Nic: When I think “Star Wars,” my mind doesn’t immediately go to the poorly written, CGI heavy, snooze-fest extravaganza that is the prequel trilogy. No, I find myself more fascinated by the world of the original trilogy simply because of its grounded feel. Technology is a miraculous thing, but the restrictions of 1970’s film technology forced George Lucas and the production team behind the original movies to use practical sets and scale models. Doesn’t anyone remember the list of technical Oscar wins the first film received, not to mention its best picture nomination?
Trenton: When I think “Star Wars,” I think of the glorious prequels. That’s right, the only good “Star Wars” movies are the ones with Samuel L. Jackson’s beautiful purple blade and Ewan McGregor’s perfect facial features. Not only are the prequels entertaining, but they are less painful to watch than the originals. Watching the originals is like staring at a bucket of crap for several hours without blinking.
Nic: While many are quick to criticize Mark Hamill’s somewhat whiny portrayal of Luke in the first movie, this is what I like to call a character arch. He starts as a whiny, ignorant teen and becomes a wise Jedi master by the end of the trilogy making him an interesting lead, something the prequels lack. There’s no sense of direction in the prequels and certainly no clear main character.
Trenton: I can’t stand Luke Skywalker. Mark Hamill may have been young when he took the part, but all he did as Luke was whine. Sure, the acting in the prequels wasn’t great, but in no way does it compare to how awful the acting was in the originals. Anyone who says otherwise should just hop down from their high horse and face reality: the original trilogy sucks.
Nic: When it comes down to it, the originals are just so much more fun than the prequels. They’re entertaining because of their relatable characters and stories. Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go watch “The Force Awakens” a third time.