Skip to main content

Revenge of the Sith Review


I’m sure you’ve probably heard that Revenge of the Sith is just slightly better than The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones. In my opinion, that is completely untrue. Revenge of the Sith is a masterpiece. Let me explain why I think so.

First of all, the plot here is just so much better. Even the dialogue is greatly improved. It’s still not perfect, but it’s only cringe-worthy in a few scenes. That in and of itself is a huge improvement. Secondly, George Lucas has the power of his own legendary original trilogy behind him this time. Finally, we get to witness Anakin become Darth Vader. And it’s glorious. We finally get a little bit of believability when it comes to why Anakin turned to the dark side. This time, it’s not just because he was an arrogant brat. We’re finally able to believe that he was pushed over the edge. On a technical level, everything is flawless, and the CGI still looks incredible today. The acting is far better this time around, and Hayden Christensen is finally able to fully take over his role of Anakin. This isn’t to say he doesn’t have wooden moments, because he does. But when he isn’t wooden, he does an excellent job. Ewan McGregor, as well, gives an excellent performance. I feel like it would be wrong to not mention Ian McDiarmid, as his performance as the Emperor is excellent.


Perhaps the best aspect of this film is its dark tone. While Attack of the Clones was cheesy or even laughable when it tried to be dark, Revenge of the Sith excels in this aspect. The film’s pace is excellent, and it doesn’t waste any time on an atrocious romance story. Nothing feels rushed or overlong. Nearly every scene is in some way crucial to the story, contrary to Attack of the Clones. Okay, I’m sorry. I need to stop bashing that movie. Ultimately, Revenge of the Sith is a gloriously dark, excellently paced, riveting entry in the Star Wars franchise. George Lucas succeeded once again. 4.4/5 stars.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thor: Ragnarok

Thor: Ragnarok is the third and final film in the Thor series. The movie finds Thor humbled, hammer-less, and in a desperate race against time to save Asgard. Ragnarok finds Taika Waititi taking over directorial duties, Kenneth Branagh having directed the first in the series and Alan Taylor having directed the second. Both Branagh and Taylor played the first two films dreadfully seriously. While the first had intermittent, light humor, the second film was oppressively dark and grim. Waititi corrects this problem in only five minutes. Ragnarok’s prologue alone contains more lighthearted fun than both of the previous films combined. Waititi has a bit of a reputation for his oddball sense of humor, but it works wonders for Ragnarok . Waititi suggested that much of the film’s dialogue be improvised, and it does a great deal to reinforce the film’s themes of uncertainty and insecurity. The randomness and off-the-wall quality of the jokes makes...

Casino Royale Review

Back when this film came out in 2006, there wasn't much hope for the future of Bond. The last few films had been train wrecks when it came to getting a good critical response. With the exception of Goldeneye and two or three Roger Moore films, there hadn't been a truly good Bond movie since Sean Connery gave up the role. That was all about to change. Eon Productions brought back Martin Campbell to direct Casino Royale, his last Bond film having been Goldeneye. What little hope there had been for Casino Royale was completely demolished when it was announced Daniel Craig would be playing Bond. It was a huge gamble. (No pun intended.) The film opens in the classic Bond manner, with Bond on a random mission which leads into a chase. Once we finally get to the actual story, we learn that a gambler named Le Chiffre (I'm still not sure how that's accurately pronounced) is joining a high-stakes poker game, and Bond is sent to join the game and beat him. It's immedia...