star wars

Star Wars: An Intergalactic Joyride ŒStar Wars¹ is the highest
grossing movie of all time. It is also one of my favorites. It was released
in May 1977 and re-released in a restored and enhanced Special Edition
just last month. There are many different criteria that can be used to
describe ŒStar Wars¹ appeal. Gary Arnold and Edward Rothstein, two
movie critics who had the opportunity to review this great movie, explain
its appeal in very much the same way. There is a difference though.
Arnold reviewed the original ŒStar Wars¹ twenty years ago and Rothstein
reviewed the recent Special Edition. While they reviewed slightly different
versions, they both came to the conclusion that Star Wars is a great
movie based on similar criteria. They judged ŒStar Wars¹ on its ability to
draw on classic styles and timeless stories to create something new and
absolutely original. The main factor in both of their positive reviews is the
skill of writer and director George Lucas to blend the old with the new.
They were both impressed with his miraculously fresh configuration of
many different themes from classic film and mythic origin into a cohesive
and entertaining movie. He has achieved a witty and exhilarating
synthesis of themes and cliches from the Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers
comics and serials, plus such related but less expected sources as the
western, the pirate melodrama, the aerial combat melodrama and the
samurai epic. The movie¹s irresistible stylistic charm derives from the fact
that Lucas can draw upon a variety of action-movie sources with unfailing
deftness and humor. He is in superlative command of his own
movie-nurtured fantasy life.Gary Arnold, Washington Post Staff WriterMr.
Rothstein along the same lines as Mr. Arnold, mentions that Œthe plot
line of Star Wars follows the mythic archetechture outlined by Joseph
Campbell in his study of myth, ³The Hero with a Thousand Faces,² which
has influenced Mr. Lucas.¹ Another aspect, unique to Rothstein¹s
review of the new Special Edition but not quite different from Arnold¹s
assessment, is the way in which the movie celebrates the past and not
the future. This aspect of ŒStar Wars¹, Rothstein says, is what

Œscreams out in opposition to the high-budget, high-tech, special-effect
spectaculars that it (Star Wars) spawned.¹ This is where, Rothstein says,
that ŒStar Wars¹ gets its authenticity.The whimsical ramshackleness is
actually meant to be a sign of the heroes¹ authenticity: what is older is
more powerful technology, when it appears in ŒStar Wars,¹ is evil,
ghastly, massive and brutish ²advanced² invention is most evident in the
space ships of the evil Empire.Edward Rothstein, Movie Critic, New York
TimesThis Œramshakleness¹ that Rothstein speaks of keeps the movie
afloat by not sacrificing the story for special effects. The special effects
complement the movie, but do not carry it. This is where Rothstein says
that so many recent movies have failed. Arnold, unable to see into the
future, was unable to evaluate the movie in this way. He hadn¹t the
chance to see how badly Hollywood would try to imitate ŒStar Wars¹,
thinking its appeal lay more in its Œeffects and quick jolts, rather than
from the mythic significance with which they were injected.¹ Hollywood
never grasped fully the lesson taught by ŒStar Wars¹. Both Rothstein
and Arnold believe that this lesson is what makes ŒStar Wars¹ so great.
They used the same criteria (the convincing story, admirable characters,
and the writer/director Lucas¹s skill as a storyteller) to come to a positive
review of the movie. Arnold summed it up in his closing ³Lucas¹ use of old
time conventions and stories add to the movie in such a way as to create
the unique and fresh fantasy world that is ŒStar Wars¹.²Works
Cited:Arnold, Gary. ³Star Wars: A Spectacular Intergalactic Joyride.²
The Washington Post. 25 May 1977.Rothstein, Edward. ³¹Star
Wars¹ Salutes a Brave Old World.² The New York Times. 31
January 1997.