Home

  FAQ

  The Book

  Articles

  Links

  Contact

Return of the King or Road to Ruin? An Examination of the Release and Reaction of Episode I

1999's Phantom Menace today is upheld as an example of Hollywood hype at its worst--a mediocre film, or so its critics accuse, loaded with stars and hundreds of millions of dollars and a swarm of fans ready to descend on the box office regardless of how good or bad the film is. At the same time, some Star Wars fans uphold it as an example of Hollywood hype at its worst in another way--how a genuinely entertaining film can be bloated to extreme conditions and then ripped apart by a media that thrives on the failures of others when unrealistic expectations are not met, and when overexposure leads to resentment and then critical recoil.

Much has already been written on the subject; most people seem to subscribe to the first perspective, that Phantom Menace was a poorly executed summer blockbuster that had anticipation riding with it that was not based on the merits of the film itself but the past achievements of Lucas and co. two decades earlier. Critics accuse that Lucas may have once been talented but in his twenty year retirement lost something fundamental; that the film had good special effects that overwhelmed what little human element there was, that the acting, writing and directing were mediocre at best, and that the film got by on the unconditional mania of fanboys and an unprecedented market saturation. Indeed, in 1998 Phantom Menace took a stab at Godzilla's marketing campaign--that film, massively hyped but then opening to poor reviews and disappointing box office, offered the tag-line "size does matter"; Phantom Menace billboards, lampooning the Godzilla font, boldly challenged "Plot does matter"--but now the film was choking on its own hubris.

On the second perspective, there has been comparatively little written in the media or professional fields; most come from Phantom Menace defenders on the internet, who usually defend the film was misunderstood, targetted from the beginning and thus never given a chance, or by some other chain of events victimised. The best legitimate example (as opposed to web ranting) of this camp comes from Jonathan Bowen, who self-published Anticipation: The Real Life Story of Episode I  (and later Revenge: The Real Life Story of Episode III ). The book tracked the hype, release and reaction of Episode I, offering a sympathetic view that the film was initially liked but then began to cultivate a snow-balling negative reaction that encouraged a negative slant.

However, examining what was being written and said and reported at the time, it seems that critics honestly just didn't like the film. During its pre-release period, critics looked forward to the movie with optimism, wishing Lucas well and eager to see what looked like a stirring chapter in one of cinema's grandest sagas--but, right off the bat, as soon as they saw the film they disliked it. It is sometimes thought that there was a snow-balling effect of Episode I's negativity, but by far its worst reviews were the very first ones, by critics who snuck into the sneak previews. These reviews, written before anyone else had seen the film (and thus without influence from other critics), completely trashed Phantom Menace , bewildered at the clunky plotting, thin characters and overkill of special effects. Fox became upset when they discovered critics disliked the film and were spreading negative word of mouth before it opened. Most critics reviewed the film a week or two later during the designated media screenings; the crushing negativity of the first round of reviews was not repeated, but most critics seemed nonplussed by the film. A couple of positive reviews surfaced from this collection, notably USA Today and Roger Ebert, while others gave the film so-so ratings, such as San Francisco Chronicle. Rated by Rotten Tomatoes, the film gets a 39% percent rating from these sources (or most of them, at least), which average at 4.9/10, while Metacritic rates the film similarly at 52%.

A few days later, the film opened to the general public. Reaction here showed greater variety--many hated the film, many loved the film, and many fans seemed to be doing their best to convince themselves that the film was satisfying in spite of understated disappointment. Its reputation with the public seems to have gone better than with critics, but it still was far from what would be considered a hit, and its harshest critics in the public sphere seemed to be Star Wars fans themselves. Financially, of course, the film was breaking almost every record in existence (due to two main factors: literally hundreds of millions of Star Wars fans who saw the film multiple times no matter what they thought of it, and the general public who regarded it as an "event" movie that had to be seen, much like Titanic a few years prior). Around this time, as the wider public saw the film, accusations of racism began to appear. And, of course, online the fandom had been severely divided. By the beginning of June, the film had already become infamous, even as it continued to rake in more money than any other movie that year.

Looking back almost a decade later, there does not appear to be a Blade Runner-like re-discovery underway, even as the generation that were children during Phantom Menace 's release grow up. The film's reputation has improved somewhat, but it's hard to resist the temptation to observe that this is only because it started out so low--the infamous film seemed to have opened leaving a bitterly sour taste in the media's mouths, but, as the veracity of that initial reputation has weaned off, history seems to regard the film as only mediocre or so-so. This seems to sit with the majority of critics from the films premier week--not as god-awful as those first wave of journalists proclaimed it to be, yet far from being a good film. The general public too seems to have found a similar appraisal of the film--its rating currently shows a 63% ranking on Rottentomatoes when accounting for websites and more audience-oriented publications, while on IMDB it currently has a 6.4/10 rating, and according to George Lucas, the reaction based on feedback from screener cards at test screenings seems to have been generally favourable. This is my own memory of how your average viewer took the film when putting aside the hype and expectation--not a great film, lots of problems, but good visuals and action scenes and an okay time at the movies if you just want to turn off your brain and enjoy an imaginative popcorn film; a sort of typical summertime action film.

This, in my opinion, is what seems to explain the general feeling of resentment, negativity, and the terrible early reviews. Critics (and fans) were not expecting a masterpiece, but they were expecting something above-average, and something whose biggest strength was not eye-popping visuals but believably portrayed characters and a more reeling sense of drama. Episode I has a strange dual nature to it in that the film is undoubtedly infamous as one of the great cinematic disappointments of all time and as a prime example of emotional storytelling sacrificed for special effects and otherwise hollow filmmaking, yet at the same time the majority of viewers, whether critics or regular audiences, do not rate the film as poorly as those labels would suggest. As I wrote in The Secret History of Star Wars , the world had not waited 16 years for a film that was merely so-so, which is what it actually gets rated as--most can admit to being entertained to a certain degree by the film, yet radiating off the screen is the overwhelming sense of potential for more, perhaps in the hands of a more capable writer-director, and it is perhaps out of frustration that the film could not become something more than mediocre that the backlash is best explained. In short, the best defense of the film against critics can be summed up as "lower your standards," a sentiment that the first fan-reviews from AICN seemed to suggest, while the critical response to the filmmakers is "make better films instead." The world seemed to have expected better from George Lucas.

What follows is a capturing of the film in the first weeks leading up to the movie's release in May of 1999. This record comes mainly from website TheForce.Net. I have chosen this for a number of reasons. In 1999, it was the Star Wars site on the net, but more importantly, it achieved this status due to its tireless reporting, often seeing updates by the hour, and in May of 1999 Star Wars newsfeeds were at their absolute peak. It remains as the most exhaustive play-by-play record of the time, in my opinion. Occasionally though, I have supplemented its news feeds with other sources it either missed or was late on reporting.

-------

• The first words on the film come from May 5th, 1999, from the previews approximately two weeks before the film's opening date. The very first voice to hit the internet, only a short time after the screening finished, comes from Ronald Epstein at Home Theater Forum. Click for Review Archive . He says the film is fun but slightly disappointing; about on par with Return of the Jedi . He says the action is great but there is too much CGI and the performances are dull.

• Next comes AICN, with many different views on the film. Click for Review Archive . In total there were seven AICN views that night:

"Sam" says: “all that I expected but not what I hoped for.” Impressed with design and FX, but surprised it is so kid-friendly. He liked the performances but was disappointed that the character relationships were not very developed.

Altogether, these sources, plus a few others, average 39% on RT's "tomatometer". When websites and a few other newspaper/magazine sources are accounted for, RT rates it as 63%--though this figure does not necessarily reflect its 1999 average, as this number derives from a few sources reviewing the film long after it opened; hower, it should be considered reasonably accurate.

02/07/09