Skip to main content

behind the scenes - Why did George Lucas set Star Wars in the past instead of the future?


I always found it interesting that Star Wars is set in the distant past instead of the (more obvious) future.


Has George Lucas ever commented why he chose to do that?



Answer



The goal was to evoke fantasy, not science fiction. Placing it in the dim and distant past freed Lucas up to create a visual and sound palette that was unique, without incurring the ire of 'hard-science-fiction' fans.



RS: You firmly establish that at the beginning of Star Wars with the words: “A long, long time ago in a galaxy far, far away…”


Lucas: Well, I had a real problem because I was afraid that science-fiction buffs and everybody would say things like, “You know there’s no sound in outer space”. I just wanted to forget science. That would take care of itself. Stanley Kubrick made the ultimate science-fiction movie and it is going to be very hard for somebody to come along and make a better movie, as far as I’m concerned. I didn’t want to make a 2001, I wanted to make a space fantasy that was more in the genre of Edgar Rice Burroughs; that whole other end of space fantasy that was there before science took it over in the Fifties. Once the atomic bomb came, everybody got into monsters and science and what would happen with this and what would happen with that. I think speculative fiction is very valid but they forgot the fairy tales and the dragons and Tolkien and all the real heroes.


George Lucas: The Wizard of ‘Star Wars’ - Rolling Stone: 1977




LucasFilm's Head of Fan Relations Steve Sansweet addressed precisely this issue in the Star Wars "Ask the Jedi Council" featurette.



How long ago is a long time ago? And how far is the galaxy that’s far, far away? Was this ever decided or is the concept just left open to our imagination?


Unlike hard science fiction such as Star Trek, where the action clearly stems from a civilization on our own planet and takes place in a definable future, Star Wars is a fantasy. As such, it doesn’t have to obey any of the laws of physics, of space, or time. George Lucas deliberately left it vague and open to fan speculation--that’s part of the fun of Star Wars. It’s other-worldly, yet somehow familiar. It’s futuristic, yet somehow anachronistic.


George could answer a lot of the fans’ specific questions, either in the films or spin-off fiction, but deliberately doesn’t. Some of the answers are in his notes and binders, others are in his head. But speculation, he believes, is healthy. It helps to create a broader, denser Star Wars galaxy and gives fans more of a sense of ownership--rightly so.


Being less restrictive also lets individual’s creative juices flow and pushes their imaginations. Over the years Star Wars films and spin-offs have inspired creativity and creative careers in countless men and women all over the world.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...
Post a Comment
Read more

What is the etymology of Doctor Who?

I recently decided to watch Doctor Who, and started viewing the 2005 version. I have the first two episodes from the first season, and I can't help but wonder what is the etymology of the name "Doctor Who"? And why does the protagonist call himself "the Doctor" (or is it "the doctor")? Answer In the very first episode of Doctor Who (way back in 1963), the Doctor has a granddaughter going by the name "Susan Foreman", and the junkyard where the TARDIS is has the sign "I.M. Foreman". Barbara, who becomes one of the Doctor's companions, calls him "Doctor Foreman" (probably assuming that is his name given his relationship to Susan), and Ian (another early companion) does the same in the second episode, to which the Doctor says: Eh? Doctor who? What's he talking about? "Foreman" is most likely selected as a convenient surname for Susan to use because it happened to be on display near where the TARDIS landed....
Post a Comment
Read more

story identification - Animation: floating island, flying pests

At least 20 years ago I watched a short animated film which stuck in my mind. The whole thing was wordless, possibly European, and I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine it... It featured a flying island which was inhabited by some creatures who (in my memory) reminded me of the Moomins. The island was frequently bothered by large winged animals who swooped around, although I don't think they did any actual damage. At the end one of the moomin creatures suddenly gets a weird feeling, feels forced to climb to the top of the island and then plunges down a shaft right through the centre - only to emerge at the bottom as one of the flyers. Answer Skywhales from 1983. The story begins with a man warning the tribe of approaching skywhales. The drummers then warn everybody of the hunt as everyone get prepared to set "sail". Except one man is found in his home sleeping as the noise wake him up. He then gets ready and is about to take his weapon as he hesitates then decides ...
Post a Comment
Read more