The Force is Strong in this One

The Force is Strong in this One
Note: While care has been taken to not divulge the entirety of the plot or giveaway exciting twists and reveals, as always in The Kinswah Reflective, the regular tone applies which includes examining certain aspects of the movie. If you haven’t seen The Force Awakens yet, then it’s recommended you skip this review for now.
Finally, the anticipation is over and the most hyped film ever has been released. Under the weight of its own expectation there was a danger Star Wars: The Force Awakens would end up being a crushing disappointment. Fans of the Star Wars saga had been there before after the release of George Lucas’s prequel trilogy. Thankfully J.J. Abrams has alleviated those fears and surpassed the hopes laid down by a new generation.
From the opening scene, it’s clear Abrams is aware of the universe he’s helping resurrect. It was a franchise he grew up with and hasn’t set out to reinvent the wheel, like George Lucas did with the prequels, instead his job has been getting the old familiar to spin once again. With the use of goggles to scan the distance, using the same graphic from Empire Strikes Back‘s ice planet of Hoth scene, a sense of reassurance settles in.
The nods to the past merely tease nostalgia, as opposed to making a vulgar grab for it. After a few more scenes it is clear we are in an authentic Star Wars universe. The prequels felt disconnected, both visually and from a storyboard point of view, from the original films. Here J.J. manages to immerse the viewer back into the world first seen in A New Hope.
This is no doubt helped by the use of actual sets, allowing for the imperfections and grime of a real world. Just like the original 1977 movie, the characters are easy to connect with too. Daisy Ridley’s Rey, plays the role of lonely scavenger on a dusty planet. She soon gets a droid that’s on a secret mission. Sound familiar? It should and it doesn’t matter. This formula works in Star Wars for a reason.
Rey is soon teamed up with Stormtrooper defector Finn, played by John Boyega. Unlike Luke from the original movie, Rey is already driven and headstrong, so Finn doesn’t need to play the role of Han Solo or Obi Wan. He provides the everyman role we can all relate to. He wants to do good but is aware of the dangers.
Plus, we get given Han – and Chewbacca – so it allows Boyega to provide comic relief. The laughs are littered throughout the story without ever being cheesy. J.J. has managed to balance drama and fun perfectly.
It’s not just the very first film that sets the ambiance for all that follows. Acknowledgements and inclusions referring to The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi are placed throughout the movie. Each one accentuates the feel of connection rather than labours it. The Force Awakens isn’t a spectacle that requires a prop-up from the past, it just absorbs those used because they fit the scenario so freely.
Unlike J.J.’s interpretation of Star Trek which also required him to juggle history and move the brand forward, he doesn’t recolour the old palette. Star Trek needed an overhaul, Star Wars just needed to be put back on its original footing.
The main focus of the saga, the drive from prequels until Darth Vader’s redemption, is the balance between the light and the dark side. Adam Driver is the actor asked to carry that load this time around. He plays the villainous Kylo Ren. As a nod to Darth Vader, Kylo Ren has chosen to wear a dark mask and matching attire. He’s aware of Vader’s history and feels obliged to continue his goals. If you’re reading this after the warning note at the top, then you can’t blame me for mentioning, this sense of duty comes from a family connection.
It isn’t a burden he bears lightly. Driver excellently displays anger, inner struggle, fear and retribution. Mid-film he unmasks; this could have killed the mystic the imposing figure had created. But it was a genius move. It allowed Driver to fully express all his uncertainties, sadness and rage. Having all the contradictions works for the subject matter.
J.J. has managed in one film to show the descent to the dark side more effectively than George Lucas did with his entire prequel trilogy. For everything that was contrived and poorly acted in in those films, there is an organically produced alternative in The Force Awakens performed by actors excelling in emotional roles usually reserved for the theatre.
The greatest testament to the payoff in all this is how Kylo Ren, for all the vulnerability he shows, is hated by the end of the story. There’s no creation of the cool anti-hero here. He’s a bad guy you want to see lose, making Rey’s character easier to get behind.
Running alongside the force is the story of political power. It has always been present in the Star Warsuniverse. The original trilogy simply had an overbearing empire fighting the voices of freedom. The prequels described a more complex system that amounted to the same thing. Here the remnants of the former empire have become the First Order. They take their cue from Nazi Germany, in both styling and use of military might.
It’s easy to see the force used directly, like with Kylo, but Leia has been a political player from day one. Perhaps her use of the force enabled her to be a key royal figure and helps her thrive in her latest incarnation as a general.
It’s the absence of her brother, Luke, that caused a pre-release debate. And he proves to be the contradiction to the former statement about seeing the use of the force directly. Without much screen time, his existence and lack of appearance, helps drive a key plot point. He proves that less is more.
To find faults with the film would be nit-picking. It may mirror some of the original trilogy in terms of storytelling too closely for some but it updates it in a way everything feels fresh rather than redone.
For this writer The Empire Strike Back is the Star Wars benchmark and it’s with a small degree of hesitancy it can be confirmed that The Force Awakens surpasses it.
With the new cast, set in motion by J.J. Abrams, Star Wars has finally found a new hope.

Advertisement

Modern Game, Archaic Attitudes

Modern Game, Archaic Attitudes

 

Last week the Daily Mail, a publication not renowned for high class output, once again confirmed its status as a small minded rag, pouring out the worst of society’s views. The target this time was Cristiano Ronaldo of Real Madrid; a man many believe is the greatest player on Earth. The article didn’t centre on any of his on-field activities, instead it speculated what he enjoyed doing in private – with other men.
The Daily Mail wrote: Real Madrid star Cristiano Ronaldo is in a gay relationship with a Moroccan kickboxer, it has been sensationally claimed.
Proving that in the world where low-end papers exist, it’s always the 1970s. It doesn’t matter if Ronaldo is homosexual or not. It shouldn’t be newsworthy.
The real problem is how a paper known for its xenophobia is using the rumour as some sort of slight against the Portuguese player.
It’s indicative of a fault well rooted in football’s primitive attitudes. In a sport that can change with the times when it comes to generating income, it still hasn’t learnt one thing since the days of Justin Fashanu.
He was the first £1m black footballer and the first professional player to come out as gay in England. The high fee was paid by Brian Clough who took him to Nottingham Forest. The legendary manager admitted in his autobiography one of his biggest regrets was his poor handling of Fashanu.
This came with the benefit of hindsight, coloured by the eventual suicide of the once promising talent. At the time Clough lacked the understanding and knowledge surrounding the issue. Like many back then, he was ignorant when it came to the subject of homosexuality.
Instead of being the father figure he later wished he’d been, when he first found out about Justin’s lifestyle he barred him from training with the first team. Then he hauled Justin into his office and broached the rumour in the manner recalled here, as written in Clough’s autobiography:
“‘Where do you go if you want a loaf of bread?’ I asked him.
‘A baker’s, I suppose.’
‘Where do you go if you want a leg of lamb?’
‘A butcher’s.’
‘So why do you keep going to that bloody poofs’ club?’”
It must have worn Justin down over the years, and by the time he was accused of sexual assault after an incident in America, he feared his colour and sexual orientation would make his case impossible to win.
Watching the many struggles he endured, it’s not hard to understand why only one other player has openly come out since. The fact it was Robbie Rodgers, a free agent at the time and hardly a household name in this country now, proves no top flight players believe it’s worth the risk.
More recently Sol Campbell became the centre of nothing more than gossip. A rumour spread that he left during Arsenal’s halftime interval with West Ham in 2006, a game The Gunners lost 3-2, because his agent had informed him a national newspaper was going to run a story about his sexual preferences.
Pink News printed comments made by Sol Campbell explaining how the racist and homophobic remarks were hard to deal with, he said, “There were moments when it became too much. West Ham at home with Arsenal I couldn’t come out in the second half. It was a chipping effect over the years. I suddenly couldn’t face it.”
The irony is, Campbell is one of the most outspoken players of his generation, had the rumours been true he would have been one of the first to come out and stand tall. But the tabloid press wasn’t going to let the truth get in the way of a story, even if it meant the well-being of a top England international was going to be damaged.
In the end they did run a story, omitting all names, only referencing the person in question as a current Arsenal and England defender. This led to Ashley Cole taking the heat. Something he put to bed when he married Cheryl Tweedy.
It was another example of sexuality being used as a negative. There shouldn’t have been a story to print. It isn’t in the public’s interest and doesn’t affect how a player performs for his club. How it’s used as a shaming tactic is disgusting in this supposedly enlightened age.
It was only a few months ago the Daily Mail (them again) reported that before the start of next season two Premier League players would come out as gay. Once more, an absolute no-news story, reported for the shock and shame value. Of course any player in the closet will expect some chants from rival fans but most of this will be more like pantomime and banter than anything close to hatred. It’s only papers such as the Daily Mailthat try and spread that.
Players should also have zero concerns about teammates making life difficult. They are protected by laws and men in other male dominated sports, such as British-born NBA basketballer John Amaechi, and Welsh Rugby star Gareth Thomas, have had no trouble since coming out.
The Ronaldo article shouldn’t have asked if he was gay, but simply: Who cares what he does in private with a consenting adult.