Speculation Lucas & Star Wars lack of Back Story/History. Maybe told in Episode 7-9

I thought we were finally going to learn a ton of info on Sith & Jedi History in Episode 3. Due to the fact at the time it was the final movie ever. We ended up only getting a snippet. Has anyone else noticed the lack of details Lucas gives us in the whole six movies? Its almost like he didn't have anything to tell us. He left Star Wars History up to the EU writers, Comic Books & Video games to fill crucial details. As someone that's read a only a little of this stuff, because its disappointing material. I hope the new writers for all future movies do not use the EU as their template for Star Wars.

 

I'm not really interested in watching history lectures on Jedi and Sith, I prefer Star Wars movies.

FWIW, the writers went to Lucas when it came time to write about the history of the Sith and the Jedi. Lucas came up with Darth Bane and the Rule of Two. The Tales of the Jedi comics were reviewed and approved by Lucas himself.

 

There's a lot more narrative value to a mystery than a metric **** tonne of non-crucial exposition.

 

Well Lucas did not give much thought to it. The Rule of Two was a weak idea. The Clone Wars have done everything to circumvent that rule. Secret apprentices etc.

 

There doesn't need to be any backstory to tell the stories in the films, and thus it is not in the films. If you want it, you can get it in the EU.

 

Have you ever noticed that we have like 400 books and TV and video games to cover that, OP?

 

The movies are episodic by design. They are limited in scope for a reason, and IMO are far more effective for it. As others have said, that's really the point of the EU. If you want more, you can get it - but you don't need it to enjoy the stories the films choose to focus on.

 

I'm curious as to the age of the poster.

The idea that Lucas didn't give us enough history is kind of ironic, considering that he actually gave us three prequels. About 7 hours of history to back up the OT. The fact that it left you wanting more tells me he did a good job.

As someone who saw A New Hope in May, 1977, I strongly disagree. Even going back to April 1999, even back then we didn't really know what a Sith was. We just knew Darth Vader was a Dark Lord of the Sith. We knew virtually nothing about the Jedis. We never knew there was a Jedi Council. Not until Episode II did we even know Jedis weren't allowed to marry. No clue who the stormtroopers were or where they came from. With the exception of the SW novel prologue, we knew nothing about the Emperor. Who he was, how he got there? We knew nothing about Luke and Leia's mother. I could go on and on. The amount of history we have been given since the OT is overwhelming. Lucas has expanded the SW universe many times over.

Now if you're saying you want prequels to the prequels, or Old Republic movies, I'm all for it. Bring em on.

But to complain that Lucas hasn't given us much history? That seems extremely unfair to George.

 

ok, answer these two simple questions & don't use EU.

What are the origin's of the Sith & Jedi?

 

Yoda says in empire there was a 'a council I had on ones who would be trained'- so I kind of had an idea there was a council. Although I always thought of it has a king arther type deal.

 

Easy for the jedi:

'For over a thousand generations the jedi knights were the gaurdians of peace and justice, before the dark times...before the empire."

 

He actually said "My own counsel will I keep on who is to be trained" which translates to "I'll decide on who I train, not you.....flower muffin"

There was never a reference to the Jedi council in the OT.

EDIT: Beat me to it PS

That word isn't allowed, and all.

 

That's okay flower muffin, I knew what you meant.

 

I am sure if there
are any unanswered
questions
the force ghosts
of Obi-WAN,
Yoda
or Anakin
will be able
to explain
it to Luke.

 

The basics of what's known from various Lucas quotes and the movies themselves is that long ago you had the Jedi...they split into Jedi and Sith...the Sith went on to rule the galaxy for an unknown period of time, oppressing everyone...the Sith had a fatal weakness which basically saw them turn on each other which allowed the Jedi to defeat them and gave rise to the rule of two and out of that the Republic was formed.

Now that last bit is a little contentious because Lucas retconned himself. The EU speaks of a 25,000 year Republic, based on Obi-Wan's quote in ANH - "For over a thousand generations, the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the old Republic..."

If 1 generation is 25 years, then 1000 generations is 25,000 years. But in the prequels there are two distinct quotes that contradict this. "I will not let this Republic which has stood for a thousand years...." and "there hasn't been a full scale war since the formation of the Republic." The second one is important because if you take the first quote on its own, you can take 1000 years to mean a thousand years of peace. But the second quote makes it clear that there has been any galactic wars since the Republic was formed. Together, those quotes not only set the Republic at 1000 years old, but they pretty much retcon 95% of Old Republic EU out of existence. The lines from Palpatine and Mace referring to the Sith once ruling the galaxy also differs from galactic history as presented in EU.

Now, EU writers attempted to explain this away by saying that 1000 years before The Phantom Menace, there was a reformation, where after a long and supposedly final conflict with the Sith, the Republic was basically restarted...or maybe think of it like renewing wedding vows. It's a messy explanation that doesn't quite work but most EU fans put it down to a bad Huttese translation.

Lucas himself has said that he considers the EU to be more of an alternate universe. He might use little bits here and there, give a character he likes a cameo or take a name that he likes, but I think to Lucas, EU is effectively fan fiction...that made him more money.

But even if you throw out the EU and go with the thousand year Republic, there's still the problem of what Old Ben says about 1000 generations...well...maybe in the Star Wars universe the word "generation" is another word for "year" and so it all makes sense....no....? Never mind then.

 

Uh, yes it is.

But we have a thread for EU discussion and this isn't it

 

He's not talking about what EU says though, he's asking about Lucas. It's entirely possible that one of the spin off movies could be a Jedi/Sith/Republic origin story that will erase Old Republic EU just as Episode VII is set to erase New Republic EU.

 

I'm not really going to argue about it.

I think the EU explanation is bit silly and to me there was an obvious explanation that would have explained it much better but the EU is the EU for a reason... It does seem to contradict what Old Ben says unless the Sith overthrew the Republic and instituted a Sith Empire. The Jedi then overthrew the Sith and reinstituted the Republic. So the republic we see in the PT is the Second Republic or the Third Republic or whatever which has ruled for a 1000 years. The Jedi however have served the Republic (in all its iterations) for a 1000 generations. But that's just my pet theory and is not supported by anything in the EU.

Now that last bit is a little contentious because Lucas retconned himself. The EU speaks of a 25,000 year Republic, based on Obi-Wan's quote in ANH - "For over a thousand generations, the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the old Republic..."

If 1 generation is 25 years, then 1000 generations is 25,000 years. But in the prequels there are two distinct quotes that contradict this. "I will not let this Republic which has stood for a thousand years...." and "there hasn't been a full scale war since the formation of the Republic." The second one is important because if you take the first quote on its own, you can take 1000 years to mean a thousand years of peace. But the second quote makes it clear that there has been any galactic wars since the Republic was formed. Together, those quotes not only set the Republic at 1000 years old, but they pretty much retcon 95% of Old Republic EU out of existence. The lines from Palpatine and Mace referring to the Sith once ruling the galaxy also differs from galactic history as presented in EU.

Now, EU writers attempted to explain this away by saying that 1000 years before The Phantom Menace, there was a reformation, where after a long and supposedly final conflict with the Sith, the Republic was basically restarted...or maybe think of it like renewing wedding vows. It's a messy explanation that doesn't quite work but most EU fans put it down to a bad Huttese translation.

Lucas himself has said that he considers the EU to be more of an alternate universe. He might use little bits here and there, give a character he likes a cameo or take a name that he likes, but I think to Lucas, EU is effectively fan fiction...that made him more money.

But even if you throw out the EU and go with the thousand year Republic, there's still the problem of what Old Ben says about 1000 generations...well...maybe in the Star Wars universe the word "generation" is another word for "year" and so it all makes sense....no....? Never mind then.

As I said: EU discussion is not allowed outside the EU thread.

 

Some people think Lucas reads everything in its entirety when he approves something for the EU. I'm sure in some cases he doesn't even have the time to read the overviews & leaves it to others.

 

Another quote to think about is Palpatine addressing the senate "The Republic will be reformed into The First Galactic Empire". I think the Sith ruled the Galaxy at one point but new worlds came on board and it was called something else. Maybe when they ruled it was originally called "The Galactic Empire minus any planets that are not in the Galactic Empire."