PT A Better Continuity Between Prequels and the Original Trilogy

Discussion in 'Prequel Trilogy' started by Kyris Cavisek, Nov 13, 2012.

Moderators: Bazinga'd
  1. TOSCHESTATION Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 17, 2003
    star 4
    Care to explain how a 20 year-old Luke 'must have' starting piloting in his pre-school years??? Then we'll know that it's not just an empty assertion/rhetorical stalling tactic. We're all ears.......
  2. Arawn_Fenn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2004
    star 7
    That is highly unlikely. If you're all ears, how are you reading this?
  3. TOSCHESTATION Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 17, 2003
    star 4
    [face_clown] Seems that I was right***.


    *** Then we'll know that it's not just an empty assertion/rhetorical stalling tactic.
    Last edited by TOSCHESTATION, Dec 3, 2012
  4. Sistros Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 24, 2010
    star 6
    @ Arawn


    seriously?

    that was your rebuttal to his point?


    i'm curious to know which obscure comic said Luke was a young toddler too.
    Last edited by Sistros, Dec 3, 2012
    SithStarSlayer and TOSCHESTATION like this.
  5. TOSCHESTATION Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 17, 2003
    star 4
    [face_whistling]
  6. TOSCHESTATION Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 17, 2003
    star 4
  7. DRush76 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 25, 2008
    star 4

    I don't see how being a bush pilot automatically makes one a first rate military pilot.
  8. LordMortis315 Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 4
    No need to be rude.
  9. Samuel Vimes Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 4, 2012
    star 3
    Vader get a backstory even in ANH.
    We are told he was once a Jedi but betrayed them to the Empire. We are also told he used to be Obi-Wans apprentice. He personally murdered Luke's father. This gives him way more backstory than Maul or Sidious. All we know of them is that they are Sith, that were thought to have been all dead for 1000 years and they want revenge on the Jedi for some reason.
    We also get some backstory on Luke's father, how he was different from Owen, that he and Obi-Wan were good friends.
    When Vader is merged with Anakin, some of that backstory becomes Vaders. We also learn that his children were hidden from him when they were born, implying that Anakin had already turned.

    In the OOT Jabba is spoken of, we get some idea what he is and what he does. That he is a threat is established in ANH as Han is willing to take a risk to earn money to pay him back. This is re-inforced in ESB as Han seem to fear Jabba more than the empire.

    Tarkin gets no backstory but the character gets established quite well in some quick scenes. Just the simple fact that he can order Vader around when Vader has been showed as quite fearsome.

    Palpatine is the main villain in the PT yes but he has no backstory and he remains off-screen much of the time, which he should.
    But the upfront villains in the PT I found lacking. Maul had no character and thus was uninteresting. Dooku had potential (and a favorite actor of mine) but was underused and killed-off too soon. Griev had a character, all talk and no delivery, and was a complete waste of time to me.


    Bye for now.
    Old Stoneface
    MrFantastic74 and Yunners like this.
  10. Samuel Vimes Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 4, 2012
    star 3
    About Maul and DOTF.

    In general, what makes a good on-screen fight to me isn't just the fight itself and how well it is put together. A fight that has some personal backstory or emotion is often more interesting than two random guys fighting, no matter how well they fight.

    Maul had no character, little to no backstory and hadn't been established all that much in the film. If we had seen more of Maul, if he had done more and been estabilshed as a very credible threat then the end fight would have been better to me.

    The ANH, while much less advanced, is to me better because Vader and Obi-Wan have more backstory and there is more emotion in the fight.
    Also why call it "Duel of the Fates"? What impact did this fight have on galatic events? Maul died and yet Palpatine got to be chancellor and could further his plans. Had Maul won that would not have changed. The TF ship would still have been destroyed, taking out the TF army. Would an alive Maul have changed any of that?
    The Yoda/Sidious fight is a "Duel of the fates" because if Palpatine were to die then the empire would most likely crumble.
    The TPM fight has far less impact.
    Also we know next to nothing about the Sith other than that they are bad guys and they hate the Jedi.
    If we had gotten some more backstory about the Sith, what they were about and what the Jedi did to them then the fight might have been about more than pretty choreography.

    Bye for now.
    Blackboard Monitor.
  11. Kyris Cavisek Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 12, 2012
    star 4
    While yes, Palpatine was the villian of the PT, and all OT fans know it. Viewers watching it 123456, dko on't know that. On top of that, there are such things as threshold villians. It is part of the Campbell "Journey of Heroes" to which Lucas subscribes. Boba Fett and Jabba are perfect examples of this in the OT. Jabba hadn't been seen in the OT until RotJ, however he had been mentioned and feared. Whereas Grevious just appears yeah im a big deal in the Confederacy
  12. Sistros Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 24, 2010
    star 6
    LordMortis315 said:

    No need to be rude.

    ------


    your idea of rude is [obi] not the same as mine [/obi]

    how was that rude?
    Last edited by Sistros, Dec 4, 2012
  13. Samuel Vimes Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 4, 2012
    star 3
    I don't think it is very hard to figure out that Palpatine = Sidious. We see that Sidious is the one who is calling the shots with the TF and he is Mauls boss. There is enough of Sidious face that you can match with Palpatine. Plus at the end, Mace and Yoda talks about who was killed, the master or the apprentice and then the camera pans over to Palptine.

    Bye for now.
    Old Stoneface
  14. Kyris Cavisek Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 12, 2012
    star 4
    This is true. I think the "We will watch your career with great attention" or whatever to Anakin is far more telling. And you are right Palpatine is the villian, but they don't fight him until 3. Instead they fight Maul once, kill him, fight Dooku twice, kill him. Fight Grevious twice in the same movie, kill him. Imagine if Maul were the long term apprentice. Maul kills Qui Gon escapes, is behind Geonosis, pulling Count Dooku's strings, they fight him. Anakin fights out of anger over Qui Gon, Obi Wan has made his peace, but there is still a chip on his shoulder too. By the time they get to three, Maul needs to die to make room for Vader, Anakin kills him early on. As for Grevious, he is fine, except I'd love to see him leading droids into battle as they fly over the battlefield in EP 2.
  15. DRush76 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 25, 2008
    star 4

    One, Palpatine was "the" upfront villain of the PT, not Darth Maul, who was merely an apprentice in one movie. Two, Palpatine DID NOT remain off-screen most of the time. What movies were you watching? But I can recall plenty of screen time for Palpatine, especially in TPM and ROTS. And three, you're willing to accept a lack of background story for Tarkin, but you can't tolerate one for Palpatine? And by the way, TPM established Palpatine as a senator from Naboo, and the rest of the PT chronicled his rise to emperor. That is more than ANH ever did for Tarkin.



    Don't you mean Count Dooku?


    And no one has yet to explain how Luke, whose only flying experience was shooting at animals, became an experienced military pilot by the end of ANH, within two to three days.
    Last edited by DRush76, Dec 10, 2012
  16. Iron_lord Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 6
    Luke had a lot of that flying experience. The novel makes the point that the controls on the skyhopper were very similar to those on the X-wing, and in the movies we see that (for one reason or another) starfighters move far more like aircraft than one would expect.

    Luke's still a rookie pilot from the military point of view- but they needed every pilot they could get.
  17. _Catherine_ Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 16, 2007
    star 4
    This comparison between Luke's and Anakin's piloting skills is pointless. It's a fantasy space movie, it doesn't have to make sense at rational, clinical, real-life level, it just has to be sincere enough to make the audience believe it.

    Luke is 20 years old, we've heard multiple times that he's a great pilot with a level of flying experience, his raw talent for flying is reinforced by the knowledge that his father was "the best star pilot in the galaxy," and initially he only flies a support role in the battle. He doesn't take center stage in the attack until everyone else has failed because it's a movie and the hero has to save the day at the end. And then when he does, we explicitly see how the Force helps him win. And then even despite that, he still would have gotten killed if Han hadn't come back to help, which was set up by the character arc Han goes through in the movie. We buy Luke being able to skillfully pilot a military plane he hasn't seen before because that fact does not exist in a vacuum; it is supported by information we already know and mitigated by the circumstances of the battle, as well as the same level of suspension of disbelief that the movie has already earned.

    By contrast, Anakn is a 9-year-old who's never driven anything that goes more than a foot off the ground. He has no experience piloting a craft that operates in three dimensions and the movie doesn't even try to sell us on the plausibility of him suddenly being able to do so. It substitutes talent and mature decision-making on Anakin's part with a series of comical slapstick accidents that completely conflict with the tone of a serious space battle where people are blowing up all around him. The whole climax of the movie becomes a big joke; a little kid accidentally blows up the bad guys' spaceship because he's shooting at robots. It's like if Palpatine had tripped and fallen into the reactor core at the end of Jedi and Vader did nothing at all. Sure, afterward you can say it must have been the will of the Force that Palpatine slip on a banana peel and fall to his death, but that doesn't make it any less of a joke.

    The most important part of the Death Star battle isn't even Luke's piloting skills; it's his decision to trust in the Force. If all he had relied on was his experience shooting animals, he would have lost. Anakin doesn't make any decisions, except to try spinning, because that's a good trick (how would he know that? He's never flown in three dimensions before); everything he does, from turning on the fighter to blowing up the ship, is just an accident caused by his childish incompetence. In ANH, there's a ticking clock countdown until the Death Star destroys Yavin, and Luke would have died trying to stop it if not for the intervention of his friend. Anakin, on the other hand, is never in any danger. There are no stakes and no tension; the whole battle is played for laughs. Luke was the only one who could have blown up the Death Star, because he was the only pilot who trusted in the Force; anyone could have done what Anakin did because he just button-mashed his way to victory. Luke makes an adult decision and grows as a character and a person; Anakin isn't even aware of the effect of his actions. I think it's pretty easy to see why people buy one and not the other.
  18. -NaTaLie- Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 5, 2001
    star 4
    I actually think the contrast between Luke and Anakin is on purpose. Luke had to make a conscious decision to trust the Force (otherwise, he'd be dead, no matter what his skills are). By contrast, Anakin has great natural abilities (enough to be the only human in the extremely dangerous podracing). Blowing up a space station is the same to him, it's just an adventure vs. Luke's epiphany. No wonder Anakin grows up thinking he's entitled to becoming "the greatest Jedi ever" and chafes under the Jedi restrictions. Luke has a great talent, too, but he has to work for it, while Anakin takes everything for granted.
  19. Samuel Vimes Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 4, 2012
    star 3
    By upfront I mean the villain the heroes are directly dealing with/figthing against.
    In the the first Terminator movie, SkyNet is the real villain but the Terminator is the upfront villain as he is the one the heroes deal with.
    In the first Matrix film, the machines are the head villains and Smith just works for them and yet he is the upfront villain.
    In ANH, Tarkin and Vader both work for the emperor so he would be the head villain. But since we never see him, Vader and Tarkin are the upfront villains.

    In the PT Palpatine (as Sidious) reamins in the shadows and gives orders and the Jedi aren't really aware of him until much later.
    Maul and Dooku are the upfront villains.

    What is this about not tolerating a lack of back story? You made a comment that the OT villains didn't get any backstory.
    I disagree, Vader gets quite a bit of backstory in ANH, certainly far more than Maul or Palpatine in TPM.

    Palptaines role is far larger than Tarkins so there is far more time to give him backstory. Tarkin didn't get any but the character was established quite well in the short time we had.
    Palpatine and indeed all the Sith have some grudge against the Jedi and they want revenge for something. But what that something is we are never told. Giving some backstory on the Sith, what they were about and what happened to them would give both maul and Palpatine more backstory.

    Vader gets more backstory in the OT than Palpatine gets in the PT. He was the senator from Naboo and later became emperor. That isn't backstory, that is the actual story. All we know of his backstory is that he is a Sith and he might have been trained by someone called Darth Plageious. Vaders past involved Obi-Wan, that is important to them and the story so we are told about it.
    The Sith apparently have some kind of history with the Jedi but what that is we never know. Despite one whole film called "Revenge of the Sith." And we never learn what they want revenge for. Tarkins backstory isn't important to the film ANH. the backstory of the Sith is important to the PT but we learn littel about it.

    Bye for now
    Old Stoneface
    KilroyMcFadden and Yunners like this.
  20. Kyris Cavisek Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 12, 2012
    star 4
    You make a good point, I agree that Palps is the shadow villian, the PHANTOM MENACE! His apprentices are the threshold villians, I just wished the thresholds put up more of a fight. Tarkin isn't all that important outside of EP4. We never find out in the movies that Palps master was Plagiues he just brings up a random sith lord in a story. Agree about the Sith back story
  21. DRush76 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 25, 2008
    star 4

    I'm sorry, but I don't think that doesn't mean anything. Even Anakin had some experience as a podracer (which is a lot more dangerous than whatever flying Luke did before he joined the Rebellion) before he accidentally took part in the Battle of Naboo.
  22. Kyris Cavisek Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 12, 2012
    star 4

    It was never established how dangerous bullseye-ing womp rat in his T-16 back home was. He might have had to do some serious piloting...
  23. Iron_lord Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 6
    "Beggar's Canyon" is established in tie-in media (I think Complete Locations) to be a part of the Mos Espa racecourse- so when Luke says "It'll be just like Beggar's Canyon back home"- he's been through some of the same hazardous areas Anakin went through.
  24. only one kenobi Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 18, 2012
    star 3
    If there was one thing that I would change to create a better continuity then it would be to remove the whole chosen one/prophecy storyline. It changes, fundamentally, the ending of the saga. ROTJ ended, originally, with the rebels victorious over the Empire, Anakin's redemption was not integral to that; his redemption instead saved Luke - purely and simply.

    The chosen one storyline seems to me utterly superfluous. There is no less impact in Anakin's crimes if he is not the chosen one. In fact I'd argue that the tragedy of Anakin Skywalker would have greater resonance as he would have been more human - less a super-human created by some nexus in the Force. The Force would remain something....enigmatic, unknowable, rather than something that schemes and plots.
    TOSCHESTATION and KilroyMcFadden like this.
  25. Arawn_Fenn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2004
    star 7
    Also mentioned in the TPM novelization.
    Last edited by Arawn_Fenn, Dec 12, 2012
Moderators: Bazinga'd