Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith

I’m not going to bother with not revealing spoilers since I’m probably the only person in the world who has only just now watched Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith. I’d have to agree with most that Revenge of the Sith is one of the better Star Wars movies… although I think Star Wars has grown into a much greater mythology than the quality of the movies themselves would indicate.

This isn’t to say that I didn’t enjoy the movie. I thought it was a good ending to the first 3 eps, a marked improvement over Eps 1 and Ep 2, and the action was brisk. However, I am by nature a rather critical person and I tend to focus on the worse aspects of a movie.

One of those glaring bad aspects is the acting. However, maybe the bad acting isn’t really bad, because it’s almost like an intrinsic part of the Star Wars charm. Star Wars is a blend of camp (bad acting, muppets) and dead-serious subjects (the slide of democracy into dictatorship, the destruction of an entire planet’s population, fighting for freedom, the temptation of evil for the cause of good). Also, Hayden Christensen’s acting improves by magnitudes after he transforms from Anakin Skywalker to Darth Vader. He still delivers his lines in Star Wars’s wooden style, but at least he’s got the crazy eyes.

Brisk action is in general a good thing, but it does create some really abrupt changes. For instance, how does Anakin Skywalker go from “I will have you arrested” to Palatine one moment to “YOU ARE MY MASTER” the next? One moment: tortured hero trying to do the right thing but feeling continually frustrated. The next moment: badass Darth Vader killing everyone without remorse. The most glaring abrupt transition is in Obi-Wan Kenobi’s relationship to Anakin Skywalker. In their climactic duel, one moment, Obi-Wan Kenobi begs Anakin to not engage in a suicidal attack. The next moment, when Anakin lies defeated, Obi-Wan gives a short farewell speech and then just leaves his pupil. Not even an attempt to help his pupil, whom just a minute before, he was telling NOT to attack.

That’s probably the major disappointment in the lightsaber duel, and perhaps a side-effect of the focus of action rather than of character interaction in these tech-savvy times. The main appeal of Star Wars lightsaber duels, in my opinion, has always been in the characters, rather than in the action. Ep 1 was when Obi-Wan Kenobi came into his own. Ep IV had his sacrifice to help Luke come into his own. Ep 5 showed the connection between Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker, and thus showed us Darth Vader as a tragic villain rather than as just a bad guy. Ep 6 had Luke skirting the Dark Side but refusing to give in (in contrast to his father, and hence the happy ending to 6 rather than the dark ending to 3). Ep 3’s sudden ending to the duel takes away from the character charm of the fight. However, it was still a decent fight, and in any case, it had more character than Ep 2’s fight, where there was no underlying tension, just a brawl. Another problem with Ep 2’s duel is that after seeing Count Dooku stand toe to toe with YODA, the legendary jedi master, it’s a little unconvincing to see him get owned so fast in EP 3’s duel.

One of the better aspects of this movie is that what's usually considered "good" (love) is what pushes Anakin to the Dark Side (because only the Sith Lord promises a way for Anakin to save his wife from death). I thought that was a good element of ambiguity, showing that the world isn't just black and white.

Overall, I liked Revenge of the Sith. It’s definitely much darker than the previous movies, and darkness is an automatic plus. Conflict is what builds drama. Yet, Sith isn’t complete darkness, either. It contains enough hope to make Episode IV a smooth follow-up to it.

Avenue Q

The Musical

Describable as a puppet show with dramatic ambitions, Avenue Q opened in 2003 to good reviews, netting a Best Musical Tony award a year later. I have seen this show. Here is my review.

Entering the modest venue, I wasn't sure what role puppets would be playing exactly, but that was quickly revealed when a plainly dressed actor came on stage for the opening number, wearing Princeton (a fresh-out-of-college bachelor) on one hand while controlling the character's arms through attached rods which he held in the other hand. The singing voice of the actor was pleasant, and grabbed the attention of the audience. Likewise the other characters were voiced by competent performers.

So even though the cast consisted primarly of puppets, the human puppeteers would usually stand in view, and enact appropriate expressions, and did not attempt ventriloquism. One got the sense that the controllers were as shadows of the puppet characters, which served to relieve the underlying storyline out from the whimsical background drawn up by the musical's format. (This was deviated from only by a certain actress who voiced two puppets, when both puppets were on stage - the actress hid her mouth when speaking for the puppet she wasn't holding.) But at its core the show is a comedy, and of course sticks to that goal and carries it out well. In addition, some of the puppet dances were particularly well done. Also worth noting, the familiar sesame street-styled educational interludes projected on tv screens added a lot to the performance.

Contentwise, the central theme of the plot was the idea of purpose in life, and this theme was well developed over the course of the show. Also alluded to was the fact that our society is plagued by a near-universal fear of commitment. I would propose that this problem is due to excessive emphasis on individuality, and ultimately on ego. As are a lot of other problems in modern society. Past societies have dealt with it simply by NOT emphasizing the individual to this outrageous extent, but neither was there a need. Whereas modern thinkers seem to favor the theory that a laid-back approach to life leads to underproduction, whatever that means. Hence, a risky but valuable sub-moral that this show could have put forth would have been to stop viewing men as machines. But the message that the show finally conveyed was both clear and positive, and made for a satisfying experience. In fact, it's hard to imagine anyone not being charmed by this musical overall.

The American quality of forced humility that is imposed on protagonist and antagonist alike has never jived with me, but unfortunately overcomes the personalities of each character in this story. Thus the various characters end up seeming slightly too uniform, but this does not impact the telling of the story much. As far as jokes go, though hokey at times, the kind of humor that permeated the show was sufficiently entertaining. The one element that was overused was "potty mouth" humor that, while easily justifiable in light of today's customs of interaction, simply didn't do it for me. There's something about a cute puppet creature using expletives that leaves a void inside me where mirth normally resides. However the audience, whether guilted into it or simply trained to respond to cues from entertainment figures, was very much stirred every time the lecherous version of the cookie monster uttered "bitch". Go figure. (To avoid confusion, my idea of "overused" in this case refers to roughly a half-dozen instances of puppet profanity. Nothing objectionable, just noticeable because people always laugh.)


Some portions of the show were a little too "real" in my opinion. For example, the songs "Everyone's A Little Bit Racist" and "You Can Be as Loud as the Hell You Want (When Making Love)". The latter was amusing enough, and caused a fair uproar among the audience. I couldn't enjoy the humor completely though. I guess the questionable grammar actually threw me, as well as my obsession with quality domestic soundproofing.

The racism - While the song in question was not excessively flip on the subject of racism, and was prompted by a conflict between the lead characters Kate Monster and Princeton over "racism against monsters" (just to show the level of seriousness the writers were shooting for). Nonetheless, the attitude it portrayed seemed defeatist, in the sense that it de-values personal progress in the area of racial tolerance, even while it recites that it is an issue for everyone. The song got plenty of laughs however, and was not unclever in its lyrics. The interracial couple fit well within the storyline, and were likeable. How true-to-life they were trying to be I couldn't decide. It's a parody after all.


The crowd in the theater was of all ages. Staff was about their business, seats were clean and well upholstered. The sound system in the John Golden Theatre was a disappointment, at times sounding akin to a cheap megaphone. It may be sufficient for amplifying speaking parts, but was much too low-end for a musical. Overall, I would say the show is well worth the time and a nice diversion to enjoy with a friend.

Not exactly a mission statement

The name is more grandiose than the "purpose" of this team blog. :-) There is no grand purpose, nor is there a quest for Wisdom like that of Solomon's. Just a bunch of people writing reviews and having some fun. :)