I’ve Got A Bad Feeling About This…

For the record, there are only three “Star Wars” movies.

Oh, I know what you’re thinking. “What’s the matter with you, you scruffy-looking nerf herder? There are obviously six ‘Star Wars’ movies – the original trilogy and Episodes 1, 2, and 3!” Well, in your universe, that may be true, but in mine the “Star Wars” saga began with two droids in an escape pod and ended with a big Ewok hoedown.

This isn’t the first time I’ve chosen to use selective memory when it comes to non-existent movie sequels. For instance, I still insist no sequels were ever made for “The Matrix.” Just consider me the International Cycling Union or the NCAA of movie fans. I may remember certain events happening, but I decide later on down the road to never acknowledge they actually took place. Remove your banners from the rafters, please.

Of course, you can imagine my confusion when, upon learning Disney had purchased Lucasfilm for 80 gazillion dollars, I began to hear reports of “Star Wars” episodes 7, 8, and 9 being made sometime in the future. “Hmm, I guess they’re just going to skip 1, 2, and 3,” I thought to myself. “Interesting strategy. Who am I to question the collective wisdom of Walt Disney and George Lucas, though?”

Putting all silliness aside, I still have a hard time describing my sheer and utter disappointment with “The Phantom Menace,” “Attack of the Clones,” and “Revenge of the Sith.” I’ve even tried several times over the years to convince myself I’m wrong. “Well, the effects were really good…” “Ewan McGregor was a really good Obi-Wan…” “Darth Maul was pretty cool…” “Um… Natalie Portman looked nice…”

I just reached a point where I couldn’t do it anymore. I had such a hollow feeling after seeing Episode 1 in the theater (Well, not as hollow as this guy, but still…) I actually wrote a column in the newspaper I was working for about it. In fairness to George Lucas, I’m sure after years of buildup and anticipation there was no way anything he did would have matched my expectations, but, my gosh, nothing could have prepared me for the train wreck known as “The Phantom Menace.”

That was just the glancing blow, though. “Attack of the Clones” somehow managed to pull off the nearly impossible task of actually being worse than the first movie. I still honestly believe the reason so many people enjoyed “Revenge of the Sith” so much is because of the pit of despair “Clones” had drug them into three years earlier. It’s like when Bruce Wayne finally climbed out of that pit/jail in “The Dark Knight Rises” – after you’ve been stuck in a hole like that, going back to Bane-infested Gotham City doesn’t seem all that bad.

I could go on and on about how poor the acting was, how badly written the dialog was, how weak the plots were, how when you’re making a movie about the past you shouldn’t MAKE EVERYTHING LOOK SHINIER, NEWER, AND MORE TECHNOLOGICALLY ADVANCED THAN IN THE FUTURE… Sorry, I guess was going on and on there, wasn’t I? But that’s how strong my utter disdain for these films runs, and I guess it’s why I didn’t exactly do back-flips this week when I learned of the Disney acquisition.

I’ve recently been reading the books “The Making of Star Wars” and “The Making of Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back,” by J. W. Rinzler, an author and editor for Lucas Licensing’s book division. In these lengthy, detailed, fascinating books, Rinzler details basically every step of how these two landmark films were made, warts and all. What has struck me about both films was the feeling of desperation in which both of them were made. The original “Star Wars” film was a huge gamble for everyone involved, from 20th Century Fox on down to a young filmmaker by the name of George Lucas. The financial success of the first movie was no guarantee that “Empire” would be a success either, as those were the days when sequels generally did not outperform their predecessors. Nearly every other chapter of the two books explains how each production teetered on the verge of bankruptcy time and time again.

Whether it was pride or naiveté or unflinching faith, however, Lucas and his merry band of creators pushed on through every obstacle. There was such a fire to prove that these stories were worth telling that nearly everyone involved risked their Hollywood futures to bring them to the big screen. That meant painstakingly long hours of crafting some of the most detailed models ever used in film; braving the elements to create the illusion of alien landscapes; and endless hours of editing sprawling plot lines. Of course, in the end, the gambles paid off.

That fire, to me, is noticeably missing from Episodes I, II, and III. By the time those movies were made, Lucas had a guaranteed, built-in fan base. Even if the movies were awful (Well…), they were virtually guaranteed financial success, which gave Lucas and everyone else involved free rein to take a more relaxed approach. I’m not saying massive effort wasn’t put into the new movies, but the fight for mere survival was not as prevalent, to be sure. Computer-generated landscapes created by keyboards and hard drives replaced hands-on craftsmanship. The actors were more well-known, as opposed to the cast of virtual unknowns in Episodes IV, V, and VI. Sometimes fear is a powerful motivator.

So now we are faced withe possibility of three more sequels, with each poised to shatter box office records before they are even made. The coup of wooing “Star Trek” director J. J. Abrams over to the dark side the rival franchise created some extra buzz, but even that news didn’t excite me that much. With the exception of the one incredibly entertaining “Trek” film, Abrams (in my eyes, at least) has always flashed more promise than results, and even if he restores the galaxy far, far away to its former glory, so what? The product has become so saturated now with spin-offs it’s sometimes difficult for me to even remember why I loved those original films so much in the first place.

I hope Disney and Lucas and Abrams and everyone else will prove me wrong on this. I would love to see a worthy follow-up to the original trilogy. In the meantime, I can only quote a line I heard a space rogue say in a movie one time: “I’ve got a bad feeling about this…”

Fumbling At The 1

Almost midway through Christopher Nolan’s sprawling “The Dark Knight Rises,” the villain Bane and his henchman detonate a series of bombs beneath the Gotham City football stadium, causing the playing field to collapse and fall into the sewers beneath the city. The fact that Nolan chose a football stadium to stage such a sequence is ironically fitting, as “The Dark Knight Rises” could be likened to the football team that just marched the length of the field and then fumbled the ball on the 1-yard line while trying to get into the end zone.

When Nolan brought Batman back to the big screen in 2005, the Dark Knight was coming off of two horrendously bad Joel Schumaker creations – “Batman Forever” and “Batman & Robin” – which had virtually deep-sixed the franchise in the mid- to late-1990s. Having directed films such as “Insomnia” and the dizzyingly innovative “Memento,” Nolan brought a solid resume in the project, and the results did not disappoint. “Batman Begins” pulled off the rare feat of providing a high-flying comic book adventure and a gritty, realistic character study at the same time. Batman was back.

Nothing could have prepared audiences for the second chapter in Nolan’s Batman trilogy – 2008’s “The Dark Knight.” Fueled by an intense, maniacal performance by the late Heath Ledger as the Joker and a harrowing tale which not only pushed the movie’s hero to his limits but also reflected the dilemmas presented by a post-9/11 world filled with ruthless evil, “The Dark Knight” proved the superhero movie could transcend novelty and become a true work of art.

With the commercial and critical triumphs of these two films under his belt, Nolan stood perfectly poised with “The Dark Knight Rises” to deliver the type of final chapter to his Batman story which would not only translate into major box office dollars, but also vault him to critical heights unheard of for a comic book movie director. Even before the movie was screened for critics, articles were popping up on the Internet handicapping the film’s Oscar chances. The world, it seemed, was prepared for a masterpiece and stood ready to anoint Nolan an infallible genius.

Unfortunately, the weight of those lofty expectations often show through the cracks in “The Dark Knight Rises.” The film has a kind of weightiness and weariness to it, even in scenes where Nolan tries to let the superb Anne Hathaway cut loose as Selina Kyle. Nearly every frame of the movie seems to be trying so hard to convey its importance that the final product winds up being nearly smothered by its own conventions. Where “The Dark Knight” operated with a simmering, slow-boiling escalation, “The Dark Knight Rises” attempts to step on the throttle from the word “go” and actually winds up losing its sense of urgency.

There are also some stunning lapses of directorial logic by Nolan, which is so surprising in light of how “The Dark Knight” hit every mark with a jackhammer-like efficiency. How in the world Nolan ever let Tom Hardy’s ridiculous Bane voice into “The Dark Knight Rises” will forever remain a mystery. Whatever Hardy and Nolan were shooting for, the end result is a disaster, threatening to derail the entire film every time Bane utters a line of dialog. There is simply nothing intimidating about the voice, which is a crippling trait for a character whose whole mode of operation is to intimidate through strength. Hardy is more than up to the physical challenges of the role, but the voice-over will inevitably go down as one of the worst in movie history.

The story of “The Dark Knight Rises” also takes some missteps in logic along the way. For example, the whole city of Gotham appears to instantly believe a speech Bane reads on television, in which Gotham City Police Commissioner Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman) spills the beans on what really went down with Harvey Dent in “The Dark Knight.” Never mind Bane is a terrorist wearing a monstrous device over his mouth, is holding a piece of paper no one can actually see, and has only been seen in Gotham a couple of times at this point in the movie. “Oh, Bane said it’s true. Well, it’s on TV, so it must be!”

There are other flaws as well. Nolan, unfortunately, succumbs to the temptation of trying to cram too many characters into the final installment of a trilogy. Oldman and Michael Caine are relegated to the sidelines for much of the movie, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt practically dominates a large chunk of the film. Christian Bale spends significant time away from the action in Gotham, while Cillian Murphy makes (another) rather bizarre cameo. Marion Cotillard ping-pongs in and out of the proceedings until she emerges as a plot device near the end of the film. No one delivers a bad performance, but no one excels in the way either Ledger or Bale did in the previous installment.

In the end, viewers are left with another Christopher Nolan “Is a lie okay if it’s better than the truth?” type of ending. From “Memento” to “Inception” to “The Dark Knight Rises,” Nolan has exhibited a fascination of this concept of the lie versus the true reality, but he seems to contradict himself here. The truth plays a large role in the early stages of the film, but is sacrificed again at the end of the movie for one character’s happiness.

“The Dark Knight Rises” may well have been a film doomed by expectations before it ever saw the light of day. Even so, it’s a shame Nolan couldn’t deliver the final run which would have put it in the end zone of movie classics.