Okay, so in my last post I mentioned that the "two good star wars movies have already been ruined for me by the three mediocre ones and the three outright bad ones." I want to clarify this a little and maybe reconsider that statement, as it's been floating around in my head since I wrote it, and has made me think that perhaps I was being uncharitable.
So what I decided to do was to go through the Star Wars Movies, one at a time in Chronological Order (in universe) and give them a ruddy good seeing to (which is to say, reviewing them whilst talking about the Philosophy and themes and stuff). especially with "The Last Jedi" now out (no I haven't seen it yet).
Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace- 1999
This was the first Star Wars film I saw in the Cinema. I went with my family and it blew my little mind. It's the first film that I quoted endlessly and I absolutely loved it. I will try to put aside my nostalgia and be objective here however. Watching it again as an adult, I can see some of the problems that people had with it. Jar Jar Binks is much less funny on repeat viewing, and I can see and appreciate the complaint of racial stereotyping regarding the Gungans, Watto, and the Neimodians, even if that doesn't really spoil my personal enjoyment of the film. It is also true that it's hard to point to a single protagonist, and the plot is complex relative to the original films. People also mention that the CGI can seem gratuitous and dated. But I also think there's a lot to like here.
Phantom Menace may not have a single protagonist but it doesn't really need one. When we were first introduced to Star Wars, we knew nothing about this world, so we needed a clear fish-out-of-water protagonist to ask the important questions. But anyone watching Phantom Menace knows this universe's important elements all ready, and I see no particular problem with the film using different characters to fill the protagonist role at different points. This is a more complex story than the original trilogy, so it needs multiple characters to drive that story in a believable way. Anakin asks a lot of important questions that we as the audience want to know the answer to: "What is this big city planet?"; "What are those "Midichlorian" things Qui-Gon was talking about earlier?". Obi-Wan also asks these kinds of questions in the film: "What are the trade federation like?"; "Why doesn't Qui-Gon listen to the council?". Qui-Gon probably fills the role of main character the closest shared with Queen Amidala, as they are the ones who are making most of the choices that drive the story forward. In these roles, these characters worked for me. Most of them have arcs to boot. Anakin learns to trust his instincts, Obi-Wan learns to defy convention, Queen Amidala learns to use diplomacy and politics to her advantage (even if she is ultimately being manipulated). I never had much trouble following the plot of this one and I think the characters are they key reason for that.To go into the story more deeply, for all the whining about trade law being boring, it's also a realistic cause for a sudden armed conflict during peace time and the plot doesn't actually focus on it all that much. Midichlorians, whilst unnecessary also don't change anything. The force was established it the Original Trilogy to be genetic ("The force is strong in my family") and as a sci-fi word to add back-story to this and give an easy way to tell the audience about relative force strength, I honestly don't see the big problem with them. The story in Phantom Menace does use one or two lazy tropes (The Prophecy, The Droids all dying with the destruction of a single ship), but I think that overall it actually just kinda works.
Another thing that I like is that there's plenty of amazing action in this film and whilst there were things that could have been done better, (maybe some lines to break up the lightsaber duel on Naboo and give our beautifully designed villain some character?) this is an incredibly visually interesting film. Pod-racing is pure Star Wars and the effects for it still hold up seventeen years on. Liam Neeson as Qui-Gon, Ewan McGregor as Obi-Wan, Natalie Portman and Kiera Knightly as Queen Amidala and her decoy all give good performances supported by an all star secondary cast, who for the most part also do great jobs with the occasionally wanting material. Jake Lloyd (Anakin) is not bad, he gets some corny lines, but so did Mark Hamill back in 1977. Chancellor Palpatine is also a joy with Ian McDiarmid reprising his role from Return of the Jedi. Of the large cast of characters in this film, they all get some development, and they all feel like real people to me with the exception of the usual target, but we'll get to him later.
Phantom Menace does use a lot of CGI for the era. However, it also uses a lot of practical effects alongside the CGI, just like the original Jurassic Park film (which was the inspiration for Lucas to make this) and the majority of it, to my eyes at least, still looks damn good. Especially compared to the other two prequel films, I think the Phantom Menace's use of CGI generally works well and I can't really see why people dislike it so much aside from nostalgia for stop motion animation.
The only major aspect of this film that I truly dislike is Jar Jar Binks(Ahmed Best). But he's there primarily to entertain younger viewers, and I remember him doing that very well, for me and nearly everyone else my age at the time. I also don't think Ahmed Best's performance is bad, he was just given a terrible comic-relief character. Jar-Jar is silly and the CGI that renders him looks dated now to put it charitably, but he doesn't do enough to spoil the overall film which is I think, un-ironically quite good. If you judge it as a film on its own merits, it mostly works, as most viewers at the time agreed. If you compare it to the original trilogy you will be disappointed, because other than some homages, it's not trying to be the original trilogy. It was a risky film, full of artistic merit that unfortunately made one or two-ee little-bitty, mistakes.
Lastly then: What about the Philosophy? What is this film trying to tell us? Several things. Firstly it establishes early on the flaws that will lead to the fall of the Republic and the Jedi. The Jedi have been in charge so long that they are arrogant "I do not believe the Sith could have returned without our knowing". This shows us that power corrupts. Qui-Gon's response to this, that he is willing to go his own way for the greater good, sets up the Civil War in the form of the Clone Wars that will come in later. The Republic is mired in procedure and bureaucracy and the film uses this to give an intelligent, realistic critique of what can go wrong in a democratic system that is based on the history of the Roman Republic. As a message this is useful and not often explored in film. It's the setup to a Greek Tragedy, where A New Hope is the set up to a Hero's Journey. Philosophically interesting and well written, as far as the plot goes.
Action: 10/10
Plot: 7/10
Message: 8/10
Dialogue: 5/10
Characters:7/10
FX: 7/10
Overall Enjoyment: 7/10- Good Film.
So what I decided to do was to go through the Star Wars Movies, one at a time in Chronological Order (in universe) and give them a ruddy good seeing to (which is to say, reviewing them whilst talking about the Philosophy and themes and stuff). especially with "The Last Jedi" now out (no I haven't seen it yet).
Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace- 1999
This was the first Star Wars film I saw in the Cinema. I went with my family and it blew my little mind. It's the first film that I quoted endlessly and I absolutely loved it. I will try to put aside my nostalgia and be objective here however. Watching it again as an adult, I can see some of the problems that people had with it. Jar Jar Binks is much less funny on repeat viewing, and I can see and appreciate the complaint of racial stereotyping regarding the Gungans, Watto, and the Neimodians, even if that doesn't really spoil my personal enjoyment of the film. It is also true that it's hard to point to a single protagonist, and the plot is complex relative to the original films. People also mention that the CGI can seem gratuitous and dated. But I also think there's a lot to like here.
Phantom Menace may not have a single protagonist but it doesn't really need one. When we were first introduced to Star Wars, we knew nothing about this world, so we needed a clear fish-out-of-water protagonist to ask the important questions. But anyone watching Phantom Menace knows this universe's important elements all ready, and I see no particular problem with the film using different characters to fill the protagonist role at different points. This is a more complex story than the original trilogy, so it needs multiple characters to drive that story in a believable way. Anakin asks a lot of important questions that we as the audience want to know the answer to: "What is this big city planet?"; "What are those "Midichlorian" things Qui-Gon was talking about earlier?". Obi-Wan also asks these kinds of questions in the film: "What are the trade federation like?"; "Why doesn't Qui-Gon listen to the council?". Qui-Gon probably fills the role of main character the closest shared with Queen Amidala, as they are the ones who are making most of the choices that drive the story forward. In these roles, these characters worked for me. Most of them have arcs to boot. Anakin learns to trust his instincts, Obi-Wan learns to defy convention, Queen Amidala learns to use diplomacy and politics to her advantage (even if she is ultimately being manipulated). I never had much trouble following the plot of this one and I think the characters are they key reason for that.To go into the story more deeply, for all the whining about trade law being boring, it's also a realistic cause for a sudden armed conflict during peace time and the plot doesn't actually focus on it all that much. Midichlorians, whilst unnecessary also don't change anything. The force was established it the Original Trilogy to be genetic ("The force is strong in my family") and as a sci-fi word to add back-story to this and give an easy way to tell the audience about relative force strength, I honestly don't see the big problem with them. The story in Phantom Menace does use one or two lazy tropes (The Prophecy, The Droids all dying with the destruction of a single ship), but I think that overall it actually just kinda works.
Another thing that I like is that there's plenty of amazing action in this film and whilst there were things that could have been done better, (maybe some lines to break up the lightsaber duel on Naboo and give our beautifully designed villain some character?) this is an incredibly visually interesting film. Pod-racing is pure Star Wars and the effects for it still hold up seventeen years on. Liam Neeson as Qui-Gon, Ewan McGregor as Obi-Wan, Natalie Portman and Kiera Knightly as Queen Amidala and her decoy all give good performances supported by an all star secondary cast, who for the most part also do great jobs with the occasionally wanting material. Jake Lloyd (Anakin) is not bad, he gets some corny lines, but so did Mark Hamill back in 1977. Chancellor Palpatine is also a joy with Ian McDiarmid reprising his role from Return of the Jedi. Of the large cast of characters in this film, they all get some development, and they all feel like real people to me with the exception of the usual target, but we'll get to him later.
Phantom Menace does use a lot of CGI for the era. However, it also uses a lot of practical effects alongside the CGI, just like the original Jurassic Park film (which was the inspiration for Lucas to make this) and the majority of it, to my eyes at least, still looks damn good. Especially compared to the other two prequel films, I think the Phantom Menace's use of CGI generally works well and I can't really see why people dislike it so much aside from nostalgia for stop motion animation.
The only major aspect of this film that I truly dislike is Jar Jar Binks(Ahmed Best). But he's there primarily to entertain younger viewers, and I remember him doing that very well, for me and nearly everyone else my age at the time. I also don't think Ahmed Best's performance is bad, he was just given a terrible comic-relief character. Jar-Jar is silly and the CGI that renders him looks dated now to put it charitably, but he doesn't do enough to spoil the overall film which is I think, un-ironically quite good. If you judge it as a film on its own merits, it mostly works, as most viewers at the time agreed. If you compare it to the original trilogy you will be disappointed, because other than some homages, it's not trying to be the original trilogy. It was a risky film, full of artistic merit that unfortunately made one or two-ee little-bitty, mistakes.
Lastly then: What about the Philosophy? What is this film trying to tell us? Several things. Firstly it establishes early on the flaws that will lead to the fall of the Republic and the Jedi. The Jedi have been in charge so long that they are arrogant "I do not believe the Sith could have returned without our knowing". This shows us that power corrupts. Qui-Gon's response to this, that he is willing to go his own way for the greater good, sets up the Civil War in the form of the Clone Wars that will come in later. The Republic is mired in procedure and bureaucracy and the film uses this to give an intelligent, realistic critique of what can go wrong in a democratic system that is based on the history of the Roman Republic. As a message this is useful and not often explored in film. It's the setup to a Greek Tragedy, where A New Hope is the set up to a Hero's Journey. Philosophically interesting and well written, as far as the plot goes.
Action: 10/10
Plot: 7/10
Message: 8/10
Dialogue: 5/10
Characters:7/10
FX: 7/10
Overall Enjoyment: 7/10- Good Film.
No comments:
Post a Comment