Star Wars Prequel Trilogy - A Missed Opportunity

Star Wars is part of the cultural fabric of the modern world. Its influence has been substantial and the generation that loved the original trilogy as children are now the established professionals within film and media. And even if you are not a fan of the films you cannot escape their influence.

That is why it is so sad that the recent prequel trilogy was frankly so weak. When episode I (The Phantom Menace) was released in 1999 sixteen years after the Return of the Jedi in 1983 there were huge expectations and a real pent up demand. The effects were stunning and broke new ground in the Industrial Light and Magic tradition of always pushing the envelope on every film.

The plot was dull and contrived and fairly aimless. That could be forgiven as this was the first instalment which had to set up the story for the remainder of the trilogy and then dovetail into the existing films.

There were, however, three things that were simply unforgivable.

The first is Jar Jar Binks. If at any moment there was any risk of you getting absorbed into the story and actually believing any of it up jumps Jar Jar with his prat falls an "stupid negro" talking which is simply cringe worthy if not actually racist. A similarly disgruntled "would be fan" created a version of episode one and put it on the internet calling it "The Phantom Edit" which was a cut down version which simply removed all shots that included Jar Jar. I had considered doing the same myself simply to see what the film would be like without this hugely annoying creature.

The second unforgivable mistake was the inclusion of the droids R2D2 and C3P0. Yes, the use of the droids , inspired by the servants in Akira Kurosawa's The Seven Samurai, as the unifying thread by telling the story more or less from their point of view did work in the first trilogy. And a similar device could have been used in the new trilogy. But to use the very same robots at a point in the story set 25 years earlier is just moronic. The idea that Anikan, a ten year old boy, could actually have built C3P0 is just insult to injury. If C3P0 was unique that would not be so bad, but other robots exactly like C3P0 are present in both the original trilogy and this film. It would be like a film where a modern kid built his own Sony PlayStation 3.

The third thing was the dialogue which was simply awful. Lucas had too much control as write/director/executive producer. Rick McCallum may be a good producer but he is in awe of Lucas and simply does what he is told and does not question or attempt to rein in Lucas' excesses. The screen play should have been handed to someone else to fix the dialog at some point.

There are all sorts of things that also undermine the story which are more than minor quibbles:

• Anikan's "virgin birth"
• The introduction of midiclorians
• The fact that Anikan and his mother are "slaves" but seem to come and go as they please, have a nice home and posessions
• The idea that Anikan also built his own pod racer (how much free time and spare cash do these slaves have?)
• The trip though the Naboo planet core in a submarine space ship
• The fact that the "queen" was elected
• The menagerie of impractical and unlikely creates on the Jedi council.

The second and third films picked up the pace and reduced Jar Jar's part which initially gave the impression of an improvement. But now with a few years perspective, these films are in many was even lesser films that Episode 1. By the end of Episode three you just want to smack Yoda over the head and tell him to stop talking backwards.

Where the original trilogy was strengthened by having a back story, this trilogy was weakened by being the back story. In the original 1977 Star Wars film we know in the first few minutes that Leia is the good princess who needs to be rescued, Darth Vader is a terrifying baddy, that there are some stolen plans that are important and need to be delivered to the good guys to defeat the bad guys. There are clear dramatic objectives for the audience to follow. The final space battle has primarily two models of ship, good ones and bad ones, the objective of the battle is to fire a torpedo into a ventilation shaft and we have identifiable pilots in both the good and bad ships. The consequences of failure are also very clear in that if they fail to destroy the Death Star, it will blow up the planet on which the rebels are based and that will be the end of the good guys.

By contrast, the new trilogy seems to exist almost solely to tick points on a checklist of things prerequisite for the original films. These are not in themselves of any dramatic interest. There is a huge cast of characters, few of whom make any impression on the viewer. The battles have no apparent objective and there are so many different types of space craft it is simply too confusing an ambiguous to inspire much desire to see a particular outcome.

Despite this the new generation of ten year old kids have lapped up the films and they have been hugely successful. I have to wonder if the problem is not the films themselves but the fact that both trilogies are kids films and that the difference is that I was a kid in 1977 and not in 1999. But somehow I just cannot believe that.

By way of contrast there is Battle Star Galactica. This was a 1978 Star Wars copy cat film and TV series. It too was set in a different galaxy. The premise was that man who inhabited "the twelve colonies" (which were separate planets) had created robots called Cylons which looked like chrome covered storm troopers from Star Wars. The Cylons had rebelled and a long war had followed. The series begins on the eve of a peace deal which turns out to be a Cyclon ambush which wipes out all of humanity except for one "Battle Star" a sort of spaceship aircraft carrier called "Galactica" and a "rag tag fleet" of civilian ships carrying the last surviors of humanity. They flee the old colonies in search of the mythical thirteenth colony known as Earth.

Again I was a kid and enjoyed the series, but it had limited success. Galactica has also made a come back in the "re-imaged" series. Fans are divided and die hard supporters of the old series refer to to this as GINO (Galactica In Name Only). The premise is more or less the same except that the Cylons had left man alone for 40 years and unknown to man had developed themselves to be almost indistinguishable from real humans. Their sneak attack to wipe out the real humans was facilitated by their ability to jam all the networked human computers with viruses.

The big difference is that the new BSG (Battlestar Galactica) series is devised as a drama for adults. Unlike Star Trek and its derivatives, these are not morality plays, but focus on the relationships among these surviving humans and their struggle against the Cylon threat. They do not have laser beams, only real bullets and tactical nukes. The rockets use directional thrusters to manoeuvre and the space scenes are shot as if by a hand held camera by a news crew with frequent rough zooms and pans. Everything about the series seeks to be credible and engaging to a grown up audience.

If only Lucas had tried to make something new with the prequel trilogy and not wasted a real opportunity to create something truly great.

So for some fun examples, illustrations and irrelevancies.

This is simply a clip from Episode I with a subtle change made a couple of minutes in. Bare with it until then because the point it makes is startlingly valid.



This is a funny song about the new series of Battle Star Galactica with clips from both the old and new series.



And this is a video a group of guys made at home with the Imperial Cruisers from Star Wars doing battle with the Battle Stars of BSG. What is amazing is how little difference there is between the efforts of multi-million dollar visual effects companies and what has been produced by six guys and their home PCs. Sure there are differences and some would argue this is just a good animatic but I'd be proud of it.