An important piece of cinematic history -- good or bad

Rating: 8/10 (30 April 2003)

Few people need to be explained the impact of "Star Wars." It rightfully belongs amongst the most influential works of art of the 20th century. It was an overwhelming commercial success. Nearly everyone who's lived at all during the past 26 years since its release has probably seen it -- at least once. It started the merchandising tie-in trend that has started to this day. It was a critical success --witness its Oscar nominations and wins and its win for Best Picture from the Los Angeles Film Critics Association. People are fanatical about it and have fallen in love with the characters, story, and themes.
But is it "good?"
There is a lot to admire about "Star Wars." It is an audacious film. For example, it starts at "Part IV," outright saying that it's portraying the history -- not the (fictional) story, but the REAL history -- of another universe. (And many moviegoers choose to believe that it IS real.) The special effects continue to impress. The story is as exemplary a myth as any.
But the acting is just about terrible. Alec Guinness is, well, Alec Guinness, and the rest of the cast stands in his shadows. Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher do their job, but Mark Hammill is just disgraceful. (It doesn't help that his character is whiny and annoying -- or is it just in the portrayal?) Adults, if you haven't seen the film in awhile, try watching it again without laughing when our boy Luke is whimpering "What's that flashing?" Besides which, most of the drama is really melodrama.
Ok, so these are perhaps petty gripes. "Star Wars" is far from the best film ever made, but neither could its importance ever be underestimated.