Originally, it was Luke's. Now it's Anakin's.

On the 1993 laserdisc "Star Wars: The Definitive Collection," Lucas says in an extended interview that the Anakin Skywalker story was simply a backstory he wrote to help himself tell the story of Luke. Writing a character's background (family history, work history, relationships) is a common strategy for writers to help themselves, and Lucas was using it here.

Not long after that, in 1994, Lucas gave another interview in which he said the exact same thing: the Anakin Skywalker story was simply an aid to helm himself understand Luke's story - he said it was just a rough 15-page aid, not even a full story. This interview can be found on the "webdocs" of the TPM DVD.

Now, of course, Anakin Skywalker has about 10x as much face time in the "Star Wars" universe as Luke does. Anakin is in all 6 movies, compared to just three for poor Luke. And since his character is "dark" and "edgy," Anakin's presence is also far more common in the EU, as well.

Of course, we as consumers are free to focus on and centralize whatever and whomever we want. Be it Han Solo, Padme, the planets, the politics, the choice is up to each individual fan. But it should be noted for historical clarity that the original intention of 'Star Wars,' as incontrovertibly stated by its creator, was to tell the story of Luke Skywalker.

Things have changed, as noted above, and Luke can't compete with Anakin just in the matter of face time alone, nor in the way of character power. (Nobody ever called Luke a messiah.) But it's just worth pointing out.

 

Well, the story IS ANAKIN'S, and that is all that truly matters up to this point.

Lucas said that it wasn't until 1988 where he truly realized that it was Anakin's story. Sometimes these kinds of things take on a life of their own, and it is what the story dictated. George Lucas just went along with it...

It is amazing too. It works out so much better than it simply being Luke's story.

His original concept for "Star Wars" was of course based on the saturday morning matinee serials. So he decided to open in "Episode IV"; it would have been like "oh sorry, you missed last week's episode", so you would be thrown into this story and be completely unaware of what is going on.

It's amazing how things change, how they evolve over time.

I love George Lucas, BOTH old AND young!

 

Remember that Lucas was still considering how he was going to finish it up with the Prequels back in 1993 and 1994. Luke was the character everyone has grown up with, and when he took those interviews, he wanted to keep it that way, but some point in time, he had to realize that if he was to ever go along with the Prequels, he would have to tell a completely different story with merely a mention of Luke.

So, this is nothing. Every film has a discarded concept.

 

I never knew Lucas to state otherwise. Like any other story that unfolds over time, some concepts wind up becoming bigger than expected, while others get thrown out. In an AOTC documentary, Lucas admits that he was surprised at how much Anakin's story came to overwhelm the saga. Something along the lines of, "We all thought it was Luke's story, and now we see it's working out to be Anakin's."

Luke is still a primary character - he is the quintesstial hero of the saga. He is what drives the OT and the post-ROTJ EU. He is still the strong focus of that particular trilogy. It's just now that the saga is larger, it require a character that crosses both mediums.

Additionally, it's not as if Darth Vader was this unknown, ill-receieved character that barely had notice in the OT, either. It was the fans taking a shining to him that pushed Lucas to focus on him more in ESB/ROTJ. Vader has always been something of a permeating presence throughout the film, just as an antagonist to the heroes. Anakin just happens to have more presence throughout the saga with his additional backstory.

Lucas is only recognizing that his story has inevitably taken a shape he didn't expect - that of the saga of the Skywalker family, particularly the rise and fall of Anakin, rather than just Luke.

 

It is indeed fascinating how a story can evolve over time. Good points, everyone.
I'd like to point out that even though the central character of the Saga is Anakin, Luke is The Hero. Anakin is the prophezised one who ultimately brings balance to the Force, but it is Luke who saves the day. Without him(or Leia), all would've been lost.



Luke Skywalker is everybody's hero
/LM

 

It would be interesting to see a transcript of the commentary on the laserdisc. Can anyone dig it up?

 

With the decision to make a PT, Luke, by default, is no longer the central character of the entire Saga. He is and always will be the focal point of the OT, but yes, he becomes relegated to just being a major player of the overall Saga, not its main character, with the PT in play.

 

My feelings on these matters goes as follows:

Luke is the hero of the OT; Obi-Wan is the hero of the PT; Palpatine is now clearly the overall villain of the story; but Anakin is the central character of the whole saga. It is Anakin's particular relationship with each of these characters that makes him so important. Both a hero and a villain. Pretty neat!

 

Anakin is the true Hero of the Saga; he is a tragic hero, in the classic sense of Aristotle.

The PT has many similarities to greek mythology, many.

 

Name 8.

 

I think the tragedy is Greek in tone but SW, both the PT and the OT, has a heavy Eastern influence as well as being clearly inspired by films that preceded them. Both the PT and the OT are heavily influenced by Fords' westerns, Kuraswawas' samurai films, and Leones westerns' all of whom are already interrelated, each drawing inspiration from the last in the order that I listed. The PT alone is also inspired by Hong Kong filmmaking as well as the three giants.


Back to the topic, I think Lucas reassessing the Saga and stating that Anakin/Vader is its central figure is an indicator of where he is in his own life. He's always be psychology connected to the Skywalkers - Luke being his naive and idealistic younger self and Anakin representing some of the failures that that young man made ( divorce, detachment from the medium, and of course becoming the very thing he set out to change ). Palpatine has been compared to various world tyrannts, but to me its fairly obvious that he is actually Lucas' manifestation of the " darkside ", and not Anakin.

 

I think the Saga is (and always was going to be) the history of the Skywalker legacy. The OT was Luke, but the main figure was always Darth Vader. But when Vader searched for Luke, the Story we should have known is a father and son legacy. That's why even if it was Luke's story (what we grew up with) it was Luke who wants to Vader to change back. Luke knew it was his "father" that could bring the end to the conflict. That's why he insists he can indeed bring him back to the good side, even if it meant his own death (note: he throws away the saber).

Its all there, its always been there.

 

Open Mind,

Dude, I just firmly established that Lucas explicitly stated that it was the story of Luke Skywalker. Common sense would say that the OT is the story of Luke.

So that's been established, okay? Let's move on.

The point is is that Old George Lucas has altered the stated intentions and creations of Young George Lucas. I'm not saying that this is bad, wrong, anything. I'm just saying that it's a change. We, as consumers are completely free to ignore it and discard the PT or be selective in what we focus on.

I'm just saying that the product's creator has fundamentally changed its ingredients since it was created, that's all.

 

Of course Star Wars wasn't always Anakin's story. Think of ANH, for instance; it was made to be a stand-alone film, and GL knew full well it might be the only SW ever. It's clearly more about Luke than Anakin.

But the more of the story you get, the more things develop.

If you read just the first book of The Brothers Karamazov, you might think it was about Fyodor.

If you read just the first few scenes of Romeo and Juliet, you might think it was about Romeo's crush on some girl named Rosaline.

Neither of these are poor assumptions to make in that context (aside from the titles of the works), but with more knowledge come new perceptions.


The very announcement of the prequels being made, wherein Luke is not even a glint in Anakin's eye, should have been enough to clue the fan base in to the idea that maybe the whole thing isn't Luke's story.


Rick McCallum loves you!

 

And since his character is "dark" and "edgy," Anakin's presence is also far more common in the EU, as well.


What? From post-ROTJ EU, I remember seeing/hearing Anakin like...twice maybe. Luke has been in over 40 novels and dozens of comics, compared to Anakin being largely confined to prequel EU (under twelve books) and the Clone Wars comics...he certainly isn't "far more common".

And his character is dark. He's a tragic hero that betrays his friends for power and to do what he thinks is right.

 

After I said Anakin's character was Dark, DarthBoba comes back and says Anakin's character is....dark.

What's the deal with you guys constantly repeating firmly established data? When you go into a trigonometry class do you have to recite the multiplication tables or anything? I mean, come on, let's move the conversation along.

 

Whoa there partner. Tone it down.

 

severian28 posted on 4/3/05 8:35am

---

I think the tragedy is Greek in tone but SW, both the PT and the OT, has a heavy Eastern influence as well as being clearly inspired by films that preceded them.
[hr][/blockquote]

I'm not even sure the tragedy is really a Greek one. That implies Fates with a capital F instead of choice. We had some discussion of that [link=http://boards.theforce.net/The_Star_Wars_Saga/b10456/18935737/?9]here[/link].

Whatever the story started out being about, it is now a story about Anakin. That is why there is now no need for Episodes VII-IX. The story is finished when RotS is finished (except perhaps for filling in gaps in between via whatever means... but I don't really trust the EU for this).

Every story evolves. When the saga was started with "Star Wars", not even Episode IV at the time, it was just a single film. It could have remained a single film. And if you have ever read up on the various incarnations of the SW story Lucas went through before it got to film, you'll see clearly how much things change when you write them. They even change during filming. It's not contradictory for the story to have started as one thing but to end up as something else (and in my opinion, something better, more profound).

I do agree with the assessment that Anakin is the center piece, the major Evil character is Palps, the major Good characters are Obi-Wan and Luke. That's how it is if you look at the saga as a whole. Luke is basically Obi-Wan's apprentice, and carries on the Good Guy role, but Obi-Wan is actually in all 6 films...

[hl=tan][color=darkred][b]-sj loves kevin spacey[/hl][/color][/b]

 

It is more greek in its nature I think because Anakin's turn, like Oedipus's fulfillment of the prophecy, as a paradox. I won't reveal anything because it would be "spoiler" material, but, in that sense it is more Greek in my opinion.

I see DBrennan is up to his old tricks...buddy, no need to attack people now. Lets just have some nice discussion about the Saga we all love, ok?

 

Please, let's all keep to the discussion and hand.

 

Mommy Dearest - Errrrr - Spike Spiegel:

Hey, we all appreciate your committment and effort and all, but I think I speak for us all when I say that we don't need your moral critique on every syllable we write.

It's like in sports how they say that the best referees are the ones who you don't even know are there? That should maybe apply here.

But thanks!


I'm going to put this as nicely as I possibly can. Spike and I have given you so many chances it isn't even funny. If your attitude doesn't change, you will be blacklisted from this forum. In other words, you're on thin ice and the next infraction will result in a ban from the community and a permanent vacation from this forum.

 

No need to speak for me DBrennan, I can speak for myself .

In regard to your question, I see it as the story of both of them.
The prequels are the story of Anakin.
The originals are the story of Luke.
Overall it forms an Anakin story arc, however it is about two characters and their journey and how it mirrors them.

It is the story of a family.

-Seldon

 

The point is is that Old George Lucas has altered the stated intentions and creations of Young George Lucas.

Lucas added "episode IV" to "Star Wars" in 1980...

So for 25 years you could have known that the Star Wars SAGA was not gonna be all about Luke. That's a fair warning, methinks.

Unless you thought the first 3 episodes were going to be about farmboy Luke dusting crops?

 

Lucas added "episode IV" to "Star Wars" in 1980...

So for 25 years you could have known that the Star Wars SAGA was not gonna be all about Luke. That's a fair warning, methinks.

Lucas' original intentions, which are still valid, were to make Star Wars generational. So, the IV-VI movies would be about Luke while the I-III movies would be about Anakin. Since Anakin's character arc ended up going throughout all 6 movies, Lucas eventually concluded that he was telling the story about Anakin's life, even though the "Skywalker" hero roles switch in the middle of the story.

 

Considering face time: I think it's interesting that Mark Hamill has more face time than any of the actors portraying Anakin. In the complete saga, I think the audience will still identify the most with Luke.