Star Wars

4883 readers

2 users here now

Discussion for all things Star Wars. Movies, books, games, TV shows and more are welcome.

1. Keep it civil.

2. Keep it Star Wars related.

3. No memeposts. Memes are great and everybody loves them, but there is already !starwarsmemes@lemmy.world for those.

Community icon art from DeviantArt user DavidDeb.

Banner art by Ralph McQuarrie.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

_finger_@lemmy.world

setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world

25 Years Later, I Am Now A Star Wars: The Phantom Menace Apologist (kotaku.com)

submitted 6 months ago by Emperor@feddit.uk to c/star_wars@lemmy.world

32 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace is historically significant for many reasons: it was the first Star Wars movie in nearly 16 years, the last Star Wars movie shot on film, and a polarizing, pulpy entry in the storied space fantasy franchise. It debuted on May 19, 1999, 25 years ago almost to the day, and earned over $1 billion at the box office, despite mostly mediocre reviews.

Its legacy is an interesting one: One of its characters, Jar-Jar Binks, was so detested that the actor who portrayed him, Ahmed Best, faced what he told The Hollywood Reporter was “the first textbook case of cyberbullying.” Several racially insensitive aliens featured in the film remain a mark on the series to this day. The dialogue is weak and often incredibly grating.

Yet its late-stage lightsaber battle is the stuff of legends, its production and costume design is intricate and beautiful, and the infamous podrace scene is exhilarating. It is a Star Wars movie full of contradictions, so when my partner asked if I wanted to go see The Phantom Menace at our local Alamo Drafthouse, I jumped at the chance.

...

But despite all that is cringe and problematic in The Phantom Menace, watching it in theaters instilled in me a newfound sense of respect for the film.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 39 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It's weird, when the prequels came out, we all knew they were bad, with great bits, but we knew they're bad movies. Then we started making jokes about how good those bad movies were, and somewhere along the years the joke was lost, and people now legit think the PT is good. It isn't, it's got great bones but it's a badly executed trilogy

[–] deft@lemmy.wtf 13 points 6 months ago (1 children)

All of the star wars trilogies are really.

Great bones, good aesthetic and the right energy. Terrible plot, basic characters and contractions galore with bad dialogue everywhere

[–] Opafi@feddit.de 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Nah. The first one is actually good. It's not a bunch of smart movies, absolutely not... It's a monomyth, but it's well executed all around.

The prequels then removed decent dialogue from the formula but kept a proper story and the terrific world building.

The Disney trilogy lacked all of those as well and was reduced to terrible dialogue, terrible story and no world building at all, so all that was left were great visuals (which had lost much of their magic by then) and a decent soundtrack (which, however, had to bank on only nostalgia as the movies just didn't know where they were heading).

So, no, I really don't think the movies are all the same. Far from it.

[–] deft@lemmy.wtf 5 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I respect the original trilogy for what it was/did. However the writing is bad, the acting is bad, and the set was mind blowing for the time but you do get this high school theater vibe from it. Best of the trilogies but really not that stand out. Empire Strikes Back does a lot of the work that keeps the OT decent. By the time you get to Return of the Jedi though it really starts to be all over the road and gets pretty jarringly goofy with all the stuff they try to play on. Sometimes watching Return of the Jedi just feels like Spaceballs.

The Prequels have the best writing, surprisingly. The story is easiest to follow of the three and the aesthetic is beyond compare. Introduces the most information but also becomes heavy and muddy especially with all the CGI.

The disney trilogy is pretty bad. Cleanest production but that's really it.

None of them are actually that good, we just like them and know they could've been better.

[–] Baggie@lemmy.zip 4 points 6 months ago

On a rewatch a few years back it was amazing how much of the rot that hit the prequels and sequels started in rotj. It's not as bad for certain, but the turn towards what was familiar from the other movies, characters being flanderised, and the whole thing being a bit of a mess all show up in that movie. It even was the first to do the yet another death Star.

[–] Opafi@feddit.de 1 points 6 months ago

the writing is bad

I really disagree. As I said, it's not a smart movie, but the world building was well done, characters acted in consistency with their knowledge and motivation and you had proper worlds building from the first movie onwards. Dialogues were cheesy, but certainly not as bad as it was in the prequels. It's a fairytale with knights and princesses, so I wouldn't expect or want deep, philosophical writing... It's not blade runner. But it fits the setting.

the acting is bad

Sorry, but I just really disagree. It wasn't stellar, but I really cannot remember a single scene where the acting put me off.