It would not be true to say that I did not like the series or setting. I LOVED the 4th, 5th, and 6th movie. I didn't detest the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd movies, but I really did not like them as well, but since we were exposed to the second set first, maybe that is understandable, even if they were made before I was born
Mea culpa, the commentary in my last post was directed at Ryvaken and no one else.
Speaking of whom . . . yes, Lucas was a poor writer. So was Tolkien. However, both were/are quite good at tapping into the collective unconscious and creating worlds that sparked the imaginations of literally millions of people. Both also managed to refuel their respective genres by bringing the genres into the public eye. Where once (1900-1960s or so) the SF genre was pretty much limited to a fairly small and introverted audience, after Lucas and Rodenberry (another not so great writer), the audience for the genre expanded exponentially. More importantly, in some ways, studios and producers saw that SF could make affordable, profitable television and film. While both L. and R. were poor writers, without them we wouldn't have the same proliferation and general acceptance of SF as a genre and would have had to wait a lot longer for decent to good SF television/film. Honestly, speaking as a soon-to-be doctor of medieval lit (come March *crossed fingers*), the same can be said about the Beowulf
transcriber - his writing is definitely not the best, but his work helped spawn native English/Anglo-Saxon imaginative fiction and for that, we continue to read and study his work roughly 1300-1400 years after his death (going by the earliest dates for the epic).
But, again, this is hardly the place or time for such a debate/discussion, even if it is pretty much one sided (sorry, "Lucas is a hack" isn't really "discussion" or "debate"). And, yes, I realize that I just went back on my word from the previous post. Again, mea culpa. I'll be good and be quiet on this subject now.