In a recent round of cultural analysis, the renowned columnist and commentator Matt Walsh revisited “Revenge of the Sith,” a film that originally premiered back in 2005. His review, prompted by the 20th anniversary re-release, has sparked a familiar debate among Star Wars enthusiasts and casual viewers alike. While Walsh’s critique holds notable merit, it leads to some exaggerated conclusions that could benefit from a more balanced perspective.

First and foremost, Walsh calls “Revenge of the Sith” one of the “worst films ever made.” While it’s easy to pile on a movie – especially one from the Star Wars franchise with such a passionate fanbase – one must wonder if it truly deserves a place at the top of the worst film list. Sure, the dialogue is clunky and feels more like a high school drama assignment than an intergalactic space saga, and yet, this film delivers some genuinely powerful moments, particularly during the iconic execution of Order 66 and the tragic fall of Anakin Skywalker. It may be tempting to dismiss it entirely, but even a broken clock is right twice a day.

The dialogue itself, as Walsh rightly points out, commits grave sins of scriptwriting. Anakin’s lines are laughably wooden, making the performances feel forced. Walsh even humorously compares George Lucas’ writing technique to that of an alien trying to mimic human speech based solely on daytime soap operas. This is a fair critique, as the characters in “Revenge of the Sith” often sound like they are reading from a script rather than engaging in authentic conversations. It’s a hurdle for actors like Natalie Portman and Hayden Christensen, who struggle to elevate their lines into anything resembling natural human interaction. Yet, this isn’t a unique issue in the Star Wars universe; it’s a long-standing criticism that follows George Lucas wherever he goes.

One particularly engaging aspect of Walsh’s review is his take on the film’s fight choreography. He humorously notes how Jedi warriors, equipped with superhuman reflexes, can be seen moving at a glacial pace during the action scenes. A notable contradiction arises when exquisitely choreographed battles, such as the climactic duel between Obi-Wan and Anakin, highlight how those same Jedi can leap across flaming lava with ease moments prior. It’s almost as if the filmmakers forgot the rules of physics – or perhaps the Jedi just turn sluggish when the cameras roll. This inconsistency makes one wonder if Lucas was pulling the strings or if the actors were just enjoying an extended vacation in the fiery depths of Mustafar.

Then there’s the storyline itself, which Walsh argues suffers from gaping plot holes. He critiques the inexplicably chosen lava planet of Mustafar for their final showdown, questioning the decision-making of characters who could pick any location in the galaxy yet opt for a volcanic hellscape. This is a head-scratcher indeed, as one can only assume that evil and lava go together like peas in a pod. But this issue isn’t exclusive to “Revenge of the Sith.” Many beloved movies throughout cinematic history fall prey to similar lapses in logic, and the key here is to understand that entertainment often comes at the expense of realism.

In conclusion, while Matt Walsh’s review does emphasize many of the serious shortcomings in “Revenge of the Sith,” labeling it as the worst film ever is a stretch. The movie has its flaws—no one is denying that—but it also contains notable moments that resonate with the overarching Star Wars saga. By balancing the negatives with the positives, fans and critics alike can engage in a more nuanced dialogue about films we love, loathe, and love to loathe. After all, in a galaxy far, far away, even the most flawed installments still hold a piece of magic that keeps audiences glued to their screens and on the edge of their seats. Sometimes, that’s just enough to redeem them.