CGI is partly to blame for the prequels looking stupid and for the Hobbit looking bad..its a cop out and takes away from realism in scenes..i personally like Return of the Jedi and its choices.
Surprised you didn’t mention how Endor was originally the ‘sanctuary moon’ around Coruscant. Meaning the final climactic battle was supposed to be over Coruscant to properly overthrow the Empire…
The same way Max and Amazon are creating a LOTR series, maybe someone should make a SW skywalker series. Reinvent the entire story as a 9 season episodic with these old ideas fleshed out
The Ewoks work on a thematic level. Luke underestimated Yoda due to his size when he first met the Jedi Master. Yoda stated, "Judge me by my size... size matters not." Luke trusted the Ewoks and demonstrated he had learned a critical lesson.
Yeah and when you watch the scene the Ewoks get absolutely whooped after some initial creative (and conveniently already prepared) traps. It's pretty harrowing stuff hearing them get shot, scream and shake lifeless bodies. People talk like he made this unrealistic super effective army of cuddly toys.
My friend worked at the theater when "Revenge of the Jedi" posters and cardboard cutouts were staged in early 1983. He still has some of them, serious collector's items.
Always felt like Yoda’s line about Leia could have been about Vader, because he too could still sense the good in him and believed he could be turned back to the good, with Luke having come to terms with the identity of his father
You are actually completely correct. I've read all of the available drafts online of Return of the Jedi and one of the earlier drafts explicitly explains what Yoda meant in Empire as referring to Anakin.
For those interested in this sort of behind-the-scenes stuff, I highly recommend reading Tom Simon’s online essay, “Creative Discomfort and Star Wars”. In essence, his thesis is that the first two movies were great because Lucas and his team took the time and effort to make sure the story was right, drafting and redrafting scripts and waiting for the best ideas to come along. ROTJ is when the series began to sour because of lazy, snap decision-making, and a desire to rush products onto the market as fast as possible without worrying about whether or not the story made any darned sense; it only went downhill from there.
Sorry, I got part way through that and realised it was the typical greasy bullshit, much like this video. And then it just deteriorated into sneery opinion. I feel bad for you if you found it convincing.
@@rumblehat4357No, revenge aligns more with the Sith, and the Jedi did return in the 6th movie through Luke (and Vader returning to the light, as well). Actually makes more sense how it is
No, that would’ve been a horrible idea. Jedi don’t take revenge because it is associated with the dark side, and the Sith were already established and recognized as having returned since Episode 1.
Holy shit, I was 6 at the time watching either Star Wars or Empire Strikes back in 1982/early 1983 and do remember those posters saying Revenge of the Jedi. Thanks for bringing up a good memory from a long long time ago!
Oh no…Empire Strikes Back went over budget! Oh no we managed to make the greatest fantasy film of all time until The Fellowship of the Ring!!! Oh no the film made 10x its budget back in its initial run!!!!!!* I see only one solution…fire that hack Gary Kurtz!!!!!!!!!!! /s It will always baffle me. I could see firing Kurtz if The Empire Strikes Back bombed, but firing him would be like firing Kevin Feige after The Avengers. I believe George Lucas always disliked anyone that pushed back, and Kurtz was the artist voice that kept the negative economic voice of Lucas at bay. As much as I love Return of the Jedi as an action adventure film, it is not the grand finale that a Return of the King or even War for the Planet of the Apes is for their respective franchises, and I believe it’s because they cheaped out with the filmmaking and characters and emotions and originality. Why not make the film a three hour epic? The film could cost $100 million, and it would still be profitable (that budget would be excessive, but you get my point). Pay the fines to get Steven Spielberg or Ridley Scott. Go for broke with the third Star Wars. There was never a more sure fire hit in the history of cinema to that point. On the plus side, at least Kurtz made The Dark Crystal and Return to Oz before hitting financial ruin with Slipstream. It’s unfortunate that an artist like Kurtz never bounced back, but hey, money isn’t everything. Kurtz is still the man in my book! *The budget was $30.5 million. The data is a little fuzzy for the initial box office, the domestic box office was around $200 million, so I am being conservative and saying the international was around $100 million.
@@korakys50 years after the death of the creator. No reason why Paul McCartney should lose copyright over his Beatles and Wings songs just because 50 years have passed.
In my youth I worked in a toy shop and was invited to a trade show where details , and toys, of the next Star Wars film were released. Told all my mates about the what I had seen. Was horrified when it came out as Return and not Revenge. Also horrified that I had not stolen one of the posters that were all over the place. Would be worth a pretty penny today!!
Every official publication and source from 1976 (yes 76) till 1983, had Luke Skywalker described as 20 years old, and Princess Leia as 16 years of age. You can imagine my surprise when in 1983 at The Esquire Theater, I learned that Leia was Luke's twin sister. 🧐
This video is missing a VERY important part of the film. Only a line connected Luke's sister to the force? Leia was shown to be Force sensitive in Empire that's how Luke was able to reach out to here using only his mind.
@@thinkhector Fair point. Though at the time ESB was released, most folks I knew would have guessed that it was just because Luke was getting so strong with the force at this point.
@@thinkhector The idea that Leia herself has some connection to the force (is she the other one Yoda mentions?) . Completely abandoned as far as driving any development in Leia's character. When you stop and think about the Leia who was rescued from the Death Star, the Princess Leia who was three steps ahead of everyone else, who could look Vader and Tarkin in the eye and tell them where they could get off, resist the mind probe, and dismiss her own rescuers as a bunch of amateurs, it is tragic what she became by the time of ROTJ, reduced to prancing around in her slave outfit, sharing an Oreo with an Ewok, playing the straight man to Solo's clown, put in a series of ridiculous situations that had nothing to do with her as - supposedly - a princess (not elected) of a people who had lost their homeland and leader of a rebellion on the ropes. So many interesting story lines that could have been developed for her in ROTJ! Starting with her relationship with the Force.
I've heard a lot of these tidbits, if not the reasons behind them, like the difficulty of finding 7 foot actors. Never heard about a mystery sister or the death star battle originally being the ending for Return of the Jedi. I'm very curious about what that trilogy would look like. There is a lot of revisionist history coming from Lucas' camp over the years. I feel like so much of Star Wars was Lucas flying by the seat of his pants, and a lot of the things people point to as being part of his master plan all along were almost accidental. One of my favorite stories is how Lucas gave a green light to kill Vader to an author writing an early Star Wars novel.
George Lucas' greatest work is his own mythology, but anybody who's really followed what he does knows you're right about him flying by the seat of his pants and pretending to have ultimate control (then when he DID have ultimate control, he made tepid movies and then sold the franchise). He has crafted the narrative of himself being a mastermind with the implication that 'without me there wouldn't have been any advances in special effects or fun sci-fi movies'. He distracts from his real inspirations to avoid copyright infringement and to pretend he's got higher-art motives for everything. The whole 'Joseph Campbell' thing, he didn't know anything about that until AFTER he started making movies. It wasn't an inspiration to him, it was an observation about his work by somebody else.
That's always been Star Wars in a nutshell. Especially when you go back to interviews and materials from of the time that the original trilogy was being made or even before that time. Lucas has always given conflicting information and the crew members and actors on the films even give different information than what Lucas would say. It seems like he wrote a shit ton of lore, but was constantly always trying to figure out how to make sense of it while telling a story. It's always wild to me when people these days talk about George like he had this all masterfully planned out when in reality the original Star Wars was a huge gamble that just so happened to pay off for him big time. He had to keep the ball rolling when the success came.
@@jamescarter3196 Looks like it is that, pretty much. I was a teenager when the first movie came out, and while I live in Europe we could get at least some of the American and UK magazines specializing in things like science fiction and movies here, and I remember reading a few interviews before the last movie which rather gushed about the role of Marcia Lucas when it came to the creation of those movies, but then after the divorce it looked like her part had been completely memory holed for years. And how Lucas made Star Wars because he could not get the rights to make Flash Gordon, which is what he had originally wanted to make. No mention of Campbell, as far as I remember, until years later. And a lot of conflicting information, like the fact that after the success of the first movie Lucas seemed determined to make a 9 movie series but then it was just 6, and then he decided for a while that 3 was enough. I never kept any of those magazines I used to buy, something I have later regretted, might be fun to now compare what was in those articles to what got told later. I haven't been able to find much online, but then I don't really even remember what I read where, or what the names of the more obscure or shorter lived magazines were. Lucas's impression of himself probably wasn't much helped by the more adoring part of Star Wars fandom, there still seem to be a lot who are about ready to attack anything that might implicate that he actually had help from others (maybe especially that ex-wife - whose potential importance I do find quite plausible simply based on the fact that he made pretty damn good movies while they were together, but the quality of what he has made after that, especially when he was fully in charge, with the prequels, is nowhere close to those) creating those movies. No, to those fans he is the genius, the ultimate genius, maybe even better than somebody like Shakespeare...
George wasn't in the best ways going into this one with his divorce looming ahead, money management being foremost on his mind, and trying to keep this massive Star Wars empire moving forward. He was put through the wringer since the start of production on the 1977 film, so, I could see him being not as enthusiastic and passionate about wrapping up the trilogy with the strongest story possible. Getting it done on budget and on schedule was all that mattered, regardless of how good it really was. DP Alan Hume was a solid and reliable cinematographer, but ROTJ doesn't have that cinematic panache of The Empire Strikes Back. Also, with Marquand passing away a few years after the film's release, we never really got to hear of his experiences first hand.
You can hear from Anthony Daniels, Howard Kazanjian and Marcia Lucas criticising Marquand in the Icons Unearthed documentary. Buying into the Kurtz myth that Lucas compromised the story for toy sales is lazy and naive, but people who the saga to be something different as quite keen to believe anything that validates their opinion. It's what makes people so gullible. Easy for Kurtz and Kasdan to criticise what already exists, but much harder to actually conceive of something as influential or with as much scope as Lucas did, which neither man ever did in their careers.
@@Ruylopez778 All that being said, ROTJ still has the feeling of having been hijacked by a different story, not to mention a different sensibility, than what characterized the first two films. For better or worse, it singularly changed the flavor of Star Wars from what it was before, and set the path for everything to follow. In my opinion, it was not for the better.
Well said Barefoot. And I agree with most of what you said, however, I am of the viewpoint that ROTS was a excellent film and followed in the traditional of New Hope and Empire. Although, the thing that kind of threw me on ROTS was how young Anakin turned out to be because I was under the impression from Ep 4, 5, & 6, that Anakin was a bit older. Especially after casting a 78 year old actor to portray him unmasked in ROTJ.
@@BarefootPeasant It really doesn't no matter how often people exaggerate about it. Subjectively disliking elements of ROTJ or the prequels doesn't mean that the story was 'compromised' as claimed by Kurtz. Kurtz was quite happy to be cavalier with the budget of ESB, knowing that, 'the movie would turn a profit anyway'. Of course, it wasn't his reputation, home, business or employees that would suffer if the shoot collapsed before it even got finished. Now, he claims that giving the director time was necessary to make the movie, but that certainly isn't the way other people on set tell it. And if his 'no rush' approach was so great, why did Kershner turn down the chance to make another movie? Because it was too much for him, much like Lucas felt on ANH. Had they both had a better producer, that got shit done and kept the crew and creatives on good terms, would they have both had better experiences as directors? Probably. But each Star Wars movie made under Lucas (as producer or director and uncredited editor/writer) was hugely ambitious both on a technical level and in terms of scale and depth on screen. To claim otherwise is ignorant - but most likely based on a narrative that that person wants to buy into to - 'I don't want it to be like this, so it should **should have been** what I wanted'. And this has nothing to do with making art or movies, and is purely about entitlement and expectation. And of course, Kurtz wanted to save face by claiming that his ideas and his vision were somehow more sophisticated and character/story focused, which is 'why' he got fired - although does he ever admit he got fired? Kazanjian and Marcia are pretty clear that he did. Although it happened in a very awkward way, because Lucas didn't want to tell him outright, but certainly didn't want him ruining his trilogy or company. The accusation in this video and its previous iteration is that Lucas was a 'businessman' and more concerned with profits than story. 1. this can't be proved, it can only be speculation, based on Kurtz's narrative, and by making further unsubstantiated claims that "prove" this narrative. 2. given that THX flopped commercially and put American Zoetrope in trouble, it's not particularly surprising that Lucas wanted to avoid this. The video, tries to imply that Kurtz is claiming that Lucas tried to be cheap on ESB. However, AFTER Kurtz was fired, and Lucas and Kazanjian did their best to save the production and the movie overall, and after it was released in theaters, Lucas made some small changes to ending, to make it clearer for audiences. So the idea that Lucas has a 'that'll do' approach to Star Wars is simply a reductive claim. Lucas doesn't want to waste time and money on things that don't matter. There is a difference, unless trying to construct a bullshit narrative by misrepresenting the past. Each of Lucas' 6 movies is intentionally different. The accusation that ROTJ 'changed' what came before it, is both an exaggeration and entirely subjective. It was Lucas' decision to make the second movie more character focused and murky - since he wrote both the treatment for Brackett, and rewrote her first draft (that he didn't like) and a further two or three drafts after that. Kasdan was brought in to polish what already existed, and Lucas, Kershner, Kurtz and Kasdan were all part of the story consultation group. You can see photos of how Carrie Fisher rewrote her dialogue, and we know Han improvised his 'I know' out of frustration. And by all accounts it was not a particularly happy set under Kershner and Kurtz. Reportedly Kurtz was scared to say anything to Kershner. But that doesn't stop fans from claiming 'Empire is so much better because Lucas wasn't involved' and 'It was written by Brackett and Kasdan' being the reason for the 'jump in quality'. Lucas was also an uncredited editor as on ANH - confirmed by Paul Hirsch, who was there. Now, ANH and ESB are very different, despite having Lucas as writer/co-writer, co-editor, producer, Hirsch returning as co-editor, Marcia as co-editor, not to mention Kurtz and all the crew and actors that were carried over. So it's fairly easy to conclude that continuity isn't the defining factor in 'what characterized' ANH or ESB. All people are doing is jumping to the conclusion they want to believe, based on which perspective they want to believe, exaggerating, and ignoring anything that contradicts their narrative. People like JJ Abrams feel that 1980 was the pinnacle of Star Wars and the first two should be revered and frozen in time, and Star Wars shouldn't be anything other than those two movies. And when he rehashed it, with all his talk of 'practical effects and sets', and killed off Han, the fans who hate ewoks still weren't happy. And when Rian made Luke disillusioned and gave him his 'bittersweet end', the fans still weren't happy. And neither Marcia Lucas, Howard Kazanjian or Paul Hirsch liked what happened to Han and Luke in the sequels. So I guess we could safely presume that none of them would have been in favour of killing them off in ROTJ, or ending with TLJ's downbeat deconstructionism. The video, like Kurtz, tries to downplay the plot and climax of ROTJ as being derivative or lazy (while apparently failing to understand the psychology or symbolism of it). And what of the mastermind Kurtz and his great ideas...? Dark Crystal? What did he ever make without the 'focus on toys' from Lucas holding him back..?
Odd, I thought Leia was already planned to be Luke's sister (the other) in ESB because at the end when her sensitivity to the Force leads her to find Luke when he's hanging on for life in Cloud City after losing to Vader?
@@Ruylopez778 - I don't think it's out of order to say that the success of Star Wars, from the very beginning, was due to a most fortuitous line up of contributors, including Gary Kurtz, John Dykstra, Stewart Freeborn, Ben Burtt, Ralph McQuarrie, John Williams and many, many more. Lucas assembled quite a team of talent. Just as you have added many comments under this video recommending against criticising Lucas without considering the full story, that latitude should be granted to all the contributors.
@@RictusHolloweye "I don't think it's out of order to say that the success of Star Wars, from the very beginning, was due to a most fortuitous line up of contributors" And Lucas has never denied that he had a great team of people to help achieve his vision. John Barry (set designer) is one who is often forgotten, but regularly credited by Lucas. However, there exists a contingent of fans that not only exaggerate in order to complain, but also (through ignorance or intent) either downplay Lucas' contribution or make up accusations and narratives about how/why decisions were made that they can't prove. I can only presume they do this to make their subjective opinion have more validity. A classic example being the people claiming the uptick in quality in ESB is down to 'Lucas not being involved' and it being 'written by Brackett and Kasdan'. In their own ignorance, they apparently think they have 'proved' something. It shows how easily people chose to believe whatever they want. "that latitude should be granted to all the contributors" So when Anthony Daniels, Howard Kazanjian and Marcia Lucas don't say anything positive about Kurtz, in a documentary that is intentionally implying that Lucas was overwhelmed and needed more push back, what should we conclude? Kurtz spend a lot of effort making accusations about Lucas, which I can only presume was to try and save face for being fired. Perhaps if he hadn't been so blasé about burning through Lucas' *own money* while making ESB, and it hadn't nearly been a complete disaster (again) we might have seen episode VII, VIII and IX made in the 80s/90s? Perhaps Lucas' marriage might not have fallen apart. Certainly recent history has shown us that making Star Wars without Lucas (as many disgruntled fans wanted) is just as divisive, and killing off Han, and deconstructing Luke with 'bittersweet' ending is equally divisive. As you're probably read me say elsewhere, retrospectively ESB gets to have its cake and eat it, because fans know how the story ends, but get a cliff hanger at the same time. The implication by people determined to exaggerate or insult Lucas for not doing exactly what they wanted, is that Kurtz's own opinion on what it 'should have been' was automatically going to be better. Han got killed off in TFA, sacrificing himself for the rebels, just as so many apparently wanted. Was the actual reality as good as the idea of doing it? I'd say opinion is very split on that. When someone like Bowie says, 'don't play to the crowd' i.e. make your own art your way, he is lauded as someone with high integrity. When Lucas makes his movies the way he wants them, he is accused of being a greedy egotist, who compromises story for profit. Can't see the double standard there? People are free to criticise Lucas for what they don't want or don't like. Creating accusations about his motives in order to downplay his involvement or contribution is both disingenuous and pathetic. But it will continue, as long as sneery fans believe they understand 'writing' because they can nitpick or watch others exaggerate and nitpick things that don't matter, or otherwise misrepresent Lucas.
@@Ruylopez778 George's ex wife didn't like him, and nor did Anthony 'This is my sole acting gig' Daniels. That's not evidence, from these two, that is their opinion.
Great video. I would only like to point out that the reason why Empire went over budget and over schedule wasn't mismanagement on Kurtz's side. It was because he gave Kershnerr free rein during production to take his time and make the best movie possible-which ultimately happened. Kershnerr was a very, very, very slow and meticulous director. He liked to work with the actors and take his time bringing the best performances out of them. And it shows. Lucas was understandably mad about it, but I think Kurtz rationalization behind his decisions was more on point: Empire was going to make a ton of money either way. The risk was minimum and they could afford to make the best movie possible. As it turns out, Empire is still the best Star Wars film around. History ended up proving him right. And it's not that he was a bad producer in any way. Star Wars (the first one) was finished in time thanks to his management of the ILM chaos that was happening back in L.A. while they were shooting the movie in England. George was famously not a people's person, so Kurtz stepped in and course-corrected ILM's efforts in order to finish the special effects mostly on schedule. He did have some disagreements with Lucas from the very beginning, because he was the man who used to tell him "no." Those disagreements got worse during production on Empire, and by the time they were starting to make Jedi, Lucas simply wanted to go in a different direction. A direction more influenced by the money and the toys, and less by the creative side of filmmaking. Was he wrong? I think so. He was also under a lot of stress with his marriage falling apart and becoming a multi-millionaire overnight. He also learned the wrong lesson from making Raiders of the Lost Ark. He thought audiences didn't care about production value, or complex characters, or a complex story. They just wanted entertainment. So that's what Jedi became in the end: entertainment. Is it a bad film? I don't think so. Not the third act, anyway. It's not a strong movie. It's repetitive, sometimes boring, the first act leads nowhere, the stakes were dropped when introducing the Teddy bears, Leia's twist looked like a watered down version of Vader's twist in Empire... and so on. Take away Luke's confrontation of Vader and the Emperor, and the impressive final Rebel attack, and what you get is an uninspired film that shies away from true, compelling storytelling. It could've been so much better. It could've been even great. It could've been the perfect ending for a beloved film trilogy. But it could've been so much worse, too. I mean... have you seen the Special Editions?
I accept what you are saying, but one of the primary responsibilities of a producer is to keep the move on schedule and budget (as much as possible). Lucas delegated a great deal to Kurtz on 'TESB' and supervised the ILM work & editing. You have to remember that Lucas entirely financed the budget (US$ 20 million). The production over-run forced Lucas to take out an additional US$ 10 million approx in bank loans, which potentially jeopardised Lucasfilm's viability/longer term goals. So there was a great deal at stake in case the first SW film had just been a fluke/a happy coincidence of timing when released. I regret many of the key decisions on 'ROTJ', but from Lucas' own p.o.v. it was far more understandable to both keep a tight reign on production and to wrap up a film series that had cost him a lot personally.
I never had a problem with the Jabba sequence. After all, his name was plugged into the first two movies - I really wanted to see this infamous Jabba. Could 10 -15 minutes have been trimmed off the first act??? Probably so... this lends to my biggest complaint with Jedi is pacing issues. The main culprit is the middle act. For the swan song of the trilogy and everything needs closure, this movie drags in parts. The whole beginning of the Endor sequence till the intro of the Ewoks is soooo slow. Even as a 11 yr old seeing this in the theatre multiple times at this point; this area of the movie was the time for a bathroom break or grabbing more food at the lobby.
The Death Star situation reminds me of the 'Superman turns back time' scene that was supposed to be in Superman II, and then was shifted to Superman I when they needed a good climax.
I hate how people (George Lucas included, and in particular) will say things like, "Oh this was part of what was originally written" or, "This was always planned." No, no it wasn't. Leia was never the sister, Vader wasn't supposed to be Luke's father, and Vader's children weren't supposed to be born without him seeing them, or even knowing of their existence, for twenty years! These might have been thoughts in George's head, or part of the broadest of broad strokes, but there is no way that he had all these bad ideas planned out, beat for beat 5, 10, 20 years in advance! I'm sorry, but the Lucas defenders just kill me sometimes. The man had a few good ideas, but A New Hope was saved in the editing room, Empire was amazing because of Kershner, and then the next 4 films were very week because it was all Lucas with everyone too timid to tell him no, and Lucas too arrogant to be open to brainstorming and input from others. All that being said, I absolutely LOVE Star Wars, especially the original EU (Legacy now, I suppose) especially the novels that REALLY showcased what that Universe could be!
I hate that, too. It's perfectly okay to admit that the story developed/evolved. It happens with characters in books as they are being written. Ask JK Rowling - she envisioned different endings for her characters, but they went other directions.
The final irony is that the sequels are so bad in part because of too much brainstorming and all input considered equal and rolled together by committee. It's a lesson in how to create greatness; there has to be one creative visionary who encourages dissent, incorporates the input, but ultimately makes the final creative decisions with all input carefully considered. Skew in either direction from that balance and you get mediocrity, or worse.
I remember being 10 years old and being blown away by how good Empire was…Instead Of walking out of the theater, I think I must have floated….Then I remember being 13 years old and seeing ROTJ and liking it all right but also feeling let down….
I was 19 when RotJ came out and my friends and I straight up hated it. It failed to honor the offers raised in Empire, which we were very invested in and had talked about and anticipated for 3 years. So many things were just ignored or thrown out, and Yoda just dies from complications of movie disease. "Help them you can, but you will destroy all for which they have fought and suffered", he said, but there literally were no consequences for Luke's actions. Han's brain turned into mush, rendering him a complete idiot, and we got to see the terrible Ewoks and their equally disastrous costumes. Luke stands around for over a half an hour in scenes with Palpatine in which NOTHING HAPPENS. RotJ just plain sucks and it set the table for the even worse prequel trilogy.
@@BrBill Totally agree buddy, Jedi felt like a prototype for the disastrous prequels ...for me it felt (and looked) like a sickeningly safe, corny Disney film - what a monumental disappointment after the epic, classy, beautifully-shot, mature Empire Strikes Back.
Love these vids, you should look into the history of WB doing a Batman Beyond movie. They were working on one 20 years ago before they went with Nolan instead, and then ofc there was apparently a Michael Keaton one in development that was cancelled when Gunn took over for DC
Of course, one of the original reasons for Star Wars was Lucas wanted to make an upbeat, triumphant movie, which was a counterpoint to a lot of movies made at the time. Keeping Han Solo alive is consistent with Lucas's original version.
Yep. Personally, having watched this, I'm very happy we got the version of RotJ that we got. The second death Star is a bit weird but I think I actually prefer every other change Lucas made ha ha.
@@Ruylopez778 It's really weird how you've got this giant chip on your shoulder about this subject, like you're afraid poor little George Lucas isn't getting enough credit for things already. You're not sharing any facts, just a bunch of 'me no like Gary Kurtz' bs and it's pretty whiny. It's clear you don't have a damn clue what producers do since you're trying so hard to pretend like he had no meaningful involvement with ESB.
I always thought the Jabba sequence was too detached from the rest of the movie, a story arc that needed to be resolved and then quickly forgotten about… I’d have liked Boba Fett to have survived the battle at the Pit of Carkoon and followed our heroes to Endor, relatives of Jabba having now increased the bounty on their heads… Fett in Endor would feel like a Star Wars take on Predator
For anyone who has fought in a war, you quickly learn not to underestimate your enemy regardless of how much you overpower them. I believe the Ewoks aren’t laughable. When I was in war, our unit truly underestimated the enemy because they were just a bunch civilians with nothing but the will to fight. That will to fight is a strong force. In the end they did do some damage. But all that matters is the final outcome. You don’t win a war by tallying all of the points and how many battles you won. That’s called a video game. You win when the other side concedes defeat. And many times in history that’s just the stronger military unable to continue the fight financially and so they concede defeat.
@@cvz8849 well the movies are just that…movies. I could write a thesis pointing out all of the flaws in the tactics used on the army side. No idea about naval doctrine, but I’m sure they screwed that up too. I mean look at the Jedi when fighting, who would let the enemy have a clear shot of their back? It’s all just art and not reality. *But* the point that George was making in this film, you can find an interview of him explaining this, was just his interpretation of the US in Vietnam. And it truly is a lesson that needs to be reiterated a lot.
Yes you can find Lucas explaining Vietnam in the documentary "From Star Wars to Jedi". To your point about Jedi's not covering their backs is true. Maybe they were just poorly trained or over-stressed thus a lack of concentration on the battlefield. Could you have won against those peski EwoKs, my guess...no. You're in "their" environment. @@pqsk
My problem wasnt that rhe Ewoks were small, cute and primitive, it's that they were played mostly for jokes, even during battle scenes. The one who twirls the bolo and wraps it around his head. The two trying to pilot the AT-ST while Chewie (who had just done a Tarzan yell while swinging from a vine) barks orders at them. The one who steals a speeder bike and cant get his feet on the pedals. If they had taken them seriously during the battle it would have really enphasized how the Empire had underestimated them. Instead I was just left, as an 11-yr old, with my suspension of disbelief stretched past the breaking point. The only scene that tried to drive the seriousness home was when one Ewok is killed and the other tries to wake it up, realizes his friend is dead, and sits down beside him, saddened.
You could tell adolescent me that and I'd throw a tantrum. But I go back to ESB as an adult, understand the themes, the repercussions, etc. As a kid, it was my least-favorite because there's slower, melancholy beats like the Millennium Falcon hiding from Imperial forces, or Luke's training. Other parts made me sad. It's arguably the darkest movie out of the 1 through 6 movies, and as me who just wanted swing swing lightsaber and vroom vrooom Xwing, I just didn't watch it as much. So FF to adult me, a maturer, critical and dynamic thinker. Yup, ESB is hands-down the best SW.
Return of the Jedi was our favorite as kids. Ewoks were cute and we loved that Ewok Movie with the green giant and light sprite. As a teen it became Empire Strikes Back because of the romance and romantic music.
I like Empire but I think it's just the critics favorite. Star Wars and Return had better elements but the surprise of Vader's identity and Han's capture just turns people into critics too. The prequel trilogy also were incredible and finally getting the love they deserve. Star Wars ends with the Lucas films. Nothing else matters to me although Rogue One and Mandalorian seasons 1&2 gets some love.
Let’s not forget some of the directors that Lucas wanted for this one were: Paul Verhoeven, David Cronenberg, and David Lynch. Any choice would have been very interesting.
You say that, but in the end, Lucas backseat directed the two episodes formally directed by other people anyway. He didn't need a creative voice, he needed a reliable employee who could be trusted to bring his vision to life while he's busy elsewhere.
@@thecandlemaker1329 You give too much credit to lucas. Star Wars was just a side project to him, he was very surprised it became so big. He never had a Star Wars vision. And the last thing lucas needed is an other yes men.
@@Zodroo_Tint Where did you read this disingenuous slander? Lucas has been trying and failing to make the movie for eight years. He was writing for eight hours, five days a week. The movie is assembled from every element he liked in world cinema, it's his ultimate auteur project. And all of that for a bunch of dumb nerds to slander him forty years later. Disgraceful.
@@karlwithak. I think American Graffiti is pretty good. Had Lucas made more those kind of films he might have been known for more than just "the Star Wars tycoon". Then again he sort of tried making "other films" and we got crud like "Howard the Duck" (which Lucas produced and pinned his hopes on).
Leia did not have to be Luke's sister - that was the moment that Star Wars became a little too soap opera. In my mind the obvious answer to Yoda saying "No, there is another." is pretty obvious because that's exactly how it turned out: Anakin Skywalker was the other hope.
To OP. "No, there is another." is pretty obvious because that's exactly how it turned out: Anakin Skywalker was the other hope." Really? That's a really hard sell when both Obi-Wan and Yoda believe Anakin/Darth Vader is beyond saving and both tell Luke that Anakin is long gone and that he's more machine than man now. Luke is the only one who actually believes there is still good in Vader, and Vader himself dismisses this several times during their talks and their final fight. The emperor himself beliefs Anakin is forever doomed to serve him. Yoda even gives Luke a warning not to underestimate the powers of the emperor or he will suffer his father's fate. Fate is final. There is no going back. This too clearly says Anakin/Vader is doomed and was turned into the dark side by the emperor. Leia being Luke's sister is clunky and obviously shoehorned in but it works. Leia is a force for good and has been ardent supporter of the rebellion since before the original film. Betting your hopes on the most evil man in the galaxy, the man who hunted down and killed all the remaining jedi and is the emperor's obedient servant/slave? Great idea...
@@McLarenMercedes I was mainly speaking from the perspective of The Empire Strikes Back, before Jedi was even written. Lucas had toyed with the idea of a sibling relationship in early drafts of a new hope but I think it's pretty obvious that he had sidelined the idea until the last second (maybe at the recommendation of someone else?). In fact I believe there are interviews where "the other" was discussed and multiple options were explored. Don't get me wrong, I love Leia, but by the time of the prequels good Lord everybody in the galaxy is related to this one family. ALABAMA... IN... SPACE!!!!
@@Bulletsandblockbusters You worded things differently and added more details, but the bias is mostly still there, it's just slightly more implied than before.
Firstly it was never stated to be 19 years when the originals were made, secondly the death star was barely built and had millennium falcon sized holes in it, thirdly they'd done it before so knew what they were doing
I saw an interview (possibly with Lucas if memory serves me correctly) that the reason they did Ewoks was because the Wookie suits are hand stitched with every hair being inserted by hand - they only made about 16 Wookie suits for Episode 3 and CGI's the rest based off those real 16 suits - that was simply not possible in the early 80's and would not have been cost effective in time or materials to make about 100 of them. They could have found that many tall men but the suits would have been the problem. However, yes the Ewoks would be more appealing to young kids and as I recall the Ewok figurines were the same price as the full size figurines so that's pretty cost effective as well. I don't recall any of my peers where were about 12 wanting Ewok figurines - we all wanted Jabba, the Rancor, the sand skiff and Jabba's henchmen, as well as Han in carbonite.
I completely agree. I was also 12 and the excitement was all about the forest speeders, the Falcon as always, Jabba, the Rancor, the Emperor etc. I even remember wanting a 2-legged AT and Admiral Ackbar figure. The Ewoks were a disappointment even at that age; it was obvious they didn't spend much effort on the costumes.
The line from Yoda about their “being another” still works even if Leia is not Luke’s sister. I’ve always thought it actually referred to Anakin Skywalker and the chosen one prophecy
George didn’t invent the chosen one concept until he did the phantom menace. Jedi was more about Anakin’s redemption, the son saving the father and the father saving the son. He wanted a Christian mythical ending. Evil destroys itself. Nothing against the prophecy idea. I kinda liked it. But so many fans upset about palpatine coming back is a waste of hot air. Lucas was gonna change it with the Disney treatments anyway.
That's what prequel hate is all about, though; the problem isn't whether it 'works', it's whether it's satisfying, which SW isn't for many with alternative universes in their heads. However much you love them.
We will never know how the trilogy would have concluded, since Kurtz, the creator of Force, was let go. Kirschner did not return either. As a result Return of the Jedi doesn’t feel like a third installment but a quick and dirty wrap up.
I feel the opening of Return of the Jedi was successful, but I would make some changes to the rest of the film. I would change the plot from there to have Han and Leia follow a lead from Jabba’s Palace to Coruscant (kind of a WW2 French spy thriller vibe), and Han, Chewbacca, and Leia discover a method to use Spice routes to smuggle rebel troops past the Imperial fleet to storm the Imperial Palace. Blade Runner was released in 1982 so the effects were possible for Coruscant. Luke is now a symbol of hope for the galaxy, meaning he will bring the return of the jedi order and peace to the galaxy. The rebel troops inspire the Coruscantians to rise up (maybe there are Wookies that were inspired by Chewbacca, which helps turn the tide). Lando and a new character (maybe someone that infiltrated Jabba’s Palace with him so they have a rapport) would follow a similar path to the actual movie leading the space attack against the Imperial fleet, but the attack on the fleet is a smoke screen to distract the actual goal of sneaking in the ground troops to the surface; Lando could have subplot about convincing the rebel fleet on a suicide mission that functions as a distraction. Luke would similarly follow a similar path to the actual movie, but I would have had Luke be training Leia in the Force between movies (it’s clear in Empire Strikes Back that she can use The Force so why not have that training occur off screen or in an early scene…maybe Leia uses the Force during the Jabba mission). I would also not make Leia and Luke related; the scene where Luke snaps when Vader says “If you will not turn, maybe she will…” still works, especially if Leia is on the planet at the time. Luke would still confront the Emperor, but it would occur at the Imperial Palace. There would be additional tension because Luke falling to the Emperor’s side would snuff out the new hope that he has provided to the people of the galaxy. The rebels are successful with taking the palace and there is a celebration to the end of the civil war. Maybe Han dies so Harrison Ford can have his dream fulfilled. The end. Regarding Gary Kurtz… Oh no…Empire Strikes Back went over budget! Oh no we managed to make the greatest fantasy film of all time until The Fellowship of the Ring!!! Oh no the film made 10x its budget back in its initial run!!!!!!* I see only one solution…fire that hack Gary Kurtz!!!!!!!!!!! /s It will always baffle me. I could see firing Kurtz if The Empire Strikes Back bombed, but firing him would be like firing Kevin Feige after The Avengers. I believe George Lucas always disliked anyone that pushed back, and Kurtz was the artist voice that kept the negative economic voice of Lucas at bay. As much as I love Return of the Jedi as an action adventure film, it is not the grand finale that a Return of the King or even War for the Planet of the Apes is for their respective franchises, and I believe it’s because they cheaped out with the filmmaking and characters and emotions and originality. Why not make the film a three hour epic? The film could cost $100 million, and it would still be profitable (that budget would be excessive, but you get my point). Pay the fines to get Steven Spielberg or Ridley Scott. Go for broke with the third Star Wars. There was never a more sure fire hit in the history of cinema to that point. On the plus side, at least Kurtz made The Dark Crystal and Return to Oz before hitting financial ruin with Slipstream. It’s unfortunate that an artist like Kurtz never bounced back, but hey, money isn’t everything. Kurtz is still the man in my book! *The budget was $30.5 million. The data is a little fuzzy for the initial box office, the domestic box office was around $200 million, so I am being conservative and saying the international was around $100 million.
My first memory of feeling critical about a film was over Return Of The Jedi in 1983, aged 11. The first 2 films were such a big deal to me that even though I enjoyed Jedi and still do, I was disappointed the plot was just destroying another Death Star and even more disappointed that my childhood hero Han Solo had so little to do and looked bored. God knows what I would have made of The Last Jedi. ;)
@@ArcanumAscent - Seriously..... You don't think the whole rescue effort wouldn't have healed old 'wounds' (they both saved each other's lives in the process); nor that they had a reconciliatory chat on their way back to rebel HQ in the Falcon? (Having some big on-screen dialogue would have been entirely un-necessary). It's not that deep; fella.
That's so true. You would think Han would have knocked Lando down and out on his butt for what he did to him, "a deep sleep of nothing" in carbonite. But i'm dreaming,... Georgie Lucas would never do that in a kids movie, thus a very bored Harrison hoping he would die in SW#6 then comes out of retirement in SW#7 35+ years later still bored not doing much on screen and get his wish fulfilled.@@ArcanumAscent
I stood in line for three hours when I was 7 to see this movie when it was released, and I loved it and that was one incredibly memorable day for a 7 year old kid.
When Star Wars came out in 1977 , on its first Saturday night, me and my brother arrived at theater at 7;00 PM for the 8;00 PM show and had to wait on the line for the 10:00 PM show, We were on line for the better part of three hours
From everything I have ever seen and heard about the films creation, The overriding impression I get of Lucas is that he is a horrible control freak. Employing someone to do a job for you and then breathing down their neck the whole time is a nasty trait at any level. Imagine being hired to plumb someone's house, who used to be a plumber and them telling you that you've done it all wrong constantly!
It's interesting to consider that IV-VI were such a mess behind the scenes but they still seem to stand up better than the latest films, despite obvious missteps. Not sure whether that's the effect of expectation, nostalgia, dumb luck or what.
Episodes IV-VI have something neither the prequel nor the sequel trilogy has: *Characters you can relate to* Luke is the down on his luck, good-hearted guy who is stuck in a life where he is going nowhere, but then suddenly ends up in the adventure of his life. Han is a wise-cracking, disillusioned space-pirate who knows his only skill is being a great smuggler and a pilot. He's in the adventure for money and since he owes Jabba a debt. Leia is spunky, young woman who occasionally let's her aristocratic, high life personality come through to the annoyance of others. Obi-Wan is the old sage who introduces Luke (and the audience) to an ancient art and knows he must sacrifice himself to let the others escape and live. The prequels have: Padme: Who in the first movie is just dull and devoid of both headstrong character or wisdom beyond her years which should be expected if she's a queen of a planet. She later falls for Anakin for seemingly arbitrary reasons and accepts him in little time despite his obvious inner struggles and flaws. Anakin: Who is too perfect as a kid, being too kind, too friendly and can fix or build anything. As an adult he wants more power but doesn't himself know why. In Revenge of the Sith he sounds like a brainwashed cult-member who doesn't understand how foolish and silly he sounds. Real power-hungry people are cunning and can sway a lot of people to follow them. Obi-Wan: A hothead who loses his composure and temper and rushes into fights by exposing himself. How is that character the same, level-headed sage we saw in the original films? Qui-Gon: He wants to defy the Jedi council because...?? Who knows. Jar-Jar: Supposedly the comical character but just comes across as hopelessly clumsy and annoying. The sequels have: Slightly better and more relatable characters than the prequels. However they all run out of steam in the second film already. At least Poe Dameron shows both bouts of humor and genuine disappointment and anger when he learns the rebel commander has no plan (or so he believed). Rey already knows the ways of the force and can defeat Kylo Ren at the end of the first film. If you don't relate to the characters or at least understand their motivations then you don't care about them. Characters whose choices and actions seem arbitrary and exist without any believable traits just feel artificial and alien.
Four reasons the OG trilogy worked: 1) amazing practical effects 2) great characters including Harrison Ford 3) clear fight between good and evil. Obi-Wan Kenobi acting almost like Jesus. 4) John Williams ground breaking soundtrack based on Holst's planets. Future generations may even think John Williams' work eclipses the films.
@@McLarenMercedes Did you seriously say the prequels have unrelatable characters? Did you also claim that the characters in the sequels are more RELATABLE!? How ignorant are you? When the heck was Obi-Wan EVER a hothead!? If anything, he has always been incredibly cautious in every movie. His fighting still is DEFENSIVE, hotheads don't rush to people to attack defensively. Obi-Wan has never shown a moment of anger nor did he ever lose his temper. He tries to stay composed and even at the death if his master, he didn't show any rage. Did you even watch the movies? Do you even know who Obi-Wan was? Anakin Skywalker was a SLAVE who tried to be optimistic as a child and dreamt of being a jedi. Once he became a Jedi, he wanted to become stronger to protect the ones he loved. His mother dying traumatized him and he started developing feelings for Padme but was told that he coulnd't pursue it because it goes against the jedi order. Anakin also NEVER wanted to rule the galaxy, he only wanted enough power to save the ones he loved. He's not power hungry for the sake of it. Qui Gon wants to defy the jedi council because he saw the corruption of the jedi. Their zealousy and arrogance brought them down a path that he was strictly opposed to, just like his master Tyranus. The sequels have dumb hotheads like Poe Damareon who makes "yo mama" jokes and some stormtrooper whose entire personality is screaming "REEEY" and the granddaughter of darth sidious who is automatically good at everything from piloting a spce ship she never touched in her life to being a jedi. How on earth did you seriously think the prequels have no "relatable" characters while believing that the clowns from the sequels are "relatable"? It's clear that you have NEVER seen the prequels and are nothing more that a proud sequel consoomer
@@tron23058 I truly believe Star Wars wouldn't be the phenomenon it is without Williams. I'm not saying it wouldn't still be amazing, but it definitely wouldn't be what it is without him.
I got to see ROTJ in the theater when I was 10. Even back then I could tell that there was a slight dip in overall quality, Han Solo had nothing to do, and the Ewoks were a stupid. Carrie Fisher also looked almost 10 years older.
Ahh man, this overall story would actually have been better. I love that idea of luke going off to find his long lost sister and them teaming up eventually to take down the emperor. Over 9 movies it would have been tons better.
Gary might have spent more, but my word, it was the best of the bunch. Probably should have looked back and said "You know, for Revenge of the Jedi, let's give Gary another shot." Bad idea is bad idea. The mention of Luke and his sister was a discussion I literally JUST finished having with my son not ten minutes ago, and then I clicked this video. I see you listening, Google! LOL
Lucas blamed Gary Kurtz for not reigning in Irvin Kerschner. Kerschner was the reason why Empire was running late and over budget. He kept wanting to refilm things that Lucas deemed “good enough.” He wanted to keep refilming Luke’s ex-wing rising out of the swamp over and over for reasons such as “the water didn’t trickle off the ship the way he wanted.” Really Irvin was the problem, but Lucas didn’t want to confront him, apparently. It wound up being the best made Star Wars film. In hindsight Lucas should have just let the same team work on Jedi...
I found "Return of the Jedi" a disappointing follow up to "Empire Strikes Back". How important was merchandising to George Lucas? When he gave permission to Mel Brooks to make "Spaceballs", one condition was that the parody couldn't be merchandised.
Lucas probably would have sold more Star Wars stuff if he'd let Brooks make Spaceballs toys, but as we know from so much other evidence, George wants control more than money or good movies. He does like money but 'control' stopped him from benefiting from Spaceballs.
The Ewok stuff isn't as bad as people tend to remember it. Yes, they're cute little merchandise critters, but if you really watch that last battle, they're not that effective. Their log traps work fairly effectively, but where their strength lies is in creating distractions. This enables the Rebel soldiers to be more effective. For those interested in early drafts and discarded ideas, I recommend Star Wars: The Annotated Screenplays. It's really interesting to see how the original trilogy evolved as it progressed.
that was the major cop out of jedi..was doing another death star battle..they should have attacked coruscant...gary kurtz if he was still around would have pushed for that
How so? it makes perfect sense. The empire had gambled on the death star being around to smack around any rebelling systems; with the first one gone, there was something of a power vacuum. So they construct a new one. The emperor then uses the death star to draw the rebels in..
Way off on Kurtz ! Lucas was a cheap ass filming in London was a mess Lucas was detached from the process all he was worried about is this toy money There’s all kinds of issues, production, and labor in England that was almost impossible for Kurtz to manage. Kurtz also directed. A lot of seens to save money
It's not like the Death Star was the only thing they copied outright from the first movie. Then, to cap it all off, once their Emperor rip-off villain gets killed they're so bereft of creativity that they just... well... you know. *edit: By "they" I am referring, of course, to Disney and their sequel trilogy.
The escalation of superweapons started with the then-canon (now Legends) novels of the 1990s, culminating in the ridiculously overpowered Sun Crusher. If memory serves there may even have been a superlaser-equipped Star Destroyer in there somewhere, albeit in a sourcebook rather than a narrative. Starkiller Base was the inevitable and disappointing result of that escalation. So many big franchises have fallen into this trap in the last couple of decades. It's as though writers think the audience won't buy into jeopardy unless the macguffin poses a direct threat to the entire world / galaxy / universe / multiverse / fabric of reality. It's all so tiresome. I mostly liked _TFA,_ but Starkiller Base stretched my suspension of disbelief to the limit.
@KevReillyUK I liked the Galaxy Gun weapon concept. It was creative & harder for the Rebels to really wipe out. The Marvel Comics run had a few creative WMDs, bases too. The extended "Tarkin" plot wraps up around 2mo prior to Jedi's May 1983 release!
Almost everything sounds better than what we got. Especially like the idea that it would have gone right into a new trilogy centered around Luke finding his sister and then taking on the Emperor. Makes so much more sense then Yoda and Obi-Wan's plan to have Luke by himself somehow beat Vader AND the Emperor at the same time.
Return of the Jedi is my fav of the original trilogy but I've never liked that Leia was made Luke's sister or the second death star. Felt like a cheap repeat of the other movie's highlights.
Empire strikes back director Kershner should have directed RotJ and continue writing directing ESB style story telling into a fluent ending with Vader’s redemption and death of Palpy
There is One moment from the annotated screenplay that I can't forget. A sequence which was scripted but never filmed: Han Solo attaches a cable between the Shield Bunker Door and the commandeered At-St Walker in an effort to rip the entryway open. This proves to be humorously futile when the AT-ST walker tears itself in two because the Bunker Doors really are that impenetrable.
"Jedi don't seek revenge" is Lucas-speak for "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan had just come out, and we didn't want to have a title that sounded similar to it".
@@crispy_338 I go back and forth between the Battle of endor and the Battle of scarif in Rogue one.... The one thing I thought was missing in Return of the Jedi is I got height to see the b-wing actually do something.... I don't remember any scenes of it actually in combat lol
@@ianbrewster8934 I do like the RO fight but there’s something so nostalgic about real models composited onto a space background that just does it for me
This would NEVER, um, ‘fly’ today, but after I learned that the Ewoks were supposed to be Wookiees, I always thought a great solution would be to still have Wicket discover Leia, and eventually take her TO the Wookiees, the race that really ruled the forest. The Battle of Endor (or Kashyyyk) would have BOTH species involved, the Ewoks still being cute and marketable little shits, but some serious asskicking also taking place. Of course, this tandem would MANDATE that at some point, Wookiees TOSSED Ewoks at hapless Stormtroopers and other Imperials, hence the ‘problematic’ implications in today’s Outragonia. So, I’m not sure I’m even allowed to daydream about such cinematic fun. P.S. George attempted to redeem this in Episode III, but the Kashyyyk sequence there just felt like a weightless, high quality videogame cutscene, which really could be said about a third of the Prequels’ total footage.
They weren't supposed to be Wookies. Or at least not in Return of the Jedi. This video misled you. Lucas wanted a bunch of Wookies flying ships at the end of A New Hope (in part cause he really like the word 'Wookie', in fact it shows up in his earlier sci fi film THX). That was the plan. But it was too pricey so he settled for one: Chewy. Then he wanted another hairy alien species but one that was more primitive, so he designed one for that role.
@@SamSaxtonArt I honestly can’t keep track of the urban legends versus the half-truths versus the historically accurate anecdotes anymore. I know his early drafts had the Wookiees helping with the assault on the Death Star. But since they didn’t, introducing them en masse in the third film would’ve been cool, and I stand by my dream of seeing Chewie heaving Wicket into a group of unsuspecting Stormtroopers standing below them in the woods.
Post the source for that claim then. Cause you're putting words in his mouth if that's your interpretation just from the clip you posted. He never even implies that that was an intention. He's gone on record as saying that he wanted to do lots of wookies and he's explaining here why he didn't just do them for the natives in ROTJ. @@Bulletsandblockbusters
I agree- the idea of cute, 3-foot teddy bears defeating imperial stormtroopers is ridiculous, but if you think about it, those stormtroopers couldn’t hit anyone anyway…
Also, history is fully of less sophisticated armies beating more powerful armies. The Ewoks weren't exactly on their own, they had Rebel troops taking the lead.
The Viet Cong won the Vietnam War over the American military, the mightiest in the world. It’s not implausible. The Battle of Endor was won through guerrilla tactics, after all.
@@rootbeer_666 : Off topic, but that’s an oversimplification of the Vietnam War. How do you “win” a war when politicians will not let you go on the offensive? Not once did American troop set foot en masse in North Vietnam- it was not allowed. Also, how do you fight a force that moves its men and machines over the borders of two neighboring countries and drops them off in your country, and you are not allowed to cross those same borders to stop them? The Vietnam War was no WWII- it was a highly complex theater where American forces fought on an uneven field, the Cold War and politics played a very heavy hand while the American home front was extremely divided, all of which put an real strain on the American soldier. Guerrilla tactics were just one part of the equation. Somehow, I don’t think Ewoks were as fierce or evasive as the Viet Cong, and as far as I know Hanoi Jane never visited them.
Get the making of book by rinzler (rip), youll get the original Story and parts of screenplay, Discussions, reasons for changes, artwork, little people stories. Just get it.
It was obvious back in the 70's that Leia and Luke weren't siblings. Just read the canon novel "Splinter of the Mind's Eye". Then of course, it got un-canoned pretty quick lol.
This is just one of many things that changed as they wrote more. Its kinda like comic books where there are a billion alternate universes. I don’t mind the Leia storyline being a Skywalker… I just wish they did more with it. Leia in my opinion was the best character in the series, though I understood it was mainly Luke’s story. Luke, however, isn’t a very interesting character, and is one we’ve seen over and over. Leia, however, was really revolutionary. She’s a teenager, but incredibly smart and powerful, and is politically minded unlike Luke who was naive and Han who was selfish and jaded. A Jedi Leia would have been so cool, or at least if we could have gotten more of her in a leadership role. They tried to touch on it in the new sequels, but there was a new generation of characters who were supposed to be the lead characters. The original cast were just nostalgic supporting characters who had little to do. Leia remains as a character with so much promise, but with no follow through. As Carrie once said, once she put on the metal bikini, she basically lost any of her relevance or seriousness.
In another universe there exists a version of Star Wars where Lucas didn’t become obsessed with revenue and merchandising. What I’d give to see that Star Wars.
it's a real shame he couldn't just get somebody to loan him the extra money to keep his talented people from empire strikes back and just pay them more. I look at return of the jedij now as an adult and hate all the ewalk stuff and find lots of it silly, but man, as a kid I loved rotj and loved the ewalks. what I've learned from star wars and George Lucas is that you can make a movie that kids will love and adults will hate and it will still make money, but if you can make a movie that kids can understand (princess Lea is in danger, luke is hopeful and good, Vader is dark and scary, the music also tells kids how to feel when they hear it.) and adults love (the visuals, sound effects, music, and story are all original, interesting, and there's tension and things that pay off). then that movie will become a classic mega hit because little kids don't understand what's really going on, on a deep level anyways.
The story conference transcripts tell a completely different story as to why Lucas didn't want Han Solo to die. That it was because toys is Kurtz's cynical take on the subject. Lucas said at the time, "I have always hated that in movies, when you go along and one of the main characters gets killed. This is a fairytale. You want everybody to live happily ever after and nothing bad happens to anybody...I resent it and I resented it when I was a little kid. I would watch and there would be these five guys and one of them would be a funny clown and halfway through, one of them gets killed. Why did they kill the lead? He was the best character." And so then what happened in the next trilogy? They killed off all the original characters and a lot of people hated it because for the most part they added nothing to the story. Cheap deaths for shock value.
han solo being killed in carbonite wouldve meant something tho for the story also if they keep him alive why waste his time by having him do basically nothing
@supercringeteam6666 the often told story is that Harrison Ford wasn't signed on for a third film and they did it just in case. However, the original 1974 draft has Leia's two little brothers being put into stasis so they can pass undetected by the Empire's scanners. They are revived upon landing on the Wookiee planet. The way it's left at the end of TESB -- "He's alive and in perfect hibernation -- would have caused a problem in part three had they killed him offscreen. It's completely anti-climactic. The death of a main character can never just be some random event. It almost never actually means anything all by itself. Rather the narrative has to be constructed in such a way to give it meaning.
I got so sick of Death Star ripoffs in the EU. The Sun Crusher, The Galaxy Gun, The Darksaber, the lost Death Star under Admiral Daala's command at the Maw Installation...it was just ridiculous. Then you see what the sequel trilogy did and I just wanted to scream. Starkiller Base was literally "LIke a Death Star, but BIGGER-ER-ER!!!" and the fleet of Death Star Star Destroyers was the most hacky thing I've ever seen.
I do wonder at what point Harrison Ford learned that this would be the final movie in a trilogy, and not merely part 3 in an even larger story. Because if he was thinking that he might have to stick around for another 4 films, that might affect why he wanted Han Solo dead.
I always thought an easy way to help explain the Ewok/Endor victory would be to incorporate some of the stuff from the Ewok movies because there was some freaky stuff going on on Endor
Amazing video essays! Can you do a VERY thorough video essay on “What Could’ve Been: James Cameron Terminator 3.” I’ve read some things here and there about what he had planned; such as the 3rd film would’ve lead to the war scenario (No time travel), it would’ve released in 97’-98’ according to Arnold & Cameron and T2:3D was Cameron’s real sequel, etc. Whatever you could find, it would be a dope video!
Now that you mention it, the Empire would have looked at the Wookiees as a threat, and the Ewoks as inconsequential, a non threat, so it all works well.
Yeah, “Return” was one of the biggest disappointments in movie history after the extremely effective storytelling and ground-breaking SFX of the first 2 films. I remember my friends and I looking at each other at the end of “Return”, almost with tears in our eyes, thinking THIS is what all of this buildup was leading too? 6 years of arguably the best fantasy story-telling ends like THIS??? The vaunted Empire gets beaten by a bunch of teddy bears? After a much too long opening segment of rescuing Han Solo from Jabba’s fortress? Jesus, did we feel like fools for being such huge fans. “Star Wars” was a revelation from 1977 thru 1982. But it was destroyed in 1983 in the name of merchandising and kid-proofing. And, alas, no SW film since has reached the heights of those first 2 movies (Ep. #4 & #5). But at least we have THEM!
I feel like the title change makes sense though, as Lucas explained how a Jedi wouldnt seek revenge. Obviously revenge of the jedi sounds cooler, but it doesnt make too much sense in my opinion
As a kid Return was my favorite and Empire was my least. But as an adult, I'm the exact opposite. As a kid I didn't understand story or characters, and I didn't like the dark tone of Empire. I just liked to see fun scenes in space. Which Jedi had plenty of... but were they anywhere as good as Empire's more high-concept, New Hollywood brooding tone? Absolutely not. The way I see it, Empire is a 70s film, in the line of Apocalypse Now, Alien, Taxi Driver... Jedi is a full-on 80s film in the line of Back to the Future or Ghostbusters. Nothing wrong with them, just tonally, and substance-wise a lot less serious.
I agree with everything you said here. I see a lot of people defending this movie in the comments, but I was there at 14 years old in 1983, and this movie was simply disappointing. Everyone thought so and that was the cultural consensus. It made money, but everyone agreed it wasn't as good as the first two. I mean, I understood even back then that "Empire" was going to be a hard act to follow, but I found the plot and execution of this movie to be worse than I expected. You didn't mention this, but Vader's turn to the light side came completely out of left field and hamstrung cinema's greatest new villain in a terrible way. I distinctly remember sitting there, watching it happen, hardly believing that this was where the plot was actually going to go. I was literally saying to myself, "No, no, don't do that..." It was so out of character and to this day I hate it, and consider it in extremely poor taste given the crimes against humanity and aliens he's committed. It's like if we forgave Hitler if he had turned over a new leaf after all he'd done. Even worse, Yoda. What a waste of a great character. Seeing him simply die of old age in his first and only scene was so deflating, I can't even tell you. What a wasted opportunity to have him come back to the Rebels and help lead them to victory fighting an angry and hostile Vader! And just listen to the dialogue of this picture - it's all recycled "bumper sticker slogans" from the previous movies. Barely any actual exposition, just a couple of speeches that explain things to us, and all the rest is just Star Wars cliches. Both Vader and Han Solo hardly have anything to do. Vader in particular, after a fine opening scene where he's his usual evil self, almost fades into the background and mostly just stands around waiting for the Emperor to beckon. He's not hunting anyone or taking any action until the very end of the film. I feel like the entire plot and dialogue of this film is irredeemable and whenever I watch the "original trilogy", I usually just watch the first two films and ignore this one. It's corny and it's not worth spending time with except to admire the special effects. Lastly, so much for a dependable 3-act structure - the first quarter of the film (Jabba's palace) feels like a completely different movie, like a Star Wars short before the main feature. This is unfortunate, because they really could have used that 25-30 minutes on the rest of the plot and expanded the story in a way that made sense and did new things instead of recycling a Death Star. By the way, what exactly was the plan to rescue Han Solo? Because what we saw doesn't make any sense as a "plan" at all. Folks, don't defend this movie - it doesn't deserve it. It's lazy and fails to live up to the extraordinarily high standards set by Star Wars and Empire. Lucas clearly lost his artistic vision on this film, and it's a damn shame because I can easily imagine a followup to Empire that would have been worthy of the Star Wars name. After Star Wars and Empire, Jedi landed with a thud, and then for 16 years we had to live with that as the end of the saga. And I'm tired of pretending that's not the truth.
Good upload. Seems incredible to me that the new movies have managed to kill off the entire Skywalker lineage. Supposedly the last hope of restoring the balance of the force. Palpatine was never as powerful as Annakin Skywalker, regardless of what's insinuated by that horrible final movie..
The original went over budget too, and they were editing up to three days before release. I wasn't there for the stuff but I really don't believe Gary Kurtz's firing was solely because 'the budget' when that would mean Gary was also the guy who facilitated George to go over-budget on the original film.
