In Praise of ‘Revenge of the Sith’: The Saddest of All Star Wars Movies
Vulture.com has published an in-depth article highlighting the often-overlooked gem of the Star Wars prequels, ‘Revenge of the Sith’. According to the publication, this film is a masterpiece that warrants a closer look, especially in light of its 20th-anniversary re-release.
Those who weren’t alive or particularly conscious during the initial release of George Lucas’s Star Wars prequels might not be able to appreciate what it felt like to live through the weird drama of those movies’ contentious reception. As Vulture.com notes, "We need not dwell on it too much — I’ve lost track of which part of the sine wave of backlash and revival The Phantom Menace currently occupies — but suffice it to say that by the time the final film, Episode III: Revenge of the Sith, premiered in May 2005, the battle lines had solidified." The publication adds that some fans believed that Old Man George had totally lost it, while others, many of them kids enchanted by this new trilogy of sci-fi adventures, were excited to return to Lucas’s extravagant universe.
Vulture.com suggests that maybe Lucas had lost it, albeit in a productive way. For all his protestations that these were kids’ flicks, one of the beauties of the prequels was the sense that the director’s primary audience for all these films was himself. The original Star Wars trilogy had been inspired by the stuff of his youth: a mash-up of Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers serials, westerns, WWII movies, and samurai pictures like Akira Kurosawa’s The Hidden Fortress. As the publication states, "The prequels carried that idea forward, with their blending of biblical epics, cloak-and-dagger intrigue, and Ray Harryhausen–style monster mayhem."
Revenge of the Sith retains some of that nostalgic referentiality, but it also feels like Lucas’s attempt to take a step back from his creation and really reckon with it. Vulture.com observes that "The clear-cut, good-versus-evil narrative of the first Star Wars had captured the public’s imagination in the 1970s, and its immediate sequels furthered its reach into the Zeitgeist." By the 1980s, Ronald Reagan was referring to the Soviet Union as “the Evil Empire,” and his missile defense system was being called “Star Wars.” It all made for an easily digestible shorthand.
The publication notes that there was a tonal challenge here as well. The first trilogy had been built on sensation and surprise (“Luke, I am your father” is still one of history’s great reveals), but any excitement in these new movies would be tempered by the overarching narrative’s gathering futility. As Vulture.com puts it, "We knew this story’s supposed twists and revelations. We knew that Senator Palpatine (Ian McDiarmid) was secretly Darth Sidious, the Sith lord who would become the emperor. We knew that Anakin (Hayden Christensen) would be seduced by the Dark Side of the Force; that his beloved Padmé Amidala (Natalie Portman) would die; that the Jedi order would be obliterated and Yoda and Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) exiled to the remote reaches of space."
Vulture.com describes how the film’s second half flowers in its full gruesome glory, as the Jedis’ massacre, as Palpatine issues “Order 66” and unleashes a galaxy-wide slaughter, unfolds like a Godfather-style gangster-movie montage. The publication states that "we find ourselves in the middle of a Godfather-style gangster-movie montage. Then we enter the realm of horror, as Anakin murders a group of Jedi younglings." When he and Obi-Wan have their climactic lightsaber duel in the hellish lava mines of Mustafar, we’re not really looking for acrobatic swordplay and cool Jedi antics; we’re anticipating the moment when Anakin will have his limbs severed and be burned alive.
The film leaves behind the excitement of an action fantasy and embraces the bleak inevitability of grand tragedy. As Vulture.com notes, "Revenge of the Sith is the one entry in the trilogy whose grimness matches the series’ prevailing mood." The publication adds that up until this point, we’ve only had hints at Anakin’s ambition and growing resentment and rage.
Vulture.com highlights how Hayden Christensen, who had endured critical fire for his stiff performance in Attack of the Clones, comes into his own in Revenge of the Sith. The publication states that "maybe his Anakin wasn’t an ideal romantic lead — especially since, again, we knew it wasn’t going to work out — and maybe he didn’t quite have the dash to be the action hero the earlier film required." But watching this anxious young man channel Anakin’s haughty and petulant fury, we finally understand what Lucas saw in him.
The publication also notes that more importantly, we witness how now-chancellor Palpatine taps into these feelings, as he massages Anakin’s grievances against the Jedi and beckons him to “a life greater than that of an ordinary Jedi — a life of significance, of conscience.” As Vulture.com states, "He lures Anakin by telling him the story of Darth Plagueis the Wise, a Sith lord who supposedly found a way to transcend mortality and prevent the death of his loved ones."
In conclusion, Vulture.com’s article presents a compelling case for why Revenge of the Sith is the saddest and most sincere of all the Star Wars epics. The publication’s analysis offers a nuanced understanding of the film’s complexities and its place within the larger Star Wars narrative. As Vulture.com concludes, "You can still behold it in Revenge of the Sith, the saddest and sincerest of all the Star Wars epics, the mad work of a man desperately trying to understand his own creation."
