Better than the previous two, but not by much

Rating: 6/10 (21 May 2005)

'Revenge of the Sith' is slightly better than 'Attack of the Clones,' due to the fact there is more emotion involved in Sith and there is less cheesiness between Anakin and Padme. However this movie still doesn't belong in the same class as the original trilogy. Some of the shortcomings of 'Clones' are in 'Sith' as well. Although watching the interactions between Anakin and Padme wasn't as painful as it was in 'Clones,' there is still some cheesy romantic dialogue and I still didn't feel any chemistry between the two. As in 'Clones,' Hayden Christensen is still wrong for the part, acting more like a whiny member of the Backstreet Boys than the future Sith Lord. However, the most disappointing part of this movie is that part of 'Sith's story isn't true to the story told in the original trilogy. (Here's where the spoiler is and here's where my Star Wars nerdiness comes in.) In 'Return of the Jedi,' Leia talks about her mother being sad and dying when she was young, and Luke saying he never new his real mother. In 'Sith,' Padme dies shortly after childbirth, making it impossible for Leia to actually remember her. My criticism for the prequel remains the same: Lucas should have handed the directorial reigns to someone else (maybe Spielberg?), as he did with 'Empire' and 'Jedi.'