'Episode I': Avoid the hype, just go enjoy the movie
Friday, May 14, 1999
By WILLIAM ARNOLD 
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Q: What's this? You're reviewing "Episode I" early? The movie doesn't open until next Wednesday. Isn't this a big break with tradition?
Media everywhere seem to be reviewing it early. When you're in the middle of a stampede, you gotta run with it or get trampled.
Q: But isn't this a strange way to review a movie -- interviewing yourself?
Too much has already been written about the darn thing. It's time to cut to the chase, get to the essentials.
Q: OK, then, let's do it. Is this movie any good?
I enjoyed it -- more than I thought I would.
Q: Many of your colleagues seem to disagree. I've got a stack of reviews here with the word "disappointment" in their first paragraph.
There's certainly room for disappointment. If you go into it expecting the same magical experience you had in 1977, you're bound to be disappointed. We're all older, and the world has moved on.
Q: Surely there's more to the general air of letdown than this.
It's also likely to be a letdown for anyone who ate up all the advance word, read the entire blow-by-blow synopsis in Time magazine, and learned every beat of the movie before going in.
Q: You protected yourself from all that?
I did. I didn't read anything. OK, I watched the "60 Minutes" segment. But, otherwise, I even shut my eyes when the preview came on. So the movie was a surprise to me. Look, there's Yoda! Isn't that C-3PO?
Q: You're saying the hype has ruined the movie for many people?
Of course, it has. It's built expectations that can't possibly be matched, and scuttled the element of storytelling surprise. I polled friends after the Seattle preview last week, and, without exception, the ones who went in cold enjoyed it immensely. Everyone else seemed underwhelmed.
Q: You say you enjoyed it. What does that mean? How would you rate it next to the rest of the Hollywood product of 1998 and '99?
Definitely in the top 5 percent. It's well-made and entertaining. It gives you your money's worth. It's five times better than "The Matrix" and a hundred times better than "The Mummy."
Q: Let's back up a minute. For those who've been trekking in the Himalayas for the past year, what's this movie about?
It's about two Jedis who go to an obscure planet that's in the process of being taken over by an evil trade cartel. The Jedis help the planet's beautiful young queen foil the scheme, with the help of a boy they pick up on the way.
Q: The same old save-the-planet formula?
More or less.
Q: How does it line up with the other three episodes?
It takes place 30 years before the first episode, which is actually Episode IV. Obi-Wan Kenobi is a young apprentice Jedi knight here. The boy hero grows up to be Darth Vader, father of Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia. Got that?
Q: How would you compare it to the previous three episodes?
In general, I liked it better than "Return of the Jedi." You have to figure there's diminishing returns with any sequel. And the basic "Star Wars" premise was played out with "Jedi." In a way, Lucas has started completely over with this prequel, and I respect that.
Q: What didn't you like about the movie?
The Jar Jar Binks character -- the computer-animated comic relief who speaks in a kind of Jamaican patois. He's totally annoying, and you can't understand even half of what he says. It's a major miscalculation.
Q: What does the movie most lack?
I suppose the thing that people will miss the most is Han Solo. He's the center of the trilogy -- the flawed, cocky, swashbuckling, rascal-hero. Someone we can love and identify with. There's really no adult human hero here. The Jedi knights are stiff and Arthurian, and so competent they never seem to be in any real jeopardy.
Q: That brings up a good question. The leads of the first "Star Wars" were all unknowns. Yet now, when he's got a built-in audience, Lucas has cast popular stars -- Liam Neeson and Ewan McGregor. Why didn't he take a chance on unknowns?
Possibly he didn't think he could make lightning strike twice in the same place. Harrison Ford jumped out of the original to become the biggest star of the past two decades. Trying to duplicate that feat must have seemed a poor risk.
Q: Is it possible that Lucas has come to take himself a bit too seriously? Many reviewers seem to miss the trivial moments, the bantering scenes between Luke, Leia and Han.
It's possible. After all, people have been writing articles for the past 20 years about how the "spiritual dimension" of the movie -- comparing it less to "Flash Gordon" than to Joseph Campbell and the Tao. But I think the new movie is not as enjoyably corny and goofy simply because it's the expression of a more serious-minded 55-year-old filmmaker.
Q: But Lucas keeps saying that "Episode I" is a kids' movie.
In a way, it is. On one level, it's much more of a small boy's fantasy than the others. The kid has the romantic attachment, and even does most of the heroics. On the other hand, our knowing he grows up to be an arch-villain gives his scenes a certain subtext of darkness and tragedy.
Q: What was your most pleasant surprise in the movie?
Its air of political intrigue. Unlike the others, it flirts with being a fascinating, behind-the-scenes, political drama.
Q: You mentioned your displeasure with Jar Jar. How did you like the other creatures?
Frankly, the creatures don't move me that much in any of the movies. They're just so many guys in rubber masks to me.
Q: What about the computer-generated action sequences?
Some of them were fairly mind blowing, especially as backgrounds. The underwater scenes. The cityscapes. The cavernous Senate chamber. Great stuff. And I thought the 10-minute race sequence -- Lucas' version of the "Ben-Hur" chariot race -- was spectacular.
Q: But?
But as lifelike and detailed as these CG scenes are, they never seem completely real. Even the best computer animation still seems slightly cartoonish -- and maybe it always will. Compare the big battle scenes here with, say, Kubrick's battle scenes in "Spartacus." Or the charge into Aqaba in "Lawrence of Arabia." Or the "Ben-Hur" chariot race. These scenes are thrilling because they're really happening.
Q: What implications do you think the extraordinary hype around the movie will have for the future of moviemaking?
We may be entering an era in which we get excited about one big movie every year. Last year it was "Titanic," this year it's "Star Wars." As American society and culture has become increasingly fragmented in the '90s, Hollywood movies have become our only common point of reference, the mainstream. But now, with so many movies and so many of them "demographically targeted," even movies are losing that position. Maybe the cultural mainstream in the new millennium will be one big movie that everyone in the world gets excited about in one way or another for months in advance. And if it's not there, the media will create it.
MOVIE REVIEW
Star Wars: Episode I -- The Phantom Menace. Directed, written and executive produced by George Lucas. Cast: Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, Jake Lloyd, Samuel L. Jackson. Fox/Lucasfilm. Opens Wednesday at Bella Bottega, Cinema 17, Cinerama, Crossroads, Everett 9, Factoria, Galleria 11, Gateway Center, Grand Cinemas, Issaquah 9, Kent 6, Lewis & Clark, Mountlake 9, Neptune, Northgate, Renton Village, Totem Lake, Woodinville 12. 130 minutes. Rated PG.
Grade: B+
|
more
