If I had my way, he'd be thrown head first into a sarlacc pit.

A Challenger to Armond White appears?

He is entitled to his opinion. And we are entitled to beat the crap out of him for it.

Does subby own a rug that really tied the room together?

His lack of faith disturbs me...

FirstNationalBastard: A Challenger to Armond White appears?

My sentiments exactly.

The difference is that the original trilogy appealed directly to the simplistic moral perspective of an America above reproach and always on the side of right in global geopolitics, whereas the much more subversive prequel trilogy stands in defiant counterpoint to the much more dangerously simplistic moral absolutism of the Age of Bush.

No, you idiot. The original trilogy worked because it followed the classic archetype of western mythos that's been well-established over thousands of years, whereas the prequels were a gibbering incomprehensible mess that offered no clear-cut characters who changed except in the most superficial ways, and were an example of bad filmmaking. Trying to squeeze topical politicism into an argument for or against the films is beyond stupid.

JosephFinn: I actually heard someone this week try to make a argument for Return of the Jedi, the 2nd best Star Wars movie, as the worst of all six. Of course, he also seemed to think Attack of the Clones was better than Phantom Menace, so we know all about his level of taste.

Goodness rankings of the six movies

1. ESB
2. ANH
3. RotS
4. RotJ
5. TPM
6. AotC

The prequels are better movies. As usual, the best art is not understood by most people.

For technical quality, of course the prequel is better. As for the acting, the original trilogy was far better. For writing, both trilogies have their weak points and strong points. The best episode of the prequel is "The Clone Wars." The best episode of all is "The Empire Strikes Back." More than 30 years old and it still holds up very well.

It's funny to see the two trilogies compared to each other. Audiences now are much more technically savvy -- and just plain nitpicky -- than they were back in 1977 when the first movie came out. In a way, people nowadays are much more jaded when it comes to their blockbuster movies, so they're far more demanding. When the original "Star Wars" came out, no one knew what to expect. Its success caught Hollywood completely off guard. There were theaters that showed the first movie for more than six months straight in its first release. I saw it in May, and then again in October or November at the same theater, still playing on the same screen.

Say what you will about the original trilogy. The success of "Star Wars" had Hollywood scrambling to bring something similar to television. The result was the original "Battlestar Galactica" on ABC. If it wasn't for that show, we wouldn't have had the excellent re-boot version of that series a few years back.

I know it's a cliche to bring up the significant impact of the original "Star Wars", but it is still true. It was a HUGE success when it came out. It filled a void in our collective psyche and its impact is still being felt today, even though people who weren't alive back then just take it all for granted now.

JosephFinn: I actually heard someone this week try to make a argument for Return of the Jedi, the 2nd best Star Wars movie, as the worst of all six. Of course, he also seemed to think Attack of the Clones was better than Phantom Menace, so we know all about his level of taste.

All Jedi had was a bunch of muppets.

I'm just gonna go on record and say that the first Star Wars movie should be called "Star Wars," not "A New Hope." I don't give a rat's ass what fanboys think. That's what it was called when I saw it the theater in '77, and that's what it'll always be.

Get off my lawn, you scruffy-looking nerf herders.

1) Empire Strikes Back
2) A New Hope
3) Return of the Jedi
4) The Clone Wars (TV series)
5) The Clone Wars (Movie)
6) Revenge of the Sith
7) Attack of the Clones
8) Star Wars Holiday Special
9) The Phantom Menace