PT A Better Continuity Between Prequels and the Original Trilogy

But this brings into question why the Jedi expected Luke and Leia to be Force Sensitive, and - if it is a genetic component to force sensitivity that is referenced - why Luke says that the Force is strong in his family...

 

You are becoming inconsistent yourself now. How can something that came before the OT (in universe) have not been invented by a later date than it was introduced. Given that your argument is that nothing has been changed in the OT by the PT, then it should be an implicit aspect of the OT (in universe). Secondly, the "will" of the Force was explicitly described that way (ie, as if the concept is implicit), and also that the "will" was that aspect that "partly controls" our actions which you spoke of as being an already established aspect of the OT.

Thinking about the midiclorians even more, however - that they are a symbiotic and separate entity to the individual (and so a form of mutualistic parasitic 'infection') - it is not clear that it is genetically inherited, and in fact throws the logic of Luke's line here into question.

I'm sure I shouldn't have to explain it this deeply, but apparently I do. The Star Wars Universe is not 'real', in the sense that it exists only in the imagination of, first the creator (Lucas) and then in those who participate in it (ie Lucas' colleagues, and fans/viewers/readers etc.) Because of that there is no real Jedi Order and no real Force Sensitives. It follows, quite reasonably, that there is no truth as to whether or not Force Sensitives are taken from their parents with their permission. Nor is such explicitly explained within the movies.

Your argumentum ad consequentiam starts off with a false premise, because at no point has a majority been argued as pertaining to a truth. In fact what has been argued is what I have said above, that there is no truth. Let's ask another question, and see if this logical fallacy you claim has no exception is relevant. Is cabbage tasty? Is there even an 'truthful' answer to be found. If I found 59% of people said it was, does that mean that cabbage is tasty? Obviously not. Butn that doesn't, either, mean it isn't tasty. In fact the concept of 'tastiness' is misplaced, because it is subjective and not a real, physical property. If I said "all soldier's sons become soldiers, and 75% of people know this" then that is a good time to show the fallacy of that position. There is a real answer, which one can demonstrate, and no matter how many people might believe it will not make it true. There is, therefore a true proposition being established. In a fiction there can be no such proposition.

What assumptions? This answer was based upon your argument that ROTJ establishes a genetic inheritance to Force sensitivity - which would only make sense if that sensitivity was inherited by direct lineality.

 

Clearly the phrase "invented" refers to out-of-universe considerations... unless you think I'm saying that some entity invented the will of the Force in-universe?

That doesn't mean it's necessarily responsible for anything someone might want it to be responsible for.

Actions of sensitives, and the appearance of Force-sensitivity in families? These aren't two different concepts?

No, it doesn't. The only reason Luke's line is considered to be "in question" is because, from a revisionist standpoint, everything is "in question".

Resorting to a pathetic strawman doesn't bode well for your position. There is no fiction exclusion to logical fallacy. You made it up.

Your assumptions regarding the intent of the Jedi to forcibly snatch all Force-sensitive children. This is still revisionist garbage no matter how much misguided and nonsensical argumentation is invested into it.

 

Wow, you've changed your tune here haven't you? You claim here merely to have been suggesting that it "doesn't mean that it's necessarily responsible for..." - but that isn't what you actually said. You said "Luke wasn't talking about the will of the Force" which is a categorical statement - but now you pretend you were merely suggesting that it might not, necessarily be.....

I don't know what this has to do with what I was saying, but apparently you say categorically they are. Or do you? Perhaps they are. Maybe. Only you, it seems, knows the truth.

Oh look, you have part-quoted again. What a surprising move.

Really? Honestly? You don't know the difference between reality and fiction? Do you know what a true proposition is? Let me just quote you from a few posts back;

"That aside, the assumption expressed above still does not become more "right" merely by virtue of the alleged number of people making it. That belief is tantamount to saying that majorities are always right, a position which is easily proven to be false."

And you talk of 'strawman'. The first proposition is a strawman, because at no point was it argued that anything becomes more right - in fact it has been made clear, very explicitly on a number of occasions that the point was to show there was no right. You also then implicitly accept the difference between fiction and reality by the emotional appeal that the first statement (a strawman anyway) would lead to real world consequenes (adding another strawman, 'majority', along the way). All very transparent I have to say.

Again a partial quote, the aim of which is obvious to anybody with anything between their ears. Not only that but....really? Despite being told five times, and then those five times having been re-posted to you? You still make the obviously wrong argument? Perhaps you suffer some form of amnesia. Perhaps you are really don't understand what has been said. Or perhaps you are being less than honest here and deliberately obtuse. I think I have the measure of your responses here and, regardless of what the issue is I, personally, have no interest in your input over this matter.

 

No.

Yes, only I am able to figure out that the phrase "your actions" does not refer to the appearance of Force-sensitivity in a population.

Really? Honesty? You're still doubling down on a silly strawman? The "fiction loophole" still does not exist.

 

Well I think these characters are all cool and better not remove any of them. The problem is just the movie wasn't enough to present them all. Dooku, GG, Maul all got great story if we look at the EU, but the movie wasn't able to present these to us, the bigger problem is the Clone War wasn't presented well, too.

The overall story of PT, and its theme is quite good, just the movie wasn't telling it well.

 

Exactly, I wanted GG to have at least appeared in AotC, in a rerelease just have him leading Droids into battle on the ground...

Maul could have lived longer, he would have been the equivalent of Darth Vader running throughout the three movies.

Dooku could stay I just think having a good guy on the opposite side is far more interesting and realistic as opposed to having him fall sith...

Bail Organa needed to be in the films more...

 

I really think Dooku should make a important appearance in EP I to show how he dislike the corruption of the Republic and the stubbornness of the Jedi Order, also his sorrow when Qui Gon Jinn died. This would greatly help the movie viewers understand his character well. In the move he got way too little time, while Lee did a great job to show the emotion of betrayal when Palpatine ordered Anakin to kill him.

 

I wonder if a great number of fans thought the PT was supposed to be about the Clone Wars. How did they come to this assumption? In fact, I never saw the need for a long story about the Clone Wars. I thought the PT was supposed to be about the downfall of Anakin Skywalker, the Jedi and the Republic. The Clone Wars merely played one part in this story. We saw the parts that really counted - the beginning and the end. I saw no need for Lucas to do an entire movie about the Clone Wars. Come to think of it, he didn't reveal the entire story about the Rebel Alliance in the OT. I don't see anyone complaining about that.

And why did the PT have to do full backgrounds on Mace, Dooku and Maul? Why? The movies are mainly about Anakin Skywalker . . . and those close to him. One could complain about the lack of background on Padme, Obi-Wan, etc. But honestly? I could make the same complaint about the lack of background on Leia and Han in the OT. So, why haven't any fans complained about that?

 

Please don't get me wrong. I don't mind the size and scale of the Clone Wars within the PT. I don't want Maul's backstory. I don't want Dooku's backstory... I didn't even mention Mace...

I was just saying their arcs within PT could have been better..

I didn't say I wanted to know where Maul came from or that he had a brother or anything. I wanted him to live longer to be the Sith that Obi Wan and Anakin always fight...

The thing that bothers me is that the Confederacy is "Bad" when in films it is simply a group that has been manipulated. Granted most of them were the capitolists such as banking clan ect... Had Dooku been a good guy on the opposite side, it could have shown that even though the battle lines are drawn, the Jedi were going to respect one another. Much like generals of the American Civil War were friends on both sides.

Grevious, I just wished that he would have been seen before Episode 3, where he is the big Threshold Villain... But that is OK I guess, I mean Jabba wasn't seen originally until Episode 6... But he was referenced in 4 and 5 at least...

 

I don't think it's just about Anakin's downfall, it's about the republic and Jedi Order became out of time and evil made its triumpth. So the Clone War is a big part, and Naboo crsis is not a big scale battle, people want to see a bigger one.

Because you need these to understand them well, Padme, Obi Wan, Leia and Han got enough screen time and their character doesn't require much other background to let you understand. Maul only had like 2 lines. Dooku also had little, also you need to know his background to understand his actions, why did he turn from a Jedi to a Sith.

 

When did the PT do a full backround check on Windu and Maul??.

 

Actually, by ROTS, even Padme was more sympathetic to the Separatists than she originally was. This was made clear in a scene between her and Anakin in her Coruscant apartment. And Lucas also made it clear at the end of AOTC that the Clone Wars was nothing more than a conflict orchestrated by Palpatine for his own personal gain. After realizing this, I fully understood the true nature of the Confederacy. I don't think we were meant to gloat when Anakin killed the Separatist leaders on Mustafar.

 

Very True, but there was no truly "Good" character within the confederacy.

 

It's interesting to think what would have happened if both sides unmasked
the plot.

 

Don't really agree, the seps are shown in a rather bad light in AotC.
The TF have engaged in murder and attempted murder against Padme and her people. Several other seps leaders heard Nute ask Dooku about Padmes death so it seems that they knew about it and they didn't seem to care.
Also the seps with Dooku were building up a big army to launch a sneak attack on a largely defenceless republic and make the senate do whatever they want.
The TF in TPM are shown to act like villains, attacking a defenceless planet, starve the population among other things.
The other seps didn't object to the TF being a part of them so again it seems that they didn't mind the TF methods in the past. The Geonosians have a rather barbaric justice system were people are thrown to be eaten by monsters to the delight of the crowd. They have every right to arrest and try Obi-Wan, Padme and Anakin for espionage, sabotage and killing of Geonosis citizens. But their sentence is rather cruel.

The war is fabricated yes and Palpatine was playing both sides but the seps were fully aware that they were going to attack the republic and they seemed fully behind this idea. The Geonisians were planing to buil the DS, a weapon that would kill billions. The seps were not under direct threat of attack by the republic. They instead wanted to attack the republic in order to get what they want. A republic that they thought didn't have an army. So they wanted war, possibly a short and very one sided war that they would win in short order but war just the same.

So the seps are shown to be little more than bad guys in AotC and RotS. On the republic side there seems to be people that want to try for a diplomatic solution but I am not aware of anyone on the seps side that are open to this.
So I don't think there is much sympathy for the seps in the audience, they are played but they still act mostly like villains.

Bye for now.
Old Stoneface

 

I really like all of these ideas and it would have fixed a lot of the continuity issues between the two trilogies.

Regarding Naboo/Alderaan, I would have also liked to have seen Padme live and return to Alderaan with Leia. Whatever happened later that resulted in Leia being raised by the Organas could have happened off screen. This would fix the issue where Leia remembers her real mother, and the emotion she remembers would fit after what happened with Anakin. Luke would have been given to Obi-Wan to be trained as a Jedi. I also don't see why Palpatine has to be Senator from Alderaan. He can be a close ally with the Alderaan system in the trade dispute, which results in him being elected Supreme Chancellor, but the Senator from Alderaan should have been Bail Organa throughout the entire triology, with him being somewhat of a mentor figure for Padme (instead of Palpatine).

As for Grevious, I don't see a need for him to have existed at all. His niche would have been filled by Darth Maul. The fight in Revenge of the Sith between Maul and Obi-Wan would replace the battle with Grevious. This would have given Darth Maul a meaningful presence throughout the entire prequel trilogy. Dooku would not have been a Sith but a dark Jedi that joined the Separatist cause.

I would have also liked to have seen more emphasis placed on politics in Episode III and less in Episode I. The trade dispute is something that was important to the story, but not a lot of time needed to be spent fleshing it out and a lot of fans found it boring. The most political part of Episode I should have been the vote of no confidence in Chancellor Valorum and the election of Palpatine. This would have given the viewers enough information to know how the government of the Republic functioned while keeping the pace. Then in Episode III, seeing Palpatine consolidate more and more power as well as take direct control of the Jedi Council is something that shouldn't have been cut from the movie. A lot of this was included in the deleted scenes from Revenge of the Sith. I would have also liked to see Palpatine's entire speech before the Senate during his coronation included. The parts where he declares himself Emperor for life, declares there will be a new constitution, and renames the Clone Army to the Imperial Stormtroopers are of special importance. Not sure why this was cut from the movie.

Lastly, I would have made the ships and uniforms more in line with what we saw in the original trilogy. The ships of the Grand Army of the Republic should have been star destroyers and tie fighters. The clone troopers' uniforms should have been the same uniforms that the stormtroopers wore in the original trilogy.

 

I understand that. But I feel that Lucas was entitled to tell the story in the manner in which he preferred. The audience had the choice of either accepting it or not. Some of the audience accepted it and some didn't. Some people wanted the Prequel Trilogy to mainly be about the Clones Wars and some were satisfied that the conflict did not encompass the entire trilogy. Besides . . . there is the animated series to enjoy.

I cannot see Padme giving up one twin and keeping the other. I feel that would have been a serious mistake. Besides, "Return of the Jedi" never stated outright that Padme had kept Leia for a few years before her death. Leia's description of her memories of Padme struck me as a bit too vague.

 

GAAAAAHHHHHH my whole post is messed up and in someone else's quote box. Crap.

 

Is there any way they could have done it without having her die in childbirth?

Leia should have no memory of her mother at all but that's not clearly what we see in Return of the Jedi. If we go by the OT, then Padme should have lived at least two years after Leia's birth, being that our earliest memories start forming around that age.

It would be a stretch for Obi-Wan to convince her to allow him to take Luke to Tattooine to train as a Jedi. Padme dying in childbirth works to explain why the twins were split up the way they were. It still leaves a disconnect on Endor when Luke has the conversation with Leia about their mother.

 

Alderaan should have been focused on more.
Bail Organa as well.
Dock should have been in TPM and Grievous should have been in AOTC.
I think that the PT era should have had another trilogy worth of movies. Between TPM and AOTC, a movie during the Clone Wars. And maybe one right after the Clone Wars.

 

Only think that I can agree is that later villains in Ep2 and Ep3 need a bit of backstory so that they don't appear from knowhere. It would be nice to hear at least mentions about Grevious during AotC and maybe to see Dooku in council in TPM.

I've always thought that Leia remembering her foster mother, not Padme. Leia couldn't possibly know that her real mother died while giving her birth.

 

The Return of the Jedi script has more backstory during the interaction between Luke and Obi-Wan's force ghost.

In the original version of the story, Anakin did not know Padme was pregnant at the time he turned to the dark side. The children were split up and hidden from Anakin to keep them anonymous for as long as possible. It appears that there was originally no forbidden love and Obi-Wan knew they were together. It also appears that Padme didn't die in childbirth but instead went to Alderaan with Leia, but did not raise her. Do you think the version of the story we got in the prequels was better, or do you prefer this one?

Here it is.

BEN (continuing his narrative)
When your father left, he didn't know your mother was pregnant. Your
mother and I knew he would find out eventually, but we wanted to keep
you both as safe as possible, for as long as possible. So I took you
to live with my brother Owen on Tatooine... and your mother took Leia
to live as the daughter of Senator Organa, on Alderaan.

Luke turns, and settles near Ben to hear the tale.

BEN (attempting to give solace with his words)
The Organa household was high-born and politically quite powerful in
that system. Leia became a princess by virtue of lineage... no one knew
she'd been adopted, of course. But it was a title without real power,
since Alderaan had long been a democracy. Even so, the family
continued to be politically powerful, and Leia, following in her foster
father's path, became a senator as well. That's not all she became, of
course... she became the leader of her cell in the Alliance against the
corrupt Empire. And because she had diplomatic immunity, she was a
vital link for getting information to the Rebel cause. That's what she
was doing when her path crossed yours... for her foster parents had
always told her to contact me on Tatooine, if her troubles became
desperate.

 

I think it was doable.

First you would need to remove Anakin's obsession over Padme. Had she lived, he would never stop looking for her. So you have them part ways earlier.

Either he doesn't know that Padme is pregnant. She gives birth and she, Bail and Obi-Wan discuss options. They all know that the Emperor would try to kill the children if he knew of them so secrecy is important. Luke is taken to Tatooine and Bail takes Leia, making some cover story that she is their child or adopted. Padme is very sad over this but Bail takes her along and gives her a place in his household. He can protect her and she can stay near her daughter with no one knowing that Leia is her daughter. So Padme lives with Leia, in a role as nanny or something. But to the rest of the galaxy, she isn't connected to Leia beyond that.

If Anakin does know that she is pregnant. Then say that he had visions of a son and that he mentioned this to Obi-Wan or Padme. So when the children are born, Luke is hidden away as Anakin/Palpatine is expecting a son. They fake a miscarriage and then the same as above. Leia is made into Bail's child, real or adopted and Padme goes there. Anakin can even go and see her and demand to know what became of his son and she says he died. Anakin buys this and never connects Leia to himself.

Of course this would require that she and Anakin part ways in AotC, the birth happens there, the children are hidden and in RotS, the children are 2-3 years old. Other events would probably be needed to happen earlier as well. Padme can die in RotS, either as a result of illness, grief or something. And you can end with Leia looking sad at her funeral, Obi-Wan talking to Bail and them saying that their subterfuge worked, Anakin doesn't suspect Leia and Luke is hidden. And the final image is young Luke running on Tatooine with Beru's voice saying "Luke, Luke."

Bye for now.
The Guarding Dark