In Defence of Star Wars Ep. I: The Phantom Menace (1999)

  Happy Saturday, folks. Today is the first of a new segment on Anachronarchy called In Defence of... This is a series of articles in which I come to the defence of movies that I think aren't quite as bad as everybody makes them out to be. For the series' inaugural airing we'll be looking at Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace (1999).

  And before I start, let me make one thing clear: I don't think The Phantom Menace is a good movie. It has tons of things wrong with it and everybody's talked about it to death. Jar Jar is annoying and unfunny and only there to sell toys. Anakin is awkwardly written and just as awkwardly acted by Jake Lloyd. (This is the kid who grows up to become Darth Vader?) Anakin's connection to C-3PO is wholly pointless. There's too much exposition and long, boring scenes of talking. Which one of these people is supposed to be the main character? And what the hell is Samuel L. Jackson doing here?

These are all legitimate points, but in spite of them I still think Star Wars Episode I is an OK movie. While it may not be the best written or the best acted it is filled with a wonderful amount of imagination and is good for some mindless escapist entertainment.

  If nothing else, one has to acknowledge that this movie has some wonderful visual designs. The way the droid army looks and moves is impressive stuff. Whether it's the droidekas that fold up into balls to roll around or the vulture droid starfighters that can walk around on their wings, one can safely proclaim the idea of an army made up entirely of machines to be a good one. Likewise, the aliens of Star Wars look just as interesting and convincing as ever. This was when George Lucas still bothered with makeup and animatronics instead of just recklessly splurging CG effects all over the place as he did with Episodes II and III. The respectable amount of practical effects they stuck with on Episode I lends more believability to that movie's aliens and environments (that is until animatronic Yoda was replaced with crappy CG in TPM's rerelease).

  It's quite clear that The Phantom Menace was a sprawling production with tons of hard work put into it from the costumes and sets to the choreography and the excellent scoring by John Williams. By today's runaway blockbuster standards it's hard to believe that the film was made for only $115 million.

  While TPM doesn't have the best of plots, it certainly makes up for it in the action department. While not exactly having much to do with the plot directly, the pod race scene was a thrilling distraction. The final lightsaber duel with Darth Maul at the end is – in my opinion – the best in the whole series. That fight's combination of great speed, fine choreography, dramatic scoring, and ingenious pacing makes it real treat to watch over and over again. Even Jar Jar Binks, as obnoxious and despised as he is, was genuinely amusing during the battle scene in which he wreaks havok on the droids through his own sheer ineptitude.

  All these factors – combined with the compelling performances of Liam Neeson and Ewan McGregor – make The Phantom Menace far from the unwatchable piece of garbage many people today proclaim it to be. As mentioned above, it has its problems but it is still a somewhat competently made film capable of entertaining.

  So why, then, do people call it trash? Could it be that since it was merely an OK movie and not a great movie that it was the victim of impossibly high expectations? Or is it that, since TPM was still two films removed from the original trilogy and by the end it didn't connect much to them, that the film just felt unnecessary once the end credits started rolling? Personally, I think the reason the Star Wars prequel trilogy is hated so much is because it focuses too much on setting up the original trilogy and not enough on telling compelling stories of its own.

  Speaking of which... tune in next week. You'll see.