|
Star Wars Episode 1: The Phantom Menace
|
Films that
come with the THX sound system – another George Lucas franchise, like the Star Wars movies – end with a written
message that implores those few spectators still left in their seats to write
in and complain if any external factor has detracted from their full enjoyment
of the show.
It is
probably not within the terms of this invitation to nominate as a prime
irritant 'the hype' – but that would certainly be the most sensible and prevalent
response when it comes to The Phantom
Menace.
Publicity
for this new Star Wars movie –
zooming three episodes backwards from the 1977 original – has been maddeningly
ubiquitous for at least three months before its release. Lucas' resolutely non-futuristic
vision of the future has seemingly infected every section of every magazine and
newspaper, resulting in journalistic conceits more fantastic and surreal than
anything in The Phantom Menace. (My
favourite being the weekend magazine travel item on Tunisia – a principal
location for the film – which boasted numerous images from Star Wars and only one of Tunisia.)
I was 17
years old when Star Wars was first
unleashed on the world. I hated it then, and have become merely bored with its
progeny (on screens and in toy shops) ever since. Lucas' novel idea of
restarting the series at Episode I at least offered the promise of a new
beginning that could seduce recalcitrant non-believers like myself: a way of
re-launching and reorienting the story, and introducing audiences to the whole,
cosmic pattern underlying the saga.
In fact, The Phantom Menace starts exactly as Star Wars did: confusingly, right in the
middle of things, after a scrolling printed legend jam-packed with meaningless
names, places and facts. There is no exposition of any kind in this long, slow
movie. All we need really grasp is that there are goodies and baddies locked in
an eternal see-saw struggle for power, and that there will be, at regular
intervals, the familiar generic set-pieces of the series: a high-speed
spaceship chase, an intergalactic battle full of explosions, and a hand-to-hand
fight with glowing lasers.
Each new Star Wars movie – as everyone, fan or
foe alike, knows – is essentially a glorified shoot-‘em-up video game. So it
doesn't actually matter whether you start at Episode 1, 4 or 8: it's the same
generic pattern, the same escalation of levels and steps, the same gung-ho
climaxes and supposedly teary interludes. The only real difference in Lucas'
pitch to the mass market of 1999 is that he has at last eradicated all grudging
gestures towards romance, and almost every trace of workable comedy (a
procession of cute, baby-talking creatures notwithstanding).
I have
never been persuaded by arguments that the Star
Wars films represent a new mythology for contemporary times. Novelist J. G.
Ballard was right to say that, while even the worst instalment (on small or
big screen) of Star Trek or Dr Who has the kernel of a intriguing
philosophical or moral problem built into its storyline, the Star Wars series has scarcely a single
idea to offer.
Instead of
having a theme or a vision of any kind, Lucas simply collects from other movies
and pop culture traditions, almost at random. He began in 1977 by recycling
moods and topics from Western classics like John Ford's The Searchers (1955); or heated family melodramas about evil,
fallen patriarchs; or bubbly comedies built on playful, sexual tension. Today,
Lucas' artistic ambitions are pitched far lower; he seems to recycle only
himself, and – judging from the crazy array of sidekick figures with Indian,
African, Jewish or Jamaican accents – the worst Disney animated features.
The wit and
wisdom of George Lucas, as evidenced in The
Phantom Menace, is meagre indeed. Despite the film's veritable anthology of
cultural, historical, religious and mythological references – everything from The Wizard of Oz (1939) and Triumph of the Will (1935) to Abraham
Lincoln and Christ's immaculate conception – nothing coheres this ragbag of
tired plot moves and stale heroics. Of course, there is The Force – but
Qui-Gon's sermons on the need to ‘focus’ sound more like a seminar in business
management than the insight of a sage.
In fact,
there is a terribly banal side to the Star
Wars epics. The constant references to taxes, treaties, bureaucrats and
ongoing debates between political leaders make the unfolding destiny of the
universe sound like an endless session of the Australian parliament. And Lucas'
script is scarcely more exciting than a typical Hansard transcript – never has
one heard such a deluge of droning, prosaic, dreary talk on screen.
One does
not have to be a science fiction buff to wonder: where are the experiments in
time travel? The puzzles and lures of alternate, virtual
realities? The odd communities and subcultures scattered in every corner
of every planet, with their perennial challenge to what we regard as normal and
alien? Lucas cares not a jot for these realms of poetic imagination. Nor does
he seem to have taken much account of all those fantasy movies of the last two
decades that he helped inspire – the crowning laser-fight here has already been
topped in at least a hundred Hong Kong ghost story movies.
Those who
are alienated by the Star Wars phenomenon exaggerate its insidious, deleterious effects on the rest of cinema.
The era of special-effects blockbusters has not exactly led to the wholesale
dumbing down of popular culture (as many unwisely argue). But it has resulted
in the de-skilling of
America's most highly paid writer-director-producers.
It is hard
to believe that the man who once directed a film as vibrant and energetic as American Graffiti (1973) now helms something as flat and inert as The Phantom Menace. In this regard, the film's closest cousin is
James Cameron's Titanic (1997): from shot to shot and scene to scene, there is no spark of invention,
hardly any sign of life – only the relentless display of big budget production
values.
The Phantom Menace is undeniably spectacular on the
visual plane (sound wise, John Williams' bombastic orchestral score tends to
recycle the predictable fanfares and crescendos). Lucas and his collaborators
seem to have concentrated primarily on the sets, costumes, and digital design
concepts (such as the stunning glimpse of an underwater kingdom). But once
these good-looking fixtures are up and twinkling, Lucas does precious little to
animate them.
Actors and
characterisation appear to have been on the very bottom of Lucas' directorial
agenda. Performers like Neeson and Terence Stamp, who have fine, strong voices
and solid, commanding presences, survive this neglect simply because they are
well cast. On the other hand, Ewan McGregor – with his thin voice and
all-over-the-shop acting style – seems misplaced and palpably ill at ease from
first scene to last. Samuel L. Jackson, equally out of kilter with the
generally wooden ensemble, at least brings a touch of nutty humour to his
cameo.
The Phantom Menace is inoffensive, time-filling fluff
– generally good to look at, and occasionally even slightly exciting. No
disgruntled viewer or critic can ever hope to put the slightest dint in the
juggernaut of Star Wars hype. But as
Yoda says, in his stilted syntax: "See through you, we can".
© Adrian Martin June 1999 |