The original "Star Wars" trilogy was a
cinematic landmark and a fond fixture in popular culture. I was
not fortunate enough to see the original trilogy in its first run
at the cinema although I did get to see the updated Special
Editions when they were released. My introduction to the original
films was television, and constantly re-watching them on home
video. I remember going through "Empire" the most, as well as the
darker scenes from "Jedi", conveniently fast-forwarding through
any scenes featuring ewoks. The original trilogy offered strong
story telling, compelling and likable characters, as well as
spectacular images and a riveting soundtrack by master composer
John Williams.So where does the new
prequel trilogy stack up against the brilliantly done originals? I
guess it depends on how you look at it.
"The Phantom Menace", or "Episode I",
generated an unprecedented amount of anticipation, so much so that
there was no way this film was going to live up to expectations. I
was certainly caught up in it all, having pre-bought the tickets
weeks before and was all ready for a completely new Star Wars
film.
The one thing I do remember after walking
out of the cinema that day was being visually overwhelmed. I
actually did not know what to think at all. I do not recall
feeling anything negative about the film, or positive for that
matter. I just felt I had seen something that was altogether
different to the original films; that and my retinas needed to
adjust to the real world after being bombarded with the cinema's
most over-burdened and detailed CGI shots in history. Visually,
the film was a lot to process.
Unlike a lot of fans, I did not hate Jar
Jar, I did not hate Jake Lloyd, and in general I did not hate what
I saw. Looking back, I realised that I enjoyed it despite it being
a bit 'lite' on story; but looking at in context of the original
films and the other prequels, there were some major problems,
least of which was the criminally underused Darth Maul.
"Attack Of The Clones" seems to get the gong
for 'silliest Star Wars title'. We were promised a more darker
tone, but I would say we got a 'sombre' tone instead. This film
introduced the world to Hayden Christensen as the young Anakin,
and soon to be evil Darth Vader. Not good. Christensen seemed
miscast to me, and for the most part he looks lost in a
complicated role. In the end, it damages the film's standing only
marginally because the film is really about the images, action and
universe-ending melodrama, but somehow it manages to make "The
Phantom Menace" a solid acting piece.
The plot for "Episode II" does manage to
install Palpatine as the Supreme Chancellor and create the Storm
Troopers seen in the original trilogy, so in this respect, it's
much 'meatier' than "Episode I". An all digital Yoda is a
revelation and a masterpiece of CGI and voicework. A friend of
mine said at the time that they could have just had the two minute
Yoda fight scene looped for two hours and it probably would have
made even more money than it did.
And then came "Revenge of the Sith". For
many fans, this was the film that "Episode I" should have been.
It's easily the best of the prequels, mainly because it actually
fosters a sense of sinister drama, and because it does not contain
any fat in the story telling: a major negative for the other
prequels. This was an enjoyable film to watch, and for the first
time, almost all the CGI actually looked perfect. And you got to
see some great moments, particularly anything to do with Palpatine
and his transformation in to the Emperor of the universe. The last
twenty minutes of the film are unexpected from a tone point of
view; you have not really seen anything that dark in a Star Wars
film, but it is very welcome from a dramatic point of view.
When watching the prequels, if you do not
nitpick too much at what you have seen, you will find them all a
very cinematic, enjoyable experience and worth the price of
admission. Of course, Star Wars fans will nit-pick. And they would
be justified in doing so because the prequels do not hold up well
under scrutiny.
George Lucas said in the "Episode I" DVD
documentary that the two trilogies rhyme; in essence, similar
things happen in both trilogies but the stories ultimately end up
taking different paths based on different outcomes at crucial
moments. If this rhyming notion is accurate, why is Anakin nine
years old in "Episode I" while Luke is eighteen or so in "Episode
IV"? Why was Darth Maul not a central figure in "Episode I" like
Darth Vader in "Episode IV"? Where was the Jar Jar Binks style
character in "Episode IV"? You could go on and on. He may have
been trying to get the trilogies to be synchronous, but it did not
happen.
Then there is just the general laziness in
the story telling, most likely due to the fact that there was not
enough story to sustain three films. Anakin's turn to the dark
side is completely arbitrary. In "Episode III", he goes from being
conflicted about Palpatine and wanting to serve the Jedi to
becoming Darth Vader in a matter of minutes. In "Episode II", we
only see Anakin's mother for one scene, yet her death is the
beginning of Anakin's journey to the dark side. I would have
thought that spending a lot more time developing the most crucial
scenes in the trilogy would been the way to go instead of endless
scenes of CGI (the wookie battle or the pod-race comes to mind).
Although I did not hate Jar Jar, he does not really have a place
in the story structure of the six films aside from selling toys
(okay, George made him relevant in "Episode II" but I think that
was more thanks to fan reaction than anything else).
The most important developments in the
trilogy are glazed over yet that is what we came to see. Ewan
McGregor once said the prequels were about the 'background' and it
is true; the images are truly astounding. It is a shame the same
level of detail was not applied to the screenplays.
In many ways, the prequel trilogy is the
embodiment of the modern blockbuster; entertaining for a few
hours, and maybe even on a few repeat viewings, but then
ultimately disposable. That may be a little harsh because they are
better than the majority of blockbusters that have come out of
Hollywood in recent years, but they are also Star Wars films and
probably deserved better treatment. They will never achieve the
high water mark of the original trilogy, nor should they. They are
different films for a different generation. For the fans I would
say, enjoy them for what they are and do not compare. It is really
the only way to watch the prequels.
