Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back
1980, Irvin Kershner, USA
“The force is with you young Skywalker. But you are not a Jedi yet.”
Most people that are familiar with the Star Wars series consider the Empire Strikes Back (“Empire”) to be the best film of the six. Once in a while you’ll run into someone who finds the original Star Wars (1977) or Return of the Jedi (1983) to be their favorite, but I find it hard to argue against Empire.
And why not? Empire succeeds in everything that it tries to do. It moves the story along from the first Star Wars film, sets up a convincing love story, trains Luke (Mark Hamill) as a Jedi, builds tension, and ends on the perfect note to set up the next film. There are none of the plot inconsistencies, or unsuccessful attempts at humor that you find in some of the other films in the series and far fewer issues with the dialogue.
So if Empire is an extremely successful and well made film – where does it stack up against the classics of the science fiction genre? I would first argue that science fiction is such a versatile genre that it is really like comparing apples and oranges, but let’s give it a try anyway.
Besides Empire, three other great science fiction films include 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), Solaris (1972), and Ghost in the Shell (1995). First, 2001 is a story about mankind’s place in the universe, contains groundbreaking visuals, and gives the audience a chance to soak in the concepts of the film with its long shots and minimal use of dialogue. It’s nowhere near as entertaining as Empire (I personally find it boring), but it isn’t intended to be – it’s intended to make you think about reality whereas Empire exists in a self-contained, fantasy universe.
Solaris is about human isolation, nostalgia, and loneliness. It is the story of a cosmonaut who is tempted by a living planet to exist in his past rather than his present. It isn’t so much a science fiction film as a fever dream. Empire isn’t interested in peering deep into your soul the way Solaris is, and with good reason. Could you imagine Han Solo (Harrison Ford) getting nostalgic about, well, anything?
Ghost in the Shell, of course, is not about a fantastic galaxy far, far away, but about our present relationship with technology. It is a commentary on the line between man and machine, and, at base, what makes us human. Granted it has a lot more action than Solaris or 2001, but its psychological themes are in some ways encompassing of both films. Like 2001, Ghost in the Shell asks to what extent can we become dependent on machines/computers and still be human? Like Solaris, it explores isolation by asking if we can have constant access to the “net” yet still feel isolated?
Is Empire a “great” film? Like 2001 or Solaris or Ghost in the Shell, it is well made and executes its goals without obvious flaws. The issue, I believe, is that Empire’s success occurs in the mythological universe of Star Wars. Rather than provide commentary on the present human condition, it instead builds upon a mythological story filled with basic and accessible themes about good and evil, fathers and sons, and friendships helping us overcome adversity. It doesn’t reach for the philosophical as much as these other films, but that’s not a flaw in my opinion.
Too often we are compelled to assign “greatness” to the most philosophical works and dismiss films with simpler themes as mere entertainment. I would argue that a film’s “greatest” exists in how well it achieves its objectives – not by what those objectives are. If you use that as a measure, indeed Empire is a great work of science fiction and one of the greatest science fiction films ever made.
(c) 2012 D.G. McCabe