logo Sign In

THE WASHINGTON POST – George Lucas: To feel the true force of ‘Star Wars,’ he had to learn to let it go — Page 3

Author
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:

Bosk said:

there was a reason Fox only wanted the middle part of his saga, even then they realised the rest of it was weak.

Except there was no “middle part” of any saga back then. That’s just Lucasian revisionism.

That’s the most important part of this trolling. It was A film, not some sort of “I had it all planned in the 70s, family saga, 12 films, 9 films, 12 films, 6 films, 9 films, 3 films, father-brother-sister” BS.

If he had it all planned out in the 70s, he wouldn’t have hired Alan Dean Foster to write a second story.

Forum Moderator
Author
Time

Considering I liked Splinter of The Mind’s Eye, I never even thought of that.

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Anchorhead said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

Bosk said:

there was a reason Fox only wanted the middle part of his saga, even then they realised the rest of it was weak.

Except there was no “middle part” of any saga back then. That’s just Lucasian revisionism.

That’s the most important part of this trolling. It was A film, not some sort of “I had it all planned in the 70s, family saga, 12 films, 9 films, 12 films, 6 films, 9 films, 3 films, father-brother-sister” BS.

If he had it all planned out in the 70s, he wouldn’t have hired Alan Dean Foster to write a second story.

The early drafts of Star Wars films (and the pre-ESB sequel plans) make it unambiguously clear that the idea that he had it all planned as a long saga is false. They made it up as they went, and had a lot of success doing it this way. For a while. It’s silly that some Lucas fans call JJ+Kasden’s work glorified fan fiction. It was always that.

Author
Time

towne32 said:

Anchorhead said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

Bosk said:

there was a reason Fox only wanted the middle part of his saga, even then they realised the rest of it was weak.

Except there was no “middle part” of any saga back then. That’s just Lucasian revisionism.

That’s the most important part of this trolling. It was A film, not some sort of “I had it all planned in the 70s, family saga, 12 films, 9 films, 12 films, 6 films, 9 films, 3 films, father-brother-sister” BS.

If he had it all planned out in the 70s, he wouldn’t have hired Alan Dean Foster to write a second story.

The early drafts of Star Wars films (and the pre-ESB sequel plans) make it unambiguously clear that the idea that he had it all planned as a long saga is false. They made it up as they went, and had a lot of success doing it this way. For a while. It’s silly that some Lucas fans call JJ+Kasden’s work glorified fan fiction. It was always that.

The idea that GL started off in like 1974 or so after “American Graffiti” and had all this crap mapped out is nothing more than a specious legacy enhancement he has churned for a number of years. SW77 was self contained and he left the room for a possible 2nd film with an ambiguous ending for Darth. That’s the only thing I’ll grant the man.

SW77 is The Hero’s Journey, that hero being Luke Skywalker. I never will ever buy the whole thing that the saga is about the rise, fall and redemption of Anakin Skywalker. The OT is about Luke Skywalker - period. GL decided to use the PT to then retcon elements of the OT which in my mind is the biggest shame of the PT.

Rant over.

“This will begin to make things right.” Lor San Tekka

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Bosk said:

… he even said in the book icons he never wrote the whole story and these drafts show only the Ot http://starwarz.com/starkiller/category/star-wars-scripts/

Good link! Thanks for that resource!
But be certain to follow a link within for “The Star Wars (Story Synopsis)” and go to comments at the bottom of the page to a more telling link …

Film Club: Star Wars Episode IV (Lucas, 1977) - Akira Kurosawa News said:

Although Lucas had already created a fair amount of background material by the time of the first film, the characters and the overall story kept evolving as he worked on the films. … It is in connection with this constant creative evolution of Star Wars that Akira Kurosawa comes into the picture. It is often pointed out that the first film of the series, Episode IV, which we are watching this month, has clear connections with Kurosawa’s The Hidden Fortress, our last month’s film club title. …
When we compare The Hidden Fortress and Star Wars Episode IV, it is clear that calling the latter a remake of the former is a stretch. Yet, the two films certainly share common elements: they are both set at a time of civil war, Lucas’s two robots are clearly based on Kurosawa’s two peasants, both films feature a princess who is central to the story, and the jedi seem to have been modelled after samurai. …
In fact, in order to discover the real Kurosawa in Star Wars, we need to go back to Lucas’s 1973 story synopsis, which was one of the first written treatments of what was to become Star Wars. In Lucas’s synopsis, after a space fortress is destroyed, a general is escorting a princess into safety in a civil war torn 33rd century galactic empire. They are disguised as farmers and in possession of valuable spice. When two bickering bureaucrats discover some of that spice, the general captures them and makes them join the escape. In their journey home, the group has to overcome a number of obstacles. In the end, they successfully arrive at their destination, and the princess’s true nature is revealed to the bureaucrats, who are also rewarded for their help. …
A year later, by the time Lucas had finished the original 1974 rough draft, much had changed. … Yet, it can be said that Lucas continued to keep Kurosawa at the back of his mind. Some clear influences can in fact be spotted also in the later films. Episode VI for instance has a speeder bike chase similar to the horseback chase in The Hidden Fortress. Meanwhile, Episode I makes use of the idea of the princess having a double who gets sacrificed to save her. Many of the costumes and designs are also heavily inspired by Japanese motives, and supposedly Lucas was even hoping to cast Toshiro Mifune as either Obi-Wan Kenobi or Darth Vader.

Do you dare cross over to the dark side of Lucas revisionism/homage? Then they even recommend a “proper order” to watch all GL’s Star Wars films. “With Kurosawa influences spread across the two trilogies, one may actually feel compelled to watch the whole saga, … I actually followed exactly this order this week, and having never seen episodes II, III or V, and remembering almost nothing of the rest, this order worked pretty well.”

But, then again, you knew all about those “samuri swords” from the beginning …

Author
Time
 (Edited)

George Lucas was a bully all along who took away our toys and broke them. He always treated the fan base with contempt and I will never forgive him for making the OT unavailable for almost 20 years now. I wouldn’t be such a pessimistic angry SW fan if he walked away back in the early 90s

Author
Time

I don’t have a problem with him saying that he didn’t like Han shooting first or that it went against his principles. However, Lucas should realize that that is within Han Solo’s character. It’s like he’s afraid people think that creating a character such as Han is an endorsement of that character.
Maybe some characters would not have shot first because they thought it to be immoral or against principle. Nausicaa (from Studio Ghibli’s Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind) is one such character who comes to mind. Or maybe even Obi-Wan or Luke Skywalker. But Han Solo never was or pretended to have any sort of Jedi code or morals.
Maybe Lucas didn’t realize how popular Han Solo would become as a character and later came to realize that people thought of him as a role model, which he never intended or wanted. So he felt the need to whitewash his actions against Greedo. If that is indeed the case, it’s not acceptable because it’s revisionism and lacking in confidence to let your creation stand on it’s own, accepting how the fans react to it. But that’s just a theory.

The character Archie Bunker from All in the Family was well, I haven’t actually seen that show so let’s just say Eric Cartman (South Park) was inspired by him. Apparently, Archie Bunker was supposed to be an example of what not to be but a lot of people actually ending up liking his character for real.
Should the creator(s) of All in the Family change Archie Bunker’s dialog to be more politically correct so people don’t have to feel some of the show’s viewers really like a “bad guy” who was supposed to be an anti-role model?

Take back the trilogy. Execute Order '77

http://www.youtube.com/user/Knightmessenger

Author
Time

Knightmessenger said:
Maybe some characters would not have shot first because they thought it to be immoral or against principle. Nausicaa (from Studio Ghibli’s Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind) is one such character who comes to mind. Or maybe even Obi-Wan or Luke Skywalker. But Han Solo never was or pretended to have any sort of Jedi code or morals.

What I think is hilarious about not wanting to make Han cold-blooded is that Obi-Wan kills one guy and slices off another guy’s arm before they even fire a shot!

Anyone remember different camera angles from ROTJ?

Author
Time

TK428 said:

The idea that GL started off in like 1974 or so after “American Graffiti” and had all this crap mapped out is nothing more than a specious legacy enhancement he has churned for a number of years. …
The OT is about Luke Skywalker - period.

May I present to the court exhibit “G” …

eBay: “STAR WARS By George Lucas PBO/Correct 1st Edition 1976 Released Before Movie”

Author
Time

^I’m not sure if I’m reading you correctly, but are you saying just because that book came out before the '77 film that Lucas had this masterfully mapped out?

This wikipedia article says otherwise.

The Rise of Failures

Author
Time

The subtitle to the book runs counter to the “Tragedy of Darth Vader” stuff Lucas was saying during the prequels.

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Oh I see, I misread you then Spaced Ranger. My bad.

The Rise of Failures