Sign In

The Star Wars canon saga as only the OT?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Although i appreciate some aspects of the Prequels,Sequels and the EU i think Star Wars should have ended with a single story i think it would have been better if Darth Vader Origin story and Luke future were a mystery i think the Prequels and Sequels do not have the same tone of the original Star Wars movies and sometimes they feel like a Soft Reboot the Star Wars saga should be the story of the Rebels vs the Empire the story finish the end nothing happen after or before of that

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I tend to think of the OT as the core story of Star Wars, and so anything that’s come out since then is supplemental to that core story. You watch the main storyline, then if you want to see more stories that build off of that foundation, you can optionally check out the PT, ST, or EU. All of those things “orbit” around the OT.

But we can’t turn back. Fear is their greatest defense. I doubt if the actual security there is any greater than it was on Aquilae or Sullust. And what there is is most likely directed towards a large-scale assault.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Servii said:

I tend to think of the OT as the core story of Star Wars, and so anything that’s come out since then is supplemental to that core story. You watch the main storyline, then if you want to see more stories that build off of that foundation, you can optionally check out the PT, ST, or EU. All of those things “orbit” around the OT.

For me they are What If stories or High Budget Fan Fiction movies i loved the Prequels as a kid and i enjoyed the Sequels but i prefer the OT more

Author
Time
 (Edited)

MinchD36 said:

i think it would have been better if Darth Vader Origin story and Luke future were a mystery

While I’m not so against the exploration of the post-ROTJ universe, I’ve come to feel that Lucas should’ve abandoned plans for a PT and put the kibosh on the EU ever touching that era. 60-16 BBY should’ve remained a big blank slate for the fans to ponder over.

90% blue, 10% pink.

Author
Time

Personally I believe only episodes 1-6 should be canon. The story of Anakin ends in ROTJ. The sequels are fun and all. But really not needed.

Author
Time

I don’t really feel like an OT purist, but there’s just so much great shit about the OT that I genuinely think gets missed if you don’t consider it in isolation, forgetting the PT and ST exist entirely.

Death of the Author

Author
Time

SparkySywer said:

I don’t really feel like an OT purist, but there’s just so much great shit about the OT that I genuinely think gets missed if you don’t consider it in isolation, forgetting the PT and ST exist entirely.

What stands out to me in particular is the sense of wonder and power around the Force. If you watch the prequels or sequels first, then Yoda pulling the X-wing out of the swamp is a less powerful, less magical moment, and Palpatine conjuring Force lightning in RotJ doesn’t leave as much of an impression.

But we can’t turn back. Fear is their greatest defense. I doubt if the actual security there is any greater than it was on Aquilae or Sullust. And what there is is most likely directed towards a large-scale assault.

Author
Time

Which OT? in the George Canon the original versions of the OT aren’t canon. Yet to me the most valid version is Star Wars, not Episode IV, the original Empire and original Jedi. The prequels the elements which aren’t discordant with the original SAGA or break canon i can view as a expanded universe material. The sequels are Disney’s replacement for the EU. But somehow to me even less canon, almost infinities.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

JadedSkywalker said:

Which OT? in the George Canon the original versions of the OT aren’t canon. Yet to me the most valid version is Star Wars, not Episode IV, the original Empire and original Jedi. The prequels the elements which aren’t discordant with the original SAGA or break canon i can view as a expanded universe material. The sequels are Disney’s replacement for the EU. But somehow to me even less canon, almost infinities.

Of course i refer to the Original theatrical versions of the OT not the Special Editions

Author
Time

Sometimes I only want the 1977 original to be canon. Maybe I’ve soured on the long-term issues around Vader being Luke’s father, IDK.

Author
Time

BedeHistory731 said:

Sometimes I only want the 1977 original to be canon. Maybe I’ve soured on the long-term issues around Vader being Luke’s father, IDK.

I feel that way sometimes. The film certainly has its own distinct properties. Plus it was being made under the impression it might be the only Star Wars anyway and though some plot lines were left open just in case, it really does wrap itself up pretty well.

Author
Time

BedeHistory731 said:

Sometimes I only want the 1977 original to be canon. Maybe I’ve soured on the long-term issues around Vader being Luke’s father, IDK.

If Empire wasn’t so damn good I would be in the same boat for sure. For me it’s Star Wars and Empire and a film called Revenge of the Jedi that was sadly never made…

Author
Time

Shopping Maul said:

BedeHistory731 said:

Sometimes I only want the 1977 original to be canon. Maybe I’ve soured on the long-term issues around Vader being Luke’s father, IDK.

If Empire wasn’t so damn good I would be in the same boat for sure. For me it’s Star Wars and Empire and a film called Revenge of the Jedi that was sadly never made…

Hahahahha. I love this.

It’s all star wars and that’s the problem!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

BedeHistory731 said:

Sometimes I only want the 1977 original to be canon. Maybe I’ve soured on the long-term issues around Vader being Luke’s father, IDK.

Hahahahahahahahaha no. Star Wars would be half of what it is if Vader wasn’t Luke’s father. ROTJ would go from a beautiful story of how a father redeemed himself to save his son to a cliche, boring “Luke kills the Emperor and Vader and saves the day! Luke gets revenge on the evil bad guy who killed his dad!”. Bleh. Imagine a ROTJ without the bridge scene between Luke and Vader, Vader throwing the Emperor down the shaft and Anakin telling Luke he was always right about him. AKA the best parts of ROTJ? Sounds pretty shitty if you ask me. The entire third act of ROTJ basically becomes meaningless. Nothing.

Literally everything would have a lot less emotional depth too, from Luke’s journey to Vader’s character. Vader especially is given a shit ton more depth. It makes their relationship far more interesting and gives them an actual connection beyond just a shallow “I want revenge on you because you killed my dad!”.

And also, just from a simple screenwriting perspective, it makes a lot more sense to just lump Anakin and Vader into the same character. Having Obi-Wan have both a best friend and an apprentice just adds more unnecessary characters, and both characters would just be bland archetypes without lumping them together. Anakin is an interesting character because of the things that lead him to become Darth Vader, remove that and you just have a typical one-dimensional hero character. Anakin’s flaws are what make him work, otherwise he’s bland. What’s the point of having both a best friend character and an apprentice character when you can just combine them, leading to a much more interesting character with a lot more depth? In general, when you have too many characters it becomes harder to develop them all. The prequels already had so many characters to develop, lmao.

It also explains why Luke and Leia are the only children of any Jedi that are around. Because Anakin broke the rules, and this contributed to him becoming Darth Vader.

I ship Spideychelle (MCU Peter and MJ) and Tomdaya (Tom Holland and Zendaya)
My Star Wars Fan-Edits

Author
Time

G&G-Fan said:

BedeHistory731 said:

Sometimes I only want the 1977 original to be canon. Maybe I’ve soured on the long-term issues around Vader being Luke’s father, IDK.

Hahahahahahahahaha no. Star Wars would be half of what it is if Vader wasn’t Luke’s father. ROTJ would go from a beautiful story of how a father redeemed himself to save his son to a cliche, boring “Luke kills the Emperor and Vader and saves the day! Luke gets revenge on the evil bad guy who killed his dad!”. Bleh. Imagine a ROTJ without the bridge scene between Luke and Vader, Vader throwing the Emperor down the shaft and Anakin telling Luke he was always right about him. AKA the best parts of ROTJ? Sounds pretty shitty if you ask me. The entire third act of ROTJ basically becomes meaningless. Nothing.

Well, I’d rather have ROTJ simply not exist. Also, Vader’s redemption feels really unearned to me these days. Give it a movie or more to work towards, then it would feel satisfying.

Literally everything would have a lot less emotional depth too, from Luke’s journey to Vader’s character. Vader especially is given a shit ton more depth. It makes their relationship far more interesting and gives them an actual connection beyond just a shallow “I want revenge on you because you killed my dad!”.

It also shrinks the universe a little and turns the Skywalkers into the most important family in the galaxy. I don’t like the idea of lineage dictating a character’s power. Luke being a nobody who happens to be the son of a random Jedi and not the son of an all-time powerful Jedi/regional manager of the Empire sounds a bit better to me at the moment. I hate how lineage becomes so important, especially to the fan (and Abrams’) perspective.

And also, just from a simple screenwriting perspective, it makes a lot more sense to just lump Anakin and Vader into the same character. Having Obi-Wan have both a best friend and an apprentice just adds more unnecessary characters, and both characters would just be bland archetypes without lumping them together. Anakin is an interesting character because of the things that lead him to become Darth Vader, remove that and you just have a typical one-dimensional hero character. Anakin’s flaws are what make him work, otherwise he’s bland. What’s the point of having both a best friend character and an apprentice character when you can just combine them, leading to a much more interesting character with a lot more depth? In general, when you have too many characters it becomes harder to develop them all.

Not really? It’s only going to be bland archetypes if you have a bad writing or aren’t willing to develop said characters. Maybe Anakin was a bit of a POS and was an enabler for Vader? Maybe Obi and Anakin hurt Vader somehow and unintentionally led to his creation? Perhaps Vader was in the right for betraying the Jedi? There are plenty of questions one could pose if Vader and Anakin were separate.

The prequels already had so many characters to develop, lmao.

Well, cut a few glup shittos and you’d have room for more character stuff.

It also explains why Luke and Leia are the only children of any Jedi that are around. Because Anakin broke the rules, and this contributed to him becoming Darth Vader.

Perhaps Leia shouldn’t be the child of a Jedi? The brother-sister twist should also be on the chopping block as it really feels half-assed.

IMHO (which could change sooner or later), Star Wars (no A New Hope) is like Gojira. It works well as the start of a series and as a standalone, but it’s best as a standalone. Controversial, I know, but its my take at the moment.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

We’ve ascended beyond OT purism now. We’ve gone up to 1977 purism.

But in all seriousness, I think something is lost when you only view Star Wars 77 in isolation. It’s neat to look at how far the characters come from the start of that movie to the end of RotJ, and the two sequels recontextualize the original in a way that adds more depth to the story imo

But we can’t turn back. Fear is their greatest defense. I doubt if the actual security there is any greater than it was on Aquilae or Sullust. And what there is is most likely directed towards a large-scale assault.

Author
Time

Servii said:

We’ve ascended beyond OT purism now. We’ve gone up to 1977 purism.

But in all seriousness, I think something is lost when you only view Star Wars 77 in isolation. It’s neat to look at how far the characters come from the start of that movie to the end of RotJ, and the two sequels recontextualize the original in a way that adds more depth to the story imo

That’s an entirely valid way to look at it and one I’ll probably circle back to at one point. I completely see how ESB and ROTJ add to the world of SW, but it’s not worth it to me.

Right now, I’m just so burned out on franchise filmmaking that I relish in the idea of standalones. Leaving on a high note > overstaying your welcome. Some people see ROTJ or ROTS as that high note, I see Star Wars as that high note in this moment. One excellent movie and that’s it. ESB isn’t a Highlander II or Jurassic Park II: The Lost World, but it’s decisions led to far worse things to come for the franchise.

Author
Time

Star Wars 77 is a fantastic movie on its own, but I don’t think it would be as worth remembering without The Empire Strikes Back

Death of the Author

Author
Time

SparkySywer said:

Star Wars 77 is a fantastic movie on its own, but I don’t think it would be as worth remembering without The Empire Strikes Back

Yeah, Empire arguably has more continued pop culture relevance than '77 and more of it has joined the general pop culture osmosis we all ingest. Star Wars, for all of its successes, is pretty basic when you get down to it. It does what it does well, but it doesn’t have the ambition of ESB.

I guess the '77 purism is akin to wishing that the Godzilla series was just Gojira '54 and nothing else. It’s excellent on its own, but you’re missing out on good (and pop culture relevant) stuff if you ignore the rest. At the moment, I’m ok with missing out on that.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

BedeHistory731 said:

It also shrinks the universe a little and turns the Skywalkers into the most important family in the galaxy. I don’t like the idea of lineage dictating a character’s power. Luke being a nobody who happens to be the son of a random Jedi and not the son of an all-time powerful Jedi/regional manager of the Empire sounds a bit better to me at the moment. I hate how lineage becomes so important, especially to the fan (and Abrams’) perspective.

Star Wars is supposed to be a family soap opera, according to George Lucas. If you don’t like it, then you just don’t really like Star Wars.

Universe shrinkage isn’t always a bad thing. First of all, it gives a lot more connection to Vader and Luke. Their relationship is basically non-existent without that family element. The family element makes it far more fascinating and the conflict between the characters way deeper. Universe shrinkage allows for far more meaningful relationships among the characters. Second, like I said, too many characters often makes things too complex in a screenplay. Usually the less characters you have, the more depth and development each of them have. Less is more. Which is why most Godzilla movies have shit one-dimensional characters; there’s too many characters that could just be combined to make a more complex and interesting character, but they insist on having one character per character trait (one comic relief character, one leading man, one scientist, one generic female character who’s the only one given permission to emote, etc.) so they’re all one-dimensional. Notice how a lot of beloved franchises have 3 main characters (including both of Lucas’ trilogies: Luke, Han, and Leia, and then Anakin, Obi-Wan and Padme). It’s a good number because it’s enough characters to make it so you don’t have enough developed characters to latch on to but not too much so it feels like the movie’s asking you to care about too many people.

Luke was always important because of his family lineage? He’s always trained because he’s the descendent of a powerful Jedi? If that’s not the case then why did Obi-Wan spend so much time with him instead of training a ton of people over the years?

Also, damn it’s almost like things from one family member get passed down to another. Sounds like you didn’t take a lot of science classes cause it seems you know nothing about genetics.

It seems like you’re just infatuated with an idea without realizing that it just works poorly on screen. Having Vader once be the man Obi-Wan described Luke’s father as immediately adds way more depth to his character. Without combining Vader and Anakin they both become a lot less complex and interesting. Since when was the universe feeling vast more important then character depth and the characters having meaningful relationships with one another? Because if you ask me that was never.

BedeHistory731 said:

Perhaps Leia shouldn’t be the child of a Jedi? The brother-sister twist should also be on the chopping block as it really feels half-assed.

You missed the point entirely. That still doesn’t answer why Luke is the only child of any Jedi left around. If Jedi having children is something any normal Jedi would do, why is he the only one? Why doesn’t Obi-Wan or Yoda or any of the other Jedi have any children? You mean to tell me Luke is the only child of any Jedi left in the entire galaxy?

It’s almost like having Anakin be a morally ambiguous character who then turned to the dark side and became Vader because he broke the rules that Jedi shouldn’t get married and have children kinda ties all the loose ends, doesn’t it?

BedeHistory731 said:

IMHO (which could change sooner or later), Star Wars (no A New Hope) is like Gojira. It works well as the start of a series and as a standalone, but it’s best as a standalone. Controversial, I know, but its my take at the moment.

Nah. Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi expand on the themes and the characters. It makes everything a lot more complex and interesting and further develops everybody. Vader would be 1/4 of the amazing character he is without ESB or ROTJ. Vader as we know him know is defined far more by ESB then ANH. I’d even argue Luke would be half of what he is without the two sequels. Luke is made way more complex and layered by ESB and ROTJ then ANH alone. If you just have ANH as a standalone movie his journey isn’t complete. He’s not even a Jedi by the end of the first movie. Meanwhile the rest of the Showa Godzilla series is mostly garbage that immediately shits on the themes of the original (turning Godzilla into a hero justifies the use of nuclear weapons, the thing the original was very much against) and has hardly any character development because they don’t ever maintain the same cast. The sequels don’t continue the journeys of any of the previous characters, they just give us a new cast movie after movie and none of them live up to the original’s cast in the slightest (with a couple of exceptions).

SparkySywer said:

Star Wars 77 is a fantastic movie on its own, but I don’t think it would be as worth remembering without The Empire Strikes Back

Agree. ANH is great but most of what makes Star Wars so beloved and iconic is owed more to ESB then ANH. Especially when it comes to Darth Vader.

I ship Spideychelle (MCU Peter and MJ) and Tomdaya (Tom Holland and Zendaya)
My Star Wars Fan-Edits

Author
Time
 (Edited)

What’s hilarious about your comparison to the original Godzilla is that the original Godzilla has a shit ton of universe shrinkage. Dr. Serizawa, Emiko, Ogata, and Dr. Yamane, the four most important people in all of Japan, all happen to be tied together through a bunch of convoluted family drama. Emiko just happens to be the daughter of the paleontologist who figures out what Godzilla really is, she just happens to be having an affair with the salvage crewman who finds him in the South Pacific, and she just happens to be engaged to the scientist who invents the super-weapon that ultimately kills him (and is also Yamane’s protegee).

But I guess having characters have meaningful relationships with one another is only bad when Star Wars does it?

I ship Spideychelle (MCU Peter and MJ) and Tomdaya (Tom Holland and Zendaya)
My Star Wars Fan-Edits

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Also: making Vader Luke’s father helped Luke’s character just as much as Vader’s. Vader was given a whole new layer of depth (being more then just cold-hearted monstrous bad guy, also being turned into a man who has fallen, who was once good but became a monster) while Luke was forced to face the fact that his father wasn’t who he thought he was, overcome his hatred for him and instead choose to love him, choose to confront his inner demons and fear that he’ll become just like his father, and also be a Jedi independently of his father. Originally Luke only wanted to become a Jedi because his father became a Jedi. But Luke finding out Vader is his father makes him become a Jedi for himself and not because he wants to live up to an idealized version of his father. Because him realizing Vader is his father crushed him, because it shattered his illusion that in order to become great he needed to be just like his father. But he’s a Jedi not because of his blood, but because of who he is. Luke thinks he’s destined to become what his father was, and when he found out his father became evil, he fears he will too. But Luke grows beyond this and becomes his own man rather then just trying to live up to his father, and in the process, redeems his father.

The irony of you saying Vader being Luke’s father makes things too connected by family is that Luke’s arc after realizing Vader is his father is about him choosing to be his own man and not just follow in the footsteps of his father. That he’s more then just his blood. He becomes a Jedi despite his blood, not because of it. Just having him want to be a Jedi just because of his father is shallow.

I ship Spideychelle (MCU Peter and MJ) and Tomdaya (Tom Holland and Zendaya)
My Star Wars Fan-Edits

Author
Time
 (Edited)

G&G-Fan said:

BedeHistory731 said:

Star Wars is supposed to be a family soap opera, according to George Lucas. If you don’t like it, then you just don’t really like Star Wars.

We have a whole thread about Lucas’ revisionism and his changing interpretations/press statements about his works. Also, Death of the Author (in the actual sense, not the “your fave is problematic” sense) opens the room up for all interpretations to be valid. Just because it’s George’s intent doesn’t mean it is what we take away from it/want from it.

Also, damn it’s almost like things from one family member get passed down to another. Sounds like you didn’t take a lot of science classes cause it seems you know nothing about genetics.

Luke’s father in 1977 was a Jedi, so yeah it’d be “passed down.”

It seems like you’re just infatuated with an idea without realizing that it just works poorly on screen. Having Vader once be the man Obi-Wan described Luke’s father as immediately adds way more depth to his character. Without combining Vader and Anakin they both become a lot less complex and interesting. Since when was the universe feeling vast more important then character depth and the characters having meaningful relationships with one another? Because if you ask me that was never.

You can still make the relationships meaningful and bring about complexity with them remaining separate. It’s only one additional character.

BedeHistory731 said:

Perhaps Leia shouldn’t be the child of a Jedi? The brother-sister twist should also be on the chopping block as it really feels half-assed.

You missed the point entirely. That still doesn’t answer why Luke is the only child of any Jedi left around. If Jedi having children is something any normal Jedi would do, why is he the only one? Why doesn’t Obi-Wan or Yoda or any of the other Jedi have any children? You mean to tell me Luke is the only child of any Jedi left in the entire galaxy?

He’s the only one we see within the scope of the franchise, doesn’t mean he’s the only one.

It’s almost like having Anakin be a morally ambiguous character who then turned to the dark side and became Vader because he broke the rules that Jedi shouldn’t get married and have children kinda ties all the loose ends, doesn’t it?

It doesn’t have to necessarily be that way.

Nah. Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi expand on the themes and the characters. It makes everything a lot more complex and interesting and further develops everybody. Vader would be 1/4 of the amazing character he is without ESB or ROTJ. Vader as we know him know is defined far more by ESB then ANH. I’d even argue Luke would be half of what he is without the two sequels. Luke is made way more complex and layered by ESB and ROTJ then ANH alone. If you just have ANH as a standalone movie his journey isn’t complete. He’s not even a Jedi by the end of the first movie.

Maybe the completion we did get isn’t satisfying to me, and I regret what the completion of the trilogy has wrought for franchise filmmaking. I think ROTJ is a deeply flawed movie (Vader’s redemption is entirely undeserved to me) and kind of renders ESB in a poorer light.

And you know my Godzilla comparison? I didn’t expect you to get so offended over it and my other points to rattle off three long posts in succession. Maybe I should have compared it to the Indiana Jones series, because at least that one had similar enough operations to Star Wars.

I really didn’t expect you to take such offense to my points. But you are right about something: I’m kind of questioning why I even got into this franchise to begin with, and what is even the appeal of it. Outside of SW and ESB, I really don’t see anything worth salvaging from this franchise. But that’s a me problem and I’ll deal with it.

Pauline Kael was right and history keeps proving her correct.

Author
Time

G&G-Fan said:

BedeHistory731 said:

It also shrinks the universe a little and turns the Skywalkers into the most important family in the galaxy. I don’t like the idea of lineage dictating a character’s power. Luke being a nobody who happens to be the son of a random Jedi and not the son of an all-time powerful Jedi/regional manager of the Empire sounds a bit better to me at the moment. I hate how lineage becomes so important, especially to the fan (and Abrams’) perspective.

Star Wars is supposed to be a family soap opera, according to George Lucas. If you don’t like it, then you just don’t really like Star Wars.

I think that’s unfair. George Lucas is classically unreliable, and I think all we can gleam from that statement is that 1-6 ended up as a family soap opera. In 1977, the only Skywalker that mattered was Luke, and I don’t think you could say that Star Wars was about the Skywalker family until the 2000s. Lineage as BedeHistory describes it wouldn’t even really be as big as it is now until after Disney.

Also, damn it’s almost like things from one family member get passed down to another. Sounds like you didn’t take a lot of science classes cause it seems you know nothing about genetics.

Luke trains to become a Jedi because he’s inspired by his father, not because he’s genetically a good bet to be a good Jedi. He’s intrigued by the mystery of what the father who was missing from his life was.

I disagree with BedeHistory. I think everyone here kind of knows Star Wars went wrong somewhere, and I think even though we all like all three OT movies, a lot of modern Star Wars’s problems can be traced back to decisions made during the OT’s production. Where I think BedeHistory goes wrong is in pushing it back too far, and rejecting too much from the OT, the good and the bad.

I understand why she (?) feels that way, though. George Lucas doesn’t seem to have ever really understood why Darth Vader being Luke’s father worked so well, and I mean, I completely agree with BedeHistory’s frustration with Disney Star Wars’s obsession with lineages.

Having Vader once be the man Obi-Wan described Luke’s father as immediately adds way more depth to his character. Without combining Vader and Anakin they both become a lot less complex and interesting.

I agree with this completely. Vader being Luke’s father makes Vader a lot less of a one-dimensional character and gives the story of the OT much, much more depth. This is why I believe ESB is what put the actual story of Star Wars into the relevance that it has.

But was it worth it? I think so, but I think BedeHistory has a good case for why she thinks it wasn’t. I mean, you say that the concept works poorly on screen, but it worked perfectly fine in 1977. For 3 years, BedeHistory’s ideas are exactly what Star Wars was. The movie never needed sequels, and it would’ve been perfectly fine without them, even though I think it would’ve been worse off. But there’s still an appeal to imagine a simpler timeline where Star Wars was a one-hit wonder.

Since when was the universe feeling vast more important then character depth and the characters having meaningful relationships with one another? Because if you ask me that was never.

That’s not what they’re arguing.

Death of the Author

Author
Time

I’m in rather the same boat as BedeHistory731. I’ll just leave it at that. 😃

LightWave = fun times with gfx for me 😃