Why do so many rate this movie 10/10?

Rating: 4/10 (30 May 2005)

A 10/10 rating means this movie cannot be improved upon. This is the sort of score that should be reserved for the Godfather, One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest and perhaps Star Wars Episode VI. The majority of reviewers seem to be blinded by the special effects and the reputation of this prequel and do not seem to understand that the acting, particularly of Ewan MacGregor, is hopelessly sub-par. There is no emotion or involvement in any of the principle actors. Whether this is the fault of a poor script or the fault of Christiansen, MacGregor and Portman it is hard to tell. I noticed this especially when MacGregor discovers that Anakin, a man he has devoted most of his recent life to training, is a sith lord. The level of surprise and shock that he must feel is barely discernibleto the audience. And don't get me started on his appalling excuse for a accent. I can only assume that American viewers are unable to hear the ridiculous bastardised Scottish nuances in it. However, Darth Vaders first few breaths were magical (until he says Padme - a name that just cant be said in a deep voice) and Ian McDamuid's performance was powerful and impressive. Samuel L Jackson was also impressive, doing much with the little he had to work with.
I can only wish that the viewing audience can see past what is clearly a lacklustre movie and that the hundreds of 10/10 reviews on this site represent a fanatical and unbalanced minority.
Sidenote: I actually met Ian McDarmuid in Edinburgh a couple of years ago, in a vegetarian restaurant, of all places.