Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[motorheadache95]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

I'm not even sure what the heck you guys are debating despite reading your posts. Obviously he was a morally grey character who got more good over the course of the trilogy, though Force Awakens shows he went back toward grey afterward. Obviously the original bar scene was supposed to highlight his moral greyness and pirate style, which was obviously toned down in the special edition to make him more good off the bat.

These things are fairly obvious. I'm not sure what the debate there is.

I'm not going to get entangled in whatever this debate is, but I'll just say that whatever arguments one might have about whether Han should shoot first or not, the fact of the matter is that the scene was set up and shot as Han preemptively shooting Greedo under the table. All attempts with Lucas to alter the scene afterwards looks awkward and unnatural.

If he wanted Greedo to shoot at Han first back when making the movie, he likely would have shot it completely differently and had an actual shoot out where Han ducks or dodges blaster shots and manages to hit Greedo. It would have been a completely different kind of sequence.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by motorheadache95

I'm not going to get entangled in whatever this debate is, but I'll just say that whatever arguments one might have about whether Han should shoot first or not, the fact of the matter is that the scene was set up and shot as Han preemptively shooting Greedo under the table. All attempts with Lucas to alter the scene afterwards looks awkward and unnatural.

If he wanted Greedo to shoot at Han first back when making the movie, he likely would have shot it completely differently and had an actual shoot out where Han ducks or dodges blaster shots and manages to hit Greedo. It would have been a completely different kind of sequence.

Well his whole wretched philosophy is that how he shot it and released it should not be how it necessarily lives on. He doesn't hide that, no one should be confused he changed the intent of the scene and by consequence the character. This kind of thing is why the special editions are especially annoying, because they're not just updated effects and stuff but also the intent, mood and style of scenes have changed.

Though no one would complain if they just put both freaking versions on a disc.

[Mighty Max]

Too bad my post last night was deleted.
It explained everything perfectly!

[ElvisForever]

Originally Posted by crissrudd4554

As far as the dialogue goes yes I am listening. Did you ever possibly consider that Greedos 'I've been looking forward to this for a long time' is his fancy way of saying 'I've been waiting a long time for Jabba to do away with you??' This could imply death or something else. Going back a few lines he said 'Jabba's through with you' which some could translate as 'you've screwed up too many times and now you're really gonna GET IT!'.

No I haven't because it doesn't make sense. Looking forward to this a long time, is collecting the reward, or if Han fights him, than he kills him. There is no question that Greedo pointing a gun knows this possibility.

The "you're really gonna GET IT!" view is that Jabba is going to do it to you. Not Greedo. Greedo's soul intention is to deliver Han to Jabba to get reward. If the money is big enough, he might let Han escape. Though I personally think it is a test. Greedo is nabbing him one way or another. What Jabba does with Han is immaterial. Greedo is simply saying there is no more bargaining. This does not equate to Greedo wanting to kill Han.

Point is there's more than one way to interpret something. In the end neither one of us has the correct conclusion because we can only present theories on the matter. I don't discredit your view of the scene but at the same I don't share the same view. And that's fine. I'm entitled to.

Of course you can feel however you want, I am just saying the facts don't support it. If Greedo wanted Han dead, than bam he was dead and no smooth talking could change that.

As far as the John Wayne thing goes, well it's your opinion to believe that but I'm only partial to do so. Again it's one of those explanations that's only been given out in recent years so I tend to question the credibility on the subject. Plus how often does John Wayne in a showdown fully pull out his gun and actually wait for the enemie to take fire before returning fire?? He draws AND fires when the time to fire back is appropriate.

I believe Ernest poster keeps repeating this too. I think both of you misunderstand Lucas meaning. It is about honor, not just shooting first. Wayne shoots when he knows that someone either intends to kill him, or is playing with fire. I put Greedo in the latter category with what I feel is his intention to fire a warning shot.

Han Solo fully removed his blaster and was waiting for an opportunity for something. You can look at it two ways 'kill the guy and get on with my day' or 'just sit here with gun in hand and wait for him to take fire and pray to God I miss it then kill him'. The latter IMO just sounds stupid when you look at it that way. Plus if Han wasn't anticipating Greedo firing at all why draw your gun and wait??

I hope you never ever got from me that Han was doing anything but intending to kill Greedo. What Han did was purposeful, and he did it with precision. Han wasn't waiting for anything. Han was going to shoot no matter what Greedo did. The point of the extra shot was to show that Han did it with precision. There was no waiting till Greedo shot. When Han did the "I'll bet you have". It is a dare to Greedo in the 1977 version AND the 2011 version. The difference is the new version is Greedo did a little bluffing of his own by firing what I believe to be a warning shot.

If you want to take the deleted Jabba scene seriously I think Greedo firing first screws this up too. Jabba says 'Why did you fry poor Greedo?' and Han says 'Look Jabba next time you wanna talk to me come see me yourself. Don't send one of these twerps'. Listen to how he says this. He's speaking in a tone as if to say 'Jabba I could easily dispose of your little 'goons' so next time come talk to me personally'. Again this works a hell of a lot better with the notion that Han killed Greedo right then and there. To me it almost sounds like he's almost threatening Jabba. Seriously! His vibe is very 'I might owe money but don't mess with me'. Again ANTIHERO!

Here is my 2 cents. Jabba went through the cantina or had one of his goons look and they see Greedo dead. Now they are searching around and of course Han creeps up on them. I think there is a bit of fear with Jabba because he knows that Han just fried someone and he could have done it again. When Jabba turns, it is without question surprise.

Han is also rather cocky, and that is why he is negotiating further despite the fact that Greedo has foolishly stated that Jabba is through with talking. This shows Han to be the "bad ass" that many on here claim for him to be. Without both scenes (the extra shot, and the talking back to Jabba and even stepping on him) there is the cornered animal theory that is put out in the video.

People at the time screamed about Jabba being less of a bad ass. If you look at the Return of the Jedi, Jabba clearly underestimates a great many things, but what is more important is the fact that it was Vader that caught Han and not Jabba. So with looking back, I never truly respected Jabba anyway, and tearing down his character...was it really? Perhaps that character wasn't that big of a bad ass to begin with...just like Han. I will say that when people scream that the new version changes him from bad ass I think ...what? Actually I think it makes him more "bad ass" as far as honor.

Though again, I never thought of him as bad ass at all. More like a weasel who has survived with deception. I can respect it, even if I don't believe in it.

Why I truly believe the 1977 version is wrong to the big picture is that Han does have a cocky attitude beyond the "cornered animal" he was int he bar. Instead of walking out looking shocked and that is it, he now has a sure fire talking back and creeping up on Jabba and all his men still talking crap!

Which do I prefer, the 1977 version without the sequels. But as can be seen clearly is that with the deleted scene an entirely new idea is presented. The original scene shows that what we saw in 1977 does not jive with what Han was to Jabba himself. The "cornered animal" fades way to more an idea of being smart when there is nothing else to do. That is why him coming back in the digitally changed version is more akin to what he could have done all along, as opposed to a "change of heart".

In my eyes, Han was coming back, but like the smart pilot he is, why be first in? Let the army do the dirty work, than come from behind when it matters. The ultimate John Wayne is when Han is saying to Vader, you are now pointing your guns at the safety of the universe pal, and I am not having that.

Plus the smooth way Han walks away after gunning Greedo down just doesn't work with the notion that Greedo fired and Han killed him accidentally. I don't think it fully works with Greedo firing first PERIOD! Again he followed the 'kill or be killed' notion of the situation, killed the guy and just casually walks away. This works with the Jabba scene too. When he says 'Jabba you're a wonderful human being' to me this is his fancy but subtle way of saying 'You WISH you owned me!'

Who here has said that Han killed Greedo accidently? When I say "flinch", what I mean is that he flinches to the side because of warning shot and then guns down Greedo. With gun uncocked that was NEVER an accident. Now you can assign that to anyone else, but please do not assign that to me because I have never ever said that.

What I did say, is that the 2011 version has turned Han into more of a leaning. This actually makes it more believable to me. It is a man that has sure aim and intends to kill Greedo and not just act cornered when his "smooth" talk has ran out. Greedo wasn't having it, and Han knew it. Han again stupidly thought that Greedo should carry messages. That was a gamble with a man that has a gun on you.

But I digress (again). Again opinions will be opinions and we can agree to disagree. In the end neither can accept defeat or victory. It's a matter of listening and respecting the views of others. I can only chip in my $0.02 (probably up to $5 at this stage hehe) and hope people will listen with an open mind and respect as I can only do for them in the same situation.

Of course, and it is nothing personal. I appreciate your $5.

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

Though no one would complain if they just put both freaking versions on a disc.

Yeah, and which version would those be? You do realize that even before 1997 there were so many changes, it is kinda insane actually.

Originally Posted by motorheadache95

If he wanted Greedo to shoot at Han first back when making the movie, he likely would have shot it completely differently and had an actual shoot out where Han ducks or dodges blaster shots and manages to hit Greedo. It would have been a completely different kind of sequence.

I don't think there is a single person here that denies that Lucas is guilty of some degree of revisionism. I myself have stated REPEATEDLY that Lucas had a rolling vision in his head and he changed things as he massaged his story as he could afford it, and as he wrote it.

What Lucas did 20, 30 years ago is immaterial to what is done today. It is an empty point like why didn't he use a young Anakin in the ghost scene. It is simple, it wasn't filmed, or conceived in that much detail yet. Lucas had to concentrate on his current story, of which he did.

[crissrudd4554]

'The facts don't support it??' Find me a FACT that Greedo did purposely miss then we'll talk about facts. Again the FACT that Greedo happened to shoot near the area where Han's hand was does not mean that's where he was aiming. How do you know he's not a bad shot?? Plus we never even got a backstory on Greedo. Perhaps something happened that actually preceded these events that made him have it in for Solo. Again we don't know and likely never will. There's always speculation but again there is enough evidence to support both our claims. I'm firm on sticking with my view all the same.

PS I never called you a troll

[octagon]

Originally Posted by ElvisForever

Of course you can feel however you want, I am just saying the facts don't support it. If Greedo wanted Han dead, than bam he was dead and no smooth talking could change that.

Greedo missed because Greedo had to miss. The rest of the movie demanded that Greedo miss. It really is as simple as that.

And all of this rationalizing about why he might have missed or whether he wanted to miss just underscores how poorly this particular change was executed.

Even if one were to accept the dubious proposition that there is some substantive benefit in changing Han from less of a Clint Eastwood 'Man With No Name' type gunfighter into more a John Wayne type gunfighter, the execution is just awful.

When the change was first made it was ridiculously clunky and awkward. After being tweaked a few times it's not as bad but it's still pretty distracting.

Which would be bad enough if it was just some throwaway scene but this was one of the coolest scenes in the film. Hell, maybe in the saga.

And this is why so many people are still so critical.

It's a change with a lot of downsides and no appreciable benefit.

It was a dumb change twenty years ago and it's just as dumb now.

[ElvisForever]

Originally Posted by crissrudd4554

'The facts don't support it??' Find me a FACT that Greedo did purposely miss then we'll talk about facts. Again the FACT that Greedo happened to shoot near the area where Han's hand was does not mean that's where he was aiming. How do you know he's not a bad shot?? Plus we never even got a backstory on Greedo. Perhaps something happened that actually preceded these events that made him have it in for Solo. Again we don't know and likely never will. There's always speculation but again there is enough evidence to support both our claims. I'm firm on sticking with my view all the same.

PS I never called you a troll

The facts are that Greedo didn't intend to kill Han. Why was he going to kill Han with no provoking?

You not looking at the scene and the obvious fact that Greedo coild have killed Han earlier just doesn't follow through. The warning shot makes a hell of a lot more sese than missing??? How would that ever make sense???

What I know is what Greedo said and his actions which never included him killing Han and the fact that his gun is pointed away from Han. Care to comment on that?

@Octagon. I am only rationalizing to hardcore fans. I got it on first watch. That and the Han shoots first is the dumbest slogan ever put to print.

When you try to speak for the majority, remember a lot of those fans think Empire is a better movie and let us face it, Han in Empire has no resemblance to Star Wars.

I only have made my case why I think the change fits. The Jabba scene des not match the Greedo scene, but I think this has been exhausted.

[crissrudd4554]

Originally Posted by ElvisForever

The facts are that Greedo didn't intend to kill Han. Why was he going to kill Han with no provoking?

You not looking at the scene and the obvious fact that Greedo coild have killed Han earlier just doesn't follow through. The warning shot makes a hell of a lot more sese than missing??? How would that ever make sense???

What I know is what Greedo said and his actions which never included him killing Han and the fact that his gun is pointed away from Han. Care to comment on that?

@Octagon. I am only rationalizing to hardcore fans. I got it on first watch. That and the Han shoots first is the dumbest slogan ever put to print.

When you try to speak for the majority, remember a lot of those fans think Empire is a better movie and let us face it, Han in Empire has no resemblance to Star Wars.

I only have made my case why I think the change fits. The Jabba scene des not match the Greedo scene, but I think this has been exhausted.

Greedo obviously would have killed him if necessary otherwise he wouldn't have fired at all. Care to comment on that???? :P

[ElvisForever]

Originally Posted by crissrudd4554

Greedo obviously would have killed him if necessary otherwise he wouldn't have fired at all. Care to comment on that???? :P

If you look at the first few sentences of post 60176 I actually stated what you said. No one here is refuting that Greedo could have killed Han. How many times do I have to say that??? Hell yes I will comment on it, again and again. Greedo was scaring Han after the smart ass "I bet you have".

The point is that you won't comment on Greedo had his gun pointing away (again THE GUN IS POINTING AWAY FROM HAN!) doesn't hit him at point blank range, and makes several indications he wants him alive (like tell Jabba yourself, Jabba will want the ship, Greedo doesn't kill him from the get go, Greedo is willing to negotiate with letting Han go for money).

So what do many people conclude even in my video post...Greedo missed because his aim is so bad!!!!

Yeah that makes sense. I don't know how many times the clues can be slammed repeatedly.

By the way one more you haven't seem to think of. If Greedo was sent to kill...why did Jabba say you fried "poor Greedo"? Seems to me by Han's own words Greedo shouldn't have been sent to pick him up and Jabba according to Han should have came himself.

[crissrudd4554]

(Rolls eyes) Fine. How bout we just say Greedo didn't intend to kill Han but would have if provoked. Frankly I don't know why I'm discussing this because frankly I don't like the Special Editions anyways.

As far as I'm concerned, Greedo did not fire in the original theatrical version and Han simply blew him away. Why can be decided by the viewer. You think Han was a weasel. I think he was being a more mysterious antihero 'don't f with me type' but that goes back to the whole opinion thing.

As far as facts go, unless i get a reliable source that says it was a warning shot, I will only accept your claim as nothing more than a theory. In the end regardless of the evidence you can't say it WAS a warning shot no more than i can say it WASNT. And even if I fully agreed with you or you turned out to be right it wouldn't matter to me in the end because I just end going back to the original edit anyways.

If you feel the need to buy into all of Lucas' claims that's your business but I don't. If Han was meant to be the John Wayne type, Greedo would have shot in the original version as Lucas insists he does now. He did not. Han shot only. The John Wayne scenario as far as I'm concerned is only part of the continuous revolving of Lucas vision of Star Wars from the last 20 years where he has rewritten history with his refusal to allow the original cuts to be available and again I will not support the rewriting of history. Yes I know Lucas isn't in charge anymore and this can change but nonetheless I never supported the change and never will.

[Ernest Rister]

Folks, like I told CaptVeg, you're being screwed with. There are people who might be a useful troll in that they provoke some positive discussion, but you're getting trolled nonetheless.

Oh..."Ernest Poster"? At first, I wanted to get offended, but then my brain kicked in and said, "Yeah, that's accurate, and I've been called worse."

[Caseyscott]

Originally Posted by ElvisForever

@Octagon. I am only rationalizing to hardcore fans. I got it on first watch. That and the Han shoots first is the dumbest slogan ever put to print.

"Han shot first" is actually the correct way to express a contingent hypothetical, so there's nothing wrong with the shirts.

[ElvisForever]

Originally Posted by crissrudd4554

(Rolls eyes) Fine. How bout we just say Greedo didn't intend to kill Han but would have if provoked. Frankly I don't know why I'm discussing this because frankly I don't like the Special Editions anyways.

As far as I'm concerned, Greedo did not fire in the original theatrical version and Han simply blew him away. Why can be decided by the viewer. You think Han was a weasel. I think he was being a more mysterious antihero 'don't f with me type' but that goes back to the whole opinion thing.

As far as facts go, unless i get a reliable source that says it was a warning shot, I will only accept your claim as nothing more than a theory. In the end regardless of the evidence you can't say it WAS a warning shot no more than i can say it WASNT. And even if I fully agreed with you or you turned out to be right it wouldn't matter to me in the end because I just end going back to the original edit anyways.

If you feel the need to buy into all of Lucas' claims that's your business but I don't. If Han was meant to be the John Wayne type, Greedo would have shot in the original version as Lucas insists he does now. He did not. Han shot only. The John Wayne scenario as far as I'm concerned is only part of the continuous revolving of Lucas vision of Star Wars from the last 20 years where he has rewritten history with his refusal to allow the original cuts to be available and again I will not support the rewriting of history. Yes I know Lucas isn't in charge anymore and this can change but nonetheless I never supported the change and never will.

It was a direct comment. The rest is like Ernest Rister (sorry, I was i the middle of posting and didn't look closer, I have reasons for this), it is meant to take it to a personal level instead of examining the facts logically.

Most of the times discussions turn into this. It doesn't matter to people that the gun isn't even pointing directly at Han. He still missed because he was that bad of a shot!...right...

Ok, keep believing it, and the rest of the evidence is dismissed as well.

Maybe you could follow in the other posters footsteps by calling me a troll because I don't agree.

What you support is immaterial. It is what the artist intended in the end is what matters to the story. Lucas laid the clues and the story follows. Don't ike it...ok...I can understand that. I feel the same if it is one movie.

[WhySoBlu?]

Originally Posted by Caseyscott

"Han shot first" is actually the correct way to express a contingent hypothetical, so there's nothing wrong with the shirts.

Exactly. Both intended to fire, Han shot first. By doing so, he prevented Greedo from firing. Makes perfect sense to me.

[spanky87]

Han Shot First debates in 2016

[The Fallen Deity]

Star Wars fans will probably be debating over this until the end of time.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by spanky87

Han Shot First debates in 2016

20th Anniversary of Han Shot First is January 2017.

Yup. Check it for yourselves. 20 years.

[The Fallen Deity]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

20th Anniversary of Han Shot First is January 2017.

Yup. Check it for yourselves. 20 years.

[bobbyh64]

Originally Posted by ElvisForever

I can't tell you how to feel, but when someone says that Greed intended to kill first..it is just plain wrong. It is as pathetic as saying that it is proven he missed. While I never can prove he did a warning shot, I can prove that it is possible.

Missing on the other hand doesn't follow the fact that Greedo never intended to kill or shoot to kill as a first choice in any version.

Wait a minute. You're saying it's a fact that Greedo never intended to kill Han. And you're saying it's possible that he fired a warning shot, but not a fact that he fired a warning shot. If you think it's a fact that he didn't intend to shoot to kill, then why wouldn't you also think it's a fact that he fired a warning shot? You think it's possible that he fired a warning shot, which means you would also think it's possible he didn't fire a warning shot. In that case, what are the possibilities? The only possibilities are that he intended to kill Han and missed, or he intended to only wound him, or his finger slipped and he accidentally pulled the trigger. These last two seem ridiculous to me.

[ElvisForever]

Originally Posted by WhySoBlu?

Exactly. Both intended to fire, Han shot first. By doing so, he prevented Greedo from firing. Makes perfect sense to me.

Uh no....but just like a religion that isn't gonna make the haters believe. Hell but how does one convince someone of a t-shirt when they can't comprehend subtitles?

Originally Posted by bobbyh64

Wait a minute. You're saying it's a fact that Greedo never intended to kill Han. And you're saying it's possible that he fired a warning shot, but not a fact that he fired a warning shot. If you think it's a fact that he didn't intend to shoot to kill, then why wouldn't you also think it's a fact that he fired a warning shot? You think it's possible that he fired a warning shot, which means you would also think it's possible he didn't fire a warning shot. In that case, what are the possibilities?

You are overcomplicating it. I stated I can never prove intention, but I can show what happeed. Actually with the gun pointing away from Han I pretty much proved that too. This is why someone hasn't commented yet on the obvious fact.

It is like someone surmising cause of death. The medical examiner can look at the drunk driver...see they spun out of control...and hit smack on into a truck in the wrong lane...but they can ever know for sure that it wasn't the devil that made them do it.

But again, why talk about it rationally, when distorting what I said is so much better?

In that case, what are the possibilities? The only possibilities are that he intended to kill Han and missed, or he intended to only wound him, or his finger slipped and he accidentally pulled the trigger. These last two seem ridiculous to me.

Um how about he didn't intend to kill Han but reacted to Han's "I'll bet you have" comment by firing a warning shot like I have stated for likey 10 pages? Forget the horse drinking water, I have practically drowned it