The ‘Badfilm’ and Camp Redemption of ‘Star Wars: Revenge of The Sith’ (2005)

(March 2022)

---

As defined by Susan Sontag, ‘camp’ may be a ‘mixture of the exaggerated, the fantastic, the passionate and the naïve’. It is not political, it is bad taste to be bad taste, it enjoys the ‘element of artifice’ and the ‘spirit of extravagance’, and understands aesthetic choices are done so to be ‘dead serious’ or intentionally campy, in some cases. It is enjoyed, rather than judged. Time is a large factor in what makes something camp, the more detached an audience is from a fantasy, the easier it is to ‘enjoy, rather be frustrated by, the failure’ (Sontag, 1964).

Revenge of The Sith is the conclusionary text in the Star Wars ‘Prequel Trilogy’. At its time of release, 2005, it came in second at the box office and was received the best of all the prequel trilogy films. Its critical reception was fine, and it had mixed reception from fans. The major issues of the trilogies, but specifically Revenge of The Sith, is the overuse of CGI, poorly written dialogue and the seemingly ‘bad’ acting of the leads, mainly Hayden Christensen’s portrayal of Anakin.

Padme dies from ‘sad’, is this not evidence enough of its campness?

30. ‘Time can enhance what may seem... lacking in fantasy’ (Sontag, 1964)

Let’s begin with the prequels as an object overall. The enjoyment of the Star Wars prequels suggests an ironic reading strategy (Sconce, 1995), enjoying it despite its failed qualities or hated existence by die-hard fans of the original trilogy. The prequels are ‘disreputable’ (Sconce, 1995), they have a negative reputation throughout its fanbase and Hollywood. The Star Wars franchise began as an innovative, science-fiction success. The trilogy success throughout the 1970-80s, was capitalised on during the 1990s. Through the 2010s, the Prequel trilogy picked up traction online from audiences who were too young to have experienced it when it premiered and a new love for this forgotten, or better, ignored branch of the franchise, was discovered, and celebrated.

The prequels defined a generation of angsty, mocking and ironic fans who love the films for their awfulness- as suggested by Sconce ‘badness appreciation is the most acquired taste’. (1995)

Revenge of The Sith is arguably camp now due to its resurgence in pop culture. Modern (younger) audiences love the nostalgia of the 90s/2000s and, the need for redemption for actors, such as Hayden Christensen, who became so ridiculed for ‘failed’ projects, their careers were destroyed (Elizabeth Berkley in Showgirls, most of the Twilight cast, Robert Pattinson, and Taylor Lautner respectively).

Fans can now relish in its ‘badness’ and celebrate the text for its place in time, having had almost two decades to detach themselves from the project (Sontag, 1964).

23. Naïve Camp- ‘A seriousness that fails’ (Sontag, 1964)

Revenge of The Sith is so serious, so dramatic in its dialogue and its emotion. The emotion feels artificial due to how overdramatic the delivery and execution of it is. This acting, from Christensen and McGregor, are aesthetic choices. To decide that these Jedi Knights will speak as though from a Shakespearean court, its camp. It’s exaggerated, its playing seriousness too seriously so that it becomes monotonous.

The final battle between Anakin, now Darth Vader, and Obi Wan is known as ‘The Duel on Mustafar’ is incredibly important to the film and the fan culture. It is a grandiose battle that occurs whilst Emperor Palpatine/Darth Sidious also duels Yoda, in the Senate. It is deliciously overacted but with pure and heartfelt intentions. At first the emotion feels forced or fake, but on second watch its raw and ambitious.

Anakin’s dialogue is ridiculous, and his execution perhaps worse, but it’s compelling and has a level of Shakespearean quotability, ironically done so of course.

“Do not underestimate my power”, Anakin says in one tone, with so much gusto its affective for the wrong reasons (it’s comedic!)

The monologues, speeches and declarations are incredibly theatrical, they have an intended gravitas, but the dialogue truly is poorly written. Christensen and McGregor exaggeratively portray the emotions attempted to be portrayed by the script. Both are really trying to convey the end of a brotherlike relationship but it’s so overdone, it’s artificial but after another watch its heart-warming, real, you can tell the actors really put their all into this scene.

55. ‘‘bad taste’ is to find success in passionate failures’ (Sontag, 1964)

Memorable moments from Revenge of The Sith include the genocide at the Jedi Temple, after Anakin’s submittal to Palpatine. Though Lucas arguably may hint at political criticism within his films, Anakin’s killing of the younglings isn’t a critique on the young cannon fodder of WW2 or Vietnam or Iraq, it’s just there.

It could be bad taste for bad taste, suggesting an unintentionally camp moment within the film as it pushes the boundaries of what’s acceptable in a blockbuster.

Like his almost killing of Padme, it’s different from what we normally see from Hollywood protagonist. We are normally not meant to have sympathy for women and children’s murderers, but Anakin is our Fallen Hero, we obviously we have sympathy or some sort of attachment to him, that can’t be denied by wooden acting.

Anakin murders not just the men, but the women and children too because he’s had enough. He’s broken, he’s ready to give in to the dark side, it’s his full commitment to his transformation. It feels unnecessary but perhaps the desperation isn’t in bad taste.

This scene represents the darker tones of this film and perhaps the overall intention of the film’s commitment to tragic seriousness. It may feel like bad taste, but it is a ‘sweet cynicism’ (Sontag, 1964), it can’t be taken seriously because the execution is far too self-absorbed to realise the absurdity of its desperation.

25. ‘Camp is the spirit of extravagance’ (Sontag, 1964)

Ambition may be a defining term for the ‘Spirit of Extravagance’. Revenge of The Sith is not a film which ‘consciously and skilfully ape the ‘badfilm’ style for comic effect’ (MacDowell & McCulloch, 2019), its intentions were somewhat pure or at least not intentionally bad for an effect- ‘they tried to make something good and then filled it with crap special effect’ (MacDowell & McCulloch, 2019).

Star Wars is known as a ‘space opera’, an idea of opera in an artificial world, surrounded by illusions of reality is a bit camp. Opera is ‘high art’ (Sontag, 1964), a traditional form of both art and camp.

A science fiction story, aided by CGI, invites audiences into a faux-world and when executed poorly, like the Prequel Trilogy, can look and feel cheap, rushed, unimportant. CGI is used to guide audiences through worlds that don’t exist, its unnatural. This is not camp, however.

Mixing it in with a seriousness that stresses how real and plausible these worlds could be feels over-compensating, its exaggerating reality, it’s an ambitious fantasy.

It is not, however, pretentious; it enjoys its subject matter and offers enthusiasm and ambition. It is somewhat consistent in its attempt at quality but nonetheless consistently passionate.

The use of CGI prompts fans or cinephiles to credit them as ‘bad’, for narrative reasons and lack of creativity in high art sense, but also, they are trash- not in the paracinematic sense (films risen to the top of the trash heap) (Diffrient, 2013) but in that they are recycled images and ideas and commodities of Hollywood’s superhero/action fetishism.

But in all their badness, they create a new world? They offer ‘outrageous aesthetics’ (Sontag, 1964) that are all over-the-top, flamboyant and terrible.

36. Creative Sensibilities- ‘Respect of styles’

The Revenge of the Sith is so angsty in its narrative, the pleading try to showcase the moral dilemma Anakin Skywalker faces, saving his love, the Mother of his children or accepting the natural order of life and death and accepting the Order of the Jedi.

But his submittal to Darth Sidious, the highly campy, queer-coded, seemingly lustful villain, cannot be taken seriously- though we can tell Christensen really is putting his all in!

Ian McDiarmid’s ‘Palpatine’/’Darth Sidious’ is sensational, he enjoys being a Menace, and relishing in his evilness. His existence within the film, much like Alec McGuinness’s ‘Obi Wan’, is camp. McDiarmid is a ‘Royal Shakespeare Company’ alumni, his take on acting is that ‘the world’s a stage’, or to quote Sontag, ‘the metaphor of life as theatre’ (1964), his way of acting is to overact.

He may be playing the character intentionally campy but it’s very traditionally theatre. His almost orgasmic reactions to his fight scenes, his lingering, sultry and coy delivery of lines and of course, his attempt at being authoritative in telling Anakin to murder Count Dooku by repeating ‘do it’, sharply and so comedically.

To Conclude-

The hatred for the Prequels is unfortunate, but the essence of Camp exists within the return of McGregor and Christensen in ‘Obi-Wan Kenobi’, a series continuing the story of Obi Wan. The actors enjoyed being a part of the franchise, they can poke fun at it but have a serious affection for it.

This franchise may come off camp now, especially the Original trilogy, but it is in ode to a beloved sci-fi story. There is an air of seriousness and superiority that surrounds the franchise, culturally gatekeeping the films from audiences who do not ‘appreciate’ the depths of its narrative and production. Fans who enjoy the film in a mainstream sense are not ‘good enough’ for the ‘cult’ followers of the franchise, they are just a ‘fan economy’. (Huang, et al., 2021) However, those who picked up an appreciation for the Prequels, even if at first ironically, ferociously argue for the good within the bad and push for its deserving acceptance within the Star Wars canon.

As time has gone on it’s become more culturally relevant and increasingly favoured by a variety of old and new fans. There is a certain elitism within ‘Star Wars’ fans. Original Trilogy fans refuse to acknowledge the prequels and sequel. Sequels fans are defensive about the new era trilogy and argue for deeper meaning of the Disney-fied plot.

But… the Prequels fans, they are quoting and re-enacting McGregor and Christensen’s dramatic ‘Duel on Mustafar’, probably more convincingly, too.

Bibliography

· Diffrient, D., 2013. 'Hard to Handle": Camp Criticism, Trash-Film Reception, and the Transgressive Pleasures of Myra Breckinridge. Cinema Journal, 52(2), pp. 46-70.

· Huang, G. et al., 2021. The Disaster Artist (2017): How we appreciate bad films. Journal of Chinese Cinemas, 15(2-3), p. 236–243.

· MacDowell, J. & McCulloch, R., 2019. Introduction: ‘So bad it’s good’: aesthetics, reception, and beyond. Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 33(6), pp. 643-652.

· Sconce, J., 1995. Trashing the academy: taste, excess and an emerging politics of cinematic style. Screen, 36(4), pp. 371-393.

· Sontag, S., 1964. Notes on Camp, New York City: Partisan Review.