Saga Do the Sequels increase or decrease the value of the saga to you?

That’s objectively wrong.

No matter whether you think the prequels are good or bad, they do not destroy the OT character’s legacies.

 

Neither does the Sequel Trilogy, both have good and bad.

 

It depends who you talk to.

Certainly seeing Darth Vader reduced to a cutesy little kid who says, "Wizard" dampened Vader's OT badass-ness for a multitude of fans. I mean, hero kids like Harry Potter, or even Kevin McCallister, were never so annoying* and cringe worthy.

For some, the "wrecking Vader" line was crossed when Episode 2 revealed Anakin as a young man to up to be a petulant, N'Sync looking, pretty boy who woos women by bitching about sand as a pickup line.

Things like that definitely can take some of the shine off of the Dark Lord of the Sith from that point forward and destroy OT characters and their legacies.

For others, Episode 3 retroactively wrecked OT Vader with the delivery of one simple line: "NOOOOOOOOOOO!"

Hell, some fans still think Yoda picking up a lightsaber and going all Sonic the Hedgehog was a betrayal to the Yoda as presented in the OT.

*Personally, I was hoping for kid Anakin to be a bit more soulful like Elliot from E.T.

 

Anakin never even says wizard, lol. Kitster does. But people’s ideas on what they wanted Anakin to be like still doesn’t take away from his sacrifice, but Palpatine somehow returning does.

This is just wrong. The sequels actively make everything Luke, Leia, and Han fought for pointless.

 

"NSync pretty boy" lol. What year is it.

Anyway, the ST increases the value of the original saga in that I appreciate I-VI even more than I did before, especially the PT and its creative priorities under Lucas.

But it decreases the value of Star Wars as an ongoing property. I sometimes think how my younger self would never believe how far Star Wars would eventually fall on my entertainment priority list.

 

30 years of peace, and the empire was defeated, remnants of the empire is to be expected. And Palpatine's return was teased by ROTS. I dont see this any different then how all Padme fought for was pointless snd her arc of just dying.

 

30 years of peace is pathetic, lol. Compare that to the 1,000+ years of peace under the Old Republic. And a “remnant” of the Empire yet it has a weapon that can destroy five planets as well as Palpatine’s ridiculous fleet of Star Destroyers.

??? Palpatine’s return was not teased in ROTS. He was obviously selling Anakin on a power he didn’t possess. That was the entire point.

And yeah, everything Palme fought (politically) for was pretty pointless, since the Clone Wars as a whole were orchestrated by the leader of the very Republic she represented so he could install himself as Emperor. Obviously her children carried on her legacy, but she by no means succeeded.

 

And the children of the rebellion succeeded, from what we know of Clone wars and Rebels he was close to the power he spoke of in ROTS and in TROS we given evidence. Death star is and star destroyers getting evolved.

 

It's better than what happene3d in legends, there was basically a war every month.

 

I’ll take legends Luke over Jake any day.

 

Luke Skywalker is the Frodo of Star Wars, not the legends superhero.

 

We weren't talking just about "taking away from Anakin's sacrifice." We were talking about perceived damages that the PT can & did cause to the OT character legacies for some fans.

Anakin's sacrifice was primarily about saving his son. This is still in tact and forever will be. The Emperor was long just a plot device of a character to get there.

If you want to get into the Chosen One Prophecy (which is a PT invention) we should debate about the ST tampering with/wrecking PT legacies*, inventions, and conventions.

*I'd love to as I think Palpatine's ST return actually enhances the PT and balances out the saga. Again, perhaps a discussion for another thread?

Uh, Attack of the Clones came out in 2002, so it's as apt of a comparison as there can be. What year are you talking about?

Disagree. Star Wars is flying higher than ever as a property with more avenues for fans than ever before. Was the ST narratively wobbly? Sure. Yet it was also incredibly successful and, one must realize, that claiming that "new Star Wars" has damaged "old Star Wars" has been a a rallying cry of misguided fan hyperbole since 1999...heck, probably since 1980... ESB initially wasn't universally loved/praised amongst fans or critics.

It's called Star Wars. Even the 1,000 years of peace under the Old Republic, and the 30 years after the fall of the Empire, weren't that peaceful. I'm not sure what you are upset about. Return of the Jedi never guaranteed us that there would be peace and freedom forever. Did it?

Every official iteration of the saga after ROTJ has featured a remaining Empire that was threatening a fragile New Republic. There have always been with various dark siders and (as we've discussed) even a returning Emperor Palpatine. Point being: Star Wars has NEVER been about some mythical extended period of peace that would follow the events of Return of the Jedi.

A remnant that has been secretly rebuilding, plotting, as a contingency plan since the end of ROTJ. No? Again, every iteration of Star Wars has some version of a dangerous resurgent Empire. As far as "ridiculous" planet killing weapons go. You never heard of World Devastators? Again, this is not some new Star Wars convention that the ST brought about. These are long existing Star Wars precedents.

This seems to be your interpretation. This plot point has always been vague. Heck, you have some fans claiming that Palpatine actually manipulated mididchlorians to create Anakin. That's up for interpretation too? Regardless of that, Star Wars often refutes/retcons itself.

In Episode 4, Obi-Wan used to be telling the truth about Anakin and Vader...until he wasn't.
In Episode 5, Luke used to not be kissing his sister....until he was.
In Episode 3, Palpatine's claims to Anakin were a lie....until they weren't.

This is an entire can of worms. What's the point of any of the battles fought in the PT or the Clone Wars? Why are we watching any of it if we know the outcome (Palpatine wins, the Jedi lose, Anakin turns). They point of these stories is about the journey. It's not a competition where our characters win/lose championship titles/awards/medals due to their accomplishments and failures. That's not how modern myths work.

 

2022. I haven't heard anything like that "NSync" slam for years and years now, so it amused me.

You disagree with my personal anecdote? Good thing I wasn't speaking for you.

 

If the Disney writers couldn’t make a competent story without making the OT trio into miserable failures, then they shouldn’t have bothered with an ST.

Yes, it’s called Star Wars, but there are several much better written conflicts in Legends than the ST. And they were able to do so without destroying the New Republic or the New Jedi Order (at least during Luke’s lifetime, although I very much don’t care to think about some of the stories later.)

The PT is about the fall of the Republic and the Jedi. The OT is about the toppling of the Empire. The new trilogy should’ve been about the emergence of a New Republic and New Jedi Order under our heroes, but instead they tore all that down in TFA’s opening crawl for a soft reboot of the OT because they were too afraid to try something original. And by doing so, they tore down the legacy of Luke, Leia, Han, Anakin, Chewbacca, etc.

 

They didnt tear anything from Chewie, you cant even argue that. Even Leia i say she fighting the good fight.

 

I mean Chewie loses his best friend, his best friend’s son, and Luke and Leia. Now he’s basically Rey’s chauffeur.

Leia loses her marriage and son, her position in the New Republic, and her future as a Jedi. She sends her ex-husband to be killed by said son despite the fact that she has Jedi training, and eventually dies from Force-calling too hard.

 

Well, back in the early 00's, it was rumored that N'Sync had a cameo in the Prequels this enraged fans. Back in 2002, one of the many complaints some fans leveled against Anakin/Hayden that it seemed as if he was designed/manicured in to be a teenage heartthrob to sell tickets to those in the teeny bopper crowd that loved Titanic.

I didn't (still don't) agree, but it was one of the sticking points for the mob that claimed that "GL wrecked Star Wars and trashed the OT legacy."

So, I pulled that reference from the way back machine as it was a (imo silly) thing fans were pissing and moaning about for a time.

Sorry, I wasn't clear enough. Let me retry:

I disagree with your statement which I have underlined. Your younger self is free to feel however it wants to about the current state of your Star Wars fandom/ entertainment priority list.

I see that my response was confusing upon reading it back. Sorry about that.

@Darth Weavile

Question: When did Leia gain/achieve all this? It sure didn't happen in Return of the Jedi. Not even a little bit.

Think about this:

The ST could have started out with Han and Leia having never been married, never having kids, and a New Republic never existing.

These were not things established/hinted at in the OT. These were EU/Legend conventions that the ST was never actually beholden to in the first place.

 

I saw the writing on the wall before TFA even hit theaters (and arguably right when Lucas sold the company).

 

Leia and Han were together at the end of the ROTJ, the Empire was toppled, and Luke promised to train Leia as a Jedi.

Which is why I and many other fans wanted to see that step forward, instead of it all be taken away offscreen.

 

This pretty much nailed it...

 

Leia and Han were together. They were dating for how long? Less than a year? Less than a month? Since Han had been out of carbon freeze? It seemed to be relatively new as, at the end of the film, Han had just learned that Luke out of the romantic picture and actually a non factor.

All I am saying is this: At the end of ROTJ Han and Leia were at the beginning of a romantic relationship. As we say on Earth, they were dating. That's it. They were a long way from getting married and having kids. That was not promised in the film. That was given to us in the old EU.

Toppled doesn't mean the same as eradicated. In both the old EU and Lucasfilm's new canon, the Empire lost control of the galaxy, yet still had nefarious remnants scattered through the galaxy vying for power and trying to dismantle the new Republic.

A. This is strongly worded. Yoda urged Luke to pass on what he learned. In ROTJ, Luke never made such a promise. Yet I get that this was a thread left open by the film.

B. This occurred in universe in the old EU and in the new canon. In fact, we saw this in TROS.

Again, the things that you say were "taken away offscreen" are things ROTJ never promised/addressed and the sequels were not beholden to.

As I said, many of these elements are not, in fact, from ROTJ's ending. They are from the old EU, and despite that, actually did occur in Lucasfilm's new canon.

 

no, everyone’s opinion on this is subjective, it’s just absurd to declare other people’s opinion as objectively wrong, why did you even make this thread if all you want to do is declare different opinions to yours invalid?

I voted yes, simply because I like the new characters, Rey, Finn, Poe, even some of the secondary characters I thought were fine, Phasma, BB-8, Jannah, Babu Frik, Zorii, of course none were given any kind of well thought out story, but nevertheless some are pretty memorable

 

It’s objectively wrong because the PT happens before the OT, so it doesn’t destroy the character’s legacies.

@jaimestarr Han and Leia were together and Leia was to be trained as a Jedi (“in time you will learn to use it as I have”). All of that was taken off screen.

A last minute retcon in TROS doesn’t fix it, and causes more problems with 7 and 8.

 

both the PT and ST were released after the OT

but regardless the opinion that characters legacies were destroyed or not is a matter of opinion, not an objective fact

 

The PT takes place chronologically before the OT, it’s premise and outcome we’re pre-determined.