Mattris

February 1

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.

February 1

3 hours ago, greenturnedblue said:

OK... what evidence?

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."

February 1

3 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

Oh please. This is hardly the first time either one of us has ignored the other’s questions.

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?

2 hours ago, greenturnedblue said:

That's not what a citation is.. I can't submit a PhD dissertation without any citations and say there are no references, Dr, because they are implied through storytelling.

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.

February 1

1 hour ago, A. A. Ron said:

I don’t know guys, I didn’t find much entertainment in this most recent Mattris post.

Entertained or not, I asked you a question.

1 hour ago, greenturnedblue said:

I ask for a citation and you just paste in the same exact thing? lol

You asked for a citation that is implied in long-form storytelling. lol

January 31

On 30/01/2024 at 7:33 AM, Chen G. said:

That is correct. Those elements were, however, almost entirely in Episode VII.

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.

On 30/01/2024 at 8:57 AM, greenturnedblue said:

That's nice. Citation?

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.)

On 30/01/2024 at 9:52 AM, Tallguy said:

To what end? Disney makes movies / TV shows that under perform to. what, soften up the audience? So they never knew what hit 'em?

You claim that George is playing some kind of rope-a-dope with... The audience? Intentionally making it appear that he is "weak". The appearance that the Star Wars creative universe is in something of a shambles is all a ruse. All part of the plan as they say.

Why? From a creative point of view it's not telling a better story. From a financial point of view it's not making more money.

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'.

On 30/01/2024 at 10:04 AM, JTW said:

It's like when you trip in front of everybody and you say "I did it on purpose" to save face.

Gimli: That was deliberate, it was deliberate!

(Wrong franchise, right analogy.)

Wrong analogy. (They did not trip.)

On 30/01/2024 at 10:06 AM, Mr. Hooper said:

I hope you're not waiting for reasonable answers to your reasonable questions.

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?

20 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

Yeah there’s really no point in engaging anymore. Every time someone points out that George Lucas admitted to lying about having a master plan, Mattris just ignores it so he can keep playing pretend.

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?

14 hours ago, JTW said:

Exactly. Ignoring him is the only right thing to do. If he can't argue with anyone, he'll buzz off eventually.

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

8 hours ago, Edmilson said:

Already seen it.

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?

5 hours ago, Datameister said:

And don't forget that his (purported) interpretation of things is shockingly optimistic compared to most conspiracy theories.

Lucasfilm has spent the last 50 years methodically deceiving the public in order to … help us eventually derive more enjoyment and meaning from their films! It's actually kind of sweet!

I couldn't have said it better myself!

January 30

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.

JTN · January 29

10 hours ago, bored said:

But what role does Greedo have in this master plan? Are the multiple Greedos just multiple versions who have been murdered by Han in various Maclunky shooting orders? Are the special editions really George's eventual plan for Star Wars multiverse?

Only Mattris has the answers...

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.

8 hours ago, JTW said:

If Lucas planned everything all along, why didn’t Disney use his story treatments for the sequel trilogy? Or they did, only Lucas says they didn’t? And he said so because… he wants us to believe that the new story isn’t his, while it in fact is? Why would he want us to believe it isn’t?

Distraction and underestimation.

8 hours ago, JTW said:

And if it isn’t, how could it be what he planned all along?

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.

8 hours ago, Tallguy said:

Why is George pretending to be weak when he is actually strong. Who is he trying to defeat? Other than us? And he did that just fine while appearing to be at the height of his powers.

Could you rephrase?

Erik Woods · January 28

5 hours ago, JTW said:

Convincing this guy that Star Wars is but a kid’s movie, is the same as trying to convince the Pope that God doesn’t exist.

He (Matty that is) will never admit that he’s wrong, even if he knows it. He’s either delusional, or he’s just the biggest troll. Either way we’ll never be able to convince him and if we would, he’ll never admit it.

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"?

2 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

You’ll notice that instead of getting a book length reply like I usually do, he just completely ignored my most recent post. He knows he’s wrong.

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.

January 28

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!

January 28

On 27/01/2024 at 7:58 PM, Trope said:

This video was clearly shot post-TROS, given the fact that she is casually talking about Palpatine being Rey's grandfather. Also, it was uploaded to YouTube in September 2020.

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.

On 28/01/2024 at 2:00 AM, Jurassic Shark said:

Because he would forgot not to.

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.

On 28/01/2024 at 2:53 AM, Chen G. said:

I'm still amazed he had the gall to write this.

Why? You consider Lucas a pathologic liar.

Erik Woods · January 28

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.)

January 28

11 minutes ago, Jurassic Shark said:

If that was for Ep X, JW would have revealed it by now.

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

January 28

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?

January 27

On 27/01/2024 at 5:19 PM, Trope said:

@Mattris Was it always Lucasfilm and J.J. Abrams' plan to change things "considerably" during the postproduction of Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker (2019), such that John Williams ended up writing 3 hours of music as a result of continually revising and rewriting cues due to the changing picture? And was it always their ultimate plan to chop up and track the heck out of the music he provided them?

https://variety.com/2019/artisans/production/john-williams-star-wars-rise-of-skywalker-1203446034/

Or is this entire John Burlingame article bait, an entirely false narrative devised by Lucasfilm and J.J. to distract the audience from the true greatness of the final film, which turned out exactly as they originally intended? Pray, do tell!

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.

JTN · January 27

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.

January 27

3 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

Correct. Since the Disney acquisition the Story Group has done an abysmal job of creating and maintaining any sort of continuity even within just their own content, to say nothing of ensuring that it all matches the content of the George Lucas era.

I wonder, do you have any factual or canonical evidence of this?

3 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

Yes, the Star Wars story is absolutely, obviously and indisputably exactly like a haphazardly-passed baton. You may not like it, but the inconsistencies between VI and VII, VII and VIII, and VIII and IX are all definitive proof that there is no single, consistent and unified "meaning of Star Wars," secret or otherwise. That's not a "grand assumption." It's just the mundane reality of any franchise with this many creatives behind it. A better example of an unreasonable "grand assumption" would be that a large group of executives and contractors are even capable of maintaining secret mythologies, to say nothing of surreptitiously filming whole ass blockbuster movies without the public finding out.

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.)

3 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

No I had the right question. The problem is that you can't accept that Star Wars is a fundamentally flawed creation from an imperfect group of creators who don't always share the same vision. It has occasional depth, but nothing terribly well hidden and certainly nothing of awe-inspiring profundity.

You did not... since it wasn't confirmed within the story that Anakin was redeemed. Do you even know what redeemed means?

3 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

George Lucas is just a person, not some 4D chess playing mastermind ... nor does there have be any deeper "essence" or "purpose" to the franchise.

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.

3 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

Why of course I know who you are. You're some guy with a keyboard and undiagnosed mental health problems, just like the rest of us. That's why you fit in so well here in the JWFan Asylum.

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.

3 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

That said, you haven't shown that there must "logically" be "more to the story" at all. Over the years you've thrown a metric fuck ton of nonsense at the wall and a small amount of it stuck because the Lucasfilm Story Group just happened to be doing the same thing. The return of a fan favorite big bad is entirely predictable. That is all you have ever proven.

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.

3 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

I agree. The story is lame. Even you seem to know this on some level. The difference between you and the rest of us is that you can't accept things as they are. You can't handle feeling disappointed or disenchanted with the lameness of Star Wars, so you have to invent all these crazy conspiracy theories that just boil down to, "Star Wars isn't bad. People just don't understand its secret genius!"

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.

3 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

Say it with me kids, "It's just a movie."

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.

3 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

The logical conclusion here is actually much simpler than that. People have differing tastes and gravitate towards the movies they like. My tastes are closer to those of Gary Kurtz, Lawrence Kasdan and Irvin Kershner, so I like Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back the most. Many others have tastes closer to Lucas and as a result they tend to like the Prequels more than I do. Still others prefer the flavor of Rian Johnson. Each of the trilogies has a set of fans who don't really like the other trilogies as much and this makes sense because there is no cohesive vision. It's a shame your need to feel superior and your general propensity for mental gymnastics prevents you having a more objective interpretation of the saga. Quite sad indeed.

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.

January 27

6 hours ago, Trope said:

The sequel trilogy.

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.

6 hours ago, Trope said:

Also, just to be clear, is Mattris arguing that there’s a secret meaning to the Star Wars films, a truth available to only a select few and hidden from the rest? Is he a part of some gnostic Star Wars cult?

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.

4 hours ago, Tallguy said:

I don't understand why they are STILL sitting on the follow up trilogy that was already filmed. In TOTAL SECRET.

When they are ready, their trap will be closed.

3 hours ago, Trope said:

This guy must be trolling!

Oh my goodness, this is the funniest stuff I’ve read on the forum for a long time! Mattris, please keep posting!

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.

2 hours ago, Trope said:

Star Wars itself contains allegories about the making of Star Wars! This is glorious.

It is. The makers of Star Wars are so far ahead of their audience, it's astounding.

2 hours ago, Datameister said:

And don't forget that he said the same thing about TROS before it came out. It was going to blow people's socks off, receive universal acclaim, unite the fans, make TFA and TLJ suddenly gel together, reveal the secret truth of the saga's hidden meaning, etc., etc. He likes to bring up his track record of predictions that came true, which is admittedly pretty impressive … if you leave out the ones that didn't.

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!

2 hours ago, Datameister said:

I'm still waiting for the big reveal that the Jawas were created by Palpatine. Their theme starts with an upward jump of a minor third, just like Rey's and Palpatine's. It's also going to be super cool to see the next Jurassic Park film reveal that the dinosaurs were robots all along, as JW cleverly foreshadowed by starting their theme with the same three notes that start the droids' theme from ESB. The evidence is overwhelming.

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."

2 hours ago, Chen G. said:

Oh yeah, I forgot the whole "musicological" grounds for the thing.

Which only bolsters my overall assessment, significantly so.

JTN · January 27

4 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

The story is whatever the screenwriters want to tell when they sit down to write a new screenplay. Sometimes they go back to old ideas. Sometimes they say "Screw it" and do things a little different than they thought they would. Sometimes they consider the plan the last writer had in mind and decide "That's dumb, I'm going to do my own thing instead."

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?

4 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

Wrong question. The question you should be asking is "Are you sure George Lucas uses the word 'redemption' correctly?"

Wrong question. The question you should be asking is "Why have you assumed that Anakin was redeemed?"

4 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

Toy sales. The point was toy sales, Mattris.

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?

4 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

Wrong. Star Wars only means what it does to you because it lets you feel like you have some special knowledge that the rest of us are too stubborn or too stupid to see for ourselves.

Wrong. I have this Star Wars knowledge, information, and interpretation whether you are "too stubborn or too stupid" to see it or not.

4 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

You absolutely need us to make Star Wars "what it means to you.”

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?

4 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

An opinion isn't necessarily false just because you think it's "lame." The truth doesn't care how it makes you feel. Some facts are dull. Some delusions are fun. And some of us think whatever "Star Wars means to Mattris" is what's lame.

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?

January 27

2 hours ago, greenturnedblue said:

If there are any viewers left, that is

The story will go on, regardless of audience's interest level. (Mark my words though: They'll be back.)

2 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

Great question, but that is the actual story of Star Wars, regardless of whatever fever dream you’re having at the moment.

What's the story? Are you sure you're using the word 'redemption' correctly?

2 hours ago, A. A. Ron said:

Dude, we’ve actually seen these movies.

And what did you take away from them? What was the point, ya think?

1 hour ago, bored said:

Well when that evil was not seen and specifics were not given, and regret was shown in Return of the Jedi, then it was pretty easy to swallow. However making the character a child murderer even when he's still supposed to be "good" kind of destroys the whole idea that there was ever good in him to begin with, destroying the main story arc of the original six at its very core.

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"?

1 hour ago, A. A. Ron said:

Mattris, even if you one day become convinced that “all has finally been revealed” it will probably be you who is shocked when you realize that the rest of us still haven’t “seen the light” and are still rejecting your theories.

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.

1 hour ago, A. A. Ron said:

Realistically though, “all” will never be revealed and you’ll just keep saying that the big reveal is right around the corner for the rest of your life.

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.

January 27

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

JTN · January 27

5 hours ago, JTW said:

To him Star Wars is religion. To us it's a series of films and tv shows.

To him it's life. To us it's just entertainment.

He wants to believe in the Matrix so hard, that he's incapable of realizing the truth, that there is no spoon.

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'.

4 hours ago, JTW said:

Nonetheless it is just entertainment, nothing more. If you're not a kid.

That's a totally different thing. JW's scores are true works of art, orchestral music of the greatest quality.

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.

4 hours ago, Chen G. said:

I also think good drama and art should be thought of in terms of religiosity.

But I still take it as an aesthetic experience: its something you experience, and sort of washes over you. Its not a puzzle to be mechanically worked out: what Mattris is doing is essentially what the rabid Kubrickians do, dialed up to a million.

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?

4 hours ago, JTW said:

I know, but you mentioned the fans of Kubrick's films. Kubrick's films are much deeper than Star Wars. E.g. 2001: ASO is one of the greatest films ever made about the meaning of life, what it is to be human, where are we from etc. While Star Wars is just pure lighthearted fantasy escapist entertainment.

Are you sure about that? On what are you basing your conclusion?

4 hours ago, Chen G. said:

Not a fan of the movie, myself. But still, the point the movie makes is felt by experiencing it, not by the kind of very reductive, simple-minded, literal approach of looking for literal clues tucked into the corners of the frame and shapes in the background and whatnot.

Same with the kind of readings Mattris is trying to make.

Simple minded? You are denying the literal words of the only primary evidence we have!

4 hours ago, JTW said:

Star Wars doesn't have deeper layers, no matter how hard Lucas or our boy Mattris wants to convince everyone.

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.

4 hours ago, JTW said:

It has motifs like Vader's redemption, but they are all on the surface level designed so that it be easy for a kid to understand. That's why Lucas subsequently put in the "Nooo!" in RotJ because he didn't think audiences were smart enough to get what Vader is thinking during that scene. It's one of the biggest proofs how Lucas treats his audience like dumb children.

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.)

4 hours ago, JTW said:

When you watch a much more intelligently written and directed film like 2001 or Blade Runner or The Matrix, there are multiple layers that the filmmakers don't shove into your face, but let you figure out for yourself. None of these three films are mainly about entertainment, but about telling a profound story that demands the involvement, thinking and undivided attention of the audience, not just their ability of being stupidly entertained for 2 hours.

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.

January 26

27 minutes ago, Mr. Hooper said:

If you mean shock and awe in the military sense, it's worked on me. I feel overwhelmed to the point of paralysis, and have lost my will to fight back, or make myself a meal that takes more than 10 minutes...

"It is useless to resist!"

27 minutes ago, Mr. Hooper said:

Yes, another Rey-led trilogy should definitely "do it", if you mean drive the last nail in Star Wars' coffin.

That's not Rey's part in the story. "These are your final steps..."

January 26

2 hours ago, Mr. Hooper said:

And as a company that should be interested in instilling confidence in their product and getting butts in theatre seats, why exactly would they want to play this charade?

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.

2 hours ago, Mr. Hooper said:

Lucas mentored Dave Filoni, and probably sees Jon Favreau as an ally at Lucasfilm, so I wasn't surprised to see him getting comfortable on 'The Mandalorian' set. And he's a Hollywood veteran that knows how to play the game, hence that outwardly amicable behaviour we witnessed with Kennedy. If he stomped around acrimoniously, I don't think he'd be welcome on set...

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.

1 hour ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

What most of you don't realise is that Mattris is, in fact, 12 years old.

I joined JWFan 22 years ago!

1 hour ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

Now, only at the end, do you understand.

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)

January 26

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.

Trope · January 26

22 minutes ago, Mr. Hooper said:

Oh, you won't get me to believe that it's been nothing but smooth sailing over at Lucasfilm...and I'm not interested in trying to persuade you otherwise.

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.

22 minutes ago, Mr. Hooper said:

I very much doubt that Lucas is thrilled with the direction Kathleen Kennedy and Disney have taken his legacy. I just have to look at his face and demeanour in the promotional appearances he's done for them to know that, not to mention what he infamously said to interviewer Charlie Rose. But again, I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise.

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.

Profiles

Forums

Posts posted by Mattris

Important Information