PT Anyone else afraid Disney is going to pretend the prequels don't exist?

Aren't you a little short for a Forumtrooper?

...I'm sorry, I couldn't resist.

10 points to you for a perfect use of Curmudgeons and for making me laugh this early in the day ;D

 

Considering how the Senate of old put Palps into power probably not. We've seen enough of Coruscant anyway. Give us some new locations, please.

Because we already got enough Coruscant, Tatooine and Naboo? Wouldn't mind a revisit to Utapau or some other lesser location though.

Rebuilding the Senate and the Jedi order on the exact same spots sends a certain message. This one: We haven't learned from the past and we blindly follow the examples of our predecessor.

New Republic should be the new Republic. Lukes jedi order should be the new jedi order. Make them distinguishable from the old. Show how things are different nowadays, how they changed for the better.

 

To try and pretend the prequels don't exist in the Star Wars franchise for Disney is like MGM/Columbia trying to pretend the 20 Bond movies before 'Casino Royale' didn't exist for the James Bond films. It's not going to happen, and can't ever happen.

It shouldn't happen either, as they are the creation of the team who brought us the classic trilogy, good or bad as we see them, they are essential to the films narrative and so must be accepted as a whole, or not at all.

 

That's not a very good example, Casino Royale was a reboot and did just that.

 

Well, the ST will likely take place more than fifty years after the PT. Pretty much everything that shaped the PT era is gone and shoehorning in locations that have been overexposed already is a bad idea.

What I can see as connection points:

Anakin Skywalker as force ghost could return
Lesser known locations like Utapau or Geonosis
Cameo of some Naberrie family member or other non-Jedi side character

 

Well, maybe. I meant that even though it's a different direction, everything about the previous Bond films was there like characters, music etc and they can't pretend nothing from the previous Bond films has directed and influenced the Craig era.

As the prequels must dictate and influence the new trilogy, they can't not exist to everyone now.

 

Yeah I really don't see how it's even a question: of course they can't act like they never happened. They bought the franchise for the legacy. It can't be ignored.

 

You feel sorry for people because they are perfectly happy with how certain movies turned out?
A complete waste of emotions, if you ask me.





- I hate you!!
- I know.
/LM

 

I'm quite keen on this idea. There's a sort of dividing line -- a barrier of history -- between the prequels and the originals. Fragments can cross over, but not whole pieces.

Yet we might also see some attempt to recover relics of the past -- people, places, ideas -- in the sequel trilogy. As an artistic imperative, it is somewhat inevitable. You can't help but be influenced by what has come before you.

Still digging your interpretation, though. And Episode I does start the saga off with a mythical, "Garden of Paradise" feel... like this is something that can't truly be regained or grasped outside of its own parameters.

Did you join the wrong thread or something? Prequels; the very prequels subtly alluded to in the forum title: "Prequel Trilogy".

I can see the matter going both ways. On the one hand, they might consider the Senate to be irrevocably tainted with the Dark Side, and an uncomfortable reminder of what awaited the last days of the Old Republic. You might also think they'd be keen to get away from the scary, bottomless-pit motif that that Albert-Speer-influenced Senate interior has going on for it.

On the other, the buildings *are* left standing at the end of ROTJ, methinks, which beckons to have them used again (or turned into museums or whatever). And the full name of the Rebellion, not uttered in the films, is "The Alliance to Restore the Republic".

Tellingly, a key change in Luke's costume at the end of ROTJ is the appearance of a small grey triangle, eerily evoking the Imperial costumes of the OT and all that machine grey on Coruscant in the prequels (inc. the Jedi Council chambers and the Senate rotunda). Given the cyclical nature of history and human consciousness depicted in Star Wars, it might be fitting to have things back where they started. I'm reminded of a Kafka quotation: "Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy". Yet Star Wars is full of subversion and new awakenings, too. We'll just have to wait and see.

 

Oh you mean THOSE prequels. Yeah, er...erm...hmmm...

 

Star Tours 2 rides at the Disney parks have elements from the PT films added to them, which I would take as a good sign.

 

^This x100.

At Disney Parks SW weekends we see bit part actors from the PT or Voice actors from the clone wars.

 

There is no way they will go with the OT Lightsaber combats, so in that sense at least they will have no choice but to have PT style lightsaber duels. Also, you can bet your butt the saber-staff will make an appearance, so that's another homage to the PT.

McGregor will also likely potray a ghost version of Kenobi, while Hayden will likely portray Anakin in ghost form.

You can also bet at least one bad guy will be tattoed like Maul and wear PT style Sith robes, while there will likely also be a Vader homage (who was in both PT and OT)

 

I never thought about the lightsaber duels. There is no way they will stick to the OT style

 

I do hope we don't see anything too direct as a character-based shout-out to either trilogy. Locations, weapons and fighting styles are one thing-- I'd be perfectly happy to see PT lightsaber duels and OT dogfighting scenes, everybody's happy. But I really hope we don't see something that's too directly based on Maul or Vader. I rememeber in the build up to ROTS there were people insisting that General Grevious would be a prototype of Vader, right down to the same design for the mask. It'll be one thing to have conceptual ties back-- a ruthless cyborg like Vader or Grevious, the double-sided lightsaber like Maul-- but aside from that one would hope we'll see something new.

Then again-- if Lucas isn't writing the script (as he did for ESB and ROTJ) or heading up the design as a producer, then I'd just as soon not care about the movie period.

 

he's not doing either of those things.

 

Sounds like a good deal to me

 

It's Grievous, not "Grevious".

 

It's weird that we agree...

Oh, There it is.

I ask this with as much respect as it is possible. We are getting new Star Wars movies. Even those of us that are fans of the Holy Trilogy had live with that other trilogy for a few days before deciding that, even though they are garbage as cinema, they still worked as great movies for which to invent drinking games. What's with all the negativity over movies you haven't even seen?

 

I know. Which is why I don't really have anything other than a mild, morbid curiosity about the new movies. I don't really give a damn that they're trying to get the old cast to get back together. If you don't have the creator assuming at least the lowest level of involvement he has in the past, I'm not even prepared to call them Star Wars movies. They may be movies based on a story or notes from the creator, but if we're getting something that's completely visually executed by Abrams (who's demonstrated an inconsistent visual tone to say the least), I really don't see it as the same thing. It's like getting a Beatles cover band together at Abbey Road to record a new album.

 

That's a bit strong. Your shooting the man down and not giving him any chance of succeeding? Me personally, I'm the opposite. If Lucas was writing and directing these ones aswell. I'd be waiting for the DVDs. But that's just my humble opinion

 

I agree, JJ hasn't failed to make a good Star Wars movie yet in the last 15 years.

 

It's more a matter of because he's not the creator, and the creator has basically signed off of it entirely, that I don't really care if it "succeeds". I have as much interest in a Star Wars movie without Lucas as I do a Godfather movie without Coppola, or a Twin Peaks reunion without David Lynch. I'm reminded of how many people went crazy for the idea of Tron Legacy just because Jeff Bridges and Bruce Boxleitner returned. For me, it was sad that Steve Lisberger, the writer/director of the original film, wasn't involved beyond maybe supplying an initial premise way-back-when that the screenwriters didn't seem to pay much attention to. Maybe if these new Star Wars movies weren't carrying the episode numbers and were trying to start their own new series (Star Wars: Legacy or whatnot) it wouldn't be so bad. But here, it just seems a ltitle inauthentic.

 

"Mild, morbid curiosity" just about describes my expectations, JFP.

There's this insuperable feeling that when Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher make their long-heralded appearances, I'll be pining for the presence of Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor or, yes, even Natalie Portman.

 

Just remember, he was the one that sold to Disney. It wasn't a hostile take over. And one of the stipulations of the sale was that they don't stray too far from his vision in the outline of the story he had in the draft. So the script, screenplay and directing will all be done by people who know what their doing. Sounds like a good deal to me.