Star Wars Disenchantment

[Mattris 416]

No, the reason people are all up in Lucasfilm's business for not having a roadmap is because they think it's true "with absolutely no basis in fact whatsoever". These people have no clue of what such a roadmap for Star Wars might entail, apart from what George Lucas has said. And he has given wildly varied accounts of his (supposed) sequel treatments. Logically, if someone is caught in a contraction, then at least one of their accounts must be a lie.

 

@Chen G., outside of those in the know and/or in control at Lucasfilm, how can anyone know that a roadmap doesn't "in fact exist"? How could you know that a roadmap for Star Wars didn't exist from its inception?

[Chen G. 3,949]

10 minutes ago, Mattris said:

how can anyone know that a roadmap doesn't "in fact exist"?

 

My own answer to those sorts of things is watch the actual films.

 

For instance, when I first went through the Star Wars series in 2015, I didn't need to read Michael Kaminski's book to tell when the 1977 film began that "Oh, bullshit was Vader Luke's father at the point this film was made." One could just feel at least some of the retcons that had gone down since, if one was watching the film with an open mind.

 

Same with the sequel trilogy. The proof is in the pudding.

[Nick1Ø66 4,718]

9 minutes ago, Mattris said:

These people have no clue of what such a roadmap for Star Wars might entail

 

3 hours ago, Mattris said:

Throughout my Star Wars reading/viewings, I've picked up on far too many interwoven clues to even remotely fathom that Lucasfilm doesn't have a grand plan to work from and toward.

 

 

[Mattris 416]

Sorry, @Chen G., 'watching the films with an open mind' and 'feeling' that there were retcons and a lack of a plan is "absolutely no basis in fact whatsoever".

 

The fact is, it's impossible to know that a roadmap for Star Wars doesn't exist.

 

@Nick1Ø66, I was referring to 'the people who are all up in Lucasfilm's business for not having a roadmap for Star Wars' because they think this is true based primarily on their interpretations/opinions of the films as well as what they have heard repeatedly reported in the news and/or within the circles of which they agree. ('So many people think like me, so it must be true!')

 

I, on the other hand, have good reason to believe there is a roadmap for Star Wars - and always has been one - based on the specific contents of dozens of canon volumes, dating all the way back to the original 1976 novelization.

[Nick1Ø66 4,718]

27 minutes ago, Mattris said:

I, on the other hand, have good reason to believe there is a roadmap for Star Wars - always has been one - based on the specific contents of dozens of canon volumes, dating all the way back to the original 1976 novelization.

 

You mean the novelization that described Palpatine as a pawn of the Senate, "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."

 

I think people who are convinced there's a secret, overarching narrative for all of Star Wars, locked somewhere in a safe in the vaults of Skywalker Ranch, are just so in love with it, that when the weak stories come along, they convince themselves there's some grand plan, that, if they're only patient enough to see it through, will cause everything to make sense. 

 

Either that, or they've spent so much time looking for clues and hidden connections, that they can't conceive that the people at Lucasfilm really are just making it up as they go along. They're just too invested, and enter into a kind of denial. Like the guy who spends hundreds (or thousands) on an HDMI cable convinces himself that the picture he's seeing on his TV really is better. Otherwise, he'd have to just admit to himself that he's wasted his f*cking money.

[Mattris 416]

That particular excerpt from the original novelization was taken from the Journal of the Whills. The point of view from which it's told is not known, nor do we know for certain the definition of that use of "controlled". (For instance, it could have meant 'secured'.)

 

Have any other novelization excerpts you'd like me to go over with you? Have you read all of these books? I have. And the excerpts I can pull are most illuminating, especially when interpreted in context with each other.

 

Do you think the "people who are convinced there's a secret, overarching narrative for all of Star Wars, locked somewhere in a safe in the vaults of Skywalker Ranch" have theorized was the secret is? I'm not talking about wishful thinking here.

 

Good is a point of view, and so is "weak".

 

I can just as easily say that it's people like you who can't conceive that the people at Lucasfilm really aren't  making it up as they go along. "They're just too invested" in being assumptive and pessimistic, "and enter into a kind of denial."

 

I don't need to be patient. Concerning the grand narrative and themes of Star Wars, everything already makes sense to me. I'm pleased with where this journey has taken me. I know what should happen within the story for it to reach a worthy conclusion. Something tells me you can't say the same.

[Holko 9,529]

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

 

The fact is, it's impossible to know that a roadmap for Star Wars doesn't exist.

 

[DarthDementous 1,059]

30 minutes ago, Mattris said:

That particular excerpt was taken from the Journal of the Whills. The point of view from which it's told is not known, nor do we know for certain the definition of that use of "controlled". (For instance, it could have meant 'secured'.)

 

I think Andor helps shed some light on what this actually means, what The Emperor sees and hears is very much limited by how judicious the higher-ups are when it comes to reporting and following up on problems. Many did not want to bother The Emperor and instead placated him out of fear for what the repercussions would be, which would ultimately weaken the Empire and create dangerous complacency that the Rebellion would exploit

Which is why I don't think that this excerpt is an example of the novelizations contradicting the movies, because the above can be true whilst The Emperor is the de facto power in the galaxy. If anyone knows any further excerpts or context that challenges this then do let me know as I have not read the novelization of A New Hope myself

[Nick1Ø66 4,718]

Good grief.
 

[Chen G. 3,949]

46 minutes ago, DarthDementous said:

The Emperor is the de facto power in the galaxy.

 

In the world of the 1977 film, the Emperor was concieved of as a puppet on Tarkin's string.

 

The meeting of the Imperials we see on the Death Star? Its not a local staff meeting: that's the top brass of the Empire.

[Mattris 416]

@Chen G., did you garner your specific interpretations by 'watching the films with an open mind' and 'feeling' that they were true?

 

Here's a fact for you:  In an extended scene of that meeting of Imperials on the Death Star - immediately preceding Tarkin's entrance - one of the generals says, "This Sith Lord sent by the Emperor will be our undoing". A similar line exists in the 1976 novelization.

 

Unless you can prove - or at least, provide indisputable evidence - otherwise, your grand conclusions regarding Star Wars have "absolutely no basis in fact whatsoever".

[Chen G. 3,949]

11 minutes ago, Mattris said:

immediately preceding Tarkin's entrance - one of the generals says, "This Sith Lord sent by the Emperor will be our undoing". A similar line exists in the 1976 novelization.

 

That's correct: the scene as originally shot includes that footage.

 

But "Sith" didn't mean what it means to us now: rather than a satanic cult, they were a bunch of glorified space pirates, with Vader clearly serving the role of Tarkin's muscle: the Bond henchman.

 

In the movie, Vader is clearly totally subservient to Tarkin and little more than an uber-Stormtrooper who happens to have a personal history with Ben and Luke.

[Luke Skywalker 1,795]

Just Ben in fact

[Pellaeon 593]

?

He killed Luke’s father.

[Groovygoth666 670]

I don't subscribe to the whole roadmap for the whole saga theory, for either Lucas or Disney. While I do believe Lucas had written a very extensive saga and had to pick a specific part to tell for his first film, everything from after that when making the films was worked out on the fly, with much of it changing from what he had intended, due in part to people like Gary Kurtz, Lawrence Kasdan, Irvin Kershner, Richard Marquand and Marcia Lucas and others I'm probably forgetting. Thing's like

 

- Obi Wan and Owen being brothers

- Vader being a gun for hire and Darth being his first name which is why Obi Wan refer's to him as Darth

- Han shooting first 

- Jabba being human

- the Splinter of the Mind's Eye novel being the original sequel to Star Wars, with it being a small story that if Star Wars had failed would be the cheaper option to adapt to film

- the opening crawl being an homage to serials like Flash Gordon, filling the audience in on the story so far, with IV and ANH being added to suggest that the audience had missed something before turning into the middle part of an overall story with the idea of prequels coming in later 

- Luke and Leia not being brother and sister, with a couple of romantic scenes filmed between them for ESB

- Boba Fett's armour being a garrison of super stormtroopers instead of a bounty hunter 

- Anakin originally making an planned appearance as a force ghost in ESB to help Luke while facing Vader

- Han being put in carbonite because they didn't know if Harrison would come back for a third film

- Yoda not being planned to appear in ROTJ till Lucas spoke to a friend who was a child psychologist that said a young audience needed to hear a good character confirm Vader was Luke's father, because they would think Vader was lying 

- Boba Fett being the main villain of the original sequel trilogy

- the whole original sequel trilogy being about Luke finding his sister Nellith

- Lucas changing of the number of episodes in the saga, from 12 to 9 to only being 6 before going back to 9

- the special editions

- every change made to the special editions on home media 

- Palpatine being Anakins father

- the change of when the Empire took over of the Republic being from 30 year's to 20 year's before ANH

- after the prequels Lucas considered Maul being the antagonist with Darth Talon being his apprentice for the sequels

- Lucas saying that the sequel trilogy could have explored the microbiotic world, introducing the whills as microscopic organisms 

- the agreement when selling Lucasfilm to Disney being that they would use Lucas's sequel trilogy ideas, and disregarding them

- the wreakage of the second Death Star being planned to appear in episode VII only for the idea to be recycled in TROS 

- Poe originally dying before Oscar Isaac asked for him to survive 

- Rian Johnson asking JJ to change it so R2 went with Rey to Ahch-To at the end of TFA instead of BB-8

- the changes made to Rogue Ones third act during post production 

- Rian Johnson ignoring JJ's treatment for Ep VII and starting from scratch 

- Snokes origins

- Lando originally being the codebreaker in TLJ

- Lord and Miller's Solo film

- Colin Treverrows Ep IX

- Rey being Obi Wans daughter in TFA, then being nobody in TLJ, going from being related to Palpatine back to Obi Wan before settling on Palpatine during the production of TROS

- Finn being force sensitive before this subplot was dropped in TROS

- the changes made to JJ's final edit for TROS by Disney 

- Kenobi originally being a movie before being turned into a series, with the original focus being on him and Luke, before being changed to Leia 

- Obi Wan being completely unaware of Leia's importance in ESB ("that boy was our last hope" " no there is another", originally refering to Nellith before being retconed in ROTJ to Leia) to him being there not only at her birth but having to save her due to Bails insistence that she will be just as important in saving the galaxy as Luke in Kenobi 

 

Not to mention the contradictions in the Marvel comics off the top of my head being

- Yoda's lightsaber being incinerated but appearing in BOBF

- Kanan during Order 66 being changed for the Bad Batch 

 

Overall things changed, evolved or were dropped entirely throughout the production of not only the original film but everything after it, some small and surface level, others have big impact on the story, it was always an ongoing process, sometimes it worked out other time's it didn't. 

 

This thread over on originaltrilogy.com has a wealth of information including articles, interviews and such from over the years regarding Lucas plans and changes over the years and is a very interesting read.

 

[Mattris 416]

An impressive list of perceived  retcons and issues. But as long as it is, it doesn't prove - or disprove - anything regarding the story of Star Wars.

 

Of course "things changed, evolved or were dropped entirely" during the writing of the masses of Star Wars projects over the decades, with focus on the episodic Saga. Changes are common practice in (screen)writing and do not indicate that there wasn't an overall plan for the main narrative and themes of Star Wars. Using the canon, I am certain their plan can be proven. (Think about it: If there was something... else  to be presented with Star Wars, these things will need to have been previously foreshadowed/teased, preferably from the beginning. Otherwise, any unexpected twists & turns will not be earned.

 

Statements from Lucasfilm employees/contractors are not a matter of fact, regardless of how much you trust those individuals and/or (want to) believe what they say, especially when they are saying things outside of official Lucasfilm content. It also must be taken into consideration that their statements are up for interpretation. For instance, Josh Gad's post-IX interview with Daisy Ridley was taken by many fans as confirmation that there was no plan for Rey... when the fact is, Ridley had simply recounted what she was told about the character and when. Turns out, she wasn't told about Rey being a Palpatine until shortly before her character found out. Mark Hamill said he had a similar experience, having not been told about Darth Vader being Luke's father until shortly before the scene was filmed. George Lucas said this benefitted Hamill's performance: He didn't need to know because his character didn't yet know.

 

If it's not official canon, it should not be accepted into canon, at least not immediately. Supposed insight regarding the writing - as well as behind-the-scenes stories - should be taken with a grain of salt, especially when the arcs of main characters and plots are being spoken about. As the audience, we are not privy to the storytellers' experiences, nor do we know for certain that they always tell us the truth... or if they are even aware of the truth, especially the cast.  I'm sure some of the cast and crew know more than others. For instance, Ewan McGregor admitted in many recent interviews, that he 'felt bad having to lie for so long about not knowing if he was going to reprise his role as Obi-Wan Kenobi'. Clearly, he wanted to make his guilt very evident. But he knew his Obi-Wan would return on-screen, and he played his part to keep the secret intact. Assuming that McGregor is the only Lucasfilm employee/contactor purposely lying, well, would be most naïve, to say the least. "You'll find that I'm full of surprises." 

 

Trust that the strange/ridiculous entries in that list that are  canon can be plausibly explained using select canon excerpts and a bit of deductive reasoning, even if the explanations aren't immediately evident. Just because you - and many others of the Star Wars audience - have concluded that these kinds of (perceived) inconstancies/problems indicate poor writing/planning doesn't mean these things don't make sense from a certain point of view.  Bigger picture, perhaps you and many others have underestimated Lucasfilm... and have yet to ascertain a through-line, a master key that makes sense of everything about the IP, including its many productions over the years, its marketing, publicity, and seemingly endless controversies.

 

But I have. 

[Nick1Ø66 4,718]

58 minutes ago, Mattris said:

But I have. 

 

[Chen G. 3,949]

12 hours ago, Groovygoth666 said:

I do believe Lucas had written a very extensive saga and had to pick a specific part to tell for his first film, everything from after that when making the films was worked out on the fly, with much of it changing from what he had intended, due in part to people like Gary Kurtz, Lawrence Kasdan, Irvin Kershner, Richard Marquand and Marcia Lucas and others I'm probably forgetting. Thing's lik

 

I don't hold much with this narrative that any Star Wars entry was good in spite of Lucas. Yes, the nature of collaborations is that other people bring ideas into the melting pot, but its ultimately the writer/director that has the call of what goes into the pot and how its stirred with everything else. That other people had input into the process is not and should not detract from Lucas' work.

 

Also, Lucas did concieve some backstory when he wrote the 1977 film, but it was all very fuzzy: I have little doubt that in mentioning "The Clone Wars" he really had no definitive backstory beyond it being the World War II to the film's Vietnam War parable. He certainly didn't have an "extensive saga" of which he picked a part: and at any rate, ALL his early drafts are "part one" and that sort of thing. The whole "Episode IV" thing was never some artistic, cinema verite device.

 

12 hours ago, Groovygoth666 said:

- Boba Fett being the main villain of the original sequel trilogy

- the whole original sequel trilogy being about Luke finding his sister Nellith

- Lucas changing of the number of episodes in the saga, from 12 to 9 to only being 6 before going back to 9

- after the prequels Lucas considered Maul being the antagonist with Darth Talon being his apprentice for the sequels

- Lucas saying that the sequel trilogy could have explored the microbiotic world, introducing the whills as microscopic organisms 

 

All these stories about what the sequel trilogy would have been I find very tenuous. More and more, I'm compelled to believe Lucas started with the idea of a 12-film anthology, and then worked it down to a 6-film cycle but didn't want to generate bad press by going from 12 to 6, so he decided to speak publically of making 9.

 

All these stories of Lucas' of how his sequel trilogy would have been either about microbiotic beings or about Darth Maul... I mean, they all came out, conveniently, after the sequel trilogy (or at least, parts of it) was out. So Lucas was in a position to posit himself as the avant-garde storyteller by regaling us with how outlandish his premise might have been. Its doubly suspicious to me, too, because the Darth Maul premise he talks about...that's basically the premise of Solo. Again, convenient. Of the actual treatment Lucas' forwarded to Disney, we only know of the contents of Episode VII: virtually nothing on his versions of Episode VIII or IX...

[greenturnedblue 372]

25 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

have little doubt that in mentioning "The Clone Wars" he really had no definitive backstory

 

The clones were originally something to do with cloud city, with Lando leading a clone rebellion, no?

[Chen G. 3,949]

1 hour ago, greenturnedblue said:

The clones were originally something to do with cloud city, with Lando leading a clone rebellion, no?

 

That's from comments from the story conferences to the sequel, held in November 1977. But when the film was being made/just released? I think it was just a concept at that stage.

 

For one thing, souvenir programmes for the film from around the same time as these conferences depict a completely different image of the Clone Wars: to me, that points towards them existing purely as a concept and that, when pressed for information, Lucas would come-up with some random soundbite on the spot.

[Mattris 416]

44 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Also, Lucas did concieve some backstory when he wrote the 1977 film, but it was all very fuzzy: I have little doubt that in mentioning "The Clone Wars" he really had no definitive backstory beyond it being the World War II to the film's Vietnam War parable. He certainly didn't have an "extensive saga" of which he picked a part: and at any rate, ALL his early drafts are "part one" and that sort of thing. The whole "Episode IV" thing was never some artistic, cinema verite device.

 

"So certain are you? Always with you what cannot be done. Hear you nothing that I say?"  "You must unlearn what you have learned."  - Yoda

 

45 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

All these stories about what the sequel trilogy would have been I find very tenuous. More and more, I'm compelled to believe Lucas started with the idea of a 12-film anthology, and then worked it down to a 6-film cycle but didn't want to generate bad press by going from 12 to 6, so he decided to speak publically of making 9.

 

All these stories of Lucas' of how his sequel trilogy would have been either about microbiotic beings or about Darth Maul... I mean, they all came out, conveniently, after the sequel trilogy (or at least, parts of it) was out. So Lucas was in a position to posit himself as the avant-garde storyteller by regaling us with how outlandish his premise might have been. Its doubly suspicious to me, too, because the Darth Maul premise he talks about...that's basically the premise of Solo. Again, convenient. Of the actual treatment Lucas' forwarded to Disney, we only know of the contents of Episode VII: virtually nothing on his versions of Episode VIII or IX...

 

As you've realized, much of what Lucas has recounted/stated - especially as of late - regarding the conception/writing of the Star Wars Saga doesn't add up... not until you realize that we know only what he has told us. But not everything he says can be true. (And he could have said nothing at all.) Perhaps he wants the Star Wars audience to think certain things that aren't true. Now why would he want to do that?  

[Chen G. 3,949]

4 minutes ago, Mattris said:

"So certain are you? Always with you what cannot be done. Hear you nothing that I say?"  "You must unlearn what you have learned."  - Yoda

 

Yeah, this thing about directing quotes from the films at people? I bet you think its clever. It isn't.

[Mattris 416]

Star Wars is an allegory, a parable-based work. It follows that these-type lines were  written to be directed at people, in this case, the Star Wars audience. From my (certain) point of view, George Lucas and the Star Wars writers are more clever than you can possibly imagine.

 

"You will find that it is you who are mistaken... about a great many things."

[greenturnedblue 372]

The ability to speak does not make you intelligent

[Brando 1,864]

Is this what derailed means?

[Jay 37,369]

Yea

[Nick1Ø66 4,718]

[DarthDementous 1,059]

4 hours ago, Chen G. said:

 

That's from comments from the story conferences to the sequel, held in November 1977. But when the film was being made/just released? I think it was just a concept at that stage.

Lando being a clone comes from the Leigh Beckett draft of Empire Strikes Back, I haven’t heard of these story conferences so if you could provide a source that would be swell

 

4 hours ago, Chen G. said:

 

Its doubly suspicious to me, too, because the Darth Maul premise he talks about...that's basically the premise of Solo. Again, convenient. Of the actual treatment Lucas' forwarded to Disney, we only know of the contents of Episode VII: virtually nothing on his versions of Episode VIII or IX…

That’s a massive stretch. Maul only features at the very end in a Thanos style cameo and he is very much not the premise of the movie. The premise of bringing Maul back as a big bad was already fulfilled by Lucas in Season 4 of The Clone Wars which was before even the Disney take-over, of which Solo is a nod to (particularly the uniting of criminal factions Maul does)

[Chen G. 3,949]

It’s less the idea of Maul being the big bad and more about him reappearing as a crime lord in the criminal underworld of the republic/Empire; which is an idea from Solo, which I believe harkens back to a show Lucas was developing shortly after Revenge of the Sith.

[Groovygoth666 670]

19 hours ago, Mattris said:

An impressive list of perceived  retcons and issues. But as long as it is, it doesn't prove - or disprove - anything regarding the story of Star Wars.

 

Of course "things changed, evolved or were dropped entirely" during the writing of the masses of Star Wars projects over the decades, with focus on the episodic Saga. Changes are common practice in (screen)writing and do not indicate that there wasn't an overall plan for the main narrative and themes of Star Wars. Using the canon, I am certain their plan can be proven. (Think about it: If there was something... else  to be presented with Star Wars, they will have needed to foreshadow it from the beginning. Otherwise, it doesn't really count as an earned 'surprise' at the end, does it?)

 

Statements from Lucasfilm employees/contractors are not a matter of fact, regardless of how much you trust those individuals and/or (want to) believe what they say, especially when they are saying things outside of official Lucasfilm content. It also must be taken into consideration that their statements are up for interpretation. For instance, Josh Gad's post-IX interview with Daisy Ridley was taken by many fans as confirmation that there was no plan for Rey... when the fact is, Ridley had simply recounted what she was told about the character and when. Turns out, she wasn't told about Rey being a Palpatine until shortly before her character found out. Mark Hamill said he had a similar experience, having not been told about Darth Vader being Luke's father until shortly before the scene was filmed. George Lucas said this benefitted Hamill's performance: He didn't need to know because his character didn't yet know.

 

If it's not official canon, it should not be accepted into canon, at least not immediately. Supposed insight regarding the writing - as well as behind-the-scenes stories - should be taken with a grain of salt, especially when the arcs of main characters and plots are being spoken about. As the audience, we are not privy to the storytellers' experiences, nor do we know for certain that they always tell us the truth... or if they are even aware of the truth, especially the cast.  I'm sure some of the cast and crew know more than others. For instance, Ewan McGregor admitted in many recent interviews, that he 'felt bad having to lie for so long about not knowing if he was going to reprise his role as Obi-Wan Kenobi'. Clearly, he wanted to make his guilt very evident. But he knew his Obi-Wan would return on-screen, and he played his part to keep the secret intact. Assuming that McGregor is the only Lucasfilm employee/contactor purposely lying, well, would be most naïve, to say the least. "You'll find that I'm full of surprises." 

 

Trust that the strange/ridiculous entries in that list that are  canon can be plausibly explained using select canon excerpts and a bit of deductive reasoning, even if the explanations aren't immediately evident. Just because you - and many others of the Star Wars audience - have concluded that these kinds of (perceived) inconstancies/problems indicate poor writing/planning doesn't mean these things don't make sense from a certain point of view.  Bigger picture, perhaps you and many others have underestimated Lucasfilm... and have yet to ascertain a through-line, a master key that makes sense of everything about the IP, including its many productions over the years, its marketing, publicity, and seemingly endless controversies.

 

But I have. 

Man there is so much to unpack here.

 

So for you what parts of that list can neither be proven or disproven regarding the story of Star Wars?

 

You acknowledge that things changed during the production, but what specifically is their overall plan that wasn't changed that contradicts what people have said? What can be used to prove this? Why would it need to be foreshadowed from the beginning? Why would it not be something that they look at and go " this was something, let's think of a way to pay that off?"

 

Why aren't the comments from people who worked on these films a matter of fact? Why so quick to dismiss? Trust on their part is irrelevant, they have worked on these productions and given their insight into this process, what information is there that contradicts what they are saying? Is it simply they're all lying? Why and what for? While I can't comment on fans reaction to the Ridley - Gad interview, I can comment on what was said, originally they were toying with Rey having a Kenobi relation, then  there was no connection to anyone, then a Palpatine connection and then a couple of weeks later saying they weren't sure before settling on Palpatine, so her origin was always in flux. My going back and forth between Kenobi and Palpatine in TROS could be me getting confused on articles that came out at this time, but the fact remains, Rey's patronage was made up on the fly. Can you please source where Daisy comments about finding out the Palpatine connection in relation to her character finding out to influence her performance? Again during the production of TROS this origin was contradicted so how does that help inform her performance, by giving conflicting information? Plus Mark Hamill in regards to the Vader reveal in ESB said this was to avoid spoilers, saying that he was told shortly before filming by George and Irvin that if it leaked they would know exactly who it came from. 

 

It's not about what is canon, it's about what went into making canon, what was canon until it was decided that it wasn't. If there's a road map and overall story how do we reconcile that there's things that were changed later, again I bring up Splinters of the Mind's Eye, Vader and Anakin being separate characters, Luke and Leia not being siblings, these changes impact the story. There's a difference with an actor who's signed an NDA refusing to talk about their involvement in a potential/upcoming

project compared to someone talking about something after the fact, a clear distinction that shouldn't have to be made.

 

Okay so from that list what specifically strange/ridiculous parts of canon can be explained and with which excerpts? And which parts need deductive reasoning? If Lucasfilm did indeed have an overall plan/roadmap for the sequel trilogy, how do you explain Colin Trevorrow's Duel of the Fates, a very different film from TROS? A film that was far enough into production that not only concept art, but storyboards were made for it, plus a tie fighter specifically designed for the film being used in Galaxys Edge?

 

12 hours ago, Chen G. said:

 

I don't hold much with this narrative that any Star Wars entry was good in spite of Lucas. Yes, the nature of collaborations is that other people bring ideas into the melting pot, but its ultimately the writer/director that has the call of what goes into the pot and how its stirred with everything else. That other people had input into the process is not and should not detract from Lucas' work.

Sorry I'm a bit confused, I never said anything about any entry being good in spite of Lucas's involvement, I was talking more about the collaboration/involvement of others and the evolution from his original ideas that went into making the original trilogy, that more what he had planned wasn't necessarily what we got.

 

12 hours ago, Chen G. said:

All these stories of Lucas' of how his sequel trilogy would have been either about microbiotic beings or about Darth Maul... I mean, they all came out, conveniently, after the sequel trilogy (or at least, parts of it) was out. So Lucas was in a position to posit himself as the avant-garde storyteller by regaling us with how outlandish his premise might have been. Its doubly suspicious to me, too, because the Darth Maul premise he talks about...that's basically the premise of Solo. Again, convenient. Of the actual treatment Lucas' forwarded to Disney, we only know of the contents of Episode VII: virtually nothing on his versions of Episode VIII or IX...

With the microbiotic and Maul comments, that's a fair point about them being made during the release of the sequel trilogy, something I should have taken into consideration and as @DarthDementouspointed out Maul being a crime lord was already established in the Clone Wars series, and at one point it was discussed that Jabba could have been who Qi'ra speaks to.

5 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

It’s less the idea of Maul being the big bad and more about him reappearing as a crime lord in the criminal underworld of the republic/Empire; which is an idea from Solo, which I believe harkens back to a show shortly after Revenge of the Sith.

In Rebels, the show set between ROTS and ANH, Maul has lost everything, he's no longer a crime lord and is just looking for revenge against Sidious.

[Chen G. 3,949]

8 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

Lando being a clone comes from the Leigh Beckett draft of Empire Strikes Back, I haven’t heard of these story conferences so if you could provide a source that would be swell.

The story conferences were with Brackett and lead directly into her writing her draft. Quoted from the making-of book:

 

Quote

Lucas: “Maybe he [Lando] could look human but not really be human. He’s possibly a clone. We talked earlier about the Clone Wars. The Princess doesn’t trust him because of that; Leia might refer to him in a derogatory way. If we set him up as a clone, maybe in one of the other Episodes, we can have him run across a clan of them who are all exactly like him. We won’t go into the whole mythology of where they came from or whether the clones were good or bad. We’ll assume that they were slightly weird in their own way and were partly responsible for the war. We’ll assume that on these planets of clones, there are many countries, say about 700 countries and he’s from one of the ruling clone clans.”

Sounds like he’s making this up on the spot.

[greenturnedblue 372]

9 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Sounds like he’s making this up on the spot.

I think it would be nearly impossible to determine if Lucas literally made this up then and there, or if these were ideas floating around in his head since the mid-70s and it was at this moment he put pen to paper, so to speak. Idk, to me it seems like he's put some thought to it and at least did some degree of brainstorming. But, who knows, maybe he did, maybe he didn't

 

Not sure if you (@chen) recall the debate we had a few months ago about Lucas having planned certain elements of A New Hope prior to the movie coming out, or if he later came up with them later. Your argument relied on the assumption that since there was no proof Lucas didn't make it up, and because "memory is faulty", therefore he must have come up with the ideas later on.

 

This is essentially the same issue... trying to figure out if certain elements were decided on before the movie came out or was added after the fact is a gigantic waste of time, because there is quite literally no definitive way to conclusively tell one way or another. even if it were possible to ask Lucas himself, I doubt he could go back 50 years and recollect his train of thought.

[Chen G. 3,949]

The thing is that Lucas wrote down copious notes, many of them in a stream of consciousness style, as he was developing the films; and these notes do not expand on the Clone Wars. I know Ex Silentio arguments are weak, but in cases in history (art history, in this case) where we feel a subject is fairly well-documented, they are used.

 

Also, from the same time as the above quote, a souvenir program to the film suggested the Clone Wars were a “last attempt by the Jedi to stop the Empire.” So the fact we have two different accounts from the same time would suggest Lucas is coming up with ideas on the spot.

[greenturnedblue 372]

Well, I don't see how hypothetically both couldn't be true.

 

Was this souvenir program written by Lucas himself?

 

But either way, he obviously came up with a third (at least) idea to explain the clones: what we saw in the prequels 

[Mattris 416]

2 hours ago, Groovygoth666 said:

Man there is so much to unpack here.

 

So for you what parts of that list can neither be proven or disproven regarding the story of Star Wars?

 

Yes, far too much to unpack in this thread. But I can comment on each of those entries, if you want.

 

@Jay, could you please move these derailed conversations to the Star Wars Disenchantment thread?

 

2 hours ago, Groovygoth666 said:

You acknowledge that things changed during the production, but what specifically is their overall plan that wasn't changed that contradicts what people have said? What can be used to prove this? Why would it need to be foreshadowed from the beginning? Why would it not be something that they look at and go " this was something, let's think of a way to pay that off?"

 

I'm not aware of things that changed during the production of the films. I do not work for Lucasfilm, nor was I present during these productions. I was merely admitting that it's plausible that some changes took place during the conception and writing of the films... not in a bigger picture sense: the lore, main narrative, themes, the purpose of the archetypal characters.

 

Someone saying something is not proof, even if that someone is important.

 

Sorry, I'm not going to share what I think is Lucasfilm's overall plan for Star Wars. At least, not now.  But if I'm right, what exists within the canon (as evidence) will 100% 'contradict what people have said' about there not being a plan... that Star Wars is mere escapism: action/adventure stories primarily made for kids.

 

As far as foreshadowing goes, the earlier, the better.  Specifics of a grander story that can be traced to the beginning indicate a plan... not just various lines and ideas continuously morphing - or being ignored/diminished - depending on the choices/feelings of the writers.

 

What evidence do you have that George Lucas didn't conceive 'pay-offs' in mind for his many 'somethings' a long time ago?

 

2 hours ago, Groovygoth666 said:

Why aren't the comments from people who worked on these films a matter of fact? Why so quick to dismiss? Trust on their part is irrelevant, they have worked on these productions and given their insight into this process, what information is there that contradicts what they are saying? Is it simply they're all lying? Why and what for? While I can't comment on fans reaction to the Ridley - Gad interview, I can comment on what was said, originally they were toying with Rey having a Kenobi relation, then  there was no connection to anyone, then a Palpatine connection and then a couple of weeks later saying they weren't sure before settling on Palpatine, so her origin was always in flux. My going back and forth between Kenobi and Palpatine in TROS could be me getting confused on articles that came out at this time, but the fact remains, Rey's patronage was made up on the fly. Can you please source where Daisy comments about finding out the Palpatine connection in relation to her character finding out to influence her performance? Again during the production of TROS this origin was contradicted so how does that help inform her performance, by giving conflicting information? Plus Mark Hamill in regards to the Vader reveal in ESB said this was to avoid spoilers, saying that he was told shortly before filming by George and Irvin that if it leaked they would know exactly who it came from. 

 

The canon contradicts what they are saying. I'm not saying they're all lying, at least not all the time. I'm saying that these contracted professionals provide to the public a mix of substance, lies, and trolling... for the purpose of keeping this gullible fandom on the far side of the galaxy.

 

You just repeated what Daisy Ridley was told. You don't know for a fact what JJ Abrams, Rian Johnson, Kathleen Kennedy, or George Lucas knew about the character of Rey.

 

As those on 'the outside', we cannot know for certain - one way or the other - if "Rey's patronage was made up on the fly". But for me, select canon excerpts and the character's musical themes (in relation to other character themes) are far more convincing than 'members of the cast/crew saying things'.

 

From this interview - the one that made so many Star Wars fans upset - one of the main the takeaways is that 'the Rey secret' was kept "to avoid spoilers", just like the Vader secret. But in a nutshell, Daisy Ridley is just sharing what she was told... and avoids saying/confirming certain major things for fear of the black helicopters coming to silence her.

 

 

2 hours ago, Groovygoth666 said:

It's not about what is canon, it's about what went into making canon, what was canon until it was decided that it wasn't. If there's a road map and overall story how do we reconcile that there's things that were changed later, again I bring up Splinters of the Mind's Eye, Vader and Anakin being separate characters, Luke and Leia not being siblings, these changes impact the story. There's a difference with an actor who's signed an NDA refusing to talk about their involvement in a potential/upcoming

project compared to someone talking about something after the fact, a clear distinction that shouldn't have to be made.

 

Only the publicly-released canon counts as real evidence. You don't know that those particular things were changed or made up on the fly; you only perceive they were changed or made up based on what you were told and/or what you assume to be true.

 

Could these cast/crew members still be under NDA, saying certain things they've been instructed to say: lies... misdirection... clues  if one knows what to listen for? That's what I think has been happening.

 

2 hours ago, Groovygoth666 said:

Okay so from that list what specifically strange/ridiculous parts of canon can be explained and with which excerpts? And which parts need deductive reasoning? If Lucasfilm did indeed have an overall plan/roadmap for the sequel trilogy, how do you explain Colin Trevorrow's Duel of the Fates, a very different film from TROS? A film that was far enough into production that not only concept art, but storyboards were made for it, plus a tie fighter specifically designed for the film being used in Galaxys Edge?

 

All of them. I'm not going to quote dozens of canon excerpts and logic explanations here and now. But trust me, they exist in droves. Otherwise, I wouldn't be so adamant and certain about all this.

 

As for Duel of the Fates, I surmise that Colin Trevorrow was instructed to write an Episode IX in which Emperor Palpatine was not to be involved... one that does not really delve into any 'bigger picture' of the Saga... or have any big twists. Trevorrow may or not have been 'in' on what JJ had planned. But he did his job, nonetheless.

 

I'll also note how absurd it was that the full DOTF script and  pre-production art was 'leaked'... and on the same day as the 'alternate' cue slates for the score. What a coincidence!  What amazing, insightful information!  Absolute nonsense.   

[Nick1Ø66 4,718]

 

[DarthDementous 1,059]

1 hour ago, Chen G. said:

The story conferences were with Brackett and lead directly into her writing her draft. Quoted from the making-of book:

 

Sounds like he’s making this up on the spot.

Thank you, and woops meant Brackett not Beckett (Solo must be interfering with my brainwaves!)

 

It sounds like he’s brainstorming here but that’s perfectly natural at that phase of development. We know that the original plan for a Star Wars sequel was much different so I doubt these particular details were well fleshed out by that point

12 minutes ago, Mattris said:

 

Sorry, I'm not going to share what I think is Lucasfilm's overall plan for Star Wars. At least, not now.  But if I'm right, what exists within the canon (as evidence) will 100% 'contradict what people have said' about there not being a plan... and that Star Wars is just escapist adventure stories for kids.

And there’s the fly in the ointment. You can’t make any predictions because then you’ll have something in stone that can be contradicted and render your entire theory incorrect

[Chen G. 3,949]

4 hours ago, greenturnedblue said:

But either way, he obviously came up with a third (at least) idea to explain the clones: what we saw in the prequels 

 

Actually, we have:

 

1. August 1975: No information, except the Wars involved Ben and his "White Legions" a long time ago. In both this draft and the following one, the war is clearly a loose World War II parallel. (Third Draft)

 

2. January 1976: The Clone Wars seemingly took place around Aldeeran, being that Ben served Leia's father, ruler of Aldeeran, in them, and had to leave Tatooine (with Luke's father in tow) to do so. Although involving the Jedi and some capacity of aerial combat, they were seemingly separate from the Imperial takeover ("years ago you served my father in the Clone Wars, now he begs you to help him hin his struggle against the Empire") and date to several decades before the time of the film. (Fourth Draft and the finished film)

 

2.5. July 1977: The Clone Wars are not mentioned (itself significant) but are clearly separate from the Imperial takeover or the onset of the rebellion. (Lucas' talks to Carol Titleman about the backstory to the film)

 

3. November 1977: The Clone Wars were "last attempt by the Jedi knights to stop the Imperial forces." (Souvenir Program)

 

4. Also November 1977: The Clone Wars were a local conflict on a planet of Clones, from which Lando hails. (Story conferences)

 

4.5 Circa April 1978: no information, but notes of Lucas contemplate making five prequels, including a "Clone Wars" trilogy.

 

5. Summer 1979: Imperial Shocktroopers, including Boba Fett, "came from the far side of the galaxy" and were "wiped out by the Jedi knights during the Clone Wars.” (Lucasfilm newsletter, also mentioned in Empire's novelization.)

 

7. 1993: "The Clone Wars was a terrible conflict that erupted during the time of the Old Republic (some thirty-five years prior to the start of Star Wars IV: A New Hope). The conflict produced such heroes as Bail Organa, Anakin Skywalker, and Obi-Wan Kenobi, who served as a general. Few details about the period have been revealed, but we know that the Jedi Knights and their allies battled to defend the Old Republic against its enemies." (A Guide to the Star Wars Universe)

 

8. Circa March 2000: What we see in Attack of the Clones.

 

[Mr. Who 919]

55 minutes ago, Mattris said:

 

Yes, far too much to unpack in this thread. But I can comment on each of those entries, if you want.

 

@Jay, could you please move these derailed conversations to the Star Wars Disenchantment thread?

 

 

I'm not aware of things that changed during the production of the films. I do not work for Lucasfilm, nor was I present during these productions. I was merely admitting that it's plausible that some changes took place during the conception and writing of the films... not in a bigger picture sense: the lore, main narrative, themes, the purpose of the archetypal characters.

 

Someone saying something is not proof, even if that someone is important.

 

Sorry, I'm not going to share what I think is Lucasfilm's overall plan for Star Wars. At least, not now.  But if I'm right, what exists within the canon (as evidence) will 100% 'contradict what people have said' about there not being a plan... that Star Wars is mere escapism: action/adventure stories primarily made for kids.

 

As far as foreshadowing goes, the earlier, the better.  Specifics of a grander story that can be traced to the beginning indicate a plan... not just various lines and ideas continuously morphing - or being ignored/diminished - depending on the choices/feelings of the writers.

 

What evidence do you have that George Lucas didn't conceive 'pay-offs' in mind for his many 'somethings' a long time ago?

 

 

The canon contradicts what they are saying. I'm not saying they're all lying, at least not all the time. I'm saying that these contracted professionals provide to the public a mix of substance, lies, and trolling... for the purpose of keeping this gullible fandom on the far side of the galaxy.

 

You just repeated what Daisy Ridley was told. You don't know for a fact what JJ Abrams, Rian Johnson, Kathleen Kennedy, or George Lucas knew about the character of Rey.

 

As those on 'the outside', we cannot know for certain - one way or the other - if "Rey's patronage was made up on the fly". But for me, select canon excerpts and the character's musical themes (in relation to other character themes) are far more convincing than 'members of the cast/crew saying things'.

 

From this interview - the one that made so many Star Wars fans upset - one of the main the takeaways is that 'the Rey secret' was kept "to avoid spoilers", just like the Vader secret. But in a nutshell, Daisy Ridley is just sharing what she was told... and avoids saying/confirming certain major things for fear of the black helicopters coming to silence her.

 

 

 

Only the publicly-released canon counts as real evidence. You don't know that those particular things were changed or made up on the fly; you only perceive they were changed or made up based on what you were told and/or what you assume to be true.

 

Could these cast/crew members still be under NDA, saying certain things they've been instructed to say: lies... misdirection... clues  if one knows what to listen for? That's what I think has been happening.

 

 

All of them. I'm not going to quote dozens of canon excerpts and logic explanations here and now. But trust me, they exist in droves. Otherwise, I wouldn't be so adamant and certain about all this.

 

As for Duel of the Fates, I surmise that Colin Trevorrow was instructed to write an Episode IX in which Emperor Palpatine was not to be involved... one that does not really delve into any 'bigger picture' of the Saga... or have any big twists. Trevorrow may or not have been 'in' on what JJ had planned. But he did his job, nonetheless.

 

I'll also note how absurd it was that the full DOTF script and  pre-production art was 'leaked'... on the same day as the 'alternate' cue slates for the score. What a coincidence!  What amazing, insightful leaks!  Nonsense.   

I really doubt that Trevorrow wrote a SW9 script to screw with some people… I like to believe that he has better things to do with his time than this, if that’s what you’re implying…

[Mattris 416]

54 minutes ago, DarthDementous said:

And there’s the fly in the ointment. You can’t make any predictions because then you’ll have something in stone that can be contradicted and render your entire theory incorrect

 

I've made many Star Wars predictions big and small. Some were posted - or at least hinted at - in the other thread.  My theories are "in stone". I choose not to post them in this forum because, at this juncture, I have no reason to do so.

 

After the first TROS trailer, I enjoyed congratulations from many (previously naysaying) JWFan members after my 'Emperor Palpatine will return' prediction was proven correct. I also predicted that Rey would be revealed as a relative/creation of Palpatine and - after the film came out - was proven right once again.

 

My grand predictions and theories not panning out within the official canon will not cause them to not make sense. I don't need Lucasfilm to make sense of Star Wars for me. I've already done it.

[DarthDementous 1,059]

2 hours ago, Mattris said:

 

I've made many Star Wars predictions big and small, some I posted in the other thread.  My theories are "in stone". I choose not to post them in this forum because, at this juncture, I have no reason to do so.

 

After the first TROS trailer, I enjoyed congratulations from JWFan members after my 'Emperor Palpatine will return' prediction was proven correct. I also predicted that Rey was a relative or creation of Palpatine... and was proven right once again after the film came out.

 

My grand predictions and theories not panning out within the official canon will not cause them to not make sense. I don't need Lucasfilm to make sense of Star Wars for me. I've already done it.

I’m referring to this: Sorry, I'm not going to share what I think is Lucasfilm's overall plan for Star Wars.

 

Why not?

 

Also, do you think if those predictions were made by a news outlet that would be enough to call them a ‘reliable source’?

[Mattris 416]

Why should I? How would sharing my theories benefit me? Receiving the approval/admiration of this forum is not the limit of my desire. Moving forward, keeping what I know/predict exclusive to me leaves my options open.

 

Throughout hundreds of posts, I've already said enough regarding my unique perspective of Star Wars to indicate that I was onto something. No need to spoil it.

[greenturnedblue 372]

Lucas would have been smart to do the same, to avoid us 'fans' examining his every word some 50 years later

 

Floating different ideas is natural during the development cycle, I would be shocked if he stuck with the first idea he ever came up with regarding a character's backstock, or motivation, or what Ben means by "the clone wars". 

 

Star Wars is not some piece of experimental film making concept, too avante garde to understand. When Snoke tortured Rey during 8 and the score played The Emperor's theme, nobody jumped up and down and said "I guess Snoke is the emperor!" Because of it. I think some of you guys are reading into things too much...

[Chen G. 3,949]

1 hour ago, greenturnedblue said:

Floating different ideas is natural during the development cycle, I would be shocked if he stuck with the first idea he ever came up with regarding a character's backstock, or motivation, or what Ben means by "the clone wars". 

 

I agree, but, for one thing, Lucas by and large DOES claim he stuck with his original ideas as they first came to him. Its part of auteur theory: hallowing the original vision, as it first appeared to the creative artist, and downplaying the evolutionary nature of the creative proccess.

 

And, I think the "silence" of his notes combined with the fact that conflicting accounts (of what the Clone Wars would have been) emerging within weeks of each other, as well as the very tentative way he speaks about the Clone Wars in the story conferences, all point to the fact that it was just a vague concept of a World War II-like conflict in the past, rather than something more thought-through with defined factions, setting, chronology, etc...

[Naïve Old Fart 9,544]

STAR WARS EPISODE 10: A KNIVES OUT MYSTERY

[DarthDementous 1,059]

11 hours ago, Mattris said:

Why should I? How would sharing my theories benefit me? Receiving the approval/admiration of this forum is not the limit of my desire. Moving forward, keeping what I know/predict exclusive to me leaves my options open.

 

Throughout hundreds of posts, I've already said enough regarding my unique perspective of Star Wars to indicate that I was onto something. No need to spoil it.

“After the first TROS trailer, I enjoyed congratulations from JWFan members after my 'Emperor Palpatine will return' prediction was proven correct. I also predicted that Rey was a relative or creation of Palpatine... and was proven right once again after the film came out.”

 

You really are just a ball of contradictions

[greenturnedblue 372]

8 hours ago, Chen G. said:

I agree, but, for one thing, Lucas by and large DOES claim he stuck with his original ideas as they first came to him.

The last thing I'm going to say about that is this is George Lucas we are talking about, the man who continuously edited and re edited and re edited again his films, saying things like "Sorry you all fell in love with an unfinished film". And by 'unfinished', meaning adding CGI rocks in front of R2D2 on Tatooine, more tentacles on the Sarlacc, Darth Vader's Nooooo as Sheev lightnings Luke, and cant forget the infamous 'Han shoots first' scene which was changed more times than I can count with the fingers on my hand. If this is Lucas' original idea, why didnt he do it from the beginning? Seems like some real George Lucas 'revisionism', that he claims "well, I actually meant to do it like that all along"

 

12 hours ago, Mattris said:

Why should I? How would sharing my theories benefit me?

Because this is a discussion board, and attitudes like that aren't germane to a thoughtful discussion. 

[Mattris 416]

2 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

You really are just a ball of contradictions

 

No, it's just that my track record is so good, I don't see the need to go out on more limbs... be further ridiculed by the majority... only to be proven right, eventually. Forgive me, but I have larger aspirations.

 

2 hours ago, greenturnedblue said:

 If this is Lucas' original idea, why didnt he do it from the beginning? Seems like some real George Lucas 'revisionism', that he claims "well, I actually meant to do it like that all along"

 

Because this is a discussion board, and attitudes like that aren't germane to a thoughtful discussion. 

 

Perhaps the relatively minor revisions to the Star Wars films are a distraction from the major facets that have remained consistent.

 

I've discussed these matters at length within the Star Wars Disenchantment Topic. For further discussions, I would like these off-topic posts here (the last two pages) to be moved to that thread. Then we can continue.

[Manakin Skywalker 4,897]

2 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

“

After the first TROS trailer, I enjoyed congratulations from JWFan members after my 'Emperor Palpatine will return' prediction was proven correct. I also predicted that Rey was a relative or creation of Palpatine... and was proven right once again after the film came out.”

 

You really are just a ball of contradictions

 

I didn't see anyone congratulate him, and don't believe that anyone ever did. Besides, this was an extremely common fan theory since before TFA even came out.

[Mattris 416]

Your memory has failed you, @Manakin Skywalker. See here, midway down:

 

https://www.jwfan.com/forums/index.php?/topic/28579-star-wars-disenchantment/page/115/

 

And through the next page, including:

 

"Well fuck me. Congrats, Mattris."  -Demodex

 

The Emperor returning - more specifically, with Rey being related to him in some way - was absolutely not "an extremely common fan theory".  On the rare occasion it was even mentioned, it was dismissed outright by almost everyone (here and fandom-wide) because 'Emperor Palpatine is dead!'