I'll admit my bias. One Wednesday afternoon in May of 1977, when Star Wars opened in my home town, I saw, with my own two eyes, Han Solo take the first shot and kill Greedo. I know this. I witnessed it, so there is no doubt in my mind that it is so and I'll always know that is the truth.
Now, all the "Han First-ers" will say that their objections to the doctored footage that first showed Greedo shooting at the same time, and later showing Greedo shooting first are because it changes the character of Han Solo. With Han shooting first, we know he's a scoundrel and his shooting first shows it. It means Han has a story arc, where he goes from scoundrel to good guy.
But does it really change that much? He's still a smuggler, he's still ready to kill a bounty hunter without a second thought, he's still doing business with Jabba, and still willing to stare him down. He also still intends to leave the Rebellion at Yavin 4 with his loot and not look back.
So perhaps this change indicates slower reflexes than originally. Does it really change Han's character?
And, more importantly, are there any points anywhere in Star Wars canon that depend on this change? For example, are there stories where Greedo's friends or family seek revenge because he was gunned down in cold blood that were affected because of this change (so Han's shot was in self defense)? Or maybe stories of Han Solo's earlier life that make him less of a scoundrel than we would consider him if the footage of that scene was not altered?
Answer
*Warning: TV Tropes Links
The changes do have an impact on the tone of Han's character.
The smuggler who will preemptively gun down anyone he perceives as a threat to his safety is significantly darker than the smuggler who merely reacts to attempts on his life, and is much further into the realm of being a true antihero*.
One version of Han is a hardened killer who experiences a fundamental shift in perspective as a result of being torn by unexpected feelings of love, and loyalty to people that became his friends (despite his better judgement).
The other version is merely a standard "reluctant hero" (or "Loveable Rogue"*) who happens to work in an illegal and dangerous profession, and who makes a few wise cracks. This hero's return after he "took the money and ran" is not nearly as surprising.
However, the biggest disappointment in this particular retcon is primarily out-of-universe.
The fact that Lucas felt the need to "fix" this after the fact is perceived as an unwelcome attempt to "soften" the movie.
Why is this change so important? Why go to the trouble of retconning this? Was the "old" Han in some way inferior to the new? Most fans seem to feel that rather the opposite is true, so this became a rallying point for those who felt that Lucas' changes were demonstrating a disconnect between Lucas and his fan base.
While many fans first watched the movies as children, they are not generally thought of as "children's movies", but rather as movies suitable for all ages. There are already a number of plot devices in the original trilogy that are clearly there to cater specifically to children (e.g. the ewoks); the justification Lucas gave for the change (that he wanted to make clear to children that Han had "no choice" but to shoot) is seen as further skewing the movie towards a children's market.
The awkwardness of the retcon, particularly the extra required suspension of disbelief that Greedo could possibly miss a seated target at point blank range, is also cited as further evidence that the change simply lowers the quality of the film.
See also The Dog Shot First*.
Comments
Post a Comment