Creatively Frustrating Fandom

"One-thousand one, one-thousand two, one-thousand three"; "Why am I watching this?"; "Was that a beer bottle?" These were just some of my thoughts while watch Star Wars: A New Hope Uncut. The crowd sourced film is equal measures entertaining, creative, and entirely frustrating to view.

The positives of this work truly stem from the creativity and loyalty of Star Wars fans. Some takes were smart, homemade versions of the original scenes (i.e. "Obi One" and "Darth Vader" playing chess on the beach for their epic battle), others displayed true talent on the part of the creator (any of the CGI, computer generated scenes). The Uncut version depicts the loyalty of fans and their attention to details.

The difficulty of the film comes from the hyperactive switching between cuts to generate the entire film. Watching the original Star Wars allowed me time to think and process what was happening: the Uncut version forced me to focus on everything that was taking place in order to orient myself to what exactly was happening. Around the forty-five minute mark I worried I wouldn't be able to finish. At the hour-and-half timestamp I was sure my brain was fried. By the time the film concluded I simply went to bed out of exhaustion.

My most conclusive thought to come out of this film is Luke's reactive to Obi One's death. Last week we noted that he moves on rather quickly from his aunt and uncles deaths, a note we chalked up to a plot device to skip forward to more interesting story-lines. Obi One's death has a more profound influence in comparison, though. For whatever reason the Uncut version drew my attention to this detail as Luke, Leia, R2D2 and C3PO sat around the booth in the Millennial Falcon.

 

Imaged sourced from theverge.com. Scene originally from Star Wars: A New Hope Uncut. https://www.theverge.com/2012/1/21/2721993/star-wars-uncut-directors-cut 

George Lucas: Perfectionist

This quote strikes me as very odd, especially the part where Lucas says "I'm the one who has to have everybody throw rocks at me...for something I love rather than something I think is not very good, or at least something I think is not finished." I understand his dislike for an original work, usually when an artist, in my case writer/poet, views their first work as unfinished or the worst copy. He takes responsibility but the two versions can and should coexist because we can compare the old and newer versions, the progress in technology, and in the end it is art. Art improves and continues to grow but to get rid of the original does not fully mean you accept responsibility of how awful it is and how everyone loved it but that you are erasing an original piece of art that was very fine on it's own. Lucas is clearly a professional and before he had edited Star Wars he must have had some pride in the first version. To erase something so impactful and replace with not just some upgrading in shading and tech but to add and replace specific things to fit your own vision is a bit selfish.

Wait, it's that simple?

              After reading "The Monomyth", it is clear that there are certain things that just work. Certain roles, like the hero, mentor, and shapeshifter, can be identified in most movies, but it doesn't stop with movies; these figures and foundations exist in ancient folklore, mythology, sacred rituals, legends, and as Campbell puts it, "even nightmares". It is undeniable to say that there are certain things that humans innately respond to. When we look at old stories like "Beowulf" and "Sir Gaiwan and the Green knight", we see the "separation- initiation- return" pattern Campbell illustrates on page thirty. There is a reason these tales are timeless. 

             But what does this say about us as humans, if anything at all? How come these certain concept work time and time again? I want to attribute it to some evolutionary development, like the reason we admire the hero who has proven his worth by journeying out and returning to improve society is because a person like this would prove useful in a village or a tribe. Of course, I don't know the answer to this question, but I often tend to attribute out characteristics as some sort of process of evolution.