Poll: Which Star Wars team is your favorite?

Not always - I know people who are around my age who think the originals are best (presumably because they were shown the films in the order in which they were made, rather than the proper episode order), and I know several older people who think Episodes 1-3 are the best, although they are a good bit older so that when the original trilogy came out they were in their 20s and above, rather than 9-10 year old children, so their minds were not as easily moulded by the originals as those who were children when the originals first came out.

I think many people's preferences are shaped due to which films they saw first and the age at which they saw them. I, for example, first saw episodes 1-3 when I was 12, i.e. child age, and because children's imaginations are so much more easily moulded and shaped by new things than those of adults, I immediately became hooked with Episodes 1-3. I then wasn't able to see the originals until I was a good couple of years older at least, because at the time the DVDs for all six were no longer available as it was the transition between the two-disc Lucasfilm versions and the one-disc Disney versions, and was only able to obtain the OT once Disney had re-released the first 6 films on DVD. Because I had first seen episodes 1-3 first and was used to seeing amazing CGI, speeches in the senate and good characters being regularly killed off, I thought the effects and storylines of the Originals were weak in comparison, as I felt the effects were noticeably inferior and the 70s escapism type storylines, where the young heroes are practically invincible and the villains have troops that are described to be good and are terrible whenever they fight the main heroes, I felt just weren't as good as the plots of Episodes 1-3, which, I felt, have more intelligent plots.This applies in reverse to people who saw Episodes 4-6 at a young age when they first came out, and feel that the traditional effects and the less serious stories are what makes up the very spirit of Star Wars, and when they see Episodes 1-3, which are noticeably different in practically every way, they feel that Episodes 1-3 were boring because of the political side, or that because the actors were noticeable different they say that their acting was poorer. I assume you are among this group, @NIGHTBRINGER ? This group is also increased further in size when those that saw Episodes 4-6 first when they were young want their children to have the same experience, so they show their children the films in the order 4, 5, 6, 1, 2, 3. This then moulds their children's imaginations in a similar way, and thus explains why some people my age prefer Episodes 4-6. I imagine that if I have a child in the future and show them Star Wars in the order I prefer, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, his or her mind will have been moulded in the same way as mine, and thus they will have similar preferences to me. Therefore, the battle between the Prequels and Originals will continue in subsequent generations. Conversely I know several people older than me, and probably older than you as well, who think Episodes 1-3 are better - this is because when they went to see Episodes 4-6 in the 70s, they were in their 20s or older, and saw the escapist nature of the films as just a bit of fun, like the 60s Star Trek series, and not to be taken that seriously, as their imaginations were not as easily moulded. Then when Episodes 1-3 come out with their storylines rooted in political intrigue and the mortality of heroes of all stripes as well as villains, they prefer the prequels because they are more rooted in reality.

Now with the arrival of the sequels, more groups have been added to the mix. The original trilogy group is divided further between those who see the sequels as a trip back to their childhood and those who see them as disrespectful remakes of the original films and think they are worse than the prequels, and a new group, those who see the sequels as children, is just starting to be created. Now if these children were to see both the prequels and the originals after the sequels, what would they think? They would most likely praise the originals for having the escapist storylines they know and love, and they will probably praise the prequels for having the better effects closer to the CGI they know and love.

This means that different people will be biased towards their particular preferences, and each person has their own preference, so just because there are a larger number of OT fans here, doesn't mean that applies in other places too. It also has to do with time period as well - there are more original trilogy fans here because there are both the adults who saw them in the 70s and their children (and possibly grandchildren), whereas the prequels and sequels groups have had no children yet, so say if we move this maybe 30 years forward, then I imagine there will be more people who like episodes 1-3 and 7-9 more than the originals.

I hope you will actually read my post this time, @NIGHTBRINGER , and that you will actually listen to what I have said here, because I feel that this is an important part of what we are discussing in this thread.

 

I was speaking more of general trends, there are obviously going to be many exceptions. Of course my line of reasoning is purely speculation and based on the fact that most people identify with what they grew up with. When something new comes out, it is in the news, on TV, discussed a
in schools, promoted via advertising/toys, etc. Kids today would probably identify more with Frozen than The Lion King, even though both films are available to them. I'll look back fondly on Transformers and Thundercats and ridicule the Power Rangers. Had I have grown up during the Power Rangers era I would have probably been into that.

As a result, my guess (and it is just that... a guess) would be if people were asked to identify their favourite trilogy, the statistically older crowd would favour the original trilogy and the youngest average would be found in the sequel trilogy, with the prequel trilogy somewhere in between. That said, we are shaped by many more factors than just the current movies/tv shows of our childhood, so many exceptions will exist. I could very well be completely off the mark, but this is my guess.

I'm actually a strange anomaly in this sense, I didn't grow up with Star Wars or Star Trek. Neither of my parents watched it at all. I didn't get into any of it until a bit later. I first got into Star Trek via the release of First Contact, that was my original exposure to the franchise. In terms of Star Wars, I got into it close to the time of the release of Episode I. With all the hype surrounding it, my interest was peaked. So while I did in fact watch the original trilogy first, it was not by much (maybe a year or so).

I highly doubt that. I really don't think that the prequels will stand the test of time. It is actually very impressive how well the original trilogy has done so. The prequels were highly reliant on what you call great CGI. The problem with that is that CGI becomes dated very quickly, and doesn't hold up that well over time. On top of that, the prequel trilogy wasn't well received even during it's release (a stark contrast from its predecessor), at which point it should have been at the height of its powers. I know you really love the prequels (and I love elements of them), but they are simply not nearly so beloved by the general population.

Even the popularity of the original trilogy will dwindle over time. How many movies from the 1930's are popular today? Movies are created with the culture of their time in mind. Each subsequent generation that follows it has a harder and harder time identifying with it. The original trilogy has held up exceptionally well, however, most of the target audience at the time of its release are still around. Interesting to see what the state of affairs will be in say forty years time.

I do read your posts, even if I tend to disagree with them.

I completely agree.

 

But knowing who Palpatine is will spoil the surprise that he's that elusive second Sith Lord that the Jedi have been looking for, and that he was manipulating both the Republic and Separatists all along to produce his own dictatorship and destroy the Jedi - that kind of backstabbing can only come with the joys of seeing 1-3 first.

I think they are good - I just think 1-3 are better.

I'm glad you agree here.

I ridicule Power Rangers, Frozen and the Lion King! I thought they were all bad!

Agreed. By the law of averages, this would be the outcome but there are a good many exceptions.

I'm an anomaly too - I was actually too young to see the prequels when they first came out - I only saw episodes 1-3 first because, if you didn't know much about the order in which the Star Wars films were made, you would see Episode 1 first, then 2, then 3.

And whose fault was it that the prequels were not so well received? It was the fault of those who saw the original trilogy first and thought the prequels weren't so good. It's mostly these people who are so opinionated over the Internet that have caused the prequels to have been less popular, as they say to everyone else "The prequels are awful, watch Episodes 4-6 first" and most people, being sheep, follow their lead as they don't have the spine to say "actually I have a different opinion". I reckon if Episodes 1-3 had been made first, they would have been at the height of their power.

I imagine also that if CGI doesn't hold over time as you say, the Sequel Trilogy will eventually look dated as well.

Also, although I'm spoilt by CGI, I also appreciate stop-motion effects in older films, it's just I found the original trilogy's stop motion for the walkers and tauntauns to be quite poor. In fact there are older films whose effects I found were better than those of the original trilogy - take the Ray Harryhausen films like the Sinbad trilogy, or Wallace and Gromit. Now THAT's what I call proper stop-motion! When you look at such masterpieces of animation and then look at the Original Trilogy, I certainly find that the OT's effects were rushed. The fuzzy lightsabers and 2D blaster bolts were not very impressive either.

 

The Lion King was good fun.

It could also be that perhaps the prequels were not all that good.

You have a very low opinion of people.

I reckon that if that were the case, the Star Wars franchise would have never gotten off the ground and become what it is today. If Episode I was the first movie to be released way back in 1999 (without the fandom and reputation of the OT), the series would likely have died then and there. That movie on its own would have been strong enough to carry the series forward in any meaningful manner.

Yes that is probably correct. That is why a movie has to rely on story. The special effects of the Original Trilogy are horrid by today's standards, but the movies endure because of the story and characters.

Rogue One's CGI of Tarkin & Leia will especially become very dated. The ability to produce those kinds of effects will grow by leaps and bounds in the coming years.

In contrast to today's effects, the Original Trilogy is sorely lacking. However, if you consider it within the context of the era in which it came, they were revolutionary. The special effects in general of the OT blew audiences away upon its release. However, as I said, such effects become dated quickly.

 

Is it me, or does this debate always seem to happen whenever there's a new Star Wars thread? This and Jar Jar Binks

 

The dark side of the Force is a pathway to many abilities some consider to be unnatural.


You're not wrong!

 

They may not have been in your opinion, but certainly in my eyes and the eyes of many people they are very good.

Only when they disrespect something I like, which is natural. Imagine if there was someone out there who said they hated Star Wars in general or Warhammer Fantasy Battle - would you have a very high opinion of them?

You don't know that - the prequels would have been given more of a fandom and would have been nostalgic to those who saw them. I think the main reason the OT is as celebrated as it is today, and why the prequels are less popular, is because there was nothing before the OT, so when the OT came out it was a brand new thing. Picture it as if the prequels were the first to come out, and it would be brand new - nothing would have come before it.

Episodes 1-3 do have a story - it's just hidden away more - if you look for it in the Senate chambers and on the battlefields of Naboo and Geonosis, you will find it. Palpatine's treachery, the formation of the Clone Army, the rise of the Separatists. In the prequels you need to look at things from the perspective of the whole galaxy, not from the perspective of three would-be rebels.

 

I still enjoy them myself. True that in your yes they are very good, and in the eyes of "many" people they are good, however in the eyes of the majority they are not very good. That is the simple fact.

I certainly wouldn't label them as "sheep" and "spineless" because they don't like Star Wars or WFB. My sister has never seen (and refuses to watch) Star Wars and I sill have a high opinion of her. I think it is too easy to fall into the trap of labeling people as sheep if they disagree with one's viewpoint.

I honestly don't think the prequels would have done that well in the absence of the original trilogy and their box office success was definitely a product of the fandom created b the OT. I know you love the prequels, but you have to consider the general reaction of the public at large. Episode I was especially weak and if it had been released on its own without the fandom created by the OT, there may very well not have been an Episode II.

Of course it has a story, it's simply that the story didn't resonate with the majority of people. I do personally feel that the prequel trilogy started to find its stride by Episode III, which if feel is pretty solid and the best of the bunch (by bunch I mean the prequel trilogy).



I'm not trying to argue that you shouldn't like the prequels. I'm not even stating that I don't like the prequels. I'm simply saying that by in large the general public (and the majority of Star Wars fans specifically) do not have a very positive view of the prequels. I really don't feel I am making a huge assumption with that statement; the backlash to the Episodes I-III was severe, numerous and very public. What I am completely opposed to is the assertion that the prequels "failure" (they were still a box office success) was because of the OT. That somehow the fans of the OT sabotaged the success of the PT. Remember that people were starved for Stars Wars by 1999 and wanted nothing more than for Episode I to be a success.

 

Why don't you guys create a specific Star Wars thread for debating? Everytime you get into a debate on a thread like this, you could then just post a link to that thread and carry on there. For that matter, it doesn't even have to be Star Wars, just a place where if people have disagreements, they can settle them there, rather than derailing existing threads, because it seems to me that every time we start a Star Wars thread, it ends up with the same debate about Prequels v Originals, or whether Jar Jar Binks deserves to be hated, or who caused Palpatine's rise to power. I don't mean to be rude or anything, but it's just a suggestion