» The Sith revenge (but the patriarchy is safe)

22 May 2005 - 10:21pm

The Sith revenge (but the patriarchy is safe)

media girl's picture

First let's get the gender role deconstruction out of the way. One of the things that was interesting about Star Wars IV (the original movie) was that the ostensible leader of the rebellion was Princess Leia, who ruled not by imperial decree but by no-nonsense take-charge authority. She was small, but she stood taller than any of the boys.

Or so it seemed. In Empire she fell down a notch, to the love-sick matriarch with little more to do than notice bad things happening and hearing Luke's telepathic plea for help. By the time we got to the teddy bear movie, she was a bondage sex slave in a skimpy outfit, and peacemaker with the teddybears themselves.

Flash back a generation and we get the two female figures of Queen Amidala as a powerless figurehead, and Anakin's insightful mother. Amidala befriends a child and otherwise plays tag-along. Anakin's mother is around just enough for us to care just enough when she dies in Episode II: The Boredom Wars. In that overlong yawn, Amidala becomes like a star in a really bad soap opera. How did Lucas manage to get Natalie Portman to turn in such a wooden performance?

In the Sith installment, suddenly all the actors seem to perform better -- especially Portman, whose reaction to Anakin's turn to the dark side really gives the sequence impact. But the big disappointment, in terms of any hint at female heroes, is that once she gets pregnant, she's relegated to helpless waif status. The only other apparent females in the show are the Chancellor's silent bald aide, and a lithe Jedi who manages to wear a skimpy midriff top for her shot-in-the-back betrayal. (Where were the women who kick ass? Why didn't someone like Queen Latifah get cast as a Jedi? Samuel Jackson's a great actor, but let's face it, he's done better, and someone else might have thrived in the role of head of the Jedi Council.)

Now that that's out of the way, I can say that I really enjoyed the movie. To be honest, I didn't expect much, especially after that mess of a movie with 45 minutes of action that ran about 35 minutes too long. Sith opens with action, but it seems Lucas has been a quiet fan of Battlestar Galactica, for the action sequences are much more intense for their lack of overt intensity. Explosions don't need close-ups and ear-splitting effects. In fact, the space battles look more like distant fireworks spectaculars. Somehow they're all the more horrifying for it. At one point, the film seems more like Master and Commander than a space epic.

The relationship between Palpatine and Anakin is quite interesting. Hayden Christensen learned some acting chops since the previous movie, so his presence carries much more weight now -- which is important, because with this film in place, we truly realize that Star Wars is really the tale of Anakin's rise, descent and redemption, and Luke and Leia and even Obi-Wan are really just side players.

Yoda and the Emperor get to do star turns in a battle that tops any Jedi-Sith duel to that point. We also get to see Wookies, including Chewbacca, and enough battle droids of various designs and weaponry to fill up an entire fictional issue of Jane's The Galaxy's Fighting Droids.

But the real star of this picture is Obi-Wan. Ewan McGregor carries the film with his charm, smile and intensity. I've never found a man with a thick beard to be so attractive. And the easy way he faces situations is quite engaging. Think of an amiable James Bond.

The heart of the story, however, lies with Anakin's turn to the dark side. It's not an easy path for him -- nor for the Republic itself, which transforms from democracy to fascism, all to the sound of applause. Many of those he kills have it coming. His decisiveness is undeniable. One can see why the conservatives in America might get a little hot and bothered about things in the film: many of the characteristics of the Dark Side of the Force are traits the conservatives like to praise these days -- black-and-white thinking, impatience, reacting emotionally, letting rage and hate determine one's actions, all with a genuine frustration with the quaint niceties that are an integral part of democracy.

But in watching the movie, one isn't thinking about George W. Bush. If the conservatives are serious about making a Sith-like move on Washington, Darth Cheney would have to develop some more in-Sidious powers than a smirk and a fat bank balance. The movie is an adventure, scored by John Williams -- and blissfully free of Frists and DeLays and other dark figures with little cinematic appeal.

It will be interesting to see what Lucas does next. He's making noises about more experimental films. At least he finished this series showing that he can, when pressed, make a halfway decent blockbuster. Since he (along with Spielberg) practically invented the summer phenomenon, it's nice to see that the dark side hasn't destroyed his storytelling talents. It's been a wild ride, but now I'm even more interested in what he'll do next.

0
 
 
About author
User picture

media girl also blogs at other places.

Comments

pennywit's picture
pennywit says:

I wish I could dig up the link for you, but I found a blogger who poked around the Sith script and found some interesting bits, including scenes that revealed Amidala, Bail Organa, and Mon Mothma were the "name" leaders in a secret group that was going to oppose the Chancellor's accretion of emergency powers to himself.

Would those scenes change your patriarchy-centered opening analysis of the movie if they were included?

Additionally, I note that in your comments about the original trilogy, you don't mention the (admittedly background) role of Mon Mothma as leader of the Rebel Alliance. Any thoughts there?

--|PW|--


(23 May 2005 - 3:25pm)
media girl's picture

I confess I do not know who that is. I recall an old guy who planned the military stuff in the original trilogy. But it's interesting to me that even today, in this day and age of portrayals of worlds a long, long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, women are mostly absent from the story. Lucas is a boy who likes his toys after all.

In contrast, Battlestar Galactica offers a civilization where a woman is president, the hottest pilot is a woman, the most sympathetic cylon is a woman, much of the crew are women -- and yet the men are not emasculated fully grown dorks like many of the men in Star Trek: The Prozac Generation. Here we are, ten years after Janeway, nearly 30 years after Leia, and we get an expectant mother who's a politician who does no politics, instead worries about her man. Now that, in and of itself, isn't bad, but in the absence of any other female characters of note anywhere else in the movie, it's a rather backward view of society, if you ask me.

Of course, it was "a long, long time ago." Maybe that also explains the ethnic stereotypes in we see in the second trilogy.


(23 May 2005 - 3:49pm)
pennywit's picture
pennywit says:

It is interesting, as you say, that Lucas is mired in the fairy-tale archetypes, as others have remarked. Interestingly, other writers who play in his universe have done a bit more with the women of the Star Wars universe. If you have an appetite for Star Wars books and comics, you might find the women of those stories a bit more palatable than Amidala.

I particularly disliked Amidala's death -- she apparently died because she couldn't live without Anakin's love. I would think that a former queen who once stormed her palace at the head of her guards in Phantom Menace would be made of sterner stuff.

From the standpoint of her character, dying in childbirth might have been more palatable. From the standpoint of story, having Anakin directly, actively responsible for her death would have been desirable, as the theme of his own actions causing the future he feared would have been more strongly reinforced.

Here we are, ten years after Janeway, nearly 30 years after Leia, and we get an expectant mother who's a politician who does no politics, instead worries about her man. Now that, in and of itself, isn't bad, but in the absence of any other female characters of note anywhere else in the movie, it's a rather backward view of society, if you ask me.

I had to chuckle at this. I would think to being married to Anakin is a bit like being the daughter of Endora in Bewitched. I figure that having a mother-in-law who could turn him into a billy goat with a thought made him twitchy after a while.

Ona more serious note, I wasn't sorry to see Everybody Loves Raymond go. I can't say that I care for sitcoms that make all men into pathetic, clueless schlubs. Over time, I find that I prefer entertainment that develops characters of both genders as the flawed human beings that they are.

--|PW|--


(23 May 2005 - 4:44pm)
media girl's picture

I managed to get through without ever seeing an entire episode. I always got bored, never interested to wade through 3-5 minutes of commercials.


(23 May 2005 - 5:01pm)
pennywit's picture
pennywit says:

Which didn't you watch? Bewitched or Raymond?

My girlfriend, for some reason, loves Raymond. Couldn't stand the show myself.

--|PW|--


(23 May 2005 - 5:09pm)
media girl's picture

Don't make me twitch my nose now!


(23 May 2005 - 8:37pm)
pennywit's picture
pennywit says:

... Now, I'm going to have to break out my Golden Dawn Tarot deck and see if I can remember a good protection ritual.

--|PW|--


(23 May 2005 - 11:18pm)
BetaCandy's picture
BetaCandy says:

I didn't see this film, and I don't plan on it. I was a lifelong StarWars fan, and to this day, can probably detail most of the comics, all of the books (to 1999) and give you advice on pricing your action figures. But after AOTC, I gave up and realized Lucas was leading the pack when it comes to writers who either don't care to make interesting female characters, or don't realize that it's very, very simple to make them: write male characters, change pronouns. People really aren't that different.

I find the idea that Padme died for love of Anakin appalling. Very, very disappointing. I'm happy for those of you who enjoyed it, and I'm sure it had good points, but all I can think is I'm glad I just plain quit this fandom two years ago and have never looked back. Which is sad, really.


(24 May 2005 - 9:02am)
Morgaine Swann's picture

I haven't even seen episode II yet, but I like Amidala in the first one. I'm looking forward to Sith, but it does sound like George let the girls down.

I watched a documentary recently about the Science of Star Wars and they pushed the connection between the Jedi and Shaolin Priests. Frankly, The Force is more a Wiccan concept, which would have made the conflict a little less predictable. Buddhism divides things into light and dark, yin and yang, which is what made Anakin's slide possible. A truly holistic view of The Force would have naturally had women playing a larger part, and would have made Anakin's choice more believable and more tragic, IMO.

Lucas relied very heavily on Joseph Campbell's views of mythology for these stories, which are heavily patriarchal in form. I wish he had gone a good deal farther back.

Morgaine-ism© #8

"A Woman's Sexual and Reproductive Autonomy is Sacred and Absolute."


(23 May 2005 - 8:00pm)
Matsu's picture
Matsu says:

One of the best lines in film history and the core of this cautionary tale:

"This is how liberty dies. With thunderous applause."


(24 May 2005 - 11:27am)

store

Not Your Emininent Domain!

Buy stuff here.

» The Sith revenge (but the patriarchy is safe)