that's not an opinion, that's a grammatical error.
So were the prequels.
Okay, serious response: I think the Plinkett reviews get across (in a very funny way) how flawed the films are and trying to draw parallels to the original trilogy is at best straw clutching. From the bits of documentaries and interviews that I've seen - correct me if I'm wrong, I've not seen much and not for years - Lucas seems to have a general idea of these writing styles and techniques but not really aware how to implement them. A lot of the Empire Strikes Back was taken away from him as the people who worked with him on Star Wars and corrected/fixed/changed many aspects of the story and script decided that was how they wanted to deal with Lucas from the off.
This is why Return of the Jedi had a different tone, because Lucas resented that and retaliated.
The criticisms of the original trilogy are worse, in that article. It's like people are holding them up as perfect examples, which isn't the case. There are a lot of issues with the original films and just because they're classics doesn't mean they're perfect. Maybe Star Wars fans are difficult to reason with but most are willing to overlook the flaws because overall they're good films with vibrant characters and a story that just about makes sense and captivates.
I forgot just how shite Attack of the Clones were because I'd tuned it out. The lightsaber fights were good but they weren't compelling. It's not exciting if you know the outcome and the plot is played very straight. I said in this thread that it would've been better if you didn't even see Anakin for most of the prequels, either make him a subplot or don't reveal his identity until the end of the second film.
Actually, I did Andy a disservice. Serenity is a very good science fiction film and it's a lesson in how to make a film like that without a big budget and getting the most out of your cast.
You had Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, Samuel L Jackson and Christopher Lee making appearances in these films. Would you say that any of those performances were up to their standards? Neeson did rogue wiseman so much better as Ra's al Ghul, Ewan McGregor would've been better if he was shitting the entire three films and as for the latter three... What a waste of acting talent.
Look at Pixar, their output shows that you can make films today that are both family friendly and unpatronising. The Muppets Movie even touches on this point, mocking the use of elaborate CG in today's films.
At no point in the original trilogy were people sat around talking about politics. Even the bits they had with a room full of people in discussion were tense as fuck as they explained the battle plans and the risk. Don't forget, the ending of Empire Strikes Back would've thrown a lot of people as if you'd left it at that, the bad guys had won and quite convincingly too.
What's the point in 'exploration' if all the planets were CG, all the characters were CG and there was no visible impact whatsoever from the alleged goings on in the story?
So to answer your point seriously, it's like saying in your opinion we should sell Lucas to Napoli for £3m because he's shit. It's just plain wrong, even if it is your opinion.
