Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[Falaskan]

Carrie better step up and put on the waterworks if her hubby Han is supposed to meet a tragic end in this new series.

[stvn1974]

Leia is going to tell Han that she has been living a lie all these years. She is still haunted by the kiss she gave Luke and that she never truly loved Han the same way. Han will then die of a broken heart in the arms of Chewbacca.

[Elvis]

Originally Posted by stvn1974

Leia is going to tell Han that she has been living a lie all these years. She is still haunted by the kiss she gave Luke and that she never truly loved Han the same way. Han will then die of a broken heart in the arms of Chewbacca.

as he dies from losing the will to live a lens flare flashes across the screen with his last breath.....

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by MechaGodzilla

Lucas and the team behind the cartoon had different visions for the character, simple as that. I too was disappointed at first, but the more I thought about it the more Lucas' version makes more sense. I don't think a non-force user should be able to beat Jedi at their own game.

That's typical Lucas, start off with a concept or villain that could (and actually did, in the case of Clone Wars' Grievous) kick ass, but then it gets watered down because it'd devalue the other concepts in comparison. Han got neutered for the same reasons, as the redemptive OT arc from killer to hero was now deemed to be solely Vader's.

Heck, even the idea of this unstoppable biomech warrior was already explored in CW S1 with Durge, who was gonna be the villain in S2 before Lucas decided to drop in his new droid general. LFL may have retconned CW but that was Grievous' first introduction, instigated by Lucas himself, so it's a shame that it appears to have been junked.

[Galactus123]

Originally Posted by Blu-21

Out of the 2 that don't have a lot of screen time but are popular with the fans which do you prefer? Darth Maul? or Boba Fett?

For me it's easily Maul. He earns his cult status a lot more because he make every second of his limited screen time count.

I think they made a huge mistake when they killed Maul. He should have escaped and then he would fight Obi-Wan again in Episode 2.

[MechaGodzilla]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

That's typical Lucas, start off with a concept or villain that could (and actually did, in the case of Clone Wars' Grievous) kick ass, but then it gets watered down because it'd devalue the other concepts in comparison. Han got neutered for the same reasons, as the redemptive OT arc from killer to hero was now deemed to be solely Vader's.

Heck, even the idea of this unstoppable biomech warrior was already explored in CW S1 with Durge, who was gonna be the villain in S2 before Lucas decided to drop in his new droid general. LFL may have retconned CW but that was Grievous' first introduction, instigated by Lucas himself, so it's a shame that it appears to have been junked.

Lucas had nothing to do with the cartoon Grievous though, right? Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I gathered he basically just told Tartakovsky and his people to do whatever they wanted with the character, then he went his own way with the movie version. There was no watering down in this case, just Lucas wanting a completely different type of villain.

It's just a shame he couldn't have decided what kind of character Grievous should be earlier, so there was more consistency between the cartoon and the movie. But I guess that doesn't matter anymore anyway.

[happydood]

Originally Posted by Elvis

He should have never been in the film, in fact neither should have the Count! Both of them were terrible ideas.




hahahahaha u 2 funny!

Say whaaaaaaat?!

The prequels have many problems but Christopher Lee wasn't one of them. In fact, he should be in EVERY movie by everybody from here on out.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by MechaGodzilla

Lucas had nothing to do with the cartoon Grievous though, right? Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I gathered he basically just told Tartakovsky and his people to do whatever they wanted with the character, then he went his own way with the movie version. There was no watering down in this case, just Lucas wanting a completely different type of villain.

It's just a shame he couldn't have decided what kind of character Grievous should be earlier, so there was more consistency between the cartoon and the movie. But I guess that doesn't matter anymore anyway.

It's still Lucas' character though, and that man being the utter control freak that he is I find it hard to imagine that he didn't give them any input on Grievous at all, not least because CW actually leads in to the movie and there's a featurette on the S2 DVD specifically about that. If we had that Grievous in Ep III - or perhaps saw glimpses of him slicing up Jedi in the battle of Geonosis in Ep II, as the EU said - there wouldn't have been too much complaining about him. (But including him in Ep II to begin with would've actually require some foresight, something which eluded Lucas as far as his prequel storytelling was concerned.)

I still think that Lucas wanted to have him as this badass character, but then he walks in with a cough one day and says "I want Grievous to have this cough" and the character was ****ed from there on out, Lucas turning on a whim not because he should, but because he's got the power to do so. sometimes I wonder if Lucas was more in love with the idea of making these big independent "**** YOU's" to Hollywood than the actual movies themselves.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Sometimes I wonder if Lucas was more in love with the idea of making these big independent "**** YOU's" to Hollywood than the actual movies themselves.

From an interview he gave in 1971 he was pretty incensed by Hollywood, that studios would have the nerve to touch films they were paying for and they weren't qualified to change in the first-place. Strong stuff from a filmmaker with one film (and something that wasn't exactly mainstream) to his credit. I partially agree with him, films shouldn't always try to be mainstream (and the director should have the final cut) and things are probably worse now with focus groups today but it isn't always a hindrance to have an experience opinion (and things do need changing after the film is finished). Studios aren't always the enemy, even if they can't tell one end of a Movilola from the other.

[Geoff D]

Lucas was brainwashed by his pal Coppola regarding the whole auteur theory thing, in fact Coppola informed Lucas about a lot of things. There would've been no Lucasfilm without Zoetrope planting that idea in Lucas' head, and there would've been no fascination with digital (in terms of image/sound acquisition, editing etc) had Coppola not been so fanatical about it first. I'm not kidding, the guy was experimenting with non-linear editing and HDTV and whatnot years before Lucas became this big-time player, and there's a bit during a 1979 press conference for Apocalypse Now where Coppola chides the journalists and tells them they'll all be using tiny digital devices to record such things in years to come.

[Lyle_JP]

Originally Posted by Vlad Draculi

Whether that is the Xmas special or not, Fisher's acting, especially in the first movie, was down right awful. The "Aren't you too short to be a Storm Trooper" line is said with such little emotion.

I don't see anything wrong with that line. Her disappearing and re-appearing fake British accent is a little harder to excuse. It's also something she fully owns up to in her show "Wishful Drinking".

[thegoat]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

It's still Lucas' character though, and that man being the utter control freak that he is I find it hard to imagine that he didn't give them any input on Grievous at all, not least because CW actually leads in to the movie and there's a featurette on the S2 DVD specifically about that. If we had that Grievous in Ep III - or perhaps saw glimpses of him slicing up Jedi in the battle of Geonosis in Ep II, as the EU said - there wouldn't have been too much complaining about him. (But including him in Ep II to begin with would've actually require some foresight, something which eluded Lucas as far as his prequel storytelling was concerned.)

I agree with this, but to be fair, a lack of foresight plague the original trilogy as well. It's just Lucas' thing, I guess.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by thegoat

I agree with this, but to be fair, a lack of foresight plague the original trilogy as well. It's just Lucas' thing, I guess.

True, true, but the OT wasn't designed to be an epic sprawling narrative about a democracy turning into a dictatorship, so when Lucas needed to fudge it he simply turned Leia into "the other" and wrote off what Obi-Wan originally said from "a certain point of view". Most people bought it too, judging by how fervently they defend the OT.

Unfortunately Lucas took that same storytelling approach - basically "I'm 'a wing it and see what happens" - with the PT and failed miserably because no amount of fudging can cover up the shortfalls in the narrative, shortfalls which were only resolved nearly 10 years later with S6 of Clone Wars! If he'd just had something, anything resembling a long-term plan for the prequels they could've turned out sooo much better, at least from the perspective of 'joining the dots' of the PT's overall narrative (never mind the loose ends with the OT).

But he didn't do that because he didn't want to be tied down, it's as though he wanted NOTHING - not even himself - to restrict his hard-fought freedom from the studio system, as if laying down a coherent story would somehow limit him.

[popeflick]

Originally Posted by MechaGodzilla

Boba for me. Sure, he does and says just about as much as Maul, but the difference is Maul serves as the primary antagonist of TPM while Boba was never supposed to be more than a minor villain in TESB.

Plus the armor is badass, and he's getting his own spin-off soon which I'm sure will add a lot to him.

Wow. Darth Maul killed a Jedi and died in hand to hand combat fighting another. Boba didnt even ACT like a bounty hunter. When Dog the Bounty Hunter finds his criminal he makes the arrest himself and turns him over to authorities. Boba found his criminal and went to the authorities, making him a simple narc who got killed by a blind guy and screamed like a girl on his way to his death.

Their accomishments aren't even close. So, no they didn't do the same kind of things at all.

[jala12]

Originally Posted by Galactus123

I think they made a huge mistake when they killed Maul. He should have escaped and then he would fight Obi-Wan again in Episode 2.

It probably would have been better if he returned in the movies and likely could have taken the role of Grievous in III. Instead, years later they retconned his death and brought his character back for the CG Clone Wars series which is now considered canon alongside the movies. I think they did a good job maximizing the potential of his character, though it's kind of a shame that most people overlook it.

[sarah_wentworth]

Originally Posted by popeflick

Wow. Darth Maul killed a Jedi and died in hand to hand combat fighting another. Boba didnt even ACT like a bounty hunter. When Dog the Bounty Hunter finds his criminal he makes the arrest himself and turns him over to authorities. Boba found his criminal and went to the authorities, making him a simple narc who got killed by a blind guy and screamed like a girl on his way to his death.

Their accomishments aren't even close. So, no they didn't do the same kind of things at all.

hey i agree with that

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Lyle_JP

I don't see anything wrong with that line. Her disappearing and re-appearing fake British accent is a little harder to excuse. It's also something she fully owns up to in her show "Wishful Drinking".

I don't even remember that too clearly but her being a politician makes that kind of thing pretty easy to write off. Look at any southern politician...they talk like good ole boys at home and Harvard Law grad everywhere else (Bill Clinton was a master of this). Even our current President tends to drop a few gs and turn going to into gonna when he's playing to a hometown Chicago crowd.

Originally Posted by Geoff D

True, true, but the OT wasn't designed to be an epic sprawling narrative about a democracy turning into a dictatorship, so when Lucas needed to fudge it he simply turned Leia into "the other" and wrote off what Obi-Wan originally said from "a certain point of view". Most people bought it too, judging by how fervently they defend the OT.

The irony of the siblings bit is it didn't really add that much to Jedi but it tied the prequels in knots. And in the potential irony category...the thing that didn't really effect the movie it happened in and kind of screwed up the next three movie could actually make this next set pretty cool.

I don't know if anybody's talked about this yet but watching Luke -and- Leia go all force-choke/light-sabre badass on some group of ne'er-do-wells could be really, really, really freaking cool.

Originally Posted by jala12

It probably would have been better if he returned in the movies and likely could have taken the role of Grievous in III..

Dying early was the best thing that could have happened to Maul. The more screen and story time he got the higher his chances of winning a one-way trip through the LucasFilm Backstory Factory. Can you imagine it. Bedwetting, playground fights, a prom date that nobody ever saw again...

If Boba Fett and Vader couldn't survive such an ordeal what chance would poor old Maul have had.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by octagon

The irony of the siblings bit is it didn't really add that much to Jedi but it tied the prequels in knots. And in the potential irony category...the thing that didn't really effect the movie it happened in and kind of screwed up the next three movie could actually make this next set pretty cool.

I don't know if anybody's talked about this yet but watching Luke -and- Leia go all force-choke/light-sabre badass on some group of ne'er-do-wells could be really, really, really freaking cool.

I'm ambivalent about Leia being a Jedi. One of people's chief complaints about the prequels is seeing all those Jedi because it devalues the lightsaber and ruins the mystique of the OT, and while I don't entirely agree with that (I loved seeing the Jedi go to war, which was actually mentioned in the OT) I don't want to see everyone in the new movies wielding a laser sword. If they wanna recapture the spirit of the OT then we can't have everyone using Force powers, and while Leia's Jedi heritage cannot be ignored I hope they don't go too far with it.

[MacEachaidh]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I'm ambivalent about Leia being a Jedi.

One of people's chief complaints about the prequels is seeing all those Jedi because it devalues the lightsaber and ruins the mystique of the OT, and while I don't entirely agree with that (I loved seeing the Jedi go to war, which was actually mentioned in the OT) I don't want to see everyone in the new movies wielding a laser sword. If they wanna recapture the spirit of the OT then we can't have everyone using Force powers, and while Leia's Jedi heritage cannot be ignored I hope they don't go too far with it.

For me, the problem with the PT was that it never showed anything positive of the Jedi. From the very first of TPM, with the possible exception of Qui-Gon, they were a moribund mob, disapproving to the point of prissiness, isolated and aloof from the regular folk around them. We weren't shown any positive values that the Jedi brought to the galaxy.

I know, to some degree that was because the trilogy was about the fall of the Jedi, but it raised two significant problems that were never addressed: the Jedi didn't need Anakin (or Dooku or whomever) to bring them down, because they'd already done that to themselves; and we were given no reason to cheer for the Jedi, because they were all so bloody unlikeable. So the movies kept telling us we were supposed to feel a sense of tragedy, but actually gave us no reason to.

Will the new trilogy be able to fix that? I doubt it; it's too broken. But it will still need to do something with the whole question of the Jedi. If it has even a substantial proportion of its characters running round a-Jediing, because .. ya know, Empire Bad, Jedi Good ... then it seriously needs to work out what actually constitutes being a Jedi. If we're to cheer for Luke, or care about him, then the films have to answer the question: What do Jedis actually do, believe and think that's different from the average pleb? If the answer, and the way it's depicted, are lame, then to my mind that has the potential to rip the guts out of the existing six stories.

[deltatauhobbit]

Originally Posted by popeflick

Wow. Darth Maul killed a Jedi and died in hand to hand combat fighting another. Boba didnt even ACT like a bounty hunter. When Dog the Bounty Hunter finds his criminal he makes the arrest himself and turns him over to authorities. Boba found his criminal and went to the authorities, making him a simple narc who got killed by a blind guy and screamed like a girl on his way to his death.

Their accomishments aren't even close. So, no they didn't do the same kind of things at all.

They retconned Boba's death in the sarlacc pit as well in the expanded universe novels/comics, he crawled himself out of it and almost killed it. I'll be interested in seeing if they go with that in the films or just leave it be. I think part of Boba's appeal is that he's got a cool costume and a jetpack.