Allan,
Hate to piss off my future game-master (Iridium), but I think your
film comparisons are stretching it a little. R2D2 and C3PO are not the ones
that save the princess; they're along for the ride. And how can you compare
the only swordfight in SW to the one in the samurai movie when the outcome is
the opposite. Does this mean that any movie
that has a sword fight between the opposing leaders is a rip-off of
this Kurasowa movie?
Sorry, but the entertainment industry is my profession, and trust me, we think
about this stuff a lot. I mean, heck, why not compare
SW to every boy-meets-girl-boy-loses-girl-boy-gets-girl-back plot
(Luke and Leia, as far as we know at the end of that movie)?
I'm not saying that Lucas' scripts are totally original--nothing is
anymore, but I'm afraid that I must disagree that just because there
are some plot similarities that his movie _must_ either be an homage
or a rip-off.
Okay, I'm putting the flamethrower down.
Aaah. Much better:)
Out here.
-monty
Excerpts from FT: 5-Aug-96 SW v. Kurasowa by RMMDC@jazz.ucc.uno.edu
> I'm not saying that Lucas' scripts are totally original--nothing is
Given that Lucas has *said* that he was strongly infuenced by The Hidden
Fortress, however, does tend to indicate it's something of a homage....
(I really don't consider it a rip-off, anyway. It's too good a movie
for that.)
> In message <Im1gaDO00iWVEABo5m@andrew.cmu.edu> Aaron P Teske writes:
I saw "Hidden Fortress" on the premise that it was the model for Star Wars and
was roundly unimpressed. Certainly there are elements in
common, but no one-to-one correlation as in "The Magnificent Seven"
or "A Fistful of Dollars".
Let's face it, Star Wars is one of the great manifestations of, well, I'm sure
there's a name it for it, I'd have to check some works by Joseph Campbell,
let's call it the Archetypical Hero Story.
1. The hero, a man of somewhat interesting birth, lives on the fringes of a
society who are oppressed by some force of selfishness.
2. He becomes aware that he is a hero at much the same time that shit happens
to him, throwing him into adventure. Things will never be the same again.
3. With the appropriate sacrifices and an unselfish motivation, he
(eventually) reaches the "Heart of Darkness", recovers the necessary panacea,
and returns to his society.
4. Everything comes out the way it should, the panacea is used to defeat the
forces of selfishness... and yet somehow our hero will remain apart from his
society. How poinient. He has in the process changed fundamentally.
This is Star Wars, and a thousand other stories. It's all a sort of metaphor
for growing up I s'pose. Another fundamental archetype is
the quest for identity. All that Return-of-the-Jedi-"Hero-(Luke)-
goes-to-the-Underworld-(Death-Star)-to-redeem-his-Father's-
(Vader's)-Soul"-sort-of-thing (other than this altered motif RotJ
is basically an inferior re-make of Star Wars).
SW is a heroic *fantasy* story just as much and more than anything Tolkien
provided us. Heroism. Magic. Monsters. Towering source of Evil. Anybody who
insists on dividing this from fantasy because it has a futuristic vaneer is on
some other planet to Yours Truly.
There's a part of me that says the best way to re-edit the SW
trilogy is to ditch the second two films. Star Wars as a stand-
alone film is perfect. I never bought into that "It was all planned as a
trilogy of trilogies" rubbish.
May the Force be with you all.
> David Brewer wrote:
> Let's face it, Star Wars is one of the great manifestations of, well,
<SNIP>
The term Campbell used is Monomyth. It was originally coined by Joseph Conrad.
> In message <3207825A.6C01@iwaynet.net> "J. Scott Miller" writes:
That's the boy. Campbell basically reduces the world's great and powerful
mythology into a simple formula showing the common elements. A similar trick
is pulled by Syd Field in his works on Hollywood screenwriting reducing great
films into a similar formula.
The trouble is, it's easy to pick the common elements out of umpteen stories
and draw a little diagramme, harder to take said diagramme and write a great
story from it. I'm not sure I could name ten Hollywood action films in the
last ten years worth the price of admission. Part of the joy of Star Wars is
how subversive it can be. The Hero goes to Rescue the Helpless Princess... who
is far from submissive and proceeds to cop off with the supporting character.
> At 10:18 PM 8/5/96 -0600, you wrote:
Apparently not TOO thin, as the box of the letterboxed edition of _The
Hidden Fortress_ makes reference to _Star Wars_ and Lucas admitted to
the same in an interview.
R2D2 and C3PO are not
> the ones that save the princess; they're along for the ride.
True. And in THF, the ashigaru are just along for the ride, too.
> And how
The outcome is the opposite, but the set up is the same. It's a
one-on-one
duel between one samurai (Jedi?) and another, with the one's soldiers standing
around watching while the good guys escape. It happens at about the same
"time" in the movie, too.
> I'm not saying that Lucas' scripts are totally original--nothing is
Well, Lucas SAID it was a homage. And after seeing the movie, there are
whole chunks that really do LOOK like _Star Wars_. Not that that's a bad
thing. After all, _A Fist Full of Dollars_ is Kurosawa's _Yojimbo_, and
_The
Magnificent Seven_ is _The Seven Samurai_. Kurosawa himself "stole" from
the
best, with _Throne of Blood_ as an excellent rendition of _Macbeth_ and
_Ran_ is _King Lear_.
I'm not saying that I dislike _Star Wars_ but it is clearly a homage to
_The
Hidden Fortress_. Lucas says it, the studio says it, and the movie
itself shows it.
> [quoted text omitted]
> At 11:21 AM 8/6/96 GMT, you wrote:
> Let's face it, Star Wars is one of the great manifestations of, well,
Gee, and I thought it was space opera.:)
> There's a part of me that says the best way to re-edit the SW
I'm sorry David, but Star Wars was FAR from perfect (and this coming from
someone who saw it 6 times that first summer, twice the first day). It is
enjoyable, but I can't help but cringe at some of the dialog. "Lord Vader,
only you could be so bold." Yuch! The dialog is quite cheesy in many places.
And there are huge horking plot holes. I really enjoy the movie, and it IS a
classic by anyone's definition, but perfect it is not.