Discussion in 'Revenge of the Sith (Non-Spoilers)' started by brendawg83, May 8, 2002.
I hope Yoda doesn't look too hokey as a computer character.
Ebert like TPM, so clearly he has no idea what a good movie is.
A very positive review has been posted at USA Today:
Edit: Mild spoilers, read my edited cut and paste.
The reviewer (Mike Clark) gave it 3.5 out of 4 stars and said it was comparable to his favorites of the original triology (ESB and ROTJ).
[blockquote]Even before its pressure-packed finale of removed mayhem, pug-ugly monsters and (surprise) crossed light sabers, George Lucas' already debated Star Wars, Episode II: Attack of the Clones manages to outduel its leaden romantic angle. There's an intriguing galactic yarn, hot rod (or hot pod) chases around skyscrapers and asteroids, plus some of the thematic heft and grandeur associated with the saga's best entries: The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. Occupying a firm middle ground in the series, the fifth outing rates 3.5 (out of four). This splits the difference between a 4-star rating for hard-core fans and a shaky 3 for the backlash-prone.
Lucas is bold enough to bring Jar Jar Binks back from Episode I and smart enough to minimize his role. But he can't enliven tentative love scenes (more "puppy" than forbidden) between Natalie Portman's now-Senator PadmÃ© Amidala and Hayden Christensen's Anakin Skywalker. Both speak in monotone for doubly deadly effect, though when not burdened by his co-star, Christensen often finds the emotion in his limited intonations the way, say, a Matt Dillon does.
The rest is much more confident, starting with a premise about a removed There are also "a-ha!" hints of Anakin's dark side. Even before PadmÃ© notes his dictatorial tendencies, we see he is petulantly rebellious against, but also removed of, his mentor, Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor). The movie's high point is removed
Yes, I wish the leads had more fire ? or even a little. But I also wish the acting were more dynamic in Ray Harryhausen's revered creature features of the '50s and '60s (whose influence is obvious during Clones' climax). These movies are never built around the Alec Guinnesses of the world.
Clones is taunting a Death Star by being that rare prequel made a quarter-century after the original. Viewers expecting to duplicate a Carter-era screen experience are futilely trying to recapture laser lightning in a bottle. Even George Lucas can't do that. But his fire's not out yet: No screen fantasy-adventure in recent memory has the showmanship of Clones' last 45 minutes.[/blockquote]
Yahoo movies has updated their site with most major critic and quotes. Funny to see the differents between them. Teh overall is a 'B'. Not bad for a Star Wars Movie (I guess only ANH was better)
My local critic have AotC 3 and 1/2 stars out of 4.
'Not bad, not bad.'
Rotten tomatoes now has 57 reviews "officially" declared rotten or fresh. 40 are fresh and 17 rotten (70%).
Yet in there "official Tomatometer" they place 16 negative and 24 positive, for a rating of 60%.
Another review AOTC has been posted at hollywood.com that gave the film 3 out of 4 stars:
The reviewer said the film had great action and very good performances by Ewan McGregor and Christopher Lee. The reviewer did not like the performances by Natalie and Hayden.
From the Rotten Tomatoes FAQ:
"The Approved Tomatometer Critics are critics that fit within a set of standards. This way we can insure that the Tomatometer better represents what you would like to see. We?re still working on finalizing the standards, so nothing?s set in stone just yet. When they?re ready, they?ll be announced on the site, to make sure that all critics can apply to be an Approved Tomatometer Critic.
For now, our Tomatometer critics list is strictly based upon the availability of RATED (fresh vs. rotten) reviews currently in our database so that we can provide the broadest possible coverage of movies."
Thus, only "approved" critics appear on the ratings. The criteria for for such approval, however, is still unknown even to them.
Bottom line, the rating itself may be misleading...
Interesting, because they have tons of "rated" positive reviews in their database that they are not counting toward the official score.
I am overjoyed to find out the negative critics were wrong. Star Wars is back
I was happy to read this morning that my newspaper critic gave AOTC 3 stars out of 4. While this is not extrodinary, it is certainly a vast improvement over the 1/2 star that he gave TPM.
windier than the signature feature!