Does anybody ENJOY Star Wars anymore?

[Henry B 50]

It's just not very ... "cinematically cool" to show babies with light sabers. It would be much better if they started at 12, but then the target audience wouldn't be able to identify with it anymore, of course.

How about Obi-Wan's conversation with Dex? That didn't seem very appealing to little kids to me.

[A24 4,331]

Yeah, you right, one has to be at least a 40-something to appreciate Dex!

[Henry B 50]

Certainly not 40, but he doesn't make too much sense to six-year-olds, the supposed target audience.

[John Crichton 4]

What's Lucas going to do next? I don't know about films, but...

The rumors currently spinning around the SW community are about a TV series. Reportedly, it would take place between Episodes 3 and 4, and depending on who you listen to the main focus will be on either Vader or Boba Fett. But it's all rumor, take it for what you will.

[A24 4,331]

Certainly not 40, but he doesn't make too much sense to six-year-olds, the supposed target audience.

What makes you say that? Let me tell you what six year olds see in him. They see a four-armed friend of Obi One. A friend he can trust.

----------------

Alex Cremers

[Ray Barnsbury 8]

Yeah, you right, one has to be at least a 40-something to appreciate Dex!

You mean IQ?

Ray Barnsbury

[Henry B 50]

What makes you say that? Let me tell you what six year olds see in him. They see a four-armed friend of Obi One. A friend he can trust.

I don't think, though, that they take in much of what he's saying, like the commentaries on droids.

[Rogue_Leader 2]

Lucas is so friggin fickle. He could be dead set on a project 1 minute and determined to do something completely different the next.

[Rogue_Leader 2]

You know I think I would stop blasting Lucas if he would seriously just give me the "un-bastardized" SW films. I mean yeah the PRequels would still suck but at least I could have the untarnished "classic" trilogy.

[A24 4,331]

Yeah, you right, one has to be at least a 40-something to appreciate Dex!

You mean IQ?

[Dean1700 4]

I'm gonna weigh into this topic by saying if someone decided to make a special edition of the 1933 film King Kong, replacing the jerky stop motion KK with a new CGI creation, would it still be the same movie. Would it still carry the same appeal to it when it did when it was first seen over 70 years ago?

Visually, yes it would be the same film but small or minor changes can effect the overall "feel" to the movie. It would feel different in the fact that a certain scene you remember sitting and watching in awe of and how you felt at that moment has been changed and you no longer feel the same emotion or you feel that that emotion has been lost with the scene that has been changed. There are many people who would abhore the changes made to a film considered a classic, whose special effects were at the fore front of technology at the time. And this is the same with Star Wars considered a classic good vs evil flick whose spfx were also at the forefront of technology at the time.

For me some of the extra dialogue in the film, using Star Wars as the prime example (C-3PO letting the gang know where the tractor beam is coupled to and the Stormtrooper saying "close the blast door") don't sit right in the Special Editons. Neither does the "Dirty Harry .357 Magnum" blaster sound effects used by Princess Leia during the Chasm fight.

On the flip side there were some good things to see included into the films ie The Millennium Falcon's launch from Docking Bay 94, and the launch of the X-wings. I also liked the inclusion of Jabba The Hutt and Luke meeting Biggs before take off since these two scenes were original scenes (albeit with CGI Jabba) dropped from the final cut but I didn't like seeing Boba Fett.

While some changes are beneficial others are not and while "revamping" some films can open it up to a new audience, ie Metropolis updated by Giorgio Morodor 1984 (an outstanding version of the film giving greater appreciation for the original), those that do seek to "enhance" old movies risk losing audience appeal or favour.

[Lurker 5]

For me some of the extra dialogue in the film, using Star Wars as the prime example (C-3PO letting the gang know where the tractor beam is coupled to and the Stormtrooper saying "close the blast door") don't sit right in the Special Editons.

Those lines were in the mono mix.

Neil

[Luke Skywalker 1,795]

You know I think I would stop blasting Lucas if he would seriously just give me the "un-bastardized" SW films. I mean yeah the PRequels would still suck but at least I could have the untarnished "classic" trilogy.

He will, and i will be there to remind you what your posted.

You post count will rise step by step since that day

[Rogue_Leader 2]

Sorry, but I just dont see the Classic Trilogy coming anytime soon. That at least gives me another 10-12 years worth of good healthy Lucas bashing.

-Rogue Leader who feels he may regret that promise he made.

[Edmilson 7,436]

This thread was created almost two decades ago, and the question it poses is still as relevant now as it was then, maybe even more so: does anybody still enjoy SW?

 

I certainly don't.

[JNHFan2000 2,959]

I do

[Holko 9,525]

TROS, Boba and Obi completely destroyed my interest in anything new and SW, except for Andor. Though I'm happy to say I still enjoyed the OT immensely when I watched the theatrical restorations again not that long ago.

[Sweeping Strings 2,357]

This thread not only pre-dates Lucas selling Star Wars to Disney, it even pre-dates ROTS. Wonder how its creator feels these days? 

[Chen G. 3,949]

Difficult question. I still think by far the best essay ever written about Star Wars is this piece which makes a very serious argument that "the cultural industry that the 1977 film spawned has ground its original charm and wonder out of existence." Later on, Mr. Kreider goes on, quite damningly, to explain:
 

Quote

The success of “Star Wars” has obviated a lot of its original virtues. Much of the fun of watching the film for the first time, now forever inaccessible to us, was in the slow unveiling of its universe: Swords made of lasers! A Bigfoot who co-pilots a spaceship! A swing band of ’50s U.F.O. aliens! Mr. Lucas refuses to explain anything, keeping the viewer as off-balance as a jet-lagged tourist in Benares or Times Square. We don’t see the film’s hero until 17 minutes in; we’re kept watching not by plot but by novelty, curiosity.

 

Subsequent sequels, tie-in novels, interstitial TV shows, video games and fan fiction have lovingly ground this charm out of existence with exhaustive, literal-minded explication: Every marginal background character now has a name and a back story, every offhand allusion a history. But Mr. Lucas’s universe just doesn’t have the depth of Tolkien’s Middle-earth; it was only ever meant to be sketched, not charted. Sequels and tie-ins, afraid to stray too far off-brand, stick to variations on familiar designs and revive old characters, so there’s nothing new to discover.

 

I think that's very accurate, and speaks very much to the situation the series is in today.

 

An analogy I would put forth is that of a feast that's more entremets than mets: There's simply more palette cleansers (those being all the films and shows shoved between the "story" entries) than there is actual food. It very much takes the throughline of a story that Lucas tried (however unsuccesfully) to thread across the five films, and loosens it to the point that its effectivelly become the third major comic-book franchise alongside Marvel and DC: the storytelling is one of vignettes, like a comic-book.

[Gabriel Bezerra 302]

42 minutes ago, Edmilson said:

This thread was created almost two decades ago, and the question it poses is still as relevant now as it was then, maybe even more so: does anybody still enjoy SW?

 

I certainly don't.

 

Saw the title and thought it was a recent thread (only 3 pages)... and it's just a bit younger than me.

 

I enjoyed pretty much everything to a certain extent, some more than others, the things I enjoyed in TRoS are not enough for me not to hate it, and remains the only unwatchable Star Wars-thing for me. But I do not scream with enthusiasm like my peers do, the only recent shows I'm particularly enthusiastic about are Andor and Bad Batch.

[Giftheck 916]

5 minutes ago, Gabriel Bezerra said:

 

Saw the title and thought it was a recent thread (only 3 pages)... and it's just a bit younger than me.

 

I enjoyed pretty much everything to a certain extent, some more than others, the things I enjoyed in TRoS are not enough for me not to hate it, and remains the only unwatchable Star Wars-thing for me. But I do not scream with enthusiasm like my peers do, the only recent shows I'm particularly enthusiastic about are Andor and Bad Batch.

 

Pretty much my view (except maybe Bad Batch). I'm also not that enthusiastic about the gaming side, but that's because we've had very little during EA's time with the exclusive contract, and now it's opened up, I'm not seeing much worth getting hyped up over there either.

[filmmusic 1,826]

1 hour ago, Edmilson said:

This thread was created almost two decades ago, and the question it poses is still as relevant now as it was then, maybe even more so: does anybody still enjoy SW?

 

I certainly don't.

From the Star Wars universe, I have seen only the 9 films.

I still enjoy the truly original trilogy (I mean not the altered one), and I have stayed away from anything else (either TV series, or re-watching the prequels and sequels).

I don't need anything else than the original trilogy. That is enough for me.

[Gabriel Bezerra 302]

18 minutes ago, Giftheck said:

 

Pretty much my view (except maybe Bad Batch). I'm also not that enthusiastic about the gaming side, but that's because we've had very little during EA's time with the exclusive contract, and now it's opened up, I'm not seeing much worth getting hyped up over there either.

Didn't even remember the games... (heard the comics are also good, have to check them some time)

I like linear games (pretty much the only kind of game I play beyond the Lego ones) so I loved Fallen Order and Survivor (the latter I haven't played but watched because I was excited) and Battlefront II got me in a "tough" period and so I have fond memories that push me into playing it again, it's fun. But I really do not care for flight simulaltions and open worlds... so not really getting hyped either.

[JTN 2,007]

I haven’t enjoyed STAR WARS since 1997 when the OT was re-released in theaters. 
I didn’t like the prequels and the last SW “content” I ever saw was The Force Awakens, which I loathed. 
To me Star Wars is and forever will be a trilogy, Episodes IV, V & VI. 

[Chen G. 3,949]

7 minutes ago, JTW said:

To me Star Wars is and forever will be a trilogy, Episodes IV, V & VI.

 

I actually think we (including Lucas himself) do the films a disservice by lumping them up into trilogies, because the nuance of the individual sensibilities, strengths and weaknesses of each film become drowned in that.

 

For instance, I like Episode III more than Episode VI, and I probably dislike Episode II more than IX.

[JTN 2,007]

19 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

actually think we (including Lucas himself) do the films a disservice by lumping them up into trilogies,

Well, George Lucas created the Star Wars universe, he wanted to make 3 trilogies. If it’s a good thing or not that’s up for debate. Imho he never should have made the prequels, it was completely unnecessary to know how Anakin Skywalker became Darth Vader, or at least in a totally different way than Lucas did. I would’ve made the sequels and maybe after that the prequels. Imho Lucas waited too long to make another SW film and he had too much creative control, no real feedback and no limitations that could have kept him in control, and he himself lost his touch of what story he wanted to tell. I think there was so much pressure on him that he almost “had to” make another trilogy, and he wasn’t passionate anymore, and his vanity wouldn’t let him hand the directing duties over to another director.

 

I don’t even want to talk about the Disney films because I don’t even consider them Star Wars.

[Chen G. 3,949]

8 minutes ago, JTW said:

George Lucas created the Star Wars universe, he wanted to make 3 trilogies.

 

Debatable.

 

And at any rates, he would like us to think those trilogies are homgenous, but they are anything but. I mean, even in the prequel trilogy, each of the three films barely look a thing alike.

 

8 minutes ago, JTW said:

he had too much creative control, no real feedback and no limitations that could have kept him in control, and he himself lost his touch of what story he wanted to tell.

 

I never bought this argument, partially because nobody has ever been able to cite good examples of how the situation was any different on the set of the 1977 film. I've yet to see one documented example where Lucas wanted to do something a certain way, and his crew went rogue on him and did another way, or anything like that.

 

Its just a simplistic way for people to explain why they like X and don't like Y. Its a stock excuse that goes back decades: one review of Doctor Zhivago suggested that David Lean needed Sam Spiegel to keep him in check, which is exactly the kind of argument being levelled at Lucas here. Bogus on both accounts, methinks.

[enderdrag64 624]

11 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

I never bought this argument, partially because nobody has ever been able to cite good examples of how the situation was any different on the set of the 1977 film. I've yet to see one documented example where Lucas wanted to do something a certain way, and his crew went rogue on him and did another way, or anything like that.

Aren't you forgetting about how Marcia Lucas convinced him to keep in the Tosche Station scenes against his better judgement because she edited them? 

[Chen G. 3,949]

Right. I believe Marcia also considered keeping the Jabba scene, because she liked (actually, quite rightly) Han's entrance into the shot.

 

Her position as some sort of "saviour" of Star Wars is fallacious, and Marcia herself admits to this. Much the same is true of producer Gary Kurtz.

[Tallguy 3,385]

Original Question: Hell yes.

 

(It would be a lot harder without the, er, methods that we have to watch the originals. Wow, even contemplating that not being possible gives me the shakes. Seriously.)

 

If the question is really "Do I enjoy NEW Star Wars"? Quite a bit. I love Andor. Bad Batch. Rebels. I find almost all of the other Disney stuff watchable.

 

There hasn't been much that I enjoy as much as Star Wars. Ever. So that's a high bar.

 

"We Can’t See ‘Star Wars’ Anymore"? Well, can we really see Casablanca anymore? Even when I saw it the first time I knew a lot of it. By this time it nearly has Star Wars / Wrath of Khan status. I can't really experience it as a movie.

 

But you who still can? If they want to? Kids. Someone is seeing Star Wars for the first time. And while I don't think Star Wars is a "kids movie" I realize that when I saw Star Wars I didn't "get" how much of it was homage, pastiche, rip off, whatever. I just loved it because it was Star Wars. Still do.

 

5 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Its just a simplistic way for people to explain why they like X and don't like Y. Its a stock excuse that goes back decade: one review of Doctor Zhivago suggested that David Lean needed Sam Spiegel to keep him in check, which is exactly the kind of argument being levelled at Lucas here. Bogus on both accounts, methinks.

 

Maybe he needed himself to keep himself in check. Whatever the limitation was, it wasn't there.

[Chen G. 3,949]

15 minutes ago, Tallguy said:

"We Can’t See ‘Star Wars’ Anymore"? Well, can we really see Casablanca anymore? Even when I saw it the first time I knew a lot of it. By this time it nearly has Star Wars / Wrath of Khan status. I can't really experience it as a movie.

 

But you who still can? If they want to? Kids. Someone is seeing Star Wars for the first time.

 

I feel like in the case of Star Wars, its more significant because the film got "buried" not just under its own popularity, but under the huge media series it spawned. Its the entry that feels the most out-of-step with the larger series, and while its better than most other entries in the series, next to them (especially taken together) it can seem a little...quaint.

 

And really, that's a problem that also extents to kids because I feel like a kid in 2023 is much more likely to get into Star Wars by catching one of the later movies or one of the new shows on TV and only eventually making their way to the film that started it all, and the chance of them finding it...quaint, as I said, is not insignificant as a result.

[Gabriel Bezerra 302]

7 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

And really, that's a problem that also extents to kids because I feel like a kid in 2023 is much more likely to get into Star Wars by catching one of the later movies or one of the new shows on TV and only eventually making their way to the film that started it all, and the chance of them finding it...quaint, as I said, is not insignificant as a result.

A friend of mine saw random episodes of The Clone Wars when he was a kid, and recently (about 4 years ago) started the movies with The Phantom Menace... and didn't really liked the Original Trilogy, he prefers the time period of the prequels. He still hasn't really gave me a solid reason of why, but I imagine he found the OT... quaint.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,516]

I've not seen any of the telly shows, but I enjoy the O.T., and I enjoy the P.T. I like THE LAST JEDI, I tolerate THE FORCE AWAKENS, and I am physically sick at the thought of THE RISE OF SKYWALKER.

[Chen G. 3,949]

12 hours ago, Gabriel Bezerra said:

He still hasn't really gave me a solid reason of why, but I imagine he found the OT... quaint.

 

Its a difficult thing. Michael Kaminski makes the argument that, for instance, the early Tatooine scenes with the Droids only work if you don't know anything about Tatooine and so are with the Droids in their venture into this new alien world. After a prequel trilogy that spends way more time in Tattooine than it should (which is to say nothing of Obi Wan et al), that sense of the mystique is lost and the scenes drag.

 

Also, the location spotting in the original film is not as good as in some other entries (whether they include Tatooine or an ersatz Tatooine like Geonosis, Jedha, Jakku et al), so it becomes harder to become as impressed with the footage of the Tunisian desert as people had in 1977. And I'm not even getting into the issue that - after we saw Tatooine's antecedents of Arrakis and Barsoom realised much, much better - it becomes even harder still to take the Tatooine of 1977 very seriously.

 

Similar arguments can be made for just about every other part of the film. Certainly, the lightsaber fight from 1977 was never particularly impressive, but TODAY it seems all the quainter.

 

And then there's the rhetorical side of it all. If one was unfortunate enough to hear or read a post-1980 interview of Lucas' and get a load of all his talk of Joseph Campbell and then go into the film expecting some serious meditation of mythopeia... its again going to seem all the quainter.

[mrbellamy 6,282]

I've always been more of a John Williams fan than a Star Wars fan, so Star Wars is kinda just back to how I was thinking of it between 2005 and 2015, which is not much. Star Wars and Empire Strikes Back are great movies. The rest of the saga I mostly enjoy thinking about as pop culture objects and remembering for their best music moments, not really as favorite movies. Although I have especially fun memories seeing Revenge of the Sith and Force Awakens the first time...I actually saw both again in a theater this summer and they're still a blast on a big screen but with diminishing returns since their premieres. 

 

I've also seen Rogue One, Solo, Mandalorian 1-2, and Obi-Wan, none of which live "rent free" in my head as the kids say, unlike the saga movies (yeah, even Rise of Skywalker.) I am somewhat curious about Andor given the raves, but it sounds more interesting as a Tony Gilroy thing than a Star Wars thing. 

[Edmilson 7,436]

24 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Similar arguments can be made for just about every other part of the film. Certainly, the lightsaber fight from 1977 was never particularly impressive, but TODAY it seems all the quainter.

 

Indeed. Kids these days (and by "these days" I mean those born after the OT had finished its run, from the 90s onwards) would hardly find the Obi-Wan vs Vader fight from ANH all that impressive or thrilling, especially when they can easily find more "epic" lightsaber battles on the newer movies, animated shows or even YouTube.

[Chen G. 3,949]

Right. And I don't think we can hinge that issue entirely on philistinism on the part of kids. Its a combination of that fight being ho-hum, and some of the later fights not necessarily being better (although many of them are) but definitely being more dynamic.

 

And that's without considering other films that have come out since which don't have lightsabres, but do have swordplay.

[JTN 2,007]

2 minutes ago, Edmilson said:

Kids these days (and by "these days" I mean those born after the OT had finished its run

I first saw Star Wars in the 80s, on VHS and I was impressed by the Obi-Wan - Darth Vader lightsaber duel. Later I saw Empire and was even more impressed, and then Return of the Jedi and I loved it. 
If a kid sees Star Wars, no matter when they were born, are impressed by it, because it’s a timeless classic. Of course if they see the prequels or sequels or the tv shows first , they won’t be that impressed by the duel, but they should be by the story and the world. It all depends on the timing. If a kid grows up on Avatar and comic book movies, they won’t be that impressed by the visuals of Star Wars, but Lucas’ films were always about story first, everything else second. The effects only help tell the story. And a child will appreciate good storytelling, regardless of what era they see it in.

The OT will always be the quintessential Star Wars, simply because it has the best story and the best music. 

[mrbellamy 6,282]

It also depends on what's meant by kids. A 10-year-old seeing Star Wars for the first time after being exposed to the whirlwind of today's media might be too jaded by that point, as opposed to 10-year-olds in the 70s who went wild for it. But a 3-year-old wouldn't know the difference and think it was made yesterday. Star Wars is a movie like The Wizard of Oz or older Disney films or Willy Wonka that I think will always work on children until they get too savvy and the magic wears off. Otherwise as an adult you can hope to come back around and appreciate these things for their finer qualities. 

[Chen G. 3,949]

17 hours ago, JTW said:

but they should be by the story and the world.

 

I feel like even in that department, other films since Star Wars - both in that series and outside it - have at least done elements of the Star Wars story better. If you're a kid in 2023 and you've seen The Force Awakens, and then you go back and see "the original", its not going to feel as engrossing, and not because The Force Awakens is better. The Phantom Menace also uses quite a few story beats from the original (its based on one of its earlier drafts) and again, its not that its better, but it is going to cast a pall over seeing those same beats mounted "again" in seeing the original later.

 

And, again, the "rescue the princess" premise had arguably been done better in stuff like Curse of the Black Pearl. The "unlikely hero" was done better in The Lord of the Rings. The bombing run was recently done better in Maverick, the desert planet was done WAY better not just in later Star Wars entries, but especially in both Dune and John Carter, etc...

[mrbellamy 6,282]

Do any of us even have kids right now? I feel like we're all talking out our ass. My little brother born in 2002 loved the Three Stooges as a kid even though he was also obsessed with Revenge of the Sith, Pirates, and Spider-Man. I put on Abel Gance's Napoleon VHS and he happened to walk by and he was bizarrely captivated by it, he was about 12 and watched the whole fucking thing with me lmao. Some stuff really doesn't age. 

[Chen G. 3,949]

Not yet, but I do see some of this through the eyes of one of at least one of my younger cousins.

 

I also see it through myself as an adult: I only saw Star Wars for the first time in 2015. Was I terribly impressed? Not really, no. Part of that was my age, but part of that was that I saw Episodes I and II (not III) and a lot of other films with similar elements BEFORE I saw it. Whereas The Empire Strikes Back did have some lustre for me.

[Manakin Skywalker 4,891]

On 05/07/2004 at 9:17 AM, Luke Skywalker said:

He will, and i will be there to remind you what your posted.

You post count will rise step by step since that day

 

[JTN 2,007]

14 minutes ago, Edmilson said:

they can easily find more "epic" lightsaber battles on the newer movies

The lightsaber fights in the OT were organic, integral parts of the story, they were much more dramatic therefore more “epic” than the “big epic” ls fights of the pt. 
Luke vs. Vader in Empire or in RotJ are the greatest ls fights because they’re not just about two people trying to be fancy, spinning their sabers like batons, but their every move means something, and when Vader attacks luke at Bespin, we can feel his power and feel Luke’s fear when he realizes the true power of Vader, that he was toying with him up until then. And when Vader cuts Luke’s hand off, we feel his pain and it means something. All those “epic” fancy ls fights in the prequels are less meaningful, because they’re “too much”. When Darth Vader turns on Luke’s lightsaber behind Luke’s back on Endor, one literally stops breathing because it’s so frightening. Again, it has a meaning, it has weight to it. Star Wars after the OT has lost its weight and became too light, childish. Yes, even with all the killings, it feels hollow and meaningless, at least to me, compared to the brilliance of the original trilogy. 

[Chen G. 3,949]

3 minutes ago, JTW said:

Luke vs. Vader in Empire or in RotJ are the greatest ls fights because they’re not just about two people trying to be fancy, spinning their sabers like batons, but their every move means something, and when Vader attacks luke at Bespin, we can feel his power and feel Luke’s fear when he realizes the true power of Vader

 

That's all true.

 

But its not true, particularly, of the one in the 1977 film. That one is totally unlike the ones in The Empire Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi, it seems to me (which again goes to show its wrong to lump these things into trilogies).

 

And, again, it doesn't necessarily have to be a worst fight to be overshadowed by lightsabre fights that have come out since.

[JTN 2,007]

7 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

If you're a kid in 2023 and you've seen The Force Awakens, and then you go back and see "the original", its not going to feel as engrossing, and not because The Force Awakens is better.

I see what you mean, but I disagree. The Force Awakens may have better visual effects, but lacks the heart and soul of STAR WARS. And I believe and hope that a smart kid can tell the difference. 

[Chen G. 3,949]

3 minutes ago, JTW said:

The Force Awakens may have better visual effects, but lacks the heart and soul of STAR WARS. And I believe and hope that a smart kid can tell the difference. 

 

Oh, I agree completely!

 

But, one, certain isolated aspects of it ARE better - or more impressively mounted - than the original. The acting comes to mind, for instance.

 

AND, again, it doesn't have to be better to "overshadow" the original or take the novelty out of it.

[JTN 2,007]

14 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

That one is totally unlike the ones in The Empire Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi, it seems to me.

Yes, the Ben vs Vader fight is indeed different, mostly because Alec Guinness couldn’t fight like a young person, so it had to be toned down for him. But still, Obi-Wan is also old and we know that the Force is with him and he doesn’t need fancy moves to fight. And in the end, he “gives up”, chooses to “die”, and while certainly not an “epic” fight by any means, it has its meaning and weight, mostly because of Luke’s reaction when he sees them fight and Obi-Wan’s end, and his reaction becomes the audience’s reaction, which shows the ingenius storytelling of George Lucas. That fight is not about the “fight”, but a master meeting his old pupil and friend who’s become “twisted and evil”. Obi-Wan wants to win some time for his friends to escape from the Death Star, he knows he’ll “lose”, but he faces Vader, because that’s what a Jedi does. I think it’s a wonderfully conceived and executed story arc. 

11 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

AND, again, it doesn't have to be better to "overshadow" the original or take the novelty out of it.

Agreed. 
When people first saw Star Wars, they were blown away by it. Since the prequels and sequels and all the cgi movies people have seen so many great effects that STAR WARS now has much less impact on them. That’s why great storytelling matters so much, and that’s why the OT will always be the best, because both the prequels and especially the sequels lack them. And no fancy lightsaber fight can make up for a bad story.

[Chen G. 3,949]

12 minutes ago, JTW said:

That’s why great storytelling matters so much, and that’s why the OT will always be the best

This is again where I feel it’s wrong to lump these up as trilogies, because story-wise Star Wars is pretty good, yes; The Empire Strikes Back splendid…and then we get to the Second-Death-Star-sized elephant in the room…

[Tallguy 3,385]

26 minutes ago, mrbellamy said:

Do any of us even have kids right now? I feel like we're all talking out our ass.

 

I do! Two teenagers, girl and boy. My boy and I saw Jedi in the theater earlier this year. The three of us watch Ahsoka every week.

 

Star Wars is definitely Dad's movie. Neither of them like the PT, we all like the ST to varying degrees. Everyone LOVES Rebels. As they see more and more of the World and the Lore they appreciate the OT and where it all came from. My son likes to dig into The Stuff of the movies and shows (neither of them are into any of the books or comics) and know the history that makes up the shows he watches now. My daughter engages with it through the Lego Games as much as anything.

 

From their point of view I don't think there is a "first time they saw" for any of the original 6. It's just kind of been in the air since they were babies. But we saw all of the movies in their life time on opening day.