Rewind to 1977: ‘Star Wars’ had no ‘hidden meaning’
On June 30, 1977, The Spokesman-Review published a review of “Star Wars” by staff writer James Nickles, under the headline “‘Star Wars’ apt to please.” He wasn’t much of a fan. - Carolyn Lamberson, Features Editor
School is out, summer is here and “Star Wars,” the movie extravaganza that threatens to overtake “Jaws” as the greatest cinema money-maker ever, has arrived in Spokane after a test run of several weeks in major cities around the country.
In those few places exposed to “Star Wars” since its release in May, audiences have backed up for hours to get seats, and then come back for more. Even most movie critics, who usually pan anything appealing to popular passion rather than art, have heaped praise upon writer-director George Lucas’ creation.
The reaction is easy to explain. “Star Wars,” playing at United Artists Cinema 1, perhaps more than any other movie in recent years accomplishes exactly what it sets out to do: Provide escapist, nonsensical entertainment.
“Star Wars” has no culturally or socially redeeming value, no hidden meaning, no moral message. But for the price of admission, it is a great way to escape the summer heat.
Lucas, who last directed, “American Graffiti,” says he spent four years just writing the script for the picture.
The finished product, rated PG, reflects the polish of such careful writing and rewriting. In fact, “Star Wars” at times seems almost too slick, too clever. Ultimately, though, such unbelievability does not lessen the movie’s impact or credibility. As in all good movies, somehow it all seems just right. The bad guys are humiliated, the good guys win, and the hero, Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill), is rewarded with a wink and a medal from the beautiful princess.
For all his movie’s apparent simple-mindedness, Lucas has touched a nerve in the American subconscious. “Star Wars” contains elements of the Wizard of Oz, comic books, World War II movies, old-fashioned adventures and old-fashioned westerns. It combines everything we used to idealize back in the days before Hollywood discovered realism, blood, guts and explicit sex. Despite its fast-moving action, “Star Wars” contains no real violence and hardly a hint of sex or even romance.
And it is all as American as cashing in on a good thing. In its first two weeks nationwide, “Star Wars” grossed almost $6 million, the highest per-theater gross in movie history. By some estimates, Lucas stands to profit about $20 million by the time the movie hits the late-night re-run circuit.
Yet there is nothing tacky nor overtly commercial about “Star Wars,” though the movie was constructed almost to formula. Like that 1930s classic, “The Wizard of Oz,” “Star Wars” is simply high quality adventure that appeals to the best in us, and of course entertains us.
The comparison with “The Wizard of Oz” seems almost overwhelming. One of the movie’s robot heroes, See Threepio (Anthony Daniels), could be the tin woodsman with a David Niven accent. Chewbacca (Peter Mayhew), the shaggy Wookie sidekick of maverick starship pilot Han Solo (Harrison Ford), could be the cowardly lion. They, with Skywalker, another robot, and the mystical Ben Kenobi (Alec Guinness), storm the stronghold of the evil imperial forces to rescue this movie’s Dorothy, the Princess Leia Organa (Carrie Fisher).
After a good shoot-out and a lot of humor, they …. but that would give it away. Suffice it to say that like “The Wizard of Oz,” we could be seeing “Star Wars” before every Christmas for a long time.