Slashdot Mirror


The Secret History of Star Wars

lennier writes "How exactly did George Lucas develop the script for the first Star Wars? Why were the prequels so uneven when the originals were so good? Did he really have a masterplan for six, nine, or even twelve episodes, and why did the official Lucasfilm position keep changing? And just how big an influence were the films of Akira Kurosawa on the whole saga? Michael Kaminski's The Secret History of Star Wars, Third Edition is a free, thoroughly unauthorized, e-book that brings together a huge amount of literary detective work to sort fact from legend and reveal how the story really evolved. Download it or have your nerd credentials revoked."

8 of 569 comments (clear)

  1. A child of Star Wars by crumbz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I saw the original Star Wars at the theater when I was six. I saw the next two, Empire and Return, on the big screen when they appeared as well. Seeing these majestic space operas as a child had a profound impact on me. These movies set the stage, along with other contemporary "childrens" novels and sci-fi of the late-70s/early 80's, of a life-long love of science fiction and fantasy fictions. More importantly, this gestalt provided a novel framework for a belief in a limitless future, a need to challenge authority and an implicit belief in the use of technology to create a better future. (Not to sound too grandiose.)

    Seeing Star Wars as a child has had a lifelong effect upon me and my worldview. /Can't say the same for the prequels though...

  2. Cult of Lucas. I don't get it. by syousef · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I enjoyed the original and Empire (though Empire felt like it had been cut short). I didn't think much of Ewok-ladden strikes back. The prequels got progressively worse. I was downright disappointed at how lousy the story was given that with the potential it had it should have been powerful and epic. I've even read a couple of novels.

    What I don't get is the obsession with how ti was made. Clearly for the first couple of films the right people were in the right place at the right time. I don't think it was all Lucas by any stretch of the imagination and it's only those 2 films that I'd call good at all, so this idea of Lucas as genius with grand plans and grand vision just doesn't appeal to me. In fact unless you're in the movie business I fail to see how it can hold more than a passing interest. I'd rather watch paint dry than read this ebook cover to cover. I just don't care. I accept that Lucas is a hack who had a miracle year (or two).

    Likewise with the actors. I don't mind Harrison Ford (even if he's getting worse not better as he gets older...Airforce One? What was he thinking!?) but Mark Hammil and Carrie Fisher weren't exactly any good.

    As for continuity? Please! One minute Luke and Leia are about to get hot and heavy, and the next we're told they're brother and sister. Vader as Luke's father was unlikely though plausible, that is until the pathetic explanation that was Episode 3.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    1. Re:Cult of Lucas. I don't get it. by Gnavpot · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As for continuity? Please! One minute Luke and Leia are about to get hot and heavy, and the next we're told they're brother and sister.

      No. The next minute, THEY are told they are brother and sister. Big difference.
  3. Re:i recently saw "the hidden fortress" by zippthorne · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well.. perhaps because the robots didn't *bumble*

    I suppose you could argue that C-3PO did some bumbling, but it was pretty quick and typically involved disassembly on his part rather than just getting hit on the noggin and mugging the camera.

    And anyway, goldenrod was only even there to give a exposition for the mute clown*, R-2D2. *almost harlequin, if you read too much into it (you can map almost anything onto commedia dell'arte if you're not careful)

    I think you're right though. In the prime-three, he polished some rocks and got diamonds. In the "first" three, he went looking for diamonds and found glass.

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  4. Re:Does anybody really care? by 19061969 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think the Jedi as religion was a bit of a joke (similar to a protest vote) done for censuses. I'm not sure if people really and truly consider it as a religion.

    When I was 8, Star Wars came out. I went crazy for it just like most of my friends. We really wanted to see it and queued up for hours in the rain when it finally came to our cinemas. We bought the toys, played at Star Wars in the playground, and lived and breathed it.

    But finally, after a few years, we just grew up a bit more and got into other things like other movies, girls, books, drinking, working, etc. My younger brother was mad keen on the return of the jedi a few years later; for him, it was his formative film, but since then, he also has grown up and sold off his toys.

    We both have soft spots for our formative films and have happy memories of watching them and playing them, but to revere them as one of the biggest global cultural events is a little bit silly. It really is just entertainment with a bit of pseudo-religious babble mixed in there. People might recognise the Darth Vader sound, but it doesn't run their lives. They don't do things like quake in terror and get shocked like I a saw a elderly French woman do when she suddenly saw a dummy dressed in an SS uniform during an exhibition once.

    In all of my travels, Star Wars has changed the world only for a small handful for people. For most, it really is just a movie and nothing else.

    --
    bang goes my karma... again...
  5. Re:nerd credentials? by Binkleyz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Please forgive this from a mere low 6 digit...

    Who are you? I am the new Number 2.
    Who is Number 1? You are Number 6.
    I am not a number, I am a free man!

  6. Re:"Prequels" not good? by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Like all sequels, they are attempts to milk the cash cow created by the original franchise Not all sequels. Stargate wasn't that great of a movie, and I'm guessing wasn't that popular -- but SG-1 became a much better show. Buffy the Vampire Slayer was an incredibly campy, shallow movie, but the TV series actually had depth. (In this case, likely because the writer had much more creative control over the series.)

    And not really in the same league, but I don't think anyone would call Serenity worse than Firefly.

    Chronicles of Riddick -- it's not as if Pitch Black was a particularly good or well-known movie. It wasn't even promoted as a sequel that way. Not saying Riddick was great, but it was better than Pitch Black. But that defies stereotypes anyway -- there was a kind of ok anime, but the best was the videogame.

    One more, while I'm at it: Star Trek. Even numbered movies vs odd.

    Matrix I actually didn't think the sequels were that bad. In particular, I think what was probably needed was some serious budget cuts and an editor -- the version we saw in the theaters resembles a "Director's Cut".

    Trim down the absurdly long action scenes, trim down the rambling dialog, and they could actually be good. Want to see the original be bad? Play the Path of Neo videogame.

    Then again, the biggest problem is that it's exactly the same story they told with the original -- The One slowly wakes up, discovers a bigger world, gains new powers, and in the last few minutes of the movie, he has an epiphany and simply solves the problem, Deus Ex Machina style. (The Machine swarm consciousness is even credited as Deus Ex Machina.)
    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  7. Re:Star Wars; breakable like Firefly by Phics · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That was part of the charm of the original trilogy, and something that largely seemed to be absent from the prequels - Lucas' idea of the 'used future'. Ships were ruddy and worn. Decks were scratched. Hulls were scored with carbon from blasters and battle. Even uniforms were marked up.

    This was a very new thing for space films - this was no Flash Gordon show.

    Still, when you look at the remake of Episode IV, check out the stormtroopers who were added in on Tatooine. They really lose that 'used' feel. Now check out Episode I. When did we ever see a glossy mirror-like spaceship in the original trilogy? Everything looks contrived - even the planet of Naboo looks far too pristine to be a credible part of the Star Wars universe.

    The characters are the same way. Where are the grungy smugglers and seedy characters which gave Star Wars its intrigue and appeal? Sure, there were some obvious attempts, but they just didn't come close.

    But having said all that, I agree with you. Firefly was a noble attempt to bring back some of that rustic grubby swashbuckling fun that made Star Wars so fascinating.

    --
    There are two types of people in the world; those who believe there are two types of people, and those who don't.