Star Wars: The Clone Wars, Season 1 Review

Following the outline from my review of the movie, I am going to briefly comment on each episode before giving my general thoughts.

Episode 1 "Ambush"
  In order to attain the support of the Toydarians in the war, Yoda, with the help of three clones, must prove to their king, Katuunko, that the republic is strong enough to protect Toydaria from the Asajj Ventrass and the separatists, who also want his support.
  Though I never liked the whole "Yoda jumping around by using the force" thing it's a part of the canon now so I just kind of roll with it and Yoda gets some pretty awesome moments in this episode. His relationship with the clones is also fairly well handled and sets a precedent for strong clone-focused episodes on this show. On a side note I find it somewhat odd that none of the main characters (Anakin, Ahsoka, and Obi Wan) are featured in the first episode of the show.

Episode 2 "Rising Malevolence" (first of a three episode arc)
  When Jedi Master Plo Koon's ship is attacked by a separatist secret weapon (an ion canon on-board Grievous' flagship Malevolence), Anakin and Ashoka break orders to look for survivors. Plo Koon, along with clone troopers Sinker, Boost and Commander Wolffe, struggle to survive in the aftermath of the attack as droid Pod Hunters are dispatched to hunt for survivors.
  Another decent, if unremarkable, episode. It's revealed here that Plo Koon is responsible for Ashoka joining the Jedi order which sets up a sort relationship for later on. Also Plo Koon has some nice moments with the clones.

Episode 3 "Shadow of Malevolence"
  When General Grievous is ordered to attack Kaliida Shoals Medical Center using the Malevolence's new weapon, Anakin proposes a daring raid with Y-Wings to take him down. Ahsoka and Plo Koon accompany his squadron on this raid, which takes them through the dangerous Balmorra Run a nesting ground for the giant Neebray mantas.
  Again this episode is ok but nothing special. It is nice to see Anakin's daring as a pilot, as opposed to just hearing about it. Really though, I don't have much to say here.

Episode 4: "Destroy Malevolence"
  Heavily damaged from the battle in the previous episode, Grievous' ship the Malevolence is being trailed by three Star Destroyers. In order to buy time, Palpatine lures Padme to the Malevolence under the pretense of sending her on a diplomatic mission. When she becomes trapped there Anakin Obi Wan and R-2 are sent to rescue her.
  There are some fun (though very brief) moments here between Obi Wan and Grievous. Palpatine's manipulation is way too transparent though. Why does no one suspect him after what happens to Padme here?

Episode 5: "Rookies"
  In preparation for an assault on Kamino, General Greivous sends a squad of elite Commando Droids to attack an outpost on the remote Rishi moon so that the republic won't be warned of the oncoming attack. Defending the outpost are five rookie clone troopers, Hevy, Echo, Fives, Droidbait, and Cutup along with their commander Sergeant O'Niner. When the base is taken and their commander killed these clones, with the helped of recently arrived Captain Rex and Commander Cody, must attempt to retake the base and warn the republic of the attack.
  This is the first episode where the show really showed promise. As I said this show has a penchant for clone focused episodes and this one really set the bar. It also includes some profanity ("What the H--l was that!") and fairly violent deaths which showed that the series would be much darker than you might expect from a Cartoon network show.

Episodes 6 & 7: "Downfall of a Droid" and "Duel of the Droids"
  When Artoo is lost during a battle, Anakin and Ahsoka are given a replacement droid, R3-S6, and sent to recover him before the separatists find him and take the military information from his memory banks. A Trandoshan captain, Gha Nachkt, retrieves him first and plans to sell him to General Grievous.
  Two rather forgettable episodes. I don't really buy the lengths Anakin seems like he'll go to for Artoo. Also the fact that R3-S6 is [Spoiler Alert] a spy felt a bit forced. On a slightly more positive note, it was cool to see Ahsoka face off with Grievous, albeit briefly.

Episode 8: "Bombad Jedi"
  Padme, accompanied, by C3PO and Jar Jar Binks, is sent to Rodia to persuade her old friend Senator Onaconda Farr not to leave the republic. Finding out that he is in league with the separatists in order to gain much needed supplies for his people, she is captured by Nute Gunray and imprisoned on Rodia. It's up to Jar Jar and C3PO to save her.
  Well, for an episode that's mainly about Jar Jar, it's not as bad as you might think. Jar Jar is not as annoying as in Phantom Menace and Senator Farr's character arc is well handled, if a bit predicable. In the end, it's just ok.

Episode 9: "Cloak of Darkness"
  Ashoka is accompanied by Luminara Unduli on a mission to escort a recently captured Nute Gunray to Coruscant for trial. Count Dooku sends Ventress to rescue or silence Gunray, before he gives the republic the vast information he has on the separatists.
  This is a pretty decent episode. Luminara's interaction with Ahsoka is well handled and is a nice set up for the relationship Ahsoka will have with Luminara's Padawan, Barriss Offee, later on. There's also a nice moment between a Clone, Commander Gree, and a Senate Commando, Captain Faro Argyus which helps show how some people in the Republic feel about the clones and also emphasizes the Spartan-like nature of the clones themselves.

Episode 10: "Lair of Grievous"
  Kit Fisto, along with his former apprentice Nahdar Vebb and a squad of clones, pursue the now escaped Nute Gunray to Vassek. They enter a castle which Gunray's stolen ship has landed by only to find that Count Dooku has lured them into a trap. Dooku hopes to test, or eliminate, General Grievous by forcing him to confront the Jedi in his lair.
  Grievous appears alot in season one but this is the only episode where he's really allowed to shine. The episode has a great, creepy atmosphere and Grievous reputation as a Jedi-killer (which was well established in the 2003 micro-series) finally feels somewhat earned here. Also, Kit Fisto!

 Episodes 11 & 12: "Dooku Captured" and "The Gungan General"
  After escaping an attempt by Obi Wan and Anakin to capture him, Count Dooku instead ends up being captured by Hondo Ohnaka's pirates. Hondo informs the Republic of his capture and offers to give him to them for a reward. Obi Wan and Anakin are sent to negotiate with Hondo and Senator Binks is sent to the planet along with Senator Kharrus with spice as a ransom. When Anakin and Obi Wan are also captured they form an uneasy alliance with Dooku in order to escape it's up to Jar Jar to rescue them.
  These episodes are a bit of a mixed bag. The interaction between Dooku and the Jedi is fun and well-handled as is the friendly banter between Obi Wan and Anakin. Hondo is also a fun character, one of a few really memorable one's that this series introduced. However the stuff with Jar Jar is a bit tedious and it's hard to buy Dooku allowing himself to be captured by a small band of pirates.

Episodes 13 and 14: "Jedi Crash" and "Defenders of Peace"
  While trying to assist Aayla Secura's damaged fleet during the Sky Battle of Quell, Anakin is wounded and stranded on a nearby planet, along with Ahsoka, Aayla and some clones (including Captain Rex). The local village of Lurmen are reluctant to help them as they wish to stay out of the war. When a Seperatist force arrives under Commander Lok Durd intending to use the villagers as guinea pigs to test their new defoliator weapon on, the villagers must decide how far they can take their pacifist principles.
  These two episodes are fairly solid. Seeing how the Jedi react to the pacifist ideas of the Lurmen is interesting and it's always nice to see Jedi outside of the regular cast get screen time. The conclusion is a bit predictable but that's the way it goes in these kinds of stories

Episode 15: "Trespass"
  Anakin, Obi Wan, and Rex lead a group of clones to the ice planet Orto Plutonia to investigate the disappearance of the local clone garrison. They are accompanied by two dignitaries from the planet of Pantora, which claims jurisdiction over the ice planet. They soon find that the garrison was massacred, along with a nearby separatist force, by the planets inhabitants the Talz. Their leader meets with Obi Wan and Anakin, asking them to withdraw all Republic forces from their planet. Pantoran Chairman, Chi Cho, insists that the Talz are not sentient and provokes a war with them. Obi Wan and Pantoran Senator Riyo Chuchi contact the senate hoping that they'll intervene and force a more peaceful solution.
  More anti-war messages in this episode. Though it's a treat visually, the story a bit too evocative of the Dances With Wolves/Avatar/Pocahontas formula to be all that interesting.

 Episode 16: "The Hidden Enemy"
   When Obi Wan and Anakin plan an ambush of separatist forces on Christophsis which is foiled, they suspect that there's a traitor in their ranks. They go behind enemy lines to investigate while Rex and Cody attempt to flush out the traitor from the inside.
  This is another good clone-focused episode. Seeing how the clones react to and deal with the traitor is really interesting. I particularly liked the bit about the clone who collects droid fingers. There's also some cool banter between Obi Wan and Ventress. On another note, this episode takes place before the movie, starting a penchant for really weird chronology on this show.

Episodes 17 and 18: "Blue Shadow Virus" and "Mystery of a Thousand Moons"
  Padme and Jar Jar are captured by droids while investigating separatist activity on Naboo. They find out that a scientist, Dr. Nuvu Vindi, has recreated the Blue Shadow virus, a deadly disease that was wiped out long ago. Anakin, Ahsoka, and Obi Wan rescue them and attempt to contain the virus but some of it is released and Ahsoka, Padme, Rex and some clones are all exposed. It's up to Anakin and Obi Wan to find an antidote.
  The first of these episodes is pretty bad. Vindi is annoyingly over the top and to add to the irritation you have Jar Jar as well. The second episodes a bit better, with Anakin having to deal with the possibility of losing both Padme and Ahsoka. The planet he and Obi Wan go to to find the antidote is also kinda cool, as the citizens there are trapped by a separatist booby trap they think is a god.

 Episodes 19, 20, and 21: "Storm Over Ryloth", "Innocents of Ryloth", and "Liberty on Ryloth" (collectively known as the Ryloth Trilogy)
  Anakin and Ahsoka's fleet must break through the separatist blockade of Ryloth to make way for Mace Windu and Obi Wan's ground assault. After losing much of her fighter squadron Ahsoka is disheartened but must lead the fleet while Anakin flies the Defender on a collision course with the droid command ship. Obi Wan and his landing force must take the city of Nabat to use as a landing ground but the droid commander there is using captured Twileks as a living shield. Mace Windu, leading the main assault force, must attain the help of resistance leader Cham Syndulla, who has become disenchanted with the republic, in order to take the capital of Ryloth form Wat Tambor.
  These three episodes are all pretty solid. "Storm" was the first episode where I remember really latching on to Ahsoka's character. Having to deal with losing her squadron was a good step up from the few genuine character moments she had up to this point. In "Innocents" there's some of nice Clone/Twilek interaction, and the central conflict in "Liberty", between Mace Windu and Cham Syndulla, is really well fleshed out. There's also some decent, though not amazing, battle scenes.

Episode 22: "Hostage Crisis"
   A group of bounty hunters, led by Cad Bane, infiltrate the Senate chambers and take a group of senators, including Padme and Bail Oragna, captive. They then inform Chancellor Palpatine, that unless Ziro the Hutt is released he will execute the hostages. Anakin, who was at the senate to visit Padme, attempts to rescue the hostages.
  A pretty decent season finale "Hostage Crisis" features some nice, Die Hard-esque moments between Anakin and Padme. It also introduces Cad Bane, another of the show's memorable characters, even if he is a bit one dimensional. It also features Aurra Sing, which is cool.

  Overall this season had more good episodes than bad/mediocre ones. The two that stand out the most are Rookies and Lair of Grievous. Rookies gave us a fairly mature character driven story and raised the bar for the show as a whole. Lair of Grievous is alot of fun for geeks like me, as you get alot of cool Grievous action and it features Kit Fisto. "Blue Shadow Virus" was easily the weakest episode. Ahsoka becomes more likable as the season progresses, showing some promise in "Rising Malevolence" and even more in "Cloak of Darkness" and finally becoming interesting in "Storm Over Ryloth". In addition to Ahsoka this season introduced two other interesting characters, Cad Bane and Honda Ohnaka. Like in the movie, there are alot of annoying droid chatter moments in this season. The animation (again, just like the movie) is a bit clunky and lifeless and overall a step down, which is not surprising given that the movie had a much larger budget than any episode would. As I mentioned the continuity in this show is really weird. Not only does "The Hidden Enemy" take place before the film but some of the episodes from this season would have prequel/sequel episodes as late as season 3.
  In the end, Season One of the Clone Wars showed alot more promise than the movie, but the show still had a long way to go.

Short Review: Open Range

  The western is my favorite genre. With it's romanticized vision of America's frontier spirit it's the closest thing we'll ever have to a true mythology. Unfortunately there have not been many great westerns in the last decade. Open Range is one of a few really significant ones. As I only recently saw it for the first time I've decided to review it.
Warning: There will be minor spoilers.

  Open Range was made in 2003. It was directed by Kevin Costner and stars Robert Duvall, Annette Bening, and Costner himself. It tells the story of four cowboys, "Boss" Spearman (Duvall), Charley (Costner), Mose (Abraham Benrubi), and Button (Diego Luna), who are confronted by an Irish-American rancher named Baxter, who wants to steal their cattle. Baxter has bought out sheriff of the nearby town of Harmonville and is basically controlling it. When one of the cowboys is killed and another badly injured, Boss and Charley decide seek justice and take on Spearman and his men.

  The conflict in the film is well established and the characters feel like real people. The relationships are well fleshed out, particularly between Boss and Charley and between Charley and Sue Barlow (the sister of the town doctor, played by Bening). There are alot of nice little moments, like Charley trying to pick up the dirt he trailed into the doctor's house while Sue changes her clothes, or Boss and Charley's final chat before the big gunfight. This gunfight, which serves as the films climax, has been called one of the greatest shootouts in film history. While I have some reservations about it (there are one or two confusing moments), it is really good. The impact of the gunfire is powerful, making the fight visceral and intense, and it's very coherently shot and edited. The visuals and music in the film are very strong and give it an old school feel. No bombastic Hans Zimmer-esque score or saturated lighting here.

  The one big flaw in the film is the dialogue. While it sometimes naturalistic and subtle, at others it's gratingly stilted and cliche'. Just a few examples should suffice: "Old Boss sure can cowboy, can't he?" "Broke the mold after him." "...they had it coming, I expect". Despite this Open Range is still a really good western and these days that's a rarity.
Score: 8.5/10

Short Review - Captain America: The Winter Soldier

As this film is still in theaters I've decided to do a shorter-then-usual, spoiler free review.

  The biggest problem with this second Captain America film is its title. While it's comic-book counterpart uses the background of a complicated plot by the Red Skull and a Russian business man to focus on the relationship between Cap and the Winter Soldier, this film makes their relationship a smaller piece of a much larger narrative involving nefarious forces inside of Shield. In other words the movie isn't really about the Winter Soldier, it's about Cap finding his place in the modern world without betraying with his old world values, something that the Winter soldier is only a small part of. I don't think this makes the film bad but it does affect the audience's expectations.
  The movies exploration of Cap's journey is really well fleshed out and this film's story is definitely an improvement over the last one, which was set up well but lost its focus after the first act. Throughout the film Cap's idealism is challenged by what he sees around him and he has to decide how to apply his values in this new, far more complex society and, unlike in last year's Man of Steel, the American icon of this film maintains his integrity in a world where moral compromises are becoming more and more acceptable.
  The action scenes, in the last film reduced mostly to one 2-minute montage, are also an improvement, though they occasionally stray into incoherent, quick-cut territory. I especially liked the long tracking shot of Cap taking on guards on the Lemurian Star, which reminded me of a similar scene from the Bond film You Only live Twice.
  There have been alot of complaints about the score, but I thought it was effective for the most part though not up to par with Alan Silvestri's score for First Avenger. I also appreciated that they used Silvestri's theme again here (albeit briefly) as this theme has been the only thing to link the scores of the MCU film's together, appearing in Captain America: The First Avenger, The Avengers, Thor: The Dark World, and now in this film.
  The film's title may be misleading and there are a few silly moments, like Black Widow's Mission Impossible-esque disguise and a scene where a villain reveals the bad guys plan to her and Cap, but overall Captain America: The Winter Soldier is one of the best MCU films to date.

Score: 9/10

My mixed feelings toward The Clone Wars movie

  When Star Wars: The Clone Wars hit theaters in 2008 it was almost universally reviled. Critics bashed it, the fans dismissed it, and it underperformed at the box office. Then the TV show came along. It too met with much skepticism at first but, as it went on, those who decided to stick with it and watch it found it to be a well-made, entertaining cartoon. So how does the movie hold up in retrospect? Did it set up the show well? Were the critics and fans just burned out from the prequels and close-minded about this new direction for the franchise? These are the questions I hope to answer in this review.

  So why am I writing this now? Well, the Clone Wars movie was recently added to Netflix along with the show (the previously unreleased 6th season is available only on Netflix), so me and my brother decided to re-watch the movie and all 6 seasons of the show and I figured I may as well review them. Interestingly enough I did not see the Clone Wars movie when it was first released. I wasn't even interested in Star Wars at the time (believe it or not my parents didn't allow me to watch the films until I was 16, in 2010). I only saw it, out of curiosity, after watching the first couple of seasons of the show and so had a slightly different perspective from people who would have seen it for the first time in theaters.

  Alot of critics said that it felt like a glorified pilot for the show, and it does pretty much feels like a three episode story arc (though each episode would be a little longer than an actual one). Because of this I've decided to review the film in three separate segments before talking about it in general.

  Segment 1: The Battle for Christophsis
  Summary: After setting up the main plot in a narration (Jabba the Hutt's son has been kidnapped and the republic hopes to help him so he'll let them use his trade routes in the outer rim) the film turns to Christophsis, where Obi Wan and Anakin are leading the clones against the separatists. They're having communication problems and can't call in reinforcements. Obi Wan's new apprentice assigned by master Yoda, Ahsoka Tano, arrives but insists she is assigned to Anakin. The droids attack under the protection of a shield. Anakin and Ahsoka take out this shield while Obi Wan and the clones hold off the droids. Obi Wan fakes a surrender to the separatist commander to stall for time. When the shield is destroyed the battle quickly ends with the Jedi victorious. Yoda then arrives and informs Obi Wan and Anakin of the situation with Jabba's son. Anakin and Ahsoka are tasked with finding him and Obi Wan flies to Tatoonie to assure Jabba of the Republic's support.
  Thoughts: The most promising thing about this film was the possibility of finally getting a better look at the clone wars. While this battle delivers some of that it's a little underwhelming. Ahsoka is ok. Her and Anakin's name calling (she calls him Sky Guy and he calls her Snips) gets old fast but their relationship is actually set up fairly well. He's reluctant to take on a padawan but is impressed by her spunk and, to some extent, sees his own rebellious nature in her. She is eager to please but doesn't always listen and is a bit reckless. I also like some of the banter between Obi Wan and Anakin, though there's not enough of it.  Oh yea and Captain Rex (a clone trooper) says the D-word, setting an early precedent for some of the more adult stuff we'd get on the show.

  Segment 2: The Monastery on Teth
  Summary: Anakin and Ahsoka lead the clones in an assault on a monastery on the planet of Teth where they hope to find Jabba's son. After taking out the droid garrison they enter the monastery and find Jabba's son only to discover that he's ill. Count Dooku's apprentice, Assaj Ventress, is directed by him to obtain incriminating footage of the Jedi, hoping to frame them for Rota's disappearance and return him to Jabba himself, thus gaining his support for the separatist alliance. She then ambushes the Jedi with an army of droids, trying to obtain Rota from them. Anakin and Ashoka escape and Obi Wan arrives just in time to reinforce the clones. He engages Ventress who makes her own escape.
  Thoughts: Assaj Ventress was first introduced in the Clone Wars micro series (I think). Having never watched this series (I'd like to at one point) or read any comics or novels she was in I'm not sure if she is faithfully portrayed here but her character is alright, though not that interesting. The best thing I can say is that it nicely sets up her rivalry with Obi Wan for later on. It also creates a sort of duality between her and Ashoka as they are both apprentices (to masters who are or will be seduced by the dark side). The initial battle for the monastery is fairly exciting and well done, though there's way too much annoying droid chatter. The later battle between the droids and the ambushed clones is not as good as the film fails to create the tension the situation calls for.

  Segment 3: Tatooine and Ziro the Hutt
  Summary: Padme, learning about Anakin's mission, decides to help him by contacting Jabba's uncle, Ziro the Hutt, who lives in the underworld on Coruscant. She catches him speaking with Dooku on a hologram and learns that he is conspiring with Dooku to overthrow his nephew. She is caught and thrown in prison but manages to send a message to C3PO, who sends Clones to rescue her and arrest Ziro. Meanwhile, Anakin and Ahsoka arrive on Tatooine where they hope to deliver Jabba's son to him. They're ship is shot down and they are forced to trek across the desert. Anakin decides to send Ahsoka and R2D2 with Rota to Jabba's palace alone and in secret while he carries a decoy Rota on a different route. Dooku intercepts him and they fight. Ahsoka is ambushed by magnaguards and struggles to fight them off. Dooku show's Anakin his struggling Padawan on a hologram and Anakin steals Dooku's speeder and races off to save her. He arrives at Jabba's Palace and, not seeing his Padawan around, threatens Jabba, demanding to know where she is. Ahsoka arrives with Rota, and Jabba, enraged at being threatened and still believing that the Jedi are plotting against him, tells his men to execute both of the Jedi. In the nick of time Padme contacts Jabba, informing him of Ziro's treachery and Dooku's deception. Ziro admits to these crimes and Jabba agrees to allow the Republic to use his trade routes.
  Thoughts: I appreciate the continued development of Anakin and Ahsoka's relationship here. He is reluctant to answer questions about his past and he shows increased confidence in her when he sends her out on her own. This confidence is rewarded when she defeats Dooku's magnaguards to complete her mission. On a more negative note the Zirro subplot feels a little rushed and thrown in and Ventress does not reappear after her escape in the second act.

  The film was criticized for having stilted dialogue. I would agree with this for the most part. Alot of it is mundane exposition and there's alot of clumsy references to the live-action films (At one point Obi Wan say's "If anybody can fly a bucket of bolts through hyperspace, he can.") and annoying lines from Ashoka and the battle droids. However there are some decent exchanges between Anakin and Ahsoka and also between Obi Wan and Ventress. There's also a line that I can't help but feel might be a jab at the prequels: Anakin: "I don't want to talk about my past. Ashoka: "Okay, fine. There's so much more we can talk about out here. Like the sand."
 The animation in this film is notoriously clunky. The character designs are meant to resemble wood carvings from Rankin and Bass stop motion films and definitely take some getting used to. The real problem is that the movements often look stiff and the visuals and lighting are generally cheap looking. Another big problem with the movie is that the film feels like it should have been a three part episode rather than a fully realized film. Not only is the plot episodic it just feels unimportant. Rescuing Jabba the Hutt's son to secure trade routes seems like a really minor issue in the overall Star Wars universe. Besides this it's hard to really care about or even fully understand the story. Does Palpatine want the trade routes for the republic? If so does Dooku know this? Is Dooku really planning to help Ziro seize power or is he just using him? Regardless of the answer to these questions, Palpatine can just use whatever outcome takes place to his advantage so why does it really matter in the end?

  Fortunately, though the story doesn't impress, the main characters are, for the most part, likable and this makes you want to route for them despite the convoluted plot. Anakin is much more likable here than in the prequels, partly because, I think putting him in a leadership position gives him an opportunity to show more admirable qualities rather than just whining all the time. Ashoka does get annoying with her excessive use of nicknames, but her spunk does make her somewhat likable (I may be biased as I've grown to know her character better over the show's six seasons). The villains, especially Ventress, are appropriately threatening and we get introduced to Captain Rex who here is pretty much just a cooler-than-average clone, but becomes more interesting in the show. The voice actors are not as comfortable with their roles as they'll become in the show, but their fine for the most part. The score by Kevin Kiner, though it's not quite John Williams, is still very good and one of the stronger elements in the film.
  Overall, despite its sloppy pacing and overly complex plot, the Clone Wars movie manages to be a decent if forgettable set up for the show. If you are interested in watching the show, this is a good a place as any to start. Otherwise you can probably skip it.

Score: 6.5/10

Coming soon: Clone Wars Season 1 review.
 

Lent Movie Reviews Week 6 (belated): The Passion of the Christ

  So I watched The Passion for the first time this past Good Friday and because it was so close to Easter I didn't have time to write a review. So I apologize that it's a little late in coming.

  The Passion of the Christ was released in 2004. It was directed by Mel Gibson and stars Jim Caviezel as Jesus. I'll skip the summary again as it would just be redundant.

  The Passion is a great film. Aided in part by the use of Aramaic and Latin dialogue it looks and feels very historically accurate and it stays true to the biblical narrative. But more than that it's a very deep and contemplative film. Christ's passion is inter-cut with the Last Supper, showing the connection between His death and Catholic Eucharistic sacrifice. Added scenes like Mary and Mary Magdalene wiping up the sacred blood after the scourging and flashbacks to Christ's childhood give viewers an appreciation of the blessed Virgin's sorrowful participation in the passion. The presence of Satan and other demons throughout the film symbolizes the struggle between good and evil, heaven and hell, a struggle which Jesus brought to a definitive close through his Paschal sacrifice.

  As was Gibson's intent, it's not a dialogue driven film but a visually driven one. In the agony in the Garden Jesus stamps on a snake, symbolizing His triumph over the devil in accepting His Father's will. It also shows the fulfillment of the Protevangelium "he will crush your head and you will strike his heel.” (Genesis 3:15 b). Later, as Jesus drags his cross through Jerusalem his mother is shown following him on one side of the street with Satan on the other, further emphasizing the conflict laid down in the Proto-gospel, "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed" (Genesis 3:15 a) The film is filled with all kinds of similar symbolism. Originally, Gibson wanted to release the film without subtitles, saying that the story was so well known that audiences could follow it without understanding the dialogue. In the end he decided it was necessary to use them in certain parts though much of the talking is still subtitle free. The film works amazingly well despite this sparse use of subs and in the future I would like to try watching it with them turned off.

  The performances are strong throughout the picture. Maia Morgenstern as Mary and Francesco De Vito as Peter are especially strong and Rosalinda Celentano brings a creepy, sinister presence to Satan. Of course the real stand out performance comes from Jim Caviezal. His Jesus is both stern and gentle, God-like and human. His serenity during his trial and condemnation display his divinity, and his sufferings help to show his humanity. A flashback, where he and his mother playfully tease each other, further emphasizes his human side. This is the man who was kind to children and showed love to tax collectors and sinners.

  The movie does have a few flaws. Personally, I found the score a little too percussion driven, though I'll admit that this gives it a savage, primal feel appropriate for the more violent scenes and there are some nicer, more subtle moments. The one really big issue is the films portrayal of Caiaphas, the Jewish high priest. In the bible, during a meeting of the Jewish Sanhedrin, he reveals his motivation for having Jesus killed: he fears that He will incite a rebellion and Rome will retaliate "You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish." (John 11:50) This motive is never shown in the film nor is the Pharisees fear of losing their prestige because of Jesus. In contrast to this Pilate is given scenes that help to further establish his own motives for delivering Jesus to the Jews. Like Caiaphas he too fears a rebellion, as this would reflect badly for him in Rome. Some have argued that because of this the film is anti-Semitic. They say that it is placing the blame for Christ's death solely on the Jews and going out of its way to make excuses for the Romans. However the film is not afraid to show the Romans in just as bad a light, as evidenced by the barbaric portrayal of the Roman guards. In addition to this, Caiaphas is shown being disturbed at the soldiers' treatment of Jesus and other Jewish figures like Simon of Cyrene, Joseph of Arimathea, and Nicodemus are portrayed in a much more positive light. Finally the film doesn't blame for Jesus' death fully on the Jews or the Romans but show's that we're all culpable. "No one takes my life from me, but I lay it down on my own accord." These accusations of anti-Semitism are baseless. Nevertheless the lack of historical background for the Pharisees plot against Jesus is an issue, especially for non-believers who may not be as familiar with the story.

   The Passion of the Christ is a stirring artistic achievement. It's a film that I'd recommend to everyone, particularity Catholics (as long as you can stomach a little graphic violence). It's the kind of film that I question giving a rating too. To apply a numeric rating to such a meditative work of art seems somehow shallow and meaningless. However I have done so throughout this Lenten project so...

Rating: 9.5/10

Lent Reviews Week 5: The Prince of Egypt

  The Prince of Egypt is a 1998 animated musical released by Dream Works studios and directed by Brenda Chapman (Brave), Steve Hickner and Simon Wells. It tells the story of Moses and the exodus of the Hebrews from Egypt. I won't bother to summarize the plot because everyone knows it and, frankly, I need to work on my summary skills. Suffice to say, it follows the Biblical story fairly closely.

  "He saw an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, one of his own people. Looking this way and that and seeing no one, he killed the Egyptian and hid him in the sand." (Exodus 2: 11-12) And he leaves for fear of pharaoh "When Pharaoh heard of this, he tried to kill Moses, but Moses fled from Pharaoh". (Exodus 2: 15) Considering that this film was made with children in mind, I can't fault them too much for changing the way the Egyptian dies. I don't really mind the added motive either because the bible doesn't really offer any deep insight in that regard. The film's portrayal of Aaron on the other hand, is somewhat problematic. Moses real brother was his strongest supporter, "The Lord said to Aaron, 'Go into the wilderness to meet Moses.' So he met Moses at the mountain of God and kissed him." (Exodus 4: 27-28) The film portrays Aaron as being doubtful of Moses' mission and reluctant to anger the Egyptians. This was done, I think, to give Miriam a bigger role as she takes Aaron's place as Moses supporter here. Neither of these changes is that significant.

  The biggest deviations are the film's depiction of Moses' murder of an Egyptian which causes him to flee from Egypt and its portrayal of Aaron. The murder is portrayed as a fatal accident that is witnessed by many and Moses leaves, mostly, because of his crisis of conscience concerning the Pharaoh's treatment of his people. In the bible this murder happens in secret

  The two biggest flaws in the film are its rushed pacing and one rather out of place musical number. At 99 minutes the movie feels a bit rushed at times. As a result certain characters, like Aaron and Queen Tuya, are a little underdeveloped. And Moses relationship with his wife Tzipporah is not as well fleshed out as it could be. The musical number I mentioned entitled "Playing with the Big Boys" features the Egyptian high priests singing a song to intimidate Moses with their powers after his staff turns into a snake. Not only is this song much more comedic than the films other songs, it also interrupts the flow of the scene and ultimately feels rather pointless. The swallowing up of the Egyptian snakes by Moses seems to go unnoticed by everyone present and neither Moses nor the priests seem to make any impression on each other. The films other flaws include a few over-the-top comedic moments (including Moses and Rameses racing through Egypt and knocking the nose off a Pyramid) and, as I already mentioned, the films portrayal of Aaron. The films many strengths far outweigh these weaknesses.

  The focus of the story in the film is Moses relationship with his adopted brother Rameses, the future Pharaoh. Watching their initial friendship and then subsequent fall-out and opposition is very tragic and it was a good way for the filmmakers to add more humanity to the story. Moses own journey, from a naive though kindhearted Prince of Egypt to a humble servant of God, is also very well done, and the film adequately conveys both his initial mixed feelings toward his supposed fathers act of infanticide and later his regret concerning his lost relationship with Rameses with is mixed with his new found sense of purpose. Both Kilmer and Fiennes are excellent as the voices of Moses and Rameses (respectfully). The supporting cast also does a fine job. The songs (aside from the aforementioned "Playing with the Big Boys") are all memorable and complement the story well. My personal favorite is probably "The Plagues" which features Moses and Rameses singing back and forth about their feelings toward each other while the nine plagues take place in the background. Visually the film is magnificent. It's filled with sweeping images of the Pyramids and the Egyptian desert and the parting of the Red Sea is probably one of the greatest animated sequences ever. Moses dream, where he sees the murder of the Hebrew Children and his own escape through moving wall paintings, is also spectacular. Really it has to be seen to be believed.

  Overall, The Prince of Egypt is an emotionally resonant and beautifully animated biblical adaption.

Score: 9/10

  

Lent Movie Reviews Week 4: Waterloo

  So this is the first week I haven't reviewed a religious movie. I guess the reason for this is that I didn't watch any religious movies last week. I did however watch Waterloo, because my brother was supposed to for school. So anyways...

  Waterloo was released in 1970. It was directed by Sergei Bondarchuk. It stars Rod Stieger and Christopher Plummer as Napoleon and the Duke of Wellington respectively.  Though it flopped at the box office it received positive reviews from critics.

The film opens by showing Napoleon's initial abdication and exile to Elba. On his return King Louis XVIII sends Marshall Ney to capture him. In a suspenseful sequence Ney and the French army confront Napoleon and his 1000 loyal followers. Napoleon refuses to surrender and Ney's men will not open fire on him but instead join him, giving Napoleon control of France. Napoleon attempts to sue for peace but the other European nations declare war so he decides to invade Belgium. The British send Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington to stop him. At a ball the night before the battle Wellington is informed that Napoleon has crossed the border, cutting him off from his Prussian allies. He decides to make a stand at Quatre-Bras but is defeated and withdraws to Waterloo. Prussian Field Marshal Blücher moves his men north in order to maintain contact with Wellington. Napoleon sends Grouchy with 30,000 men to keep Blücher from reinforcing Wellington. Grouchy fails to do this and Napoleon sees the Prussians approaching in the distance on the morning of the battle. He opts to ignore it and sends his forces attack the British outpost at Hougoumont hoping to draw out Wellington's reserves. Meanwhile the French artillery start a bombardment of the center of the British line supporting an attack by the French infantry on La Haye Sainte. When this attack is beaten back, the British cavalry under Uxbridge charge forward to support a counter attack by the infantry. Ignoring a recall order the cavalry attempt to attack the French grande batterie. Napoleon counter attacks with his own cavalry, resulting in heavy losses for the British. Later Wellington decides to reorganize some of his troops in the center of his line. French Marshal Ney, mistaking this for a retreat, orders his cavalry forward. The British form squares (hollow box-formations four ranks deep) to repel this attack and Ney is beaten back with heavy losses. Napoleon, returning to the Battlefield after recovering from a bout of stomach pain, berates his marshals for allowing Ney to attack without Infantry support. Around the same time French infantry resume their attack on La Haye Sainte and recapture it. Napoleon orders his Imperial guard forward to exploit this new weakness. This advance is met with a volley from Maitland's infantry, hiding in the grass until the French are in point blank range. The French assault begins to disintegrate and the arrival of the Prussian army dashes any hope of French victory. The film ends by showing Wellington riding through the body-strewn battlefield and Napoleon returning to Paris.

English infantry squares repel Ney's Cavalry

  Like Ben-Hur, which I reviewed last week, Waterloo is a massive film utilizing 15,000 Soviet foot soldiers and 2,000 cavalrymen as extras. The visuals are a sight to behold. The tactics, uniforms, and weapons used, to my knowledge, are quite authentic to the real battle. The way the battle plays ought is also fairly close to real life, the biggest departure being the portrayal of Blucher's Prussians. In the real battle the Prussians fought a hard battle with the French at Plancenoit, finally breaking through to relieve the British near the end of the battle. In the film the Prussians arrive unopposed. The acting, for the most part, is excellent. Steiger really conveys Napoleon's eccentricity and helps we as an audience to understand why he was a legend while at the same time giving us a glimpse of his humanity. Plummer, though perhaps more jovial than the stoic Wellington of reality, brings out his practicality, seemingly condescending attitude and his love for his men (despite referring to them as beggars and scoundrels). He also brings a wry sense of humor to what would otherwise be a rather joyless affair. The writing and the direction also help bring out the best in both of them. The supporting cast is fine for the most part, but a few of the British troops are occasionally overwrought, particularly one who, in the middle of the charge of Ney's cavalry shouts out: "We've never seen each other! How can we kill one another? How can we? How can we?"

  The biggest flaw in the film is the editing. There are alot of jarring cuts and, at just over 2 hours, the film feels really rushed for much of it's running time. The attacks on Hougoumont and La Haye Sainte are glazed over and you don't really have time to appreciate them. This is a really big problem when it comes to 'Sainte considering how important that it was to the actual battle. Apparently there is a longer (4 1/2 to 6 1/2) cut which was only released in Russia. According to IMDB this was a rough cut that was never actually released but some insist that they remember seeing it in theaters. In any case it seems doubtful that this extra material will ever see the light of day which is a shame. An extra hour or so could do this film wonders. 

  Overall, though it has many flaws, Waterloo is an exciting, and very historically accurate war film. It's really a must-see for all history buffs and more casual fans of the genre should still enjoy it, despite some of the issues I have with it.

Score: 8/10

Lent Movie Reviews Week 3: Ben-Hur

  So I saw Ben-Hur this week for the first time in, well forever. I remembered it so little, it was almost like seeing it for the first time. So with that in mind here's my review.

  For those who don't know Ben-Hur was based on a book by Lew Wallace. It was released in 1959 was directed by William Wyler (The Best Years of Our Lives, Roman Holiday) and stars Charlton Heston and Stephen Boyd. It won 12 Oscars, a record not matched until Titanic in 1997 (and again with Return of the King in 2003). I started to read the book a long time ago but got tired and gave up on it, so I can't really compare the two. (Perhaps I'll pick it up again sometime)

  The film tells the story of Judah Ben-Hur, a Jewish prince and merchant living in Jerusalem, which is contrasted and intertwined with the life of Christ. It opens by telling the story of Christ's birth and visit by the Magi. Cut to 30 years later, when Roman citizen Messala, Judah's childhood friend and his sisters sweetheart, returns from Rome, now a tribune and in charge of the Roman Garrison in Jerusalem. Having developed an unfailing devotion to Rome and a craving for power in his journeys, Messala hopes to attain Judah's help in discouraging rebellion from Jewish zealots. Judah says he is willing to use his influence to discourage violent rebellion, but refuses to inform on Jews who are critical of Roman rule. This angers Messalla who declares that Ben-Hur is now his enemy. When the new Roman governor is nearly killed by a loose shingle that is accidentally knocked of Ben-Hur's roof, he is wrongly implicated. Messala, still feeling betrayed, refuses to intervene. Judah is condemned to the galleys and his mother and sister are imprisoned. Ben-Hur vows revenge on Messala. This zeal for vengeance, along with his faith in God and concern for his family, help him get through his years as a galley slave. During a battle with Macedonian pirates Ben-Hur saves the life of the Roman Consul, Quintus Arrius, and gains his favor. Years pass and Quintus adopts Judah as his son. He learns roman ways and becomes a champion charioteer. Finally, on learning of the appointment of a new Roman governor in Judea, Ben-Hur returns home. There he meets his former slave (and secret romantic interest) Esther. She, persuaded by Judah's now leprous mother and sister that they'd be happier if he remembered them as they were before, informs him they have died.  This news pushes Ben-Hur over the edge and he enters the chariot race in Jerusalem, knowing that Messala will also be in it and hoping to avenge his family's death. Messala is killed in the race when Ben-Hur breaks the wheel of his chariot. With his dying breath he tells Judah that his mother and sister still live and are now lepers. This causes Ben-Hur to plan revolt against Rome. Esther tells him of a new prophet, Jesus of Nazareth, who preaches of peace and forgiveness of enemies and attempts to dissuade him but he won't hear it. She decides to take his mother and sister to Jesus and Judah, reluctantly, helps her. At this moment however, Jesus is being crucified, Judah, on seeing him, recognizes him as the man who once saved his life by giving him water when he was being marched to the galleys and dying of thirst. He attempts to give Jesus water but is stopped by the Roman guards. When Jesus dies a great storm begins and Judah's mother and sister are healed of their leprosy. Ben-Hur, on witnessing Christ's forgiveness of his enemies, even in death, finally relinquishes his hatred and is reunited with his family.

  The great thing about this film's story is the way Judah's journey is paralleled with Christ's saving mission. For example: After winning the chariot race, Judah is crowned with a laurel wreath by Pontius Pilate, Christ, of course receives his own crown from Pilate, but it's not one of earthly glory but of scorn. And while Judah feels emptiness on receiving his crown Christ, by wearing his with humble acceptance, accomplishes a part of our salvation. I also think it's interesting that Jesus' face is never shown in the film, He's always shown in profile and it's others reaction to Him that allows us to know him. The reason for this I think is because the film is not about Christ so much as it's about the effect he had on others. Judah, though a good, God-fearing man, is part of the old covenant. Though he initially purports to believe in peace he turns to vengeance and violence (an eye for an eye) when brought to suffering. Jesus, in founding the new covenant, teaches not just the letter of the law but of inner holiness, of love not just of fellow Jews but even of enemies. He lives out this teaching in his passion. It's only when Judah witness Christ's sacrifice and accepts his message that he finds inner peace.

  The story's not the only great thing about this film. The score by Miklós Rózsa is spectacular, conveying the films epic scope while at the same time being appropriately subtle for the more dramatic scenes. The cinematography and set design are also superb. This film is a true epic and needs to be viewed on the biggest screen possible. It features two spectacular action set pieces. The sea battle, filmed using a mixture of miniatures and live size ships, is well staged and exciting, but the big attraction is of course the chariot race. Featuring nine real chariots, two of them actually driven by Heston and Boyd (for the most part) and the largest set ever built (up to that time); the race remains visceral and exciting after all these years. It was the benchmark for movie chase scenes for years afterward. The film's also filled with evocative imagery, Christ giving water to a thirsty Ben-Hur and the blood flowing from his cross into the water after the crucifixion (cleansing the world) are particularly memorable.

  Its not without it's flaws. The acting is a little over the top at times, and first half feels a bit rushed pacing wise. More prominent is the occasionally stilted dialogue, which can probably be attributed to the fact that some of the writers had experience writing mostly for the theatre. These flaws, however, are mostly overshadowed by the films many strengths.

  Ben-Hur is both a stirring drama and a massively entertaining epic. If you haven't seen it before (but who hasn't really), do yourself a favor and go rent it!

Score: 9/10

Lent Movie Reviews Week 2: Mother Teresa

  Last week I announced that I would post a movie review up every remaining week of lent. My first review was of Becket (1964) this week I'm reviewing Mother Teresa (2003).

  Mother Teresa is a TV movie released in 2003. It stars Olivia Hussey as the titular saint and was directed by Fabrizio Costa. It tells the story of Mother Teresa's life, from her early days as a nun to her death. 
  
  The real Mother Teresa was born Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu in Albania in 1910. In 1928, at the age of 18 she felt the call to religious life and joined the Sisters of Loreto in Ireland, taking on the name Teresa after her patron, St. Theresa of Lisieux. She was sent to the novitiate in Calcutta India a year later. For the next 17 years she would serve their as a teacher at St. Mary's Bengali Medium School. In 1946, on a train trip to Darjeeling Mother Teresa felt a second calling: to return to Calcutta and serve the poorest of the poor in the streets. This would eventually give rise to her order the Missionaries of Charity, as other young woman came to join in her mission. In 1950 the Vatican approved the official establishment of this congregation and in 1965 Pope Pious VI granted permission to expand it to other countries. By the time of Mother Teresa's death in 1997 it would grow to include over 4,000 members. The Missionaries of Charity continue to serve the poor all over the world to this day.
  
  The film is mainly about Mother Teresa's struggle to start the Missionaries of Charity and then later to build a leper colony she calls the City of Peace (Shanti Nagar). In order to start her congregation, Mother Teresa has to confront the Church's resistance initial to forming a new religious community as well as receive permission from the Archbishop of Calcutta to openly serve the poor in the streets. When trying to build the City of Peace she struggles to raise enough money and to meet the proper legal requirements. To complicate issues there are multiple scandals stirred up by a certain ambitious English journalist.  She faces these problems with unbounded trust in God and support from her friend Father Van Exam and later Father Serrano, a priest initially sent from Rome to determine the merit of starting Mother's congregation who decides to stay and help her. 
  
  The biggest problems I have with the film are its lack of internal struggles for the character and it's sometimes episodic narrative. Late in the film, Mother Teresa tells Van Exam that she is experiencing a spiritual dryness and feels abandoned by God. Than it skips to a few years later and she is finally relieved from this dark night of the soul. The struggle itself is never really explored. This skipping over many years happens alot in the film and accounts for the episodic feel I mentioned. According to Steven Greydanus' review, there were about 70 minutes cut out of the US version of this film from its original Italian release. That might go to explain alot. In addition to these pacing/narrative issues the film also has dialogue problems. Though admirably utilizing many actual quotes from the saint, much of the dialogue in the film comes off as stilted and uninteresting. 
  
  Despite these problems the film still fairly watchable, thanks large in part to Olivia Hussey's performance and also the inspiring nature of the story. It was certainly at least good enough to make me want to check out the Italian version. 

Score: 7.5/10

Lent Movie Reviews Week 1: Becket

  Given the slightly larger response generated by my last post as compared to my first one, I've decided to post stuff a little more regularly, at least for now. So I'm going to try to review a movie every week for the remainder of lent. In the spirit of the season these movies will be mostly, if not all, related to religion. This week I'll review the film Becket, which I recently saw for the first time.

  Becket was released in 1964 and was nominated for 12 Oscars (it won only 1 for best adapted screenplay). It tells the story of St. Thomas Becket (played here by Richard Burton), an English archbishop who was martyred in 1170. For any who don't know about him it here's a brief summary:

Thomas Becket was initially a friend and ally of King Henry II (portrayed in the film by Peter O'Toole), serving as his Lord Chancellor. He was a worldly man and accustomed to luxury. At Henry's urging and despite Thomas' reluctance, Becket was ordained a priest and became the Archbishop of Canterbury, a position which made him the head of the church in England. Embracing his new post Becket began pursuing a life of asceticism and rejected his previous worldly lifestyle, resigning his post as chancellor. He also began to recover and extend the power of the church in England. This brought him into conflict with the King, particularly over the issue of whether or not secular courts had jurisdiction over the clergy. This came to a head when Henry issued the Constitutions of Clarendon, which reduced the independence of the Church in England and weakened its connection with Rome. Becket refused to sign these documents and was compelled to flee to France, where he lived in exile for two years. Pope Alexander III, who was sympathetic to Becket's cause, sent delegates to impose a solution to the dispute. Henry worked out a compromise, allowing Becket to return to England. But more trouble arose as Henry wished Becket to absolve two bishops he had previously excommunicated for assisting at the coronation of Henry's son, which had taken place in defiance of the Pope's instructions. Becket again refused to comply and the King, on hearing this, cried out in a fit of rage certain words which were translated by some present as a desire to have the Archbishop killed. These four knights confronted Becket at Canterbury and demanded that he capitulate to the King's commands. When he refused they murdered him inside his own Cathedral. This act created much outrage in England and four years later Henry was compelled to make public penance for his acts. A year prior to that, Thomas Becket was declared a saint.

 The film follows the actual events fairly closely, though with exceptions. There are two main conflicts in the film. The first is the internal conflict of Thomas Becket . Before becoming Archbishop he struggles with worldliness and, though he does show that he has a conscious, he only follows it when convenient. He is shown assisting Henry with his extra-marital romantic entanglements and at one point he even allows the King to sleep with his own mistress. (This particular aspect of Becket's early life is not, to my knowledge historically accurate) The reason his conscious tends to lose in this stage is, in his own words, because he has no love in his heart, he has no passion or conviction strong enough to counter his desire for worldly comfort and pleasure. This conflict is resolved when Becket becomes Archbishop. He is very reluctant to take this position, fearing that he will be compelled to give up his comfort and security, but the king insists and on taking the position, Becket discovers a love for God, which is more powerful than any previous passion he's known. Consequently he sells all his earthly goods, telling the Lord that it all seems too easy. In all this, Becket's inner struggle is made apparent through the dialogue, which is a bit too revealing for my tastes, and also through Burton's performance, which is excellent. He really sells Becket's initial apathy and subsequent zeal for the Church.

  Becket's change of heart opens up the second, this time external, conflict, as Becket, no longer content to bend to Henry's often corrupt desire's, is placed in opposition to him. This makes Henry, who considers Thomas his only true friend, feel betrayed, and his love for Thomas is now mixed with a deep hatred. Like Burton, O'Toole rises to the occasion, giving an unforgettable performance and expressing, alternately, Henry's love for Thomas, his hatred of him, and his almost childish rage at not getting his own way. (Both Burton and O'Toole were nominated for best actor but lost to Rex Harrison for My Fair Lady) In addition to the magnificent performances and the complex exploration of its central conflicts, the film also boasts some wonderful locations, sets, and costumes, as well as stirring direction from Peter Glenville. Becket's martyrdom is particularly well shot and edited.

  The film however is not without its flaws. As I mentioned, the dialogue is often a bit too analytical for my tastes and often lacks subtlety. This is really frustrating because, for the most part, I understand what the characters are going through without them having to say it. There are also historical inaccuracies. As I already stated Becket's lifestyle before he becomes Archbishop is portrayed as being much more questionable than in real life.  Though this does serve to heighten his inner conflict it seems somewhat unnecessary and is troubling form an historical/faith perspective. Another major departure is the film's portrayal of Becket as a Saxon, which brings him much disdain from his Norman colleagues, while the real Thomas Becket was a Norman. Jean Anouilh, who wrote the play on which the film is based, wasn't made aware of this until after he had finished the play, so I don't mind it too much. There are other changes, but none of them are major and most serve to help the films pacing. The most glaring problem I had was with the score. Though the use of sacred chant was nice and fits the film quite well, the incidental music is often overly dramatic, which serves to decrease the tension rather than increase it.

  That said, most of these flaws are easily overlooked, and overall I think Becket is an inspiring, well made and very well acted film.

Score: 9/10

Next weeks review: Mother Teresa (2003)

Why I strongly dislike Revenge of the Sith

  So alot of people I know seem to like the the 3rd Star Wars prequel. Some even rank it up there with the Original Trilogy. But personally I'm not so fond of it. As I recently had the "pleasure" to re-watch it I decided I'd write this review. Hopefully it will help to convey why I dislike it.
Quick note: This review will be somewhat facetious but I mean no offense to those who enjoys this film and of course this is all my personal opinion.

  Let me start by quickly going over my biggest issue, not only with this film but with the prequel trilogy as a whole, the concept that Anakin is "the chosen one".  I have the same problem, though to a lesser extent, with The Dark Knight and Man of Steel. Instead of focusing on the personal struggles of our character, be he Anakin Skywalker, Kal El or Harvey Dent, these films try to make us care about them by telling us that they're somehow "important" to the world of the film. Maybe it's partly a taste issue but this always turns me off.

  With that out of the way let's talk about the opening sequence. Alot of people rant about how visually amazing and exciting it is. The effects look pretty good I guess, but visually it's kind of a mess, it actually reminds me a little of a scene in this one Trek episode where there are a bunch of Enterprises from alternate timelines floating around in space. The battle itself is kind of dull. Obi Wan and Anakin just fly around for a while on the way to Grievous' ship, en route they encounter and easily dispatch some droid fighters and then have to deal with some buzz droids that land on Obi Wan's ship. Compared to the space battles from Episodes IV or VI, it just doesn't measure up. Anyway, after this they get inside Grievous ship and rescue the chancellor. This sequence, which is often rather lighthearted, is tonally inconsistent with the rest of this rather dark film and it makes little sense. Why would Palpatine, this supposed mastermind, come up with such a risky scheme just to get rid of Dooku? What if Anakin was killed by Dooku? What if the whole ship was destroyed and Palpatine got killed? It comes awful close. And why are the republic ships firing on Grievous' ship if they know that the Chancellor's on board and that the Jedi are trying to rescue him?  I will admit though that I enjoy this scene despite its many flaws, at least it's a little suspenseful and there's a sense of fun.

  And this brings me to my first major problem with the film as a whole. Aside from a little dry humor from Obi Wan there's almost no levity after this scene. I realize that this is a dark, tragic story but Empire Strikes Back was dark too (and far more emotionally resonant then this) but it still managed to sprinkle humor and levity throughout the film. I mean this is Star Wars, let's have at least at little fun with it. I might not mind the tone as much if it was at least well-made but, it's not.

  Like the other prequels, this film contains many inconsistencies with the original trilogy and continues to mess with the mythology. In Return of the Jedi, Leia tells Luke that she can still remember her real mother, yet in this film Padme dies in child birth. We also find out that Chewbacca knew Yoda (???), like the revelation that Anakin built C3PO this just feels strange and forced. To add insult to injury there's more mention of midi-chlorians and of course this infamous scene which has come to represent fan reaction to the prequels.

   Another major problem is the acting. It ranges from the bland, cringe-worthy line delivery of Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman, to the laughably over the top performance of Ian McDiarmid as Darth Sidious. McDiarmid's performance is fine when he's playing the more understated Chancellor but as soon it's revealed that he the dark lord it basically turns into unintentional camp. Sure he was always a little over the top but here it just becomes silly. Of course I can't really blame the actors. Blue screen backgrounds and cgi stand-ins are not inspirational settings. In fact the same day I watched this I saw Captain Philips, which was filmed on location and used long, uncut takes. The difference was extremely apparent. 

  And then there's the dialogue. It's awful. There's been no shortage of criticism for Lucas's writing in the prequels so I won't elaborate too much but it is pretty bad. There's all kinds of lame expository dialogue where the characters explain what's going on as it's happening. During the opening sequence a droid ship fires missiles at Obi Wan and Anakin, prompting them to say, "Missiles pull up!" and when they miss, "They overshot  us" and "They're coming around". We see all of this visually there's no need for the running commentary. Then there's the painfully stilted romantic dialogue. "You are so... beautiful" "It's only because I'm so in love" "No, no it's because I'm so in love with you." Finally the characters also often say things that make no sense. When Count Dooku walks in on Palpatine's rescue he tells Obi Wan and Anakin to "Get help". They're in an enemy ship carrying out a rescue mission, does he really expect them to drop everything and come back with more men? In a later scene when Yoda confronts Darth Sidious, the sith lord tells him, "You will not stop me. Darth Vader will become more powerful than either of us." What does this have to do with anything? Darth Vader is in another star system, how is he supposed to help Sidious with Yoda? And why would Sidious want Vader to become more powerful? Isn't Sidious afraid that Vader might betray him like he betrayed Darth Plagueis? And when Anakin confronts him he tells him he's going to turn him in right in front of his face. I realize that Anakin's supposed to be conflicted but warning a powerful enemy about his imminent capture is a really dumb thing to do.

  The dialogue isn't the only thing in the film that doesn't make sense. People's actions are often similarly lacking any sensible explanation or motive. After attempting to kill the Emperor, Yoda just gives up. I know some say that he realizes that the Palpatine is too powerful for him and decides to preserve himself so he can later train someone (Luke) to overthrow him, but if he can sense that then why risk revealing himself in the first place? Oh I know, it's so Yoda and Palpatine can have an over the top fight scene in the senate chambers. Moving on, after Obi Wan cut's Anakin's legs off he just stands there and watches him burn up. Seriously? I mean yes, Anakin is his friend and he might be hesitant to kill him but that is what he came there for. Why not finish the job and end his suffering?

  The most nonsensical thing in the film however is Palpatine's whole plan to seduce Anakin and overthrow the republic. First of all what does one have to do with the other? Palpatine has already amassed political power and he easily destroys the Jedi using order 66. What does Anakin do to help other than killing some younglings and political pawns? Why does he want Anakin at all? Hasn't he learned that having a powerful apprentice is dangerous? Besides this, the ways that he goes about manipulating him are so obvious that it's really hard to believe that Anakin falls for it. First he tells him to kill Dooku, who might easily have valuable information, and his only excuse is, "he cut off your hand". Then, after encouraging suspicions toward the Jedi, he implies that he knows about the dark side and tells Anakin that it can be used to cheat death at the convenient time when Anakin is afraid for Padme. Of course it doesn't help that, prior to this film, we've seen practically nothing of their "friendship".

  When Anakin finally does fall the movie fails to make me believe or care about his decision. It seems that he's doing it at this point not because he believes Palpatine but because he's so desperate to save Padme (who at this point is in no danger of dying). But then later he tells her that he believes he can destroy Palpatine and then they can rule the galaxy together, but how will that work if he needs Palpatine to save her? After that he tells Obi Wan that he now believes that the Jedi are evil, so I guess he believes Palpatine now? Or maybe he's been driven mad by Padme's perceived betrayal? Whatever.

  Finally, there's some of shoddy film making. Just look at some of these wipes that were used to transition between scenes. Lucas was inspired by Akira Kurosawa in his use of unique wipes and transitions in the original trilogy but here, although some of them are fine, many of these wipes really draw attention to themselves.

There's also alot of lazy staging and cinematography. I've already mentioned the overuse of cgi and blue screen which makes the actors job's that much harder but in addition to this many scenes are shot or played out in a way which decreases the tension and drama. I'll illustrate this (among other things) in the next paragraph.

And thus the sith-cork 720 came to be...

  Revenge of the Sith contains what may be the worst scene in the entire series. After being informed of Palpatine's true identity by Anakin, Mace Windu and three other members of the Jedi council go to his chambers to arrest him. After Mace informs him that he's "under arrest" Palpatine declares "It's treason then" and this is where things get ugly (and by ugly I mean incredibly stupid). Palpatine takes out lightsaber from his sleeve and then jumps out and executes what I can only describe as a corkscrew toward the jedi. Then he subdues the three jedi accompanying Windu so quickly it makes you question whether they were ever apprentices let alone Jedi masters. The rest of the fight plays out in awkward fashion with Palpatine flailing about like an old drunk and Mace looking like he's about to break into a dance. All of this is accompanied by the most ridiculous looking facial expressions from both actors. After Palpatine loses his lightsaber and is cornered by Mace, Anakin comes in. The calm way he walks up and looks around does not really convey the panicked confused feelings he's supposed be having now. Then Palpatine and Mace both try to convince Anakin that the other is a traitor to the republic trading off lines like "He's a traitor", "He is the traitor!" all while Palpatine shoots lighting at Mace Windu which is deflected back at his own face. He finally stops, proclaiming "I'm too weak". Perhaps he should have stopped before he fried off his own face and expended all his energy. I guess he's doing it to make himself look like the victim to Anakin, but this only goes to show how shallow and obvious his manipulations are. Anakin, apparently falling for this chicanery, pleads with Mace not to kill Palpatine because, "It's not the Jedi way" even though we saw him do the same thing to Dooku earlier under Palpatine's urging. When Mace ignores Anakin's hypocritical pleas Anakin cut's off his hand and Palpatine blasts him out the window with lighting shouting "Power! Unlimited Power!" in the most over the top fashion imaginable. This causes Anakin to drop his lightsaber and muse aloud "What have I done". Finally he pledges himself to Sidious teachings and the dark lord names his new apprentice Darth Vader and, questioned about his ability to save Padme from a yet undetermined cause of death, he informs him that only together can they unlock the secret.
  The whole sequence presents such a strange combination of over-the-top silliness, underplayed dramatic tension and flat out bizarreness that it's almost mind blowing.

  So what do I like about this movie? Well despite the bad lines and the uninspired settings, Ewan McGregor gives it his all. It seems like he's the only person in this film who approaches his role with any energy or sense of seriousness. Although some of the cgi seems dated now there are still some cool visuals. The action scenes are, for the most part, well done. And of course John Williams score is great. His music is the only consistently good thing in the prequels.

  So that's how I feel about Revenge of the Sith. Please feel free to respond/vent in the comments section below.