Is 'Star Wars' a British film ?

[julian_craster]

Is 'Star Wars' a British film ? (now 30 years old !! )



I would say yes, as most of it was filmed at EMI Elstree

(with digital effects added in California)



What do you think ?

[Nick Dando]

I'd disown it! Never saw it at the time and finally got round to seeing it in the 1980s. What a waste of time!



Nick

[DB7]

Beware the Dark Side Fell'.. erm Luke.

[DB7]

name='julian_craster']Is 'Star Wars' a British film ? (now 30 years old !! )



I would say yes, as most of it was filmed at EMI Elstree

I'd say no as there's little visible British influence on it. The Superman films were shot here around the same time and I'd say the same applies to them.

[christoph404]

name='julian_craster']Is 'Star Wars' a British film ? (now 30 years old !! )



I would say yes, as most of it was filmed at EMI Elstree

(with digital effects added in California)



What do you think ?

Erm......No....everything about this film smacks of Americana to me. Much filming at Elstree yes, but concieved and directed by American George Lucas and financed by 2oth Century Fox. The main leading characaters are American actors, some brits in there as villains or robots and I guess Sir Alec. And as John Brosnan points out in his book "The Primal Scream" this film is irritating for amongst other things its cheesy California-style , New Age mysticism, ie "The Force" !

I would say American through and through as are all the equally infantile sequels!

There have of course been many films made in the UK at british studios financed by Fox and Warners and other US film companies, and we can claim many of these as being British films because there have British directors or writers or producers exercising some kind of creative control. I don't think any Brits had any kind of influence on Star Wars at all, I would never consider it a British film. Have we had a thread on what constitutes a British film? I think it sureley has to be more than simply being filmed at a UK studio. Spielberg has made many films here in the UK, Indiana Jones, Saving Private Ryan etc, I would not class those as British films either, though I would certainly hold them in higher regard than Star Wars. You may have guessed by now that I loathe the Star War Films! each to their own I guess, being over the age age 10 when it came out it just didn't appeal, I was at my University film club watching "2001"!! now there is a great British film!! har har

[Ted Holmes]

name='christoph404']

I would say American through and through as are all the equally infantile sequels!

What a glorious statement!

[batman]

name='Ted Holmes']What a glorious statement!

Thirded !!!! Bats.

[penfold]

You know, and not just to be contradictory, I'd say it was....for a kick off, it features those icons of Britishness Dave Prowse and Harry 'Aitch' Fielder...oh ok, Alec Guinness and Peter Cushing too....but for every bit that's influenced by Flash Gordon, you have another from Arthurian legend, or even The Dambusters.....and then there's the British technicians, model makers.....we think of Bond as British, so why not? In the original trilogy, three actors combined for Darth Vader; Dave Prowse, Sebastian Shaw, and James Earl Jones. Two thirds British; Vader would vote to be a Brit !!!

[harryfielder]

It gave a lot of work to many Brit actors.



Aitch,

[D Cairns]

Taking the points one at a time...

Bond: American money, international settings, but British leads in stories about a British hero, based on British books. British directors (even recently) and chief technicians: Peter Hunt, Freddie Young, emigres Ken Adam and Maurice Binder, John Barry. It may not be WHOLLY British due to the MGM backing and conscious internationality, but it has a claim to being VERY British.

Star Wars: put it this way, would you be comfortable describing COLD MOUNTAIN as a Romanian film? Is Mission Impossible II an Australian film?

In my darker moods I'm not sure I'd class STAR WARS as a film at all, but then I think of The Phantom Menace and cut some slack to the first couple.

Superman II and III had a British-based director, American emigre Richard Lester, and lots of British actors in small roles...so I could call them films from a British filmmaker, but they still have little noticeable British cultural connection. Lester himself wondered if his 3 MUSKETEERS could be called British: shot in British studios and Spanish locations, with American and British stars, Polish producers, and was finally classed for tax reasons as a Panamanian film. "the money came from God-knows-where...and vanished God-knows-where."

[christoph404]

name='D Cairns']...so I could call them films from a British filmmaker, but they still have little noticeable British cultural connection. "

Absolutley, hits the nail right on the head.

[Joenoir]

David Quinlin in his forward to British Sound Films, written in 1984, gave this explanation.



"As to what constitutes a British film, Department of Trade (formerly Board of Trade) rules are both profuse and vague at the same time. But the majority of its makers should be British, and the studios used to shoot it should be in the United Kingdom. Several films made in various parts of Ireland have proved borderline cases in this respect, and some have been omitted.

In addition, three-quarters of the paid labour force on the film must be British subjects or citizens. If all these conditions are met, then the film qualifies for its 'GB' sticker, and counts towards the quota of British films that must be shown in British cinemas."

[clitheroekid]

I have never seen a Star Wars film

[Wolfgang]

According to my points system it is American:



Director - US (1)

Author - US (1)

Location of filming - UK (1)

Financier - US (1)

Cultural viewpoint - US (1)



So that is 4-1 to America

[christoph404]

name='Wolfgang']According to my points system it is American:



Director - US (1)

Author - US (1)

Location of filming - UK (1)

Financier - US (1)

Cultural viewpoint - US (1)



So that is 4-1 to America

and mainly US actors in the key "hero" roles. that proportion is possibly 4-1 as well which would niceley support your points system result!

[christoph404]

I think D cairns and Wolfgang have pointed out a very basic point which is arguably the crux of this debate and that is the films "cultural viewpoint" as I said before, American through and through.

[Moor Larkin]

name='Wolfgang']Location of filming - UK (1)

Huh? I thought it's location was a Universe far far away..........



Seems odd how you all want to disown Star Wars but probably think Dr. Who epitomises the best of Britishness........



What's so wrong about wanting the goodies to win and the baddies to get their comeuppances in due order?



Oh!.....don't forget Fred Woods was in it as well......

[Marky B]

name='D Cairns']

emigres Ken Adam and Maurice Binder, John Barry

John Barry is a son of York

Ta Ta

Marky B

[penfold]

name='christoph404']I think D cairns and Wolfgang have pointed out a very basic point which is arguably the crux of this debate and that is the films "cultural viewpoint" as I said before, American through and through.

True, The Emperor, Darth Vader and his stormtroopers do seem to embody current US foreign relations policy ideas...

[penfold]

name='christoph404']and mainly US actors in the key "hero" roles. that proportion is possibly 4-1 as well which would niceley support your points system result!

....but only if you exclude the almost totally British Baddies !!