ChainsawAsh said:

This whole "tainting the legacy of past works" thing reminds me of something Stephen King said when asked if it bothers him when bad film adaptations ruin his books (paraphrasing here):

"They're not ruined. They're sitting on the shelf right behind me."

That's a great explanation. I worded my thoughts incorrectly. Even though to me it's the Legacy, it's really the direction at the time. To better explain my thoughts, this statement by me;

The legacy of Star Wars was tainted a long long time ago (marketing tie-ins & Return).

should really be more like this;

For me; after Return was released, the franchise became something I wasn't interested in following anymore.

What was a deal-breaker for me, was a deal-maker for millions of others.

I will say, however, that where the first three films are concerned, I think Lucas actually is tainting their legacy. He's altered the special effects, altered the characters, and altered the entire story, while suppressing the originals. The originals won the awards, grabbed the public consciousness, became part of our culture, forever altered the way outer space science fiction would be presented on film, and very much altered the technology of special effects. Weirder still, he's succeeding in that revised\suppressed history - that tainting.

In that regard, he may be one of the few people who has actually succeeded at tainting a past work. At the very least, he's the first artist I can think of who actually works against his fan base. They express a desire and appreciation of something - and he intentionally gives them something different, while lying about why. An extremely odd situation indeed.