StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Which set of films do you enjoy more, or view as superior? Please feel free to add a few statements on why you voted for the trilogy you chose. And let's keep this thread spoiler-free.

Well I did feel that the OT had a much better twist in that Darth Vader was Luke's father, and...

Komodo9Joe wrote:And let's keep this thread spoiler-free.

Fuck.

Uh, never mind?

OT. This should not, however, be taken as meaning that I am a Prequel hater. I only really disliked Episode One, and my feelings towards it have softened somewhat as well.

Episode Two I quite enjoyed despite a few severe flaws (Spoiler ). And Episode Three was hit and miss. It had its moments and could have been a really good film with a couple more scenes added and a bit of careful editing.

Edited: Added spoiler warning in deference to the OP despite the fact that the movie's over a decade old.

I don't often see movies a second time. Last time I saw any of the OT was before episode 1 came out. Last time I saw any of the PT movies was when they were in cinemas.

When I think about what was in each movie, I remember a lot more from the OT. So the OT wins.

The Ot is preferable to me, because it has a somewhat grander story I think. Less political crap and more interesting stuff.

As someone else said, I don't hate the Prequels. Episode 1 was the least effective of the three, but even that had some redeeming features (Liam Neeson as a Jedi, and the podrace was, if not necessary, exciting and well-done).

My main issue with the Prequels was that they had a lot of baggage from having to set things up for the OT. For instance, the two epic lightsaber duels in ROTS are certainly great fun to watch, but they both lose a lot of their punch when you know the outcome in advance.

And I'm still somewhat disappointed that ROTS didn't take advantage of the improved CGI and other SFX to do a truly epic space battle. Coruscant was pretty good, and certainly chaotic and so forth, but the focus on just two fighters weaving through the ships on approach to a target was, well, limiting I think.

I think the Prequels are, by far, immensely superior to the originals.

What's not to like about watching an obnoxious kid grow up to be a whiny asshole, and then turn into Darth Vader for some arbitrary reason? Plus, CGI is amazing! Really, the main problem with the OT was that there just wasn't enough CGI.

Sigh... generic fan whining.

Anyway, its been a long time since I watched Phantom Menace, but I don't recall Anakin as a child being obnoxious so much as too perfect to be believable.

And the reasons for him becoming Vader weren't arbitrary. Years of alienation from the Jedi Order, authoritarian tendencies (probably at least partly due to his need to save everyone and his frustration with being unable to do so), a seemingly unavoidable threat to his wife's life, and an offer of help from an old friend, and even then, he still resisted and turned Palpatine in, only turning on Windu when Windu decided to conduct what was almost certainly an illegal execution. At which point, Anakin probably felt their was no going back, plus the Dark Side corrupts you more and more over time. It could have been handled better, sure, but the basic reasons for him turning are quite compelling and plausible.

As for the CGI, I felt that it was a mixed bag. I think people bash it a lot because in the eyes of rabid fans, new often equals bad. Irrational knee-jerk response.

Truthfully, I don't think the Prequels were exceptionally good or bad films. They were mediocre. But people had absurdly high expectations for them, so mediocre was treated as utterly horrible. I call it the Obama effect.

The Romulan Republic wrote:Sigh... generic fan whining.

I live to serve.

And the reasons for him becoming Vader weren't arbitrary. Years of ... blah blah blah something something darkside eye of Sauron / Samuel L. Jackson ??? ...

Everything you say is valid and convincing.

As for the CGI, I felt that it was a mixed bag. I think people bash it a lot because in the eyes of rabid fans, new often equals bad. Irrational knee-jerk response

God dammit, who told you about my weakness for new things? I hate new things.

Truthfully, I don't think the Prequels were exceptionally good or bad films. They were mediocre. But people had absurdly high expectations for them, so mediocre was treated as utterly horrible. I call it the Obama effect.

Agreed.

I enjoy the original trilogy vastly more than the prequels. That being said, I find certain scenes from the prequels really cool - like the battle above Coruscant in Ep 3, or the battle on Geonosis at the end of Ep 2.

Channel72 wrote:I think the Prequels are, by far, immensely superior to the originals.

What's not to like about watching an obnoxious kid grow up to be a whiny asshole, and then turn into Darth Vader for some arbitrary reason? Plus, CGI is amazing! Really, the main problem with the OT was that there just wasn't enough CGI.

When I read the first line, my spirits went up. It was quite short-lived though, vanishing after I read the next couple of sardonic lines.

Ugh... the PT seems to be getting no love around here. Poll, as of now, remains 10 to nothing, in favor of the trilogy that features a narrative that has been used ad nauseam of a couple of characters embarking on a journey and ultimately achieving success over the forces of evil.

Channel72 wrote:Everything you say is valid and convincing.

I'm guessing you're being sarcastic, though its hard to tell sometimes.

I'd be more insulted by the complete lack of any serious or intelligent response to what I said if it wasn't obvious that you aren't taking the topic seriously.

God dammit, who told you about my weakness for new things? I hate new things.

I can't speak for you, but I see a common attitude among fans of various stories that amounts to "Its different so its bad". But a story where nothing changes is one that is at risk of rapidly becoming redundant, pointless, and dull. Change is realistic. Its good.

A proper franchise should disrupt the status quo regularly.

And that includes being willing to incorporate new technology such as CGI when its useful.

Agreed.

Again, hard to tell if you're being sarcastic.

Komodo9Joe wrote:

Channel72 wrote:I think the Prequels are, by far, immensely superior to the originals.

What's not to like about watching an obnoxious kid grow up to be a whiny asshole, and then turn into Darth Vader for some arbitrary reason? Plus, CGI is amazing! Really, the main problem with the OT was that there just wasn't enough CGI.

When I read the first line, my spirits went up. It was quite short-lived though, vanishing after I read the next couple of sardonic lines.

Ugh... the PT seems to be getting no love around here. Poll, as of now, remains 10 to nothing, in favor of the trilogy that features a narrative that has been used ad nauseam of a couple of characters embarking on a journey and ultimately achieving success over the forces of evil.

It makes me wish I could vote for the Prequel Trilogy, though I'd be lying if I did. Because I do think the OT is better but I don't hate the PT, and I think some of the criticism I've seen of it is really unwarranted.

The Romulan Republic wrote:It makes me wish I could vote for the Prequel Trilogy, though I'd be lying if I did. Because I do think the OT is better but I don't hate the PT, and I think some of the criticism I've seen of it is really unwarranted.

Why do you think the OT is better, The Romulan Republic? I, for one, have actually never understood this preference. Is it nostalgia? Enjoyment? If the latter, would you give consideration to the thought that the PT is more layered and nuanced?

I am actually always puzzled by why some believe the OT is superior. It strikes me as very nonsensical. For the people who grew up watching the OT, and who had already mentally crafted their own ideas about the themes and ideas in the SW universe, it's understandable for why they prefer the OT. Perhaps you fall into this category? I don't know. Anyways, I'm curious as to why you think the OT is better.

Well, I did see it first, but its more than that.

Its not one thing. But I would say that a lot of it comes down to the following:

The OT has an charming idealism about it. I know grimdark and cynical is trendy these days, but it doesn't really appeal to me a lot of the time. That's not to say the OT isn't dark- the destruction of Alderan, the three different instances of implied or actual on-screen torture, the barely-veiled rape/sex slave implications to Jabba and Leia, the twist of Vader's identity, and Luke finding the charred bodies of his aunt and uncle all come to mind. But despite it all there's a sense of hope and idealism, of genuine heroes who triumph in the end. Particularly in the ending. Luke seemingly has a choice between killing his father or defeat, but he comes to realize that to kill his father is to fall, and by refusing to fight, redeems Vader and defeats the Empire, accomplishing what an army of Jedi and clones could not. And now, it is the ultimate culmination of the journey the Jedi Order began in the Prequels, from a callous, detached Order to a more human one that realizes that loving those close to you is not a fault.

Bottom line, their's a sense of joy and optimism that the PT just doesn't match.

There's also a sense of simplicity and at the same time, an undercurrent of surprising depth that I think often goes unappreciated.

And of course, coming first may make it easier to be iconic, because their's a lot of stuff that the OT got to do first.

Edit: Of course, that last one really isn't the PT's fault. But I do feel that it didn't really break new ground in its own right.

I chose the OT over the PT for one main reason: the OT doesn't have Episode I.

Don't get me wrong, I am not of the belief that TPM is some horrible abomination of film-making that should never have seen the light of day or anything like that. With that said, however, I do think it is the weakest of the six movies. Overall I can kind of dig it, but what drags it down is the pod racing scene. There's just...nothing to it except spectacle. And I wouldn't mind that if it didn't go on for as long as it did, but it just drags to me now. It was alright the first time but now I just skip it. Like most of Frodo's scenes in "The Two Towers", come to think of it.

I mean, it serves no purpose. There's nothing new or interesting revealed about any of the characters (who are mostly spectators anyway) during this. It doesn't even do much to sell Anakin as being an especially capable or amazing pilot, because I never got the sense of "oh hey he's subconsciously using the Force" from anything he did, and he barely won anyway. That whole "only human who can do it" is mostly an informed attribute, and the sequence itself doesn't do anything much to showcase his awesome piloting skills. If anything, I'd say it's not until Episode III that we see this part of his character at all shown in a convincing fashion.

So yeah, that's what brings the PT down for me. The OT never had much like that. The only sequence I can say I don't care for is the Jabba one in RotJ. But contrasted to pod racing, it at least serves to show how Luke has matured and grown as a Jedi since we last saw him. Plus it shows a multi-leveled plan on the part of the good guys, what with infiltrating Lando in quietly as a guard and then sending a disguised Leia to break out Han...but when she failed and Luke needs to come in, he had already prepared for that eventuality by sending in R2 with his lightsaber ahead of even Leia. So it gave us some character growth and development, showing us how Luke had grown since his encounter with Vader and training on Dagobah. It wasn't just a useless spectacle like the pod racing sequence.

All that said, I don't dislike the PT entirely because of one sequence in one movie. It's just that said sequence does manage to lower it down just enough that I rate the OT as above it, however slight that might be. Because I did enjoy quite a bit of the PT, and Episode III is probably my second favorite film of them all behind ESB, and even that is a very close race. I'm just a sucker for Star Destroyers and Lando.

The Romulan Republic wrote:

Agreed.

Again, hard to tell if you're being sarcastic.

I'm being sarcastic about everything except this. I certainly agree the Prequels are hated mostly because they are part of the Star Wars franchise, and thus not considered on par with the originals. If they were stand alone films, nobody would hate them really, because nobody would care that much - it really goes without saying.

RogueIce wrote:So yeah, that's what brings the PT down for me. The OT never had much like that. The only sequence I can say I don't care for is the Jabba one in RotJ. But contrasted to pod racing, it at least serves to show how Luke has matured and grown as a Jedi since we last saw him. Plus it shows a multi-leveled plan on the part of the good guys, what with infiltrating Lando in quietly as a guard and then sending a disguised Leia to break out Han...but when she failed and Luke needs to come in, he had already prepared for that eventuality by sending in R2 with his lightsaber ahead of even Leia. So it gave us some character growth and development, showing us how Luke had grown since his encounter with Vader and training on Dagobah. It wasn't just a useless spectacle like the pod racing sequence.

The Jabba infiltration plan never really made much sense. I'm not even sure what the original plan even was. Was it just to sell C3PO/R2D2 in exchange for Han? Probably not. As a child I never noticed how needlessly convoluted it was. Maybe they should have just showed up with a small rebel fleet in orbit around Tatooine and demanded Jabba release Han (perhaps in exchange for the money Han owed) or they would blow up his palace?

Komodo9Joe wrote:I am actually always puzzled by why some believe the OT is superior. It strikes me as very nonsensical. For the people who grew up watching the OT, and who had already mentally crafted their own ideas about the themes and ideas in the SW universe, it's understandable for why they prefer the OT. Perhaps you fall into this category? I don't know. Anyways, I'm curious as to why you think the OT is better.

(A) we grew up with it. (B) we like the characters more. (C) the PT is mostly boring, until Episode 3, when it suddenly rushes to tell the story we actually care about.

Anyway, I'd probably like it more if they ditch Episode I, start with Anakin as a teenager/twenty-something, make Episode 1 and 2 about clone wars adventures - building the relationship between Anakin and Obi-Wan, and then make Episode 3 about the betrayal/fall of Anakin, except not as rushed. Anakin doesn't need to be a special Messiah figure either - he can just be a great pilot/awesome Jedi.

Also, JJ Abrams apparently knows that OT fans are likely in their 30s and thus have more money to spend, so he's tailoring the new films towards them instead of 20-something millenial PT-fans who have no money. Old Han Solo = instant $$$.

(First time posting outside of the art gallery, so here goes...)

I doubt there will be too many votes for PT, so the comments are probably the more important part (if there are more/any votes for PT, that would seem to make the comments all the more important).

The PT tells a potentially more interesting story, but one that is harder to bring off with human interest. The OT, in particular the one-and-only true first, were simply better told. From a tech-geek standpoint, the OT equipment just *spoke* to me, far more... persuasively. There a plenty of practical reasons for that. I think that with time, if I can learn to tune out the worst of the dialogue in the PT (perhaps finding someway to remove Hayden Christensen's lines) I might actually enjoy them a fair bit.

Addendum to my above: I do think a lot of my issues would not have arisen with a different Jedi Order. They did not meet my expectations. In all truth, neither did the Clone Wars. From the way Star Wars spoke of the Clone Wars, I always imagined them as against or between Clones.

The isolation of the Jedi order could have fit with the PT. But the creche system, although reasonable in some ways, just didn't *work* very well as a plot point. As suggested above, the first movie feels like a [profitable] waste. Its more important plot points could have been spread across other parts. If one wanted to keep the creche system, the story of a powerful young Padawan, betraying the family of his childhood, for the family he wanted, could have been so much more tragic. In all fairness, the PT-era novelizations may well give this more. But, between the PT and the OT themselves? The PT comes up short.

Part of it is probably nostalgia. It was harder to morn the Jedi Order of the PT, than it was to cry for Sir Alec Guinness and a muppet. Nostalgia aside, I feel the OT told its story better. Less of a story, perhaps, but plucky underdogs victorious against the odds, followed up by a crashing defeat, and finished off with a battle that turned on personal redemption... not a bad tale.

Channel72 wrote:The Jabba infiltration plan never really made much sense. I'm not even sure what the original plan even was. Was it just to sell C3PO/R2D2 in exchange for Han? Probably not. As a child I never noticed how needlessly convoluted it was. Maybe they should have just showed up with a small rebel fleet in orbit around Tatooine and demanded Jabba release Han (perhaps in exchange for the money Han owed) or they would blow up his palace?

I'm not looking for "sci-fi nerd competence" here, same as the whole ID4 computer virus thing never bugged me. Point is, it demonstrates some level of planning and tactical thinking on Luke's part, which does more for me than the pod racing sequence ever will. That's what counts, not whether I can nitpick the plan itself to death.

As to the answer, the OT is superior because it is an example of superior storytelling. This is not to say that the PT is bad at all, but it is hardly as good as the originals. The Empire Strikes Back is a masterpiece, there is no way for the prequels to pull off the same feat considering that they have to be the build up to a payoff we already know.
Look at this modern version of the trailer(pointing out just how much modern hollywood spoils the plot of films in trailers) and tell me that the prequels could match this level of emotion

Eternal_Freedom wrote:The Ot is preferable to me, because it has a somewhat grander story I think. Less political crap and more interesting stuff.

I for one mostly liked the political stuff. And the sense of mystery in TPM and AOTC worked reasonably well, even if we knew it to be doomed.

My main issue with the Prequels was that they had a lot of baggage from having to set things up for the OT. For instance, the two epic lightsaber duels in ROTS are certainly great fun to watch, but they both lose a lot of their punch when you know the outcome in advance.

I think this is fundamentally what was wrong and why most don't enjoy them as much. It's like hearing the first half of a joke after the punchline. It isn't very entertaining and feels somewhat pointless, regardless of how well it is told.

And I'm still somewhat disappointed that ROTS didn't take advantage of the improved CGI and other SFX to do a truly epic space battle. Coruscant was pretty good, and certainly chaotic and so forth, but the focus on just two fighters weaving through the ships on approach to a target was, well, limiting I think.

It wasn't just the focus on two fighters, it was the fact that the battle itself lacked sufficient stakes. When we compare it with the excellent example of Endor, we see the problem. While the depiction of Endor was not without flaws, like the fact that the capital ships only exchanged fire on screen sporadically, it had the advantage that the stakes were built up and were obvious to all. Coruscant was nothing but backdrop, the lines of capital ships could have left and the story would have remained unchanged. In ROTJ, those Rebel capital ships served as a source of emotional stress to Luke in addition to their military role against the Empire.

biostem wrote:I enjoy the original trilogy vastly more than the prequels. That being said, I find certain scenes from the prequels really cool - like the battle above Coruscant in Ep 3, or the battle on Geonosis at the end of Ep 2.

While entertaining and impressively done, those battles had the problem that they were sideshows. When the AT-AT walkers menace our heroes in ESB, there is a sense of consequence for failure. So when Luke and Wedge each kill one, there is a sense of triumph. What emotion did you feel when you saw a clone walker explode in AOTC? Or even the TF Core ship(which had a much larger tactical impact than a single AT-AT)?

Komodo9Joe wrote:Ugh... the PT seems to be getting no love around here. Poll, as of now, remains 10 to nothing, in favor of the trilogy that features a narrative that has been used ad nauseam of a couple of characters embarking on a journey and ultimately achieving success over the forces of evil.

Perhaps because it was such a well executed example of this basic plot. And if you break it down the prequels are nothing but a tragedy about the fall of the old order and the rise and fall of the chosen one. Not that I am saying the prequels are bad, but they aren't as good as the originals. I will agree that watching all six episodes does make the latter ones more powerful.

The Romulan Republic wrote:The OT has an charming idealism about it. I know grimdark and cynical is trendy these days, but it doesn't really appeal to me a lot of the time.

I hope JJ Abrams realizes this in the new movie. From the spoilers I have seen, I'm not entirely sure that he did.

The Romulan Republic wrote:There's also a sense of simplicity and at the same time, an undercurrent of surprising depth that I think often goes unappreciated.

The point that you mentioned about Luke's realization is the biggest one for me. The idea that the solution lies not in violence is such a powerful one that is often missed.

The Romulan Republic wrote:And of course, coming first may make it easier to be iconic, because their's a lot of stuff that the OT got to do first.

I agree with the rest of what you said as well, but this is a key factor. It also helps that the OT will always built up as an incredible story for new fans in a way that the prequels aren't. Even as a fan that grew up with the PT(TPM came out when I was 9), the OT was built up in the eyes of the adults that first watched it with me and thus there was that element from when I started.

RogueIce wrote:Don't get me wrong, I am not of the belief that TPM is some horrible abomination of film-making that should never have seen the light of day or anything like that. With that said, however, I do think it is the weakest of the six movies. Overall I can kind of dig it, but what drags it down is the pod racing scene. There's just...nothing to it except spectacle. And I wouldn't mind that if it didn't go on for as long as it did, but it just drags to me now. It was alright the first time but now I just skip it. Like most of Frodo's scenes in "The Two Towers", come to think of it.

I mean, it serves no purpose. There's nothing new or interesting revealed about any of the characters (who are mostly spectators anyway) during this. It doesn't even do much to sell Anakin as being an especially capable or amazing pilot, because I never got the sense of "oh hey he's subconsciously using the Force" from anything he did, and he barely won anyway. That whole "only human who can do it" is mostly an informed attribute, and the sequence itself doesn't do anything much to showcase his awesome piloting skills. If anything, I'd say it's not until Episode III that we see this part of his character at all shown in a convincing fashion.

Part of the problem was that in DVD and Blu-Ray, the podrace was extended from the original theatrical version. It worked much better when edited down for length. Though I mostly agree with the criticism about it causing the plot to virtually stop. Even shortened it somewhat has this problem in that it doesn't directly affect the bigger picture. And in general this is a constant problem of the prequels. The action sequences all too often have nothing to do with emotional investment in the characters and their fates in the way that they do in the OT.

Channel72 wrote:The Jabba infiltration plan never really made much sense. I'm not even sure what the original plan even was. Was it just to sell C3PO/R2D2 in exchange for Han? Probably not. As a child I never noticed how needlessly convoluted it was. Maybe they should have just showed up with a small rebel fleet in orbit around Tatooine and demanded Jabba release Han (perhaps in exchange for the money Han owed) or they would blow up his palace?

I actually thought that the plan was always what we saw executed. It's the only version that makes sense. Only the plan we saw would actually get everyone out with all of their useful equipment. If R2 stays, so does Luke's new lightsaber. If Leia escapes, Chewie is still stuck. One possibility is that Luke was able to use a degree of Jedi foresight to develop this plan. It would certainly explain his confidence throughout the plan. And while it took a somewhat convoluted course to get there, Luke's plan of getting out of the palace makes some sense as it weakens the number of enemies he would face as opposed to in the palace directly.

As for a Rebel fleet, why would they risk an operation against a crime lord when they were preparing to attack the new Death Star? We know the importance of the main heroes carrying out the operation, Rebel command does not. If Leia and Luke were willing to go AWOL to rescue Han that was their business, borrowing even a small capital ship to do it was not.

RogueIce wrote:I'm not looking for "sci-fi nerd competence" here, same as the whole ID4 computer virus thing never bugged me. Point is, it demonstrates some level of planning and tactical thinking on Luke's part, which does more for me than the pod racing sequence ever will. That's what counts, not whether I can nitpick the plan itself to death.

]
I get what you're saying, but does the competence of a plan never matter? By that logic Joker in The Dark Knight is an amazing planner, despite the fact that his plans could never work in any reality not dictated by a screenwriter.

Adamskywalker007 wrote:I get what you're saying, but does the competence of a plan never matter? By that logic Joker in The Dark Knight is an amazing planner, despite the fact that his plans could never work in any reality not dictated by a screenwriter.

It depends on the competence of the movie and the context of the character. To take you TDK example, I thought overall the movie was great (your opinion may differ) and the Joker himself is often a chaotic force of nature type, so I can easily roll with it either being absurdly great planning, plots he just makes up and improvises as the situation goes on, etc. Overall it's the strength of the movie and the character (in this case, Heath Ledger's performance) that matters.

Sure if the movie sucks I'll rag on the details. But if I think the movie is good or the overall idea of the scenes manage to work then I'm a lot less likely to start worrying over the details and nitpicking stuff.

I'm not saying Luke was a tactical genius with his planning here. It just mattered that he was planning, in depth and with multiple stages (and arguably backup contingencies when things went wrong), which shows a clear character growth from the impulsive kid who was eager to go save the Princess by charging off into an entire Imperial battle station.

Actually, Luke always had a knack for coming up with sneaky and unconventional tactics, although Return of the Jedi was the first time in the films that he was shown doing much planning in advance rather than improvising on the spot. See his coming up with a plan to free Leia from the Death Star and his inventing the tactic to trip up the walkers (and then taking one out with a lightsaber and explosives) on Hoth. This culminated in his throwing out decades of planning by Yoda and Obi-wan to try to appeal to Vader's emotions and conscience rather than just killing him, and then throwing away his lightsaber when facing Palpatine.

Luke thinks outside the box and is willing to give ideas that others would dismiss a try. You can argue weather that's smart or a case of a guy taking dumb risks and getting lucky (except with Vader, where I truly don't think Luke could have cut down Vader without it destroying him psychologically/emotionally), but that's part of Luke's characterization and what makes him, in my humble opinion, perhaps the greatest Jedi.

Adamskywalker007 wrote:It wasn't just the focus on two fighters, it was the fact that the battle itself lacked sufficient stakes. When we compare it with the excellent example of Endor, we see the problem. While the depiction of Endor was not without flaws, like the fact that the capital ships only exchanged fire on screen sporadically, it had the advantage that the stakes were built up and were obvious to all. Coruscant was nothing but backdrop, the lines of capital ships could have left and the story would have remained unchanged. In ROTJ, those Rebel capital ships served as a source of emotional stress to Luke in addition to their military role against the Empire.

I wouldn't say Coruscant "...lacked sufficient stakes...", but I wish the capital ships had played more of a role in both Coruscant and Endor.

Incidentally, my favourite moment in the Battle of Coruscant is probably the one when Grievous's ship and a Republic ship trade broadsides.

I hope JJ Abrams realizes this in the new movie. From the spoilers I have seen, I'm not entirely sure that he did.

If the new Star Trek films are anything to go by, he's not terrible in this regard but I doubt he'll get the balance and tone completely right.

But I don't know how much freedom Disney is giving him.

The point that you mentioned about Luke's realization is the biggest one for me. The idea that the solution lies not in violence is such a powerful one that is often missed.

Indeed.

Its also magnificently original. Tell me, how often has an action movie ended with the hero winning by refusing to kill the villain, much less doing so without being preachy or a joke?

And then to be remembered as a great classic? That's not merely innovative, its arguably revolutionary.

I'm telling you, if they screw up Luke's characterization in the new films... well, there's not much they could do that would piss me off more.

Edit: To be clear, I'm not saying Luke has to be a complete pacifist. But he has idealism and an ability to think outside the box, and those are qualities that should be discarded only with very good reason.

However, his actions in Return of the Jedi also suggest mental/emotional fragility and rigidity. He seems to reject violence because he isn't capable of using it without risking falling to the Dark Side. Its all or nothing. You could do interesting and scary things with that.