Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[insomniac013]

Originally Posted by SexySamSosa67

I just don't understand why Ani's wife dies after giving birth. In real life if a woman gives birth to twins, is there a high chance she dies?

She died of a broken heart. What, you never heard of this condition?

[Havok83]

Originally Posted by BluBonnet

Because she hasn't JUST given birth to twins. She has lost the man she loved to the dark side; she has also seen everything that she fought for - democracy and diplomacy - been completely destroyed, the Jedi order has been completely anhilated and most Jedi Knights slaughtered.

They pretty much show that she has given up the will to live. Also Anakin had just strangled her with the force not long before so that made her weak

[happydood]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

It was a plot contrivance to make the prequels fit with the original trilogy. More poor quality Lucas writing.

There are a lot of bad writing choices in the Prequels, but I don't think that's one of them- at least intentionally. I think it works as a mythological, or at least tragic/operatic concept- and that's the level Lucas works on- regardless of believable dialogue. He's guilty of enough things without trying to find something else...

[crissrudd4554]

Originally Posted by happydood

There are a lot of bad writing choices in the Prequels, but I don't think that's one of them- at least intentionally. I think it works as a mythological, or at least tragic/operatic concept- and that's the level Lucas works on- regardless of believable dialogue. He's guilty of enough things without trying to find something else...

The Prequels never established Anakin 'wanted' Luke to have his lightsaber among other things.

[happydood]

Originally Posted by crissrudd4554

The Prequels never established Anakin 'wanted' Luke to have his lightsaber among other things.

Once again, I think there are plenty of bad writing choices and Lucas even admitting to forgetting he had to cover that issue at the last moment.

I was addressing the specific issue of the 'dying of a broken heart' trope which I think is purely intentional and not necessarily lazy writing- though he may be guilty of that in other places.

[crissrudd4554]

Originally Posted by happydood

Once again, I think there are plenty of bad writing choices and Lucas even admitting to forgetting he had to cover that issue at the last moment.

I was addressing the specific issue of the 'dying of a broken heart' trope which I think is purely intentional and not necessarily lazy writing- though he may be guilty of that in other places.

I understand. I was just giving another example of what you said about the bad writing is all.

[Arawn]

Originally Posted by crissrudd4554

The Prequels never established Anakin 'wanted' Luke to have his lightsaber among other things.

When you do a major retcon such as "Vader is Luke's father", there can be a lot of collateral damage.

Originally Posted by svenge

Honestly, if you want to have your opinions mindlessly accepted without anyone applying any critical thought to counter them then perhaps you ought to go to a place more suited to your ilk.

Sounds like you've never been there. It's more like a sanctuary for the Star Wars Tea Party, just one that allows the unclean members of the out-group to coexist. Maybe you're afraid of people applying critical thought to your opinions?

[Havok83]

Originally Posted by Arawn

When you do a major retcon such as "Vader is Luke's father", there can be a lot of collateral damage.

how is that a retcon? If anythign thats the one thing established as canon that almost anyone knows. Its pretty iconic

[stvn1974]

Originally Posted by stvn1974

George Lucas raped my childhood and gave me crabs.

My post was clearly meant as a joke after people were complaining about people supposedly complaining about George Lucas raping their childhood.

Remember: George Lucas didn't rape your childhood, he did however ruin Star Wars.

[happydood]

Originally Posted by Havok83

how is that a retcon? If anythign thats the one thing established as canon that almost anyone knows. Its pretty iconic

He didn't come up with the idea of Vader being Luke's father until well into the writing process of Empire. He did however come up with it. And he was involved in the writing process- including an uncredited pass on the screenplay after Leigh Brackett died, if I remember right- though you'll see folks saying he had nothing to do with Empire and that's why it's good.

And I don't know that I'd call it 'retconning' so much as it just being part of a perfectly viable creative process. But people hold Lucas to a different standard- presumably due to the high regard they once held him in. So now his successes were all flukes and his failures were as horrible a punishment as was ever visited upon mankind.

[happydood]

And remember: Stvn is going to post:

Originally Posted by stvn1974

Remember: George Lucas didn't rape your childhood, he did however ruin Star Wars.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by happydood

He didn't come up with the idea of Vader being Luke's father until well into the writing process of Empire. He did however come up with it. And he was involved in the writing process- including an uncredited pass on the screenplay after Leigh Brackett died, if I remember right- though you'll see folks saying he had nothing to do with Empire and that's why it's good.

And I don't know that I'd call it 'retconning' so much as it just being part of a perfectly viable creative process. But people hold Lucas to a different standard- presumably due to the high regard they once held him in. So now his successes were all flukes and his failures were as horrible a punishment as was ever visited upon mankind.

Leigh Brackett had almost nothing to do with the screenplay, Lucas just left her name in the credits so her estate would get her payment. It was primarily Larry Kasdan with some bull sessions with Gary Kurtz, Spielberg, Coppola, and occasionally Lucas since he had had such a stressful time with the first film. Lucas got more involved after Empire and during ROTJ's pre-production since he felt others were taking control of "his baby."

It's more Lucas' FU attitude to the original fans that has lowered his stature... that and his enormous ego getting in the way of the potential for well written, well acted prequels.

He could easily have gotten back into people's good graces by allowing the original films to be properly restored and released to the wild as Spielberg and Coppola have done with their beloved classics. And, yes, it's still possible to do so.

[WhySoBlu?]

Originally Posted by happydood

He didn't come up with the idea of Vader being Luke's father until well into the writing process of Empire. He did however come up with it. And he was involved in the writing process- including an uncredited pass on the screenplay after Leigh Brackett died, if I remember right- though you'll see folks saying he had nothing to do with Empire and that's why it's good.

And I don't know that I'd call it 'retconning' so much as it just being part of a perfectly viable creative process. But people hold Lucas to a different standard- presumably due to the high regard they once held him in. So now his successes were all flukes and his failures were as horrible a punishment as was ever visited upon mankind.

Don't forget that it was because of that "creative process" and lack of a fully fleshed-out story that we ended up with a retroactively-incestuous love triangle between two twins and a smuggler.

[MrJoeKalel]

Lately I have been thinking about the whole Lucas and OT/PT situation...and I came out with one conclusion:

We as humans form attachments to things, especially to things that give us good memories. For many of us, watching a movie makes us feel better because we feel an attachment and a connection with it, and for Star Wars, many of us got more than we asked for.

However, we ALL are CONSUMERS and potential customers. Movies are products we consume. We spend $10 to buy a ticket to watch Star Wars or SPECTRE or Avengers; the movie ends, the product ends, since it was already consumed. If we liked the movie, then we get attached to it, but we should let it go. We, as humans, do not.

So, what happens when we are offered another product (the PT or SE OT) and we do not like it? We feel as if we deserve to be given the holly grail, which we do not. We are not entitled to anything. We are not entitled to the five different versions of Blade Runner, we are not entitled to the unaltered OT, or anything else. George Lucas is a chef that decided to prepare your burger a bit different, and you didn't like it, that's fine, there is no reason to demonize him and make yourselves victims. You did not like the product, that's fine, move on. We do not.

In the end it ends up being annoying listening to the same people whine about the same issues...I want the unaltered OT...Greedo shot first...Jedi Rocks is horrendous (I agree)...just move on, let it go, and enjoy what we are given, or NOT. Your choice.

I couldn't agree more with the following:

Originally Posted by Porco Azzurro

[Show spoiler]To reiterate my earlier post, if it needs it, I was referring to when people who don't like George Lucas or things he has done (be it special editions or prequels or anything else) use the term 'rape' in a way that is in my opinion wholly inappropriate.

I think I said I don't lump all people who dislike the special edition changes or the prequel trilogy into that category - though obviously there is a large degree of overlap.

I am bemused by the argument that objecting to the use of such derogatory terms is based on a tiny number of theoretical and/or historical instances. In all honesty I was driven to write my post by reading an example posted in this forum very recently. But I have read and heard statements like it over and over again since 1999 and up to and including 2015. I have no doubt a year has not passed since 1999 that I have heard or read such phrases multiple times.

Perhaps I notice it more because I largely like most (not all) of the SE changes and I love the prequels. I am not calling anyone a liar that just hasn't heard or read people associating Lucas' work with 'rape'. But it's just factually wrong to claim it hasn't happened.

At the end of the day all I'd like is people not to use such offensive hyperbole. It doesn't strengthen any rational argument, regardless of how one feels about anything, I'd argue it does the opposite.

Everyone is perfectly entitled to hold whatever opinion they want to about whatever films they want to, but I don't think it's unreasonable to point out there are proportionate ways of expressing those views and there are vile slurs that add nothing to any discussion.

I would never generalise about people who don't like the prequels or special editions all being the same as those who go too far (IMHO) in the way they criticise Lucas, but I think mjbethancourt has made plenty of valid points. There is a certain group of Lucas' critics that make personal attacks with such vitriol that it should be quite clear who and what I'm getting at.

People not accepting that others can like the prequels and that both positions are valid is another issue entirely.

TL;DR version - Reasoned criticism and expression of opinions is fine; vile personal insults are not. So, in peace and with respect, I'd just ask anyone this applies to please don't use the term 'rape' any more when talking about how you don't like a movie or something about it - it's offensive, inaccurate and undermines your argument.

[Havok83]

Originally Posted by happydood

He didn't come up with the idea of Vader being Luke's father until well into the writing process of Empire. He did however come up with it. And he was involved in the writing process- including an uncredited pass on the screenplay after Leigh Brackett died, if I remember right- though you'll see folks saying he had nothing to do with Empire and that's why it's good.

And I don't know that I'd call it 'retconning' so much as it just being part of a perfectly viable creative process. But people hold Lucas to a different standard- presumably due to the high regard they once held him in. So now his successes were all flukes and his failures were as horrible a punishment as was ever visited upon mankind.

thats definitely not a retcon. For it to be a retcon would be something like if TFA came out and said that Vader wasnt Luke's father when thats already been well established in the continuity. Vader being Luke's father in Empire was a twist but not something that really contradicted the first film

[happydood]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Leigh Brackett had almost nothing to do with the screenplay, Lucas just left her name in the credits so her estate would get her payment. It was primarily Larry Kasdan with some bull sessions with Gary Kurtz, Spielberg, Coppola, and occasionally Lucas since he had had such a stressful time with the first film. Lucas got more involved after Empire and during ROTJ's pre-production since he felt others were taking control of "his baby."

It's more Lucas' FU attitude to the original fans that has lowered his stature... that and his enormous ego getting in the way of the potential for well written, well acted prequels.

He could easily have gotten back into people's good graces by allowing the original films to be properly restored and released to the wild as Spielberg and Coppola have done with their beloved classics. And, yes, it's still possible to do so.

Leigh Brackett met with Lucas several times to hammer out the basic story- points of which largely remain- and is responsible for a draft:

http://www.denofgeek.us/movies/star-...e-strikes-back

That's not to say the other folks you mentioned weren't involved. My point was that Lucas had more input into the final script than he's given credit for.

And clearly he was more involved in Jedi, since by all accounts Richard Marquand deferred to him for most of the shoot. This point is often used to explain Jedi's perceived lesser quality.

And I believe, like it seems you do, that the original trilogy can and will be released. But I have NO faith that people will stop saying totally inappropriate things about the man or their understanding of his motivations when they finally get what they want. I'm not saying those people don't have a right to be critical. They absolutely do. But they don't really have the right to claim 'critical thought' for the things they are actually saying quite a bit of the time that are no such thing.

But this has been going on here since the beginning and only proves the old adage 'never fear someone who's never read a book before, but absolutely fear the someone who's read one or two.' And that's not directed at you. I wish I could say the intended knows who they are, but it's clear that they can't and never will.

P.S. I saw Star Wars (not A New Hope) when I was 7 several times in it's first summer of release. And then again for each re-release the subsequent couple of years. Can I be an original fan if I'm still grateful to George Lucas and believe Harmy has got the right idea?

[stvn1974]

Originally Posted by MrJoeKalel

Lately I have been thinking about the whole Lucas and OT/PT situation...and I came out with one conclusion:

We as humans form attachments to things, especially to things that give us good memories. For many of us, watching a movie makes us feel better because we feel an attachment and a connection with it, and for Star Wars, many of us got more than we asked for.

However, we ALL are CONSUMERS and potential customers. Movies are products we consume. We spend $10 to buy a ticket to watch Star Wars or SPECTRE or Avengers; the movie ends, the product ends, since it was already consumed. If we liked the movie, then we get attached to it, but we should let it go. We, as humans, do not.

So, what happens when we are offered another product (the PT or SE OT) and we do not like it? We feel as if we deserve to be given the holly grail, which we do not. We are not entitled to anything. We are not entitled to the five different versions of Blade Runner, we are not entitled to the unaltered OT, or anything else. George Lucas is a chef that decided to prepare your burger a bit different, and you didn't like it, that's fine, there is no reason to demonize him and make yourselves victims. You did not like the product, that's fine, move on. We do not.

In the end it ends up being annoying listening to the same people whine about the same issues...I want the unaltered OT...Greedo shot first...Jedi Rocks is horrendous (I agree)...just move on, let it go, and enjoy what we are given, or NOT. Your choice.

I couldn't agree more with the following:

And on the flip side if the studio (then Lucas) wants to release something to make money (which is why they released the box set) they should expect to hear complaints from those who didn't get what they want.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by happydood

Leigh Brackett met with Lucas several times to hammer out the basic story- points of which largely remain- and is responsible for a draft:

http://www.denofgeek.us/movies/star-...e-strikes-back

That's not to say the other folks you mentioned weren't involved. My point was that Lucas had more input into the final script than he's given credit for.

And clearly he was more involved in Jedi, since by all accounts Richard Marquand deferred to him for most of the shoot. This point is often used to explain Jedi's perceived lesser quality.

And I believe, like it seems you do, that the original trilogy can and will be released. But I have NO faith that people will stop saying totally inappropriate things about the man or their understanding of his motivations when they finally get what they want. I'm not saying those people don't have a right to be critical. They absolutely do. But they don't really have the right to claim 'critical thought' for the things they are actually saying quite a bit of the time that are no such thing.

But this has been going on here since the beginning and only proves the old adage 'never fear someone who's never read a book before, but absolutely fear the someone who's read one or two.' And that's not directed at you. I wish I could say the intended knows who they are, but it's clear that they can't and never will.

P.S. I saw Star Wars (not A New Hope) when I was 7 several times in it's first summer of release. And then again for each re-release the subsequent couple of years. Can I be an original fan if I'm still grateful to George Lucas and believe Harmy has got the right idea?

I saw the original Star Wars when I was five. I'm grateful for the 1970's Lucas for his idea; the same Lucas that gave us American Graffiti (a very good film, by the way); but not what he has become.

Harmy and his crew have definitely been a Godsend.

[stvn1974]

It really is amazing that post 1997 Lucas is the same man who gave us THX-1138, American Graffiti and Star Wars.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by stvn1974

It really is amazing that post 1997 Lucas is the same man who gave us THX-1138, American Graffiti and Star Wars.

He's more corporate machine now than man - greedy and twisted.