close friend of mine saw the new movie, ''Star Wars Episode 1: The Phantom Menace.'' She wasn't very impressed. ''It's a pretty movie,'' she said, ''but it's not very deep.''
I left the theater last weekend with much the same reaction. Too much effort, I thought, went into the computer graphics and the merchandising. Not enough forethought went into the plot or character development.
But, the problem with ''The Phantom Menace'' isn't just the lack of high drama. Much of the movie's weakness lies with the computer graphics themselves, and the reliance upon them to the exclusion of humanity.
At first glance, it's hard not to be impressed by the computerized prowess that director George Lucas has wrought. There were animated armies of 'droids and reptilian creatures, playing out an exquisitely choreographed battle. There was a major character that was completely computer-drawn.
And the animation covered the spectrum of what's possible with today's technology. The animated robots were rendered with incredible detail and moved with deft precision. The animated Jar Jar Binks walked around, jumped, and dropped things as if he were truly under the influence of gravity. But most convincing was the way these characters shared the screen and interacted with the flesh-and-blood human actors. Lucas has certainly bought the world's best animation with his millions.
The problem, alas, with this computer-generated tour-de-force was that it ultimately lacked meaning and emotional depth. Animated characters can't act. They can only follow choreographed motions. You can look at the screen and marvel at the eye candy, but subconsciously your heart discounts the difficulties or deaths that befall animated creatures. They don't feel real, because they don't act as if they are alive.
The first ''Star Wars'' movie was successful, in part, because moviegoers could identify with the main characters and with the battle. True, no one in the audience had ever been on a space station the size of a small moon. But people could relate to the idea of soldiers in uniform, battleships at sea, and atomic weapons. The Imperial storm troopers were human beings wearing white body armor, and despite their face masks, you could read their emotions in their body language. The destruction of the Death Star, although necessary, was still a tragedy because of all the people that the ship carried. The movie was psychologically convincing.
''The Phantom Menace,'' by contrast, felt like a Saturday morning cartoon.
''The Matrix,'' now in theaters, did a much better job integrating computer graphics with live action. That's because the moviemakers used computer graphics to augment the storytelling and the action, rather than replace it.
The story of ''The Matrix'' took place inside a massive computer. The twist was that the computer was running a simulation of the world in which we live, Earth circa 1999. The movie's underlying theme was that people who understand the world's true simulated nature can manipulate reality to suit their needs.
It would have been easy for the creators of ''The Matrix'' to have used the simulated nature of their world to justify the creation of computer-generated bad guys. Instead, the movie had villains that were human - and thus all the more terrifying.
Storm troopers, psychopaths, and invincible demons make for successful movies because we understand the dangers that they present. 'Droid armies, on the other hand, are so alien that they can't get the adrenalin going. And without fear, there is no excitement.
Dow:
