logo Sign In

Anyone else totally disregard Leia being Luke's sister? — Page 2

Author
Time
Originally posted by: CO
I am not bothered at all when I watch ESB and Luke & Leia kiss, cause if you watch it in the context of the movie, they don't know they are siblings at that point of the story, why wouldn't they try to get it on! Now if they kissed AFTER ROTJ and they both knew, then I would probably think that was really creepy by Sir George.


The line from ROTJ "Somehow I've always known" is what makes the context weirder. Leia had a subconscious notion that Luke was her sibling, maybe even a conscious suspicion from the very start... and in ESB she kisses Luke full on the mouth. All that aside though I've never had a real problem with the scene.
Why hello there
Author
Time
Originally posted by: BeeJay


The line from ROTJ "Somehow I've always known" is what makes the context weirder. Leia had a subconscious notion that Luke was her sibling, maybe even a conscious suspicion from the very start... and in ESB she kisses Luke full on the mouth. All that aside though I've never had a real problem with the scene.


Good one, as I did forget about that line. The only thing I can rationalize that is by Leia finally getting confirmation from Luke that she was a force user, all that stuff that she had 'thought' about for years was true, cause remember she does sense Luke at the end of ESB on Cloud City, and tells Lando to go back, yet she doesn't think anything about being a force user then.
Author
Time
Yeah, what was with the scene with Leia sensing Luke on Bespin? Was it originally going to be that Jedi could use telepathy with non force users?

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
Originally posted by: C3PX
Yeah, what was with the scene with Leia sensing Luke on Bespin? Was it originally going to be that Jedi could use telepathy with non force users?

Originally posted by: CO
remember she does sense Luke at the end of ESB on Cloud City, and tells Lando to go back, yet she doesn't think anything about being a force user then.


I think you guys are giving Lucas way too much credit for writing a thorough story. It doesn't appear as though he thought things through at that level. He just came up with stuff and worried (or not) about continuity later.

Look at how ”no, there is another” was handled. He wrote and filmed that scene before he had any idea at all who the other actually was. He was letting a finished film be released to the theaters with a cliff hanger scene used to set up the next movie - as well as a possible second trilogy - and yet he had no idea about who was being referenced - in his own story. It’s one thing to hash out ideas in a story or script - and I’m sure it’s routine in the business - but he actually filmed a very open-ended plot hole. A plot hole he never resolved properly.

Man, that's sloppy.



Forum Moderator
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Anchorhead


I think you guys are giving Lucas way too much credit for writing a thorough story. It doesn't appear as though he thought things through at that level. He just came up with stuff and worried (or not) about continuity later.

Look at how ”no, there is another” was handled. He wrote and filmed that scene before he had any idea at all who the other actually was. He was letting a finished film be released to the theaters with a cliff hanger scene used to set up the next movie - as well as a possible second trilogy - and yet he had no idea about who was being referenced - in his own story. It’s one thing to hash out ideas in a story or script - and I’m sure it’s routine in the business - but he actually filmed a very open-ended plot hole. A plot hole he never resolved properly.

Man, that's sloppy.


I agree, and when I am rationalizing, I am pulling at straws! This is what happens when you write these trilogies one movie at a time, there are things that just don't work out if you inspect them with a fine tooth comb. LOTR is a perfect example of a movie trilogy that flows fluidly because it was planned that way from the books to the big screen, as they honestly feel like one big movie instead of 3 individual movies like the OT. I still love the OOT very much, so even though you guys are shooting holes in my theories, I still love it enough to overlook it.

Author
Time
Originally posted by: CO
I still love the OOT very much, so even though you guys are shooting holes in my theories, I still love it enough to overlook it.


Sorry, I was hoping I wouldn't come across that way. I'm not shooting holes in anyone's theory at all, at least not intentionally. I was just mentioning that there are plenty of times where there just isn't enough story to actually rationalize a plot element. Lucas didn't rationalize it, so there's really no way we can. His stories weren't well thought out, so they have areas where they just don't make any sense. Nor are they ever. They aren't some sort of elaborate puzzle we can solve. They're just poorly written films. There's no big secret - no big reveal - no apocalypse.

Great example you used with LOTR. Those stories were very well thought out and they are very thorough. No pretzel logic needed.

For the record, I'm completely ok with the story developing over a period of years - if - it's done with some sort of thought to what's been released already. Lucas didn't do that. He writes and rewrites like a child playing army in the backyard - the rules and characters change on a whim. Fine for 8 year olds - not so good for motion picture trilogies that have an established fan base.

Forum Moderator
Author
Time
Originally posted by: CO
Originally posted by: Anchorhead


I think you guys are giving Lucas way too much credit for writing a thorough story. It doesn't appear as though he thought things through at that level. He just came up with stuff and worried (or not) about continuity later.

Look at how ”no, there is another” was handled. He wrote and filmed that scene before he had any idea at all who the other actually was. He was letting a finished film be released to the theaters with a cliff hanger scene used to set up the next movie - as well as a possible second trilogy - and yet he had no idea about who was being referenced - in his own story. It’s one thing to hash out ideas in a story or script - and I’m sure it’s routine in the business - but he actually filmed a very open-ended plot hole. A plot hole he never resolved properly.

Man, that's sloppy.


I agree, and when I am rationalizing, I am pulling at straws! This is what happens when you write these trilogies one movie at a time, there are things that just don't work out if you inspect them with a fine tooth comb. LOTR is a perfect example of a movie trilogy that flows fluidly because it was planned that way from the books to the big screen, as they honestly feel like one big movie instead of 3 individual movies like the OT. I still love the OOT very much, so even though you guys are shooting holes in my theories, I still love it enough to overlook it.


Actually, the LOTR books work out wonderfully. The movies not so much (at least if you listen to the commentaries). Things were changed so much in TTT that they then had to change things in ROTK, even though they didn't want to.

I agree about everything else though.
F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Anchorhead


Sorry, I was hoping I wouldn't come across that way. I'm not shooting holes in anyone's theory at all, at least not intentionally. I was just mentioning that there are plenty of times where there just isn't enough story to actually rationalize a plot element. Lucas didn't rationalize it, so there's really no way we can. His stories weren't well thought out, so they have areas where they just don't make any sense. Nor are they ever. They aren't some sort of elaborate puzzle we can solve. They're just poorly written films. There's no big secret - no big reveal - no apocalypse.
.



No offense taken man, I was just saying that you guys have exposed the plot holes, and it is really hard to argue those points against them.

The reason I will always be an OOT fan & SW'77 fan is the fact that ESB is nothing like SW is a true testament. I was never crazy about Vader being Lukes dad, nor Luke/Leia being siblings, but ESB is such a damn good movie to go with SW'77, I just kinda went with the story, even though I wasn't totally happy with the ultimate redemption angle. The bottom line is no matter what Lucas changed storywise for the OOT, you can still follow Han, Luke, and Leia around for 3 movies and root for the good guys, and just kinda take all the mythology stuff, some good some bad, with a grain of salt. I can't say that about the PT, cause there isn't one character I care about for those 3 movies, and in that sense they have no sense of drama.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Anchorhead
Originally posted by: C3PX
Yeah, what was with the scene with Leia sensing Luke on Bespin? Was it originally going to be that Jedi could use telepathy with non force users?

Originally posted by: CO
remember she does sense Luke at the end of ESB on Cloud City, and tells Lando to go back, yet she doesn't think anything about being a force user then.


I think you guys are giving Lucas way too much credit for writing a thorough story. It doesn't appear as though he thought things through at that level. He just came up with stuff and worried (or not) about continuity later.

Look at how ”no, there is another” was handled. He wrote and filmed that scene before he had any idea at all who the other actually was. He was letting a finished film be released to the theaters with a cliff hanger scene used to set up the next movie - as well as a possible second trilogy - and yet he had no idea about who was being referenced - in his own story. It’s one thing to hash out ideas in a story or script - and I’m sure it’s routine in the business - but he actually filmed a very open-ended plot hole. A plot hole he never resolved properly.

Man, that's sloppy.


Trust me, I am the last guy to give Lucas credit for anything. I just though the telepathy idea was interesting, and that it is obvious that Lucas didn't originally intend Jedi to only communicate with other Jedi in this manner.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
Originally posted by: CO
LOTR is a perfect example of a movie trilogy that flows fluidly because it was planned that way from the books to the big screen, as they honestly feel like one big movie instead of 3 individual movies like the OT.


In the Lord of the Rings case it is three movies based off of one book. So it makes sense for that to work.

Really the "challenes" of writing a tight trilogy is bunk. Seriously, how many series have you watched or read that contradict themselves as bad as the SW saga does. It isn't that hard to write stories that work together. I'll admit prequels are a little more tricky than sequels, but honestly, there is no excuse for such blatant plot holes.

Anybody see that part on the ROTS DVD where Rick McCullum admits that they had to go back and refilm the scene with Obi-Wan picking up Anakin's lightsabre because "we kind of forgot he gave it to Luke in the next film." How do you kind of forget something like that? It show exactly how much Lucas had invested in these things while writing them. Pretty clear he really didn't care too much. I bet Lucas didn't even bother to go back and watch the OT before writing the PT. He should have been refering to the final scripts of each of the OT constantly as he wrote the PT.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
Originally posted by: C3PX

Anybody see that part on the ROTS DVD where Rick McCullum admits that they had to go back and refilm the scene with Obi-Wan picking up Anakin's lightsabre because "we kind of forgot he gave it to Luke in the next film." How do you kind of forget something like that? It show exactly how much Lucas had invested in these things while writing them. Pretty clear he really didn't care too much. I bet Lucas didn't even bother to go back and watch the OT before writing the PT. He should have been refering to the final scripts of each of the OT constantly as he wrote the PT.



Or do you remember when Lucas said he was at the premiere of ROTS and the crowd started cheering when Tantive IV came on screen for the first time, and Lucas could not understand why everyone was going crazy. Lucas said that whoever he was with said to him, "George that is the first ship you see in the Original SW, it is an iconic shot, that is why everyone is cheering!" Did George even watch the OT before he wrote the PT movies?
Author
Time
"and in ESB she kisses Luke full on the mouth."

True, but she was focused on pissing off Han, and Luke was conveniently close. Luckily, closer than Chewie or 3PO.

"it is obvious that Lucas didn't originally intend Jedi to only communicate with other Jedi in this manner."

Ben sensed the cries of the people of Alderaan. Was that a planet full of Jedi psychics? What Luke did is not much different from the Jedi mind trick - putting your thoughts into someone else's head.

"Look at how ”no, there is another” was handled. He wrote and filmed that scene before he had any idea at all who the other actually was."

Correct.

"Great example you used with LOTR. Those stories were very well thought out and they are very thorough. No pretzel logic needed."

Although a few key scenes in The Hobbit had to be rewritten.

"Anybody see that part on the ROTS DVD where Rick McCullum admits that they had to go back and refilm the scene with Obi-Wan picking up Anakin's lightsabre because "we kind of forgot he gave it to Luke in the next film."

LOL....yeah. I almost wish they had forgotten to do that. It would have been the funniest thing in the world.

"Lucas said that whoever he was with said to him, "George that is the first ship you see in the Original SW"

That person should have said it was a not-very-close fascimile of the first ship, but I digress...

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: Sadly, I believe the prequels are beyond repair.
<span class=“Bold”>JediRandy: They’re certainly beyond any repair you’re capable of making.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: You aren’t one of us.
<span class=“Bold”>Go-Mer-Tonic: I can’t say I find that very disappointing.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>JediRandy: I won’t suck as much as a fan edit.</span>

Author
Time
Originally posted by: MeBeJedi
Although a few key scenes in The Hobbit had to be rewritten.


Ah, but that was brilliantly handled. I hate when people compare a master story telling with a one time fluke like Lucas. I still say Lucas only made three movies, THX 1138, Graffiti, and Star Wars. I happen to like all three (though THX is very clearly influenced by certian works of literature and can hardly be considered an "original" idea, and America Graffiti is pretty much about nothing at all), but anything that can be truly credited as solely his after 1977 is pretty bad. ESB, and the Indy movies were all done in partnership with other great masters of the art of film, so while his name is on them, I do not feel it is appropriate to credit them entirely to him, as is often done by Lucas fans.

The Lord of the Rings was written to stand on its own, not to be part of a series with the Hobbit. Yes it was a sequel, but a sequel that does not rely on the one before it. They are also two very different kinds of books. The Hobbit is more of a fairy story, and the Lord of the Rings is more of an epic. It is true the Hobbit was minorly modified to fit it into the story of LOTR, and it is true the originally published version ceased to be published. But the similarities to Lucas end there. Tolkien freely admitted the change he had made, and he made the change an actual part of the story, writing the explanation for the change right into the dialogue of the LOTR, giving the change purpose and meaning. It was a masterfully done edit, that in my opinion even heightens Tolkien's story telling genius rather than discredit it as I believe it does in the case of Lucas.


"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
cool. my thread generated many great responses. keep up the good work.

i'll stay on the sideline and suck it all in!
Author
Time
If you look at the OOT, not the saga, but just the 4-6 movies before the changes, I still think Lucas made a pretty compelling story that has a begining and an end. Now in saying this, I will not defend George on changing things as he goes in each movie, but the ironic things is that the OOT works better then the supposed planned PT in it storytelling. Atleast the OOT stays consistent with introduction of characters: You have Jabba & The Emperor mention in SW, and then they appear finally appear in flesh in ROTJ, plus the Emperor is shown in a hologram in ESB. The PT you have these characters pop in out of nowhere. Where was General Grevious in TPM & AOTC? Where was Count Dooku in TPM? It is bad storytelling to have a new sith in AOTC who was once a jedi not even be on the council or even mentioned in the previous movie! You have C3PO & R2D2 with nothing to do in the PT other then they were popular in the OT, as atleast in the OT they were always doing something relevant to the plot to help the rebels. And for Jar Jar Binks, and as bad a character he is, to be dominant in one movie, and then be MIA for the next two movies tells me Lucas was just sticking his finger in the wind.

For whatever anyone thinks of ROTJ, I give Lucas credit for crafting a non-typical story ending with Vader. Lucas could have easily played the 'revenge' card that pervades so many movies, but if you watch ROTJ again, can you name a movie that the protagonist and antagonist meet face to face and don't have a fight, and just talk? Your typical movie would be Luke kill Vader and then finally kill The Emperor with the help of Han/Leia at the end, and everyone lives happily ever after. Lucas I believe tried to make a different story then your usual one in terms of how ROTJ plays out, and sure he may have miscalculated with Leia and Luke as siblings, but overall I always felt the story of the OOT as a trilogy worked real well.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: COThe PT you have these characters pop in out of nowhere. Where was General Grevious in TPM & AOTC? Where was Count Dooku in TPM? It is bad storytelling to have a new sith in AOTC who was once a jedi not even be on the council or even mentioned in the previous movie!


You know, i had completely forgotten about that. I remember hearing about some fans saying that it would have been a great scene to have Qui Gon talking to Dooku at the Jedi temple in TPM as they await Anakin to return from testing with the jedi temple--and Dooku could quietly relate that his faith in the jedi order is wavering or some such, hinting at the turn he will take some years later. I think Dooku is a fascinating character and its a shame that scenes such as this did not exist. But the reason why such a cohesive scene was not filmed is very simple: Dooku was not created until AOTC. At the time, as far as my research shows, the character of the seperatists leader and the new sith apprentice were two seperate characters--then halfway through the pre-production Lucas got the idea of combining them and having him be played by Christopher Lee; thus he created the idea that Dooku was a former Jedi who left the order after becoming disillusioned, joined the sith and embarked on a ill-begotten quest to "clean up" the Republic. Then after the movie was shot Lucas wrote in that he was Qui Gon's former master, in a pick-up scene.

So the entire character regarding Dooku was made in an evolution. Then in ROTS Dooku was supposed to survive until the end, but Lucas had to totally re-write his plot outline in august of 2002, so he killed off Dooku at the start and had him replaced with a character who took over the role he was originally going to have--General Greivous.

Its fascinating on one hand but its also surprising at how much of the supposedly planned prequels Lucas simply made up as he went, and how these smaller things actually created more inconsistencies than the big things in the OT did.
Author
Time
That is where I give credit to Lucas for atleast staying consistent throughout the OT in the overall characters and their arc. With the exception of Yoda, most characters appear for a reason, and stay true to the story til its end. In the PT, you have this supposed backstory of Boba Fett in AOTC, and it shows him see his father die right in front of his face and then you don't see him til ESB, what was the point? MERCHANDISING!!!!! Chewbacca & Kashykk is another example of a character and terrain used for 10 minutes for eye candy and appeasment to the OT fans, and then poof, its gone!

Say what you want about the Ewoks in ROTJ, but atleast you get an hour of development of their terrain. You see their tribe, you see how they live, that is called character development! The Ewoks are key to the victory for the rebels, so they serve a purpose in the movie, the only problem with them is that they are too kiddy!
Author
Time
Originally posted by: CO
That is where I give credit to Lucas for atleast staying consistent throughout the OT in the overall characters and their arc. With the exception of Yoda, most characters appear for a reason, and stay true to the story til its end. In the PT, you have this supposed backstory of Boba Fett in AOTC, and it shows him see his father die right in front of his face and then you don't see him til ESB, what was the point? MERCHANDISING!!!!! Chewbacca & Kashykk is another example of a character and terrain used for 10 minutes for eye candy and appeasment to the OT fans, and then poof, its gone!

Say what you want about the Ewoks in ROTJ, but atleast you get an hour of development of their terrain. You see their tribe, you see how they live, that is called character development! The Ewoks are key to the victory for the rebels, so they serve a purpose in the movie, the only problem with them is that they are too kiddy!


I don't think its merchandising. Once again, its the story changing. Boba was always a key figure in the clone wars, revealed way back in 1979, and Fett was confirmed by Lucas as appearing in ROTS--so his AOTC-heavy role would have paid off. He almost assuredly would have played a role in the Jedi purge. But Lucas changed his plot outline in august of 2002, as i mentioned, and Fett was written out because Lucas didn't have room to include him.

As for Kashyyk, that could indeed come down to fan appeasement, although the notion of a wookie battle was something that existed in the first draft of Star Wars in 1974, so Lucas had genuinely been wanted to show it for three decades.

Author
Time
Originally posted by: zombie84


Say what you want about the Ewoks in ROTJ, but atleast you get an hour of development of their terrain. You see their tribe, you see how they live, that is called character development! The Ewoks are key to the victory for the rebels, so they serve a purpose in the movie, the only problem with them is that they are too kiddy!

I don't think its merchandising. Once again, its the story changing. Boba was always a key figure in the clone wars, revealed way back in 1979, and Fett was confirmed by Lucas as appearing in ROTS--so his AOTC-heavy role would have paid off. He almost assuredly would have played a role in the Jedi purge. But Lucas changed his plot outline in august of 2002, as i mentioned, and Fett was written out because Lucas didn't have room to include him.

As for Kashyyk, that could indeed come down to fan appeasement, although the notion of a wookie battle was something that existed in the first draft of Star Wars in 1974, so Lucas had genuinely been wanted to show it for three decades.


I agree with you on both points, but even Lucas admitted on the ROTJ Commentary that he did not realize Boba Fett would become that popular back in the early 80's or he would have gave him a cooler death in ROTJ! I remember hearing that thinking??????? That statement tells me that Lucas was fully aware of the popularity of Boba Fett by the fans, and I think he believed they would love to see Boba Fett and that Wookie Battle we all wanted to see in the OT, and just shoehorned them in the PT, thus coming off halfass.

Author
Time
Even as a child I thought that Leia being Luke's sister was way too out there. Therefore I pretended that the force bent fate to reunite them. It works for me.

"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
Therefore I pretended that the force bent fate to reunite them


You can no longer pretend, you're a grown man now! What i'm trying to say is, it's all about the midichlorian count now and fuckin' destiny.

Author
Time
Heh, I'm perfectly willing to admit that it wasn't a very good idea and that it was implemented very badly in RotJ, but I'm also saying that I can accept it.

Originally posted by: CO
For whatever anyone thinks of ROTJ, I give Lucas credit for crafting a non-typical story ending with Vader. Lucas could have easily played the 'revenge' card that pervades so many movies, but if you watch ROTJ again, can you name a movie that the protagonist and antagonist meet face to face and don't have a fight, and just talk? Your typical movie would be Luke kill Vader and then finally kill The Emperor with the help of Han/Leia at the end, and everyone lives happily ever after. Lucas I believe tried to make a different story then your usual one in terms of how ROTJ plays out, and sure he may have miscalculated with Leia and Luke as siblings, but overall I always felt the story of the OOT as a trilogy worked real well.


I agree. That spiritual ending, along with the highly emotional climax of ESB will cause me to always be a fan of the trilogy as a whole. Star Wars is the foundation for the later two films, and is the greatest of the bunch because of that, but I believe that the later two really expand my enjoyment beyond it. Return of the Jedi, while not nearly as great a movie as the first two, still has some really great moments in my mind.

"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 can see how Lucas slipped the sibling relationship in there on a whim. The whole Luke/Leia kiss in ESB has weirded me out for a long time.

Overall, I can except it, though. Always loved all three movies as a kid. It also adds some good, albeit brief, romantic tension between Leia and Han in ROTJ. Han definitely needed that for a little character development.

Thanks to CO and Zombie for the good discussion below. I didn't know the actual history behind all of this until now.

It was also kind of weird how Lucas had Vader say in the midst of his fight with Luke "Your feelings for them are strong. Especially for... Sister! So...you have a twin sister."

"...Sister!"? Who would talk like that? Sounds forced. It's nowhere near proper English. I had heard a story that the actors didn't even know what this revelation was until they were on set. The nonsense makes so much more sense now knowing how fly-by-the-seat-of-his-pants Lucas was with Episodes 5 and 6.

But, of course, it doesn't take away how cool I thought the trilogy was as a kid.
Author
Time
The empire strikes back was the perfect springboard for the final star wars movie. Seriously, it couldn't have been any more perfect. If only they had deviced a better storyline and a better character study it could have been so much more wholesome. It shouldn't have lost focus on all the main character, yet it should've put way more focus on Luke. For eg: possibly, gradually succumbing to the dark side/or questioning obi wan and feeling betrayed by his 'point of view', inner struggles etc. I find it extremely boring how luke just surrenders and turns himself over to darth vader. What an easy and convenient way to make it to the throne room and the emperor!

Fleshing out the other characters would have helped a great deal too. Now they're nothing more than props. Sacrificing han solo was also much needed.

Return of the jedi is a fun movie. I can live with that. But it should have been so much more than just a fun movie. Especially depending on esb.
Author
Time
I wish the sibling thing hadn't happened at all, and I wish the "point of view" thing hadn't happened at all. There was an easy way to "fix" this, if you will... and that was simply to make Luke the son of Darth Vader, i.e., the Darth Vader as a name and person (not a title) and there was an Anakin, too, and he really was killed by Darth Vader. We can still carry many of the same themes as before. Luke senses good in his father, he feels he can turn him back. Leia could still be the child of Skywalker, and she could still be used as Vader's threat to turn him, etc., ("If you will not turn, then perhaps she will"). It still works. All they had to do was make these two little changes, and everything would have been just fine. No P.O.V. No lying Obi-Wan. I would appreciate the OT tremendously more.