Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

Now that the "final" film is out, what would your ideal Sequel Trilogy look like? Did you like the characters introduced, but not like where they ended up? Would you have preferred the OT characters being front and center with their descendants secondary? Maybe an adaption of some of the EU stories? Whatever Lucas' original story ideas were?

This isn't a thread to complain about what went wrong with the current films. It is to share ideas on what your vision would be.

For starters, I would've much preferred a way less macro story without the need for the entire galaxy being in danger. Something that focuses more on Jedi and Sith lore and the rebuilding of these religions. Episode 7 should've at least had the original 3 together at some point, even if they had a falling out over the course of 30 years. Although I do really like the ending of TFA and how much of a great cliffhanger that was.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

I would like to have seen the original Zahn trilogy turned into movies. If Han/Luke/Leia weren't going to star, that is fine. Have it be their kids with the three OT characters as mentors (and together on screen!).

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

I think this is so hard to say, now that everything is out. Just broadly, I'd say skip ahead and not bother with the original cast. Ridley, Isaac, and Boyega have great chemistry and could have easily held the films on their own and it would have sidestepped issues people had with depictions of characters (which, I don't think there was a way to make everyone happy, no matter what). I'd like them to get real weird, though. Don't rely on lore or bloodlines as much. I wouldn't hate a "this character is the last Skywalker", but I wouldn't want them as the protagonist. It'd be interesting to have a descendant of Luke/Leia in the same position Luke was in (self-imposed exile) and the characters trying to find him/her to help out, only for them to be like "Nah, you can do this without me". I don't think the exact characters from the OT need a direct hand-off, so much as what they represent.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

Any storyline without the Death Star, or using the same storyline as Episode IV.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

Mine would be a septology. First three would have focused on the original cast still trying to deal with holding the Republic together against Imperial Remnants, over the course of the first three movies things go from bad to worse and we are introduced to new characters (like Rey, Finn and Poe and BB-8) as up and coming Republic officers, politicians and Padawans, etc. The third movie ends with a horrific cliff-hanger (maybe here's where one of the original cast dies) and the new trilogy is the new characters taking the lead against the new enemy (maybe something like the Yuuzhan Vong (sp?) but I'd want there to be new explorations of the Force so it's not just the old movies again. Here's where we'd see new things like Force flashbacks when Rey held the lightsaber, or the Force-Skyping (one of the things TLJ introduced that I actually love) and the healing power. The remaining original cast members are in the background for advice and such, but not in the foreground.

I would absolutely want to see Luke as a Jedi Master in the full prime of his power, but I could also see him coming to a realization that he can't solve every problem with a "laser sword" and have to do something wonky like he did in TLJ to hold off Kylo's advance. In the abstract, that's something I liked about TLJ, but I would have done it differently (have Luke go in person to Crait, but then have to do some amazing Force thing that overwhelms him and he let's himself join the Force).

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

It’s tough to truly answer this. There are lots of ideas from the EU I’d have liked to have seen adapted in some way. I feel like the Thrawn books were ones that many fans considered to be the true sequels, and envisioned something similar happening if sequels ever happened (at least that’s kinda what I thought).

Obviously with a thirty-two year gap between the Original Trilogy and the sequels you couldn’t do straight adaptations of most of the EU books. Even still though there were plenty stories and ideas out there to mine from that the filmmakers could have modified a bit to work. I think it’s silly acting like things had to start from scratch. There was plenty of material it was just mostly ignored.

The original cast definitely should have had more scenes together (at least one of the three reunited, even if it was for a flashback). It’s absolutely ridiculous that idea apparently occurred to no one.

I will say though that I do think Han was handled fairly well. I would have preferred he didn’t die right away, but he had a film where he played a decent sized role and it was fun seeing him in action.

Leia was obviously somewhat difficult after Carrie Fisher’s passing. I do think she was handled about as good as she could have been given the circumstances.

I liked how the story with Luke was handled in The Force Awakens where he was being searched for, but hate how he was followed up on. I feel like Han or Leia could have died in the sequel and that would have been what finally prompted Luke to leave Ach-To and go help out. He didn’t need to be a crazy badass with tons of Force powers or anything, which apparently is the only way Rian Johnson felt he could be written to satisfy fans (-rolleyes-). I just would have preferred him handled in a more satisfying way.

You could keep the new cast. I didn’t have a problem with any of them really. Ben/Kylo was overall an interesting villain and I liked his arc. I’d have done more with Finn. Him being an ex-Storm Trooper it just seems like there was potential for more with him. There should have been more interaction amongst Rey, Finn, and Poe throughout all three sequels rather than mostly in the last one.

I feel like the sequels had some good things in them, but also a lot of half-baked ideas with less than satisfying outcomes. Especially when we’re being told that they’re wrapping up the Skywalker saga. The films feel tacked on more than anything, and don’t add much of value to the ending of the Original Trilogy. I enjoy them for what they are, but I don’t think they’re in the same league story wise as the first six films.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

I never had anything in mind for the sequels growing up since Return Of The Jedi wrapped everything up.
When they were announced, I figured they would focus on the kids. Not really anything that we got. I never would have thought they’d bring back Palpatine, but RJ painted them in a corner by killing Snoke. I would have liked to see Darth Plagueis.
More than anything I just want the Skywalker story to be completely over film-wise.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

In the broadest strokes, the Sequel Trilogy should have focused on the third generation of Skywalkers (Han and Leia's child/ren, Luke's child/ren) having some epic adventure to do with the Force, set against a backdrop of the New Republic led by President Organa-Solo trying to hold the galaxy together, and Luke rebuilding a better Jedi Order. I would have been fine with strip-mining the EU and repurposing Jacen Solo, Jaina Solo, Anakin Solo, and Ben Skywalker.

Earlier this year, I was sitting a bar at a Metallica concert, bored having gotten there too early, and had a spare hour and hashed out a treatment over a couple of beer for Episode IX that would have brought together the sequel trilogy to my personal satisfaction. I might clean it up, write some annotations as to why I did what I did, and post it here if folks are interested.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

I wanted to see the original characters in their prime. the Star Wars sequel trilogy should've happened in the 90s. Those fucking useless prequels could've been filmed at any time but the original actors had a shelf-life. Just a squandered opportunity.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

Absolutely. The Thrawn trilogy, with some big modifications, would've been awesome.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

This is the way.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

That's a good point.

I'm sure the info is out there, but I don't recall. What was the actual reason for not doing a sequel trilogy before the prequels? The original 3 just wouldn't want to commit? Or he just wanted that passage of time?

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

I actually think a trilogy based off of the Emperor doing the Sauron/Voldemort thing could have been really interesting, especially if the first scene was actually the last scene of ROTJ done from the Emperor's POV and we see him survive.

I would have just gotten a bunch of story treatments for the full trilogy from the best Sci Fi writers and then merrged them into a single vision with a solid definitive narrative for all 3 movies.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

My ideal vision is a trilogy that people can be happy with. In other words, an impossible task.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

As soon as Lucas decided that the original 1977 Star Wars was actually Episode IV: A New Hope, he was always going to do the prequel trilogy after he did Episode VI. Early on, I think there was supposed to be a movie every three years, so we would have gotten the prequel trilogy in 1986, 1989, and 1992, and then the sequel trilogy in 1995, 1998, and 2001. He didn't end up making "Episode I" until 1999, though. One of the reasons cited was that special effects technology wasn't where Lucas needed it to be, so he sat on the PT for a decade.

And another reason is that, while they Lucas was making Empire Strikes Back in 1980, he had a loose plan for a nine-film saga. But a couple of years later when he started working on Return of the Jedi, he decided to scrap the sequel trilogy and wrap everything up in that movie. So he made Leia into Luke's sister (Luke was going to have a twin sister, but she wouldn't have been introduced until the sequel trilogy in Episode VIII and it wasn't going to be Leia), and killed the Emperor (who was originally planned to be shown for the first time in Episode IX and defeated by Luke and his sister).

One thing that I found really interesting about TFA is how closely it tracked to Lucas' original vision for Episode VI: The Rebellion would have been defeated, Han would have been killed, Luke would have faced Darth Vader again and then struck out on his own, and Leia would have been left alone and elected queen of her people (whatever that means).

I think it would have been interesting if, in Episode VIII, Rey could have been revealed to be Luke's daughter instead of his sister, and then Episode IX would have had Luke and Rey team up to defeat Snoke. This would have kept the sequel trilogy consistent with the original plans for the saga.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

I really just wanted a bad ass Jedi Master Luke. When he showed up at Crait I was hoping for the scene from Dark Empire. Crushing AT AT with the force. In fact a lot of stuff from Dark Empire would have been great.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

I remember reading about the 9 movie saga in a Lucas interview way back in 1983 when he was promoting ROTJ, as it blew my mind that we were going to get 6 more SW films over the next 20 years. My vision of the ST was real simple: More adventures of Han, Luke, and Leia. Just like I wanted more adventures of Marty and Doc in Back to the Future sequels, or Rocky & Adrian in Rocky sequels. I think the biggest opportunity that was blown was doing the PT instead of the ST in the late 90's. Can you imagine the reception by the fans in 1999 when we see Luke, Leia and Han on screen again (all still young enough to pull another Trilogy off), instead we got Little Ani, boring Padme, and Jar Jar. Now many will say that Ford was still King of the Box Office so he never would have done it, and that's a good point. But $$$ talks, so I'm sure he could have been lured out with the promise of another Indiana Jones movie in the future.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

When I was into Star Wars, I remember reading the Thrawn trilogy as many people mentioned here. I would have loved to have seen that on the big screen, but that was when the force was still a mysterious spiritual force, and not simply blood bugs. I haven't really been into Star Wars since the PT. I've watched here and there since then, but the magic faded a long time ago for me.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

The ideal was this:

If Han were to die in Episode VII,

then Leia should've died when she got sucked out of the ship in Episode VIII,

so that Luke could live to pass the torch to Rey in Episode IX.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

I’ve been thinking about this a lot over the last couple of days, and I think that if I could go back to 2014 (or whichever year Disney took control) knowing what I know now, I’d just time jump far enough ahead that the OT would be as much myth as history. Have the Force shown as being in a form of hibernation for the last few hundred years since “Balance” was brought to it. Episode VII would be some type of event that causes a Force awakening (perhaps long-lost Jedi/Sith books being found). It could be that it’s a pair of siblings that have these powers woken in them (they could possibly be descendants of Luke or Leia/Han), with one pulled to the light and the other pulled to the Dark Side. This could mirror the EU, not only Jacen/Jaina Solo but also the Qel-Droma brothers (which imo is the most under-rated Star Wars story ever made). I would be firm on NOT focusing too much on politics or what kind of government system is running things, and it certainly wouldn’t be flip-flopping like what we have now.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

That it be cohesive and make sense.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

Agreed 100%. That was a great way to send off Leia given the circumstances. Instead we got Leia Poppins.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

On the whole, I think what the first two sequel movies established worked really well - at least for Rey, Kylo, Luke, Leia and Han. I enjoyed the Rise of Skywalker as well, but if it were up to me, I would have done a few things slightly differently to wrap up the trilogy...

I would have made the villain in the Rise of Skywalker a clone of the ancient Jedi that went rogue and founded the Sith, having been cloned/resurrected by the Emperor in secret on Exegol around the time of Return of the Jedi, in order to solidify the dark power of the Empire for all time. With the death of the Emperor and the victory of the rebellion, this ancient Sith clone began pulling strings behind the scenes in secret to establish the First Order and regain power over the galaxy.

I would not have made Rey Palpatine's granddaughter, but instead I would have made her an orphan, discovered to be Force-sensitive by Lor San Tekka or other members of the Church of the Force and believed by them to possibly be descended from one of the original founders of the Jedi, in a bloodline long considered to have ended. Based on this belief, they hid her on Jakku, watching over her from close by to see if she would prove to be what they believed her to be (which she eventually does). It would have validated that her parents were "no one" but her ancestors were someone indeed.

Those two things would have made the "I am all the Sith...and I am all the Jedi" moment make more sense and carry more weight. It also would have given more expanse to the mythology of the Star Wars universe in this sequel trilogy.

Lastly, given the opportunity that Abrams ultimately didn't have, I would have made Leia's role in turning Kylo/Ben back to the Light a bit more fleshed out and given Ben a slightly more direct role in defeating the Sith in the end, finally fulfilling the prophecy of a Skywalker bringing balance to the Force (and in a little more interesting way, fulfilling Ben/Kylo's desire to be as "powerful" as his grandfather).

Finn and Poe mostly ended up being "plot mover" characters in the sequel trilogy, rather than more interesting characters with meaningful arcs. Maybe there was a bit of a missed opportunity there, especially for Finn, but I think that's mostly fine.

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

Just fan-fic spitballing.
Eps 1-6 were a closed story. It made no sense to me to continue to flog the Skywalker horse as it really had nowhere fresh or compelling to go. Because of that, I would go with new characters, in a new situation with smaller stakes, while still taking place amongst some familiar touchstones.

Temp title- Star Wars: The Heretics

A trilogy that has nothing whatsoever to do with Skywalkers.
It would take place concurrent to events in Episodes 4, 5, and 6 and tell of those moments in time from a different set of perspectives with the goal of making the SW universe seem more vast and diverse than the first six films, five of which take place on the same, "farthest from the bright center of the universe" planet.

The main characters would be
• an Imperial Stormtrooper who deserts the Empire by the end of the first film.
• A former Jedi in hiding, who has renounced his faith after a failure of courage to come to the aid of his comrades in "the Great Purge" twenty years earlier. He'd be in his late 30's or early 40's at this point.
Each character has their personal "petty tyrant" whom they escape/triumph over by the end of the first film.
By the end of the first film they are both on the same planet/environment, in close proximity to each other.

The second film would be partly a game of cat and mouse, as one (the trooper) tries to evade the other (lapsed Jedi) who seeks to kill him.
There would be a turn at the end of the second act, precipitated in part by a new character and that character's needs/situation. By the end of the second film, they've formed an alliance.

The final film has them all united against a single obstacle, while on the other side of the galaxy the Rebels mount their last stand against the Emperor.

or something like that.
___________________
second draft

Re: Star Wars: What was your ideal vision for the Sequel Trilogy?
 

I’d watch that.