Making of Star Wars (New Book) Discussion — Page 3

I'm surprised nobody has actually read it by now and posted their review. My jaw hit the ground when I saw the hardcover version of this beauty sitting there on the bookstore shelf. Choirs of galactic angels were singing as a bright Yavin IV moonbeam hit the book's cover and I heard Ben's voice over my shoulder "I wanted you to have this when you were 13 years old, but your Uncle George wouldn't allow it."

I am an old and rare lonely "Star Wars" only fanatic, by which I mean my fanaticism extends only into the very first movie that came out. I love the whole saga, don't get me wrong. But my obsession belongs only to Star Wars before "Episode IV" was forced into the opening crawl, making the beautiful Star Wars logo jump away into the screen faster than the Millenium Falcon jumping into hyperspace.

With that background, this book hit my Star Wars only spot so hard I still can't believe it exists. I freaking love it. This is my Star Wars Bible. That being said, it is not the most readable book unless you are REALLY into that first movie. The rare photos (I love the way new photos keep popping up every few years as soon as I think I've seen them all), the interviews, the rough drafts before the final screenplay, all of it is Star Wars heaven to me.

But even I in my nostalgic stupor had to admit the writing is not the smoothest, particularly the first third of the book. I LOVE that there is SO much background before they even get to the making of the movie, don't get me wrong. But after so many pages you start to wonder "When is it getting to the actual movie?"

Still, it does make you feel like you got the most thorough background published EVER. And as the book progresses, the tidbits of information are absolutely wonderful (like R2 walking onto the set of another movie that was being filmed for television - don't want to give away which one, but Jesus it's funny!) But if you're not committed to reading the whole book you may not make it. I do NOT want to slight Rinzler in the least. I would pay him 10 times what he asked for this book because it's that valuable to me. I thank him for doing this. But he's a better researcher than a writer, and it's the STYLE of writing that can be difficult to get through. By the time you get to grand opening of the movie, and the stories around the sneak previews and the immediate hoopla following the film's release (again, with more very cool tidbits of information I had never read before), the book ends quite anticlimactically. Again, this is not because of the content but because of the style. It just reads more like a news article than a good story.

Okay, don't want to end on a negative note. Mr. Rinzler, thank you, thank you, thank you! I don't know or care how you got your hands on so many lost interviews and photos, but this has toppled "Star Wars Chronicles" as the singular item that sits on my coffee table at home to make a statement to the world (okay, to anyone visiting my townhouse) that this is the greatest film in all of history. Even if the writing is just too prosaic for the non-fan, the sheer magnitude of information, photographs, and effort it must have taken to compile the book does show your passion for the film, and I thank you again for doing this. (Yes, I know Rinzler's not a member of originaltrilogy.com but whatever). Thank you, thank you, thank you!

To everyone else, don't think twice. Get this book yesterday.

MTFBWY.

I've heard a lot about the making of star wars  book and I do plan on getting it this christmas.  J.W. Rinzler is the same guy who worte the making of star wars : revenge of the sith book and the new indiana jones book. I look forward to reading the making of star wars book when I get it this christmas.  And I to hope  J.W. Rinzler does a making of book for Empire and Jedi.

RRS-1980 said:

jukeboxjoey said:

Still, it does make you feel like you got the most thorough background published EVER.

 

 I guess zombie84 would disagree here ;)

 I think if any other book packed more info into it than The Making of Star Wars it would be boring and tedious. As it stands I think this is the most informative behind-the-scenes product ever made.

(my own book wasn't all-encompassing like this one, being concerned mainly with the writing).

BTW, its relevant here that The Making of Empire Strikes Back has been confirmed by a LFL press release for 2010.

caligulathegod said:

Second biggest was the mention of Luke and the Princess being twins at one point in the development. Now obviously, it's not a direct line concept to Return of the Jedi's revelation. It's just another developmental element that was in his notebooks that reappeared when he needed a story point. There's plenty of cites in the book that he never actually planned them to be siblings in the final concept as he originally wanted Luke and Leia to end up together and Han to go away. It just never worked in the eventual storyline of Luke becoming a Jedi so Han got the girl.

Hold on, Luke becoming a Jedi meant he couldn't "get the girl"? So Lucas had the celibacy thing as a definite back then?

Also, can anybody tell me the gist of what the book reveals about the contents of the Journal of the Whills? Basically how do Lucas's claims of having the prequels story in the journal hold up against what the book says?

(Just to make sure I'm getting things right here, the journal Lucas was suposed to have had the story of everything including the prequels in since way back, written during the writing of the first film = The Journal of the Whills?)

Vaderisnothayden said:

Hold on, Luke becoming a Jedi meant he couldn't "get the girl"? So Lucas had the celibacy thing as a definite back then?

 No. That's why caligulathegod correctly said "eventual storyline". There were plot elements that we find in the prequels that were there from the beginning.

Also, can anybody tell me the gist of what the book reveals about the contents of the Journal of the Whills? Basically how do Lucas's claims of having the prequels story in the journal hold up against what the book says?

Lucas's claim holds up fairly well. You can see how in flux the story was, right up to the premier of the movie. Story lines were changed for both literary and budgetary reasons. It's really neat to see the development and how so many things could have gone a different way. As for telling you the gist of the Journal of the Whills, it was a living document! "Always on the move"!

(Just to make sure I'm getting things right here, the journal Lucas was suposed to have had the story of everything including the prequels in since way back, written during the writing of the first film = The Journal of the Whills?)

 No, he did not have the story of everything. He had elements of the story that came in and out during the development of those stories. But yes, some things did exist in his mind that didn't come out until the prequels. Midichlorians, Coruscant, a bunch of names used in the prequels... don't want to give too much away. Buy the book. It's great for someone who has questions like yours. :-)

MTFBWY

jukeboxjoey said:

Vaderisnothayden said:

Hold on, Luke becoming a Jedi meant he couldn't "get the girl"? So Lucas had the celibacy thing as a definite back then?

 No. That's why caligulathegod correctly said "eventual storyline". There were plot elements that we find in the prequels that were there from the beginning.

And the celibacy thing wasn't one of those elements he had way back? Because if being a Jedi went with not having the romance you might think that meant he had the celibacy thing back then. And if I remember rightly, in the 3 years of Marvel comics after ROTJ they never got Luke together with anybody, which makes me wonder if after ROTJ they were told not to get Luke involved.

Vaderisnothayden said:

Also, can anybody tell me the gist of what the book reveals about the contents of the Journal of the Whills? Basically how do Lucas's claims of having the prequels story in the journal hold up against what the book says?

jukeboxjoey said:

Lucas's claim holds up fairly well. You can see how in flux the story was, right up to the premier of the movie. Story lines were changed for both literary and budgetary reasons. It's really neat to see the development and how so many things could have gone a different way. As for telling you the gist of the Journal of the Whills, it was a living document! "Always on the move"!

By saying Lucas's claim holds up well are you saying that it looks like Lucas had the prequel story worked out back then? Because that's what I meant. How much of the prequels story does it look like he had back then?

Vaderisnothayden said:

(Just to make sure I'm getting things right here, the journal Lucas was suposed to have had the story of everything including the prequels in since way back, written during the writing of the first film = The Journal of the Whills?)

jukeboxjoey said:

 No, he did not have the story of everything. He had elements of the story that came in and out during the development of those stories. But yes, some things did exist in his mind that didn't come out until the prequels. Midichlorians, Coruscant, a bunch of names used in the prequels... don't want to give too much away. Buy the book. It's great for someone who has questions like yours. :-)

I am buying the book. Not sure where I'm going to fit it though. I hate it when books are made bulky.

Gaffer Tape said:

Well, Timothy Zahn first came up with the name Coruscant for Heir to the Empire.  Lucas just liked it enough to use it in the prequels.  In earlier drafts for Jedi, the Imperial capital was referred to as Had Abaddon.

As for The Journal of the Whills, it was a literary device used in early drafts to make it sound like Star Wars was a small story told from a huge history of the galaxy.  It was eventually superceded by the "A Long Time Ago in a Galaxy Far, Far Away..." opening.  However, fans picked up on the name (most likely from its mention in the novelization of Star Wars where the forward is said to come from The Journal of the Whills) and imagined it to be an actual chronicle of Star Wars stories that George Lucas had written.  Later on, as a bit of self-referential humor, George compiled all of his notes in a binder that he jokingly called The Journal of the Whills.

In the 1997 book The Annotated Screenplays (page 120), Lucas is quoted as saying that when he was writing the first movie, around the time of the third or fourth draft, he wrote a treatment or book of notes which had the basic story of the scripts for all the films, including the prequels. I'd like to know how much truth there is to that claim and what really was in that notebook. 

Gaffer Tape said:

You really need to pick up The Secret History of Star Wars.  None of that seems to mesh with the actual history of the drafts that he wrote as far as I know.  One of his scripts had a few action sequences that ended up being scrapped and the ported over to the sequels (like asteroid chase and wookiee/ewok planet) but the stories themselves weren't there.

I'll be getting that book too. That bit about the scripts not having much extra stuff is mentioned on wikipedia. But with a 400-hundred page script how did he manage to have only the story of the first film, the asteroid thing and the wookie thing? In four hundred pages you'd think he'd have more material than that.

That notebook question is a big question, though, because it's a claim to have had the basic story of the prequels and the OT on paper back in the 70s.

Gaffer Tape said:

 Later on, as a bit of self-referential humor, George compiled all of his notes in a binder that he jokingly called The Journal of the Whills.

How much later on? And what was in those notes?