Beginning the ST with the Empire still controling the galaxy would be like killing Newt and Hicks in the opening scene of Alien 3, IMO. Unless of course this Empire IS the New Republic now controled by evil people.
There could always be small isolated pockets of Imperial remnants. A system or two who had it great under the Empire could refuse to join the New Republic. And somewhere there must be the SW equivalent of Switzerland.
What would they do with all those stormtroopers and Imp officers that were captured or surrendered? Put them on one giant prison planet? Force them to clean up all the Death Star debris that rained all over Endor?
Where were you in '77?
TMBTM said:
Beginning the ST with the Empire still controling the galaxy would be like killing Newt and Hicks in the opening scene of Alien 3, IMO.
As in, dramatically justified and probably resulting in a better film? Interesting point.
Jonno said:
TMBTM said:
Beginning the ST with the Empire still controling the galaxy would be like killing Newt and Hicks in the opening scene of Alien 3, IMO.
As in, dramatically justified and probably resulting in a better film? Interesting point.
??????????
Whether it's Yub Nub or Galactic Celebration, I think we're meant to believe the death of the Emperor = the death of the Empire.
TMBTM said:
Beginning the ST with the Empire still controling the galaxy would be like killing Newt and Hicks in the opening scene of Alien 3, IMO. Unless of course this Empire IS the New Republic now controled by evil people.
Nothing is that brilliant.
Cripes in Space all I could hear was that kid scream.
Jonno said:
TMBTM said:
Beginning the ST with the Empire still controling the galaxy would be like killing Newt and Hicks in the opening scene of Alien 3, IMO.
As in, dramatically justified and probably resulting in a better film? Interesting point.
No, as in: making completely pointless half of the previous movie (I like Alien 3 for what it is, but I it was a mistake to begin the movie that way, IMO). That's why if it somehow "must be" an evil Empire controling the galaxy at the beginning of the ST (as someone proposed in the previous page of this thread) I suggested it to be a kind of decadent New republic rather than the same old bad guys still in charge.
To say the truth, even if I liked some of the EU novels, having the Empire being the baddies (even just fighting against the New republic) would be just okay and not very interesting to me. The problem is that the bad guys being Sith Lords would be even more whatever (unless there is a very clever plot). That's why in another thread I suggested something completely different for the threat. What if the Force itself becomes "out of control"? What if, once the "balance" achieved (by the end of ROTJ), the Force is spreading across the galaxy and everyone with very few training can now have special powers? Should the New republic be pleased of this power now being offered to the people by "the Force" itself? Or should it be controled by the New Republic? Okay... that probably sounds "smart" on paper but would maybe become another political boredom if not handle well on screen. Harf, I don't know. Give me a new cool designed Sith after all, I guess!
I think this movie should forge a new bond with the fans and with the saga, a visual guarantee claiming that not much things will change. I bet they'll be rather conservative when it comes to inventing new designs, characters, planets, factions. They own the franchise, they said a movie is to be made every two years, and they have no limit in the structure of the story now, we don't even know if the saga will still be ordered by trilogies.
Seriously I doubt they will take a big leap forward from the very first star wars movie they make. Maybe it's just me rationalizing, since I think that star wars would be hardly recognizable if the figure of Darth Vader isn't there, otherwise being a constant and neverending Phantom Menace, star warsy but just not it.
I wish they set Luke in a quest for some lost object from the old days which finding would tie some knots between past and future. Would be a nice excuse for giving the original characters a proper farewell.
Eh, I would actually kinda want this to be TPM actually, just without the suck.
Fang Zei said:
Neverar, that's actually reminiscent of the original plan for the ST circa 1980. Wasn't Luke gonna defeat the emperor and vader in VI and then go off and find the actual real big baddie in VII or am I remembering wrong?
I think that the "original" Lucas plan was to reveal the Emperor at the end of the third trilogy, Episode 9. The Sequel Trilogy would also focus on Luke's search for his twin. Of course, Episode 6 ruined this plot, but I think that the Emperor reveal could still work if the Episode 6 Emperor was a clone.
And for those who say this change would render most of Episode 6 pointless, I would say that Episode 6 would become much more like Episode 5 in tone. It allows for a triumphant victory if you wish to end the story at Episode 6, but when you see Episode 7, you are forced to reexamine one of the main weaknesses of Episode 6 - the frankly unbelievable defeat of the Empire - as the villainous masterstroke that it could potentially be.
You probably don’t recognize me because of the red arm.
Episode 9 Rewrite, The Starlight Project (Released!) and ANH Technicolor Project (Released!)
NeverarGreat said:
Fang Zei said:
Neverar, that's actually reminiscent of the original plan for the ST circa 1980. Wasn't Luke gonna defeat the emperor and vader in VI and then go off and find the actual real big baddie in VII or am I remembering wrong?
I think that the "original" Lucas plan was to reveal the Emperor at the end of the third trilogy, Episode 9. The Sequel Trilogy would also focus on Luke's search for his twin. Of course, Episode 6 ruined this plot, but I think that the Emperor reveal could still work if the Episode 6 Emperor was a clone.
And for those who say this change would render most of Episode 6 pointless, I would say that Episode 6 would become much more like Episode 5 in tone. It allows for a triumphant victory if you wish to end the story at Episode 6, but when you see Episode 7, you are forced to reexamine one of the main weaknesses of Episode 6 - the frankly unbelievable defeat of the Empire - as the villainous masterstroke that it could potentially be.
Yeah, and maybe a third Death Star as well? ;)
I'd be VERY disappointed if the Emperor returns as a clone.....lazy,.....new trilogy, new ideas
J
What I'm dreading is a "new" villain who is actually a young clone of Palpatine. Worse, he's not even "clone", he is created by Palpatine only through the force (to bridge with Ep. III").
Oh, the horror...
If there's anything I'd like to see from the Prequels, it would be the Separatist capial ships from Ep. III. Fantastic designs which were greatly underused.
TMBTM said:
Jonno said:
TMBTM said:
Beginning the ST with the Empire still controling the galaxy would be like killing Newt and Hicks in the opening scene of Alien 3, IMO.
As in, dramatically justified and probably resulting in a better film? Interesting point.
No, as in: making completely pointless half of the previous movie (I like Alien 3 for what it is, but I it was a mistake to begin the movie that way, IMO). That's why if it somehow "must be" an evil Empire controling the galaxy at the beginning of the ST (as someone proposed in the previous page of this thread) I suggested it to be a kind of decadent New republic rather than the same old bad guys still in charge.
To say the truth, even if I liked some of the EU novels, having the Empire being the baddies (even just fighting against the New republic) would be just okay and not very interesting to me. The problem is that the bad guys being Sith Lords would be even more whatever (unless there is a very clever plot). That's why in another thread I suggested something completely different for the threat. What if the Force itself becomes "out of control"? What if, once the "balance" achieved (by the end of ROTJ), the Force is spreading across the galaxy and everyone with very few training can now have special powers? Should the New republic be pleased of this power now being offered to the people by "the Force" itself? Or should it be controled by the New Republic? Okay... that probably sounds "smart" on paper but would maybe become another political boredom if not handle well on screen. Harf, I don't know. Give me a new cool designed Sith after all, I guess!
They're most likely gonna try and recapture the feel of the original film. Darth Vader wasn't a "Sith Lord," he was just a cool bad guy in black armor. The Force has been the one unifying aspect of the saga, so it's sure to play some sort of role in Ep7. Involving the Sith would kinda ruin the ending of RotJ, with the master Emperor being killed and the apprentice Vader being saved. That hasn't stopped the post-Jedi EU from going absolutely Sith crazy, of course, but I don't see it as a requirement to make them the main villains of the ST.
Fang Zei said:
They're most likely gonna try and recapture the feel of the original film. Darth Vader wasn't a "Sith Lord," he was just a cool bad guy in black armor.
He wasn't?
J
I just meant within the context of the movie itself, he wasn't.
And Ben wasn't a Jedi?
J
^ lol
My preference would be to start the new trilogy in total peace. The Empire was long ago defeated etc... end of crawl. Then pandown to to ship being shot to pieces with Captain shouting they've got to warn the Republic. Ship explodes cut to the old gang and new kids unaware of the mysterious impending doom.
^ Many have already put forth this idea and it's still my favourite.
However the OT started in the middle of war which worked while the PT started in the middle of a confusing and uneasy peace/war/treaty/trade dispute thingy... which did not work. So I feel starting with the Empire remnants would engender too much backstory explaining exactly what has happened in the 20 years, leading to the same problems.
Either start in the middle of a war with new enemies or start in peacetime with war imminent. Requires no explanation, straight to the action!
VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.
It was never mentioned in dialogue that Vader was a Sith.
My only point was that in order to make everything fresh and new again, they probably won't bring "the Sith" into the proceedings but focus on coming up with a compelling antagonist.
I'd support a less Jedi focused ST. Sort of more Han and less luke. But I still want lightsabers in there or it wouldn't be SW
VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.
TMBTM said:
Jonno said:
TMBTM said:
Beginning the ST with the Empire still controling the galaxy would be like killing Newt and Hicks in the opening scene of Alien 3, IMO.
As in, dramatically justified and probably resulting in a better film? Interesting point.
No, as in: making completely pointless half of the previous movie (I like Alien 3 for what it is, but I it was a mistake to begin the movie that way, IMO).
At the risk of turning this into an Alien 3 thread, any writer of a sequel to Aliens would have been faced with two unavoidable facts.
Carrie Henn was older and Sigourney Weaver didn't want to continue the role (later she changed her mind but arguably Ripley 8 is a new character).
So that would mean setting the film sometime into the future recasting Newt to be the replacement for Ripley and having Hicks and Ripley as support characters in an action orientated Aliens sequel (we call this the obvious, popular and boringly predictable choice). Not having any mention of Newt which would set the film sometime after Aliens but where Ripley and Hicks in an out of character jerk move have just dumped her to grow up somewhere. Not have any returning characters at all (see Prometheus) or kill Newt in the beginning and let Hicks and Ripley cope with the grief and new perils together (which might have worked but would have cost more).
Better killing them all off in one off screen moment to set the mood of the film really seeing as Ripley herself was going to die.
This leads back into Star Wars films both the PT and ST.
In a sense the PT gave audiences what they expected, Anakin and Obi-Wan as main characters, the romancing of Luke and Leia's mum and Anakin's transformation into Vader.
It did the predictable, boring and safe option but it also did it really badly.
If Anakin and Obi-Wan were minor characters in films made much the same way, the story of the fall of the Republic would have been more interesting at least because we wouldn't have known the fate of our new main characters.
It could have kept some of the reveals of ESB etc secret (not important to some people but a bit of a stinger for of posterity).
Now we have the ST.
Everyone assumes it will be about the children and grandchildren of the Rebel heroes of the OT facing some old style new threat.
There is at least some mystery there if you ignore the EU (which I hope they do) but it would be more fun to have it about the children/grandchildren of someone killed by the Rebels of the OT.
Have them the new heroes and our heroes the new villains (well some of them).
Shake the thing up a bit.
Fang Zei said:
They're most likely gonna try and recapture the feel of the original film. Darth Vader wasn't a "Sith Lord," he was just a cool bad guy in black armor.
Fang Zei said:
It was never mentioned in dialogue that Vader was a Sith.
But Vader was never just a guy.....in SW it was established that he turned to evil whilst training to be a Jedi, he strangled an officer 'magically' he used a red laser-sword instead of a gun.....he was a evil Jedi....who are called Sith.....even back then.
I do agree with you though, Ben tells Luke that lightsabers were from a more civilized age, in the OT the only people using this weapon after Ben's death were Vader & Luke, so perhaps in the new film lightsabers should be perhaps only shown in training, blasters etc were the prefered weapons in the OT.
Hopefully we can have a break from the Sith in the new movie.....until perhaps a pupil decides to take the quick & easy route to the Force for the rest of the new trilogy
J
Bingowings said:
Better killing them all off in one off screen moment to set the mood of the film really seeing as Ripley herself was going to die.
Still not convinced that there were not other alternatives. :)
Let's see how that could be: Ripley wakes up in a medical chamber; She finds out that they crashed on a prison planet with Hicks and Newt. Few days before, Newt was sent in a place for lost Children on another planet, after verification of her identity . They don't understand why they are still kept in this prison but they discover that Weyland Yutani paid the prison's boss to keep them locked, the time for them to send a ship. Hicks is sick. Alien burst from him at key moment. Movie plays more or less as the original Alien 3 from that moment. Not sure that it sets the mood as well as the original Alien 3 (you're right about that) but at least it would have given descent ends to two beloved character from the previous movie.
The point I was making is Alien isn't about Ripley or her 'family' it's not even really just about the creatures it's about the adjective as much as the noun.
It's about the disturbing qualities of something being where it normally isn't.
Aliens was a lesser movie but Ripley, Hicks and Newt were still as much and Aliens and survivors as the creatures.
If the next one had gone down the soap route it would have fundamentally altered the nature of the series it was brave to shatter that possibility.
Similarly Star Wars was about one man and his friends caught up in wars in the stars.
It then turned into a soap opera, The Skywalkers.
It would be interesting to subvert that and in doing so get back to the one man (or woman) and his (or her) friends caught up in wars in the stars again.
Bingowings said:
Similarly Star Wars was about one man and his friends caught up in wars in the stars.
It then turned into a soap opera, The Skywalkers.
It would be interesting to subvert that and in doing so get back to the one man (or woman) and his (or her) friends caught up in wars in the stars again.
Yeah, that's what made it so great, but now there'll likely be more Skywalkers (it'll perhaps be like when the new series of Dallas returned......the new Ewings!!)
J
Bingowings said:
The point I was making is Alien isn't about Ripley or her 'family' it's not even really just about the creatures it's about the adjective as much as the noun.
It's about the disturbing qualities of something being where it normally isn't.
Aliens was a lesser movie but Ripley, Hicks and Newt were still as much and Aliens and survivors as the creatures.
If the next one had gone down the soap route it would have fundamentally altered the nature of the series it was brave to shatter that possibility.
Well said. I would have hoped that folks had come around to what Alien 3 was trying to achieve by now - quit griping, it's over 20 years old! If you want something to complain about, just look at the genuine balls-up that is Alien Resurrection (which makes the critical error of insisting that the series is all about Ripley, against all logic and good taste).
The Star Wars analogy would be the single-minded (or is that simple-minded?) obsession with Jedi and Sith which the prequels and their progeny have relentlessly peddled - at least Abrams can be counted on to give the new films slightly broader scope.