My review of Star Wars, Episode Three: Revenge of the Sith will be posted on Wednesday. There’ll be a long version at CT Movies, and a MUCH more comprehensive version up at Looking Closer.
Today, CT Movies has posted my latest Reel News column, which focuses again on Star Wars.
I had a good long talk with Steven D. Greydanus (this blog’s Film Critic of the Month) last night, and we read our reviews to each other. We had to laugh. We agreed on every single point (including how many stars out of four we’re giving it), and had often written down the same questions and observations almost verbatim. It’s tough, reviewing this film on just one viewing… especially knowing that more people will read this than probably any review I’ve written since Return of the King. There’s this intense desire to be fair, to get it right, to be sure I’ve quoted the characters correctly, and to cover all of the major points.
Man… Steven Greydanus can WRITE!! Wait until you read the first paragraphs of his review. Read them out loud. They have more drama than any of the dialogue in Revenge of the Sith.
For those who can’t wait to read reviews, Roger Ebert’s review has just been posted.
If you want MANY SPOILERS and a savage attack on the film, read Anthony Lane’s merciless condemnation in The New Yorker.
The general opinion of “Revenge of the Sith” seems to be that it marks a distinct improvement on the last two episodes, “The Phantom Menace” and “Attack of the Clones.” True, but only in the same way that dying from natural causes is preferable to crucifixion.
So… if Lucas thinks there are no absolutes, then how do you explain his explanation of the film’s political relevance?
”In terms of evil, one of the original concepts was how does a democracy turn itself into a dictatorship,” Lucas told a news conference at Cannes, where his final episode had its world premiere.
”The parallels between what we did in Vietnam and what we’re doing in Iraq now are unbelievable.
”On the personal level it was how does a good person turn into a bad person, and part of the observation of that is that most bad people think they are good people, they are doing it for the right reasons,” he added.
How can you say there are “bad people” and “good people”, George? How can you even suggest that anybody does anything for the wrong reasons or the right reasons, if there are no absolutes?