Was Revenge of the Sith too dark, just right, or not dark enough?

I first wanted to say that I'm sorry for my massive absence from the forums for some time. I haven't been posting on here for several months, which is wrong after doing so much on here during Spring and Summer, and for that I apologise. I'll try to stay on more permanently now.

Finally, I hope this is in the right forum. I think it is but I'm not sure.

So, to begin:

The question of whether ROTS was too dark a film, whether it got everything just right, or whether it should have been even darker is something that I'm sure has been brought up before on these boards many times, especially way back just after the film was released. But I don't think it has been discussed for some time, and I would like to hear current opinions on this.

Here is my opinion. ROTS is a strange film in that, to me, it can feel like all three of these things at times. There are moments in the film that seem way too dark for anything a Star Wars film should ever show, moments where it feels like a good balance, and moments where it should have been even darker. Most of the film should fall into the middle category, but I don't think it does.

When I first saw Revenge of the Sith in the cinema way back in the middle of 2005 just after it was released, I was pretty caught off guard by a lot of the stuff in the film. I remember the drastic change in tone from fairly fun to much darker right after the Council Meeting, but the film really caught my attention with the infamous "UNLIMITED POWER!" scene. When Anakin chopped Mace's arm off and Mace let out that terrible scream of pain and anguish, I was really shocked. The irony was that I had already read the ROTS Novel so I knew what was going to happen - but, rather naively, I actually believed that everything in the film would play out exactly like the Novel had done. Thus I was disappointed with some of the film for missing out things that were in the novel or for doing them entirely differently, and shocked by other parts of the film for being even more shocking than the same parts of the novel. I thought that after Anakin chopped Mace's arm off, Palpatine would simply instantly fry Mace and send him out the window in a split second, with no screaming and certainly no drawn out, nasty burning followed by the words "UNLIMITED POWER!", which was screeched with such hate and malevolence. I never expected that to happen at all, thus when Mace screamed it was the first time I felt something was actually wrong, as in "this shouldn't be happening". And indeed, it was unnatural, wrong, and amoral for Anakin to cut off a Jedi Master's arm, and the scream only highlighted that. But when that noise rang out through the cinema I was really caught off guard. The fact that it was followed up with the brutal murder of Mace by the twisted Palpatine only made things worse. I remember I actually felt sick right after that had happened, and I'm not kidding. Only for about thirty seconds mind you, but still...and the following scene where Palpatine was talking in that really disturbing weird voice and had glowing yellow eyes was like something out of a horror movie. Not only that but when I first saw the film in the cinema, for some reason it looked like the sky outside the windows in Palpatine's office during this scene was not dark, like it really was in the film, but a strange shade of red, like sunset. I don't know why this when it actually was black, but I did, and that only amplified the hellish effect of the scene where Palpatine turned Anakin into Darth Vader. The apocalyptic and hell like feel of everything that happened in that scene were really shocking to me after the light and fun TPM and the mostly not too dark AOTC, it felt really horrific and evil and wrong, which it was, so this scene worked really well, or at least it did the first time I saw it.

That aside, the rest of the movie, while depressing, negative, having the feel of an impending sense of doom and being very dark and apocalyptic with the galaxy being taken over by the Sith and everything good and noble

 

tl;dr

But in all seriousness, I think the tone of the movie was done just right. There was humor in the beginning with Artoo's antics, then the movie gradually turned darker and darker. In fact, apart from the beginning, the only thing that got a laugh in the theater was when Yoda casually took out a pair of Palpatine's guards.

There's a reason why Episode IV is called A New Hope. To quote Harvey Dent, "The night is darkest just before the dawn." ROTS had to be dark by necessity.

 

Agreed. I think that RotS is just right. It's dark enough that its tone fits the plotline(end of the Jedi and the Republic) and serves as a strong contrast to A New Hope while managing to avoid(by a large margin) becoming so dark as to be unwatchable.

 

ROTS was just right.

It's dark and depressing, but that is the point of ROTS. While it's a dark movie overall, there's underlines of hope. Seeing Luke and Leia going to their new respective families, knowing the Rebel's seeds have been planted.

Padme's last words give me chills though. Even though Anakin has done these awful things and thrown the galaxy into darkness, she suggests there's still good in him. Knowing that there actually was, is a lighter darkness.

 

Just right. It had to be dark to reflect the grimness of the events at that time, but too much darker and it wouldn't fit with the rest of the saga.

 

If these suggestions were followed, there would need to be some pretty serious alterations to the other five films in order to create saga consistency.

In ANH, for instance, Han and Chewie could be shooting up in the corner of the cantina when Ben and Luke come across to talk to them...

 

If all of these suggestions as given by NATIONALGREATNESS were followed, this movie would have needed a hard R Rating or NC-17.

I do wish ROTS had been a smidge more darker, but there is such thing as being too dark.

Plus there is blood in the Prequals, its in TPM when Maul gets Kenobi's saber though his middle. That bright red mist is blood, and its the second goriest shot in the Saga behind the ANH bloody arm shot. Plus Maul splits apart when he falls, that there is quite graphic for a "kid's movie."

 

The combination of 1) severed limbs flying through the air in slow-mo, 2) entrails bursting forth from sundered body cavities, also in slow-mo, and 3) graphic sex scenes between Anakin and Padme, also presumably in slow-mo, make an NC-17 a certainty. I'm all for a dark STAR WARS film -- maybe even an R-rated SW film -- but the height of gore and sex described in the opening post is going just a weeeeeeeeeeeeeee bit far.

 

I think if ROTS was made too much darker it would stand out too much among the other films.

 

What's next? Anakin raping female jedi padawans? Or Kit Fisto and Aayla Secura going at in the Fresher?

 

Don't forget they'd both be wearing stained wifebeater's and would greet Luke with "are you holding?"

 

Anakin could've become like Harvey Keitel in Bad Lieutenant.

Or how about a Ewan McGregor Trainspotting retro where he drops his lightsabre down the toilet.

 

Do I really have to choose? Can't I have both?

 

I don't care how suggestive Kit Fisto's name is...there's no sex in Star Wars!!

 

Thanks for reposting it, as I had skipped them, but uh...wow. Those would be so out of place in Star Wars that I don't know where to start.

 

I actually skimmed through that and i feel like i need a shower now

I......I just cant believe how terrible it all sounded.....it sounds like an X rated movie,never mind an R!

I really,REALLY hope the OP was kidding.

 

Ok, I admit the latter part of my post was slightly OTT...meaning that it was an over exaggeration of what Star Wars would be like if it was an 18 rated film. I don't think it should really be quite as bad as that.

Keep in mind that while I was being kind of tongue in cheek, I do think it would be interesting if Lucas had taken a few more chances with the PT, you know what I mean? There doesn't have to be graphic violence and sex, but the violence in ROTS seemed too obviously toned down to make it a 12A. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the original cut of ROTS would have been a 15 or an R if Lucas hasn't toned it down. Obviously that was his choice, but what's wrong with taking a few chances?

To use a good example, watch the James Bond film Moonraker, and then watch the James Bond film Licence to Kill. The former is a silly, campy fun movie filled with childish one liners, silly puns, and over the top stunts. The latter is a down to earth and really gritty, nasty, serious thriller about revenge and human darkness. That film got a 15 rating in the UK but managed to pass a PG-13 in the US, and it was extremely violent in places. I just wish ROTS had been more like that.

As I said I was exaggerating a little. I know that the other Star Wars films have a PG rating, but to me, the very fact that ROTS got a 12A says something: it could have been made a bit more risky, like at least having Anakin crush Padme against the ship, I mean the "choking scene" in the real film was so harmless looking that it took away from the real sense of horror that should have been there. Why not have it like I said in that post? That wouldn't have given the film an 18 or NC-17 rating, or even an R. It would have just made Vader seem more evil, as he actually was, rather than just a depressed madman. He could be both but Lucas decided not to show his real dark side, which I feel was missing out on a fundamental part of his personality.

And what about Vader killing the younglings in the way I described? If as I said only his face and the lightsaber swinging down was shown along with the kids' screams and the Imperial March blaring, surely that wouldn't get an NC-17 rating? Surely an R would be high enough as long as the kids actually being killed wasn't shown?

Also, keep in mind that when I said "horrific torture", I didn't actually mean blood spurting everywhere or organs flying out. It could be just something like this: Someone, say Mon Mothma is tortured because the Emperor suspects she is a traitor, and this is right at the end of the film, just after Vader is put into the Suit, and he and a young Tarkin are assigned to interrogate her. What we actually see are mostly shadows, so everything is left to the imagination.

Like this:

The camera shows a close up of the horrified face of a young woman, Senator Mon Mothma. As the camera pans it is seen that she is strapped to a large machine which has all sorts of nasty contraptions attached to it. The room is dark. Around the machine are Clonetroopers and Droids. And in front of her stands the looming figure of Darth Vader, his heavy breathing very clearly heard, and next to him is standing a thin man in his late 30's, General Tarkin.

Vader: Senator Mon Mothma, you stand accused of violating the will of the Empire. What do you have to say for yourself?

Mon Mothma: I don't know what you're talking about. I'm a senator, and my job is to serve the Galactic Senate-

Vader: The Imperial Senate.

 

I don't mind gore,(in fact I love gore) but I wouldn't want any sex scenes. To me, they just cheapen a movie and are just mindless filler given to shock an audience.

 

It was both Dark and Sad enough for me.

 

Well, they are if they're done right

 

I kinda felt dirty reading those suggestions.

NationalGreatness raped my childhood.

 

My favorite bit from NATIONALGREATNESS' latest fan-fiction is when Tarkin calls Mon Mothma a "scumbag!" and repeatedly strikes her across the face. Quentin Tarantino brings you: STAR WARS Episode III.5: Even More Revenge of the Sith!

Also, this bit of quotable dialogue from Tarkin:

"You tried to hide a transmission sent by Senator Organa to you because of some reason, did you not? Well?"

Priceless.

 

I see Tarkin's grammar picked up between III.5 and IV.

 

Sex scenes are to shock an audience? Don't you mean to arouse an audience?

Seriously, they are. It's violence that is meant to be shocking intentionally.

And if that's true, does that mean that you agree with my ideas, that ROTS would do well with the violent scenes I suggested, but without the sex?

Except ROTS wasn't part of any of our childhoods, only our adulthoods.

Is that meant as an actual compliment to my writing skills, or are you making fun of me?

Actually I often make fun of Quentin Tarantino, so it's odd to be compared to him.

Also, the part that was meant to be funny was the bit where Tarkin said:

"Tarkin: Lord Vader, I wish to deal with her myself. (A demented grin falls upon his face)Alone.

Vader: No, we don't have time for frivolity. That can be arranged for later, if you wish. I can make her answer now.

That was more funny.

I don't see any bad grammar in what I wrote...