If you were in charge of continuity at Lucasfilm and could...

how about we DE-retcon or whatever term i mean to use, but R2 with the jets in Ep2, and even the way he dismounted the Jedi starfighter in ep3. that reeked. keep it simple, GL. Forcing Obi wan into that acme hair cut for Ep3. i am sure that obi wan has some fashion sense in that he'd potentially change his hairstyle in the 17+ years between films. that wasnt necessary.


EDIT: after reading Charlemagne's original post, i have come to the conclusion that the unclear nature of the force is nothing but a good thing for the GFFA. if it were absolute, then there'd be no need for Witches of Dathomir, sith, Fallanasi, Jensauri, etc. By it being vague, while we are automatically drawn to the views of the jedi(since the stories are written from their POV for the most part)it also gives life to the views of other groups. i like that. something as "all encompassing" as the force, shouldnt be narrowed to one point of view. TRUST, it will make for better storytelling in the future as we get older and require more than black and white hat wearing good/bad guys. smear the picture a little bit...make us think more.

 

BobaMatt: To assume that the neutral, omnipotent, third person narrator is lying to you is, in most cases, the ultimate anti-argument. It kills any basis for intelligent discussion of a text.

It's not an "anti-argument" at all. It's an argument based on what's known of the context of the text: George's movies and JRRT's "Red Book" texts have been both identified by their real-world creators as existing as records within the sub-creations in which they're set - which implies that the narrator and even editors are 'characters' in their own right.

I can understand that you might not like the idea, but I'd argue that you get a more intelligent analysis by considering the ramifications of this than you do otherwise.

And on Yoda's humanity - you people know what I meant!!

- The Imperial Ewok

 

I'm going to say that Lucas' statement was meant to be "cute," and Tolkien's was intended so that he could make use of all the linguistic and cultural history he created. I'm willing to bet neither author lost much sleep over the ramifications of centuries of retelling of their text as, in the end, their statement that the books/scripts themselves are in-universe documents has no impact on the way they were written, and the authors' processes did not differ, in this respect, from those of other authors.

In the end, its all a story, and assuming that the author is lying or wrong pulls the rug out from it all.

Jets? Retcon?

How do you think he and Threepio set that pile of dead Jawas aflame?

 

LOL, alright....you can have that one. man, now that you brought up dead jawas, was that the best way to dispose of them? imagine the rancid stench!!!!!

 

Yeah...the huge smoke plume would probably attract unwanted attention, too.

But anyone who's ever read my criticisms of Obi-Wan's plan to hide Luke knows I don't consider him a great planner.

Anyone, you also mentioned the "dismount" from the Eta-2 in Episode III. To me, that seemed like a function of the ship, rather than of astromech droids. Anakin undoes his belt, then pulls something, and Artoo gets fired out of his slot in the starfighter. Kind of like an emergency droid eject, or something.

 

Just a side not, your great great Granadpa would have lived in 1912 thats WWI not the war of 1812.

 

...

Just a side note: a person cannot be shot in combat by an 1812, mostly because 1812 is a year, not a soldier.

Also, according to LFL, 60 is the new 40, so...it's possible.

 

In terms of real world semantic terminology, we sometimes speak of "fate" and something being "written in the stars," or "in the cards," and yet this does not necessarily imply a sentience behind those forces. We do not mean to say that the stars or the cards "wanted" this thing. In the same way, saying it was the "will of the force" does not necessarily imply that the force wants anything the way a sentience does. It is simply a way of explaining, within the limits of human terminology, what is fundamentally impossible to imagine. It may fundamentally be a paradox, but this is the nature of the inexplicable. And, it seems to me, that is what the force is too: the inexplicable, impossible to fathom by the human mind. And yet it is the very fabric of the universe: "It surrounds us, and penetrates us, it bind the galaxy together." This is very abstract, difficult to put into words, so I feel my description here is totally inadequate, but there you go, right? That's the point. That's the beauty of leaving the force ambiguous. It reflects something we all feel and see in the real world, whether believers in a sentient deity or not. That is why Yoda's words in the Empire Strikes Back were so powerful. The force no longer is such a beautiful concept when we try to analyze or explain it, either as a science ("midchlorians,") or as a sentient religious concept. It inevitably alienates someone that way.

 

BobaMatt: I'm going to say that Lucas' statement was meant to be "cute," and Tolkien's was intended so that he could make use of all the linguistic and cultural history he created. I'm willing to bet neither author lost much sleep over the ramifications of centuries of retelling of their text as, in the end, their statement that the books/scripts themselves are in-universe documents has no impact on the way they were written, and the authors' processes did not differ, in this respect, from those of other authors.

How the blazes do you know that? There are many authors (and filmmakers) who work with just such an eye to context, subtext and construction.

On one level, I'm sure George's remark was meant to make people smile, but at the same time, the idea that the movies are 'told' from the droids' POV is as old as ANH pre-production, and George has a known interest in pseudodocumentary narratives - at one stage, he was meant to helm Apocalypse Now with a documentary crew, shooting on/near the front line Vietnam itself.

In the end, its all a story, and assuming that the author is lying or wrong pulls the rug out from it all.

How so? We still have the same story - it just has added layers of depth, meaning, and ambiguity...

QuinineVos: This is very abstract, difficult to put into words, so I feel my description here is totally inadequate, but there you go, right? That's the point. That's the beauty of leaving the force ambiguous.

Works for me!

- The Imperial Ewok

 

Fine. I'll concede that Tolkien wrote his stories cogniscent of the fact that the heroes were not actually all that heroic, and that Gandalf maybe didn't do everything he would write that he did, but rather those things were added later on as the story was retold. Saruman's intentions have been lost to history as well, and Tolkien knew this while he was writing it, but as the story has been passed down from generation to genration, he became a gnarled villain. It's also questionable as to whether or not all of the events in Khazad Dum occured as they are retold by Tolkien. Thus, it's actually very difficult to discuss the plots and goings on of Tolkien's work, as Tolkien totally intended his readers to view his books as unreliable tellings of events.

Also, the Original Trilogy is a Rebel Alliance propaganda film.



On second thought, let's agree to disagree. While author's often artfully and intentionally obfuscate facts or make use of unreliable narrators, there is nothing to suggest that we are intended to do this with Star Wars. The Potentium view of the Force is being actively demonized as Luke turns away from it and Jacen causes harm. While the Jedi don't know everything, they know there is a dark side and a light side. How do we know this? Because we're being beaten over the head with it.

 

i think that while we all debate, and pass opinions and thoughts back and forth (whether we choose sides or not) is a healthy thing and makes these forums that much better. i wanna know how everyone else views things. Given that GL IS the writer and originator, we inevitably have to go with his words as "gospel", so to speak, but that, IMHO, hampers our ability to imagine any further than his story tells us to go. especially with consideration to an entity such as the force. i'd be willing to bet that for every poster in here, there's a different view of spirituality, the existence of God and within that, how we choose to view Him. the force, IMHO, is no different. "Because George said it" wont explain that away. he, maybe unknowingly, did away with that once he came up with the concept of the force. it's entirely too vast, all encompassing and beyond comprehension for any singular group or entity to claim that their belief system is the only correct one. hence, i hope he never tries to definitively answer the questions about the force.

 

Star Wars: Episode VII: The Rashomon Crisis

 

We're given the "because George said it," which is basically:

1) Vast energy field created by all living things.
2) It has a light side and a dark side.
3) It apparently seems to have some sort of sentience, kind of.
4) It speaks to us through our midichlorians. People with enough midichlorians can become Jedi.

Then there's all these other Force traditions in the EU. The beauty of the Jedi is that all of those other traditions are studied, considered, and in some instances incorporated. Chalactan adepts, Korun bonding, the studies of the Whills...

The Jedi are not exclusionary. Even within their own ranks there seems to be some philosophical dissent. (To serve the Republic or not? To pay more mind to the future or to the present?) All is studied, all is mulled over. In the end, we only know of two excommunicated heresies: the followers of the dark side expelled during the great schism, and the Potentium.

 

I hope I'm not too late to chime in, here - but here it goes....



I agree with Thrawn McEwok.



At least, to a degree. While I don't subsrcibe to the notion that the "Jedi Dualism" is, merely, an instrument for instruction - rather, an actual fundamental mechanic of the GFFA that the Jedi have done there best to adhere to - I do, however, agree that SW is a story that is best presented ambiguously. Watching the characters (not) think things through, try and fix things, and stumble and fumble over themselves in the process is, in a morbidly humorous way, wonderful storytelling.

I'm worried, really, that the "Only a Sith deals in absolutes." is being, largely, taken comepletely out of context within regards to Anakin's story and how it's applied to the mechanics and didactics of the GFFA. GL said himself that there are no absolutes in SW - well, actually, that was more in reference to our life, which I think points to the fact the GFFA carries with it a stronger sense of connecting to real life than previously believed - but he also says "...at least, symbolically."

Sure there are absolutes; however, outside of the Source material, I see no reason why in-universe the characters have to be aware of them.

*Tenses-up nervously*

"A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over." (Note: This wasn't meant as a slight toward you, McEwok, rather, I don't think I've properly communicated... anything.)

 

BobaMatt Fine. I'll concede that Tolkien wrote his stories cogniscent of the fact that the heroes were not actually all that heroic, and that Gandalf maybe didn't do everything he would write that he did, but rather those things were added later on as the story was retold. Saruman's intentions have been lost to history as well, and Tolkien knew this while he was writing it, but as the story has been passed down from generation to genration, he became a gnarled villain. It's also questionable as to whether or not all of the events in Khazad Dum occured as they are retold by Tolkien. Thus, it's actually very difficult to discuss the plots and goings on of Tolkien's work, as Tolkien totally intended his readers to view his books as unreliable tellings of events.

Also, the Original Trilogy is a Rebel Alliance propaganda film.



Is sarcasm your only weapon?

Me? I have an entire battery of the real-world models JRRT was basing the Red Book on - it's national literature, folks, not a bloody memoir...

And I have a rather curious piece of camerawork in ANH that's directly - and famously - quoting a Nazi propaganda film. Coupled with the little details I mentioned earlier about Artoo, I don't think it's unreasonable to think that maybe we're meant to be alert and alive here, and question the ostensible values of the film maybe just a little...

On second thought, let's agree to disagree. While author's often artfully and intentionally obfuscate facts or make use of unreliable narrators, there is nothing to suggest that we are intended to do this with Star Wars. The Potentium view of the Force is being actively demonized as Luke turns away from it and Jacen causes harm. While the Jedi don't know everything, they know there is a dark side and a light side. How do we know this? Because we're being beaten over the head with it.

The term "light side" isn't even G-canon.

There are things people do that are mistakes. But then again, just because Jacen's an idiot, doesn't mean classic Jedi dualism - which is, frankly, still the foundation of his worldview - is right either...

We're given the "because George said it," which is basically:

1) Vast energy field created by all living things.
2) It has a light side and a dark side.
3) It apparently seems to have some sort of sentience, kind of.
4) It speaks to us through our midichlorians. People with enough midichlorians can become Jedi.

I wasnt't aware that on-screen dialogue was necessarily automatic evidence for authorial intent...

Then there's all these other Force traditions in the EU. The beauty of the Jedi is that all of those other traditions are studied, considered, and in some instances incorporated. Chalactan adepts, Korun bonding, the studies of the Whills...

Isn't that arrogant, though? Can we see the Jedi working like a metaphysical virus, turning others into carriers for their beliefs...?

Blithe: I hope I'm not too late to chime in, here - but here it goes....



I agree with Thrawn McEwok.

Oh...? Hah!

At least, to a degree. While I don't subsrcibe to the notion that the "Jedi Dualism" is, merely, an instrument for instruction - rather, an actual fundamental mechanic of the GFFA that the Jedi have done there best to adhere to - I do, however, agree that SW is a story that is best presented ambiguously. Watching the characters (not) think things through, try and fix things, and stumble and fumble over themselves in the process is, in a morbidly humorous way, wonderful storytelling.

*nods* We can agree to disagre here, inasmuch as we do... I mean, I think that "anger, fear and aggression" are "anger, fear and aggression", and thus it makes a lot of sense for the Jedi to eschew them - they're discouraging naive idiots from exploring the complexities of the Force...

They leave that for the senior Masters to discover - not least through training those pesky kids.

 

He based the story on real world models, but he crafted those models into a story.

Clearly I'm not going to persuade you that you're reading far too much into it, that you're giving George Lucas too much credit for things he wasn't really intending...so yeah.

Do you do this with every novel? With every movie? I mean there are places where it's appropriate, of course...but...

Unless there's some reason to believe not, then Lucas' mythologically inspired ancient wise-man is speaking truth.

You could, I guess. What the Jedi do is use other peoples' principles, not infect them with their own. They learn from other faiths, use what they learn, see other Force-faiths as windows to the greater truth. Do you see Hindus as a virus?

 

ThrawnMcEwok:

The term "light side" isn't even G-canon.

George's interviews count as G-level canon, no?

There are things people do that are mistakes. But then again, just because Jacen's an idiot, doesn't mean classic Jedi dualism - which is, frankly, still the foundation of his worldview - is right either...

It is? Oh - do tell!

I wasnt't aware that on-screen dialogue was necessarily automatic evidence for authorial intent...

The same thing, again, is replicated in multiple interviews. You've probably seen them already yourself, but if not, I'd be happy to post them, otherwise.

*nods* We can agree to disagre here, inasmuch as we do... I mean, I think that "anger, fear and aggression" are "anger, fear and aggression", and thus it makes a lot of sense for the Jedi to eschew them - they're discouraging naive idiots from exploring the complexities of the Force...

They leave that for the senior Masters to discover - not least through training those pesky kids.

"Jedi students should concentrate on learning how to use the Force, and leave careful exploration to the Jedi Masters." - POTJSB, pg. 35 [emphasis mine]



Heh. In understanding "Only Sith deal in absolutes", I think we ought to note two things: (1.) Obi-Wan is angry when he says it; (2.) he then proceeds to utterly bloody well dismantle Darth Vader.

Not to mention that Obi-Wan is a hibitual liar, too.

And he walks away... as a Jedi Knight.

Does he? In a sense, yes, I suppose he is, or rather, was a Jedi Knight - but of what we see of him from the end of Mustafar, to Tatooine, and to his training of Luke, Owen's own, personal assessment seems to make a lot more sense, now; "That was just a crazy old man."

In retrospect, he left Mustafar just the same broken shell of a man that Vader was - only without the physical injuries . . .

No - you've done well. Worthy of a Golden Ewok?!

 

Rashomon itself based on a classic Western.

 

It's not the other way around? Cuz I know The Magnificent Seven is based on The Seven Samurai...

 

No, it's not.

 

Cool. Interesting to see that there's this exchange of ideas between Kurosawa and Westerns. What's the movie Roshomon's based on called?

 

I think it's The Searchers, but I'm probably wrong.

 

Nah, but The Searchers influenced Star Wars a bit.

 

I have one. Yojimbo (which inspired A Fistful of Dollars) was inspired by Red Harvest.

 

Yojumbo was awesome.

How's this for a SW reference: Yojimbo was inspired by Red Harvest. The opposite of red is blue. Blue Harvest was the working title used for Return of the Jedi to keep people away from the set.

Kurosawa can't keep away from Star Wars.