*OFFICIAL THREAD* Media articles, interviews and reviews for Revenge of the Sith. V.2.

Has TIME or Newsweek published their reviews yet?



Long ago, check the first page of this thread for links

 

Has TIME or Newsweek published their reviews yet?

Um, the movie was released 9 days ago.

 

I thought the writing style of the Montreal critic was familar. It's Stephen Glass isn't it. Probably didn't even see the movie

 

Not TIME's preview cover story. The review of the actual film itself. AOTC's was published several weeks after TIMEs AOTC cover story.

 

Gobi-1

Right you are. And I still have yet to see Corliss' or Schickel's review on rottentomatoes.

 

The new Entertainment Weekly's section that has a round up of several critics grades of movies has RotS averaging a 'B'. Not bad. Only 2 critics gave it a bad rating: a 'C' and 'C-'. The EW subscriber score was an 'A-'.

 

Ebert Defends Star Wars Review


Q. How you can give the new "Star Wars" movie 3.5 stars when you write, "The dialogue throughout the movie is once again its weakest point: The characters talk in what sounds like Basic English, without color, wit or verbal delight, as if they were channeling Berlitz." Doesn't this make it a movie deserving no more than two stars? Just because a fabulously wealthy producer can afford the best in special effects, does that warrant a rating close to perfection?

Robert Cavanaugh, Wheaton

A. I got a lot of messages saying there was a disconnect between my star rating and my review. Perhaps there was. Star ratings are the bane of my existence, because I consider them to be relative and yet by their nature, they seem to be absolute.

"Star Wars: Episode III" returned to the space opera roots of the original film and succeeded on that level, and for that I wanted to honor it, while regretting that it did not succeed at the levels of intelligence and wit as it did on the levels of craftsmanship and entertainment.

Q. In your review of "Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith," you wrote that the voice of General Grievous "sounds curiously wheezy, considering the general seems to use replacement parts."

I would like to clarify why he wheezes. Cartoon Network within the last year ran a series of short cartoons called "Star Wars: Clone Wars." It was placed in the time period leading up to Episode III. In the final chapter (No. 25), as Grievous makes his escape with Palpatine, he encounters Mace Windu (Samuel L. Jackson). Windu uses the Force to crush Grievous' chest cavity, causing the "wheezing."

So by the time Palpatine is secure aboard the starship, the Episode III movie has begun and, realistically, only a few hours have passed.

Leonard Blackman, Las Vegas

A. I have received countless explanations of Grievous' condition from readers who go into almost theological detail in their analysis. If they are now expected to incorporate information from the Cartoon Network series into their interpretations, I fear their heads may explode. Continuity is not everything. I grew up watching "Captain Video," on which three rocks were rearranged to indicate they had left one planet and were now on another.

Q. There is a pants/no-pants continuity error in Padme's maternity getup when she arrives on the lava planet. How do such errors creep into movies made with such budgets and so many eyes checking and approving things?

Mark Suszko, Springfield, Ill.

A. I cannot recall this detail, but as you describe it, it certainly sounds like the kind of detail that should be noticed.

Q. Is George Lucas a knowing Economic Terrorist? Lucas KNEW that by releasing the last "Star Wars" movie what effect it would have on the United States Economy. The movie was released on a working day. Lucas could have well waited to release his movie on Saturday or even Sunday. The effect was a $627 million loss in American Productivity.

The box-office take was $158.5 million. That leaves a $468.5 cost to the U.S. Economy. But that's not the end of the loss. Each day, Lucas is losing $1.5 million to pirates -- a capital cost to his investors of $6 million in four days and climbing. The loss could and should have been avoided by release on a Saturday or Sunday, and Simultaneous Distribution to Television, Sales and Rentals. The question becomes, would George Lucas really damage the economy to make a point of his hate for the Republican Party and President George Bush?

D.L. Graham, San Diego

A. And what happened to Padme's pants?

Q. In your review of "Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith," you say it is not explained why Darth Vader is several inches taller. Obi-Wan cut off Anakin's legs at the knee during their battle. Vader's legs in the suit are appendages.

Brian Killian, Berwyn

A. We should send Gen. Grievous the name of his surgeon.

Q. I took a few friends -- none of whom had never seen a Woody Allen film -- to see "Melinda and Melinda." They loved it. They said it was the best movie they

 

Sounds like he's saying he shouldn't have given it as many stars as he did?

 

Ebert should go watch the originals again. While the performancees and writing were mostly solid they never intended to be the Oscar material. And as for "Basic English" - No, I am your father - how more basic could you get? Nostalgia clouds critics' judgment.

 

Removed.

 

Someone tell me what this no pants/pants Padme thing on Mustafar error is???????

 

I read something in today's paper about Peter Travers' review of RoTS that was interesting. In it, he says that basically, this movie tarnishes the legacy of the original trilogy and does a disservice to Darth Vader.

Funny, when you consider in that same issue, they have a fake interview with Darth Vader where he admits to being a musician and playing the piano??? What in the world? Yeah, that doesn't do a disservice to the character at all!

 

The bottomline is that Ebert gave it 3.5 stars, that's what matters.

Had I read the review, and not known what the rating was, I probably wouldn't have guessed it was 3.5 stars.

But apart from that, don't read to much into what Ebert has to say over the rating. I don't think he regrets giving it a 3.5 star rating.

I emailed Ebert right after his 2 star review of AOTC.
I told him I was disappointed that he gave it such a low rating.

His reply was more or less the same as his for RotS.
He needs to use the star rating system to back up and clarify his review. And apart from that, he said something like: "a critic has got to do what a critic has to do".

Last thing we want is to harass Ebert so much so that he'll regret giving RotS the rating he gave it.

Just be thankful he was as gracious as he was.

It bothers me that some jackass wrote to him complaining that he was too kind to Sith with the 3.5 stars.

 

REVIEW OF STAR WARS EPISODE III: REVENGE OF THE SITH


MOOD: Saturated
CURRENT RATINGS:
8.5/10 Movie: Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (2005)



Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (Movie Review)

STAR WARS is now over. It is a sad, sad day, indeed for the state of Star Wars fans across the galaxy. According to George, there will be no more movies. Still, the promise of a T.V. series (two in fact) and a 3-D edition to all six films give us all reason to anticipate more Star Wars. Which, by the way is absolutely alright with most of us. It is the "anticipation, " afterall, that keeps us going.
This was appropriately labelled a "flawed masterpiece" in one critic's view. Agree more, I could not.

There are plenty of "nitpicks" to find if yer' lookin' for 'em. It could be said that it suffers from many of the same pitfalls that "damaged" the rest of the prequel trilogy. More of the same. Hum, hum. Just one big, fantastic, sensational, imaginitive, bombastic slice of putrid mediocrity. If yer' lookin' for it, it sure as tarnation is there. My obvious rebuttal would appropriately be, "Is that really all you see?"

I really believe there are some writers who have an obvious agenda against Star Wars. Just like there is such a thing in sports journalism called "east-coast bias." The same concept applies here. There are some movie critics who are honestly trying to find fault with Star Wars, and all Star Wars movies are full of moviemaking flaws if you are looking for them. So, might I add, are many of the movies we view as classics. Let's be honest, there is no comparison of the caliber of acting in modern movies to that of films 30-50 years ago. "Wooden" performances mixed with suspect dialogue were consistently a problem with many "classic" movies of the past. We view them differently because we understand and accept the state of affairs within the frame work we have already pre-conceived for ourselves. We should give Star Wars that same "handicap." Lucas readily admits to writing in the 1940's style of serial filmmaking. The same can be said for the acting. When you accept the framework you can be set free. If you cannot, you will never get past it. Within that famework, it is a beautiful, energetic, tragic, sentimental, bombastic, wonderfully scored, "flawed" piece of work. This one edges out "Return of the Jedi" as the best Star Wars chapter since the "Empire Strikes Back."

In many powerful ways, it is absolutely the best of the entire saga. The space battle is exhillirating. I can just imagine what that scene would be like in 3D. Wow! It is also dizziness personified, but I mean that in the nicest possible way. This part of the film moved at a blistering pace, and the comedy of the scenes with R2 were almost priceless. Maybe just a tad overdone, but ultimately very satisfying. While the duel with Dooku had some great swordsmanship, it lacked the tension it should have had. It felt a bit rushed and cake-walked. Once this scene ends, we are on to the meat of the story. There are moments where I cringe, but not near as many as in the last two installments. Instead, there are some surprisingly good acting moments in this final chapter. Everybody's performance has improved in this one. Ian McDiarmid is fantastic in this. Melodramatic? Sure. This is STAR WARS; not THE GODFATHER. Within that framework he was brilliant. There were a few moments where I didn't completely buy, but there were moments where he was utterly spectacular. The scene where he changes into the Emperor's face was chilling. When he turns around to Anakin, he has a vampiric appearance, and even starts heaving out wispy intonations like Linda Blair in THE EXORCIST. It was eerie and played a nice homage to classis movie horror.

I thought Natalie Portman did a commendable job in the last third of the film, and a steady job the first two thirds. Hayden Christianson improved quite a bit. There were still moments of "indicating," but he also had some very powerful scenes whe

 

whats leonard maltin given it?

 

do yall like the note book

 

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?BRD=2249&dept_id=450607&newsid=14578578&PAG=461&rfi=9

 

This is from a review of "Cinderella Man" - ROTS competition this weekend -

It doesn?t show anything new and doesn?t say anything at all. Steering clear of politics, statements and even a defined antagonist make for very straightforward, mindless entertainment. Cinderella Man is no different than any other summer fluff despite its lack of special effects or its period placement. Zellweger even gets to speak some dialogue comparable to Natalie Portman?s cheesy lines in Star Wars. On a brighter note, I guarantee you that nothing getting blown up this season will be more explosive than Paul Giamatti
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/05/30/015430.php

 

Something of interest...

If you look at the 'front page' of Rotten Tomatoes, you'll see that ROTS is the only 'fresh' movie in the box-office top-5.

Its percentage is better than the other four movies by a wide margin.

 

83% Star Wars Episode III
55% Madagascar $61.0M
32% The Longest Yard
16% Monster-in-Law
42% Kicking and Screaming

 

Bloody pathetic opening line on this artice - what do they mean that it didn't earn any great reviews?

http://www.whatsonstage.com/dl/page.php?page=greenroom&story=E8821117133448

 

Maddox hated it...which isn't a surprise.

Maddox Episode III review

 

Yeah, well, that's what he does. You can't take him seriously. Plus he's no real movie critic. but some of his stuff is amusing.

 

Those drawings on Maddox's website are absolutely hilarious!

 

Wow, Madsux is really mad about this! I look forward to his grand epic "I'm a piece of $hit, but somehow I deserve to be heard because I use foul words and bash on something I could never come up with in my own feeble mongoloid-ish pea of a brain. - Episode IV"

@$$WHOLE. ROTS rocked your mom, right after I did.