It's only fitting that I'm posting my thoughts on yet another review of Revenge of the Sith. I mean, why not? Every one and their dog is talking Star Wars this week anyway. It's premiering at Cannes and they even broadcasted Episode I on television yesterday afternoon.
I was preparing the kids to go to my parent's house when I happened to catch the scene where Annie's mum tells Kai Gwon (Liam Neeson) that she conceived Annie without, you know, having sex. Yep, the immaculate conception.
A flash of memories from seven or eight years ago flooded over me and I burst out laughing. Indeed, I forgot that this was yet another plot surprise I deemed most ridiculous. And the drama of the moment is intensified by a crescendo-ing orchestra. Oh, how I wanted Kai Gwon to look at her with this epiphany-like expression of "Koo-koo koo-koo!" But alas, that explanation seemed to only intrigue him. What a pity, I thought Jedi were smarter than that.
It simply comes down to lazy storyboarding and writing.
If Lucas would have thought more on this, he could have come up with something more viable, maybe could have even foreshadowed the plight of Anakin's future son's teenage life on a desert with no future.
For example: Why couldn't she have been impregnated by her first love? Just think of it: They fell in love, were married in meager surroundings, and were attempting to build a life together out on a small parcel of land in a remote desert region breeding sand crabs when suddenly they were ambushed by hooligans working for the slave trade. He valiantly fought them out in front of the house while she cowered in a makeshift hiding place holding her newborn baby. They killed him and marched them by his broken and bloodied body when they captured them.
Yes, things could have been more fleshed out.
Anyway, I digress. I read Glen Oliver’s fascinating review of Revenge of the Sith last night. Titled "Angst and Inconsistency in a Galaxy Far, Far Away...", Oliver poses an intriguing argument on why these last three installments are so bad, including Sith. Primarily, he believes that there is an erosion of basic fundamental truisms or natural laws that its characters have been made to live by.
I'll leave you with these paragraphs:
Revenge of the Sith is not the "masterpiece" some make it out to be. It is, simply, a far more worthy installment than we've recently been fed. Its currently lofty status is a mirage, induced and perpetuated by the shameless hokum which preceded it. This being said, it should be noted that Sith, perhaps more than any other film in the sextilogy, tries valiantly to be a "real" movie – and often succeeds. But, in doing so, it also forgoes the most fundamental tenets of storytelling.
When creating any universe or mythology, the sky's the limit. People can be any color a creator wants them to be, be from any time or place of the creator's choosing, and do anything a creator wants them to do. The physical laws of our world can be tweaked, suspended, or thrown out completely (e.g., The Matrix). This being said, the overall universe (story) these elements exist still has to make sense unto itself – it still has to be consistent.
Just because we're in "a galaxy far, far away," for example, does not mean that the "laws" of that galaxy...or the intricacies driving stories told in that galaxy...can be ignored. This factor can be applied to any kid of broad-canvassed storytelling: mythology, science fiction, historical romance, etc. For example: on Earth, Superman can fly. But, what if someone came along and told audiences, "Superman can only fly on Tuesdays, even though he flew in last month's comic installment"? It would not make sense, because such rules and limitations had not been previously established or upheld in the Superman mythology. This is the kind arbitrary, sloppy thinking that ultimately dilutes Star Wars: Episode III, and prevents it from becoming all that it could have been.
9:24:55 PM  | |
|
|
