*OFFICIAL THREAD* In-Depth Discussions of RotS

People just don't understand these movies. And, ironically, they're the ones that bitch the loudest. Heh.

LenordShellby, I'm going to say that's one of the best things I've read on these boards since the film came out.

 

like the review at the top of the previous page, it was clunky and poorly written so I stopped halfway through.

(this post was intentionaly clunky and poorly written )

 

Well, here's my in-depth review: I loved it!

It goes without saying that this film, when compared to the rest of the Saga, has far more emotional baggage. Everything that we watched in TPM and AotC (And the OT for that matter) lead us up to this heartbreaking film. You can feel Anakin's emotions, how he struggles with his dreams that he fears will come true ... and they eventually do no matter what Anakin does to try and stop it.

The breakdown of Anakin and Obi-Wan's friendship, the death of Padmé, the death of Democracy, the death of the Jedi, the turn of the Clones, the separation of friends, Luke and Leia being born as both their parents are dying. It's packed.

That's what I love most of RotS.

 

Do you think ROTS would work as a stand alone piece?

 

I'm not sure. I think it could, but is so more richly served by the fact that it's a back history of a tragic evil man and a end to a story of a young boy.

 

Oracle_Ye_Prophecy posted on 10/13/05 9:07am

---

Do you think ROTS would work as a stand alone piece?
[hr][/blockquote]

No. The reason RotS was so successful is because we had the backstory of all the characters and storylines, which in turn made the movie much more emotional.

 

Do you think ROTS would work as a stand alone piece?

Yes and no. As others have already indicated, the film gathers much of its emotional power from having been positioned as the "culmination" of a nearly 30-year enterprise which has permeated popular culture. "Revenge of the Sith," like every "Star Wars" film excluding for the first, relies to some extent upon the viewer?s knowledge of the characters and events that have occupied the various other installments; in an odd way, the pictures are not unlike the films of Yasujiro Ozu, in that each individual piece feeds into the collective fabric of the others, consequently imparting them with depth, shape and purpose. From that perspective, "Sith" is very much part of a larger filmic tapestry, and is thus considerably less potent when taken as a singular entity.

Conversely, "Sith" is a very efficient piece of popular entertainment, and indeed, the picture?s second hour represents some of director George Lucas? most inspired filmmaking. As a self-contained interpersonal tragedy, the movie is successful in its attempt to develop a dramatic urgency that no "Star Wars" picture outside of Kershner?s "The Empire Strikes Back" has been able to attain; Lucas has eliminated or contained the more deliberately-paced passages of exposition which characterized the first two prequels, paring his narrative down to its most basic, immediate and human elements. The film works as a Faustian allegory, a poignant human drama, and also as a vigorous and tremendously entertaining visionary action picture, in which case, yes, it does stand alone.

Nonetheless, to appreciate the full breadth of nuance and richness of this particular installment, in addition to being able to contextualize Anakin?s submission to Palpatine in a more cogent manner, I think it helps to be familiar with the other films.

 

I don't agree with you, Tyranus_The_Hutt about the original Star Wars being more a stand alone than the other episodes in the saga. All this talk about the Senate, the Emperer, the Empire, all the politics, and Darth Vader escaping just calls for a sequal.

Whereas ROTS has a real ending with some hope, but things are resolved (though in a dark way) which makes it more of a tragic dark Morass type drama picture which I like.