Sign In

Do you feel like this: pre-1977 to 1983 is the real Star Wars Canon

Author
Time


In the past year, My thoughts on Star Wars have been changing to this:

Everything from pre 1977 to 1983 is Canon to me
the classic versions of all three OT films, the deleted scenes from the classic versions of all three OT films, the novelizations of the classic versions of all three OT films, the radio dramas based on the classic versions of all three OT films and any material from this time span (the Expanded Universe and so on from pre 1977 to 1983). I also do not like using "Episode __" in the title of the movies. I call them Star Wars, Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back and Star Wars: Return of the Jedi. Sometimes I call Star Wars by Star Wars: From the Adventures of Luke Skywalker.    
 

Everything from 1984 to the future is Non-Canon to me 
Star Wars been changed to Episode IV A New Hope, using "Episode __" in the title of the movies, The SE, The Prequel trilogy, The Thrawn trilogy, Caravan of Courage, The Battle for Endor, Star Wars: Droids, Star Wars: Ewoks, Star Wars: Clone Wars, Star Wars: The Clone Wars, The up coming live-action series, a future Sequel trilogy and every thing from 1984 to the future is for TF.N lovers and dumb-a**es.    



Do Some people on this Site feel like this too ?

Author
Time

I can't speak for everyone but in general I'd have to go with: yes-ish

Hey look, a bear!

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Hunter6 said:


Everything from pre 1977 to 1983 is Canon to me

 


Everything?
Even the Holiday Special? ;-)

Guidelines for post content and general behaviour: read announcement here

Max. allowable image sizes in signatures: reminder here

Author
Time

ESPECIALLY the holiday special.

 

 

:p

 

Come on, Jefferson Starship kicks fucking ass.

The Secret History of Star Wars -- now available on Amazon.com!

"When George went back and put new creatures into the original Star Wars, I find that disturbing. It’s a revision of history. That bothers me."

--James Cameron, Entertainment Weekly, April 2010

Author
Time

Canon is whatever you want. "We take what we want. And leave the rest, just like your salad bars".

egg shen, Big Trouble in Little China

Author
Time
zombie84 said:

ESPECIALLY the holiday special.

 

 

:p

 

Come on, Jefferson Starship kicks fucking ass.

 

Not only that, but it gives Bea Arthur a place in the Star Wars universe... what could be better than that?

--SKot

Projects:
Return Of The Ewok and Other Short Films (with OCPmovie) [COMPLETED]
Preserving the…cringe…Star Wars Holiday Special [COMPLETED]
The Star Wars TV Commercials Project [DORMANT]
Felix the Cat 1919-1930 early film shorts preservation [ONGOING]
Lights Out! (lost TV anthology shows) [ONGOING]
Iznogoud (1995 animated series) English audio preservation [ONGOING]

Author
Time

Yeah, Bea Arthur should totally have been in Empire Strikes Back. She could have been a hard core Rebel Commander during the battle of Hoth. Or she could have taken the place of the guy who Han said he would see him hell. How great would it be to have Bea Arthur delivering the line, "Your Tauntaun will freeze to death before you reach the first marker!"

Seriously, it would have defined awesome.

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

Author
Time

To me, SW, ESB and ROTJ are the only 3 star wars movies. 

As far as the HS goes, I'm willing to accept it as canon as well because it doesn't screw up continuity or reveal any plot twists, thus ruining them for the OT.

Author
Time
negative1 said:

would that mean stuff like 'splinter of the minds eye' would be oK?
i liked that book....1978............

 

 

I like that book too. The problem with that book is Luke wanting to kiss his sister- 8-0

But I guess there's just as much of that in the films, as well. ;-)

Author
Time

Luke and Leia were never intended to be brother and sister. So says Gary Kurtz in an interview in 2002.

"I turned it off! I don't wanna talk to her!"
Author
Time
nohandluke said:

Luke and Leia were never intended to be brother and sister. So says Gary Kurtz in an interview in 2002.

That makes things confusing though

 

1.) Why could Luke talk to Leia with the force

2.) Who is the "another" Yoda talked about.

Author
Time

i'm sure they would have written 'jedi' differently with that knowledge

later

-1

[no GOUT in CED?-> GOUT CED]

Author
Time
Octorox said:

2.) Who is the "another" Yoda talked about.

 

George has admited in interviews that they shot that scene without any idea of who it would be or how they were going to resolve that plot point. He just figured he'd come up with something in time for a third film.

More proof that he's lying when he says he had it all planned out in the early 70s.

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Power up those shields, Princess.

Author
Time
Octorox said:

nohandluke said:

Luke and Leia were never intended to be brother and sister. So says Gary Kurtz in an interview in 2002.

That makes things confusing though

 

1.) Why could Luke talk to Leia with the force

2.) Who is the "another" Yoda talked about.


I agree that those two things make it very convenient for Leia to have strength with the force. However, they don't imply anything about them being siblings. Originally the force was presented in a way where it was based upon destiny and attitude, not genetics. That's why most fans find midiclorians to be so offensive.

I actually hate how small George made the Star Wars universe. The father revelation is fantasic, but the sister revelation and onward were worthless and clearly written for no other reason than to pander our earlier enjoyment.

"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
Hunter6 said:


In the past year, My thoughts on Star Wars have been changing to this:

Everything from pre 1977 to 1983 is Canon to me
the classic versions of all three OT films, the deleted scenes from the classic versions of all three OT films, the novelizations of the classic versions of all three OT films, the radio dramas based on the classic versions of all three OT films and any material from this time span (the Expanded Universe and so on from pre 1977 to 1983). I also do not like using "Episode __" in the title of the movies. I call them Star Wars, Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back and Star Wars: Return of the Jedi. Sometimes I call Star Wars by Star Wars: From the Adventures of Luke Skywalker.


Everything from 1984 to the future is Non-Canon to me
Star Wars been changed to Episode IV A New Hope, using "Episode __" in the title of the movies, The SE, The Prequel trilogy, The Thrawn trilogy, Caravan of Courage, The Battle for Endor, Star Wars: Droids, Star Wars: Ewoks, Star Wars: Clone Wars, Star Wars: The Clone Wars, The up coming live-action series, a future Sequel trilogy and every thing from 1984 to the future is for TF.N lovers and dumb-a**es.



Do Some people on this Site feel like this too ?

 

Well, as long as you don't use that logic in a SW debate, you should be fine.

Author
Time
Anchorhead said:

Octorox said:

2.) Who is the "another" Yoda talked about.

 

George has admited in interviews that they shot that scene without any idea of who it would be or how they were going to resolve that plot point. He just figured he'd come up with something in time for a third film.

More proof that he's lying when he says he had it all planned out in the early 70s.

 

Kinda like he assured us that he'd resolve the whole Syfo Dias thing in Ep. III?

At least he actually delivered in ROTJ...

Every 27th customer will get a ball-peen hammer, free!

Author
Time
Akwat Kbrana said:

At least he actually delivered in ROTJ...

 

Well, for all the "eww, gross!" moments that came of it, I'd almost as soon he hadn't delivered on it and let the EU handle it like he did with Sifo-Dyas. Of course, back then, the EU wasn't the juggernaut that it is now, so it would have had people screaming "plot hole"*, even though it wouldn't be, etc.

 

*Off-topic mini-rant: It pisses me off to no end that every unanswered question in a story is called a plot hole. A plot hole is when pre-established facts and logic are contradicted without explanation. If said contradiction is explained, it becomes a retcon. An unanswered question (such as who the Other would be if it had not been Leia) would NOT be a plot hole. It would have simply been a plot point that went nowhere, or, more formally, a "plot cul-de-sac." Leia remembering her mother when Padmé died shortly after giving birth? Until it's explained, THAT is a plot hole. Sifo-Dyas and his connection to the Clone Army? Not a plothole, simply an unanswered question (that is, in fact, answered, if you're willing to look it up).

Author
Time

Too true. Nevertheless - and regardless of whether you call it a "plot hole" or "plot cul-de-sac" - it's simply poor filmmaking to introduce a mystery that has far-reaching ramifications and then fail to resolve it, especially after George specifically said he would do so in Ep. III.

Every 27th customer will get a ball-peen hammer, free!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

How about Leia's real mother did not originally die and was in hiding.

This is what i put together reading the very small reference in the jedi novelization.

 

The original idea was probably she was one of the early leaders of the rebellion, was in hiding until palpatine found her when she went to visit her baby on alderaan at the organas and was arrested tried for treason and executed.

 

The drama would have been very strong here because she would expect anakin/vader to protect her from palpatine but he stands back and does nothing when she is put to death. Perhaps she was tortured to find the skywalker heir, or obi wan's hiding place?

 

These are far better story points than "she died of a broken heart". Like Luke says in that g4 parody "that is retarded" and i have to agree.

 

The sifo-dyas thing is easily explained in the episode II shooting script it was sido-dyas aka sidious. Lucas thought it would be too obvious and give away the fact that palpatine the senator was actually a sith lord, as if we did'nt already know that from the original trilogy and episode 1, LOL.

 

This is not the first time the canon of the oot has been changed. Up until the release of episode II obi wan was owen lars brother. Read the return of the jedi novelization, it was in the script at one point as well and talked about by kasden and lucas during story conferences. Whether or not this scene was actually filmed?

I think the dialogue was changed before they had guiness read his lines since it gave away too much if lucas wanted to make those prequels.

Up until the prequels the G-canon or george lucas canon was, the movies, the novelizations and the radio dramas.   At that point in time remember their were only 2 radio plays jedi was done in 95, or 96?  and did not feature mark hamill.  Also i don't find that play authentic to the canon since they added mara jade as a character as a dancer in jabba's palace arica.

That kind of puts it in the realm of an EU piece.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time

skyjedi2005 is right on the point.

 

Author
Time
Octorox said:

1.) Why could Luke talk to Leia with the force

 

I've heard/read that he just did it out of desperation and it happened to work. Like 'Ben! Ben? Ok, um...Yoda! No... Oh, Leia's still around here somewhere! Leia!' But who knows? They make up a lot of stuff after the fact.

My crazy vinyl LP blog

My dumberer blog

My Retro blog

Author
Time
skyjedi2005 said:

How about Leia's real mother did not originally die and was in hiding.

This is what i put together reading the very small reference in the jedi novelization.

 

The original idea was probably she was one of the early leaders of the rebellion, was in hiding until palpatine found her when she went to visit her baby on alderaan at the organas and was arrested tried for treason and executed.

 

 

that's a fairly massive extrapolation from the information available, basically all we know is that she took leia to hide on alderan (Ben to luke "your mother took leia to live as the daughter of senator organa, on alderan") and died when leia was still very young.

Also Ben to Luke "When your father left he didn't know your mother was pregnant. Your mother and I knew he would find out eventually but we wanted to keep you both as safe as possible for as long as possible"

I had always assumed the mother remained in hidding with Leia and died of natural causes, if Anakin and the emperor didn't know about the babies and the mother disapeared and was hidden by the diplomatic immunity of the Organa family then they wouldn't be discovered until luke is revealed in Episode 4.

Obviously your version of events also fits teh available information but to say that was probably teh original intention is a pretty big stretch.

Author
Time

Now, can someone explain the Ben/Owen thing? Haha. I know they were brothers up until the SEs, right? And so in Episode II, Beru is just some little girl that can be seen playing outside Padme's house in a deleted scene, right? Then she grew up and married this Owen fella, who may or may not have any extra significance to the families/characters at all?

And good gravy, why is it that everyone ages so much and Padme seems to have barely aged? Heh.

Yes, the prequels confuse me.

My crazy vinyl LP blog

My dumberer blog

My Retro blog