I am a fan of these movies. I saw the first one back in 1977 when I was not even able to comprehend what was going on in the film. In fact, I have no memory of seeing Star Wars (now known as Episode IV - A New Hope) in the theatre. I just know that I was there. Subsequently, I have seen all of the films at least once in first release (a few of them multiple times in first release). As a kid, I loved them. In particular, the first film and The Empire Strikes Back were absolutely spellbinding. Since then though, the magic for me is almost completely gone. Return of the Jedi was a very mixed film - it has some very powerful moments but it just simply isn't as good as its two predecessors. The acting, the direction, the blatant focus on merchandising (think Ewoks!) is simply inferior to what came before. Then followed the mid-1990's "special editions" of the original films that were intended by George Lucas to technologically update the original movies in preparation for the prequel trilogy that was to begin in 1999. Many of the updates were questionable and, quite simply, not necessary (did Greedo shoot first?!).
I remember the anticipation for The Phantom Menace in 1998/99. It was enough to make you forget about the dangers presented by Y2K and how the world was going to come to an end on January 1, 2000. The hype was incredible. I was genuinely excited - mainly because the movie was being directed by George Lucas. The man was obviously a genius director, no? Yet, he hadn't actually directed a film since 1977's Star Wars, and it showed. While technologically and visually stunning, the story, the acting, and some of the new characters (think Jar Jar!) just weren't that great. Attack of the Clones came two years later. Filmed without film (one of the first all-digital movies), it was another visually stunning achievement yet again filled with bad acting and bad dialogue. But, I still went and saw it twice. In 2005, Revenge of the Sith came along and, while still lacking in the magic that was present in both A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back, Lucas seemed to be finding his feet again as a director. Despite some once again cringe-worthy dialogue and acting, I loved this movie. It brought the prequel trilogy to a nice (and dark) conclusion.
Then a decade passed, and Lucasfilm was sold to Disney given that George wanted to retire but ensure that the cinematic universe that he created would be left in "good hands". In hindsight, this was seemingly a mistake on his part. Disney ignored Lucas' story treatments (or perhaps just rough outlines) for Episodes VII - IX. They hired J.J. Abrams - a director better known for cleverly repackaging nostalgia (think the 2009 reboot of Star Trek) than doing much of anything original - and released The Force Awakens. I enjoyed this film when I first saw it in 2015 but there just seemed to be something wrong with this movie that I just couldn't put my finger on. It finally dawned on me (or perhaps, more accurately, I read somewhere) that the film was more or less a retread of 1977's A New Hope. Disney took the safest route possible to making big money and it worked - The Force Awakens was the biggest film of 2015. Everyone, including hard-core fans seemed satisfied though.
In 2016, Disney decided to release Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, which filled in some critical events between Revenge of the Sith and A New Hope. It was a good film. Things were looking up - perhaps Disney wasn't the group of "white slavers" that George Lucas had described them as after all.
Then came 2017...
That year we were presented with The Last Jedi - a polarizing film, to say the least. Independent filmmaker Rian Johnson was brought in to write and direct and he decided to dispense with any subsequent story treatments / outlines that Abrams had come up with that would have furthered the narrative threads and questions laid out in The Force Awakens. In fact, he chose to basically not further any narrative threads whatsoever. The Last Jedi did not provide any answers to questions raised in The Force Awakens and included some truly mind-boggling and completely illogical story decisions - most obvious of which was the killing off of the main villain, Supreme Leader Snoke. What kind of storyteller kills off the main protagonist of a trilogy in the second film? Additionally, the movie included a fair degree of social justice and diversity commentary and casting that did not sit well with many fans who expected the filmmakers to stick strictly to Star Wars canon and not use the franchise as a platform for such commentary. Yet, this film was the biggest of 2017.
This brings us to the present day and the impending release of The Rise of Skywalker. There have been so many leaks on social media that I feel as though I have already seen the movie. A seemingly troubled production, the film has split Star Wars fandom months and perhaps even years before its release. The reviews that have been coming in today based on screenings that professional critics have already attended also seem to be very polarized - some absolutely love the film (are they on Disney's payroll?!) while others are clearly "meh".
Some very good arguments have been put forward by YouTube pundits such as The Critical Drinker, Diktor Van Doomcock (future ruler of Earth), and Mike Zeroh (some of whom are part of a movement known as the "Fandom Menace"), outlining how this film will not only break with canon but fundamentally alter the story arcs of key characters from the original six films (the most noteworthy of which is the elevation of Rey to the position in Jedi lore of "the chosen one" which used to belong to Anakin Skywalker).
I nearly laughed myself silly at the part in Doomcock's video above where he refers to The Rise of Skywalker as "Weekend at Palpatine's", pointing out the seeming absurdity of the return of The Emperor in the new film. I can't say that I disagree with him. On the other hand, the makers of The Rise of Skywalker had to deal with the lack of a solid storytelling platform (and villain) left by Rian Johnson at the end of The Last Jedi. I suppose they could have made some different decisions with character arcs and made better use of the ideas and filmed segments that George Lucas apparently put together at Disney's request (but which were ultimately not used in the film's final cut).
Ahhh... I guess that I will have to go see this thing for myself. I don't really want to give Disney any more of my money in terms of seeing The Rise of Skywalker in first release, but I've seen every single other Star Wars film (with the exception of Solo: A Star Wars Story - I haven't even watched this one at home!) in the theatre. So, I'll end up ignoring my better judgement and will go to this one. Will I go more than once? I doubt it.
Which brings me to my final point for today. At this stage in my life, I have a great deal of affection and nostalgia for the cinematic universe that George Lucas created 42 years ago. But, I think that it is important to keep in mind that all of these things are just movies. Reminds me of some wise words from William Shatner back in 1987 regarding taking Star Trek too seriously:
I wonder if I'll still agree with Bill Shatner at some point over the next few days after I've seen the potential abomination that The Rise of Skywalker may be. I'll let you know...
Interesting take by Eli Glasner at CBC:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.cbc.ca/news/entertainment/review-star-wars-skywalker-1.5398132
The Critical Drinker has weighed in...
ReplyDeletehttps://youtu.be/jilIx1EwJMk