okay-but not the best

Rating: 8/10 (27 February 1999)

First of all, I would like to say that I did enjoy Star Wars. But only for the entertainment of it. The film isn't some kind of "high art" or something. The best sci-fi film out there is by far 2001. Then Dr. Strangelove. Star Wars isn't sci-fi. It's part western, part myth, part legend. But not sci-fi. It's not a pioneer in special effects. 2001 is. Whoever said that "nothing in the following years is better" is wrong. I believe you said that Jaws and Raiders of the Lost Ark were not better. That's your opinion, but Jaws was made before Star Wars. I like art films. 2001, Psycho, The Godfather. My favorites. And, although I enjoyed Star Wars, it is not correct to call it the greatest film ever. The acting is horrible, and the characters are lame. Han Solo is the only good character (besides Anakin, and maybe Obie-Wan) because he is flawed. Luke is barely flawed, and the few flaws he had disappeared within the first fifteen minutes of the movie. Leia isn't flawed at all. Good characters are flawed, severely. Norman Bates (Psycho), Micheal Corelone (The Godfather), The Human Race (2001: A Space Oddyssey). All flawed. Great stories have flawed characters. It's always been like that. Anyway, that's my two cents.
-LMAN