Swompdonkey

7 days and a wake-up, I'm off to Europe. With all the craziness around planning a four-week vacation and putting my affairs in order at work, I needed a serious break. On Friday, I went to the cinema at noon to see Revenge of the Sith with some friends who, like myself, happen to be unreformed Star Wars fans.

You may recall, if you have been reading for a while, that I tried to speculate on how this final movie would be viewed. Well, it is too early for a final verdict, but early indications are that there is unlikely to be a Phantom Menace-style backlash, where people were initially blown away, but once the hype died down, the disappointment set in. It has broken 4-day box-office records and is being received by the fan community and critics alike with enthusiasm and a positive response not seen since 1980's The Empire Strikes Back. I consider myself neither a hater nor a Lucas apologist (as far as labels go), and I gotta say... I really really liked this movie.

Aside from a couple of brief groan-inducing moments (all the movies have those: "Tochi station power converters" anyone?), I found the whole thing very satisfying. There have been countless reviews of ROTS, but I haven't seen any that pointed out how long this movie acutally is. I think it has a running time of about 2:20, but I could have sworn it went on even longer. This thing is DENSE. Lucas himself admits that he packed in about 60% of the overall prequel story he wanted to tell into this one film --something that would explain the pacing issues and filler found in the two previous entries in the prequel trilogy.

In spite of the dark tone, it is a cround pleaser, and in my book, ranks in the top three of the series. The FX are basically better than anything seen in any other movie ever (how is that for a superlative?)I find this movie superior to Jedi, and if pressed, I might say it is on par with A New Hope in terms of overall quality. The plot would seem to make sense --to a nerd like me, at least, the sense of fun is back, and more importantly, characters recognizable from the original series (the Emperor, Yoda, and Obi-Wan, in particular) emerge as the strongest performances and come to the forefront in a way they hadn't in the previous outings.

Of the three aforementioned characters, Palpatine, most of all, steals the show, using that same slow, staccatto delivery I remember from Jedi ("Quite OP-ER-A-TION-AL!")once he is revealed as a Sith Lord. As Chancellor-turned-Emperor, Ian McDiarmid is over-the-top, terifying and hilarious all at once. Kenobi and Yoda finally show us what true kick-ass Jedi can do in a series of freewheeling fights and duels with their adversaries. Both even get in a couple of quips and inside jokes that will have Original Trilogy fans chuckling.

Problems? Performances of course. Hayden, although less wooden and much improved, still doesn't quite get to where he should be in terms of performance-- I mean, this is Darth Vader we are talking about. Sam Jackson still looks to be sleepwalking in Episode III, that is, until he <> bites it in a key scene --His promise to "not go out like a punk" has been kept. Portman: Pretty to look at, but still hasn't gotten the hang of acting in Star Wars flicks. Whatever... nobody goes to Star Wars for Oscar-worthy performances. We go because it is fun, and each new Star Wars reminds us of our childhood, and the days when we could marvel at what was on screen and think of the possibility that all of this really happened a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away.

In discussing the movie "Finding Neverland", the film in which Johnny Depp plays J.M. Barrie, the creator of "Peter Pan", Dustin Hoffman spoke about the importance of never growing up: "By all means, be an adult, but never grow up". He was talking about the importance of maintaining our ability to dream, and to use our imagination.

Now that Star Wars is all over, just what is a thirty-year old kid like me gonna do to ensure that he never grows up?