Discussion in 'Star Wars Saga In-Depth' started by Darth_Nub, May 23, 2013.
But why would Vader assume Ben to be limited to the capabilities of the dark side?
While that is a good point, why do you assume Vader knew the Jedi were capable of retaining their identity? I don't see anything in the movies that would have clued him in on this.
I don't, especially in light of the PT.
I generally agree with the bit in bold , but there's a whole lot more to the story than that . even Han's rescue wasn't sure , Lucas was prepared to make the film without him .
the Other being a new character , Han being killed , the emperor not getting killed until the last episode , these alone are huge differences to what might have been . And there's more - I think the tone of the film changed because Lucas wanted to wrap it all up , ROJ would not have had such a complete / final- trumphant ending if Lucas had continued with his plan to make 9 movies .
in summary I think things changed between '79 - '81 . which is fine , but I really don't agree that the ROJ we got is basically the same as it was intended in '79.
The Emperor in whichever draft I was referring to there was extremely arrogant regarding his own abilities and those of the dark side, while Ben knows what the Netherworld can do and tells him so. I believe he points out that there was no way to touch the Netherworld through the dark side. This sounds to me rather like "I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine." The Prequels-as-produced are irrelevant here because I'm only talking about this as a possible explanation come up with during the making of ROTJ. Obviously that doesn't appear in the final film. However, it is possible that the explanation was one that held over and was operating in the background, even during the making of the prequels. After all, we don't see any dark siders ghost. It could also be a matter of definitions; Ben and Yoda might consider ghosting to be 'more powerful' because it allows them access to the universe that is unique and interesting. The Emperor might not consider it more powerful because it may or may not allow him more physical prowess (though Yoda and Ben do block some of his lightning from the netherworld). But that's getting a bit off topic.
They thought they might have to make the movie without Han, but found out pretty early on (I believe) that he'd be back. And even if he wasn't back, the thrust of the story regarding Luke, Vader, and the Emperor could be almost the same regardless (Han doesn't play a large role in that, and I think that was the major angle of the story Lucas was thinking about while planning).
We don't know if the Other was going to be a new character at any point after Brackett's draft. We have basically none of the thinking that went into that. The quotes that are sometimes used to support the idea that the Other was an ST setup could easily refer to Luke or someone else. And apparently Han wasn't really ever planned to be killed - Lucas didn't like the idea of killing off main characters. Harrison Ford lobbied for Han to be killed, but he didn't even know at the time that the love story between Han and Leia was going work the way it did.
As for the Emperor... I think that once Lucas decided on a Trilogy of Trilogies, the Emperor was going to go at the end of the middle trilogy. There is that one quote from MoROTJ where he says that nothing really continued from the middle trilogy to "the next" one (though it is possible he meant the next one he'd be doing, meaning the prequels). It seems to me that when there were going to be twelve films, many of them would follow the Adventures of Luke Skywalker and the Emperor would be deposed in the last one. But once the Trilogy of Trilogies took hold, the Sequels were probably imagined to be post-Imperial. Lucas described that to Denise Worrell in 1982 or 1983. By that time, he was thinking that the Sequels would focus on Luke, which would go right along with the quote (from 1980? 81?) that said that the Sequels would focus on "the character who survives Star Wars III and his adventures" (at the time, Lucas was playing up the showdown between Luke and Vader, how only one would survive, wasn't he?).
It does seem possible (I just couldn't remember exactly the context in which you mentioned it before, and was also pretty tired as I wrote that). The bits in the ROTJ scripts about 'allies' in the netherworld (the old Jedi who survived) seem suggestive. Perhaps this, as I said, could have had some tie to the Other at some point. That too is total speculation, but that and The Sister seem like possible places the story could have gone. They are both mentioned in the same scene on Dagobah, very close together, in Brackett's ESB. And the ROTJ scripts would only seem to enhance the possibility that Jedi on the other side could still effect changes to the real world.
(Though it is also possible that by 'another,' Yoda meant Vader/Anakin - the idea of him being the one to kill the Emperor seems like one that Lucas had very early in ROTJ's development - maybe even before that?)
That's been brought up now & then, but if that was what GL meant, he wouldn't have bothered making Leia the Other or even Luke's sister at all. Which is a shame, because I think it works much better.
Yoda & Obi-Wan's dialogue in ESB makes more sense:
Perhaps Obi-Wan lost all faith in Anakin a long time ago, whereas Yoda still has some hope. If, on the other hand, Leia is the Other, did Obi-Wan just happen to forget?
There's also another contradiction with Leia as the Other - Yoda & Obi-Wan are content to let Leia possibly die at Cloud City, and would prefer Luke simply remains on Dagobah & finishes his training. When Luke leaves, he's in jeopardy, but "there is another". I can't imagine Yoda's referring to someone under Imperial arrest and in the custody of one Darth Vader.
Lol, that's the one thing that bothers me about Leia as the Other.
I find the whole Leia as the Other, as well as sister, thing almost comes together 100% successfully. I mean, it fits well enough, but it's a sketchy fit. Like an octagonal peg in a round hole.
I have to say, one person who definitely doesn't come out of this book looking good is Alex Guinness. I've generally felt people take too harsh a tone about his feelings towards SW, but stuff like this
really isn't to his credit.
...How did I miss that until now?
I wonder, was the recently released footage actually unearthed, or was Lucasfilm just throwing us a bone?
You have to understand that Guinness was used to the types of films that he had been making up to that point. Films like "Bridge On The River Kwai", "Oliver Twist" and "Murder By Death" were much different from the OT. So feeling bored is probably not unheard of and with the cast, well, these were mostly new and young actors. People he would have a hard time connecting with due to the generation gap. I'd wager he got along with Hamill because he probably did a bit of butt kissing and that would make things easier.
It seems that it was legitimately found by someone who was a huge fan. There's an interview of the guy by his local station in Charlottesvill, VA. Apparently he's some British dude living in Virginia!
Rinzler saying Lucas made Richard Marquand shoot every scene from multiple cameras so he could have more choices in the editing seems correct. The actual scene with Yoda in ROTJ is only about five minutes but there are apparently 30 minutes of footage from different angles on that laserdisc! Marquand was definitely doing the directing, and there's a nice touch I wish had made it to the film which was Luke holding Yoda's hand as he died.
You're talking about the Editdroid disc, I think they meant the stuff on the Making of _________ eBooks.
A question to those that have read the book.
Does the book say when Shaw was cast, was that before or after Lucas decided to have his ghost appear at the end?
Why was Shaw cast, he was older than Alec Guinness, what age did Lucas have in mind for Anakin?
When was it decided to have Anakin as the ghost, was that never really filmed and why?
Thank you in advance.
The script calls him an "elderly man" - at least to Luke's eyes, when he's unmasked. In the earlier version of the script where the ghosts return as flesh and blood, he's called an "old man": Luke turns to see an old man emerge from the darkness of the forest. ( Rinzler, p33 )
Kasdan: Is he going to have regular eyes?
Lucas: Well maybe one. "I want to see you without the aid of this machine. I want to reject the machine." When we take off his mask, we will change his voice to a much weaker version of the same thing. It will be much older.
Marquand: He's as old as Alec, isn't he.
Lucas: He's not as old as Alec.
Marquand: But visually.
Lucas: Visually, he is close. (Rinzler, p76)
Sebastian Shaw was initially cast to play unmasked Vader only. That was because the shooting script had only Ben and Yoda appear as ghosts at the end of the film, but not Anakin. However, Howard Kazanjian suggested to Lucas that having the redeemed Anakin appear might be a good idea. Lucas liked the suggestion and called Shaw back for additional shots as Anakin.
As Arawn_Fenn pointed out, however, early script drafts by Lucas had Anakin resurrected (in the flesh) at the end of the film, and there he is described as "an old man."
...which should dispel the notion that Shaw's casting - in terms of age - was arbitrary, anomalous, etc.
So Shaw was cast because Anakin was intended to be old. Interesting.
It would seem that at that time Lucas thought Anakin would be in his 40's when he turned .
But that's not compatible with "a young Jedi named Darth Vader", or with "when I left you I was but the learner...". It's not compatible with the "original Vader" who was a young man who turned to evil. Basically, Lucas favored the notion of the "original Father", who was Obi-Wan's (slightly younger) friend, perhaps because he wanted a tired, scarred, sad man under the mask (the deconstruction of the monster) and that seemed to work better with an older Vader.
But it IS contradictory to what it's said about Vader in episode IV.
It does feel that way but here are two other possibilities for harmonization (dunno if GL even considered anything like this:
1. Older people sometimes refer to proportionally younger people as young. Ben in his sixties may consider a 30s or 40s Anakin as "young."
2. "A young Jedi named Darth Vader..." Maybe 40 is young for a Jedi Knight.
Again I have no idea if these kind of ideas flitted through GL's mind; just that they could be used to harmonize an older Anakin with the "young Jedi" comment.
But then.... so is Vader as father. Full stop. As you have already pointed out; "a young Jedi named Darth Vader"
Well, of course, but that's the whole point of the plot twist: Obi-Wan didn't tell Luke the truth... or he told the truth from a certain point of view. The only way to justify Vader as a father in the context of what Obi-Wan said was to give a metaphorical meaning to the idea of "Vader killed Luke's father". You could say that "Gollum betrayed and murdered Smeagol" and it does sort of work, not literally, but metaphorically.
But the thing is, there has to be some truth to it: Vader was "a young Jedi" who was a pupil of Obi-Wan, and that makes Luke's father "a young Jedi" who was Obi-Wan's pupil, therefore, significantly younger than him. (Obi-Wan distorted the truth with a metaphorical version of what happened, but didn't just say whatever he wanted). Even more importantly, during the duel, Vader refers to Obi-Wan as an "old man" and says that he was an aprentice when he left Obi.
The only way to make all that compatible is to have Luke's father Obi-Wan's young pupil who fell from grace. Never in the movies is stated that Luke's father was Obi-Wan's age (only perhaps suggested) and I think no fan ever believed that Anakin turned to the Dark Side when he was 40-ish before the PT.
"I was once a Jedi Knight, the same as your father" hints that Luke's father had at least reached Jedi Knight status.