Lucas finally gets the finger out

Rating: 9/10 (18 May 2005)

When the release date loomed, fans all over the world were looking forward with a perverse delight to seeing how Lucas could screw up the final prequel. The stilted, eat-a-dirty-boot dialogue of the previous episodes, combined with plots that tied themselves up in knots, gave Revenge Of The Sith so much to make up for. What it manages to do, aside from exactly that, is prove that Lucas had been capable of much better in 1999 and 2002. ROTS essentially stops and balances the fantasy special effects with the aim of the story, giving it a much more resonant edge. Most of the characters seem far more three-dimensional, and the demises that the Jedi meet have impact, something that nobody who had seen only the previous two Star Wars films would have ever expected. When I went to see the first session on the East Coast this evening, it was the first time in the entire prequel trilogy that I heard applause as the credits rolled.
Okay, the film isn't all good. Some of the shots during the duel sequences really don't fit or are unclear. Some of the dialogue still seems a bit daft. When Anakin is expressing his fear of losing Padmé to Padmé, groans could be heard from the audience as the threat of more daft dialogue loomed. Thankfully, Lucas instead chose to concentrate on the corruption of Anakin as a character. The result is that Natalie Portman's role is reduced to somewhere between cameo and support, but she was never a highlight of the prequels, anyway. Hayden Christensen is far less whiny in this episode. It even manages to make one forget about the whining fit he had in the previous film. But the real surprise here is Ian McDiarmid, who manages to provide all the dramatic support for both Anakin's conversion to the dark side and the transition of the galaxy from Republic to Empire. I never thought I would say this, but this prequel actually featured good acting with actors who did not seem lost as to what they were meant to be reacting to.
Some of this film is a bit badly-planned. How Darth Sidious disposes of Darth Tyranus and takes Darth Vader as an apprentice seems hasty. Given that Christopher Lee was about the only thing in the previous episode that worked, he deserved a little better than this. Sometimes the inter cutting of action on one planet to another works. Several times, however, it is as jarring as the constant location-hopping that took place in the previous two episodes. The story still suffers a little because the audience can get confused as to where they're meant to be. Fortunately, the actual story being told reduces this problem to a minor irritant.
The dependency on having seen the original three films still remains, although this is the first time since 1977 that a Star Wars film can make sense on its own for more than half its running length. The secret lies in choosing to focus upon the Sith rather than the Jedi. As Ian McDiarmid twists the intentions and creedo of the Jedi around, we get to see things from another perspective that enables us to understand what the Force is and how it enables its users to do what they do, without having to ask fans of the original series. On the other hand, this prequel still relies on the earlier films to make audiences care why this youth suddenly becomes the symbol of fear in the galaxy. While the suit is being applied, and later as the suited Vader is throwing a fit or standing on the bridge with the Emperor, Lucas is clearly pandering to the same fans that he has recently derided for their criticisms of earlier prequels. That I am telling you this film is what The Phantom Menace and especially Attack Of The Clones (or Attack Of The Clods as I like to think of it) should have been, and am over the age limit Lucas has specified, should tell you something.
Lucas' bragging about how this film earned a PG-13 rating at the MPAA is also pretty baseless. Attack Of The Clods also received the OFLC's equivalent rating of M. Both films are a pretty softcore M at that, and audiences above the age of five will have no trouble with this film. Assuming they understand what words like "pregnant" or "dying" mean. No, Lucas' claim that the children should be left home for this outing is purely a publicity stunt, and a fairly ill-conceived one at that. Not that parental guidance isn't recommended, but people who honestly believe that this film will leave their children with permanent psychological scars honestly need to get out more. It is worth noting that what violence is shown in this prequel is shown in a fairly theatrical manner. About the only time we get to see the consequences of the violence shown in this film is when Darth Vader is permanently burned into Anakin, so to speak. Otherwise, it is all strictly elliptical "bang!" "you got me!" fare here.
If I had to give Revenge Of The Sith a rating, it would be nine out of ten. Yes, it is directed by a man who still doesn't realise that being told "no" is one of the greatest favours you can receive, and the promised answers to a few questions still haven't come, but otherwise, this is the best film of 2005. I bet nobody ever thought an old cynic like me would say that about a George Lucas film. I certainly didn't. Essentially, this is everything that the previous two Star Wars films should have been, and more. If you haven't seen it yet, and need your faith in creative souls who have more money than sense rekindled, then take the time to get into your local theatre now. You'll be glad you did.