with a race car was slick and cool with his dog. This can't be said of the new films. Anakin was a slave, what does that say of America? Not the good parts we all like to remember. The Queen is a polictian, again not very good parts of America. Now he actually could use these to explore the dark side of America, but he still fails to do so.

Also, why introduce the word "Padwan" as student now. Leave it out, you didn't use it in the original trilogy, why invent stuff now. Not good.

[GrayGhost]

I like AOTC better than the others, but TPM... lol.. no.

Here is how I would personally thank them:
1. Attack of the clones
2. Empire Strikes Back
3. Return of the Jedi
4. A New Hope
5. The Phantom Menance

I am sure that Episode III will kick and will probably end up being 1, 2, or 3 in the complete 6.

[GL2k2]

Well if I had to rank them here's my list:

1. Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back
2. Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope
3. Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones
4. Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi
5. Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace

now I have no idea how Episode three will turn out. Lucas has established the fact that it will be the darkest of the series. And I already know that the homeworld of the sith is a very dark planet, maybe even a planet cast in eternal darkness away from any sun. I don't know, but it has been said that the planet is dark. I'm hoping Episode III, which should be called "Rise of the Empire" or "Revenge of the Sith" will slide easily under Attack of the Clones.

Also, I have to say, I really wish Lucas did not direct these last two or three films. I wish Steven Speilberg handled episode II ATOC because he is much better at action stories and with Lucas overseeing it would have rocked. For Episode III I wish someone like David Fincher could direct it. If its suppose to be dark, go to the absolute master of dark, who actually uses the flash on his camera more than any director. Check the resume if you don't believe me.

Se7en
The Game
Fight Club
Panic Room

[The Game]

Here's how I rank them:

1. Star Wars: Episode II: Attack of the Clones
2. Star Wars: Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back
3. Star Wars: Episode VI: Return of the Jedi
4. Star Wars: Episode I: The Phantom Menace
5. Star Wars: Episode IV: A New Hope

I may get some heat for placing Episode IV last, but watch it. It really isn't all that spectacular of a movie. It's hard to imagine what it was like sitting in one of those theatres in 1977, but I've seen all of them on the big screen, and personally, I just don't think it's nearly was good as the others. The action sequences and energy of Episodes 1 and 2 aren't there, and the great characterization from 5 and 6 isn't quite there.

The best of the Leia/Han interaction came from Episode V, and that one is easily the darkest, whcih is why I like it som much.

I think Attack of the Clones is the best because it is so awe inspiring visually- and for what it is (the middle chapter of a trilogy that sets up another trilogy) it is done SO well. It accomplshes everything it needs to accomplish- it shows Anakin the way we need to see him- as a frusterated Jedi learning his way- one who has a dark side. It shows us the origins of the clone wars, and gives us a respect for Yoda and Mace Windu as dominant forces. And honestly- it is just the coolest one, hands down.

I fully expect Episode III to claim the throne as the best of the six when it premiers in three years. The darkest and coolest yet- Darth Vader will come at last.

-The Game

[SonGoku V3]

Originally posted by GL2k2
These new films will go down in history as the trilogy that allowed the story to take a back seat. The stories are too misconbobulated and are not friendly to anyone who was never really "into" Star Wars", which is about 20% of the population of the earth.

I would like to disagree, because I'm one of the few(many maybe?) who wasn't origianlly into Star Wars until I saw Episode 2 with a good friend. Now, I've also seen Episode 1, and bits and pieces of the original trilogy, but these new movies are amazing to me. The fight scenes are great, and the backgrounds in these movies(especially in Episode 2) were just plain great. Those scenes of that city(don't know the name of it) during Anakin's car chase scene were beautiful, and the planet where they were making the clones looked great. Just the scenery alone won me over, and I totally felt Anakin when his mother died in his arms. That really made me enjoy the movie. I don't know about others, but it made me interested in the original trilogy more.

[Clayface]

I love the new flicks. I think they're just as good, if not better than the originals. My rankings:

1) Empire Strikes Back
2) The Phantom Menace
3) Attack of teh Clones
4) A New Hope
5) Return of the Jedi

[JTurner954]

Now by new Star Wars movies, are you including the Special Editions of A New Hope, Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi??


Anyway, I have no problem with any of the Star Wars movies. I thought Phantom Menace was very good, and that people with high expectations were let down because of all the new characters that they weren't used to. I had no problem with Jar Jar Binks; I considered him to be just another unique character in the Star Wars character.


All the Star Wars movies are good. To me, there is no such thing as a bad Star Wars movie (unless Episode 3 is bad, which at this point I highly doubt).

[Andy Mancini]

I too love the new movie. Here's how it ranks for me:

Empire Strikes Back/Episode II: Attack of the Clones (tie)
Return of the Jedi
Episode I: The Phantom Menace
New Hope

Both "Return of the Jedi" and "The Phantom Menace" would be better if they didn't have the kid-friendly Ewoks and Gungans in them.

[Barb Gordon]

Although I love both the new Star wards films, I still find the first three better. Not just because they were the first, but also because of the cast, the chemistry between characters and the storylines. The cast created something pretty special amongst each other, it all clicked so well. The cast for Ep 1 and 2 are good, but they lack, something, not exactly sure what, but there's not the spark you got between Han, Luke and Leia. My mom, who loves the original three, and who has gone with me to see the latest two, has one thing to say, "It's not the same without Harrison Ford." She's not just saying that because she loves Harrison Ford, though we both do. It was what Ford brought to his character, how well he played it and how well his character acted with everyone else. You had the love triangle between Luke, Han and Leia. Luke wanting to get away from his simple life and begin some great adventure. Han, who is adventurous and with remarks always ready, the guy who looked out for himself, but in the end changed a bit. And Leia, who wasn't your typical damsel in distress, and who wouldn't take crap from a guy. As much as I enjoy Ep 1 and 2, the chemistry between Anakin, Padme and Obi-Wan definetly leave something to be desired. But that's just me.

~Barb

[Nick Biped]

If I had to rank the Star Wars movies from best to worst (IMO):

- Ep. V: The Empire Strikes Back
- Ep. IV: A New Hope
- Ep. II: Attack of the Clones
- Ep. VI: Return of the Jedi
- Ep. I: The Phantom Menace

One reason I like the first two movies could be that the special effects weren't that overwhelming compared to now. Because of that, things such as plot and characters seemed to be focused on more. As well, they also had charismatic actors like Harrison Ford and Billy Dee Williams. However, I will say that the action scenes in the two newest movies are pretty spectacular (especially in Ep. II).

For me, the problem with Ep. VI and I were that they seemed a bit too "cute" and kid-friendly at points. That's why for me, Ep. II was a return to form.

I'm really curious to see how Ep. III turns out. I mean, how could you not make it dark?

[grim15]

-Empire strikes back
-Return of the jedi
- A new hope
-Attack of the clones
-The phantom menace

[KingKoopa]

I happened to love RotJ.

-Return of the Jedi
-Attack of the Clones
-Empire Strikes Back
-A New Hope
-The Phantom Menace

[Lachesis]

The short answer is no.

The old trilogy and the new trilogy are almost entirely separate animals, that were made differently, act differently, and should be treated differently.

The original Star Wars films were much more personal, focusing on three characters in a strange universe created by models, puppetry, and photography tricks. It feels older, more run down, and truer to life. It's true they're simpler stories, built on good versus evil cliches and very dependant on the revolutionary visuals, but the writing was strong enough to match them.

The new trilogy, on the other hand, is a broader, less focused space opera that spends a lot of time on politics and factions and is much less straightforward about its rights and wrongs. The universe is created almost entirely by CGI, which has a tendency to look too perfect and rather detatched. The writing is weaker, constrained by future events in the continuity, with downright lousy dialogue, and the characters have a tendency to feel less humane. No everyman Han Solo this time around.

I'm sure it was much harder to create the pre-Hope trilogy, especially in light of the success of the originals, but I think Lucas essentially undermined himself. The two universes don't seem to match at all. The recent film are simply too perfect and too flashy to be the Star Wars where the Millenium Falcon keeps breaking down and our heroes wind up in a giant trash compactor.

In the end, I like the old Star Wars movies because they depend less on the pretty pictures and have characters I actually liked watching.

[The Dark Knight]

I can't really compare them since I've only seen the original trilogy once, but I've really liked all the Star Wars movies. And I can't understand why everyone hates Jar Jar.

Originally posted by GL2k2
Less is more

In the initial Star Wars, Jabba the Hutt was mentioned but not shown. Alderan was mentioned and then shown but too late. These were people and places never seen, but we knew they existed because the characters knew they existed. Much like Tony "Rocky Horror" Rockamora and the infamous foot massagein Pulp Fiction . Did we really need to see these things, nope. But we still believed. Lucas has forgotten that.If Lucas could have shown them, he would have. He didn't forget anything. It was only because of technological limitations that you don't see these things.


America Rules

Han Solo, Luke Skywalker, and Princess Leia were very much the only American voices in the original Star Wars. They were up against the evil empire, pick a country in the cold war era. They were rebelling much like Americans do, and Han like any cool kid with a race car was slick and cool with his dog. This can't be said of the new films. Anakin was a slave, what does that say of America? Not the good parts we all like to remember. The Queen is a polictian, again not very good parts of America. Now he actually could use these to explore the dark side of America, but he still fails to do so.Eh? Correct me if I'm wrong, but slavery and politics are not exclusive to America. America does rule, but Star Wars is hardly echoing any sentiments about the country.

[mosszonedotcom]

I think after some of you calm down you will realize that you like the other 4 just as good if not better than AOTC. Christianson and Portman's terrible acting keep it from being the best. The Phantom Menace story is better than AOTC, which is more or less a highlight film with some ridiculous love scenes mixed in.

Still, AOTC's last 40 minutes of highlights are awesome and it is more violent than the other movies. However, Christianson just doesn't translate into Vader.

[JTurner954]

I have no favorite really. I like them all. I don't follow them like hardcore Star Wars do. I just enjoy it for what the movie gives me.

There are some things I'm not going to like about some of them (like Darth Vader's death in Return of the Jedi ) but I accept them and I like the movie anyway. I have a feeling that people hate ROTJ and Phantom Menace because of the death of certain characters, and it isn't fair. People need to learn to accept what happens in a series, even if you don't like it or not.

[RogueMartian]

I like episodes IV, V, and VI much better. George Lucas has made several giant mistakes with the making of the prequels. The first mistake, and the most obvious, is the overuse of technology. Why does EVERYTHING in the movie have to be CGI? Isn't the characters and not the background supposed to be the focus of the story?

Of course, its a good thing the CG is so involving, its like a magic trick. Keep an eye on the busy left hand and you won't see what the right hand is doing. In this case, the right hand is writing a substandard story. I claim that this movie would not be loved half as much if it was called anything other than star wars. Unfortunately, its not, so it has a huge fan base of people who will defend it to the death despite the poor story and uninteresting characters. Of course, maybe the characters would be interesting if the story had some good dialogue written. Something better than "i hate it when he does that" "you've grown..more beautiful i mean" "this is a drag" etc.

The characters are the final part of the story that has been hurt.
Villains:
There is no longer an enduring villain. It could be argue that the emperor is the villain, but we never see him do anything. In episode IV, vader killed obiwan and tried to kill luke. In V he brought the rebellion to its knees, in VI he was defeated and eventually turned from the dark side. The prequels have no true villain in that respect.

The Good Guys:
You used to have characters you liked. They had chemistry on the screen and in a way you wanted to be one of them. You wanted to be the future jedi knight, the princess leader of the rebellion, or the maverick smuggler who joins the rebellion because its just the right thing to do. I know its not the same for everyone, but who cares about the prequel characters. Obi wan is probably everyone's favorite, and thats probably because he was such an endearing character in the originals.

The side characters:
I almost groaned when obiwan hugged the random CGI chef who knew everything about poison darts on coruscant. The side characters that appeared in the originals were interesting. Boba Fett has almost no lines, and is now a Star Wars icon. I can't see the chef, or the long neck aliens, mace windul, or even yoda being a character you really care about. Who would care that the little green guy can kick butt unless you saw his character in the original?

I've said it once and I'll say it again: I pray to the DVD makers that they sell the two trilogies in SEPARATE PACKAGES.

[GL2k2]

I liked Ewan MacGregor a lot more as Obi-Wan Kenobi in both movies. I know people didn't like him in the first movie because he was quiet, but he said he was just following what Alec Guiness did with Obi-Wan, who was very mysterious and silent. I didn't expect Obi-Wan, and he set the standard for what a Jedi Knight is to be. Watch Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones back to back if possible and you'll see the similarities and differences of the older Anakin and the young Obi-Wan Kenobi. Remember he didn't agree with Qui-Gon's decisions either, but he listened to him and respected his decisions.

[Mr. Obsession]

I wouldn't say I like them better. But I will say, that since I basically view Star Wars as a series of fun popcorn movies and since I have had fun every time I've every watched any of them, that I have enjoyed them all.

[SpaceCub]

1) AOTC
2) New Hope
3) Phantom Menace/Empire
5) Jedi

Although I really love the original 3, the Jedi order is what makes me like Ep 1 and 2 more. Watching Jedi vs. Sith as they should be totally rocks. In 4 5 and 6 Luke has yet to complete his training, Vader is more of a machine than man, and Obi Wan has been out of training for years. Yeah, Vader is still bad ass, but watching Qui-Gon, & Obi-Wan vs Darth Maul was in short, friggin' amazing (as was Yoda in Ep 2). Ray Parks does an excellent job as Maul, challenging Boba Fett as fav character with few lines.

Granted, the acting in 4 5 and 6 was much better (with the exception of MacGreggor, perfect choice for Obi Wan. He really portrayed the part). Just listen to Vader in the first moments of New Hope: "Tear this place apart!..." Comparing Harrison Ford to whoever played baby Anakin isn't even a fair fight. And Jar Jar sucks for comic relief. I'm just happy they go back to the droids in Ep 2.

One more reason why I like 1 and 2 more than 4 5 6 is that they show what the Galaxy was like in its prime, before the Empire. Of course everything won't look beat up as it did in 4 5 6, everything was still new.

1 and 2 also foreshadow what is coming. The separists become the Rebels and the Republic becomes the Empire (in a way). We also see how technology improves from Fedartion Starships to Death Stars and Clone Troopers & AT TEs to Storm Troopers & AT ATs. Obi Wan is slowly becoming a master Jedi (arguably one of the best) and Anakin is becoming Vader. It's obvious how Anakin in AOTC becomes Vader in New Hope. He wants to be all powerful and thinks Obi Wan and the other Jedi are holding him back, so he looks to Palpatine for help. If you really look into it, you can see how Anakin will become Vader as far back as Ep 1. Anakin is asked what he fears. He responds that he fears for his mother's safety. Then Yoda gives one of my alltime fav SW quotes "Fear leads to Anger. Anger leads to Hate. Hate leads to Suffering..." Anakin fears for his mother, so it will be his mother's safety that ultimately leads to his crossing over to the Dark Side. This is further prooved in AOTC when after his mother dies, Anakin says he hates the Tusken Raiders, which his why he killed all of them, even the women and children (thanks to my dad for pointing that out).

[JL Man]

I thought AOTC was awesome. The characters ( especially Anakin ) were interesting. Am I the only one that thought Chritenson was good?

1. Empire
2. Jedi
3. AOTC
4. A New Hope
5. TPM

[JTurner954]

I had no problem with Hayden at all. Most of my comments were posted at the AOTC talkback thread.

[Clayface]

I liked Hayden as well - I think he did a great job in the role.

[The Game]

I thought he acted the part pretty well- but he seemed like too much of a punk if you ask me. And he was annoying with his confidence- but I suppose he was supposed to act that way.

My only problem with Hayden is that physically he doesn't seem like he has the presence of Vader- he's to skinny, and too much of a pretty boy.

-The Game

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by The Game
Does ANYONE like the new Star Wars movies more than the original trilogy?

I was just thinking- I might be the only huge, legitamite Star Wars fan who prefers the new movies.

No, I wouldn't say that. I did like "Phantom Menace" alot, and I would rank AOTC alongside ANH and ESB. There was a lot to appreciate in AOTC, and I expect that Episode III will be excellent as well.

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by The Game
My only problem with Hayden is that physically he doesn't seem like he has the presence of Vader- he's to skinny, and too much of a pretty boy.

The armor alone will bulk him up, so that's not too much of a problem. His height seems right, as seen when standing beside Obi-wan and Palpatine. One thing I really liked is that when we saw Anakin walking from behind, the movements of his Jedi cloak seemed to exactly match the movements of Vader's cape. Hayden's pace when walking was perfect.

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by mosszonedotcom
Christianson and Portman's terrible acting keep it from being the best.

Christensen and Portman's acting was no less than Hamill or Fischer's. In fact, I think Hayden was excellent.

[JTurner954]

Thank you DarkAngel.

[The Game]

I agree that Hayden put on a pretty good performance, but comparing Portman's acting to Carrie Fischer's weakens your argument. Fischer's performances were much, much stronger than Portman's, and I think that is one thing most Star Wars fans can agree on.

-The Game

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by The Game
I agree that Hayden put on a pretty good performance, but comparing Portman's acting to Carrie Fischer's weakens your argument. Fischer's performances were much, much stronger than Portman's, and I think that is one thing most Star Wars fans can agree on.

I'm not saying their performances were equal, but that any inequality in that area is hardly to the level most are making it out to be. On the whole, the acting in AOTC was no less than the original trilogy. If the OT had contained acting on the level of the Godfather movies, then ok, I can understand complaints. But that wasn't the case.

[wonderfly]

Originally posted by LilSonGoku


I would like to disagree, because I'm one of the few(many maybe?) who wasn't origianlly into Star Wars until I saw Episode 2 with a good friend. Now, I've also seen Episode 1, and bits and pieces of the original trilogy, but these new movies are amazing to me. The fight scenes are great, and the backgrounds in these movies(especially in Episode 2) were just plain great. Those scenes of that city(don't know the name of it) during Anakin's car chase scene were beautiful, and the planet where they were making the clones looked great. Just the scenery alone won me over, and I totally felt Anakin when his mother died in his arms. That really made me enjoy the movie. I don't know about others, but it made me interested in the original trilogy more.

Okay, I'm just teasing here, but...how can you know the words to an old Early 80's Michael Jackson song, (as seen at the bottom of your post) and not know the original trilogy by heart? :p

Seriously, if your like most of us who grew up in the early 80's, you lived on Michael Jackson songs AND Star Wars films... :D

[RockItShipper]

Originally posted by wonderfly
Seriously, if your like most of us who grew up in the early 80's, you lived on Michael Jackson songs AND Star Wars films... :D

Which is why Luke went around with one glove by the end, right? ;)

Ummm... What strikes me about the prequels is the element of knowing, much like in Greek drama which presented a known story with loaded dialogue from ignorant characters.

[DR. BELCH]

At this point Lucas reminds me of a musician who's been around for some time, and while fans point to that as having staying power, the detractors claim he should pack up his amps and go, he's past it. A sell-out? Well, they've been saying that about Dylan since he went electric at Newport in '65, and I read one critic who referred to much of his '70s and '80's output as "fecund"...I suppose the principle with the new SW flicks is the same. So should G.L. be allowed to proceed with the grand-scheme plans, or do we tell him to leave them alone and trot the old showhorse out to the knacker's yard?

[Behonkiss]

Better than the originals? Yes and no in many aspects, but no in the general outcome.

It's hard to pinpoint the exact ingredient that made the originals so great, maybe because there wasn't just one. The characters in the new trilogy aren't unique-they're either Jedis, villains, or part of the Republic. Those who aren't get little screentime or lines. In the original, you have three diverse main characters: Luke, the Jedi, Leia, the Representative and Commander, and Han, the cocky rebel. In my opinion, the lack of a character like Han in the prequel's cast is a big, big problem. He added so much fun to the originals. And seriously, would you choose Jar Jar Binks over Chewbacca? The Gungans over the Ewoks?(.......Well, I wouldn't.) The sad thing is that I feel the only characters who are in both trilogies who really have a full transition are Obi-Wan and the droids. Obi's changing level of maturity is great(Plus, he literally did look eight years older in AOTC.)-in TPM, he's a cocky apprentice like Anakin who accepts his rise to Jedi Master by beating an enemy his own master couldn't, and taking on a new apprentice(And we all know how THAT turned out). Threepio and Artoo are in this because-Well, it's obvious. Artoo's professional career started in TPM after he was honored as being the sole droid who saved Amidala's ship, and while Threepio's role in the movie was wasted, it was a start.(We finally got to see the charm of their partnership in AOTC.)

The FX....Excuse me, what do you think I'd choose?(Though I think digital Yoda should have only been used in the fight scenes. I don't care if we never see the legs, the puppet just seems more alive. And let me say that I think he could have made at least ONE of the prequel aliens a puppet....)

The acting is obvious. Jake Lloyd was absolutely horrendous(Why did Haley Joel Osment's career have to start AFTER TPM?), Liam Neeson barely tried, Hayden is so-so, Natalie Portman is bad most of the time(I think George may have just chosen her on looks alone), and Ahmed Best is as annoying as his character. I think Ewan McGregor preserves Alec Guinness's charm, though. Ian Mcadairim(sp?)has actually improved for the most part; his lines in ROTJ were always in the same "I'M CREEPY AND EVIL!" tone. Hamill, Ford, and Fisher were, of course, great.

The tension: Only 3 of the 5 have any real tension. ANH was pretty much calm, even with the Death Star run. Empire was tension-filled because the first time you saw it, you couldn't believe that this could happen to the good guys(Don't forget the nationwide shock "I am your father" created in the 80's, and the awesome battle and dialogue that followed and preceded it.). ROTJ was tension-filled because....Oh, come on. Watch the final parts with Luke, Vader and Palpatine and tell me you're not on the edge of your seat. That's something nothing but Empire's last 20 minutes can approach, and in my opinion the best parts of any SW movie and a big reason ROTJ is my favorite of them all(To those who who insult me because of that, screw you off a cliff.). TPM's tension was nonexistant, because of how sickeningly cheery it was most of the time, and because you know which main characters would survive because they're in later movies. The only remotely exciting part is the Maul battle. AOTC does impress, though. The last half-hour was great, and the Yoda fight was the best scene of the movie and a real treat for fans(Though I find that a problem...If you were new to the SW movies and saw the prequels first, you wouldn't be too blown away by that scene.). While watching it, I THOUGHT it was the 2nd most tension-filled scene in the saga(Below ROTJ), but now I realize it was only enhanced by being in a theater.(I can't believe ANH was the only one I saw in theatres when the Special Editions rolled around.)

I'm tired.

[j32885]

From Best to worst I rank as:

1. Star Wars: Episode IV: A New Hope
2. Star Wars: Episode VI: Return of the Jedi
3. Star Wars: Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back
4. Star Wars: Episode II: Attack of the Clones
5. Star Wars: Episode I: The Phantom Menace

[Ed Liu]

Howdy,

From best to worst as overall movies, I rank them as:

1. Star Wars (A New Hope)
2. Empire Strikes Back
3. Return of the Jedi/Attack of the Clones
4. Phantom Menace

There are lots of reasons why I rank the latest movies at the bottom of the heap, but I think one of the big ones is humor. The first three movies (even Jedi) had legitimately funny jokes in them, mostly from Han Solo. They were funny when I was age 7-13 (when the original trilogy came out), and they're funny now when I'm 31.

I think there were two actual funny jokes in AotC ("Good job" and another one I can't remember), and a lot of stabs at humor that utterly failed to generate laughs. Phantom Menace's idea of humor was Jar Jar Binks stepping in Bantha poop. It may sound silly, but I miss the jokes.

I could babble more about how more is not automatically better, and spit the usual complaints about great actors/wooden performances, plot holes and inconsistencies large enough to drive a sandcrawler through, lame dialogue, and Lucas' annoying insistence on hammering us over the head with plot points, but others have done it more eloquently than I can.

-- Ed/Ace

[The Game]

Can someone please explain to me why the heck you would ever rank A New Hope first? It's just not that good. It's got the worst Lightsaber duel, the least action, and it's certainly not up there in terms of humor. Besides the fact that it came first, what makes it better than any of the others?

-The Game

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by Ace the Bathound
Howdy,

From best to worst as overall movies, I rank them as:

1. Star Wars (A New Hope)
2. Empire Strikes Back
3. Return of the Jedi/Attack of the Clones
4. Phantom Menace



My rankings:

1. Attack of the Clones
2. Empire Strikes Back
3. A New Hope
4. Return of the Jedi
5. Phantom Menace

[Ed Liu]

Howdy,


Originally posted by The Game
Can someone please explain to me why the heck you would ever rank A New Hope first? It's just not that good. It's got the worst Lightsaber duel, the least action, and it's certainly not up there in terms of humor. Besides the fact that it came first, what makes it better than any of the others?

OK, but remember: you asked. =8^). This may take a while.

I'm not ashamed to admit that sentimentality has a whole lot to do with it. I was 6 or 7 when the first movie came out, and it's the first movie I can ever remember going to see. I also remember going back home afterwards and attempting to draw X-Wings and Stormtroopers. It gets a big boost from that halo effect.

That said, I've seen and read about lots of movies since then, and I still think Star Wars holds up better than all the others so far. It all boils down to the radical idea that "more may not mean better." Sometimes, less is more, and more is just excessive. Increasingly, these concepts seem to be radical and dangerous ideas to Hollywood.

The first movie is focused pretty tightly on Luke and his classical Hero's Journey and growth to manhood. I feel that the movies, over time, started spreading their focus to the secondary characters until the present day, where I can't point to one character in the movies and say "this movie is about HIM/HER." The movies we've seen so far are NOT about Anakin -- I could easily make a case that the movies are about Obi-Wan, Amidala, R2, or Jar Jar (for Ep 1), all of whom have gotten as much if not more screen time than Anakin does. The only reason why we know they're about Anakin is because we know he becomes Darth Vader by Episode IV.

The dialogue and the characterization in the first movies are better, IMO. To pick one example, I'm far more convinced by Luke's tongue-tied fumbling the first time he sees Princess Leia (ignoring that plot twist in Jedi that makes it really really gross) than by all the lines from Hayden Christensen's mouth. More is not better.

I talked about humor in my original post. While the humor in SW may not be terrific, it flows from the plot, rather than seeming tacked on. C3PO's lines in the arena in Ep 2 are painful and can be removed from the movie entirely with zero effect to the movie as a whole. I'm not even going to talk about Jar Jar in Ep I.

As for action sequences, I think they work on 2 levels: purely as action sequences and as plot elements. As action sequences, the newer movies win hands down. As plot elements, though, I'll take the run on the Death Star over any of the newer climactic action sequences. The Death Star attack was a brilliantly plotted, tight sequence that let us be concerned on a micro-level for Luke and on a macro-level for the Rebels. It also allowed Luke to truly be a hero on his own merits, using the Force and his own skills to destroy the Death Star. In contrast, we have to deal with cutting between 4 different action sequences in Ep I, and Ani saves the day almost purely by accident and coincidence. Ep 2 is better in that regard, ending the movie with one battle that grows in scope and is plenty exciting, but it doesn't have the same emotional impact the Death Star run has, and it ends in a pretty disappointing manner (the bad guy gets away, leaving us with a big pile of robotic and clone corpses, to a questionable end). More is not automatically better.

I do not accept the argument of "the effects are better, therefore the movie is better." They tell the same basic story, but Barb Wire has far better effects (and, for that matter, far better action sequences) than Casablanca. The first movie is a piece of garbage while the second is a classic. The original Jaws had horrid shark effects (and left out the shark for most of the movie because Spielberg had mechanical dfficulties), but it's a much tenser and more effective movie than any of the sequels or Deep Blue Sea. In Star Wars, the effects are there to further the story; in the recent movies, they're there (or they are done to the extent they are) because they're cool. Sometimes, more is just more, or is just excessive.

I think Lucas has gotten a nasty habit of showing and telling us EVERYTHING that's happening. Star Wars explains exactly what we need to know about its world and no more (I'm thinking specifically of the references to the Imperial Senate and the Emperor, and Obi-Wan's original explanation of the Force), hinting at the structure behind the show but leaving the details to our imaginations.

In contrast, the new movies have an almost obsessive need to tell us things, as if we can't figure them out on our own. The scientific explanation of midichlorians in Ep I is one example (but not, BTW, the existence of midichlorians themselves). Another example in Ep II is the bit where Obi-Wan needs to be explictly told on-screen (by a 7-year old, no less) that "someone deleted Kamino from the Imperial Archive," despite the fact that he knows where it's supposed to be AND that there's a gravity well but no planet there. Is there anybody in the audience who really needed help figuring that one out? If not, then it doesn't need to be there, and it makes the film drag.

The worst example of this in Ep 2 is the death of Anakin's mother sequence. Anakin watches his mother die, gets that nasty look on his face, and then brutally kills 2 sandpeople while glaring hatefully at the others (including the child we see in the background). Then we cut to Yoda and Mace talking about a grave disturbance in the Force. It's a great sequence as it stands. Then, just to make sure the 3-year old kids with ADD and the memory affliction of Guy Pearce in Memento GET THE POINT, Lucas has to have Anakin TELL us that he slaughtered all of the sandpeople, "even the women! And the children! I hate them!" Gee, thanks, I was having trouble figuring that one out.

The politics in the later movies are horribly muddled. The Senate is a horrible, ineffective, hidebound bureaucracy. Dictatorships are Just Bad (so says Amidala). What's the alternative?

Lucas brings up these points, and then fails utterly to address these issues, even if one includes the original trilogy. The earlier movies dodge these issues entirely by never bringing them up; we know the Empire is dominating and evil and the Rebels are fighting for freedom, and that's really all we need to know. Sometimes, simpler is better.

Finally (for now), I think Star Wars manages to balance having a nice sense of closure while leaving the door open to telling prequels or sequels. This is really why it gets the nod over Empire in my head.

I don't expect much of this to change your opinion of the movie, nor have your arguments convinced me that Ep 2 is a better movie than I think it is.

-- Ed/Ace