Posted on 05/16/2005 2:07:19 AM PDT by Savage_Nation
CANNES — The last episode of the seminal sci-fi saga "Star Wars" screened at the Cannes film festival Sunday, completing a six-part series that remains a major part of popular culture — and delivering a galactic jab to U.S. President George W Bush.
"Star Wars: Episode III — Revenge of the Sith" was seen ahead of a celebrity-laden evening screening to be attended by its creator and director, George Lucas, and its cast, including Natalie Portman and Hayden Christensen.
Reaction at advance screenings was effusive, with festival-goers, critics and journalists at Cannes applauding at the moment the infamous Darth Vader came into being.
But there were also murmurs at the parallels being drawn between Bush's administration and the birth of the space opera's evil Empire.
Baddies' dialogue about bloodshed and despicable acts being needed to bring "peace and stability" to the movie's universe, mainly through a fabricated war, set the scene.
And then came the zinger, with the protagonist, Anakin Skywalker, saying just before becoming Darth Vader: "You are either with me — or you are my enemy."
To the Cannes audience, often sympathetic to anti-Bush messages in cinema as last year's triumph here of Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" attested, that immediately recalled Bush's 2001 ultimatum, "You're either with us or against us in the fight against terror."
Lucas, speaking to reporters, emphasised that the original "Star Wars" was written at the end of the Vietnam war, when Richard Nixon was U.S. president, but that the issue being explored was still very much alive today.
"The issue was, how does a democracy turn itself into a dictatorship?" he said.
"When I wrote it, Iraq (the U.S.-led war) didn't exist... but the parallels of what we did in Vietnam and Iraq are unbelievable."
He acknowledged an uncomfortable feeling that the United States was in danger of losing its democratic ideals, like in the movie.
"I didn't think it was going to get this close. I hope this doesn't come true in our country."
Although he didn't mention Bush by name, Lucas took what sounded like another dig while explaining the transformation of the once-good Anakin Skywalker to the very bad Darth Vader.
"Most bad people think they're good people," he said.
The political message, though, was for the most part subsumed by the action and heroics the series — set "a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away" — is known for.
And for fans hungry for a last look at "Star Wars" elevated above the disappointing two other films that preceded "Sith," it was satisfying closure.
"Whatever one thought of the previous two installments, this dynamic picture irons out most of the problems, and emerges as the best in the overall series since 'The Empire Strikes Back,'" the Hollywood trade magazine Variety said.
The buzz meant the movie was the hottest ticket at Cannes this year. It also signalled the end of a cinematic era for a generation of filmgoers.
"Revenge of the Sith" is the last of three prequels to the landmark trilogy that burst onto the screens in 1977, 1980 and 1983.
It is in fact the middle episode of the epic story arc, explaining the events that led young Luke Skywalker to battle Darth Vader in order to save Princess Leia, before going on to vanquish the Empire.
Its success could be measured in the claps and smiles in the theatre, which were light years away from the tepid response engendered by the first two prequels, released in 1999 and 2002, widely panned for their boring exposition and wooden dialogue. (Wire reports)
"The head of the evil capitalist Trade Federation is Nute Gunray, a cheap pun on the names of Newt Gringrich and Ronald Reagan."
Then how about Nute Gunray as the next GOP Presidential candidate, in '08?
GWB didn't say this of course, and if you look at the entire quote, in context, I don't think anyone but the looniest leftie would think that there is anything wrong with it:
...And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. (Applause.) From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.
A fresh reading of the speech gives me the chills, and I still agree with the quote, with no qualms.
I thought he was named that because of similarities with a newt.
Whatever you say big guy. If it helps you feel good.
THX1138 was clearly about a communistic (everyone is equal) fascist state. What made you think otherwise?
"It is just one of those re-occuring things. I hope this doesn't come true in our country. Maybe the film will awaken people to the situation of how dangerous it is . . . The parallels between what we did in Vietnam and what we are doing now in Iraq are unbelievable."
--George "MIchael Moore" Lucas
Yes, the parallels are there, and the Left is on the wrong side of history again. Vietnam was a proxy war against the Soviets, and gave them a message that they would be opposed as they tried to back communist revolutions around the world.
Iraq is a belated attempt to roll back the global Islamic Jihaad, whose members want to overthrow their own governments, take over land from Western nations, and topple America.
In the drive to enact a world government, people like Lucas will do what they can to prevent a war response to our enemies. Can't have a one-world-order if the Repubs' are calling the shots.
"Bin Laden gets to bonk Natalie Portman? :-0"
Well, she was wearing arab-like dress in the Phantom Menace.
LOL. How classy.
It's human nature to draw parallels from a story and relate it to our own philosophy. I do it... I don't have to accept everyone else's proposed parallel just because they say it.
If Lucas wants to discuss parallels, he should mention how much of his material was "borrowed" from Frank Herbert's Dune novels. The director who shot Herbert's movie was astonished by some 30+ instances of plagerism.
'At Cannes, the liberal crowd could watch a Hitler biography and shake their heads in acknowledgment that it was a metaphor of G.W. Bush. Nothing odd in this article.'
I agree with that! I will have to see the movie before I can say that Lucas took deliberate shots at Bush. It could be that Lucas directed the movie and then commented on the "unintentional" parallels, according to his perspective on politics. I may watch the movie and find it a stunning indictment on the liberal naysayeers.
Truthfully, as a mother, it makes me feel bad when college kids, and those who think like them, are uninformed of their history, and cannot put anything in context, or use any common sense.
Your posts reflect those exact musings of my daughters college friends, exactly. Could it be that you are reading the same talking points?
"This whole black and white 'with us or against us' mentality is unrealistically simplistic in the modern world. Churches are wanting to excommunicate democrats, Republicans want to do away with the filibuster since it is getting in their way of having things the way that they want it."
Having an up-and-down vote in the Senate is anti-democratic? I think fillibustering in the name of obstruction is a better example of that. What the fillibuster is for is to extend debate, so that all viewpoints in the Senate get heard, if so desired. What the Dems are doing is trying to shape who the President nominates to fill judicial vacancies.
"If you speak against the current administration, you are some sort of Anti American scum that should be branded and sent off to some camp somewhere. The extremism in this country is pretty frightening."
You know, we've all heard this b.s. before, back before the war in Iraq started. No, it is not true that you will be sent do a concentration camp if you disagree with the war. However, you pacifists will not accept nothing short of getting it 100% your way. Launching this war will get you called the worst President ever, evil, worse than Hitler, etc, etc. How is that for extremism and frights? You people have been hounding the President over this, like a pack of attack dogs.
Sometimes a movie is just a movie -- even if people want to read a political message into everything.
"Do not forget that WE were the ones who initially backed Saddam and Iraq. I also remember that we had Iranian Sailors attending US Navy run Data Systems schools back in the 70's. It seems like we are the pot calling the kettle black when it comes to arming our 'enemies.' We have supported both Iran and Iraq in the past. Two of the three in the so called 'Axis of Evil' It would be laughable if it were not so ludicrous."
Let's get this right: it's wrong to have once backed the Shah of Iran, who tried to make his country more Western, and now not longer backing the same country, even thought it has been taken over by a hostile Islamic (and essentially non-democratic) regime?
And on top of that, it was wrong to back Saddam, to try and get him to take out the mullah regime in Iran? The same Iran who held Americans captive and tortured all that time? Did you ever turn on the TV and watch nightline, or did that whole episode in time pass you by?
After socialism fails yet again?
I wholeheartedly agree. Once again, we have the Hollywood elite ranting like a nut about Bush. This is yet another example of Hollywood vs. America.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.