Why did Greedo shoot first?

Yes, you've made that abundantly clear already. Thanks.

Funny that you say that, because Lucas has indeed tinkered with these movies since they came out. The versions you call the originals weren't truly the originals.[/quote]

Funny, I don't recall ever saying anything about "the originals," just that Lucas is an incessant tinkerer. Yes, he has messed with them since the first theatrical release. Again, thanks.

Why not?[/quote]


Because.

After which you start talking about how Han is "retconned."

How?[/quote]

Because now he waits to get shot at before blasting his way out of trouble rather than nipping it in the bud once he feels threatened.

It can. Because how does it "dull his dangerous, resourceful edge"?[/quote]
See above. It also means that he can move his neck faster than the speed of light.

How does it retcon him? As I've pointed out a thousand times, and been ignored each time, he is still a mercenary. He still refuses to help Luke rescue the Princess until Luke promises him a reward. He still says to the Princess's face, "I'm in it for the money," causing her to refer to him specifically as a mercenary.

How? Luke's tongue-lashing in the hangar is still what makes Han come back and shoot Vader's TIE fighters off his back. How does Greedo shooting first change this?[/quote]

Luke and the others show him compassion throughout the trilogy. He's still a needly jerk even late in ESB ("I love you." "I know"). They all risk their necks to save him from Jabba and from then on you see a kinder, gentler Han (the "team player"). Before that, he was more of a rogue, and frying Greedo when he never saw it coming fits in that character. Maybe it's a minor quibble to you; that's why I've said the change isn't the be all, end all--just annoying.

Perhaps...but it doesn't change things like you're claiming. If anyone's character is changed, it's Greedo's -- and in that case, it's merely a change of degree. He's even stupider and a lousier shot than he was before. I've yet to see someone demonstrate to me how Greedo shooting first nullifies or eliminates all the other scenes in the movie where Han demonstrates what a mercenary he is.

So why are you wailing about it?[/quote]


I didn't think I was. Just presenting why it irks me--it doesn't "ruin" anything for me, though.

GL said why he made the change, to which people dismiss him as a liar or an idiot.

Did it need to be made? IMO, no. But I don't have a problem with it being made. I don't like the Jed

 

You're welcome.

Because what? Because it gives people something to complain about? Because it's stylish now to assail Lucas?

Let's just ignore how he still yanks out his pistol and shoots at Vader in ESB, even though Vader is by far the most dangerous foe.

But I guess Greedo shooting first nullifies that too. Man, that formerly insignificant scene (and I don't believe anyone who says that they ALWAYS thought it was essential to Han's character) has been built up to absolutely astonishing levels.

So what? I'd think that would add to his "dangerous" edge. He's got lightning-quick reflexes.

Luke isn't too friendly to him at first. He's disgusted by his greed and angered by his sneering at the Force. Practically all they do until the end is argue. Same with Leia.

Yeah, that is kind of a jerky thing to say, on the surface of it. But Han has already shown that he has honor at his core. If he didn't, he wouldn't have stuck with the Rebellion. He wouldn't have hauled his tail back into the command center to fetch Leia. He wouldn't have come back to the battle of Yavin in the previous movie.

You're building it up into something far more important than it ever really was. All the other rogueish elements to Han are still there.

Only if you think the scene was more important than it was.

OK.

Er...yeah.

 

Back to the original question:

It was for me, a pointless change. I prefer the old version for the simple reason there was intent for Han to kill Greedo as he would of done the same to Han. The way it is now in the SE makes Han look like he got lucky that Greedo missed.

 

When I first saw Star Wars as a kid in ?77, Han shooting Greedo was one of my favourite scenes. It?s not a big scene, it?s not essential to the plot, but it?s a great scene. Whenever I re-watched Star Wars, I always looked forward to that scene, and it always made me smile. Lots of people felt the same. It?s a funny scene. One of the things that makes it funny is that Greedo thinks he?s got the upper-hand. He doesn?t know that Han is getting ready to shoot him, he doesn?t get that Han is as ruthless as he is; and even though the audience knows what Han is doing, the suddenness of Greedo exploding after all the calm, quiet talk is somehow still shocking and unexpected. And funny.

A similar scene is the moment in Raiders of the Lost Ark when Indy confronts the scimitar-wielding assassin. It?s funny because you?re expecting a big fight, just like the assassin is, but Indy takes out his pistol and shoots him. It?s not the most important scene in the movie, but it?s a great scene. If Lucas and Spielberg went back and changed it so the assassin throws his scimitar at Indy at the same time Indy dodges it and draws and shoots... well , it wouldn?t destroy the movie or Indy?s character, but it would IMO turn a classic scene into a run-of?the-mill action scene.

Making Greedo shoot first doesn?t ruin Han?s character (for me, at least), but it does turn one of my favourite scenes into a lame action scene. A great movie is made up of great scenes. For me, this was one of them, and in the Special Edition it is no longer a scene I love. The change does spoil my enjoyment of the movie, and it?s a pity that a lot of fans take the attitude that they are happy with the scene, so everybody else should just shut up.

 

GK edit: Saying that others are lying about their own opinions is simply baiting and is not permitted here.

 

I was thinking the change had to do with the upcoming Jabba scene where Jabba says "Han, my boy, why did you shoot poor Greedo?"

If Greedo didn't shoot first, then Jabba's words in this scene just make Han look like he just committed an unnecessary murder. After all, Greedo would have just escorted Han at gunpoint to Jabba and they would have had the same conversation. Han walking on Jabba's tail sure doesn't make it look like his life was really in danger to begin with.

I would have suggested that Jabba not know about Han's recent run-in with Greedo during that scene, but I guess some of Han's dialogue could not be convincingly editted? So they made Greedo shoot first instead.

 

I think that's really the essence of it. It doesn't ruin the character - he's still Han, and he'd just as quickly shoot back at someone shooting at him as at someone who he thought would shoot at him - but it does alter the structure and approach of the scene.

I guess whether you're cool with it or not really depends on how you watch movies, in the end.

 

Was Greedo's intent to take Han alive to Jabba or kill him right there in the cantina?

When Han says, "Over my dead body." Greedo responds by saying, "That's the idea." and I always interpreted that as Greedo intending to kill Han right there and so Greedo wouldn't have to shoot first for Han to be justified in taking him out since Greedo is pointing a blaster in his face and threatening to kill him and so the change is pointless.

But Han wouldn't need to shoot at all if Greedo was just going to take him to Jabba anyway and then in ESB we learn that Jabba wants him alive since Boba Fett tells Vader, "He's no good to me dead."

So Greedo would seem to be a complete idiot who got his wires crossed somewhere which is fine because he's supposed to come off as an amateur who gets disposed of quickly but it would appear there's a bit of a contradiction and definitely a redundancy with the added Jabba scene which is essentially recycling the info from the cantina scene except we just get to see Jabba.

I think the Jabba scene really should have stayed on the cutting room floor because not only were the FX not available and still aren't IMO, but it's a redundant scene that's also a bit contradictory when you compare it with what we just saw a few minutes earlier.

I don't think Star Wars was supposed to be this confusing. Now Primer, that's a confusing movie but in a good way.

 

I keep hearing that Greedo shooting first "doesn't change anything".

So why did Lucas bother revising the scene?

 

Good point!

The reason I prefer Han to shoot first is because it was clever and funny. It reminded me of when Indy shoots the swordsman in Raiders of the Lost Ark. It's one of those moments where you think "this guy is tough". Not only does the revision ruin this great moment but it also looks crappy. Han's head doesn't move properly and Greedo's blaster misses him by a mile.

The reason why fans especially hate this scene is because it sums up everything that is wrong with the prequels:

1. Changes character motive
2. Doesn't look realistic
3. Doesn't look logical
4. Sticks out like a sore thumb
5. Shows Lucas' changing view

 

I expect to see the swordsman "shoot first" in a future SE of Raiders. Because that is how it was "always intended".

 

There was a rumour that this scene was going to be changed. Thank goodness it WAS a rumour.

 

I found this the mosy hilarious scene in the whole of the OT until GL changed it to Greedo shooting first. It just ruined the whole thing. Before Greedo shot first, the scene was so Han Solo, and not only that, when the scene was re-done, it was so fake. You could tell that it was digitally re-made. They should relly have left that scene the way it was.

 

Well, in my opinoin, this edit does take away from a very funny scene.
Han shoots Greedo from underneath the table, Greedo really should have seen that coming.
You do not point a gun at someone, threaten to kill them and then let them put their hands where you can't see them, they'll most likely pull out a weapon in self-defense.
This just shows how foolish Greedo was. I always like how han throws the Bartender some credits for the mess. Ben must have gotten stingy in his old age, because he left an even bigger mess and he didn't offer any recompensation to the Bartender.

 

The scene as originally shot kind of reminds meof Clint Eastwood in the spaghetti westerns, especially the bit where he throwns the bartender some change.

 

My premise is what is the purpose of changing this scene in the first place. I always thought Han shooting first made his character more roguish and gave us some introductory depth to his character since it was one of his opening scenes appearing. It is like Lucas is retelling the story for movies that have already stood the test of time and millions have loved. Greedo shooting first is a primary example of messing with a modern classic movie that needs no tinkering. And as far as the Raiders scene- I imagine Spielberg would talk sense into George not to try to change it.

 

I heard ROTJ had a few things altered to keep it from looking like Han was force-sensitive, yet they have him dodging point-blank shots?

 

Don't rely too heavily on Spielbeg: if it were up to him, everyone (other than the Nazis in Schindler's List) would be carrying walkie-talkies.

 

If anything, Lucas did the exact opposite when he changed this scene. He wanted to give Han a reason for killing Greedo by having Greedo fire first. However, all he did was make Han appear to be an even bigger bad-ass now that Han just walks away from the table like nothing happened even though he was just shot at.

 

Let's leave all the character-based arguments aside for the moment: Can any of you honestly say that it isn't absolutely absurd that Greedo could have missed from that close a distance (about 2 feet or 60 cm)?

 

Eh? Han didn't have a reason before? He had Greedo pointing a gun in his face, threatening to kill him - but he's not allowed to fire unless Greedo shoots first?

 

Now that is a lie. Most of us who hate the changes have elected to NOT buy the DVD's. We are so upset with the alterations that we refuse to dignify them by giving Lucas any more of our hard earned money. Don't just claim that we complain but just roll over and take the punches. We hate the changes and we show that by refusing to buy those DVD horrors.

 

Like I_J, I have not and will not purchase any version of the OT that has Greddo firing first, HC as the force ghost, or any of the other ridiculous changes in them. O-OT or no-OT.

 

[Luke] I'm with you too! [/Luke]

 

In fact, some of those fans who went out and bought the DVD's and discovered the alterations were so upset that they actually returned them to the stores. My best friend did that. You can't imagine how steamed she was at George Lucas and got her $45. You can see that at Fye or some other DVD/music stores too. I'll see DVD copies of I, II, and III along with box sets of the "original" trilogy for sale under the Used sections. Fans aren't happy.

I read a comment somewhere (maybe it was here) that changes to these movies is not a democracy. I agree. An artist can do whatever he wants to his film. This is not a "make your own Star Wars buffet" where you grab whatever scene you want while leaving in others. But to deny the fans a CHOICE in which version they prefer is wrong. George Lucas can alter the story to the point were Luke Skywalker is a pink bunny for all I care. I just want the choice to decide which "vision" of his I want to see. I don't want a "personalized" version of the movie. I just want the one I first saw as a child.



And about the whole Greedo shooting first thing. On screen it is a minor deal. But as part of the whole, it is huge deal. It looks small (the scene is only 1 second long), but it causes the audiance to loose their willing supension of disbelief. When you see it, you know something doesn't look right. It looks fake. It went by pretty quick, but you are now taken out of the movie while you try to figure out what just happened.
It's like driving down a smooth road. Here you are driving (watching Star Wars), happy as a clam and BUMP! you hit a small pot hole. You think, "whoa, what was that?" Your car is fine, you didn't even fall off the road, but now your drive has been messed up and you have to shake off that bump you just felt.
It's the same with Greedo. It causes the movie to bump and your originally smooth road is now pot marked with potholes. No physical damage has been done, but by god you sure did feel it.