New Star Wars director Ron Howard's epic angry letter

news.com.au

29 Jun, 2017 06:15 AM2 mins to read

Academy Award-winning Filmmaker Ron Howard. Photo / Getty Images

He's just been drafted in to rescue the ailing Han Solo spin-off film - and it turns out veteran director Ron Howard has been a Star Wars champion for almost two decades now.

The Apollo 13 director has taken over the reins of the upcoming untitled Han Solo spin-off film after original directors Phil Lord and Christopher Miller were unceremoniously dropped mid-filming due to creative directors.

Given the passion he displayed for the franchise in a 1999 letter that's resurfaced online this week, he seems like a perfect fit.

In the letter, an angry Howard chastised magazine Newsweek for their reporting on the Star Wars film The Phantom Menace - specifically, their harsh critique of nine-year-old newcomer Jake Lloyd's performance as Anakin Skywalker. Quoting "insiders" who apparently called the youngster "Mannequin Skywalker," Newsweek were blunt: "Word is he stinks."

Howard, himself a child actor who started working in film and television at just five years old, chastised the mag in a fiery letter addressed to then-editor Nancy Cooper.

"While your Buzz Wars, Episode One piece was generally snide and insipid," Howard wrote, "the pot shot at nine year old Jake Lloyd was down right irresponsible."

"I have no way of knowing how accomplished or professional he may have appeared during the principle filming, but I seriously doubt these 'insiders' are inside enough to have seen an edited version of the new Star Wars," Howard continued, "because I have and in my opinion, Jake Lloyd is terrific in the film (which, by the way, is truly amazing)."

Whether or not you agree with Howard's appraisal of the "amazing" Phantom Menace, he spoke from experience about the scrutiny faced by child actors:

"As someone who was acting professionally at an early age, I can assure you that nine year old Jake is quite capable of reading understanding and feeling the full humiliation of a piece like that. He may not be able to comprehend the reason it was printed, however, but then obviously neither can I. Maybe someone from your editorial staff should try and explain it to him."

Read Howard's letter in full below: