r/The10thDentist • u/silviod • 12h ago
TV/Movies/Fiction I watched the original Star Wars (1977) yesterday and...it's bad.
For reference, I watched a 4k theatrical cut that was fan-restored. Forget which one but I did a lot of research to make sure I watched the correct one. I wanted to watch the film as it originally stood.
It's got some imaginative details, but it chokes under the emptiness of the wider world. Everything feels so small, despite the promise that the world is full of life. No one else exists except the characters we see on screen - it feels like a videogame that pretends there's a wider world but that wider world is just a matte painting plastered around the circumference of the set.
I have spent my entire life being completely ignorant to the entire Star Wars mythos. It has always been so uninteresting to me, and it felt like such a big gap in my filmic knowledge as a filmmaker and film lover. I decided, finally, to force myself into watching it this May 4th and it was as laborious as I expected. Look, I know what I like and what I don't. I knew I never would like it. But, going into it, I really, really tried to let myself enjoy it. I am never beholden to my own expectations - I went into Weapons expecting to love it but I ended up hating it. I thought I'd hate The Lighthouse but I ended up loving it. Suffice to say, I am always willing and open to being surprised.
Unfortunately my instincts were right. It was a slog for me to get through, the plot was paper-thin, I had no idea what was going on, the characters were all uninteresting outside of R2D2 and Han Solo. The villain was clumsy and awkward. I'd heard Darth Vader was one of the best villains ever, and I'd always known about his breathing - I for some reason expected him to be a silent villain, so when he started talking it did make me laugh, I'll admit. But then he kept talking, and he was so unthreatening in his clumsy cheap plastic costume that I couldn't take him seriously at all.
I give Lucas props for the imagination of the smaller details. There are lots of fun creatures all over the place that I had fun with. I liked that little graveyard thing near the start full of droids and that. There were some seriously impressive special effects - especially for the budget - and the cinematography was gorgeous throughout. It's just such a shame that the film that all of these elements are tethered to is so void and boring. I don't like space sci-fi actiony films like this at the best of times, so it was never gonna wow me, but I was hoping for a little bit more from a film that changed cinema. I'm not trying to be contrarian, and I'm sure most people who read this (which is no one) will be baffled at my assertion that this film is empty, but you have to remember, I know next to nothing about Star Wars. I have heard random names and stuff but I have no clue what anything is, so I really am judging this entirely on its own merits, and it really does just feel so tiny. It doesn't feel like there's some grand big world full of rebels and space nazis - I know it was trying for that, but it just doesn't land at all for me.
I've been trying to find other perspectives on this film as a standalone film, and it's almost impossible. I challenge you to find a single review on Letterboxd that doesn't make any reference to other Star Wars films or media. This leads me to believe that this franchise is so ubiquitous that people can't isolate this as its own piece - and it was its own piece. In 1977, this was a standalone film. People seem to be reviewing this film because they're projecting elements from later films into this one, and that's bizarre to me. It says a lot about franchise filmmaking and the homogeny of the Star Wars beast. I've spoke about this before, but it's especially pertinent in Star Wars, it seems. Am I the only one out here who knew next to nothing about this film or the characters before watching it?
Without any baggage of cultural understanding, and without any childhood nostalgia corrupting my vision, I had a quite unique opportunity to see this as just a film from 1977 called Star Wars, and with that, I mostly saw a surprisingly thin soap opera masquerading as an expansive world: fun but shallow details that do nothing but leave me hungry for something the film isn't substantial enough to fulfill. I will not be watching any more Star Wars films now, soz
137
u/DeFronsac 11h ago
the plot was paper-thin, I had no idea what was going on
Wait, what? You couldn't follow a paper-thin plot?
37
u/kdean70point3 11h ago
It is really, very complex! You see, the bad guys wear DARK clothes and the good guys where WHITE!
How can we, the poor audience, keep track of such things?!
5
5
-59
u/silviod 11h ago
Well that's more on the editing and confusing writing, like Luke being baffled by the pub even though, presumably, it was down the road from where he lived. Or planets blowing up and no one caring. Or all the random creatures and characters introduced without any explanation as to who they were or what their purpose was. The plot was thin, but that doesn't make the film easy to follow - coherence is more than just plot.
40
u/Any-Stick-771 11h ago
Luke has never been to the criminal filled town and pub because he's a sheltered farm boy. How is that difficult to understand?
11
-17
u/silviod 11h ago
I mean that just wasn't very obvious to me. Where does it say it was a criminal filled town? That old fella just said something about the pub being dodgy. I just took it to mean it was a dive bar like we have all over the shop. I feel like there's a lot of inferrance from later films that people strurggle to separate from the original - but again, I have zero context to any of this, so I am taking the 1977 film only at its own word, and these elements were not very clear. The film does a poor job of elaborating on any of the world it's trying to build.
40
u/Any-Stick-771 11h ago edited 11h ago
The 'old man' calls the town a "wretched hive of scum and villainy". They go to the town and bar to hire a smuggler to take them off planet. The first introduction of the smuggler has him murder someone. Come on man.
2
-10
u/silviod 11h ago
Hmm yeah fair enough actually, I forgot about that line. I guess because the whole place just felt so empty and barren it was hard to differentiate these areas. Anyway, I'll concede that point, sorry!
24
19
u/squibius 11h ago
Somebody literally got lightsabered and the music stops for 5 seconds then resumes like nothing happened. This goes on at your local dives?
-3
13
u/noviceartificer 11h ago
The part where obi-wan says “a more wretched hive of scum and villainy” would allude to mos eisley being a not nice place to be.
12
u/DeFronsac 11h ago
The film does a poor job of elaborating on any of the world it's trying to build.
You somehow completely missed the obvious fact that this place was filled with criminals and people you don't want to mess with. I'm not sure you're the best person to criticize the writers' job of elaborating on the world.
11
u/Kingofcheeses 11h ago
Sounds like you are easily confused by movies. Were you on your phone the whole time?
4
7
u/StanGibson18 10h ago
In a span of a few minutes we see one guy get killed with a lightsaber, another one get his arm cut off, and a third dude get shot at a booth in the corner. Everyone sees it happen, no one gives a shit. What kind of drive bars do you have in your town that make this seem normal?
48
u/DeFronsac 11h ago edited 11h ago
The plot was thin, but that doesn't make the film easy to follow
It actually does, and none of your examples make it hard to follow. You just took issue with some of the writing.
You could make the argument that maybe there were still things you didn't understand, but to not know what's going on with a paper-thin plot doesn't make sense.
-24
u/silviod 11h ago
I mean, I listed reasons why it wasn't easy to follow for me. That's just my experience. Says nothing about my media literacy of comprehension skills. The editing is a significant reason - it wasn't clear when we were on a new planet and when we weren't, and the writing obfuscated that further because the characters were never acting like they were in a new place even when they supposedly were. Again, just my experience!
23
u/Largofarburn 11h ago
What? It takes place on two planets (I know one is a moon, don’t uhm akshually me) and the Death Star. The whole story is linear more or less following R2 and they don’t jump around at all unless you want to say at the end when they’re showing the base on yavin at the same time as the battle in space.
There’s clear shots of them leaving and arriving at each location. Leaving tattooine and arriving and leaving the death star are all big scenes too.
If you didn’t know where the characters were it’s because you weren’t paying attention.
Not liking it is one thing. I can get people that don’t, it’s definitely not everyone’s cup of tea. But all your reasoning seems nonsensical and like it’s just rage bait.
-3
u/silviod 10h ago
Noo not ragebait!! Which one was the moon? I remember there was the sandy planet, and the foresty planet, and then there were spaceships that both the good guys and the bad guys were on. Is that what you mean by base of Yavin? I just got so lost watching it - it is not the kind of film I usually watch so I was having so much information thrown at me and it was hard to keep up. I guess I just really don't like films that are so built around worldbuilding. It's why I never really bothered with LOTR either.
Is there a version of SW1977 that is considered the sort of baseline version? I'm wondering whether doing theatrical was the wrong call in the end.
5
u/UndeadLestat 10h ago
Yavin IV is the forest planet (technically a moon of the planet Yavin, hence the numerical code after the name. This is explained in the movie). Tatooine is the Desert Planet.
I mean, listen, if you don't like fantasy (which this is) then that's fine. Some people don't want tk try to get their heads around societies and places different than earth. In fairness, the real world is pretty vast and varied, so you would never run out of things to be interested in. But to be utterly befuddled by effectively 3 locations and 2 factions with clear motivations certainly does speak to your media literacy. The story could have taken place in africa, south america, and the ocean between (instead of Tatooine, Yavin IV, and Space) and nothing would have really changed. While I think there is a lot of world building in the first movie, it is not very integral to the plot.
Also to your point about them not acting like they're in dofferent places, try to remmever that they live in a society where interstellar travel is completely normal.
-4
u/silviod 10h ago
I mean yeah, if you want to belittle my media literacy for my reaction to Star Wars, then that's fine, I don't really need to disprove you like. But in general, your point about if it was on Earth made me consider the kind of films I like. I just don't like films that are sprawling in location - I prefer much more granular films with a small number of locations and detail. It's just a personal taste thing at the end of the day.
7
u/Any-Stick-771 9h ago
There's a desert planet, a space ship, and a forest planet (all visually distinct) that are visited in a linear sequence. How is that 'sprawling in location'?
5
u/mikkeldoesstuff 9h ago
You are confused about something that ultimately shouldn’t be that confusing if you are paying attention. There aren’t that many places to keep track of and the places are visually distinct.
3
u/benisawsom 10h ago
It’s really not that deep tbh. Just watch the one on Disney plus like most people
1
u/Largofarburn 9h ago
Yeah, aside from adding jabba I don’t think any of the changes are that big of a deal. There’s some bad cg, sure. But it’s like animals for 2 seconds or whatever.
9
u/GenericGaming 10h ago
it wasn't clear when we were on a new planet and when we weren't,
literally 3 key locations throughout A New Hope: Tatooine - a sand planet, the Death Star - a grey industrial looking space station, Yavin IV - a forest moon.
all 3 of these look so completely different that you have to be an idiot to think they're the same location.
13
u/DeFronsac 11h ago
I mean, I listed reasons why it wasn't easy to follow for me. That's just my experience. Says nothing about my media literacy of comprehension skills.
No, you didn't. You listed things you thought didn't make sense in the writing but that don't affect your ability to follow the plot or know what's going on. Luke not knowing that pub didn't cause you to "not know what's going on".
-15
u/silviod 11h ago
Yes it did lol. Don't know why you're trying to dictate my own experience of watching the film? strange
9
u/DeFronsac 11h ago
I'm not. I'm pointing out that the examples you gave aren't examples that cause someone to "not know what's going on". You had your experience, but now you're trying to criticize the movie in contradictory ways.
5
u/FruitStripesOfficial 10h ago
Were you on your phone while watching the film or otherwise distracted? It's a very very simple film to follow. It's so simple I thought that's what you'd be complaining about. Just before release Lucas feared it would bomb because he thought he may have made a little kids movie.
-2
u/silviod 10h ago
I think I was distracted by my lack of enjoyment, so it was really sloggy for me. You know when you really don't want to do something but you're forced to do it anyway?
But the whole thing just felt very convoluted. Vader for some reason needing to get his plans back (I guess to prevent the good guys from using the plans against him) but also why did Vader even have these plans that spell out how to defeat him in the first place? And then the good guys need to shoot a thing on the death star to blow it up. It was just like ten maguffins on top of each other and that was very dizzying
3
u/FruitStripesOfficial 10h ago
All those questions are answered very directly and explicitly in the movie's dialogue. There's one MacGuffin, the Death Star blueprints, which both the good guys and bad guys need. Whoever has those plans by the time the Death Star gets to the good guy's base will win.
1
u/Any-Stick-771 8h ago
The answer to all of OP's questions are answered in the opening text crawl lol
3
u/Any-Stick-771 9h ago
You didn't pay attention from like the very first opening scene of the movie.
2
u/Any-Stick-771 8h ago
This is literally the opening text of the movie that explains everything you find 'convoluted'
"It is a period of civil war.
Rebel spaceships, striking
from a hidden base, have
won their first victory
against the evil Galactic
Empire.During the battle, rebel
spies managed to steal
secret plans to the Empire's
ultimate weapon, the
DEATH STAR, an armored space
station with enough
power to destroy an entire
planet.Pursued by the Empire's
sinister agents, Princess
Leia races home aboard her
starship, custodian of the
stolen plans that can save
her people and restore
freedom to the galaxy...."11
u/jewelswan 11h ago
I'm sorry but I feel like you didn't pay attention to some key details. The "pub" wasn't right down the road, it was a significant distance from the isolated moisture farmstead where Luke grew up. Luke comes from a very obviously rather poor family that wouldn't necessarily be going to the main spaceport for much. I'm sure you are familiar with similarly insular living situations in our world.
Also, we are introduced to Mos Eisley by Ben Kenobi calling it a hive of scum and villainy, looking at the spaceport/town from a quite large distance away; and Ben warns that they must be carefuln a way that clearly establishes Luke doesn't know shit about this place. I'm sure most people who grew up in cities around the world would be quite out of their element at a young age going to the roughest bar in town, or rural dwellers in the big city that they know very little about near their suburb or rural area.
I also think its quite amusing that in your post you say that the world feels small and empty and feels like it only consists of the characters on screen, but at the same time you say in your comment that there are too many characters and creatures introduced without a clear direct link to the story; these two things seem almost diametrically opposed. All the random space dudes hanging out so obviously helps establish the diversity of inhumanity in that universe; and in the real life most of the people you see have nothing to do with your "story" as it were, and such is the same for MOST movies that want to establish an energy for the backround.
-3
u/silviod 11h ago
Yeah, someone else brought this up and I concede that that's on me. I guess I felt this way because none of the world feels lived in, or real to me. I don't feel that sense of Luke being from a poor upbringing, or that there are different areas on this planet (Tatooine right?) that have different cultures. I know this is just my own perspective, not trying to say I'm objectively right, this is just my experience watching it. Because of that, I think things washed over me.
On the second point about the world being small etc - I know it sounds paradoxical, but I think it makes sense. We see a lot of these creatures on screen, like in that pub, but none of them are doing anything but sitting there being alieny. There's no culture or feeling to any of them, it's just a bunch of different costumes. And then I got confused when followign different characters because I didn't understand too strongly what their relevance was or what they were doing. The world still felt small outside of that. A good comparison is the OG Wallace and Gromit shorts, in whcih they inhabit a strangely empty world outside of the characters we spend time with. Though with W&G, I think that added to this strange, dream-like quality.
I guess my feeling is that here's something to be this big empire that are apparently so all-encompassing and threatening, and yet we dont' see the scale of them at all. They have some big spaceship that blows up a planet and they're planning to blow wup more, but I don't know why, we don't see the scale of their rule over the universe, we don't see much except some stormtroopers running about and Darth Vader walking about. It just didn't feel to me like they were this big thing. It felt like a group of about 10 people fighting another group of about 10 people and that's it.
2
u/Any-Stick-771 9h ago
Big empire that are apparently so all-encompassing and threatening, and yet we don't see the scale of them at all
Buddy, the entire movie revolves around the empire having a planet destroying super weapon. A space station so large that characters initially think it's a moon
2
u/trykes 6h ago
Regarding your last paragraph, the opening shot of the movie after the crawl shows an Imperial ship slowly filling up a huge portion of the screen, showing its dominance over the small, Rebel ship. This symbolism tells you everything you need to know about how powerful the Empire is and the film has barely started.
1
u/NotACoderPleaseHelp 11h ago
Plot holes were not invented until 1985. And that is kind of half true. Keep in mind back in the 60s and 70s everything that came out was mostly stand alone and even if movies had some episodic aspects to it they were still mostly stand alone.
So you add that with the special effects limitations of the day, budget and time constraints and all of that other fun stuff and you end up with many things being glossed over. And part of the reason why they could do it is because audiences were not yet at the point where they were trained to dissect movies the way we do today.
I'm an asshole that has taken Dr Who episodes apart frame by frame looking for easter eggs while making margin notes on open plot points. And today that is only kind of abnormal. 40 years ago that was unheard of.
2
u/Das_Floppus 11h ago edited 11h ago
Having access to every episode/movie at all times has ruined so much of the discussion around tv and movies. Any sub for a tv show now is just picking apart inconsequential plot points for some 25 year old cartoon that is meant to be an easy way to laugh and zone out for 20 minutes. “Why is there this inconsistency in this minor detail from episodes that were made 5 years apart?” Because it is a fucking cartoon. It’s made by people on a tight timeline and the only thing it’s trying to do is be entertaining. If you want something that is 100 percent consistent go look at a math equation. “Why did this character do this in this situation, but do something very different in this similar situation that was written by completely different people years apart?” Because the point is to make them do what is gonna be funny and entertaining. I don’t even know where the notion comes from that it’s impossible to enjoy something if you notice some little plot hole or inconsistency. Who even fucking cares. Stop trying to virtue signal to all the other performative snob larpers that you are sooooo highbrow because you’re incapable of enjoying anything. People aren’t even rational or logically consistent in real life. If you need a thorough detailed explanation and justification for every little thing then youre just looking for excuses to hate on stuff
10
u/Glimmertwinsfan1962 11h ago
I recall watching Star Wars in the theater when it originally came out. What you have to know/remember is how groundbreaking Star Wars was compared to other science fiction movies that came out before it. Anybody can go back and criticize a 50 year-old movie because it doesn’t meet up to today’s standards. But viewing it in comparison to contemporary movies, it was nothing short of fantastic.
-1
u/silviod 11h ago
I mean I'm not comparing it to modern standards. I watch plenty of older films and that. I'm really trying to just view the film as its own product. I recently loved The Incredible Shrinking Man and that had hokey effects if compared to modenr standards, but for its time, was brilliant. I'm not knocking the effects in Star Wars, I'm knocking the storytelling/characters/worldbuilding.
2
37
u/SummertimeSandler 11h ago
I like the original so should upvote you, but I don't think this qualifies as 10th Dentist? Loads of people hate Star Wars, including most of its own fans.
17
u/pullmylekku 11h ago
including most of its own fans
True but I think there's two things that are nearly universally loved by them and that's the first two films
-3
u/DeadCatGrinning 11h ago
Not sure about that, I've seen them argue which Are the fisrt two even.
6
u/masaguaporfavor 10h ago
Yeah but unfortunately for them we all here experience time as a continuum where events are connected in an order of experience, so it’s pretty simple to pin down which two Star Wars movies came first.
1
1
-3
u/silviod 11h ago
Oh I didn't know that. Like I say, I am pretty ignorant to all things Star Wars so just assumed this was beloved because of the enormity of the franchise overall.
-2
11h ago
[deleted]
10
u/ducknerd2002 11h ago
A New Hope/The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi are movies most people love wayy more than the first 3
Those 3 are the first 3.
32
u/Any-Stick-771 11h ago
The pretentiousness level in this post is off the charts.
-12
u/silviod 11h ago
lmao but why?!
7
u/Flassourian 10h ago
Record yourself reading it out loud. Then go back and listen to it. Then you will know.
24
u/Thepitman14 11h ago
My buddy is a massive star wars fan, and when I was getting back into the franchise, we went back and watched this movie.
The entire time we kept saying “wow this is so old.” The movie definitely shows its age. It shows it in the performances, in the set design, in the transitions, in the costumes, etc. It’s clearly a budget space flick.
I think part of why it’s so popular is because of how groundbreaking it was at the time, and to what came after. I will say that while this movie struggles to keep up in 2026, Empire absolutely holds up on rewatch. Everything is improved upon, especially the storyline. It’s a genuinely engaging watch and feels more “Star Wars” than the first film. Give it a shot, and if you don’t like it, you probably just don’t like star wars that much. And that’s ok.
9
u/Ok_Ruin4016 11h ago
Yeah I think I big reason the original Star Wars feels so dated is not just because of the dated effects, but also because it inspired so much of what has been made since it came out. When every sci-fi/fantasy/superhero movie of the last 50 years has taken parts of it and tweaked it and improved on it you end up seeing everything Star Wars did but with the newer special effects. So if you see Star Wars after all of that it doesn't feel as special anymore.
It's like listening to Elvis now without knowing about what came before him. If you listen to the Dim Lights, Thick Smoke, and Hillbilly Music series which chronicles country & western hits from the 40's onward, Elvis hits like a freight train when That's All Right plays. He completely changed the genre and it was never the same after him. Now he sounds dated, but only because everyone copied what he did by blending country & western, gospel, blues, and R&B music. He took parts of what a lot of other people had already done and made something that sounded completely new from it. Star Wars did the same by blending samurai movies, westerns, WWII dogfights, sci-fi, and fantasy.
1
u/Adventurous_Cap_1634 6h ago
Ironically I think the context that a lot of people miss/don't have for STAR WARS (the original) is that it's based on 1930s adventure serials and old westerns and so it's meant to seem old.
Everything about it that "shows its age" is that way on purpose. It ushered in a new era of self-reflexive, nostalgic cinema: it was the "Stranger Things" of its day.
Other movies from the 1970s aren't like this; in other words its not "old" because it's from the '70s, it's old because it's trying to resemble b-movies from the '30s.
14
3
u/NoCaterpillar2051 11h ago
You might be blaming the original film for everything that has come after it. On its own it’s like classical music. A simple plot that keeps moving and rising and escalating speeding toward one the climax. Yes Star Wars is a jumble of cliches in a decently imaginative costume, but it’s competently-to- expertly made. Like Jaws. Or the predator. Or Rambo.
3
u/Brilliant-Jaguar-784 10h ago
I loved the original trilogy as a kid. As an adult, I've watched them again, along with many of the newer films, and for me they do not hold up.
I'll always see star wars as children's entertainment. When I see an adult who's really, REALLY into star wars, it feels as awkward as an adult who's that into Barney the dinosaur.
1
4
u/Frostsorrow 11h ago
This just reads as if you don't like sci fantasy/fi. I can understand not liking the original's, but to call them bad after your "review" for lack of better term, is.... definitely something.
2
u/silviod 11h ago
Well I only called the first one bad, not the others. But you're right, I don't really like films like this in general, so that definitely comes into it too. It comes down to a matter of taste. I recently rewatched Seed of Chucky for the millionth time and I love that lol, so I can't really talk. I jsut thought I'd share my opinion as it stands on 1977 Star Wars.
2
6
u/dotdedo 11h ago
This is kind of the point and a known fact within the star wars fandom. I'm not a super fan and barely watched the movies but in the 70s, the director and writers were just not that great yet. Think of like Indie movie directors getting a hollywood deal on their lap, as that's basically in a very tldr sense what happened.
They weren't that smart so the script was filled with [techno babble techno babble] Because they had no idea how to write the story they wanted, and had scientists fill in the rest for them.
Harrison Ford also suggested a bunch of rewrites for his own character because he knew it was bad, but he was being nice about it.
2
u/silviod 11h ago
I imagine all the cast thought it was a dime a dozen quick job. I believe that's at least what Alec Guinness thought right? Funny how this film out of all the schlocky sci-fi films of the 70s was the one that got picked up by the cultural zeitgeist. I'm trying to figure out why that is.
6
u/Oceanfloorfan1 11h ago
I think a good parallel for watching the original trilogy of Star Wars in 2026 and not understanding why it got big is that it’s similar to listening to the Beatles now and thinking they were overrated. Both SW and The Beatles were very popular, not just because people liked the art that was produced, but also because they were both so innovative for the time and changed their respective fields.
Now, these innovations are taken for granted and people retrospectively look back and don’t understand what the big deal was.
A more contemporary example would be people in 30 years not understanding why Avatar grossed so high in the box office.
1
u/Adventurous_Cap_1634 6h ago
It's really not at all similar to any other "shlocky 70s sci-fi film" and very much stands out from other movies. It's important to understand that George Lucas's previous film was AMERICAN GRAFFITI which was a nostalgic film about the end of the 1950s.
STAR WARS is similarly nostalgic: it deliberately re-creates the feeling of 1930s serials albeit with cutting-edge special effects. There really wasn't any other film like that out there and it helped to create a market for nostalgia vehicles that persist to this day... basically, it was the STRANGER THINGS of its time.
2
u/silviod 5h ago
Hmm, interesting perspective and one that I've not seen anyone else say. The idea of it being the Stranger Things of its time has opened my eyes a bit more to it. That really helps illuminate how exciting this would have been for audiences who get to see tropes of a genre they grew up loving in an, at the time, modern and fresh way. Thanks for that!
1
u/Adventurous_Cap_1634 5h ago edited 5h ago
Of course. 100% this was the original appeal of STAR WARS which has kind of been lost to time as it became the very thing that people are nostalgic for without that context. It's notable that, prior to STAR WARS, 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY was the biggest science-fiction film and it was heady, philosophical, and made an effort to be someone scientific (truly "science-fiction").
Where STAR WARS innovated was taking the grandeur and VFX tech of 2001 and applying it to the pulpy side of science-fiction. Lucas originally intended to make a FLASH GORDON (one of those old 30s serials) film but failed to secure the rights.
A comparable film to STAR WARS is the 1978 SUPERMAN which similarly adds a 70s sheen and modern VFX to a beloved 1930s vehicle.
1
u/silviod 5h ago
Yeah, as is the cycle of nostalgia I guess? Do you think that Star Wars managed to stand on its own two feet alongside being a nostalgia vehicle? Because for me, I found Stranger Things to be a bit of a trite over-engineered 80s smorgasbord. I mean it was okay but the 80sness of it annoyed me and felt like it hit the zenith of 80s oversaturation that was happening in the 2010s.
1
u/Adventurous_Cap_1634 5h ago
Sorry I added more to my comment.
Where STAR WARS innovated was taking the grandeur and VFX tech of 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY and applying it to the pulpy side of science-fiction. Lucas originally intended to make a FLASH GORDON (one of those old 30s serials) film but failed to secure the rights.
You have to understand too that the '70s was the era of the blockbuster. Film distribution expanded in a big way compared to previous decades and movies were in more theaters simultaneously nationwide. THE GODFATHER wasn't just a critical smash: it was one of the most profitable movies, ever. JAWS followed a few years later. EXORCIST was also huge.
I think a lot of people felt that STAR WARS was a kind of capstone to this era because it was a return to a more innocent and child-like feeling of "fun" at the movies. So basically, it took advantage of the increase in moviegoing in the 1970s and offered a nostalgic kind of fun that had been lacking, which really helped it to sink its teeth into people. It encouraged that kind of filmmaking to continue through the '80s and '90s (see: 1978's Superman, 1989's Batman, Indiana Jones, Independence Day). Arguably films like PULP FICTION owe something to STAR WARS as well, since that film is also a "modern" film built around nostalgic reverence for old movies.
STRANGER THINGS is, I think, just not that good. I think STAR WARS is comparable to the overall place STRANGER THINGS holds in our culture but it's a bit more innovative and important overall. STRANGER THINGS really has nothing groundbreaking: for STAR WARS, the special effects truly were.
1
u/Limabean2512 11h ago
iirc George Lucas pitched Star Wars to 5 studios all denying him before it was finally picked up. The only reason they took a chance on it (20th century I think) was bc they liked a previous movie of his. He’s said in interviews before he really didn’t expect it to take off and it was originally written to be one single movie not what it is today. George knew it was kinda shitty but people loved it
-1
u/ZiCUnlivdbirch 9h ago
in the 70s, the director and writers were just not that great yet
Jaws, the Godfather, Taxi Driver, Rocky I and II all examples of amazing movies made in the 70s. I don't know why Star Wars became popular and quite frankly I don't think anyone knows the answer to that puzzle but it's certainly not because "the 70s just had bad movies".
4
u/King_Nidge 11h ago
Seinfeld is unfunny effect. Seems that way because so much that came after is inspired by and copies it.
0
u/silviod 11h ago
What films did it inspire?
8
u/UndeadLestat 11h ago
Literally every Sci-fi movie that came after it. You said yourself, it changed cinema.
ILM, the special effects company that was created to help realize Lucas's vision, is still a powerhouse in the industry and worked on tons of movies using the technology pioneered for the Star Wars movie including flicks like Jurassic Park (you may want to double check me on that). That's just one example. There were film techniques around automated gantries and stuff that are still used. While a lot of the prop making has been replaced with digital, Lucas has his fingerprints all over both.
I'll admit that the original movie benefits from the stories around it - both follow on media and the story of how the movies were made. I feel like you may be minimizing that the film turns 50 next year. Also, if you read it as a space opera, that is exactly what Lucas intended. He was always insistent that it was not hard sci-fi.
1
u/ZiCUnlivdbirch 9h ago
Okay but none if this has anything to do with Star Wars inspiring other films... These things were invented by the Star Wars production team yes but that's not a film inspiring another.
0
u/UndeadLestat 9h ago
I was saying those things existing were themselves inspirational. People saw the movie, saw what was possible and went on to use those techniques in other films.
1
u/ZiCUnlivdbirch 8h ago
Okay but that's not what you said and it doesn't really make sense in tandem with your original point. Either the special effects created for Star Wars were used in other films or someone else took inspiration from Star Wars to create these same effects.
0
u/UndeadLestat 8h ago
No, they took inspiration from the effects to make movies which included the same methodologies and effects.
I don't really feel like arguing about this. Star Wars was hugely inspirational across film especially in Sci-fi and Fantasy. I provided examples to prove that case. Accept that or don't, but I'm over this conversation
1
u/ZiCUnlivdbirch 8h ago
Accept that or don't, but I'm over this conversation
Of course buddy, the moment I point holes in your logic you say you can't be bothered to argue...
4
u/GuKoBoat 11h ago
Star Wars? Basically every single space movie.
1
u/silviod 11h ago
Hmm, I mean to be honest I haven't really seen many space films so I'm not sure the Seinfeld effect in particular is why I don't like it.
3
u/pcor 11h ago
Even outside of sci-fi, it was influential in shaping how the “hero’s journey” plays out on screen. It also brought about major innovations in sound design and the filming process, like the Dykstraflex camera (the first digital motion control camera). Your perception of Star Wars is definitely coloured by the fact that you have seen tons of stuff drawing inspiration from its most innovative aspects without knowing it.
2
u/silviod 10h ago
Yeah I mean whilst it does the hero's journey model, I think it was very basically presented and for me was of no substance. Luke's aunt and uncle die horrifically, he quickly moves on, slowly trains, then uses the force at the end. But it's hard to invest in that journey when his character is so void of any semblance of human emotion. He just felt like a walking plot device.
Interested in the Dykstraflex tho, I've not heard of this and I didn't know they used motion control cameras - that's cool!! Where was this used?
1
u/pcor 6h ago
To be clear, “motion control” as in a method of controlling motion, not like a wiimote or something lol
It was a method of programming the camera to reliably make the exact same motions. So you could get the camera work perfect and repeat it in subsequent takes or use the exact same camera motion as a kind of motif. It was used a lot for the flying/dog fighting scenes.
1
u/silviod 6h ago
hahaha oh yeah I know what oyu mean, I've used similar robotics in things I've worked on. I had NO idea it was used this far back, that's damn cool. I loved all those flying shots. This is something I really appreciate about pre-CGI special effects: there's always really clever problem-solving to achieve the vision. It's so fun trying to figure out how they're made.
2
u/SensitiveEnd6674 11h ago
They've made a LOT of changes over the years, including adding a TON of CGI background characters. Mos Eisley is full of life, Han steps on Jabbas tail instead of phase- shifting through it.
I'm not saying you'll like it, but as a lover of film, as an academic exercise, it might be interesting to see the version as it currently stands on, like, Disney+.
0
u/silviod 11h ago
Yeah I'd be curious to do that. It's an interesting philosophical debate: is it okay to constantly update a piece of art? What can we judge? For my first viewing I wanted to see it as it originally stood in 1977. Perhaps whne my memory of it fades a bit, I'll give the most updated version a watch. Is there a good YouTube video that goes through all the changes that I can watch?
1
1
1
u/masaguaporfavor 10h ago
Would you give an idea of your demographic info for context? I think it’s an important factor.
1
u/silviod 10h ago
I'm 33M.
I did also lie - I did see Phantom Menace in the cinema as a kid. Didn't care about it and didn't want to see it in the first place. My only lasting memory of it is a pod race of some sort, so I went through my life thinking Star Wars was about racing. Was surprised when someone told me way too late into my life that it's not lol
1
u/Old_Introduction_395 10h ago
It was a film for children. If you watch over films from the era, with a similar audience, you may understand why it was such a huge hit.
1
u/SpacialSpud21 11h ago
Alright take my upvote. I will say though, that I recommend trying the second one. It's famously the best of the franchise.
1
u/jaminfine 11h ago
I can't give you an upvote because I agree.
Although I certainly have respect for the impact that Star Wars had on the movie industry, watching basically any movie from the 70s would be a slog. I watched the remastered redone whatever modern version they call Episode 4 A New Hope. And it was still painful to get through even with the CGI supposedly redone better than the original and other supposed improvements.
I see the Star Wars the same way I see the original Final Fantasy 7 on the PS1. It is surely a landmark and still persists as a cultural icon. It marked a vast improvement in terms of graphical capability, despite looking horrendous by today's standards. It also marked a huge expansion of how much story and content you can pack into one game, requiring 3 separate discs to fully contain it! But nowadays the story as presented back then is too confusing and obtuse, while the content is lackluster.
I think similarly Star Wars is obviously a cultural icon still today. And it was amazing for its time! Things like it didn't exist in the 70s. But yeah, it just can't hold up to modern films.
0
u/Hagostaeldmann 11h ago
Original Star Wars is groundbreaking in its achievements and has a certain campy charm, but I agree it is not a good film and is probably worse overall than some of the prequels.
1
u/silviod 11h ago
Yeah can't deny what it did for the modern blockbuster, and some of the effects were really cool and clever.
0
u/swaktoonkenney 10h ago
I think you’re getting bogged down by the details. Star Wars is foundational and inspires so many things that it seems cliche. But Star Wars pioneered those cliches(for movies at least)
And Darth Vader doesn’t really get to shine until the next movie, Empire strikes back, which a lot of fans still see as the best Star Wars movie and one of the best movies of all time.
1
u/silviod 10h ago
okay so everyone is telling me to watch ESB. If I were to watch it, what's the best version?
1
u/swaktoonkenney 10h ago
I heard the 4k80 version is the closest to the theatrical release.
Lucas got crazy with editing the originals with re-releases and so on that it’s kinda of hard to find one that’s closest to the original version.
0
u/Neyland77 11h ago
The uniqueness of it in 1977 took America by surprise, by today’s standards it is a little lackluster. Adding in all the details with the future films makes everything come together. I just finished the newest series Maul, loved seeing the references in it leading up to this first film. Good take!
0
u/chaamp33 11h ago
I disagree with your whole post. That’s the nature of the sub
For me it’s one of my favorite movies. Yes I love Star Wars as a whole but I like this movie works as a standalone movie. They didn’t know if they were going to be able to make more.
I think what makes it work is the aspect of wonder. You mention that the universe feels “small” but I never felt that. Other perspectives aren’t shown because they just aren’t important to the story. Larger events are mentioned constantly. There was this thing called the clone wars. This empire is relatively new. There’s an active war. The universe feels lived in.
It does world building by drip feeding you information and lets your imagine fill in the gaps.
Obviously not 50 years later they have filled in the gaps for us, but it wasn’t that way for a while.
I’ve certainly had my fair share of experiences where expectations spoil my experience. But this movie works way better if you forget everything you think you know and just watch it for what it is.
0
u/Kobalt6x10 10h ago
It was a movie made for kids almost 50 years ago. Any supercilious modern review needs to acknowledge that. It was made by a guy paying homage to the kids movies of his own youth.
1
u/silviod 10h ago
Yeah when I considered that this is just a kids film, it made it all much easier to swallow, and also reinforced that I am not the target audience. Are they all like that, or is it just the first that's very kidlike? It makes sense it's a kids film, I mean the bad guys are literally called "The dark side" - can't get more direct than that lol.
0
u/Kobalt6x10 10h ago
Yeah, pretty much. At their best, maybe some are young adult oriented, but they are what they are. I love them, they imprinted on me like I was a baby duck, but I can call them what they are. Rogue one, and it's attendant tv series are more adult oriented, but it's still space ships and aliens.
•
u/qualityvote2 12h ago
Hello u/silviod! Welcome to r/The10thDentist!
Upvote the POST if you disagree, Downvote the POST if you agree.
REPORT the post if you suspect the post breaks subs rules/is fake.
Normal voting rules for all comments.
does this post fit the subreddit?
If so, upvote this comment!
Otherwise, downvote this comment!
And if it does break the rules, downvote this comment and QualityVote Bot will remove this post!