Fast-paced sci-fi action flick with some serious shortcomings

Rating: 3/10 (20 May 2002)

*** Plenty of SPOILERS ahead. Beware. ***

Duh. This movie left me mostly unsatisfied, but then so have most Star Wars movies with the exception of "The Empire Strikes Back".
The problem with "Phantom Menace" was that it was mostly about a pod race in the desert. I know it was supposed to be about other things, but the way it was written, cut and directed, all that other stuff sort of diminished.
Now "Clones" was about... uhhh, what, actually? There's some kind of a story there, but it branched out into various directions and sub-plots, trying to keep viewers occupied with action scenes that didn't do anything to further the main story. The main story, by the way, was Anakin being drawn to the Dark Side and Senator Palpatine's tricks and intrigues to become Emperor. But I doubt that anybody noticed, as this rarely featured in the film at all. Instead we got action scenes, a few cheesy love scenes, and some more action scenes. Did we really feel Anakin's falling to the Dark Side or did we just see a pouty teenager? Did anybody realise that Count Dooku's droids were part of a plot engineered by Chancellor Palpatine and had nothing to do with the Trade Federation? And why the attempt to kill Senator Amidala? Oh, if you look very, very closely, you might find a few seconds donated to brief explanations of all of the above, but this could have been so much more interesting.
I like "Empire" so much because it is perhaps the most focused film of the series, always trying to further the main storyline. Plus, it's dark, grim and depressing, and it thrives from the psychological impact of Darth Vader's evil presence. With all the evil present, "Clones" could have been similar, but wasn't. There were a couple of good beginnings, but things weren't properly developed, as the plot had to haste from action scene to action scene. And the bad guys were mere cardboard characters, even Christopher Lee failed miserably as Count Dooku (I like to call him "Count Dookula" ;-)). And why is the face of Darth Sidious still not seen? Isn't it obvious that it is none other than Chancellor Palpatine? Why not spend more time on him? I kept wondering whether there was no plot, or whether it just wasn't going anywhere.
At least the computer-generated landscapes didn't look as pathetically fake as they did in "Phantom Menace", although I thought having Padme and Anakin picnic in front of five Niagara falls was a bit over the top.
As far as the actors are concerned, I must say that despite the fact that Ewan McGregor is certainly a good actor, the absence of a true character actor (such as Liam Neeson in Episode I) was strongly felt. Also the fact that most of the time the actors had to interact with thin air (a.k.a. computer-generated characters) and didn't stand on a set, but in a blue room, shows.
And a director should always beware and not try to enforce a love scene between two characters played by actors without any chemistry between them. The love scenes in this movie were about the cheesiest I ever saw in a film. As it happens, in the movie theater where I saw this film, the audience laughed during most of the "romantic" scenes. Granted, Natalie Portman looks quite hot in the one scene with the open fire in the background when she talks about "living a lie", but it really felt to me like she was "acting a lie".
Hayden Christensen... oh my. This guy is cute, but he still has a lot to learn about acting. Whenever he tries to put on a "serious" face, he is about as successful as Bruce Boxleitner in "Babylon 5" - that is to say NOT.
As I said, Ewan McGregor wasn't bad, but he is no match for an Alec Guinness or a Liam Neeson. Plus, his beard irritated me, because it looked different in just about every scene. He was helping to construct a good back story for Obi Wan Kenobi, a character I have always liked, and he brought that character to life with all his strengths and weaknesses - definitely well done.
Unfortunatly, there was some humour, which was, well, tedious. Not only did C3PO deliver probably the worst pun on film ever, most of the one-liners were just incredibly lame. I had more fun with Jar Jar Binks in Episode I.
This gets me to the bottom line:
"Attack of the Clones" is a solid science fiction movie with lots of fast-paced, well choreographed action scenes that really kick butt (especially the one with Yoda vs. Count Dracula, which had the audience in the movie theater in cheers). Apart from the grand action, however, a potentially very good story was unfortunately totally ruined by mediocre writing, mediocre acting and abominably bad directing, which did not care to put emphasis on the scenes that really mattered. The story behind the entire Star Wars series is a fascinating mixture of mythology, human emotion, and political intrigue. What we got here was neither of the three, instead we got tapestries of visual effects and action scenes that did nothing to further that story. Overall, it's a movie that just wasn't focused on anything, and were it not part of the famous Star Wars series, it definitely would not get the attention it is having.
I so hope that Episode III will be better. But I fear that the huge potential that's lying in store there will just as well be laid to waste.
Overall, of the five Star Wars movies I'd rate "Clones" second or third, definitely behind "Empire", and probably behind "Star Wars". Funny enough, the more I learn about the back story of Anakin, the more I dislike "Return of the Jedi" - it brings the whole thing, which is getting more and more complex, to such an unsatisfactory, and terribly cheesy ending. But that's a different movie altogether.