Sign In

The Merits of the Prequel Trilogy and the "Saga"

Author
Time
The following post is my reply to certain comments by Go-Mer-Tonic from another thread.

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
I was saying quality is subjective, and I could get into a million reasons why I personally think the Saga as a whole blows either trilogy out of the water on their own, but that would really be getting off topic here.

Well, this thread is your chance to provide your reasons.


Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
I think sometimes you guys are so sure of how you think it should be, that I don't think you really give much thought to how Lucas actually did it. Instead of trying to figure out the method to his madness, you guys jump all over yourselves to declare Lucas a worthless film maker.

Hmm, perhaps you can explain the method behind Lucas’ madness to us. For instance:

What was the method behind the invention of “midiclorians”?

Why are Jedi suddenly capable of jumping as high as mountains in the prequel trilogy?

If, as George Lucas claims, the original trilogy displayed “old men” that were no longer physically fit enough to perform wondrous stunts, how is it that the physically weak Yoda is able to bounce off of the walls like a ping-pong ball in AotC?

(Oh, and if anyone wants to add their questions concerning the madness of the prequel trilogy he or she is welcome to do so.)


Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Going into the SE's and Prequels, I just let the man tell his story, and that's how I noticed the high level of art behind all the glitzy effects.


Well, we can then try to discuss that high level of art in this thread. I’d be curious to learn as much as I can about what you value in the prequels. You seem very genuine in your enjoyment of them.


Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Here is a quote from Lucas I saved from a while back about how Anakin turns to the dark side:

Lucas: The message is you can't possess things. You can't hold on to them. You have to accept change. You have to accept the fact that things transition. And so, as you try to hold on to things or you become afraid of -- that you're going to lose things, then you begin to crave the power to control those things. And then, you start to become greedy and then you turn into a bad person.


Hmm, yes I find that to be a virtuous lesson to teach. In your mind, which points of the prequel trilogy embody that concept in a truly meaningful way?

"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
Well, this certainly seems to be an A-B conversation, but since the thread title isn't specifically directed at Go-Mer, here goes.

I personally wouldn't have written that story for Episodes 1-3, but the story itself isn't so bad. It was the execution. Midichlorians were unnecessary, the Flying Jedi Brothers was annoying sometimes, the dialogue was bad at times, and spending 1/3 of the PT on Anakin's childhood was WAAAY too much.

Simply adjusting those four elements would have made the PT much better - in particular ROTS - and made the Saga more cohesive.

But although I much prefer the OT, I can enjoy the PT for what it is. It's not as enjoyable as the OT and downright cringeworthy at times, but it's a whole lot better than the zero Star Wars films we got for fourteen years.

Want to book yourself or a guest on THE VFP Show? PM me!

Author
Time
Well, a version of the midichlorians was at one point in either an early draft of Star Wars or in his early notes about Star Wars. It's not something he came up with in the mid-90's. He's had the idea for it or a version of it in his notes since the beginning.

As far as the Jedi jumping, why is this an issue? Luke did about the same thing at the beginning of Return of the Jedi during the Sail Barge sequence. Nobody said anything back then....or now.
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Tiptup

Why are Jedi suddenly capable of jumping as high as mountains in the prequel trilogy?


Luke was doing some fancy-pants jumping in Empire and Jedi.
Author
Time
high level of art




We're talking about the prequels here? You've got to be kidding.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Jumpman
Well, a version of the midichlorians was at one point in either an early draft of Star Wars or in his early notes about Star Wars. It's not something he came up with in the mid-90's. He's had the idea for it or a version of it in his notes since the beginning.

As far as the Jedi jumping, why is this an issue? Luke did about the same thing at the beginning of Return of the Jedi during the Sail Barge sequence. Nobody said anything back then....or now.


Obviously, his instinct not to include them in Star Wars was correct. The Force was much cooler when it couldn't be quantified. In Star Wars, command of the Force was apparently attainable to those willing to walk the path...in The Phantom Menace, command of the Force comes from winning the genetic lottery.

As for jumping - yes, it was there in Empire and Jedi, but sparingly and not to any insane extremes. Luke jumps about twenty feet staright up on Bespin; Obi-Wan jumps about sixty while he and Qui-Gon battled Darth Maul. Mace Windu Supermanned his way across the entire Geonosis arena.

There was jumping in both trilogies, but look at the degrees. Big difference.

Want to book yourself or a guest on THE VFP Show? PM me!

Author
Time
Originally posted by: vote_for_palpatine
Originally posted by: Jumpman
Well, a version of the midichlorians was at one point in either an early draft of Star Wars or in his early notes about Star Wars. It's not something he came up with in the mid-90's. He's had the idea for it or a version of it in his notes since the beginning.

As far as the Jedi jumping, why is this an issue? Luke did about the same thing at the beginning of Return of the Jedi during the Sail Barge sequence. Nobody said anything back then....or now.


Obviously, his instinct not to include them in Star Wars was correct. The Force was much cooler when it couldn't be quantified. In Star Wars, command of the Force was apparently attainable to those willing to walk the path...in The Phantom Menace, command of the Force comes from winning the genetic lottery.

As for jumping - yes, it was there in Empire and Jedi, but sparingly and not to any insane extremes. Luke jumps about twenty feet staright up on Bespin; Obi-Wan jumps about sixty while he and Qui-Gon battled Darth Maul. Mace Windu Supermanned his way across the entire Geonosis arena.

There was jumping in both trilogies, but look at the degrees. Big difference.


As far as the jumping goes, that can be explained by stating that the Jedi were young and in their prime then. Luke was still a trainee in the OT.

And no, I'm not a huge fan of the PT in case anyone gets that idea.

Gentlemen, you can’t fight in here, this is the war room!

Author
Time
The Jedi's description of the Force(midichlorians) is a thematic device that shows how the Jedi have grown through the Trilogy. I actually quite like it. Having midichlorians doesn't kill the coolness of the Force.
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
^True about the jumping. But there is also the matter of the end point. In both situations, Luke was in an enclosed space. Anything more than 20 feet would have been impossible.
Author
Time
Wait a second? Luke was within twenty feet of the Sail Barge when he jumped? More like 200 feet....
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
I'm talking about the jump in the Emperor's throne room.
Author
Time
My bad....
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Man, this is pretty cool. Going on some of the first people to "greet" me on this forum, I have to say I am pleasantly surprised by the tolerance shown to me by most everyone else here.

As anyone who knows me can tell you, once I start down the "gushing" path, forever will it dominate my destiny.

Anyway to get things started, in a nutshell, the reason I think the full saga is better than either of the trilogies on their own is because of the way they mirror each other. Some people will say Lucas is just bereft of ideas, which is why we got a 2nd Death Star in ROTJ and a similar "blow up the space station" sequence in TPM. While all three of these "blow up the station to save the day" scenarios are indeed similar, closer inspection reveals the differences between them that elevate each of them from just being a carbon copy element.

First of all it's widely known that Lucas was originally going to just have one Death Star at the end of the classic trilogy story, but moved that scenario to ANH to give that film a huge dramatic punch at the end. When it did well and he knew he could finish the trilogy, he came up with the 2nd death star idea. The differences between the 2 Death Star scenarios are that first of all, it's the ancillary characters who are "saving the day" in ROTJ while Luke Han and Leia all have their own separate roles to play elsewhere. So it's sort of like the new generation of rebels, inspired by the heroism of Luke Han and Leia carrying on the torch of fighting freedom.

Another difference is that while the first Death Star attack was pretty simple and straight forward (the plan was always to hit the exhaust port while the imperials defended), the 2nd Death Star attack plays against the expectations of the first Death Star attack by making the whole thing an elaborately planned trap by the Emperor. Truly showing the scope of his power to influence everyone around him, he controlled the rebels right into his trap with misinformation. So the rebels go in with a similarly simple plan (albeit now they have to fly inside the Death Star to do it) but then the tables are turned when they realize the shields are up and the Imperial fleet was just waiting to corner them in. To me that made some serious drama on it's own when I first saw ROTJ. When Admiral Ackbar said "ITS A TRAP" I was going nuts on the edge of my seat.

Okay so that's what’s different about the first 2 "blow up the space station" bits. Now with TPM, we have another situation where the Skywalker is the only one who was able to hit the reactor to blow up the ship and save the day. It certainly mirrors Luke's run on the first Death Star more than it does Lando's victory in ROTJ. The big difference between them though is that Luke was consciously trying to hit a target, while Ankain seemed to "accidentally" hit the buttons at just the right time. Just before Luke fires his shot, he is urged to "use the Force" to make it in and Luke does that by consciously tapping in as Ben had taught him.

In Anakin's case, he's not trying to use the Force, but at the same time, it's pretty miraculous that he would just happen to land facing that particular direction, and he would happen to try the torpedo buttons at just the right moment.

To me this is illustrating the 2 dynamics of how the Force works.

Luke: You mean it controls your actions?

Obi-Wan: Partially, but it also obeys your commands.

I think Luke used the Force, while the Force used Anakin. So in that way I don't see this as a re-hash, as much as showing the other side to the same coin. In that way each scene augments the meaning of the other by offering contrast to these ideas.

Midichlorians

Lucas talks about how he always intended there to be this more scientific side to the Force, but that he just didn't get into that much in the classic trilogy (I think I am getting this from the commentary on the TPM DVD). If you read the ANH novel (even before the SE's came around) there is a part where Obi-Wan talks to Luke about how the Old Republic tried to define the Force with science, but that they never quite could. That perhaps the Force is just as much magic as it is science. Not more magic than science but just as much. Add to that the way Luke was strong in the Force because he was the biological son of a powerful Jedi and it's easy to see what Lucas is talking about with regards to the "science" of the Force even back then. So all this stuff about how Lucas took away the mysticism and replaced it with science isn't entirely accurate.

Now the concept of Midichlorians themselves is fascinating to me. Lucas loosely based them on our real world equivalent: Mitochondria. Just like Midichlorians, Mitochondria are a microscopic life form that lives in every living cell here on Earth. Scientists theorize that they are the reason life exists in the first place and that without them, we would have no knowledge of the Force (well okay maybe not that last part but these two concepts really are that close).

The really fascinating thing about them is that when scientists started studying Mitochondria, a lot of religious people were saying we shouldn't be studying them. That finding out the source of life could stand to disprove God himself. Just as many Star Wars fans were insisting that the introduction of Midichlorians could stand to de-mystify the Force concept.

In reality neither do any such thing. Neither the study of Mitochondria, or the introduction of the Midichlorian concept "explain" God or the "Force" respectively. They both merely add a whole new layer of questions on top of the ones we already had.

Some fans act like the Midichlorians fly in the face of everything we know about the Force in the classic trilogy.

For example, some people say if Midichlorians are only in living things, then how could the Force be in the rock as Yoda says in Empire? The answer is that Midichlorians aren't the Force itself; they are merely antennae which allow 2 way communication between living things and the Force.

Other people say that Midichlorians suddenly make the Force biological, but as I explained earlier, it was always something passed down from one generation to the next as exampled by Luke being strong in the Force because he's related to Anakin. Also the very concept that they would be able to make the Jedi "all but extinct" shows that Force sensitivity would be something that is genetic rather than purely spontaneous.

I could go on and on like this aimlessly, but I want to hear your questions if you have any to point me in a more meaningful direction for you.

For those of you who really didn't like the Midichlorians, please bring up concerns I have yet to address.

(edit I spellchecked)
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: vote_for_palpatine
Originally posted by: Jumpman
Well, a version of the midichlorians was at one point in either an early draft of Star Wars or in his early notes about Star Wars. It's not something he came up with in the mid-90's. He's had the idea for it or a version of it in his notes since the beginning.


Obviously, his instinct not to include them in Star Wars was correct. The Force was much cooler when it couldn't be quantified. In Star Wars, command of the Force was apparently attainable to those willing to walk the path...in The Phantom Menace, command of the Force comes from winning the genetic lottery.


Indeed. Fans of the PT often point to PT concepts or characters that existed in some antique draft or notes developed decades ago. This gives the impression that the PT is made up of refuse, bits and pieces that were rejected when creating the Star Wars Trilogy.

I would like to offer a comparison to J.R.R. Tolkien. Tolkien spent fifty-six years of his life writing the Silmarillion, but it was never published while he was alive. He did include bits and pieces of it in the second edition (special edition, if you will) of the Hobbit and every edition of the Lord of the Rings. When the Silmarillion was finally published by his son, it fit very well into the universe established by the earlier books.

Elements of the PT are so jarring to many fans because they were not foreshadowed or hinted at by the OT, or the SE. There is not hint of Qui-Gon Jinn, "younglings," midiclorians, dead Padme, Fett clones, etc., even where one would expect them. There exists a very clear conceptual break between the OT and the PT, regardless of how many OT notes, drafts, etc. include characters or ideas later used in the PT.
"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


I know they arent too popular here and Ive had my pops at TPM especially in the past, but I enjoy them, but not as much as I do enjoy the original films, I am not claiming they are cinematic masterpieces but I have seen quite a few films which I think are a lot worse, and once I looked past what I thought were the deficencies in the films I enjoyed even more that I did before. As for the saga as a whole it doesnt particulary interest me and I dont think I will ever be bothered to watch it as a 1-6 story, so I couldnt care less about how cohesive it is or whether or not it does all fit together.
Author
Time
Scruffy,

Alot of the Prequels are made up of ideas Lucas couldn't achieve or would "save for later." What's wrong with that?

Conceptual break? I mean, it is two different eras in this storyline. That's not such a bad thing if you want to get across the impression that life before the Empire was vastly different.
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
The problem with the saga now is that it isn't a linear story, and Lucas is trying to pass that off now as a 1-6 Character arc story of The Tragedy of Anakin Skywalker. Now, that is a very interesting story, but the problem with the saga is that 4-6 was always Lukes story before the PT, it was never about Anakin.

So what you have now is 1-3 as a character study of how Anakin is a little boy and turns to the darkside, which is very interesting, although could have been executed much better. Then we get to 4-6, and you don't really get that continuing story of Anakin Skywalker, because the OT movies weren't made with the tragedy of Anakin Skywalker in mind.

Episode IV has very little to do with Darth Vader, he is just some cool bad guy that kids like me in 1977 loved to death. All he is, is just a bad guy with about 15 minutes of screentime, so you have part 4 of The Tragedy of Anakin Skywalker, and the movie has very little to do with him.

Then you get to ESB, and the first hour again is dominated by the friendship of Han, Leia, and Luke to keep with the theme of ANH, or to anyone who forgets, the THEME OF THE OT before the PT. Cloud City gives the first hint of a bigger story between Luke/Vader with the revelation, but that is more of a plot point, not an overall character arc.

Finally you get to ROTJ, where again the first 40 minutes are dominated by saving Han, or showing that these friends will do anything for each other. The last hour is the only story that matches up with the PT as for the first time we see the inner thoughts of Vader as he begins to be conflicted around Luke, and isn't this bad ass anymore. That subtext worked perfectly when watching the OT in 1983, cause it wasn't the main theme of the trilogy back then, but a side story that added a bit of depth to the conflict of Luke/Vader.

So what has happened is Lucas is trying to marry a trilogy about Anakin 1-3 with a trilogy about Luke, and Leia & Han too, to make up the tragedy of Anakin Skywalker, and to me they are just two seperate stories when you try to watch them 1-6, not because of the quality of the PT, or the quality of the OT, only because they were written that way and Lucas changed the story before the PT.

The PT is just a backstory, and I can enjoy it as just that: information that fills in the blanks of the OT that I wondered since 1983. Now it is up to the viewer whether you view the PT as plot holes or plot holes free when seeing it as a backstory, but make no mistake it is not a linear story about the tragedy of Anakin Skywalker, cause if it was, Vader would be much more prevailent in the OT, especially ANH.
Author
Time
The story is not as linear...this is true. But, it doesn't have to be perfectly linear for the Saga to work.

Look, the end of Episode III made a serioius point of emphasis to focus on the twins and how they represent hope. This continues into the Original Trilogy. Luke Skywalker is the main character of the Original Trilogy but it does come full circle to Anakin at the end when he finally fulfills his destiny, which was his original purpose in the Prequels. So in the end, because of his son, the story of Anakin comes full circle.

And Episode V is all about Luke and Vader. The entire story is driven by Vader's obsession with finding Luke. Han and Leia are window dressing. If Episode V would've had a better plot to keep Han and Leia busy, then I would agree with your assessment. But, it doesn't. It's driven by one character; Vader.


Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Jumpman
Scruffy,

Alot of the Prequels are made up of ideas Lucas couldn't achieve or would "save for later." What's wrong with that?

Nothing's wrong with that. What's wrong is using this as an apology for the films. Their pedigree doesn't matter if they don't show the quality expected from the breed.

Conceptual break? I mean, it is two different eras in this storyline. That's not such a bad thing if you want to get across the impression that life before the Empire was vastly different.


Okay, here's some examples of concepts that were altered between the OT and the PT...

In the OT, it was established that Jedi training began during adolescence. ("He is too old to begin the training. / Was I that much younger when you taught me?") In the PT, it's established that Jedi training begins during prepubescence.

In the OT, it's established that Mrs. Skywalker stayed with Leia but died when she was very young. In the PT, she dies in childbirth.

In the OT, Boba Fett and the stormtroopers are not all clones of the same source. (They have different accents and, depending on how you interpret visual cues, different faces.) In the PT, they are all clones of a bounty hunter.

In the OT, a dying Jedi typically disappeared, and this was curious or even unremarkable. In the PT, dying Jedi leave behind corpses. There is no strong correlation between disposition of the corpse and later appearance as a ghost.

Heck, the ideas behind the OT weren't even static during the making of the OT. If you believe that the story was mutable and dynamic from 1977-1983 but entered stasis from 1983 to 2005, I've got a bridge to Alderaan to sell you.
"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
Scruffy,

I could refute everyone of your examples.

But, I'll just do Leia. It is implied that she's speaking of her birth mother all these years. But, she could also be talking about her adopted mother. And since she is a child of the Chosen One, the "images and feelings" she has in her memory could be of Padme....because of the Force.

Now, because you're an Original Trilogy fan, you'll dismiss my logic as a "stretch." But, if you call that a stretch, you'd have to call the logic of a lightsaber a stretch as well. Both are in the realm of possiblity within the Star Wars universe.

And because I'm in a good mood, I'll do the Jedi Force issue.

It's quite easy if you think about it. Qui-Gon was the first to discover the path and he only shared this peace of information with Yoda who learned and passed it to Obi-Wan. It is implied, in Episode II and confirmed at the end of the Episode III. No other Jedi know of this discovery, hence the many death corpses in the Prequels. Again, not out of the realm of possibility in the Star Wars logic universe...
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Jumpman
The story is not as linear...this is true. But, it doesn't have to be perfectly linear for the Saga to work.

Look, the end of Episode III made a serioius point of emphasis to focus on the twins and how they represent hope. This continues into the Original Trilogy. Luke Skywalker is the main character of the Original Trilogy but it does come full circle to Anakin at the end when he finally fulfills his destiny, which was his original purpose in the Prequels. So in the end, because of his son, the story of Anakin comes full circle.

And Episode V is all about Luke and Vader. The entire story is driven by Vader's obsession with finding Luke. Han and Leia are window dressing. If Episode V would've had a better plot to keep Han and Leia busy, then I would agree with your assessment. But, it doesn't. It's driven by one character; Vader.



No, it has to be linear to work 1-6, and that is my point. The whole reason Lucas chose Anakin to be a young kid, is he wanted to have a character arc for 6 movies, which is totally different then Lukes in the OT. The OT was a small part of Lukes life, about 3-5 years, and there is a story before and after about him, but that wasn't the point of the OT.

The Saga now as Lucas sees it is to see the young kid in Anakin, the teenage Jedi in Anakin, the bad guy in Vader, and then the death of Vader, which is a true character arc. Now as a story, that is very cool, but the problem was the OT was Never written that way, Vader was always the antagonist, not the main story, and that is why it is so jarring when you get to the OT, especially ANH, the story doesn't have much to do with him when compared to the PT movies. The last hour of ROTJ is the only time Vader takes center stage as 3-Dimensional Character with his feelings, his struggles, and his conflicts. In ESB, he is still one-dimensional, he is still an antagonist to Luke, and that is it. In ROTJ, the Emperor becomes the antagonist, as Vader character has much more depth as compared to ESB, and alot more than ANH.

Episode III shows the twins born, and brought to the foster parents, but you are looking at that scene in the context of seeing the OT already, and that is why it works for you and me. There is nothing that gets into the nitty gritty as to how these kids will affect the future of the Galaxy, other than showing it on screen, CAUSE WE ALREADY KNOW IT!!! The last 10 minutes of ROTS works well only for the viewer who has seen the OT, and I guarantee if Lucas wrote the story 1-6, you wouldn't know about Darth Vader, he would have left off with Anakin burning, and the crowd would think he was dead, just like ObiWan.

As for giving something to do for Han & Leia, those are some of the great parts of the movie? They subtetly fall in love through the movie, and it all comes out when Han is about to be frozen, and they know that they may never see each other again, so they profess their love, which is 100 times more dramatic than Anakin/Padme doing the same exact thing in AOTC before being brought out in the Geonosis Arena. The main story of ESB is Luke and his training on and finding out about his father, but the heart of the movie is Han/Leia, and that is why it is so great, it has two compelling stories going on at once.

But as I have said, many fans of the saga only want to see stuff in the OT about Vader/Luke, and that is why they miss the great parts of Han, Leia, and Luke which is why everyone fell in love with it from 77-83. That is why the OT is watched out of context by many saga fans.
Author
Time
I have a certain appreciation for Phantom Menace and Revenge of the Sith, but I just can't stop comparing Attack of the Clones to Empire. I just don't think the romance works, and it MUST work to be successful. I don't feel anything the way I did with Han and Leia, I don't care if they get together or not. I keep remembering the unintentional laughter in the movie theater. I would LOVE to see Lucas rebuild that relationship from scratch next year, into something more simple. Swapping some scenes with the deleted ones might be a good start, only because meeting a girls parents is simple, human and relatable. Just look at the care taken in Empire of Dreams when the Han/Leia bespin scene was re-shot with a completely different tone.
Author
Time
I agree, I think the focus on Luke Han and Leia in the classic trilogy works very well just because it sort of sets the audience up for the expectation that Anakin is now lost for good. We don't see much to his character in ANH, because really all there is to his character is what we see. It's in Empire and Jedi that his humanity starts to make a comeback.
Originally posted by: Scruffy
Okay, here's some examples of concepts that were altered between the OT and the PT...

In the OT, it was established that Jedi training began during adolescence. ("He is too old to begin the training. / Was I that much younger when you taught me?") In the PT, it's established that Jedi training begins during prepubescence. Obi-Wan never asked if he was much younger, he says "Was I any different" in response to Yoda saying Luke was reckless.

What's great about this is the tension that is being built by making even Anakin too young at age 9. They make a big deal about how Anakin is too old, and in the end he turns to the dark side, and now we have Obi-Wan trying to convince Yoda to break that rule even further with Luke.
Originally posted by: Scruffy
In the OT, it's established that Mrs. Skywalker stayed with Leia but died when she was very young. In the PT, she dies in childbirth. In the OT it was established that Leia could only remember "images really" of her "real" mother, and that she died when she was really young. Childbirth is maybe a little younger than one would have expected, but she is talking about only remembering "images really". Either chalk that up to her actually recalling her childbirth, or perhaps she was seeing images of her through the force. But the idea she was "staying" with her mother certainly wasn't nailed down at any point, again she's talking about recalling "images really" and doesn't talk about anything they did together or anything like that.
Originally posted by: Scruffy
In the OT, Boba Fett and the stormtroopers are not all clones of the same source. (They have different accents and, depending on how you interpret visual cues, different faces.) In the PT, they are all clones of a bounty hunter.
The official word on that is as time went on they ended up using a variety of genetic sources (since Jango was dead), and on top of that they found it more cost effective to recruit people into the military as well. So the Stormtroopers in the classic trilogy aren't all clones, and even the ones that are could be from one of several genetic sources.Originally posted by: Scruffy
In the OT, a dying Jedi typically disappeared, and this was curious or even unremarkable. In the PT, dying Jedi leave behind corpses. There is no strong correlation between disposition of the corpse and later appearance as a ghost.
The way it worked out in the end, is Qui-Gon was the first Jedi to figure out how to retain his identity after death. Once he did that, he hooked up with a Shaman of the Whills who had also figured out eternal consciousness and he taught Qui-Gon another technique that allows a Jedi to become one with the Force at will. Qui-Gon was just killed, he didn't choose that.

He then teaches both techniques to Obi-Wan and Yoda through the Force while they are each hiding out on Tatooine and Dagobah. Neither Obi-Wan or Yoda actually "died" in the traditional sense. Obi-Wan was gone before Vader's blade could find him. Yoda was on his death bed, but he also chose to become one with the Force at will. That's why they both disappear and end up becoming Force ghosts, while Qui-Gon never does either of those things.

According to Lucas, the reason Anakin disappears is because Yoda and Obi-Wan helped him do that from the other side. We didn't see him disappear on screen, and Lucas was saying somewhere that the point of that was to keep the audience in suspense so that when he finally does appear as the Ghost, it's a bigger payoff. Lucas contends that Vader's armor is empty on the funeral pyre.Originally posted by: Scruffy
Heck, the ideas behind the OT weren't even static during the making of the OT. If you believe that the story was mutable and dynamic from 1977-1983 but entered stasis from 1983 to 2005, I've got a bridge to Alderaan to sell you.
Well I think the story of the classic trilogy ended up evolving far more than his back-story did. Sure he just had an outline, and sure he added new ideas as he went here and there, but by and large it seems to stick closer to his original plan. Maybe Anakin and Vader were 2 different people, but beyond that, it's still pretty much the same dynamic. Anakin was always going to be a fallen hero, I just don't think he knew how far he would end up making him fall at first.

But I am really glad they ended up being the same person, I think that is far more interesting and much more thought provoking.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
CO,

The story doesn't have to be totally linear for the six films to work as one. At the end of the day, it's still about Anakin and Luke, father and son, with more emphasis on Anakin, despite the fact Luke is the main character of the Original Trilogy.

Of course, seeing the films backwards gives greater context to the Original Trilogy when you get to it, but it is greatly implied that the twins are now the focus (or are going to be the focus since all the plans at the end revolve around them) of the storyline once Episode III ends. As a matter fact, once Anakin turns to the Darkside in Episode III, it shifts totally to Obi-Wan, Yoda, and Bail Organa. Anakin is a bystander by then.

We are left with Yoda, Obi-Wan, the droids, and most specifically the twins.

And whether it was originally written that way or Lucas rethought the entire Saga, you can still watch it numerically and it makes for a very compelling story about the Skywalker family.

It may work a bit better in the way they were released but it works the other way as well.
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Originally posted by:Jumpman

And whether it was originally written that way or Lucas rethought the entire Saga, you can still watch it numerically and it makes for a very compelling story about the Skywalker family.

It may work a bit better in the way they were released but it works the other way as well.


I am not saying it doesn't work 1-6, cause it can work that way. The problem with watching the PT first, is it sets the OT up for the viewer like this, "More Anakin, I want to know more about this character."

And as I said, Anakin is not the protagonist of the OT as he was in the PT, so it keeps the viewer from enjoying the parts that were great BEFORE it was supposedly Anakin story now. You just said that Han & Leia don't have much story in ESB, and that is because, and don't blame you for this, you want MORE ANAKIN.

I guarantee you watch ANH, and while Luke, Leia and Han are running through the death star cracking jokes, you are waiting for the rematch of Anakin/Obiwan. Every OT movie has half of it with just parts that deal with the friendship of Han, Leia, and Luke, that is the moral of that trilogy, friends will do anything, even take one for the team, just to save their friends.

Lucas does a great job of establishing that in all 3 OT movies and that is why it is so easy to root for Han, Leia, and Luke, their friendship on screen is so well done, when they are in danger, you feel in your in danger, when Leia is heartbroken after Han is frozen, you feel her pain. When Luke leaves Dagobah to rescue Han & Leia, you want him to go but know he is in danger. Notice I didn't mention Darth Vader?

Darth Vader was just a subplot to the whole OT, and I will say a great subplot that added depth to a genre that sorely lacks it in many fantasy movies. The right way to watch the OT movies is through Luke, Leia, and Han not the continuing story of Darth Vader, cause if you are looking for Vader's story, watch all of 20 minutes of ANH, don't turn on ESB til about 40 minutes in, and the same with ROTJ, cause of a good part of those movies center around Luke, Leia, and Han, and that is why they are in all 3 montages in the OT, except for Han missing in ESB.

On the other end, many OT fans are watching the PT out of context, because they are looking for macro stuff (Clone Wars, Rebellion, etc.) that we all wanted to know about since 1983. The PT is a character study on Anakin, and if you don't love that story, you will never love the PT whether you think the movies are good or not. Lucas took a gamble focusing so much on Anakins story, cause that is the centerpiece of every movie (TPM= Young Anakin being found, AOTC = Anakin/Padme falling in love, ROTS = Anakin turning to the darkside)

What are the three biggest complaints about the PT:

1. Anakin as a 10 year old in TPM
2. Anakin/Padme love affair in AOTC
3. Anakins turn to the darkside in ROTS

That is why I can still see the saga 4-6 because that story never changed, it is about Luke, Leia, and Han and how they help the rebels defeat the Empire, with a nice sub-story of Luke redeeming his father, Darth Vader that adds some depth, and that is why I don't need the PT to complete my SW fandom, because I don't love the tragedy of Anakin Skywalker. Sorry, but it aint that interesting for 6 movies now.