lakamosque

oojason said:

So without Marcia introducing that ‘time-element’ - ‘a countdown clock’ - the ‘Death Star wasn’t about to destroy the Rebel Base’… this is what RocketJump alludes to, no?

The time clock came later in the editing to prop up the tension however the story point for the Death Star intending to destroy the Rebel Base was always there.

INT. MASASSI OUTPOST - WAR ROOM

On the computer display board, several of the markers
indicating rebel fighters go dark. The princess gives
Old Ben a look of amused surprise at Luke’s boldness.
GENERAL DODANA approaches the princess.

  DODANA

Over sixty percent of our craft have
been destroyed. The probability
projection shows little hope. The
Death Star will be in position to
fire on us shortly. We will be
destroyed. We must escape while
there is still time.

Third draft - 1 August 1975, page 98 of the transcript

This has been implied in the revised fourth draft as well:

  TARKIN

Enough of this! Vader, release him.
This bickering is pointless. Lord Vader
will provide us with the location of the
rebel fortress by the time this station is
operational. We will then crush this
rebellion with one swift stroke.

Revised fourth draft - March 15 1976 (with April 19 revisions), page 18

INT. DEATH STAR CONTROL ROOM

An officer approaches Governor Tarkin
OFFICER
Sir, we analyzed their attack plan,
and there is a danger. Should we
make plans to evacuate? Your ship
is standing by.
TARKIN
Evacuate! On our moment of triumph?
I think you overestimate their chances.

Ditto, page 147

Do you honestly think triumph only meant the starfighters’ destruction and not the base’s? Or “one swift stroke” somehow meant they would invade the planet as opposed to outright destroy it? The animations and voice overs were for emphasizing, making it clearer they were on a time limit.

Also, in that video you linked, she says:
“…we decided, you know, the thing that was missing was a time clock. Like, how much time does Luke have to make this shot before something as horrible as that happened?”
“We” who? Rocket Jump implies it was Marcia alone that came up with it while simultaneously not mentioning that she, Paul, Richard and George worked in the editing of the sequence as well so it’s just as likely the idea came from either of them.

They also very heavily imply Marcia came up with the intercutting, when in fact it was Richard Chew. First RJ’s version:

“It was literally sitting there, waiting to be blown up. This is where Marcia Lucas came in. The first thing she did was recut the trench run, basically from the ground up. This included removing Luke’s first run”

Now the real version:

“For me, one of the biggest contributions I made to the film was a suggestion I made to George to intercut Princess Leia and the Rebels on their station with Luke making the run to destroy the Death Star. I had the idea that if we could put Princess Leia in jeopardy and then simultaneously have Luke try to destroy the Death Star in order to save her and the Rebels, it would just provide much more tension to the ending. Originally, these were not simultaneous events; they were separate. Without this crosscutting, whether Luke blew the Death Star on time or not wouldn’t have had the same tension. If you look at the film, in the scenes with Leia, there’s no dialogue that’s on camera in synch because all the footage was taken from other scenes of the Rebels in the war room, and all the information that you’re getting as to how close the Death Star is to the Rebels is either on animated screens or off-screen dialogue through a PA system. But in Leia’s dialogue, for instance, there wasn’t really any of the exposition that would indicate that they were in jeopardy. That was all created in the editing, as was the crosscutting between the action and the shots of Darth Vader before he got into his fighter and Tarkin, the Peter Cushing character.”

From Star Wars The Annotated Screenplays, page 104

And here he is saying virtually the same in a shorter format:

“One of the biggest contributions I made to the film was a suggestion to George to intercut Princess Leia and the Rebels in their station with Luke making the run to destroy the Death Star,” remembers Richard Chew. “I had the idea that if we could put Princess Leia in jeopardy and then simultaneously have Luke try to destroy the Death Star in order to save her and the Rebels, it would just provide much more tension to the ending. Originally, these were not simultaneous events; they were separate.” Luke’s Death Star attack was also intercut with footage of a seemingly anxious Governor Tarkin, although the absence of dialogue specific to the attack in these scenes betrays the editors’ sleight of hand. Like the Leia footage, much of this Tarkin material was culled from scenes that were originally supposed to occur elsewhere in the film. The sequence was ultimately made to work by intercutting new second-unit footage of Death Star personnel preparing to fire the battle station’s giant laser.

From The Cinema of George Lucas, page 106

What’s that Chew? “Whether Luke blew the Death Star on time or not wouldn’t have had the same tension.” On time for what? The Death Star was just “sitting there, waiting to be blown up.” What could’ve given Chew such an idea, I wonder? 😃

It’s hilarious how RJ credits almost everything to Marcia. The intercutting? Marcia. The time clock? Marcia. Removing Luke’s first run? Marcia.
To which each point, it actually goes:
The intercutting? Richard.
The time clock? Unknown, but wouldn’t surprise me if it was Richard yet again.
Removing Luke’s first run? Unknown.

Another paragraph from Rinzler’s book that further confirms it:

While at one time Lucas contemplated making two movies out of the first draft—ending
the first with the escape from the Death Star, and having the second start with the
crash landing on the jungle planet, and close with the attack on the space fortress—instead
he combined and juxtaposed many of the more exciting scenes into a shorter, tighter
single film. Another of his notes on structure reads, “time lock” to add suspense:
“the empire has a terrible new weapon, a fortress station so powerful it can destroy
a planet, possibly even a sun. It must be stopped before it can be put to use.” By
transforming the space fortress from a floating, somewhat meandering locale, in the
first draft, into a horrific planet-destroying weapon, Lucas turned it into a character
as well as an all-important structural

And the cherry on the top, Carrie Fisher’s video test:

“…but our only hope is to destroy it before it destroys us.”

Anyways…

Except, the RJ video didn’t do that. It didn’t do that at all.

It definitely and absolutely did that. Look, I get that you fell for the narrative hook, line and sinker. But, that’s simply not true.

Why did they present George’s reasoning as Paul Hirsch’s reasoning?

They present this Paul quote from Rinzler’s book:

“In the first five minutes, we were hitting everybody with more information
than they could handle. There were too many story lines to keep straight:
the robots, the Princess, Vader, Luke. So we simplified it by taking Luke out,
and you don’t introduce Luke until he actually becomes a part of the story.”

While willfully ignoring what immediately follows after:

“But it also made the picture a lot weirder,” he adds, “because the main characters
became the robots, which is a wonderful idea. It’s very George. And the reason it
works is that George invested the characters with a human sense of humor. It also
made the planet they land on work as an alien place. Before, by showing Luke on the
planet, there was no mystery: You knew the planet was inhabited by people. But now
when you go to the planet with the robots, you don’t know what you’re going to find—the
first characters you see are Jawas—which gives it a whole air of exotic mystery.”

George also felt that there was no reason to see Luke until he became an
active participant in the story. But it was not an easy decision to make to just
delete those sequences; Marcia fought to keep them in, and the four scenes
with Luke and his friends were tried in different places.

This part also points out how Marcia wanted to keep the scenes the “professor” blatantly disapproves of.

And yet so what if it did highlight Marcia’s contributions, or Richard Chew, or Paul Hirsch - or all 3 of them. Why not? It doesn’t take away from George - nor attacks or discredits him - it simply highlights the effect good and clever editing can have upon a film.

That would be fine IF it was true, but it isn’t.

And if it was about the editors, how come they never mention John Jympson? It gives the impression George made the first cut, called the British cut in Rinzler’s book, implying all the poor editing choices were on him instead of John. George never intended the movie to be like that cut. They intentionally mix all the cuts together.

It was after George fan-boys & zealots watched that vitriolic Nerdonymous video did they seemed to be triggered into somehow thinking what you claim above.

I’ve always disagreed with George on so many different topics including not releasing the original cut on home video. I watched RJ’s video first, I couldn’t put it in words but I could tell something was off about it. I didn’t watch Nerdonymous’s video until much later and since then I’ve been cross-referencing to check how accurate all these videos that talk about the behind the scenes really are.

^ Nerdonymous seems to get quite triggered and angry about it too… the agenda seething through… as he progresses with his “some fans”… “they want to burn him (Lucas) to the ground” & “they want to take everything away from him” spiel; whilst showing a FactRepublic image stating some of Marcia’s contributions to the film, and some of what she edited - for which she won an Oscar for (along with Hirsch and Chew).

First of all, Nerdonymous’s full quote for proper context:

“Some fans who don’t like what Lucas did with the Special Editions and or don’t like what he did with the Prequels aren’t satisfied with criticizing him on these bases. They want to burn him to the ground, they want to take everything away from him. Because they believe they did something unseemly to their childhood or something. That is why Star Wars was saved in the edit as opposed to it just went through the normal editing process that all films go to through.”

Second, I’ve never got the impression this meant he is “anti-fan preservation”. It’s crystal clear “everything” in this context means George’s contributions because that’s what the whole subject of the video is about.

So when you try to claim: “It just makes everyone that wants to see the theatrical versions look bad.” - is that an attempt at gaslighting? (I hope not). If it is, kindly knock it off.

That’s a textbook example of accusing others of what YOU are guilty off, especially with the weak excuses provided.

You may want to think about wising up there - doing something a little more constructive other than being an apologist for a vitriolic youtuber… who has issues with fan preservations.

Look in a mirror, you’re being an apologist for deceptive fans or, in this case, a pretend film school. And for the last part, either provide proof this is the case or knock it off.

On here, we acknowledge and highlight the many contributions of everyone who worked on the Original Trilogy films - especially those who have been written out of the official history, or have had their roles downplayed, or diminished.

And when were Marcia or Paul or Richard written out of the official history? Rinzler’s book wouldn’t exist otherwise. If that somehow is not “good enough” in Marcia’s case, he interviewed her in his Howard Kazanjian book.

Just because it makes some get so triggered to the point of fuming, here’s yet another video that goes much more in depth dispelling the Marcia and/or the editors “saved” the movie narrative:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LsxGGjyZ_Q

If you’re going to attack George, do it for the things he ACTUALLY did. Like his handling of David Prowse, insisting the saga was “always” about the tragedy of Darth Vader when for a time there was material, like the first editions of the books, that officially called it “From the Adventures of Luke Skywalker” and/or the old reliable “Greedo shoots”. Don’t make up false narratives or straight up lie in how much he was involved in his films just to dunk on him.

That guy with no name said:

What lies? What manipulations? Please indulge me, you seem to be an expert.
“advertising hit piece”. Are you ok?

Are you serious? The “professor” says this, making it sound like the editors introduced the following idea in the final battle: “The Death Star was not about to destroy the Rebel Base.” This was a story point since the third draft and in a slightly different manner, it was there in the second draft. Yep, the Death Star was relaxing waiting to be blown up. It totally wasn’t tracking the Millennium Falcon to discover and destroy the hidden Rebel Base. /s And that’s only one lie or how about the times they quote Rinzler’s book, but omit in-between sentences to change the context.
As for advertising, it’s an advertisement for a pretend online film school which, as of writing, no longer exists, lol. It’s a hit piece against George, that’s crystal clear like how the “professor” complains about George changing the text on the terminal from English to Aurebesh as if no one can understand what a bar suddenly decreasing after Obi-Wan turns a lever means, lmao.
I’m perfectly fine thank you very much however you don’t sound ok to me.

Mocata said:

I couldn’t find one unless oojason has something like that, but here’s a 1980 interview I came across in my search, just for anyone that wants some light reading:

https://web.archive.org/web/20220817144838/https://www.rollingstone.com/tv-movies/tv-movie-news/the-empire-strikes-back-and-so-does-george-lucas-52767/

oojason said:

It may be in…

‘3️⃣ • Archival / Historical Discussions: History & Events of the Original Trilogy : People Behind The Scenes in the OT era’

…of An Index & Help Thread for Original Trilogy Discussion - and scroll down to ‘Category B’ which has a few interviews by George.

Thank you both. Oojason, I’ve been through all of those links, but I can’t find anything close to George explaining the changes he made to the 1981 cut or other changes he had in mind for the future. Either way, I really appreciate the effort.

RocketJump’s video is an advertising hit piece for a pretend film school. Blame George for the genuine screw ups he did, but heavily implying he was the cause for every problem in the movie, manipulating and lying, and going “Marcia! Marcia! Marcia!” is so utterly disingenuous. It just makes everyone that wants to see the theatrical versions look bad.

Title. I’m not sure where I read it, but from what I remember reading it might be a televised interview. Also, is there anything like a master list of George Lucas interviews?

This was all typed by hand looking at a scan of the newspaper. Stuck to the same format as much as possible. Enjoy!

8 Pt II—Sat., Dec. 10. 1977 Los Angeles Times
Lucas: Feet on Ground, Head in the Stars
BY LEE GRANT
Times Staff Writer
George Lucas, the force behind “Star Wars,” returned to
USC Thursday, his alma mater, and told cinema students
that he has retired from directing: “Now I can go back to
what I want to do,” he said.
What Lucas wants to do is “experimental, abstract kinds
of things, working with pure film. I just wonder if you can
get the same reactions from an audience using images,
sounds and no plot as you can with strong characters.”
But, he said, “to make a living” there will also be super-
vision of planned sequels to “Star Wars” and “American
Graffiti.” And he apparently is still helping friend Francis
Coppola with editing “Apocalypse Now.”
Lucas, 33, who graduated from USC in 1968, showed an
hour of segments from his student work (including “THX
1138” that was later turned into a commercial film) and his
features. That evening he did the same for the University
Associates, an alumni and fund-rasising group whose cur-
rent project focuses on the division of cinema, school of
performing arts.
He is softspoken, reserved, publicity shy. A reporter was
invited, then uninvited. “I don’t want,” said Lucas, “to turn
this into a media event.” He told the students, “I really
don’t have anything to say to you.”
His movie, however, has been awesomé, indeed. “Star
Wars” recently passed “Jaws”—directed by Steven Spiel-
berg. Lucas’ friend—as the top money maker in domestic
motion picture history.
Financial success or not, the film, said Lucas, "fell way
short of my expectations. It was big and cumbersome to
make. We had to deal so much with the inadequacies of
other.
“It was shot in England, Tunisia and Guatemala. We did
special effects in Los Angeles. I’m based in San Francisco.
There were more than 1,000 people who worked on the
film. I feel good having gotten 25% of what I wanted up
there.”
“American Graffiti,” he said, which was also a major fi-
nancial success, succeeded much more in capturing the vi-
sion that he had for it. “We shot in 28 days,” said Lucas,
"difficult night shooting and we had no money. It came out
about 50% of what I wanted it to be.
"‘Graffiti’ was easier because I had lived that life. In
‘Star Wars,’ I was dealing with dreams and fantasy and
science fiction. It fell short of what I wanted for it. I ex-
pected more out of ‘Star Wars’ than was humanly possible.
I had this dream and it’s only a shadow of what I dreamt.
“‘Star Wars,’ was a very long, painful thing to go
through. I had no other life for two years. It was big and I
wanted to slay the dragon before it slayed me.”
Its success and the resulting cultlike aura that has
grown around the film is “a little unbelievable,” said Lu-
cas. "I don’t feel it. I just feel like a film student who’s had
a success.
Directing, for the most part, he said, is “difficult, intense
and miserable. It’s where the dreams you had are turned to
reality. Then comes writing (he finished the ‘American
Graffiti’ screenplay in three weeks; ‘Star Wars’ took two
years) because you sit there by yourself. It’s internal pain
as opposed to the external of directing.”
What he likes best is the editing process. “It’s the most
fun,” he said, “the place where you fix your mistakes. At
heart, I’m an editor.”
Lucas’ film inspirations “come from life,” he said,
“things I’m attracted’ to like radio, cars, speed, anthropolo-
gy, records. I’m interested in how the culture relates to
machinery. That shows up in my films. I want to know
why man lives the way he does.”
“Star Wars,” he said, is "essentially a mythological fairy
tale, a children’s fantasy like Grimm. It’s similar to those
classic stories you’d tell around a campfire.
"Some of it came out of my mythology studies. I felt that
we didn’t have any now and needed a new mythology.
“‘Star Wars,’ you could say, is an outer space ‘Gunga
Din’ or ‘Treasure Island.’”
Other Lucas observations:
—“As a writer. I sit at my desk every day from 9 to 5. I
sit there and wait for the mail to come.”
—“A positive view has a stronger impact in bringing
across what you want to say. I turned from pessimistic in
‘THX 1138’ to optimistic in ‘American Graffiti.’”
—“Francis Coppola told me, ‘Listen, kid, if you’re ever
going to be anything in this business, you’ve got to learn
what Hollywood wants.’ I’ve learned it and now I can go
back to doing something else.”
—On Spielberg’s “Close Encounters of the Third Kind”:
“It turned out real well. I liked it.”

“Video unavailable
This video contains content from Lasso Group, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds”
Guess I’m gonna have to use a VPN?

Could someone share the scan? Just found out about the original cut a couple years back and didn’t think it would ever show up.

Hello everyone, I’ve been looking for years for a theatrical version of TPM and this is one of the few places where I can find any info about it. I have to say I’ve seen all of Harmy’s despecialized versions of the original trilogy and that motivated me to watch all of the prequels’ theatrical versions. If anyone could point me in the right direction to get this Adywan’s version or any other theatrical version of TPM I’ll be really grateful.