Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Review: Star Wars Episode III 1265

Posted by timothy
from the watched-two-different-movies dept.
erikharrison writes "I just watched Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith. And it is good. There are lots of things I would like to say about it that I won't, as Slashdot isn't the place. Slashdot is the place to ask two questions, however. 1) How are the special effects and 2)What has Lucas done to the possibly tattered remains of my childhood?" Read on for Harrison's answers to those questions, and for Jamie's quite different impression of the sixth (and final?) Star Wars feature film.

The special effects question is easy: This is quite simply one of the most gorgeous films ever made. Everything is superb. Lucas has an incredible visual sense; he is a truly visual filmmaker, and his images hit home, are beautifully executed, and are technically stunning. Of course, we really and truly expect perfection here from Lucas, so this may not seem like news.

You are deceiving yourself. Lucas has frankly outdone what I thought possible. My jaw was on the floor the entire time.

But what about those tattered remains?

I myself am not a huge Star Wars fan. I enjoy the films, but I wasn't raised on them, didn't see any of them (except Episode II) in the theaters. I was one of those kids who knew Darth Vader was Luke's father before I had heard of Star Wars, because I saw the parodies before I saw the originals.

I will say this now. Episode III proves that "A New Hope" was a mistake. A freak accident of success, because Lucas seems incapable of doing fun action. How he managed to make "A New Hope" a delightful, playful, fundamentally fun movie is beyond me. Because when Episode III starts, it falls flat on its face, continuing the sad attempt in Episode's I and II to make the kind of joyous space opera that, of all six, only "A New Hope" managed to be.

Lucas however, can do myth very, very well. And once Lucas gets around to telling the Myth Of Anakin's Fall, the real story that Episode I and II have been leading to, everything works. Here we have the George Lucas of "The Empire Strikes Back" and "The Return of the Jedi." Hayden Christiansen goes from a pretty (if ineffectual) actor to being the tragic Darth Vader, and you believe. Darth Sidious is the villain that Darth Vader was in the original trilogy. Better perhaps, more sinister. The fall of Anakin is completely and utterly believable. I was shocked. I understood why he fell to the Dark Side. It's called the freakin' Dark Side for goodness sake! How could you freakin' fall?

Because of a tempter. Because of dark dreams. Because of love.

I don't want to spoil anything for those of you who, like me, went in not knowing exactly how it all happened. Some have always known the story, and are just watching it play out; some of us have willfully ignored the spoilers, and waited.

But I will say this for those who do know what happens. When order 66 is given, my breath was taken away. When the final battles occur, I was truly fearful. In other words, he doesn't screw it up.

I'm going to see it again.


Jamie also saw Revenge of the Sith, but it doesn't seem like he saw quite the same film. His thoughts:

I heard it might be good, so I tried to like it. I really did. Revenge of the Sith is one of the worst movies I've seen recently. It's Battlefield Earth bad.

It's not just that when Lucas tries to "do" myth he generates a world populated by generics. Nor is it just that the plot is absurdly thin (the movie exists to showcase the galaxy's most complete betrayal ever, brought on by two dreams and a promise from someone who couldn't be more obviously untrustworthy if he were twirling a mustache).

This movie is terrible first, because Lucas writes unbearable dialogue, especially in romantic scenes. And since the motivator is romantic love, we get a lot of bad lines. Remember "I don't like sand"? Episode III one-ups that. The climactic emotional moment, I swear to God, is a rip-off of Homer Simpson.

And second, Hayden Christensen is a lousy actor. There, I said it. Even with the silly script, Ewan McGregor is fine, and Natalie Portman brings life to a few scenes, but Anakin gets not a single believable moment. Even when all he has to do is look sideways, he's more fake than a losing high school forensics team. He's wooden like community-college Acting 101. I could go on.

Best I can say is that Jar-Jar doesn't speak. The special effects are there, and since they cover every square inch of the screen constantly, you will get many per unit time per dollar. If you like that kind of thing, you're going to go see it anyway, so enjoy.


Thanks go to erikharrison for his take on the movie.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Review: Star Wars Episode III

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 22, 2005 @03:53PM (#12606744)
    Seriously, put a robot in the hangar bay, it plugs in, then NETWORK OWNED! you can open any jail cell, tell exactly where the prisoner are, open any door and even control the elevators.

    The Empire should look into using firewalls.
    • by null etc. (524767) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:03PM (#12606813)
      Seriously, put a robot in the hangar bay, it plugs in, then NETWORK OWNED! you can open any jail cell, tell exactly where the prisoner are, open any door and even control the elevators.

      The Empire should look into using firewalls.

      Well, what you forgot is that R2D2 is equipped with buffer overflow exploits that take advantage of Windows -59768 B.C. (remember, it happened a long time ago, in a galaxy far away (but not long ago enough or far away enough to elude Bill Gate's grasp (Ah, so that's how Emperor Palpatine/Bill Gates came into power.)))

    • by Allison Geode (598914) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:09PM (#12606858)
      because it happened long ago and far away. so long ago, and far away, in fact, that their idea of 'network security' is sending two super battle droids to take down whoever is hacking their network.
    • by ocbwilg (259828) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:36PM (#12607081)
      The Empire should look into using firewalls.

      I'm willing to at least give them credit for not using WEP though.
    • by Fishstick (150821) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:36PM (#12607082) Journal
      I've always been bugged by this as well.

      "There. Plug in. He should be able to interpret the entire imperial network!"

      On the Death Star, in a control room overlooking a hangar bay where you berth captured freighters -- no, you reply completely on physical security. The assumption is that untrusted clients will never physically be able to access the network port.

      This is the understandable hubris of the empire. It is inconceivable that enemy forces will be able to board your small-moon-sized space station and start poking around looking for the location of defense controls or which prisoner is where.

      This is the same kind of thinking that leads to fatal-flaw design like a physical defense that assumes large-scale assault where smaller ships can easily slip through. What? A thermal exhaust port leading directly to the main reactor? Oh, don't worry -- the concept that enemies would attack with small fighters is so far-fetched that we don't have to worry about it.

    • by DA-MAN (17442) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @05:00PM (#12607288) Homepage
      Seriously, put a robot in the hangar bay, it plugs in, then NETWORK OWNED! you can open any jail cell, tell exactly where the prisoner are, open any door and even control the elevators.

      If you noticed, all of the robots had a personality (most had more personality than Hayden Christensen). Seems to me like R2 was probably doing social attacks against the computers involved.
    • by vsprintf (579676) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @06:04PM (#12607782)

      Seriously, put a robot in the hangar bay, it plugs in, then NETWORK OWNED! you can open any jail cell, tell exactly where the prisoner are, open any door and even control the elevators.

      Ahem. Please try to remember that the story takes place "a long time ago." That was before SP2. Geez, you people with no sense of history slay me.

    • Because Artoo is a Maintenance Astro Droid...

      "Artoo! Why didn't you reroute power to the shields? Now we're all going to die!"

      "Beep beep da beep beepity beep"

      TRANSLATED

      "Because you didn't give me the network password you fucking idiot"

  • by eznihm (552487) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @03:53PM (#12606750)
    ... an interesting quote [blogspot.com] from the author of Darthside [blogspot.com]:

    When we were kids we used to "play Star Wars", which is a kind of no-fee intellectual property union we entered unto with Lucasfilm whereby our imaginations were ignited in exchange for our fealty as future consumers.
    • by Golias (176380) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:47PM (#12607151)
      In 1977, the Western was considered by many to be a dead genre which was once embedded into the culture.

      Kids my age at that time were still playing "cowboys and indians" in their backyards, just as their older siblings and parents had, but stories set in the Old West just didn't seem to connect to people anymore (that, or else Hollywood just forgot how to make them connect.)

      Lucas wanted to make a genre picture which became part of our culture's "shared mythology" the way Hopalong Cassidy and The Lone Ranger once did. There was nothing like that at all in the late 60s and early 70s.

      It worked really well. Most kids these days would much rather have a "Mace Windu Lightsaber" than a "pearl handled silver" cap gun.

      I would not be surprised if Lucas considers the fact that kids now "play Star Wars" in their back yards (as we did, post-1977) to be his greatest triumph.
    • The X Factor (Score:4, Interesting)

      by soloport (312487) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:47PM (#12607162) Homepage
      I surmize that the real reason for the hideousness of the later episodes is simple: George can't write worth a damn.

      Factoid: Lucas's wife Marcia edited American Graffiti and Star Wars; the couple were married from 1969-83.

      Remember how the original Star Wars was so different? Mixed with humor and other elements in the dialogue -- seemed to consist of real entertainment.

      Too bad Marcia wasn't there to influence all the episodes...
  • I am both a Star Wars geek and a performance/theatre geek, a dangerous combination which leads to over-analysis. Since seeing Episode III earlier today, I've been thinking a lot about how the presentation of Episodes I through III alter Episodes IV-VI. "Star Wars," as a single story told through film (ignoring books/videogames/comics/fan films/etc), now functions in six episodes tied together by numerous characters and over-arcing story threads. So how does this single narrative affect how Episodes IV-VI should be viewed?

    For example, one of the great things about Ep. IV-VI was discovering Luke and Leia's relationship and that Vader is their father. The problem is, this only works as a dramatic issue for the audience (obviously it still works for the characters) if the audience doesn't know those things going in. Now, it's not an unreasonable assumption to say that everybody seeing Star Wars (even for the first time) already knows those things. But as an artistic work (granting the "Star Wars" films the status of 'art') Lucas removed a large dramatic moment of the story as a whole. Likewise, the way Lucas has set up the over-arcing 6-ilogy (sexilogy?) now places more emphasis on Anakin Skywalker's rise, fall, and redemption (and in some ways, parallel journeys by Obi-Wan and Yoda) than about the adventures of Luke, Leia, etc in IV-VI.

    What does the Slashdot crowd think? Ignoring the actual presentation of Episodes I-III, was the very idea flawed, and does it do damage to the structure of Eps. IV-VI? Does the new over-arcing story cary enough value to disregard the problems it creates? Am I just over-thinking this way too much?
    -Trillian
    • Viewing Order (Score:5, Interesting)

      by XanC (644172) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @03:57PM (#12606773)
      You can't start at the beginning, because all of the others rely on the introductions in 4. Episode 1 assumes you know what the "force" is, for example, whereas Obi-Wan explains it to us in 4. And many of the twists in the original trilogy are presented neatly and cleanly in the prequels. My current thinking is that the best order is:

      4, 5, 1, 2, 3, 6

      So that after "Empire", at the end of which Vader reveals he's Luke's father, we take a detour and get to the back-story: where he came from, the source of the Rebellion and the Empire, and his fall to the dark side.

      It's all leading up to the climactic finish where the prequels allow us to better appreciate the scope of the triumph: the Sith destroyed, republican government reinstated, and Anakin redeemed.

      • Sadist! (Score:4, Funny)

        by GreyyGuy (91753) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:15PM (#12606910)
        It was bad enough before that we had to wait 3 years to find out what happend to Han after he was frozen, but with this schedule, we would have to wait 12 years!
      • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:34PM (#12607062)
        The flashback after "Empire" is indeed good. But all you need is Episode III. Episode II has too much nonsense about flying R2 units and bounty hunters and 50's diners. Episode I proves that little kids can only be the hero in little kids' movies, in addition to just having too much Jar-Jar.
    • by PrvtBurrito (557287) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:19PM (#12606945)
      (spoilers maybe below) Honestly, although I have mixed feelings about this trilogy, I think that this movie produces a tragic sadness that hovers over the original trilogy. Anakin wasn't just an asshole who turned to the darkside, his turn may not have totally been his fault both the sith and the jedi share the blame. I think that makes darth vader a sad tragic character instead of the evil demon he is made out to be in the OT.
    • by jackspenn (682188) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:48PM (#12607169)
      Your commment about the story focusing on Anakin/Vader is abdsolutely correct. I've read the books, seen the movies and it has always been my impression that Star Wars is mostly about father Skywalker's life and how he is saved by his son then it is about just Luke. Luke the son is important, but the story is about the father's fall and redemption.

      I see the important central idea around Star Wars in how Darth Sidious's attempt to turn Luke, ends up saving Anakin's sole.

      If you look at how in episode VI, Luke is in the place against Anakin that Anakin was in episode II with Count Dooku.

      That was where Darth Sidious realized he could control Anakin and make him his apprentice by having him kill Dooku.

      That step was Anakins last chance to resist. The difference is that Luke stops short and refuses to fight.

      It drives the Sidious to start killing Luke and it gets Vader to recognize and correct his mistake years later.

      Look at Luke and Anakin when Sidious tries to convert them, they are both roughfully the same age, in extremely similar positions.

      I think it adds to the whole experience.
  • by XanC (644172) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @03:54PM (#12606757)
    http://www.decentfilms.com/reviews/starwars3.html [decentfilms.com]

    The main site has a lot of Star Wars stuff on the front page: http://www.decentfilms.com/index.html [decentfilms.com]

    An interesting excerpt:

    The problem with Yoda's ethic of detachment is that it's dead contrary to the unabashed humanism with which the whole story ends in Return of the Jedi, where human attachments -- filial loyalty, paternal bonds -- ultimately save the galaxy, destroy the Sith and the Empire, and redeem Anakin' lost soul. Yoda and Obi-Wan consistently counsel Luke (and, in the prequels, Anakin) against the very bonds that finally lead to the triumph of good over evil.

    In the end, alas, the Jedi do seem too "narrow" and "dogmatic," not the great sages Lucas presumably wanted them to be. Perhaps the "prophecy of the one who will bring balance to the Force" was misinterpreted after all: Perhaps the prophecy was really fulfilled not by Anakin destroying the Sith order, but by Luke humanizing the Jedi ethic.

    • Luke is "The One" (Score:3, Interesting)

      by alienmole (15522)
      Both Anakin/Vader and his mentor Obi-Wan die to save Luke, and Luke goes on to help save the galaxy and as you say, develop a less stuffy Jedi ethic. It seems as though any prophecy should have been more interested in predicting Luke than Anakin.

      Then again, the Oracle in The Matrix told Neo what he needed to hear. If the prophesy was truly about Anakin, that may have been what was needed to bring about the desired chain of events. But that would imply some interesting things about the creator or source
      • by ACNiel (604673) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:29PM (#12607018)
        No, Vader destroys Sideous and himself in one selfless act. Vader does fulfill the prophecy, and destroys the Sith, bringing balance back to the force. Luke was almost dead when this happened, and without Vader's interference, would have died.

        Anakin was the one.

        And how does removing half the force bring balance? With Lukes "less stuffy" ethic, he practices both light and dark side, and through one set of monks that embrace everything, there is balance.
    • by GrouchoMarx (153170) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:21PM (#12606956) Homepage
      In the end, alas, the Jedi do seem too "narrow" and "dogmatic," not the great sages Lucas presumably wanted them to be. Perhaps the "prophecy of the one who will bring balance to the Force" was misinterpreted after all: Perhaps the prophecy was really fulfilled not by Anakin destroying the Sith order, but by Luke humanizing the Jedi ethic.

      Precisely! One thing that Ep. III touches on (and the DarthSide blog [blogspot.com], one of the greatest SW fanfics ever, expands on) is that the Light and Dark side of the Force is NOT "good" and "bad". It's "life exists, let it be" vs "life exists, if you can take it by the horns you can make it a better place". The Jedi had long ago rejected the Dark Side [jedipurge.com] completely on "power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely" grounds. The Sith, a specific small order of Dark Jedi, fully embraced the "control and order" aspect of the Force but were corrupted by it.

      Luke, in the final battle with the Emperor and Vader in Ep. VI, is able to use his anger (dark side thing) to defeat Vader, but has the strength of will to pull back and not be tempted and corrupted by the power. (Parallel to Anakin vs. Tyranus, with the same person cheer-leading in both cases.) Why? Because he sees the growing parallel between himself and his father when he cuts off Vader's hand, and he realizes where that path leads. Sidious is about to kill him for it, when Vader (that prophesy dude) realizes what he has become and sacrifices himself to kill Sidious and end the Sith line. He sees that in his son is the true balance in the Force, and ensures that it is not destroyed prematurely.

      The Force is already unbalanced with the Jedi, since they eschew the other branch of the Force completely. By bringing it back into balance, the light and dark sides are both recognized and accepted. Not something Mace Windu and Yoda would really have wanted, but but the end, Yoda's ghost seems to have come to terms with it.

      My issue with Star Wars is that the overarching story concept (the above, at least as I see it), is AMAZINGLY GOOD! The actual execution is at best spotty, and at worst talks about sand. Still, stuff like the DarthSide blog, the fan stuff, really redeems a lot of it. Lucas has great ideas, but should leave the execution to someone else.
      • by Pfhorrest (545131) on Monday May 23, 2005 @03:15AM (#12610379) Homepage Journal
        You've got it down precisely.

        Anakin/Vader was the "Chosen One". He returned balance to the Force. First, by eliminating all the Jedi but Obi-wan and Yoda, and all the Sith but Sidious and himself; and then, by killing both Obi-wan and Sidious, while Yoda died of old age and Vader died of his wounds. Thus, both the Jedi and the Sith were destroyed and the conflict between Light and Dark sides settled.

        Where Luke is important is not that he is the "Chosen One" who would restore balance to the Force - he IS the restored balance in the Force! Trained by Obi-wan and Yoda, tempted by Sidious and Vader, and then freed of all of them, left with the strength and passion of the Dark Side that almost drove him to become a Sith at the end of RotJ, but with the control and resolve of a Jedi, and the ability to temper those emotions when necessary.

        It actually reminds me a lot of the Vulcans and Klingons of Star Trek. The Vulcans are ostensibly the "good guys" on the side of reason and order; the Klingons are ostensibly the "bad guys" on the side of emotion and chaos. But throughout the series it's pretty obvious that the Vulcan's suppression of emotion is not such a great thing, and anyone can easily see how the Klingons' lack of reason is less than ideal. In that series humans are supposed to represent the "happy medium", people who embrace both emotions and reason and can control the both as needed.

        And I agree with you wholeheartedly: the themes of this movie, first of Anakin and his unsuccessful struggle to find a path between the extremes of the Jedi and the Sith, and then of Luke and his successul mediation of those extremes, are extremely powerful and touching themes that are common to any person's existence. We are all surrounded by polar choices, few as extreme as these fictional examples, but nevertheless every person must at times mediate disagreements between their reason and their emotions, their personal faith and their agreement with society, the freedom of their actions and the consent of others...

        As the old addage says, "all things in moderation", and as we all must struggle to find a suitable moderation between extremes, a well-implemented and convincing portrayal of these themes on an epics scale can be touching to anyone. Unfortunately, it seems that Lucas has failed to implement his story in such a convincing way. I am happy to hold in my mind an abridged version of the tale, and allow my own imagination to fill in the details in more acceptable ways. Perhaps someday this story will be told again, and better; either the Star Wars saga itself or another saga which tells the same essential tale. I certainly hope so.
  • Extremes... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Jhon (241832) * on Sunday May 22, 2005 @03:55PM (#12606758) Homepage Journal
    To Harrison: It wasn't THAT good.

    to Jamie: It wasn't THAT bad.

    I saw it. It was worth the price of admission, a soda and nachos. More importantly, it was worth my TIME, which to me is infinately more valuable.
  • Human physics (Score:4, Insightful)

    by uchi (534979) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @03:57PM (#12606771) Homepage
    While I thought the special effects were astounding in Episode III, I felt something was sorely lacking with the physics when applied to humans. It seemed as if he didn't even try to make it seem realistic.
    For example, when Obi Wan and Anakin were fighting Dooku near the beginning, Dooku decided to do a flip off of a balcony type thing to get to the lower level. This looked horrible. There was no acceleration invovled in his fall, and his flip randomly sped up slightly while in mid air. Of course, he was a Jedi master, so he can probably do that, but I really doubt they had that in mind when creating that scene. Did anyone else notice examples of this?
    • Re:Human physics (Score:3, Interesting)

      by jamie (78724)

      Did anyone else notice examples of this?

      Yes. Every scene where anyone did anything like that.

      Which is to say, most of the movie. In Spiderman 1 and 2 the defying-physics stuff actually worked because it gave Spiderman a kind of half-alien insecty twitch. Every CG actor in Sith, flipping and flying around, just looked CG.

      The fight choreography was terrible too. Whether in close quarters or the middle of an empty room, apparently light-saber fights look identical, nothing but big flashy sweeping str

    • by DavidNWelton (142216) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:24PM (#12606974) Homepage
      I liked the bit in the opening space shoot em up where R2 kills the bad droid that is latched onto someone's fighter craft, and the dead droid hulk is slowly "blown" backwards and off the spaceship, presumably by "space wind"?
  • NOOO (Score:5, Insightful)

    by u-238 (515248) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @03:58PM (#12606780) Homepage
    This is what Lucas had to say about Yoda, when they introduced him in The Empire Strikes Back:

    That was like a real leap

    beacuse if that puppet had not worked

    the whole film would have been down the tubes

    it just, you know woulda been a disaster, it would've been a silly little muppet...

    the whole movie would've collapsed under the weight of it.


    (quote from the bonus feature DVD in the original trilogy box set)

    Now, apply this quote to what Hayden Christensen has done to Darth Vader, one of the most memorable and recognizable villains in all of cinema history, and what do you get?
  • Death Star (Score:5, Insightful)

    by iriefrank (41550) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @03:59PM (#12606784) Homepage
    Is it me, or is the Death Star shown at the end of Episode III way too complete? At the beginning of Episode IV, there is some doubt about whether the station is fully operational, but there is a full skeleton of the Death Star visible at the end of III. Surely this is a mistake, just for continuity's sake. The DS could not have taken 16-18 years (as long as it takes Luke and Leia to grow up) to complete!
    • by Glonoinha (587375) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:14PM (#12606898) Journal
      Insiders know that the Death Star you see getting started in Episode III is the one they outsourced. Sixteen years later it was still basically a clusterfuq, way over budget and late as hell but management decided to go live with it, against the protests of the totally skilled local Imperial Base Makers (who claim that the outsource companies don't know a damn thing about building Death Stars.)

      Wait until Episode IV to see how well it holds up. Everybody (ie, the local Imperial Base Makers with experience and professional training) knows to put in defenses against snub fighters, so that shouldn't be a problem.
    • Re:Death Star (Score:5, Interesting)

      by BoneFlower (107640) <(george.worroll) (at) (gmail.com)> on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:23PM (#12606971) Journal
      Possibilities:

      That wasn't the Death Star, but a smaller scale prototype device to test out some of the technologies and construction techniques.

      It was the Death Star, but due to the newness of the technology involved, it took a great deal of time to construct, much more time than Death Star II, which was simply a somewhat bigger example of the same technology. Real world parralel here- the first time you built a computer, it probably took a lot longer than it would take you now right?

      Possible parralel with the Babylon project in Babylon 5- it took them quite some time to get a working station. Perhaps the Death Star was beset by engineering failures and sabotage along the way before they finally got one operational? As mentioned above, new things take longer to build than new examples of old things, simply because it is new. Compound this by running into unexpected engineering or construction failures, or sabotage, and things can take very long indeed.

      Palpatine didn't disband the Senate until A New Hope. Presumably, the Senate did have some power over the budget and policy until then- not as much as it used to, but some. To divert funds for such a large secret project would raise lots of questions among fairly powerful individuals. They simply couldn't divert funds to get it done any faster than 15-20 years without tipping off the Senate, which may have still had the authority and/or influence to take down Palpatine, or at least make his rule more difficult. The second Death Star, however, would not be created under those restrictions. Palpatine had unlimited authority by that point, and if he wanted to divert fifty billion credits for a battle station, he could do so and just kill anyone that asked why.

      It was the Death Star, but not right after the previous scene- a flash forward scene to the construction project a few years prior to the Battle of Yavin.
    • Actually the first 3 death stars were destroyed in episodes 3.3, 3.6 and 3.9 during the wacky adventures of Nimrod Bangalore: Rebel Extroardinaire, and his zany sidekick Jumba-Jumba! Watch as plot holes are patched and everything finally makes sense! This is what you've finally been waiting for!
    • Re:Death Star (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Malor (3658)
      You gotta realize, that even by Empire standards, the Death Star is unimaginably huge. It would be a titanic feat of engineering to build it. Consider: the Earth has a huge amount of iron in it... if the Death Star were made out of iron, it would require stripping away like a SIXTH of the Earth's ENTIRE MASS to build it. (those numbers are, admittedly, pulled out of thin air and are guesses, but I think they're in the right size range).

      Now, they'd probably go get asteroids and use those, and they'd prob
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:00PM (#12606791)
    Lucas doesn't realize that just because you have new technologies available, they are going to add to the storytelling. So we have new high-resolution timers? That doesn't mean we want to see counters all over the action and getting in the way of the actors faces! We didn't need big counters in the original trilogy. Anyone that paid to see this in a theater must feel terribly deceived.
  • by baryon351 (626717) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:00PM (#12606792)
    This might be just wishful thinking from someone who sat through A New Hope forcing myself to watch it... and only mildly enjoying the next two. Eps I and II felt like an excuse for special effects, with only Obi Wan being a character I was attached to, but episode III - the beginnings of darth vader, the first things he does as Ol' Evil One... that's worth seeing I think.

    I'm not a huge fan, probably not even a fan fullstop, but I find some parts of the movies attractive, and vader is *it*.
  • by syntap (242090) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:01PM (#12606794)
    I have two kids, under age 5. Of course most of us saw the trilogies in the order 4-5-6-1-2-3. When the kids are old enough, should we maintain that order or do we show it to them in 1-2-3-4-5-6 order?

    The reason we had to watch it in our order is obvious, but do the benefits we had in watching the films in that order cascade to the younger generations? What order will people watch them in five or ten years from now?
  • by reporter (666905) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:01PM (#12606797) Homepage
    The most poignant moment in "Return of the Jedi" occurs when Luke looks at his right hand just after slicing off the mechanized right hand of Darth Vader. At that moment, he recalls Obi-wan Kenobi's warning: "Don't give into hate. That leads to the dark side." (Obi-wan Kenobi gave that warning in "The Empire Strikes Back".)

    Luke immediately resolves to avoid the fate of Darth Vader and turns off his light saber. Luke then looks at the emperor and refuses to join him.

    Did George Lucas provide a scene (in "Revenge of the Sith") where Darth Vader's own right hand was sliced off? If the answer is "yes", then Lucas has remained true to the original trilogy.

    "Such insight, you have. The first steps to Jedi Knight, you have taken." observers Yoda.

    • by Inoshiro (71693) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @07:11PM (#12608313) Homepage
      "Did George Lucas provide a scene (in "Revenge of the Sith") where Darth Vader's own right hand was sliced off? If the answer is "yes", then Lucas has remained true to the original trilogy."

      His hand was sliced off in episode 2 by Dooku, and this fact was used by Palpatine/Sidious to goad Anakin into killing Dooku for purposes of revenge when he had him as an unarmed prisoner!

      Perhaps if you actually watched the movies, you could be considered a score above 2 commentor; as is, you trolled some ignorant mods. Good day to you!
  • I, for one (Score:5, Insightful)

    by WormholeFiend (674934) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:01PM (#12606801)
    didn't like it.

    I knew before going in, from what other people told me and from what I read online, that the acting was very bad, to the point of laughing during drama scenes, but I went to see it anyway just for the effects and the lightsaber battles.

    Generally speaking I found the lightsaber duels too cluttered, without much definition in each move sequence.

    A Darth Maul vs Qui-Gon Jinn style of fight choreography should have been used... IMO it's the best lightsaber duel of them all.
    • Re:I, for one (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ocbwilg (259828)
      Generally speaking I found the lightsaber duels too cluttered, without much definition in each move sequence.

      A Darth Maul vs Qui-Gon Jinn style of fight choreography should have been used... IMO it's the best lightsaber duel of them all.


      Yup, me too. And the reason why is that those two duels were done entirely with real people really fighting it out (well, mock-fighting it out). They didn't have tons of CG-animated bodies flipping nad flopping and twirling around and doing super-impossible "only mad
    • Re:I, for one (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Sark666 (756464) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:51PM (#12607197)
      Totally agree. The darth maul fight is one of the best fights I've ever seen in any film. Then in ep II the fights seem to slow down again, I attributed this to using christopher lee and you could tell his face was plastered on someone for some of the fights. I couldn't tell that this time around but as others have pointed out, the cg transistions were bad like with dooku and the fights were just fast and spazzy for lack of a better word.

      I am a huge fan as many of you here. Grew up on star wars, saw the first 10 times when I was 7, saw empire 34 times in it's first run, I was obsessed with empire and it is my best movie experience ever. Then I saw Return only once. A part of my childhood died that day. So many things wrong with return, but this is more on the new movie. Well, it's been all downhill ever since.

      The only thing that takes me there is during the star wars logo at the beginning and the opening crawl. And I really wanted to believe george got it right this time, but it just ain't so.

      Besides the bad dialog, bad acting, and lack luster light saber fights, there is even a problem with the space battles. Just because you can put a million things on screen at once, doesn't mean you should. There are so many things wizzing around, which are way too colourful, and panning and 3d circle arounds etc. You need the grittiness, of the ships just looking grey. You need to subtract about 1000 ships. You need to lock the camera way more.

      It reminds of Jaws, Speilburg wanted to use the shark way more but due to technical problems, they had to rely on 'building up' the fear of the shark. Needless to say it was prefect. This is probably the best example of less is more.

      Someone needed to beat that lesson, and many other lessons, over george's head. But it's too late now, George shit the bed.
  • Terrible reviews (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Junior J. Junior III (192702) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:02PM (#12606804) Homepage
    Both of these reviews are terrible. They're worse than the movie. See the movie; it's good. It doesn't redeem Lucas's transgressions against the original trilogy when he Special-Ed'ed them, and it doesn't quite make up for the first two episodes of the new trilogy, but standing on its own, it's pretty decent. Not a perfect movie by any means, but no more flawed than either of the three original films.
    • by pyrrhonist (701154) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:48PM (#12607167)
      For the uninitiated, the G. Lucas American film series about warfare amongst the stars is a peculiar look at parallel universes and strange creatures interacting with humans in an attempt to secure peace throughout the galaxy. Indeed, this war amongst the stars, or "Star Wars" as it is called, is indeed a film series about love and betrayal, incest and abandonment, good midgets and bad midgets, strange fish creatures with too much power, and robots.

      Indeed, this film series (whose art house qualities remind the intellectual filmgoer of the Decalogue in scope, or perhaps a parallel can be best made between Star Wars and the Trois Couleurs Trilogy, in that both series exhibit semi-paradoxical tendencies for the both the surreal and the comic while trying to maintain at least some semblance of the post-modernistic cliche of parallel bereavement and longing for the freudian (or perhaps jungian would be better) other in that the subconscious is always expressed in terms of pseudo-violence, usually directed towards the self but often manifested in the form of senseless destruction against establishment regulation.

      It is important to remember this war amongst the stars in these quasi-anthropological terms, for the genesis of such serial work too can have its roots in the experimental (think of the obvious parallels between Return of the Jedi and, say, Man With a Movie Camera). With that in mind, Revenge of the Sith...

      ...sucks.

    • by Tyler Durden (136036) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @05:32PM (#12607531)
      Not a perfect movie by any means, but no more flawed than either of the three original films.

      I thought it was more flawed than the original movies for one specific reason. In ROTS, I did not give one flying fuck what happened to any of the characters.

      The original movie had some believable characters, clever dialog, and this thing known as emotion that made you care about what happened. You could see a little bit of yourself in their attitudes and situations. As a kid, it made your imagination run wild so that you could daydream about you yourself being in Lucas's beautiful world.

      Not so in the prequels. Wooden characters with unbelievable stories reciting shitty dialog by actors unable to sell any of it - and for good reason. Any attempt to humanize the story in the prequels was laughably cheesy. "By God, Jar-Jar sucks. Oh look! A young Anakin single-handedly wiped out an entire fighting force by accident." And in this last movie we're supposed to care about these people? You simply cannot create a decent tragedy without characters worth feeling sorry for. When Anakin was burning up in lava with his limbs missing I did not care. When Padme died in child birth I did not care.

      These three movies amount to just one big wasted opportunity.

  • by Andrew Aguecheek (767620) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:04PM (#12606820)
    SPOILER WARNING

    What annoyed me most was the inconsistancy. There were some moments that linked to the original trillogy rather well - Obi-Wan's "so uncivilised" comment about blasters for instance. But there are other aspects that made no sense.

    Chewie and Yoda were apparently aquaintances and yet the Wookie never mentioned this to Han, or if he did, despite the trust between the two of them, Han didn't consider it to be a reason to believe in the Force.

    Perhaps more grating however was the death of Padme - it was utterly unnecessary, Vader did not know if she was dead or not and so Palpatine could easily have lied and told him she was. More than that though, it contradicted Leia's recollections in Jedi - where she remembers her "real mother." It has been suggested that she remembers her through the force, but then, why doesn't Luke?

    Of course the other irritation with the film was the godawful dialogue. The "no I love you" "no I love you" scenes between Anakin and Padme, Vader lifting his head to the skies and shouting "NOOOOOOO!" Thankfully, Threepio's pun chip does seem to have been removed, and there's a dispute over whether or not Jar Jar spoke at all. (If he did it was only something along the lines of "excuse me")

    The effects were great though - aside from the lizard thing.
    • If Padme hadn't died, Vader may have been able to feel her presence through the force or something. The real plot hole is that the emperor tells Vader he killed Padme in his rage. When he learns in ep4 that his sons are alive he should have realized that the emperor lied to him, since Padme wouldn't have delivered if he had killed her in Moustafar. And agreed, all the characters included for no reason such as Chewbacca, Jabba and the droids is lame and cause plot holes.
    • Yeah, the whole chronology never really made that much sense to me. People forgot about the Jedi and the force in about 18 years? What happeened to all the clone troopers, why did they stop using them in favor of the regular imperial storm troopers? Why is there such a massive shift in craft design after the empire?
    • Spoilers still, on Padme's fate:

      Definitely agree with you, and more. As you said, it's difficult to tie to Leia's recollection. Her comments would have made more sense, and been more touching yet, if Padme had died of a broken heart just a couple of years later. But that's more of a fanboy nitpick.

      The real problem was that it wasn't fair to her character. This is a lady who managed to get elected queen and senator, has been politicking in the Senate for probably ten years, is no pushover, but she die

    • Actually the "No, I love you" "No, I love you" dialog was the most believable padme / anakin interaction. Have you ever seen young adults in love for the first time? If you sat in on a date between two sixteen year olds, you would laugh your ass off (granted the characters are older, but I've seen a few adults act this way as well).
  • by TripMaster_Monky (885678) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:04PM (#12606823)
    For some reason there is a large timestamp running across the film. I guess Lucas wanted to add an air of suspense with that effect.
  • Warning no real spoilers below*

    *Anakin skywalker becomes darth vade

    *Anakin/vader is luke and leias father

    *luke and leia are twins

    *chancilor palpatine is the empiror

    *Palpatine is Darth sidious

    *Yoda and Obi-wan survive

    *Senator Organa adopts leia

    *Yoda dosnt kill the empiror

    *Alot of jedi get killed

    *The republic ends

    *Obi-wan beats darth vaderv
    *Palpatine is a sith lord

    *Amidala is pregnant

    Honestly , my faith was restored in lucas after seeing the film , it was honestly a very enjoyable movie .
    The only bit that bugged me were the romantic scenes which are not really lucas's strong point
  • by sssmashy (612587) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:07PM (#12606844)

    What has Lucas done to the possibly tattered remains of my childhood?

    Yeesh, I'm sick of people bitching that Lucas ruined their childhood fantasies with his subsequent movies.

    If a few hours of film constituted the emotional highlight of your childhood, I'd say you have bigger issues to worry about than Lucas or his imaginary universe.

    • -- Yeesh, I'm sick of people bitching that Lucas ruined their childhood fantasies with his subsequent movies.

      Subsequent experience with treasured childhood movies or shows is always a bad idea. Nothing is as good as it was when we were young.

      I used to love Gilligan's Island when I was a child and I think that the shows are utter and irredemable cr*p now.

      Does that invalidate my childhood memories? No it doesn't. It just means that I grew up, became a more critical viewer and now demand more depth to my c
  • See it dubbed! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by OblongPlatypus (233746) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:10PM (#12606867)
    Spending the year studying in Barcelona, I ended up seeing Episode III dubbed to Spanish, and I truly and sincerely believe this made the experience better.

    Most noticeable was the improvement in the scenes with Anakin/Vader, because Jamie is exactly right - Christensen in an awful actor. And much of this awfulness lies in the horribly wooden and monotonous delivery of every single line of dialogue, which means having it replaced by an experienced Spanish voice actor is a real blessing.

    But the improvements weren't limited to Anakin's lines, and my theory is that this can be explained by the extreme use of blue/green-screen photography in these films. The actors are used to delivering their lines while at least in some sense being there in the environment of the film's story, and end up floundering when forced to work with the nothingness of a green screen. The voice-actors that do the dubbing, on the other hand, have years and years of experience in putting emotion in their lines without any sort of environment except the recording studio.

    Maybe those of you in the right parts of the US can take a trip across the border to Mexico and see it there? Do they even dub films there?
    • Attention, mods! (Score:3, Interesting)

      by imsabbel (611519)
      THe parent isnt funny, but really insightful.

      While the actors had to make their lines before the greenscreen, the voice actors for the dub could see the final mix, and so much better apreciate the situations the characters are in.
  • Special Effects (Score:5, Insightful)

    by two.oh (721094) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:14PM (#12606897) Journal
    Being a VFX artist myself, I felt the movie was extremely lacking in certain respects. The first battle scene was amazing, without any doubt. However, Lucas, for some reason, put way too many blue screen shots towards the middle and end, where he relied heavily on CG imagery to back landscape shots.

    For example, Palpatine's room had a backplate entirely out of CG, and at times, the room itself changed from a live action plate to a CG plate when him and Yoda were fighting.

    I felt a lot of it was just too synthetic. I hate to say this as a VFX artist. It would have been nice to see more sets and a more hands-on approach towards the overall look and feel --It was just too clean.

    As another example, when Obi-wan and Anakin are fighting Count Dooku in that room, it was a in a movie set where everything was constructed except the back drop of the space battle. This was a similar set up that they had on Return of the Jedi during the fight between Luke and Anakin.

    CG has to have a job of supporting the movie, not making an integration between CG scenes and live action scenes.

    Don't get me wrong, I've seen great CG/live integration pieces. However, they were great because they were subtle and supported the concepts and ideas.
    • Re:Special Effects (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ocbwilg (259828)
      Don't get me wrong, I've seen great CG/live integration pieces. However, they were great because they were subtle and supported the concepts and ideas.

      I agree. My biggest beef with the CGI is that IMHO, VFX needs to be used to enhance the story or draw attention to important details. In this movie there is so much CGI/VFX that in many scenes it is distracting from the main story. The giant space battle looked awesome, and it would be fun to watch if the space battle were the story. But the story was
  • by PrvtBurrito (557287) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:14PM (#12606901)
    In hindsight, I think many are disappointed that the scene where Anakin turns doesn't make sense because he is upset one moment and then a murderer the next. Personally, I think Lucas constructed this movie in the wrong order.

    Why not have put the confrontation between Anakin and Obi wan earlier in the movie, perhaps having him not turn, but flee after killing Mace (Sam Jackson's character). Then Obi wan and him fight, producing a similar result as in the movie. Then perhaps having him storm the Jedi temple as the robotic darth vader from the other movies? It would have been a lot more believable if they had kept him away from being a mass murderer until he was burned and behind the famous mask. It also would have been bad ass seeing darth vader from the original trilogy storming in front of an army of storm troopers.

  • by IsItWashable (753805) <dominichowdenNO@SPAMbtopenworld.com> on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:24PM (#12606980)
    You know that bit where Obi-Wan says "It's like...she's lost the will to live"? She wasn't the only one.
  • by Balthisar (649688) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:38PM (#12607100) Homepage
    I'm in a land where Spanish is spoken, and I don't do too bad at it myself. So, of course I went to see it opening night! Despite being in Spanish (English version sold out for some reason!), I went to see it.

    It wasn't bad. I didn't see too much of the crappy dialogue and acting that everyone's griping about.

    So, anyone ELSE see this in Spanish here? Am I just not good enough at understanding Spanish yet to be totally let down by this movie? Further more, I'm HAPPY with episode III -- will I be totally let down if I see it in English???
  • by jbs0902 (566885) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @04:39PM (#12607103)
    What amazes me the most is how the media has fallen all over themselves to report how Lucas used ROTS as a vehicle to comment on the Bush administration. Now, I know it shocks you that someone in Hollywood would dislike the Republicans.
    The two lines that are quoted by the media are:
    Padme: "So, this is how liberty dies;" and later in the film
    Vader: "If you are not with me, you are my enemy."

    Fine, while I fail to see, especially given the context of its place in the film, how the first line as a commentary on Bush. I can see that it is very quotable. The second line is really unmissable as a parody of the infamous, "With us or against us" Bush line.

    But, I want to note that the movie's only voice of tolerance and relativism was Palpatine, advising Anakin that the only way to be truly great is to understand all aspects of the Force! That is multi-culturalism right there.

    So, here we have the Emperor giving the traditional Democratic view of things and Vader dropping the Bush parody lines. I thought both the Emperor and Vader were evil. I am very confused about exactly what political commentary Lucas is making. I can only assume that one of two conclusions is true, either, (a) Lucas is totally inept at political commentary, or (b) the Media critics are projecting their own emotions on to the film, i.e. the film is acting like a Rorschach test.
    Either way, I'd really appreciate it both Lucas, the media, and anyone else leave their Damn political opinions off my entertainment.

    Maybe the political arguments would have held more water is Lucas had taken the trouble to give the Sith and Jedi an constant philosophy through out the films and between characters. But, as nice as the feeling of the Jedi/Sith philosophies are they are just too inconsistent to withstand close scrutiny. Which is why is is better to just enjoy the movies than study them like they are the Torah.

    However, the funniest political commentary on the film comes from this guy who sees the Jedi council as the Catholic Church [punditguy.com]. Whatever...

    SyntheticLife [syntheticlife.com], meanwhile, gives the guy who sat next to him a pretty harsh review: "I would've said something but then I got scared when he started talking to the characters in the movie."
  • There are issues with the storyline between where we start in Ep4 and where we were going with Ep1-3. Lucas just couldn't avoid boxing himself into a corner. A corner you can't get out of no matter how many greenbacks you throw at it if you can't (or don't hire someone who can) write a decent screenplay.

    SPOILERS

    1. 3PO and R2 have their memory wiped. Fine, but how does that explain that Vader doesn't exclaim upon first seeing the droids in the 2nd trilogy "3PO! R2! I remember you two!" It's not like they even changed their names so they could start 'fresh' in their lives as androids.

    2. Luke and Leia are born and the grand idea to protect them is... drumroll please! a) place one in a senator's family, close to the Emperor and one would expect, Vader as well, and b) place the other with the only remaining living relatives of the Skywalker clan. Vader, given the 20 years or so that will pass, he will *never* visit his home planet during all that time, eh? To visit his mother's grave, see how his half-brother is doing, etc.?

    3. Padme dies of a 'broken heart'? The first 2 movies let her demonstrate the qualities that her future daughter will possess: she's basically a strong-minded and smart young woman. Yet RotS demotes her to the cliche of weak-hearted wife that can't live without her husband's love. WTF?

    4. Yoda 'failed'? How did he fail? What occurred during his battle with the Emperor that made him have to run? Surely he could've attacked again? You would think with the fate of the galaxy hanging in the balance, he would have tried to get the Emperor while his defenses were down, busy trying to placate the Senate as he wrapped up his plan of domination.

    5. What exactly compelled Yoda and Obi to go into exile? As far as they know, they are matched up quite well. Emperor and Vader to Yoda and Obi. So go run and regroup... but wait until the kids are grown? The kids are safe, they would have you believe... And as Obi already knows, Vader, as a young Lord of the Sith, makes brash mistakes (e.g. getting all his limbs chopped off) when he lets his temper get the best of him. Even the Emperor gets his ass handed to him by Mace Windu, it's only Anakin's surprise intervention that shifted the scales then. So why wait while the Emperor has all those years to train Vader?

    The point is not to say these are problems that couldn't be solved, but indeed that they COULD HAVE been explained, but for some reason Lucas did not. Padme could indeed have been mortally wounded by Vader, Yoda as well, and a danger could have enveloped the remaining Jedi, thereby forcing them to leave and go into exile, and bury their 'force' fields in order to save innocent humans, etc.

    But even further, there are other elements in this final movie that just make me so frustrated. The gravitas of the whole storyline is FINALLY hinted at, never mind with the Williams' score, but in the actual acting! Yoda, even as a CG actor, showed much more deep thought (gone are the simple platitudes that he was spouting back in 1 and 2) than practically any other actor in this film. And during the climactic lava battle, we're finally shown a Jedi's declaration of love for another, as Obi Wan, finally realizing that Anakin must die/is already dead, tells him that he loved him. Where was that during 1 and 2? Where was ANY counter to Anakin's angst that we all whined about in 2? Surely Anakin's cheese is all the cheesier when it's in a vacuum. With Obi expressing his fondness for his 'brother' it doesn't seem so 'cold' this land of Jedi. Even if it's *against* the rules for a Jedi to show emotion or grow attached, that Lucas could never (or chose not to) let us see beneath Obi's frosty mentor exterior and see how much he cared for Anakin, it's a crime that robbed the movies of the depth they were sorely lacking.

    The surprising thing, I think for many of us long-time SW geeks, is that even with all the above, this movie still kicked 1&2's ass. I give it an 8 out of 10. With Empire a solid 10.
  • Not convinced... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pandrijeczko (588093) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @05:16PM (#12607411)
    The special effects question is easy: This is quite simply one of the most gorgeous films ever made.

    Some of the effects were decidedly ropey - the giant lizard ridden by Obi Wan was not that good (I'm not sure any CGI yet is good enough to create 100% convincing living beings yet) & the bit where several of the clones had their helmets removed so you could see their faces was atrociously bad - why Lucas didn't cut that scene I'll never know.

    As to the vehicle animations, I have nothing but admiration for ILMs ability to do what they have shown they can do but the ship battle at the beginning was just too busy. I really get the impression that as many new vehicles as possible were crammed in just to generate toy sales meaning we had a battle scene that was confused and kept drawing your attention all over different parts of the screen.

    Lucas however, can do myth very, very well.

    I won't argue that he can tell a good story but his pace and directing leaves much to be desired in the first trilogy.

    Child Anakin should have been the first half hour of episode 1 and Hayden's Anakin standing on a balcony arm-in-arm with Padme should have been the end of that same episode.

    Episode 2 should have shown the gradual fall of Anakin and ended at a point where Palpatine has already placed some doubts in his mind so that he has his first piece of internal struggle at the end of the movie - this would have mirrored Luke's struggles at the end of Empire Strikes Back very well.

    Episode 3 should have just been about the fall of Anakin and the rise of Palpatine. This was done far too quickly in episode 3 and lessened the effect as a result. We should have been aching to see Episode 3 just like we were with Episode 6 when Han was left encased in Corbomite.

    In summary, the movie is the best of the first trilogy but not a patch on any of the second trilogy movies. And before anyone mentions Ewoks, at least in Return Of The Jedi we were all rooting for the Rebellion and the little bears because we had saw real people.

    In the case of "droids vs clones", who really cares how many were killed on each side because more could always be wheeled on - the first trilogy turned warfare into something very sterile and remote whereas in the second trilogy we saw and felt genuine loss, whether it was an X-Wing pilot, Hoth infantryman or an Ewok.

  • ...was not that Leia knew about her mother in Episode 6. If one actually reads the dialogue, he says the following:

    LUKE: Leia... do you remember your mother? Your real mother?
    LEIA: Just a little bit. She died when I was very young.
    LUKE: What do you remember?
    LEIA: Just...images, really. Feelings.
    LUKE: Tell me.
    LEIA: She was very beautiful. Kind, but...sad.

    So, let's see. Very young. Check. Can't remember words or anything specific. Check. However Obi-wan's dialogue is a bit more problematic:

    OBI-WAN: When your father left, he didn't know your mother was pregnant. Your mother and I knew he would find out eventually, but we wanted to keep you both as safe as possible, for as long as possible. So I took you to live with my brother Owen on Tatooine... and your mother took Leia to live as the daughter of Senator Organa, on Alderaan.

    Where to begin? How about Anakin knowing very early on and oh how about that bit about Leia taking Leia to Alderaan. Now THAT's a problem.

    However, to look at this and see that as the overriding point of the trilogy is to miss the point: the one critical mistake that could've averted Anakin's fall and the empire's rise. He didn't use a condom. If Padme/Anakin had used proper birth control, Luke/Leia wouldn't have been born but more importantly Anakin would have lost his biggest motivation to go to the dark side.

    So remember kids, for the sake of the galaxy, use proper contraception.
  • by catdevnull (531283) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @06:13PM (#12607847)
    Ok. I saw it. I really liked it--it's Star Wars.

    There are two things to remember when watching any of these films:

    1) They are not Science Fiction
    2) They are not the uber-cerebral life-changing movies you thought they were when you were a kid (and they never were).

    Ok, those said, I think a pinch or two of salt should be added to your cinematic experience. Sure the dialog is wooden and contrived--if not corny. So is the acting & dialogue on anything found on the Sci-Fi channel, Bab5, Star Trek, Battle Star Galactica. Every one of those shows are cheesy but all the geeks seem to like them anyway. Why should SWEP3 be any different?

    Lucas calls them "Space Operas" --and if you're familiar with that genre, you know that opera's stories and motivations require an extended suspension of disbelief. You just go with it.

    Because all of the technology and theory in Star Wars isn't really explained, it just happens to take place in a galaxy far, far away, it gets lumped into SciFi genre. SciFi is a bit more satisfying to the "geek" types. But, Star Wars really doesn't quite fit into that category despite it's cover.

    Hayden Christianson definitely comes off as a poor actor--or he isn't given very good direction to bring more dimension to his character. How was he in "Shattered Glass"? I think dialog and direction can make or break a good performance. Maybe if Lucas let someone else direct, it might have worked better.

    I was blown away by the eye candy and I think it sets up the next film fine. I'm going to overlook some of the incontinuity others are finding just because I have more important things in life to bitch about. Afterall, it's just a movie, isn't it?

    If you're a detail-oriented person, you'll probably be very frustrated. If you just like an entertaining, mind-blowing ride through Lucas's world, you'll probably enjoy it.

    For whatever my $.02 is worth.
  • Yoda... (Score:4, Funny)

    by tsmit (222375) <(tsmit50) (at) (yahoo.com)> on Sunday May 22, 2005 @06:32PM (#12607990) Homepage
    Anyone notice that, in the star wars movies, like episode 1 and 2, yoda is all bad ass and serious all the time. But in Empire and Jedi, the fucker is like, laughing all the time? Hanging out in a swamp in a hut? I think i figured out what happened. After everything happened with all the jedi dying and shit... yoda started sportin the ganj! It's the only explanation possible. Dude's got a bad case of the munchies when he first meets luke and he's giggling up a fit. I bet it's because he just smoked a bowl!
  • by pixelgeek (676892) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @06:40PM (#12608057)
    While this movie wasn't as bad as the previous two prequels the plot and the acting really did little to present a compelling story of a man's descent into evil.

    Anakin's path to the Dark Side just isn't believable. He goes from being confused and petulent in the morning to killing little children in the evening? Based on what? Certainly not the limited dialogue and character development we see on screen.

    His reasoning for wanting to save Padme isn't explored enough. Hell Lucas could have just been a little more concrete and gien Padme a medical condition that *would* have killed her in childbirth. That would have been more believable than a dream that Aniken has.

    The main problem really is that Lucas doesn't have the writing nor the directorial skills to explore this type of emotional material. His actors are always wooden and deliver really badly written lines with flat performances. This movie is no exception and its no surprise that the path from Aniken to Darth vader just isn't believable.

    The movie looks nice but Lucas should stick to pulp sci-fi and avoid anything than hints of emotion or depth ...he can't pull it off.
  • Not bad acting (Score:5, Insightful)

    by FullCircle (643323) on Sunday May 22, 2005 @06:48PM (#12608125)
    I see many posts saying how bad the actors were. Most of them are some of the best actors around. In other movies they are extremely talented.

    The problem is with the directing. Lucas seems to MAKE them do such a bad job.

    Elsewhere in the posts there is discusson about how good the Spanish version is compared to the English version. I'm sure that was because the voice actors didn't have Lucas directing them.

    Does anyone know why the acting is so bad in 1-3 and decent to good in 4-6? What made him go this route?

"Probably the best operating system in the world is the [operating system] made for the PDP-11 by Bell Laboratories." - Ted Nelson, October 1977

Working...