logo Sign In

It's official, George is really losing it (claims more changes to the OT to come...) — Page 2

Author
Time
Post link
On the exra's of Episode III (the same documentary I got the screen shot at the beginning of this thread) he admits to the fact that in Epsiode IV Darth Vader was nothing more than "just a villain". In Episode V he hinted on a possibility of a father-son relationship between Luke and Vader, but at the beginning of writing for Episode VI he still had serious doubts if he would continue along that direction. Words along these lines are spoken by George Lucas in an Epsiode VI 'making of' documentary I have on VHS.

With all this in mind I believe there may have been a rough outline to the story which spans more than just the movie that was made first, but never in the sense that would make Vader's (or Anakin's) role more prominent or central to the Star Wars 'mythology'. In Epsiode IV Vader is nothing more than a henchman to Tarkin (which places him lower in the Emperial hierarchy) than Tarkin, but in Episode III he's the second in command to the Emperor.

Are these (amongst many others) the kind of plot holes and continuity errors that need to be addressed while re-working the OT en PT for the 30th Anniversary release in 2007?

The Original Trilogy stories are OK just as they were when they were released to the public. But George Lucas messed up while writing the Prequels, neglecting important character releationships, timelines, etcetera that had been established in the Original Trilogy for years.
Ever since the Original Trilogy the Star Wars 'universe' has been expanded by the publication of Star Wars games and books. For all of these additions to the Star Wars storyline (I assume) George Lucas has kept a watchfull eye. After all, any license the the Star Wars franchise has to go through George (or his company). However voluminous the Star Wars universe may have become over the years, he should have taken all of these additions into account while creating another part of the story or filming Episode I to III. Apologies NOT accepted, captain Needa.

As far is comparing Lucas' writing to Tolkien's work ...
Tolkien wrote The Hobbit first and The Lord Of The Rings after that. The chronology of the story line is simular to the publication order of the books. Hobbit first, The Fellowship Of The Ring second, The Two Towers third and finally The Return Of The King.
Tolkien's The Silmarillion however was published much later. Tolkien died before he could finish it, his son Christopher completed it based on his father's notes and existing material written earlier. The Silmarillion documents all the back story to the events in The Hobbit and The Lord Of The Rings (and other stories). A sort of Middel-Earth 'bible'.
In that respect the Prequels are a sort of 'mini' The Silmarillion, just focussing on a very small part of the Star Wars backstory.
Author
Time
Post link
Except that Tolkien began the Silmarillion in 1916-17, and it was very close to the 1977 "final" form in 1937, when the first edition of The Hobbit was published. In fact, he offered it for publication in 1937, and it was rejected. Although he continued to work on it until his death, it was a fairly complete story before he went on to write Lord of the Rings. The bits of the Silm that were changed, such as Celeborn's origin or the Second Prophecy of Mandos, don't really introduce any errors into LotR. So comparing the Silm to the SW prequels, which were written decades after the "later" material, is not really accurate.
"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
Post link
I never really understood why one would compare the two. Lucas was never even close to being on par with Tolkien. Tolkein literally wrote his story from scratch so many times because he ran into problems or other things that go bump. He re-wrote the story until he came to another bump and them re-wrote it again. He didn't publish until he had the story completely worked out. Which is something Lucas never did. I think in part he didn't because he hated writing as he has said so often. I actually like writing and so did tolkien. It sorta allows one to enter a world of endless possibilities. Also remember that Tolkien wasn't writing for money or fame he already had that at Oxford. Lucas was writing for money essentially
"Who's scruffy-lookin'?" - Han Solo
"I wish my lawn was emo so it would cut itself." -sybeman
"You know, putting animals in the microwave is not a good idea. I had to learn that one the hard way." -seanwookie
Author
Time
Post link
Tolkien's academic career hardly brought him great riches or fame. Remember how he answered the question, "Art or money?"

Lucas is typically compared to Tolkien because Lucas spent six movies trying to develop a character who could rightfully be called "Dark Lord," but never came up with a Morgoth, Sauron, or even a Tevildo, Prince of Cats. Also, one could draw some comparisons between Beren Erchamion and Luke Skywalker. Except Luke ended up being the Princess's brother, so he failed to sire a heroic line upon her. I guess there's some Turin Turambar in him, too.
"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
Post link
when I meant money with tolkein I meant that he had a steady income coming in from being a professor. No fame from teaching at Oxford? I'd think that in Academia, he had some notoriety for that.
"Who's scruffy-lookin'?" - Han Solo
"I wish my lawn was emo so it would cut itself." -sybeman
"You know, putting animals in the microwave is not a good idea. I had to learn that one the hard way." -seanwookie