To me, as big fans of both trilogies, they do have some flaws.
To pick a "desert island" trilogy, I'd have to go with Star Wars. The original version, thank you. I won't even launch into an SE/DVD version discussion.
Why Star Wars? Many, many reasons, but here's three biggies:
1. I was so intimately familiar with LoTR (the novel) that a lot of PJ's changes don't sit well with me. Sure, I will agree that he's a better director than Lucas, heck even a better writer, but he changed an awful lot from the book that I felt DIDN'T need to be changed (and still would have made an effective, if not MORE effective, scene for his movies). The changes I felt were unnecessary include Sam's character, Faramir's character, The Ents character & portrayal, Gandalf's character and others.
2. Someone earlier said that he felt emotions "were forced upon you by LoTR [movies]". To this I agree. Subtlety is not one of Jackson's strong suits (nor is infrequent use of rotating helicopter shots to convey "vastness of landscape"--geez, lucky I don't suffer from vertigo). A lot of LoTR scenes made the point "YOU MUST FEEL THIS WAY" with its heavy handed directing. The story is strong enough on its own, just tell it, without embellishment, and the emotion will come. I kind of wish someone had hired Frank Darabont for the screenplay--he knows how to respect original source material and transcribe it onscreen.
3. Speaking of screenplay, how about Philippa "I'm Here To Correct Tolkien's Errors" Boyens?
Despite all of these misgivings I have towards LoTR, the essential story was strong enough to still get through and make these enjoyable movies. But instead of the A+ score I'd like to give films based on what I consider to be the greatest fiction novel I've ever read, these changes knock it down to a B+. Still good, but could have been so much better.
The Empire Strikes Back, to me, the closest to film perfection Hollywood has gotten since The Godfather I and II. Star Wars is an exceptional film (though I rank it just shy of ESB). And like the GF films, they are plagued by a weak[er] third act. Despite that third act, it does nothing to diminish what was sheer movie magic in the first two movies.
Unlike SW, the LoTR trilogy ends with what might be the strongest of the films (especially after the Extended Edition comes out). But nothing in the LoTR moved me as much as The Empire Strikes Back.
So I guess I'm giving SW the edge based on my love for that 2nd act (and ironically, I find the 2nd act to be the weakest in LoTR).
Both trilogies are full of "woulda" "shoulda" "coulda". If Lucas had retained the creative minds who had input in the first two movies, not repeated the Death Star conceit, and made the third film BUILD on the tone Empire set, rather than try to revert it back to a more kid-friendly version...and for goodness sakes had NOT made Leia and Luks siblings (and "ick-ifying" a great moment in Empire), they really could have gone down as The Definitive Trilogy for the ages.
Had Jackson let someone with more restraint touch the screenplay, and had directed with a less heavy hand with regards to action and emotions (I mean, jeez, Helm's Deep is like less than 10% of the written book [TTT], but is about 20% of the TTT movie!) and stayed truer to the written version of several key main characters, that could have gone down as the definitive way to transcribe a beloved book to screen.
Bottom line, I love Star Wars, and I really like LoTR. Warts and all. But if I gotta pick one, I'd pick SW original versions.
"Bring my shuttle!"
PS - I'd take my Dark Tower books and Lord of the Rings novel before either of these DVDs to my desert island, though!
