Toy Story Quartet

Director: John Lasseter, Ash Brannon, Lee Unkrich, Josh Cooley

1995, 1999, 2010, 2019

“A Hollywood film franchise that heralded a new era in animation, the Toy Story trilogy irrevocably changed the cinematic landscape when the series’ first instalment arrived in the mid-1990s.” (844, Jo Taylor, 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die) I do remember Toy Story coming out and being immediately taken with the idea that my toys had an entire life of their own when I wasn’t playing with them – it was magical in a way that only Disney Pixar could be. And I did indeed grow up with the trilogy – I’m not entirely sure how I feel about there being a fourth instalment imminent, as I really felt that the whole story arc was finished perfectly in Toy Story 3. 

Woody and Buzz are brilliant characters, well they all are really – I love Rex being a complete scaredy cat and that Mr Potato Head would not be out-of-place in the Bronx. Buzz is wonderfully naive in the first film, entirely convinced that he really is a space ranger which is counterbalanced by the cynicism of Woody. Tom Hanks is awesome as the self-confessed hero of the trilogy. Supposedly he provided so much improvised material during the recording of the first film that the animators are still using that material in the upcoming fourth instalment.

“And if the first two films detailed the wondrous adventures and occasional travails of infancy and youth, the third instalment tackled the bittersweet reality of growing up.” (844) Toy Story deftly set up the franchise and introduced the core group of characters and while I would have been happy to continue watching their adventures the addition of new characters in Toy Story 2 only added to the fun of watching these films. Joan Cusack as the rowdy cowgirl Jessie was a brilliant addition to the little family that Pixar had created. And Bullseye, a horse who acts like a loyal dog, is adorable. And then we get to Toy Story 3, with even more new characters, although unlike before these adorable cuddly additions are not always as good as they first appear. Mr Pricklepants is brilliant with his delusions of grandeur, ably voiced by Timothy Dalton.

I think part of the joy of watching Toy Story is that there are toys in the films, even if only in the background action, that I remember playing with during my childhood, especially the chatty phone and the etch-a-sketch. The humor of Toy Story is very much two-fold which allows the franchise to grow and expand beyond being simply a children’s film. On the one hand there is the obvious humor that appeals to children and then there is the more subtle humor that will ensure the adults are equally as interested. It’s this second level of humor that allows me to continue returning to the films as I grow up and still find something new or funny each time. There are also numerous pop-culture references littering the trilogy with the most obvious one being the relationship between Buzz and Zod that echoes the iconic relationship of Luke and Darth Vader in Star Wars (1977, George Lucas)

“Two scenes heighten Toy Story 3‘s gravitas and emotional heft: the near-oblivion encounter faced by the toys when they are almost pulled into a furnace, and Andy’s realisation that he must let go of his youth and pass on his toys to a more appreciative and understanding child. It is these moments, interspersed among the usual banter and knockabout scenes, which saw the film resonate strongly among an adult audience.” (844) I remember the hype surrounding the release of the third instalment of the wonderful Toy Story series and how I thought that the reactions couldn’t possibly be as strong as they were suggesting – grown men crying in the cinema over the fate of some fictional animated toys, surely not? And then I watched it and I was beyond choked up at the two scenes mentioned by Jo Taylor above. There was a very palpable sense of peril for the toys that we had come to know and love over the length of this series that really did cause some real emotion.

“The Toy Story series realized the emotional depth that could be invested in animation, recalling earlier Disney successes, such as Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) and Bambi (1942), and highlighted how much had been lost among the less adventurous traditional animated features of recent decades.” (844) I’m not sure I totally agree with this as the Disney films of the early 90s, Beauty and the Beast (1991, Gary Trousdale), Aladdin (1992, Ron Clements), and The Lion King (1994, Roger Allers) were very much the films of my childhood and I will always count them as my favourite Disney films, although I can recognise just how much Toy Story shaped the studio as well as the face of animated films to come. If there are any people out there who have yet to see any of the Toy Story films (and if there are then what have they been doing with themselves?!) I cannot recommend this trilogy strongly enough – you’ll laugh, and you’ll cry and you will feel incredibly attached to some wonderful toys and you’ll feel happier for it. Toy Story reinvigorated Disney and launched its sister company, Pixar resulting in some brilliant films.

And see how easily Tom Hanks can still slip into the persona of Woody in the clip below. 

As you can see at the start of this post I was very much of the opinion that Toy Story should have remained a trilogy. I would like to say that they managed to change my mind but sadly this was not the case. The Toy Story trilogy was finished in the perfect way at the end of the third instalment with Andy passing the torch, as it were. It hit all the right emotional notes and continuing the story feels a little bit like a kick in the teeth to be perfectly honest. There are a few things I have issues with in the newest addition to the Toy Story collection …

Firstly Forky – while to begin with his constant attempts to desert the gang are amusing they very quickly become tiresome. Not a good aspect to have in a prominent character. In fact all of the new characters were just a bit lacking – it’s almost as though they just didn’t have the same easy charm that made Woody and the gang so enjoyable to watch. They felt much more forced.

And then there are the Dummies who are just plain terrifying, especially for a kids film, but then I have this weird aversion to ventriloquist dummies. There was a slightly unsettling vibe for me throughout the entire film actually. Bo’s costume is a pretty overt nod to Rey from the Skywalker saga and was not up to the usual subtlety of Pixar’s Eater Eggs.

And the ending – well without giving anything away – I just can’t see how they will be able to continue to add instalments going forward!

All in all I found this film to be the weakest of the four by fr and stand by my original opinion that there didn’t need to be any more after the perfect ending of number 3!!

Alien

Director: Ridley Scott

1979

I really don’t agree with the majority of what Angela Errigo says about Alien. I first watched Alien while doing my media studies A-Level as part of a comparison into strong women in science fiction or the depiction of women in science fiction (I can’t remember exactly what one) and was bored the first time I watched it, let alone the multiple times over in order to fully analyze the film. My opinion hasn’t changed very much.

“Defying the Star Wars (1977) craze, Ridley Scott resurrected the cheap genre of scary monsters from space, introduced it to exquisite, high-budget visuals, and created an arresting, nerve-wracking, adult-oriented science-fiction horror film.” (643, Angela Errigo, 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die) I find Alien dull and it’s now a very dated film with cheap special effects that make it feel more like a B-Movie than the fare of Hollywood. Aside from the actual alien I wouldn’t consider the visuals ‘high-budget’ And it’s about as far from nerve-wracking as you can get – instead of capturing (and more importantly, holding) my attention I find Alien a bit of a snooze-fest. The film takes forever to get going and when it finally does most of the action is hard to see thanks to the dimly lit corridors of the ship.

I get the whole idea that suggestion is always scarier than actually seeing something but Alien really makes the audience work at filling in and piecing together the narrative. Aside from the fact that Alien takes place on a spaceship it is very much a horror film conforming to all the genre specific conventions, especially being set in a secluded location (after all “In space no one can hear you scream”) and the power being cut resulting in the afore-mentioned dim corridors.

“[…] the sparingly glimpsed alien designed by artist H. R. Gieger, its terrible beauty given a startling grace by statuesque Masai dancer Bolaji Badejo.” (643) About the only comment Errigo made that I agree with is that the alien is truly a marvel of artistic creation and collaboration. Gieger’s design is beautiful in its own terrible way and has rightly become one of horror’s most iconic monsters.

“Weaver became a star and icon overnight as gutsy survivor Ripley, making her stand in skimpy vest and panties. She was actually set to film the ending naked, emphasizing the frailty of the human against the perfect killing machine, but 20th Century Fox forbade it, anxious to secure an R rating.” (643) Now my real issue with Alien (besides it being tear-inducingly boring!) is the above quote. Let’s just take a moment to think of the massive inequality summed up by this quote. It’s rare that I get on my feminist high-horse (mainly because vehement feminists only really serve to give women a bad name) but this really, really gets on my nerves. And it’s not just Alien but the whole genre especially and the entire industry to a lesser extent. Women are massively objectified and expected to be okay doing things that would never have been considered of their male counterparts.

Was it really necessary and integral to the plot for Ripley to make her last stand in only her underwear? It would have been interesting to know if that scene would have been the same when Ripley was originally meant to be a man or only added in once the decision to make Ripley female had happened. Would he also have been naked in order to ’emphasize the frailty of the human against the perfect killing machine’? I rather think not and not just because apparently 20th Century Fox didn’t want any nudity. It’s a glaringly obvious inequality in Hollywood’s expectations of its actors and actresses, especially in a time when actresses are becoming increasingly vocal about the subject, and for me takes away from the supposed strength Ripley is meant to embody.

American Graffiti

Director: George Lucas

1973

If I didn’t know that American Graffiti was a George Lucas film before watching it then I would never have attributed it to him. It’s fair to say that Lucas made his name with the Star Wars franchise – indeed his name is synonymous with the space epic. As such the expectation when you hear Lucas’ name attached to a film is that somewhere along the line there will be aliens of some kind. And American Graffiti is so very different to the exact thing that has made George Lucas such an iconic, some would say cult, director.

“[…] this hugely entertaining, perceptive coming-of-age ensemble piece of high school graduates cruising through one eventful summer’s night in 1962 was inspired by 1950s teen pics but set the style – often imitated, never surpassed in hilarity, penetration, or technical virtuosity – for a hundred and one rites of passage comedies played out in classic cars to a vintage rocking soundtrack.” (556, Angela Errigo, 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die) There are no aliens, spaceships, weapons or indeed space in American Graffiti and it’s very much grounded on Earth – early 1960s America to be exact. It’s about as different to Star Wars as you can get. There’s a wonderful nostalgia to American Graffiti that I really enjoyed.

The cars – which are without doubt the central driving force (no pun intended) of the film – are spectacular. Colorful, loud and an unabashed statement of the owners’ personality, they are as individual as the people driving them. There’s a simplicity to the premise of American Graffiti if not to the actual events of the film. The core of the film is the final night for a group of friends before they go their separate ways for university. The charm of the film comes from the hilarity that ensues as the group scatters throughout the city and the night, each having their own unique (and sometimes unbelievable) experience. As Angela Errigo says “in what was only his second feature, Lucas demonstrated a charm and warmth not found in his cool, futuristic debt, the Orwellian THX 1138 (1971)” (556)

 Even in what is only his second feature film Lucas is bringing in people who will become familiar faces in is body of work with the inclusion of a young Harrison Ford as an out of town challenger to the title of Drag Race champion. There is a definite nod towards the original ‘Rebel Without a Cause’ James Dean in Paul Le Mat’s portrayal of John, the current Drag Race champion. Each character forms some new and unlikely connections during their escapades and it’s lovely to watch the original group of friends expand.

The soundtrack is indeed one of vintage rock which just increases in nostalgic feeling the older the film gets. While the performances are brilliant and very funny for me it is definitely the cars and music that stay with me after watching American Graffiti.

It seems that Lucas hit on the winning formula in his third feature (Star Wars) by combining the cool, futuristic feel of THX 1138 with the charm and warmth that permeates American Graffiti. “Shot in just twenty-eight nights for well under a million dollars, American Graffiti not only became a box-office smash, one of the most profitable pictures of all time, but it also received critical kudos and five Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture and Director, a triumph that enabled Lucas to make an even more phenomenal mark with his next film, Star Wars (1977)” (556)

While I love Star Wars (even the much maligned prequel trilogy!) American Graffiti is a pleasant departure from Lucas’ usual fare and as such is worth watching. It showcases his ability to direct a film without having any tricks or special effects to hide behind, and makes me respect him that little bit more, which is a delightful change of pace. American Graffiti is a gem, one worth the time spent discovering it.

Kind Hearts and Coronets

Director: Robert Hamer

1949

“It is sophisticated, deliciously sly, and resolved with another Ealing trademark, the smart sting in the tale.” (242, Angela Errigo, 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die) I didn’t quite get the humor of Kind Hearts and Coronets. Consequently I didn’t laugh at all, not even once. it just didn’t really register with me and the only thing I took away from the film was the performance by Alec Guinness. I only ever really associate Guinness with Obi Wan Kenobi in Star Wars (George Lucas, 1977) or The Bridge on the River Kwai (David Lean, 1957) so it’s nice to be reminded he was more than just an iconic character.

“All eight of the clearly inbred, dotty D’Ascoynes – including the hatchet-faced suffrage the Lady Agatha who is shot down in a balloon, the bluff general condemned to short-lived enjoyment of an explosive pot of caviar, and the insane admiral who does Mazzini’s job for him by going down with his ship – are famously played by Ealing’s man of a thousand faces, unrecognizable from one film to the next (and in this case from one scene to the next), the delightful Alec Guinness.” (242) He really is masterful, creating 8 very separate and distinct characters, not all of which are male either! Each one is full of idiosyncrasies making the most of the perceived (and oft evidenced) eccentricity of the English gentry.

It’s one of those films whose name I have always known but never seen, and a film spoken about in almost reverential terms. And as usual when it comes to me and classics (be they films, novels or music) I didn’t see what all the fuss was about. It was okay but I didn’t find it funny (to the point that had I not known it was a comedy I wouldn’t have guessed it was that genre). Even though the narrative follows the exploits of a character who is, when it comes down to it, a serial killer the film is a light-hearted one. Maybe the humor just hasn’t translated through the years very well.

The lead, and very much the central character, who holds the entire film together played by Dennis Price, was someone I found wholly forgettable rather unfortunately. He just did not stand out at all and I found him fading into the background on a number of occasions even when there were few characters in the scene.

And although this film reminded me just how remarkable an actor Alec Guinness truly was – one who is so much more than a wise Jedi Master – he will forever be Obi Wan Kenobi to me. You just can’t remove the impact that character had on me when I was younger. Kind Hearts and Coronets is not a film I will be watching again.

Blade Runner

Director: Ridley Scott

1982

“One of the real reasons Blade Runner has had such a cult following is the existence of more than one version of the film.” (678, Joanna Berry, 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die) The version I was watching is the Final Cut I think but what differences there are I would not be able to tell you, never having seen the original.

From one of Harrison Ford‘s cult performances (Han Solo) to another, Deckard. Boy he really racked up the cult roles in the 80s didn’t he? What with leading roles in Star Wars (1977, 1980, 1983), Indiana Jones (1981, 1984, 1989, 2008) and of course the subject of this posting, Blade Runner. Although from the sounds of things it was not an altogether pleasant experience for him, “Ford has rarely commented on the movie since its initial release, only remarking that it was the toughest movie he has ever worked on.” (678) Once again Ford plays the reluctant hero with a roguish air to his character. He’s a man of few words as Deckard.

“Scott’s superb mix of twenty-first-century sci-fi and 1940s detective film noir makes for a stunning dystopia, while Ford, as the man sent to “retire” (that is, execute) human-looking androids who have come to Earth in search of their maker, may not have liked to “stand around and give some focus to Ridley’s sets”, as he told a journalist in 1991, but his bemusement works perfectly with the storyline.” (678) Having seen how useful a storytelling device the subtitles were at the top of the Star Wars films Scott employs them in Blade Runner, providing the necessary back story neatly and concisely. There’s a fusion between East and West. Scott employs an almost exclusively blue colour palette creating some interesting shadows and lighting options. Having said that the Tyrell Corporation shuns the blue palette and is very much infused with golden light. The building screams of Egyptian or Mayan architecture. It certainly lends to the idea that one of the underlying themes of the film is religion with Tyrell in the God position. Certainly a grandeur to it.

There are obvious elements of the film noir genre neatly spliced neatly into the sci-fi nature of the film. Dark, heavy shadows; extremes of light and shadow; Rachel cast as the femme fatale and possibly a Replicant albeit an incredibly advanced one. And then of course Deckard is the detective thrown into a bizarre sequence of events. His outfit even resembles that of the classic noir male leads in his trench coat. Tortured soul with regret in his past. It’s a fairly slow-moving plot – more along the line of a film noir than a sci-fi movie. The constant downpour of ran creates a depressing feel that sits perfectly with the dystopic nature of the film. It must have been grueling filming in those conditions for days on end.

Rutger Hauer is majorly creepy as Roy Batty. The whole concept of the Replicants is that they are almost indistinguishable from humans and yet there is something so off about Batty. But it could be argued (and undoubtably has at some point) that there are humans that have something off about them, something in the make up of their character that is outside the norm. He is excellent as Batty however. While he is most definitely the villain of the piece his motivation is trying to find a way of extending his life (Replicants have a very limited lifespan) He becomes increasingly insane and delusional as his body begins to rapidly deteriorate even while fighting Deckard. Deckard’s interactions with both Rachel and Batty begin to alter his view on the Replicants. Despite the violence leading up to his death Batty’s end is surprisingly peaceful. He just sort of shuts down – it’s a strikingly beautiful sequence. 

“Blade Runner remains one of the most beautifully art-directed and visually stunning science-fiction movies ever made.” (678) It is beautifully shot with a real arty feel to it. I particularly love the eye. Eyes seem to be a feature throughout the film. Monitoring the dilation of the pupils is a key tool in identifying Replicants. There are elements about Blade Runner that really freak me out, especially any of the scenes in J.F. Sebastian’s place which is full of mannequins; but then I have a major thing about mannequins moving independently. It’s one of the most visually stunning and atmospheric sci-fi films I have ever watched with such a distinctive style.

I think films that unsettle you and make you questions things like Blade Runner (and more recently Inception, Christopher Nolan, 2010) are sort of predisposed to garner a cult following. Multiple viewing offer both answers and new questions resulting in the film always remaining fresh. Scott leaves the story open-ended leaving the audience to wonder what happens next.

Stars Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back

Director: Irvin Kerschner

1980

This has been playing on a loop at work for the last two weeks so you’d think I’d be bored with it now but I haven’t actually had the chance to watch the entire thing. The story picks up right where we left off in Episode IV and yet it can be viewed as a stand-alone film too thanks to the nifty scrolling subtitles at the start.

There’s a marked difference in Luke Skywalker or rather in Mark Hamill’s appearance following a horrific car accident between shooting the films. His skill as a Jedi has progressed since A New Hope (1977, George Lucas) yet he’s nowhere near complete in his training. And thank goodness because if he were then we would never have met Yoda who is lets face it made of epic ness!! His journey to Dagobah and Yoda is guided by Obi-Wan (even in death he is still to guide Luke) despite being dead obi wan is not gone and makes a number of appearances. Luke is still a bit of a petulant child although as he progresses towards becoming a Jedi knight he grows up effectively.

“Episode V as more personality: Romance blossoms in the lead trio, and strong new characters appear (like Billy Dee Williams’s dashing scoundrel Lando Calrissian), all of them safely in the sure hands of the studio workhorse Irvin Kerschner.” (662, Angela Errigo, 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die) Leia and Han are still bickering but it’s very clearly the early stages of their relationship forming. Some sort of misguided competition between Luke and Han for Leia’s affection – the true nature of Leia and Luke’s relationship is still unknown at this point.

Speaking of bickering C-3PO and R2-D2 are still like a married old couple, something that comes across even though R2 speaks in beeps and squeaks rather than actual words. “Charming comic interplay for the scene-stealing androids C-3PO ad R2-D2, and ever weirder alien creatures wowed audiences the world over.” (662). I love how even though characters like R2 and Chewbacca don’t speak in conventional terms you can still understand them and the gist of what they’re saying. They are some of my favourite characters and have been since childhood when I first watched Star Wars. It’s always quite upsetting when R2 and C-3PO are separated. Chewie becomes oddly protective of 3PO – rescuing him from a junk pile and rebuilding him.

While Han is still somewhat of a rogue smuggler he is beginning to change his ways – on the verge of leaving the Rebellion he instead goes to find Luke in the wilderness of the unforgiving ice planet Hoth, and all without the prospect of a reward. He’s forming many more meaningful relationships rather than being the somewhat lone wolf with only Chewie for company. And he tends to stick around more, despite all his talk (and there’s a fair bit of it!) of leaving. He condemns Lando for selling them out – something he himself would have done just a short while ago.

Darth Vader still cuts a menacing figure now hell-bent on finding and destroying Luke, and of course the Rebellion as a whole. Leia goes from strength to strength; she is still the driving force behind the Rebellion, even giving the briefing to the troops before the first land battle seen in the trilogy. And what an epic battle it is, Lucas is not just limited to creating spectacular battles in the heart of space. Although of course it must be remembered that it’s not Lucas holding the reins this time but Irvin Kerschner. You can see the difference by only just. This installment feels tighter than A New Hope and indeed all those directed by Lucas himself. As much as I’m willing to admit that Lucas is a cinematic genius I’m of the opinion that he is a much better producer than director. He is an incredible storyteller, that cannot be denied, and yet sometimes his execution just doesn’t quite hit the mark.

Angela Errigo says “one-liners became catchphrases”(662) and she’s not wrong, most of them coming from Han Solo (who else?!) like “Never tell me the odds”, “Can it furball” and of course the “I love you; I know” exchange between Han and Leia.

With the new film come new creatures, planets and characters. Gone is the hot, dusty desert landscape of Tatooine from A New Hope and instead we are treated to the ice planet Hoth and the swampy, jungle like Dagobah, (home of the infamous Yoda!) and the cloud city where Lando resides.

Yoda is amazing! He’s such a well-rounded character, which is remarkable considering he is a puppet. We are so lucky to have had the talent like Frank Oz around to bring life to such an iconic figure. Like Errigo says he is “a wizened puppet sage performed with startling expressiveness and exasperation by Muppeteer Frank “Miss Piggy” Oz.” (662) I actually prefer the puppet Yoda to the more high-tech computer generated version in the prequels (which I have said before but it bears repeating). He has such a unique way of speaking – one oft imitated and impersonated.

Along with new Jedi characters in the form of Yoda we are also introduced to the puppet master behind Vader, known as the Emperor (it all makes sense once you’ve watched the prequels). It’s an interesting point that everyone refers to Luke’s father in the past tense especially considering what is revealed at the climax of the film.

Boba Fett is yet another epic character in a world jam-packed with hugely iconic characters that tend to transcend the films. He also has an interesting back-story unveiled in the prequels.

You start seeing the “Star Wars” cuts and wipes where Lucas has employed all the different styles of cutting techniques, ones that we were steered away from during my degree. The whole idea of cutting and editing in general is to be unobtrusive. Instead Lucas draws attention to the editing and cutting process, and it’s very much a part of the new cinematic style he gifted to the world of filmmaking.

Sound is of great importance in the Star Wars films. Where would the films have been without the instantly recognizable breathing of Vader as well as the iconic sound track? Not to mention the unique sound of the light sabers – everyone automatically makes the noise when playing with one!

The carbonite process is horrible to watch and yet creates one of the most recognizable images from the entire franchise. It’s all red lights and puffs of smoke, creating a menacing or rather foreboding atmosphere. Lando does indeed redeem himself for his betrayal of Han and Leia and becomes part of the ever-growing Rebellion, spearheading the rescue mission for Han.

Finally Luke and Vader face off against one another, despite Luke not completing his training with Yoda. Elements of their fight are reflected in the prequels … Mace Windu being sucked out a window very similar to the one Luke falls through and Yoda tearing things off the wall with the force to aid in a fight. And the biggest similarity is the loss of the hand. The father inflicts the same wound on the son. It’s such an epic climax to the film with the big reveal and one of the most famous lines in cinema history “Luke I am your father“. And then you get the connection between Leia and Luke – a hint of what their true relationship is, if you’re good at piecing bits of information together that is.

The Empire Strikes Back sets the scene for the conclusion of the trilogy – The Return of the Jedi (1983, Richard Marquand) and at the same time manages to avoid being the filler film in a trilogy.

 

Star Wars IV A New Hope

  Director: George Lucas

1977

Star Wars has been in the news a lot lately what with Lucas selling to Disney and all. Also I spent all of last week watching Episode V on loop at work (the joys of working in a toy shop at half-term with a Star Wars themed week!!) so I finally thought I’d watch them properly – the original trilogy, the good films, anyway. “Lucas also created a mythology that has been embraced by young and old alike.” (617, Joanna Berry, 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die) We’ve had dads in the store who are more interested in playing with the light sabers than the kids are! It amazes me that kids born 30 years after the first film know who Yoda, Luke Skywalker, Darth Vader, C3PO, R2D2 and Chewbacca are, along with all the newer characters of course. It’s a film, well a trilogy, that really has spanned the decades and generations and is still as fresh as it was on its initial release. Now I’m of the opinion that the prequels (I, II, and III) aren’t all that terrible. They don’t have that special quality the original trilogy has but aside from the quite frankly disastrous decision to create Jar Jar Binks they’re not too bad – Ewan McGregor is excellent as a young Obi-Wan, doing a remarkable job of filling the awesome shoes of Sir Alec Guinness! And they complete the story – you finally discover how such a sweet kid like Ankin became the big bad of the universe. But enough about the prequels and on to the main event.

There is something special about the opening credits (much like those of the Harry Potter series) when you see those unique scrolling subtitles disappearing up the screen coupled with the iconic music you know you’re about to embark upon an epic journey. And what a clever and neat way to provide the necessary back story. The cult phenomenon surrounding Star Wars continues to increase over the years rather than diminishing – and it’s one that reaches an incredibly varied group of people, not just nerds and geeks. And to think that like Joanna Berry says, “Star Wars could have turned out a bit silly.” (616)

“Lucas had much bigger ideas.” (616) It’s hard to watch A New Hope without thinking about just how iconic everything has become – Darth Vader’s unique breathing, Leia’s hairstyle, the Stormtroopers, Chewbacca’s whine, R2D2 and C3PO bickering like an old married couple, and the list goes on. I so want to be a Stormtrooper – their costumes are amazing!! And it’s all pervaded our everyday life especially the Jedi’s (an inordinate number of people put Jedi as their religion on the latest census don’t you know!)

“Writer-director George Lucas’s film was not expected to be a success. A “sci-fi Western” with a virtually unknown principal cast (Harrison Ford, Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher), studio bosses were so convinced the movie would flop that they happily gave Lucas the merchandising rights to any Star Wars products for free.” (616) I bet they will regret that decision for the rest of their lives considering just how popular the franchise is and has been all these long years later, with no signs of stopping.

Harrison Ford is perfect as Han Solo with this air of sex appeal surrounding him. There is this wonderful cockiness about Ford’s Solo. He’s very much the self-assured bad boy which makes him the favourite. And it’s the role (along with the impeccable Indiana Jones of course!) that really launched him to blockbuster star status where he has remained all these years. Princess Leia provides a wonderfully strong, capable and feisty role-model for any girl. She is the driving force behind the rebellion and very much an equal to any of the male characters. It’s the defining role for Carrie Fisher, her career never again reaching the success of Leia. I love the relationship between Han and Leia. They are so persnickety with each other that you know there is only one outcome for them.

The combination of Dave Prowse‘s physical performance and James Earl Jones’ vocal performance create a menacing foe, right up there with all the truly great cinematic villains.  R2D2 is such an adorable and tenacious little droid played perfectly by the oft overlooked Kenny Baker. I never really liked Luke Skywalker all that much – he always came across as a petulant child, certainly in A New Hope. And like Carrie Fisher Star Wars is the shining moment of Mark Hamill’s career, one unable to survive following the conclusion of the trilogy. Sir Alec Guinness is magnanimous as Obi-Wan Kenobi, taking on the key role of Luke’s guide on his coming of age journey.

The sets are exquisite and all the tricks Lucas employs to create this out-of-this-world and yet entirely believable universe are outstanding especially when you think about the fact the first film was made in the 1970s. “A couple of decades before computer-generated images could be used to create fantastical worlds and distant planets, Lucas, using incredibly detailed models, clever photography, and well chosen locations […] tells the story of another universe.” (616-617) I have to admit that the prequels actually appear less real or rather less tactile due to their over reliance on computer generated imagery. It’s such an intricately created universe with innumerable species, creatures and vehicles … and it all ties together seamlessly. Light sabers are an awesome feat of imagination and just like Obi-Wan says “an elegant weapon” even if they are deadly. Everybody wants one and if they say they don’t then they’re just flat-out lying!!

The soundtrack is glorious ad one that’s imbedded deep within my brain (along with Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter) It’s the sort of thing you find yourself humming without even realizing you’re doing it. So much of the Star Wars universe has become shorthand for any number of things and appears in popular cinema, television and even adverts to this day. There are numerous references in The Big Bang Theory (2007-, Chuck Lorre), my favourite being Sheldon’s resemblance to C3PO, and one of the best moments in Paul (2011, Greg Mottola) where the red neck band are actually playing the Cantina band number from Mos Eisley. It’s become so much a part of everyday life that May 4th is widely regarded as Star Wars day … “May the 4th be with you!” The destruction of the Death Star is most definitely the set piece of the film and has influenced many films in the decades following its release – most noticeably for me in Independence Day (1996, Roland Emmerich) … but then I’ve watched it recently so it’s fresh in my mind.

The battle between Vader and Obi-Wan has always been an epic one (good vs evil; light vs dark) but for me it’s taken on a whole new meaning since watching the prequels and thus having the knowledge of the history behind the two characters. There is an intense spirituality within Star Wars most obviously evidenced in the Jedi religion and the belief in the Force. I particularly like the idea that no one truly leaves you even in death. It’s a powerful thing to believe in.

“In giving the world Star Wars, Lucas succeeded in making much more than just a movie (one that would eventually get its own exhibit at the Smithsonian, no less); he made a world, a new style of cinema, and an unforgettable outer space opera that has been many times imitated but never bettered. And you never can see the strings.” (617)