Rhikter said:
Yesterday, I was thinking about a complaint I had read some time ago. Someone was arguing against the elaborately choreographed saber duels in the PT because they were not as passive as the ones in the OT. This reminded me of a comment about "Artistic License" I made some time ago.

I bring this up because some people need to seriously consider exactly what it is they're talking about when they make arguments like this "Saber Duel" one. We cannot think about forms of art - especially film - in a purely logical manner. As layman as it may sound, the fact is that, if we did, movies would be extremely boring and unoriginal. You must have a harmony between your artistic and logical vision. Yes, the battles in the PT could have be done similarly to those in the OT, but that would not have been artistically reflective of the world GL was trying to create for the PT; that is a world where the Jedi order is thriving and at it's highest. The elegance of the PT duels reflects this, just as the passive battles of the OT reflect a dark oppresive world where Luke received his training from an elderly Kenobi and Yoda, and Vader has asthma.

Actually, there's a very simple and logical explanation for the difference in fight styles between the trilogies.

"Real world" - on the OT, they just made it up as they went along and had a basic knowledge of fight styles but didn't worry about making it the "ultimate battle" because the focus was on who the characters were and why they were fighting, not the fight itself.

"In universe" - in the OT, the only people using sabers are two old men who haven't done it in 20 years who are way past their prime and a kid who's running more on instinct than training. In the PT, you've got young, strong Jedis at the peak of their careers and physical fitness, so naturally they're going to be more energetic and creative in their fight styles.