Looking Back At 1999: Jar-Jar Binks is ten years old...
... and Hollywood hasn't learned a damn thing in a decade of blockbusters
Jar Jar Binks turns ten years old today. That's right... he's just a kid. Now don't you feel bad for what you said about him?
Ten years ago? Really?
Doesn't seem like it's been a full decade. I can still vividly remember everything about the build-up to the release of "The Phantom Menace," the first new "Star Wars" film in sixteen years.
Fandom has changed profoundly in the last ten years, and it would be hard to argue that it's been for the better. Although I detest that sub-moronic oft-repeated metaphor about George Lucas "raping my childhood," I could be willing to agree that 1999 was the end of fandom's innocent optimism and the beginning of something rancid and self-entitled and angry, something that's more about tearing down and insulting than about celebrating or enjoying.
On the surface, it seems like Hollywood has changed for the better, though. Take a look at the sort of movies that make up most of what we see in any given summer right now. It looks like the nerds won, doesn't it? Like we've taken over? Every Friday, there's a "Wolverine" or a "Star Trek" or a "Terminator" or a "Transformers." Geek service of the most direct nature. But for every one of those films that feels motivated by a love of the material or a story genuinely worth telling or an affinity for the genre, we get a dozen films that are craven, designed by committee, hollow and phony. And it seems like "fans" have lost the ability to tell one from the other, willing to grant a monster opening weekend to almost anything, no matter how distinctly the marketing promises another goddamn heartbreak. Part of it is a sort of battered-fan-syndrome, where they keep telling themselves "It will be different this time... it will be different this time..." And part of it seems to be a gradual erosion of standards in which everything is one big homogenized equal.
So what does the tenth anniversary of "Star Wars" have to tell us? What perspective have we gained?
[more after the jump]
In 1999, as people counted down the days to May 19th, it was obvious that a genuine cultural moment was underway. There was an excitement in the air, and more than that, an optimism. People belived in the best possible version of what a "Star Wars" movie could be, and there wasn't even a hint of the idea of the potential for failure. If you go back and read the message boards and the talkbacks and the international press, what you'll see is... well, for lack of a better word... faith.
I didn't stand in line for the film for weeks or even months like some people did, but I was living in Hollywood at the time, about five blocks from the Chinese Theater, where the biggest line was located, and I had a number of friends who were part of that. I also found myself getting back in contact with old friends all over the country who got in touch because of my work on Ain't It Cool, and I made new friends as well, people I'm still in touch with now, who were just "Star Wars" fans who read what I wrote and had to reach out to say hello. And what was most amazing about that period of time was the way it seemed like this one movie was bringing people together, the way people were all sharing this excitement, this anticipation. Fandom was about unity. Like I said... fandom was about faith.
And just as I will never forget the hope leading up to May 19th, we are never going to fully shake the pop culture heartbreak that set in afterwards.
Jar-Jar Binks, perhaps the most reviled character in the entire "Star Wars" mythos, has become a symbol of everything that went wrong with the prequels. You want to make a "Star Wars" fan mental, just tell them, "Meesa wuv Jah- Jah!" Even now, I'll bet you see a twitch. In another way, though, Jar-Jar isn't just a symbol of how Lucas failed... he's a symbol of exactly where fandom lost its way.
See, I'm not a hater of the prequels. I don't love them, either. Hell, I've got something like 10,000 films in my house, but I don't actually own any of the three prequels. I'll probably fix that when they make it to BluRay. But I do have my theory why the prequels simply didn't connnect with many audiences. And it's not an answer that Hollywood's going to like, especially when you look at the way they seem determined to fill in every single blank in every single geek property ever created.
Because I'm not blinded by the hatred, I have a pretty good idea why the hatred exists in the first place.
Familiarity breeds contempt.
And prequels are a narrative dead end. Period.
Please. Please. Please.
Stop giving geeks what they ask for.
"I want the Clone Wars!"
No. No, you don't.
You think you do. But you don't.
"I want the Terminator Future War!"
Again... no. You really, really don't.
It's Pavlovian. You're watching some good science-fiction movie you love and they mention "attack ships on fire off the belt of Orion" or some such thing... like "You're older than the Zarkon Battlefields," and you end up liking the movie a lot, so you end up watching the movie a lot because that's what geeks do. And by the 43rd time watching it, and half-watching it, and watching it with friends while talking, and wallpaper-watching it, you hear that line again... "You're older than the Zarkon Battlefields"... and you think in passing, "Man, I'd like to see the Zarkon Battlefields." And then it becomes a thing, an itch you feel like you need to scratch.
No. No, you don't.
Storytelling... great fun pulp storytelling, anyway... is all about forward motion. Everything is always in motion. The entire idea of backing up to fill in the blanks is counter-intuitive. So here's where I find myself now on this entire prequel reboot remake update reinvention thing.
I'm fatigued.
It is an onslaught. It's not one small part of the mainstream diet these days... it's all of it. All the oxygen in the room seems to be for fan service, to diminishing creative returns. And that's where "Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace" is, in fact, not a failure at all so much as a signpost, a landmark if you will. There is no film, in terms of technical craftsmanship, that has left a larger mark on the last ten years of pop culture. Every big-budget genre movie this summer owes something to "Phantom Menace" in terms of techniques or equipment invented there or pushed to the breaking point for the first or the furthest times. Even some of what it didn't quite do right (like Mr. Binks or those embarrassing Charlie Chan aliens) was sort of pioneering in terms of what others have done since, building on those near-misses.
I think filmmakers today have amazing opportunities and incredible tools to accomplish anything they can imagine. You look at the work being done for films like "The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button" by Digital Domain or ILM's impressive space combat in "Star Trek" or John Gaeta's brain-bending environmental work in "Speed Racer," and really... you can do anything. Style is more important than ever, since world-building can be on a whole new level of persuasive.
So... let's say that all of this prequel reboot remake update reinvention stuff has been all about getting those tools right. Practice makes perfect.
Stop practicing. Time to do.
Tell me stories you haven't told me yet. Get me hooked all over again. I don't mind adapting from comics or from books or from other media... even video games... as long as we're seeing storytellers move forward. Sequels... I'm not morally opposed as long as you're telling new stories, and as long as you create characters worth spending more time with.
Jar-Jar Binks, I'm sorry to say, is not the Devil. He led the way to Gollum, who paved the way for Davy Jones, who is but mere warm-up for "Avatar," and whatever lies beyond that. That's not a bad legacy at all.
Anakin Skywalker, though... he's the Devil. Because he's the one whose story and whose absolute lack of dramatic purpose cripples the "Star Wars" prequels. Anytime you back up to tell the same story again... and again... and again... and again... well, that's Hell. That's Anakin. And that is what we have to be done with.
Let's take this moment this morning to toast the Decade of Anakin Skywalker. 1999 to 2009.
And now... let's put it to bed.
Let's dream big again.
Can't get enough of Motion/Captured? Don't miss a post with daily HitFix Blog Alerts. Sign up now.
Don't miss out. Add Motion/Captured to your iGoogle, My Yahoo or My MSN experience by clicking here.
Not part of the HitFix Nation yet? Take 90 seconds and sign up today.
News From Our Partners
-
Cannes Film Festival: Cannes, Day Seven: J.C. Chandor makes good, Nicolas Winding Refn goes bad, and Claire Denis gets ugly
Interview: Katie Aselton on going from mumblecore to thriller—and directing her own nude scenes
TV Roundtable: Boobies, pee-pees, codependence, and grounding the shenanigans with heart
-
Rihanna Working on Eighth Album [Pic]
One Direction to Release Fourth Book This Summer
Beyonce Reveals Battle With Tonsillitis + 'Grown Woman' Choreography in Mrs. Carter Show Tour Videos
-
Please Watch New 'Arrested Development' In Order & Not At Once
From 'Idol' Contestants To Judges?
From 'Unfabulous' To 'American Horror Story'
-
Xbox One Games Can Be Played By Multiple Users on One Console
'American Horror Story: Coven' Adds Emma Roberts
'Fast 6′ vs. 'Hangover 3′: Who Will Win the Memorial Day Weekend Box Office?
-
New 'Man of Steel' Trailer: Watch Now!
'The Hangover': Retracing The Success Of A Few Crazy Nights
'Fast & Furious 6': How Michelle Rodriguez Came Back From The Dead
-
'Before Midnight' L.A. Premiere: Ethan Hawke, Julie Delpy Celebrate 18 Years Together (PHOTOS)
Josh Hutcherson in 'Ape': 'Hunger Games' Star Lines Up Role in Psychological Thriller
'Man of Steel' Trailer: Kneel Before General Zod
-
What to Watch Tonight: The Season Finales of SVU, The Middle, Modern Family, Chicago Fire, Nashville, and Criminal Minds
The Weirdest, Grossest, Bestest Moments from Netflix's Hemlock Grove, in Pictures and GIFs
What to Watch Tonight: SYTYCD, Awkward., and the Finales of Grimm, The Game, and DWTS
-
The Telefile - Critics' Choice Television Awards 2013: Nominees Announced
The Telefile - TV on DVD: Tuesday, May 21, 2013
The Telefile - Veep: The Episode's Best Insults
Get Instant Alerts on Motion/Captured
Latest Posts
-
Two of the supporting characters from the trilogy weigh in on saying goodbyeWednesday, May 22, 2013
-
Simon Pegg is still jumping fencesWednesday, May 22, 2013
-
As the series shifts focus and winds down, we talk to the main trio about returning one last timeWednesday, May 22, 2013
-
One of the film's biggest ideas is explained more clearlyTuesday, May 21, 2013


Comments
Option 1
Comment instantly as a guest GuestOption 2
Option 3
Login or create a HitFix account Login SignupInfamousKidd
May 20, 2009 at 10:48AM EST Reply to CommentThat sounds just about right, Draw. TPM was the moment that fans really went from being hopeful to being skeptical. It was almost as if a switch was flipped, causing us to hate everything until proven wrong instead of giving us the benefit of the doubt.
While the technology may have helped us get to where we are, it feels like a steep price to pay, sacrificing what we thought we wanted to see in Star Wars for the better of cinema effects today.
As a result, it is tough to look at anything Star Wars in the same way again, because the memory of the prequels and the animated show and the merchandise taints it to be some sort of joke now.
Also, because of the financial success of these movies, we get prequels to everything. Prequels to stories we imagined in our heads that can never live up to those expectations, because other people see them differently than we do.
10 years ago is the day that fans learned to live with disappointment and to expect the worse, in order to prevent ourselves from opening up with vulnerable high expectations.
badabing
May 20, 2009 at 11:21AM EST Reply to CommentTolkien was aware of this decades ago....he said he was purposely vague in the Lord Of The Rings when he mentioned historical figures or battles in Middle-Earth's past because the hint of a huge unexplained back story was more intriguing for the reader than the inevitable let down of the full delving into said back story. Smart guy.
stephengraves
May 20, 2009 at 11:26AM EST Reply to CommentOh, thank god, I'm not the only one. I've been telling rabid Terminator fans for years that no, they don't want to see two hours of the Future War, all it is is a set of cool images for 15 minutes of flashbacks and spun out over two hours it'll be as dull as ditchwater. But do they listen to me? Do they buggery. Terminator 4 will fail for one simple reason - the Terminator films at heart are slasher films in which the antagonist is a robot. Terminator 4 doesn't follow that structure, so it falls at the first hurdle.
JoeK
May 20, 2009 at 11:30AM EST Reply to CommentIt's amazing for me to read this from someone else because it's exactly what's been kicking around in my head the last few days. It is true that TPM is a signpost - for all the reasons that you mentioned and because it truly coincided with the advent of the internet as a new nexus for a new kind of "fandom." The notion that all these backstory embellishments deserve feature treatment often creatively bankrupt for all the reasons that you state and more. Kenobi wistfully talking about the Old Republic and ominously referencing the Clone Wars is much more evocative for a viewer than ANYTHING Lucas could have conceived, which was still better than most people with internet connections are willing to admit. Characters like Boba Fett, Darth Maul, etc. are interesting and fire imagination precisely BECAUSE they are enigmatic and arresting in the context of the rest of the events taking place around them. The way Cameron contextualizes and offers glimpses of the "future war" is much more effective in the realm of our own imaginations AND the story we are watching than any no-limit-budget realization we could get later. For many people these things actually have the effect of diminishing the original, or at least the effect contextually the event/reference has in the space of viewing the original. I've seen serious discussions on screenwriting positively obsesses with Quint's "Indianapolis" monologue from Jaws for example - - pointing to it as some kind of holy grail moment every script should have and I even think I've read about this trying to be given feature film treatment itself. What is completely lost on everyone is that the creative process LEADS to this type of moment in story, it doesn't start with it. In some ways it does feel like the "nerds won" because we are getting so much genre fare but it's ironic that so much of it feels inferior to expectations for whatever reasons. The notion of something like Terminator Salvation getting any kind of critical support 20-30 years ago is laughable but nowadays all the fans have a degree of Kael in them and I'm not sure if fandom or the films we've loved for years are actually better for it - especially when the good stuff is just as likely to be pilloried in equal measure as the bad. The Star Wars prequels actually do a pretty remarkable job given their origins and if it suffers at all it's mostly because you cannot make real for a group of people that which only they can individually. I also think a generational shift in how movies are experienced and enjoyed plays a very large part and for all the reasons already tossed out TPM seems as fitting a historical marker for this as any.
Mode_7
May 20, 2009 at 11:54AM EST Reply to CommentGreat article Drew. I think a part of the geek hate also stems from a feeling we'd been had. I think that for those like myself that were born in the early 80's, Star Wars was something that we thought was ours. I had no idea growing up that Star Wars had been the phenomenon that it was upon release. I thought that I'd discovered it, that it was something special that me and my buddies were into, and no one else knew about. It became a part of our identity as I suppose all the things you love do.
And so George announces the prequels and the elation masks the creeping feeling we'd been had. Star Wars was never ours. We didnt discover it, we'd been marketed to. Suddenly everyone is just as into Star Wars as we were. The popular kids in school that we hate are all of a sudden talking about X-Wings and bobba fett and we realise we've been totally co-opted. That thing that made us special in fact makes us the same as everyone else.
It wouldn't have even mattered if the movies had been great, the damage had already been done.
nick_r
May 20, 2009 at 12:03PM EST Reply to CommentI agree to an extent with the argument that it's pointless to put things on screen just for the purpose of putting them on screen, and that creative energy is better spent creating new stories and worlds.
But I think that's also sort of a cop-out. The Star Wars prequels, we can see by now, were destined to fail from the beginning because of Lucas's insular, one-man-band approach to the whole thing -- he was like Robert Rodriguez with a $150 million budget, wearing too many hats and never taking input. The fact that the films were dramatizing stories to which we already knew the end is just the pickle on the crap sandwich.
Look at the Harry Potter films as a counterpoint. If everyone on Earth hadn't read the books when the first one came out, they sure have by now. And that means the vast majority of the audience knows how the whole story ends and just wants to see events they're already aware of dramatized on screen with actors and an effects budget. Yet, the series has been much more successful from the perspective of both audiences and critics than the SW prequels ever were -- and it keeps getting better. Hell, the next film is largely about how the villain of the series came to be the villain of the series, but people are going nuts for the trailer and they'll probably go nuts for the movie.
And I'm certainly not pointing to Harry Potter as the end-all, be-all of cinema, but I think it goes to show that it IS possible to give audiences a fully realized version of a story that's already in their brains without screwing it up royally.
cellulord
May 20, 2009 at 12:07PM EST Reply to CommentGreetings. Very thoughtful piece which, as with some of the other commentators, I was glad to see someone *else* thinking. Of course, while I greatly admire the achievement of Harry and yourself and the others at Aint It Cool in breaking the steel grip of the Hollywood publicity machine, I think it's fair to point out that websites like AINC etc have had more than a hand in creating the situation we now find ourselves in. The big studios won't roll the big financial dice unless they KNOW that they'll get that all-important first weekend and the way to do that is to build up a hysteria of anticipation which you guys feed with the drip-drip-drip of rumours, guess-work and glimpses that are now churned out by *every* website and so-called news channel (most of whom do so with far less care than AICN). The Holy Grail is brand recognition ... if you can make the world know about your film before you've spent one thin dime (as you colonial types might quaintly put it) on publicity - that's mission accomplished. And the *easiest* way to do that is to re-hash ... sorry, re-imagine ... something the audience already knows well. Hence the sequels, prequels, remakes and pequels of remakes of sequels. I think you'll agree ... it's time Hollywood stopped taking the easy path. It's time they made the decision a lot of the better film-makers out there clearly decided some years ago - to stop insulting the taste and intelligence of the audience. It's time to make films that will do more than open a weekend ... we want, need and deserve films that will open up minds, ambitions and creative avenues in the way that happened for a whole generation of kids in the late 70s and early 80s. The same kids who are the backbone of Hollywood today. Just slapping the same old re-heated nonsense on screen in 3D-gimmick-o-scope isn't sufficient ... yes the films have to accomodate the new technology and look beautiful in Imax and so forth ... but what is the point if they can't create characters, narratives and dramas that can change lives on *any* size screen. I'll get off me soap box now : )
O Goncho
May 20, 2009 at 12:09PM EST Reply to CommentIt's weird for me to read this sort of thing. In 1999, I was only 11 and 'fandom' for me began and ended in the school yard.
I was THE target audience for TPM, and I have to admit that when my 11 year old eyes first beheld it, I fucking loved it.
Obviously nowadays I can look back without the threat of nostalgia and recognise how misguided the films were. That really isn't difficult. No, what interests me is the notion that there was ever a time when the internet wasn't teeming with the kind of hostile and cynical snobs/geeks that infest every corner of the 'net nowadays. Hell, I've done my own fair share of geek-ranting, myself.
I honestly can't remember a time when being a film geek didn't involve the bile and disappointment it so often invokes in me.
Nice article Drew, but now you've got me yearning for a time I've never even known. I don't even have a point here; this is just a really depressing realisation for me.
Stormshadow4life
May 20, 2009 at 1:10PM EST Reply to CommentI don't know....I agree with you in some aspect on prequels. On one hand, we already how things turn out for the main character, but if it is done well, it can certainly be a worthy movie. Take Wolverine for example, we know Logan's story, we're not worried about him. However, they failed to make me care about any of the new characters....i couldn't give two shits about his girlfriend, and that's a big problem. I think anything can work (prequel, sequel, whatever) as long as it is well done. Just because you know how something turns out doesn't lessen the value of a prequel, hell every single movie adapted from a novel has that issue, and I don't see many people complaining about LOTR (even though we all read it and know how it is gonna turn out).
One thing I agree with though...Anakin IS the devil and the biggest flaw of Ep 1-3.
MattSpringer
May 20, 2009 at 2:10PM EST Reply to CommentTerrific piece Drew...though I think any story, even a prequel, can be compelling if told well with strong characters and imagination. In other words, prequels aren't bad cause they're prequels; they're bad cause they typically suck.
I just published an ebook collecting my ten years of writings on Star Wars; it's entitled Poodoo, and it's available here:
http://tinyurl.com/poodoo
It's sorta one man's journey from that plateau of hope and hype you describe down into the depths of disappointment and ultimately unentitled reality. Plus, a few dick jokes.
Fastbak
May 20, 2009 at 2:35PM EST Reply to CommentY'know I remember getting in line I didn't love it but I didn't hate it either.
I think it works when it's not trying to replicate the original trilogy's style. When Lucas actually went for a different OPERATIC approach like moments like the faceoff with Darth Maul.
Future generations are going to end up watching the movies in chronological order and it'll be a totally different story.
JoeK
May 20, 2009 at 3:09PM EST Reply to CommentI still think that most people were less than honest in their reactions to TPM - at least as it manifested itself in the media and on the internet. After its release the film's marketing was regarded in Hollywood marketing circles as a case study of what not to let happen...the omnipresent tie-ins, licensing, publicity set the movie up for a tremendous backlash by the time it actually arrived. The people frenzied for it largely had their release when the trailer arrived and everyone else was so exhausted with it they just wanted it go away. It came to a point where there was no other way to cover the movie...I remember reading mainstrem pieces and commentary that assigned all manner of the world's evils to Lucas and that was only amplified on the internet, where fans that once wore Ewok underoos gnashed indignation that movie didn't deliver something like Jedi erotica or something. They pounced on peripheral characters that were largely tech experiments (Binks) and spewed outrage over story points they didn't expect that actually ended up dovetailing nicely in some of the best scenes in the two sequels (particularly the last one). I also continue to find it interesting that so much is made of critical mass on genre films. In the 70's and 80's and even most of the 90's the notion of a genre movie getting any kind of critical notice was laughable, regardless of its quality. As popular as most of Spielberg and Lucas' films were for example, they were never embraced by the film cognescenti the way that fanboys now point to to buttress their rantings. I don't think this is because genre fans have become more discerning either. I'll be the first one to admit to being disappointed with films I've looked forward to before but this default posture of hostility is born of the internet age I think. Maybe it will make films better. I think in a few cases it has but it has also worked against fans too.
jmd
May 20, 2009 at 3:17PM EST Reply to CommentI was taught to honor the Iceberg Principle - the idea that you only ever show the audience the tip of the iceberg of your universe, because the bulk of it, the gigantic foundation that's concealed under the water, can't ever compare to what any individual reader or viewer can imagine for his or herself. If more creators had the good sense to follow this principle, I think that the genres of fantasy and sci-fi would be flourishing, both creatively and financially, instead of shamelessly struggling to milk money from consumers by retreading over the same old stuff over and over again.
nick_r
May 20, 2009 at 3:18PM EST Reply to Comment@JoeK:
Actually, STAR WARS, RAIDERS and JAWS were all nominated for Best Picture Oscars. So it's a bit of an overgeneralization to say that Lucas/Spielberg films were ignored by critics.
JoeK
May 20, 2009 at 3:36PM EST Reply to CommentIt's pretty telling that none of them won, don't you think?
The tech nods notwithstanding, the populist embrace of these movies far outstripped critical support - particularly from the high minded set and the old-guard still entrenched at the time.
JoeK
May 20, 2009 at 5:33PM EST Reply to CommentI would also add that those three films are some of the best FILMS of all time, not just best genre films. My point is that there is not the same climate for the type of peripheral fare that many people still enjoyed within genre in the past. I'll grant people were much more forgiving, even if disappointed because the offerings were kind of slim compared to today's bonanza. These darn kids don't know how good they have it! :). No more text walls today sorry...
lazygarfield
May 21, 2009 at 6:54AM EST Reply to CommentDoes hating prequels mean you will hate THE HOBBIT too? Because that will be 37 different kinds of awesome mister, and there shall be nor debate on that.
TallBoy66
May 23, 2009 at 11:05PM EST Reply to CommentIf you think Prequels are a creative dead end, Moriarty, I expect to see this article recreated word-for-word when Hobbit comes out.
Cobbio
May 28, 2009 at 2:38PM EST Reply to CommentGreat article, Mori! I was a fan of your writings for years on Aintitcool, and I've started reading your words on Hitfix now too. Thanks for the fresh perspective on prequels (in general), Jar Jar, Anakin the Devil, and halting geek-specific movie needs in their tracks. I don't always agree with you, but today I agree with you on all counts.
Right on.
April 30, 2010 at 11:14AM EST Reply to CommentHere's the thing.
There's one thing I refuse to ignore, that I can't possibly ever forget, and that's the obvious racism and ill-informed marketing drivel associated with this character. For anyone to even remotely assign a measure of "cute" or "funny" or even "sad" to this character lends a level of disgust to a story that would drive what began as a marginally passable story and make it destined to fail. For Lucas not to see this and for the studios not to see this and fix this coming out the door is insanity.
He's right about one thing, which is that it's a mistake to do any kind of prequel, possibly ever. Prequels are unnecessary -- there is no story big enough to warrant a visit to a prequel -- with the possible exception of an "Ender's Shadow" to an "Ender" (which is not actually a prequel formula)... You start your story, you have a middle and an ending, and if Lucas was ever going to have "all nine films" be three trilogies worth of brilliance, he should have realized that and said the first 4 films were mislabeled and we're going to have 6 more films as we look into the future, as we tell the beginning, middle and end.
The Star Wars trilogy, the original three films -- is a work of genius that just gets worse as it goes along, but that was still no excuse to tarnish the first film, the one that captured our imagination and turn it into a farce that only proved to us that films 2 and 3 were simply marketing vehicles for toys and happy meals, and we barely got out alive with an enjoyable story by the end of Jedi.
It's not just a loss of faith here, it's a loss of innocence that fans are still mourning and frankly, still quite angry about. It's the continued violation of one of the best works of our generation however random it was to begin with.
To point at Jar-Jar Binks and say this work of cgi was a marvel and say it lead the way to all of this other work is something I do disagree with -- because the tech would have been invented and was being invented without Lucas's racist Jar-Jar vehicle moving forward. Avatar and everything leading up to it still would have been built, and probably would have been better even if this movie hadn't reached the light of day. I won't celebrate Jar Jar Binks, because you can't have something be frankly marketing driven, racist, and so horribly fake represent something so lamely labeled "innovative" -- And have me believe it. It won't happen.
Do we need to move forward? Sure, but not celebrating Jar-Jar Binks as something innovative, smartly done or even paving the way for anything better. It represents the worst the industry has to offer us. It's racist, treats consumers and fandom like they're stupid sheep, and it's insulting. I can't support a product of hate and ignorance. I can't.
June 9, 2010 at 11:55PM EST Reply to CommentI'd like to see the Terminator Future War... done well.
Honestly, for any concept, the execution is so much more important than the premise. And neither the Star Wars prequels nor Terminator Salvation were executed nearly as well as they could have been.
For example, the TV show Terminator: Sarah Connor Chronicles was a story that was completely unnecessary to tell, but it was executed well enough that I found myself hooked.