Review: "Star Wars in Concert"

December 15, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

I wasn't at all surprised that Anthony Daniels was greeted like a rock star when he took the stage at Conseco Fieldhouse on Dec. 12 to host "Star Wars in Concert."

After all, the flesh and blood representative of the "Star Wars" cycle of films (he played C-3PO in all six) has maintained a kind of purity unknown in the movie world. Unlike, say, Harrison Ford, who went on to movie stardom, or Carrie Fisher, who is now telling of her life of addiction on a Broadway stage, Daniels is known for nothing else besides "Star Wars." By not bringing anything else to the table--and in playing to a crowd of loyalists--Daniels was the perfect host for this event, which attempted to construct an under-two-hour narrative out of the roughly 12 hours of film history. And set it to John Williams' justly acclaimed and now iconic score.

That visual task wasn't simply a matter of distilling the good parts: The creators of "Star Wars in Concert" needed each sequence to last as long as the John Williams music to which it was being set. Thus, the show is structured around montages that sometimes--but not always--stayed on track with the overall narrative. They usually--but not always--stuck to footage from the finished films.

The result, visual, underlined the disparity between what's now known as episodes 1, 2, and 3 and the original trilogy now known as episodes 4, 5, and 6.

Clearly, the technology had changed by the time George Lucas backed up to the beginning of his saga. Yet the Luke Skywalker/Han Solo-era simplicity comes across on the three-story-high screens much more charming and engaging than the higher-tech "earlier" material. In those films, Lucas just couldn't resist adding more ships, more asteroids, more whatever into every shot and the results feels more cluttered than thrilling. Seeing it all together like this, even with short-attention-span editing, makes it seem even stranger that a saga that starts with impossible-to-follow trade disputes and political wrangling evolves into a climactic fight with warrior teddy bears.

It doesn't help that the editors often toss coherence aside, allowing sequences from one film to mix with totally unrelated scenes of another.

All that being said, the music sounded terrific. Kudos to the sound designers and to the players, who seemed to treat Williams' music with the proper mix of reverence and playfulness. 

Your thoughts?

ADVERTISEMENT
  • sounds like fun!
    Thanks for writing about this event, Lou. I think I would have enjoyed it, even with its flaws, and even though I have only seen the first two Star Wars movies. (episodes 4 and 5?)

    I had my own little multi-media Star Wars event in my home not too long ago:

    A new novel called STAR WARS: DEATH TROOPERS, by Joe Schreiber (Ballantine Group, 2009) came in for me at my local public library. I read it on my sofa while periodically waving my iPhone with the "Lightsaber" app turned on. This app makes a very satisfying "zoing" sound that is comforting when you're reading a scary book by yourself.

    Also, you can switch on the Star Wars theme music as part of the Lightsaber app, if you want to, while you're reading the fight scenes, which in this book appear very frequently.

    It's a pretty gory read.

    DEATH TROOPERS is the first (as far as I know) Star Wars book to fit both the horror and science fiction genres. It is almost all plot - very little character development - but satisfying in that you don't see how the good guys will ever escape the alien zombies BUT the ending makes sense.

    (Please notice that I did not say that the good guys escape, only that the ending makes sense.)

    Hope Baugh
    Indy Theatre Habit

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. You are correct that Obamacare requires health insurance policies to include richer benefits and protects patients who get sick. That's what I was getting at when I wrote above, "That’s because Obamacare required insurers to take all customers, regardless of their health status, and also established a floor on how skimpy the benefits paid for by health plans could be." I think it's vital to know exactly how much the essential health benefits are costing over previous policies. Unless we know the cost of the law, we can't do a cost-benefit analysis. Taxes were raised in order to offset a 31% rise in health insurance premiums, an increase that paid for richer benefits. Are those richer benefits worth that much or not? That's the question we need to answer. This study at least gets us started on doing so.

  2. *5 employees per floor. Either way its ridiculous.

  3. Jim, thanks for always ready my stuff and providing thoughtful comments. I am sure that someone more familiar with research design and methods could take issue with Kowalski's study. I thought it was of considerable value, however, because so far we have been crediting Obamacare for all the gains in coverage and all price increases, neither of which is entirely fair. This is at least a rigorous attempt to sort things out. Maybe a quixotic attempt, but it's one of the first ones I've seen try to do it in a sophisticated way.

  4. In addition to rewriting history, the paper (or at least your summary of it) ignores that Obamacare policies now must provide "essential health benefits". Maybe Mr Wall has always been insured in a group plan but even group plans had holes you could drive a truck through, like the Colts defensive line last night. Individual plans were even worse. So, when you come up with a study that factors that in, let me know, otherwise the numbers are garbage.

  5. You guys are absolutely right: Cummins should build a massive 80-story high rise, and give each employee 5 floors. Or, I suppose they could always rent out the top floors if they wanted, since downtown office space is bursting at the seams (http://www.ibj.com/article?articleId=49481).

ADVERTISEMENT