Review of Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005) by Tiberio S — 09 Aug 2016

5/20/05.

"Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of The Sith".

Film Review by Richard T. Saraceno.

Twentieth Century Fox and Lucasfilm LTD. Present A Film Written and Directed by George Lucas, Produced by Rick McCallum, Starring Hayden Christensen, Ewan McGregor, Ian McDiarmid, Natalie Portman, Samuel L. Jackson, Jimmy Smits, Christopher Lee, Frank Oz, Anthony Daniels, Kenny Baker, and James Earl Jones, Music by John Williams, Sound and Editing by Ben Burtt, Costume Design by Trisha Biggar, Visual Effects by Industrial Lights and Magic.

"Star Wars." I've claimed in the past that I only lived my life to see "Star Wars" complete. Even after the disappointments that the new Episodes brought, I was still compelled by the series, and I had faith in George Lucas that he would find the right path. Little did I know, all along, he was heading down the right path and in fact his prequel series is a wonderful addition to the "Star Wars" saga. These are not bad movies, they are different movies. They allow us to see what we could only hear about in the original films.

Many people complain about Lucas' use of digital effects. "Why doesn't it look as good as 'Lord of the Rings'?" Here's the answer to that. "Lord of the Rings" is a great film. On top of that, films with convincing effects also include "Sin City," "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban," and "Minority Report." However, these filmmakers all find the need to limit themselves by making what I like to call the "modern colorless movie." This, in effect, allows these movies to look more "real" by blending the live-action and animation more seamlessly by using one color tone as opposed to several. And it seems necessary to do that nowadays since people can't accept what movies were made for; escapism. But George Lucas is not intimidated by this uprising of "real" movies. Take a good look at Lucas' extraordinarily expansive color palette. He doesn't hold back, regardless of the results he produces. Here is a filmmaker who is really striving for something. He won't give up and he'll keep trying, once again making this a classic George Lucas experimental film, no different than "THX 1138" or "American Graffiti" except the fact that he's experimenting in new fields. And he's won some of his own battles. Yes, Yoda is finally perfected. There is not one point when Yoda does not look real. He's so organic in this film and looks as though he could be grasped with human hands. That combined with more realistic movements as opposed to the jerky puppet moves makes this the best Yoda we have ever seen. The Clone Troopers, for the most part, are dazzling. The space battles are fantastic and finally defeat those old clunky models that still look wonderful today but don't live up to the standards of the modern audience. And the city of Corouscant looks like an actual city on film. Of course, there are still plenty of flaws, but that's part of Lucas' journey as a filmmaker, and I do believe he will succeed in his mandate. Why? Because he's not afraid to fail. And there are very, very few filmmakers who can say that.

Ultimately, perhaps, he did fail with these films in terms of his concentration on performance and dialogue, but that's because he was striving for something greater. George Lucas' "Star Wars" films look no different than the way J.R.R. Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" would look or J.K. Rowling's "Harry Potter" would look. And I mean that as if those authors were the directors of the pictures. This is Lucas' world in which he created, and as the creator, his focus as a director is on the larger scale. It's more concentrated in the remarkable story in which he's created. Yes, it would be better for Lucas, as a producer, to bring in someone else to direct the film. Irvin Kershner did a remarkable job with "Empire Strikes Back" back in '80, Spielberg would've been a delightful choice if he'd have accepted the offer. And while were speaking of other directors, how nice would it have been for Lucas to bring in his old filmmaking partner, the performance driven Francis Ford Coppola, to direct this highly dramatic picture? Coppola would've been my choice since he especially knows this story more than pretty much everyone except for Lucas. But that's thinking in a fantasy world. Realistically, George Lucas, the great pioneer of modern film, did direct this picture, and you have to appreciate a creator's vision as opposed to a director for hire.

And because this man is such a great inventor, it's amazing that even through a film full of awful dialogue, decent acting, and effects that, again, are on and off good, the film is still dramatically effective and had me choked up by the end. That's the story, the music, and the will of a man who wants to express a grand vision. I am reviewing this picture not in comparison to the original trilogy or in comparison to modern day epics, but as a stand alone experimental motion picture that has now evolved the use of digital video (which is what these actors were filmed on) into a definite tool for all future filmmaking, especially when viewed in digital projection.

And I won't totally bash the acting and dialogue. Ian McDiarmid's "Emperor Palpatine/Darth Sidious" character was a twisted, seductive, and harrowing performance that is worthy of an Academy Award nomination. Lucas even wrote some wonderful dialogue for him. The half visual effects department performance and half voice performance by Frank Oz with the character "Yoda" was thrilling. And Yoda maintained his classic style of dialogue, which is much more effective than the rest of these characters. Ewan McGregor's "Obi-Wan Kenobi" was a delight. Natalie Portman, though still off at points, finally halfway embraced the character of "Padme," which is enough to say considering how she seems to belittle this part so much. And Hayden Christensen, though still needs much work, was able to step it up in scenes which required a stronger physical presence projecting anger and hatred, even through the worst written dialogue that could possibly be written for any movie ever. His facial expressions are great, but he needs to learn how to deliver from a deeper level. But hey, that's why I go to see motion picture; not to listen to them speak, but to watch them act. If anything, the only sound I hear is Ben Burtt's wonderful sound effects and John William's remarkable score. This is a visual experience like no other and will open your eyes not just to the amazing energy projected through Lucas, but also to the possibilities in the future of filmmaking.

Overall, I think fans of all genres and of all types of films will really appreciate this picture. Whether you're an old-fashioned filmgoer who only likes modern films that have the Clint Eastwood cliché touch, or whether you're the kind of person who only likes to go to movies to have a good time, I think all will be able to find a place for this picture within their hearts, because this picture actually has a heart, which is more than most can say. It serves a purpose, at least for its creator, and it has an objective through every frame of movement. "Star Wars" geeks, like myself, will be totally enthralled. And hard nose critics will melt by the time the film concludes. Love him or hate him, George Lucas has presented us with a masterpiece in experimental filmmaking and I look forward to seeing where this man's destiny lies. And so I say to you Mr. Lucas, now after finally having completed your epic, whatever journey your life takes you on next, whatever obstacles stand in the way, may the Force be with you, always.