The Instigator
PsychicPhysicist
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Knaveslayer99
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

THB: The "Star Wars" prequels are better than the original trilogy

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 9/6/2016 Category: Movies
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 513 times Debate No: 95229
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (9)
Votes (0)

 

PsychicPhysicist

Pro

First round for acceptance, rules and definitions only. Therefore, each debater must marshal their argument in its entirety in round 2. Any arguments made in places other than round 2 should be ignored by the voters.

Prop must argue that the Star Wars prequels: The Phantom Menace, Attack Of The Clones, and Revenge of the Sith, are better than the original Star Wars trilogy: A New Hope, The Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi. Con must argue to the contrary.

The victor will be determined by a "select winner" voting system. Each debater will have 24 hours to post their argument and must use no more than 2,000 characters in their round 2 argument.

I will be prop.

Good luck, have fun, and may the force be with you!
Knaveslayer99

Con

I accept this Debate and will argue as Con in favor of the Original Trilogy (Star Wars: A New Hope, Empire Strikes Back, Return Of The Jedi) I hope my opponent and I can enjoy this debate and I am looking forward to it. May only the true force master win!
Debate Round No. 1
PsychicPhysicist

Pro

What makes a good Star Wars movie? A thrilling plot, inventive characters, and, of course, some tense lightsaber battles! This is the first point on which the originals fall somewhat flat while the prequels do well: remember the final battle with Darth Maul in Ep. I, or the fight between Anakin Skywalker and Obi Wan Kenobi in Ep. III: all the characters look like they're genuinely trying to take each other's heads off! You can feel the rage Obi Wan experiences to see his master slain in front of him, and the passion Anakin feels for Padme as he fights to create the world in which he could have saved her. By comparison, the conflict between Obi Wan and Darth Vader barely constitutes a battle, and the fight between Vader and Luke is bland, unrealistic and unemotional.

This brings me nicely to my second point: the characters themselves. I often encounter criticism of Jar Jar Binks at this point, and while it is undoubtable that he is thoroughly annoying, the gibberish that Chewbacca and R2D2 spout, C-3PO's general incompetence, and even Yoda's first appearance in Ep. IV are, on sum, just as irritating. Of course, all of these characters are present in the prequels, but the former 3 have much less air time, and Yoda is much less annoying.
Anakin's motivations are always clear: the greater good, the Jedi way, his dedication to Padme, and various other factors make his decisions, though badly thought out with hindsight, far more relatable, and therefore enjoyable.
Luke's only motivation is that his family was killed on Tattooine, which, though tragic, is very one-dimensional and cliche. Han Solo seems motivated only by getting into Leia's pants.

The prequels also have much better graphics, which, though it may be somewhat unfair to compare them to their 80s counterpart, nonetheless counts in their favour in modern times.

In summary, the prequels have better lightsaber battles, the characters are more relatable and emotional, and the graphics are a nice bonus.
Knaveslayer99

Con

When it comes to story the originals just destroy the prequels I mean we already know what's gonna happen Anakin will become Vader, Palpatine was the Emperor and was Darth Sidious it was super predictable and even somewhat copied the originals. This is pretty evident by just certain scenes in Episode II Anakin loses a hand just as Luke did in Episode V which was the second installment of the franchise just like Episode II was with the prequels. In Episode III we have Obi-Wan and Anakin battle which is an exact copy of Vader and Luke sure thanks to effects and better stunts the battles seemed more intense but we knew who was gonna win the battle not to mention Obi-Wan was like a Father to Anakin as Anakin as stated just as Vader was Luke's father. Not to mention the originals also have a plot twist so intense of course I am referring to the "No, I am your father" plot twist pulled by Vader.

In terms of characters and such as much as I adore! The prequels for their characters and such most of them just aren't relatable unlike Luke, Leia and Han, Luke is just a simple farm boy trying to get through life and just wishes he could have a more exciting life and eventually he gets the opportunity and slowly we see him build up his character from a local farm boy to a Jedi Padawan to eventually a Jedi Knight and so on. Han was always that cool sorta friend we had although he was a little selfish we got to see him become more than just a simple smuggler and develop feelings towards Leia and Luke and even forgetting about getting paid just so he can help the Rebels.

While the prequels had better graphics the originals had far more detail put into them every Star Destroyer, Asteroid, Death Star was actually a small model which was shot with some intense camera work and dedicated workers.

In Conclusion: The Originals have more dedication a more developed story and helped us develop feelings towards the main characters because we could relate to their intense struggles.
Debate Round No. 2
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by PsychicPhysicist 8 months ago
PsychicPhysicist
Sure, go for it! Accept the debate and we'll get started! :)
Posted by Knaveslayer99 8 months ago
Knaveslayer99
Alright well with your permission I'll accept the challenge and debate in favor of the original. You don't know the power of the originals! - Lucas
Posted by PsychicPhysicist 8 months ago
PsychicPhysicist
@Johnbonbon: Okay, fair enough! Yeah, I guess subjective debates aren't for everyone. I usually go for more factual matters, I just felt like having a more lighthearted debate atm.
Posted by Knaveslayer99 8 months ago
Knaveslayer99
Sorry was meant to ask define stronger cast sorry.
Posted by PsychicPhysicist 8 months ago
PsychicPhysicist
@Knaveslayer99: I guess by "stronger cast" I mean actors who are better at their roles in that they're more believable, more entertaining, funnier, and so on.
Posted by Jonbonbon 8 months ago
Jonbonbon
Yeah that's the problem for me then. To me this debate seems like like a debate and more like an essay competition. Which is fine if that's what you're about, but that's just not me.
Posted by Knaveslayer99 8 months ago
Knaveslayer99
Can you define stronger? Do you mean a stronger story or?
Posted by PsychicPhysicist 8 months ago
PsychicPhysicist
I guess just more enjoyable, better quality, stronger cast etc.: it's pretty subjective.
Posted by Jonbonbon 8 months ago
Jonbonbon
What's your criteria for better? I'd accept but I don't want to argue with you over what actually makes a movie better. I just want to debate the movies.
No votes have been placed for this debate.