CommonSpace columnist James McEnaney makes a confident Star Wars prediction…
A TECH-SAVVY youngster seemingly trapped on a desert planet. A terrible enemy seeking unopposed control of the galaxy. A massive, planet-killing weapon that can only be destroyed by the brilliance of an extraordinary pilot. A lovable, quirky droid whose bravery and determination are central to the whole story. The Millennium Falcon. Space battles. Lightsabers. John Williams.
I'm talking about Star Wars, of course, but which one? A New Hope or The Force Awakens? 1977 or 2015? The answer is obvious: it's both.
Over and over again, the newest member of the Star Wars family mirrors its progenitor. It doesn't so much nod in the direction of the original film as wave a huge neon sign towards it.
But the circularity of the narrative is not, in and of itself, a problem (if it were then Gabriel Garcia Marquez' Nobel Prize in literature would have to be posthumously rescinded).
No, the trouble with Episode 7 is this: the more you watch it the more you realise that its primary purpose is to repair the terrible damage done by Episodes 1, 2 and 3. If you're really, really honest with yourself, you come to realise that the film doesn’t set out to do much beyond wrap it’s arms around you, hold you close and tell you it’s all going to be ok.
The trouble with Episode 7 is this: the more you watch it the more you realise that its primary purpose is to repair the terrible damage done by Episodes 1, 2 and 3.
“Don’t worry,” it seems to say, “you’re safe now. George isn't in charge any more. Jar Jar and Hayden are gone. Oh, and there will be absolutely no mention of the taxation of trade routes or midi-fucking-chlorians.”
In fairness, Star Wars’ six-year prequel misadventure generated such devastating levels of trauma that an ultra-safe, "don’t scare the banthas" opening to the sequel trilogy was not just sensible, it was probably necessary. Such was the damage done between 1999 and 2005 that The Force Awakens had to be sacrificed for the greater good. Fans had been hurt before and Disney (which now owns the Star Wars franchise) was wise to focus on ensuring that their fear did not turn to anger (or worse).
But things are different now. The next addition to the Star Wars catalogue – the semi-spin-off story due for release in December this year – will exist within a very different landscape: it doesn't need to play it safe; it doesn't need to repair the damage of earlier catastrophes; most of all, it doesn't need to be constrained by increasingly over-wrought nostalgia.
Oh, and there will be absolutely no mention of the taxation of trade routes or midi-fucking-chlorians.
And so, having now watched the new trailer once or twice (or 14 times, whatever) I’m prepared to call it: Rogue One is going to be better than The Force Awakens. A lot better.
There are a number of reasons for this. One is that this looks like it may be the first Star Wars film to tackle the second word of the series' title with any genuine conviction. People may associate the films with exploding spaceships, blaster fire and the hum-hum-crackle of lightsaber duels but, with a handful of exceptions (such as the opening sequence of Revenge of the Sith), the brutal realities of the conflicts alluded to throughout both existing trilogies are never truly confronted. It looks very much as though this is about to change.
This brings us to one of the most intriguing aspects of Rogue One: the casting of Donnie Yen – a legend of martial arts cinema best known for roles in Hero and the Ip Man films – as Chirrut Imwe, a blind warrior-monk devoted to the ways of the force.
And so, having now watched the new trailer once or twice (or 14 times, whatever) I’m prepared to call it: Rogue One is going to be better than The Force Awakens. A lot better.
The film's trailer only shows flashes of Yen's contribution but his prominent position should mean that the combat scenes (which, even at their best – and the best was Darth Maul vs Qui Gon Jinn and Obi Wan Kenobi in the otherwise offensively bad The Phantom Menace – have been a masterclass in crap choreography, shocking camera work and crushing disappointment) might, finally, achieve something like their potential. Outside of the animated series like The Clone Wars, the Jedi's force-wielding fighting skills have never been fully explored – that too should now change.
For years I've argued that the makers of Hero should be given the chance to make a Star Wars film (imagine this particular scene played out with lightsaber-wielding Jedi in the role of defenders). Excitingly, Rogue One may well prove to be the first step towards such a move.
Ultimately, however, Rogue One's major advantage over The Force Awakens is simple – a narrative which is, at least in theory, far tighter. Free of the obligation to build up a whole suite of characters in preparation for two further films, Rogue One should be able to avoid the obvious pacing issues of the last addition to the Star Wars universe. So long as its makers resist the temptation to grab at too many strands of the existing story it should also escape the dependence on extraordinary coincides that hangs like a shadow over The Force Awakens. This can only be a good thing.
We Star Wars fans have learned the hard way how dangerous it is to expect too much from a new addition to the cinematic family but, this time, I'm increasingly confident that the excitement is justified.
We'll find out in December if this really is the film we’re looking for.
Check out what people are saying about how important CommonSpace is. Pledge your support today.
