I’ve gone back and forth on the prequels a lot over the years. I have very mixed feelings on them, but they’re fascinating movies to pick apart.
The OT works because it got general audiences invested in its characters. That’s why it caused reactions in the theater like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzRveOGMflo
Star Wars movies only really work when they’re character-driven, and when you have compelling heroes and villains that stick out in the audience’s minds. There isn’t really an exact formula for how to achieve this, and I think George tried his best to recapture that magic when he made TPM, but failed.
At the start of ANH, R2 and 3PO are our audience proxy characters that we follow, up until we meet Luke, who then becomes the primary POV character. R2 and 3PO have great chemistry as they play off each other, and adults and children alike enjoy their back-and-forth, even after the main POV shifts to Luke. Meanwhile, the film’s plot centers around Leia, and the film does a good job of getting us to sympathize with her plight while also seeing how bold and resilient she is.
In TPM, our initial POV is Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan, who are very stoic and flat, outside of an occasional snarky comment from Obi-Wan. The central character, the Queen, is also very stoic and flat. Then, the role of audience proxy is filled by Jar Jar, which, in theory, isn’t a bad idea, except for the fact that it’s…well, Jar Jar. Unlike the droids, his appeal as a character is to a much narrower demographic.
I think George realized the cast was too stuffy and stoic, so he tried to counterbalance that with Jar Jar and kid Anakin, but the result is that we get two extremes with little balance or chemistry between them. With the OT, the main hero characters had more of a balance between serious and lighthearted, which endeared the audience to them and allowed for people to latch onto those characters and their relationships.
Michael Arndt talked about how satisfying SW77 was because of the brilliant ending. I’m quoting from another website which describes Arndt’s admiration for it:
"…in order for an ending to work, the story has to have from the beginning an effective set of stakes, which Arndt divides into three types—external stakes, i.e. the main conflict that drives the narrative; internal stakes, i.e. the protagonist’s emotional and psychological conflicts; and finally, and most importantly, the philosophical stakes, i.e. the story’s larger moral conflict, expressed as a conflict between the “dominant values” of the world and its “underdog values.” As an example, Arndt uses Star Wars, in which the external stakes are the rebellion’s conflict with the Empire, the internal stakes are Luke’s personal desire to be more than just a moisture farmer and escape Tatooine, and the philosophical stakes are whether the force is real (the underdog values) or whether, as Han says, it’s just “hokey religions and ancient weapons” (the dominant values).
A great ending, then, according to Arndt is one in which (among other things) the underdog philosophical values triumph over the dominant ones. In Star Wars, for example, Luke’s decision to switch off his targeting computer and allow the force to guide him while firing at the Death Star, along with Han’s decision to return and help Luke, confirm the power of the force and represent a victory of the film’s underdog values. In this same moment, the external and internal stakes are also resolved (the rebels win and Luke achieves a personal self-actualization by proving himself a great pilot), which Arndt also emphasizes is important for a powerful ending—the three sets of stakes converge onto one moment and are resolved all together."
It is a tragedy for Star Wars that Mr. Arndt struggled so much with the script that he had to leave the ST.
Contrast the end of SW77 with TPM where dumb luck allows both Jar Jar and Anakin to bring victory to our underdogs. Horrible, horrible writing.