Presented here in the Star Wars story chronology, not that it really matters.
Star Wars I: The Phantom Menace
1999, Lucasfilm Ltd.
Where oh where do I begin with Phantom Menace? We all know what a struggle it was for George Lucas to realize his vision for the first film, which technically was the first of the middle trilogy—whatever. We all know the resounding, industry-changing, financial universe-altering success it turned out to be. So, what went wrong with his long-planned prequel? Before continuing, "wrong" must be qualified: whereas Menace was almost universally panned, and with good reason, it was still a massive financial blockbuster. This alone creates a logic-defyling paradox.
The original Star Wars was a compromise between Lucas and the studio. Consequently, its success must be viewed in that context. When Lucas arrived at a place in his universe where he could call all of the creative and financial shots, we got to see just how mediocre a filmmaker he really was: boring script, wonky casting, flat performances, and aimless direction. Not to mention one of the most annoying characters ever created: Jar Jar Binks. I really don't need to dig too deeply into its many salient problems; just search YouTube for Menace reviews, and you'll have more than enough honest, insightful analysis. Indeed, Lucas actually threatened one of the reviewers—hit a little too close to the mark there, George?
But then, there is one word that sums up how George destroyed Star Wars for me and, from what I can tell, a great many fans: midichlorians (I've even seen reviews for other failed films refer to the "Midichlorian Effect"). Explaining how The Force works sucked all of the wonder and mystery out of the universe he'd built—the universe we all bought into. Proof positive that the pen is mightier than the light saber.
The only thing that makes it worth watching? Stunning visuals. But, as I've said many times, effects alone do not a good film make—or even a mediocre one, for that matter.
Thus, by the way, the Lucas Effect was born.
DKS 12/17/17
Rev 9/24/22
GRUMPY OLD FART-O-METER® Rating:
Star Wars II: Attack of the Clones
2002, Lucasfilm Ltd.
While Clones was an improvement over Phantom Menace, it was a barely measurable improvement. The nearly universally reviled Jar Jar Binks was replaced by the almost-as-annoying whiny Hayden Christensen as the future Darth Vader, suffering through puberty and sharing absolutely zero chemistry—romantic or otherwise—with the uncharacteristically wooden Natalie Portman. Meanwhile, the legendary Christopher Lee was stuck being a cardboard cutout villain. (George, did we forget something crucial to good filmmaking? Like character development?)
Having learned nothing from the avalanche of harsh reviews earned by Menace, Lucas continued to pummel viewers with the painfully ponderous political "intrigue" (using that term sarcastically, if you couldn't tell) between the Republic and the Jedi. The results feel like an empty excuse to play with lots of cool new CGI toys, leaving the viewer with no incentive to invest their emotions in any of the characters. All of which leaves us, once again, scratching our heads over Clones' obscene commercial success. Honestly, I can't help but speculate the box office performance was somehow faked.
The only thing saving it from being 144 minutes of utter crap? Even better visuals than before. But, at the risk of repeating myself, effects alone... Oh, and if I hear "I've got a bad feeling about this" one more time, I'm going to fly out to Skywalker Ranch and pull Lucas' fingernails out. In addition to being inept at story development, Lucas is also clueless as to when a joke has long since stopped being funny.
DKS 12/17/17
Rev 6/17/22
GRUMPY OLD FART-O-METER® Rating:
Star Wars: The Clone Wars
2008, Lucasfilm Ltd.
Welcome to the rock bottom of the franchise. George Lucas, in all of his misguided "brilliance," deliberately chose to create a new, uniquely bad animation style: using high-end 3D technology to emulate the old, cheap Saturday morning cartoons. Yes, the awful-looking characters in Clone Wars were made that way on purpose. (Color me flabbergasted.) And that's just the beginning of the bad news... Lifeless voice acting. Wooden character animation. And an utterly abysmal script. The film has two modes of operation: long stretches of boring exposition alternating with stupid lightsaber battles. Lucas has succumbed to a terminal case of OCD over the minutiae of political machinations in his fantasy universe, as if everyone is clamoring for every tiny detail he makes up, when, in truth, we just want to be entertained, and detailed theses on play-pretend nonsense is not entertaining. Bottom line, Clone Wars was merely a teaser for an animated TV series, which was every bit as forgettable as this wet fart—if not more so.
DKS 12/17/17
GRUMPY OLD FART-O-METER® Rating:
Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith
2005, Lucasfilm Ltd.
Once again, Lucas proves he alone regards himself as an accomplished filmmaker. Granted, if this is measured only in terms of revenue, then yes, he is. But when critical reviews of his efforts are objectively gauged, he's lost way back in the pack. With Revenge of the Sith, one might envision a maligned director flailing about in a vain attempt to defend himself—fans and critics be damned.
Sadly, Lucas exacerbated this image when fans voiced outrage over some of the changes he'd made to the original Star Wars, particularly the "Han shot first" controversy: he sternly advised his detractors that Star Wars was his property to do with as he saw fit. That's true from a legal standpoint; from a cultural standpoint, however, the spirit of the film, if you will, belongs to its audience. Tinker with it, and see how quickly your revenue stream can be impacted.
Well, bad reviews or not, Lucas' revenue stream remained solidly intact—merchandise licensing alone has generated multiple billions of dollars for him. So, he feels free, indeed justified, to produce whatever crap he chooses, and pass it off as worthwhile entertainment. But consider: We all knew the ending, so it's not like he was creating anything that would surprise us. Anyway, who in their right mind names a film Revenge of the Sith? Clearly Lucas didn't give jack about potential ticket buyers unfamiliar with the Star Wars universe—I mean, WTF is a Sith? To quote Darth Vader, "Noooooo!"
And once again, the only thing saving it from being utter crap is a really cool light show. The only reason I can offer for having continued to watch Lucas-produced Star Wars crap is eternal hope for improvement. Well, so much for hope. The only saving grace is that Lucas has at last turned his empire's reins over to much more capable hands, as The Force Awakens has demonstrated brilliantly.
DKS 12/17/17
GRUMPY OLD FART-O-METER® Rating:
Solo: A Star Wars Story
2018, Lucasfilm Ltd. (Disney)
Continuing Disney's money-grab for any new Star Wars opportunity, Kathleen Kennedy found herself in deep Bantha poodoo when the production began to fall apart at the hands of the original directors, Phil Lord and Christopher Miller. After firing them, she brought in Ron Howard to rescue the project. Unfortunately, the resulting mess looks just like a project that fell apart and was patched back together.
But "creative differences" were the least of their problems; the film had a number of fatal flaws that doomed it from the outset. For starters, they went to absurd lengths explaining the Kessel Run, which was akin to Lucas trying to explain the force with midichlorians or some such bullshit. Certain things work much better when they remain a mystery. Adding insult to incompetence, they changed the proportions of the Falcon—that's just wrong. Anyway, there was simply no point in trying to re-cast Han Solo, a part that Harrison Ford totally owned.
Earning "only" $400 million, it was by far the poorest-performing member of the franchise. Two additional Solo films were planned, but methinks the likelihood of seeing them is pretty slim—which is probably just as well.
DKS 4/15/18
GRUMPY OLD FART-O-METER® Rating:
Rogue One: A Star Wars Story
2016, Lucasfilm Ltd. (Disney)
With his property now wrested from Lucas' greedy little hands, we get to enjoy some worthwhile entertainment from people who care as much about quality filmmaking as they do Star Wars. Yay.
That said, I'm not quite prepared to give Rogue One (which for some strange reason is considered a "Star Wars Story" as opposed to a full-fledged franchise entry—don't bother trying to explain why to me) a top score. To begin, it takes itself waaay too seriously. Remember, the original blockbuster that begat all of these descendants was cut from the same light fantasy cloth as Buck Rogers and Flash Gordon: Saturday popcorn fare, with villains to boo and heroes to cheer. Now we have grim, heavy war stories with which to contend.
But this is not to say Rogue One isn't enjoyable; quite the opposite. Perhaps its most rewarding quality is that it offers us a view of the Star Wars universe, however brief, through very a different prism. Supporting this intriguing new take is a solid cast delivering decent performances wrapped in sky-high production value, with truly outstanding effects that don't overwhelm the story the way they did in Lucas' godawful prequels.
Still, I must pick one more small bone: the best dramas are usually leavened with some humor. While Alan Tudyk is priceless as K-2SO—eliciting laughs through bone-dry, cynical wisecracks, which is refreshingly different from the whiny, increasingly annoying C-3PO—he's regrettably underutilized. [SPOILER ALERT: Do not continue if you're one of the five people left on the planet who hasn't seen it yet.] Sadder still, he'll not be seen again, exiting the universe far too soon in an awesome death scene that had me choked up. Seriously.
"And there's a fresh one for you if you mouth off again."
DKS 12/17/17
GRUMPY OLD FART-O-METER® Rating:
Star Wars IV: A New Hope
1977, Lucasfilm Ltd.
Note that I use the film's current "official" title grudgingly; in my heart—as I'm sure it does in countless others—it's still simply Star Wars, that fresh new ray of light that unexpectedly caused a tectonic shift in the film industry, set new box office records, and acquired a mind-bogglingly enormous fan base around the world. Not to mention it gave rise to the biggest merchandising take in history, making its creator one of the wealthiest filmmakers alive.
What can I say that hasn't been said, or reveal that hasn't been known, for decades? All I can do is reminisce about my own experiences. I feel fortunate for having been an adult when it was released; I had the unique opportunity of seeing it on a genuine big screen, at a time when smoking was permitted in theaters. This may sound bad, but the cigarette smoke actually made the film more spectacular: the lightsaber fights became three-dimensional, with streaks of light slicing through the theater from front to back. It was a genuine thrill.
Strange to think Lucas was so convinced he'd made a flop that he flew to some tropical island to escape the bad press. But then again, given how things went with his prequels, it may have been oddly prescient. And don't forget how Lucas went back and tinkered with his brainchild—more than once—in infuriating ways. Yes, Star Wars is his property, and he may do with it what he chooses, but to alter it with no regard for the fans he's acquired is short-sighted and contemptuous. Improving effects is one thing; changing the story is another. Han shot first. Period.
Trivia: Sound designer Ben Burtt is credited for starting Hollywood's Wilhelm Scream tradition by including the old sound effect from the 1950s: look for it just before Luke does his marvelous swing across a bottomless Death Star corridor.
DKS 12/17/17
Rev 4/7/22
GRUMPY OLD FART-O-METER® Rating:
Star Wars V: The Empire Strikes Back
1980, Lucasfilm Ltd.
I'll keep this brief, mostly because there's not much I can add to this film's appreciation. It's actually very slightly more popular than the original, and the fact that it wasn't directed by Lucas, and only co-written by him, should provide a wee bit of insight to Lucas' true talents—or lack thereof.
Meanwhile, sit back and enjoy the show. Just the chase through the asteroid field is truly the all-time best in its class.
DKS 12/17/17
GRUMPY OLD FART-O-METER® Rating:
Star Wars VI: Return of the Jedi
1983, Lucasfilm Ltd.
With Lucas back at the helm, the franchise began to strain and crack under his ever-tightening chokehold; according to one insider's tale, he was unhappy with Empire, and claimed he wanted to "show everyone how it's done." While still an entirely enjoyable effects extravaganza, Return suffers from a lack of originality, sharing entirely too many plot devices with New Hope. Then there's the clumsy, heavy-handed dialog, performances too over-the-top even for Saturday afternoon popcorn fare, and sickeningly cute furball aliens taking on the evil stormtroopers (here playing Keystone Cops) with all-too predictable results.
But wait, it gets worse: don't forget the maddeningly wrong-headed move by Lucas to replace Sebastian Shaw with Hayden Christensen as Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker in the revised final scene. Very nearly as offensive as Han shot first.
DKS 12/17/17
GRUMPY OLD FART-O-METER® Rating:
Star Wars VII: The Force Awakens
2015, Lucasfilm Ltd./Bad Robot
After lying dormant for a decade, George Lucas' brainchild was dusted off and rebooted by J.J. Abrams and company at Disney, Lucasfilms' new owner. While I'm sure they were itching to make a few billion off of their new property, they showed respectable restraint and took their time crafting a worthy successor.
Although The Force Awakens was a massive financial success—earning in excess of $2 billion—it was not universally praised by critics and fans. Accusations that it was a remake, as opposed to a reboot, were chief among the complaints. There were also accusations that it "serviced the fans." Well, what the hell is wrong with servicing fans? We're the ones who buy the freaking tickets!
And you know what? I don't care. Abrams delivered such an outstanding, enjoyable film that it more than compensates for its shortcomings. Perhaps most significantly, it was unabashedly fun to watch. Remember fun? As in the original? It's a vital ingredient that was lost along the way as Lucas churned out more and more prequels/prequel-sequels/whatever.
While it's not without its flaws, it's still hard for me to run out of things I really like about it. Daisy Ridley is a knockout newcomer; watching Rey go toe-to-toe with Kylo Ren in a force-versus-force stare-off sends chills up my spine. Han Solo's death (oh, don't tell me you didn't know about this) is gripping, even upon repeated views. The visuals are all utterly flawless; the spaceship graveyard in particular is awe-inspiring. The breathless pace is maintained throughout, with battle sequences that succeed at raising one's pulse, all accompanied by one of John Williams' finest scores to date. Plus, Abrams knows just how far to push BB-8's cuteness without becoming annoying.
I've watched it at least a couple dozen times already—even the French and Spanish versions, just for giggles—which ought to indicate how deeply I'm hooked. It's given me hope that future entries in the franchise will be as lovingly and skillfully crafted. This is the way Star Wars ought to be, and I refuse to believe Lucas isn't secretly envious. (Well, maybe he isn't, in which case he's a total dick.)
DKS 12/17/17
GRUMPY OLD FART-O-METER® Rating:
Star Wars VIII: The Last Jedi
2017, Lucasfilm Ltd./Bad Robot
I was so looking forward to enjoying more of the quality Star Wars J.J. Abrams brought us. And so I eagerly popped the disc in the player the afternoon it arrived. And as the film unwound, I became increasingly less satisfied. Don't get me wrong, it wasn't dissatisfying; it simply didn't stir the blood the way Force Awakens did—I actually nodded off at one point.
Its greatest shortcoming, aside from star-destroyer-sized plot holes and markedly inconsistent character behavior (Poe Dameron is alternately a hero and an asshole), is being entirely too dark—in spite of the fact that writer/director Rian Johnson insists he'd created a "fun film." Uh-huh. When the only "fun" is a lame, entirely too Earth-like cell phone joke, we're way short on fun. It had me anxious to see Ron Howard's Han Solo film—the previews looked quite promising. It simply had to be more fun than this grim eulogy to Luke Skywalker. (Um, sorry, but no.)
One thing is certain, however: Mark Hamill has finally learned how to act. When Luke tells Rey he'd only ever seen that kind of raw power once before, he looks so genuinely terrified it sends a shiver down my spine. The visuals are, as to be expected, nothing short of spectacular, with Snoke being the single greatest example of performance capture yet to be realized. And the silent destruction of Snoke's ship is stunning. But, once again, great visuals alone do not make a great film; if that were true, George Lucas' putrid prequels could all be declared masterworks. At least Last Jedi is better—although that's a pretty low bar to clear.
DKS 4/15/18
GRUMPY OLD FART-O-METER® Rating:
Star Wars IX: The Rise of Skywalker
2019, Lucasfilm Ltd./Bad Robot
When I heard that J.J. Abrams was returning to the franchise, my hopes soared. Now, to be sure, the production quality was second to none, with some utterly stunning visuals, and a few incredible set pieces. But the story was just too complicated, muddled, and flighty... it could have—indeed should have—been better. As Abrams has said, however, he knew he had an impossible task pleasing everyone. I must admire him for being that honest. It wasn't bad, by any means, and Abrams did far more right than wrong. It simply didn't gel. And despite the excruciating lengths they went to make the late Carrie Fisher's appearances work, there was no pretending we were fooled. Having said all of this, please don't mistake me for some rabid fan that claims Abrams should be crucified for committing high treason. Honestly, people, get a freaking life. It's just a freaking movie.
DKS 7/3/20
GRUMPY OLD FART-O-METER® Rating: