Sign In

Star Wars as a cohesive universe/canon.

Author
Time

Now, this is somewhat contradictory since I have things that I personally don’t like in Star Wars, but I still think this is a big problem.

A large part of the Star Wars (and many other) fan communities seems to be picking a better or worse version of a thing or installment of a thing.
For example, I was just watching TLJ and I got to the scene with Yoda. Yoda is a puppet in TLJ when he was CG in the PT. The problem for me is that these movies are supposed to be installments in the same story, and yet that illusion is shattered into a million pieces when things like puppet Yoda or TFA being like the anti-prequel in much of its approach are pretty much rebuttals of earlier installments.
Another thing is the whole “TCW Anakin vs PT Anakin”. Regardless of which one you like better, it’s (IMO) a universe destroying problem when people perceive the two characters as different enough to like one and dislike the other, when TCW is supposed to be a continuation of Attack of The Clones.

So I guess my problem is, how can the fact that people can’t stop picking and choosing elements they like and don’t like from the movies (that goes for fans and creators alike) not completely destroy the illusion that ALL of these events from ALL of these movies and shows take place in the same universe? I mean, I definitely have movies that I would delete from the canon, but the canon itself isn’t really a canon if different pieces within the canon are taking stands against other pieces, or being different while claiming to be the same, like with Yoda or Anakin. (This second one is both the fact that TCW Anakin maybe should have been closer to Hayden, but also that they aren’t really AS different as Hayden detractors claim, and late season Lanter Anakin was as “unlikable” as Anakin ever was, especially in arcs like the second Clovis arc.)

This was kind of a ramble, but it’s something i’ve been wanting to get off my chest for a while. Any thoughts?

Author
Time

BiggsFan44 said:

For example, I was just watching TLJ and I got to the scene with Yoda. Yoda is a puppet in TLJ when he was CG in the PT. The problem for me is that these movies are supposed to be installments in the same story, and yet that illusion is shattered into a million pieces when things like puppet Yoda or TFA being like the anti-prequel in much of its approach are pretty much rebuttals of earlier installments.

Excuse me? Yoda was a puppet in Empire Strikes Back, which means the prequels got it totally wrong. But you complain about TFA and TLJ for trying to correct the mistakes of the PT, instead of complaining about the prequels for fucking it up in the first place?

Ceci n’est pas une signature.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Frank your Majesty said:
which means the prequels got it totally wrong.

You’re not seeing what i’m saying. The PT used CG for Yoda, yes. But that’s because CG is (very arguably) superior to puppetry. It’s why Maz Kanata isn’t a puppet.
You can of course disagree that CG is more expressive etc, but it’s changing it BACK after it’s already been changed that is the |opinion on the franchise’s history| that i’m talking about- in a way that merely “updating” Yoda was not.
Yoda being CG might strain the link up with the OT, but the strain doesn’t come from what my thread is about, which is how we can consider this all to be one universe if creators are passing judgement on the quality of the depiction of supposedly equally canonical events.

Author
Time

Probably the best answer to your question is “who cares, they’re movies,” it can be pretty easy to look past minor inconsistencies when watching, especially when they’re usually completely irrelevant to the story at hand.

As for how people on this site “cope” with the problems you mention, well a lot of people here just ignore the prequels, which are the cause of the majority of continuity problems with series to begin with.

Author
Time

BiggsFan44 said:

Frank your Majesty said:
which means the prequels got it totally wrong.

You’re not seeing what i’m saying. The PT used CG for Yoda, yes. But that’s because CG is (very arguably) superior to puppetry. It’s why Maz Kanata isn’t a puppet.
You can of course disagree that CG is more expressive etc, but it’s changing it BACK after it’s already been changed that is the comment on the franchise’s history that i’m talking about- in a way that merely “updating” Yoda was not.

I mean, they wouldn’t have made him a puppet in TLJ if they didn’t think that superior. I think many people would say puppet Yoda is far superior to CG Yoda.

As for ‘changing’ vs. ‘changing back,’ I don’t see any significant difference between the two, especially in this series where, if you were to watch chronologically, had TLJ used CG, that would seem like ‘changing back.’

Author
Time

You’re watching movies wrong.

You have to see movies as being subjective, they aren’t documentaries, they are human made works of visual art. You have to separate the story from the physical construction of the film. You have to look past the fact that the effects look crummy in A new hope compared to those in Force awakens. Or that Obi Wan is played by two clearly different people. Or the fact that Darth Vader talks with a deep black voice yet walks like a sassy british bodybuilder.

If you want to watch films properly you need to see past these things, separate the craft from the story and appreciate both for what they are. Suspend your disbelief.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DominicCobb said:
As for how people on this site “cope” with the problems you mention, well a lot of people here just ignore the prequels, which are the cause of the majority of continuity problems with series to begin with.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Chewielewis said:

If you want to watch films properly you need to see past these things, separate the craft from the story and appreciate both for what they are. Suspend your disbelief.

Suspension of disbelief. That’s all it really boils down to. People either rationalize any apparent inconsistencies or just overlook them because they just enjoy the movies for what they are.

EDIT: Those are totally your subjective opinions. It might have appeared inconsistent to you but I completely disagree.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

BiggsFan44 said:

DominicCobb said:
As for how people on this site “cope” with the problems you mention, well a lot of people here just ignore the prequels, which are the cause of the majority of continuity problems with series to begin with.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

You made this thread to talk about (seemingly) continuity errors. If the ST doesn’t fit your personal canon, I think we already have a thread to discuss that. If not I don’t know what to tell you.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

It’s a multiverse. I accept all and none of it as equally true and false. My canon is a meta-canon and anti-canon simultaneously.

STRANGE

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DominicCobb said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Frank your Majesty said:
which means the prequels got it totally wrong.

You’re not seeing what i’m saying. The PT used CG for Yoda, yes. But that’s because CG is (very arguably) superior to puppetry. It’s why Maz Kanata isn’t a puppet.
You can of course disagree that CG is more expressive etc, but it’s changing it BACK after it’s already been changed that is the comment on the franchise’s history that i’m talking about- in a way that merely “updating” Yoda was not.

I mean, they wouldn’t have made him a puppet in TLJ if they didn’t think that superior. I think many people would say puppet Yoda is far superior to CG Yoda.

As for ‘changing’ vs. ‘changing back,’ I don’t see any significant difference between the two, especially in this series where, if you were to watch chronologically, had TLJ used CG, that would seem like ‘changing back.’

I don’t think i’m really getting my point across. I’m trying to say that Maz Kanata wasn’t a puppet for the same reason PT Yoda wasn’t a puppet- the tech is newer. It wasn’t a comment on the puppet Yoda being bad. Yoda being a puppet in TLJ is a comment on CG Yoda being bad/worse, even though Maz Kanata exists.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DominicCobb said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DominicCobb said:
As for how people on this site “cope” with the problems you mention, well a lot of people here just ignore the prequels, which are the cause of the majority of continuity problems with series to begin with.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

You made this thread to talk about (seemingly) continuity errors. If the ST doesn’t fit your personal canon, I think we already have a thread to discuss that. If not I don’t know what to tell you.

Not exactly continuity errors, but more “How are we supposed to believe that all these movies have happened in the same universe when some filmmakers/showrunners are at war with sections of the saga”. And it even applies to things like TLJ throwing JJ’s mystery boxes into the garbage.

Author
Time

BiggsFan44 said:

DominicCobb said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Frank your Majesty said:
which means the prequels got it totally wrong.

You’re not seeing what i’m saying. The PT used CG for Yoda, yes. But that’s because CG is (very arguably) superior to puppetry. It’s why Maz Kanata isn’t a puppet.
You can of course disagree that CG is more expressive etc, but it’s changing it BACK after it’s already been changed that is the comment on the franchise’s history that i’m talking about- in a way that merely “updating” Yoda was not.

I mean, they wouldn’t have made him a puppet in TLJ if they didn’t think that superior. I think many people would say puppet Yoda is far superior to CG Yoda.

As for ‘changing’ vs. ‘changing back,’ I don’t see any significant difference between the two, especially in this series where, if you were to watch chronologically, had TLJ used CG, that would seem like ‘changing back.’

I don’t think i’m really getting my point across. I’m trying to say that Maz Kanata wasn’t a puppet for the same reason PT Yoda wasn’t a puppet- the tech is newer. It wasn’t a comment on the puppet Yoda being bad. Yoda being a puppet in TLJ is a comment on CG Yoda being bad/worse, even though Maz Kanata exists.

I don’t see how it’s a comment on anything. TLJ is a sequel to ESB and ROTJ and in those films Luke interacts with a puppet Yoda. Simple as that I think.

It’s the director’s decision. When Lucas decided to change Yoda to be CG, that was his perogative. Hopefully a director isn’t making decisions based solely on what tech is “newer” (though I fear that was a big factor in many of Lucas’s PT decisions).

Author
Time

Another way to look at these films and all film franchises is to see the films as if they are films about true stories.

Like every film about true stories, they cast actors to play real people, they twist dialogue, characters, events in order to make them work as a digestable 2 hour movie. The films arent the things they present, they are just the lens we use to look at these events. And I think that works for Star Wars, you can believe they are based on true stories. Instead of “Based on a true story” These films are always preceeded with

“A Long time ago, in a galaxy far far away…”

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DominicCobb said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DominicCobb said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Frank your Majesty said:
which means the prequels got it totally wrong.

You’re not seeing what i’m saying. The PT used CG for Yoda, yes. But that’s because CG is (very arguably) superior to puppetry. It’s why Maz Kanata isn’t a puppet.
You can of course disagree that CG is more expressive etc, but it’s changing it BACK after it’s already been changed that is the comment on the franchise’s history that i’m talking about- in a way that merely “updating” Yoda was not.

I mean, they wouldn’t have made him a puppet in TLJ if they didn’t think that superior. I think many people would say puppet Yoda is far superior to CG Yoda.

As for ‘changing’ vs. ‘changing back,’ I don’t see any significant difference between the two, especially in this series where, if you were to watch chronologically, had TLJ used CG, that would seem like ‘changing back.’

I don’t think i’m really getting my point across. I’m trying to say that Maz Kanata wasn’t a puppet for the same reason PT Yoda wasn’t a puppet- the tech is newer. It wasn’t a comment on the puppet Yoda being bad. Yoda being a puppet in TLJ is a comment on CG Yoda being bad/worse, even though Maz Kanata exists.

I don’t see how it’s a comment on anything. TLJ is a sequel to ESB and ROTJ and in those films Luke interacts with a puppet Yoda. Simple as that I think.

It’s the director’s decision. When Lucas decided to change Yoda to be CG, that was his perogative. Hopefully a director isn’t making decisions based solely on what tech is “newer” (though I fear that was a big factor in many of Lucas’s PT decisions).

Okay, but then why was Maz Kanata (AKA dimestore Yoda) CG when JJ tried to spin TFA as “practical effects: The Movie”?
And by “newer” I meant that Lucas perceived a benefit to using it. Not that I communicated that at all.

Also, Chewielewis I appreciate your comments, I just don’t want to doublepost. I agree that at the end of the day it’s kind of a “You can make it work in your head, or you can’t” type of thing.

Author
Time

BiggsFan44 said:

DominicCobb said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DominicCobb said:
As for how people on this site “cope” with the problems you mention, well a lot of people here just ignore the prequels, which are the cause of the majority of continuity problems with series to begin with.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

You made this thread to talk about (seemingly) continuity errors. If the ST doesn’t fit your personal canon, I think we already have a thread to discuss that. If not I don’t know what to tell you.

Not exactly continuity errors, but more “How are we supposed to believe that all these movies have happened in the same universe when some filmmakers/showrunners are at war with sections of the saga”. And it even applies to things like TLJ throwing JJ’s mystery boxes into the garbage.

Well in that case I think you’d find not everyone agrees with your interpretation of what’s going on there (to say the least).

On a macro level, some fans have been disagreeing with the direction of the franchise since 1980. Every time something new comes out, someone’s going to say it doesn’t mesh with their perception of the series. The solution is simple, of course: take what you like, forget the rest. Don’t worry about “everything taking place in the same universe” or whatever.

Author
Time

With Yoda, since the last time we saw him chronologically was in ROTJ, it makes sense that he should be a puppet the next time we see. Plus, that is how Luke remembers him.

And maybe TFA tried to harken back to the OT style more, but I don’t think they’re pushing away from CGI. Maz didn’t look bad, and Snoke in TLJ looked fantastic in my opinion. I think the Sequel Trilogy is just finding a balance between practical and visual effects.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DominicCobb said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DominicCobb said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DominicCobb said:
As for how people on this site “cope” with the problems you mention, well a lot of people here just ignore the prequels, which are the cause of the majority of continuity problems with series to begin with.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

You made this thread to talk about (seemingly) continuity errors. If the ST doesn’t fit your personal canon, I think we already have a thread to discuss that. If not I don’t know what to tell you.

Not exactly continuity errors, but more “How are we supposed to believe that all these movies have happened in the same universe when some filmmakers/showrunners are at war with sections of the saga”. And it even applies to things like TLJ throwing JJ’s mystery boxes into the garbage.

Well in that case I think you’d find not everyone agrees with your interpretation of what’s going on there (to say the least).

On a macro level, some fans have been disagreeing with the direction of the franchise since 1980. Every time something new comes out, someone’s going to say it doesn’t mesh with their perception of the series. The solution is simple, of course: take what you like, forget the rest. Don’t worry about “everything taking place in the same universe” or whatever.

Right, but at the end of the day, these movies are being sold as episodes 1 through 9 of a continuing story.
How can a movie be “Episode 7” if it hates, say, Episode 3? It feels like a lie.

Author
Time

From an interview with Neal Scanlan, head of creature and droid effects.

Interviewer: The original plan was to do Maz as a puppet. How far along did that get? And when was the decision made to go full CG or…?

Neal: Yeah. There was the truth of the matter was that Maz’s role in the film was always very fluid. As the scripts evolved, as J.J.’s ideas for Maz evolved, so did our technique. So the idea was at one time, Maz’s role was quite small. And at that time, that was perfect for a puppet. We could work in a very intimate environment with this character. We could deal with it in a very confined way. And as Maz’s role expanded, we looked at the possibility of doing it as a small person in a suit and having a sort of partial CG version. And but her role grew further than that. And at that time, we decided that to give the freedom to allow her to be developed in J.J.’s mind and also developed within the film, if we went to CG it would be a fabulous, that would be the by far the smartest move. Also as well, generally speaking, animatronic puppets and other things obviously don’t have the freedom a CG character has. And Maz was one character that needed a lot of freedom to be able to move around her own world. And for that reason, CG was chosen.

https://www.slashfilm.com/force-awakens-practical-effects/

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I mean the head art director for episode 7 was Doug Chiang, the same guy that did Episode 1.

EDIT: And the other prequels as well I believe.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

RogueLeader said:

You saying Episode 7 hates Episode 1 is just totally subjective though.

I disagree. Remember that JJ was so petty that in the final movie he deleted the podracing flags from the trailer version of the Maz’s Castle shot because “My movie isn’t about podracing.” (Or something very similar, I remember that he was asked that in an interview.)

Author
Time
 (Edited)

RogueLeader said:

I mean the head art director for episode 7 was Doug Chiang, the same guy that did Episode 1.

EDIT: And the other prequels as well I believe.

I guess this shows that the film director is the real head art director, since the same art director that gave us some visual variety in the PT gave us slightly repainted TIEs and X-Wings in the ST.
EDIT: I won’t doublepost again, I had a brain fart.

Author
Time

Oh god not this again. You should have joined three years ago when this discussion was actually relevant. You can find all the arguments for or against this in the TFA thread.

Ceci n’est pas une signature.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Haha, no worries about double posting! I just did it too.

I found what you were talking about.
“The flags are designed to drive superfans nuts with references to the earlier movies, but Abrams tells Guyett that too many of them allude to the first of Lucas’ prequels: ‘I don’t want to be too about podracers,’ he says. ‘I’d rather come up with our stuff.’”

That doesn’t really sound petty to me? I mean, he didn’t even say take them all out, he just want to do his own thing, imo.

Chiang is also a vice president of Lucasfilm as well, but I think he also respected JJ’s choices as director, if they were his own.

Now, I do agree with you that they probably wanted to stick closer to the OT designs because that is what they felt the fans wanted (and now they don’t want it), but personally I think it makes sense for things to be a little different but not that different. There hasn’t been any war in 30 years, so why would they develop extremely different fighter ships in that timespan?

And in my opinion, I think it had to be a another civil war-type situation to be a true continuation of the themes of the past six films. And outside invasion or something like would have felt really detached to me.
But you can see how subjective this gets.

EDIT: Frank is making a good point. We’ll probably just run around in circles and never convince the other on anything. Haha. I just the think the degree of cohesiveness in a movies series is really changes based off each individuals perspective. So might seem inconsistent to you and other people, but not to everyone. Just depends!