ST Integration of the Sequel Trilogy into Pre-Existing Ring Structure: Can It be Done?

Slightly off-topic for this thread but I have been thinking some more about the character of Finn and, in particular, the rumour that he is pursued by a chrome-clad stormtrooper. I started wondering "Why chrome?" since, in the original films, the stark black and white armour of the stormtroopers symbolised their black and white worldview and the cold, inorganic world they inahbited whilst their helmets dehumanised them. They were no longer individuals but an army, obeying orders unthinkingly. I can only think of two reasons why we might now have a chrome-plated stormtrooper if this rumour is true. The first reason is that polished chrome reflects like a mirror. Perhaps it shows to Finn that he is just like his pursuer or that the rebels in general have become just like the imperials or perhaps Finn would have been like that had he not just renounced the army and deserted. We see him without his helmet in the trailer so perhaps that is the first act of him reclaiming his individuality and humanity.

The second possibility for choosing chrome is a little vague in my mind at this stage but it relates to 1950s and 1960s American automobiles, which were known for their extravagant chrome trimmings. Many people noted that Abrams' reimagined Enterprise from the 2009 Star Trek had bulbous nacelles that were reminiscent of classic American automobiles and we see the old car (a Thunderbird?) in the literal cliffhanger sequence of that film. Perhaps the shiny chrome of the stormtrooper somehow reflects the optimism and hope of that era of American life and maybe somehow hearks back to Lucas' early rose-tinted view of the 1950s, American Graffiti.

 

... Furthermore, we know Finn and Rey both have scenes on a desert world (probably Tattooine) and we know in Star Wars that desert worlds have traditionally symbolised barrenness of the soul and a place from which major characters set out on their journeys.

Here are some quotes on water symbolism in the films from the article:

I wonder how this relates to 7. We see X-Wings flying over water, disrupting it.Thus the machines of war are disturbing nature and leading to more turbulence, seen literally in the way the water is churned up.

A
lso, it is possible that Luke may be residing on Skelling Michael, an island being a place where water and land meet in a kind of balance. If this were mirroring the middle episode of a trilogy instead of the first, one could suspect that the natural island of Skellig Michael was in contrast to the artificial island of the amoral cloners. Furtherm ore, as Skellig Mi chael was a Celtic monastery perhaps its real-life associations with emditation and the Celtic Christian harmonisation with nature will play some role or add symbolic depth to the story. Hence, we also probably travel from a barren desert world over the course of the new film and end up on an island where water and land meet in a kind of balance or tense harmony, islands and rivers being especially significant to pre-Christian Druidic Celtic beliefs as well as "thin places" where the spiritual and natural worlds coverged.

 

Very insightful all around on this thread. Golf clap...

 

I think Padme's mindset/motives are implicit. At the start of the movie she is willing to place the liberty/protection of Naboo in the hands of Republic democracy and justice. When she's in the senate, influenced by Palpatine, she sees first hand that the democractic process/system is failing... and is failing her people. She takes action into her own hands. What at first seemed like a lost cause, becomes victory (albeit short) when she manages to unite with the Gungan's to repel the Trade Federation.

 

I partially agree that the PT lacked some continuity... but I think that’s squarely borne out of TPM being set circa 10 years before the events of AOTC and ROTS. To all intents and purposes, Anakin, Obi-Wan and Padme are different characters in TPM, primarily because of the time gap. And I think the gap between Episodes I and II was actually counter productive... especially in terms of Anakin’s role (given he had to be played by two actors), and the inevitable delay in establishing the dynamic between Anakin and Obi-Wan (which only happens from AOTC onwards).

However, in terms of following a template and dynamic, the PT is very consistent with the OT i.e. 3 lead protagonists (the main one being a Skywalker) with one over arching antagonist (Vader/Palpatine), with several sub villains who invariably get defeated e.g. Tarkin, Dooku, Jabba and Maul etc. We never get one consistent rebel leader in the OT right? They come and go like they’re going out of fashion. Lando only comes into play in TESB and where did Lobot go? Etc. etc. This is something common to both sets of films.

Also, Palpatine’s alter-ego was kept a mystery until the last film? Not sure what you mean there??? In terms of Padme being a Queen in TPM and a senator in AOTC and ROTS. I don’t think this was written to give relevance to Leia’s role in the OT, her position came from that of her step parents, but rather it was a homage to The Hidden Fortress. I don’t think Padme changing careers has been highlighted before as being a negative thing. I think that’s just a bit nit-picky.

 

Oh I ABSOLUTELY believe that Padme going from queen to senator was meant to be a "homage" to Leia. Considering how much Lucas was pulling imagery/situations from ESB (or ripping off less than effectively, depending on who you ask) and using them in AOTC, I definitely believe that this was merely another example of that.

 

SW using rhymes in their trilogies? Whhhaaaaa?

 

Can It be Done?

it will join the trilogies or die.

 

No Palpatine's alter-ego wasn't kept a mystery from the audience, we all knew who Darth Sidious was from TPM. The only uncertainty was whether or not Palps would be a clone or something else prior to the movies release. The character could have been hidden better, with Darth Maul being the only face of the Sith that we see until much later. This would have given us a huge reveal moment

In the OT we got to know the main Protagonists ( Luke, Leia, Han, Chewey, R2D2, C3PO and even Obi-Wan ) and the main Antagonist ( Darth Vader ) across all 3 films. While some support characters were Introduced and/or removed at various stages, the central Characters of the trilogy were there from beginning to the end. I felt that was something the PT badly missed.

I do think Padme's role was written to give a deeper substance to Leia's role, perhaps so it couldn't be said that Leia was merely an adopted Princess.
The Count Dooku character was Introduced the audience to show it was possible for a Jedi knight to fall to the darkside, something I didn't think was necessary.

 

Another "rhyme" that the article doesn't metion regarding Palpatine is that his alter ego as the kindly old man is "unmasked" in ROTS to reveal an evil visage. In ROTJ, Vader's evil/frightening mask is lifted off and underneath we see a kindly looking old man, subverting our expectations of what this apparent epitome of evil will look like.

Just one more point relating to my discussion of Finn above: I am wondering, if indeed he is a stormtrooper who defects, whether or not the film might have some degree of political allegory. Not too get too political in this thread but that rarest of things, a soldier who grows a conscience, has received considerable attention in recent times given the Manning and Snowden cases. I don't expect this film to be a full-on political satire but I wonder if there will be allusions to it, especially given that Abrams' Star Trek into Darkness was also very much a political commentary about post-September 11th America (arguably not a very successful one, though.)

On the other hand, if he is a spy who has infiltrated the Empire, maybe he is a Bothan...

i think it is important to think of the three major villains who appear prior to Vader as all being preludes to his character: we have the vicious, aggressive swordsman in Maul, the cunning fallen Jedi in Dooku and the cyborg (who even wheezes!) in Grievous. Vader is a composite of all of these and thus he is a greater underling for Palpatine to have than anyone who has gone before him.

 

I think you're right Echo, there will be common themes and some characters will have some of the same traits of ones we've seen before in the series. That's not a stretch to say that at all, in my opinion.

Hopefully it doesn't get too political, though. Allusions are fine, but I don't want to be able to guess the political leanings of the story/script writers while watching the movie heh

 

I don't think it missed it in the least.

Anakin, Padme, and Obi-Wan are there across all 3 films as well as the true antagonist that is Sidious. We got to know each of the 3 main heroes and in ways far stronger and more revealing for Padme and Obi-Wan than Leia or Han.

Leia and Han really have very little effect on Luke as a character. Most of what goes between them is actually off-screen and imagined in the minds of the viewers. They really spend very little time together in the movies and Leia and Han are mostly on their own story track with only crosses at points with Luke. They are there to move Luke around but his real story has almost nothing to do with them. What real interaction do they have with Obi-Wan, Vader, Yoda and the Emperor? Padme and Obi-Wan are central to Anakin's story. They are on the fringe of his story in TPM but they are all there at the end of ROTS. Leia and Han are on the fringe of Luke's story in ROTJ.

The circle is complete as far as it concerns Anakin/Vader.

Since JJ is only doing the one film and as more episodes are made it will get further and further away from that auteur vision of Lucas' then it will simply be something else.

It seems that TFA will be along the lines of ANH (and therefore ROTS) in some or many ways but also like TPM and ROTJ as well as rings within rings. Now we hear of Leia addressing a council of Hutts which mirrors Luke in ROTJ with Jabba and the Jedi with Boss Nass.

 

.[/quote]



The PT story is centered on Anakin Skywalker , a character we see 2 different actors portray in the PT. Jake Lloyd plays a very young and likeable character in TPM, while we get a older and very different character potrayed by Hayden in the latter two. My point is that we don't even see continuity in the leading role of the PT.

And we have a different Sith Lord wielding a Lightsaber in every single movie in the PT
TPM - Darth Maul
AOTC - Darth Tyrannus
ROTS - Darth Sidious and new recruit Darth Vader.

While Darth Sidious may be the true antagonist of the PT, he is really only seen in a political role in TPM and AOTC.

 

I see it no problem. He still is that little boy in many ways and Shmi and Padme are the obvious links to that.

This is part of the basic discontinuity that comes from having Anakin being Obi-Wan's friend and Vader a student as referenced in ANH.

Exactly. That is the point. Maul fails and Siduous is using Dooku as a placeholder until he can get Anakin who he really covets.

He's the true antagonist of the entire saga.

The PT is his defense for the OT so he left it open for others to figure it out.

 

That seems, of course, to be the underlying fear for many people. I am not sure I would quite class Lucas as an auteur film-making. Maybe for the prequels, which seem, by all accounts, to have been much less collaborative efforts and in which he went against studio expectations by starting out with Vader as a young boy.

Good point about parallels if the "Hutts" rumour is true.

 

No, always.

Look at his original OT THX 1138, American Graffitti and Star Wars. It's his story. He is those characters. He is Luke and Anakin. In most ways Anakin is far more him than Luke ever was.

Those accounts are by people who despise the prequels and look for any reason to undermine them. If anything the prequels were far more collaborative efforts than the OT by far. The sheer number of people that worked on the films meant that he had to rely on the people around him far more than the OT.

The PT despisers are a funny lot. If they hate the movies so much then how can they know anything about the way the films were made? They show over and over again that they don't. If they hate them so much why do they watch them over and over again and still not get the obvious flow of the films nevermind the obvious?

 

The PT is his defense for the OT so he left it open for others to figure it out.[/quote]

Outside of the Star wars fan circuit, the PT movies were not considered great by most movie fans. Many people were Intrigued and wanted to see the creation of Screen Icon Darth Vader, but they will also say the actual PT trilogy didn't stand up well to the OT.
This is understandable, as the PT was a way for GL to tell the back story of the OT. It wasn't written as an original adventure trilogy, It was written as a back-story in which everything must tie in with the OT by the end of the 3rd movie.

Darth Sidious didn't have the same "Bad guy" appeal that Darth Vader emitted in the OT, Sidious was more of a manipulator and didn't have that same screen presence as Vader. Darth Maul was superb, and I personally would have kept him for all 3 movies and never Introduced the Count Dooku character at all. Darth Maul was a strong enough character to carry the "Bad guy" mantle of the PT, and I think it would have been a superior trilogy had he survived, killed a few Jedi before finally losing to Anakin.

 

No, what I meant was that they were not auteur films in that, going by the generally accepted account, Lucas' wife had quite a lot of input into the script of ANH and he closely collaborated with Kasdan on both ESB and ROTJ. Although Lucas was largely an indie film-maker at heart and had trouble convincing studio people about producing ANH at first, ultimately, he was working in the studio system, so there were undoubtedly other pressures on him as well.

From the accounts I have heard, Lucas had near total creative control over the PT with very little collaborative input from others in terms of script writing, editing and direction (obviously he had all kinds of creative types coming up with wardrobes, ship designs and so forth) so it is much closer to being his vision if these accounts are true.

To me, though, "auteur" generally means total control over everything, so Jean-Luc Godard going out with two actors, a handheld camera and an old Renault to make a film and writing dialogue on the fly is closer to the spirit of it than a big Hollywood effort but it depends on one's definition and how much control Lucas had. I could definitely not say the OT was solely his vision though. The PT may be.

 

Just finished the ring theory and wow. An extremely worthwhile essay. Look forward to seeing if the notions incorporate into the sequel trilogy too.

 

Just read through the Ring Theory essay. Worth the read
This is a big question for the Sequel Trilogy. Did Lucas leave a blueprint for continuing the ring? Will Abrams/Kasdan continue it?

 

It's an interesting read, to be sure.

But it doesn't change the fact that complexity does not necessarily equal quality, IMO.

 

No, but it does lend some understanding to one aspect of the PT that some really enjoy. It doesn't work for everybody (and some of it is a bit of a stretch) but at least it shows that there is something there that fans of all six movies find worthwhile.

I think the teasers show that JJ has an eye to some of the mirroring, rhyming, parallaxing, whatever you want to call it if not full-on ring structure.

The troopers in formation turning toward the camera, the First Order banner being circles and a hexagon, Rey looking upset on a blue sky background, BB peering around a corner, Luke touching Artoo's dome in affection...the visual language of the previous films seems to be all over the second teaser.

 

I think it will be difficult to fit a third trilogy into the existing ring theory, as it revolves around the crux being ROTS/ANH, which won't be the case anymore. Perhaps the ST will recontextualize and reframe the previous trilogies in a new light that requires a new overall structure.

I could see TFA being a sort of amalgamation of all three films in the OT, paying homage to the imagery and situations in those films as one last homage before the ST goes off into brand new territory with VIII and IX.

 

whether or not the ring theory was followed on purpose for the 6 movies, its true, and abrams i would hope read it or at least figu, red it out on his own. they do need to tie together.
as a fan of the OT, the viewer would notice the ring theory whether they liked the PT or not and a new sequel without following it will make the new sequel seem out of whack with the first 6