PT EW names RotS as "one of the best prequels ever"

I do not see people giving the film good reviews as "The truth is being told"

I simply enjoy that websites that formerly gave it a good review then jumped on the hate bandwagon when RLM released his stuff, only to get back onto the positive light today.

I am just happy that RLM hasn't twisted the minds of everyone for ROTS. People genuinely enjoyed ROTS.

 

Thanks for stalking me, it's nice to know I've got fans...

 

As I get older, Han Solo mostly strikes me as a watered down Indiana Jones. Entertaining still, but the character is pretty useless as far as bringing the more grounded dramatics that really make me appreciate the overall Star Wars cycle. The "my hands are dirty too" scene just makes me laugh.

As for one of the best prequels ever, yeah, that does have a faint praise ring to it, and not just because of common Internet opinion on Star Wars I-III, but also (as I see it) the general lackluster state of franchise/reboot/sequel/blockbusters. I would just stick with naming ROTS one of the best overall movies of 2000-2010.

 

I think they often praise its dialogue in relative terms. That's not to mean I am saying that they are saying, "Good for Sci-Fi/fantasy", but rather, I think they mean to say, "Enchanting in the vernacular of pulp cinema", with TESB perceived as raising the genre to a legitimately adult artform, without shirking on the carny pleasures of the underlying form, the same way, say, Tim Burton's take on "Batman", visually, at least, attempts to turn the "low brow" world of comic books into high art. In large part, I feel they are correct about that. But then, I would make a similar claim for all six Star Wars movies.

It's not the dialogue in and of itself that's especially nuanced or impactful; it's how it's layered into the film. For instance, that classic exchange between Yoda and Luke -- "I don't believe it!" / "That is why you fail..." -- rides on the back of a gorgeous sequence which exploits the full power of cinema to nestle into a viewer's consciousness, penetrating his or her spiritual ache. As Yoda dips into the Force and raises Luke's fettered X-Wing, the cinematography, art direction, effects work, puppeteering, and music cohere into an enrapturing whole. A viewer becomes transfixed at witnessing something magical, setting up a prosaic end which is retroactively transformed into pure poetry as they have been primed to look on Yoda's closing statement with awe. Other parts of the film derive their power in a similar way, even if few reach the same peak; in fact, regardless of peak.

TESB has a particular tonality to it that has made me rank it last before. I have never done so in perpetuity, however; nor, if and when I do rank a given entry last, does that mean I find it a "low point"; merely, my least-favoured in a given instant. Sometimes, fans are far too sensitive for their own good. These films are not under threat; nor is any one person's inherent love for a given movie. These are some of the most successful movies of all time; and you're allowed to love whatever you will. My general perception of TESB is that it lags a bit on Hoth, then starts to build back up -- and how -- throughout its second and third acts. A wonderful film, but not always top of my list.

Heck, yeah. I remember that thing. I must have combed every inch of that CD-ROM, back in the day. I do remember the quote; and if it doesn't come from the prequel-preview section of the "Behind The Magic" CD-ROM, it must definitely be from the "Episode I: Insider's Guide" CD-ROM. One or t'other. It isn't a great surprise that people like ROTS more purely -- or mainly -- for that reason. Though, ROTS also seems a bit more hard-nosed, a bit more focused. And it seems to be the most self-consciously balletic, crowd-pleasing of the three PT films. Like you, I can see people finding flaw with TPM and AOTC; they are the PT's "THX" to ROTS' "American Graffiti". The latter i

 

I must have been thinking of something else then? I could have sworn EW was one of the few reviewers to pan ROTS back in 2005.

 

I believe they gave ROTS a B-

so they did kinda dislike it

 

As far as ROTS is concerned, it was leaps and bounds ahead of the other SW prequels. It was a decent movie, and I'm not surprised it was selected for this list (and I'm not surprised about the conspicuous absence of TPM and AOTC).

I disagree with their statement about the script for TESB. Yes, there were a few awkward lines of dialogue, but I feel there are far fewer of those in TESB than in any of the other five SW films. IMO, TESB had the strongest over all script of the entire franchise.

I went through the entire list of "Top Ten Prequels", and I'm having a hard time thinking of any more so-called "prequels" that weren't on the list... I can think of a few "reboots", but those don't count. I don't think there are that many prequels to begin with. In fact, I don't think anyone even knew the term "prequel" until TPM came out. So the fact that ROTS made the top ten on this list doesn't impress me that much.

 

I agree. How about this?:

ESB is the stronger film in terms of movie making (if you don't apply a "all SW films are textbook-what-not-to-do-in-terms-of writing/directing/acting" type lens).

ROTS is my favorite SW movie, and my favorite film of all time, for that matter, because it's my list, and no one can tell me why MY ranking of my favorite movies is wrong/silly/stupid.

I'm going to purposefully write this like a 10-year-old: They BOTH have a lot going for them because they're SW, and SW is awesome.

 

You are all aware of how much I love the entire PT. But this article from EW is just a little too much. Something's wrong with EW's change of attitude. I smell a rat.

 

^ Well, you have to realize that EW has more than one writer. Not everyone who works for the magazine shares the same opinion.

 

FWIW, EW gave the Clone Wars movie the coveted "F" rating in 2008 and now it's hosting weekly chats with people from the show and giving it good reviews. Maybe they realized they were being too harsh. Maybe there's been a changeover in staff. Maybe Batman paid a visit to the editorial offices .

My perspective has been that EW was hard on Star Wars from the Special Editions through the prequels era and even up to the Clone Wars movie, so much so I haven't purchased an issue in well over a decade. One guy who covered Celebration III even accused Lucas of staging the kid who went up to him and thanked him for making the Star Wars saga. Even if the reviews themselves were more "meh" than "grrr," there were bashing articles aplenty.

--MissPadme

 

I feel like AOTC and ROTS are two halves of the same film.

 

Agreed. For all the reservations I have about some of Lucas's creative decisions over the course of the series, I'm grateful for The Empire Strikes Back and Revenge of the Sith. They're two of my favorite movies?-sterling exemplars of dark heroic fantasy?-and I find immense pleasure watching them as a double-feature. (It works better than you might think.)

 

While its true II and III are much more similar to each other than they are to I, i still feel each film feels very different from each other.

 

You could look at it that way. You could also consider TESB and ROTJ two halves of the same film, but most fans would rate TESB as the far greater film.

 

Exactly this.

I have to say though, that even if ROTS is far from my ideal version of the story, it's great entertainment. I have great memories of it and probably rewatch it the most of any of them.

 

How so? If A is the highest grade and F the lowest. Getting a B- is most certainly above average. It is not the best grade sure but to say that not giving the highest possible grade to a movie means you dislike it, that is going a bit far to me.
B- to me, means a good but not great film, hardly a negative review.

Regards
Nordom

 

Anything below a B is a negative score in my opinion.

I like The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones. I give them B+. I don't think I have ever given a film the grade A+. I just never have and never will.

For a film like Red Tails, i would give it a C+. I enjoyed pieces of it but overall I got a feeling of " I am not enjoying this film, yet I am not hating this film."

A recent viewing of Return of the Jedi has made me question what to rate it. I feel the middle drags terribly and there are large chunks of the film where little to nothing happens.

 

But the question is how EW uses their grades. If A is the highest and F the lowest, that gives six grades to the scale. So F is 1 and A is 6. So B- would be 5/6 or perhaps 4,5/6.
I can not see how this is a negative score. If C, D, E and F are all negative scores, why use so many? In school we use A to F, where E is the lowest grade you need to pass. So a movie that got an E would be passable, not good but not terrible. B- would then be quite a high grade. Even taking a C to be the lowest a film can be and still be ok, B- is still above that.

Regards
Nordom

 

I know it's your favorite; I actually thought of you as being one of the exceptions when I posted this. I like ROTJ too, but I prefer TESB. Based soley on observation, I stand by my statement that most fans prefer TESB.

 

You know, I realize I'm dating myself, but here goes:

When ESB came out, I was REALLY disappointed...

Aside from Godfather Part 2, which I was too young (13) to appreciate (or understand with it's complex plot) and Jaws 2, which just plain sucked, sequels were not a part of the movie landscape...

We went in expecting a stand-alone sequel & were mightily disappointed to see 'to be continued' as an ending....

By the time "No, I am your father" happened, I was literally shaking my head in disbelief at the utterly unbelievable story line manipulation lucas was pulling off just to drag out the story for another few hundred million dollars worth of movie #3....

And, no ending?

BOGUS!

You must remember, as I said, this was before things like Friday The 13 Part 69; Lethal Weapon 12 & the likes....

In fact, ESB & ROTJ helped launch all these absurd 'movie franchises'...

Now, time has softened me on ESB & I love it as part of the ENTIRE story, but it still the only movie of the six that doesn't really stand well alone ~ and if you weren't there when it came out, not knowing GL planned another movie 3 years down the road, you'll never understand where I'm coming from.

BTW: those who bash the PT for it's cheesy dialogue, well, I hope you'll change your minds, you bunch of scruffy looking nerf herders.

Because if you don't, I'm hoping your words will not become a scar upon my heart.


BTW: Just for the record, since folks are rating the flicks in order:

1. Star Wars, er, ANH: 4* ~ if you weren't there in '77, you'll never understand.
2. AOTC ~ 4* ~ love it every time, even with the cheesy love scenes. Remember all the silly conspiracy threads on who Sifo-Dios was, lol?
3. ESB ~ 3.75* It really is a great film in context of the entire story.
4. ROTS ~ 3.75* ~ Dark, yet lovely.
5. ROTJ ~ 3.5* ~ Lose the Ewoks.
6. TPM ~ 3* ~ Ditto on Jar-Jar; just moreso.

 

I find that many of the lower scores (C+,C-,D+,D-,E) are rarely used in film reviews.

 

Don't forget Planet of the Apes.

 

Letter grades have become so filled with connotations that many people are afraid to give a grade lower than a B unless they they truly hate something. That's why most of the letter grade scale goes unused. Something with a C grade sounds terrible, even though the original definition of a C grade was "average."

I personally like to use a 1-10 scale for myself, with 5 being a movie that doesn't do anything for me either way.