PT Original George Lucas's prequel outline revealed

No, no, no, no, no!!!
If that must be done, then the OT is in DIRE need of a remake!!!!

But rather, lets not touch Lucas' beautiful Saga just because we don't like a few elements!

 

This is the way the story is written now, but it needn't be the only way the story operates. For example, if the Clone Wars take place at the beginning of the narrative (or closer to the beginning) they might simply be a series of wars that take place in the galaxy and which devastate the Republic, giving Anakin some traumatic experiences as a participant, which then fuel his political leanings when Palpatine starts to come to power shortly thereafter. The Wars are manipulated by Palpatine in the current conception, but in principle, if one is retelling the story, he might just take advantage of their having happened anyway. This kind of retelling would probably necessitate a change in the dynamics and participants of the Wars, but then, we are talking about rewriting here. And anyway, I'm not sure Lucas knew what the Clone Wars would be until relatively late in the process. In some early versions of ESB, Lando was a clone, from a planet of clones, which had been damaged in the Wars. The point being, this is a plot point that seems like it was in motion for awhile.

 

The prequels are perfect as they are. That 1981. outline is just an outline, it evolved through time and it became better, perfect.

I'll paraphrase something one wise man said:

"There are many parts of the movies that I'm not proud of... there were loose threads... untidy parts that I would like to remove. But when I pulled on one of those threads... it had unraveled the tapestry of the saga."

 

I get that, but I think without that aspect -- Palpatine essentially manufacturing the war -- the story would lose a lot of its thematic beauty and contrast with the OT. One of the reasons, I would argue, that the OT and PT work well is that the counterpoint and counterbalance each other. The Rebellion is a group of oppressed citizens rallying together and risking their lives to throw off the mantle of oppression. Theirs was a legitimate struggle against an authoritarian force. The Clone Wars, though, was a sham, motivated by greedy corporations and ambitious politicians. It sent billions of faceless and easily replaceable men to their deaths while the population stayed behind in comfort. That the Jedi were complicit in this underlies their weaknesses. Because great nations don't fall due to exterior pressures alone. They have internal weakness as well. The Jedi were not overwhelmed by sheer force but instead were destroyed, in part, by their own failings.

It's a message of the importance of vigilance in our institutions and political systems. For us to simply be thrown into an already existing war, without seeing (overall), the roots from which it stems would (in my opinion) reduce the power of that message. I get that some people were disappointed in the lack of a side to really "root" for, since everyone had problems and failings, but I think this better addresses the reality of the situation and shows the events of the OT in starker contrast.

 

Oh dear....

 

I like the Prequels the way are, so thank god those were only outlines

 

The prequels came out perfect? Even the OT was not perfect to me, and I think it is far superior to the PT. I would say about 2/3 of the people who saw the prequels were at the very LEAST disappointed.

 

Pretty much my opinion as well.

So he's wrong because he doesn't share your opinion?

Irrelevant speculation.

 

I didn't say he was wrong, I just think calling anything perfect is quite bold.

How is my speculation irrelevant? This is about the prequels that could have been, and even the people who like/love the prequels have to come to grips with the fact that a large percentage of people were disappointed with the prequels (just like fans have to concede to fact that a lot of people enjoyed the prequels).

 

Well, perfection is subjective.

Irrelevant in the sense that there is no way to prove that 2/3 of those who saw the prequels were dissapointed, and even if true, it doesn't make his claim any less valid (thus being irrelevant).

 

No, the prequels are not perfect, I didn't mean like perfection. Many have said that they want that '81. outline and that it would be superior to that what we got. I expressed wrong and all I wanted to say that it's better what we have now than wishing something else.
I didn't want to sound like some fanboy.

 

I see your point, but I disagree here. To my mind it doesn't matter so much (to the story) if the initial war was a "real" one or a false flag of some kind (and I just realized that 'early' Clone Wars could still be false flags, too). The important part is that the politicians take advantage of those situations and use the structures of power, plus propaganda, to clamp down and turn the civilization totalitarian. That message would be present in either version - Palpatine as opportunist or Palpatine as evil mastermind.

 

Ignoring all the other points that Piett is making, Palpatine as an opportunist rather than an evil mastermind would've been at least somewhat contradictory of how we saw him in the OT-- as an evil mastermind.

 

For me, I suppose it's important because I think that, thematically, seeing people give into their fear and make the wrong decision is important. And I don't know if having Palpatine simply hijack an existing war would be quite as effective at demonstrating that. With the Clone Wars in the PT as is, we basically do see Palpatine as both evil mastermind and opportunist. Had the Senate held fast to its principles -- being willing to listen and engage diplomatically, I don't think the Separatist movement would have ever gained traction. In part, I think the PT demonstrates that it is the times that our principles are tested that it is most important to live up to them.

In regards to Palpatine as an opportunist, I do think we see him inhabit this role too. He quickly took advantage of Padmé's successful escape from Naboo to nab the Chancellorship. He furthermore quickly made use of Shmi's death to further lure Anakin to the Dark Side. But he is a mastermind at heart -- a schemer. "Everything that has transpired has done so according to my design." I'd be sad if we could only choose him to play one or the other.

 

Message got screwed up, will respond later.

 

It could have actually been an arc for his character if done right.

 

He's a villain. Villains don't usually have arcs. Vader did, and then he wasn't a villain anymore.

 

I don't think anyone can argue that Palpatine is the main villain of the first six episodes (I was going to say saga, but with Episode 7 on the horizon that might not be the case).

 

I personally am glad it didn't turn out that way! I can't imagine a star wars with out a wall-jumping Jedi fighter Yoda, or the PT Anakin we got!

Anyways, Leia's whole mother problem can still be solved, what if her adopted mother died when she was young, what if she actually does remember Padme?

 

What if she didn't?

 

Dreams maybe? Jedi have a way with seeing the future, couldn't they also see visions from the past?

Anyways, we can't judge everything in star wars by saying they are "Impossible" I mean, the rebels did blow up both of the death stars, one by a one man fighter, and the other one's shield was taken down by a small group of rebels and a bunch of ewoks!

 

Am I the only one who reads that and thinks of The Royal Tenenbaums?

"Now, we all know that Padme Amidala after being strangled on Mustafar. What this book presupposes is: maybe she didn't?"

 

The problem is Luke says "your mother -- your REAL mother"

 

Same. I am ok with this. After reading through some of this thread, I'm also glad that the PT didn't turn out the way it was described in the linked article. In it's description it just seemed so much less....epic. But that is likely because all of the stories and arcs weren't flushed out any more than in a single page of text, so I guess it could have turned out ok.