After my fourth viewing of The Force Awakens, something was missing. I stand by my original review, but I get the plot issues now. Relying heavily on fan service was risky and, whilst The Force Awakens pulled it off masterfully, once the nostalgic excitement wore off the story left didn't feel substantial enough. Rogue One, on the other hand, is a stand-alone film. It has no franchise building pressures; the franchise has already been built. So, it has every opportunity to be original. Does it take that chance?
All The Risk Taking
The Force Awakens was about as Star Wars as you can get. It drew most of its elements from the original trilogy, including the characters, the tone, the settings and the plot itself. It was a giant nostalgia-splosion. Sadly, there was little new stuff, and the stuff that was new was drenched in Star Wars tropes. This didn't bother me immensely; unrelenting nostalgia was what I expected. However, they couldn't get away with another film like that. Fortunately, Rogue One isn't.
Rogue One has its fair share of nods to the saga. Vader and Tarkin are the most obvious, but there are others too. Mon Mothma and Bail Organa are present during Rebellion meetings, and R2-D2 and C-3PO continue their record of starring in every Star Wars film. What Rogue One does better than The Force Awakens, however, is how the references are included. Rather than being the entire plot, the throwbacks are slid between new elements. Small background details, such as appearances from Chopper of Star Wars Rebels and the blue milk in Jyn Erso's house provide additional references for die hards to find.
What Rogue One nails best is its tone. Drawing influence from war films, it gets even darker than The Empire Strikes Back. There are no Jedi masters or 'chose ones' involved. Instead, the focus is on the soldiers that are normally overlooked. This allows for a grittier atmosphere that's more down to earth than the rest of the franchise. Before, individual rebels didn't matter much to the audience. Here, if they're injured or killed, it carries significant weight. This perspective on the rebellion isn't afraid to emphasise its harshness. This does mean the whimsy is dialled down, but it allows for more depth.
All Those Characters
The film is essentially adapted from the original's opening crawl, but almost everything else is new. The main characters for example, who (despite garnering criticism for being underdeveloped) I was fully invested in. Diego Luna's Cassian Andor is an unexpectedly brutal protagonist. His character's motives are honourable, but his actions are more questionable. This opens up debate about the morality of not only his actions but the Rebellion itself, creating effective conflict with the other leads.
Donnie Yen's Chirrut Îmwe is expectedly badass but is also, less expectedly, the most poignant character. He desperately clenches onto the force, despite the rest of the galaxy being against him. This includes Jiang Wen's Baze Malbus, Îmwe's partner who, having given up on the force, contrasts well with his partner's optimism. Their arcs are intertwined, drawing to the same conclusion that packs a significant emotional punch.
Riz Ahmed - one of my favourite actors at the moment - plays defected Imperial pilot Bodie Rook. Whilst similar to Finn in The Force Awakens, the emotional effects of Rook's defection are portrayed better through Ahmed's performance. It's nervous and jittery, more accurately depicting a guilt-ridden former Imperial. Meanwhile, Alan Tudyk's K-2SO is an irresistibly dry reprogrammed security droid who begins as comic relief but becomes a character I was surprisingly attached to.
On the less heroic side is Forest Whitaker's Saw Gerrera. An anti-hero, Gerrera is an extremist rebel who will go to any length to defeat the Empire. This allows the film to touch on the kind of controversy sci-fi is best at and is a further example of the risks the film takes. On the Imperial side, Ben Mendelsohn brings an unusual level of charisma to the typically stern-faced and upper-class Imperial Officer. His character, Orson Krennic, even has compellingly human motives, something other Officers lack. He's not as good a villain as Kylo Ren, but he's one of the franchise's stronger ones.
At the centre of everything is Felicity Jones' Jyn Erso. As opposed to being developed primarily through dialogue or plot points, Erso is developed through Jones' fantastic performance. She begins as a visibly stiff character who speaks like someone trying to appear more confident than they are and evolves into someone who moves with natural strength and isn't afraid of their weaknesses. It's a superb performance and Jones, currently starring in the vastly different A Monster Calls, is at the top of her game.
This section still isn't over.
There's also the returning characters, but they're pretty much cameos. Most prominently there's Grand Moff Tarkin, recreated with impressive CGI that's as convincing as is possible right now. There's lots of debate over the ethicality of "resurrecting" dead actors, but as far as I'm concerned if his family's happy I have no issue. Plus, it's nice to see technology being pushed like this. Of course, there's also Darth Vader, who's absolutely perfect. In fact, it's easily the most intimidating portrayal of Vader ever.
All That Fighting
Director Gareth Edwards' debut film Monsters is one of my favourites. It was as low budget as possible, but Edwards harnessed that to give it an extremely realistic feel. His second film, Godzilla, saw him transition into big-budget studio films. Unfortunately, with so much money and so many producers, the realism of Monsters was lost in favour of spectacle. Rogue One is only his third film and his second blockbuster. Does Edwards retain what made Monsters so good, or is his directorial voice suffocated by focus groups and test screenings?
Fortunately, much of the greatness of Monsters is present here. Most notably, Edwards has brought the grittiness to the action. The Force Awakens had numerous exciting action sequences, greatly benefitting from gorgeous cinematography and weighty physicality. However, it was all very slick. Rogue One's action has considerably more tension to it thanks to the ground up perspective and handheld cinematography. It's shot so that you feel part of it, not just observing it.
The tension also comes from a return to the dynamic of a small group of rebels versus the gigantic Empire. Unlike the prequels and The Force Awakens, our heroes are up against a threat that controls the entire galaxy. The odds are immensely stacked against them, and the action takes full advantage of that. Even when the rebels are sneaking through an Imperial controlled area, there's tension. This dynamic does temporarily falter during the otherwise exceptional third act. The rebels briefly have an advantage over the Empire, but it's thankfully short lived and the tension soon returns in full force.
It also helps that it looks and feels straight out of 1977. The visual effects are state of the art, but they're blended with practical ones as effectively as The Force Awakens. However, the latter still looked like something from the 21st Century. Rogue One, on the other hand, goes out of its way to look as retro as possible. The sets, costumes and props have the same worn, secondhand look that the original had. This, combined with Edward's direction, visually conveys the film's darker tone.
The Verdict
Rogue One gets the perfect balance between nostalgia and originality. Its tone is different enough to feel fresh, but not too different that it feels out of place. Gareth Edwards has seamlessly blended his voice into the Star Wars galaxy. He brings a rougher perspective to the Rebellion and introduces compelling new characters in the process. Rogue One is a fantastic Star Wars film that bodes well for the franchise's future.
8.6/10
Comments
Post a Comment