The Cult of the Cool Mac: Made with 100% USDA real meat!

Movie Review: Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith

Beware Modest Spoilers!

The most profound feeling that I have at the end of the second "Star Wars" trilogy is simple relief that it's finally over and at least the last film wasn't so badly botched as its two predecessors. It was actually kind of fun, if ultimately unfulfilling. George Lucas has learned a very powerful Hollywood lesson: Cover your lack of talent with lots of action and special effects. The result is almost non-stop action and spectacular visuals that nearly succeed in obscuring the fact that there's nothing very good about the writing, direction or acting in "Revenge of the Sith."

This is the pivotal episode in the Star Wars franchise, describing the fall of the Republic and its protectors, the wise mystic Jedi; the beginning of the Galactic Empire under the control of the evil Emperor Palpatine (Ian McDiarmid) and the corruption of young Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen) who is fated to become the Emperor's villainous apprentice, the sinister Darth Vader.

I'm challenged to review such a fragmented movie and give it one single score. The dialogue, for example, is the worst that I can remember having ever sat through -- yet it is redeemed by an impressive story. The story is among the most powerful of our age -- yet the characterization and oration are utterly incapable of sustaining belief and what should have been the most tragic scene in the picture had the audience laughing to a parodic black-masked Stanley Kowalski. The special effects are near-miraculous, but rapidly turn disappointing when every duel scene becomes a computer animated sequence rather than the awesome spectacle of live-action that it should have been but for actors lacking the talent and motivation and a director who cannot comprehend the virtue of live actors.

I've gotten quite negative now and I will go on in this vein. The flaws from the first Star Wars prequels are still alive and kicking in Episode III.

Hayden Christensen continues to portray Anakin Skywalker as an angry idiot, babbling on about how lost and confused he is in the same petulant tone. There are a few moments when Luke Skywalker peers out of his eyes, but that is a matter of costuming, makeup and lighting and not from the actor's sparse talent. In "Revenge of the Sith," Christensen has a good excuse for coming off so poorly. His scripted behavior is so irrational -- so disconnected from the people and events around him -- that the character might have as easily been schizophrenic to begin with. As a result, this is less the story of his tragic plunge than it is the story of the people around him coping with his Asbergers syndrome.

Ian McDiarmid as Chancellor Palpatine is almost as bad as Christensen. His simpering monotonous blather is simply un-nuanced, un-devious and unconvincing. Nobody could be subverted by such nonsense. Palpatine's unctuous speech is the single greatest failure of the movie.

Natalie Portman pulls off a passing Senator Amidala, but there isn't much room in the script for her to show range. My faith in Ms. Portman was renewed when I saw her in "Garden State," but she has yet to recapture the verve she displayed in that picture. Lucas can't seem to decide whether Amidala is an Elizabethan goose-girl who sways and faints when provoked or whether she is the confused Stella running back to her Stanley. In the end, she fades into death from an undefined ailment of the spirit, which seems in retrospect to be an ironic commentary upon her entire existence.

Ewan McGregor as Obi-Wan Kenobi is almost as compelling as he was in "Attack of the Clones," but is less reminiscent of Sir Alec Guinness. He is hampered by a banal script that has him claiming to prefer diplomacy, yet subsequently ignoring opportunities to prevent conflicts in favor of going off to play an adventuring assassin.

Samuel L. Jackson is rightfully given a greater role in this sequel and his Jedi master character Windu is perhaps the best in the movie in terms of consistent and believable motivation and consequent conduct. Even so, like most of the others, as the plot unwinds any pretension to rational behavior is stripped from him in a manner that belies belief and turns him into a thug.

Yoda (a CGI character voiced by puppeteer Frank Oz) and the robot R2-D2 (Kenny Baker) have a lot more screen time in this sequel and R2 in particular has some new talents in the form of gadgets of the sort a robotic James Bond might have. I have to admit that despite R2's mysterious mechanical improvements and the obvious exploitation that both of them represent, I did enjoy Yoda and R2 and the audience broke into applause at each appearance and every new trick they performed.

There are passing attempts at a morality play in the otherwise headlong race to put young Skywalker in his plastic suit. Christensen's simple vocabulary and tendency to speak and deal as if every choice can only demonstrate absolute good or evil is thrown back at him like a spit in a certain president's eye. When Palpatine attains his political goals, it's hard not to see parallels in recent American history and to hear an echo of blue-state grumbles when Amidala sighs, "This is how liberty dies." I'm grateful that the attempt was made to make the film relevant, but at the same time I yearn for a more subtle message. I'd rather have the opportunity to enlighten myself from a thoughtful plot than be subjected to a political point pushed so hard and so briefly.

Lucas plays off of the bones of the Frankenstein story with no comprehension of its meaning. In "Frankenstein," the sin of the doctor's hubris revisits him, ultimately destroying his humanity as the monster slays Frankenstein's family and drives him into exile. In this movie, Obi-Wan is the creator and Darth Vader is the monster, but Vader goes through the transformation while Obi-Wan remains largely unscathed.

"Revenge of the Sith" is a fast-paced spectacle that is entertaining as a diversion, but lacks substance. It's a theme park ride. It bombards viewers with fast-moving images -- spinning flaming spaceships and twirling lightsabers, flurries of droids and steaming severed limbs, dizzying heights, dramatic sunrises and falling bodies. Some people are going to come away very satisfied by that.

Rating: 3 Happy Macs out of 5
Starring: Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christensen, Ian McDiarmid, Samuel L. Jackson, Jimmy Smits, Frank Oz, Anthony Daniels, Christopher Lee, Kenny Baker
Directed By: George Lucas
Music: John Williams
Studio: 20th Century Fox
Rated: PG-13 for violence and intense images.

I wouldn't have goven it so good a score. I don't know how come they could do real fencing in The Princess Bride but they can't do it in Star Wars for hundreds of millions of dollars more? That was the biggest thing I didn't like about it. You forgot to mention how stupid Christopher Lee looks when hes a cartoon character.

What about the freaking plot holes? Leia talks about knowing her mother in Jedi!

ObiWan didn't know about LEia in Empire, but he was there when she was born? How did he forget about her?

Real fencing? Since when is there real fencing in ANY movie? It's always choreographed, and the fights a much longer than a real sword fight would last (usually about 3 seconds). Theatrical fighting is just that: theatrical. Although I'm really disappointed with the new SW films, I do have to defend Lucas on this point. The old Jedi where supper human. So it stands to reason that their sword fighting would be as well. This necessitates at least some use of modern FX and CGI to accomplish. I would much rather spend my time complaining about the plot holes, weak dialogue, and terrible direction of some fine actors (Hayden Christensen not being one of them!).

Re: Real Fencing:
Have you ever seen The Princess Bride? They didn't even have the budget for stunt people -- that was all the actors doing the fencing!

You don't go to a Star Wars movie to look for good acting and dialog, but with the kind of money they spent on Episode III and with the price we are paying for movie tix these days, I want a real performance from the actors!

Re:Re: Real Fencing:
Have I seen The Princess Bride? I OWN IT yu MF! It's one of my favorite movies. But that doesn't mean that the fencing in it is real. Neither does the fact that it was done by actors instead of stunt people. Look, my point is that it is pointless to compare the fighting in SW III (with FX/CGI fighting) to Princess Bride (or any other movie) because all hollywood movies are fake as fake can be. Just sit back and enjoy the fake fights (CGI, stunt or actors). If you really want a REAL fencing match then don't watch SW III or Princess Bride. Go to a Japanese Kendo tournament. That is as close as you can get in the modern world. Even the de-evolved western fencing matches only last for just a few seconds before a point is scored (and each point scored would probably be leathal if it were a real duel).

I have to disagree about stage fighting. Stage-fighting is real, it's just not deadly.
Check out the "making of" parts of the "Princess Bride" DVD. The actors practiced every day, every luchbreak, every weekend for several months to get the choreography just right and it really showed. That's skill. It's impressive. It's movie magic. It allows us to suspend disbelief and to see the fictional characters as people of genuine skills because they're demonstrating genuine skill.

All that the CG means is that someone threw a lot of money at the problem. A real stage fencing scene shows some chops -- some dedication and appreciation of the art of filmmaking.

That's why George Lucas has lost so much respect. He's unable to distinguish between art and mere technical ability.

I liked it. It felt like a Star Wars movie and it filled in all the background to the fist movies and the story was really tragic.

Me2. I liked it.