Looking back, it's probably the best of the prequels.

Rating: 6/10 (18 July 2016)

Yes, I said it, and I'll say it again, I believe Attack of the Clones, which so many viewers believe to be the worst Star Wars film, to be superior to Revenge of the Sith, considered by many to he the redeemable prequel. But, the question is, is it a good movie on its own?
Sadly, the answer is no, but I don't think it's bad either. I believe this film has the best CGI out of the three prequels, and if you don't pause the film and inspect it frame by frame, it blends in nicely with the live action footage. Sometimes it's a little wonky, I particularly noticed some extremely fake looking CG flips and some odd backgrounds, but overall it's pretty good, while also somewhat dated.
The action scenes are also fun as hell to watch, especially a speeder chase towards the beginning and Obi-Wan's fight against Jango Fett. The most disappointing of these fight scenes are the lightsaber duels, which are overly choreographed and boring to watch, a stark contrast to the intense duels of The Phantom Menace. Anakin's fight against Dooku in particular looks like a ballet dance.
The acting is a very mixed bag. Some, like Christopher Lee, Ewan McGregor, and Temuera Morrison, bring natural charisma to their respective roles and are fun to watch, yet others, like Hayden Christensen, Natalie Portman and Samuel L. Jackson are stoic and bland, Jackson displaying none of the charm of some of his other roles.
The dialogue is also quite bad. I'll just leave it at that.
So all in all, I don't think Attack of the Clones is all that horrible, though I certainly don't think it's a masterpiece, and I think it's the most enjoyable of the three prequels.