Saga What Era In Star Wars Do You Think Is Most Interesting ?

What do you mean by old republic? So we don't need to go 1000 years before, we can look into 5 or 10 years before the PT.

Age of Republic. - Includes the past before the Ep.1 and also the events during the Clone Wars.

 

Definitely PT era. The setup of the final years of the Republic in accordance with Palpatine's rise made for a more interesting conflict than the rebels vs. empire norm, both in terms of the large scale plot and individual character arcs. Basically the character emotion of the PT feels more "real" to me while the surface presentation tends toward the elaborate and fantastic. The combination makes for something great the rest of the series can't quite match, or at least not with the same consistency of the PT.

 

I went with PT era. Since for the first 2/3 of the timeframe that we've seen covered during this era there was no active war or governmental oppression going on, there are lots of different areas one can explore. I also find much interest in the idea that the Jedi are in their heyday, and all the ventures that they undertake as an order during this time. It's a more romantic, formal period where people actually care what things look like, and about the quality of life, rather than simply trying to survive by scratching a living. It is the golden age of the Republic, but there are also so many things going on underneath the surface. Deception! Intrigue! Mystery! All compelling storytelling opportunities. And IMO, the story of the PT era-not limited just to the saga films-is a fantastic story of the ending of an era, the fall of a golden age as everything ultimately comes crashing down, as were left to watch in horror as we see that this evil has been brewing all along finally reveals itself...A truly tragic tale of love, loss, and the consequences of obsession, ambition and difficult choices.

 

OT era for me.

First exposure to the franchise, of course, but seeing how the Rebellion waged their campaign against the Empire to the point where they became a legitimate threat to the Emperor's regime. The tech and ships cobbled together (or outright stolen) by the Alliance, the seeming invincibility of the Empire, the rediscovery (and re-imagining) of lost lore. Rebels and Rogue One further expanded on this era, showing how the fledgling Rebellion came into more focus and being. Plus, still plenty of untapped story and character potential during this era surrounding different groups or even factions of the Rebellion and their possible struggles against the Empire, beyond the main group of Han, Leia, and Luke.

 

OT or PT, I guess, although I really don't have a strong affinity for any particular era. There isn't enough ST content for me to call it my favorite, and the Old Republic era is, well, kinda lame if you ask me.

 

1.-New Republic Era/Post Return of the Jedi era (Legends)
2.-Old Republic Era
3.- OT/PT

 

I'm most interested in...

Joint 1st: The Old Republic around the time of Revan and Malak. And the PT. I would especially like to see the adventures of Qui-Gon Jinn and Obi-Wan. I think it would make a great animated series or live action movie.

3rd: The OT. I would love to know more stories about other people in the rebellion and more about Luke's training and Yoda's life in seclusion on Dagobah. I think this is one of the reasons I really loved Rogue One - we could see how the plans got to the Rebels.

4th The ST. While I have really enjoyed the story so far, much more I think, that a lot of fans. I just haven't had the time yet to absorb this new era. Also, I tend to enjoy SW comics and books a bit more than the films and there's less of this part of the franchise around so far. I am starting to go through the new books which are great, so this might change in the near future.

 

George Lucas's Sequel Trilogy. Sure we'll never get it, but if it was anything like the last three episodes of Clone Wars then it's right up my alley.

 

I like the Galaxy at peace, no clone wars, no civil conflicts

 

1. PT
2. OT
3. ST

This is subject to change as we gather more information about the ST. The PT and OT are very close.

 

The PT. Some of the films may not have been quite as good, but they were actually even more imaginative than the OT or the ST.

 

The (general) OT period is really overworked and played out now.

And the ST era is, thus far, too restrictive to allow for much (that will change).

More and more, the PT era is my favorite. I have some very deep problems with the PT films as films, but the era and the characters are just really rich and I tend to enjoy just about any story set in that timeframe. I was just thinking the other day how odd it is that my least favorite SW film, AOTC, probably introduces more lore that I love into the saga than any other film except, naturally, ANH. That's kind of cool.

 

New Republic era, hands down. Those stories eclipsed the OT for me as an adolescent, and will always be my favorite part of the timeline to revisit. It's a shame it's not a voting option, OT of those.

 

The Old Republic.

 

I'm not sure, I voted for the Prequel era, but I think that's just because it's the area with the most depth. The OT sticks a little bit too much to the same characters, and doesn't really show a wider view of the galaxy, but I still find it really interesting. IMO, The ST is really interesting too, but doesn't have enough quality expansion, most of it being aimed towards younger kids (books, shows, ect)

 

Honestly, right now, the Prequel era. It's the most like ours.

The OT-era is all about military people living on the fringes, for the most part, and the worldbuilding is too binary.

ST-era worldbuilding I had high hopes for but has been a disappointment.

Nothing in the "Old Republic" era is canon right now, but even in Legends they tried to replicate the OT stories too many times.

 

Old Republic.

 

The OT is the golden age of the saga, however I think the PT is the most interesting. Important moves are made (politically and militarily) to create the status quo of Imperial rule that exists during the OT.

 

So...I actually find all three extremely interesting in different ways.

From a mythos and emotional standpoint, the Prequel Trilogy takes the cake. The set designs and the worldbuilding is absolutely phenomenal. Every establishing shot is so full life and personality. The different alien designs (while I do have reservations regarding the race coding) are creative and iconic in a way that sci-fi fantasy should be. I love that the audience truly gets a chance to explore different worlds like a true adventure franchise. The politics on Coruscant get a bad rep, but honestly, they are the more interesting and realistic parts of the PT. Just the sheer genius level of detail that went into the atmosphere is amazing. My favorite in the trilogy (like most people), Revenge of the Sith (flawed as it may be), has a wonderfully Shakespearean narrative to it that's operatic and epic but also cloaked in tragedy and angst. There aren't really movies quite like and for that, I find it to be such an admirable film.

From a historically cinematic standpoint, the Original Trilogy is a phenomenal ride. Aside from being well-written, I just love how classic everything is. The OT just feels new and inventive in comparison to a lot of its contemporaries, even with flaws I pick on Star Wars a lot for its diversity issues (most of the cast is either white men and aliens with Lando and Leia being the exception) BUT the movies are actually pretty progressive for their time. It's interesting to see how Leia is extremely different from a lot of female heroines that came before her. Also, it's so much fun watching Darth Vader's reveal and pretending that I'm seeing it for the first time, trying to imagine what other people felt in 1980. Lastly, I just love looking at these movies as a time capsule and admiring the trends that they've created (or popularized). They are a landmark in pop culture and their influence is just massive.

Now the Sequel Trilogy is interesting from an analytical standpoint because it's reflective and almost anti-escapist in a way that Star Wars usually isn't. This is the era that breaks Star Wars and any previous image you may have had of it. It takes the happy-ending of ROTJ and makes it a lot more complicated. It calls out the past mistakes of previous generations. It challenges the dynastic approach to family and generational curses. However, it's also a lot less...fantastical. I don't mean that in a sense that it's not Star Wars anymore, but it kind of takes the escapism glasses off. YouTube Critic Jeremy Jahns said that the ST feels closer to our galaxy than a galaxy far, far away, but I don't think that's a bad thing at all. The ST ditches the portrayal of making the evil bigoted men in power as powerful antagonists like the OT or having stoic male heroes as the main protectors of the galaxy. Instead, the heroes are the disenfranchised (the abandoned female scavenger Rey and the stormtrooper turned deserter Finn), while the villain is the privileged, person with an inherited legacy (Kylo Ren). In my opinion, these movies are completely reflective of the current political climate and I don't believe they could have been made in any other era. Star Wars has always been political. However, while OT was pure escapism and the Prequel Trilogy was mostly metaphorical, the ST just feels like it's blatantly challenging you. And I love it for that.

 

It doesn't do anything of the sort and it's certainly not different from the prequel trilogy in this regard, which was all about the errors of established powers which were strong for generations. However, the prequel trilogy is a lot more realistic about it as the flaws that many of the prequel Jedi possess are a logical outgrowth of where Jedi philosophy has been taken as well as the kind of galactic environment many of them began to inhabit in the Core which was more institutional and bureaucratic. They don't take the characters like Luke, whose journeys to Knighthood and/or mastery are far more prone to self-reflection and peril, and make them arrogant or complacent in some contrived attempt at creating a profound story.

This is only made worse in regards to the point regarding the saga's so-called "dynastic" approach and generational curses. How exactly does it challenge the dynastic approach to family as if the Skywalkers are noble family when Anakin was born in slavery? How does it challenge it when Luke was raised in a relatively modest fashion and Leia's upbringing was the result of being brought up under a totally different family name? How exactly does it challenge the idea of a generational curse when Luke repeats mistakes that nearly cost him his life and apparently failed due to the same darkness Anakin had, according to the trilogy thus far? The Skywalkers were never royalty.

If you apply an analytical mindset to either of the two trilogies and compare them to the ST, most (if not all) of these claims fall apart.

Hold on, what? Are you serious? That's exactly how it was in the OT. It is exactly the same. The worst part of this is easily calling any of the male protagonists in the ST "stoic". It pretty much undermines everything you say here. Anakin and Luke are pretty much the antitheses of stoicism and yet here you are, proclaiming that we've changed from a type of protagonist that never existed in the saga to begin with. Hell, I'm pretty sure Jyn is more stoic than either of those two.

 

I mean, you're not wrong about the Prequel Trilogy. What I was referring to was how the Sequel Trilogy calls out the Jedi Order's flaws and the failures of Han, Luke, and Leia after the war was over. ROTJ wasn't the end of everything. There were people still believed in the Empire and held true to those principles, which lead to the rise of the FO. Also, I didn't say anything bad about the Prequel Trilogy or it's writing. It is very good at being a slow, methodical look at the descent of established powers. It's one of the strongest aspects of the Trilogy actually.

The Skywalkers are royalty in more ways than one actually. For one, technically, Anakin and Luke specifically are royalty considering Padme is a queen and she's Luke's mom and Anakin's wife. But I meant dynastic in the metaphorical sense. Anakin is the chosen one, born of a virgin and therefore the only one that can save the galaxy and bring balance to the Force. Luke is his son and he's the only one that can redeem him to bring balance to the Force. The only other one that can take Vader is Leia if she gets by Yoda. There's this underlying theme in the PT and OT that the Skywalkers are the chosen clan that are bound to save the galaxy. The hero of the new trilogy is someone that comes from no one and nowhere. As far as the generational curses, it does challenge them because it poses the question of whether or not the failures of previous generations define who you are. Not just of your family but of your teachers. Luke doesn't fall victim to the same darkness that Anakin had. He fell victim to tragedy and broken faith after something he believed in completely failed him, unlike Anakin just moved from one faith to the next. But then, Luke takes the narrative back, accepts the curses and the failures and owns them.

Oh no, I was talking about the Jedi Order, who consistently put down emotions as weakness by advocating for stoicism and detachment. Anakin and Luke are emotional, impulsive guys and their movies reflect that. However, Anakin is not a hero. He's the protagonist. Obi-Wan is the hero, along with Yoda, Qui-Gon, and arguably Mace Windu, all of whom are stoic and actively suppress their emotions. Heck, even Han Solo is pretty stoic as the anti-heroic cocky masculine guy but he makes a great foil to Luke's sensitivity.

Luke is actually one of my favorite characters because of how progressive he feels even now. He rejects the Jedi philosophy and appeals to Vader's emotions and humanity instead. He criticizes the arrogance of the Jedi Order and their inability to raise Anakin correctly. Anakin's whose emotions were not tended to correctly and, thus, created a monster. As far as the villains, they are different. The ST goes out of its way to portray Kylo and Hux as pathetic people, not powerful like Tarkin and Vader. Kylo is moody and emotionally unstable, while Hux is petulant and entitled. As for the heroes, Rey and Finn are pretty emotional characters. Rey may be rough around the edges but she's irritable, kind, loyal, and introspective. Finn is bubbly, expressive, compassionate, and charismatic.

Also, I wasn't putting down any of the Trilogies. I was saying what I personally liked about all of them because I didn't want to choose. The movies are interesting to me. It's Star Wars after all.

 

The original trilogy is more philosophical, but I'm attracted to the vibrancy that the prequels brought. The Old Republic has a few great stories - the rise of Bane, the redemption of Revan, etc. - but, in large part due to the nature of SWTOR, I think there's a quantity-over-quality problem which holds it back from seriously contending with the later eras.

 

@devilinthedetails the Bane trilogy was one of the high points, I agree. Drew Karpyshyn gave the Old Republic era much of its best content, in my opinion.