![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Why I Wouldn't Have Killed Off Han Solo
Jan. 15th, 2010 07:37 pmOne ongoing debate that has lingered lo these 27 years since ROTJ came out was whether Papa George should have listened to Harrison Ford's suggestion that Han end the saga pushing up daisies. Ford felt there was nowhere else for the character to go and the noble thing to do was to sacrifice himself for the cause or something. Lucas didn't take Ford's suggestion and Han ends up at the Ewok bbq frolicking through the night.
That alone would have been enough incentive for me to keep the curmudgeonly Ford around for the finale ;). In fact, I probably would have included scenes of Han wearing a silly hat and doing a conga line with a bunch of Ewoks just to tick him off further. Look, I may have been a very cynical 14-year-old when I first read about Ford advocating the death of his character, but it was obvious to me he was trying absolutely positively to ensure he would never have to play the role again should Lucas decide to do Episodes 7-9. It has been written that Ford only decided to do ROTJ out of loyalty to Lucas and Co., not because he was dying to cuddle Chewbacca one more time. I don't know if there's any truth to that per se, but Ford was really done with the whole thing, especially since his own career as a leading man was taking off.
Prior to ROTJ's release, many people seriously thought the Grim Reaper was going to come for one of the major characters. Was it going to be Luke? Was it going to be Leia? Think of the speculation prior to the release of "Harry Potter and The Deadly Hallows." But the OT3 and their immediate friends live to see the galaxy free. Even Wedge survives.
Some fans have come to think that whacking Han would have been a great idea, adding depth to ROTJ because victory would have come at a cost to the main characters. After all, who else on the good guy team dies besides a bunch of no-name Rebel pilots and an Ewok or two? There was a rampant urban legend during the 1990s that Lando was slated for death but Lucas changed his mind at the last minute. Goshdurn it, these fans thought, SOMEBODY should have croaked!!!
I've always argued against the idea of killing off Han, that Lucas made the right call and Ford can take comfort in the fact that there will be no Episode 7 with him in it. Why was it smart that Han lived?
1. The Saga Needed A Happy Ending
Despite what many fans think, the overall story of the SW saga is a hopeful one where ultimately good wins out over evil. Therefore, it only makes sense that the very last film in the series end on a high note. Maybe even a triumphant and joyous one. The death of a very popular lead character/hero would have been too somber of a conclusion and probably would have greatly disappointed moviegoers (I separate "moviegoers" from "fanboys"). It really would have ticked off the legions of women on Team Han too ;). If you look at it now in the full context of the entire series, there's already a high body count of much-loved characters like Qui-Gon, Padme, and so forth. ROTS ends with most of the lead characters dead, in hiding, or with nothing else to do but flack for the Emperor. ROTJ ends with the fellowship of the whatever intact. Survival in itself is part of the triumph.
Before anyone starts muttering about how much more sophisticated and deep it would have been for ROTJ to end with the main characters crying over Han's grave, you have to remember who this was originally made for. The kids. There's a reason why J.K. Rowling let Harry and his friends live at the end. Or why the Hobbits, Aragorn, etc. all got to survive the LOTR books (even Gandalf returns from the dead). These tales were created for young people and they need to see that they can persevere because the characters they love persevere.
Now C.S. Lewis took out almost his whole family of heroes, but they got to go to heaven, er, Narnia forever, so it was all good. And even that has remained controversial to this day.
It isn't say sacrifices aren't made on the good guys' team...
2. The Ultimate Sacrifice Was Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker
There was no need to have Luke, Han, or Leia sacrifice themselves because Vader giving his own life was so much more meaningful than getting blown up or shot by some flunkie stormtrooper with a miraculously fortunate aim. Absorbing Sidious's voltage to save Luke was literally the turning point for Vader, allowing him to fulfill what he was created to do: destroy the Sith and bring balance to the Force. Even if we didn't know that yet in 1983, what Vader does saves Luke's life, ends the Emperor's reign, and ensures that there would be future Jedi. It's pretty hard to top that.
3. The H/L Subplot Would Have No Point
They went through an awful lot of trouble in TESB to pair up Han and Leia and there was an awful lot of trouble to bail Han out of Jabba's palace. Why go through all of that if it's ultimately for naught? Leia is left alone broken-hearted, screwed by fate because she dared give her heart to someone after a great deal of reluctance. Everyone wasted their time saving a man destined to die by the end of the movie anyway. Yeah, that sounds great to me. The Han/Leia scenes in both films would serve as mere padding instead of building toward the happy ending that Anakin and Padmé never got.
But, what if say, Leia discovers at the end, once Han is committed to Valhalla, that she is carrying lil' Han? See, she could just raise the kid with Luke and that would be all good, right? Well, you forget…we're talking about a PG-rated, popular-with-kids movie made in 1983, long before it became fashionable for celebrities to have children out of wedlock. Lucas even made darn sure Anakin made an honest woman out of Padmé long before any twins came along and that was less than 10 years ago. Not an acceptable option.
Could they have deep-sixed the brother-sister relationship between Luke and Leia and ended the saga with them together? Well, the problem is it would look like Leia is just going back to Luke on the rebound. (Great, you pay attention to me now the other hunk is dead.) Luke becomes a consolation prize, sloppy seconds. Besides, there's little ground work between the two of them to form that kind of relationship anyway. All of the UST from the get-go was really between Leia and Han. Luke and Leia are always close, but never in my opinion that kind of close. Any kind of sizzle would have to have been dredged up out of nowhere. And it would only emphasize the futility of Han and Leia's pairing in the first place. Han would be nothing more than a placeholder until Leia finally discovered her true love was Luke, though I doubt it would be true since it would take Han's death for her to figure that out.
Sorry, Harry, I think Lucas was right. Now, when are you going to play Han again, hmm?
That alone would have been enough incentive for me to keep the curmudgeonly Ford around for the finale ;). In fact, I probably would have included scenes of Han wearing a silly hat and doing a conga line with a bunch of Ewoks just to tick him off further. Look, I may have been a very cynical 14-year-old when I first read about Ford advocating the death of his character, but it was obvious to me he was trying absolutely positively to ensure he would never have to play the role again should Lucas decide to do Episodes 7-9. It has been written that Ford only decided to do ROTJ out of loyalty to Lucas and Co., not because he was dying to cuddle Chewbacca one more time. I don't know if there's any truth to that per se, but Ford was really done with the whole thing, especially since his own career as a leading man was taking off.
Prior to ROTJ's release, many people seriously thought the Grim Reaper was going to come for one of the major characters. Was it going to be Luke? Was it going to be Leia? Think of the speculation prior to the release of "Harry Potter and The Deadly Hallows." But the OT3 and their immediate friends live to see the galaxy free. Even Wedge survives.
Some fans have come to think that whacking Han would have been a great idea, adding depth to ROTJ because victory would have come at a cost to the main characters. After all, who else on the good guy team dies besides a bunch of no-name Rebel pilots and an Ewok or two? There was a rampant urban legend during the 1990s that Lando was slated for death but Lucas changed his mind at the last minute. Goshdurn it, these fans thought, SOMEBODY should have croaked!!!
I've always argued against the idea of killing off Han, that Lucas made the right call and Ford can take comfort in the fact that there will be no Episode 7 with him in it. Why was it smart that Han lived?
1. The Saga Needed A Happy Ending
Despite what many fans think, the overall story of the SW saga is a hopeful one where ultimately good wins out over evil. Therefore, it only makes sense that the very last film in the series end on a high note. Maybe even a triumphant and joyous one. The death of a very popular lead character/hero would have been too somber of a conclusion and probably would have greatly disappointed moviegoers (I separate "moviegoers" from "fanboys"). It really would have ticked off the legions of women on Team Han too ;). If you look at it now in the full context of the entire series, there's already a high body count of much-loved characters like Qui-Gon, Padme, and so forth. ROTS ends with most of the lead characters dead, in hiding, or with nothing else to do but flack for the Emperor. ROTJ ends with the fellowship of the whatever intact. Survival in itself is part of the triumph.
Before anyone starts muttering about how much more sophisticated and deep it would have been for ROTJ to end with the main characters crying over Han's grave, you have to remember who this was originally made for. The kids. There's a reason why J.K. Rowling let Harry and his friends live at the end. Or why the Hobbits, Aragorn, etc. all got to survive the LOTR books (even Gandalf returns from the dead). These tales were created for young people and they need to see that they can persevere because the characters they love persevere.
Now C.S. Lewis took out almost his whole family of heroes, but they got to go to heaven, er, Narnia forever, so it was all good. And even that has remained controversial to this day.
It isn't say sacrifices aren't made on the good guys' team...
2. The Ultimate Sacrifice Was Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker
There was no need to have Luke, Han, or Leia sacrifice themselves because Vader giving his own life was so much more meaningful than getting blown up or shot by some flunkie stormtrooper with a miraculously fortunate aim. Absorbing Sidious's voltage to save Luke was literally the turning point for Vader, allowing him to fulfill what he was created to do: destroy the Sith and bring balance to the Force. Even if we didn't know that yet in 1983, what Vader does saves Luke's life, ends the Emperor's reign, and ensures that there would be future Jedi. It's pretty hard to top that.
3. The H/L Subplot Would Have No Point
They went through an awful lot of trouble in TESB to pair up Han and Leia and there was an awful lot of trouble to bail Han out of Jabba's palace. Why go through all of that if it's ultimately for naught? Leia is left alone broken-hearted, screwed by fate because she dared give her heart to someone after a great deal of reluctance. Everyone wasted their time saving a man destined to die by the end of the movie anyway. Yeah, that sounds great to me. The Han/Leia scenes in both films would serve as mere padding instead of building toward the happy ending that Anakin and Padmé never got.
But, what if say, Leia discovers at the end, once Han is committed to Valhalla, that she is carrying lil' Han? See, she could just raise the kid with Luke and that would be all good, right? Well, you forget…we're talking about a PG-rated, popular-with-kids movie made in 1983, long before it became fashionable for celebrities to have children out of wedlock. Lucas even made darn sure Anakin made an honest woman out of Padmé long before any twins came along and that was less than 10 years ago. Not an acceptable option.
Could they have deep-sixed the brother-sister relationship between Luke and Leia and ended the saga with them together? Well, the problem is it would look like Leia is just going back to Luke on the rebound. (Great, you pay attention to me now the other hunk is dead.) Luke becomes a consolation prize, sloppy seconds. Besides, there's little ground work between the two of them to form that kind of relationship anyway. All of the UST from the get-go was really between Leia and Han. Luke and Leia are always close, but never in my opinion that kind of close. Any kind of sizzle would have to have been dredged up out of nowhere. And it would only emphasize the futility of Han and Leia's pairing in the first place. Han would be nothing more than a placeholder until Leia finally discovered her true love was Luke, though I doubt it would be true since it would take Han's death for her to figure that out.
Sorry, Harry, I think Lucas was right. Now, when are you going to play Han again, hmm?
