Star Wars Pre-Trilogy (I-III)
(The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones, Revenge of the Sith)

Year: 1999/2002/2005 Rating: PG/PG-13 Overall Evaluation: 7.0 Significance Suppositions Story Style 6.0 / 10 3.0 / 10 9.0 / 10 10.0 / 10 Click HERE for evaluation criteria.

Style

Episodes I and II are rated PG for sci-fi action/violence. Episode III was rated PG-13 (the first Star Wars movie with a higher than PG rating) for more of the same and some intense images. This rating should be taken seriously for kids, but the heightened intensity of the film is very well done (welcome, in fact), and completely appropriate for its subject matter.

Story

This trilogy is a prequel to the original Star Wars trilogy (Episodes IV-VI) and gives the back story to the fall of the Jedi Knight Anakin Skywalker and the subsequent rise of the Sith Lord Darth Vader. It takes place a long time ago in a galaxy far away during the decline of the Galactic Republic. A young boy, Anakin, is discovered by the mystical Jedi Knights to be extremely powerful with the force (the energy that gives Jedi Knights their power). It is determined that he is the one who was prophesied to bring balance to the force and peace to the galaxy. He leaves his mother to be trained by Obi-Wan Kenobi - a Jedi Knight under the Jedi Master Yoda. But trouble is brewing in the Galactic republic - a separatist movement has arisen challenging the crumbling government and its chancellor, Palpatine, who has used his emergency powers to overstay his appointment by many years. A war erupts between the Republic's army of clones and the Separatist's droid army. The Jedi Knights are feverishly running all over the galaxy attempting to restore peace, and in the meantime, up-and-coming Jedi Knight Anakin Skywalker has become very close (too close, many say) to chancellor Palpatine and is being slowly wooed to the dark side of the force.

{SPOILER WARNING}

Chancellor Palpatine eventually is discovered to be the Sith Lord that the Jedi have been hunting since Episode I. The Jedi come after him and he is almost killed when Anakin, believing Palpatine's dark ways to be the only way to save his pregnant wife from death, steps in and saves him. This leads to his wholesale giving over to Palpatine and the dark side of the force. Palpatine then deactivates the droid armies (which he secretly controlled) and turns the clone army (which he also secretly controlled) against the Jedi Knights. A slaughter of the Jedi ensues, leaving only Yoda and Obi-Wan Kenobi alive. Anakin's wife Padme pleads with Anakin to return to the light side and in his rage he nearly kills her. Obi-Wan tracks Anakin down when he discovers that he has converted. They end up in a titanic battle on the volcanic planetoid Mustafa which ends with Anakin (now Darth Vader) legless, armless, and being slowly burned alive. He is rescued by Palpatine (now the Emperor, who had just returned from a no-win battle with Jedi Master Yoda). Palpatine then wires Anakin into the infamous life support suit and his transformation into Darth Vader is complete. The Emperor informs Vader that his attack on Padme has killed her (after she secretly gave birth to twins Luke and Leia), and this causes him to crack. Yoda exiles himself to a life of hiding, and Obi-Wan and Senator Organa agree to hide Padme's children from Vader and watch over them until the time comes to rise up against the new empire. Obi-Wan takes baby Luke back to his "uncle and aunt's" home on Anakin's home planet of Tatooine, and Organa takes baby Leia to live with his wife on Alderaan). The last we see of Vader is him standing on the deck of a star destroyer with the Emperor observing the construction of a terrible new battle station . . .

Suppositions

NOTE: There are some brief example dialogues and commentary on certain events (primarily from Episode III) below - they should be vague enough to not spoil the movie, but for the purists (of which I am counted) who do not wish to know ANYTHING about the film before seeing it I give this as fair warning!

As with Episodes IV-VI writer George Lucas has attempted to combine a Western style story (Good vs. Evil) with an Eastern worldview (Dispassion and Separation). This comes out in Episode V during Yoda's training of Luke Skywalker, and in Episode VI while Luke battles Darth Vader, but it rears its ugly head fiercely here. For example, in Episode II we are given hints that Anakin's fear of losing his mother and his rage at her death are leading him close to the edge of the dark side (as if these feelings were not entirely appropriate). The Jedi response is to basically stop feeling. In Episode III, Anakin is warned by Yoda that attachment to anything (even loved ones) is a path to the dark side because "fear of loss is the same as greed." When Anakin and Obi-Wan are in their final confrontation, Anakin (quoting from Matthew 12:30???) says, "If you're not with me, you're my enemy." Obi-Wan's reply is typical of the contradictory thought life of an eastern mystic: "Only a Sith Lord deals in absolutes." Really? Is that absolutely true? Is it absolutely only the Sith who deal in absolutes? This confusion will be lost on most audience members who have not been trained to notice self-contradictions (and who have, indeed, become accustomed to them) in our postmodern culture.

There is one scene that manages to convey reality a bit better. It is demonstrated negatively by the evil Palpatine, but truth is truth whether it is stated positively or not. Note the relativistic statements by Palpatine and the way he uses the basically selfish nature of all people against Anakin's ideology:

Here we see Anakin attempting to answer Palpatine's arguments, which he somehow knows are wrong, but he fails - for he is ill-equipped by the incoherent teachings of his Jedi mentors. Seeing the truth in Palpatine's assessment of Jedi motivation, Anakin's idealism begins to crumble. It is an odd mixture of truth and falsehood - which of course is most dangerous kind. This is a case study of the world today. People are taught that all morality is personal - that "goodness" is only a point of view - but that's OK because we are all basically good. Then we are expected to make good moral judgments (even though "good" is just a perspective), and we are shocked when people fail to do so. Hmmm, maybe there is a connection?

The Jedi's eastern mystical worldview is especially annoying in a movie with so much potential for communicating truth. The empire is, for the first time really, shown in its fully evil blossom. Yet the audience is told, through the Jedi, that hatred of this evil will make us like them. This philosophy goes against the grain of what we know deep down to be true. Anger and hatred are not wrong in and of themselves, any more than love and happiness are intrinsically right. It is the object of our anger, hate, love, or happiness that determines whether or not those actions are right or wrong. Hatred of evil is good, love of evil is bad.

Significance

While spoiled greatly by the above considerations (I allowed a higher score here since the message problems result from the contradiction between the suppositions and the significance), the overriding message of the film is good: One cannot use evil means for good ends without becoming evil himself. Good intentions do not exempt, nor protect, one from the results of evil actions.*

Anakin's fall is precipitated by his love for his wife and his fear of losing her. It is the Jedi answer to this fear that is problematic. Anakin is basically faced with two worldview choices: (1) Stop caring about your wife (Eastern Mysticism), or (2) use evil to save her (Relativism). This dilemma is not caused by reality (which offers a true worldview - love your wife AND fight evil, despite what may come of it), but by the empty worldviews the film offers as solutions. That feelings are not to rule over us, and that we should not sacrifice truth and right action for our passions (no matter how right they feel), is true. But to equate that truth with becoming passionless (even about good), and moderate (even concerning evil), is a dangerous, false view.

*This is not to be confused with a hierarchical ethical system which sees a legitimate choice between higher and lower goods in the case of conflicting moral standards.