CT Why Do People Worship The Original Trilogy?

OK, allow me to preface this, by admitting I am not a first-generation fan of this franchise. I was born in August of 1980, about three months after The Empire Strikes Back came out. I didn't see any of them until I was five years old, when my cousin showed me A New Hope on VHS...and as a kid, I loved it. The whole trilogy was a fantastic adventure, and I was hooked.
Then my teenage years came about, and when I was 16 years old Lucas introduced the Special Editions. My way of thinking at the time was simply along the lines of, "Okay, so he's making some minor changes to improve the movies; it can't possibly hurt anything." But I quickly realized how intense and outright insane the backlash was around me. People older than me who'd actually seen the films in the theater were protesting so loudly, you'd think their own child was being burned alive. I consider myself a fairly rational person, but emotionally I just didn't understand that kind of response. I still enjoy all three films to this day; they remain prime examples of excellent storytelling. The characters, dialogue, settings, special effects, music...everything works together very well. But I'm no purist, and I've never considered the films to be "sacred relics" or otherwise untouchable. Maybe that's why I was able to accept the prequels on their own merits; I didn't feel honor bound to make any drastic comparisons.

 

I'm old enough to remember what movies were like before SW. The OT had a huge effect on the movie-making industry; a lot of things changed in ways that were revolutionary. They weren't just hit movies. They were game changers. For many people, they were life-changers. When you mess with something that people take that seriously, many people are going to feel very defensive about any changes to something that was a turning point in their lives.

 

There is no need for you to say you weren't a first generation fan of the franchise. SW mania was everywhere; it transcended sci fi and was a cultural phenomenon. I didn't mind most of the SE changes, but a few bugged me. I don't know anyone IRL who got that worked up over the changes. A SW forum is the extreme fringe of the fandom, people discuss things in here I've never heard IRL.

 

I don't know; maybe I'm just either too young or detached to share that viewpoint. I can think of some things that deserve to be defended with much more dedication than a popular movie franchise, even a very groundbreaking one. For my generation, I guess the closest similar example would be the Back to the Future trilogy; everyone involved with that poured everything into it as well. Peter Jackson did the same with Lord of the Rings, and so did the Wachowskis with The Matrix. While I recognize these other films may not have been possible without Lucas being a pioneer, I don't go to the same extreme as others who appear to idolize what he created.

The only major change that bugs me in the so-called "Jedi Rocks" musical number in Return of the Jedi. The reasons are simple: its done in a supposed alien language with no subtitles, and stops the film dead in its tracks, contributing nothing to the story.

 

I mean…come on. Just look at the OT. How can one not?

 

I never said I didn't enjoy them; far from it. I think they're fantastic and very well-made examples of expert storytelling. They also deserve the awards they were given, though I do think more appreciation should've been shown to Lucas and the main cast. But in terms of idolizing or otherwise deeming the films untouchable, I just can't get there...and the same goes for any other movie.

 

Well... I was born in 1977 - The year Star Wars was released. I never got to see any of the originals at the Pictures though I could have seen Return of the Jedi at the theater in summer 1983 (when I was... 5, going on 6 years old) but because I had a lot of illness when I was young, I wasn't able to be with crowds... So... I grew up with the Classic Trilogy on TV/VHS and then finally got to see it on the "Big Screen" with the Special Edition in 1997, which was followed by The Phantom Menace in 1999.

History lesson complete lol!

But to answer your question, why do people "worship" the original trilogy? Well, it was where it all began, right? Without the classic trilogy, there would be nothing. No Prequels. Not Sequels. No spin offs. No Disney. Zilch... Nada... So for anyone who enjoys any aspect of Star Wars... it has to begin with the Original Trilogy and Star Wars (1977) ?

But my guess is that as we look into the future, Star Wars will increasingly become to be seen as Lucas (1974 to 2012) and Disney/Fan Fiction (2012 to...) Everything Lucas did was authentic SW, even if you can debate the quality... As he was the "god" - The Maker - In this instance... While the Mouse made it all up as they went along with very, very, very expensive but very, very, very inferior fan faction.

Which means in the end, over time, there will be no divide between the Originals and the Prequels. Over the past five to ten years, the closing of the gap is already happening, IMO.

Star Wars IS Lucas. There is nothing else...

 

Star Wars was massive. I mean - I
it's hard to describe. It was the next blockbuster after Jaws for sure, but it was more, especially with people with imagination and people in the industry.

And then Empire...

but still - it was seeds in the ground, and boy , did they grow...

 

The opening post seems hyperbolic and a tad revisionist. I can’t offer an answer to the question posed by the thread title, because I can’t recall any “worship”. Or any real outrage.

People were miffed. And justifiably so. The expunging from history of originals remains a shameful act of megalomania. Now that’s hyperbole.
.
.
.
Or is it?

 

I don’t “worship” the OT, but I do like it a lot.

I’m old enough to be a first generation fan; I discovered SW when in junior primary school, in 1979, at the (perfect) age of seven. A school friend had the Kenner figures.

Taking the original theatrical cuts away from the fans was wrong. Fans were/are rightly upset. There are fans that do worship the OT - it’s their life.

 

If I had a nickel for every time someone (usually younger) joined and started taking shots at the OT lol.

 

I wouldn't say that I worship the Classic Trilogy. But I do believe it's easy to discern that it is the best of the three trilogies. For me, I rank 'em as follows:

1) OT (two A+s and one A-)

2) PT (a B+, a B-, and an A+)

3) ST (an A-, an F-, and a D+)

If there is a flaw with the OT, it's that Luke and Vader have the best arcs, but the side characters don't get enough exploration. The secondary characters don't get explored quite enough, but that's what Legends or the new canon can remedy, depending on one's preference.

Don't get me wrong. I love Leia, Obi-Wan, Yoda, 3PO, R2, and Han. But we just don't get to know them as much as two OG characters, if you will. One thing that I think that is particularly outstanding is that all of the completely negative characters (major and minor, from Palpatine down to Jabba, Fett, and the Imperial officers) all come off as realistic and believable despite being otherwise unexplained. Great acting and special effects.

So, in my view of the six Skywalker films, only the PT comes close to the CT in terms of thought and care put into it. The ST comes off as shallow and offensive by comparison. Its only redeeming qualities can be gleaned in the acting and TFA's basic story. Otherwise, it's a sick joke. For me, the ST is part of an alternative reality I don't want to watch, and the CT and PT are the true story that can fit in well with either the old EU or the new canon. Your time, your choice.

 

what's the A+ ?

 

ROTS, of course. I think that it is the best of the two episodes that Lucas directed. ANH is great and fun, but ROTS is a nightmare fuel Shakespearean tragedy, and I can see why McDiarmid and Christensen did so well in it. (Look up Hayden and Mr. McDiarmid's evil chat during 2017 in Orlando for elaboration.)

But this is about the CT, though. I think that the OG trilogy starts strong, goes excellent, and that ROTJ is great but could've been better. The PT is sort of the opposite insofar as it smoothes by well until it gets great in the third act. I like ROTJ a lot, but even I admit that it would have worked better as two movies. Even so, it's enjoyable and has a good message. It's the opposite of TROS in that TROS would have been better as two movies, but it still would have been bad. It's worse as one movie. The issue with ROTJ, as I've often said, is Jabba's palace. I think that more writing should have been done about what Luke's plan was because it paints him as unfeeling and callous to an extent. He does, after all, basically throw Leia, the droids, and Chewie to Jabba to hold captive until he can save them all and Han. In contrast, he's more empathetic and admirable in the rest of the movie...which from a writing perspective is odd. It's like he can empathize with Vader more than his good friends? Ya see what I mean? That wasn't the intent, but I can see why someone would draw that conclusion. Lol. What we like about ROTJ is the ending and how Luke was able to, against all odds, help redeem his conflicted father. My personal interpretation is that Palpatine isn't using the dark side to hold Vader on his side. It's mostly psychological manipulation on his part. That's why I never understood the love for Palps/Sidious. Yeah, he's a well-written villain and he's very successful as far as villains go, but he's the kind of guy that Nazis and wife-beaters would admire. So, never got that. Luke in the non-Tatooine scenes of ROTJ is a wonderful character. I like how Luke is basically the good Jedi who's tempted by the dark side, Sidious is the embodiment of the dark side, and Vader is in the middle. Lots of food for thought there.

 

I only consider the despecialized OT version as canon

 

To his credit, George did say that when he was writing the original trilogy, Vader being seen as a personification of evil became much more prevalent than what he'd originally planned. He'd already written most of what would become the whole thing, but he only had enough money in 1976 to film the first third of his epic script. As a result, Vader comes off as extremely intense, taking orders from no one but Tarkin (and its implied he only does so on the Emperor's orders).
By contrast, when we encounter Vader again in The Empire Strikes Back, he's almost like a powerful but wounded animal - ready to attack anyone who upsets him in the slightest. He kills Admiral Ozzel & Captain Needa for their apparent incompetence, and is hellbent on finding Luke because he believes he could convince his son to help him overthrow his master.
When Return of the Jedi rolls around, Vader has mellowed out considerably: the only person he actually kills is Palpatine, and that's to save Luke. He's still manipulative to be sure, reading Luke's mind and threatening to corrupt Leia...but I've long seen that as a "cat and mouse" sort of thing. I mean, he knows Leia is his daughter for less than 30 seconds, and already decides she should trust the darkness more than the light? He even admits that Obi-Wan was wise to hide her, but still deems doing so a failure in his view.
All of that just strikes me as a desperate attempt by Vader to justify his own actions, which he knew were wrong but didn't want to admit. He'd spent most of his life since the age of nine coveting security, power, and love...but Padme's death had convinced him the last one would never be something he'd ever have again. Luke's selfless empathy showed him otherwise, and when it became clear to him that Palpatine was going to take that away again, you could practically hear Vader's thoughts - "No! I became a monster for you! I gave up everything! You will not kill my son!" And that compassion is what gave Vader the strength to finally be freed, even though he knew it would almost certainly kill him.

 

Looking back I know Luke grew in power but it also seemed like Vader aged a lot between Empire and Jedi. He seemed more like an old man, where in ESB he was a force of nature. Maybe the iron lung/burns had finally taken its toll.

 

I partly chalk that up to the waiting between films as well. If George had been given the time and money to do the trilogy in one set the way he wanted, Vader's arc would've played out more quickly, and made more sense as a result.

 

I tend to think as well that people mischaracterise the long term SW fanbase as those who would have watched them at the cinema, I spose technically I just about remember being taken to see ROTJ aged 5-6 but really what made me a SW fan was much more watching on VHS/TV in the late 80's and early 90's. I think that post cinema afterlife is really what turned SW into the cultural phenomenon it is similar to the way Trek grew after the original series was cancelled.

As far as the SE changes go I would say no I was never keen on them and would preffer the original cuts with all the restoration work done to them but still there perfectly watchable, the worst thing by far for me is Vaders added "no".

 

I didn't like the scene showing Vader returning to his ship at the end of ESB. It kills the tension, and anyone with half a brain cell knew Vader went from Cloud City to his star destroyer. The Noooo in Jedi as well. I also didn't like Luke's "lucky you didn't taste very good" to R2 changed. It's just unnecessary tinkering; Lucas can do what he wants but I like the films I knew and loved for 14 years.

 

I want the theatrical cuts now

 

I want the 1977-83 theatrical cuts yesterday.

 

Well from the interviews I've seen, his decision to alter the films didn't come from disrespect or any mean-spirited intent toward anyone who had originally helped him. I think it was either Steven Spielberg or Ron Howard who said that when A New Hope first came out, George felt it only represented about 40% of what he had in his mind. So when the technology came around later that would enable him to get closer to what he initially wanted, he took full advantage of it. I'll admit that having the unaltered versions as pieces of history would've been nice, but since I'm not a purist I don't have problems with most of the changes.

 

It remains the core of SW for many, the thing that still drives their interest to this day. I understand where they’re coming from even if it’s not that way for me as the OT has never been my main hook.