Star Wars Week Part 1

Alright everyone, I would like to re-review the Star Wars movies before the seventh film comes out. I know that I had already done them before, but it was the first review that I had done, and reviewreviewer1 and I had discussed about redoing our reviews on them since we feel that we should probably analyze and defend them more. However, here is a defense on George Lucas that we made:

I acknowledge George Lucas has his faults. Although he is reviewreviewer1’s favorite filmmaker and one of mine, what annoys us is how people try to make him seem bad at nearly every aspect of filmmaking, and to have solely been a parasite of other people, using baseless bashing from former friends in spite of these claims making no sense. All of the stories they use contradicts each other and all the evidence to the contrary. Reviewreviewer1’s favorite prequel is Episode II and he greatly credits Jonathan Hales for helping to make it great. We, as a prequel fans also thank Rick McCallum, we acknowledge Francis Ford Coppola was a strong force behind Lucas’s first 2 films. Lawrence Kasdan was vital to both sequels, and I acknowledge that Gary Kurtz and Howard Kazanjian were really helpful on the Original trilogy. Irvin Kershner and Richard Marquand brought a lot to the films. The Indiana Jones series had the help of Philip Kaufman, Steven Spielberg, Willard Huyck and Gloria Katz, who also took part in American Graffiti. Jeffrey Boam, Menno Meyjes, Tom Stoppard, Frank Marshall and Kathleen Kennedy all contributed to the Indiana Jones series. Lucas is great at every aspect filmmaking. I could understand some people think he is flawed as a screenwriter and director. That is all cool. Saying that all of his popular films wouldn`t have been as great as they were without all those other talents is fine. Also disliking the prequels, and based on the fact Lucas was screenwriter for those saying he is, on average, a lesser screenwriter then storywriter makes sense if you dislike the prequels. However, where it starts to bother us is if you try to claim that in spite of Lucas having story written, screen written, executive produced, and directed A New Hope, he would never have been a good screenwriter or director at all, not even occasionally. That is where the arguments start to feel forced and not based on logic, but based around the wish to make Lucas seem bad in every way, and where you no longer acknowledge the good that he did. Also, saying that Lucas wasn`t the primary force behind the Original Star Wars trilogy or American Graffiti, again that is where it gets forceful and biased. Lastly, with the reception of A New Hope being very great, it is incorrect to say that Lucas could not, on his own, make critically acclaimed films that appealed to a large audience.

Now it bothers us because we think that trying to attack someone personally in spite of them working hard and being a regular good citizen simply because you are disappointed by their later work is mean-spirited. Because of how unfairly it credits people who try to take too much credit, so before we go into this I want to again make clear, I also see many of Lucas’s films as partial team-efforts. I simply think Lucas was the strong captain of the team.

Also what bothers us is how forceful it gets using any possible argument, making up stories, trying to force opinions on people, based on how they looked for a few seconds and using ridiculous bashing from people that admit to not liking Lucas so who are obviously biased, and how people only listen to one side of the story. The reason also bothers us claiming that the prequels show Lucas couldn`t have made the originals, is claiming people either are always perfect or garbage. People sometimes do things right, and sometimes wrong. It is like saying that when your child gets a 10 and then a 4 he cheated on the 10. What?

Also what it comes down to it, it is that Lucas now makes films that disappoint people. Well, I have been disappointed by films, but what bothers me is how people can`t just except that Lucas made something bad but need to break him down for it. People make mistakes. Why would you need to sell out to make bad films? Do you mean that people only make mistakes when they don`t try? That someone who loses their job is automatically last? Why does he have to only care for effects? The Prequels quality is purely opinion, but it is a fact that they tell a lot of story and have many themes, which are serious, and a lot of dialogue scenes. The fact you don`t like it doesn`t mean they aren`t trying.

So I want to rebuttal these claims: Lucas doesn`t just care for money. If he did, he wouldn`t have stayed a writer and director, but hire other writers and have them do the creative work. Also, he wouldn`t put politics in his films or make them as a complex. He would listen more to fan criticism. He would have the studios fund his projects, giving him less control but fewer risks. Also, why would a filmmaker who cares for money wait 16 years to make a new film in his series when it was extremely popular? Studios make a sequel after 2 years, cashing in as quickly as possible. Look at Star Trek, James Bond, or the original Batman series. They would say that it is fine, the effects are less and we will have to compromise, but we will sell big time. Also, I acknowledge Lucas is a control freak, but he isn`t a coldhearted person. He is shy, but he gave the crew of A New Hope bonuses, which weren`t in the contract, constantly manages those that inspired, and helped him and really tries to help everyone involved.

One of the most hateful works against George Lucas is The Secret History of Star Wars. It uses argumentum ad populum as excessively as possible, and tries to disproof Rotten Tomatoes, which states that the Original Trilogy at first had a more negative reception. It tries to judge his marriage and claims he never had the touch to begin with. Also, the article often contradicts the interviews of George Lucas, Steven Spielberg, James Earl Jones, the DVD commentaries of the Original Trilogy, Empire of Dreams, from Star Wars to Jedi, and the making of American Graffiti. It claims to use obscure interviews from the seventies and eighties but provides no links to them, and they contradict the available sources to the general public, making it rather convenient that he basically claims to have secret sources. It also makes many false connections. It starts off claiming that Lucas acknowledged that he had trouble writing, which was true for the beginning of his career. Francis Ford Coppola none the less encouraged him to write THX-1138, and he wrote the story alone. He also directed it and co-wrote the screenplay. He did receive help with the screenwriting, but it was none the less a big step for him, just as James Cameron had help writing The Terminator, or Francis Ford Coppola had help writing The Godfather and Patton. It also claims that the film had limited characterization and plot, showing the writer of the article cannot appreciate subtlety. The film as Lucas intended, conveyed themes about brainwashing, war, consumerism and freedom. It had a character learning to appreciate freedom and overcome fear. Lucas later on explained that he decided to go more mainstream with American Graffiti. The article also falsely tries to claim that Lucas had another screenwriter co-write THX-1138 which is never mentioned on the making of feature. Walter Murch helped Lucas right away and he and Lucas worked together, and Lucas’s original draft was already seen as promising. This was a great achievement for a first film. It tries to claim the draft was bad, blaming Lucas for bad personal communication, even though many filmmakers reject drafts from other writers, like with Ridley Scott on Blade Runner, or John McTiernan on Die Hard or Predator. Also, the article and many people attribute a lot of the success of THX-1138 and American Graffiti to Francis Ford Coppola, but he only executive produced THX-1138 and produced American Graffiti. As the making of the featurette showed, he had little involvement with the writing process. Also, people often view Coppola as a great actor’s director, but he admits to just casting talented actors and not giving many directions. Ridley Scott said this many times of himself as did the Coen Brothers. George Lucas never characterized himself as such, but was often presented as such by the actors on his earlier films without any behind the scenes footage to confirm their claims. Also, the article again baselessly blames Lucas for a writer not properly interpreting American Graffiti. It also ignores the fact that Lucas came up with the idea for American Graffiti and then worked on it with Willard Huyck and Gloria Katz. Also, the article ignores the fact that they worked on Howard the Duck and Radioland Murders and that their most successful films were the Lucas films they worked on. Also, the article is confronted with the fact that the film was an immense hit, while being co-written and directed by Lucas. Lucas co-wrote the story and the first screen draft, wrote the second alone, and the third which was polished by his co-writers. This means he did the majority of the writing on an acclaimed film with great characters, story, themes and dialogue. Although the article tries to emphasis Lucas had help, it was mostly his work. The article tries to discredit this saying that it would be autobiographical even though it was very much a film from Lucas’s own experiences, so are many films. Huyck and Katz went a lot farther with putting their own experiences in it, yet that isn`t used to lessen their contributions. Writers often write from their own lives, but Lucas none the less did great job on the writing. Look at E.T. reflecting Spielberg`s childhood, or The Abyss with James Cameron`s own fascination, or Mean Streets reflecting Scorsese`s faith struggle. The article also tries to claim they changed all the dialogue, even though it was a shared effort. They worked on some of the characters, but many were thought up by Lucas, and not directly based off the people. He came up with the story structure, lots of the humor, and quite a bit of the dialogue. So he came up with deep themes, worked them out in a story, and created many of the characters. Just because that is based on his own experiences, like The Shining with Stephen King, or Barton Fink for the Coen Brothers, or Harry Potter with J.K. Rowling doesn`t take away from that. He had co-writers, but so did Tarantino on Pulp Fiction, or Peter Jackson on The Lord of The Rings. Also, people make way too much out of the fact that Gary Kurtz was a simple co-producer on this, even though not even Coppola or the cast members credit him, or Coppola himself with an important role. The article also tries to limit his role as director, ignoring his role in creating the great sound effects, direction, cinematography and set design, by using an unverifiable quote of Coppola, saying he would just shoot the actors without directing them, that they were just so talented and that it was lucky. This makes it very odd that Lucas usually casted unknowns, and it is odd for Coppola who always used veterans so he didn`t have to direct them, to say this. Also, it mentions Lucas hired a dialogue coach, which makes sense with new actors, and Coppola nor Kurtz had much influence on the casting, just as on THX. This makes a very odd idea that he would somehow give too little direction to. Ridley Scott, Tim Burton, and the Coen Brothers admit to giving little direction, but they always get big name actors. The claim that Lucas gives little direction is not sustained by the clips from the making of the Prequels, or even Return of The Jedi, where he gives detailed directions. James Earl Jones says he gave detailed directions on both A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back. One actor on American Graffiti even says Lucas told her to act angry. It was mainly the actors from his first 3 directorial efforts, who claimed he gave little direction, and allowed them to improvise, thereby conveniently giving them more credit for these acclaimed films. However, this is belied by the fact that the actual scripts differ very little from the final films, and Lucas’s statements also contradict this. What this shows is the actors just try to take credit for his work and it is rather mean-spirited, as their stories are very exaggerated. One of the actors said Lucas asked them how they wanted to block the scene which, considering his love for cinematography makes no sense. They claim he always went with the first blooper take, but then later said he kept doing takes till something went wrong, and the supposed gags that ended up in the film are so minor, they just seem like spontaneous things. Which lines they would have changed, how it’s always kept vague, they talk more about how much fun they had misbehaving, then how they created great characters without direction. Also, this contradicts the criticism Lucas would not allow enough improvisation, showing he is attacked from every angle possible, sort of like the Pope. Also, Liam Neeson said he was patient and precise. Also, if Lucas allowed them to improvise, why get a dialogue coach to help them remember their lines? American Graffiti really was just a masterpiece created and made mainly by Lucas.

Second, they were new actors as well, so new actors that didn`t work hard, all 3 of them managed to despite of being unprofessional, create legendary acting on their own. What? New actors need too much direction all the time, and often have a problem with the director, because of their own inexperience. They just need too much support. To the degree, it is impossible. They themselves are too flawed and are just too demanding. They just need direction. To the degree, it is ridiculous and causes the trouble due to their own sloppiness and is actually the problem for the director, not the director for them. They often are angry at the director because of their inexperience. This is common, and is the actors fault. They complain because the director can`t help them with what it means to be an actor. They criticized the director for their problems. They blame the director for the fact he can`t do their job.

Third, their stories are just bashing. Look at how over the top they are, faster and more intense, and that he`d actually just get those 2 words on a cue card when he lost his voice. Sorry, but directors never direct when they lose their voice. First, to not admit those mistakes that openly. Second, because even if you say he is a bad director of actors, he`d still have to talk a lot about the effects, and the lighting, and the camera work, all which are part of shooting scenes. The effects were produced at the same time and the cinematography is a part of the acting scenes.

So such inexperienced and unprofessional actors are much more likely to be too needy of the support and lazy. That is a lot more common. If Lucas did give bad instructions, they wouldn`t have made it so. No, obviously Lucas did help out a lot. They just couldn`t handle the pressure. Because they didn`t like it anyways, they just wanted too much support, now they blame him.

Later Carrie Fisher claims she and Harrison Ford rewrote there dialogue. What happened to Lucas being a control freak?

So the story I thought that 3 new actors claim a director is too strict while not talented, that they are to be credited while not working hard or believing in the project, later claiming they got complete freedom, and the director who worked on many films before claims they were the problem, I am going with the director.

He ended up writing both of Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope’s story and the screenplay alone. He also directed and executive produced it, yet people again try to give credit to Gary Kurtz, who was a mere producer. In the late two thousands, he ended up claiming that he “challenged” Lucas. Again, this is very vague, just as with the actors. Again the actors don`t confirm neither his story nor Lucas theirs. Also, most of the production crew, even those who criticized Lucas, don`t sustain his story told decades after the fact. What could he have to challenge Lucas? What did he do separate from Lucas that was a success? He was co-producer on American Graffiti and producer on the first two Star Wars films. Like with Willard Huyck and Gloria Katz, he did nothing that was successful, separate from Lucas. Again Lucas is being the parasite. This really is a continuing pattern. If Lucas writes his story from the heart is pseudo-graphical. If he references other films, it is ripping off instead of homage, when multiple people making contradicting criticisms, both are treated as valid. Lucas is the parasite of people who only had a career because of him.

Also, the article tries to downplay that Lucas wrote one of the most successful films of all time by claiming that he decided to indirect co-writers, which is a really desperate stretch. However, it is even worse as it tries to claim his friends were those indirect co-writers, as he asked them for advice every half year or so, after he wrote an entire script draft on his own. Now it should be noted that it uses a quote where it says Lucas and his friends gave each other advice, but this also revealed Lucas did that for his own friends, this wasn`t specifically for him. I mean, really, writers get advice from their friends. If they don`t pay them, nor credit them, it is very low key. Lucas also talked with Steven Spielberg on his plans for Episode I. Coppola discussed his Godfather script with friends. Lucas advised him on the editing of the Godfather Part II. It even tries to credit his wife, who was merely a co-editor and who didn`t even work on The Empire Strikes Back. She did on Return of The Jedi. Spielberg`s family talked with him about Schindler`s List, so this is just silly. Also, as someone once noted, Kurtz even bashed the acclaimed Raiders of the Lost Ark. He didn`t work on it, so this shows he will hate on any film of Lucas he didn`t work on. Also, it tries to misuse the fact that the earlier drafts for the film weren`t as good, when this is often the case with films. It claims Lucas had less control over the later drafts, even though he wrote them. Again, he only received feedback when he finished his work, like any writer. You don`t need to write inside a bubble to deserve credit for your script. If you listen to the DVD commentary, or Empire of Dreams, you will see Lucas totally came up with the characters, plot devices, themes, and humor all on his own. He talks about how he designed the universe, but also Luke`s arc, his contrast with Leia, how he casted based on this, how the themes connect to American Graffiti, and the actors criticized the dialogue. That was the original classic. Also, it is funny that they criticized him when it wouldn`t have been his work. The only advice Lucas really mentions at getting was to not have the first 20 minutes merely feature the droids, which he later did anyways, cutting out the earlier scenes with Luke. Also, Lucas worked so hard on the film that he suffered from hyper tension, instructing the model designs, drawing, set designs, sculpting, sound effects, cinematography, and puppet designs. Lucas put a lot effort into the casting and there is a reason that John Williams`s score in this film was one of his most famous. Again Lucas got unknown actors, and a lot of people say it was saved in the editing room. If you actually listen to the making of featurette, the Editors Cut was bad, as the editor simply did a bad job. This is why Lucas fired him and supervised the re-editing of the film. Rough cuts are often bad even when a film is well made. Tarantino says a film is made 3 times, when it is written, shot and edited. The rough cut of The Godfather Part II was a disaster as well. Lucas was very involved with creating the pace of the editing, and what scenes were put in. Some people think the studio interfered with the making of Lucas’s earlier films but they barely interfered with the making of THX-1138, except for cutting out a few minutes. Lucas got complete creative control and final cut privilege on American Graffiti where the studio didn`t interfere at all. Alan Ladd Junior said he completely trusted Lucas and allowed him free creative control on A New Hope. Even The Secret History of Star Wars acknowledges that he got final cut privilege.

A New Hope shows Lucas can make great films on his own. He had more creative control over this film then either Episodes VI or II, or even Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Confused Matthew`s remark that the original trilogy was great in spite of Lucas is ridiculous. Was it really just the producer, Gary Kurtz, who never did anything substantial after The Empire Strikes Back that made this film great? Gary Kurtz’s story is self contradicting. He claims they never planned another film and just had the Episode IV part as homage to the old movie series. Later, he claims they planned a trilogy that followed the 3 act structure, where the happy resolution was in the third film. Then he claims they had plans for later films where Luke looks for his sister, and his claim that there was an earlier draft for Episode VI that ended in a dark fashion, makes even less sense. As A New Hope was supposed to reinvent the science fiction genre into something fun, if Return of the Jedi only followed up on Empire Strikes Back, it would destroy the purpose of the original film.

The article then tries to imply that Lucas had even less control over The Empire Strikes Back. It thankfully acknowledges George Lucas wrote the story, and again if you listen to the DVD commentary, you hear how he came up with Yoda`s character, Lando`s dilemma, Luke struggling with his dark side, the Walkers, the Wampa, and furthering Vader`s character. The article brushes over this, but Lucas was in favor of the darker tone. He saw this as a part of the trilogy plan and as a contrast to the lighter tone of A New Hope he also envisioned. The article tries to claim that Lucas would have wanted to go too far with the dark tone, which makes it weird he is blamed for how dark Temple of Doom was and how oddly dark THX-1138 was. Star Wars Episodes II and III were. Also, it was Lucas who decided to have Luke lose his hand, and who designed the scene in the cave, and Han Solo being frozen, so that seems just silly. The article claims he wouldn`t want much characterization and say that if there was enough action, no one would notice. This is again strange, as he made American Graffiti, and as Episodes I and II are criticized for the lack of action. In fact, Episodes II and III were the longest films. Also, if you look at the interviews of Lucas from 1983, which prequel bashers often use against him, he criticizes an over reliance of special effects. The article acknowledges that the basic story was from Lucas. You need character arcs and themes in a story treatment to be able to work out a sophisticated screenplay. The article tries to claim that Irvin Kershner wanted a slower film, but if you listen to the DVD commentary, you hear Lucas envisioned this. He and Kershner got along great. Lucas also remarks on the making of Return of the Jedi that on both films, he discussed his intentions with the directors beforehand, and was often active on set. The article thankfully acknowledges that Leigh Brackett`s draft was discarded, and that Lucas wrote the first 3 drafts of the new script, which a few people know. This shows the importance of Lucas on the writing of the film. Also, the article tries to give the impression of Lawrence Kasdan’s, like Kershner’s, disagreed with Lucas. There is a reason Lucas produced Body Heat and brought him back for Return of the Jedi. He also accepted the instructions from Lucas and Spielberg on Raiders of the Lost Ark, the film that Kurtz criticized. The idea that everybody unanimously disagreed with Lucas seems more and more silly. Lucas was the executive producer, and as he funded the film himself, he controlled the studio that made the film. The article suggests he didn`t like the final draft from Lawrence Kasdan, but if that were the case, then why did he allow production to start? This article totally ignores that Lucas hired Irvin Kershner, as they were good friends, had a good previous relationship with Gary Kurtz, he controlled production, and that he, as he said on the commentary of Return of the Jedi, directed the second unit on this film, as he also did on Raiders of the Lost Ark and American Graffiti. The story of Gary Kurtz on this film is also contradictory. He says he suggested Kershner to Lucas as they had worked together before. But on what film did they work together? Lucas knew Kershner and they had a good relationship. Also, Irvin Kershner went on to direct Robocop 2, and he really isn`t known for directing that many great films. Kasdan was successful in the eighties, but still not nearly as successful as under Lucas. Later, he ended up directing things like Dreamcatcher, French Kiss, I Love You To Death, and Wyatt Earp. The article says Kershner would further let the material drift through improvisation, even though neither the cast nor Kershner himself claimed there was that much extensive improvisation. In fact, it was very loyal to Lucas’s script. Also, it says Lucas hounded Kurtz to restrain Kershner, 1. Why couldn`t he do it himself and 2. that is an extremely biased bigoted description. Talking about bigotry, the article claims that his attempt to write very simple films was not to have confronted his limitations as a person. What? You don`t know him as a person. Even if someone is a bad artist it says nothing about who they are as a person. Spielberg saw American Graffiti as a reflection of Lucas’s warm personality. He is always very generous, giving bonuses, raised 3 kids alone while his wife left their kid after getting a lot of money, and he is very respectful to religion. What limitations does he have as a person? Also, the article quotes Lucas guaranteeing Kershner that it would be his film, which contradicts the idea that production was high jacked. Although Kershner says this, Lucas still showed up on set, co-directing shots and puppetry, and even directing James Earl Jones. He also took part in the editing, space ship design, set designs, special visual effects, etc. He mainly allowed Kershner to work with the actors and to create his own camera work, the majority of the time. Also, the article incorrectly claims that it was reshoots and improvisation to create better characterization by Kershner that caused the film to go over budget, when a big part of it was also poor weather conditions. Again, it’s very difficult to create effects and Lucas made sure he got Kershner the money and risked his company for the film, showing he was not a sellout. The article also claims Lucas edited the film into a faster-paced version, which may have been him temporarily getting nervous about his own design, but in the end Lucas still approved of the final cut. The article also claims Lucas shocked his peers through his commercialistic approach on Return of The Jedi, which is again slanderous and melodramatic. The film was basically done in a similar fashion to Return of the Jedi. Lucas again wrote the story, co-wrote the screenplay, executive produced the film, lead the company, and directed the second unit. All of this had occurred on Empire Strikes Back as well. Lucas was working with the second unit, co-screenwriting, helping with the effects an editing and again co-directing. Also, Lucas included less action in the film, and it still had a lot of dark elements, as well as slow moments, and Lucas finished his story. If he were really a sellout, he would have made a sequel trilogy right away. Lucas got Lawrence Kasdan back and Howard Kazanjian produced this film as he did on Raiders of The Lost Ark. This time, Richard Marquand directed. The article tries to dispute this, but A New Hope had a more flawed reaction, although a positive one, when it was released, and both Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi got mixed reviews.

Also, the article tries to show how the making of Raiders of the Lost Ark was more collaborative, which is partially true. How George Lucas might mess Indiana Jones 4 goes way too far though, by saying, “Lucas, let`s just make a movie about a guy who does stuff.” Storywriters do far more. Storywriters are often underappreciated, just like David S Goyer on The Dark Knight trilogy. Storywriters write treatments of about 30 pages that contain all of the essential plot points, character arcs and traits, themes and tones for a film. A screenplay works this out with pacing and dialogue. George Lucas worked together with the great Philip Kaufman on the story, and he was still co-executive producer and second unit director. He gave ideas for the script, defined Indy`s character, the homage elements, he helped with storyboarding, casting, special effects, editing, music and puppetry. What is ironic is that both Indiana Jones and The Temple of Doom and Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade were criticized as well.

The article makes a lot of assumptions that Lucas might have seen bad writing as part of the charm of Star Wars, even though he wrote for 4 years on the Episode I script, and he wrote 4 drafts for Episode II. The article also criticizes the fact that Lucas started working on Episodes II and III without the screenplay being finished, but this is because he worked on the story for so long. Also, it assumes Jonathan Hales had little room to maneuver because the sets were already being constructed, but sets are rebuilt and reshoots take place all the time. This is why Lucas himself did rewriters. Iron Man started production without a finished script, as did Die Hard. Men in Black, The Abyss, Blade Runner, Gladiator, and Black Hawk Down all had enormous rewrites, reshoots, and edits.

So really, Lucas did have the touch and brought us many of the greatest films everyone loves. In our opinion, he kept it as well and made follow ups that deserve to be reevaluated.

Now with that said, let’s get started on “Star Wars Week” with “Star Wars Episode 4: A New Hope,” released in 1977. This film really pays tribute to old films, and George Lucas really did his research when he made this series. The opening title scroll and the wipe transitions are from The Flash Gordon serials, C-3PO and a world run by technology is similar to Metropolis, the first sci-fi movie made, The Wizard of Oz with C-3PO resembling the Tin Man and Chewbacca resembling the Cowardly Lion, the hologram of the Emperor appearing is similar to the Wizard's, the way the characters meet, The Jawas looking like the Munchkins, Luke and Han disguising themselves as Storm Troopers and when Obi-Wan dies is like how the Witch dies. It also shows a resemblance to The Hidden Fortress with the way the story is told from C-3PO and R2-D2's point of view, and how the samurais are like the Jedis. Also, the Mos Eisley bar scene is just like any bar scene from any Western and when Luke's home is burned, it’s similar to John Wayne's movie, "The Searchers." It also pays tribute to horror movies, like Darth Vader's cape resembling Dracula's, and the casting of Peter Cushing alongside David Prowse. Also, the titles are similar to B-movies, Luke is the classic archetype, Obi-Wan is the classic mentor like Gandalf and Merlin the Wizard, and the Emperor is based off of Caesar and Hitler. Everything put together really brings a special movie that you don't see very often or at all.

Luke is the classic hero who wants to get out of his home, but can't because his Uncle needs his help. He was whiny at first, but did grow as the films went on. Obi-Wan, like I mentioned before is one of the classic mentors we have seen. Beru and Owen are responsible as his Aunt and Uncle, since no one knows about Luke's parents. That is until the prequels came out, but when people from my generation was watching these movies, we had no clue. They want to protect Luke, but at the same time, Beru understands Luke's feelings but Owen doesn’t want to let Luke go out in the world. Leia is the classic princess who is strong-willed and makes decisions when she feels is necessary, even if it means costing the lives of millions. Han Solo is a great captain, but it's very evident that he doesn't know how to work with others since he's been flying around solo (practically in his name), but does learn to make new friends. Chewbacca is his loyal companion and really does a great job to help protect him. Darth Vader (Darth coming from the variation of "Dark" while Vader is Dutch for "Father") is one of the greatest villains ever. You know how strong he is since he's got an entire Empire at his fingertips and wrapped around his finger that they have to acquiesce to everything he says. Governor Tarkin is like the only person who can control Vader, and he is probably just as sadistic and evil like Vader is.

Of course, none of this would be complete without the casting of such amazing actors. They include Mark Hamil, Carrie Fisher, Harrison Ford, Peter Guiness, David Prowse, Peter Cushing, James Earl Jones, Peter Mayhew, Shelagh Fraser, Phil Brown, Kenny Baker and Anthony Daniels.

The romance was well set up since Leia and Luke understand one another and have a connection. However, Han and Leia are the ones that start to have feelings for one another, since they at first are always arguing, but they do see the good in one another.

The action was well put together. The lightsaber fight scenes were just edge of your seat excitement. The sets were fantastic for the time, the puppetry and animatronics were excellently put together, and the worlds were wonderfully created. These are breathtaking worlds that you want to be living in. The direction was great, the sounds fluent, and the music has one of the best soundtracks ever. The story is a classic rebel story where they see the democracy has turned into a dictatorship, so they try to turn it back into a democracy again. I like that. The writing is excellent and the script has some of the most quotable lines of all time. Use the force, may the force be with you, I've got a bad feeling about this, Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi you're my only hope, you're all clear kid let's blow this thing and go home, and finally, great shot kid that was one in a million.

However, there are some flaws that no one probably noticed when they first saw the movie. For instance, Leia goes to the rebel base listed transmitting their plans, Beru and Owen murdered, Obi-Wan not escaping, the long, boring moment of C-3P0 and R2-D2 walking in the desert, and also two small torpedoes blowing up an entire Death Star. But these are few and far between, so it's nothing to go crazy about. Also, this movie started the whole "Who Shot First" debate. Look, I just want to clear this up: I saw the original unaltered versions on a VHS tape that we had gotten from my cousin. Han is the only one who shot before they decided to change the scenes up and make Greedo, voiced by Larry Ward, shoot first and Han dodging the shot, which isn't possible at all, before shooting Greedo. George Lucas said that he didn't want Han to be a heartless murderer and Han would not be a good role model for kids.

All in all, it's a classic movie that everyone should check out and see. I know that Lucas was a control freak and Lawrence Kasdan wasn't a yes man, bowing down to everything Lucas said, but it still became a great movie for everyone to watch. In the end, “Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope,” hands down, gets a 10+. If you haven’t seen it, you are missing out.

Stay tuned tomorrow for the continuation on “Star Wars Week.”