Why wasn't the first Star Wars ("A New Hope") simply called "The Star War" if there was only one war going on in the...

Why wasn't the first Star Wars ("A New Hope") simply called "The Star War" if there was only one war going on in the film and no sequels were planned?

why wasnt it called star treks if they went on a lot of treks?

>Why wasn't the first Star Wars ("A New Hope") simply called "The Star War" if there was only one war going on in the film and no sequels were planned?

It was. The Episode IV: A New Hope tag wasn't added until the 1981 re-release following the release of Empire Strikes Back.

It wasn't called "The Star War".

Did you even bother reading the post you quoted?

read again

In spain we were dumb enough to translated as "La guerra de las galaxias", War of Galaxies or Galaxies war even thought it's on the same galaxy

Obi Wan talks about the Clone Wars

It was called Star Wars. And no one expected it to be such a massive success.

If asking for 'X' where X is what Lucas did, then the answer is always Lucas is a hack.

phonaesthetics

>At long last I has become, the Star War

A sequel was always planned, otherwise Vader would have died on the Death Star. What wasn't planned from the beginning were the prequels, but there was always an intent to make sequels if the first one was profitable (apparently it was)

I remember watching the film on TV in the 90's as a child. I swear to god I saw Darth Vader's Tie fighter explode at the end of the movie.

The tie fighter next to his blows up, and the explosion sends Vader's spinning out of control, but he doesn't die

>What is reading comprehension?

One of them is destroyed by Han. The other panics and knocks into Vader, then hits the wall and blows up.

God I hate it when stuff gets translated wrong like that. It's like it was done by some old fuck with no undersanding of space and scifi.

>dug galaxies is space right?

La Guerra de las Galaxias sounds more comfy imo.

Did you know, Lucas almost killed off Vader in the original Star Wars film? He then made that mistake in The Phantom Menace with Darth Maul.

Darth Maul was always meant to die. His character is uninteresting but because he looks badass people were mad that he died.

He died so Lucas could make more villains to sell toys.

>A sequel was always planned, otherwise Vader would have died on the Death Star.
This isn't true at all. There wasn't always a sequel planned, in fact people thought it was going to flop.

Maul Should have been the main henchman of the prequels. In the first one he didnt say much but there was the possibility for developement. In the end anakin would have killed him in anger and making him turn dark

The character's only uninteresting because they gave him about 2 or 3 lines in the first movie and then killed him. He was a big part of the marketing for Ep1 and had potential to become a real character.

La guerra de las estrellas sounds equally dumb, if not moreso. Before "A New Hope" gained traction here in Germany, we referred to it as "Krieg der Sterne" - War of the stars. So... American Gladiator Celebrity Edition.

Would have been better than Cunt Dookie. What a total waste of Chrisopher Lee. At least with Maul we would have gotten some sw33t acrobatics.

He never did. I've got the 1994 THX VHS here to prove it.

This.
Also this.

Dooku was boring and Grievous just wierd. I hated how Grievous didnt have any backstory, he just pops up at the beginning of ROTS and just is a bad guy. Dooku at least was a jedi and had some sort of history with the council.
Maul had the best potential tho

The first title for the movie back in 1975 was actually called "Adventures of the Starkiller, Saga I: The Star Wars"

If Star Wars had performed either average at the box office or bombed it would have had a low budget sequel called "Adventures of the Luke Skywalker: Splinter of the Mind's Eye".

>What wasn't planned from the beginning were the prequels
Really? I swear I've read that George had all 6 movies written down but chose not to do the prequel stories first because the special effects he wanted did not exist yet.

Grievous had a backstory in Republic Commando and the Genndy Tartakovsky Clone Wars. Also in the comics.
I knew he was a guy who got augmented after a terrible accident before I got into the theater to see ROTS.
People are furious about the prequels hardly explaining anything on screen, but at the same time, eat up Disney Wars, even though it does the same strategy - Every question you have (like "Why isn't Coruscant the New Republic's capital that gets blown up?" "How come the Resistance is a thing?" "What did any of the Rogue One squaddies do before the movie? Ehy are they important?") is answered in supplemental material.
Apparently. This time, I'm not reading the extra stuff, so I understand the frustration people only watching the movies felt during the prequels. I'm just bewildered that they receive praise for the same money grabbing tactics.

That's what he said in interviews when people kept asking "Why did you insert an 'Episode IV - A New Hope' title card into Star Wars?". He didn't know how exactly they would play out, though.

when you are making a film you should be able to explain stuff without supplements. If not, you have too much shit on the screen

Exactly.
Yet, during the prequels, I was in the loop and "knew" what was happening.
Now I'm out of it, I get frustrated, but everyone else keeps saying how brilliant these new movies are compared to the old ones, which are confusing and ugly to look at.
Even though it's the same tactics being applied.
It's just hypocrisy.