Skip to main content

Did the terms of the bounty on Han Solo change between “Star Wars” (1977) and “The Empire Strikes Back” (1980)?


As we know from the seemingly endless retcons of the Han Solo versus Greedo scene in Star Wars (1977) — regardless of who shot first — Greedo seemed to be fine with killing Han to collect the bounty on Han:


Greedo threatens Han in the Cantina


Greedo says this after Han says, “Over my dead body.” So Greedo’s response clearly confirms he’s fine with killing Han to reach his bounty hunting goal.


Then we get to the The Empire Strikes Back (1980). Han has to leave the Rebel Alliance because of a bounty hunter he ran into on Ord Mantell. Okay, that makes sense…


But then a little bit later in the film we see Darth Vader assembling a group of bounty hunters on the Executor to personally instruct and direct them on finding the Millennium Falcon and its passengers. As quoted in the script Vader says the following; bold emphasis is mine:



…there will be a substantial reward for the one who finds the Millennium Falcon. You are free to use any methods necessary, but I want them alive. No disintegrations.




“No disintegrations.”


Okay, so what just happened on the bridge of the Executor?



  • Did Darth Vader just do a “hostile takeover” of the bounty Jabba had in place?

  • Did he simply offer more for Solo being captured alive to — effectively — remove the risk of him being randomly killed by a bounty hunter?

  • Did Jabba the Hutt in some “Honor amongst theives…” mindset simply back off from his bounty because Vader is Vader and you just don’t want to mess with him?


Heck, Boba Fett clearly says this to Vader in Cloud City:




“What if he doesn’t survive… He’s worth a lot to me…”



What?!? So Greedo could kill Solo and get a bounty, but Boba Fett needed him alive? Was Boba Fett just hoping to get more of a reward for a live capture?


I know this might read as multiple questions, but the overall question is simply this:


Did the terms of the bounty on Han Solo change between “Star Wars” (1977) and “The Empire Strikes Back” (1980)? Or are all of these discrepancies explained by basic underworld politics and improvisation on the part of all parties?




Looking for in-universe, canonical explanations; not armchair speculation and theories. If none (currently) exist, legends explanation would suffice. Regardless, please provide references and context.



Answer




While Darth Vader may bear a slight grudge against the crew of the Millennium Falcon for interfering with his shot in A New Hope and for being rebel scum in general, he is not after them.

Darth Vader is after his son, Luke Skywalker. Whether Lord Vader believes Luke to be on the Millennium Falcon or not, he needs Luke's friends, who are aboard the Millennium Falcon, to set a trap.



DARTH VADER: "You are free to use any methods necessary, but I want them alive. No disintegrations."



Jabba the Hutt on the other hand, wants Han Solo and Chewbacca, since they owe him a large sum of money. To recoup his losses, he will want them alive, but to set an example to other smugglers in his service, they're still of use to him if dead.



JABBA: "Han, I can't make exceptions. What if everyone who smuggled for me dropped their cargo at the first sign of an Imperial starship? It's not good business."
[...]
JABBA: "But if you fail me again, I'll put a price on your head so big, you won't be able to go near a civilized system."




Perhaps their bounties are set at different levels for dead vs alive.


Greedo seems trigger happy.



GREEDO: "Going somewhere, Solo?"
HAN SOLO: "Yes, Greedo, as a matter of fact I was just going to see your boss. Tell Jabba that I've got his money."
GREEDO: "It's too late, you should have paid him when you had the chance. Jabba's put a price on your head so large every bounty hunter in the galaxy will be looking for you. I'm lucky I found you first."
HAN SOLO: "Yeah, but this time I've got the money."
GREEDO: "If you give it to me, I might forget I found you."
HAN SOLO: "I don't have it with me. Tell Jabba--"
GREEDO: "Jabba's through with you. He has no time for smugglers who drop their shipments at the first sign of an Imperial cruiser."

HAN SOLO: "Even I get boarded sometimes. Do you think I had a choice?"
GREEDO: "You can tell that to Jabba. He may only take your ship."
HAN SOLO: "Over my dead body."
GREEDO: "That's the idea. I've been looking forward to this for a long time."
HAN SOLO: "Yes, I'll bet you have."



Here we see Greedo shifting between bringing Han Solo to Jabba to collect his bounty, to taking the money from Han instead (and perhaps still trying to collect the bounty afterwards), to just getting over the hassle by shooting Han. Greedo may have been looking forward to shooting him because of a personal grudge, or maybe just because he thought him a cocky (insert epithet here).


Boba Fett is strictly business.


Boba Fett just needs Han Solo and Chewbacca to collect their bounties. Darth Vader's remark was unnecessary. He seems to need Han Solo alive.




BOBA FETT: "What if he doesn't survive? He's worth a lot to me."
DARTH VADER: "The Empire will compensate you if he dies. Put him in!"



Since it was already established that Jabba's bounty can still be collected with the dead bodies of Han and Chewie, it follows that the bounty must be higher if alive (for which Boba Fett would be compensated if Han died).


Also note that Darth Vader didn't particularly care about Han Solo; Vader sees him as an expendable test subject for the carbon-freezing chamber.


TL;DR:



  • Jabba the Hutt wants Han Solo and Chewbacca, dead or alive.

  • Darth Vader wants Luke Skywalker and needs his friends alive to set a trap.

  • Both have issued competing — but not incompatible — bounties on their heads.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

languages - Do we ever see written English in the Star Wars films?

In Empire Strikes Back , we see a transcription of what R2's beeps and bloops mean, but it's not English (sorry for the low quality, it's from the 2004 DVDs): I'd assume it's what Basic looks like when written, but is there some point in the the Star Wars films we see written English instead? (This sort of spun off from a discussion in How do people understand astromech droids? .) Answer At one point there was English but it has been phased out in subsequent versions of the films. Chris Gould at DVD Active did a comparison of all versions of each of the Star Wars films, and in his comparison of Episode 4 , there are a couple of screenshots showing how the power gauge for the Death Star tractor beam was changed. I imagine there are probably more to be found in his other comparisons but I haven't got around to reading those yet.

Was the "pure soul" of Harry's what had really hurt Voldemort?

In the Order of the Phoenix, Voldemort possesses Harry, and it hurts. Greatly. I think that Dumbledore explained that it was because Voldemort's rotten soul was incapable of assimilating Harry's pure soul, that Voldemort didn't understand the love and friendship etc that Harry has in his heart. But, I think it was a lie. Remember that in Deathly Hallows, while looking for information regarding Horcruxes, it is discovered that it is in fact possible to merge a soul fragment back, but that the process was extremely painful. Now then, if Voldemort tried to possess Harry, and Harry had a fragment of Voldemort's soul, I think that it could have been the true cause of Voldemort's pain: the fact of having his soul so close of another fragment. I think that Dumbledore knew that fact, but had to lie to Harry because it was inappropriate to let him know that he had one of Voldemort's soul fragments at the moment. Is that right? Or was it truly the pure soul of Harry's...

star wars - What "exactly" happens when someone turns to the Dark Side?

When I saw the original Star Wars saga as a kid, the concept of the Dark Side imprinted in me was quite simple. You did a bad thing, so you're a bad person so you go to the Dark Side and keep doing bad things. Now, obviously this doesn't hold true in reality. In my mind it is perfectly reasonable for Luke to kill the Emperor and Vader and then just flee the Death Star and rejoin the Alliance. After all they are at war, those are enemy officers that have captured him and are taunting him by threatening with death of all loved ones and the whole operation was intended to kill the Emperor anyway. The same would hold true for Anakin. He could have killed Mace Windu to save the Chancellor and Padme but that doesn't mean he's going to then go mad and kill all Jedis including children. It doesn't add up from a merely psychological point of view. He had a set of objectives and that made him want to keep the Chancellor alive (quite valid by the way, Mace Windu is quite clums...

star trek - Warning regarding forward saucer section in Nemesis?

In Star Trek: Nemesis , just before the Enterprise rams into the Scimitar, Picard sends a text message from his captain's chair arm pad to Troi — who is manning the helm in lieu of the crewman who was just blown out through what was once the view screen — indicating that she should put full impulse on standby. (Literally, if you watch the scene closely, Troi's console prefaces the order with "TXT MSG" !) My question is: Did Picard also somehow warn crew members in the forward saucer section about what was about to happen? The ramming of the Scimitar was a heat of the moment decision. Considering that he also resorted to calling the auto-destruct sequence shortly after (which ended up being offline), he probably was of the mindset that any losses would be acceptable in order to hault Shinzon's march to Earth. Still, I'm curious. Answer The original script indicates that he called for the crew to " brace for impact ". Whether that call (or the comma...