This week, several friends of mine (who don't know each other) used Facebook to link to an article in which a blogger named Machete pontificates on the proper viewing order for the Star Wars films. Before I read it, there would have been absolutely no question in my mind on the subject: IV, V, VI... and best stop there. (But if you must, then IV, V, VI, I, II, III. Not I, II, III, IV, V, VI, as Lucas himself would now have you do.)
But then I read the article. And I suggest you take a moment and go read it too.
I have to admit, the "Alternative Suggestion" makes a lot of sense to me. Entertainment audiences have become quite accustomed to non-linear narratives in the last decade or so. They've become particularly adjusted to the flashback structure, and extra-particularly adjusted to the "flashback which provides context for the main narrative." So yeah, I'm now thinking, if you must watch all six movies, I do have to wonder if the best order for it might not be IV, V, I, II, III, VI.
But what to make of his eponymous "Machete Order," in which the writer suggests that the narratively superfluous Episode I be jettisoned entirely?
Well, on the one hand, I can't argue with some of the points this Machete makes. Episode I is fairly inert in terms of story. The movie does play at best like a prequel to the prequels, putting pieces onto the board that is "the Clone Wars" without actually kicking that story off in any meaningful way.
But, on the other hand, I think Machete is being blind to what a terrible movie Attack of the Clones was. Seriously. That is by far the worst Star Wars films. Ask anybody what the "good parts" of The Phantom Menace were, and you actually can get a handful of different answers that people don't really have to hedge about:
There's the podrace. Machete dismisses it as a prolonged action sequence that doesn't advance the plot. First, that's false. At the very least, it lays the groundwork for Anakin's natural ability as a pilot. Secondly, the poster child for "prolonged action sequence that doesn't advance plot" was delivered to us at the end of The Matrix Reloaded. And thirdly, it's unfair to be so dismissive of a sequence that should have earned Ben Burtt an Academy Award for his amazing sound design. Seriously, every audiophile I know uses this sequence from this film to test a new home theater setup. It's genius work.
How about the lightsaber duel? Best duel of the six films in terms of choreography, and in terms of defining each participant with a signature fighting style. Also, the death of Qui-Gon (which Machete is quick to dismiss) does serve as a narrative echo for the events of Episode IV -- the master must die so the apprentice can come into his own.
Or what about... well, okay, I might be tapped out on the "good parts" of Episode I. But seriously, name me one good part of Episode II. (And if you say the Yoda fight, you're wrong. I find no entertainment in watching a CG whirling dervish fight a CG-augmented, frequently stunt-doubled 80-year-old man.) And even if you could come up with one truly good Episode II scene, would it really be worth sitting through the hackneyed dialogue and wooden acting of the Padme-Anakin courtship scenes? If only there were a way you could omit that film from the narrative, then I think Machete might be on to something with the "leave one movie out" approach.
Basically, I think Machete is just reflexively responding to the fans' thirst for blood when it comes to midichlorians, Jar Jar Binks, and Jake Lloyd. Yes, those things sucked about The Phantom Menace. But Attack of the Clones sucked worse even without any of those things.
So I think I can't complete the journey as Machete proposes. Though I do at least thank him for the suggestion of the Lost-style viewing order of IV, V, I, II, III, VI.
1 comment:
I do agree with Machete that there's nothing vital in Episode I, and I would have no qualms skipping it altogether.
But I also agree that with you that Episode II is far worse than Episode I.
My conclusion? Just forget the prequels. Every important moment of the back story is discussed in the original trilogy (as it should) and the fact that we don't actually see those events unfold clouds them in a mythical fog that works to the overall story's advantage.
(Hearing Obi-Wan speak of how Vader was ultimately turned to the dark side was always a lot more chilling than actually seeing it.)
Frankly, the prequels are so bad anyway -- why would anyone WANT to work them inside a Star Wars marathon?
FKL
Post a Comment