STAR WARS vs THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK

[Hamish Spiers]

Hey everyone. I just thought I might try to get a little discussion going on the first two Star Wars movies. They're both much beloved but which ones do people love more?

I originally posted this on my Wordpress blog but since I'm the only person who visits it, I thought I might get a better response if I post it here. So here goes... I'm about to post my own five cents on the debate. However, before I do, just remember that it's all for fun.

...

"Now, I know, instinctively most of us would just say that The Empire Strikes Back is the obvious winner. It feels more epic, it looks more polished and it has cooler music. But that would be jumping the gun a bit. So let’s slow down and put our instinctive reactions aside for a moment.

To make it nice and objective, I’m going to throw a few categories out there and see how the movies stack up against one another in each one.


Aesthetics

How cool do these movies look when you put them head to head? First off, I have to say that Star Wars looks incredible. And not just incredible for a movie made in 1977 but by any standard. Tattooine feels like a real place. Space looks like… well… space. There’s nothing about its production values that takes you out of the movie. However, the same can’t be said for some of the, er, ‘acting’ and there are some other areas where it falls short a bit too. Darth Vader’s see–through lenses make him a little less menacing than he could be. And the Millennium Falcon isn’t quite manoeuvrable as Han boasts it is, although it’s very good at flying in straight lines.

They’re little things really and they’re not a big deal but the fact of the matter is that none of these things are issues in The Empire Strikes Back. Things look better. There’s more fluidity to the movement of ships and so on. Visually, it is a gorgeous piece of cinema and worth the price of admission for that alone. On this front, The Empire Strikes Back does no wrong.

Star Wars: 0 The Empire Strikes Back: 1


Music

This one isn’t as clear cut as most people believe. Star Wars has some incredible pieces and a good proportion of the main themes for the series come into play here. There’s also something quite classic about a lot of the music in it, as so much of it is a throwback to the extravagant cinema scores from what were, even by 1977 standards, days gone by. And the music serves the final battle scene brilliantly, doing every bit as much to ratch up the tension as what is happening on screen. And, while it doesn’t have the Imperial March, there really isn’t anywhere in the movie where it would fit.

However, any way you look at it, the music in The Empire Strikes Back is just that much better again. There’s more of it. It’s livelier. There’s a richer diversity of themes going on. The music for all the set pieces is exhilarating and of course, unfair though it may be, the Imperial March does give it an advantage.

Star Wars: 0 The Empire Strikes Back: 2


Lando Calrissian

When you meet him in Star Wars, Han Solo seems pretty cool. That is, if you ignore the fact that he’s pretty much a slacker and Chewbacca is the only person who can stand his company. But, you know, he seems cool apart from that. However, it’s only when you meet Lando Calrissian that you realise what cool actually is. Frosty the Snowman’s jealous of this guy and every scene he’s in is better because he’s in it.

Now, not to be unfair, but I’ve seen Star Wars a number of times and one of the things that is quite apparent is that Lando is not in it. Anywhere. And yes, I know he wouldn’t fit in the story but that doesn’t change the fact that Star Wars is Lando–less and The Empire Strikes Back isn’t.

Star Wars: 0 The Empire Strikes Back: 3


Things are looking a little rough for Star Wars so far but it’s still early in the contest and we haven’t looked at our next category yet.


Pacing

Out of all the movies in the series, Star Wars has the best opening hands down. It hits the ground running with a very well portrayed action sequence that establishes the premise in media res as well as any movie can. After that, things slow down a bit but that’s understandable. The movie’s introducing characters, ideas and showing the audience what’s at stake. It’s set–up. And once it hits the point in the movie where the characters blast off Tattooine, it’s pay–off time. An hour of pay–off that doesn’t slow down for an instant, delivering thrill after thrill.

The Empire Strikes Back on the other hand is a different beast. The start feels somewhat smaller in scale to that of its predecessor and there’s some more set–up as the characters are in a completely different set of circumstances from when we last saw them. But it builds momentum very quickly, with a dramatic rescue in the snow, a massive atmospheric battle (possibly the best large–scale battle scene in the series) and then a desperate flight through an asteroid field. The first forty minutes of The Empire Strikes Back are among the most exciting in cinema history.

Then it slows down. A lot. And the later scenes of the movie are more intimate than epic. There’s nothing wrong with this. It’s not even entirely unconventional. However, the movie does become a bit more episodic than cinematic in its pacing. Episodic with the kind of spectacle that only cinema with a big budget and a lot of creativity can provide but episodic nonetheless. Again, there’s nothing wrong with that but you could stop the movie a couple of times for a coffee break without affecting the pacing in the slightest – and you can’t say that of Star Wars.

Star Wars: 1 The Empire Strikes Back: 3


Tone

Now a lot of people would say that The Empire Strikes Back has this in the bag because it’s darker. Now before you think about that, you have to take a moment to consider whether being dark is necessarily a good thing or not. Consider recent superhero movies for example. With the success of The Dark Knight, a lot of people wanted to jump onto the dark and gritty bandwagon. And then The Avengers blew the lot of them out of the water at the box office and largely because it wasn’t dark.

Now, another thing is that compared to Star Wars, is The Empire Strikes Back actually that much darker? Because while Star Wars is a lot of fun, a lot of pretty heavy things happen in it as well. Remember what happened to the jawas? Luke’s aunt and uncle? Basically every rebel pilot except Luke and Wedge? And what do you think Vader did to Leia when the door was closed? Have a coffee with her? Oh, and a planet got blown to pieces as well. Just thought I’d mention it. Star Wars is quite dark when you think about it. The difference with The Empire Strikes Back isn’t that it’s darker. It’s that it lingers on the darkness more. It’s moodier.

However, for a series like Star Wars, that’s not necessarily such a good thing. There are moments in The Empire Strikes Back where the movie comes uncomfortably close to taking itself too seriously, particularly when Yoda and Obi Wan Kenobi start ganging up on Luke about the oh–so–pretentiously–heavy responsibilities of being a Jedi. They could lighten up a bit, especially Obi Wan. He wasn’t like that in the first film. In fact, I’m giving Star Wars a bonus point right there for having a more likeable Obi Wan. An Obi Wan who’s still Ben to his friends.

Now, to get back to tone for a bit longer, another thing about the tone of The Empire Strikes Back is that it set a bad precedent. Just as in the wake of The Dark Knight, every Tom, Dick and Harry in Hollywood wanted to make a dark, gritty movie, subsequent Star Wars movies occasionally tried to replicate the tone of The Empire Strikes Back as well and the results weren’t pretty. The doom–and–gloom monologues of the emperor in Return of the Jedi bring the movie to a grinding halt (when the ewok interludes aren’t doing it) and the ‘serious’ scenes in the more recent movies were flat out embarrassing. And yes, so was everything in those movies but I’m not going to let that stand in the way of the argument.

Star Wars is better when the tone is light. If it starts taking itself too seriously, then viewers are forced to question things. If plans can be ‘beamed’ to a ship, why is it that they can only be kept in hard copy from then on? Would it really break the Empire’s military budget to shoot an escape pod that doesn’t have any life–forms on board? And why are Imperial stormtroopers incapable of hitting the side of a barn?

That’s why I’m giving this one to Star Wars.

Star Wars: 3 (Don’t forget that bonus point) The Empire Strikes Back: 3


Well, we’re neck to neck now but fear not. We still have one more category to go. A winner will be decided.


Does the movie require you to watch Return of the Jedi afterwards?

There’s no debate on this one. Unless you hate Han Solo so much that seeing him whisked off in a block of carbonite is a happy ending for you, then you need to see Return of the Jedi at least once after seeing The Empire Strikes Back. The tedious prologue. The embarrassing attempts at humour. The interminable ewok sequences. The sheer boredom of listening to the emperor droning on and on. The Empire Strikes Back is not to blame for the shortcomings of the movie that followed it but life is not always fair. Because it ended in a cliff–hangar, it forces you to watch that movie to wrap up its dangling plot threads. [It's like a hidden cost in the admission price really.]

Star Wars on the other hand, being the brilliant self–contained movie it is, puts no such obligation on you. It’s a friendlier movie in that way. Star Wars leaves you feeling satisfied and upbeat. And, when you think about it, that’s not a bad thing for a movie to do.

So the final score is…

Star Wars: 4 The Empire Strikes Back: 3


So there you have it. It was a close one but Star Wars emerges victorious."

...
​

Anyway, that's my take. It is a tough one really. I'm very fond of both of these movies. And I think I like them equally. For reasons that are probably fairly obvious, I find that if I were watching either one during the day, I'd prefer Star Wars, whereas The Empire Strikes Back is my preference for a night-time movie. It does have a great atmosphere for it. Still, I didn't start my list with any prejudice towards one or the other. Instead, I just threw some ideas out there to see where things went.

So what are your thoughts on these movies? Which one is best in your opinion?

​

 

[thaddeus6th]

Ha, I must admit the "Must you watch RotJ" bit amused and surprised me.

I really like the Hoth part of The Empire Strikes back, but you're right that it feels less like a self-contained film than A New Hope. It was also interesting (and this could be considered a plus or a minus) that Vader went from being a senior but not supreme rank in the first film to second only to the emperor in The Empire Strikes Back.

Leia's character also changed a lot, going from proactive and feisty initially, to a bit less so, and then wearing a collar and bikini.

I'd probably for for The Empire Strikes Back, but it must be said that I generally like a darker tone. I do take your point on films taking themselves too seriously (I prefer the Batman of the original series to "Gosh, aren't I grim?" recent Batman), though.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

For me, it's easy; I'm a sucker for sexy pilots, and Han was very sexy in Empire. Yes, yes, I am that shallow. But there you go. Although the Luke bits irk me, and Star Wars is fab fun. But still, that crooked smile...

 

[Rodders]

The Empire Strikes Back all the way although i dearly love Star Wars.

 

[Parson]

Unlike Thaddeus6th, I go for more hopeful movies (But I dearly hate the new title "A New Hope.") so I voted for Star Wars. I also really missed the key role the "Force" played for Star Wars in "the Empire Strikes Back." I also like my heroes to be real heroes, not anti-heroes or compromised heroes. And not insignificantly Star Wars being the first set a standard so high none of the rest have been able to reach me in that same visceral way.

 

[Hamish Spiers]

So far, the majority's in favour of The Empire Strikes Back. But it's nice that Star Wars is getting a few votes too. It is a tough one.

However, I had another thought on The Empire Strikes Back regarding the darker parts of the movie and that it is that I almost feel guilty watching some scenes; it's as though we're watching Han and the others going through an ordeal so we can get that showdown between Luke and Darth Vader at the end.

Some other interesting points have been raised. Thaddeus6th, I also think it's interesting how the characters change so drastically over the course of these movies.

The Star Wars trilogy has some quite jarring continuity issues. For instance, if you don't count Wedge, there's an entirely new group of rebels in each movie and none of the alliance leadership show up more than once. But one of the biggest problems is that we have a different group of core characters each time around.

Leia is a problematic character and she does get short-changed considerably. In Star Wars, she takes control of any situation she finds herself in. In The Empire Strikes Back, she retains her feisty nature but she follows others around. When Han came into the control room to get her to her ship, she went with him. The Leia from Star Wars would have told him flatly that she didn't need his help - and I imagine she would have fared better for doing so. And by the time Return of the Jedi rolled around, she'd lost not only her leadership skills but that feisty nature we loved so much. It's not just what happens in Jabba's palace; in the rebel meeting, she's just one of the gang rather than a leader and when, teary eyed, she tries to dissuade Luke from confronting Darth Vader, she doesn't resemble Leia at all.

Luke fares a little better, although I don't particularly like the way that the Jedi aspect of his character overshadows the pilot. It makes him a less interesting character. Also, the heavy focus on the force, while neglecting the other aspects of the Star Wars universe would lead to one of the more major problems with the newer movies, one that was largely overlooked when they came out. Anyway, to get back to Luke, I felt that he was a little too cold and distant in Return of the Jedi and that this was a bit of a mistake.

Han also suffers, going from a loveable rogue in Star Wars to a rather more grumpy rogue in The Empire Strikes Back and a teddy bear in Return of the Jedi, with about as much personality as a doormat.

Vader gets promoted from Tarkin's henchman in Star Wars to, for all intents and purposes, the practical leader of the Empire in the sequel. And as the Emperor would be more likely a civilian leader, that would make Vader's position very prestigious indeed. Then in Return of the Jedi, he's more of a yes-man to the Emperor than a loose cannon and his heart just doesn't seem to be in it any more. And it's the audience who loses out because of it.

Oh, and Parson, I am with you all the way in your feelings on the title 'A New Hope'. Perhaps, with Disney's acquisition of the Star Wars franchise, proper DVDs of these movies might be released someday with the original theatrical title crawl which didn't have that rather uninspired name scrolling up the screen. Well, proper ones of acceptable DVD quality at least. The official theatrical releases as low quality 'bonus features' a few years back didn't quite cut it, although there's no use sweating over it. But anyway, the first movie is always Star Wars to me.

 

[Phyrebrat]

Just to offer some balance...

I never got the massive kudos that was thrown at ESB. I mean, I got it academically, but it seemed soulless. (Mind you, I am the person who also never understood the massive fandom of Boba Fett, so maybe my brain has a permanent Internal Server Error).

Yes, I loved the AT-ATs and the more lingering shots of the Rebel fleet, but that's really about all that stands out. SW has more heart for me (and this is not to do with the darker tone of ESB.)

*Spoiler Alert*






regardless of the big Vader reveal.

pH

 

[Hamish Spiers]

[FONT=&quot]I liked the spoiler alert there. And I think I know what you mean about Star Wars having more heart too.

I've now seen both movies fairly recently and it's given me some fresh perspective. Star Wars I watched again last year. While Alec Guinness and Peter Cushing put in stellar performances, I really noticed how bad everyone else's acting was. And the various extras doing stormtrooper duty are hilarious (although maybe that was because they couldn't see out of those suits). Still, it really is a fantastic movie. I also noticed that while Threepio is irritating in all the other films, he's quite likeable in Star Wars. It seems that his character was deliberately downgraded for cheap laughs.

I really like the way in which the force is handled too. It's interesting to note that the way Tarkin talks to Vader about the whole thing suggests that Vader and Obi Wan Kenobi are pretty much the last remaining Jedi. The emperor sounds more like a bureaucrat here than some mystic force user. And that makes sense to me because there's no way Tarkin would take orders from someone who was more interested in seducing would-be Jedi to the dark side than the practical everyday business of managing the Empire. And he certainly wouldn't have anything to do with the slouching cackling fool we see in Return of the Jedi.

So... those were a few things that stuck out when I watched Star Wars. However, compared to what I noticed when I re-watched The Empire Strikes Back just last night, that was nothing. It was quite staggering how much my views on this movie have changed since the last time I saw it.

The opening is quite strong still, although one could argue that the wampa subplot is filler. Yes, Mark Hamill looked somewhat different due to reconstructive surgery after his car accident but not so different that this needed to be worked into the storyline. However, that's a fairly minor quibble because there were much bigger problems.

First off the bat, I realised that it didn't make much sense that Vader was looking for Luke Skywalker among the rebels. Sure he saw him at a distance of two hundred metres on the Death Star in the previous movie and he nearly shot his X-Wing out of the sky but there was nothing there to suggest that he would be able to distinguish Skywalker from, say, a bar of soap. One could make theories to explain it, of course, but why should they? The filmmakers should take care of that stuff. I remember last year how Prometheus fans were writing great long articles to explain away all the plot holes in that particular movie and I thought filmmakers must love these guys. They do all their work for them. But I don't think that's the audience's job.

Anyway, it didn't make sense to me that Vader was looking for Skywalker among the rebels.

Another thing that struck me was that I found I didn't like Yoda. The puppetry is incredible of course - I'm not arguing against that - but I didn't like him as a character and felt that he turned the force into something that it wasn't. In Star Wars, Ben Kenobi's a little odd but he's hardly some type of joyless monk. Yoda on the other hand is cold and more than a little hard. In Star Wars, one feels that the force is rather egalitarian. Han could learn about it if he really wanted to; he's just not interested. But in The Empire Strikes Back, the force is suddenly connected to destiny and chosen ones. Yoda runs a rather more exclusive club than Ben did when he was alive.

A further problem was that the middle section of the movie felt quite weak. We cut to Han and Leia doing nothing to advance the plot from their end and then cut back to Luke doing nothing to advance it from his end. Time is also not well handled here. We see Luke's training as a montage of sorts to suggest that he is on Dagobah for quite some time but the frequent cuts to Han and Leia tell us that very little time is actually passing at all. So Luke's training consists of experiencing a hallucination, failing to get his ship of a swamp, levitating some rocks and getting a vision. And it all happens in the course of an afternoon. Meanwhile, Han and Leia flee from the Imperial Fleet. Then they take a break for a little bit and then they resume their mad flight where they left off. And in the middle of it, the emperor calls Vader up to tell him to do what he has just been doing... for the entire movie so far.

So how does the story advance?

Well, that brings me to the biggest problem I noticed: the story is forced. I wouldn't even say that it is a plot-driven narrative because it isn't. It's a set piece driven narrative and the set piece that drives it is the showdown between Luke and Darth Vader. That's what the entire movie is all about. Setting that up. And it goes to convoluted lengths to do so.

Now, I'm a writer myself and I understand that, while you want your story to flow as naturally as possible, you sometimes have to give things a little nudge to make sure they don't stray too far from the general road map you drew up. I'm quite happy to use a bit of coincidence and chance meetings to keep things going in the general direction I want them to go. However, while there are gentle ways of getting characters to take the story where you want them to, The Empire Strikes Back eschews them in favour of heavy handed interference.

The Imperial Fleet lets thousands of rebels escape from right under their noses in order to track down the Millennium Falcon. Bounty hunters who presumably were all over the galaxy are able to assemble on the deck of a star destroyer in the middle of nowhere with just five minutes' notice. Darth Vader's way of luring Luke Skywalker to him actually works. That's right. His plan was to torment Luke's friends on the assumption that Luke would somehow pick up on this through the force and then pinpoint the exact location where it was taking place... and this works. I wonder if it would have worked just as well if Vader had cooked up Luke's favourite meal. Ah well. He's not a man to do things by halves, that Vader.

And the real kicker is that the movie is full of things like this. The whole business with freezing Han in carbonite is the same too. It really comes apropos of nothing. Did Vader happen to see a carbon freezing chamber in passing and suddenly think that freezing Luke was something he just had to try out?

Now, I realise that this has turned into quite a long post and I shall wrap it shortly, I assure you. However, there is one last thing that I noticed about the movie and that is that the shocking events that conclude it are not that well thought-out. Freezing Han in carbonite, for instance. What does it achieve, story-wise? We know he's just going to be thawed out in the next movie so what was the point of it? And making Darth Vader Luke's father? That was so clearly a gimmick, it's not funny. And while it is admittedly a lot of fun, especially the first time round, the filmmakers paint themselves into a bit of a corner with it, leading to hackneyed explanations in Return of the Jedi about Vader's fall to the dark side. But it's not particularly interesting either. While the next movie tries to create a moral dilemma out of it, there's really no reason why there would be one. Vader in The Empire Strikes Back is irredeemable and, family or not, one can't see Luke having any love for him.

So the feeling I got at the end of it all was that I had seen some spectacular set pieces, enjoyed gorgeous production values and heard a phenomenal orchestral score but nothing had really happened. It could easily be re-titled Episode V: A Bad Week For The Rebels and it wouldn't change much.

Interesting, sure. But my most recent viewing has really cemented my opinion on how it compares to its predecessor. For me, I am now positive that Star Wars is the better of the two.[/FONT]

 

[Gordian Knot]

Star Wars, by far, for me. There is a delightful innocence to Star Wars. And not just the movie itself, but in Lucas' himself.

In Empire, Lucas changed. As if to prove that the phenomenal success of Star Wars wasn't all he could do. So he got "serious" with Empire. Not just in overall plot being more serious, but his attitude about the whole thing. That didn't make Empire a lesser film, but it did make it a very different kind of film.

If you think about it, the two films are so different from each other that, if not for the same characters, one could easily be convinced they are in no way related to each other at all!

p.s. Oh, and I am SO with those of you who are proud to call Star Wars just that. None of this Episode 4 garbage. Star Wars IS episode 1; and it will ever be in my mind simply Star Wars.

 

[Hamish Spiers]

There is a lot to what you say there. And with the increase in seriousness, there came a similar increase in pretentiousness. Star Wars is popcorn... and it's good popcorn (with just the right amount of butter and salt). But try to sell it as a gourmet meal and it doesn't work.

I also agree wholeheartedly with you about the way the movies don't really seem related to each other, in characterisation or the portrayal of the rebels and the Empire.

Also, I've thought of a couple of more reasons to like Star Wars:

It has time for secondary characters. Consider for instance the rebel pilots at the end. You get a real feel for who's who and the deaths mean something.

The Empire Strikes Back makes a token effort at this with Dak and Rogue Two but once the characters leave Hoth, the rest of the rebels are never even mentioned again. And Return of the Jedi doesn't even try. Well, I suppose there's that mournful orchestral tribute to one fallen ewok but thousands of rebels are blown to smithereens in the space battle without even the slightest music cue. And I distinctly remember one rebel pilot getting blown up with cheerful rebel fanfare playing over the top.

The other thing I realised is that Star Wars is the only one of the movies with tension. That last trench run really gets the adrenaline pumping and I can't think of anything in The Empire Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi that comes close.

 

[J-Sun]

The other thing I realised is that Star Wars is the only one of the movies with tension. That last trench run really gets the adrenaline pumping and I can't think of anything in The Empire Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi that comes close.

I voted for Star Wars but I thought the asteroid field in Empire and the final saber duel in Jedi were comparably exciting - maybe the speeder bikes in Jedi, too. Though, granted, only the saber duel was a "crucial climactic" sort of thrilling sequence like the Death Star run. (There are even moments in the prequel movies that, despite pretty much loathing all the characters and situations, still aren't complete snoozefests on a visceral level.)

As far as my reasons (I was actually the first Star Wars vote, IIRC, but never bothered to explain my vote) I think when I was younger I just took all three as an unquestioned unit - "the Star Wars trilogy". But, perhaps because the prequel trilogy was not part of the unit, I realized that everything that needs to be done is done in Star Wars. It's the great "farmboy saves the galaxy" story and the two latter movies are only half-movies each that basically recapitulate the first movie, down to blowing up another Death Star. Besides which, while Yoda was an awe-inspiring character and his scenes were magic initially, they don't hold up - I almost always fast-forward through those scenes and just revel in the asteroid scenes. There's nothing in Star Wars I have the slightest impulse to fast forward through. And I agree that Empire is when Lucas started taking himself and his work too seriously and when the revisionism began and so on. Don't get me wrong: Empire is still the first half of a mostly-great film (the Vader/Luke/Emperor stuff compensates for the Ewok stuff in the second half) but nothing really compares to Star Wars.

Basically, you can never again experience the Star Destroyer thundering over your head as it chases after the rebel ship for the first time. Star Wars is it.

 

[Hamish Spiers]

I think I prefer the lightsabre fight in The Empire Strikes Back actually, due to the dramatic settings. And there's something about the way in which Luke and Vader descend level by level into the bowels of Cloud City that I think works quite well. It highlights the isolation of the two characters from everything that's happening up above. In many ways, the confrontation between Luke and Vader in that movie is like an old west film when the sheriff comes into an abandoned town to go one on one with the main outlaw.

That said, I do enjoy that last part of the Return of the Jedi duel with that wonderfully emotive score playing over the top.

The problem with all of the scenes with Luke, Vader and the Emperor in that movie though is that they have no bearing on the outside events at all. If Luke had decided to sit the Endor operation out entirely, the Emperor and Darth Vader still would have been defeated.

So there's some personal tension in Return of the Jedi's lightsabre duel but that sense that everything is riding on Luke's shoulders you get in Star Wars just isn't there. The Death Star isn't about to blow up a planet. The rebel alliance doesn't appear to be in any real danger of being wiped out. In fact, with numerous ships of comparable size to Star Destroyers, things look pretty good for them. For all intents and purposes, Return of the Jedi feels like a victory lap for the rebellion.

But in Star Wars, the threat of the Empire feels real and the rebellion is a very small and vulnerable group. I think there's a lot to be said for the scene you mentioned that opens the movie. Seeing the tiny little rebel vessel with the massive Imperial ship behind it makes it very clear just how desperate the rebellion is and how badly outmatched they are by the Empire.

And I'm with you entirely on what you said about Star Wars not needing to be part of a trilogy. It feels complete as it is and with the amount of time and resources the Empire must have poured into the Death Star, you could imagine if you wish that the Empire was defeated the moment Luke made that one-in-a-million shot. There are enough hints given throughout the movie that the Empire is losing control of its territorial gains. After all, Tarkin more or less says that that's why they have the Death Star in the first place.

Really, Star Wars has it all and is more than capable of standing alone.

 

[Bick]

Its "Star Wars" for me, by a country mile. And I seem to agree with everything that Hamish has written (again). Which is handy because he's gone to lots of trouble to write it all down and I can just write "ditto".

 

[Hamish Spiers]

Well, I'm happy to help, Bick. And it looks like Star Wars is catching up in the poll as well. Go, Star Wars!

 

[jastius]

the first time I saw a star wars movie, it was Empire strikes back. I saw it at a single screen movie theater where the screen was the approximate size of an airplane hanger. The screen curved around so that you were inside the film when the action took place. Seen that way the movie was tremendous.
I have never re-experienced that overwhelming sense of place. Being with Luke in the ice cave, trying to get the saber. In the swamp with Yoda. The storm troopers surrounding Leia and Han and Han being dragged off. The Redemption of Lando. The Battle on the Bridge with Vader. Luke choosing to fall rather then surrender.
I saw Star Wars, the movie later. On television. And I think that had I seen it first I would have loved it most. But I was introduced to star wars with Empire, and Empire remains to me the great epic of the series.

 

[Parson]

the first time I saw a star wars movie, it was Empire strikes back. I saw it at a single screen movie theater where the screen was the approximate size of an airplane hanger. The screen curved around so that you were inside the film when the action took place. Seen that way the movie was tremendous.
I have never re-experienced that overwhelming sense of place. Being with Luke in the ice cave, trying to get the saber. In the swamp with Yoda. The storm troopers surrounding Leia and Han and Han being dragged off. The Redemption of Lando. The Battle on the Bridge with Vader. Luke choosing to fall rather then surrender.
I saw Star Wars, the movie later. On television. And I think that had I seen it first I would have loved it most. But I was introduced to star wars with Empire, and Empire remains to me the great epic of the series.

I saw Ben Hur in a similar theater and the experience was mind blowing! Would that there were other movies shot for and theaters built for such an experience. I could literally shut my eyes and hear a character walk across the screen!!!

 

[Gordian Knot]

Speaking of Return of the Jedi (which I would rather not, but...) does ANYone have a clue why Lucas decided that building another Death Star was in any way a good plot element?

Because it has always felt like been here, done that, to me. Not only that, but the intense excitement of the battle over the Death Star in Star Wars is awesome, even though it is just a handful of fighters on each side.

That shot of 200 ships zipping around in Jedi, which lasts all of two seconds, pales in comparison. In fact the entire second battle of the Death Star is a snoozer compared to the original.

Why bother redoing it if you were only going to do it worse?!?!?

 

[jastius]

Perhaps it was part of Vader's economic re-development policy, due to the economic downturn with all those deathstar workers out of a job, mass layoffs and unemployment rates skyrocketing, while the emperor plays basketball for photo-ops. The counsel all figured, what the hay, we already blew 100 billion on clone armor and resupplying, lets sink another 500 billion into a useless time consuming war which we have no business in sticking our fingers in in the first place, then call the whole business economic restructuring... or thereabouts, or so forth

actually haven't got a clue and it bothered me badly too; but after all the ewoks i was fairly numb to any more shocks...( the ewoks, oh, no! oh the humanity! the ewokanity!) sort of like someone stepping on your foot after they just dropped a cast iron frying pan on it, you don't even feel it anymore.

 

[steve12553]

the first time I saw a star wars movie, it was Empire strikes back. I saw it at a single screen movie theater where the screen was the approximate size of an airplane hanger. The screen curved around so that you were inside the film when the action took place. Seen that way the movie was tremendous.
I have never re-experienced that overwhelming sense of place. Being with Luke in the ice cave, trying to get the saber. In the swamp with Yoda. The storm troopers surrounding Leia and Han and Han being dragged off. The Redemption of Lando. The Battle on the Bridge with Vader. Luke choosing to fall rather then surrender.
I saw Star Wars, the movie later. On television. And I think that had I seen it first I would have loved it most. But I was introduced to star wars with Empire, and Empire remains to me the great epic of the series.

There is a lot to be said about seeing a Star Wars movie for the first time. I saw it in 1977 (in 1977 there was only one ) in a similar theater as Jastius describes (River Oaks I) in Calumet City, Illinois. The first space ship flys overhead to be followed by the enormous Star Destroyer which seems to go on forever. The magnitude of the space battles and the special effects were a massive step change from anything coming before. There really has not been a step change in special effect that great since. The only one I can think of before was 2001.

 

[Mr Fraaz]

I've decided to vote for Star Wars. The way it presents and introduces you to another world, another universe, is just marvellous.

@Steve: I've actually tried to imagine what it was like for you guys who were old enough to fully appreciate it when it first came. The opening scene and the feeling (I imagine) of "OK. So this is going to blow me away."