George Lucas’ Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith is a space opera whose politics still feel relevant twenty years after its debut.
Much has been written about the Star Wars prequels over the years; about their apparent lack of quality dialogue, about the (sometimes) stiff acting, and about the different characteristics (good and bad) of their admittedly revolutionary visual effects. But considering the way world politics have been changing during the last few years, I think it’s a good idea to touch upon a subject that is frequently mentioned in social media, and was somewhat ignored when the movies were originally released in cinemas: the politics of the Star Wars prequels, and especially, of the soon-to-be-re-released third instalment, Revenge of the Sith.
The Star Wars prequel trilogy, released almost twenty years after the supposed finale of the saga, tells the story of Anakin Skywalker (Jake Lloyd as a kid, Hayden Christensen as an adult), a slave from a desert world called Tatooine who is rescued by two members of the Jedi Order. They’re a sect of warrior-monks dedicated to the Force, a mystical energy that binds all living things, who protect the galaxy in the name of its government, the Republic. One of said warriors, Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor), ends up training Anakin as his pupil, and is eventually unable to prevent him from joining forces with an evil Sith Lord (the Dark Side counterparts to the Jedi) named Palpatine / Darth Sidious (Ian McDiarmid).
At their core, these three films, Episode I: The Phantom Menace, Episode II: Attack of the Clones and of course, Episode III, Revenge of the Sith, are about the last days of a democratic republic and the rise of an autocratic empire. This was hinted at in the first three instalments, Episode IV: A New Hope (1977), V: The Empire Strikes Back (1980) and VI: Return of the Jedi (1983). But they’re also about the loss of innocence of a kid who only wanted to do some good in the world, and about how he is corrupted by the forces who were supposed to save him. Thus, the films flesh out the backstory that was only briefly mentioned in their predecessors, giving their stories much more context and, in general, making the galaxy feel bigger and more complex.
That doesn’t mean the Original Trilogy is lacking in political commentary, though. Centred on Anakin’s son Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) and daughter Leia Organa (Carrie Fisher), the films are about a Rebellion against the Galactic Empire and a battle between the Light and the Dark Side of the Force. And there are some interesting parallels within that struggle.
According to an interview between Lucas and James Cameron, the Original Trilogy is based on the Vietnam War, with the heroic Rebels playing the part of the Viet Cong, and the Empire representing the appropriately imperialistic United States. Thus, the movies allow the viewers to relate to the little guy; to the rebellion that went against the people in power, who were more connected to nature and spirituality than to technology or weapons. They make American audiences empathise with the representations of their supposed enemies, and root against the evil characters who are based on the leaders of their own country.
The prequels, although aesthetically different to their predecessors, touch upon similar themes. Revenge of the Sith is about the two ends of a political spectrum: autocracy vs democracy; genocide vs compassion; hatred vs love. It is a film filled with parallels to the American political situation back in 2005 (“if you’re not with me, then you’re my enemy”, says Anakin, paraphrasing then-president George W. Bush), but also to current events, especially when it comes to the frightening rise of far-right movements and even governments in many countries of the world. The first two prequels manage to flesh out their stories’ political commentary, to various degrees of success; the third one places it front and centre.
If the entire prequel trilogy tells us a politically charged story, then the third and last instalment should serve as the perfect example of what can be conveyed through fantasy and science fiction regarding real-life events. For example, we have Chancellor Palpatine’s plan to obtain power, which is based on the way Adolf Hitler came to power in Germany in real life.
The way he manipulates other politicians, the way he plays into the people’s desire to feel and be protected, and the way he obtains emergency powers, which he’s supposed to hand back after the aversion of a crisis – something he of course never does; all of this was based on Hitler’s real actions. Particularly, on the Enabling Act of 1933, which allowed the Reich government, led by then-Chancellor Hitler, to issue laws without the consent of Germany’s parliament, the same way Chancellor Palpatine is allowed to issue laws without the consent of the Galactic Senate.
The point of those parallels, then, is to show how evil people sometimes come to power not through sheer force or violent means, but democratically. Much like Hitler, Palpatine became Emperor thanks to the votes of the people, not because he did a coup d’etat or killed a predecessor. This, of course, couldn’t be more relevant nowadays, considering the way Donald Trump has won the American presidency twice thanks to a (supposedly clean) democratic process. Moreover, the way Trump is trying to cut ties or “be tougher” to other sovereign nations, eliminating the rights of minorities he doesn’t consider to be “real” (such as transgender people), and messing with the education of regular folk is all out of the fascist playbook.
Now, as can be seen in Revenge of the Sith, even though he has the support of the peoples of different planets and star systems, Palpatine also resorts to other, less legal means in order to obtain power. He has to manipulate a Trade Federation that has a seat on the Galactic Senate, play puppet master to the Jedi Council, make sure the Republic uses an army of clones he himself ordered years ago through other people, and seduce young Anakin Skywalker to the Dark Side of the Force. He has democracy on his side, but only because he manages to turn the Republic’s entire political apparatus into a nest of corruption and painfully slow bureaucracy.
Then there’s Anakin. The seeds of his fascist viewpoints are planted in the underrated Attack of the Clones, where he argues with Senator and forbidden love interest Padmé Amidala (Natalie Portman) during a picnic that autocracies maybe aren’t such a bad idea after all, as long as the leader is a wise person. This is further explored when he is seduced to the Dark Side by Palpatine in Episode III, making it clear that he isn’t such an innocent boy after all, and that he ends up siding with the Emperor not only because he is promised a very specific kind of power, but also because he agrees with his policies.
After all, Revenge of the Sith makes a point of showing Anakin slaughtering Jedi – including kids! – before turning into a half-man, half-robot creature. His physical transformation at the end of the film strips away all of his remaining humanity, but his psychological and ideological transformation starts earlier, when he decides it’s okay to kill the leader of the Jedi Council – Master Mace Windu, played by Samuel L. Jackson – without due process and destroy all of his new master’s enemies. His imposing suit is a reflection of the kind of person he is inside: the kind of man who has no problem with resorting to fascism and violence in order to obtain the power he wants. Vader is the muscle to Palpatine’s brains, to an extent, but that doesn’t mean he isn’t fully aware of the kind of oppressive government he is helping to manage.
Anakin, then, is a powerful Force user and used to be a gentle and kind boy, but he also turns into a violent cyborg with alt-right viewpoints… at least until he is redeemed by his son decades later. And maybe that’s where most of the saga’s fantasy lies: in that someone as far gone as Anakin / Darth Vader, who was evil incarnate, and agreed with and committed genocide, could be brought back into the light.
It’s a very optimistic and even naive viewpoint, which shows that Lucas ultimately always believed in kindness and the possibility of redemption, especially through the care of genuinely good people. He has consistently talked about how the Light Side of the Force has always represented compassion, which becomes clear when one watches Revenge of the Sith: Padmé believes that there’s still some good in Anakin even after all the murders he has committed, and Obi-Wan feels compassion for him as he burns at the shores of a river of lava, deciding to leave him be instead of delivering a final blow.
Revenge of the Sith, then, manages to be a politically charged film that uses parallels with real-world history and political figures in order to enrich its fiction. Lucas obviously couldn’t predict what would (unfortunately) happen fifteen to twenty years after the release of the film, but he has at least managed to show us that history is cyclical. What happened eighty, fifty or twenty years ago can happen again now, with the same kinds of characters, tactics and even speeches. A movie like Revenge of the Sith should have allowed us to learn from both the past and fiction, but apparently, it wasn’t enough.
So, when you go and watch Episode III at the cinema for its twentieth anniversary, enjoy the (still) amazing visual effects, cheesy (and memeable) dialogue and tragic events. But also keep in mind that it is, indeed, a film that couldn’t feel any more politically relevant nowadays. The prequels were undermined and underestimated when they were first released; we shouldn’t make the same mistake twenty years (and many, many political events) later.
Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith will return to U.S. theaters and cinemas in select international territories for one week only from April 25, 2025. The film will be available in several formats, including, for the first time, 4DX. Read our review of Revenge of the Sith!
