When I went to see a showing of Star Wars: Episode 3 – Revenge of the Sith (2005) as part of its 20th Anniversary re-release, I experienced an emotion that I hadn’t felt in quite some time for virtually any Star Wars-related content: curiosity. Like other people my age, I loved Star Wars as a kid. It was a shining beacon of popular culture that millions of people, like me, looked to for awe, fantasy, epic storytelling, adventure, and inspiration.
At the peak of my fandom, I consumed everything Star Wars-related: the movies, The Clone Wars (2008) animated series, the Genndy Tartakovsky Clone Wars (2003) show, video games, action figures, and even YouTube videos of lightsaber duels. Star Wars was a vital aspect of my childhood, but like most other artistic objects in my youth, I eventually grew out of it. Today, it means very little to me. Part of this loss is because of age, but mostly, Disney’s control of Star Wars has ruined the magic.
Star Wars used to be driven by the imagination of one man who wanted to take all his creative inspiration and ambition and combine it into an epic space opera saga of good vs. evil. It is now driven by profit margins, the need to fill out Disney+, and the desire to satisfy ardent fans with as much content as possible, no matter how mediocre and inadequate that content may be. Star Wars used to prioritize themes and philosophical ideas that George Lucas was interested in exploring, like imperialism, fascism, and the fall of liberal democracies. Now, it prioritizes showing as many member berries, references, and familiar imagery as possible.
I used to be giddy with excitement when I heard something Star Wars-related was coming out; now I roll my eyes with apathy. However, it seems that the call of nostalgia was just too alluring for me because I couldn’t help but catch a showing of Revenge of the Sith. Revisiting a childhood favorite that I hadn’t seen in almost 10 years, though, was a bit of a mixed bag.
First, the movie isn’t very good, but this is an opinion I’ve had for quite some time. Despite having grown up with the Star Wars prequels, I would never ardently defend these movies like others from my generation, especially Revenge of the Sith. Yet at the same time, I do not dislike watching the prequels. I would go so far as to say that I enjoy them. I had a big smile on my face at my showing of Revenge of the Sith, and while it may be because I was wearing rose-tinted nostalgia goggles and I had to hold in my laughter during all the scenes that have been memed, I was never bored or unengaged at any point. It was as if I were being transported back to my childhood.
Looking back, Revenge of the Sith is the best movie in the Prequel Trilogy, as it is a major improvement over The Phantom Menace (1999) and Attack of the Clones (2002) in terms of directing, visual effects, and writing. Out of all the films in the Star Wars Prequel Trilogy, Revenge of the Sith has visually aged the best. From big spectacle set pieces like the opening space battle and the iconic lightsaber duel on Mustafar to fully realized CG characters like General Grievous and Yoda, the film boasts special effects comparable to modern blockbusters. Additionally, while all three prequels have memorable moments of action and choreography, Revenge of the Sith is the only one of the trilogy that I actively remember a scene that isn’t just characters shooting or hitting each other with lasers.
Such sequences from this film that come to mind are when Anakin and Padme look out the window, when Palpatine tells Anakin the tale of Darth Plagueis the Wise at the Galaxies Opera, and when Palpatine addresses the Senate that the Republic would become the Galactic Empire. While these moments have better dialogue than the rest of the prequels, what sells them isn’t the writing but the performances.
A common critique of these movies is that they are filled with “bad performances,” but I only partly agree with this sentiment. The actors only give “bad performances” when they are forced to deliver the clunky, dull, and awkward Lucas-stamped dialogue in the most monotone and wooden way possible. It’s why actors like Samuel L. Jackson or Natalie Portman often feel incredibly miscast in these films; the characters they play and how they deliver their lines are counterintuitive to the type of roles they excel at, preventing them from leaning into their strengths. The actors who give “good performances” in the Prequel Trilogy fall under two categories. The first category consists of actors who take the dialogue and run with it, like Ewan McGregor, who delivers almost every line with a cheeky grin on his face, or Ian McDiarmid, who hams up his role in the most deliciously over-the-top manner.
The second group attempts to circumvent the dialogue by relying on a more physical performance. Hayden Christensen actually gives a great performance as Anakin when he doesn’t say anything and primarily relies on his eyes or facial movements to sell his character’s conflicted morality. It’s why Anakin is convincingly terrifying in the last act, and what makes the window scene with him and Padme so effective. It all stems from Christensen’s physical acting abilities. Unfortunately, his performance severely falters every time he has to open his mouth and say words like “From my point of view, the Jedi are evil.” It’s moments like this where he comes across more as an edgy middle schooler than a Sith lord.
However, while Revenge of the Sith is an ambitious and inspired film that never bores me, I can never bring myself to call this a “good movie.” While Revenge of the Sith is the best movie of the prequel trilogy, it is still fundamentally bogged down by the same core issues that plagued its predecessors. This film is filled with dialogue that, even to this day, makes me cringe, roll my eyes, or fume with anger. While there are too many to count, one particular line that stuck out to me because I hadn’t heard it in years is the one in which the medical droid explains that, despite being perfectly healthy, Padme dies from childbirth because “she lost the will to live.” What does this even mean? How does this make any sense? I don’t know, but I guess this is the best plot/lore reason Lucas could come up with to kill her since she doesn’t appear in the Original Trilogy.
Dialogue aside, what hampers Revenge of the Sith from a writing perspective is how flat, artificial, and unearned its story is. It’s clear Lucas desperately wanted to get to the fall of Anakin Skywalker and the birth of Darth Vader, but how he gets to that point is unsatisfying because nothing is properly developed. Anakin’s turn to the dark side is unconvincing and forced because, rather than establishing this in The Phantom Menace and letting that grow naturally throughout the rest of this series, he introduces this story element in the last film of the trilogy and then rushes it as quickly as possible.
I feel nothing during Obi-Wan and Anakin’s duel other than mild entertainment. Despite this film constantly telling me that these two are like brothers, nothing in the actual movie showcases this bond beyond the opening action scene and brief hints the characters drop about other adventures they had that weren’t in Attack of the Clones. I find it hard to believe that Yoda would give up his fight against Palpatine so easily, even though he clearly had the upper hand in that duel and is supposedly the most powerful Jedi. Perhaps Yoda sensed the plot armor Palpatine had, and that was enough for him to forfeit so that he could make it Luke Skywalker’s problem three movies later.
As flawed and frustrating as Revenge of the Sith is, I don’t regret watching it in a theater. All the lightsaber duels, space battles, battle droids, clone troopers, and the music from John Williams’ excellent score reminded me why I fell in love with Star Wars in the first place. Unfortunately, the film is also a stark reminder that the current state of the franchise is no longer the Star Wars I grew up with, and Revenge of the Sith most likely would never have been made under the Disney umbrella.
Lucas could have easily filled the Prequel Trilogy with references, member berries, and nostalgia-ridden scenes like Disney did with the Sequel Trilogy, but he didn’t. He made the Prequel Trilogy because he wanted to explore the backstory of Darth Vader, and even if he didn’t properly execute that story, it was at least his singular vision that he was committed to telling from beginning to end.
Revenge of the Sith is not a perfect movie, but it has more heart and soul than anything Disney has done with this franchise. While Andor may be the exception, it isn’t enough to bring me back to this franchise. Star Wars was once led by an artist, albeit a flawed one. It is now led by a board of executives who sign off on what legacy character gets their own show or cameo, and until that changes, this franchise will forever remain a relic of my childhood.
Review Courtesy of Timmy Lee
Feature Image Credit to Lucasfilm Ltd