Star Wars: The Phantom Menace
(1999, Dir.: George Lucas, with Liam Neeson, Ewan MacGregor, Jake Lloyd)
Wow, where to begin? This is a train wreck from almost the very beginning. Many defenders will say it's unfair to compare this to the previous trilogy; however, the "Star Wars" at the beginning of the title make such comparisons not only reasonable but necessary. If most of a tapestry is beautifully woven, it's hard to miss the corner that's ugly and frayed. Lucas's own defense (in the face of post-release panning) was that he made this movie for kids. What an insult to kids--the subtext there is, "This is for kids so it doesn't have to be as good." Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, Bugs Bunny, The Chronicles of Narnia, The Simpsons--all favorites of kids and adults, all terrific stories and/or characters.
The plot is servicable, though unnecessarily complicated, involving a trade war and the inner workings of the Federation. The "Phantom Menace," it seems, refers to the overlying plot of the movie--the war over Naboo, while the real threat is Senator Palpatine's machinations behind the scenes. Problem is this makes for mostly a phantom movie; the main plot of this film has little to do with this trilogy's main story arc.
A lot of actors are wasted in this film, though Ewen MacGregor does a fair Alec Guiness impersonation. Jake Lloyd has taken a lot of heat for his young Anakin; unfairly, really, as Lucas does nothing to invest his character with any emotional power (aside, perhaps, from a creepy misguided attempt at foreshadowing where 8-year-old Anakin makes a pass at his future lover Amidala--this is for kids?). Anakin never comes across as a driving force; he's just swept along by events. His separation from his mother is weirdly passive. There's none of the angst that Luke suffers in his dealing with his destiny and the Force; they simply shrug and accept their fate. The exchange between Qui-Gon and Shmi could be summed up thusly: "I want to take your son"; "No"; "Oh, come on"; "Well ... all right." An emotional flatline.
Speaking of the Force, we now (years earlier, in Star Wars time) learn that it is made of tiny little buggers called "midichlorians." Apparently, the Force is some sort of virus that one can be tested for. Fortunately, this bit of Lucas pulling something out of his hey-hey! is trumped by the even more ridiculous revelation that Anakin was (allegedly, though one wonders if Shmi's story is wholly reliable) the product of a virgin birth, so we hardly notice the midichlorians nonsense.
The dialogue is, at times, execrable. The bon vivant wit of Han Solo has been replaced by CGI-delivered bathroom humor. And while a lot of attention was focused on a certain character's Jamaican accent, I found myself cringing more often at the embarrasing stereotyped accents of the Trade Federation crony villains, who sounded like nothing more than rejects from a Yellow Menace serial of the '30s.
Worse, Lucas wants to eat his cake and have it, too. While I wouldn't expect Saving Private Ryan-level realism, Lucas apparently wants to have a film about war with no bloodshed. Amidala complains to the Council that her people are dying. Apparently we just have to take her word for it, because in spite of the battles and starvation, the casualty rate of Naboo natives on film appears to be about zero. Too bad all wars can't be like this one. In the same vein, the robot warriors of the Trade Federation are laughably inept, especially considering their only function appears to be fighting. Small wonder they were replaced by the time of A New Hope by human Stormtroopers (who couldn't shoot straight either, but at least had an excuse).
Finally, this movie serves up one of the most egregious instances of "deus ex machina" ever seen in cinema, all to make a mawkish, pretentious philosophical statement. Qui-Gon, Kenobi and Jar-Jar, escaping in an underwater craft, are grabbed, ship and all, by a large fishlike critter. Do they escape? Do they ever! A larger sea creature chomps on the first, freeing the vessel. Wow, what luck! I believe it's Qui-Gon who hammers the point home to the audience: "There's always a bigger fish." Yeah, and in this case it's the writer being as subtle as a sackful of doorknobs.
I saw the original Star Wars when I was five, and the memory is tattooed on my brain; I somehow doubt a five-year-old seeing this unfortunate movie, whether they enjoy it or not, will regard it as a seminal moment in their childhood. I guess it's lucky they'll never understand what they missed.
10 March 2003