Actually, y'know, it's really, really, REALLY bad. (May, possibly, contain tiny spoilers, if you've been living in a cave in New Guinea these past thirty years)

Rating: 1/10 (11 August 2006)

Of course, those who waited with baited breath all those years no doubt disagree. To criticise Lucas is sacrilege, apparently.
Codswallop.
You can't base your opinion of a film on how much you liked previous instalments, or how long you've waited for it. Look at the film, for heaven's sake.
It's trash.
The fact that it has those words 'Star Wars' at the start does not affect the quality of the film. Yet so many people judge it as a Star Wars film, as if that's some universally recognised genre.
Judge it instead on what it is. I did.
And here are a few wee details I noticed: (in no particular order)
1) The acting is unbearably lifeless. Yet this is a film with actors of real quality. Either you blame the scriptwriter (Lucas) or the director (Lucas).
2) The much-vaunted pod racing scene. It's the Love Bug. You know, old Disney flick with a white VW. Lucas filched the plot, condensed it, and stuck some pretty graphics in.
You doubt me? In the Love Bug:
-Our hero is a put-upon nobody with, apparently, no chance of success.
-His rival is smart, popular, amazingly successful, and no-one knows he's a cheat. And his vehicle is top notch.
-Our hero's vehicle, however, is implausibly good, far better than everyone imagines.
-So said rival sabotages it.
-And alters the signs to send our hero the wrong direction.
-A vital part of our hero's vehicle falls off.
-But he puts it back together, and unfeasibly wins the race. Sound familiar?
3) Jar-Jar Binks. Oh, for crying out loud. Even Star Wars devotees find fault here. It's just sickening. (And so blatantly designed to sell Happy Meals).
4) The 'slapstick' that Lucas throws in - Binks messing about and accidentally winning a battle etc - could have been written by a five-year-old; it's not in the least bit funny. It really doesn't deserve the same label as that attached to such slapstick geniuses as Keaton, Chaplin and Lloyd. I'd rather call Lucas' efforts 'complete dross'.
5) It doesn't make sense. If Darth Vader built C3PO when he was a nipper, surely they'd recognise each other in years to come? Unless, of course, C3PO was just put in to sell Happy Meals...
6) On the same note - if two-bladed light sabres are so great, why don't they have them in the future?
7) Ewan McGregor's accent.
8) The phrase 'Star Wars' suggests exciting adventure in space, battles of good and evil, dashing heroes saving the day, and all that matinée fun that Lucas was aiming at in the first place. It does not, nor should it ever, suggest debates about tax reform. I don't care how important it is to the story; if the only way Lucas could link this with the original was to analyse the galactic budget, he needs a new story. I don't remember the original film having to many fiscal quandaries in its plot.
9) Was anyone surprised by anything that happened in the entire 2 1/4 hours?
10) Oh, and the names. What exactly is Lucas on?
In short, then: 1) Badly acted, written and directed; 2) Plagiarism; 3) Worst character in movie history; 4) Bad jokes; 5) Blatant commercialisation; 6) Hopeless attempt at continuity; 7) Ewan McGregor's accent; 8) Desperately dull; 9) Complete lack of imagination; and 10) Rank stupidity.
And I've only scratched the surface.
If, by some fluke of glorious fortune, you've yet to see this film, please, please, don't bother. Watch Emprie Strikes Back instead. And if you can't get it, why not try peeling all the skin off your left foot? It's immeasurably preferable to the Phantom Menace.