I know that Lucas has said that he does not think that he will ever make the final three installments in the Star Wars Saga and honestly, with what he did with the prequels, this may be a good thing. If the final sections of the saga are ever covered, Spielberg and Ford would need to step up to tell george no on things like gungans and alien crystal skulls.
I recently got to thinking about the concept of how the movies could be done and I think that the final three chapters could be done really well but would need to be set many years down the line.
They could use the surviving original cast as the framework and could customize the stories around a Man in the Iron Mask type sumation of the ends of each charaters life. For those of you that have never actually read the Three Musketeers entire life stories, The Man in the Iron Mask has very little to do with a man in a mask and a lot to do with telling the end of each of the musketeers lives. Following a similar story line that sets former allies at odds you could make a compelling group of movies about how quickly new governments are corrupted and the choice by some to work within the new system to fight the correption while the others go back carrying on the fight. Basically a story of ideals and principles versusus compromise and loyalty.
I wanted to ask Dakkas thoughts on how you think the final the Star War movies should be handled.
So starting with the movies and then on to any other ideas(Keep it clean and civil)
This thread is about Star Wars and is for you fans out there to post your wishes.
As for my above storyline wish, I would want Joss Whedon to direct.
With all the content of the Expanded Universe, Star Wars could go on indefinately.
However, the window to make Episodes 7 and on with the original cast are probably going to close very soon if nothing is done within the next decade, as most of the original actors are getting quite up there in age, and a new cast will need to be found for the faces of the franchise.
@WarOne- That is exactly what I was thinking. If they decide to do such they need to do so quickly or Sky Walker wil take on a new meaning as the Cast will be using walkers.
Well, imagine Lucas gets his brain downloaded into a computer, and his far off offspring decide to reboot him up on the bicentennial anniversary of asking him if they could re-do the prior 6 episodes:
Beep-boop-
Computer-Lucas (C-L): Lucas 2.0 is now active. Who dares summon the greatest science fiction mind of all time? Who dares incur my wraith of microorganisms that are within all living things?
Harrison Ford Lucas the 23rd(23): It is I, the direct descendant of the Lucas and Ford lineage that merged together in the 22nd century to nail cyborg L. Ron Hubbard away in a replica Necron tomb vault for all eternity in order to prevent him from writing Battlefield Earth 2: Travolta's Revenge. I am your Great Grandson to the 54th power, here to beseech you as is custom every two hundred years.
C-L *disappointed*: Oh, well that is a shame. Have they invented faster than light travel yet?
23- As it has been said before in ten prior Askings, faster than light travel has been deemed realistically impossible. The last time we tried that, Mars exploded, killing all of about 2 humans who were still trying in vain to terraform a dead planet.
C-L: Well, I know what is coming. Ask away.
23: On behalf of the surviving Lucas dynasty, we ask our progenitor to allow us the right to remake the first six movies of the Star Wars franchise, as Episodes 7-6342 made very little sense when we used completely different actors for the lead roles of Luke, Han, and Leia.
C-L: No.
23: Oh, well can we have Han shoot first?
C-L: No.
23: Can we edit out all instances of the character Jar Jar Binks?
C-L: No.
23: Can we murder my sister who was named Jar Jar Binks the 5345th as we all hate her and her namesake and do away with you naming all the females in the family Jar Jar Binks?
C-L: Make it so numbah 23.
23: Was that a Star Trek reference?
C-L *looking nervous*: No.
23: I'm quite sure that was.
C-L *serious face now*: There is no Star Trek.
23 *deadpan*: There is no Star Trek.
C-L: Good. Now go make Episode 6343, and make sure the clone of Jar Jar Binks the Jedi-Emperor Master of the Parallel Galaxy Where Faster Than Light Travel Exists gets a prominent roll again.
23 *deadpan*: As you command Lucas 2.0.
C-L:Great, now log me off. I have a great idea where we can digitally insert Michael Jackson as one of the Ewoks in Episode 6...
I see alot of eu goin over uncharted timelines. like the force unleashed and the old republic. I see star wars contnueing in games and comic books. But that is just my opinion.
focusedfire wrote:I know that Lucas has said that he does not think that he will ever make the final three installments in the Star Wars Saga and honestly, with what he did with the prequels, this may be a good thing. If the final sections of the saga are ever covered, Spielberg and Ford would need to step up to tell george no on things like gungans and alien crystal skulls.
The whole "there are going to be 3 more films" has pretty much always been a myth made by fans. Though I remember reading somewhere about them knowing the plot for the 7, 8, and 9. They were ok.
You think the force unleashed is damage? The damage is the clone wars movie they did. The tv show is alright but meh the movie.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
focusedfire wrote:Who would you have play Cade?
Believe it or not, I think that the guy that played the Oldest brother on Malcom in the middle could play the part.
How would you want the film to be cast?
You mean the one who was in military school? Hmm maybe. Maybe the guy who plays jack in eureka.
But film. I would like to say micheal bay but i dont want the star wars transformers making a cameo.
So speilberg. My fav directer. But the luca would just pull the puppet strings.
I think it was a great way the rebellion started. And starkiller was a great chracter. A chracter who had no affliation wimain cast become with the main cast becomes a major player in the universe.
garret wrote:I think it was a great way the rebellion started. And starkiller was a great chracter. A chracter who had no affliation wimain cast become with the main cast becomes a major player in the universe.
I guess it's time to throw out this picture:
Seriously, Starkiller was lame and a Mary Sue. The whole story just didn't make any sense, it was shoe-horned in. Oh well. Best not to get this thread locked in its infancy.
Why was he lame? he is the dark version of the game killed darth vader. Which means even though the light ending is canon he had the power to kill vader. And he brought down a star destroyer. the second inststallment should make him even awesomer. And the chracter progression through the story was amazing. He went from a cold hearted agent of the darkside to a Major player in the rebellion. And the origin of the rebellions symbol was cool.
garret wrote:Why was he lame? he is the dark version of the game killed darth vader. Which means even though the light ending is canon he had the power to kill vader. And he brought down a star destroyer. the second inststallment should make him even awesomer. And the chracter progression through the story was amazing. He went from a cold hearted agent of the darkside to a Major player in the rebellion. And the origin of the rebellions symbol was cool.
I'm sorry but anybody who uses the force to move star destroyers, is stretching my realm of belief.
A movie might be half decent if it was with different characters and completely avoided the whole Jedi/Sith thing. Its a rich universe. Lets have the normals have some fun.
@Cheesecat- To keep them from using the escape pods.
@Frazz- I like the idea of exploring the more mundane aspects of the Star Wars universe. Maybe explore the history of the Corellian Pirates, Would be a hard sell to the studios though.
I wanted to ask Dakkas thoughts on how you think the final the Star War movies should be handled.
Let them die.
I disagree. They universe would be a fun one to explore. Don't blame the universe because Lucas's film-making ability has followed a similar path to Mel Gibsons sanity. He's lost it.
PLEASE never put Carrie Fisher on the big screen again.
Imagine the rash of suicides that will inevitably happen after all those metal bikini posters/wallpapers/screensavers and whatnot are rendered "ineffective".
I wanted to ask Dakkas thoughts on how you think the final the Star War movies should be handled.
Let them die.
Agreed.
DEATH TO THE FALSE EMPEROR!
No, No, No! We are not starting another Galactic Empire vs Imperium of Man thread.
Besides, It was proven that the Galactic Empire would win.
Seriously, lers steer away from such. Instead just throw ideas out as to what you would do with it if you were given controll of the franchise. This includes Star wars Humour*Hint
I wanted to ask Dakkas thoughts on how you think the final the Star War movies should be handled.
Let them die.
I disagree. They universe would be a fun one to explore. Don't blame the universe because Lucas's film-making ability has followed a similar path to Mel Gibsons sanity. He's lost it.
QFT. It sucks 'cause the phantom menace could have been awesome. In my opinion 3 things ruined the movie.
1: Anakin Skywalker.
2: the fact that Anakin managed to destroy a whole fleet, even though a squadron of professionally trained pilots couldn't.
3: Jar Jar
Please don't attach non wargaming pics to Dakka, especially of..him...
Deadshane1 wrote:Concerning using the original cast....
PLEASE never put Carrie Fisher on the big screen again.
Imagine the rash of suicides that will inevitably happen after all those metal bikini posters/wallpapers/screensavers and whatnot are rendered "ineffective".
...you have seen her recently right?
Yeah, wasn't planning on her being dressed skimpy. was thinking of setting her as Margaret Thatcher type role of the seasoned older politician. Time line set to tell how each of the original cast dies, while introducing the next genera....MMphh..mmphh....(Voice of my friend)SSShhh, You almost made a Star Trek reference in a Star Wars thread.
I have to say I've never been a fan of any of the Star Wars movies. Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of the universe it is set in, I just don't think that Lucas should be allowed within 25AU's of a script. Or character creation. And to be honest anything to do with film making what so ever.
I wouldn't mind a step towards a grittier, more "realistic" Star Wars. Kind of like the step they made with the more recent Batman films.
Not sure when it would be set or what woulc happen (not really read much about Star Wars fluff to be honest), but some kind of giant battle would be nice.
SilverMK2 wrote:I have to say I've never been a fan of any of the Star Wars movies. Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of the universe it is set in, I just don't think that Lucas should be allowed within 25AU's of a script. Or character creation. And to be honest anything to do with film making what so ever.
I wouldn't mind a step towards a grittier, more "realistic" Star Wars. Kind of like the step they made with the more recent Batman films.
Not sure when it would be set or what woulc happen (not really read much about Star Wars fluff to be honest), but some kind of giant battle would be nice.
Well I thought he got it right on the 3rd film with Revenge of the Sith.
That was a good film actually.
Fall of the Great:
Citizen Kane (over rated)
Hamlet
Cleopatra (fall of the Antony character-to an extent)
Sith-not so much. had the seeds but not there.
of course a proper wife would have just shanked Obi Wan when they were sitting together
"You're pregnant aren't you? Anakin's the father isn't he. I am so sorry."
(How it should have gone)
Padme: "Don't you be talking about my baby's daddy! Feth you fether!"
Padme shanks him in the throat. He stumbles to the edge of the porch, gurgling blood. She kicks him off.
Yarrggghhhhhhhhhhhhhh....
Lamest passage of the year:
Obi-Wan: Anakin, Chancellor Palpatine is evil! The Sith are evil. The Dark Side of the Force is an evil presense.
Anakin Skywalker: From my point of view, it is the Jedi who are evil.
I wanted to ask Dakkas thoughts on how you think the final the Star War movies should be handled.
Let them die.
I disagree. They universe would be a fun one to explore. Don't blame the universe because Lucas's film-making ability has followed a similar path to Mel Gibsons sanity. He's lost it.
QFT. It sucks 'cause the phantom menace could have been awesome. In my opinion 3 things ruined the movie. 1: Anakin Skywalker. 2: the fact that Anakin managed to destroy a whole fleet, even though a squadron of professionally trained pilots couldn't. 3: Jar Jar
Please don't attach non wargaming pics to Dakka, especially of..him...
The universe has been explored, quite literally to the point where it's been ruined. Let it drift off to the good death of old age, there are plenty of other science fiction settings it's choking under the weight of it's marry sue wizard characters, awful characterization, confused and contradictory storylines, and conflicted art direction.
From what I can tell, Shuma has it correct. SW is almost total crap these days and has been since the Yuzhan Vong or whatever came about. Now, some of the big budget stuff has been ok. Force Unleashed and the Clone Wars series aren't terrible, for example. But the current comics and novels have turned what was once my favorite SF franchise into something that even I would be embarrassed to be associated with. Geeky things that are good are at least defensible.
If they were to make another starwars movie let bioware write it
I know its for a MMORPG but think of the Knights of the old republic games and how awesome they were
but really they should make a republic commando sequal game at the same level of awesomeness then let the universe die a peaceful death while its still *relatively* untainted by poop
but really they should make a republic commando sequal game at the same level of awesomeness then let the universe die a peaceful death while its still *relatively* untainted by poop
So you want another bad rainbow six ripoff with substandard graphics, poor AI, samish weapons, an empty plot, and a recycled visual setting? Republic commando was a substandard game by every way used to measure games. But it was starwars, so like most starwars games it was poor but gets a free pass because star wars fans are pretty used to getting gak on.
but really they should make a republic commando sequal game at the same level of awesomeness then let the universe die a peaceful death while its still *relatively* untainted by poop
So you want another bad rainbow six ripoff with substandard graphics, poor AI, samish weapons, an empty plot, and a recycled visual setting? Republic commando was a substandard game by every way used to measure games. But it was starwars, so like most starwars games it was poor but gets a free pass because star wars fans are pretty used to getting gak on.
You know, I'd love to see a star wars fps done by some one like Bungie. They would have done an amazing job at it.
SilverMK2 wrote:
I wouldn't mind a step towards a grittier, more "realistic" Star Wars. Kind of like the step they made with the more recent Batman films.
That would require getting past Lucas' obsession with black and white moral codes, which won't happen until he dies.
Frazzled wrote:
Wait if it was falling from the sky and its like a mile long wouldn't the force of that be an EVE regardless of where it landed?
Probably not. The asteroid that killed off the dinosaurs was likely 5-7 miles across, and would have been almost completely solid. Compare that to a mile long space ship which is almost certainly at least 40% habitable space and you're looking at something with far less mass.
Still a cataclysmic event, but not extinction level.
but really they should make a republic commando sequal game at the same level of awesomeness then let the universe die a peaceful death while its still *relatively* untainted by poop
So you want another bad rainbow six ripoff with substandard graphics, poor AI, samish weapons, an empty plot, and a recycled visual setting? Republic commando was a substandard game by every way used to measure games. But it was starwars, so like most starwars games it was poor but gets a free pass because star wars fans are pretty used to getting gak on.
You know, I'd love to see a star wars fps done by some one like Bungie. They would have done an amazing job at it.
I'm not convinced it can really be done at all, the closest they ever came was a doom clone with force powers, which while fun was a very long time ago.
I more then definately have some, I recall I got quite the number of imperials, even Boba Fett.
But my pride and joy is my droids and they haven't seen action since I was 14 years old in Vancouver.
Aight, just let me know.
Personally, I thought the droids in Episode 1 were cool. They weren't moronic like in Episode 3 or in the new cgi television show. Sure they had their dumb moments "Uh...that doesn't compute...uh...you're under arrest" but at least they actually killed people.
I don't know, I think its pretty clearly stated that Anakin/Vader does both good and bad things, and is therefore a bad person until his eventual redemption; barring his childhood in the EP. 1 of course.
To me its notable that the only characters who seem to stand by him are the ones that love him (and, in both cases, that love is regarded as a flaw). Everyone else seems to keep him at a significant distance, or express discomfort at his presence.
That is what I mean by ambiguity. The character becomes evil because he has not developed the emotional maturity to handle adult relationships and responsibilities despite his being raised by the supposedly great and good. The character is redeemed against the protests of those same luminaries of justice and truth by an undisciplined, naive son who rejects their proffered wisdom, which itself turns out to be the very fear, anger, and hatred--albeit in cold and passionless form--that they claim to oppose. Vader's story contradicts every tenant of the film's articulated morality up until Luke himself re-articulates it by taking that story into account in conversation with Leia on Endor before turning himself over to Vader. In the end, as perhaps even Luke fails to consciously realize, it is not a choice of pacifism over violence that saves him from the Emperor and the Dark Side. Rather, it the choice in favor of inexplicable love for his absentee war-criminal father over a commitment to the moral rigidity of the Jedi that "saves" both him and Anakin.
Let us not forget, after all, that those moral paragons Yoda and Obi-wan Kenobi both insist that the Emperor must be killed. Perhaps they want Luke to be calm and collected and even magnanimous in murder but the bottom line is that Palpatine must die--that it is right to kill him and just as right as well as necessary to kill Vader. They cannot fathom this as abominable patricide or understand Luke's revulsion at the notion. (Remember, they're both terrible father figures. Look how Anakin turned out . . . ) For the Jedi, what is right and what is necessary neatly match up. Not so with Luke, who thanks to Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru not to mention Han and Leia has an idea of the true value of human relationships--and also, not so of Anakin. Unfortunately for Anakin, he never had any real friends. Thanks to the Clone Wars, he was basically a stranger even to his wife.
@Manchu- So you feel the reason why the Jedi fell from grace was because of an ironic emotional disconnect with other living things while the were teaching that all things were connected.
Would you say that sums up a big part of the problem?
Also, what areas of the Star Wars universe would you like to explore?
Manchu wrote:That is what I mean by ambiguity. The character becomes evil because he has not developed the emotional maturity to handle adult relationships and responsibilities despite his being raised by the supposedly great and good.
I always thought that Lucas' point was that Anakin failed to develop effectively because he wasn't raised in accordance with the traditional Jedi ways; being noticeably older than other 'recruits'. Luke managed to avoid the same fate because he was older than Anakin upon being instructed; received at least some measure of preemptive guidance from Obi-wan, Owen, and Beru; and had his father to serve as an example of what to be wary of.
Tangentially, it seems fairly clear that one of the central tenets of the universe is the inherent evil of large organizations. We see this first through the Empire, but also through the incompetence and corruption of the Senate, and the manipulative detachment of the Jedi. The 'white' in the world of Star Wars isn't related to the self-profession of Good, but the individual desire for freedom and self-discovery as personified by Luke, Han, Leia, and the larger Rebellion. Palpatine, at first glance, appears to violate this premise, but he is never treated as a character unto himself; appearing as an extension of large, unseen organization with an ancient history dominated by a set of monolithic teachings.
Manchu wrote:
In the end, as perhaps even Luke fails to consciously realize, it is not a choice of pacifism over violence that saves him from the Emperor and the Dark Side. Rather, it the choice in favor of inexplicable love for his absentee war-criminal father over a commitment to the moral rigidity of the Jedi that "saves" both him and Anakin.
He listens to his heart, and comes through the better for it; continuing the trend towards individualism over group membership.
Manchu wrote:
Let us not forget, after all, that those moral paragons Yoda and Obi-wan Kenobi both insist that the Emperor must be killed. Perhaps they want Luke to be calm and collected and even magnanimous in murder but the bottom line is that Palpatine must die--that it is right to kill him and just as right as well as necessary to kill Vader.
I don't think Lucas ever explicitly places killing on the evil end of the spectrum. Killing in the name of fear, anger, and hate is very clear evil, but killing in the name of self-defense, or necessity, is not.
focusedfire wrote:@Manchu- So you feel the reason why the Jedi fell from grace was because of an ironic emotional disconnect with other living things while the were teaching that all things were connected. Would you say that sums up a big part of the problem?
Yes, and I think that Lucas was trying to make this theme more explicit in Episode I, albeit with some pretty bizarre concepts. In Episode I, there is a subtle rift in the Jedi establishment. The Council is on one side and Qui-Gon Jinn is on the other. Although it doesn't quite work out for a number of reasons, we--the audience--are supposed to be looking at this part of the story through the eyes of young padawan Kenobi, i.e., from the perspective of someone who doesn't quite understand all of this weighty philosophy yet. Right from the beginning on the Trade Federation ship, we see this exchange between Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon:
OBI-WAN I have a bad feeling about this.
QUI-GON I don't sense anything.
OBI-WAN It's not about the mission, Master, it's somethging...elsewhere...elusive.
QUI-GON Don't center on your anxiety, Obi- Wan. Keep your concentration here and now where it belongs.
OBI-WAN Master Yoda says I should be mindful of the future...
QUI-GON ...but not at the expense of the moment. Be mindful of the living Force, my young Padawan.
And it's summed up right there. The Jedi are not focused on the vital connections that surround, bind, and penetrate all things. (Lucas even tries to make this super literal with midi-chlorians.) So, in a word, they're out-of-touch with the Force. Which explains why they fail to notice that it is Palpatine, right under their noses the whole time, who is the dreaded and elusive Sith Master. The massive dramatic irony of the audience knowing exactly who he is--most especially at Qui-Gon's funeral where a puzzled and thoughtful Jedi Council is standing only a few feet from Darth Sidious--makes the Jedis' blindness to the Force all the more obvious. Hence all the talk about someone bringing balance back to the Force. I wonder if the Jedi ever even considered that the Force was out of balance. Clearly, Qui-Gon was aware of this to some extent because he stood aloof from the Council and even all but overtly defied them on the matter of Anakin. But of course, there is no indication that he thinks Palpatine is the Sith Lord, either.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
dogma wrote:I don't think Lucas ever explicitly places killing on the evil end of the spectrum. Killing in the name of fear, anger, and hate is very clear evil, but killing in the name of self-defense, or necessity, is not.
Vader kills the Emperor in defense of Luke and in self-defense. But when Luke has the opportunity to kill the Emperor, it is not in self-defense. Luke realizes that he does not need to kill the Emperor at all. In their confrontation, more is at stake than simple physical survival. This is why Luke throws his lightsaber away. At that point, he has already "won" and he is already safe. Perhaps--like Obi-Wan before him--he will have to die (although he has no idea at that point how painful his death will be). But in dying uncorrupted, he will live on just as Obi-Wan did--becoming "more powerful than you can possibly imagine."
I think your reading of the theme as group = bad, individual = good isn't adequate. It hardly explains the actions and beliefs of either Anakin or Padme. After all, Anakin similarly "follows his heart" and ends up becoming evil. Padme, who is the real "good guy" of the prequels, never stops telling us how important democratic institutions are and is totally committed to the Senate. In Episode II, while she and Anakin picnic on Naboo, we see this conversation:
PADMÉ: You really don't like politicians, do you?
ANAKIN: I like two or three, but I'm not really sure about one of them. (smiling) I don't think the system works.
PADMÉ: How would you have it work?
ANAKIN: We need a system where the politicians sit down and discuss the problem, agree what's in the best interests of all the people, and then do it.
PADMÉ: That is exactly what we do. The trouble is that people don't always agree. In fact, they hardly ever do.
ANAKIN: Then they should be made to.
PADMÉ: By whom? Who's going to make them?
ANAKIN: I don't know. Someone.
PADMÉ: You?
ANAKIN: Of course not me.
PADMÉ: But someone.
ANAKIN: Someone wise.
PADMÉ: That sounds an awful lot like a dictatorship to me.
In my view, the dictatorship that Anakin naively admires is the fantasy of an ultimate triumph of an individual over all groups. Padme, who has actually dealt the corruptions and complications of the democratic system firsthand while Queen of a besieged Naboo and proibably many times thereafter as a Senator, is the one who is committed to the Senate. I think your reading of the films is a decent enough parody of them (especially Four through Six) but doesn't go very far in explaining the whole picture.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
focusedfire wrote:Also, what areas of the Star Wars universe would you like to explore?
In the final analysis, the Star Wars universe only exists so that the the story of Darth Vader can be told. Any Star Wars story that it is not about Vader or does not focus on an analogue to Darth Vader will simply not feel like authentic Star Wars. How many times can you tell a variation of the Darth Vader story? That's how much life the Star Wars franchise has. I think the best Star Wars EU stuff can be found in the Tales of the Jedi comics from the mid- to late-Nineties. The original Knights of the Old Republic game is the next best, IMO. But the new KotOR comics seem pretty lackluster to me. I'm not sure that I would like to see more of that time period now. But maybe the new MMORPG will make up for those things. I probably won't find out, as I do not play MMORPGs.
The Clone wars suckded , i meen all the battle droids did was the commen simpel jack thing , without the mallet and the butter flys ... my avetar may be a Clone wars thing ... they where the only ones who didn't seem like compleat .
focusedfire wrote:Also, what areas of the Star Wars universe would you like to explore?
In the final analysis, the Star Wars universe only exists so that the the story of Darth Vader can be told. Any Star Wars story that it is not about Vader or does not focus on an analogue to Darth Vader will simply not feel like authentic Star Wars. How many times can you tell a variation of the Darth Vader story? That's how much life the Star Wars franchise has. I think the best Star Wars EU stuff can be found in the Tales of the Jedi comics from the mid- to late-Nineties. The original Knights of the Old Republic game is the next best, IMO. But the new KotOR comics seem pretty lackluster to me. I'm not sure that I would like to see more of that time period now. But maybe the new MMORPG will make up for those things. I probably won't find out, as I do not play MMORPGs.
I don't know if I agree with this. As compelling as the overstory of Vader was, the side story of Han Solo is what made the movies for a lot people. That was one of the things obviously missing from the Prequels. I think Episode 1 played better than the next two because of its gritty Tatooine parts that reminded us of the first movie where we were introduced to all of the main cast. If there had been an older roguish teen-aged friend to Anikin there to plant the seeds for a rebellious nature, the movie would have been much better.(Despite the presence of the annoying one. Come to think of it with both him and c3po in the same movie, lucas doubled the annoying level while redusing the cool level with no Han type Character.)
Think about it, if Lucas had given the Emperor an unwitting accomplice in the form of a rougish friend that bounced in and out of Anakins life, someone that Anikin saw as possible competition for Amedala's affections. If not that, then just a friend that matches Anakins piloting abilities without using the force. I'm thinking a cross between Han and Lando, a charachter that both encourages and challenges Anakin to occasionaly live dangerously and at least smile on occasion. Also make him be just as good of a pilot while having no force abilities to help him.
I think it was, on some level, the lack of non-force using heros that hurt the three prequels. This is why I think exploring the Corellian pirates and The life of Hans dad could be interesting.
focusedfire wrote:@Manchu- So you feel the reason why the Jedi fell from grace was because of an ironic emotional disconnect with other living things while the were teaching that all things were connected.
That is the story, bascially. The Jedi were fixated on distancing themselves from the personal to better understand the spiritual (the force). They knew there was an imbalance in the force, and felt Anakin would be the one to somehow resolve this. In the end it wasn't Anakin but Luke who achieved this balance, and he did it in a way that the council never expected - he embraced his personal connections and used them as his greatest strength.
dogma wrote:I always thought that Lucas' point was that Anakin failed to develop effectively because he wasn't raised in accordance with the traditional Jedi ways; being noticeably older than other 'recruits'. Luke managed to avoid the same fate because he was older than Anakin upon being instructed; received at least some measure of preemptive guidance from Obi-wan, Owen, and Beru; and had his father to serve as an example of what to be wary of.
The difference was his friends. In Leia, Han, Chewie and the rest he had a close group of friends who loved him, the fixation of the Jedi Council on maintaining distance from emotion and personal relationships prevented Anakin from developing a similar strength.
Tangentially, it seems fairly clear that one of the central tenets of the universe is the inherent evil of large organizations. We see this first through the Empire, but also through the incompetence and corruption of the Senate, and the manipulative detachment of the Jedi. The 'white' in the world of Star Wars isn't related to the self-profession of Good, but the individual desire for freedom and self-discovery as personified by Luke, Han, Leia, and the larger Rebellion. Palpatine, at first glance, appears to violate this premise, but he is never treated as a character unto himself; appearing as an extension of large, unseen organization with an ancient history dominated by a set of monolithic teachings.
I think that is less of a deliberate theme and more an inevitable result of swashbuckling movies. To create dramatic tension it's natural for the heroic underdogs will be up against the large monolithic entity.
I don't think the theme supports freedom and individualism, it embraces close friendship as a key value.
He listens to his heart, and comes through the better for it; continuing the trend towards individualism over group membership.
I think he shows loyalty to his family and friends, which is similar, but different in a very important way.
I don't think Lucas ever explicitly places killing on the evil end of the spectrum. Killing in the name of fear, anger, and hate is very clear evil, but killing in the name of self-defense, or necessity, is not.
The much hated Han shoots first moment actually had a fairly decent thematic reasoning behind it. It was the only point in the films where the person who initiated violence won and he wanted that changed.
That the revised version was completely stupid is taken as granted, but it does illustrate Lucas' understanding of violence and self-defence in the series.
I hated the revised version of that scene. When Han shot first, it kind of gave us a look at the gruff violent underworld of the smuggler and bounty hunter. It was a key part of the series as we saw the transformation of Han from a violent dirty smuggler, into a caring, loving individual who still kept a part of his original shoot first personality. When Han shot Greedo out of self-defence, it took away his hard criminal feel, as if he was going to let Greedo walk away.
That is the story, bascially. The Jedi were fixated on distancing themselves from the personal to better understand the spiritual (the force). They knew there was an imbalance in the force, and felt Anakin would be the one to somehow resolve this. In the end it wasn't Anakin but Luke who achieved this balance, and he did it in a way that the council never expected - he embraced his personal connections and used them as his greatest strength.
I'd have to disagree. We're assuming balance means that "the light side" or whatever triumphs. Thats just imbalance.
The imbalance was not the Empire, but the Jedi Knights. The "prophecy" or whatever it was called was indeed misintepreted. DV restored "balance" by wiping out the jedi.
Pre DV: Lots of jedi only 1-2 Sith. Imbalance
Post DV: 2 jedi (Yoda, Obi / DV, Emperor Bob)
having said all that, yea DV was a bad guy but it wasn't all about him in the first two movies. Once it started to movie away from all the normals in ROTJ it started to get dull (that and the crime against humanity that was the ewoks of course). Frankly jedis doing this and jedi's doing that get boring in the second series. Its the same problem as Superman. If you can't be killed you're dull.
That is the story, bascially. The Jedi were fixated on distancing themselves from the personal to better understand the spiritual (the force). They knew there was an imbalance in the force, and felt Anakin would be the one to somehow resolve this. In the end it wasn't Anakin but Luke who achieved this balance, and he did it in a way that the council never expected - he embraced his personal connections and used them as his greatest strength.
I'd have to disagree. We're assuming balance means that "the light side" or whatever triumphs. Thats just imbalance.
The imbalance was not the Empire, but the Jedi Knights. The "prophecy" or whatever it was called was indeed misintepreted. DV restored "balance" by wiping out the jedi.
Pre DV: Lots of jedi only 1-2 Sith. Imbalance
Post DV: 2 jedi (Yoda, Obi / DV, Emperor Bob)
having said all that, yea DV was a bad guy but it wasn't all about him in the first two movies. Once it started to movie away from all the normals in ROTJ it started to get dull (that and the crime against humanity that was the ewoks of course). Frankly jedis doing this and jedi's doing that get boring in the second series. Its the same problem as Superman. If you can't be killed you're dull.
I though the prophecy was misread as It was Luke, not Ani/DV that was to restore balance to the force by taking out the Emperor and DV destroying most of the darksides power allowing the lightside to develop again.
I think that the balance is means that the lightsidfe reches a peak and is allowed to stay at that peak for a while, then it's destroyed by the darkside, then the darkside is overthrown and it all happens again
That is the story, bascially. The Jedi were fixated on distancing themselves from the personal to better understand the spiritual (the force). They knew there was an imbalance in the force, and felt Anakin would be the one to somehow resolve this. In the end it wasn't Anakin but Luke who achieved this balance, and he did it in a way that the council never expected - he embraced his personal connections and used them as his greatest strength.
I'd have to disagree. We're assuming balance means that "the light side" or whatever triumphs. Thats just imbalance.
The imbalance was not the Empire, but the Jedi Knights. The "prophecy" or whatever it was called was indeed misintepreted. DV restored "balance" by wiping out the jedi.
Pre DV: Lots of jedi only 1-2 Sith. Imbalance
Post DV: 2 jedi (Yoda, Obi / DV, Emperor Bob)
having said all that, yea DV was a bad guy but it wasn't all about him in the first two movies. Once it started to movie away from all the normals in ROTJ it started to get dull (that and the crime against humanity that was the ewoks of course). Frankly jedis doing this and jedi's doing that get boring in the second series. Its the same problem as Superman. If you can't be killed you're dull.
I though the prophecy was misread as It was Luke, not Ani/DV that was to restore balance to the force by taking out the Emperor and DV destroying most of the darksides power allowing the lightside to develop again.
I think that the balance is means that the lightsidfe reches a peak and is allowed to stay at that peak for a while, then it's destroyed by the darkside, then the darkside is overthrown and it all happens again
I think it is more the fact that the Force is seen as a living organism in and of itself,and as such,seeks a balance. As the Jedi(ie:Light)grew more and more powerful via their numbers,the Sith(Dark) grew more powerful in terms of the ability to use the Force and were able to conceal their actions.
I really don't see how Vader was ever the chosen one,either. In truth,Sidious did more to achieve that balance than Anakin. Sidious manipulated the entire Clone War,pitting sides against each other and dwindling the Jedi's numbers. Sidious dropped Order 66 and wiped out almost all of the Jedi council. Yeah,Anakin slaughtered some younglings in the Jedi Temple,but that's about it. Some point to him helping Sidious take out Mace Windu,but I always saw that as Sidious simply laying down to Windu in order to manipulate Anakin into joining him. In fact,if Yoda would have taken care of Sidious,then Vader would have died on Mostafar. Vader was just a pawn in Sidious' grand scheme. Luke was just able to turn them against each other.
The theme of Star Wars was pretty much that absolute power corrupts absolutely. The Jedi essentially became all-powerful within the Republic,and became corrupt as a result. They began to believe that they WERE good and just instead of servants of good and justice. Even after Ep.3,Yoda decides to hide by himself on Deghobah instead of trying to take on Vader and/or the Emperor again because he is presumably afraid of his own destruction. The trait that seperates heros like Obi-Wan and Luke is self-sacrifice. Qui-gon sacrificed personal advancement within the Jedi Order to stand up for what he believed. Obi-Wan sacrificed himself so that Luke and the others could escape. Luke was willing to sacrifice himself to save his father. Anakin,however,refused to sacrifice anything,which led to his fall.
That is the story, bascially. The Jedi were fixated on distancing themselves from the personal to better understand the spiritual (the force). They knew there was an imbalance in the force, and felt Anakin would be the one to somehow resolve this. In the end it wasn't Anakin but Luke who achieved this balance, and he did it in a way that the council never expected - he embraced his personal connections and used them as his greatest strength.
I'd have to disagree. We're assuming balance means that "the light side" or whatever triumphs. Thats just imbalance.
The imbalance was not the Empire, but the Jedi Knights. The "prophecy" or whatever it was called was indeed misintepreted. DV restored "balance" by wiping out the jedi.
Pre DV: Lots of jedi only 1-2 Sith. Imbalance
Post DV: 2 jedi (Yoda, Obi / DV, Emperor Bob)
having said all that, yea DV was a bad guy but it wasn't all about him in the first two movies. Once it started to movie away from all the normals in ROTJ it started to get dull (that and the crime against humanity that was the ewoks of course). Frankly jedis doing this and jedi's doing that get boring in the second series. Its the same problem as Superman. If you can't be killed you're dull.
I though the prophecy was misread as It was Luke, not Ani/DV that was to restore balance to the force by taking out the Emperor and DV destroying most of the darksides power allowing the lightside to develop again.
I think that the balance is means that the lightsidfe reches a peak and is allowed to stay at that peak for a while, then it's destroyed by the darkside, then the darkside is overthrown and it all happens again
I think it is more the fact that the Force is seen as a living organism in and of itself,and as such,seeks a balance. As the Jedi(ie:Light)grew more and more powerful via their numbers,the Sith(Dark) grew more powerful in terms of the ability to use the Force and were able to conceal their actions.
I really don't see how Vader was ever the chosen one,either. In truth,Sidious did more to achieve that balance than Anakin. Sidious manipulated the entire Clone War,pitting sides against each other and dwindling the Jedi's numbers. Sidious dropped Order 66 and wiped out almost all of the Jedi council. Yeah,Anakin slaughtered some younglings in the Jedi Temple,but that's about it. Some point to him helping Sidious take out Mace Windu,but I always saw that as Sidious simply laying down to Windu in order to manipulate Anakin into joining him. In fact,if Yoda would have taken care of Sidious,then Vader would have died on Mostafar. Vader was just a pawn in Sidious' grand scheme. Luke was just able to turn them against each other.
The theme of Star Wars was pretty much that absolute power corrupts absolutely. The Jedi essentially became all-powerful within the Republic,and became corrupt as a result. They began to believe that they WERE good and just instead of servants of good and justice. Even after Ep.3,Yoda decides to hide by himself on Deghobah instead of trying to take on Vader and/or the Emperor again because he is presumably afraid of his own destruction. The trait that seperates heros like Obi-Wan and Luke is self-sacrifice. Qui-gon sacrificed personal advancement within the Jedi Order to stand up for what he believed. Obi-Wan sacrificed himself so that Luke and the others could escape. Luke was willing to sacrifice himself to save his father. Anakin,however,refused to sacrifice anything,which led to his fall.
Order 66 had nothing to do with sidious. It was made before he had anything to do with troppers. It was made incase there was a jedi rebellion.
That is the story, bascially. The Jedi were fixated on distancing themselves from the personal to better understand the spiritual (the force). They knew there was an imbalance in the force, and felt Anakin would be the one to somehow resolve this. In the end it wasn't Anakin but Luke who achieved this balance, and he did it in a way that the council never expected - he embraced his personal connections and used them as his greatest strength.
I'd have to disagree. We're assuming balance means that "the light side" or whatever triumphs. Thats just imbalance.
The imbalance was not the Empire, but the Jedi Knights. The "prophecy" or whatever it was called was indeed misintepreted. DV restored "balance" by wiping out the jedi.
Pre DV: Lots of jedi only 1-2 Sith. Imbalance
Post DV: 2 jedi (Yoda, Obi / DV, Emperor Bob)
having said all that, yea DV was a bad guy but it wasn't all about him in the first two movies. Once it started to movie away from all the normals in ROTJ it started to get dull (that and the crime against humanity that was the ewoks of course). Frankly jedis doing this and jedi's doing that get boring in the second series. Its the same problem as Superman. If you can't be killed you're dull.
I though the prophecy was misread as It was Luke, not Ani/DV that was to restore balance to the force by taking out the Emperor and DV destroying most of the darksides power allowing the lightside to develop again.
I think that the balance is means that the lightsidfe reches a peak and is allowed to stay at that peak for a while, then it's destroyed by the darkside, then the darkside is overthrown and it all happens again
I think it is more the fact that the Force is seen as a living organism in and of itself,and as such,seeks a balance. As the Jedi(ie:Light)grew more and more powerful via their numbers,the Sith(Dark) grew more powerful in terms of the ability to use the Force and were able to conceal their actions.
I really don't see how Vader was ever the chosen one,either. In truth,Sidious did more to achieve that balance than Anakin. Sidious manipulated the entire Clone War,pitting sides against each other and dwindling the Jedi's numbers. Sidious dropped Order 66 and wiped out almost all of the Jedi council. Yeah,Anakin slaughtered some younglings in the Jedi Temple,but that's about it. Some point to him helping Sidious take out Mace Windu,but I always saw that as Sidious simply laying down to Windu in order to manipulate Anakin into joining him. In fact,if Yoda would have taken care of Sidious,then Vader would have died on Mostafar. Vader was just a pawn in Sidious' grand scheme. Luke was just able to turn them against each other.
The theme of Star Wars was pretty much that absolute power corrupts absolutely. The Jedi essentially became all-powerful within the Republic,and became corrupt as a result. They began to believe that they WERE good and just instead of servants of good and justice. Even after Ep.3,Yoda decides to hide by himself on Deghobah instead of trying to take on Vader and/or the Emperor again because he is presumably afraid of his own destruction. The trait that seperates heros like Obi-Wan and Luke is self-sacrifice. Qui-gon sacrificed personal advancement within the Jedi Order to stand up for what he believed. Obi-Wan sacrificed himself so that Luke and the others could escape. Luke was willing to sacrifice himself to save his father. Anakin,however,refused to sacrifice anything,which led to his fall.
Order 66 had nothing to do with sidious. It was made before he had anything to do with troppers. It was made incase there was a jedi rebellion.
Actually, without Palpatine/Sideous, there would have been no war, therefore no clone army. He sent Count Dooku to Kamino under the alias of another name to pay the Kaminoans. The Clone Wars was all orchestrated to destroy the Jedi Order. It's called Order 66 because it was the 66th order they implanted in them. I thin you misunderstood what they said in the movie. The Jedi rebellion was just a cover up to explain why the clones were slaughtering Jedi.
The balance issue is not in terms of light vs dark but rather, to use sebster's words, personal vs. spiritual. Qui-Gon Jinn calls the "personal" aspect the Living Force. Later, in the books, this gets mixed up in dichotomy with the "Unifying Force." But I don't think that spectrum of Living <---> Unifying has much to do with the theme of balance in Lucas's story. Keep in mind also that this idea of a prophecy about bringing balance to the Force did not exist until Episode I.
Also, ff, Episode I plays better than II and III? What are you smoking?
Frazzled wrote:I'd have to disagree. We're assuming balance means that "the light side" or whatever triumphs. Thats just imbalance.
The imbalance was not the Empire, but the Jedi Knights. The "prophecy" or whatever it was called was indeed misintepreted. DV restored "balance" by wiping out the jedi.
Pre DV: Lots of jedi only 1-2 Sith. Imbalance
Post DV: 2 jedi (Yoda, Obi / DV, Emperor Bob)
Which is what I'd assumed, and found the whole thing not making a lot of sense, until I read somewhere that Lucas felt balance wasn't about a balance between dark and light. It was about seperating the dark from the light, and about how the Jedi could no longer see clearly between the two. Or something. Hardly any of that is actually in the text, and is a mile away from a plain reading of the word 'balance'.
But at least it does allow the whole thing to make some kind of sense - if the Jedi were dominant and balance meant equality between dark and light, why the hell would the Jedi want to fulfill the prophecy?
having said all that, yea DV was a bad guy but it wasn't all about him in the first two movies. Once it started to movie away from all the normals in ROTJ it started to get dull (that and the crime against humanity that was the ewoks of course). Frankly jedis doing this and jedi's doing that get boring in the second series. Its the same problem as Superman. If you can't be killed you're dull.
Yeah, I agree, the Jedi were not interesting protagonists. I think it was a bit of trap, because Obi-Wan was so fantastic in the original film. But that was a supporting role, and it was played by Alec Guinness. I mean, Ewan MacGregor and Liam Neeson are fine actors, but they had to carry whole films by looking serene.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Munch Munch! wrote:I hated the revised version of that scene. When Han shot first, it kind of gave us a look at the gruff violent underworld of the smuggler and bounty hunter. It was a key part of the series as we saw the transformation of Han from a violent dirty smuggler, into a caring, loving individual who still kept a part of his original shoot first personality. When Han shot Greedo out of self-defence, it took away his hard criminal feel, as if he was going to let Greedo walk away.
Sort of, I could tolerate the hit to Han's character in order to fit the theme of the series. The real problem is that the revised scene had a bounty hunter that missed from across the table.
Whatever1 wrote:I really don't see how Vader was ever the chosen one,either. In truth,Sidious did more to achieve that balance than Anakin.
No, seriously, 'balance' was not meant to mean equality between good and evil, despite that being the plain meaning of the word, and despite it being what everyone assumed it meant. Lucas explained it, and the fact that he pretty failed entirely to establish what the prophecy actually meant in his movies is just another nail in the coffin of the prequels.
But it really did mean to seperate light from dark, to remove ambiguity as it were.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
garret wrote:Order 66 had nothing to do with sidious. It was made before he had anything to do with troppers. It was made incase there was a jedi rebellion.
Dooku created the clone army on behalf of Sidius, who gave them order 66 under the excuse that the Jedi might one day rebel. He didn't think they were ever going to rebel, he just wanted to be able to wipe them out once he'd gain complete control of the Republic, as they would be the only real threat to his position.
Manchu wrote:
Also, ff, Episode I plays better than II and III? What are you smoking?
Many people will blame the scripts, but I blame Hayden Christiansen for episodes II&III. The movies felt like there were better scenes laying on the cutting room floor due to Haydens inability to act. The kid Jake Lloyd did a much better job of acting than Hayden did and the setting of the movie was better because it wasn't so OTTCG. Yes, we had to deal with the introduction of miticlorians and the most annoying character ever creayed outside of a Jim Carrey or Sasha Cohen movie in Episode I, but the acting was able to carry the movie. I didn't suspend disbelief every three minutes like the movies with Hayden playing Mannikin.
If there had been a young Han type character in episode I, slapping the annoying one around or kicking it in the shin every other time it said something stupid, the added comedic relief would have provided what was missing. It would also have set a tone for the other movies of not being so...sterile.
As far as which are the better scripts? I can't really judge because of the acting in II & III.
Munch Munch! wrote:God, the prequals sucked. The only part worth watching was the battle scenes.
Yes they did and I attribute it to Lucas miscasting key parts and the failure to add the type of character that he writes for and directs the best. A Harrison Ford scoundrel type of character. These movies could have been very good but Lucas seemed bound and determined to make them bad. The real problem could be that Lucas can't direct this younger generation. Shia Leboeff(sp?) is a very accomplished actor but in the Indiana Jones movie Lucas failed to show the kids talent.
BTW, instead of the "they sucked" comments, why don't you tell me how you would have shot the movies or at least fix them. This is a thread where you can discuss, create, gripe about or make jokes about Star Wars. The universe of the Galactic Empire could really be developed a lot more. Honestly I'd like to see a D10 based table top game that plays similar to 40K and uses a similar scale of models. I think that it could be fun if done right.
Well, I would start trying to fix them by removing Anakin's whineyness. For a protagonist, he wasn't very likable. I would also remove the gungans 'cause well their nature's dumbass.
I would also love to see a tabletop wargame of star wars. There is alot of factions to play as, many species to model, and so much history in it, dozens of vhicles and weapons, and alot of favourite scenarios could be played out. Even with clone troopers, there's alot of variation in armour customization.
focusedfire wrote:Many people will blame the scripts, but I blame Hayden Christiansen for episodes II&III. The movies felt like there were better scenes laying on the cutting room floor due to Haydens inability to act.
There was a whole lot more going wrong than Christiansen’s mediocre performance. He was mediocre, for sure, but the cast was studded with gifted, experienced actors who have been excellent in other roles, and here they were all underwhelming.
Much of it comes down to the scripts, which were all poorly written. Most people remark on the awkward dialogue, but honestly Star Wars dialogue has always been a little too formal and awkward, that’s kind of a trait of the series. The bigger problem is the lack of structure, and how little Lucas was willing to cut to get the structure and pacing right. Each script simply needed fewer scenes, fewer peripheral characters, fewer plot explanations, and a much clearer plot.
The first Star Wars script was the result of Lucas writing and rewriting his story countless times, and it’s interesting to read early version and see how messy they were, and how they had so many of the same faults as the prequels. The Empire script was similarly written and re-written, and this time Lucas only provided the story idea, it was written by industry heavyweights like Lawrence Kasdan. Return of the Jedi had similar talent behind it, but the script had a much reduced lead in time, and really could have used a little longer to get it right.
Lucas wrote the scripts for the prequels unassisted, and wrote each over a very short period of time. It really shows.
Munch Munch! wrote:I would also love to see a tabletop wargame of star wars. There is alot of factions to play as, many species to model, and so much history in it, dozens of vhicles and weapons, and alot of favourite scenarios could be played out. Even with clone troopers, there's alot of variation in armour customization.
It would be a challenge to get the feel right, as Star Wars is a swashbuckling adventure covered with a military veneer. You’d have to do it just right to pay proper service to the crazy achievements of the heroes, while still keeping the basic military structure underneath.
It’d be a tough thing, though Lord of the Rings style hero points would probably be the best place to start.
The scrolling text reads: A thousand years of peace are drawing to a close. The Outer Rim territories of the Galactic Republic are rife with crime and oppression while corruption and villainy fester at its Core. The noble Jedi Knights are stretched thin throughout the galaxy in defense of law and order. Some believe that the Republic must raise a self-defense force to protect its citizens. Others argue that creating such a force would lead only to tyranny. As debate continues in the Galactic Senate, violence escalates to war on the frontiers . . .
The story begins with a Falcon-esque freighter tearing through a screen-filling space battle between the Trade Federation and a Hutt Fleet. The freighter is captained by a brash, crude-talking young woman who hands the conn over to her R2 unit while she takes the guns. In her conversation with the R2 unit, we learn that she is a mercenary employed by Senator Skywalker of Alderaan to spy on the Trade Federation. As a side line, she’s been smuggling Trade Federation technologies to the Hutts. “How was I supposed to know they’d start a war over it?” she screams at the little droid, called R2-D2, over the explosion of another Droid fighter. “Senator Skywalker’s not going to like this at all. Threepio, you have that hyperdrive back up yet?” Cut to a golden protocol droid comically arguing with the ships brain. He apparently wins the argument and the scene ends with the stars turning into streaks of light.
Cut scene to Coruscant, in the Galactic Senate. Senator Palpatine of Naboo is finishing a speech to the Senate about the rapacious criminal activities of the Hutts and the need for a Republican Self-Defense Force to bring order to the galactic frontiers. His speech is met with both cheers and booing. Another middle-aged human Senator is cheering from the gallery as his aide comes up and whispers something in his ear. “Thank you, Bail,” he says and excuses himself.
Cut to a lavish office. Qui-Gon Jinn and his Padawan Anakin Skywalker are waiting there. The Senator strides in, waving off reporters who are blocked from entering by his aides. "Master Qui-Gon Jinn." The Senator formally bows to the Jedi and then greets them warmly. “Young Anakin,” he smiles “I am always hearing about your accomplishments.” “Thank you, Senator Skywalker,” Anakin replies evenly. Senator Skywalker gets down to business, explaining to Qui-Gon about the latest skirmish between the Hutts and the Trade Federation. He confides that his sources all point toward a major rift in the Republic given that some powerful members do not feel that the Jedi can protect them anymore. A self-defense force is necessary to maintain the security of the Republic. He implores Qui-Gon to speak to the Council and gain their support on his behalf. Clearly uncomfortable, Qui-Gon explains that he disagrees with the Council on many issues but will relay the message.
After the meeting, Anakin seems dissatisfied with the encounter. The Jedi are walking down a corridor lined with windows. It is sunset. “My own father treats me like a stranger,” he tells his master. Anakin and Qui-Gon pause by a window overlooking the Jedi Temple. Qui-Gon explains that in many ways they are strangers given that Senator Skywalker gave up Anakin to the Jedi Temple not long after his mother died in childbirth. “Do you think he blamed me for her death?” Anakin asks as they continue walking. “No,” Qui-Gon reassures him gently. “You must learn to heed the Living Force. Had you been more mindful of the moment, you would have sensed that your father is proud of you.” Anakin pauses again and gazes out of another, this time facing the sun setting over the Galactic Senate.
sebster wrote:There was a whole lot more going wrong than Christiansen’s mediocre performance. He was mediocre, for sure, but the cast was studded with gifted, experienced actors who have been excellent in other roles, and here they were all underwhelming.
I agree. After reading your post I can accept that the scripting was a major issue but also still feel that many of the major rolls were miscast thus compounding the script issues.
Palpatine, Duku and Ahmadala were the only three that I felt were cast well. While Liam Neeson and Samiel L. Jackson were good, there presence over-shadowed the story-lines. Ewan Macgregor was acceptable but, IMO, the part of young obi-wan could have been better cast.
sebster wrote:
Munch Munch! wrote:I would also love to see a tabletop wargame of star wars. There is alot of factions to play as, many species to model, and so much history in it, dozens of vhicles and weapons, and alot of favourite scenarios could be played out. Even with clone troopers, there's alot of variation in armour customization.
It would be a challenge to get the feel right, as Star Wars is a swashbuckling adventure covered with a military veneer. You’d have to do it just right to pay proper service to the crazy achievements of the heroes, while still keeping the basic military structure underneath.
It’d be a tough thing, though Lord of the Rings style hero points would probably be the best place to start.
I like your suggestions here. Do you see the game as to being able to be inclusive of both larger scale fleet actions and ground wars or based more around small bands of heros.
Would also like to point out your use of the term swashbuckling. Very apt and cuts to the gist of what I was saying about what was missing from the prequels. They were Epic but not really swashbuckling for some reason.
Manchu wrote:Anyone interested in reading more?
1)Yes, please.
2)Are wanting to go it alone or will the discussion in here help or ideas from others be welcome?
3)Looks like you have been doing some story boarding lately from your cut scene type of writing. Been working on a project lately?
Anakin,however,refused to sacrifice anything,which led to his fall.
I disagree strongly. Anakin sacrificed the Republic to save his wife. If I were in his shoes I would have done the same, without all the emo should I shouldn't I crap. To save wifey the galaxy can burn. Gee that sounds like a cool title for a book....
(this of course makes the later fight stupid-again he wouldn't have choked her out, and further she should have shanked Obi and they could have lived like kings)
Darth Frazzled's becoming
Frazzled the valorous: "Wow I have these visions and they come true. I had this vision of my mom and it came true. My wife is the last thing I care about and just had this dream about her dying."
Darth Bob: " I can save her, but we've got to take power and wipe out the jedi."
Darth Frazzled, starting up the Rockyesque training montage 8mm camera. "Its gonna suck to be them. Lets do this thing."
Automatically Appended Next Post: To the prequels:
Scripts were bad
DIRECTING was bad.
Underlying plot development was crap.
Christopher Lee was awesome.
Lucas forgot how to direct people and story. He's only good for special effects now, understandeable as thats his business. The "special effects" were more animated than the people.
Munch Munch! wrote:I would also love to see a tabletop wargame of star wars. There is alot of factions to play as, many species to model, and so much history in it, dozens of vhicles and weapons, and alot of favourite scenarios could be played out. Even with clone troopers, there's alot of variation in armour customization.
It would be a challenge to get the feel right, as Star Wars is a swashbuckling adventure covered with a military veneer. You’d have to do it just right to pay proper service to the crazy achievements of the heroes, while still keeping the basic military structure underneath.
It’d be a tough thing, though Lord of the Rings style hero points would probably be the best place to start.
I like your suggestions here. Do you see the game as to being able to be inclusive of both larger scale fleet actions and ground wars or based more around small bands of heros.
Would also like to point out your use of the term swashbuckling. Very apt and cuts to the gist of what I was saying about what was missing from the prequels. They were Epic but not really swashbuckling for some reason.
I could easily see both. The Star Wars unverse is rich in all levels of battles from a small band of smugglers or rebels taking out small but important targets, to massive campaigns on land and space trying to accomplish their own objectives.
I also agree on the term swashbuckling. The prequels all centered around flashy battles and corrupt politicians. It didn't have the sense of adventure we got when we saw an odd band of irregulars in a rundown ship.
Manchu wrote: Also, ff, Episode I plays better than II and III? What are you smoking?
Many people will blame the scripts, but I blame Hayden Christiansen for episodes II&III. The movies felt like there were better scenes laying on the cutting room floor due to Haydens inability to act. The kid Jake Lloyd did a much better job of acting than Hayden did and the setting of the movie was better because it wasn't so OTTCG. Yes, we had to deal with the introduction of miticlorians and the most annoying character ever creayed outside of a Jim Carrey or Sasha Cohen movie in Episode I, but the acting was able to carry the movie. I didn't suspend disbelief every three minutes like the movies with Hayden playing Mannikin.
If there had been a young Han type character in episode I, slapping the annoying one around or kicking it in the shin every other time it said something stupid, the added comedic relief would have provided what was missing. It would also have set a tone for the other movies of not being so...sterile.
As far as which are the better scripts? I can't really judge because of the acting in II & III.
Munch Munch! wrote:God, the prequals sucked. The only part worth watching was the battle scenes.
Yes they did and I attribute it to Lucas miscasting key parts and the failure to add the type of character that he writes for and directs the best. A Harrison Ford scoundrel type of character. These movies could have been very good but Lucas seemed bound and determined to make them bad. The real problem could be that Lucas can't direct this younger generation. Shia Leboeff(sp?) is a very accomplished actor but in the Indiana Jones movie Lucas failed to show the kids talent.
BTW, instead of the "they sucked" comments, why don't you tell me how you would have shot the movies or at least fix them. This is a thread where you can discuss, create, gripe about or make jokes about Star Wars. The universe of the Galactic Empire could really be developed a lot more. Honestly I'd like to see a D10 based table top game that plays similar to 40K and uses a similar scale of models. I think that it could be fun if done right.
Personally Ep.1 and 2 were good summer blockbuster-type movies. They were by no means upper-tier cinema,but they were entertaining and certainly have plenty of reviewing value. The problem is,the expectations for the prequels were ridiculously high,since they were following what most believe is the greatest trilogy of all time(Ep.4-6),and Ep.3 was really the only one that stacked up against the originals. They weren't bad movies,although they definately had their share of problems. They just looked bad when compared to the originals.
Hayden sucked as Anakin,no doubt,although I do think that perhaps part of the reason he was so wooden is because Vader is so wooden in the originals. Problem is,when you've got a massive suit of armor and you're being voiced by James Earl Jones,wooden is cool. When you're just a pretty boy acting wooden,well,that's not cool. Still,Keanu Reeves could have played a better Anakin. The rest of the cast was at least serviceable,IMO,though.
A young Han character wouldn't have worked at all. For one,the prequels are tellling the backstory of the major players in Ep.4-6. Ep.1-3 were never written out in full script form until Lucas decided to do them. Ep.1-3 were basically just notes on the events leading up to the original trilogy. That's why there's so much "filler" in Ep.1. There literally wasn't enough there to make a 2 hour movie around. For another,a new Han would be inevitably compared to the old Han,and probably not favorably. It would look like Lucas was just basically trying to rehash the originals. Finally,how in the world to bring that character into consistant contact with Anakin and Obi-Wan? All the soldiers are clones,and they're fighting a war. What justification is there for this non-Jedi character to be running around with them?
Shia LaBeof has very little talent,IMO. I have always found him underwhelming. He's not horrible enough to boycott a movie because he's in it,but he's no reason to go see one,either. He's serviceable,at best. He was underwhelming in the Transformer's movies,Indy 4,Eagle Eye,Constantine,and Disturbia,IMO. One blah performance,and you can blame the director. Several blah performances,and it's most likely the actor.
Personally,if I had done the prequels,I would have pretty much scrapped most of Ep.1. The important components to the storyline could have simply been worked in via dream sequence flashbacks. Ep.2 would pretty much become Ep.1,and Anakin's involvement in the Clone Wars would be the focus of Ep.2. There is simply too much important character development that goes on in that time period with Anakin and Obi-Wan to just jump from where we currently left off in Ep.2 to Ep.3. Dooku never really comes off as the villain he should because he basically goes from spanking Obi and Ani at the end of Ep.2 to getting completely pwned in the first 15 minutes of Ep.3. Grievous also needed more development. The other huge issue with the prequels is too much concentration on easter eggs(R2,C3PO,Chewie,the Falcon,Boba Fett),CGI action sequences(pod race,Obi-Wan running around on a giant lizard),and pretty much meaningless side characters. Mace Windu got too much screen time for as irrelevant as he was to the plot. Yes,I realize that Samuel L. had a massive hard on to be in the prequels,but that doesn't mean you have to write in a part for him.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote:
Anakin,however,refused to sacrifice anything,which led to his fall.
I disagree strongly. Anakin sacrificed the Republic to save his wife. If I were in his shoes I would have done the same, without all the emo should I shouldn't I crap. To save wifey the galaxy can burn. Gee that sounds like a cool title for a book....
(this of course makes the later fight stupid-again he wouldn't have choked her out, and further she should have shanked Obi and they could have lived like kings)
Darth Frazzled's becoming
Frazzled the valorous: "Wow I have these visions and they come true. I had this vision of my mom and it came true. My wife is the last thing I care about and just had this dream about her dying."
Darth Bob: " I can save her, but we've got to take power and wipe out the jedi."
Darth Frazzled, starting up the Rockyesque training montage 8mm camera. "Its gonna suck to be them. Lets do this thing."
How did Anakin sacrifice the Republic? Remember,he told Padme' that he didn't feel that the Republic worked as it should,and went on about an idealistic view of a dictatorship. It's not really much of a sacrifice when you don't believe in it in the first place.
Please,I could have saved Padme' with a flight of stairs. You can't tell me that they couldn't perform an abortion. Once again,Anakin was asked to sacrifice either his wife or his kids,and he instead chose to try and have it all. Besides which,they were married in secret. A child out of wedlock would presumably destroy her political career,along with his. You really expect Obi-Wan not to catch on that "Hey,Padme's kid has Anakin's eyes?" C'mon. Once again,Anakin refused to sacrifice. Padme' probably told him to double-bag it,but he was all like,"Naw,baby,I'm goin' in raw or I'm not goin' in at all."
focusedfire wrote:@Manchu-You got anymore story worked up.
@All posters- How does a table top minature game that is set in space and has boarding actions and infantry battles sound yo you guys?
To use GW products as a reference it wold be sort of a mix between Rogue Trader, Battlefleet Gothica and Space Hulk.
It would have various competing factions with some relying heavily upon privateers.
Any one got some input on where to start.
I actually made a star wars table top game.
It's based on the Rogue Trader and 2nd Edition 40k rulesets. It's pretty fun. Perhaps not too well balanced but you can have Wookiees riding Speeder Bikes fighting Trandoshans with mini shield generators and laser cannons. Stuff like that.
:edit: The rules aren't the best in the world, as originally it started out as me thinking of cool stuff, and then writing down it as sort of a stream of consciousness. It doesn't have rules for boarding starships and for starship battles but they would be fun to write I think!
ShumaGorath wrote:The universe has been explored, quite literally to the point where it's been ruined. Let it drift off to the good death of old age, there are plenty of other science fiction settings it's choking under the weight of it's marry sue wizard characters, awful characterization, confused and contradictory storylines, and conflicted art direction.
This. I called it quits when they released Sacrfice and I finally got fed up with the BS. If you're going to Expand a universe, you have to actually expand it. Not beat it to death under the guise of expansion.
The only things Star Wars that in any way interest me are The Old Republic Era, which is really only good so long as Bioware remains key to its development (Bioware being one of the few groups of people who know how to write engaging story lines anymore) and the Legacy Era, which is somewhat ruined by being limited to a comic book but is at least interesting enough in that the universe is finally past Luke Skywalker.
I disagree. They universe would be a fun one to explore. Don't blame the universe because Lucas's film-making ability has followed a similar path to Mel Gibsons sanity. He's lost it.
I don't think Lucas ever had any film-making ability. He had imagination. The first three films were so good because there had never been anything like them. Lucas got by on the novelty. Not any ability on his part to make movies. EDIT: That came out wrong. Lucas is average, as a movie maker. Had his work not been so unique, he would have gone the way of M Night Shamliuanahajhgafistanbulris-blah. One good movie and then everyone wishes he'd just stop. Lucas made it to three.
I relly only likeded ep3 cause of Grievous , but the rest of the film was ok the space battle at the start was good , but it got prety boring till the mustafar massacre scene .
, i meen all the battle droids did was the commen simpel jack thing , without the mallet and the butter flys ... my avetar may be a Clone wars thing ... they where the only ones who didn't seem like compleat 
