Reel life: Readers revisit 'Star Wars' I-VI
'Force'd to comment
Dear Dann: After re-watching the six "Star Wars" films to prepare for the new movie, I think that episodes I, II and III were given a bad rap. "Phantom Menace" has the pod race, which is a blast, and the best light saber duel as far as I'm concerned between Obi-Wan Kenobi and Darth Maul. Ray Park, being a martial artist, gave a deadly credibility to the role.
"Clone Wars" shows the growing friendship between Obi-Wan and Anakin Skywalker along with the battle scenes. "Revenge of the Sith" shows Anakin's inner struggles with his destiny along with Obi-Wan wanting to believe in his friend but realizing his conflict.
Of course, the light saber duel between them in the climax was the most brutal of all. Gritty and dark, this is truly the tragedy story out of all the episodes. As a fellow fan I'm looking forward to "The Force Awakens."
- Brian E. Skol
Brian: Thanks for your admirable defense of the "Star Wars" second trilogy. As I have pointed out many times, I consider Episodes I, II and III to be visually well-crafted but minimally consequential works, as they are "resumes" (George Lucas' own word) that essentially expand on the information covered in 75 seconds during the introductory screen crawl in "Episode IV: A New Hope."
- Dann
Dear Dann: I would argue that the three prequels are about something, thematically, but it's depressing. The heroes, for all their derring do, are always being manipulated by the villain who will rise to absolute power. In other words, the inadvertent theme is that heroism is futile.
- Dan Hagen
Dan: I agree with your somber assessment of the second trilogy. If all the "Star Wars" episodes had been produced in chronological order, I do not think IV, V and VI would have been made.
The first three visually well-crafted movies with their dark pessimism, bad casting choices and eye-rolling dialogue ("I am haunted by the kiss you should not have given to me!") would not have earned the initial and significant repeat business to justify a second trilogy.
And, because I, II and III are functionally six hours and 58 minutes of exposition for IV, V and VI, their "heroism is futile" isn't a true theme, just an early dramatic complication defining the characters.
To misquote Shakespeare, much ado about not very much.
- Dann
Film critics notebook
• The After Hours Film Society presents Christian Petzold's post-WWII mystery "Phoenix" at 7:30 p.m. Monday, Dec. 21, at the Ogden 6, 1227 E. Ogden Ave., Naperville. Admission $5. (Usually, the After Hours movies go for $10 general admission, and they are shown at the Tivoli in Downers Grove.) Go to afterhoursfilmsociety.com.
• Dear Dann: Bad news. I saw "In the Heart of the Sea" and liked it. Your two-star rating I thought was a little low. Not a great movie but I loved how they made the characters real, gave you a feel for the time, and how important and brutal the whale oil business was back in the day. Good news. Sunday's article about "Star Wars" was spot on. I loved the first three movies. Numbers 4, 5 and 6 (stunk). Can't wait to see what you say about the new one.
- John Tomasiewicz, Elgin.
Dear John: One of my many problems with "In the Heart of the Sea" was the story being narrated by whaler Tom Nickerson (played by both Tom Holland and Brendan Gleeson) who relates events, meetings and conversations he could not possibly have witnessed or known about in any detail. This drives me nuts when a movie opts for a first-person perspective, then lapses into convenient omniscience whenever it runs into exposition problems.
- Dann