A while ago, I saw a post on a starwars.com blog about a book on popular culture which said that TESB was the film that defined "Generation X." The author forgot about its predecessor ANH, which really was the definitive film of the post WWII era. This inspired a politically incorrect observation that has been festering in my craw for a long time and one that I've been reluctant to talk about because, well, it's not going to win me any popularity points.

If a fan genuinely considers TESB his or her favorite of the SW films, that's fine. I love TESB. It's a great film, one of the finest sequels ever made. But I've had it with the fandom peanut gallery, the media, et al. elevating TESB to a mile high pedestal above the other SW films. Or how it's almost become predictable that someone needs to say TESB is his or her favorite or the best of the series. Often, it's for specious, even downright dumb reasons ("it's great because it's...dark!"). Some have even taken it to a point where they consider TESB the only good SW film, while the others are wretched junk.

I cannot understand how anyone could luuuuuuurrrrrve TESB and dismiss or even despise the other SW films. There really isn't a tremendous amount of difference among the films in terms of quality. You might like one SW film better than another and it is entirely subjective, but we're not talking about the difference between 2001: A Space Odyssey and Plan 9 From Outer Space either. Sure it probably covers some of the juiciest parts of the OT cycle. But there's still loads of special effects. There's still comic bookish dialogue (which suits me fine). There's still all of the stuff that's in every single SW flick. You either appreciate them or you don't.

In any case, TESB was not immediately hailed as a great cinematic achievement. The majority of critics at the time liked it and audiences enjoyed it, but there was a lot of talk about the cliffhanger ending. Today people appreciate that sort of thing more than they once did. "Fellowship of the Ring" and "The Two Towers" kind of just stopped instead of having a neat ending and no one seemed to mind. TESB's rep grew in the '90s as fans, who were able to look at the film in the context of ROTJ, appreciated the direction the story took while some simply just thought it was as close to "Pulp Fiction" or "Resevoir Dogs" as SW ever got.

Over time though it seemed to me TESB's rep was at the expense of the other SW films, which isn't fair. As good as TESB is, it needed ANH to introduce the characters and universe (or, if you will, the entire PT if you watch in that order). In fact it was ANH that made the majority of filmgoers of the OT era fall in love with Luke and the crew. The suffering the characters endure in TESB doesn't have as much meaning without ROTJ.

What's as irritating is how some people use TESB as a frying pan on George Lucas. It was good because he didn't direct it, they say. Irwin Kershner did a great job with the film but that's probably because he was trying really hard not to screw it up. He wasn't a particularly noted director before TESB and didn't really create anything on par with it afterwards. Then there's the total misunderstanding about Leigh Brackett's contribution to the script. Ms. Brackett was in the late stages of cancer when she tried to crank out the first draft of the script, virtually none of which was actually used. TESB was really written by Lawrence Kasdan, in consultation with Papa George. Kasdan also wrote ROTJ, but you won't hear as much praise for that one.

Those who claim TESB was the last good SW film, or even the only good SW film, ought to take into consideration that it was TESB that set the tone for the remaining four films of the series. It was TESB that introduced Yoda, that shaped SW further as a mythic cycle, that introduced the idea Vader was Luke's father, and that Vader was redeemable. If you didn't like the story in ROTJ or the PT...blame TESB.