Posted on 06/20/2015 11:05:05 AM PDT by rickmichaels
One day in the 1970s, George Lucas screened a rough cut of his new movie, Star Wars, for his influential Hollywood friends. And almost none of them liked it. The plot seemed incomprehensible, the made-up fantasy names absurd. Director Brian De Palma, who had just had a big hit with Carrie, made fun of everything about the film, including Princess Leia’s hairstyle: “Hey, George, what were those Danish rolls doing in the princess’s ears?”
Almost 40 years later, De Palma is mostly making low-budget movies, and the most-anticipated film of the year is Star Wars: The Force Awakens, the first Star Wars movie since Lucas sold the franchise to Disney. In June, Empire magazine published its “500 greatest films of all time” list, chosen by a poll of 250,000 readers; the winner was the sequel, The Empire Strikes Back, with the original also making the Top 10. You won’t hear people today making fun of Leia’s hair or Luke Skywalker’s disco haircut.
Instead, we have The Force Awakens director J.J. Abrams, who quit the Star Trek movies to defect to the franchise he’s always loved more. “Star Wars is probably the most influential film of my generation,” he said in 2006. “Everything that any of us does is somehow directly or indirectly affected by the experience of seeing those first three films.” This would have surprised Alec Guinness, who wrote to a friend from the set of the first movie: “New rubbish dialogue reaches me every day, and none of it makes my character clear or even bearable.”
It would also have surprised earlier generations of critics, who were raising doubts about George Lucas’s talent even before his second trilogy of Star Wars films proved them right. While the first Star Wars got mostly respectful reviews and even an Academy Award nomination for Best Picture, the bloom was mostly off the rose by the time The Empire Strikes Back came out. With its heavy tone and the implausible plot twist that the bad guy is the hero’s father, the movie was widely dismissed as a money-making machine that had lost the first film’s charm: “The Force is with us, indeed, and a lot of it is hot air,” wrote the New York Times’ powerful critic, Vincent Canby. “The Empire Strikes Back is about as personal as a Christmas card from a bank.”
By the time Lucas re-released the first Star Wars in 1997, many critics were willing to point out that even the original film didn’t hold up. “What’s stunning is simply how bad it is,” wrote Salon film critic Charles Taylor, while The New Yorker writer John Seabrook suggested it was “a film with comic-book characters, an unbelievable story, no political or social commentary, lousy acting, preposterous dialogue, and a ridiculously simplistic morality. In other words, a bad movie.”
Even if you liked the movies, you might not have liked what they were doing to moviemaking around the world. Alex Leadbeater, editor of the film site What Culture, wrote an article earlier this year on how Star Wars negatively affected cinema. He says it was one of the films, along with Jaws, that “led to the introduction of the blockbuster model and the weakening of the auteur model,” making studios less willing to take chances on Lucas’s edgier director friends such as De Palma and Martin Scorsese. That’s become such an unpopular sentiment to express, one forgets that mainstream film books used to say the same thing, but more meanly; film critic Glenn Kenny points to Peter Biskind’s book Easy Riders, Raging Bulls as a proponent of what he calls “the ‘Star Wars ruined everything’ line”; the book never misses a chance to portray Lucas as a sellout and Star Wars as a silly children’s film.
But today, you can barely criticize Star Wars at all. Actor and writer Simon Pegg (Shaun of the Dead) made a mild attempt this year when he argued that Star Wars might have killed off “gritty, amoral art films” and resulted in us “consuming very childish things.” The Internet attacked immediately, with Gawker’s pop-culture site i09 asking, “Is he trolling, or has he really gotten so little out of years of science fiction?”
And don’t even think about an artistic criticism: when Joss Whedon (The Avengers) criticized The Empire Strikes Back for not having a clear ending, his remarks stirred up the kind of Internet outrage usually reserved for people who make racist jokes. There was a time when even fans could be critical; today, the debate is not over whether those first two films are great, but just how great they are.
There has even been a shift in the way fictional characters react to Star Wars. In popular culture, being a fan of the trilogy used to mark a character as being nerdy, even behind the times. On the 1990s sitcom NewsRadio, the lead character (The Kids in the Hall’s Dave Foley) was mocked by the other characters for loving Star Wars. His ability to identify Boba Fett, the intergalactic bounty hunter from The Empire Strikes Back, marked him as having very different interests from everyone around him. Today, Star Wars is used in pop culture in the exact opposite way, as a cultural touchstone almost every sympathetic character loves. Liz Lemon on 30 Rock was a Star Wars fan; so were the characters on How I Met Your Mother (a woman who jilted the hero at the altar was a Star Wars hater). If a character likes Star Wars, you know he or she has good taste.
So what happened to change the way we looked at these movies? Leadbeater, who critizes the franchise’s influence, but admits the first two movies are among his favourites of all time—“I love Star Wars,” he says—thinks the changing reputation of the franchise is partly about generational change: “That shift came when those who grew up with the series came of age. They became a more vocal voice in the media, which shapes perceptions in many ways.” For filmmakers and critics of Lucas’s own generation, the movies were recognizably bigger, more expensive versions of things they had outgrown, like old serials; even the cliffhanger ending of The Empire Strikes Back, now seen as daring, just seemed like a ploy out of a Flash Gordon serial.
Younger critics and filmmakers not only grew up with Star Wars; they are less likely to view this kind of movie as inherently immature. The New Yorker’s Pauline Kael dismissed Lucas as “hooked on the crap of his childhood,” but people used to say the same thing about filmmakers who made Westerns, or samurai movies. An earlier generation of critics—including Vincent Canby—wound up giving more serious consideration to those genres. Today, we’ve done the same for the kid-friendly fantasy of Star Wars or superhero comics.
Star Wars is also benefiting from a new trend in pop culture criticism: an increased willingness to like popular things, and hope they’ll turn out well. Entertainment Weekly declared a wave of “pro-franchise optimism,” and, with Star Wars, in particular, it’s uncool to be too cynical; David Sims of The Atlantic wrote that people who complain about the prequels sound like “bitter Gen X-ers upset that their childhoods are receding further into the distance.” In an era when it’s almost obligatory to praise Beyoncé and other pop entertainers, bashing Star Wars doesn’t make you look refined, as it did in the 1980s.
Besides, there are many other things for critics to bash. Hollywood blockbuster movies have become so big that Lucas’s films seem charming by comparison. “As tent-pole movies have gotten ever more frenetic,” Kenny says, “the near-classical styling of [Star Wars:] A New Hope and the sobriety of Empire look more and more old-school and respectable.” One of the ways Abrams has encouraged fan optimism is to promise that the new film will use less computer-generated imagery than is the norm for modern movies, and more practical effects, miniatures and puppets. Star Wars films were once criticized for their overreliance on special effects; now, they’re from a more artistic and craftsmanlike time.
Could there be another Star Wars backlash? Maybe not. Kenny, who thinks Biskind’s criticisms were overblown, admits: “If you’re a fan of things like non-franchise, non-superhero movies, it’s kind of difficult now not to see Star Wars as a culturally corrosive influence.” But all the things people used to dislike about Lucas’s filmmaking—the New Age faux-religiosity, the overdependence on technology—are now inescapably part of every movie being made for mass audiences. Which means that, even if Star Wars: The Force Awakens disappoints, the original movies will just keep looking better. After all, as Kenny and others point out, Lucas’s visual language and storytelling in Star Wars were inspired by Akira Kurosawa. Today’s blockbusters have the disadvantage of being inspired by George Lucas.
Since my dad was born a Catholic, i chime in & say the current Pope & Pope John Paul II would & would have taken Star Wars at face value, for what it is was, meaning entertainment.
It’s perfectly understandable some liking or not liking the movies, or having a personal perception or angle. But, I really do think it’s absurd to put a religious spin on the movies - i mean that generally, not directed at you.
Now that sort of hypocrisy is hilarious.
The Marvel-Disney Comics(TM) franchise films requires you to watch 17 films spread out over 12 years of production to piece together storylines and characters from each of the films building towards some intergalactic war storyline (cribbed from 6-10 years of more developed comic book stories).
Time was that Star Wars fans, Trekkies, and Whovians were isolated and distinct cults. You were supposed to encamp only with one franchise. And the rest of society considered all of them to be "nerds" (not high tech scientific nerds but geeked out fanboy nerds who applied too much focus towards a fantasy life).
And what are many of Tarantino's movies other than a pastiche of trash cinema from the 60s, 70s, and 80s?
“You have some serious emotional problems,”
No, but you’re showing that you sure seem to. Remember, I posted ONE WORD. You keep going on and on about it. The one with “emotional problems” must be YOU.
“you jumped on this thread as a stalker,”
No, I saw “Star Wars” in the thread title. I have posted Star Wars related threads myself:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3285882/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3286066/posts
Notice, even though I have posted threads on Star Wars related topics in the past you have jumped to the conclusion that I “jumped on this thread as a stalker”. What you said there is then demonstratively false and again highlights how you make things up out of thin air. Again, who obviously has an “emotional problem”?
“an act of desperation and rage.”
Actually, neither. Again, I post Star Wars related threads. I saw this one. I saw that you and another notable FR anti-Catholic both dislike Star Wars and that made me wonder. As I said before the only two feelings I’ve had is amusement and wonder. Maybe now I should add pity to the list because you come across as such a pitiful, fragile creature.
“You obviously cant control it.”
You’re proving that you’re the one who can’t control himself. Figures.
Digital is ok...but not when the entire film is such. I think it was ‘Return of Sith ‘that was mostly all digital.
The Original Star Wars (A New Hope) is a popcorn movie. It is not social commentary or political. It is just a fast paced adventure flick where you cheer for the good guys and boo and hiss at the bad guys.
Anyone looking for more is looking for something that is not there and the people who made the film never intended there to be anything but what it was.
These so-called movie critics are clueless who think there should be more to be had from the movie. I read their tripe and feel they are the type who would go to burlesque show and rant and rave that it just didn't measure up to going to the opera.
It would be interesting to know what John Paul II thought of something like Star Wars. I wonder if he ever even saw the movie?
Sometimes the new crap simply ISN'T better than the old stuff.
Try applying The Atlantic's argument to reviews of The Rolling Stones' albums they've put out since the days of "Empire" (everything that came after Tattoo You) with those they made before it. "Oh, you just prefer Exile on Main Street because that's the one you grew up with, Steel Wheels rocks balls harder than that!!!" whatever.
And this same plastic argument could be used in society. "Your parents' generation only THOUGHT they had the American Dream with they owned their own home, stayed married, and lived to see their kids grow up, go to college, get even better jobs, and raise the next generation..." HA, they didn't even have texting, twitter, or The Daily Show. WHAT KIND OF LIFE WAS THAT???
No one in my world feels obliged to praise Beyonce or the pop president Obie.
Such empty praise is not found in the media I read, watch, or listen to. It is not found among the discussions held with friends and family. WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE???
Actually it took two of your stalking posts to me before I responded with a one sentence post.
You need to work on ending the stalking.
A bastardized copy of a copy of a copy...
Can’t recall reading any commentary from John Paul II about Star Wars movies. But, John Paul II was very savvy in keeping up with times, within limits, to not alienate young people by being extremely dogmatic.
It isn’t all about Strict religious dogma, but exercising judgement too, again within parameters.
“Actually it took two of your stalking posts to me before I responded with a one sentence post.”
Then you didn’t respond at all because I didn’t post a single “stalking post”. Again, we see you make things up out of thin air.
“You need to work on ending the stalking.”
You need to work on ending the making-things-up-out-of-thin-air habit you have.
“”beyonce” is clearly the child of one who could not spell worth spit!
Beyond that I have ni idea.
My last TV died years ago..and its dues to the crap that passes.....for modern entertainment that I never replaced that olde vacuum tube CRT behemoth.
Obama’s taste in entertainment matches his taste in all else.....
Yeah what a bummer ending. But I loved that movie as a kid. Fess Parker was Davy Crockett and he was the dad in that film.
The morale? Get your dogs their rabies shots.
Apart from the bit about political/socialist commentary, the same thing could be said about An Inconvenient Trufe!!!
It’s hard to make a “smash” hit out of a Taxi Driver or Easy Rider (which soured the film industry in their own ways), let alone an INTERNATIONAL hit film.
Today’s comic book franchise films from Marvel-Disney and others play down their American origins. Captain America became “The First Avenger” abroad. Superman mocked “Truth, Justice, and that other stuff (the American Way)”. GI Joe is no longer “A Real American Hero”.
I dare say it is better than that Jar Jar and Ewok business as well.
That may be but I wouldn't bestow the accolades on the director of the second one either. He later made a mess out of Robocop 2 and said he had a sh!t script to work with (that was well written by Frank Miller). He tossed out a lot of what was good and then blamed it on the writer. I'd wager his hand was restricted in what he did with Empire.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.