Never Say Never Again (1983) Review

Time: 134 Minutes
Age Rating:  
Cast:
Sean Connery as James Bond
Klaus Maria Brandauer as Maximillian Largo
Max von Sydow as Ernst Stavro Blofeld
Barbara Carrera as Fatima Blush
Kim Basinger as Domino Petachi
Bernie Casey as Felix Leiter
Alec McCowen as “Q” Algy (Algernon)
Edward Fox as “M”
Director: Irvin Kershner

When two Tomahawk cruise missiles get stolen by SPECTRE agent Ernst Blofeld and his fellow terrorists, special agent James Bond is called to retrieve them before it detonates.

After rewatching through all the official James Bond movies, there was another movie I wanted to get around to… that being Never Say Never Again. It was intriguing for many reasons, not only was it a Bond movie I hadn’t seen, not only was an unofficial James Bond movie, but it was also essentially a remake of Thunderball. Making it strange was that it also starred Sean Connery, who not only retired as Bond 12 years prior, but had already starred in Thunderball. This meant that in 1983, both Sean Connery and Roger Moore (for Octopussy) would both be playing James Bond. So I was curious about the movie despite its mixed reception. I wouldn’t call it a good movie but I still found a lot of enjoyment in it.

The plot is very similar to the original Thunderball story, nuclear warheads are stolen from US Navy by SPECTRE and use them to threaten the world with detonation. The story really isn’t the film’s strongest suit, it definitely overstays its welcome. Knowing the general plot of Thunderball beforehand does take away from NSNA’s viewing experience as it mostly goes through similar beats. The story is pretty forgettable, not that engaging and is rather uneven. I am one of the few people who didn’t like Thunderball all that much really, so the fact that Never Say Never Again is just a worse version of that film wasn’t a deal breaker for me. It is definitely more clunky and messy, but it’s not that much worse, and I had more fun with it at the very least. There are also some decent moments and aspects to the movie. The first thing that comes to mind in the movie is how old Sean Connery is and instead of trying to hide it, the movie works with it and makes Bond’s age to be a plot point. It actually acknowledges that 007 is old, which is interesting considering that Moore was three years older, yet Connery was the only actor to play an older Bond. Tonally, Never Say Never Again is a bit weird. It seems to be a merging between camp era Connery (You Only Live Twice and Diamonds Are Forever) with early Moore era (Live and Let Die and The Man with the Golden Gun). The tone is very off kilter at times, and this can contribute to the story losing focus as well as negating some of the more serious moments. However I was largely viewing the movie as a comedy, so this wasn’t too much of a problem for me. A lot of my increased enjoyment is due to the over-the-top silliness and humour (intentional or otherwise). Speaking of the humour, the movie can be quite fun. This really is the closest thing to a full on Bond comedy, and I thought it worked as that. It’s the self-awareness that made it work for me; as I mentioned earlier, it acknowledges Bond’s age. But there’s even some moments which go beyond camp and are fully self aware. Instead of a tense card game between Bond and main villain Largo, they’re competing in a dangerous Spacer Invaders computer game. Then there’s even a fight scene in the first act where Bond throws a glass of his own urine in someone’s face, you won’t see that in another Bond movie. For what it’s worth, I found Never Say Never Again to be more consistently entertaining.

Sean Connery returns to play James Bond, after a 12-year absence. I will say that a lot of the humorous tone of this version probably would’ve been better handled had it been someone like Roger Moore playing him. Nonetheless, he is surprisingly sharp and his charisma is back on display, he slips back into his role with ease. He looks more invested into this compared to his last appearance in Diamonds are Forever (which read like a paycheck performance), and Never Say Never Again is ultimately a better sendoff for him. There is a self-awareness to the whole movie and Connery has that same energy too; he embraces this much older Bond with ease. Overall, I enjoyed seeing him as Bond again one more time. Being already familiar with the characters in the first Thunderball, it was interesting to see the similarities and differences with the versions. I quite liked Bernie Casey as Felix, and Rowan Atkinson is in this too as a surprise comic relief character. Max von Sydow also appears in one scene as the best Ernst Stravo Blofeld we never got to see. The Bond girls aren’t really much to ride home about. Kim Basinger is a very good actress, but her character Domino is bland like she was in the original movie. Barbara Carrera plays Fatima Blush, a very different version of Fiona Volpe from Thunderball, who is in a similar position as the henchwoman for main villain Largo. Fatima is an incredibly over the top character with a very hammy performance. Very sadistic and maniacal, she seems more like Xenia Onatopp from Goldeneye than Fiona Volpe, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Fatima was an inspiration for that character. However, the standout performance of the movie is that of the main villain. Klaus Maria Brandauer plays Maximilian Largo (who was called Emilio Largo in the Thunderball movie). Brandauer is distinctly different from Adolfo Celi from the original Thunderball. He’s not nearly as recognisable with his appearance, but he’s better in just about every way. Instead of a coldly menacing man with an eye patch, this Largo is a young, smiling and unhinged megalomaniac. He goes from being calm and charming in one scene to flying into rage in another. By the end of the movie, he goes into wacky 80s villain territory and is a delight to watch. At the same time, there is this human element to him, with him being insecure and jealous. He’s genuinely interesting to watch, and almost feels more like a Craig era Bond villain more than a Connery era one. One of the highlights of the movie for sure.

Interestingly, Never Say Never Again is directed by Irvin Kershner, his work here isn’t great but is decent enough. It definitely misses certain classic James Bond trademarks like the Gunbarrel sequence in the opening due to copyright, which is understandable. However even beyond that, on a technical level it isn’t on the same level as the previous Bond movies. The visuals really aren’t anything special, it certainly looks subpar compared to pretty much every movie in the official series. It sounds nothing like a Bond movie, from the soundtrack to the sound effects. The title theme song and the score from Michel Legrand just feel really out of place here. However, the action was quite entertaining and solid. It is a balance between the action of the 60s Bond movies and the action from the 80s. The underwater sequences aren’t that good but there are mercifully less of them compared to Thunderball. Not to mention, those scenes have actual speed and dynamism and so are fun to watch instead of feeling sluggish and dull.

I would not call this one of the best James Bond movies by any means, in fact it would probably place in the bottom third. I can understand why a lot of people don’t like it; its very messy from the writing to the direction. I do think a lot of my enjoyment was with the mindset and headspace I had going into it. I treated this as a Bond comedy, and it was enjoyable as that. I certainly wouldn’t recommend watching this before Thunderball, but NSNA was interesting to watch, especially when it came to seeing the differences between the versions. However, even outside of that, there are a lot of aspects I enjoyed. Some of the supporting cast are good, including a superior version of Largo. The action is entertaining, the offbeat tone made it entertaining, and Sean Connery was fun to watch as James Bond, with the film giving him a better sendoff compared to the official one 12 years earlier. Again, Never Say Never Again is not a good movie, but I enjoyed it for what it was.

Advertisement

Octopussy (1983) Review

Time: 131 Minutes
Age Rating:
Cast:
Roger Moore as James Bond
Maud Adams as Octopussy
Louis Jourdan as Kamal Khan
Kristina Wayborn as Magda
Kabir Bedi as Gobinda
Director: John Glen

James Bond (Roger Moore) sets out to foil a nuclear attack on the NATO. However, in order to do so, he must enlist the help of a circus group and its obscure leader, Octopussy.

Roger Moore’s previous Bond movie For Your Eyes Only ended up being quite a surprise, one of the more underrated entries in the franchise. The next Bond movie for me to revisit was Octopussy, another Bond movie I have a very limited memory of. I went in open minded but unfortunately I found the film rather lacking. It’s not only silly and badly done in parts, it’s just dull to sit through.

Octopussy starts off well. Right from the get-go, it’s very clear that after the last Bond being relatively serious, the producers wanted to get back to campy Bond. It’s fun and hilarious, if not very original for a Bond opening. Even the initial premise started out pretty interesting. I was expecting some campiness and I certainly got that. There were parts of it I liked, such as when it gets to the circus and Bond dons Bond dons clown makeup. However there are also some parts where it gets a bit too much, like when Bond does a Tarzan yell as he’s swinging through the jungle. On the whole, it does border into being a bit too stupid and juvenile in parts, and it wasn’t even funny for most of it. When you look at some of the things that happen in this movie, it sounds interesting or at least entertaining. Unfortunately, its surprising dull despite its ridiculous moments. To put it bluntly, I was bored through much of the movie. The script is very muddled and confused. The plot involves Faberge eggs and somehow connects to nuclear weapons and a Russian general, and at a certain point I stopped trying to follow what was happening because the story was incomprehensible. Its surprisingly complicated and hard to follow, and not in a top tier espionage spy thriller way. The story felt half-baked, underdeveloped, formulaic and familiar, even lazy as it falls back on old tropes. It might be strange to say but this movie has just about no narrative momentum. Things definitely happen in the movie, but none of it builds on each other. Individual scenes are fine to watch on their own, but there’s no connection holding them all together and it makes for a very uneven experience. The pacing itself is rather sluggish too, and my patience really only lasted as long as the first act.

Roger Moore plays James Bond once again, and he’s definitely had better performances as the character. He is sleepwalking at times but he’s effortlessly charming and fun to watch. With that said he’s definitely on the older side, and this should’ve been his final Bond movie (or more preferably For Your Eyes Only). Maud Adams plays the role of Octopussy, and all of her memorable aspects of that character begin and end with her name. While it makes for a title that not’s easy to forget, I do wonder why its named after her considering that the character doesn’t have much to do here. I feel like even Adams’s considerably smaller part in earlier Moore film The Man with the Golden Gun left more of an impression than in here. The main antagonists are quite weak, not terrible but forgettable. The Bond villain Kamal Khan is played well by Louis Jourdan but isn’t threatening at all. Kabir Bedi fairs a little better as Khan’s bodyguard.

John Glen returns as director after For Your Eyes Only. The direction in this movie is mostly fine, if not as impressive. However there are definitely some good aspects here. The cinematography is solid, the camera makes great use of the locations (especially in India), and it captures the action very well. The action sequences aren’t as thrilling compared to For Your Eyes Only, but here’s still some solid stunt works and impressive work here. There’s fights, plenty of shootouts, chases, and more, the highlight being a long sequence on trains in the third act. The action isn’t that thrilling and leans more into camp, but there’s good work there.

I was taken off guard by how little I enjoyed Octopussy. I’ve seen Bond movies that are absurdly silly, I’ve seen Bond movies that are boring, but I haven’t seen a Bond movie that’s depressingly both. It’s not without its strong points, Roger Moore has been better in other movies but is charismatic as always, and some of the technical work and action is solid. However the script drags everything down, uneven, unfocused, dull, and tedious to watch. Very likely the worst of Moore’s Bond films and is one of the worst Bond movies in general.

Videodrome (1983) Review

Time:  84 Minutes
Age Rating: contains content that may offend
Cast:
James Woods as Max Renn
Debbie Harry as Nicki Brand
Sonja Smits as Bianca O’Blivion
Peter Dvorsky as Harlan
Leslie Carlson as Barry Convex
Jack Creley as Dr. Brian O’Blivion
Lynne Gorman as Masha
Director: David Cronenberg

As the president of a trashy TV channel, Max Renn (James Woods) is desperate for new programming to attract viewers. When he happens upon “Videodrome,” a TV show dedicated to gratuitous torture and punishment, Max sees a potential hit and broadcasts the show on his channel. However, after his girlfriend (Deborah Harry) auditions for the show and never returns, Max investigates the truth behind Videodrome and discovers that the graphic violence may not be as fake as he thought.

I’ve heard of Videodrome as a horror film directed by David Cronenberg and starring James Woods, it was meant to be something of a cult classic, but I had no idea what to expect from it going in. It turned out to be among the strangest movie watching experiences I’ve had, and I actually ended up loving it quite a lot.

Videodrome was very much ahead of its time, in fact I can see it being inaccessible to some people. It’s really one of those movies that you will need to watch for yourself and determine what it is. This is especially considering that the lead character is a bit of an unreliable narrator and you can’t tell for sure whether what he (and by extension us) is seeing is real or not, which I guess was very much intentional. From what I can tell, Videodrome is a commentary about our desensitization to sex and violence through the media, as well as the power of media on the whole, especially with the rise of television at that time. Now the movie is very much set in a VHS era (in the 80s) but if you substituted television with the internet today, the message would still remain the same, and remain just as relevant if not more so. As a movie, it was a uniquely disturbing and fascinating experience for sure. I will say that I wasn’t certain about what was happening 100% of the time (again probably intentional), but I was going along with whatever was happening. As that, it really is best if you go into this movie and experience the strangeness for yourself without knowing too much beforehand. Cronenberg created such an uneasy and tense atmosphere that only grows the more you watch. The movie is 90 minutes long and for every minute you are invested in what is happening.

James Woods does very well in the lead role of Max Renn. Despite his character being rather morally dubious, he does have a human aspect that evokes enough sympathy in the audience to make him watchable enough. Additionally, other actors in the cast like Debbie Harry and Sonja Smits also do well on their parts.

David Cronenberg really shows off the best of his talents with Videodrome. Much of the uneasy feeling throughout the movie is due to his direction, there’s just a feeling of wrongness throughout, even when there’s not currently something weird or disturbing happening on screen. It’s very surreal, and claustrophobic at times, and helps to build up this uneasy atmosphere. The editing also contributes to this. Cronenberg has done lots of body horror in the past, and he does it again here with Videodrome to some great effect. There are some truly impressive and gruesome body effects which still hold up over 3 decades later. However it’s not just the body effects, there’s some effects that are meant to represent hallucinations and they do very well in making you question whether what’s happening on screen is real or not. Howard Shore’s score also fit perfectly with the movie, giving it even more eerie and uneasy vibe.

Videodrome is a very weird movie for sure but it’s great, it’s directed incredibly, I was invested throughout, and it was such a uneasy and incredible experience. I actually want to get around to rewatching it sometime, because I feel like I’d get even more out of it on repeat viewings. While there’s many more of his movies that I have left to see, at the moment I’d say that this is one of David Cronenberg’s best, if not the best I’ve seen from him so far.

Star Wars Episode 6: Return of the Jedi (1983) Retrospective Review

Time: 131 Minutes
Age Rating: Violence
Cast:
Mark Hamill as Luke Skywalker
Harrison Ford as Han Solo
Carrie Fisher as Princess Leia
Billy Dee Williams as Lando Carlrissian
Anthony Daniels as C-3PO
Kenny Baker as R2-D2
Peter Mayhew as Chewbacca
David Prowse as Darth Vader
James Earl Jones as Darth Vader (Voice)
Ian McDiarmid as The Emperor
Frank Oz as Yoda
Director: Richard Marquand

After a daring mission to rescues Han Solo (Harrison Ford) from Jabba the Hutt, the Rebels to Endor to destroy the second Death Star. Meanwhile, Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) struggles to help Darth Vader (David Prowse) back from the dark side without falling into the Emperor’s trap.

I remember when I was younger finding Return of the Jedi to be my favourite of the original Star Wars trilogy. In rewatching it more recently however, I admit that I’m not that impressed with it anymore, honestly I was rather underwhelmed by the movie on the whole. It’s no doubt got some great parts to it, and its acted and directed relatively well, but most of the movie is generally just ‘fine’.

I’m not really sure how most people view the early section of rescuing Han Solo from Jabba the Hutt, but to me it wasn’t that good, and actually had me a bit worried for the rest of the movie. It keeps you there for quite a while, gradually watch the droids go into Jabba’s place, then watch Leia’s unsuccessful attempt at rescuing Han, then there’s Luke making his attempt. It’s just rather boring and sort of a pain to sit through. One of the absolute worst parts of the movie is the worst scene to ever ‘grace’ a Star Wars movie, which is also one of the worst changes George Lucas made to the original trilogy. I’m talking about what is known as Jedi Rocks. Now originally there was a scene of a band playing a song in Jabba’s Palace, and watching it online, it’s actually alright. The song was subtle, simple, and it lasted for less than a minute. It seems that Lucas was never satisfied with how this was done however, and added way more to this sequence, replacing the song, making it longer, louder, and having these random aliens take up the screentime, and it’s incredibly obnoxious. It’s even worse if you’re like me and you’re just not liking the Jabba Palace section, and it just tests your patience. It’s the single most painful moment to watch in the entire series. Back to that whole first act, it improves a little when Luke appears (and established himself as a much more powerful Jedi now) and ends up fighting a Rancor, but it really starts to pick up to being kind of good once he gets his new green lightsaber and starts fighting Jabba’s people, along with the other main characters. That action scene was satisfying and almost made up for everything that came before… almost. Also, every time I hear about Boba Fett being apparently great, I’m instantly reminded of his part in this movie where he gets accidently knocked down by a partially blind Han Solo and then eaten. Just thought it was worth mentioning as well.

So the first act wasn’t all that good, but I really didn’t care much about the storyline on Endor either. This is where they are going to down the shields on the second Death Star. This is the big conclusion, and I felt like I really should’ve felt the stakes, or some degree of emotion really. However it feels oddly inconsequential and nothing much happens in here. There’s not even a lot of scenes between Han and Leia where they talk about things that aren’t the objective. It’s just about the rebels trying to take the base, and also the Ewoks are in it. Now as for the Ewoks themselves, I don’t hate them but I don’t particularly like them either. Maybe if they were Wookies or some other species that was at least more credible (or one you can take somewhat seriously), I would’ve liked it a lot better. But as it is, it honestly felt like Lucas just went with these just for making toys. Let’s just say that the Ewoks are something that you’d expect from The Phantom Menace more than any other Star Wars movie. Not to mention, I almost feel like they only just pad out the runtime so that this section isn’t 20 minutes long. However it’s not like they’re the reason I didn’t like the storyline, on its own it wasn’t that interesting or engaging either. When they finally get to the battles at the end it picks up, for the Endor bits the Ewoks unfortunately make it hard to take it seriously. The ship battles to take down the Death Star 2 are pretty good however.

It’s really a shame that I don’t love this movie, because the storyline with Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader is pretty much pitch perfection. Luke is a full on Jedi now, and has learned a lot since Empire. The movie really builds up their eventual next meeting that happens in the second half of the movie, with now the knowledge that Luke is his son of course. The movie also adds the part about Leia also being his sister, which I’m all good with, but their kiss in Empire Strikes Back is still going to feel weird forever. It all comes to a head in the throne room scene during the attack on the second Death Star, and there’s a fight between Luke and Vader. I also liked where it actually showed Luke for a brief moment give into the dark side as he even chops off Vader’s hand, but doesn’t follow through with killing him. This moment along with bits in Empire Strikes Back cements Luke as an imperfect and flawed character instead of a perfect Jedi (which The Last Jedi also follows along with), which just made him all the more compelling. Then there’s the moment where The Emperor is electrocuting Luke and then you have that fantastic moment of Vader choosing to save him by throwing Palpatine over the edge, fulfilling Anakin’s prophecy of bringing balance to the force (until suddenly when the Emperor returned again from the dead in a later movie for some reason but whatever). The worst change from George Lucas is possibly when he added in Darth Vader saying “No. NOOOOOOOOOOO” just before he ‘kills’ Palpatine. It was such a powerful moment requiring no lines at all, just the physical acting by Prowse was enough to convey everything. But for some reason ever since that change was made, it was kept for future versions of the movie, and I’ve never liked it, and its much less to do with the silliness of the lines. Despite this plotline having large stakes, it feels very personal and intimate, and that made it even better. Also while we are on the topic of changes, I’m more than fine with Anakin’s force ghost being updated to be that of Hayden Christensen’s appearance.

The cast are all good. Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, Harrison Ford, Billy Dee Williams and others return and provide some good work once again. This movie also introduced Ian McDiarmid as the Emperor and he’s having an absolute blast in this role, perfect casting.

The direction isn’t quite as good as the previous movies, but it has its moments. Some of the CGI still looks a little off, the green screen of the speeder section on Endor particularly looked like it was out of a Bond film from the 60s and 70s. Whenever it came to the action with the Ewoks, it was just rather silly, and not in a good way. The rest of the action however is generally filmed well. The fights with the lightsabre are good, especially the end Darth Vader and Luke battle. John Williams of course scores this movie excellently.

Return of the Jedi has a lot of issues, and I’m not really that much of a fan of it. Outside of the cast who play their roles well, as well as some aspects on the technical side, it’s just sort of whatever. The first act drags and is borderline straight up bad, and even much of the rest of the movie after that wasn’t particularly engaging or entertaining. What ultimately saves this movie is that Luke and Vader storyline, which is genuinely fantastic and I couldn’t think of a better way of ending that. The movie has some merit, but ultimately I can’t say that it’s better than ‘just good’.

 

Superman 3 (1983) Review

Time: 125 Minutes
Age Rating:
Cast:
Christopher Reeve as Clark Kent/Superman
Richard Pryor as Gus Gorman
Jackie Cooper as Perry White
Marc McClure as Jimmy Olsen
Annette O’Toole as Lana Lang
Annie Ross as Vera Webster
Pamela Stephenson as Lorelei Ambrosia
Robert Vaughan as Ross Webster
Margot Kidder as Lois Lane
Director: Richard Lester

Wealthy businessman Ross Webster (Robert Vaughan) discovers the talents of Gus Gorman (Richard Pryor), a computer genius. Ross decides to abuse his talents, in a way to help Webster with his plans for economic control. When Superman (Christopher Reeves) interferes, something had to be done about him. When synthetic Kryptonite fails to kill Superman, it turns him in an evil incarnation of his former self. The Kryptonite pits man against himself, setting up the Clark vs. Superman battle.

The Superman franchise had a trend that the Batman movies would later follow, the first two were great, while the next two were quite flawed. With the departure of Richard Donner who directed the first (and some of the second), Superman 3 ended up being one of the worst Superman movies of all time. It’s unfortunate really, because this movie had some ideas that could’ve potentially worked well (with the exception of Richard Pryor).

Superman 3 did have ideas that could’ve worked, unfortunately a lot of the time the movie doesn’t follow Superman. Superman 3 mostly follows Gus Gorman whose story isn’t interesting, there are times where he feels like the main character, not Superman. This movie also took a turn for the worse when they tried to do comedy. The opening credits scene is filled with slapstick comedy and really sets the mood for the rest of the movie. This movie actually has an interesting idea, evil superman. The idea is fascinating but he doesn’t really do much of evil, he just sits at a bar and drinks. Also his change is very abrupt, maybe if his turning to evil Superman was more gradual and brought out some of Clark’s innermost thoughts, this would’ve worked. When Clark and Superman split into two people and start fighting, it was one of the better scenes of the movie but it didn’t make sense. There are some strange ideas like Clark somehow able to transform himself into Superman in a matter of seconds, the walk and don’t walk traffic signs start fighting after the city is hacked and near the end of the movie Robert Vaughn shoots missiles at Superman in the style of an NES video game. The movie overall is quite boring and felt too long. There are also no threats to keep the suspense and the last fight is very underwhelming.

Despite everything, Christopher Reeve is still great as Superman and in spite of the lacklust build up, it was interesting to see him as Evil Superman. The worst part of the movie however is Richard Pryor, he is in this movie too much. He is just there for comic relief but he isn’t funny, despite him being an excellent stand-up comedian; many of the worst scenes in the movie involve him. The villain (as played by Robert Vaughan), is really a poor man’s Lex Luthor and is very weak. Although there’s not much for her to do, I do think that Annette O’Toole did an okay job in the scenes she was in.

Although not as bad as Superman 4, the effects isn’t really as good as the previous two movies, that’s the case with the flying effects. There is a moment where Superman freezes a lake and flies it up into the air and the effects looks bad. I did however enjoy the fight scene between Clark and Superman.

There was a lot of potential for Superman 3, it had a lot of great ideas for it to result in a great movie. However this ended up as one of the worst movies I’ve seen in a while. Although there are worse superhero movies, Superman 3 is a terrible movie which would later be followed by one of the worst movies ever, Superman 4: The Quest for Peace.

Star Wars Episode 6: Return of the Jedi (1983) Review

Time: 134 Minutes
Age Rating: Violence
Cast:
Mark Hamill as Luke Skywalker
Harrison Ford as Han Solo
Carrie Fisher as Princess Leia
Billy Dee Williams as Lando Carlrissian
Anthony Daniels as C-3PO
Kenny Baker as R2-D2
Peter Mayhew as Chewbacca
David Prowse as Darth Vader
James Earl Jones as Darth Vader (Voice)
Ian McDiarmid as The Emperor
Frank Oz as Yoda
Director: Richard Marquand

The Empire is halfway through construction of a new Death Star; when completed, it will spell certain doom for Luke Skywalker and the Rebels. Meanwhile, Han Solo (Harrison Ford) has been imprisoned and Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) has sent R2-D2 and C-3PO to try and free him; Princess Leia (Carrie Fischer) and Chewbacca go along as well. They regroup with the Rebel fleet, which is massing for an attack against the new satellite battle station at Endor. Lando Calrissian (Billy Dee Williams) is leading the Rebel fighter attack, while Han is put in charge of a group of soldiers to take out the shield generator protecting the Death Star.

The original Star Wars trilogy has some of the best movies ever made and Return of the Jedi is no exception. There are some people who may have been disappointed with this movie, but for me, this was the perfect way to end the Star Wars trilogy. It has everything that the previous two films had: great characters, an epic score, excellent storytelling and well done action scenes. This final chapter brings everything full circle and concludes the trilogy in the best way possible.

The film has everything good from the previous two films and this includes the writing. The tone of the movie isn’t as dark as its predecessor but doesn’t go overboard either in being light hearted (with maybe the exception of the Ewoks which I’ll get to later). The first act was really good, especially with Jabba the Hutt; it is very interesting to see what’s going on. The second act, while still enjoyable, slowed down a bit as we are introduced to some creatures called Ewoks; these creatures have some of the more negative attention from some people. They didn’t personally bother me, they are a little distracting, however they don’t detract from the experience altogether. The final act however picks up; it is great and is so well cut together, intercutting scenes from three different events and locations. There is also a plot point near the end of the movie which was just perfect and is unexpected as most movies wouldn’t usually go that route.

The actors play their characters for a third time and we can see how far they have developed and matured. An example is Mark Hamill’s Luke Skywalker, in the first movie he was a naive farm boy, here he is a wise and powerful Jedi. The same goes with Carrie Fischer’s Leia and Harrison Ford’s Han Solo; their relationship from Empire Strikes Back continues here and it’s done as well as it was in that movie. Darth Vader is intimating as always with James Earl Jones’s well suited voice. A stand out performance is by Ian McDiarmid as the Emperor, like Vader, he has such a big screen presence.

Like in the previous Star Wars movies, the special effects are as good as always. The action scenes, whether it may be in Jabba’s Palace, in space with the fighters or on the forest moon Endor, they are so well shot and are very exciting. John Williams’s score is great as well in adding so many emotions to the film.

Return of the Jedi really ends on a high note. I still think that The Empire Strikes Back is the best Star Wars movie made but in my opinion it’s on par with Star Wars (Episode 4). After hearing about the next three sequels it’s hard to imagine them getting anywhere close to this trilogy, the prequels certainly didn’t. Whatever your thoughts are about the prequels and unless the new trilogy changes everything, at the moment, the original Star Wars trilogy will remain the best Star Wars movies and overall, some of the greatest movies of all time.