Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TheodoreLerell" data-source="post: 2280276" data-attributes="member: 32587">Review of Star Wars: Episode III: Revenge of the Sith. (warning: Spoilers present)Wow! My reaction to this movie is Just.. wow. If there is one word I can use to describe this movie, it would be this:  overratedI made the mistake of reading several reviews before seeing it, all of which were praising this as the best of the 3 prequels and saying that it reminded them of the original trilogy. Hogwash.The movie moved at breakneck speed, moving from one scene to another mindlessly, with mindless action. There was no character development what-so-ever, just mindless action.Christian Haydenson is about the same here as in the last movie, while Natalie Portman is far worse. The dialog between the two of them is just so incredibly horrible -- possibly worse than in episode 2. It's no surprise, with lines like "You're breaking my heart," or the sheer number of times they overused the word "baby" in just one scene -- I swear I was expecting them to start playing the American Idol "Baby Mama" song. (this viewer felt it would have been a hundred times better if they would have simply replaced the word "baby" with "child")And don’t get me started on the Computer Generated R2-D2 flying around… not to mention only doing so when it is convenient for the audience.Then there's Anakin turning to the dark side. Total Crap. It was so fast that it was just totally unbelievable. It happens after about an hour into the movie, but it still moved way too fast. So he helps kill one of the master Jedi -- now we are supposed to believe that he has turned completely to the dark side? riigghtt. Sorry, you're going to have to sell it somewhere else, because I'm not buying it. Several people have argued with me that "his conversion starts in episode 2, and you need to watch that first". To that I say hogwash. I saw episode 2 years ago, and this movie takes place years after that. I should not have to watch the previous one to enjoy this one. Unlike Matrix 2+3 or Lord of the rings 2+3, Star Wars 2+3 does not take place back to back. So that argument is flawed at best.Then comes the next pivotal storyline -- the destruction of the Jedi. This was just total rubbish. I never imagined that the Jedi could be such wussies. I have seen them surprised by dozens of enemies before, with no problems, yet here they fall faster than Vanilla Ice’s career. So much for "the force" helping them out. If these scenes are any indication -- the Jedi just suck.Then comes the rise of power for Palpatine and the Empire. This was weak. He gets up and tells everyone that the he repelled an attack by the once noble Jedi, who are now completely evil, and the Republic will not be a Galactic Empire.. and everyone cheers. What? did I miss something? Padme had to throw in some sort of "This is how democracy dies... in thunderous applause". Rigghht. My friend argued that George W. Bush did the same thing when invading Iraq. My response: Bush had months to convince the public, whereas Palpatine did it in minutes. Just... terrible. Totally unbelievable.Then there's the conversion from Anakin to Darth Vader. This was very flawed too. The final lightsaber duel between Anakin and Obi Wan was pretty weak over all. Sure it was long, but the quality was surely lacking. It is still no where as good a the battle against Darth Maul, but it is certainly better than the episode 2 atrocity. Once he becomes Darth Vader, it's pretty funny too -- he steps out like Frankenstein, which I suppose is accurate but it looks really stupid. It would have been more dramatic if he fell to his knees or something. And hearing him yell "Noooooooooo" was just awful. Even worse than Luke's "scream" in Special Edition Empire Strikes Back. Just... horrible.Oh, and there's the crap about Yoda teaching Obiwan to speak with his former master, Qui-Gon jin. That was just stupid. My friend justified it by saying "well, it makes sense and ties in with the original Trilogy". To that I say Hogwash. If that is true, then who the heck taught it to Luke Skywalker?That being said, there were alot of things that Lucas got right. All the Wookee scenes were fantastic, if not a little rushed. The space battle scenes were pretty good visually, but still very weak, especially at the beginning with Anakin saving Obi Wan. The battle with Count Dooku was also pretty good and very surprising.Al the Yoda scenes were just fantastic. Unlike the comedic Yoda light saber battle in episode 2, this one was done right. All his scenes were priceless. My favorite is seeing him throw his light saber at the enemy, then jumping on him to pull it out.Palpatine was just fantastic. He made all of his scenes come alive. Even when he talked about the Mediclorian crap, he was just amazing. He was like a fine tuned Shakespearean actor. He was clearly the strongest link in the movie.The last 15 minutes were also very good. All the colors and visuals changed to make it look and feel like the original trilogy, which was kind of neat. But something in the back of my mind bothered me – how can there be such a visual change so quickly? It’s as if the interior designer gods changed the entire universe overnight. Overall though, it was just a mixed bag, with more bad parts than good. A lot of Star Wars fans will have a real hard time being objective, as they have in the past, but I will throw this out: If this was a non Star Wars movie, would you still like it? I would give a definite No. Take out all the names and characters like Yoda and put other characters in, and the fans would kick and scream that it was such a horribly written movie.I remember getting in an argument with a friend of mine, who said that Starship Troopers had absolutely horrible special effects (I loved it). Then months later, he justified Jar Jar Binks in Episode I by saying "you have to be able to suspend some of your belief to enjoy it". What a bunch of crap. But that has always been my beef with Star Wars fans -- they usually cannot be objective. Take Yoda's fight scene in Episode 2. It was comical, unrealistic, and just plain silly. Fanboys defended it to no end. But riddle me this: if it was Kermit the frog instead of Yoda, would you still say that it looked so cool?I think the same will be said here. Fanboys will love the movie, while a minority like me will see it for what it is -- a flawed movie that had too much to tell in too little time. Personally, I think Lucas should have pulled a "Kill Bill" and separated this movie into two parts. Part one would concentrate on Anakin turning to the dark side, and end with his conversion. While Part two would concentrate on the fall of the Jedi & republic. That would have been far better, because it would allow for the one thing that this movie completely lacked:  Character development. (not to mention the complete lack of Drama that the original trilogy possessed)As it is, Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith is a pretty good Sci-Fi movie, very good action movie, horrible dramatic movie, and very mediocre Star wars movie.Yeah, I said it. It’s Mediocre.</blockquote>

Verification