Star Wars Question

[Duncan]

My 8yr old son wants to know why episodes 4,5,6 of Star Wars were made first and then episodes 1,2,3 were made last, anyone know?

[Nathair/|\]

The story I was told is that the special effects technology didn't exist in 1977 to make the first three. Lucas was also an unknown at the time and it wasn't clear how it would do. A New Hope is the only one that could stand on its own.

[Jeff K.]

Starwars was originally supposed to be a one shot deal. It wasn't given an episodic title (number IV or V or so on). While Lucas had the general story outlined for purposes of continuity of the characters, he did not originally envision it as a long series. The money he made changed his mind, first in finishing with the same actors and chemistry he began with, and then, as the story overtook the characters, with the parts I II and III. At least that is my understanding.

Edited August 11, 2011 by Jeff K.

[cinepro]

My 8yr old son wants to know why episodes 4,5,6 of Star Wars were made first and then episodes 1,2,3 were made last, anyone know?

Because Lucas knew if he made Episode 1 first, he'd never get to make any more. So he made the good ones first.

Edited August 11, 2011 by cinepro

[Jeff K.]

Admittedly the introduction of Jar Jar would have killed Starwars as a series.

[cinepro]

Admittedly the introduction of Jar Jar would have killed Starwars as a series.

I recently saw a discussion with Lucas where he was insisting, in defense of Jar Jar, that back in 1977, "people hated C3PO".

Yeah George, they hated him so much they put his footprints in the court of the Chinese Theater less than three months after the film came out.

Edited August 11, 2011 by cinepro

[Robert F. Smith]

My 8yr old son wants to know why episodes 4,5,6 of Star Wars were made first and then episodes 1,2,3 were made last, anyone know?

George Lucas originally conceived of a nine-part saga, the heart of which was 4,5, and 6. 1,2, and 3 were made as prequels. In an interview, Lucas doubted that he would ever do 7,8, and 9. It is simply too time consuming, and he is now too old (in his opinion), but we'll see. Maybe he'll change his mind.

Benjamin Urrutia brilliantly exposed the likely sources of Lucas' story in a series of articles in Dialogue and Mythlore. The most important piece he has written on this (which includes probable Mormon sources) can be found in LDSF 2 in a review titled "The Force That Can be Explained is Not the True Force" here.

[The Nehor]

In early releases Lucas was not allowed to put Episode IV in the opening because it was thought to be confusing.

George was paying an homage to the serials of the 50's and 60's and starting in the middle. When he first started he had no plans to make Episodes 1, 2, or 3 and no prospects of making 5 and 6. He just wanted to give the impression that the world of Star Wars was larger then the one film.

[cinepro]

For Duncan's son and anyone else interested in the story of the story of "Star Wars", the definitive resource is certainly "The Making Of Star Wars", published by Lucasfilm in 2007.

This book details (exhaustively) the creation of the fist Star Wars film, from the first rough drafts in 1973 through the film's initial release and success in 1977. So if you really want to know how the story developed, you can read details of each draft (and even find names such as "Mace Windu" that would pop up in later films). The book is especially valuable because it is based almost entirely on notes and interviews that were done in the 1970's, so you get a good idea of what people were thinking at the time.

As to the question in the OP, the answer would appear to be that "Star Wars: Episode IV" was made first because that was the story Lucas wanted to tell. He had a general back story in mind (obviously), but the intent was to pay homage to the style of old serial features such as Shazam and Flash Gordon. So it opens as if there were previous movies, but beyond general character backgrounds and the history of the Republic and Empire, there weren't many specifics.

But you don't have to read a book to know that Lucas hadn't really planned out the prequals, you just have to watch episodes 1, 2 and 3 and remember what we were told in 4, 5 and 6.

Like this...

and this.

As an aside, I will point out that one of the rarely-mentioned "brilliances" of Star Wars IV is that, while it mimics the opening structure of a mid-serial where we join the story in stride, it still manages to subtly but not blatantly "introduce" the characters during an action sequence. Compare it to Episode I, where the movie falls flat from the get go.

Edited August 12, 2011 by cinepro

[kolipoki09]

Gohan, Gohan, get into this thread quickly!

[Duncan]

For Duncan's son and anyone else interested in the story of the story of "Star Wars", the definitive resource is certainly "The Making Of Star Wars", published by Lucasfilm in 2007.

This book details (exhaustively) the creation of the fist Star Wars film, from the first rough drafts in 1973 through the film's initial release and success in 1977. So if you really want to know how the story developed, you can read details of each draft (and even find names such as "Mace Windu" that would pop up in later films). The book is especially valuable because it is based almost entirely on notes and interviews that were done in the 1970's, so you get a good idea of what people were thinking at the time.

As to the question in the OP, the answer would appear to be that "Star Wars: Episode IV" was made first because that was the story Lucas wanted to tell. He had a general back story in mind (obviously), but the intent was to pay homage to the style of old serial features such as Shazam and Flash Gordon. So it opens as if there were previous movies, but beyond general character backgrounds and the history of the Republic and Empire, there weren't many specifics.

But you don't have to read a book to know that Lucas hadn't really planned out the prequals, you just have to watch episodes 1, 2 and 3 and remember what we were told in 4, 5 and 6.

Like this...

and this.

As an aside, I will point out that one of the rarely-mentioned "brilliances" of Star Wars IV is that, while it mimics the opening structure of a mid-serial where we join the story in stride, it still manages to subtly but not blatantly "introduce" the characters during an action sequence. Compare it to Episode I, where the movie falls flat from the get go.

Awesome, thank you!

[K-2]

The early drafts of the Star Wars (IV) script used to be available online. I don't know if they still are.

[CARPE DIEM]

My 8yr old son wants to know why episodes 4,5,6 of Star Wars were made first and then episodes 1,2,3 were made last, anyone know?

Only saw the first two movies. Have never see the rest. Not my style!

[cinepro]

Only saw the first two movies. Have never see the rest. Not my style!

If you mean "Star Wars" (1977) and "The Empires Strikes Back" (1980), then I envy you. If you mean "The Phantom Menace" (1999) and "Attack of the Clones" (2002), then you have my condolences.

[volgadon]

Star Wars (1977) was a fantastic swashbuckler.

[Lightbearer]

My 8yr old son wants to know why episodes 4,5,6 of Star Wars were made first and then episodes 1,2,3 were made last, anyone know?

My opinion is that if 1,2,3 came first there never would have been 4,5,6! Also if we knew Luke was Vader's son and Leia was his daughter, then Star Wars would have been quite different in impact, and 5 and 6 would also lost some of the drama. At least that is my opinion.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

My 8yr old son wants to know why episodes 4,5,6 of Star Wars were made first and then episodes 1,2,3 were made last, anyone know?

Retro's are fun...

[Jeff K.]

Because the group is committed to their music

[cinepro]

My opinion is that if 1,2,3 came first there never would have been 4,5,6! Also if we knew Luke was Vader's son and Leia was his daughter, then Star Wars would have been quite different in impact, and 5 and 6 would also lost some of the drama. At least that is my opinion.

Back in 2005, I went to a double feature of Episode III and Episode IV at a theater here in LA. It was a very jarring (jar-jarring?) experience to see them back to back.

We could also ask the question of what the ideal or preferred way to watch the movies should be for future generations. Should they see them in production order, or series order? I've only let my kids watch the prequels once or twice after they've seen 4,5 & 6 (just so they would quit asking). I find them too depressing to have them on in my house.

[ERayR]

I've only let my kids watch the prequels once or twice after they've seen 4,5 & 6 (just so they would quit asking). I find them too depressing to have them on in my house.

Somewhat like life at times.

[Stargazer]

Sigh.

I keep hearing all this from so many people that Episodes 1,2,3 were horrible. One of my sons has made some B (or maybe C) movies -- and don't ask me, because I won't tell you how you can watch them, because they are unwatchable. He believes that he is an expert on movies, and he, too, considers 1,2,3 to be terrible wastelands.

I think yer all over-the-top snobs and elitists. I liked all three films (granted 4,5 & 6 were better), and while I thought JarJar was pathetic, I don't feel that he rose to the level of hysteria so many people like to claim.

I saw Cowboys & Aliens and I liked it pretty well.

I walked out of Pirates of the Caribbean IV about 2/3s of the way through, though, because I didn't like it at all and didn't care how it ended. It sucked -- and I particularly disliked those stupid mermaids. The only bright spot in the film was Ian McShane, who was excellent as Blackbeard. Penelope Cruz was pretty and OK. But I am fed up with Johnny Depp. I am told that he never watches his own movies. Well, if he doesn't, then I guess I won't either.

[Astral_Lds]

I love all things Starwars and don't get why people harp on about the prequels. I love them just as much as the originals. Your 8 year old son would probably enjoy the new 3D animated series . I know that my son does. We both think that clone wars is awesome.

[bluebell]

What killed the prequals for me was all the computer special effects. There was just so much of it, but it was still in it's earlier stages where it didn't look real at all. The movies were like watch real people interact with cartoons because the special effects were so obviously fake. I thought the special effects in the last three were more realistic than in the first three-especiall number 2.

I think if they'd just waited a decade to make them, so that the technology could have caught up to the vision, they would have been so much better.

[MorningStar]

When I saw number 1, I was 7 months pregnant, the volume was way too loud, and some kid kept kicking the back of my seat no matter how many times I turned around and glared. I'm not sure who I wanted to strangle more - him or Jar Jar. Also, the characters have no personality like they do in number 4.

There is no way people hated C3PO more than Jar Jar.

[Duncan]

I love all things Starwars and don't get why people harp on about the prequels. I love them just as much as the originals. Your 8 year old son would probably enjoy the new 3D animated series . I know that my son does. We both think that clone wars is awesome.

he LOVES all things Star Wars as well, including the $500+ Lego Death star...