logo Sign In

What is the main Star Wars Saga about? — Page 2

Author
Time
 (Edited)

NeverarGreat said:

I wouldn’t have cared if Rey was the cured love-child of Ahsoka Tano and Jar-Jar Binks as long as she got a consistent and well-written arc.

Absolutely. That’s how I felt after resigning myself to the fact we aren’t getting George’s story. Unfortunately The Rise of Skywalker botched her arc beyond repair while The Last Jedi at least pushed her away from merely being an audience insert character as she mostly is in The Force Awakens. She has emotional growth which is an important part of the Heroine’s Journey but it’s sacrificed and made into a clunky tug of war between two different visions. The whole mystery around her character was a mistake.

“Heroes come in all sizes, and you don’t have to be a giant hero. You can be a very small hero. It’s just as important to understand that accepting self-responsibility for the things you do, having good manners, caring about other people - these are heroic acts. Everybody has the choice of being a hero or not being a hero every day of their lives.” - George Lucas

Author
Time

As misguided as TROS is, whatever George had come up with for the trilogy would have been 100% worse.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DominicCobb said:

As misguided as TROS is, whatever George had come up with for the trilogy would have been 100% worse.

I doubt that very seriously. I think it would’ve been much better as at the very least he’d be following a broader story that is consistent. He always had an idea of where the story was going as even Steven Spielberg said in the 90’s that part of George’s process for the Prequels was part of his concept for the Sequels. The Rise of Skywalker has no sense of plot or story but feels more like a game of darts. You can’t say that for the Prequels. For all. The Disney Trilogy is essentially a modern take on the Original Trilogy.

“Heroes come in all sizes, and you don’t have to be a giant hero. You can be a very small hero. It’s just as important to understand that accepting self-responsibility for the things you do, having good manners, caring about other people - these are heroic acts. Everybody has the choice of being a hero or not being a hero every day of their lives.” - George Lucas

Author
Time

BB-Rey said:

DominicCobb said:

As misguided as TROS is, whatever George had come up with for the trilogy would have been 100% worse.

I doubt that very seriously. I think it would’ve been much better as at the very least he’d be following a broader story that is consistent. He always had an idea of where the story was going as even Steven Spielberg said in the 90’s that part of George’s process for the Prequels was part of his concept for the Sequels.

That’s not really true, Lucas had ideas but it’s pretty obviously inaccurate to say that it was in any way “consistent.”

The Rise of Skywalker has no sense of plot or story but feels more like a game of darts. You can’t say that for the Prequels.

That’s actually exactly how I’d describe the prequels.

Author
Time

It’s about a rise of a galaxy-spanning dictatorship and fall of a hero, who eventually ends up being redeemed by his children.

It’s pretty cool, definitely check it out sometimes.

Author
Time

I think the definition of the Star Wars saga depends on which trilogies you include.

If you only include the OT, it’s the story of Luke Skywalker. We watch as he goes though the hero’s journey, in the style of classic mythology.

If you add the prequels, it becomes the story of Anakin Skywalker. We watch as he rises, falls, and rises again, in the style of a classic tragedy.

If you add the sequels, it becomes the story of the Skywalker family. We watch as they go through their lives, ending with someone who isn’t part of the family taking their name.

My preferred Skywalker Saga experience:
I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX

Author
Time

StarkillerAG said:

I think the definition of the Star Wars saga depends on which trilogies you include.

If you only include the OT, it’s the story of Luke Skywalker. We watch as he goes though the hero’s journey, in the style of classic mythology.

If you add the prequels, it becomes the story of Anakin Skywalker. We watch as he rises, falls, and rises again, in the style of a classic tragedy.

If you add the sequels, it becomes the story of the Skywalker family. We watch as they go through their lives, ending with someone who isn’t part of the family taking their name.

One of these things is not like the others…

“The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the Force.” - DV

Author
Time

Yeah, the definition gets a lot looser once George stops being the showrunner. The first six movies were under one single vision, but now it’s basically a free for all.

My preferred Skywalker Saga experience:
I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX

Author
Time
 (Edited)

act on instinct said:

StarkillerAG said:

I think the definition of the Star Wars saga depends on which trilogies you include.

If you only include the OT, it’s the story of Luke Skywalker. We watch as he goes though the hero’s journey, in the style of classic mythology.

If you add the prequels, it becomes the story of Anakin Skywalker. We watch as he rises, falls, and rises again, in the style of a classic tragedy.

If you add the sequels, it becomes the story of the Skywalker family. We watch as they go through their lives, ending with someone who isn’t part of the family taking their name.

One of these things is not like the others…

StarkillerAG said:

Yeah, the definition gets a lot looser once George stops being the showrunner. The first six movies were under one single vision, but now it’s basically a free for all.

I don’t think so, if we’re all being honest it became the story of the Skywalker family when the PT was added. Just because George retroactively said it was the story of Anakin doesn’t make it true, obviously the OT isn’t Anakin’s story and TPM barely is either.

Author
Time

DominicCobb said:

act on instinct said:

StarkillerAG said:

I think the definition of the Star Wars saga depends on which trilogies you include.

If you only include the OT, it’s the story of Luke Skywalker. We watch as he goes though the hero’s journey, in the style of classic mythology.

If you add the prequels, it becomes the story of Anakin Skywalker. We watch as he rises, falls, and rises again, in the style of a classic tragedy.

If you add the sequels, it becomes the story of the Skywalker family. We watch as they go through their lives, ending with someone who isn’t part of the family taking their name.

One of these things is not like the others…

StarkillerAG said:

Yeah, the definition gets a lot looser once George stops being the showrunner. The first six movies were under one single vision, but now it’s basically a free for all.

I don’t think so, if we’re all being honest it became the story of the Skywalker family when the PT was added. Just because George retroactively said it was the story of Anakin doesn’t make it true, obviously the OT isn’t Anakin’s story and TPM barely is either.

No that’s ridiculous to say it was never the story of the Skywalker family before the PT, Luke goes with Ben as a mentor because he knew his father, he wants to live up to his father, not just be a Jedi because he’s all invested in the creed or even aware of them. What about Darth Vader being the father in the second movie? how early did George’s mind have to be set to qualify exactly?

Besides the reason I said one is not like the others and what I believe StarkillerAG was implying has more to do with the progression from retelling classic mythology to classic tragedy where by the third it’s not so anchored in intention (which also isn’t to say the individual movies are without theme).

“The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the Force.” - DV

Author
Time

act on instinct said:

DominicCobb said:

act on instinct said:

StarkillerAG said:

I think the definition of the Star Wars saga depends on which trilogies you include.

If you only include the OT, it’s the story of Luke Skywalker. We watch as he goes though the hero’s journey, in the style of classic mythology.

If you add the prequels, it becomes the story of Anakin Skywalker. We watch as he rises, falls, and rises again, in the style of a classic tragedy.

If you add the sequels, it becomes the story of the Skywalker family. We watch as they go through their lives, ending with someone who isn’t part of the family taking their name.

One of these things is not like the others…

StarkillerAG said:

Yeah, the definition gets a lot looser once George stops being the showrunner. The first six movies were under one single vision, but now it’s basically a free for all.

I don’t think so, if we’re all being honest it became the story of the Skywalker family when the PT was added. Just because George retroactively said it was the story of Anakin doesn’t make it true, obviously the OT isn’t Anakin’s story and TPM barely is either.

No that’s ridiculous to say it was never the story of the Skywalker family before the PT, Luke goes with Ben as a mentor because he knew his father, he wants to live up to his father, not just be a Jedi because he’s all invested in the creed or even aware of them. What about Darth Vader being the father in the second movie? how early did George’s mind have to be set to qualify exactly?

To clarify, I think it’s reasonable to say that it was almost always the story of the Skywalker family. What I don’t think is reasonable is saying it was the story of Anakin Skywalker, which is just plainly untrue.

Besides the reason I said one is not like the others and what I believe StarkillerAG was implying has more to do with the progression from retelling classic mythology to classic tragedy where by the third it’s not so anchored in intention (which also isn’t to say the individual movies are without theme).

I’m not sure I understand your distinction. OT does one thing, PT does another thing, ST does a third thing, but I guess doesn’t fit? Seems arbitrary.

Author
Time

How would you define the third thing the ST is doing? That’s where it feels loose to me, whereas the OT has its roots deep in that of retelling myth and the PT in tragedy.

“The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the Force.” - DV

Author
Time

act on instinct said:

How would you define the third thing the ST is doing? That’s where it feels loose to me, whereas the OT has its roots deep in that of retelling myth and the PT in tragedy.

All three are mythological stories.

Author
Time

But can you define what kind of myth it is? The OT is a hero’s journey, and the prequels are a Greek tragedy, but I don’t see any mythological themes in the sequels.

My preferred Skywalker Saga experience:
I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX

Author
Time
 (Edited)

They’re all the heroes journey. The PT just ends with tragedy, though also hope (plus we know the tragedy won’t stick). In a way this really makes the PT the odd one out.

I think you’re really just looking at it all wrong. I’m not sure I understand the argument.

Author
Time

DominicCobb said:

I think you’re really just looking at it all wrong. I’m not sure I understand the argument.

I could say the same for you. I don’t understand at all how the prequels fit the hero’s journey. I guess the sequels kind of fit it, but Rey’s journey has so many unnecessary distractions that it’s hopelessly confused.

My preferred Skywalker Saga experience:
I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Rey’s Journey follows the Heroine’s Journey more than the Hero’s Journey but unfortunately it’s botched in the final installment a great deal. It’s more Kylo/Ben who follows the Hero’s Journey but in reverse.

One of the biggest problems with this trilogy I feel though is it’s not necessarily something we believe in anymore. It’s inclined more towards the Han Solo side of the story versus continuing on the path of the Force and Luke Skywalker aspect which is more spiritual.

The trilogy (and Disney era in general) is very modern and not as timeless as the two trilogies before it in a lot of ways.

The Heroine’s Journey:

https://m.mythcreants.com/blog/using-the-heroines-journey/

“Heroes come in all sizes, and you don’t have to be a giant hero. You can be a very small hero. It’s just as important to understand that accepting self-responsibility for the things you do, having good manners, caring about other people - these are heroic acts. Everybody has the choice of being a hero or not being a hero every day of their lives.” - George Lucas

Author
Time
 (Edited)

StarkillerAG said:

DominicCobb said:

I think you’re really just looking at it all wrong. I’m not sure I understand the argument.

I could say the same for you. I don’t understand at all how the prequels fit the hero’s journey. I guess the sequels kind of fit it, but Rey’s journey has so many unnecessary distractions that it’s hopelessly confused.

Hero’s journey is just a framework that describes a type of storytelling. It’s not supposed to be a rigid step by step process for storytelling. It’s not even really accurate to say that the OT is the hero’s journey because that’s only describing Luke. Anyway, if you look at the structure, it definitely fits Anakin. I mean even just besides that the OT and the PT have the same basic story, just with opposite endings. Anakin fills out the hero’s journey almost to a T, though admittedly this includes his story through the OT, but arguably the hero’s journey fits Luke best when viewed with the ST involved too, so again, not really a perfect way to describe it.

I think Rey’s story is pretty clear. I wouldn’t say it’s confused so much as ultimately dumbed down, with the overall thematic thrust of the trilogy being the thing that is confused in the last chapter.

Anyway, I think it’s a confusing argument because like I said I don’t really understand the point being made - OT is one thing, PT is another thing, and then ST is a third thing but only the ST is left out? But really what I don’t get what’s being argued in relation to the topic’s question. You seem to be talking about what kind of stories they are (which of course I disagree with as I’ve said, I think they’re all operating in the same space), but the question is not that, it’s what are they about.

Author
Time

Anyway I feel like I’m gonna tap out. I don’t really care enough about these silly “ST ruined a perfect 6 episode saga” arguments. I’ll have to check back in 15 years from now when all the posters think the ST is the best thing since sliced bread so I can tell them how wrong they are.

Author
Time

To add to Dom’s correct reading of “doing the right thing,” I’d say Star Wars is about “doing the right thing” specifically in an effort to prevent fascism/totalitarianism/tyranny

That aspect is one of the only aspects that is consistent across all episodes. It’s not just doing the right thing - it’s doing the right thing to make things better for everyone, not just yourself.

The quality of the films pretty clearly rises and falls on how muddled and diluted those two (really, just two sides of the same) key throughline(s) are in whatever individual chapter you’re watching. When it doesn’t stick to those main dramatic engines, and instead chooses to pursue various retcons, shifts in focus, direct reactions to vocal fandom, or worst, indulges in acts of self-referentialism as a replacement for storyline progression - that’s when it falters and trends towards disappointment.

Author
Time

DominicCobb said:

Anyway I feel like I’m gonna tap out. I don’t really care enough about these silly “ST ruined a perfect 6 episode saga” arguments. I’ll have to check back in 15 years from now when all the posters think the ST is the best thing since sliced bread so I can tell them how wrong they are.

That’s not what I think, stop strawmanning me. The prequels have a lot of flaws, but at least they follow classic mythological structures more closely than the sequels do. George Lucas understands those things, while Disney only seems to care about trying to please fans.

My preferred Skywalker Saga experience:
I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX

Author
Time

Structures are only as important as the weight they can bear and the ideas they can house. “following classic mythological structures” shouldn’t really be a measuring stick for whether Star Wars movies are quality or not, especially if the only real reason those structures are being (loosely, raggedly) adhered to is due to that aforementioned self-referentialism.

W/R/T Lucas, time and again we’ve seen that the man gets distracted by the grandiosity of his OWN imagination and mythmaking, and one of those first distractions was Moyer and co. creating a cottage industry over the examining mythological underpinning of Star Wars. Once that happened, the sharp focus on the streamlined storytelling engine that was Star Wars (an engine that was used to fuel a story whose main point really was “do the right thing and fight tyranny no matter what.”) began to blur and turn in on itself. And then he started retconning it into a family-centered soap opera that became, more or less, a story about forgiving your dad for being a real dick to everyone. And to patch over all the weird dips, gaps, and holes introduced into the piecemeal’d story as he went from the simplicity of 1977 to “the end” of 2005, he came to increasingly rely on self-referencing and explicitly pointing out to everyone the structure of what he was doing, in an effort to shore up just how flimsy and far-afield from what made Star Wars work everything had become.

Author
Time

Yeah, you’re kind of right. George can get carried away with his imagination a lot, and the whole “Anakin is the main character of Star Wars” retcon is dumb. But I don’t think you should just wave away the mythological aspect as a pointless distraction. It’s been a key aspect of the franchise from the beginning, with the OT being a textbook example of the hero’s journey. Just because the prequels used mythology as well doesn’t mean that using mythology is a bad thing.

My preferred Skywalker Saga experience:
I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX