Sign In

Stardust1138

User Group
Members
Join date
18-Mar-2018
Last activity
23-Sep-2021
Posts
426

Post History

Post
#1449954
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? a general discussion thread
Time

Anakin Starkiller said:

Also, no, Obi-Wan dying did not advance the plot.

He’d have nothing to do on Yavin IV except sit around and watch. He would have served no purpose. Dying he was able to guide Luke into trusting himself and the Force in not needing his targeting computer to destroy the Death Star. In Empire he guided Luke to finding Yoda and advised him against confronting Darth Vader as he wasn’t ready. In Jedi he helped Luke see Yoda would always be with him and that he must confront his father again or Palpatine would win.

His death advanced the plot and served as character development for Luke.

Post
#1449866
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? a general discussion thread
Time

jedi_bendu said:

Stardust1138 said:

Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan dying in the first two trilogies serves the narrative in the subsequent two films in their trilogies.

I believe Han, Luke and Leia’s deaths serve the narrative just as much. Han dying furthers Ben’s arc, as he goes deeper into the dark side after killing his father - taking that extra step - but is also more conflicted. Rey also loses her newfound father figure and it gives her good reason to hate Kylo Ren on a personal level in the next film.

Luke’s death doesn’t serve the narrative as much - he could have survived into the next film. However, there’s nothing edgy about it. Luke’s death is symbolic of him putting his trust in Rey and passing the torch down to the next Jedi; I also find it beautiful that he dies just as he regains the inner peace and heroic purpose he’d been missing for many years.

Leia’s death is the short term cause of Ben finally turning back to the light. He realises how much he is moved by her death, showing him that despite his best efforts, he too is ‘vulnerable’ to love just as Vader was; he also realises how much he feels he should carry on what she fought for and give up his identity as Kylo Ren. This is strongly implied in the scene with Han’s ghost/memory/vision thing.

I think you’re right to an extent but it’s all surface level due to the subsequent progressions of the narrative.

Han - I only find it to be once in the narrative that Kylo/Ben is confronted with his actions. However as soon as it’s said he deflects and puts it back on Rey and her need for validation and on her abandonment issues. We are told he has too much of his father’s heart. We are told that he thinks about him and that he’ll always be with him but we never actually see these things while he’s still posing as Kylo Ren. Maybe Han’s dice conveys thinking about him but I fail to see the other two points. The dice also only appear after his confrontation with Luke.

Luke - Absolutely and I agree. Within The Last Jedi itself Luke does these things and I’d even say he inspires hope for the galaxy as we see with the kids at the end but what comes after is a reset. Leia is now the Jedi Master teaching Rey. Rey never restores the Jedi Order on screen but instead she adopts herself into the Skywalker family. It isn’t Luke that inspired the allies to come together for the battle on Exegol but Lando.

Leia - I again agree in part but there’s no substantial payoff to her sacrifice as ultimately he dies. I thought that was only to pass if Leia didn’t stop her Jedi path? He may have helped rescue Rey from the Knights of Ren and even Force Healed her but he played no part in defeating Palpatine. He had no significant impact on the story after he’s redeemed beyond saving Rey.

So yes, I think at the time they do have some kind of impact on the narrative but as the story goes along they don’t come up again or they’re glossed over. Edgy probably was the wrong choice of wording. I meant it more in the need to have death for the sake of it. George never did that except really with the Death Star and Order 66 but that was because of their purposes in serving the story.

To continue with Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan.

Qui-Gon - He was the father figure Anakin needed. Obi-Wan wasn’t ready for the trials of being his master and father figure. He saw Anakin as more like a little brother. Nobody except for Qui-Gon knew what to do with Anakin and Palpatine exploited it.

Obi-Wan - He guided Luke to Dagobah to train with Yoda and he helped push Luke towards confronting his father and Palpatine.

Their deaths had an impact on the character(s).

By comparison again.

Han - Rey remained unchanged by the death of Han apart from the instances where she confronted Ben and believed he couldn’t be turned back to the Light. Finn didn’t talk about him once after The Force Awakens. Poe didn’t mention him at all.

Luke - Rey mentions him to Leia at the snd of The Last Jedi but afterwards only gives him a moment’s thought in relation to the plot device of the Wayfinders. She also confides in him on the island. So it is a slight improvement. However Finn doesn’t mention Luke at all. Poe doesn’t either.

Leia - Rey doesn’t mention her at all except in relation to Leia’s lightsaber Luke gifts her. Finn and Poe mourn for a moment with Chewie but it’s quick to move onto the next story point.

Shouldn’t the central hero(es) we’re supposed to care about be impacted by the passings of their mentors?

Post
#1449814
Topic
Unpopular Opinion Thread
Time

Anakin starting out at nine years old was the right call as his innocence really reflects the childlike wonder of the story told and of a time before the galaxy was put in deeper despair.

The Phantom Menace would be looked upon with more understanding and needed as part of the narrative if George had made his Sequels.

Anakin’s origins, Darth Maul being introduced, who the Hutts were and what their disconnect from the Republic was, and other plot lines all connect to his plans.

Post
#1449778
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? a general discussion thread
Time

I’d say that’s very likely as Bob Iger was involved in the decision to kill off Han.

“Disney’s CEO, Bob Iger, said he was consulted by Lucasfilm head Kathleen Kennedy and director J.J. Abrams about the decision to kill Han Solo before Star Wars: The Force Awakens was made.”

“We had a big debate about Han Solo,” Iger said. “Should he die or not? It was a decision made by Kennedy and Abrams, but I got involved.”

https://www.polygon.com/2017/10/4/16418218/star-wars-han-solo-bob-iger-disney

I vaguely recall Harrison Ford also saying Han would die in George’s Episode VII. George himself said Luke would die in his Episode IX after rebuilding the Jedi Order and that Leia would still be alive and elected Supreme Chancellor. I think it would’ve played out differently than what we got as context would be vastly different. George didn’t just kill characters off to be edgy. Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan dying in the first two trilogies serves the narrative in the subsequent two films in their trilogies. In what we got Han and Luke dying has no weight as they’re glossed over and don’t serve any true narrative purposes.

Post
#1449736
Topic
George Lucas and ILM Docuseries Coming from Lawrence Kasdan
Time

"According to composer James Newton Howard, his friend and a longtime contributor at Lucasfilm Lawrence Kasdan, a man who is a credited writer on some of the studios biggest films such as The Empire Strikes Back, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Return of the Jedi, The Force Awakens, and Solo, will be directing a six-episode docuseries on Lucas and ILM.

This was revealed on the Score: The Podcast where Howard said that he had just finished scoring the documentary."

https://collider.com/george-lucas-docuseries-ilm-lawrence-kasdan/

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/10-james-newton-howard-says-be-great-at-making-a-demo/id1357882784?i=1000534709423

Post
#1449730
Topic
RocketJump's Video on Star Wars &quot;being saved in the edit&quot; is Literally a Lie
Time

As the late great Jonathan Rinzler said in his interview with Rick Worley, George was there in the edit room with the team and part of the crafting of what it became. Every final decision with the film came down to him. As well as sometimes even George was talked out of his good ideas as Marcia relates in the book that Brian De Palma thought George should take out references to “May the Force be with you” in the first film. It was Marcia who convinced George that he should include them. Just like on the Prequels it was Ron Howard who helped a certain moment in the podrace to create further tension. Star Wars has always been a collaborative venture but it all came down to George in the old days. He had final say and depending on your certain point of view that was for better or worse. I miss him greatly and after these latest developments I’m starting to find further acceptance in knowing I’m not alone in my feelings.

Post
#1449693
Topic
RocketJump's Video on Star Wars &quot;being saved in the edit&quot; is Literally a Lie
Time

I tend to give George the majority of the credit whenever I pay my dues for whose most responsible for Star Wars because so often I see the narrative that he was never talented and the Prequels prove it. I just don’t see that at all. I see both his trilogies as collaborations and George as the leader who rallied everyone to fulfill his vision that he started and in some cases they expanded upon. I think he’s extremely talented. His creativity knows no bounds. It’s truly endless and filled with wonder. I see both the Prequels and Originals as flawed as I get older and can view things objectively but I still love them both completely, and in some cases I love them more than when I was a kid. I think often it’s when one grew up or what order one is exposed to the saga that determines what they consider to be Star Wars. We each have a generational tale and in some cases we fall in the middle. I think that’s some of why I can look at the first two trilogies as one of the same. They’re different from each other but they’re from one creator. I can see endless through lines and connections.

The same can be said for the kids who grew up with the Sequels. It’s what they know Star Wars to be. It may not feel like Star Wars to some of us older fans or even George and Marcia but it is to them as they haven’t been exposed to objective reasoning yet. They’re not restricted in their thinking yet of what something can and can’t be. I think that’s similar to how the older fans that do like them tend to view things. They tend to see the films as a pew pew adventure that have familiar elements to the three films they grew up with while others like me who love the Prequels and also the Originals view it as a collective whole of both trilogies that came before it. In turn I think we tend to be the most disappointed by the trilogy because it feels like everything we see Star Wars as was forgotten for familiarity on the surface level with the original three films while the other part of what we loved was ignored. To us they tend to forget the context and established rules that the Prequels expanded upon and added to the story the Originals told. In some cases it’s even things we feel the Sequels ignored in way of the Originals.

No one group is wrong and that’s a good thing but at the end of the day what George says is Star Wars to me is what the final word should aspire to continue and expand upon. At least I think with the Sequels. They should’ve given closure to his stories before moving onto different interpretations.

I loved that excerpt from Marcia. It’s great having her come out to tell her story and what matters to her. I really admire that like George she was concerned about raising her children. I can honestly see after today entirely why George was in love with her. She seems like such a warm hearted, fiery, and honest person. It really contrasts George who tends to be more reserved and a bigger picture thinker. They’re both warm hearted and because of that we got the makings of a beautiful story that continues to resonate with us and grow beyond us. It all started with one man though and she’s quick to point it out.

Thank you for including the videos. I was thinking about that first one today but wasn’t sure where I had first seen it. I look forward to revisiting it in a new light and viewing the second one. I’ve not seen it.

Post
#1449492
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? a general discussion thread
Time

oojason, exactly! While The Last Jedi isn’t perfect with the transition between it and The Force Awakens it at least continues the narrative established. The Rise of Skywalker just feels like a reset as Rey goes through the same trials and tribulations she overcame in The Last Jedi. People often talk about how the Throne Room in The Last Jedi rips off straight from Return of the Jedi but don’t mention how The Rise of Skywalker does the very same thing when Rey confronts Palpatine. Dark Rey is more or less the equivalent to the mirror cave. It goes on and on. The Rise of Skywalker feels like J.J. was continuing the story he felt should’ve happened after The Force Awakens with a few tweaks to accommodate things that couldn’t be undone like Luke’s death.

Omni, I can’t wait to read this book. She also gives her thoughts on the Prequels. It should be a great read. I agree with her. I like Kathleen Kennedy. Just not always with Star Wars. There’s no disputing she’s had a great career as a producer. However as president of Lucasfilm I don’t think she’s the right person to head the company. I agree with her about Han. I think what she’s saying is spot on. There’s no consequences or payoff from Han’s death. They played a little with it in The Last Jedi but only on face value versus delving into how it haunts Kylo. I guess you could say The Rise of Skywalker does a little with his redemption but the context is jumbled up. The same could be said with Luke’s death. It has no consequence on the story. I agree with her about Rey. We don’t know anything about her as she’s surrounded in mystery and how she comes to use the Force is very inconsistent with established rules and lore.

Her comments abou Luke, Leia, and Han remind me of this exchange from George and Lawrence Kasdan.

Kasdan: I think you should kill Luke and have Leia take over.

Lucas: You don’t want to kill Luke.

Kasdan: Okay, then kill Yoda.

Lucas: I don’t want to kill Yoda. You don’t have to kill people. You’re a product of the 1980s. You don’t go around killing people. It’s not nice.

Kasdan: No, I’m not. I’m trying to give the story some kind of an edge to it.

Lucas: I know you’re trying to make it more realistic, which is what I tried to do when I killed Ben—but I managed to take the edge off of it—and it’s what I tried to do when I froze Han. But this is the end of the trilogy and we’ve already established that there are real dangers. I don’t think we have to kill anyone to prove it.

Kasdan: No one has been hurt.

Lucas: Ben and Han, they’ve both—Luke got his hand cut off.

Kasdan: Ben and Han are fine. Luke got a new hand two cuts later.

Lucas: By killing somebody, I think you alienate the audience.

Kasdan: I’m saying that the movie has more emotional weight if someone you love is lost along the way; the journey has more impact.

Lucas: I don’t like that and I don’t believe that.

Kasdan: Well, that’s all right.

Lucas: I have always hated that in movies, when you go along and one of the main characters gets killed. This is a fairytale. You want everybody to live happily ever after and nothing bad happens to anybody.

Kasdan: I hate it when characters get killed, too.

Lucas: Oh, you do.

Kasdan: I do.

Lucas: I resent it and I resented it when I was a little kid. I would watch and there would be these five guys and one of them would be the funny clown and halfway through, one of them gets killed. Why did they kill the lead? He was the best character.

Marquand: I felt that about Ben the first time I saw Star Wars.

Kasdan: But that one worked like crazy.

Lucas: Yes, I know. But we’ve done that. The same thing with Han. The biggest reaction we got was when people asked, “How can you leave the movie half finished?” Well, the main thrust of this one is that it has to be fun.

Kasdan: All of our material here is not fun.

Lucas: Well, I know we’ve got the serious side.

Kasdan: We have a lot of grim stuff here.

Lucas: Well, that’s why we have to concentrate on the fun.

Kasdan: There isn’t much fun stuff. There is the Jabba stuff.

Lucas: That’s fun.

Kasdan: And the Ewok stuff and that’s it.

Lucas: There are three parts to the movie: Jabba, the Ewoks, and Luke and the Emperor. Luke and the Emperor are not fun and the other two are. I think that we can roll along with the fun parts and still have this undercurrent of a fairly serious study of father and son, and good and evil. The whole concept of the original film is that Luke redeems his father, which is the classic fairytale: a good father/bad father who the good son will turn back into the good father. We can have a serious line and still have a fairly light film.

The whole point of the film, the whole emotion that I am trying to get at the end of this film, is for you to be real uplifted, emotionally and spiritually, and feel absolutely good about life. That is the greatest thing that we could possibly ever do.

Post
#1449459
Topic
Why Rogue One doesn't work well as a prequel to Star Wars
Time

JadedSkywalker said:

It didn’t feel out of character of the Vader we see in Revenge of the Sith who cut down younglings. It doesn’t fit Vader in the original film though.

I find it to be more equivalent to the cutting down of the Separatist leaders on Mustafar as we never actually see him cut down the younglings. In the former sense it does work.

My problem with it is more to do with that he’s supposed to be more machine than man. His movements are very fluid for someone who has each limb as mechanical. He’s much more restricted in his fights with Obi-Wan and Luke versus what is showed in the hallway. I also don’t feel it fits his character as by the time of A New Hope he’s overcompensating with intimidation and fear through force. Pun not intended. Haha. He’s grown into his role as an enforcer through fear compared to where he was when he pledged himself to the Sith. At that point he was doing what he thought was right to save the ones he loved. He would’ve done anything at that point but that changed when he believed he lost everything. He realised he couldn’t go back to what he was before and continued his commitment to the Dark Side.

Post
#1449347
Topic
Why Rogue One doesn't work well as a prequel to Star Wars
Time

BedeHistory731 said:

I think the hallway scene is the worst part of that already-awful movie. It just feels like a slasher movie bit got stuck in the wrong series. I tend to dislike people who like that scene, especially the ones who want roughly two hours of it in an “R-rated horror movie.” I also find that a certain crowd that likes this scene also enjoy harassing people who worked on the ST, so…

R1 fails the “eight deadly words” for me. Not even AOTC and TROS did that.

It’s my least favourite scene in the film too. However overall I really like the film. It’s a toss up between Rogue One and The Last Jedi as my favourite film of this era.

My unpopular Rogue One opinion is that I prefer the beginning of the film to the ending. I love the scenes on Jedha and with Chirrut the most. It feels like a sacred place with a history of origins and connections to a bygone era. Chirrut is also a very intriguing character. I like that he’s blind as I too have vision issues. However what I don’t like most is the CGI characters. They’re not enough for me to hate the film but they’re the one aspect I’m not entirely sure how I feel.

Post
#1448890
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? a general discussion thread
Time

Servii said:

and shows that even our heroes are people that fail

I just want to say, the OT already did this whole “heroes are fallible people, too” theme, just with more subtlety. Luke is constantly vulnerable throughout the trilogy, fails constantly in ESB, and has to be rescued at the climax of all three movies. By RotJ, he’s presenting himself as this big hero, but he’s still struggling with doubt and fear over the course of the movie. His victory in the end is very much a personal, spiritual one (rather than a glorious, material victory), which required him to “surrender” himself and take a leap of faith. It’s an unconventional end to a hero’s journey.

Exactly. I think that’s one aspect of George’s planned Sequels that intrigues me the most. Luke would have stood up by the the end of the trilogy as restorer of the Jedi Order. He would’ve had his material victory after failing at first. It’s interesting to consider as it makes a compelling reason why his Jedi Order may have failed at first. He wasn’t ready for the mantel after being helped so many times as even within the trilogy that was the case with the Solowalker daughter bringing him out of his rut. I like the idea of her inheriting the mantel of Jedi Master for all she does to help Luke find his way after he passes on and how she is central in defeating Darth Maul and Datth Talon. It shows that we can’t accomplish things alone. Sometimes we need someone to help us. It’s a very core and main Star Wars theme. It makes me wonder though where the Solowalker son comes into all of this as he succumbs to the Dark Side.

I think it would’ve worked just fine for Luke and the Solowalker daughter to both have central roles in the trilogy. It doesn’t have to take away from the new characters to give Luke a bigger role to play. This goes for both George’s Sequels and the ones we were given.

It’s interesting to consider as it probably wouldn’t have gone exactly like this but it does make me consider lines that may have been drawn through the Trilogy that connect to the previous trilogies without stepping on top of them.


The Jedi were always important to the Republic as they settled conflicts and disputes as peacekeepers before the Clone War. It’s just they lost their way through mainly the war but through compliancy that was shown to have been there in the years prior. Palpatine’s deception also made it appear they weren’t needed. I mean it goes without saying as Luke was the Jedi figure within the Rebel Alliance as Obi-Wan would’ve been on Alderaan if they had been able to deliver to Bail the Death Star plans. The Rebels were just more focused on bringing down the Empire than Jedi affairs. That’s even the role Luke took within their ranks as with the Rebels being a Jedi was second to the common goal they shared. He was seen as Commamder Slywalker to the Rebels. The Jedi and Republic/Rebel Alliance are very much mutually connected but it’s not the focal point at the time of the Galactic Civil War. The question more so is how they would work together after the end of the Empire when everything is in flux.

Post
#1448848
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? a general discussion thread
Time

I’d also add to the thought about Snoke and the First Order.

“If Skywalker returns, the new Jedi will rise.”

To me the line implies Luke would’ve come out of exile in J.J.'s version of Episode VIII and rebuilt the Jedi Order over the course of the film and possibly Episode IX too. I could see Rey helping too.

J.J. said he was surprised most by and in his own words how dark Luke was portrayed in The Last Jedi. Daisy also said his plans were vastly different from what we got.

We know in George’s Sequels he planned to have Luke rebuild the Jedi throughout the trilogy and equally there’s a snippet of Rick Carter in The Force Awakens behind the scenes documentary talking about as the trilogy goes along that we’d discover the true nature of the Force or something like that. I remember also Kathleen Kennedy saying they merely changed the history and order of George’s ideas but didn’t make wholesale changes. Maybe at the time that was true but it doesn’t always add up either in light of Bob Iger’s book.

It seems to me like there were too many clashing visions and ideas floated around. It seems like they may or may not have originally planned to follow more of George’s plan with the Jedi and the Force through his and J.J.'s ideas. However they decided to let Rian start fresh away from these notes or whatever it was J.J. wrote out. Rian did talk about asking to be given a clean slate from notions J.J. came up with. He was granted permission.

However it seems like he had nobody to reel it all in to create continuity and consistency with The Force Awakens and vise versa. It seemed to be what the Story Group was set up to do but they didn’t bat an eye or notice the inconsistenciess. It ended up being like a relay race instead.

There’s honestly too much misinformation about the process to know what is and isn’t true with what was the plan and wasn’t the plan. The films reflect as much as there’s no real set ups and payoffs that feel earned throughout each of the three films.

Post
#1448452
Topic
Last web series/tv show seen
Time

Switched at Birtb.

It’s been such a compelling and interesting series. It’s very groundbreaking in that it tells the story of two girls who were switched at birth. One is hearing and one is deaf. There’s one episode that’s entirely told through sign language and subtitles. It really explores class and social issues in a very grounded way. The characters are all so well written. It never feels like one of the two girls is getting more attention than the other as they balance it out very well. I highly recommend it.

Did I mention that Lorraine McFly aka Lea Thompson is one of the main characters?

Post
#1447622
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? a general discussion thread
Time

JadedSkywalker said:

Lucas is the consummate control freak and perfectionist. The idea he would write a story and hand it over to someone else to mangle is frankly ridiculous. He could have only done it if he had decided to move on. Because he could just as easily have not sold Lucasfilm and filmed episode 7 himself and handed off film 8 and 9 to other directors while producing them and co-plotting the screenplays.

Especially considering how shrewd he was to hold onto the sequel rights and the control of these films in the first place with FOX, i find it hard to believe he was tricked by Iger somehow. I just don’t think he was all that interested he wanted to open a museum and enjoy retirement.

Lucas had like 7 years in between episode III and the sale. He spent all this time on Clone Wars the cartoon and the unmade underworld tv series, time he could have spent at least writing and getting episode 7 out the door. I submit he was more interested in the prequel era, if he was so excited about continuing Luke’s story he had from 1984 to 2012 in which to resume it. He never did. The prequels robbed us of direct sequels as did general lack of interest on George’s part. If the prequel era interested him that much and consumed him, who is to tell him no. He created Star Wars.

And finally even when he handed off to Disney he knew the movie sequels he wanted to make were a continuation and extension of the prequels, and that the fans would have hated them. And Disney rightly or wrongly also made the same judgement on those treatments that they were sequels to the prequels and not the OT, and weren’t going to spend billions of dollars on some weird non commercial midichlorian movie.

I see the complete opposite. I see someone who is very passionate about having their vision accurately portrayed. He himself has referred to his belief in the auteur theory. If he was truly egotistical he would’ve made Episode VII (he briefly considered) and then sold the company. He didn’t and I can’t blame the guy for believing in his vision. I also can’t blame him for being wary of having anyone else creating stories in his sandbox. Similar to how J.R.R. Tolkien was wary of Disney having the rights to his books. Authors are passionate and protective over their work.

To me The Clone Wars was his passion project to break into television. He also began writing his treatments for the sale in 2011. This is right after Darth Maul makes his return and we know he was the big bad. I think he was planting seeds in some ways of connecting the series and era to his Sequels. Whether it be with Darth Maul or the Yoda arc exploring the more metaphysical side of the Force or even the mystery of Sifo-Dyas. They were seeds planted I think to create lines.

The reason Underworld didn’t get made was because of cost. They were waiting for it to go down. It’s a shame as the series and 1313 would’ve been very intriguing looks at the galaxy that I don’t think we’ll see under Disney.

Mark Hamill also has the story in the 80’s of George asking him to return in 2011 and that the Sequels could end in another plane of existence. There’s also Steven Spielberg saying in the 90’s that part of George’s concept for the Sequels was rooted in doing the first three and then the Prequels to that.

I see his Sequels as a continuation of both the Prequels and Originals. I see something that would’ve brought both trilogies together while giving us something new to contemplate.

It’s hard to say if the fans would hate them as The Clone Wars was vastly popular. Not every fan hated the Prequels and the kids who grew up with them were coming of age. Same with the return of Luke, Leia, and Han. I think his Sequels would’ve done just fine.

Ultimately it wasn’t to be and I’m still trying to accept that.

Post
#1447543
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? a general discussion thread
Time

RogueLeader, he didn’t have to but I respect his choice as ultimately he wanted to raise his daughter. I also really admire him donating the profits he made from the sell to philanthropy. I ultimately wish Disney had handled things differently. If they had just come right out and said they had chosen to go down a different path than what George intended as they wanted to make something they felt fans would enjoy more it may have gone down slightly better. Instead we were lead to believe his stories were still being used with only a few departures. It may have hurt as a devoted fan of George’s Star Wars but I think it would’ve created a lot less animosity between the fans and creators as they’d go in expecting something different than George’s style. I could be wrong on that but that’s at least how I feel to an extent.

I hope one day they release George’s complete Sequel Trilogy treatment.

BedeHistory731, definitely. It would’ve been great to see a natural progression that still very much feels like Star Wars.

I can respect that. The way you also talk about Avatar definitely makes me want to give it a chance as I’ve only seen maybe one or two episodes.

There’s definitely some formality to it. I think it’s just learning about George’s Sequel plans that kind of disrupted that for me. I definitely am finding that satisfying conclusion feeling to the first six films if I just forget everything that comes afterwards as I’m back to being a kid creating my own stories of what happens next.

That’s interesting. I was just reading too that he was getting increasingly ill and that’s why he brought others on board. I do wonder if his deteriorating health played any part in these things. We’ll probably never know for sure.

Thank you. I wish you could too. Haha. However that’s okay as at the end of the day we’re both Star Wars fans. We just have different views on the franchise. I’m sure we’d find more common ground than differences if we were to discuss the Originals. Hopefully in time I’ll be able to enjoy the Sequels more. I’m definitely excited to play the Crait and Takodana levels in the Lego game. So here’s hoping!

Same here. This forum is great for respectful debate that rarely I find turns completely sour. We may not always agree but I appreciate and enjoy reading your point of view. Afterall many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on it. Haha

Post
#1447527
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? a general discussion thread
Time

I respectfully disagree. I don’t really see George as someone who was trying to max out on profits with the Prequels. I see what he did as giving endless creativity to collectors and recouping his investment in order to stay independent. He had to make his investment back in more ways than just the films. It’s the complete opposite of what Disney did with X-Wings and TIE Fighters. They made everything look like the Original Trilogy as they wanted to make something that they felt was Star Wars. It may look like it to some extent but I don’t think it entirely feels like it.

They did carry over a few things but it’s the execution of the ideas that seems to be vastly different. I never saw midi-chlorians as a weakness to the story. I think they add an extra layer when you consider the Whills angle. I equally don’t mind the political storybeats as Star Wars has always been political. I honestly don’t see the criticisms of the Prequels as detrimental to my enjoyment of them.

I would have been right there with you completely if the story that George started didn’t feel incomplete. The difference from my estimate and I could be completely wrong is that Gene Roddenberry got to tell his stories before someone else came into the picture to expand his work or he at least was still involved in some way. I’ve never been the biggest Star Trek fan but I have enjoyed Next Generation in the times I’ve watched it. I’d probably feel differently if I were more invested in the original series.

It’s all ultimately subjective. No one answer is correct but I do think the original creator no matter who they are should be given the chance to complete their life’s work. Unfortunately life doesn’t always go the way we want it to and this is a case of that.

Post
#1447506
Topic
What do you think of the <strong>Sequel Trilogy</strong>? a general discussion thread
Time

I recommend these videos as they touch on the subject of the poetry angle to a degree.

https://youtu.be/Btp1BoGbuiM

https://youtu.be/NvlWSsZwLn0

https://youtu.be/gUKvHwjcfIQ

It’s more than a repetitive device. It’s about creating links between the two trilogies of two different generations of people and a family. They’re one of the same yet different from each other. The Original Trilogy on its own really follows the trajectory. Mind you it’s to a lesser extent but it’s there. The trilogy has lots of parallels within its own narrative. IV and VI correlate in certain ways. Just as V and VI do. The Prequels do it within their own narrative as well. It’s not about copying but creating moments that are poetic yet different from each other. Just like written poetry. The Sequels tried but ended up copying and pasting a lot of the time. The Last Jedi I find gets closest to getting it right in connecting the whole saga together. It doesn’t fully but it does succeed at times.

I’d prefer the final word in the Skywalker saga being George’s vision and having what comes after it beginning the process of creating something new and more experimental. It can mix it up and go in different directions as it’s not beholden to the established rules of the saga films. I would have welcomed new takes and spins with open arms as the story that was intended as a nine part saga was completed as the original author intended.

It honestly doesn’t bother me when creators of work go in a different direction than that of what fans want. They’re not there to please us. It’s when someone else has a responsibility to continue a story that I have a problem. It’s the difference between one vision and that of a corporation in a way. One does it for the joy of telling their own tale, while the other does it to max out on profits.

I wish I had more of a favourable view of the Sequels like you do. The only time I find I do is when I see them as disconnected from George’s story. As their own thing they are pretty enjoyable popcorn flicks but as a conclusion to what he started I find they don’t work for me. Star Wars was always a collection of art films with aspects of popcorn flicks to entertain. I find they’re now just the latter and nothing more.