SparkySywer

G&G-Fan said:

Buzz Lightyear said:

People are too obsessed with the idea of trilogies. Honestly they should have never bothered numbering the Star Wars movies at all, and should have just filled things in with whatever movies they wanted to make. So like, for instance, they could have just made a bunch of movies about young Anakin at different stages of his life, or about other characters in that time period (which could feature Anakin as a supporting character or guest character), and we wouldn’t know the exact one where Anakin would turn to the dark side, but we would see the gradual transition. And then a later movie could just be about him hunting down Jedi. Others could be about other characters, like Obi Wan.

I mean that’s eventually what the Star Wars meta narrative evolved into, when you factor in Clone Wars and all the standalone movies and Disney Plus shows. There’s no reason they couldn’t have just written things that way in the first place, instead of forcing the prequels and sequels to mirror the OT.

While I think it would’ve been great to have a movie of just Darth Vader killing Jedi

Moving his turn earlier doesn’t necessarily mean the ending is nothing but killing Jedi. A more convincing arc could’ve been:

1. Set Anakin up as a hero

2. Anakin succumbs to the dark side

3. Anakin’s friends fail to pull him back to the light

Stardust1138 said:

Emre1601 said:

Darth Malgus said:

Well, I’m perfectly aware that Star Wars has not always been Anakin’s Saga since '77, but I actively support the retcon, and I think that the Hexology, as a whole, can be described as Anakin’s Saga, even if Star Wars has not always been so from the beginning.

I mean no disrespect but it only become retconned to be Anakin’s Saga around '99, or maybe '05 when ROTS was released and this new Saga was completed.
I was only mentioning it as some fans online claim “it was always Anakin’s Saga” elsewhere online which is both annoying and untrue.

To be fair I think it could be said it goes back even further than that in a way. George told Jim Bloom of ILM during stages of post production of Empire, “The first trilogy is about the young Ben Kenobi and the early life of Luke’s father when Luke is a little boy.”.

Of course we never got to see Luke as a little boy but the story grew and evolved. However the key I think is that he said the first trilogy would focus on Anakin and Obi-Wan. This ended up being true. He talked about this in another quote that the Prequels were meant to give Anakin’s side of the story since the Original Trilogy is more relying information from a certain point of view of those that knew him.

None of this means that the OT is parts 4-6 in Anakin’s story.

It is his story after all up until Disney came into the picture and decided to not use his Sequel Trilogy treatments.

It’s not as clean cut as Lucasfilm deciding not to use his sequel trilogy treatments. Because of how much of the ST we know specifically came from Lucas’s treatments, it’s probably more likely that they decided not to be bound by them. Although it’s not like we have his treatments to compare.

A lot of the time you also claim that there are ideas in the PT which were meant to be resolved in a Lucas ST, but this is also very unlikely. George Lucas never had plans for an overarching saga, and I doubt when making the prequel trilogy he thought any further ahead than the movie he was currently working on, with very rare exceptions. The information we have on his ideas on the ST were contradictory and read like multiple separate concepts for an ST from different points in time at best, more likely there were just a couple points in his life where he thought about it and brainstormed, but never committed to any idea. Ideas for a PT that predate the 90s are the same way, with the most consistent details (Vader being in the suit because of a fight with Obi-Wan on a volcano) having the depth of a DnD character backstory. Not even that example goes as far back as the production of ANH, where the original idea was that it was just a regular space suit for breathing in space, where they figured Vader and the Stormtroopers might be often.

It’s also curious the original concept for A New Hope had a prophecy called the Son of Suns. So he was toying with idea of a prophecy in the early concepts too.

Maybe, but a Chosen One prophecy is also a common fantasy trope. It doesn’t imply Star Wars was always Anakin’s saga. I mean, the Son of Suns is obviously Luke, and not the guy who isn’t even Anakin yet. As far as Lucas was concerned in 1976, Anakin is Luke’s sword in the stone.

To be honest, Luke is a far better candidate of being the Chosen One than Anakin even with the prequels. Anakin only destroys the Sith on an absolute technicality. Not that Luke even has a strong argument, either. This is why the Chosen One as a concept works so poorly for Star Wars.

Stardust1138 said:

SparkySywer said:

IDK what Stardust’s talking about when it comes to Palpatine’s hubris or whatever.

I’m talking about this moment not long afterwards. Palpatine believes him to be dead. His arrogance and overconfidence is on full display as it is with Luke later.

I know that, it’s just not the deeper meaning of Yoda’s cloak falling has nothing to do with Palpatine’s hubris.

Anchorhead said:

I’m not familiar with the prequels, so I guess it’s lost on me as to why that’s not subtle. Neither here nor there. I’ll never see them, so it doesn’t matter.

IDK what Stardust’s talking about when it comes to Palpatine’s hubris or whatever. Maybe the prequels are less clean cut than I thought. This is when Yoda feels he lost the fight against Palpatine (not just the duel but also the wider conflict), the visual metaphor of the cloak falling is just to represent the fall of the Jedi. Metaphorically it marks the point in time where the Jedi lost. Not that deep, but cool that this idea is reinforced visually.

Stardust1138 said:

It’s nothing personal towards anyone at all what I am saying.

I don’t feel insulted by what you say in any way. I just think it’s silly that the only reasons you seem to ever give why someone would disagree with you is that they just don’t understand the prequels. The prequels are not difficult to understand. The very, very last thing they are is subtle, and the amount of “visual literacy” you need to comprehend them isn’t that much.

It isn’t really that hard to figure out what something like this is trying to say.

Nor is George Lucas’s visual storytelling particularly unique or complex.

None of this is a dig at the prequels, by the way, and “hard to understand” is not a good goal to have when writing a Star Wars movie.

My point is,

This all merely means I think it could be examined more closely instead of just assuming there’s no deeper meanings behind certain things
People absolutely do think there’s deeper meanings to the prequels, examine them, comprehend them correctly, and still come away with the conclusion that the prequels are bad. The debate over the prequels is not between people who know what they were trying to say and people who don’t know what they were trying to say, it’s between people who liked what they were saying and people who don’t like what they were saying.

RetributorsFury said:

I’m brand new to this forum, this is my first post. I’m a huge fan of the original trilogy, and I’m not a fan of much else 😃 I love games, toys, etc. that focus on the original trilogy.

Welcome to the forum king

Anchorhead said:

Stardust1138 said:
the only thing I can think of that I dislike about the Original Trilogy is Luke and Leia kissing but in a way there’s a lot of mythology that does the same thing. So while it is weird that they do kiss it’s not completely unheard of within myth and we know it influenced George

It’s truly sad how Lucas has spent decades crafting this revised image of himself as some deep thinker who embarked on a grand 12-film/6-film/9-film/the media made that up/it was always my idea/etc, Saga (genuflect).

Rowling does the same thing. I wonder if creating something that becomes as popular as Harry Potter or Star Wars does stuff like this to a person. Are there any other examples?

Stardust1138 said:

ken-obi said:

Stardust1138 said:

SparkySywer said:

BedeHistory731 said:

Sure, but sometimes you have to step back and say, “Wow, I’m spending countless hours looking for deeper meaning in family space fantasy movies. Maybe I’m no better than the nerds who memorize wikis.”

I think you absolutely can ascribe deeper meaning to Star Wars movies, even the prequels and sequels. The Star Wars fandom wouldn’t be so passionate if this weren’t the case. Star Wars isn’t indie arthouse kino and George Lucas isn’t Francis Ford Coppola, but he was a friend and close colleague of his. Star Wars isn’t Marvel either and Lucas isn’t Michael Bay.

That said, and I truly do mean no disrespect to Stardust1138 (because this is all an internet argument over above average space movies after all)…

Emre1601 said:

Mental gymnastics and insane stretches have always been required by Prequel fans when in discussion with others who did not enjoy these films or point out the discrepancies between the two trilogies. I am surprised many Prequel fans themselves rarely seem to question why Lucas’ poor writing for the later Trilogy created so many needless plot-holes and contradictions, and still look to use such gymnastics and stretches instead.

This is spot on. I almost feel like it’s a culture within the prequel fandom, because prequel fans talking about the basic plot of the prequels is full of more headcanon than what’s actually shown on screen.

All I’ll say is there’s always another side to every story. Everyone gets something different from what they see as we each have different experiences that shape us. We can choose to view something from a more personal perspective or we can view it from a more artistic perspective. I tend to view it from both but I recognise not everyone cares to go down that rabbit hole. That’s there choice but in my humble opinion especially with something as profoundly moving as Star Wars can be I question why you wouldn’t want to understand George Lucas and his point of view but in life you can’t always understand why people think as they do. I don’t know anymore in life if we truly ever understand each other but it’s human sympathy that is more valuable than ideologies, beliefs, and thought processes.

As others have said on here you assume too much. You assume that others have not also viewed the films from different perspective. You also do not factor in it is possible to view the films from such differing perspectives and still not like or enjoy them.

That is quite a narrow and limited view to take.

I would also counter that by saying I think it’s more to do with the perception of how you view the films.

and

It didn’t bother her in the slightest. She’s not been influenced by me or the years of baggage we as a fandom have with it. She’s taking the story as it’s given to her in the order George wanted her and everyone to see it. Perhaps in general that’s a lesson we can all learn from on both sides that we shouldn’t project but share as the author intended versus what is personal to us until after we give the newbie a chance to form their own thoughts.

As above you assume far too much. People have watched these films in various orders, and some will have watched the Prequels before watching the Original films.

“Baggage as a fandom?”

“A lesson to be learnt?”

“we shouldn’t project but share as the author intended”

But these are only taken into account if we didn’t like the films, right? You seem to be of the opinion Star Wars fans turned up to watch the Prequels with a closed mind, already deciding they didn’t like them before seeing them, and knew nothing of George prior to them. Or if they didn’t like these movies they didn’t simply didn’t understand them.

I would suggest you open your mind to what others are saying to you when they are of the opinion they didn’t enjoy the Prequels very much.

What you are saying is insulting and a little narrow minded. Even when overlooking some brief lip service about “all views being respected” in your posts, it seems obvious you have no respect for people with the view that the Prequels were not enjoyable movies.

I do think a lot of the problems some have lay with they don’t understand it how George Lucas views it. There’s a lot of fans that are simply satisfied with the spaceships and spectacle of it or don’t try understanding things like why the Yoda in Attack of the Clones is different from where we see him in The Empire Strikes Back.

“Everyone who doesn’t like the prequels just doesn’t get them and they don’t think any more deeply about these movies than a caveman.”

I need something more than that and like being able to draw lines between the two trilogies.

“I, the annointed one, however, need a little more than what you Australopithecines seem to sustain yourselves on.”

However that doesn’t mean I think it’s wrong to have your own personal point of view on things with this very thing being what is enjoyed most or not being interested in finding the juxtapositions.

Of course

Replace all the actors with nefarious exact copies

Easy to miss this one: There’s actually two different Luke Skywalkers in the OT, one slightly taller than the other.

BedeHistory731 said:

Sure, but sometimes you have to step back and say, “Wow, I’m spending countless hours looking for deeper meaning in family space fantasy movies. Maybe I’m no better than the nerds who memorize wikis.”

I think you absolutely can ascribe deeper meaning to Star Wars movies, even the prequels and sequels. The Star Wars fandom wouldn’t be so passionate if this weren’t the case. Star Wars isn’t indie arthouse kino and George Lucas isn’t Francis Ford Coppola, but he was a friend and close colleague of his. Star Wars isn’t Marvel either and Lucas isn’t Michael Bay.

That said, and I truly do mean no disrespect to Stardust1138 (because this is all an internet argument over above average space movies after all)…

Emre1601 said:

Mental gymnastics and insane stretches have always been required by Prequel fans when in discussion with others who did not enjoy these films or point out the discrepancies between the two trilogies. I am surprised many Prequel fans themselves rarely seem to question why Lucas’ poor writing for the later Trilogy created so many needless plot-holes and contradictions, and still look to use such gymnastics and stretches instead.

This is spot on. I almost feel like it’s a culture within the prequel fandom, because prequel fans talking about the basic plot of the prequels is full of more headcanon than what’s actually shown on screen.

StarkillerAG said:

theprequelsrule said:

That could have been the surprise in TLJ; it was the reason Luke has been in exile - he sensed Palps was behind what was going on and was looking to track down his location. Wait…is that the explanation Force Ghost Luke gives towards the end of ROS? I forget.

Nope: he says “It was fear that brought me here,”

This line bothers me so much, specifically because Rian Johnson’s whole starting position dealing with Luke was that it couldn’t be fear that brought him to Ahch-To.

Yeah. I really don’t agree with the “good story, bad execution” take. We can go on and on for eons talking about how the prequels were trying to tell a story of an evil genius corrupting a democracy into a dictatorship, and that sounds very pretty. But the story these movies actually told is a moron’s serious of ass-pulls that only work because his opposition is full of bigger morons with their thumbs up their asses. Execution and story aren’t that separate, and you have to strip the prequels down beyond bare bones to get them to actually be the good story that’s supposed to be under the bad execution.

The Phantom Menace is bad, but still creatively interesting. Over the course of the trilogy though, it really just feels more and more phoned in. I think after the reaction to TPM, Lucas probably just wanted to get the trilogy done with. All the passion got drained away by the end of the trilogy. Behind the scenes content for RotS seems to support this.

I absolutely subscribe to the idea that the original plans for the trilogy before 1999 were going to have Episodes 2 and 3 go in a wildly different direction.

Really, I just can’t understand why Revenge of the Sith is considered by anyone to be some operatic masterpiece. The only good qualities it has comes from depicting the interesting events ANH describes, but even then it butchers them. It’s really just an uncompelling story, shot and directed as blandly as possible, with a healthy helping of bloat and a completely tangential VFX reel every 15 or so minutes to make sure you don’t fall asleep.

Fanedits of Revenge of the Sith that cut out the cheese and the bloat completely fail for me because once you cut that out, the movie has very little left.

Anakin Starkiller said:

Okay Willy Wonka.

No like a sandwich or something

At this point there’s no need. I have an encyclopedic memory of all three movies, you could just name a frame number and I could draw it by hand.

They should make it so when you watch Star Wars it gives you free food

Igma Hball S

Stardust1138 said:

SparkySywer said:

Stardust1138 said:

StarkillerAG said:

• Obi-Wan doesn’t remember owning a droid, despite having owned a droid for at least 3 years

2. During the Clone Wars he has a very low opinion of droids and thinks they can be easily replaced.

Considering a droid replaceable and never owning a droid are different things

Not necessarily. He could have such a low opinion that he couldn’t care less for remembering their names or having one.

That’s a really insane stretch man

Stardust1138 said:

StarkillerAG said:

• Obi-Wan doesn’t remember owning a droid, despite having owned a droid for at least 3 years

2. During the Clone Wars he has a very low opinion of droids and thinks they can be easily replaced.

Considering a droid replaceable and never owning a droid are different things

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ukxRY45mk4

Looks sick

The edgy cynicism that once oozed through this comment has been vanquished, and your eyes have been spared. This comment has been deleted by its poster.

Anakin Starkiller said:

A lot of people thought and maybe still think Yoda’s just short from shrinking with age, but that would make too much sense for this thread.

I always thought Yoda looked a little bigger in the PT than the OT

Anakin Starkiller said:

Virgin births are common in religion/mythology and by no means exclusive to the Virgin Mary.

You can’t deny the obvious Christian symbolism of the savior being born of a virgin birth.

RogueLeader said:

I had assumed the DJ was staying in a cell for a reason. That maybe he was safe there from potential threats, since he was basically guarded by armed security. He clearly can enter and leave whenever he wants. Or maybe that’s just where he wanted to meet Finn and Rose to prove his skill. But I could see how that might bring up some questions though.

I like this idea, although I think this might be too much to convey through fanediting