Did Alec Guinness see Star Wars Episode I before he passed away? anyone know if he did

Joined
May 3, 2015
Messages
76
Reaction score
0
or not? because Alec Guinness passed away in the year 2000, so a year after Episode I came out, i'm curious to know if he saw it or not, or if his health was already in bad condition that prevented him from being able to watch a movie. Just wondering if he would have had the curiosity to see a film in which an actor portrayed his younger version of his character Obi-Wan Kenobi.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
5,610
Reaction score
62
I seem to remember he wrote a book in 1999.. so his mind was still sharp until the end. he died of liver cancer, I was under the impression that it was a late-stage diagnosis, so he wasn't aware he was sick very long until the end. I'm sure he would have been of able mind-and-body in may1999, enough to see the movie, (as the movie was released 15 months before he died).

whether he chose to see it or not, is another matter ;) (I'd like to imagine that he died blissfully unaware of jar jar binks, but I think the odds are against this). :/
 
Last edited:

GNT

Moderator
Joined
May 18, 2000
Messages
70,336
Reaction score
30
Location
Australia
"What is this dribble" is probably what he would've said if he saw it.
 
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
9,054
Reaction score
45
Location
Hartselle,AL
Yeah, I am probably going to have to agree with that statement. Even McGregor though the film was flat.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Messages
7,519
Reaction score
38
Sir Alec would have rather been remembered for his comedies(which most people in the US have never seen)...so yes, meesa thinking he would have loved Jar Jar Binks.
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
1,121
Reaction score
1
Location
Australia
If he was invited to a special screening he may have seen it. But being on death's door that year, I really doubt he would have bothered.
 
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
9,054
Reaction score
45
Location
Hartselle,AL
I am going to say he didn't give a sith about Episode 1. I will say that Mcgregor Did a good job as the younger Obi-wan in AOTC and ROTS. Really looks like a younger Alec Guinness.
 
Joined
Apr 20, 2017
Messages
998
Reaction score
0
Location
Jedi Praxeum
What does it matter what he thought about it?

If he hadn't played Obi Wan, none of us would know who he is.

Same with Harrison. :{h
 
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Messages
1,151
Reaction score
18
Location
Edinburg Texas
From what I read .. He wasn't even happy or fond of the star wars he made. I think he regretted ever making the movies. The only thing good that came of it is that he signed for a % instead of a salary.. And from what he said in a interview.. He made more money than all of his previous movies combined. I think his Estate still gets a residuals based that he took the % vs. a salary / paycheck.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 31, 2011
Messages
1,040
Reaction score
7
^^^ LOL

If it’s true he did experience TPM, it must have been insulting for Alec to have sit through...

And I adore TPM— but it was an awful bore and a hot mess of incompetent storytelling. (I may even adore it even more so these days when compared to this beyond-of-a-corporate-mess Sequel.)

Can’t say the same for Ewan and Natalie tho… It’s clear they were excited going in initially. Once TPM came out, they were just going through the motions politely and mechanically since they were contracted to the remainder of the films. The only actor that put his all into the films was poor doomed Hayden (as awful as an output as it may have been).

Funnily, this is exactly how it was for the OT-trinity as well: Carrie and Harrison were clearly too cool for SW and only going through the motion by ROTJ, while Mark-- the Hollywood outsider, was putting his all into every single scene. Of course, the difference here being that Mark’s Luke was a solid character and Mark gave a strong performance compared to poor Hayden’s mess of a performance.
 
Joined
Jun 13, 2013
Messages
1,097
Reaction score
4
What does it matter what he thought about it?

If he hadn't played Obi Wan, none of us would know who he is.

:{h
Bite your tongue, He was the butler from Murder by Death!!!!!!

Seriously I don't think he actually saw it, He didn't have fond memories of Star Wars, but then again everything he said in ANH was a Lie!!!!!
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
5,610
Reaction score
62
From what I read .. He wasn't even happy or fond of the star wars he made. I think he regretted ever making the movies. The only thing good that came of it is that he signed for a % instead of a salary.. And from what he said in a interview.. He made more money than all of his previous movies combined. I think his Estate still gets a residuals based that he took the % vs. a salary / paycheck.
the profit sharing ended with the special editions in 1997. this is why GL was so adamant that the special editions are "different movies" and the old ones would be buried forever, never to be released again; this is why the OOT was released as "bonus material" on the 2004 DVD's, this is why the original movies will never get a release of their OWN, not even under Disney's Regime. why? because GL paid everybody with a "percentage" back in 1977 LOL :p

and after 20 years he finally decided 'enough is enough'. the release of the special editions (and subsequent burial of the OOT) was a calculated move to end the profit sharing of the original movie. example: Harrison only made $10k for his work on the original SW + profit sharing.. but the gravy train ended in 1997, when GL swore to never release 'that movie' ever again (and replaced it with a 'different movie' instead) -- this ended the profit sharing deals surrounding the 1977 version, and caused a huge rift between 'harrison' and 'star wars' (harrison was so PO'ed, he wouldn't even SPEAK about SW during the 1997 hype surrounding the re-release -- he refused to promote SW, in ANY way shape or form, after his 'profit sharing' was cut off -- and in the end, he only agreed to do TFA if he was given the same deal as Robert Downey, re: Ironman -- he gets a fat percentage of every movie where he plays the character -- so Disney agreed,, and immediately killed his character. LOL) :p (so far, his payday from force awakens was $40million, and counting... a far cry from the $10k he got in 1977).

short answer: NOBODY gets profit sharing from the original 1977 movie anymore :p that ended in 1997... when the original SW was physically replaced by a (so-called) 'different movie'. :p LOL
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 31, 2011
Messages
1,040
Reaction score
7
^^^ I do remember you bringing this reason up as for why George was not releasing the OOT some time/years ago: Is it true? Or… just more of your… musings??? (Can never quite tell with you…)

I don’t blame George the least for not releasing the OOT if that really was the reason. (Harrison and company come off as entitled trust fund brats mooching off mummy & daddy for way too long.)

(BTW, I get that many love love love these characters— but both Harrison and Carrie were astoundingly forgettable in the Sequel. Carrie was just uncomfortable to watch in TFA— and unbearably zoned out in TLJ. She was clearly not into it at all and just going through the motions for that generous paycheque. And I don’t blame her the least: Such incompetent writing.)
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
5,610
Reaction score
62
I got that from 'the secret history of star wars'. it's not my own idea. sadly.



and yes, on the one hand, harrison might seem like an entitled brat, still collecting royalties after 20 years...
..but on the other hand, the only reason he put so much of himself into that first movie was BECAUSE he had a piece of the pie.
else, GL would have no blockbuster to argue about. and his financial 'empire' wouldn't even exist.

this is what made SW such a bankable film in the first place:
guys like Harrison and Guinness, who had a personal stake in the success of the film.. and therefore gave it the best performance of their lives.
--> if the deal was "2 1/4 percent" then that's the deal. they earned it. and as long as this movie makes bank,(even a hundred years from now),
then they should still get paid.

GL comes off like the joker in 'dark knight' -- killing off his team in the opening bank heist scene, so in the end he gets a bigger piece of the pie. :p
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 31, 2011
Messages
1,040
Reaction score
7
^^^ Had you copped it as your own idea, I would have been none the wiser LOL

Harrison and Alec may have given their all into ANH… But after 20 years of a good (financial) thing, it really was more than reasonable for George to cut the trust funding.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
5,610
Reaction score
62
by the same token, GL didn't deserve to collect after 20 years either then. :p
GL was one of a handful of people who ALL collaborated to make the first film.
was he the 'largest' stake-holder? yes. of course.

but GL paid everybody in percentages, or the film would have never been made.
even the bank who floated GL a personal loan, so he could make ESB with no studio funds..
..this BANK was given a percentage. that's more than a "trust fund", that's an investment.

I would argue, harrison's deal was ALSO an investment.
GL could have paid Harrison an actual 'salary' like a normal union actor in hollywood...
but instead harrison did it for $10k + a percentage of the profits.
that was his choice -- to make this 'investment' (of labor and artistry) -- in exchange, he had a small stake in the film.

like people who own small amounts of Disney stock.. they STILL get their dividends.. along with the 'large' shareholders.
IF harrison no longer "deserved" to collect his small dividend after 20 years.. then neither did Lucas after 20 years (from the same investment-vehicle). :\
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 31, 2011
Messages
1,040
Reaction score
7
^^^ $10K in 1975(?) is way way way more than scale— add to that the shares of a percentage, and that’s more than generous compensation for an unknown actor.

Without George’s initial SW concept— and Star Wars was his, as much as some will debate that SW didn’t belong to him alone, Harrison would not have the career he has; Alec would not have been nominated for an Academy, and many of the talents that shaped SW would not have had the careers they had/have. All these individuals— as talented and as much as they were an integral component of building SW, owes much of their fame and fortune to George for giving them that once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

Seems ungrateful and greedy to me that Harrison (and Co.) would expect George’s loyalty cheques to still flow like fine wine when he’s cemented his place as a multi-millionaire superstar.

There's a lot of George's creative
decisions I may not agree with, cutting the loyalty cheques is not one of them.
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Messages
1,226
Reaction score
7
the profit sharing ended with the special editions in 1997. this is why GL was so adamant that the special editions are "different movies" and the old ones would be buried forever, never to be released again; this is why the OOT was released as "bonus material" on the 2004 DVD's, this is why the original movies will never get a release of their OWN, not even under Disney's Regime. why? because GL paid everybody with a "percentage" back in 1977 LOL :p

and after 20 years he finally decided 'enough is enough'. the release of the special editions (and subsequent burial of the OOT) was a calculated move to end the profit sharing of the original movie. example: Harrison only made $10k for his work on the original SW + profit sharing.. but the gravy train ended in 1997, when GL swore to never release 'that movie' ever again (and replaced it with a 'different movie' instead) -- this ended the profit sharing deals surrounding the 1977 version, and caused a huge rift between 'harrison' and 'star wars' (harrison was so PO'ed, he wouldn't even SPEAK about SW during the 1997 hype surrounding the re-release -- he refused to promote SW, in ANY way shape or form, after his 'profit sharing' was cut off -- and in the end, he only agreed to do TFA if he was given the same deal as Robert Downey, re: Ironman -- he gets a fat percentage of every movie where he plays the character -- so Disney agreed,, and immediately killed his character. LOL) :p (so far, his payday from force awakens was $40million, and counting... a far cry from the $10k he got in 1977).

short answer: NOBODY gets profit sharing from the original 1977 movie anymore :p that ended in 1997... when the original SW was physically replaced by a (so-called) 'different movie'. :p LOL
That is an interesting theory, but it doesn't jibe with this document. It's a fax with some items for Harrison, and it has his handwritten notes on the bottom. Two items he was scheduling at the time was an interview for a George Lucas biography and an interview for a Star Wars retrospective. The fax is dated one month after the New Hope special edition was released in theaters:

 
Joined
Dec 23, 2001
Messages
11,424
Reaction score
0
Location
Caledonia, Ontario, Canada
Alec Guinness hated Star Wars, and wanted nothing to do with the "silly" movie that made him a star to young people of the late 70's and early 80's. I have serious doubts he would voluntarily watch ANY Star Wars movie, especially one he wasn't a part of.


What does it matter what he thought about it?

If he hadn't played Obi Wan, none of us would know who he is.
Wow, no one except maybe anyone who saw Bridge on the River Kwai, Great Expectations, Oliver Twist, Dr. Zhivago, Lawrence of Arabia, and other such known classics of Hollywood. :rolleyes:


Without George’s initial SW concept— and Star Wars was his, as much as some will debate that SW didn’t belong to him alone, Harrison would not have the career he has; Alec would not have been nominated for an Academy,
Not nominated for an Academy Award before Star Wars?

Are we not counting the two nominations where he was not victorious in 1953 (The Lavender Hill Mob) and 1959 (The Horse's Mouth)? Or his actual win in 1958 (Bridge on the River Kwai)?

Ian
 
Top