The Daily's 40th anniversary: revisiting a 1999 "Star Wars: The Phantom Menace" review

In 1999, the Dailywrote about the release of “Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace”. The review — or rather, a short summary about the release of the film — followed the box office success of “Menace” and discussed some of the key takeaways with which critics were leaving the theaters with (too much computer-generated imagery (CGI), good acting, a great film for children). Now, almost 21 years after its release — which was just honored with new merchandise and plenty of fan appreciation this past April during Star Wars Celebration Chicago 2019 — it’s more important than ever to understand its legacy and place in the Star Wars franchise.

The first film of the prequel trilogy is the riskiest Star Wars endeavor — save for “Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi” (2017) — ever. The prequels still receive their fair share of hate, although there’s been a recent appreciation for the trilogy in the past few years thanks to memes on Reddit and post-launch content on the video game “Star Wars Battlefront II” (2017). But the prequels, especially “Menace,” didn’t deserve the hate they received during their releases. They’re good films, full of love and plenty of quirky moments. There’s somewhat of a tonal shift when comparing the original trilogy and the prequels—although “Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi” (1983) can get pretty campy with its use of Ewoks — but is that what really matters when thinking about the prequels?

No. What matters is what the trilogy brought for its newer, younger viewers. The 1999 review notes, “What the second installment of trilogies [the prequels] does is bring Star Wars into the collective consciousness of another generation of young dreamers, too often inundated with the blockbuster rot of movies like 'Independence Day' (1996) and 'Armageddon' (1998).” The review is right. The prequels aren’t necessarily just for older Star Wars fans, just like how the sequel trilogy isn’t just for older Star Wars fans. Each generation has its own trilogy to cling to and enjoy, but the wide variety of Star Wars content is available for everyone to enjoy and appreciate.

The aforementioned recent love for the prequel trilogy brings the films back into a sort of a renaissance. It’s all really thanks to the generation that grew up watching the prequels and the television show “Star Wars: The Clone Wars” (2008–). Thanks to a sort of cultural retrospect, they’re being looked at because of their camp and style, not in spite of it. And that matters. These films weren’t made to be analyzed the same way the original trilogy was. We must look at “Menace” and its successors when thinking about the time of their release.

Thanks to CGI, “Menace” is certainly the most stylized Star Wars film, full of gorgeous new planets and beautiful costumes. It’s an explosion of exciting new images. Coruscant is vibrant and impossibly huge, the lightsaber fights are choreographed with plenty of jumps and kicks and Padmé Amidala (Natalie Portman) wears some of the most extravagantly amazing outfits the saga’s ever seen. The 1999 review seems rather lukewarm on the use of CGI, noting that “it is said that he [director George Lucas] relies too heavily on the computer to create his alternate reality.” But as of 2020, isn’t that what most blockbusters seem to do?

CGI and the broader category of visual effects are so common to modern audiences that if “Menace” were released today (with updated effects), we’d probably appreciate it. In many ways, “Menace” and the prequel trilogy feel like some of the first major franchise films to really show off the power of CGI. Now, it’s commonplace. Take the various video explanations that highlight the effects used in “Avengers: Endgame” (2019). We owe much of that mainstream success to Lucas, who has always been a pioneer of new technology. For “Menace,” and later “Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones” (2002), Lucas experimented with shooting digitally. He pushed the envelope further: “Clones” was the first major blockbuster to be shot completely digitally.

Reviews of “Menace,” like the 1999 Daily summary, weren’t kind to the use of CGI. But we now praise films with advanced visual effects that create immersive worlds. Don’t we owe that success to Lucas and the prequels? We can certainly debate the quality of the movies — sure, they’re not better than the sequels or the original trilogy — but they’re definitely the most unique pieces of content in Star Wars. They connected with their audience when first released, and that audience is now grown and reliving the love they had for them. But that audience is also watching a new generation love the sequel trilogy.

And that’s important. At the core of the 1999 review is the idea that Star Wars is always groundbreaking — whether it be because of CGI or box office success and cultural relevance — and always made to connect both with its older fans and newer fans. But those newer fans are the focus. Each new generation of Star Wars films becomes a cultural touchstone for each new generation of fans. They become childhood classics, inspire new filmmakers and plant a deep appreciation and love for the saga. This isn’t to say that these films also play into nostalgia for the older generations — they do. But the focus is what’s happening now.

The 1999 review concludes with a comment both on Star Wars as a whole and what “Menace” represented at the time.

“Star Wars is science fiction mainstreamed for both boys and girls, adults and children. It captures the struggle between good and evil as no other series has been able to do since, and its recreation of a galaxy long ago and far away, makes willing suspension of disbelief a pleasurable task. It creates heroes, tears down enemies, and builds new worlds. Movie magic has never looked so good.”

This conclusion still resonates with us 20 years later.