*Official* 3NS ROTS Reviews (Ebert's review, spoiler-free inside!)

Yes Kish, it's for a prison scene in her movie, V is for Vendetta, or it's something like that. I know, it's just way weird. Wonder if they paid her.

Back to topic at hand, I love that NY Times review. I think that ranks up there with one of my favorites. Wow...now I wonder if ROTS will become my favorite move ever....

Ebert and Roeper gave it two thumbs up. That must be a good sign. I didn't bother to hear the rest of the review because of fear of spoilers. But from what I did hear, they weren't too impressed with the dialogue.

She did it for "V for Vendetta" a movie she's filming right now.

Here's a new review from AICN:


My father got a call on October 27, 1977, from his friend Des who told him he'd just seen the most amazing film ever, and he had to meet him down at the cinema in two hours. So dad went down there and he's in the foyer looking around for Des when the theatre doors open and a crowd of people pour out. Through the crowd came Des, fresh from his second consecutive viewing. He sees my dad and says, "Come on, it starts in a few minutes," and heads straight to the ticket box.

I always feel a bit odd talking about STAR WARS with people. Reading reviews from people like Harry, Moriarty, and Kevin Smith, I feel like being born a few years after NEW HOPE's premiere meant I missed out on something. STAR WARS never affected me the way it affected the generation that's ever-so-slightly before me. I've watched the films a zillion times on TV, but that's on a small screen, and I was watching them from such a young age that I don't remember a time without STAR WARS. It's always been there, thus the impact is somewhat lessened.

For the past few years, I've bought advance tickets to the prequels, but most of the excitement I felt was feeding off other people. I liked PHANTOM MENACE the first time, but was bored the second. I really dug ATTACK OF THE CLONES the first time around, but it didn't really stand up to a second viewing. I bought tickets for SITH the moment they went on sale, and I'll be seeing it on the awesome V-Max screen at Knox. It's purported to be the biggest screen in the Southern Hemisphere. It's where I saw MATRIX REVOLUTIONS and RETURN OF THE KING, so it seems only fitting I should see out the prequel trilogy there as well. The problem is, I bought the tickets and I wasn't excited. I wasn't anticipating it with excitement. It was just something I was doing because it was STAR WARS.

I went along to the media screening on Wednesday, expectations still around zero. I've seen the (possibly) last ever STAR WARS film.

It kicks ******* arse.

That's the only way I've been able to describe it to people. It absolutely rules. It's so good, I actually like MENACE and CLONES more than I used to. It improves the prequels! It provides a believable link between the trilogies. They connect now, and not just because they're both called STAR WARS and have the same character names. No, they now feel like the same Universe.

From the awesome opening (it's really as good as everyone's telling you), to the phenomenal ending EDITED, it's almost as if Old Lucas broke through the body of New Lucas and gave him a sense of cool again.

See, I'm not a Lucas Hater, nor a Prequel Apologist. I think that the SW vs LOTR argument is one of the most worthless things someone can waste their breath on (same with SW vs TREK). I'm annoyed at what's been done to the original trilogy, and aghast at the contempt with which Lucas has treated his fans. Denying them the films they love is like snatching away candy from a baby (not the most inaccurate simile for many SW fans), and it's why I've refused to buy the recent SW box set. They're not the films I grew up on, and I feel a sense of discomfort when I watch them. (Also, I think that the oft-discussed decision to have Greedo fire his gun is one of the dumbest things in film history, completely emasculating and undermining Han Solo... this, more than anything else, has prevented me from owning the new box set.) Bottom line is, I don't think Lucas is an evil Sith Lord or anything, I just question most of the decisions he's made over the last decade or so.

But in SITH... man, oh, man... Here we see the promise from the OT. This is adventure, adventure and tragedy. Sure, the romance between Anakin and Padme still drags, but you don't care. The rest of the film is so good it doesn't make a difference.

I think the biggest problem with MENACE was not Mr Binks, but with the fact that there was no Han Solo character. There was no rogue, no one particularly interesting to watch. In SITH, Ewan Macgregor steals the show. He's always been good in the pre

The hits just keep on coming...

By Claudia Puig, USA TODAY

The Force is definitely with it this time. Star Wars, Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (* * * 1/2 out of four), which screened at the Cannes Film Festival on Sunday and opens at midnight Wednesday in many U.S. theaters, fulfills the promise of the series and rises far above its two most recent predecessors. It's the darkest of the six-film opus, but it just may be the best of the lot.

It seems George Lucas has listened to fans' complaints and entreaties, particularly in regard to the last two films released. The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones were disappointing and dull. It almost seemed that Lucas was driving the franchise into the ground. But he wisely eliminated the cutesy touches and minimized characters such as Jar Jar Binks (EDIT) and the plodding exposition and concentrated on the epic tale of a good guy gone bad.

We learn how the powerful but impetuous Jedi Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen) becomes Darth Vader. And most important, we learn why. In Star Wars: A New Hope, the fourth in the series and the original film released in 1977, Vader was creepy, but mostly just an archetypal villain with a bad case of mouth-breathing.

Revenge of the Sith chronicles Skywalker's transformation from a principled, love-struck young knight to the epitome of evil. It offers some terrific lightsaber battles, particularly between Anakin and his mentor Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) with a terrifyingly fiery backdrop.

There are major improvements in quality over the previous two films, notably the writing and the acting. Christensen and Natalie Portman as Senator (formerly Queen) Padmé Amidala, in particular, seem more comfortable and less stilted. McGregor as Obi-Wan Kenobi has grown more assured as well.

In Revenge of the Sith, Anakin EDIT

The screenplay is tighter, the dialogue sharper and the pacing right on the mark. When you watch the first three films released more than two decades ago ?A New Hope, The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi? they feel slower and plodding compared with Sith, which achieves just the right balance of emotional drama, suspense and action. Also, beloved characters from Episodes IV-VI are featured more prominently (Yoda) or introduced (Chewbacca). It's also the first time we hear EDIT, one of the most memorable vocal performances in film.

Perhaps Revenge of the Sith is all the more powerful because so many lingering questions are answered, in particular, the true identity of the Sith lord who lures Anakin to the dark side. And seeing the handsome Anakin's physical transformation to the malevolent, black-helmeted Darth Vader is riveting.

There's also a poignancy to this film because it is Lucas' final installment to one of the most groundbreaking cinematic endeavors ever made.

But there are some jarring disconnects when watching the series as a whole, from the rapid aging of Obi-Wan to the disparity in special effects from the first three films to the last.

A cautionary note: This is the only one of the six movies rated PG-13, and there is some disturbing violence. The very young ones should be left at home. But for adults who may have avoided the series, this is the one to see. Even for non-fans, Revenge of the Sith is engrossing, and fans of the series will likely be over the moon ? and into another galaxy ? with this film.

Wow, more great reviews from prominent critics! Screw you, non-believers! To quote Kevin Smith, Sith doesn't happen - Sith rules!

Just a few more days to go! Ironically, I've been distracting myself with a Trek mini-movie marathon (I didn't like Enterprise but gave the finale a shot just to watch the train wreck, plus I love Scott Bakula's work - and indeed it was a train wreck, but the last 30 second montage inspired me to check out the TNG movies again). That, and my friend's wedding, has calmed me down for just a little bit.

Thursday night and Friday afternoon, I'll just soak it in!

I found this interesting "rapid aging of Obi-Wan". Does that mean between Ep. II and III or between III and IV? I suppose she means II to III. Right?

No, she's saying that between ROTS and ANH he seems to age like 40 years. I agree.

Well, Tarkin couldn't believe Kenobi was still alive.

What is it, 20 years in the desert after everything you've known and loved has been destroyed?

Willing suspension of disbelief.

Great reviews.

It always makes me laugh though: "Perhaps Lucas has been listening to the fans" - right, there's NO way he just had this planned all along.

Well, Late Sir Alec was 58 filming SW (as far as I am aware). Obi Wan in AOTC is what 35? Makes him 37 to 38 in ROTS. That means ANH he's supposed to be 57 - 58. Hmmm? Right on target mesa thinks

Wow, ROTS getting a huge thumbs up from the New York Times is definitely a big success.

After a couple days where (inevitably) some bad/average reviews drifted in, the good news seems to be back. If ROTS ends up with over 80% I'll be more than happy.

And that Scott review is on the big "Featured Critic" panel over at RT. So many tomatoes, you can barely see the little green splat of some guy wailing about kool-aid

39 - 8! Very cool!

new york post gave it 3 stars

new york daily news 2 1/2---though the other reviewer for New York Daily News loved it; he wasn't the featured guy. instead it was Jami Bernard---who can't get over the fact there is no Han Solo in her life anymore.

instead it was Jami Bernard---who can't get over the fact there is no Han Solo in her life anymore.

It makes me cringe whenever I read or hear that. He's a brilliant character, but why can't people just let go and accept the fact that these films take place before Solo's time?

since Han Solo is a product of the rebellion (i.e. a smuggler trying to stay under the Empire's radar), it would be stupid to have a similar character in the more "civilized" prequel times. also, if Lucas did put this type of character in, he would be criticized for remaking the original trilogy.

more likely, this reviewer just had a childhood crush on Han Solo.

43-9 on RT now, 83%.
Damn, I wasn't gonna check in there...

Yeah. Lucas just can't win. If he does something, he gets criticised for ripping his own films off, and if he doesn?t do it, he gets criticised for not doing it full stop.

Take a look at the Jango situation. I loved him in AOTC, and I thought it was a great way to tie the Fetts to the Stormies. People obviously wanted to see this, and when Lucas did it, he was criticised for throwing in "...a Fett" to bring back OT fans. Now, if he hadn't created this relationship between Fetts and Stormies, people would have complained that he'd gone away from his original vision and messed with our childhoods.

Pffft. Like I said, he can't win. Personally, I can't stand critics that keep going on and on about how brilliant it was back in 1977. Their entire review becomes an essay on why the PT sucks and the OT didn't.

the Chicago Tribune gives ROTS a rave review...

it may be now safe to say it: ROTS is a huge critical success. i am glad for Lucas...though I am sure he care a lot less than some fans do

I'm kind of curious to read the New Yorker review that has this featured quote: "So much here is guaranteed to cause either offense or pain..."

Saw the San Jose Mercury News gave it 3 out of 4 stars and called it a "Darth Victory" for GL. That should be another cream of the crop positive on RT.

It's up to 52 reviews now. By tomorrow, it'll probably be up to 60-something, and the flood gates will really open by Wednesday.

What do we do about reviews after the 19th? Do we still have to make them spoiler-free?

Can somebody edit the Michael Wilmington review (Chicago Tribune)? That guy is one of my most respected critics.

Thanks!!!

Hey, imagine if ROTS pulled a ROTK at the Oscars.

The previous films getting technical awards and stuff, and this one gets every single one it's nominated for.


Imagine how cool it would sound:

"And the Oscar goes to....Star Wars: Revenge Of The Sith"