What do you think?
Rate this book
BFI Film Classics
Star Wars
The release of Star Wars in 1977 marked the start of what would become a colossal global franchise. Star Wars remains the second highest-grossing film in the United States, and George Lucas's six-part narrative has grown into something a culture that goes far beyond the films themselves, with tie-in toys, novels, comics, games and DVDs as well as an enthusiastic fan community which creates its own Star Wars fictions. Critical studies of Star Wars have treated it as a cultural phenomenon, or in terms of its special effects, fans and merchandising, or as a film that marked the end of New Hollywood's innovation and the birth of the blockbuster. Will Brooker's illuminating study of the film takes issue with many of these commonly-held ideas about Star Wars. He provides a close analysis of Star Wars as a film, carefully examining its shots, editing, sound design, cinematography and performances. Placing the film in the context of George Lucas's previous work, from his student shorts to his 1970s features, and the diverse influences that shaped his approach, from John Ford to Jean-Luc Godard, Brooker argues that Star Wars is not, as Lucas himself has claimed, a departure from his earlier cinema, but a continuation of his experiments with sound and image. He reveals Lucas's contradictory desires for total order and control, embodied by the Empire, and for the raw energy and creative improvisation of the Rebels. What seemed a simple fairy-tale becomes far more complex when we realise that the director is rooting for both sides; and this tension unsettles the saga as a whole, blurring the boundaries between Empire and Republic, dark side and light side, father and son.In his foreword to this new edition, Will Brooker discusses is how subsequent films in the series, specifically Rogue One (2016) and The Last Jedi (2017), foregrounded and developed the themes of opposition that are at the heart of Star Wars. He shows how Derridean theories of opposites which become undermined and subverted, and which change places are made more clear with hindsight and provide us with a useful lens for looking back at the 1977 Star Wars.
- GenresFilmStar WarsNonfiction
104 pages, Kindle Edition
First published August 18, 2009
5 people are currently reading
206 people want to read
About the author
Will Brooker
27 books13 followersDr. Will Brooker is a writer and academic, Professor of Film and Cultural Studies at Kingston University, England, and an author of several books of cultural studies dealing with elements of modern pop culture and fandom, including Batman, Star Wars and Alice in Wonderland
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews
April 23, 2013
The story of Star Wars, told through an academic lens, brings to focus the challenges the director had, both on a personal and professional level, in bringing his vision to life. Lucas is a director who wants control over everything, which is previous films before Star Wars show. He liked it when machines, objects, and inanimate objects controlled the focus of the camera instead of people.
Mr. Brooker argued his point that Lucas created the very thing he wanted to avoid his whole life, corporate structure. His vision eventually turned into a billion dollar industry in which he controlled for most of his life. Because none of the studios at the time though much of a little story that takes place in space, Lucas managed to keep the licensing rights for everything. Well that turned out to be the smartest move any film director has made on their own idea.
Lucas was a director that wanted complete control over the process of his films, and he didn't like it when his actors, crew, or anything in general went wrong. But ironically enough, on film, he wanted there to be a naturalism to what the audience was watching. He wanted his actors to look comfortable and natural in what they were saying, he was the kind of director who provided very little direction in terms of what to do in front of the screen. He lacked the social skills of being in large crowds, yet he ran some of the most sophisticated film crews around, which require talking to hundreds of people all the time. His ability to balance on this was great but getting people to follow it was what bothered him the most.
It was interesting to note that when he went on to make the prequels, there was more control over everything and ironically enough, the formality of order became present in both the republic and empire itself, whereas, the films from before had opposing sides. So it goes to show that when he has totally control over everything, he prefers order to chaos. You can see this again when he completes gets rid of working with physical actors and moves towards complete CGI when he created The Clone Wars series.
It was interesting to note that, in Lucas's mind, the only way a director has complete control over his films is when he edits them himself. This was something he learned how to do in college and become very good at it. But what was very interesting that the author pointed out was that Lucas would take scenes from war movies and repeat the very same scenes literally for the dog-fight scenes in space, giving him this control over what he wanted audiences to see.
This book was a pleasure to read and because it shed light on so many of the conflicting styles of his directing abilities, I can see the true structure to how the film and industry was put together, from the pre-Star Wars Films to his present films today.
Mr. Brooker argued his point that Lucas created the very thing he wanted to avoid his whole life, corporate structure. His vision eventually turned into a billion dollar industry in which he controlled for most of his life. Because none of the studios at the time though much of a little story that takes place in space, Lucas managed to keep the licensing rights for everything. Well that turned out to be the smartest move any film director has made on their own idea.
Lucas was a director that wanted complete control over the process of his films, and he didn't like it when his actors, crew, or anything in general went wrong. But ironically enough, on film, he wanted there to be a naturalism to what the audience was watching. He wanted his actors to look comfortable and natural in what they were saying, he was the kind of director who provided very little direction in terms of what to do in front of the screen. He lacked the social skills of being in large crowds, yet he ran some of the most sophisticated film crews around, which require talking to hundreds of people all the time. His ability to balance on this was great but getting people to follow it was what bothered him the most.
It was interesting to note that when he went on to make the prequels, there was more control over everything and ironically enough, the formality of order became present in both the republic and empire itself, whereas, the films from before had opposing sides. So it goes to show that when he has totally control over everything, he prefers order to chaos. You can see this again when he completes gets rid of working with physical actors and moves towards complete CGI when he created The Clone Wars series.
It was interesting to note that, in Lucas's mind, the only way a director has complete control over his films is when he edits them himself. This was something he learned how to do in college and become very good at it. But what was very interesting that the author pointed out was that Lucas would take scenes from war movies and repeat the very same scenes literally for the dog-fight scenes in space, giving him this control over what he wanted audiences to see.
This book was a pleasure to read and because it shed light on so many of the conflicting styles of his directing abilities, I can see the true structure to how the film and industry was put together, from the pre-Star Wars Films to his present films today.
October 8, 2009
A through analysis of Star Wars from an academic standpoint (something sorely lacking in terms of Lucas's film). While much of the writing about Star Wars over the past 3o years has discussed its revolutionary special effects of its blockbuster status, Brooker analyzes Star Wars in terms of what it was for George Lucas the auteur director. In his early career, Lucas longed to be a maverick, separate from Hollywood and in control of his own projects. His first two experiences with the Hollywood system (THX-1138 and American Graffiti) left Lucas with a soured perspective of Hollywood. He began Star Wars by attempting to fashion a troupe of talented people all working together to create something that would out-do Hollywood at its own game. However, Brooker traces that in doing so, and so fiercely attempting to retain his control, Lucas's desire to create band of rebels gradually turns him into the empire itself as he must reign over and control an unruly cast, crew and special effects department. Brooker also examines Lucas's fascination with objects rather than people and demonstrates that Lucas, like the empire, prefers things that are cold and impersonal, less human, but longs for the wild improvisational spirit of creativity found in the rebels. Brooker's book demonstrates that Star Wars is a much more complex film that originally gleaned by demonstrating that Lucas, as the writer/director/editor, is identifying with both sides and while the narrative the film demonstrates a clear victory of the film, Lucas's direction does not reveal such a clear cut winner.
May 11, 2021
At a certain point, if you're a Star Wars fan, it can feel like you've read it all in regards to the franchise's production and any insights into George Lucas. This short, punchy book actually presents a well-thought-out argument that I haven't seen discussed much anywhere else: Lucas was perfect for making this movie because he identified with both the Empire and the Rebels.
Brooker lays out the argument in an easy-to-follow academic language that's not too dry but clearly shows he knows what he's talking about. A fun surprise of a book.
Brooker lays out the argument in an easy-to-follow academic language that's not too dry but clearly shows he knows what he's talking about. A fun surprise of a book.
November 10, 2014
This is actually a really fascinating read on the original Star Wars movie (1977). Brooker makes a very strong case that the movie, far from reflecting a simplistic conflict between good and evil, actually "reveals [George] Lucas's contradictory desires for total order and control, embodied by the Empire, and for the raw energy and creative improvisation of the Rebels." Relevant both toward interpreting the ethos of the Star Wars saga, but also of our own world and psyches, where absolutes often rule.
February 6, 2017
A short book with a punchy argument: in the battle between Empire and Alliance - also figured as between creative but dirty mess and effective but repressive order - Lucas is actually on both sides. He, and so also sometimes the viewer, is attracted to the clean tidiness and control of the Empire even while we hate it, and upset by the disruptive energy of the Rebel Alliance even while we also love these characters. Brooker frames this as an analysis of the film, and it works well, but I wonder how it also plays out in e.g. merchandise design.
January 27, 2018
3/5 Stars
I read this for my science-fiction cinema class, and it was interesting. I'm not really into science-fiction, so it wasn't like, life-changing or anything, but I did enjoy getting a new perspective on Star Wars and on George Lucas. I think the bits about Lucas were what I found the most interesting. I had no idea he was such a not people person, and I think how that aspect of his personality contributed to the film was very eye opening.
I read this for my science-fiction cinema class, and it was interesting. I'm not really into science-fiction, so it wasn't like, life-changing or anything, but I did enjoy getting a new perspective on Star Wars and on George Lucas. I think the bits about Lucas were what I found the most interesting. I had no idea he was such a not people person, and I think how that aspect of his personality contributed to the film was very eye opening.
June 10, 2014
Very good. Academic. Especially strong on the connections in the film that reveal a personal authorship from Lucas. That is, the dichotomy of the clean, black and white, controlled empire and dirty, improvisational, earth tones of the rebels act as reflections of Lucas. Also liked the implications of rebels becoming too much like the empire.
February 25, 2018
Great analysis of the original Star Wars film, bringing new perspectives to even this nerf-herding Star Wars fan.
November 12, 2018
I was super-excited to find out that my library carries the BFI series and, of course, I had to start with Star Wars. Return of the Jedi was the first film (after Superman) which I remember getting a VHS cassette for. I still have that cassette though it hardly works. I loved the magic (sorry, the Force) which helped Luke do amazing feats and beat the bad-guys, I loved the romance between Leia and Han and I even loved the cute Ewoks (hey, I was a child). This movie franchise holds a special place in my heart so I was super interested in reading this long-form essay about the film.
Per the description from the book itself, these series are:
The BFI Film Classics is a series of books that introduces, interprets and celebrates landmarks of world cinema. Each volume offers an argument for the film’s ‘classic’ status, together with discussion of its production and reception history, its place within a genre or national cinema, an account of its technical and aesthetic importance, and in many cases, the author’s personal response to the film.
This book, written in 2009; is about the movie Star Wars before it became a New Hope. I’ve been so conditioned to think of it as the first in a series that going back to consider it as a standalone movie is an interesting premise. For all the retrospective vilification of George Lucas, the release of this movie in 1977 would have been a seismic event that we cannot fully imagine now.
The book is 83 pages long - so more of an essay than book. The premise of the book is that Star Wars as a movie in the context of the work of George Lucas as it existed when the movie was released. There is a hypothesis that, despite the later retcon of the Star Wars narrative, Star Wars does not represent a radical departure from Lucas' earlier work but "continues the experiments with sound and image that he began as a student … and continued through his first two features...".
The book will be useful for non-fans as well as the discussion of the film-making discussion and how the movie's editing, sound and visuals combine to tell the story that Lucas was intending was very interesting. It talks about the conflict and contradiction in the film which wants to love the Rebels but admires the efficiency of the Empire. It also talks at length about Lucas as a film maker, his preoccupations, his focus on editing and objects over people and dialogue (which explains a lot about the Prequel Trilogy) and his desire for control over all aspects of the movie making process.
There were lots of sections which I ended up tabbing as they were insightful or articulated things I had felt when looking at the movie. I won't repeat all of them as I will likely end up repeating the entire book. For an interesting exploration of a seminal film and a director who was innovating on what movies could be this is a short, insightful introduction. Highly recommended.
Per the description from the book itself, these series are:
The BFI Film Classics is a series of books that introduces, interprets and celebrates landmarks of world cinema. Each volume offers an argument for the film’s ‘classic’ status, together with discussion of its production and reception history, its place within a genre or national cinema, an account of its technical and aesthetic importance, and in many cases, the author’s personal response to the film.
This book, written in 2009; is about the movie Star Wars before it became a New Hope. I’ve been so conditioned to think of it as the first in a series that going back to consider it as a standalone movie is an interesting premise. For all the retrospective vilification of George Lucas, the release of this movie in 1977 would have been a seismic event that we cannot fully imagine now.
The book is 83 pages long - so more of an essay than book. The premise of the book is that Star Wars as a movie in the context of the work of George Lucas as it existed when the movie was released. There is a hypothesis that, despite the later retcon of the Star Wars narrative, Star Wars does not represent a radical departure from Lucas' earlier work but "continues the experiments with sound and image that he began as a student … and continued through his first two features...".
The book will be useful for non-fans as well as the discussion of the film-making discussion and how the movie's editing, sound and visuals combine to tell the story that Lucas was intending was very interesting. It talks about the conflict and contradiction in the film which wants to love the Rebels but admires the efficiency of the Empire. It also talks at length about Lucas as a film maker, his preoccupations, his focus on editing and objects over people and dialogue (which explains a lot about the Prequel Trilogy) and his desire for control over all aspects of the movie making process.
There were lots of sections which I ended up tabbing as they were insightful or articulated things I had felt when looking at the movie. I won't repeat all of them as I will likely end up repeating the entire book. For an interesting exploration of a seminal film and a director who was innovating on what movies could be this is a short, insightful introduction. Highly recommended.
March 13, 2025
Definitely a 4.5 star. it makes me want to re-watch Star Wars and look at it more critically (don't forget ": A New Hope" in the title, Mr. Brooker!!) again with my 2nd grader, who absolutely loves all the Star Wars films. And it really made me appreciate the artistry (a word that doesn't get bandied about much with George Lucas films) of these first 3 films (especially the first two), and how much thought went into them. And having just watched all 9 recently...these really do have a magic to them the others don't catch. It's not just nostalgia. And it's interesting to compare them to the other 2 sets of film--there's really no comparison (although I enjoy the last set, even bloated #9--I find #1 and #2 of the first set almost unwatchable).
Brooker did a great job looking at Lucas's early work and inspirations, as well as how he handled the differences between the order of the Empire versus the scruffiness of the Rebels. It was extensively footnoted with some great use of pictures supporting the claims he was making. This is my first exposure to this little BFI film critique books, but so far, big fan! This was a worthy entry in the series.
Brooker did a great job looking at Lucas's early work and inspirations, as well as how he handled the differences between the order of the Empire versus the scruffiness of the Rebels. It was extensively footnoted with some great use of pictures supporting the claims he was making. This is my first exposure to this little BFI film critique books, but so far, big fan! This was a worthy entry in the series.
January 9, 2021
Interesting addition to the BFI collection...
It states that it wants to examine the film as it was in 1977 and not as the behemoth it became; to examine it as a film, rather than the phenomenon. I understand why this approach is being taken, and why it is required...but I'm not convinced this book actually achieves that. It talks a lot about Lucas, his background in experimental film making and obsession with editing, but it doesn't really analyse the film itself in the stated manner. You get a good insight into what it was like for the main actors on set, and who Lucas' influences were...but all I'm left with is the feeling that Lucas was essentially pretty lucky and then failed to control what he created.
American Graffiti is still pretty awesome though...
It states that it wants to examine the film as it was in 1977 and not as the behemoth it became; to examine it as a film, rather than the phenomenon. I understand why this approach is being taken, and why it is required...but I'm not convinced this book actually achieves that. It talks a lot about Lucas, his background in experimental film making and obsession with editing, but it doesn't really analyse the film itself in the stated manner. You get a good insight into what it was like for the main actors on set, and who Lucas' influences were...but all I'm left with is the feeling that Lucas was essentially pretty lucky and then failed to control what he created.
American Graffiti is still pretty awesome though...
October 14, 2022
This is an interesting book analyzing "Star Wars" in the context of being George Lucas's third film. After a series of experimental student films while at USC, George Lucas made the very cold, distant, technology favored film "THX-1138" and the warm, improvisational "American Graffiti." The author posits "Star Wars" is the blend of the two films, and that the cold, ordered themes of THX and the freewheeling, rebellious style of AG are embodied in Lucas himself. The films are aspects of his personality, and the whole Star Wars saga which comes after is an examination of how the two co-exist or come into conflict. The whole Empire versus the Rebels is a passion play of Lucas's two personality traits, with Luke Skywalker serving as a proxy who spends three movies wavering between the two.
June 20, 2024
I love Star Wars and film studies, so this was definitely up my alley. As the author points out, there is certainly a lack of texts on Star Wars from a film studies perspective, despite it being one of the most over-discussed topics to date. While I do not agree with all of the conclusions in this book (I’m a big fan of the Star Wars prequels, personally), I think this analysis of the original Star Wars film is a welcome one. It’s certainly nice to feel like there are still new ways to think about these films when, in becoming one of the biggest and unavoidable IPs in almost every form of media, it is a bit more difficult to remember how much meaning and power George Lucas’ original can still have.
May 27, 2017
I've had this book for years and decided that the 40th anniversary of Star Wars felt like a good time to finally get to it. Over the decades, I've read a lot of behind-the-scenes and "making of" books about Star Wars. I thought I would mix it up with a little film critique this time. In most sections, there was a little too much emphasis and attention given to Lucas's earlier works / art films and their influence on the movie; but, overall, I really enjoyed this brief analysis of the film. Many of the thematic insights gave me a new perspective that will definitely color future viewings.
July 24, 2023
:Speaking on the verge of tears:
Mom, mom, pick me up, I'm scared, my friends pointed out obvious flaws in Star Wars and I don't know what to do :(( I'll write a book how everything is "direct hommage" (mom it's not stealing mom don't say that) and and and how everything is planned in advance and everything is part of bigger plan and and and everything in Star Wars is for grown ups but also for kids trust me, I'm not delusional
Would not reccomend; seeing Star Wars characterized as avant-garde (as well as "into the garbage chute, flyboy" being quoted more than once) made me want to gouge my eyes out
Mom, mom, pick me up, I'm scared, my friends pointed out obvious flaws in Star Wars and I don't know what to do :(( I'll write a book how everything is "direct hommage" (mom it's not stealing mom don't say that) and and and how everything is planned in advance and everything is part of bigger plan and and and everything in Star Wars is for grown ups but also for kids trust me, I'm not delusional
Would not reccomend; seeing Star Wars characterized as avant-garde (as well as "into the garbage chute, flyboy" being quoted more than once) made me want to gouge my eyes out
January 11, 2021
Doing my hardest to really pursue film studies and film writing this year, so it's time to study the films I love so much! I enjoyed Brooker's analysis of the film as well as its creator George Lucas. I found his insights into the cyclical nature of the star wars universe to be very insightful and brought a concrete description of why the conflict in the prequels feels so stunted to me. I'm lowering a star because I seriously felt the organization of the book left something to be desired, but I really loved reading this history and analysis!
December 23, 2017
A critique of the film that changed how sci-fi films were made. Discusses the themes employed by Lucas in Star Wars. Very interesting.
Read
December 18, 2020not rating any of the star wars books I read for research bc they would inevitably all just get 5 stars
November 21, 2025
Everything you always wanted to know about the making of the first Star Wars movie, released in 1977 and it's relationship to other movies by George Lucas.
August 21, 2021
The story of Star Wars, told through an academic lens, brings to focus the challenges the director had, both on a personal and professional level, in bringing his vision to life. Lucas was a director that wanted complete control over the process of his films, and he didn't like it when his actors, crew, or anything, in general, went wrong. But ironically enough, on film, he wanted there to be a naturalism to what the audience was watching. He wanted his actors to look comfortable and natural in what they were saying. He was the kind of director who provided minimal direction in terms of what to do in front of the screen. He lacked the social skills of being in large crowds, yet he ran some of the most sophisticated film crews around, which require talking to hundreds of people all the time. His ability to balance on this was great but getting people to follow. It was what bothered him the most.
A thorough analysis of Star Wars from an academic standpoint (something sorely lacking in Lucas's film). While much of the writing about Star Wars over the past 3o years has discussed the revolutionary special effects of its blockbuster status, Brooker analyzes Star Wars in terms of what it was for George Lucas, the auteur director. Lucas longed to be a maverick in his early career, separate from Hollywood and in control of his own projects. His first two experiences with the Hollywood system (THX-1138 and American Graffiti) left Lucas with a soured perspective of Hollywood. He began Star Wars by attempting to fashion a troupe of talented people working together to create something that would out-do Hollywood at its own game. However, Brooker traces that in doing so, and so fiercely attempting to retain his control, Lucas's desire to create a band of rebels gradually turns him into the empire itself as he must reign over and control an unruly cast, crew and special effects department. Brooker also examines Lucas's fascination with objects rather than people and demonstrates that Lucas, like the empire, prefers cold and impersonal, less human, but longs for the wild improvisational spirit of creativity found in the rebels. Brooker's book demonstrates that Star Wars is a much more complex film that originally gleaned by demonstrating that Lucas, as the writer/director/editor, identifies with both sides. While the film's narrative demonstrates a clear victory of the film, Lucas's direction does not reveal such a clear cut winner.
A short book with a punchy argument: in the battle between Empire and Alliance - also figured as between creative but dirty mess and effective but repressive order - Lucas is actually on both sides. He, and so also the viewer, is attracted to the clean tidiness and control of the Empire even while we hate it and upset by the disruptive energy of the Rebel Alliance even while we also love these characters. Overall, this book was a pleasure to read. Because it shed light on so many of the conflicting styles of his directing abilities, I can see the true structure to how the film and industry were put together, from the pre-Star Wars Films to his present films today.
A thorough analysis of Star Wars from an academic standpoint (something sorely lacking in Lucas's film). While much of the writing about Star Wars over the past 3o years has discussed the revolutionary special effects of its blockbuster status, Brooker analyzes Star Wars in terms of what it was for George Lucas, the auteur director. Lucas longed to be a maverick in his early career, separate from Hollywood and in control of his own projects. His first two experiences with the Hollywood system (THX-1138 and American Graffiti) left Lucas with a soured perspective of Hollywood. He began Star Wars by attempting to fashion a troupe of talented people working together to create something that would out-do Hollywood at its own game. However, Brooker traces that in doing so, and so fiercely attempting to retain his control, Lucas's desire to create a band of rebels gradually turns him into the empire itself as he must reign over and control an unruly cast, crew and special effects department. Brooker also examines Lucas's fascination with objects rather than people and demonstrates that Lucas, like the empire, prefers cold and impersonal, less human, but longs for the wild improvisational spirit of creativity found in the rebels. Brooker's book demonstrates that Star Wars is a much more complex film that originally gleaned by demonstrating that Lucas, as the writer/director/editor, identifies with both sides. While the film's narrative demonstrates a clear victory of the film, Lucas's direction does not reveal such a clear cut winner.
A short book with a punchy argument: in the battle between Empire and Alliance - also figured as between creative but dirty mess and effective but repressive order - Lucas is actually on both sides. He, and so also the viewer, is attracted to the clean tidiness and control of the Empire even while we hate it and upset by the disruptive energy of the Rebel Alliance even while we also love these characters. Overall, this book was a pleasure to read. Because it shed light on so many of the conflicting styles of his directing abilities, I can see the true structure to how the film and industry were put together, from the pre-Star Wars Films to his present films today.
January 8, 2016
While Brooker's main argument (that Lucas roots for both sides--the Empire and the Rebellion) is very compelling, this book should have been edited into a shorter essay instead. I would have liked to see more discussion of the prequel trilogy, especially some discussion on jar jar binks/other aliens instead of just the humans(ish).
March 27, 2012
Excellent analysis of Lucas's filmography, methods, and techniques, and an intriguing comparison of how the Empire and the Alliance are visually distinguished. My favorite part of this book, however, is how it academically justifies my intense dislike of the prequels.
October 14, 2012
Brooker gives a very competent dissection of the original film text in and of itself. He offers novel insights into the process behind the aesthetics and themes of the original trilogy, rooted in the Lucas' experience as an auteur. Must-read for serious students of film culture.
March 4, 2014
This is fantastic for anyone who wants to understand the influences for the movie and learn more about film. This does not deal with any reporting of life on set etc. I very much enjoyed reading this.
July 18, 2017
One of the better books in the various BFI series. Melds history and form well.
March 26, 2017
read once a critique of Star Wars, that claimed dismissively 'it is a perfect film for twelve-year old boys', and remember when i first saw it i was twelve years-old and... it was the perfect film!
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews