Sunday, November 27, 2005

A movie for all ages...

WHEN news came through that a film of C.S. Lewis's The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe was planned, many must have dismissed the idea as eccentric.

In this age of Harry Potter, and the atheist children's author Philip Pullman, surely C.S. Lewis was quaint, old-fashioned and too closely associated with Christianity to work in this climate?

How could a tale of London war-time evacuee children, a magical wardrobe, a terrifying witch and a lion who serves as a metaphor for Christ translate to an epic film that would take on the other major franchises?

But then, another epic from another crusty Oxford University figure of the 1950s -- J.R.R. Tolkien -- hasn't done badly.

And if this amazing film is anything to go by, C.S. Lewis is about to enjoy a similarly spectacular and well-deserved revival.

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe is a wonderful, colossal film that should entertain people of any age, nationality or religion.

It is not merely a "must-see" but a "must-see again and again". As a film critic of many years, I've given it five out of five. If I could give it six out of five, I would.

Not only does it do full justice to Lewis's classic fantasy, it improves on it and gives a more sophisticated sense of humour.

Above all, there's a spectacular sense of scale that turns the children's saga into a worthy successor to The Lord of the Rings.

Even the Christian subtext of Lewis's book is handled with taste and sensitivity.

Though shot in New Zealand by a US-based director, it remains lovingly true to its British background.

With only a few weeks to go until the end of 2005, I was certain Wallace and Gromit: Curse of the Were-Rabbit would be carrying off my plaudits as Film of the Year.

But now I have seen this beautiful epic, I would have to give Narnia the award.

The script sticks amazingly -- religiously -- close to Lewis's novel.

The four Pevensie children are sent from London as Blitz evacuees to the rambling country house of the mysterious, eccentric, but benevolent Prof Kirke (Jim Broadbent).

Peter (William Moseley) is the oldest, but his authority is disputed by his stroppy younger brother Edmund. Peter's somewhat priggish sister Susan regards herself as a more responsible guardian of their small sister Lucy. It is Lucy who, in a game of hide-and-seek, discovers that a huge Jacobean wardrobe on the top floor contains more than merely coats and mothballs.

"It's an awfully big wardrobe," she comments in a masterpiece of English understatement as she stumbles out of its back and into the enchanted landscape of Narnia. The White Witch (Tilda Swinton) has ruled the land for a winter lasting 100 years.

Director Andrew Adamson proves not only a master of effects and animation -- that may be expected of the director of Shrek and Shrek 2 -- but an accomplished director of children.

The quality of the four young leads is exceptional -- light years ahead of the Harry Potter cast. They make an utterly convincing and captivating family and provide marvellous depth to characters that were sketchy in Lewis's original.

Even their comic timing is impeccable, as when Peter resists the responsibility of saving Narnia from the White Witch by objecting, "We're not heroes".

The direction is a delight in both its sweep and detail, as when the White Witch casually torches a passing butterfly and turns it to stone without bothering to watch it plummet to earth.

Tilda Swinton must be singled out for her cold, cruel and commanding performance; Ray Winstone and Dawn French are hugely funny as the voices of Mr and Mrs Beaver (two of many animated triumphs); Liam Neeson is impeccably leonine as the voice of the kind, but powerful Aslan.

Despite the long running time (more than two hours) I would recommend Narnia even for small children. Whatever your age, this is a magical movie and far classier and more imaginative than I dared to hope.

More importantly, expect your heart and the hearts of your children to soar.

-Herald Sun

Tuesday, November 22, 2005

High School Student Sworn in As Mayor

Michael Sessions began talking about running for mayor when he was a sophomore in high school. He realized that dream before he got his diploma.

Sessions, an 18-year-old senior, became the city's (Hillside, Michigan) youngest mayor on Monday when he took the oath of office. The crowd included city residents, photographers and dozens of video cameras — some from news agencies as far away as Russia and Japan.

"The first couple of days are going to be rough, I think, on me. I've just got to get acquainted with the job," Sessions said earlier Monday as he took reporters on a tour of the city, which has a population of 8,200 and is located about 100 miles southwest of Detroit. "My confidence is gaining a lot each day."

Sessions beat Mayor Doug Ingles, 51, by two votes in the Nov. 8 election despite Sessions' status as a write-in candidate.

Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Baseball stiffens rules on steroids

New 3-strikes policy sets suspensions of 50 games, 100 games, potential lifetime ban.

Major League Baseball and its players union agreed to harsher steroid penalties yesterday, more than three months after the Orioles' Rafael Palmeiro became the sport's highest-profile player to be suspended for using performance-enhancing drugs.

Instead of waiting for Congress to define testing procedures, punishments and banned substances, Major League Baseball and the Players Association announced an agreement that is expected to be ratified overwhelmingly by both sides and take effect next season.

"This has not only been a historic day in baseball but a very meaningful one," commissioner Bud Selig said in an evening teleconference........

Under baseball's new proposal, which is nearly identical to one Selig suggested in April, a first-time suspension for failing a drug test would increase from 10 days to 50 games. A second positive test would result in a 100-game suspension, up from 30 days, and a third would warrant a potential lifetime ban instead of the 60-day suspension now in place. After two years, a player banned for life could apply for reinstatement.

Players would now undergo urine testing once during spring training physicals, at least once during the season and again in the offseason. Under the prior agreement, players were tested once between the spring and season's end and again in the offseason. Twelve players, including Palmeiro, failed the tests in 2005. If one of the 12 players tests positive again in 2006, the penalty would be 50 games instead of the 100 now proposed for a second offense because of the major change in policy, said Robert Manfred, executive vice president of Major League Baseball.

The new plan adds amphetamines to the banned list, and mandates that all testing, specimen collection, lab supervision and reporting of positives now be handled by an independent administrator.

During his investigation into performance-enhancing drugs, Selig said he was most alarmed by information that amphetamines - commonly referred to as "greenies" - were prevalent throughout major league clubhouses. A former athletic trainer with the Texas Rangers told Congress that one of his players said eight Rangers starters used amphetamines one season.

If a player tests positive for amphetamines, he would be subjected to mandatory follow-up testing. A second positive urine test would result in a 25-game suspension, a third in an 80-game suspension and a fourth could mean a lifetime ban.

Orioles manager Sam Perlozzo said it was difficult enough to endure Palmeiro's 10-day suspension in August and the scrutiny that went with it. A 50-game penalty would affect a suspended player and his club "tremendously," Perlozzo said.

"It's basically like a two-month injury, and not only that, but you ruin your relationship with your teammates. And to me, that's a more important thing. ... Only a person that doesn't care about his career would get into it now," Perlozzo said. "I would think this should pretty much take care of the problem." -
Sun Sentinel

Read the entire article here.


This is great for baseball. For the past several years, the "penalties" for taking steroids have been laughable. Last year, a player could take steroids, in other words cheat, and have a cheap 10-game suspension. Now MLB is getting serious. These penalties will be heard by baseball players and will scare many of them out of using banned substances. But the best part of these new rules is that testing will be more frequent. I think this will really help baseball at least minimize it's steroids problem. Any thoughts?

Tuesday, November 15, 2005

Judge Alito- pro-life

Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito's own words are offering abortion rights and civil rights supporters new fodder in their campaign to impede his bid for a seat on the nation's highest court.

Documents released Monday show Alito in 1985 telling the Reagan administration he was particularly proud to help argue that "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion," a statement senators want to know more about before voting on his candidacy for the Supreme Court.

"This puts a much stronger onus on Judge Alito to answer questions on this subject," said Sen. Charles Schumer (news, bio, voting record), D-N.Y., who called the 1985 document "the strongest statement we've seen from a nominee on this very controversial subject for a long time."

Added Republican Susan Collins of Maine: "This is an area that should be further explored in his confirmation hearings."

The document, released by the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library on Monday, shows a young Alito applying to become deputy assistant attorney general and saying his previous government work had included helping "to advance legal positions in which I personally believe very strongly."

"I am particularly proud of my contributions in recent cases in which the government argued that racial and ethnic quotas should not be allowed and that the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion," wrote Alito, who was then working for the solicitor general's office.

Alito's supporters say there's nothing surprising in that statement.

He "joins a long list of jurists who have written that Roe was wrongly decided, including Ruth Bader Ginsburg before she was confirmed to the court," said Sen. John Cornyn (news, bio, voting record), R-Texas, a Judiciary Committee member.

"The question is whether he will put his personal views aside as any judge should and base his rulings on what the Constitution says," he added. "His long track record as a federal appeals court judge shows that he has indeed put his personal views on abortion aside, and I have every confidence he will continue to do so."

Read the whole article here.

So know it comes out, that he really is very pro-life. And hopefully he will NOT put aside that "personal" view when he becomes a member of the Supreme Court.

Sunday, November 13, 2005

Goliath's name found in Israeli archaeological dig

An Israeli researcher said he has made a Goliath of a find -- the first archaeological evidence suggesting the biblical story of David slaying the Philistine giant actually took place.

A shard of pottery unearthed in a decade-old dig in southern Israel carried an inscription in early Semitic style spelling "Alwat and "Wlt", likely Philistine renderings of the name Goliath, said Aren Maeir, who directed the excavation.

"This is a groundbreaking find," he said of the rust-coloured ceramic. "Here we have very nice evidence the name Goliath appearing in the Bible in the context of the story of David and Goliath ... is not some later literary creation."

Maeir, head of the archaeology department at Bar-Ilan University near Tel Aviv, told Reuters that his excavators found the shard, possibly part of a bowl, about two metres (6.5 ft) underground at Tell es-Shafi.

The mound where the dig took place is widely believed to be the site of the ancient city of Gath, which the Bible calls Goliath's hometown.

The biblical story of the epic Philistine giant's defeat at the hands of a much smaller David, who went on to become king of Israel, has long been a popular metaphor for the triumph of good over evil against all odds.

The specimen, from about 900 BC, isn't old enough to have belonged to Goliath, himself -- believed to have lived around 1,000 BC, Maeir said.

But he added: "It is the first time in the land of Israel that we have (found) the name Goliath, or a name like Goliath".

"I haven't found Goliath's skeleton with the hole in the centre of his forehead, but it's the first archaeological evidence form a Philistine site which lends strong credibility" to the story, the U.S.-born researcher said.

The Book of Samuel I 17:4-10 spoke of "a champion out of the camp of the Philistines, named Goliath, of Gath", a heavily armed giant who challenged an Israelite soldier to a duel.

David, at the time a shepherd, took up Goliath's challenge and "prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and a stone" (Samuel I 17:50).

Maeir said the shard is also the oldest Philistine inscription ever found in Israel.

"Up until now most of what we know about the Philistines is from the Bible's point of view. ... We get a very, very subjective view. They're the bad people, the barbarians, we don't get anything nice about them," he said.

"When we look at the Philistines from an archaeological point of view we get evidence of a very rich, dynamic, fascinating and advanced culture."

Maier said he spent several months verifying his find with other experts and planned to discuss it at a conference in the United States later this month.


Thursday, November 10, 2005

A Series of Unfortunate Events

A very unfortunate thing happened to me about a year ago, I picked up Lemony Snicket's The Bad Beginning, the first in A Series of Unfortunate Events. Actually, I loved the book and read the next eleven books in the series ( of thirteen). The thirteenth book, the conclusion to this series, will come out sometime next year.

The books are based on the lives of the Baudelaire orphans who were left alone in the world after their parents died in a fire. The children, Violet, Klaus, and Sunny are shipped to their nearest relative, Count Olaf. He turns out to be a greedy ( and evil) guardian who is out to steal the immense fortune that the children will receive when they come of age. He tries various schemes to keep the children and eventually get their money but they finally get away and go to live with another guardian. But unfortunately for them Olaf follows them everywhere, as they go from inept guardian to inept guardian. The number of villains grow as the series moves alone. Things just go from bad to worse. Meanwhile, the orphans are trying to unravel the growing mysteries. Who ( if anyone) burnt down their house ( in which their parents died)? What is the mysterious V.F.D. that Count Olaf along with their parents were a part of? What connection was their between these enemies and their parents? Are either of their parents alive? Why were there so many house fires amongst their closest friends? What was the mysterious shape of darkness they spotted while riding a submarine? Was there another reason that their enemies were chasing them so vehemently? What do their enemies want with a sugar bowl? In other words, what is going on?

The series is very captivating and intriguing. The books are very easy to read but that doesn't mean that teens wouldn't be interested in them. These books are clean, and the author Lemony Snicket is truly talented. Half the enjoyment gotten in reading these books is in the way the author writes the stories.

The books:

1. The Bad Beginning
2. The Reptile Room
3. The Wide Window
4. The Miserable Mill
5. The Austere Academy
6. The Ersatz Elevator
7. The Vile Village
8. The Hostile Hospital
9 The Carnivorous Carnival
10. The Slippery Slope
11. The Grim Grotto
12. The Penultimate Peril
13. ?

I know what you are thinking, "I don't have time for such silly children's books..." But if you read them, I'm sure you'll enjoy them. Anyway, it's a great break from all the Roman and Greek classics we have to read.

Wednesday, November 09, 2005

New Jersey

New Jersey is driving me insane! The state of New Jersey itself I love, I've lived here all my life. But politics-wise we stink! Every election its the same thing: a more corrupt, more vile liberal becomes Senator, Congressman, or Governor. Each year I hope and pray that a Conservative will win any seat, but no, the foolish people of New Jersey keep voting in the worst liberal candidates possible. " Oh, New Jersey needs a change. Let's elect a new and more greedy liberal." Corzine practically bought his victory. He spends outrageous amounts of money in his campaigns and somehow makes the voters forget all the damage he's done to New Jersey. He is making New Jersey worse and worse, raising our taxes, and doing practically everything wrong. BUT KEEPS WINNING!!! It's SO frustrating! How can the voters of New Jersey be SOO stupid!!

It's partially the Republicans of this state's ( if there are any) fault. Why do they keep nominating such terrible "Republican" choices, like Doug Forrester who is pro-choice, supports stem-cell research and has helped raise our taxes almost 200%! How can the few conservatives of the state rally under him, how can there be a huge voter turnout for Forrester???

Anyway the moral of the story is, we're stuck with Corzine for another couple years.

Monday, November 07, 2005

Preaching Bible in church a crime?

Could the Bible, a document held by Christians as the inerrant and infallible word of God, someday be treated as hate speech? As unlikely a scenario as this may seem considering our nation's history, this is within the realm of possibility if two trends are allowed to converge into a perfect storm of political correctness.

America has always placed a premium on the free exchange of ideas. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech." Although most speech is protected by the Constitution, the Supreme Court has identified certain types as less deserving of such protection.

These include incitement to immediate lawless action, fighting words, obscenity, defamation and false advertising. Religious speech has always received full constitutional protection, unless it falls within one of these five categories.

The first significant trend has developed in Europe. Over the past decade, many Western democratic nations such as Germany, Sweden, Ireland, Norway, Denmark, Britain, Canada and Australia have passed laws criminalizing religious speech that is based on the Bible. Specifically, these laws target speech that could be deemed an aggression against the dignity of its citizens, particularly those who engage in homosexual behavior.

This development, in and of itself, would not be cause for grave concern. After all, repression of religious speech is nothing new in countries such as China and Iran. Many people around the globe live under the persistent threat of criminal penalties for espousing and sharing religious views inconsistent with those of that particular nation's official religion. But the recent development in those Western democracies is nevertheless unsettling considering that a minister who preaches directly from the Bible on the issue of homosexuality is likely to be prosecuted.

A second trend, however, makes this foreign hostility to religious speech significant within our borders. Over the past decade, the U.S. Supreme Court has turned with increasing frequency to foreign law when ruling on hot-button issues such as capital punishment, racial discrimination and gay rights.

Taken together, these two trends mean that legal developments overseas must be monitored and their impact on American jurisprudence scrutinized. It is conceivable, in the near future, that when reviewing the conviction of a minister for labeling homosexuality as sinful during a sermon, the Supreme Court could draw upon foreign law to uphold such a sentence.

Even more troubling, just last month, the U.S. House of Representatives approved the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act (H.R. 2662). This bill would extend hate crimes law, which currently covers classifications of race, religion and national origin, to now include sexual orientation. This would pave the way for banning speech directed at a lifestyle that millions of Americans believe is contrary to the Bible. Such legislation would actually obviate the need for the Supreme Court to draw upon foreign law to take this leap.

What does this mean for the American clergy and Christians? The net effect would be that a minister preaching against homosexuality as a sin would do so under the threat of criminal prosecution. Simply pointing out that a certain lifestyle is against the Bible's teachings, without the suggestion of animus or violence against those who practice it (which would certainly go against the teachings of the Bible), could subject the speaker to possible incarceration.

This goes well beyond the issue of homosexuality. One can foresee a time when singling out other types of lifestyles, based on the Bible, would constitute a hate crime. This would no doubt result in stifling religious speech inside houses of worship across America.

Fifty years ago, the Supreme Court recognized that it is not "in the competence of courts under our constitutional scheme to approve, disapprove, classify, regulate or in any manner control sermons delivered at religious meetings. ... To call the words which one minister speaks to his congregation a sermon, immune from regulation, and the words of another minister an address, subject to regulation, is merely an indirect way of preferring one religion over another."

If the Supreme Court holds true to its precedents, America will weather the incoming storm of political correctness and preserve our most cherished rights, that of free speech and free exercise of religion, without the threat of criminal retribution. Should the court continue down this foreign law slope, however, there is no telling the impact upon religious speech in America.

Read the whole article here.


Scary article. This is just more proof of America's downward slide. Now that Alito may become part of the Supreme Court, he will be another conservative voice in the Court. This could keep any such "hate speech" laws from being passed, at least in the near future.

Wednesday, November 02, 2005

Liberals' opinion on the War in Iraq

As many of you have heard, the liberals, over the last couple of days, have been complaining over President Bush's decision to go into Iraq. Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry and others have been whining over how there was never any weapons of mass destruction, how Iraq was never a threat, and how they have been against the war since the beginning. Some democrats are calling for President Bush's impeachment and our immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq. It seems like the democrats are "flip-flopping", for this is what many liberals said BEFORE the war begin:

October 9th, 1999 Letter to President Clinton Signed by Senators Levin, Lieberman, Lautenberg, Dodd, Kerrey, Feinstein, Mikulski, Daschle, Breaux, Johnson, Inouye, Landrieu, Ford and Kerry -- all Democrats :

We urge you, after consulting with Congress and consistent with the US Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions, including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.

John Kerry, January 23rd, 2003:

Without question we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator leading an impressive regime. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he's miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. His consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction.

Bill Clinton, February 17th, 1998:

If Saddam rejects peace, and we have to use force, our purpose is clear: We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program.

Madeleine Albright, February 1st, 1998:

We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and the security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction.

Sandy Berger February 18th, 1998:

He''ll use those weapons of mass destruction again as he has 10 times since 1983.

Nancy Pelosi December 16th, 1998:

Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.

Senator Carl Levin September 19th, 2002:

We begin with a common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations, is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.

Al Gore September 23rd, 2002:

We know that he has stored nuclear supplies, secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.

Senator Hillary Clinton, October 10th of 2002:

In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock. His missile delivery capability, his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists including Al-Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.

Ted Kennedy September 27th, 2002 :

We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.

Madeleine Albright November 10th, 1999:

Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.

Robert Byrd October 3rd, 2002:

The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of '98. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons.

Al Gore, September 23rd, 2002:

Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter, and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.

Senator Bob Graham December 2002:

We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has and has had for a number of years a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.


Can you believe the lying and hypocrisy of the democrats? All this Bush-bashing over the war and look who else supported it, look who else said Sadaam was a threat, and look who else thought that the terrorists in Iraq had weapons of mass destrustion!!! The CIA intellegence reports were what led President Bush to war, he knew that the murderous Saddam Hussein was a threat to this country. The liberals saw the threat too, and agreed that we should go to take out this threat! Even for those who disagreed with the war, it is plain that the democrats in Washington are liars ( among other things :)!

Anger Spreads Across Paris Suburbs After Death of Muslim Boys

Clashes between angry youths and French police spread to at least six Paris suburbs Tuesday night, with police firing tear gas and rubber-coated bullets at street fighters who lobbed Molotov cocktails and burned cars and trash bins.

With unrest expanding through the northern suburbs of high-rise apartments that house some of France's poorest immigrant populations, senior government officials were debating how to curb the violence during Wednesday morning's weekly cabinet meeting.
The clashes began last Thursday after two African Muslim teenagers were electrocuted in the northeastern suburb of Clichy-sous-Bois while trying to evade police. On Sunday, as the street fighting continued, a police tear gas canister landed inside a mosque during Ramadan prayers, further inflaming the impoverished communities.

On Tuesday night, sporadic fighting crossed into the suburbs from Clichy-sous-Bois to Aulnay-sous-Bois where groups of youths threw stones at police in riot gear and torched 15 cars.

France-Info radio reported about 150 fires throughout the area, including 69 vehicles and dozens of garbage bins.

Adel Benna tried to put himself in the shoes of his shy 17-year-old brother, Ziad, and two teenage friends who scaled a wall and leapt into the cables of a power substation last Thursday evening -- willing to face electrocution rather than the French police officers they were trying to evade in this impoverished Paris suburb.

"Young people don't just throw themselves into an electrical current," Benna said Tuesday, his voice trembling in anger. "They looked behind them and saw something that made them so terrified, so desperate, they did it out of absolute fear. I hate the police. They are responsible for my brother's death."

Ziad Benna and his friend Bouna Traore, 15, sons of working-class African Muslim immigrants, were both electrocuted. A third youth survived.

It set off five days of rioting, firebombing and car burning that continued here at least through Tuesday.

Groups of young men have attacked postal service vans and a police station, and set fire to trash bins during the rampages. The French news media reported that about three dozen law enforcement officials and rioters have been injured in the violence.

-Washington Post

Well right now France is in a mess, as you see here France has trouble keeping down Muslim protesters and riots. But more and more Muslims cross the border into France each day ( as you will notice many of these rioters are Muslim immigrants). Sometime in the not to distant future France's government will be taken over by Muslims.

Tuesday, November 01, 2005

Agent Tim's victory speech

Go over and read Agent Tim's victory speech at Agent Tim Online . It really is a great speech as we learn more about Agent Tim's reaction to his overwhelming victory and the brilliant strategy he used. :)

Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith now on DVD!

When "Revenge of the Sith" hit theaters last May, the most successful film franchise in history concluded with a big, box-office bang.

The final installment in the "Star Wars" saga became the top-grossing movie of 2005 and now stands as the seventh highest money-maker of all time, having amassed more than $380 million in domestic ticket sales. With the holidays looming, the "Revenge of the Sith" DVD is destined to make even more millions, no assistance from The Force needed.

Fortunately for "Star Wars" fans, this two-disc set will make a respectable addition to the library of Skywalker-related releases already occupying space on their entertainment center shelves. Like its DVD predecessors, the film looks sharp, sounds superb and comes with an arsenal of extras, including six deleted scenes, several documentaries and a commentary track. All of it is bound to keep Yoda desciples occupied for hours on end.

-Washington Post

Yes, Star Wars Episode III is finally out on DVD!!! The only problem is that the sale price is $29.98. Is it worth thirty of your hard earned dollars to by a Star Wars DVD? Oh yeah! Especially this Star Wars DVD. I saw Episode III in theatres and it was absolutely awesome, the visual effects were stunning and the acting , believe it or not, was pretty good. Star Wars is rated PG-13 this time though because of violence so it isn't for the squeemish. :) It's the final Star Wars movie ever, so go see it. ( as long as you have seen the other ones too, because otherwise you will be totally lost)