OT vs PT

Hell, for 16 years between ROTJ and TPM, the OT was doing just fine without the PT. Whereas the PT was born of a desire to see the back story to the OT.

Yes, the OT could have gone on just fine without the PT, but not the other way around. Not because the OT are better movies though, but because of the way the PT was written and how it ended.

True, the OT could do fine without the PT. However, I think what
Mizukage Yoda meant to say is if the PT had been made first it could have done well even if there was no OT.

i doubt that, look at TESBs magic

Well because of the way the PT ended I doubt it would have worked as a stand alone trilogy. The Empire had just taken over the galaxy, we caught our first glimpse of Darth Vader and most importantly the construction of the Death Star was under way. Not to mention our heroes Yoda and Obi-Wan were still around and there was now two young Skywalkers to worry about. The viewer need to see the OT to find out what happens, otherwise there are to many loose ends.

Well if they altered the end of the ROTS to show the twins dieing in childbirth, Yoda killed by Palpatine, Obi-Wan cathing pneumonia, and Bail Organa and Mon Mothma dieing from a spmotaneous encounter with a Gundark, then the Star Wars Trilogy with just the prequels would be the best example to where the bad guys win.

Only then could it survive without the OT.

Originally posted by darthsith19
What, ppl dindn't like ANH!? I have never heard that from a sw fan before. Sure it has less action and worse saber duels compared to the otehrs but it's THE Original! And it has alot of good lines, and Obi-Wan is awesome in it! The Cantina Bar music and scene, the Death Star, the space battle at the beginning! I LOVE that stuff!

I didn't say I don't like ANH, I just like it less then the other 5 SW movies.