Comments on: Star Wars at 30: ‘The Saga is Complete’

by: The Big Whatsit » Star Wars at 30: ‘Return to a Galaxy… Far, Far Away’

Sat, 26 Apr 2008 09:23:58 +0000

[…] As the battle rages on, Luke is brought before the Emperor himself, Darth Sidious. Bizarrely, Ian McDiarmid looks somehow older in this than in Revenge of the Sith, despite the actor being 22 years younger when filming ROTJ. As always, he makes for a fantastic villain. You can see the confidence visibly sap from Skywalker as Sidious reveals the extent of his plans for both the Rebellion and himself. Later, he will coerce the young Jedi into a final scrap with his father, the culmination of another scheme gone horribly right… as long as the pair don’t team up, of course. In any event, it’s a grisly plan. Luke is intended to kill his own dad, and from there become the Emperor’s new apprentice. As unlikely as this sounds, it almost works. Darth’s power has diminished. His offspring’s has grown, and the really awful part is that, whatever else happens, the older man is quite accepting that he won’t come out of this alive. […]

by: Mike

Mon, 09 Jul 2007 18:02:48 +0000

Good to see a mention of Stephen Glass - great film, and a riveting performance from Mannequin.

For me, the things wrong with Sith outweighed the problems in Clones. Ep II is a cracking yarn for the most part - III is weighed down with its own portencies, Anakin’s super-quick conversation and the same Hayden-Natalie featherweight acting that made both films a bit of a joke. I think it could have been loads better, and in the hands of a more accomplished writer-director may have turned out to be a masterpiece. Instead, it’s just decent.

by: tom barnett

Sun, 01 Jul 2007 23:21:01 +0000

i can’t believe you gave clones 4 darths and this 3 mike. far better film, same level of action for me whilst having a far better plot. as bad as Stephen Glass was (and the cry of Noooo! at the end is, for me, one of the most cringeworthy moments in film ever), i just think that as a film it was far better than clones, but there you go.

i gave it 8/10 on the lib years ago when it first came out and i think i stick by that - of the three “newer” editions, it’s the one i find most watchable.

by: Amanda Jones

Tue, 19 Jun 2007 19:03:09 +0000

However, there’s a tendency to over-romanticise the older bunch
———-

Refraining from that tendency dosen’t make any of the newer bunch any less wooden, stilted and lame.
——–
I continue to believe that Lucas’ position in the pantheon of cinema was greatly diminished by Episodes I, II and III.
———-

Yes it has, but even more sadly, the position of the originals in the pantheon of cinema was greatly diminished. Especially by 1). people who seem to think think that special effects are all Star Wars was ever about, and 2). by people who feel the need to follow chronology like a religion and watch these blunders before the originals.

by: Mark

Sun, 03 Jun 2007 12:04:22 +0000

I think part of the bitterness comes from ‘if only’. If only Lucas had handed over the job of writing to some one else. And if only they had got someone better for the part of Anakin Skywalker. Those are what I see as the two main faults running throughout the trilogy. But also part of the fault lies with Lucas’s directing which makes a lot of scenes (especially in episode 1 and 2) really quite ponderous. He needed an editor.

But, you’re right, episode 3 isn’t a film totally absent of any charm. The special effects are incredible and some performances are standouts (Ian McDiarmid in particular) but when the script fails so often and the character’s, and I especially mean Anakin, make you care so little for them then there is no way it can ever really be a good film.

by: Mike

Sat, 02 Jun 2007 19:43:24 +0000

True to an extent, but what would you have thought if the prequels had all been excellent films? Let’s just say that, as with Empire and Return, Lucas handed script writing and directing duties to someone else and retained executive producer powers (would not happen, but for argument’s sake) and the movies were great, what then?

I suppose another way of looking at it is that Lucas certainly made his money and created a new fanbase of younger viewers who were all happy to buy the figures, books, etc. For us older fans, they’re flawed experiences, certainly, but interesting to see how it all built up to the original films. Also they shifted the emphasis from being Luke’s story, to telling us all about Anakin, his fall and ultimate redemption. That, I believe, was a tale worth telling.

But I accept your argument. The prequels certainly showed Lucas up as being an auteur rooted in a less sophisticated past. Episodes I - III were totally ovshadowed by the Rings trilogy, which showed massive levels of care in all departments - as opposed to primarily the visual one - and turned out to be the one to beat.

by: Douglas F Burns

Sat, 02 Jun 2007 18:17:27 +0000

I continue to believe that Lucas’ position in the pantheon of cinema was greatly diminished by Episodes I, II and III. He should have left well enough alone after the first trilogy, and his position would have been secure beyond cavil. There is such a thing as explaining too much.