The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Arts
4 — Wednesday, October 19, 2022 

Look, I’m not here to argue 
that Jar-Jar Binks (Ahmed Best, 
“Alabama Jackson”) is the best 
character in Star Wars. I’m not 
even going to argue he’s a great 
character in Star Wars. But come 
on — does he really deserve to sit 
on “most hated movie character” 
lists, among the ranks of Dolores 
Umbridge 
(Imelda 
Staunton, 
“Downton Abbey: A New Era”) 
and 
Meredith 
Blake 
(Elaine 
Hendrix, “Dynasty”)?
As a whole, I think a lot of 
people were disappointed by the 
Star Wars prequels because they 
had such high expectations after 
seeing the original films — but 
even nostalgia for the original 
films couldn’t save the Star 
Wars prequels. There was too 
much CGI, a weird romance and, 
of course, Jar-Jar Binks. In so 
many ways, to diehard Star Wars 
fans, he encompassed all that is 
supposedly wrong with the Star 
Wars prequels. But he wasn’t 
the reason the movies were so 
poorly-received; he was just an 
easy target, someone to aim all 
the hate at. 
I’m not arguing that he’s not 
annoying — he is. But does he 
really deserve all the hate he 
gets? Does he deserve to have 
conspiracy 
theories 
written 
about him, believing him to be 
Sith? 
No. 
People spend way too much 
time hating on Jar-Jar Binks, so 
I think it’s time to come to his 
defense. 
A recurrent character in the 
Star 
Wars 
prequels, 
Jar-Jar 
Binks has been notoriously hated 
by fans of the franchise since 
his first appearance in “Star 
Wars Episode I: The Phantom 
Menace.” He was created as 
comic relief, but most viewers 
found him more annoying than 

funny. Admittedly, he is one of 
the more annoying characters 
in the Star Wars universe — he’s 
clumsy and he’s got some gross 
habits. But, let’s be real — he’s 
been villainized and hated more 
than he deserves.
I know there’s an argument 
out there that Jar-Jar Binks’s 
character is a racist caricature, 
made up of disturbing stereotypes 
of 
Black 
people. 
Lucasfilms 
issued a statement declaring that 
“nothing in Star Wars is racially 
motivated”; that being said, I 
certainly understand the notion 
that intent does not always make 
up for the consequences of one’s 
actions. 
Let’s face the facts here: 
Star Wars as a franchise has 
absolutely had its problematic 
moments. Who can forget Jabba 
the Hutt enslaving Princess Leia 
in that ridiculous gold bikini? The 
franchise pushes the narrative of 
“the chosen one” on its audience 
with Anakin Skywalker, a literal 
product of the Force. It’s not 
a perfect series of films. But 
to me, the argument that Jar-
Jar deserves hate because he’s 
a racist caricature seems like 
people are looking for something 
that isn’t there. And after hearing 
Ahmed Best’s story, I was only 
more convinced that the hate Jar-
Jar Binks receives is misplaced.
Not many know the man 
behind Jar-Jar Binks, but Best 
voiced the character in all 
three prequel films. Sadly, after 
receiving so much hate towards 
Jar-Jar — including comments on 
the seemingly racist nature of the 
character — Best was so affected 
that he contemplated suicide. In 
a recent interview, he said “I felt 
tired of having to defend myself 
and defend my work. I felt tired 
of having to fight back against 
racism and the racial stereotypes. 
I just wanted to play a part. I was 
exhausted.” 

The wrongful villainization 
of Jar-Jar Binks

SABRIYA IMAMI
Managing Arts Editor

We’ve all heard the phrase 
“art is subjective.” Our love (or 
hatred) of the art we consume 
is unique to each of us, shaped 
by our own experiences and 
interpretations. That means, of 
course, that sometimes we have 
differing opinions when it comes 
to the quality of a piece of media. 
Part of why I enjoy working for 
Daily Arts is getting to hear all 

the discourse surrounding our 
favorite books, albums, movies 
and more. I challenged the Daily 
Arts staff to write about their 
Arts-related “hot takes” — their 
unpopular 
or 
controversial 
opinions — and convince the 
world why they are right. The 
responses ranged from hilarious 
to 
personal 
to 
downright 
chaotic. While the jury’s still 
out on whether their writing has 
changed my own opinions, I’m so 
grateful for their contributions 
and their bravery.

HANNAH CARAPELLOTTI
Senior Arts Editor

Design by Tamara Turner

Listen, 
character 
death 
is 
essential. I know you didn’t want 
Sirius Black to die in “Order of 
the Phoenix.” Neither did I, but 
he had to, okay? If he hadn’t fallen 
through the veil, Harry wouldn’t 
have sacrificed himself in “The 
Deathly Hallows” and defeated 
Voldemort, now would he? As a 
creative writing major, I’ve killed 
my fair share of darlings. Killing 
off characters in narratives can be 
part of creating pathos, advancing 
the story or, sometimes, getting rid 
of unnecessary weight. However, 
with the rise of fantasy and sci-
fi media, fiction writers are 
increasingly able to do whatever 
the hell they want, which includes 
raising characters from the dead. Is 
this a good idea? On occasion but, 
in my opinion, mostly not. Since 
I’ve been studying creative writing 
for four years now, I am no longer 
able to simply consume a story. I 
have to tear apart every narrative 
choice — including resurrection. 
Here are my top five characters 
that died and should have stayed 
that way, but didn’t.

David Nolan (Prince Charming), 
“Once Upon a Time”
Not gonna lie, this guy’s just 
annoying as hell. I started watching 
“Once Upon a Time” when I was 
approximately 13 years old, and I 
will admit that I loved David (Josh 
Dallas, “Thor”) back then. Teenage 
me totally swooned for the dashing, 
virtuous Prince Charming, but now 
that I’m older and more into morally 

grey kinda guys, I’m realizing that 
he was too dashing and virtuous. 
This made his character pretty 
bland and predictable, but he was 
always 
depicted 
as 
absolutely 
essential to the show. So imagine 
my surprise when Mary Margaret 
(Ginnifer Goodwin, “Big Love”), 
his own wife, had to crush his heart 
to reverse a curse — now that’s a 
way to shirk off dead weight in a 
TV show! Gone were the days of 
watching David swing his little 
sword around while preaching 
about 
morality 
and 
generally 
suffering no consequences for his 
actions. We were taking a turn! 
Mary Margaret was going to have 
to live with the survivor’s guilt of 
killing her husband for the greater 
good, the main women in the show 
(who were all related to David as 
a daughter, wife and stepmother-
in-law) could take center stage 
without Prince Charming dragging 
them down, and finally, finally, 
“Once Upon a Time” could lose 
one of its moral compasses and get 
unhinged. But no, Regina (Lana 
Parilla, “Boomtown”) just had to go 
and split Mary Margaret’s heart in 
half so she and David could share 
it (gag), and he could stay alive. 
David’s death made a lot of room for 
some pretty intense and dramatic 
narrative progression, but I guess 
it’s hard to live in a world without 
men keeping their women in line.

Ethan Winters, “Resident Evil 
Village”
Yes, yes, Ethan Winters also 
died in “Resident Evil Village”’s 
predecessor, “Resident Evil 7: 
Biohazard,” but I’m not talking 
about that game. I’m concerned 

with 2021’s “Village” because 
Ethan died twice in it, and he 
should have stayed dead the first 
time. To clarify, I’m not necessarily 
angry with the plot that occurs 
after Ethan is revived. Is Ethan a 
pretty bland character with bland 
motivations that could have been 
replaced by essentially any other 
middle-aged 
male 
character? 
Absolutely. However, I think the 
vision he receives post–first death 
which reveals the twist of “Resident 
Evil Village,” the ensuing final boss 
battle and his ultimate sacrifice 
at the end are all compelling and 
could not logically have been 
experienced by or through any 
other character. What I am angry 
about is that between Ethan’s first 
death and his revival, we get about 
20 minutes of awesome gameplay 
as Chris Redfield, Ethan’s friend 
and leader of an elite task force sent 
to aid Ethan in defeating Miranda, 
the main threat of “Resident Evil 
Village.” Playing as Chris is so much 
fun, in fact, that returning to play 
as Ethan is a let down. I like what 
we get out of Ethan after he comes 
back to life, but it drags after having 
randomly played as another, more 
exciting character for 20 minutes. 
And while fun, Chris’ segment also 
adds a lot of narrative fat right at 
the end of the game that makes the 
finale lag. My deal is this: Either 
Ethan should have stayed dead and 
we finished the game as Chris, or 
cut the Chris gameplay and I will 
let resurrection slide just this one 
time.

Clara Oswald, “Doctor Who”
Okay, this one hurts. I’ve been 
a Clara Oswald (Jenna Coleman, 

“Victoria”) devotee ever since she 
debuted alongside Matt Smith’s 
(“The Crown”) Doctor in 2012, and 
I continue to be one, which is why 
I’m gatekeeping her death. Here’s 
the rundown: Clara was killed by 
the Raven in an alien refugee camp 
after she sacrifices herself to save 
the life of Rigsy, a young man falsely 
accused of murder. In his grief, 
though, the Doctor (portrayed at 
the time by Peter Capaldi, “The 
Thick of It”) removed Clara from 
the moment of her death in order to 
resurrect her, but she was stuck in 
a state of living without breathing, 
aging or her heart beating. She was 
eventually revived, but without 
a heartbeat Clara would always 
have to return to the moment 
of her death to let it play out. 
Realizing their relationship was 
too turbulent, Clara erased the 
Doctor’s memories of her, stole her 
own TARDIS and left to go on her 
own adventures before returning 
to her death. 
Because I love Clara so much, 
you’re probably wondering why I’m 
so averse to her resurrection — what 
I can’t stand about this scenario 
is the disturbance of her heroic 
death. The Doctor acted selfishly 
in reviving Clara after she chose 
to sacrifice herself, and pulling her 
from that moment to leave her in a 
comatose state for 4.5 billion years 
before her resurrection is akin to 
a violation of both her body and 
grave. Clara lost a lot leading up 
to her death, and despite my own 
despair, all I wanted was for her to 
rest peacefully knowing that her 
final act had been a sacrificial one.

Top five characters that should have stayed in the grave

Read more at MichiganDaily.com

Read more at MichiganDaily.com

MADDIE AGNE
Daily Arts Writer

There is no better film genre than the movie musical

If you are one of those people 
who doesn’t care for movie 
musicals, it’s time to face the 
facts: You have bad taste. I 
don’t make the rules; this is 
an undeniable fact. You are 
depriving yourself of one of the 
largest sources of joy produced 
by any art form. Don’t let your 
cold, hard, cynical mindset keep 
you from being engrossed by the 
beauty, emotion and sincerity of 
musicals. Search your feelings; 
you know it to be true. The movie 
musical is the single greatest 
film genre. 
Being the best film genre 
doesn’t keep the musical from 
criticism. In fact, there are a 
great number of high profile 
bombs — both at the box office 
and on artistic merit — that one 
can highlight to dismiss the 
entire genre. And who could 
blame you for not liking movie 
musicals if the only ones you’ve 
ever seen are “Cats” and “Dear 
Evan Hansen?” But the high 
variance in quality of the genre 
that allows films to be that 
abysmal also means there are a 
great number of masterpieces — 
some of which should rightfully 
be 
considered 
among 
the 
greatest films ever made.
Movie 
musicals 
are 
great 
because they capture the unique 
ability of film as a medium — to 
showcase movement across space 
and time. Theatre does this to an 
extent, of course. That’s where 
the musical first came to be. But 
on film, the traditional Broadway 
musical can be stretched to its 
limits. There is a dynamism 
that can be created with camera 
movement and editing that can’t 
be replicated on the stage, giving 

movie musicals such joyful, 
endearing energy.
The musical genre has been 
a staple of the medium since 
the origins of sound in films. In 
fact, the first feature film with 
synchronized dialogue was the 
1927 Al Jolson-led musical “The 
Jazz Singer.” The success of that 
film kicked off both the sound era 
and a Golden Age of Hollywood 
Musicals that would last until 
the 1960s. Here, filmmakers used 
the movie musical to push the 
boundaries of what the medium 
could do at the time. From the 
wildly inventive choreography of 
Busby Berkeley to the beauty and 
grace of Fred Astaire and Ginger 
Rogers dance sequences, the 
scope afforded by the medium of 
film allowed the musical to move 
beyond the theater and come 
into its own on the silver screen.
As Technicolor took over, 
musicals remained some of the 
most popular films coming out of 
Hollywood. With their heartfelt 
sincerity perfectly suited to the 
vibrant colors of technicolor 
film, the opportunity for artistic 
expression was greatly expanded 
in this next era. Who cares if it 
isn’t realistic for people to burst 
out in song or that the numbers 
don’t add anything to the plot 
or characters; how can you not 
be moved by the overwhelming 
beauty from the colors, costumes 
and sets in something like the 
“Broadway Melody” sequence in 
“Singin’ in the Rain”? As the scale 
of Hollywood films increased, 
musicals became one of the go-to 
genres for big-budget releases 
in the ’50s and early ’60s. This 
led to a number of great critical 
and commercial successes — like 
Best Picture winners “West Side 
Story,” “My Fair Lady” and “The 
Sound of Music” — but it also led 
to a number of flops that nearly 

destroyed the entire genre, like 
“Doctor Dolittle” and “Hello, 
Dolly!”
Though the production of the 
traditional movie musical waned 
in the wake of a number of box 
office bombs and the emergence 
of 
the 
New 
Hollywood 
movement in the late ’60s and 
’70s, filmmakers were still able 
to use the musical genre to 
create subversive works of art. 
From the campy cult classic “The 
Rocky Horror Picture Show” 
to the critical self-reflection 
of Bob Fosse’s “All That Jazz,” 

musicals were evolving in a 
completely necessary way that 
could only be brought on by a 
genre on the brink of extinction. 
The structure of movie musicals 
was even seeping into films 
that 
would 
be 
traditionally 
considered straight dramas, as 
in Robert Altman’s “Nashville,” 
which uses its country music 
performances as a way for 
the characters in its massive 
ensemble cast to express what 
they are feeling. 

MITCHEL GREEN
Film Beat Editor

Design by Serena Shen

The B-Side: Hot Takes

Read more at MichiganDaily.com

Why (Captain) America 
sucks

A few days ago, my father, 
patriotic as he is, got upset at me 
for saying that “America sucks.” 
He lectured me for a few minutes 
on my lack of patriotism, and I 
barely had time to explain I was 
clearly talking about Captain 
America (Chris Evans, “Knives 
Out”). My opinions on the good 
ol’ US of A aside, I think the First 
Avenger gets way more credit 
than he’s due (actually … that 
sounds quite a lot like America, 
come to think of it), and I’m 
here to make the case that Steve 
Rogers is actually an obstinate 
asshole. 
Across 
his 
many 
Marvel 
Cinematic 
Universe 
(MCU) 
appearances, Rogers is given 
various monikers that allude to 
his ostensible virtuosity, such as 
“God’s Righteous Man,” “Living 
Legend,” and, of course, his 
comic book nickname, “Sentinel 
of Liberty.” His moral compass 
is applauded throughout the 
films, particularly in “Captain 
America: Civil War,” a film 
centered around how best to 
hold the Avengers superhero 
team accountable for any death 
and 
destruction 
they 
may 
inadvertently 
cause. 
In 
the 

film, Cap refuses to agree to 
the Sokovia Accords — a United 
Nations agreement stating that 
the Avengers should fall under 
the jurisdiction and direction 
of a UN panel, rather than being 
independently operated, signed 
by 117 countries — on the basis 
that the Accords would hamper 
the Avengers’ agenda of helping 
people due to the introduction 
of international bureaucracy. 
Furthermore, Rogers insinuates 
that the Avengers shouldn’t be 
subject to the whims of a third 
party (that being the UN panel), 
because the third party will 
always be self-interested.
However, Cap’s moral rigidity 
blinds him to the reality of his 
own power and responsibility 
and effectively pits him against 
those who are unlucky enough 
to be born into a world with 
individuals 
with 
the 
power 
to destroy half the universe. 
The catalyst for the Sokovia 
Accords was a terrorist attack 
at the beginning of “Civil War” 
that resulted in the deaths of 
over two dozen people. The 
violent escalation that led to 
the attack was pinned on the 
Avengers present at the incident 
and served as a turning point 
in the public perception of the 

TATE LAFRENIER
Daily Arts Writer

Read more at MichiganDaily.com

