Mark: Obviously, Jar Jar Binks is the much needed "comic relief" in the unrelentingly dour The Phantom Menace. The main criticism of Binks is his similarity to black actors such as Stepin Fetchit and Willie Best from the movies of the 30's and 40's, insulting stereotypes of the bumbling, naive, eye-rolling, knee shaking, slack jawed, servile black man, both of whom played comic relief mainly in "B" pictures. My main problem with The Phantom Menace is that it is simply too "high tech", bearing in mind that it took place some 30 to 40 years before the original Star Wars. Poor old Darth Vader had to make do with live soldiers, whereas his predecessors had robot armies and other sophisticated weapons. Even the light sabres were more advanced! Whatever happened to being rational and following natural progression in technology? Just because film computer animation itself is more developed doesn't mean it has to be used. Shame on you, George Lucas. Peter Warren ---------- From: Mark Bahlin <[log in to unmask]> To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re-reading 'The Phantom Menace' Date: Tuesday, April 18, 2000 2:59 AM I don't know about you - but I was immensely disappointed with Episode One of the new Star Wars trilogy. One of the most annoying facets of this was the horrid characterisation of Jar Jar Binks, which I gather has become something of a swear word these days. I came across this essay on that character, and was intrigued by what it had to say and how this application of folklore structure worked in The Phantom Menace. I could see that in the other trilogy, but hadn't given this film much thought. It actually may provide a good reason to hang out for the next couple of films! What do you think? Mark http://www.space.com/spaceimagined/movies/jar_jar_holy_fool_000414.html ---- For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives: http://bama.ua.edu/archives/screen-l.html ---------- ---- For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives: http://bama.ua.edu/archives/screen-l.html