Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Star Wars Prequels Media Movies Entertainment

George Lucas Has Apparently Changed the Famous Greedo Scene In 1977's Star Wars Again, For Disney+ (theguardian.com) 284

Freshly Exhumed shares a report from The Guardian: George Lucas, whose departure from all things Star Wars seems to have been greatly exaggerated -- appears to have yet again doctored the famous Greedo scene in 1977's Star Wars [prior to it being shown on the Disney+ streaming service]. The scene depicts the Mos Eisley cantina in which Harrison Ford's Han Solo is confronted by an alien bounty hunter and winds up shooting him dead in a brief flurry of blaster fire. It has been much discussed over the years, largely because Solo shot Greedo in cold blood in the original, "Han shot first" 1977 cut, while in later versions Lucas re-edited the footage to depict Greedo as the aggressor, with Han returning fire in self-defense. Many fans have speculated about what effect that subtle change had on Han's transformation in the original trilogy from cold-hearted hustler to hero of the resistance. Now Lucas has tinkered all over again, to further muddy the waters.

As seen on new streaming service Disney+, the scene features Han and Greedo shooting at roughly the same moment -- to be fair, this is a change introduced several years back. But now, Greedo appears to utter the phrase "MacClunkey!" before succumbing to his wounds. Reports suggest Lucas made the changes some years ago, perhaps around the time he sold Lucasfilm to Disney for $4 billion, in 2012. Celebrities such as Stephen King and Patton Oswalt have speculated about what the re-edit means for the future of Star Wars, though nobody seems to have much of a clue.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

George Lucas Has Apparently Changed the Famous Greedo Scene In 1977's Star Wars Again, For Disney+

Comments Filter:
  • by Quakeulf ( 2650167 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @05:03AM (#59412854)
    This is beyond ridiculous at this point.
    • by paralumina01 ( 6276944 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @05:08AM (#59412856)

      Why are people still fans at this point?

      Next version, Han and Greedo sing a duet in the cantina.

      • by stealth_finger ( 1809752 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @05:11AM (#59412864)

        Next version, Han and Greedo sing a duet in the cantina.

        ...because they've replaced the blasters with walkie talkies.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Quakeulf ( 2650167 )
        I am not, and the franchise is bleeding due to certain injections of politics that no one wanted except a select few who unjustly run the movie industry.
        • If you don't like change, you'll hate irrelevancy!
        • by stealth_finger ( 1809752 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @05:28AM (#59412900)

          I am not, and the franchise is bleeding due to certain injections of politics that no one wanted except a select few who unjustly run the movie industry.

          It's not the injection of poilitics into star wars thats ruining it as much as it is the minumum effort crap stories, crap characters, just general crapness covered with amazing cgi. They are just making bad films these days, pure and simple. It's the CGI and SFX people that are really selling those films because they do LOOK and SOUND excellent, despite being complete shit.

          • by bickerdyke ( 670000 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @05:34AM (#59412906)

            And this is not limited to Star Wars. Or Science Fiction. The whole business rann out of creativity so deeply, that with "Charlies Angels" we get ANOTHER Remake of a remake of a 60s TV series. (and even that was basically a run of the mill secret-agent-formula thing)

            • by stealth_finger ( 1809752 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @06:01AM (#59412956)
              Yeah. They just said the other day about bringing friends back. They are seriously out of ideas and can only remake/reboot and even they they are shit.
              • by sheramil ( 921315 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @06:46AM (#59413030)

                They are seriously out of ideas and can only remake/reboot and even they they are shit.

                Not so much that they're out of ideas - there is a lot of good material that could be adapted - but they're scared . The old material worked once, whereas the new material might fail to where they don't make their money back.

              • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

                There are plenty of original ideas around, it's just that they are risky where as a Friends reunion episode is bound to make them a big pile of cash.

                • And the cycle repeats once more.
                • by jwhyche ( 6192 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @10:03AM (#59413554) Homepage

                  Oh gods yes there are plenty of original ideal, better ideal around that could be told instead of rehashing the same trash over and over. I have a whole library of books behind me, I can turn around, close my eyes, and randomly grab 3 books that would make better movies that the drek we are seeing today.

                  Barbara Hambly, Time of the Dark.

                  Alan Dean Foster, Call to Arms. Would rather see The Spellsinger but I can go with this one.

                  Patric Rothfuss, The Name of the Wind. I think this one is up for a movie. They can get 3 movies off this book.

                  John Ringo, A Hymn Before Battle.

                  I can go on, Michael Reaves, The Shattered World, Terry Pratchett, The Long Earth books. There are millions of good stories out there but they just want to package and repackage the same tired stories.

                  Oh yes. Here is a good one. Alastair Reynolds, House of Suns and Blue Remembered Earth.

            • by MrSavage ( 2127458 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @12:41PM (#59414252)
              1960's? Secret Agent Formula Thing? You need to check yourself before you wreck yourself. Charlie's Angels started in 1976 and was a Private Detective show. Nobody was a Secret Agent. They were all former police officers who Charlie pulled from the dept and offered them to do real cases where the Police Dept. had pigeonholed them in "Female" cop roles.
          • Comment removed based on user account deletion
            • And that's totally fair enough but at least you can recognise that. Most people don't
              • by aitikin ( 909209 )

                Is it that most people don't recognize that or that most people don't care to acknowledge it?

                Not trying to purely be pedantic. I know the stories are shit and haven't been truly compelling. I enjoy them because they're simple fun. I know a lot of my friends are in the same boat, but often times, they can't acknowledge it.

            • I like ST and SW both. Star Wars doesn't need to have deep characters and complex twisty stories, they are fine as shallow action movies. But SW and ST both are suffering from crap writing lately. It just seems that some of these movies could have been a lot better or even really good, just by improving the writing a little bit, and for these kinds of movies it wouldn't be especially hard either to improve the writing to the point where the story actually works.

              I did enjoy the first installment of th
          • by DarkOx ( 621550 )

            Exactly this! While I do think there have been some overtly political lines inserted here and there; its also true the in some senses Star Wars like a lot of art was never exactly apolitical. I don't happen to agree with the way the message is being tweaked but I can accept an author saying something I don't agree with and still value their work especially in the context of film or a novel; even a painting if you are not hitting me over the head with it. Just like you can write a well researched article wit

            • Star Wars has not crossed into hitting me over the head with it territory in terms of politics - yet. I feel they have walked right up to the line though

              I have not even watched the two most recent films yet.

              If you had seen the last two you would realize that not only has it crossed that line but left it miles in the rear view mirror.

              • by s4080326 ( 5462622 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @04:42PM (#59415174)
                The last two didn't suck because of the social justice themes though. Solo sucked because it tried to turn Han Solo into a fucking hero when at the beginning of New Hope he is anything but. It's like all the retconning going on with Boba Fett, Disney will not allow for a genuinely flawed character to be respected. The problem with The Last Jedi is they clearly wanted to create a bottle episode with all the drama of being trapped on the one ship but because it is star wars they had to shoehorn in a bunch of locations, aliens and general hijinks this ended up with a pointless sub plot and any tension or drama being built up being lost to a wacky chase scene.
          • by PsychoSlashDot ( 207849 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @01:39PM (#59414498)

            minumum effort crap stories, crap characters, just general crapness covered with amazing cgi. They are just making bad films these days, pure and simple.

            Didn't know Martin Scorsese had a Slashdot account. Hi Martin.

        • If it was only the injection of politics, I would still watch it. I certainly enjoyed Carnival Row even though it was hamfisting politics down my throat.

          What I can't stand is injection of politics and little to nothing else. Episode VII was a rehash of Episode IV, and I've already seen Episode IV. In fact, Episode IV was new and fresh for me, while Episode VII was just a worse version of it. I can't stand the new superwoman Mary Sue, I can't stand the "converted" storm trooper guy (who is for some reason a

          • Are all Stormtroopers clones? The first batch certainly were (as seen in Ep. II), but would the Empire (and the Order after it) have continued to obtain clones from whoever those long-neck aliens were? Or would they have started recruiting from the general populace at some point, and simply kept the same uniform?

            I don't mind the characters in the new episodes too much... although it is a bit weird that the defected Stormtrooper is the only one with halfway decent aim. No, what I mind is the poor writi
        • by Dunbal ( 464142 ) *
          There's nothing unjust about nepotism, Moishe
        • For the most part they got rid of all the parliamentary procedures in the Prequels. Other then that I am not seeing Star Wars to be overtly political more then before.

          Perhaps you have injected too much politics in your life so you see everything as partisan politics?
          Unless you see the fall of the Roman Empire as Too Soon.

          Star Wars Politics Timeline
          Galactic Republic: Where people were mostly happy and culture was thriving, but politics bogged things down. Early Rome
          Galactic Empire: Facing a threat the Senat
        • by Boronx ( 228853 )

          They need to keep politics out of my galactic rebellion movies!!!

          The first movie was a metaphor for the Vietnam war. It had a strong female lead and all of the bad guys were rich old white men.

        • The way politics was handled is just a symptom.

          I fully support politics in fiction, some of the best fiction out there is very political, often in ways I strongly disagree with. That's fine. The key, though, is to make it a believable part of your fictional world, with all the in-world consequences that entails. Either treat the political issue seriously and give it the respect it deserves or leave it out. If it's isolated and doesn't connect to anything else in your world, you're both missing a chance t
      • by Dunbal ( 464142 ) *
        While Jabba the Hut thin-shames them in the background.
      • MacClunkey.

    • by GuB-42 ( 2483988 )

      They may eventually. If they can get fans to buy the same movie for the n-th time...
      There will be the original version, the remastered original, the remastered remasterd, the 4K/3D/HD-BluRay, the Disney+, the deluxe edition, the one with the original commercials, ... Some may have the Han-shot-first, the other will include a lost George Lucas interview, and they are going to make sure you buy them all.

    • by Tough Love ( 215404 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @05:42AM (#59412926)

      Actually, if regard Star Wars with an objective eye, it's all ridiculous B movie stuff from beginning to end. Try to get kids today to watch those old movies, just try it. You'd have more luck getting them interested in a spaghetti western... some of which are pretty darn good to tell the truth. Star Wars just didn't age well. Maybe your memory of it did but you might be shocked by rewatching. Right up there with Flash Gordon. Funny how your memory plays tricks on you.

      • by Boronx ( 228853 )

        Yep. They're still pretty good for what they are, but kids don't get obsessed with Star Wars like they did in the '80s. For the younger crowd, kids these days don't think Lord of the Rings is a life-defining movie, either.

    • This is beyond ridiculous at this point.

      Yeah, return to the original trilogy but now with ... MORE TEDDYBEARS!!!

    • by JoshuaZ ( 1134087 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @07:25AM (#59413092) Homepage
      He has altered the scene. Pray he does not alter it further.
    • The real problem with Lucus' recut was that he dictated that no other version could be reproduced or shown.

    • by hey! ( 33014 )

      Actually, I kind of like the idea that they shot at the same time; this doesn't change Han's character from the "Han shot first" scenario the way the "Greedo shoots first" does. He still shoots Greedo *before* he's had explicit provocation.

      In fact it, in the original, Greedo foolishly telegraphs his intention to Han, *after which* Han shoots first. If you change Greedo's final line to something innocuous and have them both shoot at the same time, that make *Greedo* more formidable. It changes their conv

    • by leonbev ( 111395 )

      Come on, we all know why they did it. Disney marketing probably calculated in advance how many additional Disney+ trial subscribers they could rope in by tweaking the original Star Wars movies and "leaking" the change to Social Media. All those diehard fans who already have the movies on VHS or DVD (or both!) will eat this shit up.

      The fact that we're talking about it on Slashdot now means that they did their job well.

    • I think Han shooting first is the better method.
      From the dialog, we know Greedo is going to double cross him. So it wasn't in Cold Blood. However Han wasn't suppose to be a likable character until the end of the movie. Han was just suppose to be the lesser of two evils.
      With the turnaround at the end.

      In "A new hope" he could had been written as turning against the hero and showed to be working for the empire. Because they just offered him more money, or there was a bounty on Jedi's dead or alive. If writt
    • I know. In the original Han DOES NOT shoot Greedo "in cold blood". He's got a gun pulled on him. In real life if someone has a gun on you and you fire its still self defense. You don't have to wait for them to shoot you first to get the all clear to protect yourself.

    • by Z00L00K ( 682162 )

      Why even care about a single scene?

      In the real world there's no prize for second place.

  • You don't get to be a hero if you get shot.

    • As compared to the times where you became a hero because you got shot and still fought on. Look what happend to Rambo going from the humiliated war veteran who fought because he gut hurt too much to the invincible non-fantasy-superhero.

      • It is very ironic since in the original concept(that is in the novel) Rambo was a veteran who was severely mistreated by police(but his life wasn't threatened at that point), snapped and became a mass murderer. He was a bit more sympathetically presented in first movie that was based on the novel. But sequels are outright nonsense. No way real life US army would send someone like him on more missions. If he was still needed for something they wouldn't discard him in the first place and killing a bunch of po
      • Re:Heros (Score:5, Interesting)

        by MrKaos ( 858439 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @07:12AM (#59413058) Journal

        As compared to the times where you became a hero because you got shot and still fought on.

        I'm a couple of chapters into "The Hero with a Thousand Faces" [wikipedia.org] by Joseph_Campbell [wikipedia.org] which is a book about "meta-"mythology that Lucas has acknowledged had an influence on Star Wars.

        IMO, it's a pivotal scene in the movie because if Han died there, according to Campbell, the call to adventure would remain unanswered as the world (or galaxy in this case) stagnates. Greedo is a bounty hunter doing a job, Han isn't acting out of altruism or with virtue, he is on the precipice of crisis about to step into the unknown and confront the opportunity to be transformed into the hero. At that moment Han is just a smuggler, despite what the prequals portray.

        The point is Greedo is the gatekeeper to the unknown that challenges the proto-hero before venturing any further. There is no room for the nice guy here because no matter who shoots first, this is where the nice guy dies. This is where there hero is forced to do what is necessary to survive.

        I think Lucas is trying to convey this because on my original VHS release of Star Wars that I still have before all the edits, Solo unmistakably shoots first. The mood in the Falcon is that Skywalker is not amongst friends and that Solo is just as likely to dump them into space and take their money. The point is that Solo's story is; even a ruthless, self centered, callous and, selfish solipsist can redeem themselves and become something else. Solo is the unexpected hero, the one no one put any faith into.

        That is something that Disney is not really equipped to understand. They are plunderers of mythology, unlike Lucas, who is a creator of it.

        • Solo doesn't shoot first. He's the only one that shoots. As a kid in 1977, this shocked me as vastly different from a normal movie gunfight.

          It's that shock they were trying to remove, because it was very effective but gave Solo a nasty aspect to his character. No "fair" gunfight, or running away and escaping scene with Greedo falling into a trash can.

          They shouldn't have changed it, but that's why they did. Less forgivable is the "Nooooooooo!" crap working its way into the OT.

          • by Nidi62 ( 1525137 )

            No "fair" gunfight, or running away and escaping scene with Greedo falling into a trash can.

            A smuggler like Solo would know that a "fair" fight means nothing more than the other guy is just as likely to win as you are. In a criminal world you can't win (survive) playing fair, at least not for long.

          • by MrKaos ( 858439 )

            Solo doesn't shoot first. He's the only one that shoots.

            That's right. I haven't watched the movies for a while however I remember that too. It embeds Solo's scoundrel even more.

    • At that point of the story, Han is NOT a hero. Officially, he is a "scoundrel". He lies, he steals, he's on the run from crime lords. His story arc is that he is redeemed through the Light Side of the Force. Obi Wan and Luke bring out his "diamond in the rough" better side, giving him the opportunity to "do the right thing" and rise above his old life. Yes, he shot first.
    • Robocop defies your premise.
  • This is a symptom (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bickerdyke ( 670000 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @05:30AM (#59412904)

    I agree with Quakeulf that this is "beyond ridiculous at this point"

    But this also shows quite a bit about our society - and it is not flattering.

    Obviously we can't stand the idea of people transforming or having a complex character anymore. Once a "cold hearted hustler", you're branded for lifetime with no chance to develop compassion for others or to turn into a better person without ret-conning the past first.. We have lost the desire (if not even the ability!) to follow any story beyond the most simple black and white, good-vs-evil pastiche.

    • by religionofpeas ( 4511805 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @05:43AM (#59412928)

      We have lost the desire (if not even the ability!) to follow any story beyond the most simple black and white, good-vs-evil pastiche.

      What is also lacking is the perspective from the bad guys. If there is any perspective, it's usually an acknowledgement that they recognize themselves as bad ("come to the dark side"), almost never that the bad guys see themselves as good.

      • Exactly. One of the most shocking realizations after watching "Falling Down" was how much I could relate and understand how that little fly could trigger a mass murder step by step in an average person.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Jesus, are we talking about the same flick? The greedy bounty hunter is called Greedo, the bad people are disciples of the "dark side", the loner guy who needs to be coaxed into helping others is called Solo, the big surprise is that a guy called Vader (literally "father" in Dutch) is the father. Subtlety and nuance don't exist in that universe.
    • by King_TJ ( 85913 )

      But who are all these people who were supposedly unable to comprehend that Han Solo could change? I'm still unsure I've ever met a single person who was happy to find that Lucas edited the original Star Wars cantina scene?

      This just seems like personal guilt on Lucas's part, that he regretted his original decision to have Han shoot Greedo first, especially once the fans started focusing on details like that and putting big theories out there about what it all meant.

    • I disagree with your assessment of society. The blockbuster hits of the party decade have featured dramatic character changes and development. Even safe formulas feature dramatic changes in characters such as most of the comic hero movies (or all together if you look at the story arc of characters between the entire marvel universe).

      I do however agree all you said in that it applies to George Lucas. He seems to not be someone capable of creating or accepting character development anymore, and that IMO has l

    • by Tx ( 96709 )

      George Lucas does not speak for "our society", and I don't think our society demanded this change, or showed any sign of not being able to handle the original version of events. This was about the kid-friendly direction George Lucas wanted to go with Star Wars, plain and simple, and doesn't reflect on the rest of society.

  • This was my first link I saw for this yesterday, which in itself was quite funny.
    https://twitter.com/ericfell/s... [twitter.com]
    absorb the stupidity.

    Then observe the other edits......
    https://twitter.com/ericfell/s... [twitter.com]

  • by Meneth ( 872868 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @06:09AM (#59412972)
    Nor does his edits. The Despecialized Edition is all we need. Just ignore the rest.
  • It's pretty clear that Greedo is there to kill Han for the bounty. The only reason they're talking is that he wants Han to pay him off instead. Han shoots before Greedo has a chance.

    Greedo's shot is so terrible that Han was never in any danger. Perhaps if Han ducked out of the way it would have worked better. Of course that's not possible as an afterthought. Or if Greedo's gun went off as he was falling backwards. Here it looks like Han could easily have disarmed Greedo without firing.
  • by Anonymouse 2 ( 6383096 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @06:53AM (#59413042)
    The addition of "MacClunkey" in the scene was to foreshadow the exciting, upcoming spinoff MacClunkey where they explore the side story every star wars fan needs to see. It'll be a new trilogy of films that will show how Greedo grew from a dirty, sand runt to the disposable anti-hero we all know and love today. It turns out that he's caught in a time loop that always seems to end in his death at the Cantina. MacClunky is the name of the time phenomenon... Oh darn, I gave away the twist ending!
  • If you ever heard witnesses from a real shooting: you get more different versions of the same event from them... sometimes even from a single person.

  • That have been remastered please. That's all I want left from Star Wars.
  • Solo was the archetypal rogue who, after a lifetime of crime and violence (becoming the fastest gunslinger in the galaxy), experiences a moral awakening and puts his life on the line for others and helps save the Rebellion. That was a powerful aspect of the story. One that resonates on a deep Jungian level.

    I still don't understand why they neutered such an important part of the story. You might as well colorize Schindler's List.

    • Moral growth? Our society finds it acceptable to dig up evidence of people having done things years ago that aren't acceptable today, even if it was then, and proceeding to ruin their lives over it. Our society clearly doesn't believe in moral growth so our movies should reflect that. /s

  • Today's Hollywood loves to 'reboot', I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't at least a couple of drafts already. Queue up the 'great disturbance in the force'.
  • I'm surprised J.J. Abrams hasn't reset the time lines yet, just like he does in every other storyverse he's been involved with.
  • by theycallmeB ( 606963 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @08:24AM (#59413234)
    I do feel strangely compelled to point out that if someone walks up to you gun in hand and forces to sit back down when you were on your way out I don't think anything that happens after that point is going to be in 'cold blood.' Abrupt? Yes. Unsporting? Yeah. Calm and seemingly nonchalant? Only if you have nerves of steel and can play a bad-ass to the nines. Cold blooded? Oh hell no. That lump of dumb goon should have read the bold print on the job description during on-boarding.
    • by DNS-and-BIND ( 461968 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @10:31AM (#59413650) Homepage
      You're dealing with people who literally do not understand the world. They really don't get "threat of imminent bodily harm" or "in gravest extreme." They think in order to shoot, the other person has to shoot first, period. No matter what. This is the kind of childlike, simplistic mindset you have to deal with when they enter the room. It makes the recent few years of politics make a lot more sense when you realize how ignorant they are.
    • Not a gun nut either, but rule number two of gun safety: Never point the gun at anything you aren't willing to destroy. (I think I heard that in an illusion by Penn & Teller.) So yes, if someone is pointing a gun at me, I'll assume the person is ready to kill me, even if only in their own self-defense.
  • The Lucas revisionism of Han Solo has always puzzled me. In the same scene just a few minutes earlier, Obi Wan Kenobi chops off a guy's arm for also welding a pistol. This is someone who commands the force and could have used telekinetic power to remove the pistol from the assailant's hand.

    Han Solo was using his only option available to defend himself from Greedo, yet Solo is the burden on George Lucas's conscience...
    • Well I can only assume that force pulling wouldn’t be much of a deterrent for that crowd. Also it would kinda alert them that Obi Wan was force sensitive if not a Jedi. Otherwise he’s some old dude with a light saber. Where he got the light saber no one knows.
  • The rebel forces have been releasing deep fakes to clean their image. For all we know Darth Vader and the emperor are the good guys and the death star was a peace-keeping mission. (that will probably come out in the 2030 cut)
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • by Misagon ( 1135 )

      No, this scene is different from the DVDs. Greedo didn't say "MacClunkey" / "Ah khan kee" (or whatever).

      The edit has been known among people at Lucasfilm. It was done seven years ago when George Lucas worked on the 3D versions, just before he sold Lucasfilm to Disney.

  • Clearly he was lamenting the laggy performance of his iBlaster, which allowed Han Solo's blaster to fire first. Maybe Greedo was holding it wrong?

  • Lies. (Score:4, Informative)

    by Travelsonic ( 870859 ) on Thursday November 14, 2019 @09:16AM (#59413406) Journal

    because Solo shot Greedo in cold blood in the original, "Han shot first" 1977 cut,

    Bullshit. Greedo had a blaster pointed at Han, and talked about enjoying killing Solo.

You know you've landed gear-up when it takes full power to taxi.

Working...