Better than New Hope -PUH-LEEZ

Sith was by far more watchable than its two predecessors, but its is nowhere near the creative package of Lucas' first Star Wars directorial outing nearly three decades ago. Sith is all package and no surprising gift within. There was marginal intrigue, no introduced characters, no loose ends, and the weakest "love" story I've heard in ages. On the plus side, Lucas took alot more time building the action scenes, and it pays off. They are a bit too seemless to hold my attention, and the ability to move from one digital world to the next is so quick and easy that it fails to build a sense of the galaxy.

I don't mind Lucas' philosophy, so Sith wasn't offensive, and Greivous's pnuemonic cough (left unexplained) was actually quite interesting. Yoda steals the show. Jackson was a miscaste, Portman should be shot.

B- (on early thoughts)

Finally someone else who sees she is not good in this movie, Christensen is much better in Sith then she is.

I actually thought Christensen was laugh-out-loud awful.

Watching chicks argue over Star Wars.

There's nothing more arrousing.

I'm not quite sure how anyone can actually think christensen was bad. He was amazing in almost every scene. I thought he was much better than he was in Clones.

Pff. I just thought his acting and melodramatic delivery were grating.

It may be more George Lucas' fault than that of Hayden Christensen, because he was very good in both Life as a House and Shattered Glass. He's just out of his element in these movies, imo.

Naaah, he was perfect in his role. Angry, bitter and full of spite.

If anybody would have ever told me that Libs would like EP III better than BKB, I would have thought they were nutty. :razz:

If anybody would have ever told me that Libs would like EP III better than BKB, I would have thought they were nutty. :razz:

Well, mainly because Libs (who I think has much higher standards for the films she watches) gave this an almost perfect grade.

How did she like it anymore than me?? I've seen it twice now.. She's the one ragging on about the acting and dialogue.. My only complaint was not seeing the Dagobah scene which was a pretty big edit in my book that kept the movie from really having the continuity factor being better and would've been nice to see him land on the planet.. A "B+" when I trashed the last 2 movies is damn good and solid and honest..

I dont know, I guess I gave Sith a free pass in the acting/directing dept too. Everything else worked so well, it didnt effect me as much.

She gave it a higher grade. She's not trashing it, she just didn't like Hayden's performance. I agree with the consensus, and I think she needs to watch it again :razz: , as he was perfect in his fall from grace.

The biggest plot hole in the movie for me, was there was no explanation for how Anakin learned the force ghost trick. Yoda and Obi Wan were explained. No big deal, as the rest more than makes up for it.

I do have to agree with BKB on one thing, though. Why are people honestly paying attention to the acting and dialogue of this film? I mean, we're not talking about Crash here, people. It's Star Wars. I don't remember who, but someone gave it a low mark because it had bad dialogue or something. Why that would affect your thoughts on the movie as a whole is beyond me, but to each his own.

I can't give an "A" to a film that has the kind of dialogue you see in Friday the 13th sequels. It just isn't a symbol of perfection.

I think Lucas had some neat action scenes, but, let's be honest. Whatever you felt, do you think that justifies an awful screenplay? We're talking about moving picture with sound, no?

Eh. I gave it a B+.