Blog Posting #3: Arguing about Star Wars and the Artist

So a student emails me and asks, "Just a random question for you. Which Star Wars movies are better, episodes I-III or episodes IV-VI? and why?"

My long-winded response:
s this a test?

The original trilogy. George Lucas wrote the screenplays for the
prequels and they are pretty bad. Oddly enough my girlfriend and I are
currently going through each one. We watched Phantom Menace the other
night and it was pretty unbearable. Maybe a 2 out of 5 stars, but
mostly for special effects. Lucas also directed the prequels, and most
of the actors were not allowed to actually act. A lot of the delivery
of lines is pretty lifeless, making the prequels lack heart. The
original three had different directors and screenwriters, with the
exception of A New Hope. Lucas wrote and directed it, but he was
younger then and it seems many artists lose something with age, some
youthful vigor that allows them to create masterpieces filled energy.
While in their older age, one might think they should be able to
create masterpieces whose success lies/lays not in the energy so much
as the craft. In age, filmmakers, painters, writers, etc. should have
likely learned more about their craft, and where they lack that
certain energy of youth, they make up for it in skill.

Revenge of the Sith is pretty good, but it certainly has its
exceptionally bad parts, such as Padme dying of a broken heart,
Palpatine sounding like Gollum as he transforms, and Vader screaming,
"Nooooo!" No thank you. At least the final battle with Anakin and
Obi-Wan is an emotional one. Lucas' use of pathos there is pretty damn
good, with the music, the actors, the scenery, etc. Though I'm not
sure of that emotional resonance comes more from the previous two
films as opposed to the results of that fight, which are what the
next(previous) three films are about.

Again, if I were 6 years old and watching the prequels versus the
originals, I might have a different point of view. The special effects
in the 70s and 80s are certainly different from the CG of today's
films. It's like comparing apples with oranges, perhaps.

Of course my view is biased by my age. Not that the originals have the
best acting at all times, and dialogue, but then again, a lot of those
films were cutting edge in many ways, whereas these days every other
summer movie has special effects as good as the next film, making the
real thing that matters is the heart or lack thereof.

-Paul

PS: Were you expecting some drawn out answer to this?