ST The Orphan

I'm not really sure which kind of orphan I like best; maybe I like them all. There are so many ways you can go with it. Circular Logic was telling me about this character from Mass Effect (which I've never played) named Jack that sounds like a cool sort of take on the orphan type. Dangerous but not necessarily a villain.

But I also really like the arc of a villainous orphan (metaphorical or literal) who changes after being shown a lot of compassion. I know this arc has been done in the EU, but I don't think that's a strong argument against using it in the films.

I like the way Immortiss describes a possible arc as "distrustful and selfish, but learns to be benevolent." A lot of emotional resonance there.

 

Great post and fine insight.

I made the connection with Thomas and Luke already, but Rachael slipped right past me (but then, I'm more well-versed in the Gospel than the Old Testament).

 

If I had to guess, from the sound of things (and being somewhat familiar with you through your posts, at least), your good influence will more than compensate for any ill-conceived direction born of ignorance. You and her mother are aware of the situation, and can counter any negative influence, ultimately, with patience, love and understanding (and maybe a little gentle prodding / reminders when she shows signs of acting on her father's influence). Positive exposure to other cultures will be invaluable, of course. But then, you're a dad! I'm not telling you anything you don't already know.

You know, I'm raising my daughter on my own. Her mother split when she was 11 months old, and though she doesn't see her mom often, I still have to be on guard for some signs of unwanted influence, too (even after trying to influence my ex for seven years, her mom retains an ignorant attitude of her own towards other races). I feel your pain, man.

 

Not if they start a new plot-thread with a new villain. Which is precisely what I want. There can be some connections, but unmaking ROTJ is totally unnecessary. A cool new space adventure can exist without pooing on the previous material.

 

I probably shouldn't get into this discussion again here, but I was just reading over the "Lucas Quotes and Interviews" thread in Saga, and Lucas said over and over that Star Wars would be one story told over nine movies, a trilogy of trilogies, even in 1983 when ROTJ was released. Later for a while he said the ST probably wouldn't happen, and then he said it definitely wouldn't happen, but the fact that he wrote the story for Episodes VII, VIII, and IX should be a clear indicator that he's come back to that same notion of a nine part saga. Add to that the fact that when these movies were announced he referred to them specifically as "completing the trilogy", and I think there can be little doubt about his intentions for these films.

 

If he went for anything stupid like a resurrected Palpatine I hope his script was totally overwritten with a new villain put in.

But even then there are ideas for continuing the saga without using the most tired, overused tropes. A son of Palpatine was mentioned, for example. Former Imperials like Veers or Daine Jir could also become a villain and strive to complete the works of their predecessors. Basically there are endless possibilities without having to unmake ROTJ.

 

This saga has tendency to establish something only to later reveal that the situation isn't what it appeared to be. In fact you could say it's a running theme. I fully expect that to still be the case moving into the next trilogy, and I'd say that there is a significant possibility that Palpatine's death was not what it seemed either. What this would mean exactly I don't know... he could be a ghost of some kind, he could be corporeal... but if Lucas wrote it then I trust in his ability to make it work logically within the story.

Could the orphan be another case of what you see is not what you get? I don't know, but I'm trying desperately to stay on topic.

 

That's a pretty flowery description of retcon, but you're right, it has happened before. Like the "certain point of view" line? A retcon. But despite being a "honored" SW tradition it is still a flaw and to this day many still don't like it very much.

Eliminating a flaw, whether it is a traditional one or not, is a good thing and not a bad thing.

Minor retcons are of course more harmless than the gigantic ones. Revealing that the main villain is still alive is imo the latter case.

 

Is Palpatine the orphan?

 

What about revealing that the main villain is the hero's father? People didn't seem to mind that one so much.

 

You read "Darth Plagueis"!

But if that were the case, then the casting would indicate the film will feature flashbacks or a reboot...oh boy.

The Biblical idea seems on target. Does anyone know if the original ANH casting call featured such themes?

 

More likely it could indicate reincarnation, possession, or essence transfer.

 

This made me think...the big reveal in Episode V provides an excellent example of symmetry, particularly when you consider that it will now be the center-point of the entire saga, I-IX. It also indicates to me that it is quite possible we will perhaps see Anakin and Darth Vader, again. If it be true, I hope for the best in the story, whatever that may be.

Also, if the TESB is the line of symmetry in the saga, I expect to see many ideas PT related, in the ST. The ST being the other side of the PT coin.

 

The only thing retconned here were a couple of Obi-Wan's lines since we didn't see Anakin Skywalker on screen and Owen's dialogue still fit with the reveal. Luke's father was somewhat important to the plot, but definitely less important than say, the character of Tarkin. Even without a mention of Anakin Skywalker the young Luke Skywalker would have gone on his journey.

Retconning Palpatine's death is a different animal. It took six movies to bring him down. You can't just tell the audience now "but oh, he is still alive, you were wrong. It doesn't create many happy feels. Especially since there are audience members who despise him like Joffrey in GOT. He was created to be hated.

 

Let me just throw out a hypothetical scenario...

Lucas begins the saga with Episode I, setting up Sidious as the villain and saying that this was the beginning of a nine part story, with one movie to be released every two or three years following. In Episode III, there are multiple mentions of characters learning the secret of immortality, including from Sidious who indicates that he either knows or wants to learn this secret. In Episode IV, Obi-Wan, having studied this secret, disappears when killed and communicates with Luke from the afterlife. In Episode V, he shows up as a ghost with a blue glow. In Episode VI (released this or last year), Sidious is thrown down a reactor shaft and explodes into blue energy.

In this scenario, are you now convinced that he's gone for good, or do you think there's a chance he'll find some way to return in the next movie, and are you more forgiving if he does?

 

The point is moot since chronologically ROTJ came before ROTS and back in the day only Jedi knew how to become ghosts. Palpatine was already "declared dead" before any mention of Plagueis. Additionally, death so far has been treated as final. Except for some ghosting you don't return into the material world. Even Darth Plagueis the Wise didn't succeed.

 

But you can't go by what the story was at the time ROTJ was released. You have to look at the saga as a whole when proceeding forward. All I'm saying is there is enough of a precedent established at this point for there to be a significant possibility.

So uh... about that orphan...

 

Well, only Jedi ghosting is something started in RotS. Prior to that, there were a few EU examples of Sith spirits/ghosts.

That fact is there was blue smoke/wind/lighning that Palpatine exploded into. It wouldn't be a stretch to say it was him using a dark side power.

 

It's possible to explain ... everything as long as you're inventive. Doesn't mean you should.

I and many fans have first seen the OT and then ROTS. For us Palpatine is dead and there was no setup for anything else.

 

If there are Sith Ghosts, I think it's a dead (excuse the pun) end for Sith. There could be, but it's not where they want to be. They want to be in the material world. They cannot let go of their mortal coil, due to their inherent selfishness. IMO.

There is perhaps one way of defeating Plagueis and that would be to send him to Sith Hell, which is the haunting of some rock or hole on Korriban, or some such.

Edit: The Orphan! The Orphan! This is the Orphan thread, right!

EDIT: A Sith orphan who becomes good....Mmmm.

 

I'm one of those fans, and I can see Palpatine surviving and them incorporating the blue explosion into it.

I wouldn't see it as a dead end as much as a First Step to the physical immortality they seek.

 

This much, I'd agree with. Even after being convinced of the Emperor's death since I first saw it happen in the theatre 30 years ago, given the fantastic setting and taking what we've learned of the saga, as a whole, it wouldn't feel completely out-of-the-blue for me. I get that it won't work for everyone, but I think there's room enough for it to be a viable possibility, at least. I suppose whether I like any such move would all come down to context and execution.

 

I saw the OT first but I also saw the three films that come before it chronologically and change the perspective of many things that are taken for granted when having only seen the OT.

 

Let's direct any further discussion about the Emperor that isn't related to this topic here:
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/is-the-emperor-really-dead.50009097/page-68

 

Maybe they could pull a "reverse Vader" type character, so someone influential in the Dark Side who starts to come around by the end of the trilogy?