Wall Street might have had more to do with the making of this film than we know!

Rating: Null/10 (9 February 2005)

I would never have seen this movie in a theater if a reporter for The Wall Street Journal hadn't personally approached me and insisted that I must see it because the wise men on Wall Street were convinced that it was the wave of the future. The advertising hadn't appealed to me nor did the ordinary word of mouth, which said that it was lightweight intellectually compared for instance to "Star Trek" (the television series) or "2001." I wasn't pleasantly surprised when I saw the film because I didn't think the kinetic gimmickry or elaborate production design were a reasonable substitute for the strong characters and emotional themes that I had come to expect from the great action and adventure TV serials. Also, I felt the acting and dialogue were both substandard, except in the case of the robot characters. Some have said that the approach George Lucas used was intentionally "camp," but these are the same people who think that "The Lone Ranger" is dated and only for kids. There's an art to making the audience sympathize with the characters in adventure tales, which seems to be way beyond the film maker's capabilities.