Skip to main content

In Defense of Star Wars


Star Wars fans tend to think of their films in a bubble, separated from the narrative of film history. That’s fine really, they know more about these films and the story than any other. It’s a fun and fleshed out universe, and if your willing to suspend your disbelief to the fullest extent, it can give you unlimited pleasure debating plot points, motives, back stories, or revision (Han Shot First! see above) What I want to do though is different from a regular fanboy blog, and contextualize A New Hope in film history, and underline its importance there.
        I, unlike most fans, prefer A New Hope to The Empire Strikes Back. I love meeting the characters, the quotable dialogue, Luke’s realizations, the rescue of Princess Leia, and the explosion of the death star. I have always maintained that if the film had failed and no sequels had been made, the first film is self contained enough to stand on its own. However, in 1977, it did not fail. In fact, the opposite; it became the highest grossing film of all time, with over $770,000,000 in box office receipts; today it remains the second highest film of all time, after the numbers are adjusted for inflation. Even more, the film seemingly came out of nowhere. George Lucas primary work before this was THX 1138 and American Graffiti, two low budget films that show no signs of precursing Star Wars. THX 1138 is a cliché’d dystopian drama that was commercially unsuccessful, and American Graffiti is a coming of age story designed to appeal to the mainstream. Francis Ford Coppola produced both films, and was instrumental in making George Lucas a director. Then there is Star Wars, a film with unprecedented special effects, a film with a score rivalled only by Jaws or Superman, a film that seems futuristic, is set in the past, but is absolutely timeless. A New Hope seemingly hit the world out of nowhere.

And Luke went on to become President.

          So in 1977 A New Hope is released and shatters box office records. It was nominated for Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Screenplay, and although it lost all of those to Annie Hall, it still ended up winning the most Oscars that year. But the real legacy of the film is that it, along with Jaws, set the standard for the Hollywood Blockbuster. Films made on big budgets that bring home around half a billion dollars, a standard that the studios is today dependent on, a standard where the audience is wowed more by the aesthetics than anything else, are forever indebted to the success of A New Hope.
         And, for a while, it was a pretty good legacy to leave behind, until recently when films have lost their entire intellectual caliber and rely solely on name brands from pre existing franchises. A New Hope was not a remake, sequel, or adaptation; it was something almost unheard of today in Hollywood, an original big budget idea. It draws inspiration only from other famous stories, such as Flash Gordon, the films of Akira Kurasawa, Westerns, 2001 A Space Odyssey, The Wizard of Oz, and a good deal of original input from George Lucas. The studios took a huge risk with Star Wars, a big budget children’s movie with only one big name (Alec Guinness) and a relatively unknown director; before the film came out, many predicted that it would be a failure. Back in the 1970’s studios were at least willing to take these risks; today, it would require multiple big names attached to it and a watered down plot.
         And then, everything that made the film special and unique was negated with The Phantom Menace. Lucas took an incredible story and pushed it to its extreme. But hey, that’s what a blockbuster is in this generation, and nothing could have illustrated it better than Star Wars. Still, no matter how bad the prequels were, nothing can tarnish the originals for me.
Labels:

Comments

  1. WarstubJune 3, 2011 at 12:18 PM

    I think we who like Empire better, like it because it is darker and digs at deeper emotional depths. I completly respect that you like Star Wars more and your reasons are absolutely valid. I do seem to gravitate more towards Return of the Jedi these days, though, due to it being a more mature production - both in technique and character building.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Actor/Director

When I was a kid I used to watch Home Movies on Adult Swim, a show about kids who try to make movies with a hand held camera. I remember the main character, who was the director, saying at one point that he was going to switch roles with his friend and become the actor, because every director wants to act, and every actor wants to direct. Hollywood keeps proving this statement true. Spike Lee regularly appears in his own movies, Tarantino has done it, Kevin Smith wrote Silent Bob for himself, David Lynch acted in Twin Peaks, Martin Scorsese, Mel Brooks, Woody Allen, Fritz Lang, the list goes on of directors who have appeared in their own films. Then there are those who have had full time jobs as both actors and directors, most notably Orson Welles and Clint Eastwood. Both of them can be studied in either context, and often appear in their own work. But what I’m getting to are the actors, who make it big in Hollywood, and then try their hand at directing. These films are what interest
5 comments
Read more

I Really Miss Roger Ebert

Note: I originally wrote this article in 2011, and in July 2015 accidentally deleted it. When I reinstated it I decided to revise a lot of it. I find that I miss Roger Ebert whenever a great film is released, as I would love to be able to read his thoughts on films like Birdman or Boyhood. I highly recommend the documentary about his life, titled Life Itself.   The film critic – perhaps, in many ways, the most useless job on the planet. Nobody lives or dies, goes hungry or starves, or makes any important life change whatsoever based on the opinion of a film critic. I decided not to go to film school because I could not see myself doing anything important with a film degree. Most audiences pay no attention to these journalists, and often critics are the butt of a joke for poorly rated popular filmmakers. Still I am very grateful for those who have taken up the occupation – I personally read film criticism and, obviously, write it for my own enjoyment. I am a fan of AO Scott, Peter
2 comments
Read more

I Still Don't Like Spielberg

Sorry. Four years ago I wrote an article about my issues with Steven Spielberg, particularly taking aim at Schindler’s List and AI , mostly from the Kubrickian critique I had developed at the time. As time has passed and I have seen hundreds more films to greater contextualise the man and his work, I decided it was time for a re-evaluation of Spielberg on my part. After all, the age of the “coffee table” Hollywood drama seems to be winding down, as studios continue their unfortunate output of sequels, reboots, and superhero franchises. I sometimes pine for the days when Hollywood at least made an effort and created Oscar bait - independent films dominated awards season this year, with American Sniper being the only studio film nominated for Best Picture. So this week I watched four films I had never seen before from Spielberg’s back catalogue, in the hope of being able to soften my stance towards him. With détente declared, I watched Amistad , a film grounded in the little
4 comments
Read more