Can't see the forest for the trees.

Rating: 5/10 (5 August 2005)

One feature which characterised the original trilogy of Star Wars films was it's economy. They were all made on relatively low-budgets and, in episode four's case, a short space of time. This economy is also part of the action of the films themselves: They are marked by their constant action and a refusal to get mixed up in anything they don't need. The wealth of mythology that has since been created for the Star Wars universe is minimal, making the films easily accessible to non-nerds and very easy and a great pleasure to watch. At some point, George Lucas began to lose his spark. The shadow of this is seen in Return of the Jedi. From the no-frills adventure of New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back, Lucas starts indulging - particularly in pointless, cutsey teddy bears. It is at this point we hesitate to suspend our disbelief. This brings me to Revenge of the Sith. My biggest problem with RotS is Lucas' sense of humour. It is horrible. He can extend himself no further than ridiculous banter between cartoonish robots. This is a jarring and incongruous element prevalent in the prequel trilogy that ruins the experience. This could have quite easily been removed, and I cringe to imagine what HAS been left on the cutting room floor. In the original trilogy, the characterisation is reduced to a few simple archetypes - which Lucas can do. In the new films, however, his biggest mistake in these terms is trying to show the human side of his characters. the shaky dialogue and awful acting is indicative of his limitations as a director. Ah, yes, the acting. I feel I must blame the director for this. Respected stars of serious films such as Ewan McGregor are simply awful. An action film does not demand humans. Sci-Fi is all about escapism, and we want full-on heroes, not normal folks in films. Star Wars gets a very generous rating from me thanks to it's excellent special effects and graphics.
5 out of ten.