As Sci-Fi, ‘Star Wars’ Is Forced

Premiere magazine is calling the new “Star Wars” movie the “most anticipated film since ‘Gone With the Wind.’ ” Fans were lining up weeks in advance for Wednesday’s opening.

Yawn.

Sure, I enjoyed the first movie in the summer of 1977. The plot was brisk, the droids and aliens were clever, and all that space hardware was neato. Most important, I was a teenager.

But the sequel bored me, and I never bothered to sit through the third one.

A repeat viewing of the original has convinced me that “Star Wars” just doesn’t hold up.

Admit it--on a second viewing of Episode IV, you too were looking at your watch during the sixth or seventh gun battle, and with good reason: “Star Wars” kept its heroes alive by relying on the main ingredient of lame westerns: Make sure the bad guys can’t shoot straight.

The other action scenes weren’t much better. The light-saber clash offered the same old swipes we’d seen in Zorro movies, the dogfights were borrowed from World War II films, and that trash compactor was the kind of fix we’d seen Batman escape with ease.

But the worst thing about “Star Wars” was that drivel about “the force,” which Old Ben Kenobi describes as “an energy field created by all living things.” It’s supposed to be some supernatural power source but sounds more like the cause of global warming. How does Luke Skywalker tap this force? By “stretching out” his feelings. So in the final battle, Luke turns off his targeting computer and lets his instincts tell him where to aim.

By having Luke tap the force instead of using his noggin to solve problems, “Star Wars” becomes a science fiction movie that rejects science. In good sci-fi, smart men and women swap theories, rub their chins and draw conclusions. Someone frowns at a test tube and says, “If the evidence suggests A, we must try B.”

Some of these people wear lab coats. Many have beards. All employ the scientific method as readily as Luke taps his silly force.

Take the guys in “The Thing (From Another World),” the 1951 classic set in the Arctic. They analyze the beast, determine it’s a form of plant life, then devise a scheme to defeat it. “OK,” says one likely gent. “So it’s a vegetable. Let’s boil it!” Soon thereafter, the fierce carrot played by James Arness gets cooked.

That’s good science fiction, the kind where characters don’t reject technology but instead apply it. “The Thing” is nearly 50 years old, and some of its action scenes are hokey, but if it’s on one cable channel tonight and “Star Wars” is opposite, I’ll watch “The Thing.”

“Star Wars” was even topped in its own decade. The oft-maligned “Alien” from 1979 depicts thinking people, most notably Ripley. The ship’s No. 2 officer, she’s constantly scheming to keep a step ahead of an extraterrestrial foe who’s apparently indestructible and no fun at lunch. Just when Ripley is safe and semi-nude in the escape shuttle, damn if it isn’t in there with her.

Does Ripley listen for old Ben to coach her about tapping some force that will always be with her? No--she puts on her pajamas and figures a way to boot a bad blind date out the passenger door.

As a sci-fi hero, Luke Skywalker just doesn’t measure up. He’s not smart enough. Those who point out all his narrow escapes and his success in blowing up the Death Star must acknowledge that even these meager accomplishments are undercut in the sequel when Darth Vader reveals he’s Luke’s father.

Think about it: Luke outmaneuvered his dad. Ask any teenager how hard that is.

OK, you argue, but “Star Wars” wasn’t meant to be cerebral. It’s a story about brave rebels fighting an evil empire, and George Lucas concocted costumes and effects we’d never seen before.

And it was pretty hot stuff in the ‘70s.

Right. So were the Bee Gees.

Now comes “The Phantom Menace,” which answers all those questions about how Darth Vader, like Hulk Hogan, turned from noble warrior to meanie.

But for some of us, a more important question arises.

What’s showing on the other screens?