>
> Many adults went into it as "adults" and not the "kids" they were who saw it first. As a kid, you don't notice that the acting isn't that great and that the story is not exactly original. And the 50's generation grew up on low budget stuff at the matinee, so Star Wars seemed to be a grand version of it.
>
> I think I went in as an adult and came out as a kid. I saw it for the first time about 25 years ago. It was new then. I liked the old westerns that inspired Star Wars and got a kick out of comparing them. Some scenes like the gun fight between the Millenium Falcon and the Ti fighters (Tie? Ty? Tye? I forget.) were lifted from WWII epics like Twelve O'Clock High, circa 1949. I think he did a good job of it and quality of the acting was exactly right for what he set out to do.


I have to agree with both eric and Howard on this one. I saw Star Wars when it first came out; I think I was six or thereabouts. Looking back, I realise I didn't have the faintest idea of the plot details until I saw it again later, when I was older. But I loved it more than any other movie I'd seen at that time. I can watch it again and again now, and I still love it. I feel the same about the first Indiana Jones movie - it's sheer adventure, excitement and escapism in the grand old style.

Having said that, that's ALL I think it is. No more, no less. That's all I want from a movie sometimes, and Star Wars does it for me. Studying it in Bible class as a metaphor? You've got to be kidding. Some people take entertainment way too seriously. And eric is right - maybe talking about the hyperdrive on the Millennium Falcon DOES bring together people who wouldn't normally communicate, but personally I prefer to communicate with people who have a life.

I'm not so insecure that I have to justify my liking for something by claiming it has some higher intellectual or philosophical virtue. Sheesh, it's OKAY to just enjoy a movie because it's fun. Why does it have to be any more than that?

Brunnen-"the Phantom Menace was not fun"G