BEFORE: I've been building to this all year long, it turns out. Every choice I made, to watch THIS movie next or to skip THAT one for now has led me here, basically back to the beginning - the beginning of the Movie Year in January 2009 ("Star Wars: The Clone Wars" was movie #2) and to the beginning of my own fascination with films, which was kicked into high-gear in 1977 when I saw the first film (Episode IV: A New Hope) as we're now supposed to call it. I've seen every Star Wars film since then (umm, except the animated one...) on opening day, and I don't intend to break that streak now. Whatever I've had to do, skip out of school, call in sick, that is what I'll do, because this is the film series that I live for.
I've avoided all reviews, stayed off of Twitter and Facebook (mostly) this week, in anticipation of Opening Day. I didn't even watch Colbert's interview with Mark Hamill until it was a week old, and only then after I was fairly confident that no spoilers would be involved. All I really watched was the official "Last Jedi" previews, and then I felt even that might have been too much. You see, back in the day, 1983, on the eve of the premiere of "Return of the Jedi", I bought the paperback novelization and read the first half of the book before seeing the movie, and then of course instantly regretted doing so. There need to be surprises, so I take this very seriously, for a "Star Wars" film I go in as cold as I possibly can. Good or bad, that's what I've decided to do.
Expectations are extremely high - and I've already rated two films with scores of "9" this year - "Thor: Ragnarok" and "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2". Can anything possibly beat those scores, and consider that I'm probably TOUGHER on a "Star Wars" film than any film from any other franchise... Obviously, Carrie Fisher "carries" over from "Bright Lights".
FOLLOW-UP TO: "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" (Movie #2,200)
THE PLOT: Rey develops her newly discovered abilities with the guidance of Luke Skywalker, who is unsettled by the strength of her powers. Meanwhile, the Resistance prepares to do battle with the First Order.
AFTER: I went to see "The Last Jedi" at the AMC Empire Theater on 42nd St. in Manhattan, it's where I saw "The Force Awakens" too. Right across the street was the Regal Theater, which used to the Regal E-Walk (Ewok?) but now has a giant sign that reads "Rebel", so you have the Empire on one side of the street and the Rebel on the other - appropriate for "Star Wars", right? Only the sides aren't called the Empire and the Rebellion any more, they're the First Order and the Resistance. So this coincidence would only have been applicable for Episodes 4-6, I guess, or "Rogue One".
But I realize that not everyone feels compelled to see this on opening day, as I did. So how do I write about the film, without writing about the film? This was a common problem for me this year, by my rough count I went out to the movies 10 times this year, all sci-fi and superhero and animated films, and I'm not going to be the guy spoiling any film, especially a "Star Wars" film, for anyone. In this case, I'll use some metaphors and reference what I liked and didn't like about it, just without being very specific.
The first thing that leaps to mind is, maybe this film is perfect for our current political climate, with an unpopular (at least in MY state...) President with some people, at least, comparing him to a tyrant. So naturally one might infer that Trump's administration is the Evil Empire (sorry, "First Order"), and the liberal Democrats are the Resistance. Well, General Hux does have that shockingly orange hair... Possibly this isn't the "Star Wars" film we deserve, but perhaps it's the one that we need to see, to keep our own hope alive. And that's a funny sort of PC shift, the way that the good guys in "Star Wars" used to be called "Rebels", but now they're "Resistance".
When I hear "resistance", it calls to mind the French citizens during World War II, who fought against the Nazis occupying their country. We've determined that Nazis were on the wrong side of history, and therefore the Resistance was on the right side of history. (Well, duh, history is written by the winners, and the Nazis lost...). But I think we can all agree that Hitler was evil and wrong, and therefore Nazis were too. (See, Mr. Trump, it's not that hard to get there...). The problem with the word "rebels" is that it calls to mind the Confederacy from the Civil War, and again, we now believe they were on the wrong side of history, too. So it's a subtle shift from "rebels" to "resistance", but it carries some weight. Looking back on my review of "The Force Awakens", I struggled then with determining the difference between "rebels" and "terrorists", because I'm really not sure what the difference is, I think it really depends on your point of view, and whether you agree with their cause.
But in another sense, since I work in independent filmmaking, I could also depict DisneyCorp as the Evil Empire (and I say this as a shareholder...) - Disney bought Marvel, Disney bought Lucasfilm, and they just bought much of 20th Century Fox. It's ironic to me that they own the "Star Wars" franchise now, and have to release a story about the little independent rebels fighting against the giant mega-conglomerate First Order, when that's exactly what Disney does, they buy up other studios and other franchises. You could say Disney's mission is to take over the entire entertainment galaxy, and it's a bit weird that they plan to get there with films like this one, where ruling the galaxy with an iron (cartoon) glove is a BAD thing. I used to hear radio stations all the time play that sound clip from "A New Hope" where an imperial general says, "This station is now the ultimate power in the universe..." Sure, it's funny when "station" means a subversive radio station, it's less funny when it's a movie studio that now owns half of Hollywood's output.
But let's get back to "The Last Jedi". In much the same vein as "The Force Awakens", this film throws pieces of former Star Wars plots back at us, little things that reference bits of Episode V or Episode VI, while still taking the overall plot in a drastic new direction. If that's what you're looking for from a new "Star Wars" film, then this is an unqualified success. But still, just a bit long with a running time of 2 1/2 hours. (Make sure to use the restroom before the film begins...). As you could probably surmise from the film's preview (and the ending of the previous film, so no spoiler) Luke Skywalker has been found - but did he want to be found? And if not, then why? And why does he say that "The Jedi must end"?
We "Star Wars" fans came out of "The Force Awakens" with three major questions - 1) Who is Supreme Leader Snoke, and where did he come from? 2) Who are Rey's parents? and 3) What the heck happened between Luke Skywalker and Ben Solo during Ben's Jedi training? I can't really say that we get a whole lot of coherent answers to these questions, but maybe between zero and one of these get addressed. That's not to say a lot doesn't happen in this film, a great many things happen, but unfortunately if you're looking for clear answers, as Luke says, "This is not going to go the way you think!"
As the second film in the sequel trilogy, this is the "Empire Strikes Back" for the new generation. It's designed to continue the story, but not really resolve anything. Go back and watch Episode V and you'll see it's the darkest of the original trilogy, where the rebels are on the run and all hope looks lost, Luke is many things but he's not a Jedi yet, and essentially, it gave the audience very few answers and a ton of new questions.
And what these two newer films do very well is continue the spirit of Luke, Han and Leia in the three new heroes - Rey, Finn and Poe. They are not carbon copies of the first three stars, sometimes Poe reminds me of Han but he flies an X-Wing like Luke did, and he's got a military mind like Leia's. Finn has the eagerness and drive of Luke, but he's got an outsider's mind for strategy, like Han. And Rey has force powers like Luke, but she flies the Falcon and hangs out with Chewbacca like Han did, and she's a strong woman like Leia is. So they all have these little echoes of the original three main characters, while representing entirely new combinations of those heroic traits at the same time. Kylo Ren, meanwhile, wants very badly to be the new Darth Vader, but he's still a whiny millennial brat - and yes, they do have those in other galaxies too.
But (and you knew there'd be a "but", right?) back in the days of the original trilogy, there was a lot of romance in "Star Wars". OK, not a lot, but a little. There was this "will they or won't they" speculation about Luke and Leia, and then about Han and Leia (and a few freaks who, after learning Luke and Leia were siblings, still thought they should get it on...). So far, in the sequel trilogy, there's been no real romance, just suggestions of possible romance down the line. After "The Force Awakens", I thought it was clear that they would eventually pair up Rey and Finn, but now I'm not so sure. I think this is an unfortunate by-product of having a new director take over, and it feels like the last director didn't share his notes about what direction he was going to take things eventually.
So it's maddening to me that we don't know if we'll ever see Rey and Finn together, or Rey and Poe, or Finn and this new girl, or possibly even Rey and Kylo have some kind of connection. Heck, at this point I'd settle for Finn and Poe falling for each other, because at least that would BE a direction. But hey, maybe nobody's got time for romance because, you know, there's a war going on.
If I'm critical at all of this film, it's still too long, and that means the pacing is sort of off. When it comes to key over-arching story elements, there's a sense of "delay, delay, delay" because all the pieces have to be in place for certain things to happen. But still, there are about 10 "Holy crap!" moments for "Star Wars" fans, and that means in one sense, this film's swinging for the fences, much like "Thor: Ragnarok" did, and that's very important in the end.
There, I feel like I've told you everything you need to know, while telling you nothing at all. My work is done.
Also starring Mark Hamill (last seen in "Elstree 1976"), Adam Driver (last seen in "Midnight Special"), Daisy Ridley (last seen in "Star Wars: The Force Awakens"), John Boyega (ditto), Oscar Isaac (last seen in "Drive"), Andy Serkis (last heard but not-seen in "Dawn of the Planet of the Apes"), Domhnall Gleeson (last seen in "Ex Machina"), Gwendoline Christie (last seen in "The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2"), Anthony Daniels (last seen in "Rogue One"), Laura Dern (last seen in "The Founder"), Kelly Marie Tran, Benicio Del Toro (last heard in "The Little Prince"), Billie Lourd (also carrying over from "Bright Lights"), Joonas Suotamo, Jimmy Vee (last seen in "Pan"), Tim Rose, Mike Quinn, Veronica Ngo, Mark Lewis Jones, Adrian Edmondson, Amanda Lawrence, the voices of Frank Oz (last heard in "Inside Out"), Lupita Nyong'o (last heard in "The Jungle Book"), Tom Kane, Joseph Gordon-Levitt (last seen in "Hesher") and cameos from Justin Theroux (last seen in "I Shot Andy Warhol"), Lily Cole (last seen in "Snow White and the Huntsman"), Warwick Davis (also last seen in "Rogue One")
RATING: 8 out of 10 ski speeders (I really think I should give 8.5 here, but I don't do halves because the IMDB won't register that as a rating. However, I reserve the right to alter my rating after a second viewing, and you KNOW I'll be seeing this one again...)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete