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

game of thrones - Who were the Kingsguard escorting Cersei?

Now to the question... During the scene where Cersei sits on the Iron Throne and is "sworn in" we see her escorted by seven members of the Kingsguard. Now this is what I would expect as that is the correct number. However, I have no idea who they are ! [embedded content] The books pay more attention to detail in this area, but the show is also diverging and outpacing in this regard. We can see that a few of the names are not possible on the show. I have listed the names from the books and given why the reason they could not be members on the show in bold. Ser Jaime Lannister, Lord Commander - Stripped of title Ser Loras Tyrell - Dead and also was never a KG on the show. Ser Osmund Kettleblack - Possible, but not mentioned by name Ser Balon Swann - Possible, but not mentioned by name Ser Meryn Trant - Dead Ser Boros Blount - Possible, but not mentioned by name Ser Robert Strong (aka Zombie Mountain) - Confirmed I know it can be confusing mixing the books and shows, but the qu

harry potter - Was Barty Crouch Jr. an Occlumens?

An Occlumens is a practitioner of Occlumency , while Occlumency means closing the mind. Despite being in the same school with two great Legilimens (Dumbledore and Snape), he was only discovered to be an impostor after the last round of the Triwizard Tournament in Goblet of Fire : “Moody,” Harry said. He was still in a state of complete disbelief. “How can it have been Moody?” “This is not Alastor Moody,” said Dumbledore quietly. “You have never known Alastor Moody. The real Moody would not have removed you from my sight after what happened tonight. The moment he took you, I knew — and I followed.” Does this mean that Barty Crouch Jr. is an Occlumens? Because if not, then Snape or Dumbledore would have found it out earlier, right? Answer It is not stated anywhere in the books that Legilimency was applied to fake Moody/Crouch jr. The conclusion Dumbledore made (quoted in the question) is based on pure logic, not Legilimency or any other magical means. So unless any other canon inform

transformers - How do Soundwave, Megatron, etc. change size and mass?

The original G1 Soundwave changed from a cassette deck (don't know what it is? Ask your parents!) to a robot that was the same size as robots that changed into cars. Similarly, Megatron changed into a gun that could be held by humans. And other robots, all of similar sizes, changed into objects of different sizes: cassettes, cars, trucks and huge jets. (One Autobot triple changer, Broadside , changed from an aircraft to an aircraft carrier!) Was this impossible feat ever explained? Or was it hand-wavey magic, like the Hulk ? Answer Although there wasn't even an acknowledgement of changes in size in the animated shows (i.e. that's just how things were), there have been a few explanations within comics. The ones listed and described by the Teletraan I Transformers Wiki are as follows: Parts compression (from Dreamwave comics): The notion that the Transformers in question, such as Astrotrain and Broadside, had many dense layers of armor in robot mode, which then slid ou

Why Was It 'Essential' That Voldemort Kill Harry Potter?

‘So the boy ... the boy must die?’ asked Snape, quite calmly. ‘And Voldemort himself must do it, Severus. That is essential.’ Deathly Hallows - page 551 - UK Hardcover - chapter 33, The Prince's Tale Dumbledore tells Snape it is 'essential' that Voldemort be the one to kill Harry, I'm assuming in order for the piece of Voldemort's soul in Harry to be properly killed as well. But why? Hermione destroyed the Hufflepuff cup; Ron destroyed the Slytherin locket; Neville killed Nagini; Harry destroyed the diadem and Tom Riddle's diary. So the Horcruxes were not immune to destruction at the hand of someone other than Voldemort. And as it ended up, Harry himself wasn't even a Horcrux, but rather just an unknowing host to a parasitic bit of Voldemort's soul. Why was it 'essential' that Voldemort be the one to kill Harry in order for the piece of Voldemort's soul to die? Answer I thought it had to do with the protection Harry's mother gave him b