Skip to main content

Star Wars: A New Hope Review - A Better Film From A More Practical Age


The most difficult part of writing this review was deciding whether or not to refer to this film as Star Wars or A New Hope. Being born a long time after the film came out, I've always known it as a A New Hope, but I'm obviously aware that to a lot of people it is Star Wars and no amount of special editions will change that. I still haven't found an answer to that question and I have literally no idea where I'm going with this, so I think I'll just shut up and get on with the review.

A Tangible Galaxy, Far Far Away

If you watch A New Hope after watching the prequels (which I did last time I watched it) the first thing you notice is how real everything feels. The super revolutionary reason for that is because it is real. In the '70s there was no CGI, or at least not in a way that would be able to sustain an entire film, so instead the filmmakers actually built the sets. I know, what a ridiculous idea?

Against all the odds, however, A New Hope looks absolutely amazing. Somehow, as unbelievable as it sounds, you r- okay, I'll stop now. Star Wars is one of the most immersive films I've ever seen, all the sets, all the spaceships, all the aliens, all the villains, are actually there and they're crafted with such intricate attention to detail, that you always feel like you're there too, on Tatooine, in the Death Star or piloting the Millennium Falcon. When the characters are actually interacting with their surroundings, the viewer is far more connected with everything that's going on.

This seems obvious, but for some reason the mentality now is "the more CGI, the better", so it's extremely refreshing to see a film that is almost entirely practical. Back in the '70s this probably wasn't really a big deal, the real innovation then were the visual effects, not the practical ones. In retrospect, however, the visual effects have aged the worst, whilst everything else looks even better, if only in comparison to the usual Hollywood CG-fests we get now.

The visual effects haven't aged all that badly, however. The Death Star trench run looks almost as impressive as it did in 1977 and it's no less exciting, either. It's still brilliantly paced and tightly edited and the tension hasn't been lost with time. The visual effects that have aged the worst are the ones that were added after 1977, with the infamous special editions. Of all the original trilogy, the additions to A New Hope infuriate me the most, mostly because they're the most intrusive. The wonderful looking streets of Mos Eisley are overcrowded by poorly animated CGI aliens that take you completely out of the universe. It's really irritating, because there's no way you can justify their addition, especially when it looked near perfect before.

Ignoring the annoying CGI, the universe of A New Hope is spectacularly immersive, because most of the stuff you see was actually there in real life. It's also a massive relief after watching the three overwhelmingly digital prequels.

Coarse and Rough and Occasionally Irritating

All of the original trilogy, but mainly A New Hope, have this gritty, almost homemade feeling to them, as if they've been made in a film students back garden. This is both one of A New Hope's biggest charms and greatest weaknesses.

The unpolished nature works perfectly in tangent with the vision of a 'second hand galaxy' that George Lucas had. Everything feels used and cobbled together from some spare parts lying about in someone's garage, because they probably were. You understand that this galaxy has seen better days and you also understand that it's probably the fault of those scary guys in shiny armour. This aesthetic is continued throughout the entire trilogy, but is particularly strong in A New Hope.

There's also just something charming about the relatively low budget, compared to the stuff you see now. It's refreshing (yes, I know I keep using that word, but there aren't many synonyms for 'refreshing') to see a film that didn't have ridiculous amounts of money thrown at it, but still looks really impressive. It's like seeing a film made by an extremely passionate group of kids who, despite not having tons of money, have managed to pull something together that's visually fantastic by using everything they could find, kind of like the film the characters in Super 8 make. This is slightly lost in the following two that were obviously given higher budgets, although it isn't lost that much.

There are certain aspects of the film that do, however, suffer from being quite unpolished. In particular, the script. That's not to say the script is awful - in comparison to the prequels it's a masterpiece - it's just not great. The dialogue is often clunky, a bit of a speciality for George Lucas, and can be quite exposition heavy. It's not devoid of personality like the prequels are, although that is strengthened by the fact that George Lucas was a fairly good director back in 1977. The excellent cast contribute as well, delivering every line, no matter how awkwardly written it is, with charisma and personality (unlike a certain, other actor). None of the original trilogy's scripts are anything to write home about, but the scripts for the following two films are more polished, seen as they weren't actually written by George Lucas. There is enough in A New Hope to distract you from the script, so in the grand scheme of things you barely notice it, but it is still an issue.

Star Wars is certainly no super slick, high budget Hollywood action movie, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Aesthetically it works perfectly, but when it comes to the film making side of things, the unpolished nature sometimes works against A New Hope, not for it.

Just Scratching the Surface

A New Hope feels a lot like the first film in a series. Whether it's the characters or the universe, you always feel like there's more to be explored.

Take the main characters, for example. In Star Wars, you meet Luke, Leia and Han and you learn about where they come from and why they're involved in the story you're watching. Other than that, you find out little else. It's like the first act of a film, you get introduced to the characters and you find out a bit about them, but you don't see them develop until the later acts. It's the same with the Original Trilogy, if you look at A New Hope as being Act One, Empire Strikes Back as Act Two and Return of the Jedi as Act Three. You get shown the characters in A New Hope and, because they're well acted, you grow to like them, then in Empire you start to explore their emotions more and then finally in Return of the Jedi you see all of the characters goals fulfilled with a satisfying conclusion.

It's the same story for the universe itself. You go to a few different locations - Tatooine, Yavin, the Death Star - and you meet some aliens along the way. Everything is bursting with typical Star Wars creativity, but there's also so much more than what's on display in this film. Once more, this is where the next two films come in, taking us to even more planets, like Hoth, Dagohbah and Endor and introducing us to more aliens like Ewoks, Tauntauns and whatever Yoda is.

Star Wars is quite clearly just the beginning. It's just the beginning for the characters, for the story and for the universe. It is, however, a fantastic beginning, that introduces likeable characters and an exciting galaxy filled with bizarre aliens and diverse planets. It's the perfect introduction to something far larger.

Verdict

Star Wars is a revolutionary film, or at least it was back in 1977. Now it's special for a different reason. It's a break from the more digital, super high budget films we get nowadays and is far more practical and has a much humbler budget. It's also a wildly creative and enjoyable beginning to a bigger, deeper adventure, serving as an exciting teaser for much better things to come.

8.7/10

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Horrible Christmas Rant

Horrible, Horrible Christmas, In Every Single Sense of the Word Horrible Christmas - A Quick Rant by Nathan Brooks The Good When you expect one thing, and get something else, you can get very angry. You can get so angry that you refuse to acknowledge the positives of what you have got, and just focus on what you haven't got. For example, Agents of SHIELD. I think Agents of SHIELD is great, but unfortunately I don't appear to share that opinion with a lot of other people. Why? Because they're too busy whining about the lack of all the superhero-y stuff they expected and fair enough, considering you are watching a Marvel TV show. However, I've managed to let that initial disappointment go, and I've found I really enjoy this show.  The Bad Horrible Christmas, a Horrible Histories stage production, is the complete opposite of this. As the theme of this post suggests, I expected something great. Horrible Histories is the only children's educatio...

Is Nativity 3: Dude, Where's My Donkey?! Any Good?

Dude, Where's My Funny?! Nativity 3: Dude, Where's My Donkey?! - Film Review by Nathan Brooks Nativity's lack of critical success completely baffles me. I thought Nativity was a great movie. It was funny, it had more depth to it than most comedies and was overall just a fun movie. Nativity 2: Danger in the Manger's lack of critical success, I understand a lot better. I still remember it being fairly entertaining, but I was about 11 then, and I didn't have a brilliant judgement of what makes a good movie. Of what I can remember, however, it was nowhere near as good as Nativity in terms of story and character and basically everything important needed to make a good film. I also remember that they spent most of the movie in a bus. Nativity 3: Dude, Where's My Donkey is proof that the film makers have given up on trying to please the critics. This is an awful film. Nativity 2 was not a brilliant movie, but it at least kept me entertained for however long it...

Is Avengers: Age of Ultron Any Good?

Avengers Assemble! Again! Avengers: Age of Ultron - Film Review by Nathan Brooks And they say English Weather's bad. Back in the summer of 2012, a little film came out called Avengers Assemble. It wasn't much. It's only the biggest superhero film of all time and it only made $1.518 billion. Everybody loved it, I loved it and clearly moviegoers did as well.  Due to its massive success, obviously a sequel was going to be made. In this case, that sequel is Avengers: Age of Ultron, but with all the hype it's received, is it actually any good? Story The story in this film is definitely not for first time Marvel viewers, you really need to see most, if not all, of the previous Marvel Cinematic Universe films. It is packed full of references to earlier films and understanding a lot of elements of the story will require you to have seen the others. But is the story any good? I thinks so. The main story centres around the fact that Tony Stark, or Iron Man, has ...