The prequels were a hundred thousand times more unpopular than the sequels, and Lucasfilm had the means and opportunity to decanonize them from 2012-2014 and be met by happy fans, but they didn’t. They’re not going to retcon or rewrite the sequels.
I really hope not. I was kind of sick of the Filoni OCs inexplicably showing up this season, but at least Ahsoka and Bo-Katan were decent characters in TCW. Genuinely, unironically Ezra is the worst Star Wars character. At least Jar Jar isn’t really that relevant to the story, and Anakin Skywalker is kind of made better in TCW.
Yeah but it’s less like the reaction to mass murder and more like a case of indigestion.
Could say the same or worse about Leia to her home planet. It’s not Rabbit Hole.
To be fair, we never saw her reaction to its actual destruction, only getting back to her hours later.
Nevertheless, this is a failure of SW '77.
Or just a deliberate creative decision. Leia is still technically a supporting character to Luke, so it makes sense to merely imply some character moments. After all, they shot a reaction for her planet’s destruction but chose to cut it, probably to keep the focus on Luke.
People here are right about Lucas struggling with emotional storytelling, but this is true too. In ANH, Leia’s pretty much just a supporting character, and gets far less development and screentime than Luke and Han, and even Obi-Wan. Not showing her reaction seems weird in retrospect, now that Empire and Jedi have made her as important of a character as Luke, but she’s not as big of a character in ANH. Dwelling on her reaction seems sort of weird to me.
G&G-Fan said:
That’s another thing that a lot of people miss. When he says “Do not underestimate the powers of the Emperor” that obviously means he faced him before. Obviously he was witness to the Emperor’s power first hand. That actually becomes a plot hole for anyone who removes that duel from the movie, because now how else would he know the Emperor’s power? It fits into the original trilogy perfectly.I always took the line to mean that Anakin tried to beat the Emperor somehow and failed, thus becoming his thrall. How exactly would require some good writing. Instead Anakin was just dumb and fell for the most basic emotional trickery, then allowed Mace Windu die. And Yoda just knew all of Palpatine’s powers ahead of time, since he saw them from Dooku and wasn’t even surprised by them. They’re now just basic evil powers anyone can learn.
What’s even crazier is that Palpatine straight up tells him that he doesn’t actually know how to save people from death and Anakin still goes along with everything.
Like, it’s probably not so easy for him to just kinda leave Palpatine, but his entire motive for him turning to the dark side, he is literally told is a lie before he even becomes Darth Vader.
Maybe his tinnitus was acting up after so many explosions in the Clone Wars and he didn’t hear him. Still though, what a dumbass.
Or it’s because of what I explained above? Because Dooku knew he had no chance against Yoda in terms of the Force so he changed the fight but was too arrogant to admit it, a very Sith trait and a general trait of Dooku’s character (always portraying himself as super confident)?
Why does Yoda go along with it?
Plus, boiling down the Force to just a superpower to use to fight doesn’t help the prequels’ case when it comes to their treatment of the Force.
So when Yoda and Dooku pulled out their swords to go at it, this implied that swords still held some importance as to the winner of the fight.
Dooku outright says “It is obvious that this contest can not be decided by our knowledge of the Force, but by our skills with a lightsaber.” At the risk of being really hyperbolic… can you get any more antithetical to the core concepts of Star Wars itself?
Finn in TFA: “Hosnian Prime! The entire planet is one big city.”
I don’t see why people are so disappointed that the prequels didn’t include some mind-blowing revelations that would change the way we looked at the OT. Adding needless complications to a prequel of an already existing franchise tends to feel contrived (case in point: Star Trek Discovery). Even then, they already introduced some ideas people weren’t expecting, most importantly the clones being the good guys and the Republic falling from within.
I don’t think anyone’s disappointed by it. At least to my knowledge. Personally, if there really was some trick about Palpatine not actually being the Emperor or not actually being the big evil guy in control, I think it would’ve been really awful.
Sorry, I just gathered from the tone of your previous post that you were disappointed something like that didn’t happen. Referencing the ESB twist as an example of how great Star Wars plot twists can be, then seeming bored with how it ended up being played straight. I understand that I could have misinterpreted though.
I’m sorry
Was this meant to be condescending? If so, I should be the one who’s sorry. I didn’t mean to put you down in any way. But then again, maybe I’m just misinterpreting again.
No I was genuinely apologizing
I don’t see why people are so disappointed that the prequels didn’t include some mind-blowing revelations that would change the way we looked at the OT. Adding needless complications to a prequel of an already existing franchise tends to feel contrived (case in point: Star Trek Discovery). Even then, they already introduced some ideas people weren’t expecting, most importantly the clones being the good guys and the Republic falling from within.
I don’t think anyone’s disappointed by it. At least to my knowledge. Personally, if there really was some trick about Palpatine not actually being the Emperor or not actually being the big evil guy in control, I think it would’ve been really awful.
Sorry, I just gathered from the tone of your previous post that you were disappointed something like that didn’t happen. Referencing the ESB twist as an example of how great Star Wars plot twists can be, then seeming bored with how it ended up being played straight. I understand that I could have misinterpreted though.
I’m sorry
Reddit 🤮
The lack of released TRoS deleted scenes gives this project a big hurdle to have to deal with.
I just hope this doesn’t become yet another “promise it’s from the bad guys perspective” only to become a redemption story 3 episodes in. Let’s get a full-blown evil Sith - no redemptions!
Bad guys turning good has become so overdone at this point.
I don’t see why people are so disappointed that the prequels didn’t include some mind-blowing revelations that would change the way we looked at the OT. Adding needless complications to a prequel of an already existing franchise tends to feel contrived (case in point: Star Trek Discovery). Even then, they already introduced some ideas people weren’t expecting, most importantly the clones being the good guys and the Republic falling from within.
I don’t think anyone’s disappointed by it. At least to my knowledge. Personally, if there really was some trick about Palpatine not actually being the Emperor or not actually being the big evil guy in control, I think it would’ve been really awful.
SparkySywer said:
In the actual context of the scene that’s from, Yoda and Obi-Wan are talking about how Anakin fell to the dark side because he was unprepared and the Emperor manipulated him, and now Luke’s leaving Dagobah, with his training unfinished, to go face Vader. Especially since the Emperor wants Luke and his abilities.I really don’t think it’s about the crazy Marvel superpowers the Emperor has, because, well, for one, Force Lightning isn’t in ESB, and for two, Luke never fights the Emperor in the entire trilogy.
HAHAHAHAHAHA (this isn’t even hyperbole I actually laughed so hard upon seeing this)
This proves you didn’t actually watch the movies. Yoda says to not underestimate the Emperor in Return of the Jedi. Not Empire Strikes Back. Force lightning is in Return of the Jedi.
I would think people on a forum called ORIGINALTRILOGY.COM would actually know jack and shit about the original trilogy.
Watch the movies, because you clearly haven’t. I literally just provided examples for you completely ignored them. And another purist due literally AGREED WITH ME.
Also regarding Bede’s comments, what he suggested is another valid way to incorporate Yoda in the prequels, so I can’t really say you’re wrong, but I like what they actually did. I also don’t find the duels in AOTC and ROTS fake, I think they’re great, especially the ones in ROTS. Shadiversity (a guy who actually knows sword fighting) even did a video analyzing the Anakin vs. Obi-Wan duel move-by-move and he thinks it’s fantastic and one of the best choregraphed duels in films (he also analyzed the Last Jedi duel and found it to be absolutely horrible). But again, whether something looks fake to you is rather subjective so I can’t really say you’re wrong.
I’ve watched the whole saga multiple times and I’ve never heard of “Death Vader”. Must be in the alternate universe versions of the movies you watched, because clearly we haven’t been watching the same ones.
Also how is the Tragedy of Darth Vader story not coherent? He becomes a Jedi (rises), becomes evil in the third movie, is evil for the next two movies and the greater part of the sixth one, and then redeems himself at the end of said sixth one. “Not being coherent” would be if Vader was a good guy in ESB.
Lmao, Yoda says similar things in both RotJ and Empire. My bad. CTRL+F’ing on the RotJ and ESB scripts didn’t help me today
Looks like another feminist wrecked by hero prequel fan G&G
It’s established in Revenge of the Sith that he became Qui-Gon’s apprentice, it doesn’t take much to realize that the change in his character between the prequels and the originals was because his perspective changed during his exile.
So… off-screen and not actually a thing in the prequels?
There’s not even any EU stuff that covers what Yoda did between ROTS and ESB. Guess who also had character development between films? Luke, between ESB and ROTJ. He grew from rash and impatient to collected and wise. But I guess that wasn’t actually in the movies.
There’s EU stuff that covers absolutely everything. The Old EU had a full backstory for the guy running around with an ice cream maker in Empire, the New EU has a full backstory for the guy who gets choked out by Vader in ANH.
He didn’t say “Don’t underestimate the Emperor’s ability to manipulate people”, he said “The powers of the Emperor.”
In the actual context of the scene that’s from, Yoda and Obi-Wan are talking about how Anakin fell to the dark side because he was unprepared and the Emperor manipulated him, and now Luke’s leaving Dagobah, with his training unfinished, to go face Vader. Especially since the Emperor wants Luke and his abilities, they’re worried that the path he’s going down will lead him to the same fate as Anakin.
I really don’t think it’s about the crazy Marvel superpowers the Emperor has, because, well, for one, Force Lightning isn’t in ESB, and for two, Luke never fights the Emperor in the entire trilogy.
Also the force in the prequels isn’t just superpowers and fights.
I think both strategies for writing a prequel are valid. Writing them with an Episodic Order in mind is valid, especially since Star Wars has these episode numbers which at least beg the question on why they are what they are. Writing them with a Release Order in mind is valid, because, well, they were released in that order. Giving out information and developing the story in that order makes sense because the newer stuff builds on the older stuff like every other story.
The Tragedy of Darth Vader stuff is kind of the worst of both worlds, though. You get the OT story spoiled like a Release Order would, but it’s not a coherent enough story to justify the Episodic Order mindset. The two trilogies might as well be entirely atomized stories.
Ahh but there’s the real problem, and keeping all of the ESB twists intact would require far more creativity.
Or maybe because it would contradict more lines from the original trilogy? Like Yoda knowing who Luke’s father was enough to say “Powerful Jedi was he” and “Much anger in him… like his father”.
He can know Anakin without having been in the Jedi Order. Not to mention, Yoda says that he’d been watching Luke all his life, despite being on Dagobah for 19 years. Maybe Yoda just knows this shit.
I don’t necessarily think Yoda being outside the (main?) Jedi Order is the only or even best way to go. But it would’ve made for a much better characterization than… whatever the hell you could call the Yoda we got.
How else would he know to “Not underestimate the powers of the Emperor”?
The Emperor’s clearly powerful and got to Anakin decades ago. Him getting to Luke is a huge risk. Plus, Yoda could have had experience with the Emperor without any of the changes to his character the prequels brought.
And how else would he learn “Wars not make one great” without having experienced that first hand.
Well, just knowledge of history, although that would be really boring. Really, there’s nothing wrong with him having first hand knowledge of the horrors of war, but it needs to have one of two things:
-An actual character arc of him learning the horrors of war, in the actual movies, and not from some EU writer trying to rehabilitate the prequels
-Or, push it back to before the prequels if you don’t want to deal with it, or if you want to have Yoda be a force for pacifism in the story.
Having him be an active, enthusiastic general and then inexplicably become a huge pacifist off-screen between movies, doesn’t make for a compelling story.
That’s another thing that a lot of people miss. When he says “Do not underestimate the powers of the Emperor” that obviously means he faced him before. Obviously he was witness to the Emperor’s power first hand. That actually becomes a plot hole for anyone who removes that duel from the movie, because now how else would he know the Emperor’s power? It fits into the original trilogy perfectly.
“Powers of the Emperor” doesn’t necessarily mean his skill at lightsaber fighting. Hell, the prequels recontextualizing everything about the Force and a Jedi’s power to be just Dragonball Z fights is the worst thing about them.
I’m not a super fan of conservative prequel rewrites, but Belated Media’s Episode III rewrite has a scene that deals with this plot point a hundred thousand times better, here, and also shows Palpatine’s rise to power in a more compelling way.
Belated Media’s really only putting the bare minimum in, in my opinion, but it’s leagues better than the story the prequels gave us. Because, well, these ideas are actually there in the story itself.
People still argued about it at the time though. Not sure what the expected, as if Palpatine was going to be his brother or something.
A lot of people at the time expected the man who brought us Vader being Luke’s father to have something up his sleeve. Maybe Palpatine was a puppet controlled by some higher evil? Clones?
But it was played absolutely straight.
Fourthly, I think we need to have a more political plot line in the movie. Why is the Emperor building another Death Star? In Episode IV, Tarkin reveals that the Original Death Star was to be used to keep the Regional Governors in line with the Empire. So since the rebels destroyed the first one, are the Regional Governors not following the Emperors will? Just throwing a couple of lines that explains the state of the Galaxy would help tremendously.
It was actually there to keep the locals in line with the Regional Governors, but your sentiment is right.
Minutes before this he was self-assuredly walking into the Senate saying how Palpatine’s rule was about to end and his faith in Vader and the Dark Side was misplaced. These words may be bluster, but at the same time they don’t reveal a deep conflict within Yoda. He seems to only question himself once he loses the fight, at which point he has decided to run off into exile before the speeder has even left the air parking lot. Maybe if we saw him gazing out at the still-burning Jedi Temple, the virtual camera lingering on the sadness in his eyes as he comes to a conclusion, it would be clearer that he views his failure as something more than losing a single fight. But that’s not in the film, and I don’t see why I should do Lucas’s job for him.
What changed between when Yoda’s talking big to Palpatine and when he says “Failed, I have”?
Nothing to do with the Jedi or the Republic, or the Sith or the Empire. What changed is he lost a fight. That’s kind of what we have to go on, and that’s really the only real interpretation I think you can get from the movie itself.
Not to mention, why does he realize he’s failed then of all times, if he’s talking about some grand centuries-long, galaxy-defining failure? I’d say even before the fight, even if Yoda won, Palpatine getting as far as he did shows that something at least had failed. If this was all actually in the prequels, why wouldn’t he say this right when it became obvious that Palpatine was a Sith?
The PT & ST reflect each other perfectly — equally terrible in diametrically polar ways.
Is this really an unpopular opinion? Thought it was cannon…
From what I’ve seen, most fans love one trilogy, loathe the other, or enjoy both. Fans who dislike both trilogies seem to be in the minority.
I don’t think fans who dislike both trilogies are so rare, moreso that they end up picking one side or the other on the internet.
Yeah
The PT & ST reflect each other perfectly — equally terrible in diametrically polar ways.
Is this really an unpopular opinion? Thought it was cannon…
From what I’ve seen, most fans love one trilogy, loathe the other, or enjoy both. Fans who dislike both trilogies seem to be in the minority.
I don’t think fans who dislike both trilogies are so rare, moreso that they end up picking one side or the other on the internet.
Owned?
how fascism can come about.
You don’t need a decade long overly complicated secret plan to stage a coup (just look at the state of the world today). The PT (and The Clone Wars animated TV show) fail completely to be relevant as understanding politics (especially the TV show aimed at children: the more political arcs are dreadfully boring)
Gotta agree, Palpatine’s rise to power is completely inaccurate to how actual dictators rise to power. George Lucas compares Palpatine to Caesar, Hitler, and Napoleon, and none of their rises to power have any similarities to Palpatine other than that they gamed the system from the inside.
Caesar, Hitler, and Napoleon were natural consequences of centuries of building rot in the nations they took power in. What was this in the Galactic Republic?
For all the movies are concerned, Palpatine comes out of nowhere for no reason and wins because something something manipulation.
(not my video but this would probably take the cake for the worst edit idea)
I wonder how much longer I’ll last here… without completely fucking volcano.
By all means, fuck a volcano. Not a paraphilia I go for, but you do you. Just make certain it’s a dormant volcano you make passionate love to. There’s hot sex, and then there’s hot sex.
Me after burning my dick off after fucking a volcano
