No. I am saying that there are two separate story archs. The original trilogy, which is the main story, featuring Luke Skywalker as the main hero, is more important than the prequels, which are all just background filler. Episodes 4-6 can stand alone without 1-3 perfectly fine as a unique trilogy. The Prequels NEED 4-6 to make any sense. You can watch 4-6 without 1-3, but you can't really watch 1-3 without 4-6.
And, you completely miss the point. Episodes 1-3 were never part of the original story when Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi were created/written. Using your LOTR example from previous posts, what you are describing is if JRR Tolkien had decided to add the Hobbit to the beginning of Fellowship of the Rings after it was already written, after almost two decades of the LOTR being established as a story.
There is a huge difference in assumptions of the viewer's knowledge, and this is the biggest reasons why 4-6 then 1-3 is better than 1-6. The Prequels assume that you are already familiar with Jedi, lightsabers, the Force, etc. The only reason you care at all about Jake Lloyd is because you already know who Anakin Skywalker grows up to be. You already know who he becomes, you already know how his story ends. You can be thrown into battle almost immediately on the Trade Federation ship, because you already know who the Jedi are, you know about their powers, you don't need it explained to you. Why? Because it's assumed you have already seen 4-6.
God, I was trying to avoid the whole spoilers for the film because there were people who said they hadn't seen the movie, but you are being way too dense here.
People should watch episodes I-III before IV-VI because by watching Episode IV first the prequels become completely irrelevant. You already know virtually everything story-wise that will happen in Episode I-III.
By your method of viewing, when Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon initially meet Anakin, everyone knows that he will ultimately be trained, and by Obi-Wan (even though Obi-Wan was only an Apprentice, and Qui-Gon was the only one who wanted to train him). You can fairly assume that it is because Obi-Wan is promoted, and because Qui-Gon isn't capable of training anymore (fair assumption is that because he's dead, especially once you hear that everyone in the Jedi Council was against it).
By watching IV-VI first, you know that Anakin has 2 children, and the mother dies after birth. That means that as soon as Episode II ends and we know that Padme is pregnant, you know she will have twins and pass away.
By watching IV-VI first, you know that Anakin Skywalker (he who is to bring balance to The Force) turns to the Dark Side and becomes Darth Vader. You also know that he is turned into a half-man, half-machine, and that Obi-Wan has fought and defeated him once in a Duel.
By watching IV-VI first, you know that all the Jedi will be killed except for Obi-Wan and Yoda. So when you see an entire Council of Jedi, dozens of Younglings, and countless Knights/Apprentices/Padawans, you know they all will be killed.
By watching IV-VI first, as soon as you hear "Chancellor Palpatine", you know he is a heel and that he will eventually become "Emperor Palpatine" and that he is actually a Sith Lord.
None of those would be spoiled by watching the movies in the Order George Lucas intends them to be watched.
Let me ask you something...
-Do you watch Back to the Future III first? But for a few scenes at the beginning and end, it takes place before I and II does.
No, because 3 comes after 2 which comes after 1. And because since the plot involves time travel, 3 really doesn't come before the others.
-Do you watch the Godfather II, or at least half of it, before you throw in the Godfather? Half of the movie takes place before the Godfather does.
No, because last I checked, 2 comes after 1.
-Do you need to have a fan edited version of Pulp Fiction to watch because you can't follow it otherwise? The chronology is mixed up throughout the film. It starts and ends at the same point.
No, but it might have helped me enjoy the film more. The film was damn confusing. And since it is only 1 film, it does not fall into this conversation.
-Do you need to flip between Kill Bill volume 1 and volume 2 just so you can see the Bride kill the people in the right order? The order of kills is mixed up between the two.
Actually, I don't watch Kill Bill, that's how I deal with that. And again, 2 comes after 1.
-Do you now have to watch X-Men First Class and Wolverine before watching X-Men 1, 2 and 3? Both take place prior.
No, because First Class was a reboot of the franchise. Otherwise, I most likely would, although I would likely not watch 3, as it was shit.
The answer should be, no, of course not. Because you are already expected to be smart enough to figure out what's going on. You can watch the Godfather, then watch the Godfather II, including all of the "prequel" scenes featuring Robert DeNiro, even though they take place earlier. You can watch Pulp Fiction without having to edit it into a chronologically ordered sequence, and you can watch Kill Bill 1 and 2 back to back, despite the timeline being intertwined. It's really not asking all that much.
No, but by watching the movies out of order, the plot will be spoiled.
