Threepio takes the wheel of the landspeeder in one of Star Wars' deleted scenes |
In our continuing look
at the deleted scenes of Star Wars, we discover that See Threepio can do
something useful other than talk – and we watch George Lucas grapple with the
question of which bits of the story to leave out.
Aunt Beru and the blue milk
Aunt Beru fetches the blue milk in a deleted shot from Star Wars |
Before we get on to the substantial business of today’s
post, I should cover a deleted ‘scene’ that is really barely a scene at all.
The Star Wars Blu-ray set includes a shot of Aunt Beru
filling a pitcher of blue milk. The shot would have appeared in the movie just
before the scene in which Luke comes in for dinner and tells his uncle about
his suspicion that their new R2 unit might have been stolen.
It doesn’t tell us anything story-wise, so it’s really a bit
of discarded footage rather than a deleted scene. But the blue milk seems to
have fascinated some people, over the years, as surely as the questions of what
the Jawas look like under their hoods or why those Imperial gunners didn’t
shoot the escape pod. Authors in the Star Wars ‘expanded universe’ later decided that
the blue milk came from banthas (good luck milking one of those) and the drink
also inspired the name of the very funny Star Wars parody strip Blue Milk Special. In the universe of Star Wars, just about every detail has some kind of cult
following.
See Threepio drives the landspeeder
Threepio drives the landspeeder in a deleted scene from Star Wars |
Now we’re into a more substantial
deleted scene – one that figures in the script and in the Alan Dean Foster novel.
It’s the morning after Artoo Detoo left Luke’s family homestead. Just
after we see Uncle Owen calling for Luke – and threatening that there will be “hell
to pay” if his nephew doesn’t repair those units on the south range – we see
Luke’s landspeeder travelling across the desert, with See Threepio at the
wheel.
Yes, it turns out the droid does have a practical use, other than being
able to speak six million languages, of which the Lars family don’t seem to need
at least 5,999,997. (They appear only to require English, bocce and the binary
language of moisture vapirators.)
The neat thing about this scene
is that it would have established just how self-serving See Threepio can be. As they
hunt for the missing R2 unit, Luke mulls on how “Uncle Owen isn’t going to take
this very well”. Threepio briefly suggests he might take the blame, and Luke
welcomes the idea, saying “He’d probably only deactivate you for a day or so.” At this, Threepio changes his mind about the
whole idea: “Deactivate! Well, on the other hand if you hadn’t removed
his restraining bolt….”
Lucas aimed to give his robots real
personalities, and in this deleted scene we see that Threepio’s personality is
very human indeed. We’ve already established that he’s a coward, but in this exchange
he is prepared to see his new master get into trouble rather than him. If that
doesn’t actually break one of Asimov’s Three Laws of Robotics, it surely violates
the spirit of them. Here, Threepio is considerably closer to one of the
self-serving footsoldiers Tehei and Matashichi in Kurosawa’s Hidden Fortress,
who to some extent inspired Lucas’s conception of the droids.
But amusing as the scene is, it
had to go – and the main reason had nothing to do with its value as part of
the story.
The landspeeder back projection: Star Wars’ least convincing special effect
The unconvincing back projection caused this scene to be deleted from Star Wars |
The main reason this scene would not
have sat well in the movie is a prosaic one: The special effects were not good
enough.
The scene cuts between the characters
in the landspeeder and the Tatooine terrain. The shots of that terrain are
fantastic. Shot from the speeder’s point of view, they are a lot like the shots
of the snowscape from the snowspeeders’ angle that make my stomach lurch in The
Empire Strikes Back. But the shots of Luke and Threepio in the landspeeder are
not up to scratch.
In the alien world of Star Wars,
the one thing that would destroy the mood for the audience more than anything
else would be a sub-standard special effects shot. Yes, there might be some
effects in the movie that look a little ropy if you freeze-frame them. But in
the cinema, I can think of only a couple of moments that look a little wobbly, and
they also involve the landspeeder. Making a real vehicle, with actors in it, look
as though it was hovering above the ground was not easily accomplished in
1976-77, as this frame grab shows:
One of the weaker shots in Star Wars: The landspeeder arrives at Mos Eisley, with Vaseline on the camera lens obscuring the wheels of the vehicle used on location |
Star Wars used a lot of
traditional, practical effects techniques alongside innovations that would
change the industry. In this deleted scene, the crew used back-projection –
just about the oldest trick in the book when it comes to simulating moving vehicles.
It is the kind of technique that studio-bound, black and white movies used to get
away with, partly because we accepted a greater degree of artificiality in
those films. But in colour and widescreen, it can look glaringly phoney – and the
technique was probably laid to rest with this great scene from Airplane!:
In the case of Star Wars, the
back projection does not work well. It would almost certainly have been jarring
– and it would have occurred to George Lucas that the whole scene
could be excised without destroying the story.
What to leave out: refining the story of Star Wars
George Lucas at the time of Star Wars |
Any author or film-maker has to
address the key question: What should I cut? It’s the sign of a mature artist
who has already dealt with the even more fundamental question: Why should I cut
anything after I took all that trouble thinking it up?
George Lucas had learned a lot about cutting scenes from his experience with American Graffiti |
George Lucas was discovering, in the
editing, how to refine his story. He had learned some painful lessons in this
field during the editing of American
Graffiti, which came in at two hours 45 minutes long in its first cut.
Lucas’s biographer Dale Pollock wrote of that experience: “The story was so interwoven that
removing one or two scenes disrupted the entire flow of the film.” He quoted Lucas as saying: “You literally can
have a film that works fine at one point, and in one week you can cut it to a
point where it absolutely does not work at all.”
In the case of Star Wars, Lucas
was not facing the massive problem of over-length that he had faced with
Graffiti, but there clearly were plenty of trims he could make without fundamentally
hurting the story. The landspeeder scene is one of those. It’s the kind of
scene everyone involved might have enjoyed, and which might have seemed
important at the time, but which turns out to be loseable. These judgements are never a
science – it might have been possible to cut or trim other scenes that we have since become used used to
in the finished movie. But in looking at what was left out of Star Wars, we
can see Lucas becoming a better storyteller.
5 comments:
I suspect that could have made that scene work - without back projection Darren. Why not place a camera In the middle of the axis of the device which swung the speeder around, but in full, repeating 360 turns? It would have been real. And it wouldn't have to rotate fast either. To avoid repeating background features they could have picked spots on which to place it which had pretty flat horizons. Then intercut close ups to vary it and hide the cut when they shifted the whole setup to a different spot so as to get a different horizon.
It seems odd that they couldn't come up with something like this with all of their know-how and budget!
John
I am surprised that there are many deleted shots in Star Wars movie. I think George Lucas is a genious person. Frankly speaking, I love all related to Star Wars: films, games , books etc.
Thanks very much for commenting!
tambien se puede hacer una toma dividida con la misma pelicula,tecnica que se uso en otras filmes,consiste en tapar una parte de la lente de la camara y filmar normalmente,luego se rebobina el rollo, se destapa esa parte y se vulve a filmar.al estar tapada la lente por la mitad,esa parte de la pelicula queda sin exposicion,,esto permite juntar en una misma escena dos hechos distintos en tiempos tambien distintos.por ejemplo en esta escena,el deslizador colgaria de un riel elevado del suelo,se tapa la parte superior de la lente,ocultando el riel, y se impresiona solamente la parte inferior,el deslizador vendria moviendose pero colgado de izquierda a derecha como lo vimos en la escena original,verdaderamente lejos del suelo.solo resta rebobinar la pelicula,quitar el riel y hacer el mismo paneo de camara.hay que tener cuidado de que no se cruce algo,pues se haria evidente el truco.y logicamente la velocidad de ambos paneos debe ser la misma,si
esta bien hecho es casi imposible descubrirlo.
tambien se puede hacer una toma dividida con la misma pelicula,tecnica que se uso en otras filmes,consiste en tapar una parte de la lente de la camara y filmar normalmente,luego se rebobina el rollo, se destapa esa parte y se vulve a filmar.al estar tapada la lente por la mitad,esa parte de la pelicula queda sin exposicion,,esto permite juntar en una misma escena dos hechos distintos en tiempos tambien distintos.por ejemplo en esta escena,el deslizador colgaria de un riel elevado del suelo,se tapa la parte superior de la lente,ocultando el riel, y se impresiona solamente la parte inferior,el deslizador vendria moviendose pero colgado de izquierda a derecha como lo vimos en la escena original,verdaderamente lejos del suelo.solo resta rebobinar la pelicula,quitar el riel y hacer el mismo paneo de camara.hay que tener cuidado de que no se cruce algo,pues se haria evidente el truco.y logicamente la velocidad de ambos paneos debe ser la misma,si
esta bien hecho es casi imposible descubrirlo.
Post a Comment