Scene Dissections: The Picnic Love Scene in Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones

All right, here we go: it’s St. Patrick’s and time for an appropriately themed post. That’s right, let’s talk about Star Wars! Oh, you’re saying: not Irish enough? Very well, we’ll focus on Episode II: Attack of the Clones. You have to be stereotypically Irish to enjoy the scenes in that movie. Maybe not every scene, some of the action and effects shots are really well done. It’s just the other stuff… the stuff with the people doing something… it isn’t lightsaber fighting, it’s something else… TALKING! Yes, the scenes with the people talking are frankly, well they’re awful in that movie. And never does the quality sink lower than when Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen) and Padme Amidala (Natalie Portman) are on screen together. I could talk about any of their scenes at length but, let’s just pick at random and go with this one:

Did you watch it? Are you so turned on by love that you can’t sit still anymore? If you’ve never seen the movie: there are all like that. EVERY. SINGLE. LOVE SCENE.

But anyway, bashing Episode II is nothing new. By doing this I simply join the dark side of internet geeks trashing a movie they, for some reason, can’t stop talking about. The above scene is a failure, no question, but let’s talk about why. I’m going to break it down by story, acting/direction, and scenery/effects/music. I’m not going to do this in context with the rest of the movie (I might a bit but I’ll try to avoid it). I just want to talk about that sequence, as it is. What went wrong.

STORY: Two people are talking at a picnic. The dialogue isn’t horrible. It’s not riveting either. They’re talking about her crush… from when she was twelve (before the wonders of Star Wars puberty) and Anakin makes it clear that he doesn’t like politics. To be fair, he does this like a typical 19 year old, in the sense that he sounds incredibly naive and dismissive (like 50% of most democratic populations). Here is the first failure: Padme is not put off by this exchange. She is a senator. Someone who has devoted their whole life to the government.

Let’s try an experiment: next time you’re with a politician (or even a political science major) just say: “yeah democracy is a load of crap, people just bicker and stuff. We should totally just have someone in charge who just does right.”  That is para-phrased dialogue from Episode II. Say that to your political friend and see how often they laugh and come onto you (granted there has to be ZERO flirting beforehand… you have to be as cold as they were in that scene… so looking bored in grass).

ACTING/DIRECTION: God do they look bored. There isn’t one second of natural warmth between them. Padme laughs a little and Anakin laughs a little but what are they laughing at? Anakin’s jokes aren’t clever, not to a senator (or anyone) in their early twenties anyway. They act like teenagers at the prom: too scared to make a move and too awkward to look comfortable. Problem: He is 19 and she is 24. It’s okay for him to be awkward because he has spent the last ten years as a sexless monk-knight, but she grew up with luxury: no way she would find it that charming.

Natalie Portman has won an oscar. Hayden Christensen has disappeared. I never saw him in anything else so I don’t know that he’s horrible, but given how unnatural Academy Award-winning, Natalie Portman is acting: this is not a scene to blame on the actors. George Lucas clearly had a vision here: the mono-myth picture of ideal, innocent love. Two children in a field, just enjoying each other’s company. That’s the scene, that is an accurate description of the scene. He directed it like two children, problem is he wrote it for two young adults. Second problem: this isn’t just writing. One of the beauties of film is that it breathes with living performance when done well. When it’s done poorly… it looks like the above scene.

SCENERY/EFFECTS/MUSIC: This goes back to George Lucas’ vision. It is the idyllic field in a land of (at this point) scientifically explained magic and whimsey. Star Wars is no stranger to fantastical backgrounds but both Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi brought a sense of realism to their worlds. The people acted like people. thus drawing attention away from the scenery. No such luck here. The visuals may look impressive (at least until Anakin tries riding one of those… alien cow pigs) but they carry too much of the scene. It’s not good.

One thing truly works here and that is “Across the Stars“. “Across the Stars” is the love theme, composed by the great John Williams. Yes, it is over-the-top but this is Star Wars. The music has never been subtle. In my opinion, this piece is beautiful and captures a brief image of the idealized love that Lucas was going for. Does it sound grounded: nope, but it is the one thing that absolutely doesn’t have to be.

So there you have it: fantasy gone wrong. I guess that sums up the prequels in a nutshell. At least we got some funny Robot Chicken sketches out of it. Like this one:

And this one:

Good times. Anyway, for those out there wondering why I didn’t write an article on St. Patrick’s Day (and the wonderful “political correctness” of Irish stereotypes), I was in the mood to rant so I did something stupid to rant on. The Irish article is coming so… we’ll enjoy that at a later date.

When Good Guys go Bad: Poor Scriptwriting

With the summer blockbuster season in full swing, a recent trend has become apparent: this is an off year. While releases like Iron Man 3, Star Trek Into Darkness and Man of Steel haven’t been critically panned (although Man of Steel only enjoys a 56 on Rotten Tomatoes and a 55 on Metacritic), the reaction from fans has been less flattering. For me personally, both Man of Steel and Iron Man 3 have been disappointing mixed bags with more to say against than in favor. I still stand by Star Trek Into Darkness as a simple yet enjoyable Star Trek movie. But this article is not about how I feel about summer films, this article aims to look at what is usually a weakness in the blockbuster genre overall: the writing. There’s a lot of areas here we could discuss. Bad writing ruins films by creating plot holes, cringe-worthy dialogue and nonsensical character action. Let’s talk about that last point.

Nonsensical character action is, quite simply, when someone in a movie does something that the audience doesn’t believe he or she would do. Whether it goes against the source material (which nearly every big budget movie has these days) or whether it defies an earlier scene in the movie, these are actions that just don’t make a heck of a lot of sense. I’m going to go into a few examples that will illustrate my point. Warning: there will be minor Man of Steel spoilers to follow. But let’s not start with a Superman movie… let’s start with a Michael Bay movie!

I will never understand how his name isn't as poisonous to the box office as M. Night Shyamalan's is.
I will never understand how his name isn’t as poisonous to the box office as M. Night Shyamalan’s is.

I almost feel that this is an unfair jab. If you’re paying to see a Michael Bay, you’re not paying for the script… at least he and his marketing have been honest about that aspect. For those of you out there who may not know the man pictured above, Michael Bay is the director behind blockbusters like the Transformers trilogy, the two Bad Boys movies, Pearl HarborArmageddon and The Island. He’s done others but that’s enough to get the idea. Let’s talk about those Transformers movies, in particular something that annoyed me in all three films:

Besides this guy.
Besides this guy.

Anyone familiar with the Transformers universe knows that the Autobots are the heroic good guys and the Decepticons are the evil, horrible, villains. The Autobots, lead by Optimus Prime, are valiant and peace loving while Megatron and his Decepticons would push puppies in front of buses. This is established in both the lore and the movies (I’m giving the movies credit for something). Yet in the movies, while the dialogue establishes this, the action paints a different picture.

The decepticons take autobot prisoners in Transformers: Dark of the Moon. Patrick Dempsey's character is the one who suggests killing them.
The decepticons take autobot prisoners in Transformers: Dark of the Moon. Patrick Dempsey’s character is the one who suggests killing them.

Wait, the decepticons are taking prisoners? That’s actually really nice of them, you know, given they’re at war with the autobots and everything. Maybe they have some honor after all. Well, I’m sure if the decepticons are this generous than the autobots are even greater pillars of morality.

Nope.
Nope.

The autobots kill the decepticons every chance they get. Not just kill either but in most cases tear to pieces. Watch those movies again (if you can) and observe just how brutal Optimus Prime and his heroic autobots are. It kinda adds an underlying sinister element to their characters when the good guy (who constantly professes to be good) is a lot more savage than the bad guy. But again, poking fun at a Michael Bay script is easy. Let’s go after George Lucas instead.

In this instance, I’m going to discuss two scenes in Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith. Let me say up front: I like this movie. Is it perfect: NOOOOOO (inside Star Wars humor there), but it’s still enjoyable and a lot of it really works. Here’s something that didn’t: remember when Anakin killed Count Dooku? He just executes him as a prisoner. This is huge, it is a giant step in Anakin’s fall to the dark side. Jedi don’t kill, they take prisoners whenever possible. Except when it’s this guy:

General_Grievous_(Qymaen_jai_Sheelal)

I know what you’re saying. Yes, I have thought way too much about this… but you’re reading it so what does that say about you?

Anyway, so Obi-Wan kills General Grievous and I personally don’t have a problem with that scene. Grievous poses a lethal threat and is about to kill Obi-Wan so it is in self defense. The Jedi seem to be cool with that. I have problems with all the scenes leading up to the confrontation. When Obi-Wan speaks to the council, and when they are speaking to each other, it becomes very clear that “taking prisoners” is not what they have in mind.

“If he does not give up his emergency powers after the destruction of Grievous, then he should be removed from office.”

That’s said by everyone’s favorite cone-head Jedi, Ki-Adi-Mundi (never mind how I know his name). At this point, Obi-Wan has only “made contact” with Grievous so… he should be trying to secure him as a prisoner, right? A whole part of this movie is how Anakin falls to the dark side by being too eager to kill. Seems like the Jedi Council is bloodthirsty too. Maybe the emperor had a point about them.

It’s a small thing but that’s just it. It’s one line of script: fix it before spending millions of dollars.

Last but not least, Man of Steel. As this is a new release I won’t say much here (I could, there is definitely a lot to say on this movie). Let’s go with those trailers, especially the newest ones. You see Superman fighting General Zod in a city. Looks really cool right? That city is full of people. Superman: the man of steel, the protector of humanity, has no problem with collateral damage in this film. He throws Zod through buildings in a city the audience knows to still be populated (the film makes sure to show this).

Disregard buildings and acquire cape.
That’s a lot of devastation in the background.

Again, what makes it worse is that one of the main theme’s of the film is Superman’s morality. How he will do anything to protect the people of Earth from an alien, super-powered, threat. Is he just not getting the irony in that? I know Superman isn’t supposed to be the smartest hero on the block but come on.

If you want to see a film that encompasses Superman's morality and character in a much more competent way, check out this movie instead.
If you want to see a film that encompasses Superman’s morality and character in a much more competent way, check out this movie instead.

So why is this such a common problem? Effects shots sell tickets. That’s the simple answer. That’s what people want to see in their summer blockbusters, right? Right. Because when it works, it’s awesome. When it doesn’t… blockbusters don’t have much to fall back on if they’re not enjoyable. I put this one on the scriptwriters and the directors. Movies shouldn’t be made for the sake of cool scenes, they should be able to work cool scenes into a great movie.

Christopher Nolan: putting cool scenes in great movies since 2000.
Christopher Nolan: putting cool scenes in great movies since 2000.

Thoughts? Comments? Am I full of it or onto something? Let me know now in the feedback section of this article.