Every series has a weak episode - this is it

Rating: 4/10 (17 February 2004)

Spoiler im going to bring up some points on phantom menace and why i thought it was a boring flat and tired film. please feel free to disagree. Debate is the corner stone of democracy :)
1) the question of heroicism. the jedi as hero vs darth maul as the evil threat.
I ve read on this site people arguing whether or not maul is a good baddy. by definition a "good baddy" is someone who challenges the main character (or the hero) to ever higher of heroicism either characterised by wit, physical stamina, agility, fighting ability etc. The main characters must be tested and pushed to the absolute limit of their endurance, forced to rally at the darkest hour feats of unimaginable heroicism So when they win out in the end its incredibly moving and triumphant. The jedis in this film werent pushed very much at all, their intellect was not challenged, no intricate puzzle to unsolve (as in the sixth sense, the usual suspects etc) and since there was very little character development I wasnt very moved at all when liam neesons character died in the end. This detracted from an otherwise exhilarating fight sequence. The killing of maul by obi wan is basically a revenge killing (quite a passionate and exciting motive as characterised by many films) but its not that triumphant a killing cos we dont care much about its justification. Compare his Qui Gonns death scene to the one in Leon: the professional. Or William Wallaces death in braveheart. breaker Morant, Gallipoli, Old Yella, the yearling, The death of bambis mother. Qui Gonn is just some guy telling Obi Wan what to do. We care when Obi Wan dies in star wars because he fulfils a nice paternal role for luke something that Qui gonn doesnt even come close to. Obi wan later in life is the perfect image of everything a grandfather should be old, wise, patient and loving; A guide in a tumultuous life, a patient friend in a chaotic evil galaxy. Qui gonn is neither.
The fact that this movie is a prequel ruins the tension. We know Obi wan will not die and since Qui Gonn does not appear in the later films we can presume that he will be the one to die. Obi Wans character was flat. I recall references by Yoda and Ben himself saying that he - obi wan, was a hothead and a brilliant military general. Im still waiting to see that unfold and the third and last of the prequels is upon us. When Qui Gonn says to Yoda in phantom menace he is a hot head but he is ready to be tested to become a fully fledged jedi knight it is a false statement. Where have we seen to be a rebellious hothead ?? or heroic. Much like darth maul himself he is but a pawn to do his masters bidding. The most of the lines he says has the words "Yes master", "no master". The phrase "three bags full" would not have sounded out of place..... In lucas defence he sets up a a brilliant opportunity for these two jedis to really interact like butch cassidy and the sundance kid or the guys from reservoir dogs or Die hard 3 or pulp fiction or any number of brilliant buddy movies but unfortunately the promise goes unfulfilled. There could have been real tension between master and apprentice. Think of the brilliant scenes in fantasia where mickey mouse goes behind the back of his master and unleashes a technicolour hell upon the world, the whole baby with a gun theme with the master desperately trying to temper the youthful exuberance of his pupil. Lucas had an endless array of opportunity to enliven the film with the trial and error of youth vs the well trained master but absolutely nothing in the way of that happens !! Obi wan is boring pawn. Compare his role to the feats of heroicism of bruce willis "Die Hard" (1988), character john mcClane. Where he is sitting in the bathroom his feet cut and bleeding. He can bleed like us. There is a connection between us and him. Here he is fragile. he is human. theres a great chance that he may not survive. So when he finally wins out in the end it is all the more triumphant. Theres no real tension between the bad guys and the jedis. For most of the movie they dont even interact !! The trade federation leader being the middle man who communicates for both groups.Darth Maul was flat. He is just a walk on baddy. It is not enough to stand around in the periphery looking menacing and ugly as darth maul did. He wasnt a heroic bad guy cos simply he was palpatines lap dog ever willing to do his masters bidding. That is not a heroic bad guy that is a pawn. The first rule to making a story exciting to have tension between interesting characters and to dramatize this tension in an exciting dramatic way. sorry George you failed. A good guy is only as exciting as the bad guy is. allow me to repeat myself. A good guy is only as exciting as the bad guy is. Why ? because the human drama that is the lives and objectives of these two divergent groups are intrinsically bound. if a bad guy is a push over can the main character be considered heroic ? If the main character uses luck (as annakin does) to win out in the end is he heroic ?
the script as such did not enable darth maul to fulfill the promise of a decent bad guy and nor did the script enable the two jedis to be very heroic. in the scene where we meet jar jar they run away for gods sake ! Also Jedi's to my mind are supposed to be intelligent and respectful "keepers of law and peace throughout the galaxy". These two jedis were rude arrogant and obnoxious arguing that jar jar was beneath them and sub human even though he was obviously sentient in that he could speak ( a point jar jar himself argues). As Qui Gonn says "the ability to speak does not make one intelligent" (or thereabouts i cant remember the exact quote). OH what a wise man indeed. This contradicts the beautiful poetic imagery of the jedi as being heroic gentleman knights as was illustrated in the first films. George has lost the plot- assuming he had one to begin with. this brings me to my next point -
2) the new generation vs the generation who saw the first films (like me)
I know that people are going to argue - the movie was meant for kids so lighten up. Ok well nuts to that and heres why. George Lucas showed us in the first three films that you can make a movie for kids that is also loved by adults as well. Kids can love the immediate pleasure of action and excitement and adults can understand the sensitive portrayal of the coming of age story of the teenager they once were (i.e. luke), and both can understand the themes of love, honour and betrayal, good and evil (and yes its proven that kids can understand these concepts at a relatively early age). He achieved this brilliantly in the first films. tha fact that he didnt even remotely attempt this let alone achieve it says loudly and clearly that in every conceivable way (except financially) phatom menace was a failure.
thanks