Jump to content

Star Wars Disenchantment


John

Recommended Posts

I did say vague outline, not written treatment. My impression is that George thought of it as going to 12 episodes in 1977, and 9 episodes in 1980, and of course by 1983 he thought of it as going to 6 (and again he stuck to this idea in the 2000s), and I believe this is supported by evidence from various interviews (TV, magazine) from various periods by Kurtz and Hamill and others. BUT, the truth is probably a lot more fluid than that. In the 90s, George wanted Palpatine to come back—Zahn refused (apparently this was allowed in his contract!), but the comic book guys complied and the result was Dark Empire, which George apparently loved and gifted to all his employees for Christmas. Luke falls to the dark side (having gone “deep undercover”), and Leia finally acts like a Jedi and is able to redeem him. People in the 90s told me that this was basically the story Lucas planned all along (i.e., until for whatever reason RotJ fell out the way it did). God knows, but, probably that’s a huge stretch. Still, what Mattris is describing sounds a lot like Dark Empire. Kylo going into “deep undercover”, and Palpatine coming back in a new body.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard the number of twelve films, and I’m sure that after the success of Star Wars, studio executives wanted to get their hands on as much Star Wars as they could. I don’t believe the twelve-film scheme was ever discussed in any seriousness.

 

 I think the twelve films were also born out of a stage in which the films were going to be more episodic - like Indiana Jones ended up being instead. Early drafts or concepts for The Empire Strikes Back were still episodic, as opposed to being chapters in a cycle.

 

The idea for nine films did stick around for a while, but again I don’t think the contents of those films was at all figured out. Of course the big confrontation with the Emperor was going to in the last episode. But otherwise? Meh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/5/2018 at 8:28 AM, Mattris said:

They are still $2.6B in the red, and the film profits are on a substantial decline. She has a habit of firing directors. She allows her employees to insult the fans on Twitter. She is the head of the creative department, and public opinion of the films (and overall direction of Star Wars) is way down. These problems are her fault. This is factual.

Setting: Hollywood Oligarchic Corporatocracy

The Inciting Incident: Disney buys Lucasfilm for $4 billion

Conflict: The paid elite vs The fans

Climax: Palpatine comes back from the dead in Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker

Final Scene: A reprise of "Binary Sunset"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Mattris said:

Do you not think that George Lucas is/was a master of story crafting? Why does it matter that he thought of some story elements later in his story-writing process? Can you prove which ones weren't planned early on... or from the very beginning?

  

As Executive Producer of the Sequel Trilogy, do you not think that JJ Abrams intended to be mysterious and ambiguous... to makes things interesting through to the conclusion of the Saga? Do you think he did not have meaning behind those (above) lines in TFA?

 

I think George Lucas is a filmmaker who's particularly prone to missteps. I do think examples like Leia being Luke's sister are piss-poor storytelling, and certainly evidence of an utter lack of foresight with regards to the overall story.

 

Vader being Luke's father wasn't planned from the beginning, either. The Clone Wars and Vader's fall from grace were not originally meant to coincide with the fall of the Republic. The individual villains of the prequel trilogy (Maul, Dooku, Grievous) weren't prefigured, etcetra...

 

As for the lines you quote, all of them were from previous films and all of them had a defined significance within those films, and some of them were weighty enough and pertinent enough to the feel of the trailers to be included in them. Its cute that you want to treat them as some great pieces of set-up for the final film, but they're really not. I mean, JJ Abrams could retcon some of them, but that isn't the same as stating them as part of some grand plot scheme.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mstrox You're looking in the wrong place. The clues are in the films and canon material.

 

A ScreenRant article complied some of the evidence of Palptine's return being foreshadowed. In one of the featured excerpts from the novel Aftermath: Empire's End, Yupe Tashu - a Sith cultist who had been one of the Emperor's closest advisers - and Gallius Rax - a close aide who planned to take over the Empire for himself - conducted a mysterious ceremony, which included a Sith mask and Holocron. Standing on a walkway above a chasm on Jakku, they spoke of Palpatine's return:

 

Tashu gambols down in front of the artifacts, his fingertips dancing along their cases. He mutters to himself, and Rax sees that he's chewed his own lips bloody. "Are you ready?" he asks Palpatine's old adviser.

 

"I am," Tashu says, turning. His cheeks are wet with tears. His teeth slick with red. "Palpatine lives on. We will find him again out there in the dark. Everything has arranged itself as our Master foretold. All things move toward the grand design. The sacrifices have all been made."

 

Not all of them, Rax thinks.

 

"You must be clothed in the raiment of darkness," Rax says. "The mantle of the dark side is yours to wear, at least for a time. At least until we can find Palpatine and revivify him, bringing his soul back to flesh anew."

 

Ironically, just as Darth Vader betrayed Palpatine on the Death Star, Rax betrayed Tashu on Jakku. He pushed Tashu down the chasm, where he fell to his death... the Sith artifacts in hand. All this occurred within a year of Palpatine's 'death', during the Battle of Jakku.

 

 

Some of my own canon clue finds: Palpatine personally named Galius Rax as the "first body" of his Contingency.

 

From The Force Awakens novelization, from Rey's mind:  "Death displays nothing if not a variety in its methods, which are often surprising and sometimes amusing."

 

In The Last Jedi novelization, Rose Tico accused Finn of 'heavy pinning for Rey':

 

"You were ready to abandon the Resistance to help her. How can one person mean more to you than a whole cause?"

"I was raised in an army to fight for a cause. Then I met Rey. And for the first time I had someone I cared about to fight for. That's who I wanted to be."

"When she comes back, will she be a Jedi like in the stories? Brown robes, little rat tail?"

"No. Rey a Jedi? Nah."

"But she'll be different."

"No," he insisted. Rey would always be Rey. He was sure of it, and a little annoyed by Rose's failure to see that.

"She's on her own path. You need to find yours."

"Thank you, wise master Rose."

"Any time, youngling."

"When I see her again she'll just be Rey."

 

 

It should come as no surprise that these excerpts align with my theory... because I used them to construct it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Chen G. said:

... examples like Leia being Luke's sister are piss-poor storytelling, and certainly evidence of an utter lack of foresight with regards to the overall story.

....

Vader being Luke's father wasn't planned from the beginning, either. The Clone Wars and Vader's fall from grace were not originally meant to coincide with the fall of the Republic.

 

Can you prove which story elements weren't planned by George Lucas early on... or from the very beginning?

 

4 hours ago, Chen G. said:

The individual villains of the prequel trilogy (Maul, Dooku, Grievous) weren't prefigured, etcetra...

 

Maul, Dooku, and Grievous were not real villains - only 'side baddies' - just as Snoke was. Palpatine is the villain... always has been. Etcetra? Do tell.



4 hours ago, Chen G. said:

As for the lines you quote, all of them were from previous films and all of them had a defined significance within those films, and some of them were weighty enough and pertinent enough to the feel of the trailers to be included in them. Its cute that you want to treat them as some great pieces of set-up for the final film, but they're really not. I mean, JJ Abrams could retcon some of them, but that isn't the same as stating them as part of some grand plot scheme.

 

"You already know the truth. Whomever you're waiting for on Jakku, they're never coming back. But there's someone who still could." The TFA novelization adds "With your help."

 

"You're afraid... that you will never be as strong as Darth Vader!"

 

"Forgive me. I feel it again... the pull to the light. Supreme Leader senses it. Show me again... the power of the darkness, and I'll let nothing stand in our way. Show me, Grandfather, and I will finish what you started."

 

"I'm being torn apart. I know what I have to do, but I don't know it I have the strength to do it. Will you help me?"

 

 

- After all of the in-canon evidence I've presented, do you think that JJ Abrams and Lawrence Kasdan had no specific meaning in mind for those lines... and were going to allow the canon writers, Rian Johnson, or Lucasfilm Story Group to define their meaning?

 

- Do you think those lines will be revealed to have significant meaning in Episode IX?

 

- What evidence do you have that indicates that "they're really not" "part of some grand plot scheme"?

 

- If they were not "great pieces of set-up for the final film", why do you think they were written to sound so ambiguous, yet intriguing?

 

- What do you mean by "all of them were from previous films".

 

- How could JJ Abrams "retcon some of them" if he didn't have a plan for them?

 

- How would JJ Abrams go about "stating them as part of some grand plot scheme" and maintain his mysterious approach to film-making, of which he is famously known?

 

 

@Chen G. I look forward to you answers to these individual questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They brought JJ on board and fired the other guy because they wanted a guaranteed crowd-pleaser that doesn’t fuck with the audience. The only “twist” in this movie is the return of Ian McDiarmid, which they have already told us about so we can deal with it now and just enjoy the movie when it comes out.

 

There are three characters that we care about at all, and they are all going to save the day and they are all going to survive.

 

Rey is going to save the day, and she is going to survive.

Finn is going to save the day, and he is going to survive.

Lando Calrissian is going to save the day, and he is going to survive.

 

They’re going to be hugging and clapping and shit at the end. Audiences love these characters, and JJ is going to hang his hat on that fact.

 

The Emperor will die, and Kylo Ren will be evil until he turns good at the end and sacrifices himself exactly like Vader had done.

 

Unoriginal, but, it’s the only way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Pellaeon Please tell me you're not serious.

 

You think in 'mystery box' JJ Abrams' trilogy to end the Star Wars Saga, the only twist in the final episode was intentionally revealed before the film was released? No further explanation for Rey's existence in this trilogy? All 'goody' characters survive? An ending identical to Return of the Jedi, in which Kylo "turns good at the end"?

 

Where's the "epitome of good verses evil" that Kathleen Kennedy promised? Do you not understand that the Sequel Trilogy will be an utter failure if your predictions are correct? JJ would have to hang up his hat!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/3/2019 at 7:46 PM, Mattris said:

Can you prove which story elements weren't planned by George Lucas early on... or from the very beginning?

 

Really, you want me to prove to you that Vader being Luke's father and Leia being his sister wasn't planned from the get-go? Just go and read the first couple of drafts of The Empire Strikes Back.

 

On 10/3/2019 at 7:46 PM, Mattris said:

do you think that JJ Abrams and Lawrence Kasdan had no specific meaning in mind for those lines... and were going to allow the canon writers, Rian Johnson, or Lucasfilm Story Group to define their meaning?

 

Yes.

 

On 10/3/2019 at 7:46 PM, Mattris said:

Do you think those lines will be revealed to have significant meaning in Episode IX?

 

Some of them might be, if JJ Abrams choose to retcon them. Doesn't mean they were always going to mean something for Episode IX.

 

On 10/3/2019 at 7:46 PM, Mattris said:

What evidence do you have that indicates that "they're really not" "part of some grand plot scheme"?

 

That there isn't one, both by the admission of the filmmakers and by clear evidence: if they had the plot charted out, why not write three screenplays and shoot the whole damn thing in one go? Its much more economical. The reason they had two bloody years between each film is that each film had to be conceptualized, written, previsualized, cast, shot and edited on its own, and they were each going to be made by different filmmakers for just that reason.

 

On 10/3/2019 at 7:46 PM, Mattris said:

If they were not "great pieces of set-up for the final film", why do you think they were written to sound so ambiguous, yet intriguing?

 

Have you seen anything from JJ Abrams? His other films? His TV Shows and episodes? That's how he does things: he creates intrigue.

 

On 10/3/2019 at 7:46 PM, Mattris said:

What do you mean by "all of them were from previous films".

 

All the lines are from The Force Awakens. They all mean something...within the context of The Force Awakens.

 

On 10/3/2019 at 7:46 PM, Mattris said:

How could JJ Abrams "retcon some of them" if he didn't have a plan for them?

 

Umm, because that's what retcon means? Taking a plot element and giving it a payoff it wasn't initially going to have, and pretending as though it was planned from the start.

 

On 10/3/2019 at 7:46 PM, Mattris said:

How would JJ Abrams go about "stating them as part of some grand plot scheme" and maintain his mysterious approach to film-making, of which he is famously known?

 

He's managing to maintain his mysterious approach well enough. There's really very little we truly know for certain about Rise of Skywalker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it (the reveal of Rey’s parentage) WILL technically be a twist because it will retcon TLJ, but JJ has publicly stated that TLJ is going to be retconned on this point, so, it will come as no surprise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Mattris said:

You think in 'mystery box' JJ Abrams' trilogy to end the Star Wars Saga[...the ending would be]identical to Return of the Jedi, in which Kylo "turns good at the end"?[...] Do you not understand that the Sequel Trilogy will be an utter failure if your predictions are correct? JJ would have to hang up his hat!

 

There I agree with you 100%.

 

If Kylo Ren gets redeemed, I'll struggle to not hate this film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Pellaeon said:

They’re going to be hugging and clapping and shit at the end. Audiences love these characters, and JJ is going to hang his hat on that fact.

I used to think the world was flat. Rarely threw my hat into the crowd. I thought that I'd used up my quota of yearning. But oh-oh-oh, the tide is turning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Pellaeon said:

Rey’s true parentage/origin will be revealed but it won’t be a twist.

 

Kylo said Rey 'came from nothing, that she's nothing'. Rey said herself that her parents were "nobody". If those statements were not true, then either her parents are someone of significance... or she was created, most likely by someone using the Force. One, the other, or both of these revelations in IX would absolutely be classified as 'twists'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate the "clone" theory that's been circling around for years, but that's almost the impression I got in TLJ. In the mirror scene, we see multiple "copies" of her, and when she asks to see her parents, she just see's herself. Then of course later on she says that her parents are nobody. I mean, if she was in fact a clone, her parents would literally be nobody, and the mirror showing her herself as a "parent" would make perfect sense, since she would have originated from a host with the exact same DNA. Therefore none of what we would have seen in TLJ would have been a lie or even a misdirect, it would all literally be true.

 

But again, I hate this theory. I just think it makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Modest Expectations said:

Ok, so she is a clone. Of a woman looking exactly like her. But who was that?

She's a clone of another clone, and that clone is a clone of an even different clone!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In TFA she displays all these Force skills and piloting skills without training. It’s not a plot hole that fans noticed, it’s something that is noticed and remarked upon in the movie (“How did you do that?” “I don’t know!” “Nobody trained you?”). I think RotS will want to explain that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pellaeon said:

Nah, literally nobody will be surprised

 

Many people still cling to the possibility that Rey is the daughter of Han and Leia when JJ confirmed that "Rey's parents are not in Episode VII."

 

If her parents are someone of significance, then the Dark Side cave lied. This would be a twist. (And if Han and Leia are her parents, then JJ lied too.)

- If she has no parents at all... and she is a clone and/or created by someone using the Force (like Emperor Palpatine), then this would be a major twist.
 

By saying "literally nobody will be surprised" if one of these these 'Rey origins' turn out to be true, you either underestimate the ignorance of the audience... or you are being disingenuous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not disingenuous. I’m just a guy on the internet with an opinion.

 

TFA heavily suggested Rey was somehow part of the Skywalker bloodline—surely no-one is denying that? The trailer all but stated it.

 

My opinion is that TRoS will confirm this, and it might be in such a way that not all audience members had foreseen as a possibility, but the essential fact of her being a Skywalker will not come as a twist to anyone (unless they had deeply internalized the TLJ red herrings, which both Johnson and Abrams himself have said is not the whole picture).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Manakin Skywalker said:

I hate the "clone" theory that's been circling around for years, but that's almost the impression I got in TLJ. In the mirror scene, we see multiple "copies" of her, and when she asks to see her parents, she just see's herself. Then of course later on she says that her parents are nobody. I mean, if she was in fact a clone, her parents would literally be nobody, and the mirror showing her herself as a "parent" would make perfect sense, since she would have originated from a host with the exact same DNA. Therefore none of what we would have seen in TLJ would have been a lie or even a misdirect, it would all literally be true.

 

But again, I hate this theory. I just think it makes sense.

 

A filmmaker actually uses abstract visual symbolism in a mainstream blockbuster and this is how you repay him!?

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pellaeon said:

TFA heavily suggested Rey was somehow part of the Skywalker bloodline—surely no-one is denying that? The trailer all but stated it.

 

I deny that TFA heavily suggested that Rey was somehow part of the Skywalker bloodline. People assumed that was the case because the previous two trilogies featured a Skywalker as the hero/protagonist that Rey would also be a Skywalker. On its surface, TFA seemed to be a remake of ANH: a young Force-strong protagonist character from a desert planet who seems to be on a Hero's Journey, droid with a crucial clue for the Rebels, the father/mentor figure killed, a planet-destroying super-weapon destroyed by a squadron of Rebel ships, a tall/dark/Force-strong villain, etc. But people have been deceived.

 

Rey means well... but is defiant, selfish, and possesses or gains specialized skills with no training shown. She gains proficiency using the Force with no instruction, although she was unaware of the Force her entire life. Apart from Finn obsessively wanting to help her, the only person that she has required help from is Ben Solo, who could have killed her on multiple occasions had this been his desire.

 

Just like the film itself, the first full TFA trailer did not imply that Rey was a Skywalker. We know Ben Solo is of Skywalker lineage, so Luke's "The Force is strong in my family... You have that power too." should only be assumed to be directed at Ben. We hear Luke speaking again in the TROS teaser. Rey shown on-screen as Luke is speaking is no proof or indication of anything. It should be assumed that Luke's words, once again, are directed at Ben Solo, who Luke trained as a Jedi for over a decade. "We've passed on all we know. A thousand generations live in you now."

 

The films have been quite clear: Rey has been assigned no lineage. Peoples' assumptions have them confused. It is obvious to me that this was JJ's intention.

 

1 hour ago, Pellaeon said:

My opinion is that TRoS will confirm this, and it might be in such a way that not all audience members had foreseen as a possibility, but the essential fact of her being a Skywalker will not come as a twist to anyone (unless they had deeply internalized the TLJ red herrings, which both Johnson and Abrams himself have said is not the whole picture).

 

Rey will not be of Skywalker blood. TROS will reveal that she is a creation of Palpatine, who will (finally) be confirmed to have created Anakin, as well. Of this, I am all but certain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Nick Parker said:

 

A filmmaker actually uses abstract visual symbolism in a mainstream blockbuster and this is how you repay him!?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not me, the crazy theorists on Reddit. They take everything literally.

 

43 minutes ago, Mattris said:

 

I deny that TFA heavily suggested that Rey was somehow part of the Skywalker bloodline. People assumed that was the case because the previous two trilogies featured a Skywalker as the hero/protagonist that Rey would also be a Skywalker. On its surface, TFA seemed to be a remake of ANH: a young Force-strong protagonist character from a desert planet who seems to be on a Hero's Journey, droid with a crucial clue for the Rebels, the father/mentor figure killed, a planet-destroying super-weapon destroyed by a squadron of Rebel ships, a tall/dark/Force-strong villain, etc. But people have been deceived.

 

Rey means well... but is defiant, selfish, and possesses or gains specialized skills with no training shown. She gains proficiency using the Force with no instruction, although she was unaware of the Force her entire life. Apart from Finn obsessively wanting to help her, the only person that she has required help from is Ben Solo, who could have killed her on multiple occasions had this been his desire.

 

Just like the film itself, the first full TFA trailer did not imply that Rey was a Skywalker. We know Ben Solo is of Skywalker lineage, so Luke's "The Force is strong in my family... You have that power too." should only be assumed to be directed at Ben. We hear Luke speaking again in the TROS teaser. Rey shown on-screen as Luke is speaking is no proof or indication of anything. It should be assumed that Luke's words, once again, are directed at Ben Solo, who Luke trained as a Jedi for over a decade. "We've passed on all we know. A thousand generations live in you now."

 

The films have been quite clear: Rey has been assigned no lineage. Peoples' assumptions have them confused. It is obvious to me that this was JJ's intention.

 

 

Rey will not be of Skywalker blood. TROS will reveal that she is a creation of Palpatine, who will (finally) be confirmed to have created Anakin, as well. Of this, I am all but certain.

 

*IF* that does not happen, how would you feel?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Mattris said:

Rey will not be of Skywalker blood. TROS will reveal that she is a creation of Palpatine, who will (finally) be confirmed to have created Anakin, as well. Of this, I am all but certain.

 

It’s not my favorite theory, but it is a possibility. However, even in that paradigm, Anakin and Rey having been created in the same way by the same person, you would definitely consider them “somehow” related, wouldn’t you? She could be “the Skywalker”, hmm?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

Satisfied and vindicated. How about you?

I said if it DOESN'T happen. Meaning if your theories are all incorrect. How would you feel about that?

 

For me personally, honestly I wouldn't care one way or another. I'm just in it for the ride, and have yet to be dissatisfied with any of the new films thus far. I'm sure JJ knows what he's doing and will make a satisfying conclusion to the saga.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, misread your question. If my theories are all incorrect, I will be utterly shocked. What JJ comes up with instead will need to align with the all the films and canon material. If IX happens different than I predict, I doubt it will be better. (And I still have more of my theory to reveal.)

 

Like you, I'm sure JJ knows what he's doing. I'm pretty sure I know what he's doing, as well.

 

Thoughts on my theory?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Remco said:

I'd find it hard to believe if there wasn't some kind of broad outline for the trilogy from the beginning on. Of course, the films are made one by one and I'm sure Rian Johnson was free to do many things, but I just can't imagine he'd just kill off Snoke without any consultancy from the story group or whatever. He didn't do that just to 'shit' on JJ or TFA as it is interpreted by some.

 

If KK says that Palpatine's return was planned - but not the exact details of it - that sounds totally reasonable to me. At the same time, if the latest Jurassic World movies are any indication, it sounds just as reasonable to me that Colin Trevorrow delivered a truly hideous script, even if he followed the broad outline of the trilogy. 

 

Hello rational person.

 

Run!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Remco said:

I'd find it hard to believe if there wasn't some kind of broad outline for the trilogy from the beginning on

 

Depends on what you'd call "broad." There comes a point where its so broad, that its less of an outline and more of a matter of intuition.

 

I'm pretty sure that Rian Johnson couldn't kill off Rey or Kylo Ren in his film, but that hardly requires a story outline or even for someone to tell Johnson not to do it: its just a bit of common sense that goes without saying, because its inherent to the fact that this is a trilogy, and to how it was begun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

16 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

 

Depends on what you'd call "broad." There comes a point where its so broad, that its less of an outline and more of a matter of intuition.

 

I'm pretty sure that Rian Johnson couldn't kill off Rey or Kylo Ren in his film, but that hardly requires a story outline or even for someone to tell Johnson not to do it: its just a bit of common sense that goes without saying, because its inherent to the fact that this is a trilogy, and to how it was begun.

 

My guess is that they planned a few things that are "broader" than just using common sense things like you mention. I'm sure the members of the story group could have spent an afternoon with JJ together back in 2014 to decide on who Snoke is, who Rey is, who's going to be the main villain in the end, where should Kylo's arc generally go, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The nature of filmmaking is that you show your screenplay to the producers.

 

But I'm sure it was Johnson's idea - not that of some story group or of JJ Abrams.

 

59 minutes ago, Remco said:

 I'm sure the members of the story group could have spent an afternoon with JJ together back in 2014 to decide on who Snoke is, who Rey is, who's going to be the main villain in the end, where should Kylo's arc generally go, etc.

 

Whenever you embark on a trilogy and leave your first film open-ended like The Force Awakens does, you invariably set some sort of traejectory for the rest of the trilogy. For instance, the idea that Luke was in self-imposed exile and would be unwilling to rejoin the struggle, as explored in The Last Jedi, was all but inherent in The Force Awakens. This has naught to do with some elaborate story outline: its just inherent to how The Force Awakens was made.

 

I don't think any of the principal directors or writers on this trilogy seriously tried to grapple with who Snoke was: its not really relevant to his position. Like, how much do we really know of Sidius' origins? There are some characters who benefit from NOT having a backstory. Consequently, I'm sure JJ Abrams just revelled in leaving it a mystery, and Johnson enjoyed undercutting it by making Snoke a monologuing buffoon who ends up betrayed.

 

Rey is a different matter. Honestly, when I first saw The Force Awakens, the question of who she was in terms of lineage didn't concern me or cross my mind. She's a heroine in a rags-to-riches story and that's it. On rewatch, I did notice that the film is trying to build a mystery around her origins. Its telling that Abrams cuts just as Maz asks: "Who's the girl?"

 

But still, its the sort of thing that I think thrives on sheer mysteriousness. I think making Rey related to anyone in the Star Wars franchise will detract from her rags-to-riches journey. We initially sympathized with her because she was an orphan. Johnson didn't "subvert" anything here: he just grasped the underlying dramatic idea and rolled with it. But not before he tried teasing the opposite to make it something of a surprise where it needn't be one.

 

Kylo's journey is, to my mind, set in the closing act of The Force Awakens. Since his introduction in the opening scene, Kylo is presented as having the potential to turn good a-la Vader. But when he kills his father in the end of the film, that's to me where the film stops being a remake and shows that, unlike Vader, Kylo has crossed the rubicon and is beyond redemption. 

 

Its a traejectory bolstered by Johnson as he shows Kylo feigning moral deliberations, where in fact he's just trying to get Rey to help him usurp The First Order. At the end of the film, he has absolutely no qualms about killing anybody; and when Rey last has a force connection with him, she shuts the door on him, effectivelly telling us she gave up on saving him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watching the interview you just posted, Kennedy is saying that Palpatine's return was "in the blueprint for a long time." But she doesn't say on her own volition that it was decided upon since Episode VII - she only responds with the affirmative when the reporter all but puts that sentence in her mouth. It could almost seem as though she was caught off-guard as she was about to move on, and misspoke. Are there other interviews on this matter?

 

Even if it isn't so, there's a lot to interperate about it "being in the cards". Was it simply picking up on Lucas' original idea that the Emperor would be confronted in Episode IX? Was it picking up on a concept that was considered for Episode VII but rejected, as Lucas would often do?

 

I think its entirely possible that, after being rather upfront about making things up as they went along, the blokes at Lucasfilm learned that fans such as yourself don't like hearing this, and instead started to adopt a similar rhetoric as George Lucas did in the 1980s. It wasn't above Lucas to blatantly lie about this subject, and I'm not entirely sure its above Kathleen Kennedy, either.

 

Which is why I would love to see a treatment or synopsis of Episode IX featuring Palpatine's return, and dated to before production on The Force Awakens. That'll be a little harder to argue with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or maybe it's not above Rian Johnson to lie when he said 'he could do whatever he wanted with Episode VIII after not meeting with (Executive Producer) JJ Abrams'. (Or perhaps Johnson spoke extensively with JJ over the phone or email.) The interviewer wanted a definitive answer, and Kathleen Kennedy gave it to him: Episode IX was always going to include Palpatine's return.

 

This aligns with this recent statement from JJ Abrams:

 

"Some people feel like we shouldn’t revisit the idea of Palpatine, and I completely understand that. But if you’re looking at the nine films as one story, I don’t know many books where the last few chapters have nothing to do with those that have come before. If you look at the first eight films, all the set-ups of what we’re in IX are there in plain view."

 

This confirms that my selected (intriguing) quotes from TFA, TLJ, and the canon material were included quite deliberately as "set-ups" and proof of their plan. Episode IX will reveal their meaning.

 

With so much at stake, Abrams and Kennedy were never going to leave the story of the Sequel Trilogy up to chance, with three separate writers and directors. I'm sorry, but with all of this information at hand, only a fool would conclude otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Mattris said:

maybe it's not above Rian Johnson to lie when he said 'he could do whatever he wanted with Episode VIII

 

But what he said is perfectly in line with what JJ Abrams and Kathleen Kennedy were saying before, which was that they were "making it up" as they go along. Its also kind of evident in terms of the way the films are made: two years apart, by different filmmakers each.

 

Usually, when a trilogy has a predetermined plot traejectory, you let one writer/director take a crack at all three entries: its cheaper. You can also shoot the different entries simultaneously,  which is cheaper still.

 

But no, Disney choose to make them one at a time. If they had the bloody thing figured out, why would each film need pre-production time? Why would they need to write a script for each film individually?

 

The fact of the matter is that, under the circumstances, setting out on a trilogy with the plot being decided upon in advance isn't necessarily a good thing: it can limit creativity and make it harder to do course corrections if, halfway through, something doesn't seem to sit well with the audience. That's why most film trilogies - including the previous two Star Wars trilogies - don't go that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.