Quote:
there was very little motivation evident behind his actions). The biggest missing piece of the pie was story.

I disagree. I thought that there was a pretty strong motivation behind his actions. It could have been acted and directed better, but I think that the movie established the reasons for his conflict quite well, even if it didn't show the change itself very well. Relatedly, I think it also did a really good job of showing the conflict in the policies of the Jedi Council. On the surface, it would seem that the Council's admonition against marriage and avoidance of close personal bonds in general seems to make sense, as it was Anakin's love that drove him to the dark side. To a lesser extent, it's what made Obi-Wan ignore the warning signs that Anakin was getting darker. On the other hand, Mace WIndu's extreme distance and distrust (and the rest of the Council to a lesser extent) towards someone with whom he must have been very familiar is part of what led him to believe Palpatine's manipulations, because they largely weren't lies, but exaggerations of what was really happening. Their distance is also probably what led to their downfall in general, as the people of the Republic were apparently easily led to believe that the Jedi were against them.

There was also good conflict in the admonition against taking life. On the one hand, Anakin killed Count Dooku, who could have prevented the Galactic Civil War if he was not killed and brought in, but Mace could have prevented the same war by killing Palpatine. And those were situations that seemed basically identical on the surface. Then, later, Obi-Wan bludgeons us with "only a Sith thinks in absolutes". Or is it a bludgeon? The Jedi Council had absolute rules, as demonstrated by the fact that the Jedis killing Dooku and Palpatine were conflicted because it went against their teachings. Mace Windu, at least, I think came to realize that that absolute was not as useful as it once seemed, moments before his death.

On the other hand, there are specific reasons that policemen (like the Jedi) are not judge, jury, and executioner. Individuals should not be making those decisions. When Dooku was killed, it was at the insistence of one person. When Palpatine was under the chopping block, it was left to the conscience of one person, but was backed up by what he believed would have been the consensus of all. Does that make it more right? I don't know, and I think that's what made this a pretty good movie with some serious flaws.

I know that people (rightly) complained about the political intrigue of the last movie, and that it didn't fit in with Star Wars in general, and I think that that may be what led to the excusion of virtually all of the political parts of this movie, which is the one place where it was probably appropriate; when we would have gotten to see the beginnings of the Rebellion in the opposing viewpoints and factions of the Senate.

Anyway, I don't think you're giving the movie the credit it deserves, even if it isn't as good as it ought to have been, or even that good on an absolute level.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk