logo Sign In

Ages of Luke & Leia — Page 3

Author
Time
At the next Celebration:

FAN: "But George how could she remember Padme if..."

GL: "STOP! ... Look! I just don't know, okay? I don't know! I, uh, I, I, I just made it up, okay? It's a freaking movie, not the Bible for Christ's sake! There's just too many characters and too many planets to come up with, and so many characters dying and getting pregnant and getting into other planets, and I got lost, okay? I tried, really! I kept, you know, yellow post-it notes on my computer, with ALL those things you nerdy fans complain, like, 'Jar Jar is not cool' and 'Remember: Anakin is Luke and Leia's father', so I would make it RIGHT the way YOU wanted! Okay?! But look at me, I'm a 62 year old billionaire, I'm not supposed to be creating space characters and space sagas and space whatever that make any actual sense! I just made it up as I went along, are you happy now? Are you happy now that I've admitted my incompetence?! Huh?! Now that I've admitted I just made things up as I drank the mini-bottles of Vodka I had at my hotel room near the studios in London and Australia at 4 AM, crying and calling the Samarithans, while I was trying to shoot a movie when 5 hundred billion nerds keep whining every single MOMENT! And as for the O-OT, I lost it, okay? I left it in a cab back in San Francisco and I forgot to take those with me when I left, and I called the cab company from my hotel room that same night, but some other guy must have taken it because it wasn't there! So the SE's is all I got, okay?! But I can't admitt it, I can't admitt those facts so I lie, I, I, I, I can't speak about my weakness to everyone, not even my psychiatrist knew about this! Until now! There she is in the audience, I can see her! So, please, LET me finish producing Indiana Jones 4 and Red Tails, will you? PLEASE!!! OH GOD I can't take it anymore!!!" * runs away crying *

FAN: "............. Okay... So my next question would go for uh... Mark Hamill... How difficult was it to work with the character of Yoda."

MARK: "Well Frank Oz did a terrific job on...."
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Has Luke's memory of Dagobah ever been rationalized/explained by Prequel fans?
Author
Time
Not a Prequel fan, but ...

Yoda admits that he's been watching Luke for a long time. In fact, that's how Luke detects Yoda on Dagobah ... he feels like he's being watched. I hypothesize that Yoda's long surveillance of Luke created a two-way connection; that, as Yoda peeked in on Luke's psyche, Luke began to perceive Yoda's environment.

Or maybe he hit his head in the crash landing and wasn't thinking straight.
"It's the stoned movie you don't have to be stoned for." -- Tom Shales on Star Wars
Scruffy's gonna die the way he lived.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Invader Jenny

Uhh...yeah they are. That's the whole point of our conversation. But if you are not talking about Luke and Leia, then who are you talking about?

I was speaking in terms of the original story - before Lucas ran out of ideas and started altering shit on the fly, years later. That's why it's so hard for people to make sense out of the plot holes. It's a poorly altered story line. They aren't related, they didn't have the same mom, they aren't the same age, none of that crap. That's why it doesn't make sense. Because it wasn't originally written, acted, or filmed that way.


Luke and Leia being related was never a part of the original story....................nor was giving Han to this bounty hunter!


*Sorry, I nerded out for a minute*

Forum Moderator
Author
Time
Originally posted by: ShiftyEyes
Has Luke's memory of Dagobah ever been rationalized/explained by Prequel fans?


Actually, this fits in with the topic really well, because it is the big difference between a real memory and a Force-induced familiar feeling. Let's analyze each character's response.

Luke (about Dagobah): Still, there's something familiar about this place. Like something out of a dream.

Leia (about her mother): Just a little bit. She died when I was very young. Images really. Feelings. She was very beautiful. Kind. But sad.

Luke cannot at all pinpoint what exactly it is that is familiar about Dagobah. He doesn't mention any outstanding physical characteristics. He compares it to being dreamlike. He even wonders at one point if he is going crazy. There's nothing concrete about it at all. The best I can compare it to is the feeling of deja vu. There's no real memory there, but he just has this innate feeling that he's supposed to be there. He might sense Yoda. Maybe he did have a dream about it at some point. But there's nothing to indicate that he'd ever been there before. There's nothing wrong with this logic. I think the people who suggested there be a scene where Ben takes the babies to Dagobah are just crazy.

Leia is much more specific. I mean, she's not extremely specific, but she's comparitively specific. She said she actually remembers her mother a little bit. This is just speculation, but if my mother had died during childbirth, that's how I would explain her death. It just doesn't mesh with "died when I was very young." But back on topic, she's specific about her mother's physical and emotional appearances. It fits very much with the kinds of brief but important memories from young childhood that are kind of blurred over the ages. Just from the dialogue, you can tell it's a very different experience from Luke and Dagobah. There's nothing wrong with this logic. There is no reason to suggest that it's a Force memory. There's no sense in thinking it's her adopted mother. Luke specifically asks for her real mother. Any idiot could figure that out if confronted with that question. And if she was talking about her adopted mother, it totally ruins the emotional context of the scene and makes it completely useless. Yet so many fans are willing to accept it that way, despite any evidence or payoff, just so it will mesh with the horribly contradictory plot point released 22 years later.

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
EDIT: I just went off on a rant about why the hell does everything have to be rationalised/explained and why can't people just accept that Luke had a touch of Deja-Vu probably due to the fact that he was in the process of fulfilling his destiny. Suffice to say the rant was strongly worded and all in capital letters.

Star Wars is a magical, mystical tale. A character saying there's something familiar about a place doesn't need any explaining. We don't need to see baby Luke visiting Dagobah. We don';t need to see him having a dream at age 10, or Yoda implanting images in his mind from afar.

Geez I hate all this prequel rationalisation bullshit. The true essence of Star Wars is truly getting lost.

War does not make one great.

Author
Time
EDIT: I just went off on a rant about why the hell does everything have to be rationalised/explained


Because we're a curious species with a touch of rationalism. Even here in the natural world, when we see things happen, we ask, "Why?" Philosophers have spent millennia working on that. In worlds of artifice, we are doubly curious; unnatural worlds of artifice, fairy tales as you called them, invite this type of inspection in spades. Because fairy tales have meaning. And fairy tales on film have limited time, so everything shown to us has a point -- shots without some purpose are left on the floor of the editing room.

I'm sure there's lots of meaningless chaff in the prequels, but I like to think the team behind ESB had reasons for the choices they made. And I don't think it's unreasonable to look for them.
"It's the stoned movie you don't have to be stoned for." -- Tom Shales on Star Wars
Scruffy's gonna die the way he lived.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Yoda Is Your Father
EDIT: I just went off on a rant about why the hell does everything have to be rationalised/explained and why can't people just accept that Luke had a touch of Deja-Vu probably due to the fact that he was in the process of fulfilling his destiny.


Yeah, pretty much what I just said exactly. I agree with Scruffy that we're made to rationalize, and it's fun to do so a lot of the time. But it's simply the fact that the prequels make so much nonsensical rationalizing (paradoxical statement, I know... but, damn, it's late, and I can't remember the term for those kinds of statements, and it's pissing me off, but I'm spending too much time not writing about the topic) almost necessary. And it's from the other side. "Revenge of the Sith makes sense because..." "Leia wasn't really talking about her real mother because..." "Leia was talking about her real mother, and it still makes sense because..."

How about, good storytelling in Star Wars has been lost because....

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
We wouldn't need to rationalize anything if Lucas had even the semblance of a logically coherent mind.

On a related note, for fans of Middle Earth and The-Hobbit/Lord-of-the-Rings, Tolkien had one incredibly consistent, but amazingly complex universe to his credit. Too bad Jackson's movies didn't do Tolkien's mythology justice. Though, then again, Tolkien's writing in the LotR was very dry and so I can overlook Jackson's alterations somewhat.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Tiptup
We wouldn't need to rationalize anything if Lucas had even the semblance of a logically coherent mind.

On a related note, for fans of Middle Earth and The-Hobbit/Lord-of-the-Rings, Tolkien had one incredibly consistent, but amazingly complex universe to his credit. Too bad Jackson's movies didn't do Tolkien's mythology justice. Though, then again, Tolkien's writing in the LotR was very dry and so I can overlook Jackson's alterations somewhat.


although it is true that Tolkien's books were consistent he did edit the Hobbit in later editions to fit in with Lord of the Rings, he only edited the chapter where Bilbo meets Gollum but all the versions in print today are the edited version, although you can find the revisions in Appendix A of ' The Annotated Hobbit'(1988), in it's edited form "It represents as closely as is possible Tolkien's final intended form"

So this isn't that different to what Lucas has done with Star Wars.
Author
Time
That's very interesting! I never knew that!

I guess Tolkein found, like many artists, that, as a series of major works progresses, tweaks are needed to keep the sense of it going throughout. An artist may make thousands of such changes throughout the creation of each work, before it is presented to the public. It must be even more difficult when parts of the series are already vastly popular.

It is notable that Tolkein made alterations to one chapter of one book to get things back in place. Obviously he never suppressed the publication of books which highlighted the changes either. And his alterations were in keeping with the original, to avoid the necessity for further changes.

Lucas, however, has made changes and additions throughout all of the three parts originally released and then brought out three new parts which contained further inconsistencies and so he brought out new versions with even more changes! To further complicate matters his changes have been made in a lacklustre fashion, diminishing the works from their original potency!

This makes it fairly obvious that Tolkein had a very carefully imagined world and mythology from which he created his works. Lucas has made an increasingly jumbled, ill-thought-out series of films from which it is difficult to grasp a clear picture of the worlds and mythology they are 'based' on.

[Sigh]
Don't you call me a mindless philosopher...!
Author
Time
Originally posted by: auraloffalwaffle
...it is difficult to grasp a clear picture of the worlds and mythology they are 'based' on.

That's because he keeps insisting on giving every tiny detail some sort of backstory. He isn't content to let his audience use their imagination. He's a control freak to the point of even wanting to control what you may imagine happened to the characters years before. He's just about removed any sort of wonder from the vastness of the universe in Star Wars. He's shrunk the story down to nothing. It's not grand and mysterious in it's current configuration.

That's why the 1977 version of Star Wars worked so well - it was gigantic. It was mysterious and magical.

Forum Moderator
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Max_Rebo

although it is true that Tolkien's books were consistent he did edit the Hobbit in later editions to fit in with Lord of the Rings, he only edited the chapter where Bilbo meets Gollum but all the versions in print today are the edited version, although you can find the revisions in Appendix A of ' The Annotated Hobbit'(1988), in it's edited form "It represents as closely as is possible Tolkien's final intended form"


How very interesting. The Hobbit was my favorite story growing up as a child and it's still my favorite book of all time. I always read from an old, tattered copy of the book so I wonder which version I had always read. This will require research on my part.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
I have the original 5th chapter from 1938- is was included in a treasury called 'Masterpieces of Terror and the Supernatural' that was published in 1985.

The book explains: "It is a little-known fact that when J.R.R. Tolkien wrote his masterpiece, 'Lord of the Rings,' he rewrote part ot his earlier book, 'The Hobbit', so it would conform with the plot of the 'ring' epic. The major change was in the 5th chapter, 'Riddles In the Dark', in which the titular hero, Bilbo Baggins, meets a nasty critter named Gollum in a goblin cave. Few readers recall the first U.S. version of 'The Hobbit', published by Houghton Mifflin in 1938, yet Tolkien mentions the rewritten chapter in a prefatory note appearing in later editions. Bilbo, he explained, was normally honest, but the evil ring made him lie about what happened in the cave and Bilbo even set down the false version in his own diary, the alleged source of The Hobbit. Completist that I am, I have long sought the 1938 variant of the Gollum chapter. Thanks to my friend, Faith Lancereau, I finally obtained a copy. With the permission of the publishers and the Tolkien Estate, I am proud to present this obscure footnote to hobbit-lore in its first reprinting in many decades..." (Marvin Kaye, editor)

Author
Time
Hah, this is why Tolkien is such a genius. When he edits his story he actually makes that fact a part of his stories. Originally it seems that Gollum riddled against Bilbo with the "one ring" as the clearly presented prize. The LotR Gollum on the other hand would have never allowed that, so Tolkien explained the earlier version of the story as a lie Bilbo invented to ease his conscience over stealing the ring.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
I don't know. I still don't like it. At the end of the day, it's just a book/movie, and if there's a continuity error, then that's just the way it works out. Sometimes, even the best storyteller will have a later idea that contradicts a previous minor detail. And sometimes it's okay, and the storyteller just needs to let it slide. It's just when it happens all the time (*coughPTcough*) that it becomes obvious that the storyteller may not be the best...

But I disagree with the changing of The Hobbit.

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
I think that what has disappointed me most is that I thought of Lucas as being like Tolkein. That he had meticulously created a fantasy and then based his films on it.

What has actually happened is that fans have defined the story and mythology themselves based on the films we have. Lucas himself never had that story mapped out, which is why he didn't keep the sense of it throughout his changes and new films.

Now fans of the 6-part epic really have to struggle to make sense of the whole story and fitting it to the extended universe that has developed based on the OOT.

It's really gutted me, if I'm honest.

I'm sharing, people...
Don't you call me a mindless philosopher...!
Author
Time
Originally posted by: auraloffalwaffle

I'm sharing, people...


Group-hug.

The fans of the Star Wars universe simply believed the backstory would somehow folow the descriptions we were given in the actual OT movies and that such a backstory would actually do the original films justice. Instead, we got backstory that does not fit with what was mentioned in the OT and one that greatly lessens the entire existence of OT plot elements and characters. Who cares about Han and Lea? Who cares if Luke is in anguish over being Vader's son? Its all one big, boring and illogical "saga" now!

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Well, not here it isn't! Eh, Tiptup?

I aint gonna buy no crappy DVDs in September!
Don't you call me a mindless philosopher...!
Author
Time
Originally posted by: auraloffalwaffle
I think that what has disappointed me most is that I thought of Lucas as being like Tolkein.

The only similarity Lucas has to Tolkein is from ripping off the basic structure of Lord Of The Rings for Star Wars. Previously uninvolved person follows strange old wizard to go off and fight the evil lord in a battle of good vs evil.

Forum Moderator
Author
Time
Originally posted by: auraloffalwaffle
Well, not here it isn't! Eh, Tiptup?

I aint gonna buy no crappy DVDs in September!

Well, I'm going to buy the DVDs....and I think the best solution for the inconsistencies in the OOT vs. PT plots is just not to watch the PT.

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Anchorhead
Originally posted by: auraloffalwaffle
I think that what has disappointed me most is that I thought of Lucas as being like Tolkein.

The only similarity Lucas has to Tolkein is from ripping off the basic structure of Lord Of The Rings for Star Wars. Previously uninvolved person follows strange old wizard to go off and fight the evil lord in a battle of good vs evil.
Yeah, but Tolkien probably ripped it off somebody else. That same basic, archetypal structure has existed for centuries.

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Mielr - Well, I'm going to buy the DVDs....


If the DVDs are just going to be the same quality as the hundreds of other copies from Laserdisc then I don't think anyone should waste their money on them. I'm not going to pay LucasFilm or 20th Century Fox a premium price for a pristine copy of the SE and a basic Laserdisc transfer of the OOT! I haven't waited this long for that!
Don't you call me a mindless philosopher...!
Author
Time
Originally posted by: auraloffalwaffle
Originally posted by: Mielr - Well, I'm going to buy the DVDs....


If the DVDs are just going to be the same quality as the hundreds of other copies from Laserdisc then I don't think anyone should waste their money on them. I'm not going to pay LucasFilm or 20th Century Fox a premium price for a pristine copy of the SE and a basic Laserdisc transfer of the OOT! I haven't waited this long for that!

I understand your logic, but I think the DVDs will be better quality than the laserdiscs. Remember, they're coming from the laserdisc masters, not the laserdiscs themselves. Laserdiscs were limited in their picture quality (albeit way better than VHS) so I'm sure there was some picture quality lost in the process of transferring the information from the laserdisc masters onto the actual laserdiscs.

That's why I'm buying them, also because after all this talk about how good/bad they're going to look, my curiosity is just too strong not to buy them.

Author
Time
But it feels so dirty. I was willing to spend quite a bit of money over a month ago to make my own DVD transfer of the films, so its not necessarily the cost. I just don't want to give Lucas money when we all know he could do so much better. Even the crappiest of movies are given better treatment on DVD than the original Star Wars? I won't reward that . . . .

(Edit: changed "just a month" to "over a month". Some time before this latest DVD news sprung up. I'm terrible at noting the passage of time.)

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005