ST Episode VII Article in 'Entertainment Weekly' #1311

As Jett Lucas said though JJ and George have talked many times.

All an outline is is just that. An outline.

It's a guide to springboard off of. GL had an outline for each PT movie before he did it. If you compare the outlines he had before he did the movies and the ones you would have after they would be quite different versions of the same story but still have similarities.

 

You...you've got the movie?!? Details, man, details!!!!!!!11!!!!!!!!!!1

 

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2014/05/16/star-wars-vii-photo-set/

For those who loved the quality of the magazine article.

 

The OT was about Luke. This the ST, though. The ST should be about the next generation of the family. If Luke is all celibate Jedi, then it only makes sense that Han and Leia's children would represent the next gen. Han is obviously the father in this one, so it makes sense that he would feature prominently. Why Leia wouldn't feature just as prominently as the mother is the real question. Maybe it has something to do with the storyline,,,

 

She could be in government and not able to gallivant about as much.

 

Or maybe all this Han is a lead character talk is simply a load of bull. I still don't believe he will get more screen time than Luke and Leia.

 

Why are some of you so eager to go back to the senate and such places is beyond me. At least I know that's not the SW I'm getting from Abrams, so it's ok. But still, i don't get why some SW fans have become so strangely addicted to SW politics. Mr. Plinkett was right... SW is damaged beyond repair ! If there was no PT, no one would be thinking about plots involving heroes being in the government or whatever. Just writing it feels so un-StarWars-y !

LANDO
We're a small outpost and not
very self-sufficient. And I've
had supply problems of every kind.
I've had labor difficulties...
(catches Han
grinning at him)
What's so funny?

HAN
You. Listen to you - you sound
like a businessman, a responsible
leader. Who'd have thought that,
huh?

That's all the dull talk we get in ESB, and it serves a purpose : it goes to show Lando is not quite the guy Han knew before. See the difference with the PT ? The politics in the PT are nothing more than politics. They're a parallel plot altogether. One I never fail to skip when I watch the PT (which is rare).

 

My Thought Process has nothing to do with PT, Government seems like a pretty natural fit for Leia.

 

Oh, I'm sure Abrams is not depicting what could have realistically happened. He's going to depict whatever is entertaining to both older and younger fans. "Government" is not a natural fit for Star Wars.

 

Really I am pretty sure the OT was all about throwing off the chains of an oppressive government.

 

Yup. With action and adventures. Not through negociations, votes, and deliberations. Come on, buddy, you really want to be THIS guy ?

 

I'm with you Cheel...

 

Look saying I expect to see Leia in a government role does not mean I want Senate Debates taking center stage. I simply presenting a plausible reason why she be a lot less likely to be running around the field with next gen.

 

How about she's menopaused ? I think that's pretty self explanatory. Ahah seriously, she might very well be in some sort of government, but that will be a simple mention at best. Abrams knows he has to avoid that PT feeling, you know which one : if the movie fades to coruscant buildings, you know you're in for 10 minutes of dull, boring stuff, until the star wars stuff comes back again.

 

Yeah now there are some shows that can make such debates interesting but Star Wars no one really wants to see Senate Policy Discussions.

 

I think it is pretty hard to portray politics when you also have to show lightsaber battles, Jedi, space action, all that stuff. There is only limited screentime available and I for one rather see a romance subplot for example than SW senate action.

 

I don't think Han should be a deadbeat dad or anything but I seriously doubt he'd have taken the boring military job. I wouldn't have an issue whatsoever if Han and Leia were estranged. We'd get banter (always a plus between the two of them) and maybe a Han Solo whose sort of down on his luck.

 

If George Lucas were involved, I swear I wouldn't have the slightest interest in the ST. Thankfully he sold Star Wars a year ago. I can see a divorced couple. Again, look back on Abrams' filmography, and tell me where you see functional couples and/or families.

 

I get that, it's just…for myself, I've never been able to invest in Han's character -- I don't really care about him and honestly wouldn't mind if he were excluded from the OT. If you do that's totally cool! I have no problem with it, but I'm worried that this means Luke is going to be side-lined which would make me very unhappy. And, the thing is, Abrams seems to be primarily a Han fan, more than anything. And after some of his choices in Star Trek, he seems to have difficulty with listening to or giving consideration to people that have perspectives that differ from his own or that prefer different elements. But I won't get into that because I doubt anyone wants to hear me complain about it.

Suffice it to say, I just want Luke to be properly represented in Episode VII and I'm worried he'll be forgotten because Abrams will be too busy gushing over Han Solo.

 

I've never really heard about this gushing Han stuff about Abrams. I don't think this is going to become the Han Variety Hour, guest staring Luke Skywalker. I don't think having Luke slightly off center, perhaps in hiding, or whatever, diminishes him or his importance to the story at all. I mean...at the end of all this...this is all based on a few lines in an ET article.

And maybe that leaves a bit of opportunity for more depth to Han's character then to be revealed. I'm a fan of the Luke in exile, learning about the force, and the possibility that the Han & Co. have to search him out story idea. If Daisy is Han's daughter, and she's the main Skywalker heir, then her father might have some real importance to the story in his relationship to her.

I just thought of something: Let's say Han does in fact die in this story as some are theorizing. If he does sacrifice himself to save his daughter, that that leaves some strong motivation and development for Daisy's character. It would almost be a mirror/parallel to Darth Vader sacrificing himself to save Luke. That could be interesting. The ROTJ story leaves off with that sacrifice for Luke. EP VII picks up with another father/child sacrifice on the female side of things. Daisy's character then fully takes on continuing Skywalker destiny, that Luke left off.

 

Based on what Daisy's dad let slip about the level of physical training his daughter is doing to prepare for her role, I think its far more likely that we'd see Leia as a 'deadbeat mom' than Han. I see Leia throwing herself into her work to the point where she's barely home and Daisy's character being raised mostly by Han and her Uncle Chewie who will stress skills like piloting, marksmanship, Sabaac, the art of the con and how to throw and take a punch... You know, IMPORTANT stuff.

 

Don't misunderstand me, either. I'm not saying what I'm saying because I like Han Solo (I do, but that's not why I'm saying it). It could have been Jar Jar Binks who got together with Princess Leia in the OT and I'd be saying the same thing: Jar Jar is now the father of the next generation (someone will quote this out of context, I just know it ) Han is the father of the next generation by necessity, not by aesthetic choice. The Jedi Code being what it is, it's more likely the offspring comes from Leia (and hence Han) than Luke. So just by necessity and not by aesthetic choice do I think Han should be prominent. I completely understand the feeling that OT Han was unnecessary from a Saga perspective, but think about this: the prospect that he is now the hero's father would give him a new importance that he didn't have in the OT. So even from your point of view, you could be watching Han Solo from the OT be an "emerging character" (a phrase Lucas is fond of using) that doesn't reach his full potential until the ST, in a similar way that Obi-Wan, Mace Windu, and Yoda were emerging characters in TPM. Luke, I think, is such a significant character, that reverence for him will only grow by having less screen time, in much the same way that fear of Emperor Palpatine grew during ANH and TESB in direct portion to how much damage you saw his Empire do without actually seeing him. Then, by the time you saw him again in ROTJ, he was scarier than ever. I would love to see reverence for Luke grow to it's tipping point by Episode IX. I have every confidence that Luke will be properly represented in this Episode, with the knowledge that there are two more episodes after this to complete the story. But he has already fulfilled his primary hero's task. Perhaps Han hasn't yet. By the way, being single minded is a great quality in a film director. Having a single vision and being unwavering ensures that all aspects of production will conform to a unified whole. There is always the risk that the unified whole will not agree with other visions, but there's no escaping that in film. What happens when there is too much allowance for competing visions is that the film becomes confusing and not well-integrated. To see Abrams being uncompromising is a breathe of fresh air. It means he's being faithful to what drives him as an artist. Which is the best that you could ask of any artist.

 

Darth Articulate:

So are you saying that Leia never learned about the Force? Because if she is a Jedi, then wouldn't the rules apply to HER too?

Does Luke even know the Jedi Code?

Yoda seemed to think that the Old Order was doing some things wrong and that some things needed to be changed (like training infants, for example). I'm hoping that the "no attachments" rule is thrown out too. It seems like a pretty stupid rule to me. After all, it was because of the "attachment" of Luke to his father and his father to him, that the Emperor was brought down. I don't think it was love or attachment to something that caused the problems.It was the possessive, obsessive attachment of Anakin to Padme that caused the problem, in my opinion.

I see nothing wrong with Jedi getting married and having families, and I'm really hoping that we'll find that Luke did indeed marry and have a child when we see him again in the Sequel Trilogy.

 

No, it was Luke's attachment to his father and sister that almost lead him to the Dark Side (with Vader, it lead him right into his clutches in ESB and into Palpatine's clutches in ROTJ; with Leia, the same as ESB and it also caused Luke to rage when she was threatened by Vader in ROTJ). It was Luke's ability to let finally go of his attachments that lead to making a final stand against Palpatine, which also reignited Anakin Skywalker. Compassion and love =/= attachment. Not able to deal with losing things = attachment.