Sign In

Star Wars as a cohesive universe/canon. — Page 4

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Besides, half the SE changes are cool. That giant half buried ship that’s at a 70 degree angle in Mos Eisley is cool.
Also, the restoration of that one Biggs scene towards the end (gotta love Biggs).

If only Lucas had thought to reincorporate the earlier Biggs scenes along with it. Then its inclusion might work instead of feeling tacked on and incongruous.

How does it feel tacked on? If anything it makes the Trench run part flow more smoothly by fixing up the Biggs/Wedge nonsense.
It’s also just a nice little moment in itself, since Luke talks about Biggs on Tatooine, even in the final cut.

But even though I don’t see any "tacked on"ness, I do agree that he should have went all out and added back in the Tosche station bits.
And I’m not sure why he cut out the older Rebel pilot talking about Anakin, because it fits if that guy was around when Anakin was a General.

Author
Time

NeverarGreat said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:
Good perspective. Just to clarify, I’m also talking about the idea of certain pieces of the canon not respecting other pieces even though they are supposed to be 9 parts of one story, which is slightly different from recasting etc.
On the topic of Trek, it’s funny that you mention scale, since now that I know that the saucer set in First Contact was not full size it bugs me, even though you can’t tell in the film that it is only 70 percent of the full size.

But Star Wars has been disrespecting its own canon from day one. In the first film Luke, who had an obvious crush on Princess Leia, was the son of a war hero who’d been killed by Darth Vader. In the next film Lucas suddenly decided Vader was actually Luke’s father. Then he decided that Leia was Luke’s sister, the Emperor was a different bloke to the one we’d seen in Empire, and Luke had supposedly been ‘hidden’ at the family homestead and with Dad’s old surname intact no less! I haven’t even started on the prequels yet!

“Do you remember your mother? Your real mother?”

“Uh, well, ‘remember’ is such a strong word…”

I’m really not being clear, apparently.
That’s not the kind of disrespect I’m talking about. Lucas retconning his work doesn’t mean that he disagrees with those works, it just means he thought up a new story element.
For example, George does not feel about ANH the way JJ feels about the PT, I’m sure.

I recall that George really disliked Star Wars (1977) and embarked on a forty-year quest to ‘fix’ them to his liking.

/thread

Author
Time

dahmage said:

NeverarGreat said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:
Good perspective. Just to clarify, I’m also talking about the idea of certain pieces of the canon not respecting other pieces even though they are supposed to be 9 parts of one story, which is slightly different from recasting etc.
On the topic of Trek, it’s funny that you mention scale, since now that I know that the saucer set in First Contact was not full size it bugs me, even though you can’t tell in the film that it is only 70 percent of the full size.

But Star Wars has been disrespecting its own canon from day one. In the first film Luke, who had an obvious crush on Princess Leia, was the son of a war hero who’d been killed by Darth Vader. In the next film Lucas suddenly decided Vader was actually Luke’s father. Then he decided that Leia was Luke’s sister, the Emperor was a different bloke to the one we’d seen in Empire, and Luke had supposedly been ‘hidden’ at the family homestead and with Dad’s old surname intact no less! I haven’t even started on the prequels yet!

“Do you remember your mother? Your real mother?”

“Uh, well, ‘remember’ is such a strong word…”

I’m really not being clear, apparently.
That’s not the kind of disrespect I’m talking about. Lucas retconning his work doesn’t mean that he disagrees with those works, it just means he thought up a new story element.
For example, George does not feel about ANH the way JJ feels about the PT, I’m sure.

I recall that George really disliked Star Wars (1977) and embarked on a forty-year quest to ‘fix’ them to his liking.

/thread

Incorrect.

Author
Time

BiggsFan44 said:

yotsuya said:

Busy for a thread just started today.

But to tackle the question of the original post… things don’t have to be perfect. Yoda is voiced by Frank Oz in all the films so it is the same character. Puppet or CG doesn’t matter. Just like it doesn’t matter that there were multiple R2-D2’s used in each film, not to mention the vast number used over the course of the Saga. Do you really watch for the hoses that hid Kenny Baker’s legs or the supports that hold him in the correct position when the 3rd leg is out? Those are movie shortcuts that you are supposed to ignore. If you want perfection, you will not find it. It doesn’t exist. Rogue One did an awesome job of replicating aspects of A New Hope, but there are flaws even in that. Who cares that Hayden’s character is especailly whiny and in Clone Wars he is more sure of himself. It was his golden age and he was elevated to Jedi Knight and assigned a Padawan. Clone Wars did a good job of hinting at the growing Darkness in Anakin.

And if you watch the Saga in order on Blu-ray, you get 3 films of CG Yoda, 1 film without Yoda, 2 films with old Puppet Yoda, another film without Yoda, and 1 film with Puppet Yoda 3.0 (my opinion is that 2.0 is best forgotten and was fortunately replaced by CG Yoda). Why complain? It is a series of movies made over more than 40 years. Technology has changed and they have managed to keep the vision pretty consistent. A lot of people can’t wrap their heads around sets, props, and models not always being built to scale. Spend some time appreciating the classics and the development of special effects and movie magic and you can ignore all of it and appreciate the grander story being told. Don’t sweat the little things. The character of Anakin/Vader was played by 7 people over the course of 6 films and Clone Wars.

But then, I am also a Star Trek fan and as a Trekkie I have to deal with recasting Saavik, changing Klingons, Romulans, ship models that aren’t in scale and seem to appear in many scales, and a whole host of issues that make what you are talking about seem pretty pathetic and ignorable. I’m also a Doctor Who fan where we’ve had 3 actors play the first Doctor, 3 versions of the Destruction of Atlantis, two origins for the Daleks and Cybermen, and so many glitches, gaffs, and outright contradictions that two different versions of Anakin between the movies and Clone Wars is nothing.

Almost every movie has its issues and you just accept them and let the illusion wash over you and don’t sweat the details. It is cool to notice them and find all the mistakes the movie makers made, but letting it ruin a movie makes about as much sense as cutting off your leg because you stubbed your toe.

Going back to Star Trek, when I finished watching 7 seasons of TNG and then was presented with Generations, it sucked. 7 seasons of intelligent stories followed by such a dud… And it only got worse when Abrams and Orci made their films. Talk about not knowing your characters and no knowing the property. Those films make the worst of the Prequels look like an Oscar winner. Trek canon was literally thrown out the window. You can argue that Luke in the ST (Rian just followed JJ’s lead and piked up where he left off) is very much like the Luke of ANH and TESB where the ROTJ Luke was quite different. But there is a 200 page topic about TLJ that frequently discusses Luke. But as a fan of many franchises I find that Star Wars has been the most faithful and consistent over the course of years where others often involve overlooking a lot more heinous mis-steps.

So I find it quite easy to ignore all of it and focus on the story. That is what is important after all.

Good perspective. Just to clarify, I’m also talking about the idea of certain pieces of the canon not respecting other pieces even though they are supposed to be 9 parts of one story, which is slightly different from recasting etc.
On the topic of Trek, it’s funny that you mention scale, since now that I know that the saucer set in First Contact was not full size it bugs me, even though you can’t tell in the film that it is only 70 percent of the full size.

But that is what I’m saying. They are 9 parts of one story (more than 9 with the side movies and series). Some things have changed a bit along the way. The movies are inconsistent with sets, props, costumes, actors, so what is a bit of story inconsistency thrown in. So you have to do some reconning to make it all make sense. You have to reconn the Falcon interior to fit in the exterior. What really is the difference? For me each trilogy is a separate entity. So far I have yet to find any discrepancy between the PT and ST, so that leaves discrepancies with the OT as the entire point of this. The way I’ve looked at it since the SE and PT came out was that you have different waves. First you have the self contained Star Wars from 1977. It stood on its own and was a unique film. Then you have the OOT. Episodes IV, V, and VI. This was Star Wars for many of us for the longest time. Then Lucas came back and launched into the SEOT and then the PT. His changes to the OT were consistent with the PT. He culminated his epic saga with ROTS and an ending that brought us back to the beginning. Now we have the PT not done by GL. So that creates a different aspect yet again. How the ST ends will color a lot of things. It will color how we look at the entire ST in the future and the entire 9 part saga. But it will never change what came before. If you don’t like the ST, don’t watch it and stick to the OOT if that is what you want.

But right now many are judging the ST and it is an unfinished product. We need IX to know how to judge it and see the story arc it is trying to tell. We knew the PT story arc and when we saw TPM we knew where it was headed and what was likely to happen. You have to go back to 1980 to be where we are in a trilogy. No one in 1980 had any clue what to expect in the next movie. We have no clue now what to expect in IX. But when ROTJ came out, it gave us a solid end to a great story. And I can tell you that back in the 80’s, my ranking for the Star Wars trilogy was ANH was the best, ROTJ the next best, and TESB the weak installment. It is quite different now, but that may be what happens with the ST. TLJ could be considered the worst now and the best later. Only time will tell. We have to get IX first. Until then we are looking at an incomplete product. JJ says this one will tie the saga together and wrap things ups. I hope he succeeds in his goal.

As for canon changing… it can do that without disrepcting what came before. but I seriously have not seen anything major in canon change because of the ST. People claim that Luke is different because of the ST, but seriously, how does that change the events of the OT? I don’t see it. The ST doesn’t change the end of the OT at all. It still is about Vader’s redemption just as it was in 1983. The rebels still blew up the second Death Star and saw the end of Vader and his Emperor. Just because the new republic that replaced it didn’t last doesn’t change the end of ROTJ. The OT canon is untouched by the ST.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

BiggsFan44 said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Besides, half the SE changes are cool. That giant half buried ship that’s at a 70 degree angle in Mos Eisley is cool.
Also, the restoration of that one Biggs scene towards the end (gotta love Biggs).

If only Lucas had thought to reincorporate the earlier Biggs scenes along with it. Then its inclusion might work instead of feeling tacked on and incongruous.

How does it feel tacked on? If anything it makes the Trench run part flow more smoothly by fixing up the Biggs/Wedge nonsense.
It’s also just a nice little moment in itself, since Luke talks about Biggs on Tatooine, even in the final cut.

His introduction so late into the proceedings without any lead-up feels nothing short of abrupt. Plus it’s just more unnecessary universe-shrinkage.

Eat the multi-billion dollar corporate slop and pretend it’s social justice, you weirdos.

Author
Time

BiggsFan44 said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Besides, half the SE changes are cool. That giant half buried ship that’s at a 70 degree angle in Mos Eisley is cool.
Also, the restoration of that one Biggs scene towards the end (gotta love Biggs).

If only Lucas had thought to reincorporate the earlier Biggs scenes along with it. Then its inclusion might work instead of feeling tacked on and incongruous.

How does it feel tacked on? If anything it makes the Trench run part flow more smoothly by fixing up the Biggs/Wedge nonsense.
It’s also just a nice little moment in itself, since Luke talks about Biggs on Tatooine, even in the final cut.

But even though I don’t see any "tacked on"ness, I do agree that he should have went all out and added back in the Tosche station bits.
And I’m not sure why he cut out the older Rebel pilot talking about Anakin, because it fits if that guy was around when Anakin was a General.

Incorporating the cut Tatooine scenes would do more to rewrite canon than anything else that has ever happened. Have you listened to the dialog lately? There are some major issued with that and where the saga went (even just in the OT). The only reasons those scenes even got shot was because they didn’t take a lot of setup and were the first things they shot in Tunesia. They were cut before the rought B&W cut was ever done. Lucas had been talked into writing those scenes because of his friends and what he wanted was the droids to lead us to Luke, then Ben, then Han, then back to the Princess and those scenes didn’t fit. They were filler and were dropped. And Red Leader’s missing lines about knowing Anakin would not make sense with how the PT did things.

Author
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Besides, half the SE changes are cool. That giant half buried ship that’s at a 70 degree angle in Mos Eisley is cool.
Also, the restoration of that one Biggs scene towards the end (gotta love Biggs).

If only Lucas had thought to reincorporate the earlier Biggs scenes along with it. Then its inclusion might work instead of feeling tacked on and incongruous.

How does it feel tacked on? If anything it makes the Trench run part flow more smoothly by fixing up the Biggs/Wedge nonsense.
It’s also just a nice little moment in itself, since Luke talks about Biggs on Tatooine, even in the final cut.

His introduction so late into the proceedings without any lead-up feels nothing short of abrupt. Plus it’s just more unnecessary universe-shrinkage.

What? Biggs is still in the Rebellion in the pre SE version.

Author
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Besides, half the SE changes are cool. That giant half buried ship that’s at a 70 degree angle in Mos Eisley is cool.
Also, the restoration of that one Biggs scene towards the end (gotta love Biggs).

If only Lucas had thought to reincorporate the earlier Biggs scenes along with it. Then its inclusion might work instead of feeling tacked on and incongruous.

How does it feel tacked on? If anything it makes the Trench run part flow more smoothly by fixing up the Biggs/Wedge nonsense.
It’s also just a nice little moment in itself, since Luke talks about Biggs on Tatooine, even in the final cut.

His introduction so late into the proceedings without any lead-up feels nothing short of abrupt. Plus it’s just more unnecessary universe-shrinkage.

And Luke flying with Biggs without any conversation doesn’t feel abrupt? He was going on and on about Biggs earlier in the film and then we meet him and there is nothing. Incidently, Biggs talking to Luke is implied in the original cut because Biggs leaves Luke at the base of the X-wing ladder in every single version. That was the best edit to ANH for the SE.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

yotsuya said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Besides, half the SE changes are cool. That giant half buried ship that’s at a 70 degree angle in Mos Eisley is cool.
Also, the restoration of that one Biggs scene towards the end (gotta love Biggs).

If only Lucas had thought to reincorporate the earlier Biggs scenes along with it. Then its inclusion might work instead of feeling tacked on and incongruous.

How does it feel tacked on? If anything it makes the Trench run part flow more smoothly by fixing up the Biggs/Wedge nonsense.
It’s also just a nice little moment in itself, since Luke talks about Biggs on Tatooine, even in the final cut.

But even though I don’t see any "tacked on"ness, I do agree that he should have went all out and added back in the Tosche station bits.
And I’m not sure why he cut out the older Rebel pilot talking about Anakin, because it fits if that guy was around when Anakin was a General.

Incorporating the cut Tatooine scenes would do more to rewrite canon than anything else that has ever happened. Have you listened to the dialog lately? There are some major issued with that and where the saga went (even just in the OT). The only reasons those scenes even got shot was because they didn’t take a lot of setup and were the first things they shot in Tunesia. They were cut before the rought B&W cut was ever done. Lucas had been talked into writing those scenes because of his friends and what he wanted was the droids to lead us to Luke, then Ben, then Han, then back to the Princess and those scenes didn’t fit. They were filler and were dropped. And Red Leader’s missing lines about knowing Anakin would not make sense with how the PT did things.

I’m not sure, but I thought he cut those scenes after getting spooked because Spielberg or somebody called them “American Graffiti in space”.
And the Rebel pilot dialogue would fit, since

  1. The timeline roughly matches to where he could have been a teen in the Clone War and have seen General Skywalker in action
  2. He wouldn’t know that he became Vader
Author
Time

BiggsFan44 said:

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:
Good perspective. Just to clarify, I’m also talking about the idea of certain pieces of the canon not respecting other pieces even though they are supposed to be 9 parts of one story, which is slightly different from recasting etc.
On the topic of Trek, it’s funny that you mention scale, since now that I know that the saucer set in First Contact was not full size it bugs me, even though you can’t tell in the film that it is only 70 percent of the full size.

But Star Wars has been disrespecting its own canon from day one. In the first film Luke, who had an obvious crush on Princess Leia, was the son of a war hero who’d been killed by Darth Vader. In the next film Lucas suddenly decided Vader was actually Luke’s father. Then he decided that Leia was Luke’s sister, the Emperor was a different bloke to the one we’d seen in Empire, and Luke had supposedly been ‘hidden’ at the family homestead and with Dad’s old surname intact no less! I haven’t even started on the prequels yet!

“Do you remember your mother? Your real mother?”

“Uh, well, ‘remember’ is such a strong word…”

I’m really not being clear, apparently.
That’s not the kind of disrespect I’m talking about. Lucas retconning his work doesn’t mean that he disagrees with those works, it just means he thought up a new story element.
For example, George does not feel about ANH the way JJ feels about the PT, I’m sure.

Lucas absolutely retconned his work because he disagreed with earlier works. If you don’t believe me, go purchase an official Blu Ray release of the unaltered OT and tell me who shot first.

Author
Time

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:
Good perspective. Just to clarify, I’m also talking about the idea of certain pieces of the canon not respecting other pieces even though they are supposed to be 9 parts of one story, which is slightly different from recasting etc.
On the topic of Trek, it’s funny that you mention scale, since now that I know that the saucer set in First Contact was not full size it bugs me, even though you can’t tell in the film that it is only 70 percent of the full size.

But Star Wars has been disrespecting its own canon from day one. In the first film Luke, who had an obvious crush on Princess Leia, was the son of a war hero who’d been killed by Darth Vader. In the next film Lucas suddenly decided Vader was actually Luke’s father. Then he decided that Leia was Luke’s sister, the Emperor was a different bloke to the one we’d seen in Empire, and Luke had supposedly been ‘hidden’ at the family homestead and with Dad’s old surname intact no less! I haven’t even started on the prequels yet!

“Do you remember your mother? Your real mother?”

“Uh, well, ‘remember’ is such a strong word…”

I’m really not being clear, apparently.
That’s not the kind of disrespect I’m talking about. Lucas retconning his work doesn’t mean that he disagrees with those works, it just means he thought up a new story element.
For example, George does not feel about ANH the way JJ feels about the PT, I’m sure.

Lucas absolutely retconned his work because he disagreed with earlier works. If you don’t believe me, go purchase an official Blu Ray release of the unaltered OT and tell me who shot first.

Closer, but still not what I’m talking about since he didn’t change Han’s character in the sequels, just superseded it in the movie it happened in.
The CANON isn’t at war with itself in that instance because only the SE is currently canon.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

yotsuya said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Besides, half the SE changes are cool. That giant half buried ship that’s at a 70 degree angle in Mos Eisley is cool.
Also, the restoration of that one Biggs scene towards the end (gotta love Biggs).

If only Lucas had thought to reincorporate the earlier Biggs scenes along with it. Then its inclusion might work instead of feeling tacked on and incongruous.

How does it feel tacked on? If anything it makes the Trench run part flow more smoothly by fixing up the Biggs/Wedge nonsense.
It’s also just a nice little moment in itself, since Luke talks about Biggs on Tatooine, even in the final cut.

His introduction so late into the proceedings without any lead-up feels nothing short of abrupt. Plus it’s just more unnecessary universe-shrinkage.

And Luke flying with Biggs without any conversation doesn’t feel abrupt? He was going on and on about Biggs earlier in the film and then we meet him and there is nothing. Incidently, Biggs talking to Luke is implied in the original cut because Biggs leaves Luke at the base of the X-wing ladder in every single version. That was the best edit to ANH for the SE.

There are, what, two throwaway mentions of Biggs in the theatrical version? That’s hardly “going on and on about Biggs”. And I never even realized Red Three was supposed to be the same character as Biggs until I started getting into the reference material.

Eat the multi-billion dollar corporate slop and pretend it’s social justice, you weirdos.

Author
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:

yotsuya said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Besides, half the SE changes are cool. That giant half buried ship that’s at a 70 degree angle in Mos Eisley is cool.
Also, the restoration of that one Biggs scene towards the end (gotta love Biggs).

If only Lucas had thought to reincorporate the earlier Biggs scenes along with it. Then its inclusion might work instead of feeling tacked on and incongruous.

How does it feel tacked on? If anything it makes the Trench run part flow more smoothly by fixing up the Biggs/Wedge nonsense.
It’s also just a nice little moment in itself, since Luke talks about Biggs on Tatooine, even in the final cut.

His introduction so late into the proceedings without any lead-up feels nothing short of abrupt. Plus it’s just more unnecessary universe-shrinkage.

And Luke flying with Biggs without any conversation doesn’t feel abrupt? He was going on and on about Biggs earlier in the film and then we meet him and there is nothing. Incidently, Biggs talking to Luke is implied in the original cut because Biggs leaves Luke at the base of the X-wing ladder in every single version. That was the best edit to ANH for the SE.

There are, what, two throwaway mentions of Biggs in the theatrical version? That’s hardly “going on and on about Biggs”. And I never even realized Red Three was supposed to be the same character as Biggs until I started getting into the reference material.

Nevertheless, he is, so adding in the hangar scene does not do what you claim.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DuracellEnergizer said:

yotsuya said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Besides, half the SE changes are cool. That giant half buried ship that’s at a 70 degree angle in Mos Eisley is cool.
Also, the restoration of that one Biggs scene towards the end (gotta love Biggs).

If only Lucas had thought to reincorporate the earlier Biggs scenes along with it. Then its inclusion might work instead of feeling tacked on and incongruous.

How does it feel tacked on? If anything it makes the Trench run part flow more smoothly by fixing up the Biggs/Wedge nonsense.
It’s also just a nice little moment in itself, since Luke talks about Biggs on Tatooine, even in the final cut.

His introduction so late into the proceedings without any lead-up feels nothing short of abrupt. Plus it’s just more unnecessary universe-shrinkage.

And Luke flying with Biggs without any conversation doesn’t feel abrupt? He was going on and on about Biggs earlier in the film and then we meet him and there is nothing. Incidently, Biggs talking to Luke is implied in the original cut because Biggs leaves Luke at the base of the X-wing ladder in every single version. That was the best edit to ANH for the SE.

There are, what, two throwaway mentions of Biggs in the theatrical version? That’s hardly “going on and on about Biggs”. And I never even realized Red Three was supposed to be the same character as Biggs until I started getting into the reference material.

Biggs: “Luke, pull up. Are you all right?”
Luke: “I got a little cooked, but I’m okay.”

Luke: “Biggs, you picked up one up. Watch it.”
Biggs: “I can’t see him. He’s on me tight, I can’t shake him.”
Luke: “I’ll be right there.”

Luke: “Blast it Biggs, where are you?”

Luke: “Biggs, Wedge, let’s close it up. We’re going in, we’re going in full throttle. That ought to keep those fighters off our backs.”
Wedge: “Right with you boss.”
Biggs: “Luke, at that speed will we be able to pull out in time?”
Luke: “Just like Beggar’s Canyon back home.”

Are you seriously trying to say that with all the original 1977 dialog that you didn’t realize that was his friend from Tatooine? Seriously? It seems pretty obvious - no reference materials needed. I’ll give you the mentions of Biggs on the Lars homestead are throw away, but the dialog between them during the battle makes it pretty damn clear.

Author
Time

BiggsFan44 said:

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:
Good perspective. Just to clarify, I’m also talking about the idea of certain pieces of the canon not respecting other pieces even though they are supposed to be 9 parts of one story, which is slightly different from recasting etc.
On the topic of Trek, it’s funny that you mention scale, since now that I know that the saucer set in First Contact was not full size it bugs me, even though you can’t tell in the film that it is only 70 percent of the full size.

But Star Wars has been disrespecting its own canon from day one. In the first film Luke, who had an obvious crush on Princess Leia, was the son of a war hero who’d been killed by Darth Vader. In the next film Lucas suddenly decided Vader was actually Luke’s father. Then he decided that Leia was Luke’s sister, the Emperor was a different bloke to the one we’d seen in Empire, and Luke had supposedly been ‘hidden’ at the family homestead and with Dad’s old surname intact no less! I haven’t even started on the prequels yet!

“Do you remember your mother? Your real mother?”

“Uh, well, ‘remember’ is such a strong word…”

I’m really not being clear, apparently.
That’s not the kind of disrespect I’m talking about. Lucas retconning his work doesn’t mean that he disagrees with those works, it just means he thought up a new story element.
For example, George does not feel about ANH the way JJ feels about the PT, I’m sure.

What I’m getting out of this thread is that you don’t like Abrams/Johnson/the ST and want an echo chamber to complain about them under the guise of a discussion about coherent canon in a franchise that spans decades, and you jump down anyone’s throat who says even a slightly nice thing about the ST or a slightly critical thing about the OT/PT/Lucas.

Shame, because the topic of cohesiveness in a long-spanning canon is an interesting one. Wish I could actually discuss it here.

a trolling bantha

Author
Time

BiggsFan44 said:

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:
Good perspective. Just to clarify, I’m also talking about the idea of certain pieces of the canon not respecting other pieces even though they are supposed to be 9 parts of one story, which is slightly different from recasting etc.
On the topic of Trek, it’s funny that you mention scale, since now that I know that the saucer set in First Contact was not full size it bugs me, even though you can’t tell in the film that it is only 70 percent of the full size.

But Star Wars has been disrespecting its own canon from day one. In the first film Luke, who had an obvious crush on Princess Leia, was the son of a war hero who’d been killed by Darth Vader. In the next film Lucas suddenly decided Vader was actually Luke’s father. Then he decided that Leia was Luke’s sister, the Emperor was a different bloke to the one we’d seen in Empire, and Luke had supposedly been ‘hidden’ at the family homestead and with Dad’s old surname intact no less! I haven’t even started on the prequels yet!

“Do you remember your mother? Your real mother?”

“Uh, well, ‘remember’ is such a strong word…”

I’m really not being clear, apparently.
That’s not the kind of disrespect I’m talking about. Lucas retconning his work doesn’t mean that he disagrees with those works, it just means he thought up a new story element.
For example, George does not feel about ANH the way JJ feels about the PT, I’m sure.

Lucas absolutely retconned his work because he disagreed with earlier works. If you don’t believe me, go purchase an official Blu Ray release of the unaltered OT and tell me who shot first.

Closer, but still not what I’m talking about since he didn’t change Han’s character in the sequels, just superseded it in the movie it happened in.
The CANON isn’t at war with itself in that instance because only the SE is currently canon.

The point I’m making is that Star Wars has never truly had a cohesive canon. Only ANH and TESB make total canon sense (obviously TESB not having to answer its own questions is an advantage!) but from there on its the proverbial dog’s breakfast. We all have our own canon boundaries as a result. For me things start getting ridiculous as early as RoTJ. For you it’s clearly anything that negates the PT. Some just relax into the overall story (like Yotsuya’s wonderful post) and disregard cgi/puppet disparities and/or niggling details. Abrams himself has publicly claimed that ‘Han shot first’, so he clearly doesn’t care that the SE is ‘official’ canon. Rian on the other hand happily calls Palpatine ‘Sidious’ and drops some clear PT homages in TLJ. To each their own. Star Wars ‘canon’ is like a buffet. Choose the bits you like.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

ChainsawAsh said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:
Good perspective. Just to clarify, I’m also talking about the idea of certain pieces of the canon not respecting other pieces even though they are supposed to be 9 parts of one story, which is slightly different from recasting etc.
On the topic of Trek, it’s funny that you mention scale, since now that I know that the saucer set in First Contact was not full size it bugs me, even though you can’t tell in the film that it is only 70 percent of the full size.

But Star Wars has been disrespecting its own canon from day one. In the first film Luke, who had an obvious crush on Princess Leia, was the son of a war hero who’d been killed by Darth Vader. In the next film Lucas suddenly decided Vader was actually Luke’s father. Then he decided that Leia was Luke’s sister, the Emperor was a different bloke to the one we’d seen in Empire, and Luke had supposedly been ‘hidden’ at the family homestead and with Dad’s old surname intact no less! I haven’t even started on the prequels yet!

“Do you remember your mother? Your real mother?”

“Uh, well, ‘remember’ is such a strong word…”

I’m really not being clear, apparently.
That’s not the kind of disrespect I’m talking about. Lucas retconning his work doesn’t mean that he disagrees with those works, it just means he thought up a new story element.
For example, George does not feel about ANH the way JJ feels about the PT, I’m sure.

What I’m getting out of this thread is that you don’t like Abrams/Johnson/the ST and want an echo chamber to complain about them under the guise of a discussion about coherent canon in a franchise that spans decades, and you jump down anyone’s throat who says even a slightly nice thing about the ST or a slightly critical thing about the OT/PT/Lucas.

Shame, because the topic of cohesiveness in a long-spanning canon is an interesting one. Wish I could actually discuss it here.

I don’t think that’s what you’re actually getting out of the thread, because it isn’t what I’m saying.
The OT was first, the PT came next and was made by the same guy, who attempted to graft on an expansion of the original story by making Luke’s father’s journey an inverse of Luke’s.
The ST is being made by people who can be assumed to strongly disagree with elements of the PT, and make movies that reflect that.
For example, Infinity War feels like a modern blockbuster- using all the tech at its disposal to craft a HUGE story.
Or even look at Solo and Rogue One- they’re shot with digital cameras.

But everything TFA does (cloning a resource limited movie from 1977 being a big one), is a condemnation of the last movies in the saga before it, real life-time wise.

Now, this isn’t even about whether TFA is better or worse than the PT, really. I’m simply asking- How are we supposed to believe that Episode 7 is the continuation of a collection movies that it is telling off half of?

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Shopping Maul said:

BiggsFan44 said:
Good perspective. Just to clarify, I’m also talking about the idea of certain pieces of the canon not respecting other pieces even though they are supposed to be 9 parts of one story, which is slightly different from recasting etc.
On the topic of Trek, it’s funny that you mention scale, since now that I know that the saucer set in First Contact was not full size it bugs me, even though you can’t tell in the film that it is only 70 percent of the full size.

But Star Wars has been disrespecting its own canon from day one. In the first film Luke, who had an obvious crush on Princess Leia, was the son of a war hero who’d been killed by Darth Vader. In the next film Lucas suddenly decided Vader was actually Luke’s father. Then he decided that Leia was Luke’s sister, the Emperor was a different bloke to the one we’d seen in Empire, and Luke had supposedly been ‘hidden’ at the family homestead and with Dad’s old surname intact no less! I haven’t even started on the prequels yet!

“Do you remember your mother? Your real mother?”

“Uh, well, ‘remember’ is such a strong word…”

I’m really not being clear, apparently.
That’s not the kind of disrespect I’m talking about. Lucas retconning his work doesn’t mean that he disagrees with those works, it just means he thought up a new story element.
For example, George does not feel about ANH the way JJ feels about the PT, I’m sure.

Lucas absolutely retconned his work because he disagreed with earlier works. If you don’t believe me, go purchase an official Blu Ray release of the unaltered OT and tell me who shot first.

Closer, but still not what I’m talking about since he didn’t change Han’s character in the sequels, just superseded it in the movie it happened in.
The CANON isn’t at war with itself in that instance because only the SE is currently canon.

The point I’m making is that Star Wars has never truly had a cohesive canon. Only ANH and TESB make total canon sense (obviously TESB not having to answer its own questions is an advantage!) but from there on its the proverbial dog’s breakfast. We all have our own canon boundaries as a result. For me things start getting ridiculous as early as RoTJ. For you it’s clearly anything that negates the PT. Some just relax into the overall story (like Yotsuya’s wonderful post) and disregard cgi/puppet disparities and/or niggling details. Abrams himself has publicly claimed that ‘Han shot first’, so he clearly doesn’t care that the SE is ‘official’ canon. Rian on the other hand happily calls Palpatine ‘Sidious’ and drops some clear PT homages in TLJ. To each their own. Star Wars ‘canon’ is like a buffet. Choose the bits you like.

I agree with you in practice, it’s more of a logical problem for me. It’s like, Episode 7 kind of implies an embrace of the previous 6 movies.
It’s like if Harry Potter 7 was clearly a response to the percieved failings of the first 3 Potter movies.

Author
Time

BiggsFan44 said:

I don’t think that’s what you’re actually getting out of the thread

I don’t think you get to tell me how I think, but…

because it isn’t what I’m saying.

…okay, fine.

The OT was first, the PT came next and was made by the same guy, who attempted to graft on an expansion of the original story by making Luke’s father’s journey an inverse of Luke’s.

I disagree in that he contradicted what came before in every subsequent film. Besides, you’re ignoring the contributions of Gary Kurtz, Lawrence Kasdan, Irvin Kershner, Howard Kazanjian, and Richard Marquand to the OT (though I’d argue that Kazanjian and Marquand had markedly less influence on ROTJ than Kurtz did on ANH and ESB or Kershner and Kasdan did on ESB), and ignoring the fact that Kasdan co-wrote ESB and ROTJ while also co-writing TFA and Solo.

The ST is being made by people who can be assumed to strongly disagree with elements of the PT, and make movies that reflect that.

I don’t understand why this is a problem, since they take place after the OT, and as such should be sequels to the OT. Besides, there’s a ton of prequel influence in TLJ and even a little in TFA, so I’d also argue you’re blatantly wrong about this and letting your feelings about the ST get in the way, since you’re stating this as objective fact when it quite clearly isn’t.

For example, Infinity War feels like a modern blockbuster- using all the tech at its disposal to craft a HUGE story.

What? Why does that matter?

Or even look at Solo and Rogue One- they’re shot with digital cameras.

So?

But everything TFA does (cloning a resource limited movie from 1977 being a big one)

Oh, you don’t like that TFA was shot on film? Really? Why does that make a difference?

is a condemnation of the last movies in the saga before it, real life-time wise.

It…what? How? You’re stating this as objective fact without citing any examples.

Now, this isn’t even about whether TFA is better or worse than the PT, really. I’m simply asking- How are we supposed to believe that Episode 7 is the continuation of a collection movies that it is telling off half of?

Because it’s set decades later with similar characters and is clearly part of the same universe?

If this isn’t just a “waaaah I don’t like the ST and I’m angry about it” thing, then I honestly don’t understand what you’re saying.

a trolling bantha

Author
Time
 (Edited)

yotsuya said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

yotsuya said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Besides, half the SE changes are cool. That giant half buried ship that’s at a 70 degree angle in Mos Eisley is cool.
Also, the restoration of that one Biggs scene towards the end (gotta love Biggs).

If only Lucas had thought to reincorporate the earlier Biggs scenes along with it. Then its inclusion might work instead of feeling tacked on and incongruous.

How does it feel tacked on? If anything it makes the Trench run part flow more smoothly by fixing up the Biggs/Wedge nonsense.
It’s also just a nice little moment in itself, since Luke talks about Biggs on Tatooine, even in the final cut.

His introduction so late into the proceedings without any lead-up feels nothing short of abrupt. Plus it’s just more unnecessary universe-shrinkage.

And Luke flying with Biggs without any conversation doesn’t feel abrupt? He was going on and on about Biggs earlier in the film and then we meet him and there is nothing. Incidently, Biggs talking to Luke is implied in the original cut because Biggs leaves Luke at the base of the X-wing ladder in every single version. That was the best edit to ANH for the SE.

There are, what, two throwaway mentions of Biggs in the theatrical version? That’s hardly “going on and on about Biggs”. And I never even realized Red Three was supposed to be the same character as Biggs until I started getting into the reference material.

Biggs: “Luke, pull up. Are you all right?”
Luke: “I got a little cooked, but I’m okay.”

Luke: “Biggs, you picked up one up. Watch it.”
Biggs: “I can’t see him. He’s on me tight, I can’t shake him.”
Luke: “I’ll be right there.”

Luke: “Blast it Biggs, where are you?”

Luke: “Biggs, Wedge, let’s close it up. We’re going in, we’re going in full throttle. That ought to keep those fighters off our backs.”
Wedge: “Right with you boss.”
Biggs: “Luke, at that speed will we be able to pull out in time?”
Luke: “Just like Beggar’s Canyon back home.”

Are you seriously trying to say that with all the original 1977 dialog that you didn’t realize that was his friend from Tatooine? Seriously? It seems pretty obvious - no reference materials needed. I’ll give you the mentions of Biggs on the Lars homestead are throw away, but the dialog between them during the battle makes it pretty damn clear.

I never really noticed the name “Biggs” at all when I was a kid, in any scene; it just wasn’t what I focused on. As for the “Just like Beggar’s Canyon back home” bit, I figured he was talking to himself.

Admittedly, I was a bit slow when I was young.

Eat the multi-billion dollar corporate slop and pretend it’s social justice, you weirdos.

Author
Time

ChainsawAsh said:

BiggsFan44 said:

I don’t think that’s what you’re actually getting out of the thread

I don’t think you get to tell me how I think, but…

because it isn’t what I’m saying.

…okay, fine.

The OT was first, the PT came next and was made by the same guy, who attempted to graft on an expansion of the original story by making Luke’s father’s journey an inverse of Luke’s.

I disagree in that he contradicted what came before in every subsequent film. Besides, you’re ignoring the contributions of Gary Kurtz, Lawrence Kasdan, Irvin Kershner, Howard Kazanjian, and Richard Marquand to the OT (though I’d argue that Kazanjian and Marquand had markedly less influence on ROTJ than Kurtz did on ANH and ESB or Kershner and Kasdan did on ESB), and ignoring the fact that Kasdan co-wrote ESB and ROTJ while also co-writing TFA and Solo.

The ST is being made by people who can be assumed to strongly disagree with elements of the PT, and make movies that reflect that.

I don’t understand why this is a problem, since they take place after the OT, and as such should be sequels to the OT. Besides, there’s a ton of prequel influence in TLJ and even a little in TFA, so I’d also argue you’re blatantly wrong about this and letting your feelings about the ST get in the way, since you’re stating this as objective fact when it quite clearly isn’t.

For example, Infinity War feels like a modern blockbuster- using all the tech at its disposal to craft a HUGE story.

What? Why does that matter?

Or even look at Solo and Rogue One- they’re shot with digital cameras.

So?

But everything TFA does (cloning a resource limited movie from 1977 being a big one)

Oh, you don’t like that TFA was shot on film? Really? Why does that make a difference?

is a condemnation of the last movies in the saga before it, real life-time wise.

It…what? How? You’re stating this as objective fact without citing any examples.

Now, this isn’t even about whether TFA is better or worse than the PT, really. I’m simply asking- How are we supposed to believe that Episode 7 is the continuation of a collection movies that it is telling off half of?

Because it’s set decades later with similar characters and is clearly part of the same universe?

If this isn’t just a “waaaah I don’t like the ST and I’m angry about it” thing, then I honestly don’t understand what you’re saying.

If you can’t see how TFA is “people who were burned by the PT please come back, you liked ANH right?: The Movie”, then I don’t see how we can converse.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Man, you think it is but it isn’t.

The Neo-Empire, one of Han and Leia’s kids turning to the darkside, a young scavenger girl, a big superweapon, a new big bad, Luke in self-imposed exile, Han dying, these are all elements from George’s treatments for Episode 7. The broad strokes you are complaining about are from George Lucas.

Some sources:

  1. https://boards.theforce.net/threads/the-development-of-the-sequel-trilogy.50046418/
  2. https://www.resetera.com/threads/medium-pablo-hidalgo-and-young-many-of-the-ideas-for-tfa-and-tlf-were-from-lucas.15410/

The only thing I think you could complain about is how a lot of the designs are not that different from the OT, the X-Wings and TIE-fighters look pretty similar. Maybe George’s designs would’ve been a little weird, but with fans you can never win and people probably would have complained that it “didn’t feel like Star Wars” just like they did when the prequels came out.

The Sequel Trilogy continues the themes of family and love that the other films had. And actually, I think the Sequel trilogy is resolving issues that the Prequels had through the stories of Luke, Kylo Ren and Rey.

Luke recognized the flaws of the Jedi that the prequels introduced. And yes, we were meant to see the Jedi as flawed. By the end of the film, instead of thinking the Jedi need to disappear forever, he recognizes that the new generation has to learn from the mistakes of the old in order to grow into something better.

Rey and Kylo Ren’s relationship is the poetic inverse of the relationship between Anakin and Padme. It was romantic love that tore the galaxy apart, and I think it will be love between Rey and Ben that bring the galaxy back together. Just like how Anakin’s love for Padme damned him, his love for his son saved him.

I think these new films are truly building off what came before it.

They are implementing the Hero’s Journey made famous by Joseph Campbell, and they are using elements of Jungian philosophy to continue these stories. Things that Lucas used when developing the other films.

If you look at the Hero’s Journey, even though it is used heavily in film/literature today, most heroes don’t complete the entire cycle as Joseph Campbell has it listed in his work.
Luke ended his journey inROTJ around the Ultimate Boon, which is only the end of the second part of the cycle. Luke’s story in the Sequel films continue that off. Read this if you want to know more about it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/StarWars/comments/8azql2/how_the_last_jedi_explored_the_last_stages_of_the/

Looking at it this way, Luke’s story is really the perfect continuation of his journey. He’s now on the level of great heroes like Gilgamesh and King Arthur.

Luke, Rey, Kylo, all of their journeys reflect the archetypes created by Carl Jung in his life’s work, the ego, the Shadow, the anima/animus. Things that were heavy elements of the OT and the PT, now being continued in the ST. We also see the idea of the assimilation with the Shadow and Rey/Kylo Ren’s story. These archetypes can even be reflected with the political conflict in the new trilogy as well.

I just think you are looking at this new trilogy in a very surface level way, or have been watching to many of the toxic YouTubers who are stuck in a cyclical pattern that have to create videos for that community’s echo chamber. I’m not saying these movies are perfect, but these movies are thematically cohesive with the rest of the saga.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

RogueLeader said:

Man, you think it is but it isn’t.

The Neo-Empire, one of Han and Leia’s kids turning to the darkside, a young scavenger girl, a big superweapon, a new big bad, Luke in self-imposed exile, Han dying, these are all elements from George’s treatments for Episode 7. The broad strokes you are complaining about are from George Lucas.

Some sources:

  1. https://boards.theforce.net/threads/the-development-of-the-sequel-trilogy.50046418/
  2. https://www.resetera.com/threads/medium-pablo-hidalgo-and-young-many-of-the-ideas-for-tfa-and-tlf-were-from-lucas.15410/

The only thing I think you could complain about is how a lot of the designs are not that different from the OT, the X-Wings and TIE-fighters look pretty similar. Maybe George’s designs would’ve been a little weird, but with fans you can never win and people probably would have complained that it “didn’t feel like Star Wars” just like they did when the prequels came out.

The Sequel Trilogy continues the themes of family and love that the other films had. And actually, I think the Sequel trilogy is resolving issues that the Prequels had through the stories of Luke, Kylo Ren and Rey.

Luke recognized the flaws of the Jedi that the prequels introduced. And yes, we were meant to see the Jedi as flawed. By the end of the film, instead of thinking the Jedi need to disappear forever, he recognizes that the new generation has to learn from the mistakes of the old in order to grow into something better.

Rey and Kylo Ren’s relationship is the poetic inverse of the relationship between Anakin and Padme. It was romantic love that tore the galaxy apart, and I think it will be love between Rey and Ben that bring the galaxy back together. Just like how Anakin’s love for Padme damned him, his love for his son saved him.

I think these new films are truly building off what came before it.

They are implementing the Hero’s Journey made famous by Joseph Campbell, and they are using elements of Jungian philosophy to continue these stories. Things that Lucas used when developing the other films.

If you look at the Hero’s Journey, even though it is used heavily in film/literature today, most heroes don’t complete the entire cycle as Joseph Campbell has it listed in his work.
Luke ended his journey inROTJ around the Ultimate Boon, which is only the end of the second part of the cycle. Luke’s story in the Sequel films continue that off. Read this if you want to know more about it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/StarWars/comments/8azql2/how_the_last_jedi_explored_the_last_stages_of_the/

Looking at it this way, Luke’s story is really the perfect continuation of his journey. He’s now on the level of great heroes like Gilgamesh and King Arthur.

Luke, Rey, Kylo, all of their journeys reflect the archetypes created by Carl Jung in his life’s work, the ego, the Shadow, the anima/animus. Things that were heavy elements of the OT and the PT, now being continued in the ST. We also see the idea of the assimilation with the Shadow and Rey/Kylo Ren’s story. These archetypes can even be reflected with the political conflict in the new trilogy as well.

I just think you are looking at this new trilogy in a very surface level way, or have been watching to many of the toxic YouTubers who are stuck in a cyclical pattern that have to create videos for that community’s echo chamber. I’m not saying these movies are perfect, but these movies are thematically cohesive with the rest of the saga.

Empire vs Rebels 2.0 was not in Lucas’ story. Sorry.
And I don’t have sources on hand, but I’ve seen convincing arguments on TFN for Luke in TLJ not really jiving with Campbell.

The rest I just disagree with. Also Rey has less reason to fall for Kylo than Padme did Anakin, AKA basically none.

Author
Time

TFA (and TLJ) were under no obligation to bow reverently at the altar of the PT. Putting aside the obvious fact that that’s ridiculous and they can do whatever they want, the ST is set 50-60 years after the PT, so it’s only natural the we don’t see many elements of it. I mean, look at the OT. If one were to watch the PT and then the OT without any knowledge or comprehension of the production timelines, it’d look like the OT was completely abandoning and disregarding a lot from the PT.

I don’t understand how ‘not referencing’ is equal to ‘disrespecting’ (especially since both TFA and TLJ *do reference the PT).

Author
Time
 (Edited)

BiggsFan44 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

BiggsFan44 said:

I don’t think that’s what you’re actually getting out of the thread

I don’t think you get to tell me how I think, but…

because it isn’t what I’m saying.

…okay, fine.

The OT was first, the PT came next and was made by the same guy, who attempted to graft on an expansion of the original story by making Luke’s father’s journey an inverse of Luke’s.

I disagree in that he contradicted what came before in every subsequent film. Besides, you’re ignoring the contributions of Gary Kurtz, Lawrence Kasdan, Irvin Kershner, Howard Kazanjian, and Richard Marquand to the OT (though I’d argue that Kazanjian and Marquand had markedly less influence on ROTJ than Kurtz did on ANH and ESB or Kershner and Kasdan did on ESB), and ignoring the fact that Kasdan co-wrote ESB and ROTJ while also co-writing TFA and Solo.

The ST is being made by people who can be assumed to strongly disagree with elements of the PT, and make movies that reflect that.

I don’t understand why this is a problem, since they take place after the OT, and as such should be sequels to the OT. Besides, there’s a ton of prequel influence in TLJ and even a little in TFA, so I’d also argue you’re blatantly wrong about this and letting your feelings about the ST get in the way, since you’re stating this as objective fact when it quite clearly isn’t.

For example, Infinity War feels like a modern blockbuster- using all the tech at its disposal to craft a HUGE story.

What? Why does that matter?

Or even look at Solo and Rogue One- they’re shot with digital cameras.

So?

But everything TFA does (cloning a resource limited movie from 1977 being a big one)

Oh, you don’t like that TFA was shot on film? Really? Why does that make a difference?

is a condemnation of the last movies in the saga before it, real life-time wise.

It…what? How? You’re stating this as objective fact without citing any examples.

Now, this isn’t even about whether TFA is better or worse than the PT, really. I’m simply asking- How are we supposed to believe that Episode 7 is the continuation of a collection movies that it is telling off half of?

Because it’s set decades later with similar characters and is clearly part of the same universe?

If this isn’t just a “waaaah I don’t like the ST and I’m angry about it” thing, then I honestly don’t understand what you’re saying.

If you can’t see how TFA is “people who were burned by the PT please come back, you liked ANH right?: The Movie”, then I don’t see how we can converse.

If you can’t give examples for why you think this is the case, or if it is, how that “completely destroy[s] the illusion that ALL of these events from ALL of these movies and shows take place in the same universe” (the entire thesis from your original post, copy/pasted exactly), then I don’t see how we can converse, either.

a trolling bantha

Author
Time

BiggsFan44 said:
I agree with you in practice, it’s more of a logical problem for me. It’s like, Episode 7 kind of implies an embrace of the previous 6 movies.
It’s like if Harry Potter 7 was clearly a response to the percieved failings of the first 3 Potter movies.

I guess the difference is that Harry Potter was never a nostalgia trip. It was done in a clear uniform episodic stream, whereas Star Wars ended in 1983, was reborn in the late 90s and ended again in 2005, and now reborn in 2015 and beyond. So with each ‘rebirth’ has been a pressure to juggle nostalgia with forward motion and try to accomodate everything in between. And each rebirth has resulted in some fans falling by the wayside and/or not agreeing with the direction taken.

I get your point though. It’s annoying to have been a fan of a series, and have the new mantra be “well that sucked, let me fix it for you”. Don’t forget that Lucas did a similar thing when he retooled the OT to suit his prequels, and then set about erasing the unaltered OT from history! Luckily, like I said earlier, Star Wars canon is easy to take a la carte.