Revisiting the Star Wars prequel trilogy

There'll be some spoilers, of course, so you may not want to read this if you don't know about Star Wars.

It's fair to say that Star Wars: Episode 1 - The Phantom Menace was the most anticipated movie in cinema history. The original trilogy introduced audience to something fresh, something new, and became an instant classic. It spawned the greatest entertainment franchise to have originated on the silver screen. In the decade or so following Return of the Jedi, the hype for the prequel trilogy only grew, reaching a crescendo when it was finally announced in the mid-90s.

George Lucas claims to have envisioned a trilogy of trilogies, opting to start off with the middle trilogy in the mid-70s. While I'm sure he had a pretty good idea about the series, it's clear that the pieces fell into place after the first Star Wars. Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader were very likely two different characters then. At some point during The Empire Strikes Back's writing process, Lucas must have chanced upon the wild idea of combining the two characters. That completely changes the dynamic of the prequel trilogy. The first six episodes then becomes the "tragedy of Darth Vader", above all else.

However it turned out, The Phantom Menace was never going to meet the sky high hype. Everyone in Hollywood knew this, including Lucas himself. He approached some of the best directors in Hollywood - Steven Spielberg, Robert Zemeckis, Ron Howard, among others - but no one wanted to direct it. They would tell Lucas "you're the only one that can do it!", but I suspect no one wanted to take up the immense pressure of delivering a new Star Wars. In the end, Lucas directed the trilogy himself, not his first choice.

In addition to the impossible expectations, everyone knew how the prequel trilogy would end - adding another challenge to the mix. Lucas could have rehashed the original trilogy - like The Force Awakens did - but he went for a much bolder approach. The prequel trilogy is without doubt a far more ambitious undertaking than the original trilogy. He had a good decade or two to give it a think, and came up with an incredibly vast plot.

The Phantom Menace released to a largely mixed reception, as we all know. Jar Jar Binks in particular drew the ire of critics and fans alike - many calling it a stupid sell out to attract children. Obviously inspired by the cartoons Lucas grew up watching, looking back, I find it hard not to laugh. The fact that this seeming buffoon turns out to be the instigator of the Empire in Attack of the Clones is a devilish twist that many seem to have forgotten. There's word of a deleted scene between Palpatine and Jar Jar...

And that's what the prequel trilogy does best, try something completely different at every turn, something greatly ambitious. The same intense imagination seen in the original trilogy is on showcase, now without the budgetary and technological constraints. That's also where it fails, it feels different and detached from the original trilogy. There's certainly too much going on, and this is probably why Lucas was looking for a different director. He pretty much had complete freedom, and by his own admission, realised his fears of taking things too far. This is why every good film needs a good, stern producer to guide the director's vision.

Whatever one thinks of the prequel trilogy, there's no doubt the action scenes are epic - the lightsaber battles are all excellently choreographed and measure favourably to much of the action in the sequel trilogy.

Attack of the Clones does improve on a lot of the flaws, offering a more focused narrative. The revelation of the clones, Palpatine's devious scheming, the final battle commencing the Clone Wars - all excellent stuff. The central romance leaves a lot to be desired, though. While in mind it's certainly compelling, it just isn't executed as well on paper, and that translates to the screen. Revenge of the Sith is remarkable given we know exactly how it's going to end. Once again, there are moments that are too much, but it also has some of the best sequences in the Star Wars series.

The prequel trilogy is a lot more political and philosophical, and deals with some timeless themes. It's a timely reminder how fascism and evil grows from good intentions and decent people, has done many times before, and there's a real threat that we are seeing a resurgence of now. Perhaps its greatest achievement is that it convincingly pulls off this transition over three films. Of course, it's still far too abridged for a topic this complex, but Palpatine's rise to power, the decay of a democracy to a totalitarian regime, the fall of a hero - are all delivered well.

There still remains too many niggles though - the occasionally cheesy dialogue, Anakin's occasional questionable acting (by the way - Natalie Portman, Ewan McGregor and Ian McDiarmid are uniformly excellent), the occasional scene that goes too far and feels out of place. You see the problem - it's mostly great stuff, but every now and then, something glaringly bad shows up. It's brief, but these are the moments people remember.

Overall though, the prequel trilogy is a worthy achievement that doesn't get enough credit. It seems that Star Wars fans want more of the same, but I don't. The Force Awakens was solid, but pretty uninnovative. The Last Jedi experimented with new ideas and received quite the backlash too, even though it didn't deviate much from TFA. I imagine the sequel trilogy Lucas had in mind would be something totally wild and fresh - too bad we'll never see it now, and have to settle with JJ's safe but solid rehash of the best of older Star Wars.