PT Preserving the "I am your father" reveal.

I would argue for Toy Story as possibly the greatest trilogy ever. Not even joking. If you didn't cry at the end of the 3 then you have no soul.

 

Well actually we knew that in 1980. 1983 just acknowledged out what we already knew.

It doesn't change the narrative. Luke still doesn't know. No matter how many times you watch it he will never know. Vader and the Emperor already knew.

What are you talking about here? Vader is looking for Luke because he knows Luke is his son. The Emperor doesn't tell him anything he didn't know already.

I find this rather circular. The point is they've already watched TESB and the secret is out even if they haven't. As mentioned it's one of the best known movie scenes ever.

I don't follow at this at all. The point as talked about is that the actual narrative of the OT hasn't changed at all. The context around it has due to the PT.

We already knew Luke was the son of Anakin Skywalker. What is it that you are asking?

 

It wasn't done for us. It was done for the next generation. Read his quote again, very carefully.

"One or two generations have seen it one way, and the next generations will see it in a completely different way."

People like my mom who didn't know, were clueless because Lucas never has Palpatine named onscreen in the OT. He's only identified by a title. Just like Leia's last name of Organa was never uttered in the OT either. So when you watch the PT and find out that Palpatine is Sidious and is the Emperor, then you will be surprised a bit. Same with finding out that Bail Organa is the one who raised Leia. It wasn't meant to be a huge surprise, but it was meant to be a twist.

Because the film is for two audiences. Us, the original generations and the new ones who have yet to be born, and thus see the films. The point in not seeing his face in TPM, is that we're not supposed to know that it is him, at the star. We learn as the story unfolds. We are given clues, but there are also uncertainties. The audience also doesn't know that the eyes of the Sith change color like they do. Not until ROTS. And those of us who watch the OT first, we know that Palpatine has a malformed looking head as the Emperor, yet he does not as a senator and later Chancellor. This is what led to the fan theories that they were separate people, one who looked normal and one who had the crinkly butt head.

It also serves a function in-universe for the Federation and later the Separatist Council, who don't know the truth. That's why they don't call him anything other than Lord Sidious. They're still clueless in ROTS, when they only see his lower face and not his upper face. Also note that Ian lowered his voice as Sidious and kept it normal as Palpatine. Much in the same manner that Christopher Reeve did as Superman and Clark Kent. Also note that as Sidious, his voice is slightly distorted in hologram form, but not when he is Palpatine when he speaks at the start of TPM.

 

In this absurd hypothetical we're entertaining, you have no idea how many movies there are going to be. You don't know there are going to be three more movies after Revenge of the Sith. But even within this context of magically-induced ignorance, Revenge oft the Sith clearly presents itself as a climax and a resolution to the prior two movies, and so you're expecting the payoff to come. And the payoff you're expecting isn't the fall of the hero and the triumph of evil over good.

I don't understand what your problem is here. For those of us who can recognize the indications that Palpatine and Sidious are one and the same, it isn't a mystery, and we have the benefit of enjoying the dramatic irony of possessing information which the characters don't. For those who don't recognize the indications (which made up at least some portion of the viewing audience) they get the benefit of the reveal in Revenge of the Sith.

 

You're dreaming if you think Palpatine being Sidious was as comparable a surprise as Vader being the father was in 1980.

That's utter fantasy.

Made for two audiences? Right.

What is the change to the Vader / Emperor scene in Empire for? What's it's purpose? What did it fix, improve or enhance? Someone please give a sensible answer.

 

Well, the big surprise isn't so much Palpatine, as Anakin's turn to evil. No other major blockbuster franchise takes their protagonist, tempts them with evil, and has them succumb fully to it.

As for the Emperor scene in Empire, the change was primarily to match ESB with ROTJ more smoothly. The change to dialogue merely implies that Vader is unsure of how he could possibly have children, given the presumed death of his wife and child. In both versions, Palpatine weirdly refers to Luke as the 'son of Skywalker', as if he was artificially preserving the twist for Vader's sake. There's no reason for him not to just say 'your son' or something similar.

 

Anakin's turn is heavily foreshadowed, but, as The_Phantom_Calamari says, one hopes/expects to see him face his demons, overcome them and fulfill the prophecy in the third act, possibly at the cost of his own life (in a stroke of poetic justice).
ROTS - particularly its second half - is designed to make the viewer think along the lines of "No no no, please don't"... and I think it's actually been successful at that. It's a horrifying scenario and whether one expects it or not (although I don't see why one should), it tops off the trilogy in a very powerful way that casts a huge shadow over everything that will follow.

 

The_Phantom_Calamari

You're ignoring my point. My point was that it's fairly obvious they are played by the same actor even for those that have never seen a Star Wars film. To take your analogy, the "reveal" in ROTS is like having Clark Kent "reveal" to the audience he's Superman in Superman 3. It's a ridiculous premise, unless you reveal Clark Kent is actually Superman's evil twin. The fact that there were fan theories about Sidious' identity only confirms it was a red herring, a confusing premise that ultimately led to a totally underwhelming reveal, which only confirmed the obvious. So, it doesn't really work as a reveal, but it also doesn't really work as the evil scheming guy in the background, that the characters are unaware off, but the audience knows, because the story keeps treating Sidious as a mystery character, such that there's an off chance Sidious and Palpatine are different characters.

 

He already knows he had a child and that it is Luke. Now it could be that he doesn't 100% know for certain so the Emperor confirms his belief (just as Yoda 100% confirms that Vader is his father in ROTJ).

The 'son of Skywalker' is simply the Emperor not wanting to blatantly remind Vader that he is Anakin. Even Yoda didn't expect that. So Anakin still exists in some corner of Vader and was never fully destroyed and therefore the good wasn't either but neither the Emperor or Yoda saw this as possible.

I think that is likely why it's done this way.

It's not a red herring. In fact lots of fans self-created a version that it couldn't be that obvious. This is all based on foreknowledge anyway so in this premise can't apply.

It's not some massive reveal but lots of the regular audience simply didn't know even if they suspected.

 

How is referring to Luke as the son of Skywalker and assuring Vader that he's his son not remind Vader that he's Anakin? It does the opposite. If he wanted to avoid that he needn't have called Luke the son of Skywalker. It's the last thing he should have said.

 

I didn't say it was. I just said that it was a twist for those who didn't pick up on the clues. You have the twist, but then that's it. The films can stand on their own with or without it. The twist isn't the be all, end all of the Saga.

Right. Once Lucas committed to the idea of multiple films spanning multiple years, one of the things that occurred to him was that he could present the films in such a way that they could be released one way and then viewed in a different manner. Especially once the home video market took off in the 80's and premium cable channels became more common place. He could arrange for theatrical re-releases and cable airings that went I-VI and that future generations could either choose to be shown the films in that order, or the original release order and even newer audiences could come to the decision on their own on how to watch them.

The change in Palpatine's actor and appearance was to better sync it to the other films. The change in dialogue is to address two things.

1. Palpatine's change in dialogue is more consistent with his dialogue in ROTJ, where he only refers to Luke as "young Skywalker" and "My Apprentice". It creates a nice contrast in that he called Anakin by his first name during the PT, showing that he "cared" for the boy as part of his disguise. Whereas by not calling Luke by his first name, it sets a different tone between them. More of an antagonistic relationship, instead of a fatherly one.

2. Vader's change has more to do with the fact that while he knows that the pilot is named Luke Skywalker, he's not certain that it is his son given that Padme died while pregnant and he was lead to believe that was the case. He doesn't know if this is his son, or if it is a coincidence or something that Obi-wan cooked up to rattle him. Palpatine telling him to search his feelings is to basically accept what he knows is true, which is that she gave birth before dying and Obi-wan hid him on Tatooine.

The fan theories had to do with those who wanted a twist, because Lucas had done a twist before. But he wasn't doing the same type of twist. His twist was more that Palpatine was the enemy in plain sight, and some people either got it or they didn't. But in universe, the characters don't know. He's hiding his identity from everyone except his Apprentices.

 

Oh it does remind him but not blatantly. He doesn't say Luke is his (Vader's) son but the son of Skywalker.

It's all part of the "I know what you are up to." from Sidious.

 

The_Phantom_Calamari

Even if George Lucas had never sold it to the Walt Disney Company, the original trilogy would still exist. Therefore, there are at least six films, not three. No matter how you look at it, the story doesn’t end with EP3. Given how they were made, EP3 could never be a climax to anything.

 

I just watch them by release order in order to preserve the twist.

 

That is not the point of this supposition.

When the third movie was made you didn't know that there would be a IV-VI so it would have ended at III with Anakin being tempted and defeated or even if going to the Dark Side then returning to the Light in the same movie.

 

I, II, RO, IV, V, III, VI, VII

 

Nobody has answered the question. Why did the Emperor scene need to be changed by referring to Luke explicitly as Vader's son?

 

You can't simultaneously argue that
1. Everybody already knew Vader and Anakin were the same because it had become cultural knowledge to everybody that has talked to another human being.
2. The PT reveal that Anakin falls to the darkside instead of doing the trope of tempted but overcoming evil was a surprise.

If the cultural knowledge *ruined* the reveal of the OT, then it simultaneously *ruined* the reveal of the PT.

EDIT ADD:

Sorry, the father reveal is what everybody was talking about in 1980 to 1983.

And the study is so incredibly flawed in understanding. Do you enjoy a film less the second time? Well, you are enjoying it on a different level, but you still were not robbed of the original level. In fact, that devoted second viewing is probably because the first level:
1. In a quasi-live event, you were enjoying all the drama (chaos) and using deduction and perception to piece together the *big story* in real time.

.... the first level is what made you want to go back and enjoy it on the detail level. But not getting that rush of level one makes the level two far less likely.

I somewhat ruined AotC and RotS for myself. Read the AotC novel the night before I knew I was going to see it for the first time the next day (put the answer key in front of somebody and they find it irresistible to peek).

Then the RotS game for my Playstation 2 was given to me by a friend before I went to see it. While not the same as a novel because it had slight variations, the basic structure was there. And I quickly beat it before my friends and I had scheduled to see it later in the week.

Spoilers are like sugary drinks. You might be tempted to get that boost, but you regret it shortly thereafter ... then you do it again.

 

It wasn't, in both versions Palpatine calls Luke 'the Son of Skywalker', and the change simply switched Luke Sywalker to 'the offspring of Anakin Skywalker'. This feels fitting, as Palpatine never mentions Luke's first name at any other point in the films.

 

The "he will join us or die" was the most important part of that exchange. Lunch/Playground discussions were intense.
"He said join us or die. He's lying. That's what bad guys do. He is just trying to trick Luke."

What better way to simultaneously give Luke a reason to consider a bond to Vader (join him) and drive a wedge between him and OB1 (OB1 lied to me. What else did he lie about? Is he just using me?)

 

To be fair, the cultural knowledge was not that Vader is Anakin, only that he is Luke's father. While the general public has undoubtedly become very much aware of the person Anakin Skywalker since the release of his trilogy, that name was not widely known outside of the fanbase prior to 1999.

Then again, Anakin is the only Jedi named Skywalker in the trilogy, so I guess it wouldn't be hard to connect the dots anyway.

 

In 1999, I'd imagine there were not many kids older than 4 that had not already watched the OT. Just about every house I ever visited had Ep 4 5 and 6 in the VHS cabinet. So that leaves very few people that hadn't already watched the OT as the PT was coming out. And a parent/grandparent/older relative would probably recommend a very young kid start with Ep. 4 because it is much easier to comprehend than Ep. 1. Ep. 1 is a tragedy disguised as a hero's triumph. I can't imagine many kids under 4 would be able to get that. So why confuse your very young kid by starting them with Ep. 1.

And part of the Ep. 1 confusion for younger kids is a) because the story is actually somewhat complicated (for a kid) and b) somewhat convoluted (for everybody).

 

So now, we get into a viewing order debate with a dash of anti-TPM bias?
Let's not derail this thread.

 

Viewing order talk started in this thread almost immediately with 4 5 1 2 3 6 being a possible way to preserve both reveals, so hardly a derail.

And ANH was written to be both part of a larger story and more self-contained on the chance it could be the first and last Star Wars. Most things only get a first impression, so why not start with the film most likely to give a feeling that every part of the movie didn't necessarily need another movie to make it feel meaningful?

Ep. 1's biggest mainstream critique was "too much politics". Well, that was the real story. You can't just cut that part out because then it would just be a regular serial adventure where everything more or less resets for the next "drama of the episode". But if Ep. 1 was the only Star Wars ever released, then the whole Palpatine political rise would in fact be a big waste of time. So I should be happy this guy was elected Chancellor. Padme goes back to Naboo to do what she could have essentially done by never leaving?

It is no different than having friends with shared musical tastes introduce you to a new musical band by saying "start with Track 3 <Song Name> first." They are trying to make sure you get hooked up front with the best first impression so if the second impression doesn't do it for you, you have a reason to try a 3rd and 4th.

One could argue the thread was derailed the minute the father reveal was questioned as the milestone it was. It was one of the biggest moments in movie history.