Star Wars Episode IV : A New Hope (1977)

I always have tough time starting a commentary on good movies. As such, Star Wars presented me with such a predicament that I proceeded to print out all the reviews and read them cautiously. But know what? I realise that most of the reviewers had the same tough time.

Most had granted One of the The Best Movie Of All Time status to this one, alongside names like Citizen Kane and Casablance. What an honour! I reserve that status to the sequel (or the fifth episode) The Empire Strikes Back, but it owes terribly to this film.

The film begins with the Twentieth Century log with the marching sounds and cuts to the writing "A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away", The Star Wars logo appears with the burst of John Williams score. Wait...I already wrote this in Attack of The Clones comments. Hell, it began here first.

The opening is one of the stunning sequence ever to be filmed. As soon as the scroll of writing fades, a big freaking space ship enters the scene, so sudden, so awesome. And action begins. No time for breath. Move, move, move until the scene shifts to planet Tattooine.

For those dudes who had been in planet Mars or Pluto for the last thirty years, here's the plot (Do I have to?):

There's this guy, named Luke Skywalker, you see. And there is war between the Empire and the rebels, you see. And...Oh cripes! Go and ask your friend, and if he doesn't know, git-outta-here.

Sorry, had to. I am too excited to talk to you about my feelings about this movie, not explain the plot and stuff like that. Gimme a break. If you have taken the trouble to visit my site for the commentaries, the bet is, you have seen or heard of Star Wars.

The Actors:

The only established actor in this film, at that time, is Alec Guinness. And he was nominated, when all he played was a sagely guy, with a knowing smile and a lot of philosophical lines to toss. Piece of cake for this noble actor. His character's, Obi-Wan Kenobi, is central to this film, and all the rest of the sequels and prequels. It is fun to see how much Ewan McGregor's performance has strong similarity, playing a younger Obi-Wan, and you can read about it in my commentaries on Attack of The Clones (AOTC).

Mark Hamill was never big, and never been. But fans will not forget his contributions to this film. His Luke Skywalker, is a predecessor of Anakin Skywalker seen in The Panthom Menace (TPM) and AOTC. He is whiney, but had always some heart in him, that never made him to be drawn towards the dark side.

Carrie Fisher is delightful in this film. Unlike Natalie Portman (who plays her mother in TPM and AOTC) who is stiff and monotonous, Fisher's Princess Leia is animated, gutsy and has a wide variety of emotions.

Harrison Ford. Now this is one guy that I looked forward to watch during my childhood when they screened this film endlessly on TV. He is fantastic. Ford is in his pre-Indiana Jones days, and there is nothing that shows that he is just starting out. He is that fantastic rogue, 'scoundrel', who could have been freshly transported out of some great westerns. If TPM and AOTC are cold, it is because they lack colourful characters like Ford's Han Solo and Princess Leia.

David Prowse/ James Earl Jones both plays Darth Vader, the former the physique and the latter the voice. Of two, only Jones stand out. Never had been in the history of motion picture had we a villain like Darth Vader. In fact, TPM, AOTC and the third prequel concentrates solely on the back story of Darth Vader. Such is the power of his creation. Thanks to the costume, the mask, the sound effect (asthmatic breathing) and above all, Earl Jones' voice, Vader is the first figure rememberd by many when Star Wars mentioned. Currently I have a Darth Vader wallpaper on my PC, he-he-he.

Supporting roles like C3PO (Anthony Daniels), R2D2 (Kenny Baker), Chewbacca (Peter Mayhew) and General Tarkin (Peter Cushing) does their job well enough that it shows on screen.

The cinematography

I can't say much here that has never been said before. Please watch it again and understand how much ground breaking it is. The dog fight is something I missed dearly in the last two prequels.

The Music.

Essential The music IS Star Wars. They should have paid John Williams the first US 20 million in show biz just for this. It lives, man. It will live for a long long time.

George Lucas.

This is one visionary bloke. Unfortunately, Lucas is only recognised with Star Wars films. One Star Wars is worth many Spielberg's creation, so I guess its okay. A brilliant story teller, but not much of an actor's director, I guess. Most of the main cast (like Ford, Fisher, Cushing and Guinness) are impressive because of their own talent, the rest are just there doing their job. A situation immediately rectified in The Empire Strikes Back (TESB). The script didn't permit much space for characterisation, a subject I have some weaknesses for , and this is also corrected in TESB. But all these are sacrified for the pace of the film, which moves briskly, from one character to another, from one place to another, from one action set-piece to another. Marvelous.

When my colleague, Mazlan, was asked how to start this commentary, he said that most readers would look for something new in mine, since they would have obviously known so much and read other reviews. He asked me to look into the negative stuff in the movie. His example was the killing of the Jawa creatures by Imperial Storm Troopers. He is right. But it takes a hell of a thinking to do to find fault in the film. I agree the Troopers were pretty lousy and I didn't like the killing of Cushing's character. But both are important in establishing the Empire and Vader's evilness. I rest my case.

Special Edition

This was released during the 1997, to commemorate the 20th anniversary. Finally I got to see it in big screen, this time with a lot of technical improvement. It was one hell of an experience and I am glad that I was able to see up there. The additions did not marr the narrative flow and at times are crying for attention. If you get past that, you are in good company.

I read many reviews and I find this part interesting. This is Mark R. Leepers take on the greatness of the film:

Before we can determine if STAR WARS really is a great film, in the sense that CITIZEN KANE is a great film, we have to determine some characteristics of film greatness. What is it that makes a film great? One characteristic would be originality. A film should be experimental and should break new ground. But many film experiments fail and leave audiences confused. The new ground that a film breaks must be accepted by audiences so that a film leaves its mark. To this extent, being good is connected with being influential. Still, it is clear that an exploitation film may be the first of its kind and have imitators without being very good. The ground that a film breaks must be valuable. It should advance the art of filmmaking. If a film does what it does well, breaks new ground in the art of filmmaking making valuable contributions, and those contributions are accepted by audiences and become part of the palette for future filmmakers, no more is required for a film to achieve greatness. If you come down to it, that is really what makes CITIZEN KANE a great film. But is STAR WARS great in the same sense? I think that while CITIZEN KANE undeniably has some virtues that STAR WARS lacks (and vice versa), STAR WARS is great in the same sense.

STAR WARS WAS A GROUND-BREAKING FILM. It was the first marrying of cinema and the new video and computer technologies for creating images on film. The effects people had to invent much of the technology as they went along. The last jump in visual technology of the same magnitude had been with Willis O'Brien's stop-motion effects for KING KONG. As late as the '60s the most visually imaginative films--films like JASON AND THE ARGONAUTS--still relied most heavily on variations on, and enhancements of, O'Brien's techniques. Between JASON AND THE ARGONAUTS and STAR WARS there were some impressive pieces of visual fantasy, notably 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY and LOGAN'S RUN, but they relied mostly on just extensive use of model work and other long-existing technologies. For STAR WARS a battery of new technologies was employed and for the first time since KING KONG special effects made a real quantum leap toward the goal of being able to create on the screen any scene that the mind's eye can create.

Full review can be found at: http://reviews.imdb.com/Reviews/00/0060


				*Rakesh's movie talk* *Star Wars Episode IV : A New Hope (1977)*



	Home \| Movie Reviews \| Movie talk \| Film Personalities \| Misc Articles \| Contact Me \| Tamil Time


		Directed by George Lucas Written by George Lucas Starring Alex Guiness, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Mark Hamil and the voice of James Earl Jones



		I always have tough time starting a commentary on good movies. As such, Star Wars presented me with such a predicament that I proceeded to print out all the reviews and read them cautiously. But know what? I realise that most of the reviewers had the same tough time. Most had granted One of the The Best Movie Of All Time status to this one, alongside names like Citizen Kane and Casablance. What an honour! I reserve that status to the sequel (or the fifth episode) The Empire Strikes Back, but it owes terribly to this film. The film begins with the Twentieth Century log with the marching sounds and cuts to the writing "A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away", The Star Wars logo appears with the burst of John Williams score. Wait...I already wrote this in Attack of The Clones comments. Hell, it began here first. The opening is one of the stunning sequence ever to be filmed. As soon as the scroll of writing fades, a big freaking space ship enters the scene, so sudden, so awesome. And action begins. No time for breath. Move, move, move until the scene shifts to planet Tattooine. For those dudes who had been in planet Mars or Pluto for the last thirty years, here's the plot (Do I have to?): There's this guy, named Luke Skywalker, you see. And there is war between the Empire and the rebels, you see. And...Oh cripes! Go and ask your friend, and if he doesn't know, git-outta-here. Sorry, had to. I am too excited to talk to you about my feelings about this movie, not explain the plot and stuff like that. Gimme a break. If you have taken the trouble to visit my site for the commentaries, the bet is, you have seen or heard of Star Wars. The Actors: The only established actor in this film, at that time, is Alec Guinness. And he was nominated, when all he played was a sagely guy, with a knowing smile and a lot of philosophical lines to toss. Piece of cake for this noble actor. His character's, Obi-Wan Kenobi, is central to this film, and all the rest of the sequels and prequels. It is fun to see how much Ewan McGregor's performance has strong similarity, playing a younger Obi-Wan, and you can read about it in my commentaries on Attack of The Clones (AOTC). Mark Hamill was never big, and never been. But fans will not forget his contributions to this film. His Luke Skywalker, is a predecessor of Anakin Skywalker seen in The Panthom Menace (TPM) and AOTC. He is whiney, but had always some heart in him, that never made him to be drawn towards the dark side. Carrie Fisher is delightful in this film. Unlike Natalie Portman (who plays her mother in TPM and AOTC) who is stiff and monotonous, Fisher's Princess Leia is animated, gutsy and has a wide variety of emotions. Harrison Ford. Now this is one guy that I looked forward to watch during my childhood when they screened this film endlessly on TV. He is fantastic. Ford is in his pre-Indiana Jones days, and there is nothing that shows that he is just starting out. He is that fantastic rogue, 'scoundrel', who could have been freshly transported out of some great westerns. If TPM and AOTC are cold, it is because they lack colourful characters like Ford's Han Solo and Princess Leia. David Prowse/ James Earl Jones both plays Darth Vader, the former the physique and the latter the voice. Of two, only Jones stand out. Never had been in the history of motion picture had we a villain like Darth Vader. In fact, TPM, AOTC and the third prequel concentrates solely on the back story of Darth Vader. Such is the power of his creation. Thanks to the costume, the mask, the sound effect (asthmatic breathing) and above all, Earl Jones' voice, Vader is the first figure rememberd by many when Star Wars mentioned. Currently I have a Darth Vader wallpaper on my PC, he-he-he. Supporting roles like C3PO (Anthony Daniels), R2D2 (Kenny Baker), Chewbacca (Peter Mayhew) and General Tarkin (Peter Cushing) does their job well enough that it shows on screen. The cinematography I can't say much here that has never been said before. Please watch it again and understand how much ground breaking it is. The dog fight is something I missed dearly in the last two prequels. The Music. Essential The music IS Star Wars. They should have paid John Williams the first US 20 million in show biz just for this. It lives, man. It will live for a long long time. George Lucas. This is one visionary bloke. Unfortunately, Lucas is only recognised with Star Wars films. One Star Wars is worth many Spielberg's creation, so I guess its okay. A brilliant story teller, but not much of an actor's director, I guess. Most of the main cast (like Ford, Fisher, Cushing and Guinness) are impressive because of their own talent, the rest are just there doing their job. A situation immediately rectified in The Empire Strikes Back (TESB). The script didn't permit much space for characterisation, a subject I have some weaknesses for , and this is also corrected in TESB. But all these are sacrified for the pace of the film, which moves briskly, from one character to another, from one place to another, from one action set-piece to another. Marvelous. When my colleague, Mazlan, was asked how to start this commentary, he said that most readers would look for something new in mine, since they would have obviously known so much and read other reviews. He asked me to look into the negative stuff in the movie. His example was the killing of the Jawa creatures by Imperial Storm Troopers. He is right. But it takes a hell of a thinking to do to find fault in the film. I agree the Troopers were pretty lousy and I didn't like the killing of Cushing's character. But both are important in establishing the Empire and Vader's evilness. I rest my case. Special Edition This was released during the 1997, to commemorate the 20th anniversary. Finally I got to see it in big screen, this time with a lot of technical improvement. It was one hell of an experience and I am glad that I was able to see up there. The additions did not marr the narrative flow and at times are crying for attention. If you get past that, you are in good company. I read many reviews and I find this part interesting. This is Mark R. Leepers take on the greatness of the film: Before we can determine if STAR WARS really is a great film, in the sense that CITIZEN KANE is a great film, we have to determine some characteristics of film greatness. What is it that makes a film great? One characteristic would be originality. A film should be experimental and should break new ground. But many film experiments fail and leave audiences confused. The new ground that a film breaks must be accepted by audiences so that a film leaves its mark. To this extent, being good is connected with being influential. Still, it is clear that an exploitation film may be the first of its kind and have imitators without being very good. The ground that a film breaks must be valuable. It should advance the art of filmmaking. If a film does what it does well, breaks new ground in the art of filmmaking making valuable contributions, and those contributions are accepted by audiences and become part of the palette for future filmmakers, no more is required for a film to achieve greatness. If you come down to it, that is really what makes CITIZEN KANE a great film. But is STAR WARS great in the same sense? I think that while CITIZEN KANE undeniably has some virtues that STAR WARS lacks (and vice versa), STAR WARS is great in the same sense. STAR WARS WAS A GROUND-BREAKING FILM. It was the first marrying of cinema and the new video and computer technologies for creating images on film. The effects people had to invent much of the technology as they went along. The last jump in visual technology of the same magnitude had been with Willis O'Brien's stop-motion effects for KING KONG. As late as the '60s the most visually imaginative films--films like JASON AND THE ARGONAUTS--still relied most heavily on variations on, and enhancements of, O'Brien's techniques. Between JASON AND THE ARGONAUTS and STAR WARS there were some impressive pieces of visual fantasy, notably 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY and LOGAN'S RUN, but they relied mostly on just extensive use of model work and other long-existing technologies. For STAR WARS a battery of new technologies was employed and for the first time since KING KONG special effects made a real quantum leap toward the goal of being able to create on the screen any scene that the mind's eye can create. Full review can be found at: http://reviews.imdb.com/Reviews/00/0060



		*Check out my other Star Wars* comments:** Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back (1980) Star Wars Episode VI: Return Of The Jedi (1983) Star Wars Episode I: The Panthom Menace (1999) Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones (2002)