Star Wars: OT vs. PT vs. TCW

[RvB]

You mean other than three scenes in Empire and two in Jedi

Well played brickdoctor well played.

[Duelpear]

I don't think so- games don't tend to play well as movies. Plus it wasn't thought of untill a good 4, 5 years after RotS. And you can't condence 1 and 2- how do you take a kid and turn him into a fourteen year old halfway through the movie, make that kid who was a 9 year old a few mintues before madly in love with the girl who was just queen and then go in an entirly differant plot direction?

There would obviously changes that would need to be made to make 1 and 2 work as a combined movie. For one, you could drop meeting Anakin as a young kid and jump into his teen/pre-teen years. Keep the important parts still which between those movies are: Palpatine becomes chancellor, Clone War starts, Palpatine is granted emergency powers. For the greater story those are the important things to keep, everything else is really just extra.

As far as the reason I would want Force Unleashed as the basis for the third movie, its because it delves into the story of the rebel alliance, it gives a rare glimpse of vader trying to overthrow palpatine (or is he?), and other assorted interesting aspects of bridging the prequel trilogy and original trilogy. Much more so than just jumping from Luke/Leia being born to Leia bringing death star plans to the alliance.

[Brickdoctor]

As far as the reason I would want Force Unleashed as the basis for the third movie, its because it delves into the story of the rebel alliance, ... Much more so than just jumping from Luke/Leia being born to Leia bringing death star plans to the alliance.

Bah, retcons!

So who added the poll?

[lightningtiger]

I have been reading pieces of the last 11 pages...ouch....I must say OT is the best, but CW and PT have there places, why though ?

Any good story has a beginning, middle and end, well we all know that, OT actually isn't the end....according to an old workmate he had the 9, yes nine books of Star Wars that came out in the late 70's.

CW is to get kids hooked on to a modern fairytale, which Star Wars is as well, just read any of the classics and you'll see it.

Lucas made SW in the vein of the classic western serials, WW-II and pirate movies of the likes of Errol Flynn, the Saturday afternoon at the pictures for a 10 year old kid....sounds like what CW is on CN....the modern day saturday arvo picture show.

PT had to happen, we had to learn how the Sith rose to power again, how the droids are to do with Ben and Luke and the sister he didn't even know about (strange Jedi powers and Luke couldn't sense Leia was his sister ).

I do agree that AOTC wasn't the best, neither TPM (effects needed some work) and Attack Of...the poorly writen script.....Sith on the other hand was almost at the level of ANH and ESB....especially ESB...it's darkness totally comes out showing peoples true colours.

Many sci-fi writers take current themes in the real world around them and us to gives the story a realistic feel even though it's set lightyears away.

I'm glad there is a poll because I voted OT....hey, I'm 42 going on 43....it's my era and being an old hand at sci-fi writing (short stories similar to SW and BSG) I feel OT is more Sci-Fi than almost any other film like it.

I'm sure this topic will never end, just as Star Wars will never end.....but thank goodness who ever set up the poll.....they didn't include Star Trek or Doctor Who !

[starwarsfanatic]

I prefer the OT myself, but I'll watch the Clone Wars if it's on (I won't search the listings hours ahead for it though) and I actually don't see what's wrong with the PT. Sure, it might not be the same, but I reckon Jar-Jar Binks saved the PT.

[BrickArtist]

So who added the poll?

I think the force unleashed story-line is just to make it sell, star wars fans want to learn the story-Gamers will enjoy it too.

[Fallenangel]

Any good story has a beginning, middle and end, well we all know that, OT actually isn't the end....according to an old workmate he had the 9, yes nine books of Star Wars that came out in the late 70's.

CW is to get kids hooked on to a modern fairytale, which Star Wars is as well, just read any of the classics and you'll see it.

Lucas made SW in the vein of the classic western serials, WW-II and pirate movies of the likes of Errol Flynn, the Saturday afternoon at the pictures for a 10 year old kid....sounds like what CW is on CN....the modern day saturday arvo picture show.

PT had to happen, we had to learn how the Sith rose to power again, how the droids are to do with Ben and Luke and the sister he didn't even know about (strange Jedi powers and Luke couldn't sense Leia was his sister ).

Okay, a few points I'd like to mention:

- I know Jedi wasn't the end, and I don't really acknowledge it. I know there have the Han Solo and Lando Calrissian trilogies, Splinter of the Mind's Eye, Shadows of the Empire, etc, even before Zahn's Thrawn Trilogy in the 90's.

- Okay, I can't argue against the fact that the '08 Clone Wars is in the fashion of the old serials which inspired, among other things, the famous opening crawl of Star Wars, but it's somehow... different. Something's missing.

- The Prequels didn't have to happen. As others said, what happened with Anakin was pretty much implied with what Ben said and didn't really need to be explained in depth. Sure, you can tell it, but the emotion in the Prequels were such that nobody really cares (except for Star Wars fans and kids buying toys). The word "Sith" is never mentioned in the Original Trilogy, only the novelization; nothing is said of their rise to power, only the Great Jedi Purge; it's implied that Luke and the droids have never met before; Luke could sense that Leia had some strong connection to him, that's the (in-universe) explanation for why he was able to guess correctly when Ben so awkwardly tipped him off on Dagobah.

I prefer the OT myself, but I'll watch the Clone Wars if it's on (I won't search the listings hours ahead for it though) and I actually don't see what's wrong with the PT. Sure, it might not be the same, but I reckon Jar-Jar Binks saved the PT.

If you ask me, Jar Jar was an attempt to incorporate a stronger element of slapstick humor than was possible with Threepio, and that's part of what the audience didn't like, which is why he proved to be so unpopular (and I think Lucas realized this after Episode I, which is why he says next to nothing in the other two Prequels). If anything, CGI "saved" the Prequels.

Well in any case, kudos for using a term I coined.

[Churchill]

Read my extended post, Churchill.

Trust me, well read and thoughtfully considered. Like LightningTiger, I'm 42 going on 43. I don't post online lightly.

Bear in mind that with this discussion, I've been open minded all along, and encouraged even the most stubborn OT fans to at least give CW a chance. Read all of my posts, DobbyClone. I still am watching CW, and enjoying it for what it is. I still can find some enjoyment out of the PT.

Part of the misunderstanding here is, I think, that noone who advocates the OT has said that we don't understand the story. We agree that the back story was needed and welcomed. I understand what Palpatine did, and why he did it. There's got to be a reason for the Republic to change to an Empire, and it's as plausible a scenario as any. We've never said that we don't enjoy some of the scenes from the PT. I love the fight with Maul, as well as the beginning of Sith. I think that the interaction between Obi-Wan and Annakin at the end was amazing, and moving.

The issue here is movie making. And you just can't compare the character arcs of Luke and Annakin. Oh sure, Annakin dramatically changed. But so did the clone armor, and some might argue the clone armor had a better personality than Annakin. (Just a sarcastic analogy!)

[simonjedi]

- I know Jedi wasn't the end, and I don't really acknowledge it. I know there have the Han Solo and Lando Calrissian trilogies, Splinter of the Mind's Eye, Shadows of the Empire, etc, even before Zahn's Thrawn Trilogy in the 90's.

Shadows of the Empire was like 1997 dude. Waay after the Thrawn trilogy.

E: So was the Han Solo Trilogy.

Splinters doesn't really count either. It was released in 78 and was originally going to be a really low budget film IF Star Wars didn't do that well. (That's why there is no Han/Chewie and it takes place on a foggy planet)

Edited February 27, 2011 by simonjedi

[BrickArtist]

The issue here is movie making. And you just can't compare the character arcs of Luke and Annakin. Oh sure, Annakin dramatically changed. But so did the clone armor, and some might argue the clone armor had a better personality than Annakin. (Just a sarcastic analogy!)

And thats what I was pretty much referring to in my post, Anikans development mainly happened when he returned from the sieges to rescue Palpatine, and is consequently developed the most in Sith alone. And there also is the fact that Anikans story stretches from TPM, to Jedi.

I think I know what you mean in good movie making/Bad movie making, your talking about the acting/on-screen coarse of events itself, correct? I think if Rots had the acting of the OT, the writing of ESB, and all of the new elements it brought into SW, it would easily be the best.

Remember that we all have certain things that click with us for SW, I love the OT, it's fantastic. But I personally prefer RotS. Respectfully, of coarse. I'm not saying the OT had bad directing, I'm just saying its not my absolute favorite part of SW.

[simonjedi]

The issue here is movie making. And you just can't compare the character arcs of Luke and Annakin. Oh sure, Anakin dramatically changed. But so did the clone armor,

Seriously? Are you seriously comparing the fall of the main character of the PT to some minor change of CGI armour (I'm being serious they didn't even bother making clone armour for the films. They are either completely CGI troopers or Temerura Morrison wearing a blue suit.)?

Anakin's fall is basically...

I know about the dark side Aren't you even a little suspisious?

No

I'm evil, i'll help you save your wife.

OK

Also kill everyone.

OK

OOPS you killed your wife also You fell in lava.

[The stupidest line ever muttered in movie history and I refuse to type it out.]

Edited February 27, 2011 by simonjedi

[CMP]

All of this is true, from a certain point ov view.

I think it all depends on what you like to see more in a film. OT? Better story, classic lines, lasts forever. PT? Massive-scale battles, awesome CGI (In Episode II-III). Clone Wars? More huge battles, but it doesn't have the limitations a movie does.

Personally? I'm gonna have to go with the OT.

[Clone OPatra]

Why is this topic called CW vs. OT? It seems a bit more PT vs. OT, or PT/CW vs. OT at this point. Hmm… a change in topic title perhaps?

Anyhow, let me explain why I think that Episode I is very relevant to the whole thing, in a way:

It boils down to Qui-Gon being a stuck-up idiot. Honestly, if it wasn't for Qui-Gon, the rest of the saga couldn't exist. How so? Well, Qui-Gon is the one who set Anakin up to be a Jedi in the first place. The Council is basically against it, Obi-Wan is against, Padme is against it, but there's Qui-Gon standing with his own opinion and pressuring everybody else into doing what he wants. He's so self-centered that he even wants to go against Jedi protocol and train Anakin himself! The only reason the Jedi end up letting Anakin be trained is out of sympathy for Qui-Gon getting killed by some weird Sith-like character that makes them all afraid because they didn't even sense his existence.

Anakin never really changed much. He was an annoying, self-centered kid who ended up getting very lucky to cross paths with an egotistical Jedi who would want to help him hone his powers. He was never really fit to be a Jedi in the first place, so him killing everyone and becoming a maniac in EpIII isn't so far-fetched.

That's why the OT is better. It's kind of hard to have a trilogy (PT) where the main character whose story it is happens to be a big annoying jerk. The main character in the OT (Luke) might start out as a whiny kid, but he's still a good guy who grows up, and you can root for that.

[Churchill]

Seriously? Are you seriously comparing the fall of the main character of the PT to some minor change of CGI armour

OK.....ummm.... Welllll, I said I was being sarcastic.

DobyClone, thanks for the thoughtful reply. I enjoy the debate and hearing other's opinions.

I think I'll just go play with Lego.

[BrickArtist]

DobyClone, thanks for the thoughtful reply. I enjoy the debate and hearing other's opinions.

I think I'll just go play with Lego.

Me too

[Fallenangel]

Shadows of the Empire was like 1997 dude. Waay after the Thrawn trilogy.

E: So was the Han Solo Trilogy.

Splinters doesn't really count either. It was released in 78 and was originally going to be a really low budget film IF Star Wars didn't do that well. (That's why there is no Han/Chewie and it takes place on a foggy planet)

Okay, Shadows was a legitimate blunder (what was I thinking?) but by the Han Solo Trilogy I was referring to the older trilogy that wasn't called the Han Solo Trilogy - Han Solo at Stars' End, Han Solo's Revenge, and Han Solo and the Lost Legacy. According to Wookieepedia, the three are referred to as The Han Solo Adventures trilogy.

[Duelpear]

Seriously? Are you seriously comparing the fall of the main character of the PT to some minor change of CGI armour (I'm being serious they didn't even bother making clone armour for the films. They are either completely CGI troopers or Temerura Morrison wearing a blue suit.)?

Anakin's fall is basically...

I know about the dark side Aren't you even a little suspisious?

No

I'm evil, i'll help you save your wife.

OK

Also kill everyone.

OK

OOPS you killed your wife also You fell in lava.

[The stupidest line ever muttered in movie history and I refuse to type it out.]

What about when he murdered a whole ton of Tusken Raiders on Tatooine, fell in love (opening himself up to more emotions), and decapitated Dooku?

[lightningtiger]

The point I was trying to make about the story not finishing with Jedi was those books were I believe by Lucas himself...not by other authors (my favorite series to read was Rouge Squadron).

An important point to consider is what if Lucas choose to make TPM in 1976 instead of ANH....what would of happened ?

Now there's a can of worms I just opened up eh ? Would Darth Maul be more popular than Vadar ?

Kids might have wanted Naboo Starfighters instead of X-Wings.....at least R2-D2 and C3PO would be the same ?

[Fallenangel]

An important point to consider is what if Lucas choose to make TPM in 1976 instead of ANH....what would of happened ?

Now there's a can of worms I just opened up eh ? Would Darth Maul be more popular than Vadar ?

Kids might have wanted Naboo Starfighters instead of X-Wings.....at least R2-D2 and C3PO would be the same ?

Well, we learn next to nothing about Maul from the films whereas Vader had this mystical backstory to him. Sorry, but Vader has my vote. And N-1s in the Prequels don't even come close to the level of character and familiarity we see with the X-wing.

N-1s are shiny, flashy, oddly curvaceous ships which are almost never seen up close, one of which is ultimately a toy for a 9-year old to accidentally blow up a space station with. They are brightly colored (and thus an easier target as well as a method of drawing attention) and just really weird-looking. You never develop any sort of connection with the fighter at all, and I don't even remember whether any of them got blown up during the battle of Naboo. What's more, they ripped off the entire proton torpedo concept from the X-wing, the core from the second Death Star, and even the exhaust port from the first Death Star. The placement of the astromech droid socket required retconning to make astrodroids' heads telescope upward ( ). They don't resemble anything we've ever seen in the Star Wars galaxy other than Padme's ships, all of which are also flashy, chrome, curvaceous, and unlike any other Star Wars ship.

X-wings are the embodiment of the Rebel Alliance; they are small, beat-up, one-man fighters (in accordance with the disorganized ragtag bunch of freedom fighters that the Rebels are) which succeeded in destroying an immense superweapon the size of a small moon (symbolizing the powerful and intimidating presence of the Galactic Empire, its destruction demonstrating the ultimate triumph of good over evil) at the cost of all but three ships out of thirty, including one of Luke's close friends (illustrating the will to accept immense losses so long as their idealistic goals are reached - a rather romantic ideal well suited for great space opera, <insert that tiresome argument> or otherwise). What's more, they are so widely seen in the Star Wars canon that they even have an entire book series about their use, and most everyone who's in their forties now would know what an X-wing is, what it did, and how they did it (Luke used the Force...). There is no way that the yellow blob that is the N-1, surrounded by tons of CGI and no more noticeable than the thousands of lasers, droid fighters, and Lucrehulks flashing across the screen, would stay in a person's mind more than the battered X-wing, its dirty white hull standing out against the blackness of space and the dull gray of the Death Star's trenches.

Nobody would remember Threepio at all because he did absolutely nothing in Episode I, and Artoo would be... Artoo.

Edited February 27, 2011 by fallenangel309

[The Legonater]

The movie starts with a lone Venator, two Howling Eta-2s, and a yellow sun. There is a level of symbolism in Rots, like OBi and Anikan flying wingtip to wingtip into battle to assault Grievous. Why is grievous mechanical? Because thats what the entire droid army is, mechanics, no clone Valor, or bravery. Dooku is killed in the opening scene, why? Lucas needed to display Anikans power, and urge for vengeance against Dooku. Also Lucas needed to show how easily manipulated Anikan was by sidious(Yes Palpatine is a politician, Sidious was the one who manipulated Anikan. I don't think those 'Red Letter Media' Guys really get what the point of sidious leading both sides was. The point of the war was merely to destroy the Jedi, establish an empire, and make Anikan a Sith. Sidious had to have the war for numerous reasons such as:

-To maintain Power over various worlds to make sure that the transition from the Galactic senate, to imperial senate was smooth

-To destroy the jedi.

-Very little known fact: The outer rim sieges were all part of the elaborate plan to draw the republic to the outer rim, then strike to kidnap Palpatine. The real point was so palpie could see him in action.

-To establish power over the senate.

See, that's what a lot of people don't get about RotS. It's very carefully laid out, every detail. People seem to want big obvious statements- I enjoy seeing the little thigns in movies. For example, besides a means of escape, Obi-Wan escaping amung his spare parts and hiding behind an asteroid has a seperate plot point. In episode 5, everyone feel for Han's Star Destroyer trick, except one person. Boba Fett- who had seen the same trick before. It's things like that that George Lucas lays out so well, so subtely, and people take it for granted, or throw it out the window. Palpatine's plot is so careful, and people acuse it of being stupid. The seduction of Anakin wasn't a week long event- it was the carefull layering of 13 years, plus whatever planning went before that.

Why so much time on Coruscant? We needed to see how the chancellor worked his way into the Council, using Anikan as a his Eyes/Ears. We also need to establish how much Anikans relationship with Padme has effected him in his focus on restoring piece-Shes a distraction from the jedi in him.

When the 41st is deployed to Kashyyk we get our first instinct of how thin the jedi are being spread by the war, Yada, a senior member of the council is forced to lead a battalion of clones and defend a somewhat helpless species(The droids would have had certain victory fighting lone wookies).

Obi-Wan is another part of Sidious' plan, without Obi-Wan , and without Yoda, Anikan is left with little guidance. Slowly using Anikans emotions against him and using legends of Sith to unite him with the Sith. It's critical that these scenes were included to show how lost Anikan was at this point. We had to see him grow into Vader, otherwise it's a sloppy transition. Sidious knows Anikan won't kill him on site; he would inform the council.

Windu being killed first a good decision on Lucas' part, hes sort of the all powerful pillar under the jedi order, and temple. If he is killed the only place the order can go is down.

In addition to all this complexity Lucas shows how worlds are effected. Like Utapau, for example, after Order 66 the Pau'ns are arrested and taken away by Codys' men.

The next thing I'd like to adress is Order 66, beautifully done, and I mean beautifully done One of the best scenes in SW if you ask me (Up their with lukes vision of Ben In Anh, telling him to use his instincts, AotC Gunships/Clone Army arrival, and RotJs Death star explosion ). After the AT-TE guns down Obi-wans Lizard, Boga, between its Cry's as it plummets into the water, the music changes and the order crumbles. It was done sooooo well.

When Padme flies to Mustafar, and Anikan chokes her for not joining him seals the deals-He is Sith. "You are lost Anikan" (I think I recall using that word earlier eh?). If you recall at the start of the movie Anikan risks his own life for Obi, but now he defies him and dismisses him as an enemy, character development(The reason Anikan speant the movie with Sidious). Dealing in an 'Absolute' as Obi says. This duel is a great one-The lava makes the scene all the more fantastical.

So after explaining the movie, I think I can conclude that the red letter reviewer needs to invest a bit of time thinking about the movie itself, and not making it as humorous as possible ( ). I'm not putting down the OT in any way, and I'm not saying all the acting was great either, but I am saying that behind the Cgi, occasional poor acting, and writing, thats a pretty damn good movie. Give it a chance next time 'round, and don't dismiss it as 'PT' and walk away.

Agreed. Everything in these movies has a reason, and llike I said above, it's a carefully laid out process. So many people just can't respect that. George, despite his flaws, is a genious. It's a complex process. It's what seperates SW from most of the horrid movies out there.

And that Orderr 66 scene was really cool

[Cad Bane]

YES!! The intricacy is exactly what makes the PT so great. Everything slots together and you see the huge effort and planning it took to get Anakin to join the Sith. OT appeals to your emotions more, but lacks the complexity of the PT. This is why I stand firm in my opinion that PT and OT are one story, you can't say "oh, PT sucks and should have never been made" (I don't think anyone actually said that, but I'm getting that kind of vibe from many people) they are linked and, yes I suppose they both could stand alone (OT more so), and together they can rule the Galaxy as father and son! No, but seriously, it's all Star Wars and it's what makes it great.

On a separate note, I feel that I can't add my vote to the poll because I can't say PT or OT. Can't we have a category for both? (This does not include TCW as it is far from the awesomeness of the OT and PT trilogies AKA Star Wars! That being said, I still believe that it is a good and entertaining show that tells a decent story so please don't put it down it too much.)

[Fallenangel]

YES!! The intricacy is exactly what makes the PT so great. Everything slots together and you see the huge effort and planning it took to get Anakin to join the Sith. OT appeals to your emotions more, but lacks the complexity of the PT. This is why I stand firm in my opinion that PT and OT are one story, you can't say "oh, PT sucks and should have never been made" (I don't think anyone actually said that, but I'm getting that kind of vibe from many people) they are linked and, yes I suppose they both could stand alone (OT more so), and together they can rule the Galaxy as father and son! No, but seriously, it's all Star Wars and it's what makes it great.

On a separate note, I feel that I can't add my vote to the poll because I can't say PT or OT. Can't we have a category for both? (This does not include TCW as it is far from the awesomeness of the OT and PT trilogies AKA Star Wars! That being said, I still believe that it is a good and entertaining show that tells a decent story so please don't put it down it too much.)

As intricate and complex as the Prequels may be, as Plinkett said, most of it makes no sense. In other words, it's superfluously complex. And to add to that, I have to say that while I was watching the films, I really didn't care much about the politics of it all. I admit that I was moderately engaged with Anakin in Clones and Sith, but the whole deal about the agreement between the Trade Federation and the Corporate Alliance or whatever organization went completely over my head. Yes, I realize I sound like your typical stupid Internet nerd, but come on, how much political activity do you see in the Original Trilogy? As I've said, Star Wars is just not a political story. It's even mentioned in Star Wars that the Emperor actually dissolved the Imperial Senate because it was implied that fear of the Death Star would maintain order. Thus we see that part of how the Emperor holds power in his government is by making things simpler to prevent rebellion, something that's symbolized in the cookie-cutter design of the TIE fighter or the triangular shape of the star destroyers. It's comparable to the Party's simplification of language through Newspeak in Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four (see sig) in order to restrict independent thought, thus preventing deviation from the ideals which are promoted by the Party. Vader doesn't go through the complex process of firing an officer, he just kills him. The Empire doesn't try to confiscate the droids from Owen and Beru, they just burn their house down. Furthermore, while considerably simpler than the events of the Prequels, progressing the plot in this way allows the audience to connect with the characters and the plot more. We can expect your average Saturday-morning 8-year old not to know so much about Senate decisions but at least recognize that a guy in black armour who kills a guy and then throws his corpse at a wall is evil. In less than a minute Vader is established as the antagonist, something that took three films over six years to do with Palpatine in the Prequels.

To include a vote for both the Prequels and the Original Trilogy would defeat the purpose of the poll. Yes, you can like both, but then you're irrelevant to the argument. I can say that Evolution and Creation coexist, but that doesn't reinforce the arguments of the people who are advocating one of those issues and not the other. (And no worries moderators, I am not opening up the thread to discuss this serious issue. In fact, I will explicitly request that anyone with an opinion on this not present it anywhere on these forums, in accordance with the wishes of the moderators. Thank you.) It's also kind of like saying, "Well I don't like any of this Star Wars stuff, where's the vote for Babylon 5?"

[The Legonater]

To include a vote for both the Prequels and the Original Trilogy would defeat the purpose of the poll. Yes, you can like both, but then you're irrelevant to the argument. I can say that Evolution and Creation coexist, but that doesn't reinforce the arguments of the people who are advocating one of those issues and not the other. (And no worries moderators, I am not opening up the thread to discuss this serious issue. In fact, I will explicitly request that anyone with an opinion on this not present it anywhere on these forums, in accordance with the wishes of the moderators. Thank you.) It's also kind of like saying, "Well I don't like any of this Star Wars stuff, where's the vote for Babylon 5?"

I'd say we should add a 'Neutral' button. Because let's face it- there's people who are Neutral in this matter.

[Aanchir]

I'd never seen the Red Letter Media reviews- thanks for the referral SimonJedi and Fallenangel. While they're a bit... odd... almost all of the points he made are good arguements why the OT is better than the PT.

Now, I can enjoy watching the PT, and CW, and I've always tried to keep an open mind. But those reviews have reenforced to me that the prequel movies are just not as good as the original. That's not a preference, like I like red and you like blue. The stories aren't as good, the acting isn't as good, and there is just waaaay to much cgi going on. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Star Wars (ie, A New Hope) worked because it was a good story. Just because The Phantom Menace is "Star Wars" and is drowned in cgi effects doesn't mean it's in the same league as Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back.

It's not a generational thing, it's not what you grew up with. It's what's good movie making and what's not.

It actually is a preference. You can say the acting and stories are better in the OT, but "good acting" and "bad acting" are both subjective. In some places and periods of history, overly-dramatic and scripted-sounding acting might have been considered superior due to its stronger impact, whereas in other places and periods of history subtler dramatic cues might have been preferred. And individuals could have differing tastes from one another no matter what the setting. You can break an opinion down into as many valid justifications as you want, but in the end it's still an opinion.

This is why it always bothers me to see people say something is objectively worse than something else, implying that I, or anyone else who might have different opinions, have poorer taste or poorer perception. Nothing wrong with explaining your opinions, of course (I do it all the time), but those explanations don't serve as a reason your opinion is objective or non-preferential, and ideally you want to acknowledge this so you're not unintentionally using them just to bolster your ego with feelings of superiority.

[Churchill]

just to bolster your ego with feelings of superiority.

Well, in all the posts I've made in this forum, I've criticized movies, actors, heck, God forbid, even George Lucas. But I never said anything about any other Eurobricks member.

This post is bringing out the worst in us.

My superior ego won't be posting in here any more.