---

VEd godt at dette nok kunne findes på en eller anden hjemmeside, men i
dovenskab spørger jeg lige her....

Hvorfor blev de originale Star Wars film egentlig kaldt IV, V og VI.......
??

Var det et reklame-stunt, eller var Lucas 100% sikker på at han ville få lov
til at lave 1,2 og 3?

/Rasmus

---

Der var engang, i en fjern, fjern galakse....
Nå men anyways, Lucas udtænkte til at starte med 9 film der skulle
udgøre Star Wars universet. De sidste tre er vist blevet droppet nu.
Jeg kan ikke lige huske hvorfor han valgte at lave nr. 4 i serien
først.

> VEd godt at dette nok kunne findes på en eller anden hjemmeside, men
i
> dovenskab spørger jeg lige her....
>
> Hvorfor blev de originale Star Wars film egentlig kaldt IV, V og
VI.......
> ??
>
> Var det et reklame-stunt, eller var Lucas 100% sikker på at han
ville få lov
> til at lave 1,2 og 3?
>
> /Rasmus

---

"Kasper Møller" <kbmpost[nospamforme]@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b6ffg2$2vae$1@news.cybercity.dk...
> Der var engang, i en fjern, fjern galakse....
> Nå men anyways, Lucas udtænkte til at starte med 9 film der skulle
> udgøre Star Wars universet. De sidste tre er vist blevet droppet nu.
> Jeg kan ikke lige huske hvorfor han valgte at lave nr. 4 i serien
> først.

Tjah, vist ud fra en idé om, at det var den bedste / den, der var nemmest at
filmatisere.

/Nikolaj

---

"Rasmus Wulff Jensen" <wulff-jensen@mobilixnet.dk> writes:

> Var det et reklame-stunt, eller var Lucas 100% sikker på at han ville få lov
> til at lave 1,2 og 3?

Den mytologiske forklaring har flere allerede givet - Lucas havde det
hele klar inde i hovedet og blabla.

I virkeligheden hed Episode IV ikke Episode IV før ved repremieren,
hvor det _havde_ vist sig, at man kunne tjene penge på
science-ficition og Lucas skulle i gang med V og VI og øjnede
indtjening i horisonten.

--
Peter B. Juul, o.-.o "I'm not ignoring any facts.
The RockBear. ((^)) I'm simply ignoring you.
I speak only 0}._.{0 Slight difference."
for myself. O/ \O -jms

---

"Rasmus Wulff Jensen" <wulff-jensen@mobilixnet.dk> skrev i en meddelelse
news:b6ff42$28a8$1@jarjarbinks.mobilixnet.dk...
> VEd godt at dette nok kunne findes på en eller anden hjemmeside, men i
> dovenskab spørger jeg lige her....
>
> Hvorfor blev de originale Star Wars film egentlig kaldt IV, V og VI.......
> ??
>
> Var det et reklame-stunt, eller var Lucas 100% sikker på at han ville få
lov
> til at lave 1,2 og 3?
>
> /Rasmus
>
>

Kan der her hjælpe???

Gad ikke oversætte, så her er noget copy-paste til dig...

Although it is often claimed by George Lucas that Star Wars was always
intended as part of a series (originally nine parts, later six), producer
Gary Kurtz claimed differently in a interview in 1999. According to Kurtz,
Star Wars was meant to be a standalone film. It was only after the film's
incredible success that he and Lucas got together to consider sequels. They
came up with the idea that Star Wars was the fourth story of a nine-part
series and penned rough outlines for each episode. After releasing the
"fifth" episode (The Empire Strikes Back (1980)), Lucas made Raiders of the
Lost Ark (1981) with Steven Spielberg. The success of this film convinced
Lucas to increase the emphasis on action in the "sixth" Star Wars episode.
According to Kurtz, the Emperor was not originally going to make an
appearance until episode 9. Luke and Leia were not brother and sister. There
was no Death Star II. The search for Han Solo was the main plot of the film,
during which Luke would have furthered his Jedi training. Solo was going to
die in the final battle. Luke was going to go off to complete/continue his
Jedi training and Leia was going to resume her position as Queen of her
people, separating the major characters in a "downer" ending similar to that
of Episode 5. Kurtz strongly objected to Lucas' changes and insisted they
should stay with the story they had originally planned. Lucas just as
strongly disagreed and the two parted company. (Kurtz left to make Dark
Crystal, The (1982) with Jim Henson and hasn't worked with Lucas since.)

---

Griner


"Rune Jensen" <:fjern:blaze@esenet.dk> wrote in message
news:3e8b4b3f$0$24718$edfadb0f@dread14.news.tele.dk...
>
> "Rasmus Wulff Jensen" <wulff-jensen@mobilixnet.dk> skrev i en meddelelse
> news:b6ff42$28a8$1@jarjarbinks.mobilixnet.dk...
> > VEd godt at dette nok kunne findes på en eller anden hjemmeside, men i
> > dovenskab spørger jeg lige her....
> >
> > Hvorfor blev de originale Star Wars film egentlig kaldt IV, V og
VI.......
> > ??
> >
> > Var det et reklame-stunt, eller var Lucas 100% sikker på at han ville få
> lov
> > til at lave 1,2 og 3?
> >
> > /Rasmus
> >
> >
>
> Kan der her hjælpe???
>
> Gad ikke oversætte, så her er noget copy-paste til dig...
>
> Although it is often claimed by George Lucas that Star Wars was always
> intended as part of a series (originally nine parts, later six), producer
> Gary Kurtz claimed differently in a interview in 1999. According to Kurtz,
> Star Wars was meant to be a standalone film. It was only after the film's
> incredible success that he and Lucas got together to consider sequels.
They
> came up with the idea that Star Wars was the fourth story of a nine-part
> series and penned rough outlines for each episode. After releasing the
> "fifth" episode (The Empire Strikes Back (1980)), Lucas made Raiders of
the
> Lost Ark (1981) with Steven Spielberg. The success of this film convinced
> Lucas to increase the emphasis on action in the "sixth" Star Wars episode.
> According to Kurtz, the Emperor was not originally going to make an
> appearance until episode 9. Luke and Leia were not brother and sister.
There
> was no Death Star II. The search for Han Solo was the main plot of the
film,
> during which Luke would have furthered his Jedi training. Solo was going
to
> die in the final battle. Luke was going to go off to complete/continue his
> Jedi training and Leia was going to resume her position as Queen of her
> people, separating the major characters in a "downer" ending similar to
that
> of Episode 5. Kurtz strongly objected to Lucas' changes and insisted they
> should stay with the story they had originally planned. Lucas just as
> strongly disagreed and the two parted company. (Kurtz left to make Dark
> Crystal, The (1982) with Jim Henson and hasn't worked with Lucas since.)
>
>
>

---

> Although it is often claimed by George Lucas that Star Wars was always
> intended as part of a series (originally nine parts, later six), producer
> Gary Kurtz claimed differently in a interview in 1999. According to Kurtz,
> Star Wars was meant to be a standalone film. It was only after the film's
> incredible success that he and Lucas got together to consider sequels.
They
> came up with the idea that Star Wars was the fourth story of a nine-part
> series and penned rough outlines for each episode. After releasing the
> "fifth" episode (The Empire Strikes Back (1980)), Lucas made Raiders of
the
> Lost Ark (1981) with Steven Spielberg. The success of this film convinced
> Lucas to increase the emphasis on action in the "sixth" Star Wars episode.
> According to Kurtz, the Emperor was not originally going to make an
> appearance until episode 9. Luke and Leia were not brother and sister.
There
> was no Death Star II. The search for Han Solo was the main plot of the
film,
> during which Luke would have furthered his Jedi training. Solo was going
to
> die in the final battle. Luke was going to go off to complete/continue his
> Jedi training and Leia was going to resume her position as Queen of her
> people, separating the major characters in a "downer" ending similar to
that
> of Episode 5. Kurtz strongly objected to Lucas' changes and insisted they
> should stay with the story they had originally planned. Lucas just as
> strongly disagreed and the two parted company. (Kurtz left to make Dark
> Crystal, The (1982) with Jim Henson and hasn't worked with Lucas since.)
>
>
>
Dark Crystal... sikke et skridt fremad fra Star Wars hva' ;?