Sign In

ToscheStation

User Group
Trusted Members
Join date
5-Aug-2011
Last activity
12-Sep-2017
Posts
69

Post History

Post
#1107393
Topic
The problem of Owen Lars
Time

yotsuya said:

Wow… that is some complicated nonsense. Vader is Luke’s father but not Anakin… that makes no sense at all.

Vader being Luke’s father doesn’t automatically mean he specifically used to be Anakin. Don’t get me wrong; I used to think that it did as well, until I looked into it a bit more. Vader and Anakin remaining separate people - with the former being the father of Luke rather than the latter - makes for a better explanation for why Ben and Yoda don’t warn Luke about this in ESB, and coheres with what Ben told Luke in the first film, without the whole “certain point of view” thing. And as I asked before: how can Ben be absolutely certain that his friend (Annikin/Anakin) was Luke’s (biological) father? Of course, this is predicated on Yoda and Ben - and of course, the Emperor - all assuming the Anakin was the father, and not knowing that it was actually Vader. There’s also that line of Vader’s from ESB: “Obi-Wan never told you what happened to your father.” How could Vader know this? Unless…Vader knew something that Obi-Wan didn’t know.

yotsuya said:

The name Anakin hadn’t come up yet when Vader, in James Earl Jones’s voice (or in the novel if you read that first), said he was Luke’s father.

Actually, it had come up by then, but it was spelled Annikin, instead. It was in a continuity discussion between Carol Titleman and SW director or marketing Charles Lippincott dated July/August of 1977. For whatever reason, Lucas wasn’t using it in his ESB notes. Another name, that of “Tan Skywalker” was used in some licensing material from 1979 (the Russ Manning Sunday Comic strip authorized by Black Falcon LTD, an LFL subsidiary). Otherwise, he kept Luke’s father as a nameless character, until ROTJ, when he finally decided upon Anakin.

yotsuya said:

We have no idea when Lucas decided that was going to be the story, but script hints at it with the consistent lack of any line at that location (referring instead to inserted dialog). We only know that sometime between the dated first draft in Feb 78 and the completion of filming in Sept 79 that Vader was Luke’s father. It could have been earlier (and not included in what he gave Leigh Brackett on the story), but we really don’t know. It was almost certainly in the script that the novelization writer worked off of, but that was about the same time.

In my opinion, what I think is more improbable/ludicrous (or what you would call, “nonsense”) is the idea that Lucas suddenly came up with Vader=Anakin, in the Spring of 1978 (the period you refer to), with no prior precedent.

yotsuya said:

Lucas claims he had that in mind from earlier, but with his track record at reconning the past, he can’t be completely trusted. But, others can. Hamill, Kershner, and Kasdan had no reason to lie and according to them it was intended that way from Hamill’s performance on set and had been that way in the full screenplay (not the shooting copies given to the crew) for quite some time. The earlier drafts of the screenplay bear this out by having a reference to inserted dialog.

All that says is that they were told that Vader would claim to be Luke’s father…still a far cry from establishing that he’s the same father character that Ben talked about in the first film, or the Anakin of ROTJ.

yotsuya said:

According to the book Star Wars: The Annotated Scripts (by Laurent Bouzereau), it was the second draft that had the first version of the iconic “I am your father” scene. That was the draft Lucas did himself before Kasdan came on board. This doesn’t quite back Lucas up, but it does place it very early in the story development.

Yes, and in this same draft, Yoda still tells Luke that his father and Ben were both his students and that they trained on the bog planet, just like he says in the first draft. Vader was still being said to have been Ben’s student. So even with Vader being Luke’s father, he most likely wasn’t supposed to be the same father character that Ben talked about in the first film, if that man, along with Ben, were both trained by someone else (in this case Yoda)> This was subsequently changed in one of Lucas’s re-writes (the typed version of the Second Draft), where Yoda says that he trained Ben, who then trained Luke’s father. Which, btw, doesn’t indicate necessarily that by then, Anakin and Vader were the same person. Marvel Comics, in a story flash back (from the Annual issue #1 dated 1979), took it as meaning that Ben had TWO apprentices, Skywalker Sr. and Darth Vader. The later drafts, from the Third draft (by Kasdan) onwards, dropped the whole subject of who trained Luke’s father from the script entirely, leaving that matter up to the next film. But please not that in the final film, Skywalker Sr. and Vader are still spoken of as separate people by the Emperor, and only Vader is still spoken of as Ben’s (former) student.

To sum up, it was only with ROTJ that is was established that:

  1. Vader was Luke’s father
  2. That he used to be Anakin - the same friend and father of Luke that Ben talked about in the first film
  3. That Anakin was trained by Ben (Obi-Wan)

edit to add:

ATMachine said:

The idea of Vader and Anakin being the same person seems to date from the making of ESB, as you say. But the notion of Vader being a secret Skywalker (Luke’s brother, uncle, illegitimate father) seems to have been present even on the first film: in a 1975 conversation with Alan Dean Foster, Lucas said the second SW film was when we would “learn who Darth Vader is”.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^This.

ATMachine, I think the “stumbling block” for a lot of people on the “secret Skywalker” thing for Vader’s former identity pre-Vader, is the forgone conclusion that Anakin Skywalker was envisioned as an only child back when Star Wars was made, just like he is in the PT.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1104620
Topic
The problem of Owen Lars
Time

I think the very ‘linear’ proposal that Lucas came up with Vader=Anakin totally out-of-the-blue, in the Spring of '78 while writing (or re-writing) TESB, is the least probable scenario.

Yotsuya, Obi-Wan wasn’t lying in the scenario that I propose. His ‘funny face’ or hesitation is the due to the fact that he knew that Owen never told Luke that his father was murdered. In the alternate scenario (while ‘alternate’ I think it’s more probable than the orthodox version(s) we are told to believe), Annikin/Anakin was indeed killed by Vader, the twist would have been that Vader - or whoever Vader really was beneath the mask - was the actual father of Luke, or barring that, family member X. And let’s be honest: how could Ben know for a certainty that his friend Annikin (original spelling) was Luke’s father? All the story really needed was the presumption that he was. And from Ben’s point of view, with his assumption of Annikin’s role in Luke’s paternity, he would have no reason to believe that his former Jedi student was the actual biological father of Luke, whoever he was prior to becoming Vader.

The genesis of a ‘secret identity’ for Vader goes all the way back at least to December of 1975, in a story conference which Lucas held along with writer/novelist Alan Dean Foster, FX supervisor John Dykstra, and a few others (Kurtz of course knew). How David Prowse could have found out about this is anyone’s guess. However, Lucas realized in Jan of 1976 that Star Wars might only be realized as a single film, so he re-worked the script to make the movie read as a stand-alone. Thus, a bigger role for Tarkin, superseding that of Vader. And Vader - on a surface reading at least - is just Vader, and had no other name.

When SW became a hit, and actuall full-budget sequel movies became a real possibility, Lucas re-visisted the ‘secret identity’ aspect of Vader’s character.
edit: For all the talk of the orthodox version* of Star Wars (*i.e. where there are absolutely no familial connections among the main characters whatsoever) exhibiting a ‘larger universe’ until the familial retcons in the sequels ‘shrunk’ that universe, this version of Star Wars would have been a stand-alone movie that would have inspired ONE sequel, at best. (say, something in the vein of Splinter of the Mind’s Eye, except where Luke would have possibly killed Vader), and probably only ONE prequel.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1104498
Topic
The problem of Owen Lars
Time

Possessed said:

Well I think it was at least before post production, I remember an interview with Mark where he said George pulled him aside before shooting the scene and told him so he would know to react stronger than expected.

To be more clear, I was proposing that the idea of Vader being the same person as Annikin/Anakin - the man the Ben talked about in the first film - was not put in place until Lucas started on ROTJ, or very late in (post) production for TESB (my more ‘charitable’ estimate). Vader was indeed Luke’s father when TESB was made, but he was someone else under the mask - not Annikin/Anakin, but possibly another Skywalker (brother of Annikin), or even Ben’s son. Even if the relationship wasn’t a paternal one, still some sort of familial relationship and ‘secret identity’ was meant to be there when the first film was being made. However, the idea was temporarily set aside in order that the movie would work as a stand-alone.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1102985
Topic
The problem of Owen Lars
Time

Anchorhead said:

SilverWook said:

You were never curious about how much they knew and were keeping from Luke?

Not at all. Other than Beru mentioning that “he’s too much like his father”, it never felt like there was anything there. From what we’ve known since then (early script\story\characters\Original Vision nonsense), there wasn’t anything there. Owen, Beru, and Ben let us know that Luke’s father was a good pilot, a good man, and was killed when Luke was young.

They were a character vehicle to get a farm boy out in the middle of nowhere and have him feel less attached to his family because they aren’t his parents. They’re in the film to add a bit of depth on our main character.

Since Vader wasn’t his father in the 70s, there was no reason to ponder anything that Lucas retconned about Luke’s parents in the 80s and 90s. I never gave them any thought because there wasn’t anything there in 1977.

I think Luke was related to Vader in some familial fashion already when the film was made. But yeah, Vader most definitely wasn’t Annikin/Anakin Skywalker in 1977, nor even in 78 pre-production for TESB. I maintain that Lucas didn’t make that switch until he started on the third film (or, very, very late in TESB’s post-production period). A Vader who is not Anakin/Annikin but is Luke’s biological father doesn’t explicitly contradict what Ben told Luke. No certain point of view required, or “metaphorical” death, since Annikin/Anakin would have been killed in this scenario as well. There probably was a ‘secret identity’ involved with Vader’s character, but this aspect was of course muted so that Star Wars could work as a stand alone movie, should the planned “books two and three” sequels not get made. To me, that’s where the whole “no there, there” comes in.

This post has been edited.

Post
#914706
Topic
Legacy of Sequel Trilogy?
Time

flametitan said:

Dek Rollins said:

What?!?! I have no idea what you mean by all that. If Vader wasn’t “the elder Skywalker”, then how could he be Luke’s dad? If Ben didn’t know Vader was Luke’s dad, who was this other lightsaber wielding good friend that he assumed was his dad, and why didn’t he know who his dad was in the first place? Whoever thought of this convoluted idea is thinking too hard.

The idea is that Skywalker’s lover (Luke’s mother) had an affair with Vader that Ben never knew about, leaving him to assume that clearly this child is a Skywalker, when Luke was actually a Vader.

Thank you.

Post
#914647
Topic
Legacy of Sequel Trilogy?
Time

Dek Rollins said:

What do you mean? It was ESB when we found out that Vader was Luke’s father, meaning Ben was lying to him in Star Wars.

ESB could have meant many things…not [i] necessarily [/i] that Vader used to be the elder Skywalker. An alternate scenario is that booth Vader and Ben could have still been telling the truth (as far as they knew), but difference being that Ben was mistaken about who Luke’s biological father was.*

*a scenario which would also explain why neither he nor Yoda warned Luke about what Vader might claim, and the Emperor going along with Vader’s plan (i.e. the Emperor mistakenly thought Luke was Annikin’s son as well).

This post has been edited.

Post
#914636
Topic
Legacy of Sequel Trilogy?
Time

Bingowings said:

Okay after hearing Ben’s ‘nostalgia for Weimar’ we were led to believe that before the Empire the world was a better place and the Empire just ruined it all.
But if ESB told us one thing it’s Ben is not a reliable narrator.

Actually, it was ROTJ that told us that Ben is an unreliable narrator…

Post
#757882
Topic
The SW Saga of 1975: ATM's Take
Time

  Come on!  ATMachine is clearly taking recreational drugs and channeling 1969 era David Bowie, because he's, like, you know,  coming up with his own version of Star Wars, but not being paid by a film studio to do so!!!!

(end sarcasm)

ATMachine said:

"Who ever said George Lucas was a good writer?

Besides, in the 1974 rough draft, he very clearly stated that Princess Leia Aquilae had auburn hair and blue eyes, while both secondary protagonist Clieg Whitsun and Annikin Starkiller's brother Deak were blond.

Of course, back in the 1970s, GL had a certain amount of flexibility when it came to the appearance of his characters. Han Solo was almost played by a black actor, remember, and the first choice for Obi-Wan Kenobi was actually Toshiro Mifune.

Luke Starkiller himself was almost played by dark-haired Jewish actor Will Seltzer. But Mark Hamill, who turned up almost at the end of the casting sessions, not only had the acting chops; he also fit GL's vision of Luke as a blond Flash Gordon type.

Mind you, this flexibility seems to have evaporated by the time of the prequels.

Watch the making-of documentary on the TPM DVD and you'll see GL pass over a child actor who was clearly the better choice for young Anakin, in favor of the "cuter" (and blonder) Jake Lloyd, who was much worse in terms of flubbing his lines.

That's the peril inherent in trying to find an actor to fit your pre-existing mental image precisely. GL should have remembered the wisdom of his younger self."

^^^^^^^^^^This.   Home....freakin'.....run. 

 

This post has been edited.

Post
#757880
Topic
The SW Saga of 1975: ATM's Take
Time

 But..but..ATM is clearly taking recreational drugs and channeling 1969 era David Bowie,  because he's like,  you know,  coming up with his own version of Star Wars,  without being paid by a film studio to do so!!!!  

 (end sarcasm)

Post
#746227
Topic
Did any of you walk out of the theatre for any of the Star Wars prequels?
Time

RU.08 said:

There's a lot to like in the PT, and in the theatre I really enjoyed ATOC. It's not as enjoyable with repeat viewings as other films, but then neither is ROTJ. Personally I think ROTJ is the weakest of the OT, and that ROTS is the weakest of the PT.

 The "weakest" of the OT is still better than the "best" of the PT......

Post
#743103
Topic
When did you realize the Prequels sucked?
Time

Anchorhead said: They wanted either more "Adventures Of Luke Skywalker, or something with a hell of a lot more substance than the children's bed time story he belched out.

 "Children's bed time story" would have been preferable to what we ended up getting. 

What we got was:

"Children's bed time story" that also wanted to be "War and Peace"  + unsubtle/obvious commentary on late 90's/early OO's politics + bad soap opera (redundant) + pseudo-Godfather drama. 

Post
#743092
Topic
Is the Hobbit prequel trilogy suffering the same problems as the Star Wars prequel Trilogy?
Time

Scruffy said:

** My own hobby horse is Luke's dilemma throughout RotJ, and his debate with Obi-Wan Kenobi. As originally envisioned, Luke was right and Kenobi was wrong. There was good in his father, and we see that the old man is good at heart when Darth Vader's aged spirit turns out to be a kindly old man. In the revision, Kenobi was right. Anakin Skywalker really had died when he became evil, and thus his redeemed ghost has the aspect of a young, not-yet-corrupted man. I think this is due to the aging auteur shifting his sympathy from the idealistic youth to the cynical senex, but I might be overthinking it. I don't think there's anything in the LOTR EE that really reverses the story told in the theatrical editions like that.

 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^This.

Post
#709828
Topic
What do you LIKE about the EU?
Time

darklordoftech said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

I've never been fond of how KOTOR handled the Tusken-Jawa relationship. One race evolves into two new -- apparently incompatible -- species in the mere span of thousands of years?  I'm not buying it.

I agree 100%. What we're told in KOTOR sacrificed logic in order to tie two things together. In addition to not giving a date, the ANH novel says that only a few scientists believe that there's any connection between Tuskens and Jawas. The movie never gave me the impression that they're related.

Also, what horror visuals are in TOTJ?

 ^^^This.

This post has been edited.

Post
#704629
Topic
Lucasfilm clarifies the future of the EU
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:

^If you have to introduce more universe-shrinkage to make sense of a shrunken universe, then it's best to just toss that universe out and buy a brand new one which fits.

 

^^^^This.

To the top