GREEDo Shoots First

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

So, no longer putting Critical Miss in the title now, eh?

I was expecting an Escapist article on the greed involved with remakes or something.

I was pleasantly surprised to find standard Star Wars fanboy stuff!

Yeah. I've never seen the original trilogy, and when I do, it will be the remakes. And I take it as a point of pride that I've ignored the peer pressure to see these movies for this long.

Okay, not totally true. I saw them when I was 5-6, but you can't really ENJOY a movie at that age.

Edit:

I've added them to my Netflix queue. They're at about position 10, but I've got a Mel Brooks marathon going on. Except for "Silent Movie". I just don't like that one.

Greed, you say?

Lucasarts you say?

Preposterous.

Extendo boxing glove ftw! If that really did get implemented it'd almost be worth Greedo shooting first...almost... :)

"A New Hope" won't be out until like 2016, and even then it will only be re-released if the first three do well enough.

Hope Lucas doesn't see this, or he'll get ideas.

Still don't understand the significance of whatsisface shooting first or not. Why does it matter?

GrinningManiac:
Still don't understand the significance of whatsisface shooting first or not. Why does it matter?

Because it turns Solo in to a justified wimp instead of a dangerous outlaw? I guess...

I was about to tell you to shut the fuck up, but I'll let it slide...

Lucas is releaseing Star Wars in 3D. Films that weren't recorded with 3D technology are getting converted into 3D. Now let your mind wander over other recent releases that were converted into 3D. This won't be the Star Wars Avatar, this will be the Star Wars Clash of the Titans...

GrinningManiac:
Still don't understand the significance of whatsisface shooting first or not. Why does it matter?

In the original release, Han Solo shot Greedo while they were talking. It set him up as a badass. In the "updated" version, Lucas decided that it made Han look too mean and edited the scene so Greedo shoots at Han first, and then Han fires back in self defence. It was the principle of the thing that pissed people off. There was no need for the change, nobody was bothered and it was basically a symbol of Lucas doing everything waaaay to family friendly.

i would not be surprised if this was what it was like...

...or this: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/9/22/

Yensei:

GrinningManiac:
Still don't understand the significance of whatsisface shooting first or not. Why does it matter?

Because it turns Solo in to a justified wimp instead of a dangerous outlaw? I guess...

Pretty much. It defines Han's character for the first film. When he shoots first it shows that he is dangerous and unpredictable. Therefore Luke and Obi Wan have chosen the wrong person to protect them. It brings in uncertainty and doubt, and makes his transformation at the end of the film much more important.

I will admit. I laughed hard. I don't know why you didn't call this one Critical Miss (I still read it for morbid curiosity), but either way I laughed.

Also Deathlyphil got it right.

Onyx Oblivion:
So, no longer putting Critical Miss in the title now, eh?

I was expecting an Escapist article on the greed involved with remakes or something.

I was pleasantly surprised to find standard Star Wars fanboy stuff!

Yeah. I've never seen the original trilogy, and when I do, it WILL be the remakes. And I take this as a point of pride.

Okay, not totally true. I saw them when I was 5-6, but you can't really ENJOY a movie at that age.

I agree on what I expected clicking this. I like the Critical Miss comics, but I was thinking about something else. I don't, however, get the "point of pride." It seems really silly to be proud to have not seen the original versions.

Zachary Amaranth:

Onyx Oblivion:
So, no longer putting Critical Miss in the title now, eh?

I was expecting an Escapist article on the greed involved with remakes or something.

I was pleasantly surprised to find standard Star Wars fanboy stuff!

Yeah. I've never seen the original trilogy, and when I do, it WILL be the remakes. And I take this as a point of pride.

Okay, not totally true. I saw them when I was 5-6, but you can't really ENJOY a movie at that age.

I agree on what I expected clicking this. I like the Critical Miss comics, but I was thinking about something else. I don't, however, get the "point of pride." It seems really silly to be proud to have not seen the original versions.

I'm not proud of that, exactly. I proud of resisting the "peer pressure" to see them. They don't look like they'd tickle my fancy, and I'm not going to watch them just to satisfy some imaginary "movies you have to see" quota.

Onyx Oblivion:
Yeah. I've never seen the original trilogy, and when I do, it WILL be the remakes. And I take this as a point of pride.

Why is that something to be proud of? I just don't get it. It's like saying "I've only seen the Kevin Costner Robin Hood movie and I'm proud that I will never see the Errol Flynn one."

Even ignoring that people who really like the movies (back to Star Wars now, though it still applies to Robin Hood) mostly agree that the one you won't see is better, it's still strange. "I'm proud that I'm going to ignore a major cinematic milestone" is just a weird thing to say.

Well, knowing the re-altering of Han and Greedo's scene that's probably not that radical.

OK, this time, I actually get it and think it's funny.

Deathlyphil:

Yensei:

GrinningManiac:
Still don't understand the significance of whatsisface shooting first or not. Why does it matter?

Because it turns Solo in to a justified wimp instead of a dangerous outlaw? I guess...

Pretty much. It defines Han's character for the first film. When he shoots first it shows that he is dangerous and unpredictable. Therefore Luke and Obi Wan have chosen the wrong person to protect them. It brings in uncertainty and doubt, and makes his transformation at the end of the film much more important.

I don't agree, and to be honest I think most of the complaints about the special edition of Star Wars is just pointless nitpicking and whining.

While Han not shooting first may make him seem slightly less unpredictable it doesn't really do anything to impact is overall character. I saw the special edition first, and then years later decided to check out the originals after hearing the Star Wars fanboys talk about how Lucas "had ruined Star Wars" with his Special edition, only to find myself watching the same movies again only with shitty special effects and some missing scenes.

People are being fooled by nostalgia, or they are just being fanboys. And then of course there are also those who enjoy bashing Lucas whenever they can, so they will bash the special edition as well.

Jandau:
Lucas is releaseing Star Wars in 3D. Films that weren't recorded with 3D technology are getting converted into 3D. Now let your mind wander over other recent releases that were converted into 3D. This won't be the Star Wars Avatar, this will be the Star Wars Clash of the Titans...

GrinningManiac:
Still don't understand the significance of whatsisface shooting first or not. Why does it matter?

In the original release, Han Solo shot Greedo while they were talking. It set him up as a badass. In the "updated" version, Lucas decided that it made Han look too mean and edited the scene so Greedo shoots at Han first, and then Han fires back in self defence. It was the principle of the thing that pissed people off. There was no need for the change, nobody was bothered and it was basically a symbol of Lucas doing everything waaaay to family friendly.

Ah, I see!

So the argument is not about whether Greedo shot first, but, rather, the argument is about whether or not Greedo shooting first was a good idea!

It makes sense now! I thought people were genuinely arguing over whether or not Greedo actually fired first!

Aha, thanks!

bojac6:

Onyx Oblivion:
Yeah. I've never seen the original trilogy, and when I do, it WILL be the remakes. And I take this as a point of pride.

Why is that something to be proud of? I just don't get it. It's like saying "I've only seen the Kevin Costner Robin Hood movie and I'm proud that I will never see the Errol Flynn one."

Even ignoring that people who really like the movies (back to Star Wars now, though it still applies to Robin Hood) mostly agree that the one you won't see is better, it's still strange. "I'm proud that I'm going to ignore a major cinematic milestone" is just a weird thing to say.

Like I said above, I'm not proud of THAT in particular. I more proud of resisting the pressure to see them.

Hysterical. These comics got to a slow start back in the beginning but man have they really come into form. Another win in my book.

Uh, you've given them another chance to blame Lucas for world poverty...

I'm leaving before I (metaphorically) punch a purist.

Hardcore_gamer:

Deathlyphil:

Yensei:

GrinningManiac:
Still don't understand the significance of whatsisface shooting first or not. Why does it matter?

Because it turns Solo in to a justified wimp instead of a dangerous outlaw? I guess...

Pretty much. It defines Han's character for the first film. When he shoots first it shows that he is dangerous and unpredictable. Therefore Luke and Obi Wan have chosen the wrong person to protect them. It brings in uncertainty and doubt, and makes his transformation at the end of the film much more important.

I don't agree, and to be honest I think most of the complaints about the special edition of Star Wars is just pointless nitpicking and whining.

While Han not shooting first may make him seem slightly less unpredictable it doesn't really do anything to impact is overall character. I saw the special edition first, and then years later decided to check out the originals after hearing the Star Wars fanboys talk about how Lucas "had ruined Star Wars" with his Special edition, only to find myself watching the same movies again only with shitty special effects and some missing scenes.

People are being fooled by nostalgia, or they are just being fanboys. And then of course there are also those who enjoy bashing Lucas whenever they can, so they will bash the special edition as well.

I could have ravenous sex with you right now.

I agree.

You will never love a woman as much as George Lucas hates his fans.

GrinningManiac:

Jandau:
Lucas is releaseing Star Wars in 3D. Films that weren't recorded with 3D technology are getting converted into 3D. Now let your mind wander over other recent releases that were converted into 3D. This won't be the Star Wars Avatar, this will be the Star Wars Clash of the Titans...

GrinningManiac:
Still don't understand the significance of whatsisface shooting first or not. Why does it matter?

In the original release, Han Solo shot Greedo while they were talking. It set him up as a badass. In the "updated" version, Lucas decided that it made Han look too mean and edited the scene so Greedo shoots at Han first, and then Han fires back in self defence. It was the principle of the thing that pissed people off. There was no need for the change, nobody was bothered and it was basically a symbol of Lucas doing everything waaaay to family friendly.

Ah, I see!

So the argument is not about whether Greedo shot first, but, rather, the argument is about whether or not Greedo shooting first was a good idea!

It makes sense now! I thought people were genuinely arguing over whether or not Greedo actually fired first!

Aha, thanks!

Cheney shot first.

GrinningManiac:

Ah, I see!

So the argument is not about whether Greedo shot first, but, rather, the argument is about whether or not Greedo shooting first was a good idea!

It makes sense now! I thought people were genuinely arguing over whether or not Greedo actually fired first!

Aha, thanks!

-Gobsmacked-

Well, Greedo was a goon as well - but yeah...it's a writing convention rather than a physical argument.

And do you really want Lucas to return to his original script?

You know, the one that hints at under-age relationships (AGAIN)

Read the original

Now weep.

Am I the only one thinkning that Han trying to bargain, Greedo shooting down his plate and Han shooting him back saying "I was talking, Greedo" would actually fit pretty damn good with his character?

Greedo shooting first is probably the worst thing to happen that has been blown out of proportion.

Wait, you people are changing your name right now? That's too confusing, especially in my RSS feeds where I am partially selective about what I click.

Please say this is a one-time occurance or a very rare one!

Grey Carter:
GREEDo Shoots First

No, it was Han!

Read Full Article

You missed a trick with this one:

'Damnit Greedo you're shooting like a Stormtrooper!'

Eitherway, funny stuff!

GrinningManiac:

Jandau:
Lucas is releaseing Star Wars in 3D. Films that weren't recorded with 3D technology are getting converted into 3D. Now let your mind wander over other recent releases that were converted into 3D. This won't be the Star Wars Avatar, this will be the Star Wars Clash of the Titans...

GrinningManiac:
Still don't understand the significance of whatsisface shooting first or not. Why does it matter?

In the original release, Han Solo shot Greedo while they were talking. It set him up as a badass. In the "updated" version, Lucas decided that it made Han look too mean and edited the scene so Greedo shoots at Han first, and then Han fires back in self defence. It was the principle of the thing that pissed people off. There was no need for the change, nobody was bothered and it was basically a symbol of Lucas doing everything waaaay to family friendly.

Ah, I see!

So the argument is not about whether Greedo shot first, but, rather, the argument is about whether or not Greedo shooting first was a good idea!

It makes sense now! I thought people were genuinely arguing over whether or not Greedo actually fired first!

Aha, thanks!

Well I don't care much about Star Wars, but I can see where people are coming from on this issue and as a writer Greedo shooting first doesn't make sense in the context of the plot. As stated by Boba Fett in Empire Strikes Back, he needed Solo alive and presumably so did Greedo. Him shooting to kill Han would be completely against the motivation of the character, he'd get no paycheck and being a bounty hunter that's not in keeping with the character. Writing that contradicts itself is never well received.

That's really the only problem I have, but I don't care enough to get up in arms about it.

image

That is all ^_^

You don't have to go all the way to Star Wars Fandom to consider this change in the scene stupid. Here are two other reasons:

-Any re-release was in an attempt to make money. Do you think they earned that money by adding an additonal blast?

-That Greedo is supposed to be a professional killer. Yet he manages to NOT KILL a person sitting across a table from him... with a one-hit-kill-weapon... That's just silly. Not silly in the Ewooks way, but silly in the "Do you thing we are stupid?"-way.

GrinningManiac:
Still don't understand the significance of whatsisface shooting first or not. Why does it matter?

Because, while such a change (that is, Greedo shoots first) is generally consistent with what Han's character became as the franchise evolved, it seemed out of place with the character we are presented in A New Hope.

Just examine the facts we know about Han if we examine the first movie by itself:
Han is a smuggler - a person for whom the petty restrictions of imperial law mean little.
Han is willing to do almost anything for money (except work for the Empire) making him a mercenary.
Han is known to have dumped cargo before being boarded in order to save his own skin.
Han keeps trying to extract himself from the deal made with Kin obi whenever possible only to change his mind at the last minute when the offer of payment increases.

At the end of the movie, Han has a change of heart and returns to help Luke make his run on the death star in spite of there being no hope of payment, thus placing the needs and interests of others above his own. This represents a change of character that (likely) resulted from his experiences over the course of the movie.

Now, we have a man who is clearly out for himself at every turn. Even his refusal to serve the Empire can be considered self serving. He is a man who has little regard for Imperial law. When faced with a mortal threat, do you really think such a man would let the other guy shoot first if he could do something about it?

At least that's why I didn't care for the change. I'm not up in arms about it or anything, but much of my distaste for Star Wars is firmly rooted in violations of character consistency (Just because I can drive a car does not mean I can fly an advanced fighter jet effectively in combat without training for example, no matter how awesome a car driver I am) or in scenarios where a character acts in a way that does not seem to mesh with the situation in which they find themselves, or deliver lines as though they are delivering lines (in other words, the acting was flat). The story arc in general, the universe, even the characters themselves are relatively interesting, enough that I've seen the movies and generally enjoyed them and played most of the games but that's about as far as I take it.

Typo in the Heading?

Was expecting a comic today, just not in this article XD

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here