Slashdot Mirror
Harrison Ford Turned Down Han Solo Role
eldavojohn writes "It's being widely reported that Harrison Ford turned down a £20 million deal to play Han Solo once again in a George Lucas spin off of Star Wars. The source of this information seems to be a tabloid called bangshowbiz. Harrison was approached by Lucas with two roles but instead opted for the same amount to play Indiana Jones for the fourth time. Could the spin off centered on the rugged Han Solo save the Star Wars franchise from its prequels or would it have been another mediocre release disappointing demanding fans?"
Good for him, at least he knows his limits and marketablity. Now for a few Hundred posts on 'how old he is', and 'he'll sprain his back' or more such silliness.
"Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life." Terry Pratchet
Could the spin off centered on the rugged Han Solo save the Star Wars franchise from its prequels or would it have been another mediocre release disappointing demanding fans?
Given that Lucas most likely would have partnered Han with a squadron of Jar Jar's children and a midget in a monkey constume, I think that questions answers itself.
Push Button, Receive Bacon
Revenge of the damn kid who is always on my lawn!
*pSig = NULL;
HAN SHOT FIRST
I don't want to see Han Solo's great character trashed by a bad script and the over-use of special effects.
Lucas helped kill my vision of the star wars universe with the prequals, I will never watch another Star Wars thing he does again.
The film will be made, with Ford or without.
Lucasfilm would have to apply so many effects to the aging Harrison Ford that they might as well computer generate him from the get-go :P
R2D2 turned down the droid role. They are contacting a Jack-in-the-Box garbage can now for the part.
Table-ized A.I.
Ford's last role in Star Wars, the Star Wars Holiday Special, was such a smash hit, how anything possibly go wrong?!?
My eyes and ears they burn. Mr. Lucas, why are you asking me to bend over again?
The deal fell through because Ford stipulated in the contract that greedo couldn't shoot first.
George Lucas, on the other hand, has lost a tonnes of credibility with the Star Wars prequels. As Brent Spiner said, "it took him twenty years to come up with something lousey". George's quickness to return to the Star Wars well is more evidence that he has become a sell-out of the highest order.
George should forget about Star Wars spin-offs, go back to his roots and start a new project. Maybe a remake of Flash Gordon or Buck Rogers ... something he loved as a child.
boxlight
often the best of the books featured han solo as a major story, so george did have a good idea, but the execution would have sucked. maybe harrison ford could have directed it, too....
i disable sigs
There's NO WAY that anything Lucas or anyone else did would ever satisfy the "demanding fans" - the die-hards saw the originals when they were 8-12 years old, a long time ago. Their *memories* of seeing it the first time are far better than the movies actually were, so when 25 years later movies of the same general quality come out, of course they are disappointed. I was old enough to see them all with some degree of objectivity, and the originals weren't all that better than the prequels. The main thing that struck me about the originals were the effects, which were so much better than anything you had ever seen (aside from maybe 2001: A Space Odyssey). That Imperial Star destroyer coming in over the camera in the opening shot literally drew gasps from the audience. Very impressive compared to what came before, like Star Trek/Lost In Space, etc. That sort of "dazzle factor" is never going to be seen again from effects, and although the prequels effects were MUCH better than the originals, they didn't stand out. Take that away and all you have are some pretty predictable stories that anyone who watched B-movie Westerns would recognize.
There's no way that the grown-up fans are ever going to be satisfied the way they were when they were 11 years old.
Brett
"It's being widely reported that Harrison Ford turned down a £20 million deal to play Han Solo once again in a George Lucas spin off of Star Wars."
NOW were are the posters proclaiming how this is a good thing that another actor doesn't get paid too much money?
Could the spin off centered on the rugged Han Solo save the Star Wars franchise from its prequels
I guess if "rugged" is the new word for "over the hill", then possibly.
Is Lucas TRYING to emulate Trek here? ie: Keep re-using the same geriatrics until enough are in the grave that you have no choice but to finally re-cast the character?
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
... let him shoot first this time.
qz
He made the right choice. At least Indy still shoots first.
He told George he just couldn't face being stuck in a spaceship with Chewbacca again.
This isn't the reason why he didn't want to play the role again... he knew he was supposed to be married to Carrie Fisher! And have you seen her lately?! YIKES!!! I think he'd *RATHER* kiss a Wookie!
..be cast as the wookie!
"Could the spin off centered on the rugged Han Solo save the Star Wars franchise from its prequels or would it have been another mediocre release disappointing demanding fans?"
I was seven years old when the first one came out. By the time he made the third one, it was obvious that the franchise sucked. Anyone who stuck around after that is not that demanding.
I think anyone who watched three more crappy movies and *still* expected something good to come of it should just check "jedi" on their census form.
It's very true that, objectively, the originals weren't Timeless Cinema or anything and that it's quite impossible to compete with folks' nostalgic perception of the movies.
HOWEVER... Star Wars was also the first time anyone had done the space opera for which everyone had been pining since, I dunno, Jules Verne finally came to fruition with grandeur. 2001 was great, but it was semi-mystical hard sci-fi. It wasn't the cowboy movie in outer space that spoke to the munchkin in everyone. Except Brett, perhaps.
I am the one true god. However, as an atheist, I don't believe in myself. I guess I have a self-esteem problem.
I can imagine them getting Carrie Fisher back to play a skinny, bhang-smoking Leia, sitting by her pool overlooking Naboo. "Pool-boy! Moisture! AAAaaaaa-aaahh.....!" And Luke trying to look all Jedi while resisting the urge to sulk or stare wistfully into the sunset. Would Chewie be buying Grecian Formula 16 by the 55-gallon drum? I think we have the workings of a SNL sketch here.
If they did an entirely CG Han Solo, would they have to pay Harrison Ford anything? I mean it would be "Ford's likeness", but the "Han Character" is what they would be depicting...
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
So /. is now a third rate knock off of a third rate rumor web site?
What Lucas project is in the works that needs an older Solo? B.S.
But, the bigger thing is, why is /. doing entertainment rumor?
Since when are Star Wars rumors not nerdy enough to go on
As a
(all said while pointing at Solo, Leia, and Fett action figures on the bookshelf)
Yeah, Han in carbonite, Leia in slave bikini, and Boba Fett.
Could not agree more. Star Wars is so much fucked up after episode 1.
I mean... looking at IMDB... the Tom Clancy movies, Air Force One (Worst Idea Ever), The Fugitive, Firewall, K-19... the guy's become a grim automaton. Some of those movies were decent, but his characters were pretty much the same in every damn one. Anyway, let's hope that IJ4 breaks the long grey-brown streak.
I'm in ur starwars killin ur movies
Jesus Saves
When I was younger back in the late 70s, I remember going with the family to Century City in LA to see Star Wars. Other teens back then had seen the movie a half dozen times it was that significant.
Anyhow, Pop liked the movie. It was something to remember. Moreover, that was the only Star Wars movie he had seen in the last 25 or so years. You see, he generally thinks hollywood is hollyshit and avoids the theaters. One of those Master Piece theater types...
Lately, Dad was visiting. We were bored and I put in the Star Wars III Revenge Of The Sith DVD. After about 10 minutes into the movie he thought it was some kind of joke. Crappy to say it nicely. Or how about what the hell happened I thought this was Star Wars?
For reference, http://imdb.com/gallery/granitz/3463/CarrieFish_Gr ani_5733926_400.jpg.html?path=pgallery&path_key=Fi sher,%20Carrie&seq=2
Look as good at fifty-something you will not.
Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
to Bruce Campbell. C'mon, you know you want it. Hail to the king, baby.
Swi
Yeah! Now it's time to go fuck up the other series!
I say the story was f'd up after episode 4. I guess I'm the only one that started hating it with that whole "let me pull a Vader is really Luke's father outa my ass" trick.
Harrison Ford is American, right? So I assume that he spends most of his time in the USA... So what the hell is he going to do with £20 million British pounds in America? Maybe he's do it if he were to be offered some spendable American dollars... duh!!!
He'd take the role nowadays only if Han's wife or family were threatened by terrorists.
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
Okay, here's the REAL deal.
Harrison Ford took the Indiana Jones role over the Han Solo one because it's going to be a much better movie.
The rumour that it takes place in the sixties is true, and fits in nicely with the Mr Ford's present age.
What hasn't been widely revealed is that Sean Connory *will* be in the movie, although the role will probably surprise many people.
Since Satan owns the pink slip for the soul of pretty much everyone who has ever worked in motion pictures, he can shuffle the deck however he sees fit... and some interesting studio mergers mean that Sean Connory will play an elderly James Bond who fell through a temporal rift as the result of Xindi interference with Earth history - the theory being that if they could get all the kids hooked on beer and acid and dope then warp drive would never be invented. Little did they realise that Optimus Prime would ride in on My Little Pony and save the day by assassinating Kennedy and illegitimately fathering Rosie ODonnell with, you guessed it, Rosie ODonnell - who fell through the same temporal rift James Bond fell through. Pygmies re-discover left-over gou'auld technology that permits them to build hypersonic blow-dart weapons, which are capable of destroying ICBMs and thereby save the USA from the tyranny of total destruction when they decide to make the Ukraine glow in the dark...which happens two-thirds of the way through the movie, because the Ark of the Covenant (which was stolen from Area 51 by the Xindi) has been given to the Russians, who are using it to try to re-animate a cut-n-shunt SuperPolitician they've made from the cryogenically preserved remains of Adolph Hitler, Josef Stalin and Walt Disney - but exposure to nuclear fallout causes this re-animated monstrosity to sprout wings and fly to Tokyo, where as Mothra it does battle with Godzilla until Indiana Jones...
Sorry, I've given too much away already. You'll just have to buy a ticket like everybody else.
"Their *memories* of seeing it the first time are far better than the movies actually were, so when 25 years later movies of the same general quality come out, of course they are disappointed."
That's what alzheimers is for.
"Could the spin off centered on the rugged Han Solo save the Star Wars franchise from its prequels or would it have been another mediocre release disappointing demanding fans?" ...or could it have been cooked up by said tabloid?
"Could the spin off centered on the rugged Han Solo save the Star Wars franchise from its prequels or would it have been another mediocre release disappointing demanding fans?"
Yes.
No time like the present for Nick Nolte to step in and fulfill his destiny.
They could even act is as if nothing had happened, like when TV shows just replace the actor that plays a certain character-Becky in Roseanne comes to mind.
I remember reading that Lucas was inspired by Flash Gordon and the like, those campy movie serials. The good guys wear white, the bad guys wear black, the rogue wears both...and I'm not sure how the stormtroopers or Chewbacca fit into this. There's action, suspense, romance, intrigue, and then the good guys win.
Therein lies the danger. Star Wars I, II, and III suggest that Star Wars IV was just a stroke of luck for Lucas. He is a poor storyteller and could easily cast Ford into the wrong kind of story. Ford's career would then end in a wimper. Of course, I would waste my $10 on Star War VII.
Ford made the right decision.
I wouldn't mind seeing this trilogy being done. Timothy Zahns Heir to the Empire trilogy is good and timeline wise they could swing it with most of the original cast and have a new villian in Admiral Thrawn. As long as Lucas wasn't involved in directing or writing for the movie. I've think he's lost the touch when it comes to story telling and directing. In the begining of his career he was energetic, had youthfull vision and he had a gift for telling a good story on the silver screen. Now he looks through a lens of a special effects artist/CEO . I think if he really wants to do another, he needs to start all over from the begining by takin a break from I.L.M. and dig out the old 35 mm camera and do his indie films. Really though I would like to see him hand off the films/stories to someone else. There are a few directors/writers I would like to see take a crack at something like this. Michael Rymer,J. Michael Straczynski, Kevin Smith to name a few. Remember Lucas did say 9 movies long long time ago.
The begining of the end...
Dude, please! Use the spoilers tag next time!
I may make you feel, but I can't make you think.
would change the story in that Han Solo gets plastic surgery so that other Bounty Hunters cannot recognize him, because after Jabba the Hut died, other mobsters who were loyal to Jabba kept the bounty on Han Solo's head. Then they could get a new actor to play Han Solo.
." at the beginning of the series with the new actor.
Or just play it like the James Bond films, a new face, same character, no explanation to the fans at all. I hear that the daytime Soap Operas do that to their characters quite a bit when they ask for too much money, they simply get a new actor or actress and then say "The part of John Black is now being played by
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
I've had enough Star Wars for a while ... but it's been a long time since the last Indiana Jones. I'll be there opening day!
It's a trap!!
Why waste $100 Million just to disappoint the fans in 2 years, when you can disappoint the fans right away for free.
A lot of discussion here about the quality of the movies on several levels. That being told, I withhold my judgment on the series as a whole. However, my girlfriend has expressed interest in watching the films.
As someone who has never seen them, should she watch IV through VI, then I, II, and III, or should she watch them in series?
And so, should I pull out my original release VHS tapes of IV-VI and have her watch them in their original glory, or should she watch the new DVD releases?
George Lucas wrote the first three episodes first, as he was learning his story writing skills. It was enough to get a partner to help him with the final three episodes. That partner died before the first Star Wars movie was made and couldn't fix the first three parts like he did the second three parts.
The first three parts could not have been done in the 1970's because they didn't have the tech to animate a whole army of battle droids and clone troopers. The stories needed work anyway, because originally it was about a guy named Starkiller, and later renamed to Skywalker. In the second three scripts originally it was Starkiller's daughter, but they thought that nobody would believe that a young woman could be the protagonist so the part was worked into Luke and Leia and rewritten. Due to budget cuts, they had to rewrite parts of the script because they didn't have the CGI for a true form of Jabba, and they tried to film it with a fat man instead of a Hutt, but cut that part out, only to add it in later and replace the fat man with a CGI of Jabba. Somehow the changes they made to the second three movies worked, and it was more of a fluke. Yet the changes they made to the second three movies, meant that the first three movies had to be changed to make sense, and the Partner that Lucas had to rewrite the second three movies was not around to rewrite the first three movies. Lucas tried to compensate, added in the Jar Jar character for comedic relief and it failed, somehow Lucas botched up how Anakin Skywalker turned into Darth Vader and made him look retarded as he gave into his anger and hate in contrast to the Darth Vader of the second three movies that gave into his anger and hate but was not retarded but an efficient killing machine and badarse Sith. Lucas could not fill in the plotholes, and for every hole he filled, he had more appear causing more questions from the fans.
I think that the second three movies, episodes IV, V, and VI were Space Operas, but more of a Sci-Fi action movie Space Opera instead of a Dramatic Space Opera like I, II, and III apparently tried to be. I think Lucas had rewritten the prequels to appeal to females, in a hope of getting more females into watching the Star Wars films if they saw a better love story between Anakin and Padme, and more Drama between Anakin, Obi Won, and Palpatine. I mean the Jedi, esp Obi Won, believed that Anakin was the one that would bring balance to the force, and they treated him like a red headed step-child or something that one might scrape off of their shoe. Yoda sensed in him much fear, but instead of trying to teach him how to handle his fear like Yoda does with other Jedis, he refuses to train him. Ironic that later in the Empire Strikes Back, Yoda teaches Luke Skywalker how to handle his fear to avoid going over to the dark side, and his teachings worked. Had Yoda done that to Anakin in the first place, he might never have become Darth Vader.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
I'll second that, I'd pay 50$ to see this movie too :)
--Coder
What do they mean "save the franchise"? The prequels are out. The all six movies are released. Since when is Star Wars a "franchise" to be used to make movie after movie? In my mind, Star Wars is a story. A six chapter story. Yeah, all six parts were not released in the normal order, but wasn't the whole story in existence since the beginning? I seem to remember Lucas was given the go-ahead to make his movies and had to trim down the full story to something that would fit in a smaller number of films.
They'll ask for Chuck Norris to play Harrison Ford. CAN YOU IMAGINE THAT?!?!
George Lucas. On ICE!
Beeeee theeeere!!! {explosions}
" Could the spin off centered on the rugged Han Solo save the Star Wars franchise from its prequels or would it have been another mediocre release disappointing demanding fans?" Ummm hello, Episode III was probably the 2nd or 3rd best of the hexalogy so I doubt saving it from "its prequels" is hardly fair. With that said, I definitely don't want to see a spin off of the franchise.
George Lucas was a brilliant filmmaker on two films: Star Wars IV and American Graffiti. He had the good sense *not to direct* Episode V and VI, which is why they turned out so well in spite of how hokey Ewoks are.
The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
As much as I love Harrison Ford, Indiana Jones, and Han Solo, and definitely not in that order: MOD PARENT UP!
Bring back Sirius Punk!
What sort of media will they be on? Surely they'll all be on one piece/device/thing. 3-D and holography are likely. Maybe it'll all be just beamed into our brains. Will there be more than just sight and sound (and the rumble of woofers)? Mmmm. Wanna taste some delicacies from other worlds? Crap. Now I'm wishing I could catch a wiff of Princess Leia. Or a taste.
Uh, I'll be back in a couple of minutes...
Sig not available, please try again later. If the problem persists, then the submitter is an idiot.
What the hell can you do with Han Solo after the Empire falls? Boring political shit? It would be Millenium Falcon One or Clear and Present Stormtroopers.
Lucas needs to sign Russell Crowe and go about filling in how Han Solo got to be Han Solo. That's likely a damn interesting story, with more swashing and buckling and less epic space battles and FX shots.
At this point even a disappointment would be a welcome addition to the series after having suffered through the monstrosity that is the first three episodes.
The script is one thing and, surprisingly enough, someone's ability to act is quite another unrelated thing. It's not like he has to improvise the bad-boy lines, LARP-style. That's what he gets a script for. He just has to deliver them convincingly. And since he's done it before, repeatedly, I can't see any reason why he'd suddenly lose the ability to play a kind of role.
Good actors tend to be quite versatile. (Heck, Ronald Reagan even played the president of the USA for years convincingly;) Typecasting someone into a role or another often has more to do with looks, accent, previous roles, and generally what you think the public would associate them with, rather than some inability to say another set of lines convincingly. E.g., you probably wouldn't cast Sean Connery in the role of a rebellious punk teenager, but that's more because noone would take that seriously at his age. I don't doubt that he could say that set of lines very well anyway.
In Ford's case, I don't see that being a problem. The public already associates him with Han Solo or with Indiana Jones.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
That's partially true, but the prequels *DO* objectively SUCK waayyyyyy more than the originals. Remember the original 3 movies were re-released a couple years *before* any of the prequels came out? I went back and saw the re-released originals as an adult, and yeah, you're right...they really weren't the same watching them as an adult.
However, they were still FAR FAR FAR FAR BETTER than any of the prequels, with their wooden acting. As far as the special effects, the technology of the special effects used on the prequels may be better than that of the originals, but the actual use of the technology (you know, imagination, etc) was way inferior. The special effects in the prequels was just shamelessly piled on, without any art to it. Take the battle scenes for instance. It's all just a bunch of random chaos, with lasers shooting every which way, and stuff blowing up all over the place, and the camera doesn't stay on one shot for more than 50 milliseconds until it switches over to some other scene, making it impossible to really follow the flow of the battle. You basically just sit there, completely overwhelmed, and it's only after the battle is done that you finally figure out what the hell just happened. There's no tension, just confusion. Special effects just for the sake of special effects is crap. You can't just pile it on endlessly and hope it will automagically coalesce into something wonderful. More is not always better.
I watched them for the first time when I was about 9 and even now, they still rock over their newly bastardised movies. The original VHS (or if you were lucky to own an LD and convert it to DVD PLEASE for the love of all that's holy hook me up) is where it's at because the newly redesigned simply SUCKS. I liked them cleaning up the images to make them sharper but GEEZ! NO EXTRA SCENES AND DO NOT CHANGE THE MUSIC.
GL YOU SUCK!
my answer, original VHS of 4-6 then skip 1-3 but if you insist, watch them
DID YOU HEAR WHO MY SISTER'S FRIEND SAID HER FRIEND SAW jIMMY TELLING nANCY WHO HIS COUSIN SAW hANS fORD AT A RESTAURANT WITH? blink>yOU WOULDN'T BELIeeve iIIT!/blink
I saw an interview years back (I believe it was Inside the Actor's Studio, though it might have been a Barbara Walters interview) where Ford said that he thought the role of Han Solo was very one-dimensional and at this point in his acting career he would have turned down the original offer, and would in the future turn down that role.
s tory.asp?terms=2431
When the host questioned him about playing Indiana Jones though, Ford replied quickly, "In a New York minute". The pair then went on to discuss the Indy franchise.
I found this write up of it on a 1998 page which probably recalls it slightly better than I do.:
HEARD HERE: Although Harrison Ford has admitted he'd return as Indiana Jones 'in a New York minute,' his affection for Star Wars' Han Solo, the character that first made him a star, is considerably less. On whether he'd reprise the role, Ford confided, 'Ummm...I didn't find Han Solo to be as interesting a character as some others that I've played since. I would have to, of course, out of respect and loyalty, I wouldn't deign to deny it at the moment. But it seems to me unlikely that it would be a character attractive enough for me to want to play again.'
From: http://www.boxoffice.com/boxoffice_scr/boxoffice_
Raiders of the lost dentals....
Yeah. That was kinda planned from the beginning. That's why his last name is Dutch for "Father." George was wowed by Joseph Campbell. All in all an interesting piece of theory, but not as applicable to real life as a lot of literature teachers would have you believe.
I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
...saying that he had a bad feeling about that movie.
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
Obvious Ford saw that... Its a trap!
Ginga no Rekshiya Mata Each page.
It's always about Marcia!
Marcia! Marcia! Marcia!
Al Pacino was offered the role of Han Solo in the original Episode IV but he turned it down.
weren't episodes 1-3 written before 4-6? i don't think storytelling is the problem. i think the problem was anakin skywalker and jar-jar binks. in all other respects, the newer movies were decent. firstly, a story centered around a little kid is naturally not as interesting (for most 16+ audiences) as an older character--which is why episode I, while a decent movie, doesn't live up to episode IV-VI. And then there's that douchebag who plays anakin in episodes I & II. He's just a shitty actor. I mean, c'mon, Natalie Portman, Samuel L. Jackson, and Ewan McGregor were all in the cast, and they hire a lamo for the leading role. Throw in Jar-jar binks and the whole franchise is ruined forever...
I was eleven years old. Even then I knew much of it was shit, and so did many of the other kids who watched it alomgside me. Bad writing, bad directing, some bad acting. It was a lot of fun, yes, and we enjoyed much about it, but stop repeating the myth that somehow on'y "kids today" no shit when they see it: I have fond memories of that mostly shitty movie.
...and were suddenly silenced.
...God knows he's filmed enough of them in his career. What does it tell you when even he won't touch this project?
We need at least 1 piece of good news within a SlashDot page!
Harrison rules!
Maybe Computers will never be as intelligent as Humans.
For sure they won't ever become so stupid. [VR-1988]
>Carrie Fisher! And have you seen her lately?! YIKES!!!
Give the poor woman a break - she has manic depression (bipolar to you foreign types). There was a 2 part documentry on BBC TV last year about Stephen Fry's depression and he interviewed many famous people about there's and some rather bravely were interviewed when clearly not having a good day. Fisher's piece was quite sad as she really came over as being a tad 'out there' when interviewed.
I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
Darth Maul is really the only character I like from Episode 1, because he fights like a demon, and he is also a martial arts master if ever I saw one. The only thing that PISSED me off is how he dies! How utterly ridiculous that a Sith that fights like that, kills a Jedi Master and nearly kills his almost trained,highly promising apprentice and then dies like that is just absurd.
I've just had a scary thought - a Mel Gibson Movie starring Harrison Ford. Basic plot would be English (gotta get some English hate in there, right Mel?) Jewish terrorists kidnap Harrison's family. Harrison tracks them down and skins them alive, crucifies them for good measure over an hour or so before nuking all the oil wells and driving off in to the sunset in some crazy truck ala mad Max. Oh, and it would be in Latin.
I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
Star Wars I was the original Star Wars.
The fourth Star Wars movie was Episode 1: The Phantom Menace.
As to whether Lucas had the "good sense" not to direct Star Wars II and III, I'm not so sure. My personal theory/mad guess is that the studios had to keep a close tab on him when he did Star Wars I, and knew what a shitty director he was. So they wouldn't let him direct II and III.
First of all, did you hear that he's playing Indiana Jones instead? It's in the same link. So it's not like he refused SW to go play some peaceful suburban father with 2.5 kids role.
Second, we don't know the details there. It could be simply that the Indiana Jones role paid better.
Third, after what George Lucas did to Episodes 1 to 3, can you really blame him? I mean, it's ok to bitch and moan about it as a fan, but he's the one who gets it on his CV and maybe conscience. Maybe he's good at knowing a dud when he sees one. Or maybe, especially given the choices of roles as a good guy, he doesn't want to star in Lucas's recent moral relativism (and revisionism) lectures.
SW started as a simple kids' story, a SF version of a mix of fantasy and swashbucklers and WW2 carrier battles. Brave knights with magic swords against clear super-villains. (You'd be hard pressed to paint blowing up a planet they already knew was not a rebellion planet, just to make an example, as a moral grey zone.) The rebels are good, the Empire is evil, and it tells you so right in the opening text. Even when the good guys tell a little lie (e.g., Ben saying that Luke's father is dead), it's with the best intentions, and even when the evil guys tell the truth, you know it's just scheming to some evil end. Follow your heart, do the right thing, don't let old farts tell you what to do (even if it's Yoda), don't fall for the excuses and promises of the dark side. And, oh, trust your own skills, not some targetting computer gizmo.
Not entirely applicable to RL, but it's a simple (or simplified) story, that's easy to digest and entertaining.
And it's not _that_ far off the mark either. While RL situations are a lot less black-and-white, it's not as impossible to have some principles as some people try to tell you. Just because neither side is pure black or white, it doesn't mean there's no difference. If one side is only 75% right and the other 75% wrong, it still doesn't mean that they're perfectly equivalent and it doesn't matter which you choose. Moral relativism is a subject very dear to both philosophers (since that's their job) and sociopaths (who just love muddying the waters and justifying any evil they do), but RL isn't _that_ relative. Just because some details varied across time and space, doesn't mean that the entire concepts of good and evil are purely arbitrary and irrelevant. But I digress.
So a long time after Episode 6, Lucas seems to have decided to undo that whole simplicity. Most of what Episodes 1 to 3 do isn't as much about showing you the history of it, as about trying to undo the good-vs-evil theme of the original trilogy. It's a lecture in how, see, the good guys weren't really good, they were just some self-serving self-indulgent caste, and, see, the evil guys weren't evil as such, they were really just another point of view and at most a bit mis-guided. And Vader (you know, the same guy who supervised blowing up a planet full of innocents) didn't as much fall to the dark side by some act of selfish evil, but was just yet another guy who thought he's doing the right thing, if in a bit of a mis-guided way. Etc.
It's been about rewriting the SW universe in more profound ways than "Han shot first." The whole "A Jedi uses the Force for knowledge and defense, never for attack" got kicked into the garbage bin, for example, and that was a far more central idea than Han shooting first.
It's not just the bad acting and bad scripting and bad directing and Jar Jar that make the prequels hard to swallow, it's also that it's a moral ambiguity lesson with some special effects and badly acted/scripted/directed at that. Once the whole monomyth structure and clear cut sides fly out the window, it becomes a lot harder to empathise with the heroes or follow why did they have to do this and that. Or to what (justifiable) end.
Contrast Episode 4 where it followed a logical and archetypal structure to destroy the evil Death Star, to Episode 1 where the grand achievement is finding Anakin
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Hilarious link!!!
weren't episodes 1-3 written before 4-6?
Probably not written. He may have had a vague idea of the general story, but he wouldn't have made such incoherences : Obi'wan doesn't know C3PO or R2D2 in 'New Hope', he doesn't know that Luke has a sister before Yoda tells him. Also, the six episodes just "don't work" together. The "I am your father", which is quite a dramatic climax in the original serie doesn't work anymore if you watch Starwars in the correct order.
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
I found the kid in EP:I quite good, especially for someone his age. I really didn't like the guy they picked to play Anakin in II and III, he put me off II & III. He was a poor choice as he didn't fit the role physically, IMO. He looked and acted liked an extra in Surf Nazis Must Die - most soap actors I've seen outshine him.
Next to Ewan McGregor (an example of really good casting - and good acting on his part) and Samuel L. Jackson, he stood out all the more. I'm not sure I think much of Natalie Portman in SW though, though I've liked her in other things so I'm prepared to put that down to the direction and script.
Christopher Lee was of course hammy, basically, exactly what I'd expect from him (and so seemed another odd choice) - though in contrast he was very good in LoTR.
Ian McDiarmid was, once again, excellent - no matter what odd ball stuff was being thrown at him (makeup or potentially dubious dialog) he carried it off very well IMO.
Are you are referring to that little exchange between Obi-Wan's ghost and Yoda in ESB right after Luke left Dagobah?
Ben: That boy is our last hope.
Yoda: No. There is another.
I figure that a way to reconcile that with Ben's knowledge from ROTS would be to assume that Ben knew about Leia, but for one reason or another, he simply didn't feel that she would be up to the task of becoming a Jedi and overthrowing Vader and the Emperor.
Now, how about when the Obi-Wan ghost appeared to Luke on Hoth and told him to go to Dagobah though?
Ben: You will go to the Dagobah system. There you will learn from Yoda, the Jedi Master who instructed me.
I think that was a rather big oversight on the part of Lucas, considering the Jedi Master who instructed Ben was Qui-Gonn, not Yoda. That one might be a little more difficult to explain away.
This space unintentionally left blank.
It is definitely not that he feels that it would not do well commercially, because regardless of whether I, II, and III were decent films, we all went to see them. Lots of people went to see them. No doubt any movie with Harrison Ford would do just as well.
No. Especially not the good bits from 4-6, which were written by Akira Kurosawa in the 1950s and then copied by Lucas...
This is it, this is the final straw.
We must kill George Lucas.
The man is insane, as in -full spec baby eating loco, he clearly lives in a basement playing with Star Wars toys (much like some of us) masturbating and licking the mold off the walls while a tap drips and his cat meows or something.
I don't know how many times in the last 8-10 years on the net I've had to make a ranting post about some developer or movie studio to NOT re-make or re-tell or add to a story which is a classic!
Let sleeping dogs lie, we're talking nostalgia here, we're talking a classic!
Does Lucas REALLY give a shit about Star Wars? - was this even his idea, or one of his lackeys looking to make large cash profits?
(Yes I know all movies are there for profit but some have some artistic direction and real passion from the creators)
Oh and hell, while I'm ranting am I the only one here who actually finds his interest in Star Wars diminished in the past 6 or 7 years?
It's a really sad situation, I mean I wasn't some uber Star Wars nerd but I did enjoy the movies, hell I grew up with them (29 now) but something about the new movies and the digital edits and the DVD releases and how they were timed, it all just reeks product for cash, not a trilogy I care about, not a fantastic universe I want to know more about.
I find it difficult to immerse myself in the movies and enjoy them when in the back of my mind I know the prequels now, I know how bad they are and well I know it sounds ridiculous but it just cheapens them for me, I wish I could say they didn't but they did.
I can't channel surf, stumble upon Star Wars and go cool! anymore, I have to watch for 5 minutes till I see some nasty CGI and edits I don't remember to snap me out of it and watch something else - the charm is gone.
(On that sad note I got the same feeling for the original Matrix, great movie until the sequels came out - then it too lost its charm)
I think it's time to re-watch http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Hat - one of the greatest episodes of Southpark of all time.
(and this cock wants to make another Indy movie? after the flawlessness of the third one which was a great GREAT way to end it? oh the humanity)
Kill me now internets, kill me now.
For Star Wars Episode VII : Verb of the Noun!
Now that's what's wrong with the so called prequels. A line that corny simply has to be delivered with some humour or people just cringe like hell in their seats.
Small wonder that Kershner's name, and those of the writers, were put to the back of the credits and Lucasfilm was put up prominently. The guy is utter shite and extremely lucky, and the only reason why Indiana Jones works is because he has Stephen Spielberg to keep him in check.
Hmm.
The veterans I see interviewed say *war* is all just a bunch of random chaos, with guns shooting every which way, and stuff blowing up all over the place, and your attention doesn't stay on one gunshot for more than 50 milliseconds until it switches over to some other scene, making it impossible to really follow the flow of the battle. You basically just sit there, completely overwhelmed, and it's only after the battle is done that you finally figure out what the hell just happened. There's no tension, just confusion. Adding troops just for the sake of adding troops is crap, despite what George W. Bush seems to think. You can't just pile them in endlessly and hope it will automagically coalesce into something wonderful. More is not always better.
You should become a Presidential advisor.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
If you want to split hairs, Yoda was the Grand Master of the Jedi Order and actually taught all of the young Jedi before they were assigned to a specific master.
I think I know what your referring to, Obi-Wan is saying something to Yoda about Luke being their last hope and Yoda replied, "There is another". I interpereted that as Obi-Wan not realizing that Lea had potential as a Jedi. This would make sense because Obi-Wan was only watching over Luke while Lea was being raised by (I think) Bale Organa
my God, I'm a geek
A goal is a dream with a deadline
Obviously he's getting a bit old for these roles now but...
I think in the future actors will be able to go on for longer in these roles using technology such as http://www.mova.com/ . The actors head would be scanned in high resolution when they are younger and then when they are past it, film-makers can use the digital version of them instead.
Not sure what your point was there, but you seem to be making the argument that the chaotic battle scenes are actually more realistic. At least that's what I thought you were saying until your comment devolved into a tirade against Bush. Don't get me wrong, I think Bush is a moron, but I just don't see how Bush has anything to do with the Star Wars films.
So, assuming your point was that the chaotic battle scenes are a better reflection of the reality of war...I knew someone would make that point, but it's completely moot. That level of realism doesn't make for a good battle scene. This is the movies, after all. Even movies like Saving Private Ryan that have "ultra-realistic" battle scenes still slow it down enough for the audience to be able to figure out what's going on. Besides which, Star Wars is a space opera, which is especially not the place for ultra-realism.
The point is not only moot though, it's also wrong. Just because real war is chaotic and confusing doesn't mean that anything equally chaotic and confusing is necessarily realistic. I guarantee you no veteran ever experienced a battle from 900 different viewpoints all at once.
Saving Private Ryan was much more realistic in that sense, because it actually followed individual characters long enough to give the audience an idea of what each character was going through. Like the opening scene where Tom Hanks drags himself onto the beach, for instance. They didn't show Hanks for 0.5 seconds blowing a German's head off, then switch to the medic patching a wound for 0.3 seconds, then over to Sergeant So-And-So throwing a grenade for 0.5 seconds, then back to Hanks again, but wait, now he's 500 yards from where he was last time we saw him (0.8 seconds ago) and now he's climbing a rope up the cliff for 0.2 seconds, then some random scenes of stuff blowing up, etc, etc.
I honestly suspect Lucas' dramatic direction skills as the culprit for Episodes I- III. Sure Anakin was a whiny pussy, but so was Luke in Episode IV. Watch any scene with Natalie Portman, and compare her side-by-side with ANY other movie she's in. The difference is night and day. The lines are bad, the delivery is bad. If she can make Garden State a decent movie, then it takes an epic-level fuckup like Lucas to ruin her.
The future isn't here until I can type "car keys" into Google and have it say "You left them in your pants last night."
"He may have had a vague idea of the general story, but he wouldn't have made such incoherences"
My favorite responses I hear from the Star Wars fanboys (of which I'll admit I am one) is the constant need to explain away those inconsistencies. There's even at least one as a sibling post to me doing just that. Sure you can explain it but it's quite a stretch. I would rather it be an outright inconsistency than really be based on such vast stretches of logic and what the meaning of the word "is" is. Then at least I'd know Lucas was just lazy and not stupid.
"Also, the six episodes just "don't work" together. The "I am your father", which is quite a dramatic climax in the original serie doesn't work anymore if you watch Starwars in the correct order."
I always thought the best way to approach the situation would be to not make it obvious that Vader was Luke's father but drop hints in the first three where it makes sense in ESB when you see it and have some sort of "A-HA" moment. There would be some people who pick up on it early but that would be bound to happen anyways.
Considering that the original StarWars movie (since renamed "Episode IV: A New Hope") is largely based on Kurosawa's classic "The Hidden Fortress" (1958), one could argue that Ep4 was written *way* before any of the others. Then one could make the case that Empire is the only Lucas-original that is even half-decent. Lucas stole from the best at first ("Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal"); followed up with a good sequel; then had sufficient momentum not to care what awful dreck the rest of the series is.
I know this will mark me as a pariah in the Slashdot community, but I for one loved each and every one of the Star Wars movies. Yes, Anakin was a whiney dork. But he was supposed to be a flawed character. Thats why he became Darth Vader. Yes, Jar-Jar and the Ewoks were hokey...but the kids loved them. I remember...I was in 3rd grade when VI came out, and I loved the Ewoks. These movies aren't the sole property of Sci-Fi geeks. They're meant to entertain everyone -- including 10 year-old boys, grandmothers and parents.
While I'm on the subject of sci-fi fans trashing everything but the original, I liked Star Trek: Voyager and Enterprise. I liked ST:ToS when I was a kid, but its pretty darned dumb now, and Shatner is an even worse actor than Hayden Christensen.
I like the new Battlestar Galactica WAY better than the old one.
I didn't even think Waterworld was *that* bad. I mean...it wasn't great, but it was good enough to watch on cable.
So when we're sitting around talking about people ruining their careers, and movies not being that great...remember that Natalie Portman, Hayden Christensen, Ewan Macregor, et al -- are all enjoying great success right now because a LOT of people really liked those movies.
weren't episodes 1-3 written before 4-6?
Lucasfilms revisionism. Star Wars starts 'in media res' (in the middle of the story) because that's the way alot of historical epics were written -- you can get to the action without a huge build up for one, and also it gives it a sense of legitimacy since there's an implied continuity outside of the actual story. This is a long time writer's trick. It is also consistent with the plot to "The Hidden Fortress", which Star Wars heavily borrows from (e.g. princess in distress, comedic relief from a tall and short character walking in a desert, etc)
Lord of the Rings and Dune are both very similar. Tolkien agonized for 20 years to try and compile the pre-story for LOTR and he was mostly successful thanks to his son's editing via The Silmarillion -- and even that work is flawed and lesser than the main event. And the latest published Dune prequels are such dreck that I refused to soil my fireplace with their ashes. Prequels rarely ever work.
John Maynard Keynes: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?"
I was kinda looking forward to the scene where the Millennium Falcon makes the Kessel run in 12 parsecs with the left blinker on the whole time.
Finkployd
If I were Harrison, I'd want Han Solo to go out the way he is now as well. Han Solo is an iconic character. If you try and revisit that character, it's highly unlikely that the revisited version will be anywhere near as well done as the original, especially 30 years later. I don't think Harrison wants to portray a "washed up" version of Han Solo. It would tarnish the work he'd done on the original character. Indiana Jones, by contrast, is a character that would age well. I applaud Harrison for his decision, and I'm looking forward to Indiana Jones 4!
Obi obviously had his memory erased in Anchorhead. Why else wouldn't he remember Artoo?
-Peter
Bet he'd take $20mil to reprise his role.
(sorry, no time to search and see if this obligatory comment has been made 20 times already)
Repant. Thy end is sheer.
There's some cult of eye makeup artists in California that believes in heavy racoon-like black eye outlines for older women. They've gotten to Nancy Pelosi, too.
I believe that Yoda DID train Obi-wan. I think Yoda taught him since childhood (they do take em young) and then Qui-gon took him as a field padawan.
"Unforgiven" - the Clint Eastwood film. If you want to see what you can do with the one dimensional / gunslinger kind of character who ends up on one last job, but now has some distance and perspective on what it is he was / is, it's a great movie. And, since it involves adding actual depth to a kind of character Eastwood played early in his career, it's well beyond Lucas' abilities. So, if you haven't seen it, get past the fact it's a Western and go check it out.
Basically, Lucas spent most of the filming in California doing exec producer-y stuff, while Kirshner and the actors were holed up in Pinewood actually shooting the movie. Kirshner was also doing his own editing on-set and, occasionally, sending reels over to Lucas to show him what he was doing.
Reportedly, Lucas *hated* how Kirshner was directing it. For example, he was absolutely livid about Vader fighting Luke one-handed at the end. At the time, he thought lightsaber fights should be very rigid, like Ken-do. (see: ANH's duel) Thankfully, he changed his mind about that one or else we wouldn't have the duel at the end of TPM.
But the biggest example is that he'd gotten a copy of the first half-hour of the movie, minus effects work - basically the whole Hoth sequence. And he hated it. Now, he and Kirshner have almost opposite directing styles in terms of camera work. Lucas locks the camera down, moves it at little as possible, and creates movement in editing. Kirshner moves the camera a lot and edits as little as possible. Both of these styles can be effective, but Lucas, SuperEditor, didn't know this.
Instead, he attempted to edit Kirshner's footage with his own cutting style. And the result was, according to everyone who saw it, absolutely wretched. (as one would imagine) And they spent much of the rest of filming begging him not to recut it. In the end, IIRC, the issue became moot because they just didn't have TIME for a recut.
So, basically, the best SW film is the one that Lucas had the least direct involvement with. And it's exactly because of ESB that he ended up getting a weak, easily-controlled director for ROTJ and camped out on set all but directing it from the backseat. (now, story wise, ROTJ had huge problems anyway and as written would never be as good as the others, but that's another matter...)
Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
and play an older guy in the fourth movie then why can't Ford? Instead of Han they can do what the did with Obi-Wan. Make him "Ben". Han can be Henry. Or better yet Harry if he's so old he doesn't know what to answer to.
Not really. You are assuming that the phrase "The Jedi Master who instructed me" means that Ben was Yoda's apprentice. It could mean that Ben attended classes led by Yoda, who was an instructor at the academy. Remember the class of younglings that Qui-Gonn interrupted to ask Yoda about the missing clone planet? Thus Ben could have been instructed by Yoda simply because Yoda was an instructor.
Not difficult to explain away at all. I DO think that this is another plot inconsistency introduced by Lucas, and he intended that Ben was Yoda's apprentice at the time that ESB was written/filmed, then changed it later. This inconsistency is just not as severe of one as you make it out to be.
Harrison Ford is now *older* than Alec Guiness was when Alec played the wise old Jedi Obi-Wan in the original Star Wars.
Just makes you think or something. meh. Maybe it doesn't. Back to trying to look like I'm working.
I'm not a nerd. Nerds are smart.
Oh man I love this stuff. Everytime I watch a movie and something doesn't make sense, I can allways stir it around until it does. (At least for me.) C3po and R2d2: Maybe Obiwan just didn't care about the robots much. He knew them, but they weren't really important to him. Or maybe he didn't want to say he knew them, because if he could tie himself to the robots, it might (Through Crazy whiney Questions) lead to Obiwan admitting that Vader is Lukes Father. Yodi: Well, Yoda instructed him a number of times in the 2rd & 3rd one. Maybe what he meant was not that yoda trained him. But Yoda was a source of Wisdom when he had a question. Of course there could have been some training in between 1 and 2 as the is some time in between. And I agree with you on Leia. Maybe Ben just didn't know that she may be of any use.
Indoctrinate : to instruct especially in fundamentals or rudiments Educate : to develop mentally, morally, or aestheti
Yeah, I thought about the Yoda thing too. The only way to resolve it is if Ben meant that Yoda was one of his Jedi Masters. Truthfully all the Jedi Masters train Jedi not their own in small ways. So if the dialogue was tweaked:
Ben: You will go to the Dagobah system. There you will learn from Yoda, a Jedi Master who instructed me.
I think also, Lucas tries to smooth this out at the end of Episode III by having Yoda show Ben how to communicate with the dead.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Here's a rather undeveloped character (let's leave out the stupidity in the prequels, shall we?) who already has a good following. A kick-butt bounty hunter. Sounds like a great action franchise to me.
I've said it before, the problem with the prequels was that there was no Han Solo.
Patrick Doyle
I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
... by Nathan Fillion's big-hearted rogue spaceship captain performance. After all, Mal "shot Greedo first" several times and it was very, very satisfying. :-)
I'd love to see Ford do an endless bunch of "Oy My Piratical Back" jokes (seriously, the guy is funny), but a revisit to Indiana Jones is enough.
Harrison Ford as Han Solo is less fun to watch than he is to remember. For me, it isn't about the actor/character of Han Solo as much as it is the idea of Han Solo as the underdog self-interested yet caring rebel with the sharp wit and cynical outlook that came from a difficult youth. Old Han Solo wouldn't be interesting, but, beyond that, he would break the idea of Han Solo. For my money, Nathan Fillion as Capt. Malcolm 'Mal' Reynolds was a better Han Solo than Harrison Ford ever was.
Internet Archive: Live Music Archive
Blade Runner.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Maybe in the sense "gave me instructions"? As in to send Luke to him if he showed Jedi potential?
... that initial sequence is well above anything produced in the "prequels".
Picasso also lived to produce mostly crap after Guernica.
Lucas left all what he had in the first 2 SW movies.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Read this- it's a pretty good explanation of inconsistencies between the films. There are a couple of weak points, but this guy makes a strong argument... essentially, R2 is the rebellions best covert spy.
You know, it turns out that I was wayyyy too hard on those prequels. I was comparing them to the original trilogy viewed through some very rose colored glasses. The truth is, the original trilogy sucked... HARD. The first movie is almost unwatchable. It moves incredibly slowly, the dialogue is at least as bad as in the prequels, amd the acting is bad, for the most part. Most of the aliens are downright silly. Hell, the STORY isn't even all that great. The only thing the Original Trilogy gave us was a universe. The universe of Star Wars is truly compelling. The Star Wars movies are, for the most part, terrible. "The Empire Strikes Back" is the only good movie in the bunch.
Script of Starwars before Marsha got to it.... http://www.godamongdirectors.com/scripts/swd1.shtm l
Well the acting of Haydensen may not have helped any, but the plots and storyline of I-III sucked far more than Haydensen's acting. It would take too much time to go into detail about specifics, so I'll just say that pretty much all the elements of episoides I-III that were supposed to explain episodes IV-VI aren't convincing at all. Like for instance, how un-Vader-like Anakin's transformation is to Vader. You're telling me that wuss became Vader, and that's how it happened? Yeah, right.
There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
For all the complaining people do about bad sequels I guarantee you that you would still waste your $10 on Star Wars VII even if they had Tom Green as Han Solo.
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
It looks like Yoda had a hand in instructing all the younglings. Therefore Yoda instructed him before he became a padawan of Qui-Gon. So what he said was true, from a certain point of view.
I don't know about everybody else, but I really don't buy this story at all. It seems just a bit too out of character on the Lucas side:
1. Two Star Wars projects were "announced" by Lucas shortly after Episode 3 came out, and an older Han Solo doesn't fit into either of them. One is another Clone Wars series, and the other is a live-action series set between Episodes 3 and 4. Even if the Han Solo character does appear in the live action show, Ford is just too old to play him.
2. Considering that Star Wars is moving to the small screen anyway, doesn't it seem a bit unrealistic for Lucas to be offering anybody a lump sum of around $40 million for a single character on a television series (for that matter, has that ever happened in television history)?
3. Even if Lucas was going to be using Han Solo in one of the Star Wars spin-offs, Lucas doesn't really have a history of using big-name stars in the Star Wars movies. The biggest star who appeared in the prequels was Samuel L. Jackson, and he was a relatively minor supporting character. I can't really see Lucas breaking his pattern by bringing in a big name actor for either one of the television shows, particularly when he himself has stated in public that movie budgets have gotten too big for their own good, and he'd want to stretch his budget as far as possible over the twenty-odd shows of the season (if you do the math, that would mean that Ford would be using up around $2 million of the budget of each episode).
Frankly, I think the source article is based on a rumour inspired by wishful thinking. I can't really believe that Ford was offered the opportunity to reprise his Star Wars role at all, I'm afraid.
Robert B. Marks
Author, Demonsbane in Diablo Archive
Nah, just say that as one of the head Jedi, Yoda instructed everyone for a class or two. Note that in this time period the Jedi had a whole academy and perhaps didn't start as an aprentice until they were a certain age.
"I think that was a rather big oversight on the part of Lucas, considering the Jedi Master who instructed Ben was Qui-Gonn, not Yoda. That one might be a little more difficult to explain away."
As shown in Attack of the Clones, Yoda instructed all the younglings classroom-style. Since Qui-Gon wasn't around in the OT, Obi-Wan calling Yoda "the Jedi Master who instructed me" rather than "one of the Jedi Masters who instructed me, even though the main one died 10 years before you were born" is perfectly valid and much less confusing.
firstly, a story centered around a little kid is naturally not as interesting (for most 16+ audiences) as an older character
I don't think that's true. It depends on the characters and storytelling. Ender's Game (and Ender's Shadow et. al.) centers around kids, but there's much of interest to adults. Of course, the kids are cynical geniuses that are almost like adults. There's a movie planned, though Scott Card has commented on the difficulty of finding anybody who wanted to do a movie with Ender as a little kid; they wanted to make him a teenager in order to attract teen audiences.
Well, perhaps you are right. Maybe most 16+ audiences do assume that a kid can't be interesting. What do I know about "most" movie audiences?
I do think it's harder to make a kid interesting to adults, but a good storyteller can do it. (I agree that this is not the case in Episode I!)
Qui-gon who he loved so much that he disobeyed Yoda and swallowed his distrust of Anakin to train him (side note: they were both so whiney with each other in Ep2 that you fail to understand that they were fond of each other)?
Another whopper:
"I knew your father. He was an excellent pilot, even then". Pilot != podracer.
Aside from the fact that Yoda taught all the younglings - and presumably lil' Obi-Wan - Yoda also taught him how to become one with the Force shortly after Ep III. I'd assume this is a profound enough training that Ben would be justified in calling Yoda his teacher.
Obvious exits are NORTH, SOUTH, and DENNIS.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
>a story centered around a little kid is naturally not as interesting (for most 16+ audiences) as an older character
So? When I saw the originals I was a kid. Granted, the new ones are of slightly lower quality but the real problem has always been that these are kids movies and older and wiser adults cant get into them. Add nostalgia to the mix and you have a problem thats more a perception than a real one. I dont think too many kids complained about 1,2, and 3, but many adults did. I chalk star wars up as a very lucky piece of pop-art that attracted a whole generation of children. Its not great film, lucas isnt a genius (ignoring ILF), and the rest of his work plays on nostalgia like the last rocky movie. The fact that the original actors dont want much to do with these nostalgia pieces hints that even hollywood knows when it can no longer milk a cash cow without producing a stunning embarassment, like say, the holiday special.
Natalie Portman can be a great actress
...and H is for Hot Grits!!
Sorry, I'm in a silly mood and haven't trolled for some time
-Eric
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
"My bum is on R2D2. My bum is on the X-wing. My bum is on the light-sab... OW! FUCK!"
No unauthorized use. Trespassers will be shot. Survivors will be shot again.
Digital doubles are almost as realistic as the original actors, save their voice. You could use a juvenated Harrison Ford too. ILM's technology in this regard is probably as good as any others.
I was right there with you until you said you liked Voyager :) Off-topic, but watching reruns of ENT on SciFi this week made me realize they really did have a good premise at the start, even if it wasn't TOS'y enough for some/most Trek fans. If Berman had gone in season 2 the direction Coto went with season 4, I think that series would've been WAY more successful. Voyager reruns, on the other hand, have made me wonder why I put up with watching that series in the first place.
Obvious exits are NORTH, SOUTH, and DENNIS.
Are you sure she actually contributed to Episode VI? Personally now that I've grown up I think that movie is a big festering pile of shit. Empire is still the most convincing, although Episode IV gets points simply for making one of the biggest impacts on the sci-fi genre ever (even if SW is more fantasy than sci-fi.)
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Before they were divorced, she edited all of his movies starting with American Graffiti. The last one they did together was Return of the Jedi.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
If George Lucas is only a technical adviser and writer O.K let someone else find the actors and let's also find someone else to direct.
George Lucas is a bad bad bad director. As a kid in 1977, when i first saw star wars, i only saw magic but when you get older you start to see that it's corny and crappy so you hope that in a new prequel that the Director would evolve but NO, he has not.
So i understand why he doesnt want to take up the role of han solo with George as the only Leader in that spin-off. He agrees maybe with indian Jones because Steven spielberg might be there as well and i'm not sure about this but i think i saw aan article that suggested that he would only do Indiana jones 4 if speilberg was on the project.
So there you have it,,,,George get a clue and hire Peter jackson.
The original script for episode four at least was really different from the one they finally ended up shooting. I know this because there was some nerdy book with drafts of the original scripts that came with one of the Star Wars games I bought at some point over the years :P
Here: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2005/02/11
"The Federal Reserve is a fraudulent system."--Lew Rockwell
End The FED. -
Ben: You will go to the Dagobah system. There you will learn from Yoda, the Jedi Master who instructed me.
I think that was a rather big oversight on the part of Lucas, considering the Jedi Master who instructed Ben was Qui-Gonn, not Yoda. That one might be a little more difficult to explain away.
This is true, from a certain point of view.
Yoda almost certainly did instruct Obi-Wan when he was very young. We see one such a group session in _Attack of the Clones_. Luke needed to start from the basics so, in fact, Yoda's instructions may be more relevent then what Obi-Wan learned from Qui-Gonn.
It was called Firefly
See the consistency in your post. "[actor] is good in other movies, but not Star Wars."
Bad direction => bad acting. Even the guy who played Anakin is a pretty decent actor outside of Lucas' acting ability destruction field.
Xenon, where's my money? -Borno
Lets just hope that this Star Wars spin off doesn't turn out to be as bad as The Star Wars Holiday Special was. My mind as a six year old was scarred forever.
Specks
Batteries not included
Ohh, come *on* now. It's called "suspension of disbelief". We empathize with Luke's character at this point because for *him*, it's a shock. Seriously, bubbalaroo, this revelation was made nearly 27 years ago. You're not going to surprise anyone by hiding this fact in the prequels. I bet even an Austrailian Aboriginal knows that Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker's father by now.
Xenon, where's my money? -Borno
I like the story in the prequels *better* than the OT.
There.. I said it! Kiss my midichlorian-loaded ass, Slashdot Community. :P
Xenon, where's my money? -Borno
"weren't episodes 1-3 written before 4-6?"
No. In fact, the "different point of view" was the one where Lucas hadn't thought of making Darth Luke's father until he started writing episode 5 sometime after Star Wars became a hit.
"You are assuming that the phrase "The Jedi Master who instructed me" means that Ben was Yoda's apprentice. It could mean that Ben attended classes led by Yoda, who was an instructor at the academy."
...I guess I'm the only one.' "
Perhaps this line was actually written by Margaret Cho's mother:
"My mom used to give me messages like this: "Ummmmmmm... Scott called.... IS HE THE GAY??!!" "Well, God, mom, I don't know if he's the gay... that's a lot of pressure on just one guy. He has to do the parade all by himself! 'I'm here! I'm queer!
I think Lucas is a good storyteller when he doesn't have to work within constraints. Episode 4 (I really hate him calling it that) was written to be a standalone movie, despite his claims that he had a full 9 movie arc planned out. Episodes 5 and 6 were follow ons, so that the only constraint is how they begin. However episodes 1-3 have many more constraints so that they can fit in the story arc, which seemingly hinders Lucas' creativity. (plus there's the whole sequel-itis problem)
I remember seeing an interview with Ford many years ago on TV. The interviewer asked him whether or not he would ever play Han Solo again if given the chance. His reply was that he would not, and that the Solo character was a very empty and uninteresting one to him.
When the interviewer asked him about playing Indiana Jones again, his reply was a calm and decisive, "In a heartbeat."
-B
For "new" 4,5,6, Lucas added all the shit back in. Any scrap of plot, cut scenes or arbitrary special effect got added back in with very little thought.
The worst/best example is that stupid scene where Han Solo is all nice with Jabba, and walks behind him, re-done to make him step on the tail. The scene didn't fit with the existing and future relationship between the two.
Maybe Tom Selleck would be interested in the role. I am sure his contract with Magnum P.I. has expired.
With regards to the "jedi master who instructed me" business...
I always just assumed after seeing yoda with the room full of 'younglings' that yoda, as an adorable and hilarious little gremlin handled all the children, and that as such, Obi Wan would have been instructed by him At Some Point, and then finished up with Qui Gon.
Not that I really care about proving continuity one way or t'other. If your audience has to go to any trouble to explain inconsistencies they maybe you should consider learning how to write. yes, i said it. I love the original trilogy, but jesus, continuity isnt *that* hard to pull off.
Come read my stupid blagablog. Rants and Giggles
Please, DO NOT confuse acting with bad directing! ALL of those people (including the "douchebag" who plays Anakin) are all excellent actors who have garnered much praise in other movies. However, it's the director's job to take the best shots of the actor's to convey his story. At this, Lucas sucks. He sucks BAD! He is completely lacking in empathy, and therefore, did not know how to setup the shots or which expressions were the most appropriate to convey emotions for the movie. His directing made ALL the actors look flat and wooden. This is why actors CARE about who the director is - because a bad director can make them look like shit (George Lucas) and a GOOD director can make a mediocre actor look outstanding (Peter Jackson).
I agree, but the 6 would have had to be very tightly worked out before hand.
For one thing, either Anakin or Luke would have had to not been refered to as "Skywalker", probably Luke, since it's very easy to explain why he has a different last name (all a part of his mothers plan to hide him away).
Secondly, Anakin couldn't have been Obi Wan's only pupil, and the only Jedi trainee depicted in the first 3 episodes. I think this could have been very effective... having Anakin not so much as a main character, but one out of a few jedi trainees... the one who eventually turns to the dark side, and kills the others. This would have made Obi-Wan's "Darth Vader killed your father" statement that much more complicated in the 4th movie. The audience could have been partially lead to think that Luke is the son of one of the other students instead. I'm not talking "Star Wars Acadamy" style storyline, or a high-school drama (a trap it could fall into quite badly), but maybe that there are 3 or 4 students, though Anakin and one other student are taken under Obi-Wan's wing and eventually Anakin kills the other.
My biggest issue with the first 3 movies isn't with Jar-Jar, but with the decision to make Anakin a very unlikable character right off that bat. I didn't mind him as a little kid, as much as other people did... he was a bit bratty, sure, but he was still a kid, and some good people were brats when they were children. But then he's depicted as a hot-headed youth which makes rash decisions, and is generally fairly unlikeable. I would have liked to have seen the transition from a warmer, kinder Anakin, who was so intent on saving everyone, that he is seduced by the Dark Side, originally intending to use it for good (which was sort of implied, but completely unbelievable). The current story makes Obi-Wan's statement about "The man who was your father ceased to exist", a bit watered down... since Anakin is sort of made out to be "Darth Vader light" from the beginning, it just takes him getting pushed over the edge a bit. You didn't feel bad, at all, when he was turned, it was more of a "no shit" sensation.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
Personally, that argument is getting very tired.
I don't believe for one second that there is that much of a difference in dialogue, acting skills, or storytelling between 4-6 and 1-3. Consider:
- Each set has their strong actors (Alec Guinesss/Harrison Ford; Ewan McGreggor/Liam Neison) and each has their share of weaker actors (Mark Hammill (yes really)/Billy Dee Williams; Hayden Christensen/Temuera Morrison (Jango Fett/clone troopers)).
- Wasn't Luke just as whiny in ANH as Anakin was in AOTC?
- By ROTJ, the actors are just as wooden (or so goes the popular term for describing the acting skills of 1-3) as many think the actors in 1-3 are.
- Is the 2nd Death Star in ROTJ really inventive?
I'm not saying I think poorly of the movies - I in fact like all of them. My point is, people should really hold to the same standards that they are judging the prequels by. I've learned to look past some of the minor portions of poor compositions through the entire saga, and enjoy all of the films for what they are and what they present. And, apparently, I'm in a minority in doing so. 4-6 are in no way free from flaws, and people really should stop falling to that mindset.Not to mention, I firmly belive much of the animosity towards the prequels is a result of our upbringing. How many of us have grown up with 4-6? How many times have we watched each movie from that trilogy? So, when something new comes through, it simply doesn't compare because we didn't grow up with it for 30 years.
"Of course, I would waste my $10 on Star War VII."
And therein lies the bottom line. People still love Star Wars, even though many hop on the bandwagon of prequel-bashing. The films aren't ruined, as so many like to say. Even after many fans of the originals completely despised TPM and AOTC, ROTS went on to be the most successful film on an opening day.
Just my opinion.
Prove it.
I think it was ABC News, but I really don't know. I do know there was an interview in which he was asked if he'd ever play Han Solo again, and he said he didn't think so, he'd outgrown him, or something. When asked if he'd play Indiana Jones again, he said "In a New York Minute."
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
I see what you mean. Show Anakin and Amidala together, affectionate with each other, but also show both denying Anakin as the father. Leave it up in the air. Then have Amidala whisper a secret to Obi-Wan right before she dies, something the audience sees but doesn't hear. For this to work, there would need to be a falling out between Anakin and Amidala. She'd need to take up with someone else. This would require another reason for Anakin to fall to the dark side. That's fine, since the weakest part of I-III is Anakin's fall. Poor old George just doesn't have a handle on what draws people to evil. Jealousy always works for me as a way out of this. Jealousy and envy are more easily understood by an audience anyway. Make the whole thing much more emotionally complex. Even a girl in middle school has more complexity in her emotional life than Anakin did. Throw in a continuing investigation by Master Windu into Anakin's actions on Tatooine, and Sidious becomes a way out for Anakin. He can destroy his enemies and gain supremacy through secret Sith teachings. This would make II and III just as dark as ESB, darker. And doesn't that make sense, given how evil the Sith were? The takeover of Sidious is the fictional equivalent of a Nazi victory in WW2.
I remember talking to someone who actually does some swordfighting, and felt that the lightsaber battle in Episode 3 was much better than the one in Episode 1.
I disagree.
Episode 3's fight was long, drawn out, and frankly, boring. It really looks like two kids trying to hit each other with sticks.
Episode 1's fights were all interesting, things actually happened, and you did see personalities come out, both in the actual fights, and in moments like this.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Has anyone considered that there were millions of R2 units and protocol droids in the galaxy, and he had last seen R2D2 and C3P0 almost twenty years before, in another part of the galaxy? To his mind, not knowing the Tantive IV had been in orbit over Tatooine, they could have been any two droids. I specialize in Monday-morning quarterbacking, armchair generaling, and 20/20 hindsight operations.
Since when is a parsec a unit of time?
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
And then there's that douchebag who plays anakin in episodes I & II. He's just a shitty actor. I mean, c'mon, Natalie Portman, Samuel L. Jackson, and Ewan McGregor were all in the cast, and they hire a lamo for the leading role.
Nah, Hayden Christensen isn't a douchebag. He was good in "Shattered Glass", for instance. He was just totally wrong for the role. They should've cast Ewan McGregor as Anakin, Liam Neeson as Obi-Wan, and gotten someone else to play Qui-Gon. (Sean Connery, maybe? Just kidding, sorta...)
Anyway, I think we can all agree that Jar-Jar Binks was the Lamest. Character. Ever.
Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
Near the end of Episode 3, it becomes quite clear that there was only one criterion used to select an actor to play Anakin. Change the guy's hair a little bit, and PRESTO! - he really does look like 'Evil Luke'.
I just found similarities with the comment above mine I could put to use. My point appears near the middle of your comment ... chaotic battle scenes become much like real war... and BAD movies.
Put inversely, stylized movie battles are glamorous and sometimes young kids think war is glamorous... until they get into the middle of one with insufficient equipment, health risks, and an overall miserable time.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
I think bigger problems are:
- How does Vader know Luke is his son? The force? If so, why doesn't he guess about Leia, who he meets before?
- Why no mention of Vader knowing Luke's family?
- Why does Ben leave Luke in Tatooine and Leia with the royal family of Alderaan?
- Why does Ben say that Vader hunted down all the Jedi, when it's clear the Emperor himself was behind it?
- Why doesn't Ben warn Luke that one of the Sith will probobly try to get Luke to join him and betray the other, when it's pretty clear that's what they tend to do?
- Why no mention at all of a trade federation (ok, it was in the Solo & Lando books...), Yoda being a senior council member, Luke & Leia's mom being a princess of Naboo, celibacy requirements of Jedi, and it being a major reason for Anakin's downfall, etc.
The Qui-gon thing is kind of an obvious plot device needed if you need a disposable main character, like Seska from Star Trek VI. When they introduce a new major character like that, it's a dead giveaway that they're not going to last the film.
Harrison: "$20 million? That's more money than even I've seen! OK, George, hand it over, then." George: "I haven't got it with me..." (as he quietly unclasps his holster under the table)
Ben knew about Leia, but for one reason or another, he simply didn't feel that she would be up to the task of becoming a Jedi and overthrowing Vader and the Emperor.
Q: How many feminists does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: None. Feminists can't change anything.
I'm just seeing if I can post or if it's getting messed up again.
- How does Vader know Luke is his son? The force? If so, why doesn't he guess about Leia, who he meets before?
:(
A kid of the required age who is strong in the force, hangs out with Obi-wan, and has the name "Skywalker". It's not that much of a jump, is it? Also, I can't remember for sure (only saw Episode III once) but did Anakin actually know he had sired twins? And he does guess in the end, once he realises that there's two of them.
- Why no mention of Vader knowing Luke's family?
What family? Owen and Beru, relatives he only ever met once, in passing, that live on a backwater ball of dirt in the ass end of nowhere? Why would he need to talk about them?
- Why does Ben leave Luke in Tatooine and Leia with the royal family of Alderaan?
Assuming he didn't know there were twins, Obi-wan hid the more important of the pair (probably the one with the most potential) in an obscure spot where he could also lie low and keep an eye on things. As for Leia... sometimes the best hiding place is right infront of your nose.
- Why does Ben say that Vader hunted down all the Jedi, when it's clear the Emperor himself was behind it?
He led the slaughter of all the Jedi in the temple. Additionally it's reasonable to assume that not all the Jedi were picked off in the initial clone attack and formed a resistance, so once he got the trademark suit, he may well have hunted them down one by one. And it was always implied that the Emperor was behind it, since Vader follows the Emperor's orders.
- Why doesn't Ben warn Luke that one of the Sith will probobly try to get Luke to join him and betray the other, when it's pretty clear that's what they tend to do?
Ben may not have known that. Or he might have witheld that information because it wouldn't really have mattered. Plus, Luke was probably smart enough to figure it out on his own - I doubt that he didn't know what he was getting into.
- Why no mention at all of a trade federation (ok, it was in the Solo & Lando books...)
I thought they were disbanded once they threw their lot in with the seperatists and started the clone wars? Since they also lost said wars, wouldn't that mean that there's no Trade Federation left? Why talk about them if they're nearly two decades irrelevant?
Yoda being a senior council member,
There was no council, and the council itself never came up because there were more pressing matters for Yoda and Obi-wan to attend to than talking about how they were organised years beforehand.
Luke & Leia's mom being a princess of Naboo
If you want to talk about inconsistencies, how come Leia talks about memories of her mother when she died in childbirth? Presumably, Leia's memories are of her adoptive mother. That's the only time she ever came up in conversation, and neither of them knew any details at all, so they couldn't talk about them. She just wasn't really relevant.
celibacy requirements of Jedi, and it being a major reason for Anakin's downfall
Again, the day-to-day mundane rules of the Jedi Order were hardly relevant to the situation at hand in OT.
God, I feel like a nerd writing this.
We need a meta-mod in aisle three.