i always get sick of this argument. yes, the fights may have been made more flashy for entertainment sake. but everything in a movie is for entertainment sake. the movie was made for entertainment's sake, it's a movie.

so its justified visually solely thanks to the artform that is it's medium.

and then canonically and story wise it makes sense as well. sure you can say they just made up that lore to justify the movie but listen carefully i have a secret for you: thats what lore is

luke skywalker and han solo aren't real, hate to break it to you. all those extra expanded universe stuff is just made up to justify the actions of the movie. everything is made up to justify the vision in the artists head. thats why we have books like "tales from mos eisley" or "shadows of the empire" to explain weird and nonsensical points in the movies,

example, how in the original trilogy luke went from a blue lightsaber to a green one out of the blue. they never discuss or talk about it in the films, it isn't until some dude made up a book that mentions it did we get an explanation (dont even bring up the recently released deleted scene i dont want to hear it)

thats what lore is. alien vs. predator franchise started up as just them trying to justify a nonsensical cameo in predator 2.

and ignoring every single one of those points, the exciting raver dance motions of the prequel lightsaber duals are way more engaging than the previous ones. sacrilege to say i know but the original trilogy was made drawing inspiration from action films of the time and before hand. slow westerns and stoic samurai films. (also the canon justifies the slow lightsaber battles)

the prequels came out for a whole new audience, most several generations removed from the original inspirations of the first trilogy. seeing jedis doing crazy flips and wild sword acrobatics with dual-light sabers in a post matrix/crouching tiger world is way more appropriate then a geriatric and a clunking robot swing dicks at each other. and thats the truth.

tl;dr