Originally published March 14, 1997, in Comics Buyer’s Guide #1217
“Don’t do it, Luke!”
That was the sound of Ariel, my five-year-old, as she watched The Empire Strikes Back, safe and snug in the confines of her home—as opposed to, say, in a movie theater.
She had never seen the film before, but we had just come back from seeing Star Wars at the Ziegfeld Theater in Manhattan. The last time I’d been to the Ziegfeld was during the rerelease of Lawrence of Arabia, another major movie going experience in my life. I was one of six people in a theater that probably seats a thousand or more, and when the lights came up some woman said to me, “So what did you think of it?” And I replied, “It should have been longer and had more music”—a joke that will make no sense to anyone who hasn’t seen the film.
(Speaking of jokes that don’t make sense: I was in Manhattan the other day and someone walked up to me and said, “Excuse me, how do you get to the Javits Center?” And I said, “Practice, practice, practice!” And they looked at me oddly and ran away since, of course, the answer had nothing to do with the question. But to this day I’m still steamed over the fact that once someone actually asked me how one gets to Carnegie Hall, and all I did was point them in the right direction. So now whenever I’m in New York and people ask me how to get anywhere, my standard answer is “Practice, practice, practice.” But I digress…)
The line to get in to see Star Wars at the Ziegfeld stretched down and around the block and halfway up the other side. However, we had wisely purchased our tickets an hour earlier when there was no one around, so even though we found ourselves on the end of the ticket holders line when we returned for show time, it moved extremely quickly and we waited no more than 10 minutes.
I was impressed by a number of things in that movie-going experience. The first and foremost was the enthusiasm of the crowd. Watching Star Wars is not simply a celebration of the characters (who, let’s face it, were pretty flat; they didn’t get interesting until the second film) or the plot (not particularly innovative from science fiction standards), or the acting (Carrie Fisher hadn’t learned how yet, occasionally attempting a bizarre mid-Atlantic accent), or the dialogue (so arch that it makes even Babylon 5 look slangy by comparison; I mean, even Sheridan never looked over Z’ha’dum and muttered, “You’ll never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy”) —but, rather, a celebration of us watching the film.
The audience cheered the new arrival of each character, as if they were arriving on stage. (This, interestingly, was a marked contrast to my having seen the film a week or so earlier in a theater in Long Island, which was likewise packed but stonily silent. People in Long Island watch a movie. People in Manhattan watch themselves watching a movie.) And watching the new edition of Star Wars is a celebration of new toys that enable footage to be added with technical seamlessness—although not with viewing seamlessness. Watching the new edition of Star Wars is like watching a Hitchcock film if Hitchcock had decided to make twenty cameos instead of just one. You keep saying, “There! There!,” watching for incidental bits of business that don’t particularly further the story or flesh out the universe beyond showing us some new critters. As technically nifty as the Jabba-Meets-Han sequence was, it didn’t tell us anything we didn’t know, plus I kept waiting to see Forrest Gump mixed in with Jabba’s entourage of bounty hunters.
If they were going to add in anything, I’d like it to have been the scene with Luke and his friend, Biggs, in which Biggs informs him that he’s going off to join the alliance. A second scene between the two was restored, but still, considering the number of times that first scene is referenced in the film (not to mention the emotional pay-off when Biggs is blown to smithereens) I would have liked to see it.
But at least they cleaned up those dámņëd FX isolation squares around the ships. And considering that in the latter two films there were only more ships with more squares, I can only assume that Empire and Return of the Jedi will look even better.
So as I noted earlier, Ariel was so caught up with Star Wars that, when I told her there were two more movies, she wanted to see them immediately. I sat down with her and watched Empire, struck not for the first time by how far superior a film it was in terms of story, characterization, dialogue and acting. And she became so caught up in it that, at the climax of the film, when Darth Vader is imploring Luke Skywalker to join him in potential domination of the empire, Ariel was shouting at the TV screen, “Luke, don’t do it! Say no, Luke! Don’t go to the Dark Side!”
Understand that Ariel loves movies. Adores them. She’s seen everything from The Brave Little Toaster to Jurassic Park. But I’ve never seen her so involved that she was begging a character not to make a mistake.
When the film ended in its now-famous cliffhanger, she turned to me and said in no uncertain terms, “Put the next one on—now.” Thank God she didn’t have to wait for two years like the rest of us. And I hope to hëll that the rumors are true and that Lucas intends to film the next three films at the same time, a la Back to the Future II/III. Because if Ariel is informed, coming out of the theater in 1999, that she’s going to have to wait until the next century for the follow-up, she’ll probably have a synaptic meltdown.
Ariel’s involvement aside, and audience reaction aside, there was something I was particularly struck by (well, two things, if you count the box of popcorn a kid behind me tossed). And that was the opening words, “A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away…” It wasn’t the “galaxy far, far away” part that struck a cord with me so much as “A long time ago.”
When the movie first opened, the first four words were simply a reworking of “once upon a time.” Just like “Twenty years ago today, Sgt. Pepper taught the band to play” was simply a lyric. But twenty years later that lyric had new meaning, just as “A long time ago” has a difference resonance.
Because in the measure of not only the real world, but the film world, Star Wars was made a truly long time ago. At the time it came out, it was pilloried as being simplistic, its characters cardboard, its preaching about the Force simple pop religion with the depth of a fortune cookie. And all of those were valid criticisms within the context of 1977 science fiction films, where 2001: Space Odyssey remained the watershed film against which all filmed SF was to be judged. 2001, a film which I saw in my feckless youth and considered incomprehensible and boring, but which I saw many years later as an experienced SF fan and found it to be comprehensible and boring.
But for all the potshots and diatribes hurled at Star Wars, one is inclined to quote Madame Thenardier: “God almighty, have you seen what’s happened since?”
Star Wars, for example, showed the way in terms of merchandising. It’s hard to believe that when the film opened (on a fraction of the screens that the re-release saw) there was virtually no merchandising in place. It simply wasn’t done. Yet nowadays the concept of toylines in conjunction with SF films is so routine that the question isn’t if there’s going to be merchandising tied to a major SF film, but how much and when. It’s even come full circle in that there is Star Wars merchandising for a film that doesn’t even exist: Shadow of the Empire. When I commented that all the neat Pocahontas merchandise was dragged down by the fact that the Disney film wasn’t particularly good, I had no idea that Lucasfilms was actually going to embark on a project which had books, CD-ROMs, toys—everything, in short, except a movie to tie into.
Furthermore, at least Star Wars was about something. Yeah, sure, what it was about was certainly pabulum compared to literary SF, and all the criticisms of the apparent lack of depth were valid, but geez louise, at least George Lucas was trying. That much, at least, came through, both in his attempt to create a religious subtext to his universe and plumb the depths of mythological archetypes that have been part of storytelling since the days of Gilgamesh.
In doing so, he crystallized those archetypes for a new generation, sometimes even to his detriment. When he once again went to the classic archetype of the young farm boy on a journey of discovery in the film Willow, critics ripped into that film stating that the characters were just rehashes of the Star Wars films, as if Star Wars by dint of its success had become the defining word on the subject (a mindset nailed by Julia Louis-Dreyfus on Saturday Night Live who, in the character of a bubble-headed teen-age reviewer, brushed off The Wizard of Oz as a Star Wars rip-off).
I mean, Star Wars actually has lulls. The story takes its time getting into high gear. Little did we know how nostalgic we would be for such moments in SF films. It’s hardly storytelling at its greatest, but next to Independence Day, it’s Dickens. The FX in Star Wars caught the public’s fancy, and the major studios decided—as they often do—to imitate the surface elements of a big hit and ignore the underpinnings which made it unique and different. And this is a tendency that has only magnified as the budgets have skyrocketed. Ultimately, Star Wars is about a voyage of discovery, about redemption, about faith, while Independence Day is about two hours.
And just as an aside: Can we please, please have a moratorium on huge special effects films that feature, as its emotional core, an ex-husband and wife who find as a result of being hurled together in adverse circumstances that they’re still in love with each other? The Abyss, Twister, Independence Day—enough already.
Meantime, 20 years have been even less kind to the basic plot of Star Wars than one could have imagined. Because there is now a gaping plot hole—more of a plot concept, really—that didn’t even exist when the film came out two decades ago.
(Peter David, writer of stuff, can be written to at Second Age, Inc., PO Box 239, Bayport, NY 11705. Next week: The gaping plot hole and the untold story of the single most important individual in the entire Star Wars legend.)
• 
So what was your daughter’s reaction to the amount of waiting time between release dates on the next (or final) trilogy?
I went to see Star Wars Trilogy Special Editions in the teather with a friend that had never seen any of the Star Wars films before. He mas familiar though with many plot points because of the constant references in pop culture. After we saw Empire he asked what was the role of planet Earth in Star Wars. He wanted to know where was Earth in this “future”. I quickly pointed out that these movies are set in the past and in another galaxy so Earth did not play any role in it. The first thing each of this movies does is stablish the setting, let us know the time and place in which this story takes place. He read the words “… a long time ago in a galaxy far far away” but did not realized the meaning.
“As technically nifty as the Jabba-Meets-Han sequence was…”
As an editor, I loved that sequence. The fact that it could be put together and look ALMOST like the Jabba puppet was on set, really inspiring. As someone who first saw the movie when he was five and a storyteller, I hated it. It came across too bluntly and was made redundant by Greedo’s dialogue in the cantina. Also, the thing that was my favorite about Jabba and Han’s problem was that it was mysterious. As much as I love the movies, the Jabba introduction in Jedi was less “Suddenly the shadowy figure is revealed” and more an extra-terrestrial Robin Leach introducing Lifestyles of the Sluggy and Famous.
“Just like “Twenty years ago today, Sgt. Pepper taught the band to play” was simply a lyric.”
I bought that CD on my twentieth birthday. By my way of thinking, the Sergeant taught them to play for my party.
…and, as i recall, it was released on CD on the twentieth anniversary of the original release.
Now that’s just cool.
One of the many, many annoying things about 2012 (the Roland Emmerich movie, not the year, it’s been a wonderful year for me), is that once again we have ex-husband and wife reuniting. To make it even more frustrating, this time the ex-wife’s current husband was sort of likable., but they had to kill him off to make way for the family reunion.
.
I sort of like INDEPENDENCE DAY, but I decided that I don’t really need to watch any other Emmerich movie.
.
And yeah, I do find it annoying how some people have such small reference pools. I’ve met people that compare any villain that attains redemption to Darth Vader. As if George Lucas had created redemption.
You watched Independence Day? Then you’ve already seen all of Roland Emmerich’s movies. So far as I can tell, the only alterations between them are the settings and the characters’ names. And, of course, the exact nature of the apocalypse the main characters suffer; they’re all inexplicable and scientifically laughable, but there’s one in every movie.
I enjoyed Stargate when it first came out. I also liked the Patriot even though I found the ending anticlimatic.
STARGATE was very likable in an unassuming way. INDEPENDENCE DAY was one of the more visually impressive movies I’ve seen. The rest of Emmerich’s movies, well, I agree with Jonathan. They all have a sort of been-there-done-that quality, particularly as I have become more jaded to impressive special effects. I’ve only watched 2012 because a friend insisted.
I had some issues with Stargate when it first came out, but I liked it overall. After watching the series for a few years I tried to watch the movie again on DVD and turned it off after about 15 minutes. The movie is full of dumb plot holes that the series worked to fill, so having seen a more competent version of the same thing made the film less enjoyable for me.
If more Star Wars movies are made, I hope Lucas realizes what a great idea having Kershner and Marquand was, as opposed to directing the films himself. Lucas can make any actor as bad as it gets
I doubt he realizes it, if critical reaction to the prequel trilogy is any indication.
Indeed, Lucas recently said that he refuses to parts 7-9 of the “Star Wars” saga because – and I’m paraphrasing – he said, he puts his heart and souls into them and all the fans seem to do is focus on what they don’t like, so what’s the point?
George, the secret is simple. Heart and soul are nice – but brain helps, too. Learn from the one film nobody complains about much. Produce the film, cast the roles – then hire a good scriptwriter and director, and let them do their jobs.
When I saw Return of the Jedi in a theater when it first opened, the crowd was so excited by the introduction of each character that the cheers went up exactly as you describe, and what (I think it was) C3PO said was completely drowned out.
It was a wonderful experience.
Rene, I hope your didn’t let your anipathy for Emmerich films stop you from seeing Anonymous last year. Mind you, it seems as though Sony was doing everything they could to keep you from seeing it, but it was one of my favorite films of last year. Well-acted and beautifully shot, it was difficult at times to beieve that it was a Roland Emmerich film. It’s a very dense story, that would probably take two viewings to pick everything up, but I would recommend it nonetheless. We now return you to your regularly scheduled Star Wars-related discussion.
I am still to see ANONYMOUS, but yes, it sounds very interesting, and I’m aware that it’s not his typical product. I suppose I didn’t see it yet only because there is too much to see.
The ideas upon which Anonymous is based are to history what the ideas in his science fiction films are to science.
Well, I’ll not defending a movie that I didn’t see, by a director that I am already predisposed against, but…
.
IMO, historical accuracy isn’t needed for a gripping movie. Nor is scientific accuracy, by the way.
.
My problem with Emmerich’s films is not their science, but how they’re repetitive, predictable, shallow, and full of cliches. I couldn’t care less for the science.
“Can we please, please have a moratorium on huge special effects films that feature, as its emotional core, an ex-husband and wife who find as a result of being hurled together in adverse circumstances that they’re still in love with each other? The Abyss, Twister, Independence Day—enough already.”
Apparently, we can’t have such a moratorium, as 2012 proved.
But as tired as that cliche is, I can never get tired of The Abyss. It’s such a great movie, and Ed Harris and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio are such brilliant actors that they raise these characters and their relationship to the level of legitimate drama, and I’m emotionally moved every single time I see it. And anyway, it came before all those other movies.
“The Abyss” is the overlooked child of all of Cameron’s films..I never even see it on TV.
The Abyss is even better as a book. The movie only takes up half the book – alternating chapters. The other half is, to not spoil it, from a POV of characters other than the main ones in the movie. It’s consistent with the movie, but makes the ending make a lot more sense.
I heartily agree… Although only for the Director’s cut, which addresses a lot of pacing and characterization issues which didn’t make sense. I checked IMDB for the specs… The director’s cut is 171 minutes, whereas the theatrical is 138 minutes. Producers said that no one would sit through a movie that was over 2 hours 20 minutes, so James Cameron had to extensively cut more than half an hour from the film. At least now, producers are willing to take a gamble that a longer film isn’t too much as long as the story doesn’t drag–look at “Lord of the Rings.” The irony of course is that this wasn’t an issue many years previously… “Gone with the Wind” and “The Ten Commandments” immediately spring to mind.
A number of years ago, AMC had a special on the “Planet of the Apes” movies and pointed out that the merchandising of those films was, in some ways, a proto-Star Wars like effect.
A case can be made that PLANET OF THE APES was the first modern “franchise”. But the movie was still too worried about social relevance, per the norms of New Hollywood filmmaking. STAR WARS, as pure escapism, deserves the title of initiator of the era of the blockbuster.
A case can be made that PLANET OF THE APES was the first modern “franchise”.
I think we’d have to give that distinction to the Bond films, as Sean Connery had starred in 5 of them by the time Planet of the Apes was released.
Yes, but I don’t think James Bond had toys and cartoons and stuff.
True. Even today, there are not a lot of 007 toys or fast-food tie-ins..I don’t believe there was even a 007 video game until 1983.
.
One of the few tie-ins were a comic strip that began in 1958 and adaptations of movies like “Dr. No” which was first published in “Classics Illustrated” and later reprinted in DC’s “Showcase”.
.
BTW, the Bond franchise is second all-time only to “Harry Potter” as far as being a cash-generating movie franchise..given that “Quantum of Solace” was the highest-grossing Bond film ever – not adjusted for inflation and that “Harry Potter” is done, Bond should be No. 1 in no time.
I guess I was more thinking of franchise in general, not necessarily one fixated in selling crap in stores/fast food joints. 🙂
Another word on 007, since I feel he is often overlooked when it comes to franchises and it wasn’t that long ago people were saying the franchise was finished – I actually LIKE that there are not a million tie-ins. It makes 007 unique and stand out. Nothing against other movie franchises, but the fact that almost all their income comes from the movies themselves gives Bond a certain gravitas, a grown-up mystique.
.
Credit for this must go to the Broccoli family in my opinion..though the character has evolved, they have refused to dramatically change him..when they have made a mistake, they have admitted they were wrong.
.
For example, they originally offered the role to Clint Eastwood and were skeptical of Connery bringing the character they envisioned to life…when they saw Connery they were so excited by the character onscreen they incorporated some of his heritage onto the character.
.
It’s also worth noting that after Timothy Dalton, various Hollywood power players were saying that the character was not edgy enough..an anachronism..even too white and that they were strongly pressured to have the character “updated” and be played by Wesley Snipes or even changed to “Bond, Jane Bond” and be played by Sharon Stone.
.
They love the character and after all this time it still shows.
Funny, Clint Eastwood would have been a lot closer to the James Bond I envisioned while reading Ian Fleming’s CASINO ROYALE.
.
The old movies have their own charm, but I couldn’t see Bond as a smooth superhero while reading CASINO ROYALE. I didn’t read the other novels, but from that one, Bond is a complicated figure.
.
He is brutal, merciless, cynical, sexist to the point of misogyny. But he is also less secure in his role as a spy, and ready to genuinely fall in love with a woman at the drop of a hat.
.
Sean Connery was just too smooth and self-assured.
Speaking of Bond tie-ins I’ve been playing Bond: Bloodstone, ie the video game, and loving it. It basically plays as the next movie with Daniel Craig and Dench voicing there roles. Fun!
Rene, as a kid, I wanted to get the Corgi Toys Aston Martin DB5, with all those nifty gadgets. There was quite a few toys in the sixties, at the height of Bondmania: board games, gun replicas, electric cars circuits, and so on. Even clothes.
And in the eighties, I gamemastered quite a few games of the James Bond 007 Role-Playing Game. So, yes, quite a lot of merchandising available.
Yes, but I don’t think James Bond had toys and cartoons and stuff.
Oh yes there was, and I had it all. I had the James Bond attaché case (which now goes for ridiculous amounts on ebay). I had the plastic figures. I had the Astin Martin toy car. I think I even had a James Bond doll.
As for cartons, does James Bond Jr. count?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bond_Jr.
PAD
PAD and Saul observed that the audience cheered the arrival of characters in the special edition version of Star Wars and in the original release of Return of the Jedi, respectively. I had a similar experience when I saw Jedi in 1983. When Darth Vader seized the Emperor and threw him down that shaft, the audience cheered. Don’t recall whether anyone cheered when characters were introduced (Though, now that I think of it, I seem to recall one– and only one– person giving Luke a brief cheer when he appeared in the special edition theatrical re-release of Star Wars. Must have been a tough crowd, as they say.).
.
Fast forward to the special edition theatrical re-release of Jedi in 1997. Not a peep from anyone when Vader seizes the Emperor. Not sure what significance, if any, that has, but it was an interesting contrast.
.
Interesting that Stargate came up in this thread about Star Wars. There was a problem with the sound system in the theater where I saw Stargate, and Ra sounded like Darth Vader with laryngitis.
.
Regarding fan complaints about what they don’t like, that’s just human nature. People are always going to complain about something. Myself, I don’t have a problem with the Han and Jabba scene in the special edition of Star Wars, since, as I understand it, Lucas had always intended for the scene to be there. Of course, the film works (and worked, for decades) just as well without it.
.
As to the Han and Greedo scene, I’m not up in arms about it, but I’m definitely in the “Han shot first” camp. Not only would Han have to have super speed powers to duck a shot from so close, but having Greedo shoot first in the special edition undercuts a key facet of Han’s personality, such as it was. Han shooting first = “don’t mess with Han Solo.” Greedo shooting first = “Han was just defending himself” and/or “boy, Han has fast reflexes.” Neither of which tells us he sticks his head out for no one, or that he came to Tatooine for the waters (having been misinformed).
.
Or am I thinking of some other guy?
.
Mention of the Han/Greedo encounter does evoke reactions in some of my friends. I lied and told them that Lucas was changing it yet again, and they seemed worried about what the changes would entail. Until I said R2-D2 now blasts Greedo before Greedo even enters the cantina.
.
Speaking of R2, given that he was more of a scrapper in the prequel trilogy, maybe the line in Star Wars should be amended to “let the droid win.”
.
Or maybe not.
.
Yes, George Lucas was trying, and despite the films’ shortcomings, he finished the scripts and got them made. But I think he needed to go through a few more drafts before the films were “done.” If, for the sake of argument, a story (whatever the format) needs to go through 10 drafts before it’s done, I’d say the Star Wars films, taken as a whole, had essentially reached the sixth or seventh draft stage. The key elements of plot, characters, theme and dialogue were all in place, but none were quite complete. Or, to use another analogy, a house had been built, and was suitable to live in; but it still needed finishing touches like paint and/or wallpaper (or paneling), furniture, and light switch covers. And personal items reflecting the owners’ personalities.
.
Let’s pretend that Lucas’ claim that the films were always supposed to be about Anakin (what I describe as the “rise, fall and redemption of Anakin Skywalker”) is accurate, despite the fact that the original trilogy was clearly about Luke’s character arc. As it might be described in a capsule summary, the rise, fall and redemption of Anakin Skywalker sounds interesting and intriguing. Imagine before anything was filmed, George Lucas telling a friend, “here’s what I’m thinking of doing in a series of films. There’s this thing called The Force, which binds every living thing together. Certain people can connect with it. Some, called Jedi, use the Force for knowledge and defense. Others, called Sith, embrace the ‘dark side.’ Anakin Skywalker is a Jedi seduced by the dark side, and many people suffer as a result. Years later, his son takes it upon himself to redeem him, while trying to avoid the dark side’s siren song himself.” The films have all that, but they lacked something a few more drafts might have developed.
.
While some of the Star Wars films were better than others (The Empire Strikes Back and Revenge of the Sith are the best in their respective trilogies), I don’t think any of them, individually, had reached the hypothetical “10th draft” stage. Empire, by itself was probably at the “eighth” or a “ninth” stage. Again, I’m using an analogy. I’m not saying Empire went through eight or nine literal drafts, just that it was closer to being at the “final draft” stage than some of the other films. As to the films as a whole, maybe it’d be less confusing if I said they seem to be 60 or 70 percent “done” than at the sixth or seventh draft stage.
.
I just finished reading Star Wars The Annotated Screenplays, which concerns the original trilogy (it was published in 1997); and it’s interesting to see the changes that went through various drafts of the films. It’s also curious that Lando doesn’t insist that it’s not his fault the Falcon’s hyperdrive wasn’t fixed. That sequence is in The Empire Strikes Back Notebook, so I doubt it was an on-set ad-lib. Maybe a printing error left that sequence out of The Annotated Screenplays.
.
I think some of the later developments, like Luke and Leia being twins, is the result of Lucas wanting certain elements from earlier drafts to make it into the films, even though there’s nothing to indicate he had them being twins in mind when either Star Wars or Empire were in the script of film stages. For example, according to Star Wars The Annotated Screenplays, the third draft of Empire has Yoda replying to Ben’s “the boy is our last hope” with “No… We must search for another.” (Italics mine). Doesn’t sound like either thought Leia had any significance.
.
I distinctly remember Obi-Wan Kenobi describing Owen Lars as his brother in the Return of the Jedi novelization. That’s also stated in Star Wars The Annotated Screenplays. Interesting that the idea was abandoned by the time the prequel films appeared.
.
Speaking of the scene in Jedi were Vader gives the Emperor the heave-ho, I understand the Blu-ray version has Vader saying “nooo”, like he did near the end of Sith. Why? That’s even more unnecessary than having Greedo shoot first. When I saw Jedi in the theater in 1983, it was clear to me that Vader was torn and conflicted as he looked from the Emperor to Luke. Even with the his mask’s lack of facial expressions, his body language conveyed his emotions.
.
Speaking of taking kids to see Star Wars films, I’d intended to take my 9-year-old nephew to see Phantom Menace in the theaters a few months back. Unfortunately, we weren’t able to make that happen. He’s never seen any of the films in a theater, and it would have been interesting to have gotten his thoughts about seeing it in that environment. Guess I’ll have to wait for the 2017 re-release of all six films, in which Threepio takes out Greedo in Star Wars with an impressive kick boxing move.
.
Speaking of Threepio, imagine if he and Vader had been subjected to the mind swapping device from the Star Trek episode “Turnabout Intruder.” Wackiness, as Spike would put it, would ensue.
.
Rene said, “Sean Connery was just too smooth and self assured.” I’ve never been much of a James Bond fan, but I recall a two-part article about the films in Starlog back in 1987. In comparing the various incarnations of Bond, the writer of the article (or maybe someone quoted in it) observed something to the effect that Connery’s Bond, if threatened by a dining companion in a restaurant, would stab her with a knife and then complain he had nothing with which to cut his steak.
.
Pretend all science fiction franchises exist in the same universe. Would that mean Lando Calrissian and Londo Mollari sometimes got each other’s mail?
.
Rick
My big problem with the alterations was the one few people talk about: the addition of the crowd scenes commemorating in the end of RETURN OF THE JEDI.
.
The addition of such an obvious CGI scene in an early-1980s movie was jarring. The aesthetics was all wrong.
That’s one of the changes that bothered me the most – though not for the same reason.
I don’t understand how winning one battle on this one planet suddenly brings the Empire down so that these enormous celebrations occur throughout the galaxy.
The celebration with the Ewoks makes sense. The rest doesn’t.
It’s not that they won one battle, it’s that the Emperor is dead.
Wel, OK. But the Empire doesn’t crumble because because of that. The celebrants are exposing themselves as targets in the inevitable crackdown by the Empirical bureaucracy which will be making examples of them.
It’s just a really naive ending (akin to the ending of Lion King) which replaced something far better but less flashy.
It’s not clear from context, but maybe we’re meant to assume the celebrations on other planets take place weeks or months later, when word reaches them that the Emperor (and/or Darth Vader, the one who would have stricken more direct terror in people’s hearts) is dead. Given that– as PAD pointed out in the CBG column reprinted in a thread posted today– E-Mail doesn’t exist in the Star Wars universe, it’s doubtful– if not impossible– that these could be simultaneous celebrations with the one on Endor.
.
Rick
As to the Han and Greedo scene, I’m not up in arms about it, but I’m definitely in the “Han shot first” camp.
Not me.
I’m in the “Han’s the only one who shot” camp, which is how it was when I first saw it.
–Daryl
Good point. Maybe the phrase “Han shot first” frist arose as a reference to the first (i.e. original) version of Star Wars, not to him and Greedo both getting off a shot. Or maybe people were misremembering. But yes, Han was the only one to do any shooting in the confrontation with Greedo. I knew that, and stand corrected in my phrasing.
.
Rick
It’s not big deal. “Han shot first.” has a quicker, punchier cadence to it, I’ll agree, and makes for better t-shirts.
Like this one:
http://www.walkingtaco.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/han-shot-first.jpg
–Daryl