This isn't a review of the movie perse but, instead a review and opinon of the 3D conversion.
I will say this about the movie...it's still the same and felt really long and immature.
So the question is does the 3D look good if not great?
I wanted this to be a conquest for movies that are converted to 3D. I wanted to believe that George Lucas was right when he said, 3D conversion is just as good as shoting in it, if the conversion is done right. I REALLY WANTED TO BELIEVE.
I think he made it half way. The standard is Avatar. NO MOVIE has come close the Avatar with it's visuals and 3D image rendering. If a movie is not fully shot in 3D, and set up to be a 3D movie, you are already setting up for failure. STAR WARS on the other hand is a perfect test case for a film, that if the technology would have been there like it is today, it would have been in 3D, and it not Avatar would be the highest grossing Movie(s) of all time.
The conversion looks clear for the most part. There really isn't anything that stands out and says WOW that's much cooler in 3D. The CGI "cities" and landscapes feel more real with 3D rendering. Overall it looks sharper with a little more depth. However, high speed sequences like the pod race isn't really improved much overall. Both it and the end battle sequence with Darth Maul are the 2 poster children for this movie in 3D, and frankly there isn't much difference. I was let down. The faster the movie sequences move the blurrier it gets. I also got the sense that they only converted parts of the film that they felt would stand out...I could be wrong.
The really nice parts of the 3D conversion comes out when the camera is steady, and or in a close up. There is a crispness and depth and you really feel like you are looking through a window. The CGI characters as well have a little more "pop" on the screen...but not all. The army of droids are still semi flat, the thousands of background images like ships and people and structures are still flat...instead they went with focusing on the foreground elements to shift where your eye looks. (cheap trick in 3D conversion)
At first I really didn't like it. I thought I had been had and spent extra cash to see a movie I really didn't care for (substance) to begin with, just to be wow'd by something I hate (3D Conversion). Well, by the end I didn't hate it. (still don't care for the movie) I do feel like I was had though.
The 3D conversion does improve the movie watching experience, but not enough to justify, in my opinion, spending $10-$16 to see it again. I may see "A New Hope" and the others in that trilogy but not the next two. In fact I think Lucas made a mistake in putting the first ones out first...should have started with 4, 5, and 6. BUT like I said it does improve the movie experience with depth and crispness. Another problem however, is that you can ONLY get this experience in the theater. Home 3D Tv's aren't going to give you the quality of picture and experience unless you sit 4 feet from your TV.
At the end of the day good film making is good film making 2D, 3D, or otherwise. If you are a die hard fan you will see this film and possibly feel the same way I do, unimpressed. Or you may love the subtle difference.
As a kid or someone who passed the first time...this is a good time to see the films.
I think most people would be perfectly content not seeing it in 3D and their lives will not be any worst for it.
I give STAR WARS Episode I in 3D: 2 1/2 (unneeded) HELL YEAH's out of 5