Star Wars Episode III: Cam's Official Review

[Grim Squeaker]

Idobek, Grim Squeaker:

Qui Gon Jinn coming back is NOT news

<http://www.swcollector.com/archivenews/jan_2005.jsp>, specifically 9 Jan 2005

Thank you, drive through.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes, there are spoilers, but some people (like myself) avoid spoilers for films before they watch them. Hell, I didn't open this thread until I'd seen it.

[jester]

It might not be news, but it is simply not true. Enjoyed much of the fighting and some of the acting. The quotes are tops.

 

'If you are not with me, you are against me.'

 

I have felt the beckoning of the dark side before.

 

I also enjoyed the NOOOOOOOO-sequence with a substantial nod to the Daily Show.

[Ghreyfain]

I also enjoyed the NOOOOOOOO-sequence with a substantial nod to the Daily Show.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The No Scene. Heheh. That was terrible. Poor Vader, he was so cool in Episode IV through VI, but turns out he's just a teenager with some ego problems.

 

If you replaced the words "Jedi Master" and "Jedi Council" from his speech with some other word, let's say candy, he'd sound like a spoiled idiot, I'm sure.

 

"But I want candy! I'm strong enough in the force to eat a whole box of cookies before bed if I want! I WILL stay out late and you can't stop me! I'll run away! Or... or... or turn to the Dark Side!"

 

Bah.

 

Kashyyyk was way cool, though, as were the space battles. And all the other battles.

 

Edit: I should note that I have the original IV-VI on tape, haven't seen the spiffified new versions, and avoided episodes I and II like the plague due to reports of extreme badness. This might mean my view on III might be a bit harsh because my expectations haven't been lowered by all the other suck going on.

[jester]

Sadly the suck has been with us all these years.

[KIrving]

As Cam said, it didn't suck, however my expectations were extremely low, due to the self abusive viewing of one and two. The lack of pain and only the occasional cringe(wookies and tarzan noises? ) made for a better viewing experience during ep. three. Hayden as Anakin still seemed somewhat constipated though, even with learning how to emote and getting a better haircut.

 

I also seem to have a dim memory of Han shooting Greedo first

Yes!! My husband got very upset when he saw this change. After all it is a significant indication of the hardness of Han's character. It's kiddie editing gone mad. In the next Lucas edited version they will probably remove the bodies of Luke's family.Grrrr

[Grim Squeaker]

SPOILER!

 

 

 

Kiddie editing? Anakin kills children in this latest episode, and we get to watch the flesh burning from his face. Oh yeah, kiddie friendly...

 

 

 

SPOILER!

[neriana]

I don't think the mutilation of the Han/Greedo scene is because of anything "kiddie", unless you count, "ooooh we can make lazers now on this neato computer, awesome d00d" as "kiddie", which it is in a way.

[Domi]

I liked it... But then again I like all three Matrix-es. I think after watching Ep II a number of times and now watching Ep III I finally ( I think) got what Lucas wanted Hayden to convey - it *was* a sulky awkward boy messed up by hormones and medio-whatever they are. Story-wise though, I actually would have liked that to be the ending of the series just because it will be a rare movie where in the cataclismic duel between good and evil the evil guys won (not that I don't like the gorgeous male cast of the original SWs... )

[SimDing0]

I found it disappointing. It's worth watching as a film, but doesn't go out with the bang that the final installment should have.

 

As far as I understood, Qui Gon isn't really still alive, it's just a shitty story twist to glorify the force, so there's no spoiler anyway.

 

Yes, the "NOOOOOOOOOOOOO" scene really was the icing on the cake as far as the disasterous loss of any potential went.

 

Also, what was with the big bad guy I won't name dying in the first 5 minutes? Seriously.

 

Thoughts of disgruntlement.

[Bri]

Well, there is one review I found myself agreeing with after I saw the movie myself.

 

It was Orson Scott Card's review, which can be found here:

http://www.hatrack.com/revengeofthesith.shtml

 

One part I really felt Card was spot on with was this excerpt:

 

Too bad his inner child never learned how to write.

 

He did fine with American Graffiti -- those characters spoke with the voices of his own teenage years. But Star Wars required heroic dialogue and Lucas never acquired an ear for it. It's as if someone who once heard a few passages of Shakespeare decided to write the sequel to Romeo and Juliet.

 

Worse and Worse

 

On the first Star Wars film he had help. He was not yet so powerful that no one would criticize his work and help him get rid of the most embarrassing clunkers. On the next two films, better writers helped him even more, so that, at least in The Empire Strikes Back, his saga matched his vision aurally as well as visually.

 

Then he went sixteen years without making a movie before returning to write the true beginning of his epic.

 

But by now he was a legend. Fans not only worshiped him, some actually believed in the Force and listed "Jedi" as their religion. In Hollywood, a land where the only signs of divinity are fame and money, he had so much of both that there was no one left who could say to him, "George, please, get some help on that scene, it's going to make people laugh in the theaters, and not the right way."

 

Instead, it was apparently all "Yes, Mr. Lucas" and "Wonderful, Mr. Lucas" and the result was two of the most successful wretched films in history.

[KIrving]

SPOILER

 

 

 

 

 

SPOILER!

 

 

 

Kiddie editing?  Anakin kills children in this latest episode, and we get to watch the flesh burning from his face.  Oh yeah, kiddie friendly...

 

 

 

SPOILER!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Maybe I'm jaded, but I didn't feel anything during those parts, not even horror (although I knew I was supposed to). It was visually there (although somewhat bloodless) but emotionally sanitized. I felt like an extremely distant passenger being veered away from fully exploring the seductiveness and corruption of evil. It just wasn't there imo. I'd also have to agree with Orson Scott Card that the dialogue wasn't good enough and therefore imo, the film lacked the ability to fully engage and immerse. I felt that I didn't care about Anakin's struggle (it did not seem like much of one anyway).

 

SPOILER

[Domi]

I think it's not really dialogue that prevented me from empathizing with Anakin (I was mostly feeling for Kenobi and the Jedi #3 who most probably has a name indicated somewhere). It's just he (at least to me) came across as Frodo turned evil - ie cute little guy who decided the fate of the epical struggle. I always imagined him (on the basis of the first movies) as someone like Count Dooku.

 

I don't feel though that evil was completely sanitized. It was not shown as seductive and attractive, no. But I doubt that it was Lucas goal - after all his franchise firmly roots in the good side.

 

Actually, that's a fun question - is there any epic movie that shows evil guys as attractive alternative to the heroic opponents and have evil guys to have an intelligent agenda (any agenda but conquering the world and generally making everyone suffer for that matter)?

 

SPOILER

 

The meticulous slaughter of Jedi by the clones was very strong imo, because it was faceless and so 'clean'. Just a bullet in the back.

[Bri]

Actually, that's a fun question - is there any epic movie that shows evil guys as attractive alternative to the heroic opponents and have evil guys to have an intelligent agenda (any agenda but conquering the world and generally making everyone suffer for that matter)?

 

Off hand, I can't really say there is one. The closest (and the name eludes me) has a figure that would definitely be evil (he steals, lies, cheats, kills remorselessly), but compared to the government he is waging war against, he is the good guy.

[BigRob]

That tends to be the way it goes in major Hollywood films. The bad guys are always lots more evil than the good guys (assuming there's any trace of evil in them at all), so you know who to identify with. You'd probably never get backing for a film that didn't meet this moral expectation, so they never get seen.

[neriana]

Isn't that kind of the definition of good guys and bad guys? If the bad guys weren't evil, they wouldn't be bad guys. Conversely, if the good guys weren't mostly good, they wouldn't be good guys.

 

By the way: The Godfather. Totally evil people, glorified as heroic. Not to mention the dozens of cop films that have the "good cops" act violently, illegally, and generally despicably, to be "gritty".