Originally Posted by ChrisMcCarthy
Just shows how diverse different opinions can be....
This movie is considered by 'most' to be the only Star Wars film which was adequately directed. (GL too involved in the other 5) As to the title, how is the title childish when this is EXACTLY the point of the movie? The Empire recently had their expensive Death Star destroyed by an unimportant group of rebels. Suddenly, they are taking the rebellion seriously, and STRIKING BACK.
No disagreement at all about the quality of the directing, only the title.
To put it in perspective, here's what some other movies using similar logic in coming up with titles might look like:
Kill Bill becomes The Bride Strikes Back
Terminator becomes Skynet Strikes Back
Revenge becomes Husband Strikes Back
Any Harry Potty movie could be Voldemort Strikes Back
Day After Tomorrow becomes Nature Strikes Back
X-Men: The Last Stand becomes The Mutants Strike Back
My Super Ex-Girlfriend becomes becomes Supergirl Strikes Back
Superman Returns becomes Lex Luthor Strikes Back
and so on.....
Now, while these aren't all sequels, it's actually easier to use 'strikes back' with sequels since so many of them revive a villian to enact some type of revenge upon the hero of the first movie. But, for some reason, using 'strikes back' isn't nearly so common in titles as are 'revenge' or 'vengeance' or 'returns'. Obviously, 'strikes back' doesn't seem to hit a chord with movie producers.
As far as the content of Empire Strikes Back, the striking back is definitely a major plot thread of the movie, just as rescuing Princess Leia is even more integral to A New Hope, and yet that film is not titled Rescue of the Princess, or Quest for the Princess.
Of course, I don't expect everyone (or even anyone) to agree with me, especially those who grew up hearing the title as The Empire Strikes Back. As I said before, it is so ingrained into public consciousness now, that it seems perfectly natural.
Good movie? Absolutely! Good title? No way!