32
Debate: Is the original Star Wars trilogy actually better than the new stuff, or just nostalgia talking?
I watched A New Hope again last week for the first time in like 5 years, and then I sat through The Force Awakens right after. Honestly, the original just felt slower and simpler, but my buddy swears it's pure genius compared to the new movies. Last month at a cookout, two people almost got into it over whether Empire Strikes Back is overrated or a masterpiece. So what do you all think - does old Star Wars hold up on its own, or are we just fooling ourselves because we grew up with it?
3 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In3 Comments
susan_adams11d ago
Fiona's point about "character development way differently" is exactly right. The original trilogy let the story breathe and earn those big moments. New ones just rush to the next plot point without any of that weight.
7
fiona_kim11d ago
The original trilogy came out between 1977 and 1983, so we're talking about movies that are 40+ years old now. Stormtroopers missing every shot and the clunky lightsaber fights definitely feel dated compared to the new ones. But the writing and character arcs in Empire Strikes Back are honestly tighter than anything in the sequel trilogy, especially the whole Luke and Vader reveal which still hits hard even if you know it's coming. It's not just nostalgia, those old movies did character development way differently than the new ones do.
6