I mean, there’s definitely a legit argument one can make that he’s a good writer, based on certain factors. But I wouldn’t mention dialogue if you were trying to get people to agree with you.
His comment about stopping people from dying seems incredibly childish and delusional. Padme ought to have politely comforted him until the end of their mission and never spoken to him again.
I mean, this is a fantasy movie where people have magical powers. Him saying that isn’t exactly as delusional as someone in our world saying that, especially considering the events of ROTS take that notion very seriously.
One of the pros of adding back in the scene with Anakin and Padmé after he kills the Tusken raiders is where he sets up the whole “I will learn to stop people from dying” thing, but this is a lot less necessary if you’re mostly cutting that out of ROTS.
In my edit I found a way to cut out him talking about his slaughter, and I think it works pretty well. But saving Padmé is a big part of my ROTS.
One thing that’s important to remember is that whenever they talk about the prophecy, they talk about “bringing balance to the force,” something that’s mentioned multiple times in the ST even if the “chosen one” is not.
Did they replace Kiera’s voice with Natalie’s? That is a good question. I’ll see if I can find any info on that.
And you’re right, it is even higher-pitched in the trailer. But see, I like that. It definitely makes Anakin and Padmé feel closer in age, and I think it makes her at least somewhat more sympathetic. I definitely would want to reimplement her actual voice pitch for any future fan edit I might do.
Honestly, I feel if you were to improve Padmé’s character arcs in 2 and 3, she would be a clear main character of the films, at least alongside Anakin. Maybe they both would be comparable to how Rey and Kylo Ren are dual main characters of the ST.
It’s incredibly unfortunate how she’s handled (probably second only to Anakin in terms of PT character fuck ups). The entire plot of TPM revolves around her and she’s in the majority of the scenes, but there’s next to no interiority there. There’s a lot more understanding of who she is AOTC but we still miss out on fundamental aspects of her character (her opposition to the creation of the army) and her main arc in the film (coming to love Anakin) is downright terrible. Then obviously a lot has been said about her being little more than a plot device in ROTS.
It’s especially unfortunate considering how Portman has proven after these films to be one of the best actresses of her generation. At the beginning of the doc “The Beginning,” Lucas comments on how she’s making a decision to be in three films over the next half a decade or so without looking at a word of any script. Kinda makes me feel bad for her, I mean who wouldn’t have done that considering the quality and success of the OT, but who would have guessed that she’d be so shortchanged by the material.
This has probably been covered before but was Natalie Portman’s voice pitch shifted to be lower in her scenes as the queen in TPM? I’ve always suspected that was the case but watching some trailers and featurettes (where her voice is noticeably higher) got me thinking it might actually be.
Yeah, I think both Queen-Natalie and Kiera Knightley’s voice were both deepened.
This brings up another question I’ve always had, am I crazy or is Sabe’s voice just Natalie also, but with a slightly different accent?
I do think a few edits have tried fixing this. This video is an example of an attempt at correcting her voice (I think they have another video for Kiera)
Probably not far enough, look at this trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fo--sWDK_nU
I was just thinking about this the other day when TPM was on TNT. I really think making her voice deeper made it harder to relate to Padmé. It just sounds so strange to me, I don’t know.
Between the voice deepening, the accent, and the fact that Amidala and Padme are treated as separate characters until the third act makes it really hard to follow the character in that movie honestly.
This has probably been covered before but was Natalie Portman’s voice pitch shifted to be lower in her scenes as the queen in TPM? I’ve always suspected that was the case but watching some trailers and featurettes (where her voice is noticeably higher) got me thinking it might actually be.
Took me a while to find this thread, but really good post by both of you.
Continuing a conversation in the Lucasfilm’s future thread
Dom, I disagree that Endgame is made of fan service. Granted there is a fair number, in particular, the plan to win sorta makes fan service to the past impossible. Nevertheless, look at what happens to the characters .“What happens to the characters” is not just what constitutes fan service, in my mind. Yes the plan to win makes fan service impossible to avoid, and I don’t necessarily have a problem with that. But so much time is spent on time travel shenanigans and winks and nods without accomplishing much. One of the most pointless parts is when Cap and Tony go back further to the seventies. Basically its an extended gag, as well as a moment for Tony’s character. Except his character progresses in no way during this sequence, and nothing about it affects his conclusion (beyond the base level 'getting closure with his dad). For Cap, we get set up for his character’s conclusion, but it’s basically just a plot-based set up (this is what gives him the idea) rather than a character one (why does he choose this?).
I couldn’t disagree more that the 70s part of the film was just an extended gag. To me, hearing from his dad that he’d sacrifice everything for his kid was the ultimate thing that made Tony totally willing to sacrifice himself for Pepper and Morgan as his ultimate selfless act - he’d do anything for those 2 to live a happy life, even if it meant laying down his life and trumping every chance he had of living with the 2 loves of his life. I can totally empathize with him not wanting to do that, but I can totally see why hearing his father, a man he saw as barely more than a cold and calculist guy, saying he’d do anything for his kid, would ultimately push him over to this next step. I think that’s why we went back to the 70s. For Cap it was nice foreshadowing, because maybe casual audience members forgot about Peggy.
–Iron Man, whom we may expect will get a “rise from nothing” character arc (that was surprisingly given to #2) becomes finally happy after the opening act. This is the sort of thing you would expect their character to end on… but instead, that character leaves their happy family to do the right thing and dies. They had everything and they lost it to save the world.
A heroic sacrifice falls squarely into the bounds of fan service if you ask me, especially when he’s literally given an “it’s okay” from his wife so leaving his family behind doesn’t seem all that tragic.
Tony’s death really bothers me if I’m being honest. It’s good that we’re talking about TLJ as well because I found Luke’s death to be a great point of comparison. Their deaths are essentially the same right? They pull one last powerful trick to save the day, but it costs them their lives. Here’s the big difference. We know that both Tony and Luke are the types of guys who’d sacrifice themselves to save someone else. That’s not anything new, we’ve seen that before (Avengers 1 and ROTJ). So how do you make this feel like a poignant and satisfying conclusion to their story? You add a complication. At the start of TLJ, Luke is done being a Jedi, has cut himself off from the Force, and refuses to help. In Endgame, they actually do give Tony the complication - he has a family now, a reason to not sacrifice himself. But whereas every single scene Luke has in TLJ is building up to the moment where he makes the choice to save the Resistance, in Endgame, all we get are couple short scenes at the end of the first act where Tony decides merely to risk his life and the life of his family. Him coming to the decision to actually sacrifice himself and leave his family behind isn’t dramatized anywhere in the film.
I believe I tried to counterpoint this earlier in this post but I’ll try again, going a bit more in-depth. Tony at the start of the film was given everything, as opposed to the rest of the world. In a way he had gone back to being very selfish, with a barrier probably more difficult to break (or at least as difficult) as the one Luke had in TLJ. Still, selfless Tony is still inside him and he eventually figures it all out and even volunteers to help, already a heck of a risk and a reflection that his old selfless character hadn’t gone completely even if he now had something much bigger than he ever had before. So he still wasn’t ready to go all the way through, until the travel back to the 70s. The way I interpreted it was that the talk Tony had with his father is ultimately what pushed him over the edge and that’s why that sequence is so important. So all throughout the film Tony’s character progresses from selfish to selfless, one more time, and finally, closure.
I’m sorry but personally I don’t think a single line like “he’s not even born yet, but there’s nothing I wouldn’t do for him,” is really enough to sell the character arc for me. It’s a little too generic and vague to be the impetus for such a specific and hugely impactful decision on Tony’s part. Obviously we know how much Tony loves his daughter. We also already basically know that he’d do anything for her - it’s the whole reason why he makes it clear that they have to keep what they got in those five years. But what pushes him past the selfishness of wanting to save his daughter but also be there for her? A single platitude from his dad doesn’t do it for me; especially when considering how complicated their relationship was - because of that my reaction isn’t so much ‘oh wow he’s cold but really does love Tony,’ so much as ‘oh wow if only he showed Tony that love while he was alive.’
The other thing that bothers me is the manner of their death. I will say when I first saw TLJ, Luke’s death left me a little cold, just because it wasn’t clear until that moment that this would kill him. But the thing that’s makes it okay is that this isn’t just Luke sacrificing himself, it’s him becoming one with the Force (the thing that’s he’s shut out for so long), which is nicely symbolic of his final trick securing his legacy as one of the greatest Jedi ever - he dies but he still lives on, in more ways than one.
For Tony, the cause of death is Infinity Gauntlet poisoning, which, unlike TLJ, is set up. But I personally find it a rather bland choice by the filmmakers. The Infinity Gauntlet gives its wielder an absolutely incredible amount of power, power no one person should have. Thanos fancies himself some sort of god, and believes he has a right to this power. But the power of the Gauntlet is only considered dangerous on a physical level in Endgame. First they have Hulk do it because he can withstand the gamma, and it feels like a nice moment for him because he’s struggled with gamma for so long. But that’s merely an external conflict. There’s a potential here for some challenging inner turmoil. What if Bruce didn’t think he could handle the responsibly and he had to grow towards it? On the flip side, for Tony, he’s being trying and failing for so long now to put “a suit of armor around the world.” The Gauntlet would give him the ability to finally succeed at this mission. But of course it’s always been a dangerous mission, and one that’s tapped into dark aspects of Tony’s personality. Having all the stones could have provided Tony with the ultimate internal conflict, and deciding to do the right thing and give them up would have been (in my opinion) the perfect climactic decision for his character to make. But maybe that’s just me.
“deciding to do the right thing and give them up would hae been (in my opinion) the perfect climatic decision for his character to make.”
Well, he had overcome those demons a while ago, hadn’t he? Sure at the beginning when he was thin and probably suffering with PTSD not to mention depression he brought it back up, but I don’t think he meant it at all, and when he’s healthy and happy and OK again he never once mentions anything of the sort. I can see what you’re saying and yes that would’ve been pretty cool, but at the moment of his sacrifice he was at absolute peace and had already overcome every internal obstacle and conflict that had been posed to him throughout all films.
I don’t think he ever really overcame those demons at all. He goes through PTSD in Iron Man 3 and creates the iron legion. At the end of the movie he seems to have overcome it and quit being Iron Man… until Age of Ultron where he thinks he’s found another solution to the problem. He goes through these cycles, he’s essentially an addict and his obsessiveness keeps drawing him back to that one thing, that he needs to control and protect that which he fears. After Infinity War, he’s given the biggest blow of all. He failed at a battle he knew was coming, and he lost a surrogate child due to his own actions. He’s at the lowest of possible lows. That demon has definitely come back to haunt him, and I think that early scene when he gets back to Avengers HQ is really powerful.
Skip ahead five years, and he’s moved on and has a new family. But the specter of that past failure is still haunting him. He still remembers that child he lost. What stops him from taking things too far this time, now that he not only has half the world to bring back but also a biological daughter to protect? This is something that has become his greatest flaw, and it should manifest most strongly in the character’s final chapter. Instead, that demon is dropped after that initial scene.
I have a similar problem with Cap’s character. The opening of the film sets up a really compelling and scary possibility. Cap’s whole philosophy “we don’t trade lives” has arguably cost them everything. His steadfast adherence to his beliefs split up the Avengers in the first place which is why Thanos was able to beat them. In every film Cap has always been a rock, but now that aspect of his personality has devastated the world to an unimaginable degree. And he says to himself, “this has to work, because I don’t know what I’ll do if it doesn’t.” And it doesn’t, but we cut to five years later and everything’s fine. Just like with Tony they set up the ultimate internal struggle for Cap’s character and then brush it under the rug so that they can have fun and games. No need for Cap to do any introspection or soul searching. No need to resolve the philosophical differences between Cap and Tony.
Granted two of the six avengers manage to get the happy ending they deserved and one gets to have a glorious moment out. But the other three and our purple friend are intentionally broken and rebuilt for the movie. But the fans still enjoyed the movie- suggesting “subverting expectations” can be done in a way that both surprises and pleases the fans. As I am sure many who enjoyed TLJ already knew.
I’ll save my problems with how the other three are handled for another day. I’ll just end with this: I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with fan service, and I think there’s certainly some entertainment value to be had from it, which is not nothing. My problem is only when the fan service gets in the way of the story; in Endgame, I’d say specifically where I take issue is the extended time travel shenanigans, which puts a few (not all) of the character arcs on the back burner for the purpose of a good time, and especially the final battle, which is basically pure spectacle that overshadows any potential for inner character conflict or deeper philosophical/thematic conflict and comes down to a very base level all of us vs. all of them, with the stakes being merely ‘win or lose.’
While I agree with you here, I think the way the Russos executed it was good enough to make me buy that all the inner and philosophical/thematic conflict had been resolved by then.
Personally, while on some level I enjoyed the sheer size of it all, ultimately I found the battle hard to engage with on an emotional level without any deeper stakes for the characters.
The only other solution I can think of with that order is to try to crib Padme saying “yesterday” from her scene with Obi-Wan so she says “he came by yesterday”, but I’m not sure how seamless that would be in practice. Hal is probably fine leaving the scene out of his edit, due to his not wanting to include the second dream sequence (Personally I would just include it, but Hal has certain goals in mind with his edit)
I believe I tried that and it didn’t work to my liking.
Continuing a conversation in the Lucasfilm’s future thread
Dom, I disagree that Endgame is made of fan service. Granted there is a fair number, in particular, the plan to win sorta makes fan service to the past impossible. Nevertheless, look at what happens to the characters .
“What happens to the characters” is not just what constitutes fan service, in my mind. Yes the plan to win makes fan service impossible to avoid, and I don’t necessarily have a problem with that. But so much time is spent on time travel shenanigans and winks and nods without accomplishing much. One of the most pointless parts is when Cap and Tony go back further to the seventies. Basically its an extended gag, as well as a moment for Tony’s character. Except his character progresses in no way during this sequence, and nothing about it affects his conclusion (beyond the base level 'getting closure with his dad). For Cap, we get set up for his character’s conclusion, but it’s basically just a plot-based set up (this is what gives him the idea) rather than a character one (why does he choose this?).
–Hawkeye goes on a murderous rampage, breaking their morals to try to cope with loss. They do this for an extended period and exit the movie happy but also with sins they hadn’t had before.
In terms of screen time, I’m not sure “extended period” is the right descriptor. As well, we have to understand that Hawkeye is not on the same level of belovedness as the other characters. It’s not exactly a comparable anti-fan service situation to, say, Luke in TLJ, because also Hawkeye’s turn is bad ass (even if it’s bad), and it’s at least partly a nod to the comics (Ronin). The other thing you have to consider, is the fact that basically none of the Avengers have a problem with his bloodthirst, and it ends up not being mentioned at all except on Vormir as a means to make you think that he might sacrifice himself instead of BW (otherwise the choice would have been obvious).
–Thor sinks into some serious depression which takes a huge toll on them emotionally and physically. Where before this hero was the most “heroic” in Infinity War, but in Endgame they must entirely restart their hero’s journey.
Yeah Thor gets his big fan servicey moments in IW so they didn’t feel bad making him more comic relief in this one, especially since this isn’t a conclusion for him and a lot of his character growth is kicked down the road for the next movie he’ll be in.
–Thanos, who has been seriously hyped up, is anticlimactically killed off in favor of a more compelling plot.
I loved that part. Then they went and brought him back, and made him half as interesting - he was a compelling villain who posed an interesting and challenging philosophical conflict for the heroes, but ultimately the stakes in the final battle end up just being “save the Earth.”
–Iron Man, whom we may expect will get a “rise from nothing” character arc (that was surprisingly given to #2) becomes finally happy after the opening act. This is the sort of thing you would expect their character to end on… but instead, that character leaves their happy family to do the right thing and dies. They had everything and they lost it to save the world.
A heroic sacrifice falls squarely into the bounds of fan service if you ask me, especially when he’s literally given an “it’s okay” from his wife so leaving his family behind doesn’t seem all that tragic.
Tony’s death really bothers me if I’m being honest. It’s good that we’re talking about TLJ as well because I found Luke’s death to be a great point of comparison. Their deaths are essentially the same right? They pull one last powerful trick to save the day, but it costs them their lives. Here’s the big difference. We know that both Tony and Luke are the types of guys who’d sacrifice themselves to save someone else. That’s not anything new, we’ve seen that before (Avengers 1 and ROTJ). So how do you make this feel like a poignant and satisfying conclusion to their story? You add a complication. At the start of TLJ, Luke is done being a Jedi, has cut himself off from the Force, and refuses to help. In Endgame, they actually do give Tony the complication - he has a family now, a reason to not sacrifice himself. But whereas every single scene Luke has in TLJ is building up to the moment where he makes the choice to save the Resistance, in Endgame, all we get are couple short scenes at the end of the first act where Tony decides merely to risk his life and the life of his family. Him coming to the decision to actually sacrifice himself and leave his family behind isn’t dramatized anywhere in the film.
The other thing that bothers me is the manner of their death. I will say when I first saw TLJ, Luke’s death left me a little cold, just because it wasn’t clear until that moment that this would kill him. But the thing that’s makes it okay is that this isn’t just Luke sacrificing himself, it’s him becoming one with the Force (the thing that’s he’s shut out for so long), which is nicely symbolic of his final trick securing his legacy as one of the greatest Jedi ever - he dies but he still lives on, in more ways than one.
For Tony, the cause of death is Infinity Gauntlet poisoning, which, unlike TLJ, is set up. But I personally find it a rather bland choice by the filmmakers. The Infinity Gauntlet gives its wielder an absolutely incredible amount of power, power no one person should have. Thanos fancies himself some sort of god, and believes he has a right to this power. But the power of the Gauntlet is only considered dangerous on a physical level in Endgame. First they have Hulk do it because he can withstand the gamma, and it feels like a nice moment for him because he’s struggled with gamma for so long. But that’s merely an external conflict. There’s a potential here for some challenging inner turmoil. What if Bruce didn’t think he could handle the responsibly and he had to grow towards it? On the flip side, for Tony, he’s being trying and failing for so long now to put “a suit of armor around the world.” The Gauntlet would give him the ability to finally succeed at this mission. But of course it’s always been a dangerous mission, and one that’s tapped into dark aspects of Tony’s personality. Having all the stones could have provided Tony with the ultimate internal conflict, and deciding to do the right thing and give them up would have been (in my opinion) the perfect climactic decision for his character to make. But maybe that’s just me.
Granted two of the six avengers manage to get the happy ending they deserved and one gets to have a glorious moment out. But the other three and our purple friend are intentionally broken and rebuilt for the movie. But the fans still enjoyed the movie- suggesting “subverting expectations” can be done in a way that both surprises and pleases the fans. As I am sure many who enjoyed TLJ already knew.
I’ll save my problems with how the other three are handled for another day. I’ll just end with this: I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with fan service, and I think there’s certainly some entertainment value to be had from it, which is not nothing. My problem is only when the fan service gets in the way of the story; in Endgame, I’d say specifically where I take issue is the extended time travel shenanigans, which puts a few (not all) of the character arcs on the back burner for the purpose of a good time, and especially the final battle, which is basically pure spectacle that overshadows any potential for inner character conflict or deeper philosophical/thematic conflict and comes down to a very base level all of us vs. all of them, with the stakes being merely ‘win or lose.’
Also, personal preference maybe, but I’d prefer “star systems,” which sounds a bit more pulpy to me than “solar systems.” I’m not sure if “solar systems” is a phrase anyone says in the movies (excepting its use in this crawl, obviously).
Maybe I’m single handedly skewing the average. Look at the rankings in this thread and I don’t think you can say that this is really a “pro-TLJ site.”
Yeah I think we’re off topic. If you want to hear about my (many) problems with the way characters are handled in Endgame, it probably shouldn’t happen in this thread.
DominicCobb said:
Ani and Obi make outThis is the edit I want to see.
Seriously though, I’m intrigued by the order you suggested. How did you use the dream sequence to get around the “he came by this morning” line?
Well the issue being that their dialogue is in an uncut master shot, so it was tricky but the solution I figured was having Anakin say his first line “Obi-wan was here wasn’t he?” play over the very end of the dream, and then cut into the scene right after Padme’s excised line.
Buzzfeed just reported that a script has been completed for a KOTOR movie.
Don’t trust Buzzfeed.
How so?
I think there’d be too many expectations from a lot of people that’d potentially ruin the films whichever way they go.
I’d be all in for more personal stories set during the Clone War, I think it’d really do wonders for that time period. We get some of it from the TV shows, but nothing actually good.
But yeah if they want to stay away from the main saga at all costs I think the old republic era is definitely the most logical pick. I really don’t want it to be a Jedi story though, I think it’d be cool to see more Rogue One-like films.
You say there’d be too many expectations, but the Clone Wars has an even greater chance of “offending” people as it is directly connected to the films. And while I love the era there are many OT fans who don’t want to return to the PT, and I respect that… TOR is a fresh start for everyone.
I think about it like the MCU. You have a ton of comics/books/games on the era, and the producers are now free to tell their own story. Most complaints regarding the ST from fans has been towards inconsistent writing (agree or disagree). But by adapting characters you would be more in an MCU position.
Man, the MCU is a lot of things but I don’t think I would ever say that it has “consistent writing.” The less SW can be like the MCU the better honestly (and I love the MCU).
Well, one thing you have to admit is how happy and united the fandom is. A consistent vision is my stab at the answer to that. While any piece of new SW material will divide people. I was convinced Endgame would divide people for providing a definitive ending… but that’s not the case.
I couldn’t care less whether the fandom is divided or not. I care about the quality of the movie. People love Endgame but that’s because they created the film in such a way that their main goal was fan service/not making fans mad. I think that’s a poor way to approach a film when it’s at the expense of the story (which I’d argue is the case with that film). But anyway, fans don’t care and eat it up. That’s why it’s well received, not because the MCU has a “consistent vision” which is a claim that has no basis in reality.
The big reason Endgame worked for me is that most of the characters got resonant, consistent conclusions to their arcs. I guess that could be called fanservice, since it’s something that fans of the characters wanted to see. This is in Stark contrast to, for example, the final season of Game of Thrones. Since the showrunners were supposedly working off of the author’s own notes I can only assume that the story beats were what Martin intended when he handed them off, but the rushed execution resulted in character arcs which became incoherent or dropped entirely by the end of the show. It’s the case of story over character, and it is much worse than the Endgame approach of character over story. I think the ST so far also has this problem (with TLJ being the worst offender so far) to the point that almost every major character is uncoupled from their defining flaw or trauma when it is convenient to the story.
When I say Endgame priotized fan service over story, understand that I consider character to be at least half of what makes a story. I would actually say Thrones is a perfect comparison to Endgame, where the conclusions make sense for the characters in a broad sense but none of the legwork is put in to make them feel earned or satisfying. The only glaring difference being that the MCU has never been all that invested in consistent and clear character development, whereas Thrones has always been very granular and gradual in that regard so descending into mostly spectacle only ends up feeling wrong for one of them (the other difference being that the MCU conclusions are crowd pleasing).
I’d say they both make TLJ seem like a masterpiece of character work in comparison (which is not necessarily something I would call it). TLJ is the only of the three that actually seems to take any interest in putting time into coherent character progression.
FYI the way I do it is
Ani and Obi make out
Palpatine office
Apartment
Landing on Utapau
In this scenario Palpatine putting doubt into Anakin about Padmé leads directly into him asking her about Obi-wan. The tricky thing though is you have to cut mention of “he came by this morning,” which I did with the help of the preceding dream sequence. Not sure how it’d be done without that, but I do think it’s a strong ordering.
This issue some take with the bombs is just so minor and insignificant that it’s a bit insane that so many people talk about it as much as they do and at the lengths they do.
Pretty much.
Hey, you’re the one that wanted to invent a plot hole in the OT to complain about TLJ/ST critics and then compared it to the bomb scene in TLJ.
Im not mad and you’re essentially calling me nitpicky and thick headed simply for taking issue with a scene that in its most basic sense doesnt stack up logically, just like the slug cave scene doesn’t. If people want to argue the point then a debate will ensue as it is right now.
Regardless of how either side might interpret the bomb scene after analysis, the basic portrayal just doesn’t work anyway because you instantly refer to your own understanding of gravity and go “how is that working?” and start searching for answers, at which point the movie doesnt offer up anything conclusively satisfying and so it becomes a plot hole for those of us that can’t accept on the movie’s own merits what it is showing us. If it’s enough for you, fine. But for us it’s not, there’s too much wrong with it to ignore through a usually pretty understanding suspension of disbelief.
You’re always good for a laugh, I’ll give you that. Thanks for proving my point.
You guys see what I mean?
Ever heard of suspension of disbelief?
I don’t necessarily agree with Dom’s premise here about that ESB scene in particular
Things about the sequence that are never explained: what the giant circular chasm is, the purpose of the gantry, why it’s connected to the carbon freezing chamber, what the tunnels that Luke falls through are, why Luke falls through a random tunnel and not just down the shaft, why the tunnel pops him out directly on to a weather vane, etc. These are all things fans today would nitpick and claim are convenient plot holes. Obviously if you use your imagination and think about it there are plenty of possible explanations, but people seem to want stuff like this spelled out to them.
I’d say there are quite a few things that fans complain about in TLJ are far easier to ‘just go with’ than this sequence. I mean just look at the falling bombs complaint, ESB has multiple instances of gravity in space.
Guys, please. I don’t have a problem with it. But lotta fans today are so nit picky and thickheaded that they would call it a plot hole if it was in a Disney movie.
Watching ESB on TNT while I’m at the gym, just thinking about how mad fans would get if the movie came out today at the scene where Luke falls off the gantry and gets swooped into the tunnel.
Why?
Because there’s no explanation for it provided in the film. So it’s a “plot hole.”
Watching ESB on TNT while I’m at the gym, just thinking about how mad fans would get if the movie came out today at the scene where Luke falls off the gantry and gets swooped into the tunnel.
I’ve never really understood franchises being exclusive to one author, but in Star Wars’s case specifically, because it’s a film series (and not, say a book series where there really is only one author), Lucas has never been the only creative mind behind the series. The world of SW has been created by a variety of people from the very start. Feels disingenuous to ignore that collaborative aspect - which is to say nothing of the series’s patchwork/pastiche nature, which in my mind seems to invite baton passing since the series is more about assimilating past stories to create a modern mythological adventure, rather than the holy “saga” that Lucas later tried to make it into. There’s this sandbox where it would be silly to limit it to just one guy playing in it. Now, when it comes to the “Skywalker saga” as LFL has reframed the episodes, even then there’s a meta resonance to having the next generation round out the story that Lucas began.
I would think they at least had the foresight to shoot “clean” background plates during TFA just in case they revisited this later.
I think you mean TLJ? Actually that’s interesting to consider. Back when Trevorrow was on IX he had Rian Johnson shoot a scene for IX while filming TLJ because it logistically made sense to do so. Never thought about it but definitely could have been an additional part of that flashback. Obviously no way to know at this point if that scene (whatever it actually is) will be used in JJ’s IX.
Didn’t we see first see the burning Jedi temple in Rey’s vision in TFA?
No, just a brief shot of Luke kneeling and putting his hand on R2.
Reminds me how they wanted to shoot all the Dagobah scenes for ROTJ during production on Empire, but ran out of time. Lucas shot two scenes for ROTS while making AOTC, but neither got used.
Two? I was only aware of the Tatooine one.