Grossly overrated

Rating: 1/10 (17 October 2010)

This film is bad in the sense that it is hardly a film at all. It has no structure, no dialogue, no screenplay, a threadbare story, but one that is not told because of non-existent direction, etc. It continues where the original left off, and just notches off plot elements one by one without any urge to tell a story, or develop characters, relationships, etc. The makers probably conceived this as a filler between numbers one and three and didn't bother with it. Of course, that's all right. I don't have any problem with that. But what really does disturb me is the high praise meted out to this "film" from almost every quarter – from viewers and critics alike. On this board it's being rated as the 17th best movie of all time. I've consulted quite a few film guides, and they all tag maximum, or near maximum, stars to this film. Even more bizarrely, they consider it to be the best of the series, and in my mind it's clearly the worst. What is going on? Of course, it's not difficult to see why this film is idolized. The first film was both good and a milestone. Not great, but it was the perfect statement for an age. It was a fairy tale that was confused as science fiction. The "Force" embodied morality, even religion, for the space age. It is set in the distant past and therefore pertains to origins rather than where technology is going. Spaceships and laser guns are just the backdrop, and have nothing to do with the story or the subject matter. When this film appeared in the middle of the crisis-ridden seventies, it really must have been a beacon of "new hope". And to put the ground-breaking special effects into its proper context, they symbolized optimism. There is no doubt that the effects served the story well, but they served even better the mood of the age. And with all this going, Star Wars rightly became a tremendous hit, and the focus of fanatic devotion. It was to be expected that any sequel would have been gobbled up by the fan base, as long as it didn't spoil the original. Empire doesn't spoil the original. It not only continues the war between good and evil, it does so with more spectacle, more aplomb, more special effects.
When people say they like Empire, what I think they really mean is that thy like Star Wars so much that they are thrilled that it has a new and glossy wrapping. Because Empire is nothing but embellishment. They're not judging the film itself. The ideal situation would have been if Star Wars remained as a standalone fairy tale. Fairy tales end, and they leave us with the aura of "happily ever after". They don't go on and on and become sagas, and if they did that would totally destroy the aura. Empire is the first mistaken step towards saga, and that is why it quickly finds itself out of its depth. There is nothing else to be told, and that's why the film is so bad. One boring battle joined to another boring battle, and in between we have cardboard characters mouthing atrocious dialogue that serves no purpose whatsoever. The strain tells. Everybody is straining to do something when there is nothing to do. The third film, The Return of the Jedi, redeems itself by trying to finish a story. The prequels are interesting because they are filling in the background. But Empire is caught in no man's land. It is bad, and it should be exposed as such. All this pretending isn't healthy, I don't think.