Star Wars: Episode II – Attack of the Clones (**1/2)
review by Jon Waterman

Hoo-boy, where to start. I could actually talk for hours about this movie, and with friends, on a couple occasions, I have. Perhaps, I should start out by saying that although I’m not a huge fan – I’m not enamored by the subculture – I have seen all of the movies before…once. I’ve now seen this new addition twice: once, digitally projected; once, 35mm print. I guess this brings me to my first point, and possibly my most important one, which is that of the computer graphics.

Now, any loyal reader of my reviews will tell you that I do not enjoy such horrible overuse of technology just for the sake of simplicity and what seems like laziness and lack of creativity. "Hey, George, we forgot to call Ewen to the set." "Oh…eh, we’ll just add him in later, ADR his lines and put in some woosh noises. No one will notice." Luckily, it didn’t go quite that far.

But I won’t be surprised if Episode III is all CG. However, we no longer have Yoda as a physical object at any point. Any non-human living thing is not really there (nor are most humans). Hell, even R2 and C-3PO have their computer moments. And I’ll tell you something. It all looks FAKE. It makes the movie seem empty. Sure there’s eye candy all around and there isn’t a corner without some post-production created movement, but why? What’s the point? It just looks bad. The original movies seem real. They have substance. You can tell that they occupy a space. They! manipulate their surroundings. It’s just something you can’t get yet with a computer.

There are so many shots in that movie that involve some unnecessarily computer-generated element or person where you just have to wonder, was it really worth it? Did all the clones have to be CG? When Yoda talks to a nameless soldier wearing a full-body suit, did he have to be CG? Couldn’t afford a couple suits? Those toys aren’t racking in enough for you?

So, besides being forced to watch these stretch-and-squash things roll about and watching the "real" actors "interact" with them, my only real complaint would be the acting itself. Lucas has never been much of an actor’s director. He’s more of a story man and it shows on both accounts. Let’s first talk about the new Anakin Skywalker, Hayden Christensen. Boy, is he a jerk in this movie…and whiny. You just wanted to slap him every time you saw his dumb, ugly face. Although, I have to give him credit, because that’s what the roll was about. I felt no acceptable reason as to why Senator Amidala (Natalie Portman) would start to fall for this guy. He’s not a loveable guy by any means and he acts too childish to be taken seriously, except if he were to threaten you. But, I guess the good girls go for bad boys. I’ll let it slide. The performances were pretty much all half-assed, make-sure-you-enunciate-every-word, sound-menacing-when-appropriate act! ing jobs. Of course, the hokey dialogue in the script (Lucas and Jonathon Hales) didn’t help.

Now, I know I’ve been bashing the CG stuff, but the fight scenes still rock. The lightsabers still look like lightsabers. The lasers still look like lasers. The snozzberries still look like snozzberries. But we also get a couple cool new weapons like the seismic disrupter. You won’t be disappointed with the battles.

What would Star Wars be without a John Williams score? Nothing. This time around he doesn’t quite have the same juice he once had. My thinking is that he’s limited by the previous films. He has to work with that existing music and just tweak it somewhat. It makes for a more boring score. But, he still has the power to pump you up and energize you where it counts the most.

I enjoyed the storyline. The construction of events worked well together and is definitely building to something big in number three. There is plenty of excitement in this one to keep you going for a while after you see it. It was fun seeing things start to fall into place, thus bridging the gap between "Attack of the Clones" and "A New Hope." My only wish would be to see the love story work better. It just wasn’t there.

If you can see the movie digitally projected, then do so. The graphics (as bad as they are) don’t look nearly as flat. They integrate much better into the film than with a regular print. If you’re a fan, see the film often (as if I need to tell you that), because three years is a long time to wait for the next installment, but with the release on video in November of 2002, it’ll go by a lot quicker.

respond to jon@filmbrats.com