John Doom

You're right, it could be that he didn't want to hurt his father in the process, and eventually "save" him.

But why didn't he want to kill the Emperor, though? I don't get it. He was trained just so that he could defeat him:

Only a fully trained Jedi Knight with the Force as his ally will conquer Vader and his Emperor.

Yoda says he knows everything he needs. If he can't defeat the Emperor because he's afraid he's not ready yet, then his masters have failed :D

Frank your Majesty said:

Also, when he finally attacks the Emperor, he's stopped by Vader, what makes you think Vader wouldn't have stopped Luke, if he tried that earlier?

I'm sure Vader would've tried to stop Luke, but he could've still tried to disarm him like in the end does (but without using the darkside).

Frank your Majesty said:

His plan was not getting tempted by the dark side and bring his father back to the light side.

What about his two-movies-long jedi training? Just to get killed by the Emperor? Still doesn't make sense to me :\

Frank your Majesty said:

You question Luke's motives as soon as he leaves Tattoine, but not his plan to rescue Han? In my eyes that's the most illogical thing in that movie :D

I agree, that was confusing as well :D

It's just that I wanted to focus the thread on the second part of the movie.

Seriously, this is something which has always bothered me since I was a child.

After saving Han, Luke goes to Dagobah to complete his training, but Yoda says him he already knows everything he needs, BUT... in order to become a Jedi, he must face Vader. Why? Why does he specifically has to face Vader to prove worthy of the title? What does it have to do with the training? I guess he symbolically needs to face his fears, but what about the Emperor? Didn't Obi-wan and Yoda want to train Luke to defeat the Emperor? Will facing Vader make him somehow ready to face the Emperor's knowledge of the darkside?

He then meets Obi-wan, and he says that Luke must face Vader because it is his "destiny" (ha, how convenient! Every now and then, someone says Luke must do this or that because it's his "destiny". How do they know what's his destiny, anyway? :D).

On Endor, Luke decides to leave his "party" and tells Leia he has to meet Vader to "save" him (and also hide their presence to the Empire). He finally meets Vader, but he refuses to come with him. Instead, he decides to bring him to the Emperor (nice work, Luke!)

Face to face with the Emperor (who puts Luke's lightsaber right off his nose), Luke doesn't try to kill him. Why? He's the Supreme Commander of the Imperial fleet which threatens to destroy the Rebels, but he won't move a finger, even when their secret plan seems to be futile.

In anger, he tastes the darkside and tries to kill the Emperor, but is forced to defeat Vader first (which he does), while refusing to submit to the darkside. One more to go: the Emperor. What does our hero do? He throws away his lightsaber and nearly gets killed. What!?

So, what do you think? What was Luke's entire plan all along? :D

As for the whole childish thing though, SW is after all as much for children, technically more, than it is for adults.

Except I didn't care about that stuff when I was a child, and I was only interested in Luke's journey to the "creepy" Emperor :D

All in all the Empire, or rather a small squadron and by effect the Death Star II, being defeated on a forest planet by a few rebels and a primitive society kind of makes contextually sense. It's silly, but so is a farm boy saving the day with a single torpedo.

I'm not sure it's the same: even before becoming the "only hope" in TESB, Luke was strong in the Force (as Vader admitted himself), not an ordinary farm boy.

But all in all having the Empirical war machine defeat by someone technologically primitive kind of fits with the motifs of the trilogy.

I disagree. I know that's what Lucas said, but to me, it doesn't fit at all: why did a lot of people want a great epic final battle between the Rebels and the Empire? So to close the Rebellion's story-arc started with ANH. That's the actual motif of the whole trilogy: fighting to break free from the oppression. What we got instead was a bunch of floating Rebel starships standing-by for almost an hour until the ending scene. It was very disappointing for some.

Also the ANH rough draft literally had a bunch of Wookiees being taught how to pilot fighters within a single day and destroying the Death Star.
Now that's silly!

I can't find it in your link, but I'm glad it didn't make it into ANH :D

I kind of knew something about Fett, but I think his background draws from the EU, so I'll have to pass :D

Well, no one actually hates ROTJ, but most of the people I know (including myself) think it's an "half-assed" movie :D It looks 50% Star Wars (with Luke's journey to the Emperor) and 50% something else (with childish or lifeless characters, a good amount of bad special effects and an odd pacing), and when it comes to retcons, ROTJ is the one starting the "shrinking galaxy" trend, with Leia being Luke's sister which, compared to Vader's revelation which draws a parallel within the protagonist and TESB's main villain, is just here to fix a plot hole and has no actual impact on the story (aside for Vader's threat to make her into a dark jedi).

Speaking of ANH's drafts, it's common for stories to have multiple versions until a final polished one is written. The reason it took so long for ANH, is that it initially drew from a lot of sources (sci-fi novels, contemporary society and  Lucas's own experience) which made the script very confusing, so it had to be streamlined more and more until it became what we know today.

Good luck with that, but remember to credit "Yoda's dialogue's edit" as my original idea :D

Funny Luke's death in Battlefront :D

Let's see. From Brackett's script:

The man revealed is draped and hooded in cloth-of-gold, so that we cannot see his face, but the figure is instinct (sic) with power and Darth Vadar (sic) bows before it. 

DARTH VADER
Your Imperial Majesty Highness.

The voice that speaks is silken and deadly as a strangler’s cord.

EMPEROR
You are aware of the disturbance in the Force?

DARTH VADER
I am.

EMPEROR
Then you know that Skywalker is not dead.  And he is more dangerous than [unreadable] I had realized.  Remove him this time, Lord Vader…  Or I shall remove you.

Darth Vader bows.  The screen goes blank.  Vader turns away.  From his posture and the rhythm of his breathing, he is in a rage because he is afraid of the Emperor. 

CONTINUED

144 (cont.)

angry because of his fear of the emperor.

It seems like the Emperor knows about the Force, and this script was written 1978! I'm not sure if this was the original plan for ANH too, but it definitely seems like the Emperor was able to use the Force since TESB.

P.S.: there's a myth among fans that the Jedi weren't supposed to wear robes in the OT. According to TESB's screenplay...

The Emperor's dark robes and monk's hood are reminiscent of the cloak worn by Ben Kenobi.

...which seems to imply that Obi-wan's clothes aren't ordinary robes: possibly a vest, a jedi vest maybe? I'm not saying it was supposed to be the only "official" Jedi vest, though.

DuracellEnergizer said:

binarysunset said:

Probably when Han was deemed force sensitive because he wielded Luke's saber in ESB. Its just a laser sword.

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT???????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

(not really, it's Jacen Solo)

P.S.: Let me finish writing my garbage-posts before commenting (better reading "incomplete garbage" or "COMPLETE garbage" now, huh!? :\)

Obi-wan does say that Luke has a twin sister in ROTJ ("The other he spoke of is your twin sister"). If I could (gladly :D) only consider ANH and ESB, on the other hand...!

Speaking about Leia, any chance someone can do an ESB's fanedit to change "There's another" back to "We must find another one"? Then cut the whole twins' subplot in ROTJ, and that would make for my ideal OT :D

When talking about Star Wars's screenplays, that's literally my primary source :D

I just updated the timeline with the new fitting entries and corrections. Still no official starting date of the Empire :\

Thank you again! I'll let you know if I'll need new bios ;)

I read Dark Empire some years ago and I liked its concept of the darkside (even if it's flawed like in ROTJ). Its idea that Vader faced the Emperor but was "defeated" and/or decided to learn about the darkside to eventually overthrow him, fits very well and is supported by many OT's dialogues and pre-PT commentaries.

ZkinandBonez said:

I don't see why all four reasons can't apply to Anakin's fall. Politics and Power are basically the same in this situation. Love is possible, but that seems to have been added for dramatic effect in the PT, but then again we don't know what they were planning back then. But considering how Luke and Leia's mother survived Anakin's transformation for some years it seems unlikely. Also I'm not quite sure what you mean by "defeat"? Do you mean his battle with Obi-Wan, because that still counts in the pre-PT canon. It's described in both the novelization of ROTJ and the Guide. Also his wounding serves as a metaphor for his transformation. First of all he becomes someone else physically. The in a sense dies and sells his soul to the devil, or in this case the evil Palpatine, and is resurrected but with a catch; he's now a slave to the emperor. He actually dies when he redeems himself and kills the emperor. He has already died as a good man, and therefore can't have a second life. Also the Empire is clearly a very homogeneous environment, as fascism tends to be, as well as being quite a literal war machine. And that is what Vader is as well, a killing machine. "He's more machine than man now, twisted and evil," that line is actually a pretty good description of the Empire as a whole, or even fascism in general. 
(But enough symbolic analysis/rambling.) 

I couldn't find an age on Bail Organa, but I get the idea that he was supposed to be a lot older than he ended up being in the PT. 
It's not the greatest source, but in the 1980 radio-play of ANH there's a lot of scenes with Bail and he comes of as kind of an old king type of character. It's hard to describe, but I got a sort of Ling Theoden from LOTR vibe from the performance. That's not much to go on, but I think he was supposed to be a somewhat old man.
Mon Mothma's age is kind of weird in the timeline, but not impossible. In ROTJ she would be roughly 50 years old. However she could have been a very young senator. The Guide said that she was the youngest senator ever elected until Leia started representing Alderaan some year prior to ANH. It doesn't give a precise age though, it simply states she was elected at an "early age."

I looked up the Sith and this is literally all it said;
"The mysterious and as-yet-revealed group called the Sith causes great fear in those who know them. They are sometimes called the Dark Lords of the Sith, and Darth Vader has been identified as one of their number."
Literally no help to unravel the mystery there. Either Lucas had no clue what they were, or he was keeping it a secret until the PT-trilogy.

Also I couldn't find any mention of Vader's Castle. Does it have a specific name? I found an entry on the Emperor Citadel, but no castle with Vader's name attached. The again I might have overlook something under a different name.

Well yeah, it could be that he turned into the darkside for four reasons. By "defeat" I mean that, as Lucas suggested in the commentaries, he faced the Emperor, but was defeated, losing most of his Force (basically, Luke's path went wrong). And maybe he was then brainwashed by the Emperor (just my guess). Fact is that this interpretation makes Anakin's fall against his will. The OT's dialogues seem confirm that this was Anakin's fate.

I can't believe the word "sith", used everywhere on books and comics, was never explained! :D I'd go for the jedi-hunter order, but I can't prove it :\

I'm not sure Vader's castle had a name back then. It was mentioned in an early ESB draft, but the idea was probably rejected.

Thank you very much for the help! :)

It's faint, but it does look slightly green tinted. Could it be consequence of the noise removal?

Anakin being a teenager when he met Obi-wan seems to fit with my timeline (which I guess is good :D)
Still, if Oragan met during the Clone Wars Obi-wan, why would Leia call him "Ben" knowing his original name? I guess she didn't want to let people know about his secret.
Mon Mothma's background seems to fit perfectly in ROTS's deleted scenes, but she was a senator during Palpatine's rise to power, so how old Palpatine really is? Senators are supposed to be at least 50 years old to be elected, not to mention that Mothma doesn't look the same age as Palpatine at all :D
Anakin's fall has always been the most confusing part: Lucas himself gave FOUR different versions of it: politics (just like you said), power (like in the original ROTS's screenplay), love (as in ROTS) and defeat (as in the 97SE commentary). I don't know :D The OT's dialogues suggest the last interpretation, though, and no doubt he tried to kill Palpatine to save the Republic.
I'll look for COMPNOR, thanks ;)

How old is Organa supposed to be in ANH?
So, no clue as to why and when the Clone Wars began?
What the hell is a Sith? :D (one of the first Star Wars screenplays says it's an order founded to kill the Jedi, is it canon?)
Out of curiosity, is Darth vader's castle ever mentioned?
And that's it: if we manage to get these informations, it should be possible to complete the timeline (except for Palpatine's election's date)!

P.S.: Speaking about fascism, a reform has just passed which abolishes our Italian Senate and gathers power in the Prime Minister (nevermind, I didn't say anything...)

Well, the idea is to start from the OT dialogues and then expand with pre-PT EU canon stuff, as long as it fits. After all, even if Star Wars's canon changed throughout the trilogy, its dialogues present no evident retcon. But it's not an easy task :D

I just noticed that if, according to the Guide, Anakin is 55 in ANH, and the Clone Wars ended 35 years before ANH, how could he've taken part in war being him only 20? :\

Does the Guide mention why and when did Obi-wan change his name to Ben? When did he served the Organas?

This is very interesting: I'm going to link your post in my timeline, so that everyone can read it.

There are useful hints to build the timeline, but you still have ROTJ's rectons like Owen being Obi-wan's brother (George... :\) and so Obi-wan being only in his 60s (which contradicts Tarkin's statement).

I'm not sure it can be actually used, but it's definitely a great read. Thanks a lot!

DuracellEnergizer said:

brash_stryker said:

the AT-PT

TIE Defender



*sigh* and a TIE Tank

Of those three, the AT-PT's the only one which doesn't look completely laughable. 

It looks like a bipedal TV :D

But anyway, that Lego starship looks defintely like the one used in Rebel Assault II.

I guess you're talking about this videogame. I still wonder what the original inspiration was, but I think ROTJ did have similar starships.

SilverWook said:

Forgetting all the tacky, even disturbing official TPM merchandise already? ;)

Back in the day, I was a kid, but I don't remember TPM's merchandise being so disturbing :D

Reminds me of this (but Jar-Jar is definitely more disturbing :D)

DuracellEnergizer said:

*sniff* *sniff*

The Bunny™ is nearby. I can smell him.

Oh s**t!

Probably a "bromance" story :D

Let's hope, whatever it is, is going to be better than what we saw in the prequels regarding their relationship (but considering I disliked every Disney's Star Wars comic, I doubt this one is going to be any better).

CatBus said:

TV's Frink said:

There is no try.

Only Zuul.

Did you say Zool?

TESB has a very peculiar structure: for example, every scene begins with our heroes making progress, but always ends with the omen of a new danger. Because of this, I think General Veers's death was cut mostly because it would've made the Rebels look victorious, breaking the structure.

danny_boy said:

The language of cinema has constantly evolved to reflect a cultural aesthetic that relates to the time that the product is made in.

So that little clip in TFA trailer where hundreds of StormTroopers are assembled together ......reeks of the thousands of  Orcs from Lord Of The Rings, the Agent Smiths in the Matrix, The Chitari and Ultrons from the 2 Avengers movies ....and yes the clones and droid armies from the prequels. 

It definitely does not resemble anything from the OT.....the technology simply did not exist to convey thousands and thousands of troopers in attendance together(apart for that brief matte painting in ROTJ on the death star when the emperor arrives).

In the OT....size(e.g army of the Empire) was implied and simply left to the imagination.....which in my opinion is a far more potent storytelling technique.

These days nothing is left to the imagination......it is shown. 

Hence the creative lull that we find ourselves in.

The existence  of the TFA is proof of that.   

If you think about it, even the OT films share little in common in style. I don't think that should be Abrams's main concern.

To me, the main problem with his style is that he doesn't seem to really understand photography: he rarely gets a good composition (in his non-CGI shots, straight from the camera). His kind of shots are mostly focused on few characters, rarely on the actual scene, but when they do, they're usually either lifeless (unless he shakes the camera a bit), CGI-sets, cropped and/or missing important elements.

My concern, probably yours too, is that this may be true for TFA as well. Well, just by the teasers alone, you can already see he did two lifeless shots already (but, as I said before, he couldn't shake the camera this time, so he couldn't "fix" them). I don't know if those shots will be actually used in the movie, but I do know that they are definitely CGI-free shots, so straight from his camera, from his "vision". Do read about how much work went into the "carbon freezing" scene: are Abrams and his crew up to this quality and skill level? I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Lord Haseo said:

So Lawrence Kasdan co-writing the script means nothing? A lot of you guys are acting as if JJ is doing this film like Lucas did the PT. With no one to second guess him at all. 

Kasdan is a true asset, no doubt about it. He's probably the only reason I'm interested in the new movie.

My concern is the film's genre and Abrams's directing style. Sure, films are about stories, but without art direction, you get a product: you buy it, use it and then waste it.