>>213041412>>213042007The difference in the sequels and the prequels is not just that the prequels are shit and the sequels are shitter. What it comes down to is the prequels are something interesting badly made, and the sequels are something boring made *really* well.
I.e. if you wanted to you could remake the prequels, recast everything, get rid of the awful CGI and wooden acting and basically fix all the shit stuff and you'd end up with recognizably the same movies but better. You could not do this with the sequels because they don't have any substance.
The difference in worldbuilding can't be overstated. People forget that the prequels pretty much invented what a jedi actually was. The originals didn't really lay that out all that well, the prequels took the jedi and turned them into the monastical robed monks people think of them as (which is funny because obi-wans 'im blending in here in sandytown' robes just became the default uniform of the order).
There's a reason so many properties based on the prequels have been made. As bad as the movies are, they genuinely try to world build and set up a universe you can recognize and follow along with. They are also explicitely not copying the original movies, but trying to do their own thing.
Meanwhile the sequels just don't do any worldbuilding or make any attempt to make sense but do just try to copy without thought, which is how we have things like the empire somehow just being the big bad again and the heroes being the resistance even though that turns everything on its head.