i wonder why he said:

"The controversy over who shot first, Greedo or Han Solo, in Episode IV, what I did was try to clean up the confusion, but obviously it upset people because they wanted Solo [who seemed to be the one who shot first in the original] to be a cold-blooded killer, but he actually isn’t. It had been done in all close-ups and it was confusing about who did what to whom. I put a little wider shot in there that made it clear that Greedo is the one who shot first, but everyone wanted to think that Han shot first, because they wanted to think that he actually just gunned him down." http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/george-lucas-star-wars-interview-288523

instead of:

"we had to change it because of a rating thingy, ok?".

that might have eased the hurt a bit.

who shot first, the ratings agency or lucas? will we ever know? will we care?

And how is shooting someone who has made it clear they are planning to kill you and has a gun pointed at you any form of murder?

For that matter why would Han shooting first affect the rating?

In the US it's up to the MPAA's board of parent reviewers.

While I can't find anything solid about Han shooting first, there is some merit to the claim.

When it came time to rerelease, since the film had been modified, it had to go back to the raters and it's all about what those raters are thinking here and now. So if it happened to go to an especially.... concerned, group of parents, I can easily see how they might look at Han shooting and get upset about it. George, not wanting to up the rating, just had the change made to accommodate it, and keep the rating low.

Unless you can find evidence of that I still tend to lean toward George being the concerned parent in question.

But then again, George has lied before about things like this to help the marketing guys, so maybe he did it here too....

But then again, George has lied before about things like this to help the marketing guys, so maybe he did it here too....

Like the whole 'Han Shot First' marketing line for the release of the UOT on non-anamorphic dvd in 2006...

But then again, George has lied before about things like this to help the marketing guys, so maybe he did it here too....

Like the whole 'Han Shot First' marketing line for the release of the UOT on non-anamorphic dvd in 2006...

Actually I was referring to the release of Dark Empire. Big G said back then it was totally the direction he would have taken things. But after the canon wipe Lord Flannel said he never read any EU material at all...

i wonder why he said:

"The controversy over who shot first, Greedo or Han Solo, in Episode IV, what I did was try to clean up the confusion, but obviously it upset people because they wanted Solo [who seemed to be the one who shot first in the original] to be a cold-blooded killer, but he actually isn’t. It had been done in all close-ups and it was confusing about who did what to whom. I put a little wider shot in there that made it clear that Greedo is the one who shot first, but everyone wanted to think that Han shot first, because they wanted to think that he actually just gunned him down." http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/george-lucas-star-wars-interview-288523

instead of:

"we had to change it because of a rating thingy, ok?".

that might have eased the hurt a bit.

who shot first, the ratings agency or lucas? will we ever know? will we care?

The part in bold.

I thought that was the point (at the time I was seeing it). Like in Westerns where you have a duel and both shooters break their shots at nearly the same time. Did Clint Eastwood get his shot off first? Did Lee Van Cleef? Who got hit? Did they both get hit? And then Lee slowly topples over and Clint holsters his iron and calmly walks away to the sound of jingling spurs and says a witty one liner, like, "Sorry about the mess," as he walks passed the funerary home and flips a silver eagle to the proprietor.

You know, I don't really care about who shot first. My issue with the scene? It looks like crap - Han's head bouncing to the left like that. If it didn't look like total ass, I'd not have given the two second scene another thought.

You know, I don't really care about who shot first. My issue with the scene? It looks like crap - Han's head bouncing to the left like that. If it didn't look like total ass, I'd not have given the two second scene another thought.

Then you'll probably enjoy the improved cut, which I feel fixes that issue nicely:

And then there will be a final, final cut where Greedo just shoots himself.

I remember the old, battered and abused VHS I watched growing up: Han shot first. And last.

I remember that, and I also remember the LaserDisc version I got. I reviewed the LaserDisc and found that two frames before the whole screen goes white due to Han’s shot, there was a tiny squib right next to Han’s head that fizzled. In the original scene, it was supposed to be virtually simultaneous, but Greedo missed.

That was a time when you could go through frame-by-frame and look at each one like it was a still picture. And that fizzled squib was pretty obvious.

For whatever reason, they chose not to fix that problem in post, and they chose not to fix it with editing. Or maybe they forgot.

But in the original footage that was used for the first round of theatrical presentation, there was a squib that fizzled that was supposed to represent Greedo’s shot which hit next to Han’s head.

If you don’t believe me, feel free to dig up one of those old LaserDiscs and do the same thing I did, frame-by-frame.

If I find an old laserdisc (and a laserdisc player), I will.

I should add that the VHS copy of Star Wars I watched growing up was recorded from when the movie was being played (IIRC) on the Disney channel (back when they did "late night" commercial-free movies).

GL just thinking of the kiddies

Truthfully, if Greedo missed at that short a range after spending on that time drawing a bead on Han, then he deserved to get blown away.

I get that ultimately it was a change made for the sake of keeping a PG rating; honestly, I think studio execs give parents more credit than they are due when it comes to the PG-13 rating, as I've seen countless parents bring their wee tykes into PG-13 movies without consideration that "hey, this movie might not be appropriate for small children!"

Lucas could have probably let the film be changed to PG-13 and not have it hurt the box office receipts one bit.

For those that haven't seen yet, the first of a trilogy of books set between VI and VII. More or less creating the new EU. Not really sure there needs to be a spoiler warning as it doesn't really say anything not already known, unless you've sequestered yourself from all news completely.

http://www.starwars.com/news/what-happened-after-endor-find-out-in-star-wars-aftermath

In the US it's up to the MPAA's board of parent reviewers.

While I can't find anything solid about Han shooting first, there is some merit to the claim.

When it came time to rerelease, since the film had been modified, it had to go back to the raters and it's all about what those raters are thinking here and now. So if it happened to go to an especially.... concerned, group of parents, I can easily see how they might look at Han shooting and get upset about it. George, not wanting to up the rating, just had the change made to accommodate it, and keep the rating low.

And given what an absolute *********** of censorship and arbitrary-ness the MPAA review board is, I can't really fault this line of reasoning. If you want to be mad at how broken the Studio Industry is, go watch This Film is Not Yet Rated. You'll be pissed like you wouldn't believe by the end.

For those that haven't seen yet, the first of a trilogy of books set between VI and VII. More or less creating the new EU. Not really sure there needs to be a spoiler warning as it doesn't really say anything not already known, unless you've sequestered yourself from all news completely.

http://www.starwars.com/news/what-happened-after-endor-find-out-in-star-wars-aftermath

I've read a lot of Chuck's work (both roleplay games [he was heavily involved in World of Darkness] and fiction books), and have the pleasure of being a solid acquaintance of his, speaking several times, and he's a great guy, and I think he'll do Star Wars fans proud.

New promo 'poster' I hadn't seen. For those interested.

http://www.starwars7news.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Poster.jpg

Holy ****! JJ just threw out the prequels!

But during today’s Comic Con panel in Hall H Abrams was asked about his inspirations and influences in putting this film together, and his answer was somewhat surprising if not undiplomatic.

“We tried to sit down and ask ourselves, ‘what feels right?’” Abrams said. “The only real mandate we had was what delights us. We treated the films, especially 4, 5, and 6, we treated those as canon.”

Okay, I will freely admit that E1-3 were not well received, but I think this is a step too far. It might make the fanboys happy (well, some of them), but it'll do nothing but confuse the Average Viewer. "Wait, the ones with the goofy frog man don't count anymore? That's too much work, lets see whats playing in theater 3. . . . "

Besides, the stodgy adults may not like them, but I know tons of kids dig them, that they grew up on them,

This does not inspire confidence in JJ. . . .

What are you on about? He said movies count as canon. that's right there in your quote, ep4-6 just count more, because they're the ones that didn't suck.

He intentionally name checked 4-6 while excluding 1-3. That's pretty telling.

And no, they didn't suck. You didn't like them. There's a difference.

Once again, I reference the cave on Dagobah - that the comment is interpreted by what you take with you. If you want the prequels expelled from canon, that is how you will read it.

Honestly, yes they are drawing more from original trilogy because this new trilogy is a direct sequel to it with all the major legacy players. More people have fond memories of these films, and the actors in them, including the director. Are the prequels thrown out? No. In sure if something made the story better from the prequels it would be used. I'm betting much of the calling out of 4-6 is because of the actors and writer returning. They have a unique view on the characters.

Given that we still have Rebels and The Clone Wars as canon, so there isn't much he can really do.

I'm still hoping that somebody handwaves midichlorians away. Jar-Jar is as good a guy to make it happen as any.

Holy ****! JJ just threw out the prequels!

But during today’s Comic Con panel in Hall H Abrams was asked about his inspirations and influences in putting this film together, and his answer was somewhat surprising if not undiplomatic.

“We tried to sit down and ask ourselves, ‘what feels right?’” Abrams said. “The only real mandate we had was what delights us. We treated the films, especially 4, 5, and 6, we treated those as canon.”

Okay, I will freely admit that E1-3 were not well received, but I think this is a step too far. It might make the fanboys happy (well, some of them), but it'll do nothing but confuse the Average Viewer. "Wait, the ones with the goofy frog man don't count anymore? That's too much work, lets see whats playing in theater 3. . . . "

Besides, the stodgy adults may not like them, but I know tons of kids dig them, that they grew up on them,

This does not inspire confidence in JJ. . . .

It doesn't inspire my confidence in your ability to read an article and identify when a journalist (and I use the term loosely) is trolling you to get views...

JJ drew his inspirations from the OT, no surprise there... at all..like not even a little. And the question was what his inspirations and influences were, not what he thought happened and didn't. So his response wasn't "That whole Clone Attacking, Sith Revenging thing didn't happen" his response was "The original trilogy is the tone, feel, looks, and themes that to me define Star Wars, and so that's kinda what I'm going for in the new film."

Chill out. The movie will be good, or it will suck, and if it Into Darknesses and leaves so many gaping plot holes behind it crashes wookieepedia... that might not be such a bad thing....

Maybe I should become a Brony... I bet they never get into a tizzy over the canonicity of Equestria Girls....

"We treated the films, especially 4, 5, and 6, we treated those as canon."

That's the exact quote. Where is the controversial bit, exactly?

I do not get that from the quote, either. All films are canon, but it is pretty obvious that the new episodes are going more for an OT feel (at least going by the teaser trailers so far), so this statement just underlines that notion. The article on the other hand feels like click-bait, which, as we all know, is a technique of the Dark Side ... (no Vader-smiley, ****) ...

It's that, or the stuff that happened in the prequils are not overly relivent to the plot that is happening over 50 years after the PT ended. Most of the people who we saw then are either dead or likely in a postion of little importance. From that perspective there really isn't much point in introducing too much from the preqil era, aside from possibly stored war droids or something because it was all about setting up the story that we saw in the OT.

Think about it; World War 2 had become a distant event for a lot of people after 50 years had past (though not completely irrilivent due to the legecy of the war and the cold war.) which aside from Nazi sciencists being used to transfer jet tech in era 51 a lot of it isn't really relivent to how things are handled today. Why? A lot people who called the shots are dead. It's the same era, the galatic civil war is a conflict more relivent then that of the clone wars. Unless they are going to dig up Mauls corpse to use a 3rd time as the main villain or some nonsense. And theres almost no character that I can imagine surviving the events of the clone war fallout and the civil war.

Personally, I like some of the starship design in that era but the bulk of the plot is going to backdate to the era most relivent OT era.

Chill out. The movie will be good, or it will suck, and if it Into Darknesses and leaves so many gaping plot holes behind it crashes wookieepedia... that might not be such a bad thing....

Into Darkness has its problems but plot holes (logic, omissions or story elements that directly conflict with what the screenplay has already established) was not one of them.

If it doesn't conflict with the "rules" of what the story has presented, it doesn't count as a plot hole. It's just bad or lazy writing.