Nov 16 2012
A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, I remember reading a very specific interview with George Lucas. In it, he was asked why he’d begun telling his Star Wars story with the Original Trilogy instead of with the Prequel Trilogy. In other words, the reporter wanted to know why Georgie-boy hadn’t spun his tale in the proper chronological order. The filmmaker answered by explaining how his universe’s back-story was largely a political one, how the real fun of telling any story is where all the action is at, and he firmly concluded that was during the timeframe of Luke, Han, and Leia’s rebellion. Hence, he served up the Original Trilogy first, and he’d follow, years later, with the Prequel Trilogy.
To paraphrasing his point, Lucas felt that the stakes were higher for the Rebels than they were for the Republic. Higher stakes generally means greater conflict; greater conflict generally leads to high drama; and high drama means more to audiences than, say, political skullduggery.
Now, far be it from me to argue with the one-time Jedi Master of all things cosmic, but methinks there’s a little something more to our collectively endearing so much of the Original Trilogy while somewhat dismissing the “importance” or feigned “relevance” of the Prequel Trilogy. Continue Reading »