Sign In

Shopping Maul

User Group
Members
Join date
12-Oct-2013
Last activity
15-Oct-2022
Posts
486

Post History

Post
#1502153
Topic
The Star Wars canon saga as only the OT?
Time

That kind of arc works and produces a satisfying redemption. However, it sadly wasn’t what Lucas wanted to tell and the saga’s story suffers as a result. But hey, I buy Vader’s redemption infinitely more than I buy something like Snape’s redemption.

Really? What is it about Snape’s redemption you find unconvincing (bearing in mind I’m not the biggest Harry Potter connoisseur in the world, but I do like the series)?

Post
#1502014
Topic
The Star Wars canon saga as only the OT?
Time

BedeHistory731 said:

Shopping Maul said:

G&G-Fan said:

Yep. Definitely agree with Sparky.

From my perspective, it feels less like a deed of a good man and more like a serial killer repenting on their deathbed.

That’s kinda exactly what it is.

The entire point is that Vader is a monster. Nothing he does can change that. But it still wasn’t too late for him to do the right thing. To turn to the light, kill the Emperor and destroy what he helped create. And he does. Along with himself and the Emperor, he brings down the Empire.

His redemption isn’t making up for what he did. He’s only redeemed in the sense that he chose to act out of selfless compassion (the way of the Jedi) instead of selfishness (the way of the Sith). Changing the person he was on the inside and finally letting go of his selfishness, hatred, and even his primal fear of death, which as Yoda says, “is the way of things. The way of the Force”.

You’re still trying to turn it into the person in the physical world atoning for what they did. But that’s not what it is and it never could be. It’s like asking someone to write a story about Hitler making up for the bad things he did (maybe slightly different, because Vader wasn’t the top guy in charge of the Empire, that’d be Palpatine, but it’s still pretty close). He literally was the backbone of a facist Sith regime for 23 years that committed genocide. You can’t make up for that. But he does stop the horror and become the man he once was. It’s all just about Vader choosing to be Anakin again on the inside, to do the right thing, and to finally be selfless. To give his life for his son. The only way his redemption works is if he sacrifices himself. You can’t have Vader go to the rebellion after saving Luke and saying, “Sorry that I, you know, helped enslave the galaxy, wiped out the Jedi, was a Sith for decades and literally probably killed your friends and families, but I’d really like to help out.” Vader can’t be redeemed in the sense of taking action that makes up for what he did in the physical realm; Vader is redeemed in the fact that he changed the person he was on the inside back to the compassionate Anakin Skywalker (in a sense, spiritually). As Lucas said, he took that last ounce of good left in him and destroyed the Emperor.

Also Luke being the only one who actually forgives Vader is also kind of the point. Most people in the galaxy would never and wouldn’t be expected to. But Luke is different not just because of his personality and the fact that Vader’s his dad but also because he’s a Jedi, and Jedi love everybody including the Sith.

“The Jedi are trained to let go. They’re trained from birth. They’re not supposed to form attachments. They can love people- in fact, they should love everybody. They should love their enemies; they should love the Sith."

There’s a reason Luke is the only one attending his funeral.

That’s all well and good, but what about Luke’s role? Luke sacrificed himself because the Empire could sense his presence (which is not a great endorsement for future Jedi but still a noble act) but then made his entire quest an attempt to achieve Vader’s bedside conversion. He literally sat idle while shiploads of innocent beings were being annihilated by the Death Star. Even at the last moment, with Vader defeated, Luke threw his weapon aside and declared his own enlightenment - again while a war continued to rage outside. So yeah, hooray for Vader saving his own flesh and blood at the last moment (is that really so unselfish?) but how is any of this remotely helpful to the rebel cause or even ethically sound? The fact that Vader finally caved and saved his own son, after the Emperor had basically written him off anyway (“take your father’s place at my side”), doesn’t strike me as particularly noble…or even helpful given Luke’s complete obliviousness to anything beyond his and Vader’s religious aspirations.

Well, what else was Luke going to do? I don’t want to defend Luke’s actions, but what use would he have been in the battle? He hasn’t been an active duty fighter pilot for some time and risks being shot by a random TIE pilot (of which there were dozens, if not hundreds). On the ground, what can he do beyond slicing down a few stormtroopers and maybe pulling the shield bunker doors open, which are all things the strike team and Ewoks could do?

Luke’s most useful place is on the Death Star, dealing with Vader and the Emperor. Also, if one wants to add the Legends EU idea of “battle meditation” into the mix, Luke’s actions led to the Emperor’s death. The Emperor’s death, through the force, cratered the morale and resolve of the Imperials at Endor. Luke did have an important role within the battle, even though he wasn’t directly involved in the fighting.

Well the EU thing is just a post-hoc rationalisation to kind of answer what I’m illustrating. TESB sets Luke up as the ‘only hope’ (and Star Wars was retroactively renamed ‘A New Hope’ with this in mind) and yet Luke does nothing to earn this narrative ranking in RoTJ. The death of Palpatine is merely a by-product of Luke’s desire to save Vader. And heck, if the whole thing had taken a few minutes longer then all three of them would’ve been blown up anyway and the galaxy would never again have to worry about space gurus who have a very selective moral sense when it comes to violence, and also turn irreversibly evil when they lose their temper.

I think the actual story, in essence at least, is a good one. I just wish that Luke had gone with the expressed intention of defeating Palpatine with Vader’s redemption as the by-product of Luke’s actions (not the other way around). I also wish Palpatine had actually used legitimate manipulation to sway Luke (ie use guile to win Luke’s empathy and convince him to join the Empire to help heal the fractured galaxy and save his friends in the bargain. The whole ‘get mad and you’ll turn evil’ thing is stupid, as was the notion that Luke would join the Emperor just because he was angry).

Post
#1501894
Topic
The Star Wars canon saga as only the OT?
Time

G&G-Fan said:

Yep. Definitely agree with Sparky.

From my perspective, it feels less like a deed of a good man and more like a serial killer repenting on their deathbed.

That’s kinda exactly what it is.

The entire point is that Vader is a monster. Nothing he does can change that. But it still wasn’t too late for him to do the right thing. To turn to the light, kill the Emperor and destroy what he helped create. And he does. Along with himself and the Emperor, he brings down the Empire.

His redemption isn’t making up for what he did. He’s only redeemed in the sense that he chose to act out of selfless compassion (the way of the Jedi) instead of selfishness (the way of the Sith). Changing the person he was on the inside and finally letting go of his selfishness, hatred, and even his primal fear of death, which as Yoda says, “is the way of things. The way of the Force”.

You’re still trying to turn it into the person in the physical world atoning for what they did. But that’s not what it is and it never could be. It’s like asking someone to write a story about Hitler making up for the bad things he did (maybe slightly different, because Vader wasn’t the top guy in charge of the Empire, that’d be Palpatine, but it’s still pretty close). He literally was the backbone of a facist Sith regime for 23 years that committed genocide. You can’t make up for that. But he does stop the horror and become the man he once was. It’s all just about Vader choosing to be Anakin again on the inside, to do the right thing, and to finally be selfless. To give his life for his son. The only way his redemption works is if he sacrifices himself. You can’t have Vader go to the rebellion after saving Luke and saying, “Sorry that I, you know, helped enslave the galaxy, wiped out the Jedi, was a Sith for decades and literally probably killed your friends and families, but I’d really like to help out.” Vader can’t be redeemed in the sense of taking action that makes up for what he did in the physical realm; Vader is redeemed in the fact that he changed the person he was on the inside back to the compassionate Anakin Skywalker (in a sense, spiritually). As Lucas said, he took that last ounce of good left in him and destroyed the Emperor.

Also Luke being the only one who actually forgives Vader is also kind of the point. Most people in the galaxy would never and wouldn’t be expected to. But Luke is different not just because of his personality and the fact that Vader’s his dad but also because he’s a Jedi, and Jedi love everybody including the Sith.

“The Jedi are trained to let go. They’re trained from birth. They’re not supposed to form attachments. They can love people- in fact, they should love everybody. They should love their enemies; they should love the Sith."

There’s a reason Luke is the only one attending his funeral.

That’s all well and good, but what about Luke’s role? Luke sacrificed himself because the Empire could sense his presence (which is not a great endorsement for future Jedi but still a noble act) but then made his entire quest an attempt to achieve Vader’s bedside conversion. He literally sat idle while shiploads of innocent beings were being annihilated by the Death Star. Even at the last moment, with Vader defeated, Luke threw his weapon aside and declared his own enlightenment - again while a war continued to rage outside. So yeah, hooray for Vader saving his own flesh and blood at the last moment (is that really so unselfish?) but how is any of this remotely helpful to the rebel cause or even ethically sound? The fact that Vader finally caved and saved his own son, after the Emperor had basically written him off anyway (“take your father’s place at my side”), doesn’t strike me as particularly noble…or even helpful given Luke’s complete obliviousness to anything beyond his and Vader’s religious aspirations.

Post
#1489203
Topic
The Kenobi <s>Movie</s> Show (Spoilers)
Time

Anchorhead said:

Timeline question for the gap between the prequels and originals for the board.

I’ve watched the Clone Wars series and Bad Batch. I know both are prequel adjacent in their timelines, possibly same-as in some areas. Because I’m not familiar with the prequel films, is there any time frame that isn’t covered by any of the three? Specifically, the time (obviously) before Anakin becomes Vader.

Judging from nearly all the comments here and on review sites, people seem to really be happy with Hayden’s work in this series. Being among the few unwashed, I don’t have anything to compare it to but I will say he seems fine in the role and fits age-wise. I hope we get one or two more scenes similar to what we got Wednesday.

My thought is really more of a question; Is there an unexplored timespan where Ewan and Hayden could do a short series that takes place before this show? I would be interested in that. I know he becomes Vader in the prequels so it would be within the greater prequel time space, but maybe an adventure. Maybe something along the lines of Outbound Flight.

Actually, at least the way I see it, the age thing didn’t work for the prequels but is somewhat rectified in this series if you just go by the actors’ ages. Obi Wan was supposedly late 30s in episode 3 with Anakin being 22 or so. I think the official timeline has Obi wan as 57 in Star Wars '77 with Vader being in his early 40s (which obviously clashes with his unmasked look in RoTJ). Now Ewan is 51 and Hayden is 41, so having them be 61 and 51 ten years from now in Star Wars '77 lines up somewhat better for me. Ditto Owen Lars with Joel’s current age lining up well with Phil Brown.

Post
#1487210
Topic
The Kenobi <s>Movie</s> Show (Spoilers)
Time

I’m really enjoying this show - and I’m pretty ruthless these days re Star Wars canon. To me it is (so far) bridging the gap between eps 3 and 4 in a way that makes the transition smoother. When I used to marathon the 6 films, it never felt like eps 3 and 4 were in the same universe, irrespective of the Tantive as a bookend. To me this series is just prequel-ish enough to emerge from ep 3 and just OT enough to slide into ep 4. It seems to me that such matters as the understated lightsaber duels, the measured pacing, and the not-as-eleborate-as-the-prequels environments are simply a stylistic choice to make this transition really work whilst also providing some of the emotional beats (ie a stronger tension between Obi Wan and Owen) that the prequels lacked. Of course the saga is a continuity shambles in general, so I’m curious as to how it will all hold up (at least in my mind) when this series is done…

Post
#1484720
Topic
The Kenobi <s>Movie</s> Show (Spoilers)
Time

I’m actually quite optimistic that this show will heal the breach between episodes 3 and 4. When I used to watch the 6 films in order, it never really felt like the OT was in the same universe as the PT (with the possible exception of RoTJ which does feel rather prequel-like). In this instance the actors are the right age to match their counterparts in ep 4, and the aesthetic mix of prequel-ness and OT-ness should make the transition to the OT much smoother. Plus I’m assuming the strengthening of the relationships between Obi Wan and Owen combined with some attention to known quotes (“Obi Wan once thought as you do” for instance) will make the saga more cohesive. Here’s hoping…

Post
#1478391
Topic
Things you DISLIKE about the Original Trilogy ( but not the Ewoks, Leia and Luke being siblings, Death Star 2 etc.)
Time

theprequelsrule said:

Interesting how a fair number of people see Vader being Luke’s father as, perhaps, not a great idea. Far fewer people thought this in the last century I would bet.

It was a great idea, but the follow-through was woeful. A certain point of view? No, I think Obi Wan should have revealed that he had promised Owen Lars he would run with the ‘Vader killed your father’ thing. The backstory should have been that it was Owen who had insisted on Luke being raised on Tatooine (Luke’s being supposedly ‘hidden’ there makes no sense) and retaining his brother’s surname. Then it would stand to reason that Obi Wan would retire nearby in order to keep an eye on Luke in the event that Vader might attempt to claim his son.

Post
#1478390
Topic
Things you DISLIKE about the Original Trilogy ( but not the Ewoks, Leia and Luke being siblings, Death Star 2 etc.)
Time

Eyepainter said:

If there’s one thing that bothers me about the OT (aside from what’s already been excluded from this topic), it would be how they handled Yoda’s line, “No, there is another.” It makes even less sense because Leia is already under threat when Yoda says it. Worse, he doesn’t know what the future holds on Cloud City, so why would this other person be Leia?

If you’re asking me, a new character should’ve been introduced to take the role. Yoda would meet up with him/her, Luke could run into this other person, they’d join forces, and if we’re gonna go with a rebel victory for the ending, this other person could lead the rebels while Luke confronts his father. I’m not saying that’s perfect, but it would be a better ending for ROTJ than what we got.

This has always bugged the heck out of me! Yes, Yoda and Ben had just told Luke to sacrifice Han and Leia for the greater good, and then Yoda followed with “now matters are worse”. Hardly sounds like a guy who had just sensed that Leia would be rescued and immediately groomed for Jedi-hood. interestingly she’s not “too old” to begin the training…

I always felt Boba Fett should’ve been the ‘other’. He could’ve been someone who had trained under Yoda, abandoned the training, and taken on the bounty hunter mantle in order to infiltrate the Empire by doing bounty gigs for Vader/Palpatine. Instead of killing his targets he would be sparing their lives and creating his own secret army somewhere (hence Vader’s “no disintegrations” line) - that would explain his determination to keep Han Solo alive. Ha could turn the tide of the final battle by bringing in his fleet of pals (kind of like Lando in TROS) while Luke confronts Vader…(of course I’m thinking of Fett circa 1980, not the modern version)…

Post
#1469422
Topic
Crafting the Illusion of a Wider World
Time

Stardust1138 said:

Shopping Maul said:

I think the language/dialogue has a lot to do with it - particularly with Star Wars and Empire. Star Wars not only throws the audience into the middle of the adventure, it tosses around terms like ‘escape pods’ and ‘restraining bolts’ and ‘Bocce’…we’re hearing about the “binary language of Moisture Vaporators” like it’s completely normal/incidental. Tarkin speaks of the ‘Regional Governors’, Han owes money to someone called Jabba, power converters can be obtained at Tosche Station, and Dantooine is too remote to make an effective demonstration. The universe is full and alive. Only the Lightsaber seems to get an explanation - everything else is casually referenced as if everyone knows that losing the ‘lateral controls’ could be chancey during a dogfight.
I haven’t really thought about this in terms of the PT/ST though. Interesting…
Wonderful thread by the way!

I think the Prequels have it just as well as the Originals. Just in a slightly different way.

The Phantom Menace - We hear about the Angels on Iego from Anakin, we know the gungans don’t entirely like the surface dwellers on Naboo at first but we don’t know why, we learn about a race between Anakin and Sebulba before the one we see where Anakin crashed, and really if watched in sequence order we know R2-D2 is a R2 unit, we know C-3PO is a protocol droid meant to help out, and Anakin is destined to fulfill the prophecy talked about in lore the Jedi follow.

Attack of the Clones - We learn Qui-Gon’s master was Dooku, we learn Dooku left the Jedi Order, we learn Jango was recruited on the moons of Bogden, we learn Palpatine is staying in term long after it has expired but Padme contrasts this by giving up her position as queen to serve as a senator as shown, we hear a story of Clegg Lars and company going to look for Shimi, we learn about Jedi trials, and we have Anakin and Obi-Wan discuss falling into a nest of gundarks in their adventures together.

Revenge of the Sith - We hear about Anakin and Obi-Wan dealing with some kind of business on Cato Neimoidia, Yoda talks about having good relations with the wookiees, we learn about Darth Plagueis being able to potentially influence Midi-Chlorians to create life alluding to Anakin - which ended of being the Whills and Midi-Chlorians in reality, and we learn some character could cheat death.

There’s more of course but it’s been awhile since I’ve watched them.

George alluded to the subtle differences:

“I didn’t want to do the craziness or, as someone once described it, the ‘effervescent giddiness’, of the first film. I knew the story eventually had to go to a dark place, so I purposely darkened it down. I realised early on that the original trilogy was a plot driven, fable. The new trilogy is a history, a backstory, a personal dossier of all these characters.”

There’s a history and story that takes place alongside the confines of the stories we are shown on screen as there’s things going on that we only ever hear about or maybe see later in The Clone Wars series. However in sticking with just the films it adds a sense of realness and authenticity to the world building and characters. The Sequels have a couple of moments like this but not to the scale or scope of the first six films where there’s more going on and a real history to it. It really hurt things not having a time gap between the films. It really limited what could happen off screen and character motivations.

I agree. I think that’s Lucas’ strength really - building lore and worlds and context. For me the only thing that really detracted from this was making everyone related via the Luke/Leia/Vader thing. It kind of shrank the universe when initially Luke had been just one thread in a vast setting rather than the thread.

I agree with Rocknroll about the empty planets of TFA. Jakku should have been a true junkyard planet rather than Tatooine II, and the whole ‘Starkiller hyperspace laser that can be seen from all points in the Galaxy’ thing made the entire SW universe seem small and illogical. And who gives a damn about Hosnian Prime anyway?

TROS felt like the SW of old to me though. The references to Poe’s dodgy past and Lando’s account of post-ROTJ adventures with Luke gave the SW universe that ‘peripheral stuff happening’ vibe of the earlier movies IMO.

Post
#1469300
Topic
Crafting the Illusion of a Wider World
Time

I think the language/dialogue has a lot to do with it - particularly with Star Wars and Empire. Star Wars not only throws the audience into the middle of the adventure, it tosses around terms like ‘escape pods’ and ‘restraining bolts’ and ‘Bocce’…we’re hearing about the “binary language of Moisture Vaporators” like it’s completely normal/incidental. Tarkin speaks of the ‘Regional Governors’, Han owes money to someone called Jabba, power converters can be obtained at Tosche Station, and Dantooine is too remote to make an effective demonstration. The universe is full and alive. Only the Lightsaber seems to get an explanation - everything else is casually referenced as if everyone knows that losing the ‘lateral controls’ could be chancey during a dogfight.
I haven’t really thought about this in terms of the PT/ST though. Interesting…
Wonderful thread by the way!

Post
#1466654
Topic
<strong>Return Of The Jedi</strong> - a general <strong>Random Thoughts</strong> thread
Time

I always felt that Boba Fett should’ve been the ‘other’ Yoda was talking about. He could’ve been an ex-Jedi (or someone who’d abandoned traditional training) and taken on the bounty hunter mantle in order to win Vader’s good graces. The whole ‘no disintegrations’ thing would be because Boba had been doing jobs for Vader and secretly sparing the lives of his targets - thus creating an army of Empire dissenters and ‘criminals’ that would prove crucial in the conclusion of ROTJ (kind of like Lando at the end of TROS). This would account for his being so adamant that Han Solo be taken alive.
Best of all - no “Leia’s my sister”…

Post
#1449967
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

With regard to the Marcia Lucas thing, I’d say that no-one actually ‘gets’ Star Wars and that includes its creator. Lucas was famously ‘30% happy’ with the first film while we as fans were an obvious 100%. So arguably from the beginning Lucas himself didn’t get it. I’m not saying this to diss George, I’m just saying the whole thing is deeply subjective. I myself think Gary Kurtz is the one who ‘got’ it - but his vision for RoTJ and beyond rankles a lot of people.

Back to the ST, while I have my issues with TLJ I think Luke’s death (and the manner of his death) was one of the greatest moments in the saga.

Post
#1449316
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

Omni said:

I think once again it’s a lot more meta than anything. Mental gymnastics are required for Luke to be a legend in the galaxy - his story after Star Wars was very intimate and personal, not grand or anything. Lando, Han and Leia should rightfully become legends, but Luke? No one besides Leia and Han would even know he was on the Death Star anyway, the only people that saw him died…

Rian is playing up to Abrams’ fantasy of Luke being insanely powerful which was fed to him by over 30 years of Luke becoming the quintessential hero in pop culture - exactly because he’s not your common hero but much deeper than that, as Servii rightfully pointed - and of course the Legends stuff with Grand Master Luke Skywalker, single most powerful being ever to have been born.

Everyone expected Luke to be moving entire planets with his mind or something of the sort - he deserved it after going through such hardships in the OT. But life isn’t quite so good, and mistakes will haunt you until the end of time.

This right here is the problem - I’ve beaten this poor horse endlessly on these threads but to me the issue starts with RoTJ. Luke did not save the galaxy in RoTJ (beyond inadvertently preventing Palpatine’s escape from DSII). This sucks from the OT’s perspective because the whole ‘new hope’/‘only hope’ thing turned out to be BS - the Empire was defeated by basic war stuff. By extension the notion of the Galaxy (as expressed by TFA’s opening crawl) relying on Luke Skywalker to lead the charge against the First Order is immensely dumb. There is nothing in Luke’s actions (ie standing idly by while Palpatine destroys Rebel ships, refusing to fight Darth Vader, and finally throwing his weapon away for personal Zen reasons) that screams “yeah, let’s train a new order of pacifists to challenge this new threat”…

Post
#1447682
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

I see Star Wars in general as being a ‘band effort’ rather than the sole vision of one man. Yes, SW is/was Lucas’ creation, but the input of folks like Kurtz, Dykstra, MacQuarrie, Johnston, Burt, Marcia Lucas, Kershner, Kasdan etc etc really helped shape this universe significantly. If anything I see the PT as the equivalent of Mick Jagger reforming the Stones with an all-new lineup. So I don’t buy into the ‘George as canon’ thing at all. A Lucas-ST probably would’ve sucked.

Post
#1447144
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? - a general discussion thread
Time

Really cool thread and I’ve enjoyed reading all the posts - thank you all!

For me it’s a case of mostly agreeing with the general vibe - I liked TFA but the feeling kind of wore off, I didn’t like TLJ but it was very pretty to look at. Where I definitely part company with most folks is that I (to my genuine surprise) loved TROS and it remains my favourite SW movie since TESB. I just wish it had been called Revenge of the Jedi.

Post
#1441357
Topic
Small details that took you <em><strong>FOREVER</strong></em> to notice in the <em>Star Wars</em> films
Time

Bluto said:

Speaking of misheard lines, this one springs to mind from TESB:
“You truly belong here with us among the clouds,” said by Lando to Leia in Cloud City.

It wasn’t until relatively recently that I read the “among the clouds” on subtitles somewhere. For over 30 years, I thought he said, “You truly belong here with us modern class.”

Well when I was 9 I thought the Death Star was “orbiting the planet of maximum philosophy”…

Post
#1430017
Topic
In defense of Rey Palpatine in <em>The Rise of Skywalker</em>, and why I do not think it undermines her arc in <em>The Last Jedi</em>.
Time

JakeRyan17 said:

Yeah, that doesn’t work still. Her parents being nobody was about her not feeling like a part of this big and important conflict. Her grandfather being the biggest and most important part of this almost-century of conflict does contradict that. It contradicts her emotional arc of having to create self-worth, rather than her importance being externally from who her parents and grandparents were.

Her feelings of worthlessness don’t come across at all in Rise of Skywalker. It’s a feeling that she must be evil because Palpatine is evil. And overcoming that is literally what Luke already went through with Vader. It’s reductive to Rey as a character on a storytelling level, repositioning her again as a proxy for Luke rather than an autonomous character, and it’s also reductive to her arc that she already went through in Last Jedi to learn that she is her own person regardless of who her family was.

It’s just bad writing. Like it all you want, maybe it helps you with the accusations that she was a “Mary Sue” or whatever. It doesn’t make up for the fact that it was bad writing that hurt the character and story. Maybe that can and will be fixed, but it hasn’t been yet.

While I’ve enjoyed this thread immensely I have to agree with this. That said, as a huge fan of TROS, I like the ‘Rey as proxy Luke’ thing because it kind of goes where I wish the story had in ROTJ. Rey’s revulsion at her heritage, as well as the shocking manifestation of her inherited power during the Chewie incident, is much more convincing/interesting to me than Luke’s out-of-the-blue “there’s still good in him, I can’t kill my own father” routine. But this is purely because I view TROS in isolation as a defacto ROTJ reboot. In terms of being a coherent continuation of the previous film I think it’s a pretty blatant reversal. But the ‘Rey as nobody’ thing, compelling as it was in theory, didn’t cohere with TFA either. The whole ST is a hot mess really. It’s a shame…

Post
#1405583
Topic
Anyone else dislike Rogue One? I feel like the only person.
Time

I didn’t like it. I had an exchange about this with some folks here on one of the RO threads a while back. I think the actual premise is okay, but the film lines up poorly with ANH, the ‘reactor as deliberate sabotage’ thing doesn’t make sense to me, and the fan service is lame. I do understand why people dig it, but it’s not for me.

Post
#1405581
Topic
Star Wars is Surrealism, not Science Fiction (essay)
Time

I enjoyed Dark Empire to a degree but it never felt ‘real’ to me. I only got halfway through Zahn’s first SW novel for the same reason. Ultimately it came down to the fact that RoTJ was such a conclusive ending in my view, so anything else just felt like more SW for the sake of it. More importantly, the EU emphasised just how dissatisfied I was with RoTJ overall. The ‘Leia as twin sister’ thing just doesn’t work for me at any level, so any continuation with ‘Leia as Jedi raising Jedi kids’ just seems like so much BS to me. I’m one of the few people I know of that genuinely enjoyed TROS as a legitimate piece of post-TESB Star Wars (every other movie since and including RoTJ has annoyed me at some level!) and it’s a shame that the Leia Skywalker thing is unavoidable in this case.

On a side note let me just thank ZkinandBonez, Rocknroll41, and Pakka for these great essays…it’s such fun nerding out with everyone here!

Post
#1403581
Topic
Star Wars is Surrealism, not Science Fiction (essay)
Time

ZkinandBonez said:

screams in the void said:

also , Robert E. Howard deserves a mention in this discussion , he is regarded as the father of sword and sorcery and did a lot of world building for Conan’s world , as evidenced in his Hyborian age essay https://conanthecimmerian.fandom.com/wiki/The_Hyborian_Age Many fantasy authors imitated him afterwards , but never quite captured his spirit . Then there were the many many fantasy film cash grabs that came in the wake of the 1982 Conan The Barbarian film …

Yes, Howard’s another one of those guys that no one has ever quite managed to imitate or adapt to film. Now I do really enjoy the John Milius Conan film, but it really has very little to do with Howard. Unlike Lovecraft though, and despite often borrowing a lot of his ideas, Howard did have a tendency to add a backstory to everything so I’d definitely say he has more in common with Tolkien in that regard then with OT SW. Then again characters/creatures like Yag-Kosha are quite abstract in concept.

Does anyone know if Lucas ever made any direct mention of Howard work as an influence? I would assume he at the very least knew of the character as SW was written right at the start of the Howard boom in the late 60’s and early 70’s.

As a side note: I find it fascinating that Tolkien’s first published book was only one year after Howard’s death. People often forget that Howard did the whole world-building thing before Tolkien, that is, as far as what was publicly available.

Actually, I think the real parallel here is between Lucas and Milius. The thought processes behind Star Wars and Conan are remarkably similar - Milius wanted to create a believable ‘lived-in’ universe in the same way George did, and both were going for a real mythic quality. The ‘father’s sword’ motifs, the aged wizard - Conan even has its villain (played by James Earl Jones) deliver a ‘I am your father’ speech! And both productions had run-ins with Gil Taylor…
Conan and SW have pretty much the same poster art as well…