Star Wars: Episode I: The Phantom Menace Anniversary Today!

nihonnyanko152

New member
Okay, it's been talked about to death here (I think!) but today is the 10th :eek: anniversary of perhaps the most anticipated movie in recent times. With all this talk at the moment of the Star Trek reboot, its easy to forgot the media melt down over the return of Star Wars back in the summer of 1999.

At the hype, all the hope, for the start of a new and exciting trilogy. My question to you is, were they dashed? Were you disappointed? I have a feeling I know what the majority of answers is going to be, but there are (believe it or not!) some TPM fans out there. I still love the film, could it have been better? Yes. Was Jar Jar a mistake? Too forced upon us? I suppose so, though I have watched the film with several people and there wasn't that much hate for him, which was interesting.

I do wish Darth Maul had done more, Palpatine was perhaps one of my favourite things about the film and I really liked Amidala/Padme's character. Plus, Brian Blessed as Boss Nass! :D MESA LIKE THIS!


Discuss!
 
It was the first 'Star Wars' film I saw so I didn't have any baggage or any reason to be disappointed in terms of a comparison with the earlier films. It seemed to me like a reasonable enough slice of fantasy / sci-fi / action-adventure.

I've seen the original trilogy since and found them to be somewhat over-rated so I don't share what seems to be the prevailing dimmish view of the later films. My favourite of all 6 would be 'Revenge Of The Sith'
 
I was indeed disappointed - although I still saw it three times at the cinema to make sure! There are many tonally jarring elements (cartoony aliens, slapstick humour) which just don't sit well with me, or the tone of the Original Trilogy.

That said, if you can mentally (or physically, if you do, or acquire fan edits) removed those elements, there's a cracking little film underneath. Far better than a first viewing would imply.

On many levels, due to the physical sets and overall tone, it's the most "Star Warsy" feeling prequel film, IMO.

Much as there are elements that bother me about the flick, I still love it like a family member. Just as slightly dim, occasionally misbehaving one.
 
The only people who hated it are the pathetic star wars nerRAB who have never been laid in thier lifes, to the general public or normal star wars fan it was a good film, as all the prequels were.

Apart from Jar-Jar who was the most annoying thing ever. Terrible decision.

'Revenge of the sith' is only bettered by 'reture of the jedi' IMO'
 
It starts off too adult (taxation, trade routes, political blah blah), then sharply becomes the cartoon adventures of baby-face Anakin "oops!" Skywalker. The best aspect of the film was probably Darth Maul (who was easily as visually striking and imposing as Vader IMO) but they gave him far too little screentime. The big lightsaber duel was pretty good, though it screamed "coreography!" a little too loud. All in all, just too much of a disappointment for all the hype. The following films showed some improvement, but not a great deal.
 
It / They did.

All three of the new films were bad. The new Star Trek, Casino Royale Batman etc are a lesson in how to begin to revisit and set a prequel to a franchise.
 
It would have worked better as a TV mini-series, episode 2 as well.

Each episode could have been 30mins with a cliff-hanger at each ending, then the (relatively) complex plot could have been better integrated into the action.

Finishing it all off with an actual cinema film, Revenge of the Sith.
 
I've always thought there was a delicious irony that George Lucas' career path mirrors his fictional creations to some extent.

He started out as a filmic Luke Skywalker forging an enduring mythos only to eventually become Darth Vader & damn near destroy his legacy.
 
I watched The Phantom Menace a few weeks ago and it has not aged well. The dialogue is idiotic, the acting stale, the story boring and non-sensical and the nail in the coffin Jar Jar Binks. It will not ever be forgiven and re-appraised as a misunderstood masterpiece, it's a dreadful mess made by a megalomaniac independent film maker with too much money. I've chucked it in the bin because it's total rubbish along with the other two that were made (unbelievably) after it.
 
Although fans of the original trilogy can enjoy Return of the Sith and some elements of Attack of the Clones, the fact remains that The Phantom Menace is just a kiRAB film.

The original Star Wars was pitched at teenagers in terms of its key audience and main characters. Harrison Ford, Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher were in their twenties/thirties when they made the first one, so the story works with an older audience. Anyone who watched it aged 10 can still watch it 20 years later. Empire even more so.

Unfortunately, The Phantom Menace has an irritating brat as its lead character, some clumsy slapstick and a plot about trade routes that could hardly be less interesting. So there is nothing for an older audience.

If you're in touch with your inner 8 year old then its fine but for anyone teenage or above, it's basically unwatchable.
 
You're all wrong. TPM is the best of the sequels and hasn't aged too badly. It was massively over hyped and was never going to live up to expectation. It ranks 4th over all, not far behind ROTJ. Even Jar Jar isn't that bad in hind-sight, compared with the Ewoks!
 
I'm gonna watch it tonight, not seen it in some time and then I'll give my verdict here. I take everyone's points on this thread and I see their reasoning. It was never gonnabe the same in mu opinion, the story was too different, however I think the execution of that story is what bothered most people...and Jar Jar Binks. LOL
 
Damned if I can understand what all the trade route stuff is about but I still find The Phantom Menace to be an enjoyable film. Doesn't feel like 10 years ago since it came out :eek:
 
It's a very poor film. Awful dialogue and atrocious attempts at comedy. JJB in the final battle sequence is horrifically unfunny.

And I'm still convinced Jake Lloyd won his part by finding a token in a bag of crisps or something.

And 'midi-chlorians'? RAB!
 
The Simpsons parodied that guff mercilessly.

I think Lucas might have been trying to draw parallels with Weimar Germany & the industrialists who thought they could control Hitler.

What that particular subtext is doing in a flick with 7 foot rastafarian frogs though is anybody's guess.
 
The day Star Wars films died for me.

I still remember seeing the clip of the guy coming out the cinema and saying "I've waited 20 years for this and its terrible" made me laugh. dont quote me too much on the quote - poor memory these days
 
Ah, The Phantom Menace. Possibly the best thing it gave us was Simon Pegg's over-exaggerated nerd-rants in Spaced!

But that's not a slight to TPM, but rather a compliment to the comical genius of Mr. Pegg. In fact, I don't think TPM is a terrible film. Is it the best? No. But its not the worst, either Ok, it might be the worst of the Star Wars saga, but its not the worst film ever made.

There was much good in there. Liam Neeson and Ian McDiarmid, for example. Its also Natalie Portman's best turn as Padme, as her chartacter gets crushed under her love for Anakin in episode 2 and its drowned under almost no story for her (other than getting knocked up) in episode 3. The pod race was an exciting piece of action and Darth Maul ruled the world as most badass villain ever - if only for a very brief time on screen. The final lightsabre duel is - for my money - the best of the saga.

John Williams soundtrack was also, predicably, brilliant. Duel of the Fates is one of his best pieces of work.

However, the film does suffer in several areas. The Neimodians are (I believe, unintentionally) comical and don't work well as villains. In fact, the whole opening of the film is very poorly staged. Everything from the opening scroll to arriving at Tatooine feels chopped together and flows badly. So much happens in so short a time that it feels many scenes of exposition must have been cut out to keep the pace at an unnecessarily high speed. Or perhaps it was because the story didn't really start until we got to Tatooine and this whole sequence was rushed through to get us there. Still, if they needed to make cuts, they could have removed that whole pointless sequence with the giant fish. Pointless CGI just for the sake of it.

Then there's Jar Jar. I don't feel I need to go into WHY he was a mistake, because everyone knows it. Comedy cartoon character who engages in cheap slapstick and even descenRAB into poo and fart jokes. Unnecessary and adRAB nothing to the story. Should have been cut in the first draft.

But at least he wasn't vital to the plot. Unlike one Anakin "I will one day rule the galaxy, whilst wearing a big black suit and breathing like I've got chronic asthma" Skywalker. Jake Lloyd was terrible. Dreadful, even. It didn't help that he had rubbish dialogue, but he was so unbelievably wooden. And they called him "Ani" for short. ANI! Good god, no wonder he turned to the dark side! Way to mess with a young boy's head. But then I could forgive that if he wasn't forever saying "oops" and "yippee." The character of Vader didn't deserve raping like this.


Still, I think the basic premise of the film was sound. It still shocks me that people don't understand what the whole "trade route" debate is about. For those still in the dark, I'll walk you through it as quickly as I can.

Senator Palpatine is a Sith Lord intent on taking over the galaxy and exterminating the Jedi. So he sets out a plan to get himself elected as the Galactic Chancellor. After all, he has no army and cannot invade and why use force when you can get the population to simply give you the power? He manipulates the senate into making some rather mundane and seeminly unimportant tax changes, with the aim of pissing off the large and well-armed Trade Federation. Then, as his alter ego, he offers to assit the aggrieved party. But, in doing so, he creates a humanitarian disaster on his own homeworld. Simultaneously making the current Chancellor appear weak and generating sympathy for his people (and consequently, for himself, as their elected representative) he worms his way into the Chancellor's seat.

So it was NEVER about the taxation of trade routes. That was just the hook used to give the Trade Federation a grievance that could be exploited. And that's the thing about TPM; underneath it all, its actually a complex story of dirty politics and the manipulation of the public to gain power. Deep down, TPM is a good story. Its biggest problem is that its buried under poor dialogue, bad direction and a jarringly cartoonish sense-of-humour.

One really shouldn't mix serious politics and slapstick comedy. Not if you want to be taken seriously.
 
Back
Top