Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW]

Originally Posted by Gold Ranger

To those of you going back and forth on the Father Skywalker, Anakin, Vader backstory and Lucas' changing ideas:
What is your take on Owen and Beru's lines:
Beru: "He's got too much of his father in him."
Owen: "That's what I'm afraid of.

I haven't seen you mention this part at all.

his aunt doesn't sound very ominous about it, but it could have been kept secret from her

could easily be taken by his uncle as fearing what he could turn into, as he seemed to give it a bit more ominous take

then again it could be just that he feared he'd run off and get involved in politics and bother and danger and dare doing and get himself killed so it's a little harder to use as evidence

[WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW]

Originally Posted by Jay G.

I mean, you can see Lucas as a "villain," or just as a human who has some flaws, or maybe even justifiable in his actions to revise history. However, the fact remains that Lucas often after-the-fact changes the story about what he "always" had planned and in mind, so at the least, Lucas himself is often not a reliable source of information about how Star Wars actually came about, and outside verification needs to happen.

Also, Lucas isn't perfect. Yes, he came up with one of the greatest sci-fi fantasy adventures ever, and then steered that into making two more notable films, and then an expanded universe of novels, comics, video games, etc. before shitting the bed with the prequels, but that doesn't mean he's blameless for making bad Star Wars movies. He can be celebrated for what he did right, and criticized for what he did wrong, but what he actually did, right or wrong, is often obscured by the man himself.

This current discussion started because some fans, like myself, are frustrated that the original, unaltered versions of the original trilogy are not commercially available in a quality contemporary format, i.e. something more than letterboxed SD video. We want to celebrate George's original accomplishments, but he's hid them away for later, lesser, revisions.

Then there were new comments from Lucas himself about how people who criticize the bad dialogue in the prequels "don't understand" the original films, which comes down as patronizing from him, as well as wrong. The dialogue in the original films, while not flawless, was better, and it was better because Lucas listened to criticism from both the actors and colleagues, did revisions and hired others to polish the dialogue on the original film, as well as hiring screenwriters to write the final drafts of the next two films.

Then people like WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW and CreasyBear repeatedly just regurgitate some of Lucas's lies that they take at face value. I post corrections, with evidence, to show what most likely really happened. If they challenge that, I've been asking for actual evidence to back up their claims, and call them on it if they can't provide it.

People are entitled to their own opinions, they're not entitled to their own facts, even George Lucas himself. He's been spouting alternative facts for decades now, and it's important to know the truth to fully appreciate the history and cultural impact of the films.

yeah well you give a pretty strong slant yourself and don't exactly come across as unbiased having been poisoned by your hate for the prequels it seems

and refuse to even look at how Han was an utterly different character than a young Anakin or some of the outside prequel script help

not saying that he doesn't write dialogue that can't be awkward at times, etc. but once again you seem to take things to the bash Lucas and minimize any credit extreme

[koberulz]

Originally Posted by D00mM4r1n3

It's in HD on iTunes and probably other digital services like a lot of movies, just needs someone to release it physically.

I don't even know how to buy things on iTunes, not to mention I despise Apple and their products generally and digital ownership isn't actually a thing.

Sadly it's with Fox, so it will never see the light of day.

[Magicman38]

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

yeah well you give a pretty strong slant yourself and don't exactly come across as unbiased having been poisoned by your hate for the prequels it seems

and refuse to even look at how Han was an utterly different character than a young Anakin or some of the outside prequel script help

not saying that he doesn't write dialogue that can't be awkward at times, etc. but once again you seem to take things to the bash Lucas and minimize any credit extreme

My feeling on Lucas is that he created something wonderful and genius with Star Wars during his younger years. The Prequels were hit and miss. I think it’s hard when you’re older to have the same creative juices that you do when you are younger. And I know many disagree but I think Lucas’s best move was realizing he was older and wanted to do other things and selling Star Wars to Disney and totally stepping away from it which I’m sure was hard. But without that decision there’s no Rogue One, The Mandalorian, etc. As far as the originals vs the Special Editions I don’t care as much but I understand those that do. I do appreciate the better SFX but wish they wouldn’t have made any other edits.

[hanshotfirst1138]

Lucas has sort of reached a point where he’s demonized by some sections of the fandom and deified by others. I’m inclined to think that the truth is somewhere in-between. For my part, he sounds like a stand-up example of a human being for giving billions to charity (something always praiseworthy), but I’m significantly more ambivalent about how he treats his fans and am critical of some of his artistic decisions. They’re his right to make, of course, but I do think that doesn’t make him immune to criticism.

[Jay G.]

Originally Posted by Narcissus

This is whole debate is really rather silly, as Obi-Wan explained it in Jedi..

I don't think you understand what the debate actually is about.

Everyone is in agreement with what the backstory ultimately was, as revealed in ESB and further detailed in Jedi. The question is: when did George Lucas conceive of this backstory? Lucas claims he always knew, even before/during the making of Star Wars, but the evidence strongly suggests that making Vader Luke's father was something that was conceived of and developed during the writing for The Empire Strikes Back.

[Jay G.]

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

sure doesn't look like it to me...

You're implicitly admitting it's subjective here.

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

yes no proof...

Exactly. It's not proof, and it's barely evidence, since the scenes can be interpreted many ways. If Lucas had never developed the twist, even if you truly thought day 1 that Obi-Wan was being shifty, when nothing was later revealed in the later films, you would've shrugged it off as your mistake.

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

...but it's certainly more than possible and certainly not 100% impossible as you insist that such an idea was at least floating around in and out of his head way back and it does fit with how that scene was acted.

You're arguing Russel's Teapot here, saying I can't prove a negative, which is a logical fallacy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

You're also severely undermining your own claim that Alec Guinness was explicitly told and knew the backstory during the making of Star Wars, if you're now saying it was only a possibility "floating around" in Lucas's head. Did Lucas definitely have it planned out, to the point of telling actors, or not? You can't even keep your own position straight.

This isn't a criminal case, "beyond a reasonable doubt" doesn't need to be shown. I'm arguing on a more scientific basis: what the preponderance of the evidence shows, and what Occam's Razor suggests is the most straightforward explanation.

You're repeatedly failed to explain, and even dodged explaining, why, if Vader being Luke's father was known and planned during Star Wars, did Lucas write a treatment for ESB, and direct Leigh Brackett to write a script for it, where Father Skywalker is clearly a separate character than Vader?

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

..why take 100% of what is said by others to meet your aims as 100% gospel and take 0% of what Lucas says?

Who says I'm doing either? Is there any specific evidence I've provided that you don't think is correct or trustworthy?

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

..because it shows he had thought at least a bit about earlier stuff

I never said Lucas hadn't thought of backstory prior to or during Star Wars. In fact, I've explicitly shown examples of alternative backstories for both Father Skywalker and Vader that were developed before Star Wars, well before any evidence of the "Vader is Luke's Father" plot point being written down. I pointed out that Lucas gave Hamill a family backstory on Star Wars that was "completely different" from what it later turned out to be. Lucas had some backstory and further ideas for the universe while making Star Wars, but "Vader is Luke's father" wasn't one of them, and you have no evidence that shows otherwise.

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

Well it was known to the public since at least August '77.

Citation? I'm guessing it's this:
https://www.rollingstone.com/feature...wars-2-232011/

Note that August '77 is after Star Wars was released, so my statement was correct.

Also, even this wasn't set in stone yet. From Secret History of Star Wars, during the writing of ESB, Lucas briefly considered Obi-Wan pushing Vader into a nuclear reactor, with Vader becoming a mutant:

Another significant note from the second draft of Empire Strikes Back is that, according to The Annotated Screenplays, Vader’s scarring transformation was altered to be that Obi Wan cut his arm off and pushed him down a nuclear reactor, twisting him into a grotesque mutant. Writes Laurent Bouzereau:

“The notion of Vader being Luke’s father first appeared in the second draft. Vader became attracted to the dark side while he was training to become a Jedi. He became a Jedi and killed most of the Jedi Knights; very few escaped. Ben fought Vader and pushed him down a nuclear reactor shaft. One of his arms was severed, and Ben believed he had killed Vader; in fact, Vader survived and became a mutant.”

While this alternate version was toyed with briefly it seems the familiar volcano duel was eventually reinstated, as this is the version given in Return of the Jedi (though it was ultimately cut out of the final film).

Hamill does claim, in a 1983 interview, he knew of the lava fight during the making of Star Wars though, although again it was presented to him with Vader being a different person than Luke's father:

Mark Hamill remembers:

“I did ask what happened to my parents during Star Wars. If I remember, he gave me a really detailed answer which turned out to be completely different when I got the Empire script... He told there was a great duel between Vader and Obi-Wan, and that Vader had fallen into a volcanic pit and was hideously burned beyond recognition..

It makes sense that Lucas had some idea of why Vader would be in the suit he's in during Star Wars, and a previous duel between Obi-Wan and Vader fits in with the dialogue during the Death Star duel in Star Wars. But the lava fight is completely separable from Vader being Luke's father; just because one was conceived of during Star Wars doesn't mean the other was. In fact, the evidence for the lava fight being conceived of earlier makes the complete absence of evidence for Vader being Luke's father conceived of so early as well even more damning.

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

yeah well you give a pretty strong slant yourself and don't exactly come across as unbiased having been poisoned by your hate for the prequels it seems.

I wouldn't say poisoned, I'd say disillusioned. I no longer take Lucas's words as gospel. And really, the SEs that preceded the prequels planted the first seeds.

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

..but once again you seem to take things to the bash Lucas and minimize any credit extreme

I don't think you've actually seen an extreme effort to bash Lucas and minimize his credit. This other thread has someone far more extreme (guess who I am in the thread):
https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewto...5939#p38365939

I don't see why saying "Lucas is merely human, and didn't come up with the storylines for 9+ movies in advance, but instead developed and iterated as he went, and didn't come up with a number of major plot points until after the first film" is extreme.

[happydood]

Originally Posted by Magicman38

My feeling on Lucas is that he created something wonderful and genius with Star Wars during his younger years. The Prequels were hit and miss. I think it’s hard when you’re older to have the same creative juices that you do when you are younger. And I know many disagree but I think Lucas’s best move was realizing he was older and wanted to do other things and selling Star Wars to Disney and totally stepping away from it which I’m sure was hard. But without that decision there’s no Rogue One, The Mandalorian, etc. As far as the originals vs the Special Editions I don’t care as much but I understand those that do. I do appreciate the better SFX but wish they wouldn’t have made any other edits.

I pretty much agree with this, although I tend to admire the clunky voice on display in the prequels and I really like Sith a lot. They feel like they have something to say. The Disney films kinda feel like 'Well, we have a lot of money involved, so I guess we better pretend we have something to say."

[motorheadache95]

Originally Posted by happydood

I pretty much agree with this, although I tend to admire the clunky voice on display in the prequels and I really like Sith a lot. They feel like they have something to say. The Disney films kinda feel like 'Well, we have a lot of money involved, so I guess we better pretend we have something to say."

I've always thought that the ideas of the prequels were great (a lot of them, anyway). Dave Filoni touched on that recently when he was talking about why he was a fan of them. My take-away though is why I find them such frustrating disappointments. The ideas were all there to make a fantastic trilogy, and the execution of those ideas were so, so bad, IMO.

In contrast, the sequel trilogy to me is at the other end of the spectrum. I think they're all reasonably well-made and entertaining, even the messy Episode IX, in which I'm all but positive a better cut of the film exists somewhere. But there was almost no great ideas, no real story to tell there, so it all feels a bit superfluous.

[happydood]

Originally Posted by motorheadache95

I've always thought that the ideas of the prequels were great (a lot of them, anyway). Dave Filoni touched on that recently when he was talking about why he was a fan of them. My take-away though is why I find them such frustrating disappointments. The ideas were all there to make a fantastic trilogy, and the execution of those ideas were so, so bad, IMO.

In contrast, the sequel trilogy to me is at the other end of the spectrum. I think they're all reasonably well-made and entertaining, even the messy Episode IX, in which I'm all but positive a better cut of the film exists somewhere. But there was almost no great ideas, no real story to tell there, so it all feels a bit superfluous.

Yeah, 'superfluous' is a good way to put it. But, man, a certain character's return and Rey's heritage reveal are so wrong-headed they invalidate anything worthwhile that came before. I tried to rewatch Force Awakens in light of the last one and now everything with Rey which I thought was pretty cool makes me shake my head and groan.

[WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW]

Originally Posted by Jay G.

You're implicitly admitting it's subjective here.

arr just a figure of speech
I mean come on look at his micro expressions, he is totally acting sketchy.

now about precisely what he was acting sketchy about, no I don't have proof, but it certainly fits perfectly with at the idea that Vader might have been his father and yet you insist that there is 0.0000000000000000% chance that it possibly could be

Exactly. It's not proof, and it's barely evidence, since the scenes can be interpreted many ways. If Lucas had never developed the twist, even if you truly thought day 1 that Obi-Wan was being shifty, when nothing was later revealed in the later films, you would've shrugged it off as your mistake.

I would've thought something got changed or something was done wrong in that scene. (Luke with Luke and Leia)

You're arguing Russel's Teapot here, saying I can't prove a negative, which is a logical fallacy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

no, you are insisting that there is no chance Lucas could possibly have had the idea in his head, I'm saying that I think he did and there certainly is a chance that it had been floating around in his head. No, no absolute proof and maybe it is wrong, but there is some evidence that fits with it and nothing that proves against it and yet you insist that there is not even 0.0000001% chance

so have decided that Lucas is a 100% liar on this unless definitive, explicit beyond any doubt proof is found....

You're also severely undermining your own claim that Alec Guinness was explicitly told and knew the backstory during the making of Star Wars, if you're now saying it was only a possibility "floating around" in Lucas's head. Did Lucas definitely have it planned out, to the point of telling actors, or not? You can't even keep your own position straight.

if it was a possibility floating around in his head then it may have been something he mentioned to Alec Guinness....

i said I think he at least had an idea of doing it going around in his head and probably mentioned it to Alec Guinness. I think he did. But no, no 100% absolute proof. You have zero proof it didn't go down as he claimed but insist that you are 100.00000000% for sure 100.000000% correct about this and that the default position must be that he never had a thought about it and could never have mentioned any hint of it to Alec Guinness. Why exactly must that be taken as the default position and taking as 100.0000% gospel unless something exacting comes up? At least Alex Guinness reaction fits with Lucas having at least thought about the idea, even if he maybe was going back and forth with various plans and worries.

This isn't a criminal case, "beyond a reasonable doubt" doesn't need to be shown. I'm arguing on a more scientific basis: what the preponderance of the evidence shows, and what Occam's Razor suggests is the most straightforward explanation.

really? Lucas said he had thought of the idea earlier. Alec Guinness played the scene in a sketchy way.

and how is it simpler that he never had the idea in his head at all? it's no simpler at all. Occam's Razor doesn't fit here at all.

You're repeatedly failed to explain, and even dodged explaining, why, if Vader being Luke's father was known and planned during Star Wars, did Lucas write a treatment for ESB, and direct Leigh Brackett to write a script for it, where Father Skywalker is clearly a separate character than Vader?

maybe he became afraid for a bit about audience reaction and changed it for a bit, maybe Leigh liked him not being the father, maybe Lucas had both ideas in his head and was going back and forth, Lucas seems to have thought about a lot of various options going way back, he flipped around on who Leia was to the point that ROTJ makes certain parts of SW and ESB a trace weird. In all the screenplays handed out for ESB to cast and crew, Vader was not Luke's father either. Only one alternate version of one page was printed that had the truth.

anyway the original point was actually whether ESB screenplay was basically all Kasdan and that's why it was good or whether Lucas actually had a much bigger hand in creating ESB and it's screenplay

I never said Lucas hadn't thought of backstory prior to or during Star Wars.

you go all over the place, no backstory whenever it's something that might fit with what we got later on, no remote thought of 1-3 or 7-9 until well into ESB, but a backstory whenever it's something different than what we got

Note that August '77 is after Star Wars was released, so my statement was correct.

except that you were basically implying to various degrees that Lucas hadn't thought of shit that ended up mattering before Kasdan came on board half way into getting ESB going

and there are various quotes in Star Wars itself that directly imply the battle if not directly the lava

Hamill does claim, in a 1983 interview, he knew of the lava fight during the making of Star Wars though,

so are you not contradicting your own claims now that a lava battle was nothing ever thought up until well into ESB or, at the least, until after the release of Star Wars?

"And the Obi-Wan vs Vader lava fight was revealed after Star Wars came out, in supplementary material. It's not evidence of anything planned before or during the making of Star Wars."

I don't see why saying "Lucas is merely human, and didn't come up with the storylines for 9+ movies in advance, but instead developed and iterated as he went, and didn't come up with a number of major plot points until after the first film" is extreme.

that's not exactly how you put it
and it's still a bit of a distortion since he did come up with some bits of ideas for 9+ super early on

[WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW]

Originally Posted by happydood

Yeah, 'superfluous' is a good way to put it. But, man, a certain character's return and Rey's heritage reveal are so wrong-headed they invalidate anything worthwhile that came before. I tried to rewatch Force Awakens in light of the last one and now everything with Rey which I thought was pretty cool makes me shake my head and groan.

I was always one against a return of the Emperor. I didn't like the Dark Empire stuff at all. And the way that stuff went down sort of seemed to make 4-6 lose a lot of luster. And it seemed to be comic-booky. But I thought TROS actually pulled it all off in a way that worked and kinda made sense and still preserved key importance of 4-6. In the end it did sort of seem fitting that the final battle perhaps could be ending the Emperor once and for all. It wasn't done in a Dark Empire sort of story at all, IMO.

In some ways it almost brings us back to the OT and some of the earliest 7-9 ideas of the OT era combined with a few extra bits from somewhat later on. Some early 7-9 ideas had an "other" tied to Skywalkers come in and be a major player in helping the already seen heroes of 4-5 defeat the Emperor for good.

Rey certainly didn't have to be a Palpatine of any sort, but it doesn't bother me at this point at least now that we are past her being Luke's daughter (I kinda liked that idea, but whatever. A total no one by blood was also OK, although with where things were at the end of TLJ she simply had to be attached to Skywalkers in some way, in that point by being connected to the Skywalker vergence. I'm OK with her being related to Palpatine and it does fit with a few of the weird comments in TFA about "is it her?" or something along those lines said by Snoke (although that could've also fit with being Luek's daughter). The one thing that would've made a total mess of things would've been the whole she is a Kenobi idea that many in fandom seemed to push. Now that would make no sense and break down the entire mythology completely. I am very glad they didn't cave to that crazy fan pressure and mindlessly switch it to that.) And the key thing is, one thing everyone still seems to gloss over too much, is that she is a part of the Skywalker vergence, she is sort of the other half of a pair of virtual particles in the force (to stretch an analogy a bit far), part of a split vergeance, a dyad directly with Skywalkers. She was partially born of the force and you could say she is born of the Skywalker force. And then in the end she rejects her direct blood line and in that and in her spirit takes on the Skywalker name, her true family influences. So she is sort of a 'Skywalker' in the force and then also a Skywalker through a semi-family adoption of sorts and in her spirit. Her inner self and spirit were that of Luke and Leia and not of Palpatine.

[Jay G.]

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

arr just a figure of speech
I mean come on look at his micro expressions, he is totally acting sketchy.

That's just your interpretation, it's not fact. Absent the context of later films, it's perfectly reasonable to interpret that scene as Obi-Wan recalling a painful memory, truthfully.

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

no, you are insisting that there is no chance Lucas could possibly have had the idea in his head...

I can't say definitively that there's "no chance Lucas could possibly have had the idea in his head," but I also can't say definitively there's no chance there's a teapot that orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars. But that's the wrong burden of proof.

The actual, concrete, available evidence shows that Lucas never wrote anything down about Vader being Luke's father prior to the second draft for ESB, and that before that, in fact up through the very first treatment Lucas wrote for ESB and Brackett's first draft, Luke's father was repeatedly and definitively described as a separate character from Vader.

So now, you're the one making an extraordinary claim, contrary to the evidence at hand. So it's upon you to produce the evidence to support this claim. So far, all you've provided is:

• "well Lucas said..." when you've admitted Lucas has lied about his plans for Star Wars before.
• "Alec Guinness was told secrets on the set of Star Wars," without supplying any evidence that Vader being Luke's father was one of those secrets.
• In supposed support of your second claim, saying "well, I think Alec Guinness is acting sketchy in the scene he's telling Luke about his father," which is just a subjective interpretation of that scene, colored by the context of later scenes, and even if accepted as "correct," still doesn't act as evidence that what Obi-Wan is not revealing is the "Vader is Luke's Father" secret.
• The Vader vs Obi-Wan lava fight was publicly revealed before ESB (and actually isn't ever revealed in either ESB or ROTJ). But even if this was known during the making of Star Wars, it's completely separable from the "Vader is Luke's Father" secret, hence partly why it was able to be revealed before ESB, and so isn't evidence of the secret being conceived of/known during the making of Star Wars.

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

and how is it simpler that he never had the idea in his head at all?

Lucas had the idea when writing the second draft of ESB, hence why it's in that draft. That's the simplest explanation of all for why it wasn't written in the earlier treatment and draft for ESB, or any time earlier.

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

maybe he became afraid for a bit about audience reaction and changed it for a bit...

So Lucas is this visionary who had the whole 6 to 9 episode arc planned out before Star Wars, told Alec Guinness critical plot points during the making of Star Wars, planned a whole 3 episode arc around the backstory for Vader, and then, what, got cold feet and opted to drop a whole 3 episode chunk from his planned arc?

The earlier drafts for Star Wars have Father Skywalker as a different character from Vader. Even the shooting script and final film for Star Wars still have this. The first treatment and draft for ESB, when viewed in that context, are clearly a continuation of that line of thinking, and it's not until that second draft that the "Vader is Luke's father" twist is ever written down, in direct contradiction to not only the earlier writing for ESB, but all the writing for Star Wars. This drastic shift comes in the same draft Lucas changes ESB from being Chapter/Episode 2 of the Star Wars saga to being Episode V.

Lucas wrote down a ton of ideas while writing Star Wars, ideas that were later repurposed for later works. You're arguing that this one major twist, the central plot point for an entire 3 movie arc in the series, is something Lucas never wrote down, not even in his personal notes, not even as a possibility, possibly didn't even tell Leigh Brackett before she wrote her script, only finally writing it down for the second draft for ESB. Why? To trick all the people at the time that weren't reading his personal notes? To trick later historians?

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

anyway the original point was actually whether ESB screenplay was basically all Kasdan and that's why it was good or whether Lucas actually had a much bigger hand in creating ESB and it's screenplay..

No, the original point was that Kasdan wrote the final script for ESB, after repeated story conferences with Lucas and notes from Lucas, not to mention the earlier drafts from Lucas to work from. As Kasdan wrote the final script, the dialogue on screen isn't necessarily all Lucas's, and most likely for the most part isn't. This, combined with the dialogue polishes on both American Graffiti and Star Wars, and Kasdan writing ROTJ, means that prior to the prequels, the last time we had pure, unfiltered George Lucas dialogue was with THX-1138. So the disparity in quality in the dialogue between the OT and PT could be explained by the fact that George Lucas no longer had another screenwriter polishing that dialogue for the final script.

I don't know how you misinterpreted that to think that I was ever saying Lucas had no hand in the writing of ESB, or coming up with the story for it.

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

except that you were basically implying to various degrees that Lucas hadn't thought of shit that ended up mattering before Kasdan came on board half way into getting ESB going

If you were actually following what I wrote, and reading and understanding the sources I quoted, you'd know that the second draft for ESB, the one where the "Vader is Luke's father" twist finally shows up, was written solely by Lucas. You're upset about claims I never made.

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

..so are you not contradicting your own claims now that a lava battle was nothing ever thought up until well into ESB or, at the least, until after the release of Star Wars?

Well, I don't know if Hamill's statements made in 1983 are fully reliable. After all, it was you who said I shouldn't 100% trust what others have said about the making of Star Wars.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

arr just a figure of speech
I mean come on look at his micro expressions, he is totally acting sketchy.

now about precisely what he was acting sketchy about, no I don't have proof, but it certainly fits perfectly with at the idea that Vader might have been his father and yet you insist that there is 0.0000000000000000% chance that it possibly could be

Quite plainly because he was about to reveal to Luke how the pupil he trained to be a Jedi Knight like his father only went on to betray and murdered him instead. There's a 99.9999999999999999999% chance that what he was shiftily hesitant about was the difficult admission he was just about to make. Until Lucas retconned that admission to only be true from a retrospectively applied "point of view".

[Narcissus]

Even before the retconning started, I had always thought Obi and Darth had a major to do in their history and Star Wars confirms it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCNeJmLAsBo&ab_channel=SirClaudioBlackmore

And even if you accept the prequels as canon {NOT ME!} Obi would be very reluctant to tell Luke that he was the one who put him in that suit and was supposed to kill him and didn't, right before the confrontation Luke was to have.

[Jay G.]

Originally Posted by Narcissus

Even before the retconning started, I had always thought Obi and Darth had a major to do in their history and Star Wars confirms it..

Yes, but Obi-Wan and Vader having fought in the past isn't proof, or even evidence, that Vader is Father Skywalker. The narrative that Vader killed Father Skywalker, Obi-Wan fights and wounds Vader, Vader survives but has to wear a suit now, fits perfectly with what the original movie presents.

It's actually the later "Vader is Luke's father" twist that doesn't fit what Star Wars shows as well, hence why Lucas had to include the "certain point of view" speech in ROTJ to ret-con away Obi-Wan's story in the first movie as essentially a lie.

[Narcissus]

Obi-Wan didn't lie, okay, a lie of omission but at that key point in Star Wars, there's no way he's going to do a full reveal of what had happened. Wasn't until he faced Vader in ROTJ that he became a Jedi, Yoda being correct in Empire that he was reckless, so taking all that into account, there's no way they reveal all of it.

[QUOTE=Jay G.;18493433 It's actually the later "Vader is Luke's father" twist that doesn't fit what Star Wars shows as well, hence why Lucas had to include the "certain point of view" speech in ROTJ to ret-con away Obi-Wan's story in the first movie as essentially a lie.[/QUOTE]

Um, no. That moment in Empire does fit.
Everything in the original trilogy fits a mostly cohesive plot line.
It's only when you add in/try to reconcile all the bull that come in later that things get muddled.

[Jay G.]

Originally Posted by Narcissus

Obi-Wan didn't lie, okay, a lie of omission...

Obi-Wan didn't just omit certain details, but, in view of the later "truth," fabricated details and framed the story in a dishonest way.

"A young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine until he turned to evil, helped the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights. He betrayed and murdered your father."

Not how Obi-Wan says that it was a Jedi named Darth Vader, implying that was the name of the Jedi, even before turning to evil. Also, note that Vader not only murdered Luke's father, but "betrayed" him as well. How can one betray themselves?

The ret-con in Jedi only partly resolves these issues. It's "good enough" to not really take away enjoyment of the story, but there are still holes.

Originally Posted by Narcissus

Everything in the original trilogy fits a mostly cohesive plot line.

Saying it's 'mostly cohesive" means it's not totally cohesive. The switch from Luke's father being a separate character that Vader killed, to Vader himself being Luke's father, is one of those areas where the cohesiveness slips a bit. It's not major, and really the twist is so good most fans just ignore the minor irregularities, but it's there.

[Narcissus]

It's only not cohesive if you include all the crap lucas did to it later on, and I don't.

[Jay G.]

Originally Posted by Narcissus

It's only not cohesive if you include all the crap lucas did to it later on, and I don't.

No, even in the context of just those first three films, the seams are showing in spots.

Which is fine. They're great movies and all, but they're not perfect, nothing is. To point out their faults isn't to diminish their greatness, but to reflect on how they're great despite, or sometimes because of, their flaws.

To deny the flaws is to go down the same path Lucas did later with the SEs, trying to patch up everything that he felt was "wrong" with the original cuts/versions, and only allow people to see his "fixed' version. So certain aliens in the Cantina scene, such as the "wolfmen", were originally only in there because they couldn't make new costumes for all the extras, so used some costumes made for previous films. Lucas replaced them for the SEs, but in the process diminishes some of the charm of Star Wars.

http://jedinet.com/who-in-the-galaxy...-pariah-burke/
https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Lis...s#A_New_Hope_2

To love Star Wars is to love it flaws and all, not to deny the flaws, or try and "fix" them.