BLAST! THIS WHOLE POST WAS BASED ON A MISREADING OF 'ROTJ' AS 'ROTS'.

I AGREE WITH TB. I WILL ALSO SET YOU ON FIRE IF YOU THINK E2 WAS BETTER THAN ROTJ.

ORIGINAL POST RESUMES:

TheBoost said:

Anyone who said Ep II was better than ROTJ would get set on fire by me.

This logic works for me, so let's try it out on you.

Let's say I owe you $30 and I plan to pay you back in $10 installments over three weeks.

The first week I cough up $3. Not too bad since I promise to make up for it by pay $14 each of the following weeks. Final score: 3/10. (30%)

The second week, I pay you $4. You have to admit, it's more than last week, but is it 4/10 (40%) or 4/14 (29%)? However, I promise I'll pay you $26 the final week to make up for it.

The third week, I pay you $5. I am forced to admit I have no more money nor intention of paying you the remainder of what I owe you or have promised. Did I pay you 5/10 (50%)? Or did I pay you 5/26 (19%)?

Which week did I pay you the most? Which week did I most fall short? Can it be the same week?

As the middle episode of the prequel trilogy, I have the least amount of requirement for AotC. Is it better than TPM? Yes, I think it is. Does it sufficiently muddy the waters in preparation for a... water... purifying... Episode 3? I think so. However, it was still pretty bad. Meaning that if the Prequel Trilogy as a whole was going to redeem itself, then Episode 3 not only had to be good, but it had to be good enough to ease the debt of Episodes 1 & 2. It wasn't.

I maintain that Episode 3 was better than Episodes 1 and 2, but still fell well short of "good" and way way short of "good enough to ease the debt".

If I was forced to watch one again, and not in the Ridiculously Improved Frink Format, it would probably be AotC. I find it to be the least disappointing, even it's only the second best made.

And a movie that had more than 16 years of hype and waiting that (generally) lived up to the hype: Fellowship of the Ring.