|
The real problem with watching them in chronological order is that it would ruin (or at least pretty drastically alter) the dramatic tension of Eps. IV-VI. If you go into the second trilogy knowing that Darth Vader is Luke's father, the movies become less about the larger conflict between the Empire and the Rebellion and more about Luke's ignorance and the moment that Luke finds out what the audience already knows, which is nowhere near as interesting as finding out along with him. If you watch the trilogy in chronological order, for most of IV-VI you'd be focusing a lot more on Luke's cluelessness about his origin than on any of the unfolding good v. evil drama; Vader's claim that he's Luke's father (which is one of the coolest shock-moments in American cinema) would lose all of its impact--the scene would instead be about Luke's reaction to what we already know, and it's not like that reaction is anything other than what you'd expect; and Yoda's confirmation in Return of the Jedi would be really, really anticlimactic, highlighting the absurdity of the Luke/Leia = siblings thing even more.
This doesn't take into account the fact that the new movies, above all else, are simply boring. As far as the politics being well done, I dunno--does anyone even know (or, more importantly, care) what Eps. I-III's overarching political conflict is about? Is anyone really breathless for the next movie, when the mysteries of the Trade Federation's, like, evil tax brackets or whatever will be revealed? The Anakin/Obi-Wan stuff is cool, but the framing political story is just dull.
|