Slashdot Mirror
Review: Star Wars Episode III
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.
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
The main site has a lot of Star Wars stuff on the front page: http://www.decentfilms.com/index.html
An interesting excerpt:
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.
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?
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.
Tomorrow, I may eat another house plant
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?
-- If no truths are spoken then no lies can hide --
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.
Again, no one in the theator seemed to notice.
I'd guess no one else in the theater cared. Let's face it, if you were so disappointed by episodes 1 and 2, why did you even bother to see 3? Same reason everyone else did: closure. The difference between you and everyone else in the theater though was that you were determined going in that this was going to be a bad movie and you just wanted to get the last few story elements out and be done with it. Going in I was scared it was going to be like ep. 1. But I came out more than relieved. Fully satisfied, one might say.
Personally, I was less than impressed with ep. 1, but I didn't think it was terrible. I thought ep. 2 was better. The romantic scenes were very annoying, because Lucas can't write good emotional dialogue and Hayden Christiansen can't emote realistic emotion (except for whiny discontent). However, I loved everything else about ep. 2. And after seeing ep. 3, I have a new appreciation for the romantic scense. Ep. 3 wouldn't have made any sense at all without them. It's utterly necessary that Anakin actually has a reason for his fear.
Ep. 3 was awesome, IMHO. On par with the first 3. Maybe better just because it was dire, so tragic, and looked so good. Moreso of all three than eps. 4-6 were able to achieve. Plus, it answered so many questions I hadn't even realized I had! Now I know why the Jedi shun emotion and attachment. Now I know why the Sith are so dangerous, and why they can get rational people to support them despite that.
Anyway, like I said, it was awesome. I may have to go see it again in the theater, which I don't do often.
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.
...he can't pull it off.
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