omg: Han Solo shoulda died in ‘Return of the Jedi’In a piece on Gary Kurtz -- an early producing partner of George Lucas -- Geoff Boucher at the Los Angeles Times blog Hero Complex dug out this fascinating tidbit on why Kurtz quit Star Wars after The Empire Strikes Back: After the release of “Empire” (which was shaped by material left over from that first Lucas treatment), talk turned to a third film and after a decade and a half the partners could no longer find a middle ground. The discussed ending of the film that Kurtz favored presented the rebel forces in tatters, Leia grappling with her new duties as queen and Luke walking off alone “like Clint Eastwood in the spaghetti westerns,” as Kurtz put it. More emotionally nuanced? Hell yes! What a film that would have been. And much more appropriate to that awesome original title: Revenge of the Jedi Don’t miss the whole Hero Complex piece. Kurtz blasts the prequels, insists that “the popular notion that ‘Star Wars’ was always planned as a multi-film epic is laughable,” and much more. It’s a great read. Disqus commentsblog comments powered by Disqus |
posted:
Fri Aug 13 10, 4:23PM categories: geek classics permalink 18 pre-Disqus comments Disqus comments tip jarshare
read morerelated· Upside Down (trailer) · best thing about ‘The Dark Knight Rises’? · ‘Doctor Who’ thing of the day: awesome extras on the first Matt Smith DVD set · question of the day: What is so genuinely special about ‘Star Wars,’ ‘Raiders of the Lost Ark,’ and ‘Back to the Future’? · question of the day: What changes would you actually like to see in the ‘Star Wars’ saga? · question of the day: How much can George Lucas alter ‘Star Wars’ before it’s no longer ‘Star Wars’? · Red Tails (trailer) · watch it: “George Lucas Strikes Back” · when a boy becomes a Jedi · question of the day: If you could ask one question of George Lucas, what would it be? bloggyprevious post: a few thoughts on ‘Mad Men’: “The Good News” next post: the violence inherent in the system |









pre-Disqus comments
posted by Brian' (Fri Aug 13 10, 4:40PM)
In the DVD documentary that came out in '04, Lawrence Kasdan speaks very candidly about his advocacy that a major character should have died in the first act of ROTJ, just to raise the stakes for the rest of the film. Even Harrison Ford said he wanted Han to be the one to go, because he had no obligations or attachments, like most of the rest of the main characters. (He was probably wary of having to do more sequels, too.)
Then there's the long-rumored footage of Lando dying with the Falcon in the second Death Star raid. Lucas vehemently denies that this was ever shot, but then, Lucas often has trouble getting his story straight -- he still won't formally acknowledge the existence of the holiday special.
Also, I don't get why a character dying would necessarily hamper toy sales, unless Lucas harbored thoughts of doing further sequels with the original cast at the time.
But anyway, wow. I would have loved to see the ending Kurtz talks about. It's much more reminiscent of something like the morally complex Dune series, whose clear influence on Star Wars is not often acknowledged by Lucas. Oh, well, if "if" were a skiff . . . we could all cruise the Dune Sea.
posted by Jeff (Fri Aug 13 10, 4:45PM)
Harrison Ford wanted his character to die. He has said this for years...
http://www.starpulse.com/news/index.php/2006/03/02/harrison_ford_wanted_han_solo_to_die
posted by DaveTM (Fri Aug 13 10, 4:52PM)
I don't know if it was ever shot but I think it was in the script at one point. At a Con many eons ago I bought a draft of Revenge of the Jedi and the Falcon didn't make it out. While this could have been faked it was so many years ago I don't see why someone would and if they did it was a masterfull job.
posted by CB (Fri Aug 13 10, 4:55PM)
No, no, it's obviously untenable to make toys of a character who died. Who'd buy them? It'd be pointless to even try.
That's why there aren't any toys of Qui Gon or Darth Maul.
posted by MaryAnn (Fri Aug 13 10, 4:55PM)
I know I've heard Ford say he wanted Solo to die, but he bitches about lots of stuff. :->
I've certainly never heard that there was an actual plan to have killed off Solo, till the plan itself got killed.
posted by Ide Cyan (Fri Aug 13 10, 4:57PM)
Here's another interesting Star Wars-related article:
In Tribute to Marcia Lucas
http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/marcialucas.html
posted by CB (Fri Aug 13 10, 5:02PM)
Yeah, well, according to Lucas the plan shot first!
posted by Bzero (Fri Aug 13 10, 5:26PM)
@CB *snerk!*
posted by JoshDM (Fri Aug 13 10, 5:26PM)
I heard the reason that Calrissian and that blue midget guy were piloting the Falcon was because it was supposed to be sacrificed in the second Death Star.
posted by Jurgan (Fri Aug 13 10, 5:59PM)
I wonder. It does seem like the characters got off too easy. Killing Han would have been a blow, certainly. I personally think they needed a lot more Ewoks to die. Everyone bitches about the Ewoks beating the Empire's best troops, but they could have overwhelmed them by sheer numbers. But we only saw a single Ewok die, which contributes to the overly cutesy feeling people complain about. On the other hand, the ending we have is so iconic to me that I can't imagine it. When I want to describe a euphoric happy ending, I just say "Ewoks dancing." It may not be better, but it's hard to imagine it any other way.
I really hate the title "Revenge of the Jedi," though. Revenge is antithetical to everything the Jedi stand for- they defend themselves and help others, but they never act out of anger. Return of the Jedi makes much more sense.
posted by MaryAnn (Fri Aug 13 10, 6:19PM)
Just to be clear, I was proclaiming my ignorance here, not doubting any of the other comments.
posted by Shadowen (Fri Aug 13 10, 6:57PM)
Well, part of the reason why Revenge of the Jedi wasn't used as the title is plainly that revenge isn't terribly Jedi-like.
As for the other ideas suggested by Kurtz: Leia being "queen"...uh...no? I mean, okay, the prequel gave us 14-year-olds being elected as queens, but it was quite clear that the tall woman in the white dress (Mon Mothma, but you wouldn't know her name from the movie) was in charge of the Rebellion. And they were trying to restore the Republic. Also, she was a princess of Alderaan. Which was blown up. I mean, I guess she could become queen of the survivors...
posted by EnglerP (Fri Aug 13 10, 7:05PM)
Well, in the expanded universe, she became the head of the state of the New Republic. (Not a queen though).
posted by Anthony (Fri Aug 13 10, 8:59PM)
Yeah, I don't know about "queen" for Leia, but the rest of that ending sounds fantastic. I'd need to read a script, though, because it sounds like it could easily be made melodramatic instead of legitimately nuanced. With a great screenwriter, it would have made the Star Wars trilogy even more amazing.
I used to think that ROTJ was the best film because of its big climax. My friends always said Empire was better. It took me more viewings, but eventually I saw the error of my ways.
posted by vucubcaquix (Fri Aug 13 10, 10:33PM)
I, of course, salivate at the thought of a more bittersweet and downer Star Wars trilogy, but how would it have affected the biggest fan demographic at the time?
My uncle was eleven years old when ROTJ was in theaters and my sister was nine, and seeing the trilogy in the cinema was a bonding experience for them. I can't help but wonder how this piece of contemporary mythology would have affected them if it were played much more tragically.
posted by Brian' (Sat Aug 14 10, 12:33AM)
@Ide Cyan: Fascinating article. Thanks for posting!
posted by Bluejay (Sat Aug 14 10, 12:04PM)
Yes, thanks, Ide Cyan, for the link. The woman who was actually responsible for the excitement-building edits and many of the humanizing touches in Star Wars; who suggested that Obi Wan should die and that Indy and Marion should actually be together at the end of Raiders; and who was in short an important reason why Lucas's early films work as well as they do--and we've been told next to nothing about her? Why am I not surprised?
posted by KLW (Mon Aug 16 10, 11:08AM)
I find this post quite a coincidence since I found myself watching ROTJ last evening on TV for the first time since the one time I watched it in the theater during its original release. My recollection from that earlier viewing was of how unsatisfying I found the movie. Seeing it again last night that impression was completely confirmed. In fact it put into perspective what I thought about the 'new movies'. I saw the new episode 1 movie and didn't enjoy it in the least. I skipped the second one, and found the new third one a rather bland piece of entertainment. I found ROTJ completely consistent with those 'first' three - swirling a lot of special-effect laden action scenes together with those about overblown mystical portent and others of annoying cutesiness, all as a substitute for any compelling dramatic structure. Something all very by-the-numbers that the cast's charisma couldn't succeed to make float, almost like ROTJ was practice for the 'new' ones he was to make later.