dex14

Mike86

Mike86

Jay G.

I quoted a novel from 1976, and the writer of both ESB and ROTJ saying what his backstory for Palpatine was when he was writing ROTJ. Regardless of whether we "see it" in the movies, the basic story arc of Palpatine was clearly established, and again was widely known by fans due to its appearance in ancillary materials. And the PT's execution of that story could best be described as adequate.They weren't fleshed out well enough to be considered good. You were asserting that they were good characters, and they weren't: they were flat, one-dimensional caricatures. And if the Clone Wars TV show was able to flesh them out into actual, good, characters, that's a credit to that show, not to the PT films.

Well, that's just a non-starter right there: George Lucas would never have worked with Disney. If GL had any genuine interest in actually making the ST himself, he would have made them himself. He had the means to make them independently, just like all the Star Wars films excepting the first, and it'd be the only way to have creative control. Artists don't willingly give up creative control on a work they want to make unless they have no other choice. GL had a choice, and his choice was that he was done with Star Wars, and decided to sell his company because he rightly knew that without new Star Wars movies, Lucasfilm couldn't be sustained.

Now, I do have a curiosity towards the treatment he made for the ST, but I'm under no delusions that it's actually good. Even if I hated the ST, I'd still think GL's version would be as bad, if not worse. HIs messing up the original films with his "Special Editions" proved to me that he had lost all concept of what made Star Wars good in the first place, and the PT sealed the deal. I never want another GL penned/directed Star Wars film. Give me a dozen Solos before that ever happens.

Mike86

Jay G.

Again, memorable != good. And where a character "originated" has no bearing on whether the PT wrote them well. If you have to point to The Clone Wars to show the development of certain characters, a show written by people other than GL, that's a point against GL's writing, which is the crux of your argument (that you think a ST written by GL could be good). You're basically illustrating that anyone other than GL is much better at writing Star Wars than GL now is.

As for Maz, Hux, or Phasma, it's pretty damning the PT with faint praise that you have to compare your examples of "good" PT characters with the weakest ST characters. What about Rey, Finn, Poe, or Rose? Are there any PT characters as well developed and 3 dimensional as them? And while I'll concede that Phasma is pretty much just a shiny uniform so far, I'd take Maz and Hux over the PT characters you mentioned. At least Maz has personality, and Hux shows some traits apart from just generic officer, The scene where he almost kills Kylo shows a depth not apparent in "cool action figure" Darth Maul.

Josh-da-man

Mike86

Jay G.

Except you wrote this:

And this
And this:
I've been disagreeing with those claims. The PT story was established while they were figuring out the backstory for ESB and ROTJ, so while we can credit young Lucas for it, PT-era Lucas has no claim to coming up with the major story arcs for that trilogy. And the characters in the PT were flat and uninspired, excepting for their character design.

So since PT-era Lucas did nothing of note but squander a decade-old storyline, I fail to see how his ST would've been anything but a disaster.

It's more like the PT had interesting character makeup/costumes for flat, one-dimensional characters. And all the Clone Wars proves is that Star Wars is best when Lucas steps back and lets others work in the world he created. My understanding of Clone Wars is that Lucas was heavily involved in its creation and first season, and then his interest waned and he stepped back his involvement. Not too coincidentally, the movie and first season of that show are considered its worst, with it improving after that.

I understand your desire to see what "George Lucas with someone else exerting editorial control" would be like, but realistically that was never going to happen. Lucas owned the company, owned Star Wars, and had all the money he needed. The only way Lucas was going to be told "no," was if he let someone say no to him, and actually listened to the objection and took it to heart. There's no indication that a post PT Lucas would've done any of that. Likewise, he never would've sold to Disney if he had any desire to do the ST himself, so the idea of Disney being able to check Lucas's control is just something that realistically never would've happened.

And also, think of this: in the current situation, Disney/Lucasfilm could've at least used Lucas's story treatment for the trilogy and tweaked it during screenwriting and development if they thought it held at least the framework of a good story. But they apparently didn't think it was even worth salvaging, and that making the story up on the fly was better than using Lucas's pre-planned arc.


Edit: Missed this bit:
Anakin was horribly written for the entire PT, ROTS included. His turn to the dark side was like flipping a light switch, "oops, I accidentally killed Mace Windu trying to stop him from killing Palpatine. Whelp, guess I'm evil now, off to kill some children (again)." And that was with Anakin's arc already established in the OT.

Palpatine's arc was... fine, but as I pointed out it was established while writing the OT, well before the PT was written. It was largely saved by Ian McDiarmid, who had been cast in the role way back in ROTJ.

Obi-Wan in the PT, I feel, coasts a lot on the natural charm and charisma of Ewan McGregor, and the leftover goodwill for the character from the OT. As written, he's merely ok, but PT-era Lucas had the advantage of writing for a character that had his defining characteristics created nearly two decades earlier, and McGregor had the advantage of working off an earlier portrayal to work in more than what was merely on the page.

Trevor

If I could choose one thread in DVDTalk’s history to delete forever, this would be it.

raven56706

still talking about this shitty movie?

mcnabb

I take some of the blame for reviving this thread, but not in the manner that's being debated. My initial post was how I feel that TFA f'd up the ST and should take more of the blame for the failure of the ST even though I'm still not a fan of TLJ. But the thread ended up being argued about the same points it has since Dec 2017.

Mike86

It’s tamed down a bit in here I feel. It’s not as hostile as it was for a while, but this is always going to be a divisive film and that’s going to spark conversations/debates.

fumanstan

Its a rough time to have opinions about Star Wars on here since you'll just be told you're wrong

It seems like a lot of your conclusions skew towards "TFA set up something, so TLJ HAD to do it that way" which I don't really agree with, especially concluding that everything left open were necessarily dead ends. I definitely think TLJ could have gone a number of different directions, some of which probably wouldn't have caused so much anger. Still, I think with Episode IX left to go it'll be interesting how things wrap up and if it also changes people's feelings on what came before it.

Hokeyboy

If you don't like the way a thread is going, don't read it. Easy. Let other people discuss.

Anyway, I will of course see Episode IX in theaters but honestly, I find myself having very little interest in seeing how this "saga" resolves. There's nothing too compelling on the table right now. If, say, Ray and Kylo left both sides to form some new order that balances Jedi and Sith/light and dark to really bring true "balance" to the forth, with both sides vying to "reclaim" them, or whatever, I'd be a lot more interested in resolution.

As it stands, it looks like more good guys vs. bad guys because good guys vs. bad guys. The Prequel Trilogy was mostly garbage, but the "Fall of Anakin" was a lot stronger hook than anything that TFA and TLJ set up.

All IMO, of course.

mcnabb

I do agree with you that TLJ could have taken some plot points in different ways, but I also feel it got locked in by many TFA mystery boxes. There was no way Rey could be a Skywalker/Solo in TLJ, other then Han/Leia or Luke being deadbeats and leaving her off (via the TFA flashback), so she had to be a nobody. There was nothing that could undo that Luke quit on Han/Leia after the First Order took over because JJ stuck him on that island (he turned himself off from the Force so he could not sense Han in trouble). Now I would say that Rian Johnson's execution of Luke (flipping the saber, drinking titty milk) was a turnoff for me, so I am not defending TLJ in that respect. JJ left TFA on a cliffhanger ending, so the movie had to start right after the events of TFA so there could be no time jump like every previous SW movie. They had to have Rey meet Luke, and had to have the First Order pursue the Resistance because that's how TFA ended. I could go on and on but you catch my drift. I always thought it was TLJ that ruined the ST, but TFA gets just as much or even more of the blame.

Now I'm talking in a narrative/storytelling sense, as I think each movie is entertaining. They are the opposite of the PT in a strange way. TFA and TLJ are entertaining movies that have no narrative in a Trilogy sense, and have taken too many plotlines from the OT that it really isn't that original. The PT are terrible movies, but they have a very interesting story that really does tie into the OT (I honestly don't care about Episode 9 because its another movie of Resistance vs First Order or the Redemption of Kylo Ren) . Lucas needed a director and good writers to execute his story for the PT, and Disney needed Lucas to give them a good/original story for the ST, as both Trilogies suffer in each way.

fumanstan

I'm not a story teller or writer so I won't bother offering up suggestions, but I certainly think there are those more creative then me that could find forgiving solutions to Rey's heritage or Luke's location, so I don't agree that whomever was responsible for TLJ was locked in at all.

Rob V

By JJ not declaring who Rey's lineage is in TFA, he screwed the pooch... He tried to leave us on some cliff-hanger hell but in reality, the internet buzzed with EVERY SINGLE possible solution for who she could be -- so much so that no answer is good (even being a nobody; which I don't buy). Being a nobody is still worse than just making her Obi-Wan's grand daughter, IMO.

Trevor

Mike86

Rob V

^^ as long as she's not a derivative of midichlorians, that'd be a fine solution.

Kal-El

I think they were trying to get away from any prequel- reference with regards to the force (read: Midichlorians). You can say that they don't REALLY have to mention the M-word but still make her parents an Order 66 survivor but I think they were going for a clean break. JJ basically reset everything about the Force. The title of VII now actually makes more sense: the force DID awaken. And not just for Rey, after VIII, it can mean for everybody else. Like Broom Boy.

More than a year after, I still love the movie. 2nd after Empire.

You may now resume your dead horse arguments. Happy New Year!

Ranger

Anyone going to Celebration Chicago?

Mike86

Jay G.

Because Jedi didn't marry and/or have children. It was this whole thing. Remember how in AOTC and ROTS Anakin's marriage to Padme was a secret, because he was violating the rules of the Jedi Order? The Skywalker lineage was a fluke, not the normal way Jedi made (found from random families and taken away for training).

Also, the timing is all off. TFA happens approximately 30 years after ROTJ, and Rey is in her late teens/early twenties*. She was born after the Empire was defeated and sent scampering the edges of the Galaxy. So if there were any prequel Jedi left, they would've come out of hiding and joined Luke, not abandon their child on a remote desert planet.

*Just from the information in the movies. The reference material is more specific about date and ages, and makes it even more unlikely.