Good points and arguments pro and con here, and as a fan who started with RotJ, the first movie of the saga I saw at the cinema, my favorite moments came from the comics (Marvel and Dark Horse) because they were bold and didn't repeat ideas (ok some things are too good not to shed light from another angle).

My point is, that "Star Wars" as a standalone movie worked fine, as a part of a larger saga it needed attention, which Adywan gave it - "Empire" had Kershner, who understood that a sequel and a possible middle-part must put the heroes into grave danger and even death (so Han Solo was in real peril not just "oops wrong way") - then came "Jedi", and again, as a "lone film" it worked somehow (as I meant above) without knowledge who and what the rest was, but as a third part (and conclusion) of this trilogy (and saga) it is a very "stupid" funpark-ride - in retrospective meant to sell toys and dolls :-(

So should we leave ALL the bad parts be? or would it be better to twist and replace (if possible or feasable) until we have a coherent/harmonious trilogy (or saga, if the PT can be adjusted).

I like the second DS, but the role it has is not the one it should have, and yes the Rebellion grew from movie to movie, so it makes sense storywise that the galaxy wants to overthrow its unwanted dictator and topple the seat of power: Coruscant - with all means possible (even if they all go down in flames and leaving a galaxy burned and scarred, but FREE at last from the Sith suppression)!