So who has seen the newest/last installment of the Star Wars legacy? What did you think of the movie?

I haven't actually seen it yet because I missed the first two, but my boyfriend saw it and he absolutely loved it. He said it was the best Star Wars movie yet and for sure the best of the new trilogy. (but that's just his opinion)

***definitely some spoilers in this post***


I saw it, and while overall it was a good movie, I was disappointed with the lack of chemistry between Padme and Anakin. The fight scenes were amazing, but I would have liked to see less CGI in some of their acrobatic moves. I would much rather see someone doing the stunts themselves, on wires.

One thing I forgot to mention..

What have they done to Padme? She is a wimp in this movie! In I and II, she was a great female role model, she stood up for herself, and fought right along side the men. Now.. well.. all she does is sit back and weep. Not what I would expect from her.

I think alot of the story goes untold. They had so much to jam into one film in order for it to be the prequel to A New Hope that they glossed over quite a bit. They never really showed us enough to explain as well as they did in the other films.

That being said, I enjoyed it, and think it tied up enough loose ends to pass muster. There was enough story available to make two or three films, had they wanted to.

Padme's pregnant - she's allowed to be weepy!

the chemistry was better in the previous film....so I reckon it was on purpose because he's was turning all evil and such.

I'm seeing it again next week to analyse further!

Seriously what happened to Dooku? I liked the film in pretty much all areas - the acting was a bit better this time around, although the dialogue they're being fed hasn't improved... I agree that Padme and her motives were kind of left out of the loop, although the film is more about Anakin and Obi-Wan. I thought it did a nice job of linking E-II to E-IV as well. IMO probably the third best of the whole, behind A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back. Also one of the better films so far this year, along with Downfall and 3-Iron.

Quote:

---

Hayden Christensen is really not a very good actor

---

He's got to be in the right part - I think Shattered Glass showcases his talents nicely.

I really liked Revenge of the Sith. It was a million times better than Attack of the Clones and a bit better than Phantom Menace.

I agree that the acting wasn't so good. Hayden Christensen isn't a good actor buy he is pretty cute. lol

I agree that Padme's give up and die thing wasn't so good. And didn't Leia say she remembered her mom but Luke didn't. If they both saw here the same amount of time right after birth, how would either of them remember her??

I thought the fight scene was great. I was sad when Anakin got his legs cut off and Obi-Won was really sad for Anakin. I felt bad for Anakin once he started turning bad. I'm like WHY? Why are you doing it...you're good don't turn. Even though I knew he was going to. Oh well...

Over all I thought it was a really good movie but Return of the Jedi and Empire Strikes back were better. A New Hope was better than it as well.

frodobeh

I liked SW 3, but all of the 6 movies fell into the "woulda, coulda, shoulda" category. After the first installment, Lucas should have used more high-dollar professional writers, and had a capable director create the non-CGI scenes that involved extensive interaction between actors. The talented Natalie Portman had little to work with, and Hayden "what's-his-name" can't act at all. Lucas should have taken some cues from Jurassic Park movies. The quiet moments discussing the ethics of cloning dinosaurs were just as good as the dinosaur action.

I'll sum up "SW3" thus: a plethora of CGI action broken up by some really pathetic dialogue! I mean, all Padme can say after finding out about Annakin's turning to the other side is "Annakin, you're breaking my heart!"? And shouldn't Annakin be more torn over choosing which side he'll join? And I think Palpatine is one of the most boring villians ever to come down the pike! Shouldn't Annakin/Vader have offed him, just for dramatic value?

tjoeb};>

This movie was so stupid. It was better than the last two films, but that isn't saying much. I thought the origanal three were so good, I can't fathom why the new trilogy is so terrible.

Probably because Lucas just wanted to make the prequels. He tried to have them maked sense in relation to 4-6. He was more concerned with making them look good than having a good story line and good acting.

Just my opinion....:)

I believe if he had worked more with the actors and focused more on them rather than the SFX he would have had a WAY better movie.

frodobeh

I wasn't saying that anything was wrong with the story...I really liked it. I was just saying the special effects were more prominant. Seemed like he spent more time on SFX than actually planning the dialogue.
That's all I was saying. I thought it was a very good movie I really liked it.

frodobeh

I watched the movie last weekend, and I must say I think it was a worthy end to the saga. True, the dialogue was a little scarce, and I was as well a little disappointed by the lack of chemistry between Padme and Anakin - nut then, again (as someone here already said), the chemistry between Anakin and Obi-Wan (and Palpatine as well) was more important here, and I can't say I detected any lack of it there. Great action scenes, of course, and I liked the allusions to the old movies (although I probably missed a few of them, as I'm not really an expert on Star Wars) - Anakin's hairdo resembling Luke's, the final scene with the two suns, Chewbacca...

What's wrong with Hayden Christensen, though? I really don't see why everyone says he's such a bad actor. He may not be in the same league as, say, Christian Bale or Robert Sean Leonard, but I really liked him (and I mean his acting, not his good looks). He was credible, wasn't he? The way he still looked pained when he was sent out to kill... the mixture of youthful euphoria and ambitious craving for power... I reiterate, I found he was credible. (and besides, I have no clue what this "Shattering Glass" is you guys keep talking about here...)
Good movie, only a little weak on the dialogue. That's my opinion

Shattered Glass is a film from 2003 based on a true story about Stephen Glass who wrote for the New Republic and managed to fake a large majority of his articles, despite "rigorous" procedures of fact-checking. I simply used the film as a counter-example to those who claimed Hayden Christensen can't act.

I liked the old ones better. I got kinda bored in the middle of the movie because I couldn't seem to like the characters. They seemed kind of flat to me.