I miss the era of Star Wars clones. That era died off in the 80's.
Message From Space
Star Crash
Battlestar Galactica
Battle Beyond the Stars
The Humanoid
Krull
Starchaser: The Legend of Orin
Last Starfighter
.........
You also have those Italian titles WAR OF THE PLANETS and WAR OF THE ROBOTS.
(http://www.mondo-digital.com/warplanets3.jpg)
I never heard of those films..
I need to check them out!
Here's some info:
WAR OF THE ROBOTS and WAR OF THE PLANETS (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.mondo-digital.com/warplanets4.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.mondo-digital.com/warplanets.html&h=176&w=250&sz=15&tbnid=1OLux8XyqJRUQM:&tbnh=74&tbnw=106&hl=en&start=6&prev=/images%3Fq%3DWAR%2BOF%2BTHE%2BROBOTS%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DG)
How is KRULL a Star Wars clone? Overlap of a few story elements does not a clone make.
How is KRULL a Star Wars clone? Overlap of a few story elements does not a clone make.
Especally one that, dy design, used so many standardized story elements
Would you consider Laserblast (1978) to be a Star Wars knockoff. Considering this movie's director's apparent love/hate relationship with George Lucas as he references Lucas' career no less than twice, and the similar subject of space, destruction, and a youthful boy finding power. In the movie, the main character destroys a Star Wars sign, and one of the bully/geeks is named Froggy, a direct reference to the geek from [American Graffiti (1973) Terry "The Toad" Fields. I guess after that there's not much else. Just a sad kid getting funky skin after finding a laser gun.
I see tons of things ripped off from Star Wars in Krull. Tons.
I'm not sure if you can call a movie a clone just for adopting the same visual style. Sure, Star Wars kicked off the whole look of big, heavily detailed starships and such (and I also miss that style), but I can't see a movie being a ripoff if the story is different.
Star Crash is a wholesale ripoff -- a rogue, a wise guy with powers and a lovable robot rescue a prince, attack a villain named "Zarth" at his space fortress and destroy his super weapon. Wow.
But Battle Beyond the Stars is an adaptation of the Seven Samurai, with a lot of story differences.
Battlestar Galactica certainly borrows a good deal, style-wise, but it's really a different story again.
Krull was more in the vein of the sort of sword-and-sorcery-and-sci-fi quest movies of the time.
And I thought The Last Starfighter was based more on the fantasy of every arcade gamer of the time -- of doing it for real, or at least that the game skills served some useful purpose. It actually differed in style by adopting early CGI. The only similarity, in the end, is that a young man from humble beginnings is hauled off to space to be a galactic hero. That story, whether in space or not, is old, old, old. It could easily have been chosen without any influence from Star Wars.
I'm not as familiar with the others.
I agree that SF movies of the late 70s/early 80s owe a lot to Star Wars stylistically (for that matter, we could add the Alien films and some of their imitators, and the early Star Trek movies) but I just don't see them all being clones. And I do agree with other posters who have noted that what similarities in story there are could be due to the fact that Lucas, by his own admission, engineered his movie to be a classic story by using a lot of elements common to legends from around the world and throughout history. Lucas very skillfully synthesized the stories everybody had been borrowing from as long as there have been stories. Hard to say who is borrowing from him directly.
But I think it's safe to say that Star Crash set out to be a ripoff.
I see tons of things ripped off from Star Wars in Krull. Tons.
Okay, be specific. That's a mighty big claim. Like Andy, said, Lucas borrowed from classic stories, so is STAR WARS a clone of those stories?
KRULL is not particularly original story, but it borrows much more heavily from other sources besides STAR WARS. To be a clone, I think you'd pretty much have to copy ONE movie is very specific ways (like those Andy mentioned for STAR CRASH).
Some key story differences (there are, of course, others):
* STAR WARS did not have a cyclops.
* STAR WARS did not have flying horses, giant spiders, etc.
* KRULL did not involve one single dog fight in space.
* KRULL did not involve an organized army of rebels; the group in KRULL was a haphazard mix that formed as they traveled on their journey.
* Colwyn knew he was the son of royalty and had not only the desire, but the duty as well, to rescue Lyssa; Colwyn and Lyssa already knew each other. Luke had none of these things. He got dragged into his quest by Obi Wan's manipulation (Luke could have stayed to continue his uncle's farm, but Obi Wan needed a youngster to get him to Mos Eisley, etc. There was NO HINT at that time that Luke was Vader's son, even in Obi Wan's character). Luke wanted off Tatooine, but he initially felt no compulsion to rescue Leia.
Some similarities:
* They both have a special weapon the main character uses (sorta; Luke does not really use the light sabre in STAR WARS, except for practice), just like a WHOLE LOT of other movies.
* They both have an older guy 'guiding' a younger, idealistic guy, just like a WHOLE LOT of other movies.
* They both involve the kidnapping of the male lead's girl to drive the main character's actions, just like a WHOLE LOT of other movies.
Etc.
It seems to me that each of those similarities can be traced at LEAST as far back as Greek Mythology; they were common story elements for over 2000 years before George Lucas was even born.
I dunno dude. It's like that weak argument that Battlestar Galactica (1970's) wasn't ripping off from Star Wars...
That giant Cyclops was another Chewbacca, that magician was R2 and C3PO rolled up in one, that head theif had the attitude of Han Solo, the enemy soldiers were more-or-less Stormtroopers, you have the damsel in distress, the lightsabre- er, Glaive, the wise old guide, the infiltration and destruction of the enemy fortress, the quest, swashbuckling lasergun chivalry, fairytale themes, the destruction of the hero's home and family, the dark and forboding evil leader...
You can try to tie these into classical and mythic themes, but if this movie was released in- say, 1975, you might have a valid argument.
Anyone think that the producers of this film weren't trying to jump on the Star Wars bandwagon, I have news for you..
What's more, George Lucas took these mythic and classic themes and made them seem original, Krull is just a slightly different spin (albeit cliched) on the formula that has been come to known as the Star Wars formula.
Uh, I don't know how you can say that these aforementioned movies don't owe a lot to Star Wars. Let's put it this way, while some of them aren't a note-for-note remake of Star Wars, if it wasn't for Lucas, I'll bet you a dollar to a donut that these movies wouldn't exsist..
Bzzzzzt, you lose. Be saying if the SAME movie was made prior to SW release it is not a SW clone (and I note here, again, that you said CLONE, which implies more similarity than the LEAP that cyclops=Chewie, etc), you defeat your own arguement. How can that SAME movie be a clone, just because it was release after? It was either based on SW or not. It was either based on older ideas or not.
The story elements are the story elements. Basically, what you are trying to assert is that SW reset the clock, and made ALL subsequent use of time-honored, familiar story elements and plot devices STAR WARS rip-offs, rather than McBeth rips, or Hamlet rips, or Hercules rips, or etc etc ad nauseum.
What about The Land That Time Forgot? Was that a SW rip-off? Hmmm, Tyler was kinda like Han Solo in that one, and the Germans were like Stormtroopers. Oh yeah, and the dinosaurs at the end were symbolic of rebellion as a natural force pre-ordained to crush the empire (ie, the Germans thought they were all-powerful, until the meet the might of the thunder lizards).
Oh wait, TLTTF came out BEFORE SW, so I guess my reaching analysis fails.
IMO, as was pointed out above by others, SW was NOT in any way, shape or form a NEW story. Even setting those story ideas in space was not new. What made SW new was the fx and the technical elements of the film. The look and feel are what set it apart. (Part of the reason SW was popular with the KIDS of 1977, and less so adults at the time, is because to kids the story did seem new; to the adults of the time, it was old stuff they'd read about 30 years ago in school, back when education meant something).
I lose?! Is this some kind of contest?
I'm saying it wouldn't be a clone of Star Wars if it came out before Star Wars. Star Wars would be a clone of Krull if it came after.
Nice try..
I can't believe you are defending Krull...
As labored as your argument is..
Lol..
Uh, Stormtroopers/Empire was fashioned after the Nazis..
Sorry to burst your bubble, Nazis aren't mutually exclusive to The Land That Time Forgot.
Actually, I never said they didn't owe a lot to Star Wars. In fact, I said more than once that they do. Star Wars proved there was a market, Star Wars introduced new special effects technology, and Star Wars introduced a new look for sci-fi. Of course other movies would follow in that climate. That doesn't make them knock-offs.
Alan Smithee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I lose?! Is this some kind of contest?
Figure of speech. Colloquialism. Slang.
It's not so much that I am defending KRULL as I am rejecting your thesis that KRULL (and others) is a "clone" of Star Wars. The whole basis of my point so far has two components:
(1) STAR WARS was not an original story but borrowed heavily from long-known story elements
and
(2) LOTS of movies, both before and after STAR WARS, used those same story elements.
Therefore, it is incorrect to claim that those "other" movies are "clones," "rip-offs", etc, of STAR WARS just because they share some of the same age-old story elements. Your "clone" assertion is based on story similarities and release date (ie, after SW), which might hold up if the ideas were original to STAR WARS.
Just my opinion...
Has anyone seen the film Alexander Nevsky (1938) (http://imdb.com/title/tt0029850/)? In this film you will see a few very important image ideas Lucas uses in Star Wars.
(http://www.dehullu.net/fiepke/project2005/aleksandr1.jpg)
If you mix the film Lost Horizon (http://imdb.com/title/tt0029162/) and Alexander Nevsky (http://imdb.com/title/tt0029850/) you will see Conan the Barbarian.
I don't think anyone's mentioned Metalstorm: The Destruction of Jarod Syn.
This one not only owes a lot to Star Wars, but also borrows heavily from Mad Max.
i feel like it's worth noting that even if "message from space" was a rip-off, it's a really good b-movie, and that the following star wars flicks stole elements from it afterwards.
Which brings up an interesting question.
If it's better than the original, is it still a clone? I'm not saying Krull was better. Not even close. There are those that argue that the Magnificent Seven was better than the Seven Samurai, or Fist Full of Dollars was better than Yojimbo, despite the fact that it was almost a scene for scene reshoot, with only a change of genre (from samurai epic to western) to distinguish it.
We could get into a whole debate about the distinction between a knock-off and an adaptation or reinterpretation of a story. If your story is supposed to be Yojimbo in an old west setting or The Tempest in space, is it a knock-off?
I think Shakespeare rolled in his grave when they made Forbidden Planet. Leslie Neilsen as a romantic lead. How the mighty have fallen...
Hey, Leslie Neilsen was quite a hunk in his day. For that matter, Forbidden Planet was ahead of its time, and still holds up better than most of its contemporaries.
Forbidden Planet is also interesting in a discussion of ripoffs, because while it was an SF movie adapted from Shakespeare, it's SF elements, as well as some characters, elements of the setting and large chunks of the story, were pretty thoroughly ripped off by Gene Roddenberry in creating his pilot for Star Trek.
Now that you point out the plot similarities, I can't believe I didn't see them before....