May 18, 2005
Revenge of the Sith
All right, I guess I need to start planning to see "Revenge of the Sith" sooner or later. We haven't been to the theater since seeing "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkhaban" just before Olivia was born. I've almost forgotten what it was like. Anyway, I'm not obsessed with this movie. I'll be happy to see it whenever - frankly, I'd prefer to avoid the first week or two. I don't have too many expectations about this movie - like Dean, I just want it to not stink. Thankfully, at least one reviewer I respect liked it. The Tomatometer is pretty kind to it, too. So I'm feeling good about it.
At the risk of starting a flame war, I thought "Phantom Menace" was a mostly enjoyable piece of fluff, while "Send In The Clones" was a godawful, incomprehensible mess. I wasn't particularly bothered by Jar-Jar or the midichlorians, and the story was at least more or less straightforward. I can't recall a single scene from "Clones". I'd sit through "Phantom" again, but wouldn't watch "Clones" again for love or money. What about you?
Posted by Charles Kuffner on May 18, 2005 to TV and movies
Tend to agree with Eps one and two. Only aspects of Jar Jar that bothered me were the fact that the character seemed way too atypical for the nature of the series. I give into temptation tomorrow morning for the latest, though. Enough already ... roll film.
If you want to watch a movie about the exploits of an evil empire, I strongly recommend this movie instead.
Mostly agree with you. "Clone Wars" sucked and was the worst of the five "Star Wars" films. However, "Phantom Menace" isn't that far behind. It had a better story, but Jar-Jar was horrible. Only Roger Rabbit was a more annoying character in a movie.
Except for Jar Jar, One was very enjoyable. Two sucked. My kids watch Two over and over. I can't. I'll watch One over and over, though, especially the Qui Gon, Obi Wan, Darth Maul battle at the end.
The whole family is heading out today to see Three -- two showings of it!
Haven't seen either of the last two movies and don't intend to see this one, either. Nobody's ever said anything to me about either of those movies that has made me even the tiniest bit interested. Don't get me wrong -- I loved "Star Wars" and saw "Return of the Jedi" and "Empire Strikes Back" and enjoyed both of them.
A couple friends have already seen "Sith" and say that it's clear evidence of why George Lucas needs to stay away from writing scripts and stick to special effects.
I know I risk the wrath of Star Wars lovers everywhere, but I only saw the first film for the first time five years ago just to see what the big deal was. Let's just say that I didn't think it was a bad movie, but I'm not going to be wearing a Darth Vader helmet anytime soon.
Even though I have the original trilogy on DVD, I still have yet to see "Return of the Jedi" or "The Empire Strikes Back". I have seen none of the new trilogy.
Now that I've ticked off the Star Wars fans, I'll tell you that I also think the entire Star Trek franchise is overrated beyond belief. :-)
Feel the same as Anne. PM was underrated, IMO. Darth Maul is the coolest villain in the whole series. The story connected fairly well, too. The attack of the quones was god awful. i forgot what it was about almost immediately after watching it.
Both of the first two are pretty damn bad. I think the only redeeming parts of Clones were the parts on Kamino (the rainy planet where the clones were produced) and the scene between Obi Wan and Dooku.
I agree that Phantom Menace was a little more cohesive, but the inescapable racial stereotypes in Jar Jar, the Trade Federation officals and Watto are too hard to take and get worse with repeat viewings. Almost all of the Anakin scenes are unbearable as well.
I've got tickets for Sith tomorrow night at Alamo South Lamar. On the one hand, I'm glad this one is darker because it makes sense that it would be, but I'm bummed because this is the first and last one that I'd be able to take my son to in the theater. He's now a little older than I was when I saw the original in the theater.
I can understand why someone watching the original for the first time recently wouldn't get what all the fuss was about. You had to see it in 1977 to get why it had such a huge impact at the time. I'll never forget that opening scene as the Star Destroyer filled the entire screen for what seemed like minutes. It blew my 6-year-old mind.
I mostly enjoyed Eps 1 & 2. Of course, with a five year old in the family, we've watched each of them a dozen times or more. (They are, respectively, "The Racing Movie" and "The Fighting Movie").
The challenge with Sith is going to be finding a way for us to go while consigning the kids to a babysitter. Most of what I've read seems to indicate that the PG-13 rating is deserved so we don'w want to take the kids. Unfortunately we have been steeped in Star Wars advertising aimed at young kids for a couple of months now, and they are very hyped up about it.
I don't mind Lucas making a more adult movie (in the true sense of adult, not pornography) but I sort of resent the incessant marketing of it to children who he, himself, recommends not be taken to see it.
Saw Sith last night, and it redeemed a lot of Eps I and II for me.
I didn't hate either, but they definitely didn't live up to the Star Wars memories. One had many annoying moments and characters - Gungans, Anakin, etc - and a few story blunders like the midichlorians, but was basically a good story with solid action. Two felt rushed and half-done in many places.
The extra year for Sith worked wonders. The action is incredible, the "I wish this was over!" romantic moments were minimal, and the storyline elements are all tied up quite nicely. I'm sure the evaluations will be personal, but as a diehard Star Wars fan I could find very little to complain about.
Personally I didn't like either the Phantom Menace or Attack of the Clones. Perhaps I just outgrew the Star Wars thing as I was in 8th grade when the very first one came out in 1977. But my two main criticisms of these movies are as follows:
1. The Roman Seige style battle tactics. Are you kidding me? Think about that scene in the Phantom Menance with all the robots slowly marching forward in formation on open ground. That sort of warfare went out of style in the 18th Century. The Confederates figured out the folly of marching across open terrain into defensive lines at Gettysburg. And the British generals learned the lesson again at the Somme in WW I. Are you telling me that a civilization advanced enough to build battle bots is going to line them up as foot medieval foot soldiers? Ridiculous. Warfare in space-age civilizations is going to be about mobility. Not trudging across open fields on foot.
2. The ridiculous royalist politics. This is where Star Trek is light years ahead of Star Wars. Star Trek gets is right with the shifting complicated alliances between worlds and civilizations. The Klingons, the Romulans, the Cardassians. Which sides are they on and who's really in charge? Menace comes from different directions at all times. By contrast, most of the political scenes in Star Wars look like some sort of bizarre reconstruction of Louis the 14th's court in 18th Century France.
It is as if the entire Star Wars world is lifted out of 1st Century Rome with light sabres substituted for swords. Might as well just watch Gladiator or Troy.
Frankly I find the space universe created by Star Trek to be infinitely more satisfying and far more appealing.
Just got back from watching Sith. It was very good and I am completely drained. It was tough to watch Anakin go bad, even though we have known for years he does.
Now I feel a big need to go watch Four.
William, it is easy to understand why you were wondering what the big deal is about Star Wars. You saw it when special effects had advanced to the "Matrix" stage. Part of the magic of Star Wars was seeing it in 1977 when the special effects were truly cutting edge. George Lucas made a fortune with his effect company Industrial Light and Magic because it was damn near magic for the time.
I am doing my best not to not get too excited about RoS. I did a good job avoiding all of the spoilers up until the last few weeks. At any rate, we've got a group going to see the digital projection at the Galaxy 10 Sunday night. So, it should definitely be an experience.
I found PM a disappointment. I think it would have been much better if Anakin had been about 14. AotC was so bad that it is the only movie that I have only ever seen once, in any format.
1. The Roman Seige style battle tactics. Are you kidding me? Think about that scene in the Phantom Menance with all the robots slowly marching forward in formation on open ground. That sort of warfare went out of style in the 18th Century.
Don't forget, all of this takes place "A long time ago..."
There were extremely excellent and the best scenes in the movie "Revenge of the Sith".
Good originality and great imagination, great story in this movie!
Here's Photo gallery for Hayden Christensen(Anakin) of this movie. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0159789/photogallery-ss-0
I love Star Wars series the most!