Mattris

I'm not that well known, am I? Thankfully, a PhD isn't required to understand Star Wars, nor does one need to write an essay about it to fathom its greatness.

I posted a great deal of evidence in this very topic, starting years ago. What about you? As for your requested citations, these pages contain pertinent quotes from authoritative individuals, as well as a comprehensive rundown of the history of the Star Wars canon: https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Canon https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Wookieepedia:Canon_policy "Under the direction of the Lucasfilm Story Group, all elements of Star Wars canon now operate in a unified and collaborative storytelling setting."

What question of yours did I ignore? If you can't find one, it's only fair that you answer my latest: If you concede that "George Lucas admitted to lying about having a master plan", why can't you fathom that he lied about being betrayed and his sequel treatments going unused? That's just it. I am not constructing a PhD dissertation. I'm presenting evidence and logical reasoning to support theories concerning the interpretation of a story, as well as its presentation. Whether or not it was noted by Lucasfilm that "the individual stories continually added to the Star Wars canon must adhere to the trajectory and overall vision of the story, as well as the intent of its grander themes" is irrelevant. My point is that many if not, most - of the Star Wars audience would doubt any claim of this sort, regardless of who said it. The masses simply can't fathom that they don't understand Star Wars. So they feel justified to be disenchanted and complain. ('My displeasure is someone else's fault!') My claim is 'implied through the story'. The inverse is not: that the individual stories continually added to the Star Wars canon do not adhere to a trajectory, vision, or grander themes of a story being told. My logic is sound, and I have provided canon evidence to back up my assessments and theories. To conclude otherwise without factual evidence - or at the very least, by way of literal canon excerpts - would be entirely assumptive, therefore, illogical. But you can show me the (possible) error of my ways: Simply provide evidence that supports your position.

Entertained or not, I asked you a question. You asked for a citation that is implied in long-form storytelling. lol

Almost entirely? You make it sound like George Lucas' plan to have Luke Skywalker die in Episode VIII was an afterthought. Assumption that the few major elements Hildago noted in his book were the only ones carried over is beyond naive. Over the years, I've cited more than enough to indicate I'm on the right track, with an objectively superior interpretation of the story. It's implied in the telling of the story that "the individual stories continually added to the Star Wars canon must adhere to the trajectory and overall vision of the story, as well as the intent of its grander themes." Do you really expect Lucasfilm to outright confirm it in language like that? Why don't you provide evidence that the individual stories continually added to the Star Wars canon adhere to no trajectory or overall vision... because they either never existed or have changed? Heck, I'll even accept logical reasoning... and then explain why you're likely wrong. (It wouldn't be the first time.) The majority of Star Wars projects 'underperform' because the audience doesn't understand what they're watching. I think Lucasfilm have always been telling the story they want, not producing content that will make them the most money... not in the short-term, anyway. The money will come later. But that's not Lucasfilm's primary motivation, nor was it George Lucas'. Wrong analogy. (They did not trip.) What did I say that was unreasonable? What of the popular explanation of Star Wars is reasonable? That Lucas and/or 'the new Lucasfilm' are utterly incompetent? If you concede that "George Lucas admitted to lying about having a master plan", then why can't you fathom that he lied about being betrayed and his sequel treatments going unused? People here tend to "buzz off" when they are unable to present legitimate counter-evidence. I don't know why it's thought that surface-level interpretations and assumptions are likely to be 'right' when trying to understand a story like Star Wars. "We cannot afford to take mythology at face value." - Indiana Jones And what did you get out of Star Wars? Why do you still care about it? Why do you think so many people still love it? I couldn't have said it better myself!

Pablo Hidalgo also confirmed in one of his published books (Star Wars: Fascinating Facts) that, for the sequel trilogy, Lucasfilm used important elements of George Lucas' sequel treatment that he left to the company in 2012. Contrary to popular assumption, JJ Abrams was not allowed to do whatever he wanted in TFA and TROS. Same goes for Rian Johnson's installment. The Lucasfilm Story Group is beholden to Kathleen Kennedy and the head(s) of the Lucasfilm creative department. Logically, its members don't simply tell the new story-writing contractors "what has been done and if this story will contradict something" previously told in the story and allow them to make up something off the top of their heads, which is soon entered into the canon and sent to the presses. I'd have to read exactly what Hidalgo said, but think about it: Him knowing what it means for something to 'contradict' something else implies that certain contents previously established in the story mean something. (Rest assured, they do.) The individual stories continually added to the Star Wars canon must adhere to the trajectory and overall vision of the story, as well as the intent of its grander themes... in addition to 'fitting in' chronologically so the audience can connect the dots volume-to-volume, filling in the narrative timeline. A great deal of effort goes into the multi-hundred-page Star Wars novels. (For example, the film novelizations are not simply the screenplays in novel form. They are a unique telling of each Saga Episode, scattered with elements that couldn't be conveyed in the films alone.) The Star Wars novels are filled with intriguing stuff (context, clues, hints, etc.) that prove to me that the Lucasfilm Story Group is doing its job very well. Noticing and making sense of these particular things takes a keen eye and a certain... well, you all know the rest.

I don't perceive Greedo to be important to the story. I do prefer the original film: Han Solo was threatened at gunpoint and shot in self-defense. Distraction and underestimation. The possibility that George Lucas was told by the Disney/Lucasfilm executives that they weren't going forward with his sequel treatment - but, in fact, did - is so remote, it treads into the territory of absurdity. They lied to Lucas about breaking a promise? Nonsense. Could you rephrase?

What makes you think "Star Wars is but a kid’s movie"? What exactly comprises "a kid’s movie"? Why are you here talking so much about "a kid’s movie"? On the contrary, I know I'm right... and with more than enough evidence to prove it. I presented some of it in this very thread, a fact you and others habitually ignore. You really have no good reason to doubt me. Compared to your interpretation of Star Wars, mine is objectively superior: All featured character arcs, throughline themes, and major plot elements within the story actually have a rhyme and a reason. All told, it amounts to a story worth being told to everyone, not just to kids. You don't think you're right, do you? Based on what evidence and logical reasoning? Surely, you have something to offer! Honestly, I glanced over your utterly pathetic response and noticed - not for the first time - that you made no good points; you're just contradicting me from a perceived position of strength when you actually have nothing hold on to but assumptions.

Clearly wasn't supposed to do? When/where did he say this? John Williams revealing that he's already recorded the score for Episode X - before the film's even been announced - would perhaps be the worst mistake of his professional career... not simply 'forgetful'. He may be almost 92, but he's not foolish or senile!

Yes, I know that. I was drawing the connection between this interview and the comedic bits Daisy Ridley and Josh Gad produced before TLJ came out. Daisy's even looking away from the camera, a clear indicator that she's lying... and/or trying to remember how she was supposed to respond to the questions. Trust me, it's not a tell-all from someone who knows the complete truth. These are actors acting... and trolling. John Williams would have 'forgotten' that he wasn't supposed mention perhaps the biggest secret of his career? I think the man is much smarter than you give him credit. Why? You consider Lucas a pathologic liar.

I addressed this. Rey's lineage/origin was locked-in as the trilogy was being formulated on a basic level. Daisy Ridley didn't need to know the truth and wasn't told until 2018, making her performances in TFA and TLJ that much more authentic. This interview is 'a bit', adding to the series that Gad and Ridley shot - along with many other famous actors - in the lead up to TLJ. (They're still available on YouTube.)

What reason would he have to do that? Surely, such a 'reveal' would be breaking an NDA.

At least. Wasn't there one estimate/report that said there was the score as heard in the film, plus 90-minutes that wasn't used?

It's likely that the only things that 'changed considerably' during the post-production of TROS were editing related. John Williams was able to re-record - or entirely re-write - some cues within the recording schedule. Any editing of the film that occurred after the recording sessions had finished would necessitate editing/tracking of the already-recorded music. Production of IX was rushed - and expensive (at least $416M, plus marketing) - because the shoot also included Episode X. This would explain why the post-production of TROS was so hectic: Johnny and JJ Baby had to finish their work on two films... then step away. Job done.

Episode X is already finished. They'll probably complete principal photography of XI and XII before X is released. As for release dates, I'm keeping in mind that a significant 50th anniversary is on the horizon.

I wonder, do you have any factual or canonical evidence of this? Inconsistencies, such as? Name a single thing you haven't assumed about your interpretation of Star Wars. Occam's Razor dictates that, when presented two opposing conclusions, the more simple one is almost always correct. The most simple explanation: There was a plan for Star Wars from its inception. With the creator personally handing the keys to a trusted associate to continue and complete the story, the plan is still on. It benefits the story - and the telling of the story - if the audience doesn't totally understand what's happening. So to see out their trixie plan, Lucasfilm enacted a troll so powerful, the masses couldn't fathom it's just that and will remain ignorant, assuming, and distracted. When the time is right, Lucasfilm will strike, surprise... and win. (It's all consistent with the "effective Jedi trap", as described in the Revenge of the Sith novelization.) You did not... since it wasn't confirmed within the story that Anakin was redeemed. Do you even know what redeemed means? Perhaps he is just that, with many talented people to see his vision through to the end. There must be more to the story for it to be complete, much less, good. Otherwise, Star Wars is akin to X-Men, and George Lucas lied about literally everything about his work. You clearly do not. I predicted things about Star Wars that few thought were even remotely possible, much less, likely. To back up my theories, I presented canon evidence and logical reasoning. So, no... I am very much not "like the rest" of you all. Wrong. Episode IX ended identically to VI, which continued onto VII. It is 100% logical to expect Episode X to follow, the start of another trilogy. The only "nonsense" I spouted was assuming that Lucasfilm were betraying George Lucas... and were going to conclude the Saga with Episode IX. (All related theories and conclusions related to these massive assumptions were clearly wrong. I now know better.) Emperor Palpatine is not merely "a fan favorite big bad". He's the villain of the Saga. His return was clearly not "entirely predictable", as I was the only one here who predicted it. The story is only lame if it's interpreted as a small child would. You are not aware of Star Wars matters "as they are"; you only have a perception. It has not been confirmed that you are right in your assessment. You have theories, just as I do. "The difference between" me and the rest of you here is that I have primary evidence and factually-present musical clues to bolster my theories. You do not, only a child-like reading of the story and a list of assumptions a mile long. Star Wars was released as a book first, followed by many subsequent volumes including shows, novels, comics, and video games. It's a sprawling Saga primarily meant to teach life lessons and universal truths. Diminishing the work as 'a lame child's story' is a disservice to its very purpose, making it essentially useless apart from the visual/aural spectacle of it all. I'm not the one exhibiting "mental gymnastics" here. I accept everything in the canon and have made sense of it. You are picking and choosing what counts or can be thrown away, like Star Wars is a cafeteria, or something. Enough generalizations. Why don't you present some evidence indicating "there is no cohesive vision" for Star Wars beyond 'This element doesn't make sense', 'That thing was stupid', 'I perceive a plot hole/inconsistency', or 'I don't like this volume'. I'll wait.

Some say the OT is evidence of 'no plan for Star Wars'. But that's not evidence. The fact that you - along with many people - didn't want, like, or expect what happened in the sequel trilogy is irrelevant to the story being told. Your inability to discern a narrative/thematical throughline in the trilogy - particularly as the story continued beyond Episode VI - is on you. This goes for in any installment of Star Wars. Making grand assumptions like 'Star Wars wasn't planned from the beginning and is (still) being made up as they go.' doesn't help you. It only keeps you in a state of ignorance. I've made sense of the sequel trilogy, three films which were executive-produced by JJ Abrams. The list of evidence that they were planned is a mile long. I posted some of it in this very topic. It's only a secret because you - as part of the hive-minded Star Wars audience - haven't figured it out yet... and they don't want to spoil it for you. I can confirm that I'm not a part of any cult. When they are ready, their trap will be closed. What do you mean by 'trolling'? My current Star Wars predictions align with the 'wacky' things I predicted that were proven right... when everyone thought I was nuts. It is. The makers of Star Wars are so far ahead of their audience, it's astounding. Before TROS, I believed the lie that it marked 'the end of the Skywalker Saga'. (There is no such thing; it is THE STAR WARS SAGA.) I had to get past that falsity in order to move into previously uncharted territory. I was on the right track in the leadup to IX and am immensely confident in my updated predictions and theories. I still believe to be true the majority of what I thought then. Based on their lie, I had assumed that the story was going to wrap up in one more film... when it was actually four more. What a difference that realization made to my thought process! You might be onto something. The Jurassic Park dinosaurs weren't actually dinosaurs. As Alan Grant said in JP3, "What John Hammond and InGen did at Jurassic Park is create genetically engineered theme park monsters. Nothing more and nothing less." Which only bolsters my overall assessment, significantly so.

So the Lucasfilm Story Group is not doing their job? The Star Wars story is a baton passed from one person to the next, haphazardly? What evidence do you have that supports this theory? What do you think the Star Wars story was intended to be from its beginning, at least as of the time of filming the original movie? Wrong question. The question you should be asking is "Why have you assumed that Anakin was redeemed?" No, the merchandising rights (yes, product sales) yielded Lucas the capital to make the movies as he desired, as well as build his company and its subsidiaries. But it wasn't the point of the Star Wars story to have been created. Money is just a means to an end. What is 'the end' of this work, its essence and purpose? Wrong. I have this Star Wars knowledge, information, and interpretation whether you are "too stubborn or too stupid" to see it or not. No, I'm just showing you that logically there must be more to the story... that there factually is more... as seen from another point of view. I have a proven track record of successful predictions. At this point, who are you to doubt me? Ah, but the story as interpreted on a surface level is lame: It's full of plot holes, questionable themes, and moral ambiguity. The lore and history of the galaxy is unknown, especially as the Force is concerned. The Force, which is the main crutch and driving mechanism of the entire story. It's a fact that the Jedi didn't understand it well at all. And neither do you. This is because the story has not told us enough about it, where it came, how it was discovered, and how it works... certainly not within the Saga films alone. You have no confirmation that the general audience/fan interpretation of the story is correct. The fact that so many people disregard so much of the Star Wars canon should really indicate a logical conclusion: Their interpretation is likely (very) wrong. Shame people's pride and laziness impedes potential realization or progress towards deeper thought and an objectively superior interpretation of the story. Complaining and underestimating are the popular default responses. How utterly sad. I agree, "the truth doesn't care how it makes you feel." But you don't seem to have any pertinent facts, much less "dull" ones. You've presented no substantive evidence that I am experiencing a 'delusion'. You may think you're not delusional, but we both know you're not having "fun". What do you think Star Wars means to me?

The story will go on, regardless of audience's interest level. (Mark my words though: They'll be back.) What's the story? Are you sure you're using the word 'redemption' correctly? And what did you take away from them? What was the point, ya think? Darth Vader committed - and ordered - some pretty evil stuff throughout the OT. Showing Anakin as a good kid... than having him kill kids - in the name of good intentions, of course - was intended to show how far someone can fall into darkness. It's some pretty serious shit, if you think about it. What do you think was "the main story arc of the original six at its very core"? If so, then Star Wars just might not be for 'the rest of you'. At that point though, one's overall perception of the story will still be dependent on their interpretation, as with all stories. In the end, I think Star Wars will be fairly clear about what it was all about. If the Saga is to be truly complete, then enough will have been provided within the story to understand it well. So many things will finally makes sense. At this time, far too many important facets of the narrative, themes, and lore simply do not add up... at least if the story is interpreted on a relative surface level, that of a child. To those who aren't aware of these things, I expect the story will surprise that much more as it continues and eventually concludes. But at the end of the day, I don't need you - or anyone else - to make Star Wars what it means to me. You can say the same, but I'll bet it's something lame.

Why should one good act 'redeem' someone after thousands of atrocities, evil of the worst kind?

I'm entertained by Star Wars also. This doesn't preclude me from reading into it - and getting out of it - what I think was intended. George Lucas made clear from the beginning what was the foundation and purpose of the story: It's a "modern fairytale" formed from the old myths. If you're aware of this fact, you are choosing to ignore it. You may be shocked when you eventually 'realize the truth': Along with the majority, you were in the Matrix all along. It was 'your boy Mattris' who was in 'the real world'. Star Wars is a story of the greatest quality... and not just for kids. For his Star Wars contributions, John Williams will be given the further credit he deserves... once it's finally confirmed how much more substance he baked into the scores than most noticed because he knew then what I know now. The difference is, my interpretation is based on the literal words of the official canon - in addition to the films alone - namely the screenplays and novelizations. Words have meaning, and I garner meaning in certain phrases and reoccurring themes throughout the totality of the story, especially as they relate to other important stories and the human experience. (I quoted dozens of them in this very topic, illustrating how I arrived at my theories which were proven right.) What does your little Star Wars essay indicate? Are you sure about that? On what are you basing your conclusion? Simple minded? You are denying the literal words of the only primary evidence we have! No, you just don't perceive deeper layers, perhaps because you don't want to. You don't want to try. You don't want to acknowledge you may have missed something. That you could be wrong. What do you mean by "redemption"? What do you think Lucas intended with Anakin's overall character arc or the story, in general? What do you think were the moral takeaways for the kiddies? I agree that the story treats the audience like dumb children. (And most took the bait.) You may have been "stupidly entertained for 2 hours". But from a certain point of view, the Star Wars story is just as profound. You just don't know it yet.

"It is useless to resist!" That's not Rey's part in the story. "These are your final steps..."

To keep their audience in a state of underestimation. So when the makers of Star Wars really want to impress or surprise, they'll have the viewing masses right where they want them: in a state of shock and awe. After his infamous tell-all interview with Charlie Rose, George Lucas should never again have been seen anywhere near a Lucasfilm production, much less on the set of a major Star Wars project. I joined JWFan 22 years ago! That's the point. But we haven't seen 'the end' yet. One more trilogy should do it. ("Never more than twelve." - Kino Loy to Cassian Andor)

The sheer volume of these so-called rumors should raise eyebrows. I think Colin Trevorrow's IX script, pre-production art, and scores slates 'leaking' on the same day was meant to have been a major clue to the reality of all this. For me, it was the final straw. Obviously, they can't tell us the (full) truth regarding their Star Wars plans because that would ruin the surprise. They can't say nothing because that would be too suspicious. So they did the one thing we didn't expect: They lied.

With my story evidence as the basis for my theories and conclusions, I see Lucasfilm's seemingly endless chaos/controversies/cancelled Star Wars projects as a distraction to make them appear (even more) incompetent to the disillusioned fans. ('Act weak when you are strong'.) Han (in Shriywook, to Chewy): You and I freedom make... by secret battle of pretend. Ol' George visited the set of The Mandalorian for photos with the crew and Baby Yoda. He also stood next to Kathleen Kennedy and laughed with her, as shown in one of the official behind-the-scenes videos. Strange behavior for someone who had been betrayed.