ARTS
February 17, 2012
La Vista
3D re-release of “Phantom Menace” allows audiences to relive the disappointment BY ZACK GILL ARTS EDITOR “Star Wars Episode I: the Phantom Menace” is the film we thought was awesome when we were six years old. Ten years after its initial theatrical run and after the loss of innocence of the entire film-going generation that saw “Episode I” as kids, the film leaves a sour taste in the mouths of viewers upon its 3D re-release. Despite well-crafted, subtle 3D effects, “Star Wars Episode I: the Phantom Menace” embodies the criticisms of the new “Star Wars” trilogy, with hammy acting, wooden dialogue, terrible pacing and overblown special effects. “Star Wars Episode I: the Phan- tom Menace” is the first install- ment of the prequel trilogy pre- ceeding the original “Star Wars” films. “Episode I” introduces Jedi Knight Qui-Gon Jin (Liam Neeson) and his apprentice, Obi Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor), as they are forced to negotiate a trade dispute between the peace- ful planet of Naboo and the greedy Trade Federation. Little do they know that the Trade Federation is controlled by two Sith lords, enemies to the Jedi Order. The Jedi Knights, along with Naboo’s Queen Amidalah (Natalie Portman), are forced to flee Naboo and seek refuge on Tatooine, where they meet Anakin Skywalker (Jake Lloyd), a young,
B9
thing he learned with his original trilogy and “American Graffiti” and decides to tell instead of show. Exposition is thrown out at the audience in endless scenes of dialogue, and the dialogue itself is poorly constructed and often unintentionally comical. Still, the scenes that viewers remember well continue to be exhilarating, especially with the 3D effects. Pod racing, in which aliens and young Anakin Sky- walker race hovercraft through treacherous Tatooine canyons, is particularly exciting, as it often takes a first-person perspective of the racers - especially impactful with the 3D. The epic Jedi battle climax is also still pretty awe- some, although it often resembles something of a ballet piece. The 3D is utilized intelligently, as well. Lucas opted out of gim- micky, pop-out 3D effects, and in- stead goes for the look that Pixar uses with its films. The 3D almost makes it feel as if the viewer is looking into a model. This adds a COURTESY MOVIES.SKY.COM considerable amount of depth to YOU’VE TURNED OFF YOUR TARGETING COMPUTER: “Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace” has been re-re- the largely computer-generated leased in 3D, and while its set pieces greatly benefit from the new, crisp 3D effects, the film still pales in comparison to scenery of the film. Eventually, Lucas’ original the films of the original “Star Wars” trilogy, with hammy acting and poor dialogue rampant throughout. “Star Wars” trilogy will be re- force-sensitive prodigy. Together hour run time, all of which must merce dispute - which seems triv- leased in 3D, and everyone will with Anakin, the Jedi Knights have gone over our heads in our ial compared to the epic fantasy be happy. Until then, though, fight to take back Naboo. youth, replaced in our memories of the original trilogy. we’re going to have to sit through If that description seems overly with “lightsabers” and “that guy With so much going on, the film two more vastly inferior films. bloated, that’s because it is. An with the red makeup.” It’s hard should be exciting and entertain- “Star Wars Episode I: the Phan- incredible amount of exposition to believe that the impetus of the ing. But that assumption is incor- tom Menace” is rated PG and is occurs in the film’s just-over-two- entire plot is an interstellar com- rect. George Lucas forgot every- playing in theaters nationwide.
“Safe House” overcomes flaws in pacing, plot with powerful perfomances BY ISAAC SIEGEMUND- BROKA STAFF WRITER Experience is the best teacher. It’s no wonder, then, that “Safe House,” released Feb. 10, suffers from the shortcomings of amateurs like director David Espinosa and writer David Guggenheim. However, the involvement of seasoned actors and a prac- ticed cinematographer allow “Safe House” to overcompensate for its weaknesses and entertain audiences. Young CIA operative Matt Weston (Ryan Reynolds) has the least flashy job the CIA can provide. He tends to a “safe house,” an undercover location used for hiding wit- nesses or government figures when neces- sary—which tends to be very infrequent. The seemingly pointless monotony of Weston’s job is turned on its head when Tobin Frost (Denzel Washington), an in- famous rogue ex-CIA agent, is brought to Weston’s safe house in Cape Town, South Africa. Frost’s enemies attempt to break into the safe house to abduct him. Weston, not wanting to lose his “house guest,” takes Frost and flees from the house. As Weston and Frost hide from Frost’s enemies together, Frost gently invades Weston’s mind, pushing him to question his relationship both with his Parisian girl- friend and with his superiors at the CIA.
The lines between “good” and “bad” blur even further after a microchip containing information about government corruption surfaces among Weston’s problems. The film’s plot is intriguing but rough around the edges due to significant pac- ing problems. Petty “catch me if you can” style chases and brief unnecessary dramas between Weston and his girlfriend frag- ment the otherwise interesting (if not a tad cliché) plot concerning mass government intelligence corruption. The film’s attempt to give the audi- ence fast-paced thrills—which compose a large majority of screen time—often leaves more interesting plot elements by the wayside. Weston, doing serious CIA work for the first time in his life, clearly faces devastating internal struggles every time he is forced to kill. Better-developed thematic ideas about the effect of killing on the mind could have hoisted “Safe House” into the upper echelon of action films. That notwithstanding, the action in “Safe House” is exceptional, finding an ideal bal- ance between grandiose explosions, cha- otic chases and intimate, bloody hand-to- hand combat. Weston’s fight scenes are a rattier take on Bourne-style action, stylized but imprecise. Weston’s clear lack of field experience contrasts nicely with Tobin’s calm, controlled brutality.
COURTESY NSCENE.FILES.WORDPRESS.COM
SAFETY FIRST: In his newest film, “Safe House,” Denzel Washinton returns to the intelligent-action-hero role he is known for. Washington gives a convincing performance throughout the film, and continues to show his world-class acting chops. Denzel Washington is known for his ver- satility as an actor, playing everyone from Malcolm X to Herman Boone. His role that perhaps surfaces most often, however, is that of the hardened, but principled fighter, as seen in “Déjà Vu,” “Out of Time,” “The Book of Eli” and his other action thrillers. In “Safe House,” Washington’s standard action character is given a new dichotomy between likeable and sinister;; regardless of Frost’s despicable traitorous qualities, it’s impossible not to find his cynical charisma and calm omniscience somewhat enviable. After blunders in a series of rom-coms and half-baked superhero movies, Ryan Reynolds’ acting prospects weren’t prom- ising. Nevertheless, his portrayal of an equally naïve and confident operative in-
corporates both daring appeal and emo- tional depth;; Reynolds has finally proved that he’s capable of more than two dimen- sions. “Safe House” cinematographer Oliver Wood is no novice;; he was also behind the cinematography for all three Bourne mov- ies. In “Safe House,” Wood uses a style similar to that in the Bourne films: con- trolled and precise while leaving room for vivid colorscapes and tense action. Although hampered by its raggedly structured plot, “Safe House” is carried to success by acting duo Reynolds and Wash- ington as well as the artful visual construc- tions of cinematographer Wood. “Safe house” is rated R and is playing in theaters nationwide.