The role of the Rogue Good Guy

Discussion in 'Star Wars Saga In-Depth' started by Darth_Hawkeye, Apr 25, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Darth_Hawkeye Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jun 4, 2002
    One of the factors that makes the OT so good, IMHO, is the character of Han Solo.

    In Han, we have a good guy with a rogue-ish edge. While Luke, Leia and Obi-Wan we're all pretty much squeaky-clean, idealistic heroes, Han possessed characteristics like cockiness and arrogance and greed. He was't perfect. Most of the characters in the trilogy were either all good or all bad. Han is one of only a few to live in that middle ground. This made him extremely cool. His character added both humor and humanity to the story.

    The PT lacks such a character. What we have mainly are one-dimensional idealistic heroes and villains. You might make a case for Anakin, who certainly embodies elements of good and evil. But Anakin lacks the rogue-ishness, the coolness of Han. Besides, once Anakin goes bad, he will be pure "bad guy," unlike Han, who despite his faults, was always one of the "good guys."

    I once hoped a young Obi-Wan would fill this role in the PT ? a brash young Jedi, a little cocky, a little out of control. But he has turned out pretty much squeaky clean.

    IMHO, the Star Wars Saga would be better with the inclusion of more Rogue Good Guys ? imperfect heroes ? an absense most notable in the PT.
  2. Aunecah_Skywalker Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 25, 2002
    star 5
    Hmm. You got that right Darth_Hawkeye. I agree with you that most of the characters in PT are either good or bad, but I wouldn't say that they are one-dimensional. They are well-developed and complex characters - it's just that they're good or bad but not both.

    Also, considering the story-line, it's kind of hard to find characters who are both good and bad. I mean, Jedi are supposed to be good. If anything, I would have hoped that Amidala would fill Han's role ...

    Aunecah
  3. SaberGiiett7 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2002
    star 6
    Darth_Hawkeye: You bring up alot of good point's, however I disagree with you on Anakin not performing this role, attributed to his action's and mannerism's throughout AOTC. :D

    He may not have Han Solo's style or while were on it Hayden might not have Harrison's talent but IMO Lucas succeeded in a developing another smug lead character. Some shining moment's included; Zam's interrogation, numerous conversation's with Padme, pretty much all throughout the finale showdown especially the confrontation with Dooku. ;)

    Aunecah - I disagree about the Prequel's not having "one dimensional" character's, I believe that's one of the only justified gripe's critic's and fan's alike have about TPM and AOTC, this particular leading cast just plain does'ent have the chemistry Ford, Fisher, and Hamil shared.

    Although I do think as villian's, Lee has the correct flair and McDiarmid has the devious charm that metomorpho's into his sinister attitude which was well-done as well in ROTJ. :)

    <[-]> Saber
  4. Spacehunter24 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 2, 2003
    star 4
    Mark Hamill said in an interview that that's the problem he had with THE PHANTOM MENACE, in that there was no in between character. He said in the original film, you had the solid good guys and the solid bad guys, then you had Han who basically said, "Whatever, I'm just doing it for the money."

    I had hoped Qui-Gon would have been a real rogue of a Jedi, constantly walking the thin line between the Light Side and the Dark Side.
  5. Aunecah_Skywalker Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 25, 2002
    star 5
    Saber: I wouldn't consider Obi-Wan a "one-dimensional" ("flat") character. There are ample examples of that in the EU ::ehemjagfelehem:: sorry guys ... but anyway, no, not all of the characters in TPM and AotC are flat.

    :)

    Aunecah
  6. Darth_Hawkeye Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jun 4, 2002
    Saber: You raise a good point. Just because Anakin wasn't in the same style of Han doesn't mean he doesn't fill a similar roll.

    In fact, if Lucas had created a character who acted just like Han, people would probably whine about Lucas just re-running the same old thing.

    On another note, regarding Harrison Ford's talent, I wonder if Ford isn't given enough credit for the box office success of the OT. After all, he's an EXTREMELY popular actor. I think at one point, 6 of the top 10 highest grossing films of all time featured him. Guys dig him because he's cool; chicks dig him because he's hot (or so I've been told.)

    Could it it be that the chief reason for the success of the OT was not Lucas' epic story, not revolutionary special effects, but the acting ability and box office draw of one Harrison Ford?

    Thanks for the reply.
  7. lil_jedi_blondie Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 14, 2003
    star 1
    DH you make a good point, but at the time Ford was not as poular as he is today. I know he was popular, but he wasn't Josh Hartnett-Ben Affleck-Mel Gibson popular where everyone knew him like they do today.
  8. advent Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Mar 23, 2003
    star 2
    This may be sacrilege to say on a Star Wars message board, but (I feel) the character of Han Solo is pretty flat and one-dimensional without the presence of Harrison Ford. Han's character is pretty much the guy who's selfish that learns to be a friend and care about more than himself.

    Ford's presence in the character made Han more of a regular who's jaded about other people and the world, so he looks out for himself. Ford gave him particular looks and gestures that made him as 3-dimentional as anyone could with a architype that was written that shallowly; I suppose that's the intended nature of the Star Wars characters, for the most part.

    Don't get me wrong, I thought Han was cool when I was young, too, but he was never my favorite character. There wasn't much to him (besides Ford's presence). The thing that made me feel that he was a bit deeper was the fact that I realized that he wasn't the selfish person I thought he was. He did end up caring about other people after all.

    That being said, I do like the character and I always thought he was cool. Just not that interesting at face-value.

    He wasn't the key to my relating to the Star Wars world (as, apparently, to so many other people), so I have no problem with a clear-cut, "rogue good guy" absence in the prequel trilogy.
  9. MikeSolo Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 6, 2002
    star 4
    In my opinion I feel that Qui Gon kinda plays the Rougue Good Guy in TPM...he is always going aganist the Jedi Council. You hear Obi Wan tell him not to go aganist the council again..telling you that Qui Gon probably has not always followed the advice of the JC.

    But I do miss a Han Solo character in the PT. I still enjoy the PT very much without a character like him.
    I know the PT is mostly about the rise of the Empire fall of the Republic, death of the Jedi and how Anakin becomes Darth Vader. I know that Han's backstory will probably not show up in the next PT movie. Han's backstory will be left to the EU which is no problem to me. Both of the Han Solo Trilogy books are the best Star Wars books I've read and yes I know that for some fans the EU is nothing and the movies have the only say in what happens in Star Wars...to those fans I say with a gentle voice oh well your lost :) goodnight.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.