Jump to content

Star Wars Disenchantment


John
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Chen G. said:

That's the most correct thing you've ever said.

 

On Star Wars matters, @Chen G., rest assured: You have no idea what's "correct".

 

You seem like someone who would consider themselves 'book smart'. I wonder, have you read any Star Wars novels?

 

To all those who laughed at and badgered me for years: You have made fools of yourselves. You just don't know it yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

You seem like someone who would consider themselves 'book smart'.

 

I prefer just "smart", thank you very much...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why did this thread start up again, and how am I just now learning that it did?

 

Mattriss is just a crazy old fool. 

Anyone that believes all the leaks about Trevorrow's script were fakes put out by LFL to troll us is not a rational person. 

 

Episode X?  Not. Happening. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Chen G. said:

I prefer just "smart", thank you very much...

 

You are you're skilled at avoiding questions, like these I already posed to you:

 

Have you read any Star Wars novels?

What do you mean by "its that time of year again..."?

 

3 hours ago, Demodex said:

Why did this thread start up again, and how am I just now learning that it did?

 

Mattriss is just a crazy old fool. 

Anyone that believes all the leaks about Trevorrow's script were fakes put out by LFL to troll us is not a rational person. 

 

Episode X?  Not. Happening. 

 

Recently in the TROS Spoilers thread, SilverTrumpet quoted me with "lol" as his response. Debate ensued, and most of the discussion was moved here, probably by Jay.

 

So... Trevorrow's script for IX, many (hi-res) images of its concept art, and a supposed early/original scoring cue sheet (presumably to an 'alternate version' of IX) 'leaked' all on the same day... and that doesn't seem seem extremely fishy to you?

 

All things considered - including a constant barrage of strange/contradictory/awkward comments from current/former Lucasfilm employees, endless 'Disney Star Wars' controversies, prevalent fan disenchantment, a list of unanswered questions and loose ends regarding the Saga story/lore, etc. - and you say it would be irrational to think we're being trolled by LFL?

 

I see the writing on the wall (and in the canon material): The existence - and eventual release - of a surprise film to jumpstart a new trilogy is the only thing that would explain everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, DarthDementous said:

Why exactly is it so hard to believe that Star Wars as a franchise is being very mishandled right now, unintentionally, as opposed to there being some kind of grand plan? It calls to mind the similar concept of Hanlon’s Razor which is ‘never attribute to malice what is adequately explained by stupidity’ where ‘malice’ is replaced by ‘grand intention’ in this case.

 

Have we not seen this kind of thing play out many times with other big franchises, or do you also believe they’ve got a grand plan as well. If not, then what makes Star Wars the one that would?

 

Preach, sis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

Why exactly is it so hard to believe that Star Wars as a franchise is being very mishandled right now, unintentionally, as opposed to there being some kind of grand plan? It calls to mind the similar concept of Hanlon’s Razor which is ‘never attribute to malice what is adequately explained by stupidity’ where ‘malice’ is replaced by ‘grand intention’ in this case.

 

Have we not seen this kind of thing play out many times with other big franchises, or do you also believe they’ve got a grand plan as well. If not, then what makes Star Wars the one that would?

 

It's simple:  I don't "believe that Star Wars as a franchise is being very mishandled right now" because I've seen more than enough official canon evidence - including the first six films and their novelizations - that all but proves otherwise.

 

In my Star Wars research, reading, and reflection over the last 5 years, I've seen nothing that contradicts my current theories. Further research and reading only bolsters them. 

 

Why exactly is it so hard to believe that Star Wars is being handled properly right now, with intent, and with a grand plan? What leads you to believe that the current makers of Star Wars are 'stupid’? Of which volumes of the new canon are you familiar? Please formulate your assessments and conclusions based on factsnot opinions.

 

Allow me to direct you to the principle of Occam's Razor which states that ‘The simplest explanation is usually the correct one'.  With that in mind, what would be the simplest explanation for what's happening now with Star Wars?

 

I will not compare what you call 'this kind of thing playing out many times with other big franchises' since I am unaware of the specifics of those cases. (Though, I would ask which cyclical/episodic big franchises you think have either been ruined or are on the wrong track?)

 

But to answer your question in the simplest of terms, I have concluded that Star Wars is a very special case... so special that the makers decided to (seemingly) 'push us away' before 'putting us all away'. And because of what's coming - what always has been - they expect to get away with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does everyone think about Disney removing the Slave 1 name from Boba Fett's ship? I believe they're calling it the 'Firespray'. Not a bad name, but I don't see the need to censor the original name.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Mattris said:

Why exactly is it so hard to believe that Star Wars is being handled properly right now, with intent, and with a grand plan?

Simply because it sucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Arpy said:

What does everyone think about Disney removing the Slave 1 name from Boba Fett's ship? I believe they're calling it the 'Firespray'.

That was the generic name of that "brand" of ship in Legends already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Arpy said:

What does everyone think about Disney removing the Slave 1 name from Boba Fett's ship? I believe they're calling it the 'Firespray'. Not a bad name, but I don't see the need to censor the original name.

 

Who says it was 'censored'? I expect the explanation to be revealed in the upcoming show.

 

31 minutes ago, GerateWohl said:

Simply because it sucks.

 

What about it sucks? Please be as specific as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, GerateWohl said:

All of it.

 

What do you mean by "it sucks"?

What are your biggest issues?

Have you read or watched any of the non-film volumes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His inexhaustible energy to keep this up over years is actually quite scary. I don't know whether he is a QAnon person or not but this is how you get QAnon people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My "inexhaustible energy" is nothing compared to what Lucasfilm has 'kept up'. As they tease and frustrate the fans, so am I doing with those who continue to prod me here. Just know that I do it because I'm excited. And I'm sure those 'in the know' at Lucasfilm 'Artoo'. :P

 

@GerateWohl Usually people who give the opinion that something 'sucks' - and when asked for specifics, say 'all of it' - are ignorant of the facts and speaking out of emotion. But I'll give you time to answer my follow up questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Mattris said:

 

It's simple:  I don't "believe that Star Wars as a franchise is being very mishandled right now" because I've seen more than enough official canon evidence - including the first six films and their novelizations - that all but proves otherwise.

 

In my Star Wars research, reading, and reflection over the last 5 years, I've seen nothing that contradicts my current theories. Further research and reading only bolsters them. 

 

Why exactly is it so hard to believe that Star Wars is being handled properly right now, with intent, and with a grand plan? What leads you to believe that the current makers of Star Wars are 'stupid’? Of which volumes of the new canon are you familiar? Please formulate your assessments and conclusions based on factsnot opinions.

 

Allow me to direct you to the principle of Occam's Razor which states that ‘The simplest explanation is usually the correct one'.  With that in mind, what would be the simplest explanation for what's happening now with Star Wars?

 

I will not compare what you call 'this kind of thing playing out many times with other big franchises' since I am unaware of the specifics of those cases. (Though, I would ask which cyclical/episodic big franchises you think have either been ruined or are on the wrong track?)

 

But to answer your question in the simplest of terms, I have concluded that Star Wars is a very special case... so special that the makers decided to (seemingly) 'push us away' before 'putting us all away'. And because of what's coming - what always has been - they expect to get away with it.


I’ll answer the questions here sequentially and counter what I think is necessary.

 

Why exactly is it so hard to believe that Star Wars is being handled properly right now, with intent, and with a grand plan?

It is hard to believe precisely because I get no hint of a grand vision for the universe, instead I get the sense of disjointed visions from creators that have vision but lack unity between them. Lucas’ vision for Star Wars is quite vivid to me, even to the point that I know he would not allow for Sith to persist after death in the manner of Jedi force ghosts. It was his belief that should be the ultimate irony of being a Sith, that which you desire most can only be had by letting go. I can even contrast Lucas’ vision to some of the most notable EU creators such as Timothy Zahn, who writes with a greater intricacy and is interested in giving rational explanations behind fantastical things such as heroes’ street smarts or the way evolution responds to the Force.

 

With KK, I get no such sense of authorship. I have no idea what she wants Star Wars to be, only that she knows what Star Wars shouldn’t be based off the firing of Trevorrow and Lord and Miller. These two concepts may seem the same but the latter instead of defining a vision for the universe it has instead flattened and homogenised it. I don’t think you can truly define yourself by what you are not, it’s too reactionary and vague.

 

What leads you to believe that the current makers of Star Wars are 'stupid’?

I don’t think any of the makers are stupid, just generally misguided. I’m not convinced anyone in charge at the moment really understands what defined Star Wars to begin with and held so much resonance, and that’s propagating down into the stories. There’s some very capable writers on board, mostly in literature, but their hands are ultimately tied by the wider vision of the franchise.

 

Of which volumes of the new canon are you familiar?

Of the New Canon (or NU as I call it) I’ve read/played/watched a number of comic books/audiobooks/novels/games/TV material. Amongst these I would highlight Bloodlines by Claudia Gray, Master and Apprentice by Claudia Gray, The Rising Storm by Cavan Scott, Inferno Squadron by Christie Golden, Lando comic, Age of the Republic comics, and Darth Maul comic. I’m currently on the High Republic material which I have enjoyed quite a bit for the most part. Instead of dredging around in already defined time periods we are finally getting to explore a part of the canon that not even the EU touched upon much. This means it’s easier to take it on its own merits instead of comparing it to what came before.

 

Please formulate your assessments and conclusions based on facts, not opinions.

This is what I try to do. If I get anything factually wrong then please correct me.

 

Allow me to direct you to the principle of Occam's Razor which states that ‘The simplest explanation is usually the correct one'. 
This principle is often misquoted. It’s meant to be ‘plurality should not be posited without necessity’ which is more about in the case of two competing theories, the simpler one should be preferred.

 

With that in mind, what would be the simplest explanation for what's happening now with Star Wars?

The simplest explanation is that the right people currently aren’t in charge. The less simple explanation is that this is part of a grand narrative that all fronts of the franchise are in on, and coordinating to create a bad reception only to win back the audience they’ve lost from that bad reception later. Which isn’t even to get into the complexities claimed of the clues that are hidden in the testimonies of the people involved or the works themselves.

 

Though, I would ask which cyclical/episodic big franchises you think have either been ruined or are on the wrong track?

For the sake of brevity I’ll just speak of one that I’m more familiar with. I think since around 2010 when a new showrunner stepped in, Doctor Who has slowly been going more and more off track. Stephen Moffat’s run had some brilliant moments, but it was wildly inconsistent, and Chris Chibnall’s era is almost completely spiritually unrecognisable as Doctor Who. This only happens when the wrong people are in charge, be it the creators or the executives that hired them in the first place. The latest showrunner promised something similar to what you did, that he had a ‘grand 5 year plan’ in mind, and all that amounted to is a massive retcon that damages the core of the show, and the swift announcement that he will soon be stepping down as showrunner.

7 hours ago, Arpy said:

What does everyone think about Disney removing the Slave 1 name from Boba Fett's ship? I believe they're calling it the 'Firespray'. Not a bad name, but I don't see the need to censor the original name.

 

 

I don’t think it’s being censored. I’ve seen a number of articles about this but they’re wildly misinformed, because ever since I believe the Attack of the Clones Visual Guide the Slave 1 has been called a ‘Firespray class’ ship. The articles are treating it like this is a new designation, and until someone actually names the ship in a piece of new canon then there’s no confirmation of any change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Arpy said:

What does everyone think about Disney removing the Slave 1 name from Boba Fett's ship? I believe they're calling it the 'Firespray'. Not a bad name, but I don't see the need to censor the original name.

 

 

 

There's conflicting evidence on if they have renamed it or just stopped using they name. Calling it "firespray" is like calling the Falcon "yt-1300". Not wrong, just not specific. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because 'you got no hint of a grand vision for the universe' doesn't mean that hints weren't left. Could it be that you simply missed certain clues, all told, that could have been used to piece things together?


Once you know what to look for, I think you'll be surprised at the 'greater intricacies and rational explanations behind the many fantastical things' that have appeared throughout all of Star Wars canon, the new stuff included.


What do you think was Lucas’ vision for Star Wars? In these new stories, how do the 'Sith persist after death in the manner of Jedi force ghosts'? What did the Sith desire most? What do you think it means to 'let go'?

 

Perhaps KK is continuing George's legacy as she promised him face-to-face on camera in 2012.

 

I would say that many of the disenchanted SW fans have 'defined themselves by what they are not', in that they have rejected these new stories without reading them  and the manner in which the Saga has continued. I agree, "it’s too reactionary and vague."


I say, the fans are generally misguided, being consumed by assumptions and a hivemind-like mentality. I think it will be surprising how much those 'in charge at the moment understand what defined Star Wars to begin with.' But what "held so much resonance, that propagates down into the stories" may end up differing from how the fans originally interpreted the stories and characters. What do you mean by the authors' "hands are ultimately tied by the wider vision of the franchise"? What vision do you think Lucasfilm has now?


I'm pleased to know that you've read some of the new material. If you haven't already, I suggest reading Heir To The Jedi  and the Aftermath trilogy. Have you read any of the nine film novelizations?


By 'focusing on facts', I mean 'primarily using literal canon excerpts (intriguing lines, reoccurring words, phrases, etc.) to formulate a through-line narrative and thematical assessment. I can't say you're 'getting anything factually wrong'. It's just that my assessment varies greatly from yours because I'm noticing things that you, clearly, are not.


Occam's Razor ... in the case of two competing theories, the simpler one should be preferred. Yes. So the simplest explanation for Star Wars is that there was always a grand plan. Lucasfilm has continued the original narrative and themes in the new canon, presenting evidence everywhere, while preying on the fans' assumptions and assessments just enough to keep them on the far side of the galaxy, as defined in the "effective Jedi trap" from the Revenge of the Sith novelization.


Making a claims like "the right people currently aren’t in charge" is based in one's assessments and opinions... and is not simple to explain at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Mattris

 

I don’t think we are going to be able to find common ground on this, it’s almost like we speak different languages that use the same words. You’re reading my words and points from a framework in which you already strongly believe you are right, and so everything pretty much ends up warped to fit a conclusion you have already reached. I’m glad I tried though, and I appreciated the opportunity given of trying to clarify my own thoughts on the state of the franchise that were lended by your questions.

 

I’ve read the Revenge of the Sith novelisation which I thought was excellent. Pretty much everything I wish the actual movie was, perhaps this story could only have been told best in novel format.

 

Heard mixed things about Aftermath and it’s mostly set during an era that amounts to a confusing mess so it’s hard to want to give it a go. Correct me if I’m wrong but is this not the series that introduced the idea that the New Republic willingly signed a treaty that seceded a large part of the galaxy to the Empire, and then completely demilitarised? This is in stark contrast to the incredibly thorough campaign the New Republic took in eliminating all remaining Imperial influence in the EU. It’s disappointingly passive and ends up fucking them over later severely when the Empire strikes back (har har) so it’s just an incredibly baffling choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DarthDementous

 

I think we could find common ground because I "once thought as you did."

 

If you could determine the purpose of these stories (narratively and thematically, as George Lucas created), I think you would begin to see things from a different point of view.  I'm curious to hear your answers to my substantive  follow-up questions.

 

I agree, the Revenge of the Sith  novelization is excellent, and for me, the best single Star Wars volume. I, too, wish the movie could have conveyed the subtext and exposition a bit better and included some additional scenes/dialog, some of which were filmed but cut. Such is the nature of two-hour films, which have significant limitations compared to stories told with the written word. Shame so many Star Wars fans avoid the books. They're really missing out!

 

I admit, the three Aftermath volumes are a bit long in the tooth, mainly because they feature many characters and interwoven plots. But most of the plots are intriguing, some - as I have deduced - hinting at many things to come, with Empire's End  foreshadowing some rather significant future inclusions.

 

The time in which they are set - in the year after ROTJ - is a confusing mess for the inhabitants of the galaxy, with the Empire in a power struggle and the New Republic wary of making mistakes so as not to jeopardize the gains from their recent major victory against the Empire at the Battle of Endor.

 

No, the New Republic did not sign a treaty that seceded a large part of the galaxy to the Empire. They accepted an unconditional surrender from the Empire (from Imperial lackey Mas Amedda) but underestimated the Emperor, who had arranged a multi-faceted Contingency plan, including the reformation of his Empire, starting with the First Order which would be built in the shadows of the Unknown Regions. I encourage you to give these books a go.

 

Both Bloodline and Aftermath  explained that Mon Mothma - against the advice of Princess Leia - started the New Republic down a path of demilitarization, passivism, and centralization... choices that eventually led to its destruction during the events of The Force Awakens. Yes, it is "an incredibly baffling choice" and an example of the parallels in Star Wars to the real world: A weak, unassuming nation/government/group can be suddenly defeated by a patient, cunning, merciless opponent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, the Disney era of LFL made three great Star Wars movies, one pretty good one (Solo) and one really bad one (TROS).  Considering I’ve also enjoyed most of their TV work (excluding maybe season 2 of Resistance), I don’t buy that anything has been mishandled.  
 

Especially considering the fact that pre-Disney LFL produced three great Star Wars movies and three awful ones (in my opinion), Disney’s hit to miss ratio is pretty good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll tell you what I'm not disenchanted by: Revenge of the Sith, probably one of the best Star Wars films after Empire Strikes Back, and certainly leagues above the other two prequels.

The sequels have made me only more thirsty for a complete score release of this amazing Williams score - it's dark, moody, bombastic, action-packed, somber, reflective and intricate and is really Williams giving us his last hurrah to Star Wars (before the sequels). 

 

WHERE IS THE OFFICIAL EXPANDED RELEASE?

WHERE IS IT?

WHY IS IT BEING KEPT LOCKED AWAY?

WHY DOES DISNEY THINK THEY CAN DO THIS TO LUCAS'S LEGACY?

 

The only thing mishandled here is that AGAIN we have to wait decades to hear this music properly.

jjf56rcn5dg61.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

Here's a special message for all those who take all things SW far too seriously

  Hide contents

IT'S

ONLY

FUCKING MOVIE!!! :lol:

 

 

I mean, it's not STAR TREK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Arpy said:

I'll tell you what I'm not disenchanted by: Revenge of the Sith, probably one of the best Star Wars films after Empire Strikes Back, and certainly leagues above the other two prequels.

The sequels have made me only more thirsty for a complete score release of this amazing Williams score - it's dark, moody, bombastic, action-packed, somber, reflective and intricate and is really Williams giving us his last hurrah to Star Wars (before the sequels). 

 

WHERE IS THE OFFICIAL EXPANDED RELEASE?

WHERE IS IT?

WHY IS IT BEING KEPT LOCKED AWAY?

WHY DOES DISNEY THINK THEY CAN DO THIS TO LUCAS'S LEGACY?

 

The only thing mishandled here is that AGAIN we have to wait decades to hear this music properly.

jjf56rcn5dg61.jpg

 

I've never seen this photograph before and my life is now richer for it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Arpy said:

I'll tell you what I'm not disenchanted by: Revenge of the Sith, probably one of the best Star Wars films after Empire Strikes Back, and certainly leagues above the other two prequels.

 

We will agree to disagree. A lot. :) The only prequel that is even vaguely watchable for me is The Phantom Menace.

 

After the mind blowing last episode of The Clone Wars I thought "Maybe I should reassess RotS." I don't know what evil I felt I had done that I deserved such penance. Even if the rest of the film was fine (it isn't) the big duel between Vader and Obi-Wan is just awful.

 

The same man who had to re-edit Han shooting Greedo so we wouldn't think less of Han Solo was perfectly fine with Obi-Wan leaving his best friend, his brother smoldering and burning but obviously not dead while Obi-Wan whined like he needed power converters at Tosche station.

 

Shudder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't it always the story that Obi-Wan and Anakin dueled over the lava and Anakin lost and fell in? We just didn't know the specifics beyond that. I remember that always being the backstory. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tallguy said:

 

We will agree to disagree. A lot. :) The only prequel that is even vaguely watchable for me is The Phantom Menace.

 

After the mind blowing last episode of The Clone Wars I thought "Maybe I should reassess RotS." I don't know what evil I felt I had done that I deserved such penance. Even if the rest of the film was fine (it isn't) the big duel between Vader and Obi-Wan is just awful.

 

The same man who had to re-edit Han shooting Greedo so we wouldn't think less of Han Solo was perfectly fine with Obi-Wan leaving his best friend, his brother smoldering and burning but obviously not dead while Obi-Wan whined like he needed power converters at Tosche station.

 

Shudder.

Same. With TPM, I can feel George's drive to build a world, cultures, explore the concept of symbiosis, deepen the universe even at the risk of going too far from what he showed previously. His success is debatable but at least it's something. AotC just falls off the cliff and in the process of being too bored of itself doesn't really offer anything of interest, and RotS switches back and forth between AotC level of badness, too stupid stupidity, and trying to catch up on actually giving this trilogy the plot people expected in this one movie, or a third of it. Ugh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, SilverTrumpet said:

Wasn't it always the story that Obi-Wan and Anakin dueled over the lava and Anakin lost and fell in? We just didn't know the specifics beyond that. I remember that always being the backstory. 

 

Absolutely. I don't remember where that came out but it was in the air even back in 1977. But that was back when Darth was a first name and he killed Luke's father.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SilverTrumpet said:

Wasn't it always the story that Obi-Wan and Anakin dueled over the lava and Anakin lost and fell in? We just didn't know the specifics beyond that. I remember that always being the backstory. 

 

Its not. The very idea that Vader was a burn-victim at all was not present when the original Star Wars was being shot and edited: he was just wearing a spacesuit like the Stormtroopers do in the film.

 

Lucas came-up with the idea either late in post-production or while the movie was being released, but it changed a lot: I think at one point Lucas had said Vader fell into a reactor shaft; and of course it was only later still that he decide Vader was Anakin.

 

I never really held to this idea that Lucas had written rigorous backstories for his characters - what little we're actually provided with of Lucas notes is more a kind of "stream of consciousness" process of working out the script itself on paper, rather than some bios of the characters in the film: I bet in 1977 if you asked him twice about Vader's backstory, you would have gotten a different answer each time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't mean he write it in a series bible in 1976 or something. I know he's not that planned ahead at all. I just mean before the prequels came out it was a generally known thing that Anakin fell in the lava. 

 

I don't think I'm old enough to remember when that was first referenced. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, SilverTrumpet said:

I don't think I'm old enough to remember when that was first referenced. 

 

Oh, it was in 1977, but only after the film was released. When they were actually making the film, they had a completely different concept. Vader being a burn-victim is the first Star Wars retcon, really.

 

http://fd.noneinc.com/secrethistoryofstarwarscom/secrethistoryofstarwars.com/visualdevelopmentofdarthvader.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did they specifically reference anything else before that? 

 

The space suit thing always felt like they needed to explain how he went from ship to ship and designed a costume more than a lore thing that would be published in books.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, SilverTrumpet said:

I don't mean he write it in a series bible in 1976 or something. I know he's not that planned ahead at all. I just mean before the prequels came out it was a generally known thing that Anakin fell in the lava. 

 

I don't think I'm old enough to remember when that was first referenced. 

 

It came from the fake fan script called "Star Wars Episode III Fall Of The Republic" from 1983 https://fanlore.org/wiki/Fall_of_the_Republic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Jay said:

 

It came from the fake fan script called "Star Wars Episode III Fall Of The Republic" from 1983 https://fanlore.org/wiki/Fall_of_the_Republic

 

It was around a long time before that. Now I'm curious as to when. 

 

The closest it ever gets to "canon" I guess would be in the novel of Return of the Jedi. Which also said Owen was BEN'S brother. (Which makes a hell of a lot more sense than what we got in Attack of the Clones.) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tallguy said:

Which also said Owen was BEN'S brother.

 

which is an idea taken directly from the script to the film. They just greatly abridged Ben's monologue for the actual film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jay said:

 

It came from the fake fan script called "Star Wars Episode III Fall Of The Republic" from 1983 https://fanlore.org/wiki/Fall_of_the_Republic

 

I'd never heard of this, not that I follow fan writing at all.

 

That's another thing though. Was Palpatine always known to be a senator before becoming emperor? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, SilverTrumpet said:

Was Palpatine always known to be a senator before becoming emperor? 

 

In the earliest drafts, one gets the impression that the role of Emperor was a hereditary one, dating to before the persecution of the Jedi, who were originally the Emperor's bodyguards. Basically, its a scenario lifted directly from the samurai films Lucas was imitating in those early drafts, which tell quite a different story to the one in the finished film.

 

As we get closer to the finished film, he becomes a corrupt politican, but he's envisioned as a mere figure-head for corrupt corporations and factions who rule the Empire from behind the scenes. There's also no indication he uses the Force, but then in the original film anyone can potentially use The Force, anyway.

 

Essentially, in the world of the 1977 film, the one who really pulls the strings of the Empire is Tarkin, and the meeting of his we see with the other Imperials isn't just some staff meeting: that's the top brass of the entire Empire. With the destruction of the Death Star, they are killed and the Empire is ended. That was obviously immediately retconned when they started working on a sequel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the prologue to the novel:

 

"Once, under the wise rule of the Senate and the protection of the Jedi Knights, the Republic throve and grew. But as often happens when wealth and power pass beyond the admirable and attain the awesome, there appear those evil ones who have greed to match.

 

So it was with the Republic at its height. Like the greatest of trees, able to withstand any external attack, the Republic rotted from within though the danger was not visible from outside.

 

Aided and abetted by restless, power-hungry individuals within the government, and the massive organs of commerce, the ambitious Senator Palpatine caused himself to be elected President of the Republic. He promised to reunite the disaffected among the people and to restore the remembered glory of the Republic.

 

Once secure in office he declared himself Emperor, shutting himself away from the populace. Soon he was controlled by the very assistants and boot-lickers he had appointed to high office, and the cries of the people for justice did not reach his ears."

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Tallguy said:

Aided and abetted by restless, power-hungry individuals within the government, and the massive organs of commerce, the ambitious Senator Palpatine caused himself to be elected President of the Republic. He promised to reunite the disaffected among the people and to restore the remembered glory of the Republic.

 

Once secure in office he declared himself Emperor, shutting himself away from the populace. Soon he was controlled by the very assistants and boot-lickers he had appointed to high office, and the cries of the people for justice did not reach his ears."

 

This sounds like a much better movie (or movie series) than the prequels that we got.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s very different to what we got: there emperor is just a beaurocrat who serves as a puppet of others, not the mastermind and powerful sorcerer we see in the prequel trilogy; the timeframe is much longer, with the Empire being around for at least three decades rather than a mere 19 years.

 

The original Star Wars doesn’t have prequels: the Empire Strikes Back does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is rumour control, here are the facts.

In '74, Lucas was just another punk kid director (one of many young punk kid directors from USC/UCLA), who'd gotten lucky with some period piece nostalgia flick he'd just released.

He wrote a script for a space movie, and sent it to just about everybody, until Fox said "yes". Cut to Summer of '77: the space movie is the hit of the century, and Fox rubs its hands with glee, and says "more, please", at which point Mr. Lucas decided that he needs to expand upon this film, and create a "universe". There's nothing wrong, with that, but don't tell me, he had if all mapped out, because he plainly didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.