Revisiting Star Wars: Episode I

I love Star Wars. I am a Star Wars nerd. I have seen all six movies more times than I can count. I have read almost all Star Wars novels and comics. I have pondered serious questions like: Who are Yoda's parents, and what do they look like? Would Luke in his prime beat Obi-Wan in his? What exactly did Padme see in Anakin?

So I decided to start a journey of re-watching the six movies in order over the next several weeks/months. I would do it quicker, but I have a family and a job, and I would like to keep both.

To kick off 'Episode I: The Phantom Menace', I'm not sure why there's so much bad talk about the newer prequel trilogy. Were these movies as good as the first three? No, but the first three were three of the best movies ever made, so that's asking a lot. But all three movies were commercial successes. Phantom Menace, when adjusted for inflation, is the 20th all-time grossing movie, ahead of movies like 'The Godfather', 'The Lion King', and 'The Dark Knight.'

If you didn't like the movie, fine, but the Star Wars movies are not about awesome stories or compelling dialogue. The Star Wars formula is simple: fun adventure story + cool characters you care about + visually excitement + just plain coolness. Phantom Menace worked in the formula. Am I a Lucas apologist? Absolutely. But this is a very, very good movie. I even ranked it as the No. 5 movie of the 90s.

That being said, Lucas & Co. missed the opportunity to make this a transcendent film (like the first three), so in that way it was a slight disappointment. Here are some of the misses:

• Jar-Jar Binks. What a waste of screen time. I realize that this character was an attempt to engage younger viewers, but that's a crock to me. With young Anakin playing a central role, and R2-D2 and C3PO involved, he was completely superfluous and completely annoying. And he turned the Gungans from a warrior race into a joke.
• Anakin. Young actor Jake Lloyd just didn't get it done. Child acting can ruin movies, and he didn't do that poorly, but either Lucas was too impatient to get young Jake to the right point, or Jake just didn't have it in him. It was likely a little of both. Regardless, this detracted from the film.
• Medachlorians. Reducing the Force to some symbiotic creature was dumb, and Lucas never mentioned it again. Neither will I.
• Virgin birth. Anakin was conceived by the Force? Oh good golly. Again, we will never mention this again. I would have preferred that Palpatine had an affair with his mother, or it was Jango Fett. Anything but a virgin birth.
• More Darth Maul. He needed to blow out who Darth Maul was a little. His appearance in the series was too brief. What a cool character who only barely touches the surface of what he could have been.

Without further desecration of my Star Wars fandom, here's my not-so-random thoughts regarding Phantom Menace.

The Worlds of Naboo and Coruscant
The movie takes place on three planets: Naboo, Coruscant and Tatooine. I'm not going to spend a lot of time on the third one. It's a desert planet visited in three of the other five films. Naboo is only briefly featured again, and Coruscant is introduced to us.

Naboo, both the beautiful countryside and the spectacular capital city of Theed, gave Lucas and a his team their first chance to create a world with the new technology that was available at the time. It's a vibrant world, with two divided nations, the Gungans and the humans, who live in a tense peace. And we also get to see the beautiful Gungan underwater city. (By the way, how do the Jedi swim underwater with all those robes? That's got to be tough.)

Coruscant is a planet that is one entire city. Awesome visually, with ships and speeders criss-crossing everywhere. Coruscant is featured more in the later films, so I won't waste too many pixels here, but it was great to see the capital planet in all its glory.

The Jedi
In the first three films, there are a couple of old Jedi (Obi-Wan and Yoda), a young Jedi in training (Luke), a potential Jedi (Leia) and a Jedi-turned bad (Darth Vader). But we see very little of the Jedi, and know very little about them.

The movie begins with Qui-Gon Jinn, Jedi Knight, taking his padowan apprentice Obi-Wan on a diplomatic mission that ends up with them in some minor skirmishes. We finally get to see Jedi in action as a team, and it's pretty cool, knocking down droid soldiers and running through different terrains. Awesome.

We also get to see the Jedi Council, are re-introduced to a younger Yoda and meet other major players, including the very serious Mace Windu. We also find out that the wise Obi-Wan was trained by a somewhat rebellious mentor, someone who frequently defied the council's best wishes.

This movie left me with some questions about the Jedi Council, some of which were answered in the other movies, some of which weren't:

• What did they know about Anakin? We'll get into this later, but if Mace Windu and Yoda were do nervous, why didn't they take him as a padowan?
• Why was Mace Windu so arrogant about the Sith? Why did he believe they couldn't rise again without the Jedi knowing?
• If the Republic was already corrupt, why weren't the Jedi already becoming more proactive? Was Palpatine's power over them that complete?

The Sith
Darth Sidious (aka Palpatine) quickly becomes the central evil mastermind of this drama. He's pulling all the strings, attempting to manipulate the Republic, the Jedi, the Trade Federation, basically playing everyone off each other, all with the goal of consolidating power underneath him, ruling the galaxy under the hand of the Sith.

The question is how much of what happens in this movie was his plan or what was an accident he used to his advantage. Hard to say. I think he misjudged Amidala and her abilities, but it accelerated his opportunity to become Supreme Chancellor. I think he also greatly underestimated Obi-Wan, which he would do again decades later. He thought Darth Maul would earn his stripes against Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan, and instead, he inadvertently launched the career of the Jedi Knight who would ultimately lead to his downfall (by watching over and training Luke).

Speaking of Darth Maul, I'm not exactly sure what Palpatine had in mind for him. Was he eventually to become the enforcer Darth Vader would become? Seems to make sense. Was he more of an apprentice experiment? That's the problem with the Sith; they don't want an apprentice that's too powerful, and maybe Palpatine recruited and trained Maul to be too weak, and this bit him. And that's what drew him to the more powerful Anakin.

And the end of the movie, Palpatine makes a passing comment to Anakin about watching his career. It's clear he saw him as someone to manipulate, as an emotionally vulnerable child who would have a set of weaknesses unlike most Jedis. I don't believe Palpatine knew how he would use Anakin yet, he just knew that, unlike Obi-Wan or Yoda, he was someone he could steer.

The Seeds of a Villain
Was Anakin destined to become Darth Vader? Qui-Gon obviously believed something different, unless he believed bringing balance to the Force was killing almost all Jedis and eventually killing Palpatine. But that seems like a stretch.

I think Yoda said the most important things about Anakin: his path was unclear and dangerous. And because no one, at that point, seemed to realize that a Sith Lord would be trying to manipulate Anakin in order to destroy the Jedi Order, he was allowed to be trained by Obi-Wan in the traditional fashion, instead of being kept in the temple in a more special arrangement. But certainly, as Obi-Wan pointed out to Qui-Gon, the Jedi Council viewed Anakin as a dangerous person to train. But they also probably thought of him as a dangerous kid to leave untrained.

Obviously his attachment to his mother is the problem, worsened by his slavery and the hatred he felt toward the evil authorities on his home planet. Combine that with the chilly initial reception he received from the Jedi Council, and the seeds were planted for his rebellion.

The Mother of Luke and Leia
Amidala is a vexing figure. One of the things viewers forget is that Padme Amidala is a democratically elected, 13 year-old queen, who 5 months into her reign was faced with the aggressive blockcade of the Trade Federation. How inconceivable that may seem to us, she was put into political training at age 8, and the culture of the planet was to groom young politicians before they became corrupt.

She shows a tremendous amount of courage, similar to the courage her daughter Leia Organa would show decades later in opposing the oppressive rule of Emperor Palpatine. Her alliance with Palpatine is one of the great ironies of the story, as is the trust she places in him. This trust would dissolve in the future as his truer nature began to be revealed.

Closing Thoughts
I really could go on forever, but I won't, mainly because, as I mentioned above, I have a job and a family. But Phantom Menace does a beautiful job of setting up the next two films and establishing the three most important characters of the prequel trilogy: Anakin, Padme Amidala, and Obi-Wan. And anytime Yoda is shown on screen is awesome.

When I saw Phantom Menace on screen in 1999, it was a sublime moment, a fulfillment of boyhood dreams for a 23 year-old. Yes, I realize some of you probably find that pathetic. Others of you remember the feeling all to well. Was I slightly disappointed by some elements of this film? Yes, but I was overwhelmingly pleased with what came out.

So hopefully soon I can watch 'Attack of the Clones' and continue this little series. It's been fun to get back into the Star Wars galaxy.

Why I Was Wrong About the Red Sox

A little more than a month ago, I wrote that the Rays and the Yankees couldn't be beat. Apparently I'm an idiot. You can look at the May 18, 2010, standings here. The Red Sox were 8.5 games behind the division-leading Rays, and 5 games behind the Yanks. Before games are played on June 22, Boston is tied with Tampa Bay, both teams half a game behind New York. How did this happen?

In there last 30 games, the Sox have been scorching hot, winning 22. The Yanks have been very good, winning 18, and the Rays have been poor, winning just 14. But we can dig deeper.

As of today, the most prolific offense in the American League, measured by the most runs scored. How is that possible? Going by games played, this is the most frequent lineup OF lineup with OPS+ in parentheses: Jeremy Hermida in LF (70), Darnell McDonald in CF (86), JD Drew in RF (116). Keep in mind that Hermida is an fielder at best, and McDonald is not a CF at all. Bill Hall has played a lot in the OF, including CF (though the numbers say he's been an average fielder, maybe even better than that). How can the offense be this good with this OF?

On offense it comes down to five key players, all of whom I will briefly discuss:

• Kevin Youkilis. He's awesome. He leads the team in most meaningful statistics. According to Fangraphs, he's the second best hitter in baseball this year. He runs the bases well, hits for power, takes his walks, fields his position well. It really irks me sometimes when I hear some Sox fans say that our lineup isn't what it used to be. Youk may not be Manny in his prime, but he's far superior to Jason Bay, and he's having an all-time awesome season. Open your eyes people.
• Adrian Beltre. All of you who thought that by mid-June Beltre would be a Top 15 hitter in the AL, raise your hands? Yeah, me neither. I think his BA with come down and so will his value at the plate (his BABIP is too high at .373), but I also think his fielding will get better. Either way, the signing has been a success (except for him breaking ribs).
• David Ortiz. Two months ago, I discussed trading for a Big Papi replacement. That would have been dumb. The guy is hitting 260/366/555. He's got 15 HRs, the most he's ever had by this point in a season. There's nothing fluky about his numbers. I am sorry Big Papi; can you forgive me?
• Dustin Pedroia. Another very good season from Pedroia, including his usual stellar glove work. Solid.
• Victor Martinez. He started off slow, but he's rebounded nicely. He's pounding LHP, and struggling a bit vs. RHP (which I think is an anomaly). I think he'll come back to earth against LHPs, and will improve against RHPs.

To sum up on the lineup, this is the best lineup in baseball (at least it has been thus far). It may not be the flashiest, but it has been the best.

Pitching has been a two-sided story. Again referencing Fangraphs, Boston has the 3rd best starting rotation in the league, thanks to awesome pitching by Clay Buchholz and Jon Lester. Dice-K and Lackey have been average, Wakefield has been OK, and Beckett has been awful.

Unfortunately, the bullpen is the other side of that coin. They have been awful, 2nd worst in the league, only bettering Baltimore. Do you know who's been above-average in the pen this year? Daniel Bard. That's it. Papelbon has been shaky, and the rest of the bullpen is very questionable.

But here we sit on June 22, and the Sox are in it. The Rays lineup looks average, and the young pitching is regressing a little. And the Yankees don't look so unbeatable. So forget everything I wrote a month ago about the Sox being done and go back to my AL preview. The Sox are going to make the playoffs.

World Cup: Weekend of soccer

First off, I am not a diehard soccer fan. I follow the Word Cup every four years, and I occasionally catch an MLS match or a FIFA friendly (usually involving the USA). So everything written after this needs to be read in that light. But I love the World Cup. I love the passion of the fans, the incredible ability of the players, and the rhythm of the game, which to me is a combination of hockey and baseball. It is a strategic, slow-paced sport, combined with frenetic, physical combat around the goals. Great stuff.

There are some things though that FIFA needs to address:

• More officials. The NBA has three officials on the field, the NFL more. MLB has three-man crews, and adds additional umps for the postseason. And FIFA thinks one guy roaming that huge pitch is sufficient (with a couple of linesmen)? Come one. The foul on the US was symptomatic of this. FIFA needs an official closer to the goal who can see the physicality on corners and free kicks and let offensive players make a play. The physical nature of soccer is one of its charms, but mugging a player at the goal (and missing obvious calls) is just plain annoying and detracts from an otherwise terrific sport. Even increasing to two officials would make a huge difference.
• Stop the flop. Now before the more dedicated footballers tell me to get back to writing about baseball, let me say that I don't find the flooping in soccer any more offensive than I find in the NBA or than WRs falling over and trying to draw interference calls in American football. I get that it's part of the game. I also know that soccer is a very physical sport, and injuries are common. But please stop holding your face when you were whacked in the shoulder. And please stop grabbing your knee, and then popping up when a yellow card is issued. I'm not saying replay should be used in game (though I'm not against it), but I think FIFA should think long and hard about handing out very stiff penalties against obvious cheaters. I know they do it sometimes, but they should do it more.

This past weekend I watched 4 matches, and here are my thoughts on each.

USA 2, Slovenia 2 (Friday)
Alexi Lalas in the postgame basically said that the Americans shouldn't blame the officials, that they played liked crap for the first 45 minutes, and that if they had turned in a decent first half, that the awful call wouldn't have mattered. That's a load of crap.

All teams have bad sections of a game. Soccer, because of it's low scoring, is hyper-sensitive to these bad periods. But the US did come back and scored two goals, and made the play to score another. They were robbed. Yes, going forward, they can't dwell on it. But make no mistake: that ref made a huge mistake, and seeing him act as a back-up on Sunday was weird. Even if FIFA doesn't feel like the mistake wasn't worth taking action, from a PR standpoint, I would keep the dude as far away from a pitch as possible for the remainder of the Cup.

All of that being said, what that game proved is that when the US is clicking, they can move the ball and create very quick scoring opportunities. Assuming they make it to the next round (which is certainly still a big if), they could surprise, especially against weaker defensive squads. It would be great to watch the Yanks make a run.

Netherlands 1, Japan 0 (Saturday)
'There's only two things I hate in this world. People who are intolerant of other people's cultures and the Dutch.' A great quote from a lousy movie (Austin Powers) that actually has nothing to do with this game. But it kept running through my mind the entire time. My actual age: 14.

The Dutch showed something: their usual flashy style isn't necessary, as they scored early in the second half and put the clamps down on Japan, pretty much putting a stamp on the next round.

Italy 1, New Zealand 1 (Sunday)
So, what's up with these big-time European powers like France and Italy playing themselves out of potentially playing in the second round? Now, Italy is still in the driver's seat, and can get into the second round with a convincing win over Slovakia, but man, this match was winnable. They had the most talent, but the Kiwis wanted it and made plays on both sides of the pitch. Fun match.

Brazil 3, Ivory Coast 1 (Sunday)
Besides the US comeback on Friday, my favorite match of the Cup so far. Watching Brazil is like watching the Phoenix Suns in basketball: it's just more fun. Now the last 20 minutes turned into an ugly slugfest, with Kaka getting a second yellow card for standing on the field and having a guy run into him. Regardless, Brazil and Portugal are in the next round after Portugal's 7-0 dismantling of Korea this morning.

I just love watching Brazil. People keep asking me who my second team is after the US. Usually I route for England for whatever reason, not sure why. I'm part British, but I'm also part French and German, so that doesn't really make sense. I like watching Mexico, but they're our rivals, so I can't route for them. So for me it's come down to Brazil or Argentina, but I've stayed away from Brazil because how can your second team be the No. 1 team in the world? Isn't that the pansy pick?

Screw it. They are my second team. I don't really care if they win the whole thing or not, but I want them in the Final because that team is the most fun to watch.

So go USA, and if it can't be USA, then let it be Brazil. And anytime I can say Kaka in a sentence, I will take that opportunity. Remember my true age: 14.

Celtics-Lakers: Boston falls short

As I wrote after Game 6, I thought Artest and Odom were the keys for the Lakers. Well, Odom was largely invisible, but Artest shined with his best overall game of the series. With Kobe being double-teamed and forcing shots, and Gasol struggling at time on the offensive end, Artest delivered 20 points. He also added 5 steals, and played the best defense against Paul Pierce he'd played in the seven games. He played like the Artest of old.

Gasol, though sometimes shaky on the offensive end and playing a little matador defense on KG, rebounded like a man possessed. Eighteen boards, including 9 offensive.

Kobe played poorly. If the Celtics had won this game, he should have shouldered much of the blame. While getting double-teamed, he forced up too many bad shots. He did rebound well (15), but this was not his game.

KG is a shadow of the old KG monster. In a game without Kendrick Perkins, he had three rebounds. Three? This guy average double digit rebounds for ten straight seasons. He couldn't manage a big rebounding game for an NBA title?

Ray Allen didn't lose the game (it's more complicated than that), but 3-14 shooting is unbelievable. His defense on Kobe was very good in this series, but after game 2, his shooting touch disappeared, and that will haunt this team for a long time.

Rajon Rondo is awesome. His playoff line: 16-6-9. His Finals line: 13-6-8. When the Celtics run, they are nearly unstoppable. I think, with the right cast, Boston could be a contender for a long time with Rondo at the helm.

Doc Rivers is a good coach, but not a great one. Jeff Van Gundy had it right: Artest had proved during this series that Pierce could not go iso, but Rivers let Pierce do that too often. They needed more pick and rolls, more movement for Pierce off screens to get open looks from Artest's suffocating D. Artest was too good.

The officiating did not lose the Celtics this series, but it did get frustrating that Pierce shot 8 free throws in the final three games, while Kobe shot 31. The discrepancy is too much. Pierce drives a little less, but I've never seen anyone get so many calls on three point shots since Reggie Miller, and not one but Dwyane Wade gets as many calls going to the hoop.

I'm tired of floppers and whiners, and both teams provided shining moments of this annoying behavior. Just stop it, Rasheed, Pau, Fisher, Duncan, everyone! You occasionally do commit fouls and you sometimes tip the ball out of bounds. Shut it!

Finally, I would say congrats to the Lakers, but I wouln't mean it, so I won't.

The Career of Han Solo

Several of weeks ago I looked back at my favorite all-time movies of Tom Cruise. Today I look at my favorite movies of Harrison Ford.

As a young guy, Harrison Ford was my movie hero. His two most iconic characters, Han Solo and Indiana Jones, were the kind of heroes I acted out being as a kid. And truth be told, they're the kind of heroes I still want to be. They had swagger, they were cool, and they were heroic. He has parlayed those two roles into a 30-year career that has taken him from being a space smuggler to the president of the United States. And I've watched almost all of it.

Now this top ten is not representative of these movies on their own, but more my favorite Harrison Ford performances. So here's the Harrison Ford top ten.

1. Raider of the Lost Ark (1981)
2. The Empire Strikes Back (1980)
3. Star Wars (1977)
4. Patriot Games (1992)
5. The Fugitive (1993)
6. Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989)
7. Blade Runner (1982)
8. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
9. Air Force One (1997)
10. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)

There really is only one Harrison Ford movie I hate: 'Six Days Seven Nights' (1998), a forgettable action film with Anne Heche when she was still with Ellen. I've at least found something to like in everything else (even 'Mosquito Coast' (1986).

Now why isn't Harrison Ford's career as prolific as Tom Cruise's? A couple of reasons. First, his big break came with 'American Graffiti' in 1973; he was 31. He wasn't an icon until he was 35 with 'Star Wars' and didn't have his own franchise until 1981. Second, he just didn't make as many movies as Cruise.

Still, look at that list. What an awesome career. He's still one of my movie heroes. And since I just turned 34, he shows you can still have quite a career even if you don't get a big break until you're mid-30s.

On DVD: New Moon

When this is posted many of my male readers (all four of you) will ask for my man card, but I have a few things to say to you:

• I'm married. My wife is a Twilight-nerd and wanted me to watch it
• The movie has vampires and werewolves
• Who's to say I didn't lose my man card the day I uttered the phrase, "I think I really like 'Sleepless in Seattle.'"

So, take your shots, you mocking horde. I will go on with my movie review.

What worked
It's almost impossible for me to not compare this to the first Twilight movie, which I reviewed last year. So I'm breaking it down, and saying why this was better in this movie:

• Better special effects. The effects were very cheesy in the first one. And though they weren't top notch in this one, they weren't distracting.
• Vampires fight werewolves. The first film suffered from having too little action. This one still didn't have enough, but it ramped it up.
• Less Edward. Robert Pattinson stinks. He plays Edward as this pouty, whiny, annoying guy, that I hope gets his head ripped off. Unfortunately he survives.
• The story works for the most part. It's not a great story, but it's interesting enough.

What didn't work
Still too much cheese and teen love angst for my taste. I would have also liked more action, more chasing vampires by werewolves, and more backstory about what the werewolves and vampires can and can't do. My wife said it's in the book, and maybe they left it out because all the Twilight nerds would already know. But I wanted to know more about the fantasy behind the world.

Who would like this
I'm guessing most Twilight fans or people who enjoyed the first movie would like it, though I don't know how far they strayed from the book (because I haven't read it). Also, if you like romantic action movies (a small genre to be sure), this fits.

Who wouldn't like this
If you hated the first one, this one might be worth a rental, but probably not. Also, if you loved the book and you're the type where movies ruin your favorite books, I'd stay away. It's also dark fantasy with vampires and werewolves, and some might be creeped out by that.

Closing Credits
It was a decent movie that kept me entertained. I'm not likely to watch another Twilight movie in the theater, mainly because I have a tendency to laugh during the extra cheesy sections, which may get me killed by a crazy mob of 14 year-olds and cougars. Still, it's not a bad movie, and I like fantasy, I like vampires and werewolves, and I was emotionally invested in the outcome. That's sufficient for me.

Celtics-Lakers: One Game to Bind Them

Game 6 of this series stunk as a Celtics fan. The Lakers defense was very good, but there were opportunities. The second half opened with a series of missed layups and missed chances. So what will the deciding factors be for Game 7? What will decide the fate of the 2010 NBA Championship and the latest bragging rights in the historic Boston-LA feud? Glad you asked.

Odom and Artest. Neither player was spectacular in Game 6, but the key was they both contributed positively. The Lakers don't need either player to carry the team (Kobe and Gasol will do that), but they can't suck. The Celtics (on most nights) are two good for Kobe and Gasol to do it alone.

Injured big men. In the last two games Andrew Bynum has played largely ineffective minutes. It really hurt the Lakers in Game 5, but didn't make much of a difference in Game 6. Why? Because Kendrick Perkins left the game early, and Gasol was such a monster (17-13-9-3), that he filled the holes. But Bynum is the glue when Gasol is struggling, and he's the one post player the Celtics struggle to defend (when he's on). Perkins' injury could be devastating for the Celtics. He's one of only two plus post defenders (Rasheed being the other, and he's a nut job), with KG showing flashes of his old defensive brilliance only occasionally. Sheldon Williams, in 14 rust-filled minutes, showed why he's on the bench.

Where for art thou Rondo? After starting the playoffs brilliantly and staking his claim to best PG in the land, Rondo is slowing disappearing from the Finals stage. Yes, he threw up a decent line (10-5-6-2), but he was 5-15 shooting, including half a dozen missed layups (though the degree of difficulty was high). I know I keep harping on this, but something is off with Rondo. The Celtics need a monster Game 7 from him to get it done.

So those are the keys. Celtics in 7.

One more thing: Sasha Vujacic and Tony Allen are two of the most frustrating players alive. Yes, they both have their uses, but they both make 2-3 dumb plays a game that makes you wonder if this is there first pro game. Let me illustrate.

Sasha, toward the end of the 1st half, was trailing on a break. Kobe was being guarded on mismatch by Rondo (which happened a lot last night) and Odom was being guarded by Ray Allen. Two mismatches on the secondary break. So what does Sasha do? He jacks up a contested three. If I was a Lakers fan I would have been throwing my Jack sunglasses at the TV.

But Tony didn't want to be outdone. Later in the game he called for the ball and posted up. The only time Tony Allen should call for the ball in a post up situation is if one of his kids is guarding him at a family picnic. Even then, he'll stick brick the layup.

So I'm pretty sure if those two ever end up on the same team, the universe may explode.