Lawrence THE HANDLE, which varies in length according to the height of its user, and in some cases is made by that user to his or her specifications, is like most of the other parts of the tool in that it has a name and thus a character of its own. I call it the snath, as do most of us in the UK, though variations include the snathe, the snaithe, the snead, and the sned. Onto the snath are attached two hand grips, adjusted for the height of the user. On the bottom of the snath is a small hole, a rubberized protector, and a metal D-ring with two hex sockets.
The camera pans down to reveal a large planet and its two moons. Suddenly, a tiny Rebel ship flies overhead, pursued, a few moments later, by an Imperial Star Destroyer—an impossibly large ship that nearly fills the frame as it goes on and on seemingly forever. The effect is visceral and exhilarating.
This is, of course, the opening of Star Wars: Episode IV—A New Hopearguably one of the most famous opening shots in cinema history, and rightfully so.
Now compare this to the opening of Star Wars: Episode I—The Phantom Menace It opens with some boring pilot asking for permission to land on a ship that looks like a half-eaten donut, with a donut hole in the middle. The problem, though, is that it may not be the fairest of comparisons.
In Menace, a Republic space cruiser flies through space towards the planet Naboo, which is surrounded by Trade Federation Battleships. The captain requests permission to board. On the viewscreen, an alien gives the okay. The space cruiser then flies towards a battleship and lands in a large docking bay.
In the opening of Jedi, an Imperial Shuttle exits the main bay of a Star Destroyer and flies towards the Death Star, which looms over the forest moon of Endor. The captain requests deactivation of the security shield in order to land aboard the Death Star.
Inside the Death Star control room, a controller gives the captain clearance to proceed. The shuttle then flies towards the Death Star and lands in a large docking bay.
As you can see, there are some definite similarities between the two sequences. And they both consist of a similar series of shots. But, at the same time, there are some clear differences between the sequences. Third, the screen direction is reversed. The Republic cruiser moves across the frame from left to right, the Imperial shuttle moves right to left.
Even some of the camera angles are reversed in a way. The cruiser enters the docking bay in a low-angle shot, the shuttle in a high-angle shot.
From this standpoint, then, the two sequences seem almost like mirror images of each other. Now, the prequels are filled with frequent callbacks to the original films, to be sure, but this seems particularly odd.
Assuming it was intentional, why would the opening of Episode I reflect the opening of Episode VI and at such an incredible level of detail, no less?
It comes off like a script written by an eight-year-old. Episode III—Revenge of the SithStoklasa does offer up two possible explanations for any and all of the similarities between the old films and the new films: Anne Lancashire, professor of Cinema Studies and Drama at the University of Toronto and whose seminal writings on Star Wars form the basis for much of this essayoffers a third, perhaps more thoughtful, possibility that might help shed some light on the matter.
Lucas himself alluded to this in an interview following the release of Star Wars: Episode II—Attack of the Clones Paul Kingsnorth is a writer and poet living in Cumbria, England.
He is the author of several books, including the poetry collection Kidland and his fictional debut The Wake, winner of the Gordon Burn Prize and the Bookseller Book of the Year Award.
Kingsnorth is the cofounder and director of the Dark Mountain Project, a network of writers, artists, and thinkers.
COMMUNIQUE #3 Haymarket Issue "I NEED ONLY MENTION in passing that there is a curious reappearance of the Catfish tradition in the popular Godzilla cycle of films which arose after the nuclear chaos unleashed upon Japan.
Find helpful customer reviews and review ratings for Society Against Itself: Political Correctness and Organizational Self-Destruction at pfmlures.com Read honest and . I. “Silliest internet atheist argument” is a hotly contested title, but I have a special place in my heart for the people who occasionally try to prove Biblical fallibility by pointing out whales are not a type of fish.
Why We Fight: The Psychology of Institutionalized Violence. Mural at St. Peter's Church, Mission District, San Francisco, by Isaís Mata. Presentation, War and Peace Lecture Series. Find helpful customer reviews and review ratings for Society Against Itself: Political Correctness and Organizational Self-Destruction at pfmlures.com Read honest and unbiased product reviews from our users.