Send in the Clones--don't bother, there here.

Rating: Null/10 (4 December 2002)

Well, at last the Clones have attacked...(we first heard about the Clone Wars way back...or ahead...in the first Star Wars movie--which George now calls Episode IV- A New Hope). So was it worth the wait? (I know you've been dying to hear.)
Well, it sort of depends on who you are. The world (or at least the world of movie goers) is divided into tres partes: 1) Those to whom Star Wars is a way of life, blowing away all such pretenders as "Dune", "Lord of the Rings", "Star Trek", "James Bond" or "Harry Potter" [Question: if Star Trek fans are Trekies, are Star Wars fans Warsies?]; 2) The naysayers and degradators who relegate Prince George and his Starwars Empire to the back section along with Saturday morning cartoons and 50's "science-fiction" creepies; and 3) the rest of us, who don't regard Star Wars as either Holy Grail or Junkyard Fodder, but just... entertainment.
First, the bad news. Story-wise, it is one of the weaker entries, largely because it needs to update (and, maybe, correct...Jar-Jar?) the preceding episode, while at the same time, keeping things in line with the later episodes (that is, earlier movies) to assure continuity. (Sometimes this is clever, but more often contrived, and occasionally, way too cute.) An additional story problem is the need to accommodate ever-topping special effect events, which tend to stall story development. Also, there is the typical problem faced by all War movies (including "Lord Of The Rings"): what do we do between the giant, spectacular war scenes to keep things interesting, while not seeming trivial. And George Lucas has introduced still another story problem: he has decided to give an honest-to-goodness, down-to-earth, sentimental Love Story, (not the enjoyable, wise-cracking "Thin Man" style love match of the first three Star Wars movies, but lots of what the kids describe as "mush and gush"), a genre that Mr. Lucas has demonstrated no previous affinity for or skill with. IMHO, he does not improve his record here.
The plot meanders in and out of romantic or dangerous or nostalgic or tragic, without any discernable reason. The dazzling special effects slam against the eyeball and eardrum with the same frenzy and intensity as the latest Ultimate Arcade Computer Game. The teeming hoards of marching, fighting soldiers are just are too vast to be believable, and move with the patterned redundancy that betrays their computer origins. The romantic scenes, although played by young actors who have previously demonstrated their merits, are hokey and trite, with dialog that would be laughed at if played in a contemporary setting, by even the same actors. The "tragic" scenes are contrived and without resonance. (OK, so nobody expects Shakespeare in a "Star Wars" movie...if so, why bother to put the scenes in to begin with? The original film didn't bother, which probably led considerably to its success.). The ending of the film leaves one with the uneasy sense that we've been here before (what is Mr. Lucas' preoccupation with severed limbs?). John William's apocalyptic score constantly contrives to remind us of the earlier films (as well as every other movie we've ever seen). This was one of the most over-worked orchestras in the history of music.
On the plus side, Lucas has heightened the prominence of two attractive young performers. Though the range of his performance here (he runs the gamut of emotions from whiney to p****d off) is narrow, Hayden Christensen (bolstered by an earlier, deeper, richer performance in "Life As A House") is clearly an attractive appealing young star-in-the-making. Natalie Portman has already impressed in "The Professional", "Heat" and "Everyone Says I Love You", so her Sandra Dee-ish turn here probably won't hurt her career (at least she is not burdened with the massive, flamboyant costumes she was hidden in for "Phantom Menace"). Christopher Lee seems to have taken over for the late John Gielgud in the race to appear in every movie made each year. Samuel Jackson is not given a lot to do, except kick butt in the biggest action sequence, which I'm sure he enjoyed. Liam Neeson mercifully did not re-appear as a ghost. Though it apparently thrilled a lot of fans, I have to admit that I found the image of Yoda flying around doing light-saber fencing more than a little ludicrous (and hilarious, which I doubt was the intent). But all-in-all, the casting is sound and credible. The cinematography is colorful and stylish, though it calls way too much attention to itself.
So was it worth the wait? Well, to be honest, I wasn't really waiting (as I have been, impatiently, for Harry Potter 2 and Lord Of The Rings 2...and even, much more patiently, for James Bond 20). But it won't be on any of my "Best" lists. And I can't see any reason to see it again. But did I enjoy it? Well... yes, I guess so. And the best part was: not once during the entire one hundred and forty-four minutes did I have to put in another quarter.