Sequal Star Wars Trilogy News!

[Flexor the Mighty!]

The rabid hatred of Midichloreans blows my mind. What is so terrible about that? I know people who basicaly wrote off the rest of the flicks after that idea was put forth. For the life of me I can't see how it's that much of a problem. But I had fun watching EP I & II so maybe it's just me.

 

[d4]

I disagree. But Boba certainly is.

i disagree. i didn't like Boba in the OT, and i don't like him any better now.

now Jango... now there's someone cool.

 

[jdavis]

And this I don't disagree with. Lucas is obviously using the prequels to paint a different overall picture than was originally intended. It was the claim that "the focus of Episodes 4-6 is the redemption of Anakin" that is simply false.

Even considering the new context of the prequels, the originals still don't suddenly become about Anakin's redemption. The second half of Return of the Jedi, sure. But Episodes 4 and 5 aren't anymore about his redemption than Episodes 1 and 2 are.

Well actually since the story of the prequels was created at the time of the making of Star Wars (this whole thing was outlined from the start, it's the detail work that is recent not the story line), it's hard to say he is painting a different picture than he intended to do witht he Prequels. The story is Anakin being redeamed by his son. The story is about the Skywalkers as a family, the fall of the father and his redemption by the son. The first trilogy was presented in a way to make you change your opinions about Darth Vader as you watched the movies. Which makes me wonder if the original outline for movies 7-9 would be about a third generation of Skywalker as he relates to the second generation (and the first, it's not like being dead takes a jedi out of the story here). The focus on Star Wars through Jedi is the story of Luke Skywalker reviving the Jedi and redeaming his father. It is the stroy of Anakin's redemption, through his son (it was Luke who redeamed him). The focus of 4 through 6 might not be always on Anakin Skywalker, but he is mentioned over and over again in all three (Obi Wan and Owen talk about him in Star Wars, the whole focus of Empire is Luke learning the truth, and Jedi is Luke redeaming his father and restoring the Jedi.) Luke is the focus of it all, Star Wars Luke's rise, Empire Luke learns the truth, Jedi Luke redeams his father, If you take all six movies together, it will be the fall of Anakin and the rise of his son Luke to redeam him. Just because it isn't the only thing on the screen and isn't spelled out doesn't mean that's not what it's all about, there is a half dozen stories being told in these movies but the one that ties them all together is the story of the Skywalker family. That's why the call it a underlying story, it's under all the other stuff, it's the backbone of all the movies, it's the continous thread through all six (or nine if they ever get made). 4-6 is the stroy of the one who redeams Anakin, it's what everything leads up to through three movies, that moment where Darth Vader chooses his son over the Emperor, it's the story of redemption as told through the eyes of the one who does the redeaming not the one who is redeamed, but it is still the same story.

 

[jdavis]

Very true. I just feel that stating what Lucas claims about the saga as a whole, or certain individual episodes in the alternate and current context of the whole without the appropriate disclaimer that the films constantly revise each other pushes a much superior story, that was literal canon for years and decades, under the rug.

I don't believe revisionism is inherently bad, for instance Star Wars: The Annotated Screenplays reveals that "the notion of Vader being Luke's father first appeared in the second draft" of The Empire Strikes Back, not Star Wars.

In Star Wars Obi-Wan's tale of Vader killing Anakin was the literal truth. And its interesting to watch this film with that perspective (its the perspective we all had for three years after all).

But ESB's revision that Vader was Luke's father greatly improved the story, so I accept it as a worthy addition of the saga. However, if someone stated, "Lucas himself says that the focus of Star Wars is the first meeting of father and adult son" that would be incorrect without acknowledging that its a change implemented from ESB on.

I think its too bad that many people are so quick to just dismiss the original trilogy as "rough cuts" of this new saga, subject to revision, recutting, and subsequent dismissal.

The orignal Star Wars was a huge gamble, there was nothing else like it out there(check out some of the mid-seventies science fiction out there, things hadn't changed all that much since the mid sixties), there were no plans for a sequel or a group of sequels. Lucas wrote a outline that was way too big for one movie so he cut it up and took one part of it (he was a big fan of the old pulp serials, thus the episode 4 bit), he wasn't worrying about ever making any of the other "episodes" from his outline, he was worried about not bombing with Star Wars. He wasn't a big name then, he had no pull, and if it wasn't for American Graffitti doing decent numbers then Star Wars probably would of never been made. If he flopped he was most likely done in the industry. 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. As far as revisionist thinking on Lucas part, I first started hearing the story of Anakin Skywalker stuff around the time of Empire (after it was revealed he was Luke's father), obviously they didn't talk about any type of redemption because that would give away Jedi's storyline, but he was talking about the outline he had created and how it was about Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader. He's not lying, Lucas has always stated and believed it was about the redemption of Anakin Skywalker, it seems stuff has come to light recently that reveals Lucas isn't the movie god everyone once believed him to be though so just because he believed it doesn't mean he got the message out all that well.

 

[jdavis]

The rabid hatred of Midichloreans blows my mind. What is so terrible about that? I know people who basicaly wrote off the rest of the flicks after that idea was put forth. For the life of me I can't see how it's that much of a problem. But I had fun watching EP I & II so maybe it's just me.

Midichloreans is the Planet Ziest of Star Wars. To say that the ability to use the force wasn't some kind of special power, it was basically a microscopic parasite was just so lame. It ruined the magic of the force, there was no magic, some people just were born with a viral infection. They make the force out to be some sort of quasi-religious thing then they hit you with "it's caused by a parasite".

 

[demiurge1138]

Midichloreans is the Planet Ziest of Star Wars. To say that the ability to use the force wasn't some kind of special power, it was basically a microscopic parasite was just so lame. It ruined the magic of the force, there was no magic, some people just were born with a viral infection. They make the force out to be some sort of quasi-religious thing then they hit you with "it's caused by a parasite".

Yes, but it's a parasite of great quasi-religious signifigance!

But seriously, the midichlorians are symptomatic of the "rationalization" of the prequel trilogy. Apparently, Lucas thought people were concerned with where the Force came from, so he omitted the spirituality and made it science. The way I see it, he tried (and failed) to add some more science fiction elements into what has always been a fantasy.

Demiurge out.

Note: I still liked Episode 2, and would really have loved Episode 1 had it not been a Star Wars movie.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Midichloreans is the Planet Ziest of Star Wars.

There's no such place.

Note: I still liked Episode 2, and would really have loved Episode 1 had it not been a Star Wars movie.

Heh. But I bet you'd have complained about the lightsabers being a blatant SW ripoff

-Hyp.

 

[Orius]

George Lucas actually did try to create a new fantasy universe: Willow. Lucas wanted Willow to be a grand fantasy epic made up of three movies. However, when Willow hit theaters, it barely made enough money to cover the costs of making it. So instead, the sequels to Willow were released as novels rather than movies.

Sometimes, I wonder what the sequels to Willow might have been like if they had actually been made. I liked Willow a lot, and would have liked to see some sequels.

Besides, I know for a fact that Madmartigan (Val Kilmer's character) inspired more than a few D&D characters.

Willow was a fun movie. Some of the effects are really cheesy by today's standards, true, but were're talking pre-CGI here. So they had to rely a lot on blue screens, stop-motion, etc. Madmartigan was a blast on screen, makes a good alternate inspiration for a fighter character. And the wagon chase is a great variation on the "chase scene".

As for the sequels, there were some books published that took place in the same world, but 13 years later. Unfortunatey, the storyline wasn't that great. And even worse,

Spoiler

Madmartigan and Sorsha get killed off at the beginning of the first book, so there's only Willow, Elora, and the brownies.

 

[Orius]

The rabid hatred of Midichloreans blows my mind. What is so terrible about that?

The biggest problem with midichlorians is that is lessens the mystical aspect of the Force.

 

[Hypersmurf]

As for the sequels, there were some books published that took place in the same world, but 13 years later. Unfortunatey, the storyline wasn't that great.

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?

-Hyp.