EW, Harrison Ford, and Han Solo

[shipperx]

From EW.com:

It turns out that Luke Skywalker, Princess Leia, and Han Solo’s involvement in Star Wars: Episode VII was never really a question.

As Darth Vader might put it: It was their dessss-tah-nee.

Details of J.J. Abrams’ new film are scarce as shooting gets underway, but as I headed up the hunt for EW, sources within the Death Star noted that although fans are rejoicing over the new cast featuring original trilogy stars Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, and (most surprisingly) Harrison Ford, their participation has actually been one of the few guarantees ever since Disney bought Lucasfilm and announced the new slate of films in 2012. {...}

A long time ago (a windblown spring afternoon in 2008), not so far, far away from the galactic urban sprawl of Los Angeles, Harrison Ford hiked to the top of a rocky trail overlooking the Pacific Ocean and threw Han Solo off a cliff. We were on a trek through the woods as part of an interview about Indiana Jones, a character he cherishes as much as any fan. But whenever the conversation turned to his other cinematic rogue, Ford’s crooked smile tended to bend south and be punctuated with an eyeball roll. “He’s dumb as a stump,” the actor groaned.

For a kid who grew up on Star Wars, who grew up specifically loving Han Solo, the galactic wiseass, the man who made the Kessel Run in 12 parsecs, this was a gasping betrayal – even though for over 30 years, the actor, now 71, has made no secret of his disdain. {...}

We galactic diehards always wanted Ford to love Solo the way we loved Solo. So why didn’t he?

“He’s got a good heart, but I think he’s certainly a much less interesting character than Indiana Jones,” Ford told me during that hike in Temescal Canyon. “The breadth of his story utility was never extensive. He was the foil between the other more compelling elements of the film, between the sage old warrior and the young hero. There’s not much breadth of character to explore beyond what we got out of him.”

How could the man who brought Han Solo to life misunderstand Han Solo so completely? Luke is the easy one to figure out – naïve and noble, he longs to venture forth and do the right thing, no questions asked. Leia is another born hero, brave and ready to show up those who underestimate her. Han Solo …? He’s not so sure he wants to be with the good guys. Good guys get stomped on by the Empire. You know who survives? The one who shoots first.

Han Solo’s enduring appeal stems back to that part in every one of us that feels a tug of selfishness that’s as strong as the tug of selflessness. He’s every malcontent, every loser, every smartass who was told by someone they weren’t good enough, and believed it. Luke Skywalker was born to attack the Death Star, but Han Solo flies back into that battle by choice. We love him because he’s not one of the good guys. He’s just good enough. {...} cont'd

Full Article Here

Comments

[cindergal.livejournal.com]

Yes, Han definitely sparked my love for the anti-hero, which continues to this day. It's kind of disturbing that Ford doesn't get that. But at least he's back!

[eilowyn.livejournal.com]

Even as a kid I never got what the big deal about Luke Skywalker was. I grew up in an era where "Luke, I am your father" was one of the great line in cinema history, and there was no mystery. I think I fell in love with Han when the DVDs first came out and I had a major crush on a Han Solo stan at the time. So my love of anti-heroes doesn't originate with him, but it does guarantee I'll like him more than the straight up hero.

Now, why my film class considers Blade Runner the beginning of the globalized blockbuster and not Episode IV, I will never know, but now I have to write a paper on it. Which I should be doing right now.

[wildrider.livejournal.com]

I always remember the exchange with Greedo in the Cantina version in the book, where as Han swaggers out, the bartender pockets his money and thinks how dumb Greedo was to "let Han Solo put his hands under the table."

I was just under 13 when I first saw Star Wars (I will NEVER cave to the episodic BS), and fell in pre-teen adoration with Luke. Well before Empire Strikes Back came out, I had moved firmly to Han, where I stayed. (Loved the old Brian Daley series of Han Solo books.)

Certainly, Han Solo isn't the professorial type that Indy is, but he's more than a "scoundrel with a heart of gold." He's much more complex than that, I think.

I'm glad Ford decided to come back and give him voice again. :)

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

I actually didn't have favorites. Loved both Han and Luke as a kid.

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

I was pre-K or Kindergarten when the original came out (I remember being terrified of the poster and my sister assuring me that I WOULD like it. I think by that point in life I had never seen anything but Disney.* {Yeah, I'm that much older than you. :P) I was too small for remotely shippy feelz. However by Return of the Jedi... okay, I always liked them both.



* I blame my "Once" affection on having been rasied on a steady diet of Disney during developmental years.

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I was so small when it came out that I just drank it all in without any thought or preferences at all. I loved them all.

Now, sure looking back... Han is hotter. (I still like Luke too, though. But Han is more fun).

[queenofattolia.livejournal.com]

Actors. They're such clueless a-holes sometimes. So let's get this straight, Harrison: the geriatric, sad Indiana of Crystal Skull is still a better character to you than all of Han Solo?

Bitch, please.

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

Actors. They're such clueless a-holes sometimes. So let's get this straight, Harrison: the geriatric, sad Indiana of Crystal Skull is still a better character to you than all of Han Solo?

Bitch, please.

LOL! I know. I think he was perhaps distracted by "not the 'hero' of Star Wars' to notice that Han is actually a very interesting character.

I like Indy, but I hardly think he's more complicated than Han. In fact, probably less so.