Sequal Star Wars Trilogy News!

[Orius]

There are a lot of things that were glossed over or not fleshed out in Star Wars because they didn't affect that movie and lot of things were thrown in just to give it that serial feel. You got to look at Star Wars as a stand alone movie first because that's how it was made to be. I'm sure that much of his outline wasn't fleshed out till after it was obvious he'd get to do more Star Wars movies, I'd love to see his original outline just to see how far the story has come as he filled out the details.

I agree. Take the complaints about the Trade Federation as the bad guys. I don't see what the problem is. Lucas wrote the novelization for the first Star Wars movie, and it starts with a short prologue about how the Old Republic was weakened from internal political corruption, allowing Palpatine to seize power. That happens in TPM. Look how Palpatine convinces Amidala to call for a no-confidence vote on Valorum, as a way of worming his way into office. The current plight of Naboo helps him -- and may very well have been the plan all along.

Though TPM isn't perfect. You got the midichlorians. You got the Gungans (I think Lucas just miscalculated with them, if they were done a little differently, they might have been good). You got too much kiddie stuff. You got Anakin taking out the Trade Federation ship single handedly with a freak lucky shot. But TPM is the beginning of the story, so it's not going to be as interesting as the rest.

 

[Orius]

I have vague memories of reading half of the first one.

Hadn't Willow changed his name and turned into some multiclassed Fighter/Assassin/Peck, or something?

Yes, in the books, he goes by the name Thorn Drumheller, and he's become a powerful sorcerer.

 

[jdavis]

I was thinking about how Star Wars changed things so I went back and looked to see what was big before Star Wars came out, 1976 Logan's Run. Now Logan's Run is good, I enjoyed it but watch it back to back with Star Wars then consider that they came out less than a year apart (Logan's Run June 1976, Star Wars May 1977) Logan's Run had a budget of $9 million, Star Wars had a Budget of $11 million. Other movies around then, The Spy Who loved me with a budget of $14 million and Close Encounters with a budget of $20 million (which came out in November of '77). Before Logan's Run the Planet of the Apes movies were the big thing going. The point is that you can draw a line in the sand at Star Wars and look how the whole genre changed, not only effects wise (which was a huge change) but there was just so much of a fantasy feel added to what was once pretty much science-fiction before.

 

[jdavis]

I agree. Take the complaints about the Trade Federation as the bad guys. I don't see what the problem is. Lucas wrote the novelization for the first Star Wars movie, and it starts with a short prologue about how the Old Republic was weakened from internal political corruption, allowing Palpatine to seize power. That happens in TPM. Look how Palpatine convinces Amidala to call for a no-confidence vote on Valorum, as a way of worming his way into office. The current plight of Naboo helps him -- and may very well have been the plan all along.

Though TPM isn't perfect. You got the midichlorians. You got the Gungans (I think Lucas just miscalculated with them, if they were done a little differently, they might have been good). You got too much kiddie stuff. You got Anakin taking out the Trade Federation ship single handedly with a freak lucky shot. But TPM is the beginning of the story, so it's not going to be as interesting as the rest.

Star Wars was a big risk stand alone movie (it wasn't made to start a trilogy it was made to stand alone, sequels were just wishful thinking during production), Phantom Menace was a sure thing sequel (prequel). By Phantom Menace there was no cloud over Lucas head, there was no studio to please and no need to worry about his career (it's almost over now). What makes me wonder is whether the studio pressure on the original Star Wars didn't make it a better picture and how much better Phantom Menace could of been if Lucus had felt similar pressure (Phantom Menace was a no-brainer to become one of the biggest grossing movies ever, he could of intercut scenes from Howard the Duck and still made $300,000,000). I also wonder which parts of Phantom Menace are storyline from the original outline and which parts are stuff he came up with later. There are several moments in Phantom Menace that are as good as anything ever in Star Wars, and there are several moments of pure crap. I like the story of Phantom Menace, it's the details that I dislike. A good script could of been written from his story but instead he decided to write the script himself. Just like Endor was orignally supposed to be full of primative wookies and we got Ewoks, I wonder what the original plan for the Gungans was? Whatever it was it had to be better than how they turned out, how did the pod race turn into a cartoon? Every alien in the pod race looked like a digitized muppet show cast member instead of a hardened creature involved in a deadly race (and don't get me started on the announcer). Instead of rooting for Anakin anywhere in the movie I hoped he would die a painful death. And what can you say about Darth Maul exept what a waste of such a very interesting character, they could of done so much more with him (and so much less with Jar Jar). The idea behind the Trade federation was fine but the actual leaders of the trade federation came off looking and acting like comic relief more often than not. They were not presented as figures anyone would fear or respect in any way, they were just goofy. Midichlorians has already been mentioned (the shame of it was that that was a throw away line the movie didn't need, Midichlorians haven't been mentioned since). I think Lucas's biggest mistake was that he misjudged his target audience here. He made a movie that was so much for kids that it was hard for a adult to enjoy, the original Star Wars had a much broader appeal to it, it wasn't a adult movie or a kids movie or a guy movie, it was a everybody movie.

 

[Kai Lord]

Whatever the plan was, whatever was in an original draft doesn't matter to me. What does influence my opinion is what was actually on screen. From the very beginning, Vader and Luke had a connection beyond the fact that Vader supposedly killed his father.

Luke and Vader had no connection whatsoever at the beginning of Star Wars.

So there is a good amount going on in all 3 films but it boils down to Anakin's redemption, which is spurred on by Luke and his belief in his father.

Don't be silly. That's like saying that LOTR all boils down to Gollum's lust for the Ring saving the world. No, it was Frodo's humanity and courage that saves the world. Frodo spares Gollum, and Gollum's allowed existence causes the ring to be destroyed.

Vader's Gollum. Nothing more. He isn't the star, or the hero, or the main protagonist. That's Luke. Vader is the Gollum-like creature that Luke will become if he fails. But Luke's humanity spares Vader, and by allowing Vader to live Vader does what Luke could not do directly and kills the Emperor.

That doesn't make it Vader/Gollum's story. He's just the guy who pulled the source of evil power away from Luke/Frodo and chucked it off the edge, dying in the process (though Vader got to hang on long enough for Luke to take off the Witch King helmet and see that it was indeed Smeagol underneath all along.)

And why did he get to destroy the source of power? Because the good of the true hero and focus of the story allowed him to live long enough to do it.

 

[Darrin Drader]

Vader's Gollum. Nothing more. He isn't the star, or the hero, or the main protagonist. That's Luke. Vader is the Gollum-like creature that Luke will become if he fails. But Luke's humanity spares Vader, and by allowing Vader to live Vader does what Luke could not do directly and kills the Emperor.

Kudos Kai Lord! I've seen Star Wars disected a billion ways to Christmas, but I've never seen this parrallel or critique put forth before. While I may happen to agree with John Crichton on the finished project approach, yours is certainly noteworthy and deserving further discussion.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Midichlorians has already been mentioned (the shame of it was that that was a throw away line the movie didn't need, Midichlorians haven't been mentioned since).

I heard Yoda talk about midichlorians and I was wondering, what are midichlorians?

Gah. Grr.

-Hyp.

 

[John Crichton]

Luke and Vader had no connection whatsoever at the beginning of Star Wars.

Wrong. Luke learned that Vader killed his father. That is a connection.

Don't be silly. That's like saying that LOTR all boils down to Gollum's lust for the Ring saving the world. No, it was Frodo's humanity and courage that saves the world. Frodo spares Gollum, and Gollum's allowed existence causes the ring to be destroyed.

Vader's Gollum. Nothing more. He isn't the star, or the hero, or the main protagonist. That's Luke. Vader is the Gollum-like creature that Luke will become if he fails. But Luke's humanity spares Vader, and by allowing Vader to live Vader does what Luke could not do directly and kills the Emperor.

That doesn't make it Vader/Gollum's story. He's just the guy who pulled the source of evil power away from Luke/Frodo and chucked it off the edge, dying in the process (though Vader got to hang on long enough for Luke to take off the Witch King helmet and see that it was indeed Smeagol underneath all along.)

And why did he get to destroy the source of power? Because the good of the true hero and focus of the story allowed him to live long enough to do it.

That is one way to look at it. Interesting comparison.

Never did I say Vader was "the star, or the hero, or the main protagonist." I know what a main character is and stated it plainly. Bringing up what LotR is, is an interesting case, but we disagree there a bit. LotR was about the ringbearers, all of them (Gollum included). Just like Star Wars is about the Skywalkers, all of them. Star Wars came down to that one moment at the end, when Vader was redeemed. It was the resolution to the entire trilogy. Luke's existance in the trilogy was to redeem his father. Please don't confuse what I say is the heart of the story with who the main characters are. I'm talking about the theme of the films, not simply what a 3rd grader would observe from one viewing.

 

[Kai Lord]

Kudos Kai Lord! I've seen Star Wars disected a billion ways to Christmas, but I've never seen this parrallel or critique put forth before. While I may happen to agree with John Crichton on the finished project approach, yours is certainly noteworthy and deserving further discussion.

Thanks. And don't think that was a rip on SW. For the most part Lucas used the Tolkienisms in his story to great effect.

 

[Kai Lord]

Wrong. Luke learned that Vader killed his father. That is a connection.

Which Luke didn't learn about "at the very beginning" of Star Wars. It was an hour into the film.

That is one way to look at it. Interesting comparison.

Never did I say Vader was "the star, or the hero, or the main protagonist." I know what a main character is and stated it plainly. Bringing up what LotR is, is an interesting case, but we disagree there a bit. LotR was about the ringbearers, all of them (Gollum included). Just like Star Wars is about the Skywalkers, all of them.

Yes, we disagree.

Star Wars came down to that one moment at the end, when Vader was redeemed.

And I believe the films (as in what you see on screen) are quite clear that it all comes down to that one moment at the end, when Luke throws away his lightsaber and says, "You failed, your Highness, I am a Jedi, like my father before me..."

Vader's redemption is just as much a by-product of Luke's perserverance as the celebrations on all the planets.

It was the resolution to the entire trilogy. Luke's existance in the trilogy was to redeem his father. Please don't confuse what I say is the heart of the story with who the main characters are. I'm talking about the theme of the films, not simply what a 3rd grader would observe from one viewing.

You stated earlier that you believe that redemption was the theme of the original trilogy, specifically the redemption of Anakin. Which, as I said, is no different than saying that the theme of LOTR is giving in to lust for power (since that was what destroyed the BBEG after the hero reached the end of the journey), the same role played by Anakin's redemption.

I'm not saying you actually believe that about LOTR, just that its basically what you're saying for SW.

But you're just echoing what Lucas currently claims, so we can each enjoy the fact that we both agree with George, me with the George who created the originals and you with the George who created Jar Jar and farting camels.