Celebrating the annual joy which is #StarWars Day thinking about the non core movies so far…

Today is the annual Star Wars Day, celebrated by geeks like me, who think it is hilarious today is May the Fourth – because it sounds like the start of the Star Wars line “May the force be with you,”.

So I am pondering the legacy of the sale of the franchise rights by its creator George Lucas. Warning – SPOILERS ahead.

When Disney purchased the rights to Star Wars, I was not sure if this was the bargain of the century or a massive overpayment for a much loved – but old and well watched already – set of film rights.

Looking at the kind of money they have made from the five movies they have pushed out since that acquisition, I think they probably did get a bargain.

The final three films in the nine sequence core Star Wars movies, referred to as the Skywalker cycle (incorrectly in my opinion, as they are very much the Palpatine chronicles, as he it turns out, is somehow the ever present evil) have made a bucket load of money and shown us the death of Luke, Leia and most poignantly, Han Solo.

Whether or not you find them satisfying ends to the saga or not, they are the official conclusion. It may not be the best praise, but they are superior in many ways to the prequal trilogy, so we have that at least.

While Disney will have achieved one of its goals by concluding the nine movies Lucas had promised, yet never quite got round to delivering, the legacy they have created it best seen outside of these core movies.

Rogue One is an amazing film – the movie of the 11 released so far I love the best – yes, even more than a New Hope and Return of the Jedi (the first film I vividly remember seeing at the cinema way back in 1983). I was never much of a fan of Empire Strikes Back, which perhaps will get discussed in a blog post another time.

The start of Rogue One is so different from everything which went before – the rules are completely different in the non core movies (see also the conventions between Doctor Who characters and those in its spin off, Torchwood, which again I may blog about in detail another time).

There is no set of words scrolling through space, so hilariously and famously lampooned by Space Balls.

The Imperial Commander at the start of the movie is properly evil, having Jyn Erso, the main character’s, mother shot within moments of the film kicking off. turns out storm troopers can occasionally hit their target.

The other hero of the movie, Cassian Andor, within minutes of appearing on screen has killed the man passing him information. A much more pragmatic approach to the reality of rebellion against the empire.

Speaking of which, the Rebellion is not one big happy group fighting imperial rule, but a splintered set of factions, seemingly akin to Monty Python’s People’s Front of Judea and Judean People’s front. Except not so funny.

Rogue One shows us a much more real war than the nine movie cycle did. Here the battles are not glorious as portrayed in the main cycle, heroes make poor decisions and kill their allies in order not to get caught themselves.

The other thing Rogue One does is it closes a massive plot issue which had existed since the 1977 opener – why is the Death Star so easy to destroy?

The whole movie’s premise is to explain that one away – and it does so successfully, which is to say believably.

As for the ending – sublime, doing things no Star Wars movie before even contemplated and that cameo from Darth Vader is worth the admission price alone.

Then there is the Solo movie, which has had some criticism. While not as complete a movie as Rogue One, I felt a lot of the criticism of Solo was unfair.

Again this movie attempts, these two films are like Disney’s Sam Beckett of Quantum leap, to put right what once went wrong all the way back in that classic first movie.

Th Kessel Run in 12 parsecs – if you haven’t seen the Family Guy take down of this scene, then go find it as Peter Griffin absolutely destroys this concept.

What Peter decimates, Disney has rebuilt into a firm concept explaining how a 12 parsec Kessel Run was totally an achievement.

What I have always assumed was a misunderstanding of a concept in the first movie’s script is now a solid gold reason to show us the origin story of Han.

The film gives us an understanding of why Han knows shooting first keeps you alive – another important element of the original film.

I suspect the subtext in the movie is also showing us the concept many have believed that Han takes care of Chewbacca kind of like a pet is not the case and the reverse is true. The long-lived Chewie is keeping Han safe as his pet is very much what the film suggests to me at least.

So I think the Disney purchase of Star Wars has been both a giant commercial success, but also, particularly in the add on movies, a story-telling success too.

We hear the next film may well be an exploration of what Obi Wan Kenobi did between Episode III and IV. Time will tell how this pans out.

An honourable mention should go out to The Mandalorian. While a TV series, rather than a movie, Disney have extended the Star Wars universe in a thoughtful – and faithful way – with this show.

To date I have only seen the first series, which I enjoyed for the most part. It certainly feels like it is building to something. My understanding from those who have seen season two, is this show gets better and better.

The launch of Disney+ has, to my mind, cemented the strategic use Disney have in mind for the Star Wars brand. It sits alongside it’s Marvel and Pixar universes as a pillar of the modern Disney offering.

50 years of the little blue phone box

Today the BBC is celebrating 50 years of Dr Who (no one is dwelling on the decade and half (ish) when they did not make the show for TV (aside from the under rated US pilot).

Why has the show endured for so long, especially during that TV show blank period (altho I understand the continuation books flew of the shelves during this era). There are countless audio books available and fan sites, blogs and the British tabloids go properly nuts for any snippet of Dr Who news.

But why is this the case?

Well, certainly domestically, the Doctor is very British. An eccentric, intelligent gentleman (so far – am personally very pro a female Doctor as that would be within the (modern) show’s ethos of refreshing itself). There is a bit of Sherlock Holmes in there and as quoted in the BBC dramatisation of the genesis of the Doctor a bit of HG Wells, CS Lewis and father Christmas. British quirkie-ness, British geekie-ness (before the term geek probably existed).

Outside of the UK, why has the Doctor endured? Well in the US he is so that lone hero character so popular in Westerns and beyond: think Clint Eastwood in the Dollars trilogy, Batman or Superman or the Lone Ranger. Even Buffy – which I remember reading somewhere the 2005 return was particularly influenced by, in terms of the companion element of the narrative. Buffy was that lone hero who had friends, but walked a path they could not ever fully understand. The Doctor walks a path like that too.

And what has contributed most to the longevity of the Doctor on TV? The genius idea of regeneration – or what to do with your TV show when the star wants out. This sci fi way of dealing with the problem is completely genius and works so well within the narrative universe of the Timelords. This also gives the producers a way of refreshing the show every so often and, in theory at least*, allowing it to go on and on. What is not to like: a little blue phone box; new Doctors every now and then; endless new companions; adventures across all of time and space.

 

* There is that lingering plot device about the Master being on his last regeneration (13th, if memory serves) but I am sure some genius already has that covered (spoilers alert) – I expect River Song gave him all of hers when she saved his life that time, or maybe he has all of the Timelords regenerations ever, assuming it was he who wiped them out during the Time War.

 

Did you ever watch Blake’s Seven?

Did you ever watch Blake’s Seven – either when it was first broadcast or on video / DVD / download/ whatever.

I  was quite young when it was broadcast in the late 70s / early 80s, but one of my earliest memories is of my older sister loving / talking about / drawing images from the show Blake’s Seven.

I remember watching parts of the last series in the 80s and especially the shock ending of the show.

During the late 90s I watched most of the show on video (my sister owned them) and it was then I really GOT it.

Terry Nation (inventor of the Daleks) created the show and one of the key ideas what that these people were more real than anyone else in TV sci fi ever had been before. These characters had faults, were sometimes morally ambiguous and would not always make the right decision based on doing something which was right, but didn’t benefit them. They were pragmatic.

TV sci fi before then had been very black and white in terms of you were either completely good or completely bad. Star Trek so far was all about that – as was Dr Who (altho interestingly, Dr Who has had a slight edge at certain periods since then – Sylvester McCoy‘s Doctor always had a very dark side).

If you look at TV sci fi since then – Farscape, re-imagined Battlestar Galactica, Firefly – or many others, they have that edge. And in my opinion this is down to Blake’s Seven.

If you haven’t seen it before take a look (but please forgive the 1970s BBC special effects).