The Star Wars Prequel movies have a more consistent story than the Sequels do

The argument

The Prequels were written and directed by George Lucas, the creator of Star Wars himself. Over the course of three movies, he depicted a tale of personal tragedy and systemic corruption that set the stage for the original tale beloved worldwide. The story wasn't perfect, but it was Lucas's story, and one that the viewers could follow. The characters had clear arcs, the plot had a single direction, and the themes had unmistakable focus. On the other hand, the Sequels were an incoherent mess, as different creative voices fought for control of the series. J.J. Abrams, the director of The Force Awakens, set up several plot threads and mysteries, only for Rian Johnson, the director of The Last Jedi, to completely disregard them. He then set up several themes of his own, only for Abrams to walk them back in The Rise of Skywalker. All the while, Kathleen Kennedy and Disney executives exerted their own influence on the movies. The resulting trilogy contradicts itself at almost every point, and the story becomes impossible to follow. Lucas's Prequels had their flaws, but they were united in identity. One could feel the effect of George Lucas telling the story he wanted to tell. With so many leaders fighting over the Sequels, this cohesive vision could never have been achieved. It's not impossible to tell a story with different directors and writers, but it failed in this particular instance.

Premises

Counter-arguments

A cohesive story means nothing if the story is consistently bad. The Prequels were bogged down by uninspired politics and unlikable characters. Even if one could look past that, the poor production made them even harder to take in. The consistency of Lucas's vision doesn't outweigh all the flaws of the Prequels. While the Sequels weren't a unit, they were each very interesting films. J.J. Abrams gave viewers a really interesting cast and set them up for mysteries to be solved later. While Rian Johnson diverged from Abrams' plan, his own vision was a compelling examination of the fall of heroes and the burdens of the past. And The Rise of Skywalker was a great spectacle, unhindered by clunky dialogue or boring scenes. So while the Prequels were more consistent, the Sequels had the actual better quality.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] Consistency is one virtue among several, and the position claims the prequels are better overall. A coherent story can still make for worse films than an incoherent one. [Rejecting P2] Single authorship did not deliver what the premise credits to it. The prequels' central arc is widely faulted for the turn to the dark side arriving abruptly, and the trilogy's tonal and thematic focus is itself much disputed. [Rejecting P3] The account of the sequels overstates the discontinuity. Each film was completed and released whole, and each drew admirers as well as detractors on its own terms; that later instalments revised earlier setups is a criticism of the plan rather than evidence that the story cannot be followed.