So I did one on what I deem to be the Darth Maul problem a while ago, I wanted to do something akin for Jar Jar Binks.
I want to first and foremost say something relatively serious. As someone who was about to graduate 8th grade middle school and go into my freshman year of high school, I remember The Phantom Menace criticism well. Jar Jar took the brunt of that. Originally, as a young teen, I loved the film. It wasn't until a few years later, becoming more knowledgeable on storytelling and film itself, I came to see the drastic logical, tonal, and superficial flaws. Dangling a pretty piece of shiny CG upon my face didn't work so much anymore, but story did. Liam Neeson recently spoke out on TPM recently, something he's never done before. It's rather interesting:
So I want to preface this with...I'm a critical person. I'm so analytical it's a curse, I swear I should have become a detective or something. I feel art in all its variations should never be immune to critique. Critique is not even inherently a negative thing!
With that said, I do think some can go too far with it. Fans also can go too far in defending it, in this case it really is just a movie, but that's not the subject here. I'm not guiltless of fairly criticizing Jar Jar as a written character, few SW fans are. But when I first saw the open discussion Ahmed Best had on the backlash and the levels of near suicide he reached...I was pretty torn up about it. I felt for the guy, a man and father who seem to be a genuinely kind person and big heart.
So I felt a lot of confliction when I saw that. On a level of artistry, I'm not wild about the Gungan. Yet on the level of just being a human, I really identified and even sympathized. Jar Jar Binks is basically synonymous with being considered among the biggest and most iconic missteps in entertainment history. He's right up there with The Godfather Part 3 and the endings of The Sopranos and Game of Thrones. As an actor, that can't feel great. Yet there's one thing I've always done in favor of the role...
Is Jar Jar really what makes TPM...questionable quality? The finger has always been pointed directly at this role, but is that truly a fair assessment? I've said no for decades.
Now by no means is this an outright defense of the character. The Gungan is obnoxiously and exaggeratedly cartoonish to points of feeling unnatural, undermining of any tonal seriousness, and even the claims (moreso then than now) of possible racial insensitivity may have a small degree of merit. He does behave akin to an old Uncle Tom-like caricature. And yet, when you really think about it on a narrative level...Jar Jar is one of the only characters that has an actual progressive arch. In fact, he may be the only one who grows throughout the entire film.
The faults of Jar Jar do not lay with Ahmed Best or the CGI crew, they lay with the maker; George Lucas. George wrote the role this way, Ahmed acts how George instructed. He speaks how George advised. His dialogue is what George penned. For all intents and purposes, Best did a phenomenal job for what he was instructed to be. Blaming him is like assaulting an incredible waiter for your poor food instead of the chef. It's missguided, misdirected, wrong!
I've always felt that focusing almost exclusively on Jar Jar being the reason TPM was largely deemed lousy was sincerely ignorant. Jar Jar is an easy target, like bullying a cripple instead of calling out the blatant jagoff quarterback. Jar Jar Binks is loud, colorful, and animatedly impossible to ignore. That makes his flaws all the more overt. But realistically, the root issues aren't him. Perhaps he doesn't make the situation better, but he's not the cause and catalyst. It's the script. At least Jar Jar evolved and has some personality within the narrative. What other examples of main roles in the fim really have that? Jar Jar is altogether not all that integral to the SAGA as a whole. Sure you can argue he's why the empire rises, which in a manner of speaking is true, but is it? If it wasn't him, it would have just been someone else. I sincerely feel that Jar Jar is relatively forgivable in the long-term, the disappointment and true criticism should be aimed at Lucas and the character of Anakin Skywalker.
The very same can be said to the backlash toward Jake Lloyd. I'm not one to shy away from criticizing films themselves, but personal attacks on those not even truly and fully responsible? He was a literal child! This one always seemed the most cruel to me. Yes EP1 Anakin is cringy, not particularly well written, a slew of things...but who's real fault is that? Is it no wonder Jake basically, well, lost his mind? It's actually rather tragic. I wish him well. Yet despite Lloyd not to blame, I also see no harm in stating there is no denying Anakin was the crux of this trilogy and rather botched in my eye. He's the entire reason as to why it was even made. Jar Jar is flawed, by all means, but it's spilled milk when compared to the faults within Anakin's portrayal.
If the Saga were a Jenga game, Jar Jar may have removed a block or two from the towers general structure. The way in which Lucas wrote Anakin, the suddenly now deemed foundation of the SAGA (apparently it was always Vader's story now) due TO these prequels, was what brought the whole thing collapsing down. I think it's time folks stop shouting at Jar Jar and start looking at the real issues. Jar Jar is a wart. You can see it, it's obvious, but it's easy to forget and look past. The scripts and bigger characters were the cancer.
The curse of Jar Jar Bink isn't that he's the worst thing in the films, it's that he's so lively he got all the fingers pointed at him. He got all the blame...and doesn't remotely deserve it.
Prologue: Ahmed Best is a stellar man! He did a wonderful job with what he was give. And frankly, I'm not ashamed to say, I loved Jar Jar when I was a kid too. Brought me laughs and smiles and many happy moments. A critique of the character, not of the actor.
P.S. This does not mean I think, by any means, Lucas is some bad person either. He's to blame, but not saying whatsoever a terrible person. In fact, he's a pretty great person. I don't believe many, if any, artists go out of their way to MAKE something that their fans will dislike. Looking at you, Rian Johnson! If they do, they've got issues. Very bitter about something! I believe Lucas was tainted by some things, be it a whole new level of merchandising that makes Ewoks feel subtle or some infatuation with new prospects of "show off" technology, but I do believe he did this film sincerely. For that, I admire him...despite not caring for end product much on a personal level. And for that, I can never hate him. I can hate the film now, but by no means do I hate the man.
I want to first and foremost say something relatively serious. As someone who was about to graduate 8th grade middle school and go into my freshman year of high school, I remember The Phantom Menace criticism well. Jar Jar took the brunt of that. Originally, as a young teen, I loved the film. It wasn't until a few years later, becoming more knowledgeable on storytelling and film itself, I came to see the drastic logical, tonal, and superficial flaws. Dangling a pretty piece of shiny CG upon my face didn't work so much anymore, but story did. Liam Neeson recently spoke out on TPM recently, something he's never done before. It's rather interesting:
So I want to preface this with...I'm a critical person. I'm so analytical it's a curse, I swear I should have become a detective or something. I feel art in all its variations should never be immune to critique. Critique is not even inherently a negative thing!
With that said, I do think some can go too far with it. Fans also can go too far in defending it, in this case it really is just a movie, but that's not the subject here. I'm not guiltless of fairly criticizing Jar Jar as a written character, few SW fans are. But when I first saw the open discussion Ahmed Best had on the backlash and the levels of near suicide he reached...I was pretty torn up about it. I felt for the guy, a man and father who seem to be a genuinely kind person and big heart.
So I felt a lot of confliction when I saw that. On a level of artistry, I'm not wild about the Gungan. Yet on the level of just being a human, I really identified and even sympathized. Jar Jar Binks is basically synonymous with being considered among the biggest and most iconic missteps in entertainment history. He's right up there with The Godfather Part 3 and the endings of The Sopranos and Game of Thrones. As an actor, that can't feel great. Yet there's one thing I've always done in favor of the role...
Is Jar Jar really what makes TPM...questionable quality? The finger has always been pointed directly at this role, but is that truly a fair assessment? I've said no for decades.
Now by no means is this an outright defense of the character. The Gungan is obnoxiously and exaggeratedly cartoonish to points of feeling unnatural, undermining of any tonal seriousness, and even the claims (moreso then than now) of possible racial insensitivity may have a small degree of merit. He does behave akin to an old Uncle Tom-like caricature. And yet, when you really think about it on a narrative level...Jar Jar is one of the only characters that has an actual progressive arch. In fact, he may be the only one who grows throughout the entire film.
The faults of Jar Jar do not lay with Ahmed Best or the CGI crew, they lay with the maker; George Lucas. George wrote the role this way, Ahmed acts how George instructed. He speaks how George advised. His dialogue is what George penned. For all intents and purposes, Best did a phenomenal job for what he was instructed to be. Blaming him is like assaulting an incredible waiter for your poor food instead of the chef. It's missguided, misdirected, wrong!
I've always felt that focusing almost exclusively on Jar Jar being the reason TPM was largely deemed lousy was sincerely ignorant. Jar Jar is an easy target, like bullying a cripple instead of calling out the blatant jagoff quarterback. Jar Jar Binks is loud, colorful, and animatedly impossible to ignore. That makes his flaws all the more overt. But realistically, the root issues aren't him. Perhaps he doesn't make the situation better, but he's not the cause and catalyst. It's the script. At least Jar Jar evolved and has some personality within the narrative. What other examples of main roles in the fim really have that? Jar Jar is altogether not all that integral to the SAGA as a whole. Sure you can argue he's why the empire rises, which in a manner of speaking is true, but is it? If it wasn't him, it would have just been someone else. I sincerely feel that Jar Jar is relatively forgivable in the long-term, the disappointment and true criticism should be aimed at Lucas and the character of Anakin Skywalker.
The very same can be said to the backlash toward Jake Lloyd. I'm not one to shy away from criticizing films themselves, but personal attacks on those not even truly and fully responsible? He was a literal child! This one always seemed the most cruel to me. Yes EP1 Anakin is cringy, not particularly well written, a slew of things...but who's real fault is that? Is it no wonder Jake basically, well, lost his mind? It's actually rather tragic. I wish him well. Yet despite Lloyd not to blame, I also see no harm in stating there is no denying Anakin was the crux of this trilogy and rather botched in my eye. He's the entire reason as to why it was even made. Jar Jar is flawed, by all means, but it's spilled milk when compared to the faults within Anakin's portrayal.
If the Saga were a Jenga game, Jar Jar may have removed a block or two from the towers general structure. The way in which Lucas wrote Anakin, the suddenly now deemed foundation of the SAGA (apparently it was always Vader's story now) due TO these prequels, was what brought the whole thing collapsing down. I think it's time folks stop shouting at Jar Jar and start looking at the real issues. Jar Jar is a wart. You can see it, it's obvious, but it's easy to forget and look past. The scripts and bigger characters were the cancer.
The curse of Jar Jar Bink isn't that he's the worst thing in the films, it's that he's so lively he got all the fingers pointed at him. He got all the blame...and doesn't remotely deserve it.
Prologue: Ahmed Best is a stellar man! He did a wonderful job with what he was give. And frankly, I'm not ashamed to say, I loved Jar Jar when I was a kid too. Brought me laughs and smiles and many happy moments. A critique of the character, not of the actor.
P.S. This does not mean I think, by any means, Lucas is some bad person either. He's to blame, but not saying whatsoever a terrible person. In fact, he's a pretty great person. I don't believe many, if any, artists go out of their way to MAKE something that their fans will dislike. Looking at you, Rian Johnson! If they do, they've got issues. Very bitter about something! I believe Lucas was tainted by some things, be it a whole new level of merchandising that makes Ewoks feel subtle or some infatuation with new prospects of "show off" technology, but I do believe he did this film sincerely. For that, I admire him...despite not caring for end product much on a personal level. And for that, I can never hate him. I can hate the film now, but by no means do I hate the man.
Last edited:
