Ghostbusters said:
Screw you guys I thought it was funny. I thought the "creative adjective" would be more amusing than "bad".
Now you guys are probably going to go on and on and on about me being a troll.
Save your breath.
I really want to know though how such awful things like the "I love you dialog" in ROTS got to screen? Or how Anakin's motivation to the dark side was not questioned by anyone? Did anybody object anything to George Lucas in the prequels?
If I dare say so, I found his transition to the dark side probably the most interesting thing about the series - a pity it was executed to sloppily.
The guy was obsessed with saving his beloved - which is completely relatable - and had fantasized about being some awesome uber superman all his life, while being annoyed at everyone else for "holding him back", or mistrusting / disrespecting him.
The dude sure had some issues, and as soon as the appropriate circumstances, he grabbed the chance and willingly convinced himself that the Jedi were trying to take over (his sensation before that they didn't trust him, and took questionable political steps) to justify his actions to himself.
Basically, he accepts everything that looks like it could save his wife, denying rational arguments against its authenticity, and simultaneously using this "necessity" as an excuse to follow his ambitions at the same time, further lying to himself to dismiss everything that speaks against him going down that path.
Circumstances aside, that's how real people behave - applying wilful ignorance, biases and logical fallacies out of laziness, or to justify their actions and further their goals.
Christensen's acting even manages to convey this in the second half of the movie - not only do I much prefer him as an angry ham to the woodenness and awkwardness he had offered priorly, he actually looks and sounds like he's lying to himself and trying to hard to believe his own BS himself. Although he also looks stoned during those scenes.
However, the prequels:
- didn't establish his concern for his mother (plus that they left here there withuot any reason) before getting his dreams all of a sudden, and after the awkward scene where he rants at Padme, again fails to establish any change in character; also didn't establish concern for Padme until he got his dreams.
The dreams were plot devices in both cases and introduced too abruptly - the wooden acting by the protagonist didn't help.
- didn't establish him as a ticking time bomb who could quickly commit a slaughter if "necessary" - or attempted to do so poorly, as killing a bunch of always chaotic evil monsters in vengeance still has a way to go until reaching the "killing children you know personally after getting an order".
-didn't establish his friendship with Palpatine enough, doing nothing more than giving them one scene together per movie, and having him defend Palpatine in one piece of background dialogue while an evil assassin robot hovers towards a window.
Thus, his readiness to choose Palpatine over Sam Jackson, his resentment towards having to spy on his "friend" resulting in a distrust of and disdain towards the Jedi order, and his willingness to accept Palpatine's lies feeding these sentiments and ambitions to rule an Empire, doesn't end up being believable.
-made the transition way too abrupt, and Anakin's jump over the moral horizon way too sudden and easy.
The plot holes (like Anakin cutting off Windu's arm instead of deflecting the lightsaber - although maybe that was his subconscious, too? doubtfully so; order 66 and the whole clone thing, of course) didn't help.
Like, Anakin might've believed that the Jedi made up an excuse to remove the chancellor from office, but the fact that they had been actively looking for the awful, evil Sith Lord all this time, against "you're not sure of their intentions"? Or did he think the Jedi already knew he was, and had planned this step for a long time?
Why did he believe they were also trying to TAKE OVER THE SENATE?
All of this could've been justified in a much more thorough, and thought-out character study. The way it ended up, it looked like the writer just didn't bother, and we're left to impose "interesting psychological analyses" on the cliff notes of the script, complete with obvious, expository dialog and lazy acting, all the while these elements in the actual movie look more like plot holes and bad characterization than anything else.
