>>718784795
>>718785113
>>718785492
As an addendum to this, Roger Ebert was one of the few positive people on the prequels (don't take this to mean anything, he was always contrarian to public opinion, only SW prequel he disliked was AotC (still got 2/4)) and here are some responses to his reviews, written years after the fact (around 2012 when the 3D reissue was starting):

>I read most of the Episode 1 review and almost puked. I don't think it is that bad of a movie, but he is talking it up like it is some work of art.

>George Lucas, do yourself a favor and hand the franchise over to Joss Whedon and let him make Star Wars awesome again!
>Serenity blows episodes 1-3 away.

>He's and idiot

>I'm going to have to watch RotS sometime again, because I remember thinking it was the worst of the bunch when I first saw it by a longshot. The writing was so, so bad. That alone about killed the movie for me, and there were a half dozen other things that just kept piling up.

>(Quoting Ebert) "Star Wars: Episode III" returned to the space opera roots of the original film and succeeded on that level,
>Im sorry he must have gotten a different version of the movie than what I watched

>Ebert is like Tarantino in that he has erratic and questionable taste in films.