Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Which trilogy is better, I say the episodes 1,2, and 3, but only because of episode 3. Episodes 1 and 2 sucked.

The original trilogy even though Jedi sucks is far better then the new trilogy.No contest.

O.T. By far.

OT>*

OT, it has the two best movies in the saga.

I am old enough to have seen the OT in theaters back in the day.

IMO the PT is much better but ESB is still almost a perfect movie.

i like the new ones better more jedi action and more of my fave caracter darth vader

Originally posted by b-dan
i like the new ones better more jedi action and more of my fave caracter darth vader

Erm, Darth Vader makes an appearance for one episode.

He's in all of the old ones.

You do the math.

I bet you're 11 or something.

The Original Trilogy is far better. Better acting, better story.

Those of you who say the PT is better because of all the flashy CGI effects and lightsaber duels, go rot!

by far the new trilogy, the prequels are superior films.i am 30 yeras old, i saw all of the original star wars films in the theatres,i loved them, played with the toys and to this day am a collectibles and star wars video game geek.the new films are just better in every way EXCEPT that the originals had nothing to live up to, they were new and refreshing for their time.revenge of the sith is the greatest of all star wars films because it sews everything up, and brings purpose to the whole idea that ANAKIN is the chosen one.by killing the emperor in episode 6 he proves this.so, new film trilogy is better to me.thank you!

The acting is a reason I hear for people picking the OT over the PT more than any other reason.
The OT had:
Harrison Ford: Mostly in ESB. He was absolutely great in this movie. In anh and RoJ he was only ok.
Alec Guinness: Great always.
James earl Jones: Great, great , great.

The PT had:
Ewan Mcgregor: A little weak in TPM IMO but absolutely great in the next two. The best Obi wan they could have picked and a great actor, period.
Liam Neeson: Are you kidding me? The only crime is killing him off. What a jedi should be and an exceptional acting performance.
Iam Mcdiarmid: Best in ROTS but he stole the whole movie. Another great actor.
Sammy Jackson: C'mon, its Sammy!

I challenge anyone who boasts the OT had better acting to put up or shut up. No contest, the PT wins going away.

Hands down the best is OT over the PT. OT had well developed characters, thanks to ESB. Without these great characters, Star Wars would be nothing. The PT had very little character development and mostly very weak characters. The only new characters that were good in the PT were Qui Gun Jinn, Dooku, Darth Maul and even then Lucas failed to develop them. The problem with the PT is Lucas had to much control over the movies. He should have given his story to a proper screen writer, got someone else to direct them, let the actors act, and ease off on all the crappy computer ILM effects. OT all the way!

OT. ESB had the biggest suprise in movie history.
Vader: No, I am your father.
That makes ESB the best Star Wars movie.

Originally posted by DARTH LONER
by far the new trilogy, the prequels are superior films.i am 30 yeras old, i saw all of the original star wars films in the theatres,i loved them, played with the toys and to this day am a collectibles and star wars video game geek.the new films are just better in every way EXCEPT that the originals had nothing to live up to, they were new and refreshing for their time.revenge of the sith is the greatest of all star wars films because it sews everything up, and brings purpose to the whole idea that ANAKIN is the chosen one.by killing the emperor in episode 6 he proves this.so, new film trilogy is better to me.thank you!


You're thirty? I am twenty one and my spelling and grammar stomps on yours. Something inside me tells me you're a twelve year old liar.

Originally posted by Canadadude
Hands down the best is OT over the PT. OT had well developed characters, thanks to ESB. Without these great characters, Star Wars would be nothing. The PT had very little character development and mostly very weak characters. The only new characters that were good in the PT were Qui Gun Jinn, Dooku, Darth Maul and even then Lucas failed to develop them. The problem with the PT is Lucas had to much control over the movies. He should have given his story to a proper screen writer, got someone else to direct them, let the actors act, and ease off on all the crappy computer ILM effects. OT all the way!

I post that as my argument to Viking; actors are moot if the characters are too underdeveloped...

Characterization is about as relative as acting skill or music. There really is no debating any of them, I suppose, because people have their own views of what makes all three of those things terrible...or great.

But in keeping with the spirit of this topic, I will give my opinions on the characterization of the OT and the PT.

IMO, as always, the characters in the original trilogy were cliche and stale. The entire storyline, boy meets girl, boy meets bad guy, boy must save princess was done over thousands of times. The PT storyline was much less done before...to the same degree anyway.
The PT still had the boy meets girl thing going on but none of the cheesy story of say, ANH. It was boy who was nothing but slave finds out he is all but a king and chooses that power over what is right thus destroying those around him, including himself.
Much more atune to what I find good storytelling.
Characterization.
What to say? We learn in ESB that Vader is obsessed with finding his boy and we learn what kind of villian he is by his ease at destroying Imperial officers without thinking twice. We learn he will torture the innocent (well solo was hardly innocent) for no good reason at all. We learn how evil he really is. Excellent characterization.

How about Anakin in the PT? While Hayden is not my favorite actor by far, his characterization in the PT was excellent, better than Vader's in the OT, again IMO. We learn he is a self centered, egotistical teen who is scared to lose those around him. We see his skill in the force grow between movies as does his fear. We see how much he loves his wife...or thinks he does. We see how easily he was turned because he wanted to be. We see how messed up he actually is and how he turns into that being in ESB.

Where is the lack of character development? Obi-wan and anakin both had oodles as did Palps. Maybe someone should show me the difference.

I still say OT. The PT characters seemed a bit more stale, other than Obi-Wan and Anakin...

Heya Seepgood.
You can't tell me that Ian's small bit in Jedi, which was admittingly good , overshadowed what he did in Rots or his characterization in the entire PT. No contest.

As for Hayden vs Vader, I think part of that problem is, your are watching a whiny kid in the PT who expects those around him to kiss his ass. You very well know Vader is not going to walk around saying, "I am angry", or, "I want to kill".
Why?
Because that is not his character....but it is Anakin's. Now if you do not like that, thats cool but it is still characterization. They are completely different characters who convey their emotions in completely different ways.
If cheesy dialogue bothers you, please close your ears in the real world because I hear plenty of it everyday.

Hell, I liked Ian's acting in ROTJ a lot. Those lines were more memorable to me, seeing as he was EVIL BEYOND ALL REASON!

ROTS Ian's acting was great, but I mostly just remember 'UNLIMITED POWER!' and a few other lines.

Originally posted by viking12344
Heya Seepgood.
You can't tell me that Ian's small bit in Jedi, which was admittingly good , overshadowed what he did in Rots or his characterization in the entire PT. No contest.
That's not what I meant. You decided to omit his name from the good actors of the OT list on purpose. You listed Samuel Jackson but he had a pretty small role (even though it was of a very important character).

As for Hayden vs Vader, I think part of that problem is, your are watching a whiny kid in the PT who expects those around him to kiss his ass. You very well know Vader is not going to walk around saying, "I am angry", or, "I want to kill".
Why?
Because that is not his character....but it is Anakin's. Now if you do not like that, thats cool but it is still characterization. They are completely different characters who convey their emotions in completely different ways.

There's a difference between a whiny character and literally declaring the purpose of a certain scene. You notice it also in George's audio commentary in AotC. He goes "Now this scene is supposed to set up that Anakin thinks Obi-Wan is holding him back" and then, amazingly, Anakin says "Obi-Wan, I think you're holding me back" or "Padme, he's holding me back" or something else silly to that extant.
A character being whiny is no excuse to bad characterisation - Luke was extremely whiny in A New Hope but it's no where as bad as Anakin.

If cheesy dialogue bothers you, please close your ears in the real world because I hear plenty of it everyday. Yeah, but that's because you watch the PT all the time.

Well, no offense but I also emitted james earl Jones from rots with his small part. I call a push. No matter if he says, "Nooooooooooo!" or "I find your lack of faith disturbing." What Ian did in Jedi with a VERY one dimentional character was good but his acting was superb in the PT.
You can say it hurts my argument but I really can't disagree with that more.
BTW, where does anakin tell Obi-wan he is holding him back? I can think of one part, where he is speaking to padme in aotc where he says that and I see nothing wrong with it. Teenagers whine, especially to their friends.
It seems to me you are basing your argument off of GL's commentary. I suppose anakin could have walked around kicking a wall to show his "whineingness" but why? Luke's character(played by one of the best B movie actor's of all time btw) was no where near as whiny and when he was, especially on Dagobah, he whined up a storm.
Should he have told Yoda the Xwing was immposible to move, whining like a lil girl or should he have just jumped in the swamp, which is as big of a declaration of a scene as possible.

As for cheesy dialogue is just the PT....lol....I suppose I can quote a bunch from all six movies. GL is not a writer.

At least Lucas is consistent.

Just in case we didn't pick up on the subtlety of this fact, he considerately lets us know that

"I'm a visual film-maker, not a literary one - the movie doesn't rest in the dialogue"

ya gotta love it

Ian's performance in Jedi was great. I said that using another adjetive I believe.....but IMO, he stole RoTS and was great in every scene from TPM and AoTC I can think of.
Hell, add him to the OT lineup of great actors. That gives you three plus a voice.

Originally posted by viking12344

As for cheesy dialogue is just the PT....lol....I suppose I can quote a bunch from all six movies. GL is not a writer.

GL seriously isn't a writer, which is why he handed the job to Lawrence Kasdan in ESB and RotJ. Too bad Lawrence turned him down when he asked him to write the PT as well.

I see there's no hope convincing you otherwise. So... the PT is the best of the series, it's a true masterpiece - an epitome of visual effects and acting, the climax which movie making, from its early beginning, has been leading up to. Although Hayden gave the performance of his life, and I'm sure touched many, they should have replaced all the actors with CGI because I believe, as does George Lucas, that digital actors are much easier and better than live ones. My only spite with the PT is that they didn't give Jar-Jar enough screen time. I absolutely loved Jar Jar!
Oh yeah:

There really is no hope of convincing me otherwise. I belive both the OT and the PT to be masterpieces though, no need to be melodramatic.

I love the (soon to be) KotOR Trilogy.

Word, kick it off to myself.

Ot had Vader. NT had Jar Jar ****in binks. Ot wins.

OT Rocks.

Although both are sw and good trilogies there can only be one winner being the PT, i mean seriously- Lightsaber fights PT VS OT- who else laughed in ANH when vader and obi fought, seriously it was bad, And Alec Guiness & Harrison Ford carried the acting for the others in OT, compared to the awesome actors in PT with occasional bad lines, Natile VS Carrie = Natile Hands down, Overall PT less whiny and annoying (except Jar Jar) way better CG tech and ROTS = better then ROTJ
OT gets worse everyday sad but true

Originally posted by viking12344
I am old enough to have seen the OT in theaters back in the day.

IMO the PT is much better but ESB is still almost a perfect movie.

I am too (but I had to settle for the special edition in theaters...)

Originally posted by Sith Solo
Although both are sw and good trilogies there can only be one winner being the PT, i mean seriously- Lightsaber fights PT VS OT- who else laughed in ANH when vader and obi fought, seriously it was bad, And Alec Guiness & Harrison Ford carried the acting for the others in OT, compared to the awesome actors in PT with occasional bad lines, Natile VS Carrie = Natile Hands down, Overall PT less whiny and annoying (except Jar Jar) way better CG tech and ROTS = better then ROTJ
OT gets worse everyday sad but true

But OT had a GOOD storyline, Who cares about the flashy special effects when you can have a good story... AND NO JAR JAR. (Phantom Menace may have actually been good without Jar Jar Binks... WHO SUCKS!)

The good thing about the OT is that it never took itself to seriously, i mean ewoks defeated the emperors best troop sfor god sakes! The problem with the PT is that it tries to take itself seriously, even with the blundering idiot named after a jar. The PT continuosly fails at staying on the subject and with the ultimate main character (anakin) and instead relies to much on special effects. It foccueses on pod races, and random bad guys and never even takes enough time to explain what the prophecy is. I just hope that the new T.V. series won't be half as bad...

The ewoks more than cancel out Jar-Jar......seriously

The Original Trilogy had one problem, Return of the Jedi. Cut the Ewoks from the film and you have a decent movie, the ewoks suck and anyone who disagrees is wrong. The Prequels had many things wrong, of course Jar Jar, but I won't beat that dead horse anymore. Anakin in episode II should have been strangled by Obi-Wan and decapitated by Master Yoda. The only right thing was Episode III. The Original Trilogy is and will always be the best and anyone who says otherwise is either retarded or in love with Hayden Christenson

Jar Jar Binks makes The Ewoks look cooler than Marty McFly in a flying DeLorean, picking up Samuel M Jackson and then doing a drive by with proton packs, in space.

Seriously, OT wins everytime.

Anyone who picks the ewoks over jar-jar has either:
1. A teddy bear fetish or:
2.A severe crack problem

I have both so I don't care.

Ewoks own Jar Jar any day.

LOL

Wouldt GL be the one with the Teddy Bear fettish and a strange compassion for jars.

Both suck. OT had cliche characters, Luke, Ewoks, TIE fighters, hyperdrives, and that Parsec line.

PT was only good for Episode one and shot itse;f in the foot afterwards.

Koroni, I despise that reasoning.

Everything about Star Wars is cheesey and cliche; can't use that as an argument.

While I'm at it, no such thing as a Grey Sith, and never will be.

Well, Rex where are you now?

Right here?

Yes superfly, I agree that GL would have to be. But there are several parts of the female anatomy that I could classify myself a fetish fan over and did not create.

Originally posted by CrazyOcelot
At least Lucas is consistent.

Just in case we didn't pick up on the subtlety of this fact, he considerately lets us know that

"I'm a visual film-maker, not a literary one - the movie doesn't rest in the dialogue"

ya gotta love it

He was basically admitting to hideous dialogue in the PT, then...not a very good excuse for stuffing up a trilogy that we've been waiting 20 years for, is it? He could have got someone to help him with the dialogue and the directing, like he did with the originals, but nooooooo...he had to do it himself...

As for Anakin being a whiny teenager - that's bullcrap. Shouldn't have happened, simple as that. Anyone trained in the Jedi arts is above hormones and adolescence - what, do you think Obi-wan or Yoda acted like this when they were this age? I think not, certainly not to this extent. All that 'holding me back' crap sounded like Robin in 'Batman and Robin' (which I might remind you, is the worst Batman film EVER).

Originally posted by viking12344
Ian's performance in Jedi was great. I said that using another adjetive I believe.....but IMO, he stole RoTS and was great in every scene from TPM and AoTC I can think of.
Hell, add him to the OT lineup of great actors. That gives you three plus a voice.

He stole the show in ROTS, because, surprise, surprise - HE WAS THE ONLY ONE IN PT THAT CONVINCINGLY PORTRAYED HIS ROLE!

But I don't place the blame squarely on the PT actors - in fact, I blame most of it on their poor scripts, and having to act in front of a blue screen all the time.

The Anakin and Obi-wan scenes in ROTS actually portrayed a convincing relationship between master and apprentice, and I actually felt pity for Anakin this time around. However, the Anakin and Padme scenes were truly horrendous. The Anakin/Padme dynamic had nothing on the Solo/Leia dynamic.

I don't agree with that one bit. I think Ewan McGregor was the best actor in either trilogy. Most will probably disagree and call out Ford but do they really think Ford portrayed his role better or do they like the role (wise ass space pirate turned good guy) he played more. I would have to say they enjoyed who the character was more. I know that even I would agree with that. Mcgregor was fantastic in front of a blue screen....which is also no easy task. He may have been a little rough in TPM but so was Ford in ANH.


The point is not what the creator is trying to achieve...it's what trilogy we like better. Good info regardless. I enjoyed reading it.


I agree. Ford is a great actor and IMO, carried every last one of those scenes. You put in another actor with Fisher and we may not even be having this discussion. Portman is an OK actress but was stale in the entire PT. Hayden, while convincingly playing the role in RoTS fell short of the mark.

funny comments

Originally posted by theredbaron
He was basically admitting to hideous dialogue in the PT, then...not a very good excuse for stuffing up a trilogy that we've been waiting 20 years for, is it? He could have got someone to help him with the dialogue and the directing, like he did with the originals, but nooooooo...he had to do it himself...

As for Anakin being a whiny teenager - that's bullcrap. Shouldn't have happened, simple as that. Anyone trained in the Jedi arts is above hormones and adolescence - what, do you think Obi-wan or Yoda acted like this when they were this age? I think not, certainly not to this extent. All that 'holding me back' crap sounded like Robin in 'Batman and Robin' (which I might remind you, is the worst Batman film EVER). How do I think Yoda acted during puberty? Rumor has it he raped a d murdered anything he could get his ha ds on

Yoda was training with the baby lightsaber and ball that shoots lasers with the other green puppets by Darth Playgous before he turned to the dark side.

That's how Yoda learned how to teach children how to be jedi in AOTC and how Obi-wan taught Luke in ANH because Han Solo likes to carry jedi training stuff because he's a smuggler.

See, it's like poetry so that they rhyme. Every stanza sort of rhymes with the last one... Hopefully that makes sense.