Okay, its all just extended special effects sequences. Either way, the 'plot' is fitted around these action sequences, and not the other way around. Its like how in a video game you have a short bit of dialogue or something, then you immediately go in to the action, because thats what matters in a video game.
This is part of why I think TPM is objectively better, because that arent as many of those sequences, and they are more there for the story than the story being there for them. In ROTS its just so obvious that Lucas cant really be bothered with the dialogue scenes, that he just wanted to get them out of the way and continue with the action.
I can't say this bothered me, to be honest, and I don't see how those two movies have different approaches. All six Star Wars movies, like most popcorn movies, are based on a very simple exposition-action scene-exposition-action scene structure.
I agree, I don't see a difference in approach between the two movies.
ROTS just happens to be very action-intensive because Lucas structured the PT in a way to leave a LOT of ground to cover in ROTS, so it's very fast-paced with the second half especially being almost one action sequence after another.
The difference between ROTS and TPM is that in TPM theres relatively few big action sequences, and they're all necessary to the story. Would you care to tell me in what way the fight between Yoda and Palpatine had anything to do with the story? They fight, neither wins or loses, and then Yoda just leaves... The only reason it was there was so we could have another lightsaber fight, and lightsaber fights are, like, really bitchin', right? Same goes for the huge fight with Grevious. It didnt need to be in the story, but its easier to have another big fight where a huge robot wields four lightsabers than try and write some good dialogue, or include Obi-wan in the film in a way that connects with the main story. Same with the buzz droids sequence, they could have taken that out and the film would have been totally the same. And do we really need to get into the 'epic' final duel? Swinging around on ropes above a river of lava?
I think the best duel in ROTS is actually the one between Palpatine and Mace Windu, because it only lasts about a minute, without dragging on for no reason.
As for the OT being the same, thats just plain wrong, with the exception of the ewok battle in ROTJ. If you look at ESB, generally considered the best, theres the opening action sequence of the battle on Hoth, and then thats pretty much it until the finale. I guess theres the bit in the asteroid field, but that only lasts a minute or two, then youre back to character development. Even the finale isnt really an 'action sequence'. Leia and co run away from the stormtroopers, its just basic shoot and run. Luke and Vader have their duel, but theres a clear structure to that duel, there isnt huge bit where the characters only fight, theres so much dialogue and development going on, which is all important to the overall story.
Vader is trying to get Luke angry, Luke is trying to resist that but take down Vader. The idea that Luke is reckless and possibly a bit too angry has been developed throughout the film, and his thirst to prove himself has been there from the get go. Additionally, his anger at Vader is well established, this is then challenged by Vaders revelation, and this is something that will continue to be developed until the duel in ROTJ. The fact that Vader wants Luke to join him, and Lukes sacrifice is also important in the continuing theme of the films. So that duel wasnt really an action sequence, it was a sequence in which characters and themes are further developed, and they happened to be fighting at the same time. Nothing like that could happen in the duel between Anakin and Obi-wan because they had already decided to kill each other, there wasnt anything there to develop, they also didnt even seem that close to begin with.
So did the really need a duel twice the length of Vader and Lukes? No.
