Not as Bad as Episode II, But it Still Doesn't Work

Rating: 5/10 (19 November 2019)

"The Phantom Menace" isn't quite the worst "Star Wars" movie - that would be "Attack of the Clones." Unlike Episode II, Episode I has a basic level of awe and wonder that leads to compelling action scenes, some heartfelt moments of human drama, and of course an amazing John Williams score. But everything that fans and critics alike complain about is truly bad: the acting is often stilted, the dialogue is awkward, the story is mundane, the characters are flat, and Jar Jar Binks is an unbearable nuisance. Thankfully he doesn't play an integral role in the film's plot, making it easy for you to simply skip through most of his scenes without missing anything important. But I still can't believe that the same filmmaker who created Han Solo and Darth Vader also gave birth to perhaps the most annoying character in recent film history.
There's several reasons why Episode I doesn't work. Firstly, Lucas hadn't directed a movie in 22 years and it shows in the lackluster performances and poor special effects. The visuals from the original 1977 "Star Wars" still hold up as completely convincing - and beautiful - but the GCI characters in "The Phantom Menace" appear like they're copied and pasted from a video game. Secondly, Episode I has none of the heart and soul - the pure inspiration - that made the original trilogy great. Thirdly, "The Phantom Menace" just wasn't a story that needed to be old. We already know Anakin's backstory from watching "Return of the Jedi," and we didn't need three movies to explain it all over again. The reason why "Revenge of the Sith" is the best "Star Wars" prequel is because it's the only one with a story worth telling. "The Phantom Menace" is simply unnecessary, and therefore not very interesting. I recommend checking out the action sequences individually, and listening to John Williams' score independently from the movie, but I can't give a thumbs up to "The Phantom Menace" as a whole. 5/10.