Star Wars Disenchantment

[greenturnedblue 372]

13 hours ago, Chen G. said:

I don't think that's temp-track emulation as such. I think, in-line with the slightly meta, slightly tongue-in-cheek touch of the film, the score is also doing the same kind of thing. So when Snoke tortures Rey, in comes Williams' on the soundtrack: "Boy oh boy, this scene sure does look familiar, ain't it, folks?! hehe..." and all just shortly before Johnson turns it on its head.

The one point I concede to Mattris that there is at least one reference to Palpatine's return in IX in the form of his theme playing as Snoke tortures Rey, you say was completely unintentional and should not be interpreted that way at all. It was simply JW conning the audience into thinking they've seen this before but PSYCH! Gotcha! Snoke is actually dead now! I guess this does not lead to Snoke actually being one of Sheev's puppets, that we will see in the next film, IX.

 

Also, I find it funny that:

1. Chen says SW had little to no planning at all, GL made up much of the plot details on the fly, with retcon after retcon to explain why Vader is in the suit, Vader is Luke's father, Leia is Luke's sister, Anakin and Vader are the same person, What Ben meant by 'the clone wars'.. you even told me Vader's suit was a life support device was a 'retcon', even though GL decided that before SW came out

2. Mattris says SW was planned to extraordinary lengths since (at least) 1976. Alec Guinness says "Its been done with great taste and imagination. There's something more to it" leads to SEE, Episode X has already been completed! All the leaks, plot holes and mistakes, production issues, poor critical/audience reception, movies being announced and quietly shelved, has all been carefully planned since the infant days of the franchise to misdirect audiences

 

This place is hilarious

[Chen G. 3,948]

31 minutes ago, greenturnedblue said:

you even told me Vader's suit was a life support device was a 'retcon', even though GL decided that before SW came out

 

Okay, lets make order of that one.

 

There are three stages to the reason for Vader's suit: early on, throughout most of the drafts, he was just wearing it for the same reason the Troopers wear theirs. Basically, because it looked cool.

 

Then it was decided he was a burn victim from a past duel with Ben, using the suit to hide a damaged, unsightly visage. And only later still it was decided that these hideous injuries were in fact life-threatening and the suit is life-support.

 

When each of these stages in the conception of Vader happened is not entirely clear: George Lucas talks about it in interviews from shortly after the debut of the original film and, after The Empire Strikes Back, Mark Hamil recalls being told of the duel "early on."

 

I'm somewhat skeptical of how authentic to the circumstances of shooting the original film Hamil's memories really are: they seem to me to be an amalgamation of elements, some of which only date to the time of filming The Empire Strikes Back. Even Michael Kaminski, who generally accepts Hamil's account, admits in his book that it could simply be that "Hamill’s memory is a bit foggy."

 

I guess that because the story of Star Wars' creation is riddled with so much misinformation, I take the extreme approach that unless something is attested outright in production materials, it probably didn't happen until such time as definitive proof of it is to be brought forth. Its a bit of a harsh approach - what's called Ex Silentio - but historians do sometimes resort to it and I think that's the right approach in this instance.

 

All in all, the productions are extremly well-documented and Lucas' stream-of-conscious-style notes as well as any artwork people like Ralph McQuarrie were working on tend to illuminate any direction Lucas was so much as considering with his storytelling; so I do think Ex Silentio arguments have their room in exploring the history of these films.

 

At any length, even Kaminski suggests that while the idea of a scarred Vader may have been arrived at during production, the idea that such injuries were life-threatening was concieved-of only in post-production.

[Demodex 557]

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

What "other factors" do you think are affecting my beliefs on this matter? Critical thinking? Superior comprehension? Attuned discernment?

 

It's certainly not humility.  🙄

Do people you know in real life agree with your assertion that Episode X was already filmed?  Or do they just roll their eyes and think you're nuts like we do?

 

 

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

Seeking to understand the story - and the overall reality and purpose of Star Wars - based solely on rationale...

 

So you agree you're irrational?

 

 

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

If I didn't find anything, I would suspect that JJ or KK have the film at their house. (Just being honest.)

 

Wow. You really are crazy. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

this short-sighted approach will prove to have been a severe mistake, resulting in utter failure on the part of the Star Wars audience.

 

😄😄😄

You know these are only movies, right?  If somehow they actually make another trilogy, I don't see how any of us utterly failed at anything.  We have lives, at least. 

[greenturnedblue 372]

Yes, I realize Lucas liked Vader's suit so much, that he kept him in the suit for the entire film instead of only the sequence in the beginning where he goes through space to board the Tantive (which was later scraped anyways) and came up with the burn victim backstory to accommodate that

 

Also, I just now realized the quote in your signature is most definitely not ironic and is, no doubt, completely serious

 

[Manakin Skywalker 4,891]

.

 

 

[Mattris 416]

1 hour ago, greenturnedblue said:

The one point I concede to Mattris that there is at least one reference to Palpatine's return in IX in the form of his theme playing as Snoke tortures Rey, turns out, was completely unintentional and should not be interpreted that way at all. It was simply JW conning the audience into thinking they've seen this before but PSYCH! Gotcha! Snoke is actually dead now! I guess this does not lead to Snoke actually being one of Sheev's puppets, that we will see in the next film, IX.

 

You think truly John Williams used The Emperor's Theme  note-for-note in a torture scene 'completely unintentionally'? Why does Snoke's death negate the fact that we have seen a strong, dark-side-of-the-Force character torture someone previously in the story... that this music connection could be intentional and relevant... that Snoke and the Emperor were directly related in some way?

 

1 hour ago, greenturnedblue said:

2. Mattris says SW was planned to extraordinary lengths since (at least) 1976. Alec Guinness says "Its been done with great taste and imagination. There's something more to it" leads to SEE, Episode X has already been completed! All the leaks, plot holes and mistakes, production issues, poor critical/audience reception, movies being announced and quietly shelved, has all been carefully planned since the infant days of the franchise to misdirect audiences

 

You've got it!  Sir Alec having said that only adds to my conclusion that, "There's something more to it that you think".

 

1 hour ago, Chen G. said:

I guess that because the story of Star Wars' creation is riddled with so much misinformation, I take the extreme approach that unless something is attested outright in production materials, it probably didn't happen until such time as definitive proof of it is to be brought forth. Its a bit of a harsh approach - what's called Ex Silentio - but historians do sometimes resort to it and I think that's the right approach in this instance.

 

If "the story of Star Wars' creation is riddled with so much misinformation", why would you accept the "production materials" as credible evidence?

 

1 hour ago, Chen G. said:

At any length, even Kaminski suggests that while the idea of a scarred Vader may have been arrived at during production, the idea that such injuries were life-threatening was concieved-of only in post-production.

 

Care to explain Vader's seemingly labored breathing of which the helmeted Stormtroopers don't exhibit?

 

44 minutes ago, Demodex said:

Do people you know in real life agree with your assertion that Episode X was already filmed?  Or do they just roll their eyes and think you're nuts like we do?

 

This assumes that others are aware of my theories.

[Chen G. 3,948]

9 hours ago, Mattris said:

If "the story of Star Wars' creation is riddled with so much misinformation", why would you accept the "production materials" as credible evidence?

 

This is an aside, but it is true that Lucas isn't above doctoring production materials: there's a fake version of the script to the original Star Wars, doctored by Lucas in November 1979, which features the "Episode IV: A New Hope" header, a different completion date, is edited to match the finished film, and includes a version of the Jabba scene featuring an alien description: all attributes that don't hold to the ACTUAL script.

 

Likewise, JW Rinzler's otherwise definitive making-of books have been somewhat tempered-with by Lucas: the book makes it seem like Lucas spoke about Midichlorians in August 1977, but elsewhere Rinzler attests:

 

Quote

While we were preparing the text for The Making of Star Wars, Lucas added a note to this passage about midi-chlorians, bringing his original words in line with his later thoughts and the events of the prequel trilogy.

 

Another example is that Rinzler lists all drafts of The Empire Strikes Back subsequent to the first draft as being Episode V, on the strength of the fact that a typed version sent to Alan Ladd Junior had that title, however it is made clear that this draft was only drawn-up "a few months later" and was appended with Ralph McQuarrie artwork, most of which was drawn AFTER the episode numbering finally switched from "Episode II" to "Episode V", which seems to have only happened in early 1979.

 

Yet another example has to do with Lucas' reading habits: Rinzler suggests Lucas read Bruno Bettleheim's Uses of Enchantment in 1976, even though the book only came-out in 1977. He suggests Lucas got an "advance copy." He didn't: instead he read an extended excerpt released in December 1975 in The New Yorker. Rinzler actually quotes several notes of Lucas that, he doesn't care to clarify, actually quote the Bettleheim column verbatim.

 

Kaminski also accused the book of downplaying the role of Marcia Lucas in the editing of the original film: the book credits Richard Chew is the main editor, whereas previous books on the subject consistently credited Marcia with that honour.

 

So yeah, even production materials are not implacable as pieces of evidence. But through cross-referencing, you can presumably uncover the truth as much as possible.

 

That's not what YOU do, though.

[Brando 1,860]

42 minutes ago, Manakin Skywalker said:

You're all wrong. See, last week I broke into Skywalker Ranch, crawled through the depths of the mile-long underground Lucasfilm archives, and discovered that between 1988 and 1994, George Lucas wrote, directed, filmed and completed Episodes X-XII and Disney intends to release them in 2027 for the 50th anniversary. Joel McNeely scored episodes XI and XII, and George was waiting for John to score episode X along with IX (so Mattris was right!) I was able to save a copy of each film to a 1TB USB flash drive.

 

And now I present to you some actual, real screencaps of Episodes X-XII:

 

 

[Mattris 416]

39 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

So yeah, even production materials are not implacable as pieces of evidence. But through cross-referencing, you can presumably uncover the truth as much as possible.

 

That's not what YOU do, though.

 

Oh, I do... using the published official canon material as evidence, volumes that are consistent and reliable over the decades... unlike the production materials, which you just admitted are inconsistent and unreliable.

 

 

[greenturnedblue 372]

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

that this music connection could be intentional and relevant

You misunderstand. This specific detail, looking back, does seen to hint that Snoke is somehow under the Emperor's control or guidance in some way. When I said it was "completely unintentional and should not be interpreted that way at all", I was mocking Chen, who replied to me explaining that it was all a tongue in cheek meta reference

[DarthDementous 1,059]

  

3 hours ago, Mattris said:

I don't know. What evidence could possibly exist as valid for causing me to believe there isn't a plan for Star Wars... or wasn't a plan for the sequel trilogy?

Then there's literally no point in answering your question. You won't accept any evidence I give you because you can't conceptualize any. Starting to notice a pattern, anyone?
 

3 hours ago, Mattris said:

For starters:  Could I have access to every Disney/Lucasfilm/subsidiary companies' servers, vaults, data drives, computer systems, and reels of film to see that nothing even possibly related to Episode X exists?

 

If I didn't find anything, I would suspect that JJ or KK have the film at their house. (Just being honest.)

Here we have the 'bones of Christ' argument, common when someone wants to make out that their belief can be disconfirmed by evidence but in reality shows the exact opposite because they set the bar ridiculously high. For those not in the know, 'bones of Christ' goes along the lines of this. You're arguing with someone about whether Jesus Christ actually ascended back into heaven and wasn't just a normal person, and the person asks you to show them the bones of Christ, the implication being that it would take that in order to prove that he was a regular person. The problem being, there's hundreds of potential explanations for why we don't have the skeleton of Jesus Christ on hand and none of them have to do with divine resurrection. So here Mattris you've done the equivalent of asking me to present the bones of Christ, like that is the only possible way in order to come to the conclusion there isn't a grand plan for a second Sequel Trilogy, and then admitted that even if I gave you the equivalent of the bones of Christ, you'd still hold onto that belief anyway. I appreciate your honesty, but this is the most definitive proof, straight from the horse's mouth, that your belief is 100% not based on evidence.

 

3 hours ago, Mattris said:

What "other factors" do you think are affecting my beliefs on this matter? Critical thinking? Superior comprehension? Attuned discernment?

All I have are guesses without you admitting anything but from your constant defense and dismissal of any criticism towards the Disney canon I suspect there's some kind of coping mechanism at play. You're fond of all this stuff that a lot of people shit on and dismiss, so you cling to the idea that they're 100% incorrect about how the way they feel because they're missing critical secret information that you, the only member of the public, are privy to. This way you can cope with the extreme negative backlash and feel above them because you get the 'true meaning of Star Wars'. It's not unlike the kind of thinking that drives people towards conspiracies.

 

3 hours ago, Mattris said:

Star Wars is a story based in philosophy and other facets of human thought/study/comprehension/mystery. Seeking to understand the story - and the overall reality and purpose of Star Wars - based solely on rationale (popular audience assessment, interpretation of cast/crew tell-alls, and indisputable physical evidence only after-the-fact) is terribly limiting. Mark my words, this short-sighted approach will prove to have been a severe mistake, resulting in utter failure on the part of the Star Wars audience.

I'm not talking about understanding Star Wars, I'm talking about having proof for what Lucasfilm are actually working on right now as we speak and what their plans really are. You obfuscate the entire conversation by bringing in all this waffle about how the signs were there in the canon all along, deliberately placed there as a coordinated effort by every single creative who ever worked on the Disney era of Star Wars, yet are making hard statements about the fact of Lucasfilm production that you can't back up with any facts.
 

3 hours ago, Mattris said:

The works of the Star Wars canon and music are the only evidence that should be truly accepted since they are part of its official recorded history. This evidence can 'have bearing on the realities of Lucasfilm productions' if select excerpts/examples from this content are shown to have eluded to, connected, and foreshadowed what has happened and will happen in the story.

"Can" is not good enough. Correlation is not causation.

[Demodex 557]

"The Emperor's theme" is used to represent the Dark Side of the Force, not just Palpatine. Its use in AOTC after the Tusken slaughter has nothing to do with Palpatine. It just represents the Dark Side in Anakin. 

 

In other news, Yoda's theme is used in Cloud City because Boba Fett is actually Yoda in disguise. 

[Nick1Ø66 4,709]

I teach trial advocacy skills as an adjunct law prof, and this exchange is somewhat reminiscent of the section on juries and confirmation bias.

 

Basically, once a juror has made up their mind on a case, they become very selective how they approach evidence. Evidence which tends to support whatever they've decided is accepted with little or scrutiny, no matter how weak, whereas any evidence which doesn't fit with their conclusions is more readily dismissed, no matter how compelling. 

 

There's plenty out there to undermine Mattris's core theory that Star Wars was mapped out in detail, and there's a grand plan, but he dismisses all of it with a wave of the hand as unreliable. To be fair, others here may be doing the same to a certain extent, but to be blunt I think Mattris is much more guilty of this, which is a reflection of his dogmatism on the issue, and the way he makes his argument is frankly reminiscent of a conspiracy theorist. The fact that he's changed his tune dramatically on Star Wars here over the years (his thing used to be Kathleen Kennedy was ruining it with a SJW agenda and TLJ was heresy) only serves to undermine his credibility.  

 

Mattris is either a masterful troll or a conspiracy theorist when it comes to Star Wars (I'm hoping it's the former), either way those who are arguing with him are wasting their time. There is no argument you can make that will convince him, because he'll simply dismiss your sources as unreliable. It's a fool's game.

 

Pro Tip: The more someone has to repeatedly assert that all their arguments are based on "facts and logic", the less likely it is their arguments are based on facts and logic. A truly logical, fact based argument is a thing of beauty, is recognisable, and speaks for itself.

[SilverTrumpet 638]

Back when Phantom Menace came out, I knew Sidious was played by the guy who was the Emperor in Jedi, but I assumed they just liked him as the evil Sith guy so they recast him in a new part. So when they used the emperor theme again for him, I just thought it was one of those cases where they expand the use of the theme for other things. Sort of like how the rebel fanfare became associated with the Falcon in the Disney trilogy.

[Demodex 557]

 

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

This assumes that others are aware of my theories.

 

So either you're too embarrassed to bring these theories to people you actually know, or you have no friends. I find either one plausible. 

[greenturnedblue 372]

@Nick1Ø66 Nice to hear you are an adjunct law prof as I am a 4th year criminology student with a specialization in legal studies. I am sure you are familiar with the term "willful blindness", an important legal concept here in Canada. Seems to be a lot of that going on around here

 

Anyways, The Emperor's theme's use in AotC can easily be connected to Sidious' influence on Anakin causing him to turn to the dark side. After all, in the first draft of RotS, Palpatine tells Anakin that he orchestrated the kidnapping of Shmi. (Palpatine also tells Anakin that he influenced his birth through midichlorians. This was further expanded in the canon Darth Vader comics:)

Spoiler

 

40 minutes ago, SilverTrumpet said:

Back when Phantom Menace came out, I knew Sidious was played by the guy who was the Emperor in Jedi, but I assumed they just liked him as the evil Sith guy so they recast him in a new part. So when they used the emperor theme again for him, I just thought it was one of those cases where they expand the use of the theme for other things

Back then, a lot of casual viewers didnt notice or recognize the Emperor's theme, and were caught by surprise when the character became/turned out to be the Emperor

 

Also @Chen G., any idea what book this is from?

Spoiler

 

[Schilkeman 961]

54 minutes ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

The more someone has to repeatedly assert that all their arguments are based on "facts and logic"

I’m not an illogical person. Some of my best friends are logical.

[DarthDementous 1,059]

1 hour ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

I teach trial advocacy skills as an adjunct law prof, and this exchange is somewhat reminiscent of the section on juries and confirmation bias.

 

Basically, once a juror has made up their mind on a case, they become very selective how they approach evidence. Evidence which tends to support whatever they've decided is accepted with little or scrutiny, no matter how weak, whereas any evidence which doesn't fit with their conclusions is more readily dismissed, no matter how compelling. 

 

There's plenty out there to undermine Mattris's core theory that Star Wars was mapped out in detail, and there's a grand plan, but he dismisses all of it with a wave of the hand as unreliable. To be fair, others here may be doing the same to a certain extent, but to be blunt I think Mattris is much more guilty of this, which is a reflection of his dogmatism on the issue, and the way he makes his argument is frankly reminiscent of a conspiracy theorist. The fact that he's changed his tune dramatically on Star Wars here over the years (his thing used to be Kathleen Kennedy was ruining it with a SJW agenda and TLJ was heresy) only serves to undermine his credibility.  

 

Mattris is either a masterful troll or a conspiracy theorist when it comes to Star Wars (I'm hoping it's the former), either way those who are arguing with him are wasting their time. There is no argument you can make that will convince him, because he'll simply dismiss your sources as unreliable. It's a fool's game.

 

Pro Tip: The more someone has to repeatedly assert that all their arguments are based on "facts and logic", the less likely it is their arguments are based on facts and logic. A truly logical, fact based argument is a thing of beauty, is recognisable, and speaks for itself.

That's really cool that you're an adjunct law professor. I find myself often applying pseudo-legal methods for trying to discern truth as I believe it's a pretty robust system for doing so, and it's nice to know that I'm on the right track of actual legal procedure because this is pretty much what's been running through my head this entire conversation. Interesting context I wasn't aware of about Mattris previously taking a negative political stance on Disney Star Wars, makes me want to amend my theory that the dogmatic belief of a grand plan came from disillusionment rather than dismay at something you like being trashed by other people.

If only there was a way to get someone to recognize their confirmation bias and realize why that's such a terrible thing if you genuinely do care about the truth, but pointing it out just seems to entrench people further.

You're right that no argument based on evidence will convince him, that's what I've been trying to get him and others to realize.

[Tallguy 3,381]

How do I know that Star Wars was not planned from the start? Because they introduced two characters who later (MUCH later) became written as siblings as the CENTRAL LOVE INTEREST to the original film and then marketed it that way.

 

Also because Gary Kurtz told us so.

 

And also just about everything else.

[Mattris 416]

2 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

  Then there's literally no point in answering your question. You won't accept any evidence I give you because you can't conceptualize any.

 

It was a hypothetical question. Whether you think I "won't accept any evidence" you give me is irrelevant to the question:

 

What evidence could possibly exist as valid for causing me to believe there isn't a plan for Star Wars... or wasn't a plan for the sequel trilogy?

 

2 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

I appreciate your honesty, but this is the most definitive proof, straight from the horse's mouth, that your belief is 100% not based on evidence.

 

What an absurd statement. Have you forgot what I posted? What could my belief be based on, if not evidence?

 

I grow tired of asking, so this will be the last time... What is your belief based on?

 

2 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

All I have are guesses without you admitting anything but from your constant defense and dismissal of any criticism towards the Disney canon I suspect there's some kind of coping mechanism at play.

 

To quote you, guesses and suspicions "are not good enough."  You need factual and/or canonical evidence to prove me wrong... which it seems you don't have.

 

2 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

You're fond of all this stuff that a lot of people shit on and dismiss, so you cling to the idea that they're 100% incorrect about how the way they feel because they're missing critical secret information that you, the only member of the public, are privy to. This way you can cope with the extreme negative backlash and feel above them because you get the 'true meaning of Star Wars'. It's not unlike the kind of thinking that drives people towards conspiracies.

 

This "critical secret information" is not secret. It's in the publicly-available canon. I posted some examples in this very thread.

 

The meaning I've garnered from Star Wars is not dependent on what others have garnered from it or its "extreme negative backlash". I may eventually choose to share more specifics of my Star Wars interpretation, which was derived from the literary canon and other works from which George Lucas stated that he drew inspiration.

 

I can assure you, this is not an instance of "coping" for me. Though, it may be for others down the line.

 

2 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

I'm not talking about understanding Star Wars, I'm talking about having proof for what Lucasfilm are actually working on right now as we speak and what their plans really are. You obfuscate the entire conversation by bringing in all this waffle about how the signs were there in the canon all along, deliberately placed there as a coordinated effort by every single creative who ever worked on the Disney era of Star Wars, yet are making hard statements about the fact of Lucasfilm production that you can't back up with any facts.

 

My theory for Episode X having been already filmed was based on this line of logic:

 

- Based on my assessment of the entirety of the Star Wars canon, a fourth trilogy was always planned.

 

- Episode IX was officially marketed as, "The Saga Will End".

 

- Just as another film/trilogy past Episode VI was a surprise to the audience, any film past Episode IX would also be a surprise.

 

- Disney and Lucasfilm want to succeed in another surprise  as the Saga continues with Episode X.

 

- An official announcement of Episode X (going into production, having been already made, and/or given a release date far in advance) would mean that any possible "Surprise!" would be rendered impossible, or at the very least, would be significantly diminished by a standard marketing campaign.

 

- It follows that Episode X must have been made in secret.

 

- The long shoot for trixie was the perfect time/place to have also filmed X... and explains why its production was 'rushed'.

 

- Post production for X could have easily been completed behind closed doors, as time/budget allows.

 

- We are aware of a significant amount of mysterious/unused musical score.

 

I have also taken into account select, curious cast/crew statements. For instance, Daisy Ridley said - around the release of TROS - that the story through Episode IX was just "An end, not the end."

 

Then there's this little gathering of JJ and the cast at Disneyland... and a strange question from Anthony Daniels at the end:

 

"How does it end?"

 

 

Did one of Star Wars' original actors just forget THE END OF THE STAR WARS SAGA when he shouldn't have even being saying a word?

 

Or was Mr. Daniels continuing to have a bit of exuberant fun, as was clearly his mood in this outside interview with JJ and the cast?  Meaning, the actor simply had a brain fart regarding the specific break point between the two films... and, given his thespian nature, decided to milk his forgetfulness by verbalizing it and putting on a bit of an act for the cameras. (JJ certainly gave him a 'why are you speaking' look.)

 

Daniels goes on to act really flabbergasted regarding the end of the movie (IX), continuing to talk when he shouldn't be. The rest of the cast seems to ignore him and starts talking themselves, except for Oscar Isaac and John Boyega, who kept poker faces.

 

I'll also note that Daisy Ridley puts on an especially pathetic face... and even had a second of practice before the interviewer's "Go!"

 

Could this all be attributed to nervous energy in reaction to a lame ending to the Saga... or are they trying a bit too hard to cover their excitement for what they had accomplished?

 

You all know what I think.

[Datameister 2,041]

Y'all, the odds that this isn't a troll job are, like … smaller than a cat turd's midi-chlorian count. 

[greenturnedblue 372]

14 minutes ago, Mattris said:

Just as another film/trilogy past Episode VI was a surprise to the audience

Was it, though? When Disney bought LF, we all knew they were going to milk the franchise to the bone, including making a bunch more movies. If Disney had not bought LF, do you think someone else would have made the films instead?

 

19 minutes ago, Mattris said:

The long shoot for trixie was the perfect time/place to have also filmed X, treated as two hours of 'deleted scenes'. This why production was 'rushed'.

The shoot for VII was April 2014-Nov 2014

VIII was Feb 2016-July 2016

IX was Aug 2018-Feb 2019

The shoot was not 'long', and it was 'rushed' because they had the least time to make it, and there were several rounds of re-writes and re-shoots.

You are saying while it took 8 months to film TFA, and 6 months to film TLJ, they somehow filmed two entire movies in 7 months?

 

And you dont see an issue with dismissing evidence contrary to your position as 'purposefully misdirection' "George Lucas is lying" "Mark Hamill is lying" "Gary Kurtz is lying" "Rick McCallum is lying" "JJ Abrams is lying" "Daisy Ridley is lying" "Bob Iger is lying" ....... "George Washington is lying".  Yet, holding things like the RotS novelization saying "One's true plans", Anthony Daniels being confused about IX's ending, Alec Guinness saying decades ago "Its been done with great taste and imagination. There's something more to it" as conclusively confirming your theory?

 

[Demodex 557]

I think Anthony Daniels simply forgot how TROS ends. He's old, and he may not have even seen the completed film. 

 

There is no Episode X.

 

 

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

 

- An official announcement of Episode X (going into production, having been already made, and/or given a release date far in advance) would mean that any possible "Surprise!" would be rendered impossible, or at the very least, would be significantly diminished by a standard marketing campaign

 

Why does Episode X have to be a surprise?  No one would be shocked if one eventually gets released, and we're going to hear about it years before it's released.

 

There is no way in hell that it is filmed already. 

 

What if in 2027 LFL announces that they are filming Episode X?  Are you going to be here arguing every day that it really was already filmed in 2019?  Seriously?

 

I'm kind of worried about you @Mattris

[SilverTrumpet 638]

2 hours ago, greenturnedblue said:

Back then, a lot of casual viewers didnt notice or recognize the Emperor's theme, and were caught by surprise when the character became/turned out to be the Emperor

 

 

I really can't remember at this point if people were debating at the time if Palpatine was Sidious or if they were just being sarcastic about it. 

 

Also, I remember people going wild at this page, and then when the creators were asked if it confirmed that Palpatine and his boss created Anakin they got really pissed. They always seem to be pissy when people get excited and come up with fan theories. 

 

2 hours ago, greenturnedblue said:

This was further expanded in the canon Darth Vader comics:)

  Hide contents

[HunterTech 989]

5 hours ago, Manakin Skywalker said:

last week I broke into Skywalker Ranch, crawled through the depths of the mile-long underground Lucasfilm archives,

 

And you didn't steal any of the recording sessions? Lame!

[Edmilson 7,426]

3 minutes ago, HunterTech said:

And you didn't steal any of the recording sessions? Lame!

I think he looked up for them, but they already were tossed in the trash years ago.

[Demodex 557]

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

I have also taken into account select, curious cast/crew statements

 

As long as they back up your theory. You've disregarded everything brought up by anyone else in this thread. 

[Manakin Skywalker 4,891]

29 minutes ago, HunterTech said:

And you didn't steal any of the recording sessions? Lame!

 

24 minutes ago, Edmilson said:

I think he looked up for them, but they already were tossed in the trash years ago.

 

Yeah, unfortunately all I could find in pristine condition were the recording sessions for the Holiday Special and two Ewok movies.

[Chen G. 3,948]

7 hours ago, Demodex said:

"The Emperor's theme" is used to represent the Dark Side of the Force, not just Palpatine. Its use in AOTC after the Tusken slaughter has nothing to do with Palpatine. It just represents the Dark Side in Anakin. 

 

7 hours ago, SilverTrumpet said:

when they used the emperor theme again for him, I just thought it was one of those cases where they expand the use of the theme for other things. Sort of like how the rebel fanfare became associated with the Falcon in the Disney trilogy.

 

6 hours ago, greenturnedblue said:

 

Anyways, The Emperor's theme's use in AotC can easily be connected to Sidious' influence on Anakin causing him to turn to the dark side. After all, in the first draft of RotS, Palpatine tells Anakin that he orchestrated the kidnapping of Shmi. (Palpatine also tells Anakin that he influenced his birth through midichlorians. This was further expanded in the canon Darth Vader comics:)

 

I think its wrong to look at leitmotives this way. Yes, they're supposed to be associated with specific elements in the narrative, but they're not so specific that they prohibit any sort of flexibility in their use: its why I like to talk of themes less in terms of names (i.e. designations) and more in terms of association.

 

I can cite hundreds of examples of themes not being used merely for their musical affect, but nevertheless being used in ways that are that little bit more flexible than how we are wont to look at leitmotives. If we look at The Ring, why do we hear the so-called "Rhine motive" when Wotan talks about having created his spear from Ygdrassil? Why do we hear the alledged "Rhinegold" motive when Siegfried confronts the Wanderer? Why do we hear the theme associated with Brunnhilde's magic sleep when Wotan awakes Erda? The supposed "Tarnhelm theme" when Hagen is plotting with Gunther to trick Siegfried? Why the "Renounciation" theme (as Wagner himself called it) when Siegmund pulls Nothung from the tree in the name of love? Why the theme of Nothung itself when Wotan names Valhalla? Why "Wotan's Spear" when Hunding remarks how similar Siegmund and Sieglinde look? Why that theme - along with one of Hunding's motives - when Siegfried and Gunther are swearing blood brotherhood? Why the theme of Brunnhilde's awakening when Gotterdamerung starts? This is NOT an exhaustive list!

 

You can look at examples like that and either quarrel with the names that have been traditionally assigned to those themes, and look for a name that covers all of the theme's bases. But that would be to miss the point that these themes are used with a little bit more flexibility than we sometimes grant. Like I heard Doug Adams' say, otherwise it "becomes an editorial decision rather than musical one."

 

6 hours ago, greenturnedblue said:

Also @Chen G., any idea what book this is from?

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Can't give you an exact citation off the top of my head, but I saw it in the pages of Kaminski, who also unearthed another interview where Lucas talks about having written twelve films, three of which he eliminated "because they were tangential" to the saga.

 

Since then, of course, Rinzler had unearthed a document - probably from the time of the second draft of The Empire Strikes Back - where Lucas is still trying to fit the film in a twelve-movie scheme which, curiously, includes two trilogies: a "Clone Wars" trilogy (episodes 2-4) and "The Star Wars trilogy" (episodes 6-8). Notice that the only entry that has any content to it is the original film, already made by this point, and even at that all it has are a few names listed under it. There's also the distinct possibility that we're looking at yet another falsified document.

 

[Mattris 416]

8 hours ago, Demodex said:

"The Emperor's theme" is used to represent the Dark Side of the Force, not just Palpatine. Its use in AOTC after the Tusken slaughter has nothing to do with Palpatine. It just represents the Dark Side in Anakin.

 

No, The Emperor's Theme  represents Darth Sidious/Emperor Palpatine. Period.  That's why it's called The Emperor's Theme, used with the character's first appearances in Episodes VI and I... and so many other uses.

 

The 'Dark Side in Anakin' was being encouraged by Palpatine alone. And if Palpatine orchestrated Shmi's kidnapping... well, you get the picture. You do, right?

 

8 hours ago, Demodex said:

In other news, Yoda's theme is used in Cloud City because Boba Fett is actually Yoda in disguise. 

 

In other news, Yoda's Theme  was used in that scene as a reference to Yoda's warning that Luke should not have prematurely left his Jedi training, that in doing so, he would be playing into the enemies' hands, that he would "become an agent of evil".

 

On top of that, I think John Williams enjoyed arranging one of his new, sweet, calm Star Wars themes in a dramatically different style.

 

8 hours ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

I teach trial advocacy skills as an adjunct law prof, and this exchange is somewhat reminiscent of the section on juries and confirmation bias.

 

Basically, once a juror has made up their mind on a case, they become very selective how they approach evidence. Evidence which tends to support whatever they've decided is accepted with little or scrutiny, no matter how weak, whereas any evidence which doesn't fit with their conclusions is more readily dismissed, no matter how compelling. 

 

Evidence to what conclusion? Lack of (perceived) evidence to confirm 'There was a plan for the Saga and/or the sequel trilogy' does not yield a conclusion that 'There was no plan for the Saga and/or the sequel trilogy.'  It just means that one cannot make a conclusion one way or the other.

 

8 hours ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

There's plenty out there to undermine Mattris's core theory that Star Wars was mapped out in detail, and there's a grand plan

 

Plenty... of what, exactly? Extremely weak/unproven/inaccurate/non-factual evidence? Agreed.

 

8 hours ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

but to be blunt I think Mattris is much more guilty of this, which is a reflection of his dogmatism on the issue, and the way he makes his argument is frankly reminiscent of a conspiracy theorist.

 

How do you figure that I'm 'much more guilty of dismissing contrary evidence with a wave of the hand' as unreliable?

 

I'm fine with being called a conspiracy theorist. I seriously think Lucasfilm are conspiring against the Star Wars audience, playing them as fools... for a greater purpose, of course.

 

8 hours ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

The fact that he's changed his tune dramatically on Star Wars here over the years (his thing used to be Kathleen Kennedy was ruining it with a SJW agenda and TLJ was heresy) only serves to undermine his credibility.  

 

Having been on the extremes of both 'sides' of this undermines my credibility? Please explain how.

 

8 hours ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

Pro Tip: The more someone has to repeatedly assert that all their arguments are based on "facts and logic", the less likely it is their arguments are based on facts and logic.

 

Or it means that I have to repeatedly assert myself because I'm talking with stubborn/ignorant/lazy/prideful people, most of whom can't even fathom publicly acknowledging that I might be onto something, as I was early 2019... after presenting evidence and debating with people that doubted my stupid/wacky theories and how I arrived at them. And then I was proven right.

 

8 hours ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

A truly logical, fact based argument is a thing of beauty, is recognisable, and speaks for itself.

 

Agreed. I'll bet Pablo Hidalgo is working on it as we speak, as am I.

 

7 hours ago, Demodex said:

So either you're too embarrassed to bring these theories to people you actually know, or you have no friends. I find either one plausible. 

 

There are reasons other than 'embarrassment' when choosing what topics to bring up with friends and family.

 

We'll see who embarrassed... eventually. (And what an event it will be.)

 

6 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

That's really cool that you're an adjunct law professor. I find myself often applying pseudo-legal methods for trying to discern truth as I believe it's a pretty robust system for doing so, and it's nice to know that I'm on the right track of actual legal procedure because this is pretty much what's been running through my head this entire conversation.

 

"actual legal procedure" won't help you understand Star Wars. Waiting for answers to be concrete won't help one's confusion/impatience/ignorance. Waiting for 100% certainty to these answers will be too late, as you will be sitting in the cinema having it spelled out to you.

 

You will have failed the test.

 

6 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

Interesting context I wasn't aware of about Mattris previously taking a negative political stance on Disney Star Wars, makes me want to amend my theory that the dogmatic belief of a grand plan came from disillusionment rather than dismay at something you like being trashed by other people.

 

You are so close-minded and short-sighted, @DarthDementous. TBH, I'm growing tired of talking to people who 'put their foot down' and refuse to have a serious look at the only real, official, documented evidence of the Star Wars stories, evidence that has existed from the very beginning: the literal stories.

 

6 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

If only there was a way to get someone to recognize their confirmation bias and realize why that's such a terrible thing if you genuinely do care about the truth, but pointing it out just seems to entrench people further.

 

Me having confirmation bias doesn't mean that I'm wrong in my assessment. If you genuinely do care about the truth, then you would be willing to discuss my evidence.

 

6 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

You're right that no argument based on evidence will convince him, that's what I've been trying to get him and others to realize.

 

WHAT EVIDENCE???

 

6 hours ago, Tallguy said:

How do I know that Star Wars was not planned from the start? Because they introduced two characters who later (MUCH later) became written as siblings as the CENTRAL LOVE INTEREST to the original film and then marketed it that way.

 

Also because Gary Kurtz told us so.

 

And also just about everything else.

 

Luke calling Leia "beautiful", agreeing to leave Tatooine with Obi-Wan to help her upon Obi-Wan's enticement, then wanting to rescue her once he was put in that position... with Luke and Leia appearing together in marketing makes her the "CENTRAL LOVE INTEREST" to Luke? They were brother and sister all along! You simply assumed that they were potential lovers... wrongly.

 

5 hours ago, Datameister said:

Y'all, the odds that this isn't a troll job are, like … smaller than a cat turd's midi-chlorian count. 

 

Me or Lucasfilm?

 

4 hours ago, greenturnedblue said:

Was it, though? When Disney bought LF, we all knew they were going to milk the franchise to the bone, including making a bunch more movies.

 

Yes, more promised stories to be told (incl. movies) did not necessarily mean 'the Saga will continue'.

 

4 hours ago, greenturnedblue said:

If Disney had not bought LF, do you think someone else would have made the films instead?

 

I don't know. But I think that George Lucas only sold LF to Disney once Kathleen Kennedy was 100% on board with what he wanted.

 

4 hours ago, greenturnedblue said:

The shoot for VII was April 2014-Nov 2014

VIII was Feb 2016-July 2016

IX was Aug 2018-Feb 2019

The shoot was not 'long', and it was 'rushed' because they had the least time to make it, and there were several rounds of re-writes and re-shoots.

You are saying while it took 8 months to film TFA, and 6 months to film TLJ, they somehow filmed two entire movies in 7 months?

 

Yes. If you add up the total shooting time, wasn't trixie the longest?

 

What evidence do we have that "there were several rounds of re-writes" or any re-writes? Those so-called re-shoots occurred throughout the summer and fall of 2019. What a rush... to get principal photography done... for two films.

 

4 hours ago, greenturnedblue said:

And you dont see an issue with dismissing evidence contrary to your position as 'purposefully misdirection' "George Lucas is lying" "Mark Hamill is lying" "Gary Kurtz is lying" "Rick McCallum is lying" "JJ Abrams is lying" "Daisy Ridley is lying" "Bob Iger is lying" ....... "George Washington is lying".  Yet, holding things like the RotS novelization saying "One's true plans", Anthony Daniels being confused about IX's ending, Alec Guinness saying decades ago "Its been done with great taste and imagination. There's something more to it" as conclusively confirming your theory?

 

What did Gary Kurtz, Rick McCallum, JJ Abrams, Daisy Ridley say that makes you think I'm calling them liars? There's also a thing called lying by omission. But these are Hollywood-types and actors who have a job to do... and NDAs to uphold, ones in which additional payment is awarded if certain information doesn't get out. (Mark Hamill, 2015).

 

But let's be honest, we don't know what these people said or did behind the scenes. We may never know. All we can do is assess these stories and try to make sense of them to the best of our abilities. The reality is, I have done this better than anyone here.

 

4 hours ago, Demodex said:

I think Anthony Daniels simply forgot how TROS ends. He's old, and he may not have even seen the completed film. 

 

There is no Episode X.

 

Anthony Daniels is not that old. The man was very jubilant, coherent, and intelligent throughout the interview. I doubt  that he forgot THE END of the Saga then decided to make a big deal about it how underwhelming it was... on camera, in front of most of the cast and the writer/director.

 

3 hours ago, Demodex said:

As long as they back up your theory. You've disregarded any brought up by anyone else in this thread. 

 

Which ones? Direct quote these cast/crew statements.

[greenturnedblue 372]

Mattris' Meltdown, 2023, colorized 

[Mattris 416]

Not melting down at all. Just demonstrating that my arguments are stronger than the counter-arguments of everyone here put together... without even getting back into the canon excerpts/evidence I posted years ago. Do we want to go there?

 

Regardless, I know what I know. I don't have to prove myself here. I'm just having a bit of fun and gaining debate practice.

[greenturnedblue 372]

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

Direct quote these cast/crew statements

Doesn't matter, as you've said the cast/crew has been fed deliberately false info to misdirect the public. And now you are asking for cast/crew statements? Are they reliable or not?

 

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

If you add up the total shooting time, wasn't trixie the longest

No

 

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

more promised stories to be told (incl. movies) did not necessarily mean 'the Saga will continue'

Doesn't it?

 

18 minutes ago, Mattris said:

the canon excerpts/evidence I posted years ago

That's what we've been asking for this whole time!

[Score 770]

5 hours ago, Datameister said:

Y'all, the odds that this isn't a troll job are, like … smaller than a cat turd's midi-chlorian count. 

 

Nah, I don't believe this is a troll job. No one (*) would go at such lengths, just for a troll job - just think at the amount of time that he must have spent to do his "researches" and reply here... it wouldn't be a reasonable investment of time. In Mattris's posts, I've seen a greater amount of logical fallacies than I would have been able to conceive if I had tried. So, either he's someone who is doing a sociological research on whether people on the internet are able to detect logical fallacies and/or for how long they are going to reply to these (so, he knows them and he's producing them on purpose to study people's responses), or such fallacies are just part of his way of approaching reality, and he truly believes in what he's saying. I think these are the most likely possible explanations. 

 

 

(*)... admittedly, based on the people that I know in real life, which might not be a representative sample of the whole population of the internet!

[Chen G. 3,948]

5 hours ago, greenturnedblue said:

"Gary Kurtz is lying"

 

Yeah, about that: 

 

Quote

"Episode V." The significance of that is that Star Wars, itself, had [been] always intended to be Episode IV. What happened was that everyone was a little nervous when Star Wars came out that no-one would quite understand what that meant and asked where the missing three films were. But, of the original story material that George Lucas wrote, there were approximately nine stories, and we had decided to start with the middle trilogy, basically, with Star Wars, which was Part IV.

 

That's clearly a lie. At the height of the franchise's success, Gary Kurtz was not above lying, either; perhaps he was encouraged to speak in a way that was consistent with the things George Lucas was saying.

[greenturnedblue 372]

Is it possible Star Wars always was meant to be #4, even if it originally just said 'Star Wars' in the crawl?

 

Also do you have anything on the dialogue changes to Vader and Palpys hologram message in V made around 03/04 to better integrate with the prequels? Did GL sit on this for a while but only got a chance to film it when he had McDiarmid in full Sheev makeup/costume for RotS?

[Demodex 557]

9 hours ago, Mattris said:

No, The Emperor's Theme  represents Darth Sidious/Emperor Palpatine. Period.  That's why it's called The Emperor's Theme, used with the character's first appearances in Episodes VI and I... and so many other uses.

 

The 'Dark Side in Anakin' was being encouraged by Palpatine alone. And if Palpatine orchestrated Shmi's kidnapping... well, you get the picture

 

Is there any proof Palpatine had anything to do with Shmi's kidnapping?  That sounds logistically really farfetched, and I never put any stock into that theory. 

 

As for the Dark Side theme, we'll agree to disagree. 

 

 

9 hours ago, Mattris said:

How do you figure that I'm 'much more guilty of dismissing contrary evidence with a wave of the hand' as unreliable?

 

😄😄😄😄  Because that's what you do constantly.   For example:

9 hours ago, Mattris said:

Plenty... of what, exactly? Extremely weak/unproven/inaccurate/non-factual evidence? Agreed.

 

 

9 hours ago, Mattris said:

You will have failed the test.

 

We'll see who embarrassed... eventually. (And what an event it will be.)

 

😄😄😄😄😄

You're so melodramatic. They're just movies for christ's sake.

And If you think I'll be embarrassed, think again.

 

 

9 hours ago, Mattris said:

All we can do is assess these stories and try to make sense of them to the best of our abilities. The reality is, I have done this better than anyone here

 

By believing an imaginary movie was written and filmed? 😄😄

 

 

 

9 hours ago, Mattris said:

Which ones? Direct quote these cast/crew statements.

 

So you can dismiss them all over again?   🙄

 

 

8 hours ago, Mattris said:

Just demonstrating that my arguments are stronger than the counter-arguments of everyone here put together.

 

So certain are you?  When you haven't changed a single person's mind?

[DarthDementous 1,059]

4 hours ago, Mattris said:

I'm growing tired of talking to people who 'put their foot down' and refuse to have a serious look at the only real, official, documented evidence of the Star Wars stories, evidence that has existed from the very beginning: the literal stories.

Of course you are, because you know without that you have nothing.

 

4 hours ago, Mattris said:

Luke calling Leia "beautiful", agreeing to leave Tatooine with Obi-Wan to help her upon Obi-Wan's enticement, then wanting to rescue her once he was put in that position... with Luke and Leia appearing together in marketing makes her the "CENTRAL LOVE INTEREST" to Luke? They were brother and sister all along! You simply assumed that they were potential lovers... wrongly.

Are we just going to ignore that Luke and Leia tongue-kissed in Empire Strikes Back...twice

[Giftheck 916]

https://screenrant.com/star-wars-luke-skywalker-sister-leia-retcon/

 

Clearly Kurtz must be lying though, it doesn't fit the Great Plan. I'm pretty sure it's also mentioned in one of the books, perhaps Paul Duncan's Star Wars Archives or one of Rinzler's books, and I'm almost certain I have the documentary where Lucas confirmed he condensed his ideas for 6, 7, 8 and 9 down into one film, I'm pretty sure that's on one of the documentaries included with the 2004 re-release of the OT on DVD.

[Chen G. 3,948]

Eh, I don't buy the narrative that Episodes VII-IX were condensed into Return of the Jedi as we know it. The fact of the matter is, Return of the Jedi was pretty much the way we know it from the very earliest sketches, so if this narrative is to be believed, the sequel trilogy only lived in George Lucas' head for a few months.

 

3 hours ago, greenturnedblue said:

Is it possible Star Wars always was meant to be #4, even if it originally just said 'Star Wars' in the crawl?

 

All the drafts of the original film are called "Episode I" or "Saga I" and almost all drafts of The Empire of Strikes Back were titled "Episode II" or "Chapter II": even the company Lucas made to produce it was called "The Chapter Two Company."

 

In the document I previously showed, the original Star Wars would have been Episode six! Only in early 1979 did Lucas decide on "Episode IV."

 

But notice that Kurtz also gives the impression that the story material for the entire saga was all generated in advance, which is of course George Lucas' big schtick. Kurtz later tried to exculpate himself to Chris Taylor saying that "both he and Lucas gave post-Star Wars interviews in which they talked about the movie being 'a section ouf the middle' of a larger story -- but that this was in the fictional Journal-of-the-Whills sense of a larger story."

 

3 hours ago, greenturnedblue said:

Did GL sit on this for a while but only got a chance to film it when he had McDiarmid in full Sheev makeup/costume for RotS?

 

If by "a while" you mean from anytime during the making of the classic trilogy then no. I know that rather than have McDiarmid superimoposed on the figure from Episode V, they rather encouraged McDiarmid to initially try and approximate Clive Revil's vocals.

[Mattris 416]

12 hours ago, Demodex said:

Why does Episode X have to be a surprise?

 

Shock value. You'll see why.

 

12 hours ago, Demodex said:

No one would be shocked if one eventually gets released, and we're going to hear about it years before it's released.

 

Most fans will be shocked simply because the Saga continues... again.

 

Rest assured, we will not hear about it years in advance.

 

12 hours ago, Demodex said:

What if in 2027 LFL announces that they are filming Episode X?  Are you going to be here arguing every day that it really was already filmed in 2019?  Seriously?

 

That depends on the specific cast/crew/content of the film. I think it would be  easy to tell if it was a 2019 film.

 

12 hours ago, Demodex said:

I'm kind of worried about you @Mattris

 

Don't worry, I'll be fine. I'm in a very good place with Star Wars right now. I can't fathom anything messing it up for me. I couldn't be more serious.

 

11 hours ago, Demodex said:

As long as they back up your theory. You've disregarded everything brought up by anyone else in this thread. 

 

The cast and crew have provided a mix of information/misinformation to throw us off. But I see through their lies... to the substance/clues they've snuck through.

 

The situation they created is similar to the one within the story, where the various characters have produced a mix of true and untrue statements. Those of the audience with a certain point of view can make the distinction.

 

4 hours ago, Demodex said:

Is there any proof Palpatine had anything to do with Shmi's kidnapping?  That sounds logistically really farfetched, and I never put any stock into that theory. 

 

Is this in an early draft of the ROTS script? I think he had Dooku make a deal with the Tusken Raiders. I'll have a look for related evidence in the ROTS novelization.

 

4 hours ago, Demodex said:

IYou're so melodramatic. They're just movies for christ's sake.

And If you think I'll be embarrassed, think again.

 

We both know that Star Wars is more than "just movies" to most Star Wars fans. George Lucas intended much with this IP, certainly more than making money and pushing film technology.

 

April 2019, you were shocked that I was right about Palpatine returning. Trust me, you'll be shocked again.

 

4 hours ago, Demodex said:

By believing an imaginary movie was written and filmed? 😄😄

 

No, as a result of my nuanced assessment of the story. One theory led to another, and here I am... supremely confident in my predictions... again.

 

4 hours ago, Demodex said:

So you can dismiss them all over again?   🙄

 

Honestly, I've forgotten which cast/crew statements you're using as critical evidence that they had no plan for the sequels. What are they again?

 

4 hours ago, Demodex said:

So certain are you?  When you haven't changed a single person's mind?

 

Yes.

 

If I presented literally everything I have, I might be able to seriously intrigue a few of you. But I suspect that most here would still laugh at me. It's what they are in a habit of doing... that, and underestimating LFL.

 

I can't help that people don't want to consider that they could be very, very wrong about something. I suppose it's human nature.

[Chen G. 3,948]

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

Is this in an early draft of the ROTS script? I think he had Dooku make a deal with the Tusken Raiders. I'll have a look for related evidence in the ROTS novelization.

 

 

In the rough draft, Palpatine tells Anakin that Dooku admitted he was the one who arranged the Tusken Raiders to kidnap his mother, and Anakin becomes enraged and kills Dooku.

[Demodex 557]

2 hours ago, Mattris said:

Most fans will be shocked simply because the Saga continues... again.

 

Rest assured, we will not hear about it years in advance.

 

Wrong.  And wrong again.

 

 

2 hours ago, Mattris said:

Don't worry, I'll be fine. I'm in a very good place with Star Wars right now.

 

I'm not talking about Star Wars.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Mattris said:

Trust me, you'll be shocked again.

 

Why would I be?

 

 

2 hours ago, Mattris said:

here I am... supremely confident in my predictions.

 

Confidence doesn't mean you're right.  Unless you're JJ Abrams, which would explain why you hated TLJ until TROS came out.

 

 

2 hours ago, Mattris said:

I can't help that people don't want to consider that they could be very, very wrong about something. I suppose it's human nature.

 

This is the most ironic statement you've ever made.     

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Mattris said:

If I presented literally everything I have, I might be able to seriously intrigue a few of you.

 

Then do this.  What have you got to lose?  

Your evidence must suck if it only MIGHT intrigue a FEW OF US.

 

[greenturnedblue 372]

3 hours ago, Giftheck said:

I'm almost certain I have the documentary where Lucas confirmed he condensed his ideas for 6, 7, 8 and 9 down into one film

 

Copied an old post I made here:

 

Quote

You can read here that Lucas and Hamill spoke of this 12-film plan back in 1976 during filming of A New Hope.

 

Time magazine also reported in 78 that work would soon begin on the sequel, ESB, and '10 more sequels'. Lucas apparently envisioned 12 films as early as 1975, but probably realized this was unnecessary or that he just didnt want to anymore as began to get burnt out and time went on.

 

Gary Kurtz also said in 99 that prior to 1980, the plan was for the entire Star Wars timeline to take place over 9 films. episode 6 would have been about Han sacrificing himself to defeat the Death Star 2 and Luke confronting Vader but failing, 7 was about Lukes life as a Jedi, 8 was about Luke finding his long lost sister and 9 was about Luke defeating the Emperor. You can see that this makes up the broad strokes for RotJ. Kurtz only worked for Lucas til 1980 so he would have had to learn about the plan at some point before then. Then, probably during development of RotJ Lucas realized this all worked better as one single film and amalgamated it all into film, leaving us with the 6 movies that got made.

 

[Mattris 416]

57 minutes ago, Demodex said:

Wrong.  And wrong again.

 

As the Monty Python skit said, "Contradiction isn't an argument."

 

57 minutes ago, Demodex said:

I'm not talking about Star Wars.

 

Thank you for your concern, @Demodex. I'll be fine.

 

57 minutes ago, Demodex said:

Why would I be?

 

Twist after twist. They didn't call it trixie for no reason. You'll see.

 

57 minutes ago, Demodex said:

Confidence doesn't mean you're right.

 

I know that what I've deduced would be most impressive. If Star Wars doesn't do it, the IP has a very rough future ahead.

 

57 minutes ago, Demodex said:

This is the most ironic statement you've ever made.     

 

Having assessed the totality of the evidence, what I've come up with makes sense of everything  to do with Star Wars.

 

What most here have come up with - or just accepted as reality - does not make sense in any way, especially not professionally or monetarily.

 

57 minutes ago, Demodex said:

Then do this.  What have you got to lose?  

 

Exclusivity. At this time, I want to have all options on the table. Revealing anything specific or significant would be unwise.

 

57 minutes ago, Demodex said:

Your evidence must suck if it only MIGHT intrigue a FEW OF US.

 

No, I just don't underestimate the level of pride some here exhibit. Though, I'm pretty sure I could win over a few of you.

[Datameister 2,041]

See, @Score? Classic troll playbook. I agree that he'd need to have a pretty strong grasp of logical fallacies to hit so many of them so hard, though. (Not to mention some pretty strange priorities, to put it charitably. Imagine wasting so much time and energy on this …)

[Mattris 416]

@Datameister, why don't you or @Score have a crack at explaining my logical fallacies and how I'm a troll?

 

I'd also like to hear each of your assessments of the grander Star Wars 'situation', complete with evidence to support you positions.

[Demodex 557]

52 minutes ago, Mattris said:

Twist after twist. They didn't call it trixie for no reason. You'll see.

 

Where did that name come from?  I've never heard it before 2 days ago (or whenever you mentioned it).  

I don't know anyone but you that calls anything that.  I don't even know what it's supposed to mean.

 

There is no Episode X at this moment.  I should just make that my signature and just make every post here "See my signature"

 

 

52 minutes ago, Mattris said:

Thank you for your concern, @Demodex. I'll be fine.

 

I'm not so sure.  Have you had a psych evaluation recently?

[greenturnedblue 372]

IX's production codename was originally Black Diamond, but was changed in June/July 2018 to Trixie, because JJ wanted it to contain 'IX'. if you watch the behind the scenes footage on YouTube you can see the crew wearing Trixie hats and t shirts etc

 

It would be like referring to RotJ as Blue Harvest

[Demodex 557]

Ok.  Thanks, @greenturnedblue