I'm amazed at how many very minor flaws people on this site manage to find in the prequels.

The make-up on ian mcdiarmid? First of all, I didn't notice anything wrong with it when I watched the prequels, and secondly, even if there was, it's not a big deal.

Secondly, the plot for the Phantom Menace was great: saving an endangered planet (naboo). And the plot for Attack of the Clones was good enough, and the plot for Revenge of the Sith was fantastic (Anakin's turn to the dark side).

Thirdly, I don't even care about the not-so excellent dialogue. Sure some of it was cliche. Like Darth Vader's "nooooooooooo"... but who cares? The films were an awesome tragedy.

Fourthly, the original trilogy wouldn't mean nearly as much to me if the prequel trilogy didn't exist. I mean, sure the acting's better. But not by much. I mean look at Ewan McGregor, Samuel Jackson, Ian Mcdiarmid, Liam Neeson, Christopher Lee.... all fantastic actors from the prequels.... and sure the story in the Original Trilogy was just as good as (but not better than) the prequels when you compare the two trilogies as individual episodes, but overall as one big, single movie the original trilogy just wasn't as good as the overall story of the prequels was as a single movie....

I mean, you can't deny that the awesomeness of the action in the prequel trilogy was far greater than the awesomeness of the action in the original trilogy... and the ships abundance of great-looking ships was greater too... combine that with the awesome story of the prequels and you have one pretty fantastic trilogy.