I watched SW on HBO when I was seven, ROTJ at the theater when I was eight, and ESB as a rental when I was ten. I loved them then, but considering how the end of Jedi wrapped up in a neat little bow, the idea of more SW films didn't cross my mind.

I enjoyed the explosion of the EU starting with Zahn's Thrawn trilogy. Some of the EU was very good, even great at times, a lot of it was bad, but it was nice to have Star Wars around in some capacity. I bought the 1995 release, the 1997 release, and I was really psyched to hear that a new SW movie would be released in 1999.

Seven years later, the PT feels like EU material: some of it was good, even great at times, a lot of it was bad, but it was nice to have Star Wars back in some capacity. To me, anything beyond the OT is bonus: even if it falls on its face, I always have the OT to fall back on.

I don't want to keep the thread off-topic, but I'll just say this on the subject of the OT and PT being criticized for the same elements.

It's degrees.

There may be bad acting in the OT just as in the PT. But if there is a scale of bad acting, with a '1' being "sometimes the performances are inconsistent" and a '10' being "an Andy Sidaris film", the OT would occasionally go to 2. The PT spent a lot of time in 3 and would often get to 5.[