Members sonaboy Posted January 17, 2007 Members Share Posted January 17, 2007 'The Empire Strikes Back'By Judith MartinWashington Post Staff WriterMay 23, 1980 To call "The Empire Strikes Back" a good junk movie is no insult: There is enough bad junk around. And surely we're getting over the snobbery of pretending that it is undemocratic to recognize any hierarchy of culture, as if both low and high can't be appreciated, often be the same people. But when light entertainment is done well, someone is bound to make extravagant and unsupportable claims for its being great art. You will hear that this sequel to "Star Wars" is part of a vast new mythology, as if it were the Oresteia. Its originator, George Lucas, has revealed that the two pictures are actually parts four and five of a nine-part sage, as if audiences will some day receive the total the way devotees now go to Seattle for a week of immersion in Wagner's complete Ring Cycle. Nonsense. This is no monumental artistic work, but a science-fiction movie done more snappily than most, including its own predecessor. A chocolate bar is a marvelous sweet that does not need to pretend to be a chocolate souffl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Wilbo26 Posted January 17, 2007 Members Share Posted January 17, 2007 Somebody needed to pull their pen out of their ass in 1980 methinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ZJD Posted January 17, 2007 Members Share Posted January 17, 2007 Mensa'd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.