Joe Cortez
Stunt Coordinator
- Joined
- May 29, 2002
- Messages
- 97
...And Then There Was "Sith"
"[Cinema] is a fantasy..."
28 years ago in a place called Hollywood, George Lucas set out to re-tell the myths of old for a new generation in a way that had never been accomplished before. Now, with the release of the final chapter in his "Star Wars" saga, "Revenge of the Sith," he returns to that galaxy far, far away one last time to complete a story inspired by a melange of Campbell, Kurosawa and Crabbe. It is only fitting then that as the curtain closes on his life's work, his little space opera has taken on a mythic quality all its own, thus becoming the definitive generational epic of contemporary storytelling.
To review a "Star Wars" film at this stage is to critique a phenomenon that has captured the zeitgeist of the populous like few other works of fiction ever have before it. Perhaps nowhere is the word "baggage" more appropriately used than in describing the personal feelings that each individual carries with him or her to a screening of each one of these films. While the first three released films, "A New Hope," "The Empire Strikes Back," and "Return of the Jedi," are held in high regard, the last two entries, "The Phantom Menace" and "Attack of the Clones," were condemned for their "wooden acting" and "klunky dialogue," of all which are rendered moot by the consideration of Lucas' films as works of pure cinema.
More than anyother filmmaker in mainstream cinema, Lucas promotes the idea of pure cinema through his works in way that establishes themes, introduces complex ideas and thrills audiences. While "Revenge of the Sith" resolves the character of Anakin Skywalker and the nature of his descent towards the dark side, it also resolves the visual storytelling nature of the entire "Star Wars" saga, so much so that to complain about dysfunctional discourse and dialectical character development (or lack thereof) is to miss the point, and indeed the focus, of the "Star Wars" films as works of pure cinema in action.
While "Revenge of the Sith" lacks the pure joy and fun of "The Phantom Menace" and "A New Hope," it more than makes up for it in craft and skill, and what craft and skill indeed. Not only is "Revenge of the Sith" Lucas' finest work as a theatrical filmmaker, it may aslo be the most complex and consistently engaging film to be made within the confines of the Hollywood blockbuster, a cinematic classification that Lucas, along with Steven Spielberg, helped to usher in three decades ago. However, much of this depth is lost when the film is placed in the context of traditional film and filmmaking. Lucas carries out his ideas through compositions, juxtapositions and the use of sound (not dialogue). For those that complain about the lack of "Vader" development in the film: notice the number of scenes puntucated by celestial and mechanical allusions to the now infamous sound of Darth Vader's life support system in action, particularly during the fallout of the fierce duel between Chancellor Palpatine and Jedi Master Mace Windu and the birth of the Skywalker offspring.
I was also surprised to see a number of scenes involving Chancellor Palpatine that were composed in such a way that they are balanced evenly, providing visual harmony or peace, if you will. We know, though, that this peace and harmony are false as he is, infact, the evil Sith lord Darth Sidious.
Even the nature of a Sith Lord, Darth Vader in particular, is revealed through purely visual means. In "Menace," Lucas gave us Darth Maul, a menacing figure whose visage resembled that of a demonic heel. "Clones" brought us Count Dooku, a Jedi Master-turned-Sith Lord, thus instilling the notion of a Jedi turning from the path. "Sith" shows us the fiendish droid general, Grievous; a four-armed robotic fury trained in the Jedi arts. Although it is never stated explicitly, a close-up shot of his eyes during a tense stand-off with Obi-Wan Kenobi reveals that he is a living organism trapped within a metal shell, providing further visual development for the technological terror the boy from Tatooine will become.
While all of these techniques provide a great outlet for film or English majors to work out their frustrations with the general movie going public's analyitcal apathy towards the prequels, they are all of little consequence when compared to "Sth's" ability to enthrall an audience with its superior visual stimulus; the film is just a wonder to behold. From the openning space battle to the climactic final duel between Anakin Skywalker and Obi-wan Kenobi, "Sith" is a pure, kinetic journey to a place beyond. Lucas' direction never rests on the action, but is constantly cutting to yet another exciting moment of discovery; a trait which may be a result of his interest and trainning as a documentary filmmaker, and it is this training that lends the film's more engaging effects-driven moments a certain level of grounding in more catch-as-catch-can forms of "street filmmaking." The effects shots don't feel like set-ups created digitally on a computer but moments captured organically by a small crew braving the elements all for the sake of celluloid magic; which is precisely what "Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith," and the entire "Star Wars" saga, is: pure magic.
28 years.
Six Films.
Thanks George.
"[Cinema] is a fantasy..."
28 years ago in a place called Hollywood, George Lucas set out to re-tell the myths of old for a new generation in a way that had never been accomplished before. Now, with the release of the final chapter in his "Star Wars" saga, "Revenge of the Sith," he returns to that galaxy far, far away one last time to complete a story inspired by a melange of Campbell, Kurosawa and Crabbe. It is only fitting then that as the curtain closes on his life's work, his little space opera has taken on a mythic quality all its own, thus becoming the definitive generational epic of contemporary storytelling.
To review a "Star Wars" film at this stage is to critique a phenomenon that has captured the zeitgeist of the populous like few other works of fiction ever have before it. Perhaps nowhere is the word "baggage" more appropriately used than in describing the personal feelings that each individual carries with him or her to a screening of each one of these films. While the first three released films, "A New Hope," "The Empire Strikes Back," and "Return of the Jedi," are held in high regard, the last two entries, "The Phantom Menace" and "Attack of the Clones," were condemned for their "wooden acting" and "klunky dialogue," of all which are rendered moot by the consideration of Lucas' films as works of pure cinema.
More than anyother filmmaker in mainstream cinema, Lucas promotes the idea of pure cinema through his works in way that establishes themes, introduces complex ideas and thrills audiences. While "Revenge of the Sith" resolves the character of Anakin Skywalker and the nature of his descent towards the dark side, it also resolves the visual storytelling nature of the entire "Star Wars" saga, so much so that to complain about dysfunctional discourse and dialectical character development (or lack thereof) is to miss the point, and indeed the focus, of the "Star Wars" films as works of pure cinema in action.
While "Revenge of the Sith" lacks the pure joy and fun of "The Phantom Menace" and "A New Hope," it more than makes up for it in craft and skill, and what craft and skill indeed. Not only is "Revenge of the Sith" Lucas' finest work as a theatrical filmmaker, it may aslo be the most complex and consistently engaging film to be made within the confines of the Hollywood blockbuster, a cinematic classification that Lucas, along with Steven Spielberg, helped to usher in three decades ago. However, much of this depth is lost when the film is placed in the context of traditional film and filmmaking. Lucas carries out his ideas through compositions, juxtapositions and the use of sound (not dialogue). For those that complain about the lack of "Vader" development in the film: notice the number of scenes puntucated by celestial and mechanical allusions to the now infamous sound of Darth Vader's life support system in action, particularly during the fallout of the fierce duel between Chancellor Palpatine and Jedi Master Mace Windu and the birth of the Skywalker offspring.
I was also surprised to see a number of scenes involving Chancellor Palpatine that were composed in such a way that they are balanced evenly, providing visual harmony or peace, if you will. We know, though, that this peace and harmony are false as he is, infact, the evil Sith lord Darth Sidious.
Even the nature of a Sith Lord, Darth Vader in particular, is revealed through purely visual means. In "Menace," Lucas gave us Darth Maul, a menacing figure whose visage resembled that of a demonic heel. "Clones" brought us Count Dooku, a Jedi Master-turned-Sith Lord, thus instilling the notion of a Jedi turning from the path. "Sith" shows us the fiendish droid general, Grievous; a four-armed robotic fury trained in the Jedi arts. Although it is never stated explicitly, a close-up shot of his eyes during a tense stand-off with Obi-Wan Kenobi reveals that he is a living organism trapped within a metal shell, providing further visual development for the technological terror the boy from Tatooine will become.
While all of these techniques provide a great outlet for film or English majors to work out their frustrations with the general movie going public's analyitcal apathy towards the prequels, they are all of little consequence when compared to "Sth's" ability to enthrall an audience with its superior visual stimulus; the film is just a wonder to behold. From the openning space battle to the climactic final duel between Anakin Skywalker and Obi-wan Kenobi, "Sith" is a pure, kinetic journey to a place beyond. Lucas' direction never rests on the action, but is constantly cutting to yet another exciting moment of discovery; a trait which may be a result of his interest and trainning as a documentary filmmaker, and it is this training that lends the film's more engaging effects-driven moments a certain level of grounding in more catch-as-catch-can forms of "street filmmaking." The effects shots don't feel like set-ups created digitally on a computer but moments captured organically by a small crew braving the elements all for the sake of celluloid magic; which is precisely what "Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith," and the entire "Star Wars" saga, is: pure magic.
28 years.
Six Films.
Thanks George.