Star Wars 6. I mean 3. Or 6?

[Rod Hagen]

Whichever one is out now. What did you think? Anthony Lane's review was one of the funniest I've ever read:

 

Regarding Yoda: "Deepest mind in the galaxy, apparently, and you still express yourself like a day-tripper with a dog-eared phrase book. 'I hope right you are.' Break me a fucking give."

 

But I have to admit I liked it. Too much Lucas, obviously. Too over the top, too much exceedingly crappy dialogue, too much C.G.I. Definitely too much Yoda.

 

But it's dark, darker than Empire (the second one. I mean the fifth one.) And it does bring everything round. Of course I don't know how 30-year old Ewan McGregor become 65-year-old Alec Guiness in the 20-odd years it will take baby Luke to become Mark Hamil Luke, but it's not nice to point out plot holes, even one you can drive a Mack Truck through. And I'm sure there are many others.

 

Still, it held my interest for 2.25 hours, which a movie can rarely do. It's never slow, the story is compelling and not nearly as contrived as Starwars 4 and 5, uhm, 1, uh forget it. I liked it. Hope you did too.

[Guest ReturnOfS]

I liked the movie a lot!!

 

Of

>course I don't know how 30-year old Ewan McGregor become

>65-year-old Alec Guiness in the 20-odd years it will take baby

>Luke to become Mark Hamil Luke, but it's not nice to point out

>plot holes, even one you can drive a Mack Truck through.

 

I saw that plot hole too, but it isn't nearly as big as the reviewer says it is. In Phantom Menace Obiwan is in his mid-20s. Attack of the Clones is based at least 10 years after Phantom Menace so Obiwan would be in his mid to late 30s in that one. Revenge of the Sith is based about 3 years after attack of the clones so that would put Obiwan in to his late 30s to very early 40s. A New Hope is based some odd 20 years after Revenge of the Sith so that would put Obiwan into his late 50s to very early 60s. So the plot hole isn't as big as it seems.

 

Theres my two cents. :-)

[JamesK840]

http://www.newyorker.com/printables/critics/050523crci_cinema

[guptasa1]

I was very excited to see this one. I'm a big fan of the original trilogy, less so of the "new" one. I think this one was the best of the lot of the new trilogy, but I still think it pales in comparison with the old one.

 

The special effects are amazing as always, and as you pointed out, the story is probably the darkest of all of them, though I might argue Empire "worked better" as a dark movie.

 

Unfortunately (and I have to be pretty general as I don't want to give any spoilers), I did have some problems with a major key plot point (dealing with psychology and motivations) as well as some of the acting.

 

For some reason, and I think it's all the availability and CGI, I think George Lucas tends to neglect the story and acting in favor of really cool special effects. I've read he can't wait to get to the editing/cutting room a lot of the time, and I believe it.

 

While the special effects are all well and good (and truly impressive), I think it tends to upset the pacing of the story (so much action, they neglect the "slow" dialogue scenes), and the actors don't have enough chances to do their thing as well as they're clearly capable of.

 

If you watch the old movies, the acting overall (at least in my opinion) is very strong, the special effects are great, but the story isn't incredibly fast. They had to take their time and limit how much they could do, so it seems like there's more story in there.

 

Now, it's almost like they're rushing through any story there is to get to the next mind-blowing special effect.

 

A few times I even almost laughed because I thought the acting was so poor in what *should* be a very emotional and serious scene, and I'm not one who's even generally very critical of acting. I saw it twice, and the second time, I had less of an urge to do this, but it was still there a little. lol.

 

Overall, liked the movie and love Star Wars in general, but the problems (poor acting in places, a major plot point that just doesn't add up or feel right to me, a few places I thought the scenes could have been more powerful, some bad dialogue, etc.) just were too noticeable to me unfortunately. That doesn't make a bad movie, but I do think it separates this and the other two recent ones from the original trilogy.

 

I also highly recommend for those of you who like Star Wars to see the Clone Wars miniseries that aired on Cartoon Network. The first half is available on DVD now I believe, and I'm sure the second half is to come. EXCELLENT, and dare I say even better than the recent movies in parts in my opinion, especially if you like animation. (It's done by the creator of Samurai Jack and fills in the story between Episodes 2 and 3...including several things made reference to in this movie.)

 

Just my two cents.

[Guest ReturnOfS]

Oh come on guys. I know that I could not be the only one on this board who really liked the new Star Wars movie. There are a ton of positive reviews for the movie out there.

[Guest rohale]

I must admit, I'm not much of a Star Wars fan at all. Having said that I was talked into going to see " Revenge Of The Sith " opening night this past Thursday. Having sat through the entire movie without a feeling of stern of constentation. I liked it very much for different reassons. The tone of movie was much darker which added atmosphere to the picture quality. The storyline was much tighter than in previous films. Offcourse to start the film wih a punch in the serious of some intense action sequences was something quite different, somewhat unexpected, but briiliantly done.

 

 

Not all the performances were that great. Some were better than others, it was wonderful to see the legendary Sir Christopher Lee in the current film for a very short duration. Definitely worth the screen time, if not more. Some would say his character was probably the best villain in the entire franchise. What a marvelous career he's had thus far, both in theatre and on film, the nice touch is he shows no signs of slowing down.

 

Like as one poster mentioned, I too was curious to see how Ewan McGregor's peformance would transition itself into the late great Sir Alec Guiness. It's no easy task.

 

Offcourse Ian McDiarmid, I dont think the producers could have chosen a better actor to have played the role into two distinctively contrasting ways. He is another in the long line of distinguished actors to have spent many years as part of the Royal Shakesperian Company. Someone had asked him quite recently what Star Wars has done for his career. He mentioned that at his age, the motion of the action sequences made him really proud just to keep the Insurance Company happy. He is now more recognised from Star Wars than at any point in his entire career. He even uses the notioriety to get more people to see his theatre plays in London by either buying the ticket or buying the programmes and then he autographs them.

 

I thought Hayden Christian came off much stronger this time around in comparison to his first performance in the previous Star Wars film. He was much more focused this time around and pretty much held to his own without compromising or playing second fiddle to the other performers. There was that level of intensity in his eyes that made him believable in his performance. Natalie Portman wasn't too bad. Sam Jackson was pretty good and the fight scene with Ian was wonderfully done.

 

Overall I thougth George Lucas finally got it right. How does the old expression, " Three Times The Lucky Charm ". Indeed definitely for " Revenge Of The Sith "

 

Rohale

[BewareofNick]

And you have to admit, hearing James Earl Jones's voice at the end of the movie was very, very right.

[Guest ReturnOfS]

I missed this post. Its good to know that someone besides me really enjoyed the new Star Wars film. :-)

[Guest ReturnOfS]

I missed this post. Its good to know that someone besides me really enjoyed the new Star Wars film. :-)

[Guest EWC]

I loved the review, and almost completely agree with it, but one of the biggest problems with the movie which he failed to mention, and there was no way anyone could fix it was that there was absolutely no suspense. Anyone who has seen the others knew exactly how this one was going to end, DV in a black suit, Padme dying, the kids getting separated, the Jedi getting killed except for OWK & Yoda. Suspending your disbelief is one thing, forgetting everything you know about the movie is another. And, by the way, listening to that whining brat say "it's not fair", reminded me of a very young teenager who needs to be smacked upside the head.

[Guest ReturnOfS]

Star Wars hater! LOL

[Bilbo]

To me, Star Wars is basically the Wagner's Ring Cycle of our times. So the fate and inevitability of the piece almost added to it. If you view the action pieces as the arias and the dialogue as the recitative, it's not as surprising that more attention was given to the action.

I have read that Lucas has two TV series planned to come out in the future in this mythos. And it sure seemed like Yoda's final words to OWK in this movie set one up big time. So I don't think we'll have to just imagine for ourselves the transition from this OWK to the next.

[+ deej]

>Star Wars is basically the Wagner's Ring Cycle of our times.

 

Or Tolkien's Lord of the Rings.

 

But even Tolkien got it over with in four books. ;-)

[Bilbo]

No, Deej, it's only four books that everyone counts. It's at least five, with The Silmarillion. And I think there's another one or two, too, which are not only Tolkien but Middle Earth.

And look at Mercedes Lackey? She's got at least five trilogies - not just seperate books, trilogies - in her mythos, doesn't she? (And the Dune spice trade I simply don't read personally, but hey?!)