The Phantom Menace (1999) 131m
PART I: ANOTHER BEGINNING
The fourth (or is it first?) STAR WARS movie is finally with us (I resist the urge to make any pun along the line of 'May the fourth be with you' as it's probably already been - oops; too late). So confident am I regarding the critical reaction to this film that this review has been written prior to any actual viewing of same. Critics around the world have made up their minds about it already, so why shouldn't I jump on the bandwagon too?
I should point out firstly that I am not a STAR WARS fan - never have been, although I've seen each episode on the big screen three times - so I'm not out to grind any axes. I just see the whole business as an interesting chapter in pop culture. It's taken the act of film reviewing out of the cinema and turned it into something else - a reaction not to a film but to a cultural and economic phenomenon. It's where Art and Commerce mix, in a galaxy not too far, far away from your local KFC or Toyworld. This of course, is anathema to Serious Filmgoers. Who said that these films were supposed to make money, especially lots of money? God forbid, that might actually empower producers and directors to make more movies in the series.
I haven't read any reviews for THE PHANTOM MENACE yet, but you can tell I've already guessed their tone. Nor have I seen any any Making Ofs, interviews, picturebooks, or trailers. If you're not going to listen to the anti-hype you don't listen to the hype either. But the little that I have heard telegraphs the direction many critics' arguments are sure to have taken. THE PHANTOM MENACE is devoid of humanity, quoth they. Its digital world - the computer generated sets, locations, and characters - will have them lamenting the film's lack of humanity (I guess there's nothing more upsetting than a bunch of aliens and robots with no humanity). They will also complain about how the latest episode is merely more of the same - bigger battles, the same story elements, the same STAR WARS icons, and another wall-to-wall John Williams score (although the Bond films have been following the same formula for decades and I don't remember anybody ever getting worked up about them at any time). They will object on principle: that actors should not be replaced by CGI fabrications because human actors deserve center stage on our screens, dammit (in that case, goodbye E.T, goodbye Pinocchio, Dumbo, the Muppets, HAL 9000, King Kong, everything by Ray Harryhausen, Stan Winston, Pixar…just write your own list). The critics have been sharpening their claws for months now, I'm sure. George Lucas copped a bad year - the pendulum of Fickle Favor has swung against him, just the same way it had swung in favor of James Cameron's TITANIC the previous year. The irony is that thirty years ago when he made THX-1138 he was receiving plaudits for the same 'dehumanization' that he's being taken to task for now.
But wait a minute. TITANIC was based on a real event, and THX-1138 had real humans. STAR WARS, on the other hand, is all made up. It never happened. It's meaningless. Therefore it is just a gigantic conceit. Furthermore, by purporting to be yet-another-episode in a larger saga it has franchised itself, a thought that is sure to get the critical bile rising. The universe is expanding, and the STAR WARS universe is no exception. It has become so all-pervading that it has replaced a simulacrum of reality with its own complete alternative. To which there can be only one argument: exactly. What validates THE PHANTOM MENACE's worth as a film (as opposed to a 'movie') is that it has used every tool available at its disposal to create something that would otherwise exist only in one individual's imagination. It *shares a vision*, surely the guiding precept of all cinema. I'm looking forward to THE PHANTOM MENACE. It's going to be every comic book I read as a boy and every game I played with plastic action figures. Most of which, I might add, were never 'human'.
PART II: THE STORY CONTINUES
I have just seen THE PHANTOM MENACE. In lieu of a second protracted rant I offer the following observations:
· It's interesting seeing Jake Lloyd playing the young, tousle-headed Annakin Skywalker - it's not until afterwards you remember that the cheerful boy hero of this film turns into the villain of the series, slaying his mentor, torturing his daughter, and attempting to kill his son. It's in the nature of prequels to be ironic. · In this installment it is revealed that microorganisms within the Jedi act as a conduit for the Force - maybe the next story could take us into an inner universe as opposed to outer space. · The Jedi might be wise and powerful but they still can't cure Yoda of dyslexia. End every sentence on a verb he does. · The Trade Federation sound like Samurai and the Gungan speak like Jamaicans. · Conclusion to above point: Lucas has been spending too much time with Joseph Campbell. · Is Lucas trying to fit the phrase 'I've got a bad feeling about this' into every episode? This is at least the third film it appears in. · Lightsabers are still the coolest weapons in the universe. · One too many 'oops' in Jake Lloyd's dialogue. · The twist involving Natalie Portman's character isn't too surprising if you can recognize Portman on screen and already know what part she plays. · The worst line of dialogue is easily the alien sports commentators use of that worn-out 90s phrase 'That's gotta hurt' · Liam Neeson and Ewan McGregor make great Jedi Knights. · The screening was packed with families, reminding us once again that STAR WARS is not made for a bunch of stuffed shirts armed with notebooks and their own five-star rating system, but for people that like to have a good time. · Lucas and Spielberg are friends, aren't they? How about Spielberg directing one of the remaining two installments? The petition starts here.
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews