The saga is complete. What George Lucas began in 1977 as a little movie that took the box office by storm, he has completed in 2005 with the most heralded motion picture of the year. With the arrival ofRevenge of the Sith, Lucas places the missing piece of the six-film arc that tells of the rise, fall, and redemption of Darth Vader. It's a rousing and tragic sendoff to a beloved franchise, and the best installment in the Star Wars series since 1980's The Empire Strikes Back. If this is to be the last big-screen installment of the space opera, Revenge of the Sith ushers things out on a high note. Those who have disparaged the previous two prequels (1999's The Phantom Menace and 2002's Attack of the Clones) will find few things to complain about this time around. Lucas has delivered the film that Star Warsfans have been yearning for.Revenge of the Sith exhibits its writer/director's strengths and weaknesses for all to see. Lucas, who can at best be described as a journeyman writer of dialogue, delivers plenty of clunky lines. And the romance between Padme (Natalie Portman) and Anakin (Hayden Christensen) is as forced here as it was in the previous installment, the sincere efforts of the actors notwithstanding. Nevertheless, although weak in specific areas of screenplay-writing, Lucas is a masterful storyteller. That aspect of his creativity is in evidence here as he spins a tale as compelling as any Greek or Shakespearean tragedy: a man who attains power only after sacrificing everything dear to him, including his soul. There is bitter irony in Anakin's situation: by embracing the dark side of the Force, he loses the very thing he seeks to protect.