Tuesday, March 31, 2015

"WUTHERING HEIGHTS" (1939) Photo Gallery


Below are images from "WUTHERING HEIGHTS", William Wyler's 1939 adaptation of Emily Brontë's 1847 novel. The movie starred Merle Oberon, Laurence Olivier, and David Niven: 

"WUTHERING HEIGHTS" (1939) Photo Gallery









icon merle oberon














Tuesday, March 24, 2015



I never understood director Tim Burton’s decision to name his latest film, "ALICE IN WONDERLAND". I mean . . . why did he do it? His new movie was not another adaptation of Lewis Carroll’s 1865 novel, "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland". It was a sequel set thirteen years after the original story. So why use the shortened version of the title from Carroll’s original title? 

Many of you might be wondering why I had just made a big deal about this new movie’s title. For me, it represented an example of what I consider to be the numerous missteps that prevented me from embracing Burton’s new movie. Before I continue, I should confess that I have never been a Tim Burton fan. Never. I can only recall two of his movie that knocked my socks off – 1994’s "ED WOOD" and the 2007 Golden Globe nominee, "SWEENY TODD". I wish I could include"ALICE IN WONDERLAND" in that category, but I cannot. The movie simply failed to impress me.

As I had stated earlier, ”ALICE IN WONDERLAND” was a sequel to Carroll’s original story. Thirteen years after her original adventures in Wonderland, Alice Kingsleigh has become a nineteen year-old young woman on the verge of accepting a wedding proposal from one Hamish Ascot, the son of her late father’s partner, Lord Ascot. Unfortunately, Hamish is a shallow and self-absorbed young man with very little character. Salvation arrived during Hamish’s very public marriage proposal, when Alice spotted a familiar figure – the same White Rabbit who had previously lured her to Wonderland – scampering across Lord Ascot’s estate. 

History repeated itself when Alice fell down into the rabbit hole. However, she soon discovered that Wonderland (orUnderland) had changed during her thirteen years absence. The Red Queen had managed to wreck havoc and assume control over most of Underland, thanks to her new ”champion” - a dragon known as the Jabberwocky. Only the realm of the Red Queen’s sister, the White Queen, has remained beyond the red-haired monarch’s reach. However, that situation threatened to change if the White Queen fails to acquire her own champion. A scroll called “the Oraculum” predicted that Alice will not only be the White Queen’s champion, but she will also defeat the Jabberwocky and end the Red Queen’s reign of terror. But due to her stubborn belief that Underland was and still is nothing but a dream, Alice was reluctant to take up the mantle of the White Queen’s champion. 

Judging by the plot I had just described, ”ALICE OF WONDERLAND” should have been an enjoyable movie for me. Granted, Linda Woolverton’s script seemed like a typical ”slay the dragon” storyline that has been used in numerous fantasies. But it still had enough adventure, intrigue and personal angst for me to find it appealing. So, why did it fail to light my fire? Production designer Robert Stromberg created an interesting mixture of Gothic and animated styles for the film’s visuals in both the England and Wonderland sequences. Anthony Almaraz and his team of costume designers created lush and colorful costumes for the cast. And Dariusz Wolski’s photography brought out the best in the movie’s visual styles. 

”ALICE IN WONDERLAND” could also boast some first-rate performances from the cast. Johnny Depp gave a wonderfully complicated performance as the Mad Hatter. His Mad Hatter was an interesting mixture of an extroverted personality and pathos, punctuated by bouts of borderline insanity. The Red Queen might possibly be one of Helena Bonham-Carter’s best roles. She struck me as the epitome of childishness, selfishness and cruelty. Crispin was slick, menacing and subtly funny as the Red Queen’s personal henchman, the Knave of Hearts. Anne Hathaway’s delicious portrayal of the White Queen reminded me of a Disney princess on crack. I really enjoyed it. Both Tim Piggott-Smith and Geraldine James (who were both in the 1985 miniseries, ”JEWEL IN THE CROWN”) gave solid performances as Alice’s potential in-laws - the kindly Lord Ascot and his shrewish and bullying wife, Lady Ascot. And Alan Rickman gave voice to the Blue Caterpillar in a deliciously sardonic performance. Despite my positive opinion of most of the film’s technical aspects and performances, it still failed to impress me. Why?

First of all, the movie rested upon the shoulders of Australian actress, Mia Wasikowska as the lead character, Alice Kingsleigh. I understand that Ms. Wasikowska has recently received critical acclaim for her portrayal of a suicidal teen in HBO’s ”IN TREATMENT”. It seemed a pity that she failed to be just as impressive as Alice in ”ALICE IN WONDERLAND”. Some people have labeled her performance as ”subtle”. I would call it ”insipid”. Or perhaps just plain boring. I swear I have never come across such a bland and boring performance in my life. No only did Wasikowska managed to make Alice’s battle against the Jabberwocky seem dull, she still came close to putting me to sleep in her character’s moments of triumph in the movie’s finale.

Tim Burton’s direction of ”ALICE IN WONDERLAND” proved to be just as uninspiring to me, as Wasikowska’s performance. Actually, I found myself thinking of the 1992 movie, ”DEATH BECOMES HER”. I was not comparing the visual effects between the two movies. Meryl Streep had uttered a word in the 1992 movie that perfectly described my opinion of Burton’s direction. Flaccid. ”FLA-A-A-A-CI-I-ID!” How did a director with Burton’s reputation managed to take a solid fantasy adventure and make it one of the most boring films in recent Hollywood history is beyond me. His direction lacked any pep. Or spark. I had felt as if I was watching a piece of limp lettuce in action. I even began to wonder if Burton’s dull direction had affected Wasikowska’s performance. Then I remembered that actors like Depp and Bonham-Carter managed to rise above his direction. I might as well dump the blame of Wasikowska’s performance on her shoulders. As for Tim Burton . . . what is there to say? His direction simply disappointed me. 

I might as well say something about the movie’s 3-D effects. They were not only disappointing to me, but also a waste of time and the extra cash I had to pay for the movie tickets. I did not care for the 3-D effects in ”AVATAR”, but it was an example of technical wizardry in compare to the 3-D photography shown in ”ALICE IN WONDERLAND”. Speaking of”AVATAR”, I have one last thing to say in regard to 3-D . . . ’Damn you, James Cameron!”. Seriously. I would like to take the man’s head and bash it through a wall for introducing 3-D to the movie going experience. In the two movies I have seen it in, I found it unimpressive. Worse, I had to pay extra movie because movie theaters are more willing to show the 3-D versions of movies like ”ALICE IN WONDERLAND”, instead of the 2-D versions.

In short, "ALICE IN WONDERLAND" had all of the hallmarks of a solid and entertaining movie experience for me. It was the continuation of a classic fantasy adventure. Talented actors like Johnny Depp, Helena Bonham-Carter, Crispin Glover and Anne Hathaway gave first-rate performances. And I must admit that the movie’s production designs and photography gave it a unique visual style. But all of that could not save a movie hindered by pedestrian 3-D effects, a dull and insipid performance by Mia Wasikowska and an even more insipid direction by Tim Burton. Frankly, I think it is a miracle that this movie managed to become a box-office hit.

Friday, March 20, 2015

"LOST" RETROSPECT: (1.17) ". . . In Translation"

"LOST" RETROSPECT: (1.17) ". . . In Translation"

Before I commence upon this article, I should reveal that the "LOST" Season One episode, (1.17) ". . . In Translation" is one of my all time favorites from the series. I will try to be as biased as possible regarding the episode, but do not expect me to succeed. 

To understand ". . . In Translation", one has to watch the previous episode, (1.06) "The House of the Rising Sun". The flashbacks in that episode revealed the backstory of the marriage between Jin-Soo Kwon and Sun-Hwa Kwon (née Paik) before they had ended up stranded on the island via Oceanic Flight 815. Told from Sun's point of view, the flashbacks revealed that Jin had to take a job working for Mr. Paik, Sun's father, for her hand in marriage. The couple became increasingly estranged, as Jin began spending more time doing his father-in-law's bidding than with his wife. One night, after they are married, Jin returned home covered in someone else's blood. Fearing that her husband might be a dangerous killer, Sun secretly plotted to leave Jin (hence the secret English lessons); but changed her mind while on route to Los Angeles, via Sydney. "The House of the Rising Sun" also revealed the growing animosity between Jin and fellow castaway Michael Dawson, when the former attacked the latter for wearing Sun's father's watch - something that Michael had discovered on the beach.

". . . In Translation" continued the revelation of the Kwon marriage, only from Jin's point-of-view. The flashbacks revealed the circumstances behind Jin asking Sun’s father her hand in marriage, the bargain he made to work for the older man, Jin’s growing awareness of Sun’s frustration with his duties and more importantly the real circumstances surrounding the infamous blood on his hands that Sun had spotted. Sun saw a man who may have committed a brutal murder. What really happened is that Jin prevented a government official – who had refused to re-open one of Mr. Paik’s factories – from being murdered by one of his father-in-law’s henchmen by convincing the man to cooperate with a severe beating. Realizing that he was in danger of losing Sun, Jin decided to take his fisherman father’s advice to use a business trip to leave South Korea and stay in the U.S. for good. Only the crash of Oceanic Flight 815 intervened. Following the events of (1.14) “Special”, Michael Dawson decided to build a raft in order to get his ten year-old son away from the dangers of the island. The hostility between Michael and Jin finally come to a head when someone mysteriously set fire to the raft. Believing that Jin had set the fire, Michael attacked the former. Sun’s desperate cries for Michael to stop revealed her knowledge of English to Jin and the other castaways. The revelation not only led to a rift between the South Korean couple, but also to the beginning of a friendship between Jin and Michael, as they proceeded to rebuild the raft.

Following the events of (1.14) "Special", Michael Dawson decided to build a raft in order to get his ten year-old son away from the dangers of the island. The hostility between Michael and Jin finally come to a head when someone mysteriously set fire to the raft. Believing that Jin had set the fire, Michael attacked the former. Sun’s desperate cries for Michael to stop revealed her knowledge of English to Jin and the other castaways. The revelation not only led to a rift between the South Korean couple, but also to the beginning of a friendship between Jin and Michael, as they proceeded to rebuild the raft.

This episode was aptly named ". . . In Translation", a take on Sofia Coppola's 2003 movie. If anything, it focused upon the main problem that surrounded the Kwon marriage - namely the bad communication that existed between the couple before and after the crash of Oceanic 815. For some time, Sun believed that Jin might be a murderer on her father's behalf, due to the blood she had spotted on his hand. This would explain why she had continuously declared to people like Michael and fellow castaway Kate Austen about Jin's dangerous nature and how "he was capable of anything". And this would explain why she took the trouble to learn English and not tell Jin. However, Jin was also guilty of keeping secrets from Sun. He never told Sun the details behind the blood on his hands, believing that it was not her place to know. More importantly, he lied about his father, Mr. Kwon, telling both Sun and her father that the latter was dead. Which is ironic, considering he left Sun after learning that she spoke English. Even more ironic is the fact that Sun knows that his father is alive . . . but never bothered to reveal this to Jin. Some viewers translated that last shot of Sun revealing her bikini without Jin hovering about, as a sign of her "freedom". Whatever ”="bondage" that Sun found during her marriage, had been created by bad communication between her and Jin. For me, Sun’s removal of her wrap struck me as a hollow and irrelevant gesture. Her"freedom" came at the cost of losing - at least for a while - the very man that she would always love more than anyone.

On a minor level, a lack of communications also continued to exist between Michael and Walt. Most fans tend to blame Michael for this by accusing him of being a poor parent. Although there were moments when Michael became forgetful of Walt. And there were other times when Michael's jealousy of Walt's friendship with castaway John Locke got in the way. However, many of these fans failed to recall that Walt was just as responsible as Michael, due to his residual resentment toward the major changes in his life - losing his mother and gaining a long lost father. Because of this resentment, Walt had a bad habit of disobeying his father when he should have done the opposite. As far as these fans are concerned, Locke would have made a better parent than Michael. Personally, I disagree. Locke was adept at being a friend to Walt. Being a friend did not necessarily mean one is a good parent. The latter has to be an effective disciplinarian, as well. Unfortunately, being a disciplinarian does not jibe with the early 21st century ideal of parenthood. 

A third storyline centered on the triangle that existed between Shannon Rutherford, Sayid Jarrah and Shannon’s stepbrother, Boone Carlyle. But I barely paid attention. In a nutshell, Sayid declared his intentions to court Shannon to Boone. The latter decided to stir up trouble by hinting to Sayid that Shannon likes to use older men for her own benefit. Needless to say, Shannon set things to right and resumed her romance with Sayid after receiving sound advice from Locke.

Screenwriters Javier Grillo-Marxuach and Leonard Dick really did a great job in continuing the revelations behind the Kwon marriage in this very emotional episode. The island incidents balanced very well against Jin's flashbacks regarding his marriage. And this episode really worked, due to the outstanding performances from Daniel Dae Kim and Yunjin Kim. Also Harold Perrineau (Michael Dawson), Bryan Chung (Mr. Paik), and John Shin (Mr. Kwon) gave excellent support. 

Some of my favorite scenes in the episode included Jin's successful attempts to save the life of the South Korean government official, his marriage proposal to Mr. Paik and especially the poignant conversation he has with his father, Mr. Kwon, about his marriage. I also enjoyed the scenes that featured Michael's two attempts to bond with ten year-old Walt - the second being more successful. I also enjoyed Locke's revelation that Walt was responsible for burning the raft. But my favorite scene featured the moment when Jin discovered that Sun spoke English. Director Tucker Gates did an excellent job in conveying Jin's confusion with spinning camera work and muffled babble, as the the South Korean castaway tried to understand the English words that swirled around him. The only dark spot in this episode was Sawyer's attempt to form a lynch mob for Jin, after the raft caught on fire. It was an unpleasant reminder that Mr. Ford's penchant for resorting to violent retribution remained with him until the last season

Some time ago, I had created a LIST of my ten favorite episodes from "LOST"". . . In Translation" ranked at number six on my list. After my recent viewing of the episode, that ranking still stands.

Monday, March 16, 2015

"KNIGHT AND DAY" (2010) Photo Gallery

Below are photos from the 2010 action movie called "KNIGHT AND DAY". Directed by James Mangold, the movie stars Tom Cruise and Cameron Diaz: 

"KNIGHT AND DAY" (2010) Photo Gallery







Friday, March 13, 2015

"THERE WILL BE BLOOD" (2007) Review

"THERE WILL BE BLOOD" (2007) Review

I really do not know what to say about Paul Thomas Anderson’s 2007 movie, "THERE WILL BE BLOOD". This movie, based upon Upton Sinclair’s 1927 novel "Oil!", is about a ruthless oilman in California between 1898 and 1927. I cannot deny that this is basically an excellent film and that Daniel Day-Lewis gave one of the best performances of career. I cannot also deny that "THERE WILL BE BLOOD" was basically well written, produced and directed by Anderson. I enjoyed it very much and consider it to be one of the better films released in 2007 But for some reason, I cannot muster any real passion for it. 

I must admit that there were times that I found the movie fascinating. One has to thank leading Daniel Day-Lewis’ riveting performance maintaining my interest. He portrayed the ruthless Daniel Plainview, a hard-working silver prospector who discovered an oil well, while prospecting for silver. On the very day he discovers his first oil well, one of his employees die in an accident and Plainview adopts the dead man’s infant son. By 1911, he is one of the most successful oil men in California. In order to convince many farmers and other small landowners to drill on their land, he uses his adoptive son, whom he names H.W. (Dillon Freasier), as his"partner" to project his status as a family man and a family businessman. Plainview is approached by a young man named Paul Sunday (Paul Dano) who sells Plainview an oil lead located on his family's property in Little Boston, California. Plainview and H.W. travel to Little Boston, and, pretending to be hunting quail, scout out the Sunday property and discover a good amount of seepage oil. Plainview attempts to buy the property without notifying Paul's father Abel (David Willis) of the oil, but Paul's twin brother, Eli (again Paul Dano), knows of the oil and raises the price to $10,000, the bulk of which he intends to put into the founding of his own Church. Plainview pays him $5000 up front and promises the other $5000 as a donation to the church. In order to ensure the monopoly on the Little Boston oil, Plainview buys the "ranches" of a number of the surrounding neighbors, with the exception of one property, which the owner, a Mr. Bandy (Hans Howes), was hesitant to sell.

As I had earlier stated, the heart and soul of "THERE WILL BE BLOOD" for me was Daniel Day-Lewis. His Daniel Plainview has to be one of the most fascinating characters in movie history. Certainly not in literary history, since Plainview was a character created for the screen by Anderson. I really do not know how to describe him. He seemed to be the epitome of those ruthless tycoons of the late 19th century and early 20th century. He is certainly not typical. Utilizing a John Huston accent, Day-Lewis captured all of the malevolence , cunning and emotional perversity of Plainview, as he draws the audience into the character’s unchecked greed for wealth and power. The ironic thing is that Plainview does not seem to care for the trappings of wealth. One example of this is his habit of sleeping on the floor, even when a comfortable bed is available. And even in that exclusive mansion he has built by the end of the film, he sleeps on the floor inside the mansion’s bowling alley. But the money and power, he definitely needs. And he needs an audience to witness his financial triumphs, judging how he had temporarily abandoned H.W. when the latter first lost his hearing in an accident and how he took under his wings, a man claiming to be a long lost brother named Henry Brands (Kevin J. O’Connor). Day-Lewis won both a Golden Globe and an Academy Award for his performance. Quite frankly, I was not surprised. It would have been a travesty if someone else had won.

It is a shame that the Golden Globes and the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Science could not acknowledge Paul Dano for his performances as the twin brothers – Paul and Eli Sunday, and Dillon Freasier as the young H.W. Plainview. Dano, who had first impressed critics with his supporting role in 2006's "LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE", had studied evangelism for his role as the Sunday twins. The Paul Sunday character made a brief appearance near the beginning of the story, but Dano’s performance as the other twin Eli really impressed me. Dano’s performance revealed the malevolence and greed for wealth and power behind Eli’s meek and religious demeanor – traits that seemed to match Plainview’s. Anderson could not find a child actor to portray Plainview’s adoptive son, H.W., so he had hired the son of a Texas state trooper who had pulled over the movie’s casting agent for speeding. Like Dakota Blue Richards in "THE GOLDEN COMPASS", Dillon Freasier turned out to be find. Especially for Anderson and the movie. With very few words, the young actor managed to convey all of his character’s array of emotions experienced in the film – from his intelligence and warmth, to his suspicions and resentment of Plainview’s relationship with Henry Brands.

Most of "THERE WILL BE BLOOD" seemed to be set during 1911. Sinclair’s novel seemed to be a condemnation of the oil industry itself and a response to the infamous Teapot Dome Scandal during the Warren G. Harding administration. Anderson does condemn the oil industry in California, especially in his revelation of how many small landowners were cheated out of millions of dollars through the manipulations of oil companies and tycoons. But for me, "THERE WILL BE BLOOD" seemed more like a character study than an expose on a major industry. But I must admit that it is a first-class movie and probably one of the better ones of 2007. Anderson paced the movie very well, making one ALMOST forget that this movie is fifteen minutes short of three hours. With actors like Day-Lewis, Dano, Freasier, Ciarán Hinds and Kevin J. O’Connor, Anderson managed to make the most of a first-class cast. Well, almost. Freasier gave a memorable performance as Day-Lewis' "son". Both Dano and O'Connor benefited from some choice scenes provided by Anderson. Unfortunately for Hinds, he seemed wasted in this film. In fact, my only memories are of him hanging around Day-Lewis' character, while the latter acted his ass off. I cannot say the same for Did it deserved its Academy Award nominations? Of course. But as excellent as the movie is . . . as first-rate as Day-Lewis’ performance was, it did not exactly rock my boat. Aside from Hinds' role in the movie, I have a few other problems.

As I had stated earlier, "THERE WILL BE BLOOD" seemed more like a character study, instead of an expose. And because of that, perhaps it could have been at least a half hour shorter. But when I said that Anderson had almost made me forget that this movie was nearly three hours long, I was serious. He ALMOST made me forget about the film’s running time. Until the story shifted to 1927. Frankly, I do not see why Anderson had even bothered. Following the time shift, the movie lost its epic scope. Even Plainview’s personality seemed to have lost some of its steam . . . until his last encounter with Eli Sunday. Speaking of those two, I believe that the make-up artist Kim Ayers may have done both Day-Lewis and Dano a bit of a disservice. Despite the fifteen to sixteen year difference between the two time shifts, I never really got the impression that either Plainview or Sunday had aged at all. There was barely a strand of gray in Day-Lewis’ hair and Dano still looked like a young man in his early twenties, despite the fact that Eli Sunday must have been at least in his mid-to-late thirties during this period. But the one thing I truly disliked about the film was its abrupt ending. One can say that the movie ended with the final confrontation between the two adversaries. But there is this feeling in my gut that Anderson had ended the movie in the middle of the story’s finale. He probably had a reason for ending it in this manner. Whatever reason he had, it has eluded me.

Despite the few quibbles I have with "THERE WILL BE BLOOD", I must admit that it is overall, an excellent film. It may not have rocked my boat, but I did find it fascinating. I also believe that it fully deserved the accolades and nominations that it had received, especially Daniel Day-Lewis' Academy and Golden Globe awards for Best Actor. And if you can deal with a two hour and forty-five minute character study, then I suggest that you watch the movie.

Tuesday, March 10, 2015

Notes and Observations of “STAR WARS: Episode VI – Return of the Jedi”


The following is a list of minor notes and observations that came to me, during my recent viewing of “Episode VI: Return of the Jedi”. I hope that you enjoy them: 

Notes and Observations of “STAR WARS: EPISODE VI - RETURN OF THE JEDI”

*I have always found the launching of shuttles rather different in the STAR WARS saga, in compare to other science-fiction sagas. The Imperial shuttles leave the starships like drops of water from a faucet.

*The commander of the Death Star II seemed to react with horror at the news of the Emperor’s impending arrival. Quite a contrast to his mild nervousness at Vader’s arrival.

*When I first saw ”Return of the Jedi”, I must admit that I found the numerous creatures inside Jabba’s palace a bit overwhelming. Okay, a lot overwhelming.

*I like the way the camera suddenly in on the image of a frozen Han Solo hanging on Jabba’s wall. Very dramatic.

*Why would anyone torture a droid with hot irons?

*Why was Jabba suspicious of Leia’s bounty hunter disguise? Why did he suspect that she would attempt to free Han?

*Why did Luke use the Force to briefly strangle Jabba’s guards? Was it necessary, considering that all they did was block his path?

*I hope that getting captured by Jabba was part of Luke’s plan. If not, he was being rather arrogant in his belief that his initial plan to rescue Han would work. He reminded me of Padme’s display of arrogance in ”Attack of the Clones”, when she believed that she would be able to rescue Obi-Wan from Count Dooku.

*”Vader’s March” seemed intensified in the scene featuring the Emperor Palpatine’s arrival on the Death Star II.

*It is interesting that Yoda had warned Luke about facing Sidious . . . and not Vader.

*Yoda is the only major Jedi character from the Old Republic that died peacefully. Even more odd is that although he has never been a favorite character of mine, I found myself crying over his death.

*”When your father left, he didn’t know your mother was pregnant. Your mother and I knew he would find out eventually, but we wanted to keep you both safe as possible, for as long as possible. So I took you to live with my brother Owen on Tatooine . . . and your mother took Leia to live as the daughter of Senator Organa on Alderaan.”

A lot is wrong with the above statement by Obi-Wan. Anakin knew that Padme was pregnant. He just did not know that she was carrying twins. Owen Lars turned out not to be Obi-Wan’s brothers. Which is a good thing, because Obi-Wan had seemed unnaturally cool over Owen and Beru Lars’ deaths in "A New Hope". He ended up reacting more strongly over the destruction of Alderaan and his encounter with Vader. And Padme did not survive giving birth to Luke and Leia – which also makes sense, considering that I cannot see her giving up one child to the Lars and taking the other one with her to Alderaan.

*I found it disturbing that even as a Force ghost, Obi-Wan tried to encourage Luke to commit patricide.

*I hate to say this, but Harrison Ford did some truly atrocious acting in the scenes that featured Han volunteering for the mission on Endor and saying good-bye to Lando before his departure.

*I wonder if Vader had any idea that Sidious had been planning to replace him with Luke.

*Every time I watch this movie, I have to be reminded that Han, Leia, Chewbacca and the droids were accompanied by Rebel troops.

*The speeder bike chase sequence through the Endor Forest is still a classic with me and the Redwood State and National Forests were never more beautiful.

*Oh God! Ewoks! Just what I need. DAMN YOU, George Lucas!

*It is interesting that the Ewoks did not take the threats of their . . . ”deity”, Threepio, very seriously. Until Luke used the Force.

*Threepio’s tale of the past two movies was rather emotional, but I think it would have been better if Bail Organa had not ordered his memories of the Republic wiped.

*The minute Luke and Leia began to talk about Padme, I started to cry.

*The quarrel between Leia and Han . . . featured some sloppy acting by Carrie Fisher and Harrison Ford. Geez! What is with them in this movie?

*Great moment between Luke and Vader at the Imperial base on Endor. It is odd that Luke had advised Vader to let go of his hate. I never got the feeling that hate was Vader’s problem in this movie. He seemed too lethargic and resigned to his fate.

*EMPEROR: Ah, yes, a Jedi's weapon. Much like your father's. By now you must know your father
can never be turned from the dark side. So will it be with you.

LUKE: You're wrong. Soon I'll be dead...and you with me.

Both Luke and Palpatine seemed to be suffering from massive ego trips.

*Despite my dislike of the Ewoks, I must admit that I found their battle against the Imperial forces on Endor well shot. Many fans believe that Lucas was trying to convey the idea of the futility of technology against nature. I can see their point.

*That old bugaboo about attachments seemed to have reared its ugly head, as Palpatine goaded Luke into attacking first.

*Many fans have claimed that Luke had become more powerful than Vader in this movie. However, I have this odd feeling that Vader’s heart was not really into that last duel. When he discovered that he has a daughter, he used this knowledge to goad Luke into attacking him. Was he trying to turn Luke to the ”Dark Side”? Or trying to goad the latter into killing him? Suicide by duel?

*It is easy to see that Palpatine has become too arrogant and sloppy in his old age. He has developed a big mouth over the past two decades. If he had kept his mouth shut during Vader and Luke’s duel, the latter would have killed his old apprentice, and the Emperor would have acquired a new one.

*Ah yes! The ultimate moment when Anakin saved Luke and killed the Emperor. Still brings tears to my eyes. 

*Great special effects used in the sequence featuring Admiral Needa’s death.

*I think that I like the destruction of the Death Star II a little better than the destruction of the first one in ”A New Hope”.

*After watching Anakin’s death scene, it occurred to me that all of the movie’s best scenes centered around Luke and Anakin.

*Why in the hell did Leia wait so long to tell Han that Luke was her brother? I knew that she was upset to learn that Anakin/Vader was her father, but . . . geez! 

*What goes around, comes around. Anakin received a funeral pyre just like his first Jedi mentor – Qui-Gon Jinn, the very man who had discovered him.

*The celebration music at the end of the movie seemed like a slight improvement over the original version. I can also say the same about Hayden Christiansen’s appearance as the ghost Force Anakin Skywalker.

*Even though this is my least favorite STAR WARS movie, I must commend it for the strong emotional ties it seemed to have with the Prequel Trilogy.